Grade II

I once noted on this blog that I do not and will not “pull withholds” on or security check anyone.  David Miscavige hollered “Eureka!” and had his Corporate Scientology propagandists spread the word far and wide that I allegedly audit over overts and withholds as an avowed practice.  They ignored my explanation on the former that I don’t need to “pull withholds” because my pc’s are sufficiently in-session that they inevitably voluntarily, without coercion, freely vent them.  When someone completes Grade II with me he/she is free from the hostilities and sufferings of life because the person understands the overt-motivator sequence in life. They don’t walk around with withholds because when they commit an overt they pretty much always take responsibility for it.  When they do have a withhold they readily share it, it doesn’t need to be “pulled.” As to “security checking”, I explained my position on this in some detail in mid 2009 in a video taped interview available on the St Petersburg Times website, (go to segment entitled Abuse of Trust).

I often refer to Grade II as the make-break point in one’s progression up the Bridge.  People who treat the grade with a lick and a promise don’t reach the abilities gained for the level and that makes the rest of the journey a potential rocky road.

When I take someone through Grade II, we complete it when a person is entirely satisfied without doubt or reservation that he or she has attained all four flows of the abilities gained for that grade, as abilities in life. Not as some ethereal theoretic postulate.

It is rather plain that if one is not thoroughly freed from the hostilities and sufferings of life, by definition the person is not really in-session the rest of the way. Conversely, if a person has been freed of and understands the mechanisms of the overt/motivator sequence, it is quite clear that an individual is not accumulating more motivators, complexities and their resultant masses in life and can concentrate fully on higher spiritual endeavors and living a fulfilling life.

One reason for our tremendous success is our approach to the confessional requirement of Grade II.   When Miscavige directed the compilation of the False Purpose Rundown Series in the eighties he failed to publish Hubbard’s embracing discovery that lead to his direction to compile a series in the first place.  That was this, Hubbard wrote that somewhere along the line someone omitted handling evil purposes and non survival considerations in confessional procedure.  Hubbard noted that a confessional, by definition, most importantly includes pulling the roots from the overt/motivator sequence by getting to the postulates that prompted the chains of overts.

In fact, Miscavige only published a corollary statement Hubbard made along this line in the suppressive person declare of David Mayo; something about Mayo allegedly corrupting confessional procedure by omitted the handling of evil purposes.  Fact of the matter is, Mayo was not the cause of the omission but that is another story entirely for another day.

But, the entire statement about the vital importance of getting to and as-ising the postulates beneath chains of overts in ALL confessional auditing, and the entire philosophy outlined by Hubbard in despatches to Senior C/S Int  have remained buried in Miscavige’s tunnels, if not shredded entirely.  A greater act of cruelty to humankind is difficult to imagine for those who have seen or experienced the remarkable gains attained by addressing and handling the postulates beneath the overt-motivator sequence.

But, for those who slavishly adhere to a literal interpretation of Hubbard who need a specific written injunction in order to understand and act for the greatest good for the pre Clear in front of one, what I am stating here can easily be divined as “on Source” by studying the entire body of LRH’s work on the overt-motivator sequence and confessionals (including his dozens of lectures on the subject delivered in the St Hill Special Briefing Course).

The Scientology Corporation has known for decades that the Joberg Confessional security check has been culturally outdated for decades and that fact has lengthened and complicated the completion of Grade II.  But, being robots and literal they continue to deliver it as part of their Grade II – leaving pcs muddled and confused as to what constitutes an overt and right/wrong conduct, not to mention restimulated by touching upon, but expressly leaving unhandled the intentions and considerations prompting chains of overts. Note, Miscavige has recently “piloted” dropping the confessional requirement of Grade II altogether (judging by recent Flag promo at the end of this post it appears Corporate Scientology must have gone ahead and implemented such broadly).

When we get to the confessional requirement of Grade II, my pc’s are hatted on False Purpose Rundown procedure.  The C/S uses the FPRD basic form as a model (not robotically delivered verbatim as it too is a sloppily worded – violating LRH policies on wording of confessional questions – piece of work) to tailor a confessional for the pc in front of one.  The confessional is designed to, and does each time, bring about the complete “abilities gained” specified by Hubbard for Grade II completion – with flying colors.

I have audited four people up the bridge in this fashion. All four people are so freed from the overt/motivator sequence, and so freed from their own postulates that made that sequence once dictate their lives, that their lives and the manner in which they conduct them are a continuing inspiration to me.

I am including a success recently written by Tatiana  Baklanova.  Tatiana sought me out specifically to deliver her Grade II because she sensed it was an all important Grade and that I would treat it as such.

http://community.freezone-tech.info/success/2011/10/28/life-changed/

Finally, by way of comparison, below please see the latest from a Flag Service Consultant doing the bidding of Corporate Scientology’s Mecca.   See the lick and a promise attitude they approach the Grades with. See the technical degrade that has become David Miscavige POLICY throughout corporate Scientology.

—–Original Message—–
From: Barbara Dews <barbaradews@flag.org>
To: barbaradews <barbaradews@flag.org>
Sent: Fri, Apr 1, 2011 9:12 pm
Subject: What really happens to a thetan who is not salvaged or processed and goes on down the route? This is not April Fools!

Hello Everybody,
          At Flag people are moving up The Bridge faster then ever before.   You can go to Flag ARC SW case level and come home Grade IV complete in under 2 weeks.  We are doing this on regular basis.   Over the last two weeks at Flag we have made almost 20 people Clear!!!!!!!     In the last few months we have averaged 7 to 10 New OT 7- Solo Nots – Cause over Life – Completions every week.
          The reason we can do this is we have hundreds of auditors and we deliver the tech standardly which rolls people up up up The Bridge.
          You can go to Flag and find that by getting your case standardly handled you will find your Bridge just opening up and you will move forward.  It happens all the time.
          I am here to help you make it.    Just below this are two LRH quotes that ARE NOT April Fools!   You need to go up The Bridge believe me!
“I have been researching upper OT Levels and I can tell you this very plainly:  If Scientology doesn’t make it worldwide, you’ve had it – yes, I mean you.
 
“One is not working for just this life.  He is working for any future life at all…
 
“All right, all right, if one has a penchant for being a soulless idiot and believes he has no future, then he is in for a dreadful surprise once he kicks the bucket.  The worse off he is, the nastier the surprise.
 
“So don’t let people play around with this.”  
 
LRH   HCO PL of 14 March 1982, Financial Irregularities.
 
 
“Man is a complex being, far more complex than he ever conceived.  And he possesses abilities and potentials that neither he nor any of the wise men of the ages ever dreamed of.
 
In 1978, a great many new insights and revelations about life were disclosed, many of them discovered in my research at very upper levels.  These then were used to speed up the lower and more fundamental grades.  Without discarding any of the tech we already had, all of which remains very valid, the time and cost for a given result was greatly reduced…
 
“But there was one discovery is ’78 that I haven’t said very much about and am really not likely to since it is a sad thing.  It is what really happens to a thetan who is not salvaged or processed and goes on down the route.  Man when I saw that and knew it to be true I actually felt sorry for these guys that try to hit at us.  Poor devils.  Some religions talk about hell.  It’s an understatement of what really happens.  I got a real close look at what we were salvaging people from.  Well, we can do it, better than ever today, especially with these newest discoveries.” 
 
Ron’s Journal 30  1978 – The Year of Lightning Fast New Tech    17 Dec 1978
 
          I want to help each of you make it up and in doing so truly help us achieve the aims of Scientology and help Clear this planet!!!
Call me or write anytime for anything.
Love,
Barbara Dews
Flag Service Consultant
323 872 3585
@2010 CSFSO.  All Rights Reserved.  Grateful acknowledgement is made to L. Ron Hubbard Library for permission to reproduce selections from the copyrighted works of L. Ron  Hubbard.  FLAG, OT, SCIENTOLOGY, THE BRIDGE, AUDITED NOTS, SOLO NOTS, STANDARD TECH, NOTS, NED, L.RON HUBBARD, HUBBARD, LRH  and THE FLAG LAND BASE are trademarks and service marks owned by Religious Technology Center and are used with its permission.  SCIENTOLOGIST  is a collective membership mark designating members of the affiliated churches and missions of Scientology.  Services relating to Scientology religious philosophy are delivered throughout the world exclusively by licensees of the Church of Scientology International with the permission of Religious Technology Center, holder of the SCIENTOLOGY and DIANETICS trademarks.

199 responses to “Grade II

  1. Great points, Marty. I’ve been watching Grade II tech get mangled by Miscavige for the past decade.

    One key question: As far as you know, did LRH want FPRD-style Confessionals to be done as part of Grade II? If so, this is a MAJOR omission!

  2. Great post Marty,

    I’m Glad that you recognize the importance of this vital action (Grade II) and are addressing it thoroughly. You’re right that an in-session PC will bring up withholds voluntarily. Keep up the good work.

    Congratulation on your stellar results!

  3. Marty, you Rock! Congratulations to everyone involved in these successes!

  4. Thanks for the post on grade ll.

    Hey, great success story and I am SO glad Tatiana went to you! She is a valuable asset to the Independent movement and will have a good idea now of standard tech and it’s value.

  5. Grendel's Mother

    Flag “tech” is an oxymoron.

  6. Well you see this is because Misgarbage doesn’t even understand the concept of a pc really being “in session”. No, to him that is just a sign on the door so everyone else is quite so he or his minions can hear on their look-in systems and “executive C/S” — or squirrley C/S — over the mic to the “auditor” so they get all of the dirty/nasty withholds of magnitude and high crmes (nothing else, real or imagined, would be acceptable)…..and so it goes. Just a total unreality that he will, unsadly, NEVER get!
    On the bright side of life, your pc has written a beautifyl Success Story — and therein lies the MAGIC of SCIENTOLOGY🙂

    • Gary Morehead a.k.a Jackson

      Shannon,

      I don’t believe John Travolta knew… ” Misgarbage doesn’t even understand the concept of a pc really being “in session”. No, to him that is just a sign on the door so everyone else is quite so he or his minions can hear on their look-in systems and “executive C/S” — or squirrley C/S — over the mic to the “auditor” so they get all of the dirty/nasty withholds of magnitude and high crmes (nothing else, real or imagined, would be acceptable)…..

      When JT came out from behind one of those signs at Flag to find Flag personnel stuffed in a room looking in on his session, I would bet that he, like the rest of us, believed something slightly different!

      Poor soul. I remember the feeling too. I call it “raping the soul”! and yes you can quote me on that! Every time i saw it, that is how I felt about myself or for the person I witnessed it happening to.

      — Jackson

      • Jackson,

        Funny how trust is so dear, how we feel our souls raped when our trust is betrayed. I would guess that “trust” is one of those qualities which comprise theta much like ARC, and when our trust is invalidated or evaluated, enforced or inhibited, then our souls suffer.

        You know how you feel when you’re around someone you could trust with your life, your wife and all your secrets? The feeling is so huge and powerful. And great auditors make you feel it, and give you a chance to experience it and flow it back.

        What a betrayal, not only of JT, but of all Scientologists. I just hope that when each person leaves, their trust is not so shattered that they paint Scientology as a traitor and enemy. It isn’t the subject that has sunk to those low conditions, it’s the being mangling it.

      • Li'll bit of stuff

        reply—“raping the soul”

        Hi Jackson,

        I totally duplicate and understand this. The sheer abomination of what you have described,makes one feel revolted, yet again, by this THOROUGHLY DETESTABLE piece of “MISGARBAGE” YES, SIR-EEE, Roll on T-H-E M-O-T-I-V-A-T-O-R / S

        with you, Li’ll bit

      • It’s interesting, when I describe my experience on OT Eligibility to others, I used the term “spiritual rape”. It’s the best I’ve been able to come up with regarding how I felt.

        • Bert, to “rape” you can add “pillage and plunder”; I’m hearing more stories of Flag using overts revealed to literally blackmail and extort huge sums of monies – becoming more prevalent as time moves on.

          • Marty

            Well, that got me to experience a whole new level of incredulity followed by total disgust.

            Oh…. the hole they dig…

            Eric S

          • That made me think that Miscavige’s Flow 3, “others to others” are on full ev purp restim, meaning me insists others do to others what he would do to those people himself!

            Marty, Who last failed to get Miscavige in session? Wilhere, Heidi Stahli, Hansuli Stahli, Mitoff?

            Who used to audit Miscavige?

            Who last audited him, and why didn’t Qual RTC just force him into session per the 1959 “Individuation” tape that says others just below the exec have to just lead them into session.

            The point when people around DM last failed to have an influence on him, to get him into session, of course was long after his case was off the rails.

            That date that anyone last had any effect on getting him in session, and putting in some control on him, to get him in session, is an important point in the last couple decades.

            Was Jesse Prince the last one who pulled an honest withhold out of the guy?

            • Gary Morehead. Aka Jackson

              Chuck,

              This was answered in earlier posts by my dear darling bud Jan Weiss.

              Jesus, I remember Penny Mace honestly trying to get David – I don’t have time for this tech / admin stuff details besides standing on an applebox is hard enough -Miscavige and the other IG’s. She was successful with all even Dave – yeah I’ve got my box – Miscavige but he lasted no more than a week. The other execs were systematically pulled OFF COURSE by David – I think I just stepped on a nail – Miscavige.

              – Jackson

      • Hi Jackson, and thanks. I believe you are correct on JT. And your descriptive term “raping the soul” is spot on.

        • This is a tricky one for me …and I’m sure what I’ll say isn’t going
          to be popular—but realize I AM trying to sort things out. I know
          what I’m going to say *may* contradict Marty–but if I’m off,
          he’ll be able to show me where. I’d like
          to run by you all my thoughts on this, from my training. I’m a
          Grad 5/Interned, Flag Trained and Interned Security Checker,
          and then FPRD trained, too, which I co-audited for quite some time.

          I get you have a new definition of “In session”….but that is not
          what “Ron” said, wrote about, or put on many tapes I listened to.
          I am a Flag Trained and Interned Security Checker—so I speak
          with either *tons* of mind control—-or training as I knew it.
          It was Hubbard–I listened to his tapes of he getting a pc ready
          for session. I listened to he pulling withholds, in session, that started out very tiny. I’ll never forget it: Ron kept saying: “Well, I’m still getting
          a littttttttttttttttle tick tick here”. And the pc would come up with more.

          Anyone here heard that tape? It’s AMAZING. I think it was the one with Jack Horner? The guy goes from some tiny “overt’ on and on and ON —to quite large things he’d done. But had Ron not used to meter, and literally pulled the w/h—-they would have never gotten that.

          So with that training, it’s hard for me to read you now no longer pull w/h’s when that was a big deal to Ron. I understand people feeling safe enough to get off their overts. I’m just trying to piece that together with the tapes of Ron pulling w/h’s years and years ago. Please help me understand this. I also called what I went through “Spiritual Rape” with the Top Secret Mafia, so I understand that concept, Jackson.

          Love to all🙂 Tory/Magoo

          • It’s hard to tell if you are (not for the first time) criticizing LRH, this time for “pulling” whoever’s withholds. Or maybe you are saying what is actually true – that sometimes, withholds have to be pulled.

            I am also a trained sec checker, interned all the way up, etc, years as a professional auditor. I include that only to communicate that I am speaking from experience.

            Marty’s experience is somewhat different than mine. I understand that it is possible to have such a perfect, safe presence that your pcs will often – maybe always for someone like Marty – voluntarily give up their withholds. I completely acknowledge that. I’ve had a few auditors I would tell anything to; others who I could sense were way too weak or unsafe in some way (or, frankly, too attractive if of the opposite sex) to give anything up that was embarrassing.

            But, as I’m sure many other trained auditors will agree, sometimes the auditor must get in there and pull – and persist – until he or she gets it. Sometimes the pc really needs that firm hand of help, to overcome the resistance of his bank in giving it up. Not all auditors are up to the task, which is why rigorous sec checker training (as it existed in the 70s) was so valuable.

            I have had at least a few experiences where the effort to pull a withhold went on for some hours – varying the question, etc etc, pc flat out refusing to give it up (but acknowledging that it was there), persisting until it finally came off. Not bullying, but just being determined, Tone 40 (TRUE Tone 40, that is), persistent.

            Bottom line is, getting one of these “big” (usually not so big but just embarrassing or discreditable in some way) withholds off the case produces more case gain and relief than just about anything else. It is a HUGE help to the pc to get these things off and sometimes it takes a considerable amount of determination to do so.

            It doesn’t seem to me that it’s the way you get the withhold that’s important (excluding of course all forms of “not in session”, non-standard or squirrel gangbanging stuff). What’s important is that these confessed overts and withholds be treated with the utmost confidentiality, and the trust given by the pc to the auditor and organization behind him or her (if any) NEVER be violated under ANY circumstances.

            • First off, it’s not criticizing LRH for pulling w/h’s…I way saying what you said: “Or maybe you are saying what is actually true – that sometimes, withholds have to be pulled.” Yup—that. I actually loved hearing him “pull” w/h’s as it was done in such as ‘soft’ yet effective way, vs. the way we were being taught. It actually *totally* changed how I did sec checks, and thus they were way more effective.

              And, having had my own session w/h’s spread around the Net for 11 years (and made up ones, by the knuckleheads)–I for sure agree on confidentiality.
              I’ve been speaking out about C of $’s abuses for 11 years—and have never divulged the many “secrets” I was told. It just isn’t right—no matter the reasons. My best to all🙂 TLC

              • Thanks for clarifying – now I understand (and agree) with you. I really like your description “soft yet effective” way he did it & as we were taught.

          • I understand what you’re saying Tory. Ron talks about the nature of O/Ws keeps many hidden from view of the pc. Hence the need for such things as “Fish & Fumble — Checking Dirty Needles” which is what the Jack Horner tape is called I think.

            I believe a pc in session will easily get off withholds if he feels safe enough to do so, but he does need to “see” them to be able to do so.

            But it is also true that the earlier Lower Grades (ARC SW, 0 and 1) done fully and properly (NOT the norm in the modern Cof$) will set the pc up to have the confront to see his O/Ws that before would have been obscured. I’m pretty sure the above mentioned tape was before the final codification of the Grades. So it needs to be understood in context of ALL the data on this.

            • Thanks, Gehr. Interesting! I never looked at that—re the Jack H’s tape being pre-grades. Ok, that helps put it in perspective a bit more.
              I thank you for taking the time to explain that.🙂 Tory/Magoo

  7. Gee Marty, I got called a squirrel for doing exactly what you are saying in regard to confessionals on GII. The results were absolutely magical.

    I guess the 100K my wife spent at Flag from 2005 to 2006, with zero progress up the bridge, was all just squirrel shit. Geeze, I got declared for telling them that.

    Ron said that the following is a suppressive act: “Boasting as to speed of delivery in a session, such as ‘I put in Grade 0 in three minutes’.”
    I guess that suppressive act is old and no longer used? I guess it’s okay now?

    What a great auditor you are.

    What a bunch of immoral squirrles they seem to be at Flag.

    • Les, thanks for sharing your observation and practice in this regard. It is interesting that in the three minutes I’ve been reading comments this morning you are the second person whose understanding and application I admire who has noted he came to the same conclusions on his little lonesome (Raul being the other one). This leads me to wanna say that in addition to your observation about where the squirreling lies, it is actually forbidden within Corporate Scientology to practice standard tech.

      • Marty, I can’t agree more. My experience at Flag in 2005 is that the PC or Pre-OT is not allowed to participate in the robotic processing session. The spiritual being in front of the auditor is “treated” with a Scientology processes until he succumbs to them. This does not meet the definition of “in session”. In 1996 the technology that LRH left us was described as the “blind leading the blind”, which gave Miscavige cart blanch license to alter the tech to its very core to suppress and control people for his benefit. Which is another way of saying that the practice of standard tech is expressly forbidden within Corporate Scientology because it does not lead to suppression and control.

        • Auditor plus Bank is greater than PC. That is fundamental formula of Black Scientology and the ultimate intention of every bit of Darth Midget’s twisting and warping of Ron Hubbard’s tech.

          Michael A. Hobson
          Independent Scientologist

      • I believe that missed-witholds have been used to ruin the Church internally for decades. Out-tech sec-checking missions being fired in wave after wave on the major tech delivery lines has resulted in a very, very poor scene indeed.

        With all the focus on O/W’s, a lot of good people have blown, thinking they truly are suppressive or out-ethics due to the unrelenting focus on their O/W’s within the Org.

        Whats needed is for Org terminals to hold the line and present their stats, and LRH policy, in defense. This hasn’t been easy when the Orgs are being torn of their top producers due to some ‘overt discovered during session that qualifies them for the RPF’ ..

      • Very, Very True in the 90’s—OT 7’s were not allowed to practice Standard auditing tech, we were tested beyond belief every 6 months. If you missed *a* word—off to Cramming for usually large crams, work clearing, etc. Of course the endless sec checks were part of each one. I remember saying to my auditor: “We’re at the top of the Bridge, yet you treat us as if we were prisoners let out of prison for a few weeks”. It was insane. I was on OT 7 when they Changed the GD definition of F//N! Talk about a nightmare. As the D of P said, when I asked “What about the HCOB “Are you Waiting for the Meter to Play Dixie”? She said: “I know, I know—we have orders, that’s all I can say. ((ARGH!!!))

        Once I got my Mother-in-law onto OT 8. The OT 8 Reg’s Husband was ON the Freewinds and turned in the FSM slip, getting the $500. I called the ship–they said “It’s true, that wasn’t right, you should get the money”. I started calling Sharmain (the Reg) to get the money. Finally I get to Flag, do the reg 6 mo night-mare Sec check. Then? “Oh you have a tailor made Sec check”. I go in session: “What overts have you committed on Sharmain?” “What overts do you have on the Sea Org”.
        On and on and ON! AND *I* Had to pay for every single hour of that—and I never got the FSM $$$ that they stole from me!

        It’s hard to believe I stayed—-thankfully I finally quit, after 7 years and my final C/S: “See if you can walk down the road and NOT Think about your case”. (Don’t think about an elephant). I made it to the second driveway—stood out in the street and said: ” *I* am DONE with this
        F O R E V E R–not just this lifetime, but lifetime after lifetime after
        lifetime”. ENOUGH. After I escaped out, I later met many highly trained auditors, top C/S’s, LRH’s Staff, all who were out.
        NONE of them could believe that C/S. They all agreed it was THE Squirliest C/S they’d ever heard. Yes..you’re spot on, Marty. All the best, Tory/Magoo

    • Les, I think George Orwell would have gotten a kick out of DM’s brand of Scientology. If Coke were the brand, DM would be selling it with something most reprehensible for coloring, claiming the “secret recipe” sacred, while customers get sick left and right.

      But, back to Orwell and redefinition of words. To be labeled an SP by the church has become a badge of honor. To be viewed as a squirrel because you stick to LRH’s basic theory on what is standard and what is valid auditing and what actually produces results in a pc…well, what a delight to maintain your integrity.

      • The most egregious sin of all has been DM’s editing of LRH’s lectures to remove the references to Orwells 1984, wherein LRH WARNED US that Scientology could be used to deliver Orwells predicted results.

        It was very clear to me when that happened that DM was in fact, full-on restim dramatizing Fac One.

        No Sea Org member today is safe from Big Brother. It is a simple fact that if you read 1984 while in the SO, you’ll find yourself in big, big trouble.

  8. Thanks Marty,

    You never cease to amaze me in your rational, logic and understanding.

    I independently came to the same set of conclusions and agree with you wholeheartedly on your approach to Grade II, especially for a somewhat seasoned Scientologist. Maybe for someone completely new who couldn’t be easily set up to receive FPRD you should run, “What have you done? What have you withheld?” and similar such processes as it would alleviate some pressure at that person’s reality.

    But, it is factually inhumane to delve into long WT overt chains without tackling the underlying postulate while you’re at it. It’s a patch job at best. I thought this would be “obvious” just from the pure Dianetics perspective of blowing the “Basic” or postulate holding the chain together, and once blown, the entire chain and its baggage disappear, but, “No” I was a squirrel who thought it was valid to mix Dianetics concepts with sec checking.

    Really? What is the difference in principle? NONE! Whether you use a White list to find the charged area, or a set of sec checking questions, is there any good damn difference in principle between NED and FPRD? NO – just in procedure and application, but the basics are the same. The mind only works in one way, and that is the same whether you’re fishing for a reading item in NED, or going down an overt chain.

    So, all the power to you Marty. I think it is time to consider who the real squirrels are. The ones that try to create preordained scripts which predict your every move and robotically train them through endless repetition, or, the ones who seek to gain a full conceptional understanding of the basics of the mind and apply all the tech and tools to simply handle the PC in front of them. This is how it used to be, but DM labeled this “old” and “out-tech” and replaced it with GAT who churned out robots who couldn’t think for themselves, couldn’t think with the tech and sought rules to solve every single thing they ran into.

    Did nobody ever wonder why the results seem to suffer? People probably did but didn’t dare speak up in fear of being considered “stupid” or “against DM”, I mean, who wouldn’t after all the brainwashing propaganda, event after event, which made it the highest crime in the universe to think for yourself with understanding.

    Understanding has been replaced with rules and “training aides” and audio/visual properties and patter drills.

    I bet the OSA sycophants are doing serious patter drills to “handle” you, just like all the regges and call-in folks are. Pre-drilled rules have replaced ARC, the tone scale and 2-way comm, but of course, all the riff raff staff are so incredibly stupid and incompetent (from DM’s perspective) the only way to go is telling them what to do in every scenario. They couldn’t possible figure it out by themselves, and God forbid if they started to think for themselves, those morons may even pose a threat…

    So +100 for Marty and all actions which lead to independent thinking, understanding and action. DM’s strategy is slowly killing his own operation as all the patter drilling and robotic actions have caused so many PR situations, created so many enemies they will drown in their own doing!

    • Raul, you noted: I independently came to the same set of conclusions and agree with you wholeheartedly on your approach to Grade II, especially for a somewhat seasoned Scientologist. Maybe for someone completely new who couldn’t be easily set up to receive FPRD you should run, “What have you done? What have you withheld?” and similar such processes as it would alleviate some pressure at that person’s reality.

      But, it is factually inhumane to delve into long WT overt chains without tackling the underlying postulate while you’re at it. It’s a patch job at best. I thought this would be “obvious” just from the pure Dianetics perspective of blowing the “Basic” or postulate holding the chain together, and once blown, the entire chain and its baggage disappear, but, “No” I was a squirrel who thought it was valid to mix Dianetics concepts with sec checking.
      L Ron Hubbard agrees with your independent set of conclusions. He noted as of 1983 that there is no such thing as “sec checking” that does not also include the handling of the underlying non survival considerations that prompted them.
      As a note, we run lots of o/w processes before engaging in the confessional requirement at the end.

      • Thanks Marty, that makes a whole lot of sense, and of course you would run the standard O/W processes as laid out in the LRH directed Grade II checklist – I specifically meant doing all sec-checking type actions FPRD style, which you also confirmed!

      • Marty,
        Thanks very much for the update on the subject of FPRD and Gr 2, it really filled in the blanks for me on the subject and put quite a few experiences in perspective. I hope I don’t bore you with my personal story on this subject.

        Received my expanded Grade 2 in ’79 which was pretty thorough as done by a Cl 12, but didn’t include FPRD advices which came later. Needless to say, it took over 2 weeks. I would imagine that including the FPRD in EPing the chains would elevate the power of the Tech akin to the change from Std Dianetics to NED. From ’87 -2001 with the compilation, C/Sing and application in POB’s reign, the majority (95%) of actions when I picked up the cans was Sec Checks and FPRD in all of it’s forms and countless “Tailor mades” in the 14 years. Personally it got frustrating just looking for stuff that didn’t exist just to end the endless lists.

        Other Non FPRD “auditing” was 2D coaudit and half of Superpower. That, in comparing with other ex-Int staff is the standard fare of POB Tech at the Int base, including GAT in the mid 90’s. The inclusion of periodical sec checks run every couple of months run FPRD style, while on POB’s personal staff the last few years was cleaning cleans and not a happy experience with prepchecking it seems at every turn. Needless to say it puts one out of session with a defensive posture, just looking for FNs and EP to these bouts.

        Inclusion of look in systems and fixation on sec checks and Grade 2 materials simply indicates a POB case dramo, paranoia and probably consistent personal nightmares or something. Picking up the cans is not something one looked forward to within the confines of RCS! I had a bit of that consideration, my last experiences when arriving in Texas, completely unfounded as it turns out in the great environment Marty and Mosey live in, despite paddleboat raids at the time.

        As a contrast, sessions in Casablanca with all the right stuff including auditing for the PC with the PC is just an incredible, blow away experience and pure case gain! It validates the reason one got in Scn in the first place, to move on up higher!

        • +1

        • Gary Morehead. Aka Jackson

          So Sinar,

          What you are telling me is that you didn’t like my 24/7 hang time with you in between your FPRD at the Grand O’l Old Gilman House?

          But what of our time at Sublett and Quandt Ranch??

          Your cycle (s) in particular Sinar is what I refer to above!

          From my perspective, Paula aimed at and worked the hardest at delivering what S-man screamed for during those times…… Good o’l reliable auditing!

          Ahhh good times huh??!!

          –Jackson

    • Raul,

      Isn’t it interesting that those who don’t mind being viewed as “stupid” or “wrong” often turn out to be the most analytical?

      (Course, that doesn’t include the sociopaths who don’t care what anyone else thinks anyways.)

  9. Congrats to you both!
    The little one just grabs anything_ridiculous because he’s got so many overts & withholds of his own and only sees this tech as punishment to make people guilty with. Proof positive he’s never gotten anything close.

    Keep up the great work!

  10. Marty,

    There are so many significant points you’ve made in this write-up I don’t know where to begin or end.

    However, I know, as a long-time Dianetisist and founding Scientologist, it all begins with having unlimited and unrestrained communication with the auditor.

    Period.

    And that ultimately boils down to trust.

    LRH conveyed that sort of beingness and that’s why he was so successful with his clients even going back to the late ’40’s in LA and through to his other great discoveries and revelations in Phoenix, Philadelphia and Camden.

    There does exist those who consider themselves grateful guinea pigs. The cult of dm won’t allow that to be acknowledged, much less understand how to handle.

    “God willing”, I look forward to seeing you in January.

    I see these things as so simple. Sometimes, though, as Ron discovered, they, some considerations, require another terminal to discharge.

    Through this blog of yours i have come to trust you as I trust Ron.

    Thanks for being here.

  11. Marty,
    You are definitely the best auditor I have ever experienced. Thank you for being there and helping all of us!

  12. HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
    Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

    HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 MARCH 1982

    Execs
    FP Pack
    Finance Terminals
    Not BPI

    FINANCIAL IRREGULARITIES

    Anyone who permits, neglects or forwards financial irregularities with org finances is, to put it very mildly, tampering with his own future.

    It is not a matter of “Oh, that’s just the org” and “The company is a bottomless pit.” It is not the same with Scn orgs as it is out there in business.

    The waste and financial laxity which characterizes the workaday world may be the fashion out there but it is not the way Scn orgs may go.

    The business of Scientology involves the future of this population and planet and only the very insane would tamper with that.

    I have been researching upper OT levels and I can tell you this very plainly: If Scn doesn’t make it worldwide, you’ve had it—yes, I mean you.

    One is not working for just this life. He is working for any future life at all.

    When one uses an org for personal rip-off, he is cutting his own throat.

    Oh yes, I know the insane commit suicide. Yes, I know the psychs believe they are just brains and thus soulless zombies. Yes, I know they hope they live only one life.

    Only the insane or a zombie would imperil his own future.

    So leave the insane conduct, the zombie ranting about one life to the psychs and the Justice Department and other trash. Don’t forward their avowed intent of bankrupting Scientology financially. They have not made it, will not make it. But why help them?

    Are you such a good friend of the raving psychiatrist or the terrorist FBI that you would imperil an Scn org by condoning financial irregularities? The money donated to the Church belongs to expansion and salvage of the world population.

    I set you a good example. Money that I make as an author is dedicated to this planet’s future. And whatever I make—and I happen to be one of the best-paid writers on the planet-will go into salvaging people—and has gone into it for over half a century. What do you think paid for, pays for, the research you use?

    Many people sacrifice a very great deal—and thousands even forego high pay-for orgs to have enough money to get the job done. Don’t waste it or, worse, engage in personal games with it.

    It isn’t a matter of “What can I make on the first dynamic.” It’s “What can I make for the third and fourth?”

    The lifeblood of the Western nations is money. When an org is dealing with this society, it can go as far as it has financial resources.

    The money that one makes for an org is intended to save more people.

    All right, all right, if one has a penchant for being a soulless idiot and believes he has no future, then he is in for a dreadful surprise once he kicks the bucket. The worse off he is, the nastier the surprise.

    So don’t let people play around with this.

    One has no right at all to be an idiot about org funds, much less to waste or misuse them. Ignorance is no excuse at all. The data is all in Finance packs. Good sense itself should make one prudent.

    Let those who engage in financial irregularities go join the walking dead. They sure are no part of this team. They are buying no future. In fact they are burying themselves. If they knew what they were burying themselves in, they’d faint.

    This is not a plea. I am just pointing out that org monies misdirected in this life could very well guarantee a very nasty next.

    Millions of criminals suffering in prisons share this in common with those who engage in org financial irregularities—they too thought there were no consequences. But those criminals have it easy. They are only suffering this life.

    Anyone who has misdirected Scientology org monies will, of course, try to brush it off in various ways—black PR, belittlement, seeking to make nothing of the crime. But it won’t brush off, brother, it won’t brush off. THAT crime stood in the way of freedom. You better believe it.

    Whether one has any reality on Scientology or not—he will, once dead, oh yes, he will!

    This is not a threat or a curse. This is about the most friendly advice anyone ever gave.

    L. RON HUBBARD
    Founder

    • Formost,

      Thanks for posting this. Once again just goes to show how blatantly DM violates policy and tech–BLATANTLY–and then sits back and laughs at how he convinces his victims that they are the ones who are wrong. Incredible.

      • You are most welcome.

        I posted this because the Quote in the E-mail in the “Opening Post” took Matters a Tad out of Context. LRH clearly infers primarily criminal Conduct.

        Irony is, this Policy applies more to DM & Co-horts than anyone else. IAS, Idle Morgues, and other Donations that defer the Parishioners Resources away from the “Bridge” is the very Thin that prevents Scientology from going World-wide.

        It’s not just DM doing it to himself, but pads his own Hell for Everyone else too.

        • Formost,

          Irony. Yep. Wonder if he is even aware of violating this policy. Wonder if he is so divorced from reality that he actually believes that what he is doing with the money is what LRH wanted. Total not-is denial.

          Considering Jesse Prince’s experience sec checking him I imagine he’s quite aware that what he’s doing can get him into a lot of trouble. He was cowering apparently over the idea that LRH would find out.

          I imagine he’s pretty worried that Marty might actually bring that trouble to fruition. His head must be vibrating back and forth.

          Which is why I’m in the stands having purchased season tickets to support the home team and cheer. It’s not even that I enjoy the game, just that I despise the opponent so much.

          • >Wonder if he is so divorced from reality that he actually believes that what he is doing with the money is what LRH wanted.

            I don’t believe that DM is actually a Scientologist. I think he’s a CIA plant put in place to destroy the Church.

            This is borne out by statistics.

    • Watchful Navigator

      Look at the date (1982) on that, everyone. I just realized that LRH wrote that for church funds embezzlers and Vegas gamblers, Pat Broeker and David Miscavige (as well as for our own general benefit). But they just didn’t get it, did they?

  13. Martin Padfield

    Flag Service Consultants doing RCS’s bidding obviously don’t have an easy life. Imagine having the pre-OT in front of you and you telling them for just $x,000’s you will get them to OT, knowing full well it’s just not true. Mike Garside had that unenviable task in the UK for decades. Not any more. He is OUT. Anybody knowing the UK scene will know just how big this is. He and his wife Beryl have long SO careers behind them, including spells in GO/OSA. I sincerely hope Mike finds his way into the Indie community ASAP. If he needs any help or advice he will know how to find me.

    • As Mosey pointed out to me, that promo email reflects the bait and switch that has become Corporate Scientology. How many people do you think they are going to get through in the two weeks promised? Zero. And every one of them is going to think “Geez, must be something really messed up with me.” And they’ll be willing to buy hundreds of hours of case correction, willingly because “hey I couldn’t even get through ARC SW, let alone the Grades in two weeks.” Actually, Hy Levy wrote on this blog some months ago that that is exactly what Flag does, bait and switch, knowingly and with malice aforethought.

      • Exactly, bait and switch. The 1.1 SOP of RCS. Lower orgs, bait, actually deliver some Scientology that makes raw public into believers that than can be plucked by donation programs and higher orgs and never get Scientology delivered but implants that keep them hooked.

      • In the late 80’s I got all my Grades done by top Flight FLAG Case Crackers, all done to very well result. Zippo on any repairs by anyone subsequently … delivered by the Numbers.

        But it took approx. 100 hours, and 2 hours a Day is all I could do being too blown out for the rest of the Time.

        Whatever they are doing in 20 Hours is most definitely not the full Grades as prescribed by LRH.

      • Hy was my D of P for ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLL the long, Seven (7) years
        I suffered at Flag, doing that F*** level, writing to DM telling him:
        “There is SOMETHING VERY VERY WRONG WITH THIS”. I continually
        got “OK, Continue”. They would not let me off the level—and I didn’t dream, back then, of just leaving.
        Unbelievable that He KNEW??? That it was a planned mind F***?
        Argh. That’s bad….really bad. I’ll try to process *that*. (((And the hits just keeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep on comin!) TLC

    • Mike and Beryl are out? Holy shit!!!

  14. Davey & co SOP: The greater the lie, the more people will believe it.

  15. Hmm Quickie Grades ,,,,, plus hundreds of auditors, should equal hundreds of grade or clear attests! Now add to this mulligan stew, fear and the threat of damnation plus no salvation, there should be thousands flocking to CO$ for services. Oh I forgot bring ALL your money, mortgage your house, hand them your credit cards, borrow from all family members, then disconnect from them so you don’t gave to pay them back. Did I forget anything ,,,, oh yes, when things don’t go well for you because you did not get standard tech, it will be your fault ,,, here come the sec checks, then the declare. No friends, no money, no real results ,,,, time to wake up & smell the coffee, stop drinking the cool aid, venture out to the independent field. ,,,,, the flowers smell really sweet, the water is fresh & the results are 5 star! Happy trails,,,,

  16. Tatiana, beautiful success story on your Grade 2 completion. Congratulations! And it gets better from there. The awareness levels for Grade 3 are Energy, Adjustment, Body and when I did mine many years ago I got an unexpected but life changing surprise. I wish the same for you!

    • Plus on Danny’s congratulations Tatiana!!!!

    • Thank you Dan and Jim! I noticed too that every time I was done with a Grade, the attention would go to the next one into the state of “curios about” or “not knowing about” – creating a space for it. The mind is off the already healed area and posts the questions advancing into the new territory.
      And I can’t thank enough Ron for the tech and Marty for been there and uncompromisingly, wisely,and truly delivering this tech to those who can be helped.

      • Tatiana,
        Thanks very much for sharing your success, showing that when properly compiled and applied standardly, LRH tech is simply miraculous.

        • I very agree with you on the validity of testimonials, Sinar. The success stories are the R-factors on what Scientology helps people to achieve. This is why I feel responsible to communicate mine honestly, fully and as clear as I can. This is why I created and manage the “Success Stories, Wins and Testimonials” website that you can find by clicking on my name here. You are also welcome to read the wins there, comment them and even add yours!😉

      • Tatiana,

        Thanks for the story. I love heart-felt success stories. The truth of what one writes gives us a measure of what can be.

        I find your assertion about your attention going to the next level fascinating. LRH had noticed that when one freed theta on a case, the individual would tend to dive right back into conquering more of the entheta on the case. He surmised that it was simply the nature of theta to not only conquer MEST but to bring order back to entheta.

        What you said makes me want to re-examine the grade chart.

        Very, very interesting.

        • I wish, I could say something thoughtful and wise to impress you even greater, that you would re-examine not the grade chart only, but the whole world around you… but I am afraid that I was out of those for today.🙂 So to not disappoint you I will pass on commenting your comment.😉
          Thanks for your kind attention to my remark!

        • When you do that re-examination, be sure to look at the spine of the grade chart – the awareness levels – that has served as its foundation from the very beginning (see filmed LRH lecture introducing the first grade chart) and has remained the one unchanged constant through many revisions.

      • Tatiana-I am so happy for you. It is a real milestone to complete Gr ll. Lucky you for getting Marty as your auditor.

    • +1

  17. This would apply to the entire Lower Bridge, yes? (Not to be nippy, but would you luxuriating in South Texas mind running Grade II on the weather, please? We must defeat this encroaching evil that is snow.)

  18. Li'll bit of stuff

    Marty

    Thank you, firstly for your thorough vindication of what Grade 11 CAN accomplish !! as Tatiana’s Success Story shines for all switched on persons to see. She included her glowing gratitude to you in handling her case per her origination; “not making it too easy for me ” –{in order to REALLY have the gains} Not that you would have done it any other way !

    That YOU totally embrace KSW, as your natural MO,shows in all you do for others. In saying this, Who, in their ‘ right mind ‘ is going to set foot in the ‘Friendliest place in the whole world’ just to get FLEECED,LIED TO,CRUSH REGG’ED,SPIED UPON,etc. by enslaved DMbots, who simply DON’T KNOW there is an alternative ‘OUT THERE’ with the REAL SCIENTOLOGY group; The INDEPENDENTS. Let’s say it again ‘REAL” Scientology, affordable, safe ,genuine ,caring,and effective, as offered by the founder, L.Ron Hubbard ,yesterday, today and tomorrow and as delivered, stock standard, by YOU.and Indie auditors. Way to go (move on up a little higher!!}

    Lots’a luv, Li’ll bit

  19. Happy Halloween

    (a day to celebrate Evil Confront!)

    Classically people think of Halloween as a day of evil spirits, in fact it is the day that Evil has to ‘show’ itself, As we all know we are surrounded by Evil 24/7, often it is hidden behind a mask of false goodwill (DM anyone), on Halloween that Evil is ‘forced’ to show it’s true colors before ‘All saints Day’ (1 November).
    If one is unsure of Evil, today is the day to Confront!!(That doesn’t mean refusing Halloween treats to children!)

    I would like to take this day as an opportunity to bow in respect to all those Fireflies and Shooting Stars that have chosen to endure Black Dianetics to stand up to the ‘Beast’!
    Whether Indie, Freezoner, Anonymous, Critic etc, all those who choose to make a difference, who stand against evil, oppression and suppression to make the World a better place.

    I dedicate this in humble Respect to all mentioned above.

  20. Fantastic Marty!!

    My ex-husband during our various and seemingly endless 6 month checks on Solo Nots – flatly refused to get any sec check auditing UNLESS it was FPRD style. The CSs relented and agreed.

    He was then (almost) delighted with his 6 month checks, knowing he was going after core stuff!!

    Kudos to you and congrats to your shining PC.

    WH

    • Interesting. One problem OTs, Clears and others who have had substantial FPRD have had is being continually hammered for more “evil purposes”. LRH wrote of “false purposes”, “non survival considerations”, and other less nefarious sounding postulates. If one looks at the entire body of what he wrote at the time, the spirit and intent of it is lost in the resultant FPRD series published by Corporate Scientology. When an auditor is not so blasted accusative in searching for the underlying intention “FPRD” is far more productive and a joyous activity.

      • I’m curious here Marty, do you put in the entire gamut of buttons when checking an evil purpose, or do you simply check it and put in suppress and invalidate which is from what I remember what the original FPRD issue stated on checking for false purposes procedure?

      • Frankly — after my first Joburg – back in 1973 during an enormous evolution in the PAC area wherein we were all sec checked auditorium style in a large room side by side — after getting OFF THOSE big overts of this life time — my life changed and it’s never been the same.

        Subsequent sec-checks and even FPRD never produced that utter heavenly peaceful state of — wow — even WITH my “badness” I’ve been forgiven and can more forward.

        The 6 month checks on OT VII were mostly hell — and as a result we managed to make our 6 month checks more like 18 month checks. Flag was placated though cause we would stay for a few months and spend much.

        I have no doubt that what LRH wrote and what became the Tech are unrecognizable.

        Glad to have you and the others on watch!!

        Love,
        WH

      • FPRD was also very enjoyable and beneficial prior to the alteration of F/N’s and the use of untold numbers of buttons to get the meter to read. So now you get lots of protest reads and ARCX F/N’s. And running chains that literally don’t exist except for the purpose of chaining a person down. Properly done, FPRD makes space. It has become an insane exercise that amounts to spiritual abuse.

      • Li'll bit of stuff

        Marty,

        Thanks for really “Car- washing” away the BS. Trust the ‘Miscavology’ ‘ Founder ‘to include this ‘ hack job ‘ in his squirrelling. Does he really expect us to believe his REAL motives to’ his version’ of FPRD get by undetected? Pu’ leeze y’all. WAKE THE F— UP !! YOU A-R-E B-E-I-N-G H-A-D !

        RREEE-OWWRR,!!!

        [ just sounding off in my Tasmanian Devil valence] Li’ll bit

      • Boy Marty – you hit something dead on. Hammering for more “evil purposes” really is evil in itself – it introverts one and stirs up all manner of past religious views in regards to evil vs good,etc. “False purposes”, “non survival purposes” open the scope for looking and handling. I remember thinking how I must have been so theetie-wheetie because I just didn’t see an “evil” purpose behind everything. I saw non-survival consids,etc but these were not good enough or something, and it just made me feel confused about my ability to perceive.

        Also, when I was at INT, I recall so vividly, how grueling sec checking was KNOWING that everything I said WOULD be used against me. We all want to survive – why would someone give an executioner the sword to cut his head off? And yet that is what we did time and time again because it was the “ethical” thing to do. Twisted, twisted, twisted. The only thing you can do in a system so rigged, is to walk away from it , if any effort to reform it is to take place. It is impossible to attempt any changes from within.

        DM, as head, and the ULTIMATE approval terminal on ALL LRH tech and policy submissions would have the power to stop out-tech and off policy actions. He instead, has twisted application of the tech via perverting the compilation lines, wiping out any compilers who KNEW what they were doing, wiping out old timers and staff with many years of experience under LRH, and has had his criminal brand of Scns(charging ridiculous prices for gross alter-is of it) driven into everyone, through his bullying, introverting, character assassination hit-man blackmail tactics to gain compliance.

        DM we SEE you.

        • Miscavige is fixated on Grade II to the point where he dramatizes the enforcement of Grade II as most of a staff member’s bridge.
          Witness how even OT VIIs report for their sec checks year in and year out.
          An example is son was in the Sea Org 14 years and in 14 years he got a Purif and the only other action done for 14 years were sec checks.
          No SA Lists, no Life repair.
          Grade II is a Miscavige fetish.
          But Miscavige himself never gets his over hasn’t has any Grade II or FPRD for some 20 years according to those who have reported he does not go in session

          • Correction of high speed typing.
            An example is my son (who received sec checks for 14 years)

            Correction
            But Miscavige himself never gets his overts off
            It is reported he has not been in session for 15-20 years…

          • Karen- same with my kid. Same with me.

            Interesting you point out that he is fixated on Grade II. Jane Kember was also constantly harping about people’s crimes and hidden OWs, obsessed woth sec cking staff, etc. and look what she herself was involved in. Hmmm….

        • freespirit

          Yes, The attention seems to have shifted to finding (accusing, these days) a being of some “Major Basic Evil” or some such. Generally what I found were much more subtle and more easily justified. The more “explosive” evils, or overts were generally later on the chain.

          Those early decisions that “one has apparently failed to handle a situation from a particular tone, or viewpoint, that is survival on their Dynamics,” and the “solution” of moving “downscale” to “handle”, seem to be at the root of these things. (at least for me) Although one gives up a little bit of their integrity every time, the “solution” appears to have worked, and the being tends to use that “solution” ever after. It becomes a “service facsimile”. (From the definition of “Service Facsimile”; “One uses engrams to handle himself and others and the environment after one has himself conceived that he has failed to handle himself, others and the general environment.”)

          Unfortunately, but predictably, every time the person uses the “solution” (it is an “overt” as it actually decreased ones quality of life on the Dynamics) he commits another “overt”. and the basic postulate is buried deeper.

          And when the processes that handle this are done standardly…
          WOW… Pure Magic!

          Eric S

        • Freespirit~That totally indicates to me too! One of the last things I did was FPRD and I was confused (as I had NEVER been before) and going WTF is this??? the whole time. And then of course I was punished for my sins.

      • Very good points, Marty. It seems auditing within RCS differs from what LRH envisioned of helping the PC/PreOT to just concentrating on Grade 2 materials no matter where on the grade chart one is working on, having a flavor of POB gang bang sec checking and the like.

        • The entire Bridge is consistently invalidated, and “proved” unworkable by Corporate Scientology day in and day out:
          Grade 0: We’ll tell you who you can or can’t talk to “freely.”
          Grade 1: We’ll give you problems you can’t solve (like financial ones that put you in debt forever)
          Grade 2: We’ll see to it there is no “relief” in this release – wait till we have the Regges and MAAs gang rape your bank accounts holding your overts over your head as threat.
          Grade 3: The only change that is worthy of acknowledgement is your changing at the whim of our cult leader.
          Grade 4: We’ll put you in a fixed condition you’ll need a nuclear warhead to get yourself out of.
          etc.

          • You nailed it perfectly!

          • Marty
            +1
            Another thing that was enforced in relation to Grade II is never ending O/W write ups.
            This is defined as giving up one’s overts, (transgressions and crimes) in self authored write ups.
            This was something that took a few hours at most depending when the last write up was done.
            It now takes MONTHS, and MONTHS and is FLUNKED by Ethics Officers and seniors and more is demanded.
            It is standard for Radical scientology to take some of these forced confessions and publicize the confessions on their malicious hate tabloid sites, mocking the content.
            These O/W write ups are very enforced and are simply another Grade II action done on one and all.
            An example of how bad this can go, was the enforced O/W write up of deceased Lisa Mcpherson, who weeks and months before her death was ordered by Benetta Slaughter and supervised David Miscavige to continuously look for “CRIMES”, to “dig deeper” to go within her soul to manufacture and cough up her transgressions.
            This was the earlier beginning to the Type III spin and mental breakdown she fell into.
            http://www.lisafiles.com/scn/ethics/ow/6027.html

            • And how about, after an endless O/W write up, then being comm eved based solely on that O/W write up, with essentially no other evidence whatsoever?

    • Grendel's Mother

      My colleague’s ex- has managed to avoid getting any sec checking – FPRD style or not – during his 3+ years on Solo NOTs… how does that handle the underlying postulates? What does LRH say about NO sec checking at all?

  21. Great post Marty,

    Mr. Miscavige needs your guidance.

    Definition: ” Advice or information aimed at resolving a problem or difficulty, esp. as given by someone in authority.”

    GMW

  22. Marty,
    Some weeks back I had posted that the Confessional Procedure had changed to FNing every question. I had made an observation of the 96 version for that comment. Pulling it back, the actual change came in 87. Pulling it further I did find that on 11 April 82, L. Ron Hubbard wrote an HCOB, SEC CHECKING IMPLANTS which states:”For one thing, if you cannot get an area of track (or list) to F/N, there is something wrong. (One can, of course, have a false read or a Suppress or an Assert or out session ruds to prevent an F/N.)”

    Standard Tech applied gets results and it is apparent Marty applies it as he has no trouble getting F/Ns on a Standard Confessional.

    Any who haven’t experienced this but on the other side HAVE gone through gruelling IMPLANTS as SEC CHECKING (the reverse of Scientology) it’s not the tech, it’s DM’s squirrelling passed down the line in his Suppressive Group.

    I heartily recommend a BC tape, WRONG TARGET, SEC CHECK: “All right, we mean the thetan. Now when he, directly, personally – what is conscious of a thetan and the attention units available there – are attacked by the auditor, you’re going to get no auditing done. Your target is the reactive mind. It is auditor plus pc versus the reactive mind.”

    DM continually sec checks/attacks the thetan, the analytical being, and of course this is a wrong target, so it’s no wonder he has such gruelling bouts of six month nightmares at his joint.

    Thanks Marty for applying Scientology to the routine and spectacular releases it can actually achieve.

    • Great post Jim. That lecture is on my all time favorites list. The wisdom imparted on that “sec check” series of SHSBC lectures is golden; so many principles important to all auditing at all levels.

  23. Wow, it’s great to learn and spot how the tech ‘fits together’ as a whole. Thanks Marty, of course the Grade 2 stuff slots into standard handling of bank phenomena. Being overrun on that squirrel stuff from the Church sure takes a bit of getting over but it does drop off once the truth of what they should have done gets fully known. Still angry at ’em though.
    I was only studying the other day when I realised if you don’t get the postulate at the bottom of chain of incidents you’re leaving behind an incomplete cycle of action. These build mass and form chains themselves. It follows the communication formula in that first is the consideration, then the action of implelling an impulse or particle… but it’s the consideration (continuing postulate) that started the whole thing in the first place. Getting that throughly seen completes the as-isness, never quite aligned that before to grade 2 procedures but it sure makes sense now.
    Geezes all that sec checking – folders and folders of it, for what?
    The Cof$ = the house of introversion.

  24. I just love the simplicity of auditing.. Congratulations to pc and auditor. Fantastic wins !!! I totally agree that life is beautiful and fun . For me, since leaving the Church and receiving a little bit of brilliant auditing from Marty life itself has become therapeutic.

  25. “You can go to Flag ARC SW case level and come home Grade IV complete in under 2 weeks.” !!!!!!!!!
    This means the pc is NOT making big wins! The “auditing” must be so bad, the “auditor” just rattling off commands with the “pc” not being in session. I know pcs that took days, weeks, some months just having cognitions on an auditing action. (One was blown away for over a year cogniting. There was nothing you could do with him – still F/Ning on the item found.)

  26. Recommended Reading:
    HCOB 8 October 1970, C/S Series 20, Persistent F/N
    and
    HCOB 21 June 1979, C/S Series 9, Superficial Actions

  27. Mike touched upon the elements of what criteria scholars use to determine if a subject matter is considered a religion. One of those was Hope/Future Life which Grade 2 certainly is a part of bringing that within the grasp of an individual.
    Regarding Future Life, here’s a few rings off the wordsmithing anvil that I hope conveys some of that concept.

    It’s from mistakes,
    hopefully we learn.
    While pursuing dreams,
    we dearly yearn.

    Placed upon our open hands,
    precious moments slip through fingers,
    like so many grains of sand.
    That we could live but yet again,
    defies defeat and shatters sin.

    It gives one hope,
    he will not fail.
    That tomorrow brings,
    fair weather and full sail.

    That we could live another time.
    In sweet innocence,
    and nursery rhymes.
    Belies the fact that here we are.
    Living dreams yet thinking they’re afar.

  28. This is great Marty. I could not agree with you more. Does anyone here remember the LRH quote (not certain, may have come from OODS, or Flag Order) that ‘if one only gets the flow of OW’s that the person has committed on others, the result is a mean person”. Something very clearly like that. I bet Karen would recognize where this came from.

  29. Marty,

    Hate to jump on the band wagon…oh hell, I love band wagons when the music is right and the company is good.

    I think this is an incredibly significant post. Like Les and Raul, I came to the same conclusion about running O/Ws down to basic postulates. The greatest win I ever had using Scientology processing came from running O/Ws back to postulates. I have even commented on it a couple of times on this blog. My TA floated for weeks–despite my urge for mischief with all its consequences.

    The thing that I’m curious about was the phenomenon that occurred which paralleled a “clear cog” except concerning overts and withholds to postulate. It seemed that running the pc past this cog on the subject of first dynamic overts created much the same phenomenon as running a person on engrams after a “clear cog.” It seemed to throw the individual into the same general area of bank with the same consequences.

    I don’t know how valid that observation will turn out to be. Maybe it was just that one pc and not broadly applicable. I suppose enough data will accumulate one day…

    • Michael

      Well, I’m with you on all this. I did the FPRD “basic list” around 1981, and I found that after being totally blown out and basically as-ising the original postulates that initiated the overt chains, it was very difficult to simply “muddy the waters” with O/W handlings that did not address the basic postulates. I also feel that I had the equivalent of a “Clear cognition” concerning the whole mechanism behind O/W phenomena.

      Regarding getting O/W handling following FPRD:
      One of the problems, in my particular case, was that I was being HCO sec checked on someone else’s orders, and I promise you, there was little or no auditing taking place. It was in no way addressing ME or MY CASE. I even asked to have it done “FPRD style” but they refused. It was brutal! You may have seen my comment on this blog before, where I told the story of saying “I would rather go to Hell than get any more of that!” after I had somehow managed to “get through” the cycle. (“Through” in this case, basically means that I was about five correction lists deep into “resolving” a mis-handled item in the first place. As I say… Brutal!)

      But my FPRD result…. I would definitely call it an “enlightenment”, profound and far reaching. It is the basis upon which I conduct the activity of LIVING.

      Eric S

      • Eric,

        I’m so happy about your wins on the FPRD.

        And disgusted about the attempts to destroy those wins.

        I suppose we just look at all this as a learning experience. DM certainly is expert at caving in other beings. EXPERT. It’s not accidental. He’s had lots of practice applying the same tech that has been trapping thetans for a very long time. And there is considerable tech involved. It’s not just accidental. It’s a learned and understood skill that he’s mastered.

        I don’t believe he just studied a bit of Scientology and decided to reverse it. This nasty tech existed long before 1950. It’s the tech of how to confuse, enturbulate and destroy a thetan. And this planet is filled with the product of that tech.

        • Michael

          Yes, Truly Suppressive Persons don’t just happen in a flash. It takes a lot to bring a being to his knees to the point where he runs a total reversal on the whole purpose of LIFE.

          Some may disagree with me on this, but the way I see it, the more charge that the Suppressive Person dramatizes, the stronger the being originally, and the more force it took to overwhelm him. It generally takes MANY decisions, by a being, that he has failed, and increasingly “bad” solutions to “handle”, in order to bring him to this point.

          I’m sorry, but it actually brings a tear to my eye to conceive of a “suppressive” being struggling under the enormity of the degradation of having created their condition. They cannot even dare to entertain the notion of “having a peek”, for they “know” the charge that would be released if they did. The charge of the accumulated overwhelm prevents them from “saving themselves” Auditors are their only hope.

          (OK, call me “an old softie” if you will, but that is the way I see it.)

          Eric S

          • Eric,

            Here’s something I observed a while back about the ARC of individuals that might take some examination. It applies somewhat to what makes a suppressive. I was looking at an acquaintance and realized this person had a huge reality about him, but very little affinity and communication. He was just stunningly real and others were aware of this also.

            Could a person have a different mix of affinity, reality and communication, one to the next. The more I looked, the more this made sense. I knew people who were very high communicators, but low in affinity and reality. The stuff they communicated was practical garbage, but boy could they assemble words and boy could they just talk your ear off.

            I knew others who had tremendous affinity, but were weak in reality and communication. The affinity had its own commensurate measure of communication and reality one woman I focused on, and raising one point of the triangle actually did bring up her higher on the tone scale overall, but she still remained predominately affinity oriented. And a person heavy on communication would go up tone and remain heavily weighted toward communication.

            We’ve seen actors who really were poor in communication and were dirt dumb because they had such poor sense of reality but they had such incredible stage presence because they were so REAL!!!!

            As I went back track to examine this, I was curious about whether this somehow applied to those prone to being suppressive. The sociopath. I watched how certain sociopaths could adopt any quality we seemed to want or need and use it to manipulate us. Where was their level of affinity, reality and communication that allowed this to happen? How could such a person be so charming, while having no reality on anyone else’s rights or feelings?

            You can’t really commit overts on another without your ARC going screwy. If you have a high sense of ethics and a high reality on another, you just will look out for their well being. You care. You have caring as a quality of your affinity.

            But, sociopaths don’t care. You can see one of these guys in native state and they don’t care. On the track, some of these guys have been very OT and still didn’t care. But, if ARC is a constant of some type, then surely a being in native state or capable of OT feats would care, would have reality and affinity about others.

            Which demonstrably is not the case–regardless of any theory otherwise. Powerful beings operating at 20.0 on the tone scale or higher can be absolutely ruthless in destroying others–and never for a moment consider that he has committed an overt. He was right, he was playing a game, he won, end of story. Good and bad, right and wrong alike are merely opinion.

            But for the social being, caring for others is such a part of their basic nature, such an inherent quality, that their sense of nurturing others would not allow such harmful acts without profound regret and shame and blame.

            Just a sketch of an idea here.

            • Watchful Navigator

              Fascinating viewpoint. Got me thinking about the A-R-C components and their varying emphasis manifesting in personalities. Nice insight on a key basic.

            • Michael

              I can see what you are saying here. ARC, or the lack of it, has many curious aspects. So much depends on the conceptual understandings one has for the various terms and their interplay.

              All my Scientology career, up to a certain point I somehow got the idea that the Affinity, Reality, and Communication, of the ARC triangle, were three distinctly separate, but related things things.

              And then I did the Route to Infinity Course on the Freewinds, and I got a whole new look at it.

              I realized that affinity, reality, and communication (although distinctly different by definition, in this case are actually simply three different ways of looking at the same thing. In Science of Survival LRH speaks of “theta” in this way: “Theta is thought, an energy of it’s own universe analogous to electromagnetic-gravitic laws. The three primary components of “theta” are affinity, reality, and communication.”

              When I tried to completely separate the three concepts of affinity, reality, and communication, I found that I could not. I found that “affinity” does not really even exist without “reality” and “Communication.” What we know as “affinity” ( as in; liking, willingness or desire to be near, attraction, willingness to grant beingness, etc. whether incoming or outgoing) can actually only be created or communicated to the precise degree that there are also “reality” and “communication”. I also offer here that ARC is not a “single terminal” occurrence. By its very definition, it only exists when the aspect of “communication” and “reality” (as in agreement, or duplication) are present.

              In your examples, what I see are likely what I would call “counterfeit” A, R, and C. What you may be looking at is counterfeit affinity ( as in artificial joy, love, caring, etc, desire to be admired, desire to attract attention, desire to convince others that they are “friendly” as a means to get something or prevent attack); counterfeit Reality (as in; pushy, dominating environments and people, having lots of or “the best” stuff, making their presence FELT.) and counterfeit communication. ( as in compulsive talker, being LOUD, overly outgoing {in a bad sense}, boisterous, etc).

              Real ARC is undeniable, it is “infectious”, it is shared at a “theta” level.

              I certainly agree that different beings appear to have differing ARC levels. The “Tone Scale” is an example of this, as it is a scale of ARC. There also appear to be different “magnitudes” of ARC. Some beings, at anger say, are capable of producing a lot more “volume” of that particular tone level’s expression of ARC. So ARC appears to have not only “quality” but also “quantity”. Whether a particular being has a fixed “quantity of ARC ” that they are able to create, experience or communicate ARC, (again, same thing really) or a fixed level of “quality”of ARC, I tend to actually doubt it.

              So… try that one on and see if it fits (perhaps with a few alterations to personalize it, and make it more comfortable)

              Eric S

              • Eric,

                I had the same cog about the inextricable nature of A, R and C being such that in the upper tone levels they are virtually identical. It’s not an easy concept.

                As for the counterfeit nature of what I was referring, I understand your point. However, I’m talking about pure theta rather than MEST. Any creation, to persist, has to have some alter-is, maybe some not-is, which could be defined as counterfeit. You could describe as counterfeit any quality of a being which Windhorse just called “compounded reality or phenomenon.” (I like the buddhist phrase for it.)

                At some point you reach the basic nature of the being where the compounding doesn’t exist. Which is probably the only point at which compounding or counterfeit doesn’t factor in to some degree. But, because we have all had experience and the experience becomes part of our understanding and awareness, our native state is in constant evolution. It changes. Ca’t help but. We can never go home again.

                Now, if you examine any personality or identity, you’re going to recognize and identify certain traits and qualities and talents. You’ll see inclinations, intentions, considerations and the gamut of potential become manifest. Even beyond applying this to humans, you will discover similarities in the quest to discover the true nature of a thetan. Any individual thetan.

                So, you ask, is this the real George Smith? What is his nature? And you might discover that there are aspects of his life that he emphasizes more than others. He could focus on other qualities and characteristics, but he has chosen what he has for whatever reason.

                Granted, “reality” is its own communication. You can’t have reality without communicating it. And those who experience that reality must share its space and qualities. And in many ways, the creation of a reality is the creation of a complex symbol for the creator, a symbol for the thetan or an aspect of theta. If that reality was exactly as-is, it would vanish. But, it’s a bit of an alteration that substitutes for something else.

                A thetan creates an identity, which has its own reality, which is communicated to others and shared with others. But, that creation contains all sorts of intentions, considerations, postulates, opinions, qualities. All of these things are intended. The being knowingly brought them into existence. (I realize it gets more complex than this, but I’m just taking it from a point before the contradictions overwhelm the argument.)

                For some reason, some beings apparently emphasize those qualities which we would call affinity, or reality or communication. You get beings who are just rapt with language, symbols and ideas and sending these things back and forth to other beings. You have thetans like Mother Theresa whose emphasize is love and nurture and caring.

                The other day I was at the gym and this girl was standing there, not necessarily pretty, but she just had the quality about her that I can only describe as “reality.” She was more real than anyone else there. It wasn’t a physical thing. It was a theta thing. She wasn’t putting on airs or sending out vibes or looking like she wanted someone to love or talk to. She was just so amazingly real.

                I certainly wouldn’t claim that someone who seems more dramatically manifest of one aspect of ARC lacks the other traits. Each person would have equal shares of each quality or it wouldn’t work. The things are mostly inextricable. And not everyone is heavily evident of one trait over the others. It’s just that some people seem to be–and dramatically so while seeming weak in the others.

                As for fixed quantities, how can anyone quantify a static? But, that said, there are demonstrable differences between the potential of one thetan and another. Or so it seems to me.

                • Michael

                  Gotcha. I think we are pretty much on the same page.
                  It is totally fascinating to watch the creative interplay that is ARC in all its manifestations. It is as complex, and yet as simple, as life itself.

                  Eric S

      • Li'll bit of stuff

        Reply to Wind walker { Well, I’m with you on….|

        Hi to you Eric,

        May I firstly say to you ‘thank you’ for being the person who welcomed me onto Marty’s blog some short while ago. It has been a real ‘ SOUL ‘ opener to be able to 2-WAY share our journeys,experiences,wins & cognitions with so many {mostly} incredibly ABLE, INTELLIGENT and WITTY persons. You all are Shining examples of “…RISING TO GREATER HEIGHTS ” as mooted by LRH and seconded by our LASER SHARP Host -Marty Rathbun. Can ANYONE ask for better company ?

        Eric, your conclusion to your FPRD,..an ‘ENLIGHTENMENT’ ……the basis upon which I conduct the activity of LIVING ” sounds very appealing … Is it appropriate to share this ?

        much luv, Li’ll bit.

        • Li’ll bit

          Thank you for the acknowledgement. I consider your “voice” here valid and valuable.

          And yes, feel free to share any part of anything I post. In fact, by posting things in a “public domain”, it is pretty much “open season” what you do with it.

          OK,… I just realized you may be asking if I will share more of the details. If so, the answer is still yes. I would be happy to lay the whole thing out, but since it is perhaps somewhat “off topic”, unless you have specific questions, it would perhaps be best done elsewhere.

          You can e-mail me at windwalker8008(at)Gmail.com if you choose.

          Eric S

          • Li'll bit of stuff

            Reply; {…Thank you for the ack….}

            Eric,I’m looking forward to your ” details.” Will E-mail you soon. Thanks for keeping in comm.

            much luv, Li’ll bit

  30. Great post Marty.

    And congratulations on your beautiful success Tatiana! I’m so glad you chose Marty as your auditor and had such amazing wins.🙂

    • Thank you, Christie.
      Isn’t it funny that the best decisions are made with no thinking involved? It was just knowing that Marty would be the best auditor for the Grade II for me. There was no doubt, no figure-figure, no time – simple question and no comm-lag, instant simple answer. The shortest and the most successful not metered self listing:
      – Who will be my auditor for Grade II?
      – Marty Rathbun. (BDFN, VGIs, action.🙂

  31. During the late 80’s the Eligibility checking for OT levels was done FRPD style. I did mine this way and it was a fabulous action. Apparently someone on tech lines thought this was the right approach as well. Later, the FPRD aspect of the Elig was said to be arbitrary and removed. I thought that was odd as I had such a great experience with it.

  32. I don’t usually read the “tech” blogs. (personal interpretation) I don’t practice scientology anymore and don’t plan on it anytime soon. For some reason I decided to read this blog. What a mind blower? I wasn’t “smart” enough while in Scientology to communicate the outpoint Marty so clearly communicated. I always wondered if someone had done Grade II, why all the sec checking afterwards? Thanks for clearing that up Marty, I love when a mystery or misunderstanding get resolved.

  33. Watchful Navigator

    Marty – an awesomely vital technical clarification that I appreciate very much. It makes total sense.

    This really opens the door to the returning of the magic of auditing results to humanity.

    I recall LRH mentioning in some auditing-of-staff issue about how staff get PLENTY of Sec Checking (implying, “too much!”)

    Here’s also a very related insight into “MEAN” behavior (culture of violence?) and the vital importance of balancing flows as in a 4-flow Grade II approach, as opposed to the current state of Inquisition-style confessors that DM has going.
    Staff – OSA – Sea Org – take note:

    “You can run overt act, overt act, overt act … Oh he just gets meaner and meaner and meaner and meaner!” “You keep running these overt acts out and you’re leaving unexplained motivators there. I mean, he’s got motivators he’s never used. You’re giving him this tremendous supply of motivators. And, “Look at all these things that happened to me. I can do anything I want to anybody”. And he goes out and he bawls out his boss and he bawls out this guy and that guy and then he sees people come into the parking intersection, he’s liable to bump their bumpers and so forth. And he’s talking around mean, ornery, he gets sarcastic”. “Boy, you’re wondering, “Is this what it’s like bringing somebody up the Tone Scale?” No, No, that’s what it’s like by taking out all the overt acts a fellow has done and leave the motivators in place: he just gets meaner and meaner.” “If you take the motivators out he gets more and more pathetic, more and more pathetic, you see? He’s got to have more and more motivators. And when you take the overt acts out, he gets meaner and meaner, and meaner and meaner. He gets ornerier. He becomes capable of more overt acts.” “So you’ve got to have a balance there”.

    This is from an LRH tape lecture of 24 July 1952, titled “E-meter behavior versus flow lines and patterns”. This is one of the tech 88 supplementary lectures and the transcript can be found in new R&D volume 11. This specific quote is on page 129.

    (Remind you of any OSA staff you’ve observed?)

    You can further consult HCOBs 5 Aug 68 and 26 Aug 68, where you find additional clarification reinforcing what Marty is describing and which I will post separately….

    • Watchful Navigator

      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
      Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
      HCO BULLETIN OF 5 AUGUST 1968
      Remimeo
      LEVEL II
      CHANGE OF COMMANDS
      OVERT-MOTIVATOR SEQUENCE
      IMPORTANT
      (This HCOB takes precedence over all other
      tapes and HCOBs on overts)
      Whereas it is workable to ask for “What have you done” and “What have you
      withheld”, it is NOT the Level II Grade II process any longer.
      The original work on this used the overt-motivator sequence and the commands
      are
      “What have you done?”
      “What has been done to you?”
      There is a third “leg” which is
      “What has another done to another?”
      which can be used and if not used may stick as a flow.
      This is a problem in flows. (I) Inflow, (2) Outflow, (3) Cross Flow.
      Therefore the only commands to be used to clean up overts are three in number.
      They are run one at a time to floating needle on the process (not F/N on each leg).
      “What has been done to you?”
      “What have you done?”
      “What has another done to another?”
      (By drawing three symbols an auditor can put his pen on each as it is asked and so keep his place.)
      L. RON HUBBARD

      (see above HCOB from original Tech Volumes, for a picture of the symbols referred to here)

    • Watchful Navigator

      From:
      HCO BULLETIN OF 26 AUGUST 1968
      REHAB & CORRECTION

      “Sec Checks can be overrun and overdone. By-passing 2 or 3 Floating Needles on a Sec Check is bad business.”

      • Geezes, so much stuff is coming forward as to what is standard C/Sing. These outpoints should be handled terminately at the C/S level, correcting auditors. However, I’m sure guilty of not writting cramming orders on my C/S when I realised rudiments were being consistantly used to run the case rather than the all important point rudiments are simply to get the PC in session for the major action – no more.
        I scratch my head in wonder just how good things could have been on lines. Now with the truth coming out of the bag – some real study and application can begin.
        Let the good times roll.
        Thanks Watchful and to all the other source references given on this thread, this is a wonderful cramming session.

    • WN,

      Could this have something to do with the rule that what you give attention to strengthens it? LRH talked about this extensively on Validation Processing. By ’51 he was aware that running too many engrams just validated the case more than the being, which spun the person in. Could validating overts tip one the same way?

      • Watchful Navigator

        Wow -good point. Your mentioning that does spark an observation. Validation of case instead of being is one aspect. A related trouble is over-run and what the being does, or seems to do. Over-run a Clear and the being seems to “put things there to run” and that would certainly apply to the over-run Sec Checking I’ve observed. The being invents overts or gives insignificant incidents as overts to finish the question, “put something there to run”. Different pcs handle it differently. Some protest and up goes the TA. Some propitiate and down goes the TA. This seems to be less of a problem with other areas of case. I can see problems being over-run. But whoever heard of an auditor badgering a pc for ARC X’s for example? I’m sure it’s happened but usually, no, you run out of ARC X’s and look up and smile and your needle is floating. Engrams and overts have more serious connotations. Thus, becoming the primary area of abuse. Marty mentions in a comment above about being badgered for evil ints -a good candidate for gruesome over-run. That really stirs the sludge at the bottom of the case and is quite cruel. The way to get sludge at the bottom of the case is in careful, precise, gentle moves and not forcing the pc or trying to blast something out that isn’t ready to run. The very references covering what I just described are now the most ignored, since DM’s arbitrary 3-swing F/N would be called into serious question. It is going past the fleeting F/N on beings that are releasing but not being audited on the exact area they need handled – so their F/N doesn’t persist to 3 swings – that is the worst.

        • Watchful Navigator,

          Overruns. Yes, yes and yes. Now here’s a subject that really needs grasping. When is the particular process finished?

          You go back to basic theory on theta attacking entheta in the case. Theta naturally attacks entheta. Entheta naturally attacks theta. You get someone in session and you are directing his theta to attack the available entheta, or another way of saying this is you’re recovering attention units.

          You hit the end of a process when you’ve recovered the relevant attention units or converted the relevant theta. But, what does that theta want to do? It wants to attack entheta. And if the auditor allows it or encourages it, the theta will do just that. It dives right back into the bank. And you get “over run.”

          A thetan doesn’t even have to invent answers. The nature of this universe and the nature of interrelations between thetans is such that you can as-is a particular overt, get the F/N, which the auditor ignores or misses so he asks the question again. Theta will look for the answer. And he might find it sitting on Aunt Martha’s case in Fargo, so he pulls out that overt now alter-ised and assigned to his own case. No F/N now, so the auditor asks again. Theta being very obliging in hunting entheta dives back track and pulls up Charlemagne’s overt on the subject and gives that.

          Any thetan can access any other thetan’s viewpoints. And that leads to all sorts of problems with overruns.

          As for ARC break running, I suspect the difficulty lies much deeper. I suspect that very few really understand ARC. LRH said that ARC could explain all mathematics. Now, if you talk to your average Scientologist, that wouldn’t even register. LRH was hugely enthusiastic about the concept of ARC as an explanation for everything. But, ask about anyone and you get this ho-hum,” yeah, ARC, raise one side of the triangle you raise the others.” And if you press, you get “ARC comprises theta. And ARC is part of the tone scale.”

          But an in depth understanding of the importance of these three things and what they actually are gets lost. An odd phenomenon of learning is that a person will learn a stable datum and then substitute that datum for further observation and learning. We just get complacent.

          Overrun fits in that category. Pc’s are pretty resilient. Some are endowed with so much theta that you can manhandle them and abuse them and they still walk away with F/Ns and VGIs. They as-ised your question by inspectiion and then went on a merry chase of a bunch of other case which they as-ised in pursuit of the original intent.

          One thing that’s overlooked about overruns is that the pc will be driven into self auditing. His attention units get stuck in all these side paths and he just kind of goes on automatic. He knows that the auditor is no longer asking him the right question because he answered it, so he’s answering an altered question. Which causes a persistence of the action.

          If you’ve got a pc on auto-pilot in overts and withholds, he’s dredging up all sorts of stuff out of session. He’s been so badly over run that he can’t help but be on self audit. “What’s happening to me? Why do I feel this way? What did I do?” He’s driven out of present time into the bank. And his attention units are now more and more trapped in irrationality. With overts, having yourself stuck in overts also dramatically reduces you ability to perceive.

          Quite a trick being run on people in the Church. Set them up on an over run on Overts which puts them on a perpetual introversion/self-audit so they don’t have enough free attention units to observe present time and make rational conclusions. Talk about a suppressive’s dream vacation.

          • Dear Once,

            Thank you for taking the time and care to write this.

            I believe when LRH, Buddha and others speak about man’s BASIC nature it is something that NEVER changes.

            Our personalities of course do change life time to life time and throughout our lives. This is, if you will, what buddhists call – COMPOUNDED REALITY OR PHENONMENA —

            Everything compounded is impermanent.

            THETA – BASIC NATURE – CHRIST CONSCIOUSNESS is not impermanent.

            dm, sociopaths and others have COMPOUNDED ONTO their basic nature so much dirt, crimes, grim and stuff that to dig down TO the basic nature is not something that going to happen anytime soon.

            Basic nature however doesn’t change and with enough exposure, enough
            darkness, enough others shining light and perhaps a miracle or two🙂 — even the darkest soul can be reached.

            It’s a question to me of never forgetting to not give up on anyone.

            Take the easy ones first, help those who ask to be helped but be willing for your worst enemy to say — uncle — and then know he too can achieve happiness.

            WH

            • Windhorse,

              Thanks for keeping me honest–a provenly difficult task.

              I love the concept of compounding. It rings true.

              As for the nature of beings, I see what I see, but remain ever hopeful.

              • Once Upon a Time,
                Every sentient being IS basically good. And likes to play games. That can involve opposed terminals (selves), such as cops and robbers, cowboys and indians, etc. But it’s just for fun. There is no basic evil in any of these selves, let alone thetans wearing them.

                But then, because games require reducing one’s awareness in order to play, mistakes are made. Failure to confront these mistakes leads to further mistakes. Each “side” develops chains of problems, O/Ws, ARC breaks, right and wrong, etc, finally culminating in being stuck in roles (selves) inititally adopted merely for fun. Thus service facsimiles.

                Any being who seems to NOT be basically good is just dramatizing this stuff, and is out of valence (being a false self). If any being seems to you to be natively “a little evil,” you’re just not looking deep enough into his nature.

                • Kassapa

                  oops there goes a billion kilowatt dam

                  “If any being seems to you to be natively “a little evil,” you’re just not looking deep enough into his nature.”

                  I wonder if there is something deeper to view/know than that which exists before the creation of viewpoints. Language is such a bummer; so focused on MEST phenomenon. “Deeper” has the same flaw as “moving” on the time track. How does a static actually move? How does a static perceive “deeper?” By putting dimension points further into the area? By putting “know points” or “awareness points” beyond what is being perceived and known at that moment?

                  I ride the wave cresting between the 7th and 8th dynamic and a dolphin knocks me off my board.

                  Such is my inadequacy. I try my best, but once again prove myself insufficient. Where is my board? I see another wave.

                  If I said I believed any being was natively a little evil, I was clumsy. I meant that there are those who SEEM natively to have less capacity to care, who are more easily piqued, who tend to manifest ser fac phenomenon more than others. Just as there are beings who are more steadfast, more forgiving, more prone to creating truly aesthetic realities than others. The need of those who wanted to control, who wanted to garner the admiration being showered on others lead to precursors of what we see today. I had tickets. The performance was wanting.

                  When someone manages to convert a dyed in the wool sociopath into a highly caring social being, I would have all the evidence I needed to dismiss my observations as faulty. Doesn’t mean I can’t care for sociopaths, doesn’t mean I don’t have hope. Doesn’t mean I won’t keep butting my head against the dam…

                  Nor should the ant…

                  Ooops there goes another rubber tree plant.

                  • Once Upon a Time,
                    Theta is uncompounded. The qualities of which you speak ARE compounded. They are created by each thetan simply to have a game, with no precurser qualities influencing which qualities are chosen. If there were precurser qualities then theta itself would be compounded. Therefore, if you are viewing something you consider to be theta in its native state, and find qualities there, you’re not looking at actual native state but something that came later.

                    Thetans develop considerations about themselves which are so intimate to them that they seem to be inherent. The first few layers of onion skin selves surrounding the native state onion core are so thin as to be not only transparent but just barely noticeable even when you’re looking for them diligently. But they are there. Native state theta is uncompounded. That’s the DEFINITION of “native state.”

                    Once might ask why one thetan chooses one quality (viewpoint) to be, while another chooses a different quality (viewpoint, as in Factor 5, “But there are other viewpoints”) to be. That question is not answered by Gotama or LRH. LRH said at the end of the Factors, “Above these things there may be speculation only.”

                    My personal speculation is that it’s all completely random to begin with, in order to create chaos so we can play the game of bringing order to chaos. Then, according to how successful one is being at the bringing order game, and where one is on the tone scale as a result, one reaches a fork in the road. The high road is bringing order through co-operation, while the low road is bringing order through competition and domination. We call the high road “good,” and the low road “evil.”

                    But this is just my personal speculation, and is unimportant. What is important is that Buddhism and Scientology work to make things better for everyone when we accept and operate on the idea that all beings are basically good. They don’t work when we seriously question that idea, even though in the short term it is necessary to move off the line those beings stuck in evil valences.

          • Watchful Navigator

            Once – all great points – I love that discussion. Lots of good LRH references on all that, the most important ones being where he points out how suppressive it is to over-run and there is no excuse for it. This means to me that an auditor is charged with the responsibility of silently noting any “fleeting F/N” – at which point I may let the pc go on a bit, not having heard a cognition, but my pen is stuck right there on that “fleeting F/N” and the cog usually comes – but if the cog wasn’t recognized by the auditor as such and/or the pc not up to originating easily, you’re going to get into over-run if you don’t go back and rehab right away. The being “knows” it and will likely go out of session or protest.

            Back to the key point, LRH stated that auditing results DEPEND on this factor which is what makes “F/N watching” (forbidden by LRH) as taught by DM’s Flag, so suppressive and so fruitful as a covert income producer (you either cycle into a long, unnecessary over-run which confuses the high-toned pc even as he gets through it as you described above, or more usually it outright drives him into his case and a needed repair).

            I get what you are saying with the pcs that can cycle through a deeper run – that’s touchy – a very high-toned or trained pc can probably do this if he is in agreement. But be warned that the “resilent pcs” you describe are the ones DM and the (out-)”Tech” hierarchy use to justify their blatant violation of what LRH pointed out was the most important auditing rule in Scientology. For every one that makes it through, there are dozens utterly ruined. Just thrown on the repair pile.

  34. Having experienced Flag on dozens of occasions between the late 1980’s through the early 2000’s where I did my grades, Ls, and the nightmare of getting onto OT VII, I witnessed the slow degradation of my confidence (reverse or Black Scn applied in spades). It was amazing how when I received standard tech I would soar high only to be driven down scale and PTS by the sec checking or “GAT-bot-Tech”, crush regging, and make wrongs. Apparently, I just had to be more “OT” it was implied. The last time at Flag about 2 years ago while trying to locate the so called PTS item (the item that was holding me back from giving more money to them), it wasn’t running well at all, (I didn’t realize I was PTS to The CO$ and Misavige and the whole cockamamie boatload of bull), the auditor actually stated (evaluated) that it was an overt to not be flourishing and prospering so I could do my bridge. Apparently, having paid for nearly a million dollars of bridge prior to VII with all the donos for Ideal Orgs, IAS, Library campaigns, Super Power, Training through Class VIII etc. wasn’t good enough for this auditor who decided I was a down stat because I was at Flag trying to handle my financial situation. They ran me dry and it was my fault I was such a downstat. What a crock! They promised to help me sort out finanances as the carrot to get me back to Flag but ignored that once I was there, and just continued the crush regging and heavy evaluating about why I couldn’t pay more to IAS, Super Power, Ideal Orgs, buy all the ACC lectures, etc. etc.
    The overruning and sec checking made you feel like a puppy who shit on the carpet and they put your nose in it every time you pass by even though you cleaned it up 50 times already.
    Over my SCN career this happened innumerable times extracting almost every cent I ever earned in my life. I was now a down-stat because I didn’t have the money to get onto that life-sucking “level” of 6 month sec checks and endless year after year, stifling and repressive OT VII – DM Style- 3 swings of the needle, etc. Thank goodness I wised up. After receiving life changing wins from standard LRH tech (when it was applied at the lower levels) it is the hope of receiving more wins that is the big mystery sandwich. Mystery being defined as hoping to find out what you never will. Flag was a theta trap. While the Flag fiasco was occurring I was also being stopped from within the church in getting through the SHSBC imposing arbitraries to prevent making auditors. It was as if, now that they had fleeced me, they had no reason to deliver because they knew that I would never threaten my eternal freedom by demonstrating upset. Or if I did they would just declare me. Well, they have never shown me a declare order (same for most of you all) but they say it is because I have asked for my funds on account to be returned to me since I won’t be permitted to use those funds due to my Special Person status. Of course, they have returned NO MONEY and say they won’t yet all my comm lines within the church have been severed. How ironic, I cut most of my family comm lines just to be in SCN because, supposedly, my family was too “entheta” and must be holding me back from flourishing on the bridge. But then once I am out, all my SCN comm lines are cut. (I guess they are afraid I might help others to WISE UP).
    DM has got his product. He has my money and I have a lot of CUT COMM LINES. Now, isn’t that just dandy. And I’m the suppressive??? What was my suppressive act? I just said that until DM is handled I am done playing that game “where every one loses.”

    • I understand exactly what you are talking about.

      We were so relieved to find out it wasn’t just us who were dumped on. It really IS miscavige who is the WHO…the big SP…the implanter…

    • The ethical thing to do is asking all the $$$ back for which you didn’t get exchange or that you paid while being mislead about what is was used for; pay for Scientology and get implants, pay for expansion and get implosion, pay for dissem and get PR flaps, etc.

    • mirari,
      Thanks for sharing your story.
      GMW

    • Mirari,

      My wife tells me stuff just to vent and used to immediately want to “help.” Her response was always, “stop trying to solve my problems.”

      I read what you wrote, and, boy did I want to just jump in and solve all this for you. But I guess the right thing to do is just acknowledge what you went through and validate that you have the capacity to handle it one way or another.

      One of the advantages of this group is the understanding that there are others out here who have your back, who will be there to put order into the enmest, who will help convert the entheta back into theta.

      Viktor Frankl discovered that some of life’s harshest moments can also be the most profound and life-confirming.

    • Hi,
      I hear you, I was on lines at Flag in the mid 90s on VII. It got so bad I just didn’t show up anymore as well as leaving staff at my org. It’s a tough grind and left a bad taste in my mouth and broke etc.
      There’s a question a young soldier asked at the battle of Forks Rift in the late 1800s when a Britsh garrison of a couple of hundred troops was attacked by over 4000 Zulu warriors. “Why us?” he asked. His Sgt Major replied, “because we’re here lad.”
      Flag is much the same, it’s just a location and is manned by zealots of DM. The trickery used to get us there is just that, trickery.
      It’s a tough ball to pick up but as those British troops survived so can we. We have veteran status from one of the most wicked battles on Earth, the battle for sanity and the attainment of OT.

      • Thanks to all of you for the great acks. Your responses were all spot on and I thank you for this comm line. Yes, we shall eventually find our way through all this mess and recover our theta goals. They are worthy goals indeed.
        Mirari

    • Mirari,

      Powerful post. I hear you loud and clear.

    • Mirari~ Fellow puppy here…damn I hear you loud and clear!
      Did you ever just want to scream out – But I am your product!
      Well, I did.
      It gets better. Here’s to getting your money back too!

  35. Eligibility is probably not from LRH, the first issue of 1982 was “assisted by snrc/s int”, means Mayo at this time. It may have not been him who wrote it but I definitely doubt it was LRH.
    Since 1966, Clearing and OT levels were delivered without prior sec-checking up to 1982. There was two HCOPLs which are in contradiction with the concept of eligibility :

    HCOPL 6 february 1968 Organization – the flaw (which state that INSPECTION BEFORE THE FACT destroyed every great civilisation) Eligibility violates this idea. It’s part of volume O, please read it.

    HCOPL 26 august 1968 Security checks abolished.
    It doesn’t abolish the tech of o/w but the practice of sec checks for security reasons. It’s page 486 of old green voume 1. Read it if you can.
    During all the time these issues (with at the next page “cancellation of disconnection”) were in force, scientology was expanding like mad.

    Now, obviously, the tech of the grades has become robotic, and people are very often not having the ep of grades while having done OT levels. Difficulties to communicate, having problems, effect of hostilities and suffering of life… you name it… Probably it’s the in-sessionness which is at fault due to robotics TRS and threat of punishment (for PC and auditor!).

  36. Wow Davey… you’re making shit up as you go along!
    “SCIENTOLOGIST is a collective membership mark designating members of the affiliated churches and missions of Scientology. Services relating to Scientology religious philosophy are delivered throughout the world exclusively by licensees of the Church of Scientology International with the permission of Religious Technology Center, holder of the SCIENTOLOGY and DIANETICS trademarks.”
    Don’t seem to recall having read that definition of ‘SCIENTOLOGIST’ anywhere or anything about licensees…. can I see the LRH references on that please?

    • SCIENTOLOGIST, 1. one who betters the conditions of himself and the conditions of others by using Scn technology. (Aud 73 UK) 2. one who controls persons, environments and situations. A Scientologist operates within the boundaries of the Auditor’s Code and the Code of a Scientologist. (PAB 137) 3. one who understands life. His technical skill is devoted to the resolution of the problems of life. (Scn 0-8, p. 12) 4. a specialist in spiritual and human affairs. (Abil Ma 1)

    • “SCIENTOLOGIST is a collective membership mark designating members of the affiliated churches and missions of Scientology. Services relating to Scientology religious philosophy are delivered throughout the world exclusively by licensees of the Church of Scientology International with the permission of Religious Technology Center, holder of the SCIENTOLOGY and DIANETICS trademarks.”

      That probably the definition of a ‘Corporate Scientologist’.

      • Yep. That’s my point 🙂

        • Cheers.

          It may also be noteworthy that the Definition of a Scientologist in the Tech Dictionary makes no Reference in respect to the Organization. Nor does “Modern Management Defined/Admin Dictionary” as posted below:

          SCIENTOLOGIST, someone who can better conditions. A Scientologist then, is essentially one who betters the conditions of himself and the conditions of others by using Scn technology. Of course, there are lots of “do-gooders” and people trying to better conditions, but the difference between them and a Scientologist is that the Scientologist is the one who knows how. He is equipped with far superior know-how. He is in much better shape than the person on the street. (BPL 21 Oct 71 I) 2. an individual interested in Scn. Disseminates and assists Scientologists. (HCO PL 21 Oct 66 11, City Office System) 3. the being three feet behind society’s head. A trained Scientologist is not a doctor. He is someone with special knowledge in the handling of life. (HCOB 10 Jun 60)

          Thus the Definition posted is in respect to a “Trademark” or “Servicemark”. For Tommy Davis to tell us that anyone booted out by the Church is not a Scientologist, that’s merely legalese, and has no Bearing on the authorized Definitions by its Founder.

          Tommy probably got his M-1 at FLAG in under 2 hours … lol

    • Sam

      Very interesting that you posted this today. I got a promo piece from SO/Superpower/Flag yesterday and noticed that quote in very tiny print along the bottom. I was going to comment on the part where it says “designating members of the affiliated churches and missions of Scientology.” As far as I know there were never any “memberships” for any of the churches or Missions.

      So, assuming that this is presented as a “legal” “trademark” statement, I would be curious how exactly this “membership” in an org or mission is arrived at. Without a bona fide membership being offered or required at that level, I am guessing that this statement is totally unsupportable.

      I suspect it was put in there as a knee jerk response by David Miscavige to try to make it so that nobody except those HE approves of, would be able to call themselves “Scientologists”.

      It may also be worthy of note, that on my promo piece, the word “Scientologist” at the start of the statement, is written as “Scientologists”.(plural) Just one more thing that can be challenged, if one really was that hard up for entertainment.

      But beyond all that, I have long since stopped taking anything that comes out of “The Church of David Miscaviges’s Scientology” as being valid.

      Eric S

  37. Well done Tatiana!!!
    going to Marty for standard tech… SMART as well as beautiful 😉

  38. Marty

    Probably one of the most life changing events of my life was doing FPRD. I was one of the very early PCs when it was first delivered to the public. I got it at LA Day under Jeanie Bogvad as CS.

    One of the things it did, though it is not directly addressed in the auditing, as such, was to give me a more basic and profound understanding of “ethics”, the “conditions”, and the “Dynamics”, and their relationships to the very nature and goals of LIFE. Many of the “ethics” understandings and viewpoints that I share on this blog, were formulated as a direct result of this action.

    Besides that, It blew me out totally.
    I would like to share two of several poems that were attempts to share the feeling of JOY that I experienced.

    Awakening
    ———–

    I was,
    from ignorance released,
    like a greased pig,
    squealing,
    and pleased!

    And

    I sat and smiled
    ————

    I sat and smiled,
    for miles and miles,
    not just a bit,
    but piles and piles!
    No limitations set,
    or seen,
    I just bold-faced sat,
    and beamed!

    ———–
    Powerful shit alright!

    Eric S

    • Eric,

      And this little piggie opened up his eyes and went, “Holy Shit!”

      I’d sort of forgotten those cogs about ethics and the dynamics I’d also had running out O/W postulates. About integrity also and the true nature of being.

      When I studied overts, I would read how perception was affected. That made good theoretical sense, but it wasn’t real until I’d actually handled some of those postulates that suddenly my theta perceptics went out the roof! And they weren’t bad to begin with.

      This whole discussion is rehabbing so many wins that had begun to fade. I’m looking out the back at all the life force involved in creating the trees and grass and animals. All the vibrations of the environment. This world really is a multi-layered symphony of perception and “vibration.”

  39. Fantastic post Marty. You really connect quite some technical dots and indicate all the source material for doing so. Something not allowed in RCS.

    I think this message from Flag heralds Miscavige’s out tech pendulum swinging from endless, endless overrun to lightening fast, quicker than quick, quickie. The message is: “We are going to overrun you to all hell on Objectives and then skimp your grades. We will deliver five major grades in two weeks and to hell with PC wins and at least four of the ten points of the Technical Degrades policy letter. Tech degrades is old anyway, its pre Golden Age of Tech, its just historical background material because it was written by L Ron Hubbard.”

    The loud and clear message underlying the Flag communication is: “David Miscavige trumps L Ron Hubbard.”

    Also, Flag promoting Grades??? What the ….? The mind boggles.

    • haydn,
      It boggles the mind that those asserting and jumping hoops for “good standing” don’t see or ignore the fact of KSW1 and Tech Degrades being totally out despite being the first two on every major course!

  40. I believe the difference here is that the auditing is done for the benefit of the person, rather than the organization. The auditor’s focus is on helping the PC. With that in mind, true results are possible.

    I recall recently watching videos from the guy who is currently making a documentary on the Church where he asks a question, seemingly non-invasive, along the lines of “What event are you holding here?” and the response is an angry “What are your crimes?!!!” This is just an astounding act of misapplication and made me cringe. If this is being used on people outside the Church, I can only imagine how often this is used on Church members who voice valid complaints or who are not supplicants in relation to the Church of Scientology.

    • Sue,
      Excellent point on the “What are your crimes?!” misapplication.

      DM has worked relentlessly to invalidate the tech of Confessional and FPRD by using it to attack the thetan, the analytical being, and PREVENT relief.

      My life utterly changed with Grade II, and when it came out, the FPRD. Spectacular releases and complete shifts in viewpoints.

      Then the grinding overrun. Then the accusative tone, the snide refusal to accept the FN and that it was clean. Then, the use of what was clearly gone from my universe, to bring it back, to prove that I was “bad” and that nothing had changed and it wouldn’t ever.

      DM refuses to let evil go, on any line. Scientology doesn’t work for him, it MUST not work for any other as their freedom from all that case rankles him, unable to attain it himself.

      Ahhh, sweet freedom from the hostilities and sufferings so manifest in “What are your crimes?!”

      • Yes Jim. So sweet.

        And for you, little david…just a simple question…”what are YOUR crimes?”

      • Jim,

        I can attest to how “bad” you are–which is why I love you so much. You’ve heard the saying, “your enemy is mine?”

        Reading all these comments tweaked an awareness. Suppressives seldom are aware of their own overts, believing that what they do is right. The flip side is that whatever others do is wrong. And that means everyone.

        With a viewpoint like that, the sociopath would just plain be obsessed with finding the crimes of others–especially if he theorizes that the process used would rid him of the experience of other’s crimes. If he could somehow get rid of all those crimes, his world would be better.

        But, the only way to get rid of the crimes would be to get rid of the thetans. After all, merely existing is a continuous overt of long duration for everyone else. Allies are merely tolerated until they can be subjugated and turned into slaves.

        Hunh.

        On looking at this, I don’t think that all the crimes and overts a social being could commit over countless millennia would ever be as bad as the basic nature of a being who just can’t bring himself to care about the well being of anyone else. Sad.

        • (warning – it’s long and buddhist)

          “as bad as the BASIC NATURE of a being who just can’t bring himself to care about the well being of anyone else. Sad.” (caps mine)

          I agree with everything you said in your post except what I quoted above.

          LRH said – all beings are basically good. The buddha said “all sentient beings have buddhanature, basic goodness. The Christ said “everyone has Christ consciousness”

          What is so sad is that ALL beings have this basic goodness AS their basic nature – not that some are without it.

          What is so sad is that because of their continuous ignorance, unwillingness to SEE cause and effect, their violation of the basic laws of nature they live miserable dark claustrophobic lives.

          I believe that if we are to truly move on up we must acknowledge what LRH has said about basic goodness WHILE recognizing and exposing the crimes of sociopaths.

          It is only because of their habitual patterns of crimes of lifetimes that they have become too encumbered to peek out behind the dark window of hate.

          It is sad though when we and others start to believe that any particular sociopath isn’t basically good. It leaves us with no where to go but
          to begin to slower think *some* are just not human.

          It takes tremendous work to truly care and have compassion for someone who is so different from ourselves. It’s not that hard to care for family, a pet, and a stranger who LOOKS like ourselves.

          But feeling compassion for dm —- almost impossible I find and yet, I believe it’s the way forward.

          The more we malign him, call him names, want nothing to do with him the more he digs in his heels and fights.

          He uses OUR energy whatever it is — do build up his own energy and his own plans.

          I’m not advocating STOPPING the exposure as that IS the compassionate thing to do. STOPPING him from attempting to destroy others and himself IS compassion.

          But hating him just fosters more hate and even mocking him is a form of hate.

          This is a buddhist “prayer” that I try to do everyday. It is called The Four Immeasurables because you can do it for every single sentient being, or for your friends, your family, those people you don’t care about or your enemies — you could do it individually for each of the 7 billion people on the planet and keep going.

          For now — let’s just hold this aspiration in our hearts and minds for dm:)

          May dm be happy and know the root of happiness
          May dm be free from suffering and the root of suffering (ignorance)
          May dm never be separated from the great happiness devoid of suffering.
          May dm dwell in equanimity, free from passion, aggression and bias

          What would happen if everyone actively involved on this board as well as just people who read this were to truly aspire on a daily basis this aspiration for dm? (known as “The Four Immeasurables” (google for more explanation)

          Don’t know but that to me would be Hundreds if not thousands of positive postulates that just might create a crack in his hundred mile thick armor.

          Love,
          Windhorse

          • Brilliant.

          • I’ll give it my prayer WH. Daily. Moment to moment. Yes.

            Should I be so noble.

          • Windhorse,

            Yes, I see what you’re saying. So much of life hinges on balance. To know hat another is evil and still have compassion takes great balance. And to degrees this applies in recognizing the frailties that each of us bring and still wanting the best for each others.

            Some of my earlier posts speak of the need to grant DM beingness and to learn to understand him as a being worth caring for and salvaging. When we forsake the concept of redemption, we are all doomed.

            As for “basic nature,” I guess we’re waltzing around definition. Just what is “basic nature?” Both LRH and the Buddha recognized the vast differences in humans. Such a wide range of intelligence, ambition, ethics, aesthetics, power, and myriad and numerous other qualities. We are all different, one to the next, and sometimes glaringly such. LRH talks about equality under the law does not equate to equality of beings in all these characteristics. He often spoke of differences in theta endowment.

            Just as we have differences in theta endowment and intelligence and aesthetics (capacity to create art, let’s say), we differ in the capacity to care. And this begins somewhere. So, to me, the basic nature of someone is a summation of all of those qualities which make the thetan what he/she is.

            When we say “good” in a social sense, we’re really describing that which stems from the capacity to care for another being. All beings have this potential to some degree. It’s the basis of the golden rule in its various statement. To treat others as we would want to be treated. Some of us need to be reminded of this now and then. Some must be reminded continuously. But, some need no such reminders. Some beings have this basic nature that is so filled with love and compassion for others that to act otherwise is nearly unthinkable.

            This capacity to care has nothing to do with one’s endowment of theta, nothing to do with one’s intelligence. I realize that the term “theta” has become synonymous with all things good and beautiful, but theta really means thought or spirit. ARC. ARC also has come to have connotations of benevolent understanding.

            But, not all thought (theta) is benevolent. Not all reality (R) is pleasurable or supportive. Which gets into discussions of entheta and enMEST.

            At what point does basic nature become enturbulated? At what point does an individual’s intent become disharmonic in regard to others? Some beings just seem (from observations of native state) inclined to jealousy and selfishness and punishment. It doesn’t take much to set their vibrations toward others into dissonance. Which sets off urges to control the behavior of others–both from the individual who gets upset and from those he’s upsetting.

            Just as a matter of practicality, the lessons of the track should teach us that suppressing others is ineffective. It just makes things worse for everyone. Even the suppressor. To marginalize. To reduce. To treat others badly is just self-defeating. And I don’t say this because I have a high quotient of caring or compassion. It’s just experiential.

            None of us will be free unless all of us are free. That someone is trapped will come back to haunt us.

            Which means freeing thetans like DM. Which is a huge problem, because such beings basically have a flaw which makes freeing them nearly impossible. I have yet to see evidence that any true sociopath has ever been redeemed or brought to a social state of caring for the well being of others. I see theory that it can be done. I think that ser fac tech probably has the most hope because these thetans have an exaggerated sense of their own rightness compared to others, their own need to dominate and control. I think even when you get such a thetan back to his native state you are then taxed with educating him. You get rid of all his entheta and you still have a being disinclined to care for others, a being who is easily piqued, a being who wants to be admired and be right to such an extent that others become irrelevant.

            So, for me, it might well be true that all beings are basically good. And I prefer to believe that if for no other reason the practicality of it. Yet, we are all different by nature, by native state. And this universe is proof that getting along with others presents challenges. The key is to recognize and understand the basic nature of those challenges.

            (sorry for boring you to death) I tried to make it short but didn’t even scratch the surface.

            • My answer to this post somehow found it’s way under another thread between you and watchful navigator —

              But thanks again for taking the time and you didn’t bore me🙂

            • Once Upon a Time,
              You’re on a dangerous line of thinking here. Beings ARE basically good. The differences in their qualities are the result of their experiential track — the selves they’ve created, been, and gotten stuck in (see my comment to one of yours above), and the knowledge and abilities they’ve gained analytically. Your musings otherwise only reveal that you’re not looking deeply enough into the nature of beings. In the onion of false selves, what you’re calling native state is several layers up from actual native state at the onion’s core.

              As for DM, his core is not our problem. We can have compassion for it. But he is extremely stuck in many layers of false selves that are functionally evil in the game we’re playing now. We must not flinch from applying justice to remove him from that game, no matter what that takes. Later, of course, we’ll save him, as we will all sentient beings.

              • Kassapa et al.

                “You’re on a dangerous line of thinking here. ”

                I wonder if there really can be a dangerous line of thinking. Dangerous? As in bringing potential harm? From thinking? As we look over the track we discover that that which we don’t confront tends to persist. It’s not the thinking that causes the persistence but the non confront.

                Holding an idea is no big deal. Thetans are capable of considerations, postulates and opinions. You can have two opposing ideas side by side and not have any problems. Pan determinism. They can sit there side by side not generating any charge at all until you play them against one another.

                LRH used creative processing to attack the case at one point. It went along the line of “Okay have your mother slice up those babies and and bury them under the roses.” Horrible stuff. “have grandpa’s head explode. Now mock up thirty grandpas with their heads exploding.”

                I don’t take any of my ideas or thinking too seriously. I have ideas and I throw ideas away with complete abandon. I love other beings. And I’d like to strangle a few. Some, I love dearly and beat the crap out of them with insults, back and forth, just because they can take it and it’s amusing to fight. Leaves others aghast.

                Overts (bringing harm to others by commission or omission) hang up the case from non-confront which leads to no-responsibility and no-control. KRC. The danger to self and others is less from destruction than from the lack of KRC which follows.

                For me, not saying what I observe would be an overt of omission. We can all think of examples of that. What would have happened if every Sea Org member had listened back in the early eighties to those who observed that DM was suppressive. That was considered “dangerous thinking” by the group.

                While looking at some stuff that existed before “track” began, I ran across beings who I could only describe as anti-thetans, much like anti-matter. I permeated a couple of them in turn and traced their ARC back to before their then current condition to their “native state.” It wasn’t that they were “evil” in that native state, it’s just that their “potential” ( as in energy creation) tended to have a dissonance when compared to a “normal” thetan. They were a “static,” but when they put out a viewpoint or a dimension point, the vibration was just slightly off.

                I didn’t wish them ill. I didn’t want to isolate and destroy them. I just sort of thought, “ah!”, that explains a lot, and went on my merry way.

                I’m not all beings so I can’t really say what all beings have as a basic nature. Until one has shaken the theta hand of every thetan in existence, it would be mere assumption to know what they are.

                Dangerous thinking is having an idea and letting it prevent you from looking at what is there. You’re driving down the road and have the idea that there is no truck blocking the intersection and Bam! There was. So, next time you go to the intersection, you’re convinced there’s a truck there so you stop just before getting to that point and Bam! someone rear ends you.

                I put my observations on the shelf every time I go looking anew. I try not to let my past observations prevent my looking at present time. Or at whatever I happen to be observing. And I don’t let pressure from others decide my conclusions.

                I also recognize the limits of language. A person says, “man, the sun is beautiful reflecting off that window.” There happen to be windows all around the house. But a protest goes up from those on the opposite side of the house, “You’re a complete moron, there’s no sun reflecting off any window. Jeeez. What a fool.” Well, the sun isn’t hitting their windows.

                Too often groups form on one side of the house, listening to Guru Bob, agreeing with everything he says, and letting what is said become the ideas by which they observe the house. I like to walk around the house. I like to go walking in the woods. Sometimes, I find Guru Bob sitting on a log in the woods shaking his head and lamenting that those who followed him didn’t really follow him because they liked the side of the house where he left them. So, I pat him on the shoulder, good commiseration and acknowledgement, and head on up the path to the mountain.

                Climbing mountains can certainly be dangerous. But, ah, the view!

                Danger adds interest to life. Dangerous thinking? Ah, I can handle it. And if I fall? I’ll just pick my theta self up and go right back.

                • Once Upon a Time,
                  That all beings are basically good is a primary stable datum in both Buddhism and Scientology. Your line of thinking — that some beings may not be basically good — is dangerous because it encourages the maintaining of oppterms (false selves) and thereby inhibits progress towards liberation.

                  I, too, have looked at “before track” apparently evil beings, and found them to be NOT in native state, because what seemed to be “before track” wasn’t. Universes exist as boxes within boxes within boxes. Native state is before all the boxes. As I said in my earlier post, you haven’t looked deeply enough into the nature of the beings you think may be basically evil.

                  • Kassapa,

                    Despite our caviling, I do think you’re quite brilliant. I was going to say a brilliant “guy” but realized…

                    I shall be careful about “encourages the maintaining of oppterms (false selves) and thereby inhibits progress towards liberation.” I have often been guilty of that in the past. Used to be an occupation and a hobby. Guess bad habits…

                    As for anyone, including you, making observations in an area I’ve observed and coming away with different conclusions, I can only encourage that. I don’t want anyone to take my observations as truth, I want others to make their own. So, kudos to you for observing.

                    Whatever has gained the status of “stable datum” in a group or individual has only the value to me that others have accepted that as senior datum explaining all or most of what it encompasses. A datum senior in both subjects deals with integrity: the person must make their own observations and come to their own truths. Otherwise you run into enforced or inhibited ARC/Understanding which destroys self-determinism.

                    Neither Scientology nor Buddhism can work without self-determinism, but either or both can work with or without the idea that ALL beings are basically good. It’s good enough for me to accept that 97.5% are basically good, so we’re in 97.5% agreement. That’s better than most marriages.

                    Ron gives a wonderful lecture on this called “Some Educational Data” in which he says there are two principle ways men accept data, neither good. First is because authority says so. Second is because there’s a preponderance of agreement amongst others that the thing is true. He goes on to give William Harvey as an example when the doctor contradicted the accepted beliefs of Galen about how blood flows in the body. It took Harvey 12 years to disclose what he knew because he was afraid of being attacked–and he was, leading to the famous quote, “I’d rather err with Galen than be right with Harvey.”

                    So, good for Ron and good for Buddha making observations which have stirred the imaginations of all of us and made our lives better. I’ll love them for their observations and continue to make my own.

                    I’m not the brightest kindling in the campfire. Whether my ideas ignite the logs or not has little interest to me. I just love the glow I feel when my little self is burning.

                    Love yah

                    • Once Upon a time,
                      I’m glad you’ll be careful not to encourage oppterming. Thank you.

                      I agree that Personal Integrity is an even higher and more important principle than All Beings Are Basically Good. I consider that in the final analysis neither Buddhism nor Scientology can work well without both principles. But if I had to choose just one and chuck the other, I’d choose Personal Integrity.

                      However, group effort is necessary for the accomplishment of certain goals, and group functioning requires agreement on workable stable data, whether or not they are absolutely and unquestionably true. One can follow a leader such as Gotama or LRH without becoming a “premie” (cultified devotee of an all-knowing and all-loving guru). Some ideas become adopted as certainties by group members when they are only very probably true given available data. I see nothing wrong with this, as long as Personal Integrity prevails once re-evaluation becomes appropriate because the goal has been achieved or the effort to reach it has failed. All Beings Are Basically Good is one of those adopted certainties at lower levels, and becomes more and more obviously true the higher one goes, at least in my experience and opinion.

                • Dear OUT, I really enjoy reading your posts. Would be nice to be able to associate them with a person. I wish I knew who you are, so I can say “hi” to you when we meet.

  41. Marty, this is fascinating that you should mention this. I remember the first time a long time ago {before I knew there was something REALLY, REALLY WRONG ALTOGETHER with the Church of Scientology} and I still suspected it was me that was causing a problem. So I sat down to do my O/W write-ups for an ethics officer for the first time in my life. I remember to this day afterwards cogniting “Oh, is that why people have the MU’s between each other that they do”. It was life changing. I did my whole track for this lifetime’s O/W’s. After I mentioned this to one of the Ethics Officers I finished them with whose original suggestion it was that I do them, the response was “What? You got your O/W’s off? Is there something wrong with you?” I thought to myself “Yes, there is something wrong with me dear, sitting here and listening to you!”🙂 Best wishes Marty and Happy Halloween!

  42. LRH gave me the stable data on this decades ago, in lecture 6304C30 PATTERN OF THE GPM SHSBC 289 p.179 cassette transcript.

    “For instance, I never Sec Check a pc. Never nbeen known to. I audit the pc with sec checking, see.”

    It’s yet another reason why Miscavology isn’t LRH.

  43. The misuse of O/W tech is one of dms main weapons. Of course, he is the one who needs a heavy dose of FPRD. Since that won’t happen for a number of lifetimes I will list some of his evil purposes:
    To suppress others to the point that they know they are basically bad.
    To destroy the Tech that really does help others.
    To make this Tech so repulsive that one will ever want it again.
    To obliterate LRH
    To get others to be stuck in the overt motivator sequence and to be fixated on Os and Ws.
    To implant
    To make robots.
    Just to mention a few.

  44. http://d.yimg.com/nl/australia/au-news/player.html#browseCarouselUI=hide&repeat=0&playbackStart=0&shareUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fau.news.yahoo.com%2Ftoday-tonight%2Fvideo%2Fwatch%2F27120794&vid=27120794

    Talking about O/Ws, missed withholds and overt chains, there is more media hitting the airways in Australia tomorrow night…

    Ouch! Truth hurts little Davey — doesn’t it?

    • Ouch.

    • I am continually amazed at the caliber of being allied with these star high goals. Lana Mitchell is such a being. So eloquent. So poised. So full of life.

    • Lana — I sense another shitstorm about to dump all over those two unnaturally close BFFs….

      • Li'll bit of stuff

        reply {…Lana–I sense..}

        Mike,

        Thanks for a sterling job done, with such a welcome dose of ARC.

        {TAKE THAT !! YOU PSYCHO LITTLE BRAT !!} Bet he has now gotten TD on his daily regimen of rice and beans and the whole STINKING ROTTEN RPF REGIMEN.

        Once again,leave it to a pro { MR } to GET THE JOB DONE!!

        Feel GOOD to “warm up” the couch / lectern / audience AGAIN ? When you’ve had a ‘breather’, luv to see you “TELLING IT LIKE IT IS { again ! }. ” Pretty please MATE ?”

        Wishing you lots’a luv & other indoor fun, Li’ll bit.

  45. Li'll bit of stuff

    Lest we forget , per LRH ; ” LIFE IS A GAME ” consisting of FREEDOM BARRIERS AND PURPOSES. Objectively then, one sees spectators at a ball game getting highly animated ; i e ” KILL THE F—ER! while caught up in the “frenzy of the moment ” Taken literally, of course, the F—ER would end up on the cold slab !! This would end the game. So, using this logic, if the “other side had put up a HUGE score against us, we sure would like the time and opportunity to ‘PUNISH’ the opposing side, NEGATIVELY , if necessary ,{ HEAVY PENALTIES , SENDING OFF,BANS, etc. especially if the referee had been, shall we say, COMPROMISED ? {BOUGHT!!} ” Of course,” its far more satisfying to whip the other side with sheer, GUTS, DETERMINATION, A GREAT GAME STRATEGY,{COACH!} and most of all A GREAT TEAM, WHO GENUINELY LOVE THE GAME and PLAYING FOR EACH OTHER—— That is the type of game I prefer to watch !!

    AM I mistaken, or ARE WE ASSEMBLING A NEW TEAM HERE ??

    Prediction; winners–INDEPENDENTS disqualified–MISCAVOLOGY

    Lots’a luv, Li’ll bit

  46. Excellent post, Marty. The grades are awesome.

    One thing I realized as I was studying my Academy Levels is that the grades are pretty much super-ruds – as in getting your ruds in for life, and certainly before the clearing courses and OT levels. Grade 0 is communication, Grade I is problems, Grade II O/W, Grade III is ARC breaks, and Grade IV is Ser facs, and, as Tatiana noted above, you find yourself ready for the next one (and dramatizing it in spades), in exactly the sequence as given, so someone who is ready for Grade I will have the most amazing problems!

    Confessionals in the CofM have nothing to do with case gain – they even tell you “I am not auditing you.” It’s not even about O/W. It is all about control.
    It is possible to be cause over the bank, and over the O/W sequence. Not that you would ever find out in the CofM.

  47. Excellent post. Indeed, who doesn’t run to unburdened to wisdom and freedom and understanding! And there is no greater betrayal than that of Trust.

    Congratulations to Tatiana Baklanova and her auditor, Marty Rathbun. Good work, both of you! Tatiana, thank you for sharing your success and gains. It made me so very happy to duplicate!! Cheering for you!

    Saluting courage and integrity and rightness of individuals! What a hoax Evil is when we are Life. Amazing tools (Gr. 2) that give a person back themselves!!!

    • Thank you for duplicating!🙂 It helps to moving forward when people around understand. It is really a 3d Dynamic game – keeping the Bridge there available and walking it up.

      • Tatiana,

        Put this here rather than the descending channel above. Thanks for what you said. If I knew how to put those cool portraits in I would put up a picture of me. Then you’d have better reality on what my body looks like.

        • Once Upon a Time,
          This is an answer to your post below. For some reason the blog system wouldn’t let me post a reply to it there. So I’m replying here.

          Unfortunately I don’t have enough free time to continue our discussion after I write this final installment, which I hope you will find satisfying.

          The issues you raise are some of the classics of college philosophy courses. They are important questions, but not answerable intellectually (know about), which is why they persist. They do have answers, but only at the level of knowing attained as a result of liberation technology. One could perhaps make koans out of them. But the purpose of a koan is to exhaust one’s intellect so he stops using it, and thereby ceases to obscure his view of reality.

          Can one return to and maintain native state — pure theta with no mest? “Yes” on return, because I’ve done it. “I don’t know” on maintaining it, because I’ve never done that. This is the philosophical issue of “pure consciousness.” Read “Mysticism, Mind, Consciousness” by my old friend Robert K.C. Forman.

          Can one see things as they are, without the object being colored by the subject’s considerations? Yes, but then the object will disappear. So will the self (subject) one is using to do his looking for him.

          Were thetans created at some point in time? No. Time exists inside thetans, not outside them. Buddha nature (theta) is unborn.

          The answers I’ve given you here are from my own personal experience. Intellectual musing about them is a total waste of time. They cannot be calculated. They can only be known. And the only way to know them is through the use of liberation technology of some sort.

          A good start might be to clay demo every impossible-to-answer question you can think of. Not the answers — just the questions.

          • Kassapa,

            What a pity. I was curious whether you knew of what you spoke and was just beginning to hope you might. Beginning.

            I read Forman after a friend leant me her copy almost twenty years ago. She said he touched on stuff we had explored, so… Some of it made us smile with recognition, but nothing struck us as territory we hadn’t mapped.

            Most of my questions were rhetorical: strings plucked to see what resonated. To see what you knew. To elicit a response and better measure where you were actually sitting. Since it covered my own backyard, I didn’t need a neighbor’s map. I was merely offering an opportunity to share a few cold ones while chewing the fat.

            To claim higher knowledge requires merely the utterance. I find it interesting to see what lies behind the claims. Claims vs. reality.

            Your word choice tickles me and reveals much: “A good start might be to clay demo…” Start? A man tells a five star chef, “A good start to learning how to cook would be….” To which the chef raises an eyebrow and shakes his head.

            I’ve been at this for thousands of years.

            Around 2600 years ago, a group of us hit this planet after speculating there was a potential opening way, way out here on the edge of nothing. Some of us had come down earlier to test it out. It was akin to heading far from cities so you could see the stars without light pollution, except we weren’t looking for a clear view of the stars. We were looking for a clear means of overcoming the confining forces of this universe. The closer one moves toward the center of any galaxy, the more difficult pure theta view becomes. Too much interference. Too much force.

            The space in between offers no home to establish reference and we knew the project would require a long time.

            On some planets, the enforced reality wavelengths are so oppressive analytical thought is virtually impossible. On such planets, recognition of the possibility of the soul only exists in micro-second bursts–a dreamed illusion that is never remembered. Nearly complete suppression.

            Because these energies and forces are difficult to produce and maintain (the reasoning went) moving to a planet further removed from the hubbub offered some potential. Of course, this planet was a barbaric mess, but we figured we could spruce it up some and make it habitable.

            You’ll find a huge uptick in enlightenment after we arrived and spread out.

            Further, as clay table has limited application, I’d prefer to mold reality.

            Of course, making such claims is easy. Maybe I’m just mad. Crazy. Delusional. Hide the children. Don’t break the planet’s reality. But hey, I’m right at home amongst humans. Stark raving mad.

            God, this is hilarious.

            • Once Upon a Time,
              OK. One more installment, in the interests of friendly closure. But this one really is the last, at least until some unforeseen time in the future.

              I posted re Buddhism vs Scientology a couple of weeks ago only to correct George on his understanding of the doctrine of no-self. I did that not just for George’s benefit, but also for the benefit of others interested in Buddhism, who might have picked up the same bit of false data, as it is very widespread. It was not my intention to get into a long, open-ended chat with anyone, or to make anyone wrong, or to assert that I personally am at some super-lofty level of awareness. I’m pretty aware, but I have a long way to go.

              The exchange with George got a lot longer than I was really prepared for time-wise. Various others jumped in, too. I thought I should continue to answer their posts as long as that was contributing to my original purpose for posting.

              Then you joined the discussion, with a different purpose — to find out how much of a kindred spirit to you I am, and how high my awareness really is. As that was mixed in with your own take on the no-self issue, I answered your posts like I answered those of others. But your posts were very long, taking too much time to read and answer. You also wanted to chat about matters I really don’t care to spend any time on — not that I have any aversion to them, but only that I have physical universe cycles of action to complete. So, I finally said I was posting my last installment.

              Re Forman, the book I recommended was published in 1999, so the one you read 20 years ago must have been one of his earlier works, either his book on Meister Eckhart or one of the anthologies he edited on the subject of pure consciousness. The book I recommended is a much more substantial presentation of his ideas.

              I actually put Forman on the path in 1967. I offered him Zen, Transcendental Meditation, and Scientology. He wasn’t ready for Zen. When I told him of my own enlightenment experience (see my first post from about 2 weeks ago) he was interested but didn’t really understand what I was talking about. Later at my suggestion he tried TM and liked it. That became his solution, so a couple of years later when I told him about Scientology he wasn’t interested. He went on to study with Maharishi in India, and spent 8-10 years as a TM instructor before leaving over disagreements with the TM version of the development of OT abilities. He continued to meditate while also receiving psychotherapy, got his PhD in religion, and became the champion of pure consciousness in philosophical circles. He now runs his own “new age” organization teaching meditation and counselling people.

              I suggested Forman to you only for his intellectual discussion of the issue of pure consciousness, not because I believe him to be at a high enough level of awareness to satisfy your appetite for exploring the “above these things” zone. I’m not saying he’s not aware enough in PT, because I haven’t spoken to him in many years. That would be for you to decide if you ever meet him.

              I do understand your appetite for “talking shop” with people you run across who may inhabit the “above these things” zone. And I share it. I like to see how high up people have really gone. But I am currently on a definite, particular purpose line, which led me to try to herd you back into what I consider to be a channel more relevant to our communitiy’s current needs. It’s certainly OK with me if you don’t want to go along with that, but I don’t have any more time to just chew the fat, no matter how tasty it may be.

              Re my suggestion that you “get a good start” by clay demo-ing your unanswerable questions, that wasn’t meant as an indication of your being some kind of beginner on the path. It’s quite obvious that you’re way beyond that. The “start” I was suggesting was on a new cycle of action. Clay demo-ing is not just a study method for newbies. It can be a very powerful process at upper levels, too. I suggested it because you seemed to be endlessly fascinated with your impossible questions at an intellectual level. If those questions were merely rhetorical, well OK. Thanks for clarifying that. If you were testing me, I hope you were satisfied with whatever you learned. I really have nothing more to say about the questions you asked.

              I, too, have been at this for thousands of years, and a very, very long time before that. I share your reality on the Goldilocks nature of this planet, although I find visiting the space between galaxies to be very relaxing.

              In Zen there’s a method called “dharma duelling,” with which you may be familiar. It’s a game of one-upmanship in discussions of spiritual matters, engaged in not to prove who has superior insight, but to break down the egoistic urge to do that, and shock all the players into realizing that they don’t know everything yet. That’s sort of what we’ve been doing. It’s been fun to a degree, and I’m sure that others have found it informative. I haven’t been trying to make you wrong, any more than I was trying to make George wrong about no-self.

              My purpose is only to promote standard tech as a workable path, and to help others get better organized and productive around it. That’s why I chose the handle “Kassapa,” as you surmised in your first post addressed to me.

              Perhaps we can chew the fat re “above these things” at some point in the future, out from behind our handles. For now, though, I have to move on to completing other cycles of action that are important to me. I hope you can understand that and grant beingness to it.

              • Just as an acknowledgement, thanks. It’s been fun. I understand the time constraints. Normally, I wouldn’t have bothered nor had the time but I’ve been on vacation and was between projects.

                Yes, the dharma dueling. Being the stinker I am, I have to confess to baiting you to see what would ensue. I find it therapeutic in quelling my inflated ego. It’s easier sometimes to understand self by understanding another.

                Will revisit Forman. Makes me wonder what you have written, but… I understand. Have written down your other reading selections to sandwich my guilty pleasures.

                Yes, perhaps later. As for now, I’m playing with phasing consciousness with present time and spotting what’s contributing to all this. Curiouser and curiouser.

                Ciao.

                • “It’s easier sometimes to understand self by understanding another. ”
                  So you sometimes take the easy way out? Fair enough. Nuttin’ but mostly respect for ya, sir.
                  Bruce

  48. Kassapa,

    I was feeling claustrophobic so I moved the discussion defile to valley, from gorge to plain.

    “Theta is uncompounded. The qualities of which you speak ARE compounded.” I find that to be a true and useful statement. Here’s the rub. Once theta knows, it knows, and that knowing will forever affect what it knows thereafter. Knowledge builds. Understanding builds. Experience builds. So, when we speak of “native state,” for practical purposes we are speaking of “the good old days” without matter, energy, space and time.

    The question obtains, “can one actually return to and maintain native state?” To a state of theoretical nirvana where one is pure theta without matter, energy, space and time contamination. My experience says probably not; it’s just a theoretical.

    So, when we speak of “native state” or the original state we found ourselves in before we assumed any viewpoint, before we extended any dimension point, before we assumed any quality or quantity or consideration, postulate or opinion, we are speaking of something that well might not be supportable, but is merely theoretical.

    As a parallel concept, take infinity. You can only have infinity as a theoretical. And as a theoretical, you can posit unlimited infinities. You can juxtapose infinite infinities, but you can never achieve an infinity in practice. It just is not possible.

    So, with theta, we are dealing with what is possible, not what is theoretical.

    Certainly I can imagine any condition for theta that I can develop or agree with. I can imagine states and conditions for theta for which English has no terms. But, ultimately, we are dealing with our perceptions or with what we “know.”

    How do we know? How do we perceive. Not as humans, but as spiritual beings. What makes a perception valid? Is there a test for that validity other than agreement from other beings or acceptance from self?

    We also encounter the rub of viewpoint affecting dimension point as addressed in Quantum Physics. Can we perceive something purely as it is, or does our accumulations of understanding, knowledge, considerations influence what we perceive? Can we reach a pure point of observation in which we as the observer do not influence or affect that which is viewed.

    In this case, theta. How does our “native state” alter what we perceive? Does our perception begin to alter as we gain more experience and knowledge and understanding? If you were in incipient “native state” would you even be able to understand all that exists in this universe as constructed now, or would you need to learn?

    And how does theta actually learn? We can speak glibly of communication, duplication, permeation, knowing, but what theta physics allows one thetan to learn from another?

    For either of us to assert that “this is native state and there is no other possibility” is short-sighted. Too many answers reside in that area which you refer to as “speculation.”

    If I lived in a poor Chicago neighborhood, with thugs and villains and thieves, my view of individuals might vary greatly from yours if you grew up in upper strata of Martha’s Vineyard. Different neighborhoods. If our paths crossed and we introduced each other to our friends, we might be taken back by how different they are.

    So, were all thetans spawned in the same neighborhood? Is it possible rather than merely theoretical for one thetan to know all thetans? I know it’s theoretical. But, when you speak of the thetans you’ve seen in native state, just what neighborhood did you visit?

    Is it possible that “beyond which there is only speculation” actually creates thetans? I know this type of experience is contained in various implants. And implants can obfuscate understanding. But to offer, “beyond which there is only speculation” begs a look. Is there something that exist there other than speculation?

    And if there is a line which we term speculation, does that same line apply to “native state” and post native state wherein theta has gained new qualities, quantities, experience, knowledge and understanding? Does that same line apply to your journey to Source compared to my journey to Source? At some point are we not merely speculating about what the other has perceived?

    And what hubris for me to tell you what you have observed and try to correct your observations. I’m a vain and arrogant soul, that I grant, but my hubris stops at the doors of observations and shared observations. I am humbled that others exist and that they can share their experiences with me. I can’t claim to know what they know or experience what they experience. I can only thrill in their sharing with me.

    Our perceptions to some degree are our personal creations. We perceive what we are disposed to perceive. If we are disposed to see good, then we will look for good.

    To have a “good world” depends on creating “good perceptions” and “good experience.” Doesn’t matter what underlies that creation. If we choose, then it shall be. What we validate becomes. Thus, perceiving good in others is absolutely necessary to creating a “good” universe.

    But, watch out for as-isness undermining the whole thing.

    And watch out for the capacity to evaluate and understand because a datum can only be evaluated by a datum of comparable magnitude, so thetans, in order to understand will create that datum of comparable magnitude. Every creation contains the potential of its own opposition.

    Which makes the devil necessary to understand God.

    The hubris of my observation deflates on the realization that something exists beyond that observation for which there are no words but of which I know intimately and certainly.

    I need to go to the gym, so don’t have time to scan this for errors, so…

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