...All for One?

In fact the idea of reading or listening to an expression in language implies the viewpoint, or identity, of the speaker. The assumption is that the viewpoint of the speaker is his identity. Thus, "Jones says..." and "Ron said..." and "I think..." and "In my experience...".

The thrust of much good therapy and growth research is the enhancement of that identity. But it also helps to remember that "Finding out who you are", only goes so far. Hubbard's early observation that every personality graph is a picture of an identity opens the question of what lifeforce, or awareness, or whatever you call it, is like in the absence of identity.

He explored some answers to that, but much of what he found has been left out of or under-emphasized by the organizations that inherited his work.
One such observation, for example, is the axiomatic statement concerning affinity, that it falls away from a spiritual co-existing, through the interposition of space and barriers.

An interesting contradiction works its way out in examining this axiom. On the one hand, a strong sense that increasing awareness brings one to Be more and more One with his/her own true Self. On the other, the belief that at the very heights of enlightenment a sort of co-existence of spirituality occurs.

In experience, both statements are perfectly true; consciousness completely empowered and in maximal affinity is both completely "oneself" at will and experiences a co existence with all phases of "life force".

This is the ultimate state of pandetermined. Will Obviously one does not become less oneself because one becomes pandetermined. The contradiction is an apparency.

But short of this high ground of Co-existence, the interplay between what one believes one's "self" to be, and what one believes to be "selves" around him, is a fascinating study. Some believe in spiritual beings as a description of an individual. Others believe in identities in triplicate -- higher, lower and middle selves. Maybe our higher selves should all have a hearttoheart talk! Others believe in disincarnate beings seizing power over incarnate ones, in walk-ins, in clusters, and in other forms of selves such as spirits, angels, forms of awareness such as group consciousness, group identity, etc.

The addiction life expresses for identities was nicely summed in Hubbard's line "any identity is better than no identity". Why so?

Clearly life has built itself some myriad mazes and some intricate combinations of force and significance by evolving all these different kinds and levels of self, holding all these relative (but separate) positions. And it may be that doing so is a necessary concomitant of being in space at all. The creation of space seems to be closely tied to the construction of identity. This is why any processing works when it does.

But above the level of "processing" and shifting points of view, what is this thing called a self? If it is identification of life force with a structure, a "postulated knowing structure" (PKS) called an identity, what are the potentials of lifeforce not so identified? When awareness is free of any identity, what happens to it? Is it still firmly separate from other awareness? Or is it possible, as is espoused in some new age practices, to achieve the re integration of consciousness at will? If such integration (co existence) of consciousness is possible, what does that mean about the nature of a Who identity ("I am Jones!") or a What identity("I am a person!"). And what does it mean about the perception of "higher beings", "Gods", "channel sources" and other power sources believed to be "outside oneself".

Consider the possibility, for a moment, that if you can perceive an identity, contact a beingness, no matter how high or unlimited that identity seems to be, that you are therefore capable of all the awareness that identity is capable of. In other words, if you can see it, you can be it; and if you can be it, it is less than "all of which you are capable".

In other words, you are greater than any beingness which you can assume (since you assume it from a senior, exterior point of view), and in the final analysis you are merely an infinite source dallying among finite forms.

This opens the door to examining the whole spacetime fabric as a series of constructs, or postulated knowledge structures. A PKS is an identity or experience within which certain reality factors are known. For example, one might postulate "I have a future". At that moment, one will begin to experience the feeling and the dynamic forces of having a future. If one chose to create on top of that PKS another which said "There is no future", as in an apathy expression, one would feel the terrible stress of dividing himself between two opposing PKSes. Like two fullblown mockups of a horse, pulling against oneself in two directions, one would experience stress, deep emotion, flipflop and rollercoaster, and so on. A PKS is a reality-shell, like a balloon full of a particular kind of reality.

From within a PKS, the reality it calls into play is unquestionably true. Noone doubts, within the PKS of "I am me", that he is who he is. But it doesn't particularly feel like an elective choice; it feels more a given of existence. One can subdivide within this PKS and then feel "I am me" while also feeling "I don't know who I am", which will then be uncomfortable solely because of the conflicting creation going on.

Conversely one might do well to assume that if he is feeling any of those things that he is trying to ride a horse in two directions (or two horses) and that the horse(s) is a PKS of his own exact design.

Once he gets used to this notion, he can explore an unlimited
supply of forms, structures, with their accompanying dynamics of sensation, emotions, intuition, mechanical certainty, etc., including the building bricks of Self, Time, Space and Energy. How far it goes I cannot quite say, but the chances are that the keys to genuine spiritual power are therein.

How group structures of reality work is an open question. The barriers that separate one self from another are opened enough to allow the "individual" to subscribe to the creation of the "group reality". To shift the whole range of group creation, it is necessary to be the consciousness in each alleged "origin point" of that group consciousness. It is probably also necessary to resolve an metaidentities, such as the Gods of the Tribe or the Angels of the Congregation, or whatever. The identities associated with the common mythstructures, once viewed as One Creation, can be dissipated, liberating creative consciousness from within the structure of reality called into being by those identities.

Here in the West, one might have to appease the allsourcing identity of Mother Nature, once one could contact it. Then, being fully all the "ones" and all the "rulers of the ones", consciousness could conceivably shift the Reality structures by redesigning the PKS' being used by those identities, or redesigning the identities themselves.

How far will this path go?