The Enemy

I commented twice in the discussion on the post Scientology Regression that there is no enemy; the malady is having to have one.  Apparently, Scientology instills the firm belief that there are people worthy of the label ‘enemy’, and that such people must be depowered and dispensed with, or in some cases made to be and act in an acceptable way.  I’m sure someone will cite to What Is Greatness?, originally published as a magazine article in March 1966, to stop this train of thought.  In that case, someone else can just as easily cite HCO PL The Responsibilities of Leaders, issued as policy less than a year later, which justifies murder provided it is carried out stealthily against the enemy of a worthy enough power.

You even have a self-auditing process in Scientology designed for people deemed by authorities in the group to have acted in a way that warrants the label ‘enemy.’  That formula requires the individual to change the very essence of his being – his very concept of his own identity – to conform to the liking of the powers that be in the group.  That can be a rather dysfunctional, destructive process given the fact that finding out who one really is is the end product of the Scientology bridge itself.  In order to be accepted back into the group he must, in addition to other steps, ‘deliver an effective blow to the enemies of the group one has been pretending to be part of despite personal danger.’

I think it is worthwhile for someone who has adopted Scientology beliefs to think about what notions have been inculcated into oneself about labeling people as ‘enemy’ and treating them as such.  Think about the effect it might have on your relations and your own peace of mind.  For contemplation about how to deal with anyone who might declare you an enemy of him or her, an apt passage from the Tao Te Ching describing what is a ‘great man’ might assist:

      He thinks of his enemy as the shadow that he himself casts.

463 responses to “The Enemy

  1. I agree. The more you put a person behind a wall called, “enemies over on the other side there,” the more you do not see that portion of your universe and so are less capable yourself.

    • Lynne,
      I remember driving with my husband and newborn and realizing a resurgence of freedom that we could do anything we wanted and that the world is not made up of enemies. We had been falsely expelled and had to demand reinstatement from FOLO (no comm eve, and actually no situation other than what an SP administrator mocked up by not giving me maternity leave when needed) which we did receive with an order for HCO to immediately reinstate us. This would never happen now! I didn’t take the declare with a serious tone because it was too stupid, but what I did cog on at the time (over 35 years ago) is how easily people did what they were told, and how little they actually compared what they heard to what was written in policy or to their own observation. This was when the staff were warned about the SP phone company, the SP post office, the SP news media, SP psychs and medial doctors, and of course the IRS was the biggie SP along with the CIA and FBI. I came in to Scientology seeking spiritual knowledge, and did not see the world as a horrible place, nor did I have personal enemies. I accepted that some people / groups could dramatize evil and want to attack good. But, after what I experienced and observed in my own org I knew that an outpoint of Scientology was seeing enemies everywhere. I still stayed in Scientology for years and years winning in training and auditing, but growing more disgusted with the outpoints in the ‘think’ and the actions of the church members toward people. I was hoping after the IRS win, attitudes would change because clearly we didn’t need to keep fighting. I was wrong. The church needed more and more enemies to fight because of all the overts it has accumulated over the years. It is worse than any of the SP groups it has ever named. Organizationally, it compares with the Natzi’s in terms of control. I know this isn’t news, it happened under LRH’s watch and direction, but it is so much more insane now. I have never forgotten my own surprise at my expansion of being and cognition when realizing the truth, and of course this continues to happen.

      • Good points, Jewel!

      • Jewel, that is not too hard to understand. It is not that the church never admits to wrongdoing (rarely if ever though), or that they don’t know of their own overts. They never take RESPONSIBILITY for the fact of their overts. I know it is bad to talk about people but :) I met this one registrar I have seen “get off” her overts twice in public (in the Flag auditorium & at the NOT’s event) but not to the proper terminal. Only instead to anyone at the church that would listen. Even a new public person and staff do this with her. She did this in front of me where I could hear her O/W’s being communicated twice, but she never took responsibility for the fact that she did these things. She never did any kind of amends or was actually held accountable for her actions. Before this and after when I required an actual comm cycle with her it was like talking to an SP. She backflashes, makes 1.1. comments, jokes & degraded cracks about people. Why? Because “she doesn’t HAVE to do any amends like everybody else, she’s in the Sea Org!” If that is not crazy Jewel, I don’t know what is. Wouldn’t that make enemies with people fast? :)

        • Lawrence,
          “It is not that the church never admits to wrongdoing (rarely if ever though), or that they don’t know of their own overts. They never take RESPONSIBILITY for the fact of their overts.” I agree that NO RESPONSIBILITY is taken for overts. I will have to disagree that the church management sees their overts as overts. They don’t see because they can’t see. I want to say LOL, ’cause its so extremely pathetic but it’s not funny so I won’t.
          Does the SP (ie DM) stop, squish, destroy with the idea that he is committing overts? NO. He is out of valence and can only dramatize. He sees expansion, he sees that everyone else is incompetent, he sees that everyone is beneath him and HE AND HE ALONE is saving the earth. He is right right right and will continue to be right even until he is a solid black dot.
          But, so as not to overly generalize, the way the Church operates as a single entity reveals a suppressive track and it is stuck on destruction in everything it attempts to do. A staff person may be willing to take responsibility for what he or she considers an overt, but they agree with the direction of management or they wouldn’t be there (or can’t get out if SO) so they will defend to the end the reason for attack and destroy tactics. I have heard a DSA, for example, say that “Well, we aren’t perfect, we make mistakes”….infact, this is their PR way of PRETENDING that they are taking responsibility. They think that this somehow smooths over all the ‘misunderstandings’ that others have about the church. Geeze, how f’d up is that! But, what happens to ones ability to confront when one is swimming in overts? The church is running on automatic bank and DM and associates will have to loose a TON of black mass before and come up to even the idea that an overt could ever be committed by them. That won’t happen so the whole org is a train wreck.

          On another note, I am trying to get the scene about the REG who gets off her overts to the public. It sounds like the makings of a good comedy skit! I can’t seriously conceive of this. Can you give me more R on it? What does or did she say?…

          “Good Morning, Welcome to Sunday Service! Before we get started with Minister Rob Ot, I’d just like to say that last week, Thursday at 1:55 to be exact, I convinced Joe Will Blow to use his status of Executor over his mothers estate to withdraw all the funds for his OT 5-8, plus enough for a big fat IAS donation! He actually did it, but he didn’t tell his mother because she has dementia anyway, so she’ll just forget. He wrote all the checks out and now my stats are in screaming Affluence! The only thing is now the rest of his family is angry at him for bypassing all the beneficiaries which was illegal, and now there is no money to keep the mom in the expensive nursing home so she is going to a county hospital. Oh, and no else gets a dime despite the legal orders of her living trust. He could be looking at jail time depending on what his family decides. Anyway, he is super mad at me and started screaming at me! He now has a huge PTS A situation. I told him to go to ethics and get handled because it is HIS situation that he created and he HAS to take responsibility and HANDLE his family. I suggested that he gets them in to see the div 6 film and buy a basic book. He blew from ethics. No responsibility! I guess my overt is that I failed to get him to buy his family the Basics, but hey WE ARE CLEARING THE PLANET! and shit happens.”

      • Great post Jewel
        +1
        This was when the staff were warned about the SP phone company, the SP post office, the SP news media, SP psychs and medial doctors, and of course the IRS was the biggie SP along with the CIA and FBI. :) :) :) :)

  2. “He thinks of his enemy as the shadow that he himself casts.”

    http://youtu.be/VeW7T5Q5mhI

    (Language on this may be NSFW)

  3. I’m think a great way to trap 2 people would be to give half the key to their happiness to each, then make them enemies that never speak again.
    That would keep the secret to happiness safe forever.

    Maybe in a similar way, if we really embraced being able to experience anything to the end of experiencing what ever stopped us from befriending an enemy, we would find happiness in brotherhood of man.

    Just a thought. The alternative is withdrawal, a little more, a little more, a little more…

    • Martin, your first paragraph sounds a lot like marriage and divorce…

      • Yup it does sound like divorce. And it is clearly explained here (note that overts and critical “enemy” stuff, is below help (which is the make-break point of sanity):

        “The forces of two beings cannot come into dispute until after they have first joined. Thus there is no war like that seen between brothers or husband and wife.
        The cycle is this:
        INDEPENDENT BEINGS
        COMMUNICATION
        MIS-COMMUNICATION
        CONTROL
        MIS-CONTROL
        HELP
        FAILED HELP
        OVERTS AND WITHHOLDS
        OVERTS AND WITHHOLDS BY TRANSFER
        WORRYING OTHERS
        WORRYING ABOUT OTHERS
        BEING CRITICAL
        BEING CRITICAL OF SELF(roughly paraphrased).”

        Regarding “to enemy” (should that be enemise? trying to make a verb from a noun) or “to help” – which gets gains? If a terminal is charged, and full of betrayal to the point of enemy-that-must-be-destroyed, what can help the situation?
        From HCOB 7 JULY 1960
        THE ASSESSMENT OF HELP:
        EXCERPT
        “Thus there is something peculiar about help which is not true of any other button.
        Any help run is a gain even (Gawdelpus) if it is left wholly bogged with a half hour comm lag. All bits of help run are chewing away at all tangles of identification. So chew away and to the Dickens with it. Any help run is better than no help run. And because the PC is a bundle of aberrated identifications, any help run untangles some of him. And any help run on any terminal tends to “get at” any other terminal.
        So that’s why help run in any old way will sooner or later make the grade. But this is no reason to believe there are not also smart ways to run help.”

        • That first quote was from “HCOB 22 DECEMBER 1960″:
          “O-W A LIMITED THEORY

          Before I would permit you to believe that the overt-withhold mechanism was a total way of life, I would point out that it applies only to a strata of existence and that it stems from failures to help.”

          Living based on enemies is a low strata of existence. Help is common to all man, they are some where on the chart of attitudes, and the king, yet was missing button in that chart is “HELP/DESTROY”. But don’t forget destroy-to-help. How does an angry man help? He gives a kick in the pants.

          The sane and naturally trusting and understanding person, has no use for enemies, and starts to wonder how they can be helped.

          The sick advertise enemies.

          • One of my favorite references. I love reading it over and over. Thanks for posting.

            • Laura Ann – I believe you will also enjoy this reference. I can see this only being done by individual free thinking beings. Hard to believe it says this when we see what the RCS is doing but here tis:

              “…instead of worrying day and night about what the federal government is or is not going to do, instead of worrying about the fact that we apparently have no sweepingly effective leaders, and instead of worrying about what they did do or didn’t do or what the army says or didn’t say or what the navy says about the army, and so forth, instead of worrying about this sort of thing, would it not be possible to just skip it.

              “That’s a rather startling proposal, but just skip it and be effective by making it possible for a country to exist some time in the future. Instead of worrying about whether it exists now, or whether it’s functioning now, let’s just get down to the grass roots and begin to grow a country, person by person, guy by guy, IQ by IQ. And sooner or later these people will be smart enough to find some leaders and get a show on the road.”

              — L. Ron Hubbard

              Excerpted from the lecture “Creating a Third Dynamic” delivered on 30 December 1957. This can be found in the Ability Congress.

              • Sapere, that was worth reading! LRH, now that was guy that used his head! :)

              • Wow, Sapere Aude! That is nice! I especially love the last paragraph! Thank you!

                • Laura Ann, and you know another thing is, that in spite of exactly how true, how applicable and how real and do-able that LRH reference is, take a good look at the Church of Scientology today. There “mode” of communicating such a welcome idea is to literally hang up billboards around town that say “Has mental illness gotten the better of you lately? Try Dianetics!”. :) Anyone would think a person with perhaps REAL mental health issues might put up a sign like that. :)

                • LA – You are most welcome! The last paragraph summarizes how I feel the real valuable function of any “Indie” or even any person who sees some value in some or all of LRH’s work. We simply apply and use what we know to be true and help our family, friends, neighbors, and on up the dynamics. We will find those capable and valuable beings who can get the show on the road.

                  I don’t believe Marty, Mike or any here wish to project themselves as the leader. We just help who we are in live communication and ARC with and carry on. You have always shown yourself to be a gracious lady so I felt you would find this reference to fit your demeanor. Here is to you and Mike continue to carry forward as stable positions in your area to help bring peace and wins to all around you.

                  • martyrathbun09

                    Laura and her husband have done more than 95% of ex-church members to help Scientoligists to integrate, evolve and transcend. Don’t get the wrong impression that she simply graces those she touches – which is certainly true. But that family has done and continues to do more than most.

                    • I don’t know what to say but, Thank you for the validation.

                      I will also say, that there are so many doing so much more than we could ever do. That includes you and Mosey. I’ve watched you both give with great care all you have to give, to insure a person is helped and in a better place. And, without asking for anything in return.

                      This ties in with this post because, I can’t imagine anyone labeling you or Mosey or the large majority of people I’ve met in recent years (that includes Scientologists, Indies, ex-Scientologists, non-Scientologists) as an enemy.

                      People of good will are easy to spot. No matter how they go about things, if they are concerned with helping others, why enemy?

          • Martin,
            Good Reference, thanks for posting.

  4. I love Scientology and a whole lot of the writings of its founder. And I practice it, more so than anything.

    But I’ve stated elsewhere that I have no use for ‘Responsibilities of Leaders’ nor the ‘Lower Conditions’ (including ‘Enemy’). In my re-evaluation of the subject for myself, these were the first to go.

    They are tools for the aberrated to abuse others at their whim.

    They are ‘Canceled.’

    Thanks for stating it as you did so well.

    • However, I like this quote from the above PL (Resoponsibilities of Leaders):

      “One is what one is, not what one is admired or hated for. To judge oneself by one’s successes is simply to observe that one’s postulates worked and breeds confidence in one’s ability. To have to be told it worked only criticizes one’s own eyesight and hands a spear to the enemy to make his wound of vanity at his will.
      Applause is nice. It’s great to be thanked and admired. But to work only for that?”

  5. I find the last series of posts very enlightening. It is quite a journey.

  6. A truly humanitarian group should not promote or generate hate or hatefulness. IMO.

  7. “The Enemy Within”

  8. Hey Marty,

    This is most certainly an important reminder. After all, much of my OSA DSA full hat was a recipe for creating enemies out of illusion.

    Recently, I’m admiring some interesting shadows and figuring out how to love and bless them as well. Wildly powerful healing process for me.

    So this post is not a surprise, but a helpful reinforcement.

    As always,
    Vic

    BTW: OSA DSA full hat was the actual training materials package with drills that qualified me to work in a Class 5 org as the OSA rep.

    • martyrathbun09

      Yes, that was some serious stuff. I just finished a review of all the OSA NWs (mostly formerly Guardian’s Office orders) and the creation of the illusion was remarkably intense. It is a wonder we have arrived where we have after having pledged, and acted in, allegiance to all that for so long. Hat tip to you, brother.

    • From one ‘Fully Hatted’ DSA to another: – congratulations.

      Wildly powerful healing process, indeed. What a long, strange trip it’s been, back out of all that, eh?

      Amazing that I’m having a hard time finding enemies, these days. Although I find I still have some shadows in my soul to confront.

      • Scott Gordon – former DSA CCDallas; DSA Costa Rica
        Active Auditor Class 0+

      • martyrathbun09

        Tip of the hat to you too.

      • My first post was DSA in Phx. Some of it was cool. One of the first things I did was attend hearings on court ordered aversion therapy for juveniles. I didn’t know they did stuff like that. It was like Clockwork Orange. Really sick stuff.

        Based on my notes and report my seniors in LA decided to send an expert to testify . Some doctor, I forget his name.

        CATS was being promoted and I drove the spokesperson around to do the talk radio shows and met the hosts. I listened to talk radio a lot then because my car only had AM so I was familiar with the hosts.

        I spied on people. There was a guy who received a trust fund or inheritance when he turned 21. He came into the org a few times and “bought his bridge”. Then his family disallowed it and I was told they were controlling and preventing him from coming to the church. I followed him and discovered he was moving and some other information. I did stuff like lay in my car with binoculars and watch him though my mirrors. It was fun at the time.

        It was pretty cool in the beginning. I met with reporters and congressmen and fought “SP’s” .

        There was a fire at the mission and I had to work on an investigation, researching criminal records and gathering data. It didn’t seem to be correct though. Someone decided one of the staff was responsible and I basically was ordered to find dirt on him, looking up his records and background.

        The DSA office had a couple filing cabinets full of folders containing negative information on many people including staff and pubic- opinion leaders and upstats included. Kind of like ethics folders, but there didn’t seem to be any system or policy for what goes in them. Just anything bad about them.

        I was told to be suspicious of and to “keep an eye on” certain people and this changed my opinion of certain staff and public when in hindsight there was probably nothing there.

        I don’t believe there is any policy such as with the report system or Ethics tech that covers DSA/OSA activities with regards to the correctness or fairness of handling of information. It’s just “this guy is suspicious”. If there is some embarrassing personal information in someones file, it’s in there for OSA to read and that is the information they have on the guy.

        I didn’t last too long on this post. The org was a disaster and things like rent were “going legal” which was a relief for the ED because she could put it on me.

        After a few months I wasn’t doing well. The office had mold on the walls because the roof leaked and I felt isolated from the group. I had some problems and arguments with the ED and other staff when I tried to follow orders to get things improved . In hindsight I probably missed major withholds in the financial area.

        Around that time I started getting “Out-Int” which was pretty brutal. I got some auditing for that and then was ordered to LA to get some apprenticeship and hatting for my post. Can’t remember last names right this second, but my seniors were Pam, Stan was legal. Pam was my direct senior at OSA WUS.

        I found the berthing and conditions in LA to be terrible. Maybe it was my state of mind at the time, but I don’t know how SO members can live like that. I read it has improved, but at that time I was in a room with probably 15 people. There were cockroaches and the bathrooms didn’t work. When I arrived I pulled back the blanket on my bed and cockroaches scurried. They said it was because the last guy in that bunk was “out ethics”.

        It was the old hospital building and it just was not built to handle that many people. Shower were shared by seemingly thousands of people. Pubic hairs covered the bathroom floor like shag carpet. Of three toilets one worked and the others overflowed when used and were left unhandled with “out of order” signs.

        The whole situation was weird and I was unprepared for it. I was pretty new to Scientology and I decided I had made a mistake- not in Scientology, but in coming to LA. I wasn’t working and I was running out of money and I just didn’t feel like I could trust the people there so I left and came back to Phoenix.
        I have had two times now where the church and/or OSA knew where I was and what flight/bus I was on somehow. On this occurrence I took a cab to the airport, got a ticket and there was someone waiting for me in Phoenix to my surprise.

        When I opened the door to my office it had apparently been closed for weeks and the mold had grown halfway up the walls and even on the desk and chairs. The carpet was damp and sort of sticky. It had always had the flickering flourescent light and now this just made it like something out of a horror movie.
        I sat at the desk and then two SO OSA staff came in and told me I shouldn’t be in there. No shit.

        After that I started working in Div 6 as a Reg and PCS which was a lot better.

        • Chris – I can relate to a lot of that. I was on the Dallas post an trips to LA from 1999-2004. Curious as to what years you were on post. I worked under Pam and Stan, as well.

          The tendency towards alienation for a DSA (who misses others’ withholds as a matter of course) from the rest of the org, is a familiar condition for me, as well. In the ‘New Era of Management’ Miscavige has us fighting each other for scraps. Scraps of power, scraps of budget allocation, space, personnel, etc.

          Conditions were uncomfortable (but the food was good) at PAC base, and I got to see a lot of back-lines Sea Org activity (EPF and RPF) that opened my eyes as to how this whole thing was set up. As is common to a lot of us, you just rationalize that it will get better ‘after we get over this initial struggle’ (you shut out the fact that the ‘struggle’ was supposed to have begun decades ago and yet, ‘here we still are!’).

          • I think this was in 93.

            The food was actually ok from what I recall.

            My post sounds victimy. I guess it wasnt that bad. I was young and wasnt used to roughing it.

      • Thank-you for the acknowledgment Scott.
        And I’m glad you’re also working your way through the healing process.
        Looks to me like the fun is just beginning…

  9. I’m guessing there is a particular audience for this post… I dearly hope they read the words and take head… I can’t imagine them being anything other than better off for it.

    I like William Goldman’s quote on the subject of “enemies”… It’s the same truth you’re offering here though. Mirrors are quite the evolutionary tool.

    .

  10. she is mild about her uncle

  11. Boy Marty you really want to whip people into a lather eh?? Lol.

    My knee jerk opinion on this is that I think you are right in some ways and maybe not in others. I was a trained ethics officer and wore that hat as a public helping people and also at times in an Org as Chaplain and Dir. I&R.
    I abused people sometimes early on with ethics but as I made case gain I started to see some validity in the conditions. I spent hours studying them.
    I was always baffled at why LRH didn’t elaborate more on the lower conditions? Why didn’t he explain HOW to help someone ~ Find out who they really are? or ~ Find out THAT you are? I did find very cryptic help on sorting these things out and actually created a system where I could actually help people to their satisfaction and make it make some sense to them. But you would think that something as apparently important to the success of the group he could have done a better job explaining it. Instead of a line or two??!

    I personally have had some major wins applying ethics to myself. I mean actually using the lower conditions.

    Having said all that I was constantly amazed how ethics was abused in the cult and especially in the Sea Org. And was further amazed at how the Sea Org members seemed to gulp it down. I actually started to think that maybe people that joined the Sea Org had some masochistic traits.

    I think people are basically good. That is very real to me. I think good people want to correct bad behavior. I also think that the condition of enemy and below were way overused and actually part of some political use within the cult.

    I feel that LRH started going off the rails somewhere in the mid 60’s and as he started injecting his own case into his writings, I think it went off the rails to that degree. There is still some very brilliant stuff in his later materials. You just have to evaluate the stuff as you go along.

    I think people in the cult were really never allowed to fully analyze LRH’s material in a safe environment.

    I think that people are just communicating things now that they couldn’t communicate about inside of the cult. If you did try to evaluate things in the cult and disagree then you started on the hamster wheel of MU’s, ethics, lowers, overts, whithholds, evil purposes, a to j, PTS, and SP. You didn’t get off the hamster wheel with any overt disagreements in tact.

    Thanks for having the guts to say what you see Marty.

    You know if you are allowed to evaluate things, good things can happen. A person can say one thing today and change his mind tomorrow! So what?? It’s really not that serious is it?

    • martyrathbun09

      Thanks Tony. When I look at the context, the history, of how the lower conditions came to be, my view is that they were done to create compliant, trustworthy group members. As such, from the get go those lower conditions were ‘assigned’ to people. When you go there, you go out of the realm of ethics, by its very Scientology definition – that technology an individual applies to himself to pull himself up the chute. But, the concept of enemy is communicated over and over in Scientology, beyond just the conditions.

      • Interesting.
        I think I assigned a condition to someone maybe a handfull of times in my whole career.
        I always took the the definition that ethics was a personal thing so I mostly consulted the understanding of the person I was working with. That usually goes pretty good if you also apply ARC.

        I agree that LRH uses ENEMY a lot in his writings. I was also surprised how if you did this or that you were automatically applied DOUBT or TREASON or some such. I pretty much not-ised those things because they weren’t very real to me.

        • Marty and Tony,
          I feel that you nailed it on the head. The lower conditions look like the nightmare of a schizophrenic-paranoid. There may be some value for a person assigning self one of these, but not to the formulas. I have yet to see a situation where doing anything below Non-Existance is needed.

          • martyrathbun09

            Interesting. Look at the Danger formula and see whether that doesn’t take care of the inclination to do destructive activity.

            • It’s funny you say that.
              I know many catholics here where I am living and many of them seem to wonder why “confessions” doesn’t really work for them. I.e. why they have to confess to the same “sins” all over again and again.
              The “standard procedure” in the catholic church consists: 1) confession and 2) repentance.
              I figured out that it is not for the lack of skill of the priest to listen to their confessions but rather the lack of understanding of what repentance really is (i.e. accompanied by a true willingness to really change).
              A thorough danger formula may help many of them. As would the clearing of some words. The catholics seldom understand the different meanings of phrases they use and therefore the benefits to their souls are little, as they can’t really grasp the concepts leading to redemption. Or at least that’s what I found out talking to many of them in the last year.

          • Mary Freeman, class VIII, under LRH does magic with lower conditions.

            What she does is client oriented and the results , and I believe the
            practice is more akin to auditing.

            An example below:-

            > I’ve had broncospasms in the upper right side of my chest for decades. Even when I felt completely well, there was always a tightness in that portion of my right lung and I found it difficult to breathe at times. Recently, however, while working with Mary on the Integrity Program, I felt this sensation go away and I suddenly found that my breathing had become effortless! Not something I would have expected on this action, but I’ll take it. I continue to be amazed at the power of the Tech LRH left us and Mary’s brilliant application of it.
            >
            > C
            >

        • I think the ethics conditions bring an awareness of condition. Enemy is below doubt but above stuff like confusion and treason. I think what causes a lot of confusion is the pre-determined “EP” of these conditions in the church. What if you were applying these to yourself and found out who you really were. Wouldn’t that then move up to doubt where you could decide what group you really belonged in? Maybe you are in the wrong group in other words.

          If you found yourself being an enemy of a group and didn’t move up to doubt you would risk sliding down to treason and confusion regarding that group or activity. Seems like it’s better to find out and then move up.

          What about a guy who wants to be an actor but his parents made him go to music school and now he is going around breaking pianos and stuff. He needs to find out who he really is. He’s an actor. Then he can quit and go to acting school instead of being an enemy. That’s how it makes sense to me.

          You could assign someone this condition. You could say- hey, you’ve been breaking the pianos and we’ve tried to handle you on it and you keep doing it and we think it’s on purpose. Then maybe the guy would cognite on the condition and move up to doubt.

          What happens at the org, or in the SO apparently is you have already decided that this guy needs to be in your music school and his and the entire universe depends on him staying in your music school. There’s no self determinism involved and everybody just goes through the motions and it doesn’t mean anything. There’s probably a hundred ways to not do it right.

          This stuff seems pretty smart to me. LRH was a genius and had a very interesting way of looking at things. It’s not the only way obviously, but it’s damn interesting. I’m sure it’s been misapplied and misunderstood, maybe even misapplied by LRH, but I cant comment on that really.

          That’s how it makes sense to me. If it has been misapplied I am sorry.

      • That’s exactly it.
        “When you go there, you go out of the realm of ethics, by its very Scientology definition – that technology an individual applies to himself to pull himself up the chute.”

      • The point of the Enemy Formula is not to realize that “who one is” is bad, but rather to recover one’s basic goodness by finding out that one is not the valence one was dramatizing as an enemy.

        The lower conditions make total sense and are very useable by people on their own with no one above them doing any assigning. What you are complaining about is politically motivated misuse and abuse of ethics tech.

        • Not sure if you were talking to me or not diogenese?

          I know that the use of the enemy formula is to discover the theta side of a person.

          I used to use this reference called “Planning by Product” it is an HCOPL. In it lRH describes the use of BE-DO-HAVE , and how you first need to find the product (HAVE) and then find what you need to DO to accomplish it and then you will find the correct beingness (BE). I used to use this on the enemy formula with people to help them find out who they really are by finding out what the product they really wanted was. It was very workable. The fact that LRH never laid out any real way to do this other than asking the person, (which a lot of people had no clue on how to figure it out) left me to figure it out the best I could.

          • martyrathbun09

            It sounds like you were a great ethics officer.

              • Yes, Tony, you sound like you actually took the tech and thought with it then applied it with creativity to make it real to another. I can say that I only have met maybe a few really good ethics officers. I sure have helped others recover from bad ethics cycles.
                I have always loved the conditions and consider them very powerful, even magical. Just like Admin Scales- I love them. For whatever reason, most (no exaggeration) Scientologist that I have met over the years hate conditions or simply say they don’t really work for them etc. and won’t write their own admin scales. Now maybe business types do, for the biz. I think this stems from enforcement, and even worse wrong enforcement at that, which then serves as a wrong indication and then the person gets into listing as to what condition he or she is really in ….and the whole thing becomes a mess. Probably because staff HAVE to write conditions, and public only write them when they are ‘in trouble’ so they get a bad rap. I also think people will go into this self abasement mode so they start at the lowest one (usually because they have been told how they’ve really messed up and have made to feel like a db) when , as Marty pointed out, Danger is very applicable.
                One thing I have learned is to be very specific about the subject matter of the assignment. This is where I see people get confused from the get go. Looking at the think behind the actions really opens doors also. I think Scientologist think that you can’t really think with the tech and you have to savor every word so to speak. Ironic, but true. You know, they are afraid to mold it around a bit, how can this be or not be, or discuss it. IMHO you have to work the stuff and take ownership and actually, OMG, have FUN applying it. Re: the lowers, they can kick ass, but only if they are truly applicable to the person/sit. I hate rote. I guess I’m a read it drill it do it kind of person. What does one have to loose? It’s not brain surgery…now that would give me pause! My philosophy has been that if it doesn’t make me go Wow!, then it isn’t the right application of Scientology. That is my experience and I’m stickin’ to it.

          • Actually I think to find out “who you really are” has lots to do to introspectivly look at what you want to achieve in your life. Goals. Ambitions. Having worked it out, you than look at the higher condition of “doubt” whether or not the group you’re in doubt about will match with your ambitions or if it is contrary to it or even oppressive.
            The only thing I never liked about the formula of Doubt was the phrasing:

            3. Decide on the basis of “the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics” whether or not it should be attacked, harmed or suppressed or helped.

            Well, you see you have here a black or white situation:
            “whether or not it should be attacked, harmed or suppressed or helped”
            Why is there no option in the phrasing to just “let it be”.
            That was my only objection with the “lower” conditions.

            • SKM: as written one could “or not” all four options, which would amount to “let it be” or “do nothing to or with them”, wouldn’t it ?

              Michael A. Hobson
              Independent Scientologist

              • Thank you Michael.
                You’re right.
                I checked the german translation I am used to and in fact this part goes lost in translation in the german version.
                A back-translation from german would be:
                Decide on the basis of “the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics” if it should be attacked, harmed or suppressed or helped.
                (The “whether or not” part is missing.)

                I am glad you pointed it out to me.

              • theosismanides

                Thanks Michael, those damn words…. lol…. good point.

            • SKM, +++1 JP basically says the same thing in his post. It seems that in scientology, one has to be obsessive cause / obsessive playing of the game , as opposed to just being cause. You have to take direct physical universe action with that step. And seriously, what is the real practical difference between attacking, harming or suppressing? LOL. I am not going to attack you, but I will harm you. I won’t harm you but I’ll suppress you! How but just I don’t want to directly help you, but I don’ t wanna hurt you either. Peace to you. Well, we can just make it so, like a little amendment.

          • Oh Tony, I like that. That’s a very workable approach.

          • Tony,
            Your approach to the application of ethics resonates with me. I appreciate that you worked to get people out of an introspection mode and into application in the real world with the HAVE-DO-BE process. It also steers the PC away from the tendency to get into a self listing spiral. Nicely done!

          • Tony, I was responding to Marty’s comment that started with “Thanks Tony.”

        • I disagree with you. The formulas of Treason and Enemy are cryptic and open to wide interpretation. Hence they are by definition, not really formulas. The formula for Liability is degrading and is designed for self abnegation. How could the person that wrote Dianetics come up with these? Did he forget everything he has done before?

          The real way is laid out in “Dianetics” and the rest of the auditing tech. You handle the person by handling his case, not by punishing him, or telling him to punish himself.

          • Simple Thetan

            I agree that the lower conditions formulas tend to be difficult to duplicate. It would have been wonderful had LRH really expanded on what you are really trying to do with each of these, and why. The “expanded Confusion Formula helps, and also the data on the Treason formula, but it would have been good had it been included with the formulas.

            It is important that one roll his sleeves up and really get into what they are all about, and how they achieve their product.

            The names could certainly be interpreted as degrading but the formulas themselves contain nothing that would degrade the being. They are the basic formulas of survival. They are tools that any being can use, at any point of his enlightenment, to help him align his own efforts toward his own goals. They are truly a wonderful tool when really understood and used.

            When one is lost, one would be wise to address “where am I”. When one is overlaying some earlier time over present time, thereby making some of his actions or responses “crazy”, he really does need to somehow realize his “confusion of times” in order to remedy the situation. Yes, auditing is a valid therapy for this, but what the auditing is largely doing is assisting the being in “finding out where he is”, “finding out who he is, and finding out “that he is”( what he is trying to do.) This in no way makes auditing senior to “ethics” since the auditing is designed to assist in the achievement of improved operating states, the very “goal” of ethics.

            Of course, where one cannot simply look around and sort out “where he is” (or some other ethics step) all by himself, then “auditing” comes into play. But that suggests that auditing is helping in the achievement of a being’s “ethics”, rather than the other way around. I feel that where the auditing “bridge” ends you will likely find that “ethics” is the tool that you will most likely STILL be using to “move on up a little higher.” Without a good founding in “ethics” a being will basically find himself “lost” at some point, however much auditing he has had.

            Eric S

            • Dear Eric,
              Let’s make a few assumptions before continuing:
              1. Both you and I have cleared these conditions to within an inch of our life.
              2. Both you and I are quite intelligent and can think logically.
              3. LRH was capable of erring, and was not a supreme being. Just an unusually smart one.
              4. LRH was susceptible to the emotional ebbs and flows of life just like anybody else.

              Now let us look at a few things. The conditions from nonE and up are written clearly. They are not intuitive, but as you read them they make plenty of sense to you.

              The cycle of be-do-have is embedded in the higher conditions. You start by a very detailed procedure in nonE that makes you assume a beingness, then you start doing. Having done some out ethics things you do the Danger condition etc.

              The higher conditions are then a complete and self contained system. They are specific and clear. Having lost your beingness, or even if you are confused – you should re-establish it by doing nonE. No need for a generality such as “find out where you are” (I am always here). Or “find out that you are”. Do the nonE and you will. Then do Danger and you will handle any out ethics. No need for invalidations, punishment, etc.

              I have handled many people with conditions from nonE up. I have never needed to resort to any lower. Even when the person has committed crimes. The upper conditions are elegant and can handle any ethics sit.

              • martyrathbun09

                Well put.

              • I will give an example of using lower conditions to a big win.

                While doing RPEC when it first came out in 1982, I realized that earlier this lifetime I was in treason on the first dynamic. On the first dynamic I did not KNOW THAT YOU ARE. If you see the HCOPL Hats Not wearing, LRH explains this as not knowing your designated post. I spotted my post on the first dynamic which was “The person in charge of myself”. I literally did not kow this. So by finding That I was the “person in charge of myself” I moved to the next condition up. ENEMY on the first dynamic. I found out WHO I REALLY AM by using the HCOPL Planning by product and found out that the havingness I REALLY wanted on the first dynamic was health, a good mind, personal integrity. Thus working it back on the BE-DO-HAVE scale I was REALLY a person who wanted that havingness on the 1-D, not taking drugs and doing the other destructive things I was doing. The havingess I was creating on the 1-D was an ENEMY to my own goals and purposes. So, Having finished ENEMY I did DOUBT on whether I wanted to do the actions of drugs etc, or the actions and activities of health , integrity etc. So on and so forth.

                It changed my life.

                • Very nice write-up. Really, I mean it.

                • Tony,

                  First of all, I want to acknowledge your win. Please understand that I am not trying to diminish it in any way, shape, or forum. Your win was incredible.

                  In developing the Tech, LRH gave drugs a special attention. He developed several processes that handle drugs, including the irresistible urge to take them: Purif, Objectives, Drug Rundown, Dianetics Drug Rundown, and Wholetrack Drug Rundown. Clearly, LRH saw drugs as a case phenomenon and not an ethics matter. Obviously, there is an ethics aspect to it, but it is auditing that resolves it. In “Dianetics” LRH claimed that all out ethics stems from the Reactive Mind. He never backed off from this and I believe he was right.

                  That you were able to do soul searching and reach some conclusions that were earth shuttering for you is more a testament to your intelligence and strength of character than to the workability of lower conditions. You just showed that some people are able to ascend without the need for lengthy auditing. For that, you have my respect.

                  • But LRH also said, that Ethics is the means to handle a lot of bank (dramatisations).
                    That’s what was done in the above example in my opinion.
                    He found the tool, used it and it was then easier for him to put “ethics in” on himself.
                    Can’t you see?

              • Simple Thetan.
                Which condition would you apply if someone is in doubt about a group he is mentally stucked into?

                • I would find out what this guy is being forced to do that he really does not want to, and then make sure he is no longer coerced to do it.

                  • Thanks for reply but it actually didn’t answer my question.

                    • Of course it did. The issue is that you need to resolve a situation. A condition is not always it.

                    • No it didn’t. You did answer, but it didn’t answer my question.
                      But I see, you would make something different.
                      Fine.
                      For me it looks a bit more complicated as giving the person the formula and helping him through it. After all he himself is in that condition regarding a specific group.

                • I would make sure the person understood the conditions and then see which one he felt indicated to him.

                  • Indicated is ok, for a intuitive guide, of course, but it seems over -used in scientology. There can simply be ask the person what they see as the right condition and help them do it.
                    The assignment of a condition should be a recognition of a condition, this only can occur when it is understood, so any assignment of a condition without then helping in understanding it and evaluating for one self 1) the existence of the condition and 2) how the condition (the set of circumstances or attitudes etc) can be handled by using the formula – is intellectual murder through evaluation.

                    I think there might be a misunderstanding on conditions.

                    The formula is a change of operating basis. Right there you can see if it is not self determined a person is unlikely to wake up every morning there after and do it of his own accord… Ethics is personal, and is a failure otherwise.

                    OPERATING BASIS = CONDITIONS IN SCIENTOLOGY.

                    What is your operating basis? Example: I am oblivious to my responsibilities (unable to self-assign unless by some miracle a person goes into confusion, and comes out of it and then thinks “I must be doing SOMETHING wrong, or do NOT KNOW something. It could help if someone said (assignment of CONDITION OF OPERATION), “you’re not cleaning up after yourself, do you know you have to clean up after yourself?” CONDITION OF OPERATION = TREASON
                    The person then finds out the company doesn’t have a cleaner, each person is in charge of cleaning up after themselves.

                    Worse yet, and this would be funny, you hire an accountant and the guy thinks he is a bouncer (some hilarious misunderstanding), the guy stands at the door kicking people out and asking for ID, and the manager says, “Hey that’s not your job (CONDITION OF OPERATION correction in progress), you ARE THE ‘accountant’ “.
                    Assignment of condition is a by-pass, Seniors need to by-pass on anyone below emergency, right down to confusion. BUT the bypass should be to ONLY HANDLE THE DANGER IN IT, UNTIL THERE IS NO DANGER.
                    By-pass being an evaluation is harmful, and should be used only when necessary.

                    A formula is a OPERATING BASIS, METHOD OF CHANGE. A “condition” is a OPERATING BASIS. “Hows he doing his job?” “He is NOT doing it at all, and he doesn’t even KNOW HE IS NOT DOING IT, BECAUSE HE DOESN”T KNOW IT IS HIS JOB!!!”
                    Therefore he is in TREASON.

                    If you are not talking about CONDITION OF OPERATION, then you are talking about just STATE OF BEING and are as likely to succeed as asking a rock to find out who he really is.

                    The condition below NON-E do in fact exist. It is completely possible to hurt some one you care about, find out, fix it, and live happily ever after.

                    • I have done this hundereds of times to good result.

                      Assigning a condition is justice putre and simple and I have rarely seen it get a good result.

                      Helping someone with ethics is a bypass of them if they don’t understand how to use ethics on themselves.

                      Although a person can still apply ethics to themselves even if they don’t understand conditions.

                      I do believe that people are basically good and are trying to do their best with what they have. Any help by me would just be an attempt to give them some tools that they may not already have and would only have value to them if THEY saw the value in it.

                • SKM,
                  I feel I need to clarify. I feel that doubt is not a condition. It could be lack of data, in which resolution is trivial. However, if it persists, it’s a case manifestation. LRH acknowledged in in HCO PL “Hung up in doubt”. This is why I cannot answer your question the way it was presented. It had an assumption in it that I do not agree with.

              • Simple Thetan

                Hi.

                Yup, I am with you on the first assumptions.

                I also do not really disagree with what you say regarding the conditions. The conditions of “Non Existence and above” are certainly very workable and well laid out. The “lower conditions” are defiantly more cryptic.

                As I see them the two sets seem to be harmonics of each other. There are also observable harmonics within each set.

                When it is all boiled down, there seem to only be a single set of steps that keep repeating themselves from different viewpoints, and are handed using different tools.( from each of ethics, tech, and admin) I find that each of the conditions concentrates on one or more of those elements from different viewpoints and gradients.

                But, of course the bottom line is that any step of any condition, whether upper or lower, if it is the correct gradient for the being, and he applies it correctly, knowingly or unknowingly, will produce a higher “operating state”.

                As an Ethics Officer, I was never comfortable with orders to “get someone’s ethics in”, as though it was going to happen with force on my part. I always tend to fall back on reason and understanding in order to resolve situations. I always assume a being is capable of “doing the right thing” given support and a technology that he finds he can use to do so.

                However I would not quickly discard the lower conditions as I feel they do have a place in the vast array of gradients that beings are capable of.

                I have personally never considered that the lower conditions should ever be used except as a tool to help a being. Their use as a tool of invalidation or evaluation, is itself suppressive in my view. I do not consider that that was the intention of RON when he wrote them up. I could be wrong about that, but in any case I have personally found them a very useful tool and experienced very good results by addressing them, as necessary.

                Eric S

                • Eric, the problem is that you are a good guy with good intentions. You would take any tool and use it to help people. However, LRH by creating the lower conditions, created a tool for suppression and coercion. Wether that was his intention is not important. Perhaps not, however he gave a tool to suppressives. The same way he gave a tool to them in Sec Checks.

                  • Thanks for the great acknowledgement.

                    Yes I see where you are coming from. The tool can demonstrably be used to harm.

                    As I see it, whether ANY particular thing is a tool or a weapon depends on the intention of the user. It is a sword with two edges. But even the sword, which was created as an efficient tool of death, in the right hands can save lives, without “killing” anybody.

                    But you have pretty much acknowledged all that.
                    For my part, I totally acknowledge that it is a tool that opens the door for suppression when used as a tool to do so.

                    Without sanity there is no safety.

                    Thank you for persisting with the communication.

                    Eric S

              • theosismanides

                This is a very valuable discussion. Lowers have always been a nightmare the way the have been used. I would like to hear examples of how they have been used to some success.

                • I am sure there are many examples with which lowers have been used successfully. However, they are partial, incomplete tools. The real tools are the uppers, they work every time. The problem is that they require real work to implement and supervise.

                  If you can do from Confusion to Doubt in one hour, and than liability in one day (providing you are willing to humiliate yourself). None E requires real work. It might take a month, Danger may take a few weeks. They require that you use skills (communication, your profession, your training). They require the cooperation of others, and not just to sign a peace of paper. For a statistics driven MAA, the uppers are a bad investments. I must say however, that I have seen people change for life doing the uppers. I have seen them become professional at whatever they were doing, and stay that way.

                  The upper conditions are a real gem. What you have there is a real workable third dynamic tech. I have yet to see an executive who did not show enthusiasm when presented with the Tone Scale and the upper conditions. I have presented it to religious leaders, and senior politicians. Never got a negative response.

                  I urge everyone reading this forum; if you feel you have to do lowers do them, but for God’s sake, do not ignore the uppers. That is where success is.

                  • I agree with you.
                    And in fact I think the lower conditions is something which should be done as fast as possible. Because the real survival tools are the upper ones.

                    • (I didn’t mean that the lower ones are not survival tools, they are, to some degree they have the power to rehabilitate the basic purpose to survive in the area the conditions are applied to.)

                  • theosismanides

                    ST, I hear you… I am looking into viewpoints… It’s interesting.. Upper Conditions are a gem, ok!

              • ST
                “Oh, that is soooo squirrel. You have MU’s and you Must go get cleaned up…that is enemy line!”
                HaHa. +1 for thinking and making it your own.

                • Thank you, I know I have MUs, overts, PTSness, and I am putting case on post. I am enturbulating dm and he cannot do his job because of me.

                  All this will end tomorrow when I drag my body to the Implant Station (MAA Office) to be handles. ;)

        • Precisely, Diogenes. It’s not the Tech that’s wrong, it how it was used, including by LRH himself, who tragically let his own ego get in the way of the material that he was channeling. Personally, I find the ethics conditions and formulas one of the most original and workable aspects of Scientology, and continue to use them to this day, as with much of the Tech. I call it LifeTech.

          The only exception to that, I would add, are the OT levels. I have been saying since 1985 that it was with the OT levels that LRH and Scientology left the rails. Having promised so much, LRH had to produce the OT levels in 1966/67 and, having finally run out of inspiration, merely reverted to his old trade as a second-rate science fiction writer, and invented a load of harmful nonsense. I think you will find that most of our subsequent troubles date from that point, my friends.

          For what it’s worth, my wife Adrienne and I have found, in the years since, that a close study and practice of yogic philosophy, and especially the phenomenon of the Chakras, is a remarkably effective way of transcending the material and experiencing oneself as a higher level of being (the electric, causal or astral body) and is a much more workable route to OT, immortality and beyond. But Scientology, with the state of Clear, is an invaluable springboard for that adventurous journey!

          We recommend the Sivananda Book of Yoga as an excellent starting point. Happy travels!

          • I find that the formulas for Confusion, Treason, Enemy are left vague on purpose. It’s like a cake recipe that reads: eggs, flower, water, yeast, sugar, cinnamon, oven. You don’t really get how to make a cake. The Liability formula is simply vicious. I will never do another one again, nor will I ask somebody else to. Doubt is trivial. I do not believe that lower conditions are part of nature, one you are out of none existence, you are out.

            Like Marty mentioned above, Danger handles out ethics. He does it from a self determined view point. If you view none existence as zero, there is no negative condition.

          • “LRH had to produce the OT levels in 1966/67 and, having finally run out of inspiration, merely reverted to his old trade as a second-rate science fiction writer, and invented a load of harmful nonsense”

            I agree ! So many deaths with the OT levels all over the planet. And so much in France !

        • martyrathbun09

          I’m not complaining about anything. I am observing that the concept of ‘enemy’ is embedded in Scientology think. I used the enemy condition as one example of many.

          • You are so right about that. I remember loving FoT and the basic books when I first got in, but I did ask the supervisor one day why LRH hated psychiatry and the medical profession and so many others? I mean this stuff just kept popping up in all the policies. It was obvious that he wanted us to immediately agree to have enemies from the get go.

      • I discover for myself that scientology is an hypnosis business (very close to Erickson one). It was a very big win to realize that and I immediatly stop the trance. I feel really free and strong as a being. No more irresistibly stuck on scientology.

      • Marty, Tony

        Interesting. I certainly agree that the lower conditions were almost always used as a punishment/invalidation and control mechanism. That is so sad, because I have found that those conditions are magic when applied with a real desire to assist a being in forwarding their dynamics.

        Some back story…

        I was in the first batch of public that got FPRD at LA Day, when it was released. My C/S was Jeannie Bogvad. Well, I gotta tell you… for me it was one incredible experience. I pretty much totally exteriorized from my case, and this whole sector of the universe. And I only did the “basic list”! For me, the “overt” part of the process was just a “lead in” that got me into a position where I could view the “false purpose”. Not EVIL purpose… FALSE purpose. No, “I’m the shit of the universe and the spawn of the devil” stuff. What I addressed was more in the area of personally bypassing my own integrity and diving down-tone and “nuking” (figuratively speaking) the whole area rather that using “reason” to handle. And then the third step, finding the “prior confusion”, well… for me, that handled the “why” for using a “false purpose” in the first place. Pure magic!

        Amazingly, following that rundown, (even though the FPRD does not address it directly, as such,) my whole concept of “ethics” ( the personal application of,) fell totally into alignment. I could totally think with the formulas. I could align it with the philosophy of Scientology, with the Tech of auditing, admin scales, etc. They all dove-tailed into a workable whole.

        So…back to the purpose of this post….

        I gotta say, I cringe a bit when I hear people say that they see little or no real value in the “lower conditions”. I find that the “lower conditions” do have a place in actual “ethics” attainment. A VITAL place.

        It was a dark day for Scientology, and for mankind, when any being in “lower conditions” was equated with somehow being a “lesser being” or “the stupidest, lowest piece of shit in the universe” just because he needed some help to sort out where he really was and what he was really doing here (his own assessment) so he could get back to creating his dynamics towards his concept of “optimum survival”.

        Hell… That is really ALL auditing is designed to do… or the Life Improvement Course (LOC) or “ethics” itself, or… or…. ( personal ethics, that is… When “ethics” steps beyond being a Personal thing” it moves over into being “justice”)

        The greater part of Scientology technologies dovetail to produce this one result. It applies at every level of your progress “up a little higher”.

        I have gone a bit long here… but I offer this…

        I have developed a little “ethics orientation” that I have successfully done with a number of people, to excellent results. It is simply an exercise in rolling up the sleeves and getting down to the real basics of ethics, ethics conditions, the dynamics, why finding/data evaluation, admin scales, and several other things, and seeing how they all dovetail into a workable whole. (Disclaimer… this is just an “orientation”. It is not a full blown study of all of these technologies.)

        I offer it free, at this point, and I am willing to work with anyone interested.
        Contact me at windwalker8008(at)gmail(dot)com

        Eric S

        • theosismanides

          I recommend to people to hook up with Eric and do the Orientation. I just started and Eric has shared with me some very valuable data from his long experience in Scientology. I recommend it to everyone and I am proud to be in this team of Indies who can think with the data.

      • Marty – I agree. I have never had any wins from doing lower conditions assigned to me. However I have had life changing wins when I personally applied a condition to improve some area in my life .

    • There are some data about the Treason condition, Possibly the article on Scientology-Cult can be helpful:
      http://www.scientology-cult.com/treason-formulaforgotten-facts.html
      During the last months the following point have become my view regarding Ethics Conditions and their formulas:
      1. What is considered “Ethics” fails or succeeds to the degree it is applied with an understanding and application of the Data-Series. (Above article gives only one example for application of the Data-Series to Ethics.) Without the Data-Series “Ethics” will not work as a reliable tool.
      2. A complete understanding of the formulas as a whole system provides understanding also for those formulas where not much information seems available. For instance, The “Don’t disconnect” from the Power-Formula can look contrary to the “effective blow” from the Liability. (Here I found understanding of the Data-Series extremely helpful, since attacking a wrong target, based on a wrong Why, will not help the situation, no matter how hard one delivers “effective blows”.
      2a. Word clearing helps.
      3. I found it to be an enlightening exercise to work out the Formulas on several examples downward and upward, i. e. how each step, if violated or worked backwards, would bring one down and how correct application remedied the error.

      • Agree completly.

        Using “justice” without a good understanding of data-evaluation will worsen the scene and hinder it to evolve to a more ideal one.

        • SKM, worsel

          Yes!. Ethics is not a “stand alone” technology. Nor is Data eval,or Admin scales. All three of these things are actually built into each other. They each require one to address the other two in order to achieve a full result. ( in my view, the full value of auditing itself also depends on an address of all of these elements.)

          They are perhaps like ARC, in that they are not actually three separate things, but three aspects or entry points into addressing and the handling of the same thing. (see my post above)

          Eric S

      • Worsel

        Love where you are going with this. I would very much enjoy chatting with you along this line. My contact information is below.

        Eric S

    • “I personally have had some major wins applying ethics to myself. I mean actually using the lower conditions. Having said all that I was constantly amazed how ethics was abused in the cult and especially in the Sea Org.”
      My, my does this statement ever resonate.
      I couldn’t figure out why people didn’t like the ethics formulas. I read the HCOB OR HCOPL when they first came out. I looked up every single word in each formula, including words like “are” (“to be” or “exist”), “who” (“which particular being”), and “really”. As well as “that” (searched until I found the applicable definition) and all others. I never paid much attention to the comments or descriptions of the conditions as altered, I mean “written” :-), in the various editions of compiled ethics books. I just stuck with the early LRH issues. I actually got a lot of case gain out of using these formulas. Even the Treason formula. I was amazed that I could loose track of the fact that I actually do exist…..but apparently it did happen occasionally. :-) And it was very therapeutic to find out that I really do exist with regards to many, many things! Wow! Then I got to find out exactly who I really am with regards to whatever I was applying the condition to. Eye opening! For the most part I discovered and applied my conditions with regards to various things and areas of life myself. I found them to be a useful tool in life.
      I also read and then learned the hard way early on that to accept a wrong condition results in dropping two conditions below whatever condition the person is actually in. So if I do not see or experience good indicators and improved conditions as the condition is applied I know that it is a wrong one, reject it, and find the right one which will result in good indicators and improvement.
      Over the years I have observed many people, particularly in the SO, accepting wrong condition from others. They feel like shit. They keep accepting more bs conditions. They drop into lower and lower conditions in various areas. They introvert. It is a just a terrible crime to do that to another person. You’d think that the assigner of conditions would look up at the person and the results of his handiwork now and then.
      I actually remember a time when ethics officers or MAAs would have people read through the conditions and then assign themselves their own condition to apply, and then monitor the results with them as they did so, always being willing to take another look at the situation, always improving the situation. Always helping.
      It rather pisses me off when I hear of how these concepts have been twisted, mis-applied or stupidly and harshly applied.
      There is supposed to be “a fine line between ethics and tech”.
      It can be simple if one’s intentions are pure.

      • Hello. Nice comment.

      • theosismanides

        Espiritu, thank you.. I am still trying to figure out the “THAT” in the Treason formula… the “find out that you are”… I still cannot digest that “THAT”. I am open to proposals and evaluations (lol) on that definition… I simply cannot digest it, still.

        • Hi Theosismanides,
          I believe that the word “that” in this context is used as a CONJUNCTION. It is a “grammar word”. In Webster’s the definition which I see as applying (under conjunction usages)is :

          “used to introduce a NOUN CLAUSE as, ‘that he’s gone is obvious.’, ‘the truth was that we never saw him again’.”
          So in the treason formula “that” is used to introduce the noun clause “that you are” to the verb of the sentence which is “find out”.
          So the sentence advises a person in a condition of treason to “FIND OUT”. Find out what? Find out “(that) YOU ARE”.

          I hope that helps a bit.
          More comments: LRH was a very literate guy. As a writer, he knew English grammar very well. But these formulas were discovered and written up before he had discovered the study tech. Most of the study tech came out in the 1970’s.
          Learning grammar well helps understanding tremendously. There is a very good basic grammar book sold by Applied Scholastics called Grammar and Communication. It’s a spin-off from the Key to Life Course.
          http://www.appliedscholastics.org/catalog/basic-books/index.html
          There is also an “old” checksheet written by LRH called the Basic Grammar Checksheet” . It was a course given in the 1970’s and is excellent. I still have the checksheet.

          • correction.
            I said: “So in the treason formula “that” is used to introduce the noun clause “that you are”…..

            I should have said: “So in the treason formula “that” is used to introduce the noun clause “you are”…..

    • Tony,
      I agree with the whole reply you’ve written.
      And this here is also true for me:
      “I personally have had some major wins applying ethics to myself. I mean actually using the lower conditions.”

    • Tony, wonderfully written, I agree with most of it.
      As a public I always applied Ethics outside the Org to situations and my life. And I always had great wins from it, never any problem. Done by me for me.
      The only occasion in which “Ethics” was applied to me in the Org, at OT
      Eligibilities, resulted in my life and case devastated and nearly ruined…
      But when done in a sane way, and when a being has sunk low, the lower conditions and their formulas can and do create miracles and fantastic results. For a being to realize he has betrayed his own inner truth, (for whatever reasons) and correct that, there is only benefit and relief. Be it his own realization and not an enforced one.
      As to Enemy formula…in a funny way, and with a suitable view point, that command: “find out who you really are” can achieve exactly what Marty is getting at: If one is an enemy (harming others openly) and he finds out about himself as a being, remembers that he is one, a thetan,
      a ray of light, goodness…than he will cease to be an enemy, or to see so many others as such.
      So I think the conditions, including the lower ones, are just arrows, signs, pointing towards self, and consequently towards what’s best to do by self. Nothing more.
      And that’s Ron, always at his best dreaming technical, workable systems and ways. Always technical. And by his own admission not necessarily the most brilliant theoretical philosopher.
      So may be that’s the best way to evaluate or judge his work – on its workability. And observe wrong/horrible applications of his tech as such.
      I can testify that since joining the Indie way, it has done nothing but miracles.
      I get the Tech (OT5, Dror center) applied, thoroughly and skillfully, to the best of my knowledge. There is nothing else attached to it in terms of any arbitraries of any kind, and the whole area is just safe. Totally.
      And I can do anything I wish. And I do. Talk to anyone, psychiatrists if I wish, and I can read anything I like, which I do. And I take good stuff from whoever I find fit: Lao Tze, Guatama, Obama, or anybodies Mama…
      Many of Marty’s ideas I have adopted and benefited from, greatly, and many I have not.
      And I do answer my auditor’s commands, and keep away from being too much of a smart ass when not Needed or necessary. And that is Freedom of choice, and I feel Free and so many things are right, and hardly ANY ENEMIES in sight… and in a matter of months life has changed utterly and blissfully.
      “I destroy my enemies by…making them my friends.”
      Seems very real.
      Hemi

    • Roger From Switzerland Thought

      ~ Find out who they really are? or ~ Find out THAT you are?

      At the end I just asked the Ethics Officer about how he understands those phrases and then wrote up something that was real to him ( I could see it at his VGI’s) and so was upgraded, as I had long time ago given up, to even discuss with a MAA about conditions. Just : ” What do you want me to do ?”

      I’ve heard 100ds of different opinions of Maa’s about what those phrases mean. They are in fact very simple, even too simple.

      Just recently I discovered a real criminal activity of a person in my entourage and for the first time I’ve seen a person that was really in treason (stealing money and falsifying financial reports for her own advantage and this person was trusted). When I confronted the person with her crimes and she admitted to it, I instantly realized that she is in a real low condition, and that all the assignements of low conditions I ever had were all false. I never was criminal while being member of the COS, but was treated like one many, many, many times !

      Also I don’t apply in my own production anymore conditions on a weekly basis as I just was making my juniors crazy with that nonsense. I
      If one is working in the future and has contracts of 100 000.- for the next months, but this week was a little slump because you were preparing and organizing the delivery, which you cant count yet as a product and then you assign yourself danger and you look for out-ethics while you were honestly working the whole week ! This is a horrible state of mind…just spinning……

      There is quite some workability in the lower conditions, when they really exist. But when you look at all lower conditions that ever were assigned in the history of Scientology you would propably come to the conclusion that about 90 % of the Scientologists were once criminals !

      Propably 97.5 % of the lower conditions ever assigned in Scientology were false !

      • theosismanides

        Hahaha, Roger… I am laughing my guts out because of how you said what you said, which is so true. 97.5% of the Lowers… were false…. I fully agree. Still, can’t get that “THAT” on Treason… it’s not mine… I don’t get the word “That” there, how does it fit, what is its definition.

      • AMEN! A condition is a state of being…that is all. I like “Propably 97.5 % of the lower conditions ever assigned in Scientology were false !”
        RE; the idea that everything has to be broken into equal segments of time is not operating above mest, it is operating at mest. If at thursday at 2:00 it isn’t finished then your stat suffers is ridiculous, especially if the cyle will come through at 2:10. I understand the idea about making it a ‘game’ except it isn’t treated like a game!

  12. I invite everybody to watch and listen to what Class VIII Auditor, certified by LRH, Mary Freeman has to say about delivering Ethics program. She has been continually delivering it successfully FOR OVER THIRTY YEAS. This is an excerpt from an interview with Mary in 2010:

    Here is a little background regarding “Mary’s Ethics/Integrity Program”. In the 70s, Mary was delivering lots of ethics cycles in the field. People were clamoring to receive her ethics program. She was hatting other people to deliver it because she could not keep up with the demand. The hatting of others is what got the attention of the orgs. She was told to stop hatting people to do Ethics in the field, was accused of squirreling, etc. They couldn’t hit her because of her stats. She made her stat “number of people back on lines at the orgs and onto their next action”. Her stats were in Power. But they still kept trying to stop her. So she went to Flag to petition to be allowed to continue to deliver the program and hat others to deliver it. This was in 1977. The first thing she did at Flag was sit down with a friend who wanted to help, and backed up every line of the ethics program she was delivering with an LRH reference. Basically, she wrote up the hat. She turned in her “ethics program” along with a CSW up to LRH, and then waited on pins and needles for several days. Finally, Liz Gablehouse, LRH’s Personal PRO, came to her. She told Mary, “It’s ok. Go ahead and hat people”. That was that.

    You can find more at http://community.freezone-tech.info/freeman

    • … “LRH’s Personal PRO, came to her. She told Mary, “It’s ok. Go ahead and hat people”. That was that. ”

      YES – that is exactly how it was with L. Ron Hubbard when working with him.

    • Thank you for this reference. In addition to presenting how the lower conditions are something one could actually look forward to working with, Mary Freeman is able to articulate very well the case for independant scientologists having no authoritarian leader and no organizational hierarchy. She points out that in having such a thing there is always a likelihood of persons who seek wealth and/or power trying to take over (as has happened.) Wheras, as highly trained individuals having and practicing tech, as originally taught, the market place finds you. Practicing reverse or incompetent wrong tech (as has happened) the market runs away. Tao of the market.

    • It is or was such a good feeling when you could get back up from Ron. I csw’d him for something that everybody told me ‘couldn’t be done, its off policy” etc. and when I got his letter I took it straight to HCO and threw it on the desk…say what?
      Was Mary working in the bay area back then, or was she back east. Just curious as she looks familiar?

      • Hi Jewel! If you use a link above to the Freeman’s website, you’ll find there a Contact page – the form to send comm to Mary. You may ask her any question, she is open for communication.

  13. Society not just Scientology instills the belief that some people are worthy of being labeled “enemy”and that they must be depowered and dispensed with and made to act in an acceptable way.
    Al Capone was labeled public enemy #1. He was depowered and dispensed to San Quentin. I have no problem with Al Capone going to jail.
    I did lower conditions myself after reading much on this blog. This was done completely on my own determinism. I was my own judge, jury and defendant. I concluded that I am Scientologist- which means I’m not part of the church anymore.
    Lower conditions worked for me, because that’s where I was.

  14. I am loving this. I am feeing so good right now. I am so grateful to you Marty.

    So many people need to pass this milestone. Some aren’t ready yet.

    Their unreadiness to look at this will manifest in the need to make you an enemy for bringing this up.

    Trained, educated, word cleared, clay domeoed haters.

    You are doing such good work Marty. I send you a theta hug! Well friggn done!

    May others out there have the courage to reason their way through some wrong knowledge. Knowledge that is antithetical to a happy life for self and respect for others who think differently than you.

    And that wrong knowledge is in writing. And that wrong knowledge came from Ron.

    I know………….. It is hard to admit it. It is hard to even say it, right?

    Do you want to know why it’s hard to say?

    Because saying it……………..

    Makes you……………

    The enemy

  15. The “Enemy” concept is planted in very very early on in your journey within. It starts off with the very embedded concept of US vs THEM.
    Us, *ELITE* Sea Org members vs them the *WOGS*, the unenlightened almost *degraded* beings who are so brain dead, so moronic that they do not have a clue til Scientology enlightens them
    This is the culture. Gradually the *them* becomes the Public who are not Sea org.
    Then the THEM becomes Staff, but of *LOWER* Orgs.
    ALL they while the GPMing of them vs us is further installed.
    Anyone deemed to have “lowered ethics” is a THEM.
    This is taken to the point where you do not *LOOK* at an RPFer or deckie but walk by with your eyes looking ahead !
    You do not speak to someone is a lowered condition !
    They are an enemy notwithstanding a previous 25 year staff history !
    Marty, this is a great post. You said it well.

    • Yes, Karen! That us and them concept creates lots of turmoil within the group. For me, I never felt quite good enough or that I could ever do quite enough. And then there are all those labels that separate you from the rest. It was introverting. It made me feel anxious to be part of the group. I think that’s part of why people donate so much money.

    • Karen, while reading what you just said I had the cognition that you are so very right, and that this concept of “others” IS very ancient! This is also what tribal leaders in uncivilized societies have used for thousands of years to incite people to exclude, steal from, rape, torture, commit violence upon, eat, behead, etc. “others”, including members of “other “groups.
      “We are people and those ‘others’ are NOT!.”

      With all of the wonderful Tech that LRH bequeathed to them, those are the actions that Miscavige and the S.O. pick to apply to the world?
      What losers.

    • Yuk Karen, boy am I glad I blew the Sea Org after one year in 1973. Yuk:-)

  16. Discussing the Enemy condition (if I may) I’d like to share my cognition, that I attribute to Ethics program with Mary Freeman I did 3 years ago, different auditing I was receiving recently and our conversations with Phil, my dear friend and spiritual terminal of great influence! :) Here it comes.

    Never in my life I understood better an “Enemy Condition” then when I faced an enemy valence in that identity handling auditing. The Evil eventually got splinted off enough that I could give it a good examination and really face it for what it was. What a relief to find out that that beast was not me, but connected to me (genetically, through the body). It also feels really good to switch from been an effect of that monster to one in control of it, to end the internal fight and use a hungry beast where it is helpful (as an “annihilator” – a sort of vacuum cleaner) . I now can even admire its power and beauty, no more ARC break of enforced identity. :)

    Being able then to perceive as ME, from WHO I AM, and evaluate with greater clarity, I finally understood where I am at the case-wise. Ever after the Grade 2 Release (Thank you, Marty!), I was questioning myself if I was a clear, because that how it would feel to be a clear, I thought. But after this Identity handling and mid through the Auditors Integrity RD (delivered by Ron Fitch) I started to realize where (case-wise) I was and who I am.

    I am a child in a spiritual sense that is just about to be born and separated from a feeding cord that connects me to the “Mother” of a bigger spiritual me that is outside of this universe, that was feeding me with theta as much as I needed, but no longer will. Not because it is upset with me or punishing me, not because I took all there was for me and there is no more left, but because it is time – I am ready to be separated and make it on my own. That was a moment that I looked at my case of FROZEN THETA as a resource, I can and should start using, converting it back to theta, reversing the process of losing theta to it, that I had been fed and took for granted. And boy, it’s huge! Like that helicopter hanging on the chain. :))) Because it’s not of only my creation, it is connected and charged by other people’s cases,. But no fear, no hesitations. I am calm and happy, because I know I am ready to face it and handle – I am ready for Dianetics auditing. I feel just like “the one” at the end of the first Matrix movie, breathing deeply and smiling at the useless bullets, switching a view point from the effect to the cause and observing the unbeatable system to fail. Well, not there yet, but anticipating the state and enjoying the knowingness of inevitability of it’s arriving. :)

    Thanks to Dexter Gelfand and Ron Fitch for auditing,
    Thanks to LRH and Alan Walter for Tech,
    Thanks to Mary Freeman for my deep understanding of the mechanics of Enemy condition,

    Love,
    Tatiana Baklanova.

    • Nice Tatiana, I completely agree. There is, in the conditions formula, a beautiful gradient through various states of activing.

      Your use of it is the right use of it. But when Ron to war, it became his weapon. It became the B1. The daddy of them all. “putting in ethics.”

      That part is the rub. Not us rising to new states of being through properly measures action. That was beautiful, the other stuff is not. The other stuff is the philosophy of a war strategy. Justification for harming human beings in the name of the only way.

      • Thank you for acknowledgement, I appreciate it! :)
        I have a theory that have not tried yet, but am planing to. That has to do with ethics conditions – how we have a choice which condition to apply.

        If you draw two circles one above another with a distance between them, and then a circle in between overlapping both (third or have of each), and shade two overlapped ellipses, and then mark the white area top – “thetan”, middle – “mind” and bottom – “body” you will see the tree levels of awareness – of being an animal, a human and a spirit. The theory is that when one is at the bottom of the human circle – the shaded area of mind+body, he is in a state of awareness of been a reasonable animal. If he regards him as an animal, you would have to say that it is an animal in a very good shape – can do math, can talk etc. You’d have to assign him an affluence or power as an animal. But if regarded as a human that aware of self as body+mind – that’s a very poor state of awareness, and as human he will be in condition of confusion about where he is (to which circle he belongs). When working up the conditions and arriving to getting in touch with a bottom of the top circle, which will be about normal as a human he starts getting curious about a spirit, he starts getting first signs of maybe been a spirit himself. That will be a confusion about a theta universe. Then the higher he goes up as a human, the clearer his mind gets, the more theta he produces and accumulates, the more aware he becomes of a theta universe as WHERE part. Then by the time he is released from the bank and has more free theta he may realize that he IS a thetan in the theta universe. Then becoming a clear as a human that converted back into his possession all his theta he may be at the power condition as a human and about nonexistence (new arrival) as a thetan. By then he is out of the human role and game and entered the game of being a thetan in the new field, working his conditions up in there..

        Conclusion: It is necessary to differentiate whether you are doing the lower conditions as a spirit or higher as a human, which both will bring you to the same result. I suggest to apply the higher conditions to the lower zone, rather then straggle through the lower conditions in the higher zone that you aren’t quite there, not ready to be there yet. Also doing the lower conditions there may resonate negatively on your conditions as a human and put you down there to. (lack of attention and theta for the happy human living).

        If somebody is happy as human (body+mind) – do not make him miserable by forcing to realize how low he fail as a thetan and assigning him a lower condition. Instead, let him do normal to power, to progress naturally by accumulating theta and knowledge, by exercising and mastering his mind. It is a smoother and more enjoyable way, I think.

        I am going to try it – to step back, stop jumping up to and trying to hung at the bottom of some theta universe that I am nothing but confused about, having all that random uncontrollable perceptions. Let’s see what happens if I act in the realm of humans, exercise my mind, learn new data, make friends, accumulate theta, clear the bank etc. Out of confusion there into a normal to affluence operation here. Let’s see what happens then. :)

        Hope you can understand something from my mumbling. :)

        Love,
        Tatiana.

        • Having said that I realized, that I finished the Confusion formula as a thetan by answering the “Where?” question with a decision “I am human in a human circle”, which put me as a thetan right into the next condition of Treason, as I denied my existence as a thetan. And the next formula tells me: “Find out that you ARE [exist]!”. So, instead of dropping my human-oriented goals, I will continue toward them as a successful action that moved me up in conditions (from confusion to treason), while agreeing that yes, I do exist as a thetan, but… here immediately comes the next one(!) as “Who?” . And to that one I stubbornly answer that I am a human in the realm of the human field with all my human goals, but at the same time (!) I am a spirit, connected to that me-human. It’s really funny, that you can not help it but fly up the conditions as soon as you started from the right place. And before I knew, I am already in doubt – sitting on the chair marked “human” but doubting if that was the right one – am I a human or am I a thetan? :) Will work on that one now. :)
          I think the key to the doubt is to define correctly the main project and then to develop a measurement system so I can have a stats to compare. I think the main product is theta as positive and entheta as negative. In order to understand where I am more productive and so who I should be I would have to compare in wich state do I produce the most theta and the less entheta. I am not sure yet how to do it. :)
          It’s interesting that asserting been a thetan was blocking my progress as a thetan and blocking my joy of living as a human. But turning it around and starting on the higher conditions of the lower zone (as a human) allowed my progress in lower conditions of the higher zone (as a thetan). Also, when I was trying to go through these lower condition as a thetan answering “Where” as in a theta universe – that was a partially true, but not enough comparing to how much I was in the human circle, that I was trying to deny, that drugged me down into the treason as a human. Then I would push it still forward doing lower condition in a higher zone from the view point of thetan saying the same thing – that I am a thetan trapped in the human body. Same, but upside-down. That put me into enemy as a human, as I was fighting everything human in self, refusing human goals, knowledge, warms – any creations there. And I never could rise any higher then enemy. I would never come to the doubt, as by then I was not thetan enough yet, and made myself not human enough already. Sitting BETWEEN two chairs.

          Marty, thank you so much for allowing to post my comments-originations that are off the main topic. It’s not easy to find the ethics terminal, so I do dev-t others by out-flowing broadly into the universe, or to someone who happened to be near. I am thankful for any ack from anybody who would be willing to pick up that comm.

          Love,
          Tatiana.

          • Tatiana,
            with all due respect, your approach sounds very complex and complicated.

            I agree there are people unware of being a spiritual being. Some of them are so materialistic they will not easily cognite – and you couldn’t convince them to make any kind of the approach you presented above.

            Pick them up where they are and use other tools to raise their awarness (the awarness characteristics, you know, the ones you’ll find in the middle of the grade chart), help-control-communication-interest processes, mood-drills.
            I wouldn’t even apply the conditions of existence (as those are related to specific games and activities and not particularly to spiritual developement – though one could use them if he needed to reorganize his life/habbits/behaviour in order to go up the bridge).

          • Tatiana, I did read your posts and I am happy you got all those cognitions and a way to move up and reconcile our human nature to our spiritual one. Conditions help in many areas and dynamics. I find that the 3rd dynamic is key to moving up as it is the 3rd…. One can work a lot but if the 7th dynamic is not in place and moving, little will be done about things. Of course there are people who are satisfied with their lives but that does not mean that they have gone some ways ahead. My experience with Scientology and in the Sea Org taught me a few things. A being can be a saint but if he cannot effectuate anything on a 3rd dynamic level and a 4th dynamic level, he is not going to be there at that state for a long time.

            Ron left behind him a Tech and the writings of his. He left an organization which has gone mad but still it produces theta results too. He left thousands of people who can NOW think in a different way and are definitely above the level of a human. There is no doubt that a Scientologist can contribute to the sanity of people around him just introducing them to the Tech and its results.

            So, Ron is in a much higher condition as “he” keeps going on this planet. It’s not the physical Ron, but it’s his spiritual presence through all those means (7th dynamic: the tech and the writings, 3rd dynamic: the orgs and the people).

            The 3rd dynamic is the pivot around which this Universe turns.

            A thetan working towards survival action for the 3rd and 4th dynamic is more sane than others.

            We as Scientologists from all around the world form a 3rd dynamic which goes into our 4th.

            We can exchange news from all over the world, any place of it, any race and culture.

            And in that aspect we have this 3rd dynamic which is so important as we make it.

            Conditions do apply and they apply for this 3rd dynamic too. Not ising that fact does not help. The more we work together here or anywhere else this condition moves up. We have been through Dangers or Non Existences and higher conditions through this blog and other activities. We may not all agree on how tight such a group should be but we all agree that the affinity level should be high.

            As a 3rd dynamic can impinge on life and can change conditions, it’s group members become more sane. Isolation on the 1st (or if you want 7th dynamic) is not the solution. The solution is through the 3rd to the 4th and that way up. And of course we all have a much stronger and saner 7th as we have all participated in the Tech one way or another.

            The way out is the way through and I think we are re-attempting to get things going from a safer point.

            • More on that as each person has a condition on the dynamics, this group or any group is in some condition on each dynamic. Like look at the church, its rich and has a strong 6th. But it’s 7th now is gone by the boards as it does not apply the teachings of Scientology to the fullest sense. It also creates enemies in the other dynamics. Hubbard had this down cold and I am sure he managed the orgs by conditions based on their impingement upon society.

        • I meant above “to define the main PRODUCT”, not project, when talking about doubt formula.

          • theosismanides

            Tatiana, I have had 2 or 3 beers and reading at the bar while on my laptop so I cannot get everything you said today but… but… but I feel there is something in what you are writing here and in what you have experienced that I will surely re-read your posts and be able to get them fully. to me it’s very OK to write and be a bit off topic, too, as being off-topic might be more on-topic, finally!

    • Not sure if I got all this, but I love you. :)

    • Wow, what an absolutely beautiful win! Congrats on your new state of being.

  17. Marty, I’m all for “moving up a little higher” above opp-terming, and have written about that on this blog in the past. But, I have to ask the following questions, which follow logically from your recent statements:

    Miscavige and his minions ruined the Church because all of us had an aberrated need to have an enemy?

    The way to get him out of power is to cease seeing him as a bad guy and give him some love?

    The universe does NOT contain any thetans with evil intentions –no SPs or implanters?

    The downward spiral LRH described, and our own whole track recall supporting it, aren’t true?

    Instead the universe is slowly but surely evolving on its own towards universal enlightenment by way of yoga and the discoveries of quantum physics?

    Which is a good thing, because we can’t trust ourselves to run large organizations to train auditors in volume without becoming just like Miscavige ourselves?

    But, if he really isn’t an enemy, then why NOT become like him? Why fear what a large alternative training organization would do if there actually are no enemies?

    • martyrathbun09

      Here is the answer to all of your questions:
      He thinks of his enemy as the shadow that he himself casts.

      • This is exactly right Marty….We get exactly what we project on to our brother…Nothing more nothing less. :)

      • That statement sounds cool and has some workability but I wouldn’t take it as an absolute.
        I believe that there are people who are real enemies to mankind. This doesn’t mean that they aren’t basically good. But I would still call someone an enemy if I saw tham as such. Take dm. He is an enemy to the group of people that I cared/care about.

        • Ok, so how are you gonna deal with your enemy?

          • It depends on the circumstances.
            But if you are talking about dm, I am doing what I am doing. I don’t feel I need to dedicate my life to destroying him, but I will do my fair share. :-)

            • Have fun with that.

              • Didn’t you spend the first 2-3 years of your blog trying to destroy DM, or at least weaken his ability to continue suppressing mankind?

                Did you complete getting that VFP?

              • Marty I can see how you could be burned out on fighting dm as an enemy. My impression is that you did the amount that you felt was enough.
                I think a person can call someone an enemy without having to be consumed and frustrated with fighting them.

                I don’t care what you say, I see that you were fighting dm as an enemy . Maybe that is over now and that’s ok with me.

                • martyrathbun09

                  I’m not burned out. I corrected the third answer to ‘yes.’ Time to move on.

                  • When you say “move on” do you mean that your efforts are moving on from doing what you were doing earlier on this blog with exposing dm and helping people get out of the church and so forth? Or do you mean “move on” off of asking you about fighting dm as an enemy? It’s not really clear.

                  • I like this – I got the following image from this interchange: You and others have planted the seed (the Truth Rundown and other actions) that opened the door to understanding, and then continued to nurture the seed until it germinated and started growing. It is now at the point where it is growing and spreading on its own, inevitably, with new seeds being spread. The seed planter moves on.
                    “There will be growth in the spring.”

            • “Ok, so how are you gonna deal with your enemy?”
              “It depends on the circumstances.”

              I agree. And it depends on the game and what is on stake.
              DM is a good example for an enemy and he should be brought to justice for his crimes.
              Sooner or later he will pay for the wrong doings he accumulated. His Karma will find a way to discharge eventually. I am glad some people reach out to him with a helping hand. So thank you Tony, Marty, Mike, Luis, Debbie and every one of you who do something about this lost soul.

            • You can boycott him so to speak. Out create his entheta and continue in your own direction. Create as you do with Indies, and spread the truth about the church. Help people etc. These are things he can not do! Or you could shoot him dead , but then he becomes even more evil, not less. Damn it anyway. You ARE more powerful than he is because you operate in truth and the direction of survival. He will be of no consequence as time goes on, while you will continue to expand. It really is a no contest as you have won, if you can see it that way.

      • Marty, your quote, while not irrelevant, doesn’t answer my questions.

        There is truth in your recent articles, and I’ve commented positively on that. Someone dramatizing a GPM, or just craving motivators to balance his overts, WILL tend to see others as opponents based on the slimmest of evidence. We definitely should rise above that. We HAVE to rise above that.

        But there’s also a practical side to life. When one ISN’T dramatizing an aberrated need for enemies, but someone ELSE who IS dramatizing BEING an enemy shows up and threatens, it may become necessary to fight that person and win. That isn’t necessarily a personal responsibility dump, or being an effect, or insisting that “Cause is over there.” Well, compared with theoretical Total Enlightenment it may be. But as a practical matter, we’re not at Total Enlightenment yet, and have to life our lives at the level we’re on, while also working to “move up a little higher” as we can.

        Bodhidharma was the 26th Indian Zen Master in direct succession from Buddha, and was charged by his master with taking Zen to China. When he arrived at the Shaolin Monastery, he found the monks there passive and introverted, too physically weak to meditate effectively, and continuously distracted by bandits against whom they were unable to defend themselves. Bodhidharma had originally come from a noble military family, and had been trained in weaponless hand-to-hand combat in his youth. So, he adapted what he remembered of that training to the monks’ situation, and that was the birth of Shaolin Kung-Fu. The monks became both deadly AND enlightened.

        In 1969 Alan Kapular, the Las Vegas mission holder at the time, told me the following LRH story, which he had personally witnessed. One evening in the late 1950’s, LRH had just given a lecture in a large public hall and was walking to his car, when a guy who’d been in the audience came up and physically attacked him from behind. Alan, a former professional boxer, ran towards them to help LRH. But his help turned out to be unnecessary. LRH threw the guy to the ground and ruthlessly beat him into total submission. Then he helped the guy up, got in comm with him, and gave him a touch assist, his business card, and the promise of a free session to run out the incident. Was this an illustration of LRH’s famous flaws, or his wisdom?

        I think it would contribute to the learning experience for everyone reading this blog if you would actually answer the questions in my comment above.

        • I answered the question, you just don’t like the answer. Do you know why the church of Scientology banned the book ‘the Secret’? Because LRH knew the secret and built the entire technology around it. Because of ‘having to have an enemy’,the power of the secret was lost under tomes of aggressive writings. The ‘secret’ is now a secret to Scientologists. If you look real hard you can find it – you get what you postulate. Or as The Art of Racing in the Rain put it, your car goes where you look. Keep your attention on enemies or keep mocking them up, and you’ll get them, in spades.

          • Didn’t you keep your attention on DM as an enemy?

            Didn’t you do a lot to try to neutralize him?

            Did that make him more powerful or weaken him?

            Are we better off or worse off today because of what you did to oppose him?

            • Inappropriate acknowledgment. Actually, no acknowledgment. No sign of duplication or understanding.

              • So, communicate with greater intention to be duplicated and understood.

                Actually, I did duplicate and understand you. Then I went beyond understanding to engage you in a discussion at the level of judgment.

                By the way, you have a bad habit of breaking off communication when you think you’re not “winning.” All one has to do to chase you off is ask you a question or make a statement the honest response to which would weaken what you see as your debate case. Then you make a flippant remark to put the person down, and cut comm. When he tries to keep the comm going, you then accuse him of being motivated by personal aberration or worse. These are, of course, standard PR techniques. But they’re not conducive to a sincere discussion to find truth.

          • I heard what you said Marty.

          • I am having a tough time taking this “Secret” stuff seriously. I watched that video 5 years ago, start to finish. My wife brought the DVD home from work. Sorry, I must be unenlightened, but I laughed my ass off listening to it. My thought was, whoever came up with this was just picking out the concept of positive postulating, along with the “A” side of ARC=U, and saying you can get anything you want just by using/doing those 2 things.

            “The Secret” amounted to glibness on steroids, IMHO.

            By the way, it did not cross my mind that someone intentionally “used” those parts of Scientology. Those concepts could have been pulled from all sorts of places. WTF, you might as well just chant “love is all there is” or “I’m OK You’re OK” and expect the universe to reward you with career success, new BMWs, and exteriorization – same level of banal simplicity.

            Why the CofS “banned” it was beyond me at the time. I considered it harmless fluff. Of course, now I understand, as they now ban just about anything that moves.

            But still – “LRH built the entire technology around it” (the Secret)??

            Help me out here, Marty. I’m having a hard time with this one. Sounds to me like someone stole your computer or hijacked your blog. Or else the margaritas in the Hill Country are a hell of a lot stronger than they were down at the Gulf.

            • martyrathbun09

              The banal simplicity, as you put it, is the Law of Attraction, or ‘you get what you postulate’. If the statement that Scientology is built from that stable datum seems bizarre or alcohol-induced, then I suppose you and I have two entirely different ideas about what Scientology does, and what its end phenomena is.

              • I definitely don’t believe “you get what you postulate”. I don’t think that is Scientology. if that’s all there is, why bother with such things as getting off charge? I’ve postulated a whole lot of things I have not gotten. And have gotten a lot of things I definitely did not postulate. I think the universe is a lot rougher than that. The true test of a thetan – “MAKING it go right” – I think that simple statement has a lot more truth in it than just “positive postulating”.

                Which, by the way, is why I and I’m sure many others have admired you for what you’ve done over the past few years. Taking on an evil force, looking it straight in the eye, attempting to right the serious wrongs of what DM has done. But this was obviously not as easy as just postulating that it will turn out that way and flowing affinity at the problem, nor have I ever gotten from you that it was that easy. Just like clearing this planet – it is a long hard slog.

                I could see it if the end phenomena of Scientology – the whole bridge, properly and honestly done – wound up in the ability to “get what you want” (in a pro-survival way across the dynamics), or at least be a lot better at that than when one started. But just to take that DVD, give it to the average Joe on the street, imply that that’s all there is to it, a key to life if you will, strikes me as being so very glib.

                My guess is, I’m not duplicating you correctly.

                • martyrathbun09

                  Well, for starters you are altering and redefining what I said. I never said ‘you get what you want.’ To answer your question ” why bother with such things as getting off charge?”:
                  So that you will recognize that ‘you get what you postulate’ and that YOU can take charge of the process.

                • Publius

                  Hi.
                  If I may add a voice here…

                  You said: “I definitely don’t believe “you get what you postulate”. OK But the way you are using the verb “postulate” looks like you see it as a wish or desire, or hope, belief, etc.

                  The way I understand it, a postulate is a “done deal”. It is an unreserved “I get it” rather than ” I’d like to get it”. Or “I have it” rather than “I’d like to have it, or “I am that”, rather than “I’d like to be that”.

                  Ya ya ya.. but when one “can OBVIOUSLY SEE” that he isn’t being, doing, or having it, how the hell is JUST SAYING you are being, doing, or having it going to change anything? Well there is the kicker… It WON”T!

                  In that example, the first set of postulates is actually still contained in the second set, and so they continue to “work”. Perhaps one can get some insight into it if he were to ask the question a little more accurately. A more accurate question would be “how in the heck can one cleanly achieve the second set of postulates while he insists the first set are true?” … well, he can’t… It won’t work. How could it?

                  If one thinks (considers to be true/postulates) “I am poor but I am going to say “I am Rich” and see what happens”. Well the tech/ philosophy says that “postulates ALWAYS work”… But you may argue “but it didn’t work, I am still poor!” OK. but look at the postulates that are actually in play… You know for sure (have as a postulate) that YOU ARE POOR but you are going to say that you are rich(even though you KNOW FOR CERTAIN (have the postulate) that this is not so…..
                  so you find yourself still knowing that you are poor and wishing you were rich…. Congratulations… your postulates are working precisely as postulated.

                  So here is the tough part. After one mistakenly believes that his “postulates don’t work”, because he believes he has failed to “make them work” often and thoroughly enough, he tends to go down tone on it and give up on the whole mess. Eventually he decides that the the statement (and postulate) that “you get what you postulate” is a lie and only designed to invalidate. Now what are his chances of ever being at cause over his own postulates? (in other words,”in control of his universe”)

                  So, how does one get there from here?

                  To me, THAT is what Scientology is all about.

                  Eric S

                  • If I may add something here. I have heard about the Secret and have read few things about it. Seen some films. Some people I know have had wins out of it just by understanding that they can get things done if they ask for them. Which is good for their level.

                    I think what Marty wants to say is that the end final product here (we don’t care how we do it) is you get what you are thinking of (postulating).

                    We know of a Postulate as having this attribute:

                    The less effort you use the closer it is to a postulate.

                    So, the more unserious a thetan is in life the more he can accomplish. Unseriousness as described in the PDC is a big subject and needs to be taken seriously (lol) into consideration.

                    The spirit of play. The upper levels of the Tone Scale. Things over there are getting effortless. You are closer to the “Secret”, a postulate.

                    On the contrary though there are those beings who are more and more merged into the physical universe and its flows. That’s what Ron did do and liberated them and no matter how many times you give them the “Secrets they are not going to make it. They are forming groups and agreements upon the Secret as we did upon the Tech but things in a Homo Sapiens are more complicated. Not the same with a Thetan who is in the OT bands.

                    That’s my opinion and that’s why the Secret is right and why Scientology is right too in how it approaches the Secret. But as in all stages, one has to move from the stage of the uninformed to the stage of semi-informed and at that point, as we say in Greek being uninformed about something is better than being semi(half)-informed. A lot of misunderstanding are happening right now with Scientology. The biggest one is that an SP is running the church and the semi-informed buy it. That is a stage we have to go through before we can all move higher on up.

              • Thanks for explaining where you are coming from in this area Marty. I get it. I think that I also understand better now what your recent change of style might be at least partially based on.
                It really is true that one gets what one postulates. Some one said to me once (might have been LRH) that “if you want to know what the existing postulates are in an area, just look at the existing conditions.” That idea might be hard to confront, but it’s not that bad and it seems to be true. Postulates always work, including “counter” postulates. And postulating is really quite easy, natural, and simple. Did I duplicate that correctly?

                • martyrathbun09

                  Sort of. But, I think even that might be complicating it. I could go even simpler with the Buddha, ‘you are what you think.’

            • Hi Publius,
              I tried to listen to the Secret. It was hard to wade through. In my opinion it bordered on theetie wheetie. I agree that it takes more than “thinking good thoughts” to change conditions. Thinking good thoughts can help on some occasions and can hinder in other occasions imho.

              • Yes, I agree with you Tony. Although I’d cut to the chase and just call it what I think it is – over the top theetie weetie. I haven’t really seen anything else that comes so close to The Secret in that respect, except for one I know Diogenes will recall – Meher Baba and his single Key To Life:

                “Don’t Worry Be Happy”

                I guess that’s all it takes, folks!

          • A quick comment on The Secret. I loved the movie. It’s all true. But it’s so high level that no one can control it all the time. Scientology exists to find and erase the cause of that limitation.

            • Bingo!

            • Yes.
              But after processing your postulates will be different also.
              Beware of what you wish ;-)

              Indeed in the video was a kind of a tone-scale at I was amazed that they actually used data from the PDCs in it to express that your “postulates” will stick better if you’re higher on that scale.

              • Neither The Secret or the Law of Attraction use data from the PDC or from LRH.

                Rhonda Byrne, the author of the book, “The Secret” directly cites the book “The Science of Getting Rich,” written by Wallace Wattles in 1907. These same concepts appear in the book, “The Law of Success in Sixteen Lessons” (1928), and “Think and Grow Rich” (1937) written by Napoleon Hill, which sold millions of copies and is still popular today. Norman Vincent Peale, ran a very well known and tremendously popular radio show, “the Art of Living,” which started in 1935 and ran for 54 years. He summarized his teachings on his radio program in the book “The Power of Positive Thinking,” which was released in 1952. It also has sold millions of copies. All of these predate anything LRH ever published with the exception of Peale’s book, which was a summary of his radio shows.

                In his shows, Peale focused heavily on the damage of negative emotions on health and prosperity as do 90% of the New Thought researchers and writers, especially Ernest Holmes, who wrote a massive tome called “The Science of Mind” (1926,) which is a comprehensive summary of the writers up to that time.

                From Holmes: “Go through a process of self-analysis; look into your own past and carefully remove every complex. This is easily done by the one who is not afraid to look himself in the face. Find out what you are afraid of and convince the mentality that there is nothing to fear. Look the world squarely in the face; sift the mentality to its depths, removing every obstruction that inhibits the free flow of those great spiritual realizations, such as will be found in the meditations that follow these lessons.”

                These authors and their works are now referred to as the New Thought Movement, which started in the late 1800s, and the father of the entire movement is considered to be Phineas Parkhurst Quimby, a prolific researcher and writer whose works span from 1843 to 1865. The New Thought movement includes a massive body of works with many, many contributors.

                It is clear to me that LRH drew from the New Thought movement extensively. He even directly cites Émile Coué, a well known New Thought Writer from the early 1900s, in process R2-41 of the Creation of Human Ability, and offers R2-41 as a Scientology version of what is taught in The Secret. He even explains, in Scientology terms, why people have trouble getting their postulates to work.

                • OK, thanks Maria.
                  I know of the New Thout movement. You may be right about the origins of all this. However, all the data and laws you’ll find in the secret you’ll also find in the PDCs. And much more.

                • Very interesting, I will have to look that info up!

            • I agree with this also.

        • Hey, nice story.

  18. Per LRH himself, justice and moral codes are what the group applies to its members, while Ethics are for the individual to apply to his or her own self. So, how did we get into the habit of “assigning lower conditions” to others? Spotting and recognizing someone’s condition? Sure. Helping someone with their condition, who wants the help? Absolutely. But assigning Ethics conditions to another? That’s just bogus. It’s not Ethics at all; it’s an enforced moral code and a bypass of the person’s own ethics.

    So, the very concept of assigning someone a condition of say, Enemy, is off the rails from the get-go, and as we’ve all seen, in practice it can get pretty ugly indeed.

    • “That’s just bogus.” Exactly.

      Assigning conditions is an eval which will more than likely turn into a wrong item for the individual as it was not them self who assigned it.

    • Aeolus,
      The assignment of a lower condition to another comes from what Hubbard called “The Mutuality Theorem” (or something like that): “You wear the condition you do not assign.” This contradicts the beautiful essay “Ethics, Justice, and the Dynamics”. All of the sudden, we are supposed to become vindictive towards one another. Instead of being a group where members help and care for each other, we are supposed to be a group where member fight with each others. We are supposed to be reactive rather than analytical.

      • Perhaps this all stems from a misdefinition of the word “assign”. One definition is to “attribute”. If you can see that someone is in a condition of Treason toward you, or toward their post, you would do well to take note of that and then know what to expect from them. By “assigning” them the accurate condition you are less likely to go the effect of it.

        However, telling the person what their condition is in some area and requiring them to go through the prescribed steps of the formula is far less likely to result in benefit to you or to them. It not only undermines their own self-determinism and responsibility, it’s practically an open invitation for abuse and domination.

        • LRH meant that you should ASSIGN them the condition. Not just verbally but with all the trimmings. Of course a good ethics officer (in a sane world) should be able to discuss the condition and see if it’s a correct one. Sadly in an insane assylum you are not always allowed to do sane things.

          I think it is valid to assign conditions in some sense. If someone is messing me up by doing something I think is wrong, I think talking to them about it to try to get resolution is a great thing and has worked great for me over the years.

          Going up to someone and ordering them to do LIABILITY or something is asinine.

        • You make a great and very agreeable point. I am just not sure this was the intention of LRH.

    • theo Sismanides

      Aeolus, exactly right. I was always baffled in the SO because assigning Ethics conditions was the order of the day, whereas LRH speaks about Ethics being applied by the individual. It got so enforced that I guess now is at Inhibit… It’s hard to find one’s condition, anymore in the SO.

      That however doesn’t mean that are there are no enemies. What is Miscavige, for example, to you and me and Marty and anyone here or to the whole of Scientology? A friend?

      I think judgement again is the key and I am sorry to see that judgement is something which is not so abundant around. How can you keep on enforcing things on people and expect a result. Where is self determinism gone? I mean, I have seen the Ethics gradients misapplied and too steep a gradient always being the norm. How stupid. That destroyed people’s morale. They knew right there they couldn’t apply ethics themselves. It was a complete bypass of their own self determinism.

  19. Marty, What a great passage. That definitely brings more calm and peace of mind than other avenues of tackling an “enemy”. These posts are so good. So many ways of thinking need to be re-evaluated and I appreciate you sharing your views and pointing these things out. It’s therapeutic to think outside of the “Scientology” box and look. As a girl who grew up raised only on Scientology – even ate Scientology for breakfast everyday – I’m really digging these posts.

  20. One can examine the mechanics of cause and effect, terminal and opposition terminal, etc., and come away with some valuable tools. As a philosophical tool I’ve even found the lower conditions valuable. The enemy formula (when I was able to apply it with the intention to find truth, rather than to satisfy some authority) always helped me see myself on both sides of the conflict.

    Probably the most valuable understanding I’ve gotten in studying beyond Scn is the fact that cause and effect cannot exist separately–each implies the other inextricably. Alan Watts is well worth a listen or read on this.

    Scientology’s focus on “must stay at cause and not be effect”/ “cause is good, effect bad”/”Be OT or be DB” is necessarily denial of self and a formula for insanity.

    LRH said many things that make think he had some understanding of this, but it never really reflected in his attitude or in the organization (especially the SO) which sets the for all the onging RCS mania and destructiveness. As dynamic as LRH was, I don’t think he could really just let go.

  21. Mike,
    Once again I mean no disrespect but if the Church of Scientology is guilty of thinking that anyone and everyone is an “enemy’ you are likewise guilty of thinking that no one could possibly be an enemy. Both ideas are silly in the extreme.

    My biggest complaint with the Church is we had the means to do so much better than we’ve done in the past but we kind of failed at that. Instead of ushering in a new age of enlightenment, sanity and civilization we tried to stamp out evil. We could have succeeded at the fist goal but no one has ever succeed in the second one.

    As far as how best to deal with enemies I kind of like the words of Jesus Christ despite that fact that I am in not particularly a Christian in the religious sense.

    Jesus encouraged us to “Hate the sin but love the sinner” Very wise words.

    • Of course enemies do exist and often have to be fought. The problem is when the enemy MUST be viewed as “other”.

  22. I’ve got a simple take on enemy that works for me.

    Anyone running a “Can’t Have” on me.

    That covers it all. Can’t have trust. Can’t have friends. Can’t have standard tech. Can’t have what you paid for. Can’t have what you were promised.
    Can’t have harmony. Can’t have peace. Can’t have a fight. Can’t have your cut. Can’t have what you are worth. Can’t have improvement. Can’t have space. Can’t have truth. Can’t have love. Can’t have money. Can’t have a straight answer. Can’t have control over this. Can’t have stuff. Can’t have food. Can’t have shelter. Can’t have a safe space. Can’t have any prediction. Can’t have duplication. Can’t have reason. Can’t have honesty. Can’t have knowledge. Can’t have a solution. Can’t have a resolution. Can’t have justice. Can’t have a conversation. etc etc etc.

    If you can name it someone will come up with a way to run a can’t have with it. That’s when I op term. If you don’t, you are agreeing with it and run the can’t have on yourself.

    And when you can’t stand by yourself, you are fucked.

    • There are some can’t have’s that been run on this blog that have whizzed by me. (Not run by Marty either)

      Can’t have a proper acknowledgement to your origination. Can’t have an alias. Can’t have too much admiration for Marty. Can’t have your own take on some part of Scientology. Can’t have other ideas from the “outsiiiiiide” Can’t have a straight answer to a question. Can’t have an idea of your own. (with out getting slapped with a cram to correct your view) Can’t have a different viewpoint. Can’t have ARC for Hubbard. Can’t have criticism for Hubbard. Can’t have faith. Can’t have doubt. Can’t have fun! Can’t have pride. Can’t have respect. Can’t have any altitude over me! Can’t have votes. (thumb symbols) Can’t have trust in Marty. Can’t have security clearance to post here! Can’t have , what’s his name, the funny funny one who always made us laugh…oh yeah, Can’t have random stranger! Can’t have my support. Can’t have my endorsement.

      Marty does run Can’t have flame wars here, but that’s what keeps the space safe from abuse.

      Otherwise, the reason this forum is such a comfort zone for me, is that CAN HAVES are not only permitted, they are ENCOURAGED.

      Can have the truth. Can have the knowledge. Can have the information. Can have your own view. Can have some space to communicate. Can share your thoughts and ideas. Can have someone to talk to. Can have some one to listen to. Can have the tech. Can have reason. Can have access. Can have conversations. Can have some T.A. Can have some fun and adventure! Can have some good news! Can have some people on your side. Can have some help. etc etc etc. CAN HAVES is everything flowing through this blog.

      Thanks Marty, and everyone else, for the CAN HAVES that were always supposed to be a part of the Scientology adventure! Thanks for the CAN HAVES on the Scientology, and so much more!

      • YES! That’s it ! thanks for the’ can have” and can do and can be.
        When I read this post nothing profound or earthshaking came to me . I haven’t been abused dramatically in my life and didn’t abuse dramatically ,but hanging to my sanity , hanging to my understanding of ethics and people has been a constant fight within the Church , a mostly silent one and sometimes not so silent , but a boring exhausting one.
        This blog is anything but boring and exhausting .
        Always something to learn either new , to expand or a validation , a recognition of my own thoughts in others.
        What came to me , was the movie “joyeux Noel” , this brief moment in history when people who have been turned into enemies find themselves taking a break from hate and death.

        • “but hanging to my sanity , hanging to my understanding of ethics and people has been a constant fight within the Church”

          I hear you! You know what rocks sanity is when people run “Can’t have your item” “Can’t have the right item” “Can’t have what you were promised” “Can’t have a straight forward answer” etc etc etc. “Can’t have a session, Can’t have Super Power, Can’t have the next OT level etc etc. Can’t have the correct C/S.

          A person’s understanding is reduced when Can’t Have’s are run . Must have’s don’t even bother me if nobody is running a Can’t have on what I must have.

          Can’t be’s and Can’t do’s restimulate people also.

          Someone wrote the other day, “What other Church attacks people for practicing their own religion?” The Can’t Haves are that bad!

          It’s bullshit. Everyone can have Scientology now and get up the bridge.

          That is why OSA is out here attacking people. We are no longer in agreement with the Can’t Haves. That is why we are dangerous and suppressive. We are running CAN HAVES!

          All DM and OSA are really doing is still trying to run the Can’t Have’s.

          Someone promising standard tech and giving you something else is actually running a covert Can’t Have with the Scientology. Someone setting people up for losses is running Can’t haves on success’ and wins. Anyone that sets you up for a loss is running a Can’t Have on you.

          The Church and the sociopaths have managed to emptied out the Orgs and blown people off lines running “You can’t have Scientology”. or, “You can’t have a win in Scientology”.

          • Don’t want to run this in the ground. Can’t haves go over a lot of people, they don’t even notice. But I am going to tell a story. If you remember this story, it will come to mind next time someone runs a can’t have on you. Hopefully, it will register as a red flag.

            There was a guy at the base, a DM darling. He was selling special properties and making tons of money for ASI. Those cheap posters that were flying off the shelves for a while as “investment properties”.

            Let’s not forget THAT scam.

            He was very wealthy and very arrogant. He saw himself as very handsome and walked the base like he was a shareholder.

            He married another customer that was at the base. A really nice sincere woman. She had kids from a previous marriage.

            She came into the Fort Harrison one day and looked absolutely stricken. She asked me to help her find her husband right away as she had to get to the school to get one of her children. I took her and tracked him down pretty quick and she explained she needed the car keys instantly to go get her son.

            He was very calm. He reached in his pocket and took out the car keys and held them out to her. When she reached for them, he pulled them back. He kept doing this for about a minute and I could see her face starting to well up into grief and frustration.

            I don’t know what my face looked like, as I was about five seconds from smacking him. I had already started to shake a little in the effort of holding myself back. But he took one glance at me and the smile left his face and he quickly handed her the car keys and she fled.

            I marched right down to the C/S office where I knew he was a P.C. and asked the C/S what the bad news was behind this guy.

            Turns out his father had been very, very wealthy. He had drugged his father over a period of time with some kind of hallucination drug until he had been able to get him committed to a mental institution. Then he got control of the man’s entire estate.

            This was how he had paid for his bridge, this was how he was going up the bridge, this was how he had invested all sorts of money into becoming a super star at the Flag Land Base rolling in the A.S.I. scam as an F,S.M. for Fran Harris. He had total ethics protection at the Base.

            Better to fuck with John Gotti than one of Fran’s money makers. She would fly to the base if you fucked with one of her people.

            Those pretty gold and silver plated emeters flying off the base, 5 to 10 week for 20, 40, to 60 grand a pop.

            Someone got convinced to buy me one as a gift.

            I dumped it in the C/S office.

            “Here, have it.” I said. “I’ve been here five years and haven’t been allowed to finish my product zero yet. Was on course two weeks after I joined the Sea Org before I was ripped out of the academy and put on post. Got into big trouble once for going back in there. Two seniors sent to body route me out! I’ll never learn how to use an emeter in this place.”

            They were all sitting there and the auditors in the H.G.C. were using funky old meters that looked like hell. Looked like children’s play toys from a bad day care center.

            Well! Good lord. What to do with a gold plated meter for the love of God!

            What a fuss among the staff in the H.G.C..

            What to DO with the thing?

            Don’t know how they finally got it sorted it out and who got to use it.

            T.O.

            • Well, it wasn’t all Fran. He was spending a lot of money at the base. And, “Besides”, I was told. “His father was apparently antagonistic towards Scientology.

              Seriously!

              That was one hell of a “handle or disconnect”. Right?

              Very CREEPY! These were the people puttin ethics in on the planet!

              That was just after Hubbard had died. Hate to think about what it has become by this time.

      • Brilliant post Oracle. You are wise in a funny way.

  23. “I think it is worthwhile for someone who has adopted Scientology beliefs”

    “Scientology and beliefs.” Man I wish those words wouldn’t go together.
    Don’t get me wrong I am not trying to make you wrong for using them together. Considering the real scene of $C unfortunately those words seem to have gained rightful grounds together. However if one looks at the essence of SC tech then beliefs would not be something that one should have as a result of using the tech. Beliefs is what people get when they are running around with quotes of LRH tech in their head as opposed to understanding and using them. If they used them they would be doing less and less believing and more and more knowing as they progress up the bridge. I do understand that corporate $C has turned the words of LRH into somewhat of a belief system but that is exactly where they have gone off the rails.

    As far as the enemy subject goes I agree about 95%. The remaining 5% is due to this: It’s all peachy and dandy to not chose enemies. But.
    What if one chooses you as their enemy. We can’t just wish those away who seek to harm us for no just reason. Given the attacks of the past on you Marty it is obvious that there are some who seek to bring you down for no good reason. Many here got your back including me. However I find it very important for all of us to know how to deal with those who choose us as a target. The brighter you shine the more likely you will have some particles choose to harm you. Then what do you do? Turn the other cheek? I don’t think that woks out too well. Indeed we need to be able to confront those who seek to destroy us. No counter attack. No revenge. But simply not granting them power to abuse. Granting power is a big subject and I don’t want to turn this into a book. But at it’s smallest building block even the willingness to listen and “react” to someone who is running around smearing others is a form of granting power. An audience even in partial agreement is a form of power.

    Therefore my humble recommendation to all would be to consider thinking twice before we give those tearing others down in direct or indirect ways our precious attention. If we can maintain an auditor’s frame of mind and threat such as an origination and see if we can help the originator by shedding some light on something they have missed, then great! No problem. But the moment we let them affect us we have granted them power. That we could do without IMO.

    I personally do not have an enemy and agree that one should strive to have zero flow 2 enemies. But if you ignore Flow 1 enemies and cocoon up you will not be surviving most optimally. IMO it is extremely useful to look at the subject of enemies and strip it apart with the flows.

    • Just re-read my post here and realized that instead of turn the other cheek the term should be turn the other wrist.

  24. One of my favorite books is Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations. I can’t say I agree with everything he or other Stoics espoused, but I find many of these philosophies to be really useful to me in my life.

    One particular quote comes to mind on the subject of labeling people as enemies.

    “When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: The people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous and surly. They are like this because they cannot tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own – not of the same blood or birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine. And so none of them can hurt me. No one can implicate me in ugliness. Nor can I feel angry at my relative, or hate him. We were born to work together like feet, hands and eyes, like the two rows of teeth, upper and lower. To obstruct each other is unnatural. To feel anger at someone, to turn your back on him: these are obstructions.”

    The message is perhaps a bit different than what Marty might be mentioning, but to me it seems like one fundamental idea is similar: when you create a relationship where you label someone as an enemy, you’re actually the one obstructing that relationship. You’re the one putting the walls up, and you’re walling yourself in… why not treat them as a fellow human being who is searching, just like you are.

  25. My view is that too many religious movements encourage people to separate from the world and also to put distance between members of the religion itself. This may come from a desire to have all the attention go to the object of worship. Worse, some religions divide followers or even pit them against each other. I believe these are misguided approaches.

    My view is that religions instead ought to encourage friendship as a healthy social behavior. Embracing friendship as a social behavior makes people happy, empathic, open, understanding, and predisposes them to disseminate whatever is good in the religion from a point of authenticity.

    Sadly, in Western societies, the importance, the value of friendship is getting lost. According to a study in the journal American Sociological Review, Americans are suffering a loss in the quality and quantity of close friendships. The study states that 25% of Americans have no close confidants and that the average total number of confidants per person has dropped from four to two.
    According to the study:
    • The percentage of Americans who had at least one confidant not connected to them through kinship dropped from 80% to 57%.
    • Americans’ dependence for close contact on a partner or spouse went up from 5% to 9%.
    • Research has found a link between fewer friendships (especially in quality) and psychological regression.
    American friendships have lost the force and importance they had in antiquity. C.S. Lewis, in The Four Loves, writes:
    “To the Ancients, friendship seemed the happiest and most fully human of all loves; the crown of life and the school of virtue.”
    How sad that this has been lost…

    Interestingly, research also indicates that quality friendship, with healthy, interesting and fun interactions, is important for a person’s physical well being. Also, research shows that high quality friendships have great ways of resolving conflict which ultimately leads to a stronger and healthier socialization.
    Friendship is about trusting a person, until its been proven that they cannot be trusted. Its about spending time doing things together, enjoying together life experiences, believing that our friends and their friends and everyone have the right to their opinions. Friendship is also about mutual assistance: helping and supporting friends and having them help us, and last but not least, it is about being able to confide and find empathic listening ears.

    Religions would be well served to adopt friendship as away of behaving: “love thy neighbor” in action. Love parishioners, and love people out there. Would it not be nice if all religious (and non-religious) people operated on the assumption that, unless specifically proven otherwise, everyone is a friend?

  26. If you look at forbidden websites on the internet…you might be an enemy.

    If you refuse to turn over all your pay to the IAS…you might be an enemy.

    If you talk to Marty or Mike or Steve or Jim or Jeff or Jason or…you might be an enemy.

    If you sneak out of line at lunch time and go into the store to by a candy bar…you might be an enemy.

    If you have negative thoughts about david miscavige after watching him beat the crap out of someone…you might be an enemy.

    If you had negative thoughts about Debbie Cook in 2004 or positive thoughts about Debbie Cook in 2012…you might be an enemy.

    If you notice that the idle orgs are empty…you might be an enemy.

    If you state the idle orgs are empty…you’re a lot worse than an enemy.

    If you fail to comply in any way with whoever has deemed themself your senior at that moment…you might be an enemy.

    If you deliver the tech without paying your dues…you might be an enemy.

    If you criticize a criminal who gave to the IAS…you might be an enemy.

    If you apply like a fundamentalist you’re a KSW-bot enemy.

    If you take what you want and leave the rest you’re a dliettante squirrel enemy.

    What a bunch of silliness. The wonderful world of scientology with added inapplicable serv facs galore.

    “Service Facsimile defined: Advanced Procedure and Axioms definition accurate.
    Added to this is: The Service Facsimile is that computation generated by the preclear (not the bank) to make self right and others wrong, to dominate or escape domination and enhance own survival and injure that of others.”

    Just going out and helping people to the best of one’s ability seems to be cause enough for some to label one an enemy. Oh well.

    • LDW | March 22, 2013 at 12:03 am | Reply
      If you look at forbidden websites on the internet…you might be an enemy.

      CAN’T HAVE LOOKING.

      If you refuse to turn over all your pay to the IAS…you might be an enemy.

      “CAN’T HAVE being on good terms with all people.

      If you talk to Marty or Mike or Steve or Jim or Jeff or Jason or…you might be an enemy.

      CAN’T HAVE KNOWLEDGE OR OTHER POINTS OF VIEW.

      If you sneak out of line at lunch time and go into the store to by a candy bar…you might be an enemy.

      CAN’T HAVE “me” TIME”.

      If you have negative thoughts about david miscavige after watching him beat the crap out of someone…you might be an enemy.

      “CAN’T HAVE AWARENESS OF CONDITIONS”

      If you had negative thoughts about Debbie Cook in 2004 or positive thoughts about Debbie Cook in 2012…you might be an enemy.

      CAN’T HAVE A K.R..

      If you notice that the idle orgs are empty…you might be an enemy.

      If you state the idle orgs are empty…you’re a lot worse than an enemy.

      CAN’T HAVE ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE TO ANYONE ON ANY SUBJECT EVEN IF YOU PAID FOR IT.

      If you fail to comply in any way with whoever has deemed themself your senior at that moment…you might be an enemy.

      If you deliver the tech without paying your dues…you might be an enemy.

      “CAN’T HAVE MATHEMATICAL SKILLS.”

      If you criticize a criminal who gave to the IAS…you might be an enemy.

      “CAN’T HAVE HONOR”
      If you apply like a fundamentalist you’re a KSW-bot enemy.

      If you take what you want and leave the rest you’re a dliettante squirrel enemy.

      CAN’T HAVE FREEDOM OF CHOICE.

      What a bunch of silliness. The wonderful world of scientology with added inapplicable serv facs galore.

      “Service Facsimile defined: Advanced Procedure and Axioms definition accurate.
      Added to this is: The Service Facsimile is that computation generated by the preclear (not the bank) to make self right and others wrong, to dominate or escape domination and enhance own survival and injure that of others.”

      Just going out and helping people to the best of one’s ability seems to be cause enough for some to label one an enemy. Oh well.

    • Roger From Switzerland Thought

      :)

  27. LRH did say that Man cannot be trusted with justice. I guess he has to include himself in that one.

    • LOL! Good one!

    • Roger From Switzerland Thought

      Last years I had a Justice Cycle here in Switzerland with real attorneys and all that stuff. iT WAS SO FAST JUST AND FACTUAL. I was totally in awe about it and thought to myself : ” They apply LRH Justice and ethics policies better than any Scientologists I ‘ve ever met !

      So my my Experince I made was : ” You can trust some people with Justice and the Wog Justice System is much more on Source than this of COS ! ”
      What a Cog ! :)

    • “Man cannot be trusted with justice”
      Yeah right! This one – I didn’t buy even in my most “brainwashed” state.
      When you are getting accused of sth in the CoS you cannot defend yourself but you stand alone. The “Committee of Evidence” is a farce. (here only one of the many examples reported: http://www.scientology-cult.com/bill-straass/487-perversion-of-justice-on-the-freewinds.html)
      What is called “justice” in the CoS is a big joke, a bad parody for real justice, used to get you into a state of submission. In the “wog-world” you can at least have a lawyer. One of the things I was missing most in the SO was a personal lawyer to deal with the accusations, the KR-wars, Dep 3, CMO and the craziness, to put things right (even in the sec checks – interrogations – I was thinking I needed a lawyer). If you are blacklisted in the “Church” it is not better than in any suppressive regime (with the difference that there you don’t have automatically your friends and family turned against you).
      And the KR-line is meanwhile functioning on the Internet…

  28. This is actually pretty much the point that motivated my turning over the 5 missions I had at the time, and exiting the formal organization in 1980 after completing my NOT’s under Mayo. I was asked to sign the new IAS credo proclaiming my dedication to join “the fight” against any and all enemies of LRH and Scn. I would not do so, because that attitude- even if true- created an unsafe environment, which would make auditing and case gain impossible.

    As a Cl VI- XDN C/S, responsible for creating an environment in which auditing could occur, I could not do that. To me, the whole idea of there being an enemy that needs to be defended against is contrary to the fundamental creed and principals that we (at least a good percentage of us) signed up for: The most basic tenet of Scn is “what’s true for you is true for you, belief has no part in it”; therefore, Scn is about TRUTH- in whatever form that truth exists or takes. TRUTH needs no defense, it simply IS.

    If an “enemy” that might do harm is postulated, it means that there is less than truth. It is alter-is. The greater the amount of potential damage that is contemplated or warned against, the greater the degree of alter-is. When and how did people lose sight of basic TR-0- “just being there”?

  29. Great subject Marty as it gets to the heart of probably the oldest dramatization on this planet – my side against yours, I win, you lose, I live, you die, etc etc. LRH did nail this on Level 4 (process R3SCA – serv fac brackets).

    While doing lowers about 20 years ago, I cognited on the enemy condition that I did NOT have to play the game of “being an enemy” this LT and oppose another entity outside myself as a basic game. And I have chosen as much as possible not to do so.

    In the present time, I have been formally declared an enemy of Scientology, largely because I have dared to communicate with you and Mike and some others as YOU are an enemy of Scientology.

    Scientologists that I have known and worked with way back to 1970 have been forced to disconnect from me, otherwise THEY will be in a condition of enemy, giving aid an comfort to me, an enemy, who has given aid and comfort to you, an enemy ……

    Now this sounds quite crazy and aberrated put this way, though it is in fact what has occured. But there is a method to this madness, certainly in the history of planet Earth. The King can always get the Knights and the peasants/slaves to suit up and fight the enemy instead of fighting HIM for a better life for themselves. It has always suited both dictators and even democratically elected presidents and prime ministers to find enemies and direct the aberrated games of their populace to fight in patriotic fervor (Ms. Thatcher, was it REALLY worth the price of even one life to start a little war over the Falklands?) Try to imagine an IAS fund raiser without hours spent on what the enemy is doing to destroy not just us, but the entire world.

    The very unfortunate thing is that Scientology, which seemed so much like an enlightened activity that rose above human insanity, fell into the same trap. It is a heartbreaking occurance on so many dynamics to me personally.

    And I see so many people I know, even through OT8, slavishly still playing this game like puppets on a string, terrfified it seems that they will get in bad with ethics and have to pay for that in months or years wasted as well as tens or even hundreds of thousands of more dollars demanded of them to go up the grade chart. Very disappointing to say the least. I expect your next book will look into this phenomena in Scientology in some depth.

    But, as I like to close these type of posts on a positive note, we still do have a choice, and we can still choose NOT to live life playing the “enemy game.” Even though my impulse is often to “strike back”, I remind myself that life will be better by understanding people rather than labelling them and identifying them as someone to hate or defeat.

    • martyrathbun09

      Great post Joe.

    • Joe – What you have written is so very true for me. I don’t consider those not in agreement with me an “enemy.” I have friends, trusted people, those who so far seem trustworthy and at the end of this list is those not to be trusted by the actions, products, intentions, etc. But I cannot remove them from my 4th dynamic on this spinning mud-ball.

      No, I don’t have to place myself near or under their influence so either I can hold my position and bring about a change for the better on their part – or – if not able or a waste of my energy at this time, I can just reposition myself or my activity to not be receiving any opposition.

      But I, just as you and most of us, have better things to do in just playing the game of life. No need to waste any thought time, effort or energy on the person who at this time is more interested in striking out and fighting non existent terminals as opponents.

      An “enemy” is just a label. When the sheeple accept the label they have thrown out the need to actually confront the person or scene, evaluate it in present time, find what is actually true for them, act on this truth and thus maintain their integrity. Instead, we see “OT 8’s” playing a contest to see who can act and appear most insane, most undesirable, most aberrated, etc. Seems their idea of total spiritual freedom is the right and ability to dramatize unfettered. Maybe what we see there is the end result of all thinking being label – label – etc and no theta the solver even considered.

      I expect this next book will cause this vessel we are traveling in to creak, groan, pop, and thrash about. We shall still be afloat and traveling along the journey to self exploration of our true inherent self – and I expect some will still have fleas and parasites to deal with. In due time my friend – we cannot stop and step-off so we may as well play the game and enjoy the experience.

    • JP, very well stated. What a good point that you make : you don’t have to fight back and go into an op- term situation. Ron got stuck in fighting back and the church is always ..fighting..fighting…fighting and the whole concept of just acceptance or granting beingness to something is foreign.

  30. In the close to his First Inaugural Address, on 3 Mar 1861, Lincoln said the following to try to ward off those who would make war. His appeal failed, but his words live on:

    “We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break, our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battle field and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.”

    • Nice quote Joe.
      Abe Lincoln was an amazing man. He is someone I would attribute prophet like status to.
      His use of vocabulary and justice is fantatic.

      • BTW Tony, my oldest son Mike is in the Lincoln movie by Spielberg.

        Everyone in the cast stayed in costume and role pretty much the entire time of filming. That must have been amazing.

        • Wow! That’s cool. I saw that movie and I thought Danial Day Lewis did an incredible job.

        • NTLS…
          that is very interesting! Can you say what part he played or is this too personal. I loved the movie by the way, and Daniel Day Lewis is a great actor IMO. He did the movie There Will Be Blood which was amazing film.

          • Hey Jewel,
            I don’t mind a bit. He played the Congressman from North Carolina who tries to shoot Lincoln’s agent with a blunderbuss pistol outside a restaurant after the agent tried to bribe him.

            My son said right after the filming that to be with Spielberg was like going to film boot camp. And yes, DDL is a truly great actor. It was the experience of his professional life.
            Vic

  31. Marty and the group,
    This blog is really helping me break the shackles of the mind and become again a free thinker.

    “What’s true for you is true” said LRH in “Integrity”. Thank you LRH. I would rather take this than the lower conditions.

  32. “enemy” – Definition #3 of the Thorndike/Barnhard New World Book Dictionary:
    “anything harmful. Examples: Frost is an enemy of flowers. Every animal that consumes another animal is called an enemy, or predator and the animal eaten is its prey.”
    To declare another member of your dynamics an “enemy” can reduce your affinity and brings your dynamics somewhat down and creates an area of no control. Therefore I would consider the declaring of someone as an “enemy” to be based on a limited view. Often such a declaration is not free from the factor of bypassed charge and thusly done with reduced reality.

  33. “He thinks of his enemy as the shadow that he himself casts…”

    This gave me the cog in a new unit of time that when you clean up o/w’s and your needle floats, the gains you make are basically had because you’ve just forgiven yourself and so you can get on with living, winning, being happy, etc.

    It ain’t god that forgives you and clears the way to getting on with living. It’s you forgiving yourself which does the trick. It’s your own power to free yourself up. LRH provided some tech to assist here, to be sure.

    In the same wise, enemies are just a mirror image of your true condition. It ain’t them. It’s you.

    • As with everything- it is as you see it.

      I don’t know if I stole that from somewhere, but that phrase seems perfect. Not a word wasted or unused. Life is as you see it.

  34. Im just going to throw this out there as a theory.
    We can all agree LRH in the main was in the main pretty sane, a genius even, from the work he did. Lets say LRH actually did have alot of powerful enemys, maybe even people who wanted him dead and worked on it. Lets say Quentin was killed, not suicided.
    At the same time he was trying to get Scientology going and quickly, the US was on the brink of nuclear war 2 times that has been reported. From what he wrote this was a concern to him.
    What would you do with those organizations opposed and attacking him and Scientology? Allow them to continue their actions?
    Lets say there were plants who infiltrated Scientology. What do you do with them if they realise that this place is not the place he was told but did people some good? I would say do the lower conditions. Maybe those lower conditions were so freely handed out to the wrong people.
    Its a hell of an outpoint when you consider the huge amount of good workable material that LRH came up with and place it along side that which is now in some quarters being considered destructive and say that they both came from the same man. I look at those “destructive” policies and for some beings out there, they make perfect sense. And I am not talking about you good folk.
    I am not saying he was perfect and didnt make mistakes, but what I am saying is that he wouldnt turn that mistake into an organizational nightmare for us all to suffer under in the form of policy, if he could possibly help it.
    To me it doesnt make sense that he would put his name to something which led to the degradation of a being after all the work he put into boosting us all up.

  35. Neat.

    I covered some of this a couple of months ago:
    http://isene.me/2013/01/26/ot-8-follow-up/

  36. Marty, in support of what you are saying here, this excerpt from an LRH briefing to the Guardian makes such a good point:

    “Now the Scientologist, not to make a comparison but the Scientologist is perfectly willing and is at this time by Ethics being over-disciplined, so we are over-disciplining the Scientologist and under-disciplining society and we should reverse that — reverse that very definitely. If anything, under-discipline the Scientologist and over-discipline the society. Now in that direction you’d still win but in the direction we are going we won’t. If you underdiscipline a society and over-discipline Scientologists, why, we’ve had it. As a Scientologist normally is very, very willing. We’ve got to upgrade the idea of what is a Suppressive, as Suppressives really are nuts.” – LRH 18 July 1966

    I recommend that this be inserted into a suppository for DM, not that it would do any good based on the last 5 words of the above quote. Nevertheless, it shows how LRH went back and forth on how to deal with people. He obviously saw that the first year of Ethics in Scn was not going over too well.

    • martyrathbun09

      Dan. Yes. Someone sent me this quote recently and I replied along this line: I have seen this misapplied so many times in both directions that I don’t have much use for the datum. It reminded me of the old ‘idiot tiger factor’ he had you guys apply in RTRC. It was a great datum,and it was applied pretty assiduously to tech – not so much to admin and the like unfortunately.

  37. Most impressive. Reading your ever so little analysis has helped me. I will leave it at that. Thank you.

    • Hey, are you the guy from “The Beginners Guide To L Ron Hubbard”?
      I love that. You did some awesome work there man. (If it was you, which I think it was) . It should be required viewing for anyone who has left the church.

      • Just in case anyone hasn’t seen this:

        For me it somehow communicates the beauty and the aesthetic theta of Scientology. Maybe it’s just my reality and doesn’t communicate to someone who’s never been in an Org, but I do love this documentary.

        • I love the movie, seen it few times. Laugh to tears! :))) It sure lifts some charge off. I like a lot the part in Russia. It is a balsam on my soul to see all these Russian learning how to know.

      • Yes, that was me. Glad you liked it.

        • Yeah, I liked it too. I liked the Train Scene with the guy (I forgot his name) reading FOT. Hillarious! And the TRs section. And the Straightwire at the end of the movie. Very well done.
          The movie is funny in some way. And that is what I liked about it.

  38. “Hate” and “enemy” is a trap which causes suffer and mental pain/stress.

    The person who hates and has enemies from his own viewpoint has not understood the basic truth. To put it in Scientology words: he did not cognite that he IS the dynamics and to fight others means to fight himself. If you do it as part of a game like soccer that is something different. Because after the game they sit all together and enjoy their creation. After the game is over they are not continuing to fight as they KNOW they are not really hating the other group.
    If someone is not even aware of those very basic truth he ends up like David M. … LOL

  39. Marty, if you don’t mind, I’ll have this translated and posted on the French Independent blog. There is much wisdom in what you wrote and it deserves to be shared with the French-speaking Independent community. Merci, mon ami ! You are a true mensch.

  40. Marty,
    What is Greatness? is a wonderful policy and I have actively used it in life. However, the church NEVER applies it ! I see it as one of LRH’s moments when he was wearing the compassionate Ron hat. I like to think of the compassionate Ron as being the true beingness of Ron without ptsness/case which he dramatized when he was being Ron the enforcer.

    There is already much written about how labels influence the behavior of the person/group doing the labeling and the person being labeled. Unless someone is labeled with appreciating values, then it is just a downward spiral for both parties. A negative label which also includes group action against the person is a suppressive additive. It incites hatred. I’m not talking about a murderer who should be placed away from the community. Even then, do we need to punish the person more just for reactionary satisfaction? That mentality is simply feeding the bank. That is what the church does in labeling Scientologist or others as enemies just because of a critical mark, a disagreement, or because of a comm line with an already known ‘enemy’.

    It is possible to fight for a cause or stand up for your rights without seeing each opposition as the enemy. When Ron positioned Scientology as a church that was willing to fight back, he should not have included in that scenario the right to destroy opponent’s lives. Instead of evolving out of that destroy the enemy mantra, it only got worse. In a sane, civilized society (which Scientology is supposed to be creating) people don’t need to chase down critics and beat them or use social pressure from the group. What about not being bothered by the barking dogs and just getting on with the show? Of course now the whole Organization is just a show!

  41. In 1983 and 84 the search for enemies had been in full gear. As sample: I had been told that OSA found out that staffmember „A“ had been seen talking to a known Squirrel and I have to accitentally find that out in an Ethics interview. Not to blow the cover of the OSA „agent“ that found this out. Not unlike to spy games movies. Enemies and spies everywhere.
    But not to forget that there are real Enemies out there. Someone that is trying to break into your home to steal all your money is in fact an enemy. But he does not care about your assignment. If someone did that and you cannot assign him this condition then the usual „mechanic“ is to finally assign this condition yourself. Or if you would go to ethics after that robbery he might tell you that you pulled that in and he will assign you a lower condition.
    Following that logic I could guess that a real enemy had not been found. After that things went really wrong and then the self assignment of lower conditions started.
    In my personal life I have to find those points of wrong assignments. And as additional source of difficulty: not to mix present time with past times. If I fought someone in the past and cannot remember that in full this might shadow my current view.
    The last time someone wanted to beat me up had been back in I think 82. I found out that I do not need this to prove my OT ness or control over the environment and I stopped those occurrences.
    I apply a similar strategy with a virus. If some virus thinks that my body is a good host for him and my body has some troubles whith that I tell the virus to leave my body and search another host. This usually works fine.
    But this subject of „external influence“ is not very easy for me to understand. Some schools of philosophy say, that there is no such thing as „external“. All created by myself. Thus, there cannot be an real Enemy. As result then all those self assignments would be correct. With that kind of thinkingness I cannot agree. As I think there are also other beings that can cause something in my direction. Good or bad. The next level of thinkingness would be to say that good can be caused by someone else and bad I did pull in. With that I also cannot agree. Thus there could be the possibility of someone else that is acting towards me good or bad. If he acts bad (my point of view) towards me then I could call him Enemy. But this alone would not undo something. And if he finds out that acting against my interests would be „him“ then he did apply that Enemy formula. At this point my understanding stopps. By the way, I never assigned someone a lower condition. Not in 9 month being ethics officer. Then I had been „shot“.

  42. Very enlightening post Marty! This really blew some charge.

    I always had a strange feeling when I had to do lower conditions (and I did many!). I got the idea the person assigning the condition knew “who I was”, now I just have to find it out.

    And how many times did I find out, who my friends are (doing liability) during my time in the church the last 30 years. Where are those friends now??? They disappeared very very fast when DSA spread some rumours about me.

    Friends? What definition of friend is that??

    Maybe there also different types of “friends” in the “church”.
    – Virtual friend
    – Friend after doing Liability
    – Friend as long as you agree
    – Friend as long as you are also friend with David Miscavige

  43. Can you imagine the guys in the “hole” having to do
    the enemy condition over and over and over as they
    never get upgraded. That is black (reverse) ethics
    application as it can spin even the “cleanest” thetan.

  44. I wanted to highlight an aspect of this which may or may not be prevalent or widespread; but, is something I’ve run across quite a few times. It is the idea that Scn is somehow engaged in an epic battle with dark forces as old as the universe. This was said to me by senior Scnists in hushed whispers, making me feel like I was part of the initiated.

    It was never explained exactly who or what this was, but for sure you could expect our old friends “the psychs” were deeply entrenched. The effect this had was that Scnists were somehow righteous or special (dare I say “chosen”). This took on mythical proportions and felt that it informally became part of the cosmology of Scn.

    This all played into the importance of going up the Bridge. That by doing so I was a “player” in this galactic, whole track showdown. You really felt privy to some deep dark conspiracy. And it was Scn and the Scnists that were going to somehow vanquish this enemy and save the universe. I cannot give you any specific LRH which details this, but I will say I think there are plenty of times where he may have eluded to it.

    I think most Scnist would agree that, while members of the church, you felt that someone or something was trying to stop Scn; that Scn was right and just, and had the solutions to save the planet. So, obviously there was some agency dedicated to stopping Scn. Of course.

    This was often used to compel the individual to: 1) donate money, 2) join staff, 3) do a service or 4) donate even more money.

    Come to think of it, having a group enemy is very much a part of organized Scn and seems to be ever present, if only lurking in the shadows. For Christ sake, they have a War Chest; gotta have a potent enemy if you can justify a war chest.

    • In Ron’s Journal 67, he talks about the major sp’s holding down the planet.
      That lecture scared me into doing OT3, which I must say I’m glad I did.

      • martyrathbun09

        And that fear acts as a glass ceiling in my opinion.

      • Hi Dan,

        I’m also glad I did OT3, but did it for different reasons.

        I found RJ67 interesting (global conspiracies, planetary powerbrokers, etc). But, how any of this relates to the actual auditing materials of OT3 is beyond me. The fact that two reside side-by-side in RJ67 has created this association that getting through OT3 is an important step to Scn overcoming these perceived enemies. Nonsense I say.

        I just think it is silly to couch it international intrigue. Why not just say “Hey, this thing happened a long time ago and it has resulted in a chronic condition that you may or may not be aware of. And if you do these steps you can resolve this condition and be better off.”

        I’ve coming to the conclusion that much (maybe all) of this talk of enemies (whole track or otherwise), theta/entheta forces, battles of good vs evil, etc is unsubstaniated borderline para-Scientology. I couldn’t prove it if asked, nor could I produce any tangible evidence. These are things that are believed in.

        • Roger From Switzerland Thought

          I never have seen any real evidences of all those conspiracy theories that were floating around !

    • Datum of comparable magnitude, dichotomies. Can’t have God without the Devil.

    • From what I have studied of the chronology of Scientology and the shift to an “enemy” and “us vs. them” attitude, it happened in the early 1960s. It is reflected in HCO PL 30 July 1963 — Current Planning:

      “Finding exactly who we’re up against on Earth (the AMA) helped. But finding exactly what each one of us faces and how, in the Between Lives Area, bids for a change of mood.

      “We’re not now in this for play. Our personal futures depend on keeping going and making no major flubs. It isn’t a question of is there something else. There isn’t. Nobody can be half in and half out of scientology. scientologists are scientologists no matter what they do for a living.

      “If we’re going to make this, we have to work at it personally, administratively and as a group, and work well.

      “The prize is regaining self and going free. The penalty for our failure is condemnation to an eternity of pain and amnesia for ourselves and for our friends and for this planet.

      “If we fail, we’ve had it. It is not just a matter of getting killed. It’s a matter of getting killed and killed and killed life after life forever more. Even if you have no great reality on this now, you will soon enough. But probably you already understand it.

      “Those guys up there mean business. We’ve got to match or better their energy level and dedication or we lose.

      “We’ve been given this priceless chance.

      “We must make good.

      “The hour lost on natter, the slow down time because of some petty ARC
      break have to be salvaged.

      “We haven’t any time for doubts and maundering.

      “The next time you hear somebody whining, “Well I just don’t know, whine, whine,” kick his teeth in.

      “We’re the elite of planet Earth, but that’s only saying we’re the not-quite-gone in the graveyard of the long-gone. Somehow despite our condition and the degraded environment we’re in, we’ve got to keep the dedication and the guts to carry through no matter what comes. And carry through.

      “That’s our future.

      L. Ron Hubbard.

      I never did find any conclusive information on who “those guys up there” are and believe, I searched. Does anyone know who he was talking about and where up there is?

      • Not sure but it may have been in Ron’s vivid science fiction imagination :)

      • Feels like a pre-cursor to KSW #1.

        He doesn’t mince words. The Scnist is superior to well…everyone else. This, along with KSW, is a battle cry. The line has been drawn in the sand. You’re either with us, or against us, win or die in the attempt. Why should we be shocked or even wonder why Scn became radicalized?

        It was all a matter of time before these seeds bore fruit.

      • And justification for war against the enemy. The enemy that was born in Ron’s super charged creative subconscious. And the enemy is anyone critical of the only hope for man. This teaching is what gives decent people the license to act indecently.

  45. Marty, I somehow tend to disagree with you this time regarding the “lower conditions”.
    The misaplication of conditions in the church is no proof for a “non-validity” of the formulas.
    I used the lower conditions to effectivley leave the Church of Scientology and I know if it wasn’t for the “lower conditions” I would maybe have left, but I would have not recovered from many aspects of indoctrination and self-invalidation.

    Speaking of the concept of “ENEMY”, I agree it’s repeated too often in the writings of LRH, but he also gives concrete Definitions and you can determine for youself who your enemies are.
    Maybe the condition of “enemy” could be better named with “opponent” so you would more easily recognize that you’re out of ballance with what you really want in your life, thus helping yourself to find out where you really wanna go and starting to move back to the (spiritual) middle (realignment with your true nature), leaving all groups which are not beneficial to you behind or if you see that you really wanted to stay with the group rehabilitate your commitment.

    I don’t think “find out who you really are” is something you can only know once you achieved the top of the bridge. No way. Just ask yourself where you wanna go.

    There is one thing to the concept of Enemy everyone should be aware of: is the enemy of “your group” your own enemy?
    Maybe your group has somewhat lost its grip?
    When in doubt, open up your eyes and apply the formula.
    No life is a bigger nightmare than while fighting non-existing enemies or fighthing the wrong targets. You may loose yourself.

    Honestly, Marty, the lower conditions have their validity.
    They just shouldn’t be applied to control people (as anything else in Scientology).

    • martyrathbun09

      I am not saying they don’t have some level of ‘validity.’ They do effectuate the change intended. I am saying that they are designed solely for the purpose of controlling people. So when you say ‘they just shouldn’t be applied to control people’ you are speaking an oxymoron. I am saying one can transcend all that need to consider people enemies if they don’t toe the line.

      • And exactly here I don’t agree with you:
        “I am saying that they are designed solely for the purpose of controlling people. “
        It’s absolutley fine with me you point out the misaplication, but “fighting” the discovery is the wrong target, frankly.

        You’ll have your “reasons” why you consider them being “designed to control” people, I don’t know about your research and even than no one of us is in LRHs head, right?

        “I am saying one can transcend all that need to consider people enemies if they don’t toe the line.”
        I am with you on this one.
        However, this has nothing to do with the validity of the lower conditions as a description of some manifestations of the games of life.

        It’s great to know you don’t consider Miscavige or the Squirrel Busters Productions your enemies. At the other side, I consider them the opponents of Scientology – they use no correct evaluations and they do reverse Scientology.

        All right, next thing you say: LRH himself wrote the GO/OSA “tech”.
        Right. He did.
        He also wrote a lot about “using ones own mind”, “logic” and the whole lot of data series.

        Let’s face it – if the “tech” of lower conditions helped me and helped a lot of other people to recover their morale and purpose in life, it’s not only a “political muster” but is based on some underlying laws.

        I know that those conditions where used to force people to toe the line. Probably even by LRH himself on ocasion. We already did establish the point that LRH had his own flaws. But still the lower conditions is not the correct target.
        Condemning the “lower conditions” tech and all the times LRH speaks about Enemies won’t help.
        Enemies is something real.
        It’s good for you if you can transcend the desire to mock-up enemies where there are none. And it’s absolutley great if you are in a shape of mind where you can tolerate “oposing viewpoints”. Indeed, that’s one of the objectives of Scientology as far as I am concerned.
        But it still is true that there are three universes.

        So the only correct way would be correct education, superliteracy (I know my english is not that good, but I get used to it ;-)), moving people up the bridge in a compassionate environment.

        In the destructive environment of the Church of Scientology, I can take almost any LRH datum and see it reversed.
        “Lower conditions” is no different.
        It’s a usefull bit of tech if used with the correct attitude and understanding.

        • Thanks. I am not fighting the discovery. I am pointing out that it is one of many, many conditionings Scientologists are indoctrinated with to intill the idea that enemies are aplenty, ought to be labelled and destroyed, depowered or reformed. Look, this whole thought came to me when some prominent ‘Independent Scientologist’ wrote to me that I was in Treason because I put facts that I observed in my book that were allegedly contrary to opinions of L. Ron Hubbard. I took a look at those formulas and recognized: in or out, they are being used for the same purpose, force conformance. A form of mind control. But, the post goes broader. As above, I’m asking people to take a look into their own hearts. Are they still carrying some of that think that when someone disagrees, or doesn’t perform to their liking, or even does something hostile, is that person is an enemy?

          • Thanks, gotcha.

          • I for one try to apply Christs “golden rule” from the “Sermon on the Mount”. At least I try:

            Matthew (5):
            20) For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

            43) Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

            44) But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

            45) That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

            46) For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?

            47) And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?

            48) Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

            In my opinion Jesus preached transcendence of worldy games and the flesh. He wanted the people to evolve to a higher spiritual plateau.

            And of course, as I said before, you’re right when you say one should transcend the “need to consider people enemies if they don’t toe the line”.

            Your question: ” Are they still carrying some of that think that when someone disagrees, or doesn’t perform to their liking, or even does something hostile, is that person is an enemy?”
            Hm. Yeah. You know, maybe they just have some misunderstood concepts or definitions and they put out a “otherness” they “need to put in line again”.
            They maybe don’t realize that you are not interested in a organized Scientology or they don’t agree with you being opposed to this idea – and I can understand that.

            I only can tell you honestly what I think about you: I respect you as a free thinking individual using Scientology the way you see is the most beneficial in your hands and I also respect your strong desire to “recreate” Scientology so it could be picked up more easily and without restrictions by those interested in spiritual advancement.
            At the other hand, speaking of “Standard Technology”, I honestly think we need some organisation in order to allow people become “Standard Guitar Players”. They may evolve later on, integrate and transcend after they know how to play the guitar.
            I understand when people are concerned with some of your excursions, as they at the other hand are trying hard to preserve the “standard” writings and use.
            OK. You than say, well they can’t because they are as litteral as the scribes and Pharisees from the old days. Well… I think somewhere in between a understanding may be found.

            By the way, I found a nice illustration of transcend, evolve, integrate:

            Enjoy!

            • Thanks. I spent four years creating safe ground, and urged people to take advantage of it, all the while delivering and training. To the degree those who did nothing – but wait for an organization to arrive – want to appoint me their enemy as the cause of their failure to act, have fun with it. To the degree the technology requires such an assist to get people off their butts to do something to deliver it, that technology apparently is not as valuable to those people as they so solemnly swear it is.

              • I really know nothing about some people “appointing you their enemy”.
                If there are some such people they are just a few.

              • Plus 100 Marty. Can’t argue with you on that one.

                • I’m with you Tony. Fair is fair. Don’t walk out of the house where you put on 60 pounds and bitch about the food you ate. That’s plain wrong.

              • What you did to draw off OSA’s resources from the rest of us was valuable and heroic. But that’s not all you did. You also used your Opinion Leader status among us to actively oppose the establishment of a large, alternative organization to train auditors in volume.

                You promoted the idea that we couldn’t trust ourselves to run such an organization without it going down the same path to darkness that the Church did. But we could have easily applied the Danger Formula and Third Dynamic Engram handling to update LRH policy and real-world operations to prevent a re-occurence of the suppression that happened in the Church. The key points needing change have been glaringly obvious all along, and have been commented on by many readers of this blog.

                The legal front vs the Church could have been handled, too.

                You were in a position to lead a discussion of all this, but you never did. In fact, you vehemently opposed it. If you’d supported the idea of an alternative organization implementing the right policy updates and legal strategies, enough people and money would have gathered around that purpose for such an organization to exist today, or at least be well along in its planning stages.

                Now Steve Hall and Mike Rinder have established blogs that are attracting Indies unhappy with the evolution of yours, and you’re off on a tangent about someone (rightly or wrongly) assigning you Treason. The LRH reference that applies is “Responsibility of Leaders.”

                • martyrathbun09

                  Thanks for demonstrating the precise mentality that I noted in the last comment. As to The Reponsibities of Leaders, if you want to continue to cling to that recipe for suicide, you won’t want to read my next book.

                • martyrathbun09

                  By the way, where were you when the bullets were flying? Actually, they still are, I am just not giving the shooters the satisfaction of publicizing on my blog. You haven’t even made yourself known. You’re telling me how to lead? Please.

                  • But there is nothing bad in defining a Ideal Scene, or a better scene first and going along a set out path.
                    It could turn out to be a very productive activity.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      I did so 3 1/2 years go and encouraged, and fought to make it possible since, http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2009/09/21/the-joe-howard-paradigm-tech-outside-the-wall/.
                      Again, those railing the most at me being in their road have done nothing, and I mean nada, about getting on with it. No delivery, plenty of assignation of blame, assignment of conditions, and disconnection. In any event, back to the issue at hand, any views on the instilled need to find enemies?

                    • OK Marty, as I said before, I am not in the business of mocking-up enemies where there are none.
                      LRH said in the PDCs, don’t be AGAINST something, be FOR something.
                      One will only get what one puts his attention on.

                      Thank you for linking the references from you and Dan Koon.

                      “To allow anyone to attempt to consolidate and monopolize the tech could lead to another Dark Ages like we are attempting to break through today.”
                      I am with you when you say there should be no monopoly what so ever on the materials or application. And there will never again be something like this.
                      But what is wrong of having consolidated the training line-up for good.
                      Indeed Dan Koon is working his ass off in order to compile correct checksheets and materials. And this is consolidation work.
                      Or I just don’t understand what you mean by saying “an attempt to consolidate the tech”.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      Monopolize was the idea – used the wrong word I guess. It is right in the PDC lecture on the only way that Black Dianetics will reign – by allowing it to be monopolized.

                    • “Monopolize was the idea – used the wrong word I guess.”
                      Thanks Marty.

                      Yeah. The monopoly of Scientology backfired and would do so again and again.
                      It is my belief that every motion to unmonopolize it is a worthwhile activity.
                      But consolidation at the other hand is pro-survival, too.
                      I think the “Internet Org” is still work I/P and this is very good.
                      Some things need time in order to evolve.

                    • Marty, without going into detail, I will say that I HAVE done something about “getting on with it.” I was not successful, due to my underestimating in a number of ways how difficult it would be. I lost thousands of dollars in the effort. But I did step up and try.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      I’m sorry to hear that. Did you communicate with me about it during your effort?

                  • You can post this or not as you think fit Marty, but are you aware that Diogenes came to your blog immediately after being nailed by Geir Isene on his blog? He was put on moderation, one of only two people Geir moderates at this time, because of his trolling behavior. Geir left his post on the blog as an example of trolling and posts that will prompt Geir to put someone on moderation.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      I did not know that. Thanks for informing me Maria. It is my second go-around with this individual.

                    • Maria, I’ve occasionally posted on Possibly Helpful Advide, but have been to Geir Isene’s blog only a few times out of curiosity, and don’t recall ever posting there, let alone being kicked off. So, I don’t think I’m the Diogenes you’re speaking of. I could be wrong, though. I’d appreciate your telling me the date of the post Geir left up, so I can check it out.

                      There is also a “Diogenese” (ends with an “e”) who has posted to Marty’s blog who is not me. And there’s a “Dio” (short for Diogenes) who’s not me.

                    • I had no idea that there were two people posting under this unusual handle. Sorry for the mix-up then.

                • Mike Rinder took on a hat so Marty could focus better on the future. As far as I know, he is the ONLY person that has offered to do this for Marty.

                  Steve Hall has worn some very valuable hats and contributed in fabulous ways with his web sites and organization and creative skills. He has had a blog for so long I don’t know when it wasn’t there. Those people have been contributing and there are not any Indies going to them because they are dismayed with evolution here.

                  There is one new blog set up on one of Steve’s web sites that is described as far as I know, as “theta only no L.R.H. bashing” . It is an “applause only for Ron and Scientology” blog.

                  Nobody is complaining about blogs or people creating.

                  Personal attacks on Marty by a few people that can be added on one hand, wrong indications, is what is in mention here.

                  There is responsibilities of readers also. :) And responsibilities of writers. :)

                  • I’ll admit I like the new iScientology-Blog.
                    It’s a good idea to have it.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      I don’t. I think it justifies, rationalizes, and promotes cult think. In that regard, it counters the notions of integration, evolution and transcendence for Scientology. I therefore find it regressive to what I have done and am continuing to do.

                    • Ah, now I see why someone would assign you a “lower” condition.

                      You won’t let people have their own group think? Why, third dynamic is a natural thing. You can’t control or unmock them all.

                      I think it would serve you well rereading some of the LRH references you try to reject.

                      You quoted lots of protestantism and some people obviously thought you would take the part of Luther and really lead some kind of reformation.
                      Many flowed power to you and many still do.
                      If you don’t want to do that, fine – but at least you should be willing for them to have their own game.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      And you my friend have qualified as a card-carrying cult member. An opinion expressed with no rancor and ad hominem cops a Treason condition. Hypocrisy.

                    • No – actually I am not.
                      I am only pointing out that you have a blind spot on some of the references you reject. One of them is “Responsibility of Leaders”.
                      It’s actually fine with me that you won’t apply it.
                      You only should consider that some other Scientologists where indoctrinated into it too.
                      I am not hypocritical with you.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      I do take that into consideration. I am trying to make people uncomfortable to take them out of their cult mind set. Others are trying to make them comfortably numb.

                    • I get that Marty, please reread my comment from 6:45

                      I’ve read your Post about “What is right with Scientology” and I acknowledge(d) that you were right with your views (actually I saw it for the same the day it was published and I didn’t comment on it because that’s not the way I want Scientology to go).

                      Still I think that the blog is a good Idea. People share wins and appreciations. Trust them. They’ll make it.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      Not if they don’t evolve and transcend they won’t.

                    • I have to agree with SKM. Better they have moved off these lines instead of fencing people in here and stuffing them back in closets while Marty is trying to herd them out into the field.

                      Some people want to regress into a comfort zone for props if they are a little wobbly. It’s natural.

                      You see middle aged men moving back in with their mothers all the time. Or moving in with someone who will wear the mommy hat. Feed them, provide for them and tell them what to do and when and how to do it.

                      Sometimes people need a leaning post and need to lean on old familiar ways until they can get stable and figure out where they are at. That’s O.K. as long as it is a non profit shelter and not some store front selling something under the counter.

                      Not every one can keep running against the wind. And if you think about the Wizard of Oz, not everybody can walk through the beautiful poppy fields and not dope off and go to sleep.

                    • SKM please check your facts or enlighten me as to how integration, evolution and transcendence is a reformation of SC?

                      IMHO It is the application of SC tech to its fullest extent and the intention to remove (by healing) the widespread misapplication and mystification that has eroded this once great organization into what we now have: The Assylum.

                      Of course I must admit. I wan’t there. But people like Phil Spickler was and the picture of the early (up to 70’s-80’s) SC hi depicts seems a hell of a lot like what Marty is after. Needless to say so am I.

                    • “A is not equal A”,
                      I think you’ve answered your own question.

                    • The Oracle, you have a gift for making observations that seem to be coming from left field but pierce right to the heart of the matter, and I think your comment about middle-aged men moving in with their mothers is a case in point. Each of us who joined Scientology was obviously willing to embrace the unfamiliar at that time. Now, at a later stage of our lives, some seek the comfort of the familiar while others are still looking for higher truth and greater enlightenment. That second choice of course involves rejecting the comfortable in favor of the unknown. Again. And again. Personally, I can’t really fault someone in their later years for saying “been there, done that”, but at least Marty is reminding them that there is more adventure, and growth, to be had.

                  • Oracle, I was referring to Steve Hall’s new blog on iScientology. Also, so far neither that blog nor Mike’s have veered off as much as Marty’s has re the original purpose of just re-establishing delivery of actual Standard Tech without the interference of the suppressives who’ve taken over the Church. Marty is now engaging in a process of deeper soul searching that may have value for many people. I wish him and them well with that. But I also know Indies who are unhappy with his blog evolving in that direction, and see Steve and Mike’s blogs as being more on-purpose for them.

                    As for “please don’t bash Marty,” if it’s OK for him to disagree with LRH in his books and this blog, which he’s not only done but said he’s done, then certainly it’s OK for any of us to disagree with him. I often AGREE with Marty, and have said so on various occasions. But I feel perfectly free to speak up when I disagree with him, too. I’ve also spoken up about issues on which I disagree with LRH. Isn’t gaining freedom to disagree one of the major reasons we left the Church?

                    • I was referring to this: ” Now Steve Hall and Mike Rinder have established blogs that are attracting Indies unhappy with the evolution of yours,..”

                      Clarifying Steve Hall’s blog has been up forever. The new blog is something else. Mike did not start a blog that splits anybody, it’s another function.

                      Has nothing to do with Marty bashing. Has to do with presenting the facts as they are.

                    • I agree.
                      To me disagreeing with Marty isn’t necessarily “bashing” him. Just as when Marty disagrees with others, he isn’t necessarily bashing them. Or if someone disagrees with LRH, it doesn’t mean they are “bashing” him.

                      If you have to AGREE to everything a person says to stay in ARC then that to me is the sign of a CULT.

                      To really get at the bottom of things you have to have a willingness to look and be in comm and respond as truthfully as possible. And for the most part try to keep it civil. That is not always easy to do, but it is an ideal to work toward.

                    • “deeper soul searching”
                      ??

                      Would you please enlighten me and throw me a bone here?
                      How is Marty doing deeper soul searching?
                      Deeper than what?
                      Deeper than DM? (You bet)
                      Deeper than corporate Asylum dwellers? (Yes indeed)
                      Depeer than he was a year or ten years ago? (That might just be so)

                      We (those on the same page with Marty) are after the wisdom of Early high ARC SC tech and delivery.

                      But what do I know? I’m just a guy. C’mon talk me down!
                      Let’s talk facts.

                • Roger From Switzerland Thought

                  I can’t believe it !
                  Just one Question:
                  Why didn’t you do it ?
                  LOL ;) :)

                  • I don’t feel I am qualified to do the work Marty and Mike are doing.
                    I do not have the experience or vision or understandings of the social conditions that they have. This is like asking me why I am not delivering the L’s. Marty, Mike, Karen, these people lived, breathed, slept, the Scientology experience from every angle. They have viewed the game from every angle. They have panoramic vision that it isn’t even possible for me to get. Since two of them were raised by Hubbard himself and Hubbard is deceased. Who the hell has these kind of qualifications?

                    Unless you meant, why didn’t I set up the L.R.H. applause only blog?

                    • I could set up a blog for Scientology Street Smarts. But I would have to condone use of forces. Wielding force. Bringing the force into the Scientology arena. Accepting force as a tool that can be wielded artfully.
                      Who wants to learn about that? When people in Scientology crumble at the mere sight of Golden Rod?

                      Or the bad ass M.A.A. who can make or break a person’s life at the printing machine.

                      Living within those “sacred boundaries” that can never ever be crossed by anyone but David Miscavige. That is what makes fanatics so easily controlled. The ruler or leader pushes them into “sacred boundaries” while he steps over them. Hubbard had to cross over sacred boundaries to bring us into Scientology and lay it out. So why are people huddled up inside them now? Why the fuck should Marty be told he must remain in sacder boundaries when he knows he can’t clear someone if he can’t drag them over that line? There are a lot of devout Hubbardians that don’t have a single clue about what Hubbard’s life meant. They don’t have a clue about Scientology or why it works or why they are in it. “Applause only” is a boundary. That has nothing to do with Scientology.
                      Doesn’t even align with how Scientology came to be. Tears down the acknowledgment that Hubbard deserves for crossing “sacred boundaries” and dragging our asses out of a whole lot of madness.

                    • Why not take a piece of paper one day and start writing all of the boundaries you made for yourself while walking bridge to Freedom?

                    • There are plenty of people out there who want a nice tight little group where everyone is going to stay inside the fences they erect. Where nobody does anything to surprise anybody. Where it is all predictable and everyone is under control. Where everybody is on the same page as to how everybody is going act. Where questioning is not part of the culture. And there are plenty of people who are only going to feel safe inside those fences with Mom and Pop watching over them.

                      But that is not what Hubbard did or asked for or was or had to do to bring Scientology on to this Earth. He jumped fences and soared over sacred boundaries. And he dragged others with him hoping they would get the idea. High hopes!

                      People say “KSW blah blah”. KSW was a POLICY letter. Read the definition of policy in the admin dictionary and see where it stands on a admin scale.

                      He didn’t drag himself and everyone else in this game across boundaries we were NEVER supposed to cross, so people could run off somewhere and build little fences all around themselves.

                      Who gets it? Not many! Most people have no fucking idea why they are even connected to Scientology. They think it is because they are “good” and “compliant” and have “good karma”

                      Bullshit. They are people that were willing to cross sacred boundaries.

                      You have to commit crimes to go free. You have to step outside of the “now we’re supposed to’s” That shit made Hubbard SICK! He wrote a policy letter about the “now we’re supposed to”.

                      That there are groups of people out here wallowing in that flying a Hubbard Flag on top of their ship is about as twisted as it gets.

                  • Too many comments are in the way of seeing which one you’re responding to. Could you clarify?

                • Diogenes, i have to say, your continued digs at Marty are starting to exhibit a distinct shade of strange.

                  Its obviouls you two dont agree, so why do you keep on this line? Seems rather silly in my opinion.

                  You seem frustrated by your inibility to control Marty or dictate how he should spend his life.

                  Marty is doing what he thinks is right. Carping at him isnt going to in anyway make him more amendable to your wishes.

                  • I am sure that everyone here who thinks there are no enemies do not feel that same way when it comes to David Miscavige. The trick is figuring out who by actual statistic is an enemy to survival and not just someone who disagrees with you.

                  • Moonshot, you have asked some good questions. Here are my answers.

                    There are two Marty’s — Marty the individual seeker, and Marty the Indie opinion leader. I fully support Marty the seeker following whatever path he considers to work for him as an individual. In my comments I try to avoid invalidating or evaluating for him with regard to that. But Marty is also a very important Indie opinion leader, who has a powerful commline to, and credibility with, thousands of Indies all over the world. When he uses that status to encourage them to move in a direction I think will not serve the reason they’re on his blog in the first place, I feel some responsibility to speak up. I also feel I should speak up when he manages his communication in a way that silences well-meaning, intelligent commenters who disagree with his direction.

                    In general I consider that Marty has taken his new “evolve, integrate, and transcend” approach too far. I myself have studied and practiced other paths, and made gains doing that, so I’m hardly an ignorant bigot about it. My broadened reality has made it easier for me to explain Scientology to new people in a way that makes sense to them. I agree with Marty when he says we should be less narrow-minded. But I also think he’s gone substantially beyond “less narrow-minded,” and may now be flirting with “open minded” as in PTS-H, to the detriment of some of the Indies who follow him.

                    We need our thought leaders to find ways to make Scientology work in the environment in which we find ourselves, but not “evolved” into something else. Scientology is NOT just one path among many, or another incremental development in the ongoing spiritual evolution of life on planet Earth. It’s a seventh dynamic jailbreak. We certainly should avoid being elitist, arrogant, and cultish about what we’re doing. But we shouldn’t deny it, either.

                    When Marty says we’ve made mistakes in the way we’ve pursued our spiritual path at the group level, I welcome the discussion. From LRH on down, we definitely made mistakes. We need to determine exactly what they were, and find ways to implement effective solutions. But when anyone suggests that there may be deep, fundamental, basic errors in Scientology philosophy, and leads the discussion into what borders on natter without offering positive solutions, I consider that to be harmful fo our cause.

                    I deplore the political fragmentation in the Indie community. I am not anti-Marty, and in fact I frequently DEFEND him to certain of my friends who ARE anti-Marty. I believe that he’s trying to do good, and that he’s done a lot of good over the last 4 years — indispensible good, in fact. But I also believe he’s recently become mired in a huge philosophical Q & A, about which he’s been behaving with arrogant elitism similar to what he says he deplores in the Church.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      Diogenes,
                      I have taken quite a bit of evaluation from you, such as the latest pearl: ‘he’s been behaving with arrogant elitism similar to what he says he deplores in the Church.’ I asked you what you have done to try to make Scientology work and you answered you gave it a shot with no specifics, but that it didn’t work. I asked whether you asked your self-appointed ‘leader’, me, for direction with that. You never answered. I asked who you were so that people could evaluate your evaluations of my character against the evaluator. You chose not to answer. I told you three times that your condemnation for me not following the Policy Letter Responsibilities of Leaders was misplaced, because that very policy letter is a tract that instills us v them, have to have an enemy mentality that is at the heart of the demise of Scientology. I made my views clear on that years ago, http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2010/11/02/worse-than-fair-game/. Rather than addressing my questions and the issues I raise to you, you keep coming back with more arrogant, elitist evaluations, which continually mischaracterize what it is I am doing and writing, such as this latest: ‘But when anyone suggests that there may be deep, fundamental, basic errors in Scientology philosophy, and leads the discussion into what borders on natter without offering positive solutions, I consider that to be harmful fo our cause.’ I am not doing anything of the sort. This latest post offered a simple, positive solution that dozens have attested on this blog helped them out, consider how ‘having to have an enemy’ was instilled into you in your Scientology experience. Your continued advancement of the notion that we must have enemies, while making evaluations about me personally that alter my own communications, and border quite frankly on psychiatric circa 1950’s, is rather dishonest. I have subsequently learned who you are. I now know what your ‘effort’ to get Scientology going in the field consisted of. It could not have been more off-policy, including having to have before you could do – the precise opposite way I have advised people to go about it. You did utilize resources that I helped to create through my efforts; diverting my resources while my wife and I were under seige in south Texas. You violated, in spades, the very policy letter you keep accusing me of not following, Responsibilities of Leaders. And you continue to do so with your undermining, criminal-mind accusations on this blog. You are a study in what I am trying point out is the assured demise of Scientology in the field – see my post The Tao of Scientology – that being, you can get away with murder in the Scientology communiity if you know how to talk the talk. You certainly can talk the talk. But I know – and though you did not elaborate on it, you admitted it that when you noted your indie Scientology venture failed – you cannot, or will not, walk the walk. I also know that you posted under a different handle last year on this blog, and that after you alienated a number of blog regulars, I finally took the time to break down your tautology and sophism, and you blew. Don’t lecture me about responsibility.

                    • Diogenes, I’ve restrained myself from responding to your comments lately in the hope that you’d sort yourself out. But this one exceeds all your others in unmitigated arrogance.

                      You seem to have some idea that YOU are senior to Marty and can direct how he runs this blog, how he communicates, and even how he thinks or acts. You might as well work for the RCS, as you certainly forward their mode of operation.

                      In your own words, you tried and failed to set up some sort of alternative Indie venture, due to underestimation of effort. So how do you dare criticize Marty, who audits and trains others, writes books, spends hours per day moderating this blog, and does other immeasurable tasks to help Indies?

                      What exactly do you do, besides flap your virtual lips on this blog about how Marty is creating discord? And those accusations, by the way, are a manifestation of your own confusions and arrogance. I strongly suggest you look outside your own self-important mind filter before posting again—if Marty even allows that.

                      And finally, consider the irony of Marty having found out “who you really are” on this particular post! I’ve never seen any actual humor from you, but I hope that you might have the grace to acknowledge that irony.

          • I agree. On 100% of tech, you have 2.5% of very destructive tech. This 2.5% are 1.5 on the tone scale. If people had an honest look on the Hubbard Chart of Human Evaluation, they would find that Lrh after 1960 fell down to 1.5. His level of mock-up became destruction under the mankind…(ennemies, ennemies, ennemies)

  46. “That formula requires the individual to change the very essence of his being – his very concept of his own identity – to conform to the liking of the powers that be in the group. That can be a rather dysfunctional, destructive process given the fact that finding out who one really is is the end product of the Scientology bridge itself.”

    Okay, it wasn’t just me that found that formula to be all but undoable (honestly) for myself or when working it on others. Went round & round with Gary C. & Hansuli for 2 weeks over this one time long ago. Grrr!

  47. Lets just say for a moment that it is true that “Everything you think molds the world you see in front of you” and lets say that it’s literally like that…If that were true would you not be very very careful what you thought?…..you would treat your brother with love…..you would forgive any enemy you might think you have? Of course you would… Because if you now know that everything you think….everything you give power to is what you see when you look outside your eyes you would try your best to keep thoughts of love and respect for your brother on a minute by minute basis. I have found the above to be absolutely true in all areas of my life.
    I know that in Scientology it’s all about being “right” “special” and “ethical” but for me and I think those of you who really understand the Dao see this too:…We are ONE…that’s right..I said it….We were created by God (or whatever your word for it means) and we are like him. Of course we have free will and all that but when I realized that I was connected to all of you… my life became better…I became more responsible for the thoughts I thought…for the way I looked at life….and I forgave myself and everyone I could think of for all the past stuff I had done or the stuff I imagined was done to me. We are connected and it is the truth that what you put out you get back…It’s an absolute…There is only mind and mind was created like unto itself…We all have tons of love to give…we can heal each other by loving and forgiving each other. I understand to someone who practices Scientology this could be sort of a Bi-Polar situation because Ron says what he says in “what is Greatness” and then he turns around and says what he says in Simone Bolivar…..and then there are all those tapes calling Christians victims etc. etc. etc.
    Life IS simple and the one thing that Ron said that I completely agree with is this: “Anything that is truly powerful is truly simple” and for me this is as simple as it gets. The Book A Course In Miracles & The Dao.
    I have found the truth for me and the way I know it’s true is that my life and the lives of everyone around me are better than they have ever been.
    I am very grateful to Marty for finally letting go of the insanity that calls itself “the Church of Scientology” and focusing more on what will truly take us “a little higher” :)
    ‘See no one then, as guilty…and you will affirm the truth of guiltlessness unto yourself. In every condemnation that you offer the Son of God lies the conviction of your own guilt” A Course In Miracles.

  48. My understanding of how the enemy condition comes about.
    I think that enemy is an opposing terminal against which you are playing. If you are high tone – you may respect, understand and even love your opponent, while been disagree and not ,sharing space. As you go down the tone scale you start taking it more seriously, things get solid and dispute becomes the war.
    If adding dynamics into a picture, then who is you enemy will be determined by the size of your game (your field). If someone is not aware of the first Dynamic, he fights against himself. If someone lives with a first dynamic awareness, he will play against his wife and his children and parents, until he learns to respect them, to understand them and to include them into his circle of “I”, so they stop been the opposite side and become the partners in the bigger game. Now that guy will play against the groups, etc. Scientology church is acting on the basis of third Dynamic (falsely pretending the forth, as it plays against other groups on Earth.)
    We have a saying in Russian: “Tell me who are your friends, and I’ll tell you who you are”. You can define it as well by the enemies. Tell me, who are you enemies (or who are you an enemy to) and I will tell you the size of your game and who you are in it.

    SO, no matter where you are, there is a circle of life bigger then your field of game. And you will go through all conditions starting with confusion about that new world found (Find out WHERE you are), then not been aware that you already exist there, on that new level (Find out that you ARE), then not understanding it and fighting against it until defining a role for self in that bigger game, creating an identity (Find out WHO you are), end forward the rest of the conditions. The lower once are addressing the beingnes, then from the liability (when you are still been pushed around and controlled a lot, as not well enough familiar with the new rules of new game are been robotic, not initiative enough) and up to non existence, where it all calms down and into a balance. You are not producing yet, but not a destructive ether. Then you go up through doingness conditions up to the havingness. And when you get to the Power – watch out, your boundaries are to stretch out, you are about to enter a confusion in a bigger game.

  49. “That formula requires the individual to change the very essence of his being – his very concept of his own identity – to conform to the liking of the powers that be in the group. That can be a rather dysfunctional, destructive process given the fact that finding out who one really is is the end product of the Scientology bridge itself. ”

    Marty, I see you share my dismay and antipathy for this incredible state of affairs, especially so when most of the time the condition is assigned by others, not self, and its completion is judged by others, not self. I have a really hard time even thinking it through because it doesn’t make sense for the bottom process to be the same as the zenith reached by doing all of the processes!

    Another strange thing about this is that the last time I applied the enemy condition was under orders. I never did it again. The result of doing that condition was that I disassociated completely from what was going on that earned me that condition in the first place. It had no meaning for me.

    As to the business of electing enemies, even though LRH repeatedly did not walk the talk, he sure could talk the talk:

    “Scientology and Scientologists are not revolutionaries. They are evolutionaries. They do not stand for overthrow. They stand for the improvement of what we have.

    “Scientology is not political. When the fires of ideology threaten to consume us all, it is time to forget politics and seek reason.

    “The mission of Scientology is not conquest – it is civilization. It is a war upon stupidity, the stupidity which leads us toward the Last War of All.
    “To a Scientologist, the real barbarism of Earth is stupidity. Only in the black muck of ignorance can the irrational conflicts of ideologies germinate.

    “Government, to a Scientologist, is a thing of reason, and all problems of government can be resolved by reason.

    “Perhaps in yesterday one could afford the exploitation of ignorance for the sake of fancied gain. Perhaps in yesterday the study of the mind and reason was something for a summer afternoon. Perhaps in that same yesterday one amongst us could afford his irresponsibility and hate.

    “But that was yesterday. Today, exploited ignorance, a dilettante attitude toward existing knowledge, and a refusal to assume one’s role as a responsible member of the human race may be punished in the searing thunderclap of H-bombs released by men whose intelligence and statecraft were incapable of a better solution. Ignorant people elect ignorant rulers. And only ignorant rulers lead to war – and this time will lead to a war which will bring silence forever after to Earth.

    “As your associates, their homes, their children, their possessions and all their future lie ending in a radioactive street, there won’t be time for us to wish we’d worked harder, been less easily dissuaded from pressing our arguments. The copies of this book you did not distribute will lie there too.

    “Some say they have no fear of death until the midnight of their dying is at hand. They say different then.

    “Those who strike at this work out of some black well of ideological mis-orientation, some anti-social cravenness, strike at the heart of Man – for Man has been a long time on the track to reason, and Scientology can take him there.

    “There is not much Earth time. We must work.

    “The criminal is ignorant and stupid. Ignorance and stupidity may therefore be called criminal.

    “Cause Man to lay aside his hates and listen. Freedom from ignorance is at hand. Perhaps that was the Kingdom of Heaven.

    “There is not much Earth time in which to distribute this knowledge. This is the solution to our barbarism out of which we would lose all. Scientology works. We must work, all of us – not to harangue Man towards impossible freedoms, but to make Man civilized enough to be worthy of his freedom.

    “It is time Man grew up. That is what we have in mind. For there can be but weeping in the night where ignorance, factionalism, hatred and exploitation are served by the most ferocious and final weapon of all – the H-bomb.

    “Change no man’s religion, change no man’s politics, interrupt the sovereignty of no nation. Instead, teach Man to use what he has and what he knows to the factual creation, within any political reference, of a civilization on Earth for the first time.

    Quoted from Fundamentals of Thought

    That’s what I bought. And then, like Phil Spickler so aptly identified, he inverted and carried out tactics that not only created enemies, but tried to set Scientology above everyone else, the sole and only true source of freedom. The seeds of this are in the very article I have quoted. Scientology as the sole remedy, above it all, and vastly superior to any other works of man. It is woven into statements that the majority of people would applaud, and accept whole heartedly, positioning Scientology as THE solution, the ONLY solution. A solution that works to MAKE man civilized.

    I thought we were declaring war on ignorance. Not people.

    • I fail to see how declaring war on ignorance is different than declaring war on ignorant people. I generally like your post and I could be wrong but ignorance is a manifestation of certain people. Without whom that doingness (or not doingness) does’t exist.

      We should’t be declaring war of any kind. We should be focusing on beefing up our ability to spot conditions and ignorant or otherwise fix idea driven unstable people. For the sole purpose of withholding power from them that they would use to hurt us and/or themselves with.

      Whatever tech we use to achieve such ability doesn’t matter. Use whatever works just don’t for the love give people power who can’t handle it. If we just did that much and nothing else and be able to spot those who pretend to be trustworthy of power and withhold it from them we would be healing at a never before seen rapid rate. Whether it is a corrupt politician or a CEO or the Lead loony of the Assylum (SC org) who is doing more damage than good, they were trusted at some point by people who failed to spot that the person is pretentious. IMO there is nothing wrong with withholding power from such people. There is nothing wrong with wanting to know who can and who can’t be trusted.

      The be able to withhold is an important ability when done right.

      • All good points and I certainly agree.

        I looked up a few definitions to clarify that last line that I agreed with for I remember looking it up the first time I ever read this:

        Ignorance: lacking in knowledge, training, awareness, information.
        Stupidity: lacking ordinary quickness and keenness of mind; dull, in a state of stupor

        Ignorance and stupidity are both a lack, something not present. You really can’t fight something that is not present. So that leaves fighting people who are ignorant or stupid. In my opinion, doing that is itself stupid and ignorant.

        But there is another definition of war, def. 7 online a dictionary.com:

        7. a struggle to achieve a goal.

        • We are in harmony now :)

          Do you ever wish there were no words with multiple meaning?
          Strive:
          1. Make great efforts to achieve or obtain something.
          2. Struggle or fight vigorously: “scholars must strive against bias”

          All the overlaps. I don’t think that’s helping us (all) too much.

    • Thankyou Maria, that was the Ron I signed on to follow. Thank you for ressurecting that in me. The man became quite the dichotomy.

      • You are very welcome and I must say, I enjoy your posts immensely.

        I was already engaged in the “war” on ignorance and stupidity before I ever encountered Ron or Scientology. I signed on because I thought that Scientology offered workable tools that would be of great assistance in that war. I had no idea that the Church and Ron had acted contrary to that goal and I never dreamed it possible that the Church would become an organization that acted in opposition to that goal. I simply cannot see how you can close the door on all knowledge and wisdom other than Scientology and hope to win a war on ignorance and stupidity.

  50. Marty your last comment here is so priceless and amazing! I had major charge blow upon reading it (about the indoctrination of assigning people as your enemy just because someone disagrees with you or doesn’t perform the way you thought they should etc.) I too had an Indie assign me as her enemy and even disconnected from me just because I disagreed with her on something that was trivial. So old habits die hard from our decades in corporate Scn. LRH writes that “communication is the universal solvent…” and it is true. So force yourselves to first use comm rather than aknee-jerk disconnect at the first sign of trouble. Disconnection is what we have been protesting against and then to have it done to me by an Indie is, in this case, just dramatizing the winning valence of corporate Scn, in my humble opinion. My stable datum here is “What Is Greatness” and I try to apply it even to people I’m having a hard time with at the moment. And one other thing: In the Factors, LRH said that there are three universes: your own universe, other people’s universe, and the collective agreed-upon shared universe. Knowing that will answer the question of are we all just causing anything and everything that happens to us. Also there are four flows, done by you to yourself, done to others, others done to you, others to others. If it is true that we cause any and all things that happen to us, then that means there is only one flow, which would be Flow 0, self done to self. And I don’t buy that. I agree with LRH about the 4 flows.

  51. I have been interested in this blog for about a year now and this topic of enemy has brought up thoughts I have had from time to time.

    Scientology and the word Scientology and Ron Hubbard mean so many different things to so many different people. To Paulette Cooper it means an evil force that tried to destroy her life. To Lisa McPheason it means the same. To an auditor who has helped people it means the power of good. To a sane application of ethics it means the power of good.

    One of the things I learned from Ron was the power of words and terms. I like creating terms when I feel one needs to be created.

    The term is: NON CULPABILITY BY COMPARISON

    That means you try to lesson culpability by comparing it to something else.
    For instance, you try to handle something with someone and they tell you you do the same thing. Or months ago I posted about a women I knew who was harmed by the GO and someone posted back “yeah, but look at how much good Scientology has done.” And they never addressed my idea.

    If you go into a hospital and tell the doctor you have a pain in your stomach the doctor doesn’t do a test and say, “why be so negative? All your other organs are fine.”

    So here we have Marty talking about all the harm that is possible and did occur with an aspect of the ethics condition and then we have many many entries saying what wonderful wins people have in proper us of ethics.

    Ok……. fine…… But that is not what Marty is bringing up. He is revealing an ailing organ and you are saying that the lungs, live, eyes etc etc are fine.

    It is impossible to get to the bottom of a problem and resolve anything with NON CULBABILITY BY COMPARISON. Impossible!

    Marty is not questioning the sane use of ethics. He is stating that inherent in the formula is a twisted philosophy that creates enemies. He is not saying that evil does not exist. He is not saying that some people are not dangerous like thieves, tyrants, killers.

    NON CULPABILITY BY COMPARISON has only one goal. The denial of culpability so as to blame the person bringing it up. It is a thought stopper on steroids because it gets the originator tricked into defending themselves.
    And the issue is never handled.

    So if someone brings up that Ron orchestrated the destruction of Paulette Cooper, just watch what your mind does. Does it go to all your cognitions or all the good you’ve seen in Scientology?

    You will never be able to see with clearity the true nature of the Paulette Cooper saga if you default to Scientology is good. Of course it’s good! When you are using it for good. It is no inval on it’s goodness to realize that horrible bad has been done in it’s name.

    Separate the two. And don’t justify or deny the bad by comparing it to the good. You will never resolve this maze of incongruity.

    And I believe that is what Marty is courageously doing. The organ needing surgery is the processes of creating enemies. Not that ethics is good when done well.

  52. Am interested in how the Us vs Them developed. Is it simply attributable to LRH’s military background? For instance, hazing in the military is quite common, along with harsh ethics/justice. The military also refer to people not in the military as ‘civilians’ and a job outside is, ‘civvie street.’

    It’s really a shame that the biography has never been published as a bit of contextual understanding would be very helpful.

  53. And what causes a person to use NON CULPABILITY BY COMPARISON?

    1) And inability or refusal to see one’s self or an issue
    2) a refusal to be self critical or critical of something
    3) fear of being wrong
    4) need to be right
    5) inability to reason correctly
    6) a strong emotional attachment to seeing something a certain way and refusing to budge because critical thinking has been suspended with strong faith, or because having critical thinking meant punishment and rejection by the group that one has considered the “only way.” In other words, becoming an enemy.

  54. Did LRH create his own enemies and instilled it in his Philosophy?

    No.

    • Psyches, journalists, CIA, FBI, squirrels, blown scientologists, anyone critical of Scientology etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.

      Psyches are part of upper level theory. Fair game, blow to the enemy, destroy them utterly, sue into submission.

      Portland85……… yes! Ron did create enemies and made them part of his philosophy.

      • His personal isseus indeed, CIA and FBI where really sick organizations back in the day. Journalist and Psychs. He should have had more character to handle them. BUT I REALLY HATE AMERICAN PSYCHS THAT SAY HOMOSEXUALITY IS A MENTAL ILNESS AND ADMINSTER SHOCK THERAPY

      • Brian, please challenge me.

        • Cat Daddy lol, I have never had anyone asked me , “please challenge me” quite like they way you just did. For some reason it is such a refreshing communication! And makes me smile.

          Look…….Ron was great ok. He did some amazing things….. Amazing. His passion for research, his giving hope and purpose to all of us here, his creating a fun group when it was wroking well in student environments. The Scientology parties, his love of words and study, his love of helping a stranger with auditing. Our first out if body experience, helping another to solve their suffering as an auditor, going from atheist to man or women of spiritual knowledge etc etc etc.

          But Ron then needed to protect all that. I could even undertand why. He saw something beautiful and new ( forget about the money part for a moment, let that one go) that needed care against a crazy world. Ok I get that.

          But seeking to destroy………..destroy mind you!………… his critics.
          Not have a public debate or use the power if good in Scientology to win in the public square. But to seek utter destruction of critics…… To destroy a women. He sought to sabotage a womens life…… A jounalist……. A writer.

          That was a crime against the First Amendment: freedom of speech

          You could talk of the crap in the CIA, FBI etc etc forever. You may be right or you may be brainwashed. But when Ron started to target people for harming, that’s when Scientology became a drooling mass of barking mistrust: a junk yard dog, a thug.

          There is only one enemy, the noise and crap in our head, our own personal weaknesses to over come. And when Ron institutionalized his war against critics and created a war room, the B1; he ceased being a sage in the lineage of the Buddha and became a cult leader.

          Ethics was the tool, destruction of enemies became the goal.

          • Brian I understand, but the bottomline was that Hubburd did not like boredome and that is why I understand his whole voyage.. He practically fel into the trap he preached others not to fall into, I would i am not Ghandi or Nelson Mandela, It’s hard to be a sage.

            whit regards Niels

      • Brian, your posts have always been helpful to me. Thank-you.

        I steal some of your stuff and pass it on to those I am lucky enough to be with.

        That’s how much I appreciate your presence.

        Please keep rockin’ it!

        Vic

      • You think that’s outside the box?

  55. Enemy, David Miscavige please come to the Netherlands, You will never do that because you are a scared little boy.

  56. This Post is worth putting on Golden rod and famed with a guilded frame.
    Even Jane Kember wrote a Blue on Blue stating “WE create our own enemies” so true. Well done Marty !!!!

  57. “YEP, SON, WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US.”
    -Pogo

  58. My final comment on this matter:

    I’ve used the lower conditions, on myself, to greatly increase my own beingness, doingness and havingness. It’s a personal matter.

    That’s the way we use them here.

    In the Co$ they are merely used as an operation to coerce one into an artificial and arbitrarily acceptable 3rd dynamic valence and to force one into subservience.

    • Exactly. I fully agree. There is no Ethics in the church. It is a judgment. It is not self-, but other-determined and so has nothing to do with original Scientology and original creeds of the church.

    • Thanks Les,

      You can bet your bottom dollar ‘lowers’ are a subservience
      servo-control mechanism when applied within the extant cult.

      The remaining few are fixed in some serfdom or slave-like valance. I’m not surprised. Some humans are irrepressibly compelled to do the same dumb things over and over again.

      And isn’t that a recognized definition of insanity?

  59. Is there a difference between enemy and things like adversary, or someone who has goals opposing your own?

    I’ve never really been good at the enemy thing. I don’t think it’s good to have in ones universe. It’s one of those things I cant seem to do for too long. It’s like trying to mix oil and water- it tends to settle out to it’s natural state.

    However, if somebody is f-ing things up on purpose they may need to go, or get handled. But it should all be as smooth as possible with the best for everybody involved. I actually think that is what the enemy condition is about (in my mind anyway). instead of destroying the guy or firing him or expelling him you try to handle him and he goes up to doubt and decides what to do- one way or the other.

    But whats the difference between “enemy” as you use it here and defending against an attacker or protecting your organization from something that has the intention to destroy it?

    Is there a way to oppose something and work against it without falling into this trap? I can think of some examples where there are enemies and it just gets into games really.

    I live in a small town and some didn’t want a liquor store so they fought it and won. Then a few years later the liquor store people got it on the ballot and won. Now there is a liquor store. I’m sure there was some “enemies” in that scenario. Was it fair to everyone? No Was it the best solution? I don’t know. Was it the end of the world? No.

    It’s getting into some semantics here I think. It’s pretty easy with Scientology to shift meanings around a bit and make it sound bad, but it’s just as easy to go the other way. I can do it all day if you want Marty. You tell me how somethings bad and I’ll tell you how it’s good.

    • martyrathbun09

      I helped expose and prosecute gang members in my town. During the course of it, they put a hit on me – actually tagged my house; then conducted drive bys. I sat outside to protect my wife for two weeks all night long with a double barreled shotgun across my lap. Did I ever consider these kids the enemy? No. Did I make the streets of that town safe? Yes.

      • Marty,
        While in the Sea Org did you consider the psychs the enemy? Did you consider the IRS the enemy?
        If not , while in the Sea Org did you consider you had any enemies or that the church did?
        Is the definition of enemy useless?
        If yes (about having enemies), what made you decide that this was a wrong course of action?

        • martyrathbun09

          If you don’t get my position by now, I don’t think you will.

          • This response is another example I think of what diogenese is talking about above.
            Or is it that you are so enlightened that a mere mortal cannot duplicate your hightened awareness?

            • No, I think it is more like I have a communication problem which has also alleged on this thread. This has degenerated into word play.

            • Tony, Marty is not saying enemies do not exist. He is saying that having enemies is part of a church doctrine that may have created them when they did not exist. Enemy is so strong in the psyche of being a Scientologist that you can’t even imagine what Marty is saying. You default to “whadya mean enemies don’t exist?”

              You have been indoctrinated to conceptualize the need to fight bad guys to save the universe. It is part of your world view now and you can’t see how you have carefully, with the sincerity of a passionate student, accepted into your mind, the creation of an opposing terminal that gives justification for cosmic war, to save the earth, from the enemy that you spent so much money to learn about.

              • Tony, where is the CIA, FBI, Psyche now. Have they just up and decided, “oh well let’s not fight Scientology anymore!” where are they????
                The only destructive force fighting Scientology is Scientology. The need to have an enemy as a spiritual vurtue is causing Scientology to self destruct.
                It is eating itself alive with attack the enemy. It has become the enemy to itself.

              • Brian,
                You don’t even know who I am or what my beliefs are so don’t be so eager to tell me what I think.
                I never said that I consider the IRS, psychs or anyone else an enemy to me. That is not “part of my world.” I do consider dm to be an enemy of mine and my friends. I believe that the word enemy and it’s concepts have a use in life.
                I agree and did agree already on this blog that a lot of enemies are fabricated.

                My questions were to him and not you. I appreciate your attempt to handle my universe. But you didn’t.

                • By the way Brian, my questions to Marty above were not to convince him that those groups were real enemies.

                  I was curious to see if when he was in the Sea Org if he DID (at that time) feel they were enemies or if he had this same philosophy about “no enemies” while he was in the Sea Org?

                  Also, if he DID think they were enemies at the time, when did he change philosophies to the “no enemy” style and why did he change? (I am curious)

                  My interest was in his reality and didn’t go into what my philosophy is on the subject.

                  • martyrathbun09

                    Tony, did you ever read What is Wrong With Scientology?

                    • Yes. I read both of your books and liked them a lot.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      Thanks Tony. The answers to all your questions that you asked of me on this thread are in WIWWS in spades. I can’t say it any more thoroughly than I did there.

                    • Sorry Marty,
                      I don’t remember everything in the books. I might need to be reminded from time to time. Either that or it’s back to M-9ing.
                      I feel if there is a conversation going on the blog, it in some cases, may be better to thoroughly handle the questions rather than leaving loose ends. It is the desire of the audience to actually be in 2wc with you and it seems that you reject that occuring to some degree.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      Thanks Tony. Some things require spelling out. That is why I wrote books and am writing more. In short, the answers to your questions are, I integrated, evolved, and transcended and am continuing to do so.

                  • Ok, I understand Tony. I don’t know you and texting places are really no way of getting an accurate sense of each other.

                    And I know this communication was between you both. But this is a public forum.

                    I’ll tell you when I lost the enemy bit. It is when I realized that they were Ron’s enemies and not mine. When I was convinced he was projecting his enemy out of his mind and convincing you and me to fight against them to save the world from becoming a rock forever and ever. Scientology’s version of eternal damnation.

                    Tony, the war against the evil SPs came from Ron. We bought into the drama.

                    • Thanks Brian.
                      I agree that Ron created a lot of enemies for himself. I was never in the Sea Org so I never “fought” them except by giving cold hard cash. And maybe mentally a bit.

                      I think there are people on Earth that do not have the best interests of the average person at the forefront of their mind.

                      Whether you want to call a person who gives another person an “enemy” or not is not that important to me. It’s just semantics.

                      What is important is how you handle them. I think with most people if you want to change something in them you have to get in communication with them and use ARC and give them some idea that makes them WANT to change their own behavior.

                      If they are criminal, you may need to put them behind bars where they can’t hurt others. If they are social outcasts you just have to deal with it.

                    • And here we go again, folks, another SHOWSTOPPER.

                      I love the people I have lost to the church. As well as those I might still.

                      They’re out but not stably free yet.

      • I think thats an example of having to oppose something but being wise enough to not go into the enemy thing. “Enemy” seems like anger band which is a stuck flow right? Who wants to be stuck? It sucks to be stuck.

        For some reason I’m thinking of the movie “Get Shorty”. Theres a few scenes in there where Travolta wins in different ways without fighting.

        This one is cool, but theres another one where he punches James Gandalfini and then befriends him.

    • So Chris, I suddenly got interested. You mentioned earlier in this thread that you had escorted around a CATS spokesman during your time as DSA. I was CATS main, and only, on-the-road-spokesman. I did the gig you speak of. Where was it? Why don’t I remember you? Huh.

      Please help me refresh my memory.

      Vic Krohn
      CATS Co-Founder

      • Well, I’m not sure. This was 20 years ago. This was a guy I would guess in his 20s, maybe 25. I think his name was Chris, but that may be wrong. No one else ever did radio shows?
        It seems like he said he was “filling in” or “helping out” or something like that. Do you remember anything like that? Was it you? Did you come to Phoenix 20 years ago and do the talk radio circuit for a couple days?

        • Thanks for this. Yes, I did go to Phoenix for a radio show tour. And I remember staying with a chiropractor. There was also a flat tax v sales tax debate with our guys (CATS and the Cato institute) and US Rep. Dick Army’s guys.

          We had local spokespeople, but I did Phoenix cause it was close to LA.

          Like you said, it was about 20 years ago. I remember most of the DSA’s, back then but I guess we didn’t quite connect.

          Again, thanks for filling me in.

          Vic

  60. What about cleverly defeating an opponent? A known and pan-determined game.

    If you had some clear, definite action available to you that would put Miscavige out of business tomorrow would you do it?

    • Hell no. I want him in that prison, not running around among us.

    • Chris, there is a very crucial difference between the creation and culture of the “enemy game” as is so often dramatized between groups throughout Earth’s history and confronting and handling either a great societal injustice or an individual that threatens one’s survival. The latter usually needs to be done either in immediate self defense for one’s very life or the long term prospects for one’s survival (or one’s group’s survival).

      A great example of the latter is the life of Martin Luther King. (I highly reccomend Stephen Oates’ biography of King). MLK did not hate or engage in the creation of the culture of “enemy.” But of course he recognized insanity and evil and threat to survival, and set out to actively handle it.

    • “What about cleverly defeating an opponent? A known and pan-determined game. If you had some clear, definite action available to you that would put Miscavige out of business tomorrow would you do it?”

      Short answer: YES.
      Long answer: In a New York minute.
      Longer answer: Once he is out of business, he is no longer an opponent.
      If he decides not to be an opponent, he is not in the same business.
      If he stays in that same business, there exists a postulate saying that he is in that same business.
      When that postulate disappears, we still have other postulates and bigger games to play.

    • Hi Chris

      You asked: “If you had some clear, definite action available to you that would put Miscavige out of business tomorrow would you do it?”

      Hmmm.. You see, without more data that would be tough to decide.

      Right now I consider that David Miscavige is valuable to the future of Scientology – the subject and technologies.

      Sounds a bit crazy yes? But consider that his actions have produced more “real” Scientolgists, or led to the freedom or de-PTSing of more Scientolgists than would likely have happened in most other scenarios. This is an amazing opportunity for each of us to confront and handle this kind of thing.

      I consider his demise be best orchestrated by his own hand.

      Somewhere between now and when he turns into a total raving loonie, those still under his suppression may still make the jump to realizations of what is happening, and give them the opportunity to handle whatever PTSness they may be experiencing, for themselves, and by their own determinism. Should an intervention occur, some will inevitably get stuck into considering him a martyr and redouble their resolve that he was truly enlightened and was taken down by some, or all, of the suppressives that he railed against.

      I personally have no desire to see him punished, as it would likely just reinforce the valence that he dramatizes and fixate him even more. That ultimately does no good for anyone. Given the opportunity, I would tend rather to help “fix” him than bury him in this state, or worse. Pushing him further into his insanity only makes our work harder in the future, and he will certainly be in our futures, one way or the other.

      Eric S

  61. gretchen dewire

    DM will destoy himself with his own force.It probably wont be as soon as we would like it to be though. We can just step out of the way and let it happen. That said, I still think it is wonderful that Marty and Mike have these blogs where we are free to tell our stories and communicate. Thanks again guys

  62. Speaking of enemy, I just have to share something here. Roland is either a class lV or a class Vlll.

    “People don’t get what the famous “eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” means.

    It does NOT mean that you should extract vengeance for a slight. It was said as opposed to the normal human practice of Vendetta – i.e. you insult or injure me, and I have carte blanche to do whatever I want in revenge.

    The “Eye for an eye” was intended to say – ONLY an eye for an eye. That is, the response to injury is measured and appropriate, thought out and not emotional and vengeful.

    Gandhi, and Jesus too for that matter, were saying “Do what it takes to get a good result, even if this means doing nothing.”

    Roland Aldridge

  63. Marty: “I am trying to make people uncomfortable to take them out of their cult mind set. Others are trying to make them comfortably numb.”

    Quoted for truth.

  64. I was pondering the concept of ‘enemy’ as if it might be something real to ponder. I was in comm with ‘Big Me’ aka ‘Higher Self’, ‘Bob’, ‘ING’ (internal guidance system) and whatever other label I feel like assigning to ‘It’ about this notion of there being an enemy and in the midst of this comm I suddenlyay, I go to my YT page. There’s a video there at the top of the list that I’m instantly attracted to. I don’t know if others who watch it will see its relevance to this topic, but for me, it’s quite obvious.

  65. Marty I have to commend you for exploring the approach of “integration, evolution and transcendence “. I believe it is right on.

    This is exactly what is needed for people in many new religious movements who aspire for more freedom than their religion is ready to grant them. It is an excellent way for them to continue on their journey to explore new spiritual heights without having to turn their back on their religion or on others.

    Also, I like the nobility of standing for something, not just criticizing the movement you just exited from. There is something so ordinary about just criticizing and not inspiring, guiding, towards some destination, or building something.

    I see someone here quoted LRH as saying: “Don’t be AGAINST something, be FOR something.

    ”That’s a great statement. There are too many people who leave a religious movement, but are unable to formulate for themselves (let alone for others) a workable path that is integrative, inclusive, open-minded, peace-oriented, and aspirational.

    I see that the person posting as “Simple Thetan” wrote a comment which I find quite telling: “Marty and the group,
this blog is really helping me break the shackles of the mind and become again a free thinker.” That’s so great to read, kudos to you and your team.
    Integration, inclusion, peace and love for all will prevail!

  66. Hi Marty,

    I mean this post with the utmost respect.

    I really have to take issue with the way you tend to blow some people off.

    I will be the first to say that you have been a hero of mine and I know you probably don’t care about being one.

    You bring up fascinating topics and I do think you bring people to a higher level.

    I do think also that once a person gets into the role of “opinion leader” they have a tendency to have to “be right”. It seems to me that you may be falling into this trap to a degree.

    You have many, many stellar abilities and you have some shortcomings also. I think you would be more real to people if you shared more of your “decompressings” too, as a lot of us have done.

    It is all good to make people uncomfortable to make them think and wake up. But when they then try to ask you questions and be in communication and for you to brush them off is contrary to your stated purpose as far as I can see.

    Obviously, you can do what you want. But since you tell others your ideas, I thought maybe you would like to hear some too? Maybe not.

    • Thanks for your views Tony. I appreciate it. I will make an effort to improve my communication skills. However, since I have a hell of a lot more to do than deal with 200 originations on this blog alone – including researching the way out of this trap – I may not live up to your standards. But, I’ll try.

      • I understand.

        You have broad shoulders and I know people like to jump on them. Including me, sorry for that. That was a great ack by the way… :-)

        • And Tony, your intention to help shows through loud and clear… :-)

          Personally, I have had remarkable and quite stable gains from the combination of:
          1) NOTS-style *service facsimile* handling,
          2) reading and digesting several of the books from the recommended
          reading list here, and
          3) reading and considering the posts and comments from this blog.

          ALL of these things are the direct result of Marty’s, and Mosey’s help.

          Thus my comment about a personal debt and paying it forward towards the beginning of this thread.

          I am certain there are many others with gains similar to mine.

          And finally, while we can all benefit from constructive criticism, it’s also important to balance it with the well-deserved acknowledgement.

          Thus this post.

      • Marty, I’ve known all along that part of the reason for your sometimes short and dismissive replies is that you just don’t have the time to answer every comment in depth. I appreciate your pledge to try to do better. I also want to say that for what it’s worth, I think you’ve done a great deal of good — indispensible good in fact — with your blog. Thank you for that..

      • For those of you who have never moderated a blog or forum, I can tell you from experience that it can be very time consuming, sometimes maddening, extremely rewarding and often a very thankless task.

        I know this because I modded the scnforum that Geir Isene set up at one point and OMG! People don’t see the half of it!

        I was attacked as a moderator, often criticized and believe me, you don’t even want to know about the posts I didn’t let through! These were often offensive beyond any reason, written to intentionally upset, offend and attack.

        That being said, Marty, I am sure that you could perfect your communication skills, but even so I am DELIGHTED beyond all reason that you take the time every day, day in and day out to produce and moderate this blog. If you suddenly lapse or feel like taking a chunk out of someone from time to time or just don’t feel up to creating an amazingly enlightened response every time, I will certainly understand! But thanks for acknowledging Tony, who I think is a great person who brings much to this blog!

    • Hi Tony, you know well by now I appreciate your sentiments and thoughts. Although we’ve never met – yet – I can see you are a straight talking guy. Here’s what I see:

      Marty’s blog was never called “Let’s handle the Church” or “Get DM”. It was always “Moving on up a little higher”. So while the emphasis might have changed over the 3.5 years or so the basic point hasn’t really, I believe. Marty made it real clear to me personally on the phone once that there would be no Church Mk II or even a structured “field” – it was always about getting others to get their own lives back, with or without LRH tech. The first and necessary step for any Churchie still “in” is to get OUT! That hasn’t changed. Nobody gonna move up anywhere while still “in”.

      Now – it may be that those who are newly coming out may find the last 6 months of Marty’s blog a little “out gradient” – as their attention is still bound to be fixated on the cult and all its indoctrination and baggage. Fine – there is host of blogs and sites they will easily find if they look, including Steve’s and Lana’s. Then there’s Friends of LRH, Save Scientology, Old Auditor’s, etc. and, of course, the archives of this one.

      Plus, I would bet my bottom dollar that Marty wouldn’t turn ANYONE away who was still spinning and genuinely needed help, even if they were skint (correct me if I’m wrong Marty).

      I would hazard that anyone “suggesting” Marty do things this way or that haven’t read or understood his first two books – particularly the last chapter of the second.

      Personally I still enjoy the game of getting people out and free, and annoying the hell out of my local OSA – I see it as a hobby, much like philately but with added harassment and fun, and without all that fiddly sticking things in albums. As a working parent of two young ‘uns I don’t have the time to spend long weeks studying advanced Eastern meditative techniques or tantric philosophy – but just the books I’ve read as a direct result of this blog, and the blog itself, have made my life immeasurably better. And I thank, again, not just Marty, but all who contribute here.

      I try and apply “what an Executive wants on his lines” – every minute not spent finishing his next book but trying to untangle some minor upset on the blog is wasted IMHO. I just want the next book – I think it will answer and handle a LOT of what seems to be upsetting some here.

  67. Great topic – think about the 3rd party law – now think about Scientology – now think about the reference “the person is so restimulated they don’t know who the real sp is” – now think about the reference – “covert and overt invalidation is the social intercourse of the sp!

    Can you spot the 3rd party to all conflict since you became a scientologist – for me – scientology became the 3rd party to all of my conflict!

    • I’ve thought about this. Not with regards to myself, but with regards to others involved.

      When I was involved with the Church I just viewed everyone as being there on the same terms. They were friends of Hubbard’s, as I was a friend of Hubbard’s. It was that simple. Didn’t matter what they were doing or being beyond that. Sea Org no different than public. Friends of Hubbard’s.

      The friends fought among one another. I didn’t borrow any of his friends for my own personal use. And I did not inherit his enemies either.

  68. The concept of Enemy is in essence: something you cannot control. The latest definition of OT I remember is: „the distance around him (I forgot if added „in his environment“) that he can control“.
    If you can control something then you cannot have an Enemy. Thus the Enemy formula should be in the direction to enable you to control that part of your life you see an Enemy. If you feel the need to fight an enemy you are not in control. Actually those doubts within you create an enemy condition if not resolved. In other words: those areas of you life where you know what you want do have no enemy situation. An enemy can only exist if you are a) total effect or b) you do not have a clear concept of what you want.
    If you want to fight an enemy by force and this is your decision you can do that. That is your game. If you do not want to do that go up one step and resolve your doubts. If you cannot resolve your doubts the enemy condition is ongoing. The really difficult task is to resolve your doubts. And the much more difficult task after that is to make known your decision. That would be liability in fact. You tell your environment what you decided. If you do not want to do that (for social reasons or if you are afraid to say it or whatever) you right at this instant are in doubt again and the enemy is showing up. This process can be very fast. The faster the better you are in control of your environment. It goes bang bang.
    I did learn that the really hard way in my life. That is the other side of the coin of increased ability without the proper steps done on the bridge to resolve my aberrations. My doubts about myself created the situations I have to face in my life. Still ongoing.

  69. Just some random (or not so random) food for thought:

    When people say Marty disagrees with LRH we should see which LRH is he disagrees with?
    50’s ? 60’s? 70’s? 80’s?
    (or perhaps 90’s? as some people speak/think of him as if alive)

    Phil Spickler describes in his video how money motivation went from bottom of the scale to top of the scale.
    (Sorry but it seems I had to post the video again)

    (right around 3:18 onwards is the part that applies)

    I dare to disagree with the money motivated LRH.
    I also dare to raise suspicion on those who favor that LRH.

    LRH doesn’t even agree with LRH.
    No matter what your opinion on money motivation is, one of the LRHs will disagree with you!

    Which LRH are you going to listen to?
    Well If I may recommend why not listen to the one that makes most sense.

    People can change.
    Especially when they dabble in stuff like SC.
    Some for the better.

    I don’t consider myself the same person I was 10 years ago.

    I think referring to LRH an indivisible entity is a mistake and one huge A=A=A.

    • “Some for the better.” I realize I should have written Many for the better.

    • Yes let’s all jump on Phil, who are you ? A=A=A, “nPretty Nasty Swear”

      can you eleborate on your argumentation A=A! ???

      • Can you please tell me which part of what I’ve said comes through as “let’s all jump on Phil” ?

        I have the utmost respect for Phil.
        Please re-read my post with that in mind.

        My message is about people not being able to see the difference between LRH’s different ‘personalities’ throughout his life.
        That is the A=A I’m talking about.

  70. Marty said : “I think it is worthwhile for someone who has adopted Scientology beliefs to think about what notions have been inculcated into oneself about labeling people as ‘enemy’ and treating them as such. Think about the effect it might have on your relations and your own peace of mind.”
    Very simple and to the point. It’s interesting to see how much confused answers (and some very wise ones) this single post generated. You are definitely bringing order, Marty!
    Yes, this enemy notion is also a very “yang stuff” and this one alone, imo,was enough to destroy any possibility of real spiritual gains in corporate scientology. I worked several years with a group of OT7 and didn’t see any peace of mind, quite the contrary. I had constantly to handle controversies, dichotomies and adversity. Sad story, though to confront. And what you wrote here since a few weeks constitutes a great healing process for a lot of us. Thank you Marty

  71. One of my favorite quotes on compassion ever:

    “But what if I should discover that the least among them all, the poorest of all beggars, the most impudent of all offenders, yea the very fiend himself – that these are within me, and that I myself stand in need of my own kindness, that I myself am the enemy who must be loved – what then? ” -Carl Jung

  72. What is an enemy? Well, IMHO, it’s not a person or a group or an organization or a government or a thing or a place. If I perceive an enemy existing outside of myself, what I am perceiving is a story, a figment of my imagination, that I have fashioned then projected onto a target or targets that might be seen or might be unseen (the unseen ones are most efficacious) in my environment. It could be that others have also fashioned stories about an enemy or enemies that are similar to my own. And together, we make the stories come to life, we make them appear solid, formidable and real. Thus we have a game.

    The idea of an ‘enemy’, the belief that an enemy exists, is based in fear. Fear is about the future. It is located in the fifth dimension. The dimension of probabilities (at least that’s what some physicists are calling the fifth dimension). If one has an enemy, the enemy is the vessel of their own fear. The fear that there is a high probability that they are going to lose something that they don’t want to lose or get something that they don’t want to get. The ‘something’ might be symbolized by mest but mest is not it. The ‘something’ is an experience. The so called ‘enemy’ is actually a service to one as the enemy reveals, by reflecting back to the person, their projection of their own unconscious fears. This can be most helpful if one knows what’s going on but if one doesn’t know what’s going on they will just “beef it up”, make the story more real, give it endurance and all the while keep imagining and adding more stories to it. Thus, the illusory universe appears to expand.

    The idea that anything exists outside of self is a story. There are no others and there is no ‘out there.’ The universe(s) that appear to be outside of self are projections from within. Where is within? Well, it sure ain’t inside the body! The body is a story.

    As I zoom in here on Marty’s blog and listen to all the comments through my eyes and note the numerous differences and similarities, it certainly appears that there are many individuals here offering perspectives peculiar to their unique self. And some it seems, by my interpretation, appear to be moving on up a little higher and some not so much. However, if I zoom out and get a much broader view, I don’t see separate individuals each with their own label, I see multiple expressions of ONE. Then, zooming out even further, completely out of time and space, where there is no such thing as a ‘further’, the ‘expressions’ are recognized to be a dream. Is the ONE having a dream? No. Not exactly. Imagine that your body is the ONE and that a subatomic particle in one of the body’s quadrillion cells has a dream. I suspect it’s more like that.

    Of course, everything I just said through my fingers is only my opinion and has no more weight than that.

    • So what would be your take on a statement like: “shit happens” ?

      • “Shit happening” appears to be random. However, in one’s passage through space and time there is no random. You cannot help but be in the right place at the right time. Even making and leaving a typo in a comment is not random. :) Do I believe this? Not completely, not yet. But, the more I integrate this notion into my perspective with regard to the events (tiny and large) that manifest within my journey, the more sense it makes. If nothing else it reminds me that I have a choice in how to respond. I will either choose to view the happening as a lesson being presented or choose to assign it some other significance that, more than likely, will only serve to diminish my personal integrity in some way.

        • I know exactly what you are talking about when addressing the random phenomena. I have been trying to wrap my mind around this for quite some time. The way I perceive it is that indeed nothing is random from a certain level but that level from which something (or anything) ceases to be random is not necessarily available to us. If it was then there would be no such thing as random to those who achieve that state. Randomity at its core seems to rely on lies (false/omitted info). I tend to think that it falls into the absolutes are unobtainable category. If you did achieve total control over random then this would cease to be a game and this universe would cease to be a shared one. Who knows what would happen then. I doubt that even OT8 would get anyone to such elevation and I also doubt that this would/should even be the goal of OT levels and SC tech.

          Therefore one must in absence of such absolute accept the fact that “shit happens” I don’t care how OT one claims to be I think if they are here in this realm “shit does not happen to me” can only be stated if one is lying to self.

          As usual this is all merely my opinion/view.

          • I’ve been looking at this further and when I came out the other end my conclusion for now, at least, is that whether shit happens or doesn’t happen whether it’s random or not random is not all that important. What, I believe, is important is how I choose to respond to any given manifestation that happens in my field of perception. How I respond will determine my experience. And that always, regardless of my interpretation of what I perceive, that I respond from a place of Love and peace rather than from a place of fear, judgement and condemnation.

            • That is a very good point/attitude/goal Monte. Seems like we are on very similar pages and as a result I don’t even know now why I threw my original question at you. I guess it seemed like a good idea at the time :) I think it must have been this: “And together, we make the stories come to life, we make them appear solid, formidable and real.” I realize I seem to have a basic disagreement with the concept of things being solid because we are making them be that way in present time. But who cares. Just thinking out loud here anyway.
              To me present time is something we perceive only when we are affected by this machinery called the universe we (or who cares who) mocked up. To me the mockup is in the past when we speak from within the game (which is what I am doing now). Which may seem like an unimportant detail but I think it is the part that expresses the fact that there are certain strongly agreed upon (or set) rules which can’t be bent. (Or at least not easily) Outside of the game I agree with you again there is no such thing as time. So if I take time out of the equation then what I think we have left is a fixed thing (the machinery of the universe). This may or may not be the same thing as the static LRH talked about. I call it the universe rig because to me that expresses the fact that there are static rules. Some of these can be bent (maybe) but only when the attention of other beings are not attached to it. This of course is just a theory but it is my way of explaining the weird and wonderful things that can happen when makes and holds postulates.

              The universe is like the bushes in the shrub maze in the movie Shining.
              They manifest when you are not looking. Except these aren’t hostile by nature. (Just my idea :) )

  73. Great post Marty, you hit the bull’s-eye again.
    Yes, the lower conditions for me were a blatant control mechanism from the start.

    I was particularly frustrated by the Enemy, Treason and the Doubt formulas. So I rejected them from the beginning and refused to do them. Hell, the only worthwhile doubt formula that I ever did was to tell the cult to screw off!

    The Enemy formula in particular is a clever bait & switch on the Bridge, having failed to deliver what they promised; the Church is now cleverly coercing you into some kind of shortcut, group enforced spiritual cognition, to keep you under their wings.

    For anybody who has gotten out of his head, and looked around a bit, The Enemy formula is nothing but a self listing, self spinning exercise.

    Here is a clue on “Find out who you really are”:

    You are not a Scientologist! You are not a Sea Org member! And thanks god for that!

  74. Hey Marty. Dang I come in late on these articles.

    “There’s a liability to being sane, you know. You get friendly with all the people you used to hate.”

    This is my datum now but originally told to me by Hubbard. (3D Criss Cross Assessment Tape).

  75. Well, here is my summary of the lowers conditions in the Sea Org;

    Confusion, Find out where you are:

    Wow, I seem to be in some kind of collective group engram, where a bunch of people are going around thinking they are part of the Galactic Federation Death Star.

    Wow, some of them are absolutely convinced they are part of the Borg Cube.

    Wow, I’m definittely in the wrong fucking place!
    .
    Treason, Find out that you are:

    I’m basically nothing and intend to keep myself that way. No thanks, I don’t want to be Borg.

    Enemy, Find out who you really are:

    I’m basically nothing again and very happy about it. Please not again, do I really have to be Borg?

    Doubt Formula:

    I never wanted to be part of The Collective, Borg doesn’t work for me.

    I join the group of free beings who know that all identities are basically not true, and who can be whoever they damn please to be.

    We are not Borg but we do come back!

  76. I agree. The only time you have an “enemy” is when you are in a game or games condition. As we rise, we become more pan-determined and there are no enemies. The only way you can have an enemy that influences you is if you agree to let the enemy influence you – or indeed, consider the person an enemy in the first place.
    An SP or psychopath is not “an enemy”. The psychopath just is. They are doing what they do, like a shark or a wolverine. The SP or psychopath doesn’t even see you, or comprehend how what he or she is doing affects anyone but themselves – and in the case of the SP as defined by Ron, they are not in present time anyway, and you are not perceived at all. Therefore, it is you, not they, that is labeling the person an “enemy.” The more enlightened point of view would be to consider them someone that you make allowances for so that they do not affect you or your loved ones.

  77. Mary Freeman has a funny point, (Tatiana Baklanova clip above)

    Below Confusion there is the condition of Delusion, and the formula is: Fall on your head.

  78. morelivesthanacat

    A few random comments after scanning through most of this.

    1. I happen to think LRH would be quite happy with Marty’s work and approach. Organizations grew up to the degree that people were too lazy too actually work at it themselves. Too lazy to read what he read. Too lazy to investigate and apply principles toward betterment of conditions. It was a long shot to try to overcome the shortcomings of most people and I think he knew it would probably fail. Can’t fault him for dedicating his life to trying.

    3. So Marty’s got the right idea. Study the works of those who figured out some stuff on the subject, but think for yourself. After all, that’s the whole idea that those who figured out some stuff wished to impart to the rest of us. Nothing wrong with a helpful push in the right direction, but you’ve got to do the walking. LRH covered it on “The Road to Truth”. And most of the rest of the time in those days he was trying to tell us how to put on those boots. No one or no organization can put them on for you.

    • martyrathbun09

      More Lives, I took out your point 2. I really don’t want to get a character fight going with folks. Unfortunately, many are still in the throes of having to have enemies, and I think where you are going with 2 is going to resurrect a lot of the drama. I don’t think it belongs here. You cool with that? (for those watching, it had nothing to do with me)

  79. morelivesthanacat

    Cool.

  80. There are no enemies.

    There is, however, purpose.

    If your purpose is to build a big tower, and you need to destroy a few forests and mountains to do this, then you can do that. Purpose, desire, will .. such is the nature of the thetan entity, itself, at work and play.

    But if there are other thetans, whose purpose it is to live in a jungle and nurture a simpler way of life among the beasts and trees, and they suddenly find themselves surrounded by machines and death and disorder of construction, well then .. that is another purpose.

    Such flows of purpose, they do exist, they are a real social thing, we use all sorts of language to describe these things.

    There are two, particular, words that are used to describe all this mixing up of purpose, which I just think need to be observed:

    * * *
    en·e·my [en-uh-mee] plural en·e·mies, adjective
    noun
    1. a person who feels hatred for, fosters harmful designs against, or engages in antagonistic activities against another; an adversary or opponent.
    2. an armed foe; an opposing military force: The army attacked the enemy at dawn.
    3. a hostile nation or state.
    4. a citizen of such a state.
    5. enemies, persons, nations, etc., that are hostile to one another: Let’s make up and stop being enemies.
    # # #

    Oh, this word .. antagonism .. it is but a branch of such a large, large tree:

    * * *
    an·tag·o·nism [an-tag-uh-niz-uhm] Show IPA
    noun
    1. an active hostility or opposition, as between unfriendly or conflicting groups: the antagonism between the liberal and the conservative parties.
    2. an opposing force, principle, or tendency: Her plan to become an actress met with the antagonism of her family.
    3. Physiology . an opposing action, as by one muscle in relation to another.
    4. Biochemistry, Pharmacology . the opposing action of substances, as drugs, that when taken together decrease the effectiveness of at least one of them ( contrasted with synergism ).
    5. Ecology .
    a. a relationship between two species of organisms in which the individuals of each species adversely affect the other, as in competition.
    b. the inhibition of the growth of one type of organism by a different type that is competing for the same ecological niche.
    # # #

    Believe it or not, but there are some in the world whose purpose of enslaving their fellow men with chemicals, machines, the wanton order of society into compartmentalized ‘labels’ appropriate for an antagonistic master, seriously does cross the purpose of a Scientologist.

    This is not to say we ‘should have enemies’ or ‘do have enemies’, but there is most definitely a scale of “man is just a sack of chemicals, the world is overpopulated, we are vermin upon the earth who ought to die in endless future wars” up to “man is a spiritual entity who can solve his problems by recognizing the theta/MEST engram and using ARC/KRC to resolve things, here and now, in present time”. Yes, I said from ‘down’ to ‘up’, but if you like, flip the chart.

  81. Related here is the tao: yang invoking yin, yin evoking yang. Are they enemies, no. It is impersonal. They depend on each other. They are alway moving one into the other “conquering” each other (so to speak.)

    Above is described how persons have purposes and how biological finity gives rise to cross purposes and to enemies. Whether our enemy is personally targeting us or not, the impact is personal. How to fight?

    If yang is coming at you ( or yin) the way of tao (as embodied in tai chi principles) would be to not try to match it. Yang against yang is clashing, who ever has the “most” will win but will have also just made themselves a bigger target for the balancing yin they have invoked.

    Another principle is “sticking” – you stay connected to the enemy so you know where it is at any given time – sticking is like listening, it does not mean engaging, it is more like following in a very soft way, in an invisable way. Point: it is visable to you, you are not visable to it.

    Another principle is called ” yielding.” Body and mind yield, not to the enemy but to the impersonal of what is, becoming harnessed by that force, be it yin or yang doesnt matter, relaxing into the ground while remaing soft and flexible to air, no resistance.

    These tai chi principles are guidance for riding the dragon that eats it’s own tail i.e. How to fight is to align with the tao.

    Don’t these principles bring to mind the auditor’s preparation as described in WIWWS?

    This post and responses have been so beneficial as players demonstate their sticking and yielding.

  82. Three years ago a friend recommended and strongly encouraged me to read the book, The Disappearance of the Universe, by Gary Renard. I just added it to my books to read list and went on. This past summer I was in a bookstore and came across a used copy of this book. It was in very good shape and only ten dollars. But, I didn’t purchase it. Three weeks later I’m in the same bookstore and the book is still there. This time I accept that it is time for me to read it and so purchase it. I read the book and it incites me to do some major adjusting in some of my very fundamental perspectives. Interestingly, The Disappearance of the Universe turns out to be a “can opener” for another book; A Course in Miracles (ACIM). The metaphysics as presented in ACIM has been pretty much a “mind fuck” for me (I just don’t know another way to put it). On top of that, even though it is most definitely not a Christian book, it is written with a lot of Christian terms. That took a while to flatten (turns out I had more than a little charge on these terms). Also, discerning what is metaphor and what is literal keeps me on my toes.

    Earlier today I was reading Chapter Nine in ACIM and I came across a paragraph (actually many paragraphs) that prompted me to think of this blog post. Here’s an excerpt:

    “If your brothers are part of you, will you accept them? Only they can teach you what you are, for your learning is the result of what you taught them. What you call upon in them you call upon in yourself. And as you call upon it in them it becomes real to you. God has but one Son, knowing them all as one. Only God Himself is more than they but they are not less than he is. Would you know what this means? If what you do to my brother you do to me, and if you do everything for yourself because we are part of you, everything we do belongs to you as well. Everyone God created is part of you and shares his glory with you. His glory belongs to Him, but it is equally yours. You cannot, then be less glorious than he his.”

    The idea that we are all actually a Oneness is and idea that has gradually found resonance in me. Slowly but surely I am beginning to see me in everyone and everyone in me. As this perspective expands, I am noticing that the imaginary lines that separate people into classes, hierarchies, levels, categories and so on, are becoming increasingly blurred. That noted, I am noticing a new level of peace within that I have no earlier familiarity with that I can recall.

  83. I found this of great reading

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s