A question for those in the know, as this thread has been livelier of late:

I was particularly put off by CV practitioners' view that the goal of their practice and involvement in the school was to develop what they call 'the body of immortality,' or a subtle body that can survive physical death. To me it seemed like the ultimate in egocentric activity, and pretty diametrically opposed to what I understand spirituality to be about. Buddhism, Vedanta, Sufism, Kabbalah, just about every spiritual path that I know of emphasizes that acceptance of impermanence and transience is critical to genuine spiritual development.

CV also does not seem to be particularly up-front about the fact that this goal is what people are signing on for, which, IMO, seems to violate the principle of informed consent as I understand it.

I am curious why CV seems to think this is a worthy goal, and how central is it to what they do?

Ok, well, this was just my understanding of why one might want a body of immortality that could survive death, but I feel like it had to do with what they teach about reincarnation. According to Clairvision certain parts of your subtle bodies fall away or shatter upon death. Once you have refined the subtle bodies to a certain point, those subtle bodies don't shatter or fall away with death. This means that ultimately you can take parts of your energy (the good parts hopefully) from incarnation to incarnation with you - you don't have to start all over again when you're born like most people do.

My understanding was that Clairvision's view is that one of the big problems with the world is that most humans cannot tolerate spiritual fire with the way their subtle bodies normally are, therefore they can't contribute as much to that life - when your subtle bodies are refined you can do more, be more. What it meant to me was that having a body of immortality meant that you didn't have to start from the beginning with each incarnation afterwards. Also you can contribute more to the world if you also remember your reason for incarnating - if you have refined subtle bodies you're more likely to remember these things according to them. They describe normal reincarnating like "the great forgetting" because once you fall from heaven to incarnate you tend to forget everything about spiritual worlds and become trapped in the human experience. With a body of immortality you also don't go through "the great forgetting".

I would say that the body of immortality is pretty central to the CV teachings and practices - ultimately everything is aimed at refining your subtle bodies in one way or another.



metanoia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A question for those in the know, as this thread
> has been livelier of late:
>
> I was particularly put off by CV practitioners'
> view that the goal of their practice and
> involvement in the school was to develop what they
> call 'the body of immortality,' or a subtle body
> that can survive physical death. To me it seemed
> like the ultimate in egocentric activity, and
> pretty diametrically opposed to what I understand
> spirituality to be about. Buddhism, Vedanta,
> Sufism, Kabbalah, just about every spiritual path
> that I know of emphasizes that acceptance of
> impermanence and transience is critical to genuine
> spiritual development.
>
> CV also does not seem to be particularly up-front
> about the fact that this goal is what people are
> signing on for, which, IMO, seems to violate the
> principle of informed consent as I understand it.
>
> I am curious why CV seems to think this is a
> worthy goal, and how central is it to what they
> do?

Understood.

mesche Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This bit I meant: "I checked with mesche and it's
> not the same person they knew who killed
> themselves... so there are at least 2 Clairvision
> students we know of so far who ended up committing
> suicide, apparently even more who attempted but
> did not succeed. "
>
>
> So much was never private in CV, including private
> conversations on email. That's why I don't share
> most personal information here.It might seem
> harmless and I'm sure you mean no harm but I would
> like to be asked.
>
>
>
>
> grok Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > To clarify, the below quote from me was not
> meant
> > to quote mesche... sorry if it came across that
> > way
> >
> >
> > mesche Wrote:
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > > But Grok. Don't quote me unless you have
> asked
> > for
> > > permission.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > grok Wrote:
> > >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > > > Remembered another one:
> > > >
> > > > "It's all just part of The Work"

That's just very weird to me. Even if you buy in to the premise--that we have subtle bodies, that this is how they work, and that CV practices can do what they say they do in augmenting your subtle body--they're describing a process that is fundamentally acquisitive and egocentric, 'more more more.' It's no different than acquiring cars or money or sexual conquests, it's just couched in spiritual language and concepts. 'Spiritual materialism' feels like a really apt term for this.


grok Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ok, well, this was just my understanding of why
> one might want a body of immortality that could
> survive death, but I feel like it had to do with
> what they teach about reincarnation. According to
> Clairvision certain parts of your subtle bodies
> fall away or shatter upon death. Once you have
> refined the subtle bodies to a certain point,
> those subtle bodies don't shatter or fall away
> with death. This means that ultimately you can
> take parts of your energy (the good parts
> hopefully) from incarnation to incarnation with
> you - you don't have to start all over again when
> you're born like most people do.
>
> My understanding was that Clairvision's view is
> that one of the big problems with the world is
> that most humans cannot tolerate spiritual fire
> with the way their subtle bodies normally are,
> therefore they can't contribute as much to that
> life - when your subtle bodies are refined you can
> do more, be more. What it meant to me was that
> having a body of immortality meant that you didn't
> have to start from the beginning with each
> incarnation afterwards. Also you can contribute
> more to the world if you also remember your reason
> for incarnating - if you have refined subtle
> bodies you're more likely to remember these things
> according to them. They describe normal
> reincarnating like "the great forgetting" because
> once you fall from heaven to incarnate you tend to
> forget everything about spiritual worlds and
> become trapped in the human experience. With a
> body of immortality you also don't go through "the
> great forgetting".
>
> I would say that the body of immortality is pretty
> central to the CV teachings and practices -
> ultimately everything is aimed at refining your
> subtle bodies in one way or another.
>
>
>

I suspect that a Clairvision response to this would be that the body of immortality is supposed to be about a transpersonal perspective, not about the "little ego". I always found this confusing, but Clairvision refers to the Self or the Higher Self as the Ego (capital E). I think this was a Steiner thing but I don't remember for sure. So the body of immortality is essentially operated from this Ego or Higher Self, and the Ego is free from samskaras and the things that the little ego might hook into that might make one chase certain things in life. But looking back, I see what you mean, metanoia, I see how it could be construed as spiritual materialism with the constant need to acquire something, even if that something may seem like a worthy goal to pursue.

metanoia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's just very weird to me. Even if you buy in
> to the premise--that we have subtle bodies, that
> this is how they work, and that CV practices can
> do what they say they do in augmenting your subtle
> body--they're describing a process that is
> fundamentally acquisitive and egocentric, 'more
> more more.' It's no different than acquiring cars
> or money or sexual conquests, it's just couched in
> spiritual language and concepts. 'Spiritual
> materialism' feels like a really apt term for
> this.
>
>
> grok Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > Ok, well, this was just my understanding of why
> > one might want a body of immortality that could
> > survive death, but I feel like it had to do
> with
> > what they teach about reincarnation. According
> to
> > Clairvision certain parts of your subtle bodies
> > fall away or shatter upon death. Once you have
> > refined the subtle bodies to a certain point,
> > those subtle bodies don't shatter or fall away
> > with death. This means that ultimately you can
> > take parts of your energy (the good parts
> > hopefully) from incarnation to incarnation with
> > you - you don't have to start all over again
> when
> > you're born like most people do.
> >
> > My understanding was that Clairvision's view is
> > that one of the big problems with the world is
> > that most humans cannot tolerate spiritual fire
> > with the way their subtle bodies normally are,
> > therefore they can't contribute as much to that
> > life - when your subtle bodies are refined you
> can
> > do more, be more. What it meant to me was that
> > having a body of immortality meant that you
> didn't
> > have to start from the beginning with each
> > incarnation afterwards. Also you can contribute
> > more to the world if you also remember your
> reason
> > for incarnating - if you have refined subtle
> > bodies you're more likely to remember these
> things
> > according to them. They describe normal
> > reincarnating like "the great forgetting"
> because
> > once you fall from heaven to incarnate you tend
> to
> > forget everything about spiritual worlds and
> > become trapped in the human experience. With a
> > body of immortality you also don't go through
> "the
> > great forgetting".
> >
> > I would say that the body of immortality is
> pretty
> > central to the CV teachings and practices -
> > ultimately everything is aimed at refining your
> > subtle bodies in one way or another.
> >
> >
> >

From: [www.decision-making-confidence.com]

"What the manipulators say...
It's interesting that many cult leaders will often claim that people cannot be made to do things against their will, even using mind control hypnosis. There are two important issues here.

First of all, the members of the group are programmed to accept whatever the leader says. Therefore they will tend to accept this idea. Secondly, implicit in the idea is that if the person does something they are doing it of their own volition; it is their own decision to do so. When we make our own decisions, we believe more firmly and are more committed to the result, and the actions and effects of our decisions last longer. This is a very subtle but potent idea."

"When people are bored or tired, they will often find their attention drifting internally, away from the outside world. It is often easier to induce hypnosis in people like this, or for the unscrupulous hypnotist or cult leader to utilize these naturally occurring trances to implant suggestions in people. And remember, in cults and sects the suggestions given using the combination of mind control hypnosis are for the leaders benefit!

Group pressure is another powerful force for getting people into trance states. If everyone around you is doing the same thing, it can be very difficult not to follow along, especially if the group leader is berating anyone for being different!"

If anything, Samuel Sagan was definitely a genius. He did all the right things to train his "lieutenants" how to take over once he passed, and to look back and reflect on this, the way Samuel did it was pure genius too. Here's a great quote about cult leaders getting their people organized and ready to spread the word, and ultimately keep the cult going.

From Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini, page 117:

"From my own perspective, most attempts to analyze the Jonestown incident have focused too much on the personal qualities of Jim Jones. Although he was without question a man of rare dynamism, the power he wielded strikes me as coming less from his remarkable personal style than from his understanding of fundamental psychological principles. His real genius as a leader was his realization of the limitations of individual leadership. No leader can hope to persuade, regularly and single- handedly, all the members of the group. A forceful leader can reasonably expect, however, to persuade some sizable proportion of group members. Then the raw information that a substantial number of group members has been convinced can, by itself, convince the rest. Thus the most influential leaders are those who know how to arrange group conditions to allow the principle of social proof to work maximally in their favor. " [grok's emphasis]

"Why isolation from society works so well for cults [and CV]:
Once again we can see that social proof is most powerful for those who feel unfamiliar or unsure in a specific situation and who, consequently, must look outside of themselves for evidence of how best to behave there."

I look back on my time in Clairvision and see how these manipulation tools were expertly used, it certainly gives me a different perspective on my time with this group and the leaders who took over once Samuel died.

More thought terminating cliches frequently heard in Clairvision:

You're reacting/having a reaction/in a reaction
You're projecting
You're being a victim


grok Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Remembered another one:
>
> "It's all just part of The Work"

> > USE OF THOUGHT TERMINATING CLICHES IN
> CLAIRVISION
>
> > The 2 most insidious:
> > -Samuel says...
> > -Samuel said....
> > ...these are usually followed by something that
> > may or may not be taken completely out of
> context,
> > or may be one of the things that Samuel later
> > changed his mind about.
> >
> > Others frequently heard within the group:
> > -That's just your samskaras talking
> > -It's in the space
> > -It's not in the space
> > -The space changed
> > -It's (the space) not landing
> > -It's what the Energy is pointing to/it's what
> the
> > Energy wants.
> > -Get comfortable with being uncomfortable
> > -People only disrespect you if you let them
> > -People are mirroring your own reality to you
> > through their behavior
> > -Whatever problems you're experiencing are a
> > reflection of your internal state
> > -Some part of you chose this
> > -What part of you wanted this?
> > -You didn’t put enough Will into it/you need to
> > put more Will into it
> > -It will be good for your spiritual development
> >
> > If any of you have any others you frequently
> > heard, I would be interested to hear them.

This is all so provisional...the assurance is that once you reach this Higher Self everything will be clear or free, but it places that moment in a far-off future when you have finally practiced enough or become clear of enough samskaras. It keeps people hooked and seeking.




grok Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I suspect that a Clairvision response to this
> would be that the body of immortality is supposed
> to be about a transpersonal perspective, not about
> the "little ego". I always found this confusing,
> but Clairvision refers to the Self or the Higher
> Self as the Ego (capital E). I think this was a
> Steiner thing but I don't remember for sure. So
> the body of immortality is essentially operated
> from this Ego or Higher Self, and the Ego is free
> from samskaras and the things that the little ego
> might hook into that might make one chase certain
> things in life. But looking back, I see what you
> mean, metanoia, I see how it could be construed as
> spiritual materialism with the constant need to
> acquire something, even if that something may seem
> like a worthy goal to pursue.
>

GROK!!!!!!!!

Good for you! You did such a good job in posting all this!

Wow, I am SO impressed by you. this is great material and I'm so happy that you brought all this to the forum so other people can see it.

By the way, I have gotten a lot of random messages from random users since I started posting and especially in this last several weeks since you hit the forums with your big info drop.

Anyway, I want to say thank you again for all this.

I have noticed abuse from other people in clairvision including old friends who have acted hostile to me since I stopped doing group work there in my choir, certain people started acting suspicious and also I've gotten calls from an old IST practitioner who got really angry over the phone with me after calling me out of the blue. I had recently told old friends I had doubts about my work in CV and also that I was concerned about abuse there as a general issue.

perhaps because I told some of my old CV friends about my experiences word about this had circulated and filled some people's inboxes inside the school and gotten to ears within the leadership there.

I think that leadership of the school is corrupt now, especially since Samuel died, and that there are abusers in positions of power there and that they will misinform people within the school and tell the other students things about you that are not necessarily true if they do not like or agree with you.

I have heard things from other students since my departure including: you violated the trust of the school, you didn't do the work or handle your process in a way that was responsible to other people in the school, or even that have become a person who has done harm to the fellowship doubting it and its integrity; I was also told I HAD to trust the CV fellowship and its members by other people within it and that everything from the meals we were given there and the rooms we were assigned were chosen especially for us and that if we doubted a school guided by the archive we were betraying it. I was also told by students and teachers I had to listen to my IST practitioner and also that they were right no matter what and that I was being a fool if I didn't do so, even when my IST practitioner lied about things or misinformed other people about me.

I still love the techniques but I hate what the school has become...