> From: ondinegreen@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 09:04:41 +0000 (UTC)
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 125.238.168.200
> Newsgroups: alt.ucp
> Subject: UCP compared to some other techniques
> Hi UCPeons:
Hi!
> Is it possible that the UCP insights have been (partially) replicated
> in other practices? I draw your attention to www.idenics.com.
Idenics was developed by an old-time Scientologist,
[John Galusha?], who worked with LRH, but I never met.
He may well have been a really cool guy.
He died many years ago, I forget when.
[Many of those LRH old-timers were
extraordinary people. I was lucky
enough to know both John Sanborn
and Jack Horner slightly.]
See alt.clearing.technology archives for more data.
Idenics is promoted and sold by Mike Goldstein, who was John's
protege. I know Mike slightly from AOSHDK org in Copenhagen in
the early 1970's, where he was the Flag Banking Officer. The
best thing I can say about him is Rebecca Jessup married him.
I've read the few materials. Some people really love it.
Phil Scott, for instance, claims many of his terrific
abilities were activated by Idenics, before his consciousness
rose beyond even it's scope, and he adopted Castenada's fictional
character "Don Juan" as his guru. He promoted Idenics quite
enthusiastically for many years, starting at least as early
as the 1980's. He talked it up so good I drove down from LA
to some hotel in the Anaheim area for a session, just to see.
I CAME. I SAW. I FLED.
That may be the last time I ever saw Phill,
though, as ex-partners, we talked for years
on the phone. I didn't hang up on him untill
the early 2000's, when he gratuitously outed me on
alt.clearing.technology, for winning our $10K bet.
The essence -- as Phil Scott practiced it --
was to zoom in on one tiny critical instant
and try to pick it apart for postulates, etc.
Phil of course, picked the instant
for you to focus on, and tried to
control your attention, to see what
he decided was im****tant for you.
Mike Goldstein is MUCH saner than Phil ...
but I'm hardly trying to emulate him either.
The ONLY teachers I remain interested
in are Sailor Bob and Nisargidatta,
Neal and Captain Frank's gurus ...
as well as Neal and Captain Frank.
Just yesterday I decided to get
back in touch with Frank. He
was enlightened listening to
a Sailor Bob tape. If DJ can
teach me telepathy on the fone,
and I can pass in on to Manuela,
and Sailor Bob can give Frank
enlightenment via video, maybe
Frank can enlighten me on the
fone. It's worth a call!
It's on my to-do list now.
> Similarities:
>
> - founded by refugees from a certain mindcontrol cult;
>
> - explicitly rejects the idea that the practitioner tells the client
> what their problem is;
But the practicioner still attempts to control the client's
attention. It's still the therapist trying to fix the patient.
> - focussed above all on the client looking for themselves at their
> own mental universe and keeping looking until they can see what's
> there properly
Phil certainly isn't very good at that.
> - determined to eliminate compulsive pretence identities.
.... is compulsively certain they are all gone?
.... and willing to kill you to prove it, in phILL's CASE!
> There's unfortunately not enough material on the website for me to
> make a further judgement on exactly how close and how different the
> two practices are. (I am tempted by their slick sales techniques to
> shell out $20 for the book!)
I'd spend that $20 on something else, unless
you're studying slick sales techniques.
> I don't know whether Idenics uses the
> "comparison" step which is the essence of UCP, but comparison with
> something else is certainly an effective way of finding out exactly
> what something is.
My feeling about the demonstrated workability of
Idenics is summed up in two brief words: PhILL Scott!
> My only real disagreement with UCP as KP invented it is the Chart -
> trying to "follow the chart" led to me attempting to shoehorn my own
> experiences into a predetermined scheme (first comes Protecting
> Bodies, then comes Controlling Bodies, etc) which I think led to me
> getting bogged down and going off the practice after about a year.
I think ones CHRONIC tone DOES rise
naturally up the UCPlot doing UCP.
Your NOW tone often varies wildly as life comes at you.
Individual waves rising and falling wildly can distract
attention from the tide coming in, but do NOT stop it.
The tide may be coming in,
but you're still surfing
that individual wave.
You've gotta ride it
.... where it is now!
> Idenics' skepticism about "additives" resonates with me, for this
> reason: http://www.freezoneplanet.org/12a.html
>
> Anyone have any further thoughts or data? The main thing that makes
> me distrust Idenics at the moment is that most of the testimonials
> seem to be from crazy, money-obsessed libertarians,
That's your first clue!
How does that compare with UCP,
Sailor Bob, and Nisargadatta?
> but perhaps
> that's just the kind of people who're most interested in ideas of
> "personal growth and development".
HOW DARE you call a jewish Flag BANKing Officer "money-obsessed"!
That's: "Focused in his mission orders, with NO counter-intention!"
Go directly to the Ethics Officer ... and write up your Overts!
I think you need an Amends Project for your LIABILITY OUT-PR.
> Also worthy of note: another fellow appears to have invented the
> "Virtual Witness" concept independently! (Or perhaps he knocked off
> Gene Goodreau, I don't know.) See http://www.paulsrobot.com/
,
> although his actual "tech" is far too close to that aforementioned
> mindcontrol cult for my liking.
I don't know that one.
> There may be some room for dialogue between followers of such
> practices and our own. What do you guys think?
I think they'd be vastly better off with UCP.
I'd be dialoging with the Sailor Bob/Nisargidatta
crowd to enhance my N-Lightenment with ENLIGHTENMENT.
My last revision of "N-Lightenment Now!" reflects that.
> In personal news, a couple of "big wins" in my personal UCP practice
> - I think I've cracked another MAJOR pretence identity that I was
> compulsively assuming. I'm tweaking the Robot Witness as I go - I am
> finding, for example, that "Visualise a possible scene" works far
> better for me than "Where are you now?", although probably the ideal
> wording is different for all of us.
WAY COOL!
> best, ondine
THANKS FOR WRITING!
O
--- )
\
..
|
