What's new

How Dangerous is New OTVII (Solo NOTs)

mate

Patron Meritorious
Hi Vinaire.
I am astonished that you ascribe to Darwin's evolutionary nonsense. There is no "survival of the fittest", it is "survival through cooperation". But that is another story. Birds and animals are not a lower order, they're spiritual beings are here too in the physical world to learn something, just as we are. Their ability to share thoughts, is a skill that most of us have lost. As a result mankind had to develop a primitive artificial appliance, the telephone, to compensate.

So you want some "human" examples. Okay then you have my realisation that the birds were thought sharing, that they all got the thought simultaneously, that there was no "sending" of a thought from one to the others. Then you have Siddhartha Gautama and his awareness of the state of self realisation and subsequently he developed vipassana to achieve it. Then recently there was A. Garrett Lisi with his Simple Theory of Everything.

While it is probably true that in most cases, they were reflecting on the subject at hand, the realisation itself was not a conclusion of their deliberations but a sudden thought like a bolt out of the blue. Many would call it inspiration.

Vinaire, I'm not sure where you are coming from, in all of this. I sense that you are in some way, holding onto your reality by ignoring the concepts I am presenting, by viewing my presentation in great detail rather than grasping the concepts I am presenting. You certainly don't have to accept them. But it is time for you to reflect on your own past experiences of having an inspirational thought. That is the only way that you are going to get an experiential understanding of the phenomenon, continuing to ask questions isn't going to do it.

Regards, David.



Hi David,

What we are looking in birds and animals is a lower aspect of evolution and not higher. It is hard wiring of a structure and not some super thinking process. We have a wonderful hard wiring in our body. Interactions among birds in a flock should be compared to interactions between various parts of a human body.

Now have you observed mental telepathy between one flock of birds and another flock of birds? If you have then I would like to know about it.

So, let me rephrase my question that I put to you in my last post:

Could you please expand upon the nature of what becomes suddenly known among humans with some examples.

Sincerely, Vinaire
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
Looks like we are reaching the end of this discussion. Your responses has been very helpful especially this last one.

Yes, I have experienced inspiration, and the latest one has been LOOKING WITHOUT THINKING, which resulted in the following four issues:
LOOKING
EXPERIENCING
ATTENTION
VIEWPOINT


I am presently inspired to examine the subject of depression in the following thread;
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=16537


It seems to me that inspiration comes from LOOKING WITHOUT THINKING. That is what the Vedic process "Neti, neti" is. That is what Buddha did to achieve enlightenment. There is nothing more mysterious than that.


Here is my statement (I don't care about any agreement):

(1) I shall use the word STATIC for the moment in an attempt to describe my understanding at this level. It doesn't really matter what word I use because word is not the "thing."

(2) The problem here is that there is NOTHING to describe. As far as our knowingness is concerned we can only know the considerations that appear spontaneously and randomly... from where... that is impossible to know.

(3) We can never know what lies beyond these considerations. We may certainly CONSIDER what lies beyond; but then, we would only know the consideration we make.

(4) Thus, we can only know the considerations and not the Static. As we dig deeper for the Static we shall simply find more considerations.

(5) Actually, as we dig deeper for the static in our attempt to describe it, we may describe our own hidden considerations as we uncover them.

(6) Thus, Static is nothing more than a carrot, to help uncover the additives (considerations) that may be hidden deep in our consciousness. That is more than wonderful.


Furthermore:

(7) Static is the core of beingness. It is not the beingness itself. When we think of beingness we think of the thetan.

(8 ) Whether thetan dissolves into Static or not is neither here nor there. At the level of Static there is no time. So, whether one is Static for a billion years or for just a blink of an eye. It is the same thing.

(9) We would never know if we had ever dissolved into being a Static or not. All we would ever know at the highest level is being a thetan in its simplest form.

(10) As far as we are concerned, the ideal of Static is simply there to help us uncover the deepest of our considerations.


And beyond this:

(11) A thetan can be constrained only by its own considerations. Total freedom would mean not constrained by one's own considerations.

(12) Only those considerations would constrain a thetan that are being generated unconsciously.

(13) A thetan may enjoy life fully; participate in any and all adventures, while also being aware of all considerations one is generating even at the deepest level.

(14) That would be Nirvana... that would be Static... that would be attaining Brahmahood; for this doesn't mean forsaking of life and adventure.

(15) Nirvana, or total freedom, simply means absence of hidden considerations even at the deepest level. It means total command over oneself. The concept of Brahma, as built into the process "neti, neti," helps one move in that direction.

(16) Nirvana would simply mean the ability to generate a consideration, hold on to that consideration, and then destroy that consideration.

(17) Nirvana does not mean forsaking this universe. Nirvana simply means total control over one's considerations. One can attain Nirvana while being in this universe. In fact one's enjoyment of this universe would be infinitely greater after attaining nirvana.

(18) Buddha lived to a grand age of 90, quite rare for his time, after attaining nirvana.


.

Hi Vinaire.
I am astonished that you ascribe to Darwin's evolutionary nonsense. There is no "survival of the fittest", it is "survival through cooperation". But that is another story. Birds and animals are not a lower order, they're spiritual beings are here too in the physical world to learn something, just as we are. Their ability to share thoughts, is a skill that most of us have lost. As a result mankind had to develop a primitive artificial appliance, the telephone, to compensate.

So you want some "human" examples. Okay then you have my realisation that the birds were thought sharing, that they all got the thought simultaneously, that there was no "sending" of a thought from one to the others. Then you have Siddhartha Gautama and his awareness of the state of self realisation and subsequently he developed vipassana to achieve it. Then recently there was A. Garrett Lisi with his Simple Theory of Everything.

While it is probably true that in most cases, they were reflecting on the subject at hand, the realisation itself was not a conclusion of their deliberations but a sudden thought like a bolt out of the blue. Many would call it inspiration.

Vinaire, I'm not sure where you are coming from, in all of this. I sense that you are in some way, holding onto your reality by ignoring the concepts I am presenting, by viewing my presentation in great detail rather than grasping the concepts I am presenting. You certainly don't have to accept them. But it is time for you to reflect on your own past experiences of having an inspirational thought. That is the only way that you are going to get an experiential understanding of the phenomenon, continuing to ask questions isn't going to do it.

Regards, David.
 

mate

Patron Meritorious
Hi Vinaire, well done. Yes, your viewpoint is just as valid as mine, and indeed, just as invalid as mine. And yes, we will all experience insights from time to time, insights which will allow us to develop, piece by piece, a coherent understanding of it all.

Regards, David.
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
Hi Vinaire, well done. Yes, your viewpoint is just as valid as mine, and indeed, just as invalid as mine. And yes, we will all experience insights from time to time, insights which will allow us to develop, piece by piece, a coherent understanding of it all.

Regards, David.


PEACE...

And let there be no mystery!


.
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
This thread is concluded for me as far as I am concerned. This thread gave me an opportunity to look at OT III and NOTs materials in depth and to really examine the ideas of BTs and clusters, and to understand the underlying principles that really work.

The true danger of New OT VII (Solo NOTs) is getting one enmeshed into more and more thinking instead of simply looking... in trying to repair those things which don't need repair... in ignoring the real problems of life.

The true danger of New OT VII (Solo NOTs) is "figure-figure."

The OP of this thread promotes that figure-figure in worrying about the body. The body simply needs good nutrition and proper direction from the mind.

Mind simply needs LOOKING, and not more THINKING from the spirit. It sorts itself out if not imposed upon. Like a coiled spring, which uncoils itself when allowed to, mind straightens itself out when allowed to. LOOKING without thinking, and EXPERIENCING without resisting makes it safe for the mind to uncoil itself.

I learned a lot through participation on this thread. I am now off to another thread (WHAT IS DEPRESSION?) from which the following post is presented here:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=379947&postcount=96

Thank you, David for the discussion. You are a true gentleman.

Regards, Vinaire

.
 

Hatshepsut

Crusader
mate
Your next question "Do you consider spirit to be an entity?", I have already answered this question, but let me state it again. The spirit is not an entity, the spiritual being is, but the spirit is not. The spirit can become an entity by becoming a spiritual being, indeed more than one at the same time, as Yogananda described of his master, in his book, "Autobiography of a Yogi". Newton also describes in his book, "Journey of Souls" that a spiritual being itself, can split into two spiritual beings

This idea used to be brought up every so often. However as of late seldom ever. Glad you posted this.
When I was young, I was on the HSDC (Dianetics) course. I was clay demo-ing engram chains and earlier similars and basic basics. I wondered if a person's time track in the physical universe was what gave him a kind of mind 'skin'.Remember that strange definition of what an individual is ....the one in the Tech Dictionary. Something about being as precise as an apple and having to do with his first arrival on earth. Am I confused? :yes: It was a strange one. It seemed much different from the definitions of 'thetan'.
I wondered if the distinctly separate time tracks resultling from the forking in the theta line, made the illusion of separateness more real.
Some people today in the independent field use the process...'Point to the being you separated from'. It does not work for me. But after Grade I my sense was that I was monitoring 7 lives concurrently. Wierd.
Also then hypothetically, lets say we are in a setup like The Matrix. If those bodies in pawn to which we were anchored or tethered were billions of yrs old...yet we are simultaneously existing on earth....and we have our attention socked into both...what would be the definition of an individual?.:duh:
 

RogerB

Crusader
On The "Codes"

OK, I'm catching up . . . . been busy.

no.

The codes auditing was a listing process.

The subject contained in the following article by Dr. Max Sandor is similar, but derived from book one style auditing.

http://orunla.org/pnohteftu/ch66.html


I don't know if Alan's center does codes auditing anymore.

The "Codes" are still on the line-up at the Ranch. But it is up in the higher level address to the case . . . this after the client has been properly and fully set-up, including having done some training and become spiritually literate.

There is also a solo-auditing course slotted in in the "advanced" or upper levels of the "Ascension Levels Chart," though it is not Codes related



CarmeloOrchards said:
If, as in any listing process, the right items aren't gotten, the consequences to the PC can be heavy and destructive. One of Alan's team, named Eric Woolery, Alan's "master processor," had a record of codes' clients that included: one death, one house burned down including a life time worked manuscript that was not saved elsewhere, I lost half a million dollars in six months, two people ended up drinking heavily for six months, three divorces, several bankruptcies -- there was more, but you get the idea.

Eric couldn't audit his way out of a paper bag.

Even with the half million dollar loss, the codes, once I figured out the bug(s), was worth it to me. no regrets. It takes an auditor that is wiling to and able to match you in hugeness. An auditor that can allow you (not just by words alone) to be fully yourself, with no boxes or judgmental stuff that you, the PC, have to fit into.

Yes, Eric W was/is a disaster. He sabotaged the tech and the lines in more ways that one. Eventually, Alan did fire him from staff, calling Eric, if I remember the words Alan spoke to me correctly, "an evil little shit!" Either that or just telling him he was "a little shit!" But when Alan related this to me, the venom and dismay he had towards what had gone on, and towards Eric seared the atmosphere around me :D

Problem was, Alan had no other trained to deliver that R/D.

Several things on this. CarmelO is correct in that some folks did get wrong items . . . or, it may also be that they failed to get the completeness and a correct comprehension of the "item" they did get.

CarmelO and I did have discourse on this issue at the time, coming to it from different perspectives.

CarmelO, as he rightly says of himself, is a "Qual type guy." I tended to approach it from an executive type approach or as an educator and tech developer rather than as a Review Auditor.

To me, the fact that of the nearly 200 folks (actual figure was about 190-198?) who had done the "Codes Course and R/D" very, very few stayed on the lines. Folks simply dropped off the lines.

CarmelO did find some he was in contact with that had "wrong item/out list" scenarios.

From my memory, these were mainly or all regarding the client's negative Code.

The thing that was omitted in the tech materials and from being a part of the hatting and education on the issue was something I found and wrote up on the Kn equivalent of ESMB at the time, and which Alan did an Aha! on and agreed as correct, was the fact that the Negative Code spanned the spectrum of the mood scale in a way that the Positive Code did not.

And because of this, the Negative Code did change expression, and even concept . . . so, part of the source of the problem of clients getting their "right item" was: at what level on the mood scale (Expanded Tone Scale) did the person contact the Negative Code . . . that is a two-fold thing, what was the mood level expression of the Neg. Code and what was the mood level of the client in approaching the entire subject.

I will give examples of this.

Elsewhere on this thread I have posted Alan's write up for public consumption on the Codes. He indicates that, in one context, they are your most wanted wants.

So, pick a want (for Christsakes don't try and do a self listing on that to try and find your "right item" . . . . :D) . . . better still let me grab an item that lots of people yap on about :D

HAPPINESS. This is for example reasons only . . . this is really not very likely to be a Code item. :D

So, at the very top of the mood scale, there is a scenario wherein there is no contact with "happiness". It is simply an uncontacted thing. Then, you contact some happiness and you think this stuff is a real WOW, let's have more of it, and you want it to continue :yes:

So now you have a juxtaposition of a positive happiness to a negative no-happiness . . . . no problem there. It works fine:p

Now you begin to decline down the mood scale. We all did it.

Happiness continues on as your positive want (even if troubled), but the and your aspects of the negative side of things changes. The no-happiness morphs into an opposed not-wanted! Then, when you are pissed enough, you go through the Power Split and change or reverse your polarity and vector on the issue and go anti-the whole scenario . . . now your negative code is actually opposed to your positive Code and destructively so.

And, of course, you continue to decline, and eventually the whole scene becomes a failed scene, then lowered you begin to substitute wants and games for what you really, originally wanted; and then eventually, you sink so low that you are in delusion about your original true wants . . . like, it has become "What Happiness? What is happiness, what the hell are you talking about?" Life is all and always ugly, hated unhappiness. And so on.

And the other joker in the pack is that this spectrum of mood aspects of one's Codes has gotten hung up in various expressions or levels at various times differently in different games/universes, etc. So any of its expressions are a "right item" . . . depending on where it applies.

The other issue that applies here that was not taken up at the time publicly, but can be now as a consequence of what has been already put on this thread, is that your spiritual teammates (STMs) can and often do have different Codes to you . . . I subsequent to getting my own Codes in November 1994 found I have two STMs with different Codes to me and to each other . . . which Codes, by the way do complement mine even though they are different.

I ran into one "Codee" from the old Dallas days who had this problem till revealed . . . . she was in degrees of doubt on the certainty of what her Codes were until we found one was hers and the other belonging to a STM.

And, there is an additional factor. Essentially, nearly all of the Codees were ex-Scn, and that is why Alan considered they were suitable and competent to go onto the action.

The trap in this was two-fold:
a) Most of them were career PC's, and they were looking for the "One-Shot-Clear" phenomenon . . . and the Codes were promoted as the "key to the case" . . . which they are!
b) They all carried forward lots of BPC and earlier ascensions scenarios which, in my view, were not correctly handled/recovered . . . I know mine were not . . . and this is one aspect of Eric W's superficial screwy processing that messed things up.

Another thing on why these Codees dropped off line is that, I know of no one who actually completed the full "Prime Source Axioms (Codes) Course" and all its drills and related processes and exercises . . . . they only did enough to get hatted to go into session for their magic one-shot-clear shot! Went out on a high, didn't keep applying the tech, and crashed.



CarmeloOrchards said:
Basically the codes are basic basic to GPMs.:)

BTW: Once I had figured out what had happened to me, I phoned a bunch of my friends, who had gotten codes auditing, and where it was warranted, fixed the out lists over the phone.

I wrote up my actions, and my findings re Eric's "auditing," and gave it to Alan. I earned an enemy for life. Even after Eric, years later, had left, and was now on the shit list for years of squalid actions, I was dirt. No good deed goes unpunished.

Alan's "thing" at the time was that he used to get very easily pissed at the idea of "people complaining about an outness but not 'coming and giving a hand.'" He had degrees of difficulty accepting info and input on negative scenes from those "on the outside" who weren't "contributing." . . . . I know I got negatively handled in that context . . . Alan having expressed it so.

My response being, "Well, I could have ignored the scenario, assumed no responsibility for anything and just left it be to blow up on you, or I could choose to inform you so you can get going, based on the info, to address and correct it . . . after all, I am not able to correct it from here, if I was an executive in charge in the area I would. But I'm not!"

Alan was massively overworked. Not only did he take on the research hat . . . and that alone is a monster, and dangerous job, but he took on the financing of the entire project (some of which was done by him as a very successful gambler :D Oh, secrets, Oh, secrets! :D) and then he had to train his staff then manage the entire operation as an executive dealing with the nonsense and stupidities of those who wanted to live off of what he had created.

For my part, I had my hands full with my own projects, but eventually committed to join him on staff to help the show along and arrive in March, 2006. I would have arrived with $600,000 available to promote the tech and a personal regular income from fixed sources well in excess of the national median and thus not wanting nor needing any salary from being on staff.

At the end of December 2005, Alan told me not to come . . . but that is another story for another time.

RogerB
 
Last edited:

EP - Ethics Particle

Gold Meritorious Patron
Question/comment for Rog...

OK, I'm catching up . . . . been busy.

...snip...

HAPPINESS. This is for example reasons only . . . this is really not very likely to be a Code item. :D

So, at the very top of the mood scale, there is a scenario wherein there is no contact with "happiness". It is simply an uncontacted thing. Then, you contact some happiness and you think this stuff is a real WOW, let's have more of it, and you want it to continue :yes:

So now you have a juxtaposition of a positive happiness to a negative no-happiness . . . . no problem there. It works fine:p

Now you begin to decline down the mood scale. We all did it.

Happiness continues on as your positive want (even if troubled), but then your aspects of the negative side of things changes. The no-happiness morphs into an opposed not-wanted! Then, when you are pissed enough, you go through the Power Split and change or reverse your polarity and vector on the issue and go anti-the whole scenario . . . now your negative code is actually opposed to your positive Code and destructively so.

...snip...

RogerB

I opine and/or observe that this "Power Split" or "Reversal of Life Force Vector" occurs, or can occur, suddenly and precipitously - am I correct in this?

Like the little boy playing marbles and having a bit too much competition suddenly "picks up his marbles and goes home" saying "marbles is a stupid game anyway" - then maybe goes home and pulls his sister's pigtails and tells her she's only a dumb girl.

Holy Squirrel! Bugger! Crikey!:melodramatic: Sounds like someone I know! :whistling:

EP
 

nw2394

Silver Meritorious Patron
And, of course, you continue to decline, and eventually the whole scene becomes a failed scene, then lowered you begin to substitute wants and games for what you really, originally wanted; and then eventually, you sink so low that you are in delusion about your original true wants . . . like, it has become "What Happiness? What is happiness, what the hell are you talking about?" Life is all and always ugly, hated unhappiness. And so on.

And the other joker in the pack is that this spectrum of mood aspects of one's Codes has gotten hung up in various expressions or levels at various times differently in different games/universes, etc. So any of its expressions are a "right item" . . . depending on where it applies.

RogerB

Another "joker" factor is that all of us (IMO, multiple times in the past) have got ourselves caught up in one religion or another - many of which, including Scn to a significant degree - but also including at least to some degree every major faith today as far as I can see - which focus on things like "native state" and that the path to achieving such things is by avoiding wants - or getting rid of compulsive wants - which can generalise into opposing having any purpose whatsoever in the extreme case. This would be all very interesting but not that important if it weren't for the fact that some of this activity is accompanied by what Kns would call major ascension states.

So you go along with your pet want of "bananas for all", and then get a major, pro survival looking conclusion that all bananas are bad - and not only bananas - but strawberries - and damson fruit and all the flaming possible foods in any possible world are all bad and everyone had better learn that in order to save themselves they had darned well better not have anything to do with food except maybe to eradicate it. Death to all farmers :grouch:
And death to anybody pedalling a religion that says you can eat too :grouch::angry:

Nick
 

RogerB

Crusader
I opine and/or observe that this "Power Split" or "Reversal of Life Force Vector" occurs, or can occur, suddenly and precipitously - am I correct in this?

Like the little boy playing marbles and having a bit too much competition suddenly "picks up his marbles and goes home" saying "marbles is a stupid game anyway" - then maybe goes home and pulls his sister's pigtails and tells her she's only a dumb girl.

Holy Squirrel! Bugger! Crikey!:melodramatic: Sounds like someone I know! :whistling:

EP

Any decision a spiritual Being makes has rather "instantaneous" effect (though some can be made containing a delay or timing element for later implementation) . . . it's the set up and moving towards that decision that can take some time.

The thing to know about this power split phenomena is that once you've gone through it, you have an automatic opposition to your wants and the attaining of your wants in place that can either be on continuum automatically or be triggered outside of your control.

Having said this, I think you can see how this jams a person into immobility and ineffectualness . . . in many respects, it's only our subsequent solutions to all this that enables us to be "active."

Hence the "complexity" of case.

Rog
 

Hatshepsut

Crusader
RogerB
The thing to know about this power split phenomena is that once you've gone through it, you have an automatic opposition to your wants and the attaining of your wants in place that can either be on continuum automatically or be triggered outside of your control.
Roger, you got any tech on this? How can this be triggered outside your control? Is it then a whole 'nother person, or just a valence or automaticity (i.e. machinery?)

I've seen more than one good fellow chewing himself up over this. It was usually the bigger ones who had a shortage of oppositions of comparable cleverness.
 

nexus100

Gold Meritorious Patron
Any decision a spiritual Being makes has rather "instantaneous" effect (though some can be made containing a delay or timing element for later implementation) . . . it's the set up and moving towards that decision that can take some time.

The thing to know about this power split phenomena is that once you've gone through it, you have an automatic opposition to your wants and the attaining of your wants in place that can either be on continuum automatically or be triggered outside of your control.

Having said this, I think you can see how this jams a person into immobility and ineffectualness . . . in many respects, it's only our subsequent solutions to all this that enables us to be "active."

Hence the "complexity" of case.

Rog

I don't see immobility and ineffectualness in anyone, honestly. We all do as we please and that is always a complete creation no matter how it is interpreted. We are in an operation of looking at larger or smaller space. No one is right or wrong for doing either except as one chooses to create right and wrong.

Humanity tends to want equilibrium. As one sees more one deals with understanding. But all that really is, is changng perspective to space that includes a greater field. The refrain of right/wrong still appeals to adherents of most spiritual corners of the world, my opinion. Getting out of the corner is the idea, no?
 

RogerB

Crusader
Another "joker" factor is that all of us (IMO, multiple times in the past) have got ourselves caught up in one religion or another - many of which, including Scn to a significant degree - but also including at least to some degree every major faith today as far as I can see - which focus on things like "native state" and that the path to achieving such things is by avoiding wants - or getting rid of compulsive wants - which can generalise into opposing having any purpose whatsoever in the extreme case. This would be all very interesting but not that important if it weren't for the fact that some of this activity is accompanied by what Kns would call major ascension states.

So you go along with your pet want of "bananas for all", and then get a major, pro survival looking conclusion that all bananas are bad - and not only bananas - but strawberries - and damson fruit and all the flaming possible foods in any possible world are all bad and everyone had better learn that in order to save themselves they had darned well better not have anything to do with food except maybe to eradicate it. Death to all farmers :grouch:
And death to anybody pedalling a religion that says you can eat too :grouch::angry:

Nick

I agree, Nick.

What you write above (highlighted in red) is rather an astute and accurate observation.

Doing any practice that has you feeling in any way changed such that you believe you are bettered or have ascended to any higher state can fix you in feeling you have solved the riddle of the universe(s).

It is what one can observe in "born again Christians" and among the Buddhist/Hindu practices, for example, as some we might all be more familiar with. But I have seen it in almost all cultures and "religious" or spiritual practices I have investigated around the world.

The situation I observe is that these practices are quite limited and truly incomplete in terms of what is actually there to be dealt with in order to be fully, truly free. Yet they assert they have the absolute, final and total answer. :duh:

My response to that is go have a look at the societies or outcomes such produce . . . and if one is honest one comes to the very rapid conclusion that something is at least "missing" or "out" in the belief or practice.

You see, one's "wants chain" is where one's real power, energy and life-force has been applied and directed. It's also where one's real power, energy and life-force has been misapplied and misdirected. And it is this highly volatile charge that hits a person when they approach it, which impact of charge typically drives the individual away from the area . . . and certainly the area will have been smothered by occlusion, masking devises and solutions thus making it hard to fully perceive and experience.

So, the observation is that, merely doing a passive mediate or prayer to God in the area doesn't get much of a needed complete job done. Typically, only superficial charge comes off . . . though the person will feel some relief.

I've seen the same thing among the Balyran of South East Asia, the Ifa in Africa, the Sufi in the Middle East.

The Kahuna of Polynesia and in particular, Hawaii, do have some real operational capacity . . . though like all these cultures, their practice is limited to their operational paradigm. Sadly, the idiot white man made strenuous efforts to outlaw the Kahuna practices when he settled Hawaii, and prejudice against these practices developed as the Hawaiian society developed.

I would say that anyone who believes that a spiritual Being is merely, only "a consideration" is seriously avoiding the real charge and life-force that is truly present.

Rog
 

nw2394

Silver Meritorious Patron
RogerBRoger, you got any tech on this? How can this be triggered outside your control? Is it then a whole 'nother person, or just a valence or automaticity (i.e. machinery?)

I am not sure it makes much difference really. Some people are of the opinion that they actually split a piece of themselves off - the bad, dead, failed bit being sort of left behind - while the new bit goes off divorced from the old with a new or at least modified purpose.

Others would couch it in terms of valences and postulates.

Does it really matter which is true? I don't think so. The upshot is that you have a new you with some erroneous conclusions and something else that is going to come to life and go "GRRRRRRRR you had better not look here" if you come close to it.

Nick
 

RogerB

Crusader
RogerB-Quote:
The thing to know about this power split phenomena is that once you've gone through it, you have an automatic opposition to your wants and the attaining of your wants in place that can either be on continuum automatically or be triggered outside of your control.

RogerBRoger, you got any tech on this? How can this be triggered outside your control? Is it then a whole 'nother person, or just a valence or automaticity (i.e. machinery?)

I've seen more than one good fellow chewing himself up over this. It was usually the bigger ones who had a shortage of oppositions of comparable cleverness.

Hats,

The Power Split itself is a solution . . . it's what was done to solve the situation we were confronted with or suffered that we did not want to experience. That is why it is such a bitch.

And like many "solutions," even serfacs, they sit there doing there thing as they were designed/created to do. Problem is when on auto they can do their thing when inappropriate; otherwise if dormant can be triggered into operation by events around one.

In the strictest terms, it is you acting out an auto solution . . . the bad news it is you opposing your own true wants . . . you had a want you now "don't want" and oppose.

It's quite nuts, spiritual insanity, actually; but that's what we have done to ourselves down along through the time trail.

It's one of the reasons we are now so spiritually incapacitated . . . folks running around denying their true qualities and capacities. Folks come up with all kinds of additional solutions to this also. Things like telling you "God is cause, it's not really you"; and that "you are really only a consideration or creation of . . (slot in whatever the religious deity or Supreme Being fits here) . . " etc. People often are into the denial of themselves!

The only handling I know for it is the following:
1) recognize the phenomena exists . . . don't label it as something else from some other belief system . . . this is NOT "the same as Hubbard's emotional curve" or anything like it . . . this is no "curve": it's a violent reversal of self that inverts your positives to negative.
2) Be willing to experience it when you are advancing your case in processing/training.
3) be willing to experience and know the circumstance that led you to having to create this (unfortunate and erroneous) solution . . . it is only a massive creation cum intention. Or, in Scn terms, a postulate of yours.
4) be very smooth with your use of Repeater Technique (as presented by me in Pasadena) and the charge handling and unpleasant sensation/low moods handling techniques and processes. This is used to undo the need for the solution and the solution itself.
5) be very smooth in handling identities . . . for we did create ourselves as . . . the "as" being an identity or Beingness in order to implement and carry out the solution.
6) realize we have implemented this solution a number of times . . . though there is a key basic one: that is the catastrophic basic one that fires this whole chain.
7) to unravel this you will need a comprehension of what your true basic virtues, qualities, strengths, powers and characteristics are as a spiritual Being . . . reason being is that it was these that were sabotaged and inverted, and it is these that you have to be prepared to perceive and restore when the area opens up and you start making contact with it. And, by the way, it is this last point #7 that so many are in denial of and avoiding . . . we see it on ESMB all the time. We saw it on this thread very recently.

I will be posting more on this thread, as there are still some loose ends to tie up :yes:

Rog
 
Last edited:

Hatshepsut

Crusader
I am not sure it makes much difference really. Some people are of the opinion that they actually split a piece of themselves off - the bad, dead, failed bit being sort of left behind - while the new bit goes off divorced from the old with a new or at least modified purpose.

Others would couch it in terms of valences and postulates.

Nick

Yeah I guess we do that with each new life postulate to be. The intention is to be brand new and have a clean slate.:coolwink:
 
Top