Religion/Spirituality After Leaving Scientology

[Hatshepsut]

I think that a better question would be... why hasn't any scientist won a Nobel Prize for "discovering" this spiritual answer to any of this?

I think there have been many Nobel type prizes given out on the track for those "discovering" a way to harness and control the awesome life force. It IS time to reverse the trek and give awards for reverse engineering. But we as a race have a penchant for killing anyone coming up with something useful.

 

[Hatshepsut]

Origianally quoted by Mark A. Baker

Le cœur a ses raisons, que la raison ne connaît point. On le sent en mille choses. C'est le cœur qui sent Dieu, et non la raison. Voilà ce que c'est que la foi parfaite, Dieu sensible au cœur. - Blaise Pascal

Translation: The heart has its reasons, which reason does not know. We feel it in a thousand things. It is the heart which experiences God, and not the reason. This, then, is faith: God felt by the heart, not by the reason

wiki excerpt...Blaise Pascal

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Blaise_Pascal

Pensées
The heart has its reasons, which reason does not know. We feel it in a thousand things.[edit] Section I Thoughts on Mind and Style (1-59)

...it is rare that mathematicians are intuitive, and that men of intuition are mathematicians, because mathematicians wish to treat matters of intuition mathematically, and make themselves ridiculous, wishing to begin with definitions and then with axioms, which is not the way to proceed in this kind of reasoning. Not that the mind does not do so, but it does it tacitly, naturally, and without technical rules; for the expression of it is beyond all men, and only a few can feel it.
2
There are then two kinds of intellect: the one able to penetrate acutely and deeply into the conclusions of given premises, and this is the precise intellect; the other able to comprehend a great number of premises without confusing them, and this is the mathematical intellect. The one has force and exactness, the other comprehension. Now the one quality can exist without the other; the intellect can be strong and narrow, and can also be comprehensive and weak.
2
Those who are accustomed to judge by feeling do not understand the process of reasoning, for they would understand at first sight, and are not used to seek for principles. And others, on the contrary, who are accustomed to reason from principles, do not at all understand matters of feeling, seeking principles, and being unable to see at a glance.
3
La vraie morale se moque de la morale.
True morality makes fun of morality.
True eloquence makes light of eloquence, true morality makes light of morality; that is to say, the morality of the judgment, which has no rules, makes light of the morality of the intellect. 4 [Variant Translation]
...it is to judgment that perception belongs, as science belongs to intellect. Intuition is the part of judgment, mathematics of intellect.
4
Se moquer de la philosophie, c'est vraiment philosopher (4)
To make light of philosophy is to be a true philosopher.

 

[Zinjifar]

What would a spiritual scientist do with an 'award'?

Probably something unmentionable or silly. So, they don't get any

Zinj

 

[programmer_guy]

I think there have been many Nobel type prizes given out on the track for those "discovering" a way to harness and control the awesome life force. It IS time to reverse the trek and give awards for reverse engineering. But we as a race have a penchant for killing anyone coming up with something useful.

Name one and I will look it up.

 

[Hatshepsut]

This is purely my speculation about trappings engineered for the spirit in eons gone by. I definitely feel there have been some.

 

[programmer_guy]

This is purely my speculation about trappings engineered for the spirit in eons gone by. I definitely feel there have been some.

That's what I thought.

BTW, I think that your avatar is appropriate.

 

[Tiger Lily]

I have found that there are some great things about people who got involved in Scientology.

They have a natural curiosity about philosophy and religion and spirituality. And they usually have a very unique path they are following, and continue to follow.

They do not accept the standard common, milquetoast explanations for things.

And they talk a lot.

That's a pretty good combination in my book, and it's why I think that Scientology attracted some of the best people in the world.

As for me, I've been studying quite a bit of the history and underpinnings of the Bible, as well as reading and studying a lot of Plato, Marcus Aurelius, Seneca and others from that time period and region.

Last year, I finished studying 5 books on the theory and practice of Tibetan Buddhism, and I have been meditating on and off - mostly off - for the last 5 or 6 years or so.

Next up, since I just bought the complete works of Plato, and a course on Plato from an online course-selling company, I am going to get through as much Plato as I can.

Then, since Paul has gotten me interested in Micheal Newton, I am going to read some of his stuff. (Not Paul's stuff, but Micheal Newton's) And now it looks like I'm going to have to look into that other woman he mentioned in this thread, too.

I truly feel that I have continued to develop spiritually since I left Scientology 10 years ago, and that Scientology was but one step along my spiritual path that taught me very valuable lessons about spiritual vulnerabilities and the corruption of truth that can occur among human beings.

I have also learned the importance of spiritual progress to me in my own life, and have been helped to see that there are a lot of choices that exist, and how important it is to keep choosing and to keep moving.

The biggest lesson I've learned after Scientology is not to let it get you down, and not to allow it to sour you on your own spiritual path.

Exes of all stripes, and even some current Scientologists, have all helped me to keep going, and have given me abundant and excellent advice, guidance and opportunities to do so.

For that I am eternally grateful to this online community of spiritual seekers.

From the bottom of my heart, thank you.

Alanzo you are awesome!!!

I can love and accept any dog way more easily than I can love and accept any human.

Really? That's not the Alanzo I knew . . . . you oozed "ARC" and people loved you --seemed to be reciprocal -- was that an act? If so, you pulled it off very well . . .

Why is that, auntpat?

Is God fucking with me again?

He fucks with me all the time. . . . like a cat plays with a mouse.

No, Alonzo,

It is not Faith vs Gnostic. It is faith and gnostic. Gnostic turns us on and Faith turns God on.

Or does "faith" just shut off judgment? That's what it did to me in Scientology. . . .that's what it does to Muslim terrorists, and did to Jim Jones and David Koresh followers. . . .

I know what you mean about dogs. And I have often said, "I love mankind, it's people I can't stand."

Interesting -- I think I'm just the opposite. . . Mankind in general, and it's "human nature" disgusts me . . .I do not love Mankind, but I feel great love and compassion for individual people all the time.

-TL

 

[programmer_guy]

When Does The Soul Enter The Body?
http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=3KNrTrl_HwM&feature=related

 

[Veda]

Carl Jung addresses his Soul

This audio/video is sometimes difficult to hear but, if one clicks the top, and goes to YouTube video, there's a transcription of it.

This is Carl Jung addressing his Soul, or perhaps "Higher Self" or "Over Soul" would be a better description.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt_-LHKff_g

There are many views on how the notion of a Soul (capital "S") should be regarded. One holds that the person on Earth is no more his entire being than a finger tip is the entire physical body. Re-uniting the finger tip with the rest of the body (the "lower soul" with the "Higher Soul"), according to some, will occur at the end of the person's physical life. Others attempt this connection in this life through prayer, meditation, and other mental/spiritual disciplines.

In Scientology, there is no "Higher Self" or "Higher Soul" recognized, and Scientologists tend to see themselves as the compete expression of their being, They are "thetans" who proudly announce that they do not have a soul but are a soul. Yet, what if there is a Higher Soul, and Scientologists have cut themselves off from that? The result: many little Scientologists with giant egos, cut off from further spiritual exploration that may have made then whole.

Years ago, I even experimented ("squirrelling") with this area, using the basic format of an auditing session. The client ("pc"), after a brief description/discussion of the notion of a Higher Self, was asked if there was (forgive the Scientologese, it was a long time ago) an "ARC break" with the Higher Self, with idea of opening a line of communication. It was interesting but not earth-shaking.

It's perhaps noteworthy that Aleister Crowley wrote of "the knowledge and conversation with one's Holy Guardian Angel" as an objective of Magic(k)al study and exercise. Crowley, towards the end of his life, admitted that his "Holy Guardian Angel" may not have been a separate being, but an aspect of his own mind.

(And to Scientologists reading this. No, this is not about "BTs.")

Even Hubbard wrote (in the 1940s) of his Guardian Angel, whom he named, and seemed to regard her (it was a female) as a separate being.

In any event, this audio/visio by Jung is worth hearing, IMO. It does appear the Jung regarded himself as the lesser expression of a greater Being (no matter how one wishes to word it), one with which he wished to re-acquaint himself.

 

[Gottabrain]

This audio/video is sometimes difficult to hear but, if one clicks the top, and goes to YouTube video, there's a transcription of it.

This is Carl Jung addressing his Soul, or perhaps "Higher Self" or "Over Soul" would be a better description.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt_-LHKff_g

There are many views on how the notion of a Soul (capital "S") should be regarded. One holds that the person on Earth is no more his entire being than a finger tip is the entire physical body. Re-uniting the finger tip with the rest of the body (the "lower soul" with the "Higher Soul"), according to some, will occur at the end of the person's physical life. Others attempt this connection in this life through prayer, meditation, and other mental/spiritual disciplines.

In Scientology, there is no "Higher Self" or "Higher Soul" recognized, and Scientologists tend to see themselves as the compete expression of their being, They are "thetans" who proudly announce that they do not have a soul but are a soul. Yet, what if there is a Higher Soul, and Scientologists have cut themselves off from that? The result: many little Scientologists with giant egos, cut off from further spiritual exploration that may have made then whole.

Years ago, I even experimented ("squirrelling") with this area, using the basic format of an auditing session. The client ("pc"), after a brief description/discussion of the notion of a Higher Self, was asked if there was (forgive the Scientologese, it was a long time ago) an "ARC break" with the Higher Self, with idea of opening a line of communication. It was interesting but not earth-shaking.

It's perhaps noteworthy that Aleister Crowley wrote of "the knowledge and conversation with one's Holy Guardian Angel" as an objective of Magic(k)al study and exercise. Crowley, towards the end of his life, admitted that his "Holy Guardian Angel" may not have been a separate being, but an aspect of his own mind.

(And to Scientologists reading this. No, this is not about "BTs.")

Even Hubbard wrote (in the 1940s) of his Guardian Angel, whom he named, and seemed to regard her (it was a female) as a separate being.

In any event, this audio/visio by Jung is worth hearing, IMO. It does appear the Jung regarded himself as the lesser expression of a greater Being (no matter how one wishes to word it), one with which he wished to re-acquaint himself.

Veda, your views and mine. I agree wholeheartedly.

Thanks for posting the Jung vid. It's terrific.

 

[Gottabrain]

Faith vs. Gnostic

I said that long ago I chose knowledge as my path.

He looked at me and said, "There is never enough knowledge."

I immediately got it. Just as there is never enough sex, never enough food, never enough money, there is never enough knowledge.

Christians speak of love, Buddhists speak of compassion.

That's an element that I am probably missing in this whole thing.

The only problem is that I suffer from Internet Augsberger's, and real life people too often make me puke.

I can love and accept any dog way more easily than I can love and accept any human.

Why is that, auntpat?

Is God fucking with me again?

Dear, dear Alanzo

Has it ever occurred to you that maybe you don't dislike people. Maybe you just love them too much.

Maybe you don't believe they love you as much back.

And maybe - just maybe - they really do.

And maybe if you realised this, it would be easier to be with them in person.

Love,
Sheila

 

[Free Being Me]

This audio/video is sometimes difficult to hear but, if one clicks the top, and goes to YouTube video, there's a transcription of it.

This is Carl Jung addressing his Soul, or perhaps "Higher Self" or "Over Soul" would be a better description.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt_-LHKff_g

There are many views on how the notion of a Soul (capital "S") should be regarded. One holds that the person on Earth is no more his entire being than a finger tip is the entire physical body. Re-uniting the finger tip with the rest of the body (the "lower soul" with the "Higher Soul"), according to some, will occur at the end of the person's physical life. Others attempt this connection in this life through prayer, meditation, and other mental/spiritual disciplines.

In Scientology, there is no "Higher Self" or "Higher Soul" recognized, and Scientologists tend to see themselves as the compete expression of their being, They are "thetans" who proudly announce that they do not have a soul but are a soul. Yet, what if there is a Higher Soul, and Scientologists have cut themselves off from that? The result: many little Scientologists with giant egos, cut off from further spiritual exploration that may have made then whole.

Years ago, I even experimented ("squirrelling") with this area, using the basic format of an auditing session. The client ("pc"), after a brief description/discussion of the notion of a Higher Self, was asked if there was (forgive the Scientologese, it was a long time ago) an "ARC break" with the Higher Self, with idea of opening a line of communication. It was interesting but not earth-shaking.

It's perhaps noteworthy that Aleister Crowley wrote of "the knowledge and conversation with one's Holy Guardian Angel" as an objective of Magic(k)al study and exercise. Crowley, towards the end of his life, admitted that his "Holy Guardian Angel" may not have been a separate being, but an aspect of his own mind.

(And to Scientologists reading this. No, this is not about "BTs.")

Even Hubbard wrote (in the 1940s) of his Guardian Angel, whom he named, and seemed to regard her (it was a female) as a separate being.

In any event, this audio/visio by Jung is worth hearing, IMO. It does appear the Jung regarded himself as the lesser expression of a greater Being (no matter how one wishes to word it), one with which he wished to re-acquaint himself.

Very interesting Veda! I'll have to look at Jung in more detail later.

 

[Free Being Me]

Dear, dear Alanzo

Has it ever occurred to you that maybe you don't dislike people. Maybe you just love them too much.

Maybe you don't believe they love you as much back.

And maybe - just maybe - they really do.

And maybe if you realized this, it would be easier to be with them in person.

Love,
Sheila

A graceful and admirable encouragement

 

[Free Being Me]

For anyone interested in a 'modern' christian parable, I'd highly recommend Philip K. Dick's 'Valis' quadrilogy.

This link has the three books free, but, for some reason fails to mention 'Radio Free Albemuth' as the 4th of the set, although it's also on the page.

Anyway, it's some very interesting reading. Take note Kindle users

Zinj

I had to wiki the VALIS quadrilogy. I had never read it or seen it on a book shelf, much to my dismay. Looks like an awesome read. Thanks Zinj!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VALIS

 

[Zinjifar]

I had to wiki the VALIS quadrilogy. I had never read it or seen it on a book shelf, much to my dismay. Looks like an awesome read. Thanks Zinj!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VALIS

Possibly necessary to clean up some misunderstandings the Wiki element might leave; I have always seen what's called the 'Valis Trilogy' as including:

Valis
Radio Free Albemuth
The Divine Invasion

The Transmigration of Timothy Archer is often left out, for some reason, although to my reading it's an essential element.

Timothy Archer is the fictionalized Bishop Timothy Pike, who was a close friend of Dick's. Excellent reading.

None of the 4 books are *directly* related to the others, except in theme. So, it's possible to start with any of them.

Valis itself may give a better insight into the 'plot' and 'The Divine Invasion' may function best as a culmination, but, since Dick was always a little progressive with 'time', well, it's really not that important.

Anyone familiar with his other work will find elements and deja vu. Especially from 'The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldrich', 'Through a Scanner Darkly' and especially 'UBIK'.

But, Dick was incorporating christian elements throughout his career. 'The Penultimate Truth' is one that immediately comes to mind for me, and one of my favorites.

Zinj

 

[Hatshepsut]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt_-LHKff_g

I was really touched by this video. The field of psychiatry is considered so cold. This intimate attempt by Jung to reach his higher self moved me. I can envision the household he grew up in where his mom and other relatives were mediums and such.
When I was messing with the Excalibur Revisited materials back in 1987 we did group experiments with the Oversoul. We had an ex NOTs auditor from Riverside heading our little group. Geoff Filbert had a belief in the Oversoul.

Veda, your new avatar looks like the cover of my book MYSTICAL QABALAH by Dion Fortune. It is one of her best.

I was fascinated at one time reading the old apocalyptic books. The creation myths that the ancients had came from lore so old you cannot trace it. In the Secret Book of John it goes into the emanations theory I believe. Each of these I consider to be a modality of Cause. The archetypes governed by each Sephiroth or modality are worth understanding. They don't change much. To reconnect with the higher oversoul that governs your realm of operation is what our Indians did. We almost get back into to a pantheon of Gods here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zohar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sephirot
I have never agreed with this Hebrew interpretation of how I see the modalities described. I see the different domains where there are oversouls kind of like large theta bodies (s'cuse the scientologese) or minds that monitor creations. This same phenomena is a cousin to how the Archons or the Aeons were viewed in my opinion. They dominate the predicatable workings of a certain plain and keep things in their place. It was well agreed in ancient times that the if you tried to 'go up the pole' the Archons would chew you up and spit you out. Look at some of the Greek mythology.

What if there Is an oversoul that is keeping all animal life on planet earth from evolving upwards. Or determining how 'huge' plants can grow any more. Oversouls are sort of governors of an area. I never did entertain the idea that they existed 'outside' the periphery of the manifest world though, or had human-like personalities or were sub-gods. I have smacked into myself as myself outside of this charade but not the 'soul'. I have seen souls issue or be sent forth from an anchor point like a ' pawn' somewhere, but these are artificial 'splits' which are controlled artificially. I sometimes view this as a way to keep from being fully present or to keep others from being too fully present in an area. Hell, if you look at it, an Oversoul is a way for a god to have some time off and not be fully present to run a certain section of his creation. He can withhold himself from that area and go into 'action' and not feel he is controlling everything. A step down from Omniprescence.

 

[Commander Birdsong]

I think that a better question would be... why hasn't any scientist won a Nobel Prize for "discovering" this spiritual answer to any of this?

that really is a very interesting question. the physical universe has utterly consistent laws that make phenomena predictable and replicable. spiritual phenomena far less so and in fact the attempt to apply scientific method is like a barking dog making birds take flight.

rejoice!

be exceedingly glad!

that which is of god will be contained in no box.

 

[AnonKat]

MEDIUM

I was really touched by this video....rl]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dY99AADGeJM

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1dvOZ9iIho

QUOTE:

"SCIENTOLOGY THRIVES BECAUSE AMERICA IS EVIL"
-MEDIUM

 

[Veda]

Let's hear what a Medium says

-snip-

The Kaballah Center is a cult, and this lady is just plain annoying. Please don't inundate this thread with videos featuring wacky people, especially those who channel Aleister Crowley. Thanks.

 

[nexus100]

The Kaballah Center is a cult, and this lady is just plain annoying. Please don't inundate this thread with videos featuring wacky people, especially those who channel Aleister Crowley. Thanks.

Not another thread control operation! Geez what is going on here?