Letting Go

When I write of the idea of cultivating the skill of ‘letting go’, some Scientologists react as if I am from the planet Farsec (the alleged origin point of the universe for all psychs, reference: Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior).   On the one hand this is surprising because it is precisely what one does when one experiences a spiritual ‘release’ in a Scientology session.   On the other hand, the idea of employing and refining that capability in life is looked upon as blasphemous.  It is in a way since so much in Scientology implants precisely the opposite idea in believers.

To help get the concept across I have many times recommended folk read and attempt to think with Tao Te Ching (my recommended translation, The Tao Te Ching, an English Translation by Stephen Mitchell).   A number of people have written  to or told me that they have done so, and find the idea of ‘letting go’ liberating and useful in their quests for self- actualization (equinimity attendant to becoming who one really is and attaining toward one’s full potentialities).  Still many want the ‘tech’ to it or an instruction manual of sorts.

I came across a good description of breaking ‘letting go’ down into a process on buddhanet. net.  It is below for your perusal.  I don’t know who the author is and I don’t even know what all is on buddhanet or who operates it. All that I know is that the following description of the process rings accurate in many ways and may communicate to, and be found to be useful by, some.

Letting Go from buddhanet

If we contemplate desires and listen to them, we are actually no longer attaching to them; we are just allowing them to be the way they are. Then we come to the realization that the origin of suffering, desire, can be laid aside and let go of.

How do you let go of things? This means you leave them as they are; it does not mean you annihilate them or throw them away. It is more like setting down and letting them be. Through the practice of letting go we realize that there is the origin of suffering, which is the attachment to desire, and we realize that we should let go of these three kinds of desire. Then we realize that we have let go of these desires; there is no longer any attachment to them.

When you find yourself attached, remember that ‘letting go’ is not ‘getting rid of’ or ‘throwing away’. If I’m holding onto this clock and you say, ‘Let go of it!’, that doesn’t mean ‘throw it out’. I might think that I have to throw it away because I’m attached to it, but that would just be the desire to get rid of it. We tend to think that getting rid of the object is a way of getting rid of attachment. But if I can contemplate attachment, this grasping of the clock, I realize that there is no point in getting rid of it – it’s a good clock; it keeps good time and is not heavy to carry around. The clock is not the problem. The problem is grasping the clock. So what do I do? Let it go, lay it aside – put it down gently without any kind of aversion. Then I can pick it up again, see what time it is and lay it aside when necessary.

You can apply this insight into ‘letting go’ to the desire for sense pleasures. Maybe you want to have a lot of fun. How would you lay aside that desire without any aversion? Simply recognize the desire without judging it. You can contemplate wanting to get rid of it – because you feel guilty about having such a foolish desire – but just lay it aside. Then, when you see it as it is, recognizing that it’s just desire, you are no longer attached to it.

So the way is always working with the moments of daily life. When you are feeling depressed and negative, just the moment that you refuse to indulge in that feeling is an enlightenment experience. When you see that, you need not sink into the sea of depression and despair and wallow in it. You can actually stop by learning not to give things a second thought.

You have to find this out through practice so that you will know for yourself how to let go of the origin of suffering. Can you let go of desire by wanting to let go of it? What is it that is really letting go in a given moment? You have to contemplate the experience of letting go and really examine and investigate until the insight comes. Keep with it until that insight comes: ‘Ah, letting go, yes, now I understand. Desire is being let go of.’ This does not mean that you are going to let go of desire forever but, at that one moment, you actually have let go and you have done it in full conscious awareness. There is an insight then. This is what we call insight knowledge. In Pali, we call it nanadassana or profound understanding.

I had my first insight into letting go in my first year of meditation. I figured out intellectually that you had to let go of everything and then I thought: ‘How do you let go?’ It seemed impossible to let go of anything. I kept on contemplating: ‘How do you let go?’ Then I would say, ‘You let go by letting go.’ ‘Well then, let go!’ Then I would say:

‘But have I let go yet?’ and, ‘How do you let go?’ ‘Well just let go!’ I went on like that, getting more frustrated. But eventually it became obvious what was happening. If you try to analyze letting go in detail, you get caught up in making it very complicated. It was not something that you could figure out in words any more, but something you actually did. So I just let go for a moment, just like that.

Now with personal problems and obsessions, to let go of them is just that much. It is not a matter of analyzing and endlessly making more of a problem about them, but of practicing that state of leaving things alone, letting go of them. At first, you let go but then you pick them up again because the habit of grasping is so strong. But at least you have the idea. Even when I had that insight into letting go, I let go for a moment but then I started grasping by thinking: ‘I can’t do it, I have so many bad habits!’ But don’t trust that kind of nagging, disparaging thing in yourself. It is totally untrustworthy. It is just a matter of practicing letting go. The more you begin to see how to do it, then the more you are able to sustain the state of non-attachment.

Dean of Technology

The following is an excerpt from the book Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior.  I am interested to know whether anyone else ever had an encounter with a nut job bestowed with Scientology high priest status.  If so, did you ever wonder how that could be given the representations made in policy letter Keeping Scientology Working?  You think John and his like were not handled ruthlessly enough in their training?  You think ruthlessness was given such a positive emphasis that thugs like him were encouraged?

From Chapter Nine:

I was also to be on training courses five hour a day, in the staff course room.  There I met the head of staff training and auditing, John Colleto.

Colleto was a Class VIII auditor – a very advanced level of auditor training and, presumably, skill. Attaining this level included the right for Colleto to use the title “Dean of Technology.” The fact that Pubs staff were under the care of such a highly trained Scientologist was a big part of Billy Kahn’s recruitment pitch. Despite the hype and his lofty title, John turned out to be a dull, serious, bored, overweight, bespectacled man in his late twenties. For someone who was supposed to have attained the higher levels of training and spirituality in Scientology, he struck me as a pretty troubled individual.

My assigned study period meant I’d be alone for five hours each day under Colleto’s supervision. He showed me no warmth – in fact, what I often got instead was disdain.

The texts for my courses consisted of organizational policy letters and directives, written over a span of many years. They were full of Scientology organizational jargon, which made study a grinding task. Adding to the difficulty was the fact that the jargon itself had evolved over time, so that writings from different periods had different terminology. Sometimes my only hope for making sense of what I read was to ask Colleto for clarifications. But it seemed whenever I asked his help, he would take the opportunity to leave me feeling stupid. I began to withdraw into myself and just try to grind it out alone.

During study time one day, I began dozing off. “Wake up,” snapped Colleto.

“I must have gone by a word I didn’t get,” I said, referring to the principle from Hubbard’s study technology that when someone passes a misunderstood word, they can become foggy or dope off.

Instead of helping me find what word I didn’t understand (as course supervisors are trained to do), Colleto pulled out the Scientology Technical Dictionary.  Opening the book, he showed me the definition of “implant” – a technical term from auditing technology, meaning “a painful and forceful means of overwhelming a being with artificial purposes or false concepts, in a malicious attempt to control and suppress him.”

I thought I understood Colleto’s point. In Scientology auditing, one recalls moments of pain and unconsciousness from his past, reviewing them until they are discharged of the mental energy they contain, and their destructive mental and spiritual effects. By reviewing and relieving enough such incidents, the state of Clear can eventually be reached.

“Yeah, I get it. I suppose these implants can come up during one’s auditing.”

“They do come up. Everybody has them. How many do you think you might have?”

“I don’t know. I haven’t had any auditing. So I suppose I’ll find out I have a few.”

Leaning across the table and fixing me with an icy stare, just inches from my face, Colleto said, “Try a few million.”  At that he got up, went back to his desk, picked up some papers and started reading

Dichotomized Religion & Sheep Production

The following is a 1964 analysis of what had happened to religions over the millennia. Interesting how it was happening in real time, first generation, to Scientology while the words were being typed.  It continues to play out in real time in the ‘independent field’ as evidenced by the commentary – and omission thereof – on this blog.  If you find yourself not to be one of the sheep described (or no longer wanting to be one), you might be interested in investigating more deeply how this applies to Scientology, by reading Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior.

From Abraham H. Maslow’s Religion, Values, and Peak Experiences :

When all that could be called ‘religious’ (naturalistically as well as supernaturalistically) was cut away from science, from knowledge, from further discovery, from the possibility of skeptical investigation, from confirming and discomfirming, and, therefore, from the possibility of purifying and improving, such a dichotomized religion was doomed.  It tended to claim that the founding revelation was complete, perfect, final, and eternal.  It had the truth, the whole truth, and had nothing more to learn, thereby being pushed into the position that has destoryed so many churches, of resisting change, of being only conservative, of being anti-intellectual and anti-scientific, of making piety and obedience exclusive of skeptical intellectuality — in effect, of contradicting naturalistic truth.

Such a split-off religion generates split-off and partial definition of all necessary concepts. For example, faith, which has perfectly respectable naturalistic meanings, as for example in Fromm’s writings, tends in the hands of an anti-intellectual church to degenerate into blind belief, sometimes even ‘belief in what you know ain’t so.’  It tends to become unquestioning obedience and last-ditch loyalty no matter what.  It tends to produce sheep rather than men.

Keeping Scientology Working Revisited

The following is an excerpt from the book Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior.  It covers my introduction to the Policy Letter entitled Keeping Scientology Working.  In the past, we have attempted to discuss  how far this central religious tenet of Scientology ought to be adhered to given its thought-stopping potential.  That discussion degenerated into recriminations, character assasinations, and other indicia of thought stoppping.  Perhaps presented in a fuller context we can consider the effects of this indoctrination without instigating a riot.

From Chapter Seven:

This particular policy (still in use today) was originally issued in 1965. It pronounces that Scientology had by that point achieved “uniformly workable technology.” It states that the only troubles the organization ever encountered were because of incorrect application of that uniformly workable technology.  Therefore, KSW called for zealous enforcement of the standard application of Scientology. By “standard” was meant precise, unquestioning adherence to all technical and administrative instructions from L. Ron Hubbard.  No interpretations or alterations allowed. Only L. Ron Hubbard’s words, followed to the letter. Quite a bit of attention was paid by the course supervisors to each student, on a one-to-one basis, seeking to elicit agreement that they would follow KSW to the letter.

My struggle was attempting to accept that level of certainty, and agreeing to that level of steadfast devotion to the idea that Scientology was it, to the utter exclusion of any other ideas or philosophies – all without the experience of finding out for myself whether Scientology was indeed it.  I could not progress in my studies without first agreeing that the following ideas of L. Ron Hubbard were incontrovertibly true, and that I vowed to adopt and adhere to them:

–          Any inability to agree to the tenets of KSW was due to the fact that “the not-too-bright have a bad point on the button ‘self-importance,” and that “the lower the IQ, the more the individual is shut off from the fruits of observation,”

–          That “the [defense mechanisms] of people make them defend themselves against anything they confront, good or bad, and seek to make it wrong,” and that “the bank [reactive mind] seeks to knock out the good and perpetuate the bad.”

–          The idea that “a group [of people] could evolve truth” is inherently false.

–          That Hubbard relied on absolutely no major or basic ideas or suggestions from any other source in developing the world’s only workable mental/spiritual technology, which he called Scientology.

–          “Popular measures” and “democracy” have done nothing for humankind except “push him further into the mud.”

–          Humankind never before “evolved workable mental technology,” but instead only “vicious technology.” Scientology, therefore, must be “ruthlessly followed.”

–          The only common denominator among humans is the reactive mind. Therefore all agreements between humans who have not achieved the state of Clear can only be classified as “bank [reactive mind] agreement.”

–          “Bank agreement” can also be called “collective thought agreement.” Collective thought agreement is responsible for “war, famine, disease” and the development of “the means of frying every man, woman, and child on the planet.”

–          “The decent, pleasant things on this planet come from individual actions and ideas that have somehow gotten by the Group Idea.”

–          “It’s the bank that says the group is all and the individual nothing.  It’s the bank that says we must fail.”

–          “When somebody enrolls, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe – never permit an ‘open-minded’ approach…If they enrolled, they’re aboard; and if they’re aboard, they’re here on the same terms as the rest of us – win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded about being Scientologists.”

–          “The proper instruction attitude is, ‘You’re here so you’re a Scientologist. Now we’re going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what happens. We’d rather have you dead than incapable.’”

–          “We’re not playing some minor game in Scientology. It isn’t cute or something to do for lack of something better.  The whole agonized future of this planet, every man, woman and child on it, and your own destiny for the next trillions of years depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology. This is a deadly serious activity.  And if we miss getting out of the trap now, we may never again have another chance.”

The tract dramatically drove home some conflicting ideas.  On the one hand, Scientology is portrayed as the only technology for enhancing and preserving individuality.  On the other hand, by the end of the policy Hubbard is demanding that no one be allowed past the first bulletin in Scientology training courses without assuming the identity of hard-core Scientologist, and agreeing to abide by the rules on the same terms as everyone else. The conflicting concepts between the group and the individual were finally resolved by me with the mental computation that the only way to truly realize true individuality is to forfeit individuality in favor of the purposes and goals of the group.

In retrospect, had it not been for the fact that my life seemed so bleak and hopeless, given the circumstances of my brother, I never would have agreed to this indoctrination.  But the world and the state of mental health in my view were as bad as Hubbard described, and up to then I had not found anyone else who saw what I was seeing in such black-and-white terms.  And so I decided to agree and to abide, even though deep inside I did not fully agree.

Only 30 years later did I fully appreciate how significant that moment of intellectual surrender would become. The realization occurred when I read Thomas Paine’s The Age of Reason, which described precisely what I had done with my fresh, sharply-honed intentional abilities:

 It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime.

Confusing Name With Reality

From Lieh-Tzu, A Taoist Guide to Practical Living, (Eva Wong, Shambhala Publications Inc, 1995)

A man from the eastern provinces was traveling along a seldom-used road when he fainted. A robber happened to be passing by and noticed the man fallen by the wayside. Seeing that the traveler was still alive, the robber started to revive the man by offering him food and water.  After three mouthfuls, the man opened his eyes.  Seeing a gruff and fierce-looking man bent over him, he said, ‘who are you?’

The robber said, ‘I am Ch’iu of the region of Hu-fu.’

Startled, the traveler said, ‘You’re not that infamous robber who’s wanted everywhere are you?’

‘I am he.’

‘Then why did you give me food?  Did you help me because you associate me with your kind?  I am a man of virtue and will not eat anything that comes from a criminal.’

The traveler then tried to throw up the food the robber had given him.  Eventually he choked on his vomit and died.

Even if Ch’iu was a criminal, his intent and action in this situation was not criminal.  Although he might have committed unforgivable crimes, there was nothing criminal about the food and water.  Self-righteous people often follow a principle blindly without understanding it and in doing so confuse what is name and what is reality.

A Little Perspective

Excerpted from “The Paranoid Style in American Politics”, a 1964 essay by Richard J. Hofstadter:

“The paranoid spokesman, sees the fate of conspiracy in apocalyptic terms — he traffics in the birth and death of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human values. He is always manning the barricades of civilization… he does not see social conflict as something to be mediated and compromised, in the manner of the working politician. Since what is at stake is always a conflict between absolute good and absolute evil, what is necessary is not compromise but the will to fight things out to a finish. Since the enemy is thought of as being totally evil and totally unappeasable, he must be totally eliminated — if not from the world, at least from the theatre of operations to which the paranoid directs his attention. This demand for total triumph leads to the formulation of hopelessly unrealistic goals, and since these goals are not even remotely attainable, failure constantly heightens the paranoid’s sense of frustration. Even partial success leaves him with the same feeling of powerlessness with which he began, and this in turn only strengthens his awareness of the vast and terrifying quality of the enemy he opposes.

“The enemy is clearly delineated: he is a perfect model of malice, a kind of amoral superman — sinister, ubiquitous, powerful, cruel, sensual, luxury-loving. Unlike the rest of us, the enemy is not caught in the toils of the vast mechanism of history, himself a victim of his past, his desires, his limitations. He wills, indeed, he manufactures, the mechanism of history, or tries to deflect the normal course of history in an evil way. He makes crises, starts runs on banks, causes depressions, manufactures disasters, and then enjoys and profits from the misery he has produced. The paranoid’s interpretation of history is distinctly personal: decisive events are not taken as part of the stream of history, but as the consequences of someone’s will. Very often, the enemy is held to possess some especially effective source of power: he controls the press; he has unlimited funds; he has a new secret for influencing the mind (brainwashing); he has a special technique for seduction (the Catholic confessional).

“It is hard to resist the conclusion that this enemy is, on many counts, the projection of the self; both the ideal and the unacceptable aspects of the self are attributed to him. The enemy may be the cosmopolitan intellectual, but the paranoid will outdo him in the apparatus of scholarship, even of pedantry. Secret organizations, set up to combat secret organizations, give the same flattery. The Ku Klux Klan imitated Catholicism to the point of donning priestly vestments, developing an elaborate ritual and an equally elaborate hierarchy. The John Birch Society emulates Communist cells and quasi-secret operation through “front” groups, and preaches a ruthless prosecution of the ideological war along lines very similar to those it finds in the Communist enemy. Spokesmen of the various fundamentalist anti-Communist “crusades” openly express their admiration for the dedication and discipline the Communist cause calls forth.”

You Will Know

Don’t bother reading Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior.   All I was trying to say was said much more succinctly and melodiously by others long before I bothered messing with it.

Lyrics:

Songwriters: ARCHER, MICHAEL D’ANGELO / ARCHER, LUTHER
Mmm…hmm…hmm…mmm…hmm… Yeah, yeah
When I was a young boy I had visions of fame They were wild and they were free They were blessed with my name
And then I grew older And I saw what’s to see That the world is full of pain And my dreams they left me
And then I got stronger Inside of the pain That’s when I picked up the pieces And I regained my name
And I fought hard, y’all To call by my place And right now you could ask me And it all seems in vain
[Your dreams ain’t easy] Your dreams ain’t easy [You just stick by your plan] You just stick by your plan [Go from boys to men] Go from boys to men [You must act like a man] You gotta act like a man [When it gets hard, y’all] When it gets hard, y’all [You just grab what you know] Got what you know [Stand up tall and don’t you fall] And my background sing
You will know [You will know], yeah…eah… [You will know] [You will know] You will know, you will know [You will know]
And I know you’re cryin’ ‘Cause it’s all in his vein And the things you want you can’t have It just all went away
But life ain’t over Hoo…hoo… Just grab the winds and make demands And the vibe will take you far
[Your dreams ain’t easy] Your dreams ain’t easy [You just stick by your plan] Stick by your plan, boy [Go from boys to men] Go from boys to men [You must act like a man] I know it ain’t easy [When it gets hard, y’all] it gets hard sometime [You just grab what you know] Yes, it does [Stand up tall and don’t you fall] Stand up tall, don’t you fall, and you will know, yeah
[You will know] [You will know] Ah…ah…ah… (You will know) [You will know] Hey, there’s no doubt about it [You will know] Hey, you will know
[You will know] You will know [You will know] Hey…ey…hey… [You will know] You will know, yeah [Oh, you will know] Hey…
[Your dreams ain’t easy] Your dreams ain’t easy [You just stick by your plan] Stick by your plans [Go from boys to men] Boys to men [You must act like a man] You must act like a man [When it gets hard, y’all] It ain’t hard, yeah [You just grab what you know] Grab what you know [Stand up tall and don’t you fall] Oh…oh…oh…
[Your dreams ain’t easy] [You just stick by your plan] Hey…hey…yeah [Go from boys to men] Boys to men [You must act like a man] I know it ain’t easy [When it gets hard, y’all] [You just grab what you know] Yeah… [Stand up tall and don’t you fall] Come on D and sing this song
[You will know] Yeah… [You will know] You will know [You will know] [You will know] Hey…
[You will know] [You will know] [You will know] [Oh, you will know]

On Becoming A Person

To the degree that Scientology – or any other mental/spiritual practice – affords a person the opportunity and ability to safely view his life and mind and communicate his observations and conclusions with no hint or possibility of evaluation, invalidation or repercussion, it is a positive methodology for assisting a person to increase awareness and ability.

To the degree that Scientology – or any other mental/spiritual practice – departs from that formula it is a practice potentially destructive of awareness and ability.

Means by which Scientology adheres to and departs from this workable formula are covered in the books What Is Wrong With Scientology? Healing Through Understanding (Amazon Books, 2012) and Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior (Amazon Books, 2013).

Other means by which Scientology routinely, and as a matter of policy, departs from its own workable formula:

  1. Requiring membership in Scientology accompanied by the label and assumption of the personality traits of Scientologist.
  2. Issuance and enforcement of codes of conduct for Scientologists to guide and control their behavior.
  3. The invalidation of gains that people assert they have attained through practices other than Scientology.
  4. Indoctrinating people in detail what incidents they should address and what events lie on their own experiential tracks.
  5. Appealing to fear in order to persuade or coerce people to engage in or continue Scientology practices.

To the extent any purported Scientology practitioner engages in any of these departures, I recommend people steer clear of them.  To the degree they do participate in them is the degree to which they will ultimately contribute to a decrease in your awareness and ability.   These departures may indicate either of the following in the practitioner: a) a lack of understanding of the mechanics of what makes witnessing (including Scientology auditing) a therapeutic activity, and/or b) their own unhandled subjugation to any or all of 1-5.

The fundamental two-way communication process that all Scientology processing derives its workability from existed before L. Ron Hubbard ever wrote a word on the subject of the mind.  It would behoove Scientology auditors to study of it.  A great place to start would be On Becoming a Person by Carl R. Rogers (Houghton Mifflin, 1961).  One of Ron Hubbard’s greatest contributions to the improvement of  mind and spirit was simplifying the codification of such principles thus opening the process of self-actualization to far more people.  Unfortunately, as his group evolved much of that contribution was lost as Scientology became more mass-production oriented, expensive, exclusive, and cult-like.  The training of practitioners became progressively more assembly-line like.  On the one hand that helped to thoroughly drive home some workable skills while on the other hand it omitted a more contemplative, intellectual appreciation for the mechanics at work and the responsibilities incident to such practice.

Many veteran auditors reacted with some surprise when I noted the vital importance of the First Act (the one paragraph contemplation exercise an auditor is advised to engage in so as to have his own head right in order to audit, from Advance Procedures and Axioms) in What Is Wrong With Scientology?  Some noted that there was next to no emphasis placed on that in their auditor training.  That may well be.  But, the book (AP & A) is part of the auditor training line up.  I would suggest that the fact that a single paragraph is devoted to the issue is a flaw in the Scientology line up.  On Becoming A Person is a four-hundred page treatise on the First Act – relating it to every aspect of the actual auditing (or generic, counseling) process.  I believe that an auditor ought to study the book so that he fully appreciates why and how auditing works; and why and how an auditor must become the being (not simply ‘assume the beingness’) that naturally (not mechanically) duplicates, understands, accepts, and fully acknowledges (not with a mere ‘good’, ‘thank you’, ‘I got that’), all while genuinely – and unreservedly – intending the client to regain his or her genuine self and his or her determinism.

It cannot be gainsaid that Scientology is rife with datums, dictates, rules, and policies that detract from this pure, undiluted intention and being.  It therefore would behoove anyone trained in that discipline to read and contemplate On Becoming a Person so as to orient himself to what actually creates gains for an individual, and how the slightest departure from it spoils the process, any process.

Even if you are not an auditor or training to become one, I recommend On Becoming A Person.  It is all about becoming a better person, more of who one really is.

Ripple In Still Water

We have been pretty much closed to folk visiting Casablanca over the past few months while I wrapped up Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior.  Now that the book is done and available I am scheduling people again for consultation.

I am in progress on the follow up book to Memoirs which will spell out in some detail how it is that I believe certain principles codified by L. Ron Hubbard can be sensibly practiced; that is, how they can be integrated, how they can evolve, and how people can learn from that to transcend.  One of the purposes of Memoirs was to set the factual foundation for that presentation.  It is difficult to communicate to closed minds that are implanted and conditioned to not dare think along those lines.  I have been labeled by some Scientologists as being like a ‘Nazi War Criminal’, ‘Gestapo’, and worse for attempting to have that conversation.  The reasons for such a reaction are pretty well spelled out in Memoirs.  Rather than waste time attempting to debate with such a mindset, I decided it made more sense for me to spell out the facts that led me to consider that people need to graduate from that frame of mind in order to get anywhere meaningful.  Hopefully Memoirs will help to accomplish that.  Certainly, the follow up book will be all about how to do that.

I am no longer wasting time with the necessarily interminable argumentation on what constitutes ‘standard technology’, ‘standard admin’, and such . You might come to understand through Memoirs how it is that Scientology is hardwired to create that perpetual state of conflict and how it will continue to manifest  down through the ages (to no possible substantive conclusions) if anyone in the future continues to find that activity worthwhile.  In either event, I don’t find that rancorous debate productive.  Most of the people who want to argue (or disconnect) on that subject don’t have much of a production record anyway, so it is like fighting with a gossamer of theory based on a patchwork of quotations.

Based on my several years of Scientology training/practice and based on my several more years of outside-of-Scientology study and practice, I deal with people one on one to try to help them move on up a little higher.   My view is that certain Hubbard principles integrated into and used in such wise brings about lasting results. Conversely,  robotically-applied, wholesale reliance on those principles leads to capture, captivity and ultimately to anguish. Those principles that don’t lead one any higher, or worse lead him or her lower, don’t figure into a program seeking transcendence from frightened, delusory states.  Incidentally, I am convinced that such principles won’t become any more popular either, no matter how much marketing, commanding and fighting one wants to apply to them.

I suggest I can help with a) repair Reverse-Scientology application people may have experienced, b)  repair/rehab any grade or level that might be incomplete or ‘out’, c) put one’s Scientology experience into perspective from which growth is possible,  d) graduate people from the cult and any lingering cult think, or fixation with the cult experience people might be walking around with, e) guide people toward a meaningful transcendence from their Scientology-inflicted obsessions, and f) help OTs transcend the captive, glass ceiling dimension they’ve been led into.

By popular consensus among independent Scientologists, communicated in various ways, the core ideas I propose and what I do cannot be accepted under the title ‘Scientology.’  I accept that.  So, there is no more reason to discuss the chapter of trying to win folk over to my ideas to the contrary.  It is history.

I do not go by any labels and I am not a member of, nor am I affiliated with, any groups.

So as to avoid any conflict or possibility for misunderstanding, I ask anyone interested in my services to first read Memoirs and What Is Wrong With Scientology?   That will give you a good sense of my philosophy about the subject of Scientology and those subjects it overlaps with.  A number of people have told me that by simply reading and thinking with either or both of those books helped them to resolve that which they would have come to me for help to remedy.  So, you might save yourself time and cheddar by simply reading what I have already had to say.  On the other side of the spectrum, I want people to know what I am about in advance so that we don’t waste your time or mine scheduling you for an activity that will offend you by conflicting with your religious beliefs.

 

Dichotomies

Some have registered protests in the comments section to my sometimes being cryptic.  In particular, recently some folks thought this origination by me was too mystical to grok:

The solidity of the universe is created by energy of opposite opposing forces. We don’t have to be governed by them. Let’s not. The dichotomies are a bitch – and as long as we fixate on identification (particlarly our own) it becomes a progressively worse bitch.

I was invited to elaborate, or explain myself.

I’ll give it my best shot.

Answer one:

If you listen to Hubbard’s lectures and read the books on the Academy Levels auditor training there is no need for further explanation.

If you read the Scientology OT II materials there is no need for further explanation, except perhaps to help clarify technical mechanics from mythology.

If you read the Tao of Physics there is no need for further explanation.

If you read, and contemplate the Tao Te Ching, there is no need for further explanation.

To those who are not inclined to take me up on the reading recommendations I periodically offer on this blog, here is

Answer two:

The reactivity of humans is largely brought about by their mistaking the physical universe for themselves.   The more one clings to, relies upon, and validates the laws of the physical universe as controlling spirit, the greater the confusion.

The physical universe is made up of ever-changing, exchanging and converting energies.   Those energies consist of attracting and repelling (or positive and negative) forces; sometimes referred to in Scientology as ‘dichotomies’.  Those forces can be affected by spirit.   They can also affect spirit, but only if spirit considers they can.

Perhaps the greatest factor in convincing spirit that it is effect of the physical is its proclivity toward assuming an identity, a physical being.  The more one mocks up the reality of the identity, the deeper he becomes enmeshed into and acts at the effect of the physical universe.

If one really wants to lose sight of his or her own spiritual nature and become thoroughly entrenched into the physical, the most sure-fire method is to act as if one is part of the physical universe.  In other words,  start playing the positive/negative charge game for keeps.  The way to make it more and more solid and irreversible is to get real enamored with one’s identity and start to oppose other identities one considers a threat to that identity.  Mocking up of energy flows between such terminals creates more and more solidity and fixidity.  Before long opposing forces close in on one another so firmly that they become a bigger one, i.e. that which you resist, you become.  More solidity, more fixidity, more mass, more confusion, more force, more violence.  And, though one would not think, less identity, less individuality, less free thought, and more ‘gee, we’re all one homogenous flock of sheep after all.’

If one reads Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior, one might see how these factors even prevailed upon a subject that was originally intended to free folk from them.