International Viewpoints (IVy), Issue 33 - August 1997

• Editorial Details
• Have you lent anybody your copy of International Viewpoints?
• Another Look at Basics-#14:
  • On Happiness
• Why Britannia Changed her Rule
• Philosophy, Technology and Policy
• Mastery
• Pre-emptive Defensiveness - Pt. 2
• 1000 Year Empire and KRC
• Confront, Commmunication and Control
• The Free Zone as a Movement
  • Introduction
• Aspects of Ethics
• English May Conference
• Regular Columns:
  • Classic Comment :
    • Hot Potato
  • Kemp's Column :
    • Quantum Philosophy and Theta
    • Mentor Offer
  • IVy on the Wall:
    • Writin' Wrong
• Further Note on the Roos Story
• I Create One Version ...
• Horner's Course Picture
• Yang and Yin
• Repetitive Processing
• Perception versus Sanity
• Book News:
  • Review of Super Scio by "the Pilot"
  • Further Comment on TROM
• Spiritual Power
• Desiderata
• Sales Data

Editorial board consists of: Antony A. Phillips. (Responsible under Danish law = ansvarshavende redaktr.)

Printed by I.Tnder Offsettryk ApS Production Team: Lars Peter Schultz, Morten Ltken, Sigrun Lone, Tron Enger, Joergen Haas, Thom Pearson, Kim Baker, Judith Anderson.

Address: Box 78, DK-2800, Lyngby, Denmark. Internet: ivy@post8.tele.dk (new address) thomp@internet.dk & IVy@vais.net http://home8.inet.tele.dk/ivy/ Postgiro No.: 5 85 87 98 (Denmark)

International Viewpoints is independent of any group or organization.

IVy's aim:

In 1934 the book Scientologie by A. Nordenholz was published. In the middle of the twentieth century the subject of Scientology was greatly expanded as a philosophy and technology by L. Ron Hubbard and a big band of helpers. This band coalesced into the Church of Scientology, which became somewhat secretive, restrictive, expensive and slightly destructive. From 1982 on many left or were thrown out of that church and continue to use and develop the philosophy and technology outside.

It is this large subject that International Viewpoints deals with, and it is our aim to promote communication within this field. We are independent of any group (sect).

Have you lent anybody your copy of International Viewpoints?

Why not give someone a real treat?

Lend them an IVy so they can see that they can get a regular communication line in with others in the free Scientology movement.

They can write to a distributor listed on the back page.

A message from the (ex) Scn. world! Theta!

Help get the message around the world, that there is a theta Scn. comm line in existence, where expanded Scns. can get inspiration and new viewpoints.

Write to us!

Box 78, 2800 Lyngby, Denmark or Internet: ivy@post8.tele.dk

You can also help make the magazine more varied and useful. Send us a letter with your comments, or an article on what you are doing, what you think, or even go and interview someone in your area and get her or his viewpoints out. Exchange of viewpoints are often very beneficial.

Another Look at Basics-#14

On Happiness
by Frank Gordon, USA

A High School student once told a teacher who challenged him that what he was doing was "the pursuit of happiness," and that this was his Constitutional right. The teacher replied that this was not in the U.S. Constitution.

Actually, the "pursuit of happiness" was originally in the Declaration of Independence, and this concept was not transferred to the U.S. Federal Constitution. However, although neither the teacher nor student apparently knew this, it was placed in the Preamble of the State of Maine Constitution. And since this argument took place in a Maine school, it would have applied.
 

The pursuit of happiness in law

There is a legal definition of the pursuit of happiness, given in Black's Law Dictionary:

The Pursuit of Happiness, in constitutional law includes ... (Note: among other rights)... the right to follow one's individual preference in the choice of an occupation and the application of his energies...
 

Hubbard's view of happiness

Hubbard's early definition of happiness in DMSMH parallels this view: "Happiness is the overcoming of not unknown obstacles toward a known goal and, transiently, the contemplation of or indulgence in pleasure." In the somewhat later Dn. Axiom 190, he states: "Happiness consists in the act of bringing alignment into hitherto resisting plus or minus randomity. Neither the act or action of attaining survival, nor the accomplishment of this act itself, brings about happiness."

The first part of this could be used as a definition for what one is doing in any regular occupation, i.e., overcoming not unknown obstacles toward a known goal; as in shoe-making, farming, surgery, etc.
 

Happiness as goal-directed

Thus, happiness is primarily goal-directed on-going causative action and only secondarily a form of pleasure. This implies that in addition to recalling pleasure moments in which I felt all cuddlely-wuddlely, I might also recall overcoming the difficulties of mountain climbing or attempting to invent an instant coffee dispenser.

In Modern Management Technology Defined 1976, Ron includes a number of definitions:

Happiness

1. is not itself an emotion. It is a word which states a condition, and the anatomy of that condition is interest (note:attention with intention). Happiness, you could say, is the overcoming of not unknowable obstacles toward a known goal. <8th ACC lecture, 1954>

2. comes from self-determinism, production and pride. Happiness is power and power is being able to do what one is doing when one is doing it. (HCO PL 3 Apr 72).

Another definition is given by Herbert Spencer in his Social Statics 1851, p.5: "Happiness signifies a gratified state of the faculties (Note: one's abilities). The gratification of a faculty is produced by its exercise...to have complete felicity is to have all the faculties exerted in the ratio of their several developments; and such an ideal arrangement of circumstances calculated to secure this constitutes the standard of greatest happiness;"

This might be summarized as: happiness is the satisfying and graceful flow of one's abilities in action.

G.I. Gurdjieff expresses something very similar to happiness in his "Satisfaction-of-self arising from the resourceful attainment of one's set aim in the cognizance of a clear conscience." <Meetings with Remarkable Men, Dutton, N.Y., 1974, p.302.> A similar result might be expected from following the practical advice given in Hubbard's pamphlet The Way to Happiness <Bridge Publications 1984>.

And Augustus Strong points to something even greater than happiness when he states: "Happiness (hap, happen) is grounded in circumstances; blessedness, in character." <Systematic Theology, 1907, p.265.>

I have not found a satisfying definition for blessedness, but it is very likely manifested in the concepts of charisma (spiritual power, e.g., to heal), and the darshan of a holy person whose mere presence is uplifting. Here Hubbard's view applies: when sufficient theta is present, entheta disappears.

I've heard two stories which might illustrate this. One is of a Rabbi in Jerusalem, who whenever he appeared, would produce tears of joy in the viewers. The other is of a man who was to be arrested by the Gestapo in the middle of the night. They took one look at him, then turned and left.
 

Exploring Happiness

Using these definitions as a guide, one can explore related concepts, such as: enthusiasm, exuberance, exhileration, jubilation, joy, ecstasy, bliss, blessedness, and serene contentment.

But the above are often evanescent <evanescent: gradually disappearing.> peak experiences, and happiness to me is more of a kind of everyday life; self-energizing, productive and satisfying.

By self-energizing, I mean that even though effort and energy are expended, as in a work situation, one ends up with more energy than one started with. For example, when just learning to drive and doing so for several hours, I expected to end up feeling tired; and was surprised to feel refreshed. Apparently, there was an optimum balance in the situation between the challenges I faced and my budding skills.

As another example, I knew three men on the same job. Two of them had to go to a bar when they finished work to "unwind." I asked the third man about his experiences on the job, and he told me that he had found a way to do his job, so that he always felt better when he was done working than he felt when he began. I think that man had found an effective way to pursue happiness.

Why Britannia Changed her Rule
By Britta Burtles, England

THIS IS AN EXTRACT from my letter to a friend who does not know anything about Scientology and the Conditions in Scientology:

Dear Richard,

To start with let me say that I was one of those who firmly believed the Conservatives would again win the General Election. Like many others I probably also had my eyes firmly shut to those quite visible and audible signs that they were slowly but surely sliding into expulsion.

A few weeks ago Michael Heseltine said, when talking about the prospect of a future Labour Government: "The country is sleepwalking into disaster" .-- That is as it may be, but I think the Tory Government together with the whole Party sleepwalked into the recent debacle.

People may suggest many reasons why this happened, and they may all be right. However, I believe, the basic common denominator for what occurred is this:

An inexorable Natural Law demands: "When in Power -- do not disconnect". I think the Conservative Government violated this law. What is more, they have most definitely been perceived by the Electorate to have violated it.

My husband said he thought the Tories had lost for two reasons: 1. Because they had not shown a united front; and 2. Because of all the sleaze stories <Discreditable stories about Members of Parliament. Ed.>. -- There is no doubt these were contributing factors.

Doing well

But the main reason, I feel, was that intangible, unrecognised phenomenon of disconnection. As signs of this we <Britta was telephone canvassing for the Conservative Party.> had little "red flags" sticking out when people said: "They are out of touch" , or "They don't live in the real world", or "The gap between the rich and the poor is widening", or "You can't trust them", or "They don't listen", or "We want a change". People knew that, generally we were doing well in the U.K., and they knew about the achievements of the Tory Government. They obviously did not want to reverse and change all the progress we have made. They did, however, feel and sense the disconnection, however invisible it might have been, and however incapable they were of putting a name to it, as they were not aware of this underlying principle which was at work and guiding their responses.

There were many more pointers to indicate that people sensed disconnection had taken place. They perceived the Government as not being "theirs" any more. So they withdrew their support and put into effect that which they felt had already happened, by disconnecting themselves from the Government and the Party.

Hand in hand with the Government's disconnection -- maybe even because of it -- went complacency and lack of self-discipline, which showed itself in moral laxness, greed and in-fighting. These were picked up by the media and the Opposition, and through constant repetition they were magnified and reinforced. So the people got their noses rubbed into it day after day ad infinitum. More and more voters took it on board and forgot all about the Government's achievements. Hence, Labour's landslide victory.

As Governments more or less regularly alternate in Power, there will come a time for the Tories to rule Britain again. Maybe, in the meantime, someone will have made them aware of the Law -

When in power -- don't disconnect.

-- so they do not again "sleepwalk" into the same trap, just because they don't know it is there.

Philosophy, Technology and Policy
By Peter Graham, Australia

There are three main categories of materials in scientology. In addition to technology and policy, there is also a lot of philosophical material.

Under the heading of philosophy, there are things such as the Axioms, the Logics, the Factors, the Code of Honor, The Way to Happiness, the ARC triangle, the cycle of action, the dynamics, life as a game, numerous philosophical articles (including My Philosophy), practically everything in Scientology 08, the Book of Basics, plus many more.

There is an important relationship between philosophy, technology and policy which can be represented diagrammatically as shown below.

This relationship applies to the activities and games of any individual, group, tribe or nation and it also applies to Mankind as a whole.

Philosophy is senior to the other two factors. It is philosophy that determines what technology and policies will be developed or selected and how they will be applied. Technology, of course, consists of the methods and techniques. And, policy exists to facilitate the application of the technology within the framework of the ideals, values and principles of the underlying philosophy.

In practice, these three factors can all influence each other. A new technical discovery may lead to a new philosophical insight. A review of an unworkable policy may bring about a clarification or modification of an existing philosophical principle. A philosophical datum may be enshrined in policy or may be used in a technique (such as the ARC triangle in the recall technique "ARC Straightwire").
 

All have a philosophy

Every practitioner, group or business has a philosophy (clearly defined or not), some technology, and some policies or operational guidelines. To function optimally, the three factors need to be well developed and in alignment with each other.

Every person has some sort of a philosophy of life, some strategies and methods (technology) for achieving things and some rules or policies that he/she tries to follow. Some individuals are completely unaware of having a personal philosophy. But they still have one, no matter how unexamined, unworkable or confused it may be. Consider what the philosophy of a criminal or beggar might be.

"Each person ... (has) an outlook on life which differs in some respects from those of his fellows. Nevertheless, his conduct considered as a whole represents an attitude toward his environment which, for want of a better term, may be called his philosophy of life. It is in this sense that the oft quoted words of G. K. Chesterton were intended to apply when he remarked that, whilst it is important for a landlady to know the income of her prospective lodger, it is even more essential for her to know his philosophy of life." -- S. Curtis.

During the latter part of my involvement with Scientology organizations, we heard an awful lot about technology and policy, but very little about philosophy. Incredibly, the essential philosophy of scientology fell largely out of view. In 1970, Hubbard claimed that all that was needed to "clear a group" was to remove illegal policy or counter-policy. No mention of counter-philosophy or a false or missing philosophy. Compare that to his early statement (in Notes on the Lectures) that "group engrams" are formed by arbitrary rules and orders which "distort the ideals and ethics and rationale of the group".

The "evaluation technology" used by upper management from 1970 onwards to "handle situations" required the relevant policy or policies to be stated when doing "an evaluation" but did not require the relevant philosophical materials to be referenced as well. If that had been a requirement, it may well have changed the whole history of scientology from that point.

There is an obvious relationship between technology and policy no matter what field you are in. There needs to be some rules and guidelines to get the technology applied correctly or to facilitate its application. There is also an obvious relationship between technology and philosophy. Mention of the relationship between technology and philosophy is made in several of Hubbard's works.

In one version of the book DMSMH (the version dedicated to Elbert Hubbard, 1950, 6th printing 1956), Appendix 1 is called "The Philosophic Method" which is an extract from a book by William Durant. It discusses the relationship between science and philosophy.

"Science tells us how to heal and how to kill ... but only wisdom ... can tell us when to heal and when to kill." ... "Science without philosophy, facts without perspective and valuation, cannot save us from havoc and despair. Science gives us knowledge but only philosophy can give us wisdom" -- William Durant.

In his book The Creation of Human Ability, Hubbard wrote: "There are two distinct divisions in scientology. The first is philosophic, the second is technical", which he then expands on. He also states that the philosophical side of scientology could stand alone (without the technology).

Later, he wrote: "All we know of science and of religion comes from philosophy. It lies behind and above all other knowledge we have or use." -- My Philosophy (1965).

And later, he wrote: "Whenever we as an organization violate the basic philosophy of Dianetics and Scientology we get into muddy water." (November 1980).
 

Comparison

Some years ago, I examined the main things that I strongly disagreed with regarding the CofS and Scn organizations at the time. In each case, it was easy to identify the philosophical principles of scientology that had been overlooked or set aside. Example: The policy or practice of disconnection was not consistent with the datums "when in doubt, communicate" and "communication is the universal solvent".

Another example: There is evidence that in the seventies crimes were committed to help achieve "a world without insanity, war or crime". Several leading figures were jailed as a result of those crimes. Spot the contradiction. The viewpoint that "the end justifies the means" is an alien philosophy. There are also philosophic materials on topics such as justice, ethics and exchange (for services), which were key areas of disagreement or grievance amongst those I surveyed in the mid eighties who had resigned from the CofS.

Truth versus ends justify means

Truth was a fundamental of fundamentals in the original subject of scientology. The axioms of scientology certainly have something to say about truth. And about lies. Later, with "the fair game law", it became acceptable to not be truthful about certain people or groups deemed to be "enemies" or considered to have "counter-intentions". Also, incorrectly labeling people as being in certain low conditions was at odds with the known consequences of wrong indications (untruths), especially when done with force or threat.

Understanding the relationship between philosophy, technology and policy helps to explain how scientology organizations went off the rails to the extent that they did. The truth is that they could get back on the rails simply by recovering the original subject and being true to its basic philosophy. The rest would start to fall into place. The subject of scientology is after all an "applied philosophy".

It can be extremely rewarding for an individual to systematically inspect, review and revise or refine the core viewpoints, beliefs and values that comprise much of his/her philosophy of life. In clearing sessions, things like false beliefs, fixed ideas and stuck viewpoints are often reviewed and resolved. Where these are particularly basic, the resultant benefits and re-alignments can be huge and life changing. Despite rumors to the contrary, the truth still sets one free.

Copyright © 1997 by Peter D. Graham. All right reserved.

Mastery
By Alan Walters, USA

MASTERY: n. 1. Having full power and control over a subject or area. 2. The knowledge and skill of a master. 3. Being able to consistently produce products of excellent quality. 4. Having and demonstrating the full Green Zone Truth Phenomena <Green Zone (See Knowledgism web page on the Internet -- http://www.knowledgism.com and scroll down to bulletin No. 11. Green Zone Truth Phenomenon). In the Green Zone, Truth, Knowledge, Honor (Honesty), Intelligence, High Mood Level, Prosperity, Happiness, Love, and Ethics are synonymous. The Green Zone is the best place to be. There are three other Zones.> over the subject or area.

The demonstration of excellence and understanding is the product of Philosophy, Policy, and Technology, and is either Integrity or Mastery.

The truth is these parts create layers, thus you get levels of existences and conditions of existences. The Being cycles through the P -- P -- T -- M's.

Even a full blown "wino <U.S. Slang, an alcholic addicted to wine. World Book Dictionary. >" follows this sequence. Philosophy: Obliteration of memory and feelings. Policy: Get the most alcohol at the cheapest price. Technology: Go to the wine store, buy a gallon jug of $2 wine, drink it. Mastery: Obliterated.
 

Mastering a new technology or subject

The highest Green Zone level (in Knowledgism) is mastery. The reason for this is, at Mastery the Being maintains his integrity, knowledge, action, awareness, perception, empathy, responsibility, communication and harmony with the subject or subjects he has mastered.

The technology of mastering is the high quality training that moves a Being up the Levels of Existence on a subject.
 

Mastery attainment

To master any subject one has to master the parts. The mastered parts meld together to make one the master of a subject.

This is the secret that has made every great person great, and has produced masterpieces. They mastered the parts and thus were able to master the whole.

The term that defines a great work of art, writing, music, craft, or superlative action is called a masterpiece. A master-piece is of mastered pieces or mastered parts.

In our language, you would have a floating T/A on all parts and the whole subject or area.

So the basic step of mastering anything is to break it down into its pieces or parts.

Integrity come by mastering the parts. Amateurs have very little integrity!

Take the great master painters of the Renaissance: Raphael, da Vinci, Michelangelo, etc. These great artists served long apprenticeships learning to make their own paints, brushes, and canvasses. They did such arduous and menial tasks as sweeping out the studios, getting the food and running errands, carrying out garbage and disposing of excreta. They learned to market their paintings and get sponsors as well as learning the skills of their art. So masterful were they at doing all these pieces that their masterpieces have lasted hundreds of years.

Raphael was perfect at drawing a circle freehand. When he called on friends and found them not at home, he would leave a drawing of a perfect circle. They would know that Raphael had been by.

That is what professionalism is all about. It is mastering the pieces and never, never, never settling for mediocrity or quitting.
 

Measuring mastery

Mastery can be measured by one's own estimate of achievement, the judgement of others, and the objective evaluation as by computer analysis.

Often, in the beginning, it can be only you who "knows" you have attained mastery. As the word gets out, then others marvel at your mastery. Then you have an audience, often you may have to master these extra skills, sales, marketing, recruiting, production, leadership, etc. in order to get your product out and known and make a decent living. Most people's survival problems can be traced to a failure to master these other skills.

Many artists only concentrate on their art, they often die broke and unknown.

The products of mastery

There are many products of Mastery. Here are some:

1.Truth -- The precise duplication of people, things, subjects, locations, shapes, happenings, moods and intentions.

2.Knowledge -- All that has been perceived or grasped by the spirit, the mind; awareness, comprehension, learning, and quality application.

3.Certainty -- A firm, settled belief or positiveness in the truth of something; not to be doubted.

4.Ability -- The paradigm of Spirit -- Perceive -- Intend -- Envision -- Implement -- Result.

5.Competence -- Being well qualified and capable; ability.

6.Effectiveness -- Producing a definite or desired result; efficient.

7.Winning -- A consistant and natural ability in reaching or achieving a specified product, condition or place; intending a goal and achieving it.

8.Higher Green Zone Mood Levels -- Aesthetic, exhilaration, action, spirit of play, empowerment, truth, serenity of beingness.

9.Respect of Self and others who seek or attain Mastery.

10.Certainty of actions and results.

11.Effortless control of Self and actions.

12.Honor -- Can deliver what you promised. Able to keep your word.

13.Trust -- Can be relied upon.

14.Success.

15.Prosperity.

16.Happiness.

17.Causativeness.

18.Creativity and originality.

19.Freedom from domination.

20.Sovereignty over and ownership of own universe.

These products are interactive with each other. They manifest naturally when a Being has Mastery over an area or subject.
 

In learning

Mastery is a vital subject. It is the full EP <E.P. End Phenomenon = very good indicators e.g. laughter, smiling, cognition/s (ah-ha's) with E-meter needle "floating".> of the cycle of learning. ie. Student, apprentice, (intern), journeyman, craftsman, master.

Any subject not taken to mastery is an incomplete study cycle. With too many incomplete study cycles and you end up as a mediocre or dysfunctional identity.

If a being took every subject to mastery, there would be no GPM's (Goals/problems/mass) or degraded identities. At mastery a Being can mock-up or unmock super Being or Prime identities at will.

At mastery you have wholeness of a subject -- the Philosophy -- Policy -- and Technology, you're above the Games conditions of Life, you operate purely on a win-win motivation.

A "case" <"case" -- the composite of the Being's misemotions, traumas, misadventures etc. that cause him/her to act as s/he does> is basically a composition of events of "failure to master" harmonious relationships and interactions with Beings, people, places, things and subjects.

When you process a being to a full EP on a process, you have completed the "failure to master" on a specific area or subject. This gets demonstrated by incredible improvements in effectiveness and demonstrations of competence in life. You get a balanced, harmonious relationship and interaction with the spirit, mind, body and product of yours and with others.

Most of today's processing (clearing) is being run far too shallowly, consequently you do not get the life gains that should occur. It may take years to get a full EP of mastery on an area or subject, but until a Being does achieve mastery in the area or subject, that process is unflat. It may take the handling of many other related areas, but, the EP must be mastery, or it is an incomplete action. The area of "mastery" may well be the most charged area on a case, consequently it is heavily avoided, this is a "huge tacit sabotage" agreement area, and has many misdirectors connected to it. The biggest failure in all training and education is the failure to take at least one area to mastery. If a Being never takes one area to mastery, that Being has sentenced itself to an eternity of mediocrity or worse. <This and the preceding article by Peter Graham first appeared on a private Internet group (list). They have since been revised.>

<When still a young boy in England in the 1940s, Alan Walter had what he describes as a "Gold Zone" Experience. For a brief magical time, he was outside of Time and Space as a Spiritual Being, perceiving from that viewpoint. He never forgot that experience, and, when he had similar experiences later, they ignited his interest. He began a quest for knowledge that inspired over 40 years of research, and resulted in a highly advanced technology which many feel is at least a generation ahead of anything similar. A portion of his research and experience was within the Church of Scientology. He trained at St. Hill under the direct supervision of Ron Hubbard in the 1960s, and he was active in research being conducted at that time. In recent years, Alan founded the Knowledgism Group in Dallas, Texas, where the major services using his technology are delivered and currently resides in North Texas, within driving distance of the Dallas headquarters. More information on his technology is available from: The Advanced Leadership Center, 3339 Earhart Drive, Suite 213, Dallas, TX 75006, USA. Tlf (972) 404-8125. E-mail: leader@knowledgism.com; Web Page: www.knowledgism.com>

Pre-emptive Defensiveness -- Pt. 2
<This is an earlier version of the article currently available at the ASC Internet website, address http://www.asc.org The later version does not refer to SP's (a Scientology term) so we have printed this version. Pt.1 of this article appeared in IVy 32 page 6. This part 2 starts with a response Allen got when he published part one on the Internet. Ed.>
By Allen Hacker, USA

On Wed, 8 Mar 1995, a friend wrote privately:

Really and truly.... there is such a thing as a gradient scale of free beingness. LRH wrote up his version, the tone scale. People actually do operate at these various levels and also tend to stick in them.

The lower regions, and LRH's predicted behaviour, test out as one looks the scale over in the typical live human being range..... the lower levels exist as well.... I do not feel that those of us on this board relate to levels much higher or lower than our own..... these ranges are just out of our reality band.... we do not, cannot, comprehend the thinking of an indivudual out of our reality band.

From what I have seen the tone levels of many of these individuals would make -90 look like Mr wonderful..... there is a coldness down at the bottom where there is no being present anymore....

Living beings do not relate to these motives at all... we cannot even concieve them... and so we think we might be halucinating our suspicions.

I have no advice to offer. I do not know what to think. I suggest one study history, particularly the blackest aspects... and look for the personality types, the ploys, the intentions, the tactics, the look into the eyes of these people.... get to know evil.

There is a distinct set of recognisable characteristics.

Become its blood brother.... dance in its path, hold its eyes, permeate its space, know the flows.... feel the blackness. Antagonize it, draw your sword and stand your ground, force the issues, see what surfaces.... one only sees evil in combat, it's hidden the rest of the time.

And then you will recognise it..... and your blood will run cold, and you will never, ever, be the same again. But you will know the truth, and that might set you free.

And I decided to respond publically, because this topic is too important to keep private:
 

Evil

I believe that this thing you have named "evil" is actually a complex manifestation of only two characteristics.

You speak of free beingness in the sense that the more one has, the more alive one is. Of course, the implication from that is, as you so nearly stated, the less free beingness one has, the less alive one is, unto approaching zombie-ism -- being an unalive being -- the walking dead that cannot create anything but the destruction of its own opposite.

It was by way of an experiential process very similar to your powerful exhortation above, to "Become its blood brother...." etc., that I accomplished exactly what you predict.

And what I found there were two underlying characteristics, nothing more.

Actually, there is only one characteristic, as the first is integral to the second in that the second does not come to be, and cannot manifest in behavior, without the first.

The second is Pre-emptive Defensiveness, much as I have described it.
 

Alienation

But there is a section to be added to that description which explains the fact of the pre-emptively defensive person's ability to be so "cold": Alienation.

It is the process of cumulatively defining oneself as separated and different from "others" that gives rise to the perception that those others are mere objects, unreal as anything akin to self.

Alienation is the first characteristic, the one with which we must concern ourselves if we are truly to improve the lot of humanity.

Alienation finds its genesis in the being's initial individuation. That is, the seeds of alienation are sown at the very moment one becomes an individual consciousness, separated from the whole (however that happens, I'll leave that as a supporting topic).

There is even a gradient scale of initial alientation at the moment of individuation.
 

All that is

Some feel incredibly alive, excited about the infinite experiential possibilities spread forever before them. They know themselves to be localized expressions of AllThatIs (the AEther, in Acceptance), and they are continually energized in the knowledge that they share the panorama of life with countless other faces. Thus it could be said that they live in a very warm place, one of brotherhood (sorry, sexist, need a better word!). They live in Communion and walk forever the comforting edge of being the manifestational expressions of god itself.

At the other end are those who feel cut off, excluded, pushed out and rejected. Theirs is a cold place, absent of any sense of oneness with anything. Its name is Isolation.

Somewhere, well between these two extremes, you will find all of us.

Some would say, closer to the bottom.

There was a little poem that Ron really liked:

There is so much good in the worst of us, and so much bad in the best of us, that it hardly behooves any of us to say anything about the rest of us! (or something like that)

If the game of clearing is actually the quest to recover communion, it must begin at some definable point.

I say that point is identifiable, and that the failure to identify it, and offer a handling for it, is the one thing that will get you killed as a practitioner.

That point is alienation.

Religion: re (again) + ligare (a tie, or binding) = to bind back together

And thus the mission so many of us share.

We want Communion for ourselves, and by extension, for all of us.

We may be generally unable to say what it looks like, but we want it, and some are willing do anything to get it.

There must be a way....

The only real argument among us is "How?"

1000 Year Empire and KRC
by Todde Salén, Sweden

AN INTERESTING question: "Is our modern, Western civilization (2nd Empire) moving in the direction of the 3rd Empire?" Yet another: "Is our ARC society (2nd Empire) really progressing towards a KRC society (3rd empire)?" <See Todde's earlier articles on the subject, particularly in IVys 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 27. Ed.>

Before you try to answer such a question, you should clear it to understand what kind of an answer to look for. In Scientology auditing, you are required to clear the question with the preclear before the auditor even attempts to get the person to answer the auditing command.

In this case, you need to learn what Knowledge (the K in the KRC triangle) is and what it is not. Also it is good, of course, to know something about the most important principles of the 1000 year kingdom (3rd Empire).

L. Ron Hubbard defined knowledge as "a gradient scale of increasing certainty". At the top was certainty of creation. The KRC triangle implies that, to be able to take Responsibility for something, you need to have Knowledge; if you have the knowledge required to be responsible for an activity, it is then up to you to assume a position where you can Control the cycles of action leading to the desired result.

Supposedly, a 3rd Empire civilization will be based on the principles of the KRC triangle -- just like our contemporary, Western civilization (2nd Empire type) was built on the principles of the ARC triangle, and just as earlier civilizations rested on the principles of the CCH triangle.
 

2nd Empire

A 2nd Empire society first was created on our planet in ancient Greece, when the original democracy in Athens was established. The early Roman Empire was a continuation of that first democratic civilization. But when Caesar made himself the supreme ruler of the Roman Empire, that 2nd Empire vanished as the principles of authoritarian, 1st Empire civilization gradually replaced those of the 2nd Empire.

Before democracy in Ancient Greece there was an attempt to establish a 2nd Empire in Egypt by Pharoah Echnaton (about 1300 b.c.). A very good and interesting best-selling book on that subject was written by Mika Waltari. Sinue -- the Egyptian. It has been translated into most European languages.

After the fall of Rome came the Dark Ages. But maybe the medieval times were not so bad after all, because it was then that the foundation was laid down for the 2nd Empire of the American and French revolutions. It has been observed that, in England already during the 11th Century, ordinary people for the first time in history showed an interest in saving money and securing their future by means other than through many children (or cattle and so on). Society at last felt safe enough for common folk to dare acquire private capital as a means to secure their lives. Thus, capitalism was launched in medieval Europe, and it kept growing in England and expanded its influence across the Continent.

Eventually, various systems resembling present-day banking took over the creation of the capitalist system. A middle class was born, which had wealth and aspirations to influence society; and through the American and French revolutions this new class of citizen made its power and influence felt through the new and modern Western civilization. Since then, a worldwide demand has boomed for this type of society. This expansion, by demand of the common man, is going on right now and will continue into the near future.
 

Turning points of civilisation

Probably, the most important invention behind the creation of the 1st Empire was the invention of written language. And it was when the ability to read and write was learned by more and more people in the European countries that the 2nd Empire could assume political control of America, France and then other nations in Europe and the World.

In these 2nd Empire cultures, the principles of the ARC triangle made women of the bourgeois class teach reading and writing to the majority of each population, the new generations. (Most teachers during the 19th Century were women.) This effort laid the foundation for the even greater changes in society that have happened since.

Never in the known history of the World (accepted by universities and scientific establishment) had a majority of a country's population had the ability to read and write. The effects of this silent revolution, created by women, are still changing everything we know of civilization.
 

Changing 2nd empire

Next question: How many members of our current, Western society are advancing towards a 3rd Empire culture, based on the principles of the KRC triangle?

It is already a fact that today's civilized world is heading in the direction of an information community. But will this produce increased knowledge and thus improved KRC ? Or will it result in individuals being confused by the mass of unevaluated data?

The ideal man of the Renaissance was the "liberal man", with broad general knowledge and orientated towards individualism. Democracy means that democratically-minded individuals can represent other men and women in legislation and governmental affairs, because they are willing to fight for the democratic rights of others -- that is, they are willing to pay the price of freedom: constant vigilance.

Information society

Another question: Is the transformation of our society from a liberal democracy to an information democracy a move in the direction towards increased KRC ? The vast bulk of information our modern man has available is not structured, and has not been properly evaluated. And it is of such magnitude (volume) that it is basically impossible to digest during one lifetime.

The structured information of mass media -- radio, TV, newspapers -- is slanted to make today's citizen bend according to the desires of journalists and opinion leaders, who are concerned only about short-term consequences. They share a bleeding-hearts philosophy with feeble minds that do not dare confront present-time problems to create a brighter future. Are such minds ready to pay the price of freedom? Desire to find truth or to follow commonsense logic does not worry a bleeding-hearts philosopher.

The liberal-democracy society tried to teach its school children to think by training pupils to use their judgment. Upbringing, schooling, work and life-experience were supposed to educate society's members to do this.
 

Political correctness

In present information democracies, the mass media use overwhelming amounts of images and data to trick the individual into conformity with the ideals of the bleeding-hearts. It is a lack of an overall view (that is, 8th Dynamic viewpoint) and an overemphasis on the destiny of 1st Dynamic victims that lures the person into unintelligent thinking.

In Scientology axiom 58, Hubbard defined intelligence as the ability to assign correct importances. <Specifically, in part: "Intelligence and judgment are measured by the ability to evaluate relative importances..." The mass media continually assign false importance to information. For instance: Whenever an aircraft has an accident, the media report on it at once. But very seldom do they inform their audience that air transport is by far the safest method of travelling vast distances.>

The process Not-Is Straight Wire is based on this axiom. Running it improves I.Q. It is an interesting fact that the Co$. has removed that process from their Grade Chart. They also removed the "lying process" and the Power Processes (except given to "failed Dn. clears").

The media try to control your thinking process by slanting information, giving you a distorted point of view. If you fall into this trap, you become stupid and easily controlled. The media lack the ability to assume a pan-determined viewpoint. Most of the time, they use black and white logic, which is a sure way to lose one's judgment. Whenever an individual tries to make up his own mind, and arrives at a point of view unpopular with the media, he gets harassed in a very undemocratic way.

The democratic mind is supposed to allow others to have freedom to think and to express their viewpoints, no matter what they are. Only those who are willing to fight for everybody's rights, even if the other person does not agree with oneself, are real liberals and democrats. Are today's mass media and journalists such freedom fighters?
 

KRC knowledge

The true philosopher is well aware that data is not the same as knowledge. Every Scientologist should know that data has very little to do with the knowledge required to assume responsibility for cycles of action (KRC). KRC Knowledge is certainty on how to control cycles of action to achieve a desired result.

Is the information society leading us down the road to such knowledge? Or is it just confusing the individual with undigestible amounts of data of no real value?

Without knowledge of how to assign relative importance to information, the material becomes valueless. A computer often has lots of available data, but by itself cannot evaluate data; it is stupid by nature. A living mind can use the data available in the computer and, with the assistance of the machine, can arrange those data in such a way that they can be used intelligently.

Our philosophy contains methods of evaluating data (the theory of the Eight Dynamics) as well as a framework to teach data of value to the individual (auditing) who desires to reach spiritual freedom. Such factors can improve a person's judgment.

A famous philosopher once said that journalists are human beings who know little in many areas, which means they have no real knowledge in any area.

The power that they have in a modern society is way beyond their KRC level. It can be said that journalists and bleeding-heart politicians are not leading the members of our modern, Western nations towards the 1000 year Empire (KRC society).

To find the 3rd Empire, man now needs assistance to find the data that are important to gain spiritual freedom, data that help him think gradient scale logic and assume overall (Eight Dynamics) viewpoints.

We, who have inherited the technology and philosophy of L. Ron Hubbard, have a responsibility (R in the KRC triangle) towards the rest of the human race. Do you have the knowledge required to accept this responsibility? Are you ready to assume that responsibility? (= Do you have the required knowledge?)

If you can answer "Yes" to both these questions, it is time to start creating cycles of action that lead you and others towards higher KRC -- and to stop other cycles of action. If a lot of individuals are willing to pay this price of freedom, that is a way the 3rd Empire can be created.

Can we count on you? If not today, when?

Confront, Communication and Control
by Mike Bull, England.

KOICHI TOHEI <Koichi Tohei is the author of a book called "Book of Ki: Co-ordinating mind and body in daily life". He has over 40 years experience in teaching the principles of Ki, and is a 9th Dan in Aikido.> recognised that in order to teach his students Aikido, it was necessary to try and define Ki and to give drills so that his students could appreciate the reality of Ki, so that it could be applied in daily life. LRH evidently made the same observation about communication.

Koichi defines Ki as the infinite gathering of infinitely small particles, ie. dimension points. Yin and Yang are the fundamental actions of Ki. Yin = withdraw, Yang = reach. Reach and withdraw are the two fundamentals in the action of Theta (Factor No. 6 -- The action of a dimension point is reaching and withdrawing.) Expansion of space-EXTENDING KI, contraction of space-HOLDING THE ONE POINT are two exercises Koichi gives his students in his Ki training.

Incidentally, the comparison of any form of martial arts training with the data on communication makes for some very interesting observations. Look at the confront and reaction time of these guys.

Dianetics 55

Page 63 <All page nunbers refer to the 1968 edition. Ed.> -- A conversation is the process of alternating outflowing and inflowing communication, and right here exists the oddity that makes aberration and entrapment. There is a basic rule here: He who would outflow must inflow -- he who would inflow must outflow.

Page 65 - A mass is no more and no less than a confusion of mis-managed communication. You could say that charge is mis-managed dimension points. Therefore the reach and withdraw action of communication straightens out confusions.

Page 79 -- There is a manifestation known as a "Stuck flow". This is one-way communication. The flow can be stuck incoming or it can be stuck outgoing.

Attention could be defined: At = Position + Tension = the stretching out of dimension points creating space. Tech. Dict. def 2 -- "a motion which must remain at an optimum effort. Attention is aberrated by becoming unfixed and sweeping at random or becoming too fixed without sweeping"<Scientology 0-8, p. 75.>. So from these observations we could define Be as position, Do as outflow of Dimension points, and Have as inflow of Dimension points. As an example a man who is afraid of women could not Have a girl friend. Solution: Work out a gradient scale based on reach and withdraw so that the man can confront women.

From Factor no. 6 confront drills can be derived.

Solo confront drill no. 1

Purpose. To comfortably outflow attention and duplicate accurately.

1. Sit in a straight backed chair, close your eyes.

2. Practice flowing your attention outwards, practice observing.

3. If any somatics turn on, simply flow your attention at the somatic. Somatics or discomfort only persist in the absence of or the reduction of the flow of attention.

4. Drill this for about an hour or until you feel really good about it.

Solo confront drill no. 2

Purpose. To comfortably inflow attention or dimension points from another source and duplicate accurately.

1. As first drill.

2. Practice inflowing Dimension points-Listening

3. Any somatics turn on, continue inflowing-listening.

4. Duration as first drill.

Confronting another, drill.

Purpose. To be at ease whilst observing or listening to another. So that accurate duplication and understanding can occur.

1. Two individuals seated facing one another a comfortable distance apart.

2. One practices the outflowing of attention-observing, the other practices the inflowing of attention-listening. Any discomfort or somatics turning on are handled as per solo drills.

3. Do this for about half an hour or until both participants are happy with their progress.

4. Now alternate the roles. The one who was practising outflow does the inflow and the one who was inflowing now practices outflowing.

5. Duration as per 3.

Some further observations.

OT could be defined as Operating as a Thetan. Confront is a Thetan activity not a MEST activity. SCI.AX.46- "THETA can become a problem by its considerations, but then becomes MEST".

SCI.AX.48- "LIFE is a game wherein THETA AS a STATIC solves the problems of THETA AS MEST".

Otto Roos in a past edition of IVy made the point that in the Ethics conditions the condition above power is control. Therefore any deterioration in ones ability to control gives us the gradient scale of conditions. Confront is prerequisite to Duplication. Duplication is prerequisite to Understanding. Understanding is prerequisite to control. Therefore applying any condition in the absence of Confront, Duplication, or Understanding, will only worsen the condition.

The Free Zone as a Movement Introduction
From The Freezone Org Home Page, Internet. <http://www.freezone.org>

It is November 1995 and the Free Zone has been in existence now for more than 12 years.

The Free Zone is a "network" and as such it is not hierarchically structured.

We have, however, had our ups and downs.

It all started in 1982 when the first people like Capt. Bill Robertson (CBR), Peter Green, Dave Tops, to name only a few, started to "investigate" the ocurrences in the Church and published their findings. You will find their debriefs and those of others in the English and German historical section of our Home page. Those who speak German can read a whole timetrack on the history of Scientology.

It was the time of the "Finance Police" headed by Wendell Reynolds. The GO (Guardian Office) was dissolved, Mary Sue and 8 high ranking Church representatives were in jail. And LRH couldn't be found or contacted. MSH had her last contact with her husband in 1979, Bill Robertson in 1981 and David Mayo in 1982.

Hubbard awarded CBR the rank of Captain, an honor otherwise only bestowed on his own wife, Mary Sue. He was -- technically -- the successor of Hubbard because he was the highest ranking Sea Org Officer when LRH and MSH dropped out. In part as he was 2nd Deputy Commodore, the third in command after LRH and MSH.

CBR started the Free Zone Movement in 1982.

When Bill could no longer contact LRH, and when he saw what was really going on in the church (see his debrief on that), he started "Operation Phoenix". Purpose of Operation Phoenix was to exteriorize the Theta from the church and to bring it into a new organization. Bill felt right to do so because he was technically the only one left of the top Sea Org (SO) echelon. He was the highest ranking SO Officer when LRH and MSH dropped out. He called it Operation Phoenix because Phoenix was the place where LRH went in 1952 to start Scientology after he broke up with the Dianetics Foundation. Bill did the same by taking the Theta and putting it into a new organization.

In 1982/83 David Mayo (former Senior C/S) left the church and started the "Church of the New Civilization". He stated that he had a letter written by LRH in which the Tech-Hat was turned over to him for the next 20 years. Some people from the Sea Org confirmed this but later Mayo withdrew this statement.

In the beginning CBR and Mayo worked together. The idea was that David take the tech hat and Bill the admin hat. In 1985/86 they broke up and Bill started the RON's orgs in Europe. He explained the situation at that time in Tech Briefing 1.

Bill got back into Tech and became Senior C/S for the Ron's orgs. His Tech and Admin Briefings are recommended reading if one wants to get deeper into the subject.
 

Ron's statement

In 1952 L. Ron Hubbard gave the PDC (Philadelphia Doctorate Course) Lectures. In No. 20 of these lectures called "Formative State of Scientology" he talks about "unlimited weapons":

"Scientology will decline, and become useless to man, on the day when it becomes the master of thinking. Don't think it won't do that. It has every capability in it of doing that.

"Contained in the knowable, workable portions before your eyes there are methods of controlling human beings and thetans which have never before been dreamed of in this universe. Control mechanism of such awesome and solid proportions that if the remedies were not so much easier to apply, one would be appalled at the dangerousness to beingness that exists in Scientology". (pg 47 of the lecture transcripts)

"... what kind of a weapon is really serious? Not a weapon which destroys mud. A weapon that destroys minds, that's serious. Out of the body of knowledge which lies before you a sufficent technology is available to take over, seize and handle any government or people on the face of the Earth. You aren't of an ethical level, even, that permits you to observe this. You wouldn't think on these lines. And yet if only those principles were known, there would be people who could and would think on those lines.

"You can control men, like you would control robots with those techniques. The implantation, black Dianetics, pain-drug-hypnosis are very mild methods of control". (pg 48)

"There is only one thing that could happen to Scientology, and that is to say that it would be buried. The remedy would be buried. If it ever went out of sight, this world's done. All you've got to do is invalidate it and put it out of sight and hide it, and it'll come up in the wrong place doing the wrong thing, and mankind will find itself a slave".

..."So anybody that knows the remedy of this subject, anybody that knows these techniques, is himself actually under a certain responsibility -- that's to make sure that he doesn't remain a sole proprietor. That's all it takes, just don't remain a sole proprietor. Don't ever think that a monopoly of this subject is a safe thing to have. It's not safe. It's not safe for man; it's not safe for this universe".

"This universe has long been looking for new ways to make slaves. Well, we've got some new ways to make slaves here. Let's see that none are made". (pg 49)

..."Therefore we really do have the remedy before the assault weapon is produced. Did you ever read poor old George Orwell's uh.. 1984? Yes, yes, that's wonderful. That would be, could be, the palest imagined shadow of what a world would be like under the rule of the secret use of Scientology with no remedy in existence. Well it's all right in this offhand age to just brush things aside and say, "Well, it's of no importance, no importance, really, and.. let's not be dramatic the way people are being about the atom bomb". Actually the atom bomb isn't as serious as this subject. It's just a MEST weapon. And, it's all right to be very offhand, and very cheerful and so on, and -- like the little boy whistling in the dark says, "No ghosts or boogymen exist." -- Well, this boogyman does exist".

"It's a very simple remedy. And that's just make sure that the remedy is passed along. That's all. Don't hoard it. Don't hold it. And if you ever do use any black Dianetics, use it on the guy who pulled Scientology out of sight and made it so it wasn't available. Because he's the boy who would be electing himself "the new order". We don't need any more new orders ...." (pg 49/50)

P.O. Box 1215, D-83524 Haag

Aspects of Ethics
By Ralph Pearcy, USA

IN THE BEGINNING, Beings were infinitely powerful and infinitely naive.

This state, of being able to do anything that could be imagined, could be called "Sovereignty" ("Lord Over All").

But notice that this may have entailed (if only through ignorance of consequences) total disregard of everyone else. So it seems likely that this state may not have lasted very long, as far as most Beings were concerned. It would appear to have been a very unstable state, if Beings were interacting at all.

So -- can anyone get back to being "Lord Over All" in this primal manner? That is, can the pan-determined Sovereign point of view still exist? Would it not have to abandon all experience and become totally innocent and naive again?

Experience

But we know, from the experience of our present universe and our present lives, that we cannot do this. Even to attempt to view circumstances from a Sovereign point of view entails viewing also the countless relevant experiences from which a rich background of past events has been built up, which are available to recall and which are potentially relevant to the ethics status of any action.

In other words, "You can't get there from here". Sovereign naiveté is gone for good, unless you lobotomize yourself, theta-wise. (Which no doubt is what has happened to many).

But the abilities of Sovereignty are not gone for good. They are weighed down and buried by all the considerations from a vast experience. And in addition, as we know very well, the "experience" certainly includes irrational components, from traumatic incidents, security formulas ("service facsimiles"), and the like. It also includes unconscious components which inhibit the exercise of intention and prevent a thetan from operating.
 

Domination

Besides which, such "experience" may include an urge to ruthless domination which may override compassion. For example, hostages are blown up with the terrorists holding them, in order to deter terrorism. But this is treating people as objects to be sacrificed, and the mindset is that of a police state in which a Total Ownership Case treats the population as puppets for amusement.

This is a clearcut case; but in most circumstances, where the hostages are treated as valuable individual Beings, the terrorists have to be handled firmly but delicately. Ethics becomes a matter of nice judgment, complicated judgment, tricky judgment. And in general, ethics decisions are not a matter that can be solved by a packet of cut and dried regulations. (And certainly not a matter that can be solved by endless litigation, United States style).

This need for rational judgment in the midst of typically irrational circumstances is also why effective ETHICS is rarely applied. It is much easier to pretend that everything is rosy, that compromise will solve everything.
 

Integrity

But the harsh truth is that compromise solves nothing. Compromise is the opposite of INTEGRITY -- and it is integrity that is the only practical basis for ethics, I submit.

But in case this is taken to support Dictatorships and the Iron Fist, please note that the solution has to be sought BEYOND COMPROMISE.

This is because "compromise" means agreeing to invalidate what you think is correct so that the other guy can save face by also agreeing to what HE thinks is incorrect.

But two incorrectnesses jam the whole process up. At best, two groups of people buy time to examine the other's point of view and to develop a SYNTHESIS -- taking the valid parts of both points of view, that is, getting it right at last, and admitting that some parts were wrong.

The criterion for "right" and "wrong" being WHAT WORKS, not necessarily what someone's Scriptures say is true.

And "what works" is, of course, part of INTEGRITY. "Integrity" literally means "all of a piece" -- a Being in tune with his group of other Beings, in tune with his mest and/or non-mest environment, in tune with other Beings and other groups. Where "in tune" implies all of what is said above about applying experience to present situations.
 

Logic

In other words, it's just a matter of "the facts, ma'am" and LOGIC. Where Logic is not some kind of abstract philosophy but the knowledge of the ways facts and circumstances combine or clash.

And besides Logic, or included in it, there's an Esthetics component. If something doesn't "ring true" or doesn't seem harmonious (unless of course this is put in for dynamic effect), then there's probably an ethical component which needs to be sorted out.

A bizarre example of this is the anti-abortion movement. Killing evidently triggers heavy charge for these guys, and they think without inspection that early abortion is depriving a Being of a body, regardless of there being no Being there yet. Late abortion to avoid producing a defective body likewise triggers "killing" -- they'd much rather have some Being trapped in a malfunctioning body for years and years, instead of going on and finding a better one to pick up. And so on.

In this example, the ethical components to be sorted out are, firstly, the definition of "killing" (and its reactive implications), and secondly, the tricky judgments as to whether a given body is a fit (esthetic) habitation for a Being. But this is certainly not the way most people, on either side of the debate, are approaching it.
 

Games

This discussion hasn't mentioned games. This is because I think that Ethics doesn't have much to do with games. Artificial or arbitrary RULES are not a valid substitute for Integrity, although preachers, team captains, or umpires may try to tell you so.

Let it be noted, though, that there are games which are agreed upon ("tennis next Thursday") and games which are ENFORCED. The reason why Beings are so avid for games and fall for being trapped in them is another subject. Why are we here? Because we let ourselves be Game Fodder for someone. Why? -- well, only you know your personal answer to that one.

Beings like FUN -- i.e., enjoyable doingnesses. This is both an exploitable weakness ("Come and see what fun you'll have in this Training Implant") and a target for suppression ("Find out what Johnny's doing and stop him").

Maybe DELIBERATE DECEPTION is the basic of Out Ethics? Certainly, "Deliberate deception for the purpose of entrapment of Beings".

There is of course a great deal more to be said on this subject. Discussion is welcomed.

Copyright © 1997 by Ralph Pearcy

English May Conference
By Albert McManus, England

Held May 17th. 1997 in North London

Lilian and I arrived early, but not so early as our guiding angels who set the conference up. With the usual relaxed skill the conference was gotten under way and was lightheartedly launched with a bit of poetry in the Burtles style. It was nice to see some new and nearly new faces, together with the reappearance of some older ones.

Antony Phillips brought news that Scientology had climbed into the Internet and that circulation of IVy achieved the impossible state of unvarying change since first issued at the magic figure of 150 <Not quite true. Some go, some come. We are not good at keeping comprehensive statistics, but I have just had a note from the English distributor giving the following figures: 1995 = 48, 1996 = 44, 1997 (so far) = 52. I don't think we have reached all potential readers yet.. Ed.>. He also hinted that he wouldn't stick with the Phillips IVy editor GE for ever.

I was pleased to see that Ray Saunders had found a realistic thread of response in his audiences by using Spiritual Response Therapy. Being a natural healer he has been expected (like all natural healers) to heal without reward beyond achievement of the healing. Healing as a service seems to need a long via to put value into it; something the medical fraternity well understand. The most expensive treatments go on for painful years or are on very long waiting lists or need years of saving up money to achieve them.

Neville Chamberlin gave us some straight talking about taking life seriously whilst giving the impression that that was the last thing he did even if he had been impressed, boy and man, into the service. Later he gave us the idea that 42 was an important number -- something to do with numerology, I think.

As always Barry Fairburn got us looking at the possibilities that we are operating as spirits after all; and his examples were so real you could touch them. His trip through the realms of creation, from all directions, was really elevating and had no loose nuts to it. I now know why gambling on a river in a steam boat is so exciting.

Britta Burtles's enthusiasm after lunch was boundless, as usual, despite the efforts of some in the audience to keep some valid opponents in the games she recommended we play. The excellent lunch we all had probably put extra energy into the listeners -- the audience definitely participated. Ulrich Kramer's contribution stretched us all to look out into the universe and then to take a closer look back to see what goes on earthwise. His pictures were on the largest canvasses; even when they described the doings/misdoings on earth. What goes on in space has always been real to me and I enjoyed this muchly.

The group discussion were good fun. We had Neville Chamberlin in our group and the mysterious number 42 kept re-appearing. It all became hilarious.

Chris Dunk added fun and reality to our lives beyond the bounds of clay modelling and brought the power of the spirit to the fore with much interest. Like the best of conjurers he kept us all guessing to the last.

On the electronics front a good basic Emeter was on show together with a low voltage "zapping" device to clear the body of germs and viruses and other bugs. Something to help the G.E. keep pace with your rapid spiritual arisings.

Classic Comment
By Terry Scott, England

Hot Potato

I WOULD LIKE to grab a "hot potato" that exists in the philosophy but is seldom heard of: the Eighth Dynamic.

L. Ron Hubbard makes reference to it now and again in his many writings, but -- in those I have come across -- they are brief. Further, no specific techniques seem to be extant that would help us to expand into or to invoke the Eighth. The First, yes.

Christians have prayer as their technical answer on the Eighth Dynamic. Does prayer work? Maybe. But prayer as practised in at least Western culture tends to be passive.

People sit there at effect appealing to Cause. Mind you, some non-Christian, "pagan" religions used to invoke their God(dess) or god(esse)s -- invoke and use power; quite interesting.

Active prayer would be in communicating with the Eighth Dynamic on the lines of: "Let's go and move that mountain. Let us..."

But to do this for real, one needs at least a glimmering of recognition that one's being is grounded in the Divine.

What is the Divine? Source of All -- Source of all theta and thereby of all matter, energy, space, time and games.

My personal point of view is that ultimate Source is the creator-and-perceiver of all. And that Source began as a unity that conceived the idea of itself as capable of being an infinite number of sources (lower case "s"). Thetans.

And Source is able to thoroughly be each and every theta being. And every thetan can be a source point for mockups and games and a lot more.

God is indeed in each and every one of us, far more than organised religion dares to really let its parishioners know. And to use what might be called "God Power", one invokes it as Cause. Not as effect, asking "Lord, please gimme".

The Eighth Dynamic is a dynamic of Power, but that ultimate power can only be re-attained through responsibility, ultimately in being part of source.

From Uafhngige Synspunkter 1992

Kemp's Column
By Raymond Kemp, USA

Quantum Philosophy and Theta

I HAVE LONG PONDERED that Quantum Theory/Universe, and Mechanics, and the Theta Universe are interrelated, and that the subject we call O.T. (Operating Thetan) needs more examination.

The following is my first attempt to quantify data and put it into an organized format so that others may read it and hopefully pursue it and add to it.

Since the early 1920s, Quantum Philosophy has been turning the world of general physics upside down and inside out... similarly, since the 1930s L. Ron Hubbard through the application of Scn. Philosophy also turned the field of general psychology and mental therapy or expansion of awareness upside down.

In all the latter day upsets and arguments and disagreements, these have been more concerned with the Administration of the subject, than with its Application. The Philosophy remains, and it is true that proper application of the tools of Scn. do work, and with constant success. It is also true that the scope of the subject, the well mapped road, takes us from an observable Homo Sapiens, to a postulated Homo Novis, known colloquially as the State of Clear. The realm beyond that, commonly known as O.T. (Operating Thetan), Hubbard himself defined as "para scientology" meaning outside the scope of that well defined road.

The current Church of Scn. (and incidentally it was not started by Hubbard but by Dr Evans Farber a student of LRH in Los Angeles) has made much legal noise over the protection of "sacred teachings". These apparently are the course materials earlier known as OT 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, etc. and have little to do with the original philosophy of Scn., as these materials deal mainly with one overall subject, Past Track Implants.
 

My thesis

I want to take a new position, and go back to the basics, the Factors, and the Axioms, which according to the original publication were "humbly presented as a Gift to Man", and try to see if there is any parallel in the field of the Quantum theory.
 

Applying quantum theory

According to Quantum Philosophy a particle (mass) does not have a definite spin speed or position. It does have a number of different possible positions or speeds or locations, until we actually observe it. It may not even exist as a particle per se, it may be that such is actually an energy manifestation called a "Wave Form" likened somewhat to a soap bubble, that collapses upon being observed. When such is observed, only then can that particle occupy a well defined state in which it can be precisely known and measured.

Put another way, defined particles are only potentials, until observed by an observer, and the observation itself defines the state of the particle, because he brings into that observation his own experience. As Heisenberg said "if an experiment is designed to detect a particle it will always detect particles -- if it is designed to detect wave forms then it will detect wave forms".

Sir James Jeans said in the 30s that nothing can be fully observed because of this, and that a total observation can not occur since it would bring about a vanishment of that being observed. Put very simply, "an observer will observe what he puts there to observe".

Hubbard says this similarly in his writings of AS-ISNESS, and indeed the phenomenon of as-isness is central to the desired result of counselling in the Hubbardian method.

Can the Mind then be considered to be a quantum device? It can be argued that the thought process does indeed collapse wave function, the "thinker" coalesces from probability of billions of possibilities and resolves these into a single defined idea or thought, thus paralleling quantum mechanics.

Since an entity (thetan) is potential, (by definition -- no mass, just potential, with no location in time or in space), it has, again by definition, no speed (energy), no location (position) and no mass, but billions and billions of possibilities.

When an entity thinks a thought, per quantum, there is a collapse of the wave function into an observed, and thus well defined mass we call a thought. If you have grasped an understanding of this, then let us move on.
 

Mental pictures (facsimiles)

A facsimile, either is a mass, or has a mass. For practical purposes we could define it as an encysted thought, but according to our theory it can not exist except to the extent that the thinker, by observation of possibilities, brought it into being. It can only be "unthinked" by direct and full observation. Sound familiar?

We are used to dealing with facsimiles, those of long duration (we say), we sub-divide into Engrams, Locks and Chains; we own some, we say; we were given some, we say; we were implanted, we say......

But wait! Re-read that last bit, and in place of "we say", substitute "we think".

All of these then are thoughts -- created by us from infinite possibilities and only exist because we have collapsed these possibilities into thoughts... right now.

The coarse facsimile phenomenon does have time attached to it, but only because we put it there and hold it there. But if we assume that the thinker is "clear" then he is still thinking thoughts, still coalescing from infinite possibilities these well defined quantum particles.

It could be said then that a preclear doesn't think anyway -- he simply reacts to and from masses known as facsimiles, bouncing through life like a pachinko ball. <pachinko, is a mainly oriental slot machine game where one shoots hundreds of little ball bearings onto a vertical board where they bounce around randomly through a maze of pins before arriving at 'scoring' locations.>
 

The physical universe & quantum

So far we have been talking about the area of human consciousness, not necessarily a part of the physical universe, but observations in that the universe too has some bewildering aspects until one applies quantum theory. For example, with the Hubble Telescope we can now see stars we have never observed before, it is said that we can observe some 95% of the physical universe. (Note the use of the word observe). Recently the birth of a star was observed, measured, examined, data was gleaned from it, and so on. But this star was (I don't know the exact measurement), some 300 million light years away. It took the light some 300 million years to reach us and be observed through the Hubble Telescope.

Does that star, now being measured and quantified actually exist... now?

Not necessarily. What we are observing now is an event that took place 300 million years ago... then.

What if, some 1500 million years ago, that star went nova, collapsed and became a black hole? Then for the next 1500 million years we shall be looking at, observing, and quantifying something that does not exist anywhere in the physical universe. No wonder Schrodinger, one of the foremost of the Quantum Philosophers said of Quantum physics, "I don't like it, and I am sorry I ever had anything to do with it".

In quantum theory one could say that we observed a wave function and brought it into being by that observation now, and in that observation we chose from all the possibilities that particular set of parameters. As a result we can measure things that may not exist, we can, from one time, observe a different time, and say with truth "Now is then" or "Then is now". That can be done in the Physical Universe where time is considered an arbitrary.
 

Consciousness

What then is available out of the billions of possibilities in the universe of consciousness, which is the universe of the entity you are.

All "things" are potential until you observe them, all thoughts are only possibilities until they are observed, at which time they cohese into a mass and become definitive.

The "clear cognition" (Editorial note: I have felt that there was confusion (in the latter day church) about the clear cognition, and asked Ray for a clarifying footnote. Ray wrote: "I am not going to quote the actual Clear cognition based on my last article on Valences and Service Mechanisms. It is not "I have been mocking up my Bank all this time" as some have said." Perhaps there is room for a clarifying article! Ed.) does in fact encompass this, but to then add great significance, spin, time, and location to more masses, thoughts, coarse thoughts (facsimiles), makes significances with masses, called Implants. Potentials called BTs, (FBTs -- Body Thetans.) and so on begin to look like an exercise in futility in so far as increasing one's own ability to coalesce one's infinite potential i.e. the route to O.T.
 

An assumption

As I said earlier this is a thesis, a necessary preliminary assumption. One of the assumptions is that to enter this road one must first be truly, (not as a service mechanism), clear. One must have rid oneself of all need for facsimiles upon which to operate. One must be able to look at the physical universe for what it is, and what it is not. One must be willing to be right, and willing to be wrong, to observe that there is no such thing as a coincidence, that there are flows and there are terminals, and the intersection and interaction of these make for a fuller immersion into life, not a constant protest to get out of it. One must desire, and be willing to give and receive communication from others, even strangers.
 

What is real?

Now all this is not to say that the Reality of Implants, B.Ts etc. does not exist. Quantum philosophy, and backed up by experimental data shows that when a wave function has collapsed into a defined Particle, out of all other possibilities, those other possibilities or potentials still exist. One has acquired a reality of the particles one has created, and, become more and more "real", as there is more and more agreement and communication about that particle. The alternatives remain equally valid, equally real, and existing in their own parts of the Universe.

To simplify this into what has been called Alternative Realities as in "parallel worlds", however, is not a true description, and while seeing it as a constantly splitting branching tree has some workability, (especially if one has created a Time Track of linear events), it still seems to be an inaccurate picture.

So...... You exist in a limitless potential, untrammeled by space or time, with possibilities that have no boundaries. Why waste it on creating, and then having to create more masses, arguing for years what the real name of an alleged implanter mass was, or how many BTs can sit on the end of your nose!

Have fun.


See also Ray and Pam's article "Mentor Offer" on next page.

Mentor Offer
By Ray and Pam Kemp, USA

In response to a letter that was sent us regarding a person who wanted "Training Data" we would like to respond as follows:

We realise there are many who would like to learn the Philosophy of LRH together with the application of the technical side of that Philosophy.

What is missing apparently in the "free field" is a source of stable data to whom they can go. (In the 'old' days we had Book Auditors who would get advice from the HAS (Hubbard Auditor Service) <Editorial note: I came into Scientology in 1954 in England. To me HAS means only Hubbard Association of Scientologists (later with I for International added). I Emailed Ray, And this was his reply: "It was a part of HAS, book auditors would call in when they were in trouble auditing, and Ron would give them advice, sometimes by phone even. Later this became CECS (don't remember the full name except certification." I remember CECS (vaguely). "Committee of Examinations, Certifications and Services (PAB 39)" according to Modern Management Technology Defined (popularly known as The Admin Dictionary). Ed.> . In the tradition of Learning, and Academia, older Universities had students who "read" the subject under the guidance of a mentor.

Pam and I therefore are offering to be Mentors for those who want to read LRH. I will take on students and advise and coach them on the Philosophy (theory) of LRH as published in his books, tapes and conversations. Pam will be the Mentor for more direct Technical advice.

Preferably we will use Email, but Fax and ordinary mail can be used. We will only give advice on LRH material, not Ch. of Scn. necessarily, and not any other 'ism' or 'ology' deriving from Scn. no matter how good it seems.

In other words we shall stand in for Ron where possible. There will be an exchange for this service. In this way we shall be doing our bit to see that our promise to LRH to advance the subject unalloyed, be kept.

Ray & Pam Kemp, P.O. Box 1216, Wildemar, Calif. USA 92595 Fax. (909) 678 1173 email kempeha@inland.net

IVy on the Wall
By Kenneth G. Urquhart, USA

Writin' Wrong
<This article is also listed as "Reminiscences of Ron -- 7" in IVy's full list of contents, which is available on diskette (DOS) and kept updated on our Internet Home page: http://home.sn.no/home/trone/IVy.html>

Eleven years after the death of his sick body, L.Ron Hubbard still casts long shadows over the lives of many of us who were touched by his near or extended reach. It seems to me that the most vocal of us have been those who came away with a grievance. Then there are those who are tired of hearing about the fuss about the grievances and prefer not to hear anything at all. And there were many who came away feeling either better off in some way, or not better off but willing to accept what happened; they are getting on with their lives.
 

The real warts?

We have a relative vacuum of information from those who knew LRH personally over long periods of time, and who have been in a position to know the LRH who was the person behind the public personage responsible for creating the institutions of Scientology (the "Church," the "Sea Org," for example). He was The Commodore, The Founder, and Source, and still is to many, but nonetheless remained an individual with, like Cromwell, warts and all.

The vociferous ones, in expressing their feelings, make a lot of noise. It is time to balance them with other and more considered views, views based on direct personal observation of the man rather than on direct personal observation of members of the staffs and how they behaved or didn't behave. This is not to say no-one has grounds for complaint against LRH. Many people were hurt by mistakes that he made in the technology and in how the organizations were set up and managed. He made some terrible mistakes, to be sure, and many were definitely damaged as a result. What the mistakes specifically were and what are the specific responsibilities we should certainly examine and will at a later time.

My own objection to the way charges are leveled at LRH stem mainly from his being addressed in them by his accusers as though he had been a standard, live-only-once, competitive, self-seeking, materialistic, power-hungry, obsessed human being, and a fake, a posturer, a manipulator of people, a slave-driver, a tyrant and dictator soaked in greed and burning with contempt for gullible humanity. Or something like that.

Well, you can make a case for just about anything in that list, and not be far from some of the truth -- some of it.
 

Speaking loud in accusation

Anyone who gets confused by the ferocity and the insistence of the criticism of LRH the person should recognise that the confusion is natural and that when the accuser focuses persistently and with force on the wickedness of his target, the accuser is telling you much more about himself than he is about his target. The accuser is telling you that he has a personal investment in having you focus on the badness that the accuser points the finger at. Yes, I repeat, LRH did make mistakes and a lot of people did get hurt. The focusing on the mistakes, the denial or ignoring of what was positive, position the accuser on the tone scale at a level which tells you, the observer and seeker after Truth, there must be more to the reality than the accuser is capable of calling to attention. This is not a condemnation of any accuser; it is a statement of what I take to be fact because I find the tone scale inescapably accurate. I do not deny, excuse, justify, lessen or alter, any of LRH's goofs or any part of his case which made him susceptible to making his mistakes. I also was seriously damaged when I left the Sea Org in 1982 -- from an Earth-bound, Homo sapiens viewpoint -- and I was luckier than most. If I wanted to blame anyone I could only blame myself. Who made me a member of that group? Who made me stay? Nobody but me. I could wish much of what happened hadn't and much that didn't happen did. But I cannot change a thing about my past and now that it is mine to possess I wouldn't change any of it for universes. I honour my experience.

I suspect that one of the hardest things for a complainer to experience is that LRH was much, MUCH larger than life, to use the English expression. By this I mean that what we learn to accept as the normal, everyday, routine day-to-day experience of living was always far too small to contain, limit, or define him. Now of course the physical universe imposes constraints we have all agreed to, and I don't know for sure that he could overcome any of these constraints. I do know that he was not bound by any cultural or societal "Now I am supposed to ______," or "Now I am supposed not to __________." He was like a mural painter who painted not on a manageable wall; he created on the face of life itself. He said to me one day, "People see me only in terms of this one lifetime." Who knows what lifetimes he wanted people to see and acknowledge, if it was the past he was looking to; I understood that he was talking about his core purposes in life which encompassed more in time and in intention than what he was manifesting in the present lifetime. He felt people tended to view him as a being who couldn't have existed before and wouldn't again, one who brought no special background or experience into this lifetime, and who couldn't be continuing work from earlier lives into the present and into future lives. Well, perhaps some can perceive this just enough to make them howl with an agony due to their own errors as immortal beings but which they can only ascribe as human beings to what they are sure he did wrong.
 

"He would like to see you now"

You who have glimpsed his beingness in his writings or lectures or films but never saw him or talked to him, or perhaps caught sight of him on a distant deck or dock, or on a lecture platform, wonder: What was he really like as a person? It would be very understandable for you to have gained the impression that he was an intensely caring person. Yet he went wrong somewhere, and there are all these screamings about him. (Were screamings ever inspired by some little suburban being who did little and died self- satisfied?) Is there a reality beyond the screams?

Come with me a moment, up this flight of stairs. We are going to the upper deck of a ship.... we are approaching a person you see through the open double doors of the room he is in. You feel at once that this is someone very important. There is something very different about the space you're walking through -- there is a feeling of a very precisely individual specialness about the space -- the floor, the walls, the ceiling, and the space in between. It's not just that they are clean and shiny, as though kept that way for a special person. They have a certain pride in being part of the life of a certain being who has put his stamp of ownership on them. The man you see in the room is standing up, ready to greet you. You take in at a glance that the body is about average height and has air of power and authority. The body is massive but not massy. The head is large, the forehead strikingly expansive, as are all the features of the face. The eyes convey a certainty which a relaxed readiness to smile underlines. You wonder just how much those eyes are capable of making out.....The shoulders are broad and decisive, the arms, in short sleeves are substantial, well-proportioned, and ready for action as they hang to his sides. The waistline looks rather too expanded and comfortable; the body is lightly but solidly borne on its legs and feet. The head hair is a golden carroty colour and is combed back from the rampart-like forehead and temples. This is not a man to fool with.

We enter the room, and just a little way inside the door, you enter something else. You know you have entered his space, a space which emanates only from wherever he is, and over which he has complete command. Yet, as you enter this space, and move closer to its owner's body you know that you are being made very welcome. I murmur a brief introduction since you both know in advance who the other is. Without the slightest inhibition or enforcement you are suddenly not just in his space, you are included in his glow. His hand reaches out to you energetically and enfolds yours in a warm and firm fist. The large, wide, mobile mouth breaks out immediately into a broad, engaging, friendly, open grin revealing regular white healthy teeth a little stained from smoking. His eyes twinkle, the space around the head seems to be glowing goldenly at you, the deep, commanding but gentle and friendly voice asks "How are you?", waits for your answer, acknowledges it, and directs you to a chair with some remark that you can both chuckle about, making you feel very much at home and somehow, suddenly, more valuable than you had ever dreamt you could be. The certainty comes to you that this being is absolutely more than human.

And yet, here you are, very much the focus of his attention and interest, of his willingness for you both to get on real well. At the same time you know that you are being felt out, observed, examined, and summed up broadly, deeply, accurately, objectively, and purposefully -- not that you are being judged as this way or that, you are becoming real to him, your beingness is assessed so it can be granted you. Naturally you begin to feel the comfort of being acknowledged, and you find that you have to be alert not to slip into a state of hypnosis. But even if you do, provided you are not antagonistic his beautiful manners will ride smoothly over any shyness on your part and soon you will relax interestedly, basking in his glow. You may find yourself having a very lively conversation. Well, LRH being LRH, the lively conversation will most likely turn into a lively monologue on his part, and it will be fascinating. He shines, he laughs, he is animated, he can be brilliant, and you will love it. You will forget time. You will forget care, worry, and misery. As he shares himself with you, you feel very happy. You will never forget this. You come away uplifted and inspired, genuinely so. Did he get you to agree to something? Very likely. Did you agree against your will? No, you liked it. Did he ask your opinion, and listen to it? Yes, he did. Did he seem to respect what you said? Yes. Was he at the end just as much in command of himself and what he was doing, as before? Yes. Was he always in such a good mood?
 

Tornado warnings

No! I have seen him strike a man in anger. I have seen him so enraged with a man (never with a woman) that the expression of his rage, face-to-face, had the flesh of the other man flattened out whitely against his cheekbones as though the man were barefaced against the force of a hurricane. LRH moved up and down the scale largely and rapidly.

I am willing to bet that you have not come across in this lifetime a being of such size and energy, such strength, and such eagerness for enjoying others, such power to grant you your beingness, such quickness of perception and of thought, such depth of active understanding along with readiness to laugh -- and so on, and on.

Well, you tell me, you work in a Macdonald's, you see nothing but such people every day all day and are sick and tired of them already. Oh, well, okay! Good for you.

You don't need to be told that he could get upset, impatient, intolerant, bitchy, cross, contemptuous, cruel in word, in intention, and in action, harsh, capricious, angry, bitter, impetuous. He had his good days, his so-so days, his bad days, and his terrible days. There was a dark side as well as that glow. He could get sick. He prided himself on certain abilities, such as medical, legal, musical, PR, without basis always obvious to me, and I think with mixed results. He had a very hard time with what he felt was criticism from a terminal not of comparable magnitude. When once he was very angry to find that the topmost deck of the ship was being cleaned daily with fresh water (which was a waste of fresh water) he absolutely hated it when I told him he had ordered it himself six months before when he got so angry that it was being washed with sea water (which was affecting electrical circuits). Who had ordered that it be washed with sea water? He had, of course. There were times when it seemed to me that he desperately needed something to be angry about so he could express anger.

When he took care to communicate something very clearly and urgently and it was not accepted or was altered, misunderstood, or made unimportant, he would be angry. If this persisted he might be beside himself with fury.

He could interfere outrageously with an activity on the ship, he'd get everybody in it completely upset and befuddled. Then he'd have to ride in on his big white horse at great self-sacrifice to rescue them heroically from the confusions they would never have thought of creating if left to themselves to do their jobs. On the other hand, he could straighten out an area of real confusion quicker than you'd believe possible using his tremendous intelligence, his ability to analyze a problem, his imagination, his strength, his natural authority.
 

What'll we do next time?

We all need to understand something of how this being's creations, the technology of Scientology and the protective organization he set up to promote and deliver it went so awry. How could something that set out to be and might (so easily, it seems) have become so positive turn into such a mess? I can't say I understand everything about it myself. It is worth exploring. We need to know what to watch out for when he comes back.

Consider, as a parallel, some aspects of a river. The river we're looking at is quite wide, deep, and flowing rapidly between well-defined banks -- let's say in a gorge. We can tell from the smooth surface of the water that its depth is sufficient to allow it to flow smoothly over any large rocks that might be on the river's bed.

A little lower down the river, there are some waves and other ripples on the water that tell us that there are rocks in the river, not large enough to break up the flow, but enough to disturb its smoothness. Further on there are rocks that reach above the surface of the water. Here the flow though still not halted is definitely enturbulated.

Of course not all rivers are deep, wide, and running fast through gorges with or without rocks to rough them up. Ours does. Experience the volume of water, its speed, its depth, and its density. Share the purposefulness with which it is moving from where it is towards the sea. Feel the flowingness, the energy, the focus. Can that river be other than what it is? Can the magnificence of that flow change itself into a trickle of treacle, a marsh of muddy molasses? No!

No more can a powerful being change self and flow once embarked on a purpose and committed to it. The river (so far as I know) doesn't create the rocks that enturbulate it; a powerful being does create his or her own impediments. The powerful being's "rocks" are the mental and spiritual masses he or she creates out of pain and untruth uninspected, out of fixed ideas left in place unattended. When the masses and fixed ideas are not challenged they are as rocks deep down on the riverbed. When they are pulled up to present time by the being's putting himself at effect of Life with his own reactivity, they are as rocks above the surface of the river enturbulating the flow of the water; the being's flows, the being's flow of existing, are enturbulated.

When a person's flow is not large, strong, and fast moving, the masses and fixed ideas do not cause the person dramatic enturbulation. A powerful person has very little choice but to flow powerfully; a powerful person has powerful masses and fixed ideas. A powerful person experiences powerful enturbulation. Everybody involved in a powerful person's flow can expect to be involved also in the powerful enturbulation as well as the powerful glow. Another aspect of powerfulness now comes to attention.
 

Mutual masses and messes

Everybody has some masses and some fixed ideas. They are buried deep, or at the surface (that is, manifesting in present time), or somewhere in between. A person becomes involved with a powerful being's flow; the powerful enturbulation inherent in the powerful flow will activate masses and fixed ideas in the less powerful one, sooner or later. The enturbulation of the lesser person will activate masses and fixed ideas in the powerful being; the resulting enturbulation will activate more of the lesser person's masses, and so on. Now, usually in the interaction between them there will be at least some glow, so that masses and fixed ideas will tend to sink below the surface. But on balance, you can be certain that plenty of additional mass and fixed idea force will persist uninspected and unattended to.

Add one other lesser person to the group, and you have now the two lesser people interactivating their masses and fixed ideas, each of them individually interacting witih the leader, and the leader now interactivating with the group of two and with the cross flows between the two lesser members. Multiply this a couple of hundred times, and then by several thousand. Consider it a while. Put yourself in the leader's position. Only in an ideal world will the strength of the flow of the greater being overcome all the impediments to his flow that he experiences both outside of and inside his own group to such an extent that his or her flow plus the flows of the subordinate members overcome all their impediments too. We should and we can hope for and work towards such an ideal; if someone makes the attempt and fails should we blame him for his failure, or be mighty glad that he put his foot on this road to show us that it exists and is there to be walked along?
 

Not so simple, after all, hey?

Perhaps this parallel gives some additional perspective and dimension to our view of LRH. And of the "Sea Org" and of the "Church of Scientology." It doesn't explain everything, but does it not also give some context to the complaining charges made against him and a little clarity to the positions of the complainers?

There is more to explore in this subject which I will have to leave to a later time. I'm about out of space, and out of editorial patience about deadlines, and it is my bedtime (which is not subject to editorial flow).

I take my leave for the moment with a favourite quote, which is relevant to our discussion:

"All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity, but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes to make it possible." (T.E.Lawrence, The Seven Pillars of Wisdom)

Goodnight: I go to my dreams.


Copyright © 1997 K.G Urquhart

A Further Note on the O. J. Roos Story
By Frank Gordan, USA

IN PETER SHEPHERD'S article on Dianasis in IVy 11, p. 29, he says: "Auditing is a gradual process of increasing knowingness, as charge, caused by frustrated first postulates, is freed."

One of Hubbard's first postulates was probably, "I can communicate an understanding and get it duplicated."

That this was often difficult can be heard on tape #6211CO1, SH 206: The Missed Missed Withhold. He describes how he issued one bulletin after another, and still they didn't get it. He treats this with some humour, but the building charge is obvious.

Probably, in his later and short-tempered years, the humour had vanished but the built-up charge from trying to get duplicated remained (Listen to the Class VIII tapes ca. 1968) This gives one possible explanation as to what happened.

I Create One Version Of What We Know:
All that I say has been said.
By Muriel Chen, Australia.

Are we really creating by postulate?

SOME OF US have problems with money. Some of us have problems with attacks from organisations. Some of us do not have enough time or enough love or enough power to do as we wish to do. And all this after having become clear and O.T.!

How else can we create except by postulate? How else can we be, do and have?

Right now, in present time, we are creating all the considerations that create all that we each perceive. Every little bit of it. What we each at present perceive is about .0001% of what is already created and is available for us to perceive. Parents, social class, society and nationality are a few of the many variables which program our perceptions.

We are each using our own stock of postulates and considerations to choose or allow that part of all possible creation that we experience. When we expand consciousness, it is expansion into all that is created that we are not yet aware of. It is also expansion into what is not yet created.

We are reactively programmed. We have a technology to clear away certain parts of this reactive programming.

But can we be aware of all automatically presented and manifest postulates that determine exactly what we experience? Can we be aware of what we perceive and what games we play "automatically" right now?

We know to put reality creation on automatic in order to play a game with persistence involved. But can we see that we are creating all the persistence that exists? Are we choosing the automatic creations or being their effect?

If you would choose to have everything just the way you find that it is, then you are at cause now. You are not reacting. You are clear!

We are using a technology to remove "experiences" that are stored in the subconscious. But have you thought what else is in the subconscious? The abilities to operate the body are there, our manners and our toilet training are there, and if we were to speak more esoterically, the body itself is there. These things are also reactive.

The body is being automatically created underneath or outside consciousness by dichotomies. (A friend who was working on black and white processing in the late 50s and early 60s in Sydney found that he was actually as-ising the body -- it was disappearing -- and realising that there were other things to as-is first, he stopped running it in the way he was running it.)

We call the part that automatically functions in all life forms the "somatic mind" or the "GE". We call the part that automatically functions in individuals or groups the reactive mind. Where does one mind end and the other begin?
 

Creating truths

We hand on the "truths" that create our physical reality in our physical reality. We as beings hand them on through life forms. They are transferred "genetically". i.e. Agreements are made, become cellular and hence persist physically.

We are constantly creating our particular form of society, our particular workable truths, our relationships with any other living beings, as well as all the objects and energies that we can at present experience. If enough people had wanted to believe their fellows who saw space ships in the early Sumerian times, they would be real now to most of us. If enough people .....

We create the truths we agree to.

We hand on chosen and preferred truths

We hand on these truths so well that many people have fixed ideas of right and wrong, truth and untruth. These come from enforced choices and enforced preferences. They were enforced in trauma and through lack of inspection.

The ways of doing and having things and the reasons for doing and having them and the justifications for preferring them are infinite. The only limits to creation are created ones. Some people specialise in creating personal limits for a more challenging game. Others create limits by default and create overwhelm. Many of us create limits to right and wrong and find those limits that others create to be wrong. Some create to manifest that which has not manifested.
 

Heredity or influence?

We hand truths on from generation to generation. By the time you were born into your present body you had within it as part of its "cellular" structure all the dramatisations and "cellular mind content" of your mother. These are not only the traumas. These are the reality recipes as well. It is the default. (Pun intended!) She got hers from her mother, and so on.

This body is not just a separate being called the G.E. It is an intrinsic part of your beingness. It is as much you as are your thoughts, emotions and your aesthetics.

Prenatal and track engrams are by definition cellular, and are automatically presented into your reality as restimulation occurs.

It has been demonstrated that genetic structure in a physical reality is formed of vibrations -- that particles are a vibrational pattern. Therefore, transference genetically is not to be differentiated from transference on other levels of vibration (e.g. communication) except by the variation in the wavelengths of the vibrations and the content.

If this is so, where are the body inheritance and the theta recall separated?
 

Whose body is it?

When you run an engram (cellular recording), whose is it? According to Deepak Chopra, the material which forms the illusion which is your cells, your material body (which is just vibrations anyway) is constantly flowing. We are constantly sharing "this material". Each body is constantly being made. It is not the body you had a year ago, or even five minutes ago. It contains vibrations (or particles if that sounds better) that were part of Christ and of Buddha, of me and of the dog next door and of all the others you may or may not approve of sharing bodies with. The body's only constant is the pattern of considerations we restimulate in self and in each other. But the cells themselves have identity, held in place by ridges and attracted by the considerations held by you as a thetan.

We create intricacy for richness and interest.

All of creation is for the purpose of interest. Why then are we not celebrating it all?

There is only now and all that you experience is now

All that you receive on a cellular level and "in any part of your mind" or in your memory, is now. Your body is the embodiment of the mass of your own now. Your experience is determined by the thought in your own now. What is appearing outside of your self is attracted to you by your own now.

I remember when I was auditing on my dianetic internship. (I am remembering it now!!), my Pc, an able being, had been doing other clearing approaches, but had not previously heard of Dianetics. He had dramatic gains that changed his entire life, and he attributed his greatest gain to, and as, TR0. He cognited that all there is, is being here, now, and by actually doing so, there is no past influence preventing creation. His opinion was that L.R.H. would be known and revered forever for Tr.0. alone.

Outside of time and space is the thetan: you. But whilst you are here and surviving in time, you are also the body. As a clear OT you create in time as a thetan but your present time is aligned with and as a body. The body is your alignment in time with all its cellular recording and automatic creations. You are wanting to discover and be free from or change at will those creations you do not prefer right now. To do this you need to choose your postulates to create your reality, knowingly.

What is right and what is wrong?

We know that the consideration of right and wrong is an individual choice or preference. It is also a group agreement for the span of a game. It is not that you had other agreements that you are now stuck in, it is that you have and are dramatising all the agreements that you have hoarded. You hoard those that you force on others, those that you resist, those that you give sympathy to, etc. If they are right now, they can all be changed. If they are right now they can all be released. If they are right now, they can all be let go of.

They can be released, let go of or changed merely by removing the judgement

You could say, remove the whole o/w (O/W: Overt/Withhold; bad things done, good things withheld. The sequence is quite an important part of Scientology and this definition is inadequate We need an article! Ed.) sequence. You could say, remove all the implants. You could say, take the middle way. Whichever you do, you will be releasing the charge on the ridges that form the fixed part of your reality and your body. Whatever means you choose, you are releasing energy on one or both sides of a dichotomy. It can be called a judgement because it is a judgement rather than a choice which puts a ridge there.

How do you locate the present you wish to audit ?

What is being judged as right, right now, is a major part of what is wrong. It is easy to see what we accept as wrong with self or others and seek to rectify it. The rightness that is fixed hides in our own light.

How do you know what it is, if it is automatic and reactive? How do you become aware of it?

You are judging it as right, right now, and you may be doing what you judge as right but you are seeing the opposite of what you judge as right in that or those you resist or in that you wish to change. You may be trying to do what you think is right.

By auditing both this rightness and the other end of each dichotomy (that which you wish to change), amazing things happen to your ability to effortlessly create by postulate.
 

What can be changed

You can write down all that you are aware of in the world which is not right and which you choose to make right. You can write all that is right and which you maintain as right. You can locate everything that is true in the sense that you know it is not changeable, at least for you. You can find what is true and what is unchangeable for others, for our society, for our world, and for our universe, as you see it.

These are some of the things that will point, in your present, to fixed attention on rightness which hangs dichotomies with ridges, thus constantly creating mass.

Once you have found them, you can use auditing tools to as-is them, or, if you wish the concept to remain in your reality in an unfixed form, to change it by removing the right/wrong judgement. If you are working with TROM, "timebreak" each judgement. You can use belief changing in any of its forms.

The things you find will be in simple statements of "fact". If you use a meter you may find that there is initially no read on some of these things because the charge is projected and needs to be owned. (It could be a rise rather than a fall, initially.)

All these things that are "right" are what limit your freedom to be clear of reaction, to be more OT, and to create any experience with postulates, or even, having played all games here in time and space, reabsorb the energy of your body and your life experiences, and ascend as a completed being.

Horner's Course Picture

Ray and Pam Kemp spotted the following people in the picture we published in IVy 29, page 41:

1. Francis (Dr. Holliday's daughter).
2. Rosalyn (Dr. Holliday's daughter).
3. Gladys Wichelow.
4. Erna Wright.
5. Eileen Hibberson.
6. Muriel Payne O.B.E.
7. Jan Flemming.
8. Erna Campbell (Jack's wife).
9. Liz Williams (Ray's mother).
10. Jean Atkinson.
11. Mary Long.
12. Francis Holliday.
13. Eve Weigand.
14. Enid Bronson.
15. Raymond Kemp.
16. Dennis Stephens.
17. Dr. John Watson.
18. George Wichelow.
19. Jack Campbell.
20. Peter Greene.
21. Jo Mobray.
22. Ensor Holliday.
23. Jack Parkhouse?

Ray wrote the following comments:

That picture can be said to be of the Pioneers of Scn in UK.

Erna Wright (4). Refugee from Europe in WW2. She also pioneered Natural Childbirth at the same time that Pam discussed Dianetics with Dr Grantley Dick Reid, author of of Childbirth without Fear and we had an agreement to quote his book for physical and he quoted Dianetics for the Mental side of childbirth.

Muriel Payne (6) got her OBE (Order of the British Empire, awarded by the reigning monarch, Ed.) for work done in India in educating small children. She wrote a book called Creative Education, that Ron liked.

Jan Flemming (7). Calligrapher, took on the publication of the British version of Creation of Human Ability.

Liz Williams (9, my mother) was the first DScn (Doctor of Scientology) in UK. I introduced her to the subject while I was still in the RN.

Mary Long (11). Became the star registrar at St. Hill. Staff complained about her methods which included giving a tea party for each registrant, and when Ron found out that the staff wanted to com ev her for off policy procedures, he presented Mary with a floor rug, arm chairs and a tea service. (From this came the policy of Facility Differential, see IVy 27, p. 18)

Dennis Stephens (16). Later wrote TROM.

George Wichelow (18) was one of the first trained Dianetic auditors in UK.

Jack Cambell, (19, wife Gurney) was the man who put the definition of Dianetics into the Funk & Wagnells dictionary. That definition still stands in most dictionaries and Encyclopaedia Brittanica.

Peter Greene. (20). Successful Franchise holder and author of some Scientology books. Died a few years ago.

Ensor Holliday MD (22) was instrumental in setting up the HAS (Hubbard Association of Scientologists) in England. It was set up as a "Learned Society", and originally St. Hill was set up as a College.

Joan Beak went to Edinburgh and set up there.

There are many stories about each of those in the picture... I can't remember all of them, but they were the pioneers, and successful... long before the CofS was formed. (Incidentally not by Ron but by an auditor in California)

Yang and Yin
By Leonard Dunn, England

<LOOKING IN DICTIONARIES, at any rate older ones, the terms masculine and feminine, can appear to be exclusively associated with gender. But, they also refer to personal characteristics and have been so used in the columns of IVy. They were known in Jung's psychology as animus and anima. Long ago in Chinese philosophy they were known as yang and yin. It is by these that I shall offer what I have to say since these are probably better known than Jung's terms these days. I have spoken of them before in my articles. The understanding of these characteristics can be of great value to the counsellor, practitioner, call it what you will.>

IN IVy 30 I READ an article by a scientologist who has entered this movement some 17 years ago. She could only identify the terms masculine and feminine with gender when it was quite obvious that these referred to personal characteristics. They were known in Jung's psychology as animus and anima. Long ago in Chinese philosophy they were known as yang and yin. It is by these that I shall offer what I have to say since these are probably better known than Jung's terms these days. I have spoken of them before in my articles. The understanding of these characteristics can be of great value to the counsellor, practitioner, call it what you will.

Yang is masculine and its main quality is logical reasoning. Yin is feminine and it is here that we find the quality of intuition. Yin people, whether masculine or feminine in gender, tend to make better contacts with those from other planes of existence but I will deal more fully with this later.

So what importance does this have for the Independent Movement? The answer is that it has a great deal of importance, both in regard to the practitioner and his clients. The greatest importance for the practitioner is when he or she has a good balance of the complementary characteristics.

This does not apply to those who work by rote, using exactly the same means of handling any and every client without regard for that one's individual needs. In the early days of Scientology we were treated as individual cases and the processing was in accordance with our individual needs. The idea of everyone having to do the whole of The Bridge came later.

It is in the progressive aspects of the Independent Field that we find the response to different and more workable ways of handling the individual in front of us, according to that one's nature and needs. What works for one does not necessarily work for all. The Creative Processing that was used on my case produced extremely good results -- I was stable in less than 25 hours. This didn't work for all hence the need for different approaches. It is the different approaches that I have found so beneficial in recent years. The best in the Independent Movement produce better results and usually at a much lower cost than the "donations" of the C. of S.

Very yang practitioners tend to run by logic whilst very yin will use intuition. The really balanced workers will use either, in accordance with what is needed for the individual client. I have found both to be of value, but intuition most especially.
 

Balance of Yang and Yin

When using the yin aspect there can be a greater chance, or certainty, when this side is recognised and developed, of help from beings from other and more knowledgeable planes of existence. If I may give an example from a case I am currently running at the time of writing this. My client was running some whole track incidents and seemed stuck on an incident where he had been prospecting for gold. Right out of the blue, without any previous indication that what came through was valid, I asked him, "Were you accused of a crime that you didn't commit?" Without hesitation he told me that he could recall that this was indeed so and that he could recall being shot, wounded and then hanged because of this. Total EP!

With another client some while back I recognised that she needed to run an admiration process. I was working from Filbert -- Excalibur Revisited -- since he allows the work to be used without the limitations of copyright and he didn't have a process for admiration in there. So based on my theoretical knowledge I invented one to suit this case. After running this, she re-did her Oxford Capacity assessment and every column was over the top. The creation of this process involved the use of logic -- yang.

To achieve good results easily there must be a good, or better still, a perfect balance of the two qualities yang and yin.

The first step towards this is to find out where you stand in regard to them. I have a book called Who Are You? by J. Maya Pickering and the Draytoon Group. In this there is a short question on one's personal preferences and these are registered as either yang or yin. When I did this on myself I found that the answers were exactly equal.
 

Imbalance of Yang and Yin

It can be observed that a many people are markedly yang or yin rather than having a balance of these qualities.

The macho male is heavily yang and considers himself to be superior to women and in consequence they are considered inferior. One has only to look around to perceive this dominance of masculinity in so many aspects of life. The question was raised as to whether or not Scientology and its founder manifested this imbalance of the two qualities. When I first came into it the classes that I attended always contained far more men than women. I don't know if this is still the case. In regard to the founder, one had only to see him lecturing on the platform at a Congress to perceive his masculine presentation. His lectures were logical -- a major characteristic of yang. In most business concerns men are found to be in control. There are far more male members of parliament than there are women. Women still tend to have lower level posts than men in most areas.

This attitude probably came into being when the dominant female deity -- The Great Mother Goddess who was worshipped at least 400,000 years ago and perhaps as long as half a million -- was replaced by a male deity. It was when the hunters became agriculturists that a warrior class came into being and a masculine god came to be regarded as being better than the Goddess. This attitude has persisted ever since.

The strongly yin woman is ultra feminine, very emotional as well as intuitive. She represents herself as being dominated by the yang male whilst quietly getting her own way by flattery and similar means, without him ever realising that he has been manipulated. On the other hand she can be so besotted by a male type that she is dominated by him at the cost of her own survival because "she loves" him. She may be aware of his faults but refuses to confront them.

The over emphasised yang or yin being often tends to produce strong physical characteristics that are associated with the type.

The imbalance can also take place in regard to opposing genders. Here we find the man who has an overwhelming amount of yin in his make up or the woman who has an too much yang. It may occur when a being has had a long run of lives in one gender and then takes over a body of the opposite gender. This can lead to balance but often doesn't. It can often cause a sexual preference for one's own sex.

Where there is a good balance of these two qualities the sexes each respect the other. Incidentally, good or perfect balance tends to be associated with a high tone level.
 

The application to practitioners

At one time L.R.H. decreed that PCs should be audited only by a member of their own sex. This was discontinued later. My attention was drawn to this recently when a rather yang male was to be handled by a woman. Because of his attitude she got nowhere with him but when a male took over, he made immediate progress. He then began to develop a more balanced attitude but, from what I heard, still has a long way to go.

Looking first at the practitioner's state in regard to yang and yin, a good balance of these will achieve far better results since the balanced person can handle it all, using logic when it is needed and intuition when this is of value. I have already shown that this can be done.

L.R.H. said that one should handle the case in front of one and not some imagined case. The case in front of one can be balanced or with some degree of shift away to either yang or yin. A practitioner in the Independent Field may be working in ways that are somewhat, or greatly, different from the ways of very orthodox Scientology. It is here that the best results are attained from the understanding and use of yang and yin. In regard to himself the best balance attainable will produce the best results for him. As I said, balance relates to tone level. The yin side produces the intuitive knowledge that I, personally, have found to be so valuable as have others who are aware of this and make use of it. The yang side equally is not without its uses. So if the client has an imbalance of yang or yin, the practitioner can use which ever mode produces the best effect.

Tone level in the client will indicate whether he is more inclined to the physical or the spiritual. The physical realm produces the state of attraction of opposites whilst the spiritual will be that of like attracting like. This needs to be observed by the practitioner so that the appropriate mode is used.

What I have written is what I have found to be valuable for me in latter years. It has also been found very workable by a close friend with whom I have been associated for quite a few years now. If on the other hand you think this is a load of rubbish, then just follow your own path since there is never only one way of achieving results and each must progress in the way best suited to him or her. Find the way that works for you but, I suggest, do not fall into the trap that your way is the only workable way. The balanced yang and yin will always be ready to pass on their knowledge to others for use. The imbalanced are those who will keep it to themselves and usually for the sake of the money that it produces.

I end with two quotes from L.R.H.

A being is as valuable as he may serve others.

The supreme test of the thetan is his ability to make things go right.

I thoroughly agree with both of them since both are applicable to myself.

Repetitive Processing
<Technical Essay # 87 -- 11 May 1992.>
By Flemming Funch, USA

Most repetitive processes work by repeatedly putting attention on a certain subject or activity, noticing the restimulated phenomena that happen as a result, and continuing the repetitive activity until no more phenomena appear. That will usually correspond with a realization of increased perceptions or ability in the area.

The repetitive process focuses on a very specific area and stays with it until the available restimulation is taken out of it. That accomplishes something that would be difficult to do out in the noise of everyday life. It takes a safe space, a limited focus, and the intention to carry through with it.

The repetitive activity can be any of a number of different types. These are some of the things that can be repeated as a process:

A physical activity (objectives)

A question (grade processes)

A desirable activity (TRs)

A desirable thought (affirmation)

Any kind of thought or attention (meditation)

See, there are many more possible processes than what we have traditionally regarded as repetitive processes.

Solo or audited

Repetitive processes are by their nature essentially solo processes. The person needs to repeat the same action and notice the feedback from his mind until he has gotten as far as he can get with it and there is no new feedback to inspect. There is not much need for an experienced practitioner to analyze the situation and take decisions about what to do. Some experience and analysis might be useful in picking the right process to start with, but otherwise the only decision to take is really when to end the process.

Other reasons for needing a practitioner to run repetitive processes might be that the person lacks the discipline to finish a simple action, or that he is unable to perceive that things are going on in his mind. That is a pretty common state of humanity, so that can be expected. But, shouldn't a skilled practitioner be able to address these inabilities more directly in an interactive manner? We could work intensively on locating the charge that keeps somebody from doing something consistently until they are done. And we could coach them into noticing that responses happen in their mind.

In other words, I don't think repetitive processes are the best prescription for getting somebody to continue cycles of action and to notice what happens. Objectives would do that to a certain degree, but in a very brute force exhaustive manner. I think repetitive processes would be much more pleasant and productive if those matters were dealt with directly first.

Noticing the restimulated phenomena would have to be something the client does himself, nobody can really do it for him. The practitioner could help him to get started. That is for example what happens on objectives where the client would have some kind of physical change, and the practitioner would ask "What happened?". However, it could probably be done a lot more directly than that. Otherwise there are a lot of responses that some people never learn to recognize.

What gets turned on

The responses might be physical feelings, pictures, thoughts, etc. There are a lot of possible distinctions in these. Temperature, pressure, movement, vibration, sounds, colors, etc. The ability to recognize these can be brought up with the help of a practitioner who will insist that there is something more to perceive, and who will insist on getting a description of what is there.

Those responses are the kind of stuff that comes up if you sit down to do TR0. Thoughts, discomforts, change in eye sight, etc. Any repetitive process produces such responses if one will just notice them. The more phenomena one goes through, probably the greater the benefit from the process. If one just ignores it or gets rid of it without noticing, it isn't very beneficial.

Most people would focus almost exclusively on the verbal responses when running a repetitive question process. Practitioner asks a question, client gets an answer from the bank, and states the answer. However, that is only a small aspect of the whole picture, and the verbal stuff isn't particularly the most important. Of course the client does other things to bring forward an answer. He might look at pictures, notice feelings he has, and so forth. But people have a very varying awareness of these things, and therefore different people can get widely different things out of the same repetitive process.

By an increased emphasis on what repetitive processes really do and who does it, it should be possible to increase their benefits and general usefulness.

As I said, if a person has the discipline and perceptions to run repetitive processes well, then he could probably do just as well on his own. If people can do processes in their own time, it avoids a lot of logistical and monetary problems.

What to repeat

The activity done in a repetitive process doesn't have to be a question. It could for example be a desirable thought. Since thoughts have the power to shape your reality, i.e. postulating, you might want to pick something you would like to think and run it as a repetitive process.

We could take a typical affirmation as "I deserve to be prosperous and wealthy". That would be kind of nice to firmly believe to the point where the universe will oblige you. However, if you think that statement, and whatever it implies, you will probably notice some kind of mental feedback. The file clerk mechanism will tend to come up with all the counter examples to it and the reasons and feelings why not. Particularly if you think it again, as a repetitive process, you will quickly notice that it brings about some sort of restimulation. If you continue it, and you notice what is happening along the way, the responses will probably gradually change to positive responses, and your "file clerk" will supply you with supporting information for what you are claiming. Eventually it will go flat and you will just feel good about it, an EP in other words.

The statement given is just an example. Any kind of desired positive thought that one would like to have right now can be used. How about "I have full exterior perception", or "I am an all-knowing being", that would probably work.

You could run a given affirmative process beyond a mere "feeling good" EP to the point of having something happen in the physical universe. Similar phenomenon as the Suppressed Person RD, if you continue until something actually happens, it will.

Flows

A process like that can be run as several flows, and it might also work well to throw in your name in it. Such as:

1. "I, your name, deserve to be prosperous and wealthy."

2. "You, your name, deserve to be prosperous and wealthy."

3. "your name deserves to be prosperous and wealthy."

That is a standard tech for doing affirmations, I didn't invent it. However, if you can set aside any fundamentalist biases you might have, you will realize that this kind of thing follows the basic principles of processing. And it is very safe to do on one's own. Of course, the many people who do affirmations don't necessarily know about the technical basics we might apply to it, and they might well Q&A and not run things to EP. However, processing still works even when imperfectly done.

There are a million other things one could do repetitively that would bring about some phenomena of restimulation, that one could work through as a process. For example, along the lines of TR0, instead of being there while putting attention on another person, one could put attention somewhere else. You can probably build up exterior perception by putting your attention in different places in the environment and keeping it there regardless of what happens, until the phenomena stabilize.

There is no reason to let repetitive processing be something proprietary and exclusive that you can only do if you pay a lot of money to a highly trained and carefully supervised practitioner. Repetitive processing is fairly harmless. It can certainly be done wrong, but that doesn't make it dangerous.

Repetitive processing is a simple method or spiritual improvement that almost anybody can do almost anywhere with minimal instruction.

Perception versus Sanity
By Bob Ross, USA

WHEN YOU LOOK for something you must first visualize the something you are looking for. If you don't have a clear idea of what you are looking for you will not recognize it when you come across it.

This explains why one can look for something fruitlessly that is in plain sight, and then finally find it, right where one had been looking. For example, looking vainly for a salt shaker and finally finding it right on the table where one had looked vainly before.

The explanation could be either that one had been looking for the sound "salt shaker" or perhaps for an earlier different appearing "salt shaker" in one's past experience.
 

Buried in noise

The mind or brain is expert at recognizing patterns buried in the midst of "noise." Where the definition of "noise" is: noise is data irrelevant to the desired information.

Recognition of anything is actually pattern recognition. We compare what we see with our eyes, hear with our ears, smell with our noses, or perceive through other senses, with a mental picture or pattern that we use for comparison purposes.

The mind can detect patterns deeply buried in the midst of noise. This is so common, that we don't realize how miraculous it is to recognize a two by four-foot window or picture frame in a forty foot by one hundred-foot wall at a glance. That wall has an area of four thousand square feet versus the 8 square feet of the window making a noise to signal ratio of four thousand divided by eight or five hundred to one.

Similarly we can recognize individual letters of the alphabet on a printed page in a book. But, any confusion as to the pattern or identity or shape of the individual letters interferes with recognition of that pattern and so slows down or prevents reading.

That is one major reason for learning letters of the alphabet thoroughly before or at least separately from learning the phonics values of letters and letter combinations. Another reason for learning letters as letters and their sequence is because that skill is needed for filing or looking up words in a dictionary or finding names in a phone book.
 

Pattern recognition

In life, pattern recognition plays many roles. For example, how can one achieve success in life unless one is able to recognize success or opportunity when it exists? One can only recognize what one is familiar with or what one can imagine.

Misinformation, disinformation, and errors in understanding prevent recognition of patterns and hence prevent recognition and understanding. The classical truth, that misrecognizing a word or symbol i.e. in a manner different from that intended by the originator of a message or the writer of a book, is explainable by pattern recognition theory. Pattern recognition theory states that the mind is unable to recognize meaning as correct meaning, when any piece of a message is recognized incorrectly. This is one reason why natural languages have a great deal of built in redundancy. Redundancy such as agreement of number between noun and verb helps one to not misinterpret messages.

When part of a message is misperceived or misunderstood, an incorrect message or no understandable message is perceived.

Fixed patterns of recognition inevitably produce fixed patterns of behavior.
 

Held down 7

Efforts to change behavior without changing perception are mostly fruitless. Also, attempting to change perception without finding the reasons for that perception or interpretation are as fruitless as attempting to get the proper answer from an adding machine when the 7 key is stuck causing a 7 to be added in or multiplied by in addition to any other action. Just as the adding machine must be repaired or a computer debugged, the mind must be debugged by finding the fixed ideas which are the reason for persistently wrong thoughts and persistently wrong actions.

Fixed thoughts are not always wrong. The adding machine gives the right answer when 7 must be added in or multiplied by, but gives wrong answers at all other times. Similarly fixed opinions about life, are right when they are in agreement with current life, but wrong at all other times.

Some data is held down more strongly than other data.

All education is a matter of learning patterns of recognition and patterns of behavior. Such patterns are drilled to be instantly recognized in the midst of noise and confusion, e.g. stop on red traffic lights, and go on green. Perceptions may result from chance assemblies of objects and circumstances or may result from seeing, feeling, hearing, etc. actual physical objects, circumstances or relationships.
 

Guilt -- paranoia

The old adage, that "the guilty man fleeth when no man pursueth", is a specific example of seeing delusional patterns not perceived by others. Paranoid thinking is an example of seeing feared patterns, which others do not recognize. For example, blaming undesired events on conspiracy. The fearful individual is supersensitive to the feared pattern and will perceive that particular "truth" long before others do.

The paranoid individual has occasional success at perceiving real threats. This tends to keep the paranoia in place, with its delusion of non-existent threats. This can be compared to a supersensitive smoke detector which makes lots of noise as a result of one person puffing on a cigarette in a house, not just sounding the alarm when a roast burns or a fire takes place in the house.

Wondering whether someone knows one's secrets arises from recognizing in the environment chance references to secrets one feels no one must know about. Thus a chance remark can cause one to wonder, whether someone knows or might find out, i.e., "Does he know?"

Restimulation

The theory of restimulation embedded in the Dianetic theories of L. Ron Hubbard depends upon patterns of recognition. Certain patterns are perceived as evidence of imminent danger.

Hubbard's error was in assigning cause to the perceived patterns, which he called "restimulators", rather than to the individual's decision to react to that perception as meaning "painful" or "dangerous".

Alfred Korzybski (of General Semantics fame) taught that we can re-educate the individual in what he called "nonallness" and "nonidentification" so as to modify modes of pattern recognition, particularly a tendency to react to words as though they were the actual things represented by the words.

In extreme cases, people who have been reacting to words or their own imagination as though it had reality, by thinking "This is a ____", or "This means ___", became able to recognize that words and thoughts are not things and change their behavior. When words are perceived as equal to things and people respond to words as though the words were the things they represent, they are in trouble.

The workability of a General Semantics (G.S.) education lies in promoting sane responses to one's perceptions of the environment.

When words are discovered to be only sounds into which we each pour our own meanings, we no longer react to words as though they had power over us. We assign that power to words and we can take that power away.

Book News
Review of Super Scio by "the Pilot"
By Leonard M Dunn, England

THE AUTHOR OF this lengthy work, which is 550 pages in length in print out from the Internet, has used a pseudomyn in order not to be prosecuted by the C of S. Although no longer on staff there, he has retained his membership and therefore has hidden his identity. The work is available with the proviso that its contents shall in no way be changed and it is offered, through the Internet, free of charge. <Those on Internet should look at IVy's home page to find a link to where they can get SuperScio. The address ishttp://home.sn.no/home/trone/IVy.html. We published a short extract in IVy 32.>

The first section of the work deals with the outnesses of the C of S and he suggests changes that the C of S should make -- a forlorn hope, I should imagine. Following this there is a long section dealing with what is true and what is untrue about scientology itself.

The second section is called Cosmic history and is based on lectures given by LRH to advanced scientology students in the early days. It covers home universes and the series of universes that have occurred since then down to the present one. Each is followed by a penalty universe and it is how to run out the effects of these that is the longest part of the work.

Other processes are given too, such as how to handle actual GPMs, old processes on exteriorisation and how to audit the Higher Self. Some reference is made to eastern practices and he presents his own view of the chakras.

OT levels first

It is interesting that he advocates that the OT levels should be run first and that the Bridge should follow. He also maintains that none of this work should be made confidential as it does not restimulate. This conflicts with the experience of the AAC at East Grinstead who had to handle a number of people who had been badly restimulated by reading the OT materials when they were first made public.

If you like

I remember a drama critic writing of a show "if you like this sort of thing, this is the sort of thing you will like". This applies very much to this work. The author has spent thousands of hours of solo auditing running out the effects of the mentioned implants and is still working on them. Personally I am of the opinion that if these things are not causing you personal present time trouble they are best left alone. Even if you feel that you do need to run them, his incredibly lengthy running may not be necessary.

Recently my colleague, Judith Methven, ran into a restimulation of an actual GPM. Working on the principle that life is a game, I decided that using the games processes of TROM level 5 should handle it. I suggested she try this and she cleaned it up solo in less than two hours and the changes that have occurred are proof positive that this method worked for her, and far more easily than Scientology of other varieties.

Conclusion

To conclude, Super Scio is excellent for what it is and the processes that are offered have been discovered, run and found workable by the author. His comments on the C of S and scientology in general are rational, well intentioned and balanced, unlike some other attacks on the subject. So if you feel this work is for you, then I don't think you will be in any way disappointed with it.

Further Comment on TROM
By Judith Methven, England

THE MAIN AIM of TROM <TROM is a self help book, full title The Resolution of Mind, written by Dennis Stephens. Judith Anderson is the worldwide distributor of TROM. Her address is, P.O. Box 212, Red Hill, Brisbane 4059, Queensland, Australia. Internet address: juditha@mcs.net.au. The cost is $A40, or 20 Sterling and includes postage. In the USA you can contact Flemming Funch at 17216 Saticoy Ave, #147, Van Nuys, CA 91406, USA. E-Mail address; ffunch@newciv.org . He charges US$40 incl. airmail. There is an Internet list concerned with TROM. To get on it write (Email) to Majordomo@newciv.org with the single message line: subscribe trom-l.> level 5 is to get you to understand why the other guy (or just MEST <MEST: Matter, Energy, Space and Time; the physical universe.> in general) is able to make life unpleasant for you. Now there can be a million diverse reasons for this.

But it all comes down to the same thing -- he is able to do it because you let him. This is the main understanding I have gained from TROM.

You are responsible for accepting other people's thoughts (or postulates). So you need to work out why you accepted them -- for that is why you ended up in unpleasant situations. From this you will know how to avoid them (which is not to say you can't handle them). Of course these understandings all hinge on having a good look at what your own postulates actually are.

So for me, using TROM resulted in a huge realisation to do with responsibility being the bottom line of case.

My gains

I took this (new) knowing out into life and used it, and was astounded at how so many things turned out differently -- and much, much better for everyone involved -- especially me.

The depth of that understanding was a direct result of working TROM.

Well, that was some two or three years ago.

Progressing through life, I've occassionally done other auditing, and also gone back to TROM.

A few weeks ago I ran some items through TROM. Didn't actually find any incidents, just ran feelings to do with affinity/power. There were unpleasant sensations of being indignant, annoyed, uncomfortable, which after some 45 minutes, just faded away. To be honest, it's difficult to remember exactly what did go on in the session -- but the feelings faded and it was boring to continue running the process. The result out in life seems to be that I no longer have much difficulties saying "no" (politely) to people, which makes life better for me.

Understanding is vital

Understanding the theory of TROM is essential for the running of level 5. Also, having a sound knowledge of the mechanism of how a game is played and how to stop it if you wish, is a very useful life tool.

In the beginning, TROM stirred things up and then took the heat out. Later on I've found that it doesn't necessarily stir things up but is often effective for dealing with items that have come up through life experience. It is a practical way of sorting out the game behind troubles.

TROM seems to be a very direct way of dealing with case. The drawback being that sometimes the gradient may be too steep. Also, some people find the gradient of the information given in the text difficult to get to grips with.

Spiritual Power
By Homer Wilson Smith, USA

HUBBARD MENTIONS THAT there are 3 universes of concern to the preclear on his journey up the Scientology Bridge.

You have had, have lost and can regain spiritual power in each of these three universes.

The first universe is your own personal universe.

The second universe is the personal universes of others.

The third universe is the common universe we all share called the physical universe.

Power in the three universes

Spiritual power in your own universe consists of things like being able to make and see 3 dimensional moving mockups clearly, have an accurate and facile memory, being aware of your basic purpose in life and having lots of free flowing energy to apply to it.

Spiritual powers involving other's universes would involve things like being able to see other people's pictures, telepathy, and the ability to project intention into others.

Spiritual powers over the physical universe would be things like the ability to exteriorize from your body, being able to move physical objects at will (telekinesis), being able to create and destroy physical universe objects at will (materialization and dematerialization). Also the ability to move forwards and backwards in time or even perpendicular to any given time line to another time line either already existing or one of your own creation.
 

Demonstration

Each of these powers is demonstrable to the person who has them and to the people that they effect.

Powers within one's own universe in general only effect oneself, and so would be most evident to oneself. However increased energy, imagination, etc. would be obvious to <%-5>others around you so it's not that there would be no evidence at all for these things if you had really attained them.

Powers between yourself and others' universes such as telepathy of course would be very obvious to those who could communicate this way, and would probably be verifiable to some extent by those who were looking on.

Powers between yourself and the external physical universe would of course be the easiest to verify to external onlookers.

These various powers return to the preclear pretty much in the order discussed here. First he brings order and control to his own universe, then, along with others who are doing the same, he begins to extend his control and intention outwards towards others and their personal universes. Lastly he regains ability over his involvement in the physical universe, and eventually over the physical universe itself.

None of this is religious dogma that you are expected to believe without evidence. It is all conjecture however, until you manage to do it yourself or can observe someone else doing it.

The underlying theory contains a rather clearly laid out route by which you co-created universes with other beings, complete with powers in all 3 universes, and then you lost those powers, took them away from yourself in fact as things went wrong. The theory also contains a rather thorough explanation of how to regain those powers to a point where you can have them or not have them at will.
 

Certainty

People who end up merely believing this stuff never manage to be able to do it, because belief is a violation of certainty, and certainty is the only workable truth. You don't have to know why some technique works at first, you only have to use it to see that it does, but if the technique works it can only be because it is based in truth, and if it is indeed based in truth, then one day when your sight is clear enough you will be able to see with certainty those truths that the technique was based upon.

Thus you are not asked to have faith, except perhaps to follow for a while in the steps of others who claim it all works. The evidence you seek should be forthcoming all along the path, you needn't wait to the very end before it all suddenly dawns on you. It helps to know the theory cold so that you can check each part of it out against your observed facts as you go along. Also you can derive your own techniques and test them out, and add to the body of knowledge that we are all using to regain mastery over, and exit from enslavement and imprisonment in this universe.

There is nothing wrong with being in this universe as long as you are here on your own self determinism. We are not trying to escape this universe never to come back, but to bring the light of day back in where before there was only darkness.

Thus we can turn our prison into a home.

That would be the final irony for our tormentors, now wouldn't it?

Copyright © 1993 Homer Wilson Smith

Desiderata
<desideratum, pl -ta, something desired or needed, World Book Dictionary>

GO PLACIDLY amid the noise and haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence.

As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons.

Speak your truth quietly and clearly, and listen to others, even the dull and ignorant -- they, too, have their story. Avoid loud and aggressive persons: they are vexations to the spirit.

If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain and bitter, for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.

Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans.

Keep interested in your own career -- however humble, it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.

Exercise caution in your business affairs, for the world is full of trickery.

But let this not blind you to what virtue there is -- many persons strive for high ideals, and everywhere life is full of heroism.

Be yourself.

Especially, do not feign affection, neither be cynical about love -- for, in the face of all aridity and disenchantment, it is as perennial as the grass.

Take kindly the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth.

Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortunes.

But do not distress yourself with imaginings: many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness; beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself.

You are a child of the universe. No less than the trees and the grass, you have a right to be here.

And, whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.

Therefore, be at peace with God, whatever you conceive him to be.

And, whatever your labors and aspirations in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace with your soul.

With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world.

Be careful. Strive to be happy.

Anon
<Sent in by Terry Scott: "I've heard this came from an inscription on a gravestone in New England.">

Sales Data

Subscription covers one calendar year, January to December.

Distributors

We have a chain of fully independent distributors, who receive subscriptions in their own currency, relay the magazine to you, and in most cases add their own locally produced material. These distributors charge less than the direct from Denmark line, and are fully responsible for the local material sent out.

Here are the distributors:

Scandinavia, Antony A Phillips Postbox 78 DK-2800 Lyngby Denmark

British Isles: 18 Anne Donaldson 28, Huxley Drive Bramhall Stockport, Cheshire SK7 2PH England

USA: Canada: Mexico: Sehlene LeCornu, 3440 Dodge Road, Guest House, Oxnard, California 93033
email to IVy@TheUS.com for subscriptions and sample copies, USA

Australia: Ray Harman 49/49 Leader Street Goodwood, South Australia 5034

Cartoons, pictures, relevant to Scientology or escapees from Scientology. If you have, or can produce any, let us know. We would like to make the magazine as varied (though clean) as possible.

We are also very interested in receiving your articles and letters. On editorial matters, write direct to the Editor at Box 78, DK-2800 Lyngby. Or Internet: ivy@post8.tele.dk or ivy@vais.net