Becoming Clear

The communication training routines in Scientology are very much downplayed in my opinion.  Supervised with the requisite attention and emphasis, in and of themselves they are a tremendous advance toward the state of Clear.  Ron Hubbard at one time made that point rather plain.

From L. Ron Hubbard’s lecture Scientology and Effective Knowledge (15 July 1957):

I woke up eventually to discover that these training drills (communication training routines) all by themself, practiced with sufficient rigor and coached well enough and instructed well enough, were steps on the road to Clear, all by themselves, without any further processing…

…And where training and processing processes are successful, they lead toward a straighter communication.  And therefore, the road out is marked by simplicity and direct observation….

…The whole subject opens up at its inception with just this: that the simplicity of observation, the simplicity of communication itself and only itself, is functional and will take Man from the bottom to the top.  And the only thing I am trying to teach you is look.

Provided one approached the training routines with the above in mind, and not as a bait and switch toward dependence on years and years of costly and complex psychotherapy or membership in some true-believer group, one might avoid the pitfalls Ron warned of in the same lecture:

Now, that’s the first thing we must know about Scientology is that by the attainment of a simplicity we accomplish a benefit. By the attainment of a simplicity, we accomplish a benefit.  By the invitation of or involvement in a complexity, we accomplish the unfathomable and create a mystery.  We sink Man into a priesthood, we sink him into a cult.

It is interesting to note that Taoists had a similar philosophical view about becoming clear more than two millenia ago.   From Lieh-Tzu: A Taoist Guide to Practical Living (translations of ancient Taoist texts) by Eva Wong:

Those who are involved are muddled; those who watch are clear.

There was a man who was so intent on avenging his father’s death that he could think of nothing else.  He was so engrossed in making plans for his revenge that he forgot he was holding his walking stick upside down.  He leaned on his staff and the sharp point punctured his cheek.  One of his friends said, ‘He is so deep in his own thoughts that everything around him is a blur.’

There was another man who was obsessed with getting rich.  One day he went into the bank and tried to walk off with several bags of gold.  The guards caught him immediately.  A passerby said, ‘only a fool would think of robbing a bank in the presence of armed guards.’  The man said, ‘my mind was so set on the gold I didn’t see the guards.’

You often see people stumbling into walls or stepping into holes because they are so occupied by their thoughts that they don’t see what’s in front of them.  When we are too involved in a situation, we can’t see straight, and things that are obvious and clear to bystanders are a blur to us.  This is very dangerous.

The training routines that Ron devised, well supervised by those not caught in the rapture/delusion of complex scripture, go a long way in attaining that ability to be clear.  A handy stable datum to help steer one clear of the ‘priesthood’ and ‘cult’ aspects of Scientology is to question anything you encounter that doesn’t seem to contribute to this:  And the only thing I am trying to teach you is look.

249 responses to “Becoming Clear

  1. Wow. Once again, more AWESOMENESS! :)

    I never knew LRH said this, “By the invitation of or involvement in a complexity, we accomplish the unfathomable and create a mystery. We sink Man into a priesthood, we sink him into a cult.”

    What happened is exactly as LRH said.

  2. Very well written post.
    It was a joy to read.

    The greatest complexity and high cost item I ever ran into
    in Scio was the excessive “sec-checking” on a meter.
    One of my friends in about 1981 paid a “ton of money” for the
    the “Joburg”. She never recovered from the financial problems
    after that. The irony is that she was one of the most dedicated
    members I ever met.
    My observation was that Scio got itself into a “witch hunt” mode.
    The very high price for auditing policy reached a dead end.
    The avowed purpose was “clear” and, if attained, would command
    a price premium. However, the entire movement became stuck
    to the idea of the narrative as the key to spiritual progress.
    There were OT narratives about Xenu and your own personal
    narratives which were “flushed out” in sec-checking.
    It turned into an endless process at a very high cost.
    I always thought that “sec-checking” could be sold only
    at a bulk rate.
    The communication courses were excellent and
    I became proficient in sales after taking them.
    IMHO the basic problem with Scientology started when
    religion became confused with business. Have a religion
    or have a business. Charging a ton of money for a religion
    is a path to destruction. Ted Koppel in his interview with
    Miscavige handled it so well. Miscavige kept avoiding the
    money issue as per scientology policy. Ted Koppel makes it
    very clear that the exchange with society is way out of balance.
    George M. White

    • Path of Buddha brought a couple things to mind.

      Yes! The exchange with society is way out of balance. The justification I heard repeatedly was “how can you put a price tag on eternal salvation and going free? It’s worth every dime!”

      Well, precisely — how can you put a price on spiritual freedom? You might as well say food should cost you $100,000 a year — after all, you can’t live without it, right? As stated above, makes sense to keep religion separate from business. To do otherwise is folly, and you create not only a priesthood (Sea Org) but a cult (CoS, Inc.) and not only a cult but an aptly named cult of greed.

      And a cult of greed in the midst of a sea of imagined enemies. Recently I came across a list of suppressive organizations, businesses, people, etc. It went on and on single spaced for 11 or more pages, with the people being listed in more than one column. Astounding how many supposed SPs there are! Please. Declaring people and organizations was simply a control mechanism to make people behave and protect CoS, Inc’s income stream, masquerading as protecting the tech.

      That protecting the tech was _not_ the motive is clear from CoS, Inc activities in altering and then re-issuing all the materials at great cost to members (and thus great income to the church). This was done precisely for income and control: Money going into the church for new sales; and control through copyright of the newly issued materials (since much of the original work had fallen into the public domain). Hence the lie of “transcription errors” and other BS in the originals. It was not about correcting errors.

      CoS, Inc at this time meets and exceeds all the standard definitions of a cult, with the hallmarks of its achievement being control (declares, ethics, threats from confidential auditing materials) and money (crush reging, lying about “new” materials, IAS, multiple buildings paid for multiple times, and so on).

      For anyone in doubt about what is happening, I suggest doing exactly what LRH suggested in the excellent article Marty has posted: LOOK.

      • By the way, that list of pages and pages of suppressive persons and organizations was from _1991_! I can’t imagine how long that list must be today. The act of declaring people is now done so broadly that it has lost the inducement of terror that it would have had say in the 1980s. Now it just looks like CoS, Inc just can’t play in the same sandbox with the human race and insists on having sharp elbows to drive the other kids away.

        Might as well just declare everyone in the world an SP as a default and make anyone who wants to get in the church prove that they are not an SP.

        • FOTF2012,
          “The act of declaring people is now done so broadly that it has lost the inducement of terror that it would have had say in the 1980s.”

          Yes! My wife and I were declared. The “declare” was done by
          a yellow highlight pen on a policy letter.
          We had no contact with them for more than 20 years.
          The declare is a worthless piece of paper.
          GMW

        • The new meaning of “SP” is beginning to come around to be “Standard Practitioner”.

  3. Marty, I don’t fear being member in a true-believer group that is made up of individuals who believe in LRH and the workability of the tech he provided. I am however very sorry I spent as much time and money as I did trying to better myself while involved with David Miscavige and some of his supporters who don’t believe in LRH.

    I also don’t fear “dependence” on such a group or LRH. I look forward to the camaraderie and actual high morale that may be possible in an Independent group practicing Scientology. There is a lot of fun and excitement to be had by a group that has its heart right and is building something worthwhile.

    There is a hole in the hearts of a lot of Scientologists ( and more to come ) and if it going to be healed, “This is the session!” will have to be part of the healing.

    • I heartily agree with you, KF. The fact that the Church of Scientology has morphed into a monstrosity does not invalidate the concept of a high toned group, dedicated to helping people.

      Also I would like to request further delineation of this statement: “. . . as a bait and switch toward dependence on years and years of costly and complex psychotherapy” – Is that a reference to the grades & upper levels? I sure hope not.

      There is no doubt that the grades & levels are costly (especially under DM, and, since 1777, LRH). There is also complexity involved, especially if you look at the whole bridge. But “bait and switch”??

      There is enough material on the “one shot clear” notion and how it is a pipe dream. If people could go clear or OT with “be three feet back of your head” or just doing TR-0, I think Ron would have ended his research then and there.

      For most of us, it required a much more gradual set of gradients to get there.

      Hopefully I’m misunderstanding this part of the article. Wouldn’t be the first time.

      • Correction – I meant “1977″ not “1777″!

      • martyrathbun09

        That is a reference to those Scientologists who cut down the ‘certainty’ attained through TRs completion to convince people they need intensives upon intensives of auditing to successfully navigate life.

        • Thank you for the clarification. I understand, and have observed the practices to which you are referring. It is amazing and puzzling that so many otherwise intelligent people fall for this. It’s pretty damned easy to tell when you are auditing a charged area and when you are digging a dry hole. I know a few who sat through literally hundreds of hours of unwanted, unneeded “sec checking”, knew it was the wrong thing for them, but kept paying for it and getting it year after year. Sort of a “mental masochism” at work. Truly mind-boggling. I keep coming back to my point about the Monopoly. I’m quite sure, had there been other legitimate options for where to get services from the start (as there are with chiropractors, for example), no one would have put up with the abusive case programming or any other abuses for a nano second.

        • That is exactly what happened to me in 1968. I had just done my first TR’s course at ASHO, when it was on Temple Ave. in LA. They were done two-hours “blinkless” (whatever that was supposed to mean) and I blew right out the top. Electrified, and frankly a bit terrified, I was sent to the reg for intensives of auditing. I pie-faced my way out of there, completed the course, and wasn’t heard from again (meaning no contact with scientology) until the late ’70′s.

          • martyrathbun09

            Fascinating.

            • Marty, you always seem to be thinking something I have on my mind. This is the TRUE obstacle I bumped into in my progess up the Bridge. I remember I did the Communications Course (just TR’s 0-IV) for $10.00. I was making fantastic progress. I had never confronted anyone before in my life, let alone actually acknowledge anyone. So all went well, until people that were not Scientologists that I was communicating with in my very in TR’s manner started asking more or less “What is your secret? Where did you learn to communicate like this with people?” I wanted to them to have the same wins as me, but I was afraid to refer them to the church I learned this skill at because it was full of CULTIES that had been like that all along, long before my TR’s ever fell into place. :) It is still a matter worth discussing today! :)

              • L, you are SO right. I wonder how many thousands if not hundreds of thousands have missed out on this amazing stuff called Scientology all because of high pressure regging and other nutty psycho dramatizations – they did not miss out as a result of having actually been the effect of those things, but because others of us who WERE the effect of them said, one way or the other, “I can handle the bullshit, but I’ll be damned if I’ll send any friend or relative of mine into this psycho ward, regardless of the wins they will be missing out on”.

                I used to rave about my wins in Scientology to anyone who would listen. I was proud to be a Scientologist. I wanted others to know about it and, if they were interested, introduce them to it.

                That all ended in 1982. Thank you for that, David Miscavige. You’ve really made that “straight up and vertical” thing go really well these past 30 years!

                • Publius, and it doesn’t end there. Life after leaving the church sometimes has felt like one is walking around with a big sign on one invisible to one’s self that says “Do me in! My Dallas Org Contract Expired!” :) All the people whose lives *would* have been bettered if there really ever was such a thing as a “Church of Scientology”. It is nice to have the respect of others in it’s place to make up for the church’s wroongdoing. And of course, most people know and take for granted the kind of degraded moron David Miscavige is. I cannot imagine what church it is that he believes he represents for the good of all concerned. The man suffers from many MU’s. :)

          • I just realized that I did this course during the fall of 1969 (not 1968). BTW, the opening of the first Celebrity Center on 8th street by Yvonne Gillham happened during the time I was on this course.

          • Blown out – wow! Happened to me too. I now see it as the absence of the “mind-self” and pure awaring.
            After the blown out event the “mind-self” will try to claim its own absence which it usually succeeds in doing. Have a look at

        • Marty, would you also clarify what you meant here: “The training routines that Ron devised, well supervised by those not caught in the rapture/delusion of complex scripture, go a long way in attaining that ability to be clear.” It seems like you’re saying that the more complex LRH “scripture” is delusive, but that doesn’t sound like you.

          • On a comm lag, I think I see what you meant – that some supervisors are making the TRs materials themselves complex with their delusions.

          • martyrathbun09

            The legal definition of the scriptures of Scientology is the written and recorded-spoken words of L. Ron Hubbard on the subjects of Dianetics and Scientology. Of course, many hands over the years were involved in the compilation and editing of those written and recorded spoken words.

            • Yes, I’ve heard that, but where does that the leave us with regard to studying his writings and lectures? I have downloaded earlier editions of books (and lecture transcripts). But I often compare them to the latest basic books editions when something seems off, and commonly find the editing to be much better as regards things like punctuation and paragraphing – and thus making them easier to read and understand.

              • martyrathbun09

                I guess the best advice I can give was covered in this post, http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2013/04/10/why-learn-something-of-quantum-theory/

                • That is great and relevant advice. I had read that post but just now reviewed it again and got the concept even better. Btw, in the earlier book editions there were even inadvertent word changes which in the latest editions have been corrected to the word LRH obviously intended when he either wrote or dictated the manuscript. So, in spite of opinions to the contrary, even those recent editions can be helpful as part of looking at the whole body of work over time, with all the various editions and compilations. Anyway, I really appreciate your knowledgeable overviews on this and other aspects of Scientology.

        • I think this basically falls under “invalidation of gain” which is in itself a suppressive item of some sort that you can be checked for in trying to weed out someone interfering with your progress in Scientology. The irony of course is that there is a whole culture of invalidating gains at the Church. I know in my experience before I had a chance to finish and thoroughly enjoy one action, I would already be regged and pushed into a “ruin” over something else. The dynamic seems to be to keep you in a perpetual “ruin” and inevitably down the tone scale so you always need more Scientology to be fixing something that is wrong with you or with your life. This is of course wrongheaded in my view. Scientology is for making able more able. To me this means that a great many people that have reached out to Scientology did so in an effort to go beyond where they were so the focus should be on moving up from where you are currently not on verbally implanting some problems into one’s universe which one is then supposed to buy more services to fix.

          This culture of “know best” pushing “Scientology” onto others is definitely not limited to confines of the Church, and from what I have seen a great many Scientologists are miserable people because of this. This is easily explained in a reference on Introspection RD under the subject of wrong indicators. Wrong indicators make people miserable, sick, and introverted and can eventually drive someone “over the edge.” Moreover, “know best” Scientology delivery style establishes a dependency on another’s evaluation of you and your life. You are no longer the deciding factor in what YOU need to move up from where you are. I think for some people it even gets to a point where they don’t even know anymore why they got into Scientology or what it is exactly that they are striving for. One just focuses on “going up the Bridge” without much consideration of where that “Bridge” is actually going which as far as the Church is concerned can lead one to bankruptcy, loss of self, and subjugation to someone else’s command.

          • Very good point – and very well expressed. By the way, what does LTC stand for?

            • Look-Think-Communicate – I picked it a while back when I was parting my ways with group suppression at the Church which I saw as imposing the exact opposite of where I was trying to go: not to look, not to think, and not to communicate. :)

    • I’m personally wary of the term “true believer,” which the Urban Dictionary defines as “A person who earnestly believes in something, despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary. Usually used as a derogatory term to imply the lack of critical thinking and/or intelligence on part of the true believer.”

      There are some milder definitions too, but the preceding one is what comes to my mind when I hear “true believer.” I have no objection to someone choosing the term “true believer” — that’s anyone’s choice and I don’t mean to criticize. For me, I’d probably say that I am convinced through experience of the workability of auditing, the power of TRs, the ability of the e-meter to presage what is coming to a PCs mind, and am an advocate and supporter of many, but not all of Hubbard’s ideas.

      In that sense, I have confidence based on experience and observation. But from a skeptic (in the positive sense) view, I am aware there could be alternate explanations for some of the things I experienced or saw.

      Am I a true believer or any sort of believer in LRH the man? No. He was flawed and went down some blind allies. He was not always honest or forthcoming. But he also made some incredible discoveries and made the first massive effort to integrate Western and Eastern thought in a rigorous, detailed, verifiable way. What truly works will stand scrutiny, scientific investigation, and the tests of time. What doesn’t work or was specific to a certain context or point in time should be recognized as such. The very least that LRH did was smash his way into history as he said he would. The very most he did was blazed a trail toward a totally different approach to psychology — in the sense of study of the spirit.

      • FOTF, I was aware of the disparaging connotation that goes along with “true-believer” but I used it in the way that I had found it.

        A better way to say it may be that I believe in LRH because I have personally found that the vast majority of what he wrote is workably true.

        LRH may have been off on some things ( I am not certain) but if he was 90% right and 10% wrong those percentages will work for me. The 90 will take care of the ten.

      • By knowing L. Ron Hubbard’s tech it’s easy to spot the lies people in the church tell to the public, to the staff, to themselves for thrills or evil purposes or to “get in good” with Sea Org members, get invited to dinner at the White House or a whole list of other unreal justifications. Justifications that just don’t justify smearing a decent human being’s (LRH’s) hard won philosophy. And, church members are not lax in their dramatizations. I don’t tell people this often, but one staff member that became OT VIII in the process followed me around for 20 years impersonating an “ethical type person” I might be conned into believing the stories of knowing I wouldn’t recognize him as such, showing up in restaurants and telling me things like the *HE was L. Ron Hubbard’s original student not I*. One day I finally recognized him as this character that kept turning up in my life after he turned up in one too many places too many times with too much say. This is why I say these people are not lax in their insanties. They are deeply immersed in them. My life has been very changed since. I imagine his has too! :) But, in the real world, you really, really, really don’t too often if ever meet anyone going around impersonating a Scientologist, but you can meet members of the church, some very highly trained and audited, like the one mentioned above that can “now do normal things with normal people just like normal people do”. I am sure he told this to his family. And they developed opinions. :)

      • You know I gotta say this, sorry guys.

        I really do wish people would stop saying Hubbard “blazed a trail”, “was the only one”, “the first to integrate…”

        It does two things;

        1. Exposes your ignorance.

        2. Perpetuates a lie and helps keep others ignorant.

        Please in the future preface your statements with “I believe”, “in my opinion” and perhaps “to the best of my knowledge”.

        I have done enough research to know these three things for a fact.

        1. Hubbard was not the first to “integrate” east and west.

        2. He was not the only one to do it in the 20th century.

        3. Hubbard’s “way” is nothing more than his “model” or “map” to his understanding of spiritual or psychological enlightenment. It does not in any way preclude or “codify” the existence of spiritual or psychological enlightenment.

        Enlightenment exists regardless.

        There are plenty of map writers. The best ones help you write your own map. The worst ones tell you not to look at other maps.

        The above are facts and thus I can state them without preface.

        Now I do not know if Hubbard “smashed his way into history”. I know that currently more people have heard of Scientology than they have Hubbard. And of those more people think scientology is a creepy cult than think it might be any improvement on today’s psychology or religion.

        So has Hubbard “smashed his way into history” presently? No. Will he in the future? No idea but I would speculate the odds are very much against him and lay entirely in Marty’s hands if there is any chance.

        FOTF, et all… “True believers” or not… I would suggest it is simply being honest in what you do and say that matters. By honest I mean honest with yourself. Stop saying things that you simply cannot know are true.

        Please.

        For everyone’s sake.

        • Chris do you honestly believe that LRH’s legacy and influence on society lies entirely in the hands of Marty Rathbun?

          Could you consider that it is possible that it may actually rely on the effectiveness of his body of work and what it can do to help the guy on the street live and have a better life?

          LRH stated that he believed that fame was a rock and not any goal of his. I don’t believe LRH sought for himself parades in his honor, gold by the ton, women at every hand, adulation from VIP’s and fame.

          “Smashing his way into history” would have been accomplished by producing something that man could use to better his life.

          Take a look at what is all over television this morning and you will see what LRH was trying to address with all the work he did -Madness in the society.

        • I just have to laugh when I see someone negatively pontificate with utter certainty on something they clearly don’t fully understand and then admonish others for their lack of equivocation. :)

        • Well put!!!!

  4. last year i did trs for 5 days,it was great getting my tro in. i hadnt done trs in 35 years. the trs are quit valuable. the old joke was you open ot 8 pack and it says tro now do it right.

    • I remember that joke, but I heard it this way: there was only one HCOB in the OT VIII pack and it said, “OT TRO to Full EP. Love Ron.” Always made me crack up because it made perfect sense to me!

    • Hey Roger,

      Good to see your post.
      Next time I’m down in NC prospecting, and you’re in the neighborhood, let’s get together.
      Maybe even do some TR’s…
      Love,
      Vic

    • At Flag in the mid-70s we always did a round of TRs 0-4 first thing in the morning each day; all the guys on the auditing internships and those auditing in the HGC. Some of the bull-baiting was brilliant; Amos Jessop was the funniest – he had us all cracking up! It was a pleasant way to start your day, getting comfortably into PT. These days I do yoga instead.

  5. Thank you Marty. We can see how complexity has been intentionally constructed in order to further confuse and entrap, not just within religious avenues but political and educational, etc. While Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard might not be the fad for many any longer, both still easily rest on original integrity and feasibility. IMO

  6. Excellent article, Marty, and I completely agree with you. The Communication Course, in my experience, was invariably a life-changing event for most people, and fuelled their rocket ride upwards, certainly incurring a big dose of loyalty to LRH. Students usually had a breakthrough result: more in valence, able to communicate more clearly, some other life ruin handled. Incredible technology.Often people experienced themselves as separate from their bodies, or exterior – another evolutionary milestone.

    Some people say there’s no such thing as the state of Clear; but I believe that LRH was right about that too. And he didn’t borrow that phrase from somewhere else; that was his original concept, and he deserves enormous credit for postulating that.

    • Robin “Some people say there’s no such thing as the state of Clear” – no Clear ? saying that is a statement an absolute (NO Clear) does exist. Which is funny in this context ;-)

  7. I see. Thanks Marty.

  8. My favorite lecture by LRH. To look in Spanish = mirar, latin root = mirari, indo-european root of mirari = smei*. Some other words with “mirari” as their root are: miracle, marvelous, wonderous, magical, mirror and admiration.
    Discovering this definition and derivation, along with that LRH lecture that I listened to many times, was one of my best moments from the Key to Life course became my stable datum and one reason for my ultimate awareness that DM and others had turned a wonderful tool to help mankind into a trap… again.

  9. Oh, yes, and Smei is the root of smile. I just love that.

  10. Roger From Switzerland Thought

    Amen ! :)

  11. Well, since we’re on the subject I thought I would share something that happened yesterday.
    The following is from someone who stumbled around the Co$ for about four years…getting nowhere:

    TR 0-9 Ability Gained

    “The TRs 0-9 were mind blowing for me. On the surface they seemed like actions that would more or less “teach a lesson.” However, upon really getting into them, an entire new universe opened up–both within and around me. I can see how I–a thetan–have control over “me,” the body. I see how pure intention can overcome MEST and really help to become cause over life. I’d recommend them to anyone.” MJ

    And, for those of you who have had losses on TRs or think they take a long time to get fabulous wins, this from LRH…

    “The basic reason students remain long on courses stems from inept criticism from instructors regarding what is required.”

    Les

    • Beautiful.

    • Les, me and my wife saw your lecture on you tube the other day where you used this quote and talked about the comm course and how the church “managed” to get rid of Auditors.
      I’d like to say that you are so very right.
      And seeing you speaking was a well spent time.
      Love to you.

    • “The basic reason students remain long on courses stems from inept criticism from instructors regarding what is required.”

      Thanks Les. Nothing more unholy than a “course sup” that is there to set people up for losses. Either by brushing off the student’s wins, or by rushing students through without the proper training. Not getting students through the proper check sheets, It is off policy to run “a course” with no check sheet. Forcing out gradients, using “instruction” to harm attack and suppress. Once you set people up for losses on learning about the Scientology so they can not use or apply it you can be assured you will make blow offs .

      “No results” is not just from the auditing. There are people that will make sure they get ‘no results” from training cycles also.

      Is there a supervisor’s code?

    • I was doing TR’s when I was 18 and went exterior for the first time doing TR 0. This never got acknowledged either! :) The course supervisor said “C’mon. Hurry up. You’re taking too long. We need you to graduate tonight!”. Is that allowing a person to have a win is PUSHING them through their course because the org is paying its staff $3.85 a week? It can be hard to have a real win in the church other than the experience of walking out the front door. :) Almost as soon as some of the staff hear of a winning public, they start making plans to pay their electric bills, beginning with security check sales. Security check regging has been going on since the 1970′s hard core. I remember the man in New York that stole my mail from LRH regging me for a Security Check. I thought he was out of his mind. And he was. And to this day he still is. Clears and OT with mental problems is the kind of name people like that give to the words Dianetics and Scientology.

    • Yes, wins on the TRs! Here are two competing views of one thing that I experienced.

      Scientology and spiritual interpretation: I went exterior. I could “rewind” the being I was looking and see their physical appearance from earlier times. I used this in bull-baiting in fact. Here’s a specific case. I “rewound” a woman and saw her clearly as around 10 years old, wearing a very distinctive sweater. I then bull-baited her about the sweater — describing its colors, embroideries, etc. Her reaction? Well, her TR0 definitely went out (my win as a bull-baiter, I guess). She asked me how I could possibly have known about her favorite sweater when she was a girl.

      Tibetan Buddhist interpretation? We all project thought forms and create bodies of thought propensity. In certain states, we feel we should have a form, we postulate it, and there it is. In my bull-baiting scenario I certainly did not time travel or anything. I was just here, looking at the images in the other’s mind, of the other’s creation. I can still do that with certain people when it is safe and I am welcomed to do so. But I am sparing in it as it can rattle people, and it is not totally at will.

      Traditional psychiatric explanation? I dissociated, creating a feeling of being separate from my body. I had visual distortions and hallucinations in a semi-trance state. If I chanced on an image that was something important to the other person, I must have known it already and forgotten it, or it was Folie-a-deux — a hallucination shared by two people, or it was just chance luck. My counterarguments: (1) I had never known this person before, and there was no way I could have known what she wore as her favorite sweater 12 or so years earlier; (2) hardly seems like a shared hallucination — we were both “there” in a very real space and not looking at some external event that we could have jointly misinterpreted or talking about something we somehow collaborated on, persuading ourselves it was a valid perception; and (3) doesn’t seem like luck of the draw — whenever I saw in that special, distinctive way of seeing, and used it in bull-baiting, it turned out to be valid. This is part of why I think LRH got so down on materialistic psychology — the invalidation of spiritual experience and gnostic ways of knowing through direct observation and experience.

      So what did the TRs do for me? They opened up some doors of perception that have not closed since. Here is one of the many ways in which my experience in Scientology aligns with Scientology (and some Buddhist philosophy) and is very much in conflict with certain schools of psychology — but to be fair, psychology is not a homogenous, monolithic field. There are various schools, theories, and practices, and some of them are not at all inconsistent with some Scientology principles (in my opinion).

      So I would love it to open an OT VIII folder and see that direction of “Do OT0 to full EP”!

  12. My first experiences with T/R’s had me full exterior watching myself and my twin doing zero. I was sold then and there.

    Nice Reference

    • Same here – the old “rough, tough” Comm Course of the early ’70s, which was in fact simplicity itself. I was heartbroken when it was replaced by the watered-down Success Through Communication course.

      • So true. A great example of “if it isn’t broke, don’t fix it”. The Comm Course of the late 60s & 70s was “simplicity itself”. It was the utter simplicity, the absolute basics of existence, starting with “confront”and building on that, that made me realize from Day One that I had found something of pure gold when I discovered Scientology.

        Then there was the “blinkless TR0″ that was introduced by LRH in 1971. Why? Go figure. He did it right in the midst of the biggest boom Scientology ever had. It was a disaster. People blew by the thousands.

        But later that year, it was obvious to him that it was not working, and the Comm Course reverted to what it had been earlier, and remained so for most of the 70s.

        Then came “Success Through Communication”. When I read the booklet, I wondered why LRH was introducing all this complexity into the TRs?

        But “Success Through Communication” was only the beginning of a lot of fiddling around with the entrance to the bridge, almost all of which was a solution to the insane price increases that he (LRH) also introduced.

        So much of the current troubles of Scientology trace back to fundamental errors stemming from the top. It is too bad there seems to be no recognition that the Conditions apply to management from the top down. Instead what we see, year after year, is that management apparently subscribes to that most basic of all mistakes, which is to assign source and responsibility to someone – anyone – besides self.

        An assured route to self-destruction.

  13. The Communication Course (HAS, Hubbard Apprentice Scientologist Course) and the Professional TR’s Course, were my first Scientology services. They were very well taught and done the hard way. I considered from then on, that Scientology was the art, science, and skill of Communication. I still consider that to be true, only to be expanded by the definition of “the science of knowing how to know”.

    That is the main reason I considered DISCONNECTION to be so evil. It is the opposite of COMMUNICATION, and creates a dichotomy within the Church. Those who are supposed to be dedicated to resoving problems with Communication are now dedicated to cutting communication lines with Disconnection. How ridiculous! All that is occurring there is: they are shutting off more and more people from the fruits of communication, (for them, that appears to be money), and alienating more and more people, to the point where there are more “DISCONNECTED’S” (those who are shunned} than there are active public. The powers that be have cut their own observation down to the point that they can’t even SEE, BY THE PROCESS OF LOOKING, that their numbers are dwindling more and more. They are cutting off their nose to spite their face!

    I had a big realization this morning that I am truly free to communicate Scientology to the public as I wish; free of all the rules, regulations, restrictions, and fees that I used to subscribe to, that became suppressive to the use of this most wonderful technology. I recently started a consulting business after deciding that it is time to disseminate Scientology as a professional, instead of only as a voluntary service at no charge, as I had been doing all these years. It is truly amazing the results that can be obtained in people’s lives and businesses when they receive pure, unadulterated Scientology principles! It is so much fun and very gratifying to watch this process of change in people. I am convinced this is the way to get Scientology to the public, one person at time, delivered by independent practictioners, who hold themselves to a high standard of delivery, because they WANT to provide a good service that is valuable to the public.

    Thank you Marty and Monique, for making it easier to free myself of the mental shackles that bound me, and made me feel guilty about using Scientology in the manner that I do now. This has been a very long term goal of mine, and you have my undying gratitude for creating an atmosphere and community within which Scientology can be practiced the way that it was meant to be — in FREEDOM!

    • Well done, Lady Min. And your actions are fully authorized by “Special Zone Plan” and “What We Expect of a Scientologist”. Enjoy!

      • Thank you, Graduated. I really needed that acknowledgement! I appreciate the references, too! I love this state of complete fluidity with which I view the philosophy of Scientology, now. Maybe LRH was right, there comes a point where the subject runs itself out. It is almost like all the bad things that happened are erased, and what it left is just the pure joy of creating with the “infrastructure” that Scientology gave to my life and viewpoint!

  14. Excuse me Marty, but I thought you might not be aware of this and you would want to be. Didn’t know how else to get it to you.

    http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/technolog/wordpress-accounts-are-under-botnet-attack-1C9342312

  15. I once asked Dan Koon about his pre-Scientology experiences with meditation. He informed me that (paraphrasing), one can get a bigger win and/or better results from simply doing OT TR 0 and (I believe he might’ve said), TR 0.

    Dan is one cool dude and he was (literally), the poster boy for TR’s, coached by LRH himself.

    Dan, if you’d care to swoop in with the assist here and clarify….

  16. gretchen dewire

    When I meditate, I am the silent watcher. Things role through my mind. There is no involvement. There is no judgement, just looking. I try to carry the serenity of this throughout my day.I did some trs when connected to the church and I feel kind of cheated because I could noy stand up to the constant reging and all the other time consuming crap that went on, so I left. Most of you here on Martys blog and especially Marty are so far ahead of me in understanding, but reading this blog has helped me tremendiously in straightening out a lot of confusion concerning scientology and my life. Ever grateful Gretchen

  17. It’s my own reality that the extensive TRs training I did has done more for me than the Grade Chart I received all the way up to OTIV. That’s not to make less of the auditing, that is to say how remarkable the TRs are when they are taught and learned correctly.

    My observation of the horrible comm cycles of staff at the int base (getting worse as the years went by) helped me see that something was dreadfully wrong. I would have accepted these communication “habits” if I hadn’t learned what proper communication really felt like and the good effects it has on others.

    It also sometimes kept me free of verbal and physical abuse. If someone comes at you yelling and screaming about how your work is overdue and you’re really nothing but an unwilling and uncooperative jerk, some self-control can get it to shut up a lot quicker vs. enflaming the situation even more.

    There were times when I witnessed Miscavige absolutely butcher the concept of communication. I didn’t actually physically see him that often due to where I worked. At the time I (as well as most others) thought he was trained to the highest levels–who would atttempt to edit LRH’s works if they weren’t? But after I witnessed a few stellar inabiilities on his part I wondered who in the world graduated him on his way up the training classes. They must’ve been idiots.

    Turns out it was no one! He never completed one of the first major steps of the training! And with proper TRs being the very first thing anyone should learn about Scientology, (but doesn’t anymore) nothing I saw was surprising anymore. And he made it to the top–not by learning and using executive and “people” skills, but by sheer fear and bullying.

    I hope this might clue in anyone on the fence to use what they know about the very basic things of Scientology, and notice that they are not around anymore in the C of $! And look what’s happened.

    • gato rojo,
      Thank you for the post with your first hand observations about
      miscavige. When I met him on the Freewinds in 1989, I noticed
      the flaws in his communications skills. When he did the interview
      with Ted Koppel on Nightline, he was asserting his own view but
      did not really answer any questions.
      George M. White

      • DM is confronting VIA his entourage who is around him!
        Imagine if he wouldn’t have these conditioned staff shielding him, and he would be somewhere in a different environment all by himself. Yes, he draws his authority from LRH – without it, he would crumble and be what he really is… .
        One of the reasons (when not even the main reason) why he has always a crowd around him, who is always ready to attack and punish with their cold-chrome-steel attitude on their master’s hint, is because he cannot confront people. And … he doesn’t want to be confronted – thus the “shield”.
        He also cannot grant beingness, and such persons have mostly no good comm cycle.

        • KA,
          Yes, that was my experience on the Freewinds when I met him. He
          was unwilling to confront me.
          I consider miscavige the 50/50 person – He gets 50% of his
          inspiration from LRH. He gets 50% from his selfish cunning.
          George M. White

          • To KA an George M, I say Here Here! Very good observations. Good on ya and anyone else for *Looking* and having the integrity to know what you did see.

            • George and gato rojo – I was staff on the Freewinds from the beginning till I left (till I was released) in1999. I didn’t realize it then (only felt that something was odd) but only with hindsight when being out of the mind control, recovered and in valence again and when recalling situations, reading/hearing reports from others who were in. Then I could connect the dots after a so to say very intensive “post-looking”!
              I remember specifically one incident on the promenade deck when one of DM’s bodyguards (who by the way was a former staff from the Ship and knew me well) shooed me away to shield Miscavige (he demonstrated this quiet physically), so I wouldn’t enter his sacred sphere. This was so ridicules as I was working in the “Sky Lounge”- it was my workplace since years. – Karola

  18. This is brilliant, Marty. I love this post of yours. Doing TRs have been the most beneficial actions I have ever done on the Bridge. Doing TRs changed my entire life. I love doing them and I love what they do for me.

  19. Thank for another great article. I feel that the TRs are great when done per LRH instructions. With simplicity toward lively and natural communication. The person ends up with the ability to communicate.

    When done dm style, the person ends up a frozen face robot that pisses off anybody talking to him.

  20. I agree, beautiful Post, Look don’t Listen is a good advice from our Friend.
    Ciao Marty.
    Francesco Minelli

  21. Excellent!

    We are talking about one of my favorite things here.

    The first thing that I did in Scientology was the Comm Course. The second thing I did in Scientology was TRs 6 t0 9. The third thing that I did in Scientology was to supervise the Comm Course.

    Over the years my concepts for each of the TRs have become more and more simple, and I found I could get better and better results on them as a student, and in helping others achieve quicker and better results as a coach, and as a supervisor.

    Here is an example of how valuable we considered TRs in the early days in our Mission.

    When a student was on the Comm Course (TRs 0 to 4) we would address any concerns that they had in their lives with either the TR that they were currently on, or TRs that they had previously done. Marital upset, trouble with job interviews, lack of friends, “stage fright,” shyness, having trouble being understood, not feeling comfortable in groups…. you name it…. we would use the TRs to help them with it… And not the NEXT TR…. We only used the ones they were on, or had done. (and kept them advancing so we would have more tools.) We were using the very tools that we were training them on, to handle their lives. It was a very powerful combination.

    The emphasis was TOTALLY that –THESE TOOLS ARE FOR USE! Each and every one of them can be used to help handle the things one wants to handle in one’s life.

    Every day, before we got into the drills the supervisor would ask each student for examples of how they had used their TRs since their last time on course. We would often spend a half hour or so on this. It was considered important! We were dedicated to getting the students to becoming more proficient in the use of the tools they were learning.

    So, I guess one could say that I find some value in the TRs.

    Eric

  22. I love the way you cut to the chase.
    Great post, Marty.

    “…the road out is marked by simplicity and direct observation…”
    Yes, indeed.

  23. Marty,

    Great post as usual.

    After reading through the post and the comments I had two thoughts (one dovetails into the other) to share on this.

    The orgs don’t currently deliver ‘standard tech’ on TRs anymore and haven’t for a very long time. From things I’ve read, back in the ’70s one got ‘real’ TRs, ‘the hard way’ from the start on the HQS course. Now one gets a lot of watered down TRs and when you finally get to the “Pro TRs” course you’re put through the clay table auditing first.

    Now back in the 80s when I did the first Pro TRs course, the clay table wasn’t there yet. Despite seeing the film and the book he carried around (which when it came out was clear was the clay table processing book for the TRs) instead people all clay demo-ed the entire chapter on communication from Dianetics 55.

    When the ‘new’ course came out with the clay table auditing people then would twin up and do the clay table. With very little training on clay table procedure, as layed out in the HCOBs on the subject.

    There was no checking to see if the item was even charged. For me personally, it meant I was overrun on this clay table process from the get go.

    Your earlier posts on Black Dianetics and overrun quickly came to mind, except now, you have CLAY running this into your case.

    Talk about a real solid overrun.

    Personally I recall going exterior with some perception when I first did OT TR0. It actually scared me a bit; despite that gain being what got me into Scientology in the first place! It was never really taken up and I vaguely recall needing the first INT Rundown shortly thereafter.

    I recall reading your post on the handout you give out at Casablanca for doing the TRs and thinking, “Man! I wish I’d done them that way!”

    JTG

    • martyrathbun09

      JTG,
      Thanks. I had a similar experience. Originally did 0-9 to high standards, with exteriorization on TR 0, in late seventies. Did PRO TRs course in 95 – clay, for me, was unecessary. I now take folk straight to 0-9 to high standards – with minimal via or complication. I’ve heard some people had wonderful experience with clay – so more power to folks who go that route.

    • I did TRs the same way you describe including clay demo-ing the entire chapter on communication from Dianetics 55. That was an enlightening action in itself. Exteriorizated on OTTRO, also. Worked up the gradient to 2 hours blinkless. Did the mood TRs and 50 ft mood TRs. Became a very good coach and had good coaching in return. Never did clay table auditing. Great wins. So this way worked great for me. too.

    • JTG! Wow, We must be related! Good to see you.

  24. Yep, yep and yep. (BTW, LRH developed the clay table processes for the course and I piloted them for him. All the pilot pcs, did great on them and said they really helped.)

    • Dan, I have a question as you’ve been in the compilations unit.
      In HCOB 24 DEC 1979R (rev. 19 JUN 1986) “TRs BASICS RESURRECTED”
      LRH says: “The result of this past year’s study and piloting and the isolation of these factors has now culminated in a full and final TRs course which will be issued very soon in unalterable book form.”

      Can you give any insight as to what happened to this project?
      Was it finished? Or was there a substitute for it?

      Thank you in advance for any data on this.

  25. I like your quote from L. Ron Hubbard about simplicity:
    “By the attainment of a simplicity, we accomplish a benefit. By the invitation of or involvement in a complexity, we accomplish the unfathomable and create a mystery. We sink Man into a priesthood, we sink him into a cult.”
    And, as you rightfully note, Taoists had a similar view more than two millennia ago.

    John Maeda, a Japanese-American world-renowned graphic designer, MIT professor of computer science, and current President of the Rhode Island School of Design has done some interesting work on simplicity. In 1999, he was named one of the 21 most important people in the 21st century by Esquire.

    He has published “Laws of Simplicity”, a book based on a research project to find ways for people to simplify their life in the face of growing complexity.
    In this book, he proposes ten laws for simplifying complex systems in business and mostly in design, but I find his laws eminently applicable to life.

    His 10 laws are:
    Law 1: Reduce: The simplest way to achieve simplicity is through thoughtful reduction
    Law 2: Organize: Organization makes a system of many appear fewer
    Law 3: Tim: Savings in time feel like simplicity
    Law 4: Learn: Knowledge makes everything simpler
    Law 5: Differences: Simplicity and complexity need each other
    Law 6: Context: What lies in the periphery of simplicity is definitely not peripheral
    Law 7: Emotion: More emotions are better than less
    Law 8: Trust: In simplicity we trust
    Law 9: Failure: Some things can never be made simple
    Law 10: The One: Simplicity is about subtracting the obvious, and adding the meaningful.
    Even though he is not primarily a religious or spiritual person, he taps into some very fundamental dimensions.

    Last but not least, I’d like to share two of my favorite quotes on simplicity:
    • “If you can’t explain it to a six year old, you don’t understand it yourself.” – Albert Einstein
    • “Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” – Leonardo Da Vinci

    Love to you all

  26. Well stated!

  27. Hey Marty, something you might be interested in for a laugh: from the Puget Sound Business Journal (THE business journal for Seattle and vicinity) Mar 9-April 4, 2013 issue, page 23: “Federal Tax Liens, document #20130225000300, 2/25/13: TASC, Technical and Assembly Service, 9211 Aurora Ave N. Suite 107, Seattle 98103, $88,778 (941 tax). ”
    This company is owned by none other than the guy on your right side as you’re looking out the door on the book cover above.

  28. John Travolta adds to this thread. On looking:

  29. “The actual mechanics of training or the mechanics of auditing became more important than getting results. Again, the ritual became more important than substance. I see that a great deal in TRs recently. Over the years they became rote, they became mechanical, they became ritualistic. The ritual was more important than the original purpose and intention of the TRs, which was breaking the components of an auditing session down into manageable, trainable and learnable steps. It taught you to audit bit-by-bit, piece-by-piece in a relaxed normal manner and atmosphere. But I see that what has happened over the last several years… it has been turning out robots, making you mechanical, ritualistic. The substance has been lost. And I would imagine in just a few more years the actual true meaning and purpose and reason for the TRs will be completely lost. People will be running the TRs as a religious ritual and not know at all what the hell was behind it at all or what the purpose was, but they do know they’re supposed to do it. And it will turn itself into a highly stylized dance. People will be graded on how well they do the dance and not graded at all on its purpose or reason.

    Another way to say it is… is that the theta has been removed from the TRs, it’s that simple. One of the goals could be (and should be I think) in Scientology in general is to get theta back into Scientology. One of the things I’m certain you’ve heard a great deal of is “Don’t demonstrate Clear or OT abilities because it might compromise, damage, hurt someone else’s reality” … Bullshit! The reason Dad put that in in the mid-fifties was simply because he did not want those abilities demonstrated – again “terminal of comparable magnitude” stuff. The actual fact of the matter, if you will look at things historically and in actual MEST universe fact, is that a student should always be superior to the teacher. That is, a teacher should do such a good job that his students, as time and events proceed down the time track, become greater than the teacher. If that rule is applied then this promotes growth, expansion and research, and of course, benefit and result. A teacher should promote growth and the cutting of the apron strings so that they can go out and do bigger and better things. An organization should exist only to serve the membership, not the other way around. The rule should be that the organization or any organization should promote and ensure and help the success of its members, not itself.”
    L. Ron Hubbard Jnr (Nibs).

    • Oh and the source:
      “TRANSCRIPT OF TAPE #1 OF JUNE 28, 1984 – RON DEWOLF

      Side 1

      Thursday, June 29th, 1984. This tape is not copyrighted, it is not patented, and it is not trademarked. You are free to use this information or this tape in any way that you please. Freedom and independence is what it is all about now, and you therefore may exercise your own prerogatives regarding this tape. I will however simply state that it is true and factual and as so many other people have done in the past you will find that your own reality, your own perception and your own awarenesses over the years will prove what I am talking about in this tape as true. If I had a penny for every time I have told someone “I told you so” then I would be a millionaire by now. You will also find as time goes on here that other sources, records, documents, court cases, papers, and affidavits and testimony from literally scores if not hundreds of people will verify and substantiate what I am talking about and possibly will give you some idea as to why there has been a quarter-century campaign to keep me quiet and to keep me contained. A campaign which has proven so far to be highly unsuccessful and will continue to fail. The truth will set you free and that is the basic stable datum this tape is based on.

      My name is Ron DeWolf, I live at 1401 East Long Street, Apartment 101, Carson City, Nevada 89701. My telephone number is: (702) 883-6738. I was formerly known as L. Ron Hubbard, Jr. or by the nickname, Nibs. I am L. Ron Hubbard’s oldest son and by his first marriage – one of three – and I was rather deeply involved in the formation of the beginning organizations of Scientology and tech from 1950 to November 23rd, 1959, when I left the organization.”

  30. TRs were done the hard way when I joined the Sea Org back in 1972 and produced tremendous gains – 2 hours of blinkless TR0 was required for a pass. Later the requirement was eased and people got into things like rehabbing overruns. The blinkless requirement was removed. However LRH did say in HCOB CANCELLATION OF DESTRUCTIVE BTBS AND BPLS ON TRS4 HCOB 23.9.79

    “Nor do you do “pat-a-cake” TRs and you never pass someone who makes reactive body motions. Get the student able to confront. Any good auditor or Scientologist takes this ability for granted.
    Totally blinkless wide open staring-eyed TR0 and TR 0 Bullbait are not a requirement for pass but any truly competent auditor can do it. ”

    Unfortunately I don’t have the LRH reference but recall him saying that you could have someone read the Clearing Course materials and then sit them down and have them do TR0 and they would go Clear but it would be a rough ride. I think it was on one of the video tapes that were on the original Clearing Course.

    I find as an auditor that the more people want complex significant solutions to their cases the less they are willing to confront.

    LRH says in C/S series 6 that the action of the C/S is the reduction of forces. The PC continually dives into the significance.

    • I had someone come by here and decide my two kids aged 13 who have taken no drugs who were on an auditing program already, be taken off the auditing side bridge, they were on cch’s, and put on hard tr’s. I disagreed and bought a basic communications course course pack (success through communication, with check sheet for them to do) Some weeks later after one became so over restimulated it turned into a real scene, found out he had them on bullbaiting for hours upon hours doing “hard tr’s”, no check sheet and they had not even been passed on ottro or tro. All he could do was cling to one policy letter about tr’s being part of the bridge. The kids were blown off the bridge and totally over restimulated. I had to get an auditor here to do a repair on both. They had made originations about having wins and when I bought it up to the guy he said he thought they were “glib” so he didn’t acknowledge it. What a mess!

      I think you have to have enough common sense to parallel someone’s mind with the tech and set people up for wins. I went up the bridge through clear and I started the end of 1972 myself, doing tr’s to a “major stable win”. And I was a signed sealed delivered drug case. In fact, I was high when I signed up for HQS.

      This idea someone must “pass” something to be a “bonafide product” for THE CHURCH, without regard as to whenether the person is being set up for HUGE losses is as looney as it gets.

      If you can cross midtown traffic in Manhattan to get to the Org you can face the person in front of you once you get into the Org.

      I knew of people who finished the pro tr’s course (I did it myself much later)
      who stood by and permitted themselves to be abused physically and in other ways and did not fight back. Do you know how easy it is to do NOTHING but BE THERE and face someone for two hours with out blinking?

      You are NOT doing NOTHING when you are auditing!

      I think the whole “two hours of blinkless tr’s” is one of the most misapplied misunderstood over rated bullshit traditions in the Church. A dead man can do two hours of blinkless tr’s. I’m up there competing with the skills of a dead body and that is making me an OT?

      Hubbard wrote about this being for HEAVY drug cases. NOT CLEARS and KIDS! I was a CLEAR and in the non interference zone when I was sold the course at Flag.

      The “course supervisor” insisting my kids do this couldn’t even confront getting them through the lower tr’s first or getting the kids on a standard check sheet! Or anyone here through a check sheet!

      Sorry if anyone offended by the rant. That’s how I feel about it. Look at all the people on lines that have done pro tr’s that will NOT confront the current condition of the Church and their “leader” Quack Quack!

      • To illustrate: Have you seen anyone setting up a hard tr’s center?

        If I went out on the street next week and opened a corner shop, hung a sign outside that read:

        “$4,000.00 only to come in here and sit staring at someone without blinking until you can do it for two hours! Only $4,000.00! Several blinkless tr’s..learn how to sit and do nothing! Two week estimate part time to complete!”

        I mean, it’s a great gig if you can get people to do that! Pay that kind of money to sit still for all of that time. While you watch them. Especially with Skype, laptops and audio books available now to play with while that is going on in the background!

        • The “bullbaiting” tr bred some sick culture. Like an exec at Int standing there while someone bent her finger back and tried to break it. I guess she put her “tr bullbait” tr’s in? Do you honestly think it is sane to stand there and DO NOTHING when someone is bending your finger back and trying to break it? That is NOT sane. Stand in a trash can while people slap you and do NOTHING? Some people took this a little too far. Really confronting someone who slaps you is to knock them across the room so they don’t come back on you until you summon them.

          • There is a MAJOR tr that is MISSING on tr’s course. It’s the “restimulate someone else at cause” TR.

            You get someone in Scientology and you hear this stuff like “Don’t watch television, it’s restimunlative”. “Don’t talk to people that are antago, it’s restimulative”. “Don’t go here, don’t read books don’t do this don’t do that it’s restimulative”

            Well hell! What do P.C.’s pay the Church for? To restimulate them in session so they can confront some part of their case! People PAY to get restimulated.

            Sure! You get keyed out in a session! AFTER the auditors KEYS you in!

            But nobody ever talks about this.

            Clearing someone is just having them do a contact assist with the bank until they clear from it!

            P.C.’s pay to get restimulated!

            But this obvious way of healing never gets addressed like this. It’s like people don’t even want to admit the auditor is a paid restimulator!

            Well you are not going to get anything out of a session until Mr. Holy sitting across from you looks at you and intentionally restimulates you!

            But the entire culture is on some kind of deny trip about the restimulation burden and who is doing it and causing it.

            The Church is one big restimulator. If nobody gets restimulated nobodies case can get addressed.

            Yet you walk into the Church and it is presented as “safe space with no enturbulation no distractions that is all keyed out where the only purpose is to key people out”.

            Uh…no! Nobody is going to get keyed out until they get get keyed in first or restimulated first.

            If before the start of session the auditor said, “Is it O.K. if restimulate you now now we can plow through some of your fucking case’? Instead of, “Ahem..is it O.K. if I audit you?” Things might have kept moving along.

            It’s like this big with hold!

            Where is it in the training routines? “Get comfortable restimulating someone else and owning it”.

            • Don’y you think if everyone had done this tr, there wouldn’t be such a HUGE not is on this massive ARCXen field?

              Do you see the Church taking any responsibility for the people over on ESMB?

              How are you going to clear a planet if you can’t own that you are going to have to restimulate the hell out of everyone on it?

              • Lastly, while auditing on solo nots I personally discovered every part of “case” I handled there was with someone I needed to do a contact assist with. personally. Either for them, or for me.

                I have found all clearing is done through simple contact assist.

                You know who DOES restimulate at cause? David Miscavige, the regges, the OSA staff and others as well. There are people that restimulate willingly and intentionally. Sociopaths. And the people who can not incorporate this into positive and negative contexts and action go the effect of it.

                • Yes, good points. All that you said.

                  I could had helped a friend more just by chatting with him than through restimulating him to make thim ‘realise’ that restimulation is real :P

                  Unless you got some really good dough in store and get audited fast, you’ll be hearing over and over how dangerous-restimulative the environment is and how bad and crazy (out-ethics and keyed-in) you are, untill you thoroughly believe it.

                  • Anyway, this is long gone for me. Why am I talking about it? It’s your fault for restimulating me :P :P :P

                    • I didn’t get the view of this restimulation process until I was on the Hubbard Personal Ethics and Integrity Course and doing the practical of writing all overt and with holds on all dynamics. On the seventh dynamic the overts I wrote were the times I had restimulated others. It came up as the “why” on why I didn’t want to audit other people. I didn’t want to restimulate other people.

                      But this is when case rules! When you are so afraid of it, you walk around it like a land mine. It is one thing to overcome your own case. When you then permit yourself to be ruled by other’s case because you “don’t want to stir it up” , you fall into another situation of being dominated by case.

                      Not everyone has the same reason for having case. For some people case is a an operating tool. For others it is a ser fac. We are constantly taught “not to upset” other people. “Not to be a disturbance” “Theta only” “Nothing negative” . The WHY on why “children should be seen and not heard”. You hear negative reports like, “He drove her crazy” . Even in Dianetics Hubbard admits people can die from a broken heart. If you do false data stripping on this, just write down all of the rumors and taboo and warnings you have heard about “upsetting or disturbing others”, you can fly through reams of papers!

                      I think this is why the auditors really shine as the products of Scientology and why it is “50%” of the bridge. Not to suggest there are not a few who are trained and have no idea what they are doing. Once you handle your case, reach out and start doing contact assists with other people’s case, you can create and hold space for yourself that you are in command of. The purpose of the tr’s as far as I can tell, is just to get you up to being able to be cause over another person and their case.

                      There are MANY people in this world already that have to do this as part of their daily routine! And they are successful at it! It’s called “social intercourse”.

                    • Oracle: But this is when case rules! When you are so afraid of it, you walk around it like a land mine. It is one thing to overcome your own case. When you then permit yourself to be ruled by other’s case because you “don’t want to stir it up” , you fall into another situation of being dominated by case.

                      Spyros: Yes, this is the dark side of this force. In my opinion, any case is to be restimulated just to be handled. In other words….just have a case during auditing. According to the DMSMH point of view the restimulation was an automaticity, out of the person’s control. But times changed and LRH stated other things too, like that quote from the AP&A below.

                      I would instist that one has a case, if I wanted to reduce him, not help him. If I wanted to help I would tell him to put it there, so we can run it out. Basides, all cases are lies, by definition. This tactic of pointing out subconscious abberations to ‘help’ actually, reminds me of psychosciences. I would say, let grand beingness, to ourselves at first, then to ‘others’. :)

                    • Exactly! Do you know why people are so afraid of Sea Org members? They don’t want to “stir up their case”. I mean, you can see they are totally keyed in already. Like, GONE! You get the feeling if you push them into it one more inch they are going to fizzle out like the wicked witch of the west in the Wizard of Oz film. It is obvious they are keyed in, look at their faces.

                      I was in the Sea Org and I saw how keyed in they were. Up at the top the leader is beating people, stuffing them in trailers and vaults (his wife, who he will not divorce because then he would have to share his financials) . The people of WACO Texas had it better. Until the end.

                      Jenny Linson and Laurie Webster were walking computing psychotics. Both heavily into sadism. They really seethed with it. Some kind of robotic killer run over dead bodies automaticity and it was obvious there was “nobody home”. The lights weren’t even on.

                      Even people just coming in to Scientology are up to “need of change”. When you have someone that has been in and is an “OT” or Sea Org Member, that is so far below “need of change” they are into “sadism” , you are looking at people that went SOUTH in that movement for whatever reason. AND dragged other with them or tried to.

                      There is some spooky shit going on in the movement. People get restimulated just knowing they are going to have to know, to get through. All kinds of madness gets going.

                      If people know they have to restimulate to destimulate, it is more understandable. But some people get restimulated and it was just a little bit more than some of us thought possible. Or anticipated, because you think intelligent and knowing people will be the only ones attracted into the theater.

                      It’s like showing up for one of these honorary “tree plantings” with a shovel. There is the dignitary, or president, and he has his shovel, and he is with the new ally, and this ceremony of ground breaking is supposed to be a SOLUTION and the beginning of newly created tomorrow, and the whole world is happy. And he puts the shovel in the dirt and much to everyone’s dismay, he hits some rock or tree root and the whole “solution” turns into some fucking nightmare. It turns out to be some poltergeist ancient Indian burial ground and all kinds of shit you never thought possible comes spewing up and it turns into a horror movie.

                      And you there eating popcorn watching this thinking, WTF???????

                    • And you know, we go along and think we are on the same page with others in this Scientology group, because it was all set up so everyone could be on the same page.

                      But there are people that turned the pages so we all wound up on different pages! This was not supposed to be an adventure that you have to walk through all alone. But it goes that way. Just like all of the other adventures. You stand one day and say, I am better all alone.

                      And when you start to believe again, you realize you have been lonely too long. There is a balance you have to master. You just have to be comfortable in both places. Alone and not. You never think you have been lonely too long, until a good hearted terminal comes along. There are always good hearted terminals. Like those gas stations you find when you are about out of gas.

                      The difference between us, and the bible thumpers and fanatics and ronbots or whatever and however they classify “running with the herd”, Is that we can carry ourselves, until we find a higher reason, before we admit we have been lonely too long.

                      But even then, we can admit, only the lonely can play. I don’t know how to translate this to a group, to say that in Scientology, although it is organized as a group, you really are not in the game unless you are a lonely.

                      Everything is some backwards puzzle I still can not translate.

                    • Oracle, LOL for the poltergeist example and LOLer for the movie trailer. I had never seen it before.

                      I’ve never joined the SO myself, so, I don’t know what goes on, first hand. But because I co-operated with some SO people during my being on staff, I figured out that they must be under some great pressure. No-time-left, and obedience to authority, and guilts if something goes wrong…I don’t know how this stuff relate to what I have read in SCN. Nor do I think that one needs to suffer to help the world –what were we, christians?

                      I think in one way or another SCN has attracted actual SPs, and those SPs aren’t usually the ones who get declared, but those who rule and declare others. I know this is a generality, but it’s all I’m willing to tamper with right now. Where have those people read in SCN that it is good and ethical to to impose ethics on others. If I’m not mistaken, ethics was self-determined (in contrast to morals) in the HPV&I course.

                      One enters SCN to become sort of a Jedi and is liable to wind up being a clone in a Sith corps. Now, whether it is a corps or a elite corps or some other kind, it really doesn’t matter.

                      I used to be lonely too, as I had all my SCN friends (and more) turn against or ignore me because I was no longer approved by their always-right masters. For long years betrayal and distrust was my most obvious charge. I no longer make such friends (that seek to be other determined) so, I have solved this issue, and I’m not lonely. Actually, I’m glad to be out of that Church.

          • OracleM, bending someone’s finger back and making someone stand in a trash can whiile people slap you are not TRO-Bullbait.

        • It was GBP 5 back in 1971. It was blinkless TRs for public too. Being forced or coerced into doing TRs on other determinism is a violation of the basic principles of Scientology.

      • Sorry typo, I meant kids who have taken NO drugs.

      • I’m still line charging over your letting us know that you were high when you signed up for HQS!

        I think it’s restimulating “similar overts of my own”!!

        No one told me drugs were a no-no for some time after I got in. I was “shocked, shocked” when I found out . . .

    • Yes, I did 2 hours of blinkless twice back in the day. It definitely classifies as an ordeal. A 2 hour confront is almost like running a marathon.

  31. When I was on my levels, I did a round of 0-4 every day in the morning, before commencing back on with the checksheet. It was great.

    The TRs properly and fully done is not much different from Tone 40 and the top of the scale.

    • Jesus. Just re-read the HCOB regards the com course. Ron just put the process of living (communication) in a rather simplistic, intersting, and doable write-up. It was “interesting” to read his thoughts on this and his breakdown of the components. I was a journalist at the time, working an “expose” at the time and was rather “fixed” on how I would nail this. However I became interested in the philosophy regarding Hubbards thoughts on communication “as the universal solvent”. I abandoned my current project, got the “ok” from the GO to do the Com Course, as there were some “drills” I could do to verify/validate Hubbard’s ideas as broken down, simply, in that bulletin. I did that course in 1975, and it changed my life. I mean, to this day, I still have so much appreaciation for Ron giving me the simplicity but heretofore, ignorance/avoidance of such a simple but (IMO) most important of human interaction on ALL levels. Sheesh. I didn’t go exterior{as far as I know}, but as an attestation of the benefits of studying/drilling Ron’s thoughts on Communication, my friends, family, professors, and newly made friends all commented on the change in me. I wasn’t a “non-communicater” per se, (Senior class president, number 1 on golf team, etc.) but they made comment how I was so much “easier and more comfortable” to talk to. Even my dad, who hated my involment in Scientology, stopped me one day and said ” I think Hubbard is just in this for the money and “I think we should hang him by his balls” but you have changed in away I appreaciate. You are so much more able to talk with me and if what you are doing with Hubbard results in our ability to talk like we have this weekend, I guess, I am all for it, But don’t ask me for money”.
      Anyway, Marty et al, the Com Course, “the hubbard way” was a course that changed my life. I just retired as a long time senior manager of the largest Aerospace outfit in the world and I, having had to attend, study then train my staff(s), my most beneficial/productive training in holding and expanding that positon was that basic course done in 1975.

      • Steve, thank you for telling us this. I loved it! Especially the part about your Dad! Great Win! Well done, too, on using the TR’s tech in the aerospace industry! It made me realize how valuable the TR’s are in training others!

      • That’s a wonderful story. Thanks so much for posting.

  32. 40 years ago I approached Scientology with the total intention of bettering myself. TRs through TR9 were tremendous steps on the road to Clear for me. I’d have to say the Training Routines are the best gift I’ve ever given myself.

  33. I did the TR0 to 4 in 1976. On the communication course. TR0 2 hours without blink to exterior. After that I had to do many TR drilling on my auditor training. This did not add a „better exterior“ or a better „no blink“ to it. This is also a type of going more complex. If done TRO do EP thats it. But then you have to do TR0 every day. Or do a Super Pro TR course. Or whatever.
    Maybe I forgot it, but as far as I can remember we did not do OT TR0. Fresh from the street. Some instructions reading. Sitting on a chair. Supervisor say „start“ and after 2 hours say „stop“. No gradient. Tough. After 4 days I made it. This had been the toughest thing I did in Scientology.

  34. TRs are definetely one of the major tools in increasing ones abilities.
    When I joined in 74 in Italy there was nothing BUT TRs !!!
    Problem was the translation of materiel and so what was available were ONLY Trs 0-4 and Trs 6-9 (Upper Indoc) for a FEW YEARs and this was “Scientology” for us – and every staff in the morning was doing TRs.
    I was supervising them and after going tru some “fog” I totally understood what LRH meant and wanted from them.
    The results on people were just amazing and they were the basis for the enormous expansion that Scientology had in Italy in mid late 70.
    I personally did hundreds of hours of TR0 up to “exterior full perceptions” …. of course not stable. But the releif, the releases and the ability gained were gigantic.
    So Yes I agree, they are a MAJOR factor in the attainement of Clear.

  35. Pretty sure most of the field have not seen this HCOB.
    You probably have NOT read it.
    Why did LRH call it “OT” TR 0?
    Note the differentiation in OT TR0 THEORY and HISTORY – An undercut to CONFRONTING. UNDERCUT. That is why it is OT TR0, the OT part of the name, as it is NOT ABOUT THE COMM CYCLE, OR THE BODY, OR DYNAMICS. It is drilling as a static in direct perception without the body or mind vias.
    It was removed by RTC probably, but it was said by LRH to be squirrel.
    Well either one or both of them were ass’s on that one – it is a spot on communication of the drill.

    HCO BULLETIN OF 16 AUGUST 1971RA
    ISSUE II
    REVISED 5 JULY 1978
    RE-REVISED 4 SEPTEMBER 1980
    (Revisions not in Script)
    Excerpt:
    “These TRs are done exactly per this HCOB without added actions or change.
    NUMBER: OT TR 0 1971 REVISED 1980
    NAME: Operating Thetan Being There
    THEORY: OT TR 0 is the drill which provides an undercut to the actual use of the communication formula. For any communication to take place, it requires somebody there. On OT TR 0 the student is drilling simply being there as potential Cause or Source-point or potential
    Effect or Receipt-point.
    COMMANDS: None.
    POSITION: Two students sit facing each other with eyes closed, a comfortable distance apart – about three feet.
    PURPOSE: To train the student simply to be there comfortably. The idea is to get the student able to BE there comfortably in a position three feet in front of another person, to be there and not do anything else but be there.
    TRAINING STRESS: Students sit facing each other with eyes closed. There is no conversation.
    This is a silent drill. There is no twitching, moving, confronting with a body part, „system“
    or vias used or anything else added to be there. One will usually see blackness or an area
    of the room when one’s eyes are closed. Be there, comfortably. This does not mean the student is supposed to be completely unfeeling or unaware. And he does not get into a figure figure or go into weird additives or considerations. There is no complexity to this drill. It
    means exactly what it says – simply be there, comfortably.
    Students do not coach each other on OT TR 0. The Supervisor does the coaching, covering the whole classroom, spotting any twitches, squirming, etc., and flunking them. If a student goes to sleep or starts boiling off, the supervisor gets him back onto the drill. He simply keeps
    the students at it.
    PATTER: None for students. Supervisor starts the drill with „Start“ and uses„That’s it“ to terminate the drill. When he needs to flunk a student he uses „Flunk“ and indicates what the flunk is on. When a student can BE there comfortably for some time, the drill is passed.
    NOTE: OT TR 0 would only be coached on a student by his twin if the student had flunked a later TR and been put back onto OT TR 0. It is then up to his twin to get him through, coaching him as the supervisor would, with the supervisor also keeping an eye on it. This means
    the student coach (who would have his eyes open for this coaching) sits across from the student who is doing OT TR 0, observing him and flunking twitches, squirming, etc. During this coaching, the coach would use „Start“ „Flunk“ and „That’s it“ as given in the Patter section
    above.
    HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in June 71 to give an additional gradient to confronting and eliminate students Confronting with their eyes, blinking, etc. Revised by L. Ron Hubbard in August 1971 after research discoveries on TRs. Further revised by L. Ron Hubbard in 1980 to clarify coaching of OT TR 0 and emphasize the drill as a gradient to actual confronting.”

    • “It is drilling as a static in direct perception without the body or mind vias.”

      Yes, beautiful stuff. I wish I knew it back then when I did it. It wasn’t even clear to me the relation between ‘static’ and ‘thetan’. So now I preach the axioms all the time hehehehe :P

      • “The Supervisor does the coaching, covering the whole classroom, spotting any twitches, squirming, etc., and flunking them.”

        I disagree with this. Because to me this process…is a process and body reactions can be produced through this process.

        Also, static can put viewpoint(s) there or elsewhere too, but it isn’t there itself. It isn’t elsewhere either.

        • Other than the obvious from the definition of static (no position in space and time etc), there’s one about beingness too, from the factors: “3. THE FIRST ACTION OF BEINGNESS IS TO ASSUME A VIEWPOINT. ” It is an action. I used to think that being=viewpoint.

      • one of those who see

        I love that line! There used to be a How to Achieve Effective Communication Course. Truthfully, I don’t know if the beginning little lecture was part of the course. But our Sup had us “get a picture of a cat”, good. Who’s looking at the picture?
        Fantastic.
        Then if this was there too “It is drilling as a static in direct perception without the body or mind vias.” – Wow, that would clarify OT TR0 perfectly for the student and take them a long way down the road to OT.

        • Yes, basic stuff is basic.

          I just thought of one myself, but it is not SCN, just my own invention, based on other inventions. “Perceive yourself. Who is perceiving yourself?”

    • Anyone who is wondering why the first drill is called *OT* TR 0 should give thought to the first 5 Factors:

      “1 Before the beginning was a Cause and the entire purpose of the Cause was the creation of effect.

      2 In the beginning and forever is the decision and the decision is TO BE.

      3 The first action of beingness is to assume a viewpoint.

      4 The second action of beingness is to extend from the viewpoint, points to view, which are dimension points.

      5 Thus there is space created, for the definition of space is: viewpoint of dimension. And the purpose of a dimension point is space and a point of view.”

      “BE” has a special definition in Scientology given above and predating the TR’s by nearly two decades. It is my opinion that the above action definition of “BE”
      from the Factors should have been on every TR’s course checksheet just prior to the bulletin. Maybe then people might know what ability they are supposed to be exercising on OT TR0 and that it really *IS* about the most OT thing one can possibly do in this MEST Universe.

      Michael A. Hobson
      Independent Scientologist

  36. I did the standard Comm Course in London in 1973, and a Hard TRs Course at Flag in 1976, with the 2-hours blinkless confront. I always felt the blinkless requirement was an added arbitrary, and actually quite counter-productive. It is not natural not to blink; blinking is a routine automatic body function (like breathing) and occurs on average every ten seconds or so. To suppress this natural process is the complete opposite to a natural comfortable confront (try not breathing for two hours)! It merely led to awful grinding and overrun, and the invalidation of achieving a good TR0. That’s the manic stare which characterises a lot of Scientologists, and puts people off – quite rightly so.

    • I’m with you. It’s like requiring the body to stop its natural processes, as you said, like breathing. How about 2 hours of no heart-beating? You don’t think about blinking until you’re told you can’t. In order to not blink, you have to put your attention on that or your body would just do it. So then, you are not just being there. And you look like an idiot.

    • Hello, maybe this quote from the HCOB 5 JULY 1989, “COACHING TRs 0-4″ can help:
      “BLINKLESS” TR 0 AND TR 0 BULLBAIT

      When a student gets really good on TR 0, he is said to have “blinkless TRs.” However, a blink is not a flunk on TR 0 and “blinkless” is not a requirement. Nobody has a right to put any attention on whether somebody is blinking—it is whether or not he is confronting.
      Blinking is really a symptom when one is confronting with his eyeballs.
      What is required for a pass on TR 0 is two hours of good, acceptable confront.

  37. The basic comm course I Finnished back in the 80s ,and processing . overts and withholds,is what made me stay in Scientology all this time,very powerful stuff.
    Eric Alexandrou
    Brisbane ,Australia

  38. Μarty thanks for the wonderful post and the great quotes.

    You wrote the following quote from LRH amongst others:
    “Now, that’s the first thing we must know about Scientology is that by the attainment of a simplicity we accomplish a benefit. By the attainment of a simplicity, we accomplish a benefit. By the invitation of or involvement in a complexity, we accomplish the unfathomable and create a mystery. We sink Man into a priesthood, we sink him into a cult.”

    I hadn’t read that ever and it’s a great quote. Same as in the TRs, in Wordclearing the same applies. One can attain a simplicity when one goes down to the basics, clears up the words in an earnest and meticulous way and attain a great benefit.

    I am afraid this is not the case in Scientology course rooms where completions count more than real Understandings.

    That,too has led to the demise of the subject within the church.

    The way you state it about the TRs and the Communication Course and the impact it can have on a person is so clear cut and it’s evident that Quickies all over the place have been happening. In two words: Out Tech.

  39. WHEREAS SURFACE OBSERVATION SAYS THAT RESTIMULATION CAN OCCUR, DEEPER STUDY SHOWS THAT AN INTERIM STEP OF SELF-DETERMINISM IS NECESSARY FOR ANY RESTIMULATION TO TAKE PLACE. (Advanced Procedured and Axioms

    Homo sapiens is normally controlled by directing energy at his facsimiles and setting them into action so as to cause him to dramatize facsimiles and training patterns. (8-8008)

    TRs can help a person be able to make this separation and view his facsimiles and mental machinery as different from himself. He becomes more and more at cause over his mind and able to spot aberrative decisions, not only from the past, but I feel even more importantly, he can be aware in the present moment of what he is creating. The more one practices this self-awareness and disciplining of one’s mind, the easier it becomes.

    Auditing would be cut way back because the person is very good at looking and as-ising for himself.

  40. Even if someone went clear in auditing, they would not stay stay clear without being aware of and vigilant as to their decisions and their handling of their mind. TRs and training help accomplish this. Training was more than 50% of my gains.

  41. Marty, just out of curiosity, do you train on your Comm Course line up the Axiom 28 (with all the components of communication)?
    Or only for selected individuals, if at all?

    I can imagine that this could be some “complexity” for DIV 6 in the church (and they removed even the comm-formula from the new STCC pack!).

    Would you like to share some specifics, your “successful actions” about the comm course you deliver?

  42. Guess I am WAY off on this blogpost as I have done
    hundreds (maybe 1,000′s) of hours of TR’s and never
    had any big wins like enumerated above. Once on the
    cl VI internship I did go exterior with full sight perception
    on OT TRO but I had been ext before. Usually all these
    hours of TR’s were enforced so many times it became
    a chore. HOWEVER, not knowing them, life (and
    auditing others) would be like walking down the street
    with one leg.
    When the GAT came out and we had to redo the TR’s
    and get an RTC pass, it took me about 7 tries before I
    could get that pass and by that time my TR’s, in my
    estimation, sounded so horrible I was cringing when I
    viewed the video.
    Would be nice to do a set on my own determinism and
    under the supervision of Les, Marty, Karen or even Dan.

    • I had HUGE wins on the tr’s when I did them on HQS at 16. Back then, you did them to a major stable win. I did the pro tr’s course 12 years later and did much more than required as I had to get two other people through when I was assigned two twins during a stat push at Flag. Must have done 30 hours of tro. I was able to get through the course requirements but the only wins I had were just getting through the course, helping the others, and getting out of there. It seemed like on big dev t cycle.

      Myself and the two others never did training at Flag again that I know of. The stat push was crazy, the supervisor was making the students run, no walking allowed. Stayed up all night Wednesday into Thursday to get video passes Thursday before two for all three comps. The course supervisor who stayed up with us was at her desk crying.

      Marty very sanely said he prescribes tr’s on a “case by case basis”. That is sanity. An entertainer that has spent 12 years on stages confronting thousands of people in an audience drug free with no problem doesn’t necessarily have problems with confronting disciplines. One of my twins was singer that had been doing that for decades. It’s like telling a ballerina that can already do a split to sit in a split for two hours. There is something hugely degrading to a being that I can not describe when they are told to master something they don’t have an issue with.

      David telling auditors they all have to retrain because he edited some books is an example. These people had already been clearing people for decades. All certs cancelled because punctuation marks upgraded? A few lines? The premise for Dianetics is “FUNCTION MONITORS STRUCTURE”. The FUNCTION of the books put Scientology on the map. Made clears and releases and abilities gained! And here is David, announcing that the STRUCTURE of the books is the main issue.

      Same thing with the purif. The purif came out, everybody had to do it! I was 5’5″ and weighed about 100 pounds and was already a clear. I had no fat cells for drugs to hide in! I had already been sweating in gyms and on stages for years. With all the food and vitamins and oil I had to stuff down I put on about ten pounds of fat cells on the purif that I had to peel off after. I was forced to eat when I wasn’t hungry to choke down the vitamins I did not need.

      If you do not LOOK, and you do not recommend solutions on a CASE BY CASE basis, you can not set the other person up for WINS. The only people that are setting themselves up for losses with a pocket full of cash are people wandering into casinos.

      NOBODY exploring Scientology should be expected to choke down LOSSES as part of this voluntary exploration. EVERYBODY is paying for playing with cash, time, labor and life. It’s a pay to play game.

  43. The Comm Course got a lot of people into Scientology, huge realizations, rehabilitation of confront, life changing wins and people wanted more.

    “And the only thing I am trying to teach you is look.”

    I took that as a stable datum early on and it has served me well.

    The watered down namby pamby STCC is not the Comm Course. I helped a lot of new public through it and some of the drills, like the no answer drill comes to mind, are interesting, but the end result, the product is no where near the old Comm Crs. Does the Comm Crs even still exist?

    • Alaska Ronn, the original Comm Course was also called Apprentice Scientologist course. It was re-leased I believe in 2010 along with some upgraded HQS. STCC is a different course that existed as early as 1980 and I believe was geared toward something like WISE.

      I haven’t done the comparisons so I don’t know if there are any changes from the original versions.

      • Oh ok, thanks LTC. Yea the “New and improved HQS”, which I understand now includes the previous version of the Code of a Scientologist. I don’t have it to hand but to paraphrase one of the points, “Do not speak to the press…” instead of, Keep the press and public accurately informed… Apparently that is not kosher any longer.

        • Alaska, it looks like STCC was in fact a Church course first published by CofS of California in 1980. By 1988 it was published by WISE and looks a bit smaller. I’m yet to do the comparison between the two and the newest one from 2010.

  44. Speaking of TRs. It aint short but does describe a particular time in my life. That was a great course sup.

    The Comm Course Sup

    If a fella could get worse with each coming season,
    Then the reverse should be true, it just stands to reason.
    Or so I was thinkin’ while across from the table
    A man with a graph said I was likely unstable.

    Lookin down at the floor at the shit on my boot,
    That I was imperfect seemed a point that was moot.
    But then with a stare and no reservation
    He proclaimed what was next without hesitation.

    That I could be directed without my consent
    Was taken by me that hostility was meant.
    But I curbed my tongue and went along for the ride
    With students all week working side by side.

    Now any good hand knows it’s work sometimes
    To sort through the chaff and get down to the fines.
    But talkin’ to dolls, well it seemed quite absurd
    Was it magic I saw, could they polish a turd?

    You know I’ve dug post holes in life
    And know well the shortcomings of an angry wife.
    But nothin’ in this world can quite take the place
    Of staring for hours at your twin’s blurry face.

    Like climbin’ aboard a young horse that farts
    Amusing himself while he tears ya apart.
    His body, like emotions, literally breakin’ in two
    It gets damn hard to see much benefit for you.

    Now I don’t mean to seem an ungrateful sort,
    But to put up with bullbaiting without a retort?
    Seemed against my convictions, all afflictions aside,
    Damned hurtful things, it was an affront to my pride.

    Certain things can be known and others you keep,
    But what the White Rabbit said I would not repeat.
    To my friends in the arena who quite often rope
    They’d have thought I was crackers, on some kind of dope.

    That sup kept on flunking, tryin’ to raise up the bar
    While myself I was thinking of places afar.
    Sitting on that hard chair was a pain in my ass,
    Across from a stranger, awaitin’ a pass.

    The flunks kept on coming as my temper did rise,
    It was all I could do to not blink my eyes.
    Then the whole thing seemed silly but still no relief
    From that wretched supervisor who was giving such grief.

    And then in a flash, random thoughts it did handle
    All criticisms gone and my mind didn’t ramble.
    Clarity of vision and time seemed no more
    If I hadn’t been sittin’ I’d have been on the floor.

    That night in the dark, driving home all alone
    I considered my options never feeling forlorn.
    For if one could feel like this all of the time
    Then I guessed indeed, the world could be mine.

    It’s been three score and six since that night in the car
    As I look at my life tryin’ to judge just how far
    I’ve come as a man and if I arrived
    Did I meet expectations or will I survive?

    I’ve had lots of answers and some were for not
    Some of them treasures and some I’ve forgot.
    If ever I’m confronted with things I don’t know
    I’ll gladly admit that the world can be so.

    But if you run into me don’t be mistaken
    I’m a better man for what I have taken.
    Despite all the bull, the lies and the shame
    My world forever tilted, never on the same plane.

    So humbly I ask, just one thing of you
    If ever you’re feelin’ out of the blue
    Much like the rabbit in Alice’s story
    Just look up that sup, you’ll never be sorry.

  45. Great post Marty,
    “And the only thing I am trying to teach you is look.”
    Look at what? Look at everything. Like to as-is your case by inspection. See complexities for what they are and allowing for self determined desision
    across the dynamics.

  46. A curiosity for myself came up while contemplating this blog and so I ask has anyone had wins doing TRs in a controlled environment with others who are there learning the same tech as yourself? You know, like your twin knows what the objective is and you both are operating on the exact same data and reality. I would think definitely yes. But when was the last time you were up against a “real” suppressive person and those same TRs worked wonders? I didn’t see anyone have them work on DM. Maybe there were no TR0′s around to try it out. My question is what makes a “trained” scientologist think it took a scientology background to achieve what other non-scientologists do everyday. Take a soldier in Afghanistan. A Doctor performing miracles in surgery on a hopeless case. The little kid who just got slapped and stood there quietly , willing to experience it? Etc. So do TRs actually do something special that a non-scientologist couldn’t have achieved the same without knowing? Always looking. Always curious. And asking you an honest question.

    • martyrathbun09

      Sure, folks in action are so far up the tone scale they are more in present time that most comm course grads. But, as Jason Beghe famously said in a tech film, paraphrased, ‘you sayin’ that I’m still gonna have to do what I gotta do, only I’ll do it better?’

    • “But when was the last time you were up against a “real” suppressive person and those same TRs worked wonders? I didn’t see anyone have them work on DM. Maybe there were no TR0′s around to try it out. “
      I think the DM problem is more one of group-agreement than the ability to confront by single individuals.
      You would need to understand how considerations and mock ups can be manipulated by “authority”. Group agreement is a common thing in any game, but it generates a “is-ness” for the individual. Sticking too much in group agreement, therefore, is in conflict with the individuals ability to as-is (i.e. you need to look for yourself, as individual, in order to as-is something) and will lead, ultimately, to not-isness.
      That’s the mechanism how sociopaths and aberrative personalities get away with what they’re doing. Hard “facts”, agreements.
      Good reference is also PAB#13, On Human Behavior.

    • Jean-François Genest

      @ nojokin8 ←
      « I didn’t see anyone have them work on DM. Maybe there were no TR0′s around to try it out. »

      I never had TR problems with DM in each of my encounters. I first met David Miscavidge in January 1991 when he and Marty came to Toronto Canada for an inspection. Eyes-to-eyes, face-to-face, I was there comfortably and effortlessly, and answered his questions. I controlled the communication cycle, not him, prevented him from probing or getting into his endless Q & A wandering (questions & answers) I had observed him do earlier that evening, and I carried on my work.

      I was sitting at my desk in our CMO office when DM and Marty came in to meet with the CO CMO. Marty made the other two messengers leave the room so they wouldn’t hear/witness the scolding. Marty then asked me to leave as well, but I held my position in space, and politely informed IG Ethics that I was staying right there, continuing my work, [and OBSERVING :-) ]
      I stayed at my desk, being there comfortably and continuing my work while the onslaught took place. My fellow messengers could NOT believe it. They shook in terror, and ran out of the office as soon as requested. I stayed there comfortably the whole time. Nobody moved me. → TRs

      That same evening, and later on throughout my “career” in the Sea Org in Los Angeles, I witnessed other Sea Org Members that were not as fortunate. They shook and baffled in front of DM. I don’t.

      • In December 1992, it took 5 LAPD officers armed with batons to grab me from behind and physically throw my body on the pavement when they arrested me. The first two could not succeed face-to-face. The first one had grabbed me by the throat. He soon learned about TRs 0, 4 and 9 ;-)
      So did my cell mates and the judge in the courtroom. → TRs

      The TRs ARE effective! They are great tools. It is the Communication Formula. [ there are also Messenger TRs as part of the CMO training - awesome! ] I still use TRs today in my life. I would LOVE to go through them again & brush up! That’s how much I love them.

      My wish is for you to experience them too.
      Θ Cheers, JFG

      • ….”I stayed at my desk, being there comfortably and continuing my work while the onslaught took place.”

        Thank you Jean-Francois for that amazing example of great TRs. I hope my next question isn’t going to be construed as an inval intermixed with eval, but I don’t know how to satisfy my curiosity without point blank asking this way. Was there a time when you perhaps had a thought that DM could have operated using the tech to bring people uptone, rather than drag them down into the Fear band and then use them for his own personal maniacal reasons? Especially considering that I don’t personally know anyone who became interested in Scientology via L. Ron Hubbard for reasons of preferring to go further downhill than they had already managed to take themselves. Was it sufficient that you knew “your” TRs were in , even while watching others get their anchor points yanked out from beneath their billion year contracts and loyalty clause? It seems the loyalty was to DM instead of the group? I ask you since you were in the place to know how it went in that regard. As always, curious and willing to ask.

  47. Excellent post!

  48. Ralph Hilton comments on John Maeda’s 10th law of simplicity, which I had posted. Maeda’s 10th Law reads: “Simplicity is about subtracting the obvious, and adding the meaningful.”

    Ralph Hilton writes: “Simplicity is about observing the obvious, and deleting the meaningful.”

    I do not fully understand what you mean, Ralph, maybe because I am not a Scientologist, I may miss some references.

    I am also not fully comfortable with Maeda’s formulation. My proposed wording would be: “Simplicity is about subtracting the obvious and letting the meaningful surface.” (my thinking here is inspired by Michelangelo’s well-known comments that he carved his statues by removing what did not need to be there)

    How to attain simplicity is a long story. Some advocate withdrawal and retreat. David A. Cooper, for example, with his book “Simplicity, Silence and Solitude”. He promotes the practice of withdrawal and meditation as an antidote to the alienation of modern life. He has been a student of mysticism for decades and has engaged in retreats in Sufism, Vipassana, Kabbalah, and Zen. He advocates simplicity, silence and solitude as a means to obtain direct awareness of God. This seems very different from the path of Scientology, but I guess many paths lead to the same destination…

    I’m a bit wary of relying on withdrawal to find simplicity. I’m more interested in a simplicity that can be had, experienced whether I am in the woods, or have to in society.
    I’ve come to see simplicity more as something to yearn for, within, and as a kind of knowledge to rely on. Do I feed on complex knowledge, or do I nourish myself from simple, yet profound knowledge? Just like with food, where you “are what you eat”, with knowledge, you “become the knowledge that you consume.” Hence its very important for me to watch the kind of knowledge I tap for my own nourishment, edification and growth.

    For that, Im in sync with Taoism’s Three Treasures; compassion, moderation, and humility. My sense is that if I practice these, I will experience simplicity. According to Arthur Waley. the Three Treasures have also been correlated with “abstention from war and absolute simplicity of living, and refusal to assert active authority” The Tao also says that to attain “naturalness,” one has to free oneself from selfishness and desire, and appreciating simplicity.[

    Simplicity feels good!

    Ill leave you with three uplifting quotes about simplicity:

    It seems that perfection is attained not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing more to remove.
    Antoine de Saint Exupéry

    To gain freedom is to gain simplicity.
    Joan Miró

    Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated. – Confucius

    • martyrathbun09

      You got it right Paul, in my opinion.

    • Dear Paul,
      I like your comments, they are meaningfull and easy to follow.
      But I thought you had some Scientology background, no?
      The quote form “The Little Prince” author was my guide since age of 21.
      There is another nice one from him, slightly connected with simplicity and the subject at hand: “It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye.”

    • Paul

      Some very wise observations.

      You have mentioned that you are not a Scientologist, and thus may not have much experience with TRs personally. I would like to offer this brief summation to perhaps assist you in a better understanding of what we are talking about here.

      “Confronting” basically means “to face” or “to face up to”.
      L. Ron Hubbard adds that “confronting is the ability to be other than.”

      So when you are confronting something one could surmise that you would be facing it, from a position of being outside of it.

      To confront your problems would mean you would be outside of them and facing them. Etc.

      The TR 0 drill (TR stands for Training Routine) in Scientology adds the aspect of being “comfortable”. That doesn’t mean your physical comfort so much as, as it does your “spiritual” comfort.

      It is training toward being able to face things without being upset, or in turmoil, or wanting to be elsewhere, or feeling shy, nervous, fidgety, fearful, etc. in the presence of the thing that you are confronting. (facing, in the sense of “facing up to”)

      The TRs were specifically created to get Scientology practitioners to be relaxed and able to comfortably be with, and communicate with their clients (Preclears, PCs), whatever the PC may say or do, but as you can see these same abilities one is training in can have significant value in all aspects of interactions with people generally.

      This can also be extended to all of living. As a person becomes more able to comfortably face things, he will find that he is better able to better deal with situations that challenge one in life. If he is able to be “comfortably facing” an issue, instead of being the effect of it, or actively embroiled in it, it is observable that he has a better chance of dealing with it.

      That is the simplicity, and the breadth of the use of TRs.

      Hope this helps.

      Eric

    • Hi Paul,
      There is a principle in Scientology that complexity is proportional to the degree of non confront. It is also observed that when a person doesn’t look at what is obviously there then they tend to substitute additional meaning and complexity. Thus to bring about simplicity one takes away the meanings that have been added to something and observes it exactly as it is.

  49. I attested to Clear from OT TRO 0 & TR 0 (it got cancelled later). That is how significantly deep my wins were from these drills, fantastic, but that being said I observed others around me just not getting it, never understood why they couldn’t just duplicate “be there”, as that is the key. I word cleared “be” and “there” and everytime I would drift off, I knew I wasn’t being there and kept focusing myself back to “being there”. Eventually when I accomplished that, holy schmolly shita moly, exteriorization and perception of everything around me was astonishing. When I was on staff at SEAF and felt the pressure of the world around me (especially from being on staff) I would elicite a junior to sit down and do some OT TR 0 and/or TR 0 and bang I was exterior once again and felt all powerful to do my job in an effortless state.

    • Many, many people are not doing OT TR0 or TR0 when they think they are. One guy I knew who did the Pro TRs at ASHO a couple years ago, was talking about his experience: He did 2 hours on his first try, but the way he explained it (bragging) was that after the 2 hours, he was not even aware that the time was up and did not even notice the supervisor, who had to physically rouse him. He was not being there; he put himself in a trancelike state. The sup should have seen this, but it seems they are just looking for someone sitting there and not moving. I have spoken to many people who bellieve they are doing TR0 when they are way out of PT – they describe various lowered awareness manifestations which are non-confront of PT, but as long as they sit there and don’t move, they are passed.

    • breppen, I’m not so sure a person couldn’t go Clear on OT TR0 & TR0. It seems entirely possible to me, based on the materials I’ve studied.

  50. “Provided one approached the training routines with the above in mind, and not as a bait and switch toward dependence on years and years of costly and complex psychotherapy or membership in some true-believer group, one might avoid the pitfalls Ron warned of in the same lecture:

    Now, that’s the first thing we must know about Scientology is that by the attainment of a simplicity we accomplish a benefit. By the attainment of a simplicity, we accomplish a benefit. By the invitation of or involvement in a complexity, we accomplish the unfathomable and create a mystery. We sink Man into a priesthood, we sink him into a cult. ”

    Marty,
    Does it get any better?
    I love it. Thanks

  51. I’ve been on a warpath the last couple of years to drive a stake through the heart of this monster.

    The best summation that I could find of all things wrong with Scientology was stated by the old man himself:

    From 18Th ACC –Tape Lecture #7. LRH TAPE SHSBC-05, 19/07/57 THE FIVE CATEGORIES:

    “….you can take any philosophy and make a control slavery operation out of it.
    Do you understand this?

    Therefore, I am saying to you here that the next resurgence or compilation of knowledge concerning the spiritual nature, actions and behavior patterns of man and this universe coming up at this time could again be roped, hogtied, smothered and used for a control operation.

    The first sign of this would be secrecy concerning one or more of its essential parts. It would have to be made into a mystery before it could be made to accomplish slavery.
    Slavery and mystery are almost the same thing. Look at the CDEI Scale. Curiosity becomes desire becomes enforce becomes inhibit. Mystery. Dispel the mystery and you’ve dispelled all.

    Now, for understanding, a thing called trust may be substituted. This is true. They’re two slightly different things: understanding and trust. Now, trust can very, very easily be made over to enforced faith. And any time anybody tells you to take something totally on faith, they are trying to pervert your sense of trust. There is no reason you, at any time, any
    place, or any period of the universe should have to take anything on faith.

    Therefore, destruction would be the end product of any slavery, super control operation, whether it be communism or Christianity or anything else.

    Now, these things basically found themselves on truth. And then somebody comes along and for somebody else’s good, feels that it would be best to pervert this truth, give it a little curve, omit a couple of things, add a couple of saltshakerfuls of mystery and this is for the good of man. At no time will this ever be for the good of man.

    Something wins, however, to the degree that it assists others to exert control over their own environments. Those things which solely seek to control and nothing else, don’t win.

    They just—this little group here is going to control all those groups across the world. And that—that just doesn’t win. The only way a win is achieved is to use what you know to better somebody else’s control of his environment.

    War comes about because nations—meaning nationalistic nations— weaken the control of other nationalistic nations by propaganda and trade and other things. They don’t bolster the control, they weaken it. And sooner or later they drive another nation mad and war occurs.
    That is the phenomena of war. It’s just you weaken the control of somebody somewhere and he gets angry and upset.

    Now, here we have numerous examples and I have to set them forward in this wise: the first thing I’m trying to tell you is the use of any technology to place another being into duress brings about a disaster. It doesn’t matter whether it’s on a large, civilized plane or individual to individual or group to group or nation to nation.

    And you haven’t realized it but all this time I’ve been talking to you about a thetan.
    And therefore they’ve got all these wild ideas about spirits and souls and religion and all kinds of other nonsense. And all of these wild ideas have made them avoid entirely this signal, single datum: that the only thing you can do is assist a spirit to control his environment. That’s all you can do. You can’t do anything else but that. Because anything else but that is destructive. And because you are part of that environment, you’ll get included in.

    Well, let me call to your attention that this does not fall outside what you have just been looking at. It is comprehensible. The only thing that stands between you and totally comprehending it is an interjection of the mystery factor, usually for purposes quite remunerative, apparently, to somebody else—which will pay him off not at all. Somebody’s dropped the blinds on it and when we peek around back of the blinds, we find ourselves once
    more looking at thetan, mind, body, universe.”

    .

  52. SKM, in answer to your question, I spent nearly 40 years of my life in a new religious movement, (Maharaji/Prem Rawat/www.wopg.org) lived a monastic life in ashrams (much like your Sea Org) in India and in the West, etc..and had a high level of responsibilities (like some of you). I went in 2008 through the rollercoaster of separation from the movement/organization very similar to what you are guys seem to have been going through. 4 years after exiting, I’m still in a recovery mode, enjoying the practice of the “technology”, trying to stay at peace in my heart and to have a happy and fulfilled life, in spite of all the reasons I could have to look back and be angry.

    I’ve been a lifelong student of religion and spirituality. I remember being 13-14 and already reading books comparing religions. At 16, I was studying Sanskrit and reading the Vedas and Upanishads and in 1972, at age 23, I met my teacher in the Himalayas.

    In 2008, when I exited, I was very upset and angry and started reading forums like yours written by people exiting other new religious movements. At first I was interested mostly in reading from other people leaving spiritual movements, to help me understand my own journey and cope with rollercoaster moments and also to not get stuck in anger. I found a lot of similarities between my own journey and the journey of people exiting Scientology.

    At some point I noticed that even though I read and understood about people leaving Scientology, and saw their reasons for departure as being pretty much the same as mine in my movement, I had no idea what Scientology was about—which in itself was interesting since I knew a lot about a lot of religions and spiritual paths– and I started getting interested in knowing more.

    Most people have no idea about what Scientology is, all they know is the clichés. I believe it may be the least understood religion. Also, I find the person of L. Ron Hubbard fascinating. That someone in his lifetime would find the vision and energy to formulate a technology of the scope and breadth of the path of Scientology is beyond normal human possibilities. This aspect is little known. Whether one likes Scientology or Hubbard or not, what he did is mind-boggling. This story unfortunately is not being told. I’ve never been through auditing or training, but, after reading so much on your and other sites, I get a better sense of what Scientology is about and I feel a kinship and brotherhood with you guys. For having done it, I know what it is to spent decades leaving in poverty, chastity and obedience, with a 24/7 focus of serving. I have deep respect for whoever did this, regardless of what movement they were in. This is at the core of the closeness I feel with you guys.

    What I find very interesting is the depth of the contrast between of your rejection of the movement, and on the other side, the depth of your continuing loyalty to the religious technology itself. The same contrast exists in me between how I see the movement I left, and my views in how it was managed, and the validity of the spiritual path and practices that were shown to me and that I keep practicing.
    I’m getting old, and don’t know how long I will be around.. I realize more than when I was young that each breath matters and that I need to make the most of each to understand, and live whatever the best is that life has in store for me. Im trying to focus on the positive, on the meaningful, to keep growing as long as I am alive..

    I find Marty’s site and the comments from people like you to be very interesting, helpful and inspiring and I enjoy spending a bit of time here each day. Even though I’ve never had any auditing or training or even read Dianetics, I can completely relate to what is being said (even though most of the Scientology terminology flies above my head) . Thank you to Marty, to you all, and to you SKM!

    • Fascinating, Paul, great story, my friend. I think what you sense is that, despite the outpoints and the bad publicity, Scientology technology contains an enormous amount of brilliant and profound truth – as well as procedures to attain that truth. LRH, for all his faults, was a genius with feet of clay – but you are absolutely right to admire the vast scope of his unparalleled achievement.

    • Nice :)

    • Paul, to me you are a truly kindred spirit and this reflects in all of your posts.

      When you stated, “Whether one likes Scientology or Hubbard or not, what he did is mind-boggling…” you certainly got the big impact.

      I think you would enjoy auditing and/or TR’s…

      At any rate, thanks so much for your inspiring posts,
      Vic

    • Hello Paul,
      thank you for the thorough answer.
      I very appreciate it.

      I liked your posts from the very first I was aware of. Your spirituality really comes through.

      I really, really wished you could come together with a well hearted Scientology Practitioner, who would be able to introduce you to Scientology in an appropriate way.
      Given your spiritual background you would need someone who really is into the spiritual aspects of Scientology. Scientology has many many different aspects and in the last years I very seldom came across Scientologists who really were spiritually “sparked”. A Scientologist with a good grasp of the spiritual basics of Scientology and some understanding of the different religions of the world would be of great help for you.
      I mean, there is so much material in Scientology and it is not easy to pick something out at random.
      I would suggest to listen to the Phoenix Lectures, but if you go in communication with some of the people here who are in your environment and speak English better than me and if you really want to try it: do it – don’t hesitate.
      Or get in contact by e-mail with someone you trust. They will answer your questions in private and will suggest some reading material on the subject you’re interested in mostly.

      I can tell you one thing: I left Scientology because it lost its soul, its spiritual goals. I was spiritual since my earliest childhood. Found Scientology with age of 18. Left the Church behind with 35. But I always was interested in different paths – before Scientology, while in the Church and for ever. LRH encourages us even on many occasions to do so. It was the Church who told me not to look around – but this is stupid – I was into religion not only to find God, but also – and maybe even more so – in order to understand my fellow man. I wanted to know what is driving them. In Germany you have people from around the whole world. With different religious and ethnic backgrounds. I loved to talk to them about their believes and often they wondered how I could know more about their religion than themselves. Haha. It was not always the case – but I always was willing to learn more about it.

      It was a sad circumstance for me that Scientology Church was so deep into MEST and that MEST was more important than the accomplishment of spiritual progress as LRH asked for.

      That’s why I left. And I am glad that I started to reconnect with Scientologists who are similarly spiritually motivated as I am.

      It’s very nice to have you around here.
      Namaste.

      • martyrathbun09

        Just so you don’t get tripped up by running into contrary facts, this statement by SKM is not true: But I always was interested in different paths – before Scientology, while in the Church and for ever. LRH encourages us even on many occasions to do so.

        • Which part?
          That I was always interested in different spiritual path or that that LRH often (“on many occasions”) encourages us to explore different paths?

          • martyrathbun09

            The latter of course. I listen to LRH daily. If there is one theme consistently driven in as hard as the technology of Dianetics and Scientology it is that any other path – religious, spiritual, eductional or scientific – is merely a dramatization of one sort or the other.

            • Got you.
              Here is but one example from “The Phoenix Lectures”:

              ” The Veda, should you care to look it over, is best read in a literal translation from the Sanskrit. And there are four major divisions of the Veda, all of them quite worth while. A great deal of our material in Scientology is discovered right back there. This makes the earliest
              part of Scientology, its sacred lore.”

              For me it looks like an invitation. And “The Phonix Lectures” are full of this stuff.

              He also cut down some people, even spiritual figures, I know, but who am I to judge him?
              And that fact doesn’t make my statement untrue.
              LRH was a man of vivid emotions.

              • martyrathbun09

                Yes, and if you read the back history of this blog – or even What Is Wrong With Scientology? – you will see I noted that very things in that very same lecture series. However, there are thousands of other lectures and hundreds of other writings that say otherwise. Don’t want Paul to think you were conning him if he makes a study of it and encounters this.

                • “Don’t want Paul to think you were conning him if he makes a study of it and encounters this.”
                  I understand. Thank you.

                  You are right, Paul may encounter some critical stuff from LRH.
                  He also may see that LRH was right in some instances.
                  After all LRH also said “Don’t believe it only because I have said so.” (paraphrased.)

                  Actually Scientology for me was very encouraging to study/restudy other fields. That’s why I am so enthusiastic about Pauls presence on this Blog.

            • Marty, I agree with some of what you say here. However I do not believe it applies to education. How about the study tapes? How about LRH’s study of photography & motors & all sorts of stuff? Yes, he may poo-poo other religions & certainly some aspects of science – but I have yet to read where he discourages education itself. Quite the contrary – he put the study tech there as tools for people to use. Nowhere did I ever see him or hear him put down study or education, or discourage it in the slightest.

              True, he said that the field of education was fertile ground for supressives and that a lot of what passes for “knowledge” in academia is suspect and arbitrary. How can anyone who has spent 4+ years at a major university argue with that?

              But a blanket statement that education is “merely a dramatization” – I think that is overdone and inaccurate.

              • I guess it depends on how much you study of LRH.

                • I think it also depends on the observer.
                  I wouldn’t be too scary about what people may think when they encounter some of LRH criticizing other paths. He did it.
                  I think it was his right to express his views.
                  After all, he really found something of magnitude. I mean, the whole body of work is not really comparable with any other path. This is not a try to justify his temper. Anyone can study it all and judge for himself.
                  The problem is when people take things out of context (where the context is, LRH tried to help mankind.)

                  LRH also spoke many thousands of hours of lectures, to different audiences with different tone-levels and in different time periods. That’s why his words sometimes seem inconsistent or contradictory (and sometimes they actually are).
                  As I said, the observers eye.

                  • martyrathbun09

                    Don’t get so defensive.

                    • Marty, no “offence” but I think “being defensive” is one of those things that classify as “in the eyes of the beholder”. I sometimes get told in so many words (or directly) that I’m on the defensive as regards LRH and Scientology, and I in turn usually feel that people who say that to me are prone to take the offensive on these subjects. I imagine that, as with anything, it’s inevitable that each of us comes to an overall evaluation and that’s the “stable datum” we operate on.

                      “Any body of knowledge, more particularly and exactly, is built from ONE DATUM. That is its STABLE DATUM. Invalidate it and the entire body of knowledge falls apart. A stable datum does not have to be the correct one. It is simply the one that keeps things from being in a confusion and on which others are aligned.” (Problems of Work)

                    • martyrathbun09

                      Precisely my point, I am not on the offensive against your, and SKM’s, cherished stable datums – unless of course, those are complexities, mysteries, and defense mechanisms that seem to come with the package.

                    • Thanks. I just wish you would have left out the word “cherished” in the first part of the sentence, which seems to imply you assume I’m merely defensiveness and makes you sound a bit on the offense :). But sincere thanks for the last part, which is a really good stable datum on the subject of stable datums. I’ll keep that in mind.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      Gotcha.

                    • You are really cool, Marty. Or I could simply say “free”. :)

              • I think LRH noted the plus-points and pitfalls of every subject he studied, including his own.

    • Wow Paul.

      You brought a tear to my eye with that.

      Thank you for your story, it was very moving.

      Thank you for being here and contributing your wisdom to this forum.

      Eric

      • Same here, and my feelings exactly.

        We have all graduated from the grip of participation in groupthink with the treasures that induced us into it in the first place. The only regrettable bits is where we compromised our own personal integrity for the group. But then, wasn’t that a valuable lesson learned as well?

        We have all been betrayed a million times across our lifetimes on this journey out of the matrix. And many have abandoned the search as a result. But there are ways out and the Bodhisattvas – corporeal and not – will never abandon us. And each time their collective efforts lift the veil just that much more, even if they, too, or their efforts become obscured by the sociopathy of groupthink in the interim. With such assistance, however, there ultimately comes an opening that will require us to walk out alone. Then it will be our turn.

        Welcome, Paul

      • Tears (plural) in my case. A big dose of good emotion.

    • Thank you for your beautiful story. There is definitely a kinship in truth-seeking, no matter the path chosen.

    • martyrathbun09

      Thanks for your fascinating story. Man’s Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl is fantastic medicine for anger and regret.

    • Hi Paul,

      First, I want to thank you for all your good comments in this blog. It’s very important to compare different religions and philosophies.

      Like you, I remember being 13-14 and already reading books comparing religions. At 16, I became a Premie. I used to frequent the Ashrams, but I never lived in one of them. My best friend became an Initiator.

      I have a lot of good memories from my involvement with Premies and Maharaji.
      During my 20s I started co-auditing Dianetics. After some years (especially after reading the Scientology 8-8008 book) I left Maharaji.

      Similar to this blog, there is a website (http://ex-premie.org/) about brainwashing, attempts to silence Prem Rawat’s critics, etc.

      I think you’ll like this cartoon.
      http://www.ownimg.com/i/MafaldaEducacion.jpg

      • Hi MaBű :) I’m curious what it was that you read in Scientology 8-8008 that caused you to leave Maharaji. Or was it just a general recognition of truth?

        • p.s. I forgot to say that yours is an amazing story too!

        • Marildin,

          As I already stated, I have a lot of good memories from my involvement with Premies and Maharaji.

          I appreciate your interest in the subject, however I don’t think Paul is following and contributing to this blog in order to read something critical to his own religion. (Unless he himself ask it.)

          • MaBű. I phrased it in a misleading way but I was actually just wondering what you found in 8-8008 that inspired you to become involved in Scientology, rather than what in it made you want to leave your former practice. I just happen to think Scn 8-8008 is a great book so that’s where I was coming from. But I do get what you’re saying. :)

      • MaBu — thank you for speaking out as well as providing the link to the ex-premie site.

        I spent a couple hours reading the stories and the similarities are remarkable —

        But what amazed me is that I had never ever run across a premie nor the teacher … and apparently the movement was/is vast.

        Leading me to wonder, yet again, how much MORE is outside of my radar screen?

        The tendency is to stay so very locked into what is comfortable, familiar and known … leading to rigid views of the world convinced that my view is THE view.

        Fortunately my own experience for years within scientology only mind set enabled me to step away from the buddhist group I was attached to.

        Am now continuing with buddhist philosophy but away from buddhist “religionists” –

        Again thank you for sharing.

        Christine

  53. I think that to be able to be in present space and time, is a great ability. But it is vast limitation to say that that’s all there is to a road towards spiritual freedom. I cannot give you an exact refference, but I know I have read in a ‘PDC tape as well in another source this thing with which -by personal experience too- I agree, and correct me if you have the exact quote somewhere handy: A psychotic lives in the past. A neurotic lives in the present. A sane man lives in the future. Also: Axiom 45 Theta can consider itself to be placed, at which moment it becomes placed, and to that degree a problem.

    For this reason, and for reasons of my own cogs, I understand that OT TR 0 can result in a Clear, but I don’t think it is a technique to the end of all Bridges. A being is so much more unfixed, than to be a point in the here and in the now.

    • Spyros: I remember that quote as well.

      However, I remember another one … something about being able to *predict* the future only because one’s *now* is bigger …

      I came to understand that now isn’t a POINT but rather it is a view and depending on how wide that view is, one could be said to predict the future.

      Perhaps this is what LRH meant when he said a sane man lives in the future. And perhaps he was talking about the neurotic as someone with a very narrow fixed view.

      Don’t know –

      Thanks for reminding me about that quote.

      • :) maybe it’s meant that if one can be in present comfortably, without being dragged into some past, he can then create and predict futures too.

        Thank you too :)

    • It’s a bit more complex and very well expressed in PAB 17, 1954, Future Processing: “FUTURE PROCESSING
      There is a basic rule which is covered in the first book and which was more specifically delineated by Fellow of Scientology Dick Halpern, that the psychotic is concerned with the past, the neurotic is barely able to keep up with the present, and the sane, as we jokingly called homo sapiens in 1950, are concerned with the future.
      This division could be more specifically made by realizing that the neurotic is barely able to confront the present but that the very, very sane confront the present entirely and have very little concern for the future, being competent enough in handling the present to let the future take care of itself. Looking into the past and looking into the extreme future alike are efforts to avoid present time and efforts to look elsewhere than at something.”

      The definition of Know-point might be to the point too – “KNOW-POINT, a know-point is senior to a viewpoint. An individual would not have dependency on space or mass or anything else. He’d simply know where he was.”

      • Pierrot, yes the way you put it is much more understandable. Thanks for correcting me.

        Some additional data that were mentioned in those lectures in the PDC (it would be great if somebody, knew exactly where. I cannot recall where out of the 72 tapes :P ), were about psychologists who asserted that all one has to do, to be alright, was to be in present time. LRH made fun of them for saying so.

        I think the reason for this, and also the ‘future’ part is that one uses his own universe in order to plan for the future of the MEST universe. And if he can do that independently of the MEST universe, he is then sane. SCN 8-8008 and the PDC were much about the attainment of infinity through the reduction to 0 (nothing) of the apparent infinity of the MEST universe (it’s domination over a person), by increasing the person’s own universe from 0 to infinity. In my own words, to have one stop convincing himself that the MEST universe dominates his own universe -or worse to identify the MEST universe with his own- and to be infinitely self determined over his own universe.

        Other than that, since time is a lie, I think there isn’t actually any past or present or future time. It is all created the moment it is experienced. One could say, that there is only present time, or no time. I think all would be correct. The reason why I mentioned this about past, present and future, is because I used to think that to be sort of fixed in MEST universe present time, is therapeutic. I no longer think so. I just think that it is better to perceive present MEST universe time, than to dramatise some past MEST universe time. But one should be flexible to be whenever and wherever he decides to be.

      • Pierrot, (or anyone), are you aware of an LRH lecture in which he refers to the Code of Honor, in which he states “The future is made for you.” ? (rather than the conventional “you make your tomorrow”.)

        Your statement about the future taking care of itself for the very sane, associated to this in my mind. I’m sure I have it on a CD or possibly even a DVD from the CoS, but I haven’t been able to locate it.

        • Spyros – thank you, I got what you wrote. Perhaps a handy definition of Present Time is “(…) It is the point of coincidence of three universes” From PAB 29. It’s handy because it doesn’t refer to concepts like “time”, “moment”, past-now/present-future, otherwise one is going into a loop of having to define no-time of “being there” while using concepts related to time.

          This is where OTIII level makes a nice statement, if one cares to look at some of its functions, regarding the overwhelm factor and resolves that matter completely – as long long as one of the three universes doesn’t overwhelm another or others, the coincidence of those 3 universes achieves a nice balance, an effortless present “time”. One is – a source point in ex-istance rather than lost in some is-nesses. Thus, for instance, the time track ceases to exist, other than as a curiosity, all knowingness is where one is (saying “now” would make one start creating a time track all over again) rather than having to look for answers wayyyyy back on the track, as that would be agreeing with the mest universe or the universe of others too much for one’s taste.

          Iamvalkow – hi, I don’t know that reference, sorry. But both ways are good and workable.

          If I go on stage and play a solo on a guitar, thus improvising, I would hear the notes slightly before In my universe before translating them on the instrument and projecting them into the universe of others. The apparency is though that the action is simultaneous in all 3 universes, that is when one does really groove (which is that coincidence I wrote above :-) and the key here is the rhythm.

          Now – if you and I did switch bodies, occupying each other’s viewpoint (if we had any, lol) I’m sure that the whole physical universe we do ex-ist in would take a turn and a fast evolution. That means Pierrot wouldn’t be living the life of iamvalkov for long. Thus the future is somewhat depending upon the viewpoint of the observer, and as Spyros wrote above the formula 8-8008 getting one’s own universe from 0 to infinity is a marvellous trick.

          Other than that I prefer the future to be made – I love surprises and besides I’m too busy to have to create the future of the physical universe part all day long…

  54. To be there comfortably ,doesn’t imply that you become stuck in PT.
    But it implies that you are not creating pictures or situations not under your control ,just doing what you are doing when you are doing it , toward a future that you can envision , unencumbered of unwanted arbitraries.

  55. Going Clear on OT TR 0, absolutely astonishing!

  56. Eric S.

    Thank you for your explanation of TR in the Scientology context– yes, this helps!
    I just read this quote from the Dalai Lama
    “Do not let the behavior of others destroy your inner peace.”.
    Inspiration for the day!
    Wishing you the best, Cheers Paul

    • Paul

      Thank you. I am glad it helps.

      I must add however, though I suspect that you realize this, that this is my own view of TRs based on my personal assimilation of the philosophy and from doing the exercises and experiencing my own results, and through supervising others through these drills.

      Certainly not all Scientologists will see it this way. Perhaps none at all.

      And thank you for that “inspiration of the day”.

      Eric S

  57. That Paul mentioned humility before, rung a bell in me. It is not rare to find in SCN texts decriptions of the powers of a thetan. One could say that this indicates some arrogance or big ego.

    These are my own opinions: I think that arrogance and ego are enemies of freedom and thus of power too. The reason why ego has been mixed with power and control, is because those who have much of that ego try to convince that they are powerful and that control. In fact, people obsessed with controlling others, are so weak, they can’t even control themselves…their own thoughts. They’re confused.

    Pan determinism is a light thing and takes no force at all. It is the control of self, but not self in the sense of an ego. Static can be more than a unit.

    Other determinism is a mockery of that. It is controlling another through enforcement and inhibition.

    An SP mocks pan determinism. He uses force (not his own. Can use stuff like money, or fear and other things) in a way to make the other think that he is controlled, and that he is not controlled by himself. This is a lie, as one is responsible for all that happens to him. An SP aims to implant one so as to make him think he is not in control of himself.

    All this stuff give abilities and power a bad name. But this is just the dark side of power –which is only apparent power. A truly powerful being wouldn’t use power to dominate over others. And if he did, he would reduce himself so that he wouldn’t be able to use this power anymore, as that would be an overt.

  58. Talking about simplicity, SKM mentions a wonderful quote from Saint Exupery: “ “It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye.” As a child, I grew up reading Saint Exupery, this quote brings up a lot of fond, early memories.

    There is a book called “The Mystic Heart: Discovering a Universal Spirituality in the World’s Religions” by Wayne Teasdale. His work is about examining the world’s religions and highlighting the underlying beliefs and yearnings that link humankind. Teasdale is a proponent of spiritual diversity, urging readers to protect and study their own indigenous religion. He distinguishes “spirituality” from “religion,” for him: “Being religious connotes belonging to and practicing a religious tradition. Being spiritual suggests a personal commitment to a process of inner development that engages us in our totality.” He sees religion as a potential means to the greater end of genuine spirituality, which in his view is of mystical nature. The common points that he seems between all religions include ”solidarity with all life; moral capacity; nonviolence; self-knowledge; selfless service; simplicity of lifestyle; daily practice; and serving as a prophetic witness in the causes of justice, peace, and protecting creation.

    Teasdale may be overoptimistic in that he sees an age coming, where spiritual unity will emerge among diverse peoples, but nonetheless he is a good and kind soul and reading him is heartwarming.

    There is on YouTube a video (“The Mystic Heart, The Supreme Identity” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDuAHdaleNU
    ) with an interesting conversation about the Heart, between Ken Wilber and Teasdale. Teasdale comes through as clear, gentle and humble.

    I also just noticed a nice, 6 minutes video from my teacher on YouTube, talking about the Heart. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehyMWWKFIOc (if you watch, watch until the end, there is a progression to the video)

    Love
    Paul

  59. Jean-François Genest

    Thank you! Excellent post! Really spot on!
    I am so glad that your new home allows you to operate without the insane distractions. Θ

  60. Excellent post. Thank you. :)

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