Scientology’s New International Spokesperson

Mike Rinder is in Dublin Ireland today.   He was invited to Trinity College to speak on behalf of Scientology in a debate sponsored by the Philosophical Society.   The question: should Scientology be considered a legitimate religion?   Corporate Scientology chose not to participate. Mike represents Scientology (clearly of the Independent variety, as opposed to the Corporate version) as I post this.

Mike was greeted at the Dublin airport yesterday by seven Corporate Scientologists screaming in his face “YOU ARE NOT WELCOME IN IRELAND!”  The rabble probably represented half the total die-hard Corporate Scientology field in Ireland.   Irony or ironies, Mike Rinder came to Ireland for one purpose and one purpose alone, to defend their rights to believe and practice their religion; a chore that David Miscavige explicitly ran for cover from.

Here is Mike on national television broadcast last night in Ireland.  Note, despite Corporate Scientology’s best efforts to shut Mike up and prevent his appearance at Trinity College, you just can’t stop the shinin’.  My take: With Davis MIA and Miscavige AWOL, the applied religious philosophy of Scientology finally has a spokesperson Scientologists can be proud of. (note: the video goes up to about 17 minutes, then repeats itself without sound – no need to watch beyond the conclusion of Mike’s interview)

321 responses to “Scientology’s New International Spokesperson

  1. Well Done Mike Rinder. The babble that comes from the corporate side is not being heard anymore.

    • Maybe not heard by you, lady, but they are very active in my city. Those TV reports and newspaper articles are quickly forgotten already the next day.

      I don’t like the church leader, he reminds me of a failed movie star but I don’t believe you guys either that he is the only one in your ways, whatever those ways are.

      How about some self-criticism once in a while on this blog?

      • I hate myself.

      • I guess you haven’t been folowing this blog too long. I have seen plenty of criticism of the independent field and have posted some myself. If your an independent you need to be aware of the pitfalls of the independent movement, I am, and Marty is as well and has posted warnings as such.
        I think Mike makes and excellent spokesperson and I support him for his work andapplaud him as well.
        David

      • Critic… just curious: you said they are very active in your city. What city could that be? It’s hard to imagine. I live in a suburb of Clearwater, FL and when I drive through CW every other day, I don’t see a thing… it’s a ghost town… looks like a neutron bomb went off (kills off all living things and leaves the buildings standing)…

      • Dear Critic,

        Okay, here’s some “criticism” of the whole ongoing mess.

        a) Independent Scientologists ARE acting more decently than official Scientologists.

        b) Were Hubbard alive, what he would do? That’s a very important question to spend a good amount of time really thinking about it. I think he’d favor Mike’s and Marty’s more higher principled intentions to a large degree. But this is exactly where the discussion veers off in all directions. Per what Hubbard has left on the books, ANYONE who is an unofficial splintered member, is technically NOT a Scientologist. The Independents would argue that things have gotten so out of control in official Scientology, that official Scientology isn’t right to claim that the independents are NOT in fact just as valid Scientologists as official Scientologys. They claim Hubbard would oust Miscavige, and I’d agree with that. But how to deal with the Hubbard massive full package of administrative policies, many of which paint whoever is calling themselves a Scientologist, into a difficult corner (I personally am an atheist, no longer a Scientologist, but Hubbard changed his past ideas and policies enough times, that he might revise or cancel himself, were he to see the current scene, and I’d absolutely think that would be the case today, were he to appear, even though I think he is NOT going to show up),

        b1) Hubbard has not returned from his last life, no one has heard from him. He left a variety of implied and stated intentions about his future. We don’t have all of his various statements in official form, in the public domain to argue them all, but THAT is a hugely important thing to have, which scholars like Doug Cowan have argued for over 15 years now, which is that we NEED what Hubbard said and wrote, in the public domain, and for people to today claim to have the moral high ground about what Hubbard would do, it comes down to knowing what he said, and having it all to back up one’s views. (It’s like, actually, this blog, and Steve Hall’s blog, and Jeff Hawkin’s “Counterfiet Dreams” site, are just like any other “new” religions, when those religions start splintering.).

        b2) Marty and Steve Hall, see their blogs, possibly their best writings and discussions should be summarized into “Freequently Asked Questions” and have a question about “What Hubbard source references back up independent and freezone Scientologists in the first place?”

        c) I argued long ago with Marty, that LRH would call Marty NOT a Scientologist, and I argued LRH would NOT want to dismantle the whole multi-echelong Sea Org bureaucracy and all of Hubbard’s 3 decades of work making all the church echelons. Marty thought LRH, if he were here, might just do that and just let the whole setup come completely unglued, and start over. I argued that LRH would not, because I felt LRH had too much invested in the whole Sea Org and church multi-echelon bureaucracy setups.

        Morally the independents seem more tolerant, they don’t do disconnection, they allow all manner of people post here, where official Scientology uses Hubbard’s disconnection/excommunication policies to stop communication and not answer questions, and divide families.

        I’ve considered the independents have the moral high ground, because it seems the freezone and independent Scientologists are doing what the official movement SHOULD do, which is adapt to the world, be more tolerant, STOP the insane control and stop the disconnection practice, stop the abuse like beating staff and coerced abortions that go on at the “religious order” echelon of top ranks staff life.

        The big question is, what would Hubbard do in this situation.

        That will always be the point.

        I think the people still considering themselves Scientologists, seem to have the most claim to moderating the worst of what Hubbard ordered.

        They are the ones who have somehow retained the overall label they are happy to call themselves, “Scientologists”, and they’ve dropped what is most controversial and offensive about official Scientology’s behavior in the prior 60 years.

        I’ve hoped, and it’s not yet gotten to that level of scholarly understanding of Scientology, that some scholars might just take the time to look at and compare this recurring pattern that goes on in Scientology, of splinter ex official members, who act more decently, tolerantly, than official Scientology, and notice and talk about how and if this is just typical of any tight knit totalitarian group, that has defectors who revolt and still practice some of the aspects of the official group, but they dispense with the most offensive aspects of the official group.

        I’ve argued here on this blog, that were there enough freedom of thought allowed, and debate allowed, and time to reflect to even debate and propose reform, (something Hubbard didn’t allow, but despite Hubbard NOT making group discussion an option), Hubbard DID leave the movement with two top councils.

        One’s the Watchdog Committee.

        One’s the International Executive Strata.

        I favor the loophole of how Hubbard defined the “Exec Strata” where Hubbard calls it the “think tank”, that I think is the loophole for this important top council to review and reform official Scientology’s most controversial and offensive abusive control methods. Plus as some have noted on this blog in answer to some of my arguments, there’s a number of basic policies by Hubbard allowing for retirement of policy, which also support internal reform.

        Well, I’ve many times argued, on this blog, that were official Scientology to simply be allowed to take the years to generate the two top councils, and particularly allow the “Exec Strata” members sufficient latitude and education, they could study the religion landscape and reform even the worst downsides of what Hubbard’s still existent poilcies cause.

        A study of Hubbard himself, NOT done yet by any of ex members, on this point, and not even close to even being contemplated by any academic in the new religion or religion history field, is the point of Hubbard’s constant changing, and sometimes major swings in direction, in church administrative history.

        Well all that needs be done, is reform the official movement, in the direction that the freezone and independent Scientologists have naturally taken it upon themselves to go!

        Look at all my arguments on this blog, if you want to see some criticism of mine.

        I tend to think official Scientology isn’t going to tank, and it will eventually reform, maybe not for decades.

        Professor Stephen Kent just wrote a paper on the decline of official Scientology, and it should appear in public, he’s given okay to share it however people wish. Someone ought post it on some site and link to it.

        It’s a fine paper, but I’ve seen decades of the same pattern in Scientology., of “small and failing churches” carrying on and on and on, despite how ridiculously failing they are.

        In the end, I think it is due the whole world detailed in the green (administrative) volumes of church writings by Hubbard, that the staff use to “keep the show on the road” (as Hubbard says).

        Official Scientology has been on their recurring decline my whole career inside the movement, and for the 8 years since I left it.

        Chuck Beatty
        ex Sea Org 1975-2003
        866-XSEAORG
        412-260-1170

        • Chuck,
          Excellent post. Thanks for taking the time to explain real issues to the critic.
          May all beings be well and happy!
          GMW
          PS Where can I find the Stephen Kent article?

        • Hello Chuck,
          You said, “The big question is, what would Hubbard do in this situation.”
          That is an interesting question but not one that I spend any time speculating on.
          Hubbard laid out a philosophy to follow, towards his concept of spiritual freedom and made it available for all those willing to look – to follow or not. He said broadly to all humanity, “Here is a path”. His concepts slammed the extant psych community right in the teeth.
          In my opinion, this is the reason he established the church – to keep his philosophy safe from governmental intrusions of licensing and authorization which would eventually shut him down and or altered his philosophical concepts. The church platform gave his applied spiritual philosophy sanctuary and was made “off limits” from governmental entities. I believe Hubbard had to do this in order to keep his philosophy pure.
          A critic might say Scientology is not a religion. And in the current norm of religions, there exists the requirement of “belief” and or “faith”. Hubbard’s philosophy requires neither, which makes it “odd” by normal religious standards. I consider Scientology an “applied spiritual philosophy” and if anyone wants to consider that “religion” that’s fine with me.
          Hubbard’s organization, by his own admission, was not perfect. But it worked nonetheless to keep his philosophy alive. Did Hubbard anticipate his church imploding? I don’t know, but I think he at least planned for it based on the corporate structure he left behind.
          In my opinion Hubbard held the philosophy of Scientology in high regard and the church was simply an organizational means of its application and delivery. The church has now failed, but witness, the philosophy lives on.
          “The big question is, what would Hubbard do in this situation.” I believe Hubbard gave it his all and did far more than any other individual under the same circumstances could have done. The bigger question now is, what are WE going to do in this situation? And you see the answer to that playing out every day.
          Thank you Chuck, I appreciate your post.
          And very well done to you Mike Rinder – you are a bad ass!!

          • Andy, I couldn’t agree more. In my opinion, “What are WE going to do in this situation” is the ultimate step to a Scientologist finally coming of age. Until one takes that step he has not “grown up” as a Scientologist. He’s still depending on someone else for direction; he is still other determined and to a great degree, irresponsible. Yet the whole of the Bridge is calculated to make one grow up as a being. So, as we move up the Bridge at what point do we finally stand up and walk?

            The answer is now.

            Viktor Frankl, author of Man’s Search for Meaning, said you can’t always prevent bad fortune from befalling you, but what you can control is your own response to those events. Bad fortune can make you smaller or you can grow as a result and become more powerful.

            Our response to the corruption of the CoS was to catalyze ourselves as a group to stand up on our own two feet and stride forward as real Scientologists for the first time.

            Take Mike as an example. Nobody sent him to speak for Independent Scientology. He just did it on his own volition. And why? Because he posed the question “What am I going to do in this situation?” and his response was the answer.

            Every one who, like you Andy, contributes their voice and observations, is doing the same thing. They are asking themselves, “What am I going to do in this situation?” and they are speaking up, speaking out and taking action. F*’ing bravo.

            The corruption of the Church was entirely unnecessary since this very outcome could have been accomplished years ago in a non-destructive way. The good thing is we have finally “arrived” as real Scientologists. And where do we stand? At the starting point.

            We are small group because we have only just begun to live yet already we DOMINATE the Scientology world because the Church is nothing but a suppressive group and SPs have no real power except the power to enturbulate. Our lines are powerful because they are theta lines and that’s why we are accelerating upward in the world. We are barely 3 years old and already we are recognized on the world stage — and listened to.

            Thank you Chuck, too, for your thoughtful comments.

      • “Critic” said: “I don’t believe you guys either that he is the only one in your ways”

        Inept, corrupt, criminal or psychopathic leaders can damage an organization far beyond what most people can imagine, especially if they are authoritarian. Corporate turnarounds after an inept CEO is fired can take years, if not decades at the largest organizations — look at what Hewlett-Packard is grappling with after they fired the guy last month who was the CEO for less than a year. He wasn’t evil; he was just the wrong guy. But it will still take three to five years under stellar management to get the company back on track, even though there are tens of thousands of rank and file employees who did their jobs well during Leo’s tenur.

        On the darker side, It will take Libya two generations to shake off the effects of Kadhafi’s rule. Other tyrants like Al-Assad in Syria and Kim Jong-Il in North Korea have spent thirty years wiping out their opposition, just like Miscavige has. That means that if they eventually meet a violent end, there’s nobody left who can unify the country and get it back on track. Same for the organization that Miscavige heads.

        So while it’s not literally true that David Miscavige is the only problem for the Church of Scientology, it is more accurate than it might initially seem. Even if he is deposed tomorrow, changing the “organizational DNA” of the Church of Scientology could take decades. But it may be too late — it may no longer be possible to save what’s left of the organization; the whole thing may have to collapse into a completely non-functioning heap of smoldering rubble that is then carted away. It’s just like a car that has been in too many accidents… eventually it’s better to melt it down and start over than to try to repair what’s left.

      • Critic, why don’t you show us how? Come, criticize yourself here for us.

      • Critic, DM is not the ONLY one in Scientology’s way, but he is the PRIMARY one by quantum orders of magnitude above anyone else in or out of the official organization. Your comment indicates to me that you are at best a cursory observer of what is going on. The main thrust of this blog is to bring the crimes of DM to light and see him removed from any position of authority in Scn. Once that occurs reforms will occur rapidly. Take it from someone who worked with DM for years.

      • Self-criticism is definitely worthwhile, but its much more productive and enjoyable to discuss ones faults with someone you trust not to invalidate your position in response. If self-criticism produces denial of ones responsibility, for example, it can be a dangerous path to follow, alone.

        This is something that we all, Scientologist or not, like to experience.

        An Auditor is someone, wearing the hat of helping one inspect at will.

        There may or may not be a lot to criticize in Scientology, but a Scientologist will mostly be looking at the statistics, because the real, actual, on-the-wall value of life that results from being a Scientologist becomes rapidly a statistical rocket-ride ..

        If you can understand these points, we can continue the criticism. Scientologists, communicate!

  2. Thank you Mr. Rinder for defending my religion. Please continue to be the International spokesperson for Scientology.

  3. Such a great spokespearson, Mike communicates so well, I found myself glued to the screen.

  4. Mike,

    Good to have you back on post!

    Honestly, the Little Pope that Couldn’t, would be hard-pressed to ever get a healthy, glowing, in-valence individual to communicate as well as you did in this interview.

    Contrast this with Tommy Davis or the unfortunate performance of the ex wives on CNN and you can see just how far from reality, sanity or long term success the cult has come.

    VWD!

  5. Brilliant Mike, absolutely brilliant.

    Scientology has had a tortured history in the wonderful country of Ireland. You did more for the subject of Scientology in Ireland in seventeen minutes than Radical Corporate Scientology has done in the last twenty seven years.

    • Tony DePhillips

      Plus 1!!

      • Superb interview Mike.
        Flawless TRs, certainty of facts, certainty of self, we are
        all so proud of you.
        Great that you clarified their continuous LIES and SPIN
        that you were removed and ex-communicated
        by saying
        “I WALKED OUT when I was on post as International Spokesman.”
        The host did not buy their “Dead Agent pack”.
        She felt comfortable with you.
        I am guessing you will be asked for a lot more interviews world wide.
        Congratulations.

        • The omitted Radical Corporate Scientology spokesperson spoke volumes. RCS should have had someone on the show. Problem is they have nobody that could hold a candle to Mike. There is no one better than Mike. It would have been like some novice boxer going up against Ali in his prime. RCS was reduced to sending along a cheesy dead agent pack instead. Game over.

          • Haydn,
            Yes, RCS had nobody to hold a candle to Mike. The other problem is that what he is saying is truth. A slight correction to your statement as they did not send a cheesy dead agent pack. They send a cheesy attempt at a smear pack. A true dead agent pack would be the documentation of truth to be compared to the false statements the speaker was making. As Mike was speaking truth there was no way to “dead agent” this.

            RCS has been reduced to calling drivel smear materials as PR. Guess they missed the PR series where they are to NEVER use lies in PR. It will just backfire – which is what it has done. Mike was there and communicating. The opposition is not really there and just dramatizing.

            No live person would be sent due to the fact that real live communication might lead to the PR spokesperson (if they had sent one) coming to the realization that Mike was on the side of truth, they were on the side of lies, and the only rational thing would be to walk and join the Independent side. Just as Mike did several years ago in London when he walked.

            And for Mike, thank you for that eloquent presentation of the facts and truth of the issues.

          • Motor City Redneck

            Well said Hayden and my sentiments exactly!
            Best part of the interview…

  6. Mike,

    Great Job!

  7. Truly excellent interview! Ticked all the boxes for me and then some.

    The debate is only open to students, but will be filmed. Hope we get to see that.

  8. Great job Mike. Looks like you took your hat back. I guess DM forgot that the universe abhors a vacuum so along you came and filled the vacant post. Hilarious.

  9. Great job Mr. Rinder!
    POB says in the written statement that you renounced your “faith” in Scientology. Faith?
    Personally, I have made my PEACE with LRH on the subject of Scientology as a religion and its relationship to Buddhism.

    1. Corporate Scientology(Miscavige) cannot claim any real connection to Theravada Buddhism. There is no way to link LRH to Gotama Buddha. If the corporate church wishes to claim a mystical connection, that falls under freedom of thought. However, they would be hard pressed to support a real connection since the Pali Canon is quite clear and explicit about the marks of a Buddha. Hymn of Asia is only a speculative document. The Pali Canon even states that a mark of a Buddha is blue/black hair – not red.
    Mr. Cruise and Mr. Miscavige would be advised not to claim that “Buddhism is like scientology” as stated on Nightline.
    2. Independent Scientology has a much broader viewpoint and seems to focus on the value of direct auditing which helps people. Since Independent Scientology is democratic, the subject of the Buddha would be a matter of personal belief. I think auditing has real value and these auditors have a right to the technology. In the end, does it really matter if LRH was connected
    to the Buddha? If the person experiences relief, it is beneficial. The Buddha
    taught us to rejoice in the happiness of all beings.

    At any rate, the Buddha taught us to respect all religion. As a matter of fact, there is a very famous story. After the Buddha converted Upali from his ancient belief, the Buddha instructed him to return to his teacher, Mahavira, and re-examine the teacher’s words. He was was still alive. When Scientologists call me to inquire about Theravada Buddhism – there have been more than a dozen in the last year – I tell them to re-study scientology. This is my ‘policy’ which follows the words of the Buddha.
    When a person truly desires to approach the Buddha, they are always welcome to “come and see” which is the most direct statement the Buddha ever made.

    Much loving-kindness,
    GMW

    • I think Professor Frank Flynn got it right in the seventies: Scientology is technological Buddhism.

      • Marty,
        I read his article a few years ago. You could link Scientology/Buddhism on the subject of past lives. However, Theravada Buddhism has the doctrine of ‘anatta’ or no soul. Thus the doctrine of the thetan would not be linked. As mentioned, the Buddha was silent on the issue of the spirit.
        It would be possible to form a technology of Buddhism utilizing the e-meter but it would be different from current Scientology auditing in many ways.
        For example, meditation follows rules of concentration which are very specific. Interesting challenge.

        May all beings be well and happy,
        GMW

        • I’m not talking about the miillions of interpretations that have arisen during the ages. I am talking about Siddhartha Guatama Buddhism.

        • George,
          As a fellow Buddhist, as well as a Scientologist, let me clear up for you a huge misunderstanding people have about Gotama’s doctrine of no-self. The “self” that one gets rid of in Buddhism is not the thetan as an awareness-of-awareness unit. It is all the valences, both self-created and otherwise accumulated, that Scientology addresses and removes. If Gotama were alive today as a human being, he would become a Scientologist in a heartbeat. The only reason he avoided the issue of personal survival after body death was to force his followers to confront and as-is their dependence on whatever valence they had chosen to wear. In this lifetime, my own enlightenment experience came after 3 weeks of continuous, obsessive concentration on the following koan: “How could existence possibly exist? How could existence possibly not exist? How could I possibly exist? How could I possibly not exist?” The explosive, life-changing experience that resulted from this meditation fully answered those questions, and DID include personal spiritual immortality. Nibanna means cessation, but what ceases is not one’s personal existence, but one’s creation of the false selves (valences) that comprise one’s case. This may not be stated in the Pali Canon you quote, but that canon was not written by Gotama, as India had no written language at that time. The Canon was passed on by word of mouth for several generations before being written down, which was long enough for it to be altered. Also, your Theraveda school, while entirely valid, is based only on Gotama early teachings. He went on to teach the Mahayana and the Vajrayana technologies. The Vajrayana became the basis of Tibetan Buddhism, which very definitely includes the concepts of personal spiritual immortality and reincarnation. The idea that Scientology is technological Buddhism is entirely correct.

          • Thanks, Kassapa. Very interesting!🙂

          • Kassapa, Very interesting. I guess we have a difference in view.
            Let me begin by saying that I follow the Pali teachings and the proof that I have is that these original teachings really work for me and other Theravadins. I do not agree that Gotama would have become a Scientologist because I have completed all of the Scientology OT levels and all of the meditative states and clearly the meditative states are superior. You might make a case that Scientology is technological Tibetan Buddhism or Mahayana. I have no disagreement on that issue because I do not know them. On the other hand, LRH clearly states that only Theravadin or original Buddhism is the correct path. He is very specific on this issue. The Pali Canon is very clear. In fact, the Buddha repeats himself so many times on the same technique that one notices. In reading the Pali Canon, one goes through the ‘levels’ of awareness. In my own personal experience, I have arrived at the gateway to Nibanna many times. This gateway is very much unlike theta/mest theory. Five hundred years after the death of the Buddha, the Pudgala-Vadin school emerged which has a ontological basis very much like your persoanl experience.
            In Thervada, the future Buddha is still in Tusita heaven waiting.
            My Pali name is Joti, which means joy. I took refuge in the Buddha in 2001. I hope we can be friends.
            Much loving-kindness,
            GMW

            • George,

              You said you left Theravada after practicing it for 9 years, and took up Scientology instead. So, you must have found something missing in Theravada. When you went back to it 15 years later as an OT 8, Scientology had removed a tremendous amount of your case. Then Theravada worked better for you. So, which is superior? Seems to me like they both helped you.

              I don’t know whether or not LRH was Gotama, but I think he had a lot of whole track experience with the collapse of enlightened states of awareness. I think his purpose for Scientology was to undercut the reasons for those collapses. To that end, he had to focus on what people were pulled back into, which is the playing of the game of being a specific self. That’s why Scientology can seem to be a lower level subject to some Buddhists.

              However, LRH’s early 50’s lectures contain all the philosophical fundamentals on which both Scientology and Buddhist technology are based. It all boils down to as-isness, alter-isness, is-ness, and not-isness. The only thing that’s different between the two technologies is the specific processes and the explanations of why those are the processes. What one attains through as-isness is always greater truth, regardless of the process used.

              “Pudgala” means “person.” Pudgalavada actually arose 240 years after Gotama’s death, not 500. Its founder, Vatsiputra, was a reformer who stated that Buddhists had lost the correct understanding of Gotama’s doctrine of no-self. He said that “self” only meant ego — the consideration of being a specific identity that can die, rather than the reality of being an immaterial awareness unit that creates and experiences considerations, and that exists beyond body death because it’s not something that is born, survives, and dies in the first place. Getting rid of all considerations of identity therefore liberates this awareness unit from any compulsion to be, do, or have anything, including rebirth for another lifetime. Since no one wrote down anything Gotama said until several generations after his death, there is no proof that Vatsiputra wasn’t right about what Gotama really meant.

              Thetans wear selves in layers like onion skins. Each truth of who we are turns out to be a lie at a deeper level. Nibanna is the result of peeling the onion all the way, so there are no more compulsions or aversions to being, doing, or having anything in particular.

              The basic Mahayana criticism of Theravada was that in its pursuit of no-self, it encouraged selfishness, in that it focused on individual liberation only, in a monastic setting withdrawn from the world, and did nothing to help householders. As a result, it often produced a sort of hot-house, up-the-pole type of spiritual awareness and ability that lacked viability in the real world.

              LRH was after viable spiritual liberation for everyone, without destroying all their games. As Gotama grew older, his viewpoint and teaching evolved in exactly that same direction. That’s why he’d be a Scientologist today.

              Kassapa

              • Kassapa,
                Thank you for the post. You have a deep knowledge.
                You are correct in that my experience in Scientology was positive. I have even stated many times that it was the entrance of Mr. Miscavige which caused me to walk. My early entrance into Theravada lacked the study of the Pali language. Studying Pali was essential and I did not do it until after OTVIII. Once I learned Pali, the progress was very quick.
                I had the same debate with a Buddhist monk who was personal friends with the Dalai Lama. He made the same points about the Theravada school being self centered. In fact, he had a viewpoint very similar to yours.
                He knew nothing of Scientology so he made no comments in that area.
                His point was that spiritual liberation for everyone was most important than
                the Theravada school. These points are classic. In Thervada, we choose to study the original words of the Buddha. So many feel that these words have been distorted. All that I can say to you is what the Buddha said which is “come and see”.

                “As Gotama grew older, his viewpoint and teaching evolved in exactly that same direction. That’s why he’d be a Scientologist today.”
                The Buddha warned us very strongly against this type of statement in the Pali Canon. If you recall, he said only that he taught the ending of stress.
                As I have posted many times, I can accept that others desire that viewpoint. In fact, I don’t even choose to refute it as the Buddha also warned us about speculative views. As stated, I personally see no connection between LRH and the Buddha after having achieved higher Theravadin meditative states.

                ” However, LRH’s early 50′s lectures contain all the philosophical fundamentals on which both Scientology and Buddhist technology are based..”
                If you listen to LRH materials during the 1950-60’s period in regard
                to spiritual principles, you will find a mixture of ideas. For example, he claimed that he had mystical experiences 10,000 years before recorded history and that he was in contact with a monk called Dharma. You may choose to accept this, but the great thing about the Thervadin school is that we have no need of these types of narratives. They do not forward progress as the Buddha stated.

                We still do not agree on many points. However, I can accept your viewpoint as your own.

                Much loving-kindness,
                GMW

                • Kassapa,
                  One further question which just arose.
                  For the benefit of this blog, do you place yourself as an independent Scientologist? If you are independent, that opens up many new doors.

                  May all beings be well and happy,
                  GMW

                  • George,
                    Yes, I am an Independent Scientologist. However, in the Factors LRH said, “Above these things there may be speculation only. Below these things is the playing of the game.” Through my pre-Scientology practice of Buddhism I had, and continue to have, “above these things” awareness and experiences. So, I’ve never dropped Buddhism as my religion. But my personal version of Buddhism has been stripped down to its most simple essence by my years in Scientology. So, I guess you could say I’m an Independent Buddhist, too.

                    When you say that Buddhism has given you gains superior to those you achieved in Scientology, I can subjectively understand that and grant beingness to it. But I also believe that without Scientology, Buddhist gains will ultimately be temporary. I do not see the two technologies as competitive. While I don’t mix practices, I cannot imagine true Scientology without Buddhism, or true Buddhism without Scientology. They are indispensible branches of the same tree to me.

                    • Kassapa,
                      Glad to hear you are an independent. It is a relief.
                      Personally, as a Theravadin, Buddhism and Scientology don’t mix in my practice. I find sufficient technology in the Pali Canon. I have heard the “Canon distortion” argument so many times. I blow it off.
                      However, the proof is in the practice, and I have had total path certainty for over 10 years. I enjoy listening to Scientology but, except for a value that I place on old-style auditing, I find very little use for it in my meditation.
                      Much loving kindness,
                      GMW

              • Kassapa: Once again your clear, precise wisdom and logic are wonderful.

                As a Vajrayana practitioner — I have to concur with every line.

                Historically, when the vast vast Pali Canon was translated and codified and indexed – there wasn’t a CLEAR delineation between the two publics that the Buddha addressed: The Monks and the Householders.

                People have gotten the teachings FOR the monks commingled with the very different teachings FOR the householders. Wealth being one of them.

                In any case, BOTH the Buddha and LRH changed up the spiritual game.
                Buddha was a game changer in that ALL people, not just the Brahmins were welcomed into the spiritual teachings. Women were equal — a shock in those days. We know that LRH thought highly of women as many of his key executives were women.

                As for reincarnation? Well — perhaps some are just parsing words. OF COURSE “something” lives FOREVER … I’ve heard many teachers say it’s the consciousness that is “reborn” —

                Vis a vis the 4 marks — all compounded things (phenomena) are impermanent.

                Well — theta — mind consciousness (6th) is NOT compounded and therefore is not impermanent

                What I love about buddhism and loved about scientology is that one could study and apply endlessly and never reach the bottom of this wonderful well of learning.

                Love,
                Windhorse

                • Windhorse,

                  Theta is not compounded. Exactly.

                  Kassapa

                  • Wonderful!!!

                    Duplication🙂

                    What IS compounded are all the valences, lifetime memories, engrams, secondaries — EVERYTHING that auditing addresses and works to eliminate … giving the PC “negative gain” —

                    OT VIII which was told to be the first OT Level for Positive Gain was so butchered that it appears to be tantamount to taking a nearly “pure” thetan (almost pure Theta but not quite yet) and then sending it into the nether lands, buried underneath 3,000 miles of earth, without a flashlight and saying …

                    Good luck bub — see if you can make your way back to the top of the mine.

                    Sadly many have not been able to.

                    Several OT VIIIs have lost their lives. Several have lost their minds. None to the best of my knowledge still IN can be considered “theta is not compounded” even remotely!!

                    WIndhorse

                    • windhorse,
                      Yes I agree about the problems with OTVIII. Actually, as I recall, the problems started earlier. What a mess.
                      So glad to hear about your wins in the Vajrayana tradition.
                      The Buddha was confronted even in his day on the issue about the renunciation of the monks and the self-centered nature of the Theravadin teaching. In the Theravadin tradition, we just meditate. Actually, it is rare that one of us teaches. Might seem like we bury our heads in the sand, and you would not be too far off if you described it that way.

                      Much loving-kindness,
                      GMW

                • windhorse

                  This is a very interesting and educational discussion. I have studied very little of Buddhism, somewhat more of Scientology.

                  Here is a bit of my take on the subject of “spiritual enlightenment.”

                  I see “spiritual enlightenment” followed by “spiritual advancement”, as a function of the particular being’s own “quest” or “path” or “interest” if you will. Beings will tend to gravitate toward viewpoints or technologies that appear to forward their progress.

                  You said; “What I love about buddhism and loved about scientology is that one could study and apply endlessly and never reach the bottom of this wonderful well of learning.”

                  What I have found to be true for me is that, because the capabilities of a being appear to be practically endless, a being is capable of “searching endlessly” or “expanding endlessly”. I liken it to “man’s” quest to find the “smallest particle” or the “end of space” or similar things.

                  It is not that “absolutes are unattainable in the physical universe”, it is that “absolutes are unattainable in Theta or in the “spiritual essence” if you will. I consider that a being is creating the universe that he experiences, and so long as “he” reaches further, “he” will find “further” to reach.

                  It is perhaps somewhat akin to looking for an “ideal partner”. So long as one continues to “look elsewhere” one will never CREATE their “perfect partnership” in present time.

                  I consider that one will only truly “arrive” at their spiritual goal when one no longer feels the need to search further.

                  “Seeking,” or “searching” is already the “second postulate”. By the very concept of choosing to “seek” one has already postulated that they have not “arrived’. The very concept of “seeking” or “searching” contains that earlier postulate in its creation. One will never cease to “seek” until one is willing to cease to create the postulate that they are “not already there”

                  But all these considerations appear to be limited to “physical universe” experience, or interaction.

                  Beyond that? …. Ahhhh the trap is already set….

                  With THAT very physical universe postulate, you bind yourself to the physical universe.

                  There is no BEYOND!

                  Tricky ain’t it, this game we play?

                  Eric S

                  • Windwalker,

                    Enlightenment is relative to one’s environment. There are levels of enlightenment depending on how much responsibility one chooses to assume as the definition of his game. Many so-called enlightenment techniques really have to do with matching one’s game to an environmental size he can handle well enough to achieve optimum randomity. This is the basis of the erroneous idea that the only reason one is unenlightened is that he’s still searching for enlightenment.

                    LRH talked about confronting what one has created. That would be top scale, and as-is the creation. At the bottom of the scale one not-ises his creation. That also makes it seem to disappear, albeit only for the not-iser. Then he can go “out the bottom” and pass through into top scale in a smaller game. This is called “key out after a blow.” Many seekers of enlightenment do this. It feels good, but it’s not enlightenment.

                    True enlightenment is as objective as it is subjective. It’s going out the top of the scale on each creation, and requires as-ising everything one has ever created and not already as-ised. That’s a big job. We’re all co-creating the entire mest universe, which contains 300 billion galaxies.

                    It’s certainly true that one can create a mystery in present time and then go looking for an answer to it. But in the past we’ve already done that a zillion times over, and the residue of that remains to be confronted and as-ised. That’s the path to true, full enlightenment.

                    • K,
                      Hello. Nice to have you here, there, and wherever you may consider. Very nice🙂

                    • Kassapa

                      Thank you for the response. Some interesting viewpoints.

                      As always, I find discussions such as these are, to a large extent, communications involved in “defining one’s terms”. Much of what is taken as disagreement or misunderstanding, is simply a failure to agree on key terms.

                      So here are some of my “definitions of terms” and viewpoints.

                      I do not see how “enlightenment” can be “both objective and subjective”. By my concept of “enlightenment”, we are looking at a wholly “subjective” experience. It is a “state of awareness”. I do not see where the being, when he becomes “enlightened” is changing his “objective” situation (as in Matter, Energy, Space, and Time.) What he appears to be changing is simply his viewpoint (how he views things, not where he views them from, or what he is actually looking at). or “awareness” of his physical and spiritual situation. )

                      To me, “enlightenment”, to one degree or another, would be experienced if he were to raise his “Q”, and, as you point out, his responsibility. ( Q, in my use…as stated by LRH in PDC 6….”Q can be defined in this way: it is the level from which we are now viewing, which is the common denominator to all experience we can now view. This is the level from which we’re viewing all experience and which acts as a common denominator to all this experience and “the Q” is the highest level from which we are now operating.”) Particular “Qs” (or levels of “Q”, if you will) are likely equated to “enlightened states” in their own right. ( as in “OT” levels, or equivalent spiritual states)

                      I can see your point of view if you are somewhat equating “enlightenment” with “exteriorization”. Exteriorization certainly has both “objective” and “subjective” possibilities. (in that one can exteriorize from (move out of) an idea or consideration but he can also observably move out of MEST locations.)

                      I do not consider “that the only reason one is unenlightened is that he’s still searching for enlightenment.” Not at all. To me, “enlightenment”, like “exteriorization”, are both experienced as gradients.

                      You defined “true Enlightenment”, in part, as; “True enlightenment … It’s going out the top of the scale on each creation, and requires as-ising everything one has ever created and not already as-ised. ”

                      I can see how one might see that as “true enlightenment” since “as-ising everything one has ever created” would certainly put one at “know” on the entirety of one’s universe, but at that point one would no longer be in any part of the physical universe at all, not a goal of mine at all, at this point, because I still desire to “play the game” called living.

                      From personal experience ,(keeping my definitions of “enlightenment” in mind)I consider that at one point I achieved “enlightenment” in that it was a profound shift in my viewpoint. I had taken the “red pill”, as it were. But, of course, that was not the end of further “enlightenment”. It was simply a “quantum leap” whereby I had exteriorized from the “reality” I had come to believe. A radically new “Q” for me.

                      Eric S

                    • martyrathbun09

                      LRH noted in the SHSBC that it is not “enlightenment” (singular) that well applied auditing and training achieves, it is enlightenments (plural). Every cognition, every ability regained is an enlightenment. The entire subject being predicated upon infinity logic, potential enlightenments are indeed unlimited.

                  • windhorse

                    Just to be sure that I am not misunderstood, when I commented on your statement of… “What I love about buddhism and loved about scientology is that one could study and apply endlessly and never reach the bottom of this wonderful well of learning.”… I failed to acknowledge that I find this statement true for me also. (for Scientology especially) Somewhere along the line I lost track of that most important communication. On hindsight I can see that the rest of what I said should have been a separate comment.

                    Eric S

                    • Windwalker,
                      Enlightenment is objective as well as subjective, because it a breakthrough in knowledge (certainty not data), which thereby increases one’s responsibility and control, and therefore his ability to operate causatively and successfully. One can attain false enlightenment by reducing one’s zone of responsibility and control until one has optimum randomity, and then postulating attitudes across the top of the tone scale. But that reduces, not increases, one’s ability to operate in the “real world.” This is one of the criticisms of Theravada. The only path to real enlightenment is to take more responsibility, confront what that restimulates, and as-is it.

                      Thus, as Marty pointed out that LRH said, the proper term is enlightenments (plural). Every process EP is an enlightenment, and if valid increases one’s ability to operate, not just feel good.

                      Your equating of enlightenment with exteriorization is correct. The 4th part of every process EP is extroversion from the subject of the process, which is exteriorization from it “out the top.” One can also exteriorize “out the bottom,” which is called disassociation and is accomplished by not-isness. This is the path to false enlightenment.

                      Regarding “true” enlightenment leaving one no longer part of the physical universe, I should have used the word “full” rather than “true.” Every EP achieved by taking more responsibility, resulting in restim which is then as-ised, is a true enlightenment. Full enlightenment would be the as-ising of everything one has ever created, including the physical universe. But a fully enlightened thetan could then recreate it and play in it at will. That would require lying to himself, which is how he got in trouble before, but this time he would be doing so at cause, with the ability to uncreate his creations at any time. The fully enlightened being doesn’t necessarily cease to play.

          • Hi guys,

            Similarities and differences between Buddhism and Scientology is an interesting subject. There does seem to be a relationship stemming back from Hubbard’s own writings in praise of the dharma. He did seem to speak somewhat affirmatively about it.

            Buddhism as a whole is vast, encompassing many variations of philosophy and meditative techniques. But generally speaking, all Buddhist traditions are based on the four seals: impermanence, suffering, no-self, and nirvana.

            Regarding no-self (or anatman) in particular, the view is that there is no solid, fixed entity known as “I”, which includes the idea of a soul as such. This of course doesn’t mean that we stop functioning as individuals or that our mental continuum doesn’t continue to flow from life to life – quite the contrary! The point of the teaching is to break down our self-imposed limitations on who we think we are. The realization of this is liberation.

            There is a specific intention in the teaching that the mindstream is continually reborn; it clarifies that all sentient beings, rather than only specific lifeforms with “souls”, reincarnate in various realms, and that the mind is subject to constant change. So I think it’s a useful teaching in that regard.

            Because the mind has the potential to change and undergo myriad possible experiences in the various realms of existence, it is also able to transform into wisdom, replete with enlightened attributes such as miracle powers and so on.

            It’s all about our potential.

            • vajracutter,
              Much, much enjoyed your post. It has great wisdom.
              I will only add one point about LRH. In an early lecture in 1961, he claimed that he was in contact with a monk called “Dharma” at a point 10,000 years before recorded history. It was a mystical experience which he claimed which gave him insight. The Pali Canon, of course, does not support this view so I reject it. However, it was his claim.
              May all beings be well and happy!
              It is about potential.
              GMW

            • Vajracutter: Terrific post!

              “It’s all about our potential”

              And as I recall LRH said (not exact quote) — “You have a great deal more potential than ANYONE has let you to believe” (emphasis mine)

              It’s all about our potential. Our original state of the mind, fresh, vast, luminous and beyond thought.

              Windhorse

            • As far as I can see, most focus in Buddhism seems to be on the first dynamic whereas Scientology philosophy includes all 8, reaching actively out towards betterment of society. I see Buddhism aiming for nirvana and cessation whereas Scientology aims for creation of one’s own universe (8-8008) and illusions in this one. Scientology focuses on cause and create whereas Buddhism focuses on as-isness and un-create.

              • Only true for those buddhist who are theravadan buddhists.

                Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhists are actively engaged in helping ALL sentient beings reach enlightenment.

                Check out the http://www.prisondharmanetwork.org or the peacemakerinstitute.org — to name just 2 groups actively engaged in the world.

                This is NOT to say that theravadan buddhists are not interested and involved with others — it’s just a different focus.

                WH

                • One more thing:

                  It was buddha who taught about as-is-ness, is-ness, alter-is-ness and not-is-ness first🙂

                  Which absolutely amazed me when I found those teachings within buddhism. I then KNEW that LRH was amazing beyond words because THOSE concepts to my knowledge had NOT yet been translated into English.

                  And scholar though he was – I’m pretty sure he didn’t speak Tibetan, Pali or sanscrit:)

                  WH

                • I concur. The Mahayana Bodhisattva Vow is to liberate all sentient beings. Well, there are 300 billion stars in this galaxy, and 300 billion galaxies in the mest universe as of the latest count. That’s a lot of sentient beings!

                  Also, given the structure of the bank and the OT case, how could anyone think he could permanently liberate himself without taking full responsibility for others?

                  Gotama left home originally not because of his own suffering, but because of the suffering of the people of the small Nepalese kingdom in was in line to inherit. He thus had the Mahayana viewpoint from the beginning. But the monks who flocked to him after his enlightenment were mostly interested in ending their own suffering. So that’s what he taught them to do. Later, when they were ready, he spoke more of outreach to help others. That didn’t cancel what he’d taught earlier. It just added to it.

              • The foundation for Buddhist practise is the “Noble 8 Fold Path”, which Buddha taught as the means to overcome suffering and reach enlightenment. This consists of engaging in the correct view, intention, speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness, and concentration.

                This actually covers a lot, as it encompasses ethical conduct in relation to oneself and others, mind training techniques such as calm abiding and special insight, and experiential knowledge of ultimate truth.

                This is valuable for all Buddhist practitioners, and I think it can create very positive results in the community as well as the individual.

                • vajracutter,
                  So many excellent posts, I researched your name.
                  Appears to be a Mahayana multi-chain meditation center Great to have you here.
                  I am not familiar with the Vajra Cutter sutra, but I found this verse
                  under the Diamond sutra which it said is related.

                  “All conditioned phenomena
                  Are like dreams, illusions, bubbles, or shadows;
                  Like drops of dew, or flashes of lightning;
                  Thusly should they be contemplated. ”

                  Same type of verse appears in the Great Commentaries.

                  May all beings be well and happy,
                  GMW

                  • George,

                    Yes, this is the correct sutra, and it is very important in Mahayana. It is part of a group of sutras known as “Perfection of Wisdom”, which present the view of ultimate truth. One of the more succinct of these texts – commonly chanted in the Zen tradition – is the “Heart Sutra”. It contains the famous line:

                    “Form is emptiness, emptiness is form. Form is not other than emptiness; emptiness is not other than form.”

              • I understand the Buddhist reaches out like any religion. But then the goal for the new recruits is inner enlightment and liberation, not ability like Cleared Theta Clear or any of the abilities of OT that were thaught in 1950-1954. I understand it as liberation from mental mass and MEST instead of cause over it.

                • Erwin:

                  “I understand it as liberation from mental mass and MEST instead of cause over it.”

                  Au contraire: The buddhism we basically discuss here is “relative truth” —
                  how to overcome suffering, how to live a good live by following the 8 fold path etc.

                  And THEN there is Ultimate Truth — which really is not something one can really discuss but merely point to.

                  IF you were to read some of the abilities of Jamgon Mipham the Great (died 1912) it reads like some of the stories from Superman. Or the Eight Bodhisattvas. Are they myths? Well, I doubt it but then I wasn’t there to “see” these abilities.

                  I think perhaps some of your knowledge of buddhism is limited and therefore you fit it into what you do know.

                  There is ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT in my mind that without Scientology — through OTVIII as I’ve done — the depth of my understanding of buddhism would be limited.

                  I have buddhist friends who have practiced for YEARS who do not believe in reincarnation — a corner stone of buddhist thought and yet they are practitioners.

                  Why don’t they? Because unlike you and me, they’ve never had an auditing session and gone past track.

                  Buddhism is experiential and without the experience of a past life — it becomes an idea.

                  JUST LIKE — without the experience of being able to see the universe in a tea cup — as Milarepa did — it’s just a story.

                  Love,
                  WH

                  • Do the practitioners that don’t believe in past lives get rid of their bank? The ultimate truth, would that be a cessation of the MEST universe? I haven’t read much about Mipham but it looks like he was a reincarnated monk that didn’t get a forgetter and was famous for his wisdom and healing powers, not unlike the performance of some auditors. I see quite a difference between healing and increasing ability as a main purpose.

                    • Erwin,
                      Whether in Buddhism or Scientology, one just runs the process, and what comes up is what comes up. The key is to fully observe and experience that with no resistance, evaluation, invalidation, interpretation, etc. Thereby one achieves as-isness of one’s previous creation.

                      Buddhist scriptures have many references to past lives. Gotama himself, during the 6 years he sat under the bo tree leading up to his enlightenment, reviewed everything from his past lives.

                    • Thanks, that clears up a lot!

                • Erwin,

                  Mahayana Buddhism doesn’t just “reach out like any religion.” It is a commitment to save all sentient beings in the entire universe, as a condition of achieving one’s own enlightenment.

                  Buddhist technology is not aimed only at negative gain. Just like Scientology, it focuses on negative gain in the beginning. But at higher levels some of its schools definitely seek to develop OT powers. They are pretty much ignored in Zen, and are regarded as a distraction when they occur. In Vajrayana (Tibetan Buddhism), the highest level lamas quite deliberately cultivate them, although they don’t talk about it publicly.

                  • Thanks, I didn’t know that some upper level Buddhists seek to develop OT powers. I can understand why they don’t talk about it; look what happened to LRH when he did. A commitment to salvage all beings before enlightenment looks a bit like; you have to go OT 15 before you understand. I experience enlightenment after every session.

                    • Erwin,
                      Yes, the EP of every process is an enlightenment, and they all add up and take one closer and closer to FULL enlightenment. The Bodhisattva vow means to postpone one’s FULL enlightenment until one has helped all other sentient beings to attain theirs. What it really means at a deeper level is that the trap was made by all of us together, and must be unmade by all of us together. It is a rejection of the possibility of anyone ever attaining the Theravada goal of individual liberation only. Thus helping others became part of the path.

                      Gotama introduced this concept after many years of training monks in the Theravada technology, which does work, but only up to a point. George said in one of his posts above that Theravadins just meditate, and that it’s like sticking one’s head in the sand. That’s exactly right. Some Theravadins wind up in a situation called “stuck in the cave,” which means that they become addicted to going up the pole to native state in their meditation, and have to avoid the real world and meditate all day to maintain it. Their high awareness is real, but trapped within an extremely small zone of operation.

                      The Mahayana Bodhisattva vow was intended by Gotama as a preventative to this happening, after he had accumulated years of experience teaching his monks to meditate. Just as LRH continued to research throughout his life, so did Gotama. The Pali Canon that George cites was compiled by human beings, who apparently didn’t like this later teaching. but it’s just as much “what Gotama originally said” as the teachings they did accept.

                    • Hi Kassapa,

                      Actually, according to the bodhisattva vows, it is a downfall to suggest that bodhisattvas must continue to stay in cyclic existence without seeking complete enlightenment. The reason for this is because the resultant buddhahood that is attained at the end of the bodhisattva path has special qualities such as being able to emanate limitless forms in order to benefit beings in response to their individual conditions.

                      It is also considered important to respect those on the path of individual liberation, since it also eventually leads to the same result.

                  • Kassapa, what would you suggest for reading to be introduced to Buddhist philosophy and practice. Within the branch your most familar with. I have read some books on Vajrayana but the material I had was out gradient for me. And if you could only take 4 books with you to an island, which would they be?

                    • John,
                      In my opinion the best branch of Buddhism is Scientology. Read or listen to The Phoenix Lectures. Then, if you want information about earlier branches, one of my favorite books is “The Compass of Zen” by the Korean Zen Master Seung Sahn. The first half of the book covers the history and philosophy of Buddhism in India, China, Korea, and Japan. I also really like “Don’t Know Mind – The Spirit of Korean Zen” by Richard Shrobe. For Tibetan Buddhism, two books by Dzogchen Ponlop are good: “Wild Awakening” and “Mind Beyond Death.” But read or listen to the Phoenix Lectures before your read any books on traditional Buddhism. And ignore the cultural trappings.

                • According to the written accounts, Buddha manifested many miraculous activities which demonstrated his mastery of the elements.

                  The mind and external phenomena are interconnected; abilities are never out of reach.

                  • vajracutter,
                    More wisdom, thank you.
                    I might add that the Buddha also did not encourage the use of the supra-normal powers even though many monks – as many as 500 at one time – developed them fully. He said this because Nibanna was more important as a goal.
                    Thanks vajracutter. Your brevity reminds me of Chanda who was a very famous monk who ofter interpreted the Buddha.
                    May all beings be well and happy!
                    GMW

                  • True, but I don’t understand why he deterred others from reaching those abilities.

                    • Erwin,
                      The Buddha used his supra-normal powers only when it was necessary in the circumstances. For example, he once confronted a serial killer who was very, very dangerous. He created the illusion in the mind of the serial killer that no matter how fast he ran, he could not catch the Buddha.
                      Thus the Buddha saved himself from death. When monks went over-board with the supra-human powers, he cautioned them because some used them in very trivial ways. He urged them to attain Nibanna as a solution because it is a higher state than surpra-normal powers. One of the very few times he encouraged supra-normal powers happened when he wanted to get the attention of some monks who were having a party when they should have been in meditation. He sent one of his disciples out who used supra-human powers to get them in line. The disciple shook the house where the party was going on and the monks ran outside in a freak-out.
                      May all beings be well and happy,
                      GMW

                  • Vajracutter,
                    The point of the Bodhisattva vow is to get everyone liberated, rather than merely enjoying one’s own liberation. So, a Bodhisattva would do whatever was necessary to get that done, whether that entailed remaining in cyclic existence or transcending it to become more powerful. The exact details at that level are most likely above our ability to predict from our level.

                    The real issue is whether or not one can achieve full liberation for oneself while turning one’s back on others who are still caught in the trap. I don’t think that’s possible.

                    Of course we should respect those who are on the path of individual liberation. But there is a fork in that path, where one must add helping others in terms of actual physical universe action, or begain to regress while under the delusion that one is attaining higher states. See my comments on “stuck in the cave” in one of my posts above.

                    • I don’t think it’s possible to go fully free and let others behind. As long as we’re all co-creating this universe we’re interconnected and as long as we have 8 dynamics, we consider other theta and theta products to be part of self and by that consideration they are. I think the way up is through increased abilities to a point of creating and uncreating own universe and eventually MEST and other universe. Only at full cause can we determine to play or not play or making a field to play in. Existence at cause is so much different and so much more enjoyable than exterior to MEST (which is already very liberating).

                    • Kassapa,

                      While I agree with you that bodhisattvas are called to do what is necessary in the circumstances, even if it means transgressing a vow in order to do it, it is misleading to assert that they have a choice between cyclic existence or “transcending it to become more powerful”.

                      The main support of a bodhisattva’s activities is their provisional development of merit and wisdom through the practise of the six perfections, namely: generosity, ethics, patience, joyous effort, concentration, and the Perfection of Wisdom itself. This advances an individual along the 10 bodhisattva levels, in which increasingly powerful abilities manifest so they can help a greater number of beings.

                      Eventually this culminates in the buddhahoods of stage 11 and so forth where merit and wisdom are naturally boundless.

                    • Vajracutter,
                      I hope this comment turns up below the one of yours I’m answering.

                      I agree with what you said. “Transcending cyclic existence to become more powerful” was a poor choice of words and not stricly correct. Let me state my meaning in another way.

                      A bodhisattva engages in meditation practices to achieve negative gain, as-ising false selves to become his true self, which is unconcerned with being any particular self at all, except as it may be fun on a temporary basis. At the same time he helps others to make similar gains, and in that way he achieves positive gain in the development of his abilities in the real world. Until he has helped both himself and everyone get very, very close to full liberation his work isn’t done.

                      The exact sequence and nature of what happens at the end of the path is something that no one at our level can predict with any certainty. Trying to do so is holding on to a false self. Insisting that Gotama or LRH had reached perfection is holding onto a false self. All we really know is that the more we look, the more truth we can see, and that ultimately the truth is good for everyone because it was made by beings (us) and beings are basically good. The exact nature of the final, ultimate truth is irrelevant to our work here and now. That’s why both Gotama and LRH refused to speculate on ultimate metaphysical issues.

                      As for the exact details of the end stages of the bodhisattva path and/or the Scientology bridge, let’s not make our method into a self by getting too detailed. I know what works to keep us making progress, and what we need to do to avoid various traps along the way. I don’t pretend to know exactly what’s at the end of the journey, other than the fact that the existence of existence, and the existnce of ourselves is eternal, and that games are fun as long as one doesn’t get trapped in them.

            • An identity is a method to disconnect from some part of life that is thereafter considered to be “other” or “different”. The same goes for memberships in groups, religions or shades of teachings. It is part of being in a game to have some difference being invented. After having been invented those differences can become real.
              Because an identity is a second postulate it compares somewhat to an engram to theta. Clinging to one identity and then mixing it up with one or more different identities gives additional complications.
              A position IN the physical universe is likewise a kind of invalidation. Changing that concept into “have the physical universe IN YOU” is less invalidative (and gives an interesting sensation of space). However, to have NO position permits to be ALL dynamics. (And even “soul” IS an identity.) And so one can be each single part of the dynamics – and have no need to have an identity that disconnects one from some “other” parts.
              Having no need for identity or group membership one can be each single unit simultaneously and have no position at the same time.
              That’s the best words I have for it at this time.

            • The similarities are fascinating. I lived in a Buddhist country for 7 years and loved Buddhism. What I enjoy about Scientology are the Differences, i.e., the researched application. I just love having help and guidance on something to do … simply equivalent to someone handing me a shovel or bulldozer when I need to dig myself out of a hole.

              Truth is Truth. It’s not really invented or created (it alter-ises then). However, an exercise, a technique, a practice, that is unique and created. And That is what I admire about Hubbard. Of course, when out of the itch or rut, there is the shining Truth, a personal AND universal thing… which Buddha had achieved in many realms.

              I love sitting under trees, but I also am in the age of efficiency…give me the tool that will get me there A to B, pronto presto, NOW🙂 What I love about the difference in Scientology by comparison.

              I no less love reading wisdom and philosophy and truth and beauty or artists and philosophers and other roads.

              Loved all the wisdom and knowledge imparted in this blog by you all. Thanks.

              • There is good reason for this in my opinion. Hubbard’s greatest contribution was the discovery of the importance of the second terminal and the communication methodology which allows for the first being (terminal) to discharge.

                • Marty,
                  Absolutely. To a certain degree a second terminal was supplied by the Buddhist monk’s master, especially in Rinzai Zen, which makes heavy use of koans (riddles or problems to solve). The master would assign a koan to a monk, who would go to try to solve it, and then report back periodically to the master, who would in some way keep “repeating the auditing question” until the monk got an EP. Then the master would assign the next koan, and the cycle would start all over again. The personal relationship between the master and the monk were crucial to the koans working. This was called the “special transmission outside the scriptures” that defined Zen. Tibetan Buddhism also employs a close relationship between master and student monk. LRH’s auditing comm cycle and use of the emeter, even without his processes, would have accelerated ancient Buddhist case gains tremendously.

          • Holy cow, Kassapa, where the hell have you been?

            • +1 🙂

            • Windhorse/Kassapa/George/Vajracutter-

              Thank you for the awesome thread.

              Alan Watts, the prolific British speaker and writer on Eastern philosophy, and his classic The Way of Zen provides a wonderful example of the application of Buddhism in a social context. When Zen came to Japan it was during the Kamakura Era, when the militaristic Yoritomo and his samurai followers had come into power. It soon became rather a strange phenomena when the non violent, peaceful philosophy of Zen was adopted immediately by the warrior class. This, in itself, was a rather odd occurence to see these two ways of being interact to form a new way of life called, bushido- the Tao of the warrior.

              Watts explains, “The association of the peace loving doctrine of the Buddha with the military arts has always been a puzzle to Buddhists of other schools. But one must face the fact, in its essence, the Buddhist experience is a liberation from convention of every kind, including moral conventions.”

              Scientology, IMO, is about liberation from convention. And that included Scientology itself.

              Scientology and Buddhism exist in the framework of time and space. They are just as an existential fact– alter-isms.

              In “pure theta” there is no Scientology, there is no Buddhism.

              There is no mass, no wavelegth, no motion, no nothing.

              It just IS. This is the “emptiness” of the Buddha. This is the “no soul” of the Buddha. This is the “thetan” of LRH.

              The difference is language in that as an ontological phenomena, the Buddhist uses a negative contextual framework, where Hubbard uses a positive.

              Yes George– “May all beings be happy and free”

              Love this blog.

              • Brian,
                Great post. You are welcome.
                A few weeks ago I saw some material on the attitude of Buddhists in regard to soldiers. I should have saved the reference but the author quoted a sutta in which the Buddha told a military soldier that it was his duty to protect his country. A soldier should be skilled in his trade which is war.
                Even though monks and householders take the precept to not kill living beings, the Buddha saw the need for protection from enemies.

                I wish that somehow some form of “no wavelength” would penetrate into Mr. David Misavige’s head which has a dispersed location. If he could just for once see beyond his nose, the world would be a better place and:

                All living beings would be happier!
                GMW

              • As always you are right on the money, Brian

                Emptiness = unlimited potential and space

                Love this blog as well. Spent the evening watching a Pema Chodron live streaming retreat from Omega Institute. Then enjoyed the company of 4 friends as we discussed the program.

                And once they left — my first thing to come join THIS party — this blog.

                “And now as long as space endures
                And as long as there are beings to be found
                Until then may I too abide to dispel the misery
                of the world” Shantideva – 8th century buddhist

                Windhorse

          • Kassapa, you stated;
            “The “self” that one gets rid of in Buddhism is not the thetan as an awareness-of-awareness unit. It is all the valences, both self-created and otherwise accumulated, that Scientology addresses and removes. ”
            I think the misunderstanding of Bhuddhism by myself, and many others, was that your ultimate goal was to cease to exist as yourself, not just your false selfs. I remember this being taught to me in catholic High School, and it definitely caused me to give a pass to the subject as a “path” for myself.
            I now wonder if the misduplication or misunderstanding of what Bhuddism strives for or helps the individual to achieve was a translation error or an intentional misrepresentation, a sort of black pr by the dominant western religion(those devious jesuits). In any event, this is the first time that has been cleared up for me and I appreciate the narrative you gave. It makes perfect sense now.

            • John,
              The misunderstanding of Gotama’s doctrine of no-self existed broadly in his own day. When Vatsiputra attempted to correct it 240 years after Gotama’s death, the vast majority of Buddhists rejected him.

              • Kassapa, you responded to my request for reading recommondations on Buddhism with the following;
                “In my opinion the best branch of Buddhism is Scientology. Read or listen to The Phoenix Lectures. ”
                I have to think LRH would would be smiling over that. That was a favorite book of mine. Its been almost 40 years since I read it. I think I will give it a re-read with an older set of eyes. Thanks for the other book suggestions as well.

          • LRH : “in the final analysis what is this thing called thetan? It is simply you before you mocked yourself up and that is the handiest definition I know of. (5608C——)”
            “the handiest definition”, indeeed🙂

      • I think LRH got it completely right in the first three chapters of the book The Phoenix Lectures. I hadn’t duplicated that a religion is a philosophy.

        By the way, Marty, on about the fifteenth page of Hymn of Asia it is written, and I quote as fair use:
        “If a ruler rules
        Well assist him
        If he rules with violence
        Do not assist him
        And let that be
        his penalty”.

        I thought that is very good advice for Sea Org staff.

    • George,

      When I was 17, about 1972 and a student at a private Jesuit High school in Cincinnati, Ohio, I took an elective course, Comparative Religious Studies. This half year course reviewed the bulk of mankind’s known major religions.

      At the end, I knew that I was a Buddhist, with no animosity towards having been inculcated and raised as a Roman Catholic. In fact to this day I will sometimes refer myself as being grateful for having been raised as such.

      Then about 1975, while a Sophomore in college, I read DMSMH this lifetime and then immediately thereafter read Fundamentals of Thought. Three times.

      My point is that at that time I knew I had found what I was seeking.

      Since that point I’ve always considered Scientology to be ‘High Tech’ Buddhism.

      And it’s always served me well.

      LRH and Siddhartha Gautama Buddha are to me one in the same, only separated by time.

      And I am forever grateful for this enlightening journey.

      So there you go. Thought I’d throw in a couple of cents.

      As a final thought, …………… Oh hell you get the point.

      I love your posts. Thank you.

      • Tom,
        Thanks. What a great post. I went to a Jesuit College. In 1964, I took a course in comparative religion. You guessed it; I turned to the Buddha.
        I practiced until 1973 as a Buddhist having been in Korea, Thailand, Singapore, Taiwan, and Malaysia searching and meeting monks.
        In 1973, I read Dianetics. I achieved OTVIII in 1988. After meeting Mr. Miscavige, I saw no future in Scientology OT level aspiration.
        After an adjustment period, I started back in Theravada Buddhism.
        It has been great. As posted on this blog, I went through a period of distrust of the teachings of LRH as I went higher and higher into the meditative states. Recently, within the last month or so, I made my peace with LRH when I removed what in Pali are called ‘asavas’ or defilements..
        At that moment, I simply rose above the entire issue.
        At present, I am very happy discussing any viewpoint. In addition, I duplicate what LRH taught and what the Buddha taught.
        There is NO WAY I would go back to Mr. Miscavige and let him run his case on me.
        As also stated on the blog , if you equate LRH with Gotama, that is a viewpoint I can accept. My personal devotion to the Buddha is too strong to allow that. I consider myself at PEACE with LRH. As the Buddha taught, the exact moment of body death is unknown to us. Thus we need to be heedful.
        Much loving-kindness,
        GMW

        • George,

          The concept of defilement I have come to understand through Hubbard’s concepts and definitions of sociopaths (suppressives) has been of great benefit to me and assorted associates.

          We are today witnessing the awakening of our fellow beings, and yes, ourselves, concerning those who are ‘stuck’ on the time line.

          Whence stuck, it is apparent that ‘they’ are into some destructive mode that equates to ” If everyone is weak, then I am strong”………..”If everyone is dead, then I’m alive”. It has now run its ruinous course.

          They, like Miscavige, are into some type of think that they are superior and thus withhold extant knowledge to maintain their positions at the cost of everyone else.

          I sense that we are at a point where those who want to treat their fellows as dogs to be beaten and broken are going to find themselves at the other end of the stick.

          I don’t wish it on them, however, so be it.

          Karma’s a potential bitch-fest.

    • You don’t understand L. Ron Hubbard if you think that he didn’t respect all other religions. Maybe you don’t know Scientology as much as you think you do. Buddha was a man, so was LRH. He never said so but I personally believe that he was Buddha in a past live and DM was nothing but a Catholic altar boy.

      Mara

      • Mara,
        Very interesting viewpoint about David Miscavige as an altar boy.
        That is very funny. Mara is also a great name.
        Much loving-kindness,
        GMW

      • I never realized catholic alter boys were held in such low esteem. Perhaps I should remove it from my resume. Or maybee you should leave other religions and their offices alone.

    • Interesting exchange on Buddhism, thanks to all. I would like to learn more about the teachings of the Buddha. Regarding this concept of no-self, I certainly got a glimmer of that concept of the 8th dynamic when studying things like the Factors and the Axioms. My glimmer was of the possibility (reality?) that there are no individuals, that we, as thetans, are multiple manifestations of the One, the All. We are fingers that have forgotten we are attached to the hand. Per the Factors and Axioms, that was originally done causitively, to have a Game.

      disinfected

      • Interesting, but a question.
        What would you do without that game? If you weren’t playing that game – then what?
        Cause is cause. Potential is delicious but its gradient has the aspect of being somewhat monitored by uninspected games and other things. Hubbard in many ways simply gave us the tools to be you – how you use them determines much about how much potential you are willing to grant yourself. Admin scales, ethics, data series evaluations are tools. Auditing releases the shackles – then what? Only you can answer that, but one thing I do know – being uptone is a blast.

      • disinfected,
        Many Buddhist traditions have been covered on this blog.
        Speaking for the Theravadin tradition, you might try:

        “What the Buddha Taught” by Rahula Walpola.

        The other traditions can supply their own as there are difference.

        GMW

      • Hi Disinfected,

        Your experience is definitely interesting.

        When we have a glimpse of our mind’s real nature, there is still a continuation of one’s own experience – it is just not necessarily limited by our conditioning factors (karma and its traces). Reality is apprehended in a different way, and everything can be appreciated for what it is.

        In that sense, speaking in terms of either “one” or “many” doesn’t compare to the actual experience, which is beyond such formulations and is the reason why concepts only have limited use.

        According to Buddhism, our root problem is ignorance, which starts a chain of causes (12 links of interdependence) that produces suffering. This isn’t really considered a good thing other than the fact that understanding it can help us to attain realisation.

        • vajracutter,
          Very refresing!

          NOTE FOR MARTY: I want to express my thanks to you and to this blog for such a great discussion on Buddhism. It has been such a great experience. You allowed all of this into your ‘home’ You truly are an exceptional being. I learned so much about the traditions that I rarely ever study. It has given me a broader view because I have been in Theravada
          with a steam roller purpose for so long. Great to peek into the other traditions for a change.

          Much loving-kindness,
          GMW

          • Yes, I think there are a lot of important discussions that are able to take place here. Thanks Marty.

            George, the teachings found within the Theravada tradition are instrumental as a foundation stone for all Buddhists.

            Personally, I am a non-sectarian practitioner, although I do recognise and respect the differences in traditions. Nonetheless, I am constantly surprised by the profundity of the sutras in all their variety.

            I also like to study other religions, which is why I have an interest in this blog.

            I think it is possible to use a variety of methods from elsewhere if they are helpful, in the same way that some non-Buddhists can benefit from Buddhist meditation.

            Thank you for the discussion.

      • Disinfected,

        LRH was very clear that as individual thetans we are not part of some Big Thetan, which idea he labels as an implant. We are not “All One.” That does leave a mystery on the 8th dynamic, which he left up to us to solve for ourselves. He also said we wouldn’t find the answer until we’d fully handled the first 7 dynamics.

        The Buddhist doctrine of no-self does not contradict LRH on this point. Many Buddhists, however, misunderstand no-self and do believe in the Big Thetan concept in one way or another.

        Kassapa

        • Ah, Kassapa,

          Interesting handle. Interesting discussion. Ideas forming and arranged. Logic applied. The intellect absorbed in an endless dance of pattern and reflection.

          But who is the dancer? Who scores his music? The intellect’s feet leaving the floor momentarily, then returning, stepping to rhythms already formed.

          To jeter, to pirouette, without effort takes practice. A practice that exceeds lesson. Where the dance is but an expression of something more.

          As with logic. As with intellect.

          What have you seen… beyond the dance? That is my curiosity.

          A student’s feet, these are not.

    • Wow… Hi Marty, et all… Been a long time… Just wanted to say what a priceless moment in blogging this discussion is… If anyone has skipped over this conversation I highly recommend you have a look… “greater truth”… Two words only exceeded by “the truth”… P.s. Mike you rock… P.p.s Marty we need a catch up… and love to Mosey!

    • Scientology. Buddhism. Both ideologies, collections of insights and ideas formulated to enhance an individual’s chances of gaining further insights and understanding. Both, ostensibly, a search for the truth.

      A path.

      A means.

      A methodology. Of techniques.

      But each supposedly leading to the TRUTH.

      The question becomes, “does the end truth differ depending on the method used to reach this truth?” Does one’s ultimate understanding of self and all aspects of existence alter depending on the means one uses to attain this “enlightenment?”

      Any ideology becomes part of the quality of the viewpoint used in employing that ideology. The ideas color the perceptions received by that viewpoint, partially because perception is based in “meaning applied.” And one’s perceptions formulated according to the supply of meanings the viewpoint or individual applies to the sensory input.

      Sensory input exists even in “native state.” “Meanings” exist even in native state. A thetan is capable of consideration, postulate and opinion. And the status of every creation will depend on those considerations, postulates and opinions. The significance applied to the mass.

      “But, an ideology has no mass,” one might argue. Not true. An understanding, such as had by Buddha will begin to generate mass almost immediately once he conveys that understanding to others. The Buddha Understanding will begin to separate as others create it. And that separation will create just enough difference in energy potential to create resistance as the two versions of understanding play against one another.

      You can have Prime Idea which separates into Prime idea A and B. B is just slightly different from B. Each holds a position in space and time. Each comes into contact with the other. And each has a slightly different “wavelength” or quality. And if you place these two ideas, A and B, near one another, you will get a difference in potential which creates a flow.

      Two ideas which are identical will not create a flow. Two ideas which are diametrically opposed will create the greatest flow, depending on the volume of energy available to flow.

      The condition which creates the flow is the viewpoints’ opinion and consideration that “this is different.” The difference creates the flow.

      You can try this out. Get an idea and then imagine two different viewpoints holding that idea. If they both exactly duplicate that idea, no flow will occur. But, as you alter that idea in each viewpoint, the flow will increase.

      Along with an increase of flow, you get an increase of resistance, an increase of solidity and eventually an increase in opposition. The ideas become more and more solid.

      Then throw “right/wrong”, dominate, survive, succumb into the mix and….
      Zoweeee! What a game!

      Not to turn this comment into a five hundred page dissertation, just to point out that the truth that precedes the creation of ideas, of considerations, postulates and opinions, of universes and ideologies, etc, etc, etc, is what ultimately matters far more than the subjects created as understandings.

      • Once Upon a Time,
        Look at your “self” looking, and you’ll as-is what’s preventing you from seeing things as they are.

        • Kassapa,

          Curious response. I reread what I wrote and, methinks, you have missed the point. My having a self looking which prevents me from seeing things as they are isn’t really part of the message.

          One could offer the advice you gave to anyone making any discussion, because, truth is, if the knower beyond the viewpoint (self, in some cases) were to “see things as they are,” all that would remain would be pure understanding.

          If the writer tells of fixing a car, or painting a picture or making love, then a guru of “high ideas” could advise, “Look at your ‘self’ looking, and you’ll as-is what’s preventing you from seeing things as they are.”

          Maybe, the person enjoys seeing what he’s looking at: the car, the painting, the lover. Maybe, the guru has an image he’s infatuated with and believes all others should witness it: some image of a spiritual state that really is pure fabrication at a really high vibration. Pleasure that exists so close to pure theta that it’s easy to mistake as pure theta.

          We used to use that trick long ago in helping others design universes for themselves. Less creative souls.

          However, one can both look at self looking, see things as they are and maintain a multitude of “selfs” that are bat-assed crazy–and continue to be perfectly happy and enlightened on a multitude of fronts/levels while having a miserable time that adds interest on others. One can simultaneously occupy the entire tone scale, as it were.

          The contradictions on descending levels are not necessarily contradictions at the level which created them. Not just from the manifestations in GPMs or NOTs, but simply as rational practice in living.

          (Odds are, looking at your “vibrations” and message, we have run across one another a little over 2500 years ago.)

          Besides, “looking” always requires a viewpoint, which gets one into a hall of mirrors situation–always moving back to the higher/preceding viewpoint. Eventually, looking becomes ineffective and useless. Knowing would be the preferable means of achieving what you suggest.

          But, hey, I’m just an idiot, what do I know? Guess I’m trapped. Maybe I can find someone who observes and knows for me so I can use those observations and knowledge to go free. Yeah, that’s the ticket. Knowing from someone else’s know-point.

          • Once upon a time,
            Subject and object are a package. The meaning one assigns to raw sensory input is based on the self one is wearing. “Self” is a substitute for knowing. Don’t make a self out of your method. By that I mean strip from your method any expectation of what truth it will help you find.

            All workable methods boil down to “Look here, and tell me what you see.” The only difference is where “here” is. If the method demands that you see certain things and not others, then it’s an invalid method. Buddhism and Scientology can each be either valid or invalid, depending on this factor in how they are used.

            As you progress in one of them, the changes in how you perceive the world will not be the same as they would be if you were using the other. But both approach the same ultimate truth of life, the universe, and you.

            • Kassapa,

              I have the feeling you’re used to being the smartest cookie in the oven, lifetime after lifetime. You’ve got quite an array of intelligence going.

              Sometimes, I have to remind myself that God’s measure of the smartest human against the dumbest compares to man’s measure of the smartest butterfly against the dumbest. We all have so much to learn.

              I would agree that all workable methods tend to boil down to “Look here, and tell me what you see.” Such is the gift and frailty of methods. The method can only bring one to the point where methods no longer apply.

              Bear with me a moment as I seem to digress. Consciousness is constantly evolving. Theta intelligence, theta understanding, theta knowing is constantly evolving. Way, way, way, way back–many universes in the past–theta consciousness, though complete in and of itself, was pretty crude. The efforts to create viewpoints and dimension points and energy and solidity and forms was rudimentary.

              Certain beings/individuals always managed to emerge with a greater understanding, greater insight of conditions and possibilities; and passed this knowledge on to other beings. Knowledge, thus evolved.

              Unfortunately, any creation contains the potential of its own opposition. So, “good” knowledge could become “bad” knowledge. What could help others could also be used to harm.

              The assumption in Scientology and Buddhism seems to be that because a being has arrived at this point, he is privy to all the great insights that have preceded this point. The assumption is that “we are all simultaneously creating all that we perceive.” And that we are all of equal intelligence, equal understanding, equal (fill in the attribute.) All an individual need do is “look” so he can relearn what he already knows.

              We are awakening, or we are unburdening our case, or we are emerging from darkness. Some such movement from a state of unknowing to knowing, from unawareness to awareness. And the end product is a being who knows everything, because by his nature, he is Creator.

              I would venture that most of us are being sucked along this time continuum with merely the suggestion of “co-creation.” Most of what went into the creation of this universe must be learned fresh rather than merely uncovered as unknowing becomes knowing. You really can’t know what you don’t know in the first place. “Know” can become “unknow,” but the exact “know” doesn’t magically evolve into more sophisticate knowing merely be returning up the tone scale to native state. That original “know” will remain with its limitations until greater knowing is attained.

              Understanding and knowing are evolving.

              If you unburdened/woke up/enlightened most, you would not arrive at a native state of sufficient understanding about the why’s and wherefores of this universe. The end product of the method would usually be a brighter, happier, saner, more rational thetan who was now capable of learning some of the more sophisticated bits of knowledge and understanding that have evolved in his “absence.” He now has this potential to learn more. He hasn’t automatically learned it. He has to put forth the effort to learn.

              Much has to be learned AFTER one arrives at what might inadequately be called “one’s true self.” That state of cleared theta clear. Much learning and education is still ahead, even at that point. It’s just that you now have a being who has the theta perception which will allow him to learn.

              Which brings me back to “self.” I don’t know that meanings assigned to sensory input are necessarily limited to a particular self one is wearing. One can have abundant meanings and qualities which one has not invested in a particular self. A self can be created with very limited resources just…. because. Pick a reason.

              And I don’t know that wearing a self necessarily brings about a condition of substitute knowing in every case. A thetan can create an abundance of “selfs” which all would be substitute knowings, where “know” has become “know about” and yet still maintain the state of knowing. A thetan can both know and not know and know about simultaneously.

              The only way to truly/completely understand something is to be it. Complete ARC. Perfect affinity. Perfect duplication/experience of the reality. But, that can be hazardous to a thetan’s health: taking on horrible and degraded conditions. Lucky us, a thetan can be and not be at the same time. A thetan can be a planet and not be a planet at the same time. The way to have your cake and eat it two merely requires having two cakes. Two simultaneous (and perhaps contradictory) states of existence.

              You have to forgive my annoyance and frustration (actually, that would be enforced, so actually you can chose if you wish) over “methods” and quoting sources with great reverence and solemnity. Both Scientology and Buddhism seem to me to be merely paths to something greater. Paths. To revere the path loses sight of that which is greater.

              Of course, the path is useful for those who follow and should be maintained and respected. The emphasis on the path rather than what lies beyond rankles me. (must be rankled because of my affinity for anger. Oh my God! Low tonedness!)

              As much as I love and respect LRH, the Buddha (yeah, I know, what’s in a name?) and their works; there are beings out there who would pat either on the head and greatly admire the quality of “intermediate level” work and place these volumes amongst a vast library of theta knowledge. The library of theta knowledge is literally never ending.

              Knowledge is being acquired every second. New understandings. New knowledge.

              Of course, this sounds crazy. But what’s a poor genetically engineered boy to do? After all, FBI agents are hiding in the Martians hiding in the ficus leaves pretending to be grapes. Ah, the concatenation of madness. When will it end?

              • Once Upon a Time,
                One perceives only what he has created. But much of what we’ve created was after agreeing to copy the creations of others without understanding those creations. Negative gain processes, whether Buddhist or Scientological, help us as-is our own creation, including our agreement to copy what others have created, but don’t necessarily let us in on how and why those others created what they did in the first place. That’s where training comes in. LRH says 50% of gain is from training. Without it, you get a “cleared cannibal.”

                Assigned meaning doesn’t have to be from a false self. One can also have false data, or simply have an opinion for no reason other than its fun. But it’s the false selves that lock in habitual patterns of assigned meaning. Hence the doctrine of no-self and the Buddhist and Scientology processes to rid oneself of false selves.

                The ultimate goal of practice is liberation, not all-knowing. Liberation is not the end of living. It’s really a new beginning. It makes better living possible. But there is still knowledge to be acquired about that better living. Liberation just gets us back to the real game.

                • Kassapa,
                  “One perceives only what he has created.” Now there is a statement fraught with potential for understanding. First, to define who or what “one” is. Then to study the nature of perception as experienced at the level of creation. Which brings us to creation itself–that moment of manufacture, when awareness actually moves from a condition of essentially no space, time or particle to placing a viewpoint and dimension points.

                  From whence comes the knowledge to do this? What understandings must exist in that awareness to create what it does? We glibly speak of creating viewpoints and points to view, of creating forms, energy, matter, space and time.

                  In Christianity, there exists the naive belief that God just decided to create the heavens and the Earth out of nothingness. He manufactured all that exists in an instant, a perfect moment when all things are formed and destinies are set in motion. Then, to make things interesting He created beings with free will. And nothing other than God existed before this moment.

                  But, from whence did God derive the insight and understandings to create the forms he did? Which question immediately transfers to the discussion of a thetan and his creation.

                  From whence did he get his knowledge? From whence came his understanding of the forms and qualities and quantities which would make up his creations.

                  Creation follows intent. Intent must contain what is intended. To create a “crystalline purple globe” would require some foreknowledge of “crystal,” “purple” and “globe.” Intent is not simply random. Intent is very exact.

                  And creation is very exact.

                  Even postulates about time are very exact–so why did we settle on this rate of progress and rate of change that we credit as “time?” What knowledge existed which gave us this particular “time?”

                  It is easy to say, “well, we’re agreeing to the creations of others,” but how is that possible? Obviously, it is possible because the evidence is right before our thetan noses. But how does one static with no position in space and time contact another? That’s a very curious thing when viewed from human mentality.

                  I know how it happens. I perceive how it happens. It’s quite a piece of magic. Filled with pleasure. At times.

                  Then this matter of “agreement.” How does one thetan “agree” with another? What awareness occurs to bring about co-vibrations with another being? And how is the knowledge/reality of one being’s creations transferred to another?

                  And just how does agreeing with one portion of another’s creations bring about the liability of being subject to all the other creation attached to that initial point of contact? This was the trick that enabled implanters to set up theta traps. Very interesting technology concerning theta physics.

                  And there is a vast understanding of theta physics and theta mathematics and theta sociology, theta “biology,” etc, etc. So much knowledge available.

                  When someone proffers theory, I instantly want to apply it, to test it, to extrapolate from it. Where is the reality of this idea? Is it merely an idea, a piece of imagination, or has it gained the status of “reality” that affects a number of beings? Where does that condition exist? And what are the qualities and characteristics that comprise that condition?

                  Long, long ago I was “liberated” but liberated to what? Theta liberated is theta filled with knowledge. With knowledge comes responsibility in ways not understood by man. Liberation merely sends us back into the fray to bring order to other theta in harm’s way. To rescue theta trapped and enturbulated.

                  Liberation for an individual is merely an introduction to all the lost souls who need saving. Individuals have tried to become free as a first dynamic. Or in small to large third dynamics. It never succeeds for long.

                  The connections and the awareness persist. The overt of doing nothing when responsibility demands otherwise will always contradict our claims to liberation.

                  It’s a sunny day, nice and warm. I think I’ll go for a walk with my wife.

                  • Once Upon a Time,
                    You’re asking about the mystery of the 8th dynamic. Neither Gotama nor LRH explained it. LRH said that each person had to discover the truth of the 8th dynamic for himself, and that it would take full knowledge of the first 7 dynamics to make any headway on the 8th. The fact that no on can answer your 8th dynamic questions doesn’t invalidate workable methods eventually leading to those answers. I agree with what you say about liberation. One cannot stop with the first dynamic.

        • Kassapa,

          Didn’t mean to imply a discussion of the 8th dynamic. I was actually talking about stuff just above “old” OT7. Just practical theta questions that both the Buddha and LRH entertained.

          Like, coming in the back door and saying, “honey, I just found a hole in the yard. Wonder what creature made it.” Then finding a ground hog running around. You have a condition and you know it’s a created condition, so you look for what brought this about and how.

          Asking about who created thetans would get you back to God perhaps, then you’d have to ask who created God, which gets ridiculous. At some point one just is aware of creative awareness that precedes creation. Asking who created the creative awareness is stultifying. Asking the nature of that creative awareness can bring enlightenment.

          As enlightenment proceeds, one becomes more and more aware of the nature of awareness and how awareness has both evolved from first awareness to present awareness to potential awareness. Fun stuff. Theta physics. Theta sociology. Theta history.

          To save a couple of key strokes, you can abbreviate the handle to OUT if you wish.

    • Dadgumit! Mea culpa. I left out the point that originally prompted my previous comment. What an idiot!

      If you look at Buddhism and Scientology as a collection of understandings, ARC comes into play. The reality of Buddhism in its many forms; the reality of Scientology in its many forms. Each with the affinity of that form’s adherents, each communicated by different groups.

      Buddhism has had a long time to separate out into different ARC’s. Scientology is going through the same process. Different camps forming. Different viewpoints coalescing.

      As we all have learned, affinity, reality and communication comprise understanding. Three apparently different manifestations of the same thing. All three parts comprising theta.

      And original state theta has a purity where affinity, reality and communication are not actually different things but merely aspects of the same thing. Communication is reality, affinity is reality, reality is communication, etc.

      It’s only when theta begins to come down the tone scale that communication becomes different from reality, when affinity differs from communication. These three things become different and begin to unravel from one another and take on distinct definitions that don’t exist in pure theta.

      Eventually, theta goes so low scale that communications can have nothing to do with affinity and reality. You can have communication fighting reality and opposing affinity. Enforced and inhibited affinities, realities and communications all acting against one another across the dynamics. Very, very, very complex stuff. Very hard to understand. Very hard to imagine. Very hard to grasp.

      Because theta is simple.

      So, you get thetans and beings adhering to Scientology or Buddhism, all with differing opinions and ARC about their particular subject. Each with a defining affinity for their subject. Each with a defining reality which gets a particular communication. All with a defining understanding.

      But, the thing is, there is an actual state of existence, an actual original understanding that is theta that precedes all of these separations of subject. There is an original understanding (ARC) from which all others proceed and manifest.

      Just as affinity, reality and communication split apart in descending tone, that original Understanding (state of being) will split into different “understandings.”

      Joke is, all these derived understandings depend on the as-isness of that originating understanding. That originating ARC or being or theta or whatever you want to label it.

      So, back to cleaning the kitchen before my ARC gets smacked by my wife’s ARC about what I should be doing at this moment.

  10. Nice Mike. Well, we have 2 spokemsmen really, Rinder, who is currently cleaning up the the mess in the UK and another who recently cleaned up the mess Miscaviage made in Germany.

    ML Tom

  11. Fantastic interview!

    Mike is so polished and so calm and so charming! He radiates positivity and forgiveness, even while addressing the incessant, ongoing, puerile and negative attacks on him.

    Any chance the debate at Trinity College will be recorded and shared with the rest of the class?!

    Big Love,

    John in Austin

  12. We love you Mike! Nice “projecting” of the truth. Got it! L, Rachel

  13. I did enjoyed Mark’s interview on midweek. TV Ireland He seemed relaxed, clear with clarity on the position with church /DM/ stating clear The reason, the diseffection, and why he himself left.
    The presenter came across well if your a viewer listening and showed understanding with Mike’s message. My view overall is that it was a postive dialog, and I liked the fact the presenter made sure all information was aired about the debate at the trinty colleg, adding might i say the effort put into clarity of indepts and Mike made that clear . It did make me smile I have to say . Good promotion as far as I am concerned.Exellent Interview.

  14. Mike Freaking Rinder!!!

  15. A real “Tour d’ Force” Mike! No one does a better job speaking on TV about Scientology than you!!

  16. No arrogance, no hubris, just an honest guy answering the questions in a friendly manner. Thank you so much, Mike for wearing that hat.

    Must be a heck of a lot easier now, to be able to just tell the truth rather than having to cover for miscavige’s bullshit.

    You did an awesome job.

    Les

    • Les you hit the nail on the head: “No arrogance, no hubris, just an honest guy answering the questions in a friendly manner.”

      • +1000! And isn’t it refreshing to see well-informed media people like Colette quite willing to discuss that there is a difference between the corrupt “Church” of Miscavige and Scientology itself, and those who choose to practice it independently. Would have been unthinkable just a year ago.- the change due largely to your blog, Marty, and the courageous actions by you and Mike and others to GET THE TRUTH OUT THERE.
        I am sure Mike will make that point quite clearly in the Trinity College debate, as well, which I look forward to.

        Its so great to have a REAL spokesman for the REAL Scientology getting some airtime! Truly historic in its import.

        • Li'll bit of stuff

          Randy S, { +1000 }

          Don’t you just love being alive…waking up…Oct, 27 …opening THE BLOG …and getting a HUGE rush of pure THETA ?? Mike, you just nailed it , SIR !!!……..YOU’RE BACK!!!….doing what you do best. Thank you. I have a suspicion that you have, {following on from Marty} just re-invigorated a huge surge of creative energy. I feel it ! Randy, you just hatched our new name; ” REAL SCIENTOLOGY ”

          Lot’sa luv, Li’ll bit

      • I agree. Non-aggressive, non-rehearsed, unafraid, comfortable-in-his-skin manner. Friendly guy, that Mike Rinder is. What a relief.

      • Indeed. This is so refreshing. After watching this, I’d feel totally comfortable just going fishing with Mike and talking about the mysteries of the universe without worrying about any questions I asked or opinions I voiced being viciously attacked or invalidated.

        Hey Marty, just FYI — you may already be aware, but you were mentioned on the Young Turks: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_profilepage&v=DZksCrBqiC4

        I’m not sure what’s up with the canned subtitles, though.

        Cheers!

    • Perfectly stated Les.

      Mike, you were wonderful. Thank you for being there, and doing what you do so well.

    • Well said, Les.

      What a great job Mike!! Best of success with the debate.

  17. “Mike was greeted at the Dublin airport yesterday by seven Corporate Scientologist screaming in his face”

    Oh my all the Irish Church bound Scientologists showed up.

  18. Mike is the new international spokesperson. He just took a short leave and is now 1000x more effective as he is not shackled with the misdirection of DM and the whole 2.0 or below format.

    If we applied Theta-Mind-Body to this: The Church is the body. The symbol that most believe represents Scientology. But because of the crimes of DM and it’s current mentality, it is stuck. No spokesperson for the body will last more than a few months as they are put in a position of defending his crimes of Miscavige and lying. It takes minutes to dead agent those lies. And the messages are 2.0 or below. Attack with very little theta.

    Mike, representing the Independents, is the thetan. He is free of the body, and can move and speak freely. Things as-is as he speaks the truth and people recognize this.

    As Mike stated, one of the biggest lies that the Church holds over those in the Church, is that Scientology does not exist outside of the Church, so by leaving one must sacrifice having Scientology. The facts are the opposite. There is no real Scientology in the Church under its current suppression.

    One of my first realizations in Scientology was that I was not a body, but a spirit. I did not have to identify myself with my body. Had the same realization 35 years later once I was introduced to the Independent Scientology movement.

    So… I guess we all exteriorized!

  19. All I have time to say right now is Thank you Mike!

  20. Feels like Mike is applying the senior danger formula over at Trinity. Bypass those normally in charge of the activity (defending scientology in this case) and handle the situation and any danger in it.
    Great TV interview Mike and I am sure you will be equally well versed at Trinity. The point that there is a distinction between independent scientologists and the church becomes more and more real daily in the public arena. Its unfortunate that the distinction has to be made. But if one has to make the case, its good to have the best at it back on post.
    I don’t think its possible for you to desert LRH. Your one loyal officer.

  21. Looking good Mr. R…..

    Gotta love that Irish spirit. Looking forward to the debate report.

  22. Perfectly well carried out interview on the part of Mike and the interviewer.
    At least the most important part of the truth package was delivered to the Irish community. I don’t think Miscavige is going to have a lot of influence out there in Ireland from now on. Absofuckinglutely very well done Mike!
    Miscavige, in his deluded state of mind doesn’t have a clue of what he’s up against. And a big thank you to the producers of the program, who had the cojones to help expose the Cult of Scientology’s crimes against humanity.

  23. Excellent interview, very well done, Mike!

  24. To me Mike comes over as far more believeable now than he ever did as a Church spokesman. Before, he gave the impression of following a script, being trained to bullshit. He knew that some of what he was saying was untrue, and it showed.
    Oh – here’s a tip. Don’t call interviewers by their first name in the UK (or Ireland). We don’t do this, ever, as in British English it indicates that you are personal friends.

    • Very true Hartley.

      Just another reason for those still in who think “What else is there?”
      Get on the internet and other media, watch, listen and read, then think for yourself.

  25. Mike you were fabulous! Did everyone catch the clip of LRH (at 0:33) “Oh no, a suppressive person isn’t critical. A suppressive person is a person who denies the right of others.”
    Great job Mike!!
    Love Mosey

  26. Mike is simply the best PR and spokesperson!

    He was a master while doing this job when in RCS, but has stepped beyond that as the information is the truth and not some cover up or acceptable truth of a POB screw up and footnuke! Just simply awesome communication skills!

    • Gary Morehead. Aka Jackson

      Sinar,

      That’s the Mike I always knew and know!!

      Plus his Blackberry wasn’t blow-n up with YCSMF etc… etc….

      Thank you for doing what you do Mike!

      Beautiful person, beautiful friend!

      — Jackson

      • Couldn’t get a definition for YCSMF. Please define…

        • Would someone please help out BlueBonnet? I’d probably make a fool of myself. Thanks!

        • It’s a Davey hobby horse. Davey loves to wish off his own case on everybody else and especially text it to his field operatives, like Mike once was. It’s an obsession for oral sexual conduct with male partners and obsessively damaging the very place his body came from with sexual perversion.

          • Thanks TheWidowDenk and EC. No further explanation needed .

            • Gary Morehead a.k.a Jackson

              Miss Bonnet,

              Erwin explains what I said well.

              To be a bit more specific about what I wrote, you’d have to refer to earlier posts here by Mike and Marty. They gave a rundown of what it was like when they were on the ground handing media or a situation David Miscagive didn’t have the balls to be at handling himself. But yet he always claimed he was the best at handling anything anyone else was handling.

              While at these “event’s” such as the BBC where Mike and Tommy Boy Ding Dong Davis were at, Mike would report back through his Blackberry mobile device to Dave what was happening.

              Well, since you could NEVER make Dave happy, his responses were the ultimate in degradation one could fathom. Aside from Dave’s being hyper micromanagement, his way of “impinging” was done by means of using extreme vulgar communication. This procedure became the backbone of the way in which David Miscavige communicated to anyone doing anything for him.

              Dave communicated his vulgar rage through the use of acronyms.

              If your mommy found herself repeatedly telling you to GET YOUR LITTLE BUTT IN HERE NOW….. and was telling you by way of text messages, she would eventually change it to “GYLBHN”.

              Now, your creative mind has to interpret what “blow-n up with YCSMF etc… etc….” actually say’s

              Let’s see if I can help in a clean manner….. Y = You… C = Cocka doodle doo….. M = refers to one’s Mama and… F= from the Movie Little Focker.

              These acronyms Dave would “text” could be quite long at times.

              If what I have explained her is still foggy for you, you’d have to text message Dave yourself to better understand!

              — Jackson

              • Thanks, got it.
                Interesting that he accuses others of this type of activity. Since he is demonstrably a criminal he is accusing others of his own overts…

              • Jackson,
                Superb description and clarity. You Great Big Fire Fighting Giant Being Friend Of Mine -YGBFFGBFOM!

  27. I’m impressed! You have my vote as Independent Scientology spokesman too. Very well done.

  28. Absolutely brilliant!

    The major footnuke for the church of course was how absolutely effing creepy it was that they knew Mike would be there and their ‘dead agent’ material (documents which are supposed to expose the truth about a source of negative influence or communication, such as a soviet spy operating in America), which very transparently was complete BS.

    To make an analogy, it’s like Hitler trying to DA Patton…after the death camps have become public knowledge.

    Have fun with the debate tonight, Mike. I wish I could be there (as everyone else here I’m sure!) and am looking forward to hopefully seeing the video.

    (And I loved Collette’s accent. )

  29. Yes…yes,yes…and yes to anything that Mike told and is written here..!
    We are catching up at very fast speed !
    I would have liked to see the faces of Osa nodding in agreement about the explanation of Scientology given and see their confusion thereupon.
    MIke you’re a genious !
    Pr series 1000% in !

  30. And very well done to muck cabbage for the added footnuke of having his cronies show up prior to the interview armed with anti-Mike Rinder propaganda. The good folks at TV3 were most impressed that RCS had access to our travel plans but unfortunately didn’t have time to read the ‘bumpf’ they were given (that’s what they called it anyway).
    Having a lovely time in Dublin. Wish y’all were here! xxx
    Sam, Jan and Dartassasin 😉

  31. Tony DePhillips

    That was friggin amazing Mike!!
    You looked so comfortable and unflappable. Now YOU are the kind of person I have always wanted as a representative of Scientology.
    Thank you!

  32. FCDC Class of 1974

    WOW ! That just left me uptone. Courage and conviction, that is how we all can rise a little higher. Thank you Mike Rinder

  33. Tony DePhillips

    Instead of defending muddcabbage Mike defends the philosophy.
    That is the correct importance and now things are flowing correctly.
    Defending muddcabbage is like a stuck 7 for the mind of the third dynamic of Scientology. You always spit out incorrect conclusions as long as the stuck 7 (protect muddcabbage at all costs) exists.

  34. EXCELLENT interview!

    As radical, insane, criminal Scientology continues to implode I think it’s interesting to see a fresh, new format take shape. You can see the functions of divisions like 1,4 and 6 leading the way as one would expect.

    While radical Scientology relies on pushing around paper as its main form of internal communication, the independent field uses the internet. If that wasn’t bad enough, radical Scientology is all weighed down with crimes, lies and force.

    Times are a changing…..

  35. Sort of amusing thought, I would like to share….

    Mike Rinder; International Spokesman for the I.I.A.S.

    (International Independent Association of Scientologists)

    We don’t need no stinking church…..

    above: mock-up of famous movie line…. we don’t need no stinkin’ badges!!

    • For me it would be International spokesman for the HASI – the HUBBARD Association of Scientologists International. Interesting how that name has been dropped from the acronym isn’t it?
      What’s it going to be next Davey? The MASI?

  36. Hey Mike, Great job so far and I’m sure you will do a fantastic job tonight.

    Now and forever the keynote of all things Scientology MUST be truth. That has always been the source of Scientology’s integrity and thence its power and influence — since the beginning. And where that principle is ignored, the subject is instantly false. Scientology has no choice but to live up to its own ideals. Thus it is up to every Scientologist to be Scientology’s watchdog and to personally intervene to maintain transparency and accountability.

    I’m glad you’ve got your hat back. I’ve got the marketing hat. Marty has his hat. And the Church has no ability to do anything about it. They are total effect and the only thing they can do is “receive motivators.”

    • Steve-We got all the cool people out here.

      • Martin Padfield

        Takes one to know one Ingrid – I only know you through this blog and you’re own, but I would say you’re about as cool as they come.

      • Ingrid, Yes, you know what is amazing, leaving the Church has no bearing on your hat in life. The CoS is a virtual zero of influence; you and every independent Scientologist have an influence that is only limited by your own imagination or desires. Many Scientologists who have left the Church tend to think they also left their hats they wore. Not true. Every person has the power to wear any hat they want right this minute. It doesn’t require permission from any “authority.” It only requires the assumption of personal responsibility and the desire to play the game. It all comes down to the Code of Honor, particularly the point to “Never disparage yourself or minimize your strength or power.” You are a shining example of that. I bet you are having more fun than ever wearing your hat in life now that you are out from under the oppression of the CoS. I know I am and I know Mike and Marty and virtually every one of us are, too.

        • Steve-You are so right. I am having so much fun wearing my hat as an auditor now. Before, I had to wear it with a yoke choking me around my neck, which is now gone.

        • So true, Thoughtful. Exactly what Mike Rinder is doing: wearing his hat! Responsibility! And Marty Rathbun has been wearing his hat too in a big way.

          Occupy your purpose and hats, Occupy your lives, Occupy Earth! Own it baby, it yours!

        • Thoughtful
          As an ‘ex-Sea Org Member’ you may appreciate this:
          While Mike was here a friend of mine asked him if he thought ‘all of this’ would ever be over and how long he would continue to ‘do this’.
          Mike smiled and replied ‘forever’.

  37. Excellent interview Mike. You look so healthy, calm, smart and confident. Your statements had substance and you exuded a very pan determined beingness. Particularly enjoyed your clarification of the fact that you left the Sea Org and WERE NOT relieved of your post as the lying liars led by Lucifer continue to proclaim. Same as Marty and all the other powerful vocal independents that are bringing the truth to light about “Corporate Scientology”. Out tech, out ethics and out admin in a cesspool of pretense!

    If you are still hanging in the Church and reading this blog, obviously something is wrong. How’s your confront? Time to face without flinching WHAT is really happening behind closed doors at your local org and above. Where is your money really going? Find out the real truth about where your IAS donations have gone, why your case is stalled, what happened to all the great auditors? Buckle up and start reading. Get ready to have your mind blown and don’t forget, the truth will set you free. When you get the truth you will have many realizations and understand so much more. Follow the links. Start!

  38. Awesome, Mike! Thank you, thank you.

  39. Bravo Mike!

  40. Loved the interview !!!!!! Tommy Davis Please watch this ! This is how you do it!

  41. You have not only stepped into the boots of our new spokesperson – you have done so with the presence of a moviestar/rockstar on camera because you are so cool and confident about who you are and what you know. People will be drawn to your charisma because you come across with an air that you really have nothing to prove. This attracts attention and it attracts trust. The perfect storm for the eventual inevitable knockout punch! BAM!!!!!!!

  42. Brilliant! Delivered with sincerity, spark and calm demeanor – what you would expect the “church” spokes-people to do, unfortunately they are so busy piling on the sugar to cover up the truth that it loses it’s candidness. Good job Mike.

  43. Tampa Bay News, CNN, BBC, Germany now Ireland. The truth is getting out around the world. Well done Mike and Marty.

    “Oh no, a suppressive person isn’t critical. A suppressive person is a person who denies the right of others.”

    I couldn’t be a plainer than that.

  44. Mike has such natural TR’s and a such a nice way about him. Really pleasant to watch. I would love to see the debate if possible- and for that matter- if you ever need a debate ‘team’ member- please let me know. 🙂

    What a wonderful potential of communication in regards to a debate about Scientology.

    Sounds exciting!

  45. Mike,

    What an awesome interview! You are no doubt a great spokesperson, and you seem so relaxed… just awesome!

    Thank you!

    P.S.: And what a bypass that is taking place! Between Marty’s work in Germany and now you in Ireland… we are witnessing a major turning point.

  46. What a difference with the days when Mike was speaking for the CoS, though admittedly even then he was better than the current spokesman. He looks so relaxed, healthy, unrestrained and de-pts’d now, like a normal human being – a relief to see someone who can speak to a journalist with reality! For many years, I would wince whenever I saw a spokesperson try to defend Scientology on television; they were so rehearsed or combattive or misemotional or would repeatedly lie even when confronted with true data. LFBD, this is the kind of spokesperson Scientology needs – bravo Mr. Rinder!

  47. Mike is a natural for this kind of thing. I noticed how much more calm and relaxed he is now that he is working on our behalf rather than DM.

    Independent Scientology will do well in Ireland. As for DM’s version of it, well, let’s say, ……….it’s a long way to Tipperary. 😉

    Press on..

  48. Mr. Rinder did an outstanding job in the interview. He came across as friendly and engaging, unlike the defensive, antagonistic Tommy Davis and celebrity scientologists (such as Kelly Preston, Kirsty Alley, and Juliet Lewis). The Church scientologists must not be very forward thinking/strategic, or is it truly fear of DM. I will be tracking the scientology saga.

  49. Nice job Mike, nice job!!!

  50. Martin Padfield

    Great job Mike – thank you for taking the time and trouble to do this; you are a credit to us all and I’m sure LRH would be smiling right now…

  51. Way to go Mike…

  52. ARCU…Best Interview I have seen yet!

    Dial wide FN…persistent…I could hard ly pay attention to the last minute…so happy!

    Thank you, Mike…and everyone who has led up to this moment. This is huge!

  53. The real spokesperson for scientology is back in town, what a breath of fresh air. good luck in your future speaking engagements on sharing your knowledge, wisdom and most importantly the TRUTH about Scientology.
    Go get em Mike, you are the man and so damn proud of you. Thx for bringing back PRIDE to Scn.

  54. Michael Fairman

    It was a pleasure watching and listening to you clearly and calmly explain what is wrong with the “church” and what is right with the subject of Scientology. Both you and Marty are both showing the world where the sanity resides. As has been said, all one needs to do is contrast your interview here and Marty’s in Germany with the rabid attack dog insanity that was foisted on Anderson Cooper to see where the truth lies. It’s a slam dunk.

  55. Indie-saurus-rex

    Great job Mike. I look forward to the day when the new Scientology Organization is being run by people like you.

  56. Great interview Mike! It’s great to see someone speak about Scientology and simply speak the truth. Karin Pouw and the Freedom crew are so far from practicing the basics of Scn that counter-creating is all they do. When will they see that their alter-is of Scn increases the exodus of Scientologists from the church? When DM is sitting alone with mortgage payments for all the empty real estate, he’ll focus on Karin, Gail ,Aaron and Linda, etc.

  57. Well, since POB claims he is the only one that can do things right and has to do everything himself, why doesn’t he come out and do a (non-scripted) TV interview to prove to us how great he is. LOL.
    He is being bypassed now and first step of the Danger formula is “Bypass habits and normal routines.” That’s gonna be tough: No more beatings, no more copper rods, no more coffee enemas, no more Hole, no more Ideal (Idle) Org (Morgue) strategy; no more extravagances; no more expensive favors/slave labor jobs for Tom Cruise; no more 3-swing FNs; no more endless sec checks/FPRD; no more IAS crush regging; No more disconnection…shall I go on?

  58. He did a good job. Compare his warm summary of the subject with the glassy-eyed ravings of Miscavige on Nightline all those years ago and see which is more likely to interest people. Best of luck for the debate, I hope he’s not too much put off by the heckling of the Abbey Street inmates :-S

  59. Thank you Mike! What a fabulous job you did on that show. You can speak for me about Scientology anytime, anywhere.

    And I want to include Marty in my thanks also, for all he’s been doing to get this avalanche of Truth rolling.

  60. Excellent job! Thanks for wearing your hat again.

  61. Corporate Scientology in Ireland consists of the same, tired 20 individuals who have been running around like headless chickens for the past quarter-century, achieving nothing, going nowhere, totally shunned by the surrounding community. Any noobs quickly blow, there is no body-routing as there is a decent Anon presence that quickly shuts them down. Trinity College is an institution which is older than the United States and globally recognised. It’s fantastic to have Mike as a guest and help shut down the suppressive, treasonous organisation we know as the ‘church’.

  62. Theo Sismanides

    hehe Mike… you are the Spokesman!!! You had that hat so well worn (despite all the pressure you got from the Pope) that it looks like it comes back to you now naturally!

    Congratulations and a big hug!

    Hey guys, am I the only one who after 16.45 min. there is NO sound on the video? Why is that?

  63. Mike- that was great. You must feel so much relief being able to speak and defend the TRUTH as an Independent as opposed to figuring out how to dodge bullets, no-answer, provide acceptable truths, how to spin,etc. I can so readily see why they hound you. You ARE a force to be reckoned with. No longer hindered by having to reinterpret and cover DM and his lies, you truly shine in the light of truth – free to be yourself fully as a spokesperson- how cool is
    that!!! You are really real, with genuine care. Just loved it!

  64. Mike, this was a real “we come back” moment for me when I saw you pleasantly, charmingly and confidently announce the existence of Independent Scientology to the world.

    For me, you were the Rocky Balboa that ran through the streets with his neighborhood fans who cheered him to the top of the museum steps: Feeling strong now….. Feeling strong now…

  65. As an atheist and someone who’s read a fair amount of scientology material and listened to a number of L Ron Hubbard lectures I disagree that scientology provides answers how ever I believe that y’all have the right to believe that and that to some degree what is true for you is true for you works.

    I think Mike did fairly well but some of the accounts of beatings I hear are worse than mere intimidation. That said I wasn’t ther and even “mere” intimidation beatings are torture by another name.

    • Thanks Dean. Tolerance is a virtue I wish was more abundant in this world, thank you for that. Yes, some of stories are pretty horrendous, but when in the public eye I believe it is best to stick to what one can attest to first-hand, and not go off into hear-say. Besides, it is all pretty well documented by others elsewhere.

  66. Oh yes, love the church of scientology foot bullet of giving the show that smear campaign booklet. Any chance someone could upload that (Mike Rinder: Hate Crimes) for the lulz? Protip: scan paper doc into pdf file. I gather there’s a DVD too. Mike should collect them, I imagine a set of 6 would make great novelty coasters.

  67. Mike has the most natural TRs and best ARC of any Scientology spokesperson I have ever seen.

  68. Mike, INCREDIBLE job!
    The Independent Movement has its intenational spokeperson for REAL!
    You control on the situation was 100%, 99,9% of the interview was theta.
    Thank you so much. It is a big sign of success!

  69. Super performance, Shinin’ Mike!
    It’s enough to make OSA give up … hint, hint…

  70. What an interview! Thanks, Mike. Superb effort.

  71. Wow! Just like I remember. Mike Rinder laying things out in great fashion with carefully placed words that make sense and don’t leave people confused or with a mystery.

    Mike Rinder, International Spokesperson for Independent Scientology! I like the sound of that. Great interview, great how you so elegantly got into communication and answered questions. I imagine this is what LRH was talking about on how one should interact with media.

    In contrast, when I’ve seen Tommy being interviewed he just flies off the handle and ridges all over the place or balks and stutters and with the craftiness of an elephant charging through a fine China shop, tries to change the subject or no answer questions. Talk about STCC fail.

    Anyway, keep up the awesome work.

  72. BAM! Mr Rinder is the most evocative and informative spokesperson for Scientology right now. Bar none.

    • ▒ definitely ▒

      And what a perfect juxtaposition! ⇨On one hand we have Mike Rinder …composed, affable, eloquent, perceptive. ∆

      ⇨On the other hand we have a disturbing, if puerile, piece of slander dropped off at the orders of the “Pope of the Trademarks”. Good heavens, can we see the poor people laboriously taking out their Photoshop crayons to draw horns and a tail on Mike Rinder’s photo, with garish red letters and name-calling, and actually dropping it off to a television news station with a statement of utter balderdash NONFACTS!??!? Can we profile the source from which this imbecilic tantrum emanates? And this is someone at the helm of a religion and billion$ of pilfered tax-free dollars!?

      • “Pope of the Trademarks” not only commandeers people to draw seriously challenged and obviously unbalanced “Church Statements” complete with defaced photos of their “targets” and seriously believes this is acceptable? to deliver to the TV news studio? This from a “Pope”? It’s astonishing and highly revealing of the rage behind it, this tantrum grafitti a six-year-old writes on the wall with poop if mad at his parents for saying he can’t kick the cat!!

        But there’s more! Corporation $cientology is caught in a sting knowing where Mike Rinder was going to be, revealing they DO illegally access flight records, airline info, phone accounts, emails, and violate the law and Human Rights.

  73. Also, I can’t help but wonder if Tommy Davis has been beat so terribly bad by David Miscavige that Miscavige himself is afraid to let Tommy show his face in public right now?

  74. And so the torch passes. The Church is not only dead, it is officially bereft of Scientology itself. Scientology is now officially independent.

    Mike, great interview.

    • Perfect Grasshopper:

      “Scientology is now officially independent.”

      This is an historical event… and we are all signers to the declaration of Independence inside Marty’s internet house… it’s an amazing age where internet technology has created such rapid communication! May the world never be the same!

      Thanks M & M, from all of us, I am sure.

      • Yes, thanks to Marty and Mike for putting up with this incredible abuse (and you, too, sir).

        The internet has forced the issue of communication, and forced us all to communicate about Scientology – with non-Scientologists, and with each other. I totally get the reasoning behind the prohibition of “verbal tech”, and the course supervisor’s stock answer “What do your materials state?” In addition, there is the idea that we don’t want people to get misunderstood words when we speak of Scn terms. So, I get the prohibition, but it has gone too far to the point where there is NO communication on the subject for fear of imparting MUs and false data.

        Well I say, cuss that. The Internet and its players, lord love ’em, have forced the issue. When we COMMUNICATE about it, even people who were formerly opposed to all things Scientology start to see that, well, some people who “believe” in Scientology really are not all that bad, and may even have a point or two. Personally, I think it is worth the risk of some variance and some MUs when it means that people are more aware of the subject as a whole. When you take a look at it, Scientology 0 – entry level Scientology – paints with a broad brush the outline of the subject, which becomes more refined as more study is done. Blanket statements like “If you are sick, you are PTS” become more granular when the mechanisms are better known (even to the point where, well, you are in a meat body on planet Earth – PTS by definition🙂 ). So, we can survive a little variance in general discussions.

        The senior datum is communication is the universal solvent. And it is solving. Communication has saved Scientology.

        Where we have open and honest communication about Scientology, we have Scientology. So, of course the independent field is where Scientology lives. Naturally, those who communicate about Scientology will be the spokespeople for Scientology.

        Mike and Marty, well done!

    • Grasshopper,
      I had the same thought: “Scientology is now officially independent”.
      May all independent beings be well and happy!
      GMW

  75. Bravo Bravo Bravo, Mike Rinder!!! All of pure Life applauds and supports you!

  76. Mike, this was a great great interview. You are such an awesome example of someone who is NOT PTS to “Miscabbage” anymore…I hope many current cult members will see your interview and become free. The times are changing – Scientology will be free again😉

  77. “Scientology is now officially independent.”

  78. By the way: Will we have a video clip from Mike’s college talk?

  79. Mike: Wonderful interview. I could watch without flinching which I’ve honestly never been able to do when a scientology spokesperson is being interviewed.

    Even the interview of Heber’s back sometime between 1978-80 when he yelled and screamed at someone about psychiatry — yikes. Much as I love Heber that interview was horrific.

    This interview you were engaging, intelligent and your warm smile is so genuine.

    Thanks.

    Love,
    WH


  80. Everything I have, everything I own
    All my mistakes man, you already know
    I wanna be free, I wanna be free.

    From Senegal West Africa,
    To St. Louis, Missouri
    Thanks to Catherine Dana
    For giving my pops his glory
    He came down with his drum
    And a dream to change the world
    In a free upliftin world
    And thats all he ever want
    Mom came a little after
    Gave birth to my brother
    then all of the pressure
    Made em’ fight one another
    See, the pain would never last
    Did the best with what they had
    He knew the world was out for grabs
    And he searched to find his

    Freedom, Freedom, Freedom, (Oh)Freedom
    Everything I have, everything I own
    All my mistakes man, you already know
    I wanna be free, I wanna be free
    So I search to find my(find my)..
    ..Freedom, Freedom, Freedom, Freedom
    Everything I have, everything I own
    All my mistakes girl, you already know
    I wanna be free, I wanna be free, yeah

    As a kid I never knew
    i’d have to hustle just to make it through
    So I found myself skipping school
    Cause’ the girls dont think i’m cool
    And because of that I did’nt care
    Wether or not I went to jail
    I just wanna be treated fair
    Cause’ thats all I ever knew
    Tellin’ me I need to slow down
    Cause’ everybody in the whole town
    Cause’ they know how I get down
    Far enough from another town
    Can you believe we still around?
    After so many hit the ground
    And we ain’t gon stop now
    Until we get that

    Freedom,(ooohh) Freedom, (oohhh) Freedom, (oh)Freedom
    Everything I have,(have) everything I own, (own)
    All my mistakes man you already know (yea)
    I wanna be free, (free)I wanna be free (free)

    If you wanna be free, and the land is drug-free
    put your hands up, (ay)put your hans up (ay)
    If you wanna be free, from all your misery
    put your hands up, (ay) put your hans up
    If you wanna be free, with plenty money (ay)
    put your hands up, put your hans up
    If you wanna be free, just prace G-O-D put your hands (ay)up, put your hands up (ay)

    Freedom, (ohh) Freedom(Freedom), Freedom, (ooh)Freedom
    Everything I have, everything I own
    All my mistakes girl you already know
    I wanna be free(wanna be free), I wanna be free (wanna be free yea)

  81. The world is waking up. This is a Middle Eastern Islam artist, and the right to dignity and respect is sweeping the world. Truth is universal!

    Freedom from Tyrant Dictatorships who don’t lead for the purpose of those they pretend to serve!

    Thank you Mike Rinder. I am jumping with renewed hope that people can HAVE and practice the true purpose of pure Scientology.

    THANK YOU Marty Rathbun and all around the world. This is a very important debate taking place in Ireland. Damned be the stranglehold of greedy fearful tyrants, zealots and kooks!

    Scientology is now on the map where it deserves to be — in the hands of people who use it to better their and other’s lives and the world!

    LYRICS: “Freedom”

    Gathered here with my family
    …My neighbours and my friends
    Standing firm together against oppression holding hands
    It doesn’t matter where you’re from
    Or if you’re young, old, women or man
    We’re here for the same reason; we want to take back our land

    Calling you for freedom, freedom
    We know you can hear our call, ooh oh
    We’re calling for freedom, fighting for freedom
    We know you won’t let us fall, ooh no
    We know you’re here with us

    No more being prisoners in our homes
    No more being afraid to talk
    Our dream is just to be free, just to be free
    Now when we’ve taking our first step
    Towards a life of complete freedom
    We can see our dream getting closer and closer, we’re almost there

    I can feel the pride in the air
    And it makes me strong to see everyone
    Standing together holding hands in unity
    Shouting out loud demanding their right for freedom
    …This is it and we’re not backing off.

  82. Well done interview. Mike carries himself very well. In his old job he had to lie to cover for the cult. Now he seems very relaxed and natural. No more facade.
    Umm….shouldn’t Davy have sent an emissary to debate at Trinity?
    A minister at least, no? He probably can’t trust anyone anymore. I guess he fears someone will crack under the pressure and tell the truth! After all the last incident of parading out the ex-wives was no help to him. No worries, Davey, relax. Mike seems to have it covered.

  83. Mike – A very good interview !!! What I really liked about your interview is the fact that you were sincere and unpretentious. Qualities like that can’t be faked.

  84. Wow, great interview Mike!

  85. Very well done, Mike.

    This Interview was particularly triumphant and unique in that it stressed that the Scientology Philosophy can be practiced outside the parameters of the Church.

    Ultimately this is the proper Course for the Freezone/Independents to pave the Way for many more to “actually” move up the Bridge without getting financially gutted by the CO$ Monster.

    10 Cheers … 1 very big leap into the right Direction.

  86. Kudos Mike Rinder. Excellent interview🙂

  87. Way to go Mike!

    I particularly liked how you D/A’d the enemy line (and “BIG LIE”) that the only place that one can get Scientology is in the C of S.

    You’ve really come full circle now, Mike. On thing I will say about you is that being in your space is just as safe at 1 foot away as it is from the other side of the planet.

    How many individuals can claim that distinction? Not many outside of the ranks of some Auditors I know, I’d wager.

  88. Cindy Pinsonnault

    Wow, Mike.

    This is the kind of thing that must have DM knotted right up into a terrified little ball. He works so hard all day trying to destroy scientology and ruin LRH’s reputation, and along comes Mike Rinder, in 17 minutes no less, giving people the idea that scientology might just be okay — that is, without the little dictator and the corporate, cultish church. It’s kinda sad … and funny.🙂

  89. GREAT interview Mike! Thank you for your honesty, calmness and showing to the world what a true scientologist should be like.

  90. Marty,

    While this type of coverage is great, and the benefit to the subject of Scientology and the Independent practitioners of Scientology is incalculable, I have yet another request of you:

    How about some more of those “Fishin’ and Dishin” videos?

    I hope this doesn’t seem like puerile self-interest on my part, but I really feel that those “correct target” type of videos are a valid form of public relations as well.

    Plus, I miss seein’ you guys hangin’ out and fishin’.

  91. Interesting to compare Mike here to his years doing interviews as CoS spokesperson – like a different person entirely. I’d be curious to hear from Mike about the intense pressure he must have endured under media spotlight being forced (under threat of awful abuse) to defend what amounts to his torturerer and his bullshit. Mike, unsurprisingly, came across as very stressed and confrontational when working under DM. I always wondered if part of it must have been resentment of the media because the fact they were merely asking questions about Scientology in any capacity, even just droll curiosity on a slow news week, meant Mike (and others) might have to suffer terrible abuse and debased living conditions depending on bizarro reaction to it. (Hell, the mere fact the media would even do a story – meaning OSA couldn’t magically torpedo every single one – meant DM’s temper tantrum and abuse was immenient.) I don’t think the media could even imagine the repercussions suffered by certain SO members due to a simple piece they decide to report on. I can’t imagine being worked like a dog and then being faced with a national TV interview knowing my performance, and other issues totally out of my control, would have a major impact on my diet, shelter, ability to see my loved ones and physical safety for the next several months or longer. It would be great for Mike to speak about the type of pressure applied to SO members forced to be in front of the media – and would help people understand why you have situations like the “CNN wives” willing to lie or say anything on TV, literally because their physical safety and living conditions are in great jeopardy if they don’t say as their told – and many times even if they do. POB isn’t exactly rational or predictable as to reactions, even if you do exactly as he directs.

  92. Bravo. Great interview!
    That said, may I make a few suggestions?
    I would like to hear you make a distinction between Sea Org members and the public person when it comes to the rough treatment.
    Also, I was puzzeled to hear you say that the “beatings” would leave no bruises or outward signs. The use of that word implies being roughed up to the point of having bruises, bumps, cuts and etc. I think that needs more clarification. You say it is for intimidation purposes but then go back to calling it beatings.
    I applaud your bringing up the money, but I would like to hear you mention the aggressive and unrelenting pressure brought to bear on people. The pressure to get people to refinance their homes, go into retirement funds, go into debt, go into college funds, beg, borrow and yes, steal in the sense of borrowing more than one can hope to pay back.
    I would like to hear you talk about the consequences, the broke, in debt and bankrupt Church members.
    And I would like to hear you memtion the deceit and deception used to raise funds for such things as the bogus library project and the Ideal Orgs. The public who think those orgs will then be owned by the local Churches.
    I would like to hear more about the psychological manipulation. It is probably worse for a Sea Org member, but even as a public I remember being at Flag in the 80’s and feeling glued to the sofa. I wanted to leave. I wanted to walk right out the door but felt paralized, unable to put one foot in front of the other. I can not explain to this day what force it was that had me so incapacitated.
    I applaud your efforts to expose the cult-like aspects of the organization. Keep up the good work.

    • There’s a reality being in that situation, getting questions, having no time to plan your replies. It’s a tough one. Mike did it very well. I’m totally impressed.

  93. Mike Rinder,
    Bravo! I can’t wait to hear the debate. I hope you will find the opportunity to restore some integrity for Scientology as an applied religious philosophy and demonstrate that real Scientologists can actually be there and communicate. Thank you for taking up this mantle.
    Good luck.
    Leonore

  94. The tv appearance was great! I wish all the Scientology interviews from the past could have been like this one, and the John Sweeny interview with Mike and Marty where Marty puts Sweeny on the cans….it is all so natural and in ARC…a great example of Scientology in application. How ironic that the truth about Scientology is being spread in a theta way by guys who are ‘in bad”. Real Comm and honesty are 100% effective–what lies and cover ups can never be.

  95. Mr Rinder was a wonderful spokesperson yet again!, listening to Mike R reminds me of the row breaking out bin the Church of England at St Pauls Cathedral London over the growing tent City and Canon Giles Fraser, the cathedral chancellor’s support (and and now resignation on a matter of principle), when a religion comes to close to interests of governments and financial institutions it loses it’s ethics and ceases to be a religion, I believe that the Co$ has always been down that path but the true practitioners of ‘Scientology’ (Indies, Freezone etc) can wear the bage of ‘relgion’ with pride, from my personal experience of those i have spoken to.that is.
    Below is a link to an article in todays UK Daily Mail, interesting the simularities

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2054408/Occupy-London-St-Pauls-Cathedral-chancellor-quits-violence-fears.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

  96. It’s such a pleasure to listen and watch Mike COMMUNICATE with others. It’s just so simple the way he does it. Good show. 🙂

    JM

  97. so what is the real scientology and the proxy scientology?or are there 2 scientologys?ones left wing the other is right wing….!
    my bet is the independents are the ones that are humble and can deliver the tech…miscabbage has got to many pyhcs around him via his lawyers and pr firms….word on the street is that miscabbage needs 24hrs care and he cant operate without wog experts…the little man doesnt see much sunlight these days!great interview mike,u were fairdinkum..!

  98. Mike, that was simply flawless.

    It must be such a difference giving an interview where you don’t have to worry about covering up lies, or worry about if what you say will have ramifications with DM, or if you’ll be going to the Hole afterwards. Who could make a sincere and honest interview under such pressure? Not even DM himself could.

    So, with all that false pretense, lies-infested pressure off the lines, you really proved the power of simply saying the truth in a down-to-earth, but matter-of-fact, friendly, calm and convincingly-to-the-point manner!

    You’re my #1 choice for a Spokesman!

  99. Andrew Robertson

    I felt Mike did an excellent job in making it very clear that a Scientologist is someone who believes in Scientology. No more, no less. There is no requirement to be an IAS member nor to be in good standing with the current management of the Church of Scientology. If Sea Org members and staff could watch this video it might well be a very liberating experience for them.

    Well done Mike!

    Andrew Robertson, Wellington New Zealand

  100. Radical Scientology can do and say anything they want and they do BUT the kicker here is no one believes or listens to a word they say or write especially the Freedumb Magazine actually its become comical in the real world! The real liars are the corporate Scn and they do it in grand style using parishoners hard earned money. The castle is a crumblimg

  101. Mike R, Thank you so very much. You “represent” in a way that is natural, clear, and without agenda. Scientologists young and old, in or out, who know you from the many years of dedication to the Scientology philosophy, can recognize honesty and integrity when they see it.

    I sincerely hope that those still “in” avail themselves of the factual data about the Independent Scientology movement and raise their confront and honestly look at the actual activities and statistics of the MiscScavenge MEST perversion of Scientology.

    Your simple statement to them that Scientology services, auditing and training are available here and now is what they really want to know. And that there are standard and dedicated people who can deliver the technology as originally intended, free from the “vulture culture” and perversions of the existing corporate version of Scientology carefully controlled and held out of reach by David MisCavenge.

  102. StandingOvation

    BRAVO Mr. Rinder! “oh no, a suppressive person isn’t critical. A suppressive person denies the right of others”.

  103. Isn’t this just incredible. Mike Rinder a walking Hate crime or whatever. I am in Dublin and I missed the debate and I am disgusted with what the “church” in Dublin did. I spent 50,000 euro there and I got nothing but sec checked to see if I was against Scientology. I am not. I am for it and Mike is too.

  104. top of the vale

    Trinity College was founded in 1592 and represents “Higher Learning”. We here in the Independent Network of Scientology are also representative of ‘higher learning’ and I would hope that the subject of the technology of LRH be brought up when interviewed at Trinity. LRH codified all the great learnings of the world into one particular thought process. When DM brought his ‘basics’ to the Co$ community, he degraded LRH Tech by indicating that the ‘blind were leading the blind’. DM was saying that LRH missed it and that DM with his all powerful intelligence and sociopathic attitude got it better than anyone else. Then, altho’ not right then, continued to alter the tech in “his” image”. DM’s image is a 1.1’s interpretation that anything that doesn’t come from him, doesn’t exist. This is why LRH’s Training Line-up was all wrong because as the new leader of Scientology it had to be his(DM’s) established by ‘his’ authority and not LRH’s. Thus the GAT came into being and LRH’s successful auditor training went out the f…in window. And because DM was the ‘leader’ he was agreed with to the ‘T’!

    THE ALL POWERFUL OZ. It would be funny that a munchkin is running things except that everything he is doing is the direct opposite of what LRH did and that’s the sadness of it all.

    Dianetics and Scientology was developed by LRH, NOT DM. This really pisses me off that a high-school and class IV internship drop-out thinks he can just wave his wand over LRH’s Tech and change it at his whim. Well, the answer to that is that DM is following LRH’s HUBBARD CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION to the letter in the 1.1 band.

    Under ‘Y’ – Method Used by Subject To Handle Others: “Nullifies others to get them to level where they can be used. Devious and vicious means. Hypnotism, gossip. Seeks hidden control.

    Under ‘AD’ – Pleasure Moments: Occasional pleasant memory can be found but very rare. Reactive delight in inflicting sadistic injuries on helpless persons or objects.

    And on and on. Bringing me back to Trinity being an excellent base for standing one’s ground about the true evolution of Scientology and what it means to be a true purveyor of LRH’s Technical Learning. Auditors could be trained per LRH’s instruction at Trinity if the positioning were safe-pointed correctly. Our New Spokesperson could do that!

  105. one of those who see

    Mike!! The interview was fantastic! You and Marty, both big beings that play big games!! It was so great seeing you out there on the comm lines of the world. And LRH was a star right along with you. Thanks Mosey for pointing out that LRH said “Oh no, a suppressive person isn’t critical. A suppressive person is a person who denies the right of others.” Can’t get much clearer than that! Then Mike just goes right into pointing out the 3 major outpoints – clear as a bell: 1. Disconnection 2. Vulture Culture 3. Violence at the top directed by DM
    You and Marty are restoring the good name of Scientology and LRH. The public can differentiate when they have the data.
    You also hit the key point that there is Scientology outside the Church. And I thought it really honorable of you to publicly tell the truth about what happened to John Sweeney and in doing so restore his good name. The icing on the cake.

    I ran across this policy the other day in my old Management Series Vol 2.
    HCOPL 1 Oct 67
    Admin know-how series 15
    Uses of Orgs
    There are two uses (violently opposed to each other) to which Scientology orgs can be put. They are:
    1. To forward the advance of self and all dynamics toward total survival.
    2. To use the great power and control of an org over others to defend oneself.
    When a decent being goes to work in a org he uses 1.
    When a suppressive goes to work in an org he uses 2.
    When you get in ethics, the decent one raises his necessity level and measures up. The suppressive type blows (leaves).
    It is of vital interest to all of us that we have orgs that serve to increase survival on all dynamics. And that we prevent orgs being used as means to oppress others.
    The answer, oddly enough, is to GET IN ETHICS exactly on-policy and correctly. And we will advance.
    LRH
    Founder

    • ootws,

      Excellent reference find. Explains what is happening it the C of S in a nutshell.

      The orgs need to get in ethics instead of following the suppressive orders of David Miscavige and he will blow.

  106. Mike Rinder is an Absolutely Fabulous person!

  107. Way to go Mike,

    Great presence. Very powerful!

    Thanks

  108. Here’s Mike Rinder :

    • one of those who see

      Mike, Absolutely brilliant!!
      Thank you, Thank you, Thank you.

    • Would be intresting if he took a tour along more colleges and universities around europe.

      The university in my city has a philosophy branch too. And of cause a Psychology and Theology one too. tix all the boxes.

    • I wasn’t totally sure I respected Mike Rinder – until I heard this lecture to the students. Now I’m sure I respect him, as I do any individual with the scope and breadth to cover not simply philosophy in the venerable traditions of men of serious thought, but philosophy within the context spanning both Scn and the pre-Scn world, uniting the two into an individual perspective without enforcement or evaluation.

      Thought is free. To me, some of LRH’s words that always rang particularly true and deep to me are these:

      [quote] But before you go, whisper this to your sons and their sons – “The work was free. Keep it so.” [end quote] L. Ron Hubbard (excerpt from Scientology: Clear Procedure, Issue 1 – December, 1957)

      I wish I had the space to print the entire segment of that here, but to me, those simple words are the embodiment of philosophy and of freedom, and of work. The entire segment also contains a critical piece of LRH’s historical thought, and his reasons for what was really a mandatory defense of Scientology before its very real foes. Then, it was not at all even close to the quest for domination the Co$ has become.

      That Mike Rinder can cover philosophy, and religion, and manage the PR demands of the inflated and pretentious modern age “philosophical society”, under the hostility from the Co$ and the hostility of a world sometimes incensed by the very word “Scientology”, that he can speak correctly and walk away on calm waters, is very good indeed. It deepens my empathy for the pain and soul-twisting turmoil he must have gone through while still in the Co$, to have goals of true Scn so close, and yet so destroyed.

      Keep it free.

    • Mike’s speech writing puts Dan Sherman to shame. Well done!

    • Your humble servant

      Thank you. I hope there is another recording with better sound quality. Although I could understand 1/2 of what Mike was saying, I couldn’t understand the other speakers at all. If not, maybe someone with more discerning ears than mine can get it all onto a transcript. This reminds me of the recordings of some of the speakers at the most recent Freezone convention. Very interesting speakers, but they couldn’t be understood at all because of the poor audio.

    • After listening to the first speaker,,,and then Mike, I couldn’t help but notice the differences in their impact on the audience. The audience was bored throught the first speaker’s presentation but when Mike spoke, not only were they INTERESTED, they stayed interested throughout.

      Another obvious interaction or in the first speaker’s case, lack of interaction, was how they handled originations from the audience. The first speaker dismissed them all, unwilling to give up his own importance but Mike not only took up the originations, he acknowledged them and still had enough time to complete his section of the debate.

      Mike, you are a superb example of how one can apply Scientology to daily life. Watching this presentation shows the effectiveness of the tech, when correctly applied. Loved the church vs religion clarification! Keep up the good work!

    • STANDING OVATiON for Mike Rinder and all the curious people willing to LOOK!

  109. Well you never see a Church Scientologist engaging the students in a college like that.

  110. So an institution of higher learning does not consult “church authorities” to discuss a particular religion because all the scholars who adhere to the tenants of the religion and understand it are OUT OF THERE.

    I’m trying to conjure up a worse PR statistic than that and really can’t come up with one.

  111. Great job Mike!

  112. The debate appears to now be online at youtube in several segments … I’m in the process of watching them. Here’s the link to the first one:

    http://www.youtube.com/user/TCDPhil#p/u/7/r-To9ci-tdM

    • Beyond Rinder it is pretty academic and boring.

      • I agree, a bit of a snoozefest.

      • I can see you and I would have shared the hot seat in the school principal’s office. It used to bore the heck out of me too.
        “Beyond Mike”. He was over the top! Intelligent, articulate and irrefutably correct in his presentation. He not only explained the religious validity but he clarified the difference between a church and a religion right up front.
        It was an intellectual experience if they were paying attention.
        Well done!

      • That it may well is but nevertheless Mike is a smart cookie. I would welcome him here in Groningen if something like this was to take place at my city’s University.

        I could inquire if it’s desirable.

    • What’s with the bell ringing while the speaker is talking? Is it indication time’s almost up or are they saying he scored a point?

    • Your humble servant

      Thank you, Margaret. The audio on this link is better than that on the link I commented upon above.

  113. Mike;
    You are so smooth, so eloquent, so theta….10+ on your interview.

  114. George White, Kassapa, Windhorse, Vajracutter,

    A truly fascinating discussion, Sorry I’m late in the comments here. And thank you Marty for providing such an open forum for this. I am singularly impressed by the gentleness of the discussion despite the disagreements. Thank you all. I have an interest in this topic but lack sufficient time to rut through the material to find good sources. Several were posted here. I made note. Others would be appreciated. I’m more the nuts and blots kind of person so maybe one of these branches is better suited to my personality. Any suggestions from our resident experts here?

    • Hi Ann,

      I have mentioned the “Heart Sutra” as an important source of wisdom in the Mahayana schools. It can be found here:

      http://www.lamayeshe.com/index.php?sect=article&id=375

      Sutras such as these are difficult to fathom and many of the statements can appear quite paradoxical. But it is definitely possible to understand them and contemplate their essential meaning.

      A famous Indian saint, known as Nagarjuna, set forth commentaries that elucidated these scriptures, and his works are considered the “gold standard” in terms of hitting the salient points.

      Innumerable scholars from a variety of schools have relied upon his works to further unpack the presentation of subjects such as no-self, the nature of phenomena, and the nature of mind.

      Through the use of negation, an analytical form of meditation is presented which is used to develop insight into reality, culminating in the wisdom that directly realizes ultimate truth.

      There are many books which elaborate in very specific, minute detail. Here’s a great one:

      http://www.amazon.com/Center-Sunlit-Sky-Madhyamaka-Tradition/dp/1559392185/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1319931705&sr=1-1

      It is highly technical, but also very incisive. Here’s a choice quote:

      “Since the materials are tailored to address the mind, plenty of emotional and intellectual reactions are sure to be triggered by this process of the mind working with its contents and being worked on by them. All of these reactions can and should be acknowledged, watched, and processed as they appear. This is nothing other than practice – mindfully dealing with our experiences.”

    • Ann Howe,
      In my opinion the best branch of Buddhism is Scientology. Read or listen to The Phoenix Lectures. Then, if you want information about earlier branches, one of my favorite books is “The Compass of Zen” by the Korean Zen Master Seung Sahn. The first half of the book covers the history and philosophy of Buddhism in India, China, Korea, and Japan. I also really like “Don’t Know Mind – The Spirit of Korean Zen” by Richard Shrobe. For Tibetan Buddhism, two books by Dzogchen Ponlop are good: “Wild Awakening” and “Mind Beyond Death.” But read or listen to the Phoenix Lectures before your read any books on Buddhism.

  115. Marty, Mike what a great interview, How proud, how good I feel hearing you Mike representing the meaning of Scientology to the world. Thank you from my heart. Sergio

  116. Mike, your speech at the Trinity College indicates a milestone for Scientology in general. Finally there is a Scientologist who has the guts to take part in a debate without the fear of criticism/attacks. The Cof$ lead by a sociopath has caused many to misunderstand or even detest this beautiful philosophy. Now finally someone can set the records straight – LRH would be proud of you…

  117. Thank you Mike for being so articulate and delivering a great communication to the audience of this interview on the philosophy of Scientology.

  118. I am very late to this. My bad. Just wanted to say that these statements of Mike having natural TRs, related possible comments of him being “in valence”. Hogwash. We see Mike. Mike is and as Mike. Truly spectacular as it so seldom happens this day and age.

    Mike, thank you. Thank you for being you.

    Bruce

  119. Another new spokeperson for the Church!

  120. Mike,

    I finally got a chance to watch your talk at Trinity College and your interview on the Dublin TV show.

    You did great on both.

    My highest ARC, Lisa

  121. Pingback: Student writer at Trinity College Dublin takes the Scientology Personality Test … is unimpressed | PseudoScientology.info

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