************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************
Aleister Crowley: The Other Loch Ness Monster David > ********* > The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] > ************ > Hi Martin, > > On Aug 7, 2012, at 3:11 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > > > Hi Paul, > > > > If ever you have a lucid dream and someone you are talking to > > says, "When I end this dream you will disappear!" You could have > > an argument as to who will disappear first. LOL > > > That's a really good one. I enjoyed the laugh. Yes, that would be a > great argument. Of course I always win my own arguments but it would > be fun. LOL > > > I didn't know LRH did out of body work. He was very disparaging > > about Astral travel. The only semi-scientologist I know who does > > Astral and remote viewing is Ingo Swan. The chief of the RV > > program at Stanford was Hal Putthoff. He was a Scientologist. Ingo > > eventually rejected Scientology. He hoped it would reveal more > > about psi. He made his own discoveries. > > > That is how I see that Ron got a lot of his Whole Track data. I also > ran into a piece that he wrote talking about his 'guide' and his > postulates. If you will listen to RJ 67, Ron's tape about his OT III > research, you will hear him say, "not my particular incident". > That's why I also feel he had to go to the Canary Islands to contact > ridges from that incident in order to run it and get the data. It is > also why I say from my knowingness and others too have stated that he > didn't get it completely right or fully complete it. There is also a > lot of info about Ron and Alister Crowley, 'The' guru of the time > (before Dianetics) of mysticism. > > > Many are stuck in the old adage of "If a tree falls in the forest > > and no one is there to see it - did it fall?" > > > > Our reality is perception of data and we comm in terms of symbols > > or metaphors. > > > To me, not only that but we don't read digital code, ones and zeros, > we integrate and get analog and then pile on symbols and/or metaphors > after that. > > > That we may not be in a position to receive data does not mean that > > the data does not exist. > > > > We and others interpret data received in terms of own metaphors and > > or symbols based on experience. > > > > We create and experience simultaneously. If one interprets all > > experience as creation then the solipsists have a point. LOL. > > > Well, yes. If we are in a Matrix, a virtual reality and one could > say we all create all of our experiences. Then you could go around > being a fantastic solipsist given that you only operate off of > experiences. > > > I agree that the universe is a probabilistic virtual reality. > > > Yes, when I came across that data and that theory in MBT, it > explained a lot to me that I had experienced and just like the one > and two slot, particle/wave experiment, I can see no other > explanation. Not there won't be but this theory/explanation is > totally and fully sufficient. > > > We do have power of choice - but only within the bounds of the rule- > > set and our perceptive abilities. > > > Don't forget the psi uncertainty. I have myself personally, many > times gone beyond what is considered the bounds of the rule-set. And > like Tom says, it can be stretched and I am not the only one to > either witness or exact a stretch of the rule-set. Now for God like > phenomena ... I can see the rule-set holding true. But more on that > later. > > > What we are currently experiencing in this rule set, we experience > > using body perceptions, which give us a common reality. Folks with > > different antenna attached to their sculls may perceive more - or > > maybe less. > > > I'm still in the process of erecting my own personal, humdinger of an > antenna. OT drills, OT knowingness expansion and OT understanding. > You got any other OT stuff I may have missed? > > > This universe or system is set up to help us evolve. (My current > > belief) > > > Me too. > > > Hubbard's view that we are super beings who started existence > > before time began seems to me a delusion of grandeur which gave his > > followers a feeling of superiority. His whole OT thingamabob is > > based on being able to violate the rule set. > > > Yes and I have always felt that was a great way to cave someone in. > You do all of the OT Levels and you're supposed to be OT ... I don't > see that it has been accomplished yet. Not even Ron got there or if > he did, it wasn't permanent or long lasting up to the end or even > past his 'this lifetime'. > > > Violating the rules of the physical universe can be done but > > because the intent to do so stems from outside the universe > > (outside used metaphorically) - no certain objective evidence can > > be obtained. > > > Now here's where I come in and say ... Yes it can if enough get > together and create an entirely new universe for just them to occupy > or that enough in this particular universe come to new agreements on > what the rule-set is. And of course all the ones that didn't > agree ... we'll just call them solipsists. What the heck they'll > never know anything changed anyway. To them it'll just be the latest > system upgrade if they can even be aware of that. > > See, now you got me going again. Because what I just said could in > fact be happening every other moment and it's just that you and I and > everyone else who is not delusional or 100% certified Thetans/spirits > are solipsists to the degree that we don't know that something all > encompassing, major and totally different just occurred. Who was > that guy who said ignorance is bliss. Did he know something that he > hasn't told us??????? Is he still over there somewhere in the wings > LOL. > > > In Scientology, mental compromise is treason. There is no search > > for truth, only the enforced acceptance of totalitarian dogmas and > > cliches. > > > I agree. But I also recognize that there was a lot of truth > discovered in the early pioneering days which is now fairly ignored > with the new Bridge and OT Levels. Not to mention the fact that > management has their own fish to fry. Never mind that you and I > would like a chance at frying fish. But then I guess that's what > brought the like of you and me here to this site. > > > Confusedly yours, > > > > Martin > > > Paul/Level 5 in progress ... not only resolving my mind but now > having to resolve my solipsisms thanks to you. LOL Will I ever be > able to return to bliss? > > > On 07 August 2012 07:36, Paul Tipon wrote: > >> ************* > >> The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] > >> ************ > >> > >> On Aug 6, 2012, at 11:09 AM, [email protected] wrote: > >>> > >>> On Aug 6, 2012, at 8:31 AM, [email protected] wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 06 August 2012 08:18, Paul Tipon wrote: > >> > >>>>> But then I still question if there really is a 'you' out there > >>>>> or is > >>>>> all of this just me and my magnificent imagination) > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Yes and it surprises me that there are not more of us > >>>> solipsists. lol > >>>> > >> Oh yeah. You're one of those guys eh. ;-) Yes, I can see that > >> point > >> but also think there are enough as it is. Now the funny thing is > >> that > >> if you have any kind of an inkling that a Matrix, a virtual > >> environment actually exists ... There is a whole lot of data that > >> there is. Did you know that LRH was into this with his out of body > >> work? I know for myself that solipsis cannot be totally denied. It > >> explains too much both physically and scientifically. You know, all > >> of that mystic stuff that not even Ron talked about but in fact was > >> heavily into. There are mysteries and anomalies in science and of > >> the > >> physical universe that only lend themselves to a solipsis > >> configuration to explain how 'that' can be. > >> > >> Yes, I can see where solipsism is in the here and now. It's just > >> that > >> I'm to smart, knowing and can see across the heavens and Earth, > >> backward, forward and present. So I'm somewhere between all knowing > >> and not knowing at all. What an interesting spot, huh. Proof there > >> is with a skepticism and that it just may not be that way but it sure > >> can explain a lot when nothing else can. > >> > >> For me, I just know that it is true. I then look around and sure > >> nuff, there they are but know that I am not one of them but creepy, > >> that we all may be inhabiting a solipsis. It's just that people like > >> me (ahem!) can see above and beyond the solipsis while still playing > >> the solipsis game. In solipsis ragtime no less. > >> > >>>> To me the greatest evidence against solipsism is that there are so > >>>> many differing points of view each with its created ego which we > >>>> hold onto, > >>>> with our past, to hold onto the identity we created to interact > >>>> with > >>>> others. Some call it ego. Preceding ego will be found the postulate > >>>> that created the identity "to be known". > >> > >> I agree that ego is a component. But then wouldn't an ego keep > >> one in > >> solipsis when there actually might be a virtual reality but we're not > >> supposed to know that. And there you have it, the basic key ... to > >> know. Can we be so sure that we know all there is to know. Of > >> course > >> not but then this is not an argument for solipsis but a potentially > >> possible situation. Just think, the MEST Universe could possibly > >> be a > >> solipsis. > >> > >> So there we are once again. What is real for you is real for you and > >> it may not be real to anybody else. oops, how did I do that ??? now > >> I'm right back into solipsis. I thought I was climbing out of it, > >> out > >> of a virtual and into something real. Now if I could only find out > >> which reality I'm lost in ............. > >>>> > >>>> Martin > >> > >> Paul/Level 5 in progress > _______________________________________________ > Trom mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
_______________________________________________ Trom mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
