Category Archives: Uncategorized

How to trek the Great Middle Path


Suggestions on how to trek the Great Middle Path:

Seek balance of intellect and intuition

Harmonize reason and compassion

Make concert of heart and mind

Modulate the need to do or say with the abilities to observe, to share and to let be

Spice the syntheses with rhythm

Recognize the oft-intruding, peculiar notion that you have arrived and let it pass

Repeat as indicated, striving toward ever more penetrating and radiating degrees and forms of balance, harmony, concert, modulation, spice, synthesis and rhythm.



Purpose of life might be reducible to the following simplicity:

We serve that which and those whom we care about in the best manner we see fit.

Life becomes most complicated by the arrogant who attempt to dictate to others whom, that which, and how they must serve.


Perhaps the greatest appeal of religion is its affected ecstasy activities.  Those can provide exhilarating peak experiences. Religion’s greatest benefit might be the order that it brings to its adherents’ lives. Oftentimes however that order and ecstasy only maintain longevity with forfeiture of one’s intellect and sometimes even conscience.  How seriously one regards his religion is a good indicator of how far down that road he has travelled.  When this apparent cycle goes unchecked religion can begin to dictate and even stifle lives.

The Will To Believe

William James observed that ultimately philosophy does not shape needs and wants.   Rather, needs and wants mold philosophy.  Some consider this idea counter-intuitive.  Others demean it as a convenient justification against common notions of morality.  Detractors of James argue that philosophy exists only to keep needs and wants focused in the right direction.  The argument is not without merit.  At the same time it begs the question, who determines the right direction?  It appears to be a dismissal of the view that individuals are capable of exercising free will.  It assumes people are intrinsically incapable of deciding for themselves what the right direction or correct purpose is in life. It also assumes that the proponents of a given philosophy know better.  When that attitude prevails control of thought and behavior can be considered not only acceptable but necessary.

When philosophy (religious or secular) is considered senior to free will, all manner of control mechanism comes with it, both covert and overt.  It is inevitable.  It is evident in religion and in secular circles.  The anti-religious set is not immune.  It too follows philosophies, whether organized, acknowledged, denied or not.  As much as many secular humanists like to denigrate religionists as a form of thought police, they can be just as authoritarian and intolerant as those they sharply criticize.  Sometimes they are not so easy to identify.  That is because they have adopted the language of logic and science to assume the high ground of reason from which to rail against  intuitive-based mysticism and mythology attendant to religion.  All the while, much of their ‘science’ is firmly grounded in beliefs (see e.g.,  Bill Bryson’s ‘A Short History of Nearly Everything’). Ironically, one of the earliest and clearest observations of that kettle-pot legerdemain was detailed in William James’ 1896 essay “The Will To Believe.”

I think James’ observation  about what drives philosophy was insightful.  It seems that at the end of the day, one traffics in reason ( including secularism), mysticism (including religion) or a combination of both as one’s needs and wants (free will) dictate.


Investigation Discovery

Last year I spent a day with Investigation Discovery (ID) filmmakers outlining the story of my involvement with scientology.   They took what they considered interesting and created a one hour piece from the several hour interview.   A preview can be seen at this link, Investigation Discovery.

ID’s Crime Feed blog also features an interview with me, Crime Feed link.

Interview with


Marty Rathbun Is Scientology’s Public Enemy No. 1.  And He’s Okay with That.

Good vs. Evil


Choosing a side and then obsessively resisting against another side causes one mental and spiritual dissonance.  One doesn’t get relief from one’s dissonant self by changing sides and carrying on with resisting.  Agreeing to resist and then resisting is the trap.  Many a trap sells jazzed up forms of resistance.  Inspection of the salesmen on either side of most dramatic conflicts shows close parallels to those whom they invite you to resist.  Intuitive people can even perceive their similar exuded discordant wavelengths.

An easy mark for resistance recruiters is someone who has been deeply conditioned to resist.  Such folk are sitting ducks for re-enslavement by entrainment. Resisting against that which you once resisted for appeals to the denialist mind looking for return to the seeming comfortably numb stasis of two-valued thought.  It is the lazy, short-sighted condition experienced by those practicing denialism.

Both sides in denialist conflict depend upon one another for the continuation of their chosen crusade, in some cases even for their very identities.  All the while what you consider of the other side is precisely what it considers of you.  In the world of scientology this week while the post ‘Scientology’s Vortex of Hate’ was current, a prominent scientologist twittered that those interviewed in the documentary Going Clear were akin to ‘Nazis’ talking about Jews.   Meanwhile, one of those alleged ‘nazis’ publicly dropped the same ‘N’ word on scientology twice.   Two-valued logic thinking prevails: black vs. white, right vs. wrong, good vs. evil, God vs. the devil, America vs. the Nazis.

It is a game where everybody ultimately loses. Into the matrix one goes joined with and thoroughly dependent upon his nemesis for his very continued being.  One can even wind up difficult to distinguish from his enemy in terms of language and behaviors.

Transcending is often accompanied by some discomfort and some new thinking; and that requires a tad of courage.  The mechanics are similar to those employed in addiction rehabilitation.   The way out of the matrix is not paved for the pack-minded weak.  That is not to say it requires great effort.  It does require some discipline to learn the skill of letting go.

The simple minded on both extremes of the scientology ‘war’ will no doubt deal with this as denialists do with reason.  It will likely be categorized with a label convenient to stopping thought or contemplation, like ‘a call to apathy’, or ‘lack of compassion’ or ‘an apology for the enemy.’  For those perhaps capable of looking beyond the most immediate emotional impulse, and appreciating nuance and paradox, I leave you with a passage from the Tao Te Ching.

Nothing in the world is as soft and yielding as water.

Yet for dissolving the hard and inflexible, nothing can surpass it.

The soft overcomes the hard; the gentle overcomes the rigid.

Everyone knows this is true, but few can put it into practice.

Therefore the Master remains serene in the midst of sorrow.

Evil cannot enter his heart.

Because he has given up helping, he is people’s greatest help. 

True words seem paradoxical.