Clearing Archive Roboposter roboposter at
Tue Nov 8 06:06:02 EST 2016

CB Willis (cbwillis at wrote:

>"Ego" is a very ambiguous word in the history of psychology, world 
>religions, and metaphysics.  Sometimes it has a positive healthy 
>connotation akin to soul or healthy individuality, other times it has an 
>undesirable or derogatory connotation akin to arrogance or 
>worldly-physicalworld self.  So you have to know a tradition and how it 
>defines "ego", not mix traditions or desirable/undesirable connotations 
>and have broad historical awareness when you hear the term.

>Prayer, meditation, contemplation, prayer intentions, postulates,
>affirmations are a complex set of subjects.  There is great danger that
>one from outside of a tradition will misdefine and misunderstand, and then
>argue against his own misdefinition and misunderstanding, with the
>questionable purpose of setting his own view off against or in contrast to
>some other view that he has now in effect trashed.  

>My preferred interpretation of Scn "thetan" is more like Hindu "atman" or
>pure consciousness, spirit.  

>And I understand "theta" as spiritual substance in a classical sense.  
>But I've been told countless times that my understanding on these misses
>LRH's view/definition.  My view is more like Scn if I had invented it.  
>Sort of like the Society for Creative Anachronism (SCA) - the group that
>acts out days from the middle ages as they should have been lived.

>I think however that LRH modeled "thetan" in large part on, or was
>inspired by, Kant's "transcendental unity of apperception."

>My partial definition of Kant's "transcendental unity of apperception"
>is a self that is a priori or prior and beyond sense experience and
>logic, with an ability to look AT the contents of thought, and includes
>self-consciousness or self awareness.  This was a step beyond Descartes'
>systematic doubt and his "I think, therefore I am."  So what is prior to 
>and beyond sense experience and logic?  Traditionally that would be 
>spirit, self as spirit. 

>In Scn, sometimes ego in an undesirable sense as in arrogance or excessive
>pride or narcissism etc. get tangled up with thetan.  I consider that a
>liability and a failure to differentiate, but it does make for certain
>kinds of "games" in life, people having an experience, and all who stand
>witness then have an opportunity to see the consequences, how all that
>tends to unfold.  As Phil would say, "People are doing their demo in 


>jacksonmoore69 at wrote:
>>Please help me understand

>>By auditing the past we are clearing the losses of the "being"
>>individual. Of course this is placing "share of attention" on these
>>areas of Duress and we of course can expect future slumps after
>>auditing as a result. (A thetan creates what they postulate and
>>validates whatever they put their attention on)

>>It appears that the Thetan realises with more clarity that they are
>>'source' and do not need to Prayer or Connect to a source point.

>>Is this the premise behind all auditing type schools??

>>On the other hand - there are those that use the brotherhood of the
>>universe - the infinite energy - an with meditation and intention,
>>prayer and whatever well in life.

>>A true Scientologist may beleive they are falling into the oneness
>>trap...a long term trap.

>>However many people in a very loving way - say how many wins they have
>>had from this path...

>>Hardcore scios are the first to ridge against most other non scio
>>things including oneness - we know they are awkward to be around and
>>we know they have individuated.

>>In Jungian or any other ology - this is the ego talking.

>>Are we supposed ti audit this ego and make IT more aware...simply

>>A few of you guys have said that god is a duality and we are both "at
>>one" and "ourselves" simultaneously..

>>Or is it more correct to say...

>>"we are all connected to the infinite...but we are all individual and
>>this is how the glory of the infinite realises its own wonder..." or
>>some stuff like that

>>And if one person wants to exteriorise and realise they ARE a thetan
>>(ie exteriorise the EGO to validate erroneously that we are super
>>individual) then they may be subject to the ultimate CON

>>That we can enforce everlasting life by empowering the ego through
>>auditing the ?thetan? so that this ego can have everlasting life which
>>was the original erroneous goal of the ego in teh original scriptures
>>(refer to the story of aladdin and the lamp - aladin is the poor boy
>>that wants to improve his lot by askiing the infinite wisdom, genie,
>>BUT the bad guy wants the lamp for himself to have all the power for
>>himself and thus wishes he has all the power of the genie and is thus
>>destroyed in the attempt)

>>This is the ancient way of describing hw the ego realises it can have
>>the knowledge of GOD AS the ego instead f connecting with source.

>>On the tone scale we may easily say - well at tone 400 (not tone 40)
>>400!!, you are the one source (hyperthetically) - But that is theory.

>>Are we just trying to enforce everlasting life by figuring out HOW the
>>ego (thetan) failed in past eons..when we should be validating TRUE
>>SELF.. straight off and placing most attention on that and ignoring
>>most of the negative other than giving it acks..

>>TRUE SELF??? - is this the being that is part of the whole magic of
>>the universe and can make an impact onteh universe with infinite
>>loving power. With no ego and unlimited forgiveness and love can we
>>use the theta energy or whatever you want to call it to truly move
>>mountains...Shift galaxies (lovingly).

>>Do WE live forever - operative word WE collectively and simply ebb and
>>flow from each I truly NOT YOU (i don't think so) - this is
>>even proven in Scientology as auditing case from a % of the population
>>is enough to handle the condition.

>>Thanks for reading

Homer Wilson Smith     The Paths of Lovers    Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF        Cross            Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer at    In the Line of Duty

Wed Feb 21 21:47:22 EST 2007

================ ====================
Tue Nov  8 06:06:02 EST 2016
Send mail to archive at saying help
================== ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but 
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.

More information about the Clear-L mailing list