1. Body, Mind and Soul

Spirit is the invisible-to-the-eye animating agent that brings vitality to otherwise lifeless matter.

A soul is an individual unit of sentient life.  It is the spiritual being.

Souls, so far as we can tell, are of the same quality as spirit. Souls seem to be distinguishable from spirit by carrying the notion of individuality or demonstrating it through operation of, and identifying with, an organism and exercising some measure of sentience.

Thoughts are those considerations, ideas, intentions, and similar units of mental creation of other descriptions that are produced by souls.

Mind is the combination of, or repository of, thoughts generated by souls, including mental mechanisms and systems devised by individual souls to satisfy interest, curiosity, and convenience.

Physical matter reality consists of the observable, measurable components and combinations of energy and matter in space and time.

The body is the physical human organism that is distinguishable from soul or spirit, but which is animated and operated by spirit or soul.  When imbued with soul or spirit the body is alive.

Spirit, soul and thought can only be measured indirectly.  That is because they do not apparently consist of energy and matter located in space and time.  However, they can be observed to create effects in physical matter reality. They can only be objectively evaluated against those effects that they create in the physical matter reality universe.  Because soul and spirit cannot be observed directly through the five senses nor measured by physical matter reality instruments, they have largely been ignored or denied by many sciences.  That ignorance is more recently being challenged by modern thinkers conversant in both advances in science and traditions of spirit.

Whether souls are actually separate units or individual manifestations of a greater, all-encompassing body of spirit is a philosophical question that has been argued through the ages.  Since neither can be measured and directly scientifically evaluated nor described precisely by words, ultimately that question is answered by each individual in accordance with his or her own perceptions, awareness, experiences, knowledge, beliefs, and conscience.

This work is designed to assist an individual become more acquainted with soul and spirit.  It is based upon the idea that increasing such familiarity can lead to more spiritually fulfilling states of awareness or consciousness and more meaningful lives.

A soul is capable of the creation of effects on other souls and physical matter reality.  It does so through animation, the as yet scientifically inexplicable process of bestowing life.  It also apparently does so through thought.  A being’s considerations are so effective that they seem to dictate how others and the world itself appear and how they affect the individual.  Wayne Dyer has said, ‘when you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change.’   That would serve as a fine exercise to test for yourself to determine whether the ideas conveyed here have any validity or appeal for you.   Before you continue reading try it for yourself.   Alter your own viewpoint in any fashion you choose, then go out and take a walk or a ride or a drive and see how the world appears from that new viewpoint.   If you are undecided on how to change your viewpoint, try to assume a more optimistic, positive outlook; then take your walk or your ride with that attitude.  From this new point of view talk to people you have talked to before from an earlier viewpoint or outlook.  See whether your change of viewpoint and outlook creates an effect upon others and whether it changes the way things look to you; even if only ever so slightly.

If and when you see that your considerations can change the world and even the people in it, you may wish to continue reading.

180 responses to “1. Body, Mind and Soul

  1. Marty, my dear, I got nuttin’ to add. I just want you to know I am here trackin’ with ya, and enjoying what you are putting out there.

    I so appreciate that you are willing to share snippets of your life journey. Thank you.

    Nancy

  2. gretchen dewire

    I have definitewly experienced this phenomena.For a long time I was depressed and drowning in self pity due to being somewhat disabled. by a back problem. After practicing meditation for a year, I decided this attitude had to go. I refuse to be a victom. I refused to let self pity be a part of my life. My life has completely changed. People treat me alot different and many wonderful opportunities have opened up for me. Some people would call this a miracle. Change the way you look at things and the things you look at change has become my favorite mantra.

  3. I assume this is the beginning of a new book? I like it.

  4. I assume this is the beginning of a new book? I like it. I never picked up on the the soul being individual or part of a body of spirit. Hmmm.

  5. Excellent Marty

    Start of your new book? If so,it sounds like it will be an interesting read.

    I like the aspect of getting right down to encouraging one to try the concept you presented out,right from the get-go.

    I am very interested to see where you go to with this. My guess is that the exercise of putting your thoughts together, and by necessity having to inspect them intimately, you yourself will move to new realizations.

    I am wishing you a wonderful and satisfying journey.

    Eric

  6. Hi Marty,

    thanks for the above. Very necessary definitions for discussing what Ron would call a thetan. Quite coincidentaly I read, below, this piece from the latest book I am reading, Five Myths About Nuclear Weapons by Ward Wilson.
    “Philosophers of science have observed that scientists tend to fit data into existing frameworks even if the framework does not do justice to the facts. Investigators deduce evidence in support of theory. Theory, once accepted, determines to which facts they pay attention. According to Thomas Kuhn, the several fields of science are each dominated by a “paradigm,” an accepted body of related concepts that establishes the framework for research. The paradigm determines the phenomena that are important and what kinds of explanations “make sense.” It also dictates the kinds of facts and explanations that are to be ignored because they are outside the paradigm or not relevant to the problem the paradigm has defined as important. Paradigms condition investigators to reject evidence that contradicts their expectations, to explain it away, to deny it, or simply to ignore it.”
    This might help someone who has a battle with the apparent nothingness of the spirit or soul, and science’s dismissal of any subject that infers life is anything but material.

    • martyrathbun09

      Thanks for that. Just started watching ‘Through the Wormhole’ narrated by Morgan Freeman. After having read Bill Bryson’s ‘A History of Nearly Everything’, among other books taking a sober look at the ‘scientist’ mind and constructs, I couldn’t help noting the most advanced scientists sounded more ‘religious’ (unshakable beliefs in constructs) than archetypal priests.

  7. Possible Intro to your next book, Marty?

    • martyrathbun09

      Possible. An experiment perhaps in interactive editing; where the readers have a chance to participate in the making.

      • Interesting.
        Marty, have you ever read Plotinus (i.e. The Six Enneads)?
        Lots of his philosophy resembles what we know from Dianetics and Scientology.

        Here are some interesting excerpts:

        As the Soul is evil by being interfused with the body, and by coming to share the body’s states and to think the body’s thoughts, so it would be good, it would be possessed of virtue, if it threw off the body’s moods and devoted itself to its own Act- the state of Intellection and Wisdom- never allowed the passions of the body to affect it…”

        But, we ask, how, possibly, can these affections pass from body to Soul? Body may communicate qualities or conditions to another body: but- body to Soul? Something happens to A; does that make it happen to B? As long as we have agent and instrument, there are two distinct entities; if the Soul uses the body it is separate from it.
        But apart from the philosophical separation how does Soul stand to
        body?
        Clearly there is a combination.

        And his basic premisse that people are basicly good:

        We come, so, to the question whether Purification is the hole of this human quality, virtue, or merely the forerunner upon which virtue follows? Does virtue imply the achieved state of purification or does the mere process suffice to it, Virtue being something of less perfection than the accomplished pureness which is almost the
        Term?
        To have been purified is to have cleansed away everything alien: but Goodness is something more.
        If before the impurity entered there was Goodness, the Goodness uffices;
        but even so, not the act of cleansing but the cleansed thing that emerges will be The Good. And it remains to establish what this emergent
        is.

        He speaks about aesthetics, exteriorisation (separation of soul from body or its influence), cleansing…
        Very interesting stuff.

        The Six Enneads can be found here as plain text version:
        http://classics.mit.edu/Plotinus/enneads.mb.txt

      • Great, Marty! Thanks for the opportunity to participate in interactive editing! I would like to see a book that would among other things zero in on points where Scientology misinformed, glanced over or ignored. Some examples:

        1. The sole vs. spirit as you illuminated already but could be expanded into GE and animals.
        2. The 8th Dynamic, God, true infinity, true abundance of everything including A, R, C and U.
        3. The mechanism of HOW postulates work in the physical universe.
        4. Full memory retention after “death” and upon assumption of a new body. What is the path to staying cognizant life after life and how do we retain our training and experience, lets say, so we become increasingly more competent and smarter with every passing lifetime?
        5. The question of unity of all spirits as One as in one Big Thetan doing all the thinking and day dreaming from various viewpoints — kind of like playing chess with himself on gazzilion chess boards concurrently. You glanced over it in your post taking a scientific viewpoint that since our true bottom-line nature can’t be measured, then its all subjective. Not so. It is an “either, or” situation with one correct answer. We are either completely individual or we are all really one pretending that we are separate. Nothing really important or basic can be directly measured but these things can be known through experience, such as meditation. That route could be followed.
        6. Gaining true mastery over the physical universe and all that is included by ARC. How does one really become an OT? Can you imagine if you opened up the gate to true OTs?

        There are probably more points that I can’t think of right now. The common denominator is that they are not sufficiently or truthfully covered in Scientology.

        Thanks!

  8. Eloquent, direct, concise, and according to my experience and observation, true. I feel strongly that there is a whole world of positive gain for oneself and others, by using this.

  9. Hi Marty, what you speak of in the last paragraph is similar to ‘reframing’ – a technique used in many therapies. Are your views above in accordance with Scientology or does that ideology dictate another supposition? Also, how do you feel about psychiatry now that you’re away from the dogma of the church?
    (Watched the documentary about you a few weeks ago – you’re a brave guy!!)

  10. Very Clear. Very concise.
    I, as one soul, shall continue reading.

  11. You have, as usual, hit the nail on the head. This is what “Moving On Up” means to me.

  12. Nice topic.

    Have a question though:

    You wrote:
    “Spirit is life energy. It is the invisible-to-the-eye animating agent that brings vitality to otherwise lifeless matter.”

    Agreed 100% so far.

    Then later you write:
    “Spirit, soul and thought can only be measured indirectly. That is because they do not apparently consist of energy and matter located in space and time.”

    I am not sure if stating this as an absolute is safe and here is why:
    Just because we can’t measure it now isn’t reason enough IMO to deem it non-located in the physical universe.

    I like the “Spirit is life energy” part much better.

    Life does have an often overlooked property which is that only life makes life. Cells split, plants seed to spawn new life, fish lay eggs, and our wonderful ladies give birth. Life is the combinatory energy entity which occupies the matter unit that we identify as life. It’s goal is to guide the host matter of the life entity so it remains intact as well es making duplicates of self. Remaining intact means to make decisions based on samples collected from the environment in order to seek out non harmful environments, energy sources, and parts (other matter) for self repair.

    The life energy usually governs a unit commonly called a cell. (Or amoeba or whatever) Such cells can be found alone (segregated) as well as combined into more complex entities where each cell takes on a particular task for the same purposes extended for the complex being. (procreation, food, maintenance etc) The cells in our eyes for instance take the task of capturing ‘photons’ in an attempt to get useful information about the surrounding. One of our most relied on senses quite rightly since they give us the highest bandwidth of information.

    When life leaves the body the atoms (or subatomic particles) continue to interact with one another. They still implement various combinatory and conditional reactions but not in service of the life unit any more. Instead they return to serve chaos until life energy occupies them again in a different arrangement.

    (Just my 2 cents)

  13. “Spirit is life energy.”
    I’d say spirit creates life energy. The spirit is not matter, energy, space or time. But the creator of matter, energy, space and time.
    It in itself is not energy. That is an important difference.

  14. christianscientology

    Nice thread Marty! The bible throws further light on this issue of Soul and Spirit. I was born into a Christian Science family and the basic premise in Christian Science is the idea that there are two separate ‘creation’ stories at the beginning of Geneses. The first being “the truth” and the second “error”, or as I prefer to see it the actual and the apparent. When studying scripture I have found the Scientology study tech. most helpful and it has enabled me to realise the first account of the creation of man is his spiritual creation. The second account is from the interior viewpoint and refers to ‘man becoming a living soul’. A close study of Geneses 1 and Geneses 2 reveals two quite different accounts. One being a creating story and the other being a making account.

    Further light is available as to the fact that soul and spirit are not the same in Hebrew 4:12 where it says:- “For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.” New American Standard Version.

    And also in 1 Thessalonians 5:23 “Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” NAS.

    Also John 4:24 “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” NAS

    Taking these verses into consideration in relation to what LRH has written I believe that SPIRIT is not in essence energy but the creator of energy, because it is capable of “postulating particles in space”.

    I agree that “a soul is an individual unit of sentient life” but only becomes such when spirit becomes located in space and time. Pure spirit (theta) not being located in space and time cannot animate matter without first being located (assuming a viewpoint)

    I am very passionate about this because I maintain that this is the fundamental outpoint in Scientology – the failure to differentiate between soul and spirit. Soul is always “a persona” a mask– a valance. Spirit is the essence of personhood and only personhood is capable of unconditional love – co-existence of static. Hence our true identity is MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD.

  15. Thanks Marty for carrying the spiritual tradition forward. Thank you for continuing being a seeker. A thank you for seeing the spiritual value in other sources besides Scientology.

    You represent the future of spirituality. The future is an open source where the shared genius of all is the benefit of the individual.

    Where our only group membership is our shared planetary citizenship.

    Breathing the same air and wending our way back to the same Spirit.

  16. When I was a little kid my mother taught me a little bedtime prayer and each night before going to bed, saying this prayer became was the prime component in my bedtime ritual. But, I was never a kid that went right to sleep. Instead, I would lay awake, sometimes for hours, and wonder about all manner of things. One of the things I often spent time wondering about was the meaning of the prayer I was saying every night. There were three characters in the prayer; there was me, there was the Lord and there was the soul. I wondered most about what the soul was. Obviously, per the prayer, ‘I’ had one and I wanted the Lord to ‘keep’ it and if ‘I’ died (implying that ‘I’ was the body) in my sleep I wanted the Lord to take ‘my’ soul to take. I spent many nights wondering about the ‘soul.’ The little prayer I said was this one (there are many versions):

    Now I lay me down to sleep,
    I pray the Lord my soul to keep,
    If I shall die before I wake,
    I pray the Lord my soul to take. Amen.

    So within the prayer it was implied that I was my body, I had a soul, there was a probability that I could die in my sleep and when that happened I wanted the Lord to take my possession the soul. Because I didn’t know what a soul was, where did I keep it, how was it different from me, what would I did and it not,,,and so on, a confusion began to build, however, it was a subtle confusion. Adding to this confusion was that the grown-ups would tell me to wash my body, brush my teeth, give my body a rest, etc.. If course, phrases like these implied that I had a body but was not the body. It was inevitable that the question, “Who am I?” would appear. And it did.

    While I was wondering about what was what with regards to me, the soul and the body, somewhere along the line (I think after I entered school) I began to learn about the brain aka, the mind (people always seemed to use the words brain and mind as if they were synonyms). There was a great deal of importance given to the brain and because the brain had such importance, was located in my head (that’s also where ‘I’ seemed to be) I began to think that ‘I’ might be the brain and the brain was in possession of the body. But that still didn’t explain the soul. I wondered and wondered and wondered some more about all of this.

    Then, one day I bought a book titled, Dianetics the Modern Science of Mental Health. As I read the book my life and the world around me changed immensely (for the better). That noted, reading Dn didn’t sort out for me the confusion I had with where ‘I’ was amongst the body, soul and brain/mind composition. However, when I began attending the communications course at the SC mission, after many, many hours of wonderful conversations and lots of word clearing, my long held confusion regarding me, the soul, the body, the brain and the mind, got sorted out to my satisfaction. But, as I have discovered, there is any earlier beginning and much more to the story.

    • An old Alter Boy

      I was taught the same prayer. I still say it at times.

      • Old Alter Boy, thank you for sharing that with me. I have not said that prayer for a very long time. But you’ve got me to wondering…if I was to say it now, what would it mean to me? Would you mind sharing what the prayer now means for you as an ‘old’ alter boy?

        • An old Alter Boy

          Thanks for asking, Monte. I do think there is a judgment awaiting us. Whether we judge ourselves as our own divinity or its done in concert with a external higher power. Part of our spiritual progression. I think it can happen over and over. Until it does not need to happen any more. I do not think its once and done. Through that prayer I am asking, hoping, for some compassion and acceptance from the divine. We all have gone through this life committing sins, hopefully atoned for and/or outgrown. The prayer is partly a plea for mercy. Its not part of any daily ritual. Its said when I am in fear of not seeing the next day, for whatever reason. I have probably said it 10 times in the last 20 years. It certainly creates within itself a moment when you can take stock of yourself and should see any area that you might want to work on if you make it to the next day. The areas you think may not pass muster rise to the top, like a listing action. Thought of judgment can do that. Whether there is purgatory or Bardo or whatever, there is ultimately judgment involved. So if I am given another day, I will try to balance the scales of justice in this world in order to have a happier ending, or a better beginning. The prayer is a good one. It causes a person to reflect, by default at least, and look at how he can become a better person. Perhaps that was partly the intention all along.

    • Now I lay me down to sleep,
      I pray the Lord my soul to keep,
      If I shall die before I wake,
      I pray the Lord my soul to take. Amen.

      Monty, Thanks for this. It was a comfort when needed. It’s nice it got you thinking and the search on. Good for you not giving up.

      Now I pray (and envision/postulate) I will be completely in control of things when I decide to lay this body down. And if that is not exactly what happens … well then … back to the drawing board. Not a big deal. :)
      Cece
      PS I’ve been practicing Marty’s drill for 2 days now and feel like I’ve been on vacation. OK better tone it down – no one will believe me. Especially not the ones that have me in their thoughts – yes, I know this. Why? Their thoughts/questions put a vacuum in MY mind. Has something to do with sprit I think :) The stuff one can not measure directly.
      OK OSA keep reading my posts (I am not hiding), briefing my X, and then making him do triple duty to see if he can figure out this one. He is a deeply caring soul. If you keep kicking him and his dynamics around he will bolt.
      And then who will help your HIM DM to checkout these building for sale to see if they will raise IAS funds and/or are worth the investment.
      Just today I realized that IAS is actually a splinter of Scientology. Why don’t they just all go get their own identity instead of stealing others.

      Let’s get some Class 8s, OTs and the old stuff! There really was some old good stuff. 200 on the Class 8 at AOLA in 1999! Yea Barb and Karin Koshi!

      But if you do the drill ~ you can create it all there. Thx Marty.

      Cece
      I know I’m very late with a post. It’s OK if not read. Watching movie ‘I Am’
      now – gotta go :)

      • Hi Cece! That little prayer got around didn’t it? It’s interesting to hear what it meant to others. I had never really thought about that before.

        Yes, Marty’s drill…so simple yet so powerful! I actually began doing that drill several months ago and have experienced amazing shifts (for the better) in my reality.

        Cece, one early morning a while back, during my daily contemplation, I began to have past relationships appear before me, relationships that I was still holding some degree of grievances about. As I viewed each relationship as it appeared I changed my viewpoint from one that had some degree of annoyance connected to it to one of forgiveness and gratitude to the other person. As this process (it was definitely a process) continued, it became increasingly more rapid and kept going for well over an hour. I looked at relationships from all over my timetrack. Relationships I had totally forgotten about. I felt so good afterwards! So light! So free!

        Since that extraordinary experience that morning, whenever I notice that I am perceiving from a point of view that contains any degree of annoyance directed to anything I perceive outside of myself or to myself, I quickly shift my point of view to one of forgiveness and gratitude. Routinely practicing this drill Cece, has changed my life. I have so much more peace in my journey than ever before.

        Speaking of forgiveness, I just finished watching a short doc on Netflix titled The Power of Forgiveness. It was made in 2007. I found it to be both interesting and moving. Certainly, I would, and will, recommend it.without hesitation to anyone.

  17. martyrathbun09

    First sentence was removed due to great reader input participation. Thanks.

  18. Marty, I am struggling with the use of the word “sentient” in the context of the soul. Sentience is primarily recipient of physical sensation, although there is a definition that could be interpreted as “conscious; aware” beyond the physical. Still, the Latin etymology clearly refers to physical sensation.

    I wonder if “percipient” might be a more accurate word/meaning for this context.

    That’s my one-cent, since it probably doesn’t quite add up to two cents…

    Nancy

  19. I have a feeling my day will be a better one than I anticipated after reading this post! :)

  20. I hope this is the start of a book. I love your approach. Straight forward presentation without a lot of esoteric logic or language. Practical application so that the reader can test the theory for himself. I’ve long held the belief that the most important ideas can be expressed the most simply. I look forward to more.

  21. gretchen dewire

    In my opinion, a spiritually adept person would have the ability to look at things from all viewpoints { points from which to view } It is interesting that LRH seemed to see this, but created a cult with only one viewpont Fascinating stuff. Marty

  22. Pretty much agree with all you say Marty.

    It made me recall on of my most fascinating experiences which occurred on OT 2. I separated from a being, minimally theta clear, and experienced the most intense affinity I’ve ever experienced. I commented to someone about this and he said it sounded like “Twin Flame or Twin Soul”. So I googled this and went onto some twin flame forums. This was in itself a very interesting experience. Just about everyone on these forums were empaths, or telepaths or demonstrated some type of for want of a better word “OT” abilities. There was not one single member who ever doubted any of these abilities in themselves or others and all considered such
    abilities quite normal.

    Many stories of what happened when they met their twin, and usually
    the relationship was very rocky despite the intense affinity. In general
    one twin was a masculine presence the other feminine. Below an URL
    and the first paragraph from the website.

    http://www.soulevolution.org/twinflames/twinflames.htm

    “What is a Twin Flame?

    Twin flames, also called twin souls, are literally the other half of our soul. We each have only one twin, and generally after being split the two went their separate ways, incarnating over and over to gather human experience before coming back together. Ideally, this happens in both of their last lifetimes on the planet so they can ascend together. So you probably haven’t had many lifetimes with your twin.”

    • Terrilpark, your mentioning of twin flames brings back memories.

      A few years ago when I returned home from work, not even all the way through the door yet, my wife is meeting me and emphatically saying, “Come in here, I’ve got to tell you something.” I had no idea what was coming and what came proved it.

      There is a long story here (lots of details) and a back story as well. I’m going to skip almost all of it but I will give just a bit of the back story. My wife, until she joined Facebook spent practically no time at all on the internet. But once she discovered FB things changed dramatically. Living where we do (in Fort Smith, AR) she had become starved for comparable terminals to converse with. In less than six months on FB she had 5,000 friends and was conversing with incredible folks from all over the planet. As a result, she was happier than she had been in a long while. Also, my wife has numerous ‘OT’ abilities but, as much as I had attempted to get her involved in SC, it just was never something she took a shine to.

      So my wife sits me down and tells me that she has encountered her ‘twin flame.’ This is a phrase I had no familiarity with and I’ve never heard her speak of. And even though she ‘knows’ that she has encountered her twin flame she cannot really tell me what that is. As I am better at researching on the internet than she is I find some data about twin flames and send that to her.

      That, Terrilpark, is how it began. That was my intro into the world of twin flames. And for my wife, it was as if she had gotten herself strapped to one of those automated bucking barrels (the kind you used to see in cowboy bars) and there was nothing that could get her off that barrel. For two long years this went on before she could finally bring herself to disengage from this incredibly explosive energy. Or, perhaps it’s the other way around. Perhaps the energy decided to disengage from her.

      Whatever really happened in those two years, I couldn’t begin to say. I can say this, though, that whatever did occur, it brought about immense and beneficial changes in awareness and ability for my wife as well as myself in just being the observer of it all. Ou lives have never been the same after that experience.

      • Glad things worked out for you :)
        I’ve read many peoples stories of the intensity of the experience with
        twin flames. However not one story of separating in the first place. I also
        asked on 2 forums if anyone had the experience of separating but no
        one responded.
        I hope to one day meet my twin as the intensity of the affinity flows
        I experienced indicate meeting again will be life changing.

        • In 2000 I encountered this term — twin flame while also learning of twin soul. Back in 2000 there was a bunch of stuff on the internet about “soul mate”

          In any case, I read everything I could find but the best book IMHO is
          “Twin Souls: Eternal Feminine, Eternal Masculine The End of Loneliness” by Patricia Joudry and Maurie D. Pressman M.D. 1993

          Checking Amazon this particular edition doesn’t seem to be in print but there are several used copies.

          What is in print is “Twin Souls: A Guide to Finding Your Spiritual Partner”
          same authors. I don’t believe I’ve read this — or perhaps it’s just the same as the one I still have – with a more marketable title.

          In this book it definitely talks about Twin Souls breaking up … in fact, its more rare for Twin Souls to have a “happily ever after relationship” — but some do. Here are some happily ever after — Elizabeth Barrett Browning/Robert Browning — Marie and Pierre Curie although Clara and Robert Schumann had tragedy due to Robert’s increased depression as he grew older.

          Christine

  23. My concept of the “Spirit, mind body” combination, that wecall “life” goes something like this.

    Theta organizes MEST into a form that it can control intimately. Each living cell is Theta controlled MEST.

    Clusters of cells have chosen to associate, likely for increased survival reasons, and, although each cell still is an independent living unit, These clusters may then shift from being an association of fully self determined cells to a group of inter-dependent cells. This shift seem to be accompanied by a shift in control.

    The cells seem to all give up some of their self determinism to a dominant theta control, however they still maintain most of the local control of their particular cell.

    As these groups become more and more complex in their functions, they also become more complex and specialized in their structures. However, the individual cells still have some determinism over their particular cell. The groups of cells still maintain some determinism over their group, (call it an organ, or cellular type.) but these groups are now also organized under a common dominant theta controller, to which the individual groups have given over some of their determinism, whether voluntarily or by subjugation. This formula seems to be repeated until we come up the line to living units as complex as animals.

    (Note: Every organization, of any kind whatsoever, extant on this planet, seems to be modeled after this same blueprint).

    At every level there is still that level’s theta control unit. Each higher level theta control requires a more dynamic theta endowment. When this Theta endowment reaches the point where it becomes defined as a “soul” is totally dependent on the definition used.

    Concepts such as sentience, awareness, etc, would seem to be a gradient when you consider every single cell has enough of each to operate its own area of control.

    All Theta appears to be able to exteriorize from whatever level of Theta organized MEST It happens to be the controller of, either by choice, or by the “death” of it’s organism. (Death = the point where the controller is no longer able to exert or maintain order within its sphere of influence.) It also appears able to “interiorize” into organized MEST under certain conditions.

    “Mind” appears to follow a similar pattern. I consider every single cell has whatever form of “mind” and “memory capability” that it requires to “observe” and “adapt” to its environment. They all follow “learned” patterns dependent upon the situation they are in, at any given time.

    In complex organisms, each cell, and each specialized cluster, (or cluster group) and the overall life unit, has its own “track” and “memories”. All of this, combined or severally, I would call “mind”. Accessibility to this (these) “mind”(s) by any given Theta unit, also seems to be a gradient.

    Oops… Gone a bit long.

    A lot more could be said, but I think that is pretty much the gist of my thinking on the subject, at this point.

    Eric

    • Cool, Eric. There is probably a lot of truth in what you are saying – I can’t tell how accurate it is, but it feels right and sounds logical. It also works with creation theory and evolution theory – both can be true enough (two parts of the same puzzle) if we look at things from this perspective.

      Man, I wish we had more scientists working on figuring this one out vs. which part of the brain need to be stimulated to get a certain reaction from the body…

      • Thank you Globetrotter

        For me, this concept potentially answers a lot of questions and many things have fallen into place. There are still many things left unresolved however, like : When a cell divides, is the theta that that cell acquires somehow split from the original cell’s theta, or does it enter from elsewhere?

        I am also toying with the concept that, if the statement that ” Every organization, of any kind whatsoever, extant on this planet, seems to be modeled after this same blueprint.” is true, then one should also be able to work it backwards. One should be able to look at the nature of organizations and theoretically learn things about how bodies are “organized”.

        If one considers, for example, a ship and its crew as a sample organization, one may be looking at basically the same organization that is in place in a body. This may potentially shed some light on the Theta/MEST, Theta/Theta, relationships involved in living organisms.

        OR

        I could be way off base on this one.
        Just playing with ideas, but this one rings more true for me than many others.

        The trick with “good” science is to be able to observe, notice that what you are observing is what you are observing, and not try to reshape or alter your observation so that it fits some preconceived notion. It also requires a good deal of flexibility or willingness to reevaluate one’s evaluations.

        Eric

        • I agree. There is no harm in creating any number of theories as long as one is aware that one is making theories. A theory is something unproven, and can be the basis of experiments to validate or disprove it. If one doesn’t feel the need to believe in them before they are proven, theories are extremely useful and open the door to discovery (determining if the theory was right or wrong, or discovering something else “by accident”).

          You may also find Bruce H. Lipton’s The Biology of Belief very interesting. It adds some biology-based verification to the mind over matter concept.

        • Eric, thanks much for sharing your concepts. You’ve set me to ponderin again. :)

          Consider a body that is in good health…it’s composed of somewhere around a quadrillion (that’s a one followed by 24 zeros) cells, numerous complex interconnected symbiotic systems and subsystems, replaces all its cells every seven years and all the pieces manage to reliably perform incredibly complex functions in harmony and balance over a span of time. Whether the ‘span’ is of short or long duration is relative to the observer.

          If it is possible for such a complex sophisticated structure as a healthy body to exist why do you suppose that a human society (an aggregation of human bodies) is unable to mimic the sophisticated, harmonious operation that is demonstrated in a healthy human body’s aggregation and diversity of cells? What do you suppose is going on with the Theta control here that is different? Or is it different?

          • Monte, good questions.

            Obviously I do not have a pat answer for that.

            There are differences between body “organizations” and human organizations. One of the key differences is that in bodies the cells generally do not have the ability to simply walk away. They do not have to be herded or contained. Their dependency upon the entire organization and its state of survival, to their own survival, is very intimate and is almost total.

            Also I suspect that “harmony” may be what it looks like but is not necessarily what is actually occurring. In “History of Man” Ron says that it is a case of heavy subjugation or even suppression the theta controllers bring down upon their “underlings”. Without the ability to “exteriorize” (leave, either as a cell, organ, etc., or as the life unit) there may not be many options left but to “cooperate”.

            If what Ron says is the way things are, in this case, it would be interesting to consider what one could do with a body if it were to be managed by self determined cooperation. Partly I am looking at that from the point of view of myself and my body, but to succeed it seems it would be necessary to bring all of the theta units up tone individually, and as a group.

            An interesting project perhaps, but is that really the point. It seems we stole (acquired by force) the bodies originally. Perhaps it would be better all round if we just moved on from the body operating cycle, and let them get back to their own business.

            It seems that we have totally dominated bodies for so long that it would be quite a struggle for them to get back onto their own two feet, as it were.

            Whatever the case, there are things to be discovered in and around this whole subject. (keeping in mind I have not had any auditing above clear, at this point).

            Eric

            • Eric,

              Currently, I believe (my beliefs frequently change) that I, for whatever the reason, seem to exist in a universe created out of perception. That being the case, I do not believe that it is possible to ever find a definitive answer, certainty, truth or knowledge in such a universe. That noted, I have been noticing that my former interest in finding answers has been eroding at an ever quickening pace. It’s the questions I’m interested in now. :) For me, these days, a good question is worth a wheelbarrow full of answers. And the best answer I can find is the one that prompts the next question.

              Eric, you wrote something that snagged my attention….you stated: “Whatever the case, there are things to be discovered in and around this whole subject. (keeping in mind I have not had any auditing above clear, at this point). This has prompted a comment.

              LRH did a wonderful job of compartmentalizing and labeling levels of awareness. And the SC system did a most efficacious job of instilling in its members that the only way one could legitimately move from one level to the next was to buy the ticket, buy the books, buy the packs and ride the ride. Personally, the day I stopped identifying myself as a scientologist, is the day I freed myself from years of compartmentalized awareness, labels and evaluation and discovered that there’s more than one way to skin a cat.

  24. Marty,

    Its obvious you have transcended the desire/need to comment on what has been happening in the cos, specifically regarding Leah, but I do miss your insight into these happenings. There are other sources for this information, but yours was the best. I still read your blog, but for non-entertainment reasons. I read for life improving reasons.

  25. Marty, I do not know if you have read of the concept of Zen-No-Mind. You very may well have and I do not want to come across as condescending that is not my intent.

    However I believe in these thoughts in regards to the concept. That to see the World you cannot see the World. Or to point at the Moon and state that I see the Moon I do not really see the Moon.

    I have on occasion asked others when was the last time they saw a tree. As they then look at me in dismay and say they see trees everyday.

    Yet as we look at our World everyday our minds are always working. We are thinking of a past event or a future event. I’m looking at the tree but thinking of driving to work or an argument I may have had last night.

    If one can clear the mind of thought and then look at the World without thinking. Then for those precious moments we are living in the present, with no thoughts. Our Ki (power) and Tao (path) is at peace and harmony with the universe we become one.

    I found Zen No Mind to be a difficult concept to grasp it took me some time to develop an understanding of it. Yet in time I did I learn through meditation, reading and using techniques of Buddhism to leave the rat race for periods of bliss.

    When one see’s the World yet does not see the World then the beauty and peace found with a mind void of thought is realized, Bliss. There is beauty all around us yet we never take the time to see it yet not see it.

    Of course one cannot do this while driving or anything like that time has to be set aside. Yet if one can learn as well as take some time to just do nothing it is worth the effort.

    Your call Marty if this adds to the discussion or not I don’t want to detract if I am way off base of the discussion. It’s just I believe so many live in the World yet never see it’s beauty. There is to much of a race, to little time, to many tasks etc.

    Just my thoughts thanks for the time Marty.

    • I really enjoyed reading your post Jon. Thank you.

      You wrote…”There is to much of a race, to little time, to many tasks etc.” Jon, I believe that each and everyone of us will always have just enough time. Not too little, not too much but just the exact amount that we need. Just the right amount of time we need to recognize (know again) who we REALLY are. A point where we leave all questions behind and return to KNOW.

  26. About “Through the Wormhole” on the Science channel: I have been watching this show for some months. Fascinating possibilities, but as I get further into each narrative, which often hints about consciousness, other realities, how we affect and create our own reality and the universe itself, what’s it all about, and teases that the answers are coming after the next commercial…inevitably the subject of the program turns to how scientists are studying the BRAIN for answers to these and similar questions. Dang! Round and round they go again. Shut the door!

    The writers need to read your blog, or something that communicates the distinctions between mind, body (physical universe) and spirit.

    Or maybe you need to write for the Science channel! That would be interesting! Wormhole is pecking at the door of knowledge, and it seems as though someone there at least is interested in going beyond science=physical, but they don’t know where to go and how to do it.

    I can imagine some great shows on the quantum physics/consciousness studies and all sorts of other subjects that won’t doom the writers to revert to “we’re studying the freaking BRAIN to figure out how this works.”

    Wouldn’t it be great to actually have programs on TV that explore these issues? Even on a relatively obscure channel at this point. What could be a better medium than TV to get this kind of communication into wider circulation? Info about these shows also could be publicized through all the exscio websites, and I am sure many other channels. It’s about time TV ITSELF evolves to provide important information to a broad audience.

    THERE’S YOUR NEW CAREER, MARTY!, or one of them.

    Jackie Johnson

  27. An old Alter Boy

    Marty. Very nice. The importance and mechanics of THOUGHTS deserves its own book. . “As a man Thinketh” is one such book. I don’t hear the word soul used much anymore. “Care of the Soul” by Thomas Moore is a book I liked. I read that a person would do well to find within the religion he was raised the truths he sought. I think there is something to be said for that. Our adult head and heart and experiences could plumb the depths much more now than we were able to as children, when fewer are ready to see, understand or go much beyond the symbols and ceremonies. I think for anyone to revisit as an adult their first religion could be rewarding. At least I found it so.

  28. Brian Thomas Lambert

    Thoughts arising in me from your post Marty.

    An analogy from the spiritual masters I have been influenced by:

    The Spirit or God or Absolute Undifferenciated Consciousness is likened to the Ocean.

    The soul or individual separate counsciousnesses is likened to waves in the Ocean. Undualting arisings and fallings.

    The waves can be said to have an individual life of their own with their own characteristics and natures.

    But……. they only appear separate because of their undualtions (world of duality the essence of all creation)

    In essence, the wave is not separate from the ocean but is one with it.

    So the individual soul is one with Spirit or God or the Unified Field of All Creation.

    Another analogy I have heard from the wise regarding the souls relation to Spirit or God:

    On a full moon, if you put many tea cups filled with water on the ground and look into each tea cup, there in the cup you can see a total reflection of the moon. In each tea cup is a separate reflection of the moon. Are there many different moons reflected? No only one moon in different cups.

    Break the cups, does the moon die? No, the reflection resolves back to it’s source which is immortal.

    Another analogy I have heard from the wise:

    To play the game of chess we have to separate the board into separate squares. The separation is key to having a game but are there really separate squares on the board? No, the chess board is only one piece of cardboard. The individual squares are only for the game.

    So, the wise say, we as individuated consciousness (separate souls) are not separate at all. We are the same as the Ocean, the Moon, the Chessboard.

    Yoga means to yoke. Like yoking two oxen together. It means reconnecting the individuated soul with the Absolute Spirit. That is Yoga, melting the individual soul back to the Immortal Ocean of Spirit.

    I am grateful to all the wise teachers that have helped me understand this.

    • Me too. :)

    • Brian, thank you so much for sharing those analogies. They are now part of my collection. In a world that seems to be nothing but one big metaphor, the communication of abstract concepts, I find, really lends itself to being relayed through stores, analogies and metaphors.

      As a side note: Just a few nights ago I was listening to an interview with Robert Rosenthal, M.D., on Spiritual Insights Radio. He was discussing his new book, From Plagues to Miracles: The Transformational Journey of Exodus, from the Slavery of Ego to the Promised Land of Spirit. From what he and the interviewer had to say about the book it sounded like it would be an interesting read. Anyway, I’m digressing from what I want to highlight, which is… Early in the interview Dr. Rosenthal was saying that what he felt to be the most effective way to relay the ‘truth’ down through the ages is through, not words, but stories. He thinks stories maintain the essence of the message.

      Brian you stated: “So, the wise say, we as individuated consciousness (separate souls) are not separate at all. We are the same as the Ocean, the Moon, the Chessboard.” At this stage of my journey I happen to very much agree with ‘the wise.’ Individuality is an illusion.

      I too, am most grateful to all the wise teachers that have helped me. Teachers that I’m only now beginning to recognize have, and continue to be, more abundant than I could have ever before imagined.

    • Warren Marston

      LRH tested processes based on the idea the “we are all one, just waves on the sea of theta,” and they made preclears worse, not better. He concluded that we are separate beings, each god in our own universe, and that the physical universe is the overlap where we’re creating together. That idea yielded processes that made preclears better — more aware, more able, and less aberrated.

      • martyrathbun09

        Warren,
        Where is this particular branch of research covered?

        • Warren Marston

          I don’t remember the exact reference. Sometime in the early 50′s. Stated by LRH in more than one spot, and utterly basic to Scientology philosophy.

          • martyrathbun09

            Yes, utterly basic, and ultimately stifling.

            • I don’t have the entire reference for context and date Marty but check out this LRH Quote from Vinaire on Geir Isene’s Blog:

              vinaire 2013-07-01 @ 00:53
              I shall give you THE FALSE DATUM of Scientology that is embedded in Scientology Axiom #1, and which is expressed here in Scien tology 8-8008:

              “One of the control mechanisms which has been used on thetans is that when they rise in potential they are led to believe themselves one with the universe. This is distinctly untrue. Thetans are individuals. They do not as they rise up the scale, merge with other individualities. They have the power of becoming anything they wish while still retaining their own individuality. They are first and foremost themselves. There is evidently no Nirvana. It is the feeling that one will merge and lose his own individuality that restrains the thetan from attempting to remedy his lot. His merging with the rest of the universe would be his becoming matter. This is the ultimate in cohesiveness and the ultimate in affinity, and is at the lowest point of the tone-scale. One declines into a brotherhood with the universe.”

              There goes love, compassion and kindness in Scientology with the US versus THEY thinking of THETA-MEST theory. MEST does not come from theta to entrap theta. Individuality does not merge with MEST in Nirvana. That is Hubbard bullshit.

              Theta and MEST are two aspects of the same system. In Nirvana there is neither MEST nor individuality to serve as the boundary. There is simply no boundary.
              *****
              End of quotes
              Cece

        • Good question, Marty. I do not recall LRH saying this. I recall him stating the reverse.

          • Warren Marston

            You may be thinking of “in ARC” and “out of ARC” processes. Treating pc’s as separate beings rather than “drops in the sea of theta” doesn’t mean running “out of ARC” processes. The ideal scene is separate beings in great ARC with each other.

        • Marty, it’s not exactly as Warren says, but it is in the Advanced Procedure and Axioms book, chapter “An Analysis of Self-Determinism”:

          Another prime error has been made and is part of our culture, both religious and scientific, and that is the error of single source. At 1.1 single source looks to be the case. Also at 39.0. At neither point, however, is there any clear view. All life forms are not from a single source. The ideas of Nirvana, Valhalla, Adam, the original cell, each is now rather completely disproven. There is a source for every genetic line. By this is meant both a theta (thought static) and MEST form. There are as many sources as there are living organisms, each line distinct and individual. The similarity of form in a species is due to similar environments and age of the class, not single source. A negative proof lies in the finding that health, sanity and effectiveness exist where the greatest self-determinism can be rehabilitated. A positive proof is that, if it were single source, the discovery of the genetic line facsimiles, the blueprint of the body, should permit just one individual to go back and clear the original upsets for the whole human race. It has been tried several times. It affects none but the preclear. His source is the very model of self-determinism.

          • martyrathbun09

            Makes sense. He also says in that book that basic purpose is compounded from experiences from the genetic line.

            • However, a few years later in his research he wrote the following in the theory part of the process “R2-48 Separateness”, in COHA:
              ————————————–
              “This was the process which told me that we are not natively sprung from one ‘common body of theta’. If you run Separateness, accentuating the difference in unity of a thetan from other thetans and things and spaces, he continues to gain in tone. If you run this process in reverse, how he is the same as, or is connected to various items, he continues to dwindle in tone. By handling this latter process one can press a thetan down into the rock-bottom state of aberration. We have long known that differentiation was the keynote of sanity, and that identification was the basis of aberration. This fact is utilized in processing by running separateness.

              “It can be concluded that the thetan is an individual separate from every other thetan and that he has never been part of any other thetan. There are many ‘phony’ incidents implanted on the track whereby an individual is made to feel that he is a result of explosion having occurred to a larger body. He is also made to feel that he was at one time ‘whole’ and is now only a splinter of himself. This is only an effort to reduce him. He has always been himself, he will always be himself, down to a time when he is entirely identified with this universe, at which time he would no longer be himself simply because he would no longer be conscious.

              “It seems that the only aberration can occur by enforcing Basic Truth. [AXIOM 35. THE ULTIMATE TRUTH IS A STATIC. A Static has no mass, meaning, mobility, no wave-length, no time, no location in space, no space. This has the technical name of “Basic Truth”.] Here we discover that the individual, being separate, is then forced to be separate, and so develops a complex of ‘the only one’ and tries to fend off the rest of the universe from himself and finally merges with it with his impossibility of fending it off. All you have to do is accentuate truth and force it home as another determinism in order to create an aberration. There is some basic truth, then, in whatever is wrong with a thetan, and of course the basic wrongness is that he is not a static.”

              • Sorry, Marty, the above was actually relvant to Warren’s post. More to the point of yours is the following from Handbook for Preclears, published right after AP&A:

                “The human mind’s basic purpose in operation is the posing and resolving of problems it observes as related to survival along any of the dynamics.”

                And here’s another passage relevant to this thread, also from HFP:

                “You as a personal identity are the composite of all your experience PLUS an initial decision TO BE and occasional decisions NOT TO BE. YOU do not die as an identity or a personality or an individual. YOU and the MEST body ‘separate’ and the MEST body gets a funeral. YOU then link into the protoplasm line with your genetic blueprint—the plans of construction of a new body in the orthodox manner of conception, birth and growth. You depend upon some inherent abilities of protoplasm but you, as experience and identity, monitor that protoplasm’s ability and modify it. There is a family line, then, from generation to generation, modified by YOU as experience. YOU are not necessarily part of that family line. Every child, for instance, distrusts his identity as a family member. And there are numerous cases of record wherein a child, up to the age of three or five, recalled entirely who he had been—but forgot it under the pummeling of his ‘imagination’ by adults. Perhaps you take off after some lifetime and go to heaven. Nobody can argue successfully about that. But YOU are the source of yourself with regard to various generations. Now this, by effort processing, becomes so irrefutable, so clear and unmistakable that if it can be disproven, then the laws of heat and fission can be disproven as well. We are on solid ground about immortality and all the rest of it for the first time in history.”

                • martyrathbun09

                  Thanks. And I heard in a mid 50s lecture recently where he said he didn’t have the answer to the oneness question; and quipped that he might solve it one weekend if he could get free to do so.

                  • Warren Marston

                    Do I detect a metaphysical preference for Aurobindo’s cosmic evolution theory?

                    • martyrathbun09

                      Never heard of him or her. What has that got to do with citing a contrary assertion from the source quoted?

                    • Warren Marston

                      Aurobindo was Ken Wilber’s mentor and the source of his cosmic evolution theory with holons, etc. Aurobindo was out of the mainstream in Yogic philosophy because he said consciousness comes from the physical universe, rather than the physical universe coming from consciousness. Your embracing of Wilber was surprising to me for this reason.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      You are mocking up something fierce. I am following nothing and nobody. If you go the opening post, I am suggesting precisely the opposite of what you are now so assuredly alleging. Your paranoid, obsessive evaluation and judgmentalism is telling.

                    • Warren Marston

                      Perhaps “embrace” was too strong a word. But you did promote Wilber to your readers, and your motto of “integrate, evolve, and transcend” does echo his work. When I looked at his book, “A Brief History of Everything,” as well as the Wikipedia article on him, I was shocked to find out what “spiritual evolution” really meant to him. The reason I brought him up now is that his concept of evolution seems to require that “we are all one.”

                    • martyrathbun09

                      If that shocked you, then you are wasting your time here. There is no arguing with you as you habitually accuse others of precisely what you are doing. That is following (read worshipping) a single God. My opening piece is introducing the idea that no one (not Ken Wilber, not Buddha, not L. Ron Hubbard) ought impose upon one the answer to the ultimate question. The problem with Scientologists is that they are certain they have not been so told, while firmly believing in an answer that has been implanted.

                  • Wow, I am very interested in that lecture. Can you please say which one it was?

                    • Now I remember reading an excerpt from a 1959 lecture (7 April 1959 Universes) quoted by David St. Lawrence at http://workabletechnology.com/?p=424 , part of which is the following:
                      ————————–
                      “One – are you one person or are you part of a big thetan?

                      “The truth of the matter – which I’m not going to thrust down your throat – is, apparently, that you are you. And I won’t say that’s all you are, but that is definitely indicated by all the facts.”
                      ————————–

                      Where he stated “I won’t say that’s all you are” it made me think that maybe it’s a mistake to consider that it has to be one way or the other rather than the possibility of there being an individual soul as well a “Oneness”.

              • Cool! Thanks for finding that.

              • In the end you better make peace with yourself Implant or not.

              • Warren Marston

                Yeah, that’s the reference I was thinking of. Thanks.

      • Brian Thomas Lambert

        Thank you Monte for your response and vid. I will watch it later. I remember in my days as a Scientologist that the idea of oneness was associated with old school doctrines and possibly implants.

        I got into Scientology to find God and that goal was many times addressed by CSs as an implant. I know becuase I was the pc.

        Oneness of all life was considered an aberration. That was my experience as a person pursing God Realization as a Scientologist. My OT friends would always give me that funny ‘”Brian you are stuck in an implant look.”

        It wasn’t until I was privy to the upper levels that I realized how I was being perceived by these “advanced superior beings.”

        It had to do with God and Oneness.

        And Warren this is an addendum to my conveying what I learned:

        When an individual soul merges back into the Unified Field/God/Nirvana/Total Freedom/Satori/Samadhi/The Void\The Static/Pure Theta etc, they do not at the same time loose their individuality.

        That is the fun of it. We are all of it. We the individual and the whole. Knower-Knowing-Known as one.

        We are the Impersonal Undifferenciated Spirit and the Personal Individuated Soul. We are both the Unmanifested and the Manifested.

        These states Warren are far beyond the scope of a mental therapy. They are states that are only attained, sometimes, after many years of solo practice.

        When the wavelengths of thought, the wavelenghts of emotions, the wavelengths of the vibrations of the body are neutralized through meditation, that is the time these states are revealed as a direct experience immposible to describe except through analogy.

        Everything is vibrating, and the occilations are creating a dream world. The same dreams we weave at night where worlds are created and dissolved.

        The difference is the material world is based on different laws then our nightly godlike status of creating infinite possible dream perseptions.

        When we wake from nightly dreams the nightmares are laughted at.

        When we wake from our wakeful nightmares as embodied beings in the material world we laugh at pain and suffering:

        Because we understand the ephemeral nature of all temporal vibratory things.

        We then become one with the Cosmic Dreamer while at the same time being conscious of our individual natures.

        Have our cake and eat it too !! Life is so GRAND!!!!!

        • Warren Marston

          BLT (may I call you that for convenience?), before I found Scientology I spent a lot of time looking into Eastern religion and related Western philosophy and psychology. Without ever taking any drugs, I had a full-blown Zen satori in which all thought ceased, the universe became corpuscular vibration, and I ceased to be either subject or object, cause or effect, self or others, but instead became the non-directional process of existingness / perceivingness / doingness / relatingness. So, I don’t speak about Scientology as a mere true believer unaware of other paths and practices, or the gains possible in them.

          What you say about being a separate being and all beings at the same time is very real to me. What I commented against was the idea that individual existence emerges from and later disappears back into some kind of “sea of theta.” There ARE specific implants encouraging that idea, along with the idea that our consciousness somehow arises from the physical universe, rather than the other way around.

          I also was a serious practitioner of Transcendental Meditation. I experienced useful tone arm motion from it, and had a number of fascinating OT experiences on that path. Maharishi frequently warned us against “mood making” as a substitute for true awareness, but the fact was that his brand of meditation caused a “we are all one” key-in, complete with generation of mental mass that had weight and viscosity and felt absolutely wonderful but smothering. The specific experience that convinced me to switch from TM to Scientology was the utterly empty and clean space I experienced at a major Scientology event in 1968 (when events were totally different from what they are today).

          At the highest metaphysical level there are two mysteries. The first is how and why existence, including all of us as aware beings, exists at all. The second is how and why separate self-aware beings can be aware of each other while still being separate. Scientology does not directly address these issues. What it does do is remove the self-created charge that prevents us from knowing the answers naturally. In that context, it doesn’t work to process people directly towards “we are all one.” What works is processing towards individual self-determinism balanced with high ARC with others, and with recognition that somehow existence is a Whole if not a One, and that as individuals we have a vested interest in making that work for everyone.

          • martyrathbun09

            You noted the following with emphasis: There ARE specific implants encouraging that idea, along with the idea that our consciousness somehow arises from the physical universe, rather than the other way around. What is your source for this authoritatively delivered datum?

            • Warren Marston

              Marty, I’ve been in Scientology for 45 years, and have heard a LOT of taped lectures, many of them a LONG time ago. I can’t give you exact references for a lot of what I understand about Scientology philosophy, including this. Perhaps others can, as Miraldi did a ways above.

              As I asked above, have I collided with Aurobindo?

          • Hey Warren, BTL is fine. BTW I am also Brian. I decided to give my full name.

            I think Warren, we are looking at somethings from different vantage points. I left Scientology in 82 and basically dropped it’s “going up the bridge” goals. Since then I have concluded, for myself, that most, if not all of whole track implants were either Ron’s imagination or something that occurred to him or he did to others and is making amends.

            So any implant association regarding the unity of all life has been concluded by me to be false or wrong knowledge. Implants are no longer part of my spiritual landscape.

            Science is also revealing the truth of unity as exemplified by Monte’s video. There are many many other scientists saying the same thing so he is not isolated.

            I have been meditating since a teenager. I am now 60. I give my testimony that God exists, that life is one and the expressions are many.

            These experiences can only be experienced by oneself. Talking about this stuff is fun but ultimately fruitless to some degree.

            On the other hand, all wise men and women that I have ever read or studied under have all talked of the unity of consciousness, the unity of all life while still experiencing the magic of being an individual.

            There is only one religion that has doctrines doubting the unity of all life: Scientology, with it’s goals of exteriorization and personal power.

            So unless you grant Ron infallibility, the circumstantial evidence of every other sage saying one thing and Ron another would suggest that Ron is wrong. Is one man right and all great sages wrong? Or are all great sages right and one man wrong?

            All great sages throughout history have taught this. And one man has not.

            P.S. Exteriorization was and is not the goal of Buddha or any other sage. Changing location in space does not immediately confer wisdom, liberation or happiness.
            There are countless disembodied souls roaming in darkness.

            Understanding how and why we are attached to the body is the only way to be free from it. Simply moving from the head to the ceiling may be fun temporarily but ultimately is not freedom.

            God is the invisible intelligence that permeates all things animate and inanimate. Holding together the dream substance of all time and space in countless island universes in countless worlds beyond worlds peopled by countless souls wending their way back to Source back to God back to Truth.

            And the qualities of this state are joy, love, bliss, immortality, benevolent unlimited power, wisdom. omniscience, omnipresence.

            If you put your attention on your leg you feel it. If you put your attention on your whole body you feel it.

            To saints and liberated sages they feel the entire cosmos as their body just like we can feel our leg or arm. And yet they are not limited by it. A dream is limited by the capacity of the dreamer.

            When the little icy ego of body identification is finally melted with the warm inner space of Spirit, the sage experiences all of life as his own self. That is why Jesus taught, “love thy neighbor as thyself.”

            Because underlying all the complexities of all things manifested lies the Dreamer of Dreams, the creator of all this infinite complexity.

            We Are That. Tat Tvam Asi. It is who we are.

            • Warren Marston

              Brian, what particular brand of Eastern wisdom do you now practice or follow?

              • Brian Thomas Lambert

                I have somewhat tossed all the labels.

                I am gun shy of saying, because of being pigeon holed by the comprehension of other’s understanding regarding the terms used to describe.

                But here goes a general summation: I follow and practice the disciplines from the ancient rishis. That culture that gave rise to the Buddha, Christ and many many others.

                All true paths have to accomplish certain things: lead to liberation from suffering and awareness of immortality.

                I follow and practice certain proceedures, but my path and lineage is not the only best perfect path. Therefore I feel confortable promoting meditation as all paths teach some kind of discipline that neutralizes the wavelength of thought and thus put us in a state where things can be seen clearly without mind filters. At some point the answers are not in the mind anymore.

                In a nutshell: meditation, self inquiry, self discipline, attunement to my own innate intuitive knowing, attunement to my teacher, constructive self criticism, kindness to others, uncompromising where principles are concerned, taking healthy care of my body etc.

                At some point we leave all the props and labels and group identities of the path behind and focus on essential principles to be demonstrated.
                And in that regard there is essentially no difference between any true path except the externalities of culture, custom and proceedure.

                Happiness knows no preferencial bias to any one path. Principles not labels are king.

                Yogananda is my preceptor.

            • Brian, you say about exteriorization that “Simply moving from the head to the ceiling may be fun temporarily but ultimately is not freedom.”

              But you also say “God is… holding together the dream substance of all time and space in countless island universes in countless worlds beyond worlds peopled by countless souls wending their way back to Source back to God back to Truth.”

              So then how is becoming one and all with everyone and everything and God and Truth supposed to be “freedom”? To me, it rather sounds like becoming a static to end all games and just “be” there forever, amen.

              Where’s the fun in that? It doesn’t sound more fun to me than getting to Heaven and playing the harp until the end of time. I would get bored in half an hour and start looking for ways to make some trouble :-)

              Numbers are a MEST universe thing. I’m not even sure if the question if we are one or we are all separate makes sense as a question outside the MEST universe. It is like arguing if the sub-atomic particles of your body are all separate or they are just parts of the same body. They are both. We can all be one in one respect and still be separate at the same time, and live happily ever after. There’s no conflict in that in a universe that has no time space, matter or energy, or numbers to count and measure those things.

              But if we would be all one and only one then right now it’s not me talking, it is you arguing with yourself :-) Why on earth would you do that…? :-)

              • Globetrotter, I have been thinking of your post all day. Looking for the words in answer to your words. Great questions!!
                Firstly let me say discussing these things is not easy because these states of consciousness are so subtle.
                Secondly let me say that my response is partially from my understanding and experience and partially from familiarity with the subject and knowing just a few people that have attained this state.
                Basically this is a preface to reveal to you that I am still a student and have not perfected these states in my self.

                Also, this view of mine is a culmination of me moving up a little higher since 1982 the year I quit Scientology and then was kicked out. Ha, funny!

                This idea of oneness is quite ubiquitous in the field of consciousness out here in the wilds of Hi Crime SP Squirrel Country. It is understood to be a truth, but that does not suffice in answering your question.

                So here goes my attempt:

                Being circumscribed by body identification with it’s vortexed limitations of the 5 senses gives the soul the false impression that being an individual means hovering around a body, a singular body in a small space.

                Sages have given an analogy regarding a souls problem with relative sizes of space. If you have a bird who has been in a cage for many many years and then one day open the cage, the bird may be afraid to leave the cage because that is all the bird has known. Freedom is to big and the bird has cage consciousness, that is all it has ever known. So it may choose to stay in it’s limited space because it is afraid of infinite space.

                The body can be likened to a prison for the soul because the soul so identifies with it’s limited 5 sense impressions that it cannot conceive of anything other than being circumscribed around a small space.

                Another analogy: If you can conceptualize the entirety of Theta/God/Spirit as the ocean and each individual as a bulge or wave on the surface I can give you an analogy to help you with the “I’d be bored being one with all’.
                If a wave retires back into the ocean, does the ocean become boring? The wave only experiences a small amount of the greatness of the ocean. As much as it is fun to be an individual wave in the Ocean, think of all the waves experiencing fun, an expanded dynamic, surviving as and for other waves having fun.
                And then to bring the fun up a big notch, what about all the life teeming and having it’s being in the Ocean. Then you are surviving as and for a wide possibility of experience not limited to just viewing though one body.
                The ego is afraid of the unknown. There is a Buddhist saying,” Enlightenment is the ego’s ultimate disappointment.”

                To survive as and for the 8th dynamic means just that. To survive as it, not just as an observer. The word ‘as’ is key.

                One more thing:

                Every wise man I have met who has attained these states are the happiest people I have ever met. And just being around them is like being on a magic carpet ride. They are drunk with happiness. One very old monk that I was very close to told me, ” One of my biggest challenges is to mask the overwhelming joy and ecstasy that I experience so I can be grounded to deal with people and the world.”
                Ever new joy can never be boring because it is ever new!

                There is a word in sanskrit for God, Satchitananda. It means ever new existence, ever new awareness and ever new joy.

                Far from being some boring state of being. That state is constant ever new existence forever and ever. The quality of the Static is joy itself, happiness itself, wisdom itself, all knowing and liberated from all pain and sorrow because we realize that our very existence is not material it is spiritual and can never be harmed or destroyed.

                When the little wave rests back into the Sea it becomes the Sea with it’s infinite variety of life having it’s being. But the wave is never forgotten. The individual does not disappear. the elements that made up the individual wave still exists.

                How in God’s name can that be boring. Then the game becomes very big. Then our influence on the planet becomes extreme. We then can operate on a much larger scale influencing the minds of men and thus help with a more potent dynamism serving in the great cause of societal evolution.

                Then we become a god in service to all creation.

                • and from someone who knows:

                  “In his famous equation outlining the equivalence of mass and energy, Einstein proved that the energy in any particle of matter is equal to its mass or weight multiplied by the square of the velocity of light. The release of the atomic energies is brought about through the annihilation of the material particles. The “death” of matter has been the “birth” of an Atomic Age.
                  Light-velocity is a mathematical standard or constant not because there is an absolute value in 186,000 miles a second, but because no material body, whose mass increases with its velocity, can ever attain the velocity of light. Stated another way: only a material body whose mass is infinite could equal the velocity of light.
                  This conception brings us to the law of miracles.
                  The masters who are able to materialize and dematerialize their bodies or any other object, and to move with the velocity of light, and to utilize the creative light-rays in bringing into instant visibility any physical manifestation, have fulfilled the necessary Einsteinian condition: their mass is infinite.
                  The consciousness of a perfected yogi is effortlessly identified, not with a narrow body, but with the universal structure. Gravitation, whether the “force” of Newton or the Einsteinian “manifestation of inertia,” is powerless to compel a master to exhibit the property of “weight” which is the distinguishing gravitational condition of all material objects. He who knows himself as the omnipresent Spirit is subject no longer to the rigidities of a body in time and space. Their imprisoning “rings-pass-not” have yielded to the solvent: “I am He.”
                  “Fiat lux! And there was light.” God’s first command to His ordered creation (Genesis 1:3) brought into being the only atomic reality: light. On the beams of this immaterial medium occur all divine manifestations. Devotees of every age testify to the appearance of God as flame and light. “The King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto.” 5
                  A yogi who through perfect meditation has merged his consciousness with the Creator perceives the cosmical essence as light; to him there is no difference between the light rays composing water and the light rays composing land. Free from matter-consciousness, free from the three dimensions of space and the fourth dimension of time, a master transfers his body of light with equal ease over the light rays of earth, water, fire, or air. Long concentration on the liberating spiritual eye has enabled the yogi to destroy all delusions concerning matter and its gravitational weight; thenceforth he sees the universe as an essentially undifferentiated mass of light.”

      • Last Sentence
        “Thich Nhat Hanh—or, as his students call him, Thây, the Vietnamese word for “teacher”—brings along a group of Plum Village monks and nuns to listen in on our conversation. In some spiritual traditions, there is a concept called “holding the space”—or showing up as a compassionate listener. Thây’s friends are the space holders who have traveled with him from France, and as we take a photograph together just before our chat, they usher in a peaceful mood by collectively singing a Buddhist song: “We are all the leaves of one tree; we are all the waves of one sea; the time has come for all to live as one.””

        Read more: http://www.oprah.com/spirit/Oprah-Talks-to-Thich-Nhat-Hanh#ixzz2ZoQVwZDC

      • I like you, You are a Scientologist not fucked up by KSW and. Where you an affluant member of “public”in the past ?

  29. Good Post Marty

  30. Marty,
    I have tried this many times in the past. It works but then I get other junk come in on me. Any exercises that will help to overcome the counter positive thoughts.

  31. “Because soul and spirit cannot be observed directly through the five senses nor measured by physical matter reality instruments, they have largely been ignored or denied by many sciences.”

    Hence the inability for scientists to formulate a scientific Theory of the Origin of life.

  32. Love Wayne Dyer by the way, very real I mean awake. That is my viewpoint I woke up here looking out, stuck knowing that the body was just a ride and after DMSMH and auditing knew positively that one day I’d get me another or not. That is where I’m at now. Thanks Marty for clarifications of that which this current blog is about. ARC Bill Dupree

  33. In reading through the many insightful comments on this blog post of Marty’s I have been prompted to do a bit of an assessment with regards to the question I’m now asking myself: Exactly what do I REALLY know about body, mind and soul?

    Well….after a bit of soul searching (pun intended) I was surprised to discover that, concerning this question, there was only one thing that I REALLY know. I REALLY know that I am not my body. While I may seem to know many other things about the body, mind and soul, everything beyond this one thing that I REALLY know, is only my opinion.

    While I was soul searching for the answer to the question, although it doesn’t have to do with body, mind and soul, I came across another thing that I REALLY know. I REALLY know that where I seem to be is not my home.

    I have a collection of sayings i.e., truisms, adages, cliches, mottoes, maxims, etc. (mostly from sources other than myself) that I refer to as being my “Monteisms”. I collect these sayings because I find them useful in my journey of self-discovery. They serve multiple purposes e.g., being used as grappling hooks, guardrails, safety nets and sedatives to name but a few. That noted, the saying that I have placed at the point of this collection is this:

    “There is ALWAYS an earlier beginning and there is ALWAYS more to the story.” That being the case, the next saying that follows this one is:

    “NOTHING is EVER what it appears to be nor is it EVER about what I think it’s about.”

    REALLY knowing the two things that I REALLY know has been all I required to launch me onto a fabulous journey of self-discovery. A journey that, I think, will eventually and inevitably find me being back where I never left i.e., home.

    In Marty’s post, Time and Space, Joe van Staden contributed some wonderful input. Within his comment, Joe included a really good analogy (I instantly included it in my collection) that I can easily use to describe at least some of my journey. Following is an excerpt from Joe’s analogy:

    “Imagine being in a large art museum hall filled with a multitude of art works hidden from view in darkness. All we have is a tiny narrow-beam torch. Although it sheds some light on our surroundings, our view will be determined by the width of the beam. In most cases this will be much too narrow to shed light on the complete item in front of us. In some cases, we may have to scan the beam up, down and sideways to make out what is there. Now imagine having a torch with a much wider beam. Using the wider beam it becomes possible to see complete items at one glance. Having a torch with an even wider beam, it is now possible to see several items simultaneously. The wider the torch beam the more we can see. It may be that at some point the beam is wider than what is required – too much is exposed to our view – we can’t take it all in.”

    In the process of continuing on my journey, I have managed to continue, ever so often, to upgrade my torch to one with a wider beam. Currently, the torch I am using cast a beam so wide that, like in Joe’s analogy, it exposes far more than I can readily evaluate or integrate. At this point, I can see what’s in the beam, I can (at times) ‘feel’ what’s in the beam but I am still (I think) a good distance from being able to trust what is in the beam.

    I just recognized that there is something else that I know I REALLY know and this has to do with my choice of paths in my journey. What I REALLY know is this: there are only two paths to choose between and it is impossible for me to be on both at the same time. In looking at this, I am reminded of something Don Juan the Yaqui indian said in the book by Carlos Castenada, The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yacui Way of Knowledge. He said:

    “This question is one that only a very old man asks. Does this path have a heart? All paths are the same: they lead nowhere. They are paths going through the bush, or into the bush. In my own life I could say I have traversed long long paths, but I am not anywhere. Does this path have a heart? If it does, the path is good; if it doesn’t, it is of no use. Both paths lead nowhere; but one has a heart, the other doesn’t. One makes for a joyful journey; as long as you follow it, you are one with it. The other will make you curse your life. One makes you strong; the other weakens you.

    “Before you embark on any path ask the question: Does this path have a heart? If the answer is no, you will know it, and then you must choose another path. The trouble is nobody asks the question; and when a man finally realizes that he has taken a path without a heart, the path is ready to kill him. At that point very few men can stop to deliberate, and leave the path. A path without a heart is never enjoyable. You have to work hard even to take it. On the other hand, a path with heart is easy; it does not make you work at liking it.”

    • Monte: Thank you for posting the words of Don Juan. After leaving scientology but still of course looking for truth(s) and my spiritual life – I studied for a short while with a group that followed Castenda’s books/teachings.

      I found this website that extracted JUST the wisdom from Don Juan (leaving the story of Carlos, which can IMHO get cumbersome …

      http://library.kisps.net/Carlos%20Castaneda%20%20-%20don%20Juan's%20Teachings.pdf

      Christine

      • Christine, thank you so much for that link! What a wonderful resource.

        I only read the first book, The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yacqui Way of Knowledge, and I think I was all of twenty years old at the time. The story had an impact on me but that message regarding paths, which I included in my comment, was what really stuck with me and has ever since influenced my choices.

      • Thank you so much for that link!

    • Brian Thomas Lambert

      Beautiful Monte, thank you for your wisdom.

  34. I have mentioned numerous times in my comments posted to Marty’s blogs that I have been reading/studying the book, A Course in Miracles. In the book there is a section where some terms used in the book are clarified. One segment in this section addresses the Mind and Spirit. If anyone might be interested, here is the link to that reference (it is not lengthy): http://courseinmiracles.com/clarification-of-terms/mind-spirit

  35. Excellent summary!

    I think you will find this article both interesting and appropriate:
    http://wakeup-world.com/2011/07/12/scientist-prove-dna-can-be-reprogrammed-by-words-frequencies/

    • Thanks much for posting the link to that article Maria. Very interesting!

    • Maria, thank you for posting this link. Good data to study.
      I have found my thoughts effecting electrical equipment many times. I do know to leave it alone till another day. Camera, mp3 player, phone, printer etc. Nicely explained. Its a relief to see this all being studied. What a great time to be alive :)
      Cece

      • Cece, I recall LRH saying something to the effect that you could tell a lot about a person’s state of case by the condition of their machinery or equipment.

        • In the Dianetics Jingles (in the Tech Vols) one is (from recall – not exact) When your MEST is in disorder, your case is on the border.
          The link above from Maria is describing a different phenomena the article calls ‘hyper communication’. Different then what LRH is observing.
          From the article: “The side effect encountered most often in hyper communication also in human beings are inexplicable electromagnetic fields in the vicinity of the persons concerned. Electronic devices like CD players and the like can be irritated and cease to function for hours. When the electromagnetic field slowly dissipates, the devices function normally again.”
          Apparently the book this is from is only in German so far. I’m not sure of it’s date. The article is from July 2013.

          Cece

          • Thanks Cece. I see what you mean. I want to study that article more thoroughly (it’s fascinating!) but just from a light reading so far, I got that physical phenomena can affect human beings – and vice versa. It also reminded me of this sentence from Scn 8-8008:

            “In that the beingness of an individual is actually extended for miles in all directions around him, if not much further, any idea or thought or past
            thought (as there is no past) is part of his beingness, and so he must continually strive to be ‘faithful to his agreements with the MEST universe’.” (Scn 8-8008)

            Here’s a video of scientific findings that relate to LRH’s statement above and to the link Maria posted :

    • You’re welcome!

      Here’s a couple of links that support the one I already posted – they are much more in-depth, lots of citations, lots of studies and raw data:

      http://noosphere.princeton.edu/
      http://www.rexresearch.com/gajarev/gajarev.htm

  36. Marty, you have a knack for making things simple. Thanks.

  37. ‘when you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change.’
    Yes Marty. LRH has the drill ‘The Joy of Creation’. There is the old saying – “When you smile the world smiles with you”.
    I occasionally ‘force’ myself to go outside and take a different viewpoint. Or even when ever I want to. I just spent 2 days studying logic because as my mind empties some stuff was coming in so I now better understand logic and can toss out the illogic. Anyway, I knew to finish that b4 reading your post.
    You say: ‘Spirit, soul and thought can only be measured indirectly.’
    What about the e-meter. Does it not measure thought directly? I have certainly experienced that in Solo auditing.

    Also, some beings CAN see the spirit. You know that right? I’m not understanding why you’ve stated the exact nesses (above) which may or may not be true.
    I think some persons can not only see ‘a sprit’ as well as ‘sprit’ it’s self emanating from a sprit, but they can feel this. Dogs can feel emotion emanating from a sprit. Maybe they can also see it. Dogs can see spirits also. How would I be able to know what someone was thinking with out somehow being able to perceive thoughts coming from somewhere besides my own self? Those thoughts are the others emanating sprit so yes, that can be perceived.

    Truth is hard to capture in words.

    I do like the drill.

    I have a drill I have been doing several times a day. It’s from a small cardboard box of cards ’50 yoga exercises’. I found it during my dumpster diving days :)

    ” Posture: Correct posture forms the basis of all yoga exercise. Think of a string at the top of your head pulling you upwards.”

    I do this and the string is much higher up then my head :)

    Well, I didn’t do so well with meditation ~ my space was to cluttered so I’ve been simplifying my life for some 6 months now. Going great but these little drills help enormously. Going for a walk helps. Pab 6 is a useful reference and most of it comes about automatically once one gets started. LRH did plot some sequences which have been helpful didn’t he.

    Thank you for sharing. When/if you do write a book it would be nice if it were kept this simple. I’m hoping you perhaps can write it as useful to all ages – that simple. And maybe pictures too :)
    Cece

    • martyrathbun09

      Joy of Creation is something entirely different in my view. ‘Creating’ one’s own emotions has another similar definition, acting.

    • “‘Spirit, soul and thought can only be measured indirectly.’
      What about the e-meter. Does it not measure thought directly? I have certainly experienced that in Solo auditing.”

      Well, in your solo sessions, was there a body between the meter and you, the soul?

      That’s what “indirectly” means :-)

    • Cece

      Perhaps I can offer some ideas that may be of use.

      You have taken up Marty’s statement that ‘Spirit, soul and thought can only be measured indirectly.’ My guess is that your difficulties lie in your understandings of some of the words.

      I would point to the words “measured directly”. “Measured” suggests a physical determination of size or scope. It implies “by physical measurement devices”. “Directly” would suggest with no added vias.

      So, although the e-meter can seemingly detect the “effects” of theta impinging on the electronics of a body, it is not measuring the theta directly, as itself.

      Consider a person walking into a room. One could get out a tape measure and determine the body’s dimensions. assess it’s color against a color chart, assess its temperature with a thermometer, its shape and motion can be recorded with cameras, etc.

      But a being has also entered the room. Even though there are devices that may be able to detect wave phenomena, there is no instrument that can “see” or record the exact “size, shape, or color, or location” of the being. The closest any device has come to measuring a being would be equivalent to being able to detect only the breath coming from a body, but not the body itself.

      Hope that helped.

      Eric

  38. You say: “If and when you see that your considerations can change the world and even the people in it, you may wish to continue reading.”

    Well I’m thinking don’t most persons know that their considerations can change the world? Isn’t that one reason why they intercourse with others?
    Another being to gather information and learn.
    But then maybe not – maybe I’m overestimating others? No – I don’t think so. I believe many know and are simply waiting till they are duplicated re-affirming that they are there and can change the world. Then they will get on with it or not.
    Maybe I’m making this too complex.
    I gathur that from the get-go you want to ensure the guy is there reading. Smart.
    Cece

    • Hi Cece, I was thinking about what you said i.e., “Well I’m thinking don’t most persons know that their considerations can change the world?” I had to spend a bit of time and look over ‘most’ people that I come into contact with to see if this was the case. From my observation and experience, most people have very little interest in taking the time to drop below the veneer, so to speak, and have a good look around. So while they may know that their thoughts/considerations/choices can change the world, they are not mindful of, or connected to what they know about that. However, in most cases, it doesn’t take much to bring them back into recognition of the fact that what they think does make changes in the world.

      As a side note: search the phrase “create your reality” on YT and see the plethora of videos that come up. It’s a good thing!

  39. This post is the reason I check out your blog! Love, love, love it!!!!

    This epitomizes the essence of spirituality, and is what I’ve been searching for-for lifetimes.

    You are resounding questions I’ve had, and many are still unanswered.

    What got my attention that I’ve not given thought to, is the difference or separateness of the soul vs the spirit. Having known I was a spirit they seemed synonymous. Now, I’ll have to contemplate the differences….and surmise subsequent movement to a higher awareness or consciousness!

    I can only speak to this from experience: I’ve known this life-time I came from another planet. As a child I’d lay on the grass and contemplate the heavens. I remember telling my mother I came from another planet. Of course she thought I was ‘day-dreaming’. I also ‘knew’ I was different, from very early on. I was never sick, then when I became a nurse I realized I didn’t agree with the germ or genetic theories-and still don’t. Hence, I firmly believe I won’t have an illness related to either.

    One of my most vivid perceptions is what I perceive to be the first time I became aware of being aware. It’s beyond words, and puzzles me in that-is this ‘the’ time I located ‘myself’ or is this a consciousness of a much larger magnitude (?).

    I’ve had several experiences of ‘oneness’. And, others of being entirely separate, such as when I exteriorize. And sometimes I’ve traveled far distances (sometimes with a line I put out, for ‘safety’). Other’s I’m totally secure just looking from above.

    Last, I concur with you wholeheartedly that what we think is how we perceive the world around us and visa versa. I’ve done this with great results!

    As always, I appreciate your wisdom and ability to get us to ‘look’. Thanks, Midge

  40. Marty, Great post. I just finished seeing the DVD movie called, “I AM” by director Tom Shadyac which you recommended. Wow! It moved me! I had cogs and was lifted high spiritually from watching this movie. It really keyed me out and enlightened me. I recommend everyone get the movie, “I am” from Netflix or wherever and watch it.

  41. Life in the business world can be very tough sometimes. Also on the streets in a city. The very first thing you are taught there is that you have to change your viewpoint. Many betterment books tell you exactly this. Change your viewpoint and the world around you will change to the better.
    That is not my point of view. In the army, on the streets in munich, especially as staff member in Scientology 1982 to 1985, on my job in a global player US based company I learned that changing your point of view you are dead. So, I use that datum too that if you change your considerations then your environment and the people around you may change. But the first step is to get discipline in on my environment. Seconds step to remove those that choose to be my enemies. Then I can be nice and friendly and try to help others.

    • martyrathbun09

      You must be a rather powerful figure.

      • I am not weak. But that is not the point. Real power you can develope only in a group. I get help and I help others. Lets put it into some numbers. Lets say I can produce one watt. My wife can also produce one watt. But working together we produce not 2 watts but 10.

        We are a group. Currently our bodies are not in the same room or location. But we still are a group. Then we can produce power and help each other. Therefore the only possible way to defeat us is to „un-group“ us.

        „POWER FORMULA, (1) the first, law of a
        condition of Power is don’t disconnect. You
        can’t just deny your connections, what you
        have got to do is take ownership and responsibility
        for your connections.“

    • If changing your point of view is not felt by the heart than you are ubtrue to yourself and might die inside, if changing your view is a result of a change brought on by expierience through life or an enlightening moment or your heart has been touched in a way you cannot denie something has changed inside you, you grow.

      Niels

  42. When a person does what Marty has done here with this blog post i.e., addresses the body, mind, soul trinity, they literally open the door to EVERYTHING. And even though I say ‘EVERYTHING’ I recognize that I cannot begin to conceive of what ‘EVERYTHING’ actually means.

    In another comment I posted I stated three things that I know I REALLY know: I REALLY know I am not the body; I REALLY know that where I seem to be is not my Home; I REALLY know that, in my journey of self-discovery, there are only ever two paths to choose between. That noted, what I state that follows, has nothing to do with REALLY knowing. Whatever happens to come out onto the page next is all coming from that seemingly bottomless bin of opinion, supposition, hypothesis, logic, illogic and so on. Basically, what I’m referring to is the “What if…?” bin. A bin that definitely appears to contain and infinite supply of material due to the fact that ‘what ifs…?’ beget ‘what ifs…?’ a thousand-fold. Ironically, though, it is the postulating of ‘what ifs…?’ that seem to be a key factor in my continuing to move up a little higher in awareness and understanding.

    In a discussion about the body, mind and soul there are three other concepts that immediately appear for me. These are: belief, truth and certainty.

    Belief: What I believe I can or can’t do is the foundation of thought for the reality I manufacture and then experience. As my beliefs change my reality adjusts to mirror the shift that has occurred at the base and what I experience changes. The reality I manufacture has no endurance. Everything, ‘in time’, comes and goes. It seems, too, that I believe from different points of view simultaneously, thereby creating layers and dimensions of reality. I can only adjust a reality I’ve manufactured from the point of view of it’s origin i.e., the point of view where a particular belief resides.

    Truth: There was a time where I came to think of truth as being elusive and transitory. I don’t think that anymore. I now see conscious awareness as being composed of seemingly infinite levels with each level having a truth that is fixed at that level. Whatever level of awareness my point of view happens to be, the truth of that level is what is true for me. Of course, the truth in that level is being manufactured by me based upon what I believe at that level of awareness. The longer I hang out on a particular level of awareness the more stable and reliable and valid the ‘truth’ appears to be. But, the instant that I change my beliefs, I shift to a different awareness level and a different truth. Truth is not elusive or transitory…I am.

    Certainty: The singular act of my eradicating any belief, need, want, desire, obligation or compulsion to be certain, has proven to be a tremendous factor in accelerating my progress in expansion of my awareness and understanding. Once I became totally comfortable with being uncertain, the many and varied constructs of resistance that I had manufactured from a fear belief, came down faster than a turd in a churn. In other words, eradicating certainty from my beliefs was one of the most incredibly freeing things I have ever done. As far as I’m concerned the concept of ‘certainty’ has no place in this universe of perception. Indeed, ‘being certain’ is, IMHO, a formidable block to anyone’s attempt to move up a little higher.

  43. Joe Pendleton

    Yes, attitude and viewpoint greatly monitor how one sees life, how one approaches what one does in life and ultimately how one comes to terms with one’s environment in making life more livable and really, more joyful.

    In its extremes, this is why you can hear about a prisoner in a very small cell for decades, who can still extend his freedom. life and experience way, way beyond those stone walls (Nelson Mandela one prime example) and yet, you can also hear about a person who apparently has all the freedom and money to move around the entire planet, but who feels imprisoned in his own self, depressed to the point of not being able to leave his small apartment.

    Of course, there are many gradations between the above extremes, but the realization is that one CAN move towards the viewpoint of more freedom, even if slowly and one step at a time. This is one of the lasting wins I certainly did get out of Scientology, and it’s a big one.

  44. A bit off topic, but hopefully not too much (Marty, or anyone who can shed some light on this): I understand that the supposed OT levels above OT VIII actually don’t exist and never have. Was it LRH who came up with the names for the levels (that have been on the Grade Chart for decades, even while LRH was still around, e.g. it’s on my 1985 Grade Chart)? They are listed as (9) Orders of Magnitude, (10) Character, (11) Operating, (12) Future – and that’s it.

    Was this a postulate by LRH, a path for future research that never took place? Or someone else just made them up? Or…?

    Just curious… it is an outpoint that levels that didn’t actually exist were added – was this done with LRH’s knowledge or even by him?

  45. The notion of individuality, “my life”, is a thought, which is form. One doesn’t have a life, one is life. The idea that there are individual “units” of consciousness (separateness) IS the basic trap.

    • Don, you seem to be pretty sure about that. Is this a belief, a personal experience/opinion, or you have proof or some way for someone else to experience/see for themselves what you are stating?

      I’m open to all possibilities until I or someone else comes up with the definitive answers to these spiritual matters that I can see and experience for myself, but just stating something and leaving it at that, or saying it is so because it is stated in such and such book, or X people have been believing so for Y number of years, is no longer “proof” for me. I learned from my Scientology experience and no longer accept anything on blind faith. Instead, I try to discover, question, test and understand.

      • Excellent response. You took the words from my mouth, the thoughts from my mind. Amen.

      • Globetrotter, in reading your reply to Don a very big smile spread through my being. I am very happy for you. You obviously have chosen to let go of self imposed arbitrary restrictions and have made a more enlightened choice.

        Globetrotter, how Don communicated what he did i.e., with an attitude of matter of factness, and how you interpreted Don’s manner in communicating what he did (perhaps you felt as if you were being other determined), are both very familiar to me. Appearing to be certain about that which one upholds to be ‘true’ for their self (however that ‘truth’ came to be derived) and then communicating that personal truth to others as if their belief/perception of what the ‘truth’ is, IS ‘THE TRUTH’ is a bad habit (an unconscious action or no action) many of us fall into. And like most bad habits, it can be an enormously difficult one to kick. It’s difficult because to drop it, one has to first spot then move beyond the fear that is maintaining, what is actually a misperception, below the awareness level. In my case, it was my fear of being uncertain that was holding my ‘bad habit’ beneath my awareness. As it turned out I had a doozy of a misperception concerning value and validity in regard to the concept of being certain.

        Globetrotter, here’s something to ponder….

        Do perceptions change? If your answer is ‘yes’ then would it not be obvious that perceptions have a dependence on time? Would it not follow that if perceptions depend on time then they are going to be subject to transitory states and that implies the existence of variables?

        When you are asking questions what are you asking questions about? If not perceptions, what? It seems that a questioning mind would have to perceive itself in time and consider that it does not know, otherwise it would not be a questioning mind would it? But in being a questioning mind, it questions transitory perceptions and looks for future answers.

        Placing your point of view in the flow of time, asking questions about perceptions and looking for answers in the future…how could it ever be possible that ‘definitive’ answers, knowledge (knowing) or certainty be obtained? Don’t the words definitive, know and certainty mean ‘no questions?’

        • Monte, hm, interesting.

          My thoughts: as I progress with my “path of discovery”, I become more and more of the opinion that words and MEST concepts are not likely to be able to describe the spiritual adequately to be understood. Or if they are, that would be a high level of art.

          Two examples come to mind:

          “Absolutes are unobtainable”. Probably true. However, that statement itself is an absolute, isn’t it? So this is a statement that, if true, contradicts itself, and it can only be true if it isn’t always true :-) Good luck with that one in the MEST universe :-)

          And that leads to the other one:

          What we tend to do pretty often, is search for “truth”, or stable data to have certainty about something. But the most stable being is one that doesn’t need stable data, and he is the most stable datum there is. So true certainty is when you don’t need or want certainty :-) That wouldn’t do too well in a dictionary though :-)

          So instead of looking for stable data, my aim is to be a stable being.

          Explanations that lean on MEST universe concepts may be able to point the way and paint pictures of what OTHERS see from where they are, but I highly doubt that reading a book that “says how it is” makes an enlightened person. Auditing is more likely to lead in that direction, because it gives you questions that make you look, and YOU provide the answers.

          I read something a while ago that unfortunately I only remember as a concept, and not the actual story: it was about someone who spent a lifetime to climb a mountain on top of which was the secret of ultimate wisdom, with the purpose of bringing it down for all the people to have it. And when he reached the top and found the secret, he found that it can not be brought down.

          That’s how I see it.

          • Damn, did I just say “my aim is to be a stable being”? OK, that’s now officially outdated… too low on the tone scale. Next :-)

          • Globetrotter: “So true certainty is when you don’t need or want certainty.”
            Exactly! And you’re right of course…that description won’t work very well in the dictionary. :)

            Globetrotter, would we not be accurate if we stated that the mest universe is a universe of perception where one can never really fully Know or be Certain of anything?

            Would perception be possible if we did not believe that there could be ‘more’ or ‘less’ ? If perception at every level did not involve selectivity would it be able to organize anything? Can you think of an instant when perception does not involve a continual process of accepting and rejecting, organizing and reorganizing as well as shifting and changing of focus? Isn’t evaluation an essential part of perception since judgement must be made for selection? But what if there was a state of perfect equality and there was no need for judgement, would perception be of any use then?

            Truth, if you think about it, can only be Known. If you know even just a part of it you know all of it. Truth cannot be partial. Truth is an integrity. It is not in parts. Perception, though, is partial as it can never perceive a wholeness that cannot exist in time where there is constant change.

            By the way, this is all coming from my “What…if?” bin.

          • Globtrotter quoted:-
            “ABSOLUTES ARE UNOBTAINABLE”. Probably true. However, that statement itself is an absolute, isn’t it? So this is a statement that, if true, contradicts itself, and it can only be true if it isn’t always true Good luck with that one in the MEST universe”

            This is the most mind blowing statement to come out of Scientology because it is both true and false at the same time.

            Let me explain. Most people whether they believe in God or not would support the idea that God is Absolute. The dictionary defines absolute as – “free from imperfection or lack, complete, whole, entire” and these adjectives certainly describe the popular definition of God.

            Now let us suppose for a moment that God is an infinite person, and that He has created each of us in His image and likeness. If this is so then each of us is in essence THE ABSOLUTE.

            If the above is true we cannot OBTAIN the absolute for the very fact we already are the absolute. However the enjoyment derived from recognising that each of us are the absolute is not generally experienced by Homosapiens for we all experience being beset with imperfections or lack, often incomplete and far from whole.

            So it seems that from our human standpoint absolutes are unobtainable, but we have already said that our very nature is absolute so how can we obtain this absoluteness.

            Well it was a free gift at our creation and will forever be so. It can never be earned, (obtained), and it can only be received and to receive it requires SURRENDER and it is in surrender that we receive – (obtain), the absolute.

            Another fundamental outpoint in LRH’s philosophy is the idea that “we can pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps”. That is a RELATIVE TRUTH and relative truth is very much obtainable by our own efforts.

      • Your points are well taken… the words I used simply “arrived” when I read Marty’s post; I typed them out and gave no thought as to how they might appear or explaining them further. I have been experiencing a spiritual state or beingness with more frequency and coming up with the words to describe it has been a struggle. The state I refer to seems to manifest only when accompanied by what I would describe as the “death of self” and the cessation of thought, which is what I was referring to. It was not my intention to present it as anything but my personal opinion/experience. In the meantime, I suppose a few well placed “IMOs” would be appropriate :-)

  46. gretchen dewire

    Marty, I love yiur blog and this to me is one of the best posts ever. All the truths spoken on this blog have been around for thousands of years.Giving us that exercise in the post about changing your attitude or viewpoint is a direction I feel is very valuable.The longest journey is from the head to the heart. If we dont know how to { experience } these truths they are just an intelectual exercise.although at times quite inspirational.

  47. Food for tought in light of this post.

    So the essence of a mind is said to exist within the mind of God, eternally, despite its own limited duration. What this does is give the human mind a kind of eternity, an existence outside of the brief flicker of expression, but what this also does is place that eternal existence in relation to all other essences, of all other things, animate and inanimate, which are also produced by God/Nature. The human mind is eternal in essence as all other things are eternal in essence. But further, (as is shown in the note to EIV39 below), identity itself, our preservation of ourselves as ourselves in duration, is also not guaranteed, and is in fact likely an illusion of perspective. Just as his Spanish poet has died to himself, despite the continuity of his body, unable to recognize even his own writings, we too would only be an infinite series of eternal essences – slight modifications of a rectangle within its circle – defined only by our momentary consonance of parts – both ideational and extended. It is not so much that Spinoza has awarded undue eternity to the human mind, but rather has radically (categorically) undermined the basis upon which the human mind privileges itself to be unique among things in this world, given eternal life, but a life fused with all other things, capable as alien to its own “past” as akin to another thing. I list below relevant passages and definitions to this thinking:

    http://kvond.wordpress.com/2008/07/03/spinoza-on-the-immortality-of-the-soul/

  48. I love Wikipedia.

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

    We are so fortunate to live in a human age where anyone reading this, can simply find excellent endless information on the internet.

    At some point, someone will write correctly about how Scientology’s conceptions of the soul (thetan) fit into world history’s conceptions of the soul, in full.

    There is a lot to the full discussion of the soul. And it has been discussed from ancient times, very intelligently, I think. I favor the pre-Socratic atheists myself.

    Surveying world beliefs on the existence of the soul, and why people believe in the soul, and the strengths and weaknesses for their arguments and for and against people’s personal soul expeirences, is a very large discussion.

  49. Sorry for the intermezzo but some Leah person might need help

    ‘You’re too good to talk to that b***h’: Kirstie Alley and Stacy Francis wage Twitter war against Nicole Remini after sister Leah’s Scientology defection

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2373143/Kirstie-Alley-Stacy-Francis-wage-Twitter-war-Nicole-Remini-sister-Leahs-Scientology-defection.html#ixzz2ZoFR4ZhL
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  50. The most Beatiful thing about America is the right to be yourself, The most Beautiful thing obout my country is that we live it.

  51. This one is for David Miscavige.

  52. Hello Mosey, my mother will love you to death, my father is an introvert like me. You are a gem. Marty and You have stirred me to a decicion.

  53. ‘A soul is an individual unit of sentient life. It is the spiritual being.”

    Well that means I am a soul and i am going to get the most out of life I can.

  54. Marty, LRH suggested something similar to your idea of personally experimenting and making up your own mind. You wrote: “See whether your change of viewpoint and outlook creates an effect upon others and whether it changes the way things look to you; even if only ever so slightly.”

    Here is another quote from LRH lecture 7 April 1959 Universes (which I found on David St. Lawrence’s website: http://workabletechnology.com/?p=424):
    ———————————————-
    “Let’s start in where we should start – which is a thetan. Anything that is alive either has or shares a thetan. When I say ‘shares’ I’m thinking of these vast ant armies and things like that. And every once in a while, why, you’ll look into this – you’ll puzzle over this one too – is this vast bunch of ants being run by one thetan or does each ant have a thetan or what’s this all about? And there are a series of experiments that you can actually conduct that lead you in the direction of making up your own mind concerning it.

    “One of them is take an ant as he scurries along and make him turn around by putting a match or something in front of him and you keep turning him around and annoying him and annoying him. After a while, you become aware that something, someplace is getting angry. It’s quite – it’s quite odd.”
    ———————————————-

    I personally experienced something quite like the above one time. I had discovered a snake in the corner of my enclosed porch and I wanted to get it out, so I kept nudging it towards the door with a stick. At a certain point – wow! I really did feel that snake’s anger – and it was pretty strong. This was years ago before I had the awareness that one could “feel” even another person’s anger, let alone an animal’s – so I certainly wasn’t expecting it.

    • I had another personal experience of having a student in a word clearing session one time tell me about her having created another thetan. Much later I came across the following from lecture of 20 October 1954 “The Parts of Man, Overt Acts and Motivators”:

      ——————————————–
      “Now, this mustn’t be confused with another function of the thetan, another action, another ability. He can actually create another thetan, just like that, bang! He can duplicate himself. That is to say, he can give birth to or create or bring into being an entirely different life unit – an entirely new, different life unit-which in its turn can have a full personality, which can have full determinism, which can do everything and anything that he himself can do and can be as powerful as himself, or more powerful than himself, according to its endowment.
      […]

      A person is totally capable of doing this. A man can get himself thoroughly haunted by living beings – living, breathing beings – simply because he can duplicate himself. This is not machinery, and it is not part of the thetan, by definition. But it is the thetan moving outward through the second dynamic of creation into a third dynamic of becoming a group.
      […]

      “You would have, let us say, a hundred million souls on earth during one period of its ability to advance, and at another period you would have a couple of billion. Well, how could they possibly disappear? Do they ever become less? Do they just always become more and more and more and more and more? No.

      An individual could repostulate himself back into his original creative entity – you know, he could just say “I am no longer myself…” Nobody else would influence him to do this, you see. He’d say, “I am no longer this unit. I am now another unit which created me in the first place.” You see how he could do that? […]

      “You recover an individual’s knowingness, one of the first things you would recover is the fact that he has occasionally multiplied himself.”
      ——————————————-

      More of the above lecture transcript can be found on David St Lawrence’s blog post, “Supplementary Information on Entities – part 1 extended” http://workabletechnology.com/?p=424

  55. I read and commented on your later post then came back to this one to catch up on it. In reading the statements and comments about whether we’ve been “one” or not, it’s interesting to see that I can now reject an idea that I just simply feel ain’t true for me from my experiences (http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2013/07/18/1-body-mind-and-soul/#comment-273100) where Cece quoted Vinaire who quoted LRH. I disagree with what he says there and my experiences have shown me otherwise.
    And it’s become crystal clear to me by the unwillingness of some to view the bigger picture, just how constricting the construct can be.
    Just another ability/awareness gained from my trip to your place… :D

  56. Here’s a short video by Foster Gamble (Thrive Movement) that fits right in on this blog. It’s titled Journey and the question being asked is, “Who are YOU, Really?

  57. Very Nice, i read the article, its good. Its very good for book. The name is very effective “Body Mind and Soul” by reding the name everyone want to see what is actually written in this. All The best Marty.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

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