What We Are Doing Here

There have been some questions of late about what my intentions are for this blog.  These come from people that seem offended by my allowance of comments that question aspects of Scientology and my posts suggesting reading outside of Scientology.   I think one huge impediment – if not the biggest of all – to people realizing the gains attainable from Scientology is the Org inclulcated false sense, even beingness, of “certainty.”   It is an injection of the biggest barrier to learning – thinking one already knows.  I see Scientologists being created who taste a bit of “Know About” on the Know to Mystery scale and buy into some bullshit that they have achieved KNOW.  They have been denied achieving KNOW by learning how to talk the talk without ever learning to walk the walk.  And therein lie some seeds that grow into what people on the outside perceive as a cult.

One does not achieve KNOW without passing through NOT KNOW.   (Know to Mystery Scale)

NOT KNOW lies above CURIOSITY on the CDEI Scale.

NOT KNOW lies next to KNOWS ALL on the Scale of Postulates which is equivilent on that scale to Native State.

One goes from INTEREST through NOT-KNOW to arrive at KNOW on the Scale of Stuckness.

NOT KNOW is plotted at 30.0 or POSTULATES on the tone scale.

Those who are stably above 30.0 on the tone scale should really have no use for this blog. 

But before you decide to tune out, did you know that all of the above has been available wisdom for upwards of 2,500 years? 

These excerpts from the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu on the subject of the importance of Not Know have been in print since about 500 B.C.  

The Master leads; by emptying people’s minds

and filling their cores, by weakening their ambiton

and toughening their resolve.

He helps people lose everything they know,

everything they desire, and creates confusion

in those who think that they know…

…The ancient Masters

didn’t try to educate the people,

but kindly taught them to not-know.

When they think that they know the answers,

people are difficult to guide.

When they know that they don’t know,

people can find their own way…

…Not-knowing is true knowledge.

Presuming to know is a disease.

First realize that you are sick;

then you can move toward health…

…When they lose their sense of awe,

people turn to religion.

When they no longer trust themselves,

they begin to depend upon authority.

618 responses to “What We Are Doing Here

  1. Beautiful post, every single word, Marty, yours and Lao Tze’s. Scientology is never going to go anywhere until people take the principles proferred and apply them, argue about them, debate them, observe them, see whether or not they work and are true, see which ones are relatively more true than others and in that way pass into the Know band. Man, Scientology is so broad and there is so much that could be done with what LRH left as a legacy but only application (and discussion/debate) will keep it alive and progressing. DM thinks that the subject is all in the past, hence, ordering OT VIIIs to redo everything. To him it is all rinse and repeat, chasing his tail in the squirrel cage and dragging everyone with him for the ride. For Indies, it is all forward progress with LRH as the guide.

  2. Well not many people got it earlier.
    Few can confront how far there is to go.
    If the masters of old had known how to reduce the gradient to a point where it was acceptable to the current populace then the planet would have been cleared aeons ago.
    LRH was and is an incredible master of gradients. He somehow became aware that it was needed not to give incredible wisdoms to people stuggling to feed themselves and their children but to impart wisdom on a useable gradient.
    He taught how to look at another person and communicate with them to people not yet ready for the wisdoms of the old masters.
    I do not dispute that the Old Masters were wise.
    Where LRH transcended them was in presenting a way to make it available to all.
    The old masters selected their pupils carefully. LRH sought a universally applicable technology.

  3. It is impossible to forget anything a person may have learned from LRH. He was one of if not the greatest philosopher that ever lived or ever will. I think.

    I still apply his information to this day. I choose to do it in a manner I think LRH would consider OK not what corrupt profiteers who feel as though they have “gotten their hands on a good thing” might suggest they have available.

    The tech works when applied, and it doesn’t when its not and reading this BLOG has convinced me there are some people who can get results the right way and some who can’t.

    And Mr. Rathbun, just so you know. I remember a long time ago I saw a picture of you with your fellow SO members and David Miscavige and I remember thinking to myself “You that guy looks like he is really trustworthy. I would like to talk to him one day”. And that is still true today, you just stand out. When I heard you left the SO I thought it was a mistake at first and had to question it. But obviously it is not. I consider myself a safe terminal and if I feel OK about it, it is generally pretty OK.

    I like what you are doing. I enjoy reading and I learn something every day.

    A person incapable of producing any kind of results in life would never have been able to permit me to do that. So thanks Marty. I appreciate your hard work.

    I absolutely won’t rest until DM is defrocked morally and ethically.

  4. Theo Sismanides

    Marty, I don’t allege to be stably over 30.0 (though at times I definitely demonstrate signs of 45, LOL), so I stay!

  5. What are you saying? LRH did not create SCN but Lao Tzu did?

    Or do you think that LRH was Lao Tzu in his past life?

    LRH’s abilities to research were amazing. A person like that was certainly famous in former lifetimes.

  6. Great post!

  7. I personally do not care if DM is defrocked or not.
    LRH talked in the early days about ignoring the baying dogs.
    DM and the existing decaying organizations have no chance when compared to those who wish to make the tech available.
    They frantically cry for attention when we leave them by.
    Please let us just ignore them .
    We can get on with delivering Scientology.

    • To whom are you addressing this Ralph?

    • Ralph,
      It is sound to bypass the broken line.

      Yet, they, those we know seek, are worth the attention.

    • If your PC would be PTS, in a state in which he accepted suppression, would you (still) help him?

      • Yes. By the baying dogs I meant those who seek to destroy the tech who crave attention. DM obviously craves attention and hates anyone who would divert attention from him to correct application.

        • Ralph:
          I know you are a Class VIII auditor. I know you practice your auditing regularly and I am sure you are pretty good at it. {LOL}.
          I want to take your side here for a moment. If there is anybody in this world with whom Scientologists had an actual opportunity many, many times to apologize to and get straight and honest with it would have to be me.

          But if certain C of S members had actually done so, then knowing what you know would I have not been covering up for criminals afterwards? So which is the greater of the two evils.

          I hope I have never impressed anyone as someone who does not believe in and abide by certain technologies discovered by LRH. It would be a sure path to “suicide” for anyone to try and prove O/W’s or implants were in fact something dreamed up by a “drug addicted person named LRH”.

          LRH Was never a drug addict, but looking at things from my point of view, how would someone from the C of S feel if someone had stolen one or more of the few letters LRH ever wrote to them as one ED did to me. Try and think if you can “What kind of gains can a person get from stealing LRH’s letters to another person?” Isn’t that a true Suppressive Act in itself is to steal LRH’s mail to someone?

          The current and former church management does not think so as those people are still in the church in “good standing”.

          I am very glad that you still do Class VIII auditing. I wish I could get some {LOL} but I am quite a distance from your delivery center.

          My whole track of services in the church is one big LOCK borderline SECONDARY. That is a pretty grim reality.

          People that try to “wipe out LRH” of course make no sense.

          But people that try to support the tech are often fought, not by SP’s but by corrupt Scientology practitioners.

    • Yes you are so RIGHT, don’t pay any attention to the abuses still going in on in the name of scientology and L. Ron Hubbard.

      -Go directly to I don’t give a Damn, You do not passs Nirvana and you don’t collect your 200 spiritual points-

      • I think Ralph means that the best revenge is doing well inspite of oppostion or suppression, or as Hubbard put it, to “Flourish and Prosper”. Of course sometime/energy must be put towards dealing with DM right now, but factually, if EVERYONE(and I mean EVERYONE) ignored him, he would wilt away.

        Back in the 1960s there was a song, “What if they gave a War and nobody came….” What if DM spoke, and nobody listened?

        • I fully agree with that but the sad fact is so many and women are still in that Abomination that calls itself a church.

          I WISH nobody listened to him. DMs own answer was something like:” When people listen to you” to the question from Ted Koppel on what makes a good (religious) leader.

          Must be in here somewhere:
          http://www.youtube.com/user/proximodiz#g/c/B8D5A63EC51700B4

          • Here is *a* bottom line only.

            Isn’t David Miscavige the one that said “Friendliness is hard to fake”? He is. Because I heard him. I know it is on YouTube.

            When I was in Scientology one day I responded to someone by saying “Yes dear.” I had a lot of affinity for the person.

            Certain staff at the org caught wind of this and their respnose was “What?” “What is this, affinity or something?” and I have not been able to be friends with them since. It is like I triggered something by having ARC after being a non-Scientologist for a long time before that. WOG Ways.

            Yes, it is like DM says, friendliness is hard to fake but that does not mean to kill someone one sees that is friendly. DM “looks like he is friendly”. Well that is just great. I wonder if other people know anything about it yet.

        • If DM is yapping in the woods and there’s no one there to hear him, would he still make a sound?

      • Cat,

        I think you miscomprehend the gist of what Ralph said. He didn’t say that everyone in the world must ignore DM said and act like it never happened. That’s not even possible as there is such a thing as law enforcement and their job is to pay attention to such things.

        I’m not going to explain what Ralph meant – he can do that for himself. Consider this though, what should the main focus be of the Scientologists on this blog? They won’t mostly have the same focus as you – many of them will want to see real delivery increase and you probably don’t have that as a personal goal. You’re Anon, you likely want to see DM and his church neutered. Nothing wrong with that, and we can’t all have the same goals – people should follow the path they think is most important for themselves and there’s enough people who see this differently to have all the bases covered.

        I tend to agree with Ralph as far as my own path is concerned and let you get on with your job of taking DM out.. Like in running a business and facing competition from an innovative competitor, I’d rather concentrate on making my product better than his above trying to take out the competition.

        Alan.

        • All I ask of you is that if you are ever in the position to let’s say help in a lawsuit like the headleys or John Lindstien or any other case against the church you go for it. Not wait untill asked but if you can shed light go for it. Oh and if you ever see a protest stop by for some caek😉

          thank you, CD

          • caek gives me a sugar rush. Make it Dutch beer instead and you got yourself a deal🙂

            On a more serious note, yes I will definitely help in cases like you mentioned if I have anything to add.

            • Recently I tried water fasting for 3 days. The results were spectacular. It is extremely possible the Purification Rundown is OBSOLETE.

        • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

          splog,

          This to me is beautiful music in words …

          “people should follow the path they think is most important for themselves and there’s enough people who see this differently to have all the bases covered.”

          Thank you.

      • Anonymous Kitty – There’s a lot of abuses in the world much much worse. Why aren’t you doing something about that instead of here annoying people and trying to have a discussion about things you don’t seem to have the capacity to understand? You’re out of your league kitty kitty, go back and play in your esmb/wwp sandbox.

        • atc,

          That’s out of line, no need to pull the church-inspired “I’m better than you” stuff here.

          CD is genuine, he’s not trolling. If you engage with him using real TRs you find someone who is interested in what we do and has kept up a good comm line for months. But he also calls BS as he sees it.

          How about you grant him some beingness, use real TRs and attempt to understand where he’s coming from? You know, do what Scientology is supposed to be all about?

        • atcause, what makes you think anybody else is annoyed?

        • atc,
          Annoying what people? Personally I´m fond of cats, notoriously ah so independent.

        • I love Cat Daddy. So does Sam.
          Just Me

    • Hi Ralph, there is great wisdom in what you are saying. I, too, believe that if real Scientology is to survive, it must be used, cultivated and put forth independent of the suppressive influences of “the Church”. And so it shall survive. There are, however, other major issues which must be simultaneously confronted. There isn’t a one-shot cure here. Each department on a 21 dept. org board has issues to address in the process of setting things right.

  8. Good for you Marty,

    Your willingness to have alternate viewpoints (even conflicting and critical ones) here on your own blog is an example to all. I’ve always believed that to find out if something is good, correct and workable then you have to be OK with the concept that it might not be, then check to see which it is.

    To evaluate data, one needs datums of comparable magnitude. If one of those datums is highly critical, well so be it. Evaluate them against each other and see what you find. If two datums appear different but on examination they turn out to be very similar, that’s great too – one looked and to that degree KNOWS more. To add to what Ralph said above – discovering that someone with great insight figured out something that LRH also wrote of can only reinforce both of them. I can’t figure why some folk have a problem with that, unless they are trained to NOT look.

    So keep doing what you are doing, judging by traffic stats there’s a lot of agreement out there about what you do.

    Alan.

    • Alan, I feel fortunate having been on external lines for so many years. I had no alternative but to read all criticisms of LRH and Scientology. Had I not lived that for 12 years before embarking on tech training, I think I might have wound up having as little regard for the subject that the “very best” Scientologists now demonstrate.

      • Marty,

        All I can say is you’re a better man than I; from experience I know I couldn’t have maintained personal integrity for those 12 years. I have some awesome skills of my own, but that is definitely not one of them. I’m glad you do though – I had all but given up on Scientology and ever making progress up The Bridge until I stumbled upon your blog.

        Alan

    • Alan,

      I have also experienced this feeling of wanting something to be a certain way so it would fit my beliefs. It happened to me with Scientology as I was starting on my path to discovery and, like you, I realized that to find truth, I had to let go of any agenda. Truth is going to be the same, even if it is a painful one that shakes my realities to the core. Living in an alter-is that “fits” my desires does not bring about increased awareness. So I keep searching.

  9. Wise words.

    One of the first signs of the clutish aspects of the DM church that I ran into was about 4 years into my Scientology experience. I was at tha AOLA and was there with a friend who was getting a session. I was not scheduled for any session or course. I was there to wait for her and then we were going to have lunch at a Thai place on Larchmont.

    I had brought a book named “”The Gods of Eden” with me to sit and read, quietly to myself, in the HGC wating room. My friend had to speak to the Solo Course Super and asked me to go along. I agreed. She approached him outside the courseroom with me in tow. I stopped behind her about 5 feet and leaned against the wall while she spoke. As they were talking, the super looked over and noticed what I was reading. He immiediately told me to stop, and remove that book from the org. It was banned from the org and I was not to read it. I was stunned.

    Never in my life did I ever expect that anywhere in any building in this country would I be told a book is banned from ones own hands to read on their own time. I could understand if I was on course time, that such should be put away. It makes sense. But I was in a common area. I was not interfering with anyone. We can argue about wether or not that book had merit or any intelligent content. But, I was reading something I wanted to read.

    From that time forward, every time I picked up a book of learning that was not Scientology releated, I felt a restimulation of an enforced implant that forbid be from reading anything NOT LRH. Why? Because an SO member trold me to stop reading something. In those days, SO members were like mini gods to me. They were devoted to knowledge and spiritual growth, I thought. So, they must know what they are talking about.

    So, I have complete and direct experience with the kind of thing Marty is imparting here. Scientology is supposed to increase your ability to benefit from the fruits of observation. It is NOT supposed to create a barrier to observing and understanding things outside the Scientology technical volumes.

    So, I just turned around and left the org and went outside on the grass and kept reading. However, I made a metal note in my head about that experience, to never allow anyone to ever tell me what to read, ever again. I had prepared two choice words in reply to any future reoccurance. One rhymes with duck. Fortunately, I have never had a repeat of that occurance. And unless I am forced to crash land in North Korea, or at a local Idol Org, I am certain I never will ever again.

    Marty speakes soothe…..may the gods feed him honey.

    Centurion

    • ain’t that the truth: “So, I have complete and direct experience with the kind of thing Marty is imparting here. Scientology is supposed to increase your ability to benefit from the fruits of observation. It is NOT supposed to create a barrier to observing and understanding things outside the Scientology technical volumes.”

      • I became a “born again Christian” about 8 years ago. One of the things that was so nice about that was the fact that I could worship my God and I’ve been encouraged to read anything. I know longer have a list of banned books. I grew up Mormon and by the time I became a Scientologist at age 21 I was use to living a life of believing with proper research. It seemed natural as a Scientologist not to read anything negative about LRH. I had a friend who lived in the Bay Area when I was on mission there who I had come to the Stevens Creek Org to try out Scientology as we were best friends since we were young and always had the same likes and dislikes. He came and tried it but also wanted to do his due diligence on Scientology and LRH. He did some research and felt that LRH and Scientology had a lot to answer for and tried to get me to read some of the things he had read. Of course I never read them and I didn’t hear from him until I left the Sea Org in 1993. I probably would’ve saved a lot of time and heartache had I just had done my due diligence. It’s nice now not to have a list of banned books.

        • Chad: How can you be sure that it wasn’t the circuitous route through Mormonism, then scientology, and Sea Org staff that ultimately led you to your current belief as a “born again Christian.”

          You might have done your due diligence and not become a scientologist or at least not a Sea Org member – but that is where it stops.

          Becoming a born again Christian was somehow the next evolution for you.

          But I agree — not having banned books is a great relief.

          WH

        • That is amazing Chad.

          I remember when I was in Scientology feeling like as if, if I threw out a copy of Source magazine {the official magazine of the Flag Land Base} even if I had read it 50 times that it was an overt to do so.

          I was not alone in this belief, my friend Barbara, who I believe has long ago been OT VIII already TOLD me one day “Oh, what am I going to do with these Flag promotional mailings. I can’t throw them out”. She was almost upset about it.

          My common sense told me “You can throw a copy of Source magazine in the garbage if you want and nothing is going to happen to you!”

          What a thing to think. And the exact kind of innocent mindset the current Church of Scientology preys on.

    • Centurion,
      If they only knew what Scientology is, actually. Know how to know. Anything.

      • Jim. Right on. A big RIGHT ON! (Marty, share some honey with Jim)

        • Scientology is the delta of a river of truth that has been flowing for thousands of years. It is just new in the way that it possesses the developed technology of applying all that wisdom that the river has carried to the delta. Of course, the delta has given us the sea.

    • Yes, I remember the “Gods of Eden” being put on the forbidden list. Fascinating book, too. A friend of mine had a similar experience at Flag when I loaned him “The Dancing Wu Li Masters” to read during the flight. He hadn’t finished the book and when he took it out during a session break he was promptly routed to Ethics. It was mostly about quantum physics, for crissakes.

      If I had paid more attention to the warning signs back then it would have saved me a lot of hassle and a small fortune.

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Centurion wrote, “And unless I am forced to crash land in North Korea, or at a local Idol Org, I am certain I never will ever again. ”

      Centurion, this cracked me up! LOL.

      Clearly, that Sea Org member did not respect the Creed of the Church of Scientology …

      “That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others;”

      Perhaps because Ron didn’t add “to read freely” after “to write freely”, that Sea Org member couldn’t think far enough to see this was implied.

      I call that practicing Robotismology.

    • So – there is a “forbidden list?” This is the second reference here that I have seen of it. Books you can’t read? Honestly, I have never heard of such a thing. I had some AAC stuff that an MAA said I should get rid of, but…

      “The Gods of Eden” and “The Secret” are banned books? Is there a published list somewhere, or is it the whim of some random staff members?

      Ridiculous.

      • I haven’tseen thelist, butitmakessensethey wouldhaveone. reportedly, the Vatican has a huge Library, and there is a whole section of books Catholics are forbidden to read. As goes the Vatican of the Dark Ages, so goes Pope Miscavige.

        “The more things change, the more they stay the same”, eh?

        The sad thing is, I believe the censorship started before Miscavige, and it was not started by LRH, it was done on the “individual initiative” of reactive little “scientologists” who took it upon themselves to be the Book Police, and it has been spreading ever since. I saw traces of it in the early 1970s. Contagion of abberation as described in DMSMH is real.
        It is “mob” or “gang” mentality that too many people are susceptible to and actually kinda enjoy succumbing to. “Better any 3rd dynamic, than none at all”, I guess. Think “groupies”, “cheerleaders”, would-be demagogues.

        Today I’m sure it’s rampant. “Everybody knows”, without thinking about it at all anymore, that it is far safer to inhibit than to allow or empower, within the CoS. “Nobody here but us chickens”.

        • The earliest case I know of was MSH (IIRC it was a Scn Policy Directive) herself forbidding Scientologists to watch “2001: A Space Odyssey” as it was “restimulative”. Well, that is true enough – lots of whole track space opera shit in that movie. But I found “Saving Private Ryan” many times more restimulative, to the point where it made me fell very ill, and no-one put that movie on the banned list….

          • Docs, please. Were you eyewitness to MSH issuing that order or was it just hearsay?

            Michael A. Hobson

            • It was a printed issue, a Policy Directive IIRC, signed by MSH. Not hearsay, an actual issue which I read.

              It might take a while to dig up a copy or a link

              • Splog,

                The “Policy Directive” issue type did not exist until 23 Feb 1982 when Scientology Policy Directive #1 created them.

                Mary Sue Hubbard was forced to resign from her post as The Guardian by Miscavige in 1981 and thereafter held no further C of $ posts, so there certainly was never a Policy Directive authored by her about anything.

                Michael A. Hobson

                • So maybe it wasn’t a “Policy Directive”, there have been heaps of directive types over the years. I care little what exact type of directive it was as I see little difference of substance between all of them. Someone writes stuff on a piece of paper thinking other people will obey; I lump all of that stuff in one big category as essentially all the same thing. I have ability to differentiate, but I reserve it for those activities where it matters in what I do. This case is not one of them.

                  • Splog, you made a (minor) defamatory claim against Mary Sue Hubbard, upon which I now call bullshit. Apparently ensuring that things you post are true is not one of those activities where it matters – to you.

                    Michael A. Hobson

                    • martyrathbun09

                      IMHO, Mike I think you busting his balls a bit too dramatically. Based on all I have read from Splog, I don’t think he would make this up. If you read his comments long-term there is no motive him for him to make this up.

                    • Marty, I probably am.
                      Splog, I’m sorry.

                      Michael A. Hobson

          • WTF I have seen many gruwsome movies: Horror, action and combat based.

            Red Stephen King Books at age 11

            I think you are just lightly upset.

      • Tony DePhillips

        While at Flag I saw a goldenrod issue posted at the MAA space banning the viewing of “The Secret.”

      • believe it or not I had a client (OT VII with his wife) who told me that the ethics officer at flag told him to burn “Pour Dad Rich Dad ” by Robert Kyosaki ,after I told him to read it — I laughed and called him the first supper PTS for complying -especially since he liked the book .
        At the time I was still on flag lines .
        But as you know by now I never cared about what I say and do .
        Actually Ron does talk on the PDC about that you should read and try other stuff.
        Anyhow, anyone who can come up with GAOT and Idle Orgs, and endless superpower reging, and objective for everyone after attesting to clear MUST ban ALL reading material as ALL of it would make more sense than what is currently presented in SCN.
        Love,
        Helmut

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        I’m also curious if the book “Jonathan Livingston Seagull” is now banned, too. In 1978, I had many Scientologists recommend reading it when I was first introducted to Scientology.

      • Yes, The Secret is a banned book. I decided to read this book after countless hours of auditing at Flag and going nowhere fast. I was so sad at the time with what was going on at Flag (I knew something was very wrong all the auditing I was getting) so a friend told me to pick up the book and read it (yes, this person was also a Scientologist but out). I blew so much charge and was so keyed out that I wanted to share this with some friends. I was told by an OT VII that I could not read that book, and it would affect my OT eligibility if I continued to read this book. I was shocked and stunned and asked “if something is bringing theta in my life, blowing charge, helping me feel more cause, and is making me happy, why then is this forbidden by the church?” All I was told was I could not read the book that it would present eligibility problems.

        Well, needless to say, that was the last straw for me. I’ve always felt something was out of wack at the church, and this was the last nail in the coffin.

        The only thing that matters is you do what makes you happy that doesn’t hurt another. THIS is what life is supposed to be about. Not the suffering the church puts people through under the guise of “freedom”.

    • To anyone who still has access INTO an AO, or ASHO or FLAG:

      I would love to see if you would be escorted to the MAA if you were reading a Glenn Beck “bestseller” —

      Having never had the stomach to watch Glenn Beck, I did listen to an NPR interview with an author who wrote a book about Glenn Beck – the phenomena and what Beck’s “about” —

      He’s definitely not my kinda guy but I’m thinking — even though he’s a Mormon – he’s a Palin fan and so are most of the scios I know, still in.

      Just thinkin’ this would be a fun experiment on censorship … and what’s allowed.

      WH

    • Centurion,
      Ain’t that crazy? Because that book has a marvelous definition of the 8th dynamic and treats Scientology very favorably. It even quotes the Tech Dictionary, as you know! Totally nuts! That’s a fine book.

    • Centurian

      You said…
      “However, I made a metal note in my head about that experience, to never allow anyone to ever tell me what to read, ever again.”
      I imagine that the word METAL there was a “sloydian fripp” but I gotta say it got a chuckle out of me.

      WW

    • I have to agree with this as well. Although I didn’t bring any books in with me to be censored I just brought myself and my body.

      I would go into the Church of Scientology of New York {per invitation to do so} to handle something and when I got there, every time, without any investigation or inspection and proof from the staff without even a Delcare being issued on me the situation suddenly became “Uh oh! Lawrence! Oh, you’re not supposed to be talking to him, I’ll tell you why…” right in front of my face. And then a staff member would come up to me and say “Sorry. Better luck next time.”

      I was never offended, until they sent OSA volunteers out to my house to enliven things a bit. That was the last straw.

      So, I am enlightened and OT outside of the church. For this lifetime and a couple of more to come.

      When Scientology gets its act together and show Mankind it is worthy of their support then and only then shall I consider going back {and not without weekends off EVERY weekend}.

  10. Leland Conrad Powers

    There is nothing wrong with allowing comments that question Scientology, any Scientologist who would be offended at that particular kind of action needs to grow up and get a little faith. Every other religion has had these problems and they’ve solved questions of ridiculous aspects of their religion by saying ” I just believe” or “I have faith”.

    Jesus resurrecting and coming back from the dead is preposterous scientifically but people have faith that it happened and will happen again. Is their faith well placed? Probably not, but who cares? If it’s not true for you, it’s not true.

    • A resurrected body is supposed to be immortal — you never get to die again. What a nice theta trap, if it were real. It is certainly a suppressive teaching.

      • My graphics driver as gone caput at P.T. so it is difficult to keep the page still.

        I observed what happened. May be it will be told one day. Loki notwithstanding

    • There were over 5000 witnesses to his being resurrected. It’s been pretty well documented also.

      • And modern medical science does the same thing routinely. Except they do not mistake it for death, they call it by it’s right name – “coma”.

        There’s no need to subscribe to the logical fallacies of “I can’t believe it so it’s not true” and “I can’t see how it can be done therefore it is impossible.”

        • Splog:
          The end product of Roman crucifixion is *DEAD*, not “in a coma”. What you have given is a “meer explanation” and nothing more.

          That doesn’t mean I agree with the biblical tale, either.

          Michael A. Hobson

      • Damn strong stuff that nardus oil/ black seed oil Jesus was rubbed in with.

        History of the black cumin seed oil

        “Black cumin seed had once been considered a very highly valuable spice, so that even a tax was levied on it. In the New Testament one can find a sermon by Jesus (see Matthew, 23,23) in which he mentions the plant and criticizes the ongoing tax-practice: “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices–mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law–justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.”
        http://www.oleador.com/en/produits/black-seed-oil.html

      • Huh? 5,000 witnesses to Jesus’s resurrection? With dox? Por favor, the dox!

        Just Me

    • Being a Scientologist you should not dismiss the matter. Maybe he as a Thetan made his body stand up again and repair itself or at least stop from smelling too bad😉

      Oh yeah I went there🙂

  11. Well Marty and Ralph said it and I’m sure other posts I’ve not yet read.

    What LRH did is to continue the study for answers that has been going on for a long time and not just in our little corner. It isn’t and was not meant to be reduced to a Dogma such as the Catholic and many other churches are today. SCN is now being attacked and shaped into such just as other religions were attacked in EU some centuries ago and has been done for a very long time. ‘Man’s’ freedom to Be is always under attack. If the path out can be made into a dogma or destroyed then the SP’s feel safer and are safer. That’s not optimum for the other 97.5%.

    Great post Marty. My space is clearer.

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      becomingAware wrote, “If the path out can be made into a dogma or destroyed then the SP’s feel safer and are safer. That’s not optimum for the other 97.5%.”

      In hindsight, I see that huge risk of restimulating past religious implants, and the risk of corrupting Scientology into religious dogma was not worth metamorphosing Scientology into a “religion.”

      That is exactly what happened, IMO.

      IMO, Scientology should have been kept a spiritual philosophy, and the technical part of it, a science.

      Had that been, Scientology wouldn’t have been turned into an absolute, and would have expanded “the science of knowing how to know.”

    • It is worth knowing that the Index to Forbidden Books was abolished sometime in the 1960’s. Catholics are free to read as they wish. The Index itself was rarely enforced, and served more as a guideline for those interested in such things. Sometimes a work would get on the list, and then be removed after review. It sounds oppressive to modern ears, but was unremarkable when first begun around the time of the Reformation. Pax

  12. Thanks for the Lao Tsu Marty, and the ref.s of the various scales. I knew I didn’t know and have been wroking on knowing more, just didn’t realize where that was on the path. I do think walking the walk is very important. The most clueless are those who think they get Scn, yet never audited anyone nor have any desire to do so. Critics who rail against it yet really never looked at any part of it, only someone else’s fixed ideas are next in line. If every one who has a onesided viewpoint of a different group or individuasl really looked they might realize that there is truth in all of us on this orb, and might not need to attack so blindly ( and often ineffectively), to make the other wrong.

  13. Marty,

    I don’t know that a being stably above 30.0 would have no use for this blog. Perhaps, there are those who seek channels to reach the rest of us and offer some guidance and help. The only path for that is finding the reality and interest of the individuals you’re trying to help. This blog certainly offers up a serious portion of interest and reality–like fried chicken and mashed potatoes with lots of gravy. Down home and accessible. Not a lot of pretense. Good cognitive munching. Finger licking good ideas.
    Quite likely, those who can find their own way will not find answers here, but having found answers one is left wondering, “What about all those beings I left back on the trail? Shouldn’t I go back and give them a hand? Am I not responsible for their well being and enlightenment?” That seems to be the pattern with enlightened beings: to reach out and help.

    I don’t think we make if “out” alone. We may seem walk through the valley of the shadow of death alone, but I have yet to go anywhere in this universe or any other without running into other beings. Some of them very, very enlightened.

    The “use” of this blog is the joy of sharing with others. I have no doubt that reading this blog has brought tears to most readers. Not of sorrow but of understanding. And I would postulate that those above 30.0 have a greater “use” for shared understanding because their understanding is so great. The understanding is not misused or wasted but embraced.

    Powerful beings do not abandon those less fortunate. Only the weak will not help. And even an individual who has lost his strength will still try to help if his native responsibility is high.

    I’m not singing your praise for running this blog. I’m just saying you make some fucking good gravy for the mashed potatoes–and the chicken ain’t bad either.

    Michael

    • Michael,
      Seems more like filet mignon & lobster, fresh grilled fish or rack of lamb & roasted potatoes to me with some nice red wine. 😉

      • Sinar, that sounds delicious. But, really, if you would pass on to Mosey your recipe for those simple burritos you made for Mid-ratz, I’d be eternally grateful. I’ve been on a quest for 10 years to find one that even is in the same league, to no avail.

    • “Quite likely, those who can find their own way will not find answers here, but having found answers one is left wondering, “What about all those beings I left back on the trail? Shouldn’t I go back and give them a hand? Am I not responsible for their well being and enlightenment?” That seems to be the pattern with enlightened beings: to reach out and help. ”

      Would one be creating others as unenlightened though if one had these postulates? And if so, is this responsible? IME, we do mock each other up in certain ways, by postulate, as well as self.

      More basically…
      Are there others perceivable, for you, if you don’t mock them up? Axiomatically, how is it possible to perceive others without postulating them?

      Just a different viewpoint, to yours.🙂

      • As-is,

        I’ve not yet reached a conclusion on “mocking each other up” as the means by which we view one another. I know it as a theory. I’ve experienced the phenomenon both ways: as mocking up another and as just knowing they exist. Thus far, I believe both occur. I believe that we just know one another in native state; it isn’t a matter of mocking up the other being; it precedes mocking up or creating and causing the other being to come into existence.

        To mock up another being sufficiently for them to exist independently would imply a godlike state: “I have created this being.” And there are those who hold to that view, that we are all created. I’ve seen evidence of this, and I’ve seen evidence to the contrary. I just don’t know.

        I know that as a human we perceive by assigning meaning. Without assigning meaning, the perception becomes a stimulus-response event.

        “Axiomatically” would mean referring to a self-evident truth. And what is self-evident to a Democrat is not to a Republican, and an independent probably views what is axiomatic to a party member as pure bias.

        Loki offered up a suggestion that I read Thomas Aquinas’s argument for the existence of God, which I did. And I was mildly impressed. But, part of that argument would imply that the existence of that which precedes all arguments. Carried a step further, and applying this to our discussion, how would you know that another being was actually there to mock them up? At what point does knowing that they exist merge into “mocking them up?” And if the only means one has for knowing that another exists is by mocking them up what does that imply?

        I’m certainly glad you have a different viewpoint. It made me think. And mine is cluttered with all sorts of junk–it’s like one of those garages that is so packed with useless can’t-depart-withs that you can’t open the door, much less store a car. My viewpoint is just too much of a mess for you to fit in, much less walk around in; but you are welcome to come over and help me clean it up–as long as you don’t suggest that I depart with my dearly beloved antlers.

        But, one more point, which you can have from my cluttered viewpoint: if I were to mock up other beings, I would mock them up happy and enlightened and interesting rather than unenlightened. It’s not my wish that another read something and not understand it. It’s not my hope that others need mentors or Scientology or Buddhism or any other subject to guide them on a path to greater observation, experience, analysis, and understanding. It is my wish that others be able to see and understand on their own. And that is how I would mock them up.

        But, alas, I have looked at the world. And my mock ups have failed. I can’t even drive to work without running into drivers who are not polite and smiling. I keep mocking them up as courteous and the proof is in the fender.

        As for being responsible, I do not mind running other people’s lives. I do not mind postulating ability and greatness into another’s existence. But, at some point, I think the responsible thing to do is to allow them to make their own postulates and control their own lives rather than depending on my mock ups and postulates. I’m just kind of lazy that way.

        Michael

        • Sweet, Michael. Really sweet. (I’m smiling and happy right now – thank you.)

          Just Me

        • OnceUponaTime

          Some good points for sure. My personal take on “having to mock up another being in order for them to exist” seems to be missing the proviso “for the being doing the mockup.” I have fair certainty that one has to create what he experiences. That experience however may have very little semblance to other points of view of the same time, place, form, event or beingness. I certainly do not consider that I am “here” on this blog, at this exact time, because someone is “mocking me up”. Each observer is apparently mocking something up, but I doubt that there are many who are duplicating my entire beingness.

          And thank you for that last paragraph. Not at all “cluttered” from my viewpoint.

          WW

    • ya’ll bring some nice ribs to the table too

    • Michael,
      Mrs. Gordon, from Charlottesville Va., made the best fried chicken. All by itself. I’d take some a Marty’s gravy on it. That’s gotta be GOOOOOD gravy.

      • While you fine young ladies and gentleman are on the subject of gourmet delicacies {with myself being a Vegetarian and all -HINT!} I would like say something here.

        When I was at Flag I went to that Ice Cream – Restaurant place that used to be on the corner of South Fort Harrison Avenue and Cleveland Street {the SE corner}.

        I went in there for lunch and some lady on her NOT’s at Flag came in with her kids while I was sitting at the counter eating. She told her kids and pointed at me “Oh look at the man!” “Look at what he’s having” “Hmmm doesn’t that look good!” “Oh my that looks delicious!” and then her little boy came alongside me and said “My Mommy says that ‘s delicious”.

        I thought it would be rude to tell the little boy “Well, go to your Mommy to run back to the NOT’s HGC for a second and see if that helps” but I didn’t. But it was the most distracting thing and pointless for a Scientologist to do to a total stranger with her kids present.

        Your talk of all these menu items just reminded me of that afternoon I was trying to enjoy myself.

        Lunch commentaries!

      • Jim,

        I think I love Mrs. Gordon already. I also think that, as Marty is on the coast of Texas, I could have used steaks, ribs and fish as a metaphor. But, I wanted to test out the variable terminal energy generation theory. How much energy can an idea generate?

    • While we’re reminiscing about food, does anyone remember Chris’s Sandwich shop down Ft Harrison? He was a gourmet chef who owned the place, came in early, made the bread and sauces. Best sandwiches ever!


  14. These come from people that seem offended by my allowance of comments that question aspects of Scientology and my posts suggesting reading outside of Scientology. I think one huge impediment – if not the biggest of all – to people realizing the gains attainable from Scientology is the Org inclulcated false sense, even beingness, of “certainty.” It is an injection of the biggest barrier to learning – thinking one already knows. I see Scientologists being created who taste a bit of “Know About” on the Know to Mystery scale and buy into some bullshit that they have achieved KNOW. They have been denied achieving KNOW by learning how to talk the talk without ever learning to walk the walk. And therein lie some seeds that grow into what people on the outside perceive as a cult.

    Yes, we do not see eye to eye on many things. But I am surprised to find out that we still agree on many things. This is one of them.

    • Seconded.

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Thirded.🙂

      “They have been denied achieving KNOW by learning how to talk the talk without ever learning to walk the walk. And therein lie some seeds that grow into what people on the outside perceive as a cult”

      And if I may add …

      “and also perceived as arrogant and ignorant, and/or even stupid.”

      I thank God there is a large representation of non-cultish, intellectual Scientologists here. Marty, that is one of the biggest service your blog provides in the name of scientology – the science of knowing how to know, not the CofS name brand “Scientology” (RS for short).

      Though I see still see a few remnants of the CofS inculcation here, that’s mainly because new church Scientologists arriving here are still learning/unlearning, and decompressing from the cult indoctrination.

  15. A Scientologist who can only talk about Scientology and its positive aspects, and who can’t talk to certain people because they are declared, can look like a cult member. A Scientologist who can talk openly to anyone about anything, including the negative aspects of Scientology, can look like an advertisement for Scientology.

    The COM operates under the first sentence; this blog the second.

  16. Great quote (as usual) Marty.

    Ron’s speeches are peppered with references to other philosophers and practices. If he had not sifted through these, we probably would not have Scientology. Trained Scientologists know this, Pure PCs might not.

    This is a case of LRH doing almost too good a job – it makes one an even stauncher Scientologist to do one’s own independent reading/study, and rediscover some of the same things LRH did. Just take the list of sources he once started his early books with – this is a good reading guide.

    As an aside, I sent that link to the “empathy philosopher” you boosted recently to a wog buddy (because he asked me a stray question about social utopias)………….it was like throwing raw meat in a shark pool. He went NUTS over it and started promoting it to all his friends and family.

    I could only spectate sheepishly, thinking to myself “I really don’t know the public…..AT ALL”.

    • Your viewpoint, accomplishments and opinions still astound me.

      This is not a selfish question I am about to ask but a real one for you:
      “Why did I get into Scientology?”

      I got into Scientology because I was having a difficult time getting along with my father.

      I said Catholic prayers and tried going to confession regularly, which didn’t work. I was in 6th grade. I started reading books on Militant Groups, Communism, Theology, Occult, Witchcraft, Sex, *Techniques*, Activism none of which solved anything. Until 10th grade when I read the Dianetics book. Case closed.

      I didn’t get along with my father. That is why I read and applied Dianetics and Scientology. I never thought I had psychological problems although my father did.

      Now my father is gone, but he paid me back 10x over for my effort before

      LRH Did the same thing, like any good scientist, researcher or even exorcist. From the viewpoint of an exorcist “One must first exhaust all the somatic possibilities of the alleged possessed before one leaps to the conclusion that an exorcism is necessary”.

      LRH Pretty much convinced me he exhausted *ALL* the possible other reasons behind Mankind’s existence in that one paperback. He was a good man.

      • I never “got into Scientology”.

        I simply experienced OT abilities (unexpectedly) that were not even promised for the action I purchased – then there was no going back.

        No number of knuckle-walking EOs, MAAs, and pseudo-Missionaires have ever been able to dissuade me.

        No one got me “in”……no one is ever going to drive me “out”.

        External critics? Internal traitors? Neither means anything to me.

        Even the Founder has been unable to disaffect me.

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      OT VIII wrote, “Just take the list of sources he [LRH] once started his early books with – this is a good reading guide.”

      You’re right. Too bad the DM Despot squirrelled versions of LRH works took out many of these sources LRH referenced. So to get them, one needs to get the “By L. Ron Hubbard” versions of his books to find out who they are.

  17. I just want the beatings to stop!

    I, also, prefer to think and discover and look and learn and enlighten myself constantly. I think it’s OK to ‘go into my memory banks to remember what LRH wrote’. I also think it’s ok to make up my OWN DECISIONS and to find truth for myself. Hence, an INDEPENDENT!

    PAUL
    NOT A CULT MEMBER

    • I just want the beatings to stop

      OMG! Did someone actually say or suggest that it was not OK to use your own mind? What is the point of handling the mind if you don’t get to use the results so doing? The F..ing thing is yours! Do with it as you see fit!

      WW

  18. Good post.
    I did not know that.

  19. one of those who see

    Wow Marty. I just love you.

  20. Marty,

    I “don’t know” what you are talking about.

    P.S. I’ll answer this post for you…

  21. Smartass.

  22. Marty, I really do appreciate what you are doing. You are spot on with this post. Your suggested reading, especially of the Tao, has sparked a huge resurgence in my quest for more truth and spiritual expansion. I’m on a roll now, reading like crazy and it is SO liberating! There’s a whole world of good people out there, many in better shape spiritually than most Scientologists I know. Who knew? I feel so much more in comm with the rest of the world now that the blinders and suppression of free thought have been lifted. So, thanks for that.

    I have realized that in all the previous 30+ years as a member of the Church, I would not have even considered opening up the Tao Te Ching, even though I had read and gotten much out of it in my teens. What’s up with that?

    I can see so much clearer now how Scientology of the last 20 years has evolved into a closed minded sect. Closed minded in that “OUR” tech is the ONLY tech that ever was or ever will be. And you don’t really have to KNOW all of the tech, you really just have to agree that WE have THE TECH and THEY don’t. Talk about setting up an out of communication and out reality with the rest of the planet. Talk about thought stopping.

    Not that I don’t understand that LRH had a reason for having the PC doing what he’s doing when he’s doing it–i.e. not mixing practices. But I’m talking about even having the freedom to explore what other religions believe. I can’t imagine not landing in ethics at Flag during a 6-month check for having done something as audacious as reading the Tao.

    Reading about Taoism and Buddhism and Zen, plus some of the newer philosophers on the scene has been an interesting journey. And it has given me something to compare LRH’s tech against–which is a good thing. I’m seeing his tech from different angles now which ultimately has lead me to greater understanding and appreciation of what LRH achieved in his lifetime. Would LRH possibly have a problem with that? I don’t think so.
    What kind of person would have a vested interest in keeping those blinders on? (obviously rhetorical)

    So, for the record, here’s one who really appreciates your open communications, your insights and the insights of so many who post here. This is a good thing. Please keep doing what you’re doing.

    • Magnolia,
      Reading your post reminded me of the Ser Fac materials. You know there is such a thing as just dominating by pure presence. Then there is the necessity to dominate, and make others subjugate. Scientology dominates by pure presence. No need to subjugate. When it is a Ser Fac, ooooo, hugly.

      I read anything and everything, always have. I continue to do so, reading Jed McKenna, from a friend, these days. I’ve never read anything like Scientology.

      • Try the Tao.

        • Yeah Jim, scio, particularly the axioms, factors etc, are pretty damn precise and concise. Thats what makes it different to other stuff Ive read that also contains great wisdom and knowledge.

          I liked what you said about dominance and presence. So true.😀

          • I mean no, I won’t try the Tao.

            (Goodness sake, I hope that wiseacre ‘no’ gets across.)

            Right now I’m having an utterly amazing time on the first Factors and the ‘music’ of the 1st ACC for ‘space is a viewpoint of dimension’. There isn’t a single aspect of life and living that I can find that isn’t embraced by that tooooo simple definition. Not in the universes I’m viewing.

            • P.S. I did read the Tao earlier on. I’ll be reading it again. See what I wrote that has so many interested🙂

              • It’ll take but an hour or two. I read it early on too. After the NOTs band and PDC, I finally understood it. And it greatly enhanced my understanding of Scientology. I am saying it is pretty damn arrogant for people to assume that someone,somewhere is not capable of living the Tao absent doing every step of the Scientology Bridge. And it is that attitude which has resulted in the majority of humanity considering Scientology nothing but a descructive cult. And if that is not reversed, the Bridge will forever be relgated to a luxury only to be shared by a few, adventrous souls in future generations.

                • Marty,
                  Not sure if you did the minister’s course, which I seem to recall the entire SHQ base having to do in about ’79 as an LRH order due to some legal smeagle reason only known to some at the time, perhaps for tax purposes. That actually was an excellent course with lots of reading of the scriptures of other religions which actually broadens one’s horizon spiritually. I don’t quite know how the knowledge base and reading list became restricted from that point to only Scn texts.

    • Jean-François Genest

      « I can see so much clearer now how Scientology of the last 20 years has evolved into a closed minded sect. Closed minded in that “OUR” tech is the ONLY tech that ever was or ever will be. »

      2010 -20 years = 1990 (ish)→ 1989 ► The start of the Scheduled Indoctrination Events with COB as our “host for this evening”, in which the Scientology population is repeatedly conditioned and indoctrinated to think DM’s thoughts & instructions. (I have his voice and tone in my head from the Dec ’89 New Year’s Event)
      “We are the only ones with the Tech and the answers to human suffering …”
      4-3-2-1 Happy New Year!

      Then all names in the Central Files were mailed the newsletter “International Scientology News” that summarized and ENFORCED the Event with pictures and quotes of DM and the Int Execs.

      I am sorry to say this but, it worked! DM’s strategy worked.

      Marty, via his blog and its comment writers, help to strip off the “conditioning”.
      It makes total sense that the topic/thesis of today’s post was warranted, IMHO. I could be wrong.

    • That is a brilliant understanding Magnolia, brilliant.

      Because even if you didn’t know, and no one told you, people ought to, people should know, that a person calling themselves a Scientologist aboslutely DOES NOT mean in any way that he or she is much or able than
      yourself spiritually.

      One recent case in point:

      OT VII Colorado Scientologist Rex Fowler that not too long ago assassinated one of his former co-workers in cold blood over
      their severance pay.

      Is someone like that more able than you or me? More able to get themeselves arrested it seems, but that is about all. {LOL}

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Magnolia wrote, “I can see so much clearer now how Scientology of the last 20 years has evolved into a closed minded sect.”

      Magnolia,

      By “Scientology”, I assume you mean the “Church of Scientology (CofS)”. You are SO generous in calling it just a “closed minded sect.”🙂

      Factually, the CofS is a cult. There was a time I when I could never confront that and defended CofS with “righteous” anger.

      Had the science of knowing how to know and its spiritual philosophy NOT metamorphosed into a religious sect, CofS could have never evolved into the cult is is today, IMO.

      cult (kŭlt) n.

      1.

      a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.

      b. The followers of such a religion or sect.

      – The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        Corrections:

        “There was a time I when I” should be There was a time when I”

        “into the cult is is today” should be “into the cult it is today”

        Note: Isn’t there a way by WordPress.com where one can correct their mistakes after posting their comment? I write fast, and many times I don’t catch my mistakes right away until it’s too late.

    • Thought Provoking

      While I was on the Ministers Course, I read the simple (required) book, “Great Religions by Which Men Live”. The EP of reading that book was the realization that the basic goal and purpose for many religions is the same. How they go about it specifically, (the doctrine) varied, in some cases, quite a bit. Knowing this has allowed me to have a greater appreciation for other religious philosophies.

      The church no longer forwards the original purpose of its founder and in fact has become the antithesis of it. As Michael suggested, people have a great willingness to help others. Just as I would warn someone about drinking tainted milk, I feel compelled to communicate about my observations regarding the obstruction of Scientology’s purpose. What others do with that information is up to them but I know that I have taken some responsibility in helping to accomplish the Aims of Scientology. An excerpt:

      “A civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights, are the aims of Scientology.

      First announced to an enturbulated world in 1950, these aims are well within the grasp of our technology.

      Nonpolitical in nature, Scientology welcomes any individual of any creed, race or nation.

      We seek no revolution. We seek only evolution to higher states of being for the individual and for society.

      We are achieving our aims. ”

      Even here, ANY individual of ANY creed is welcome.

      With that statement, I find it hard to extrapolate the idea of restricted reading, thought or understanding as being part of Scientology.

      When one compares this excerpt to the current operations at the church one easily sees the disparity. Each of us has to some degree been involved with this obstruction of Scientology. Some more than others, yet as basically good beings we want to fix that. To the degree of our involvement, we have been suseptible to false indoctrination. But, LRH even gave us a tool to handle this proble, FDSing. This blog has been an incredible tool in stripping off false data.

      As a result, I find that my thinking has cleared up and I am more able to establish my own viewpoint once again. My understanding of the ARC triangle and the Factors make it easy for me to accept and discard data at will. Of course, I don’t agree with everything posted on the blog. That would be boring AND robotic (like the church). But, I do feel more pan-determined about Scientology and have been able to gleen a much higher understanding of the Scientology concepts that I have been exposed to as a result of reading what others have posted.

  23. You’ve done it again — somehow tapped into my mind and the conversation I had yesterday with a friend — all about CERTAINTY 🙂

    I believe one of the gravest problems is this myth of “Total Certainty” that we seem to embrace as scientologists. I don’t know if LRH ever even said it but it certainly has become a “battle cry” — achieve Total Certainty.

    I’ve found THE MOST frustrating conversations to be with scientologists who are so ROCK SOLID about their certainty that they can’t even step to the left or right to possibly see another perspective.

    Within the Shambhala Buddhist teachings there is a pith (short) instruction and that is to be COMFORTABLE WITH UNCERTAINTY.

    We are so basically afraid of not having CERTAINTY or SOLID ground under ourselves that we wrap ourselves in this cocoon of CERTAINTY.

    Someone pisses us off — making the outcome UNCERTAIN — rather than just being AWAKE with that uncertainty — we automatically react with our CERTAINTY of fast answers, rebuttals, POWER over remarks.

    Just be AWAKE with what arises — I’m just NOW learning HOW to be comfortable WITH uncertainty.

    I find it takes a great deal of willingness to just relax and not insist that I control every conversation, every outcome, every plan.

    While Ralph said – “few can confront how far there is to go” – the other side of that coin is that enlightenment is so close or our true face is so close, we miss it every time.

    Again and again, what I find so appealing about this blog, Steve’s and Jeff’s – they strive to show how to be decent human beings.

    And that IS the path to enlightenment. Being decent.

    Love,
    WH

    • WH – I think TOTAL CERTAINTY would be akin to a NO-GAME CONDITION. Under life as a game theory, that would be rather dreary.

    • “Just be AWAKE with what arises — I’m just NOW learning HOW to be comfortable WITH uncertainty.
      I find it takes a great deal of willingness to just relax and not insist that I control every conversation, every outcome, every plan.”
      I so totally duplicate that!
      When I let go of the “safety net” (aka ser fac) of my CofS, this was a huge phenomena for me and one I recently have been dealing with in trying to make many mismatched pieces of this life puzzle fit together, taking on MORE again in life (thanks to y’all). Here I am railing about the square peg and round holes, trying to predict the future, think through all the possible outcomes. It’s tiring as hell! And when it all just seems impossible – I decide to accept the uncertainty as it is.
      (A couple of weeks ago, I listened to the Marriage talk as suggested)
      Since I released this obsessive controlling of the universe (yesterday)😉 I sat and talked to Hubs about create and the Marriage talk of LRH and he originates out of the blue, he’s heard LRH lectures? He really liked him. Huh? He wants to read LRH and hopes maybe I’ll do those processes with him (with excitement).
      Poof! Just like that. He’s on the same page for me to continue up the Bridge, audit again, make sure I have a space that’s acceptable and even wants to get him some.
      Damn! That was easy, huh?!

    • WH,

      Yeah, the more I explore “certainty” the less important it becomes. Like being right. I don’t have to be right. Being wrong is alright. Not being certain is fine. I’m comfortable with knowing what I know and willing to change my consideration and opinion.

      I used to take great pride in how quickly I could counter an argument and “win” a debate–even if it meant using tricks to confuse the issue. But, in the long term what do we gain by dominating with lies and tricks?

      Data is far less important than the well-being of those who view the data.

      Michael

    • Thought Provoking

      One way this fear of uncertainty becoming a fixed certainty has been instilled has been regarding leaving staff.

      A person ready to blow staff often is certain that they are a failure if they leave the church. This certainty is often solid enough to make them stay despite horrible conditions.

      My own experience with this happened when I blew staff for the first time. I was scared and was absolutely certain I had failed as a Scientologist. I had let LRH down. But, I was also certain that I would most likely have had a psychotic break if I stayed. At that point “failure” seemed to be more prosurvival At least “failure” allowed me to have my mind intact. After having some destim time, I keyed out and eventually was recovered.

      As part of the recovery cycle I insisted on changes that would prevent this from happening again. And for a time, this was done and everything was fantastic, actually better than fantastic. My stats were in a long term screaming affluence and my other dynamics were doing well, too.

      After we went Ideal Org and the heavy IAS, building and staff recruitment kicked into full gear, the old operating basis slid back in. I tried to tough it out, be a bigger being, etc. but I could feel the walls closing in again and feel myself disappearing. Having come to the brink of a pychotic break once before, I vowed never to allow it again.

      It was at that point I realized that I didn’t fail, the church did. And I knew that it could not be handled, not at that time, nor with those people. So I walked again. This time, I knew that I was going to be okay, that I would survive and be a better person because of it. I still had no idea where I was going to go or what I was going to do. I knew that I was closing the book on the life that I’d lived the past 30 years. This time, instead of being scared, I was excited. I was beginning a new adventure and my world would never quite be the same again. I was starting a new game. I hadn’t ever played this game before and there weren’t any rules to it, so I made up my own. Every moment was an unknown leap of faith, in my own certainty that I was a spiritual being. And that Scientology gave me the tools I needed to survive. This time, I forgave myself for my lack of omnipotence and knew that LRH would understand that I needed a break, time to destim before I was ready to take another go at Scientology again.

      Learning to be comfortable with uncertainty has been one of the spiritual milestones I have had this lifetime.

      • That was beautiful. Exactly what I experienced regarding my kids’ survival. I knew leaving was in their best interest but I did feel like I let the group down – that had been run on me…I believed it. But in reality, the group let ME down; that is something I realized through coming here.
        Reality.

    • Cheryl mother of Zack? If so please email, I have something for you to look at.

  24. Marty

    Good post.

    In my case I find I am not here seeking wisdom (though I certainly do not yet feel that I have more than I can tolerate.)
    I find I am more here for what is commonly called, here on this blog, community. I simply love the free exchange of ideas that is not only permitted but encouraged here. With a good number of intelligent and insightful and questioning beings posting, this community is an excellent “playground” for the mind, and in this “playground” I learn and enjoy. I feel acknowledged and duplicated and welcome.
    It is a source of great pleasure to consider myself part of that Community.

    Thank you Marty for allowing and assisting in its creation.
    Thank you those who come and play in this “playground”

    WW

  25. Marty~And BINGO was his name, oh!😉
    You are an auditor extraordinaire, especially in this case for my third dynamic, dear sir.
    Finesse comes from duplication.

  26. DM is the supreme Not Know that thinks he Knows. He should have been put on goldenrod and given the boot when he assaulted his PC at St. Hill . At that point he knew he had license to do whatever he wanted.

  27. Excellent post Marty.

    It appears many Religions inherently choose to block exploration further than the confines.

    Example : The Catholic Church emphatically blocks communication with spirits, exorcism must be done with specific approval of the Vatican.
    Actually the Catholic Church does allow communication (prayer)to the Virgin Mary and other declared Saints.

    Example : The Church of England does not tolerate communication (prayer) to the Virgin Marty or the Saints. Wijja boards or speaking with a ghost in a cemetery !
    Studying witchcraft is considered study demonology….

    Example: Muslims absolutely must be faithful to the Koran even to the point of homicide of their own family members as in “honor killings” still widely practiced today ~~

    (Koran)Quran- 4:15 “If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four (reliable) witness from amongst you against them; if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them. Or God ordain for them some (other) way.”

    (Koran) Quran-24:2 “The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication—flog each of them with hundred stripes: Let no compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if ye believe in God and the last day.”

    Yes, that’s right, in the year 2010 ~~~whip a woman 100x til her back is broken and she is traumatized beyond repair………..Muslims are not permitted to examine this logically and explore outside the text of the Koran.

    Extreme fundamentalists will not tolerate more modern scientific discoveries and narrow mindedly forbid any looking or exploration beyond their core beliefs.

    In the “Church” or Dm’s cult, I believe a lot of this is merely greed for MARKET SHARE $$$$$

    Anyone paying outside DM’s profit and stats is labelled all kinds of vicious names.

    I know of an athlete that was put through the ringer for doing BREATHING EXERCISES before an marathon.
    As if Breathing exercises were squirrel ! Give me break ! What has breathing to do with the techniques of auditing ?
    (Athlete has since blown and went to Indies)

    #######

    There is not one single OT 8 that I have ever met that was exemplary or someone I would want to aspire to be like.
    On the contrary, having reached the top of the Bridge, they are anything but exemplary.
    Instead of depicting that OT 8 is something to aspire to, OT 8s, like the general population, develop cancer, they die of heart attacks, they go bankrupt and file for divorce and even worse, leave DM’s cult and disconnect their phones from further regging $$$$$$$.

    OR

    They are told they are not CLEAR and need to re-do their Bridge after attesting OT 8.

    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Also, Something does not add up re these OT 7s on the rundown 20 to 25 years still not trusted
    and needing to be sec checked every 6 months for their MISDEEDs.

    While I obviously uphold that counseling (auditing) is done by the book ~~I am partial to the idea that believing that one cannot grow or explore beyond existing materials is a myopic viewpoint.

    • Amen to that: “While I obviously uphold that counseling (auditing) is done by the book ~~I am partial to the idea that believing that one cannot grow or explore beyond existing materials is a myopic viewpoint.”

      • Marty this is very important point: Is Scientology is a tool or a commandment. My understanding from one its earlier definition is “knowing how to know”.
        Unfortunately, we have seen the Church has started discrediting colleges and university graduates and PHDs are brought to the same level as that of journalists, lawyers and judges (the second tier enemy of the Church).

        I totally agree that none of the OTs including OT8 are failed to be at cause over MEST to the same degree as that of a common man (non scientologist). Their issues ,living style and behavior are not reflective of the teachings neither they have any super natural talents : the major selling point of these levels.

        I do not want to go at length and decribe the outness, as it has been already mentioned earlier. However, I just want to make this point , missed by almost all of them: IS THERE ANY SCIENTOLOGIST SPORTSMAN, INVENTOR,POLITICIAN, SCIENTIST, HUMANITARIAN, SCHOLAR, ECONOMIST, BANKER, WALL STREET GURU, POET, NOVELIST, JOURNALIST, LAWYER, RESEARCHER, DOCTOR in last sixty years which is know to the world . Nope, none, none at all – all what we have is half a dozen Hollywood celebrities- including prominent one like Jhon Travolta and Tom Cruise who are now going down because of other factors including the getting older and losing younger audience.
        SO THINK WHAT IT HAS GIVEN TO THIS WORLD SO FAR

        • Modern-shaman

          Hmmm… I have to say that perhaps your “yardstick” needs recalibration. Or perhaps a new kind of “yardstick” altogether.
          “Enlightenment” is not synonymous with “fame” or popularity.
          A truly free being is… well… FREE. Totally up to them how they choose to deal with their dynamics. I am sorry if you have not found enlightened beings in your everyday environment, for they are certainly there!

          WW

          • A very good point, but , does Church has ever applied this “Enlightenment” criteria for the celebrities handpicked as Church Ambassador ? or even go further, what sort of ” Enlightenment” has the management portrayed while dealing with ex members even current members. I do not want to go on details ,already mentioned in ABC, CNN, BBC,New York Time and SP Times.
            Dear, the Church has only projected and sought approval of FAMOUS personalities. FAME is the name of the game. Unfortunately, they even failed miserably in this game as well and have only half a dozen of Holly wood celebrities of which the prominent ones are losing their Charisma due to age factor. Check your self if you have to choose who is Elightened amongst John Travolta and Richard Gere , we all know the answer.

            • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

              Modern-Shaman wrote, “A very good point, but , does Church has ever applied this “Enlightenment” criteria for the celebrities handpicked as Church Ambassador ? or even go further, what sort of ” Enlightenment” has the management portrayed while dealing with ex members even current members.”

              Excellent questions to ponder, Modern-Shaman.

              What I’d like to know is when has ANY organized religion, longterm, created any enlightenment? Personally, I’m done with the game of organized (restimulative) religion. For me, it’s not “The Way.”

              I’ll stick with science and spirituality, thank you.

            • Mordern-Shaman

              Sorry… I guess I totally misduplicated your original communication.
              Your response to my post, though sounding somewhat true in some aspects, has left me thinking that I am misduplicating it also. The two posts seem almost to be at odds to each other for me, and I am having a hard time reconciling them.

              As far as what the Church does in regards to “picking it’s ambassadors,” I do not credit the current CofS of being capable of viewing anything as it really is, and therefor its actions do not reflect any kind of truth at all.

              This is not an attempt to attack you on some level. I am simply not getting it.

              WW

    • Very important points, Karen. Thank you.

      Here’s what I think might be an appropriate response by an OT8 after having been told he/she is not actually clear:

      OT8: Well, I’m an OT8. So being not clear doesn’t bother me any more. But thank you for your input, have a nice day! Click.

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Karen#1 wrote, “There is not one single OT 8 that I have ever met that was exemplary or someone I would want to aspire to be like.”

      This indicates and actually blows charge. I’ve observed the same thing!

      I’m not even an official Scientology church version of “Grade O completion” yet, though I feel I am.

      What has had me stumped is I’ve observed in myself that I have much more apparent free will, free thinking, happiness and horsepower than any OT VIII I’ve met. Of course, this has shattered my past belief about OT VIII.

      Pam, an OT VIII course supervisor (an AWESOMELY good one I’ll say) always used to look haggard and stressed. She rarley smiled, and looked sad. This stumped and puzzled me, “How can what I’m observing be the Beingness of OT VIII?” I expected a lot more.

      What is wrong with this picture?

    • Great post, Karen
      Re: “There is not one single OT 8 that I have ever met that was exemplary or someone I would want to aspire to be like. On the contrary, having reached the top of the Bridge, they are anything but exemplary.”

      I was not in the church long, even so, I had not met one OT that I aspired to be like. I met some auditors and C/Ses I thought were quite amazing though. (grins!)

      *!G!*

    • Kathy Braceland

      To Karen #1 and Wayne Froemke:

      Hi, I’m OT VIII. I hope like hell no one aspires to be like me but I sure do hope that they be who they are.

      • I’m going for both Kathy.

      • That was great, Kathy! Loved it.
        Just Me

      • Kathy Braceland.
        For you to have been through it all to OT 8 and have the perception you now have to call it like it is ~~~ I salute you.

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        Very good Kathy. I’m happy you say that. That inspires me (not aspires).🙂

        I would love to have some conversations with OT VIII’s here, and perhaps my viewpoint will change from my past experiences. I’m definitely interesting in their viewpoints on the conversations here on Marty’s blog, having made it up to OT VIII.

        So I hope you stay and participate more.🙂

        • Did you read he Independence Declaration on this blog? She has commented quite sufficiently in the formative stages of this community, all memorialized on this blog, to not have any obligation to start all over to satisfy someone’s hidden standard about OT VIII.

          • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

            I’m sad that’s what you think and that we are not connecting. Is your judgement and apparent antagonism towards me a way of trying to help me? I’ve observed this judgement and curt antagonism in several of your posts to me.

          • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

            Marty,

            I am surprised and angry about having one of my replies on this blog get deleted, especially knowing there was nothing vile in my comm (that I could see), and I also feel discouraged about my communication getting stopped, along with I’m disappointed that this blog may not be as open as I first believed and hoped. Have any of my other posts been deleted too?

            Can you see where this may head our relationship here? It’s not a place I want to go. I really don’t want to head towards an enemy condition relationship for either of us. I’m not out to oppose or ridicule you and I hope you’re not either. I’m hear to both teach and learn.

            Of course, I can understand the need to protect oneself from potential unwanted perceptions you may not want others to have. It’s the need of the “Protector”. Is “Fear” also talking? Also, is “Anger” saying to delete posts that are disagreed with or found challenging the Ego? I hope you talk a look at this.

            This is my first personal experience at censorship from a fellow Scientologist on this blog. I’m surprised and saddened by that, because I know how important open dialog is for helping to sort out confusions and misunderstandings and get to the root of the cause.

            Perhaps our trouble spot is that we haven’t really gotten out of non-existance with each other yet. With that in mind …

            What is it that you need that I may be able to contribute from the heart?

            What I need here is open communication where I’m free to speak what’s on my mind. One of my purposes here is to spark thought where thought hasn’t been allowed in the CofS. In other words, to help free some of the thinking of my other fellow Scientologists, along with my self. Is that OK with you to do here?

            • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

              Correction:

              “I hope you talk a look at this,” should be “I hope you take a look at this.”

              Another spot “hear” should be “here”. Oops.🙂

              Marty, is there any way that editing posts is possible after one clicks “Post Comment”?

              • Wayne, I don’t know. Most folks just post a reply to their own post with corrections and it all works out.

            • Wayne, take a look in the mirror. A true OT VIII, a wonderful being, was dissed. Someday I’ll defend you similarly.

              • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

                Your implication is not true. I didn’t personally or specifically attack anybody. If you think I did, please be specific and quote what I said. And if I truly did personally direct an attack or insult to a specific individual who is OT VIII, I’ll be the first to apologize. Besides, I believe they can very easily defend for themselves.

                The facts are, I only gave my opinion on my own personal general observation from my past experience. Which God in judgement says that’s wrong? (That’s a rhetorical question.)

    • Karen

      I know of one OT VIII who I consider “exemplary.” A fine example of an auditor (Class VIII), and a truly wonderful being. Was one of the first “new” OT VIIIs. An exceptional being, which I suppose makes her an exception, but if there is one I am betting there are others.

      WW

      • WindWalker

        I hear you. I am sure there would an exemplary OT 8 once in a while~~~ after all, they have been delivering OT 8 since the 1980s. There has to be some that made it through.

        Which again proves the point of how the tech was delivered pre-“Golden Age of Tech” which came out in the 1990s. Different tech, different results in the 1980s.

        I simply said I myself had not encountered an exemplary OT 8.

        It is quite an endurance marathon to have endured the 6 month sec checks in the middle of Solo NOTS which has its own side effects….

        Did you know that OT 8 has kept changing through the years and that the 1980 VERSION is nothing like the 1990 VERSION, which again is nothing like the 2000 VERSION ? Some OT 8s got together and compared notes and were astounded to see this was not the same Rundown !

        I guarantee you LRH did not write multiple versions of the same Level !

        • Karen

          Thanks for the additional information. This person did her OT VIII when it first came out. She would have been before any of the later alterations. It is also true that she was already a wonderful being and all but OT VIII just put “icing on the cake”

          My personal observation about any level of audition and “OTness” is that it manifests itself at the level where the being first accepts “cause” and takes responsibility across the dynamics. I feel that on is only as OT as they are doing this. I know that that does not acknowledge their case state, but I feel OT is in the DOING. So… Yes, I tend to agree with you for the most part on your observation. I have met many OTs and yet there are only a few that I feel have truly “made it”, sad to say. I guess my “standard” falls into the category of “humanity” and ARC and pursuit of “optimum survival across the dynamics”. To me those are the qualities I consider as my yardstick of “enlightenment.” It is not necessarily a valid yardstick, but I use it none the less, for it is what I aspire to.

          WW

        • Kathy Braceland

          To Karen #1

          I’m curious, what would an exemplary OT VIII be like from your point of view?

    • Karen,
      I know what you’re saying about OT 8s going splooey. It’s true. I know, I’m one of them. All sorts of whackiness occurred with me after 8. There’s just something strange about that level that’s hard to fathom, despite being well trained. Like it partially unhooks some voodoo frequency that creates a dichotomy of beingness that is very hard to understand or describe, but it consists of a strange positive/negative surrealism that puts a warp one’s reality while at the same time creating a self-aura of a SuperBeing. I saw this phenomena with other OT 8s as well.

      I experienced the divorce, the cancer, the non-exemplary conduct, just about everything you mention except for the bankruptcy and I think that might have come about to, had I not taken the alternate path by leaving the Church of DM’s cult, disconnecting from the hypno-regging, the Golden Age of Bad Auditing and forced realities and went on my merry way.

      • “I know what you’re saying about OT 8s going splooey. It’s true. I know, I’m one of them.”

        A genuine question – how many OT8’s do you know that didn’t experience that type of thing? I’m trying to get a handle on how widespread this phenomenon is.

        Down here in South Africa there’s quite a few 8s, but I only know 3 well enough to have an opinion about them. All 3 showed the same type of thing you mentioned, but that’s not enough data for me to form a conclusion.

        • splog,
          Let’s see…to answer your question…the first friend of mine that comes to mind is dead after OT VIII, multiple schlerosis. Then second one, friend of mine, not OT 8, but mid-7, dead from lukemia. Another OT 8 I know, found drunk in a ditch. The fourth one, OT 8, last I knew was still stuck on the ship after at least 15 intensives to try to debug 8, going bonkers. The fifth one I know, OT 8, was last seen spouting non-sequitor, turrets-cursing compulsively, while waiting in the OT 8 HGC, for repair. The sixth one I know left mid-7 with a brain tumor. The seventh one I know, OT 8, had cancer they recovered from, but got in big ethics trouble. The eighth one I know, OT 8, got into ethics considerable legal trouble over money.

          That’s just off the top of my head. These people were all either friends of mine or I knew through business or at least knew them.

          • That breaks my heart.😦

            • Same here. I read OTDT’s response and just didn’t know what to say.

              So the EP of the church’s bridge is to take 10 years, spend $200k or thereabouts and finish up being …. all fucked up? Go back to the beginning and do it again?

      • Whoa, OTDT! That was a mouthful.
        Just Me

      • OTDT~So glad you made it through that and got out ♥

  28. Marty,

    Thanks for this post. This is exactly the point — of inspecting, wondering, thinking, considering, debating, disagreeing — where I entered this conversation with my first substantive comment here on January 24, 2010:

    “At the church’s core – and at Scientology’s core, too – is something rotten that must be cut out if anything good about Scientology has a chance of surviving. That worm at the core is ‘absolute certainty’ and the attendant hubris introduced by LRH’s powerful personality, which so many Scientologists, staff and public alike, adopt and leverage.

    “I’m talking about the kind of certainty that permits no consideration and discussion, much less doubt, of church policies and technology, training and auditing experiences, executives’ behavior, arbitrary social mores, and ecclesiastical dicta. Those who enforce this kind of certainty become arrogant and cruel. Those who bow to it become servile and self-loathing.

    “Absolute certainty is the lukewarm bath we all willingly slid into as Scientologists. Gradually it got warmer, then hotter, and finally boiled the dreams of those who didn’t know they had the option of jumping out before it was too late.

    “In an age of great transparency, we are left with the command-and-control church of Scientology circa 2010 – a staggeringly tacky version of Versailles. The Sun King is dead. The Dauphins are dead or irrelevant. And Napoleon is now bankrupting the empire.

    “For anyone now in or out of the church of Scientology, this clearly isn’t working. After the church’s current dictator is removed, much more about its practices must be reformed if the church and Scientology itself can survive.”

    Thanks for this blog, the conversation, and the opportunity to explore again these issues that interest me so much. And for introducing me to so many good people!

    Just Me

    • Interesting. You probably planted a seed with me way back in January. Really sharp ones have a way of doing that.

    • I think the danger is in how authority is hypnotic, thus gurus potentially become hypnotic agents to those who follow them…

      …rather than freeing agents.

      Thus a problem with scio was scientologists relationship to LRH, not as imparter of great wisdom or as a spiritual technical scientist, but as guru worshippers. Authority worshippers.

      • As-is

        A little story here that I was told by a friend. It is not session data or told in confidence. I hope he will forgive me if it is not totally as he experienced it, but it is how I recall it.

        Some time in the past, this person was a “monk” following a particular “teacher”. They were walking through the woods one day, with the “teacher” leading and other monks following along behind. My friend was trailing along at the end of the line. He was struggling with following this teacher at this point and was troubled. Finally he could no longer remain silent and proceeded to the front of the line to talk to the teacher. He said to the teacher, ” Master, I find that I can no longer follow you.” The teacher paused for a moment and then said, “OK, so lead!”

        True wisdom enlightens others.

        WW

        • Nice story. Ultimately, one has to be ones own leader, ones own guru. A guru can get you started but once you rely on the guru indefinitely you’re in trouble or at least you won’t get to high levels of cause and responsiblity and freedom.

          There’s a fine line between having a guru help you up to the point of being able to find truth yourself, and relying on a guru to constantly provide you with truth and wisdom because you haven’t got the responsiblity to stand up and take care of yourself spiritually.

      • If the church were to simply live up to it’s own Creed, it could at least have that as a foundation of greatness.

    • Just Me,
      I love the Bonaparte reference, it carries so much truth.

      And in case you missed it in the cluttered up comments last time, here’s the hug you wanted

      • “One does not achieve KNOW without passing through NOT KNOW” and by then it is too late.
        Keep Loki away from that lion.

        The Count

      • Krautfag! Yes, I did receive that hug from you a few pages back. What a delicious hug. Thank you so much. Sorry for not acknowledging. I should have. (Big kitty hug back!)
        Just Me

      • I stole a hug too. I love that clip!

    • Just Me,

      You’re just ahead of the curve–by about three decades or so.

      Michael

    • ΘTater/GaryLerner

      Just Me,

      Beautifully put and very true!

      You are as good as they get, my OT friend! 🙂

      Gary

  29. So, when are you actually going to tell us the purpose of your blog?

    • I just did.

      • Yes, you did, but some find it hard to belive.
        As most people judge others based on how they, themselves, would behave, then there are always going to be those around who are convinced that you must have some hidden purpose with your actions, just because they do.
        Like asking a seemingly innocent question, with a hidden underlying purpose…

    • Anonymous

      Sorry but that just made me laugh. Just burst right out… Easily rejected outpoint I suppose.

      Anyway… thanks for the chuckle.

      WW

  30. When I left organized Scientology, I had a freer mind than most ex-Sea Org but I mistakenly thought that life mirrored Scientology maxims and what not. Eventually, I realized it was the other way around. Life has its own agenda and will wiggle any which way it goes. Causation is great but one will eventually be humbled by the Tao. It teaches humility and anyone who asserts too much, Scientology or otherwise, will be humbled sooner or later.
    What impressed me most about Scientology when I got started was LRH’s comments in the Phoenix Lectures which stated that Scientology was a cousin to the Tao and he recognized the doctrine of Wu Wei (causing action through non-action) as the most civilized of principles. Non-assertion. Now I have had some very exotic adventures in my post Sea Org life and one of them occurred when I was brought to be initiated by a Taoist master. The person who brought me by the way, proved to be quite evil and I eventually had to have them arrested to preserve my own well-being. The Taoist, however, explained through a translator (to a group of us) that Taoist masters went underground thousands of years ago because it was no longer safe (this is coincident with the Age of Pisces….an age of great darkness) to teach the Tao. Times had changed, however, as Earth was reaching critical mass and Taoists were now coming forward to teach what had been hidden. Many years later, I would meet another Taoist master who is really beyond a grand master but he refuses to be called a master because he says that anyone who claims to be a master is a fool. He calls himself the head student. I can tell you that these lessons run very deep and I certainly have not done them all, including the Great Stillness which teaches you to “undo the cord” that ties you to your body. It is basically a Native State.
    There are other exercises we could loosely call “Objectives” which are basically martial arts postures but there are more than you could do in one lifetime. This is the perspective of the Taoist. It is a continuous and infinite process that is taught from Infinite Mind, not a book or even a curriculum per se. It is really the 8th Dynamic in Scientology terms. It is a different perspective than “one month” or “two years”. It is infinity.
    Now, I don’t want to compete Taoism with Scientology because neither philosophy believes in competition. They are cousins as LRH said. My experiences with the OT levels exteriorized me from the 3D so I could work on the 4D but I ended up with many exteriorizations with regard to the 6D and 7D. Most Scientologists are stuck in the 3D and can’t see past it. This is what the whole Mission Holder fiasco was about. There was Operation 4th Dynamic by Diana which was ATTACKED and what instigated the revolution that DM so “skillfully” curtailed. This also is related to the De-Oppression Tech which LRH formulated based upon his study of the French and American Revolutions. I think LRH identified with Robespierre. Anyway, these exteriorizations have led me to some amazing places…..even a bizarre encounter with Ingo Swann…..who I later learned was interested in countering different things I wanted to expose.
    While I could be VERY verbose, I will summate it like this. The 8th Dynamic represents Infinite Wisdom. It is accessible at the drop of a hat if you are lucky/causative enough to access it. We all have our moments. The Taoists knew this and always knew it. They just remained silent. LRH was special and unique…whatever you think of him. Maybe Old Mayo didn’t teach him everything he knew. And I don’t mean David Mayo. And maybe Old Mayo wasn’t even in a body….who knows. But I will tell you this. LRH had problems with his lungs. This was the first thing I learned when I came to the Apollo. “We stay in warm weather climates because the Commodore has a lung condition.” This was not a dig. LRH said the body was a body and it had to be treated like a body. It was matter of fact to the crew who cared to pay attention to such things. I was told by an old timer and also through banter with the Medical Officers. Ancient Taoism, which is not taught almost anywhere (what I’m telling you here is a bit of good fortune on my part), teaches how to breathe and fill your lungs to 100% capacity. This takes years but it can cure asthma in no time. Long slow breaths through the nose and exhales through the mouth. Each breath longer than the first. It takes discipline and after a few yars, you might reach full capacity. I’m only part way there. The point is, this ancient wisdom would have cured LRH’s lung condition no problem, smoking or not. I think LRH would have been the first to tell you he did not know everything. Now, I might not impress you and I don’t mean to…not personally…but when this breath fills the lungs, it then goes beyond into ten chambers of the body and then goes beyond that. When my teacher uncorks it, and I have witnessed this on occasion, it knocks people down from thirty feet. It is physics and not metaphysics. It is Taoist power. Now, there is an important point here. Many members at Int were bullied by DM and one of the justifications for him beating down a superior physical specimen to himself, like Greg Wilhere for example, is that he is surrounded by goons. Well, this method of Taoist Chi Gong teaches you to fight 8 people at once (because no more than 8 can access you geometrically at one time). Maybe this is all water under the bridge but knowing and practicing these Taoist teachings would have prevented DM.
    What I have also learned about martial arts is that the Chinese have misdirected people for millenia. Only the “few families” know these secrets and they keep them to themselves to preserve power. They teach certain things to martial arts students like “the tuck” (always tuck in your pelvis) which is designed to make you lose your balance. In other words, the true adepts are laughing at you while they teach you the wrong thing.
    The whole Chinese system of medicine and ancupuncture is attributed to the Yellow Emperor who was also openly gay even though he had a wife (sound like a Scientologist you know of?). He is credited with almost every invention ever made but he also introduced the patriarcy to China which begins feet binding for women. This Yellow Emperor is like an earlier incarnation of DM in that he is a phoney and most Chinese just take their ancient history for granted.
    These secret teachings I learned came through a Chinese woman who taught her son to protect him from his suppressive father. The woman could have kicked the father’s ass but she was too polite. It was a feminine art. I won’t go on.
    I am also eternally greatful to LRH. Without him, I never could have attained what I have attained. My biggest failure as a Sea Org member was that I wanted to audit LRH and give back to him what he gave to me. I never completed sufficient training to where I thought I was ready to take that on even though I read everything and practiced more than most. I did not realize that where he needed me most was as an admin qual but that is another story too.
    When I went on mission somewhere, Scientologists were often a freak show. Some were sweet and lovely beyond belief but too many “believed” or thought of LRH as a god which he was not. New Sea Org recruits were incredibly naive as to what the real life circumstances were.
    I once went to an OT Committee meeting after leaving. Everyone was sort of robotic when they would speak. THey all rotely asked, “What training and processing have you done recently?” The real kicker was when the head of the committee read that P/L about “Those boys in the between lives area mean business…..” In other words, you’d better get on your next level. The crowed went silent in fear just like when I went to jury duty and the judge said to all the prospective jurors that women could get free breast scans and men could get free protrate checks in vans outside. The audience went into total fear. My point is that OTs and Clears should not be afraid of the boys in the between lives area. They should have surpassed that. These were robot Scientologists.
    An OT is not limited and is open to the infinite.

    • Metaqual, interesting stuff.😀

    • Interesting post. How about some links to the topics you discussed here?

      • Joe Howard – We used to eat some meals together and always had friendly conversation but never got to know each other that well. It is understandable for you to ask for llinks. Unfortunately, I am learning a tradition that is not written per se. The Chinese imperial bullshit I am just uncovering. The Tao te Ching is a summation. I always thought it to be the be all and end all of Taoism. Perhaps it is in some ways. Now, here is a very tantalizing aspect of the Tao te Ching which will go unnoticed. Note what is says about bones:
        “Not exalting the gifted prevents quarreling. Not collecting treasures prevents stealing. Not seeing desirable things prevents confusion of the heart.
        The wise therefore rule by emptying hearts and stuffing bellies, by weakening ambitions And strengthening bones. If men lack knowledge and desire, then clever people will not try to interfere.
        If nothing is done, then all will be well.”

        Strenthening the bones is very key and it takes seven years of diligent practice to strengthen the bones. Huge oxygen intake goes into the lungs which goes into the blood which goes into the fascia (fashia is made up primarily of cartlidge and is a thin sheath wrapping your entire body) which takes the (oxygenated) blood in to the marrow. This is where stem cells are created. Taoist Chi Gong is called “bone-marrow washing” for this reason. It makes you H-E-A-L-T-H-Y and strong. Everything that is healthy is martial and vice versa. Most martial arts masters do not understand this, however, and they often have drinking or smoking habits because they do not do the internal martial arts which include much breathing. Any hard tough ass will collapse without internal work. Witness Walter Payton and Earl Campbell. Martial arts masters are the same way. They are tough as hell on the outside but their internal organs collapse. Joe/Dan – please email me at metaqual@hushmail.com.
        My teacher is planning to do web teaching in the near future and this is how it is best shared. He always encourages us to do our homework and read up on the body and oriental books. Stay away from Mantak Chia however as he has commercialized things to excess and mistaught huge numbers. I will try to be more expository as conditions permit. One thing, however, this whole thread of free philosophical thinking is really beautiful to see. Most everyone in the 70s was attracted to Scientology because of the freedom of philosophical thought. I would rather be around free thinking philosphers than regimented Scientologists any day, but if you combine free thinking with Scientology, you have what amounts to Total Freedom, and wasn’t that what Scientology offered when you first looked at that complicated Grade Chart?

        • Metaqual, you statement that many were attracted to Scientology because of the freedom of philosophical thought rang true. Over and over LRH disparaged about the Ivory Towers, vested interests and Institutions which prevented one from looking and deviating. Freedom to look and think for oneself and all the altruistic verbage was that that, words. They drew us in for sure. And then the door slammed shut.
          By the way, In Percivals book “thinking and destiny” he has breathing drills which he places a premium on for the development of what he calls the”breath form” of a being. He was originally a theosophist and they drew on eastern traditions. Perhaps there is a common ancester there on those techniques and the ones your being taught.

        • Metaequal: Thanks for the further information. I’ve not studied QiGong myself; however, many of my buddhist friends have and I intend to start taking classes.

          In fact, it was interesting to see that Dr. Eva Wong – she holds a particular QiGong lineage (don’t know enough about this to go further) is holding a class on the 6-8 October at Karme Choling (karme.choling.org – click on programs) about bone washing. There are prerequisites which take about 4 years at least to complete. I frequent Karme Choling often so at some point, I’m going to start these classes.

          Others are teaching the basic Levels 1 and 2 in Dec and Mar.

          I’m not trying to detract from your teacher — just let others know that classes in person are possible. Also, if you go to Amazon there are about 15 books written by Eva.

          I’ve met her. She’s quite a formidable lady.

          WH

        • Metaqual,
          Cool post.

      • Perhaps LRH did know more about breathing he didn’t write down. In ’79 he did discuss that subject and showed the few of us talking to him at the time how to do it – he never went into the philosophical aspect, but knew a bit about just breathing and how it relates to the body, and had the ones with him drill it. I had not remembered it until the subject was brought up, but there was a very wide gamut of subjects he would talk about after meals, which I was privileged to have served him.

        He would also as part of his routine, go and brush his teeth as per TWTH when the talks were over.

        • It was quite amazing how much the man knew on different subjects, which he had absorbed from just reading his huge library. Marty is totally correct on the point of having a perspective and a comparison on the subject of life – how else is the concept of a cleared cannibal going to move on up higher?

        • Sinar,
          That’s the being I know. Full of elan.

    • Your humble servant

      Metaqual,

      Thank you for your valuable narrative. I have learned from it. We appreciate your perspective.

  31. Very true. Excellent post.

    In the Hellenistic philosophy of Skepticism they say “The only thing you can be certain of is what you don’t know.”

    Skepticism might be negative and possibly incomplete but it’s at least right about one thing: we can be certain about we do not know.

  32. Tony DePhillips

    It’s funny because I didn’t really start to wake up until I decided to LOOK around at some of the things the church was doing and decide for myself if I agreed with them or not. I then realized that there were many things I didn’t agree with and that lead to many great cogs and freedoms that I had lost by being a know besty little robot in many ways within the church of cabbage. My head was underground looking at the cabbages and I thought I “knew” all about the things above ground without even looking. Well..I’m outside now and looking at things and it is very nice. These “wogs” are all pretty cool, there is some trouble here and there but we can best handle it with ARC and other basic tools rather than resorting to the think of cabbages.
    Thanks Marty for keeping the torch burning.

  33. I know others have said something to the same effect, but I just find it completely refreshing that a Scientologist is willing to look at other teachers/teachings and recognize the truth in them, rather than saying one should only read LRH and that anything other than LRH is squirrel or whatever. Completely refreshing. I feel really sorry for people who grew up in Scn and never learned other viewpoints. They have no datum of comparable magnitude! Fortunately for me I looked in to many philosophies, religions and practices before I found Scn. I have data of comparable magnitude.

    Chart of Human Evaluation, Column M, Reality, 4.0: “Search for different viewpoints in order to broaden own reality. Changes Reality.”

    • Obnosis,

      Thank you for reciting that element of the Chart of Human Ability. It’s probably my favorite datum on the entire chart — certainly not because I’m always there, but because it is the datum that seems to me the sanest and, when applied, resolves for me the most confusion.

      Just Me

  34. Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

    Awesome message, Marty! Kudos for posting it!

  35. non-scientologist

    Thank you Marty for this post. I would like to provide another example for this teachable moment. Let’s say I am an evengelical Christian. I could be close minded or I can engage with the wider world. For example one can go on youtube and easily find christopher hitchens debating dinesh d’souza over the existance of god in a relatively civil manner. (no PI’s or lawsuits) obviously, Dinesh read Christopher’s articles, books, and that of Richard Dawkins, and doesn’t tell others not to familarize themselves which such arguments. I dare say, that dinesh’s arguments have benefited from such challenges, and both he and Christopher use openly available sources to make their arguments.

    However in a cult, one is told not to read or familarize themselves with any material calling their beliefs into question. While this produces a short term gain for the organization, it produces a long term loss for the individual who will never actually critically examine their own beliefs.

  36. Ditto to Ralph, and Once Upon a Time; I love your finger licken’ good analogy.
    I come to this blog for many reasons. Personally I always like a good recommondation on a book or anything else. In keeping with that, I would like to promote Coast to Coast radio with George Nory. It was started by Art Bell years ago, but George has taken over. It is a great late night program. Just type in Coast to Coast radio on your search engine. They cover everything including cutting edge science , spirituality, ufo’s, health, you name it. Once Heber Jentz was on it and Art Bell was a wonderful host.

    Marty, whoever is critical or wanting something different on this website should start their own blog. I believe this is called Marty’s Blog. We can love it or leave it. I’ve met old friends and I am able to talk about stuff that I haven’t been able to talk about with other Scientologist for obvious reasons. It’s an ARC point. Also, I have learned facts about the Church, and some technical things (by way of communicating to someone off the blog)which in turn rehabed a state. No small matter. Besides, DM’s crap has got to be discussed so that the truth prevails. Not that its up to me, but I invite any kind of spiritual/intellectual discussion aside from the DM/Church subject, as its not exactly uplifting, “talkin trash”, though necessary.

    Also, DM’s SPness notwithstanding, he and the rest of Int Management have failed to create a new Admin Scale for Scientology. The fact is that Church went off the rails chasing barking dogs instead of putting its head on straight with the technology as a main priority. The fixation on enemies continued with DM to the nth degree so as he concieves ‘everyone’ as an enemy. The only real enemies of Scientology, on planet earth, are those Scientology has spawned through bad handlings, out tech etc. We, the dedicated soldiers of today and of yesteryear are now considered ‘enemies’. Mr.DM has no idea how or where to lead the organization and can ‘t possibly create a sane and pertinent admin scale. He can only screw up what has already been done! Sad thing is, no one inside the Church has the wherewithall to lead and even if they did, I don’t believe a WW organization can pull it off sanely in the manner that LRH set up. We have a substantial history now to examine. I see that the admin scale didn’t work, when you look at the ACTUAL SCENE. I have had more than one person get frustrated with me and say, “Don’t you want to clear the planet!!!!” Yes, that is a great idea, but it isn’t happening nor will it happen the way it’s going. Even under LRH, the plan was flawed.

    LRH gave us a start that we could never have gotten on our own –chanting mantras for two lifetimes, or whatever ,isn’t going to get it. I’ve listened to guys like Deepak Chopra, and he is very wise, but, he doesn’t consider self and the soul as one. He speaks of the soul as seperate from self; somthing we have. Right there, that tells me that his intellect is superior to his experience and his true knowledge. Similarly, untrained and unaudited Scientology staff and public are forwarding a world wide organization pushing and selling a religion, for the most part, that they have not fully embraced. Without the higher awareness states, they themselves can’t pull off the hyperbolic goal of clearing a planet. They think by being part of the group that they somehow have superior knowledge over everything in life! They talk like LRH or a wise person, talking the talk, but not walking the walk.

    The reason Scientology Orgs were doomed, in my estimation, is that there is no real set up for staff to get what they need, and that includes a pay check. Theory is great, but the history of the Church shows that staff do not get the personal time needed to be living breathing examples of Scientology. It is sad. I’m not trying to trash staff, but only to state a terrific outpoint in the organization. Perhaps Ron thought too much of us….or too little. I mean did he really believe that any ol’ guy off the street could work for a living, expand his dynamics by having a family to support, work on staff, get enhancement by way of auditing and training, complete all the staff training and do it all in a 2 to 5 year contract? Or did he just know that if you push purpose and help, and tell people that they are special etc, that people will jump on the bandwagon and will be willing to sacrafice anything, and so staff pay would be the smallest part of the FP…naturally.
    The Thursday at 2:00 thing has validity, as far as stat collection etc, but the insane way that the demands for targets are pushed down the Org board makes a practical administrative tool into a neurotic mess. Real products are sacraficed for an appearance of a stat. Staff are more concerned with not getting in trouble by being downstat than getting true products.
    Considering that much of the planet is third world, how are they going to get clear by the way the organization is set up? The cost is prohibitive to them, as it can be even to middle class Americians. Now, if you are very well off or you run with the Hollywood crowd, you may pass Go and give 100,000 to start, before going directly to the Boardwalk. So, I do disagree with Ron- you can’t sell Scientology like soap, especially by people who have dirty faces.

    • There is a lot of truth in your post. Thanks. A point of possible interest to you. LRH was grappling – with lots of traffic for other folks to help puzzle it out – on how to make being on staff viable. The very problem you note. Once he was off the lines, and others took charge, it was put in the back of the priorities list. For years leading up to my leaving, several folks at Int were desparately trying to solve this, using LRH’s advices. At every turn they were stymied by Miscavige personally.

      • Hi Marty,
        Regarding the financial viability of orgs or small groups, the major departure from the ideal scene, in my estimation is the tech-admin ratio. In many orgs with 20 staff there are only 2 who are truly tech people who can get good products. That is a 10-1 admin to tech ratio. In some orgs I examined (Tampa) there is a 10-1 admin to tech ratio without even considering the competence of any of those “tech” people.

        The groups I am familiar with in the Indie field who are quite viable are running 1-1 and some have a 1-2 admin to tech ratio. With modern financial systems and good word of mouth, this is highly do-able. It starts with a truely competent tech terminal who can and will get results.

        Within the Co$ there is also the problem where anyone who does become financially successful delivering the tech is considered a threat and is crushed after being raped.

      • Very true, Marty. From various comms overheard, I knew he didn’t like the staff to have to moonlight in order to survive and was looking and ordering solutions to be found so that staff could concentrate on getting others and themselves up the grade chart as a full time activity.

      • This was highly illuminating, Marty.

        “Viability” for staff has always been an issue for me – it is heartening to know that others cared, and actually were trying to do something about it.

    • Great points Jewel. In 2006, during a horrendous ethics cycle, I had the startling and sudden revelation that I was being “handled” in The Church of Scientology by people who knew NOTHING about the applied religious philosophy called SCIENTOLOGY!!!!! (this was in a Sea Org service Org). The MAA came over to my place and told me that it was discovered in a survey that many SO members had never read a book by LRH (I hope since remedied).

      Yeah, a LOT of bullshit also took place in the 70s – jewel knows what I’m talking about. BUT our agreed upon game was getting more and more people into Scientology, training and auditing them well, all leading to the eventual goal of clearing the planet. We weren’t concentrating on buying real estate or “busting psychs.” The irony on that point is….talk about OTHER intentionness (but I don’t think Ms. Weber will be covering this at the Freewinds Ethics seminar).

      Miscavige is applying the LRH idea of the leader as visionary, game setter. But his games are MEST accumulation, with the accompanying methods of force, punishment, extortion, shame and blame. It is a tragic outpoint that too many Scientologists have agreed to play these games.

      Here’s my idea if I was ever to become leader of Scientology. The first step of the new game of clearing the planet is: A target of two years for EVERY SINGLE staff member on the planet to be a Class V Auditor.

      That’s the FIRST step. For all the people who work in the church to be actually expert in the application of the religous philosophyof Scientology as they set out to handle this island Earth. Do I need to mention how much personal gain the staff would get from training and the co-auditing, which would also be a big part of this.

      Besides all the T & P, and the BLAST that staff would have playing this game (talk about high toned doingness), staff exchange MUST be looked at. LOTS of ideas on this. I would just say as a start, using all the church moolah to at least put all staff on a medical insurance plan. And then how about awarding credits for each year served that can be used at ANY Org at ANY time all over the world (including AOs) with a mandate that these staff or ex-staff receive gold star service.

      • Joe, you and Jewel make excellent points. During all my 40 or so years in Scientology, I could never make sense out of some of the policies and practices of the organization. Bottom line, it always seemed to me there were maximum DISincentives to becoming a staff member, as it was so much based on 1st and 2nd Dynamic sacrifice – endless hours, very little pay. Plus a high level of danger – of comm ev, declare, expulsion. Plenty of able, intelligent, rational persons are going to stay the hell away from a system like that.

        I just never could figure out why it was set up that way. Look at the massive wog (“real world”) companies that have come into existence, thrived and grown into international behemoths in just the last 30 years. Loaded with talent, clear game plan for expansion and execution of plan ACROSS THE GLOBE.

        Scientology could have been one of these, IMO, had it been organized and operated as a business. Don’t get me wrong, I believe Scientology is a religion in the truest sense of the word, quite possibly the first ever on this planet. I just mean, if your goal is to get your “products” delivered to the world, seems to me you should approach this the way any successful business would.

        One of my favorite stories was told to me by a friend who was recruited for staff at SF Org I believe in about 1969. He did not do any “due diligence” (as to what he was getting into) before signing his 5 year contract. After his first week of work he got his paycheck. It was for something like $9.50. He was sure it had to be a mistake. Wish I could remember all the details; it was his reaction to this and his getting his reality quickly adjusted that made it such a funny story. Certainly the reality was not funny. It curled my hair just to hear about it.

        Frankly, I still can’t understand the pay thing. WHY was this a problem that had to be “desperately grappled” with by LRH and others? WTF, I just don’t believe there wasn’t enough money coming in, during the 70s for example, to pay staff a decent wage comparable to what they would make in the “real world”. If that’s true, it means that Scientology was not really viable economically. That’s an outpoint of magnitude all by itself if true, at least by that time. Perhaps Marty or someone can elaborate on where the money all went.

        As long as we are exercising “free speech” on this blog, I’ll have to admit the following: I KNOW the auditing tech works (and I am not coming from that kind of arrogant “certainty” Marty was talking about in his last post – this particular knowing is based on experience). But I’m not and have never been similarly convinced about the workability of the “green on white” side. Maybe other voices can help me see what I’m missing (if anything).

        • What I find so horrible about the SO,never being near it, is people loosing their teeth at young age. I know it is not the key abuse but it sticks in my mind.

          • CD,
            Dental floss.

          • There actually is an LRH reference I read years ago where he calls dentists con-men for addressing the teeth with dental technology. He said it could all be handled with auditing. I wish I could give the exact reference but I don’t have it. Someone else may very well know it, though.

        • Publius~The admin to tech ratio would explain why staff weren’t paid well in an org taking in good money…me thinks.

        • Too many staff = too much overhead = low staff pay. Any org I’ve been in as a public, I could have done with about 90% LESS staff. It’s a bad business model, not one conducive towards being able to support its staff in the real world.

          Too much $ spent on promo that gets mailed and thrown away by recipients. It’s ineffective and a waste. Money that could be used to pay good staff.

          An org should be able to use profits from it’s book sales to pay staff, too. It used to be that all the HCO book account money was hacked out of the GI and unavailable for staff pay.

  37. love the post. lao tsu is da man. and your bit “Those who are stably above 30.0 on the tone scale should really have no use for this blog”–priceless. a real beauty of a comm, marty.
    love you.
    j

  38. I’m not a Scientologist, and never was, but I think the lack of questioning may be the most sinister aspect of organized Scieintology. If you are not constantly challenging what you hold to be true, you are not growing. Lose the fear of uncertainty and take a step closer to understanding reality.

  39. Why does life have to be so complicated? Being an outsider with NO connections to Scientology what-so-ever, but having an interest in reading about Scientology. I ask thee…why is life so complicated within the teachings of Scientology? Why is it that most of you speak with some foreign language to the outside world? How do Scientologists clear the planet when what they say is just nothing but foreign mumbo jumbo to the rest of the world? And I am talking about the language. I do NOT understand it.

    How is the planet going to get cleared without telling what all these meanings within the scientology speak is? It all seems so secret. I’ve spent months deciphering what acronynms are. Such as SP, PSP, and all the acronyms that go with all the orgs, etc, etc,…It is actually enough to drive a person insane! How is Scientology going to clear the planet when it is so secretive about it’s basic elements? Shouldn’t Scientology be free information to the public, just like the Bible? I mean, after all they do call themselves a Religion. Why do people have to pay for this shit? This is a cult, brainwashing a person into paying money for their ultimate salvation. This is extremely sick behaviour, and the Cult is taking advantage of people that are in the lowest part of their life. And BONUS! If they have money, just like Jason Beghe, and the many other celebrities, the church scores! I don’t understand who can buy this shit. Help me understand this…

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Joy,

      I hear you loud and clear. Many Scientologists have not taken very seriously the Code of a Scientologist, namely the following, which applies to exactly what you’re saying …

      “To teach Scientology at a level it can be understood and used by the
      recipients.”

      I strive very hard to communicate clearly with clarity. Are any of my posts not clear to you? If so, please let me know what it is. I’ll try harder, I promise.🙂

      With the Internet, there is no excuse for the Church of Scientology to force people to pay for the books and tapes by L. Ron Hubbard (save for their own profit reasons). LRH books and tapes should be freely distributed by being available free to download, just like you can find many Bible’s online that are free to download.

      Not making the information available without paying is not very church-like, is it? Instead, the “church” acts like a business … which in its current state, they really are just a business, though its much worse than that.

      Not only is the existing Church of Scientology (CofS) NOT honestly a church, and IS a business, it is also a large cult, just like you said.

      As a Scientologist, I want no part of that fraud! CofS is not only a creepy cult that takes your money without giving you what you thought you paid for, but worse, it harms people with thought programming, what I like to call thought “inculcation.”

      I’d like to apologize to you on behalf of real Scientology. What you have witnessed is what is called “Reverse Scientology”, which is wicked and evil. That’s what many of us here are exposing.

      Real, authentic Scientology is the exact opposite of this wicked and evil Scientology you see.

      For a real understanding of the benefits of Scientology, I’ve always recommended the Communications Course. Sadly, I have no idea where to tell anybody to go to try it because I’d never, ever send you to the Church of Scientology as the CofS obviously doesn’t know what real, open communication is, because they don’t even do it themselves!

      But I can tell you this much; When I was able to take the Communication Course in 1978 at the popular Mission of Davis in Portland, Oregon, this Communication Course dramatically increased my ability to communicate and overcome my shyness, and thus it raised my self-esteem to a level I never expected it would get. People started liking me a lot more, and my sales career had dramatic success … just becaues of better communication.

      If that’s all I had done, my life would forever be happier for it just with the better relationships I’ve had because of it.

      As beneficial as the course was to me, today, I sadly don’t know where to tell one to go to take it, as I do not trust the Church of Scientology anymore. Perhaps somebody else here does and will chime in.

      I hope that helps shed a little more light. Let me know if you have any more questions.

      • Wayne, wow, what a great reply this is! You addressed Joy’s issues clearly and elegantly. Very impressive and effective communication.

    • I don’t understand who can buy this shit. Help me understand this…

      Errm, if I may…

      Basically, anyone can end up in a cult.
      People from all walks of life, of all degrees of intelligence, everyone. It mostly is a matter of who you meet at what stage in in your life ( Will all the men here who followed a hot chick into an org please stand up? thank you :D)
      What now diffentiates Scientology is that it offers to the beginner a series of mental discipline techniques, which are consequently trained. Any regular practice of any mental discipline technique, not just Scientology, can have an astounding effect on and to the mind, especially if one never has done anything like that before. That effect is very subjective and hardly experienced likewise by any two people. Overall it is commonly described, outside Scientology as well, as a feeling of sharpened senses, faster and clearer thinking, better memory, mental uplift, kinda like “pimp-ya-brain”. The Scientology flavor of these techniques has – in my oppinion – some nasty tweaks to it, but I won’t go into detail here, that would get a tech discussion started and the lord deliver me from that😀
      Anyway, you now got a person who has experienced something extraordinary to him and he is promised that he hasn’t seen anything yet, the real goodies are yet to come as he continues his path in the cult.
      Add some lovebombing and peer pressure, and voila, after a couple of month, welcome to the cult and you didn’t even notice.

      • I guess it depends on your point of view, and on the intent and practice of the practitioner. I suggest Ken Wilbur’s A Brief History of Everything, for the proposition that objective research demonstrates that all workable roads to higher states of awareness involve gradient scales, or as he puts it a ladder.

        • Ken Wilber – Spirituality and the 3 Strands of Deep Science

        • Good book, not an easy read though, but on the other hand, philosophy texts seldom are. Thanks also for the Tao quote, here’s something I hadn’t read before.

          It’s definitely true that all working systems use some form of progression/qualification schedule up to the point of not formal but spiritual initiation where you are supposed to confront your negative self with all it’s aspects and depending on the teaching either overcome or embrace yourself (lots of names for that..the dweller of the threshold in Rosicrucianism, Marduk of the Chaldeans, Michael and the dragon in Christianity, Ganesha in the yoga tradition). In the progression to that point Scientology is actually pretty classical (save for the meter😉 ), exercises, theory, body cleansing, a very common “ladder” till the end of OT II, with the also classical target topos of magician/adept, who forms the universe at his will (cause over MEST), overall in exercise and advancement closest resembling the magical branch of Rosicrucianism probably. On OT III, the moment where the classical systems would have the spiritual initiation, Scientology wildly disgresses from anything known, as the personal state of the practitioner is not attributed to the state of development his soul is currently in but to exterior influences. I don’t like that.

          And aye, a lot of the experience in a spiritual group/church/lodge/order/cult/whatever depends on the practising person. Not everything though, the subjective intentions may be as clean as fresh snow and one might do his exercises with the discpline of the buddha, if the person is caught into a malignant gruoup, or a group whose teachings are plainly screwed up, the practioner still can’t help it. Anyway, I virtually just wanted to give Joy a quick and dirty “why”.

          • Kraut,
            Superb analysis. On the, what you’ve termed ‘digression’, mayhaps that area applies to the issues you’ve mentioned in your last para.

            The mentioned by Wilber, three branches of epistemology, could serve your resolution of the connections and rapport apparent in the group dynamic.

    • Hi Joy. I think you understand it quite well. As for abbreviations and “keywords”, most subjects of study or groups have them. They are not hard to learn. But your point is well taken. Scientology organizations evolved to where they can clear nothing. The Sea Organization was sunk.
      There is a lot of great material in scientology though which most here find useful and I hope you read up on it and enjoy it. And if you can learn some applications of it you can most certainly help yourself and others if you choose.

    • The “foreign mumbo jumbo” actually serves a couple purposes. On a basic level these newly-coined words (also known as “neologisms”) describe new and unique concepts created by Scientology’s belief system and give members a shorthand to discuss the topic and apply the belief system. They are not hard to learn.

      The second pupose, not necessarily intended, gives members a sense of specialness and even superiority over non-members, thus solidifying the “group.”

      • Brendon, your right. The second purpose if actually very important. A special or secret language or sign system bonds the group.

    • Joy,

      The jargon: every technical subject has this problem. Whatever else Scientology does, it does have a technical core that strives to be exact. New concepts and things are found, and there is no existing word for these things. So what’s a person to do? Well, you must do what all languages do – invent a new word that hopefully describes the thing.

      Scientology terminology is mild🙂 You should see some of the weird shit I have to put up with daily – I’m in IT. Specifically Unix which has a fine tradition of coming out of hard-core academia. Those dudes really get off on using big words correctly….

      Lucky, Scientology has a dictionary; and around here lots of folk happy to answer honest questions about what stuff means. But I doubt we are ever going to get away from needing to learn a new terminology. And this applies to any technical subject.

      FWIW, it’s better that we invented new words for things. If we tried to add new meaning to existing words, there would be chaos as we’d have to constantly state how this new meaning differed from the old.

  40. Thank you Marty. Loved reading this post! It is so good to hear other view points that parallel LRH. Very nice.

  41. Jean-François Genest

    Informative post Marty. I don’t question your intentions with your blog, and I am thankful to be a guest and allowed to comment.

    Thanks for the Tao quote and the refresher on the scales. Boy I miss my Scientology 0-8 small book with the locomotive on the cover.
    Tao Te Ching is next on my reading list.

    I am halfway through Frankl’s “Man’s Search for Meaning” and I really enjoy it. Fascinating! And he’s a p-s-y-c-h-i-a-t-r-i-s-t. Yes, a very TABOO word Scientology.

    Of course, as often happens with me in my universe, the day I got Frankl’s book from the public library, and started reading it, was the very day I happened to watch Oprah Winfrey, and she had Ingrid Betancourt as her guest.

    Ingrid and her colleagues spent 6½ years under FARC guerrilla captivity in the Colombian jungle. Her attitude towards her situation was exactly in line with Frankl’ s thesis in the book.

    Well, to quote John Sweeney, “carry on.” 🙂 Θ♥

    • JFG~Frankyl’s book was fantastic (not too wordy, not too much of a “study”) and I still daily think about it. I talk about it with my kids to the point they now tell me, “MOM! We are not in a death camp!”😉
      OK OK I really liked it!

  42. Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

    The title of this blog is, “What are we doing here.”

    I can only speak for myself, what “I’m” doing here.

    First, I’m here to seek understanding about WHAT really happened, and then WHY?

    Secondly, I hope to contribute to that understanding, and do it with clarity so anybody (including Non-Scientologists) can understand. I intend to help create more empathetic understanding.

    I also love and enjoy the community of such intelligent thinking Beings.

    The CofS portrays Scientologists as robotic idiots who fail to communicate and can’t confront evil. The communication by independent Scientologists on Marty’s blog show that Scientologists can be free-thinking, and intellectual.

    I don’t believe any aware person arriving here can deny that the majority of Scientologists here are very aware, smart, and good people with great hearts. It may come as quite a shock to some to see that we are not who they thought we were.

    The people here are one of the few places where understandings of WHY church Scientologists came to be trapped in the CofS implant station, and WHY they are having such a hard time waking up and getting out.

    Most trapped church Scientologists are extremely good people with good intentions within, but their expression doesn’t always show it because of their mindwashing inculcation.

    Personally, I’ve never met an SP (a truly evil person) who was a Scientologist. Of course, the head dominating tyrant of CofS is an SP, but I’ve never, ever considered him a Scientologist.

    Marty, Marty’s blog, and its community (the rest of us) are doing a great service to Scientologists and Scientology. I cannot thank every participant enough!

    I consider all of you my friends.

    • Wayne, what are you “on” today? I want some. Often I feel compelled to take issue with some point you’ve made (even though I always find your posts to be among the most interesting and intelligent). But today I’m in agreement with just about everything you’ve said and in awe of how well you’ve said it.

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        Perhaps, hopefully, I was better in that post in my practice of speaking the “language of giraffe” instead of the “language of jackal”.

        Giraffes ears point straight out as if they are trying to listen very closely. They also have the biggest heart of any land animal.

        I’m still practicing (as in practicing playing the piano) what Dr. Marshall Rosenberg, in his book “Nonviolent Communication”, calls the language of giraffe in our predominately domination culture of “language of jackals”. An amazing work, btw.

        This domination culture isn’t just in the CofS either. It has been spread like an infectious disease through governments, businesses, churches, and parenting for the last 8000 years on Earth, just like Walter Wink explains in detail in his book, “The Powers That Be”.

        This new language is a work in progress for me.🙂

        By the way, the definition of a jackal is this …

        jack·al,n.

        1. Any of several doglike mammals of the genus Canis of Africa and southern Asia that are mainly foragers feeding on plants, small animals, and occasionally carrion.
        2. An accomplice or a lackey who aids in the commission of base or disreputable acts.

  43. Great post Marty!

  44. Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

    Afterthought:

    Church Scientologists are not getting an education in the Church of Scientology, they are getting an inculcation!

    Independent Scientologists call this “implanting”, the most evil practice anybody can do to an individual. That’s why Marty refers to the CofS as an “implant station”. For non-Scientologists, that’s an “inculcation station.”

    To Anons reading this; If you would be so generous, please try to keep the above in mind, if you’re not already.

    The latin root of inculcate means to force uponto trample. Church Scientologists don’t need to be trampled on any more than they already are by CofS and DM. Please help them, not spite them.

    in·cul·cate (ĭn-kŭl kāt′, ĭn kŭl-)
    tr.v. in·cul·cat·ed, in·cul·cat·ing, in·cul·cates

    1. To impress (something) upon the mind of another by frequent instruction or repetition; instill: inculcating sound principles.
    2. To teach (others) by frequent instruction or repetition; indoctrinate: inculcate the young with a sense of duty.

    [Latin inculcāre, inculcāt-, to force upon : in-, on ; see in-2 + calcāre, to trample (from calx, calc-, heel).]

    in′cul·ca tion n.
    in·cul ca′tor n.

    – The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition.

    • Wayne,
      you conjured the Anons up and here I am😉

      About the inculcation…
      We know that the churchies are under that duress. You can see it in the Bunker-Vids from 2000, you can see it in their promo pieces, you can read it in the defector stories on esmb, we see it at the orgs.

      Anon was posed with the question how to engage these people.
      And most Anons chose the approach of “it has to get much worse before it can get better”, i.e. ridicule the CoS and its members to the extreme, crash their BIS stats and generally make being a CoS member so unbearably unpleasant that their inner pressure overcomes the thought stop. Plus the maximum number of lulz had to be gotten out of it too. It’s kinda cruel but then, Anons and at the time channers are not reputed for kindness and tender behaviour.

      So, I fear, the churchies will continued to be trampled upon in most cases.

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        Krautfag,

        Cool, I’m glad it’s understood they’re under duress “from within.”

        Though unfortunate it seems to have to resort to this, the duress strategy “from without” may very well be the most effective strategy. Make it so uncomfortable to even go to the CofS, and put the pressure on to make going there so socially unacceptable, church Scientologists will finally wake up and say to themselves …

        “That’s it! I’m going to uninstall my church sponsored Nanny software, and run my anti-spyware to make sure it’s all gone, so I can search the Internet freely to find out what the hell is really going on!”

        Who knows, that may be working as we speak. The Orgs look pretty empty to me. Thanks for stopping by. As far as I’m concerned, Anons civil input such as yours are always welcome.

        • Wayne/Krautfag,

          Here’s an interesting thought experiment.

          Take the church as a single 3D entity and plot it’s position on the Tone Scale. Take what Anon says the intend and the actions they do, and plot those on the Tone Scale. Compare them.

          I don’t need to tell you how this will unroll if the latter is pitched about 0.5 or so above the former🙂

          • And now plot your own your comment on the tonescale😉

            • It’s Interest.

              Anon impinges on the church hierarchy in a big way. The protests are noticed because the incoming comm is pitched at a level that is very real to DM and his cronies who are sitting at around 1.1.

              This doesn’t mean that individual Anon’s are mostly at 1.5 themselves as their chronic tone, or that they display anger and antagonism routinely. It just means that when communicating to the church, using the tone of 1.5 to 2.0 is the one that is going to get you noticed.

          • Anons vs. the CoS. It’s really a matter of “correct estimation of effort”, isn’t it?

            Discovering and using just the right amount of force. It doesn’t have to be devoid of ARC. It is best done with ARC.

          • I’ll leave that to Wayne, too much tech for my taste🙂

  45. Discussing the tech, degrading the tech. I see it in plenty on the web. First they say: “I am free to discuss the tech – Horray!!” and in the next post I see them degrading the tech as “unworkable”.

    Anti-Scientology has already space in media, just been watching the Sweeney report which in part is an example of this. I am not blind.

    I run a blog in swedish and I will NEVER let any anti-Scientology be part of it. LRH deserves better than having some smartass degrading his work. Do you know anyone who could give you real answers? This is really what I am talking about, as I see these smartasses wanting to discuss AND degrade the tech, as if THEY EVER brought some workable truth to the table.

  46. Great post, Marty. Very true.

    This is a basic on the Study Tapes as well as the scales you mentioned. In order to learn something, you can’t already know “all about” it. You have to Not Know something before you can Know it.

    To me, there were two basic types of Scientologists. The first were those that found a piece of data that spoke to them (like, Ethics, or PTS-ness, or perhaps the barriers of study), and then everything else was accepted as sooth, based on their own really big cog.

    The other were those that read it, worked with it, poked it, learned it, practiced it, screwed up with it, helped people, got into ethics trouble for pushing the occasional button the “wrong way” and looked at all the pieces to the puzzle to put it all together – and learned how Scientology fit in the context of things. Some of my best friends were people who came in from other practices or religions, and who found in Scientology the missing links they were looking for. My best friend grew up Catholic. My other best friend had studied Krishnamurti and GI Gurdjieff and had gone to India to study. Others had taken a little too many drugs. Personally, I like reading Deepak Chopra and Alan Watts.

    Did you know that there is a branch of Islam that has as a belief that Allah recreates the entire universe from scratch instant by instant, and that the only reason that we have continuity (like, a ball bouncing down, then up) is because He doesn’t want us to go insane? And that a miracle is just Allah recreating the next instant a little more different than the previous one? “Was dead. Now alive!” This, to me, is just fascinating!

    Watts taught that God is, basically, everything – you, me, the entire universe. And, we are little instances of the beingness of God – little egos that are a little blip – perhaps a connected polyp, of the whole universe. A viewpoint of God that allows Him to experience everything. Evil and cruelty are just more interesting things for God to experience, and that without Evil, how could there be Good? (Dichotomies, there, as you mentioned earlier Marty). Fascinating!

    And, then of course, there is the atheistic view that all is matter, people and consciousness are just accidents of evolution, and that when we die, we return to random “star stuff” – Loved that term from Carl Sagan.

    My point is that learning and knowledge is fascinating, and that the more you know, the better off you are. It is when you choose one “brand” of knowledge to adhere to as TRUTH to the exclusion of other “brands” that you limit your knowledge, because now you have “taken sides.” “I believe in Brand A Knowledge!” and a datum from “Brand B” comes up and knocks heads with your “Brand A” and, naturally, “This MUST be wrong, because it is contrary with Brand A!” However on further reflection, you may find that “Brand B” is not exactly what you thought it might be, and if you took an unbiased view and looked at Brand B as is, you may find that it fits in somewhere with Brand A.

    This happens in Academia – the subjects of Sociology and Economics conflict, and Physics and Chemistry conflict. But there has to be common Truth in there somewhere.

    Hence, there are parallels between the Tao and Scientology, Christianity and Scientology, Judiasm and Scientology, etc., etc. In other words, what is True is True, and people tend to slice Truth up into little slices and label each slice.

    If you are afraid looking at something will shake your “belief” in some subject or another, then your belief is already shaken.

    You cannot Know if you are afraid to Look.

    One thing I really like about this blog, Marty, is what I think I mentioned before, which is that we have an open place to discuss what we know, and that there is a variety of viewpoints. I think this is a good thing, and you are doing a great job keeping this blog a place of open discussion. Thanks for that. Truly.

    • Grashopper,

      you might find OSHO very interesting. Just google him, there are plenty of videos by him. He is a rebel and genius – very inspiring, very.

      Fidelio.

  47. Very interesting discussion!

    Somehow this “total certainty” never got to me from my studies in Scientology. I always (truly) believed it to be a “marketing slogan” of the Gross Alteration of Tech (GAT) and, while initially an appealing concept, the “results” soon made it “pure marketing” and bad one at that.

    Don’t get the impression that I feel I was so “wise” (i.e. a real smart ass) that it didn’t get to me – well, it got to me in many other ways – just read my various other comments! In an earlier post Marty described how his then position as IG gave him a “safe space” aboard the Freewinds when studying LRH tech within which he could make up his own mind about it.

    It reminded me of what my safe space was when I studied the PDC tapes some 25 years ago, when practically nobody (!) listened to tapes yet. My job made it geographically impossible to go near an org for an extended period of time. And I would daily listen to any LRH tapes I could lay my hands on.

    The point: I had nobody around who would tell me what I should think about the data. It was exploration all the way through. I was constantly comparing data with my environment. And I’m one of those to whom the “PDC’s contain it all”. Once done with the PDC’s the first round through, I turned around and listened to them a second time. Out of interest alone!

    There was a specific time after discovering scientology-cult.org and this blog that I seriously posed this question: Did I fall with Scientology for a completely false and fantasy world? After answering that question (by further investigation, comparison, inspection) I’m a better Scientologist than before with a higher certainty on data I had certainty on before, with a never before known willingness to doubt in data I believed to be true, with a freedom to truly accept or reject data that are true to me or not (read it without “absolutes” implied).

    If people were given a safe space to study Scientology in a safe space (ideally “neutral”, neither overly pro nor con) it is hard for me to imagine that anyone would interpret it as implying not to study, learn or investigate something else.

    At least for me it did the opposite.

  48. Would you be interested in running that?!

  49. Bullshit! The data is the data and not even you are superior to it.

    • Mr. Boice,

      You apparently need to restudy the Factors and the Scientology Axioms.

      Thetans are vastly superior to *any* datum or data, being the ultimate source of all such. Ron Hubbard’s Scientology(no tm) data is only true to the degree that it is a description of what a being has *already* decided or agreed down through the ages of its existence.

      All we do in Scientology is aimed at bringing a being to the point where he is *aware* of these data and eventually to a point where he once again is senior to them. Enforced agreement, such as you just attempted, *reduces* their awareness and lessens their responsibility and command over the data. It’s *not* Scientology.

      Michael A. Hobson

      Michael A. Hobson

    • John B,
      I’m gonna take on this non sequitur.

      My dear man, ‘data’ the plural of ‘datum’ (Latin – to give), is defined as:
      “A DATUM IS A FACSIMILE OF STATES OF BEING, STATES OF NOT BEING, ACTIONS OR INACTIONS, CONCLUSIONS, OR SUPPOSITIONS IN THE PHYSICAL OR ANY OTHER UNIVERSE.” Logic 4.

      Dude, tell me again how a facsimile is senior to a being, who creates the damn thing in the foist place? Not only that, he creates the MEST from which the facsimile is taken. Hmmmmmmm?

  50. Great post Marty!

    Reminds me of a story going around in the late 60s early 1970s.

    The OT 7 completion goes in to get his C/S from Ron, for his next level. In the envelope there is the hand-written instruction: Go do OT-TR0, only this time, DO IT RIGHT!

  51. Thank you Marty,
    what a nice post.
    I found studying other philosophies that I gained a much better understanding of Scientology… I understood the basics better.

    Reading is a form of communication, you look, get the data add or trash them as you wish.

    LRH would have never want us to close our eyes and believe everything he said: that would be a trap and a big step backwards from freedom.

    LRH from “the descent of man”
    5 June 1955 ‘Anatomy of Spirit of Man Congress’ Lecture #9

    “Now, the cure for it, oddly enough,
    is communication-not non-communication.”
    “Because communication is the only way out.
    To continue an entrapment it is necessary, then, to punish communication or some phase of it-to enforce or inhibit communication.”

    I also would love to add a word for who is condemning any other person for practicing different philosophies.
    My advice is: first of all STUDY WHAT SCIENTOLOGY 0 is.
    Than look at their product before judging.
    I think the degree of effectiveness on helping others should be the measurement to decide if they are good or else.
    Not what they believe or practice.
    It is so easy to go into the band of fascism…

    Thank you again Marty.

    • Silvia – that’s sane and I like what you said.

      Just how much LRH wanted us to blindly agree with him, here’s a bit from the PDC lectures (page 14 of transcript available from http://www.stss.nl):

      “So I’m not asking for anybody to agree with me but I’m not asking
      for anybody to disagree with me either. All I’m asking is that we take a look at this information. …. It is a very interesting thing but all this phenomena is discoverable. So I’m not asking you to agree with me … “

  52. Thank you for this posting Marthy ” What we are Doing ” It Seems from the Feed back that This Blog is certaintly a Positive One. May I add its quite a Constructive blog for views , and the sharing of them for those that Post. Some might have a hard time otherwise for reliable data .So for those capable to get and receive and share with this Blog ” Updates within ” Its a blessing to know what is really going on in the Church, And if I am not wrong the blog shows by the postings a lardge amount do express Support and their loyality to the Tech.

  53. Namaste, Marty.

  54. Marty,

    This post really hit home for me. LRH became an authority in Scientology – someone whom we must believe without question. I talked to a woman who was a Scientologist for many years who left because she was berated and invalidated for noting that LRH’s grammar was not correct in something she was reading.

    Much of the church promo emphasizes TOTAL CERTAINTY. That’s a real thought-stopper. Without being wishy-washy, I try very hard to leave room in my opinions for being incorrect or incomplete. I have found it humbling, and very liberating. I am learning SO much. On Jeff’s blog, someone brought up the concept of their ideas being set in velcro rather than set in stone. I’m using that concept and having loads of fun. When I change my opinion on something, my kids often call me on it. Now I just plead “velcro.” It’s a good thing to change your mind. It’s learning and growing.

    Being liberated from the church was step number one. Every day I sing to myself, “Yo ho, the witch is dead…” You have been a big part of that. Being able to evaluate and, if I so choose, discard anything that I am told or read, being able to have “critical” thoughts without feeling bad about it, this is step number two. This has been a gradual process and boy, does it feel good. Thanks everyone for contributing.

  55. Just to weigh in here.

    Many of us share a burning passion for knowledge and wisdom. Scientology and other traditions, Chopra, Stuart Wilde, Gary Zukov (Dance of the Wu Li Masters), Carl Sagan etc provide plenty of knowledge and wisdom.

    This is not to say that the TECHNOLOGY or PRACTICES of these various traditions should be commingled and create some sort of spiritual soup.

    Marty’s blogs and others expose how the technology of LRH has been destroyed WITHIN dmology AND how the innate desire for learning has also been destroyed thanks to censorship.

    Marty had a wonderful article about TECHNOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY awhile ago (I just can’t find it).

    I think it’s very important to understand and keep these two things in mind when discussing looking.

    QiGong for example is very EXACT; however, there are many lineages. They don’t commingle those lineage hoping to get a super-duper QiGong or something.

    WH

    • WH,

      A lot of practices and technologies are very exact, but they all boil down to forms and methods to understand, to increase awareness and to become cause over life. Not cause in a dominating way, but in a way that benefits all. Of the wide range of spiritual and physical practices I’ve studied, successful application comes down to just a very few universal factors which permeate each subject–including Scientology.

      Languages have accents, grammar, syntax, vocabulary, dialect, idiom, slang etc. A good linguist adapts to all of this when speaking one of the languages at her disposal. Each style of dance has its own vocabulary and form, but the basics are very much the same. And a good dancer can move from method to method, accent to accent.

      When I practice yoga with my wife, I use things I learned in Scientology to improve what I do. I also use things I learned in martial arts. And in dance. And biology. Anatomy. Art. Ceramics and oil painting. I even use what I learned from falling in love. On and on. So much crosses over and applies.

      But, then again, I’ve never thought of systems as much other than a means of application rather than dictates for belief.

      And, by the way, you’re a very interesting cookie. Some of your ideas set my thoughts vibrating, zing-zing, and I have to stop to re-examine why I’ve held onto some notion. But, I toss the banana peels in the compost heap, and I use my discarded ideas in much the same way.

      Without being too bold, I surmise that some lifetime in the very distant future, our paths might well collide. Maybe when I grow up (say ten thousand years hence) and become less thuggish.

      Michael

  56. Dear Marty!

    I really think that you are leading into the wrong direction, in regard of fighting the church and DM.

    My concern is that you and all who follows you are getting yourself involved into the DM game of finding and labeling enemies, blaming, fighting them and resisting. That is not a Scientology game, which was to walk up the bridge and help others to. DM is not a scientologist by LRH definition “one who betters the conditions of himself and the conditions of others using Scn technology” as he stopped moving up the bridge long ago and considerably slows down the progress of others up the bridge.

    You know that what you resist, that you will eventually become.

    I see the only way to handle the “off rails” church with its dictator in place of leader is to withdraw our attention from it. Stop flowing theta toward it. Start and keep doing Scientology, creating the products – well audited pc-s and well trained auditors. Promote broadly this activity and its product. And the stronger this flow up the bridge become, the more people will observe it, join and support. This is how the swamp of a stack flow of DM hate will get dried out and parish.

    Not by playing and thus continuing his game.

    • I’d agree if DM was playing his game with himself on some island and not defraud, punish, humiliate and destroy the lives of so many – and quite a bunch of them happens to be my friends and even family.

      If a rapist is in the house it doesn’t help much to work on a “happy family”.

      • DM is not a rapist, and your friends and family aren’t blind helpless victims. Both sides need a little more credit and respect then you give them.
        I say – give DM the full acknowledgment for a huge mess that he has created, admire his ability to influence such enormous amount of people and his ability to screw a greatest creation! Just acknowledge fully a big job the little man has accomplished, and then withdraw your attention from him. End that cycle and start a new one – KSW.

        • Turn your back and get a knive in your back. As long as the criminal is commiting criminal acts better pay attention because the moment the moment he can ferret in the dark again some folks will be walshed over again. Criminals work best without attention on them.

          • Well, turn you face to criminal, get a knife in your hand, pay attention to his actions, which means keep mocking him up, BE EFFECT of his hate by opposing and resisting it – and voila! The game continues forever, or as long as he wishes to continue originating it. And before you know, you become the criminal yourself.

            • Please don’t become a cur dog. You all have got overts of magnitude or you’ve been infiltrated through and through by OSA. If it is the latter you are a sorry lot in light of my other response to you.

              • Are you now suspecting me? Well, that is illustrating exactly my point. You were looking for enemies – and find a new one, me (even though imaginary and in your head only, as I do not feel nothing but great affinity to you and wishing to help).

                • No.

                • The plight of suppression looks like a catch 22. If you fight it you’ll have to mock it up, say it’s there, and say it’s horrible and devote more energy towards it’s destruction. Of course the suppressor will do the same and that’s the reason that wars only yield destruction and losers. Another wrong way is to walk away from a suppressor, act as if it’s not there and take no responsibility for your dynamics. Having been in contact with a suppressor, it’s on your track and you’re responsible for that part of it. If you walk away you’re not at cause over the suppressor and never will be, meaning you’ll always be effect. Having contributed to Davey once, we now have pay for it dearly (ask Marty) but there’s no way around. DePTSing starts with education and this blog is a very good way of doing so. That’s why it naturally attracts many (smart) people. No one knows what exactly happened and how and why (do you understand why OT VIII’s, full cause over life, act like black sheep?) but we like to connect, find out, educate and know about. The good thing about finding out for ourselves, is concurrent public exposure of withholds and crimes, by far the best way to curb them. Of course there are many more steps to go before full responsibility can be reached but all have to be done to end bad games and this is a nice start. BTW, I love your site, work and successes.

                  • Erwin, thank you for the explanation. I can see it this way. I thought it would be more effective to promote the positive results rather then undressing the negative. But I can agree with you on double sides approach. I picture Marty with a sward in one hand fighting, and keeping the other hand on a meter, auditing.🙂

                  • Thank you very much Erwin for bringing light in the darkness.

                    You nailed it ! CD

            • You obviously live far away and live in some kind of Ivory tower ,. REAL things happen to REAL people.

              I call it taking responsibility. But thanks for your support😉 You sure know what’s going on in never never land.

              • Imagine that, Cat Daddy defending me against freezoners. Who would have thunk it?

                • Not all of them just this particular one who obviously does not KNOW anything about the relentless attention DM has for certain people that results in harrasment and criminality.

                  She should be glad she’s of his Radar.

    • Wow, this sounds like a comment from a REAL OT. No drama needed here. Thank you for visiting.

    • Exactly. Create an alternative, and the alternative soon becomes the stable datum if it’s a better product. I think people want quality when it comes to spiritual technology and healing, and the church lost its reputation to that a long time ago…

      So…yeah, attention on the church isn’t worthwhile, although theres something magnetic about it, like watching a train crash…

    • As Michael Hobson points out to me when I forget, there’s another key part to that phrase: that which you resist, you become if you lose.

      There are all kinds of ways of preventing one’s self from losing.

      • Yes you have to know when to stop pushing.

      • Dierdre

        Thank you for that!.
        I had read that recently but with your saying it again, it all fell into place for me. I had not totally “connected the dots” in my own universe.

        Here’s what I looked at.
        If you lose you put the thing that you resisted into the category of a “suppressive person or thing.” A Suppressive is sometimes defined as “something against which you cannot fight back.” When one loses enough to something or someone one gets into this feeling and then “becomes PTS” to it. When one is PTS one tends to go into the “valence” of the Suppressive to some degree. One becomes the person to some degree, or in the case of MEST one becomes more MEST, or takes on the attributes of MEST to some degree.

        If one is simply resisting something one would tend to “be the effect of it” to some degree. One would tend to change somewhat when it changed, Q&A with it but I do not actually see how one would “become it.”

        It was the part that says..”if you lose” that dropped this concept into focus, and allowed me to assimilate it into my understandings of “Theta Mest Theory.”

        Thank you for that!

        WW

    • You know that what you resist, that you will eventually become.

      DOGMA

      • CD,
        Nope, not dogma.

        • Yeah yeah push against it bla blah. Not all is viewpoints and space and dimension. Some is just plain old nitty gritty defiance

          THATS it defiance in the face of evil.

          • CD,
            Defiance: you’ve viewed something to defy. That’s a viewpoint of dimension. You and the thing you’re defying. You put out a thought, ‘I’m agin it’. That’s you, putting forth attention in defiance.
            Both involve the creation of space, the distance between you and ‘it’, in either one. (The second involves both the thing defied and the attention/thought placed toward it to ‘defy’.)

            QED

    • “For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing.”

      -Simon Wiesenthal

      • I didn’t say “do nothing”. I suggest stop fighting and move attention toward creating an alternative, which is moving toward the original purpose of Scientology.

        • And what if the fighting is in:

          “move attention toward creating an alternative, which is moving toward the original purpose of Scientology.”

          THAT is what DM can’t stand. loosing money because Marty and others are cutting in to his (church) bussiness.

    • Marty IS doing Scientology on a fulltime basis.

      Enemies? (such as Miscavige)…….they don’t disappear by doing the ostrich act.

    • Tatiana,

      I think Marty is just trying to live his life, and it is DM who is fighting and bringing the attack to Marty. Marty is just handling and part of that must be publicly exposing DM and what the CoS really is. If DM would stop his attacks and harassment of Marty and his friends, there would be no fight. Marty is just holding his position and speaking the truth, which exposes DM for what he is.

      There is nothing wrong with “leading” in that direction, if setting an example of telling the truth and making a space in which others can tell the truth is “leading”, then it is a good kind of leading. Marty IS living his life, delivering tech, and standing up to DM, all three. He is actually doing what you say he should be doing, as well as defending himself and fighting off DM.

      Per your later comment below- Yes, DM IS a rapist. He is a 1.1 hypnotist rapist. Rape can be not only of the body, it can be of the mind and soul also, and DM does all three kinds of abuse.

      • All right, I have to separate a few things in my mind, I guess, and make it clear.
        There is a Scn mission of Saratoga near where I live, and every Saturday for about 5 hours or so the anonymous are marching back and forth in front of it with the placards that appeal against Scientology. Not the church, but Scientology. Destroying and damaging the image of Scientology. Not mentioning the anons all over the internet screaming about Scientology that they know nothing about, not a squad. Also destructive to the image of the philosophy. It took me almost 2 years to overcome that black PR in my husband’s mind to get him started in Scientology where now he is doing fine progressing up.
        I guess all that added up to my willingness to shut the criticism and negative publicity on the subject. Or at list make it clear that Scn is not the same as the church that claims to be the only one.
        As in Russian saying, let’s separate the crab cakes from the flies.

        Thank you, Valkov. The picture is clear now.
        I have translated 5 episods of Marty’s interview with SPTimes into Russian. And now I will go back to that project and finish it, as I understand better what is going on and will contribute.

    • I’ll try to say the same thing in different words, as from comments I see I was understood by Bryon and As – Is only, thank you, guys!
      1) There was LRH – source, he created the tech, he build the bridge.
      2) People start walking up the bridge – some arrived to the greater ability, some fell off.
      3) LRH delegated responsibility to deliver to auditors he trained and then to the orgs to train the auditors and audit. Sea Org was created to be a team of scientology experts to ensure the tech being applied correctly.
      4) LRH goes of the picture, DM comes in.
      Now, if you would, imagine a river going toward the ocean (bridge), and then DM and co (re-writing the books and bulletins) redirecting the flow that it never reaches the ocean now, but grows as a lake and turns into a stinky swamp.
      5) There is a tiny-tiny string of the flow that still flows toward the ocean, directed by few freezoners who continue routing the public onto the original bridge. There are not many of them, but they keep the scientology working and get the job done, they audit and train: http://community.freezone-tech.info/success/
      6) Rehabilitating the original bridge, rehabing the original purpose, making that river to flow where it used to – that will clean the scene. Just rehabing the purpose and redirecting back the flow will do the job. Not walking around the swamp with a poster.

      New successful game will heal the damaged image of scientology and attract attention of new and the lost in the swamp public. Isn’t that our common purpose – to improve our own conditions and help others to get on and up the bridge? We are the free people in the free country, where religious freedom is one of the constitutional rights. All we need to do is 10 steps of ksw, that does not start with getting dm out of picture. Let’s roll-up the sleeves not to fight, but to get trained, to audit and to move up the bridge.
      That was my point.

  57. Hi Marty
    Been lurking here for a while now…I take the word Independent as it stands…whats true for you is true for you! My take is if the tech works, it will stand up to criticism and other viewpoints. (People tend to use what works for them) Open discussion is the hall mark of a healthy group. I read what I want and respect others rights to do so as well. Good on you for encouraging others to look for themselves! THIS is Scientology………
    Best Regards…………..2wolves

  58. This comment is for Tatiana. I would like you to look at this: If you had kids and their father kept suppressing them, beating them, making it tough on them, and impinging heavily on them to the point they were afraid and you observed cowed children… would you DO SOMETHING to expose this act of suppression on your children or would go off and get yourself educated as a teacher and create a kindergarten for other kids WHILE your kids were STILL being suppressed ?

    • If I was in the circumstances you described, I would NOT engage in the looooong, way too long fight with a “father” hitting him in a face, calling him names, exposing him by running around and screaming how wrong he was etc, (and I start to suspect that Marty really enjoys the fight itself), I would TAKE THE KIDS OUT into the safe place, into the hands of loving teachers.
      There ARE already plenty of “kindergartens” existing and productively functioning in the Free Zone:
      http://community.freezone-tech.info/success – take a look!

      And, by the way, DM IS NOT A “FATHER”, even he acting suppressive, give me a brake! And miss-leaded church members are NOT poor little kids!!! Find an appropriate analogy if you wish to speak figuratively. They don’t have to be so much other-determined to go blind! I have no sympathy for idiots who prefer to believe DM versus LRH.

      • Tatiana, go ahead and join the club. I’m getting it from all sides. I knew I would going in. And though this will likely fall on deaf ears, I’ll write it again:
        I am not asking for anything from you all. What myself, Mike, Tom, et al have been engaged in for the past year and one half has made space for the likes of you to get on with it, delivering Scientology. I suggest you do, instead of lending support to DM by joining the chorus against me. And btw, I’ll put my production of pure Scientology products that I personally produced during this year and one half – while carrying out the ethics program – against anyone in the freezone. Final answer? Yes, final answer.

        • “I suggest you do, instead of lending support to DM by joining the chorus against me.”

          Just because someone disagrees with one aspect of your communication does not mean that they are against you, fighting you!

          It’s not all or nothing you know!

          • You didn’t read the thread to make a comment like that.

            • No I’ve read the thread Marty. It’s plain as day. Re-read your comment and try and see how someone in the freezone might take it…

              The language you use in that particular comment suggests to me that you feel like people in the freezone are against you.

              “I’m getting it from all sides.”
              “I suggest you do, instead of lending support to DM by joining the chorus against me.”

              WTF!?

              And also slightly antagonistic towards the freezone specifically…

              “…for the likes of you” (how beneath me…)
              “…against anyone in the freezone.” (why not “compared to”?)

              So come on Marty, drop the your against me mentally when someone has a disagreement with you. When someone doesn’t share the same intentions as you, does that automatically make it a counter-intention to your intention?

        • Marty, I am not against you at all. I am aware of you delivering the Scientology by auditing people – my huge respect to you!
          Your brave action of taking all the heat from DM and Co on yourself so that others go out of site able to breath and produce – is adorable and very much appreciated! BUT that is not a handling, that is a copping!
          The ethics program you apply is steaming from the ethics you have learned in the church that quality is a suspect.
          I suggest you get in touch with those learned directly from LRH in earlier years. Just go back to where things were going right and pick up from there. I advise you to get in touch with Mary and Franklin Freeman – LRH trained and certified class 8.
          http://community.freezone-tech.info/freeman/ (their website has just started but you can find their a few valuable videos, especially Mary’s talking about Ethics).

          • I need Mary to teach me Ethics about as much as need Sharon Webber to do so. Guys and Gals stuck on the 80’s listen: Mayo and co failed because they became what they resisted. Now, they are eager to accuse others of the same. We’ll talk again in about five years when perhaps you will see what IS materializing before objective eyes.

            • “Mayo and co failed because they became what they resisted.”

              You have to explain this to me because everytime you say this it pisses me of big time.

              • CD, simple concept. Great artistic representation in the Stone’s Sympathy for the Devil: “like every cop is a criminal, and all the sinners Saints.” The cop fights crime so zelously for too long, he starts going criminal. The Priest who resists sex so thoroughly he winds up molesting boys. The world is full of these dichotomies; I bet if you think about it or look you’ll see it.

                • Marty, I understand what you’re saying about becoming what you resist and you’re examples illuminate that. However, as far as I know, you haven’t actually said what David Mayo actually did in your view, and how he became what he resisted. You saying he became as unethical as RTC was at that time?

                • It’s poetic but it does not always hold mustard. Do you have Interpol after you too ?

                • CD,
                  Mechanically speaking (that is, in terms of ‘stuff’ and how this works), when a cop opposes criminals, the cop has to have ‘criminals’ on the other side of a created deposit of resistance (attention/thought directed toward that which is being resisted). This all to often ends up creating a capacitor effect. It’s a ‘one way’ DC flow toward the resisted thing. The dielectric (the space between the resisted thing and the attention/energy flowed at resisting it) sets up a ‘scarcity’ of the resisted object. You can’t have it, ergo, it seems to be ‘scarce’. The dielectric (the screen between the two) breaks down and a craving for that which is scarce reverses the flow. That ‘craving’ is a real energy and it is part and parcel of breaking down the ‘gap’ and voila, you has become that which you resisted. These are the mechanics behind GPMs as well. One must consider the fact that viewpoints extend points to view or none of this is possible.

                  • CD,
                    Oh yeah, the ‘gap’ is part of the vacuum of ‘can’t have’, ‘scarce’ it would seem. I haven’t fully ‘Three Branches of Epistemologied’ that as yet. But my prelim view of this dimension is tending toward that. Others can falsify this themselves.

                    • I fully understand and I agree that it happens but not ALL the time. I’ve read animal farm too if you need an anology. (The pigs turning into what they resisted).

                      Didn’t Americans resist the English once ?

            • Well, hopefully you’ll be as effective at expanding scientology outside the church as you were inside! Oh, wait…the stats were what?

              This was just a playful joke, I dont doubt your ability, but seriously marty, why the problem with david mayo and people who have been in the freezone since the eighties? Is it because they automatically make you wrong, by default, as their decision to leave the cofs back then, based on ethical reasons, implies you weren’t ethical to be there at that time? A bit like when you state your a vegetarian to someone, they sometimes erupt into a tirade about how natural it is for humans to eat meat…etc…trying to justify themselves because they feel under attack on an ethical basis just because a vegetarian exists in their vicinity…!

              • No problem, just trying to free people of the false worship trap – the very trap church Scientologists find themselves in.

                • Marty, just out of curiosity, can you picture yourself coming to the next freezone annual convention, that will take place October 2011 in Las Vegas? Can you even allow such possibility?

                  • I can even allow such a possibility.

                    • Marty, I hope I will not stretch it too far by asking you, would you please e-mail me success stories of your pcs and ots so I can be publishing them on the Success Stories, Wins and Testimonials website amongst the other Scientology application products? Or post them there yourself?
                      http://community.freezone-tech.info/success/
                      Can you become by doing this a part of the freezone group – someone who shares a fz common purpose of improving the conditions and abilities of self and others by using Scientology?
                      I so hope that this Success website can become a common ground for auditor in the freezone.

                    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

                      Tatiana,

                      100% Theta! Thank you Tatiana for what you’re doing.🙂

            • Marty~Whatever process or path or plan or idea it is you’re doing, please don’t stop.
              I do not think this blog is solely focused on DM by any means. Hell, I rarely ever think about the guy (or his thong-ewwww-that I resist too much).
              I arrived here later than some others and some others have arrived here later than me. There are hundreds of trained auditors out there in vacuum land that I hope will still find your blog. I hope they will de-PTS from it as well and revitalize their purpose and feel free to at least apply the basics again and communicate with other people like we do here.
              You really are making it possible to de-PTS, wake up, revitalize purpose. strip off some false data here.
              I got it that some people are already out there delivering LRH in the field outside CofM. So are you. For whatever reasons, I wasn’t.
              We will have to find those ideas we all agree on – within LRH’s tech, as that is the common reality we have here.
              You aren’t going to please all the people all the time.
              C’est la vie.

          • I suggest you get in touch with those learned directly from LRH in earlier years.

            So Marty should go live on a ship and start his own Navy ?

            • No, get closer to the tech as taught by LRH by being taught by those who he actually taught personally. Come on Cat…

              • Yes, exactly. I can not understand why and how the auditors in the freezone including Marty as such are so disassociated and have very little or no ARC.

              • Captain Bill was taught by LRH personally and he wound up issuing whacky advanced levels that were authored telepathically to him by Elron Elray.

                • That is true, yet how many people have rons orgs cleared in its history? They audit the same bridge up to OT7.

                  • I don’t have any numbers available to me, how many? Whatever it is, that’s nice, but the advanced levels put forth by Capt’n Bill are not authored by LRH, therefore not Scientology.

                    They should be presented as something different than Scientology, like ‘Advanced Levels based on Scientology’ or ‘Capt’n Bill’s Interpretation of Unreleased Upper OT Levels’, not for any copyright reasons, just so that a person knows exactly what he’s getting and can make an informed, self-determined decision whether to do them or not.

                    • OTDT~Is Ron’s org the group doing Excaliber? Just trying to keep things straight.

                    • Well you may be correct about how to classify the upper level material of rons orgs.

                      However, we have to remember that people did come up with processes, other Ron, during his lifetime, that were incorporated into the scientology bridge (e.g. Pam Kemp’s scn drug rundown). I don’t think you can say that unless a process was invented by Ron it can’t be considered scientology. Sorry the tech doesn’t work like that. Tech is the tech. It’s not LRH = the tech.

                      Also, you might consider that LRH never wrote up levels beyond OT 8, or at least not in fully written up form. So what does one do once one reaches this level? It’s not a finished bridge, at least not as advertised by the cofs.

                      Is more freedom, awareness, ability and case gain available once one completes all the processes LRH created? And can one, with conceptual understanding of the tech and philosophy, rise to even greater heights by continuing processing, using the principles of scientology to invent and run new processes?

                      Sure one can argue on the semantics about what to call such processes, but if they follow the principles of auditing, they are still essentially scientology processes…

                    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

                      As-Is wrote, “Tech is the tech. It’s not LRH = the tech.”

                      As-Is,

                      Very good. I’m happy you got that. Some don’t get that yet.

                      That would be like one saying …

                      The entire tech of physics = Eisteins’ writings

                      The entire tech of scientology does NOT = LRH’s works

                      That would also be like stating …

                      ONLY LRH is capable of developing the science of knowing how to know (scientology).

                      Of course, these false notions are the result of the Church of Scientology name branding Scientology.

                      There is the name brand “Scientology”, and then there is “scientology”, the science of knowing how to know.

                      Of course, the CofS wants to hold a monopoly on the science of knowing how to know for commercial profit reasons.

                      Just like IBM, at one time, wanted their customers to believe that only THEIR tech of PC’s were the only one’s who were “PC compatible.”

                      If one replaces the word “scientology” with “the science of knowing how to know”, I believe this distinction of differences becomes clearer.

                      The science of knowing how to know can come under a different brand name other than “Scientology.”

                      For example, there is the Tech of nonviolent communication. Though its not branded as “Scientology”, it is still scientology as its very definition is … the science of knowing how to know.

                      Nonviolent communication fits under that category of science. Perhaps some day in the future, the word “scientology” will finally be acknowledged as the official word label for “the science of knowing how to know.” Right now, I know no other official word label for this supreme science of the sciences.

          • Okay you’ve got my Attention SPELL IT OUT. what should Marty stop doing than.

          • Tat,
            I figure you’re a good bunny. With that in mind, I’ll point up something you may have not evaluated for its importance. There are those who have the endowment to do what needs to be done. It IS being done, now. Were it not for these beings, circumstances would not be as they are. That’s a fact.

            Marty, Mike, Tommy, JB, Christie, Sam, Veritas, Jeff, Ted, Mike L, Jackson, Karen, Glenn, and those I’ve missed: BIG. BIIIIIG.

            Damn I’m lucky.

            • A good bunny?
              BIG. BIIIIIIG?

              LOL Jim.

            • Jim

              Seems to me that one aspect of Marty’s “hat” is Ethics/Justice Officer to the Cof S. He and others as well.

              Ethics need to go in before Tech can go in, not only inside the CofS but outside as well. I feel that dealing with the CofSs “ethics” and injustices is important anywhere they interfere with the application of the tech of Scientology and its philosophy. I feel one would also be wise to recognize and address any “out ethics”, from any source, that would hinder such application. KSW.

              Thank all who are wearing this hat to some degree or other.

              WW

          • Titiana,
            This is an LRH quote. Maybe you missed this.
            “PRICE OF FREEDOM, constant alertness, constant willingness to fight back. There is no there price.”
            From the Dianetics and Scientology Tech Dictionary, by L. Ron Hubbard

            People are being lied to, suppressed, harmed, tortured, yes tortured, some dying, at the hands of an insane leader of the current Church of Scientology and those he has caught in his web. Many individuals have a hard time confronting evil, but the truth is the truth and there are way too many people that have left the Int. base, the Sea Org and the formal Church, telling horror stories of human rights violations, total suppressive squirrel tech being the norm and many of them are saying the same things. Re-read the LRH quote above. It is smart advise to anyone, anywhere.

            Marty has created a juggernaut that grows each day. He has helped so many, aside from the very superlative auditing he delivers, by all accounts. He and his associates, Mike, his wife, Karen #1 and all, are so doing much; working to expose the crimes perpetrated against those that have been trapped and overwhelmed by the despicable suppression of an ugly criminal and a system that did not work.
            He allows all to speak here in his generous style and has raises the LIFE ARC of many, while fighting the fight. You may need to back track and just DUPLICATE what is doing and has done. There is a tremendous amount of information on this blog, unlimited links and all you need to know to realize what he has actually accomplished.

            He has created unity, where there was only a restimulated dispersal of viewpoints, bypassed charges, invalidated wins and unwanted conditions. His communication revitalizes purposes daily and destimulates many. How do I know, he helped me and I have calmed down considerably reading this blog! He fights the fight and he will win and your life will be better because of it and so will mine.

            I personally, cannot endure the thought of dedicated, upstat, good thetans, being suppressed. Particularly, those that forfeited the simple pleasures of a more leisurely life to HELP all achieve spiritual enlightenment.

            • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

              “PRICE OF FREEDOM, constant alertness, constant willingness to fight back. There is no other price.” – L. Ron Hubbard (AHMC-1, 6012C31)

              Another great Ron …

              The man below, Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, is a very bright living example of constant alertness and the constant willingness to fight back for Freedom. He’s still tireless at 75! He may well be America’s only living true Statesman. (I dedicated 2 years of my full-time life to get him elected as President of the United States of America. Though it never happened, the good news is the Freedom movement has kept moving forward and growing.)

              Here Ron addresses the state of the Republic …

              “Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.”
              –Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

            • Penny, thank you for your passionate speech. Yes, I know little about Marty, though I follow his blog for the year, promote it and quote from it a lot on my website. But I watched that video-interview of Marty with a SPTimes, and understood a lot about who Marty is. It is not a question, he has my deep respect since I watched that video.
              I just wish the group was forming not around the Marty – fighter, but around Marty – auditor. The common purpose of the group to be not to win over the little man, but the original Scn one – to better the conditions of self and others using Scn.
              And boy, I can not understand all that tortures you describe – why would anybody LET IT HAPPENED to them? When I observed the gap between what LRH says and what surrounded me – I walked away. WHY would the other stay and tolerate the evil?

              • For better or for worse, I truly believe the idea that responsibility could be diced up and small parts of it distributed across an org board, no matter how logical and beautiful, has proven unworkable. The idea that “handling attacks” can just be not-is’d by another branch, while another will insulate itself into its own “tech” or “production” world, in my opinion, was a the beginning of the cult culture that became the church, RIP.

                • Marty, my example may seem unappropriated, but if you take a look at the way bees or forest ants live, you’ll see an org board of delegated and splat into divisions responsibilities in action. Any family including yours has divided responsibilities. I can not agree with you, that org board structure was a bad unworkable idea. It is a matter of how wisely you choose your partners and then how much you trust them while delegating responsibility and allowing it go out of your site, letting them to control and handle it.

                  • Tatiana

                    Yes, much of what you say is true. One of the mistakes that many seem to make is deciding that they can give their responsibility to someone else. Ultimately we are, each of us, totally responsible for the condition we find ourselves in.
                    This is not “blame”, this is POWER!
                    One can let others contribute to the flow and creation of your own dynamics, but ultimately you are the one who has to live with the results, good or bad.
                    Besides other issues I have with some of the Admin policies of the Org structure and operation, I think partly it has failed because each staff member involved did not, or was prevented from, taking the ultimate responsibility for the Org. I think it takes stellar beings to do this, and some exist. The structure might ultimately only work if it is made up of only such beings. I feel that this may have been LRHs intention in the first place but found it unworkable because he was dealing with “broken straws” to one degree or another. When auditing and training lost their importance in regards to org staff, the Org structure was doomed in my opinion.

                    WW

                    • I agree with you, it is better to have it smaller in quantity, but better in quality. Growing up step by step – Dynamic by Dynamic, not jumping over 1st and 2d into the false-OTs on 3d. OT group can only be a group of OTs, not of a bunch of strangers recruited from the street and formally taken through EPF and labeled “OT”. Sea Org has not survived at the level of operation it was expected to.
                      There is another group in a freezone been growing as we speak – not a Sea Org, but a LAKE CENTER.🙂 The core of the group are all Class 8 OTs-8.
                      I look forward to when this LAKE CENTER will grow into the OCEAN of THETA! :)))

              • The answer to your last question is contained in the PTS-SP Course. Keep reading.

                • I have done that course twice to my full satisfaction. Do you mean the ability to confront evil lessening because of own past or present o/w-s that person avoids to confront?
                  Then those “poor victims” who stay in the church and go on been victimized do it on there own willingness. If you look at it in reverse, maybe they want to be victimized and stay connected to evil as a REMINDER of their own o/w which eventually they will have to confront. If you look at these people in church not as victims – valances they are using to represent themselves, but if you look at THEM directly, as THETANS that put and keep those “poor victim” valances there, if you address thetans and give them a little more credit, then you’d have to assign them a correct condition of TREASON to themselves, or even confusion. Failure to do so will put YOU in condition you have failed to assign. That is what I have learned from the PTS SP course and from the Ethics program I am currently on with Mary Freeman, that is truly amazing.

          • typo correction!
            “PRICE OF FREEDOM, constant alertness, constant willingness to fight back. There is no other price.”

      • If you so believe in past lives I am sure you know you alsoo were a cultmember once.

        YES anybody even you could given the right circumstances become a cult member

        • Cat Daddy: Did you just claim that belief in past lives is sufficient to establish that one is a cult member?

          General George S. Patton believed he had spent many previous lives in the military. What cult was he a member of, please ?

          Michael A. Hobson

          • NOOOOO , I ment that everybody at some point of their liveS has been anything imaginable at least that is what I’ve got from past lives in relation to that everybody has been the master and the slave , the criminal and the victim.

            So in that line of thinking she has been a cult-member somewhere on her whole-track

          • Mike H,
            Let’s just keep this between you and I, but CD is actually acknowledging there may be ‘past lives’. Hell’s bells. Tha’s OK wi’ moi.

    • People in the cofs are adults.

      • albeit brainwashed or mindcontrolled or just squeezed by the short and curlies as DM still can fuck lives up through his criminal organization.

        • Nah I dont mock them up as unknowing anymore. Only self-determined beings in my life😀

          In fact, seems like life is more exciting when its like this. More people actually causing havoc in the game!

          • As-is

            Ahhh. Brings to mind the Chinese curse..
            ” May you live in interesting times.”..

            One persons curse is another persons playground.

            Ahhh… Ain’t freedom grand?

            WW

      • Well, people in North Korea are adults. Mind control happens anyway. What’s your point?

        • It was in response to debussy comparing saving a child from an abusive father to saving those in the church. Yes mind control happens, buts each being is the one doing the controlling of their own mind, good or bad control, on a vias or not…

          We’re not going to get anywhere worth going if we consider people to be victims of others. Because it’s actually not the truth of the matter. It’s an apparency. But once one takes the responsibility that it was oneself that caused everything that happened to oneself, then one goes up to greater freedom. This is what scientology is about!

          • And what would it take to bring Scientology to North Korea?

            For that matter, what will it take to bring Scientology to the Church of Scientology?

            • A being has to want truth and freedom. They seek it. It’s up to them. It’s the only way it works, evidently.

            • Well, looking at the bridge – awareness scale – they will have to rise up from the Fear of worsening (that DM artificially cultivates) to a Need of change and Demand for improvement. Then Scientology can help the church members.

            • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

              ROTFLMAO!😆

              You totally cracked me up, Valkov.

            • Valkov

              “For that matter, what will it take to bring Scientology to the Church of Scientology?”

              Well said… well said!

              WW

  59. Marty, I think what we are doing here is a step on the Danger Formula. Bypass habits and normal routines, to be precise. Its the Senior declaring the condition on the junior. The non-existence formula having been thoroughly completed over the past year or two.
    The habits and normal routines would include not looking , asking, questioning or telling. This Blog is one vehicle for bypassing all four.
    Scientology’s reputation and application on a broad scale may yet be salvaged.
    If the junior(organizational church) ever applies the junior formula, all the better. But no one need or has to wait for that to happen.
    Individuals may be in different conditions but everything is in a condition, including groups. The stats have been crashing. The rupute has been destroyed. And the fact that the number of independent practicing scientologists and those who have quit the subject altogether over abuse outnumber those “inside” by 20 or 50 or 100 to 1 would certainly entitle the former to do what it can to salvage what is of value in the subject.
    No one that i can see is trying to hurt anyone. And by applying the correct condition, the junior may very well at some point see the reality that it is in this condition and steps will be taken to apply the formula.
    If the condition is not acknowledged and correct formula not applied, they go to non-existence as a relevant, living, breathing force for good.

    • I suppose one could assert that they have descended past Non-Existence and have become a liability to the very goals they were founded upon.

      • loki~It’s gone far below that…stuck in a state of confusion. Look at the random motions people are taking that have nothing to do with nothing – nothing from nothing leaves nothing. The oddball seminars. The talent show fundraisers. The glossy videos for new people. Distributing Way to Happiness to people bleeding with broken bones or to hungry people. Thinking a paper certificate means you’ve attained some fabulous state. The ED of a mission feeling she’s doing something just because she shows up after her day job. I could fill this page with examples. CONFUSION.

        • I submit that this blog is the expanded confusion formula in action…through which you can compare where you are to other places you’ve been with regards to LRH and Scientology.
          Worked for me.🙂

  60. One may think that the lowest level is blindness but it is not.

    There is a level below blindness.

    It is one who is blind but thinks he sees.

    He has to be brought up to the point of realizing that he is blind before he can truly see.

    • Based on that, it would seem that the only true remedy to DM’s why of the “blind leading the blind” is to LOOK. A remedy he has purposely sabotaged.

  61. This IS the truth of all Universes.

  62. Thought Provoking

    “You cannot Know if you are afraid to Look.”

    A concise truth.

  63. One of the reasons I follow this blog is because it DOES venture beyond LRH’s writings. In my post “Church Scn” life, I’ve discovered that my road to freedom is a very personal journey. It takes a lot of work and (for me, anyway) the willingness to assume different points from which to view which, in turn, expand space and beingness and, in time, offer a state of knowing… maybe not everything, but something more than before. We all go at it at our own pace and by our sense of what works. The open forum you’ve allowed here gives some room to toss around ideas. That seems to me a good and useful approach. Kudos.

  64. Well Spoken, Marty!
    Can you tell us which version or translation of the Tao you are using? I would like to buy a copy of it.

  65. Great post Marty. Freedom to study anything, and expand one’s spirituality and one’s own mind. Agreed on not-knowing. Someone or even a group that thinks they know it all, or have it all, will never achieve anything greater than that because there’s no room for expansion. A glass that remains full will never be fresh.

  66. Marty, I loved this post. Everyday I learn something new from this blog. I am in awe at some of the comments made by so many incredible beings who post here. I think we are all seekers of truth and its a real joy to be able to share so many different viewpoints. I find it easy to assume anothers viewpoint if I use ‘beginners mind’.
    “In the beginner’s mind there are many possibilities,
    but in the expert’s mind there are few”
    Shunryu Suzuki – Zen Mind, Beginner’s mind
    Thank you, LOVE!

    • Sarge allow me to ditto off of your comment. This is a daily enhancement activity for me.

      Thanks Marty and everyone else who puts this here.

      ML, Tom

    • Sarge!! Suzuki Roshi — fabulous!!

      He was one of the pioneers who brought Buddhism to the West. He was friends with Chogyam Trungpa the founder of Shambhala. There is a great deal of Zen within the Shambhala Community thanks to Roshi — Kyoto (archery), Oryoki (formal eating), Ikebana (flower arranging)

      Love,
      WH

      • WH, I know I told Marty about this when he was here. Years ago I used to go for walks around my beautiful town. I was meditating everyday back then. I used to walk with no agenda, just walking and I would find myself going into the local card shop that also sold books in the back.
        Daltons by no means. I wasn’t using my mind except to keep from bumping into something. I would walk to the back of the store where the books were. I would see a book, pick it up and buy it. Zen mind, Beginners mind was one of those books. Only copy on the rack. I would then walk to my favorite bench under the big tree on the bluff overlooking the river and lake and would read the entire book. I did this often. Wow ,I was so into ‘AMing’ back then. Marty’s visit brought all that back to me.

  67. The truth has been coming down the line for thousands of years since Dharma. Ron finally refined the technology, as it was only possible in the last century to do so because of technological advances. Now all the knowledge handed down can be applied for true self enhancement. However it is important for complete advancement to have all the knowledge, and that lies in or outside Scientology as you know it. Scientology gets you going on the path to truth. You must find the rest yourself.

    • truthofsource,
      One of the biggest gains in knowledge that made Scientology possible was the discoveries in the area of atomic and molecular phenomena. The findings, way down in sub-atomic physics that there is a whooooooooole lotta nuttin’ in among that li’l tiny bit of sumpin. Heck, even ‘solid’ particles’ don’t appear so solid with lots of space in there.

      • Yes, its the beauty of this whole physical universe. A whole lot of something made of nothing. Hahaha. Feel free to post any wisdom of value that you may have, I am trying to get people back on the road to truth. Its the path, the way, that will eventually get us where we want to go.

  68. Marty, I appreciate that you let me speak my mind on your blog, even though you said I need to be “Esto’d” – whatever that means. (Unless it involves JB and a glass of chardonnay, no thank you.)
    😉

  69. I just love how open-minded and reasonable Marty is. You would never see this kind of open communication in the Church of $cientology, cult of greed. LRH never emphasized money, and Marty is consistent with that.

  70. Beings are attracted to Truth, it is in their DNA so to speak.
    Every idea, philosophy, method, false-religion, true-religion, cult, dogma, tradition, you name it, contains some particle of truth otherwise no Being would bother with it.
    What attracted me to LRH at one time, was the same that attracts me to the founders of the USA, Judeo/Christian principles & Libertarians for that matter. The idea that the individual was created Free & can & should BE FREE. However, stated over and again thru eons of time is the dichotomy: will any Being exercise this Freedom with any responsibility to his/her fellow Beings? Answered succinctly by the statement, “Freedom is not Free. With Freedom comes Responsibility.”
    In the case of the current “religion” fast approaching DOGMA that is COS, the answer is NO, they don’t. In the case of Independents, a resounding YES, as evidenced by what is discussed here. Never have I felt any kind of anything other than acceptance by all these loverly people who post here, excepting Trolls of course.
    Banning Books, indeed.
    Can we learn nothing from history?
    Indeed we can not when we, “Know Best” the plague and enemy of free thought everywhere.

  71. Markus Stuckenbrock

    Great post Marty and let me say it with Socrates:

    “The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.”

    In my opinion LRH showed that he was far away from this wisdom when he wrote KSW.
    Here is the most important quote from “Keeping Scientology Working” which in my opinion shows this very clearly:

    “Getting the correct technology applied consists of:
    >
    > One: Having the correct technology.
    >
    > Two: Knowing the technology.
    >
    > Three: Knowing it is correct.
    >
    > Four: Teaching correctly the correct technology.
    >
    > Five: Applying the technology.
    >
    > Six: Seeing that the technology is correctly applied.
    >
    > Seven: Hammering out of existence incorrect technology.
    >
    > Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications.
    >
    > Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology.
    >
    > Ten: Closing the door on incorrect application.”

    So Ron was sure he had found the truth and the only truth, the only road to freedom.
    In my opinion Ron was closing “any possibility of” developing his “science”
    here – if he would have been the superb philosopher he claimed to be he never would have written anything like this. He locked himself and all his followers up in a Tower of Ivory and threw away the key.

    Or let me say it with the words of another true great thinker:
    “The mere formulation of a problem is often far more essential than its solution, which may be merely a matter of mathematical or experimental skills. To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old problems from a new angle requires creative imagination and marks real advances in science”
    Albert Einstein

    By writing KSW Mr. Hubbard stopped any real advance in his “Science” if it ever was a science at all – in my opinion it never was.

    Marty I think you and many other members of this blog should start to learn to know nothing about L. Ron Hubbard – you seem to know anything about him – so you are not able to see the dark sides of this man and the mechanisms of the trap which he created to enslave people.

    Best wishes
    Markus

    • Markus, you remind me of the psycho therapist on the Sopranos series. She’d get all sorts of tone arm action by two way communication with Tony Soprano, then blow the session because she couldn’t restrain herself from evaluating for him. The latter is a sure means of losing friends and having no influence on people. Thanks all the same for weighing in. I appreciate what you have done to get to the truth of your beloved brother’s plight.

      • Marty, I sooo agree with this blog today – thank you, thank you. This concept was a factor in my leaving and a realization that grew even more expansive after leaving.

        I must say that KSW came to mind for me too… however I think it is a mix of KSW (see Marcus’s post) and what Windhorse is saying about technology and philosophy. When I read the points of KSW with a differentiation of tech and philosophy, it paints a whole different picture.

        I am not denying the ruthless misapplication of KSW, ethics and such…
        I am just saying. I am very, very saddened by where cos has gone and I don’t begin to say that LRH has no responsibility for it. Again, I am just saying. … And, I would hope that as scientology moves forward that the errors of the past are acknowledged, learned from and rarely repeated.

        • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

          KSW applying to the Tech (Technology), and not the spiritual philosophy makes sense to me.

          I wonder how many people have an MU (misunderstood) on the word “tech” or “technology”, which means “the application of science.”

          KSW can be applied to ANY technology, Scientology’s or electronics.

          Even though any technology may be workable in its current form, science is constantly UPGRADING technology to become even more workable. They’ve been doing this in the computer field for decades!

          So we know technology constantly advances forward.

          Why hasn’t the technology of Scientology advanced forward along with all the other applications of science?

          tech·nol·o·gy (tĕk-nŏl ə-jē)
          n. pl. tech·nol·o·gies

          1.

          a. The application of science, especially to industrial or commercial objectives.
          b. The scientific method and material used to achieve a commercial or industrial objective.

          2. Electronic or digital products and systems considered as a group: a store specializing in office technology.
          3. Anthropology The body of knowledge available to a society that is of use in fashioning implements, practicing manual arts and skills, and extracting or collecting materials.

          [Greek tekhnologiā, systematic treatment of an art or craft : tekhnē, skill; see teks- in Indo-European roots + -logiā, -logy.]

          – The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition.

          • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

            Clarification;

            I’m referring to the name brand, Scientology, not scientology – the science of knowing how to know.

            The technology of the science of knowing how to know has and IS constantly advancing, however, it’s not called by the scientology name because the word “scientology” is not yet acknowledged in science as the official name for the science of knowing how to know.

            For example, the Tech of nonviolent communication falls under the appropriate category of the science of knowing how to know. However, Marshall Rosenberg, the original developer of the technology of nonviolent communication does not call it scientology, yet.🙂

      • Tony Soprano ran the sessions.

    • Independent Scientologist

      In KSW, LRH is talking about the TECHNOLOGY of Scientology – such as exact counseling procedures like when it is OK to end off on a process – not the PHILOSOPHY. Very very important distinction.

      Ron Matlock

      • Dittos Ron, perfectly and accurately stated. IMO participants on this blog would do well to keep this distinction much more clearly in mind. Too often it seems lost in the discussions.

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Markus, let’s take the liberty of “personalizing” KSW to add ownership (responsibility), and let’s see how it reads then. Perhaps his, more accurately, expresses more clearly the viewpoint of the CofS about KSW?

      One: Having my correct technology.

      Two: Knowing my technology.

      Three: Knowing my technology is correct.

      Four: Teaching correctly my correct technology.

      Five: Applying my technology.

      Six: Seeing that my technology is correctly applied.

      Seven: Hammering out of existence any incorrect technology that’s not mine.

      Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications of my technology.

      Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology that’s not mine.

      Ten: Closing the door on incorrect application of my technology.

      To me, the subject of Scientology doesn’t look free from this viewpoint.

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        Correction: Should read, “Perhaps this”, not “Perhaps his”

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        I completly understand LRH’s good intention with KSW.

        However, it has apparently resulted in a militaristic attitude towards the science of knowing how to know, and has frozen the development of this senior science, in time, effectively chaining the science of certainty from furthering its advance.

        LRH’s research hat was dropped after his death, and his hat, for some reason I don’t understand (and nobody I know of has explained), was not passed onto anybody. This puzzles me to no end.

        Nobody can make me believe the the entirety of the science of knowing-how-to-know has been all wrapped up, and all there ever is to know about the science has already been stated by LRH.

        Perhaps this may strike one as heresy, and that I’m a heretic. But I make no apologies. I don’t buy it.

        • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

          Addendum:

          I don’t buy the infallibility of Ron any more than I buy Papal infallibility.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility

          Though this errant thinking is apparently predominate in many Scientologists.

          Why? How did that happen? Inculcation?

          in·fal·li·ble (ĭn-făl ə-bəl)
          adj.

          1. Incapable of erring: an infallible guide; an infallible source of information.
          2. Incapable of failing; certain: an infallible antidote; an infallible rule.
          3. Roman Catholic Church Incapable of error in expounding doctrine on faith or morals.

    • Ok, let me chime in on this one. KSW is to me a brilliant piece of work, as I have stated before. Let’s look at it:

      “One: Having the correct technology.”

      NOTE: key word = “correct”. Correct means workable, means technology that gets the desired result. It is not “GAT” or squirrel crap, or, for that matter, Creative Processing, since CP was found to not work as expected in all cases. It is also not R3DXX, or other deprecated techniques. It is CORRECT technology.

      “Two: Knowing the technology.”

      If you have not read the books and have not been trained, or have learned it in some way, you do not know the technology. You apply study tech, look up words, use the proper gradient, balance mass and significance, do not assume you already know it. You do not automatically agree with it – you learn it, and KNOW it. You also need to know the technology, not “some of the technology.” One note people can know very well one little datum, and apply the hell out of it, but they do not KNOW THE TECHNOLOGY. Only a slice.
      Note – “Knowing the technology.” Not “Knowing the CORRECT technology.” You don’t know it is correct or not – but you do know it. You apply it, check it out. No one knows everything, but the more you do know and learn, the more likely you are to know correct technology somewhere in the mix. Which is the point behind not closing your mind to all kinds of data and knowledge. The more you know, the more context you have.

      “Three: Knowing it is correct.”

      To quote: “Three is achieved by the individual applying the correct technology in a proper manner and observing that it works that way.” Corollary: Three could also be achieved in negative by applying the INCORRECT technology in what is supposed to be a proper manner, and finding out it DOES NOT WORK. Or perhaps applying the correct technology in an improper manner, and finding out that all hell can break loose, as I did when I ran a correction list in a PC that was dead tired AND hungry, and (wonder of wonders) she red tagged. But, she was keyed in! She needed my help! Yes, but she was not sessionable, and she needed to have food and sleep – and I violated an Auditor’s code law that has been in existence since 1950. This was one of the very few sessions I flunked. I remember each flunked session as a scar on my psyche. I fixed her up later – before 24 hours, but after food and sleep, and she was fine.

      “Four: Teaching correctly the correct technology.”

      “Five: Applying the technology.”

      “Six: Seeing that the technology is correctly applied.”

      These can only happen if you have one, two, and three. In fact, four, five, and six bring about two and three in other people. So, this is a cycle.

      Then we have the core that the frickin’ RTC is so interested in:

      “Seven: Hammering out of existence incorrect technology.”

      “Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications.”

      “Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology.”

      “Ten: Closing the door on incorrect application.”

      In order to do numbers seven through ten, you have to know what is correct technology AND what is INCORRECT technology. Same with correct and incorrect application. Waving a magic wand at someone who blows staff is incorrect technology, and falls into this category. But, a person can blow from staff who has no overts. Read this again:
      A PERSON CAN BLOW FROM STAFF WHO HAS NO OVERTS. This is correct technology. But, yet, do you think the CofM knows this? They sure don’t apply it. The think that are applying seven when they hammer you over the head saying that the ONLY reason anyone blows from anywhere is because of overts. Yet, that is untrue. Reference: Int RD series 7: BLOWS Auditing Over Exterior. A person who is audited past exteriorization can be “out int” and can just want to LEAVE wherever they are, including staff. The int R/D will handle it (in this case), O/W will not. This is only one example of how someone can “blow” off staff without an overt being the cause.

      So, to me, the key pieces of this puzzle are one, two, and three:

      Having the correct technology. Knowing the technology. Knowing it is correct.

      Now, someone can be a Nazi about INCORRECT technology, and then say “you are violating KSW!” Well, whatever. No one said it would be easy.

      One more note: KSW does not in itself stifle extension of Scientology. What it does is try to stifle incorrect technology and applications. That is a lot different.

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        Grasshopper wrote,

        “One: Having the correct technology.

        NOTE: key word = “correct”. Correct means workable, means technology that gets the desired result. It is not “GAT” or squirrel crap, or, for that matter, Creative Processing, since CP was found to not work as expected in all cases. It is also not R3DXX, or other deprecated techniques. It is CORRECT technology.”

        Grasshopper,

        I respect a lot of what you write. I’m interested in your opinion on the following question;

        Do you believe only LRH can be the only one to have the correct technology for the science of knowing how to know?

        • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

          Correction: More clearly, this is really the question I meant to ask;

          Do you believe only LRH can be the only one to be able to develop the correct technology for the science of knowing how to know?

          • Wayne,

            The short answer is “no.” This is clearly not the case. Even in KSW, LRH acknowledges this.

            But, this does not mean it is easy! As DM and other squirrels show, it is easy to screw it up. Caveat Scientologist. This is something that has bothered me for a while. LRH has been gone 25 years. He is not around to come in on a white charger and strike down bad tech trends. DM would not be in Scientology now if LRH had not died.

            Scientology is not done. Question: When we die, and we are OT, why should we come back into a Human body? Why? Is it a given? This is not answered anywhere I have seen. What should you do if you don’t come back? Float around? Doing what? What is the ultimate goal after you achieve OT TOP (whatever number that ends up being)?

            I put this other question out on another post: There we 25,000 people on Earth about 50,000 years ago. There are over six billion now. Where did these extra beings come from, and do they all have past lives? They certainly don’t on this planet.

            Can a being spontaneously exist? Not here today, here tomorrow? A theta being is nothingness. Which nothingness is a theta being, and which is not?

            What is the purpose of life? Axiom 10 is only part of the answer. Why are there beings at all?

            Is there a God? What is God, really? A being? The collective all? The Theta Universe?

            What I do know is that we do have a workable technology, and we should not abandon it.

            If these answers exist in levels higher then OT IV, then I have not read them. But, they should not be hidden behind closed doors. And, since I know of a few OT’s who have died, I know that they did not have these answers, really.

            I have been around a very close person who was OT and was dying. The “hatting” that was given was that when you come back next lifetime, remember your name this lifetime so you can A show you were person X, and be, have your folders to continue your auditing. So, we don’t have a real answer to the question: Why come back at all?

            I have my own answers and speculations to these questions. I do not presume to augment Scientology or any other philosophy with my contemplations, but my thinking about these and diving very deep into them has been rewarding to me, has opened my point of view, and has been comfort. But, the questions are there, and many others as well. So, if LRH is the only one to find the answers, we are in trouble!

            • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

              Excellent questions to ponder, Grasshopper.

              • What is really interesting to me is that Scientology is the only subject I have seen, including the sciences, where these questions are really, really explored. Maybe Hinduism. Maybe. Even physics encompasses this universe only. What existed prior to the “Big Bang?” When you point your finger up, and just keep on going, where do you end up? When you reach the edge of the universe – then what? How do you know you are at the end? If you took the entire universe – everything, and then zoom out so that it is all the size of a basketball – where are you, and are there other basketballs? I think there probably are.

                People tend to fall away from questions like this because they are virtually unanswerable – kind of. but Scientology does embrace it. Right or wrong, at least it tried!

                Look, only a few years ago, some scientist or another postulated that it was a 95% or higher chance that everything we are and all we see are really one large computer simulation – his reasoning being that we will soon be able to duplicate the experience in software, and so therefore, there is a large chance that someone has already, and we are it!

                This is one reason LRH put the objectives in place – all that space opera and creative processing drives havingness down the tubes if you are no ready for it. With objectives, at least you know you are here, now!

                • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

                  Grasshopper wrote, “What existed prior to the “Big Bang?” When you point your finger up, and just keep on going, where do you end up? When you reach the edge of the universe – then what? How do you know you are at the end? If you took the entire universe – everything, and then zoom out so that it is all the size of a basketball – where are you, and are there other basketballs?”

                  More great questions, Grasshopper.

                  Then there is; “How does somethingness come from nothingness? When is the beginning of time? Who created God or Gods?

                  Your questions and my questions, have not been clearly and satisfactorily answered (for me) in my studies of scientology yet, nor in any other field of science, religion, or philosophy.

                  They’re still a big fat mystery to me. Any attempts of their explaination have sounded like convoluted nonsense. It’s like, why can’t there be an explicit and clear explanation? My conclusion is because nobody knows yet.

                  I hope these mysteries to me won’t always be so. However, I’m losing hope in figuring it out in this lifetime. I pondered these questions even as a boy.

                  I had hoped the top of the scientology bridge would answer them. Are the answers really that unexplainable, with clarity, to any average Joe in general without having to be at some mystic level of beingness in life?

                  • Yes – I think that’s why we’re Scientologists. At least, why I am. As a boy, I was fascinated by infinity – both in terms of largeness, and smallness. The contemplation of “absolutes are unobtainable.”

                    By the way, if there were a consistent and clear explanation, it would all disappear! Sometimes, I am glad for the mystery.

            • Grasshopper.

              First off I want to acknowledge you on the quality of your posts. some fine stuff.

              May I offer some of my ideas on some of your (perhaps rhetorical) questions.

              Your question: “When we die, and we are OT, why should we come back into a Human body? Why? Is it a given?”

              My take: First off I stop on the word “should”. That seems to introduce a “now you are supposed to” concept. Who told you that? (rhetorical question) If you achieve freedom then it would seemingly be totally up to you. If YOUR dynamics are really YOUR dynamics then who the hell else gets to say what you “should” do or not do on them.

              Your question: “What is the purpose of life? Axiom 10 is only part of the answer. Why are there beings at all?”

              My take: I look to the factors for that one. Factor *1 provides some comfort for me on the first one, Factor #2 for the second.

              Your questions: “Is there a God? What is God, really? A being? The collective all? The Theta Universe?”
              My take: For this I also find some understandings from the first few Factors. Also in the definitions of the 8th dynamic LRH says ” It is carefully observed here that the science of Scn does not intrude into the dynamic of the Supreme Being.” Well “the science of Scn” may not but I am quite willing to share my thoughts . First off, I consider that the dynamics of most concern to you are yours. The 8th dynamic is one of your dynamics. LRH talks about “existence AS” the dynamic. One of the qualities of your existence is “existence AS” the 8th dynamic. It is the most senior of YOUR dynamics as a being , or perhaps something senior to a being (notice beingness shows up at factor # 2.), if factor # 1 is the case as to the situation prior to assuming beingness. I still include it as YOUR dynamic as in “Existence AS”.
              You may have noticed in other posts of mine the implication that I consider we are all “Gods”. My above understanding is the source of this consideration.

              Some of your other questions are certainly pause for thought but I always seem to end up back at the first few Factors and the Dynamics of Existence.

              That having been said, I, of course, cannot answer your questions. I certainly hope you have taken nothing I have said as “truth”, for how in “Gods” name would I know what is true in your universe. I do hope however that my viewpoint may be of some use in your search.

              WW

              • Thanks, WW – I appreciate it, and I have enjoyed your posts as well. Marty has collected together a fascinating group of people here. It is the only forum I have come across that keeps the discussion on a high level, and doesn’t resort to name-calling and snark, about a subject that is so fraught with, well, emotion, pain, upset, and lies. Of course, we call DM names, but he’s Fair Game, after all😉.

                Thank you for your thoughts about this – the Factors are an amazing piece of work. I clay demoed them on the BC – quite a feat! The factors and the axioms are as close as I can think of to being the truth here.

                I have broadened my concept of God by reading a number of people’s thoughts on it. I no longer view God as an old man with a scepter and a dogmatic disposition, but view God more in the Hindu or Zen way. Scn certainly has left room to contemplate it.

                Thanks!

      • Grasshopper~Excellent explanation.
        You’ve explained exactly why CofM HAS NOT and CANNOT
        Keep (continue/persist) Scientology (LRH’s tech) Working (functioning or operating).

        The church doesn’t even HAVE the correct technology anymore…

        • Exactly right. When those that are in realize this… Well, I think they are.

          The reissuing and pounding of The Basics and all these newly released lectures will probably backfire on the Church – in a good way overall. Listen to a tape – ahhh! Look around the org… WTF?

    • Markus

      You see… When I read that I do not feel that LRH was talking about any other tech that Scientology and Dianetics tech. Perhaps we have been “made” to think that it includes other technologies or wisdoms by those of little wisdom themselves or maybe some other agenda.

      It is possible that LRH meant it the way you read it, but I choose to understand it differently. Perhaps I am rationalizing, perhaps not.

      WW

  72. Just for the record:

    I knew all of this.

    HA!🙂

  73. Marty, in light of the recent “Anon-style” harassment of you , I thought it’s worth mentioning a failed OSA op; obvious PI footage of you arriving at LAX was posted on YouTube and then a WWP newbie (and obvious OSA plant) started a thread attempting to promote it. They were quickly outed and sent packing, but the intention was clear; sow dissension between yourself and other critics of the church.

    Before everyone races to proclaim their differences, I’d ask people to think before giving DM what he wants.

    • Marc, Thanks for the data. As you can see I look rather edgy, and I was quite aware (probably too much) of my surroundings. OSA has a clue what I was up to at the time, and it was clear they posted it to send a message to me. And there was no way that could have been taken by anyone without very well concealed expensive equipment who knew where I was going to be when. If your anon friends want to keep promoting it, I only ask out of fairness, they dub-in Freddie Mercury and David Bowie’s “Under Pressure” (believe me it is appropriate to the circumstances).

      • Yes I found the music chosen too dramatic but hey DM is a drama queen after all😉. It just shows you are human like the rest of us😉.

        KKS,AK,CD

      • I have no idea when this OSA PI video was taken, but it broke my heart.

        Perhaps I’m getting soft in my later years but to see someone I have grown to care about, so agitated is truly heartbreaking.

        I find lately when I see others distraught, it brings back so many memories that it makes me sad, indeed.

        The world IS a mess – no doubt about it. BUT it doesn’t HAVE to be. There are brilliant minds alive today, brilliant teachers alive and gone who have brought wisdom to the world.

        Now the job is to do the best we can collectively in our own ways to create around us a brighter environment WHERE enlightenment can expand INTO.

        Ken Wilber for one talks about it a lot.

        WH

        • I forgot to mention that I was at the same time furious that dm – in the NAME and with the $$ of scientology and LRH – does this type of thing.

          It still completely boggles my mind what he has done. Had he done NOTHING for the past 30 years but just other well meaning staff get on with it — there is absolutely NO TELLING where we might be as a planet.

          I’m not of the school that single-handedly LRH tech could “save” the planet but it certainly could have lent a hand and would have if it hadn’t been for dm.

          Instead ZERO ZIP NADA is getting done by those still in and instead of children learning to read etc- $$$$$ are spent chasing Marty at an airport.

          Disgusting.

          WH

      • Marty, while the paparazzi are following you around, remember to always wear underwear and be careful about how you climb out of low-slung automobiles. You should be fine.

        Just Me

      • Marty, I thought you looked focused, present and making good use of your time during a smoking break (since they don’t let you smoke indoors in any public building in CA). Hope you were there to pick up Diana H. or the next great escapee from Int!

      • I saw the video – didn’t bother me at all. You looked like you were trying to figure out something. I have been that edgy a lot more than once in my life. The one who was crazy was the one behind the camera!

  74. As-is

    Don’t know if this got waylaid on the internet or what, but it didn’t show up on the blog. Maybe I didn’t sent it. If it shows up as a duplicate, sorry.

    “As-is,

    I’ve not yet reached a conclusion on “mocking each other up” as the means by which we view one another. I know it as a theory. I’ve experienced the phenomenon both ways: as mocking up another and as just knowing they exist. Thus far, I believe both occur. I believe that we just know one another in native state; it isn’t a matter of mocking up the other being; it precedes mocking up or creating and causing the other being to come into existence.

    To mock up another being sufficiently for them to exist independently would imply a godlike state: “I have created this being.” And there are those who hold to that view, that we are all created. I’ve seen evidence of this, and I’ve seen evidence to the contrary. I just don’t know.

    I know that as a human we perceive by assigning meaning. Without assigning meaning, the perception becomes a stimulus-response event.

    “Axiomatically” would mean referring to a self-evident truth. And what is self-evident to a Democrat is not to a Republican, and an independent probably views what is axiomatic to a party member as pure bias.

    Loki offered up a suggestion that I read Thomas Aquinas’s argument for the existence of God, which I did. And I was mildly impressed. But, part of that argument would imply that the existence of that which precedes all arguments. Carried a step further, and applying this to our discussion, how would you know that another being was actually there to mock them up? At what point does knowing that they exist merge into “mocking them up?” And if the only means one has for knowing that another exists is by mocking them up what does that imply?

    I’m certainly glad you have a different viewpoint. It made me think. And mine is cluttered with all sorts of junk–it’s like one of those garages that is so packed with useless can’t-depart-withs that you can’t open the door, much less store a car. My viewpoint is just too much of a mess for you to fit in, much less walk around in; but you are welcome to come over and help me clean it up–as long as you don’t suggest that I depart with my dearly beloved antlers.

    But, one more point, which you can have from my cluttered viewpoint: if I were to mock up other beings, I would mock them up happy and enlightened and interesting rather than unenlightened. It’s not my wish that another read something and not understand it. It’s not my hope that others need mentors or Scientology or Buddhism or any other subject to guide them on a path to greater observation, experience, analysis, and understanding. It is my wish that others be able to see and understand on their own. And that is how I would mock them up.

    But, alas, I have looked at the world. And my mock ups have failed. I can’t even drive to work without running into drivers who are not polite and smiling. I keep mocking them up as courteous and the proof is in the fender.

    As for being responsible, I do not mind running other people’s lives. I do not mind postulating ability and greatness into another’s existence. But, at some point, I think the responsible thing to do is to allow them to make their own postulates and control their own lives rather than depending on my mock ups and postulates. I’m just kind of lazy that way.

    Michael”

    • Hey Michael,

      Basically, postulates and “believing to be true” are closely related. How can you postulate something if you know it won’t work?! It just won’t manifest unless you know it to be true.

      In current human times it’s easy to see how someone with good quality postulate power could very easily influence another being. There are all sorts of mechanical percerptions and so-called causes of this, but beyond that, postulates are senior.

      Is it a possiblity that a being could not have, at some point, fully created a being (with full willpower) at some point, by postulate?

      When I said axiomatically I meant applying the knowledge in the axioms of scn.🙂

      Perhaps it is not your mock ups that are failing, but your thoughts about your mock ups taking effect or not that are closer to the reason for their failure.

      For example, you could be the finest artist the world has ever known, but if you believe that your work always gets ruined before you finish it…well… misery! Hahah.

      Ultimately, it’s your life, on all dynamics. You perceive what you create. Scio is the control of the process of life.

      • As-is,

        Ah! I was wondering why my postulates didn’t work. Thanks for the advice. I’ll put it on my antlers.

        • Alas, the world is co-created.

        • Yeah its a funny bind. Postulates not working because of already existing postulates. I think Osho said something along the lines of,” as soon as you make a choice you lose freedom. Check out his book “freedom: the courage to be yourself”. Some fine thinking.

          • Yes, I like Osho. He speaks the language I know, of the seekers of the 1960s and 1970s. I have one of his books on Eastern religions.

            Yes, making a decision creates a limited identity, which is a loss of freedom in a sense. The trick I hoped to learn from Scientology is how to make decisions and take action yet keep my individuality free.

            • Valkov

              You might find some solace in always keeping in mind who made the decision that you made. (Oh damn… did I go and give it away there?) Notice or postulate that you are capable of making any decision at all at any time. Seems to me that if you were the “author of the universe” (yours; that being the one you experience/ “create”), you would pretty much be totally free.

              WW

            • Marty, it seems arbitrary why you didnt allow my last comment with video, considering that it was directly related Osho, as part of the conversation with Valkov.

              Seems you’re not as open minded as you think you are about other philosophies and their techniques…

              Cool story you”re telling yourself tho.

              • Infinity, Please if you wish to continue posting here anonymously, at least keep your handle consistent so as to not confuse readers and participants any more than they already are by anonymous folk. As to your video – it was so insignificant I don’t even recall it; so I assume I deleted it because it was long and off topic. Please don’t be so judgmental.

                • Sorry for any confusion, am sticking to this handle from now on. Or maybe I’ll use my actual name haha…or not.

                  As for the video, fair enough I supppose. In the comment I did refer to the exact part of the video (minutes in) that was intended to be viewed. It may have be insignificant to you, but Im sure valkov may have enjoyed it as it was relevant.

                  For some reason marty you seem to be able to make me LOL with some of your remarks within comments and posts, and piss me off with others. How do you manage that?😀

  75. Not having read the comments, only the blog post.

    I got to say this is perhaps the best blog post I have seen in this realm since… perhaps ever.

    Freakin’ cool,

  76. One of the first things I did after leaving the CofS was learn more about the forbidden practices.

    I discovered that many people who do meditation do it for pretty much the same reasons that I think TR-O can achieve: to learn to sit there with one’s self and others. To learn to be there. Regardless of how one feels about the subject, I think Pema Chödrön’s audio lecture called “Pure Meditation” is really remarkable and worth listening to.

    I learned that spells were just postulates with some MEST-universe bindings in the forms of words and accessories. Not really scary, not really a reason to forbid them, so long as one isn’t intending to cause harm. As an example, many prosperity spells have expensive ingredients (spices, typically). In other words, using our summed agreements that these things are valuable. A typical prosperity spell will have you waste a bit of something expensive.

    I learned that yoga works very well for my body, and I don’t mind chanting, but I don’t personally feel any deep connection when I do it. Some people do. Go them.

    I now identify primarily as a Druid, because that emphasizes the interrelationships between beings that I always wanted to feel in Scientology but never did.

  77. While we inform of current situations, we should work on forwarding constructive truths and knowledge which will bring us to the eventual goal we wish to achieve here. Lets keep the road to truth alive.

  78. Marty, thanks for your reply.

    I hesitated before even bringing this up because I didn’t want to be a party (however inadvertently) to violating your privacy. The response from WWP, btw, was outright condemnation and disgust, so the op backfired.

    I did, however, want to let you what the Church was up to and leave you to your own conclusions about the effect they are attempting to have.

  79. Markus Stuckenbrock

    Thank you for being so generous and letting my post pass the moderation🙂
    I have never seen “the Sopranos series” so I don’t know what you are talking about. May you please explain this to me – so I can understand what you mean.
    I’m in direct contact with four people who knew L. Ron Hubbard personally. I met two of them and they were trustworthy, caring beings.
    I have no reason to question what they tell me about Mr. Hubbard more than anything what Mr. Hubbard said about himself or what the Church propaganda machine was and is spreading about his alleged glorious career.
    Where you there when he locked up children in chain lockers for days?
    This incident alone disqualifies him for me to claim that he has found the only way to total freedom. Then there are his writings that caused the suffering and much too early death of my brother Uwe in the Sea Organization in California. Yes Mr. David Miscavige played a big part in this criminal abuses against my brother. But he used Hubbards body of thought to force people like you and Laurisse (my former sister in law) to help him to translate the abuses into action. It is too easy to blame only DM for all what happened. You played your roll in this mean game too and so did Laurisse and your founder LRH.
    If you are interested I can post the writings of Mr. Hubbard here which in my opinion were causing my brothers suffering and early death first and foremost.
    Thank you again for giving me the opportunity to communicate freely to you and all the Independent Scientologists here on your blog especially today: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=10996

    I’m looking forward to a free and fruitful discussion.

    Best
    Markus

    • Markus,
      Thanks. We are not going to resolve this here. Our ideas of who is credible and who is not will not likely agree. I’d just like to leave it that you have your views and I have mine. I won’t try to change yours. If you want to change mine, you’ve got my email address, and you know I answer albeit sometimes with a lag.
      Marty

  80. Markus Stuckenbrock

    And please let me add that it seems that I have a totally different idea about the qualities of a friend. I think you know my point of view Marty.
    In telling you that it is dangerous to be blind regarding the dark side of Mr. Hubbard I’m trying to help you – my brother lost his life, his beloved wife and family in this trap.
    This is what I would expect from a good friend of mine – to tell me if I’m mistaken or in danger – even if he would hurt my feelings by doing so.

    Best
    Markus

    • I understand Markus, and believe it or not, I appreciate it.

    • Markus,
      I lived and worked with Uwe for some 7 years. I doubt this will be any consoloation or ease your mind, but, we had an absolute blast. He lived. Fully. I loved him, dearly. I lost a brother too, this lifetime, and under difficult circumstances. However, he is now alive, newly. The grief is for us left, not for those moved on, to something new. Something hopefully even better.

      • Markus Stuckenbrock

        Yes I know that you worked together with Uwe for many years. Was it you who stated on another post that you did’nt even know that he had a brother.
        Start to ask yourself why you did not know this and you will learn to see the criminal abuses of Mr. Hubbard against my brother and my family.

        Best
        Markus

      • Markus Stuckenbrock

        May you please tell me more about this years with Uwe Jim. I’m interested in every little detail. Tell me about these fun days with him.
        We were not allowed to have much of such “fun days” with him since he joined the Sea Org in 1979. In fact I had about 4 days in 29 years.
        But may you please ask Marty for my e-mail address to let me know these details about his live in the 7 years you were working with him.

        Thank you so much
        Markus

      • Markus Stuckenbrock

        And here you will be able to learn something more about Uwes early years in Germany:

        http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=10996

        Best
        Markus

    • Markus, I knew Uwe and his wife and I can guarantee you that Uwe would have had a different fate had LRH been around to know of it. Positively guarantee. You seem to want to blame LRH for the policies that DM has used to abuse many people. The truth is that the vast majority of SO members and Scientologists have never abused anybody, yet they were bound by the same policies as DM and his ilk. So, to blame the policies written by LRH for the culture of abuse perpetrated by DM makes no logical sense. 99% of those working under those policies never even considered applying them in the abusive manner of DM. I can use a hammer to build a house or bop someone over head with. That doesn’t make a hammer evil if I choose to do latter. It makes me evil.

      And, yes, LRH had his “dark side,” as do you and I. So the fuck what!

      • Markus Stuckenbrock

        I’m not claiming that I can save all mankind…..
        Hubbard did.
        Best
        Markus

        • What you say is true, Markus. It takes a great big set of brass balls to attempt something like LRH envisioned. He even talked about how any person who steps forward to help mankind becomes a target. Mankind doesn’t want to be “saved.” And to be accurate, LRH was not trying to save mankind. He was only trying to show you and me a way we could improve conditions across our lives.

    • I am saddened to hear of your loss. I worked under LRH but never personally witnessed any inhumane treatment. He taught me to care for others and I saw him give urgent orders to care for staff when no one else did; public too. I have also heard many stories about Scientology and suicide. Defending LRH or Scientology will not help you. Like Christianity, it can be both good and bad. I just lost a friend who was a medical doctor of Chinese descent. She died a natural death but told me that she had committed suicide in her previous five lives. I don’t know if that was true (she was not a Scientologist but a Taoist) but she believed and gave away her services for free as a result of her “great sins.” I was at her wake the other night. Death connects us all. Dr. Parmesa tried to embrace the archetype of Quan Yin. In Chinese tradition, Quan Yin is the consort of Lao Tzu and is the goddess of ultimate mercy and compassion, the Chinese equivalent of the Virgin Mary. Although I have lost my friend and doctor, I am happy for her because she wanted to pass and this is the first time she has passed naturally. Suicide is considered a grave grave sin in most traditions but if there is anyone who could absolve this “crime” it would be Quan Yin. Look her up. If prayers mean anything to you, I will say a prayer that my friend, Magdalena (her first name), will help your brother and give you a sign that will help you resolve this issue. You are looking for answers. We are all looking for answers. I know that Scientology has a dark side. Life has a dark side, too. Hubbard even made a tape lecture called “Black Dianetics” as to how the subject could be misused. The Buddha taught that this is a world of suffering and that we it is our challenge to break the trance. Egyptians taught that we are judged in the afterlife by two criterion: 1) first and foremost, by how much joy we experienced in this life and secondarily, 2) by how much joy we gave to others. I will pray that a miracle will come into your life that will enable you to find joy. I hope that your post and mine will raises the consciousness of Quan Yin especially as so many people here are fans of Taoism. There is no limit to her mercy and compassion.

    • Markus: are you related to a staff member in Stuttgart Org (same family name)?

      • Markus Stuckenbrock

        Yes I’m related to a staff member in Stuttgart Org. If you are talking about Dieter – he is my father. He has three sons from his third wife who are all living in Stuttgart. I’m the second son from the marriage with his first wife Christine. Uwe was his eldest son with Christine. I have a sister and our youngest brother Jürgen died 8 years young in 1975.

        • Thanks for the detailed answer – every time I saw your name I thought there must be a connection with Dieter as the family name is not a common one. I am interested to know what happened to your brother as I know (knew) Dieter fairly well. One of his last sons is ex-SO and I believe he doesn’t want to know anything about Scn anymore and I don’t think he’s on good terms with Dieter either. This whole thing is such a mess, and though Dieter surely must turn a lot of blind eyes on his family situation it is actually quite unlike him from the way I know him.

          • Markus Stuckenbrock

            Is there a way for me to give you my e-Mail address in a private message? If not are you a member of ESMB – because I could send you a PM there in which I could give you my e-mail address to discuss these family matters in private or via a PM (private message) there.
            Best
            Markus

            • Thanks for answering again – I hope you see this new reply. I already had written in my previous post that I would like to talk to you in private but then deleted it as I had considerations you might find it inappropriate.

              Just tried repeatedly to sign up at ESMB but always got a server-error. Here is my hushmail account:

              samuelsamuel94@hushmail.com

              If possible, let me know from which hushmail account you will be writing to me (let’s use hushmail, I think it is secure – and then we take it from there).

              Looking forward to it.

  81. Marty, your blog has several valuable purposes in my opinion.

    1. to show that there is a life ( and a bridge ) after Co$

    2. to inform about the almost unbelievable abuses within Co$

    3. to prove that people with quite different views can communicate about a subject of common interest

    All these factors add up to increased understanding about past and present — enable better decisions for the future — can trigger action or enthusiasm.

    And last not least – it’s fun !

  82. Pingback: Top Posts — WordPress.com

  83. If one need to categorize in order to be understsood, by all means, lets have fun with it. “not know is plotted at 30.00o or Postulates on the tone scale” Not Know is above the Postulate above the Know. The not know, postulate and know can not be the same in comparison on the tone scale. The “Know”, a subject which is, only can be, can exist if related to the MEST Universe, if otherwise there would be no subject to “know of”. If it exist than it is posulated, therefore has beginning, will end. Have, holds dimensions, therefore have substanence, than at this band, the “Know ” is in the MEST Universe. The infinite can only be infinite if hold nothing, not even one thought. Than, is Intangible=Infinite. In that state the Native State there is nothing. From that state if a postulate is made than that postulate is in the MEST Universe. Than the not know becomes the know or known of therefore ……. At this State why bother with splitting hairs???

  84. It is a great article, given me understanding of the why. Thank You. Elizabeth

  85. Just to conclude :

    This is again for all the Tatiana’s on this blog. Thank you for your rendition, however, the example taking your kids out of a school to a safer environment does not take them out of the hands of someone like a biological father who has access to them whilst you CANNOT as yet PROVE that he beats them – yet the psychological signs are there and your kids are too afraid to talk. So I understand your mentality …. you take your kids and run .. here is how the scenario will pan out….. you will get harassed for removing them from a biological family member … court orders will ensue till you have proof …. but no one is willing to confront or talk …. not even your kids they have the mindset that “daddy” is god. You now have a situation on your hands and you lose either way. Removing them produces involvement with the courts and allowing access continues the abuse which could change from “physical” to “verbal”. What do you do now? I am simply stating that it would be easier to EXPOSE and take the SUPPRESSIVE O-U-T of the equation altogether? How? You have to find someone who has been abused who will talk and confront and expose the atrocities not only for the safety of your “kids” but others as well.

    • Debussy,
      Why are you making simple thing so complicated? I did have in my real life a situation when my ex-husband laid a hand on me and my one year old daughter happened to be there to see it. Once was enough. I did not pack and run. I threw his staff out and kicked him out of the house and got a divorce. There was no doubt, no regret, no running away, no hiding. Few simple legal steps to clean up the picture.
      And again, we are not talking about the kids. The church members are adults. You have to find an appropriate analogy.

      • “You have to find an appropriate analogy.”
        How about a real life anology.
        The Jonestown Death Tape, Rev. Jim Jones. Pt 1/5
        http://www.youtube.com/user/Miracululz#p/a/744A0B796CB2096A/0/hXmwc45uDt8

        • And how that was an analogy to the subject we have discussed?

          • David Miscavige leads a Cult and Jim Jones led a Cult. The latter eventually leadsing his followers into death.

            You dismiss the power of brainwashing. Adult or not everybody can be brainwashed given the proper circumstances even You and me.

            Did you know that even the frontal lobes of the brain shrink after extensive brainwashing ?

            • I’ve had conversations with IAS reges where it was their clearly stated viewpoint that the group was all and the individual nothing.

            • Cat, I see but do not share your view point.
              If you stop regarding church members as poor hopeless victims, then you will understand what I was trying to say.
              Sea Org was formed of Scientology experts originally, it had to consist of OTs and highly trained auditors, and look who are been recruited now – row public from the street! Of course they aren’t capable of handling the post and environment as expected. BUT THEY ARE NOT BLIND VICTIMS ether. Unless THEY WANT and AGREE to be such.

              • There is the apparency of a disagreement here.
                Let me try to re-frame this discussion.
                First off, although each person is an individual, they have a common condition, such as “being human”. Andhumans have some common traits and vulnerabilities.
                Even so, humans vary from one to another, in their responsibility level, thus it’s not so easy to generalize. As LRH said, we can Clear people, but it can only be one person at a time. There is no other way. There is no way to bypass handling the individual person.

                Sea Org is recruiting not just public from the street, but teenagers and as many children of scientologists as possible.
                those are pre-conditioned people. At the same time, CoS no longer offers or practices Scientology. They are being fooled from the start.

                To re-frame the discussion: I think we are talking about “correct estimation of effort”. Think of North Korea. What will it take, to bring real LRH Scientology to North Korea?

                Now, What will it take to bring real LRH Scientology to the
                Miscavige CoS?

                They are similar problems. Whether you call it brainwashing or mind control, or whatever, the obstacles involved are similar.

  86. Right now what I am doing here is posting some music. These are 2 of Neil Diamond’s finest. He wrote many more good ones, including the theme song for the Movie “Jonathan Livingston Seagull”.

    LADY MAGDELENE by Neil Diamond

    The man on the right is a man undone
    He’d give you his soul
    If you asked him for some
    A child in his way for he needs to believe
    That love is a song for each man to sing

    The man on the left is a prize un-won
    A candle unlit and a song unsung
    Believing that love is a dreamer’s dream
    The man on the left,
    The me in between

    Lady Magdelene,
    I can hear your distant trumpet
    Calling from the morning mountain
    Singing to the passing river
    Take me home,
    Show me peaceful days
    Before my youth has gone

    The man in between waits between the two
    Not hearing the lie and not seeing the true
    Unknowing what is and denying what seems
    And there he will sleep
    The man in between

    Lady Magdelene,
    I can hear your distant trumpet
    Calling from the morning mountain
    Singing to the passing river
    Take me home,
    Show me peaceful days
    Before my youth has gone

    Lady Magdelene,
    Make the sound of silent thunder
    Calling from the lips of Abraham
    Make a sound that we may wonder,
    Where we are
    Take us to your soul
    For we have wandered far

    The man on the right was a man undone
    The man on the left like a prize unwon
    And God only knows
    What their time will bring
    Or what will become
    Of the man in between.

    I”VE BEEN THIS WAY BEFORE by Neil Diamond

    I’ve seen the light
    And I’ve seen the flame
    And I’ve been this way before
    And I’m sure to be this way again
    For I’ve been refused
    And I’ve been regained
    And I’ve seen your eyes before
    And I’m sure to see your eyes again

    For I’ve been released
    And I’ve been regained
    And I’ve sung my song before
    And I’m sure to sing my song again

    Some people got to laugh
    Some people got to cry
    Some people got to make it through
    By never wondering why

    Some people got to sing
    Some people got to sigh
    Some people never see the light
    Until the day they die

    But I’ve been released
    And I’ve been regained
    And I’ve been this way before
    And I’m sure to be this way again

    One more time again
    Just one more time again

    • V, thank you so much for putting these songs up. “I’ve Been This Way Before” was always one of my very favorites. It expressed better than any other song what I sought – and gained – from Scientology.

      • Thanks Publius. I had not thought of Neil Diamond in years, but going through this thread, and suddenly he came back to me. I find it remarkable that I posted these songs before Metaqual’s post about his own “Lady Magdalene”, the doctor of Chinese descent, appeared. And is not Lady Magdalene, Kwan Yin? In my mind, she is.

        That song never fails to bring tears to my eyes.

        “I’ve Been This Way Before” seemed like a natural “follow”.

  87. Theta Networker

    Marty,

    Thank you for this post and the continued in-context reference to the Tao Te Ching …

    What you are doing/helping us to do here is confront what happened in the C of S … Then, it is up to us to continue with the good things we had/have from Scientology … {I’ll leave my opinion/feeling on the posts regarding KSW for another time}

    Peace be with you,

    Al

    I have not been posting as much as many of you, but I would like to share the following that I just found, which expresses, quite well, in a nutshell what happened:

    http://www.cosvm.org/altereds.htm
    12 Feb 2002
    Mike Answers CL on Copyright Fraud — Part 3

    Here is a simple explanation of their Fraud on the paying public:

    The subject of Scientology was replaced by the “Scientology religion.”
    The subject of Scientology and the “Scientology religion” are NOT the same thing.

    In October 1993, at the IRS “win” event — a booklet was handed out entitled: Description of the Scientology Religion

    Scientology and the “Scientology religion” are both defined in the booklet as follows:

    “Scientology is an applied religious philosophy. Its goal is to bring an individual to an understanding of himself and his life as a spiritual being and in relationship to the universe as a whole.”

    “The Scientology religion is based exclusively upon L. Ron Hubbard’s research, writings and recorded lectures.”

    The key word in the definition of the “Scientology religion” is based.
    And that is exactly what they have been doing — altering, deleting and fabricating LRH issues and obtaining a new copyright under the legal title “based on the works of LRH.

    In these new copyrighted works — CSI is the author, not LRH.
    In other words — they have replaced LRH as Source!
    Scientology is the works of LRH where LRH is the author.
    The “Scientology religion” is based on the works of LRH, where CSI is the author.

    See the difference?

    So, here is the Fraud.

    Miscavige and Church promo materials repeatedly lie to the paying public that they are receiving “pure, unadulterated LRH.” They know full well that is a lie, and a blatant Fraud.

    The last corporate entity to market Scientology was the Church of Scientology of California.

    The conspirators dismantled that corporation and replaced it with 3 new corporations:

    Church of Spiritual Technology
    Religious Technology Center
    Church of Scientology International

    These 3 corporate entities market the “Scientology religion,” not Scientology.

    But they lie to the paying public and say they market Scientology.

    The public is in a condition of Confusion.

    They think they are in the Church of Scientology, receiving Scientology.

    They are actually in a new corporate structure that markets the “Scientology religion.”

    The formula for Confusion is — Find Out Where You Are

    • Theta Networker~Thank you for that clear explanation re. CSI, et al. De-confusing!

      • Yep, that’s right on. It’s a “bait and switch”. There isn’t much actual Scientology left inside the CoS of Miscavige. It’s probably a few of the older people who are still trying to deliver Scientology, and may try until they are purged too.

        God knows what the rest are doing – I doubt they themselves do, although they might believe they are delivering Scientology since apparently that’s what they are told they are doing. Some are knowingly doing Black Dianetics.

        The only way I can identify myself to anyone as a “Scientologist”, is to make clear the CoS does not do Scientology anymore, but does behavior modification and mind control.

        It pisses me off no end that I have been put in that position by those assholes. And that they have put LRH whatever his faults mayhave been, in that position.

        It seems unforgivable.

        It’s fine to be “Independent”, but I feel the lack of a unified brand is a lack. I may be wrong about that. I hope so. Perhaps “Independent Scientologist” will grow to be a recognized brand differentiated from all the poop that has been dumped on Scientology. But right now it seems like a steep hill to climb.

        As Tatiana posted, it took her 2 years to decontaminate the word “scientology” and the name of LRH in her husband’s mind, enough to get him to actually look.

        It seems we have a loooooong handle cycle ahead of us.
        Any millionaires who can step up for some full-page ads in USAToday, and billboards saying “Scientology: Under New Management!” ?

        • Scientology: Under New Management!
          We will be registering people from 9-10 a.m. Sessions will occur from 10 a.m.- 9 p.m. Course room open from 9-9 via live online supervision. Attestations will be done every 2 hours. 1 on 1 word clearing can be scheduled via online reservations. When you register, pay house call fees if you want to reserve an auditor or word clearer who goes to your home. Click here to select the person by qualifications, price and schedule.
          All fees can be paid in person during registration or online at the time of booking. Online access to your schedule and account, books you’ve read, training, etc. Session files on flash drives. LRH materials on flash drives – green and no clutter.
          I can create on this big time! Good management utilizes every available tool to get delivery of products done efficiently. That is the point.

          • Awesome Tara! It really gives me hope. At my age, I amnot so computer savvy, but I know all you wrote is entirely possible RIGHT NOW!

            Some are concerned there are no openly established orgs in the USA that are fully staffed and at least in Normal Op.

            But I have been thinking of a different model, the “distributed computing” model. All that’s needed are secure servers and secure comm lines. The “staff” don’t need to be all assembled in the same physical location. And that’s what you depict in your post….

            (But of course it’s great to be able to all get together for a barbeque….) 🙂

          • I hope I am not the only one who gets totally and completely excited by something like this??? Anybody? Bueller?😉

          • Tara

            I like your create on this.

            I am a Hubbard Professional Course Supervisor and I also get good products with ethics handlings.

            I would consider contributing to such a create as you have put forward.

            WW

            • There are others creating on this too, so let’s try to put our collective theta-heads together on this. I’ll try to get back to you on who, what, where. I’m trying to figure that out myself at the moment. I’m working on my own “where” right now.🙂

    • “Only Nixon could go to China” Thank you for posting this link for all to inspect.

      “Scientology is an applied religious philosophy. Its goal is to bring an individual to an understanding of himself and his life as a spiritual being and in relationship to the universe as a whole.”

      “The Scientology religion is based exclusively upon L. Ron Hubbard’s research, writings and recorded lectures.”

      There you have it.

  88. Marty, thanks for the info about LRH and staff pay. That was good to hear.
    Tatiana, “what you resist will persist…if you loose” Don’t forget that last part.
    Secondly, exposing an SP is not a game nor is it a games condition, it is a justice action that is necessary.

  89. This may be my last comment as I need to move on. I have other obligations to other beings but I’d like to leave with a couple of observations.

    First, Marty speaks of knowing and the know to mystery scale. He speaks of 30.0 as a defined point of demarcation. However, the numerical assignments to that scale were always arbitrary and merely numbers. And knowing is not an absolute. You do not pass from this great door of not-know to this expanse of knowing. Knowing is a scale in and of itself.

    Compare knowing to light. And darkness. You pass from darkness to light. But how much light? How much darkness remains within the light? The light of a match? The light of a sun? A galaxy? How much light?

    And how much knowing?

    We do not suddenly pass from this state of not-know to full knowing. We will always inhabit the realms of know and not-know. It’s just a matter of how much of each. The ratio.

    Theta inhabits the entire scale, and once embarked on that scale or journey, theta will always occupy the entire scale if for nothing else, for experience and understanding.

    Which brings me to Scientology. Scientology is theory. LRH made observations about existence and made statements about those observations. For him, those statements were about his knowledge. For us those statements are merely theory.

    And they remain theory until we pass into such understanding and knowledge that we could make our own statements. We would no longer need Ron’s descriptions. We could make our own from having observed the same things he did. Theory becomes knowledge.

    Marty plays basketball. There is theory to shooting the ball. Theory to playing offense and defense. The more one studies and practices, the more that theory becomes knowledge and certainty. At some point, you don’t think about the theory; you just know.

    And when you teach someone the game, you’re giving them theory, and to them it’s just theory until that point when they know. Theory becomes knowledge or not.

    Human tendency is to pretend knowledge by quoting theory. To quote Einstein’s theory of relativity is not the same as knowing. It’s nice to honor someone by quoting them, but what is important for you is to move beyond those quotes and theory into your own knowledge and understanding. At that point, you have truly honored the author.

    Now, we come to mocking up beings. LRH and Lao Tzu (if such an individual actually existed) made certain observations and described those observations. Of interest to both was the basic nature of a being and how a being knows. Hubbard wrote the factors and axioms as expressions of what he observed. But, those are merely statements and theories of what actually is without those descriptions.

    We talk about viewpoints and dimension points and assuming these and extending out dimension points to create space, energy, time, matter and form. But something precedes the creation of a viewpoint. Something precedes the dimension points. Something precedes the perceptions we attribute to a viewpoint.

    Theta does not need a viewpoint to perceive. Theta does not need a viewpoint to create. Theta does not need a viewpoint to know. Knowing and perception both exist independent of viewpoints.

    You can think about these things, but thinking about them is not the same as knowing.

    When we speak of mocking up a being, we are talking about mocking up images and personalities and attributes and viewpoints. We are talking about mocking up significance: considerations, postulates and opinions. But something precedes considerations, postulates and opinions. For those who did old OT7, something precedes intention.

    And that which precedes is not dependent on these things.

    Theta can certainly segment and mock up independent beings that operate in separate spaces and interact with one another. Theta just has this capacity. And LRH talked about it. He talked about meeting another mock up of him down in Cuba if I remember correctly.

    And we attribute all sorts of things to others which are just a bunch of significance that we choose to confront rather than perceive the actuality and the actual being behind the matter, energy, space, time, form. Our bank is a tribute to our tendency to do this.

    LRH treats this with his four conditions of existence, but one thing most of us overlook is the fifth condition. Axioms 15 and 16 contain a clue. Creation is accomplished by the postulation of an as-isness and complete destruction is accomplished by the postulation of an as-isness. But, what precedes creation? What persists beyond time and destruction? There has to be a fifth condition that precedes existence as we know it.

    See, the proof is that you can’t “as-is” theta. You can’t thoroughly view theta and make it disappear. You can’t postulate the as-isness of theta and bring about its destruction. You can postulate the destruction of theta. You can postulate the diminishment of theta and the disappearance of theta, but these are creations and lies, not actualities. You can mock up theta as wearing large red noses and funny hats as a native state–but it ain’t true. You can postulate and mock up anything you can imagine. And that postulate has as-isness at the moment of creation, which can be undone.

    But, the point I’m making is that there is a vast universe that lies beyond the point of postulation and creation and assumption of viewpoints. It is the realm of theta and theta beings who are not dependent on this universe or the viewpoints, considerations, postulates, creations, etc of this universe.

    I’m using Scientology terms here because this is a group of mostly Scientologists. I would use other terms elsewhere so don’t think I’m depending on LRH or Scientology here. I’m just using a common language that has meaning to those reading this.

    I’m not really part of this family. I stand on a hill, mist settling through the trees, colorful leaves scuttling across the ground. Down below, people are gathered at a funeral, feeling sadness over a loss, but feeling a certain thrill in anticipation of the wake. There will be food and drink. So much noise and excitement. The departed will be celebrated and remembered. Life will go on. I know some of these people, but I am not family–only a distant acquaintance. I do not choose to stand at graveside. To mourn would be a pretense. I am merely curious.

    The ceremony ends and I remain long after the mourners depart. I watch the workers fill in the grave and wonder where the departed has gone. I wonder about his life. His birth. Growing up. What he has learned. And what we have lost.

    The workers walk away, smoking and laughing. The wind picks up and the sun begins to sink. My jacket is inadequate. Thin and a bit worn. Certainly nothing to wear to show my respects. Certainly not of sufficient expense and quality to impress those who need to be impressed. I shiver, but do not feel the cold.

    It is time to move on. Time to return to my family. To warm my hands in front of the fireplace and share what I have seen. They understand my quirks, the madness that drives me to understand what others feel and know. The urge to travel beyond the comforts and stability, to suffer if necessary, just to know. They will nod their heads and smile as I talk for we are of the same seed. We know one another. And are glad in one another’s presence.

    Adieu,

    Michael

    • Michael, had I not just posted Tony’s interview, I would have made your comment into a post. Thank you for it. And stay in touch if you wish, you have my email. Thanks for all you have contributed.

      • Post it anyway, Marty.

        That was incedible.

        Beautiful post, Michael. Thanks. And now I gotta go back and re-read every post you’ve ever written. I feel like a wise old uncle showed up, patted me on the head, and left again… never having the chance to talk to him.

    • Michael,
      Me bra’, give me a tweak every now and again. Or not🙂

    • Michael. Nice try. I tried it myself. I hope you’ll be back. I think you’ll be back. And I would love to hear your take on Percival’s “thinking and destiny” if you manage to get through it.
      Few audiences can or would appreciate hearing from you as much as this one does. Its all about balance. And you bring a lot of that to the table.

      • I hope you are right.
        Love your take Michael. Theta hugs flowing your way~♥ ~♥ ~♥ ~

        • Michael, “May the road rise to meet you, may the wind be ever at your back….” And until we meet again, may Theta hold you in the palm of it’s hand.

    • Without the light the dark doesn’t exist. I know you are the light to someones dark ouththere😉

      Untill we meet again Micheal.

      Cat Daddy

    • Dear Michael,

      Is it possible you can stay and just, perhaps, expand your sphere of influence?

      I, personally, would find your absence a loss. Then again, a man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do. And I’ll understand.

      Sincerely,

      Tom Gallagher

    • Oh, dear. I didn’t see this post until 8:00 pm CentralWednesday evening. Michael, my friend, I’ll miss meeting you here. But knowing you, you could show up tomorrow, you booger!
      Just Me

    • Dear Michael,

      I’ve enjoyed your zanyness immensely. I can’t imagine yet the nature of other universes that I could create beyond the realm of time and space but I do look forward to getting to the point where that would be real. Theta post-cards most welcome. 🙂

      Bernie

    • Michael

      Thank you for your contributions to this community.

      I offer a poem…

      I looked into another’s eyes
      and was quite pleased to see
      what surely was another God
      smiling back at me.

      WW

  90. Well said

  91. GREAT post, Marty. Also, your responses to Markus were beautiful.

  92. Thanks to you all beautiful people for so many wise words as written in that thread. The best ever !
    Why did I never meet you wise and intelligent people while I was a member of the C.O.S ?🙂🙂🙂

  93. Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

    Another item in regards to “What are we doing here”, I believe, is getting in touch with our feelings about what has happened.

    How can any live, compassionate spiritual being (let alone a Scientologist), who is in touch with their feelings, not weep with sorrow after watching this video …

    I can deeply feel this 80 year-old Dianetics and Scientology Auditor’s pain. (I ending up breaking up myself.) This is new video, which I believe will become a classic among authentic scientologists.

    IMO, the title of this video should be, “Look what happened?”. You’ll see why at the end.

    • Good god almighty. This is a great example of the genuine theta, compassion and ability to communicate that used to be the hallmark of a Scientologist hero.

      Now, a hero in the church is someone who is rich and donates a lot or is famous and oggled or someone who is unfeeling, unflinching, cold, hard chrome steel attitudeless, goosestepping to the beat of the pounding pretentious drums of arrogance.

      No wonder Phil is crying.

    • Do you mean to rename the whole video or this particular part # 3 of all 5?

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        I was referring my unofficial renaming to just part 3.

        In case one may not know, they can watch the other 4 parts of this video by right clicking on the video, and choose “Watch on Youtube.” Highly recommended.

  94. Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

    Yet another reason I believe some Scientologists may be here is to learn how to beoome peacemakers instead peacebreakers, which is what the Church of Scientology has become the latter.

    I recently cognited (realized) what the “holy spirit” really is.

    The holy spirit is not the religious dogma as the way in which it was presented in my Christian family. My family and I had no true understanding of it, even though it was talked about all the time! But it was preached in a way that for one to get this mystical “holy spirit” was to pray for it to enter the body. To me, that never made sense and sounded absurd.

    Finally, I’ve learned what the holy spirit truly is, and how one receives this all allusive and “mysterious” beingness.

    The holy spirit is that spirit of grace and compassion of wanting to give from out of one’s heart, out of the the pure spirit of giving, through one’s own free will (with no force from anybody), to bestow joy to others … to life.

    This holy spirit is “contagious” in a positive sense, such as the “pay it forward” concept in the movie of the same name. However, it differs in the sense that one is not paying back anything. One does so out of the pure joy of creating more joy for all. To me, “duty” is not the highest purpose. Giving joy for joy’s sake is. No strings attached. Pure giving. No exchange expected.

    This is real peacemaking and the creation of more peacemakers.

    The “how to” of “receiving the holy spirit” is simple in concept, but difficult in practice. But with constant attention and “rebooting” of one’s mental paradigm away from the inculcated domination culture over the last 8,000 years, one can create a new habit of thinking in the real language of life, compassion.

    The old domination culture says to control others through anger, judgement, blame, shame, guilt, regret, threat of punishment, and actual punishment. This communication violence and physical force only begets more of the same. It also begets unthinking robotic behavior, as we see in the CofS. However, this non self-determinate robotism it is not limited to just the CofS. It is a worldwide culture in schooling, parenting, and in governments.

    Is it any wonder there is no peace on Earth, and that it remains just an apparent hopeful dream. Don’t most humans, except for the truly insane ones like DM, want peace on Earth? I believe so.

    Once one achieves the state of using no anger, no judgement, no blame, no shame, no guilt, no regret, no threat of punishment, and no actual punishment as a way of controlling others, life takes on a totally new reaction towards one. No more blowback.

    When Life starts operating on a basis of giving from the heart, it begets other Life to willingly give back out of the same joy. This holy spirit naturally perpetuates itself and spreads. To me, that is what “spreading the holy spirit” is all about.

    Finally, after 52 years in this life, I finally get it!🙂

    Reboot in process …

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Compassion, itself, is THE fuel and energy of the holy spirit which keeps naturally expanding in a geometric progressive circle, the same way the physical universe is expanding.

      It starts with self, expands out to family, then to groups, then to all of mankind. This compassion and holy spirit was lost in the Church of Scientology.

      Is it any wonder why so many are in utter contempt and disdain, and are repulsed by the current CofS?

      • ‎”Be humble, be simple, and bring joy to others.” Saint Madeleine Sophie Barat
        Wayne, I truly understand what you’re saying. What you wrote reminded me of how Scientology wasn’t supposed to replace your religion.
        Well, if it were practiced the way we talk about here, of course it wouldn’t.
        I was indoctrinated in Catholicism but really only had a minimal understanding of it and mostly knew the practices/rituals of it and did not truly understand the spiritual side.
        It was very similar to what we’re discussing here. If I don’t understand spirituality from different viewpoints, then I have nothing to compare or analyze against.
        LRH gave me a WAY to understand anything I desire through Key To Life. A MAJOR reboot!
        It did not give me ALL the info about life. After that MAJOR reboot, the Life Orientation course does in fact orient you or reorient you anew. But again, does NOT give you ALL the info you can possibly have. You have to LIVE to get that. You can choose to learn more about life through LRH auditor training and/or his philosophies…you can learn about other philosophies and assimilate the info from a true spiritual understanding.
        I say you CAN…are able to…but not in CofM, with their thought stopping.
        I had some realizations re. Catholicism but really had no time to study it while on staff and I’m sure the thought police wouldn’t have taken too kindly to it anyway.
        So recently I’ve been clearing up some misunderstandings about saints and how to become one😉 The nearby Sacred Heart convent I was schooled in actually has a shrine up on the third floor in honor of a miracle by St. John Berchmans.
        Growing up and before LRH as described above, this was like okay, whatever, queue Twilight Zone music…went completely over my head. While IN CofM I was never given the space to evaluate it.
        NOW I evaluate it and wow, these were some very spiritual people like I never imagined. Forget the dogma, forget the rituals…here’s a man that returned in spirit form and HEALED a dying nun. Right there in that very room that still remains today🙂
        My point is NOT that Catholicism is the be all, end all to spirituality. There are some hokey rituals I NEVER would follow and like all good things, bad people pervert it.
        But you are quite right in the culture of peace or hostility being core to survival. That is why my third dynamic as a Sacred Heart alumni actually creates great things for the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th dynamics. For real. I can WIN on my 3D and 4D with them and as part of them and create GOOD things. I don’t even have to agree 100% with the dogma because we have a culture of peace, love and understanding (queue Elvis Costello) overall.
        LRH’s work is a peaceful work and I know 100% a path to true spiritual enlightenment. I know this from being the receiver of and the applier of. No doubt because I’ve read it, drilled it, done it and it worked EXACTLY right.
        How people use it in a bad/hostile way is not what he intended.
        (Sorry so long) 😉

        • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

          I’m so happy you really got what I’m saying. I loved what you said too, and it wasn’t too long, in fact, left me wanting more.🙂

          It’s actually easier for me to evaluate the “charm” of any individual or group now, by looking at the “holy spirit” within (the sacred compassionate force) and the “spirit of play”.

          The definitions (or synonyms) I mean for the word “holy” are divine, godly, sacred, or blessed.

          For me, compassion and the spirit of play fall in the category of any of those words above.

        • Hi Tara. There is a tremendous amount of growth possible through understanding christian prayer and meditation. Revisiting it as an adults is worthwhile.
          I agree with Wayne’s placing importance on Compassion. But compassion must be AN ACT, not an emotion, not just a feeling. Empathy is the corresponding emotion. We need to be ACTIVE.

          • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

            Yes, Loki.

            Being compassionate for another is expressed an action, IMO.

            I’d further define it as “the ability to find out what is alive in one, and to enrich life.”

            Trained Dianetics and Scientology Auditors do this all the time in session with their PC’s using Dianetics and Scientology auditing tech. If they applied the Auditors Code all the time in everyday life, this compassion would come through then also.

            The goal of the Tech of nonviolent communication is specifically designed for knowing how to apply compassion to everyday life especially needed when one receives life-alienating communication (violent communication). There’s more to this than just being there and confronting.

            It consists of listening, observing, and understanding an individual’s actual feeling, and finding out what their need is behind that feeling.

            There are specific types of communication which literally blocks compassion (an act). Everybody needs to understand this, but church Scientologists direly need to understand it, but it’s not part of the training line-up.

            Here’s a little excerpt from Chapter 2: Communication That Blocks Compassion, in the book “Nonviolent Communication” by Marshall Rosenberg which I believe is appropriate for this discussion. Dr. Rosenberg, IMO, is THE expert on the subject of compassion, which the understanding of is sorely lacking, not only in the CofS but in the entire world of domination societies.

            Trained Auditors may appreciate this more than anybody. IMO, knowing this tech is vital to life.

            Overview

            Do not judge, and you will not be judged. For as you judge others, so you will yourselves be judged . . . — Holy Bible, Matthew 7:1

            In studying the question of what alienates us from our natural state of compassion, I have identified specific forms of language and communication that I believe contribute to our behaving violently toward each other and ourselves. I use the term “life-alienating communication” to refer to these forms of communication.

            Certain ways of communicating alienate us from our natural state of compassion.

            Moralistic Judgments

            One kind of life-alienating communication is the use of moralistic judgments that imply wrongness or badness on the part of people who don’t act in harmony with our values. Such judgments are reflected in language such as, “The problem with you is that you’re too selfish.” “She’s lazy.” “They’re prejudiced.” “It’s inappropriate.” Blame, insults,put-downs, labels, criticism, comparisons, and diagnoses are all forms of judgment.

            In the world of judgments, our concern centers on WHO “IS” WHAT.

            The Sufi poet Rumi once wrote, “Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and right-doing, there is a field. I’ll meet you there.” Life-alienating communication, however, traps us in a world of ideas about rightness and wrongness—a world of judgments; it is a language rich with words that classify and dichotomize people and their actions. When we speak this language, we judge others and their behavior while preoccupying ourselves with who’s good, bad, normal, abnormal, responsible, irresponsible, smart, ignorant, etc.

            Long before I reached adulthood, I learned to communicate in an impersonal way that did not require me to reveal what was going on inside of myself. When I encountered people or behaviors I either didn’t like or didn’t understand, I would react in terms of their wrongness. If my teachers assigned a task I didn’t want to do, they were “mean” or “unreasonable.” If someone pulled out in front of me in traffic, my reaction would be, “You idiot!” When we speak this language, we think and communicate in terms of what’s wrong with others for behaving in certain ways, or occasionally, what’s wrong with ourselves for not understanding or responding as we would like. Our attention is focused on classifying, analyzing, and determining levels of wrongness rather than on what we and others need and not getting. Thus if my partner wants more affection than I’m giving her, she is “needy and dependent.” But if I want more affection than she is giving me, then she is “aloof and insensitive.” If my colleague is more concerned about details than I am, he is “picky and compulsive.” On the other hand, if I am more concerned about details than he is, he is “sloppy and disorganized.”

            Analyses of others are actually expressions of our own needs and values.

            It is my belief that all such analyses of other human beings are tragic expressions of our own values and needs. They are tragic because, when we express our values and needs in this form, we increase defensiveness and resistance to them among the very people whose behaviors are of concern to us. Or, if they do agree to act in harmony with our values because they concur with our analysis of their wrongness, they will likely do so out of fear, guilt, or shame.

            We all pay dearly when people respond to our values and needs, not out of a desire to give from the heart, but out of fear, guilt, or shame. Sooner or later, we will experience the consequences of diminished goodwill on the part of those who comply with our values out of a sense of either external or internal coercion. They, too, pay emotionally, for they are likely to feel resentment and decreased self-esteem when they respond to us out of fear, guilt, or shame. Furthermore, each time others associate us in their minds with any of those feelings, we decrease the likelihood of their responding compassionately to our needs and values in the future.”

            • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

              (Oops. I mis-closed an italics tag and can’t fix it on my end. My apologies. I didn’t mean to italicize so much text as I know it makes reading it more uncomfortable. Marty, if you have time to close that tag for me, I appreciate it.)

  95. Markus Stuckenbrock

    One thing really bothers me here on this blog and in many answers to this post – too many people are talking about the truth-their problem is that they still don’t know that they will never know the truth – to claim to have found the only truth is very dangerous.

    Best
    Markus

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Markus,

      True about the idea of an “only truth” is very dangerous. What example(s) on this blog where you believe it’s that way?

    • Interesting, how can you know the truth that they will never know the truth? Wouldn’t this be putting you in a position of knowing truth, when you say it cannot be known?

    • It’s very much human though, for the good or for the bad.

  96. Aren’t we all wise?! How ya’all doin’ with 8-8008?

  97. Markus Stuckenbrock

    I think You are on the right path Marty – somehow I feel that we are companions on this path. And it seems that both of us still have a long road to travel on this way to love and understanding. I hope so very dearly that you will keep on going into the right direction. If you are not very carefull you will start something here which could harm people in a similar way as the CoS did and still does. Somehow you allready harm victims and their families in protecting a man who in my opinion had no good intentions in founding this “religion”. Please start to examine this man, his actions and intentions for yourself before you continue to do what you are doing here.
    Meet Hana and Sharone – listen to them – I can arrange some more connections for you if you are interested. Read “Bare-faced Messiah” and listen to your heart while reading it.

    “You don’t know but that’s ok” 🙂

    but please don’t get the message of this song wrong 😉

    Best Markus

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Markus,

      I always still keep the possibility in my mind that I’m still inculcated. lol.

      At this point of my belief, I believe the compassionate Ron in the early days had great intentions before he went off the rails (IMO) and couldn’t have others out-creating him, and eventually became the supreme dictator, of which David Miscavage took over that post after Ron died.

      Coming to terms with this has been difficult for me to confront. Because I want it not to be. I actually want my thinking to be wrong on this. lol. But I also don’t want to ignore the truth either.

      In any case, I know much of scientology (not the brand name Scientology) is right and works. The challenge is sorting out the wheat from the chaff. I don’t judge the tech of scientology by the personality flaws of the originator of the word “scientology” and the forward advances he’s made on the science of knowing how to know, which has been in development for 1,000’s of years on planet Earth, and is STILL in development … but not by the name of scientology.

      I have read the book “Bare-faced Messiah”. Admittedly, it was a very uncomfortable read. But it made me realize too that LRH is just a man, not infallable, and is subject to the frailties and hazards of any human, especially the hazard of Ego.

      I understand your intentions, Markus, and I know they are good.

    • Markus, that’s one serious case of arrogant presumption you have in just taking it for granted that Marty or the rest of us Independent Scientologists (no tm) are not (to a greater or lesser degree) aware of Ron Hubbard’s darker side or his many mistakes.

      Furthermore, we have many accounts on this blog, from persons who knew and worked closely with Ron Hubbard, that kindness and good will were his aspect the vast majority of the time – that he was far more often sunshine than dark clouds or thunderstorms, as it were.

      That you apparently choose to only believe the bad reports about this man and ignore all of the good ones, speaks far more loudly about your own condition and intentions, than it does of Ron Hubbard’s.

      Michael A. Hobson

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        Michael,

        I totally understand the possibility of the feeling of righteous indignation to Markus’s post, and the urge to return the “favor” of judgement back at his judgement. It can turn into a vicious cycle. I’ve done it myself too many times.

        Perhaps both you and Markus will read the post about life-alienating communication here …🙂 (I am the first one to admit I have not perfected myself regarding this subject. I’m no angel, yet.😉 lol)

        https://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/what-we-are-doing-here/#comment-54808

      • Markus Stuckenbrock

        Marty I wrote a long and detailed answer to Michael here and somehow it is gone or did you not let it go through moderation?

        • Didn’t let it through. I am not promoting other sites that are diametrically opposed to what we stand for. You can email Mike.

        • Markus, I fear Wayne Froemke was right and my response to you was way too harsh. Given what you have gone through with the loss of your brother, especially so.

          Michael A. Hobson

  98. This is HUGE HUGE HUGE! Science shows that REWARDS AND PENALTIES is a HALF-TRUTH!!! EVERY SCIENTOLOGIST MUST SEE THIS!!!

    More: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mG-hhWL_ug

    • See my post above re. Scn: under new management.
      I’d say it fits exactly with what Mr. Pink is talking about.

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Excellent reference, Obnosis. Thank you very much.

      But wait, LRH can never be incorrect at anything, right?😉 (Oh, I’d get hung for heresy in the CofS for saying that! I’m glad Marty allows “heretics” here. :))

      I partically found these quotes interesting …

      “Traditional notions of management are great if you want compliance. But if you want engagement, self direction is better.”

      “If we get past this lazy, dangerous ideology of “carrots and sticks”, we can strengthen our businesses, we can solve a lot of these “candle problems”, and maybe, maybe, maybe … we can change the world.”

      – Dan Pink

      A book along the same lines is this one …

      “Punished By Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A’s, Praise, and Other Bribes” – by Alfie Kohn

      Kohn, the author of other iconoclastic books, among them You Know What They Say: The Truth About Popular Beliefs ( LJ 8/90), here shows how rewards of all sorts undermine our efforts to teach students, manage workers, and raise children. Although aimed at a general audience, the book is based on extensive research and documented with almost 100 pages of notes and references. The first six review the behaviorist tradition and lay out in a clear and convincing manner Kohn’s central argument that “pop behaviorism” is dangerously prevalent in our society. Here Kohn discusses why rewards, including praise, fail to promote lasting behavior change or enhance performance and frequently make things worse. – – Mary Chatfield, Angelo State Univ., San Angelo, Tex.

      Now he challenges the widely held assumption that incentives lead to improved quality and increased output in the workplace and in schools. He notes that the system of rewards and punishment is based on Pavlovian and Skinnerian behavioral theories, which are supported largely by experiments with laboratory animals. Kohn derides rewards as bribes and offers instead the proposition that collaboration (teamwork), content (meaningfulness), and choice (autonomy) will serve to motivate both students and workers. He marshals impressive theoretical support and, at the same time, uses humor disarmingly to argue his case. David Rouse

  99. Expanded Confusion Formula…now this passage from Tao Te Ching means so much more to me:
    When people see some things as beautiful, other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good, other things become bad.
    Being and non-being create each other.
    Difficult and easy support each other.
    Long and short define each other.
    High and low depend on each other.
    Before and after follow each other.

    Therefore the Master acts without doing anything and teaches without saying anything.
    Things arise and she lets them come; things disappear and she lets them go.
    She has but doesn’t possess, acts but doesn’t expect.
    When her work is done, she forgets it.
    That is why it lasts forever.

  100. These come from people that seem offended by my allowance of comments that question aspects of Scientology and my posts suggesting reading outside of Scientology.

    “Offended” might be a bit strong.
    But I never read anything recommended here.
    I consider there is nothing in any other Sources that has not been more accurately stated by LRH. And if it hasn’t, it’s not important.

    Some Ex SCN Message Boards have deteriorated into the Validation of other Practices for the Purpose of backhanding Scientology. I never read these type of Threads.

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Foremost wrote, “But I never read anything recommended here.
      I consider there is nothing in any other Sources that has not been more accurately stated by LRH. And if it hasn’t, it’s not important.”

      That’s quite a big assumption to have faith in. Maybe that’s why religions are called, a “faith”.

      Or why religions that close down one’s minds to the thoughts of others for expanding one’s viewpoint, are called a “cult” (like CofS).

      My current viewpoint on religions now is that they are a thought trap. However, I’m willing to change my viewpoint about religions if I see any evidence that merits doing so.

      Personally, I don’t practice the Scientology religion, or any religion. I only practice the science of knowing how to know (scientology – LOWER CAPS) which embraces much more science and application of its technology than just what only one person says.

  101. Wayne~Perhaps you are trying to fit too much into the definition of Scientology. It is LRH’s subject and anything to do with his writings or processes is connected to him. I don’t think you can lump every nuance of knowing into Scientology. We’ve been knowing long before Scientology.
    I acknowledge that the things you wrote about non-violent comm are good and true and if practicing those things makes your life and your fellows’ lives better, then it’s perfect for you.
    I would submit to you that because of the way people can’t get true LRH in the CofM, YOU have been denied what you should have or could have attained.
    And that’s very upsetting to me because you obviously are smart enough and have the drive to even have become Class 8 and OT8…etc. if that’s what you desired. Instead, you were stopped, ignored, wasted.😦
    I feel this way about pretty much everyone here actually, including myself.
    If you were allowed to get LRH’s tech on communication and had been audited through expanded Grade 0 or even through all the Grades, you would have the tools and lack of charge on the subject, for probably ALL you looked for in your new practice…but you were not allowed or given that opportunity.
    You, like me, went looking for answers and did not find them, so you had to look elsewhere. There are good workable things elsewhere.
    But from my own experience, not good enough or as good as what I got from LRH thus far. Once I got rid of my computation that there can be only one, I could see this. While IN CofM I could not even LOOK at that idea.
    I can only relate what I’ve experienced and learned from LRH and that’s been quite a lot. I haven’t learned everything there is to learn of LRH and I’m not processed nearly as high as I want to be on the auditing side. But because I’ve studied Book One and audited hundreds of hours of that to great results and trained through delivering Grades and NED and audited hundreds of hours of those to great results…why would I use some other method of releasing charge? I would maybe if I couldn’t ever get the real thing – out of desperation.
    Those PCs expected me to know how to give them the real thing so they could get the real results. (This is all pre-GAT) I knew how to do it to get results, therefore, I also was winning and accomplishing my own purpose by doing so. Everybody wins then. Why would we look elsewhere?
    Reading books by LRH does give you the theory of how comm works and why, etc. but it does not give you the ability to use communication to resolve ANY situation as Pro TRs does.
    But wait, you were not allowed to do Pro TRs, right? So what the hell are you supposed to do meanwhile back at the ranch? Suffer, muddle through it, pretend you’re not really pissed or sad, hide your emotions, put on some valence of superiority just to make it through the day and get your stats up!
    Fortunately, most of the group I started with at our mission were old-timers who were very compassionate people. They had done LRH’s OT levels and training before the corruption and valence shift to meanness. None of them were in the S.O. and were always far removed from the insanity of above. Most of them have silently withdrawn now and I don’t blame them really! They are amazing people personally and in business, etc.
    Their group let them down big time. Their group (CofS under DM) committed huge overts on them. My group (CofS under DM) committed huge overts on me…and pretty much everybody here. On YOU too! How do they justify that? Well, read the posts in this blog and you can find lots of the justifications CofM uses.
    (This is my latest cog from someone’s post here.)
    But don’t fall prey to the big lie that CofM runs on EVERYBODY…that YOU are the only one with overts and it’s all YOUR fault and YOU did this to yourself. NO YOU DID NOT. Wayne, YOU did not do anything to fuck up CofM and make it train people to wait for 3 swings on a floating needle. I have NEVER violated the Auditor’s Code thus calling for my sessions to be secretly recorded. Nope. Who here told public their stats were out the roof when they weren’t? We’ve been lied to and deceived and told WE did it to ourselves. Uh, no WE didn’t.

    • ΘTater/GaryLerner

      Tara, I wish that there was some magic words that would instantly provide case gain and understanding. You know that as well as most of us do. For Wayne it seems like he’s been betrayed. Yep. Wayne, it’s not LRH and his philosophy that wronged you, it was David Miscavige and his SPs. What is almost impossible to understand about getting case gain through auditing is that factually you are removing problems. Meaning that what you are aware of right now is potentially covering further problems totally hidden and below your awareness. I’m not invalidating or enforcing thoughts you may or may not have but rather just describing what LRH has described about negative gains that going from pc to pre-ot obtains. It seems like a weird phenomenon to “lose” case rather than “gain” case. Every level of the Grades and NED and OT levels and of course doing courses like the PDC or Briefing Course, etc. greatly enhances those negative gains. You are a real thetan, Wayne. Finding all of the wondrous things that LRH describes in his works (NOT DM’s) will provide so many amazing cognitions that you will be blown away. You know the LRH saying “What’s true for you is true for you”? You have to LOOK at the truth in order to duplicate and understand your truth. I did LOOK at my truth. The more you look at truth the more aware you become. I’m just asking that you or anyone that has doubts about LRH’s Scientology, just walk the walk before you decide what is the truth.

      Tara, I get what you say because I feel you have a good heart (that’s number one in my book) and tell it like it is.

      Gary🙂

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        Tara and Gary,

        I appreciate the both of you trying to compassionately explain your reality.

        It’s possible that I may have a stronger grasp of scientology than one may think.🙂 It’s also possible I may be a Natural Clear, and that I may already have some OT abilities that some may get from the official Scientology OT levels. I would never judge or assume anybody’s case state by looking at where they are on the official bridge. That means nothing, IMO.

        As far as LRH works go, I have a serious problem with scientology being “LRH’s Scientology” or “LRH’s subject” as both you suggest.

        I don’t acknowledge LRH’s ownership to the wisdom of the “science of knowing how to know” any more than Einstein or Newton “owns” the “science of physics”.

        The science of knowing how to know is still in development. Any technology, no matter what field, can always be upgraded to become more workable, faster, more efficient, and more powerful. That’s just the nature of technology.

        I also have a serious problem with science getting frozen in time with a “That’s it, that’s all there is to know about it, I wrapped it all up by myself. Nobody else has the capability, as I do, to futher develop it.”

        If any other science or technology were treated that way, and people really believed in this smug idea, we’d still be in the dark ages back before Newton.

        I know for a fact that a lacuna in the name-brand Scientology is in the area of education on how to precisely increase one’s QUALITY of compassion by using specifc technology. To me, it is the most obvious missing link (outpoint) in the name-brand Scientology. All I have to do is to observe the obvious to clearly see that. All this warring that has been going on throughout the history of name-brand Scientology is plenty of evidence of the very lacuna I’m talking about.

        Only when one study’s the tech in that lacuna will one ever really understand what I mean. It’s similar to trying to explain how great scientology is, but if they have not gotten an actual taste of it by DOING it themselves, they’ll never really know. It won’t be real to them.

        Again, the science of knowing how to know (scientology) is a science that is very embrasive of a lot of tech that is outside of name-brand Scientology.

        I hope I am able to make myself clear about the difference between free and open-source scientology – “the science of knowing how to know” (just like all other sciences are “open source” and free to expand upon), and name-brand Scientology monopoly that has registered trademarks, and is closed for further tech development, frozen in 1986 when LRH died.

        • Wayne, I was not eval’ing your case at all.. Sorry if I wasn’t clear. I arrived this time Clear but not naturally – why be normal?😉
          I did oh 15 intensives of Grades 0-4. LOVED it, ran everything I could get to read. But before I did that, I was already a Grad V auditor with plenty of time in the chair.
          My point is that the lacuna you speak of, IMO, does not exist. It’s well covered in LRH’s tech. That people don’t apply it – PTSness, by the book. The PTS culture of the CofM is why.

          Scientology is a name coined by LRH and when we talk about it here, that’s what we refer to. LRH is not the be-all end-all of knowing how to know or the science of knowing – just Scientology and Dianetics.
          If you want to use another tech for knowing how to know…great!
          I feel I got what I was supposed to from LRH tech and I want more. Problem is, I went PTS to some PTSes. OK, so handling underway.
          What I was trying to say to you too is that you were denied LRH tech, like everybody here, at any level. THAT pisses me off.
          You and me don’t disagree.

          • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

            Tara,

            I feel we’re on the same page, but just looking at things from a different angle. I feel your compassion oozing through, though.🙂

            May I suggest watching the rest of those Marshall Rosenberg videos. Then I believe you’ll more clearly understand my viewpoint.

            • Wayne~I meant to come back and add that the only reason I brought up the auditing that I did AFTER Clear was to acknowledge that I had plenty of case to handle…
              Oozing, huh?😉
              I want to ensure that I can continue up the Bridge and that my kids can too, that my husband gets onto the Bridge. I didn’t even think this possible ’till finding this blog.
              Do you want this too?

  102. I read the whole discussion we had here – thank you for answering!
    I stay with my truth that a war – any war – can not be won by concurring the enemy. That is not a victory in a whole sense of it. Justis is not a handling, it is a coping with a situation in an absence of Ethics. In view that “the war” is fought not between “good” and “bad” individuals, but on a bigger picture it is a Theta – enTheta confrontation. And from this view point the only true victory will be dis-enturbulating enTheta and converting it back into Theta.
    Do you really think it can be done by criticizing, evaluating or making somebody wrong? Even if they are wrong, or especially when they are wrong?
    What does LRH say about handling the low-toned people? The lower they are, the higher the auditor should be. Thus you do not handle anger with anger, or 1.1 with anger etc. This way we all lose and the whole ship may sink.
    We should stop fighting, no matter who first started that fight, because we will not win through the fight – non of us will win.
    We can only win for real with LOVE.
    The position on the tone scale is determined by proportion of theta – entheta. So if we want to handle DM for good all we need to do is to move him up tone. He is one of us, us all living on this planet. We are the group. And we can raise a group tone level.
    If DM doesn’t go in session, we can use other tools, read the Dianetics. What else do we have besides auditing? Ethics in, Training, Non re-stimulative (THETA) environment, and LOVE.
    We also know, that enTheta will dis-enturbulate in the presence of greater amount of Theta. And this is also a tool that we can use.
    We can create a theta bank – unlike a bank of engrams, it will contain THETA.
    We can do it on the Internet placing there Theta messages, collecting them in one place or on the different, but linked together websites.

    So, if you feel like OUT-FLOWING THETA, welcome to the Success Stories, Wins and Testimonials website! http://community.freezone-tech.info/success/ – comment and post! Lets collect all that pleasure moments! Lets create a group that is bounded together by common purpose to improve conditions in own and lives of others using scientology and by SHARING THETA! We have to make us all REAL to each other by creating and collecting video-interviews introducing ourselves as Scientologists. We have to stay in COMMUNICATION and keep our lines clear from enTheta. And we will raise the AFFINITY so high, that people in the church will come to UNDERSTAND what is been missing in the church.

    It all may seem naive, but that is what I believe in and what I support to the best of my abilities.

    If you are willing to record and add your video to my collection on http://youtube.com/svetka812 – upload your video to youtube and send me a link. If you like me to register you on the Success website (link above) that enables you to post your wins there – just drop me a line: admin@freezone-tech.info (You do not need to register in order to comment).

    With Love and Hope,
    Tatiana.

  103. I wonder, what would happen if we all find something in DM that we can honestly respect, like, admire or love. What if we all send him our affinity? How is it going to change him, us and the whole world?

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Interesting you mention this, Tatiana. I love your attitude!

      What a challenge to think of David Miscavage as not an “enemy.” I’ve been actually working on this, myself. I’m concluding it’s wrong-headed thinking of mine which never moves towards peace and understanding, let alone my own peace of mind.

      So far, I’ve reached a compassion level for David Miscavage in that I actually feel sad or him that he must be feeling very confused and extremely alone at the top.

      Perhaps, inside, he really feels he’s being a protector and doing “good”, but many “just don’t understand” him. I can admire the goal of being a protector, for sure. And I can admire wanting to do good, even if it’s misguided.

      In my opinion, DM is confused about how to do good, and needs help. Perhaps true empathy, true compassion for him is the starting point to help him move forward.

      To be able to respect, like, admire or love him is just a little too much for me to do at this point in growth.

      But I am able to show some compassion for him, finally.

  104. Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

    Another area I hope to contribute to is to help reduce the number of obedient and docile Scientologists.

    “I have thought for a long time now that if, some day, the increasing efficiency for the technique of destruction finally causes our species to disappear from the earth, it will not be cruelty that will be responsible for our extinction and still less, of course, the indignation that cruelty awakens and the reprisals and vengeance that it brings upon itself . . . but the docility, the lack of responsibility of the modern man, his base subservient acceptance of every common decree. The horrors that we have seen, the still greater horrors we shall presently see, are not signs that rebels, insubordinate, untamable men are increasing in number throughout the world, but rather that there is a constant increase in the number of obedient, docile men.” – George Bernanos, French novelist and journalist

  105. Great post! Although in my personal life at the moment I dont want to hear from antagos to the tech, I just skip over those. I can choose what I dont want to read! (I just recently resigned, so it seems to be a button with me, esp when those that are OT whatever get antago to the tech). Your blog is 99% theta and data we need to know, no matter how not theta🙂 – with lots of good posts by others. For those that complain, they should try the ESMB, mostly natter about the tech.

    • Hi Mary Lee. I like to keep my own theta to entheta ratio very high, myself. I couldn’t tolerate those boards as I needed every bit of theta I possessed and could get. I still do.
      Anyway, welcome!

  106. Pingback: Total Certainty – Really? | Moving On Up a Little Higher

  107. Re the censorship in the church: I saw a 20 minute DVD about The Secret ans was sent to ethics and made to KR the friend who showed it to me and I was told not to read it. Then goldenrod came out on the Secret. But it didn’t stop there. I remember being in the pc waiting lounge reading a romance novel or some light fiction while waiting for session, and I was Rfactored that I was “out ethics” for not reading LRH or listening to LRH tapes while waiting for session. I refused to stop so he then took my name down and KRed me and others who were doing the same. Later it ratcheted up to you had to be ON COURSE at all times except when in session so that you could be reading LRH on coruse or doing Basics on course etc. I think the real reason was that there weren’t enough BIS to keep the student points up, so they wrangled the little dogies into the courseroom with force and intimidation and threat of losing eligibility. And the Robert Kiyosaki thing is even worse. There were rumors he was “squirrel” and a black PR campaign ran on him to the point that people were writing KR’s on anyone who read his book or played his Cashflow game. Many tried to trace down the facts to see if it was true and no one, including myself, no one could find that he’d ever been on lines, that he ever was hooked up to a squirrel or SP at all. Yet the church was advocating ruining his book business as in “you must never buy or read anything by Kiyosaki…” If he were to hear about this, I would hope he would sue for libel and slander. But that is how CO$ operates: don’t confuse me with the facts. And the fact that they told everyone to “burn your old LRH books” when the new basics came out, that made the hair on the back of my neck and arms stand up. This is so witch burning and midevil.

  108. jown phillips

    Had not-know cog in 90, now know the feeling of knowing the right answer since 09. Who knows the most basic truth of life?

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