What We Do, Part One

For some orientation to what I would like to over in this essay I begin with a passage from Chapter 25 Epilogue from Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior (Amazon Books, 2013):

     As has been ably reported by Janet Reitman in her book Inside Scientology (Houghton Mifflin, 2011) and by Lawrence Wright in his book Going Clear (Alfred A. Knopf, 2013), L. Ron Hubbard was a very capable marketing man. What they did not acknowledge as much, but did not totally discount, was Ron’s ability to solve problems – including those of the mind and spirit. Ron had a knack for finding out what was bothering people, putting together methods to address those things, and then selling those methods as services – the end-all that people just had to get their hands on.

     The Reitman and Wright books detailed how Ron was continually creating new rundowns, new levels and new packaging to keep the Scientology public enthused over the latest in the mind and spirit.  It was the formula that created continuing expansion of the Scientology empire during L. Ron Hubbard’s life.  A strong customer base was established and continually kept interested and buying as new, essential route-to-total-freedom items were rolled out.

     Because Ron so unequivocally mandated that only Ron could discover, create and memorialize mental and spiritual technology (the only stock-in-trade of the church of Scientology) upon Ron’s death the church’s expansion pattern also died.

     Consequently, David Miscavige took on an unenviable task when he was handed the reins of Scientology Inc.  And those reins were handed to him, whether begrudgingly or not, by Annie Tidman Broeker (Loyal Officer 2) when she sided with Miscavige against her then-husband (Loyal Officer 1) Pat Broeker. Miscavige had no choice but to radically change Scientology’s forty-year expansion pattern.

     The movement had been built and held together primarily through the promise and continual roll-out of new technology. Now Miscavige had to keep that movement going, but with no possibility of introducing new technology. For a while he seemed to have somewhat of a grasp of marketing, but all the marketing in the world could not keep an organization thriving when it had nothing new to sell. At least not an organization whose viability depended on continual emanation of new technology to sell. And by firm religious belief and church doctrine, he was powerless to create any new technology.

These facts – recognized by credible, outside observers and by insiders like myself – are at the heart of why Scientology (the whole package) is as dead as a door nail.  The promises are infinite while the delivery of them is impossible.

The first thing that probably distinguishes us from all others we are aware of who utilize some of the discoveries of Ron Hubbard is that we do not play – in any way, shape, fashion, or form – the baiting evaluation game that comes part and parcel with Scientology.  That is the incessant, overt and covert, game of continuous evaluations along the line of ‘the next roll out will really get you there’, ‘the next level will handle your problem’, ‘you need to act in this fashion so that you see the wisdom of taking your next step’, ‘you’ll understand that when you get to ______’, or any other of the pitches that were memorialized in unalterable, firm Scientology policy and mental technology throughout the years.

That most decidedly includes the insidious safety valve, bait-and-switch line ‘the reason it didn’t work for you was that it was corrupted by someone else, and now we’re going to give you the real thing’ as is so regularly chanted by the church and the shadow it casts, Scientology practitioners outside of the church.  The real thing is precisely what is described in the book passage above: the never-ending promises to the stairway to Heaven that demonstrably does not lead to Heaven.  It more often leads instead to the perfect cognitive storm: holding these two conflicting ideas counterpoised,  a) I have done everything Ron prescribed, so I know everything there is to know, and can never improve because I am already perfect – b) all the while colliding with the deep-down, suppressed self-recognition that the individual has become intolerant, arrogant, callous and miserable.

This find-the-ruin, bait-and-switch mentality is woven into the woof and warp of Scientology.  It gets played from initial marketing to the highest reaches of the bridge. It has always been, both inside the church and without, that those who play it best are sainted with being the most ‘On Source’ (with L. Ron Hubbard) Scientologists.

It also happens to be Ron’s first,  greatest  – and ultimately most fatal – departure from the technology he primarily borrowed from in creating Dianetics and Scientology: Rogerian client-centered psychotherapy.  The second the client is played – in any way, shape, fashion or form – by definition the process is no longer client centered.  Instead, it by definition becomes practitioner – or organization – centered. The road to restoration of self-determinism becomes paved with enforcement of obedient following.

Do I mean to say that Ron was a con?   Do I mean to say that everything he discovered or purported to discover was fraudulent?   No; as you shall see in further installments.  But, I am defining what it is we do and the first thing we do is stay true to the client-centered philosophy that is at the heart of – in fact, is the sine qua non of – all that is workable in Scientology.

133 responses to “What We Do, Part One

  1. ” But, I am defining what it is we do and the first thing we do is stay true to the client-centered philosophy that is at the heart of – in fact, is the sine qua non of – all that is workable in Scientology.”

    This should be at the front of all courses not KSW1.

    • Hello my good friend. Do you remember visiting my workplace, That was actually a Clíent Based bussiness under a foundation to lead people back to usefull and productive life and sanity and I do mindfullness there and Yogha and they want people “to fall awake”We even do bodyscans sometimes lol. The founders of that place Willy Warnar and Ieme Boomsma were disgruntled by how the Psychiatric place operated were they worked and created there own foundation. Their “Org” (little joke) is operating for 25 years now.

  2. An Old Alter boy

    Marty, good emphasis on client-oriented practice. That a fundamental issue. But I don’t agree that Miscavige was dealt a tough hand and that the absence of “new” technology to continually offer boxed him in. I do not believe its because on an absence of New Tech. That may be a Div 2 challenge but its certainly not a Div 6 why. There a whole planet of people out there that never had their first service or the rest of the bridge. Miscavige was handed the crown jewels. In my opinion it was not because LRH died. Jesus died too. That Christian church didn’t even exist when he was alive. The scientology church is imploding for a lot of worthy reasons, among them your point about not being client-focused but organization focused. Great Point.

    • Brian Thomas Lambert

      Yes great point Alter Boy. Happy people is the only stat.

      Happy people will be the only achievement to shift Scientology’s brand as a ruthless thug. A brand well deserved and so well planned out by crushing any legitimate dissent; like the Nazi’s and Mao’s Cultural Revolution

      Totalitarian regimes be they political or religious always have a bad smell in western democracies.

      That is a great start Marty. Actually the only start to help people free themselves from their own suffering. Concentrating on their needs instead of using them in a spiritual production line.

      Use it to free people not to entrap them.

  3. Seems so true, Marty. Of course, at some point it would be expected that a person moving up through Scientology would turn his or her attention to those who have not had similar gains available from the subject and stop needing something new for their own personal benefit. RTC could have had an overall stat that was in line with the PL Proportionate Marketing instead of Advanced Tech VSD, which focused RTC’s attention on what the AOs and FSO and Freewinds were doing and to hell with everything else. That was a huge mistake right from the get go and proven by the last 20+ years of declining stats.

    • martyrathbun09

      Of course. And if they weren’t themselves dragged along by way of marketing or scare tactics, they might not feel compelled to use the same means. I know from experience that those tactics are not required to draw interest and participation.

      • Marty, here is a tactic that caught my eye yet, probably yours too and others but allow me. A person in a Church of Scientology that acquires an O/W on the church and originates this to an EO must then be assigned a lower condition correct? Depending upon how big the O/W and how low a condition assigned, that person eventually does their liability formula to gain entrance back into the group. I want to repeat that “to gain entrance BACK into the group” because one is not yet IN the group yet because of the O/W and the lower condition. So, how then, is it possible, if a person is not yet allowed back into the group the person can be trusted to clean and file all the org’s confidential PC’s folders as amends? Wouldn’t the amends have to be done outside the church instead of as a trusted responsibility within the church? Would a judge accept it if you ran over me by mistake with your car and broke all my legs that you should clean out the PC folder room as an effective blow to the enemy of the group one was pretending to be a part of when the O/W was acquired? :) Consequently, if real SP’s are the enemy of the church and one goes out and delivers an effective blow to that enemy and comes back with the act as their amends, wouldn’t there be someone in the church to stop you and say “Hey, now would you like it if someone did that to you? Go out and do some real amends!”. Marty, I don’t think the Church of Scientology ever really was in business to begin with and doesn’t help anybody if its name makes it sound like it is in business. :)

        • Lawrence

          “Ethics and justice” are so out of whack in the church, for the most part, that they are practically unrecognizable if compared along side their definitions.

          Regarding your point about someone “in lowers” working with confidential files (or any files actually) there are actually ethics policies against that.

          Regarding doing something “to make up the damage” that does not actually even address the real damage, is totally useless. It is a misdirect. It also leaves people thinking that “ethics doesn’t work”.

          One could take almost any aspect of ethics and justice, as applied within the church, and find similar crazy or even suppressive misuses. Unfortunately, due to misunderstanding and misuse of ethics while in the Church, many people, even outside the church, have a lot of false data on the whole subject.

          Eric

          • Part 3 Integrety and the 7 and 8 Dynamic

          • Eric,

            As with so much else in Scientology, “ethics” has multiple definitions.

            One for public consumption.

            One for use a little further inside Scientology.

            And another for deep inside Scientology.

            “What you see is *not* what you get.”

            Not because of a “misunderstood,” but because of a deliberate deception by the founder of Scientology when he formulated its doctrine.

            This is not considered to be deception by Scientologists, who see it as simply a use of “gradients,” made necessary when dealing with aberrated humans.

            The exception is Scientologists who either are in denial, or naive, and are not aware that the window dressing definition of “ethics” is just that: window dressing.

  4. Interesting article. This must take valuable time to construct.

    When reading this and previous comments about client-centered approaches, I am reminded of the evolution of marketing from production-orientation in the early days to to market orientation much later in this chain. The philosophies of marketing further evolve from this to relationship marketing and the like. Client-centered approach.

    In today’s market places you probably will not survive without having client-centeredness as your guidon.

    I see now it applies to therapy. I hadn’t considered that before.

    Interesting.

  5. Yes, totally agree. Take one sample: „Cause over life“. What would that be? I can grow my onw body. I can go to mars and start life there. Grow a flower. I can stop life. I can create a being. Someone who serves me or someone that is aware of being aware. Things like that. Complete unreality. No one can be „Cause over life“. Except those that are.
    By the way: those that are „Cause over life“ never would allow us be Cause over life. Not at the condition we are in.

    Or „Super Power“. Someone who wants Super Power, what will he do with his „Super Power“? In case „Super Power“ would be really attainable would this be desireable? I think not. Not for me and not for those many that would be effect of it.

    Back to my story: the best thing I learned in Scientology is how to protect myself from attacks of OTs or so called OTs or crazy Sea Org Missions.

  6. “The road to restoration of self-determinism becomes paved with enforcement of obedient following.”

    My understanding of auditing is that it is a method of taking over control of the pc’s mind to the degree necessary to bring the pc to a point where he himself is more and more in control of his own mind and can factually be self-determined – and even pan-determined as his growth continues.

    Similarly, I can’t help but wonder if at some point Hubbard decided it was necessary to apply those same auditing principles to the 3rd and 4th dynamics – i.e. he attempted to take over control of “the mind” of those dynamics in a way that, as with individual pcs, those dynamics as such would be in greater control and be more at cause. It does come across as “the ends justifying the means”, but is it any more so than individual auditing could be described?

    With respect to any dynamic, there probably does need to be a certain amount of agreement as regards putting oneself under another’s control – i.e. agreement as to the means – as well as agreement with the intended ends. But how much would a beginning pc, for example, be able to understand an explanation for the means and purposes of objective processes? Likewise, how much would be understandable to the individuals in groups as regards 3rd and 4th dynamics means and ends?

    If the above actually describes Hubbards attempts, it appears that he failed – but perhaps for different reasons than what would appear.

    • martyrathbun09

      You noted, ” But how much would a beginning pc, for example, be able to understand an explanation for the means and purposes of objective processes? “. Very much, with about a two minute r-factor. But, it seems ‘standard’ delivery of objectives calls for no such enlightenment. Maybe that is why they more usually take many intensives, when it is hard for me to imagine more than one or two being necessary for just about any pc.

      • Got it. Okay, I imagine something could be stated like: “These processes will bring you more into present time.” Or: “These processes are to enable you to follow verbal commands in which the auditor isn’t able to fully supervise what you are doing with the commands as can be done with objective processes.” But on a 3rd dymamic level, it would likely come across as “I know better than you and thus you just have to let me take control of you.” Which is kind of what LRH did say in KSW, etc. and is what people started objecting to, understandably. It’s a conundrum in terms of what LRH may have considered necessary.

        • This was a pretty good 3rd dynamic R-factor at the time it was given:

          “If you will just stay with me on this line, up to the first milestone in Scientology, and bring yourself up to a high level of ability and apply yourself to that, you will be free – free from me and from Scientology too!” (LRH 520303 HCL 1 – Scientology – Milestone One)

          • martyrathbun09

            The problem with that reference is he says throughout the series repeatedly that the only source of aberration is a single incident called Fac One; it is the only way to raise tone permanently for example. He lectures for some time grooving in this alleged incident being common to everyone. Over time, it works its way out of the line up and isn’t even mentioned for decades.

            • Philosophically at least I think that it holds a lot of weight. Being able to find and overcome the single source of all aberration in an individual is really the holy grail of all spiritual pursuits.

              But wouldn’t it perhaps be too advanced for most individuals to address completely from the start?

              If it were that easy then we wouldn’t have had to spend so many lifetimes in needless suffering. But I don’t see why it couldn’t be introduced initially and then worked back up to gradually.

              Regardless, this is another example of why it seems to me that Scientology came out theoretically quite fully-formed from the beginning.

              • Brian Thomas Lambert

                There is no one incident that causes all this mess. It is the mind itself which is the problem.

                The answer to the resolution to human suffering does not lay on the time track at some magic-all-painfull-basic basic past.

                No liberated soul has ever taught this. Putting the answer to suffering in “time” is like saying the answer to becoming theta is to become mest. Time is the T in mest. Mest is the problem, and mest is based in thought and thought is based in spirit.

                The answer lies in soul realization. The basic basic to all basic basics is consciousness. Because all experience is generated from it.

                To help a person fighting dragons in a nightmare you wake him up. The basic basic to the nightmare was a sleeping thetan.

                “awake thou that sleepest and arise from the dead”

                • Hi Brian,

                  Actually the first incident that he refers to is Incident One (Milestone One – Lecture 22). What he mentions generally as Fac One is further up the track.

                  This incident at “origin” is considered lighter (a slight downtone from Theta into MEST, and its resulting upset). But this may then be the initial aberrative incident (Hubbard mentions in lecture 13 that the first incident on the track is the initial determiner of the tone).

                  And for all we know, it *is* a manifestation of our own mind separating from itself.

                  It is further said that practically everybody in the universe has this incident. I’m assuming that those who don’t, have reached total freedom in one way or another.

                  Of course things always get a bit difficult in spiritual teachings around this area because it speaks to initial culpability and so on. But I think that if an individual is able to hold pure tone then they would not be affected by it, or anything that comes after.

                  I don’t really think it’s a problem to dispute this, but having said that, if you do, you’re going to be debating with a number of other spiritual teachings as well.

                • Crashing Upwards

                  Brian states;
                  “The basic basic to all basic basics is consciousness. Because all experience is generated from it.”
                  Now that is pretty easy to understand and it makes sense. I like it. One has to become conscious of their consciousness as a first step. The awareness of awareness unit. The conscious self. The Doer in the Body as Percival calls it in his book Thinking and Destiny, published in the 40’s.

                • Brian, you stated…”There is no one incident that causes all this mess. It is the mind itself which is the problem.” If I would have read this a year ago I probably would have been moved to express a different perspective. One that I, of course, would have considered to be more accurate than yours. lol! All I can say now is, oh what a difference a year can make in one’s interpretation of what is being perceived. :)

                  About the mind…well, as I am learning…there’s a helluva lot more to that story.

                  Brian, in this moment, I very much agree with what your telling rainbodhi. There is no basic basic to be found in the world of perception. And, the way out of the world of perception is, as you put it, soul realization.

                  You also wrote: “The basic basic to all basic basics is consciousness. Because all experience is generated from it.” Brian, I am currently supposing that consciousness occurred when the soul split the mind at which point (the introduction of consciousness instantly created a ‘point’…something to be conscious of) the soul became a perceiver rather than a creator and thereby a world of perception i.e., the mest universe, came into being.

                  • Monte you wrote, “Brian, I am currently supposing that consciousness occurred when the soul split the mind…….”

                    Rainbodhi you wrote, “This incident at “origin” is considered lighter (a slight downtone from Theta into MEST, and its resulting upset). But this may then be the initial aberrative incident (Hubbard mentions in lecture 13 that the first incident on the track is the initial determiner of the tone).”

                    Consciousness did not occur. Consciousness is not MEST. An occurrence happens on a time line. Consciousness is the creator of time. Consciousness never began and will never end: Timeless and bodiless.

                    The origins of suffering is not in the past. We are the authors of our suffering right now. The origins of it are not a past painful moment.

                    That therapeutic process may be good for Freudian analysis but it does not answer the deeper questions of life: How and why the infinite complexities of all created things happened. And what is suffering.

                    The origins are ignorance. The main ignorance is our considering that what happens to our bodies is happening to us. The problem is one of identification. A free soul who knows he is not the body (or even partially free) will not be traumatized by body death, or even torture ( which is Ron’s reasons for suffering)

                    It is not knowing who and what we are that makes the mind susceptible to the suggestion that “it is happening to us”.

                    I would suggest reading “The Yoga Aphorisms Of Patanjali” translation with commentary by Swami Prabhavananda and Christopher Isherwood. especially the first couple of aphorisms to understand the main problems in understanding we face. BTW, all mystics defer to Patanjali as he is considered one of the important sages. By all.

                    Going back in time can go on and on and on. Just like looking into how small small can get………… atoms, quarks, strings…….. science will always go on and on because nature goes on and on.

                    L.Ron Hubbard, fancied space opera and painful electronic incidents as the cause for suffering. Always something or someone else: BTS, SPs, PTS, Psyches, Journalists, Communists, CIA, FBI, Interpol, Implanters, Marcabs, Planet Farsec, Third Party.

                    Ron did not know the soul. Ron was enamored with the infinite modifications of his mental impressions. And he believed in the absolute accuracy of needle reactions being the arbiter of truth. And in that regard created for himself and others a very blurry line between fact and fiction. This is the point where the conscious mind and the unconscious collapsed into each other and you get the phenomenon of many Mozart’s in Scientology and delusional OTs.

                    Ron also believed that exteriorizing from the body was the holy grail of all religion and the goal of the Buddha: false

                    Changing location in space does not automatically confer wisdom. It may be helpful in gaining the conscious experience of “I am not a body” but it is still not the goal. There are countless disembodied souls roaming in darkness without physical bodies.

                    Understanding the reasons we are attached to the body, understanding the mechanism of transferring of soul identification to body identification is the only method of being freed from bodies.

                    Ron’s reasons were always outside himself. Some cosmic bad guy.

                    The answer to human suffering is not in a Cosmic Freudian analysis.
                    It is not in time, it lies in understanding the soul, which is the creator of all time and space.

                    • If you want to know the origins of a story, make friends with the writer. God/the Soul/Nirvana/Consciousness dreams the dream of cosmic creation. We are that, that is us.

                    • Brian, rainbodhi, Crashing Upwards…what a wonderful exchange! As rainbodhi said, “At least we’re in a position where we can discuss this.” Yes, I have much gratitude for such a rich gift as this discussion is. The questions raised here have launched me into a remarkable exploration of thought. You are all such splendid teachers!

                      I cannot debate or argue any point that has been made nor do I feel a need or want to do so. In the not too distant past (which doesn’t even exist) I assure you that that would have not been the case. I used to love to argue ambiguous and elusive points as if they were real. Nowadays, it’s the questions I’m interested in not the ‘answers.’ As odd as this may sound, I now believe that questions are what will lead me HOME while the answers will work to keep me in the dream.

                      Words, for me, are so inadequate for discussions like this but words are what we have for now so words it is. That said, I think its prudent to keep in mind that words are perceived and thus it follows that they are interpreted. And regardless of what the dictionary states is the meaning(s) of a particular word, each person who reads that definition is interpreting the word through a seemingly infinite number of filters.

                      Speaking of ‘filters’…they’re another reason why I’ve come to prefer questions over answers. In my experience, I noticed that the ‘answers’ that came from sources that seemed to be outside of myself (sources I resonated to), would become yet another filter acting to distort my perception, not clarify it.

                      Much thanks to each of you. You have given me most excellent gifts!

                    • Brian, you said:

                      “If you want to know the origins of a story, make friends with the writer. God/the Soul/Nirvana/Consciousness dreams the dream of cosmic creation. We are that, that is us.”

                      This sounds absolutely wonderful. But there are also a lot of animals out there eating their own feces right now.

                    • Brian,

                      You said: “The origins are ignorance.”

                      But the question remains, how and when did that initial ignorance occur?

                      This is such a fundamental question, but I just don’t see how LRH’s view on the subject is so disagreeable. All he said is that there was a separation at origin which veered towards solidity. His teaching is actually strikingly positive since he asserts that our nature is good and that we can reattain our recognition of it.

                      Regarding exteriorisation: I think that any experience that allows us to understand that our mind is able to operate separately outside of our body, at least ostensibly, is a positive thing. There are many people in the world who do not have an experience of this at all.

                      However I do not believe it is the actual spiritual goal of Scientology.

                      I do agree with you that separation from the body alone is not enough. In fact I’m pretty sure that disembodied beings run the same gamut of emotions as we do. But the difficult consequence of that is as such: because those who have negative emotions in physical embodiments can be abusive, so too could those who do not have such embodiments.

                      I must recommend you to read the accounts in Buddhism of the sufferings in the hot and cold hells (and hungry ghosts, asuras, etc) – many of them make LRH’s conceptions look like a picnic.

                      And even if those experiences are only taken metaphorically, it should be fair to recognise – just from what we see around us – that many beings are undergo terrible difficulties. We are in a privileged position. Many other beings do not have the ability to meditate on God. And there are some people who do focus on God (or their conception of God) but end up in dire circumstances anyhow.

                      I’m not saying it’s not worthwhile to do that, but I am saying that it’s perhaps not enough by itself. For example, basic Buddhism, as Sakyamuni taught it here, doesn’t have any explicit conception of an ultimate essence at all, and yet the tenets and the approaches are all it needs for it to work in a way that’s practically unmatched.

                      Nonetheless, I have taken away some important things from LRH’s teachings so far, particularly increased self-responsibility.

                      Thank you for the recommend on the Patanjali sutras – I recognise their importance and look forward to studying them deeply one day.

                    • Brian,

                      p.s. please excuse my non-sequiturial comment. :)

                    • Rainbodhi and others responding to my post, thanks. I have been very busy and haven’t the time to address all your great interesting points. Such deep questions and views about life.

                      My simple answer is that I’ve been out of Scientology now since 82. My purpose for stating things I do is to share what a person is like moving up a little higher since then. The things I have originated in this blog are to be found everywhere in free investigations of other practices. The knowledge is ubiquitous and very frequently strongly reveals some of Scientology to be wrong knowledge.

                      Scientologists were at one time my family and as such I have the desire to share with you all the very rich landscape of knowledge that is available, when we de-hypnotizes ourselves from the blinding vice grip of the arrogant ‘only way’ mentality, that Ron himself imparted.

                      I have been out of the church now for 31 years. It is possible that you will be me 31 years from now saying similar things to others. That is, if the spiritual path is your passion.

                      It is ok to be judgmental of Ron and still see the good in Scientology. That is also my job here. Agree with me or disagree with me is fantastic.

                      Civil dialog with dissent is one of the first signs of washing the cult out of one’s mind.

                      Thank you for allowing me to be my own authentic voice Mr. Rathbun.

                    • Brian,

                      Thanks for the conversation. I do understand the adverse effect that Scientology – even as a doctrine – has on a number of people.

                      But I do think that it should be taken seriously enough to be able to be debated and discussed on a level with other religious philosophies, particularly Eastern traditions and their individual schools.

                      There seems to be a relatively current idea on various forums that Scientology is invalid due to its divergence with what some people are familiar with in relation to their own spiritual beliefs.

                      You can even say “9 out of 10 mystics agree…” but the point is that it should be open for serious questioning rather than just deferring to authority or tradition. However I do believe in forming a view of what is personally acceptable and what is not.

                      I also believe in the fundamental unity of all (or at least many) religions and spiritual paths. But it’s clear that these teachings and approaches are not identical; in some cases, they are diametrically opposed. However this doesn’t mean that they can’t eventually lead to truth.

                      I appreciate the process of looking for a common denominator. And if you place all of the major concepts of world religion into a melting pot, you might come up with a reasonable yardstick. But you might also miss some otherwise important points.

                      And anyone who has the idea that only their spiritual view is the sole truth, and even that others should accept it, doesn’t really have much ground to stand on when it comes to criticizing Ron for the same thing; in some cases he is actually more admitting of the veracity of other paths than many other religions are (strong opinions notwithstanding), and at least theoretically taught that you shouldn’t just accept, but be open to all possible knowledge.

                      *That* is the standard that Scientology should be held to.

                    • I agree Rainbodhi, all is open for discussion. But realize, and I’m sure you do, that this open discussion is occurring because Scientology has failed. This open discussion in Ron’s day would have all our heads on a pike.

                      Regarding the esoteric ideas we are discussing: It is fun and I love it,but at some point we are, to some degree, discussing theories and states of being that I do not have direct perception of. So as it may be fun, I realize I only have partial understanding on these things and I don’t want to fall into the trap of coming off as more than I am.

                      It also would be more fun sitting around a table with a beer and going at it. Sometimes my iPad 1 cannot handle large blogs with videos and I don’t want to go into my studio to access my computer.

                      Peace Out Fellow Traveler

                      P.S. I do hope the benevolent stuff in Scientology survives and the lies are culled from the doctrines and relegated to history instead of practice.

                    • Brian,

                      In the early days, it’s clear that discussion about other religions and their relationship to Scientology *was* accepted and even encouraged. I’ve even heard stories of where Ron took his students through mystical texts using techniques to help discern their value.

                      But it’s definitely bombed in relation to that high watermark. Over time, the controls were put on too tight. And we have yet to see what can come of it in a more liberal and allowing environment.

                      In Christianity, you could attend one church in the local district and hear them bloviate every Sunday about the evil influence of Satan in society, or “the gays” or single mothers or whatever have you. Or you could turn up to the next one down the road and hear them encourage parishioners on the importance of charity and non-judgment.

                      Both churches use the exact same source material, but the difference lies in the attitude of individuals and their perceptions of what to focus on.

                      And if you were so inclined, you could round up all of the bulletins and other bits in lectures where LRH talks about “the psychs” and deliver them as special booklets. Or you could recognise that it’s not really something to be made into the foremost agenda, and instead focus on the principle of improvement through spiritual progress wherever possible. You can even say “we do it better” – but you’d need the track record and viability to back it up. And right now that can’t truly be claimed.

                      Having said that, you do have to be a bit careful about completely editing out the “wrong stuff”. To some people, that includes all talk about spirits or otherworldly phenomena altogether. Better to leave it all in there and encourage a kinder, smarter attitude.

                      It would be interesting to discuss further at some point what you consider to be correct or acceptable within Scientology. And whether it’s better than, say, scientific materialism. A forum environment would be good for keeping debates going – but generally most forums have a very antagonistic attitude at present.

                      Thanks for the discussion.

                  • But it is stated that Theta has primacy – and the “incident” is the actual moment of a moving away from that somehow – nothing more. If a split like that had occurred, such a moment should be findable.

                    Whether it’s a “magic” solution or not is beside the point in some ways, because it still requires the development of spiritual knowledge to address properly.

                    Also, the problem with positing a completely benign or inert split is that it doesn’t explain suffering, or it would follow that suffering is part of a grand plan, etc.

                    An exception to this would be through the process of spiritual emanation, which would still be within the domain of the original field.

                    I also agree that if consciousness refers to something that is perceiving something else, then it is not the initial state.

                    But at least we’re in a position where we’re able to discuss this.

                • Crashing Upwards

                  Brian, this follow-up comment is partly prompted by other comments made by Rainbodhi and Monte. Does “The Fall” , as reported in the Bible, as at least one source, also describe this separating from whatever source we were once part of and assuming a separate identity. That rings a bell for me. The game is how one gets back. First step is to realize you are now aware of being other than your body and separated from whence you came. And then to find a path back. I am not seeking to diminish anything LRH said about basic incidents. But lets also keep a historical perspective. I don’t think any of this is news.

                  • I do think there’s a connection, but it depends on how it’s approached philosophically. I think the way that the Fall is commonly apprehended in mainstream-to-hardline Christianity is that it is so far removed from our actual perceptual reality, and is considered to be only reparable through faith in the person of Jesus. All of the angels who fell during that time are fubared. Judaism is a bit different but it depends on where you look.

                    Rather than saying: we did not exist at the origin, but we incur the fault of Adam and Eve, therefore our nature is sinful, it’s far different to affirm: our nature is pure, we alone have responsibility, and we have existed since the beginning.

                    It might be speaking to similar events, but otherwise the difference is like day and night.

            • Marty, I’m not familiar with the whole Milestone One series, but here’s another quote from it that describes milestone one specifically:

              “The only question in your minds at this moment is ‘Can I attain the first milestone?’ That’s the reason I’m giving this course. The first milestone. That’s the reason you have this book, *Handbook for Preclears*. That’s attaining the first milestone.”

              In the Milestone One series, Fac One is referred to as “the basic on the service facsimile chain”, and *Handbook for Preclears* does involve handling ser facs. However, the tech for handling them doesn’t include actually running Fac One.

              On the point about telling a pc what he should run, it seems to me that the tech in general became less and less directive as research went on. Even comparing Book One tech to NED, for example, although the basic principles are the same.

              As a matter of fact, according to Dan Koon, who as you know was on the highest technical research lines, LRH even wanted to eliminate OT III and had asked for a pilot to be done where pcs would go from OT II straight onto NOTs. Unfortunately, Miscavige never got that pilot done.

              Btw, I got the impression from a post you wrote quite a while back that you considered ser facs to be one of the most significant aspects of case – you may have even said it was the most significant. I remember that because LRH made a similar statement, at least at one point – and I still think there is a lot of truth to it.

              • Correction: I wrote “However, the tech for handling them doesn’t include actually running Fac One.” I should have said it doesn’t include actually “asking” for Fac One,

              • martyrathbun09

                Thanks. That OT III business was according to me, not Dan Koon, based on a dispatch I saw from LRH.

                • Thanks – that authenticates it even more. Dan Koon apparently saw the dispatch too. Here’s a comment he posted on Geir Isene’s blog:

                  “…At one point, LRH was reported to have considered the idea of doing away with OT III and in fact ordered David Mayo to do a pilot of taking Clears (or OT IIs) and putting them straight onto NOTs. I have seen the dispatch. The pilot never got done thanks to a little friend whose initials are also DM.” http://isene.me/2012/12/10/ot-8/#comment-25130

                  I forgot that he had stated it was not just OT II’s but Clears that could be put straight onto NOTs. I can really see why DM would not want that pilot done – too much loss of revenue!

                  • Come to think of it, the fact that LRH did want that pilot done is a pretty good indicator that he was not just interested in making money, as some critics claim.

    • “My understanding of auditing is that it is a method of taking over control of the pc’s mind to the degree necessary to bring the pc to a point where he himself is more and more in control of his own mind and can factually be self-determined – and even pan-determined as his growth continues. ”

      Great point, marildi.
      I remember reading or hearing a statement along that line which implied that independence was the ultimate goal of Scientology. It was LRH saying something like “turn you loose”. I think he said it before the total corruption of planet earth by capitalism.

      George M. White

      • Thanks George. Yes, and I think another way Hubbard phrased it was that we would have to “run out Scientology” in the end.

        You made a good point too, as regards the corruption of the planet. In a Study Tape (also a BC tape) which I reviewed recently, Hubbard stated :

        “You see in one PC the world at large, you see? He is the microcosm and the world is the macrocosm; and you see that what is happening to a PC – you know that if you audit him slowly and poorly he makes thuhh, and he goes duhhh… and he slows down and goes into third gear, and he puts it all on the back burner, and so forth. Well, those fits and starts would be the fits and starts of the track of the civilization in which we live if we did not approach this problem effectively and do it with fair effectiveness.” (SHSBC-108 – 24.1.62 “Training: Duplication”)

        This was the point I was trying to make in my first post above – that LRH seemed to have been trying to apply the principles of auditing a single pc to the 3rd and 4th dynamics, and that he considered the vital thing was to take control and push people along fast so as to keep ahead of the suppression in the environment – speaking in 3rd and 4th dynamic terms – and corruption by capitalism is a good example of suppression in the environment.

        • p.s. I do recognize that the CoS turned into a cult, in spite of whatever Hubbard’s intentions were in the measures he took.

      • ACC Lectures. Opening Procedure 8-C

        Again don’t mind the text in the video, it’s the Audio that is important

  7. Mark, as more and more ex-staff leave and enter the ranks of the indie area what does one look for in deciding if they are client-centered and that whether just because they have hung up a shingle that they adhere to both Ron’s workable tech and those other influences that Ron drew from? Bill Dupree

    • martyrathbun09

      Beats me. Apparently, we walk alone at the moment.

      • Brian Thomas Lambert

        As an auditor I always feel that a great caring for the happiness of the pc always brought a person to some realization. Always.

        I heard of a survey/study done that concluded through observing many therapist-client modalities and found that friends listening to each other had similar results as professionals.

        Caring……….. Is king……………. appropriate procedure is supportive.

    • Been connecting people up for more than a decade and been promotimg
      successes . Anyone is welcome to ask me. And to consult who ever.
      Will give best advice I can. I lean towards standard tech but know so much excellent results from others.

      Marty seems to get great results but is in a particular location. I may be able to help on other locations, I try.

  8. I remember feeling sympathy for DM (and all of us, actually) when I first read this. I feel it again now.

  9. Joe Pendleton

    Very true Marty. I think that there is TREMENDOUS wisdom in much of the early writings of Scientology. Just reading about the attributes of theta in 8-8008, I always feel more aware of the potential of my own beingness to create my universe …. and thus have an almost immediate uptick in the ability to postulate and cause and be happy and play fulfilling games. BUT …. when evaluations about beings are added into this pursuit of knowledge in order TO HANDLE OR CONTROL THAT BEING IN ORDER TO GET THAT BEING TO DO SOMETHING …… well, then we are engaged in activity that is essentially placing the being at effect and other determinism (and of course these evaluations are almost always negative ones designed to drive the being down the tone scale, and force and threats of loss and punishment are almost always added for “good measure” to accomplish the intended result of controlling the being).

    Why Ron felt he had to go down this path and dramatize these earlier activities on the track of course is a big subject and has been discussed much in this venue and others (though I think there is more to be said about it).

    My own current “method of operation” you might say, is to not invalidate any of the wisdom or the gains I have gotten in my 40 years involvement in Scientology but to also be open to ANY wisdom from any source. And to recognize as well that true wisdom (or maybe I should say the wisdom that I personally am open to) has nothing to do with duress, heavy evaluation, force or insane group dynamics.

  10. Doesn’t any tell him he is only (so called) religious leader giving marketing and sales and PR speech all the time.
    Listen to Dalai Lama , Pope Francis or any religious leader of present and past : no one is dumb like him.
    Marty you writing carries more depth and higher under standing and more humility then “COB”

    • norman williamson

      DM needs proper training: he never attended any public event nor made any public speech …neither he has the ability to face media.
      Personality like Anthony Robbin can be a good inspiration for him…he can teach him how to attend public event and be amongst the strangers with ease…etc

    • He is stil a book sales man. This is his universe and reflects all over his personality. Lacks depth and vision

    • Ron is not from this planet as he explainds in this lecture.

      Fair use excerpts from the Class VIII Auditor Tape #8. Presented to demonstrate the thesis that Scientologists give L. Ron Hubbard a special reverence not permitted to any human.

      • Cat Daddy, what is your point ? In Scientology theory, *NOBODY* is originally from Earth.

        Michael A. Hobson
        Independent Scientologist

        • I distrust people who claim they are special and therefore asume authority over others. If you would follow the old lectures per Hubbard you don’t take anything at fave value, even his words. He said so himself.

          Well if you believe you are under the influence of Implants that could be the biggest Implant in itsself. In the lecture of october 27, 1954 Hubbard himself on hypnotism explains how that works.

        • I feel mean a bit towards you. (Overt perhaps) because I think you are a real nice individual. So In the end you of course choose what game(s) you want to play. And of course you determine your own course in life.

          I personaly belief the older Hubbard lectures reveal a lot about the choichers he makes later with regards to his teachings.

          I belief you mean the world well and would not harm others but help them

        • Part 4 is for you especcialy the end of the video.

  11. Good post. Do you think any of the constant supply and subsequent demand for new services is related to LRH’s experiences as a writer for pulp magazines? I wonder if the constant need to sell the next story didn’t become “provide the next course.”

    • martyrathbun09

      I don’t think the why’s are important in learning to differentiate between workable ideas and not so workable ideas.

  12. Rons explains what now is known as routines or automatisms in the brain.

    I actually think it’s very ahead of his time. This was the bit I actually was talking about earlier. The thetan builds machines and hides tham and forgets about hiding them.

    Like learning to drive a car.

    Route 1 Step 14

  13. What the different between Scientology tailor made and client-centered?

  14. Tom Gallagher

    I’ll cut to the quick from my viewpoint…..

    The Bridge to TOTAL FREEDUMB that LRH put forth is a failed business model. Let me repeat that. IT IS A FAILED BUSINESS MODEL! Never-the-less, everything that Joe Pendleton stated above is true.

    And there is THE conundrum for the zealots and cultists who consider RON IS GOD. He wasn’t and maybe worse.

    Not overlooking or disavowing LRH’s accomplishments and contributions, I guess the point is: Can’t we move on. Or better yet as Marty has coined it- Move On Up a Little Higher?

    Jeesh!

    I think a key to all of this confabulation maybe centered on the confusion regards the pre-bridge, early period that focused on Creative Processing. There was a later line of research that developed into Identity Processing as discovered and developed by John Galusha, LRH’s senior research auditor through the 1950’s. It’s worth a read.

    http://www.freezoneplanet.org

    Client-centered therapies seek out beneficial stuff for the client.

    Cult-like modalities seek to reinforce the organization (or cult).

    • “How does life become totally painful? By total retreat. Total noninspection becomes total pain.
      […]
      But existence is basically composed of a very few truths onto which have hung a great many artificialities and which man has adorned with enormous numbers of lies. And man is prisoner of his own shadows.
      Now one of the things you can do with man is to get him to look up and find out that he can look through the shadows and look at the shadows and find out what they are.”

      L. Ron Hubbard

  15. I absolutely loved this post. It just so sound and objective!

  16. As a Case Supervisor, my personal integrity was devoted to handling the person in front of me and paralleling that person’s needs and wants. I had to send a folder of one person, who truly thought they were Clear, back to the Advanced Org 5 times with the statement that I would NEVER supervise a program for Dianetics on this person unless they agreed with being told they were not Clear…which they didn’t. (Nor did I)
    Why would I try and do an auditing program on someone to achieve Clear when they thought they were already there?? What possible gain would they get from being in session on something they thought they had already achieved? Yet, I was told, they just need to be gotten in session and audited…just do the program. Thus, the folder went back and forth 5 times. What ever happened to Auditor PLUS preclear is greater than the bank?…or, paralleling the PCs mind, or the C/S is the PC’s safest friend? After the 5th time of refusing to follow the program and insisting the person be handled properly, he was in fact validated as having achieved Clear.
    The church of David Miscavige has totally taken the preclear out of the equation…except for the $ part of it. And while there are still some auditors and Case Supervisors at the orgs who want to do what they know is for the pc, it is becoming less and less achievable.
    So when you state, “The second the client is played – in any way, shape, fashion or form – by definition the process is no longer client centered. Instead, it by definition becomes practitioner – or organization – centered. The road to restoration of self-determinism becomes paved with enforcement of obedient following.” …I totally agree.

  17. Snoopy's Uncle

    When I first got my win from Scientology, it resonated through me so deeply I would never expect anyone around to be otherwise than client-centered. Because that was the only thing that would make sense. It took some time to understand that majority of people around were stuck in one or more such happy moments and the rest was their effort to get further by following instructions from the apparently same source as the wins had come from. It took even more time to understand or better say to confront that it is even further otherwise – as you say, org-centered, and even golden-calf centered. And Scientology has more than one calf in store and now they are not even ashamed of promoting their cattle breeding publicly.
    It is really interesting how far one can go in reasoning to “align contradictions” to make them seem sensible. I knew I was doing it and I was expecting some higher truths and cognitions would come to enable me to get above the “reactive computations” which were always coming up and indicating something was not right. The same moment I have to confess that if I got another big win I would probably be much more willing to go on tolerating the apparent wrongnesses. From that I dare to guess that these people who perpetrate the wrongnesses in the name of “good for all” (with little to offer), they are not just manipulated individuals, they are not just people with little ability to observe and little or no own will, but they probably are desperate for moments of enlightement and relief and the level of ther desperateness is mirrored in their actions, even though deep down inside they must feel that their actions will prevent any enlightement, too.
    To me it seems a perfectly right idea to be client-centered. It also means to accept whatever the client comes up with, not only “in session” but also after it. Which is, however, not an easy task. The idea that people are stupid and cannot think for themselves until we make them clever – and clever we will make them by disciplining them into cleverness – well, look at it and where it got us, as the only test of an idea is its workability; not sayin’ how much in contradiction with LRH this LRH would be.
    Thank you, Marty, for repeatedly pointing to important moments we many times cannot see or do not dare to see.
    Is your e-mail address at hushmail still in use?
    SU

  18. Well yeah, client benefit has somehow fallen down from what “must be done” to what would be “nice to be done” on priorities.

    P.R. statements are the main product. “Look at us! Look what we did! Look at us! See what WE did! It’s all about US!”

    Copy Cat organizations have started up out here in the Independent Movement under the same operating basis. “We traveled so many miles.. We did this! We did that! It’s all about us!”

    “WE, ME, US, It’s a ME ME ME world! It’s all about MEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!” This is narcissistic viral issue. “Pay me for being me!”

    This is the alter is in this arena. Who gets rewarded for being themselves?

    Is it the P.C. or student? NOOOOOOOOOO! They get charged and penalized for being themselves. Like that is some kind of FKN handicap.

    “We will travel the world to help all of you who have not adapted to the image of us, who have not followed our steps, who are blown……..”

    How narcissistic can this get? “Follow me or you are a liability”. “We are saving people from themselves”.

    These are the sickest people among est us. This is as sick as it gets.

    Fuck you and your habits. I do not want to be like you, act like you, talk you, think like you.

    I am happy being me. If that is not good enough for you and I am thrown in the barrel for “ethnic cleansing” who gives a fuck? I live in the good old U.S. of A.. Where the only person we all owe is the tax man. The mortgage company. The credit card company. We don’t owe the rest of you shit.

    Scientology is NOT A DEBT to be paid! Getting up the bridge is not a debt we owe to anyone.

    Get real! These are the people that audit so they can promote them self! They don’t care a hell about the person in front of them!

    “I’m tired of cleaning up P.C.’s” is what you hear from them. “I donated X amount” “I was part of the hierarchy” …fuck you people. Narcissism is a form of mental illness. You people are mentally ill. Get out of my face with your mental illness.

    Client benefits are so far from your view it’s impossible!

    Traits and signs:

    A 2012 popular book on power-hungry narcissists suggests that narcissists typically display most, and sometimes all, of the following traits:

    An obvious self-focus in interpersonal exchanges
    Problems in sustaining satisfying relationships
    A lack of psychological awareness (see insight in psychology and psychiatry, egosyntonic)
    Difficulty with empathy
    Problems distinguishing the self from others (see narcissism and boundaries)
    Hypersensitivity to any insults or imagined insults (see criticism and narcissists, narcissistic rage and narcissistic injury)
    Vulnerability to shame rather than guilt
    Haughty body language
    Flattery towards people who admire and affirm them (narcissistic supply)
    Detesting those who do not admire them (narcissistic abuse)
    Using other people without considering the cost of doing so
    Pretending to be more important than they really are
    Bragging (subtly but persistently) and exaggerating their achievements
    Claiming to be an “expert” at many things
    Inability to view the world from the perspective of other people
    Denial of remorse and gratitude

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

    • martyrathbun09

      That is a incisive post right there.

      • It is AMAZING how much COURAGE it takes for a Scientologist these days to stand up and be them self, instead of a “Scientologist”, and still think they matter. But when that happens they no longer “matter” to the group.

        http://omg.yahoo.com/news/leah-remini-leaving-scientology-im-not-shut-151800843.html

        “I believe that people should be able to question things,” Remini tells People. “No one is going to tell me how I need to think, no one is going to tell me who I can, and cannot, talk to.”

        • “Leah Remini will not be silenced.”

          http://omg.yahoo.com/blogs/celeb-news/leah-remini-leaving-scientology-m-not-shut-150515642.html

          You bet she won’t be silenced! If fact, she is just starting to crank up the volume!

          Jason Beghe
          Leah Remini, These are New Yorkers. Ever try to silence someone from New York? They are like squeak toys, the more you suppress them the louder they get! It’s a terrible, terrible experience to try to silence them, an unattainable goal! The more one efforts to turn down their volume the louder the volume gets!

          In a “perfect Scientology world”, New York would be ethnic cleansing territory. New Yorkers would have to go. What are all of the massive declares coming out of the Church these days? ETHNIC CLEANSING.

          “Ethnic cleansing is a the process or policy of eliminating unwanted ethnic or religious groups by deportation, forcible displacement, mass murder, or by threats of such acts, with the intent of creating a territory inhabited by people of a homogeneous or pure ethnicity, religion, culture, and history. Ethnic cleansing usually involves attempts to remove physical and cultural evidence of the targeted group in the territory through the destruction of homes, social centers, farms, and infrastructure, and by the desecration of monuments, cemeteries, and places of worship.”

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

  19. “technology he primarily borrowed from in creating Dianetics and Scientology: Rogerian client-centered psychotherapy.”

    For years I observed Hubbard and his supporters continually referring to Buddhism as Scientology’s most significant ancestor. Over time I started to suspect this was largely a marketing ploy. Hubbard stated openly that he practiced psychoanalysis before developing Diabetics. Those who have actually read Freud know did more in his own era to inform people about the unconscious mind as well as the existence and talking therapy for psychosomatic illness than anyone else. These components along with the discovery of the engram and processes for measurably increasing the intelligence quotient were key to Dianetics the Modern Science of Mental Health which rocketed Hubbard to fame. I believe you are on the right track now. Best of luck.

  20. Oracle said:
    “Fuck you and your habits. I do not want to be like you, act like you, talk like you, think like you.”

    OMG!!! Yes, Yes, Yes! And that for me includes Mr. Hubbard as well.

    I came for his counseling ONLY. I listened and studied what LRH had to say about the mind, the spirit, life and the universe. Isn’t that enough of an acknowledgement?

    I considered that LRH had something important to teach. I paid attention, I learned, I applied. And that is ALL LRH is ever going to get from me!

    And to those dedicated Scientologists, copycats, priesthood wannabes, who are compulsively doing a Life Continuum of LRH and his insane Scientology maze to nowhere, this, is what I want to say to you:

    We don’t need your degrading mystery sandwich control operation.

    Grow up and find out who you really are.

    • It’s the ethnic cleansing goals that are creepy. The purpose with K.S.W. and killing off anyone who isn’t a “copy” Scientologist, is the INTENT of creating a territory inhabited by people of a homogeneous or pure ethnicity, religion, culture, and history.

      Ethnic cleansing is the process or policy of eliminating unwanted ethnic or religious groups by deportation, forcible displacement, mass murder, or by threats of such acts, with the intent of creating a territory inhabited by people of a homogeneous or pure ethnicity, religion, culture, and history.

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

      Ethnic cleansing is part and parcel of the Scientology CULTURE. It is the reverse of “granting beingness”. Ex communication and disconnection are ethnic cleansing habits. I suspect many people on this planet are already the product of ethnic cleansing cycles.

      Some others are just dramatizing what has been run on them. The goal is herd the Scientology community into a territory inhabited by people of a homogeneous or pure ethnicity, religion, culture, and history.

      THAT is PURE narcissism.

      • Sorry to point this out, but the purpose of the Sea Org IS ETHNIC CLEANSING.

      • Ironically enough, by their practices of disconnection and fair gaming, Scientologists are “ethnically cleansing” themselves out of comm, contact, and influence with the society at large.

        Perhaps they can trade the ship up to a spaceship and take their purity on to a “target 2″ somewhere out there, becoming an “invader force” of their own, and leaving us alone to live our lives as we wish.

        • This entire business of avoiding “other practices” , not reading the newspaper or other books or the Internet, not having contact with any sources in full agreement with you, it is all part and parcel of “keeping it all homogeneous and pure, with religion, and culture” . The fanatics have been ethnically cleansed. They live behind barb wire and security officers to keep out the “evil world” that lay beyond the gates. The ones on the outside only mingle with their own and consider all other influences as a threat.

          But Hubbard did not rise to his condition of keen awareness and neither did he found Dianetics and Scientology , by excluding others. The final years of his life he excluded all but a few people you could count on one hand. There has been a lot of mystery but I don’t know why. He was simply suppressed into non existence. The “ethnically cleansed” have been suppressed into non existence.

          These are all forms of suppression and ptsness. That is all it is. But, a person can make themselves PTS, if they decide everyone else but them is suppressive. There are plenty of fanatics that consider that everyone beyond the Scientology arena is suppressive. That the AMA and the FBI and the IRS are out to get get them. To become “homogeneous” with the Sea Org’s goals and purposes, one must practically become PTS type 3. Where the suppressives are spread all over the world and there are so many more of “them, than us”.

          From the tech dictionary: “the person sometimes has ghosts about him or demons and they are just more apparent SP’s but imaginary as beings as well”.

          Makes me wonder about solo nots and the people auditing on it. Because my experience solo auditing was very different. I was occupying the same space with people I had loved. Love has as many dynamics if not more, than the eight laid out in the ethics book.

          What does it take to occupy the same space with someone?

          Hubbard gives two answers. This is a dichotomy in itself. First it was “love, or affinity”, later, is was translated as “engrams”.

          In all my years of solo auditing I have found the first premise to be true. For me.

          Scientology is a subject. Like math. You learn some things and then you go out and use it as you can to solve problems.

          “Scientologist” is an IDENTITY.

          Choosing your OWN IDENTITY is about the only Freedom a person really has on THIS planet.

          To have the goal of DISCOUNTING or REMOVING from society ALL OTHER IDENTITIES to form a “homogeneous and pure, religion, and culture”, is an entirely different purpose than KNOWING HOW TO KNOW.

          And threatens other identities. It actually suppresses them.

          • Cece (exed Mother of Sandy Kruchko)

            Yes, Thanks for speaking out.
            Cece

          • I hear ya, T.O.

            What it amounts to, I think, is Scientology and Scientologists have been individuating (by Hubbard’s definition of the word), away from the rest of humanity at a mad rate. Meaning, they have been committing overt acts at a mad rate, pretty continuously in fact, on the rest of us.

            Also about the Dynamics – Hubbard referred to at least 2 Dynamics beyond the 8th – Ethics and Esthetics I believe. However, Ken Ogger (“The Pilot”) as well as others have postulated the existence of 16 Dynamics. Here is one such scheme: http://www.lifemastertraining.com/16dynamics.html

            And here is Ken Ogger’s essay on the upper Dynamics:as related to Scientology: http://freezoneearth.org/pilot/sscio/05_02.html

            • Wow, Thanks. That is interesting about the mention of other dynamics in Scientology, I had not heard that before. Yes, ethics is another dynamic. The highest form of ethics is when you create your own reality (as opposed to be a guest in some reality created by someone else). I see that as true. It is a full responsibility.

              You are right about Scientology’s condition. The code of a Sea Org Member wasn’t even written by L. Ron Hubbard. It was totally off source.

              “I promise through my actions to increase the power of the Sea Org and decrease the power of any enemy.”

              Whenever you effort to unmock someone else, it recoils on you.

              It is one thing to inform and educate people about unholy manifestations. I think it is only civilized to educate people about abuses with drugs and other forms of abuse in the mental health field. Or any field, including Scientology.

              When you ask people to increase power and decrease power at the same time, you are putting them in a GPM of create/destroy.

              There is very little create in the field of Scientology at this time.

              The truth is that all you need in Scientology, is one other person. The auditor who can care about the person in front of him. All the rest is Q and A, noise and distractions.

              For Scientology to work, is actually a very quiet, simple cycle. You and one other person (your auditor or your P.C.), or you and a book. Finally, you and your emeter. It is really that simple. It does not take a village, a leader, a building, a uniform, a group. It is a TWO TERMINAL universe.

          • In the 1950’s, ethnic cleansing was not only acceptable, it was expected and granted as a good idea. Catholics of course, wanted everyone to be Catholic, and did not want people in their family to marry outside of the Catholic Church. This was actually considered “nice”. How sweet! The same with all other religions for the devout. It was considered taboo to marry someone from another race, even illegal under our government. Third dynamics strove to keep women at home and men in the marketplace and there was a wide divide between the two cultures. So the premise laid down for the Sea Org, was “the usual”. This was more than half a century ago. Today, these cultural habits are seen by the rest of the world as suppressive and “inhibitive”.

            But because of the “K.S.W.” fanatics, the Scientology culture has not evolved or integrated with the rest of society. To the rest of the world, the Church of Scientology looks a like a child with learning disabilities.

            Common sense is a gift that can not be sold in the Church. Reason seems to be enforced by “masters at arms”!

            Do you know what “Master at Arms” means?

            The person in charge of law enforcement, discipline and security.

            By merely placing in one a Church, it suggests the building is full of lawless criminally bent people, without discipline, who threaten everyone else’s security.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master-at-arms

            Do Scientologists and people exploring the occult resemble rowdy soldiers on a ship who may be taken to bouts of cabin fever and therefore require, a “Master at Arms” on the premises, to enforce REASON?

  21. Roger From Switzerrland Thought

    In 1982 I could study some ” Confidential FEBC tapes ! “. Some sentences I never forgot were somthing like this:
    ” When there is a piece of tech out, with the time people are no more using it, and when you want them to use it, you give it out as a new discovery under another name and it gets used again, even it’s the same tech that was already published once !”
    In those times I didn’t recognize the idea, but today I would say it’s cheap marketing.
    I think DM has that in mind when he’s squirreling around.

    At the end of his days LRH wasn’t happy with his achievements and had a very low esteem of humans (even in 1950 he had that attitude)and meant that the main reason Scientology was not expanding was because of humanity being illiterate and full of drugs and because of that serv. fac developped all kind of tech to cure those ills, which didn’t handle the problem. How he found out about the state of humanity, he never told but i think he got those ideas when observing the unqualified staffs he had.

    The bulletin ” Lsd cases years after they come off” was written after he observed 2 Lsd cases ! And published this as a breaktrough when in fact it propably was one of the most destructive F.O. ever written ! It labeled and condemned 10 000ds of people without any real justification for it !

    Nevertheless he discovered so much gold ! And it’s up to us too see what is real Gold and what not.
    Marty and the people here are daily percieving what is gold and what not !
    Thanks for that !

    • Roger, I must disagree with your assessment of “Years after they have come off of LSD”. As a one time LSD tripper myself, that bulletin totally indicated to me, and the Purif did in fact relieve me of the difficulties caused by the LSD’s aftereffects on me. Those were just as described in the bulletin. And I knew others to whom it indicated as well.

      What is your objection to that bulletin, then?

  22. I haven’t read all the way through the post yet. But I did want to say that dm could have continued to re-sell all the tech that had already been discovered and issued over and over again to thousands of new people over and over if the tech was used in a friendly fashion. Part of the problem of getting new people into Scn. was the bad PR that was being created throughout society.

    I feel the organization could have survived without any new tech issued at least for a few decades. I do agree that at some point it would become an issue.

    • Joe Pendleton

      I agree with Tony. There were many, MANY OTs who had not trained as auditors and many other people who had done the levels but had never interned. Miscavige could have made a game out of getting EVERY single staff member trained to Cl V within two years, let’s say. Lots of things he COULD have done to promote and get folks trained on what was already issued in Scientology.

    • I think it is the statistics themselves that are flawed. What is DM’s statistic considered to be? If it does not reflect overall expansion of all networks then it is seriously flawed.

  23. I think that part of what supplied a never ending stream of “new things to do” was that Ron never seemed to stop researching. Many of his continuing discoveries hold a certain amount of merit. and some are priceless. I appreciate his desire to bring individual beings as far up the line as possible.

    But I think that when Scientology’s attention went more toward extracting as much money as possible from every person they get on-lines, and away from helping as many people as possible handle their real concerns, that is where this “need for new things” entered in.

    I think that when there was less technology available, when Dianetics was the only tool, for instance, most of a practitioner’s income came from serving new people. As more and more technology was developed, the practitioners were spending more and more time handling each individual.

    At this point a practitioner could probably make only a handful of people his life’s work, if he were trained to deliver both sides of the bridge, from the bottom up, and he somehow convinced them that they desperately needed it all.

    I do not consider that Scientology actually “needs” any new tech to keep growing. The only scenario where this becomes a problem is where the organizations or individual practitioners do not continually offer their services to brand new people. They tend toward being “scavengers” of already existing public.

    There are enough people on this planet that even if the entirety of the Scientology auditors and organizations were only delivering Dianetics-Book One, I would bet they would never get to helping every individual. Not even close!

    I would bet that there are more people being born on this planet every day than the total number of people who complete even one process, of whatever kind, over the entire world.

    The insanity of the phrase “clear the planet” becomes evident in real terms when “Scientology” isn’t clearing enough people to even start to keep up with the birth rate, much less clear the existing population.

    There is virtually no end to the volume of people who may some day desire to have some help from someone trained in Scientology or Dianetic technologies.

    So I do not consider “the lack of new technology” as a REAL why for Scientology’s failure to continue to expand and stay solvent. I would tend to look more in the direction of becoming too insular, or in creating such bad PR that they are actively alienating the general public instead of offering them a real service, that they may need and want. Or perhaps just turning their attention away from helping as many people as possible and becoming scavengers of their existing public.

    The consideration that Scientology continually has to create new things to do, and/or to repackage old things to sell to existing public, is a mishandling for a wrong why.

    End of rant.

    Eric

    • Great post Eric.
      You said it much better than I did, but that is what I was trying to get across. :-)

      • Tony

        Well, ya know…

        I wrote that whole thing and posted it, and then went back and read some more comments, and I saw that you had already said that….

        You said it quite well, in a lot fewer words.

        Eric

  24. I agree with this. In fact I I think that if the tech that had already been discovered and issued had been applied, promoted and delivered in a “friendly fashion”, simply giving people assistance that they were interested in to improve their lives, there would have been gradual, continued expansion to this day.
    I agree with Marty’s statement that “Ron had a knack for finding out what was bothering people, putting together methods to address those things, and then selling those methods as services.”
    There are still billions of people with these same issues bothering them and these methods still are very effective at addressing those issues when applied with interest by someone who simply has the well being of another person in their heart.

    • “…there would have been gradual, continued expansion to this day.”

      Perhaps the problem is a practical problem and lays in how expansion is regarded and measured. Expansion of what? Cumulative statistics like cash/bills play little part in expansion measurement.

      For example, if there had only been annual memberships, getting a true count of continued interest and participation would have been realistic and indicative of ACTUAL membership growth. Membership would have grown naturally on the basis of birth into the religious household.

      Instead, staff numbers and production were counted on a weekly basis, which became meaningless due to staff turnover and churn and the staff who were counted as “expanding statistics” were forbidden to have children.

      • Maria

        Yes, I consider that when one operates by statistics, one has to be very clever in getting statistics that actually reflect what one actually wants to accomplish.

        Some time back someone gave a little story about a Russian nail factory. It went something like this:

        The operator of a Russian nail factory wanted to make more money, so he sent orders down to the production supervisor to increase the weight of nails that were produced each day. The supervisor, being a clever sort thought about this and came up with a solution. Since larger nails didn’t take any more time to make, and obviously weigh more per unit, he would concentrate on producing larger nails.

        The operator of the factory very quickly realized what had happened and that he was actually producing fewer nails, but more weight of nails, so he changed the order. He told his supervisor that what he had wanted the supervisor to do was to “produce more nails”.

        Our clever supervisor thought about this and came up with a solution. He realized that if he produced only the smallest nails he could meet this new demand for more nails.
        ……..
        There is a management policy in Scientology called “Name it, Want it, Get it”, that deals with the necessity of naming exactly what you want if you have any hopes of getting it.

        If one has done a good admin scale, and all statistics within it align with the goals and purposes of the area it is addressing, and with each other, then one potentially should make progress toward those goals. But the valuable, exchangeable, products that these statistics measure have to be named precisely, along with the goals and purposes, or you end up with something like the “Russian nail factory” scenario.

        If one is “managing by statistics” it is vital that all of the applicable statistics are taken into account. Statistics are just a form of data, and all of the technology of “data evaluation” and “situation analysis” come into play.

        Wrong or incomplete data…leads to wrong “why’s” and wrong handlings.
        (It also depends upon the sanity and intelligence of the managers)

        Eric

      • In my opinion “cash-bills” and “membership” statistics are very secondary indicators of expansion. The only truly important statistics are “Well Done Auditing Hours” and “Auditors Made”. These are the two basic products of orgs. If these two continually go up, all other statistics will naturally follow.
        Of course, as you point out, when “stat nazis” who like to “push” stats on a weekly, daily, and (insanely) an hourly basis rule the roost, expansion is difficult to maintain. These insincere kooks have to “push” stats because they very often cannot themselves produce actual products. They are dead weight and destroy actual production by people in organizations who want to produce actual valuable products.

  25. Brian Thomas Lambert

    Marty said “It also happens to be Ron’s first,  greatest  – and ultimately most fatal – departure from the technology he primarily borrowed from in creating Dianetics and Scientology: Rogerian client-centered psychotherapy”

    Brian says: I think Ron departed from his client centered focus because money became or was the focus all along. If happiness was his only goal for pcs, he would have kept that focus. Because having a purpose keeps actions along the lines of that purpose.

    It is possible that Ron’s intentions were not always the benevolence of happy pcs. His good intentions for a happy earth could have been a marketing angle and an installed believe system imprinted on receptive minds.

    When someone departs from something, they go to something else. The question is what was Ron’s motives for the direction away from Rogerian Client-centered psychology? 

    What was he pursuing instead?

    My opinion is power and money. Power and money was more important than clients.

    Power and money. That is the legacy of Scientology. That is the legacy and the brand that the world knows.

    Salvaging any of the good stuff is really good people doing good things with some of Scientology.

    There will always be a weight around the neck of those good people salvaging the good in Scientology. That weight will always be Ron, no matter how many times people say he is not important to evolving higher.

    Scientology is Ron’s psychological brain child, born out of his creative imagination and belief in needle reactions and the desire to free himself from suffering while monetizing the process. Sometimes accurate and sometimes delusional.

    • Brian, I think there is more to it. I think Ron had 3/4 goals, not necessarily in this priority order: 1. To help people by codifying a workable tech which really did help people who used it. 2. To firmly establish delivery organizations all over the world, for this tech. This turned out to be on a “church” model for various reasons. 3. To “smash his name into history”, something he was quoted as saying was one of his personal goals. 4. To make money for himself and his family. There are apocryphal stories that he said he thought starting a religion might be a good way to go about this.

      I think the obstacles he ran into, to implementing #2, and the desire to establish the security of his organizations, drove an increasing money motivation, a desire to build a large “war chest” for himself and his “baby”, and his family, just in case, in the face of some considerable worldly opposition.

      I do think it is to his credit that the “product” he decided to create as the vehicle to his personal success was a “workable” psycho-spiritual tech that really can benefit many people.

      The rest is still open to interpretation by historians. Time will tell whether he was successful or not, but certainly Scientology is becoming a household word. Perhaps not in the way he wished? I’m not even sure of that. Didn’t he also say, “There is no such thing as bad publicity”?

  26. When the process moves from being client centered to being organization centered that is when the door is opened up for cruelty to enter. Cruelty, wearing one of its many benevolent disguises (including compassion), walks in and exerts tyrannous control creating imprisonment while genuine compassion goes out the window.

    As I review my entry into the world of SC, I observe that when I was in the Div 6 crs room taking the Comm Crs, it seemed that there was genuine compassion there, that there was a client centered process going on. But when I left Div 6 and entered the Div 4 academy, where I, for the first time, got the KSW reality factor, the organization centered process revealed itself (of course I didn’t recognize this until much, much later) and was the ever standing order of the day.

  27. Hi Marty. More and more I’m feeling like your site is appropriately named. Rick

  28. “Now Miscavige had to keep that movement going, but with no possibility of introducing new technology. For a while he seemed to have somewhat of a grasp of marketing, but all the marketing in the world could not keep an organization thriving when it had nothing new to sell.”

    From one perspective I agree with this – if one is dealing primarily with the same customer base, the same 50,000 clients, or whatever it works out to be – then yes, the customer will begin to feel some fatigue. Some sense that there is nowhere else to go. But two things come up in opposition to this, in my opinion. When I was on staff, receiving LRH telexes, policies, etc., the focus was always on New Public. There’s a world of people out there, who know nothing of Dianetics or Scientology. To them, every level, every grade and process is new. Here is where expansion lies. This was the message, oft repeated.

    Alternately, one would switch over to the left side of the Bridge, the training side. This is where the emphasis was early on when I got in. The Levels was step 4 or 5 on the line up, after Student Hat and PRD. “Everyone” was supposed to do it. Many did, many went off to enjoy wins and a decent SCN career, others fell off and didn’t make the full journey and never got the gains, that were there to be had. Half the Bridge and gains, barricaded, for all intents and purposes, with a detour sign.

    To me, DM and Marketing are two primary ingredients in making money. That’s been DM’s focus since Day One, as far as I can see. He was never about service or quality. (Once again, if the iPhone were only available in NYC, then eventually the market would become saturated, no one else to sell to. But there were lots more cities open – so sales grew.) DM never focused on quality of service well enough – ever- to gain a steady stream of new people in. Thus there was extreme pressure on the limited remaining pool of Scientologists to do more, experience more in order to BUY more. Only DM’s version of new technology was repackaging and altering what was already done. Finding ‘missing technology’ and inserting it back into OT VII and reissuing/reselling the entire rundown – again. Purpose: generate more money, not provide a greater service or quality. There simply are too many signs that DM didn’t understand the Tech, sufficient to protect it. He never got the effing memo! He never saw the wins or experienced them personally. If he had these wins, if he had successfully audited others like Marty and many others had, then IMO, he never could have altered and squirreled the Tech like his did. It would have been like the Pope, spray painting graffiti on St. Peter’s Basilica.

    I believe SCN’s potential was limitless, there literally was a world out there who never received any direct benefit from it. But like Sherman’s March to Georgia in the Civil War– with death and destruction behind him – DM’s scorch and burn theory of marketing, was tantamount to beating up the consumer who chose Pepsi over Coke.You either agreed with him and his minions or were expunged.

    Early on, the PC and student were the central character – it was all about them, because it was all about delivering wins and gains to them! When LRH passed, the focus shifted to the 3D and to DM personally. It’s been all about DM and his legacy, his ego, for decades. Moving attention off LRH, but mostly off his Tech and the inherent wins, over to DM as a person, takes great force, as it’s not an organic migration – it’s not natural. DM is a symbol, (command Intention) that’s all he can be, which is why he fights so hard and enforces loyalty and admiration, so ruthlessly. It’s all he’s got. He lost everything else he had, when he made the decision to further his own goals and not those of SCN, back in the 1990s. Trying to focus on the PC or student, today? Not possible. It’s antipathetic to DM’s goal.

    market

    • Thomas, I agree. That is how I got it, back in the 1970s. I recall some lecture in which he said “Dianetics(and Scientology) are new news.” Meaning that 99% of the population of the world had never heard of it, much less experienced any of it.

      He researched on various lines, but in fact there was no need to always be coming up with “new products” to sell. That was just “selling the sizzle, not the steak”. Generating and trying to maintain the excitement for those already hooked. In fact, I took his emphasis to be on contacting new public with the existing goods; it seems to me the upper Bridge was way oversold, and I’m not sure why. In fact Scientology was never in danger of running out of new prospects, had it maintained “good relations with the public”, for real.

  29. Love looking at David Mayo’s clip ytube/

  30. Pingback: Ability | Moving On Up a Little Higher

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