International Viewpoints Issue 35
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
 |
International Viewpoints (IVy), Issue 35 - January 1998
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Another Look at Basics-# 16
CONNECTEDNESS AND HAVINGNESS
by Frank Gordon USA
The following quotations show how Ron related connectedness to havingness:
"Connectedness is the basic process on association with MEST. .. The command is "Get the idea
of making (indicated object) connect with you. "Havingness is a complicated Connectedness. Also a permissive
one." Tech Vol. III 163. "...Connectedness in any form is a very excellent process to run. But
note carefully that we have him get the idea of making the object connect with him. We never command the preclear
to get the other idea of connecting with the object. This is a no-games condition. This is what is wrong with the
preclear.
"The only thing that ever went wrong with the connectedness processes was the unreality factor. The auditor
would tell the preclear to get the idea of making that wall connect with him, when as a matter of fact the preclear
couldn't have gotten much of any kind of an idea of making anything connect with him.
"Thus .. "Do you think that there is anything anywhere that you could get to connect with you?"
III 189.
Connectedness basic to havingness
"The basic form of any havingness process is Connectedness." III 318.
"There may be some factors kicking around in Havingness which are not entirely understood and which are not
entirely conncted with Connectedness. However, it has been found that Connectedness will put a preclear in a condition
where he can eventually run Havingness. Therefore, Connectedness undercuts and possibly even overpasses Havingness
in general." III 191.
The importance of connectedness:
"It doesn't make sense." "What is this all about?" "What's going on?" "I
don't see the connection." "What has this got to do with anything?" These are are all observations
about the lack of a connection.
The trouble many have with mathematics, Algebra, e.g.; is that they do not have an opportunity to cognite that
equations express connections. Usually, as the price goes up, the number of sales go down. When rabbits are petted
while being fed, they have less coronary arteriosclerosis than those who are not petted.
All of science is based on finding valid and useful connections. This is not always easy. A classic example in
epidemiology was the decrease in typhoid fever as more telephones were installed. One might conclude that the best
way to avoid typhoid fever would be to have a telephone. But it so happens that the key factor is actually a parallel
technological advance; the installation of a pure water supply.
Learning
Learning is a kind of random exploration. Then one can finally say "This works but that doesn't."
To say, "This works this way." means "Now I recognize how this connects up, and so I can control
it and get the result I wish." Thus, the resulting cognition is the recognition of a connection. "Aha,
so that's why .."
An engram can be a problem if it compells you to connect with it. "Running it" (where run = operate)
reverses this. You make it connect with or disconnect from, you; and and thus regain control.
A recognition of the connectedness of something is also an increase in havingness. I can "have" a piece
of equipment like a computer, but not know its connections, i.e., how to operate it. Then it's no better than a
doorstop.
To really have something and retain a decisive control of it, one must recognize how it connects to and fits into
one's life in a desired way.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Magic of Static
By Lars Peter Schultz, Denmark
SCIENTOLOGISTS OR FORMER Scientologists seem to have different ideas regarding the term "thetan". Personally
I believe that a thetan is a life static that has no mass, no wave-length and no location in space and time; but
there are people who say that the thetan is some kind of connection between the static and the body. A bit surprising,
since the connection between the static and the body as far as I know is called the mind, so that we have these
3 subjects: Thetan -- Mind -- Body.
Operating
If scientologists or former ones have different ideas concerning the word "thetan", then they also
have different ideas concerning the idea of "operating thetan". This means that they have different goals
when they say that their goal is operating thetan. Some -- when they say operating thetan -- are talking about
"operating static", others are really talking about "operating mind". Both things are great
since it is an excellent idea to have good awareness and ability at a static level as well as at a mind level.
And if we include the third level "operating body" and decide to have good awareness and ability on all
3 subjects, then life can be very pleasant.
With teamwork
How can you know which level you are operating on? Very often you will probably know intuitively and feel fine
with that. If you have a good balance between the levels it makes sense to believe that all 3 levels can operate
simultaneously. As an example, let's take me writing this article. It's easy to see that there is a good "teamwork"
between the body and the mind. The body movements -- typing the words and looking with my eyes during the typing
-- are obviously the body working. All the arguments that I have written are the mind working. Where is the static?
Well, the static has no location in space and time, but this indicates that it has another kind of "location"
which is beyond physical terms. With this in mind we'd better abandon trying to tell where it is. We can do something
else, we can sense the static. I think that the static level of this article is some kind of individual essence
that shines through the words when you read them and thus you can sense it. It is individual because I am an individual
life static. If you wrote an article, the words would radiate a different essence and thus give another experience
for the reader.
Clarification of reality
Since there are different opinions regarding the word "thetan", let's do what we all have been taught
to do, look up the word in a dictionary, in this case the Tech Dictionary. When we do that we will soon
realize that the Tech Dictionary has a whole row of definitions and some of the definitions seem to be in
conflict. One of the definitions says that thetan means "the awareness of awareness unit, which has all potentialities
but no mass, no wave-length and no location". This is clearly the life static. Another definition says
that thetan means "the being who is the individual and who handles and lives in the body". This definition
says that the thetan does have a location in space -- in the body -- so what do we believe?
Personally I have decided to regard the definitions in the Tech Dictionary as indicating different possible
levels of consciousness thus suggesting that one can experience those levels (at least theoretically). One could
also say that they suggest different possible states of mind and these suggestions may or may not help one find
truth and personal reality concerning life.
Unique creativity
An interesting point is that the Tech Dictionary in several of the definitions states that thetan means
the individual. "Individual" means something unique, something with its own quality and that makes it
a bit hard for any person to fit any definition 100%. Because of this you could decide
that there is a consciousness level called the level of your own personal quality. You could "operate"
from that level making very personal definitions of the word "thetan". It could result in amazing definitions.
Here are 7 such individual definitions. You could also call them 7 remarkable postulates or 7 creative catchy suggestions
of individual life concerns, derived from the enchanted library of the magic masters of poetry, art and joy. So
here we go:
1. Weirdness and magic sounds of missing locations.
2. Intuitive power generator.
3. One's higher greatness.
4. Behind, above, beside, underneath or elsewhere -- depending on what it thinks itself -- we have the real realness
that really makes things real.
5. The uniqueness of oneself.
6. Ability unit.
7. Sooth saying source soul.
Having a heart
Until now this article has only discussed those 3 levels called "thetan -- mind -- body". There is
a fourth level called "having a heart". If you understand the importance of that level and "operate
with it" then it is like knowing a spice that gives the meal a special touch of excitement.
Sometimes people don't dare to open their hearts for some reason or another, but it can be done gradually with
a gentle approach. "Operating having a heart" is a nice and powerful kind of magic.
Concluding poetically
And thus we have plenty of excellent opportunities to enjoy the richness and warmth from the sparkling feelings
of life.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Letter to the Editor:
About Knowledgism
Dear Ant,
RENÉE AND I have just arrived back from the USA and Alan Walter's Knowledgism group in Dallas. This time
Renée got her codes (she is codée nr. 156 -- I became number 148 in August).
Renée is very pleased with her codes, just as I was when I came back in August. Alan Walter has done a fantastic
job in researching "the GPM bank" and thus finding "the Codes" and developing the technology
to deliver these codes.
I did read the article "Knowledgism -- A Technology for the 21st Century" (see page 8. Ed.). It
gives a very good picture about the whole thing as I have "U" it. Not much to add, except I would prefer
to write it in a way that is easier for SCNists to "U".
The fantastic break through in processing technology that Alan has done by developing the Codes is really something.
Both René and I admire him for this.
When Alan worked on the "GPM-project" under LRH in the early sixties there were both successful actions
taken and failures. Eventually Hubbard decided to stop the "GPM-project" and go for building the Scn
bridge". But Alan did not agree. He continued to solo-process himself as well as co-processing with others.
After more than 30 years, in April 1994, he eventually grasped the importance of the Codes, and developed the processes
which allow others to discover their Codes. And he opened his center in Dallas, Texas, delivering the codes. Since
then more than 150 individuals have had their codes located.
It is not possible to inform a person who has not had their codes rehabilitated what it is all about, but it is
very much like Charlie Dunn says in his article (referring to what Alan Walter says): "The codes are the reason
for you to exist as a live thetan. Knowing this, it is possible to straighten out your life as a thetan. Just like
in the teachings of Dharma -- learning the laws of life + your meaning of life".
I strongly recommend old time Scnists to go to Dallas for their codes. The cost of the codes course is presently
$3,500 and that includes 10 hours of processing. The Knowledgism group has good processors. Colin Mills is delivering
the set-up and "polishing up" after the codes. Eric Wolery delivers the codes. Both are excellent and
know their business.
Todde Salén, Sweden
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Transition and Chaos
By Allen Hacker, USA
(This article first appeared on Allen's Internet forum/list Accept-l on 16th September 1997.
For Internet users, the home page is: http://www.asc.org
and you can get onto the Accept-l list by writing to: Accept-L-request@lists.best.com
with the single word subscribe on the first subject line (no signature, subject or anything else needed).)
SOME THOUGHTS on change:
Any two apparencies of order are connected by an apparent chaos.
An apparency, in this case, is such because it is a mere subset of perceptions from among all possible (and available)
perceptions. We select out from all possibilities only those made most probable by our opinions as to where we
perceive ourselves to be in the moment, and build from them our next moment.
When we are comfortable with where we are and make more of the same, we have an apparent order. This is where we
believe we understand what we have created into our experience well enough so that we can deal with it without
too much effort.
When we enter into a period within which we are uncertain of our details or situations, we lose or have already
lost our anchors to the extent that an increased degree of randomness enters into our stream of experience. We
find ourselves selecting into experience mildly or largely disrelated possibilities, and feel ourselves sliding
into a disintegrating sense of continuity. We usually call this "chaos" in the old, unhappy, definition
of the word.
The new, mathematical definition of chaos is functionally invisible to nearly everyone. However, it can be experienced
and even applied to creating desirable futures. But that's another topic.
The topic at hand, that transitions between orders, or systems, appear as chaotic, leads to an explanation of certain
personal and social phenomena.
Those who are terrified of chaos can be expected to strive to prevent all changes. They see change as destructive
to their worlds, and they take that with the same seriousness as death. The most resistive of such people will
be those who share both a vested interest in the status quo and a complete lack of vision regarding the coming
new order. And why shouldn't they resist what will take from them everything they have and deliver them into oblivion?
Too often those who favor the change will try to reason with resistance by explaining the benefits. This usually
won't work because there is the other item of vested interest to be dealt with as well. It can be as innocuous
as defending a comfort zone or as vicious as maintaining a destructive financial or enslaving power base.
Still, one should not challenge these people, or rise to their challenges; one should invent neutral questions
that point toward potential losses and benefits, toward fear and understanding, and make of the conversation something
that will benefit even an insane attacker. Make of it a clearing session. And if that doesn't work (that's up to
the other guy), simply ignore him.
Handling "reactionaries"
To those who cherish the dying order, the transition looks like chaos approaching. Thus they resist it.
To those who cherish the dawning order, the transition looks like chaos fading. So they enthusiastically make a
project of getting through it as quickly as possible.
And there's the source of conflict in most cases. Somebody with something to lose, even if it's just a sense of
location, being confronted with somebody with something to gain by destroying an old world in the process of building
a new one. We fall into the conflict if we forget or do not realize that the old world fading under our intention
is somebody's home.
If we think of a flamer and a heckler in this light, we'll deal with them as pre-emptively defensive (See
IVy 32, page 6.) people who are trying to stop something they don't understand, or are trying to
preserve something they fear losing, or both. Of course we must remember the rule: hecklers are not to be in control
of the conversation.
When someone asks a question, answer it if it makes sense to do so, even if it's sarcastic or a trap: you can always
recast it before responding. When someone accuses, or tries to put you on the defensive personally or professionally,
ignore it. And when someone pushes the "must-communicate" button, let him lose by showing that you are
not controlled that way: ignore it, too.
Enlightenment is not about making others feel good. How they feel is their responsibility, just as how each of
us feels is our own. We should not commit antagonistic acts that will decrease their happiness, but neither should
we inhibit our constructive impulse in a misguided effort to protect others falsely.
Enlightenment leads to certain abandonments. This is necessarily so: to build something new, something better,
one must let go of, even dismantle, something old. Don't be surprised, however, if its proprietors object.
Ultimately, it's a matter of perspective.
Are we entering into a period of chaos? If so, expect discomfort and opposition, and deal with it from your profession
rather than your self.
Or are we exiting from a period of chaos? If so, don't ask permission. Just do it!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Knowledgism -- A Technology for the 21st Century
(This article is taken in the main from the Internet Home Page of Knowledgism.)
By Charlie Dunn, USA
THIS IS A FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) -- or, at least, an attempt to provide some answers to frequently asked
questions from participants in our Discussion Group.
First, a "re-cap" of our "Mission Statement" from our "Netiquette" file:
The Knowledgism Discussion Group (On Internet) is designed for you and others who want to continue their pursuit
of expansion of self, who have the goals to come together in open discussion. Appropriate topics for discussion
are: The handling of...
* Abuse
* Unwanted conditions
* Upsets
* Failure to continue progressing upward
* Anything which limits your prosperity, success and happiness.
This is a World Wide forum for increasing Truth and Knowledge.
In the Technology of Knowledgism, we have made momentous technical breakthroughs on the subject of Abuse, and it
is clear that there is an "addiction to abuse on this planet". One of our goals will be to assist individuals
in getting over that addiction. We certainly will not add to it or to allow anyone else to do so.
*****
Answers to frequently asked questions:
Who is Alan Walter?
For their book 21st Century Leadership, authors Lynne Joy McFarland, Larry E. Senn, and John R. Childress,
chose Alan C. Walter as one of America's Top 100 Leaders -- along with Lee Iacocca, H. Ross Perot, Bill Gates and
others. The writers quote Mr. Walter's viewpoints about what will be required of future leaders. Their book is
recommended reading. It is available in major bookstores.
Alan C. Walter is recognized as one of America's top leaders because of his far-reaching accomplishments, which
include his leading-edge research into Human Potential, and his ability to lead and train others to be Champions
in their chosen fields.
Alan was born in London, and was a small boy there during World War II while German bombs were falling. While still
very young, he lived briefly in Wales, and then, finally, his family moved to Australia, where Alan grew up.
Success at an early age
As early as the age of 13, Alan found he could not conform to the existing paradigm. He left the public school
system because he realized he was being taught that he couldn't do things, not that he could. He began a life long
quest for knowledge through self-education and experience. Even at that early age, he demonstrated entrepreneurial
abilities, taking his savings of $30 and buying a horse and some dogs in order to work as a drover in the Outback
of Australia. Soon, the young man was making more money in a day than his father earned in a week.
At the age of 19, with no experience, Alan decided he wanted to become a football player. Within 2 years, he became
a professional, and ultimately became a top Champion on the National Australian Football scene. At the same time,
he began building a national sales organization that quickly grew to over 400 sales people.
Over the years, Alan has experienced great success in business, becoming a self-made millionaire. All the while,
his continuing interest has been in the field of human potential. Since 1964, he has worked with over 250,000 people,
many in Fortune 500 companies, training them to be Champions in their chosen fields. His techniques are known for
being the most advanced anywhere.
He has written a number of books, including The Secrets To Increasing Your Power; Wealth And Happiness,
or How To Unleash The Champion Hidden Within You; The Paradigm Matrix -- Its Effects On Future
Prosperity And Human Events; and Gods In Disguise.
While continuing his research, he also conducts special training programs based on his discoveries.
Alan has been one of the most successful operators of human potential centers in the world. He was responsible
for opening 30 Scientology franchies in major cities, many of which became organizations.
Years ago, when Alan first read about the state of "clear" in the book, Dianetics, he decided
that the abilities described in the book were attainable. His discoveries, as of now, seem to indicate that an
individual's potential is even much greater than originally thought; in fact, there seems to be no limit to human
potential. "Human potential", of course, can be better understood as "Spiritual Potential".
That's where the true advancement begins.
The Ascension Experience
What makes Knowledgism different from all the other enhancement programs? The answer: It's effectiveness!
For example, this is the only technology that can handle the Ascension Experience Phenomena.
It is not at all unusual, in various practices, for an individual to suddenly feel "Empowered". At such
a time, the being feels absolutely wonderful. This state has been described by various terms. Some label it "Cosmic
Consciousness", others would call it a "Giant Key-Out". Still others may describe it as "Going
Up The Pole". It is a big blow-out -- a huge win in which the being feels all powerful.
Alan Walter writes about it in his book Gods In Disguise:
Much, much more is being uncovered as the research into the ascension experience phenomena gains pace. It has
been found that when someone is triggered into an ascension experience, vast changes take place spiritually, mentally,
in mind shifts, in the body, and in the physical universe.
At the time of the ascension experience, the being has a massive realization of his actual potential. He becomes
huge and very, very causative -- empowered. He knows he can succeed at anything, and he gets into action. This
is where the booby trap begins.
In his book, Alan goes on to describe the various phases of such an experience. The good news is that it feels
wonderful, and that the individual gains a sense of his own power, with a strong sense of immortality. The bad
news is that the state is often short-lived, and it may likely bring on an aftermath of negative consequences.
If you have known anyone who had great gains, only to "crash in flames" later, you have observed this
phenomenon.
Someone who had been in an earlier practice recently wrote:
I've had some superb processing; slowly, gradually but inevitably the results fade away and actually I'm at
a new low point. The phrase, "the bigger they are the harder they fall" applies here. I've attained phenomenal
ascension states with expanded awareness and ability but in 6 months feel like I'm worse off than before the processing.
It's easier to fall from 10 feet than 1,000 feet!
That's the way it used to be. Fortunately, Alan has discovered the reason for the phenomenon -- and the remedy
for it. There is now a steady stream of individuals from other practices coming to the Advanced Leadership Center
to not only have the negative consequences from earlier processing repaired, but to realize dramatic new gains.
The Codes
Another way Knowledgism is different is the momentous discovery of "The Codes".
The discovery of The Codes has put to rest, once and for all, the question of whether every individual should be
run on the same processes. The answer is "no".
It has been discovered that each individual has unique "Codes" which the being assumed prior to entering
the physical universe. These "Codes" are the individual's personal agenda. They are unique to the being.
When your writer first asked Alan to explain the nature of the codes, Alan made a simple, direct statement: "They
are your reason for living", he said.
The discovery of the Codes was a tremendous breakthrough, because that meant that each being has to have the technology
programmed specifically for him. The processes have to fit against the person's code. That means each case is a
complete unit unto itself. It is accurate to state that, for the first time, when a being finds his own Codes,
he will run on his own case -- not some other imagined case. This, of course, saves a lot of hours of processing,
because, as Alan discovered, an individual can run on someone else's case for a very long time.
Individuals who have regained their "Codes" and had training, express extreme satisfaction. The famous
painter, Roy Kerswill, recalls writing to Alan before he came to Dallas for services:
Alan, I hope you will not fail us. I know there is a way out. You claim to have it. So also did earlier practices,
and they betrayed us. I want you to know we shall not forgive you if you betray us. Betrayal after trust is one
of the most devastating traps into which one can fall.
Roy then writes of his experiences that followed:
Then I paid my money and arrived in Dallas. On the second day of my work here, I obtained that which I sought.
I can tell you that what Alan has claimed he provides is indeed here for you to obtain and experience. It's yours!
Go for it! Whatever it takes for you to obtain this, it is worth it and I must tell you it is all you dared to
wish for, hoped for, or expected.
The files at the Advanced Leadership Center in Dallas are packed with success stories that express similar enthusiasm.
Handling abuse
The news about a recent breakthrough was virtually "hot off the press" in early 1996. That discovery
by Alan has to do with the terrible technical ramifications of abuse.
He wrote in a bulletin on January 24, 1996:
I have been responsible for the training and processing of hundreds of thousands of people over the last 45
years. This quantity of time and people has given me a unique and very experienced view of cases, plus the human
manifestations of regained abilities, awarenesses, power, strength and cleverness caused by these processes and
training exercises.
I have also experienced first hand all those processes and exercises on myself. These procedures must work
on me as well as my staff, clients and students.
The discovery of the effects of abuse is a momentous event, as it unlocks a huge area of cases that have
never previously been properly handled.
The action of an abuser in creating and introducing an unwanted want into your time and space cause
your Spiritual, Mental and Body machinery to malfunction.
Alan provides the following definition:
Abuse is getting something you don't want, or being stopped from getting something you do want.
Think about it. Anytime you have had something shoved onto you that you didn't want, there is a degree of abuse.
Anytime you have failed to get what you wanted, that also could be abuse.
Using the above definition, that makes us all abusers, doesn't it?
Obviously, not every time an individual receives something he didn't want does it leave a mark. If the spiritual
being is in good shape at the time, he just shoves the effect away -- in essence, nullifying it.
But what about when he shoves back and it doesn't go away. What if it overwhelms him a bit and he really fights
back? Well... he gets stuck with it. Physically and telepathically.
There is a terrible contagion of abuse on this planet. The abused become the abusers, who then abuse others, who
then become abusers and abuse others, ad infinitum.
Abuse has become a significant topic in the public mind. When we recently checked on the Internet's World
Wide Web, we found 23,019 documents dealing with Abuse. But the most catastrophic kind of abuse was not even noticed.
Abuse occurs on Physical, Mental, and Spiritual levels. In each of these levels, there is a form of subtle abuse
-- which is the most damaging of all.
On a Mental Level, the subtle abuse is inflicted to the mind by misprogramming and pain done in an underhanded,
subtle way. Examples are drugs, alcohol, false or destructive teachings, friends lying, cheating, betraying,
giving false and wrong data.
On a Spiritual Level, the subtle abuse will occur in such conditions as having your creations,destroyed
by betrayal and treachery, being betrayed by a loved one; loving someone who is dishonest and corrupt; not maintaining
your spirituality by making your mind, body, identity -- or material objects -- more important than you; playing
small non-spiritual games, denying the vast scope of your spiritual powers; not living up to your codes, virtues,
principles and honor, etc.
Real life
There is a chronic addiction to abuse on planet Earth. So much so that the most harmful kind of abuse -- the
insidious kind -- goes virtually unnoticed.
We all carry the marks of abuse.
The reason "abuse" doesn't resolve in the usual way that other stress items do, is that, since the abuse
was originally created by someone else, the individual can't merely glance at it and make it disappear. The Knowledgism
Abuse Handling Technology is designed to resolve that difficulty.
The effects of cults and cultures
There has been another major technical breakthrough in 1997. It deals with the "molding" that we have
received from cults and cultures in which we've been involved.
Alan wrote:
"There is a very deadly trap that all of us have been in at one time or another. That trap is the identity
we wear.
"What makes it so deadly is the fact that it is created by outside forces -- by our parents, our schools,
our friends, the culture we live in. All these combined create and mold a being into a conforming, controllable
identity. They program you how to think, how to be, how to operate, how to act, what is acceptable or not, what
level of income is OK, what it is OK to live in, what is OK for you to own, what you should be willing to be responsible
for, etc., etc."
The latest technical breakthrough deals with how to handle the effects of Cults and Cultures.
The major areas
Four major areas have been addressed in this article: The Ascension Experience Phenomenon, The Codes, our Abuse
Technology, and the handling of Synthetic Identities created by Cults and Cultures. This information is what we
at the Advanced leadership Center consider to be very important for anyone who has begun the spiritual path as
many of us have.
There is one other area that is extremely significant. It is described in a lecture by Alan entitled "Miracles
and Magic". In that lecture, Alan describes the liabilities of treating the spiritual beings in an individual's
space as liabilities, and seeking to get rid of them. That action can produce severe case difficulties. For example,
it would be insane to seek to drive away a Guardian Angel, wouldn't it? The tape recording of Alan's lecture is
available from the Center.
For more information
We invite your questions. If you have access to the Internet, our web page can provide a great deal of very
useful information -- including some actual processes that you can use with another to greatly enhance the quality
of life.
We are also offering IVy readers a free tape of a recent lecture by Alan on the subject of Cults and Cultures.
If you would like a copy just write or send e-mail to me (Charlie Dunn) at the address below.
The Advanced Leadership Center, 3330 Earhart Drive, Suite 213, Dallas, TX 75006.
e-mail leader@knowledgism.com
Web Page: www.knowledgism.com
972-404-8125 (USA) FAX: 972-404-8821 (USA)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Forgiveness & Love in Christianity & Scientology
by Britta Burtles, England
ALL GREAT RELIGIONS, including Christianity, are forerunners of Scientology. Let us first look at forgiveness in
Christianity. Jesus said, "Turn the other cheek" and "Let whoever is without sin, throw the first
stone". He also told us to "Love your neighbour like yourself" and to "Love your enemy".
We know Christ was all for forgiveness and against punishment and revenge. And yet, -- however much I respect and
admire Jesus and his enormous positive impact upon the world, and the great help he has given and is still giving
to many millions, he was not able to tell us how to get rid of hate, hurt, anger and resentment. He could only
advise us to suppress such feelings and to pretend they were not there. In other words, to not-is and not to confront
them. Christ could not give us a technology which would enable us to eradicate negative, potentially destructive
feelings.
Some time later L. Ron Hubbard appeared and taught us that "the way out is the way through". One of his
key words was confront. He also told us about the Overt/Motivator Sequence, responsibility, cognitions, and about
as-is-ing the charge linked to incidents.
Two Parts
Forgiveness has two parts:
1. The self-determined decision to forgive. Meaning: not to blame any more and not to seek justice, let
alone revenge. This in turn means accepting and taking responsibility for what happened. I think that is also what
Jesus meant with "Turn the other cheek". He could have said: "Tolerate, bear and understand what
has happened. Don't give in to the physical universe's demand to obey the law of Cause and Effect. This law of
force invites retaliation, and asks for a tooth for a tooth in a never ending circle and escalation of violence
and strife."
Hubbard talked and wrote a great deal about the overt/motivator sequence. Even though he did not use the precise
word "forgiveness", I consider, taking full responsibility for both sides of the overt/motivator sequence
is synonymous with forgiving.
2. Eradicating the hurt, resentment and other misemotions connected with both sides of the overt/motivator
sequence. This means removing, as-is-ing all the charge linked to an event. After this, the person will probably
have a cognition. He will also realize that he no longer has any mental mass in that area, but instead, much more
space in which to operate. He will also have more free attention units to create his present and to set up his
future. Moreover, he will discover with relief, that he has fully forgiven, and realize with joy, that he now feels
more affinity -- maybe even love -- for the people involved.
In his technology and other writing, LRH has dealt extensively with all these aspects of forgiveness.
Self-forgiveness
The above applies to self-forgiveness too. However, if I have harmed a person in some way, it is really not
up to me to forgive myself. I have to tell the person what I have done, thus taking responsibility for my action,
and ask him to forgive me. Then I follow it up by repairing the damage I have caused. We can call this "putting
in the missing flow" or "completing the exchange". When I have done that, and the person I harmed
has forgiven me, I will most probably be able to forgive myself too. But if not, then I have either not yet confronted
some part of the situation or the terminals involved, or there are earlier similar incidents which need handling.
The sole purpose and aim of forgiving is to end a cycle of action, both for the person I have harmed and for myself.
Love
Hubbard looked at forgiveness from another angle as well. In his article "What is Greatness?"' he
says: "Forgiveness is a lower level action and is rather censorious". I understand what he means: LRH
is here looking at forgiveness from the standpoint of love and recommends one should "...continue to love
one's fellows despite all reasons he should not". -- Looking from that high vantage point, forgiveness is
not only censorious, but even condescending, and thus "a lower level of action". It is as if Ron was
saying: "Don't lower your level of love by allowing resentment to pollute it". And if I have permitted
resentment to get hold of me and reduce my love, I need some form of release from it, which is achieved with the
relevant parts of Hubbard's auditing technology.
Nothing to forgive
Hubbard says: "Justice, mercy, forgiveness, all are unimportant beside the ability not to change [one's
love] because of provocation or demands to do so". This is the high moral ground Christ, too, occupied and
talked from; hence his edict: "Love your enemy" rather than: "Forgive your enemy". So, love
rather than forgiveness: To high an ideal for most of us lesser mortals, but certainly one worth striving for.
When 1. all the charge has been removed, 2. through studying Ron's tech one understands what and
why something happened, and 3. one can accept full responsibility for an incident, then the forgiving occurs automatically
and restores the love, which was never destroyed, but can apparently vanish when it is covered and hidden by charge,
MUs and non-confront.
Thus, forgiving is not really something one does, but something that happens after properly carrying out the above
three steps. One feels and realizes it with relief and delight. If not, then one or all of the above three steps
are incomplete.
Ron talks of the love that does not need to forgive, as it did not sink down into resentment. I believe Jesus would
agree with this attitude, and say similar things, if he lived among us today. He did not concern himself with forgiveness
as much as with love. -- With love intact, there is nothing to forgive. Christ talked of love and practiced love.
We can say, he embodied love.
Confusion?
LRH was a practical man, and so he said: "One must act, one must preserve order and decency, but one need
not hate or seek vengeance", and "Man is basically good but can act badly", as well as "Happiness
and strength endure only in the absence of hate".
In his article "Forgiveness" in IVy 7, Mark Jones says: "He [LRH] must have had a confusion
in this area,..." I do not believe that Ron had a confusion there. Maybe he considered, rightly or wrongly,
he had to act to "preserve order and decency". This does not necessarily mean, however, that he hated
or even resented. But if he did, then it just proves, that, despite being a genius and visionary, he was still
human and imperfect. I know from experience that, although aware of a good theory, one is not necessarily able
to put it into practice all the time.
In time, Ron's shortcomings will be forgotten by society and forgiven by those who were not able to stay at the
high level of love. Eventually these will get their charge in that area properly handled. Then they will find the
strength to take full responsibility for what happened to reduce their love. As a result they will not only understand
Ron, but also fully appreciate who he was and what he did for Mankind.
There are probably many instances where people think LRH had a confusion. Like with other great thinkers, his views
and visions reached ahead of his time, and were misunderstood by many. The above is just one example of that phenomenon.
I also think, Hubbard being misduplicated, misinterpreted and misunderstood, is part of the reason why the CofS
developed the way it did, and why some Independents levelled harsh criticism at Ron. Many of their views are based
on M/Us and kept in place by unhandled resentment.
Regain Abilities
During our existence in this physical universe, we have manoeuvered ourselves, through ignorance, into a pretty
low state. That is why we cannot always respond to a request to forgive with a simple "Yes, of course!"
and just do it, however much we might want to, and however plausible and good the reasons are why we should.
At present, we can neither postulate ourselves out of that state, nor "jump over our own shadow" into
higher ones. But we can, step by step, with the tools Ron left us, and with a lot of practice, gradually regain
many of the abilities that are in us already. One of them is the skill to forgive and, further up the scale, the
art to keep our love in the first place, as Christ and Hubbard suggested.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ron Invents a Game
By Phil Spickler, USA.
HELLO -- HERE'S CHAPTER 1 (The introduction to this series is in IVy 34, page 9),
entitled Ron Invents a Game. The title could be the chapter, since most of the folks that might be interested in
this chapter know just what is meant by the term "game." Nevertheless, any hope of an audience is most
inspiring so here I go.
The historic Ron: "All games are aberrative; some are fun." So what happens when you take the spirit
of play and start a game with a goal at its beginning? Well, goals do find their oppose and after awhile, with
the help of time, things can get serious, solid and aberrative. The opposing forces or groups eventually end up
looking like what they initially opposed, and we finally end up with a friendly Internal Revenue Service and a
very scary menacing Church, just as an example of what happens if you play serious games with crazy groups.
So finally in the 60's Ron could write in his policy letter "Keeping Scientology Working," "This
(Scientology) is a deadly serious business." This from the laughing redhead of the early 1950's who showed
us the Dianetic EP of great laughter as erasure and Truth came in.
Initially the idea was to be 3 feet behind the planet's and its peoples' heads, or from a pan-determined view of
our dynamics seek to help bring about a more ideal civilization just for the fun of it, just for kicks. However
and alas, a planet like ours is very tempting when it comes to games, and it's easy to get into opponents and fighting
and also to become pretty aberrated along the way.
Some of us, after awhile, chose not to play the "later Ron's" game, and left the big team, philosophically
much richer and in some cases sadder but wiser, and went off to have some fun without goaling the conquest of Earth
or the universe. My salute to the fun lovers: they are the real thing!
A partial quote from Stanza 29 of the Tao Te Ching of Lao Tsu: "Do you think you can take over the
universe and improve it? I do not believe it can be done!"
P.S. Per Buddha: suffering, old age, sickness and death can, in some cases, contribute to loss of laughter!
Chapter II is Fun and Play With Ron in the 50's.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Editorial Secrets
Nobody but Thom and Ingeborg are allowed in IVy's editorial office. The reason is very simple. Somehow we
get a fairly reasonable magazine of 48 pages out to subscribers reasonably on time, and all looks well.. Until
you look in the editorial offices and see the piles of unfinished work, the mess! I blush. I cringe if someone
approaches the office. This despite knowing much Scn admin data.
Until recently.
I read the part of Ray Kemp's Management without Ulcers which dealt with "The Org Product System".
Light, understanding and relief. No guilt, and a way to handle.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Envy
By Gregory Mitchell, Denmark
This Essay formed part of Gregory's Mental Development "Wake Up" Course which was level II in his
scheme. For further data you are referred to his article on "The Importance of Drills" (IVy 11, page
9), and "Coaching Listening Skills" (IVy 31, page 22). Ed
HERE WE ARE dealing with a group phenomenon which blocks progress, wherever it occurs, and it will occur
in any system where, of necessity, there has to be some hierarchy. On the Course, there are students who are either
beginners, intermediate or senior -- depending on when they started, and always, some people will be better at
particular exercises than others, because that is the current state of their mental development. People are, in
certain ways, unequal. Life would be very boring were that not so!
A student who cannot accept his present, natural place in the hierarchy will not be able to learn, improve and
change. His attention and concentration will be introverted onto grief, anger and hostility as he energetically
resists the reality of his position. It may be especially difficult when a person comes from a position of status
in his business affairs to the position of beginner-student, and finds that, in Mental Development, he must, like
every other student, start at the bottom. But the paradox is that, if he can let go of any thoughts and feelings
of resentment, he will progress to a higher status quickly, as his mind will also be able to let go of those past
belief-systems he has held in place to boost self-esteem.
Excesses of inappropriate emotions, like envy, greed, anger and apathy, result in a reduction of consciousness,
because these are narrowly self-centred pursuits, conflicting with a proper appreciation of the present situation
and the long-term consequences. When a person becomes extroverted out of these self-defeating phenomena, he regains
a broader awareness, interest in objective data, intellectual curiosity and interest in wider fields of activity.
Root
The root of envy and jealousy is often an irrational belief in one's personal divinity, which places the
individual above all ethical constraints and leads to a wish to recreate the Universe according to his own plan.
This divorces a person from reality, because he will disregard anything that does not conform to his own pet theories.
Envy is directed at anyone who seems to be superior in ability to himself and who disrupts his cosy sense of inherent
godliness (if, as so often, that depends on superiority). This is of course quite separate from a rational sense
of personal divinity, in which others are perceived to have their own spiritual presence.
Increased understanding brings about an awareness of the equality of action and reaction. "As you give,
so shall you receive'" This law is actually based on what the individual needs to learn from life and
determines why we are here in our present situation. We can only escape it by accepting the rhythm of giving in
order to receive' and make progress. Envy disrupts normal progress because it asks to receive more than is our
due. It sees the success of others as unfair and such a student will often complain of unfairness and prejudice
against them -- when the responsibility lies with themselves.
An envious person must always be right and doesn't want to see evidence of his own mistakes. It's a case of "I'm
OK, you're not OK". There will be an underlying arrogance in his or her attitude; a wish to denigrate
anyone and anything.
The envious student will also seek to subtly sabotage and undermine both the authority of the supervisor
and the performance of other students. This can manifest in 'accidents' which damage clothes, equipment or even
another student! The envious student will have a cruel sense of humour when 'accidents' occur. The twinning scheme
has great over-riding power here, insisting on the ethic of positive co-operation between students.
The envious student will tend to waste time on non-essentials and impede the progress of the course. They will
exhibit manic excitement at times -- centred on activities which allow them to escape reality, such as childish
hobbies.
Envy also results in the destruction of relationships, especially when the partner has achieved a significantly
better appreciation of the realities of a situation. Friendships will break up because the envious person cannot
accept their friend's success. The envious student will become increasingly alienated from the rest of the class,
because of the effect of all the foregoing characteristics and anyone so alienated should be referred for individual
analysis to help overcome this problem.
The condition is not irreparable since, in many cases, the envy against others may be a subconscious 'projection'
or defence-mechanism, which can be resolved by counselling, to find the reason why this defence was originally
thought necessary. The techniques of Mental Development, in themselves, should help to discharge envy by a recognition
that the student can work effectively for the betterment of his Twin and the Group, and be valiant for Truth.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Three Dimensional Tone Scale
By Ken Renshaw, USA
I PRESUME ALL of the readers are familiar with the idea of the tone scale, a sequence of emotional states going
from near death, through apathy, anger, conservatism etc. to unnamed states above serenity. It is usually considered
a one-dimensional scale. A goal in processing is making people able to experience the higher states and have the
freedom to move up and down the scale freely.
The two dimensional tone scale
Some years ago I decided the scale could be thought of as two-dimensional, like a soccer field. The tone scale
ran along the length of the field and the sideways dimension was an aesthetic dimension. Every emotion has a "heavy"
version near one sideline and various aesthetic versions spread across the field.
One time I was at a Holistic Health Conference in San Diego, California. There were about a thousand attendees,
representing many religious and health viewpoints. I talked to a young girl who was wearing a white muslin dress,
her blond hair was braided and she appeared to be trying to look like a member of an eastern religious sect. She
was a puzzle to me. Her voice and demeanor indicated to me she was in Apathy on the tone scale. However, she didn't
seem to be in a bad state. She seemed content to sit and contemplate the beauty of a single flower for hours. I
later saw her guru talking to his group. He seemed to be in apathy. In a flat voice he said, "Isn't it wonderful
we can all be here together. Let's all sit and meditate on this mystical symbol displayed at the front of the gathering."
They all did for an hour. Their meditation seemed to move them to an aesthetic state of apathy.
I realized that every tone has an aesthetic dimension.
(I don't mean to imply that all meditation is apathy. I only mean to say that meditation by apathetic people produces
an aesthetic form of apathy.)
A friend asked me to write a love song. I wondered what made a love song a love song. I analyzed many popular love
songs. Most seemed to be about the loss of love, "I am so sad since I lost you...." "I would die
if I ever lost you...." The movies that are considered great love stories are about the loss of love: lovers
going away, dying, sacrificing love for responsibility. Romeo and Juliet, and Bridges of Madison County
are examples. I decided "Love" in this limited popular sense is an aesthetic form of grief.
I analyzed other music. Most successful popular music falls near the aesthetic form of conservatism. I classify
the Beatles music as conservative. A lot of heavy metal seems to be aesthetic Anger or Apathy.
Many classical works are in only one tone level. Tchaikovsky was mostly in grief. Many of his melodies were made
into popular "Love songs." Mozart was usually in enthusiasm or playing games. Bach was in serenity most
of the time. Beethoven's Third Symphony is a highly aesthetic version of anger. I am sure there could be a lot
of debates on whose music is where. Conductors do not agree on the emotionality of music and how it should be performed.
I have heard a Beethoven concerto played sweetly by a gay pianist. I do not claim to be a music authority: I only
point out that performances convey the aesthetic emotionality of the composer or performer.
In my experience, the wins I had in processing seemed to boot me out to a highly aesthetic version of my current
tone level or perhaps to the aesthetic version of a higher tone.
I have a friend who seems to be very high on the tone scale. He has taken up transcendental meditation. He describes
the state he achieves in meditation as a very aesthetic form of serenity. I am sure there is more to it than that.
Whatever it is, it happens at that part of the emotional/aesthetic soccer field.
I have another friend I call a "win junkie." He buys a lot of processing and gets to a big "win."
He goes around in that aesthetic state for a while and then returns to his normal tone. A couple of months later
something happens to make him go down-tone. He saves up his money and then goes and buys another "win."
Is this all there is?
Eventually, I decided I didn't need to make any more trips to Florida for processing. I was emotionally where
I wanted to be. I had the emotional freedom I set out to obtain.
For a while I tried the next-greatest processes that were invented by various people. I found I still ended up
in the emotion/aesthetic playing field. Buying "wins" gets old after a while.
However, the general form of my life hadn't changed much. I still lived in the same house, drove the same car,
went to work at the same place, had the same job, had the same friends. I still was single, hunting. If asked,
casual friends or neighbors would say I was happier but not much had changed in my life.
I observed that by the consensus definition, success didn't have much to do with where you were on the tone scale.
I knew of very rich and successful people who were also very angry. I knew covertly hostile Hollywood attorneys
winning million dollar cases. I went to see successful movies produced by angry directors. I knew serene people
who filed for bankruptcy. I knew conservative people who labored hard with little success.
Few of the people I knew who had done all the processing and all the training were financially or professionally
successful. I knew a few who were successful. They were successful before they got involved in processing or would
probably have been successful anyway.
The people with the most processing and training I knew were living lives on the margins of society. They drove
very old cars, lived in low cost housing (usually renting) and worked at jobs near the entry level of industry.
I decided processing had to do only with the tone scale, work in the emotional/aesthetic plane. It didn't have
much to do with the success dimension in my life. The degree of success could be thought of as another independent
dimension.
The third dimension
I decided financial success was really a very limited definition of success. Magic was what I wanted! I remembered
a definition of Magic I liked. John Rafanello, a Los Angeles Seminar Presenter, said, "Magic was making things
you didn't want in your life disappear: Magic was making things you want in your life appear."
I decided I wanted Magic, and it was not a dimension in the emotional/aesthetic plane.
The next thing I had to learn was that achieving Magic was not a technology or the result of a technology.
My next step was getting rid of the arrogance of thinking I had all the answers as the result of all my processing
and training. Most of the stuff I had learned was only applicable to moving me around the emotional/aesthetic plane.
My training was a liability in learning the secrets of magic. I was judgmental of new ideas.
The search
I went searching for magic. A lot of people were trying to invent the ultimate run-down. I decided I had had
the end-of-rundowns run-down. I wanted something new. At the time the really new ideas seemed to be coming from
channels. I listened to about forty channels in Los Angeles. Most of them had a similar general message. It didn't
include Judgments (e.g. we are superior because we have The Technology or have had The Technology applied to us),
Separation (e.g. There is "Us," the enlightened ones with The Technology, and the abberated "Them").
Their message said everyone creates their own reality! Everyone is responsible for their own life! There are no
victims! This is not a prison planet! They said there were techniques but not a technology of Magic.
Since there are tons of books and millions of tapes on the messages of various channels, I won't try to expand
on the subject here.
In listening to channels over several years, I was surprised at how many went bonkers and channelled more and more
bizarre stuff. Some had best selling books before they disappeared. Channelling can be a very hazardous activity.
I finally found a channel who had been channelling for fifteen years. The channel, himself, had his own spiritual
development program to keep growing. The message of the channelled entity kept growing in scope and depth. He seemed
to me to offer a path to Magic.
Eventually, the form of my life changed. I changed careers. I created new things. I learned about unconditional
love and got married. I built my ideal house. My life priorities changed. There is very little similarity between
who I was when I had my last processing run-down and who I am now. My neighbors and children will acknowledge that
if asked.
I will not offer the channel's name. Finding a channelled entity you need to listen to, is a personal quest. I
could detail my personal spiritual quest, convince you of the validity of my personal beliefs, tell you that was
The Technology, and suggest you all follow in my footsteps. For some it might work. A few billion people on the
planet would recognize is as a waste of time.
Difficulties in improving in the magical dimension
Those of you who have had a lot of processing may find it very difficult to find Magic. You are happy all the
time and you are not experiencing incidents of great emotions. You do not have the strong emotions of problems
to flag the areas of your life that are stopping the magic, or more precisely misspending the magic in creating
a different life than you consciously would like to have.
One of the issues in Magic is the metaphor of your life. It exists outside of matter, space and time. It is who
you are, the idea you are living. It is the trademark of what you are creating. It may or may not be simply described
and probably is/was invisible to you most of your life. If others try to name your metaphor they would probably
be wrong. Metaphor cannot be placed on a list and be subjected to list processing. Being out of space and time,
they probably cannot be traced to incidents. Thousand of micro decisions go into defining one's metaphor.
For example one might say the metaphor of Mother Teresa's life was martyrdom. She dedicated her whole life to sacrificing
her self to helping the poor. That was who she was. "Martyr" is certainly a good example of metaphorical
description. However, if you had talked to Mother Teresa she would have denied she was being a martyr, and she
probably wasn't. She probably would have described herself in totally different religious terms.
Another over-simplified life metaphor might be "Being Daddy's Little Princess." That person might spend
their life trying to be this cute little girl and doing everything just right. They might become a professional
model. Their search for a mate might be a hunt for a "daddy" to be a princess for.
Some people are stuck in the metaphor of being who they were as a "Teenager." All of their relationships
might be with people who also act like they did at age fifteen. Girls get together and talk about boys and clothes
and "who does she think she is". Boys get together and drink beer and hoot at televised sports games.
They share vivid speculations of the sexuality of girls based on the size of breasts.
I know of a famous popular musician who appears to me to be stuck in some metaphor about being an eleven-year-old.
He has been accused of being a child molester. I doubt if he is. I think he finds kids of his (mental) age group
to play with and do things eleven-year-olds do. I think that someone near him tried to get him processed, get him
fixed. It didn't take. How can you process the eleven-year-old out of an eleven-year-old?
Some people spend their magic subconsciously copying one of their parents' life. They probably don't copy it literally:
they copy the envelope, form or the metaphor of their parent's life. Let me give you one small example.
A friend of mine had a father who was an aspiring Hollywood actor. The father went on thousands of casting calls,
many of which had wonderful prospects of stardom. He landed few parts. To support his family he was continually
getting involved in get-rich-quick schemes. Nothing ever worked out. His family lived in near poverty.
My friend hated her father. She vowed she would never be like him. She struggled her way to achieving a Master's
Degree in Business from a major university. She entered the corporate world. She married a wealthy executive. Her
husband lost all of his money. The small start-up companies she joined went bankrupt. Nearly everything she tried
failed.
She did not see that she was copying the metaphor of her father's life. Neither could I. I got her involved in
processing. She spent about $100,000 doing everything suggested. She had an amazing career as a PC. Lost folders,
and everything else you can imagine went wrong. Those providing her processing never caught on that her real magical
subconscious purpose was to fail at processing. She cleaned up all the negative emotions toward her father. She
was sure she was not in her father's valence. She cleaned up all her emotions toward the people who cheated her
and otherwise apparently caused her to fail. When she quit she was a happy failure.
All of her magic continued to be spent magically creating failures. That was her life purpose. Whenever she tried
to figure out why nothing worked right, her father never came up. He had been handled.
She may merrily continue creating near-misses and failures the rest of her life.
I have seen other people who similarly were creating the metaphor of their parents' life. They had not had the
"benefit" of being processed to emotional serenity. In channelled therapy their emotions could lead them
to realizations about the structural problems and foundations of their life metaphor.
People who have had a lot of processing may have trouble learning the Magical dimension. Processing has eliminated
the emotions attached to the metaphor of their life. Processing makes the metaphor less apparent, harder to find.
They believe everything has been handled.
For some, the metaphor becomes "The Work in Process." They become professional receivers of processing,
"win junkies". Life is defined by the next process they can find to have run on themselves. The value
of their life is measured by how much time they spend in the aesthetic version of their emotional tone.
Finding the source of your magic
The first step is deciding that processing as we know it has to do mostly with the emotional/aesthetic
plane. It probably will not change who you basically are.
The second step is dropping the arrogance that your processing and training has given you any advantage
in finding Magic. It is probably a disadvantage. You will have to unlearn a lot of ideas.
The third step is learning that there is not a world-wide applicable technology that you can access to change
your magic. It is doubtful that you can go somewhere for a few weeks for a run-down that is going to change who
you basically are.
The fourth step is starting a systematic exploration of spiritual ideas that are new to you. You will have
to develop a humility to accept new ideas. You may have to take all those old certificates of spiritual achievement
and scrawl "no longer applicable" across the front of them.
Finally, realize that you will have to develop your own life run-down, a "technology" applicable
to only you. Only you can be Source in this adventure. You will have to read this book.. attend this lecture...
talk to this psychic... go on this meditation weekend... listen to this channel... learn to communicate with this
spiritual entity.... you will have to become acquainted with entities, including parts of you, which operate outside
of time and space. Everyone's spiritual path is as unique as their DNA strands.
And so is their Magic.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Disconnection
By James Moore, England
IT SEEMS THAT amongst some of my acquaintances, Britta Burtles' article "Why Britannia Changed her Rule"
(IVy 33, page 5) has been regarded as a political article, and I fear the mud of local politics has obscured
the Scientology principle it draws attention to. Possibly in other countries this has not happened.
Too shallow
However I feel that the rule "when in power, do not disconnect" can be interpreted far to narrowly
by those influenced by recent church activities and philosophy. Here power has something to do with statistics.
And statistics are aimed at large figures, especially of money.
And life is much more than money, large figures, domination, being an "opinion leader" and the other
claptrap some associate with the church (and some with Scientology).
So I would suggest a better wording to this principle. When in a position of influence, try to avoid disconnecting.
Two thing can be noted with regard to this. the first is that many are in positions of influence, and they are
not all those narrowly classified by the words power, or high statistics. They include meek and humble people.
People who apparently would not hurt a fly.
The second thing is that disconnection can occur on two flows. Others can disconnect (to greater or lesser degree)
from you. And a tendency to do so can be increased by you, by your giving a communication the other is not really
willing to receive.
As an example, a friend intends to do something which you consider foolish. One reaction would be to give advice,
and invalidate the others ideas. In doing so, in many cases, you would be issuing communications which the other
was not really willing to receive. You are helping him build up a sort of mental barrier between him and you.
Supposing your friend now runs into trouble, because he did what you so strongly disapproved of. He or she now
has some difficulty in communicating to you about it -- a real or imagined fear of receiving an unsympathetic "I
told you so", a further undesired communication.
You caused the disconnection, from your viewpoint, anyway
Applies to all
It is suggested that the avoid disconnection principle should be used by all in influential positions. But who
is not in a position of influence, whether he or she realizes it or not? Except for the complete hermit, we all
influence each other.
Also, there is a natural loss of friends and acquaintances through death, moving to other areas, changes of job,
etc. If you regard communication as the pay of life (an old Scientology slogan) then you can expect your pay to
go down if you are not actively seeking to increase your connections, and also nurse those you have by granting
beingness, avoiding emitting undesired communications (though not to the extent of yourself having withholds and
the problems these give), etc. In other words we are reminded of the old Scientology principle (Fundamentals
of Thought) that if you are not continuously creating something (your life, communication, connections) then
that thing is on the destroy end of the cycle of action -- you are approaching death.
People can notice this when they are suddenly sacked or put on pension, if they have not taken adequate precautions.
New Code of Honor clause
I would therefore suggest that in a "New Scientology" Code of Honor, a clause like --
discourage disconnection
-- should be one of the principles.
Better have too many friends and acquaintances than too few.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
George Hay
by Terry Scott, England
A personal obituary
GEORGE HAY left us on 3rd October 1997, four days short of his 75th birthday. Latterly, his home had been in Hastings,
on the south coast.
In the early 1950s, George was the Secretary of the British Dianetic Association, and he wrote to L. Ron Hubbard
asking him to come to England. Ron took up the invitation.
Eventually, George trained in London org, worked at Saint Hill during Ron's time there, and was one of the early
Power Releases.
From late 1966 to early '68, my wife and I resided in London, about 15 minutes' walk from George's flat on West
Green Road. We visited him and his family regularly: one flight up -- cats and books...and George's personality
gently dominating the front room.
The last time we actually met was in 1972 or '73, when he bought a camera in the Dixons shop in Fleet Street, London.
But around the late '80s, I re-established contact with him through my activities in the independent field.
Letters flowed between us and, now and then, we phoned one another. I was writing for IVy and Synspunkter,
and in 1992 launched a series of conferences. He never got to a conference, but did write for IVy. His most
recent piece was Getting Back on Track in IVy 32, pages 20-22.
He and I shared various interests: Scientology in its best aspects; a love of good English; and "sci-fi,"
science fiction.
George was the founder of the Science Fiction Foundation here. A day or two before writing this obit, serendipity(!)
I chanced across a hefty reference book on sci-fi, and under "George Hay" is a long entry which confirms
his status.
A few months ago, George sold me some old copies of Astounding and Analog science fiction magazines.
These were edited by John W. Campbell Jnr., who had some importance in L. Ron Hubbard's career. George hoped that
I would write up some of Campbell's thought-provoking editorial ideas for IVy, and that sounds fine to me,
and Ant has expressed interest. All being well, something on those lines will be done.
George Hay deserves broader acknowledgement in our field. His is not one of the gee-whiz names in Scientology,
yet he played a significant role in the early days.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Classic Comment
By Terry Scott, England
Star Wars?
I WOULD LIKE to offer an entry point into Astrology for Independents, for I have been studying the subject with
the tools of tech for four decades.
According to L. Ron Hubbard, a facsimile incorporates all perceptions, such as visio, audio, and so on. Evidently,
star data, too, are recorded: the pattern of the planets in the solar system, which changes moment by moment.
If a being is involved in an event that has either high aesthetic or intense charge, any facsimiles of it can be
restimulated at a later date by similar star data.
These can occur when one or more planets returns in its orbit to the same position in the heavens held during the
incident. Or it can be another planet, but the same point in the heavens.
Remember your Dianetics: for restimulation to occur, factors in the environment have to approximate those that
were present in the original incident.
A being takes part in a battle in May 1867 and his facsimiles record the pattern of the planets at the time. One
of the planets is Pluto (I will specify just one to keep it simple) at a point in the heavens labeled, by astrologers,
"15 degrees of Taurus".
The star data sit in the mind like a time bomb. We have a standard facsimile plus the factor not known in our tech
until now: Star data.
In February 1989, present time Pluto in the solar system has reached 15 degrees of Scorpio i<%5>n its orbit
cycle around the solar system. Although this is not all the way back to 15 Taurus, the "opposition" (plus
180 degrees) is restimulative enough, and nudges the 1867 incident in the bank.
Depending on his case state, the being turns on somatics or feelings, dramatizes chopping people's heads off, or
picks up a fresh body and acts out a lifetime that is a spin-off from the 19th century identity.
Or, if he is in very good shape, he is aware of the restimulation in some fashion, and handles it. Also, auditing
for example might release him from restimulation or, better, locate and erase the charge.
Restimulation goes away when the planet moves on through its orbit, but some planets move relatively slowly in
terms of their own year<196>cycles.
(In approximate figures, Pluto orbits in a 250-year (Earth year) period, Neptune in 165, Uranus in 85, Saturn in
30 Jupiter in 12, and so on.)
This is Astrology for Independents at the Dianetics level. A being may do strange things when present time planetary
positions coincide with or oppose or otherwise strongly relate to star data in the being's mind.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kemp's Column
By Ray Kemp, USA
An Understanding of the Saga of Princess Diana
"If one fails to use his technology in every-day life one can become too enturbulated to do one's job"
Taken from an LRH Lecture.
FIRSTLY LET ME say that I am by choice a Royalist, and nothing here will be intended as a criticism of Princess
Diana. However, tragic as the recent events were, if one is to gain a better understanding, then emotional reaction
must be put aside, and the observed public hysteria must be recognized for what it is. By the way, grief is also
an effort to reverse time, and sometimes that effort is an effort to lessen overts or unkind thoughts.
Diana was from the start a person in need of help. Such help as only a trained Counselor could have given. She
was, to say the least, a neglected child, born into a dysfunctional family, in a section of society where it would
seem that dysfunction is the norm.
Like everyone else she had a "case", and, like everyone else, this case controlled her life, her actions,
and her outlook.
Some aspects
As to the details of that case, without actually auditing her we can never be sure of its details, but some
aspects, some vital aspects are, and were observable.
The "coy" look, out of the corner of her eyes for example, is seen in cases where the reactive bank masses
are carried in front of her body -- in order to communicate she was, apparently trying to look around those masses.
(see Scientology 0-8 for this phenomenon).
She was bolemic, and herein lies the biggest clue. Bolemia as a condition carries with it certain syndromes. Firstly
there is a Havingness problem. Just as an alcoholic "can't have" alcohol -- they have to hide it or get
rid of it, and do so by putting it inside the body. So too a bolemic can't have food. The solution there is broadly
speaking, to eat (hide) it, and then regurgitate it to get rid of it. The bolemic condition is actually one manifestation
of a "can't have" condition.
Everyone has a level of acceptance of mass, and significance. Too much, or too little, being outside these self-established
(by Bank), parameters, falls into the "can't have" area. Money, love, affection, clothes, condition of
physical items around one, all are monitored by the individual's level of Havingness. Couple this with a person's
level of self-esteem or self-worth, and you start to get an overall "personality", which is what the
O.C.A., (now O.P.A) graph is targeting to indicate.
In Diana's case, look at what her can't-have levels affected: Clothes, food, affection, men, sex, self discipline,
life style, marriage.
What she could have is equally obvious -- children, and in her upbringing of these boys, she showed remarkable
talent, and great wisdom.
Her bolemia, being seemingly totally ignored, or made nothing of, drove her already shaky self-esteem further down-tone,
provoking emotional instability and even apparent near suicide attempts, and a disastrous marriage. She changed
in the later years, so what happened?.
The change
Well there lives in Canada another remarkable woman who has been pioneering work on "Eating Disorder Patients".
Her approach, and highly successful it has been, is to recognize the underlying lack of self-esteem, the constant
need for re-assurance, and the need to constantly, as she puts it, "touch, hug, and love" the patient.
The physical techniques including constant validation and hugging, is of course a form of repairing Havingness.
Non-critically, I did not see any evidence of a full "Remedy of Havingness" which in our profession would
be the ideal scene and goal of therapy.
However this Canadian lady did contact and treat Diana, and certainly improved or handled her bolemia and this
of course would, and I am sure did, raise her self-esteem.
However there is still the question of her level of Havingness. Her life then became involved with others who were
victims of low self-esteem; sick kids, the homeless, AIDs sufferers, land mine victims -- in every case people
with low and damaged levels of Havingness. And her interface with them is also interesting...in every case we see
her hugging, touching, giving physical contact, all being basic Havingness not only for the victims, but for herself.
In her "love life" we see the same actions, touching, hugging etc. indicative of constant repair of a
lack of Havingness condition, yet nothing that could be called remedy. Her men very soon were dropped off or cast
away. The life she wanted was outside her levels of Havingness.
The public's havingness
The public in general blame the Paparazzi, and certainly the latter, for the most part are despicable in their
activity, but again one has to realize that they are trying to deliver what the public want, and what the public
want, is an indication of what the public level of Havingness is, too.
Diana's death is a great loss -- especially to the children, but a lesson can be learned here. One's reactive mind
can and does rule, and ruin the lives it is connected to.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
IVy on the Wall
By Kenneth G. Urquhart, USA
To Myself, Out Loud
WHY DO I WRITE about LRH? Partly for a selfish reason. I believe that in the future a great deal of attention
will be paid to LRH and his workings. People will notice that outside the C of S there were a great many who trashed
him, ridiculed his memory, blamed him mercilessly for every mistake and failing of Scientology. What he started,
whether he started it appropriately, he did not continue appropriately and in the resulting confusion some, whose
feathers and masses were ruffled, and many whose were not, are name-calling -- often hysterically and out of control.
I sympathise with the dignity of those who know better, but are disgusted and remain silent.
Do I imagine something, or is there indeed a need for a balance in how we view the bundle of phenomena we know
of as "LRH"?
There is no feeling that I owe it to him. I do owe him a great deal, having become a much, much better person than
I was before I experienced any part of Scientology. There is no great feeling of loyalty to a person who I could
say suckered me along with everybody else, once he had created the organisational monster. I owe nothing and am
owed nothing. There is no ledger.
I can't say I have any special knowledge or insight: I worked for him, observed him, spoke to him, listened to
him, experienced him, occasionally counselled him, helped him as I could, every day for six years except for his
one year away from the ship. Out of that personal contact I have my feeling for who he was -- there are others
with as much or similar familiarity with him, others who have had plenty of time to speak out, and (as far as I
know) have not.
My selfish reason is that I don't like the idea of historians (who are bound to come across my name in connection
with LRH) looking back and asking Why did people let the mob tear his memory to pieces? Or worse- -Why didn't Urquhart
ever speak out? I wouldn't want to be accused of failing in ordinary, common, human decency. The man was a friend
to me, perhaps not so much in his later years but certainly up to 1972 (I met him in 1964) and to some extent up
to 1982 when I left the SO.
It is not right that the only strong positions taken about him publicly outside the Scn establishment are those
yelled by the truly ignorant, the intellectually and morally disadvantaged, the Earth- bound too long to be able
to make any sense out of what was good about Ron's work, and able only to position themselves to be the effect
of the mistakes. To take much notice of them and their screams is an affront to dignity and integrity. Their body-frothings
can be contemptible and disgusting. Yet that fare is on the menu every day at several places on the internet.
Who is so negative?
There are three broad classes of people who are sourly negative, whether quietly or not:
Those who have observed something of Scientology and the C of S at third-hand, from the safety of suburbia or academia
without ever exposing themselves to either Scn or the organisation.
Those who had some contact, little or much, with the Scn approach, a contact that made them unhappy; while seeking
resolution of an inner condition they felt a possible solution had been denied them. Perhaps they felt a solution
was owed them by somebody.
Those who immersed themselves deeply in Scn and in the organisation. Of these, some are rabidly anti; some are
respectful of some aspects of LRH and negative about others and on the whole unforgiving of his mistakes.
The bliss of ignorance
In the 'burbs, people have read articles, watched TV shows, and heard neighbourhood or family gossip, and are
happy with their knowledge on the subject. In academia they have read materials and spoken to ex-Scners (which
is known as 'research'). Both their opinions are worth very little as they are all completely unable to encompass
any reality beyond their own. What is unfamiliar is unreal. But they sure can judge it. The man who studies the
flea knowing it is the only important creature in existence is very contemptuous of the man interested in all animal
life. I have been interviewed by supposedly scholastic people; their eagerness to know exactly what they know is
boundless. They are as full of categories and labels that protect them from reality as the suburbs are full of
little boxes to live in that put so certainly in their place all the hitherto untameable geophysical splendours
of the Universe.
There is an element of tragedy in the old, grand Greek style in LRH's choosing planet Earth as the stage for his
performance. Earth is the comforting burrow of the body-bound where the bourgeoisie of the 'burbs (inner city and
outer) bind themselves to unshakeable self-satisfied self-congratulation on becoming and staying comfortable while
denying any need for self-examination.
No wonder that the 'burbs level of existence makes nothing of him. There, they are as capable of containing force
such as his as are their houses capable of containing the hurricane. The purposes are diametrically opposed: he
is not the loser, but he had to share a stage with them -- to their continued protest, loud and intense.
Blue sky
I stated in my last essay that he was not bound by Now I am Supposed To's. That is only partly true. He despised
a great many cultural supposed-to's; he could not always steer clear of his own. Out of these he created, or contributed
to the creation of, an organisation which quickly became a monster. The monster misled people, such as John Atak,
who wrote A Piece of Blue Sky. Some, like John, were promised some blue sky, a promise they should have
known better than to be dazzled by; they were disappointed and bitterly blame the monster, and Hubbard, and the
whole approach of Scn. They seek over and over to 'expose' the falsehoods and to explain how they were led to believe
they were buying a visit with a comfortable flea when they were put face to face with their own elephant. Such
were suckered by an outfit driven by relentless pressure to produce "statistics"--the most important
statistics being Sales. Without Sales there was nothing. Sales were measured primarily as Gross Income. Staff on
the front line were pounded on to pull in the cash. There was little attention paid to how they pulled it in--what
were they selling to whom, what were they promising to deliver? The system empowered them to sell and disciplined
them for not selling. It penalised them only for selling to Suppressive Persons and their connections.
This pressure did not originate with Hubbard, altogether, by my observation. He was concerned that the statistics
increase, certainly. He never pushed for Income over all else. A number of executives around him found they could
please him greatly with reports of large amounts of money brought in. To him this meant future delivery. But to
please LRH could for many people become a focus, and to find any demonstrably workable way to gain his favour an
obsession for some. When they found that he would not refuse transfers of large amounts of cash into his hands,
they poured it in. You have to exist in or near the inner circle around a charismatic and despotic leader to experience
this phenomenon, to understand the grip of that driving desire, the endless need for the word of acceptance, the
nod of approval, the smile of recognition, the feeling of being included. These are all natural desires, of course,
and healthy when anchored in integrity. But, in those days, in the early seventies, the floodgates were opened,
the money flowed in. We all had to Hurrah every latest Highest Ever Gross Income.
I for one wondered, but did not ask Who is selling what, how, to whom? John Atak, I am sorry.
The needy
Amongst those whose money was sucked in were people with genuinely difficult personal situations they really
wanted help with. I do not doubt that there was technology that could have helped them and that there were people
in and around the organisation who could have used the technology effectively to help them. I can conceive also
that some were in conditions that were closed to any Scn approach. In the crazed fixation on statistics and on
Gross Income, it's doubtful that one in a state of severe restimulation would have managed to do much else than
get more restimulated.
The game begins
But even prior to the fixation on statistics and income which got seriously out of control in the early and
mid-seventies -- and ever worse after that -- LRH in 1965 set up himself and the organisation to be a target, by
seriously targeting others. It had been a long time coming. He had never kept a friend for long. Many loyal to
him in the early days had dropped away or been driven out. He focused on "squirrels" from time to time.
In early 1965, during and after his stay in Africa, he placed the organisation squarely on a war footing. The enemy
was clearly identified; the Suppressive Person and his connections, everyone who was anti-Scn, and, by implication,
anybody who was not pro-Scn or pro the organisation, and pro-LRH.
There he sowed the seeds of conflict unambiguously and irrevocably, and he nurtured them in the years that followed.
The Games Condition that monitored all future Scn games began in earnest.
All that were drawn into Scn's sphere were drawn into the game. People already in Scn and prone to their own dramatic
games conditions might find themselves clashing with LRH or with the organisation. In adopting his position as
the being the one SPs most love to hate and to target, and at the same time the only one who can save the planet
from those SPs (hence their "hatred" for him and Scn), he created a situation in which those with games
conditions of their own of a similar nature to his were attracted to positions in his organisations from which
they could now dramatise with his assumed approval. From those positions they created their own insider, parallel
games conditions with those they could consider "off source" and therefore due for "reality adjustment"
or outright punishment, or the ultimate banishment of excommunication (they were fond of terms that positioned
them with legitimate institutions) and denial of advance courses forever.
Thus were stellar pioneering figures ejected from the game or so alienated that they dedicated themselves to their
own games conditions of proving wrong the C of S, or Scn, or LRH, or executives, or selected people. I believe
that some of them keep their game going to this day.
Into this maelstrom of random force were tempted many who innocently thought they would help and get help, but
who never expected to get so confused; I believe that some of them are still dealing with that confusion and are
still very upset about it.
Some spirit remains...
In the C of S and in the Sea Org, however, was a leavening of very sane, very accomplished, very competent,
extremely disciplined, and devoted people who desperately hung on to their original inspiration for Scn and for
mankind. They had recognised in LRH's motion something that brought them hope of contributing to an achievement
that would benefit all, something quite the opposite of pretence and betrayal. Given half a chance, they would
have accomplished a much happier outcome for LRH and for the world than the Scn establishment could ever conceive
of. Some of these people became broken-spirited; some are still at work, taking their lessons to heart, still in
hope.
The direct consequence of Hubbard's lifework has been a fragmentation. The C of S lost many members. The C of S
itself maintains certainly the apparency of unity; we can't know what will be the stresses that will cause it to
crumble, fade, or come to its senses. Many of those who left it have been busily exploring other ways of doing
things to help others, a few with tremendous success in terms of gains obtained, with more or less of a nod of
acknowledgement to Hubbard. Very few people outside the C of S feel they can safely claim any connection with him,
and hide their history from the public, so bad they feel his reputation to be in the world -- a world so far from
conceiving workable solutions that it is hell-bent on planetary suicide. There is a world that knows that nothing
could work; some of its individuals experienced a possible solution in Scn and swear that it doesn't work.
WHAT didn't work?
The three classes of people I mentioned who tend to be negative about LRH are mostly critical of the technology
of Scientology. They say it didn't work or did them harm. Some are proud to say that they now know far better than
LRH ever did. My attitude to these is that I can't be sure of what they are talking about. I can easily conceive
that whoever audited or trained them in the C of S took something away from the pure technology or added to it,
to make it unworkable. Who can tell what was going on with the recipient that required a different address than
the one given.
The question "What did not work?" is as relevant today is it always was when Hubbard himself asked it.
"It doesn't work" communicates nothing about the technology and a great deal about the complainer. The
complaint has no time, place, form, event, or identity -- or responsibility. Who did what to whom, in what circumstances?
Was what was done Scientology or was it something else? Did the registrar sell the recipient a piece of blue sky
only to have the C/S or auditor address him or her as a being higher-toned than such as would be so much at effect?
The complaints clearly tell us that something was going on that was unsatisfactory; they don't in themselves help
to clarify what it was. That there were misdeeds is not questioned.
Some do not say that the technology was misdelivered but that it did them harm anyway, and couldn't have done otherwise,
correct or not. I have only one problem with these people. I can conceive easily that in the years in which LRH
put together what he put together there were aspects of spiritual reality that were not clear to him or to anybody
else then that have become clear since. I could understand that they should have been clear to him and he failed
in not getting them, if that be the case. I have no problem with people finding ways of producing gain greater
than they received in the C of S or delivered there as auditors. It's wonderful. The important thing to me is that
people should make as much gain as they can. I don't care who is righter or wronger. I like knowledge to grow.
My problem with these people is that instead of stating their position and then getting on with what they do they
go on and on moaning about how bad it all was over there then. I just can't buy that as a reasonably sane and adult
point of view. The repetitiveness betrays the absence of judgement. The complaint tells us little of LRH or Scientology,
and much about the moaners.
I can accept that LRH did try a shotgun approach, a one-size-fits-all deal, which turned out to be incorrect for
many. I can accept that LRH made a great many moves that have turned out to be mistakes. But how childish do we
have to be about his goofs? He was unreal in much of his over-optimism (he acknowledged it more than once) and
offered solutions he could not in fact guarantee delivery of; the organisation he started with the purpose of delivering
the promised solutions took the opportunity to deliver other things. If we are unable to accept the inevitability
of what has happened we do not rejoice in the inevitable lessons, we have to squeal like thwarted spoiled brats,
we strut like victorious street-bullies, and we risk another layer of cult, the layer that is going to make the
C of S good and wrong.
That LRH made mistakes is a given. Why would anyone expect him to have been perfect? So what that he gave out that
he could do little wrong? It makes no sense to me: to moan and groan that he was flawed is acceptable for a while,
considering the claims he made (and his vanity) but to keep up the chorus of carping complaint produces nothing
-- and to produce a great deal of nothing is its exact purpose.
It takes two...
Another unreality in the "no gain from auditing or got worse because of it" situation is that there
must have been a gap between the deliverers of the auditing and the now-unhappy ex-pc. This gap they all failed
to bridge, deliverers and receivers. To some degree it has to be Hubbard's fault that the auditor and C/S could
not bridge it. It is not his fault that the pc could not make the required effort. You can say that it was not
the pc's job to make that effort, but it is not true that a pc gets much out of auditing that he does not contribute
to. If he tried to contribute and got nowhere, it could have been because the auditor and C/S refused to accept
his effort. The organisation was very structured, and technical staff certainly could get solidified into viewpoints.
LRH's faults here are by proxy. He could not find a way to have all C/Ses and auditors act as he would act. Even
if parts of his technology now can be shown to be incorrect, he himself when working to apply it to an individual
case, or to cases in general, was entirely genuine in his desire to bring gain to others. I saw this with my own
eyes, and felt it myself in session under his C/Sing.
Keeping it simple
As I see it, the basic situation is that he had some very unusual insights upon which he built a structure of
philosophy and technique, and built an organisation to take care of large-scale sales and delivery. The intention
was clear: to help people improve their own lives and to improve conditions in the world as a result of individuals'
heightened awareness, responsibility, and ability.
The intention went out into the world, up against individual and collective resistance. It penetrated some levels
of denial. Confusion flew off. It is still flying off; as it flies off, great spiritual freedom opens up and more
and greater gains are possible. This is not to say that LRH is the source of all gains. He is the source of what
he is the source of. Others can be source of gain, too. The confusion hit LRH hard, and he could not deal with
the confusion within himself that it restimulated. Condemning him for that is the blathering of a fool writhing
in his own shit.
The process continues.
The auditor has had to retrain.
Within LRH, within Scientology -- and yes, even within the C of S -- there is a core of integrity and sanity. I
am certain that the core still exists in its purity. To mistake confusion about the confusion flying off is merely
a mistake and is itself part of the confusion. The core is unaffected. It is as pure, as strong, and as determined
as ever. Its motion is dispersed or quiescent, not fragmented or stopped.
"There will be more auditing"
I expect LRH to take some responsibility for the situation, to learn his lessons and to pull it all together
with dignity and respect for others.
Whether he will, and, if he will, when he will, are up to him; I think he will give himself no choice but to do
it.
When he does, doubtless his work will not be perfect; more confusions will fly off -- people will moan and groan,
accuse him of being fake, swear it does not work, take the information or a piece -- and run off with it to make
it work better.
And the core will still be as pure, as strong, and as determined as ever. It perceives no combat and recognises
no defeat. It simply is, infinitely.
The core exists independently of L. Ron Hubbard. Others share in its being. Some of us are large, some small, some
are quiet, some are commanding, some are peaceful, some are active, some are competitive, some are gentle. We could
align with each other but seem to prefer to remain stoutly in independent independence. When we do align, and when
LRH realigns with us, there will be no stopping...I promise.
© K Urquhart 1997
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Diana
By Jim Buretles, England
Diana, the woman who cared
Diana, the person who shared
Diana, the stranger who cried
Diana, the leader who tried
Diana, princess on duty
Diana, icon of beauty
Diana, radiant pleasure
Diana, thetan to treasure
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Book News
More on Super Scio
(Those on Internet should look at IVy's home page to find a link to where they can get SuperScio.
The address is http://home.sn.no/home/trone/IVy.html.
To our knowedge the book is only available as downloaded from Internet -- so if you don't have Internet,
it pays to cultivate a friendship with someone who does.
See also IVy 31 page 32, 32 page 29 and 34 page 12. Ed.)
By Rick Reijers, Holland
SUPER SCIO IS A WORK on scientology written by someone of the CofS who wishes to remain anonymous for safety reasons
and who has been involved with the Church for many years. It contains his personal viewpoint on the subject, a
lot of inside information, and data on the tech. The materials are available on internet for free. The only exchange
the author requires is that he hopes that others may benefit from it.
The most valuable things of SuperScio are for me:
1. The author discards many myths on scientology which you find in many of the books, brochures etc. of the CofS,
e.g. he says that scientology hardly deserves being called a science, that the grades were not well planned out,
that stable OT abilities have never been demonstrated and that the BTs on the upper levels are not the source of
the pc's aberrations contrary to what the CofS seems to maintain.
2. It contains lots of new data which you will not find in any of Hubbard's works (see below). These have been
discovered by the author himself during many years of research and auditing experience.
3. He challenges the readers to test the new data on processes he has found to improve on the tech and to make
processes easier and more effective. For him, scientology is still on a research line and many things must still
be found out. Test persons are needed for this.
4. The data are clearly arranged making the book also useful as a reference work, e.g. all types and methods of
auditing are neatly put together.
5. Last, but not least, the author has an entertaining writing-style, a clear presentation, he puts things in a
broad context, he keeps things simple and gives lots of examples to illustrate the processes he is writing about.
Data examples
- The author says that the lower level grades are also the ultimate OT levels. What he means is the following.
At the beginning, the accessibility area of the pc is too small to bring the grades to erasure. On the other hand,
the things the grades are dealing with (problems, communication, overts etc.) are at the very base of the pc's
aberrations in his past existence. A good approach is to bring the grades first to some point of release, then
clean up some stuff on the upper OT levels until there is no more case gain, return to the grades to erase them
more fully, switch to the OT levels again when the accessibility area has increased, etc. As a matter of fact,
the author presents a complete new version of the grades, called steps to avoid confusion. Apart from old processes,
many processes have been added as well.
- The true pattern of line plots is revealed and a route to find the actual GPM is offered. According to the author,
GPM technology was a too early abandoned research area in scientology despite the many important results which
were obtained. The author discusses the origin of the line plot pattern. Once this is known it becomes very easy
to spot GPMs and to find the actual GPM, i.e. the current GPM one is living in.
- A cosmic history is presented in which a succession of universes is described and in which the thetan degraded
gradually more and more from his original god-like state.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Group Mind Incidents
By The Pilot, Earth
THIS IS HIGHLY SPECULATIVE. I have been thinking about this for a while in an attempt to understand the org's cultish
mob behaviour. It is especially prominent in the Sea Org. One ex-SO member described it to me as "when they
wave, you wave". This was not as strong in the early days, there was a lot of room for individuals and much
less "group think".
Maybe I'm stretching too far with this one and it could simply be explained on the basis of mass agreement, but
the effect is so strong that I think that there is a distinct possibility that some kind of a "group mind"
effect can come into play, a bit like the "collective unconscious" that appears in some early psychoanalytic
theories.
If there is such a thing, what might it encompass? My first thoughts are of mob behaviour, mutual exchange of BTs,
and "sympathetic" vibrations of emotions in a feedback effect.
In a group mind, the thetans are not merged but they are temporarily packaged by the mutual attraction exceeding
the normal repulsion.
The main bar to telepathy might be fear of absorption or overwhelm by a group mind.
It seems to me that there were early whole track practices which tried to regain native state by intentionally
merging into a group mind which would be god. It was a misguided attempt to rejoin native state. You joined these
things wilfully (not forced by implants) and then found yourself overwhelmed and couldn't disconnect. So you built
walls.
There is lots of sci-fi about telepathic societies with this group mind stuff kicking people around in various
ways. Often they purge or attack individuals who wouldn't blend into the group mind. Maybe these are hints of real
buried recall.
Fear of talking to groups could be fear of this group mind stuff. You stand there at the focal point of all those
intentions and postulates and you might get overwhelmed and taken over by the group. But you don't usually invoke
one of these things unless you begin to push hate and fear buttons.
The heavy emotional reactions may have group mind incidents as basics.
I can seem to spot an old incident of a crowd chanting "all is one", wanting to become it, wanting to
invoke god, a frightening religious ritual.
Resonance
The cheering "hip hip hurray" can sweep you up and pull you into resonance if you go into agreement.
It's the sympathetic doingness, cheering together, yelling "zieg heil" or whatever, that does it, not
just listening to a speaker.
Occasionally in a church when you have the people chanting a litany together or singing, you will get a bit of
a group mind effect. But in this case it's usually mild and uplifting. Sit in on an Easter Sunday service sometime
and see what you can perceive.
It's strongest when everybody sings together as a unit. Not so strong in professional productions where there are
many different parts. That gives you awareness of being an individual participating in a group.
Playing in an orchestra or as part of a team with individual roles may to some degree proof you up against this
group mind syndrome because you are drilling holding your own position as part of a group effort. You learn to
sing your own line or move in your own direction as a contributing part of the group effect rather than submerging
into the mob.
This makes "Chinese school" (the class reciting things together) and group sing-alongs slightly scary.
The org is pushing this effect sometimes with large "musters" and group participation at events.
But I've never felt this effect in real group processing. Although everyone does the same commands, the commands
encourage individual cognitions and differentiation of individuals. But you can get a group mind effect in these
shallow bits of group processing that they use at the beginning of events if you have everyone do exactly the same
thing without any commands that create individual variations.
If you tell everyone to look at the right corner of the room, you get a uniform group action. However, if you tell
everyone to look around the room and find something that they like, you get individual actions which undo the group
mind effect. So you're safe as long as you don't run uniform group actions exclusively.
If you tell the group to stamp their feet on the floor, everyone does it their own way, some faster, some slower,
some lighter and some with more force, etc. The effect always seems chaotic and cheers people up. But if you were
to have everyone stamp their right foot, and then stamp it again, all together in unison, you would start building
up this group mind effect and loss of identity and volition.
Applauding is not really dangerous in this regard. People clap faster and slower and can whistle or cheer or stamp
their feet individually. Group waves at sporting events where the rows of spectators stand up and down in sequence
are just fine, giving the individual the fun of group participation without having everybody do the same thing
at the same time. Again, this aids individual differentiation because you have to time your moment for standing
and not stand up at the same time as the row behind you does.
There was no problem with this in the old style of applauding completions at the org as long as they didn't insist
that everybody always applaud or look happy. But when they started with the "hip hip hurray's" towards
Ron's picture, they began stirring up this group mind effect because everybody is cheering in unison. It's very
bad and quite hypnotic.
Group activity
This hypnotic group mind effect is created by group activity in unison. It is broken by group activity with
individual differentiation where the individual has to consciously do something different than the rest of the
crowd. Unfortunately it is not broken by applause or having everyone stamp their feet because those can be done
either way (they don't force you into the effect, but they don't force you out of it either).
Let's say that you're still in good standing at the org, and you get announced or otherwise have the opportunity
to control one of these group dramatizations. And let's say that you don't want ethics on your back, but you do
want to make a little push towards undoing group hypnosis instead of contributing to it.
The thing to do is to stop the crazies from giving their usual "hip hip hurray" by saying "lets
do something really nice for Ron" and then introducing anything which causes individual differentiation from
the group effect. Simply dividing the audience into 4 groups and having them hold different notes (forming a chord)
while singing "thank you Ron" would force each person to hold separate from the composite. Another good
one would be to have everyone "imagine something really nice and flow it towards Ron", but don't you
dare tell them what to mock up because it's having them each imagine their own different thing that makes them
all unique.
These kind of things will get you the "together yet different" effect which breaks group think.
Four part harmony is ideal since the majority is almost never in unison, and yet they are all working together
and in agreement.
Affinity and agreement
One of the basic lies is that you have to be like everyone else so as to like and be liked by everyone else.
The tight coupling of affinity and agreement within the ARC triangle does exist but it is a basic aberration rather
than an underlying natural law.
One of the beauties of working in an orchestra is that it shows you that people can be quite different while participating
in a satisfying group effect. Violins, drums, and trumpets are all radically different from each other and yet
they can play together very nicely.
Once you've swallowed the group think lie of having to be the same as everyone else, you then get fed the next
horrible lie which is that the only way to be different is to go into opposition. The lie is that you can only
retain your individuality by fighting, and this leads to building up GPMs.
You're alone and isolated in a human condition because you're fighting off these group minds that exist at the
next layer up (everybody creating reality together, etc.). But those group minds are an aberration. At the very
top, there are many individual lines, the same, yet different, which are not in opposition to each other but instead
delight in the flux of shifting harmonies.
If the fragmentation theories have some basis in fact (see Super Scio chapter 6A "Divide and Conquer",
and Ron's HCL lectures, and some of Allen Hacker's materials), we may sometimes fragment in ways that leave "holes"
which we want to fill, a bit like an incomplete electron shell. Instead of putting ourselves back together, we
join with others, both in packaging implants and in these group minds in an effort to fill the vacuums.
If so, excessive running of NOTs without balancing it by regaining fragments of yourself (with "point to the
being you divided from" as discussed in Super Scio) might leave behind excessive vacuums which would
encourage group mind formation at the higher levels of the org. I'm just guessing here, but it might explain a
lot.
And there is the possibility that Ron's identity submerged totally under the continual impact of standing at the
focus of group think.
Don't bet your money on this theory, it's laid on very shaky ground. But please do try to break those group drilling
patterns, because something sure does happen with them and the end product seems to be along the lines of Nazi
Germany.
Best, The Pilot
Note [still The Pilot writing]: I label posts [to Internet] like this one "Super Scio Tech"
so that people who are not interested can skip them easily. Sometimes these only go to ACT (freezone), but some
(like this one) also go to ARS because they might be of interest to CofS lurkers.
The pilot is a pseudonym for the author of the large work Super Scio, available on the Internet at ftp://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/pub/ss/index.html
This article was released on Internet (from a false address) and there is apparently no way to communicate
to the Pilot except putting a message on a public forum and hoping he will see it. ACT and ARS refer to two public
forums on the Internet, alt.clearing.technology and alt.religion.scientology. Ed
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Letter to the editor
Overts, Withholds, Mws
Dear Ant,
IN IVy 33, P. 35, LOOKING for a simple definition of O/W; you defined overt as "bad things done,"
and a withhold as "good things withheld." You then received some disagreements on this definition, and
requested an article. (These came from Judith Anderson, who helps by searching out mistakes in most of IVy
before it goes to press, and Russell Stockdale, an Australian subscriber on the Internet "list" IVy-subscribers.
Ed.)
First, the ordinary English definitions:
Overt: adjective; open to view, public. Using the legal defn. of a "overt act," Hubbard converted
this to an noun.
Withhold: verb, to hold back, to check, restrain. To refrain from granting. To refrain from acting.
As a noun, a restrained action.
And related to the above; Motivator: that which serves as a stimulus to action.
Still trying to keep your definition as simple as possible; an overt-withhold (OW) can be defined as: a bad thing
done or a good thing left undone (the overt); followed by a concealment of this out of guilt and fear of punishment
(the withhold).
A related phenomena, the missed withhold, is something another person has done which makes you wonder if they know
something bad about you. I saw this manifest as a sly flinch in a student, when I was telling him about how someone
had been restricted from a local store for shop-lifting. He then admitted that this had happened to him, and I
helped him get his privileges back.
All of these things become important when you have a group working together towards a common goal; since a concealed
bad action by a member of that group will gradually alienate him from it and reduce his contributions to it.
Groups have traditionally used two different methods to handle the harmful actions of a person towards others or
the group: 1. Police investigation, trial and punishment, or 2. Religious confession and absolution.
Hubbard's goal was to erase both the overt-withhold and overt-motivator mechanisms.
There is a lot more in the Tech Vols; but perhaps the best overall summary is in The Volunteer Minister's
Handbook under "The Integrity Pack."
Also included in the Handbook is the overt-motivator pair. A motivator is a harmful act received, which can then
be used to justify an overt.
An example is: "Johnny hit me first!" In its worst form, the overt-motivator sequence can result in a
long-term feud with no end to trying to "get even."
-----
Hubbard's first three technical definitions are given in the Board tech Bull 13 May 1975, the Integrity Processing
Series 1R, as:
Overt -- A harmful or contra-survival act. Precisely, it is an act of commission or omission that harms
the greater number of dynamics.
Withhold -- An undisclosed contra-survival act; a no action after the fact of action, in which the individual
has done or been an accessory to doing something which is a transgression against some moral or ethical code consisting
of agreements to which the individual has subscribed in order to guarantee, with others, the survival of a group
with which he is co-acting or has co-acted towards survival.
Missed withhold -- An undisclosed contra-survival act which has been restimulated by another but not disclosed.
This is a withhold which another person nearly found out about, leaving the person with the withhold in a state
of wondering whether his hidden deed is known or not.
Motivator -- An aggressive or destructive act received by the person...It is called a motivator because
it tends to prompt that one pays it back -- it "motivates" a new overt. (HCOB 20 May 68). Tech Dict
72, p.258.
These last four technical definitions are attempts to be very exact, but need examples provided by the reader.
Best wishes, Frank Gordon, USA
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ross's Reminiscences -- 1
My Discovery of Dianetics
by Bob Ross, USA
WHEN RON CAME out with DMSMH in 1950, I was already a strong fan of his. Not only that, but I had just finished
reading Science and Sanity, by Alfred Korzybski, (AK), whom I had been introduced to in the pages of Astounding
Science Fiction by the Null-A stories of A.E. Van Vogt. Ron thrilled me with the idea of clear and his
statement in DEOS (Dianetics, Evolution of a Science) that he had discovered the source of identity
thinking which AK had said was the source of all human non-sanity.
AK in his Non-Aristotelian Philosophy, General Semantics, had stated that non-sanity resulted from unaware
use of language, and in particular from unawarely making statements that incorrectly stated that one thing was
identical to another, when in fact it was not. According to AK the major culprit was the "is" of identity.
General Semantics is a philosophy created by Polish born mathematician and philosopher Count Alfred Korzybski,
which concerns itself with the relationship between language and the people who use that language. Korzybski taught
that many human behavioral problems could be fixed up, by changing language behavior.
AK said such obvious things as "The word is not the thing" and "The map is not the territory."
He taught sanity drills such as making quotation marks with one's fingers when saying or hearing words, which have
many more meanings than the one currently being referred to by the speaker as a warning to use that word with care.
After leaving LRH's church in 1983 I began to put more attention on language training as the Road to Sanity. I
realized that clear was not identical with sane.
Dianetics, Evolution of a Science
Initially of course, I read DEOS not DMSMH. I read it as a fact article in the May issue of Astounding
Science Fiction. On the first page of this article there was a footnote stating that the book, Dianetics,
the Modern Science of Mental Health, was being published by the Hermitage House Publishing Company. My excitement
over GS as the answer to human misery was transferred tentatively to this new book, for Hubbard had said, "know
your General Semantics well. Same thing, except we take in more perceptics". At the bottom of that page in
the magazine article, General Semantics was defined as the philosophy of Count Alfred Korzybski.
In more recent printings of DEOS, this footnote has been altered to eliminate reference to AK and misdefines and
so denigrates GS. For many years from 1950 until about 1965 Ron mentioned and praised AK and General Semantics.
LRH stopped praising GS, calling it bad, in one paragraph on the first page of the first policy letter of the Data
Series. That could be taken as one of the major points heralding the change from an effort to help humanity and
increase sanity, to an effort to control humanity.
At the time (1950) that I read that reference to Hermitage House Publishing company, exciting though the article
was, I wasn't at all sure, that such a publishing company even existed. I was all too familiar with fantasy authors
such as H.P. Lovecraft and Manley Palmer Hall, who referred to books, publishing companies and universities which
were as purely imaginary as all the characters in their stories!
I want it now!
Being suspicious, and not yet certain that the so-called fact article was not an author's trick, the first thing
I did was to pick up a Manhattan phone book, to find out if the publishing company even existed. I found a listing,
called them up and asked if they were publishing a book titled, Dianetics, The Modern Science of Mental Health.
I heard "Yes, but..." and I didn't wait to hear the girl say that the book wasn't out yet, but immediately
hung up and went down into the nearest subway station, to travel to their offices located on Madison Avenue, near
Fourteenth Street in Manhattan.
I found when I got there, that the book was still on the presses being printed and no copies were yet available.
I saw several people in the office who turned out to be waiting for the book to come out, as if their presence
there would make it come out faster. I left money and asked that the book be sent to me, when copies were available.
This was about the middle of April. My copy arrived on May 20th, 1950.
That day, May 20th 1950, is the date I assign to my entry into the world of LRH.
An early dianetic auditing adventure
I've covered elsewhere some of my early adventures with dianetic auditing. I'll only mention here, that the
first demo I saw of dianetic auditing was in a private apartment and was being done by a student from the Dianetic
Academy at Elizabeth, on a young woman who had had a dental extraction done using nitrous oxide to knock her out.
She of course had no conscious memory of the details at the time, but did recount it all in session.
Not in the book -- demo
A noteworthy demonstration was the one I gave a young man who came in to the office of the N.Y. Dianetic Association,
where I was ensconced to receive phone calls and give demonstrations, much as I had been given one earlier, in
an office space rented by the NYDA. This was about November 1950, a large rather empty area, equipped with a telephone
and two chairs, in an apartment building, located about 83rd Street a few doors east of Fifth Avenue, within walking
distance of the Metropolitan Museum of Art on Fifth Avenue.
A young man came in one day with a loudly blaring portable radio. He wanted to have a demonstration, so I got him
in session and as usual immediately asked him to return to conception. As he recounted the incident, he came to
a point where he drew a good sized knife, stood up and began to walk toward me brandishing the knife. This alarmed
me considerably but I managed not to panic, as I considered what to do.
I immediately came to the conclusion that he was dramatizing the incident he had been running. In fact he was running
the incident from the viewpoint of one of the people in it, suggesting that his conception was the result of rape.
What to do? I kept my TR's in, (though they hadn't been invented/named yet). An answer came to me, I'll give God
credit because I don't recall that Ron had mentioned anything quite like this in DMSMH. I simply said, quite
calmly, "return to the beginning of the incident." He immediately put the knife away, sat down, and began
to recount the incident from the start of the incident.
We went through this little scene, half a dozen times I think, before I felt able to end the session and send him
on his way, with his radio blaring again. No doubt, I should have run out the incident completely, but I was satisfied
at the time to have gotten through the experience with a whole skin.
I came to the conclusion that he had the loudly blaring radio to drown out his own thoughts, i.e. it helped him
to stay in present time and not attack people!
The New York Dianetic Foundation, was a few blocks further down town also just off Fifth Avenue. I visited there
one day and spoke to the Doctor in charge, who had been the resident physician at a mental hospital on Long Island.
He told me how he had become convinced that dianetic procedures worked after running one of the patients on the
incident he was dramatizing after which the patient promptly got better.
Doctor Joe Winters and CO2 therapy
Another incident worth preserving was the first visit I made to become acquainted with Doctor Joe Winters, who
had written the original introduction to DMSMH. This introduction, incidentally, has been omitted in more
recent editions, along with some articles at the back of the book. Dr. Winters, it turned out, was a brother-in-law
of ASF Editor John Campbell Jr.
Doc Winters was interested in exploring the uses of Carbon Dioxide/Oxygen breathing mixture, the use of which had
been described in a book by Meduna called Carbon Dioxide Therapy. Apparently, if one gave a psychotic patient
a breathing mask and allowed him to breathe Oxygen with high percentages of Carbon Dioxide the psychotic individual
became temporarily sane. In fact I had a brief conversation about this with the doctor at the NY Dianetic Foundation.
He told me that experiments had been tried of equipping an entire room with Oxygen/CO2 mix and having patients
live in the room.
Such patients would remain sane for a period of time and then despite the high oxygen content would eventually
resume their psychotic behavior.
Well, Doctor Winters was quite interested in testing O2/CO2 mixtures in conjunction with dianetic engram running.
So he offered me the opportunity to try some. I agreed and lay down on an examining table in his office and when
we were ready, he put a breathing mask on my face and I began to breathe in the O2/CO2 mixture from a steel medical
oxygen cylinder.
I discovered then, that the standard mixture supplied to patients consisted of 20% CO2 to assist the breathing
reflex, but that it could also be obtained with 30% CO2. Higher percentages of CO2 were unstable and had to be
mixed from separate cylinders of O2 and CO2 and combined at room pressure in the mask.
I lay on the table inhaling pure oxygen and found that my breathing became very deep and rapid. Next thing I knew,
I was bodyless in space, without much perception of my surrounding, I'd say I was in a kind of grey fog, but I
dimly sensed that I was hovering in the air over Fifth Avenue near Forty-Seventh Street, dimly being aware of traffic
noises and people's voices.
Then while still focused on that perception, I felt myself being pulled back to Dr. Winters' office. I experienced
successive sensations of light and dark and eventually became aware of my body and a spot on the wall of the office.
Making a change
This was highly exciting, to say the least. I didn't know what had happened but was eager to experience it again.
However, this second time I wanted to experience the sense of space and freedom for a longer period of time. So,
when Joe Winters put the mask on my face again, I attempted to breathe more of the mixture, to fuel me onto a longer
Out-Of-Body trip. Instead of breathing stertorusly (stertorous, making a heavy, snoring sound. World
Book Dictionary), or gaspingly and very deeply, the usual Cheyne-Stokes reaction (Cheyne-Stokes
breathing: a type of abnormal breathing found in certain cerebral and cardiac disorders, characterized by alternating
periods of heavy, agonized breathing and of temporary suspension of breath. World Book Dictionary),
I resisted that impulse, and breathed deeply but normally, hoping to stay out longer.
Instead, after a few more conscious breaths, Joe pulled the mask off my face, and demanded to know what had happened.
It seems that instead of going out longer, I didn't go out at all.
I recognized at that moment, that my own decision or focus had a great deal to do with what happened when I breathed
in that mixture. The O2/CO2 sort of fueled my body or energized it, but my intention or effort controlled where
I went or what I experienced.
So, when Joe gave me the mask again, I selected a feeling I knew I had some control of and could create at will.
Then,while I let my body react to the O2/CO2 mixture, I focused on the emotion of anger.
Next moment I found myself on a platform in front of a lectern and a large audience, haranguing that audience.
I did not hear anything or know what I was saying, I was only aware of being on that platform in front of that
audience apparently attempting to stir them up, undoubtedly to make them angry. Whenever I think of that scene,
I think of Adolph Hitler at Berchtesgaden, where an attempt was made to assassinate him, about 1940. In 1940 I
was a college student in New York City.
When Joe pulled the mask off my face, I described the scene to him, after which he put the mask on my face again.
Again I focused on anger, and again found myself on that platform in front of that audience.
That was the end of that experiment. But, I bought a mask and rented O2/CO2 cylinders which were easily available
from a medical supply company for use of patients. At that time, no doctor's prescription was needed. I don't know
if any is needed today. So much for CO2 Therapy and Dr. Joe Winters
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Objectives:
Objectives (2)
(Objectives (1) is on page 24 of IVy 34 -- Christine Norstrand's article
"Heart and Soul:Creativity and Basic Objective Processes")
by Otto J. Roos, Holland
Historical
THE PROCESSES WHICH LATER became known as "the Objectives" seems to initially have played a far more
important role in the past than they did at later stages. In the long ago days after engram running, they were
gradually developed to full stage activities. They were no longer just being used to sustain, by way of Havingness,
the other subjective procedures which were being developed all the way up to Goals running, but they became full
scale Auditing Intensives in themselves.
From personal recall after having blown the entire History of Man (without at that time knowing it was
that!), lying on a couch as was done in earlier years, it apparently became "necessary" for me to be
sold and to be run on hundreds of hours of CCH's!
Having been both a bush-worker and a long-shore man, those quantities of CCH's were at that time, after the earlier
auditing received, not exactly the right item. (Necessity level alone puts a person engaged in the
professions named above quite into PT (Present Time). Not being in PT, "PTE", present time event, and
the "PEV", present time environment, can have dire consequences for forest workers or persons involved
in loading/unloading sea going vessels.)
Except for may be a few Havingness commands there was no need "to be put in PT" by hundreds of hours
of Objective procedures. However, such Intensives were rather arbitrarily assessed as needed and run.
Danger
The danger is quite easily seen. Once the fellow has been put in PT by whatever activity, continuing this activity
implies that its intended result has not been attained. This invalidates the rightness achieved and validates
the wrongness that it had not been achieved. This is a double-edged sword of wrong items making the auditing,
the auditor, and the pc wrong. The pc then becomes forced to continue to reach what has already been achieved.
The activity intending to get the guy into comm with the PT environment now starts to really plough him in.
Mixture
What frequently happened in earlier years was that, in the middle of running valid procedures, sudden orders
would arrive from Saint Hill "to drop whatever you are running as it has been discovered that..." and
something new would have to be arbitrarily run on pcs who were often doing well. A guy was going great guns on
Objectives, and was right in the middle taken off these procedures designed to put him into PT, to suddenly
run the goal "to forget" as "this had been found to be rocket reading on everybody". In this
way the Objectives could become identified with arbitraries ordered at random and running into huge pc losses.
This not only happened with Objectives, of course, but also with other procedures. However, Objectives are, as
a unique stabilization procedure, more vulnerable to random unsettling activities.
Confusion
The steps handling the Condition of Confusion (Confusion, one of the lower level ethics conditions.
See Management Dictionary or later editions of Introduction to Scn. Ethics (1978 or later). Ed.)
basically strip past environments, which inhibit perception of the present, off the pc. Ideally they sooner or
later discover where they are. They get into comm with the present environment without being hampered by earlier
environments stuck over them, which prevent them from seeing PT as it is.
Although this is a step used when handling Ethics Conditions, it is of course at the same time very valid as auditing
tool. It could also be regarded as an Objective. (It can have the same liability when overrun!)
Liability
The Objectives are a very elegant series of procedures. They do have very specific aims. Returning present time,
space and event to individuals, by restoring their reach to these, is very valid processing indeed.
However, in the "good old" days there was quite a devilish arbitrary called "a 20 minutes flat spot"
connected to some of the procedures. This meant that the process was flat when similar comm lags of equal lengths
had been achieved during the last 20 minutes the process was run.
It should be understandable that with that requirement the process would never flatten. A flat spot of 20 minutes
of equal lag would just not be achieved. Having been run on some 800 hours of these procedures was quite sufficient
to obtain a good personal reality on this.
As the basic purpose of the Objectives was to get the pc more or less stably into PT, their overrun could drive
pcs "up the wall" so to speak. Lovely, very effective processes, like the CCHs were often seen to become
true battlefields. Auditors were specially trained to be seated between the pc and the door in order to prevent
pcs making a run for it and trying to escape. Auditors occasionally had to literally drag pcs from wall
to wall to get them to carry out the auditing command.
The main reason why these dramas occurred was the 20 minute flat spot. Even for auditors it was not easy to have
an unvarying attention span for that length of time.
As a result overrun and protest became the order of the day. PCs often protested against these inherently great
processes. (It was the same as the old TR 0 training where the "not do anything else but be there" rule
was driven to the extent of training robots Witnessing LRH audit, one would never see displays of such robotic
motionless "in Trs".)
Many of the potential gains to be obtained were obtained and then lost again through overrun resulting in caved
in pcs (overrun being one of the causes of PTS, as taught by LRH to the class VII Internes in SHUK in the mid 60's).
Some people may remember how eventually LRH himself changed the 20 minute requirement into an EP of three commands
with equal comm lag, and from that point on these great procedures made their come back.
He changed this when running some of these procedures in Saint Hill (UK) and expressing surprise about "what
the activities had been turned into by others" (who did try to run according to the 20 minutes rule!).
His changing the rule from 20 minutes into the very achievable end phenomena of three equal comm lags made all
the difference!
(LRH, as often happened, accused "others" of having "altered" the procedures by "introducing
arbitraries", etc. These accusations were often unfounded.)
Regardless of the unethicalness of making others wrong for having tried to run the data as ordered, LRH's decisions
did save the procedures.
Later uses
The procedures became really validated from approximately the late 60's on up, during the Flag Drug research days.
A great change had occurred in the type of reactivity to be addressed. The vast majority of cases presenting themselves
for auditing and training were suddenly, completely unexpectedly, found to have been involved in a very extensive
use of drugs. This was quite contrary to the 50s to early 60s when drugs, except the medical variety, were a virtually
unheard of item in engram running and later case technical procedures.
LRH immediately started an extensive research program on Flag with the Sea Org Class VIII auditors, and a whole
new area of importance of TR Training, all the way to Upper Indocs, and the running of Objectives was discovered.
This has since become far more extensively researched, and a large range of standard procedures in the handling
of not only drug/alcohol and other resistive cases has become established.
The newly found validity of Objectives has been proven in thousands upon thousands of hours of auditing. The truth
and power of these mainly simple procedures has, of course, been seen by LRH from their beginning.
After different periods of absence they have returned. This time to stay!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Objectives:
Objectives (3)
(The following three articles first appeared on the private Internet list IVy-subscribers,
in response to a request I made. The list is open to subscribers to IVy. Ed.)
By Russell Stockdale, Australia
ANTONY, YOU ASKED for anecdotes concerning Objectives.
I had my Objectives done in the church by well trained auditors. The processes turned on and ran out a lot
of mental stuff I'd had sitting there for a long time. One particular highlight, on "Book and Bottle"
was exteriorization with full perception. That is I looked down on my body, the auditor, the room. Although it
only lasted a few seconds (no way was I gonna stay out there!) I gained a total certainty then that I was
NOT the body. I had had two similar exteriorisations before this. The first was when first taking LSD and the other
was on my first parachute jump. Another major Objectives result for me was the ability (as a thetan) to do anything
forever. There were other, major life enhancements as a combined result of scientology study, Objectives, grades,
etc.
After two years of scientology I started writing poetry, limericks and songs, taught myself guitar, keyboard, and
computers. In my forties I got back into martial arts, then into ballroom dancing to bronze medal standard. I doubt
if I would have gotten to OTIII without the Objectives well done. Now I am doing upper level solo auditing in the
Free Zone. Without those Objectives I would probably only be able to talk about scn. Now I can, and am,
doing it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Objectives:
Objectives (4)
By Judith Anderson, Australia
Dear Russell, Great Post.
I STARTED MY auditing with Objectives, i.e. Give me that Hand -- and the bracket. There were a lot of hours I remember
with Stanley Richards, and as they were done before Grades and Floating needles were known, in l965 when they were
rehabbed for the Grades, and from those Objectives I had three grades (the others were then run). I did have things
key in out of session, and from that I realised I had a bank!! They empowered me.
Later, on Power, I went exterior and that experience was my most dramatic, and I've often ascribe my early
Objectives to that win.
A friend of mine had 8 hrs of Objectives and huge wins and no auditing since, and could run disburbing events in
past lifetimes (often clinging on to her husband) and recalling being in them, and running them out. She has been
high toned ever since.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Objectives:
Objectives (5)
By Muriel Chen, Australia
JUDITH AND RUSSELL, thank you for your interesting contributions. You have inspired me to share my own experiences.
Thank you.
My first auditing was of about 50 hours. It began with CCH's and then continued with alternate sessions of CCH's
and Joburg. My case began to be handled.
I remember in the Joburg there was a question "Have you ever been a cannibal?" or similar wording. It
always read and there were never any answers I could find. It was many years later I found the answer and it came
in contemplation of the joke which the auditor told me in place of the loss of not finding an answer to fit the
read. This is it: "Did you hear about the cannibal who 'passed' his friend in the forest?"
It was and is the only joke I ever remember. I got my other gains from the Objectives.
Then when I began training there were more. Then on staff, each time a student needed someone to practice upon
I volunteered. I have done hundreds of hours and each time I get more gain. And every time I get more awareness
of the nature of now. And each time I see more of how I create my own now. I think one could resolve
the riddle of the universe this way! Anyone want more practice running them now?
When I did my dianetic internship I began my PC on Objectives. We ran them for weeks. He found and ran his locks
and his secondaries and then his engrams. He ran his grades and turned on all the valences that were there. He
came more and more into present time. He ran out all PTSness. When we finished there seemed to be nothing in his
life or awareness that he did not wish to be there. He began creating a brand new life. Dianetic Auditing brought
in nothing so I had to get a new PC. Many years later I saw him again and he is still making life successfully
and happily.
When someone wants to expand through confronting the barriers to expansion, any process works. In my opinion the
simpler more direct ones work the best.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Objectives:
Objectives (6)
By Ray Kemp, USA
JUST AFTER Objectives came out, I ran my Blue Great Dane dog on them. "Give me that Paw" went well and
flattened in about 15 minutes then ran SCS (Start, Change, Stop) using standard commands, and Hunter went through
every level of the tone scale, throwing up, peeing and pooping, snarling, and jumping around. It took 2-3 hrs but
we ended up with a floating needle (sorry -- tail!), and after that he would "play the SCS Game" on occasion.
Ron mentioned this at a London Conference, at the same time as Pam did a touch assist on a dying Goldfish which
revived and lived for a couple of years after that.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Objectives:
Objectives (7)
RECENTLY, some one on an Internet group asked: "Are there any Objective procedures/processes that are not
repetitive that you are aware of?"
Ted Crammer, USA, replied:
To name a few, not in any order:
Take a Walk
Physical labor (if not grueling)
Arts and Crafts (particularly if it is properly supervised and 2wc'd)
Order vs Disorder Policy Letter
Probably half of the Group Processing as given by LRH and written up in the Group Processing Handbook
Please Pass the Object. (Creation of Human Ability)
Or,
Make something up like a game of catch which is really cool if verbal 2wc accompanies the physical object going
back and forth. But this might be construed as being repetitive...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
NORDENHOLZ' SYNTHESIS, Part 2
by C.B. Willis, USA
This article continues a series for IVy on Anastasius Nordenholz' Scientologie: Science of the Constitution
and Usefulness of Knowledge [1934, 1937], now focusing on the later section of his "Synthesis" (pages
34-67), which addresses the formation and molding of beingness.
This segment of the book is remarkable for several reasons: 1) the style changes to one of greater complexity and
rambling and is thus much more difficult for the reader to follow, 2) Nordenholz is now bringing to fruition and
making practical the ideas he introduced earlier. It is as though Nordenholz has combined the basic ingredients
to make philosophical "bread," and has now taken the mass into his hands to knead it - first this way,
then that, then force applied from yet another direction, to get the dough thoroughly mixed. Nordenzholz worked
the material over from nearly every angle in order to master it.
The impression I had in reading this segment of the book is that Nordenholz, who wrote very much in the complex
tradition of German idealism, and who did not have access to word processors in his day, had not polished this
material as tightly as found in earlier sections. Reading this section of the _Scientologie_ is not impossible,
but the ideas are very convoluted in places and require the utmost in philosophical discipline and patience to
sort it all out. Indeed, this is some of the most difficult material I have encountered in 30 years of philosophical
study. In this article, I will attempt to extract the essence of what Nordenholz intended and present it more simply.
Form-System Defined
A form is like a vessel that holds stones, but does not further qualify the particulars of how the stones are
held, or how the stones stand in relation to each other within the vessel. Everything about "how" a particular
thing comes to exist in reality is not given by the form. Form gives a general shape or direction to things, which
then needs to be further qualified by the precision of individuation. A "form-system" is defined as the
combination of form plus individuation. [page 34]
Let us review the analytic and synthetic directions of thinking. In analytic thinking, which is "top-down,"
we have a consciousness, which creates conscious-beingness, and creates general formatory ideas of essence or kind,
plus specific individuation involving quality and quantity, into a particular thing. Top-down is the direction
of creation, where consciousness creates reality. We move from unity to the individual parts of creation.
In synthetic thinking, which is "bottom-up," we begin with one or more particular things, name the quality
and quantity about a thing(s), move to the general formatory essence or kind of thing, then leap to conscious-beingness
and consciousness itself. Bottom-up is a direction for scientific understanding, whereby we allow objects to mold
our thinking in the consideration of them. We move from the parts to the whole, which is now seen to be a composite
or sum of parts gathered up, rather than a unity. (To move to a unity would require a leap beyond the phenomenon
of a composite or sum, which does happen for the intuitive scientist.)
Here we have a brief outline of how consciousness orders reality in an active way, and how our thinking is, in
turn, ordered by particular things in a more passive way. Thus the creative process proceeds continuously, like
breathing out and breathing in. In both cases above, there is a subject (consciousness) and an object (what consciousness
is aware of).
Systems Thinking
Nordenholz states that every system is a representative and creator of itself. [page 37] The system generates
the system from one moment to the next over time. Many analytic and synthetic processes operate simultaneously
in the system. Because of the two-way flow between consciousness and the object(s) of consciousness, we are not
just dealing with a consciousness creating a universe. Since consciousness has the experience of being shaped and
changed by the objects it contemplates, we are really talking about a system that creates and re-creates
itself on an ongoing basis. Consciousness is, of course, a senior element of that system, but not the ultimate
senior element as we will see later.
The evolution of a system depends on the consciousness and character of individuals, the choices made by individuals
based on their character, and how individuals interact based on those choices. In other words, evolution depends
on how people choose to design and play the game of life!
Character Formation
Adaptation to the environment points toward externality, toward the seniority of the total environment over
a person. However, no constitution or character can develop without some outside influences. The implication here
is that a person should not merely adapt to his environment, but rather have a balance of constructive influence
on his environment, yet at the same time be flexible enough to allow for positive social interactions and the ability
to learn new things that enhance his capabilaties. Again we see a two-way flow, and a distinction made between
various kinds of inflow and the attitudes a person can take about them.
The character of an individual is formed by a combination of constructive adaptation to externals and his own inner
connections and constitution. [page 40]
Different Types of Individual
The type of a individual derives from one or more stable qualities shared by individuals in common among themselves.
An individual's type also shows his relation to the multiplicity by contrast. [page 41]
The "koinotype" shows what about an individual is shared in common with others. The word "koinotype"
derives from the Greek words "koinonia" meaning equal or community, and "typos" meaning kind.
The "idiotype" shows what about an individual is different from others. The word "idiotype derives
from the Greek words "idios" meaning own, individual or isolated, and "typos" meaning kind.
At any moment, either koinotype or idiotype tendencies can predominate when the person relates to another individual,
thus defining the social dynamic with its element of openness or uncertainty. Yet, individuals show themselves
as types, so what is "typical" cannot be missing from human events in the world. Here Nordenholz presupposes
a necessary, higher level of abstract evaluation regarding behavior, thus imposing a layer of significance to actions
and events that may or may not in fact be necessary but facilitates analysis, understanding, and the ascription
of meaning to life events.
Individual character and integrity, an "interiorness," manifest in a spectrum from integration to disintegration.
[page 42]
Likewise on a spectrum, adaptation to externals, an "exteriorness," can be increased or decreased. Nordenholz
implies that adaptation to externals can be constructive and for the benefit of the individual and the whole, so
readers need to keep this ideal in view and not interpret adaptation to externals as a kind of overwhelm by others
or the environment.
Individual differences manifest in social relationships on a spectrum from idiotype to koinotype, and the turning
from one to the other ["amphitropy"] as the individual may deem appropriate in the moment.
Thus from character and integrity, then adaptation to externals, and finally to the demonstration of types in social
relationships, we see the constitution of the individual and his action in society.
Character and type position a person in relation to the opposites of compulsion and freedom. From the above basic
elements (especially character, type, compulsion and freedom), the person orders his creations. [page 43] Compulsion
and freedom are "elastic" in their proportions, compulsion widening at the expense of freedom, and freedom
widening at the expense of compulsion. The person adjusts the proportions of compulsion and freedom according to
his estimate of what is needed in a particular situation. Again we see the dual-turning and adjustment that works
to carry a creation into form.
Evolution of the Individual and the Whole
Character and type may lean more toward freedom, which produces evolution, or more toward compulsion, which
produces involution. As the individual evolves, his qualifications increase, which is to say his attributes and
capabilities increase. In involution, an individual suffers the loss of qualifications, an impoverishment of attributes
and capabilities. A change in a person's qualitative existence is an indicator of the proportions of freedom and
compulsion in operation, and is thus also a measure of his evolution or involution.
Nordenholz claims that the evolution of the whole will be "purchased through the rising qualitative differentiation
and particularization of the parts." [page 45] Specialization by individuals benefits the whole and releases
individuals to an immediate freedom - a freedom and empowerment to grow and flourish in their respective specialties
as well as to enjoy the growing freedom of the whole that occurs as individuals work in harmony.
Applied Methodology
Scientologie, which Nordenholz elsewhere calls "eidology," is about the conscious formation and molding
of beingness toward the world. There is a directionality or vector of creation, from: 1) consciousness which
then creates 2) conscious-beingness (what Hegel would call spiritual substance), to 3) the general ideational
forms [eidos], and then to 4) particular objects and situations by means of character and type, as
well as quantity, quality, and modality. [page 35]
"To the soul belongs its characteristic substance. The substance of the soul is the general expression for
the spiritual substance, [which is also] spiritual presence." [page 60] A person's spiritual presence is his
most fundamental creation, and derives from his consciousness, his integrity, and his character.
Following the Platonic tradition, Nordehnolz states that outside of the forms, there is no knowledge, which is
to say that the forms are the principles of intelligibility. Forms are what we use to both shape our creations
(actively) and understand the world (passively). [page 52]
Form derives from conscious-beingness [page 54], which I take to mean that the consciousness which creates conscious-beingness
imbues that substance with creative ideas [eidos]. Nordenholz is quick to state that form(s) cannot be derived
from consciousness alone however; rather, experience gives us feedback, and the experience of creating conscious-beingness
gives consciousness a feedback that is revelatory and useful in perfecting or fulfilling the creative process.
I consider the foregoing observation by Nordenholz, who builds on both Plato and modern phenomenology, to be one
of the greatest philosophical discoveries of all time.
The final determination of what manifests does not lie in consciousness or conscious-beingness, but in the origin
of consciousness which is beingness-by-itself: the ground of being. [page 53] Thus, individual creation
takes place within the larger context of the ground of being, which is not seizable, adaptable, or fully conceivable
by individual consciousness.
C.B. Willis, MA Northern California October 27, 1997
© Copyright by C.B. Willis, 1997. All rights reserved.
[This article was published by IVy (International Viewpoints) in Denmark, http://home.sn.no/home/trone/IVy.html.]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
British Conference
A CONFERENCE WAS HELD in London on 4th november 1997 and the next British conference is planned for 16th. May
1998. So hold this date clear if you are interested in meeting new people, and perhaps old friends, and getting
some new viewpoints on things. Nearer the date, a mailing will be sent out to all British <MI>IVy<M>
subscribers, but visitors from abroad are also very welcome. If you want to make sure of getting full details,
write to Ewa Manius, 76, The Fairway, North Wembley, Mddx, HA0 3TJ. G.B.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Olympiade
By Jim Burtles, England
If High toners create aesthetics
And Low toners cause lots of chaos
Shouldn't we encourage high tone Athletics.
There are lots of events we could run
In our special kind of theta Olympics
Can you imagine the amount of fun?
There could be lots of theta things to do
To stretch our little mental muscles.
By way of example, I'll mention a few.
What about the 100 meter High Hopes?
Perhaps the Hope, Snap and Done!
And skiing up vertical slopes.
The long postulate instead of the jump
Which might last a very long time.
Brag Racing might appeal to some.
I rather fancy the As Is Relay.
It would be very interesting
To see what's left at the end of the day.
|
|
These pages created by FreeZone
America ©1997
last updated: 10 Dec 97
|
