A Very Good Friend Of Mine Is Now OT VI in Scientology

reply to post by AQ6666


I think what many of us are saying in a very sloppy and backdoor kind of way, is that people that are religiously involved in their belief system is either under the influence of the demands that allows them and others to recognize and identify with the other members of their group. Their isn't a lot of room for individual thought or logical thinking.

It is like the ring, brand, tattoo, veil, handshake, etc. that allows members to recognize each other covertly. It is for the group, because their God doesn't need a way to identify those that follow him. Just like their God doesn't need their money or for them to fight his battles. All of the demands that religion places on its members is for, identification, control, and recruiting.

Obviously your friend receives some degree of gratification and pride from being able to gloat about his position and rank in his prestigious organization. If it wasn't Scientology he would be standing in line at Mr. Sylvester McMonkey McBean's Star On machine.

Eryiedes
reply to post by combatmaster

 

No it's not.
If it was...it would be called a "religion" instead of a philosophy, no?
Sorry I have upset you.

-Amitaba-

Im not upset... on the contrary, i am happy because i've learned something new. you have enlightened me to the fact that even Buddhism is dogmatic.

You learn something new everyday!

combatmaster
you have enlightened me to the fact that even Buddhism is dogmatic.

If you think buddhism is dogmatic then I still don't think you get it yet.
(I'M still having trouble getting it!)

-Amitaba-

Eryiedes

combatmaster
you have enlightened me to the fact that even Buddhism is dogmatic.

(I'M still having trouble getting it!)

-Amitaba-

edit on 11-10-2013 by Eryiedes because: Typo

Yes... i have realized.

reply to post by combatmaster


Thought you'd like that.

-Amitaba-

L. Ron Hubbard,
Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous. If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion.
-- science fiction writer who later created the very lucrative Church of Scientology, quoted in the New York Times, July 11, 1984, from James A. Haught, ed., 2000 Years of Disbelief

reply to post by Eryiedes


Lol..... Fair pay bro

combatmaster
reply to post by Eryiedes

 

Lol..... Fair pay bro

You're welcome.

-Amitaba-

Thought of this thread after watching The Master with my husband last night. Amazed and intrigued that this exists.

Ah, OT VI..... I believe when I read that Tom Cruise was doing his OT's, during the third one he was going a little crazy... (perhaps time related to the couch jumping on Oprah) so OT VI must be very hard, and I read that one has to be fully free in scientologist terms to get to OT VIII.

That's where L.Ron Hubbard reveals that he's the anti-Christ and will come back as a politician to take over. (no joke)

All this incriminating info can be found in the Fishman affidavit. It keeps changing host's on the net last I heard, since Scientology is full time tracking down the hosts and hacking it to keep it from reaching too many folks.

Try and find it if you can. Eye-opening to say the least.

reply to post by AQ6666


Clearly all about the moolah...

Some 15 years ago i moved into a house where the previous tennant was either a Scientologist or on their mailing list and obviously i couldnt help but open the mail!

It was full of opportunities to buy lectures on audio tape for hundreds of pound a piece, busts of LRH for around about £700 (!), and a whole range of books by LRH explaining his mastery of any craft or skill you could care to mention - complete with covers of LRH in catalogue style poses at work on said craft.

I'm amazed that people fall for it, but then the chance to rise through ranks and be "above" others always appeals to some no matter the financial cost. And of course you get to wear natty uniforms and read atrocious sci-fi.

combatmaster

Eryiedes
reply to post by combatmaster

 

No it's not.
If it was...it would be called a "religion" instead of a philosophy, no?
Sorry I have upset you.

-Amitaba-

Im not upset... on the contrary, i am happy because i've learned something new. you have enlightened me to the fact that even Buddhism is dogmatic.

You learn something new everyday!

Some forms of Buddhism are dogmatic in certain regards--for example, reliance upon certain ceremonies, mantras, meditations, etc. But the dogma of Buddhism is in paradoxical opposition to the dogmas of Western religion, which practice ritual, prayer, etc strictly for the sake of practicing it.

In other words, in Western religions, the dogma IS the religion. Without it, there's nothing.

Buddhism is rather different. In Buddhism, the limited amount of dogma is only a means to an end, not the end in itself. The ritual practices and meditations and the like are merely stepping stones leading you to the end of the road (Nirvana, enlightenment, whatever you wanna call it).

This idea is elucidated in numerous places and in numerous ways in Buddhist writings, but one of my favorite is the saying that "When you meet Buddha, kill Buddha."

In other words, once you reach the point of direct experience with the source, where you've seen the other side and you know that you yourself have Buddha-mind, go ahead and throw away the rest of the nonsense that got you to that point. You need it no longer.

Only infantile mentalities maintain psychological dependence on their toys after reaching adulthood. And western monotheistic religions very much like to keep their toys laying around.