In plain English, here are scientology’s core religious beliefs.
- Scientology’s sophisticated mix of pop psychology and hypnotism are firmly believed to be the only workable ‘technology’ for curing mental issues, neurosis, psychosis, physical disease, increasing awareness and intelligence, and for creating OT’s (operating thetans, L. Ron Hubbard’s version of Nietzsche’s superman or Aleister Crowley’s magician).Note: Scientology is at first presented in secular, scientific terms promising and then false reporting 100% workability. In fact scientology never achieved even the scientifically recognized 20 to 30 percent placebo effect in terms of long-term satisfaction. In order to explain away that discrepancy the less-than-placebo percentage who stick with it are led to adopt the remaining listed beliefs. The ‘technology’ evolved being carefully designed and administered so as to lead scientologists to wholeheartedly accept and live according to these beliefs.
2. Planet Earth is a prison. The vast majority of human beings – and billions of invisible other beings – are its inmates.
3. Xenu is the name of scientology’s Satan who established Earth as a prison and transported billions of beings to serve as its inmates.
4. Our continued imprisonment is assured by ‘psychs.’ ‘Psychs’ are defined as psychiatrists, psychologists, psycho-therapists, priests, ministers, and anyone else practicing in the field of the mind and spirit. Psychs were sent here from a planet called ‘Farsec.’ They are a special breed of being created and invested with the sole purpose of keeping humankind mentally imprisoned.
5. Ron Hubbard is the first to discover the above ‘truths’, and the only one to have devised a means of escaping the prison planet.
6. Navigation through the only hole in the wall consists of closely emulating Hubbard and behaving as he did when he lived.
7. Enemies, including psychs as well as anyone expressing any doubt or reservation about these beliefs, must be destroyed by any means necessary by scientologists. Such means include lying, suing, cheating, harassing, intimidating, blackmailing, smearing and by physical violence.
8. When a scientologist has expended all of his best efforts in the vain pursuit of these beliefs he is expected to ‘discard’ his body so that he may continue to pursue them without such a physical ‘impediment’.
Whether the ultimate belief, number 8 above, constitutes suicide is a wholly subjective question of religious belief.
Moving On Up a Little Higher 
Where does #8 come from?
Got no words to counter your points….as it’s true what you say..I never looked at i this way…Ok
Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior, Amazon Books 2012
you surely have misunderstoods about tech! When tech is correctly applied, like I do, people are winning, and having co-audited NOTs, i know with certainty that what Ron found is correct!
‘Scientology ‘technology’ consists of a sophisticated mix of pop psychology and hypnotism’
This one sounds like a core belief of Marty Rathbun
Thanks for this. My son just asked last night for an explanation of scientology as it was brought up in his psychology class. This is scientology in a nut shell.
This sums it up. This is the ‘Confession of Belief’ of the Scientology Church, which you can’t read nowhere as such in Hubbard’s scriptures. But it is the most important thing to read before entering an (ideal) org!
It explains everything that is going on within and with Scientology. It is all you need to know really.
I would like to add: this gave me a long fall blowdown. Scientology finally as-issed/as-ist (don’t know how to spell this).
I so much appreciate your continued thoughts on this subject. All The best to you, Mosey and the little tyke.
Nailed it!
rogers100, that is covered in point #7.
Great summary. Thanks for continuing your writing. It is always of interest and value IMO. Simple truths do not require but simple explanations and I feel you got it just right.
Bravo Mr Rathbun.
It is to be realized that Hubbard lived with these beliefs. These beliefs made up his case, or rather, to him, a solution to his case.
He was still working on them as his case was not really resolving, and he was getting frustrated about it near the end of his life.
Still he thought he was right in his beliefs.
I feel sorry for Hubbard!
It comes from the belief that accompanied the explanation of Hubbard’s death.
One has to be careful about what it means to be winning in Scientology.
A person who is happily hypnotized into a wonderland feels that he is winning.
In my opinion, a winning state would consist of living closer to reality than to some wonderland. The “wonderland” effect is produced by drugs also. Hubbard lived in the wonderland of drugs but he wanted to transition to the wonderland of self-hypnotism.
Is it worth noting in this post that Scientologists are only fed this info in bits and pieces over a long period of time? Some may not even be aware of it as they are lower on the bridge and would sincerely deny its truth if confronted with it.
Effects of good tech can be easily measured by the rationality and reality of the person. “Good feelings” alone are not sufficient. You can observe plenty of good feelings felt by a person on drugs or on crazed sex binge.
I think the post is addressing BELIEFS.
be·lief
1.an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
“his belief in the value of hard work”
something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion or conviction.
opinion, view, conviction, judgment, thinking, way of thinking, idea, impression, theory, conclusion, notion a religious conviction.
“Christian beliefs”
synonyms: ideology, principle, ethic, tenet, canon; More
2. trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.
I do not think believing is the same as knowing.
know
: to have (information of some kind) in your mind
: to understand (something) : to have a clear and complete idea of (something)
: to have learned (something, as a skill or a language)
a (1) : to perceive directly : have direct cognition of (2) : to have understanding of (3) : to recognize the nature of : discern
b (1) : to recognize as being the same as something previously known (2) : to be acquainted or familiar with (3) : to have experience of
2 a : to be aware of the truth or factuality of : be convinced or certain of
b : to have a practical understanding of
What people believe and what they know, there can be a very wide space in between.
I think it makes sense that Marty would know what the beliefs are.
I would say myself, the culture that bubbled up around the conversations in that group, made #7 a reality. It was not that way when I first got involved. It has not been my experience. On the other hand, it is my personal view that I have been exploring magic. And this has been a very offensive idea to most people. That is not a personal belief for me. It is a personal understanding. I can see how it can be defined as pop psychology too. “Pop” in the meaning that it “challenges tradition”. That is what pop means in this context.
psy·chol·o·gy
noun
the scientific study of the human mind and its functions, especially those affecting behavior in a given context.
synonyms: study of the mind, science of the mind
“a degree in psychology”
the mental characteristics or attitude of a person or group.
plural noun: psychologies
“the psychology of Americans in the 1920s”
synonyms: mindset, mind, mental processes, thought processes, way of thinking, cast of mind, mentality, persona, psyche, (mental) attitude(s), makeup, character; informalwhat makes someone tick
“the psychology of the motorist”
the mental and emotional factors governing a situation or activity.
“the psychology of interpersonal relationships”
According to these definitions, it is pop psychology also if one would not see it as magic.
New Definition: Hypnosis
Hypnosis typically involves an introduction to the procedure during which the subject is told that suggestions for imaginative experiences will be presented. The hypnotic induction is an extended initial suggestion for using one’s imagination, and may contain further elaborations of the introduction. A hypnotic procedure is used to encourage and evaluate responses to suggestions. When using hypnosis, one person (the subject) is guided by another (the hypnotist) to respond to suggestions for changes in subjective experience, alterations in perception,[19][20] sensation,[21] emotion, thought or behavior.
“Move to the beginning of the incident…” This is a command. There are auditing COMMANDS. You are commanding the P.C. in the session.
verb (used with object)
1.
to direct with specific authority or prerogative; order:
The captain commanded his men to attack.
2.
to require authoritatively; demand:
She commanded silence.
3.
to have or exercise authority or control over; be master of; have at one’s bidding or disposal:
The Pharaoh commanded 10,000 slaves.
4.
to deserve and receive (respect, sympathy, attention, etc.):
He commands much respect for his attitude.
5.
to dominate by reason of location; overlook:
The hill commands the sea.
6.
to have authority over and responsibility for (a military or naval unit or installation); be in charge of.
The auditor gives COMMANDS the P.C. follows. That would not be possible with out a certain degree of surrender.
Unless you have the viewpoint that you are having a CONVERSATION. In which case you might say, “No, I don’t want to.” Or YOU could change the conversation at any time and direct it to where you would like the conversation to be.
If you are following commands, you are being other determined. I can see how this is a form of hypnotism. And there has been much praise for hypnotic therapy. I benefited from it myself on Dianetics.
You go out in the world and you see people following commands all over the place.
“Sign on the dotted line” “Move to the front of the line” “Step out of your car please and put your hands behind your back.” “File your taxes.” “Drive at the speed limit.” “Take a seat.” “Take a number”. “Eat your breakfast” “Put on your seat belt” “Pay the rent on the first” “Repeat the auditing command” etc etc.
When you are following orders or commands, you are in a state of hypnosis.
When using hypnosis, one person (the subject) is guided by another (the hypnotist) .
I am not put off about it. Whether people are exploring Scientology or not, they are out there following commands from other people.
I think the point is, for me, is being aware of it. It’s a condition.
Thank you for your essay Marty. I wholeheartedly agree with your summation. Those who don’t agree will one day reach this same conclusion that you and many of us have already attained. Keep up the good fight brother.
I suggest you learn some new words and revisit the conversation.
What a great post! I would just add ‘and all his money’ after ‘efforts’ in point 8 🙂
That brings it full circle. Joining in on number 8
Thank you for your succinct statement of the facts. Within Scientology its unpalatable truth is so buried beneath theta talk and feel good Scientology Zero that it goes unrecognized for what it is.
Thank you for speaking the truth about scientology. This is the answer that scientology (and scientologists) avoids revealing. This will ultimately help many people.
Maybe this belief needs to be explained better. As noted above, effects of good tech are measured through the reality and rationality it imparts, and not just “good feelings”. When a person has “good feelings” but he is out of touch with reality, and moving farther away from rationality, as a result of auditing, then it cannot be called good tech.
So, take a good look at how closer you are to reality as a result of Scientology auditing. Are you able to see the abuse and contradictions in the Church of Scientology?
Excellent and thank you Marty. Thank you very much. #8 has been weighing on my mind, particularly since reading Tony Ortega’s story from yesterday about the mentally ill woman who was victimized by Scientologists. I hope you don’t mind my sharing something I wrote after reading that:
Although it’s veiled, Scientology’s dogma does advocate death. Think about it:
-It’s only a body, you’ll come back.
-LRH dropped his body because it became an impediment to his work.
-But don’t worry, he researched, codified and left us all the “tech” on how to die (Pat Broeker, LRH Death Event)
-Billion year contracts.
-Advocating against life-saving medical care.
-Denying the existence of life-threatening illnesses.
-We’d rather have you dead than incapable. (KSW policy).
-Coerced abortions.
It goes on.
The fact that Scientology places so little value on human life should be cause for great concern.
Done it all… I have found the above to be true, except for Xenu and the gang. Personally just hogwash. But if you want.to agree with the prison, billions of beings thing etc & dig in, I say have at it. If you do some research you’ll find elements of the truth here, but it is not the total accurate truth. So IMHO running it is just running LRH’s case. What a mixed bag of $#%&
Hubbard has credibility problems. Miscavige has mental/social issues.
It’s not that every Scientologist has been instructed in writing to discard their body per se. It’s that all Scientologists are indoctrinated to do exactly as Ron did. And the public PR line is that once Ron got to the point where he could no longer conduct OT research because his body was a hindrance, he “discarded the body”.
Of course, public Scientologists believe they are still about a dozen unreleased OT levels away from this being an issue.
But the fact is, they all believe LRH just “discarded the body” because he could not move any further up the ladder of OT unless he did so and Scientologists are totally cool with this.
So this idea of “I’m just going to get rid of my body now, because I’ve done everything I can do in Scientology with it” is absolutely something Scientologists embrace, even though none of them have had to cross that bridge (pardon the pun) yet.
I am just going to refer people to this post over and over every time I am asked what the fuck Scientologists believe. Brief, exact and still contains all the crazy. Thanks for this Marty. Brilliant.
Rogers100, you have every right to practice whatever method of self-betterment you choose to. And others have a right to say that you are practicing a form of pop-psychology and hypnotism.
But if you ARE practicing a form of pop-psychology and hypnotism, then OF COURSE you would be convinced of your own rightness.
So round and round we go.
And commanding, is about forces. Conditions and forces.
Crowley: “Magick is the SCIENCE of understanding oneself and one’s conditions. It is the Art of applying that understanding in action.”
Hubbard must have thought conditions were pretty bad to create his own para military. To bring soldiers into the mix. I do not think these kinds of forces and commanders are wanted and needed in the Scientology community at large. The purpose of a soldier is to bypass.
Hubbard’s legacy has been destroyed by his own soldiers.
“…never violate the second law of magic, “Do not be hoist by your own petard.” “Do not be an effect to your own cause.”
He has been totally bypassed.
Dealing in the MEST (Matter, Energy, Space, Time) universe you can shilly-shally around and monkey around a little bit if you want to, shift possessions around — don’t take them very seriously.
– L Ron Hubbard, 7 November 1952
The past twenty years you have commander Miscavige stating that the people can not be cleared or audited or helped with out ships and buildings. And they have made a certain number of people believe it.
That ethnic cleansing must occur so people can be enlightened.
The soldiers have flipped the subject around 180 degrees. The soldiers deal in force.
When you have people that are suggestible, and dependent, and their days are spent following commands, all the while you remove their CHOICES or ability or freedom to choose, you are dealing in slavery and hypnotism. Those soldiers can not CHOOSE what to eat, where to sleep,when they can walk, where they can walk, what time they eat, what time they sleep,what to wear, who they can love,who they can marry or even who they talk to or live with. And if they make a choice for them self, they are flattened with more force.
That is complete hypnotism.
so glad – you are finally there…. hope you remember all those deleted messages….. but…. so glad you are here, welcome Marty.
Big hello from LRHs Bulgravia.
@rogers100. As a Libertarian I respect your religious beliefs and your right to speak freely of them. I also respect the rights of others to speak freely about anything they wish to comment on. Yeah, things get messy when free speech is practiced, but freedom by its very nature is messy. If one values freedom, one has to learn to tolerate all that freedom others are exercising too. Or one could just live in a neat and tidy tyranny if that is what they prefer. Having said all that, I would like to say this about the standard tech you mentioned. I got into Scientology via DMSMH back in the 70s. That book promised eidetic memory when Clear was reached. It also promised alleviation from all psychosomatic ills. After 30 years of “standard tech” I never even came close to eidetic memory. And I have the same psychosomatic illnesses I was hoping to deal with back in the 70s. When you say people are “winning” with standard tech, that is just too vague for me. I had specific, clear-cut gains I was going for based on promises from Hubbard, yet these were never forthcoming despite lots and lots and lots and lots of auditing (through the OT levels by the way), including tons of repairs, O/W pulling, PTS handlings etc etc etc. Sure, I had “wins” all the time whereby I was temporarily elated. However, those specific goals never happened and I justified the lack of achievement of those specific goals for literally decades. But no longer. I am sorry to have to question “standard tech”. But with all due respect to you and your beliefs, I do.
BIG hugs to you, Marty! It’s been a long road you’ve traveled, and I’ve cheered you on every step of the way. Yesterday, we were idiots. Today, we know better. Imagine what we’ll be tomorrow…
Marty, you’re one of my heroes; I hope to meet you in person to tell you that someday. ❤
Jesus Marty I don’t know about throwing a primed hand grenade, you’ve just thrown in a suitcase nuke. Ta don’t lack balls pal!
If you don’t think Scientologists are highly suggestible people, just look at how Commander David Miscavige labels beggars “registrars” and people believe they are. They are not registering anybody for anything. The ones that are beggars. They are begging. They do not call themselves beggars, they call themselves registrars, and they do not register anyone for anything. And nobody is allowed to point it out or speak of it. Even if they could notice it.
Last line should have been ” ya don’t lack balls pal!
Thanks Marty. Good summary. It’s quite a journey from there to here, isn’t it?
There is no “beggars” full hat or check sheet or post, because Hubbard did not mock up beggars. He mocked up soldiers, David altered them into beggars.
There is not one policy letter or reference by Hubbard on “Golden Age of tech”. Not one.
These fanatics and “loyalists”, have been hypnotized. They follow commands and it doesn’t matter much who is giving them.
From a master hypnotist:
“People keep saying, ‘How’d you get power?’ ” Miscavige said. “Nobody gives you power. I’ll tell you what power is. Power in my estimation is if people will listen to you. That’s it.”
Well guys, I’d never intentionally set out to denigrate, dismiss, invalidate or negate another persons wins or beliefs but as Jack Nicholson famously bawled to Tom Cruise ( oh the irony) ” You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth!”
Hence, you have a prison of belief.
Mark, these are very clearly stated. There seems to be a big gap in your summary, though. You don’t mention the belief in Body Thetans. Half of the upper OT levels are about exorcising these invisible dead alien infestations. So much time, energy and money is spent on pursuing this. You also chose not to mention belief in the whole track and past lives, which appear to be core scientology beliefs. Just wondering if you might share your reasoning about why you didn’t include these in your list?
The purpose of a soldier is to bypass. The purpose of an auditor is to bypass also. You get the same purpose with two different identities, and people can have some “mental issues” with that. It can be very easy to flip an auditor into a soldier.
But a soldier into a beggar? Sure,you bypass the guy and spend his money for him.
That quote is not a core belief of Scientology it;s Marty’s opinion.
“The fact that Scientology places so little value on human life should be cause for great concern.”
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is a very sad TRUTH. No real concern about death and illness..He is out-ethics or pts etc., should get a new Body.
The true suppressive in today’s Scientology, is the person who refuses to be bypassed / hypnotized.
And those are the people that have been helped by Scientology. Whether they know it or not.
The domination of one will over another.
I suggest you make more sense
I don’t believe in any of that. And yet, somehow, I find value in Scientology. Go figure.
Millions of words distilled down to these eight brief paragraphs.Bravo!
Here, in my opinion, is a further distillation: Scientology Beliefs = bullpucky.
Why do you think the Church is so terrified of reporters? They build a following and people ASSUME they are relaying facts. Once they add innuendo, half truths, untruths,part truths, attitudes, words that excite, labels, start witch hunts, they have a hypnotized following. Media is hypnotic. As well as enlightening. This is why the Church is obsessed with controlling everything written about it, and publishes enough false information its self to qualify as mass marketing fraud.
Amen Shelly! Amen Marty!
I love this post… and this reply to it. I am going to copy it and carry it around to share with those whom ask “What is that Scientology?”. Thank you! As previously stated, you nailed it!
It’s a leap in logic to say that because LRH “discarded the body” in order to do further research (according to those who made the announcement) that all scientologists are supposed to do so. I never heard a single scientologist express that idea. It would be more consistent for them to think that LRH is the only one who does research.
This is a typical stretch that causes many critics to lose credibility.
Because Hubbard “borrowed”a bit.
That story on Tony Ortega’s blog is very telling indeed. I remember a yound Marc Valliers from my days on Flagship during the 70’s.
I don’t know if Scientology dogma advocates death, but it does discount individual life in favor of the survival of the Church of Scientology. I regrad the following beliefs in Scientology to be false.
(1) A soul (thetan) is believed to exist indpendent of the body, and even to move to another body after the death of a previous body. This is not the belief in Buddhism or in other Eastern religions, which differentiate spiritual elements from soul. A soul is a configuration of spiritual elements. This configuration is temporary and it disintegrates after death. The spiritual elements may continue like the physical elements (atoms and molecules), but not a particular configuration as a body or a soul.
(2) That LRH continues to exists as a being is a false belief. His soul is disintegrated just like his body. The concept of “reincarnation” is misunderstood in the western society. It is no a being that gets reborn. It is simply a new configuration of spiritual and physical elements. It is not only a new body, but also a new soul. The spiritual elements that made up Hubbard’s soul may continue like the physical elements that made up up his body. But they are long absorbed in new bodies and souls.
Scientology has simply exploited the ignorance of western cultures in these matters.
.
Well, the Scientology belief is that its “tech” is infallible. My criticism of this belief is as follows:
1. Scientology consists of much ground breaking work by Hubbard.
2. Scientology introduces a whole new plateau to addressing the problems of the mind.
3. The work on this breakthrough is, however, far from complete.
4. The success from the application of Scientology is far from consistent.
5. Any lack of success gets blamed on the practitioner of Scientology.
6. Unmanageable difficulties seem to exist in the application of Scientology.
7. Correction lists have become a part of “Standard Scientology.”
8. A closer look at Scientology shows a lack of application of the principle of poka-yoke.
9. Mindfulness is the key to successes in Scientology auditing.
10. Scientology does not seem to put emphasis on Mindfulness.
11. Scientology takes up aspects of mindfulness on TR0, Obnosis, and Data Series, but it fails to treat mindfulness systematically, and fails to highlight its importance in auditing.
12. The principles of Mindfulness were first elucidated by Buddha 2600 years ago.
13. Mindfulness seems to provide poka-yoke to Scientology processes.
14. The principles of Mindfulness are presented under KHTK Mindfulness on this blog.
15. Here is an example of application of mindfulness to Scientology processes – Running Scientology Grade 0 with Mindfulness (Part 1)
16. Here is a closer look at Scientology Auditing.
For details, please see,
A LOOK AT SCIENTOLOGY
.
Then why did Buddha say he recalled many of his own past lives, and that he had been “born for the last time”?
Exactly. A lot of people do not want to be cause. And they do not want others to be cause. In fact, it is even considered evil or satanic. You have to have a purpose to “be obedient” before you can be hypnotized. O.K.? The therapy of Dianetics and Scientology can bring a person out of hypnotic state, but then you have culture enforcing total obedience and sec checking everyone to death out of FEAR of THEM! Anyway, we are not the only people to be having these kinds of conversations. The church of Scientology is not the first institution to claim the only way to salvation. And people do not have to explore Scientology to wake the f^*k up and think for themselves. personally have no urge to destroy Hubbard’s books or thoughts and I am not threatened by them. I also realize these ideas are not born from me and they are not mine. Some align with mine,and some have caused me to see things I did not see before, just like when I read any book by another human being. People do generally get very afraid of others who are willing to think for themselves, not just in the culture Scientology has become.
Not impossible, even against the backdrop of your fixed ideas and protest reads.
And ser facs.
But, he did. See point nr 1 – ‘the invisible beings’…
In my understanding, Buddha was talking about different configurations of spiritual elements that he was aware of. Each configuration was a different “I”. For details, please see
THE STRUCTURE OF “I”
.
I think a few indies just fainted. This is fantastic and spot-on. The only downside is that somewhere a 5’1″ dictator just breathed a sigh of relief as he realized that Marty is really not trying to take over.
He’s simply saying that it’s not a belief of scientologists themselves that scientology is pop psychology and hypnotism, and that this is Marty’s own assessment of it.
Hubbard tricked CofSers into using hypnotic, domination techniques. For example, a lot of CofS policy directed towards the handling of disagreements, dissidents etc come straight out of what Hubbard called “The Brainwashing Manual”, he merely used a trick of semantics to rename them for propaganda purposes, then introduced them into CofS policy while telling his followers that it was to “help” when it was order to make a self enclosed thought bubble to entrap the minds of his followers. Apparently, he wanted everyone to be his slave under hypnotic control.
Indeed.
Winning means that the heavy bulge in your wallet is getting lighter.
Brilliant, Marty! Thank you.
I have always approached auditing as a tool to help me investigate myself, others, life and the universe. I have never found a more powerful tool for doing so. Even though there was an auditor there I was using the tool – not the auditor. From this causative viewpoint i have discovered amazing things. It has led to an amazingly successful life.
That doesn’t mean I subscribe to scientology “beliefs”. There is a fantastic amount of BS connected to the subject. It just means that I have found it to be a very powerful and valuable tool.
You have come a long way over the years, Marty, and with that you are taking others out along with you. So glad to see the fruits of your evolution out of the Scientology mindset hit such a new high.. Here is hoping many will read and listen and get it.
The extraordinary is always found in the ordinary and simple ways of everyday people. Even with Scientology and it’s ceremonies. The ordinary and simple people, have given it whatever magic it has had. Be they suggestible or not. Anyone that has benefited from Scientology, has done so because of WHO THEY ARE. Not because of who L. Hubbard was. And I have no purpose to discount people’s gains, or losses. But to teach people that they are what they are, because of what Hubbard was, is hypnotism in it’s self.
This is then the real ‘Truth Revealed’.
Not wrong at all on any of this. Perhaps I would add that for the vast majority of those still in and many who are out, that the “game” of Scn. is having these “mysteries” revealed to one as they progress.
1. The “Prison Earth” idea is expressed in one’s training as early as the first auditor course one does. It is strongly bookend-ed by information on the ARC=U, session procedures, etc., – but it is still an indoctrination item regards what things are wrong with a person.
2. Xenu never comes up until one is well into their progress into higher levels and training. However, those that “know” are well-trained to generally keep their mouth shut and present themselves as “knowing the mystery” below what is wrong with who they are talking to. I’ve heard this expressed as an ingenious trap, and the fact of hearing this and such statements in conversations with the intiated leave one feeling that there is something to know and drives one to the goal. So, again, another indoctrination to continuing up to discover the mystery.
3. “Psychs” being the root of all evil is heavily promoted and a firmly held belief, and a strongly run indoctrinational point very quickly for those who are new to the subject.
4. Hubbard’s “discovery” of the mysteries, and development of the only technology to walk through the construct is another strong indoctrination in his “Keeping Scientology Working” writings. Reinforced each time a new development is announced, in most technical writings on the subject, and so on.
5. “Behaving as Ron”, the most blatant example of this indoctrination is how he recommends handling a post in an organization or otherwise. “What would Ron do?”
6. “Enemies” are firmly established by his writings, but most specifically covered in his “Conditions Formulas” works and the Suppressive Persons, Potential Trouble Source writings. To the latter, again, a fairly early piece of church indoctrination.
7. The technology itself, I am personally only beginning to see the hypnotic aspects of it, although I do have some reality on the “pop psychology” reference. In short, what I have presently come to understand is that the whole “present time” aspects are possibly the most theraputic aspects of anything Hubbard wrote, which I have also found are expressed countless times in many self-help and religious works, as well as sport and artistic fields. “Being in the moment”, “being in the zone”, etc. Sitting down and interiorizing on past upsets, transgressions, etc. to then change one’s mind about them to then “come to present time”, from an outsider point of view, seems a long way around the mulberry bush to simply just handling the present environment as it is. Lots of time was wasted by me to find irrelevant root causes to things I should and could simply handle in the now. Ultimately I find life taught me a much better lesson than Hubbard could, and to that, I am much more fulfilled as a result. However, I begin to really feel for those who lost or weaked their abilities to simply just have their full attention on their environment at will, and those that bought the promise that auditing will restore it. Each time they buy, is another step to “resolving the ultimate mystery”.
8. Unfortunately this is so true as a working practice, I am hard pressed to argue about this not being a “belief”. In my own area, I have seen suicides, persons who are to a significant degree “undersireable” or not qualified to access higher levels of the Promise of Scn. due to their physical being, sexual orientation, or even age. “They need to drop their body” is a common refrain. Ultimately, were I pressed to determine why this was so common in my own area, I would have to identify those factors in the works of Hubbard and how he desired public indoctrinated. Hence, yes, a belief and faith in what he wrote being the only answer to the problems noted above.
Not a pretty nor politically correct distillation of the core of Scientology, but personally resonating and true, none-the-less.
Scientologists do not describe it as magic either, even though Hubbard said it was over and over and over.
That doesn’t mean it isn’t.
Not sure why Marty’s assessment of what it is, considering his in depth exploratory, should not be a valid one either.
The mere fact that it is taboo to describe it in your own words is pretty telling.
party line – definition of party line
One or more of the policies or principles of a political party to which loyal members are expected to adhere.
Dianetics was originally based on valid therapies – early Freudian regression therapy and Korzybski’s General Semantics. However, when mind control is surreptitiously entered in along with the valid therapeutic ideas it is especially insidious because both mind control and valid therapy involve an emotional shift. It can be hard while undergoing the experience to tell the one from the other, but one is to heal for the person’s benefit, the other is to dominate for the benefit of the controller (first Hubbard, then Miscavige). Real therapist don’t try to use “transference” to exploit, CofS was built on it.
While Lron may have been on drugs during his Naval Hospital stay in 45, he was mostly out of the ‘psych drugs’ by 1950. His instructions to auditors made it plain that light and heavy hypnotism were the real products of ‘auditing’.
Agreed. but neither aotc or myself said anything about whether Marty’s assessment was valid or not – just that it was his own and not the belief of scientologists as regards point #7.
The fact that the Church enforces disconnection is evidence in itself, that it believes Scientologists are highly suggestible people.
No one ever asks them what they believe. About what it is. They are told what to believe.
This is an axiomatic true summation.
If there was a #9 to add, I would add that in Scientology Inc change of conduct and behavior is brought about by escalating punishments, domination, humiliation. There are reams of policies on Qual “Correction’, i.e. to correct instead of discipline, but in actuality, punishments are used for behavior modification.
Well, when I was on Flag (a long time ago) I overheard a couple of advanced Scientologists talking about ‘discarding’ their body because they were out of the ‘circle of life’. They decided to stay on a bit longer …
Children thrown into chain lockers on this ship, people who could not swim blindfolded and thrown overboard, the sadism of SP Hole, the horrific Rehabiitation Project Force locking people up in the dreaded Old Gilam House, imprisoning them on freewinds, constant kidnap held against will so that in mates cannot reveal what happened and terrorizing them to stupefaction, this is the woof and warp of daily Scientology conduct.
Here are some Escape stories from those who made it out.
The valid part of Dianetic therapy was “looking at the the trauma for what it was, without filters.” The purest form of Dianetics appeared in 1969 as R3R. It was my first experience with auditing. It was quite successful but not without some difficulty.
The earliest form of Dianetics in early 1950 was not that clean. It was corrupted by “continual auditor speculation” to guess at the engram and then run it as soon as one hit upon it. Read the auditing demos of that period from R&D volumes. Hubbard is continually speculating on what the engram was, and then questioning the pc based on his speculation.
This approach could only get the low hanging fruits, and beyond that it did not work because “occlusion” set in. The occlusion built up because Hubbard was not allowing the mind to “un-stack” itself. When there was nothing stacked up the engram simply appeared all by itself and could be run out. But Hubbard was always in extreme rush and did not have patrience for mind to unstack itself. The simplistic idea of chains had only limited value. The data in the mind is indexed in so many complex ways, that it is best to let the mind unstack itself in the order determined by it. That was the idea underlying the ‘file clerk” but Hubbard used the ‘file clerk” along with his continual speculations.
Luckily, in my first auditing in 1969, the auditor let my “file clerk” have a free hand after instructing me to maintain TR0 during the sessions. Once I got the hang of it, many deep engrams appeared and were run out one after another during the latter period of 25 hours. What happened, surprised me a great deal, and there was immediate and perceptible benefit from it.
So, undue influence in auditing was there even in the early 1950s due to Hubbard’s ineptitude. It somehow worked intermittently when right factors happen to came together.
Mind-control came in with a flawed Theta-MEST theory that Hubbard treated like a “fourteen pound diamond.” He enforced that theory in all different ways possible. That gave him a way to make a person feel better by boosting his thetanic ego.
.
I differentiate the CoS from core scientology.
It’s interesting that LRH pointed out that a workable tech which frees people could be used for evil – simply because it IS workable, due to being based on valid principles. By the same token, what is now being used as an evil tech that imprisons people can still be used to free them. This is the principle those in the independent field are operating on, and by many reports people really are achieving more freedom.
You seem either offended that Rogers100 experienced wins through scientology tech, or envious.
as crazy as thinking that a man born from a virgin rose from the dead 3 days later and floated to the heavens …..
Wow!
Thank you. Regarding # 4- “Ron Hubbard is the first to discover the truth of 1 through 3 above, and the only one to have devised a means of escaping the prison planet.”
This ‘only one’ concept invited to the use of excuses to force it on others, either by invalidation of their knowledge and the covert, but always present pressure to introvert the individual by clearing what you failed to understand and/or find out what you did that prevents you from seeing the ‘truth’. Practically constant nullification.
In addition it became a ‘save every man, woman, and child’, ‘save the planet’, ‘you won’t make it unless you use and are a scientologist’ – which translates into domination through fear (your eternity is at risk), and later on through threats, abuses, and even crimes.
“Psychs were sent here from a planet called ‘Farsec.’ ”
LOL. I guess that explains why I’m such a weirdo — I’m not from this planet at all! 😉
Karen, are you saying you no longer adhere to LRH beliefs? and if so, how come you still promote yourself as an auditor in the FZ? Please, no more BS: Are you a believer or not? and Why u keep auditing people?
Dear deanblair06,
You really expect all those who don’t agree will one day agree? God forbids, why would you want that? ALL of them and us agreeing to SAME conclusions which you have attained…? B o r i n g… I Kind of prefer everyone has and keep their own covlusions, no? Unless… you absolutely have the whole and nothing but the truth… Sir!
Have a look at this web site, and figure out how many false reports and how much false information, and wrong items the Organization is putting out there on a daily basis right now. This is what people are told to believe. It includes “learning to know God”.
http://www.whatisscientology.org/
Marvellous Marty. Now, if you could only do a summarised, tweetable version….m’kay thx 🙂
He was certainly chock full of ‘psych’ drugs (vistaril, notably), when he died in his tatty trailer in the80s, hallucinating ad screaming about stuff crawling on him, but thanks for playing!
Your outline is correct. Sad but true.
I agree the CofS is it’s own entity. Some people have even personified Scientology as if it were some large being.”Scientology believes…” “Scientology thinks..” “Scientology kills….” etc etc.
It is like saying “mathematics destroys moral..” “mathematics kills students..” “Math can’t be good, look at that mathematician”.
I have never myself viewed the green volumes as Scientology. They are all called ORGANIZATIONAL policy letters. Not, CHURCH policy letters. They are simple policies like any business would have. McDonald’s, Burger King, IHOP, you should see the policies and manuals that come with opening up one of those franchises.
I have no issues with Scientologists, Freezoners, Independents. I do not have ethnic cleansing goals. I do not agree they should be harmed attacked and suppressed bullied and fair gamed. I am not a threat to them and I don’t think they have a lot of threats against them. They do not have the enemies they imagine they have. The enemies they do have are dedicated fully to attacking them in the open.
I do have issues with people using the umbrella of “religion” to violate the ten commandments, the golden rule. I do have problems with witch hunts and bullying. I do have problems with a police force and terrorist organization operating under the umbrella of religion. And I think that is what the Sea Organization has become and perhaps, has always been.
Scientologists would be better off with out this appendage. The Sea Organization has burdened every Scientologist world wide. It is a suppressor group. It’s purpose is a police purpose. I do not think reform is possible as it has become a culture. I do not think it is a good idea at all. It is a taxing organization. The materials are free to everyone now.
No, I do not need to attack Scientologists every where or the subject matter of Hubbard’s research and writings because of one terrorist organization.
Time and time again the Sea Organization has proved themselves a threat to Scientologists and Scientology groups. Everything they touch turns to sand.
The really new news in Hubbard’s history are Marty’s book, chapter 24 “Meanwhile Back at the Ranch”, and in Lawrence Wright’s “Going Clear…” final 3 pages.
Both books are just hugely unappreciated new history that still hasn’t been caught on by media yet.
I’d hoped the final thoughts of Hubbard as relayed by Sarge Steven Pfauth would get more attention.
There’s time that they still are absorbed and fit into Hubbard’s full story!
“The psychs” didn’t shut down the mission network. It was David Miscavige.
“The psychs” didn’t cancel the certificates of every auditor on the planet, it was David Miscavige.
“The psychs” didn’t institute”the hole” ethics technology, it was David Miscavige.
“The psychs” didn’t bring law suits into and upon the Church.It was David Miscavige.
“The psychs” didn’t insist on ethnic cleansing of Scientologists through abortion and declares. It was David Miscavige.
Their enemy in the Scientology group is David Miscavige. And the staff that bully harm attack and suppress their fellow man. That is their big enemy. It is within. It isn’t out here and it isn’t Marty.
It is a high crime to have an ARCXen field. Look at what the Sea Organization has done!
This IS the Sea Organization doing it’s thing:
I ask you, who the hell on the planet wants and needs this?
Bravo.
Hubbard: more problems than his pop pyschology or Problems Release can ever resolve. Miscavige: more mental/social issues than he can ever blame on Hubbard.
Actually, if you watch the LRH death announcement video again, you will hear Pat Broeker clearly state that anyone could now go into Flag to run the E.O.C (end of cycle) L Ron has just completed.
This is what Pat said;
“We also by the way have the OT level that is goint to be done (very long pause) immediately after every thetan discards his or her body. He wrote that up before he went (applause) now this…don’t take this as an invitation, because you don’t get it until youre through the OT level before it.
But know, that, when it’s time, the tech is there so you’re not left with what to do now or even having to figure it out for yourself. It’s there we’re er that will be written up right away, coz we have that, word for word and it’ll be archived and made safe and it will be eventually available at Flag and other AO’s and people will be allowed to come into AOLA, before they discard it, read the materials, check out on them, do wordclear, demo (mumbling in crowd cause laughter)…So you know. Now you know it. Now you’re ready for when it happens.”
OSA ~~ nice try ~~ LOL
As in any prison what lessons do we learn? If you had God power could you use it responsibly, if the universe were inhabited by countless Gods whose “will” would dominate, still here witnessing
IF you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:
If you can dream – and not make dreams your master;
If you can think – and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools:
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: ‘Hold on!’
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
‘ Or walk with Kings – nor lose the common touch,
if neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And – which is more – you’ll be a Man, my son!
Anyway, the comm ev of David Miscavige has become a public affair, and the U.S.Government has been called in to mediate in the various law suits. David Miscavige has already been bypassed. It’s going to snowball from here.
My own purposes at mediation in all of this conflict, have been realized. Justice. David Miscavige is swimming in justice arenas.
As far as exploring the supernatural, it can not be escaped. At the end of everyone’s life, they will have the opportunity to explore the supernatural on their own terms. If they don’t do while they are alive, they will do it when they are dead. Killing off ideas about the supernatural,doesn’t delete the future for anyone. My own exploration of Scientology andall of supernatural, has not been about my past, or even today. It has been about where I will standing a thousand years from now.
This is just here for authenticity as email address has changed
ps marty i pinch myself to believe what you have achieved – not for posting
“the way out is the way through” -lrh
“clear the planet” clear of what, humans, non-scientologists
“scientology, the only game where everyone wins!” -because there will be nobody left who opposes them
anyone who leaves or doesn’t join scientology will be asked for a reason why they aren’t joining, and that reason will be considered criticism, suppression, and per the ethics book, lol, critics are suppressive persons, who are to be… “deleted… quietly disposed of… What are all those dead bodies doing at the door?”
replace homo sapien with homo novis, a clear
There’s no need to make up or exaggerate things about the church, just read lrh carefully, ironically the ethics book or the 2nd book, science of survival and genocide is spelled out in plain english.
The Church of Scientology’s central ideological construct is embodied in the narrative Mark Rathbun describes. This narrative is gradually disclosed in a series of steps. The net effect of this narrative is to create a radicalized collective identity that is binding upon both the individual and the group.
This collective identity summates to this fact: At its core, the Church of Scientology is a genocidal master race cult: http://scientologymoneyproject.com/2015/02/02/the-church-of-scientology-is-a-genocidal-master-race-cult/
Thank you, Marty, for once again summarizing the crux of the matter in a concise and understandable few words.
Since I used this forum to announce my leaving the cult of cofs four years ago, and given Marty’s profound summary here, I would like to update my status. I do not consider myself a scientologist; independent or otherwise. Yes, I had gains while participating in scientology. I also was very accomplished in life before scn and had many gains in other practices as well. I consider myself to be a person who could obtain gains in life because that was my viewpoint on life – gains to be had.
Four years ago, I still retained respect for Ron Hubbard. Now I see him very differently. Time and investigation and feeling safe to evaluate for myself, I see LRH and his probably intentions differently.
Life is good. Joy and happiness are here for my taking. Kindness is my religious practice.
Oracle: a Suppressive is “who refuses to be bypassed / hypnotized.” True. Scientology; “knowing how to know in the fullest sense of the word” Until you know (or find out too much) then you graduate. An SP Declare is the Graduation Certificate.
“8.When a scientologist has expended all of his best efforts”……. AND ALL OF HIS MONEY, PPROPERTY, AND BUS TOKENS.
I like.
Marty their is more , hope you did not miss it this life !!
Darren may
Sent from my iPhone
>
Lots of integral info in a nutshell article, when they can’t convey anything meaningful in a full page ad. Hate seeing this waste.
BINGO!
Next, and final stage: all these beliefs were systematically implanted into the minds of Scientologists as a distraction from the original, single intention of extracting cash from them.
A good perspective to read this from is to pay special attention to the sentence that precedes these points: “In plain English, here are the core religious beliefs of scientology…”
Almost all that follows are observations of what Scientologists believe to be true, save point #7. People who believe point #7 to be true could not any longer be Scientologists, could they? That would be like a Christian saying “I am a Christian, even though I only am a Christian because the writings and practices were carefully designed and administered so as to lead me and other Christians to wholeheartedly accept and live according to my beliefs.”
So, I think an earlier commenter (aotc) here was right in saying that #7 is what Marty (and many others here) believe to be true. Someone dissed aotc for that, but the disser was not as careful a reader as aotc.
One of the core beliefs I have not seen mentioned here is, I think, the principle and most core belief of Scientology. That belief is “Ron is 100% right and none of the tech can be argued against.” This smothered out of existence a “belief” put forth in Scientology Zero materials: “What is true for you is what you have observed yourself to be true”, etc. This essay on personal integrity worked as a good TR4 to the newcomers’ qualms when they first get in, but, after not very long, that stable datum was shaken and was replaced with KSW 1 and KSW 2 (Safeguarding Technology). It’s never, ever been right for a true Scientology believer to consider for a moment that Ron could be wrong in anything, as far as I can tell.
But the belief that Ron was always right and the “only one” who could be Source is the most important belief of all to inspect and then discard. Once a person does that, he can assign relative importances to all the various data of Scientology. That’s how I can still value much of Scientology, and disregard, or relegate to the trash heap, so much that is not of value or is harmful.
We might liken Scientology to the notes of some brilliant 18th century chemist who managed some break throughs. Trained chemists now might still marvel at some of this fellow’s discoveries and insight, but blush or shake their heads at other things once asserted as truth, that just did not turn out to be so.
While looking at the other points, remember Marty introduces them as “religious beliefs”. Remember the etymology of religion – it’s from the Latin “religare” – a binding together. It’s things that a group or people hold together to be true.
There is little or no distinction in this post or in the comments here between the beliefs of Ron and Scientologists and the technology of auditing. And it would be of more benefit in this discussion if such a distinction were made.
Consider:
a)if a person were to be audited all the way from Life Repair, through his Grades and Power Processing, even up to OT 2, and
b) was not subjected to the indoctrination that is continually brought to a student or parishioner by virtue of course materials, books, policy letters, registrars, promotional pieces and events, then
c) he might not believe ANY of the things brought up my Marty here. Consider: He might not even have thought any of those things, let alone believe in them, without those sorts of influence.
These beliefs are not borne out of realizations attendant to auditing sessions. They are borne out of indoctrination brought to people by course materials, books, policy letters, registrars, ethics officers, FSMs, promo pieces, taped lectures, confidential briefings and upper level materials, etc.
That may be why there are still a few people refusing to succumb to the ex-Church people who now want to lump all of their Scientology experience together and call it “bad”.
I think that it might be therapeutic for some here to sit alone at a table and write out answers to these questions: “Have I benefited from Scientology?” “If so, how?”
I’ve done that several times and it’s always been fun. You can call that hypnotism, if you like, you and John Atack can call it “increased levels of dopamine”, if you like. You can call it whatever you want.
Call it “hypnotism” though, and I will respond with, “Yes, and what, exactly, is not hypnotism?” Cheering for your favorite Super Bowl team or anything else is a sort of hypnotism. Having good manners or a certain way of addressing elders is a programming, in some respects. Much of life is, for most of us, spent in a sort of hypnotized state. The red pill or the blue? Even the red pill is an illusion.
If you are one of the blessed few for which life is not at least in part a hypnotic trance, I kneel before you in awe of your awesomeness. Cause baby, you’ve got it.
Increased levels of dopamine? Running does that, and so does getting laid. These things are now wrong? Should we just be injecting ourselves with the stuff instead, or working to run or have sex without having increased levels of dopamine?
I begrudge the use of the term “pop psychology” to dismiss any subject. I would not want to put ANY subject under that umbrella, not even bumper sticker stuff or facebook feel good memes. I don’t think of Marty as being snarky, but that feels snarky to me. In being described, the subject deserves better than that.
Scientology has not been asserted in to our lives. It’s not some cruel demonic inky black stuff that engulfed us that we now have to exorcise from our lives. It’s a subject that we thrived in, toiled under, found thrills in, and feel betrayed by. It’s a lot like every other area of life.
So, why be miserable about it? I know Jews that whine about their upbringing, and Catholics too. I think that less than 1% of us have been brought up properly. And we’re assaulted by undue influence on a daily basis by marketers and politicians.
So what? There’s always been something rough going on here, making life a bit of a bitch. Once it was saber tooth tigers and tar pits. Now we have politicians, marketers and religions. About the same thing, I think.
I’m “coming out” as “pro-pop psychology”.
Defined: “Popular psychology (or pop psychology or pop psych) is the concepts and theories about human mental life and behavior that are purportedly based on psychology and that find credence among and pass muster with the populace. The concept is cognate with the human potential movement of the 1950s and ’60s.
Popular psychology – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_psychology”
Ron’s and Scientology’s claims that Dianetics inaugurated the human potential movement of the 50’s and 60’s are true, I think. It even preceded “The Power of Positive Thinking” by two years. Living in the USA, prior to 1950, if you wanted to find encouragement and validation for “being you” and being alive, you found it from a family member or from a popular song lyrics, not from a non-fiction book. It’s true that there was psychology before Dianetics, but it was not popular, and it did not validate or encourage human potential or “being awake”.
I think that “pop psychology” has been a “It’s a Wonderful Life”‘s George Bailey type of influence on our culture – and that’s brought a lot of good. If it had never been “born”, the world would not be as nice a place.
My turn to be snarky! Nyah ha ha! Take THAT, you scoundrels!
Let me be the first to state that I do not … I repeat DO NOT include Dr. Phil in #3 above. Dr. Laura, yes.
From my point of view, the core beliefs of Scientology are stated in the Scientology Axioms. One could also include The Factors.
“No, I do not need to attack Scientologists everywhere or the subject matter of Hubbard’s research and writings because of one terrorist organization.”
TO, that’s a large viewpoint, succinctly stated.
Thanks for the post marty.
It helps me as a non scientologist get a frame of reference.
I have to say though, that the materials for me, seems really absolutely way out there. For me these points are impossible to digest
And this man never existed in the first place. It is just a remake of the Egyptian god Osiris. Osiris = Jesus Christ.
I don’t see #7 as a belief so much as the finding of an analysis of its technology. Seen from the inside, I think the belief would be more along the lines of: Scientology has the only valid and workable technology to free beings from the prison of the MEST universe (and the prison of his own making).
All in all, it is a concise list and certainly addresses pillars of scientology.
I see some indipendents seeth with hatred on several blogs when a view other than the party line is presented. It makes me wonder if they realise they are responding on a stimulus/response basis and whether they deem outright attack as evidence of spiritual improvement?
Marildi, I agree with you on differentiating the CoS from core Scientology, if what you mean by core Scientology is the Axioms, Tone Scale, much of the work in the basic books and most of auditing procedures and processes on the lower levels. I personalIy do not view those things as pop psychology or hypnotism. In 35 years as an audiror, CS and Course Supe, I participated in countless wins and cognitions on all four flows. And I think I have kept my gains after being out for almost 9 years now. I still apply my wins and cogs in every day life.
At the same time that LRH was developing/discovering what I very much value in the above, he was also a megolomaniac who was very slowly but surely going insane (by his own definitions) and establishing a Soviet syle fascistic organization bent on control of his parishioners’ minds, behavoir and their money. Some of LRH policy is wonderful, much of the Org Series for example and some of his early basic policies. But the vast majority of it is his blueprint, procedures, and insane ideas which form the basis of the above mentioned Soviet style fascist organization. There’s an amount of evil intention in it that is not pretty. But to even stay IN Scientology, one had to agree that even the crazy things Ron said were “the truth.” I still continue to have to this day (last night) “3D nightmares” about Scientology.
If independant groups like the Dror people in Israel can audit and train people to more happiness, without using the 80% or so of LRH policiy that stinks, lies and hurts people, I say great for them. Personally at 64, I no longer have any interest in or desire for any further Scientology training or processing. I have moved on to other studies and activities which speak to me more now.
I believe that there was once technology that worked and then it was altered, Misunderstood Word Tech, E-Meter Reads, Overrun, etc. The word tech today regarding Scientology is a generality. and really has no validity. Ron had some valid tech that really worked across the boards and he should be remembered for that.
The whole perception about HYPNOSIS changes, when one perceives SELF to be just a structure, and SELF-DETERMINISM to just be a mode of that structure. It is a fun thing to explore. One then realizes the real meaning of interiorization into “I”.
THE STRUCTURE OF “I”
.
What works in Scientology is the chance application of mindfulness.
.
In that case he should also be remembered for locking children in the chain locker on his ship. We have to remember the whole man, not just selective aspects.
Scientology and THE CHURCH 0F SCIENTOLOGY are two different things. There are no BELIEFS in Scientology. It either works or it doesn’t work, it is basically a set of tools hence it really has nothing to do with belief. On the other hand The Church of Scientology very definitely is a belief system, and it is impossible to embrace the belief system of the Church of Scientology and still maintain another belief system intact for the simple reason that for L.R.H. the Church of Scientology was and is his personal belief system hence he sees it as “the religion of religions” which I cannot help thinking may be where Alistair Crowley was coming from.
Unfortunately once one has embraced the belief system of the Church of Scientology and found it wanting it is often the case that the person who has lost their faith in the “Church” also loses their belief in the workability of the technology of Scientology.
It reminds me of what happens when a child loses respect for their parents and as a result rejects any good advice that those parents might offer. The expression “Throw out the baby with the bath water” comes to mind. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Throw_out_the_baby_with_the_bath_water
Love with ARC
Pip
Congratulations! You have inspired me today. Kindness may be the best religious practice, today I will try to practice.
The announcement from Scientology leadership that LRH “discarded the body” in order to do further research, did set up an “Ideal scene” for scientologists how certain things should be viewed. It may differ from scientologist to scientologist how they absorbed this view in their psyche. It shall certainly depend on a scientologist’s state of indoctrination.
I am continually amazed to find how scientologists are indoctrinated by the Theta-MEST theory.
.
It is far more rational to look at “I” as a process with a structure.
.
To be more precise, you are, in fact, talking about mindfulness rather than Scientology. The only aspect of Scientology that still works is mindfulness.
But most of Scientology has taken leave of mindfulness these days.
.
Hubbard was intetriorized into “I”, and Scientology is an expression of that. Thinking in terms of “terminals” and not in terms of “processes” is a symptom of this interiorization. Focusing on “what” and not on “how” or “why” is also a symptom of this interiorization. And so we have a terminal named “Xenu” in Scientology. It is much more solid than the terminal called “God” in Christianity.
Most rational is the view of “I” and “God” as a process in Eastern philosophies.
.
Correction:
Most rational is the view of “I” and “God” as processes in Eastern philosophies.
.
Any cult that presented a smiliar set of beliefs in this exact way would be viewed by most people as a fad, while Scientology has a big number of followers (compared to other “recent” cults anyway).
I wonder if the practice of limiting access to some of these points until a person is much deeper into the study of Scientology is the only thing that makes a difference, or if there is some other factor that helps making this cult stand out and have more credibility.
Well said. I took forever to say much the same thing. I think it’s also important to recognize that there are many who have gained much from auditing and training without having bought into all these beliefs. I don’t think most of us ever bought into all of these things all of the way, and some did not not buy into these things at all, and made case gain, perhaps more case gain than those who did buy into them.
I think that condemnation of “psychs” is a cornerstone of Scientology belief, primarily to have a war cry that corrals all the followers into their camp.
It is also to convince them of Scientology’s greatness and winning monopoly.
But the way the field of the mind is progressing and reforming itself (while Scientology remains frozen), any advantage that Scientology obtains from putting down psychiatry shall soon be gone.
Excellent point!
+1
Bingo!
Many valuable points for all to consider. Even (especially) those here who are “convinced of their rightness.”
Thanks for adding a shake and a pop to the discussion.
From my viewpoint, there is tech from scn (that may all, or in part) be in other workable philosophies, as well, that can be used from a self-determined position to improve life and mental state. One is “the clear cog” which is contained in Viktor Frankl’s books as well many other works. The service facsimile is a related subject, but the specifics of it have been very helpful to me in looking at myself (and others) and seeing where life went off track, was too painful to confront, and the resulting “solution” which ever after, was clung to as if to a life raft. Fascinating stuff to me. I have witnessed others making lasting, life-changing gains, as well – the kind that everyone who knew them would observe. There’s some good stuff, for sure, but I have gotten more gains with it on my own, using it as I see fit, than I did in the church, where there was a suppressing agenda. I like to be able to pick and choose, not only from what I have learned through scn, but from the whole wide world of knowledge that is available. I did not interpret LRH’s “discard” of his body to have anything to do with what I should do. I thought it was all about his research.
Here is my criticism of the belief contained in Scientology Axiom #1:
An Analysis of Scientology Axiom #1
.
And, here is my criticism of the belief contained in Scientology FACTOR #1:
An Analysis of Scientology Factor # 1
.
SCIENTOLOGY (minus) INDOCTRINATION & HYPNOTISM = MINDFULNESS.
“An SP Declare is the Graduation Certificate.”
That is a nice description.
.
I see LRH as a very troubled person, who could find nobody to help him. So, he helped himself in a remarkable way.
I may have simply succumbed if I were in his shoes. I admire LRH for fighting valiantly against his demons.
Nobody is perfect. LRH did the best he could. I don’t agree with his philosophy, but I am impressed by his genius.
It all depends on what you are angling for.
Theta-MEST theory is a belief of Scientology. You cannot afford to not-is it.
.
Good question! Scientology must have filled some need that was left unfulfilled in the Western culture.
To understand Scientology fully one also need to study the Western culture. Scientology is no fly-by-night affair.
wow that’s accurate!
and the narrative is so distracting people don’t even see the end they are pushing towards
Marty, the vast majority of what you write fascinates me.
In the very near future it seems there will be nothing confidential at all regarding anything that constitutes the Church of Scientology’s disseminatable religious beliefs. A church and it’s congregation with such religious beliefs, if they mean not to harm anyone then they should never make a gesture as though they mean to harm anyone. Misunderstood? Hardly. In the end the Church of Scientology gets what is deserves. Making believe they are trying to set Mankind free while making a joke out of us. Look who the laugh is really on! 🙂
Thanks, Joe. I do mean the same as you do by “core scientology”, and I have also moved to other studies and activities. Doing so was validated by LRH himself back in 1951 in the Chart of Human Evaluation (SOS), where the highest tone level on the chart was characterized as “Search for different viewpoints in order to broaden own reality. Changes reality.”
You probably remember the study tape “Training: Duplication” where LRH explains why it is that learning the truth about something is a road to having judgment – not only judgment in whatever subject is being studied, but judgment in general (even about women, he jokingly says in one part 🙂 ). I consider a gain in judgment to be one of the most – if not THE most – valuable things a person can take away from scientology. Here’s a quote from that 1962 study lecture:
“Of course it’s [judgment] most rapidly restored on such a track by teaching the person the exact truth of something. There is the truth of something, he is able to duplicate the truth of something after many travails, and this truth of something is immediately pursued by the understanding of that something he has been taught. You understand that that is a stage; he’s still dependent on you for the understanding of what’s been taught. And your next stage up is a realization, which he reached at a sudden step up the line on his own bootstraps, so to speak. He regained an ability to understand, and so then he himself could realize. That’s the route that you’re taking. That route has total self-determinism and other-determinism and, of course, therefore, pan-determinism all mixed up in it, all at one fell swoop.
“The person becomes pan-determined over the data. The person does not only understand why they learned the data but why the data was taught to them, and understand and REALIZE – of course, the realization includes the independent truth of the datum regardless of having been taught the datum. And with that, of course, a person has reached a high peak of the ability to judge something. A person then has judgment. There’s no other route that I know of. I mean if this is not a perfect route, all right, so it isn’t a perfect route. There is no perfect route.
“Perhaps there is a perfect route, but there is no perfect route to hand at the moment if this is not a perfect route.”
(“Training: Duplication”, 24 Jan 62)
Interesting page. I too felt that the movement had ethnic cleansing goals. This really lays it out. The H.B.O. documentary airing is the tip of the iceberg. Once it airs, people will run to their computers to Google “Scientology” and find everything that has been documented on the Internet in terms of Sea Org abuse,domestic violence and domestic terrorism.
eth·nic cleans·ing
noun
the mass expulsion or killing of members of an unwanted ethnic or religious group in a society.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing
Wikipedia
Ethnic cleansing is the systematic forced removal of ethnic or religious groups from a given territory with the intent of making it ethnically or religiously homogeneous. The forces applied may be various forms of forced migration (deportation, population transfer), intimidation, as well as mass murder.
I agree C Ann. You really should give people their “right items”. If you found reasons to be glad for some of what you learned, good for you. This isn’t a pity party or a witch hunt. It is just a broader viewing of backstage activity. Most people do not get invited in, as the Sea Org is highly secretive. I do think as more members or Scientologists are informed of the real situations, they are going to have to take more responsibility. Perhaps all of it, and excuse the Sea Organization away from their lives. David Miscavige’s incidents of domestic terrorism and domestic abuse are a burden laid on all Scientologists now.
The fact that David Miscavige took hundreds of thousands,…millions, of dollars, donated by Scientologists to help kids off drugs, and to help the Narconon network, and misdirected it into Sea Org reserves for his own wants and needs, (fraud,embezzlement) , and nobody around him except a lawyer, pointed this out as something unethical, is further evidence of hypnotized staff.
Testimony from Lana Mitchell:
Laurie Zurn D/ED ABLE Int — “Spent her whole career working in ABLE (Association for Better Living and Education) and SOCO before that (Social Betterment Corporation — part of the old Guardian’s Office). Have no idea what she was doing at Int as she never worked there while I was there. She was in ABLE Int in LA as the second in command (D/Executive Director ABLE International). When I was the WDC ABLE, I once sat in an all-day meeting with Laurie, Simon Hogarth (the ED ABLE Int at the time), the DSA ABLE Int, Lyman Spurlock (Corporate Coordinator CSI) and two church attorneys (Monique Yingling and Tim Bowles). Legally, the ABLE sector was not supposed to be sending money into the Sea Org reserve accounts, but it was, and the tax attorneys were trying to figure out a solution. I had made a proposal on how to organize the sector based on the attorney’s advice, which would have meant that the funds that had been going to Int Reserves would get rerouted to the social betterment programs themselves, instead. This didn’t fly with Miscavige, who said that it’s up to legal to find a way to set things up the way we (church management) want it, not the other way around. My proposal was therefore rejected and I was removed from post, restricted to the property and once again assigned to berthing out by the swamp. ”
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2012/08/scientology_concentration_camp_the_hole.php
You might probably be less impressed by his genius when you read about his proposed way to get rid of ‘wogs’ or inferior people (2.0 tone scale and lower). He uses words like ‘to delete’, ‘to isolate’, ‘to quarantine’, ‘to dispose’ of ‘quietly without sorrow’. Homo Novis has a right to use Fair Game on them, just because they are antagonistic towards Scientology. See the essay on scientologymoneyproject.com.
That is why I distrusted mindfullness at first and bodyscan and the lot I do at my place of work besides the working there. (And alsoo Yogha and fitness.)
Melyanna, This may be hard to imagine. But there was a time when going into a Scientology Organization, (one far far away from”management” and the police force) meant having a lot of fun, with a lot of laid back people, who had very good intentions, were very helpful and respectful to the others. It was very fun and exciting and every one was having a really good time. It was very easy to buy courses and counseling. It was very accessible,nobody was paranoid,nobody was getting punished. Really, you could do no wrong. THAT was a “safe environment where auditing could occur”. That was when it was packed with curious (and educated) people.
I do not think they have ” a big number of followers” as you now suggest.
It has been a real drag to walk into one of those places since 1982. David Miscavige sent soldiers all the down into the streets and people’s living rooms to wipe out the missions (small intimate groups). Cutting off the feeder lines to the Orgs, and causing a mass exodus.
You can see it reflected on these graphs in this article:
http://www.mikerindersblog.org/scientology-shriveling-media-take-note-they-lie-to-you/
Very interesting hypothesis at your link, JSwift. Looks like Hubbard was moving toward the Brave New World of Aldous Huxley.
Bad boy!
Thank you for publishing a clear, simple and largely objective description of Scientology. Are you still performing any auditing on people? I hope so since I can’t imagine anything that would actually devalue the practice of auditing but I am interested to hear your views.
Well, what’s wrong with pop psychology and hypnotism? Every time you sit down in theater to watch a movie you are indulging in hypnotism.
I can see the rightness in that. I can get hypnotized by a good book.
Marty didn’t imply pop psychology was a bad thing,neither hypnotism. I didn’t take it a negative way. No need for me to get suddenly stuffy, after dabbling in the occult for decades. Hell, bring out the Ouija board!
Hypnotism, pop psychology, cults, magic, secret societies, religions, rituals, ceremony, spirits, parallel universes, magic spells, the super natural… we have most of us been knee deep in it. So, it can get a little murky in places. So what?
The “denial” with Scientologists is pretty strong. You get your average guy who is going to stick it out. This can be for different reasons. Mine was curiosity. But in comes the person and struggles for 15 years at an expense of 300K to go home and talk to spirits in his living room. (Solonots)
In the house next door you have a group of “wogs” with a Ouija Board and they are just doing it. You find people talking to angels,Gods, all sorts of communication going back between people and spirits. And it is a non issue and they have no C/S. I was talking to spirits and animals when I was very young. I just got desperate for company and extended myself. I don’t know why Scientologists think it is so dangerous or unusual, and why they remain secretive about it. They actually pretend that they are not doing it. And if you “let it out of bag” you have endangered everyone’s security. It’s like,they are embarrassed about the “tech”.
You go to Japan, those people for the most part feel their ancestors in their homes and honor them, even if they have been dead for hundreds of years.
Why would anyone that has explored Scientology be offended to admit pop psychology or hypnotism? There is an entire section in SOS called “hypnotic level”. Hubbard pointed it out to people. Scientologists I have noticed, generally have a problem admitting what they are doing and thinking. And if they get busted, or get board, they say they were “brainwashed”. They do not want to admit they were hypnotized, they do not want to admit they took a walk on the wild side and dabbled in the occult. Closet Hippies.
Interesting summation.
Mark
Take what you need or want (if anything) and leave the rest.
One nice thing is that now it’s all Free to anyone who is not in good standing with the cult.
Good comment, I thought you summed it up quite well.
Like you, I do not see Scientology as a belief system either, I do see it as having a practical approach to life. A previous commenter stated that you could go from basic courses all the way up to OT2 and have fabulous wins and gains without even being aware of OT3 and onward. And you do not have to “believe” in anything, what is real for you is real for you. You either attest honestly to what you just finished – or false attest to the completion – or leave. It comes down to “you”!!
It doesn’t actually get funky until you realize there is a para military organization on top of this wanting to control your conversations with other spirits. I think the work Hubbard did up through OT2 was pretty simple and straight forward. There is something to having lingering spiritual connections. For sure. I think a person should be turned loose to work these things out for them self. It’s hard promise to someone that you can hold their hand all the way into the supernatural. That they can be in command with those forces and conditions. Especially with a paramilitary group of soldiers on top of you in the environment. These are forces and condition in themselves that are not easy to manage. If you took the Sea Org out of the picture, and the ethics officers, Scientology wouldn’t really be a strange thing to explore. Most grown ups don’t want baby sitters and cops crawling all over them while they are straddled in parallel universes. The whole Scientology universe has a cross purpose/identity conflict/out of valence issue. Hubbard changed the purpose,from clearing the planet to getting ethics in on the planet. When he changed the purpose the whole dynamic shifted from spiritual to political. To me, it’s the Sea Organization that makes it all strange and weird. Not the Hubbard writings. Then Miscavige turning it into a religion?
That kicked in a whole new chapter of case and fanatics. This is why it feels creepy. It’s multivalent. It’s not clear anymore as a group. It’s Identity. Cross purposes. The soldiers got restless. They waited and waited and waited for the enemy to attack. Nobody paid any attention to them. For morale they began to stalk the perceived enemies. “Kill the psychs” blah blah. Then they had some”squirrels” to go after from time to time. The last ten years have been the glory of the Sea Org. Battle after battle. No fight? They turned on each other. Now they are famous mostly for domestic terrorism and domestic abuse. Piracy looting and pillaging.
The closet hippies got left behind in the dust and put back on objectives to keep them busy while the wars are going on. They even have a “war chest”. The purpose is domination, not liberation. You see,that changing of purpose just flipped the whole thing around 180 degrees. And yes, Hubbard did that. The place has cleared out because most people seeking to grow spiritually, do not want to be dominated and neither do they want to dominate others. They want a hippie kind of harmony. ARC, understanding, a world of peace, pleasure, calm, laughter, love, education, joy,musicality. The aesthetics of the supernatural. Not soldiers stomping all over dead bodies. You can not dominate and liberate at the same time. Hubbard locked the whole activity into a GPM. He sabotaged it. And he did it on purpose. This is what I find interesting.
If you read KSW and a lot of other things he wrote around that time and after, it’s pretty clear he did not have a lot of arc for his peers. I think he probably got sick of the hippies and dependents. The needy. Don’t think he had any close friends. I think he wanted to help up to a point. Then he got sick of the Scientologists himself. He pawned them off onto David Miscavige. Who has also abused them and also seems to hate them.
I wonder how many Scientologists properly originated the cognition, “I can communicate about anything with anyone!” And I wonder how many of those Scientologists copped out of communicating by disconnecting instead.
It is fascinating that these Born Again Communicators brandish Disconnection like a finely honed sword, thinking that they are “at cause over communication cycles.”
Silly AnonWWP – Jesus didn’t rise from the dead 3 days after he was born from a virgin!
Gah! Where are the Grammar Police when you need them?
David calls the Scientologists the blind leading the blind. Refers to Hubbard an overt product maker. David has the OTs back on objectives. Both of these men seemed fed up with the Scientologists.
I would not accept Mike Rinder’s stat calculations as 100% true, especially since he has been getting them for the last year from “un-named sources” and his “special correspondents”.
I know of a few people who have recently been to FLAG and they claim the course rooms are packed. Yes, it (Local Orgs) may not be like it used to be, but I believe the internet has 3rd partied and frightened many people and money is TIGHT. There are millions of people who have had life changing gains through Sci – but they are “encouraged” not to go on entheta websites to comment; because it really does make you PTS when someone is insulting and lying about your personal endeavors, but if they could I’m sure 1000’s would stick up for their Church. Since I’m an old fart and will probably not be able to go into an Org again in the near future, and I’m quite certain about my personal wins and gains – I can “enjoy” all the various comments here and on Rinders/Tony’s site. Keep in mind too there are only a few hundred “noisy” individuals (haters) who obsess about “getting DM”. Maybe I would want to “get” him too, but I do not feel I was harmed by his actions. If you were personaly harmed – then have at it I suppose, but to blame him for all the trouble the Church is experiencing may be the wrong target, possibly LRH did leave a battleplan or LRHED to be excuted when the Church gained TAX FREE status. I can’t see LRH just dying and not leaving some plan to follow based or triggered on certain “events” i.e. tax free status, wars, crime stats, etc.
For me, after 40 years as a Scio – I really do see the Church of Scientology making good headway on the 4th D – maybe the 1st D focus has fallen behind, but we need a safe environment 1st in order to get trained and audited. I feel there are many many more PTS and 3rd partied people now, not to put them down, – just – it is what it is.
It would appear that your consideration is invalid in that it seeks to draw a differentiation where none exists.
Sure, by applying just the technology of auditing, a person may well not have certainty or even know about any of the items mentioned in the OP. However, if a person was subject to auditing outside of the cult infrastructure up to OT 2, that person would still be required to believe lots and lots of L Ron Hubbard’s bullshit, just as the auditor does. Things like the “reactive mind”. There is no evidence for a “reactive mind”, so how can anyone insist it exists? The most likely background to the concept of the “reactive mind” is that its a perverse fusion of Freud’s “unconscious mind” and Korzybski’s theory of identification. Freud only ever used his concept as a model for understanding, whereas L Ron Hubbard insists that the reactive mind is an actuality, and then he jammed in things called “engrams”. It doesn’t take too many keystrokes to source scientific evidence – which L Ron Hubbard helped compile – confirming there is no such thing as an “engram” as defined by L Ron Hubbard. Then there’s the e-meter which, according to the technology of auditing. “. . . passes a tiny current through the preclear’s body. This current is influenced by the mental masses, pictures, circuits and machinery. When the unclear pc thinks of something, these mental items shift and this registers on the meter . . . ” Again, this is utter bullshit. The e-meter certainly measures something, but it is not what L Ron Hubbard says it is even if L Ron Hubbard believed it when he wrote it.
And so it goes on. Bit by bit, gradient by gradient: the auditor’s attempt to slowly inject L Ron Hubbard’s beliefs, which the auditor has adopted as their own, into the mind of the PC. Accordingly, there can be no differentiation between the beliefs of L Ron Hubbard and the technology of auditing.
What elements of truth exist in the “prison” and “billions of beings” thing? Where do you suggest one research to verify any elements? How does one determine these elements of truth?
“…somewhere a 5’1″ dictator just breathed a sigh of relief as he realized that Marty is really not trying to take over.”
Damn, that was FUNNY!!!! 😀
It’s all very funny when I think of it like that. Very funny.
Beautiful. Thank you for this. 🙂
This statement indicates that perhaps you have no clue just how far scientology has altered your mind and perceptions: “I really do see the Church of Scientology making good headway on the 4th D.”
Pehaps better than leading them down the upper OT E.O.C route.
Has no one noticed that Mark does not refer to himself as Marty? He posts as Mark C. Rathbun, and signs his name as Mark.
Couldn’t we all respect the moniker he has chosen?
Mark, thank you for your clear and succinct description. I wish I had found your blog as soon as you presented it. You have helped me so much!
Marty, I’m curious how many people you know of or heard of who had the idea that the “OT E.O.C. route” was the route to be taken? Or even how many know about such a route?
I must say Marty, I am glad you are continuing to have realizations about LRH and scientology. I was once very critical of you…BUT, what I read now shows me you see what is what and what is not. Keep at it mate!
We did nothing wrong and everything right. We explored. I am not a leader or a follower. There are places where I still belong., Because I can care about the people in front of me. I am a fool. And my foolish identity transcends every universe. I’m a fool and not complaining.
Vinaire, I have read what you have said about this a number of times as you continually use your truth to make less of other beings’ truths on this matter. You never offer it as another explanation or as another viewpoint on the properties of theta/spirit but as THE TRUTH. I understand the sources for what indicates to you as truth, as you have noted these in you essays. I would never actually question what indicates to you as truth, as I do not feel that my personal truth (or L. Ron Hubbard’s) is in any way superior to yours. But as you keep mentioning your truth as THE TRUTH to point out how untrue other peoples’ truths are, I have asked you more than once (though you will never answer me) HOW you know your truth about the properties of a being is true, but axiom one is not. Now if your answer is that your truth indicates to you more or feels more right, why not just say s0? That would be real to me. But you assert it is the ONLY truth, and I’m just curious how you came to that conclusion.
By the way Vinaire, so it is clear, let me add that I am in no way attempting to debate this point of theta/spirit with you. Far from asserting Axiom #1 as true, I’m not even sure it is anymore.(it may just have been an idea that has indicated to me since I go into Scientology in 1970). What I’m so curious about is your personal experience or viewpoint, WHY you are so sure what you say is the truth.
The man jesus existed not the Christ the myth, just like Source didnt exist but Hubbard , the man did.
If you want to end up a Satanist, Scientology is the way to go. Masters and slaves.
Pingback: Scientology Beliefs | The Scientology Money Project
The whole of scientology’s genesis narrative is predicated on the theta-MEST theory (see for e.g. The Factors). How is it amazing to find people who make their decisions or view the world based on it? It wasn’t too long ago that Christendom made many intersocial decisions based on the concept of Original Sin. The theta-MEST theory, if I am correct, is a fundamental pillar of the concept of one’s own godhood (source of and thus cause over MEST). Until one no longer needs to be god, one will look to confirm that one is, indeed, godlike.
???
Why is evil genius not impressive?
I love Spy vs Spy.
Most people are looking for security and it appears that certainty will bring about security and it also appears that knowledge brings about certainty. The problem is that at the very heart of existence is a profound MYSTERY which can only be approached by FAITH (Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. – Hebrews 11:1 – King James Bible)
What drew me into Scientology was the belief that I COULD KNOW but of course if you can know you don’t need faith, and without faith THERE IS NO HUMILITY, there is NO LOVE and certainly NO FORGIVENESS.
For 40 years I have been communicating off and on with The Church of Scientology through the C.J.C here in England, and the reply is always the same “your only recourse is steps A to E, and my plea that I was never a Suppressive Person falls on deaf ears.
You might well ask why do I persist. That is because I believe in the technology. In the Seventies I was declared P.T.S. and was given an S & D supervised by L.R.H. on board the then Royal Scotsman. My item was SCIENTOLOGY – L.R.H. wrote in my P.C. folder “Give him his item and get him out of the area”. That left me two choices, 1) Handle my suppressive or 2) disconnect. I chose the former, which brings us to P.T.
It has been there in the Bible all along in the allegory of the Garden of Eden, we were never told we could not eat of the TREE OF LIFE but we were warned of the consequences of eating from the TREE OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL, and of course the rest is history.
Talking of history this video graphically shows what the results are when we believe that knowledge brings certainty. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x20ohne_bbc-ascent-of-man-11-knowledge-or-certainty_tv
Love with ARC
Pip
Good point!
.
Nor… So, you have your “un-named sources” and “special correspondents” too! This is classic! 🙂
Good argument and excellent prose too! 🙂
What I find interesting is that the Americans are more accepting of all this bullshit of Scientology and Sea Organization than the Europeans.
Scientologists hace hacked the American Legal system.
“what is real for you is real for you” = Your filters are your filters.
.
While I generally agree with your summation of beliefs, I would also include the vast amount of material Scnists claim to “know”. Things like Engrams, the Theta-MEST theory, comm cycle, tone scale, etc. Basically anything which cannot be objectively verified or analysed, which is the bulk of what is taught in Scn. To me these are beliefs as well.
Well said! The concept of Original Sin is just as amazing!
Everyone who still had/has their faculties to listen and think intact: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJkq60CnXoM
Joe, my intention is simply to highlight the inconsistency that I see in Scientology Axiom #1. The rest what you say about my intention are your additives. I am very aware of the knee-jerk reaction of Scientologists to any criticism. They always “defend” by attacking back. I see that characteristic displayed here. There is complete absense of a logical response from you.
How can one theoretical end of a spectrum produce the other theoretical end of the same spectrum as claimed in Theta-MEST theory? A virgin giving birth may be more convincing.
I am not sure of absolute truth, but I am sure of an inconsistency when I see one. Please see #4 of the Scientific Method in the following paper.
Solving Real-Life Problems
.
FIXED IDEAS = FALSE CERTAINTY = FALSE SECURITY = SCIENTOLOGY
Why does one wants to be in good standing with Scientology? Why does one want the false security of Scientology? The “technology” that one has learnt from Scientology cannot be taken away from one even if the Church has declared one a suppressive person.
So, why does one want to be back in good standing with Scientology?
Because, one has been hypnotized into believing that one’s eternity depends on Scientology..
The hypnotism of Scientology locks on to earlier hypnotism received through some corrupted brand of Christianity.
Has he voiced a preference? Maybe he doesn’t care.
Satanist is just another label.
What we are looking at is an interiorization into “I”.
.
What if there is no baby in the bath water? What if you are convincing yourself that there is a baby in the bath water?
That was a fantastic dog and pony show!
Marildi, a hypnotized person is not aware that he or she is hypnotized.
The reports of Flag being packed are always second and third hand. Is there anyone here who has firsthand knowledge of packed course rooms?
Hi Statpush
Thanks for your reply. I agree anything that cannot be objectively verified or analysed is a belief, however I believe that most of the technology in Scientology and especially Dianetics can be verified by anyone who can analyse these things objectively.
One might believe a saw can cut wood but there is nothing to compare with actually cutting a piece of wood with one, at which time the properties of a saw become a demonstrable fact. However that does not mean said saw can cut every material, but that in no way invalidates the usefulness of a saw.
I have subjective reality that these Scientology tools work, and without them I would struggle to run my business. These tools when understood and used IN LOVE produce miraculous results but used without love (THETA) can be exceedingly destructive.
Love with Understanding
Pip
I would not quality Hubbard as a genius. He might have written a lot of words (or borrowed them from others), but quite a lot of it is bad SF or downright unintelligible. Also, the tech of scientology is not producing what it promises. His ideas about government take-over, ethnic cleansing, controlling the mental health field, are just ludicrous. Delusions of a fascistoid utopia by a SF writer. If you ask me.
I have to admit one thing though: he was a master in pseudo-science.
Marty, I LOVE this article. It is so great to see so many people waking up to the facts about Hubbard and “the tech” – which is exactly what you say it is!
You have NO idea how happy you have made me today! The number of Indys who are koolaiders still is sometimes frightening. However, I do see changes in this as people waking up and see the sham for what it is and the dangers in it; and who admit that he “had” us all.
“…he was mostly out of the ‘psych drugs’ by 1950.”
Zemoo, he never stopped taking drugs. He had every colour and shape and he was audited over drugs. L. Ron was drugged up when he conjured up OT 3!
He was a boozer, too.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
I wish to give you a long overdue thank you for a post you made in 2013 and to present it here once again as I have often referred to it when discussing the cult with others. I could go into an ego-reinforcing description of exactly how and why I am grateful, but I believe it is self evident to anyone who practices mindfulness and has undergone the Scientology indoctrination process (technical training as a Snr. C/S in my case).
Don
I shall give you THE FALSE DATUM of Scientology that is embedded in Scientology Axiom #1, and which is expressed here in Scientology 8-8008:
“One of the control mechanisms which has been used on thetans is that when they rise in potential they are led to believe themselves one with the universe. This is distinctly untrue. Thetans are individuals. They do not as they rise up the scale, merge with other individualities. They have the power of becoming anything they wish while still retaining their own individuality. They are first and foremost themselves. There is evidently no Nirvana. It is the feeling that one will merge and lose his own individuality that restrains the thetan from attempting to remedy his lot. His merging with the rest of the universe would be his becoming matter. This is the ultimate in cohesiveness and the ultimate in affinity, and is at the lowest point of the tone-scale. One declines into a brotherhood with the universe.”
There goes love, compassion and kindness in Scientology with the US versus THEY thinking of THETA-MEST theory. MEST does not come from theta to entrap theta. Individuality does not merge with MEST in Nirvana. That is Hubbard bullshit.
Theta and MEST are two aspects of the same system. In Nirvana there is neither MEST nor individuality to serve as the boundary. There is simply no boundary.
Thanks, Marty, for the opportunity to listen to this video.
In the first few minutes of the video, there’s already a contradiction. It’s said that Hubbard dropped the body to continue his OT research. Not long after, it’s said that Hubbard had completed all the upper level research he’d set out to complete!
Of course, we know now that not even OT 8 was complete; and there is no OT 9 and 10 or any other level above that.
Of course, I couldn’t listen to much of the video it because it is such a lot of baloney as to be offensive. I did notice the DM had the good grace to blink when he told such an outrages lie.
Bullshit baffles brains.
Hey Christain, That was a great story!
The Oracle said:
“The psychs” didn’t shut down the mission network. It was David Miscavige. NO, IT WAS LRH. Miscavige was the messenger.
“The psychs” didn’t cancel the certificates of every auditor on the planet, it was David Miscavige. LRH CANCELLED CERTIFICATES LEFT RIGHT AND CENTRE.
LRH also declared many, many valuable people, loyal and who contributed greatly to the “tech”. He declared people willy nilly, anyone who stood up to him or disagreed with him.
If he was having a bad hair day, he would declared people for things they didn’t even do. And remove certificates for the same reason.
I agree. I love the conversations, the auditing. Some people pay for vacations, gambling, drugs, theater, vitamins, spas, sex, wardrobe, food..whatever. I pay for conversations. So what? Makes me feel good.
I love the auditing. Hubbard’s value,in my mind, was in setting people up to have meaningful conversations. Recommending questions. I like the questions. Not so much the accusatory ones. That a person is forced to answer. I think that is where the craft got a little seedy.
A very good point, Vinaire.
Can you also live better as a result of your auditing? Once the euphoria has worn off, is life better, simpler, happier? Are you more able to earn a good living? Are you well physically?
I didn’t find many Scientologists whose lives had improved in spite of all the auditing they’d had. My OT friends are having a hellish time. So are my Clear friends. And they can’t see it, that is, that their life was not much better.
Oh, you hear stories of how right in the middle of a proces, not even before it had ended, this wonderful thing had happened. It was probably going to happen anyway. A little down the road, you find out their spouse did them in, or their boss; or they got very ill; even died of cancer. And so on.
Hi Marty,
Good writing, I think it is a good ending for this lunacy.
I recommend Edward Gibbon’s book “The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire: Abridge Edition”, particularly Chapter XV “The Progress of the Christian religion, and the Sentiments, Manners, Numbers, and Condition, of the primitive Christians.”
The chapter is hilarious, written with Gibbon’s wit and humor. It is an uncanny description of Scientology and Scientologists behavior and beliefs system down to a T.
The earlier so called Christians sects, whatever that meant, were universally mocked and rejected as Scientologists are today.
The reasons why they were so ridiculed had nothing to do with the propaganda spun by the official Church for millennia.
No, the original Christians were so despised because they misappropriated every pagan Mythos, ritual and belief system known in the ancient world and literalized it into historical facts.
Proclaiming at all times their exclusivity to the truth, the uniqueness of their revelation and their entitlement to overlord the uncouth heathens.
No, no, ONLY their Gospels had the verbatim word of God, and the ONLY way to salvation. Nobody in the entire history of the world had ever know anything of value, let alone state the same things these morons were preaching.
Presumptuous, arrogant and stupid they brought down the Greco-Roman Civilization and sunk the West into a stupor for more than a thousand years.
Scientology apologists are going to have a very rude awakening as the world pushes back on their stupidity.
.
Thank you nor for chiming in. David has been making the environment “safe” for who? He has been dabbling in domestic abuse and domestic terrorism for over 30 years.
In your comment to Joe – how about the cycle of a downward spiral. As you know, I could not name the names of those at FLAG. There are many many winning Scios, extremely wealthy and successful individuals who use Scio to help others – name a few of your solutions to War, Crime, rampant Drug use and failing education and governments.
There is NO guarantee that Scio will SAVE US, LRH made that clear – the race is on. If you do not see the the social ills and the possible benefits of Scio, fine – but some of us do. As mentioned previously, possibly the middle class are in the bubble and PTS from the social ills. There are 4D engrams war, drugs, crime – all engrams!!!
I don’t feel sorry for him. He didn’t apply Scientology to his life or his case. He preached about what should be done but didn’t do it himself.
This is addressed to some harsh criticism and not the topic in particular: Most of the time I have been -in vain- trying to explain how rotten apples do not equal oranges. And no, I haven’t been talking the usual line that the Church of Scientology does not equal Freezone/Independent Scientology, either.
I only have respect and feel close to people like Anonymous because they indeed challenge suppression and oppression, and among other things, they are among the few people who instead of parroting the usual press lines about Greece (how we are all lazy etc) they viewed a different angle. An angle that I have observed too.
People who represent suppressive religions and corporations who have been jolly well making profit out of the slave labor and brainwashing of others, are not my friends just because they attack the suppression and oppression within Scientology. Their talk is just disturbing to me, and means nothing more, as they talk about their beliefs or asserted beliefs and nothing that they personally know. Few are those who had experiences from inside, and not all of them say the same. And I don’t buy hypnotic suggestions such as ‘Satanism’ and implied calls for crusades. You call for fanaticism. What do you have against then fanaticism of Scientology, then?
This stoning and online court case calls for punishment. And I’m not interested in it. I would interested to discuss stuff like how to make things better. If you think that the deeds of some should deny the right of Scientologists to not have their pride and freedom to think and practice what they want, you are no better than what you supposedly fight against. You are indeed very arrogant and fanatic to think that you know ‘the right thing’, which would be a ‘right belief’.
I don’t want Scientology either. So what? Is it my call? Should I lie and scare people about it so as to make it disappear? Should I seek for people to get punished? If I did that for each and every group I deem destructive, I would be doing nothing else. I rest my case.
Consider:
a)if a person were to be audited all the way from Life Repair, through his Grades and Power Processing, even up to OT 2, and
b) was not subjected to the indoctrination that is continually brought to a student or parishioner by virtue of course materials, books, policy letters, registrars, promotional pieces and events, then
c) he might not believe ANY of the things brought up my Marty here. Consider: He might not even have thought any of those things, let alone believe in them, without those sorts of influence.
I am living with a such person. He did the entire bridge and has never stepped foot in a Church. He does not consider himself a Scientologist.
He did everything in a few years and just kept on moving forward with out a hangover, or any trace of the items listed above.
But how could he have done that without an auditor, who was “indoctrinated” with course materials and books?
Hi Marty,
I respect you greatly. But I can’t believe that you actually believe the things you wrote in your article. It you do, that would mean at least 2 things:
!) You yourself have never had any case gain from Scientology.
2) You look at the supposed case gain that other people are having as just some way these people are fooling themselves into thinking they are doing better.
I hope the above two points are not true, and I don’t think they are. So I personally don’t think you really believe the points at the beginning of this post.
Thanks for lots of great things you have done and are doing.
Great point palehorse. As of this date, the Sea Org has made more SP’s than OT’s.
Actually, I think you get an SP declare now if you are ARCXen.
This is politics. I think U.S. gov was very, very smart to slap that religion label on them. It instantly blocked them from politics.(Church and state are kept separate) Took away all of their power to do anything but sell religion. That is their only right, to sell religion. That’s why CCHR and the IAS are such a farce. They are beggars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States
AnonWWP, back then, magic and religion were the same thing. There were some powerful magicians. I think Jesus was one of them. Don’t you believe in magic? Isn’t magic part of the Scientology belief system also?
Not sure why you fundamentalists always discount it.
“But mysticism/occultism isn’t our source. Our source, actually, is magic. Magic is something that, today, is performed on a stage with prestidigitation. But magic actually has a much more vivid and noble history than a stage magician. It is quite remarkable that the magician attempts directly to use spirits to perform his will. And that is his basic modus operandi. That is his goal in practicing magic.”from a Lecture given on 29 January 1958, The History of Clearing by L Ron Hubbard.
Hey, AnonWWP, who is using you to perform his will?
Those two conclusions are splendid application of scientology two-valued ‘logic.’
Brilliant article, Jeffrey. I’ve saved it. Thanks.
Thanks for the reference and thoughts. There is a major distinction between christianity and scientology that will guarantee the latter never rises to something even in need of the world pushing back at. That is, fundamentally, christianity was and is ‘inclusive.’ Scientology was and is and always will be ‘exclusive.’ It only ever hopes to service the .055 percent according to Hubbard’s own calculations. That is, the one big being for ever 17 degraded beings. That it will end in war with itself is inevitable according to simple math.
And so it was with God, for Hubbard.
And for what he did to Paulette Cooper and others who stood up to him.
Yes, it’s good training.
“Big number of followers” – mmm…? Thirty thousand or so world wide? And dwindling fast…
You are right, palehorse. I will use Mark’s proper name from now on.
You are right on the money Don.
Sign me up. Maybe I’ve been too harsh. Sounds good to me. Ha ha ha!
Thank you so so so much Marty. If I say I am proud of you it sounds a bit condescending. But I am. You are who I’ve thought you were.
Namaste and Thank thank thank yooooouu 🙂
Brian
It’s worse Marildi. On a Scientologist’s death bed it is whispered into their ears to find a hospital, pick up a body and buy more Scientology.
That is so perverse to actually reg a dying person to buy more Scientology.
One word……… YUK! SUPER DUPER MEGA YUK!!
Spyros, I admire your integrity.
When you say “domestic abuse” do you mean the Sea Org? or against his wife? Please clarify. Remember, he is 5’3 and 140 lbs at best – not much damage he could do aginst Marty et al.
http://www.wiseoldgoat.com/papers-scientology/hubbard_vs_nwo1-b.html
Nope, L Ron hubbard branded himself Satan.
But Selfish being that enslaves is about the same.
What i said. Knowing Scientology I distrused all mind shit.
I just think he had a enormous hangover and went: TFW I am doing in this dark cave.
Magic is just mindgames
Uncomfortable truths. Can Scientologists confront them or not ?
Inclusive.
That is beautifuly expressed. That you for sharing, particularly the last paragraph.
When I finish my personal evaluation of scientology I will know the exact percentage of what is workable and what is not. I will also have a precise percentage of what was bullshit and what was not.
I will send you all a report within the next fourty or fifty years.
Wait for it!
Well said.
Not to mention that there was never a day, not a second when it wasn’t LRH who was bringing lawsuits onto CoS. In fact, it was only after he ran Dianetics into bankruptcy and was fleeing from debtors and harmed people (already the true, long-term occupation of his life), that he was forced to form CoS (forming a religion being the way to ‘make real money’ as he had told many people)
Miscavige is an egregious mismanager and an unscrupulous person who has done a great deal to drive Scientology into the ground.
He also has a bad side.
A girl named Tory Maggoo teached me to look at both sides. And looking at it again I can see the process can have a bennifet but:
5: Navigation through the only hole in the wall consists of closely emulating Hubbard and behaving as he did when he lived.
I know they work.
All I was wanting to point out is that such a person as the person you are living with would not find himself believing the various things that Mark Rathbun says are the beliefs of Scientology. Unless this person was also indoctrinated thusly.
Fundamental Christianity has in it some pretty barbaric aspects, particularly in the Old Testament. There we have stonings, whole populations being rubbed out by a vengeful God, etc. The New Testament, while less barbaric, doesn’t sit well with a lot of today’s sophisticated people for various reasons, including Paul’s views about women and homosexuality.
Various Christian thinkers have managed to get past the “it’s ALL God’s Word and it’s ALL got to be followed”, and have basically asked themselves, “What’s workable and generally improves conditions?” and they take those things and preach and practice on the workable and leave all else alone. Ernest Holme’s Church of Religious Science is an excellent example of this. Hinduism is full of brilliant information and guidance; it’s also full of myth. Certainly there’s many people who have been able to decipher the difference between the good and bad.
Islam is another example, with the most dangerous being those who want to follow all the Prophet’s words, and it’s unfortunate that his later teachings were venomous; his earliest teachings very loving. So there are fundamentalists there beheading and stoning, and other’s who have filtered out the hatred.
Such could bea “new way” to teach Scientology. Label the balderdash and non-sensical and harmful any way you want, but move it off the line up. I think there’s many in the Indie Field doing just that. Although these beliefs Marty has enumerated are certainly embedded in the Church and in many church-goers; there is lots and lots of material that are not influenced by these beliefs and do much to bring relief and a clearer view of things to people. There’s a lot left over.
I think that there’s many people who have benefited from Scientology in a similar fashion to your roommate or partner. And there’s also lots of people who held on to their personal integrity while being on org lines studying. Just because these points have been put forward by Ron and then advanced by many, there are plenty of people who filter these nonsensical or harmful things out. Very few people at the Washington Times personally advanced the aims of their owner, the Unification Church. We are not infected with the principles of Christian Science if we read the Monitor’s book and movie reviews.
Here we are on Marty’s blog. Perhaps a few thousand of us have commented over the years. How many of us have employed Scientology in such a way as to hurt another since we have left the Church? I think there are very few or any of us here who have done that.
I think that most of those still active in the corporate Church are tolerating these beliefs. less than accepting them. And I think that is true with many of us here. And, just as there was a “breaking point” for us, there will be a “breaking point” for many of them. The ranks of “exes” bailing is greater every day. There are 3 people who have told me they are under the radar to every one person I know who has said publicly that they have left.
Children, your Founder just did not care and don’t point me to books. Go one on one with me on L Ron Hubbards Track record.
Thank you Don, I was always trying to remember when I read this and what it said. It is directly the opposite of any sage, saint and wiseman?women has ever said. Ron actually invalidated to goal of life itself with this.
This is the doctrine of the deification of the ego. It could be considered Anti Christ as Christconsciousness by definition if feeling unity and oneness with all life. It could also be considered Santanic as this doctrine preaches eternal separateness.
I sometimes feel this man, Ron Hubbard, was a lower astral being, come on earth for a time.
He even identifies with the dark side with his affections for being called the Prince of Darkness and the Anti Christ. Nibs even said his dad thought he was the 666 Beast.
He hypnotized his way, to smash his name into history, with his powerful will and bold face lying. This was a dark man.
Preliminary finding #1: The number of different opinions about scientology is directly proportional to the number of contradictions within the subject.
O.K.please, I didn’t go back half a century and the dead man is gone. If David Miscavige drops dead tomorrow I will probably not mention him in more current situations. Not A=Aing David Miscavige either with Hubbard.
Or Hubbard’s cancelling certs with David’s GAOT events and cancelling everybodies certs on the planet at one event. Dead people don’t bother me please don’t try to force items on me that are not mine. David Miscavige is a PRESENT TIME PROBLEM. He uses attack dogs (spirits to do his bidding).
You don’t sound very cheery yourself.
Great prosecutory summary. Seeking to get people punished is different than fighting back. There is a wide difference. You have made several accusations here about denying people freedom or having the purpose to deny people freedom. Yet you enjoy the freedom of joining in on this conversation. A freedom Marty created for you.
As far as Freezoners and Indepenents, several people have alluded to them lately as being concerned parties.
The Freezoners have never been involved in this noise, they could not care less about these conversations. Attempting them into this theater has been a waste of time. One fanatic OSA plant tried desperately to create a civil war between the Freezoners and Independents and just wore his stubby fingers out on his keyboard.
There are only three people in the Independent Movement attacking. Hardly a casting call in this theater.
Then there are people like you, that think any conversation about Scientology = hostility. This is not a hate site. Marty has never been anti anything except domestic abuse and domestic terrorism and corruption.
I have no idea why a FEW people A=A this blog with other blogs or web sites. He is not a hater and he is not anti any religion, that I know of. He is a WRITER.
Have a chat with your file clerk and sort him out. Get your records in order.
Please, he travels with a pack of dogs. He’s a gangster. And a pimp. Men smaller than he have conquered entire nations.
Good points. All. I really enjoy reading your posts.
TO, I didn’t get that Spyros was pointing any fingers at Marty. I think where he used the word “you” he meant the general you.
“used to refer to any person or to people in general”
Example: It grows on you.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/you
I agree Chuck. The final years to man’s only hope, the man who sold total freedom, created OT 3 and NOTs, the man who demonized psyches and electro shock therapy was howling at BTs, and wanting to be electrocuted.
It seems he could not wait for karma to catch up with him. He was wanting to do it to himself.
His state of mind at the end was not the result of being an”old man.”
His depraved life and the lies and deception, the violence cause against critics brought him into his own self styled darkness.
Look dear, I have tried hard, in writting stuff, to keep people from concluding this and that. Actually, I’ve spent much more time clarifying stuff than saying anything new. You can’t say anything against SCN and you’re SP, and you can’t say anything pro-SCN and you’re brainwashed, and so on. I know how it goes.
Generally speaking, I don’t quite get how the things you wrote about me connect to what I said before, nor before that.
I have been reading anti-SCN stuff since before I got involved with SCN itself, and even after that, and I don’t see how much of that is related to SCN, either.
I think freedom is not a nice excuse to smear-talk others in public and cause outrage against them. It would be something to take some freaking LRH text and analyse it, and another things to compare SCN with satanism and jihad and other stuff. One might bring about understanding, the other create impressions. Do you know the difference? The difference is similar to having a chat with somebody or having that somebody im-press his boot on your face, so you will get impressed.
Most of the time I let people be hostile or whatever they are, whether I like it or not. Because I am a ‘Satanist’ and agree with Crowley who said to do what you will and let others do the same too. But hey, today I reached a point I couldn’t even connect to the conversation at all, without being a liar. I had to tell passionate critics what I think about what they were writting. Do you think that’s part of my freedom, or are you gonna trace and beat me?
I was very young when I got involved with SCN and somehow my schools principal learned about it. So, he approached me and with an intimidative look told me ‘I know what that thing is about…you will not proselytize anyone in here.’ I never intended to ‘proselytize’ anybody, but it was something between tragic and funny to be told that by him in specific, as in school, I was being proselytised since 5 years old. I was forced to say my prayers, and learn and write good exams or else…(bad things would happen to me). So, from that alone, Christianity 1 Scientology 0.
My point is regardless of outrageous or not beliefs, people should be free to believe…or not. I shouldn’t be afraid to become a Wiccan nor a Thelemite, if in the future I decide to do so –so that others wont boo-boo at me. I don’t give anybody the right to impose nor hinder any beliefs upon me.
I’m glad some nasty practices get known so that people wont fall victims to them. I’m not glad to create dicrimination. I could have some #$#% to talk about some beliefs too, you know. Generally, I find it funny to hear by christians how ‘crazy’ SCN is. Because a psychiatrist would be glad to hear from them how nice it is to chat with an old man in the heavens before they go to sleep every night.
This is not personal about Marty. You misunderstood. But if I understood that Marty became like that then OK, I would let you all be. I just can’t fake it, and shit PR and pretend this would be OK with me. This time I reffered to other people.
Coolness (for lack of a better word 🙂 ).
The bravery and persistence of Marty and Mosey has been a continuous inspiration for me.
Marty knows probably better than most “my story” — my pre scientology story, my scientology story, my more recent story and no doubt has figured out my most recent story.
Hubbard’s prison of belief failed with some of us. It almost killed a few of us but it failed.
And Mark was a big part of my own de-shackling.
I will be forever grateful.
With love,
Windhorse
And dare I say, the result of paying no homage to any spiritual reality, no benevolent transcendence, whereby comes the do’s and don’ts, Dharma, from those sages that have merged into that Great Light of Spirit and seen their very self in all selves.
It is this state where it becomes impossible to harm others as they are our own very self. Our brothers and sisters in this great life. The very source of love itself is our unity with all life.
Tat Twam Asi-Thou Art That
Any cause and effect is simply illusion.
It is all just a grand IS-NESS.
Scios are really making a difference in the word! Ha ha…
Where is that difference? I guess it is just some vague subjectivity.
Scientology has now pretty much reduced to a self-cannibalizing cult. I do not give it much staying power. Maybe ten years at the most.
You know I think the liability of being somewhat free is you can get at odds with various groups people –much like Marty. You can get some rot about me by asking inside the COS, inside the FZ and elsewhere. I could be outside and still be friends with them all, but I am allergic to domination and it makes me become rude. I do it on purpose! I think it makes life a bitty more spicy. Still I don’t hold grunges against them in a way to seek revenge. If I think somebody boils, I let him boil, you know. Too bad for them. I’m not very mean –only temporarily, sometimes.
I could come here and be nice with everybody, but I chose to be a little rude. I don’t know why I do it. I thought being nice while everybody else is rude is a bit too peaceful. Blame my fileclerk, for making me think so.
I’m not with anybody. I’m with honest people, and I want freedom for all. A kind of freedom that wont be used to reduce the freedom of others.
And I don’t think ‘do what you will’ cancels ethics, because I think will (what thelemites call ‘true will’) and ethics go together. And people don’t need another to point that out to them. I don’t believe in imposing ethics.
And I don’t feel at all victimised by that bashing at SCN. One because i’m not a SCNists. Two because I partially agree –but only partially. I just talk to talk.
Hey, truth be told folks, I think SCN is some crazed sci fi thing, and magic like you said, and unrealistic, and I have no prob with that, to be honest. I have prob with some suppression involved with it. I think all religions and spiritualities have the ‘crazy’ factor involved more or less. And I’m cool with it, because I don’t believe in psychiatry.
I too think that to be cool with dumping your body is cool, in SCN. But it doesn’t mean suicide to me. Suicide is more like quiting, where dumping would be more like not feeling bad about it, because the body is their possession and not them, as spirits. I wouldn’t use that to justify coaxing another to die, though. Nor would I want a beloved person to me to die, nor others. I’m sorry if it’s been used like that. And you have to admit SCNists usually look younger than the average –it must be because of the contracts with the devil.
Anyway, I wish you all well. I’m not too serious about what I said. I just talked to talk.
Vinaire, I am not a Scientologist anymore and as I am quite in disagreement myself with a number of LRH’s ideas, I do not feel obligated at all to “defend” him in any way. As far as I’m concerned it is open season for all to battle out any philosophers’ ideas. I didn’t think I was “attacking” you. I was just interested a bit more in your certainty of viewpoint. That’s all. Your answer that you are not sure of the absolute truth is appreciated.
I hope you have a more balanced view now, instead of going from one extreme to another extreme.
See how you just made nothing out of something? That was very magical.
Satan is a person who is interiorized into “I”. Scientology, basically, interiorizes people into “I”.
God is, correctly, the universal viewpoint. It is how the universe will look at itself and at all of its parts.
Nirvana is the complete discarding of ego and of any fixedness of attention, and looking at everything from a detached, universal viewpoint.
” today I reached a point I couldn’t even connect to the conversation at all, without being a liar.”
O.K., but you did connect to the conversation. And you were free to say whatever you wanted to say.
Your frequent efforts to translate conversations to me suggest you think I am have problems duplicating. This is a wrong indication for me. And a wrong item.
“This is not personal about Marty. You misunderstood.”
Pardon me.
“But if I understood that Marty became like that then OK, I would let you all be. I just can’t fake it, and shit PR and pretend this would be OK with me.”
Protest noted.
In particular,the insinuation that you “get it” when I can not.
I get it. And I get what you are doing and implying. I’m not so dense that I need to feel forces to understand purposes. Your purpose is clear to me.
I get you.
Scientology creates ineriorization into “I”, and people don’t even know it.
Interiorization & Exteriorization
.
The big inconsistency that I see here is an interiorization into “I”. It is extreme focus on I… I… I… “I” this… “I” that…
People are sort of interiorized into “I”, but Scientology has made a business out of it by creating the concept of “thetan,” glorifying it, and turning it into an ideal scene.
If there is an implant in Scientology, it is sticking people into the concept of a thetan.
Rogers, Ron concocted a form of dream therapy. What is running and reading on the meter are concepts. Concepts that are archetypes which trigger associations in the subconscious, which is real.
If you spent years and years paying, hoping for and believing in OT 3, if you arrived there and Ron told you that a gigantic cauliflower once ate the universe and shit out the earth and all it’s inhabitance, and that is the cause of suffering, you would find it reading on the meter.
If he told you that the source of all pain and suffering came from this, your subconscious mind would bring up real concepts and experiences of pain: real emotional and mental pain.
The very act of confronting subconscious pain can resolve that pain.
The pain is real, the cauliflower is not. The cauliflower is the restimulating symbol of that pain. Ron’s Sci Fi Symbols of his case.
In dream therapy you can run real pain. But after it’s resolution you know it was a dream you were mocking up. You know you created it.
But in Ron’s dream therapy you are left with a twisted cosmology with the source of your suffering being an external make believe cause: the whole implant OT3 thing.
You are then left with a non duplication of reality: A Scientologist
Oracle,
And you sound like a Holy Roller. Gaslighting as usual for LRH, your God, and invalidating people that are aware, and can see what is in front of their faces. Not everybody is in a permanent trance like you (point #7).
You are are also confirming point #6 of this post with your sophistry, and yes you are covertly and overtly running your implant on other people.
Ex-Scientologist and the public at large do not want the “item” you are obsessively pushing on everybody.
The subject of this post is “Scientology Beliefs”, last time I checked Hubbard is the Source and Founder of the Religion of Scientology, not DM.
Not committing blasphemy on Ron-God because he is death? Really Oracle how obtuse can you be?
If I expected to hear that from somebody, that was you, M. See, I’m not surprised. Am I downtoned? 😛 Thank you. I’ve been contemplating ever since how to keep intergrity without breaking any hearts, and not triggering any out-valence SCN detectives to search my dirty past. Any ideas? 😛
Gut.
You assumed too much, too quickly. I don’t play those espionage games, because I don’t have hidden intentions. I’m a mere mortal being and not any important Class to profit. I have friends and I know some of the games played –shit-talking about people etc. I had somebody organize a group shit-talk against a friend of mine and the same person organized a group disconnection against me too, for a really SP reason. And yeah….I don’t care but I can’t say the whole FZ is completely BS frei. I’m not gonna tell you who he is. He is well outta my life. I don’t want him any closer.
No, it’s just that I have known Spyros for a long time, and I saw how what he said could have been taken – but I know him better. No need to get huffy and say “I get you”. Because I don’t think you do. And you yourself don’t like to be given wrong indications, so why give them to me?
Don’t go changin’… 😛
Ehhh to avoid possible further assumptions: By no means do I generalize with ‘Freezoners’. Actually, I know very few, compared to the whole. And I have met some very nice people too.
It seems Marty has had some experience(s) too that made him generalize with SCN too, instead of dividing it between the bad COS and the good fz/indie, and Geir too. I think that by what he writes in here. And might I add what LRH said in KSW 1 that attacks occur when results don’t occur –for those who believe him. I would add to not make the mistake some COS people make and look hard for enemies ‘out there’.
Third party? Well, maybe I didn’t get disconnected in vain. Maybe he had forseen I would third party him after over a decade. That’s why he did it first.
Enough detective stories for tonight. Gute nacht!
Huh? Just like any regular poster here at “Movin’ On Up”, the person TO is living with is not in any way a Scientologist by Scientology’s own definition. This person doesn’t call themself a Scientologist. The OP is talking about Scientology beliefs – why on Earth would any non-Scientologist believe any Scientology let alone the core beliefs as delineated by Marty?
The remainder of your comment, I suggest, is invalid in that it seeks to draw a false equivalence. This is because Scientology is not a religion. For it to be valid to describe Scientology as a religion the definition of the term “religion” would have to include as a qualifier something like this:
Now, while that qualifier is an accurate description of the day-to-day and on-going core business of Scientology, it also excludes Scientology for consideration as a religion.
A valid equivalence with which to measure Scientology would be with criminal organisations such as the Mafia, the Hells Angels, the Tongs, the Triads, and so on. Just like Scientology, each of those criminal organisations has facets which could be described as religious in nature, but not one of them can be described as a religion.
Thank you! I think we should get together and establish a pop psychology practice. Let’s call it it “Playology” A lot like Scientology, but without ethics policies, bad guys and space opera. Here’s my proposed 8 beliefs:
1. Planet Earth is a playground. The vast majority of human beings – and billions of invisible other beings – are your team mates. We are here to express and experience freedom, growth and joy.
2. Steve Irwin (aka “The Crocodile Hunter”) was the name of the hero of our pop psychologist group. Steve established Earth as a playground and transported billions of beings to serve as our fellow team mates.
3. Our continued state of play is assured by stand up comedians, late-night talk show hosts, friendly people we meet in day to day life, ex-Scientologists and people who write critically about Scientology without having any first hand experience with it. The males are from Mars, and the girls are from Venus.
4. Dan Locke and The Oracle were all amongst the first few billion to have discovered the truth of 1 through 3 above, and are not the only ones who have devised means of enjoying life on this planet, and wanting to immerse themselves in the experience of it, and can’t imagine why anyone would want to escape from it.
5. It’s of vital importance in our group that we don’t consider there’s only one hole in any wall and that it’s typically not necessary to navigate through holes in walls. It’s usually fine to let a hole in a wall just continue to be there, and not go through it. If one decides to go through a hole in a wall, it’s usually only necessary to determine if the any of the available holes are wide enough to pass through or can be made wide enough, and this can be done usually without skills in navigation.
We also recognize that going around the wall or through a door are frequently available options.
It is also important to answer the age-old question many of us have suffered with over the ages, that being the question, “What wall???”
6. Playologists don’t have enemies. About as bad as it gets for a playologist is to encounter people they haven’t yet quite figured out.
7. Playology ‘technology’ consists of a sophisticated mix of “pop” psychology and hypnotism carefully designed and administered so as to lead people to wholeheartedly accept and live according to these beliefs. In keeping with “pop culture”, we do our best to keep up with what’s trending, and mod clothing. We are pretty split on the whole Justin Bieber thing.
8. When a playologist has expended all of his best efforts in the vibrant pursuit of these beliefs he is expected to belch loudly and shout “Huzzah” and laugh as others wonder what “huzzah” means. All playologists eventually “die”, usually while laughing or after extraordinarily satisfying sex.
Well . . . when
teachingmaking shit up about “Identity Versus Individuality” in SCIENTOLOGY 8-8008, L Ron Hubbard, had this to say about what an hindrance the body is when it comes to operating as a spiritual being . . .. . . so speaketh Mainkind’s Greatest Friend.
(As and aside, that first paragraph is kinda interesting when one considers just how tightly some people cling to the label “Scientologist” after escaping the cult.)
Another aspect to bear in mind on Scientology’s disregard for the human body is that ubiquitous unofficial axiom “The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number of Dynamics”. This statement is bizarre when one considers that, assuming there is the slightest validity to “the dynamics”, each dynamic, starting with the second, is dependent for its survival on the one immediately below it. The first dynamic is the self operating in MEST world via the body. Providing that is surviving well, there develops an ability to put the second dynamic in place and, the healthier the second dynamic the more likely to survive is the third . . . and so on. That’s just logical, right? Well, in practise, Scientology demands that if a particular action will provide the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics, it is always the first – and pivotal – dynamic, the body, and then the second – family – which are sacrificed.
Remember also that, as masters of the universe, Scientologists are “not their bodies”, Far from it. They are mighty spiritual beings dealing not with just one life time, but with millions and millions of life times stretching across the entirety of eternity. A billion year contract – yeah, sure, where do I sign?. This sense of such vast scale, most often implanted by auditors leading people down the
garden pathwhole-track often results in an abnormally cavalier attitude about the physical matters of personal health and death.Its been a while now since I first saw the video where David Miscavige and the rest of his capos announce the death of L Ron Hubbard to a hall full of Scientologists. Do you know what they did upon receiving the news that L Ron Hubbard had dropped his body? They rose as one to their feet in a prolonged celebratory ovation of cheering and clapping. Quite, quite bizarre.
LOL……
Conan, I so agree with your response to Oracle. She just goes on and on and on and on and on. Talk about someone being SO RIGHT!
You spoke for me and have said it so much better than I could have. Thank you!
And as far as we know, Hubbard didn’t beat up people or though two of his wives reported being beaten up. However, he did punish viciously including locking up young children in the chain locker, in the dark, without ablutions. He had these people fed with slops in a bucket. They were not allowed to wash. Some people were locked in there for three and four weeks!
He threw people overboard with the arms and legs tied. One lady was sixty years old. At least one person had a broken shoulder or arm as a result (Masters, I think it was, but I stand to be corrected).
He used people. Those little girls dressed in hotpants dressed him! They carried an ashtray around for his cigarrette ash.
There is so much more that I could tell about his cruelty but enough for now!
Disconnection was carried out and enforced by Hubbard himself. As we know, he wrote the PL, Fair Game. There was some PR letter written to publically refute it after disconnection was queried and to cover up but he never cancelled Fair Game. It was alive and applied to people like Paulette Cooper who had her life ruin. Hubbard did this, not Miscavige!
All Miscavige does is carry on with the process because he doesn’t know what else to do. It seemed to work for Hubbard but that was before the Internet. This is all DM does and it was what he as trained to do – by the man himself. DM is in trouble because of the Internet. He’s floundering, his stable datum has been shook up. One could almost feel sorry for him.
Hubbard set the ball rolling for the collapse of Scientology. As I’ve said before, Miscavige is just the messenger.
Agreed, Gene Trujillo. The SO and most staff behave like robots, carrying out orders without such rightness and without any real thought about what they’re actually doing.
I believe we were all in this state to one degree or another and that is why it took so many of us so long to see and to leave. This is a hell of an evaluation, I know. If it is a wrong indication to you, scrap it.
However, it does answer the question I’ve asked of myself many times, Why did I wait two decades to make my move? Others longer than that? And in that very first decade I was as unhappy as hell – but I stayed!!!
Great response, Marty. I am a mathematician and computer programmer, so I already have a tendency to look at things that way.
How else are you going to convey how the world looks from your vantage point than by using the word “I”? I understand that the very fact of a vantage point infers interiorisation, but then we all are observing and communicating from our perspective and understanding. Even you started out with “I see” as a reference. So what would non-localised communication of views look like in a localised setting? 😛
You’re not into bringing up Hubbard’s failings and for my part I mostly don’t care. But observe others bringing up his documented failings on backincomm and watch what happens.
I say this for transparency’s sake, as I’m probably one of those you are referring to as having alluded to the FZ and indies as concerned parties. A surprising conclusion, as I don’t recall seeing FZ mentioned here recently. As for the indies, some are creating their own space for their own conversations. It’s a good thing, and we all (both those who agree and those who don’t) will learn which forum is right for us. It is when we think every forum is our forum that the sparks fly, and those sparks say a lot.
The Quest for Certainty
Buddha declared.
“The Absolute Truth is that there is nothing absolute in the world, that everything is relative, conditioned and impermanent, and that there is no unchanging, everlasting, absolute substance like Self, Soul, or Ātman within or without.”
DEFINITION: Absolute means, “Viewed independently; not comparative or relative; ultimate; intrinsic.”
This postulate may appear self-contradictory to some, but it essentially says, “There are no absolute certainties.” This is reflected in one of the most ancient hymns, The Creation Hymn of Rig Veda.
All certainties are relative. This statement does not degrade any certainty we have. It simply means that one can always come up with a better certainty.
That is how science makes progress. Einstein declared the speed of light to be a universal constant. This is a certainty for now, but there may possibly be a wider context in which the speed of light is a special case.
Similarly, in the field of spirituality, we cannot be absolutely certain that self or soul is permanent. The phenomenon that is described as self or soul must be open to further investigation.
There is little progress possible for a person who believes his certainties are absolute.
One can always improve upon a certainty one has.
.
Mindgames… Catdaddy is right!
When a person is interiorized into “I” he may think he is free, but he is getting more and more confined into “I”.
He is all the time using his “I” as the reference point to judge everything around him.
He is just going around in circles. It is a form of insanity.
This is what Scientology reduces one to. It is very unfortunate.
“You know I think the liability of being somewhat free is you can get at odds with various groups people –much like Marty. You can get some rot about me by asking inside the COS, inside the FZ and elsewhere. I could be outside and still be friends with them all, but I am allergic to domination and it makes me become rude. I do it on purpose! I think it makes life a bitty more spicy. Still I don’t hold grunges against them in a way to seek revenge. If I think somebody boils, I let him boil, you know. Too bad for them. I’m not very mean –only temporarily, sometimes.”
TRANSLATION: “I” is very important to me. Watch my “I”. See, how unique and wonderful my “I” is.
.
“I could come here and be nice with everybody, but I chose to be a little rude. I don’t know why I do it. I thought being nice while everybody else is rude is a bit too peaceful. Blame my fileclerk, for making me think so.”
TRANSLATION: See how cute my “I” is. I just loooove it.
This interiorization into “I” is quite a phenomenon to watch.
This is called “pumping of I” or maybe “pimping of I”.
It’s still a big number (and it was bigger before) compared to the average amount of followers in cults with that kind of beliefs, I think.
Yes, Vinaire. I think it’s even worse to hold on to an ‘I’ and claim you express the views of universe. Maybe if you let go too, you will ease on your offensive against LRH, who’s been part of the universe as well.
And no Vinaire and others, I’m not trying to reduce your freedom of speech, merely because I disagree with you. I promise I’m not going to send anybody any ghost busters, nor dig his long past O/Ws, nor invent any, nor otherwise hold him accountable.
There has been talk about Buddhism in here, about letting go of the past, the ego and so on. I think of this as a peaceful state. I think pointing out who is right and wrong is not a peaceful state. It can be done, of course. I just don’t think it is the state you describe. I have a very high idea of high states. And the universe that you have been talking about, Vinaire, includes me, Hubbard, you and everything else. If you deny some part of it, you deny the universe. If you oppose some part of it, you oppose the universe, no? Deny it and fight it if you will, but if you think you are the universe, and not some ego, then maybe you deny and fight yourself?
I also had high expectations of OTs — higher than to have them ‘put ethics’ (hold me accountable) on me, because they are RIGHT. And yeah maybe I have done that too a little bit, I just don’t have any illusions that is ‘OT’. And I aim higher than that.
Well, thanks for opening up in that way. You have found a place within this conversation where you belong. My viewpoint is that if Marty writes something new, or you read something anywhere on the Internet that is a conversation going on, if you FEEL, FEEL something, you belong somewhere in that conversation. Because the WORDS have conjured something up in you that wants or needs to be heard.
So, if you read something, and the thoughts and words begin to flow, it concerns you in some way.
On the Internet forums there are no obligations to anyone so I don’t think there is a lot of PR going on.
I can see it is very disturbing to some people when they feel they have been privy to a secret society, that has been groomed in close conspiracies, when the curtain is drawn back and suddenly, the world can be included. From the beginning I felt that Marty’s actions were bringing the Scientology down on to the streets. David Miscavige has been burying it tombs. The only way for it to bloom and grow, whatever is to be used, is to put it out on the streets.
There is a condescending view amongst the Scientology community that “street people” or “wogs” can’t handle the ideas. That one must have some spiritual supremacy and entitlement for these ideas. And mainly, one must be paid up in taxes to Int Management and registered as a member to know.
When Hubbard wrote most of his ideas down, birth control pills were considered taboo. This is not the same society.
Marty gets attacked over and over and over and it is always for the same reason. He is bringing it out onto the street and he is INCLUDING others.
Someone, had to grow some courage and do SOMETHING. Because under David Miscavige, burying it all in vaults and paying people like mad to keep their mouths shut and working madly to bury the TRUTH in the shadows, this Scientology subject was DYING.
Hubbard made huge headway with the subject of psychometry that will matter greatly as time moved forward.
Marty chooses not to devalue and underestimate his fellow man or run the “spiritual supremacy” ser fac on people. I think it is a good thing and if people had more faith in their fellow man and less concern about the economics involved with their secret societies, exclusive groups, and spiritual supremacy, the world would be a better place.
That people take some of their faith and place it in people outside of the Church, has been taboo for too long. The Nation of Islam is flying with Dianetics. Bring it on down to the streets. Have a little faith in the street people.
That is what I see right about Marty.
Hi Eileen
What! No baby in the bath water, now there’s a thought. However since I believe that “considerations are senior to mechanics” then if I consider there is a baby in the bath water there is, just as if you consider there isn’t, then there isn’t.
Love with ARC
Pip
Hi Marty
I was not aware that two-valued logic was anything more than what can be observed, the only kind of logic that Scientology laid claim to is INFINITY VALUED LOGIC, and for me when I put that on a scale of infinity wrong and infinity right, Scientology falls to the right of the middle and the Church falls to the left. How far each is from the middle zero, must be down to each person’s personal experience.
Love
Pip
Well are you familiar with the Original OT8 text before DM squirreled it ?
“Christianity was and is ‘inclusive’” where did you get that idea from. I have literally been thrown out of several Christian churches. Just try and befriend a ‘born again Christian’ and mention you are pro Scientology and you will soon see how “inclusive” they are. The only person who is truly inclusive is JESUS CHRIST. Christianity is no more than a parody of His teachings.
Thanks Oracle
How about a bit of the Scientology as well.
Love
Pip
Good!
The recent photos (taken days after the HCO documentary shown at Sundance) show a happy Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman.
What Mark said about them made no effect on them. Have a look:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2940526/Tom-Cruise-schmoozes-friends-London-art-gallery-enjoys-night-filming-Mission-Impossible-5.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2939204/Nicole-Kidman-Julia-Roberts-shoot-scenes-Secret-Eyes.html
“It would be more consistent for them to think that LRH is the only one who does research.”
BINGO.
I love your smartness.
And I do not take the obsessive efforts of a few street people who work 24/7 to reduce Hubbard’s ideas and life, and all of the curious who explored Scientology or the supernatural, into a minus value, as an index of everybody down on the streets.
I have never gone into agreement that I should feel or be ashamed of myself or others, for being curious. I don’t owe anyone an apology. I do not view myself as gullible or stupid.
These guys that put together this HBO documentary, they are bringing some information down onto the streets and including a lot of people in the know. About real events. I don’t see that as an overt. I see it as a blessing.
The Earth provides so much knowledge about conditions. You push a seed underground, bury it. Look what comes back. A plant or tree that can feed a family. Suppression is over rated.
Exposing the way some people choose to use “religion” to harm attack and suppress others, that is helping people know how to know.
I do not see David Miscavige in this arena much longer. What happened with the Sea Organization, this lesson will serve you well in the future. David’s life, as a result of his actions and decisions, this is a life lesson. Your eternity is not being threatened, you are only being schooled.
The heat wave is on for David Miscavige.
“Patrick’s methods found him standing trial several times on kidnapping charges – a part of his technique he ceased though he continued trying to deprogram cult members like those who had joined Scientology.”
http://deadline.com/2015/02/orlando-jones-noam-dromi-ted-patrick-cult-deprogrammer-1201367273/
Oracle says,”Hubbard’s legacy has been destroyed by his own soldiers.”
Hubbard’s legacy was and is destroyed by the instruction to be violent against critics. And the instruction to be violent is in writing.
Written by him.
And studied, word cleared, demoed and check out for proficiency by his soldiers.
Hubbard destroyed his own legacy by his own immoral narcissistic evil behavior. His unwitting naive minions were his students who learned how to be soldiers which committed acts in his name, which created his legacy.
Hubbard is cause, source and author of his life. His legacy is the legacy of selfish power hungry tyrants. Ron was no victim. He was well aware of what he was doing.
Just google “Altitude Instruction, L Ron Hubbard.”
Karen, do you still believe in running OT3 materials? Do you still think Xenu is real?
I am not any of the above GO/OSA. I think you know me by now.
Do you still run these things on people? Or yourself?
These are just questions. Not attacks.
Whose views are you pumpin’ and pimpin’ almost non-stop, if not your own “I”?
I watched a couple of videos that feature you, Mr. Rathbun, e.g. Truth Rundown, media interviews and depositions.
This said, during those few past years, you appeared more and more bitter and unhappy impression.
In the beginning you were surrounded by hundreds of Independents but most left you for reasons that are just whispered.
Was dropping Scientology such a good idea? You seemed a lot happier when you still were applying some of it.
It is there for everybody to see on Internet.
Marty I am being verry rude. but here goes. Who was the mate of Bill Clinton. The Scientologist that Bill had good repore with in his Collage/Uni times
If you can’t say or tell me at this moment I will understand and I will not speak of it.
I guess yours is the universal viewpoint of God?
Using “I” as a reference point does not necessarily mean an interiorization into “I”. It is like having a body and simply using it, without attention fixed on it. The body is simply there and doing what it does.
When there is interiorization, there is fixed attention. The more fixed the attention is, the more interiorized one is.
Interiorization into “I” is having attention fixed on “I”.
*smiles and bows*
Damn I feel icky. I have never asked you who Christ is to or for you.
Do you have anything to say other than just insults, generalities and nonsense?
I don’t think that you get it, Spyros.
You are fixating on “you” now, which is the another flow of the same fixation or interiorization.
“I” and ‘you” are reference points. They are not cause points. It is the interiorization that makes them appear as cause points.
Spyros, as long as you think that you are being cause, or, if you are being effect, you are simply being deluded.
Looking at “I” as a cause or effect is certainly an interiorization into “I”.
Treat “I” like anything else that is around. It is simply a part of is-ness.
I left — in a manner of speaking in 1993 — I decided around 2000 that I was actually no longer a scientologist; HOWEVER, I still *thought* like a scientologist …
In 2000 I moved back to Clearwater from having lived for a couple of years near family …
I worked for several scientology companies in Clearwater UNTIL I realized that FOREVER MORE I would be the WHY on ANY but ANY down stats since I was a “no longer allowed on the base” but NOT declared and opps a failed OT VIII.
I swore I would NEVER EVER work for a scientologist again and I never have.
THAT said — I remained friends with several “still ins” — until I started to notice — good grief — these people are crazier than I EVER was because they haven’t a CLUE who they are. They have ZIP integrity and will sell their mother to ensure their own “freedom” — and many of those people have tragic stories they NOW share about how BAD scientology is/was … but it took THEIR tragedy to WAKE THEM THE F**K UP. Before I get piled on about the generalities — indeed — not EVERYONE is/was like this. But IMHO the majority.
So be it.
in 2009 I found Mark’s blog (Marty) … and on back channels we spoke. Bit by bit I starting posting …
BUT my point is UNLESS you are DAILY and I mean DAILY looking at your own thoughts and seeing — hmmm is THIS a TRUTH or a carry-over from the prison of belief — you are NOT WAKING THE F**K UP — you are just carrying over the absolutely incredible chains that this prison of Hubbard created.
Mark has distilled this prison so well. 8 very simple things.
It’s quite amazing I must say.
Again — deep gratitude to Mark.
Windhorse
Brian, you wrote: “I sometimes feel this man, Ron Hubbard, was a lower astral being, come on earth for a time.”
When I read this Brian it made me chuckle. Not at you or what you shared but at the insanity of this world, this cosmos. Over the seeming years I have imagined many scenarios regarding the who, what, where and why of this character L. Ron Hubbard. Finally, I came to recognize that this identity emerged in my experience of consciousness as a projection, a manifestation, of my own unconscious guilt, fear and self-hate. I have played this particular story line so, so many times (like portrayed in the movie Ground Hog Day) never waking up, never getting the lesson and the experience always having the same outcome. This time, though, something happened, and I finally made a different choice. A choice that put me on the path of waking up and getting a very important lesson. For me, L. Ron Hubbard has never existed except as a character I imagined and inserted into my seemingly endless dream of an existence in an unreal world that I have totally believed is real.
It wasn’t truth that I couldn’t recognize all along, it was the lies.
Conan, Your summary of my evil, covert plots, and anti magic sounds like I am reading a comm ev results on a declare. Gaslighting? Worshipping Hubbard as a God? All False reports. Blatant lies.
Wallowing in injustice is a purpose. I hope you are just get started?
I think it is admirable for somebody -in order to do what he thinks is right- doesn’t care to be ‘nice’ to some or everyone to have their alliance. And I try to be like that too.
I don’t know how much you know/remember from what I have written. I am even more out of agreement with people than Marty, but I’m not popular and I don’t matter to the FZ nor the COS nor the anti-SCN people. In this trio I take no part, but I acknowledge the existence of good people in all sides. Plus, the ‘bad’ thing about me is I disagree with things said about SCN as theory, as I have a different understanding about it. I think it’s better than usually said. But regardless of that, I too have thought that the way I have witnessed SCN, it would better off gone. In present time, I don’t really know. I leave it to each one to decide for himself. I don’t think it is my call to decide what each person should do, I think so, because not all view SCN to be the same thing.
I don’t believe in any spiritual supremacy, nor any imposed ethics from the ethical ones towards the unethical ones. I also think we all are -in our core- at the end of any possible spiritual path. All we have to do is realize it.
I like Hubbard’s texts, though I don’t and wont audit. I wont fight for them, either. He doesn’t fight them either. I don’t attribute all that has happened in the name of Scientology to him, either.
Well, in any case, no matter what happens to SCN, it will be what is decided by it’s people. It is kept alive due to some good people. And good people can do good SCN or not. I’m cool whatever happens, because I don’t think it is the only possible way. But Scientologists and all others should have the right to believe and practice –without harming others. And the ill-intended guys…I wouldn’t fight them either, because fighting perpetuates conditions, it doesn’t resolve them. Love, truth, assistance solve much better. I could have a hard time, or temporarily get a little harsh but, I never fall in apathy about solutions.
And, I see you even have a backup witness! To bear false witness!
1. Planet Earth is a prison. The vast majority of human beings – and billions of invisible other beings – are its inmates.
Who on earth does not feel this to be true at one time in his or her life.
What a lovely defense argument for David Miscavige. I hope his attorneys can rely upon you when the time comes.
“Your honor,Mr.Miscavige was just following orders. He was brainwashed. It was his religious upbringing. He didn’t know better…blah blah blah”
I see it disturbs you that I do not align myself with your defense arguments about David Miscavige. And trust me. he,and his attorneys will rely upon people just like you in the court systems, that will buy into the idea that he has religious rights to follow his religion, and Hubbard is the one to blame because he founded Scientology.
But I was there. I did not beat people, spy on people, abuse people, harm attack and suppress people. No matter what others were doing. I refused to take places in comm evs and I never disconnected from anybody, even when they were declared. I have nothing to blame Hubbard for because I disregarded what didn’t feel right to me.
And at this late date it is totally unlikely that I will contribute to a defense for David Miscavige. And hold someone else accountable for what he has done and is doing.
Not that I don’t suspect witness’and arguments like you and yours, will provide a possible means for him to evade justice.
The only one to discover truth
The only one to know how the mind “really” works
The only one to know how to free others
The only one to go through the Wall of Fire
The only one to discover OT 3 druggie BTs
The only one to actually know personally that jesus was a pedophile
The only one to say that God as omnipresence is being trapped as the MEST universe.
The only one to say that Life is not a Unified Field of Consciousness but we are eternal separate beings that create our own laws.
The only one to know that psyches are special evil beings from the whole track.
The only religion except for Satanism to declare on tape that He was the Prince of Darkness, on original OT8 that he was Lucifer, and his son, Nibs, said “dad’ told him, Nibs, that he, Ron, was the Beast 666.
The only present western religion who created an army of mindless minions to cause violence against critics.
The only man to declare that all religion comes from the Marcabs and all religion and all other therapies but his, Ron’s, are meant to imprison your mind.
The only hope
The only way
The only road out
The only one true savior
The only one to say that heaven is an implant station
The only one to state that the spiritual light within is an electronic implant
And yes, Oracle, the only one who has the magic, the genius, the wisdom, the insight, the greatness to do research
And the only “savior” that I know of that says he will lead you to “truth” and then is proved to be an inveterate, compulsive, confirmed, pathological liar.
And the only “wiseman” I know of that, even though it has been proven that he is a liar, he still is looked up to by those who have fallen under his spell.
Truly, it is only beginning to be revealed who and what this man was and is.
LAUGHTER! I am so recruited!!! Laughter! And sugar cane crops and grape vineyards are government funded…..wine and rum should be human rights,not privileges!
And um…by the way,”Conan”, don’t think I have not noticed your , ummmm trademark “methods” for spinning someone in, and recognized you. In our earlier history, your little bag of tricks had a little punch. Wrong indication, wrong item, false report mixed with a little injustice and hurled at someone. But, you played it out on me already. Next you come after me, bring a new bag of tricks. “Conan”.
Oh, by the way,doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand why you don’t want to post on this blog under your usual name. Your secret is safe with me!
Hi Monte. Nice post. You reminded me of a Wayne Dyer quote:
“When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at will change.”
This may be the biggest reason why people view scientology, or anything else, and see such different things.
Harle Quin, quoting Broeker: “We also by the way have the OT level that is going to be done (very long pause) immediately after every thetan discards his or her body. He wrote that up before he went (applause) now this…don’t take this as an invitation, because you don’t get it until youre through the OT level before it.”
The above statement only says there’s an OT level “to be done…immediately after the thetan discards his or her body.” There isn’t anything in that statement that suggests suicide, as it doesn’t indicate in any way that the thetan “discards” (or “drops”) the body IN ORDER TO DO THE OT LEVEL.
In fact, Broeker then says “don’t take this as an invitation, because you don’t get it until you’re through the OT level before it – which, to me, simply means that when you die – which eventually everyone will do – if you’ve done OT levels up to the particular OT level that is (supposedly) to be done after you die, then you would be ready to do that one.
Not that it really matters what those speakers stated, as their words aren’t based on anything Hubbard ever wrote, and they are known to be liars.
I inadvertently left out the closing quotation marks in the second to last paragraph. It should read:
In fact, Broeker then says “don’t take this as an invitation, because you don’t get it until you’re through the OT level before it ” – which, to me, simply means that when you die (which eventually everyone will do, obviously) if you’ve done OT levels up to the particular OT level that is (supposedly) to be done after you die, then you would be ready to do that one.
That makes sense. So what would a conversation look like where attention is not fixed on the “I”?
I, for want of a better word, sometimes feel obsessively squashed into this “I” and quite fed up with the fixedness.
This is strange!
Scientology 8-8008 contradict THE CREED OF THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY!
“And we of the Church believe That Man is basically good. That he is seeking to Survive. That his survival depends upon himself and upon his fellows and his attainment of brotherhood with the Universe.”
http://www.scientology.org/what-is-scientology/the-scientology-creeds-and-codes/the-creed-of-the-church.html
Mindfulness is seeing things as they are. The filter of “I” is minimized or simply not there. The awareness belongs to the phenomenon itself.
It is like the thinking being present in the thought. There is no one standing behind the thought thinking it.
One may say that mindfulness results in the as-isness of the interiorization into “I”.
Mindfulness
.
Look what is there! 🙂
Marildi, I’m one being who LOVES the “I”. I DIG IT! I love playing games as the “I.” And you know what else? I can also dig being the “we” or even … the “YOU.” I get off on it ALL. If you wanna be me, be me, if you wanna be you, be you, cause there’s a million things to do, you know that there are . Wait … hold on … I think Cat Stevens wrote that before … well, you know.
Blaming LRH, or blaming DM, or blaming Scientologists, or blaming wogs, or blaming anybody amounts to interiorization into “I”.
It is better to look in a larger context if you really want to handle the situation,
.
Marildi, re: your reference to me before of “Training/Duplication” – back in the day (before I so rudely retired to the tropics here in the mountains of northwest Thailand – soon to travel to Europe) I gave a lecture to groups on the stages to judgment maybe 150 times. Yeah, confusion, duplication, understanding, realization, judgment. I love it, REALLY great and highly applicable LRH lecture. UNFORTUNATELY, my observation of people in the CoS is that they almost NEVER came out of duplication (which seemed to be the main challenge for them). Of course, ACTUALLY spending the time to truly understand and work through to realization would “slow” one down in the eyes of the robotic supes and product officers, so folks very rarely got there. The best auditors and CSs did. Judgement? Ha ha ha ha … PLEASE! Using your judgement and not just “following orders” and complying in the church of scientology? You’re kidding, right? That’s what Ron wrought by insisting on obedience to “source” and the datum that YOU always had it wrong if you questioned his authority. (and don’t quote the early tapes on education to me, I’ve heard them countless times – Ron changed his mind)
In Scientology, INTERIORIZATION refers to a condition that has to do with “going into and becoming part of the body too fixedly.” EXTERIORIZATION is defined as a state where the individual experiences being outside his body.
The above definition assumes that individual and the body can be separated “physically” from each other. But the awareness of individuality is not something physical that can be pulled out of the body.
The truth is that a person, whose attention is fixed on the body, and who has been operating as a body all his life, feels very liberated when that attention suddenly becomes unstuck. This comes to him as a big surprise. He literally feels being outside the body. He thinks that something very special has happened. He feels a deep “spiritual awakening,”
INTERIORIZATION is the condition of attention being too fixed on the body with the person unaware of it. When that attention suddenly becomes unstuck the person feels very liberated.
But the experience of being outside the body is just a feeling. The person does not know that he has been operating as a body all this time. The experience goes away just as suddenly as it had come because he does not have awareness of what really happened. But he remembers the brief experience and longs for it.
Such “out-of-body” experiences are actually quite common, but they are random and uncontrolled. But after such experience the person’s attention may get fixed on getting exterior to the body.
When a person’s attention is too fixed on separating “self” from the body, then it is just another form of INTERIORIZATION.
Scientology convinces a person that he is basically an immortal “thetan” (self), that can operate exterior to the body naturally. The person is then offered expensive Scientology processing to attain the state of “operating thetan.” He is put on a long “bridge” that he must cross to achieve the goal of “operating thetan.”
This may sound crazy. But a person, who already believes that there is a God who exists outside the universe, can easily be convinced to believe in a thetan that can exist outside the body.
In truth, “self” is not something physical that can be separated from the body. What needs to be freed is the attention fixed on the body, which the person is not aware of.
But Scientology directs the person toward the goal of “operating thetan,” and makes loads of money of him. The person ends up either hypnotized or feeling betrayed. No operating thetan has actually been observed throughout the existence of Scientology.
The simple truth lies in freeing the attention that is fixed on the body unbeknownst to the person.
But the attention can be fixed on the body, or on the liberation of self from the body, or on salvation, or on attaining nirvana. The actual problem is the state of the attention, which happens to be fixed.
When the fixed attention actually becomes free, there is a feeling of liberation that continues to be there. With this, one attains the certainty that one is much more than some boxed in ideas and thinking patterns. This feeling is real and not the artificial feeling of an “operating thetan.”
When there is no fixed attention either on body or on self, one can then be as large as the reality one is witnessing at any time.
The simple method for freeing fixed attention is mindfulness. One can then view the whole universe for what it is.
.
Both Lawrence Wright and Alex Gibney are looking at the situation highlighted by Scientology in a much larger context.
There are looking at the “Prison of Beliefs.”
.
Vinaire, I agree.
But … is the Buddha’s statement about absolute truth … an absolute truth?
Probably is. Maybe 99.99999999% of the time anyway.
Good to speak to you Don.
If I may, let me paraphrase Ken Ogger, who may have been paraphrasing someone else.
‘We are as a shattered glass, wanting to be again whole.’
But there is more to it than that. Individuality does have it’s place, equal to that of ‘oneness’. To ignore either is to lose half the truth. Hubbard was quite correct in that work toward oneness ALONE will drive an individual down toward MEST and interiorize him into a solidity. But he missed half the picture. I used to believe that he eventually found the rest of the story and I simply hadn’t read or heard later lectures explaining it, but no, he didn’t.
And the answer was just beyond the tips of his fingers. But I long ago dispensed with the attitude that the tips of HIS fingers were my limit.
Mark
This big problem is not the interiorization into “body”. The big problem is interiorization into “I”.
I find the scientologists glorifying the inteririorization into “I”. They do this by focusing on a “terminal”, whether that terminal is individual or even God.
They look at God as an individual.
Focus on “individuality as cause” hides the underlying processes. It puts “I” there as a placeholder instead. There comes about cluelessness about what is really going on.
There is deeper truth beyond “I”.
And that truth is NOT the “I” of God.
LOL!
You may try out the exercises linked inside the following document.
The 12 Aspects of Mindfulness
.
Karen, thrown into chain lockers by who?
I have a sincere question Karen. Why do you not ever say Ron when communicating atrocities? You say “church”.
Churches are a generality that make up no doctrines.
Why do you never say L Ron Hubbard is the source of this violence against our citizens?
Thank you, Mark. Of course the ego (“I”) can be a useful tool if one can perceive it for what it is (an artificial construct) and not be controlled by it. But it should never be confused with consciousness (the “observer”) itself. Living life as though awake in a dream gives one a sense of it.
Hi Peter,
The creed was designed for public consumption in order to present a religious image to the world – strictly PR. The real “tech” is contained within the axioms.
Don
no doubt Monte that to a large degree others are defined by our experience of them, colored by our own views and biases.
but others do have an independent existence outside of our mental understanding and projection of them.
I am coming to a conclusion as a result of the past few years of blogging here.
I was a true believer for 11 years. Ran with Scientology celebrities, was in the Sea Org, was the first artist to perform at celebrity center when Yvonne got the OK to restart Celebrity Center on La Brea, was a Missionaire to find a new New York Org directly connected to Ron in the early seventies.
So I have experience.
My present view of Ron now, I know this can sound crazy to some, is that he is a sort of Raksaha as is talked about in Indian scriptures. He is a lower class of being who has certain powers and is inherently opposed to Righteousness and Dharma.
He preaches a doctrine which is completely the opposite of any sage. He preaches a doctrine of eternal seperateness, eternal ego and hates Christ, hates Yoga, hates the concept of God as omnipresent, puts hate above sympathy on the tone scale, loves Crowley, says he’s the Prince of Darkness, say’s he’s Lucifer, says he’s the Beast 666.
Metaphysically speaking L Ron Hubbard is NOT a being of the Light.
Empathy and sympathy is considered a weakness by him.
The family unit is made into the product of genetic ghosts and IS doctrinal source of all this family agony.
L Ron Hubbard metaphysically speaking is a being from the dark side. Just look at the fruits.
He knew and had certain hypnotic abilities and he used them not just in a stage entertainment way, he used them in a nefarious metaphysical way to create an empire of the cult of personality, power, money and control.
Ask yourselves this question. When you think of the concepts or reality of God, where does your mind go?
L Ron Hubbard hated God. L Ron Hubbard said that the only god that ever was is you. He said that, I read that.
L Ron Hubbard payed no homage to any reality other than if it is true for you it is true.
L Ron Hubbard was who he said he was. The Prince of Darkness, Lucifer and the Beast 666.
What I mean by that is not that he was actually these symbolic personalities, but that because he enjoyed the monikers with a chuckle on one of his tapes, he reveals his own spiritual state as a man who is repulsed by common standards of decency.
And beyond simple common standards of decency he was on the dark side of the metaphysical spectrum.
He hate Christ. Christ stood for love.
You and I were duped by a dark ignorant soul who had some psychic powers of manifestation, and a con mans understanding of the mind and spirit.
“the truth though always fought, always in the end prevails” L Ron Hubbard
Mark, can you tell me of one person you know of that was damaged by seeking communion with God?
Not here for blood shed Brian. I do like to exchange ideas. The fact that Miraldi is fully knowing that Scientologists feel wholly dependent upon someone to lead, suggests that she could see the hypnotic value in that.
Listen Starship, I do not want to be bullied into hating someone I do not hate. I think this is the glue that makes Scientology a cult. People are really bullied into inheriting enemies and hating.
I have personal reasons for wanting David Miscavige and the Central Intelligence Agency of the Church bought to justice. You do not have any information about my recent track with these people. I do not have a problem with you, or anyone else hating L.Ron Hubbard or exposing his life or influences.
I have my own reasons and my own experiences and you are uninformed about these matters. I wish everyone out here could just treat one another decently and with respect and unite on one doable goal. Take on something we can be at cause over and manage. I can’t manage a dead man. I can manage to contribute to current change. So that is what I do.
This appears to be an observation influenced by your expectations and desires. It violates Mindulness aspect #1.
The 12 Aspects of Mindfulness
.
Peter, which of these definitions of “brotherhood” do you feel fits the context of each of those two quotes:
“all those engaged in a particular trade, profession, pursuit, ETC.”
“the belief that all people should act with warmth and equality toward one another”
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/brotherhood
I agree with you, Joe. Nevertheless, the “road to judgment” is a piece of true wisdom (one of many) that Ron delineated. I think that’s more important to focus on than the fact that orgs were run in a way that few achieved judgment, and more important than whatever “Ron wrought”.
That was then and this is now. Wouldn’t you agree?
I do remember much of what you have written. I have always been appreciative of your thoughts. I like the “middle road” and it’s calm winds myself. On the middle road, it is only important for me personally not to run can’t haves or must have’s on others. Because these are things I do not tolerate very well when run on me. Mostly, I do not want to run “can’t have ideas” on others. Unless those ideas lead to harming others.
In a perfect world for me, Scientology would just be a bookstore outlet. Where people could go to buy the books or course packs. Co audit in small groups and have meet ups in people’s living rooms. It would just be about that, people having interesting conversations with one another.
I don’t like the ethics and justice system because it presumes people do not have an ethics system of their own. Or the one they have is not workable. I had my own code of ethics when I came in and it worked for me. I wasn’t interested in switching over. I haven’t met many people on this earth that don’t have a code of ethics. Maybe I never met anyone that didn’t have a code of ethics, even if it was unique. These things have to be arranged by a person them self.
I didn’t make many friends in Scientology because I knew those friendships were very fragile and highly conditional. At the end of the day what was the value for me? The conversations I had with the auditors. Those were very magical.
I still see the entire essence of the experience as exploring magic. But I have never met anyone involved that sees it like that. I never had a group or friends to loose in reality. I was encouraged to have enemies I did not want. I declined. Got labeled “reasonable”. I took it as a compliment. Nobody wanted to burden me with any real responsibility because I was a “defective” thetan. I love to reason. It’s a habit.
I try to smooth out some of the conflict with a “spoon full of sugar” from time to time. That annoys some of the soldiers.
Handling danger situations is not beneath me though. And one only needs to watch the videos and read the testimony, and sometimes, just be at my house, to see that David Miscavige and his Central Intelligence Agency makes themselves a danger situation people are forced to deal with. If they stopped being a danger in this society, they wouldn’t have any problems being “supreme beings”.
I think it can be sorted out with out blood shed. Marty has been brilliant at handling these forces and conditions. He had a duty to himself and his family to handle the danger situations the Church has become to him. And so do I. I can support this from a distance because I do not possess the calm needed to stand in the middle of the storm. Like, the guy that was doing those depositions? I would have jumped across the table and started choking him. I know my weakness’. That is why I stay on the middle road. And on the far left and far right, I see people consumed by their weakness. And it’s scary.
On this “Earth prison”thing. I figured if this was a prison, what does it say about the people that sent us here? I’d rather be here with these people.
You can do what you want
The opportunity’s on
And if you can find a new way
You can do it today
You can make it all true
And you can make it undo
You see ah ah ah
Its easy ah ah ah
You only need to know.
Oh, wait… 🙂
To assume that this universe is made up of individualities is like assuming that space is made up of points.
.
By the way, I know annoys some people that I don’t have any regrets. But I’d rather be sorry for something I’ve done, than for something that I didn’t do.
What about what was said regarding “BEING the dynamics” – being all of them at once?
Sorry. This was Letting go posting under the alias I use on Mike’s blog. The question stands. What would a conversation look like where attention is not fixed on “I”?
“I” am extremely curious 🙂
Christianity and Churchianity are two different realities.
Christian Philosophy: Christ’s own words are inclusive. For all peoples.
Churchianity is human beings caught in fixed ideas of theology created to control and keep power. Just because people say they are Christians doesn’t mean they are truly following that Great Master.
I think David Miscavige, his Central Intelligence Agency, hide under the umbrella of Scientology and the Church. When they get busted and called on the carpet, they scream that the religion and the Church are being attacked. They work to pull everyone in as the targets, when they are not. This is how they re stimulate people and use them.
Once they can be made aware that they are NOT the targets, (for me anyway), they can be separated out. There are people out here that are targeting every Scientologist, every Church of Scientology, and every idea Hubbard ever had. And this is PROOF that everyone and their life and community is under attack and David thrives on this because it gives him cover. But this is a minority. Most of us do not have animosity towards everybody there and we are not trying to set them up for a loss or run any can’t have on them. Or even take something away from them. Miscavige frightens them into think they are all being attacked,and they group around him. So he is never forced to stand alone or even, stand out on the front lines.
I know exactly how he does it and how he gets away with it.
This is a very fragile species that is easily threatened and frightened. The ones that separate out are the ones that are being enlightened by the people out here. By information, and kindness. Not by ridicule threats and bullying.
SO many people stormed out of that place when Marty offered a HELPING hand. And he has managed,one step at a time,to lay the facts on the table for people to look at. In the courts,on the Internet and over the phone. And this is the magic that is working.
It does not help people to leave when the Indies and Freezoners are getting attacked out here. A lot of people do not have the ability to walk away from something into nothing.
Now Joe, I have a personal relationship with both Tom and Nicole, just like you do. I also know them very intimately and can read their minds, just like you can.
Tom is smiling because no one had asked him any embarassing questions about the HBO film.
Nicole is smiling because her ex is finally getting his comeuppance without her having to say one single solitary negative word about it.
Or maybe they are both smiling because that’s what actors do when someone is photographing them.
Mark: I think #9 should be that scientologists believe they are morally obligated to twist the truth or blatently lie with conviction, regardless of the circumstances, to make themselves and their cult RIGHT!
Inquisitions are your bag brother! No wonder you landed a post as the MAA!
In that conversation there will be neither blaming nor admiring of any terminal. It would be simply be spotting things and the relationships among them for what they are.
.
Love the way you flaunt the instant subpoena power! As if you can just summon her up for a public inquisition and she somehow has some duty to appear for questioning!
Nobody is being anything. Things are what they are.
“I” ??? What is it?
Thanks, really.
Middle road could mean from peace with all, to war with all, or even nothing with all. It depends on how you deal with it each time. I have swung from side to side, from time to time, but it doesn’t feel good to me to act against any part of life. So, I don’t have it last for long. I understand and agree with the concept of not submitting to suppression, but at some point, if the suppression was 20 years ago, that game should end. If a condition exists in present time, it is different. I’m not always calm if I have some hostility occurring in PT and I don’t like to turn cheeks, either.
You said “Mostly, I do not want to run “can’t have ideas” on others. Unless those ideas lead to harming others.” That was my argument, exactly. A can’t have, can’t do, be Scientology, is a can’t too. People should be free to choose. I’ve heard (mostly through that documentary) how harsh the German government has been on Scientologists, and that shouldn’t occur. Here the government hasn’t interfered as much, but the press has made it so one would feel ashamed to say that he is a Scientologist. If we started to count crimes and sins, very few to no groups should any longer exist.
The worst thing about ethics in SCN and in general, is when you have an unethical person ‘put ethics’ on you. That drove me to self-invalidation. And I’ve noticed it is usually unethical people that get obsessed with forcing ethics upon others.
What you said about Scientology fragile friendships had been a big heartbreak for me. To have a whole bunch of people think ill of you, or even disconnect, because some %#$%%## told them so…not nice. I think it is the major reason why Scientology gets pounded so hard by former members. Some could realize that, and save themselves. Alas, no sense of self criticism.
So, you have trouble with DM? You must be kinda like a vip. Fortunately, I’m not. It takes some nerve to be under pressure, and not hate the subject as a whole.
For me, magic is included in SCN theory in the sense of making things happen by non physical means –but directly, as spirit. There is no mysticism that I know. One would wonder, ‘If you can make things happen, as spirit, how come you run onto such trouble? What sort of power is this?’. I laugh at this contradiction. Well, it is up to anyone to discover, whether power exists or whether we bring trouble upon ourselves through our own power, as said in SCN. I for sure don’t think of power, as a way to cause harm, for starters. I think mean people are also weak, that’s why they try so hard to convince others of their power. The domination of evil exists only as a delusion. Sadly, commonly shared delusions can be called reality.
To those of us who have read the “running program” advices of Hubbard’s, there’s the one “running program” advice that says that in ancient space civilization times that “OTs” (pure souls that didn’t have bodies but which existed and did duty on advanced ancient space civilization planets, think of superhero Caspar the Ghosts dutifully helping out on humanoid inhabited planets sort of like a Caspar the Ghost/Greek Gods force of “OTs”) when the “OTs” needed therapy, they’d go circle large expanses of outer space, as their therapy. That’s in otherwords the “OT running program.” It’s what the Scientology promo now calls the “Cause Resurgence Rundown” or “OT objective.” (Objective in Scientologese means “Objective Process”, like the “CCHs” or “Book and Bottle” are “Objective Processes”, and thus the OT running program is an “objective” process for disembodied soul astronauts.)
Supposedly, then, how this all fits together, is that today, if you really believe in what all Hubbard wrote, and put this all together, it means that once you are “up to” this topnotch spiritual horsepower level, that Hubbard considers he himself had reached at his death, that when you then leave your body and “die” you can go off to a distant star, like Hubbard told Sarge Steven Pfauth as is told in “Going Clear..” and “Memoirs of a Scientology Warrier”, and supposedly today a Scientologist who is OT 8 or thereabouts could like dead Hubbard go do the OT running program yourself, as a rejuvenating OT horsepower amping up therapy on yourself.
This is truly NOT to be taken seriously, but if one is a full blown brainwashed Scientologist who got themselves deep all the way in the Hubbard fantasy crank crackpot therapy then this is what this would mean.
It’s more than irresponsible, it’s truly why Hubbard is a crank crackpot, and his “work” on this spiritual stuff is truly not to be taken seriously.
Marildi, I definately agree with you. There is TONS of wisdom in Scientology and as I have said before, I apply those principles every day. As far as what is “more important”? Well, I’m with you in that the “gold” in Scientolgy is indeed much more important to ME. As far as folks who are in the CoS … no, the ARC Triangle, the comm cycle, the road to judgement, etc … those things are NOT more important to THEM (in fact, I have rarely even observed most staff even USING the above as true fundamentals of life).
I see your point
Bravo.
Brian, do you see yourself as being obsessed about Hubbard? And if not, what would obsession be like?
BINGO 🙂
Agreed Marlildi. I have pondered that before as well. The word “as” meaning “the same” does correspond to a unity with.
But with all things, Ron he is expert at inconsistency. What is Greatness vs Destroy Utterly for example.
Surviving “as” the dynamics vs. merging into the Unified Field Of Consciousness is a downed toned becoming MEST.
So that would make the 6th Dynamic: surviving as and for the Material Universe null and void.
The “I” exists as itself and always has as a discrete entity. It does not … I repeat, it does NOT break up into tiny pieces of spirit after one’s death. It goes on to another body or no body at all as it wishes. The “I” is IN FACT all powerful as a source of creation. It IS the fountainhead of postulated reality and one’s truth,, both in one’s universe and existing as a co-creator in the universe of others. I have thus spoken. I create or un-create my own truths. I no longer need ONE source of truth that I must speak of as THE truth to other beings. I do not need to justify my own truths by the ideas of The Buddha, L. Ron Hubbard, Ron Paul or Vince Lombardi (to use just some examples) though I can take from them what wisdom I CHOOSE to take (while facing the challenges of crossing the streets in Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam, I very wisely applied Lombardi’s old Green Bay sweep play; I darted behind an old Vietnamese woman who was crossing, and I played Paul Hornung to her Jerry Kramer and yes … I got to the other side in one piece … nice to have a “blocker” when you needed one … applied wisdom, folks).
Note: I really shouldn’t have included Ron Paul with those other luminaries above. He’s always whining, whining, whining … and that VOICE … my god, that VOICE! …. droning, squeeking high pitched …. did I mention droning? … yeah, it’s better to READ what some folks say, than hear them … the great Hank Stram had much to say too, by the way “Keep matriculating that ball down the field boys” (Suoer Bowl IV, you can even hear him say that on video, as he was miked up for that game)
Vinaire, after very, very careful consideration of what you are saying here … I have concluded that … (drum roll please … tension mounts as the multitudes await my conclusion … ready?) …. the spirit can and does in fact obviously exist COMPLETELY separate from the body or any physical entity. The spirit is of a COMPLETELY different nature, it has no wavelength, etc etc etc. It is not OF the physical universe, but exists and operates IN the good ol’ fiz yune (accepted shorthand for physical universe, kind of like “beat talk” was for the beatniks back in the day, scio talk for us old timers).
Right, Joe. And it’s probably true of many public as well.
LRH lost his way too. Maybe that’s why in his last days he said he had failed – or part of the why. I can’t believe he only had 1st dynamic goals. That just doesn’t compute. 🙄 🙂
Joe: “I have thus spoken”
My bet is that you have spoken from direct knowledge, rather than from figuring it all out on the vias of logic and science (even though those do have their place).
Not to mention – the Spirit of Play is alive and well! 😀
Good question and an honest one. The answer is no, not at all. Actually I haven’t really thought much about him since I left in 82. I think more about the people that have been harmed in his name after getting interested just recently.
I stumbled on some blogs for fun just a few years ago and was quite curious about how things have developed.
I have found, Marildi that I get various responses from people. I have been thanked very deeply and touched by people who have said that my thoughts have helped them.
I have also been cursed and condemned by people as well. I take both responses as they come and understand them to be those people’s experience. What anyone thinks of me is their own business, not mine.
My intention that has been stated before is twofold:
1) Revisiting the 11 years of my development from the age of 18 to when I left the church. The revisiting allows me to go though my own mental files and discard any old unless thought forms that may be lingering. Things that I once thought were true, receded into my subconscious and became part of my energetic self so to speak: wrong knowledge
2) The second purpose is to be an iconoclast to the false deceptive image that Ron causatively and deceptively perpetrated on our citizens.
Specifically his third partying other paths, causing his students to only rely on him for guidance and trapping them in a prison of belief.
Part of this second intention came about when the Indies were complaining about DM as the reason things are in a mess.
With all my heart, I strongly disagree with this sentiment.
I realized early on that people were having a hard time seeing Ron’s causative link to Scientology’s present condition. I knew that Scientologist’s have been conditioned to never be critical of Ron by way of threats to their family, jobs and continued being on the bridge.
I then decided that I wanted to be a willing piñata and push as many buttons as I could, using reason and critical thinking, to help Indies be comfortable with criticism.
So regarding step two, there is still much work to be done. I believe you and many others have no idea what a spell you have been under. Many people still think that only Ron knew the truth and there is no other path available for them. That is one thing I would love to address. Study others, learn from other wisemen and women. Ron was a dark soul. He was a confirmed liar and has harmed many people by third partying other spiritual paths.
That is the essence of my constant criticism. To make it ok for those now out, to allow themselves to rehabilitate their own sovereign discriminating intelligence. And that starts with seeing L Ron Hubbard as he is, not the marketed lies of make believe he worked so hard to convince us of.
So my question Marildi is: why does it bother you that I do?
In this case speaking for myself. Making it clear that these are my views only, and that I can not comment for everyone else about these things.
What is wrong with this question? If I asked a Catholic if they believed in the Virgin Birth they would not be ashamed to answer yes.
I am only asking a person if they still resonate with a practice. It’s only a question.
Oracle, do you believe in Xenu? Do you run BTs?
There is no shame in saying yes or no. Just be honest. What is wrong with stating the truth.
Vinnie, it seems to me that you are using “I” with the meaning of “ego”. That’s not the way people use it in the context of a soul/thetan (which is the “I”).
I don’t think anybody is disagreeing with the idea of “ego” being a filter – but not so of “I”. The “I” is what does the filtering, when filtering is being done.
Are you using “I” and “ego” to mean the same thing?
Ha ha yes MAA. Basically my job was to keep the EPF cleaning and making things shiny.
Marildi, if ok with website and if ok with you, would you be willing to supply an email address where one could write to you at?
LDW, great response!
Wow! This blew so much anger for me!
“The worst thing about ethics in SCN and in general, is when you have an unethical person ‘put ethics’ on you. That drove me to self-invalidation. And I’ve noticed it is usually unethical people that get obsessed with forcing ethics upon others.”
The thing is,making the best choices. That is how it’s described anyway.
It used to come up on sec checks. O.K. like I stole money for food frequently growing up. Only until I knew I could panhandle (beg on the street). It wasn’t a lot that I stole. Change out of the bottom of people’s pocket books,only to buy something very small. One time I got real criminal and greedy and took paper money and splurged,went to a Chinese restaurant like a big shot. That was the only time I got caught and,the only time someone noticed some money was missing!!! That is how little and infrequently I did this. So, this comes up in auditing. And the up shot is that,you know, I’m a criminal on some level. “Financial irregs” on my history.
Well, what choices did I have then? I was a very smart kid,skipped two grades ahead in school, I knew a lot about making the best choices. It was the best choice. The other choice was to starve, and I was so thin and ate so infrequently that that was a real possibility. Is stealing always an overt or an indication of criminal intention? No. What kind of choice is it to starve? I would have worked gladly. And finally did get a job when I was 12, cleaning out pet store cages and selling out dated newspapers. I didn’t want to steal or beg.
And the thing I have about these sec checks and the ethics, is that nobody ever asks how what you did was the best choice. They never look for rightness. They never even ask. THEY ADD IT UP FOR YOU. They decide you didn’t make the best choice,and never ask what the choices were. Don’t you think common sense would prevail? They do the math and they don’t know the equations!
Once I was late for a session at an org. Got sent to ethics. Told if I was later again I would be put in liability. I was the only P.C. that Org had at that time. How the hell could I be a liability even if I was late every night? What about the fact that I was showing up at all and trying to improve? I got mad and walked out the front door. The entire staff came running after me,my auditor finally catching up to me and convincing me to come back. Last time I ever got sent to ethics. I said it. I made them admit I was not a liability. Not even close.
I knew about the fragile friendships before I ever took a course. Because my mother who I was visiting, kicked me out on the streets when I was 14 because I said something negative about Scientology. I didn’tknow what she was up to,asked a neighbor. He said Scientology was a crutch and I relayed the message. So, I never trusted a Scientologist. Except the auditors. But you have to have a line in the sand there too. It has to be a two way conversation. I haven’t been afraid to stop a process. I haven’t been afraid to end the conversation on my terms and when I want to. I didn’t like the one way rights. The auditor ends the session and all that. I cut a few auditors off,O.K.more than a few. Not forever or in a bad way, just, “This session is over if this is the way it’s going to be.” And they ended to tell the C/S.
I really did like the other people that were involved in Scientology for the most part. But I knew they were Hubbard’s friends,not mine. It’s like going to a party. You don’t ask the guests to come over to your house to continue the party. I wasn’t eager to bring any of my friends into Scientology, because I knew that an unconditional friendship could turn into a conditional one by them becoming one. My friends never bothered me about my involvement, I didn’t burden them with it either or try to push it on them. I may have gotten a little teased in good natured ways.
All in all, it was pretty interesting. It still is when I am getting auditing out here. Friendships in the independent movement have been very solid.
I think it attracts some very interesting people. I love the conversations on the table. Even if I do not originate them. If I originated them, I would really be considered weird.
Sorry about the eval on your file clerk. I was just kidding you. I made my file clerk do the anti Q and A Drills.
(Just kidding you)
The thought police is at it again. How about it is none of your business because you are not paying her electric bill? You are running depositions with no power to subpoena. It is none of your business why she chooses the words she does or what she thinks. Get off it.
Hey, I have always said Hubbard was street wise. Look at the sec checks he wrote. He was a warlock. I never implied he was a victim. I believe he beat his wives, swindled people, conned people, the whole nine years. It doesn’t upset me because I never put him on a pedestal. Who thought he was a “holy man”?
I never expected anything more.
“Just be honest”. Like that is a problem for someone?
“There is no shame”. Brother, you don’t know what shame is.
It is none of your f*(%^*g business what I believe. What I have done in a session. I do not feel compelled by you to step forward in your inquisition.
But, if you will make 500.00 donation to this blog within the next 24 hours I will answer any ten questions you ask.
As long as it does not betray another trust.
Show me the money honey, it’s a pay to play world. How important is it for you to know these things? You can always make a counter offer.
I just need to know, how VITAL AND VALUABLE do you really these consider these ANSWERS TO BE?
Don said:
” Living life as though awake in a dream gives one a sense of it.”
What a fascinating analogy.
Funny thing though. I can never recall, so far, to an early point in which I did not feel as an individual. Even when I was playing the part of several individuals at the same time, I always considered myself as me, myself. Even when I knew I was everything and everyone around me, I still had a central sense of Me.
There have been several times lately, of great affinity, when I was the same person as another. I was not joined with that other, I was not intimately connected with the other, I was the same person as he or she while myself at the same time.
I have learned a few things, but I still have a long way to go.
Mark
Hehe I didn’t mind the file clerk thing. I just didn’t get the joke, and I don’t think I have any file clerk.
“How the hell could I be a liability even if I was late every night? ” Do you mean you were late to go home at night and thus you were assigned a liability condition? That’s too lol for words.
My view of ethics is that -like you said- it is inherent to beings. And a being is aware of ethics the more it is aware of itself as it’s original being, and doesn’t identify with other things and thus doesn’t get brainwashed either (one brings another). Thus actual self determinism is ethical. Thus a self determined being doesn’t harm –at least not more than it assists life. It goes along with what I said before about power. And the more self determined a being is, the more it allows self determinism in others, too. So yeah, be free and let be free.
On the contrary, people on a constant overt mode, with no sense of self criticism, see in others what they themselves do, and seek to stop others instead of themselves. For them freedom means chaos, destruction, for that’s what they would do if they were free. And they cannot allow that.
For me the handling is to let them be too, like the rest. Just don’t play their game.
I have met nice people everywhere. I don’t think there is any rule that the good ones go here and the bad ones go there.
I have long decided to not be involved with SCN because I think something is amiss. Simply put, by studying SCN I got different ideas how it would be like, than it was. it is good to get rid of some charge, of course. I just don’t think Hubbard set any goals like ‘to handle the 4th dynamic so we can then handle ourselves.’ That’s blame, and quite opposite to what I’ve read. If you’re in trouble, you should handle your creating it, not others creating it, as per SCN. Trouble is not natural for a being, according to theory. Thus, I think all trouble can be handled, and fighting is not only unnecessary, but it is a form of trouble itself.
I cannot speak on behalf of Hubbard, I only try to make logical sense out of what I’ve read in conjunction with my own experiences. He is very well responsible for my knowing I’m not just a body and I’m very grateful for that. And the outpoints I have noticed in SCN are due to his own theories, as well. From then on, i try to deal with my stuff by myself, the way I see best.
🙂
Good to hear from you, haven’t talked to ya in a day or two.
Brian asked:
“… can you tell me of one person you know of that was damaged by seeking communion with God?”
Too general a question to answer, and a bit of a stretch to relate to my comment. I have met several who fell into that “one with all, nothing matters, I am just a tiny speck in this enormous universe” type of mentality.
That is not what you meant by your question but it is what I was referring to in my comment.
Mark
Vin.
Interesting thought.
It would be safe to say that this universe is made up of gradients and relative importances. That is, safe to some.
Mark
Okay, thanks.
JMO, but you would probably be more successful if you were less heavy-handed in the way you go about it. Have the kind of light touch you do when you talk about spiritual things. That’s so much more appealing and doesn’t push people away – even if they have completely different views. You have the advantage of being an artist – why not express your views more “artfully” and less forcefully? Aesthetics is far more powerful than force. And I think you’d enjoy it more yourself.
It is only a question. Your characterization and judgment of my question says more about you Oracle. It’s only a question.
I’ve found it interesting that folks can’t even say his name. It’s like Lord Valdomort in Harry Potter and people can’t speak his name.
Oracle, I truly believe this happens because of years and years and years of being asked the question, “have you ever had a critical thought of L Ron Hubbard.”
Think of it. Year after year, knowing full well that if your secret judgment or disagreement was picked up by the needle it potentially meant:
1) word clearing
2) Ethics
3) Declare
4) being declared PTS
5) If declared loosing family
6) if declared loosing friends
7) if declared loosing your “only road to spiritual freedom”
8) if working for or with Scientologists, loosing your job
9) being seen as an SP by family and friends.
All of these fears being cemented in association with criticism of Hubbard. So if you do not want to experience any of the above. Keep your mouth shut and deny what your feel and perceive. Better yet, if you do have these thoughts, it’s because of your evil intentions. You are evil for criticizing Ron.
I have felt that blow back. But it’s fine. It’s all good. It’s good practice for me to be centered when folks think I’m a jerk. Great learning and I appreciate every one.
No wonder people have a hard time. The command to never have a critical thought is laid in like cement.
The outcome of this hypnotic command is to explode with anger towards critics Ron. It is diabolical Oracle: evil beyond a doubt.
Why does it bother me? For one thing, some of your data is off – and I think that’s because you are in too much of a fervor, to be at your best.
As for what you are right about, it’s still offensive to have someone keep rubbing everybody’s nose in something unnecessarily. The blogs you frequent have virtually no one who hasn’t heard – multiple times – the things you have to say. And heard them from you alone multiple times!
No matter how right you are, it doesn’t work to try to shove the message down people’s throats. It also becomes an overkill of more negativity than necessary. Not just unpleasant, it defeats the purpose. I say, go back to your artist roots, Brian! 😉
Sure, Joe, You can write me here: marildi (at) hushmail (dot) me
I don’t want revenge. I just would like the motherly pleasure of her children phoning every now and then. Thank you Marty for always saying what’s on your mind.
It seems that one of the basic motions of the basic building blocks (the cell, and below that negatively or positively charged proteins) is toward desirable and away from undesirable (my reference is Bruce Lipton’s Biology of Belief). If we are as such composite beings made from a cell colony and its responses to the environment (toward/away from) as well as processes (thoughts, emotions, sensations) that give rise to the apparency of an “I”, then how does attention arise and from what? And how is this attention supposed to “unstick” itself from the playing field of “toward/away from”?
Specifically, if the playing field, or parameters of toward/away from (same/not same?), give rise to attention, how can it possibly transcend the boundaries or reality it arises from?
Yes, that really makes it very clear to me, both what David Miscavige is doing and the value of the Freezone and Indipendents. When I walked away, it was not into nothing either. I walked a bridge built of a tremendous amount of information and viewpoints to get where I am now, and continue to be extremely grateful to everyone who built that bridge.
When I read Dror centre’s second year report on Mike’s blog recently, I experienced relief knowing that those people are now completely free to do what they joined scientology to do.
Running around a pole .. running around a star .. you can also run around your home if you want more power .. this run around something is good idea for one who is pretty well in disorder .. means you implant yourself a place for order .. and then create new order .. all athletic persons must then be in super power .. no, not really, because they do not handle disorder ..
The LRH advice for running around something is the simpliest thing to do for handle disorder .. best is to run run around a star. Why? Ohh, a star is very hot and throw out a lot of energy, electronic and magnetic waves ..
Best advice from LRH would be to run around a galaxy. I mean, with low power you would need about 900 billion years for one turn .. but at the end you would have good havingness about .. but see, the galaxy is maybe at this time not longer there .. so it is maybe better to run around a sun .. or around a pole .. or around your home .. or around your desk ..
Lets say it with my words, running around something ist only an order to yourself for having order. It is therapy, but nobody has ever need this as order from LRH .. if you are free, you can make every night a turn around the galaxy .. but only if you are not involved in disorder about it ..
I have read once about blowing. I have forgotten the word: will say when a thetan did blow in next galaxy, and the auditor asks him back. It is basicaly something which only LRH could invent ..
I am using “I” as the “center of ego”. Just like there is mass and a “center of mass”, similarly, there is ego and a “center of ego.”
Mass represents physical inertia, a state of physical motion trying to maintain its status quo. It resists any change to status quo.
Similarly, Ego represents mental inertia, a state of mental motion trying to maintain its status quo. It resists any change to status quo.
Please see Inertia, Space and Location
.
Thanks. I see “I” as a “center of ego”, where ego represents mental inertia that is trying to maintain its status quo.
“I” is best used as a reference point. But it is possible to get interiorized into “I”. Here inetriorization takes place as increasingly fixed attention.
A state of motion is defined by INERTIA. The main confusion seems to be between physical and mental aspects of MOTION. So, there is physical inertia as well as mental inertia.
PHYSICAL INERTIA = FREQUENCY & MASS
MENTAL INERTIA = FIXEDNESS & EGO
Physical inertia is made up of the FREQUENCY of electromagnetic waves, and the MASS of material particles. On the spectrum of physical inertia, frequency appears in the lower half, and mass appears on the upper half.
Mental inertia is made up of the FIXEDNESS of attention, and the EGO of individuality. On the spectrum of mental inertia, fixedness appears in the lower half, and ego appears on the upper half.
Based on the concept of inertia we may define SPACE and LOCATION as follows.
PHYSICAL SPACE = A STATE DEVOID OF PHYSICAL INERTIA
MENTAL SPACE = A STATE DEVOID OF MENTAL INERTIA
Space may be defined as the lower end on the spectrum of inertia. Thus, physical space would be an electromagnetic wave of zero frequency and infinite wavelength.
Mental space would be a state of attention that is totally free.
PHYSICAL LOCATION = THE CENTER OF MASS
MENTAL LOCATION = THE CENTER OF EGO
A location may be defined as the upper end on the spectrum of inertia. Thus, physical location would be an infinite mass that is centered at a point. We visualize geometrical point to be dimensionless but discrete. On this concept of point we base the whole subject of geometry. But geometry is only as useful as it is consistent with physical observations.
Mental location would be an immense ego that is centered at a “point”. The “point” is visualized as the spiritual “I”. On this concept of “I” we base the whole subject of spirituality, where God is the ultimate “I”. But spirituality is only as useful as it is consistent with what is experienced.
The concept of SPIRIT is derived from the mental aspect of motion, just like the concept of MATTER is derived from the physical aspect of motion. Both spiritual and material aspects are present at every point on the spectrum of motion or inertia.
When we talk about SPIRIT, we are talking about mental aspects and not the physical aspect. So, SPIRIT has to do with mental space and time, whereas, MATTER has to do with physical space and time. We cannot talk about SPIRIT in terms of physical space and time as it has been done in many religions.
.
The File Clerk should not be manipulated in any manner. It should be left of freely associate on its own. That is when mind will be able to un-stack itself cleanly.
This is where Hubbard went wrong. He was a control freak.
Brian, I think that the way you are approaching it, you are generating in others a fear of being misinterpreted. It is like you are insisting that the question, “Do you still beat your wife?” be answered with a yes or a no.
Xenu and BTs seems to provide a certain framework for auditing at OT3. It is not the belief in this framework that produces actual auditing results. But some people literally start to believe in that framework and lose their rationality.
This may not happen with everybody though. Some may not believe in the framework of Xenu and BTs, but may just find that there are some auditing results.
What produces actual auditing results (without the hypnotic “feel good” effect) is mindfulness. There is this factor of mindfulness in scientology auditing, but it occurs very infrequently right in the geginning of one’s auditing, or never at all.
Personally, using the framework of Xenu and BTs is completely unnecessary. It is a product of convoluted mind of Hubbard. Straight application of the Scientific Method with mindfulness is much more effective. Please see
Solving Real-Life Problems
.
If there is a desire to clarify that these are “my views” then one is probably anticipating challenge to those views.
One is probably not ready to handle such a challenge, so one is putting up the shield of “my views.”
.
So my question Marildi is: why does it bother you that I do?
Hahaha… that is skillfully turning the table. That is a fantastic Marildi-style question. But Marildi may be capable of wriggling out of it.
.
That is what I call “pimping the ‘I'”.
🙂
To LRH, all the eight dynamics were part of his first dynamic “I”. Hubbard was an extreme study of narcissism.
Hubbard was a person so interiorized into “I” that he went to the extent of symbolizing it as “thetan”.
.
Here is the correct view of The Eighth Dynamic
.
Joe, you may not be aware of this, but you are just parroting Hubbard’s tripe.
Your view Private is one from the prison of belief. I actually see Mike and Mark (Marty) look so much more healthy. Gone is that gaunt “children of the corn” hypno-stare. Gone the need to lie to protect falsehoods.
And you Private, do you think L Ron Hubbard is infallible?
HAHAHAHAHA!
Brian, I saw that in the mid eighties. What was so funny to me, is that the entire package of Scientology reminded me of Ron’s ARSCLYCUS, space opera story .
All down to leaving a piece of themselves (PC Folders) to come back for more.
And yes the word around then was to come back to complete Ron’s Bridge to Heaven, as it was so fucking long and expensive, that obviously one needed several lifetimes to accomplished it.
The Sea Org 1 Billion year contract and other Ron’s artifices all built up to a massive implant.
Some people posting here have audited/studied themselves into a permanent trance, and are so confused and overwhelmed by the hypnosis, that they cannot spot SOURCE in their entrapment.
No, no Ron-TheMasterThereon, got all of us, by a very clever use of Religion, Magic and Hypnosis.
We were young then, uneducated, mostly agnostic or secularly inclined.
Most of us came for the “Therapy”, and felt for the “exact science”, and every religious artifice thrown upon us to the point of total overwhelm.
Live and learn!
Ah, Conan! Thank you my friend. Thank you for you.
Thank you for sharing your view Marildi 🙂
Marildi, do you believe in the Xenu story?
What is a Warlock in your opinion? And why is a warlock a worthy teacher of life?
Not that vital at all Oracle. They are simply questions. You have every right to not answer them. Thanks for the reply.
I can’t speak on behalf of anybody. I like it when people speak on my behalf. The turning point for me was on the ethics thing you spoke of. Because once I found myself “at the top” in the Sea Org, that is working out of the Flag Command Bureau under WDC, I found out I was surrounded by criminals. Huge financial crimes. White collar crimes. Federal prison crimes. Taking millions in donations to help kid off of drugs and socking that money into Sea Org reserves. Fraud, embezzlement. This is prison time. And I was shamed for pilfering for food?
About the Scientology, what else would I have been doing in the time I spent there? More parties? More shopping? More traveling? More entertaining? It was different. It was worth my time. All of my relationships have been. I’m not out of arc with the life I have lived or who I have been.
I don’t belong in those conversations. I don’t want others to be out of arc with the life they have lived, or who they have been. So I don’t belong in those activities.
At the end of the day what do we have? Great conversations,like these.
XXOO
“you are generating in others a fear of being misinterpreted”
Sometimes I seek out being misinterpreted so I can deal with the fear. Once the fear is gone, there is no more need to be understood by others. It is a wonderful practice. Then it it easy to love those who think we are jerks because we realize that all experience is self generated. Then we don’t take others personal issues so personally any more.
But in Hubbard’s Lientology it is considered powerful to be misinterpreted. Being misduplicated in Scientology has been given the power to take away one’s “wins”.
How certain is a certainty that can be invalidated by know it all fools like me?
Oh ok, I see what you mean now. Thanks Mark NR. Yes, good to talk to you.
Attention is “awareness with a direction.” Awareness is an aspect of motion. Motion is the inherent condition of this universe. Spectrum of motion forms the basis of Hubbard’s Theta-MEST theory.
So, awareness is simply there as an inherent condition of this universe. Awareness in its specific characteristic may be called attention.
So awareness is part of is-ness. It does not arise from anything though it may appear to do so. Like motion it is assuming different characteristics all the time and changing. This forms the changing attention.
Just as motion may evolve by gaining frequency and mass, similarly attention may evolve by gaining fixedness and ego.
Awareness (attention) and physical motion go hand in hand. They are not independent of each other.
Marildi,
Do you see yourself as being obsessed about Hubbard?
And if not, it is your religious devotion to Scientology scriptures, and Ron-Deus messianic command over you, maybe and indication that you have been had?
Knock, knock. Is there any brain left not been thoroughly washed?
As a man, I didn’t put him on a pedestal. As a magician, he was a magus opus. He broke a lot of spells. He cast a lot of spells too. I don’t see eye to eye on some of the things he had to say about magic and magicians. But I did figure out the first law of magic myself. And,it’s interesting because the first law magic means you can not share it. What the first law is. The first law of magic is, “Never tell”. If you hold something back from the other person, you put them into “not know” when you know. I think Hubbard’s obsession with with holds stems from this. He was obsessed in knowing that NOTHING was being with held from him.
Contrary to his notions, with holds are NOT always preceded by overts.
Do you share your hand at the poker table? If you did,there wouldn’t be a game.
Hubbard does give it up that inability to with hold can be a weakening point.
What makes magic potent is purpose. You only become entangled with anti magic when your own purposes align with it.
Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do.
Voltaire
But Hubbard empowered the Church with with holds. He taught to hold back. The “confidential materials”. Not talking about your case or sessions to anyone but your auditor. Not talking about your track. Keeping confidential records. Sharing secrets. The entire time getting people to give up any with holds, giving them more and more relative to the Church.
David Miscavige’s hat was to safeguard the secrets. He failed. And the more his secrets fall out onto the street, the less power he has.
Attention gains fixedness by gaining a structure. The only way to control that fixedness would be understanding that structure.
It is not a matter of “sticking” or “unsticking” attention. It is a matter of understanding how a structure of attention comes about.
Structure of attention shall be accompanied by structure of motion. In macromolecules, like DNA, there are enough mobile electrons in the outer shells that can provide different arrangements, and each arrangement shall specify a certain value structure.
With this understanding, attention at the level of macromolecules may be controlled.
Hi Cat Daddy
Good question! Christ is me without my valences.
Love with arc
Pip
Marty. Here is a bit of history on spiritual memes:
And part two:
Hi Brian
I do get your point but in reality Churchianity is the result of Christianity. Jesus was not a CHRISTIAN in fact, the rulers of the synagogues saw him as a heretic in Jewish terms. JESUS DID NOT COME TO START A NEW RELIGION, HE CAME TO RESTORE A RELATIONSHIP, FIRST WITH OUR MAKER AND THEN WITH OUR BROTHERS.
Christian was not a name the followers of Jesus called themselves, this was a term of derision used by NONE-BELIEVERS (Acts 11:26), believers called themselves “Followers of the way” (Acts 9:2) Constantine historically was the first person to call himself “A CHRISTIAN” not because he followed Jesus but for political expedience. I would argue that in fact Constantine was the first Christian and it was him and his followers that instigated Churchianity. One only has to look at the number of schisms in Christianity to see how EXCLUSIVE it is.
Jesus Christ is both totally inclusive and totally exclusive for his teachings are the ultimate paradox. While inviting everyone to come to him at the same time He affirms that He is the only way, “Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; …….” John 14:6 NASB. This is because his was and is the way of UNCONDITIONAL LOVE and without such love one is ultimately excluded from The Kingdom of Heaven.
Love with ARC
Pip
How does a static “run” anywhere, especially around a pole somewhere, when a static has no mass, no wavelength or location?
Sincere question here…I don’t get it.
I shall start from the same point that LRH started.
The universe is a spectrum of motion.
LRH simply took it in a wrong direction from there.
By being on Earth we are running around the Sun anyway.
Letting Go said, “Specifically, if the playing field, or parameters of toward/away from (same/not same?), give rise to attention, how can it possibly transcend the boundaries or reality it arises from?”
That is a good question. Attention, as we find it, is narrow and broken and dispersed among a large number of egos. Recovery of attention depends on it becomeing whole and occupying the boundaries of reality completely. It is very far from that.
I don’t know who came up with the stupid idea of “”transcending the boundaries or reality it arises from”?
Oh! That is nasty! 😉
Karen, as always your valuable knowledge and insights inspire people. 🙂 I was thinking about this very thing you mention here just the other day. (e.g.) – In an org, if stats drop for the day a “correct LRH ethics action is “punch the org staff in the head to gets their stats back up to par”. Magic overts! 🙂 [sic] And of course everyone knows LRH wrote this. He may have, some of it, but would he like it if someone did that to him if his stats dropped for the day, and his stats dropped plenty for several years in a row if he ran and hid from the IRS I think! 🙂
On a broader, brighter note they need more vegan restaurants out there in sunny California! You and I are going to campaign for this one day together! 🙂 Maybe even over at INT Base where food and utility bills and staff health issues cost 20x more than they should because of the staff’s ignorance on the subject of diet. And can you believe the church see the Purif as the real answer to all of this? It is helpful but not the whole truth. Be well! 🙂
“I was the same person as he or she while myself at the same time”. You don’t have as long a way to go as you think, my friend 🙂
As I understand Magnum Opus it means “great work” in both the artistic and alchemical traditions but not a name of a person.
Do you mean Scientology was his Magnum Opus?
Good good, I have no regrets or other sentiments either. I rarely contemplate what I used to do. I’d only keep past goals on mine in the present and future, because I’m some stubborn donkey, when I choose to. I mean I wouldn’t forget who my wife was….if I had one 😛
I hope you can stand a little light metal music 🙂
Yes I understand this. My point is, in my opinion, a true Christian is one who follows the most important commandment. When Mathew asked him which one it was he said, and I know you know this already, but I am bringing it up to share my understanding of my relation with him:
“’Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’
This is the essence of Christianity for me. I need no cement walled church, nor authoritative interpreter of scripture, nor dogmatic “only way” theology to live this.
It is free like the air, a portable joy and divine blueprint for human interaction.
This law of the Spirit was the one Ron was most ignorant of. And in that ignorance, to a great degree, made it hard for Scientologists to develop a personal relation with the Supreme.
When the ego is god, God is nowhere to be consciously found.
It is only a question Vinay. And not meant for harm or otherwise. Anyone can ask me anything about any of my beliefs. I have nothing to hide.
Oracle you said, “the dead man is gone”, meaning Ron.
Not true.
He lives on within the mental constructs of his students, defining their world views with a false make believe cosmology, that distorts their ability to see life, problems and people as they are.
He lives on in the introverting process of constantly looking into the mind, the past, to understand the present.
He lives on when a person looses his will to solve his own problems because he should not self audit, but pay others to do his own thinking.
He lives on every time a Scientologist hears a person say,”I love God” and then makes a judgement that person is in R6.
He lives on when Scientologists misread their own thoughts as alien beings.
He lives on when Scientologists think that every relation that cannot resolve itself is because of a third party. Thus making victimhood sacred church doctrine.
He lives on every time a Scientologist goes by a church or synagogue or temple and thinks it’s an R6 dramatization.
He lives on every time a person who needs meds for a physical or mental problem dies because of being in the Prison of Belief in Ron.
He lives on everytime a mother, father, child, husband, wife decides to disconnect fro their family because the Family Man is a GE and is really a bad group to be in for a thetan.
He lives on every time a Scientologist bursts a vein with anger and hate and violence against critics to protect mans only hope.
He lives on when the Greatest Good For The Greatest Number means harming people to save the planet.
No way Oracle. This man is not dead. Not yet. But if we do our job well, we can extricate him from the minds of those who believed that he is the only hope for man. We can help save people from a difficult situation.
Acting as, or working toward, or Being the dynamics is a gradient thing with occasional and temporary leap as one becomes aware or more aware of something. At it’s height, being the dynamics fully does not mean losing your self. It means gaining everything else. ‘Me’ need not be lost, but expanded, broadened. Human words fail.
When an artist becomes, say, one with his violin, it becomes an extension of his hands, the sound comes forth with barely a notice of the position of the bow or fingers, his individuality is not reduced. When in a late night perfect conversation with a good friend, and you begin to think the same things and answer questions before they are asked, one is not diminished by it. As one expands, self is not lessened. Physical and emotional love, when perfect, is a slightly higher gradient. There are higher gradients still.
I will try to explain in a more duplicatable manner in the future.
Mark
Don, thank you.
I have a couple of things I would like to discuss with you if you get a moment. Drop me a line.
marknr@hushmail.com
Thanks.
Vinny – I think you may be intending to hurl at me your ultimate insult, but honestly, you had me at “A state of motion…” (I think Professor Corey once said “One man’s tripe is another man’s steak”)
A sincere question deserves a sincere answer (caps are mine):
“The thetan (spirit) is described in Scn as having no mass, no wave-length, no energy and no time or location in space EXCEPT BY CONSIDERATION OR POSTULATE.”
(*Scientology, The fundamentals of Thought*)
Who cares if she does, and what would it matter if she did? She and others like her are a stepping stone away from the cult, and a valuable one at that. They offer direction to those still in and those out, to get out of the cult and ultimately, hopefully, out of the hypno-psycho-babble.
Otherwise, might it have made better sense to simply ask her privately? It’s not like she’s that hard to reach? Tackling this, if you are really interested, in an open forum just plays to the trolls.
Well, can’t argue that. Domination and degradation seems to have become the rule of the day, for sure.
“I know of a few people who have recently been to FLAG and they claim the course rooms are packed.”‘ – What’s been happening is that public are being referred out from local orgs and sent to FSO. This has been going on for at least 7 years, hot and heavy. Not only that, but the pressure is still high for trainees from orgs, OTs redoing their Bridge with GAT 2, and such. In short, the “true believers”. Local orgs, if not ideal, essentially don’t have the right to hold on to their public, apparently. The ‘net really doesn’t have much to do with it. True believers don’t look at it anyway. Any outward advertising is targeted mainly to keep the true believers convinced the church is expanding. It’s pretty sordid.
Millions of people is a pretty high number. I hope you are counting since 1950 and also the ripple effect for people who actually got better. That said, that number is a bit out of your hat as well. What possible factual figures would you be looking at?
Yup – there are haters for sure. There are lots. Getting out of the church is a pretty daunting experience for many. Lots of odd emotional responses, and lots of confusion. However, there are easily many, many more who are trying to come to grips about what they have experienced, and how they let that happen to themselves, and so on.
Personally I really don’t think DM is the problem, and he is an easy target. I think the more germane problem is how many let him get away with what he does. Once, when I was working in an org, there was an HCO interog regarding using physical violence against people in Scn. I can only imagine those poor MAA’s faces when they started realizing how far up the org board it went. And I would bet real money all many ultimately did was disconnect from the truth. When I realized how far up it did go, I simply stopped supporting anything Scn related, myself.
However, many have quite loudly and vocally left and begun to call attention to those abuses, and I believe this is actually the ultimate undoing of the organization. Still, it is a hard pill to swallow when you see the church promoting HUman RIghts when the highest ecclisiastical members are regularly whistleblowing the lack thereof in their own organization. It’s like being a pornographer and supporting celibacy. Personally, I fail to see any good the church has done on the 4D. Following the logic of dynamics, it takes strong individuals to make strong groups to make strong impacts on a global scale. I don’t see how making slaves of one’s fellows is going to do any good for anyone, anywhere. Frankly, I don’t see how you can think so as well.
Right, and if it doesn’t work, you misapplied it, had Mis-U, or overts in the area. In short, all homosexuality is covertly hostile, out-of-valence and degenerate activity, correct? (As a dramatic example of SOS book technology.) Or, Pain and Sex are implants by the psychs of long ago? Just because someone can remember a past-life, does not also immediately mean he is covered with entities that challenge him at every go in life. This is all Scn. technology. And if you are not getting results with it then it ultimately comes down to what’s wrong with you, correct?
My friend, they are not that different. There is plenty of Hubbard belief in the technology.Factually, Hubbard refers to his “admin tech” as 3D technology, and places it on par with 1D technology. I mean, really, what is your line between the two?
To a marked degree, the inclusive aspects appear through the Bible. I think Mark’s key word is “fundamentally”. E.g. at it’s basics.
I have heard this was the last senior c/s of FSO, the one that passed away not too long ago. Damn if I can remember his name.
and without faith THERE IS NO HUMILITY, there is NO LOVE and certainly NO FORGIVENESS.
I beg to differ.
But following your logic according to you LRH lacjed Faith.
I never used the word Magnum. Reread,look up the word Magus.
synonyms: sorcerer, wizard, magus, magician, enchanter,magus.
I would have any idea why a warlock is a worthy teacher of life. I have never said anything like that. Such a person could a good command of magic. Teaching what one knows about it is not a good idea. But I feel I learned some things about magic from Hubbard.
Well Brian, I guess everyone needs to be doing something. Whatever interests them. If this is your thing, great. I’m not a bounty hunter,a prosecutor, or a member of the thought police. We can’tall be on the same path can we?
For a long time I thought my purpose was to put order into chaos. Until I realized I needed chaos to fulfill my purpose.
I’ve got independent purposes now,so I don’t have to rely on other people.
Mark, somewhere LRH said a thetan can be anything he wants to be while still remaining himself. (Wish I could remember the reference, maybe a lecture.)
Well, I’ll throw you a bone and maybe you’ll pony up something.
I was aware of spiritual influences before I read the OT3 materials. I was not aware of spiritual interference. The whole space opera story I really didn’t attach much interest or significance to. It was the idea of extending further into the supernatural that interested me.
To be able to step into the invisible and be at home in that space.
When I took a look there were a lot of interesting things to see. Can’t say I have ever thought of “BT’s” although I have used the word for the benefit of communicating to an auditor. They were not part of my body, they were part of my soul. There were people that were part of my soul. A lot of them, in a better place than I was. I didn’t feel any need to distance myself from that, I mean,it just didn’t bother me. Some were there because of unfinished conversations. Most were there because of the laws of ARC, and occupying the same space for that reason. Some were just earlier versions of me, that I parked in a closet. Per the laws of ARC you know, you occupy the same space through affinity. Not through engrams. That is what was true for me. But if you loved someone, and you were pushed off a cliff together,and you were both killed, do you think that could really create distance between you?
Yes,it is sometimes noisy in your space when you can hear one another’s thoughts. That noise comforts me. I have learned a lot from these conversations. A lot of valuable information.
Hubbard said magicians use spirits to do their bidding, as a goal. I can see how he thought that, but it is not a goal for everyone involved in magic. I don’t do that myself.
You find many people on Earth that say they are doing “God’s” bidding.
I feel there many Gods. And I care to remain in favor with them.
The here and now is not very relevant to me. I have someplace I am going to be,in the future. And where I am going to be about 1,000 years from now, is important to me.
I am just gathering an education.
Not to worry Vinaire. I don’t think people will begin to tamper with the file clerks. They are safe. snicker….
So,OT3 for me, was soul searching. Whatever anyone else made of it, I treat as their personal business.
Contrary to popular teachings, I do not care to “Invade another person’s privacy” to obtain intel.
I like it best when I am a guest.
Vinny, I stopped doing that when my pink Caddy was repo’d and I had to hock all my full length fur coats (not to mention my feathered hats and dark glasses).
And just so you know Brian, my undertakings to bring David Miscavige out into the open about his treachery, has to do magic / anti magic forces. I am learning a lot about anti magic. About illusion. About forces and conditions. This theater, is a practical for me. As an observer.
Beyond that, I think Marty is favor with the Gods too. And there is a force of nature about this where the human spirit proves itself worthy of all possible promise. It is all very magical. Marty doing what Marty wilt, and it becoming the whole of the law.
Laughter!!!!!!!!!!!!!
#7
IMO Hubbard managed to industrialize hypnotism. By not calling it hypnotism, he trained unknowing hypnotists to make more hypnotists.
He universalized a process, then made verboten everything that might interfere with the process; high emotion, drugs, “psychs,” other meddlesome people, entheta, etc…
Hi Brian
You make me smile, I love it when people change the goal posts.
Your first post started off with “Christianity and Churchianity” and now it has changed to what “a TRUE Christian is”. I would be interested to hear what you deem to be the difference between a Christian and a TRUE Christian is.
I wonder if the same differentiation can be made between a Scientologist and a TRUE Scientologist. I endeavour to be both a true Christian and a true Scientologist.
Scientology for me is “knowing in the fullest sense of the word through study”, and that applies equally to the physical world as to the metaphysical world.
Love with understanding
Pip
Dutch news Item:
Geez, where does that leave Global Warming, Vaccines, and 9/11?
Brian, man after my own heart. You’ve said it so well. Have copied and pasted for further reference when needed, if that’s OK with you.
Oracle,
“And I do not take the obsessive efforts of a few street people who work 24/7 to reduce Hubbard’s ideas and life, and all of the curious who explored Scientology or the supernatural, into a minus value, as an index of everybody down on the streets.”
By the time “a few street people ” get over with Hubbard and his wet dream for a massive IMPLANT, “obsessive” Queen registrars like you won’t be able to led anybody by their noses into the great mystery.
Of course you are including into the “a few street people” Marty, Mike, Mark Bunker, Tony Ortega, Jon Atack, Amstrong, Lawrence Wright, Russell Miller, Gibney, et al. right?
You are preaching Ron Gospel all the way to your own complete stupidity.
Many Indys, ex-Scientolists cannot confron the truth of it.
I suppose it’s understandable perhaps in that that they’re still under hypnosis, still implanted. Another reason is often the fear of discarding a stable datum that’s been part of a lot of one’s life for so long.
Problem is that the will out, either in the now or in the future. I’d rather have it now.
David Miscavige is not the Why. It’s so much better for everyone to look at this than not. Look, don’t listen. Don’t listen to the blustering idiot. Look past him.
“Problem is that the will out, either in the now or in the future. I’d rather have it now.”
Should have been: “Problem is that the truth will out, either in the now or in the future. I’d rather have it now.”
You are so literal, Oracle. And your arguments quite childish.
Do you ever listen to yourself?
My comment was to Marildi.
Oh! I am very worried!
So well said. The implant is that It’s so wrong to criticise the big man.
What’s the problem? We won’t be on church cans again. Let the bs go now, man.
vinaire said: Attention is “awareness with a direction.” Awareness is an aspect of motion. Motion is the inherent condition of this universe.
So if an airplane is travelling from A to B, it is both moving and aware? Am I correct in assuming that awareness does not equal cognition?
My desk is in motion at the atomic and sub-atomic level. Is it aware?
Do thoughts, sensations and responses or whatever ultimately make up the concept of “I” have direction? If attention is awareness with a direction and thus by nature in motion, how can it be fixed?
vinaire said: With this understanding, attention at the level of macromolecules may be controlled.
Can you do so?
vinaire said: I don’t know who came up with the stupid idea of “”transcending the boundaries or reality it arises from”?
I wrote “transcend boundaries” because transcendence implies just that, moving beyond limits. Is the idea of transcendence false in your view?
You fell right into it, Oracle. You just can’t help yourself, can you?
Michael *fucking* Fairmanwas in my favorite TV series “Bones”
A must see for every Anon and (Ex) Scientologist.
Be sure dutch people went WTF.
Dutch news Item:
Hello OT 8’ts you can not makev this go away.
You have a choiche
Admit your Inhumanity or sustain tp be a Supressive Person
Anytime Olucky-you
If the word “BT” is replaced by the word “inconsistency” one will get better results on upper OT Level. Trashcan the word “BT” and all the significances that go along with it. It is all hogwash.
Sent from my iPad
>
There is no “self” that exists independent of the dynamics.
Sent from my iPad
>
Thetan is simply a consideration designed to interiorize a person into “I”.
Sent from my iPad
>
http://www.linksandlaw.com/news-update10-scientology-spaink.htm
All magic is just a manipulation of psyche.
Sent from my iPad
>
Well, Ron is now reduced to a filter that loyal people use to look through.
Sent from my iPad
>
Why do people keep talking about there “I”? There is so much there to see besides.
Sent from my iPad
>
What sort of things about magic? And what is magic from your view?
And please understand, I am only asking questions. They are not attacks. Just questions 😉
I see, thanks for the clarification. I have two questions for you above.
Running around something is a physical universe activity. How does a thetan” run”? How can something without mass, energy, wavelength,time or location actually run? How is that done?
Thank you Oracle, thank you for sharing something very personal. See, it wasn’t so ill intended as you thought.
Any looking is better than no looking. Being attuned to and being cognitive of the inner world of limitless imaginings and states of being, the endless filters of mind that color our true nature as raw power, light and being is truly a hero’s journey indeed. As Joseph Campbell has stated,”Some mystics drown in the mystery and some become good swimmers” (paraphrase)
So for you the OT 3 materials were a metaphor or a good excuse to go diving inwards and look?
If I’m getting you correctly, OT3 materials are not literal. Xenu was simply an idea of Hubbard’s from his Sci Fi imagination? And 75,000,000 years ago, just his imagination.
Do you believe Hubbard believed it? And in your opinion, could running this level and assigning cause to one’s problems on this level create distortions in one’s capacity to directly perceive truth? If in fact what is being run is not true.
That is, if our problems are not our own, but something outside of ourselves, or more exactly, some alien creature attached to us.
Can you see that this approach can be the cause of mental delusions for some? Believing in imaginings as realities?
Thank you Another Thought. I am sure you would know how she feels.
I am grateful for Karen and the work she does. I watch all of her Vids. I have thought from time to time that maybe she does not mention Ron because of not wanting to alienate those just now leaving who still believe in Ron. I can appreciate that totally. And honor it.
I guess I have been out of the bubble so long that I have tossed the idea that we can talk about somethings and not about others. Unthinkable thoughts and secret knowledge are no more for me.
And since these forums are about Scientology it seems to me that more communication not less is better. That being punished for being there and communicating is what needs to be tossed in the rubbish bin like a stinky bad potato.
Trolls seek to disrupt. I only asked a question. Equating troll-hood with asking questions in an unreality for me. I cannot even think that way. We are free, knowledge is free, we are free to believe in anything we want. I support and honor that.
I am so glad I have 30+ years behind me. The intellectual stifling was unbearable.
If you know Karen please tell her I wish her all the success and happiness.
Another Brian
Sorry, I misinterpreted the mention of trolls. I thought you were implying that I was. My bad. 🙂
Sorry you have issues with children.
The sages say that when we merge our individuality (soul) into the Supreme Self (God or whatever you want to call it), which is the meaning and goal of Yoga, we retain our capacity to be that same individual: Eternally
Have our cake and eat it so to speak. What gratitude I have for being alive! Such love and joy!
Yogananda said once,”Do you want to no what the goal of Yoga is trying to tell you? You don’t know what you are missing. The joy, the freedom for ourselves and loved ones is incomparable!”
What Jesus said. Anyone who loves God and their neighbors as their selves is a disciple of that great master. A true Christian can be a Jew or a Hindu.
The principles internalized and lived are senior to the assumed labels.
Karen is a Class XII C/S. And as LRH has said “When a Class XII speaks, people listen”.
Ripley: Do you get it? We homed in on it’s beacon.
Executive: And found something never recorded once in over 300 surveyed worlds. A creature that gestates inside the living human host – these are your words – and has concentrated acid for blood.
Ripley: Look I can see where this is going but I am telling you those things exist.
Commader Van Leuwen: Thank you, that will be all RIpley!
🙂
Conan, no I”m not obsessed with Hubbard. My focus isn’t really on the man himself but on his works. You need to differentiate between the two, even if it doesn’t suit your purposes not to.
How about you? Do you see yourself as one of the most vitriolic and malicious posters on any of the blogs?
I can’t help but wonder what spiritual teaching you could possibly be “devoted to.” I sure hope you don’t claim to be a Buddhist or a Christian. Or almost anything else I can think of.
I meant “You need to differentiate between the two, even if it doesn’t suit your purposes to do so.”
I guess Vinnie is the only one who can use “I” – with Vinnie the word is just a point of reference. With others, it’s called “pimping the ‘I'”. 🙄
No sense of humor either! 😛
I believe it was Richard Reiss.
In that case, I’m back in business. Many decades ago Woody Allen wrote an essay called “The Whore of Mensa” wherein a man could pay a woman to discuss very deep philosophical issues with him (Plato, etc). Presumably one could pay someone to also engage in raising awareness about one’s spiritual nature. Oh wait … that’s been done. Anyway I will hapilly attempt to raise your awareness for free. Just your thanks and cogs are enough exchange for me.
The Scientology impulse of eye for an eye trumps over any feeling of ARC. Their sense of ARC is totally fake. This is so very evident among Scientologists even on this board. They may be out of the Church, but they still have the same spots peculiar to that philosophy.
There is no use talking about any feeling of compassion in them, because there is no such thing in Scientology.
It is done through delusory hallucination.
This is to clarify for LETTING GO, how I look at awareness.
From Wikipedia:
“Awareness is the state or ability to perceive, to feel, or to be conscious of events, objects, thoughts, emotions, or sensory patterns. In this level of consciousness, sense data can be confirmed by an observer without necessarily implying understanding. More broadly, it is the state or quality of being aware of something. In biological psychology, awareness is defined as a human’s or an animal’s perception and cognitive reaction to a condition or event…
“Awareness is a relative concept. An animal may be partially aware, may be subconsciously aware, or may be acutely unaware of an event. Awareness may be focused on an internal state, such as a visceral feeling, or on external events by way of sensory perception. Awareness provides the raw material from which animals develop qualia, or subjective ideas about their experience.”
.
Here awareness is being described in terms of human subjectivity. This subjectivity seems to be taken for granted as awareness. It is being used as a “standard” to measure the awareness of other animals, organisms and objects . An objective definition of awareness seems to be missing.
In order to define awareness scientifically, let’s do the following thought experiment. Imagine being out there in the interstellar space, but with no stars or heavenly bodies around to provide any reference points. Pay attention to your motion. You will find that there is no awareness of motion even when you could be moving at the speed of light. Awareness arises only when there is motion relative to something else.
Light that contributes to awareness seems to be made up of pure motion. Objects that contribute to awareness seem to be full of motion at molecular and atomic levels. Awareness of sensations, such as push and pull, seems to accompany changes in motion.
Science talks about structure like visual cortex or other parts of the brain to explain awareness. But the brain too is made up of atoms and molecules, neurons and electrical impulses. All these things consist of motion. So there is motion outside the brain as well as inside the brain. Science is simply associating the motion inside the brain with awareness.
It seems that awareness simply cannot be separated from motion. Any change that gives rise to awareness is fundamentally motion. Even the change in color amounts to the change in wavelength of light, and is thus a very fine motion.
We are used to looking at awareness in human context only. Awareness appears to us as something very subjective and complex, but that may just be a human-centric perspective. It was the same human-centric perspective, which held that earth is at the center of the universe. If we look at awareness objectively, it is found to be intimately related to motion.
Motion and awareness seem to be aspects of each other.
Atoms consist of motion and an effect of that are the properties expressed in the periodic table. This motion in atoms is also atomic awareness. Simple motion associated with electromagnetic waves leads to simple properties. This represents simple awareness. Extremely complex motion associated with human configuration leads to complex properties. This represents complex awareness that we are intimately familiar with.
The properties of animated organisms and inanimate objects are an expression of the motion and awareness that they are composed of.
This is a very different take on awareness of which human awareness is a special case. If we move away from the narrow, human-centric view, we find that awareness is all around us.
The universe is imbued with motion, and thus, it is imbued with awareness.
What is Awareness, Scientifically?
.
In my effort to clear up some differences that I’ve had in mind between how I view Scientology and how some others that I’ve known view it, so that people wont wish to destroy the whole thing, because of some parts of it, like they wouldnt -hopefully- wish to destroy a whole country because of some persons and some corrupt services and activities that occur inside it, I have made some indirect accusations from time to time and I apologise for that. To me it doesn’t matter whether one has a list of sins that written down would fill a whole skyscraper, I don’t think it is my business to point them out –no matter who that person is, that is. And I practice more than forgiveness, usually. I practice ‘what happened yesterday shouldn’t matter today’.
I also don’t wish to tell people what to think, so as to invalidate their view of things. I only want to address people that think maybe they don’t know everything about the talked-about subjects, and wish to read about my view. I do not claim to speak any universal truth, it’s just my view. And I do not wish to play any PR game for or against SCN. I am totally indifferent with what is going to happen, with that matter of PR. I don’t have any appetite to go against anybody’s firm belief that Hubbard was a master brainwasher, nor that people like me are the reason why SCN got messed up. I only address people that want to communicate. I’m not in the game of creating positive nor negative impressions against other impressions.
I started to write online because somebody or some people taunted me, that I couldn’t communicate without their approval –and it was about something important. But since I have resolved the matter inside me, and I know I can communicate indeed, I have no reason why I should be engaged into that particular game. I would only be willing to communicate to like-minded people that take it easy, for I don’t feel like fighting.
I think people -no matter what faction they might belong in- could take it a bit easy, because most of the things we talk about, don’t exist in present time. And for many, never have existed, ever. This should go to all directions, as a light hearted advice, and not as an effort to stop things forcefully. I think a desire for revenge corrodes from inside, no matter the fair causes that might back that up –and of course, I’m talking generally, and not just about Scientology. If I wanted to be free from something, I would practice ‘F*ck it’ or ‘let go’.
So as not to talk about things totally irrelevant to the topic, I don’t feel any enforcement to study nor practice Scientology, and I haven’t done either in a long time. Still I think -if taken lightly, and if done willingly- it could be an interesting subject to get into. For me, it has much to do with personal interpretations and then personal application. Not few people have interpreted love and freedom as hate and war. And fortunately we are now -politically- at a point where we can make our choices for ourselves –unless ‘we’ live in Iran or other countries with enforced and hardcore ideologies. I think there is room for even more freedom, like education could be more individual-based than society-based, –an individual should decide what to learn.
I have also ‘moved on’ to other stuff that are to a degree alligned with Scientology, but are other stuff, and they are noname. They are my stuff 😛 Still, I don’t have any sentiments about possibly negative or extremely negative past experiences in Scientology, as I don’t have any past hidden anywhere waiting to jump up and eat me. I could of course think of some past and make some sentiments, but what for? I preffer computer games. I had a purpose in the past to ‘awaken’ others form what I considered negative in Scientology, but I only have one now to only share with those willing to share. I’m not going to pound anything to anybody. And by ‘share’ I mean share how to be better, not what is wrong.
Sorry for the long text. At least this time it wasn’t a rant 😛
I don’t think the word “run” can be taken literally. How about “move”? Many people who report out-of-body-experiences talk about moving from one location to another, and even to another time.
In this video about OOB experiences, at about 9:45 Graham Nicholls starts talking about both – moving to a different location as well as to a different time, as in precognition. (And the interviewer is none other than Lilou of the “Juicy Living Tour”. 🙂 )
Brian, thank you for the uplifting post. This type of thing will do more good than all the warnings of fire and brimstone ever will, IMHO.
marildi,
“Then why did Buddha say he recalled many of his own past lives, and that he had been “born for the last time”?”
In original Buddhism, the Buddha does speak of a few past lives. However, the details of the past lives would today seem “culture bound.”
They are mostly restricted to India. The point is that the Buddha was
more concerned about a level of knowledge which reaches the expression of the “regularity of karma”. In other words, the idea of the Samsaric cycle.
The Buddha stated “born for the last time” after enlightenment.
Many of the past life accounts found in later texts such as the Jataka are disputed.
The idea of past life is only important in the context of the Four Noble Truths. By the way, this is not a very good translation. It is more like
“facts of existence.”
May all beings be well and happy!
GMW
“You just can’t help yourself”. That’s kind of a gnarly spell I wouldn’t cast on anyone.
I understand there are people who think they should be protected from radical ideas. That they should be illegal. It’s a big planet. I think most of those people do gravitate to areas where ideas are closely monitored. There are still many places like that. Not sure if the entire planet should be lock down. South Korea and places like that provide for people en danged by ideas and communication that is “out of the box”. Not sure what your thoughts are on past or future lives. This is taboo in many places also. People will find what is comfortable as time goes on. Where they belong. Yesterday is really part of “past life” in some forbidden alleys. Ideas can be very terrifying to some people. Some people think the freedom in the U.S. is a plague. For them, it is.
Some people are just in cross purposes. I wouldn’t stand in the way of anyone seeking shelter from ideas they consider dangerous. I just don’t wan the burden of inheriting their fear. I don’t care to attack ideas. They are things put out there the same as traffic lights. But if you were traveling down a road in 1329 and came upon a traffic light, I am sure it could have been a very terrifying experience.
If you have ideas that counter other ideas. I think this is better than complete avoidance or suppression of ideas.
For instance,”ethnic cleansing” ideas I do not think are good ideas.
But many people have risen against the back drop of that idea and it’s results. New ideas about it have been laid on the table. That changed the course of life in many countries.
I have faith in my fellow man. Contrary to some ideas being put out there that the world is coming to an end, that people are doomed, I see conditions improving. I see this civilization rising up. Not falling down. And it took some radical ideas to push it in that direction.
Gee have I been out of loop! I hadn’t heard of light metal. Great song!
“If I don’t make it.someone else will.” Bright idea. Thanks for putting up the music too!
From what I have seen of those OT 3 materials, and I have seen it in cartoon form twice,most people think it is funny. Kids across the nation watched it on South Park and didn’t fly into mental shock or delusions, that I am aware of.
That it is scaring the hell out of a few grown ups, sure, it’s possible. I have a friend that will not take her children out on Halloween because she believes it is Satanic and they will be influenced by Satan. It’s a real current situation.
I love reading you! 🙂
marildi,
I have one other piece of information on this. The Buddha recalled past lives in blocks 10, 100, 1,000, 10,000, 100,000 etc. . It seemed odd to me at first, but he is looking at the overall pattern. In Theravada, we do not use
past lives. In fact, I know of an interesting story in Thailand in the early 1900’s.
A Nun wanted a certain monk to be her teacher. She never stopped talking about past lives despite his pleas. He finally tossed her out. She came back and listened to him and attained sainthood.
May all beings be well, happy and peaceful!
This would lead me to ask, is the planet or the ecosystem as a complex configuration on a much larger scale aware? Same for the universe. Is “it” aware or is this a human-centric attempt to anthropomorphise the system of motion and forces we call universe?
Would awareness be a property of relativity?
If a person says “there is nobody there doing anything – everything is just what is happening”, would that express this perception?
Why are we lost in fights of right view and wrong view? Why are they so intoxicating?
Thank you for writing your book. I feel unseen encrusted thought patterns breaking open as I read and contemplate. It is a liberating experience and came at the perfect time.
Conan,
“Of course you are including into the “a few street people” Marty, Mike, Mark Bunker, Tony Ortega, Jon Atack, Amstrong, Lawrence Wright, Russell Miller, Gibney, et al. right?”
No. Not sure why you would say “of course” and create list for me. Create a small essay of my inner thoughts as if you even slightly knew me. You do not know me,even in the slightest.
What disturbs me about you, and something does, isn’t even Scientological. What disturbs me about you, is that someday in the near future, a woman is going to pick up a baby and feel unconditional love towards it. Not knowing that baby was once you. Bring you to breast or bottle to feed you. Sacrifice much for herself, to provide for you. Not knowing that when you had the freedom to care about the people in front of you, simple strangers, you couldn’t even mange good manners and respect.
That is our lot. And if you think I owe you more than that, by becoming a target of verbal or any abuse, you have bigger issues than Scientology to be concerned about.
From a scientific point of view, if there is motion then there is also awareness.
This view is different from the human-centric view of awareness.
Thus, this universe as a whole is aware. Human awareness is a small but complex part of this overall awareness.
Sent from my iPad
>
So one could consider humans a certain “strata” of awareness and some more complex configurations (electromagnetism?) a more developed awareness?
“No effect”message again.
Lettin go,
You are welcome. I changed while writing it. Recalling thought
patterns from 25 years ago was an experience.
May all liberated beings be well and happy!
Marildi, there are many just out that would think that this is just an implant talking. All this God gooblygook.
It is productive to continue the important work of pulling back the veil of Hubbard. Some have never even thought about it.
You have no idea who comes on this site and never posts. Some are allowing themselves the right to be critical for the first time. Some are very depressed and are in a bad way.
If you don’t like what I post, please feel free to move on and not respond.
But I am glad you like what I say about life and the Spirit. I realIy am. I would rather talk about it 24/7.
But this is not why I am here.
I think you and I Vinayji need to have an arm wrestle and settle this soul no soul thing like men! Once and for all!
My “I’ can kick your “i’s” ass.
Happiness to you Vinaji 😉
To measure whether a tool “works” one must first grasp its purpose. What was it created for? Is one using it in the manner it was intended?
The “self-stated” purpose of Scientology is arguably the attainment of “OT” (via “the State of Clear”). Its pursuit obviously requires an acceptance this purpose is worthy. Broken down, this involves a belief in Hubbard and his authority. Belief in the existence of these states and that they can be achieved through one’s submission to, and participation in, Scientology therapy.
Belief.
Thanks for sharing your deep thoughts Oracle. Yes I agree, I am a hopeless optimist as well.
Behind all of this projected madness, within the soul of each of us, is so much joy and sense of well being.
We are never alone when we know were happiness lies.
Some drink and drink and drink alcohol. At night, when no one is around, every night. Out comes the bottle. Some think it’s like medicine, but it only corrupts.
The Himalayan Musk Deer secretes a strong perfume in the middle of it’s belly. It smells it and goes mad trying to find it’s source. The nose cannot reach that part of it’s underbelly and goes searching here and there, outside of itself.
It gets agitated and goes crazy trying to find the source. Some have flung themselves off a cliff to their demise in that mad attempt to locate the source.
Human beings are like that.
It was always within us, what we are looking for.
When the student is ready, the teacher appears. The true Preceptor leads the student to his/her own under belly through a practice that reverses the search lights of the senses back into the source from whence we have come .
The source of all we are looking for. Immortality, bliss, power, true knowledge and wisdom, guidance. It’s there for the taking. If we want it.
“The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few.” Jesus the Christ
Tat Tvam Asi……….. Thou Art That
Peace and Hugs to you and Marildi
Yeah,I kind of feel the same way. I am also grateful we have one another’s company, and for the pleasant conversations we manage. I used to imagine myself getting old,sitting on the front porch down in Miami of some old folks home, playing cards to keep myself amused. A bottle of Jim Beam in my house robe pocket.
Look at the lot of us. We aren’t getting any younger and here we are, talking all about such interesting things instead of playing Bingo. Still looking for clues at a crime scene. Time is being good to us. Life is being good to us. Most of the people we know, are being good to us.
It’s going to be a great summer!
Jenny did it better than Joe.
Path of Buddha: “The Buddha stated ‘born for the last time’ after enlightenment.”
The above seems to say that the soul / self / thetan does exist – although not permanently, as it ceases to exist when enlightenment is achieved.
Sometimes it seems to be a matter of semantics as regards the question of “soul or no-soul?”
At the top of one of the columns of the Chart of Attitudes (40.0), the “attitude” is “Everyone”. Below that, in the same column (at 22.0), is “I am an individual as I please.” So it would seem to be a matter of position on a scale where there is no matter, energy, space or time at the top.
Also, I think the idea of “Everyone” would correspond to “co-existence of static” in the following axiom:
“Axiom 25. Affinity is a scale of attitudes which falls away from the co-existence of static, through the inter-positions of distance and energy, to create identity…”
Yes. That seems possible.
You and Spyros are both on such a great roll! I was just trying to find the words to reply to his post above when I saw your reply to it.
I’ll give you both a heartfelt bravo! ❤ ❤
“talking all about such interesting things instead of playing Bingo.” <— LOL
Regardless of our high philosophy discussions, I'm usually occupied with trivial activities –not bingo in specific. But yes, that's why I write too –because I like the philosophy side of this all, and for the friends. From time to time I might abberate from that a bit, but I return 😛
Summers in Athens are a bitty too much on the hot side. I'm a winter guy, and it's been snowing since yesterday 😀
‘Light’ metal is a term I made up when I wrote about it. Because true metal fan would get dipleased at me calling that ‘heavy metal’ 😛
Glad you like it!
Me too!!! Well said Marty. And yes, #8 is a very unfortunate possibility that we must all be aware of and take whatever steps we can to handle. Thanks for sayin.
Pull your head out Miraldi. You do yourself no favors displaying cognitive dissonance.
Brian, You are one spot on dude! Keep swingin and never let the bastards get you down. There will be many that just want to chip away and make less of your observations.
Be that as it may, your comments align with my thoughts on the subject and I appreciate your commentary.
Oracle, ALL you can talk about is Miscavige. Miscavige, Miscavige, Miscavige…………………………………………………………………………!!!!!!!!
You are simply do not have the ability to confront the man who LRH ACTUALLY was or to assign proper cause and therefore seem to be able to see only what is before your eyes.
It’s a shame. You miss a lot!
marilidi,
In Original Buddhism, the idea of “no self” or “no soul,” which is a stretch, is a working construct not a fixed idea. The monk Sati tried to corner the Buddha when he asked about the soul. The Buddha replied that he never taught that doctrine. In ancient India, the Vedas had inspired the doctrine of
transmigration. The Buddha was breaking from that tradition. His idea of
“no self” or no soul was new. This is not correctly reported in Scientology so it is important. In another meeting, the Buddha when pressed about the soul and was silent. This gets back to the idea of the working construct of the idea of “no self”. The Buddha was very clear that theoretical issues were to be avoided as no one could prove the existence of the soul. At the mundane level of awareness, the soul is evident as an awareness because of the grasping better called in this case “bhava kamma”. This is an aspect of kamma restrcted to the idea of the soul. The Buddha was also clear in the doctrine that the universe, in his view, had no beginning. This contradicts Scientology’s “Before the beginning was a cause”. At the surpramundane level in early Buddhism, the idea of soul is examined in a four fold void corresponding to the Noble Truths. The Buddha clearly stated that he had to do this. In phenomenological reality the working constucts of soul and “no self” are used to see multiple causes or Karma with a capital K. Thus Buddha instructed us to keep away from theoretical discussions of the soul.
The structure of the universe in Original Buddhism is vast and complex,
but centered on one point which is not a soul.
Axiom 25 would not apply. Co-existence of static violates the primary dictum of Buddhism. Everything is impermanent. Existence or co-existence is “bhava kamma”. This is a hinderance to knowledge.
The Chart of Atitudes also does not apply. The Buddha does not use MEST in the same way as Hubbard. The Buddha clearly stated that the elements of the universe are physical atoms and mind. Mind is not a spirit, soul or theta.
It is dependent on matter for awareness. This is complex stuff better left for now.
A better topic to discuss is Meta or loving-kindness. This operates on a far higher plane than affinity.
At any rate, the primary point is that “no self” is a working construct used
in meditation. Thetans in Buddhisms are impermanent gods subject to the laws of kamma. These gods come in many flavors.
GMW
LDW: to make themselves and their cult RIGHT!
It is surely that what you said .. but this is a SerFac .. something which should be handled with scientology .. if not, the cult run to be suppressive
LRH wanted to get the SerFac of the case .. so the way to clearing ..
And a bit more about the objectification of spiritual memes:
Peace and hugs to you Brian. I note you have great potential as writer.
Hello marildi! Thanks for the video clip of Wayne Dyer. I have seen this particular presentation of his on PBS numerous times in its entirety and always benefited by doing so.
His quote that you shared is one of those that requires absolutely no debate but invites one to embark on the simple journey of personal exploration and experience. How difficult could it be for one to pick something that they hold a belief on as to how that something is, then choose to change the way they look at it and and observe how the perception of that ‘something’ changes (or not) after doing so?
Personally, just taking the subjects of L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology…I couldn’t begin to count the number of times I have changed the way I look at them. And with each change in view came a change in perception and interpretation.
The world I see is the world I have invented through both my conscious and unconscious beliefs about the world. Everything I perceive means to me what I have decided for it to mean thus there is no truth or facts in time that I can share with what would seem to be another. All that I am able to share in the seeming journey through time and space is my interpretation of what I perceive.
Brian, I too used to believe this…”but others do have an independent existence outside of our mental understanding and projection of them.” However, this belief ever so gradually gave way to the belief that the idea of there being individual beings is a misperception where what is unreal is accepted as being real. While I cannot begin to conceive of, describe, define or explain…I believe that nonduality is actuality. This is where my mind goes Brian when I think of the concepts of God and Reality, which is really, for me, beyond concepts and symbols.
When it rains,it pours.
Citizens of Clearwater surveyed……….
http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/story/28048955/survey-asks-clearwater-residents-about-the-church-of-scientology
Looks like the state of California is cracking down on stalkers. This woman didn’t do anything on scale of what Miscavige ran down in Texas, and she is under house arrest.
http://news.yahoo.com/woman-sentenced-tormenting-couple-says-she-devastated-over-185747018–abc-news-topstories.html
I think most people that oppose Scientology and people that believe and practice it, don’t really have anything against each other. The hate is mostly addressed towards some practices that almost anyone would deem to be messed up. But in the process of fighting people tend to generalize, often on purpose, like myself, as I don’t want to accuse anybody specific in public. And so they go like “Scientologists are crazy” etc. I too have said really mean stuff about ‘Scientology’ but I had specific things in mind that were indeed really mean. I wouldn’t do nor recommend to anyone to do that stuff (I have written what that ‘stuff’ are, from time to time), of course. But if me or another condemned all ‘Scientology’, he would also condemn much Buddhism, as well as other things that are alligned with Buddhism, and those things are not few. I think what makes Scientology special is it’s practice -auditing- and the e-meter. Space opera sounds new, but it’s not completely. It’s just that the ancient scripts that talk about strange things in the sky, and strange looking creatures, didn’t use terms such as ‘space opera’, ‘aliens’ etc.
It is odd that in Scientology there is the concept of the ‘third party’ (third party=a person that secretly incites fighting), and is seen as the root of all war, and there is an implication that war is uneccesary and stupid and that fighters are used. I say it is odd, because -based on that- I don’t see what reasoning one has, if he fights FOR Scientology. As per the text, one should automatically search for a HIDDEN, UNKNOWN third party, if he felt like being drawn into a fight.
I do believe it too, that from the division of Scientologists, and critics too, only few could benefit. I can imagine, if somebody wanted to create a sect -to keep people secluded, and in the dark- would benefit from such a war. Those who wouldn’t want some communications to flow freely. So, they would make communication so painful (fighting) so that people wouldn’t communicate. I suggest people shouldn’t play along, and they should take care of each other more, and not divide.
G, thanks very much for your learned comments. Very helpful. Buddha’s idea of “no self” as a working construct makes more sense, put in that way.
You also wrote: “The structure of the universe in Original Buddhism is vast and complex, but centered on one point which is not a soul.”
Is that one point karma (with or without the capital “K”)?
I get a sense of what is meant by karma as being a sort of inevitable flow of things, and that makes sense to me too. However, it would be a completely deterministic viewpoint if there exists no free will / choice – so how does that fit in? You also said:
“The Buddha clearly stated that the elements of the universe are physical atoms and mind. Mind is not a spirit, soul or theta.”
If there is nothing but atoms and mind, “who” or “what” is making the choices in life that will determine the karma and whether or not there will be rebirth for that “who” or “what”?
I see what you mean. But, two different truths can be simultaneously opposed and in agreement.
There is the absolute and the relative. In the absolute we are one. In the relative we are individual. The wave is the ocean and the ocean is the wave. But there are individual waves, are there not? Where does the wave begin and the ocean end?
If we are the same individual then I want your car because it is mine. Hand it over bud!
This is a great discussion Monte. Just marvelous.
To play chess there is only one square chess board and many individual squares. How many squares to a chess board?
Only one in reality, but many imaginary lines of demarcation to play the game.
We are both the Unified Field that is omnipresent and the reflection of that omnipresence in our individual forms.
We are both because we are One with the Grand Dreamer of dreams who dreams individual souls and universes for fun and play. In Sanskrit it is called Lila: The Lord’s Play or Sport
We are made in It’s Image. Jesus said,”I and my Father are One.”
Tat Tvam Asi………. Thou Art That
Monte: “The world I see is the world I have invented through both my conscious and unconscious beliefs about the world. Everything I perceive means to me what I have decided for it to mean…:
I think there is a lot of truth to what you say. However, dear Monte, I’m not sure I would agree with what you wrote here:
“…thus there is no truth or facts in time that I can share with what would seem to be another.”
Tell me what you think of this passage from Dan Brown’s book *The Lost Symbol*, in which a speaker by the name of Peter Solomon is addressing a student body:
—————————————–
…Solomon said, “I find it wondrous to note that throughout history, all of mankind’s disparate philosophies have all concurred on one thing – that a great enlightenment is coming. In every culture in every era, in every corner of the world, the human dream has focused on the same exact concept – the coming apotheosis of man…the impending transformation of our human minds into their true potentiality.“ he smiled. “What could possibly explain such a synchronicity of beliefs?”
“Truth,” said a quiet voice in the crowd.
Solomon wheeled. “Who said that?”
The hand that went up belonged to a tiny Asian boy whose soft features suggested he might be Nepalese or Tibetan. “Maybe there is a universal truth embedded in everyone’s soul. Maybe we ALL have the same story hiding inside, like a shared constant in our DNA. Maybe this collective TRUTH is responsible for the similarity in all of our stories.”
Solomon was beaming as he pressed his hands together and bowed reverently to the boy. “Thank you.”
Everyone was quiet.
“Truth”, Solomon said, addressing the room. “Truth has power. And if we all gravitate toward similar ideas, maybe we do so because those ideas are TRUE . . . written deep within us. And when we hear the truth, even if we don’t understand it, we feel that truth resonate within us . . . vibrating with our unconscious wisdom. Perhaps the truth is not LEARNED by us, but rather, the truth is re-called . . .re-membered . . . re-cognized . . . as that which is already inside us.”
—————————————-
Click to access file.axd
“The number of Indys who are koolaiders still is sometimes frightening. ”
This scares me. Because I know how discounting your fellow man, can lead to justifiable crimes against them.
Marty did not in any way shape or form, discount another human being by laying this truth on the table.
You did.
5. Navigation through the only hole in the wall consists of closely emulating Hubbard and behaving as he did when he lived.
When the animals decided to establish schools they selected a school board consisting of Mr. Elephant, Mr. Kangaroo and Mr. Monkey, and these fellows held a meeting to agree upon their plans.
“What shall the animals’ children be taught in the animal school? That is the question,” declared Mr. Monkey.
“Yes, that is the question,” exclaimed Mr. Kangaroo and Mr. Elephant together.
“They should be taught to climb trees,” said the monkey, positively. “All my relatives will serve as teachers.”
“No, indeed!” shouted the other two, in chorus. “That would never do.”
“They should he taught to jump,” cried the kangaroo, with emphasis. “All of my relatives will be glad to teach them.”
“No, indeed!” yelled the other two, in unison. “That would never do.”
“They should be taught to look wise,” said the elephant. “And all of my relatives will act as teachers.”
“No, indeed!” howled the other two together. “That will never do.”
“Well, what will do?” they asked, as they looked at each other in perplexity.
“Teach them to climb,” said Mr. Monkey.
“Teach them to jump,” said Mr. Kangaroo.
“Teach them to look wise,” said Mr. Elephant.
And so it was that none of them would yield, and when they saw there was no chance to agree, they all became angry and decided not to have any animal schools at all.
http://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/04/06/fish-climb/
Hey Spyros – you amaze me sometimes. What you wrote is very close to what LRH was saying back in 1955:
“…the arduous lesson along this line is that no-communication lists, revocation/suspension of certificates, court action of any kind whatsoever within the realm of Scientology and so forth, is not only…not only difficult to do but does not work. That’s just the end of it. It just doesn’t work. It’s for the sea gulls.
“That might work in Gestetner Limited or Westinghouse, but it does not work in Scientology. Got that?
“It’s because they are people of good intention. And by saying that these people are not fit to associate with us anymore, we have told a lie of magnitude. This is not true. It’s never true. You got it?
“OUR INABILITY TO UNDERSTAND THE ACTIONS OF OTHER SCIENTOLOGISTS HAS A VERY FASCINATING BARRIER. THE LIMITATION ON OUR UNDERSTANDING IS SIMPLY THIS: WE SAY THEY HAVE BAD INTENTIONS, AND THAT IS A LIE. Got it?
“So the whole situation is liable to enturbulate around that postulated bad intention. That’s what enturbulates the situation. That makes a lie. The situation then becomes unsolvable. Because we’ve entered a changing factor called a lie into it.
“The most valuable asset we have, actually, is our ability to understand, to do the right thing, to be kind, to be decent.
“WELL, I HATE TO UNSETTLE A VERY STABLE DATUM, IF IT DOES UNSETTLE IT. BUT THE ONLY WAY ANYTHING EVER DOES RESOLVE IS BY LETTING YOUR OWN KIND HEART REACH THROUGH. THAT’S THE ONLY WAY IT EVER DOES SOLVE. AND IT NEVER SOLVES BY BEING TOUGH.
“What do we really have of value in the organizations of Scientology? The only thing we have of value, actually, is Scientology, an understanding of life, increasing ability to communicate, a good concept and grip on reality and the ability to like guys. That’s all you got.
“And there’s only one more thing that we could know that would make us all feel very, very relaxed about the whole thing. There isn’t a person anywhere in Scientology who has bad intentions for Scientologists or their fellow man. And that point all by itself is very well worth thinking about the next time some trouble arises in your vicinity, because that is the truth. And if you handle a situation with that in mind, you will solve the situation.”
(“Attitude and Conduct of Scientology”, 4th London ACC, 3rd November 1955)
My conclusion is that Hubbard tried to position Scientology using the popularity of Buddhism. He defined the goals of Scientology to be similar to the goals of Buddhism; and the state of Clear to be similar to the state of Bodhi. According to him, Scientology far surpassed the results of Buddhism.
But the truth is that through the technique of mindfulness Buddha could see that the self was illusory, and he took steps to help others transcend that illusion. However, Hubbard and Scientology went in the opposite direction making the empowering of individuality to be its goal. These two goals are completely opposite of each other. Please see,
Hubbard, Scientology and Buddhism
.
Hi Cat Daddy
It is said that a river cannot rise higher than its source, and for someone who follows L.R.H. exclusively and that includes most in the church, they will never develop anymore humility than they were graced with when they got involved. Ron was a very capable man but humble he was not!
The standard tests of humility he failed on miserably which are best expounded by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount Matthew chapters 5-6. Namely “Turn the other cheek” ”love your enemies” “do good to those that persecute you” “walk the extra mile” etc. These are sadly missing in the tenants of Scientology.
I don’t think L.R.H. lacked faith, he just saw no place for it in his world view.
Love
Pip
Hi Another Thought
The Bible is made up of the OLD and NEW Testaments. The Old Testament is very much the history of the Jews and is very clear that the Jews are “God’s chosen people” which reeks of exclusivity from beginning to end.
The New Testament has been grossly mis-interpreted by vested interests down through the centuries and many wars have been fought over doctrinal positions that man has taken, always over exclusive dogma which boil down to “we are right and they are wrong”. It can very much become a sort of third dynamic Service Facsimile.
Love
Pip
Hi Another Thought
Certainly any technology that doesn’t work, if you become critical and start to blame the technology, it has to be you misapplied it, had M.U’s or overts. There is a line in A COURSE IN MIRACLES that says “the blameless cannot blame”. Please note there are two definitions for the word ‘critical’. One is continuing or making severe or negative judgements. The second is containing analytical evaluations. To be negative about anything is to choose disharmony rather than harmony.
If a person truly knows “who they are” it is impossible to blame anyone or anything, because the truth is everything I see in my external world is only a projection of my internal world.
As for homosexuality, well there has been a revolution in that area over the past twenty years or so, something for me as a 73 year old I am still trying to catch up with. However promiscuity whether homo. or hetro. is an indication of a chronic low tone.
Since I never got further than Clear in the Church my knowledge of implants and BT’S is very sketchy. I got fabulous results from my study of Scientology but then I long since stopped thinking I might find unconditional love in the Church.
I find no conflict between admin. tech and any of the other tech. I use ethics tech. in my business and admin tech but the difference is I endeavour not to let the tech become senior to the THETA (LOVE). Where is my line between the two? Scientology works, L.R.H.’s belief system and world view is interesting but is very definitely HIS PHILOSOPHY, which is available for me to “cherry pick” where and when or not at all as I choose.
Love with Understanding
Pip
Hi Marildi
+ 1 – That’s my girl!
Love
Pip
Thanks Brian
Here is this word TRUE again. What is a “true Christian” as opposed to a true Jew or a true Hindu? Surely these are just meaningless labels.
A ChristianScientologist is a totally new breed of person. They are neither a Christian nor a Scientologist, true or otherwise. The essence of Christianity is UNDCONDITIONAL LOVE and the essence of Scientology is UNDERSTANDING, therefore a ChristianScientologist is someone who expresses their love through their understanding. It really aint rocket science.
Love with Understanding
Pip
Hi Spyros
I enjoyed your post and it encouraged me to post the following:-
About a week ago while eating my breakfast the words came to me “sue for peace”. I did not know what they meant but they did seem familiar. After Googling the expression I came across this book “Suing for Peach: a Guide for Resolving Life’s Conflicts”. Having read the preview I ordered it from Amazon.
Basically what it is saying is when we perceive that someone has taken our happiness away we react by taking away their happiness in the mistaken belief that in so doing we will regain our happiness. However the other person now deeming his happiness has been taken away reacts by attempting to take away the other’s happiness. This belief that another can take away our happiness seems to be what lies behind the overt-motivator sequence.
I can only speak for myself but when I got involved in Scientology it was the happiest time of my life, so when I was expelled it was the most unhappy time of my life. I could have easily become bitter and retaliated to what I perceived as unfair treatment, but instead I resolved to continue to investigate why I had been expelled.
I can say now with comparative certainty that the main problem in the CofS is its inability to think outside the parameters of the technology of Scientology which produces an inability to see other viewpoints that apparently conflict with the Scientology paradigm.
Over the years I have met enough fundamentalists to know one challenges their stable datum at one’s peril, for it is their stable datum from which they derive their happiness, and as the book I am recommending points out when our happiness is threatened our reaction is to attempt to restore it by taking away the other person’s happiness. I don’t believe any sane person wants to see “Scientology at War” and I am confident by applying the principles in this book forgiveness can be achieved on both sides in any conflict. Do look at the website http://www.jameskimmeljr.com/literary/suing-for-peace/
Love with Understanding
Pip
Thanks mwesten
I agree with your first paragraph but let’s take an example of a Scientology tool. Take for instance “Communication is the universal solvent”. Here is a very workable tool. If I want to know something I need to communicate. I can’t think of a single activity that does not involve communication of one sort or another.
The “self-stated” purpose of Scientology is best expressed through the definition of a Scientologist, namely “one who has found a way to a better life and is actively achieving it by studying the material of Scientology” and that is certainly true for me.
However I was fortunate to get thrown out of the Church before I had done any more than the Clearing Course. I am Clear nine hundred and something.
I say fortunate because if I hadn’t been I may not of found Jesus Christ and I would still be craving the love that attracted me to Scientology in the first place.
Every human being who gets into Scientology craves unconditional love, and hoped they would find it in The Church and all they found was UNDERSTANDING and although that satisfies the mind the heart remains bereft. Only by reconnecting with our creator can the heart be satisfied.
Take it from me only when the void at the centre of each being has been filled will the desperate search for ultimate meaning be over.
Love with Understanding
Pip
From now on we’ll be going around throwing sugar cubes at everybody.
‘Truman Show’ type sugar-coated arsenic, make sugar taste bitter, but there could be sincere sugar too, right?
They still all love each other. Tom gets kissed by gal friends.
Nicole revealed to Australian Women’s Weekly that she was proud of her and Tom’s kids Bella and Connor. “I am proud of the people that they have become,” she said. “They are generous, kind and hard-working, and these are traits that I love to see in my children.”
http://us.hellomagazine.com/celebrities/2015021223386/tom-cruise-dinner-penelope-cruz-salma-hayek/
John Travolta returns to the Oscars as presenter.
http://gulfnews.com/arts-entertainment/celebrity/hollywood/john-travolta-returns-as-oscars-presenter-1.1455659
Nobody really believes HBO documentary.
Yes Oracle… The best is to enjoy life, but one has to have a good health.
WWP will go down for some time, somewhere in the next two weeks.( Probably Sat 21 feb)
This is why: explanation.
Your support and contributions are appreciated.
https://whyweprotest.net/
thanks
What’s amazing is that not only did you buy this hook, line and sinker but that apparently you are going to take all of them to the grave.
Hi Pip. I’m enjoying your comments too. You da man. 😉
I actually tried to tame it down so you wouldn’t find it too “sweet”!
And yes, sugar can be sincere, sweetie. 😛
Pip, LRH actually does talk about faith. It’s at the top of one of the columns of the Chart of Attitudes. And here’s what he says about it in a lecture:
“The first cause, the first prime thought, is TO BE – moving from a state of not-beingness to a state of beingness. That is a decision and that is a postulate. And once that is undertaken it airs out into the spheres of motion or activity in life. To continue being, of course, one has to go through these various changes, because the whole environment shifts. So does the individual. But this decision TO BE is ahead of all these other decisions, and the only thing that can happen after TO BE is modification. You can’t close out that first decision. The consistency of that first decision is very powerful, very strong.
“This is the first act below faith. Faith is sort of above all this and faith is actually a state of not-beingness. Faith is the word which describes the life static. That emerges from faith.
[…]
“This situation of being faith or having faith is very interesting. You are faith!”
(from “CAUSE AND EFFECT – PART I, a lecture given on 19 November 1951, Being and Not Being”)
Here’s the link if you want to read the whole transcript: http://www.matrixfiles.com/Scientology%20Materials/Tapes%20in%20order/5100c00%20Tape%20Transcripts/TXT/5111C19A%20CAUSE%20AND%20EFFECT%20-%20PART%20I.txt
Btw, I like this definition of “faith” from my Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary: “complete confidence”
Cooper, do you have any disagreement about the substance of my comment? I mean did you see any illogic in what I wrote, or are you criticizing it simply because I didn’t interpret Broeker’s remarks the way you would like to? Seriously, be specific as to what you are referring to that you would then conclude I have some cognitive dissonance about.
Thank you.
I agree, it can become a vicious circle to seek revenge –specially from people that have nothing to do with the matter.
I think if somebody tried to really harm me or something I care for, I would defend. But from then on to search for the person to take revenge doesn’t feel good to me. I think I would have to boil in my juice, from then on, to have a reason to take that revenge. In a way, I would attack myself.
And beyond that I think that ethics and justice exist. And one who would harm continuously wouldn’t have a good time with it. Sometimes, some people’s ‘success’ is only an image they project.
Others might look upon such people for their being ‘successful’ or ‘powerful’. But like the poem says if you lose yourself, you have lost everything.
I am not nice -if I am- so I will not get harmed back. I just feel the harming myself, and I don’t like it.
We might not be ‘one’ as beings, but there is a different kind of oneness, an all-encompassing dynamic.
Interesting quote
Marildi,
Free will fits into the idea of Karma because the individual or the “I” is actually accountable for its position in the cycle of birth/rebirth. This
sounds contradictory because there is “no self.” The contradiction is
handled because the point of self/no self is an inflection point. The
forces of karma are manifested in a series of mental contaminations. The Buddha used a word which translates as “fermentations” or “pickled”.
Imagine a person soaked in Bud Light. The brain is in fermentation. This is the analogy on the level of thought. Free will is not possible when picked.Since the
goal is cessation, free will is really the idea of stillness. You do not have the idea of free will in the modern sense of capitalism in Buddhism. Gain/loss are lower levels.
The centered point is not Karma with a capital “K”. Buddha uses the idea of
the “centered point” to get the idea that “all you need for salvation is within your five or six foot body”. You don’t need anything else. Time in original Buddhism is not linear. Thus you cannot apply the idea of MEST. There is no beginning in Buddhism. Also, the past and the future are infinite. However, you can center yourself in the universe through meditation. It sounds strange. But remember Time is non-linear.
The individual thus has an input of both determinism and free will at the same time. Free will in Buddhism is better defined as the removal of black karma.
Karma with a capital “K” is the grand accountant of the universe. It is
like a debit and credit card that does not go away.
The “who” or “what” is impermanent and temporary. The being comes from nowhere and goes nowhere. There is no “doer” in Buddhism.
You can look at all of Buddhism as birth/existence/death. Buddha taught this as a fundamental building block. Hubbard’s create, create, create would
have been rejected as temporary. The cosmic cycle in Buddhism extends over more than 91 big bangs but there is no end. Buddha said it went on and on beyond. Moral Thetans are accounted for in Buddhism. They actually hang around in a special place waiting for the next big bang. They never go clear until Nirvana or Nibbana. They are impermanent.
GMW
marildi, thanks for the excerpt from Dan Brown’s book. It’s profound. I’ll give you my interpretation of what is communicated in the last paragraph of the excerpt and then some. 🙂 That paragraph being:
“Truth has power. And if we all gravitate toward similar ideas, maybe we do so because those ideas are TRUE . . . written deep within us. And when we hear the truth, even if we don’t understand it, we feel that truth resonate within us . . . vibrating with our unconscious wisdom. Perhaps the truth is not LEARNED by us, but rather, the truth is re-called . . .re-membered . . . re-cognized . . . as that which is already inside us.”
TRUTH IS. I am, you are, we are TRUTH. TRUTH is not fragmented, there are no degrees of when it comes to TRUTH. TRUTH is not just ‘inside us’ it is us. However, in our identifying with the human condition we believe that TRUTH exists outside of us and needs to be sought for, discovered and learned. We do not know that WE ARE and we are terrified of knowing who WE REALLY ARE. Therefore, we have made a universe of perception that appears to have a subject and object, a cause and an effect and in this universe we hide from TRUTH. In the fragmented universe of perception where each seeming individual identity can determine their own truth and where truth is always seen to exist outside of the individual…TRUTH is obscured. You could say that TRUTH is the ever shinning Sun and perception is the system of clouds that continually block the light of the Sun.
In the universe of perception all I can perceive through my senses is the past. BTW, my senses constantly affirm that there is indeed a world of form that exists outside of myself and in perception ‘myself’ is nothing but a construct.that I identify with. What resembles truth in the universe of perception is based on observations, comparisons, evaluations and judgments that are filtered through myriad belief systems that exist both consciously and unconsciously. In the universe of perception no two individuals will ever join in an exact truth.
The universe of perception is nothing but a dream that we believe to be quite real and we act toward it as if it is real. The universe of perception is a very strange place indeed. It is a place where the individual is never complete and there is always more to want and more to get. The good news is though, that regardless of how incredibly inventive we get, we can never escape from being who and what WE REALLY ARE.
WE ARE TRUTH. WE ARE KNOWLEDGE. WE ARE LOVE. WE ARE ETERNAL. WE ARE EVERYTHING AND WE ARE NO THING.
Isn’t it interesting that the very things we want and are in constant pursuit of in the world of perception i.e., truth, knowledge, love and immortality…are the very things WE ARE and always will be. Indeed, WE have never been anything else, This is why ALL paths taken in the universe of perception eventually and inevitably arrive at the same place…TRUTH. It cannot be otherwise.
Lol! 🙂
Vinaire, I have long understood what you try to say, and I have long answered to you. I don’t want to run around in circles all the time. What am I, crazy?
I couldn’t have stated it better. Thanks, Knatherthomas.
Brian, I could not begin to conceive of, explain or describe the abstract, which the word ‘absolute points to. Yet, somehow I know of it and I feel pulled to it as do we all whether it is recognized or not.
A few synonyms for the symbol ‘absolute’ : truth, knowledge, love, eternal, peace, consistency, mind, consciousness, God, light. In the relative (what I refer to as being the universe of perception) these symbols point to the abstract that is beyond the relative as the relative and absolute cannot exist simultaneously. Being that we cannot define or explain the abstract we invent all manner of symbols, stories, metaphors and allegories to point to the ineffable. Unfortunately, though, the pointers are all to often interpreted to be literal and conflict with one another.
The relative is both fragmented and fragmenting. It is constantly dividing, subdividing and compartmentalizing. It is complex and complicated. Everything that exists within the relative exists in a perpetual state of incompleteness. In the relative MORE and LESS in are symbolized and manifested in form in seemingly infinite ways. MORE and LESS sit as the ever ruling Gods of the relative and demand measurement, comparison and judgement of everything perceived. In the relative where nothing is seen as being complete but is always in a state of needing, wanting more…all of the conflicting wants bring about a constant state of chaos.
Brian, is it possible for there to be more than everything? Can the waves ever really leave the ocean? Can a singularity ever leave itself? Can an absolute ever not be an absolute?
I would say no to all the above questions. However, the existence of a relative seems to prove otherwise doesn’t it.? Personally, though, I believe that the relative and all its components is an unreality, an illusion, a dream, an hallucination. I believe that we can never be anything other that what we are. This is where I am in my beliefs now but I know that my beliefs are not true. I know that I don’t know yet I continue to climb metaphors and allegories and symbols to the abstract.
Rule of thumb: if it can be measured it’s relative.
Today’s Daily Reflection http://www.aa.org/pages/en_US/daily-reflection reminded me once more of the moment I started to see Scientology for what it really is.
Thirty Five years ago I heard a voice that said “you have sold your soul to the devil”. If I had never been expelled from The Church of Scientology I would still be living under the delusion that I was Homo Novis (new man) and as the daily reading says “…… float above the rest of the folks on our brain power alone”.
Change the word “alcoholism” for the word EGO and that was me. “Even the most brilliant mind is no defence against the disease of Alcoholism (ego)”
Love with Understanding
Pip
NOTHING IS WRONG WITH SCIENTOLOGY, THAT’S RIGHT, IT’S NOTHING THAT IS WRONG.
Lol! Hubbard had mental/social issues, too. Serious ones. Just listen to the people who were on the ships with him and come to your conclusions. I’ll think you’ll agree that he was insane, callous, cruel and anti-social.
My suggestion would be to build all three schools, or a school with three classrooms, and all who are inclined to attend all three.
Of course, we would then have to have a coffee bar for graduates to discuss and argue their opinions.
Mark.
I think so too. His remarks could be criticized as being idealistic in the extreme, if you wanted to be rather literal about it.
The other thing, of course, is that every point he made was later reversed. But as regards him saying those things back then, I see no reason why he would do so if he hadn’t meant it at the time.
I love your explanation.
.
G, thanks for all the interesting data. My brain is no doubt too pickled 🙂 to fully grasp what you wrote; however, I still get a sense of possible semantical differences only. One reference that comes to mind is a short paragraph from 8-8008, which describes a state above 40.0, the highest level on the tone scale:
“Space is not necessary to the beingness of a thetan when the thetan is above the tone level of 40.0 and can create space at will. He creates space to have specific beingness. AT 40.0 space and beingness can be considered to be interchangeable. BEINGNESS CAN EXIST WITHOUT ANY ENERGY OR MATTER, WHICH IS TO SAY, WITHOUT TIME [my caps].
Another part of Hubbard’s cosmology would be the Gradient Scale of Exteriorization (COHA). At the top of the scale is “a true Static” – that might correspond to the description of Nirvana as “stillness”. Here it is:
“There is a gradient scale of exteriorization which could be described as follows:
—————–
First, the thetan without contact with a universe;
Then, a thetan in full contact with a universe;
Then, a thetan in contact with part of a universe, who considers the remainder of the universe barred to him;
Then, a thetan in a universe without any contact with any part of the universe;
Then, a thetan unknowingly in contact with a large part of a universe.
—————–
“The first condition would be a true Static. The last condition is called, colloquially, in Scientology, ‘buttered all over the universe.’
“As it is with a universe, such as the physical universe, so it is with physical bodies. The thetan, who has already gone through the cycle on the universe itself, may be in contact with a physical body in the same order:
“At first he would be without association with a physical body;
Then, with occasional contact with bodies;
Then, with a fixed contact on one body but exteriorized;
Then, interiorized into a body but easy to exteriorize;
Then, in contact with and interiorized into a body, but withdrawn from the various parts of the body;
Then, obsessively ‘buttered all through the body’;
Then, obsessively and unknowingly drawn down to some small portion of the body, and so forth.
“This is the gradient scale which includes inversion and then inversion of the inversion. The auditor will discover preclears are very variable in the matter of exteriorization. Some preclears, even when they have a dark field, exteriorize rather easily. Others, after a great deal of work, are still found to be difficult to exteriorize. The matter of exteriorization is the matter of which level of inversion the preclear is in.
“One of the more difficult levels to work is so inverted that he thinks that a thetan is running him. In other words, here is a thetan functioning in a body and actually running it through various covert communication lines, who yet believes he is a body to such an extent that he considers himself, or any life around him to be some other being…”
Monte, beautifully said. What you wrote in the following rings of truth. 😉
“WE ARE TRUTH. WE ARE KNOWLEDGE. WE ARE LOVE. WE ARE ETERNAL. WE ARE EVERYTHING AND WE ARE NO THING.”
The only thing you’ve said that still doesn’t ring as truth for me is that we are all “one” and not individuals. It seems to me that even apart from the universe of perception, there could exist an infinity of individuals – each one truth, love, eternal. When I look “inside”, I feel/know that “I am”, not that “I am one with all”.
Over to you Count Monte. And have a Happy “Valentine’s” Day. 🙂
Mr. Hubbard was quite a complex man. Rich with love and compassion for his fellows. You and I. Driven to help man and mankind. Obsessed to find the properties of life and living. Plagued with demons and attackers, fanatically protecting his work. Amazing powers of observation, insight, vision. The ability to work, nonstop, for years if necessary to find the cause and solution for an outpoint. He also had quite a talent for gathering and sifting through information, codifying it, and making it understandable and useable.
That being said, he also had the ability to be harsh when he felt the purpose was valid. He detested weakness and sloth to the point of being blind to the worth of individuals who may have temporarily displayed these qualities. He demanded honesty and integrity, yet hid those lapses of his own, producing irreconcilable conflicts within himself.
Traits which are not the least bit uncommon, but unforgivable in a leader of men. He produced the most comprehensive system yet known for resolving an individual’s undesirable qualities, yet touted it as perfect and complete.
It is quite unfortunate that those who seized power over the group who was responsible for carrying on his work, are those whose main purpose were to seize power over others. They will pass and times will change. For the better, perhaps. Maybe not.
Hubbard had faults which he never overcame, and some which he did resolve. The effects of those weaknesses that he clung to are affecting us all today. But we are not beneath or inferior to him, nor weaker, nor blind. We are not so superior that we can ignore his efforts. We are bright enough to confront his perversions and embrace his discoveries. But it is a tough road, a road which toughens. The key is due diligence and joyful discipline. That is where the fun begins. And fun it can be.
ARCL, Mark.
I don’t know about LRH and SCN. But I am idealistic too, until some ‘superior’ dude comes at work and with a bitter face, and finds everything about me and my workplace wrong and guilty and demands that I do much more than I’m supposed to, to serve him, like he was my master. or else he will write bad reviews about me and my workplace on the internet, hoping I will lose -or be afraid I will lose- my job. And he comes in and causes much more trouble to us the staff and the customers, and demands much more pampering than anybody.
If the workplace was mine, I’d kindly -or not- show him the way out. If we are so bad, what are you doing here, anyway? I think. Or I try to not think. But the workplaces owners want the money, so I’m not allowed to do that.
I think to consider that such guys are not really bad, but rather mad, thinking their life depends upon others death, is a kind compliment.
Still, I take it further wondering how come I draw such stuff to me. Is it random or?
Anyway, it’s nice and easy to be idealistic from a distance. And maybe a good solution would for people to play the games (including jobs) that they want to play. Maybe it is indeed my fault, if I don’t.
Hi M,
Great response. I’m happy you laughed at “pickled.” The critical issues boil down to the definition of a body and “potential”.
Exteriorization from the body is a step beyond mindfulness which does not apply to Buddhism. In Scientology, Hubbard talks about the body as an
object. He does this over and over. In the scripture that you posted above,
it is a central theme. Hubbard uses the idea of the “genetic entity” as the conductor of the body. This body is used in transmigration. This theory fails at the outset because it ends in the dichotomy of theta and mest. In original Buddhism the body is a product of physical matter and Karma with a capital “K”. The internal world and the external world are linked together into a unified whole with mind. The difference in regard to the thetan is related to Hubbard’s “potential” In other words, the thetan has the ability to return or transmigrate. In Buddhism, nibbana or cessation is bliss and it is not necessary to return.
It is “letting go”. Hubbard wanted to keep grasping or clinging in the picture.
You can come up with any scale you want 40.0 or 400.0, you are still stuck in the Max Planck constant. You could also call it Hubbard’s paradox.
“As it is with a universe, such as the physical universe, so it is with physical bodies. The thetan, who has already gone through the cycle on the universe itself, may be in contact with a physical body in the same order:”
The above merits discussion.
Hubbard separates the universe from the thetan and implies that they go through the same cycle. In Buddhism, there is an integerated view. Mind and matter exist. The idea of the thetan is derived. It is not primary. There is
no description of nirvana which includes anything like a thetan or potential.
Think of Buddha’s definition as a live shell you would find on the beach.
A child not knowing about these animals knows there is something inside but
cannot describe it. Hubbard does not know what the universe is, but describes it with the thetan. In reality, what is in the shell and how it was formed is far more complex. The thetan would be the child drawing conclusions with no understanding.
“Space is not necessary to the beingness of a thetan when the thetan is above the tone level of 40.0 and can create space at will. He creates space to have specific beingness. AT 40.0 space and beingness can be considered to be interchangeable. BEINGNESS CAN EXIST WITHOUT ANY ENERGY OR MATTER, WHICH IS TO SAY, WITHOUT TIME [my caps].
In Physics, it is not proven that beingness can exist without time.
What Hubbard is talking about here is theoretical. There is no experiment that proves this. You could use quantum physics. However most of these experiments were done in the 1930’s and Hubbard does not define them.
They are not proven. The observer is not defined in science.
If a person wants to accept Hubbard on faith, that is clearly an option.
Beingness without time is a derivative of the exteriorization of the thetan
which is also not proven. We are into some wild speculation which is beyond science. These axioms you quote are not convincing.
In Buddhism, it is not important if beingness is “in time” or “out of time”
The process is more important.
May all pickled beings be well and happy!
vinaire,
Thanks. Some day we will meet.
No worries on the misinterpretation. I really don’t know Karen that much, but she, as was Mark and Mike, quite helpful and instrumental in my settling myself when I decided to leave after a few decades myself. She offered to audit me, which was a rather soothing balm as I went through what essentially was my withdrawal period. Though I never took her up on the offer, just the fact of knowing that helped me dramatically, I think. My point was mainly that I found she served a worthwhile purpose in being ready to service what I though I needed as I settled out into my life without Scn, and I am sure there are many, many more like myself.
How many others on the edge, but still indoctrinated heavily into the Hubbard system Mark summarized above can be released from it by persons who can service in accordance to those procedures while at the same time, opening their clients’ eyes to the idea it might all be a placebo after all. So, I’m a little protective of this valuable potential in forums like this because this really can the the trickle that becomes the flood of people stepping away from the bs.
The truth, Marildi, is that there is no beingness beyond inertialess space.
Hubbard was simply blowing drug-laced smoke. He was no scientist.
Master race. Apparently, I am the only one, to think, “Remove all counter intention from the environment” is an evil purpose and an ethnic cleansing goal.
But if someone thought for a minute they were going to be “removed from the environment” for having counter intention, they might keep that counter intention on full suppress. Apologize for having some “counter” intention.
I can co exist with counter intention. Sometimes, it feels good!
“The purpose of ethics is to remove counter intentions from the environment. And having accomplished that the purpose becomes to remove other intentionedness from the environment”
This is domination, and ethnic cleansing purposes. Why won’t a spokesperson for the Church announce this along side their “Human Rights” campaigns?
Huh? That’s what I want to know. This is one big f%&^#*g with hold, that’s why.
The purpose of the Sea Organization is to put ethics in. It’s right in their bibles. Ethics is REMOVING counter or other intention from the environment. This is the only reason anyone needs to get a restraining order on that group. It is their sworn duty to remove YOU from the environment if you are a counter intention.
How does that align with Human Rights?
I’ve thought about the fact that anyone who buys into this “purpose”, is in an automatic enemy condition with the rest of their fellow man outside of the group. Unless they ” intend” everything you do.
This is a big with hold many Scientologists carry. That they are in an enemy condition with many of their fellow man. Anyone that has counter or other intention. That would definitely be every other religion.
How do rise up when you are in a persistent enemy condition with your fellow man? How does this purpose of ethnic cleansing take you “higher”. And what kind of spiritual supremacy would one need to have to even think this is even righteous? A group that discards children as counter intention or other intention. That’s how bad it is.
Hi Monte
As I have said before I have been aware of and have studied ACIM for the past 15 years and although I still read and post on miracle_e_pals_uk@yahoogroups I am aware the Course Students have quite a back off where Scientology is concerned, and in fact many of them would believe that ACIM is closer to Buddhism than Christianity.
My attention was drawn to your thoughts concerning who and what we really are. I was particularly interested in your last statement “WE ARE NO THING” this is where Scientology makes its fundamental mistake. Having first established that man is a NO THING that is THETA, it then goes on to speaking about a THETAN. So WHO YOU TRULY ARE is THETA, WHO YOU REALLY ARE IS A THETAN. In other words you are A THETAN by AGREEMENT. This handles the apparent paradox of how we can be ONE and separate INDIVIDUALS at the same time, in fact, INDIVISIBLE and INDIVIDUAL come from the same root, as I have said before.
Love and Understanding
Pip
Thanks for your acknowledgement Spyros. Yes the more I think of the insanity of thinking if someone has taken my happiness I can get it back by taking theirs, the more silly it seems.
My family motto is WILLING EFFECT IS TOTAL CAUSE. To the degree I apply this to my life nothing and no-one can harm me.
Yes! we might be ‘one’ as beings but that is not the entirety of who we are, for we are both IN TIME and ETERNITY, both AL-ONE and ALONE.
Love
Pip
Hi Marildi
Very interesting! “The first cause, the first prime thought, is TO BE”. This is so true. However as per the FACTORS it starts “BEFORE THE BEGINNING”, here is the SOURCE of FAITH. As Ron says faith is above TO BE. Scientology does not get involved in the area beyond TO BE (BEINGNESS) because beyond beingness the technology no longer applies. This is the realm of UNCONDITIONAL LOVE, the realm of the EIGHTH DYNAMIC. Here we find ONENESS instead of INDIVIDUALITY but where individuality is contained. AFFINITY is a scale of attitudes that falls away from the CO-EXISTENCE OF STATIC, but LOVE (unconditional love) will forever be beyond affinity for affinity can not even exist unless DISTANCE is postulated.
Thanks for that definition of faith and it works well in terms of M.E.S.T., but in terms of THETA I like UNDESERVED FAVOUR.
Lots of love
Pipx
Love you!
Hi Marildi
This idea that we are “one with all” is one of the most elusive teachings in ACIM, but if embraced it brings about TOTAL RESPONSIBILITY.
How can you not love your brother if in TRUTH you and he are one. Obviously we are speaking from a spiritual dimension, so gender does not apply.
Lots of love
Pip
Thanks for your post Mark. I find it a balanced view of L.R.H. It is my belief that the more certain a man becomes of his truth, the more open he is to becoming a tyrant. Perhaps it will be the uncertainty principle that will eventually save the world from fundamentalists.
Regards
Pip
Yep, that’s the idealistic Spyros I’ve come to know and admire. 😛
To answer your unvoiced question, I could say to you to “handle or disconnect” (and play the game you love!). But I’m sure you know just as much about that tech as I do – so I’m guessing that with either of those choices, it’s “easier said than done.”
You brought up another possibly relevant point – “how come I draw such stuff to me”. In Buddhism, I suppose the answer would be “karma”, and of course there are Buddhist practices to “handle”. In scientology, the answer is similar – “O/W’s” – with one solution being to write them up. Another scn solution would be TR-0, which all in itself could possibly even make a change in that other guy – or maybe just in yourself.
Well, guess what – I’ve got another Eckhart Tolle vid for you, which I would say is really just another way of describing TR-0, but maybe he communicates it better for some people. Take it as my little Valentine’s Day “card” for you. ❤ 😛
Wow, Mark. I don’t think you missed a single thing – and you expressed it all so eloquently! It really moved me.
Happy Valentine’s Day to one of my all-time favorite guys. ❤ 🙂
LOL.
Yea, so to squirrel it just one notch higher, running around the whole universe would be the ticket to ultra rehabbing your soul for more God like action in the next universe of your own making! LOL
Hubbard the prolific pulp fiction writer, he should have stayed pulp fiction writer, period, not launched his career as religion founder. Now a whole lot of people are stuck in Hubbard’s fantasy narrative.
This was a great thread by Marty.
Hi there OSA,
” He produced the most comprehensive system yet known for resolving an individual’s undesirable qualities, yet touted it as perfect and complete. ”
No Mark, Mr. Hubbard was a religious implanter.
No that you would ever understand, since you have driven yourself into a permanent trance.
Removing any good or bad connotations, and Scientology in its most pure and simplest form is a system, and essentially like any other system. One can obviously cherry pick out what they want but then that is not a representation of what it actually is in its fullest form then, does it? One of the best lines that I felt suckered people into the subject is that it is not a belief system. It very surely is and Hubbard’s assertions to the contrary.
Case in point, friction is friction, and will be produced regardless of whether one believes it will happen or not, whether one is critical of it or not, whether one has “overts” against whatever objects one is using to produce it or not. Nothing in Scientology can hold up against that test.
I think you are right.
Thank you Cooper.
Am I bad if I actually consider these blogs fun?
Both states of
1) Absolute Being, undifferentiated consciousness
2) a reflection of that Absolute radiating through our personalities.
Are, the same thing.
But we, consciousness, Are the dreamer and experiencer in all this.
There is a state of consciousness called Nirvakalpa Samadhi. It is a state whereby the soul is simultaneously aware of having a body and living a life and being absorbed in Omnipresence within: All knowing
That state is unshakable because the experiencer, the witness, of that state, has cognited on the root causes of matter itself.
The double blind experiment, on waves vs particle, which would become Quantum Mechanics, was found to have the influence of the consciousness of the observer out outcomes.
We are both the Absolute and the relative because we are the fulcrum upon which duality swings or stays still.
That is what I mean, we are the fulcrum. Both duality and an absolutely stillness depend on a third factor: Consciousness; the fulcrum. Untouched by change yet its the reason the scales can sway.
sounds good to me Pip.
Brian: ” But if we do our job well, we can extricate him (Hubbard) from the minds of those who believed that he is the only hope for man.
What is your “job”? Mind control, thought police, memory swipes and brain washing? Playing God? Extricating from other people’s minds?
Why do you have any ownership over other people’s minds? How are other minds any of your business to the degree that it is your job to program them or even decide what program they should be operating with?
When you lay things out like that and cut to the chase, the meaning becomes very clear. But I think a lot of people were operating on their own interpretation and with their own definitions of what that meant, and so were never fully aligned to begin with. It seems to be a group where everyone has their own private version of the truth.
Hi G,
“May all pickled beings be well and happy!” You got a hearty lol on that one. 😀
G: “Beingness without time is a derivative of the exteriorization of the thetan which is also not proven.”
As a matter of fact, there is a lot of scientific evidence of exteriorization (easily found on the internet) in spite of the fact that scientists in general and thus the media (especially in this country) don’t pay it much heed. Based on this evidence, you essentially made the case for individual beingness (soul/thetan) where you said that from exteriorization one can derive beingness without time.
That is actually what I understood Hubbard to mean where he wrote that ABOVE the scale (a scale of physical universe wavelengths) “beingness can exist without any energy or matter, which is to say, without time.”
More to the point of our overall discussion, the word “can” in the above quote seems to me to be the same idea as what you said about nibbana (or nirvana) – i.e. that “it is not necessary to return.” In other words, “not necessary” seems to be another way to say “can”. So I am back to seeing different constructs – which amount to semantical differences only. Which pickles me pink. (Sorry for the corn, but I liked the alliteration. 🙂 )
One very compelling out-of body (exteriorization) experiment was described by Tom Campbell in his book *My Big TOE* (TOE = Theory of Everything). Campbell is a NASA physicist and a researcher of “consciousness” for several decades. As a scientist, he used scientific protocol in experiments involving his and others’ OOB experiences. He and a research partner named Dennis Mennerich started out being skeptical (but open-minded), as any good scientist would be. They had quite a moment when they got the first proof that their OOB experiences were real. Below is an excerpt from Campbell’s book *My Big TOE*.
—————————
“One of our first experiments was for Dennis and me to take a trip (experience) in the nonphysical together. Our independent descriptions of what we were experiencing should correlate closely if the experience were real and independent of either of us. From the beginning of our training, we had learned to give real-time descriptions of whatever we experienced. A microphone was suspended from the ceiling above each of our heads. What we said was recorded on tape. Dennis and I could not hear each other because we were in separate soundproof chambers.
“Dennis and I quickly achieved the appropriate altered state, left our bodies, and met in the nonphysical as planned. It was a long adventure. We went places, saw things, had conversations with each other and with several nonphysical beings we happened to run into along the way.
“Bob had let us go a long time before he ended the session and called us back. We pulled off our EEG and GSR electrodes and stumbled out of the darkness into the hallway of the lab.
“In the control room, Bob was waiting for us. After a quick exchange, we knew that this would be a good test because we both had experienced many specific interactions. But were they the same interactions? Bob looked at us deadpan. ‘So you two think you were together?’ he asked, trying to sound disappointed. We looked at each other and shrugged our shoulders.
“‘Maybe,’ Dennis said tentatively, ‘at least we perceived meeting each other.’
“‘Listen to this!’ Bob said emphatically. The tapes, rewound as we disconnected electrodes and climbed out of our chambers, began to roll forward. We sat down and listened. The correlation was astonishing. For almost two hours we sat there with our mouths open, hooting and exclaiming, filling in the details for each other. Bob was now grinning. ‘Now that tells you something, doesn’t it?’ he exclaimed beaming. He was every bit as excited as we were.
“I was dumbfounded. There was only one good explanation: THIS STUFF WAS REAL! […]
We repeated that experiment with similar results. It wasn’t a phenomenon that depended on the two of us. Nancy Lea and I shared equally astonishing joint experiences. We tried other things as well. We read three and four digit numbers written on a blackboard next to the control room. Somebody would write a random number and we would read it while our bodies lay asleep. Then they would erase it and write another one, and so on and on. We went places – to people’s homes – and saw what they were doing, then called them or talked to them the next day to check it out…”
(Thomas Campbell – *My Big TOE*)
—————————-
Here’s the link, if you want to continue reading where the above leaves off (the whole book can be read for free on Google books):
http://books.google.com/books?id=RYHtBPiZVgsC&pg=PA84&dq=%22trip+%28experience%29+in+the+nonphysical+together%22&hl=en&ei=750HTtqMKsvEswbvp9TbDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22trip%20(experience)%20in%20the%20nonphysical%20together%22&f=false
p.s. Just to note – “Bob” is Bob Monroe, who at the time was already well known for his book *Journeys out of the Body*. He recruited the two scientists, Tom and Dennis, to do scientific experiments on OOB experiments. He also founded the famous Monroe Institute.
Athens, lucky you! Some day soon I will be able to go there to visit. There used to be a community of Greek people in Queens N.Y. that were Scientologists. Nick Maminakis and his tribe. Spent quite a few week ends in the summers over there. So many great memories. Anthony Quinn in this film clip, is truly the sexiest man in history. I salute Greece!
“…affinity can not even exist unless DISTANCE is postulated.”
Generally, yes. However, there is also the following definition of affinity:
6 . in its truest definition which is coincidence of location and beingness, that is the ultimate in affinity.
In that case, there would be no distance. And people do have this kind of experience. Here’s one description of it, where it’s jocularly referred to as OOB sex:
❤
Wonderful scene!
Well, I no longer use any techniques. Anyone who wants, can use them. I know what I should do with myself now, to deal with my issues.
If you’re interested in LRH’s opinion about karma and O/Ws, as opposed to what I was told, you can check out HCOB ‘O/Ws a limited theory’.
Thanx for the gift 🙂
Well, I don’t mind where I am, as long as I’m with nice people hehehe 🙂 And also I get to meet many foreign people daily, so it’s as if I was living all around the Earth, people-wise 😛
You might not fancy it, but it’s what I’m willing to offer right now, as I had been playing it all night long. It’s soo trippy.
My dear Pip, have you forgotten that article by UCSF Professor Arthur Deikman? You introduced me to it about a year ago, right here on Marty’s. The title is “‘I’ = Awareness”. Here’s the abstract:
“Introspection reveals that the core of subjectivity — the `I’ — is identical to awareness. This `I’ should be differentiated from the various aspects of the physical person and its mental contents which form the `self’. Most discussions of consciousness confuse the `I’ and the `self’. In fact, our experience is fundamentally dualistic — not the dualism of mind and matter — but that of the `I’ and that which is observed. The identity of awareness and the `I’ means that we know awareness by being it, thus solving the problem of the infinite regress of observers. It follows that whatever our ontology of awareness may be, it must also be the same for `I’.”
The article is summed up with the following:
“KNOWING BY BEING THAT WHICH IS KNOWN [my caps] is ontologically different from perceptual knowledge. That is why someone might introspect and not see awareness or the `I’, concluding…that it doesn’t exist. But thought experiments and introspective meditation techniques are able to extract the one who is looking from what is seen, restoring the missing centre.”
“Once we grant the identity of `I’ and awareness we are compelled to extend to the core subjective self whatever ontological propositions seem appropriate for awareness. If awareness is non-local, so is the essential self. If awareness transcends material reality so does the `I’. If awareness is declared to be non-existent then that same conclusion must apply to the `I’. No matter what one’s ontological bias, recognition that `I’ = awareness has profound implications for our theoretical and personal perspective.”
http://www.imprint.co.uk/online/Deikman.html
Marildi, this is human self-centric view of awareness. It is a very narrow view.
Thank you for the offering. Gratefully accepted.
Oluckyme, Perhaps primal scream therapy would have been a more workable route for you.
For one thing, if one were to consider the Xenu incident as having happened, and I am not saying it didn’t. Just because I wasn’t in the White House today doesn’t mean the president didn’t go to work. Anyway, Earth was here already. There were people on it. I have dated earth incidents in my auditing, and there were other Earth calendars. I ran something that happened here on Earth in the year of 4000’s. So, there was an earlier time here, an earlier beginning. But the point is, there were Earth people, even if the Xenu incident happened. Earth was not an abandoned planet.
So, the Earth people would not have been part of that. Doesn’t anyone ever think about that? So why would they need to think that applied to them if they did get involved with Scientology? And Hubbard made a lot of snarkey comments about Earth. The people who were already here were not dumped here and were nobodies prisoners. The “loyal officers” and all the rest that got offloaded, don’t even act like guests. They are guests. And they want to determine the fate of this planet. The motto is “we come back”. Well, let them go back. What do they need, a spaceship? Doesn’t the IAS have enough in reserves to cover that yet?
I mean, if one does accept it as a truth, it sounds even worse.
“We were very noble and loyal officers and we just happened to end up here with all of the criminals”.
All right.
“We were doing everything right, everybody loved us, Xenu just wanted to thin the population.”
All right.
“Earth is dumping ground for the unwanted, but we ended up here because we are the most valuable persons in all the galaxy.”
All right.
“We come back. We will go back to reclaim that civilization. No date set yet. No address either of where we are going back to, in case you wanted to give us a lift back home.”
All right.
After what those loyal officers became unto themselves out in that compound in the desert, I am highly suspect of the shipwrecked story.
One thing we could do is sec check THEM, and find out why they got expelled from the last planet they were on.
I made good gains from my time in Scientology. I use TR’s, ARC, KRC and study tech in my day to day life. I’d like to think that I’m more at cause over my environment and my own universe as a result of my Scientology training and auditing. I don’t give a shit about the OT 3 story and the current organization sucks. To condense the beliefs of Scientology into this list of 8 items seems quite “redonkulous” to me.
Spyros: “I know what I should do with myself now, to deal with my issues.”
Good to know you’re back in character. 🙂
Did you watch that vid (it’s only 4 minutes)? I loved it that Tolle used Obama (I had you in good company!) as an example of someone who remains “conscious” in spite of all the heavy stuff he deals with. He then questioned (this was a few years ago) whether even Obama would continue to withstand all the “unconscious” beings he is confronted with.
Thanks for reminding me about that bulletin “O/W, A Limited Theory”! I am familiar with it (read it first on Level II) but wasn’t keeping it in mind – and it should be. It has some valuable data:
“Before I would permit you to believe that the overt-withhold mechanism was a total way of life, I would point out that it applies only to a strata of existence and that it stems from failures to help….
“O/W is a theory which sets in when aberration sets in. It is not a high natural law. It is junior to the various laws of Communication, Control and Help.
“O/W can occur only when help has failed. Help is a co-joining of vectors of life.
“When two beings who have joined forces to help fail each other, only then does O/W come into existence.”
Hi again Pip,
Spyros reminded me of the bulletin “O/W, A Limited Theory”. It has everything to do with this idea of unconditional love – expressed by Jesus as “Love thy neighbor” – and it bridges the gap between ARC and universal love. In other words, one can indeed reach Love through Understanding – which only makes sense if you think about it.
I hadn’t thought about this before but the bulletin also correlates with physics. In the realm of aberration, the principle in operation is from Newton physics – which is linear. But there is also a correlation with quantum physics – in the sense of life units being entangled. And experiments have now shown that not just particles but life itself can be entangled. (Yet another example of LRH’s insights being “re-discovered”.)
Here’s the relevant excerpt from the bulletin (my caps for emphasis):
———————-
“The theory that what you do to others will then happen to you is a punishment control mechanism peculiar to this universe. It derives from a deteriorated willingness to duplicate. IT IS THE LAW OF PHYSICS OF INTERACTION – FOR EVERY ACTION THERE IS AN EQUAL AND CONTRARY REACTION.
“‘Love thy neighbor’, when it is no longer a willingness, is enforced by the theory of O/W. ‘Love thy neighbor’ can exist only when help, control and communication are high. When all these go, then O-W comes into vogue as a method of enforcing peace.
“O-W is a theory which sets in when aberration sets in. It is not a high natural law. It is junior to the various laws of Communication, Control and Help.
“O-W can occur only when help has failed. Help is a CO-JOINING OF VECTORS OF LIFE.
“When two BEINGS WHO HAVE JOINED FORCES to help fail each other, only then does O-W come into existence.
“THE FORCES OF TWO BEINGS CANNOT COME INTO DISPUTE UNTIL AFTER THEY HAVE FIRST JOINED. Thus there is no war like that seen between brothers or husband and wife.”
No, it’s cousciousness-centric. 😛
And that has been proven by quantum physics with the experiment that went beyond the double-slit – that is, the delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment:
LOL 😀
Actually, I think whoever developed primal therapy may have gotten the idea from a process in *Creation of Human Ability* called “Yelling”:
“In that man has, for a long time, used words to make space, and as any barbaric people uses noise to make itself big, it will be found that an inhibition of making noise is a major difficulty on the case of any preclear.…The auditing command is: ‘Start yelling’, and ‘keep yelling’. The preclear can be sent off by himself to yell. If a group is being processed where its noise will not disturb others, a back and forth interchange between the auditor and the group will be found beneficial. This process is very limited and has a tendency simply to make people cheerful [like it did in the posted video], but occasionally some cases are so inhibited on the making of noise that they are having difficulty with their vocal cords or with their mouths. Tooth trouble can be traced to the inhibition of making noise. Distaste for singing is equally traced to the making of noise.”
“We are both the Absolute and the relative because we are the fulcrum upon which duality swings or stays still.”
Great line. Wish I had said that. 🙂
“What is your ‘job’? Mind control, thought police, memory swipes and brain washing? Playing God? Extricating from other people’s minds?
Why do you have any ownership over other people’s minds? How are other minds any of your business to the degree that it is your job to program them or even decide what program they should be operating with?”
Good questions!
Is scientology your religion?
Got it Another Thought. Thanks for the clarification. Welcome to freedom .
🙂 🙂 🙂
I think Hubbard’s beliefs need to be evaluated against Gnostic beiefs. Some thiongs he said make a lot more sense when looked at from a Gnostic viewpoint.
http://gnosis.org/gnintro.htm
Cepuscule, I recommend this, for a more three dimensional understanding:
http://vis-www.cs.umass.edu/~dima/mytexts/suff.html#subjectivity
Also the concept of existentialist philosophy in general, and the thought of Ken Wilbur, as in “The Intergral Vision” or “A Brief History of Everything”.. Not all of existence can be understood by “objectivizing” everything. The objective is just the sound of one hand clapping. The other hand is the subjective side of things.
I think Marty, Mike, et al still apply everything of value they took away from scientology.
He had already had several strokes by the time he died.
I didn’t want to get into that again, so as not to sound mean, and just let it be, but since you ask me again, I will say it again. I think TRs are good Div 6 stuff, and drills for auditors. But they could as well be nicely used in psychology –the way I have done those TRs. And they are not spirituality. Particularly, this not reacting thing, this poker face, is well taught in psychosciences too, and is considered a desirable EP. Like Hubbard wrote in the book about the purif RD ‘We used to have men made of iron and ships men of wood and now we have ships made of iron and men made of wood’. I don’t like TRs and the fixation on body PT. TRs so as to go through difficulties in communicating, yes. TRs to make you wood, no. Before you tell me how Hubbard wrote about robotic TRs and premature acks, I know about it. And may I also tell you how I have mostly witnessed that, and not anything else, and how TRs ARC broke me constantly, because they seemed fake to me, and I didn’t feel I communicated at all. Of course it was my fault because ‘I had too many witholds’. Bah. How come I no longer ARC break? Maybe I had something with SCN eh? Nope. the SCN group had something with itself. The other fixation on flow 1 omits the other 3 flows, and it’s done on purpose to implant guilts, by the way. Nobody questions the group. It’s all your fault mehehe. Guess what, that’s blame from the group to the person too!
Yes, I watched the video, but I’m still not sure whether he has something in mind like the TRs I mentioned, or something else. Obama projects the iimage Tolle says, indeed. Who knows what goes on inside him? A capable person could project about anything. I’m not implying anything. I just don’t know Obama. I only know a face I see on tv.
🙂
*flow 2, not flow 1. I meant fixation on O/Ws.
I don’t think this is necessarily true.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primal_therapy
I don’t entirely agree with this because it depends on the process and intended EP. If the EP is intended to be subjective, eg “feeling good”, then that’s it. If the EP is intended to be “aa better meory”, or “Higher IQ”, if it does that, then that’s it. Being “in touch with reality” is a possible goal or EP, but it isn’t stated as such in most of what Hubbard wrote or said. My grandfather didn’t approve of comic books or sci-fi, because they were not reality oriented. He was kinda suppressive in that way. He didn’t see the value of fantasy or even imagination unless they were placed in service of “reality”. In fact I kinda agree that “agreement with reality” is not a very worthy goal, especially when it is enforced. As when cops beat people up for not mindlessly complying with their their commands. Obviously it is the cops’ reality ythat their commands must be obeyed, or else. What kind of freedom is that? Makes me wonder about some of the statements posted by commenters here, who appear to be trying to enforce their view of Hubbard on everyone else.
“No that you would ever understand, since you have driven yourself into a permanent trance.”
You know, even if I were a harsh critic of scientology myself, I would not want to be associated with people who make comments like the above. It’s arrogant and kind of mean.
Valkov, good to see you back. You were missed.
My definition of reality seems to be different from yours. I see reality as the lack of inconsistency resulting in harmony. To the degree there is inconsistency and disharmony something is unreal.
Reality includes both physical and spiritual aspects.
Yes, I think I fully agree even if I used slightly different wording.
I too lately found that the most important thing in Christinity is true for me too.
Both in Scientology and in Christianity there are elements with which I disagree. But the basics on which the rest are build (or abberate from) are true for me. I think the most basic in both, even if not directly addressed, is God.
From the the viewpoint of such basics, there can be alignment. From the viewpoint of what each religion does, through it’s people, there can be differences and even hostilities. I don’t know details about what Muslims believe, but I think basically, they believe in God and even Jesus –as a prophet. Yet, look how some create hate between those two. It’s the humans that do it. Yet, they do it in the name of God, Thus, more materialistic-minded people figure that God is the reason for all war. I think God doesn’t negate sciences, at all.
Revised 2/17 to correct sequence and add notes.
Me too.
Thanks LG. I thought it was clear as a bell. But this is why I got labeled “reasonable”. But it comes down to mathematics doesn’t it?
If the purpose of the Sea Org is to put ethics in on the planet. And ethics is removing all “counter intention” from the environment, and then, all “other intention” from the environment. Who will be left in the environment?
I mean, if you are sleeping and you are woken by a siren, that is counter intention. Traffic is counter intention. Other intention.
Counter intention and other intention is also known as co existance.
If you lived in a world with no counter intention and no other intention, what kind of world would you live in?
When you think about purpose, you have to have some idea of why you would align yourself with a purpose right?
The purpose of ethics then, within the Scientology framework, and the purpose of the Sea Org, is that no counter intention or other intention exists.
But if there is only one other person on the planet besides yourself, you are going to have other intention.
So, this entire premise that the ethics structure is built on, in the Church, is anti social in itself.
It doesn’t even align with the admin scale.
I mean, no wonder the Orgs are empty. Those people “out there” are other intention. The Sea Org is supposed to keep those people REMOVED from the environment, not suck them in!
Marty, thanks for the revision.
The key to Scientology’s bamboozle is the hiding of its SOURCES, that is the principal trick Ron used to create the illusion of Omniscience and to project his Demi-God status.
All other hypnotic tricks employed, build upon and reinforce the assumption that Ron created Scientology through preternatural insights into the nature of Reality. Once you know Hubbard’s sources, including his undisclosed intentions, the entire house of cards crumbles.
A sleight of hand from a master hypnotist, as it creates a difference of potential between the Operator and its subjects, from whom commands can flow down and stick as memes.
I and others have noted many times before that knowledge about the mind, its processes and phenomena has been extensively studied and recorded in the East for thousands of years.
Particularly that Buddhism is the largest reservoir of knowledge on the subject.
In the late 1800’s two major events occurred that advanced human thought in the West:
One was the publishing of The Egyptian Book of the Dead and The Pyramid Texts which essentially revealed the source and history of Religion and Magic in the West and showed the three main monotheistic cults as emperors with no clothes.
The other was the publishing of Buddhist and Vedic sacred texts, along with disseminating Yoga and meditation practices.
The Theosophical Society had a big hand in syncretizing and popularizing both aspects of this ancient spiritual knowledge. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theosophical_Society
Hubbard’s main source, Aleister Crowley was at the forefront of this movement and incorporated all of this esoterica into his Thelema system. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A%E2%88%B4A%E2%88%B4
I think a must read for recovering Scientologists and others is Crowley’s Essay on Yoga, brilliantly written, you will see Hubbard’s “unique” insights into the mind plagiarized from Yoga, via Crowley.
See http://hermetic.com/crowley/eight-lectures-on-yoga/
It is obvious to me that Scientologists lack the most basic common sense to be able to understand the processes involved in auditing, the similarities and differences between the various states induced by focusing attention on mental objects, as done under Reverie, Meditative Absorption or under
Hypnosis.
Well, just remedy that ignorance and lift yourself up to be at par with Hubbard’s knowledge and hopefully exceed it.
Hi Marildi,
I need to clarify one point because you seem to be using me
to make a wrong conclusion about beingness and time. I was trying to say
that, in Original Buddhism, it does not matter if the being is
in or out of time. As I said before, this does not prove the definition
of the “I” or the spirit. It only means that it is not important in the
overall picture. It is the elimination of the Karma that causes
these states which is important.
I read Tom Campbell and your analysis of exteriorization.
If you go back 2,600 years, there are numerous stories of
astral bodies, duplicate bodies, and exteriorization. These
are in Hundu, Buddhist and other accounts. Tom is
simply covering what has been known for 26 centuries. None
of these states lead anywhere. We could discuss thsi for
another 2,600 years. You will still hit a dead-end as did
Hubbard.
MM,
G
Let me put it slightly differently. I hypnotized person is not aware of what he is hypnotized about.
For those in the church, it should be a responsibility of those outside to make them aware that no part of scientology is necessary for health, happiness and prosperity. That no part of scientology is necessary for spiritual growth. That no part of scientology is necessary for education or artistic development. All that has been accomplished throughout history, from the most ancient written records up to 1950, was never enhanced or brought about by scientology. All of those misled to believe in the wonders of scientology and trapped in that belief have been, and are being robbed of their freedom of choice, the mechanics of scientology having created the illusion that the choice is only scientology. This understanding of the non-necessity of any scientology should be the very first responsibility of every freezone auditor toward anyone seeking auditing once they have escaped the church.
Thanks for the references and thoughts Conan.
You welcome Marty, it has been a pleasure working with you.
And you know, I broached this subject a while back on another forum. About this whole ethics subject and the way it is set up. And it seems very clear to me about what it is. But I got slammed by a “KSW fanatic” as “railing against ethics and justice” (therefore labeled whatever…)
Well, what about theta being repelled by entheta? Doesn’t that count for anything?
See, you can rail against the entire system. But it doesn’t unfold, the pieces that do not work, unless you pull a little string.
What is so theta and in ethics about the KSW series? Look at the purposes a person is supposed to align themselves with that.
Hammer out of existence ?
Closing the door?
Hubbard states, “I know what a group of people will do and how insane they will go in accepting unworkable ‘technology’.
How about that unworkable ethics technology? How insane have people gone in that group accepting unworkable ethics technology? The Orgs are empty. The Sea Org has made more SP’s than Clears!!!!!!!!! There is more counter intention towards the Church than ever because of the people that got set up for losses with the ethics sections of the Church.
The leader of the Organization is running domestic terrorism crews!
I am not railing against ethics and justice!!! I am railing against unworkable technology!! Anti social technology.
This environment is a CO OPERATIVE. You can’t just remove others from it because they have counter or other intentions.
If you can’t through ARC and reasoning, bring people over to your side to support you, what does that say about your own communication skills? The product you are selling.
Police and soldiers do not have the same effect on people they did 50 years ago. It is no longer a police power or a soldier power civilization for the majority of the planet.
This is not the same planet Hubbard lived on when he wrote these notes and ideas.
And isn’t ” removing all counter intention and other intention from the environment”, the exact complaint against Xenu?
The purpose of the Sea Org aligns with Xenu!
Yes, this is closert o the way it is. A person who has been hypnotized and implanted rationalizes his “belief” or irrational actions. Hubbard actually explained this quite well, when he talked about a person’s apparently hardwired sense that his computing ability is perfect, therefore he does not make mistakes in computation.
Thanks for the welcome Vin. I don’t know, maybe our meanings for reality differ. Reality to me has subjective aspects and it has objective aspects. Subjective aspects can be targetted, and objective aspects can be dealt with also. There is a lot about these in Scientology, as I’m sure you are aware. The old-school differentiation is “inner” vs. “outer”.
According to Crowley’s essays about Yoga, everything we perceive is in the mind. Thus all reality is “mindgames”.
I think that Scientology got many started on the right track. But then it did not continue to provide the right track.
Wow, I don’t think you missed a thing!
“Arrogant and kind of mean’ sums up Hubbard and his family and life-destroying mind-fuck perfectly.
Subjectivity comes from having a viewpoint. When there is no viewpoint there is no subjectivity.
In mindfulness, ultimately, there is no viewpoint and no subjectivity or objectivity. There is simply seeing things as they are.
There are various perspectives possible, on death. Here is a book that reflects some American attitudes. It is a largely unexamined subject, compared to some other cultures. Look at the traditional Japaness attitudes towards death and suicide in particular. That was a culture in which suicide was actually institutionalized and called for under some circumstances. What I am saying is, a culture’s attitiudes towards death and suicide in particular, usually constitute a “bubble” of its own, apart from any “objective” reality of death. I don’t think we know much about what happens, and this makes us susceptible to “stories” about it. Early Christians were notoriously fearless of death, as are today’s “Islamic” suicide bombers. They were disliked by secular rulers then, and are just as disliked by today’s powers-that-be, because not fearing death, they are difficult or impossible to control. Even in recent history, was it not Patrick Henry who said “Give me Liberty, or give me death!” ?
Hubbard did write a funeral service that I liked, because it validates the idea that the person is not entirely “dead and gone” but has moved on into the future. Its a comforting thought.
But that’s Unpossible once you’re Clear!
And it has nothing to do with his Vistaril, and paying someone to make an emeter that would get rid of all his BTs (in other words, kill himself by electroshock) etc. Besides, he denied even epileptics their treatments…
Hubbard’s ‘method’ leads to both houses- that of the mad and the poor, and the fact is that the world would have been, and still would be,a better place had he tried out his electro-shock machine before he write ‘Dianetics’ (or for that matter, before he was shelling Mexico, masturbating in Satanic Rituals and sleeping with this friends’ wives.
Forgot to post the link about the book:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_American_Way_of_Death
From the link http://gnosis.org/gnintro.htm provided by Valkov:
“All religious traditions acknowledge that the world is imperfect. Where they differ is in the explanations which they offer to account for this imperfection and in what they suggest might be done about it. Gnostics have their own — perhaps quite startling — view of these matters: they hold that the world is flawed because it was created in a flawed manner.”
World is flawed only from a human-centric viewpoint and not otherwise. That is what Buddhism tells us. Nirvana is extinguishing that human-centric viewpoint. Do plants and animals suffer? I don’t know. But from our human-centric viewpoint they suffer. When we give up this human-centric viewpoint, we can bear any suffering with equanimity.
The world is what it is. Blaming it, or blaming its supposed “creator” doesn’t resolve anything.
.
I think “standard tech” ought to be studied without regard for what Hubbard “promised” it would deliver, but objectively as to what it actually does deliver. What changes of state does it actually produce? That to me is the main question. I have used assists, for example, on people who had never heard of scientology, and gotten good results. So clearly, often, something does happen.
Marty has actually addressed that. He never said there was nothing of value in Scientology, just that it was very difficult to sift out the wheat from the chaff, to such an extent that he thought it was probably not worth recommending to most people, because help and wisdom were available in less contaminated forms.
Love your response, George.
Marildi failed to pimp your “I”.
There is no “I” to be pimped in your case, of course. Haha.
Well, Scientology is Hubbard’s interpretation of certain knowledge. He is the source of that interpretation.
Hubbard got his rise from Scientology. He will get his fall from Scientology too.
But Hubbard will be remembered for dusting up the subject.
“Yet, look how some create hate between those two. It’s the humans that do it. Yet, they do it in the name of God,”
Of course, because the very concept God as a “Creator” does not stand up to reality. It is deceptive. It can be molded any which way.
Hi G,
Sorry if I came across as flippant. 😦 However, I do think Tom Campbell did something above and beyond “what has been known for 26 centuries”. With scientific protocol, he proved that a being – the “I” or spirit – does exist and that it is separate and distinct from the body. Nevertheless, I do get what you’re saying as regards the Buddhist view that “I” is impermanent and is not important in the overall picture.
With respect to the word “impermanent”, the main point in my previous post had to do with Hubbard’s statement that above the tone scale “beingness CAN exist without any energy or matter, which is to say, without time” in relation to your statement that “it is NOT NECESSARY to return” (my caps throughout).
In other words, you used the words “not necessary” – which could mean that one CAN return, although it is “not necessary”. Does that idea about nibbana/nirvana exist, i.e. that one could choose to return?
If so, then it still seems to me that the views to do with “I” are expressed differently from Buddhist views, but that the basic ideas might amount to the same thing. (Thanks your willingness to share knowledge you’ve gained through dedicated study!)
I know of several “OT’s” in the LA area who expressed the idea for suicide or “dropping the Bod” after LRH died.
I’m sorry, but if you don’t know what the emeter measures, then how do you know it does not measure what Hubbard said it measured?
Also, “reactive mind” is as good a term as any in psychology or psychoanalysis. It pretty clearly differentiates functions taking place “below the level of awareness of a person”, from those that are consciously monitored/initiated. Anyone who has observed/studied post-hypnotic suggestion can see that.
Nope – It’s a practice, discipline and set of tools for me.
For sure count me in! 🙂
Spyros: “…And may I also tell you how I have mostly witnessed that, and not anything else, and how TRs ARC broke me constantly, because they seemed fake to me, and I didn’t feel I communicated at all… Maybe I had something with SCN eh? Nope. the SCN group had something with itself.”
Sad to say, but it seems that what you experienced was not uncommon in other parts of the world too. I’ll say this, however – even many critics still consider the TRs to be of value. I would add to that – IF they were supervised correctly on them. And in that case, there definitely would have been spirituality involved, in the way that Eckhart Tolle describes.
(Remind me not to bring up the subject of TRs to you again. 😛 😉 )
crep, I believe the differentiation was between the “believers” in the church and a person who was “audited” up through, say, Clear, outside the church, by auditor or listener or facilitator using perhaps the Clearbird materials which are distillation of the procedures, apart from any indoctrination into the beliefs outlined by Marty.
That is what some of us are talking about, and what some refer to as “core scientology”. I think it is a differentiation worth making. One might call it “decontaminated scientology tech”.
That is so true, Val. And that article you link makes the case so well. Thanks.
And, I mean, O.K., the ethics formulas are fine. That is very helpful. Except for the lists you are given to choose from. “harm attack or suppress”. What if your item is not on this list? What if one of those just doesn’t feel right for the situation? You still have to pick one or all of them to graduate up! A person should come up with their OWN idea of how they want to deal with it.
And then there are the comm evs. That doesn’t work because by the time the comm ev members sit down, they are all out ruds on the person being comm eved. In fact, from what I have seen, by the time they convene, they have already decided the person they are comm eving, should be harmed attacked and suppressed! If they are in a lower condition, and they have to be at least be in doubt about this person or they wouldn’t be comm eving him,
Ordering people for sec checks? Public, at their own expense so the org can feel secure? That’s crazy.
You see, so much of it doesn’t help the person or the group at all.
Yes, there are situations. There are sociopaths. Information about their treason and hidden agendas and sabotage and their usual social intercourse needs to be shared for damage control. But these are rare.
They are discovered rather quickly as one for one they are pathological liars. They need to be to cover their tracks.
But if you groom someone to unmock anyone in their path who has counter or other intentions, aren’t you creating sociopaths?
And why is it considered technology at all? It’s rules. customs ,traditions and ceremonies. I mean, it’s SOOO bad that in the ethics book under “Rewards and Penalties”, there are NO rewards listed!!!
p.s. I meant to ask you about the book Letting go mentioned in a comment and thanked you for writing – if you wouldn’t mind telling about it.
MM,
M
exactly; provided your delay in response was simply due to your schedule and not due to hours of contemplation. And so your response to my post about scientology religious beliefs is inapposite.
I think that the only decontaminated Scientology tech may be OT TR0, but there I have my doubts because the instructions for it are so skimpy that it can be easily misinterpreted.
Almost all Scientology Tech is contaminated by the flawed Theta-MEST theory.
I want to share a piece of Wisdom
Acting silly sometimes makes you a sane peron
Human “mind” is a very narrow concept. There is something, which may be referred to as the “cosmic mind” that was there before humans came along.
Cosmic mind does not exist independent of what is perceived as the universe. If there is no universe, there is no cosmic mind either.
You can bring it up, I just don’t like to bring up that old rant again. I have written a few times what I think about TRs and O/W writte-ups.
I think it’s good to be nicely, naturally open and understanding, not resisting, evaluating, invalidating, freely loving even if another is misemotional. It makes me want to be open when the other is like that too. I just think it should be natural. It should come from inside.
What I am saying is that if there is some inconsistency even between “inner” and “outer”; or between “subjective” and “objective” then there is lack of harmony and also unreality.
To me, REALITY = CONSISTENCY AND HARMONY.
Oracle: I did not read Starship’s comment that way at all. He/She’s simply stating what to many of us is the obvious: LRH was a fraud, the “tech” is a scam. I agree, you don’t. That discounts neither one of us. In fact, it would seem to me that you exercise as much judgment on Starship as he/she does on indies.
Whether one hold’s Starship’s view or not, we are all capable of justifying many “justifiable crimes,” as the term implies.
I am in a sharing mood:
The only way hypnotization can be detected by a hypnotized person is by becoming aware of inconsistencies. These inconsistencies are like little flags sticking out that tell one that something is not right.
That awareness of inconsistencies is what results in a person leaving the Church. The awareness of inconsistencies is just the starting point of handling one’s hypnotization. There is a long way to go still.
Deikman’s essay makes some sense to me. In Vin’s terms, “I = mindfullness”. When Vin is being mindfull, then he exists. When he is not being mindfull, he does not exist and the world is not real to him.
Actually, I think there are many ways that some critics exemplify the very things they are criticizing.
Okay, but “several” in the LA area is a small minority. You could find several of almost anything in almost any group. I’m pretty sure that if there were anything close to a majority who had this idea, the subject would have come up many times on many sites. But it hasn’t.
Cryptic
That is a good way of putting it, Valkov.
One needs to investigate what really works. It may not be what Hubbard said.
Actually, the illogic lies in Broeker’s statement. As such, the dictum applies that it is impossible to hold logical discourse about it. Put another way, regardless of where you stand on the issue, cognitive dissonance is inevitable.
First off, there is absolutely no evidence that the OT levels that Broeker proclaimed even exist. The evidence suggests that they do NOT.
But more importantly, Broeker suggested that LRH conducted “research” (and left it behind) about the body-discarded state while LRH had clearly NOT (yet anyway) “discarded” his own body! How is one to reconcile this absurdity.
Then again, maybe it was the Vistaril that was doing the talking?
Hi marildi,
Lucifer’s Bridge started as a project when Hugh Urban called me in 2008 in regard to the authenticity of the OT VIII student briefing. Hubbard described himself as on a mission in the role of Lucifer. I had to write the book in order to give public testimony. At sixty-nine years of age, I wanted to get the data on blogs, into the hands of former members, and into libraries. I met Miscavige on the Freewinds in 1988 when he was in the process of killing it.
Since I was trained in the Bible by Jesuits at Holy Cross College, I instantly duplicated where Hubbard was coming from and where he was going. In college, we spent time with the greatest scholars in the world on issues such as the anti-Christ and other “miracles”. Thus I left Scientology but not before a few tense moments. Hubbard’s comments on Buddhism alerted me to his flaws. Oddly enough, we were drilled on Buddhism at Holy Cross in 1964 by very fine scholars. Thus I knew both ends that Hubbard failed to resolve.
In no way do I claim to be an expert in Scientology. In fact, I have carefully steered away from the 1989-2015 time period. All I have ever said is that I survived that day in 1989 and I am alive to tell about it. Many of my friends have passed.
Good post. Incidentally, after Hubbard had departed, Broeker produced what he alleged were Hubbard’s notes about his return. He would return at 21 years old. So, it appears that the proof of Broekers funeral pronunciamentos failed to materialize.
TRs are supposed to be natural. The poker- or pie face is not “TRs in”, it is fake indeed. It is a flunk. Unfortunately, it was all too commonly supervised as “TRs in” and any expression was flunked. I believe it was an MU right at the start, a “fake it until you make it” kind of thing.
Bob Cray: “Actually, the illogic lies in Broeker’s statement.”
Right. That’s basically what I meant when I wrote: “Not that it really matters what those speakers stated, as their words aren’t based on anything Hubbard ever wrote, and they [the speakers] are known to be liars.”
typical scientologist response. the dead agent caper.
Here is my current understanding.
“I” = the center of Ego. Mindfulness can exist without “I”.
Mindfulness is attentiveness. The function of mindfulness is to bring clarity to what is being perceived. The basic approach is:
“Observe things as they are, without assuming anything.”
For details, please see: The 12 Aspects of Mindfulness
.
Hi G,
Thanks very much. Your book looks like it will be a significant contribution to scientology history!
MM,
M
Spyros, I don’t think you would find anything wrong with TRs if you were sup’ed correctly on them. But no matter how many times I say that, or how I say it, it doesn’t seem that you receive it. Or else you just don’t agree. I’m curious, which is it?
That’s very consistent, Val. 😀
“I believe it was an MU right at the start, a ‘fake it until you make it’ kind of thing.”
I must have been lucky “at the start.” Neither the mission I first went to or my first org, back in the early 80’s, had that MU. Other orgs and missions weren’t as in-tech, from what I’ve gathered.
However, when I was at Flag in the late 90’s, the Pro TRs course suddenly became confusing as to the kind of flunks being given – starting with the flunks from RTC.
Nice post.
It seems consistent to me that observing brings into being an observer(as well as that which is observed), and perhaps vice-versa.
Marildi I don’t get into that because -for starters- if somebody has left the Church and sees nothing wrong about it except from DM, consequently he goes on doing what they did in that COS, except from what DM told told him to do –which means about nothing. So what does suped correctly mean?
I personally have never done any GAT, have never had any contact with DM, yet I have enormous disagreements.
So, for starters, answer to me what is in and out tech in SCN, and from then on, we can discuss further.
marildi,
Appreciate your kind words.
I am getting ready to donate library copies of the book to eleven colleges
and universities in New England. Long term I want to set up a non-profit forum so that college students can have information about splinter religions such as scientology. If the program works in New England, I will spread it to
the nation. I can create a data base with links to blogs etc.
If my book had been available in 1972, I would have been able to read it!
May all beings be well and happy!
In my view, a phenomena is self -aware. It divides into “oberver” and “observed” only when filters come into play.
With filters is generated the ego and the “I”.
George,
Thanks for your contribution to the truth about this lunacy. Your disclosure was the final hair that broke the camel’s back for me.
Hubbard’s Gnosticism is sophomoric , but with malice aforethought, enough to ruin and waste thousand of people’s lives.
If you haven’t done so I still recommend reading Aleister Crowley’s, it is real Gnosticism, not because I like it ( I don’t) but because it shows how the whole religion was put together, as it was done in ancient times.
Also by reading Crowley’s its is easy to see how both men, corrupted and spun Buddha’s Enlightment and turned their stories into a caricature of themselves.
In any case thanks for your contribution.
I agree, Todd. There are multiple factual points where Ron was dishonest and/or fraudulent. There are zero objective, scientific validations of the results of Dianetics or Scientology. There is not a single proven clear or OT as originally defined by Ron, not one after six decades of opportunity.
Pointing this brutal truth out does not demean others. Rather it provides a necessary wake up call to our fellow human beings.
That’s not to say that Scientology cannot lead to many realizations and insights. I think it can and does. Unfortunately, it also leads to delusion and the totalitarian stifling of free thought.
Where Scientology ultimately sinks itself is that it makes both religious and scientific claims. Scientific claims are falsifiable in any number of ways. Religious claims are not.
Most religions keep themselves off the hook by limiting their ultimate claims to an unfalsifiable afterlife. Their current life claims are typically very subjective and debatable. They often include claims like being a better person, being happier, feeling in touch with God, and so on.
While Scientology also claims betterment of one’s internal state, and makes claims of a better afterlife or afterlives, it unfortunately also makes a slew of easily falsifiable current life claims.
These include, but are not limited to things like: increased IQ, freedom from psychosomatic disease, better eyesight, better health overall, immunity from lung cancer caused by smoking, becoming radiation proof, drug treatment programs with 70 to 80% effectiveness, the ability to the exteriorise from one’s body at will and do so with full perceptics, past life recall, ability to change the world through postulates, super powers, perfect recall, longer lifespans, greater wealth, greater creativity, the ability to control MEST both objectively and subjectively as well as the ability to control life and thought. And so many more implicit and explicit claims, most or all of which could be verified through objective research if they were real.
While there are nuggets along the road, Scientology’s promised gold mine never quite materializes. The bridge becomes a circle, a hamster wheel. Escherlike, the lizard of the organization circles back on its own tail (and tale), and begins to cannibalize itself. The lack of the ultimate results is hidden behind unfalsifiable gnosticism. The attention of the faithful is misdirected to supposed enemies and false causes as to why the results are never achieved. The hopes of the faithful slowly turn to self betrayal in stubborn persistence of belief.
I know that. I am addressing the point that Mark is saying these are “scientology’s core religious beliefs.” They are not. Most of Mark’s assertions aren’t even true.
In many regards, theta-MEST theory harks back to Cartesian duality (in Western thought). As science learns more and more about the nature of consciousness, such a duality seems less and less likely to capture the incredible nature of existence and consciousness.
Scientologists in general are taught that dying is a causative act. You don’t die. You _drop_ your body. This is seen as not being a big deal. After all, you are an immortal being. And any grief felt by your survivors it is simply a secondary that can be handled as part of their own case. Therefore, dropping your body is not an overt against your first dynamic or other dynamics if you make an EOC decision for ethical reasons.
Of course such details are never discussed or debated within Scientology because of the lack of free speech, the stifling of analytical reasoning, the absence of critical thought, and prohibitions against verbal tech.
In a way, Scientology’s view of causatively dropping one’s body reminds me of the old MASH theme song: “Suicide is painless. It brings on many changes. And I can take or leave it if I please.”
Well said.
If you haven’t read it I thought you might be interested in I Am a Strange Loop by Douglas Hofstadter, who also wrote Gödel, Escher, Bach, which won a Pulitzer Prize in 1980.
MUs occur on TR0 because there is omitted data by LRH. Here is the complete data.
TR0 and Mindfulness
.
I agree with that. This relates to ontology, which is the study being, reality, etc. Some thoughts.
In terms of ontology I myself fall in the range of constructivist and post positivist.
Constructivism holds that what we consider reality Is constructed by ourselves. To me this is nearly self-evident as it relates to things like beliefs, religion, culture, and so forth. This can be correlated to be subjective reality whether within an individual or a group.
Positivism holds that there is a universe independent of human considerations and that the truths of the universe can be determined. Post positivism makes a qualification. It asserts that we can get closer and closer to understanding the universe, but most likely we can never get there 100%. Positivism and post positivism correlate to objective reality.
While Scientology as a constructed, subjective reality and culture Is pretty much immune from having to prove itself (like religion in general), it makes a number of objective claims that do not stand up to scrutiny and which can be and have been falsified, and/or for which no objective evidence has been brought forward.
Well, I can’t really disagree with that, as I see any language is a “filter”. Language and thinking is “knowing about”, is different from just plain direct “knowing”. It’s kinda like the difference between swimming naked in water, as opposed to being in a submersible craft of some kind.
My inference is that is the SO influence. I was lucky too, back in the 1970s. Then, later, one of the first Pro TRs grads I saw in Ann Arbor, when he came back from wherever he had trained, I am guessing Flag, looked like a walking ridge to me.
More recently from reading the comments on Marty’s blog, I have gathered 2 things, 1. The Sea Org “doesn’t use ARC”, and 2. The cultivate the “cold chrome steel” valance. So if that’s how they are supped, then their TRs are just plain OUT. They would be totally lacking in the relaxed “I am here and I am me” presence of natural TRs. And I do think that goes back to before DM, as Spyros says.
Awesome. FYI, the subject matter of your book came up over on the South African blog and today I posted a comment too. Here’s the link: https://backincomm.wordpress.com/2015/02/12/the-great-divide/comment-page-1/#comment-15426
Spyros, both correct and incorrect sup’ing of TRs occurred way before DM had anything to do with it. When you and I had this discussion before (quite a while ago on Geir’s) I dug up and posted quotes from several HCOB’s that related to the things you had experienced – IMO, the quotes showed that you had definitely been mis-sup’d.
“In-tech” sup’ing of TRs would be to follow the bulletins. I would say that DM and RTC, with regard to the “passes” that were being given when I was at Flag, are violating a bulletin called “TRs Basics Resurrected” where LRH stresses ARC.
What year did you do TRs?
Valkov, thank you for understanding. 🙂
FOTF, What prompted that advice?
Good post FOTF. You are right about influence Cartesian duality on the Theta-MEST theory. Cartesian has long been superceded.
I can remember what you had said.
My original arguement was that TRs and O/Ws are no panacea, for reasons I have explained before. The most important point I have explained, is that TRs are ‘too much body’, the way I see them. They are communication drills, not meditation. I don’t see how they relate to what I said about attempts to get me bullied. There is more, for me, than dealing more efficiently with a problem, and that is not having it. And the ‘handle or disconnect’ is a choice similar to ‘get a job or not’, if you don’t control who you communicate with at your job. Of course, I only talk whenever and with whomever I want to, whenever I think I have a choice. It doesn’t matter whether I think ‘SP’ or not.
I can imagine TRs and other things being used in a self determined manner. But I didn’t take it there in the first place –whether LRH meant them to be like that or not. I have pounded that a bit too much, and I think it’s best for each one to find out for himself, like the poem says. I only talk general philosophy, for the sake for each person’s personal gains, SCN or not. I don’t want to antagonize anymore whether SCN is right or wrong. I might talk about TRs like I would talk about Tolle’s ideas.
I am reluctant to defend Scientology, for the same reason I asked that rhetorical question about DM. For it doesn’t matter as much, in practice, what LRH intended, but it mostly matters what happens in the name of LRH. If I wanted to defend SCN, I would consider people that mess SCNists from inside, more harmful than people that antagonize SCN from the outside. It’s the same coin, but different sides. I try to go with the golden line.
My stay in SCN was ’98-’04, I think, and that was the duration of my doing TRs, as they were plenty.
It is impossible to fully separate Scientology from Ron.
You can separate the inventor of the combustion engine from the motor.
That is because he made a physical product which is separate from him.
You can drive around in a car and the inventor’s mindset personally is meaningless and has no effect on the driver.
L Ron Hubbard created a religious philosophy and practice. Philosophy deals with thoughts, value systems cosmologies and world views.
These things are read, studied, word cleared, demoed and checked out for proficiency.
They become part of you. You are imprinted by his psychological profile. That imprint becomes behavior. That behavior is called being a Scientologist: someone who has opened up their mind to study, agree with and become someone whoa has some Ron traits. Because the traits he thought were useful became HCOB which became your mind.
That argument of, L Ron Hubbard is dead and left us with the tech is an attempt to separate out the unethical life and criminal revelations of Hubbard from those who are still under his spell and practicing his philosophy.
Who wants to have a spiritual teacher that lies, puts kids in chain lockers etc etc. It’s too embarrassing to those who call themselves a Scientologist.
So………..let’s separate us from him by saying Scientology and Ron are different.
What kind of spiritual aspirant wants to distance themselves from their teacher by coming up with such rubbish.
I am more than proud of my teacher. His life is a star high goal I seek to emulate, not run away from and create mind games to distant myself from his immorality.
Scientology is L Ron Hubbard. It’s his mind that becomes yours.
I had a friend who -together with other friends- made a sort of a group, to chit chat and exchange knowledge about alternative therapies, as most of them had some sort of an involvement. I got invited (note that) to show them what I was into, and decided to show them a simple meditation technique that I knew. So, I told them a couple of things about it, and then asked them to do it, as my time was limited and I wanted it all to have some practical value.
All except one at least tried. The guy who didn’t try looked pissed for some reason, and talked to others (while they were doing it) and distracted them. Because of the resulting mess (including my protests about it) that meeting didn’t go well.
After a few days I got invited to show it again, privately to that guy who didn’t do it, but created the mess. The message was that I was incapable (among other things, I dared to protest his attitude) to deliver it, but ‘others’ could possibly do it, and ‘it seemed an interesting technique afterall’.
Farsec looks and feels like a completely made-up name. Which I am sure that it was.
For one thing, it is way too close to the astronomical term parsec, which is a measure distance — 3.26 light years.
For another thing, it is quite odd that Hubbard’s names fit so well with the English sound system and phonological rules.
It’s almost as if a science fiction writer were making things up …
SP (I’ll just use your initials – joke! 😀 ): “TRs are ‘too much body’, the way I see them. They are communication drills, not meditation.”
That’s all they’re supposed to be – communication drills – their primary purpose. However, to me, OT-TR-0 and TR-0 are types of meditation (there are many types), not unlike what Eckhart Tolle describes.
“I don’t see how they relate to what I said about attempts to get me bullied.”
TRs may not relate to every bully situation – depending on the bully. But I’m sure many people could attest to having handled some bully’s attitude simply by being there comfortably. Or maybe by giving him a really good ack, as another example.
The interesting thing about TRs, and everything else in scientology, is that everyone can benefit at a level that suits wherever they happen to be as a being – if the tech is in, that is. What happened to you makes me wonder if the situation was similar to this quote from an early edition of NSOL, in an essay about Acceptance Level:
“You can understand, too, some of you, why you were not acceptable in your own homes when you were young; you were too bright and too cheerful and this was too high above those around you.”
You wrote: “I might talk about TRs like I would talk about Tolle’s ideas.”
That’s really how I feel too (contrary to popular belief 🙂 ). But not everybody is willing to talk about some particular part of scientology in and of itself, separate from other parts. That’s one reason I like to talk to you, and a few others, because I know that you can have a straight comm cycle with me – and that you aren’t unwilling to say something good about scn. Or something bad, for that matter (with good TRs! 😛 ). You summed it up beautifully here:
“For it doesn’t matter as much, in practice, what LRH intended, but it mostly matters what happens in the name of LRH.”
“98-’04”? Well, no doubt there were “additives” on your course, especially since that was after GAT in ’96. Too bad you never got a TR’s Correction List after that – by someone whose TRs were in! 😉
For sure, Val. But I think it got worse after DM as the years went on.
When I was on Pro TRs in the late 80’s, we had to do a video that was sent up to the Senior C/S for a pass. I made a vid where my “pc” (coach) went into grief, and I just naturally lowered my tone level too. The Sup was reluctant to send it up because she had the idea that auditors should always be uptone, but she sent it anyway stating her reservations. The Senior C/S sent it back with a “Pass” and wrote, “She was in ARC with the pc.” By the time the late ’90’s came along and everybody had to do all the courses over again because of GAT in ’96, “natural TRs” became very confusing for a lot of us.
All the good stuff he came up with was “borrowed” anyway, right? So it should be fine. Right?.
I’m not disagreeing , but I feel many if not most of the “objective” claims have not been systematically tested. I’m not sure they ever could be, because of “operator interference” type of factors, as well as theindividual differences, person to person. IQ is measurable, reaction time and speed of perception, those kind of things could be measured, but the studies themselves would be enormously time-consuming for everyone involved. Given the lack of standardization of scientology methods, how would anyone study it at all?
I don’t want to emulate anyone. I simply want to live my own life.
Vin, yes, but that is kinda like saying “When there is no hand there is no grasping”. Deep?
Whatever, Brian.
I can personally attest that Karen actually helps other people to live happier lives every day of her life. I have seen it up close and personal for myself and in others. What do you care what she believes? Instead of asking what she believes, you might ask yourself if YOU actually help others to live happier lives every day of YOUR life. I hope that you do.
If you actually do that, I still won’t question what you believe. Just do what you do.
Conan,
You are welcome.
Hubbard will pay the most for his attempted assumption of the Buddha’s identity. The penalty for the actual physical harm of a Buddha is a very,very,
long time in the lowest hell. We can only speculate as we cannot judge.
May all beings be well, happy and peaceful!
Thanks Brian for the acknowledgement
Regards
Pip
Hi Another Thought
From my viewpoint the basic observations in Scientology are in the same order of scientific fact, as is friction. Take for instance the cycle of action that states that everything goes through a process of START-CHANGE-STOP. Even friction must follow this “scientific principle”, if it didn’t your break pads would never wear out.
I would be interested to hear any example you can conceive of where something in the physical universe violates the process of start-change-stop.
Yours
Pip
Hi loveliness!
Let’s take your “6. in its truest definition which is coincidence of location and beingness, that is the ultimate in affinity.” If we assume A THETAN is located in SPACE and TIME then by definition a thetan has MASS. Now we know that “two objects may not occupy the same space at the same time and that if they do it will cause the vanishment of both objects. Hence if two thetans occupy the same space all MASS is ‘asised’ and what is left is THETA which is unconditional love – NOT AFFINITY.
As for OOB sex, bring it on. Sounds like an extension of “phone sex” or maybe cyberspace sex, like we have, but of course in the “best possible taste”.
Lots of love
Pip
My dear Marildi
How could I have forgotten the article by Professor Arthur Deikman. I originally came across that article when exploring AWARENESS of AWARENESS on Google.
Ever since I was “EXPELLED” and yes! I said expelled from the Church of Scientology I have continued to test the assertions of Scientology against known data in the larger world.
Awareness of awareness is one of the fundamental tenants of Scientology, and at the time this article by Arthur Deikman came nearest to my understanding of awareness of awareness. It isn’t quite there as demonstrated in the title “I” = Awareness. If this was true then anything that had awareness would be an “I”, no! it should be “I” = Awareness of Awareness. Awareness is the beingness of ME not THE “I”.
I have just revisited AWARENESS of AWARENESS on Google and this most interesting site came up
http://www.albigen.com/uarelove/awa_clarification.htm
To my mind it is the best example I have come across of what OT TRO is. Please have a look.
Lots and lots of love
Pip
❤ – I couldn't decide whether this was 'bottom' or 'boobs' but Google saved the day when it said it was a heart!
On my computer the heart came out as < and 3 together. So disregard my previous comment. xx
Vinaire for once we are in agreement. Please see my reply to Marildi. This article is still confusing the “I” with “Me” which I would agree is “self-centric”.
Regards
Pip
Hello again Marildi
That directive by Jesus to “love thy neighbour” is not complete, the rest is “as you love yourself”. It is literally impossible to love your neighbour more than yourself for the simple reason your neighbour IS YOUR SELF. Also this is the second of the two great commandments, the first is “you shall love the lord your god with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; ……”Luke 10:27. And then “your neighbor as yourself.” NAS bible.
When Jesus is speaking he is never talking about natural love (the ego), but DIVINE LOVE, (the true self)
Your last point “The forces of two beings cannot come into dispute until after they have first joined”, is so true and can equally be summed up with ARC ALWAYS PROCEEDS AN ARC BREAK.
Lots of love with understanding
Pip x
“REDONKULOUS” great word, but new to me. Thought I would give it a new meaning “RIDICULOUSLY RIDICULOUS” I love it!
Thanks Spyros
It can certainly appear that religion is responsible for all wars, but in fact CERTAINTY is. That is the certainty that we are right and they are wrong. This is obviously true where the Church of Scientology and dissenters are concerned. Each is insisting on their rightness.
Love
Pip
Thanks for that Valkov
I think you are spot on. Vin’s viewpoint is “human centric” to the nth degree.
Regards
Pip
I would say that the larger is the context in which one observes the lesser is the subjectivity.
Hence when one observes in the context of the universe, as do the scientists, the observation is more objective.
It is like observing in the context of the cosmos rather than in the context of earth.
It is like observing in the context of a universe having both spiritual and physical characteristics, than in the context of just the spiritual universe or the physical universe.
.
It’s hard to preach peace to a person who got back-stabbed for ‘ethical’ reasons, by people that he used to defend. You might as well get punched yourself, trying to calm him down. I know it, as I have been ‘him’ 😛
Still, I saw rage didn’t lead to any good place, thoroughly, and I quit it.
I’ve met people involved with ACIM, by the way. i must say I really like it.
I admit what I said that TRs are not meditation, is a bit off, because there are body meditations too.
There can come a time when you no longer have to have some phenomena and to go back to handle them, convinced that you still have them, just because you CAN have them. That would be ‘black’, the way I see it. That’s what I have against ‘TRs all the way’ or ‘Clears are not really Clear’ and stuff like that. That can go on forever, creating charge and discharging it (or not). It is black to point out that somebody has something that he doesn’t know he has, as from then on he might as well start to create it. It is an alteration, and it can put a person to create case. If SCN was the only thing that puts people to create case, I would agree with Marty in all he says. But psychology/psychiatry do a fine job telling people that they have things they didn’t know, they had, no?
Hi again marildi! The exchange of interpretations of perception can, I believe, work to form a ladder, so to speak, that one can climb to access interpretations that were previously inconceivable or unimagineable. That being said, here is a video from Ruppert Spira where he presents yet another interpretation of the subject matter we have been addressing.
No implication that psychology/psychiatry only, do that. It could be as simple as to tell somebody that ‘you are stupid’, if he believes you. You know, you can put him to put it there, afterwards, by making him resist it, try to handle it etc –further alteration. It’s common for people to tell each other ‘you are this and that’. It doesn’t take a professional. But it isn’t the truth.
Science.
Huh? The term “reactive mind” makes no such differentiation. Think about it: reactions can be entirely conscious and monitored, they can even be pre-determined. A more accurate term which does make the differentiation you describe is “sub-conscious”.
My point was that regardless of whether a person was a “believer” in Scientology or a person who was “audited” in the Free Indie Dependent Zone up to Clear or OT2, they will still end up believing a whole pile of L Ron Hubbard bullshit. From that perspective, it doesn’t really matter because, if the auditor has done a “standard” job, the poor PC could well end up believing in Xenu and all the other core beliefs as delineated by Marty. And paying good money for it, poor soul.
Thank you, although your suggestion seems to have very little to do with what is being discussed here. Nikolai Berdyaev was an ardent Christian and his philosophical musings stand in direct opposition to what flimsy fragments of a philosophy the Lucifer-infused L Ron Hubbard was able to cobble together.
I do understand that, rather than the body of his work, you were referring specifically to Berdyaev’s subjective/objective premise. I am not surprised to see it being raised because that subjective vs objective question is something of a constant theme in Scientology discussions when efforts are being made to defend the subject. The most common use of it that I have seen is in an effort to exclude anyone who has not personally undergone some form of Scientology processing. The idea being promoted is that without having experienced Scientology processing, a person is wholly unqualified to discuss it. Nothing could be further from the truth. For example, if such logic were to be valid, then there would be no male obstetricians. A more prosaic view highlights the abundantly apparent truth that your average wog understands more about Scientology then any Scientologist. Which is kinda ironic; for all L Ron Hubbards millions of words, the sum total of wog understanding of Scientology can be expressed in just one word: AVOID.
In this specific raising of the subjective vs objective question, it would appear that the defense of Scientology is being shifted into the philosophical, rather than scientific, context. That’s quite understandable because anyone who believes that L Ron Hubbard had anything useful to say about “the modern science of mental health” has an elephantine “MU” on the second and third words in that description. Science also requires that anything it states as fact can be objectively measured, something Scientology has never been able to do. Instead, it perpetually seeks to confuse anecdotal “success stories” with independently verifiable data. L Ron Hubbard also proved a third context for the defense of his fraud by drawing the cloak of religion over his operation. I’ve already addressed that aspect further down-thread so won’t labour the point here except to point out how tricksy it is to pin Scientologists and their enablers down. After all, depending on the argument being made, Scientology is an “applied philosophy”, and/or an “exact science” and/or a “religion”, Shimmer Wax, comes to mind.
So, here I am, after presenting a number of objective facts, being encouraged to read-up on Berdyaev’s subjective/objective premise in order to develop a “three dimensional understanding”. But, why would I want to limit my understanding of Scientology to just three dimensions and, even if I did, a three dimensional understanding of what, exactly? The lethality of Scientology, the fundamental flaws of L Ron Hubbard’s “eight dynamics” which were being addressed in that exchange, or Scientology itself and, if so, what use is the subjective/objective question in dealing with either or both of those? None, as far as I can see. I understand that for people locked into the Scientology prison of belief their subjective experiences trump objective reality every time. The very nature of Scientology processing starting with the entry level TRs was carefully designed by L Ron Hubbard to ensure that very thing in order to encourage innocents to “clear”” their “banks” as quickly as possible. In Scientology’s case,
Oddly enough, Berdyaev would agree with me and point to his concept of “Original Sin” whereby anthropocentrism and the confining of one’s thoughts to oneself leads to to self-imprisonment. L Ron Hubbard knew that too which is why Scientology is so solipsistic. I further agree with Berdyaev that the gaining of knowledge must rely in many respects on the seeker of knowledge making what is known a deep part of their being. Newton, for example, didn’t discover gravity at the moment when, as myth has it, an apple fell on his head. Rather, Newton spent years and years learning up on extant – and objectively verifiable – knowledge, imbuing his very soul with what was objectively true so, when the apple dropped, it provided the lens through which the wider picture could be perceived. Inspiration, intuition, creativity, magic – call it what you will – but it didn’t happen with out a long and difficult runway cluttered up with all manner of subjective permutations.
Where Berdyaev and I part ways is in his assertion that all knowledge is subjective when it originates. That’s like saying gravity didn’t exist until Newton discovered it and, at the moment when he did, gravity was his alone. That’s just silly. Its like saying “what’s true for you is what you have observed to be true”. It’s the doorway into the prison of belief where inhabitants are held captive in chains forged in the smelter of their own subjectivity. And that, my friend, is the labyrinth of the mind where time really is kept by the clapping of one hand. It is the obnosing of objective reality which sets us free and into the world where time is measured by three, or more, hands.
It is more like intolerance and unwillingness to discuss.
The process of start-change-stop applies to the spiritual universe also.
The degree of objectivity depends on how wide is the context and that all inconsistencies within that context have been satisfactorily resolved.
A man is measured by his own deeds Val. It seems Hubbard apologists are simply clambering and racking their brains to find justification in Hubbard.
The insanity of space alien auditing and equating it with shamanic demon possession.
Oh Hubbard is a Gnostic
Hubbard was being attacked by the CIA and that’s way he’s on the defensive.
His own deeds are so immoral, that he himself, his own legacy, is not enough to fish him out of ill repute, so apologists try to piggy back him on some valid benign human history.
L Ron Hubbard had mental problems.
There was a person on a vid here on this blog. He was an old timer. He said Ron did not experience people. He said that Ron “confronted” people.
The only real metaphysical connection I see Hubbard having is Crowley and black magic.
Gnostic is from Sankrit Jnana: knowldege. All these words have the same root. They mean to know. Know what?
The Gnostics wanted to know God. The Jnanis, yogis, want to know God.
Hubbard thought he was God. He does not fall into any real tradition or lineage except magic and wanting powers.
Marildi, I can borrow a hammer from a neighbor to build a nice cabinet, or I can use it to kill someone.
Yes he borrowed, we all do.
Sir Issac Newton had the humility to say,”if I saw further than most it’s because I have stood on the shoulders of giants.” That is a powerfully mumble statement from a great man.
L Ron Hubbard stole from others. He never announced his sources because he thought so low of himself and craved to be seen as one of his Sci Fi heroes. He was an egotist.
He constantly berated other teachers and approaches, with great talent for narcissism. And claimed authorship of other’s works. He was not a great man.
He was an intellectual coward who did not have the courage, intelligence and wisdom to bring a debate to the real world. If in fact he had something to offer.
Instead he sought destruction of critics and hid like scared pathetic rat.
Looking up to Hubbard is a strange mindset. The more I find out about him the more I know what the prison of belief means.
Do you know the person? Do you not look?
L Ron Hubbard is like a big fat man selling weight loss products and his devotees don’t see the cognitive dissonance in this.
Pop psychologist and charlatan are the labels that work for me.
I ask these things because I believe the upper level OT3 implant, gruggie BT NOTS things are dangerous to knowing what is real and unreal.
It is a lie to equate one’s problems to Ron’s imaginary enemies: BTs, Xenu.
The OT3 material can distort our ability to perceive reality as it is.
Regarding happier lives. Amway can make that same claim. I am for happiness wherever it happens.
The OT3 materials and NOTS are a lie. They are part of Ron’s nightmare. That nightmare had him wishing electrocution to rid himself of BTs. This one really gets me.
Do you understand, that the man who conjured up these levels to make to you free was trying to commit suicide to rid himself of BTs????
Ah!!!!! It must be the Prison of Belief. I simply cannot fathom how people still buy into it with this new info that was in Marty’s book.
My question for you is: how can you stand by allowing this delusion to be perpetrated on our citizens. And letting them pay for it.
There are no BTs, there was no Xenu, Hawaii was not even there 75,000,000 years ago!!!
Thanks Pip, great link.
“Below the level of awareness”, “sub-conscious”, you think there is a fundamentl difference in meaning? It sounds like quibbly nit-picky word-play to me. As I mentioned in a discussion with Vin recently, any language, any words are “filters”. They point to realities but do not necessarily delineate them with absolute precision.
Nice. Perhaps it is ‘certainty absent compassion’ that is more fundamental? As certainty of itself may be benign in itself. While lacking compassion, it contracts into something that is neither benign, nor itself.
I am reminded of an awakened being I once had the honor of meeting in this world. Whose certainty was not tainted by the absence of compassion (for ignorance). Including both in the certainty of wisdom. Where neither up nor down can exist at all, absent the reality of the other.
Brian: “Ah!!!!! It must be the Prison of Belief. I simply cannot fathom how people still buy into it with this new info that was in Marty’s book.”
There is no surprise really. A scientologist is looking at these beliefs through the filters of his “wins” in Scientology. It would invalidate his wins if these beliefs are knocked down. So, to himself of the validity of his wins he must uphold these beliefs.
The truth is that those wins, if real, are not dependent on these beliefs. But the person doesn’t see it that way. Or maybe those wins are just “feel good” moments.
.
Intolerance & unwillingness are perhaps required study (via experience) for the advancement of understanding the nature of real being?
On the other hand, perhaps not?
I find what you say in this comment entirely unsupportd by experience or logic. It would however be a good objective test of tjhe matter, to have a person be “processed” without being “indoctinated”. You seem to feel s/he woud somehow magically be indoctrinated/imbued with Hubbard’s worldview and cosmology. That seems like magical fantasy to me, but carry on.
My point about Berdyaev and subjectivity was perhaps well delineated by Ken Wilbur. He does a petty good exposition of the roles of each in and the different realms of knowledge involved in ech. Kool-aide drinkers like current CoS members are introverted into their own subjectivity; some critics seem compulsively extraverted to the opposite extreme. From my own pre-scientology experiece, here is an example: Back in the 1960s, I took some LSD, and prmptly went out the top of my head(not “3 feet behind it”, but straight up). Of course the LSD experience varied from person to person, but some of the “expert” “authorities” who had never taken it authoritatively stated that my experience was a “hallucination” or “delusion”.
How in the world could they know what it was?
My dear ol’ Pip 😉
Now that you put my attention on it, I think Deikman’s article was mis-titled, in that he actually describes “I” as an awareness of awareness, although it’s only implied. He came pretty close to articulating it in the “Conclusion”, where he said “Knowing by being that which is known is ontologically different from perceptual knowledge. That is why someone might introspect and not SEE awareness or the `I’ – concluding…that it doesn’t exist. To me, “SEE awareness” is another way of saying “aware of being aware” or “awareness of awareness.”
But the article you posted the link to explicitly expresses the idea of “awareness of awareness” And I would agree – it is a very good description of OT-TR0.
I think we’re also in agreement that plants and many animals (perhaps not all) are “aware” (obviously) but not “aware of being aware” – and thus, it would seem, they are “one with the universe” (their environment).
marildi xo
Sorry, there should have been closing quote marks after “…that it doesn’t exist.”
Spyros, maybe not the other TRs but I don’t think OT-TR0 could be called a body meditation. Please have a look at the short article Pip posted the link to. He and I both consider that it describes OT-TR0: http://www.albigen.com/uarelove/awa_clarification.htm
You also wrote: “It is black to point out that somebody has something that he doesn’t know he has, as from then on he might as well start to create it. It is an alteration, and it can put a person to create case.”
I don’t disagree with that. However, unless a person is able to forge his own path (some are), one way to assist him would be by the means of words and constructs – i.e. “fingers pointing to the moon.”
Hi Monte. Very nice video.
A couple of things came to mind. One was that I have a friend who was a last-lifetime Clear, who remembers his experience between lives as simply being aware – without an “identity” in any physical universe sense. In other words, not the previous life identity or any other . Just an awareness of his existence.
The other thing I thought of is the time you experienced a communion with me(!) 🙂 one morning, and then you wrote about it in a comment here. It was a communion of spirit only (obviously). So my question is – what is your understanding of that kind of experience (in light of what Rupert had to say in the vid)?
One thing he said was “As the localization [of mind] disperses, its contents are still in consciousness.” That seems to say that the “localizations” are permanent in some sense.
Totally got it, Spy. 🙂
And on top of that is the view expressed in the following quote, which you might appreciate (note – “Basic Truth” is defined in Axiom 35 as “a Static”):
“It seems that the ‘only’ [as in “the only one”] aberration can occur by enforcing Basic Truth. Here we discover that the individual, being separate, is then FORCED to be separate, and so develops a complex of ‘the only one’ and tries to fend off the rest of the universe from himself and finally merges with it with his impossibility of fending it off. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS ACCENTUATE TRUTH AND FORCE IT HOME as an Other-determinism IN ORDER TO CREATE AN ABERRATION. There is some Basic Truth, then, in whatever is wrong with a thetan… [my caps for emphasis]”
Isn’t that interesting? That there is “some Basic Truth” in any aberration? This would have to be the case before you could have a duality that hangs you up.
Hi Pip, my pet 🙂
The “combining of energies” (as worded in the video) in the same space would not be the same as any (or all) of the particles of those energies occupying the same space. (And so far, at least, physics hasn’t proved LRH wrong on that point.)
marildi xo
Sorry for the ambiguity, you rascal.
marildi ♥
Brian: “I can borrow a hammer from a neighbor to build a nice cabinet, or I can use it to kill someone”
The point is that even if the hammer had been used to “kill someone”, why would we need to destroy – or even not use – the “nice cabinet” ?
Hi FOTF2012,
Hubbard considered scientology to be gnostic. Gnosticism expresses itself in myth, and truths are considered to be embodied in the myths. This may be why some pcs who didn’t agree with the literal theory on the OT levels, for example, still got gains from them.
Well, OK, but what does Oracle think?? That is the question.
Crepuscule, what’s the problem with this statement you disagree with in 8-8008:
“The worst method of having an identity is having a body.”
Is it that you consider there are even worse methods of having an identity? Or do you consider it valid to have the body be your identity? Or… ?
I didn’t get what the objection was exactly.
Laws A-mighty!! Just saw the trailers for the documentary. Did you see them yet Dave? I am actually getting sweamish. It’s getting hard to watch your justice cycles. Seriously.
Well, every dog has their day. I was kind of hoping you would just go away. Didn’t expect to see this blood bath. I mean, everyone is going to know you are on a motivator flow. You know, the public. Some of them are going to feel ashamed for remaining so oblivious. I did. It is a much bigger flap than the G.O. bust with Mary Sue. You know that by now don’t you? You really out created everyone with the “bad boy” routine!
Then there are all of these law suits you are fighting, fraud, domestic terrorism. Your underlings doing your bidding and having it all backfire. Like everyone in the legal community isn’t going to be watching this documentary right? The president of the United States is probably going to see it.
Well, every dog has their day. I mean, you are SOOOOOOOOOOO busted. It is brutal. It was hard for me to watch the trailer. My in box is full already from friends and family and they are like, “Hey, are you still mixed up in that?” One friend emailed me from Israel! They are seeing this trailer in Israel!! Jeeeeze!
Kind of strange your justice cycles all over the news and television. I have no idea how you can get on stage again after this and do your periodic “applaud for me” routines.
Well, every dog has their day. Not sure I can watch anymore. It’s not easy anymore. Not curious like I used to be. This is a blood bath.
Well, every dog has their day.
Like I said, Brian, I am not questioning what YOU believe or saying that you are “bad”. It is your right to form your own conclusions about the universe, what is truer, and what is less true.
I don’t really care much about what people say. I am much more interested in how they do affect other peoples’ lives, i.e., do the people around them wind up feeling happier, more empowered, and are they glad for the experience of interacting with that person.
It seems to me that anybody whose claims have a “scientific” nature finds themselves saddled with the burden of proof before they even deserve serious consideration by others (such as peer studies). LRH tried to do that once (the “first clear”)–with devastatingly telling results. That was the end of that, although not the end of his “scientific” claims.
“Science” is also a bit of an Achilles heel to the “church.” By definition, science is not only verifiable but also repeatable. To use a simple example, if I drop an apple the result has to be the same as you dropping one. Otherwise, gravity is not really a scientific principle but strictly a matter of “personal experience”–an experience that only one or some (not all) may share. In that way, “science” (if it could be demonstrated in the “tech”) undermines the “church” monopoly on effecting and experiencing the alleged “wins” through its “tech.”
No, and I never suggested there was. Flunk for fallacy of equivocation.
Spyros,
“Yet, look how some create hate between those two. It’s the humans that do it”
Well your statements all sounds very aloof and oh so impartial.
I sincerely hope that beetles and cats are not creating third party between people.
I mean for somebody who has nothing to do with LRH and SCN, you sure know how to preach the Gospel of Ron.
Here is an answer to your allusions of mysterious, unknowable third parties creating conflict between the pious and the righteous:
Could it be that that Gurus/Prophets and religionists have been implanting psychotics memes on their flock for millennia?
And political operators and other opportunists just simply stir what it is already there?
I’m pretty sure that the sociopathic nature of Scientology is contained within its Scriptures the same way it is contained in both religions that you mentioned above, which you obviously don’t know much about.
Here is an idea for you. Why don’t you study the history of Religion.
Star here: http://freethoughtnation.com/dutch-theologian-and-banned-pastor-christ-in-egypt-is-a-fantastic-book/
Yes Marildi. Every + and every – have a portion of truth. And as long as there are poles, there are also lies. And as one seeks truth he might find supporting truth along with lies, or opposing lies along with truth. And lies get supported and truth gets hit, and war doesn’t work.
Thus, I don’t want to argue about TRs etc anymore. But I read an interesting poem recently. The language is a bit difficult, but it’s worthy. It’s much about all that we talk about in here.
http://philoctetes.free.fr/parmenidesunicode.htm
Espiritu: “I am much more interested in how they do affect other peoples’ lives…”
Yes that is good parameter. But it should be kept it mind that the final outcome of how someone affected a person’s life depends on not only on the actions of that someone, but also on the nature of inertia in that person affected.
Each person’s inertia is different. It determines the reactions within the person to outside influences. Basically what I am saying is that it takes two hands to clap. Niether hand can be blamed for how the clapping sounds.
Todd: “It seems to me that anybody whose claims have a “scientific” nature finds themselves saddled with the burden of proof before they even deserve serious consideration by others…”
The first line of proof is that there are no flagrant and rather obvious inconsistencies. This level of proof is rather easy to attain and to qualify for peer review. It seems that LRH couldn’t even get past this initial level.
This shows his failure to mass hypnotize wogs. He then had to put together a gradient of hypnotism. He called this system of gradients a “Scientology Org.”
.
Marildi: “Hubbard considered scientology to be gnostic. Gnosticism expresses itself in myth, and truths are considered to be embodied in the myths.”
All gains come from as-isness of fixed attention. Underlying any method that accomplishes this, is mindfulness.
How OT Levels get one to apply mindfulness, and as-is one’s fixed attention needs to be analyzed properly before making such general, inane statements.
Marildi: “Crepuscule, what’s the problem with this statement you disagree with in 8-8008: “The worst method of having an identity is having a body.””
That is not the worst method. The worst method is what Hubbard actually used. It may be expressed as follows:
“The worst method of having an identity is fixing attention on self.”
Hubbard did that by promising OT abilities.
Marildi: “The point is that even if the hammer had been used to “kill someone”, why would we need to destroy – or even not use – the “nice cabinet” ?”
The furor over “blood diamonds” comes to my mind.
A person audited on Scientology Grade 0 has to agree with Hubbard’s definition of communication, a being, and the importance of “I”.
You talk to me like I’m a supporter of ‘Gurus, prophets and religionists’ that you have put in one bucket like you know them all. You forgot to add ‘philosophers’ in your bucket, as many have expressed ideas similar to SCN. And Buddhism was a philosophy before it became a religion too.
I am impartial with regards to groups, not with regards to ideas. I will certainly not stand for any ideas like to witchunt the heathens, the pagans and generally ‘the others’.
That one is either an atheist or a religionist might be your own idea, but I don’t sympathise with it, as I think I’m neither.
Go find how Hubbard claimed that he was the prince of darkness, because I know the part where he ironically said that, when somebody got charged for being that.
Oh, by the way Dave. (I leave this message here because I know you read Marty’s blog) . I just have to say, I am really disappointed with your inability to think with conditions. It’s only at “clear” on the awareness characteristics. Aren’t you even a clear? Duh!!! The guy running the Church isn’t even a clear!! Well, by now that is rather obvious. I mean, you seem to be at “oblivious” on the awareness characteristics.
Has there NEVER been a staff qual officer at the Int base who had the courage to point out to you that you are oblivious???
Having Louis read his success story about justice only being possible in the Church, in a courtroom in Florida???????????????? DUH!!!! How ignorant and dense!!!
Do you honestly think the judge is going to make someone ” right ” for a statement like that, and permit injustice now? Or lack of justice?
It pains me to watch you orchestrate your own legal cycles!!!!!
And to think you could have just cut a check and admitted some out exchange!!!! But NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO you had to spend another few million to act an idiot in a Florida courtroom and open Scientologists everywhere up to new harassment, out P.R., and Lord knows, more heat from their associates for even mingling over at their local CofS!
How do you snatch 250K from someone, then, when they are not happy because of the fraud and no exchange, tell them to F*%K OFF, spend twice that much to avoid putting them back at peace? Are these optimum solutions? Isn’t this out ethics even by your own standards?
You have become ethics bait, in the world at large.
Are you even aware of your own condition now?
It looks like this:
In my view, energy is disturbance of space. Space is the limiting state of energy of zero frequency.
Please see
Disturbance Levels of Space
.
Energy starts as space and ends as mass.
Thanks for introducing S.M. Murdoch. Literal belief in Bible is as much of a prison of belief as the literal belief in Scientology.
http://freethoughtnation.com/dm-murdockacharya-s-on-dvd/
.
I just realised, because I didn’t get what you said, it in the beginning. Actually, you didn’t either.
Spyros:”Yet, look how some create hate between those two. It’s the humans that do it”
By those ‘some’ I meant their spiritual leaders as well, of course. Those who want to kill all Christians or all Muslims. And those who speak about ‘love’ but with some exceptions (like when the works of Satan are involved, that we shouldn’t love) …where the exceptions might as well be 99% of the cases. So, Conan, we don’t disagree about that. And actually I also spoke of the basics, that meant actually, love and such stuff –without the ‘exceptions’.
Other than that Conan, to condemn anything spiritual as insane, is not religious alright, but is of similar nature as to codemn anything non religious as a sin, Satan’s work, SP and so on.
Regardless of how you think things are, maybe you could let other people to think their own stuff too, if they don’t shove that stuff down other people’s throats, that is. Do you think only a Scientologist would have such ideas? Do you think it’s either ‘I love it all’ or ‘I hate it all?”. My own purpose Conan is not to PR pro- nor anti- any group. I have my own purposes for myself, and I use those ideas that serve me, for as long as they do. Thus I can also change them. My income is not dependent upon them, nor do I report to anybody.
If such ideas don’t serve you, dump them and piss on them too, if you will. But I think to go around calling all those people, including myself crazy etc is a bit on the manipulative side. Quite ironic if you say you stand against Scientology’s manipulation.
I do agree with you Marildi. Spiritual counseling, I believe, will only increase in popularity as we grow as a culture.
I believe, that the process was started, to some degree, with Ron.
So yes, there is validity in looking within for answers, in finding basic starting points of associated chains of events to neutralize mental and physical pain. To use reason as our god to extract truth from suffering.
This even extends into past life therapy.
But it won’t be called Scientology anymore. It will be called something else.
No one owns these processes. Einstein did not invent the theory of relativity. He discovered a verity that existed since always.
The problem, with this present evolution of a spiritual therapy called Scientology, is that L Ron Hubbard imprinted his dark side into these writings that distort truth.
I will trust no Scientologist or Indie who does not acknowledge the dark and dangerous heritage of knowledge that L Ron Hubbard infected Scientology with.
“He was just a man,” He said he was only human”, “he was not perfect”, does not cut the mustard. Some of his writings and behavior can rightly be called evil.
The OT levels must be exposed as part of that madness.
Use the hammer by all means. But make sure the metal hammer part is secured to the handle. If it flies off people get hurt.
Look at L Ron Hubbard and his religion with the cold hard look of a wise dispassionate observer.
Do not let emotional attachment to who you think he, Ron, is/was.
If a person still has this magical attachment to Hubbard and thinks he’s a true wiseman, what is to stop the next madman from recreating a paramilitary dog kennel of “willing hounds” to set the planet free by the “only one true technology.”
Sorry that ment to be a comment to another comment. But since I am here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmations_%28L._Ron_Hubbard%29:
Excerpt:
he “Affirmations” (also referred to as the “Admissions”) are a work said to have been written by L. Ron Hubbard in the late 1940s, a few years before he established Dianetics (1950) or Scientology (1952). They consist of a series of statements by and addressed to Hubbard, relating to various physical, sexual, psychological and social issues that he was encountering in his life. After the Affirmations became public knowledge in 1984 the Church of Scientology has disputed their authenticity, though in legal papers it has described the Affirmations as having been “written by” Hubbard and sought to retain ownership of them. The Affirmations appear to have been intended to be used as a form of self-hypnosis with the intention of resolving the author’s psychological problems and instilling a positive mental attitude. They are closely linked to the occult philosophy of Thelema, devised by Aleister Crowley in the early 20th century, in which Hubbard participated for a while during 1945–46. In her book Inside Scientology: The Story of America’s Most Secretive Religion, Janet Reitman calls the Affirmations “the most revealing psychological self-assessment, complete with exhortations to himself, that [Hubbard] had ever made.”[1]
I agree with you Espiritu.
My addition to this is accurate knowledge. Right Knowledge.
Although I myself have a long way to go, I know, from my studies and inner investigations of many paths, that there are similarities in procedural outcomes, theory, practices. There is an underlying unity within spiritual paths of diverse customs and cultures.
I can tell you with complete conviction, that L Ron Hubbard instilled untruths in his religion.
The only way to really know this is to investigate other paths. To practice the disciplines of the sages for some time. Read their works.
But L Ron Hubbard booby trapped that possibility by associating other spiritual traditions with the ultimate evil: OT3 materials. Thus making it a holy writ for Scientologists to be compulsively condescending about meditation and other teachers.
L Ron Hubbard actually had no idea of what he was talking about regarding the soul and Spirit.
He dazzled with his quick witted, compulsively lying rhetorical skills.
And we mistook this for wisdom. That is the trap.
Well, I don’t know what a “fallacy of equivocation” is, but here is your post I was responding to, in which you seemed to clearly saying there is a difference:
“Huh? The term “reactive mind” makes no such differentiation. Think about it: reactions can be entirely conscious and monitored, they can even be pre-determined. A more accurate term which does make the differentiation you describe is “sub-conscious”.
The reactive mind is defined as operating below the level of a person’s awareness, as is (to me), the “subconscious mind”.
So it appears that “reactive mind” and “subconscious mind” are pretty much referring to the same phenomena. I use “reaction” as denoting stimulus-response, rather than consciously intended, planned, or volitional actions.
I feel you.
Damn she is good.
Posting this for the Record:
Here is David Miscavige, has his attorney in a Florida Courtroom, waving around a memo labeled “SUCCESS STORY” , wherein a member of the Church is writing that the justice system outside of the Church is useless. IN FRONT OF A JUDGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And this is a “SUCCESS STORY”. It doesn’t get funnier than this.
And, you know, he is doing this to score points in the courtroom!
David, you ain’t no Perry Mason!!!!!!!!!!
David, Why didn’t you just send the judge a memo:
Dear Judge ___________,
Here in the Church of Scientology, we believe our members have achieved notable success when they come to the conclusion that you aren’t worth a damn and have no value in society. In fact, at that point, we invite them to write a success story.
Sincerely, David Miscavige
No love without Freedom, No Love without Freedom.
This represents the bond between Marty RaTHBUN AND ME
Damn, Spyros. I loved the above two posts of yours!
It’s obvious that you are willing to respond to a comment to you because you know who you are and where you stand. Kudos to you. 🙂
Conan must have thought you were some kind of a little pushover that he could take a free swipe at and get away with it. WRONG.
If by “self” you mean “thetan/soul”, Hubbard wasn’t the only one by far who considered the “self” as central to truth. Here’s a woman named Dolores Cannon, who came up with basically the same fundamentals as Hubbard – and she did so through extensive, years-long experience in working with others.
Hey Vinnie, must you be like a little dog that has to pee on every bush?
Let at least a few comments go by without leaving a “deposit” of pronouncements – as if you are the supreme authority. It gets old.
Brian: “I will trust no Scientologist or Indie who does not acknowledge the dark and dangerous heritage of knowledge that L Ron Hubbard infected Scientology with.”
But don’t you see, Brian – you are unwittingly demanding the same thing you are against – authoritarian rule.
Who would be the one to be given the authority to say what “needs to be acknowledged”. That would mean everybody else being required to see things the way the “authority” sees them – the very thing we are all protesting about the CoS.
If you are in favor of freedom of thought, and I trust you are, then I think you should allow others just that – freedom.
Your reply is non sequitur, and it is a no answer to my observations and recommendations.
Vinaire,
You are welcome.
I meant “you are willing to respond to ANY comment to you because you know who you are and where you stand.”
Marildi, My comments are intended to clarify the truth about what is being claimed. They are not meant to upset you.
Please use Scientology to maintain your inner peace. Do you think Scientology is up to meeting that challenge?
Are her results as harmful as Hubbard’s then? Let’s look beyond PR.
I can’t answer to you the way you put it. Maybe next time we can talk about something specific.
To answer to your ‘accusation’ that I’m a scion, I have read probably much more than average, but my interest in Scientology, it’s Bridge, auditing, courses orgs etc starts and ends with my posts in this blog. I do other things in my life. I fancy to talk philosophy, or else I have no business here. And that’s what I think I (could) have in common with (some) Scientologists in here, as well as some others. You want to hold a court against LRH and SCN and religionists. Not my business. And what I said the other days about harsh criticism wasn’t to make you guilty, but to have a civilized discussion, altogether, with SCN people too, and I would tell them the same too, if they were all accusations and stuff (I have). If it doesn’t happen, not much will change for me. I hope you can grasp a thing or two of what I wrote now. Have a good night.
You mean you understood what I wrote?
It’s no wonder Conan assumed I’m a Scientologist. Like another would assume that I am an anti-Scientologist, for bad-talking TRs, Conan knows only a braiwashed scilon, or maybe an OSA, would ever say anything good about Hubbard, who’s been controlling all Scientologists subcosciously since ’86 that he died and became a haunting ghost. He even makes Conan mock and see himself in others like me. Too bad. I’m not to be trusted.
If you ever really get to dislike fighting, and domination -not only the fighting and domination of others- let me know.
Spyros, thanks for posting the poem of Parmenides. I’m surprised that you only read that recently, because it comes across as your way of thinking and expressing yourself – your “style”. Reading along, I started to wonder if Parmenides was your direct ancestor and that you inherited his DNA!
As for what you said regarding “arguing about TRs, etc.”, what I think is that former scientologists seem to have a common bond – probably because most of us are seekers of truth. So, to me, it’s kind of a shame that we aren’t free enough with/from scientology that we can have free and open discussions about it. This is the common subject among us, and it could easily be used as a springboard and “datum of comparable magnitude” to so many other topics of discussion.
As an example, on the subject of DNA, have you heard or read anything about “spiritual DNA”? Here’s a less than 5-minute vid that gives an overview:
Lots of people bought that hook line and sinker, Marty, because that was what we thought was the proper attitude and conduct of Scientology and Scientologists — even as we were being hounded and berated at the service org level and as you guys were pummeling each other at Int.
I think if you looked a little further and purposefully looked for other points of view you’d see that many Scientologists never bought into these things you have mislabeled as the “core beliefs” of Scientology. These aren’t core beliefs at all, and to say that they are is just sloppy thinking and I am surprised to see you thinking that way.
Your points are not the core beliefs of Scientology; they are the peripheral delusions of L. Ron Hubbard and many of them were slipped into the bulletins and policy letters and lectures and there have been SOME who believed them – not many, but some.
There have never been millions of Scientologists, but I’d bet that there have been some hundreds of thousands who at one time or another proudly considered themselves to be Scientologists or Dianeticists and yet had subscribed to little or none of these “core beliefs”.
The things you are calling the core beliefs of Scientology were never the core beliefs of most of the people who have directly benefited from Scientology. These are the beliefs of some staff members and some Sea Org members and the most zealous of public. But that’s a minority of the people who have been or are involved.
What’s the average tenure of a staff member? It is much less than two and a half years – very few complete a contract. What’s the average tenure of a Sea Org member? I don’t think much longer. You accept that sort of thinking when you are in as it’s part of the battle-cry and part of the game the way Ron had it mocked up. Ron admits to needing enemies. There’s at least one place where he admits to it being his decision to make the psychs the bad guys. We all had to band together to fight to coalesce the group. It’s like the sci fi stories of all the nations of earth getting their shit together to beat the mean martians.
But once you leave staff, you don’t have to put up with that harangue anymore. When you leave Truman’s World and you realize it, you know longer have to act like Jim Carey.
What percentage of people who get involved finally arrive onto OT 3? Very small. What’s the percentage of OT 3s who quit very soon after? I understand it’s pretty high. People blow off those levels as Ron’s Sci Fi explanation of the problems of the universe just doesn’t make for very good reasoning. It’s hard to stomach as a “right why” for the travails of Man.
I think most Scientologists when we knew of these beliefs did not buy into them. Maybe the psychiatrist one a bit, as there certainly was evidence that these people certainly had a bloody history.
Yes, they cheer as long as they are in and nod their heads in agreement, but once they are out, these ideas you have mentioned, if they were ever believed are soon jettisoned as they just don’t make sense. Believing in such things when you are not on staff is just not a component in building a better life.
You have done a good job of identifying LRH’s fantastically ridiculous notions about the world that he did his best to get people to accept as true. But this particular bit of hypnotism was not successful to most Scientologists. To label them as “core beliefs”: just not so.
These might be considered the core beliefs of the most nutty people in Scientology, or of many Scientologists when they were at their most nutty, but these are not the core beliefs of Scientology or most Scientologists.
Henry Ford did much to advance the technology of management. He also had a lot of screwball notions, not about psychs, but pretty much the same sort of thinking about Jews. In Spring 1920, Ford made his personal newspaper, The Dearborn Independent, chronicle what he considered the “Jewish menace”. Every week for 91 issues, the paper exposed some sort of Jewish-inspired evil major story in a headline.
Undoubtedly lots of people believed just as he did and cheered him on. But there were also thousands if not millions who said, “Makes a great car, but what a creep!”
You can’t truthfully say that Ford’s perverse view of the world made his management technology looney. People in his camp were able to differentiate. The same is true with many Scientologists.
The true core beliefs for most people who have ever been Scientologists are truly the Scientology Zero materials and the Creed and the Aims. Yes, pretty much all the things grandma would agree to if they were well explained. These are the true core beliefs.
The things you mentioned aren’t core; they are strategies that LRH put into place to frighten people into compliance, and, being that they were in direct opposition to the core things that were taught that really did align with “the combined truths of fifty thousand years of thinking men”, they never worked very well for very long.
Every time one reads about the “good old days” of Scientology, they are talking about their times in a mission or org where ARC and the best things of life were the way the game was played. Truly there are many of us who will indeed carry the points of view given in “Attitude and Conduct of Scientologists” to our graves.
And wherever did you get the information where you could say “In fact scientology never achieved even the scientifically recognized 20 to 30 percent placebo effect in terms of long-term satisfaction.”? I am very curious about what data you or someone has that brought about that conclusion. I venture to say that there are no actual facts that back up that conclusion, or that these “facts” were advanced by a very prejudiced individual.
Hi Brian,
I got what you said. Cool.
Regarding Karen, one of the many ways that she helps people is by advising and giving excellent referrals to those who need to get a refund or repayment (and there is a difference between the two!) from the cherch of $cientology.
🙂
Prison of Belief comes from accepting a religion literally. It comes from blind acceptance of inconsistencies (cognitive dissonance) after suspending mindfulness.
Christianity has wonderful lessons that one can learn from if one can only step around the inconsistencies that the Bible is filled with. Same thing can be said about Scientology, though there is precious little that is new and really useful in Scientology.
If Scientology has its Xenu, then Christianity has its God as “creator.” The idea of “God as creator of the universe” is no less inconsistent than the idea of Xenu. If you can’t see that then you can’t.
The word “God” has many meaning. One has to to work out the right meaning of “God” that is not inconsistent. Here is how I see it.
CAN GOD BE DEFINED?
.
A hypnotized person cannot be handled, just by allowing freedom of thought. He cannot be handled by “authority” either as Hubbard tried. “Authority” simply ends up hypnotizing the person more.
So, how do you handle a hypnotized person?
Frankly, Marildi, you sound like a third party.
It’s already happening, Brian.
http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/
Here is my Greek Goddess!
David, Your lack of empathy is a sink hole.
The Church took Narconon away from Willie. He is the founder. They haven’t paid him one thin dime in licensing fees.
Now they are pimping his image and name. Now they are pulling him into the loop. He must be a solution to some problem. Probably to shift the blame to him against the back drop of the law suits.
I got about a third of the way into your comment before recognizing I was listening to scientology induced dissonance unrelated to what I wrote. What you note as ‘core beliefs’ are unoriginal secular, positive thinking pablum. They are of the hook referenced in core religious belief number 1. As to the placebo effect numbers provenance, it is 35 years of observation and experience – with thorough access to scientology’s religiously implanted obsession with statistics – with the subject in and out of the organization. Only a very hypnotized, dramatizing (continuing to mock it up wildly) scientologist would counter with the idea such facts are the invention of a ‘very prejudiced individual.’ I will say (concede) this for your comment, it indicates that you are quite the sincere, compliant religious adherent to this day.
MODERATOR REJECTION: Come again when and if you graduate from the cultic mindset that must label the commenter of comments that don’t meet your religious standards.
^^^^ You mean like this one?
Free investigation, free scrutinizing, free inquiry into the nature of Ron’s claims/clams, is the opposite of authoritarianism.
To equate critical analysis with authoritarianism is to be still affected by Ron.
CRITICISM = ATTACK
The OT 3 level claims need this scrutiny.
The uncovering of lies is not mind control.
That is still Ron talking.
Conan,
Your recent protest reads:
“And you sound like a Holy Roller. …”
“… you sure know how to preach the Gospel ….”
You sling like little declares. It is an identity attack. You have problems with these types of people. Lack of empathy. Scorn and disdain.
I doubt you have ever attended Church in Harlem, Mobile Alabama, Mississippi, or other states where people congregate and inspire one another.
You don’t stand in front of a Southern Baptist Church and heckle people for how they choose to get their inspiration.
You seem to have ethnic cleansing goals yourself towards ministry and preachers. Gospel singers are entire culture/community unto themselves, and comprise an entire section of the music industry.
Not everyone is repelled by these people. Their empathy holds them together.
Not everyone wants to read your trash talk slurs about them.
What are you doing to inspire these people? Slurring them on the internet when you have no clue, or you just don’t care about, the burdens they carry that drive them into Church looking for inspiration.
I think that “Scientology” as a brand of knowledge is finished because of the way it presented itself to the general public, and how it has acted as an organized religion. It is no use trying to defend this brand.
As far as knowledge is concerned, it flowed into Scientology and it has flowed out. What is good and useful shall continue to be appreciated. What is bad and evil shall targetd until it is disposed of.
Any love affair with the brand called “Scientology” is nothing but hypnotic attachment.
It is better to focus on knowledge and to let go of Scientology.
Now that the Church of Scientology has made BILLIONS off the backs of people with drug problems, and the free labor of those staff, off the Narconons, embezzling MILLIONS of donations for Narconon into the Church coffers, it gets controversial and, “It was Willies idea.” “Wille is the founder”. “We were just supporting Willie and the Latino community.”
Does anybody know how OUT RUDS Willie is with the Church of Scientology?
Thanks for posting this flyer Cat Daddy. I know some people in his family that are really going to want to have this.
I agree — good points.
Let me pose this as a challenge (to the church). Let’s take IQ claims. Ron said IQ definitely goes up with hours of auditing. There are standardized, non-Scientology tests to measure IQ. A comprehensive test can take several hours and cost some money to administer. And the church reportedly has billions of dollars at its disposal.
The church has made a claim about to IQ through its “scripture” and therefore the onus is on the church to prove its claim (that is just how burden of proof works). It has the resources and the self interest to prove its claim. The church could easily set up a program where a standard IQ test is given by external experts before auditing and then at one or more points in time as auditing progressed.
Without getting into supernatural powers, metaphysical knowledge, past life recall, testing IQ improvement would be a pretty straightforward and standard way of validating or falsifying this particular claim.
If the church and its believers are positive that the words of Hubbard are infallible scripture, why would it hesitate to do such testing? It has plenty of money to fund such a project. And every self interest in doing so. In fact, if the claims proved to be true that would spur worldwide positive interest in the church and its teachings. So not performing such research could be argued to be an overt of omission.
As I reflect on this it strikes me that Miscavige’s focus on MEST acquisition could be taken as the signal that he himself does not believe in the ultimate claims of Scientology — or even some of the more pedestrian claims. Therefore he would rather buy impressive buildings than perform research that would pull the rug out from under his own feet.
I did not mean it as a advice per se. I myself am not that familiar or knowledgeable about Hofstadter. But I keep coming across references to his work in relation to the study of consciousness and the sense of self. So … just sharing.
If it is not true to you, it is not true.~~ LRH
Take a deep breath.
OK, I undertand. I windered if there were someting in his writings that may have resonated with you.
Maybe I am third partying you to you. That would be funny.
Not so for a person who is not-ising.
.
“If you ever really get to dislike fighting, and domination -not only the fighting and domination of others- let me know.”
The thing I liked was that you weren’t easily dominated in that you objected to a misinterpretation of what you wrote. If you don’t want to call that “fighting”, fine.
Nothing was said about free inquiry or critical analysis – rather, it was your insistence about what “needs to be acknowledged”. That puts your own personal view as a limitation to free thought.
I don’t think this is too much of a nuance to be understood, is it?
Thanks Espirtitu. I never questioned her decency in helping others.
It was simply a question regarding the OT 3 materials.
It still has the mystique of danger. I will let it go.
(̅_̅_̅(̲̲̲̲̲̅̅̅̅̅̅(̅_̅_̲̲̲̅̅̅ Thank You _̅_̅_̅() ڪے
Damn nice tune. Thanks Cat Daddy.
In my view there is either harmonious and consistent thought, or there is thought that contains inconsistencies.
“Free thought” probably means freedom to express one’s thought. That freedom very much exists on Marty’s blog. “Free thought” does not exist in Scientology because of KSW.
Do ideas have force that they can dominate?
I think that an idea can dominate only when it fits consistently in a structure. However, it can dominate only within that structure. It may not dominate when considered in a larger structure where it creates inconsistency. That is the story of Scientology.
To make Scientology right, one can always present it in a limited context. But the true test will always be of demonstrating consistency and harmony in a universal context.
.
Yes, it is fighting. I have fought too. I think whenever you assert that you know (or do, or other things) better than somebody, no matter what that is, no matter your good purposes, it is a kind of fighting for you assert the other person is somewhat incapable to know as good as you. It is not the same as to punch him, but it is fighting nevertheless. So now I wonder what is left for me to say, thinking that. I will let you know, if I find out 😛
Marty,
Just to assuage the overly emotional concerns that my comments prompted.
Here is what I actually think is in the future for Scientologists and their Religion. I redacted it from my post on Mike’s blog yesterday.
Mike, you made a discriminating assessment between what constitutes a Religion and what are the public perceptions and legal expectations of what a religion should be. Two very different things.
No government in the West is ever going to deny Scientologists the right to practice their faith, whether dependent or independent of the Church. What will eventually happen, is the Justice System will catch up with Scientology’s fraud and abuse and force the Church to conform to the laws of civil society, and make them stop their wholesale violations of people’s civil the rights.
In third world countries where Catholicism prevails, you can see the craziest syntheses of native shamanism, witchcraft, black and white magic all mixed up with the Christian faith, etc.
NOBODY CARES. NOBODY INTERFERS with anyone’s practice of their religion.
Scientologists will have their faith, they just need to get used to behaving like any other religion, be upfront and honest about what they believe and what they do. And part of that is getting used to having their Theology openly discussed like everybody else in the West.
Peace and Enlightment.
Hey marildi! You ask what, in light of what Rupert is saying, my understanding is of the experience of our spiritual communion. Well marildi, this is going to possibly seem like a cop out on my part, but I have to say that I don’t have an understanding of that experience. However, there is the experience and somehow I know that there is the experience. I could easily fabricate some understanding of the experience and perhaps even present this understanding in a convincing manner that would at least give it merit enough to appear worthy of your consideration. And, marildi, not all that long ago this is a likely scenario as to how I would have responded to your question. Now, though, I realize that when it comes to that which is abstract e.g., consciousness, the mind, eternity, love, truth, knowledge, and so on…I do not know or understand anything. Now that being said, I must add that I do not recognize any other individual that seemingly appears to me as being one who knows or understands either. I do, though, seem to benefit in examining the interpretations, in their many creative forms, as offered by others…even if they are offering what they’re saying as being true (that, I believe, is the result of an incredibly common training program). As long as one realizes that when it comes to addressing the abstract from the realm of perception there is no truth or understanding to be had, one can remain free to explore, look and adjust their desires, beliefs and interpretations as they see fit.
Take care marildi. I always enjoy our exchanges. Much Love, Monte
Marlidi, I have asked you this simple benign question at least 5 times in our discussions over the years.
You have characteristically never ever replied. I am freely inquiring into your view on this. It is just a question.
1) Do you believe in Xenu?
Good afternoon G. Excellent article you wrote to Marildi.
I have spent a few thousand hours investigating this subject and have written many of my observations. Perhaps you would like to see them. They are at minimum entertaining, possibly thought provoking. The information I have was a bit hard won, but I am glad to share. Maybe you will recognize a few of the principals and can add further detail and align some of the occurrences. I am always searching for further understanding.
Your assistance would be welcome.
I am continuing with my metallurgical research with the assistance of Marshal Space Flight Center, and have become the communicator to my family with my mother after her stroke. But time is a created thing and I have found that to be a valuable skill lately.
Mark
Hello Pip. Haven’t spoken to you directly for awhile, but I keep up with you. Interesting conversations lately.
On the point of “The decision to BE”, I can only relate my experience and extend that into my opinions.
The decision to be and the decision/desire to continue are simultaneous and intimately tied together. That is why I have mentioned in the past that time was the first and most important portion of MEST. Many complexities were added later, but this simplicity is primary to the others.
One thought, postulate, idea, following and adding to the others, predates and was primary to any motion or space. Just my experience, your results may vary, use your own judgement. Batteries not included. Not approved or evaluated by the FDA.
Mark
Thanks Pip.
Keep in mind that knowing with certainty and opinion and creative thought are two different things. I know I had eggs, ham and toast with apple butter this morning. No opinion will change that. Why my lady decided to make that particular breakfast is a little less sure. Some believe that fact and opinion is a gradient or gray area, but there is a solid line that can be drawn between them. The gradient comes after the line is crossed. The ability to recognize the difference is a large portion of what we call judgement.
I sometimes write my experiences as fact for all, but that is because I write shortly after my observations while they are fresh and raw. I like to leave some things open for your evaluation and opinion. What is true for me is not necessarily true for you, and I like to gather others thoughts and ideas. It often leads me in an addition direction of thought.
Mark
Thank you much, Marildi. Hope your Valentine’s day was joyful.
Mine was a bit challenging. I have been assigned as my mothers communicator since her stroke that day, but we are all pitching in and getting through it. Love has proven the most valuable asset. Mother appreciates it and is as much worried about us as we are for her. She is a strong woman. The inability to communicate is very distressing for my family more than I, but we are getting through it together.
ARCL, Mark
Thank you for you thoughts, Conan.
I have gone to great lengths to understand and prevent hypnotic and implanting of others ideas and methods. But I am not arrogant to the knowledge that the danger is present.
Who knows, I may be found in a pool of saliva tomorrow morn. Wish me luck.
Mark
Vin said:
“There is no “self” that exists independent of the dynamics.”
Interesting statement. Do you man that the dynamics are the component parts of self and in their whole make up the self?
It was my thought that the dynamics are a description of the activities of the self, but do not define the self itself.
Hmmmmm. Your statement suggests that the individual consists entirely of it’s activities.
Mark
Marildi said:
“Mark, somewhere LRH said a thetan can be anything he wants to be while still remaining himself.”
And therein lies the rub. Once one has decided to be something, how does he completely release that and decide to be something else. How do you completely release experience while retaining the knowledge and experience gained. A long sought piece of information.
Well, I’ll keep at it and keep you informed.
Mark
The concept of DYNAMICS by Hubbard is a perfect human-centric view of life and existence. It is built on the idea of human self.
Centered on the human self is the family, then human groups of increasing sizes, and then the whole mankind. These are the first four dynamics.
At fifth dynamic we have life other than mankind. It provides us with a human-centric view of life.
At sixth and seventh dynamics we find a sharp division between spirit and matter. This again is a human-centric view that elevates spirit over matter. They are looked upon as separate existences that interact to produce life.
At eighth dynamic we have the concept of Supreme Being. It is the concept of pure Cause that produces the universe. It projects itself outwards as spirit which impinges on dead and inert matter to produce life.
The human-centric view projects humanlike “beingness” as Cause of this universe.
If we look with mindfulness, we find that the dichotomy “Cause-effect” is an integral aspect of the Universe. Cause does not lie outside of the Universe since the boundary of universe is not marked by effect.
“Cause-effect” may be represented by a scale made up of infinite gradients. The two ends shall stretch into infinity in opposite directions. Neither cause nor effect are absolute. It would be nice to think of Eighth Dynamic as “absolute cause” but that appears to be inconsistent.
The postulate of Eighth Dynamic as “absolute cause” indicates human-centric fixation.
Beingness is existing-ness. If there is any beingness at Eighth Dynamic, it is the whole Universe with nothing excluded. This is the superset of all existence real or imagined, rational or irrational. This beingness extends beyond the human dynamics of self, family, groups and mankind to all other life and substances and the underlying spiritual and material aspects.
The Eighth Dynamic is the complete spectrum of awareness and motion.
The boundary of the universe is, thus, marked by no awareness and no motion. The major aspects of the Universe are awareness (spirit) and motion (matter), which are expressed as seventh and sixth dynamics. These two aspects go hand-in-hand. Even inanimate matter is composed of motion and awareness at atomic level. “Spirit” or awareness cannot be isolated as some absolute condition existing by itself. It would be nice to think of spirit as “superior” but that appears to be a human-centric fixation.
The Seventh and Sixth Dynamics describe the two key aspects of the Eighth Dynamic.
Awareness (spirit) and motion (matter) evolve together from simplicity toward complexity. Thus we have electromagnetic radiation, fundamental particles, atoms, molecules, material combinations, cells, organisms, plants, animals and finally humans. This evolution is covered by the Fifth and Fourth Dynamics.
The Fifth and Fourth Dynamics describe the evolution of awareness and motion as life.
Humans as the Fourth Dynamic seems to be the ultimate in evolution of life. It is a very complex combination of motion and awareness. Human species operated at first on instincts alone. Interaction with different geographies and climates produced different races over time. As human awareness evolved under different conditions, different cultures and political subdivisions came about.
The Third Dynamic came about as human awareness evolved into races, cultures and political groups.
Families have been the product of cultural evolution. It provided an environment in which children could be raised to become productive members of the society. The sex act was always there, but the family structure now provided a better organization of the need to reproduce, protect and rear children.
The Second Dynamic came about as a better organization of the need to reproduce, protect and rear children.
Human ability to solve problems also evolved with awareness. With this ability arose differences among people and thus the sense of self. The earliest focus was on areas of basic sustenance, such as, food, shelter and security. This was followed by barter. Communities evolved around these needs and the knowledge to meet them. Travel required the study of stars in heavens as guides. Birth and death lead to speculations. Religion became a repository of knowledge and a guide to social organization. Increasingly, problems were solved by individuals. Self was perceived as the source of action.
The First Dynamic came about with the recognition of problem-solving abilities.
As the individual problem-solving abilities have grown, so have the knowledge and awareness of the Universe. Science has focused on improving physical comforts of life because it is easier to look at physical phenomena objectively. It has been more difficult to look at the spiritual phenomena objectively. But this is the direction to take to further improve the problem-solving abilities.
To improve problem-solving abilities we need to start looking at the spiritual phenomena more objectively.
The Eighth Dynamic has essentially evolved into the seven dynamics below it. It is the evolution of motion and awareness toward increasing complex configurations. Trouble spots occur when inconsistencies are introduced and harmony is disturbed. But that is part of evolution.
Any harmony and disharmony is part of evolution.
The Universe is a spectrum of motion and awareness. It seems to come about as a transition from no motion and non-awareness. It may transition back into no motion and non-awareness. The expanded Eighth Dynamic shall include motion and awareness as well as no-motion and non-awareness.
The expanded Eighth Dynamic consists of the Universe cycling between awareness and non-awareness.
The trick is to spot and resolve inconsistencies as they come to view.
The one would gradually move toward enlightenment.
.
Mark NR, different people have different certainties. Two certainties from different people may even be contradictory.
All certainties are relative. This statement does not degrade any certainty we have. It simply means that one can always come up with a better certainty.
That is how science makes progress. Einstein declared the speed of light to be a universal constant. This is a certainty for now, but there may possibly be a wider context in which the speed of light is a special case.
Similarly, in the field of spirituality, we cannot be absolutely certain that self or soul is permanent. The phenomenon that is described as self or soul must be open to further investigation.
There is little progress possible for a person who believes his certainties are absolute.
One can always improve upon a certainty one has.
Mark NR: “The decision to be and the decision/desire to continue are simultaneous and intimately tied together.”
One is already being, before there is a conscious decision to BE.
This decision acts as an alter-is, and sticks a person in a false beingness.
.
Why do you think Marildi will answer you this time? Any questioning from you that puts her on defensive is a suppression of her “free thought.”
Monte, good post!
Brian, I neither believe nor disbelieve in Xenu. In general, I do my best to avoid having “beliefs”.
What makes the most sense to me, up to now, is that Hubbard apparently considered scientology to be a gnostic faith – which could explain the reason for all his “myths”. Per gnosticism, myths can embody basic truths. That could explain why some of the OT levels work for many people, regardless of whether or not they are literally true.
Hubbard may also have considered himself to be what is called in gnosticism a “Messenger of Light”, whose purpose was to bring knowledge and freedom to others. I talked to an old-timer one time, back in the early ’80’s, who knew Ron personally and told me that Ron was very excited when he realized what he was here to do.
Be that as it may, it’s also possible that Hubbard was a false Messenger whose purpose was to deceive and entrap people by giving them some truths – along with untruths, with the actual aim of enslaving them.
Whichever of the two purposes it was, it seems to me, based on my own study and experience, that he did reveal a lot of truth. And benefiting from the truths, along with sifting out any untruths, is what I consider to be important.
Ok MIraldi, good points.
Two questions:
1) Do you give Xenu, the OT3 materials, credibility that you would audit this material?
2) Why do you need to associate Ron with other paths to find credibility?
It would seem his own deeds and legacy are now obviously impotent to support his own credibility.
His believers who say they are not believers but “dispassionate observers of truth” reveal the bulldog attachment we humans have to delusions and imaginings.
The mind games, to hold in place the deceptive image of Ron, are obvious, sad and instructive.
L Ron Hubbard worked hard to make less of other spiritual paths and put himself on the “only way pedestal”.
Now his apologists are in denial of his contempt for other paths and using them “Gnostics, Shamans etc to support him.
Denial and wishful thinking are certainly good friends.
I am thinking MarkNR that maybe Vinaire does not have a self. If in fact he does not have a self, maybe we should not respond to him anymore because there is no “him” there.
😉
Vinaire has a self but it is not permanent or eternal (like a thetan) by any means. Vinaire’s self is changing every moment and there is no permanent or immortall core underlying it.
Brian, it is my turn to ask you a direct question.
1) Do you believe that there is an eternal thetan? Or an immortal soul? (Both are the same thing by the way.)
This is on the same level as your Xenu question.
.
My pleasure
Vin.
Your view and my view differ significantly. But I learn a great deal from your writings and have been directed to different lines of thought due to your thoughts. For that I thank you greatly. I will continue considering all your directions of inquisition. When you see a thought of my origin that you deem inconsistent, and decide you want to look no further, I am disappointed. At that point we both suffer a loss.
Keep writing.
Mark
Brian, Marildi, I will give you my detailed observations shortly. My mother is having a bit of distress tonight.
Mark
Brian.
Humor. Ar, Ar, Ar. Perhaps Vin is not without self, but rather, Selfless. An admired quality.
Mark
Vinaire.
You have sparked a realization in myself that i had not expected. It is also one that you had not expected. The relationship, and definition, between theta, thetan, and mest has become much more clear.
Thank you.
I hope to assist you in the future as you have assisted me.
ARCL, Mark.
Thanks for your reply Spyros.
I’m glad you like ACIM. I find a lot of similarity between ACIM and SCIENTOLOGY and equally between ACIM and Christian Science. It is my belief that love and understanding are an unbeatable combination.
Love
Pip
Hi Vinaire
That only goes to show how profound some of these Scientology fundamentals are.
Pip
That’s true Vin but what lies underneath “intolerance and unwillingness to discuss” is a person’s insistence on their RIGHTNESS supported by their own personal CERTAINTY.
Love
Pip
Hi Valkov
I am glad you enjoyed it.
Pip
All I can say to you is <3+<3=<3 and three big XXX's
It is great when hearts join as one. Thanks for the acknowledgement.
Love
Pip
Love you!
I agree “certainty absent of compassion”. I made that comment as a result of watching this video http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x20ohne_bbc-ascent-of-man-11-knowledge-or-certainty_tv
Love
Pip
Hi Sweet one!
Energies can indeed combine, but that is in terms of sharing SIMILAR SPACES. The Axioms of Scientology define ENERGY as “postulated particles in space” and since two particles may not occupy the same space at the same time without their vanishment it surely follows that two energies cannot occupy the same space at the same time, but that in no way precludes two energies interacting with each other. They can duplicate each other but not PERFECTLY else it would bring about an AS-IS-NESS.
It is great to share our NO-THING but a little MASS can be fun too.
Love
Pip
Thanks Monte for the video. I am going to share it with my Christian Science friends. Christian Science and ACIM are very similar.
Cheers
Pip
Not so much of the ‘Ol’!
Yes for me and I know for you it is the concept of the AWARENESS of AWARENESS that sets Scientology apart from most other attempts to figure out how the mind works. In fact it is there in the opening pages of DSMH “man is looking at mental image pictures”.
Lots of love
Pip X and ❤
Hi Vinaire
I know you like to re-write the Axioms of Scientology but it makes sense to me that ENERGY ACTUALLY CREATES SPACE, that is of course after the particles that define it have been postulated. So I would say
SPACE STARTS WITH ENERGY AND ENDS AS MASS.
Pip
These are fundfamentals from Hinduism.
You know more about physics than I do, my field of interest is metaphysics. I see no reason that a wave should not be made up of particles of THOUGHT and as the wave length of thought changes so matter is created which itself defines SPACE. This helps me to get my head around the Zero Point Field.
Love
Pip
Thanks Cat Daddy
Hi Mark
Your breakfast sounds very appetising. Perhaps it is when ‘opinion’ and ‘creative thought’ become certainty that creative becomes destructive.
A past Archbishop of Canterbury here in England once said “fundamentalism whether it be Christian, Jewish or Islamic is the scourge of our time” (he could have added-in Scientology there as well).
The certainty I was thinking of is where doctrine becomes dogma, when ‘my’ truth becomes THE TRUTH.
My thinking was influenced by this video http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x20ohne_bbc-ascent-of-man-11-knowledge-or-certainty_tv which for me highlighted the difference between certainty and uncertainty, and how we used to believe that the physical universe was fixed by the laws discovered by people like Newton, and now as a result of Quantum Physics we have had to rethink things that we have taken as CERTAINTIES. Thus making room for the idea ‘I’ might be mistaken, this is the missing factor in Scientology fundamentalism which pretty much agrees with the Christian fundamentalism. “The Bible is the inspired word of God and is literally true” just change the word Bible for the word TECH and the word GOD for the word RON and you have a working definition of FUNDAMENTAL SCIENTOLOGY.
Love
Pip
Mrak NR: “When you see a thought of my origin that you deem inconsistent, and decide you want to look no further, I am disappointed. At that point we both suffer a loss.”
LRH said something like don’t go past a misunderstood without resolving it.
I say don’t go past an inconsistency without resolving it. I certainly look further after resolving the inconsistency.
.
Mark NR, you can assist me by discussing an inconsistency using a pan-determined viewpoint until it is resolved.
I see it the other way around. Rightness and certainty can always be improved upon, That happens all the time in science. But many people are intolerant and he is unwilling to do that. Hubbard was like that. Scientology is like that.
Please see
The Quest for Certainty
.
Whether it is physics or metaphysics, particles result from a condensation of wave inertia.
Thoughts are waves. They condense into particles of ideas (like the fundamental particles). The ideas can then become fixed into a configuration, like the atom of matter.
.
A postulation is basically making an assumption.
If you really look at it “awareness of awareness” is the same thing as “introversion.”
One is looking at one’s awareness. One is introverted. Hubbard was indeed introverted.
Scientology is just a pseudo-science. It is pretending to be a science.
It appeals to those who are also pretending to know, and who do not like to put out the effort required for critical thinking.
.
I haven’t studied ACIM, but I liked some talks I had with some people.
Generally speaking, I think the less vias, the better. And when it comes to the subject o spirit or God, it’s the same. I don’t really agree with Christ nor Mohamed. I once opened a quoran that somebody had left at some book exchange, in some random page explaining how to punish your wife right, and it really wasn’t my thing. Those punishments and sufferings are not my idea of spirituality. Nor is it to feel serene about anything you do. I think feelings could work as compass. And feeling like #$%$%$ could indicate something is not OK.
My ‘basic’ agreements with religions are agreements they themselves have with philosophies too.
Most often I find movements talking about something I agree with, then adding stuff I really disagree with. So, I try to have things my own way, whether I partially agree with groups or not. I think, in spirituality, the core of what one looks for is inside.
I understand atheists arguments too and most often I agree.
I don’t think that if religions get wiped out, the world will be free -particularly brainwash-free- either. Proof is some past atheist countries. Brainwashing can come in many flavors, so long as there are people to sell and buy it.
In any case, since there are also many beliefs and brainwashes of many flavors, I think we must -at least- respect each other’s views –without that meaning to agree with them. And respect those who respect. I would personally not respect one who would want to impose his views on me or a friend. But also I think it is a waste of time, for myself, to fight those who don’t intend to respect.
Anarchists have the motto ‘No gods no masters’. I’m close, as I don’t want bosses above my head, but I keep my (own) spiritual stuff, and try to avoid unnecessary collisions. For anyway, fighting is a way to impose something, even if it is a fight-back, no?
Het Brian, you haven’t answered my question yet. See
https://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2015/02/03/scientology-beliefs/#comment-330547
I shall keep reminding you of it till you answer it. Don’t be evasive like Marildi now.
Spyros: “Generally speaking, I think the less vias, the better. And when it comes to the subject o spirit or God, it’s the same.”
The two biggest vias are “I” and “God” in that order.
.
Hi Mark
Thanks for your reply. Although I have my own experience, I am sometimes aware of how my experience matches up to what is written in the Bible. The Bible differentiates between the first cause and being. In Chapter One it says that “man is made in the image and likeness of God” and it also says “God is spirit”. In the second Chapter of Genesis it says “man became a living being”, not man was but man became. Just as in the Factors it says “Before the beginning was a cause and the entire purpose of the cause was the creation of effect, IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE DECISION AND THE DECISION WAS TO BE. From there MATTER, ENERGY, SPACE and TIME could be created.
For time to exist there must be “change of position of particles in space”. I cannot conceive of TIME without CHANGE.
Love with ARC
Pip
Interesting Vinaire! The two that are not vias are the two that you see as the biggest. That leaves only your opinion that is “via-less”.
Love Pip
Hi Spyros
Only NO-THING has no vias. That is what the ONE TRUE GOD is and he has made you in his image.
I often tell people “Jesus did not come to start a new religion, he came to restore a relationship”. To invite us to let go of all our vias which is just another word for VIEWPOINTS and to realise we are not a view point but that which can assume a view point THE AWARENESS of AWARENESS.
Atheism is just another viewpoint. The trick is to be able to assume any viewpoint without getting stuck in it, hence WILLING EFFECT IS TOTAL CAUSE.
Love
Pip
Vinaire, I am sure people said the same about Quantum Physics in the early days. I was brought up a Christian Scientist and Mark Twain apparently said that “Christian Science is neither Science nor Christian” and yet when Einstein was in New York he visited the Christian Science Reading Room and believed that Mary Baker Eddy was ahead of her time in her discoveries.
Pip
Hi Vinaire
That is the whole point. YOU CAN’T ‘LOOK’ at the Awareness of Awareness, because it is that which is doing the looking, all you can do is EXPERIENCE it.
It is the complete opposite to introversion.
Pip
Hi Vinaire
I don’t really know what I am talking about except YOU CAN’T GET NOTHING OUT OF NOTHING.
Even a wave must be made of SOMETHING. Waves have ENERGY (I am a messer about in boats) and energy is made up of POSTULATED PARTICLES.
Pip
Of course Scientology is COSMIC HINDUISM
I don’t think that you have understanding of Hinduism.
Hello there.
My relation to JC is similar to some people’s relation to LRH. I was a Christian early on, then gradually turned against. Now I balance it. Some big disagreements that I have with Christianity are that we must suffer on Earth to be rewarded in Heaven, that God is a judge, and a couple of passages I read that say that JC coaxed people to be respectful to their Earthly masters, like they would be towards God. Of course, it could be that JC never said such things. And that is very important, Like I think about some cases that LRH didn’t mean for SCN to be how it is, and that fanatic LRHers are as SCNists as fanatic crusaders were Christians.
I have thought all that you wrote above too. But I’d rather not analyse God anymore, for I think words only alter it. I also think I’m not entitled to do it, and people should know for themselves, not through me nor others.
True. Something can come from something only. There is only transformation and transition of state. Creation is just a myth.
That is why thetan’s abilities are a myth, and postulates cannot come from the thetan.
Experiencing is looking with all the senses. The two are the same thing. Therefore, “awareness of awareness” is introversion.
Simply being aware is extroversion.
Are you just using authority? or do you have a logical argument to make?
JC on the other hand defied all Earthly lords and said his only lord is God. He told people to not judge, to not punish and to share. So, there is some contradiction, and I couldn’t aceept nor reject it all.
I’m also certain that people who use SCN to create guilts in others, would need some Ethics handling of their own, as it is written in SCN that the one who makes another guilty has the overts himself. I think Ethics was meant to deal with some of the stuff I have seen that Ethics delivers.
The pattern of how SCN and Christianity got used to dominate, is similar in many ways. I personally -although I tried to keep keep the texts- didn’t accept any bosses in SCN, no advisors, no gurus, no judges, nobody to tell me who to marry who to befriend and who to divorce, as part of SCN. So I got out early.
That’s not meant to create guilts in others either. Just to point out differences between my experiences and my studies.
No. It is just that you don’t have a clue about Hinduism, Buddhism and the Vedas.
Quoting from Bible’ or from Scientology, simply shows a dependence on authority that makes one live happily with cognitive dissonance.
All monotheisistic religions make the same error.
Hmmm.
Change in relative position in space may not be the only change possible. Perhaps not even the earliest type of change. Change of thought does not necessarily HAVE to involve mass or energy, Vinay’s writings aside.
Mark
Would it be fair to add – IN MY OPINION – to your post?
Hi Spyros
Being a ChristianScientologist is not an easy road to walk but is very exciting. The Christian bit which is LOVE is modified by the Scientology bit which is UNDERSTANDING.
One without the other is incomplete but by the same token it is neither one or the other. One day the two will become ONE and then all labels will fall away.
Love with understanding
Pip
A bit of both.
Love
Pip
O.K. So now we have three different awarenesses. AWARENESS – AWARENESS OF AWARENESS and SIMPLY BEING AWARE – RIGHT!
Interesting. So where do POSTULATES come from?
Love
Pip
Hi Spyros
Like you, before I met Jesus LRH was my “main man”. Please don’t confuse JESUS with CHRISTIANITY they are not the same thing.
A lot of Christians don’t understand Jesus when he says “……. resist not evil:……” Matthew 5:39 American King James version. But the reason he says this is because when we resist evil we give it “substance”. What we need to do is UNDERSTAND the root cause of evil, anyway it is only LIVE BACKWARDS. As for being “respectful to Earthly masters” well that is just plain common sense. If I get stopped for speeding my only reply to the cop who has stopped me is “Yes Officer, No officer, anything you say Sir”.
Love
Pip
I don’t think you have understanding of
I don’t think you have understanding of COSMIC HINDUISM – where everyone is and has their own god.
“Ignorance is bliss” comes to mind, and also “none so blind as theme’s that will not see”.
Pip
Awareness comes from non-awareness, and then awareness returns to non-awareness. It is a cycle.
Postulates are part of awareness.
.
For now it is whatever appears consistent to you.
Pip, no matter what disagreements I might have, I certainly don’t have anything against somebody who even sacrificed his own body, teaching what he wanted to teach until the end. That by itself -as well as not compromising what he thought was right to please the masters of his age- is admirable. And I would like it if he was here now. For me the time that I antagonized Atheism VS Christianity etc has long ended. And I so very much agree about not resisting evil, negativity, darkness. And when I do so enough, I find there is nothing to fight against and nothing that fights me either. Still, I have some desire to play, from time to time and I do resist and even more than resist 😛 But at least I know it more when I do it, that some time ago.
Be well
Spyros
Here is relevant information about Hinduism related to what you are referring to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%E1%B9%A3%E1%B9%ADa-devat%C4%81
.
Is there a relationship between your JESUS, and Scientology THETAN or THETA or STATIC?
Not really. What you hold is quite inconsistent with Hinduism.
In Hinduism there is no creator God.
In Hinduism (Vedas), there is no permanent soul either. Atman does not translate as soul. See
.
Absolutely! Jesus Christ is the word (THETA) made flesh (THETAN) BE STILL AND KNOW THAT I AM GOD (STATIC)
Love
Pip
I still maintain that Scientology is Cosmic Hinduism.
Hi Vinaire
Perhaps we have different definitions of the word POSTULATE. I am using the definition “to say a thing is and have it be”. in that case there has to be a “SAYER”.
This idea that “awareness comes from non-awareness and then returns to non-awareness is an idea that I came across in Theosophy and I find singularly unattractive. The idea that Brahma breaths out the universe and then breaths it back in again, over some unimaginable time period does not do it for me. SORRY!
Love
Pip
For me there is AWARENESS of AWARENESS – then AWARENESS on a sliding scale towards UN-AWARENESS, down to BUT MYSTERY.
Pingback: Scientology Beliefs (revised) | annladenberger