|
sam
Date: 26 Jan 2001 04:00:11
Actually I'm posting in honor of Joe Harrington, but that's a separate message. I decided to answer this one too as long as I was writing. And in case you all are interested, I am doing a bit better now.
Too true. The levels are supposed to be for the gains that you make on them. If something exists for the purpose of its own expansion, then, in its purest form, it is what we call a pyramid scheme, a self feeding monster that lives as long as it can find new cannon fodder to fill the bottom ranks. On the other hand, if something is valuable in and of itself, then it is a good and desirable product. And if it is a good product, of course you recommend it because it is worth recommending. My best rule for distinguishing the one from the other is whether or not the praise is solicited or occurs as a natural byproduct of the customer's delight. If you demand a success story, then by definition it is solictied. Case closed. And please note that there are times that I would have written a success story. I have had some wonderful gains. Maybe one success story in ten would have been written volentarily. And those are the best ones I ever wrote for the org too. Occasionally something really wonderful happened. But why did they want the other spurious ones? There is something wrong with an organization that does that.
Well said.
Back around 1974 a sea org recruiter found out that I had some considerations on joining the SO because I'd have to abandon playing the piano (no piano for lowly SO staff). And so she told me that if I was OT 8 obviously I'd be super able to play the piano, so why not join and bring that about quickly. I will say that processing has improved my playing. I will also say that if I had no piano and never played, then I could run processes until the cows come home and still not be any good at the piano.
Obviously Nothing.
No, actually I kept things pretty much in balance. In case I haven't said it, I do think that you need to spend more time living in the real world than processing. The processing really does help, but does not subsitute for living life. It only enhances living life. If you have no life to enhance, then it goes nowhere.
Yes, do processing and other stuff too!
Actually I don't think that. The failure is that I got derailed on researching the tech which is another of my great loves. I really don't think that there is anything wrong in persuing any of the asthetic goals like piano playing. The fact that I have more than one really good goal (piano playing, research, software design, etc.) is probably why I can still live life well despite have one of my goal lines kicked in by a bunch of SPs.
One of my real interests actually is the tech. This is a deep seated old purpose of understaning life and the universe and everything.
Here I have to disagree. The processing I got last year did take charge off, it was simply a factor of too much charge and a real world PTS situation (to OSA and to the 2D) that made the gains appear transient. In truth, anything that was run out remained gone, but there was always so much more that the charge levels remained just as high. Most of the case is suppressed and out of the accessible band. We depend to a huge degree on the keyout effect to move things out of the way temporarily. I was trying to run out the entirity of the 2nd dynamic. That was way out gradient. It's much easier to simply have sex, that's what normal people do. As for solo vs being audited by others, some of the processing I got last year was from Class 8s and super capable auditors far beyond those still remaining in CofS and the effects were pretty much the same (but much faster) as when I was soloing. I've said many times that you can run much faster and deeper with a top level professional auditor than you can in soloing. But if you are a trained auditor, you can solo anything, it is just slow and takes a lot more processing to reach the same result.
If I couldv'e done that then, then I would have and I would have been out of the woods fairly fast. No, I couldn't get any women to sleep with me, no matter how inappropriate. There is some sort of misconception that if you lowered your standards you would get somebody, and that is wrong, you just get rejected by girls that nobody else would want anyway. Or, for that matter, working on appearance, style, technique, romanticism, etc. That did work to get me dates. I had lots of girls who would run around with me during the latter half of last year (in sharp contrast to the the first half of the year). None who would sleep with me of course, it was constant torture, but I really learned to be a great date. Oddly enough, when I spotted that I was teaching myself a lesson, things shifted around a bit. I have a very strong postulate to understand things and find a way out. Resigning as Pilot took some of the pressure off and I could look at it a bit. It occured to me that I've done this before and that the research failed at a crossroads where I favored less sex rather than more sex as the way out. Note that this is common in metaphysics (practicing abandoning desire). So it occured to me that the whole mess, even pulling in that osa thing, stemmed from the fact that I needed to teach myself that spiritual advancement depended on more sex rather than less. As soon as I thought that and learned the lesson, somebody slept with me. I have no other proof and I've still got more charge kicking around that I can shake a stick at, but everything changed and I'm finally enjoying life instead of going around in constant agony. I plan on remaining retired, at least for now, because there is too much in confusion and I still don't trust my judegment, but things really are getting better finally. As to why having sex is higher scaled than not having sex, my best guess is that it goes back to early co-creates and ARC on the track, much earlier than bodies or sex as we know it today. It is not a reproductive urge at all, but a basic solution to having separated from each other. And note that I'd already run every grade process to the wall on this topic. Not just the obvious ones like Overts but the extended areas like protest and inval as well. And of course I was continually handling out grade 3 because the obvious fact that nobody liked me enough kept throwing the grade out again. Finding out what lesson you are teaching yourself is common in metaphysics. I did touch on that a little bit in some of my earlier writings, but I didn't go nearly far enough. We probably need a grade on this topic.
Actually I tried a hell of a lot. I could tell you some facinating stories about last year. I did not just sit around running processes.
Here I agree. The real test of an OT is does he get a big laugh out of visiting the reg instead of suffering an implant. Happily, I can say that I mostly got the big laugh.
Looking forward to it.
Many who remember the old days in CofS have died in the last few years. LaMont and Ray Kemp and Wayne Marple to name but a few. And orthodox old timers too like Randy Parsons and Nate Hightower. Soon there will be nobody left who remembers what Scientology really was unless the freezone keeps the truth alive.
Ken formerly The Pilot truthseeker7@excite.com ------------------ The free Self Clearing Book, The Super Scio book, and the "SCIENTOLOGY REFORMER'S HOME PAGE" are all over the net. See The Self Clearing Homepage for URLs to these sites http://fza.org/pilot/selfclr.htm Or see The Pilots Home Page at http://fza.org/pilot/index.htm Some translations are available, see links at fza.org Also see the new www.fzint.org website. See the Pilot Archives at FZA.ORG.
|
