From International Viewpoints (IVy) Issue 7 - August 1992

by Bob Ross, USA

I am told that when one succeeds with meditation, one reaches the
levels of Empyrean (Empyrean: The highest reaches of heaven, believed
by the ancients to be a realm of pure fire and by early Christians to
be the abode of god and the angels.) and Wisdom and begins to see
that paradoxes are actually a necessary part of existence.

I am told and have read that with meditation one reaches a great
light and experiences wisdom. Two of my friends recently told me of
hitting such a state briefly in auditing. Both said they lost it when
challenged with suppressive remarks. I hit it myself in 1967 for a
few seconds. My auditor's mouth dropped open. Then she went on with
the C.C. sec check and I lost it.


A statement or a phenomenon is called a paradox when it seems to
contradict itself. One expects one thing but and finds what seems to
be a contradiction. Many if not all scientific discoveries have come
from scientific exploration of contradictions and other unexpected
phenomena. Ron in one lecture, said he made his own discoveries by
exploring unexpected results.

Mathematically speaking paradoxes are defined as violations of the
basic Aristotelean premise that a thing, "A" cannot be both "B" and
"Not-B." This seems quite sensible and ordinary. A piece of fruit is
an apple or is Not an apple. It is an orange or Not an orange, it
can't be both.

However, let's look at the statement, "I am a liar," which implies
that - all - I say is a lie. If I am indeed a liar, then this true
statement contradicts itself and hence is a paradox.


Is it possible to make a clay table demo of a paradox? Yes! It can be
done with clay but using a piece of paper is easier and less messy.

Cut two strips of paper about 1/2 an inch wide (1 cm) from the side
of a sheet of typing paper. Lay them flat on a table. Glue the two
ends of one strip together, making sure there is no twist. This makes
a simple loop such as can be used to make a paper chain. Twist one
end of the second strip half a turn (180 degrees) with respect to the
other end. Now glue the two ends of the second strip together making
sure there is only a half twist in the loop. Compare the two loops.
How many sides and edges does each loop of paper have?

To find out, make a pin hole on each loop and mark the spot on one
side "A" and the spot on the other side "B." It is instantly obvious
that there are two sides, side "A" and side "B" to each loop. Next,
trace along an edge of each loop from "A" back to "A" again with a
marker pen. You will see that the plain loop has one marked and one
unmarked edge, and thus it has two sides and two edges. One side with
a line and one side without a line. The loop with the twist, on the
other hand, called a Mobius loop, or Mobius strip has only one line
which appears on both sides, going from "A" through "B" before it
comes back again to "A." This proves that the Mobius strip, with the
single twist, has only one side. The Mobius loop is a physical
representation of a paradox because it has both one side and two
sides simultaneously. We cannot argue, as we might, with the
statement, "I am a liar," by saying that that paradox is only a
mental creation with no independent existence in the MEST universe,
because the Mobius strip very obviously has an existence independent
of our looking at it. Or, to put it another way, a paradox is not
only in the eyes of the beholder. Both contradictory facts exist.

For some people the idea Ron was human and that Ron was more than
human are contradictory, - mutually exclusive - facts. But the
essence of paradox is that seemingly mutually exclusive facts can
indeed exist simultaneously. Ron was indeed both homo sapiens and
homo novis.

It seems likely that the common dichotomies of existence that we deal
with daily in our lives, and in auditing, such as Effort vs Counter
effort, Love vs Hate, Friend vs Enemy, Mass vs Space, Rich vs Poor,
War vs Peace, etc. are also set up as paradoxes inasmuch as one does
not exist without the other.

Here versus there

For example, if every one had the same level of income there would be
no rich and poor. In order for there to be rich and richer there must
be poor and poorer. One cannot exist without the other, and one
cannot be as-ised without also as-ising the other.

The same is true of any ridge or problem. When there is an Effort -
Counter-effort, Thought - Counter-thought, Emotion - Counter-emotion,
or the opposed items of a GPM, both sides must be confronted and
identified before the condition can be as-ised.

It is much harder for me to imagine an outflow by itself, or a
pressor beam without a simultaneous tractor beam, but this is the
idea presented by the concept of god as "prime mover unmoved." That
may be one of the lies of creation.


It seems to me also, that an effort to create only one condtion, such
as "peace on Earth" without its opposite is doomed to failure. Can we
have Peace without War? Peace is defined in my dictionary as "The
absence of war or other hostilities". Thus Peace exists only in
relation to War. So Peace Mongers by their very actions must
inevitably, considering the nature of the universe, also be creating
War. War mongers on the other hand even though they may be trying to
create continuous war must inevitably create peace along with it or
after it. This is a telling argument for following the "Middle Way,"
neither total Peace nor total War but a moderate amount of both.


I used to be confused about "Space is the viewpoint of Dimension,"
and thought that Space could be independently created without Matter.
I now see that that is a lie, which I foisted on myself. True, space
exists by the creation of anchor points, or particles. What I had not
seen until now in writing this essay, was that anchor points, no
matter how small are matter.


Similarly with Time. The Axiom states "Time is the consideration that
space and particles will persist." I took this as meaning that Time
was a separate creation or consideration, whereas I now see Time as
being simultaneoulsy created as part of the idea of persistence, not
separate from it.

I see something else here. Dichotomies and paradoxes are, or can be,
ideas without energy of their own. The energy found when observing
dichotomies or paradoxes is put there by the observer when putting
attention on that dichotomy or paradox. Ron, in fact, said as much
about engrams, that engrams have potential existence and when run are
created by the individual by putting attention on them. The same is
certainly true of GPMs.

In summary: Paradoxes are necessary to creation. As-ising any
condition requires identifying and simultaneously as-ising the
opposed ideas, emotions, energies, forces, etc., that make it up. If
you or the preclear don't immediately see the other side, look for
it. This has been implicit though not explicit in all workable forms
of auditing. We know, for example, that flows must be kept balanced,
that any flow continued too long in one direction, tends to pile up
or jam, or seems to be an overrun.

We know, for example, that when boy chases girl, girl runs away, but
when boy withdraws from girl, girl chases boy or reaches for boy.
This is another aspect of the same mechanism. You can't have a reach
without a simultanious withdraw, or a withdraw without a reach. So be