Long story short, his basis for why we do bad things and feel bad things is because of bad things that happened to us in childhood that cause us to unconsciously lash out due to the fear and anger that these have placed in our subconscious. Scientologists call these bad memories engrams, and cleansing yourself of them so that you can embrace your true self is one of the fundamental founding principles of Scientology. (after Xenu I guess.. hahaha)
Sounds a lot like moonie to me.
Sounds a lot like moonie to me.
But are you saying he has some beliefs that you see as similar to something in Scientology, or that he actually is a Scientologist?
The beliefs you mention of his are pretty general and would apply to a lot of psychological views outside Scientology, I'd think.
The beliefs you mention of his are pretty general and would apply to a lot of psychological views outside Scientology, I'd think.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
I've got to assume you are familiar with Freud... and his development and arguments regarding a Sub-conscious and the 'buried' events. Moonster's dialog more closely follows Freud and IMO... Anna's work than any other... Unless of course Scientology follows that as well..
I'm not too sure how much the pain Freud was in regarding his mouth cancer and how that may have affected his take on things.. but Freud does make alot of sense in explaining repressed events... some so painful they must be buried.. somewhere..
Me sees it this way... IF one does have repressed issues and IF they affect conscious behavior then that IS what Moonie is directing his comments to... It is hard to determine just what is going on in this kind of forum.. but generally one might reasonably conclude statements made that contain venom directed to some entity are the result of Moonbeam's discourse on the subject..
Long story short amended according to Moonbeam:
We were all put down and compared negatively to other children. We were made to feel the worst in the world. The pain from this was too profound to continually consciously experience and it was buried along with being true to ourselves behind a pretend structure, the ego, that is the worlds best. By working to feel the real truth of what we actually feel, our massive self hate, we can discover that we were sold a lie, that there was nothing wrong with us at all. The real human unfettered by self hate regains his or her capacity to develop enormous and unrealized potential.
This has been and will be know and happen, I believe, to any who feel and remember and then realize the lie. It is what we feel that we are unconscious of and it is feeling that brings consciousness. It isn't easy to feel pain because it hurts. Grief heals but buried hurt only festers.
When I studied Algebra, I didn't feel a particularly strong urge to proclaim "Calculus is for heathen! They shall forever look for the little bits in ever-smaller places and find nought!" So too, a particular faith, which is addressed at least in part to a particular community at a particular time should be seen as a limited part of the greater whole.
There is the other side of the matter -- politics, membership and exclusion, power and egoism of our collectives. Wars are literally fought between minor divisions of a single faith. But what does this really have to do with spirituality? Nothing. These are power plays, petty politics, chauvinism and such at work. Yes, they're part of the human condition, naturally, but they're not the main attraction, and not grounds for acceptance of genocidal crimes committed, in spirit and otherwise, in the name of God and religion.
It is natural to think that yours is the best. It's unnatural to accept that, and once you're aware of that, to even tolerate it in yourself with the sort of blinding zeal and chauvinism that many practice it with.
"How many tales does slander frame,
And rumour whisper 'gainst my fame;
With malice both combine:
Because I wish to pass my days
Despising what each snarler says,
With friendship, love, and wine."
Hafiz, trans. J. Richardson
You are the moon and the sun is your slave;
As your slave, it like you must behave.
It is only your luminosity and light
That light of sun and moon can save.
?? ???? ? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ??????
?? ???? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????
??? ??? ??? ?? ????? ??? ?? ??
?????? ???? ? ??? ?????? ??????
Hafiz
As your slave, it like you must behave.
It is only your luminosity and light
That light of sun and moon can save.
?? ???? ? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ??????
?? ???? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????
??? ??? ??? ?? ????? ??? ?? ??
?????? ???? ? ??? ?????? ??????
Hafiz
A man was chased over a cliff by a tiger which growled above as he clung to some roots. Below another tiger paced. He noticed a strawberry, as his muscles tired growing on the cliff. He plucked it and it tasted so good.
What is above, what below, to what do we cling? What is the strawberry and why alas?
In other words, this is called arrogance, or insecurity (or both). If you actually cared about having a discussion as opposed to spouting nonsense that either you are so sure is right you don't need others' input, or that you are so insecure about you don't want to know what others think about it, you wouldn't hold this view.
I think the implication is that some can't listen. For example here I think you are not hearing what he says but he has no need to make you. You will see, if you look closely, that those who are full of themselves can't take in more. They will not make room for what they don't know because they don't think they are in need.
This implication is just used as an excuse to 'excuse' oneself from an argument and to take no responsibility for one's statements. What you are saying is hypocritical, for it is you that does not care what others have to say, for either of being too full of yourself to take in more, or fear that what you are filled with is wrong.
It's called a cop-out, and a big reason why whatever message you think you may be sending is worthless since you never really discuss the merits, dismissing those that would dare to disagree as arrogant or 'blind'.
Logic is A implies B, B implies C, therefore A implies C. It is never, EVER not true. Never. That's the whole point of logic. So why are so many people so ready to reject it, simply to reach their desired hypothesis?
Well thanks for proving my point. One hopes you wouldn't but it was to be expected. The reason people are blind to something is because they can't see it. Before you can discuss the merits of something you have to actually be talking about it and not what you imagine it to be. You can't talk to the blind about sight. You cannot discuss experience with people who have none. You think truth is some idea you can manipulate in your head. Truth is knowledge that derives from being. It's what the older teach the younger, the more experienced the less, etc. You can't put an old head on young shoulders, as they say. But those who know know they know and they also know who don't.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
That is what I said... seems rather clear to me...
Now then.. you make the "In other words"... in my own words I said what I said.. is that not clear enough for you? You seem to further the spouting of nonsense.. I don't think in this thread I've attacked anyone.. I'd not do that.. I don't need to.. facts is facts.. arrogantly postured or not they are facts.. Opinion follows the same pattern... each opinion is an interpretation of something that in and of itself can be or may not be a fact... Freud's opinion regarding the subject I've addressed suggests as Moonbeam has opined.. although he speaks from first hand knowledge.. he does say all inclusive with which I can't agree with.. Not everyone smolders under the same heat.. nor to the same degree, IMO..
But, in context, my comment about reading and writing in threads seeks to only suggest that the messenger (if one sees themselves as that) need not look back to see who said what.. IF they were only making a one off comment... and not engaged in a debate.. There are threads like that... I'm sure you agree. But I did say I'd always go back if someone asked me to comment and they have.. and I've asked folks too... and they have.. Anyhow, if one does not have the ability to assimilate what is said one may try and try and argue and debate till they are blue in the face... I have debated issues in threads like this one and will again.. but the same folks say the same thing based on the same criteria.. their inability to even try to understand.. they fend off any suggestion that they are not listening or that there is another side or consider what is said by the other side as anything rational...... they can't do other wise.. ehheheheheh sad as that is... Only the horse knows what it is to win the race... he ran it.. the jockey only was a passenger... so to the issues here.. Moonbeam ran the race... he knows what he knows.. how dare anyone challenge his own personal knowledge by calling him crazy [EDIT] or arrogant or a fool or what ever else has been said.. [END EDIT] that is so utterly stupid.. arrogant and what ever else can be attributed..
Oh please, you are such an arrogant ******. What happened to *knowing* nothing? Guess that goes right out the window when it applies to you, huh? You come in here with your big philosophy, expecting people to accept it, and when they don't you attack them, telling them that they are blind and you won't bother arguing with them because they don't 'see' what you 'see'.
What are you afraid of, Moonbeam? You have been proven to be a shill time and time again, refusing to discuss the merits of your philosophy. What happened to everyone knowing nothing, eh? You used to act the part of the Zen master, now you go and tell me that I don't know something but you do. At least acknowledge the fact that your arguments are inconsistent at best, morphing to best fit the situation. When someone calls you on it you merely reply that there is no use arguing because you know so much more than they do.
Nice try, but you're not fooling anyone, save maybe LunarRay who seems to run parallel to you. But at least he doesn't assume ultimate knowledge like you do.
/ignore
A: Oh please, you are such an arrogant ******. What happened to *knowing* nothing? Guess that goes right out the window when it applies to you, huh? You come in here with your big philosophy, expecting people to accept it, and when they don't you attack them, telling them that they are blind and you won't bother arguing with them because they don't 'see' what you 'see'.
M: Ah, I have a big philosophy and that makes you feel small. I see. Can you see that you are reacting from ego? The issue of know and knowing nothing I will answer in a minute. I simply show you what you do when I present my thoughts, and it's you who go off the deep end not me. You are shown yourself and scream attack. It is not because it is an attack, it's your reflection, but you don't like being who you are. I have told you this how many times. And every time you don't like it, neither in words or when it's demonstrated.
A: What are you afraid of, Moonbeam?
Ah so this is about your fear, fear that you project on me. But I've told you that too over and over again. You fear you will lose this battle of egos you imagine we are having.
A: You have been proven to be a shill time and time again, refusing to discuss the merits of your philosophy.
M: Goodness me I am such a shill. I don't even know what really a shill is so if I am one it subtracts not one whit from me being happy. You, however, probably were told you are a shill, hate shills, and want me to suffer whatever horrible fate it is that befalls shills. You transfer over on to me your hidden problems. This is all well known in psychology, I'm pretty sure.
A: What happened to everyone knowing nothing, eh? You used to act the part of the Zen master, now you go and tell me that I don't know something but you do. At least acknowledge the fact that your arguments are inconsistent at best, morphing to best fit the situation. When someone calls you on it you merely reply that there is no use arguing because you know so much more than they do.
M: All these thing you complain about are really rather simple but of course only resolved in a higher understanding. I know things by experience, like for example that I know nothing. Everything I knew had to die but that's what set me free. If that is Zen then so be it.
A: Nice try, but you're not fooling anyone, save maybe LunarRay who seems to run parallel to you. But at least he doesn't assume ultimate knowledge like you do.
M: I've learned some things from anger; I hope you do too.
M: Ah, I have a big philosophy and that makes you feel small. I see. Can you see that you are reacting from ego? The issue of know and knowing nothing I will answer in a minute. I simply show you what you do when I present my thoughts, and it's you who go off the deep end not me. You are shown yourself and scream attack. It is not because it is an attack, it's your reflection, but you don't like being who you are. I have told you this how many times. And every time you don't like it, neither in words or when it's demonstrated.
A: What are you afraid of, Moonbeam?
Ah so this is about your fear, fear that you project on me. But I've told you that too over and over again. You fear you will lose this battle of egos you imagine we are having.
A: You have been proven to be a shill time and time again, refusing to discuss the merits of your philosophy.
M: Goodness me I am such a shill. I don't even know what really a shill is so if I am one it subtracts not one whit from me being happy. You, however, probably were told you are a shill, hate shills, and want me to suffer whatever horrible fate it is that befalls shills. You transfer over on to me your hidden problems. This is all well known in psychology, I'm pretty sure.
A: What happened to everyone knowing nothing, eh? You used to act the part of the Zen master, now you go and tell me that I don't know something but you do. At least acknowledge the fact that your arguments are inconsistent at best, morphing to best fit the situation. When someone calls you on it you merely reply that there is no use arguing because you know so much more than they do.
M: All these thing you complain about are really rather simple but of course only resolved in a higher understanding. I know things by experience, like for example that I know nothing. Everything I knew had to die but that's what set me free. If that is Zen then so be it.
A: Nice try, but you're not fooling anyone, save maybe LunarRay who seems to run parallel to you. But at least he doesn't assume ultimate knowledge like you do.
M: I've learned some things from anger; I hope you do too.
shira
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2005
- 9,500
- 6
- 81
What, specifically, did you do? What approach did you take? What books did you read? What therapy did you undergo? What philosophers, poets, gurus, teachers (or whatever) provided you with meaningful answers or at least pointed the way?
And when you say you are free, what specifically are you free of or free to do? What freedom do you have now that you didn't have before? In a practical sense, how is your life different now from what it was before?
I know you will (in part) tell us that the your ego has died (or been significantly reduced) and that you are now able to nurture that inner child who was taught self-hate. But how, specifically, did you accomplish that?
I am using the words "specific" and "practical" because you tend to write in generalities and non-specific language. I realize your approach is itself a product of whatever philosphy or philsophies you adhere to. But it is still possible to tell us the precise steps you yourself took. The master might say (in the same type of non-specific language you prefer), "What is the sound of one hand clapping?" but the desciple who considers that question would nevertheless be able to tell us, "I sought out Master XYZ" or "I read book ABC."
And if being specific isn't possible, why isn't it?
I have told my story numerous times from different angles and am rather sick of doing so. You want to put a name to what I am and I want your view of a poem. 
You could maybe experience something from the poem but from this you will only walk away with Moonbeam tied nice and neat with a bow:
I looked at the world when I was young and saw wars and misery and I heard there was a God whose heaven sort of made up for all of that. It bothered me that man preached love and killed but I had no words for it. Well I saw a black and white movie, the Day the Earth Stood Still, and I know right away that humanity really is insane.
So I set out to prove that life is really good and has meaning that takes away all pain.
I read all sorts of things, all sorts of thinkers and teachers etc and in the end all I saw was lies, that everybody believed what they wanted to believe just to feel good and of course that they'd never practice. Nobody had any truth they could prove to me. The universe is cold and dead and cares not one whit what happens to you and me. All the beautiful little children that die are just dead, never ever to see life again. All my life and hope was taken. Everything I had ever been taught is a lie. All the lights went out in my house and I lived in total blackness depress to a singularity. That was the time I discovered Zen, the men who walked with a smile without tile overhead or a single place to put a foot. What the f were they talking about. How dare they talk of strawberries while I hung there in the blackness. These assholes convulsed me with rage but they planted a seed that caused my house to explode. Here were folk who saw what I saw, that life has absolutely no meaning but they were laughing, laughing at poor sick little me, so I thought.
So I begin to ask myself what was the source of my pain, why did I suffer so much because there is no meaning. Well deep in the night as I pondered this, casting out this and that, the wind hit the house and I entered the now. I was there in a room and there was only the wind. I turned inside out. One second I was in a state of deep deep concentration and the next second there was only the silent awareness of being in a room blasted by wind. I had lost everything you can lose except what can't be taken. I am and all the love I ever wanted to get is in me to give. I am the answer. There is no meaning and that is meaningless too. I had lost meaning but clung to a delusion it was a need. There really is nothing except, of course, what you really are. I see this truth all over the place.
So back to the poem, why will the lover not comply with your hope for love?
You could maybe experience something from the poem but from this you will only walk away with Moonbeam tied nice and neat with a bow:I looked at the world when I was young and saw wars and misery and I heard there was a God whose heaven sort of made up for all of that. It bothered me that man preached love and killed but I had no words for it. Well I saw a black and white movie, the Day the Earth Stood Still, and I know right away that humanity really is insane.
So I set out to prove that life is really good and has meaning that takes away all pain.
I read all sorts of things, all sorts of thinkers and teachers etc and in the end all I saw was lies, that everybody believed what they wanted to believe just to feel good and of course that they'd never practice. Nobody had any truth they could prove to me. The universe is cold and dead and cares not one whit what happens to you and me. All the beautiful little children that die are just dead, never ever to see life again. All my life and hope was taken. Everything I had ever been taught is a lie. All the lights went out in my house and I lived in total blackness depress to a singularity. That was the time I discovered Zen, the men who walked with a smile without tile overhead or a single place to put a foot. What the f were they talking about. How dare they talk of strawberries while I hung there in the blackness. These assholes convulsed me with rage but they planted a seed that caused my house to explode. Here were folk who saw what I saw, that life has absolutely no meaning but they were laughing, laughing at poor sick little me, so I thought.
So I begin to ask myself what was the source of my pain, why did I suffer so much because there is no meaning. Well deep in the night as I pondered this, casting out this and that, the wind hit the house and I entered the now. I was there in a room and there was only the wind. I turned inside out. One second I was in a state of deep deep concentration and the next second there was only the silent awareness of being in a room blasted by wind. I had lost everything you can lose except what can't be taken. I am and all the love I ever wanted to get is in me to give. I am the answer. There is no meaning and that is meaningless too. I had lost meaning but clung to a delusion it was a need. There really is nothing except, of course, what you really are. I see this truth all over the place.
So back to the poem, why will the lover not comply with your hope for love?
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Aisengard,
Long before I ever joined AT I would happen by the OT forum and read the various postings.. never had a need to add my two cents worth to anything.. but then I happened on some of Moonbeam's postings... different and almost always castigated by the masses.. Sometimes there'd be a nice comment to him but usually a "CADkindAGuy" response... if you recall..
I don't really know much independently (although some research projects I've undertaken were intended to produce independent thinking and results.. but there is but so much new stuff potential about to develop) But I do know a bit about three disciplines one of which is Psychology. I understand it from an Academic POV rather than a clinical one.. (no practical experience or rather, little) From that vista I've tried in this thread and many others over the last few years to be simple in the approach I use to communicate. I am sorta simple!
In the case of Moonbeam v World of AT it is so very apparent what he is saying that it screams Freud from the mountain tops.. (I find Jung's approach more to my liking). So... How on earth can folks just dismiss what he says? It flies in the face of Freud's ummm revelations and interpretations.... So there can be but a few answers to that... One might be that folks read the name Moonbeam and use that to write some scathing remark.. why might they do that.. heheheheh that is the point of MB's discourse.. (might).. Or they may not agree which is fine, however, no where in the arguments propounded against MB are the required reasons why Freud/MB are so wrong.. (notice I pair them... they say the same thing differently)... So they must not agree for some other reason.. like.. Freud et al. v God or some other Supreme Power or they simply don't understand the work that has been on going for a 100 years and are simply looking at psychology as Skinner's rats.. Freud was into neurology a physician and other stuff too.. obviously.. he has some credentials..
At the end of the day, I think folks simply disagree and MAY be as MB suggests.. or they MAY not agree with the psychology of today because of other reasons.. but they refuse to acknowledge that Freud developed the notion of a Sub-conscious and defined it pretty well... and he indicated - others agree - that in that intangible place lies the 'buried' events of our youth and even our current... AND the MB sorta says the very same thing...
Now.. I wonder why that might be true... maybe cuz it is a hidden forum.. no one really knows each other.. or can pop them in the nose hehehhe..
Long before I ever joined AT I would happen by the OT forum and read the various postings.. never had a need to add my two cents worth to anything.. but then I happened on some of Moonbeam's postings... different and almost always castigated by the masses.. Sometimes there'd be a nice comment to him but usually a "CADkindAGuy" response... if you recall..
I don't really know much independently (although some research projects I've undertaken were intended to produce independent thinking and results.. but there is but so much new stuff potential about to develop) But I do know a bit about three disciplines one of which is Psychology. I understand it from an Academic POV rather than a clinical one.. (no practical experience or rather, little) From that vista I've tried in this thread and many others over the last few years to be simple in the approach I use to communicate. I am sorta simple!
In the case of Moonbeam v World of AT it is so very apparent what he is saying that it screams Freud from the mountain tops.. (I find Jung's approach more to my liking). So... How on earth can folks just dismiss what he says? It flies in the face of Freud's ummm revelations and interpretations.... So there can be but a few answers to that... One might be that folks read the name Moonbeam and use that to write some scathing remark.. why might they do that.. heheheheh that is the point of MB's discourse.. (might).. Or they may not agree which is fine, however, no where in the arguments propounded against MB are the required reasons why Freud/MB are so wrong.. (notice I pair them... they say the same thing differently)... So they must not agree for some other reason.. like.. Freud et al. v God or some other Supreme Power or they simply don't understand the work that has been on going for a 100 years and are simply looking at psychology as Skinner's rats.. Freud was into neurology a physician and other stuff too.. obviously.. he has some credentials..
At the end of the day, I think folks simply disagree and MAY be as MB suggests.. or they MAY not agree with the psychology of today because of other reasons.. but they refuse to acknowledge that Freud developed the notion of a Sub-conscious and defined it pretty well... and he indicated - others agree - that in that intangible place lies the 'buried' events of our youth and even our current... AND the MB sorta says the very same thing...
Now.. I wonder why that might be true... maybe cuz it is a hidden forum.. no one really knows each other.. or can pop them in the nose hehehhe..
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Moonbeam,
What you really are... What you really are... that intrigues me... The 'you' devoid of any self interpretation of events past and inculcated and buried that produce a false emotional event experienced in the real time conscious..
How can one be certain that what they feel is not truth.. ? IOW what they 'feel' is an exact deduction of the event past that SHOULD make them feel 'bad'. Maybe a child throwing a rock at a bird and killing it.... then during the course of 25 years they develop hate toward rock throwing folks cuz it may harm...( Sure.. they can dig up the event and deal with it.. but it was truth then and now... ) They see themselves in the throwers.. but don't know it.. (Yet). They hate who they are or were in this case..
I wonder how many of these little ditties each of us carries.. IF what I opined above is true?.
What you really are... What you really are... that intrigues me... The 'you' devoid of any self interpretation of events past and inculcated and buried that produce a false emotional event experienced in the real time conscious..
How can one be certain that what they feel is not truth.. ? IOW what they 'feel' is an exact deduction of the event past that SHOULD make them feel 'bad'. Maybe a child throwing a rock at a bird and killing it.... then during the course of 25 years they develop hate toward rock throwing folks cuz it may harm...( Sure.. they can dig up the event and deal with it.. but it was truth then and now... ) They see themselves in the throwers.. but don't know it.. (Yet). They hate who they are or were in this case..
I wonder how many of these little ditties each of us carries.. IF what I opined above is true?.
Freud opened the door to the notion that we are motivated unconsciously and that makes our motivations not only irrational but curable. Self knowledge is the process of becoming conscious of what we are unconscious of. For that to begin one must first get to first base, begin to credit the notion that we do not understand how we operate. This is profoundly difficult to do because it is an affront to the ego. Imagine you not knowing you. Who wants to believe that? Hehe. But if you saw Forbidden Planet you will know the unconscious is destroying the world.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter