The Irreducible Minimum

Deutsch: Rote Zwiebel längs aufgeschnitten

The topic and discussion of the self might be the original topic of philosophy.  It is interesting to consider and to discuss the many layers of considerations which seem to make up the self.

The context of this post was in reply to a comment made by 2ndxmer on Geir’s blog.  I copy it in part:  “Few people managed to not fall into that valence and trap. Speaking for myself, I saw that trap sitting there but I saw many fall into it. It starts with the commision of an overt (sin) of hostility towards someone else in order to get YOUR (one’s own) product.  Like all overts, after the first time it gets easier… and easier… and finally you need a conscience like Alanzo to rub your nose in it – over and over – to either pop out of it, blow from the restim, or really, really work that ser fac up into a lather worthy of . . . (David Miscavige.)”

l liked this post. Though it seems to me that the overt (sin) of hostility is late on a long, long chain of iterations. This type of dramatization is not the start as taught to us but the result of a very long succession of iterations.

Griffeath's cyclic cellular automaton

Griffeath’s cyclic cellular automaton

The model that I’ve been working on incorporates some form of fractal iteration or cellular automata and a seed iteration. So there does not need to be a lie that begins it all, there only needs to be a very simple rule or condition that arises, and when iterated repeatedly, say at Planck rate, can result an entire sub-universe (like this one that we know about), but most of all can result in both mystery and randomity. Both of these are manufactured ideas which facilitate the identification with and the personification of the Self. The only lie, if you will, is the identification which occurs from that point forward. But using the word “lie” is itself part of the illusion.  It only needs to be and is in fact only a consideration, but even having written that, I admit and acknowledge that the word consideration is itself a layer of identification with personification.  

I hadn’t worked on Marianne’s repetitive “who” for a while but decided to give it another go since she insisted. The “who” of Marianne’s thetan, etc., is the irreducible minimum identification. But it is still an identification. Every attempt to reduce it further runs out of, and tends away from the set of iterations which make us human. Underlying this is not a personification in any sense that we normally use it or think of it. The “I” is not an all knowing all seeing being, but is the beginning of a basic lie in which the self is created.  It is the beginning of The Great Mystery,and the beginning of algorithmic randomness which may be the only randomness there is.

Advertisements

187 thoughts on “The Irreducible Minimum

  1. I like this post. The first thing that hit me was a nice explanation of what “free will” is. It is the ultimate randomness. And underlying that is, of course, the great mystery, or unknowable.

    Well done, Chris.

    .

        • Scare? haha I don’t know what you mean. Well we agree on egotism, but I am just trying to introduce another way of looking at it. Trying to introduce another possibility for understanding free will as well.

          Indulge me. Free will and randomness as you say are manifestations. Manifestations are perceived. Attaching a significance like free will to a manifestation could categorize without straining under ego,

        • egotism = excessive and objectionable reference to oneself in conversation or writing; conceit; boastfulness.

          self = The substance of self is thought. It acts as the key filter.

          atman = There is no substance to atman. If self is a “thought donut’ then atman is the hole in that donut.

          Free will = unbridled movement possible within a boundary… like atman within self.

          .

        • Vin asked if scared anyone away.
          Not me, I’m still lurking and evaluating for myself. Interesting!

        • Chris: Yayyy! That’s 1.

          Elizabeth will be here, busy with a Mest project, altho she may be lurking.

        • Chris: I want to smell those roses that I know you are planting.

          This year first in long time I planted 3 rose bushes, 2 red, one white. Also a Dahlia, Snap Dragons, and Petunias along with many cuts (sticks) of my Plumaria plants (frangi pangi, hiawaiian flowers used for lays) that are starting to have wings (leaves). All except Plumaria I got at a very discounted price and I’ve made them survive and bloom. The trick is feeding them right and got that down now. I care less about the grass and let the rain take care best it can with water prices high here. Come play in my garden front and back yard. I have sufficient amount (small enough) to keep the spirits high and the senses pleased. Thanks for enjoying small pleasures in life.

        • Randomness means different things in various fields. Commonly, it means lack of pattern or predictability in events.

          I want to try and show that randomness does not need to have an external input or intention. Maths can totally account for randomness. Please consider perusing Stephen Wolfram’s NKS or NEW KIND OF SCIENCE.

          I am not trying to falsify the idea of external intelligence. I am trying to explore whether manifestations need external intelligence as a fall back position; if manifestations need external intelligence in order to come into existence. Written another way, it seems that when our knowledge and philosophy fail to sufficiently explain the world that we default to spirituality and worse to religion.

        • Seriously. Did you guys watch “Life of Pi?” Those skinny Indian dudes are BAD ASS!

          ((SMILES WHILE NODDING HEAD. BACKS AWAY SLOWLY WITHOUT TURING AROUND…))

        • katageek: “Life of Pi?” Those skinny Indian dudes are BAD ASS!
          ((SMILES WHILE NODDING HEAD. BACKS AWAY SLOWLY WITHOUT TURING AROUND…))

          Dee: No, but I have a good imagination. Good one!

        • The book, as always, is even better. I listened to it after watching the movie. Didn’t detract from the book at all. In fact, I watched it again with me mum.

          The author actually ripped off the story idea from another writer and plagiarism was screamed. But the intent and direction and message of the story is so different that the charges were dropped.

          Hell, nothing Hollywood doesn’t do EVERY. FREAKING. MOVIE.

        • As a boy, I loved Walter Farley’s BLACK STALLION series and ISLAND STALLION series, always imagining myself in as the young lad cut loose by fate to live wildly and freely. This movie trailer has the similar theme of wild untamed animals and young boys coming together with understanding over shipwreck as a backdrop. Shipwrecks, wild animals, and young boys as heroes make great stories.

        • LOL!

          .

          >________________________________ > From: Chris Thompson >To: vinaire@yahoo.com >Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 9:55 AM >Subject: [New comment] The Irreducible Minimum > > > > WordPress.com >Elizabeth Hamre commented: “Hi V… i am so scared that i have moved to Hungary!!!!! hehehe love you all!” >

        • hello my dear i am having one, the food is killing me here, the hungarian hospitality is to good,they all want me to eat and drink all the time… they think that i am toooooo skiny but in my reality they are the one who weight too much.. good god.. the amount of food they put away daily!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! not my reality.. i believe eating is just that, not my interest and i can think better thinks to do than eat. Love you much amd miss you!!

        • Eliz : i believe eating is just that, not my interest and i can think better thinks to do than eat. Love you much amd miss you!!

          Yes! I have some hungarian friends and boy can they put on a spread, even when they went vegetarian, still Way too much food. they can’t stand us skinnier folk I guess. Oh well as long as you’re having a good time and seeing lots of sites. Miss you too, very much.

        • THE CLOUDS FLY LOWER!!!! They seem float right above ones head… i love that. The food is toooooooo rich.. heavy enough to clog up all your senses… and it do just that!

        • Eliz: heavy enough to clog up all your senses…

          Arteries too bet’cha too! Dangers lurk, but not for you my dear!

        • Understood. Eating too much too rich food has been my way of operating for years. I have been preparing for a camping trip this coming October. It is hiking in the Rockies and I need to condition my body if I am to enjoy it. So far lost from 240 down to 216 pounds. Body is rebelling and going through wild gyrations which have felt mentally like riding a bucking bronco. As you say, this is opening my senses.

          I love that kind of weather and we have very little of that here in Phoenix. The ground is too hot and the moisture, even when present, floats far above. Rarely any of the fluffy clouds that you describe. They are too smart to come to this hot dry place! haha

        • You are going camping in October here Nortwest? Its rains by than and could be cold or you believe that the layer of fat will help you? 🙂 The only camping i am planning is in my living room…you can join me there!!

        • Elizabeth, don’t get me to start lying. Camping is just something boys like to do. We won’t be in the northern Rockies by you, but we will be in southern Colorado and it will undoubtedly be frosty. Riding horses in, staying a week on foot and tent camping, then riding horses back out. No hot bath, pork and beans from a tin can, farting around the campfire at night, and a sky full of stars — a boys dream! haha

        • Sounds good to me, and your boys will be happy and so will be Shelly because you will be out of her hair…hehehe. Now about lying that would be a very good topic for your blog, just think no one mentions that why and the comments could be great fun to read.
          I miss being home and i have had a realization this morning: i have known that my life have been so far a fantastic adventure but till i got here i have not realized just how incredible the journey has been. See how people live in this coundry and how they think… well … I know for sure that I live in different planet= in different universe!
          Most of all I am trilled that you all belong into my universe too1

        • Elizabeth: I miss being home and i have had a realization this morning: i have known that my life have been so far a fantastic adventure but till i got here i have not realized just how incredible the journey has been.

          Chris: What a wonderful view!!! I know just what you mean by that! To be able to look around ones world from altitude — to get a view to see the length of a journey from its beginning to its end is truly a gift. Now you truly can have another fresh new beginning. Wonderful! My wish for you is for the next 70 years to be as great an adventure as the 70 years !

        • Love you my dear for the good wish but for wishing for me to be in this body for the next 70 years … now that is a bit to much dont you think so? My body looks a bit pruney by now and i dont even one to viziulize how it would look 40-60 years from now. Mummy! yak–yak…
          but i will stick around if you will you old wingless bird!!

        • Chris: … lost from 240 down to 216 pounds. Body is rebelling and going through wild gyrations…

          Congrats and good on ya! Your organs and bones will thank you, for relieving the stress.

        • Agreed! Thank you. My 6 month goal (I have about 4 months left) is 180 lbs but will be happy with being under 185, zero body fat for me is approx 165. My next step is conditioning but I know the gradients which I can bear so am looking long term. I am using my hiking/camping trip as motivation as I know what the punishment will be if I go unprepared.

  2. That essay on Clear by David Mayo linked from Geir’s blog is enlightening. It essentially confirms for me that Hubbard’s research was basically into his own case.

    Hubbard drew conclusions from “auditing” of his case, and then tried to verify them through the “auditing” of others. I wonder if he actually looked at resulting inconsistencies or simply justified them.

    For example, Hubbard concluded that the only test of an organism is survival. To me this is an opinion which can be justified in many ways.

    However, when we look at what is really there, we see an organism creating and resolving inconsistencies. That seems to be the basic activity of life. That shows that an organism is alive. When that is not happening, the organism is dead.

    .

  3. Anything that is persisting is an inconsistency. We may even say that the aspect of this universe, which is persisting as “constant”, is an inconsistency. Scientists are certainly busy in trying to resolve it. This makes scientists full of life. 🙂

    .

  4. The EP of OT VIII basically seems to be an admission by LRH that the basic conjecture underlying his theory was wrong. That conjecture was that an organism is basically trying to SURVIVE. That was the justification underlying the activity of the Reactive Mind.

    Thus, Hubbard came to a full circle at OT VIII. He seems to have found himself back at square one, with his case apparently unresolved. What a disappointment it must have been. I feel sorry for him. But, no doubt, Hubbard was brilliant and he blazed a lot of trails with his research.

    But Hubbard failed to penetrate the fundamentals.

    .

  5. The following is an interesting observation of Huubard’s state of mind by David Mayo in his article at http://www.ivymag.org/iv-01-02.html:

    “A step in the procedure for handling these new clears was to establish the date when the person went clear. Sometimes the date so found would be before scientology or even prior to the pc’s lifetime. When LRH heard that some persons considered that they had attained the “state of clear” in an earlier practice such as Buddhism, he became very upset. He stated that the idea that a person could go clear through any other means than scientology was “suppressive”. At a certain point, he also got upset at the fact that people were concluding that they had gone clear in scientology auditing. So he specified that a person can validly go clear only in dianetic auditing. He handled the “earlier than this life time” clears by deciding that they either went clear in their last lifetime in dianetic auditing (presum ably if they were young enough for this to be possible) or had attained a new state he dubbed “natural clear”. His new theory was that some people had never been anything but clear. However, he refused, thereafter, to issue any further clarification of what he meant by this assertion.”

    My feeling is that Hubbard seems to be in a games condition with Buddha. He desperately wanted to be better than Buddha. Could this be true?

    .

    • David Mayo stated in his article above:

      “The idea of “harmonics of clear” is quite accurate. The main reason why LRH blew up at the idea of “harmonics of clear”, as expressed in the HCOB I wrote, was, as he told me, that this idea tended to leave him open to the charge that the claims he had made in DMSMH and elsewhere concerning the “state of clear” were fraudulent.”

      Hubbard seemed to be more concerned about his reputation, business and being right. He seemed to be less concerned about being mindful or scientifically accurate.

      .

    • Vinaire: My feeling is that Hubbard seems to be in a games condition with Buddha.

      Chris: I see what you mean. Mayo’s quote that Hubbard stated that he had an “Insatiable lust for money and power” always rang true to me. I have spent quite a bit of time correlating Hubbard’s work with my other work studying the self, but a while back I thought, “Why am I doing this?” I have done better working out things for myself since 2005 than all the previous effort spent on waiting around for Scientology since 1977.

      One of the tricks I see in Scientology is that the tension and anticipation builds between sessions until highly anticipated gains , however small, are subjectively blown out of proportion.

        • I didn’t write my comment very well. Mayo audited Hubbard and in session, Hubbard claimed to have an “insatiable lust for money and power.” — not Buddha. Sorry.

        • oh I got that right, you did not make the mistake..but the old shit would love to have the knowledge of Buddha plus the riches of Midas at the same time, but what he did not understood= LRH that greed having greed is not a spiritual concept but a heavy duty low level aberrated compulsion which was implanted, possibly by one of his invention- implant games in his own track.

      • Chris: One of the tricks I see in Scientology is that the tension and anticipation builds between sessions until highly anticipated gains , however small, are subjectively blown out of proportion.

        That is a good observation. EXPECTATION adds to what one finds in session. One no longer sees what is really there. The preclear’s mindfulness is compromised.

        .

  6. Irreducible minimum? Not really, life: living in the moment makes life very simple affair: As one takes one breath at the time, one’s heart beats one at a time.. we do create things the same way… the rest…those random thoughts which seems to fill the space called head those are the lies, they are not real…
    Good post, and of course LRH was confronting his own case and nothing else and of course the feedback what he got from others was again those persons cases, their reality their inconsistences, whatever, how they have seen, experienced their very own universe, it was their realities how they viewed believed what was real to them.
    LRH has done lot of assumptions and he believed what he had, what he thought, believed in, how he understood the world around him was real to everyone and on that reality-assumptions he has founded the “Church of Scientology”; and that was a very large patch of quick sand
    His reality was his own and therefore could not be a solid foundation the Belief: truth, fact, reality for millions of others.. His mistake was that he believed all was the same for everyone that shows he too has a long way to go: just understanding the meaning living is only happening in the moment

    • It is physical reality that is in present time and not the subjective reality. One is living in the present moment only when one is completely in touch with the physical reality.

      .

      • You are look in the mirror and see that image there? that you see in the now, what you feel that moment is in the now, what you read here in this second that is now, what you will answer in the moment will be now, what you have thought in the moment is in the now, look down at you shoes, that look is now, what you feel, think is now….. there is only now… we cant create yestarday or tomorrow… even when one think I will do tho that tomorrow, that thought ” I will do that tomorrow” is now, and what you will be doing that will be in now… When you think: when I was a boy 10 year old and you see pictures as a boy… those pictures is not past pictures of the past but your self creating -in a new unit of time NOW… and you add emotions to that newly created picture and you ” call” that remembering but you do not remember but created from knowledge and that is the ability we have.
        Only one needs to understand that and one has to realize that all is there. that now: the is… than bingo… one is in the present time which he alway was and will be… Now even Buddha could not say it better than this hehehe 🙂

  7. I agree with the following which Chuck beatty wrote in a recent post:

    The Hubbard promise is “super powers” and regained spiritual abilities of “operating thetans”, pure soul abilities to supposedly be fully conscious, as conscious and aware as you are this second that you read this. But consider Hubbard said about Operating Thetans, that they don’t have to have bodies to operate. At the highest level of ability for a thetan (single soul that each of us are at our most primal level), we can be completely enlightened to the point of NOT having to have a body. It is a very heady spiritual concept.

    The lure of the whole Hubbard shebang, remember, is this primal powerful pure soul state.

    Operating Thetan, definition number 1, thanks to Ken Delderfield and the team that compiled and edited the red hardback “technical” dictionary of Scientology:

    “OPERATING THETAN, 1. a thetan exterior who can have but doesn’t have to have a body in order to control or operate thought, life, matter, energy, space and time….” – L. Ron Hubbard

    Soul astronauts, happy to be pure souls, doing whatever games one does, at that supposedly high spiritual state of being.

    It is simply a delusion that one can exist without a body, and that there is free will.

    There is only randomness. More later…

    .

  8. “OPERATING THETAN, 1. a Thetan exterior who can have but doesn’t have to have a body in order to control or operate thought, life, matter, energy, space and time….” It is a very heady spiritual concept.”
    Elizabeth: Concepts considerations are born out of experiences, they describe- define explain past events actions movements: doing –nesses.
    One could not talk of, describe, known of anything of it would not have happened before.
    We only know things which was once experienced therefore my reality is that State described before has existed and existing and Experienced in the past that is the very simple reason one knows of it and can talk about it, describe it.
    Just because that state is not understandable for one person that do not means it do not exist in the Universe of others.. So assumptions what is there or not there: real for others and what can be done by others remains for us only on assumption?

    • Elizabeth: Just because that state is not understandable for one person that do not means it do not exist in the Universe of others.. So assumptions what is there or not there: real for others and what can be done by others remains for us only on assumption?

      Chris: Totally agree, plus you will never catch me out saying what is real or not real for another. I am totally sure that everyone’s reality is quite real to them!

      • Sanity seems to be based on Objective physical reality and not on Subjective mental reality.

        Present time seems to be easily associated with physical reality and not with mental reality.

        .

        • I was talking about mental reality, even thinking which I believe mental reality, can only be done in the moment of thinking…. when one writes, not the hand writes on the computer, but first there is the moment of mental doingness than comes the motion of the body part, but that body part just moves on mental command.

        • Being in present time with mental reality requires

          (1) Perfect mindfulness
          (2) Treating mind as a sense organ
          (3) Treating reality to be made up of physical and mental objects.

          When one does that then ideas, such as, “Thetan without a physical body roaming around the universe” simply become mental objects. All mental and physical objects are impermanent according to Buddha. I am in tune with Buddha.

          .

        • It is not a matter of liking or disliking. Those are simply opinions.

          It is the matter of mindfulness: Seeing things as they are.

          .

  9. “My feeling is that Hubbard seems to be in a games condition with Buddha. He desperately wanted to be better than Buddha. Could this be true?”
    Him Buddha? or in game condition with Buddha?… he did not have the equal power which could put him in that category: maybe wanting to be yes, but being that and happening in reality… please ….that is toooo farfetched concept: now that I would put down as Hubbard’s day dream or wildest dream or he sent a letter the Santa Clause and asked for that knowledge-wisdom as xmas present put under the three but he was not a good boy because of that reason LRH never received or had in his possession the wisdom of Buddha’s.
    LRH when compared to Buddha was nothing but lowlife in his last life…so let’s not do any comparison… but keep it in mind even Buddha himself… hehehe… had a nice bundle of inconsistencies under his belt…did he ever..

      • Then it seems that we should be careful when declaring “how things are.” This seems to be the tightrope that scientists must walk if they are to be successful. There seems to be somehow a correct balance, doesn’t there? Too much reality and too little reality are unhealthy?

        • Many of us will want to argue that there really is such a thing as schmuck. Kind of the way we say there is an atom. We should address how to find balance; how to know when we are looking from a point of irreducible minimum. In my tautological universe, what does it truly mean to call a spade a spade? When is calling someone schmuck a thought-stopping label and when is it well deserved?

  10. Fine article Chris and interesting. Loved all the above discourse. Nice to hear Vin’s point of view. My considerations run alongside of Elizabeth but only because she’s the flower in my pot. The pot is temporarily placed in Chris’s garden and Vin is giving rays of light for all to better see with in our own space.
    Hey, it’s end of evening and lights out. 🙂

  11. David Mayo On the State of Clear (click hyper-link)

    Anyone is at least somewhat causative over his own mind. So anyone can find an interpretation of this definition of “clear” that he can attest to. The states of “MEST Clear”, “Theta Clear”, “Cleared Theta Clear”, “Clearing Course Clear”, “Clear-OT”, and, finally, “Dianetic Clear”, and “Word Clear” were equally absolutistic when first stated, but when people started attesting to them, the definition of each, or the criterion for allowing a pc to attest to each, was similarly watered down. This sequence has been repeated over and over throughout the history of scientology. — David Mayo

        • I think it says that at times, even Hubbard was faced with cognitive dissonance. When he faced that with enough reality, he made better changes in the Tech. When he faced it with too little reality he failed to change or changed the Tech with flights of possibly drug induced fantasy. His errors, post 1950’s, seem to err on the side of too little reality; too little understanding, tolerance and compassion for his people.

          There is a lot in this issue of balance to learn about healthy living.

      • it has been achieved but can not be proved for many reason, one of them is : the writen communication, because each being who uses that tool in communication has different reality on the words therefore understanding of the meaning and the second is one only believes in his very own dear valuable reality.
        Unless one can produces solid manifastation in their universe which can be seen with their “eye” than the the achieved state is not believed, very good example here in this blog. Vinay, he mostly dismisses the knowledge I have, that the words I speak is from experience simply because I dont behaive properly, I dont have proper education, I dont quote, and in fact these facts should point toward the State which has been achieved by me long time back because I have not studied these material of which I write of, I am not quoting any one….
        There are other reason that state is not believed by any one but it is existing and very permenent.
        By the way the most SOLID REASON NO BELIEVED: IS NOT HAVING REALITY IN THEIR UNIVERSE because of their own occluded reality to that fact AND THERE IS NO MASS AGREEMENT OF ITS EXISTENCE: THEREFORE IT CANT HAPPEN.. NEVER WILL HAPPEN..NOT ATTAINABLE.. LRH WAS A LIER.. and these reasoning alone undermine the State existence and its reality.

        • Thank god for Buddha, if he would not put the thoughts how to do these or that, how to behave, think, be like, there all you folks would be empty headed: unfilled, blank vacant in the mind, just zombies walking about since you do not have your own experiences of the world, of the universe it self.. you can only quote what you have memorised from text, none of you can thing for self, none of you is a free thinking entity… you are all boxed into one way of thinking, believing and can’t move out of the robotic behavior.

          You have nothing without his teaching his wisdom, his knowledge!!!!!!!!!!!

          Buddha is the only free thinking person on this planet and all you followers are just a watered down replicas –models- imitations -simulations of him who all wants to be wise- knowing intelligent like him and you all want to know what he knows and all you poor saps have done just moved into his VALANCE and imitating him…. including you..

          You ALL have given up self, your powers, your reality; your abilities because BEING IN the VALANCE of the other person is SAFE… nothing can harm one that way… Being in that Valance is the blanket which you all protect yourself from confronting –experiencing the true reality what is around you!!
          You all have become prisoners of that valance and therefore you no longer existing standing as on individual creator! You folks are no longer present as self in the Universe…you all have given up….and given away your own self with that your knowledge.

          Yes I am aware that It has no importance of being Individual.. but it is good to know that one can be and one is, and one has the choice..

          But you saps don’t have choice.. You are in a solid valance one thinking person who was Gautama therefore you all have given up, erased –removed – obliterated yourself with that your potential of creative powers and free thinking with that you all become robotic little statues which litters have of this planet’s surface!

          And you Vinay, making statements putting down LRH that he wanted to be like Gautama!!!!
          What are you doing if not the same as you accuse of what others doing?

        • Eliz: You ALL have given up self, your powers, your reality; your abilities because BEING IN the VALANCE of the other person is SAFE”

          Awesome post! It should be widely circulated.
          I want to be, or be like _______ (fill in blank).

        • Same thing can be said about you following Hubbard as your criterion. You may say that your ideas are your own from your experience, but are they?

          Suggestion has a great value especially when it is tied with one’s desire.

          Sent from my iPhone

        • LRH’s knowledge about spirituality same as your own from buddhisom.. which is nill.. so dont compare mine just because I use words which is in the tech dic. I left scientology in 82 and my path is not of on scientologist since than but my own…

        • Elizabeth, you may invalidate LRH, but I notice that your reality parallels LRH’s suggestions. I wonder if this is what is known as conditioning.

          Sent from my iPhone

        • I do see what you mean. But in fairness, the State of Clear has many objective definitions – Great claims that beg for great proofs. I am fine with anyone believing what they want to so long as it doesn’t impinge on my own right to believe what I want to. My own reality is personal and not easy to communicate as it roils and changes all the time.

        • Chris, in reality there is no clear, but only the course material is the same at that level which it was incerted, the outcome the cognition was different for each individual which can not be compaired. Not like the first grade for children: they should all be able to read or write.
          LTH put there a defenation which was his reality only.. the rest cant be compaired and definately not to his heality. The whole subject is crap and belong to the outhouse as on aberrated outlook

        • Elizabeth: the cognition was different for each individual which can not be compaired. Not like the first grade for children: they should all be able to read or write.

          Chris: Bingo! I’ve been thinking this for some time now but you are the first to articulate it. This is totally what I think occurs. They want to call it the clear cog. Well, the clear cog is that “I am clear.” Not too startling. But what does each individual experience? That is personal for them alone. All the circumstances are from them and for them alone.

      • Oh the need for solid avidence is so huge, wanted, desired a must have, so heavily implanted reality that one must not believe unless one SEES something, that the person can only seeing walls, obsticles, the make wrong, negative thinking, sure wipes out the positive.
        those incradible wall they are just words and nothing more!
        You folks looking for spiritual existance but want avidence in solidity and you never will find or experience that state because of your belief…. the beliefs alone is the only wall which holds one away.

        • Elizabeth: You folks looking for spiritual existance but want avidence in solidity and you never will find or experience that state because of your belief…. the beliefs alone is the only wall which holds one away.

          Chris: I should be clear and say that I do not yearn for proof of these things, these claims of others. I have my own reality and it is satisfying to me. But if someone wants to make a great claim and look meaningfully in my eyes looking for my agreement, then they may have to expect to stand behind their claims and “show me.”

        • I do believe that we care about similar things and are on similar paths. I believe I am on a spiritual path of discovery. But I made a mistake where Hubbard was concerned – giving away too much benefit of the doubt. Maybe I complain too much about Hubbard but I haven’t done it to the neglect of my life and family’s well being. I respect others and their right to believe what they want. I just do not believe very easily. I do not have too many hidden standards. There are plenty of Scientology standards which are right out there in the open, in plain sight that beg to be measured. So if someone wants to make a great claim and state that it is objective, they should expect to have to prove it.

        • My own sense is that we enjoy sharing out adventures and experiences but no two people walk the same path. We can walk similar paths but it is we who lay down the path we walk as we walk it. Therefore it can never be the same even for the same person as it is continually new in every moment.

      • OK… the other reason is in none believing that Clear or OT State [whatever definition that has is not believed in because by now people know that words cannot be trusted since they know from experience that words are the most manipulative tool ever created by the ‘’I” the ‘’self”. [ lie- lying what is we all know about and use as a tool to deceit,: therefore verbal communication cannot be trusted: needs to be proved.]
        Verbal communication is not reliable, one needs proof in manifestation in solidity as in agreement by many in order to be believed in something..
        While LRH has presented a different reality and therefore that subject is handled the same way: prove it please! But spirituality never can be proved in solidity.
        Even Buddhism is just concepts of words agreed by millions-billions? The reality of those words who practice cannot be ‘’seen’’ by eyes… what one ‘’see’’ by eyes is bodies practicing certain postures, doing ritual, using colors, eating different way, etc…etc.. and lots of statues millions of them made out of every kind of solid material this planet provided.
        BUT ONE HEARS AND READs : I BELIEVE, I AM is that! hahaha
        But not one person can ‘’see’’ spirituality with eyes, they just ‘’see’’ bodies and hear words… and nothing more.

        • yes I write, words can be writen down and I believe that you use them too for making your statements… Do you think your writen words have more value than mine? If so than how, do tell!

        • Hehehe yes they are words… good observation.. but they are mine and not quoted stuff like yours, when you people want to look smart be inteligent you quote somebody who is or was inteligent free thinker who had his experiences and his knowledge was based on his experience.
          Well, quoting that is not inteligent that only show that who you quote is itelligent and when you quote show that you are only robotic parrote who has nothing in his head of his own…

        • Eliz, that is soooo true.
          I like when people say what they have to say in their own words, even yes, if they got the idea from another. They then make it their own and a more interesting discussion. Chris is very good at that and speaks his own mind which is appreciated. Of course no question that you speak for yourself and I love it and it’s inspiriting. Yes, occasionally read what another has written, but as you say, shows that persons intelligence, and that’s fine for short lines or educational purposes. On a blog it seems to me that we are discussing what we think about a subject. I don’t write much because I don’t have the background for writing, except simply. Plus, I try to not think too much, hehe 🙂

        • Chris; LOL! You write just great! And your thoughts seem tranquil – not given to fits and bouts.

          Hey, thanks, now I can throw a hissie fit and some muck into the gears, so everything will come out Clear! Teehee and mischievous fun!

  12. V …”A delusional person can provide the exact same argument”.
    how would you know what is real or delusional? Very funny statment.. totally ignorant of the facts… maybe Buddha said it some place was is deluisonal and what is not?

  13. V…..Same thing can be said about you following Hubbard as your criterion. You may say that your ideas are your own from your experience, but are they?

    You never have read anything quoted by me which was said by LRH.. I do not used his teaching,,, his dogma a a safety blanket when I want to say something or make a statement but you do that regularly.

    • Conditioning has to do with unconscious behavior based on what has been suggested. Quoting is conscious behavior and not conditioning.

      Sent from my iPhone

  14. There are a lot of ex-Scientologists who still behave unconsciously according to suggestions in LRH’s materials. They believe in implants because they have “experienced” implants as suggested in LRH materials. They believe in a “thetan without a body” because they have “experienced” thetan without a body, as suggested in LRH materials.

    People, who are hypnotized, really “experience” what is suggested to them. Then they start to believe in it because they have experienced it. They never doubt it.

    They have certainty as LRH wanted, even when they say they think nothing of LRH.

    LRH won.

    ..

    • The anti-dote to such conditioning is MINDFULNESS. However, such people rail against it.

      In my opinion, Buddha, who introduced mindfulness was the first scientist and engineer to operate as such in the spiritual field.

      Anybody having issues with Buddha’s teachings, seems to have some unresolved issues of their own.

      .

      • Vinaire: In my opinion, Buddha, who introduced mindfulness was the first scientist and engineer to operate as such in the spiritual field.

        Chris: It is a conjecture of mine that men and women have routinely worked things out for themselves throughout history. But like many entertainment celebrities of today, it takes many factors to escalate a prophet or rabbi or teacher’s status to that of superstar. Only very few have ever been published. Fewer of their works made it down through the ages. I think that followers of enlightened teachers project ego for their teachers that their teachers probably did not have. I think it is great to study what the great teachers said and accomplished. It still falls on each of us to attain a measure of enlightenment for ourselves regardless of teachings.

        I think many of us can and do achieve Buddha quietly.

        • I would agree to that.

          What makes a superstar in the field of spiritual knowledge (like Buddha) is the simplicity and clarity of their expression, which inspires others to look and find enlightenment.

          In today’s age of Internet, almost everyone has the opportunity to be published. I am looking forward to some new superstars.

          .

        • Chris:I think many of us can and do achieve Buddha quietly.

          I think you’re right. Those that have those goals learn and by nature throughout life, look into many different teachers and take the best of each, receiving what we ourselves need.

    • Such conditioned people seem to propagate their conditioning to others, because they are so certain about their “experiences.” They tend to force their reality on others by constantly harping on it.

      .

  15. CH…Chris: I should be clear and say that I do not yearn for proof of these things, these claims of others. I have my own reality and it is satisfying to me. But if someone wants to make a great claim and look meaningfully in my eyes looking for my agreement, then they may have to expect to stand behind their claims and “show me.”
    And when one arrives to reality where one do not have the need or desire to prove ones abityly what one is or what one can do, there is no importance to have it exibited verbaly or otherwise.

    • Eliz, another thing I like about your comments is that you don’t push any made up words like some sect’s do. You speak plain english for greater understanding, not from another labeling prison. No 2 cents, just a bouquet of flowers.

        • Chris: Smells good.
          Glad you like it. Recently got rose bushes and flowers at the discount 1/2 price and they do better than full price. May your days be filled with sweet smells of gardena or any flower you like, mocked up or the real thing. What’s real anyway? What we make it huh?

        • Chris: Yup. Plus stolen beer tastes better! (I got that from a movie somewhere and thought how true! haha)

          LOL. Also one could buy it, pretend that you stole it, think it isn’t good for you or shouldn’t have it and hmmn good!

  16. My friend Ivan presented me with this book TERTIUM ORGANUM by P.D. Ouspensky.  The title refers to THE THIRD CANON OF THOUGHT, A KEY TO THE ENIGMAS OF THE WORLD.

    The work is concerned with the nature of the universe and cosmic consciousness – anyone who hobbies to struggle with those matters will find this book to be most insightful and helpful. Download Tertium Organum here free, unabridged and yours forever:

    Tertium Organum by P D Ouspensky
    P.D. Ouspensky starts out with the implicit belief that something cannot come from nothing. He says,
    “Knowledge must start from some foundation, something must be recognized as known; otherwise we shall be obliged always to define one unknown by means of another.”
    My thought is that the desire to know brings about expectation. Expectation brings about speculation. Speculation brings about assumptions. And assumptions bring about beliefs. And, thus, knowledge expands.
    The seed of all knowledge seems to be the DESIRE TO KNOW. Where this desire comes from is anybody’s guess.

    Here is my favorite Hymn.
    The Creation Hymn of Rig Veda

    .

    • Vinaire: The seed of all knowledge seems to be the DESIRE TO KNOW.

      Chris: Your entire comment was thought provoking. For a while, I have been going with an opinion similar to your comments. My difference would only be in the language I would couch the thought in. I am trying to abandon personifications and the connotations that go with such a word as “desire.” It’s not very important overall. It is just a mindful device of my own. Doing so leaves my mind open and ready to receive when a fresh perception arises.

  17. Desire has something to do with conditioning. It seems to be a good area to investigate with mindfulness.

    Scientology auditing can lead one into conditioning in the absence of mindfulness.

    What is missing in the basic Scientology TRs is mindfulness.

    .

    • Back around 1978, I was removed from the post of TRs Word Clearer at Flag Land Base in Clearwater. I discovered recently that it was ordered by David Mayo because I was “being too thorough”. Taking too much time in word clearing TRs was apparently delaying auditors from quickly going into session.

      As far as I recall, my success rate of debugging students on the TRs course was very high. The primary reason for this success was that I was word clearing students not only on TRs but also on mindfulness. Being from India, that is how I had understood TRs to be. Apparently, the concept of mindfulness didn’t sit well with the executives in Scientology. It was considered “squirreling.”

      Thanks to Dennis Erhlich. The pieces are now falling in place.

      .

        • Hi Vin,
          To me Ego is Ego. Conditioning to me is an additive, is changing something, possible improvement or detrimental. Like one conditions his mind, car seat or some food. What cha think?

        • From the viewpoint of mindfulness anything “fixed” may be considered conditioned. It doesn’t have the connotation of good or bad. It is just “fixed”. God! it reminds me of my cat. Ugh!

          .

        • Thanks vin. Meaning it’s changed back to it’s original form? How was it before it was conditioned? Good to have your cat fixed unless you like and able to take care of kittens, nice!

        • Well Dee, you really want to know the nitty gritty? One conditions oneself from the get go by making postulates and keeping them. The moment you make a postulate and keep it, you reduce the scope of the next postulate that you can make.

          Interesting, eh! There is no limit on the postulates you can make as long as you are not fixing those postulates in place.

          Be nimble, be fast…

        • Awesome. That choices narrow one’s life vector.

          This is what I teach my children. Rather than generalities like “you can be anything.” I don’t really think its true that we “can be anything.” We are born with certain predilections, instincts, talents. There was never a time in my life when I was going to become a governor of a province in India.

        • vin: Interesting, eh! There is no limit on the postulates you can make as long as you are not fixing those postulates in place.
          Be nimble, be fast…
          Understood. thanks Vin. I do practice changing a lot in my life and it’s amazing and free-ing. I have only one postulate or goal that what will happen to me when I leave my body, otherwise I’m becoming more nimble and fast on all the rest. 🙂

        • It seems to come down to “me” or “I” in the final stretch. Here are two of my conjectures:

          (1) Soul versus Atman

          The eastern concept of Atman is incorrectly translated in English as soul. The two concepts are as different as a “doughnut hole” is different from “doughnut.”

          Let’s imagine a “doughnut” that is made up of considerations (thoughts, ideas, assumptions, expectations, suppositions, conjectures, speculations, etc.). Basically, we are looking at a “doughnut” made up of thought material. This is the concept of SOUL in western religions.

          Now let’s look at the “doughnut hole.” This hole is defined by the doughnut. If the doughnut is gone, the hole is gone too. But that hole has no substance. There is nothing there. This is the true concept of ATMAN in eastern religions.

          When there are no thoughts or considerations, there is no soul, and there is no atman either.

          Atman, being nothingness, is considered to merge into parmatman, the surrounding nothingness, when all thoughts and considerations are dissolved.. Parmatman cannot be described because there is nothing there to describe.

          On the other hand, soul of western religions cannot merge into God because God is considered to be something or someone, The concept of soul dissolving into nothing is not there in western religions. Soul is considered to be something that is held in some state after death.

          Atman is considered in Hinduism to be indestructible and indivisible. Bhagavad Gita says:

          O Bharata (Arjuna), all beings were unmanifest before they were born and will become unmanifest again when they are dead; they are manifest only in the intermediate stage. What is the point then for lamentation? (II-28)

          All this can be said about atman because it is not made up of any substance… not even thought.
          .
          .(2) Soul disintegrates same as body disintegrates after death.

          At death, the body disintegrates into physical particles (atoms and molecules), and the identity that was the body is dissolved. Similarly, the observing and thinking part of the person (the living soul) also disintegrates into considerations (thoughts, ideas, assumptions, expectations, suppositions, conjectures, speculations, etc.), and the identity that was the person is also dissolved. That is my current understanding.

          However, the particles and considerations remain and they can recombine into another “body plus living soul” configuration. There is infinity of such recombination.

          What are the ultimate laws underlying this disintegration and reintegration, I don’t know the details at the moment. But this seems to be going on forever like complex cycles of some eternal wave according to Hinduism.

          Nirvana is something different altogether. It happens to a live soul. In my opinion, nirvana is like de-condensation of CONSIDERATIONS. It is the separation of perception-point from all its considerations. This is called giving up of all attachment in Hinduism. One then sees things as they are without any filters as in Buddhism. There is no individuality in terms of attachment to considerations. A perception point is the same as any other perception point. It does not add anything to what is observed or experienced.

          Nothing arrives at Nirvana. it is what remains after all attachments are dissolved. I call it a perception-point. But even the perception-point dissolves at parinirvana by merging into its own manifestation… something like electron merging into positron.

          Parinirvana is probably what occurs at death, where the live soul, that was already reduced to a completely detached perception-point, merges back into its own manifestation, extinguishing both. The laws of disintegration and reintegration are thus bypassed. But this is only my speculation.

          The basis of this speculation is removal of all inconsistencies that I am aware of at this level.

          .

        • Vin: God! it reminds me of my cat. Ugh!

          Chris: Ok. Watch it Vin! If you must ad hom the cat, you are going to have to take it elsewhere. I used to be ok with this until my little brown Hershey cat won me over… Now she has conditioned me to see that she is cute and smart. And she raised my IQ 20 points up to 80.

        • Vin: My cat…. He settles himself right between the computer screen and myself.

          Mine does that too and when insistent, I finally take out a minute to put her on my lap and give some personal attention. Then she seems satisfied for awhile.

        • Good post. You are now a member of my tautological universe. Say more what you mean by “ego is ego” please. (I may start my own tautological cult. I wonder it that has any traction? Everywhere I turn, I see tautology. Last year it was fractal, then cellular automata, now it it tautology!)

        • Chris: Say more what you mean by “ego is ego” please.

          And then, keeping it simple language by simple dictionary. Ego, egoism, egoist, egoistic. egotism, egotist, egotistic, egotistical, and egotistically. I am now showing off in my simple egotistic manner. 🙂

  18. Hi !
    Some random thoughts I´m chewing in a sleepless night:…..

    Existence seems to consist of an interaction of cycles of action which grows into fractal structures.

    Consistence would be harmony in those interactions.

    Understanding would be the identification of those cycles of action…. that would be mindfulness, maybe I will put this on Vin´s blog too.

    A big hug pal!

    • Just great to hear a word from you my friend! Yes, I see what you mean and see that too. My attention seems to catch upon the inconsistencies between those interactions.

      This week I’ve had trouble seeing the difference between Vin’s Buddha quote of “seeing things as they really are not as they seem to be.” When he explains it, I get it, but then it sort of dissolves away and damned if I am sure what that means.

      I no longer take myself very seriously as an individual as such but in the scheme of things merely as a sense organ for God’s own experiment, edification, experience, and amusement. The Book of Job in the Holy Bible comes to mind. Yet, even in feeling less individualism, I feel more a part of things — no less than a tree or star.

      • Yes pal, we are children of the universe! I try to live life with as little significance as possible this days, like a dog or a tree. I wrote a comment on KG´s blog, I think you will know what I meant.

        About Buddha and Vin I always wonder how in hell I´m gonna know when I´m seeing things as they really are and not as they seem to be, and I haven´t got a f****ng clue, if I ever get a satisfactory answer´you will be the first to know!!! I feel that all we ever do is give meaning to things before we are even able to see them! like when we are staring at the background noise on a TV set, remember?

        Hey! This TV set thing is giving me an idea: Maybe there are many universes in front of us, even an infinite number of them, and what we see and experience depends entirely upon us……….what we can focus on……what kind of reality we can collapse……shit!…..I really like this answer! I liked a lot that TV set experiment, and now your comment drove me here, and I don´t think I will ever get a better answer than that, imagine if we could move freely between those universes!
        Maybe we could start a religion with that… Ha ha ha!!!

        • LOL! Like I say, we are barely the puppets, not even the strings and surely not the puppet masters! hahaha The universe is big a wild and as you say, “what we see and experience depends entirely upon us.” When I go down to the taco stand to get a bite to eat I try to remember that a person in China might pay big bucks to have the experience that I’m having for $4, so I try to enjoy the adventure. In the big scope of it all my own life is similar to a few epithelial cells on the skin of God . . . no more, but surely no less! It’s all good old friend.

          You should make pilgrimage to Phoenix for a visit this winter! I know a good place for you to stay! Vinaire should come out at the same time and the “three unknowables” could ride again!

        • Let me help resolve the mystery of “Seeing things as they really are not as they seem to be.” as it means to me…

          The last time I saw Chris having problem with it, I changed the wordings to “Observe things as they are without adding anything to them,”

          Let me explain it now as follows: “While observing, let the mind associate things freely, but become very alert when an inconsistency comes to notice.” All these three statements are the same to me.

          Follow up the inconsistencies with: http://vinaire.me/2013/09/11/contemplation-2/

          The idea of pilgrimage to Grand Canyon somethime in 2014 is quite attractive to me.

          .

        • Now it comes back to me. The operative word is closer to “seems” than it does to “see.” Don’t create additives that are obviously additives, assumptions, etc.,. The rest of it has to settle out on its own. Feeling better already, thanks Vin.

        • Vin: The idea of pilgrimage to Grand Canyon sometime in 2014 is quite attractive to me.

          Chris: We can even crawl the last bit on our hands and bloody knees if that will induce you to make it here!

        • I will study carefully Vin´s explanation, but I don´t quite trust my mind yet as much as to believe everything it shows me, it has played tricks on me before.

          I like very much the idea of a pilgrimage, but maybe not quite as soon. The invitation is very much appreciated and I look forward to it 🙂

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s