Fear

L. Ron Hubbard once designated the entry level of Scientology as Scientology Zero.  Scientology Zero consisted initially of demonstrating to a person that the environment was not as dangerous as he had been led to believe. It educated a person on the existence of merchants of chaos who traffic in painting a picture of danger so that they can profit by protecting one from that danger.  It is the old organized crime protection racket.

As we have seen over the years Scientology has become that which Scientology Zero warned of.  The church continually plies its public with end-of-world scenarios that can only be handled by contributing more greenbacks to the church.  Some folks on the outside engage in a similar game of designating the church as the enemy that will consume humanity if not combatted continually.

One purpose of this blog from the outset was to demonstrate that the church of Scientology was not something to be feared; that it in fact had simply perfected the protection racket game, giving folk the illusion that it was something to continually fear.

I came across a little something by Bruce Lipton from The Biology of Belief (Hay House, Inc. 2005) that explains why obsessing with fear inhibits growth:

In a response similar to that displayed by cells, humans unavoidably restrict their growth behaviors when they shift into a protective mode.  If you’re running from a mountain lion, it’s not a good idea to expend energy on growth.  In order to survive – that is, escape the lion – you summon all your energy for your fight or flight response.  Redistributing energy reserves to fuel the protection response inevitably results in curtailment of growth…

…Inhibiting growth processes is also debilitating in that growth is a process that not only expends energy but is also required to produce energy. Consequently, a sustained protection response inhibits the creation of life-sustaining energy. The longer you stay in protection, the more you consume your energy reserves, which in turn, compromises your growth.  In fact, you can shut down growth processes so completely that it becomes a truism that you can be ‘scared to death.’ 

Maybe that is a scientific explanation for Lao Tzu’s having wrote the following in the Tao Te Ching:

There is no greater illusion than fear, no greater wrong than preparing to defend yourself, no greater misfortune than having an enemy.  Whoever can see through all fear will always be safe.

196 responses to “Fear

  1. Fear, as well know, is often used in political and many kinds of other battles to steer public opinion on hot-button issues, from budgets to deficits, healthcare, immigration, war and a lot more (pretty much every issue up for funding or debate).

    Interestingly, not everyone is equally predisposed to be influenced by a fear-based strategy, according to research by Rose McDermott, professor of political science published in the American Journal of Political Science. The study is called: “Fear as a Disposition and an Emotional State: A Genetic and Environmental Approach to Out-Group Political Preferences.”

    By examining the different ways that fear manifests itself in individuals and its correlation to political attitudes, she found that people who have a greater genetic liability to experience higher levels of social fear tend to be more supportive of anti-immigration and pro-segregation policies.

    Using a large sample of related individuals, including twins, siblings, and parents and children, she first assessed individuals for their propensity for fear, using interviews. She was able to identify influences such as environment and personal experience and found that some individuals also possessed a genetic propensity for a higher level of baseline fear. Such individuals are more prepared to experience fear in general at lower levels of threat or provocation.
    According to her: “It’s not that conservative people are more fearful, it’s that fearful people are more conservative. People who are scared of novelty, uncertainty, people they don’t know, and things they don’t understand, are more supportive of policies that provide them with a sense of surety and security,” she said.

    What she found out also is that genetics plays only part of the role in influencing political preferences. Education, they found, has an equally large influence on out-group attitudes, with more highly educated people displaying more supportive attitudes toward out-groups and education having a substantial mediating influence on the correlation between parental fear and child out-group attitudes.

    “We have to recognize that a lot of what’s driving the political paralysis and disagreement has to do with emotional factors that are not necessarily amenible to or easily shifted by rational arguments,” McDermott said.

    I guess the good news here is that, even if our genetics predispose us to experiencing fear, there is plenty we can do by educating ourselves to overcome this predisposition, and to put fear in the box where it belongs…

  2. + 1 000 000 Marty. That is the correct indication, all round. Thank you.

    “Fear is the mind killer”. – Frank Herbert.

    I would only add: the manufacturing of an “Enemy” causes the condition of Fear, which overrides reason, objectivity, rationality, sanity and compassion. Reason, objectivity, rationality, sanity and compassion do not constitute agreement with wrong actions. Rather, they provide the means to find solutions, whereas Fear-based responses perpetuate and compound the problem.

  3. Fear is quite easy to understand for those with exterior perception. Wander over to the sleeping place of DM early in the morning and observe the sharp constriction of the nether regions as he awakens and wonders “will they find out about me today?”

  4. Don’t post, just dive into Ethel kennedy you and Mosey, Dive into this and you will be enlightened.

    Here is a person who spits in the eyes of fear.

  5. Marty I was wrong on Eugenics being a Nazi-thing It was American born it seems:

    Eugenics, the social movement claiming to improve the genetic features of human populations through selective breeding and sterilization,[1] based on the idea that it is possible to distinguish between superior and inferior elements of society,[2] played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States prior to its involvement in World War II.[3]

    Eugenics was practised in the United States many years before eugenics programs in Nazi Germany[4] and actually, U.S. programs provided much of the inspiration for the latter.[5][6][7] Stefan Kühl has documented the consensus between Nazi race policies and those of eugenicists in other countries, including the United States, and points out that eugenicists understood Nazi policies and measures as the realization of their goals and demands.[5]

    A hallmark of the Progressive Era of the late 19th and early 20th century, now generally associated with racist and nativist elements (as the movement was to some extent a reaction to a change in emigration from Europe) rather than scientific genetics, eugenics was considered a method of preserving and improving the dominant groups in the population.

    I am sorry for my oversight.

    • Thank you for reading Marty and Mosey, It is a rather complicated thng anyway, most Nazi’s were just people and you and I know what people are capable of under the regime of a dictator.

      CD

  6. Tom Gallagher

    If you understand others you are smart.
    If you understand yourself you are illuminated.
    If you overcome others you are powerful.
    If you overcome yourself you have strength.
    If you know how to be satisfied you are rich.
    If you can act with vigor, you have a will.
    “If you don’t lose your objectives you can be long-lasting.
    If you die without loss, you are eternal.”
    ― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  7. Looking at CA today and what is understood to be the progressive Californian mindset, one would never associates CA and Eugenics. The shameful story is that 20,000 Californians were forcibly sterilized by the state from 1910 to 1963. Yes, 1963, that’s very recent…

    The goal was to rid society of people thought to be undesirable: people labeled “feeble-minded” or “defectives.”

    California’s movement was so effective that in the 1930s, members of the Nazi party asked California eugenicists for advice on how to run their own sterilization program. Germany used California’s program as its chief example that this was a working, successful policy. They modeled their law on California’s law.

    32 states had eugenics programs, but California was in a league of its own. CA sterilized more than twice as many people as the next state, Virginia, which sterilized 8,300.

    CA law said that wards of the state had to be sterilized in order to be discharged from institutions. Men and women, boys and girls, were sent to state institutions for all sorts of reasons. Some had serious developmental disabilities. Some ended up there just because their parents were alcoholics and couldn’t care for them.

    What’s mind blowing is that, in the mid-20th century, the American intellectual elite such as doctors, geneticists and Supreme Court justices supported forced sterilizations. At the same time, many in Congress were pleading that abolishing slavery would be bad for business because corporations would not be able to pay people and remain competitive…Unreal…

    In California, the eugenics movement was led by figures such as William Starr Jordan, president of Stanford University, and Harry Chandler, publisher of the Los Angeles Times.

    In other states, the sterilization program would stop and start due to legal challenges, but California’s ran strong for more than half a century.

    So glad all this is over…If I can do my little part to help this planet be a more humane place to live… a place where people have respect and deference for each other.. a place where life is held sacred…where no one is seen as inferior for any reason… Such a simple dream and sometimes still so far away…The only way to usher change, is one person at a time, and the good news is that I, like every one, can do my part…

  8. The noted Zen master/monk, who helped popularize Zen buddhism in the US in late 1950’s once said:

    “Hell is not punishment, it is training.”

    When I’m having a bad day or reflecting on my life or trying to sort through my scientology experiences (good and bad — good might be considered heaven (also training)) — it’s a valuable quote for me.

    At the end of the day … it’s all training.

    Training in watching ones mind, choosing as positive a choice and moving on up.

  9. “Exterior with full perception” was another vague concept.

    Look at the perceptible. Figure out how much of that is happening because you are IN A BODY. Colors (eye lens) Sound (ear drums) Temperature, and so on.

    Yes, there are people that hoped to go “fully exterior” and have all of those perceptics AMPLIFIED!

    Full perception of what?

    That was a question seldom asked. Going fully exterior myself, there was no sound. There was no color. Um…there was a lot to NOT perceive.

    • I did have full perception of all that I could no longer perceive. Which made quite a list!

      • This was hysterical! To see a P.C. running around the base, just cranked out of the L’s H.G.C., complaining madly and loudly that he was not exterior with full perceptions, and in fact, seemed to be perceiving much less.

    • The Oracle, was there anything you did perceive?

      And can you comment on this Tech Dictionary definition:

      THETA PERCEPTION, that which one perceives by radiating towards an object and from the reflection perceiving various characteristics of the object such as size, odor, tactile, sound, color, etc. Certainty of perception is increased by drilling in certainties as above. Theta perception is dependent upon willingness to handle and to create space, energy and objects in view of the fact that the mest universe can be established easily to be an illusion. One must have an ability to perceive illusions before one can clearly perceive the mest universe. The thetan who cannot perceive the mest universe easily will also be found to be incapable of handling and orientating other kinds of illusions with certainty. Theta perception is also a direct index to responsibility, for responsibility is the willingness to handle force. (Scn 8-8008 Gloss)

      • I figured out that I went into the body because I wanted to perceive. I wanted to perceive colors, music, sound, taste, feeling.

        What I perceived outside of the body was quiet, shadows, my own “way” as a being of moving. Which felt like spilling. Moving around was a feeling of spilling. I mean, that is the only way I describe it. A slow spill. Well, I was taking it slow. Not to say I couldn’t speed things up.
        But I felt like a syrup pouring across a pancake.

        Things did not appear 3D anymore. It all looked flat and distinguished by shadows. And, that universe was occupied, I mean it was populated by more same like me, but with very distinct space between all of us. The others had distinct identities. The others felt very neither friendly or unfriendly , but and curious. Nothing scary at all. Seeming lost or uncertain mostly. There was no feeling of obligation there. You know, to say hello or something like that. I felt nothing was expected of me. If there was any “force” out there, I didn’t feel it. I didn’t feel myself “radiating”. But hey, that is just me. I didn’t notice anyone else “radiating” either. There was nothing to really do but spill around a little bit. I found I got very bored very fast and scurried back to “live a little”.

        So yes, I became keenly aware of the illusion. But I have a far greater appreciation of life and living. My reason for living is to have some fun. I owned it.

        I think people check out when the pain/pleasure ratio is out of balance. Too much pain, not enough pleasure. That is getting punished for living, not rewarded. People should be excused from that. Really.

        But I certainly wouldn’t be getting auditing to GO OUT and STAY OUT of the body, if my purpose was to PERCEIVE. So, “Exterior with full perception” is well, what it is.

        I also wouldn’t presume that everyone breaking body, would have the same experience. Or even have the same experience. That would be assuming that there are no parallel universes out there.

        • Perhaps he might have said, “Exterior with full perception of the illusion”, and that might have translated a better understanding to people.

        • I do think, one is either in, or out, of life. You cannot be in and out at the same time. That could be real GPM.

        • Maybe, to “go out”, at cause, one has to admit or understand or own, their want and desire, to go in. I wouldn’t audit someone with the promise to “get them out”. Unless the auditing was to focus on all of the pleasure people were seeking wanting and hoping for, when they started up a “life”. This falls under purposes. And that is exactly what you address on the L’s. But you have to spell it out for people who go through all kinds of auditing and have no idea why they are taking up certain paths. Someone sitting there with a deliberate purpose to “Go out and stay out” isn’t owning the life they created. They do not want to be in it. They create a life, then pay an auditor to get them out of it.
          You can direct a person’s attention back to their “reasons” and “purposes” for having a life they would like to live in. That should handle it. But it just doesn’t always go that way.

        • I guess a common denominator between Scientologists “on the road”, could be, that they really do not want to be in the life that they created.
          They don’t want to NOT have a life, just a different one. To have different life, or be a different identity. After all, the big Question is, “What is ruining your life”? And the answer is always, “Scientology can handle that”. They are always promised a new life, or a different life, or a better version of them self.”

          People that are already content just aren’t going to walk down that hall.

          I mean, you can dig and pester anyone to admit to a perceived “flaw” in their life, then bug them to “fix it”.

          When you hear people complain about the life they have, or don’t have, “because of Scientology”, they have long forgotten the life they had, or didn’t have, before Scientology, that they wanted Scientology to fix. Happy campers don’t sign up. Your first free “service” is an OCA test to agree with you, that your life is a substandard creation.

          Either way, there were in a life they were not happy about before they got involved. They were in a life they were not happy about while they were involved. And they are in a life they are not happy about, since they left. And it is all something or someone else’s fault.

          I mean, that is one way to live your life. As if it has nothing to with you.

          • Your first free “service” is an OCA test to agree with you, that your life is a substandard creation. As in, “Your graph should be up here, up here, way up here see this line? And,and it is way down here,see, down here, look down where my finger is when I’m talking to you.”

            Can you believe, there is someone out here working as an auditor, that is propping up clears and OT’s and running OCA’s on them?

        • Thanks, T.O. I have heard others express similar experiences to yours, using words like “flow”. I really enjoyed your other comments too.

          Here’s a short video that I think relates, although it’s not about exteriorization due to death. It’s about meditating and going “out-of-body”, healing, doing remote viewing, etc. (i.e. exteriorizing). In the video Tom Campbell explains that individuals usually start out by becoming aware “in their consciousness”, which at first means they become unaware of the physical. But he says that with practice that doesn’t have to be the case – they can be aware of both. It’s all a matter of having an “intent” to gather “certain” information. This video is just part of a seminar where he answers a particular question, but if you watch any of the videos where he presents his whole theory, the “intent” can be to have perception of a particular location in the physical universe, or of some other physical or non-physical universe, or to “go back” to the past – or any of the other “data streams” that he says are available. He bases his claims on his own and others’ personal experiences.

          Btw, you mentioned that there were others “out there” who mostly seemed lost or uncertain. I had an experience where someone close to me died suddenly of a heart attack and I asked an OT friend to get in comm with him. She said that he right away wanted to know what happened. She had to explain to him that his body had died but assured him that “he” was fine, and then she answered some of his questions. She let him know that there was no rush, he could take his time before choosing another body – told him to look around and see where he wanted to be born and pick the body he wanted. Whereas he had been quite misemotional at first, by the end she felt a great sense of relief in him. Seems to me everyone should have this “hatting” – early on in life.

          • Wow! He is so out of the A=A. Such a good call, Thanks for sharing the experience. I have had them, with former Scientologists! I had a very close friend that was an OTV. He died, O.K., within a very short time he arrived. He was complaining of sleep deprivation and cold. I let him share my body and sleep. By that I mean I layed down and slept for two days under a comforter. I had never slept that long in my life. He was an addict for heat and sleep and food.
            I mean, he couldn’t even function with out “sleep”. As a thetan. I had a former Sea Org Member “techie” staying at my place. He had been tossed under the bus and I scooped him up. He was alright. I asked him to help me understand this. He showed me a reference from a book where Hubbard talks about a thetan’s temperature going down outside of the body. To like, under zero! So it made sense. Still, exterior myself, it was not cold. So I am driven to believe there are parallel universes.

        • There is not “nothing” outside of your body. There is an “atmosphere” about the planet that is it’s own mass and weight. I moved into and through that. I was still “in” something. Which gave me the feeling of my own motion. I think it would be different being outside of the body, to then move beyond that. But “space” has weight and mass when you are near a planet. And things can just hang in that.

          • Very interesting. Is it possible that this “atmosphere” around planets exists away from them as well? Actually, any of your direct perceptions of the universe while exterior would be of great interest to the students of theoretical physics and cosmology who post here. And me too! :)

            • Sorry, I didn’t get something. You said, ” Is it possible that this “atmosphere” around planets exists away from them as well? ”

              Exists away from who (is “them”)?

              What I mean to say is, “Fully exterior” can be misleading. So can an “out of the body experience” in this atmosphere. You can be exterior from the body, but you are still in something. So you are not “fully exterior” even if you are out of the body and in this planet’s atmosphere.

              The felling of “spilling” I had, was the feeling of moving through the atmosphere here.

              Away from this atmosphere, being outside of a body is an entirely different feeling.

              You can move out of the body but still be “in” something, like an atmosphere.

              The atmosphere here has some similarities to other atmospheres but this is it’s own unique planet. No two planets are the same and either are any two atmospheres.

              This is why electronics work here. They can travel through the atmosphere because it is a mass.

              You can leave the body you are in but when you do, you just enter another body of mass.

              Getting exterior from that body of mass may take it’s own auditing process’. IF one seems to be stuck in it. I would think that would carry the same auditing laws for leaving any body of mass.

              I guess some thetans could be stuck in it, I seemed to be the only one moving in it, the others were still. But that may have been a calm. A “just being there” that was going on. Maybe some people like just hanging around. Maybe some people are figuring it out.

              I’ll do some more exploring!

              • Thanks, T.O. And in your further exploring, see if you can find out anything about the Higgs field. Theories are interesting but can’t compare to direct experience. :)

                By “them” I meant planets, i.e. away from the atmospheres of planets. In other words – in outer space. And you actually answered the question. Your comments on “exterior” reminded me of the two-part “Gradient Scale of Exteriorization” from Creation of Human Ability (and also in the latest edition of Scn 0-8).

                Start of quote:
                —————————
                There is a gradient scale of exteriorization which could be described as follows:

                First, the thetan without contact with a universe;
                Then, a thetan in full contact with a universe:
                Then, a thetan in contact with part of a universe, who considers the remainder of the universe barred to him;
                Then, a thetan in a universe without any contact with any part of the universe;
                Then, a thetan unknowingly in contact with a large part of a universe.

                The first condition would be a true Static, The last condition is called, colloquially, in Scientology, “buttered all over the universe”.

                As it is with a universe, such as the physical universe, so it is with physical bodies. The thetan, who has already gone through the cycle on the universe itself, may be in contact with a physical body in the same order:

                At first he would be without association with a physical body;
                Then, with occasional contact with bodies;
                Then, with a fixed contact on one body but exteriorized;
                Then, interiorized into a body but easy to exteriorize;
                Then, in contact with and interiorized into a body, but withdrawn from the various parts of the body;
                Then, obsessively “buttered all through the body”;
                Then, obsessively and unknowingly drawn down to some small portion of the body, and so forth.

                This is the gradient scale which includes inversion and then inversion of the inversion. The auditor will discover preclears are very variable in the matter of exteriorization. Some preclears, even when they have a dark field, exteriorize rather easily. Others, after a great deal of work, are still found to be difficult to exteriorize. The matter of exteriorization is the matter of which level of inversion the preclear is in.

                One of the more difficult levels to work is so inverted that he thinks that a thetan is running him. In other words, here is a thetan functioning in a body and actually running it through various covert communication lines, who yet believes he is a body to such an extent that he considers himself, or any life around him to be some other being.
                ————————

                • Very Interesting. I had not seen the quote, but something in it sticks for me. So, it doesn’t indicate as true for me. And I think it is something basic, like goals. I have only met a few people who had the goal of being exterior or seemed to be obsessed or have a lot of attention on exteriorization.

                  It is placed as a goal right on HQS on the upper indocs. That and the results could be a thread in itself. “Exteriorize” is a verb.
                  “Exteriorization” “easily or not”, seems to be a new skill or challenge put forth into the Scientology mix.

                  I went exterior long before I sat in the Church of Scientology on HQS. I think a lot of people that took drugs did, and already knew they had been in and out of the body more times than they had, the back door of the home they grew up in.

                  It got made a big issue and some kind of huge standard in the Church.

                  I don’t think people who are happy care. People want to be happy, and they want to be doing what they are doing when they are doing it. I don’t think a lot of people have the goal to be “elsewhere” unless they are not happy where they are. “Elsewhere” is also on the chart of human characteristics. People would not be in a body if they did not want to go into one to begin with. I don’t think it is a crime or a degraded condition to be in a body. I am still seeing it on the plus side of having a game and keeping myself busy. I wouldn’t want to be three feet in back on my head. I like my head. I like being in the head. And I like being in the body.

                  This sub culture of being in a body and pretending you really don’t want to be in it is kind of weird. Making nothing of the body is kind of weird, these things are high maintenance, it takes a long time to grow one up, keep it well keep it running and keep it as an asset. Why the hell would I pretend it doesn’t amount to anything and I really don’t want to be anywhere around it? Not that I am into “worshipping” bodies. But I think resentment towards the body is not too healthy either. Either is pretending it is some kind pf parasite that has a hold on you.

                  Hubbard spoke a lot of exteriorization, “running the body”, getting out of the body, whatever. These were all of his interests, concerns and viewpoints. Yet he was terrorized at the thought of sharing his bodies with others. He wouldn’t permit a doctor to tend to him. He wrote of concerns about his body in early memoirs. He hid his body a lot later on so people could not see it or find it. He just had issues that were his own.

                  When I read the quote above of Hubbard’s, it sounds to me like he is tripping. Especially the inversion into the inversion ……… From my viewpoint, you are in or out of the body. That’s all. If you are dying to get out, even though you are in, you are in a G.P.M.. You have to handle that. To be in and to be out at the same time are colliding purposes. Imagine if you were trying to get in and out of your house at the same time?

                  If people “have trouble exteriorizing” maybe it’s because it’s not their purpose. Geeze Christ isn’t it more cheerful to focus on what is right?

                  “You are in a body” defined as a handicap, is an indication. What is right about someone in a body? Well, they can sign up for a course! Hold the cans! Learn! Laugh! Love! Hear the command! Have the conversation!

                  There is an undercurrent of shame about bodies and being in one that flows through Scientology that I always thought was pretty creepy.

                  It’s on the tonescale. “Being a body”. It is a “crime” we all share that is plotted very low on that tone scale. He even cloaked his body of work in Scientology.

                  Hubbard was apparently repelled by it. But he collected thousands of them to his bidding. He liked his shirts rinsed 13 times. He had his own butler and his own chef. He had other possessions he loved. His guns, his homes, his bank accounts, his staff (if they were obedient), his cars.

                  But anyone should know by the laws of affinity, if you are occupying the same space with someone else, there is a high degree of affinity.

                  Perhaps someone not into “exteriorization” just didn’t want to put space between them and their body. A body, is a creation. To make less of someone’s body is to make less of something they have created. And that is something of THEM.

                  I just think Hubbard should have audited himself or had someone else do it , with the attention and attitudes and emotions he had on the subject.

                  • Frankly, the quote above sounds like case to me.

                    • Causes me to consider the resources the Church has to “protect bodies”. The G.O.. That was to protect Hubbard and his body of work.
                      All of the security staff, M.A.A.’s, Justice officers, I.A.S., CCHR, these are groups and entities with the purpose of protecting bodies. Hubbard spent a lot of time and resources hiding his body too. If it’s anyplace that worships bodies (look at what happens when one of them tries to leave) it is the Scientology culture. There are just some big issues there that have been created.

                  • T.O. got your viewpoint. Mine is that Hubbard’s own case may or may not have been a factor in his development of this Gradient Scale of Exteriorization, but it was apparently based on his research. And I didn’t get that he meant it had anything to do with setting goals but was simply a description of the cycles thetans go through in relation to universes as well as physical bodies (the second part of the scale).

                    I do agree with you, however, that “exteriorization” seems to have been made into a big issue by Scientologists and/or the CoS. But as for LRH, I think the subject may come down to what he had to say about “theta clear” and the purposes for attaining that state, which would in fact be a matter of goals – although these goals would actually involve the freedoms of choice that you wrote about.

                    Quoted from the Tech Dictionary:
                    ——————————-
                    THETA CLEAR, 1. it is a person who operates exterior to a body without need of a body. (SH Spec 59, 6109C27) 2 . that state wherein the preclear can remain with certainty outside his body when the body is hurt. (PAB 33) 3. a theta clear, then can be defined as a person who is at cause over his own reactive bank and can create and uncreate it at will. Less accurately he is a person who is willing to experience. Theta clear is stable. (Ab1,1 92M) 4 . theta clear would mean clear of the mest body or cleared of the necessity to have a mest body. (5206CM26A) 5 . there are two types of theta clear, the theta being which is cleared of its necessity or compulsion to have a body and a theta being which is cleared all the way on the track. (5206CM26B) 6 . the basic definition of theta clear is: no further necessity for beingnesses. (SH Spec 36, 6108C09) 7 . this is a relative not an absolute term. It means that the person, this thought unit, is clear of his body, his engrams, his facsimiles, but can handle and safely control a body. (COHA, p. 248) 8 . in its highest sense, means no further dependency on bodies. (SCP, p. 3) 9 . an individual who, as a being, is certain of his identity apart from that of the body, and who habitually operates the body from outside, or exteriorized. (PXL, p. 16)
                    ——————————-

                    p.s. Did you do any more exploring? :)

                    • I attested to Theta Clear in 1976. And Cleared theta clear the same year.

                      There is I think, I should distinguish a difference between necessity, and desire. One is down in the enforce band, one is up at the top of the CDEI scale.

                      My theories are simple, if it is up at desire or curiosity about, it’s O.K..

                      If it is anything less than that, it is aberrated. Scientology doesn’t even work down in the enforce band.

                      Necessity and compulsions are usually enforced situations.

                      But 99% of the people who travel across the threshold of Scientology are not in the enforce band. They get driven down there by the culture.

                      People will not sign up for a service unless they “curious about” or feel some desire.

                      How does that same person get up for 8:30 muster on the R.P.F. a few years later after they have laid themselves on the line to help others before themself? That is taking the holy and making them unholy.

                      Scientology can drag people down or lift them up. That should be obvious from the feedback.

                      I have been doing some exploring, and I have come to the conclusion that maybe I shouldn’t say my views of Hubbard’s theories. I don’t know who he was talking to when he itsa’d. Maybe what he is saying is true for the people he was speaking to. But it seems to me, if you are going to put something in writing as fact, you would have KNOW the person you are telling this to. And you cannot possibly KNOW everyone who is going to read what you wrote. Maybe he went for a majority that I am not a part of. Maybe what sounds true for others is not true for me. Maybe there are people tripping with “in and out” and I just didn’t get it.

                      Maybe other people have issues with bodies I do not have. I only know all of the process’ worked for me, exactly as they were laid out on the grade chart. I have more or less been considered a “Cadillac P.C.”. So, I thought I was very ordinary.

                      I noticed how many times the word “body” and “free from” were used in the definitions above.

                      I only know two categories. What I do know and what I don’t know.

                      What I know about myself, does not mean I know about other people.

                      Maybe what Hubbard had to say about others was 100% true for them, and I just don’t know it yet.

                      I don’t have charge on bodies.
                      I don’t have charge on drugs.
                      I don’t have charge on radiation.
                      I don’t have charge on Hugs.

                      I don’t have charge on Xenu
                      I loved him very well.
                      I don’t have charge on Heaven.
                      I’ve lived it up in Hell.

                      I don’t have charge on other people’s past.
                      I don’t have charge on Hubbard’s enemies.
                      I don’t have charge on Hubbard’s friends.
                      I don’t have charge on Pedigree.

                      I don’t have charge on Magick
                      I don’t have charge on religion.
                      I don’t have charge on “squirrels”.
                      Or staff as pregnant women.

                      I don’t have charge on Psychs.
                      X S.O.,Freeloaders , Blows , PTS
                      or People fighting for their rights.
                      Long dark nights. Inflated price.

                      I don’t have charge on Hubbard
                      I love him very well.
                      My charge is the illusion
                      where people choose to dwell.

                      Am I obligated to inherit
                      all of Hubbard’s charge?
                      Or am I free from to be myself
                      as an honorable discharge?

                    • T.O. that was a wonderful poem! :)

                      On the earlier part of your post you wrote, “I have been doing some exploring, and I have come to the conclusion that maybe I shouldn’t say my views of Hubbard’s theories.”

                      I disagree! :) And hopefully that was only a momentary sentiment for you too. The sharing of ideas is what leads TO greater truth. This has been the case throughout history – including on blogs like this one, as I think you would agree.

                      You also wrote: “I don’t know who he was talking to when he itsa’d. Maybe what he is saying is true for the people he was speaking to. But it seems to me, if you are going to put something in writing as fact, you would have KNOW the person you are telling this to. And you cannot possibly KNOW everyone who is going to read what you wrote. Maybe he went for a majority that I am not a part of. Maybe what sounds true for others is not true for me. Maybe there are people tripping with “in and out” and I just didn’t get it.”

                      I would say there is definitely a difficulty in communicating basic truths through the means of words. Here’s a relevant quote from Scn 8-8008:

                      “Truth in Scientology is the study of the lowest common denominator of agreement, plus the establishment of the true ability of the thetan. The true ability of the thetan is a truth much higher than the truth of the MEST universe itself and, if it has ever before been known, the difficulties of communicating it have been such as to inhibit its promulgation.” (Scientology 8-8008)

                      Also, as you know, Hubbard (when at his best) basically said the same thing you did – in his essay “Personal Integrity” written in 1954, and even in 1981 when he wrote the following in “The Way to Happiness” booklet:

                      “What is true is what is true for you. No one has any right to force data on you and command you to believe it or else. If it is not true for you, it isn’t true. Think your own way through things, accept what is true for you, discard the rest. There is nothing unhappier than one who tries to live in a chaos of lies.”

                      You said it beautifully on your last stanza:

                      “Am I obligated to inherit
                      all of Hubbard’s charge?
                      Or am I free from to be myself
                      as an honorable discharge?”

                    • Oracle, I really enjoyed your poem!

                      ‘Charge’ is the fabric used to weave the the unholy veil. ‘Charge’ is a barnacle with venom. As long as it’s stuck to one, it is ever secreting poison into its host who is not willing to let it go. ‘Charge’ is unforgiveness of self.

                      I am very happy Oracle that you have no ‘charge’ on so many things. Certainly, the veil has thinned for you.

                    • Ha ha! We are having a nice chat back in this corner. :) I guess the point I was leaning on, is that nobody, nobody, nobody, ever, ever, ever, gets an honorable discharge from Scientology. It is always always, dishonorable. The game is set up that you can only lose by “getting out” or “going exterior” to it. The game itself, “The route out”, is illusion. You are not supposed to “get out” or “go exterior” from Scientology. It is set up so you go in, and stay in. The system is a product of Hubbard’s . He set himself up to be trapped in it. He had the franchises going very well and he was getting a % and his royalties. He could have sailed off and done a lot of things. But he wove himself into the fabric in a way that he could not back out of it. And he set up so that nobody could with good conscience, go exterior from it. So I suspect that he himself had some issues about exteriorization. Look at the penalties and losses imposed upon anyone who even express a desire to go exterior from Scientology. The dangers and warnings, crimes implied should one even consider “departures from the ideal scene” “falling off the bridge” “departures from standard tech” “Absence without official “permission” ”
                      it goes on, and on, and on. Well, yes, he had some issues with people “getting out” or “going exterior”. “Getting out” or “leaving” is a crime in Scientology. In fact, it means you are evil or have overts if you want to leave or “go exterior” from it. I think the bodies were more important to him than he let on. Bodies in the shop is a stat. :)

                    • He even declared somewhere, I read it, “You can’t be half in and half out of Scientology”. When I already was.

                    • Running “Can’t Be’s” is just as bad as running “Can’t Haves”. Add that to the “Can’t do’s” and you’ve got some can’t mixed in with the can. The entire theater of Scientology has morphed into Can’t Be Do or Have.
                      Any store front selling anything, is supposed to be running CAN HAVES. Or CAN BE’s or CAN DO’s. People pay for CAN. They don’t pay for CAN’T. Why the Orgs are empty. It is that simple. Trying to run a can’t have on the body, as in, “you really can’t have your body, that is degrading” is as lecherous as it gets. If you start a subtle aggression towards it, someone else can run it. Who has a purpose for it.

                      When he said, “It is quite remarkable that the magician attempts directly to use spirits to perform his will.” (from a Lecture given on 29 January 1958, The History of Clearing) I would say, “What magician?”

                      Command of Magic is a complete harmony with nature, it’s forces and conditions. An ARC so complete you occupy the same space with no distances. That is a long distance from “using spirits to perform his will”. Any reduction in ARC is a reduction in magicality. Using vias and cloaks is an indication of out ARC. And using vias and cloaks reduces ARC. Cloaks create a synthetic ARC. And why you see people doing the strange things they do under the mask of “religion”.

                    • I don’t think there is a higher state than Native State. It is rather sad for me to see people working to attain more than that. Thinking they are supposed to be more than that.

                    • Thanks for all your comments, Oracle. As you said in a comment above, we’ve had “a nice chat back in this corner”. :)

                  • Oracle, you wrote: “People would not be in a body if they did not want to go into one to begin with. I don’t think it is a crime or a degraded condition to be in a body. I am still seeing it on the plus side of having a game and keeping myself busy. I wouldn’t want to be three feet in back on my head. I like my head. I like being in the head. And I like being in the body.

                    “This sub culture of being in a body and pretending you really don’t want to be in it is kind of weird. Making nothing of the body is kind of weird, these things are high maintenance, it takes a long time to grow one up, keep it well keep it running and keep it as an asset. Why the hell would I pretend it doesn’t amount to anything and I really don’t want to be anywhere around it? Not that I am into “worshipping” bodies. But I think resentment towards the body is not too healthy either. Either is pretending it is some kind pf parasite that has a hold on you.”

                    Since I have been, and am currently exploring the message (supposedly as dictated by Jesus – which I view as a metaphor for my higher self) as written in the book, A Course in Miracles (ACIM)….I am constantly coming across material in the course that speaks to or parallels concepts being discussed here on Marty’s blog. Just to be clear, in my sharing excerpts from the course in my comments that I post, I have no agenda to ‘sell’ the course to anyone here or anywhere else. It’s just another perspective I’m adding to the table. That said, your comment about the body brought something I read in the course a while back to mind. I thought you might find this of some interest.

                    Excerpt from ACIM Text, Chapter 18, Section VIII (The Little Garden):

                    “It is only the awareness of the body that makes love seem limited. For the body is a limit on love. The belief in limited love was its origin, and it was made to limit the unlimited. Think not that this is merely allegorical, for it was made to limit you. Can you who see yourself within a body know yourself as an idea? Everything you recognize you identify with externals, something outside itself. You cannot even think of God without a body, or in some form you think you recognize.

                    “The body cannot know. And while you limit your awareness to its tiny senses, you will not see the grandeur that surrounds you. God cannot come into a body, nor can you join him there. Limits on love will always seem to shut him out, and keep you apart from him. The body is a tiny fence around a little part of a glorious and complete idea. It draws a circle, infinitely small, around a very little segment of Heaven, splintered from the whole, proclaiming that within it is your kingdom, where God can enter not.

                    “Within this kingdom the ego rules, and cruelly. And to defend this little speck of dust it bids you fight against the universe. This fragment of your mind is such a tiny part of it that, could you but appreciate the whole, you would see instantly that it is like the smallest sunbeam to the sun, or like the faintest ripple on the surface of the ocean. In its amazing arrogance, this tiny sunbeam has decided it is the sun; this almost imperceptible ripple hails itself as the ocean. Think how alone and frightened is this little thought, this infinitesimal illusion, holding itself apart against the universe. The sun becomes the sunbeam’s “enemy” that would devour it, and the ocean terrifies the little ripple and wants to swallow it.

                    “Such is the strange position in which those in a world inhabited by bodies seem to be. Each body seems to house a separate mind, a disconnected thought, living alone and in no way joined to the Thought by which it was created. Each tiny fragment seems to be self-contained, needing another for some things, but by no means totally dependent on its one Creator for everything; needing the whole to give it any meaning, for by itself it does mean nothing. Nor has it any life apart and by itself.”

                    http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_Course_in_Miracles/Text/Chapter_18

                    • Beautiful prose. Whoever creates their own reality is certainly a Super Natural force. Probably why we all find Marty and his life so fascinating. He blatantly creates his own reality.

                      It is a co dependent universe. No food without rain. And what you are dependent upon you become the effect of. The crops become the effect of the sun. The oceans becomes the effect of the moon. I am aware of the fragile conditions. I just don’t have charge on it.

                      I see being cause and being effect as basic thetan rights and abilties. Not handicaps. I just admit my decadence. My willingness to live intensely under these conditions. Yes, I admit I accept these terms and conditions for living. And I accept myself the way I am. If this is “ego” , I admit I have it. I am guilty of it all. I confess I don’t have any charge on that either.

                      It sure has been swell sharing my transgressions with you. :)

  10. Talking about fear….I was just looking at the book: “ Love is Letting Go of Fear” by Gerald G. Jampolsky. I had forgotten how good this book is…

    There are some really great insights in it. This one resonates very much with me and my departure from the spiritual movement I was associated with: “When we think we have been hurt by someone in the past, we build up defenses to protect ourselves from being hurt in the future. So the fearful past causes a fearful future and the past and future become one. We cannot love when we feel fear…. When we release the fearful past and forgive everyone, we will experience total love and oneness with all.” I believe I’m just starting to turn this corner, it has taken years to get here.

    I also really like this one: challenging, but right in front of me right now: “Peace of mind comes from not wanting to change others. You can be right, or you can be happy.” How true…

    And finally: “The world we see that seems so insane is the result of a belief system that is not working. To perceive the world differently, we must be willing to change our belief system, let the past slip away, expand our sense of now, and dissolve the fear in our minds.”

    This guy is good…..I need to read this book again from cover to cover…This book came out decades ago, and needs to be resurrected! What a timelessly relevant book!

    • Paul, thanks for the recommendation. Sounds great and so consistent with the above video with Bruce Lipton.

    • Paul, thanks so much for bringing Gerald G. Jampolsky and his book, Love is Letting Go of Fear, to the table. I had never heard of him or his book until I read your comment. Reading the excerpts you chose to include in your post, I see that this man is awakened. Perhaps even enlightened (I have to read the book). Thanks again. I really appreciate it. ~Monte

  11. Let’s play Spot That Group!

    (From the Chart of Human Evaluation, “Method Used by Subject to Handle Others” and “Ability to Experience Present Time Pleasure” columns.)

    Where does YOUR group reside on the Emotional Tone Scale?

    4.0 – Enthusiasm
    Gains support by creative enthusiasm and vitality backed by reason. Finds existence very full of pleasure.

    3.5 – Cheerfulness/Strong Interest
    Gains support by creative reasoning and vitality. Finds life pleasurable most of the time.

    3.0 – Conservatism
    Invites support by practical reasoning and social graces. Experiences pleasure some of the time.

    2.5 – Boredom
    Careless of support from others. Sometimes experiences a moment of pleasure. Low intensity.

    2.0 – Antagonism
    Nags and bluntly criticizes to demand compliance with wishes. Occasionally experiences some pleasure in extraordinary moments.

    1.5 – Anger
    Uses threats, punishment and alarming lies to dominate others. Seldom experiences any pleasure.

    1.1 – Covert Hostility
    Nullifies others to get them to level where they can be used. Devious and vicious means. Hypnotism, gossip. Seeks hidden control. Most gaiety forced. Real pleasure out of reach.

    0.5 – Grief
    Enturbulates others to control them. Cries for pity. Wild lying to gain sympathy. Pleasure: None.

    0.1 – Apathy
    Pretends death so others will not think him dangerous and will go away. Pleasure: None

  12. IS FEAR THE ILLUSION IN THE OVERALL ILLUSION WE OURSELVES CONJURE UP OR IS IT ANOTHER AGREEMENT WE DELUDE OURSELVES WITH TO KEEP PLAYING WITH THE ONION? Pardon the caps. Bill Dupree

  13. “Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.” ~ Victor E. Frankl

    In this ‘space’ between stimulus and response that Victor speaks of, I believe that, ultimately, there are only two responses that we have to choose between. One is love and the other fear. If we choose to respond in fear we have guaranteed that we will experience pain, suffering, loss, chaos, complexity and so on. If we choose to respond in love, despite the chaos that may appear to be occurring in our perception, we will remain in peace without need, want, obligation or compulsion to judge and condemn.

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