Real Emotions

Somewhere along the way emotion was converted into equating with states or levels of consciousness in Scientology.  In the process emotion became a negative humanoid attribute, e.g. writing off any feeling or expression of emotion off as ‘human emotion and reaction’ or ‘h, e and r.’

Emotion and grades of awareness or consciousness are not the same thing.

Wikipedia gives a good definition for emotion that was no doubt contributed to by a number of interested people from a variety of religious, philosophical, scientific and educational backgrounds.  It is as follows:

In psychology and philosophy, emotion is a subjective, conscious experience that is characterized primarily by psychophysiological expressions, biological reactions, and mental states. Emotion is often associated and considered reciprocally influential with mood, temperament, personality, disposition, and motivation,as well as influenced by hormones and neurotransmitters such as dopamine, noradrenaline, serotonin, oxytocin, cortisol and GABA. Emotion is often the driving force behind motivation, positive or negative.

That definition is not inconsistent with Scientology definitions, even if it is far more comprehensive.

The last sentence bears some thought, ‘Emotion is often the driving force behind motivation, positive or negative.’    Carl Rogers has noted that emotion can serve as an important referent to deriving meaning.  For example, an issue that confronts you causes sadness.   In processing that emotion, it might inform your conscience and influence you to decide to do something worthy about the situation.  That in turn could result in your feeling some more pleasurable emotions.

If instead you used a mental trick to lift you out of sadness, you may well simply feel comfortable – in the short run – in forgetting that which made you sad.  Your conscience is bypassed in the equation; and the situation that perhaps legitimately engendered feelings of sadness remains unaddressed.   Would that be ethical?  Would that be pro-survival?  You’d have to think of examples of real situations and work it out for yourself.

Imagine habitually utilizing exercises that rose you from genuine emotions caused by real situations that confronted you.   What would ultimately happen to your conscience?   How real and worthy and meaningful a life would you wind up living?

Perhaps because emotion is mistaken for a level, grade, or state of consciousness in Scientology the culture tends to frown on having, demonstrating or processing emotions per se.  They certainly are not recognized as anything worthy of serving as a referent to deriving meaningful meaning.  Emotion instead becomes something to get out of, something to rise above, or something to manipulate in others.  Techniques abound in Scientology for achieving that.  Nothing wrong with such tools provided they are used wisely.  When I say wisely, I mean not done so habitually and consistently that one becomes emotionless.  In Scientology cultures, folks can become downright anti-emotional to the point where conscience is effectively forfeited.  That would seem to be a factor in Scientologists’ facile ability to turn their backs on loved ones, associates, family, and  friends; and even to proudly avow to never fear to hurt another in a just cause.

If you’ve been in Scientology culture for very long, I invite you to have and process for yourself some real emotion.  Don’t try to repress it, suppress it, avoid it, evade it, escape it, conquer it or ‘causatively’ rise above it.  Instead, feel it for all it is worth.  See for yourself whether sometimes emotion can inform your conscience and your decisions and lead to more rewarding and meaningful activity on your part.

244 responses to “Real Emotions

    • Warren Marston

      I agree with you that Sea Org staff and customers were grooved in, to one degree or another by monkey-see-monkey-do osmosis, into sociopathic inability to feel normal emotions. I also agree that they were fed the false data that all emotion is MISemotion and “case on post,” and therefore dishonorable for Scientologists. But that was CORRUPTED Scientology, and happened because the Sea Org had departed from REAL Scientology.

      REAL Scientologists have always felt real emotions. Scientologists grooved in on the later corruption are the ones your article describes. The idea that Scientology inherently turns people into unfeeling “tin men” (lacking hearts) is nonsense. A REAL Scientologist does not suppress his emotions, but experiences them fully as they occur, so that he doesn’t accumulate secondaries. This is elementary.

      I got into Scientology in 1968, and my auditing and training resulted in the suppress coming OFF my emotions. As I became less MISemotional (emotion inappropriate to present circumstances), I became more able to feel and experience real emotion that IS appropriate to present circumstances. I came ALIVE. That’s what REAL Scientology does for people. It returns them to LIFE. It’s the CORRUPTION of the subject that makes them DEAD, both figuratively or literally.

      Sometimes it’s necessary to set emotion aside temporarily, such as during emergencies, but a REAL Scientologist doesn’t let that become permanent. When my father died suddenly in 1975, and my mother instantly became an emotional basket case, I had to take control of the situation, and did so by slamming in my TRs at Tone 40. That enabled me to remain effective and productive until the funeral was over, the relatives had returned home, I’d taken care of all the loose ends, and my mother’s practical and emotional condition had been stabilized. All that took about a week. Then I went into my room, locked the door, buried my face in my pillow, and deliberately pulled in and embraced all the emotion I’d held off during the previous week. This resulted in my crying my guts out, with huge, loud, convulsive sobs, for an hour. I kept it going until there was nothing left.

      Then I was OK. When I got my next auditing about a year later, the auditor checked the incident, but found no remaining charge. There was no secondary to address. When my mother died in 1985, I did the same thing. My C/S at the time insisted on running a recall assist on the incident, but there was no charge to be found.

      To me this was Dianetics 101, applied with common sense. One should be able to experience his emotions fully AND/OR rise above them as circumstances demand.

      So I disagree with your assertion that Scientology inherently robs people of their ability to feel emotion. And, I see your position on this as another example of your erroneous attribution of the destructive actions of the Church to the fundamental subject of Scientology itself, rather than to the corruption of that subject by Sea Org management.

      I believe that your data evaluation has failed, on the basis of Data Series 7, “Familiarity.” You got into Scientology in the late 70’s, joined the Sea Org almost right away, became an admin person uninvolved with the tech, got elevated to Int Management quickly, and didn’t get much tech training or processing yourself for 15 years. And, of course, whatever tech you did get was corrupted, This is what formed your idea of what Scientology IS. You never experienced REAL Scientology, so you think it doesn’t exist.

      Meanwhile, there ARE auditors out here who apply LRH by the book, the way they learned it 40 years ago, who are getting great results with their pc’s and pre-OTs, without any of the destructive consequences you say are inherent in Scientology. This is contrary facts with much of what you’ve written, and vital data you should be using as part of any eval you do on what’s wrong with Scientology and what should be done about it.

      • That is some very good points!🙂 By being grooved in, I think they are bracing themselves for the rewards of ripping off people that would not yet know the truth about their lives here on Earth in complete essence. But, my emotions? I remember the day in 1979 (some people complain that the church went bad after DM took control) we are talking 1979 New York City here, the month of August! During that time I was informed by some lady that claimed she was a Flag trained EO that I would require several intensives of Securty Checks before I was allowed to finish my Student Hat course.🙂 Not START my Student Hat course mind you, but before I could be allowed to FINISH the course.🙂 My emotions, I shut my mouth and acknowledged her and the rest of the criminals there and left. I joked when I got back home!🙂 I have never quite viewed or felt the same way about any Church of Scientology or church member since. So it is true to some degree, that the Church of Scientology has changed many people’s lives including people’s viewpoints!🙂

      • While I can’t speak to your disagreement with Marty, I am very thankful for this blog where thoughtful and generous people such you and Marty can compare your experiences for the good of us all.
        “Much appreciated!” to you both.

      • Warren, thank you for your excellent post. But i dissagree with your assertion that Marty is somewhow incorrect in his assertions.

        If you re-read this blog posting, Marty is clear that he is speaking of the CULTURE of SCN, not the practice itself.

        I dont know how thoroughtly you have read Marty’s blogs over the past couple of years, but over and over he is critical of the corrupted culture of SCN, not the auditing tech itself.

        In other words my friend, you are “cleaning a clean.” From reading you and Marty, it is my observation that you are both in complete agreement on this topic.

      • Warren, I agree with the following observations and conclusions which you expressed regarding this and other posts on Marty’s blog:
        “So I disagree with your assertion that Scientology inherently robs people of their ability to feel emotion. And, I see your position on this as another example of your erroneous attribution of the destructive actions of the Church to the fundamental subject of Scientology itself, rather than to the corruption of that subject by Sea Org management.
        I believe that your data evaluation has failed, on the basis of Data Series 7, “Familiarity.” You got into Scientology in the late 70′s, joined the Sea Org almost right away, became an admin person uninvolved with the tech, got elevated to Int Management quickly, and didn’t get much tech training or processing yourself for 15 years. And, of course, whatever tech you did get was corrupted, This is what formed your idea of what Scientology IS. You never experienced REAL Scientology, so you think it doesn’t exist.”

        I do think that your last statement is evaluating for Marty as to what he thinks and what he experienced. If I were you I would take a look at that. Personally, I am willing to let Marty describe his own thoughts and experiences.
        But I do agree with your statement that attributing destructive actions of the Church to the fundamental subject of Scientology itself to the extent that Marty has been doing recently has been mostly a wrong target. And I agree that it might be a result incomplete information. There have always been Scientologists who applied the subject intelligently as Ron intended it to be applied. Most of the “hard, chrome steel” crap came directly from the SO from the 70’s onward and is nothing but SRDH. (Shit Runs Down Hill)
        For example, in Scientology Warrior Marty describes how his brother, who had finally reached for Scientology and was having wins with it, was rejected from the org as an “illegal pc” before he really had a chance to get started and what a loss it was for both of them. This was a despicable, cowardly act and the people who did it will have their karma to deal with. On the other hand, I remember two people who had actually had shock treatment who were accepted for services back in the 70’s and early 80’s. One received his grades and was a staff member and the other also became an internened Class IV auditor who helped many people with his auditing skills as well as getting audited. There are probably more examples.
        Incidentally, shock treatment is a f@!ing engram for God’s sake! That’s what Dianetics has the ability to handle and free people of. (Duh.) I am not a C/S, however, apparently this is an individual call and I gather that the only issue should be whether or not the person has had too much actual physical damage to their brain to prevent adequate perception and communication. Otherwise, one just audits out the bleeping engram. Same with drugs.
        Back to the gist of what you are saying. There have always been Scientologists and staff who applied the subject thoughtfully as LRH himself usually did. But I think that too high a percentage of people who joined the SO, particularly those who gravitated towards management, were overly motivated by a lust for power over others rather than an interest in the Tech. As someone who occasionally audited SO members I saw some of the out tech that had been perpetrated upon these people with a “so what, they are SO members, they’re ‘tough’ ” attitude. So, I agree that most of the alterations have always originated from the SO. And, since LRH passed in 1986, we have obviously had the large-scale overt re-writing of LRH tech and policy including the infamous GAT as products from these confused pretenders.
        In summary, I personally appreciate your “calling Marty out” on this particular niggling issue. But I also appreciate Marty for publishing your comments and mine.
        May we all continue to integrate each others thoughts with our own as we evolve upwards a little higher.
        “Everyone you will ever meet knows something you don’t.” -Bill Nye

        • I may be going out on a limb here, but… try for a moment to hold for yourself the idea that the tech is inherently flawed and see what response you get. It might be revealing.

          Also, I have felt in reading posts that sometimes a clarification would help in understanding. When discussing tech is it Green on White or Red on White at that particular moment?

          Ultimately, I believe that the tech (particularly the red) will have to stand on its own merits. And I believe it will have to be developed further if it is going to survive at all. I don’t understand how it is we can have people at Class XII/OTVIII yet not permit them to contribute anything to it. For a ‘science’ that is essentially untenable. Right now, it is barely even a fringe subject. I don’t have figures, but I believe the indy field is not booming like the church was in the 70s, despite the Internet commlines available. So, before laying the blame at anybody’s door, does the tech (red in particular) stand on its own merits? Does it honestly deliver what is promised?

    • Brian Thomas Lambert

      Don’t know if you’ll allow this one up so close to start of this thread Marty. It is good. If not put it at the end if you could. This link gets to the heart of what you are conveying here. My wife sent it to me.

      Best,
      Brian

      http://goop.com/journal/be/236/the-truth

  1. It is interesting that as I wonder about something, you go ahead and write about it. I feel that you are correct. I never abandoned my emotions for the sake of some manipulative fake ones. Perhaps that is why I was able to not robotically accept all the bs I was fed.

  2. From my experiences the emotions or feelings that were the most heavily suppressed in Scientology were caring or compassion.
    Of course you were required to “care” about your stats, but not people! Anyone suffering from…well, almost anything was deemed to be a victim, a “potential trouble source”, a sort of sick sponge. Emotions were considered to be dramatizations of the reactive mind or ones “case”.
    This insanity of cold-hearted ruthlessness was like a radioactive waste dump, the closer you were to Scientology management or the Sea Org, the stronger the insanity became.

    • martyrathbun09

      Thank you for that Andy. I had caring and compassion up there above ‘exhilaration.’

      • As a registrar, emotions provided leverage to get people to pay. I had a box of Kleenex on my desk and one of my “sub-products” in closing a person for a course was to get the person to cry. Back then, when I was on staff, emotions were a sign that there was something wrong with you, some aberration that needed to be handled.
        Happily, this insanity has been cured!

  3. Well put. Auditing can really get rid of some misemotion. Post Scientology, once I felt sadness. Normally I’d rise above it with TR’s. Well, I decided to find out why I was sad and it was a much more revealing experience. Emotion is LIFE. It’s REAL and TRUE. It’s a signal, like pain, that there is a lesson to be learned, spirituality to learn about….and it often feels very good. After Scientology, it’s like finally coming home and enjoying life. Emotion can be beautiful.

  4. I couldn’t agree more, Marty, that emotions are best experienced, and that any attempts to repress them constitute a path to a false reality (delusion). When doing the Super-Lit course, 4 decades ago now, and clearing the word “emotion”, it became clear to me that the word, derived from a French word meaning “to move”, referred to the energy a being would apply towards achieving whatever EP was being conceived with whatever intention- large or small, short term or long term. The being starts out, unless there are preconceived barriers to achievement, simply postulating accomplishment (enthusiasm or above), and exerts harder and coarser energy (emotion) as perceived difficulty in attaining fulfillment of the goal seems to occur. That emotional energy might then be visualized as proceeding from the very high, down towards the low on a continuum that LRH assigned relative descriptions that most people are familiar with, along with arbitrary numbers, in an attempt (I always assumed), to make the Tone Scale more easily understandable and practiced for training and auditing purposes. Obviously, if the being went down, experiencing those variations of energy, (s)he would proceed up the same way. If this is anywhere close to being correct, denial, repression, suppression, or attempts to in any way alter-is the existence of those emotional energies, must constitute a denial of self. FEEL IT FOR ALL IT’S WORTH, indeed.

  5. Marty,
    A former staff member/friend of mine… his mother passed away. Lung Cancer. This was a few years ago. His mother was almost as much a mother to me, as to him. We were very close, close enough I still call his father “Dad” or “Pop”.

    Anyway, at the funeral, I really thought I’d keep it together. Just before walking in the chaple, some of her artwork was on display outside the door. I lost it. I cried, couldn’t help it. I knew my “friend” would laugh at me, but I hoped for goodness sake that would not be the case.

    I was right. He tried not to laugh, but he had a smug look on his face trying to conceal his humor at my “HE & R” or “misemotion.”

    That’s always been a burr in my saddle: any emtional display below 2.0 being “mis-emotion” or “case on post” or “banky” or any other crap “scientologists” care to throw at it. This woman, who I cared about, died! She’s gone! It was a loss! I tried to big-boy up and not let it get to me, but it did. Oh well! Now you got ME and my emotions to deal with, so deal.

    I really need an auditor. Not because having and displaying emotions is bad, but because there are times I’d like to cry… and can’t.

    “Scientology can handle that!”
    Yeah… well… Depends on if there’s a big capital “I” in front of that or not.😉

    • martyrathbun09

      You didn’t need an auditor. You just needed to cry. I love you Bozz, you crazy West Texas SOB.

    • Cece (exed Mother of Sandy Kruchko)

      Well geeezzz Boss. You got me crying🙂
      Cece

    • The way I always understood it, misemotion is having or displaying the wrong emotion for the circumstances. If someone you loved died then Grief is the correct emotion, and Cheerfulness is a misemotion. HE&R would than be responding with a misemotion.

      The problem with many Scientologists is that most of the time it becomes fashionable to use a word or a concept incorrectly. Being brainwashed into robotism, they then use it to make people wrong when, as a matter of fact, it is them who are wrong.

      As for the demented midget (dm), there is only one emotion he uses, anger. Hence most of the time it is a misemotion.

      • martyrathbun09

        Name calling doesn’t really advance your argument much.

      • simplethetan, a similar thing to what you describe is that Scientologists have the erroneous idea that sympathy is wrong to have or display. When I had a death in the family, some of my Scientologist friends expressed the appropriate emotion of sympathy, whereas others were careful not to give any hint of sympathy and in fact were very blasé about it – which felt so strange to me even though I knew which references they thought they were applying as regards not giving sympathy, so I understood.

        You’re right that misemotion has been defined as “having or displaying the wrong emotion for the circumstances”. Unfortunately, it was also defined as meaning any of the lower emotions, period – appropriate and rational or not. See definitions below. But checking the referenced issues in those definitions, it’s clear that LRH was referring to the lower emotions that occur as a result of restimulation although they may have been appropriate at the time of the incident. Thus, this is one of those Scientology terms that created a lot of confusion – which to my mind, btw, is at the root of so much controversy about Scientology.

        MISEMOTION, 1. anything that is unpleasant emotion such as antagonism, anger, fear, grief, apathy or a death feeling. (HCOB 23 Apr 69) 2. emotion and misemotion include all levels of the complete tone scale except “pain”; emotion and misemotion are closely allied to “motion,” being only a finer particle action. (HCOB 19 Jan 67)
        MISEMOTIONAL, 1. such a word would indicate that a person did not display the emotion called for by the actual circumstances of the situation. (SOS, p. 49) 2 . being misemotional is synonymous with being irrational. (SOS, p. 49)

        • Wasn’t Hubbard the master of being vague?

          • That’s a bit of a generality, isn’t it? With regard to the terms we were talking about – emotion and misemotion – it does taking looking at the context, as with any word being used. Hubbard may not always have been clear but it’s not just his responsibility that others understand him. It’s theirs too. He communicated amazingly well, IMO, at least in the earlier decades before he started contradicting himself – whether that was because he was misguided or for more insidious reasons. Ultimately, he stated a great many truths which, when looked for in life, are seen to exist. IMHO

            • Yes, I see what you are saying Marildi. It’s very true that not understanding the original thought LRH was getting across would change the thought (bouncing to a new viewpoint?). Not seeing his material in context with his universe and the world view he was very involved with and some of world history could easily give one an incorrect intention behind Ron’s message.

              I spent 16months, 5hrs a day on the Student Hat. I knew I had a problem understanding the written word so I got all I could out of that course. Sometimes I felt so duplicated! He really had a way of reaching to each level of understanding to get duplicated.

              The data I gained in that course has never steered me wrong.

              But I see what Marty is saying…. This is part of thought stopping from what I gathered. And it’s true it happened even to me.

              Amazing what education paths we take. There are so many we write about them to help others.
              As I read the post – I ran through a chain of incidents of same. I get the thought sometimes that my experiences are exceptional and out of the ordinary. But no it must be similarly happening to us all as Marty continues on bringing up the picture description of what I am looking at and it’s real to me.
              Thank you for your delving in like ya do🙂
              Cece

              • Cece, thanks for the ack about my “delving in”.🙂 I had a lot of practice at that for several years as a word clearer. It was on that post that I first observed a lack of application of the full body of study tech – a huge lack. One general example, which you probably remember, is the tech in the study tape “Evaluation of Information” – which is now lost tech, IMO. Most Sups never allowed such a thing as evaluation of the material in terms of “what you want it for”, such as with regard to the excursions into other subjects which LRH often took on the lectures: In other words, you weren’t allowed to use your own judgment – the very ability you were supposed to be aspiring to!

                Another example of the lack of application of the whole of study tech was that you had to fully clear every item on the “Remimeo” section of a bulletin or policy letter, which often took you into word chains in the admin dictionary – and far astray from your needs and wants as a student in relation to what you were studying. The only datum applied by many Sups with regard to words was “never go past a misunderstood word”. Yet, another part of the tech was that you should be relaxed about study; and if you did get MU phenomena, all you had to do was find the word you missed, decide whether or not you needed to know it – and if you didn’t, you could just say “Yeah, that’s a word I don’t understand” and the MU phenomena would blow.

                I saw students MADE into slow, obsessive students for whom study was a grueling activity – although they had once been good students! Btw, other students had great wins on the Student Hat, like you did – even saying that they felt they had gotten an education for the first time in their lives.

                You also wrote: “But I see what Marty is saying…. This is part of thought stopping from what I gathered. And it’s true it happened even to me.” I agree with that too and am very appreciative of the many, many pointers Marty has given as regards what can go wrong – and has gone wrong. I just think that we should also bear in mind that a lot of went wrong doesn’t trace back only to Ron. With regard to study tech – and tech in general, for that matter – it got applied without full conceptual understanding of the whole.

                As for MU’s – many of which were related to context, as you pointed out – there may be a lot of truth to the idea that Ron failed in this respect because HE didn’t get across his ideas well enough. But how much of the responsibility can one man be expected to take? He took an awful lot, IMO, and I think that Scientologists themselves can be held just as much responsible for how things turned out, if you see what I mean.

      • This is amazing that you wrote this. That you wrote this: “misemotion is having or displaying the wrong emotion for the circumstances”. Can I tell you a little story? I hope Marty will allow it. Misemotion? I can describe it to you graphically for free. Way back in 1979 LRH wrote a new Flag Order barring ANYONE that has ever taken LSD or Angel Dust from joining the Sea Org. This applies to me. I won’t say which one, but I used one of them when I was about 15. Not a lot, just once or twice, but the policy doesn’t discriminate how many times. So anyway, one day I was sitting in my kitchen with my mother under the influence of one of these substances and my mother has always been VERY keen to anything about me. So, my oldest sister walked in the house and sat down in the kitchen next to me. I immediately felt like laughing hysterically because she was there, just to show her happy I was. And then I thought, “Well what if she suspects this drug is invovled?” so instead, I pretended like I was completely normal, and then I started to laugh with her, so she would think a normal person was having a good time with her as she spoke even though laughing hysterically under any circumstance may be OK. Right?
        So this can be part of the reason why LRH wrote that policy and NEW OT IV as well. Because just pictures the damage that can be done to a person’s case, not from their mental image pictures, but 1,000,000 images
        that are hallucinatory from a drug experience, and I say that because a more knowledgeable person will know that engrams is not the last thing a person audits. Now that I can look back on that exerience safely, imagine I was stuck in the picture? So, if is misemotion you seek a definition for, I can describe it to you, 100% standardly, without being in the Sea Org.🙂

    • Hi Bozz, I bet I know who that was, our mutual friend Mike’s mother. I remember him telling me his mom was an artist. I’m sorry he got smug with you . . He has his faults, but he was one of the few that defended me when I was attacked, and refused to disconnect when he was ordered to do that. (This was an illegal off-policy order to disconnect from me by the DSA). I do know that Mike loved his mother very much, and he loved her artistry and art-work. He spoke of her many times very lovingly. I know that he had to be suppressing his emotions; that it was a big loss for him. When we were roommates, he used to paint and draw a lot. I think I still have some of his art.

      I’m glad to know you are still in touch with his Dad, I remember you told me about him. I know Mike doesn’t communicate much with him . . his mom seemed to be the one he cared about.

      Hope you are doing great, Bozz; you can call me up and cry anytime of the day or night. I think we are all still decompressing, and being able to show emotion, and get the suppress off of them, is part of that decompression.

  6. Very nice message here. It resonates so strongly with me that I almost don’t have anything to say.

    I will just add that having gone through a great loss in my life directly caused by disconnection, for a long time I limited my processing to ‘small doses’ – intuitively I realized that obscuring the ongoing loss by enjoying spiritual gains in other areas, was liable to make me less sane, not more so.

    Getting in touch with my feelings and processing my life in present time, was the right answer. Your write-up validates this. Now after over a year of allowing myself emotion and its direct processing, I am doing well enough to return to ‘standard processing’ and really enjoy its benefits.

    You do foolish things when you are not ‘being yourself.’ And the root of that is often some sort of ‘rabbiting’ from emotion.

    Early Dianetic theory stresses that we shift away from being ourselves when a loss is not properly processed. I would say that is true for me, and that it’s too bad that other than the L1C (a processing list for dealing with upsets) you pretty much have to go all the way back to 1950 to read very much about recovering from victimization, without all of the negative connotations of ‘you done it to yourself’ -which is only true in a limited sense.

    The 4 flows and the rudiments used in Scientology auditing, ought to be enough for people to demonstrate that it truly is a universe of randomity, only a small part of which is under any possibility of our direct personal control, and that what we go through is not always directly connected to our past (though the way we view it almost always is so connected, and thus some form of processing almost always proves quite helpful).

    I’m afraid that deluding oneself that one is ’cause of it all’ – as Hubbard apparently sometimes did, and as his predecessors like Crowley did – is not quite the route to coming to terms with what is.

    Sometimes the right process is simply “Be there and experience it” – and the closest thing in the tech to giving such advice that I have found, is in the Two Rules for Happy Living – going all the way back to 1 MAR 1959:

    1. Be able to experience anything.
    2. Cause only those things which others are able to experience easily.

  7. “Without free emotion, an individual cannot appreciate, as he should, the pleasant things in his environment.”

    L. Ron Hubbard

    Found this quote to be the onley one that still exist on the internet, but for how long ?

  8. I recall being told that I was misinterpreting what I thought was anger and antagonism from execs in the org. It wasn’t anger; it was Tone 40. (shuddering)

  9. Roger from Switzerland Thought

    Beautiful !

  10. Marty, don’t the following definitions of emotion that are in the Tech Dictionary pretty much cover every point you made in the blog post?

    EMOTION, 1. a response by a wave-length affecting an individual or another which produces a sensation and a state of mind. (SH Spec 83, 6612C06) 2. emotion is three things—engramic response to situations, endocrine metering of the body to meet situations on an analytical level and the inhibition or the furtherance of life force. (Scn 0-8, p. 66) 3 . a manifestation, a condition of beingness which is the connector between thought and effort. The tone scale is a direct index of emotion. (5203CM05B) 4 . the intention to exert effort bridges into the body by emotion. In other words, the physical-mental bridge is emotion. Emotion is motion. (5203CM04B) 5. emotion could be called the energy manifestation of affinity. As used in Dn, emotion could be called the index of the state of being. In the English language, “emotional” is often considered synonymous with “irrational.” This would seem to assume that if one is emotional one cannot be reasonable. No more unreasonable assumption could possibly be made. (SOS, p. 48) 6 . this word is redefined in Dn and is given an opposite for comparison, “misemotion.” Previously the word emotion was never satisfactorily defined. Now it is defined as an organism manifestation of position on the tone scale which is rationality appropriate to the present time environment and which truly represents the present time position on the tone scale. Rational effect. (SOS Gloss)

    • Here are some specifics of the OP that I think are answered succinctly in the Tech Dictionary definitions quoted:

      “Somewhere along the way emotion was converted into equating with states or levels of consciousness in Scientology. In the process emotion became a negative humanoid attribute, e.g. writing off any feeling or expression of emotion off as ‘human emotion and reaction’ or ‘h, e and r.’ Emotion and grades of awareness or consciousness are not the same thing.
      […]
      “If instead you used a mental trick to lift you out of sadness, you may well simply feel comfortable – in the short run – in forgetting that which made you sad. Your conscience is bypassed in the equation; and the situation that perhaps legitimately engendered feelings of sadness remains unaddressed. Would that be ethical? Would that be pro-survival? You’d have to think of examples of real situations and work it out for yourself.”

      Applicable Tech Dict definitions:
      EMOTION: 5. emotion could be called the energy manifestation of affinity. As used in Dn, emotion could be called the index of the state of being. In the English language, “emotional” is often considered synonymous with “irrational.” This would seem to assume that if one is emotional one cannot be reasonable. No more unreasonable assumption could possibly be made. (SOS, p. 48) 6 . this word is redefined in Dn and is given an opposite for comparison, “misemotion.” Previously the word emotion was never satisfactorily defined. Now it is defined as an organism manifestation of position on the tone scale which is rationality appropriate to the present time environment and which truly represents the present time position on the tone scale. Rational effect. (SOS Gloss)
      MISEMOTIONAL, 1. such a word would indicate that a person did not display the emotion called for by the actual circumstances of the situation. (SOS, p. 49) 2 . being misemotional is synonymous with being irrational. (SOS, p. 49)

      • I get what you are pointing out. One of the best actions I ever did in the course room was to define each of the tone levels on the expanded tone scale in the tech dictionary (and other references) in sequence as I did the “Mood Drills” all the way from -40 to +40. It was quite an experience which I would recommend to anyone.

        • Thanks, Espiritu. Then you would probably also find it as interesting as I did that science has apparently proven emotions have specific wave lengths. Here’s one reference about it from a website for the book *The Magic of Quantum* by Phillis Kirk:

          “Emotions have unique vibrations just like colors and physical objects do. These emotional vibrations also go from higher/faster to lower/slower. When you are laughing and having fun, your body’s vibrations are lighter (higher and faster). When you are tired and sick your vibrations are heavier (slower and lower). You know how when you are in love, you feel “energized”, “high”, like you’re “walking on a cloud?” That’s because your emotions are literally adding voltage and power, lightening your body. And when you’re negative and depressed, you feel sluggish, “feeling low,” “heavy”. “I’m down today.” Your emotional vibrations are giving your body a slower, lower vibration. This is not speaking metaphorically. This is scientifically measurable. (Molecules of Emotion by Dr. Candace Pert and HMI http://www.heartmath.org )” \\

          http://www.themagicofqua\ntum.com/review.php

          • Looks like I goofed up on the link. Here it is:

            http://www.themagicofquantum.com/review.php

            • Interesting. LRH had a similar, simplified chart of wavelengths in one of his earlier books- I think that it was 8008.

              • It’s in 8-80:

                “Here are some rough estimates of wavelengths which produce reactions on the mind, a Tone Scale of Wavelengths. (Accurate lengths not given here.)”

                θ….….……………………… 0.0 wavelength

                39.0 aesthetics ….…
                ……000000000000000000000000002 cm.

                8.0 analytical thought…………0000002 cm

                1.5 emotion…………………………0.24 cm

          • OMG. How interesting that I was just this morning reading some pages of this book – wondering why I had it for 3 years and never opened it yet. Says in the inside insert “Cecilia Kruchko, 872 Lucile Ave Unit A, LA CA 90026. Feb 10, 2006. Order total 13.45$
            OMG that was over 7 yrs ago!
            Cece

      • Emotion vs. MISemotion

        Marty, I think you are right as to how LRH’s writings are (mis)interpreted in the CofS “cold chrome steel” culture, but I don’t think LRH meant it that way – the tech dictionary definitions above and my own experience in what I have read and seen are different as to what emotions are in LRH’s view.

        I think what you are referring to is mostly MISemotion (as defined by LRH) but MISemotion came to mean ALL emotion in the organization (especially with the EXPECTED “confront anything” TRs). Since the goal is to rise to the STATUS of OT, which is defined as cause over life, it is obvious that OTs are expected to be cause, and thus unaffected by “lowly humanoid” stuff like “emotions”. That’s clearly wrong – but they are expected to not be effected by them to set a good example. Of course the not-yet-OT-status crowd looks at them and admires them “wow, look, his mother just died this morning, but he is so OT that he just came to work and went through his day like nothing happened! My god, this guy is SO OT! I’ll try to be like him!”. So you end up with a bunch of emotionless freaks who think it’s a virtue that they can suppres any feeling.

        The existence of the tone scale and processes based on it are mostly based on chronic tone, being stuck in one, which, most of the time, based on simple logic, IS probably MISemotion if it remains the same, since whatever caused the person to continually express the same emotion most of the time is probably not there all the time, so it is reactive, as in stuck in a past incident or incidents that cause that sadness or whatever MISemotion.

        So if you have a saddening event in your life and you are sad, no *sane* person would treat that as something to “handle”, get rid of or as “a problem” or such. That’s an acute tone, and if it is a result of actually confronting the situation, then it is a present time emotion and there is no need to “get rid” of it. Crying it out would probably be actually confronting it and going through the pain, and is probably therapeutic in itself.

        But if you don’t have anything in the present time that would justify you feeling sad but you are still sad, that’s a MISemotion, and handling what causes you being stuck in it (and not just “rising above” the emotion by “getting your TRs in”) would probably be good therapy. But using a trick to “rise above” a real present time emotion would actually be a LACK OF confront, and probably harmful. If not addressed properly, it would probably just result in a restimulated and bypassed charge and mess you up.

        I think what LRH pointed out in his charts was that chronic MISemotions lead to a gradual worsening of (or parallel) levels of consciousness, and not that they are the same thing. I do agree with him based on my observations – a person stuck in a chronic lower toned emotion will probably also have a lower level of life energy, awareness and consciousness. But you are right, they are not the same as the tone levels/emotions.

        • Globetrotter, what you bring up about chronic vs. acute (temporary) tones is a key part of the subject. Chronic doesn’t mean frozen, however. It refers to the “general and common behavior”. Here’s a quote from *Self Analysis*, which is based on the Chart of Human Evaluation from *Science of Survival*:

          “This scale has a chronic or an acute aspect. A person can be brought down the tone scale to a low level for ten minutes and then go back up, or he can be brought down it for ten years and not go back up.

          “A man who has suffered too many losses, too much pain, tends to become fixed at some lower level of the scale and, with only slight fluctuations, stay there. Then his general and common behavior will be at that level of the tone scale.

          “Just as a 0.5 moment of grief can cause a child to act along the grief band for a short while, so can a 0.5 fixation cause an individual to act 0.5 toward most things in his life. There is momentary behavior or fixcd behavior.”

        • When I was on training courses I watched the Tone Scale film dozens of times. One of the stable data from LRH is that emotions are inherent in the being, and this is stated in his voice in the film, as I recall. This was very meaningful to me, as I’d spent many years as a staff member, and nearly any emotion except enthusiasm (even if fake) was considered misemotion.

          I attended the funeral of a long-term staff member a few years ago. Most of us were crying. One of this person’s best friends said she was ashamed to be “in grief”. I gently said that I couldn’t think of a more appropriate emotion, and she looked quite surprised and perhaps even relieved that such a low tone could be acceptable.

          • “There is only one way, really, to get into a state of living, and that’s live! There is no substitute for an all-out, over-the-ramparts, howling charge against life. That’s living. Living does not consist of sitting in a temple in the shadows and getting rheumatism from the cold stones. Living is hot, it’s fast, it’s often brutal! It has a terrific gamut of emotional reactions.
            If you are really willing to live, you first have to be willing to do anything that consists of living. Weird. But it’s one of those awfully true things that you wonder why one has to say it. And yet it has to be said.”

            – L. Ron Hubbard

          • I was not in that long and had lived a good life up until Scientology with loads of experiences of living, working, playing, helping and people. I noticed that Scientologist’s DID not feel! They were “misemotional” when they should show appropriate emy motions. They did not look happy and were extremely serious all the time. The only time I saw enthusiasm was when a stat was being obtained…then it was back to dead.

            I am so glad I got out!

            Great post Marty!! Good information for those decompressing. How to be human again after Scientology!!

      • What is “rational”? What authority does Hub or anyone have to judge what is or isn’t an “appropriate” emotion? This has the same whiff about it as the APA’s incessant need to define what is and isn’t “normal”/”sane”/socially acceptable. It’s folly.

        It is a matter of belief (faith) and can be used to make money (APA/Big Pharma), to crush dissent (Russia, China) or both (Church of Scientology). Abuse is inevitable.

        • I think Hubbard used the word “rational” no different from the dictionary meaning: a : having reason or understanding b : relating to, based on, or agreeable to reason (Meriram-Webster)

          Here’s a quote where he uses the word “rational” in the context of emotion:

          “The social order has confused irrationality with emotionalism. Actually a person who is fully rational would be most able to respond to the stimulus of his environment. Being rational does not mean being cold and calculating. An individual who is rationally happy can be counted upon to make the best calculations. Without free emotion, an individual cannot appreciate as he should the pleasant things in his environment. Lack of appreciation for art or music comes about when the individual cannot be freely emotional. The person who feels he must be coldblooded in order to be rational is what is called in Dianetics a ‘control case’, and on examination will be found to be very far from as rational as he might be. People who cannot experience emotion because of their aberrations are
          ordinarily sick people. Well people can experience emotion.” (Self Analysis)

      • Marildin,

        I’m glad you are commenting here, in “Moving On Up A Little Higher”.
        (You used to comment on a blog which I call “Moving In On Down A Little Lower”).

        XOXO

        • Thanks MaBű! I’ve learned that this is the best blog – it doesn’t have a preponderance of one viewpoint with little tolerance for others, like some other blogs. And as you noted, this one is truly moving on up a little higher.

          Btw, I’ve read many of your comments on this blog, before I started posting much here, and I’m glad you are here too! Always good to see your comments anywhere.

          xxooxxoo 🙂

    • martyrathbun09

      If they do for you, then more power to you.

      • Thanks.🙂

        I wanted to also say something about what you wrote here: “Emotion and grades of awareness or consciousness are not the same thing.”

        My understanding of LRH as well as what I’ve observed in life is that the chronic tone level – the “general and common” tone of the individual – is indeed correlated with grades of awareness or consciousness. It’s described in *Self Analysis* as follows:

        “The tone scale, a small edition of which is in this book plots the descending spiral of life from full vitality and consciousness through half vitality and half consciousness down to death.

        “By various calculations about the energy of Life, by observation and by test, this tone scale is able to give levels of behavior as Life declines.

        “These various levels are common to all men.

        “When a man is nearly dead, he can be said to be in a chronic apathy.
        And he behaves in a certain way about other things. This is 0.1 on the tone scale chart.

        “When a man is chronically in grief about his losses, he is in grief. And he behaves certain ways about many things. This is 0.5 on the chart.

        “When a person is not yet so low as grief but realizes losses are impending, or is fixed chronically at this level by past losses, he can be said to be in fear. This is around 1.1 on the chart.

        “An individual who is fighting against threatened losses is in anger. And he manifests other aspects of behavior. This is 1.5.

        “The person who is merely suspicious that loss may take place or who has become fixed at this level, is resentful. He can be said to be in antagonism. This is 2.0 on the chart.

        “Above antagonism, the situation of a person is not so good that he is enthusiastic, not so bad that he is resentful. He has lost some goals and cannot immediately locate others. He is said to be in boredom, or at 2.5 on the tone scale chart.

        “At 3.0 on the chart, a person has a conservative, cautious aspect toward life but is reaching his goals.

        “At 4.0 the individual is enthusiastic, happy and vital.

        “Very few people are natural 4.0’s. A charitable average is probably around 2.8.”

  11. Scientology is not he only place emotions are not confronted, but are seen as something to escape from. Witness the proliferation of anti-depressants, mood elevators, anti-anxiety medications like Valium, not to mention alcohol sales and the soaring sales of other mood-altering substances, pot, LSD, Ecstasy, crystal meth, heroin etc etc.

    I think the aversion to feeling emotions is endemic in this culture and that may be what has tainted Scientology attitudes towards emotions. It’s in the business culture too – as in “Never complain, never explain” and expressed philosophies such as “Don’t get mad, get even”.

    Jacob Needleman, a professor of philosophy at San Francisco State University for decades, titled one of his last books “Why Can’t We Be Good?”, which is all about conscience. He might be called a “philosopher of conscience”.

    He has written many books, and “conscience” is the theme of most of them.

    • martyrathbun09

      You noted: Scientology is not he only place emotions are not confronted, but are seen as something to escape from. Witness the proliferation of anti-depressants, mood elevators, anti-anxiety medications like Valium, not to mention alcohol sales and the soaring sales of other mood-altering substances, pot, LSD, Ecstasy, crystal meth, heroin etc etc.
      Indeed.

      • And that is why people are better of swinging by your place to get a bit of real Theta my hard begotten mate, You practice littarly what you preach.

    • I would like to add my own experience to your assertion that anti-depressants, et al are simply an escape from unpleasant emotion. Depression and anxiety have been a lifelong plague for me. That was my “ruin” when I joined the Cult. I could never identify a ruin that CAUSED these emotions – it was the emotions themselves. Sure I had plenty of experiences that could trigger these emotions, but once they were handled and I no longer felt troubled, these emotions kept returning relentlessly.

      For years I have tried to dig deeper and deeper into causes for such emotions, and despite getting to a place where I had no reason to feel so awful, the emotions persisted. After years of auditing (including Clear and Ls) I finally dared consider anti-depressants. After 35 years of religion, philosophy, auditing, meditating, etc… I finally found a chemical compound that helped me.

      This does not mean that I no longer cry or feel anxious or angry. I DO! But when I do, there is a reason behind it, and when I honestly address that reason, I can return to a place of equanimity once I have fully experienced the emotional reaction.

      After several years of feeling in control of my environmental stressors, I decided to slowly wean myself from the anti-depressants. After a gentle decline, I began to cry and shake in distress over the tiniest provocation. My colleagues noticed and were careful to be quite gentle and empathetic. On my way home from work (where I knew I would not be observed) I would allow myself to howl in grief, hoping I could simply purge myself of the pain by expelling it at forcefully as I could muster. But in doing so I could never identify a reason behind the intense agony.

      After several months of subjecting myself, my husband, my family, my friends, my colleagues, and my students to my experiment, I decided to slowly reintroduce my anti-depressants to my daily regimen. On the first day, I simply felt relief. Within a week I noticed my colleagues no longer had that pitied look of concern, my students were no longer afraid to look me in the eye, and my husband stopped avoiding me. I felt soooo much better, and most importantly, I felt like myself.

      I think of myself as exuberant, goofy, happy-go-lucky, insouciant, compassionate, loving, and caring. Constant crying and hiding beneath the covers feels like I am trapped in horrible cave where I am not able to be ME.

      Perhaps there is an auditing procedure or set of procedures that could replace the success I am experiencing with a simple, daily dose of my anti-depressant. But what is the point?

      When I’m pissed off I roar like a lion. When I suffer a loss I cry like a baby. When I make a fool of myself I blush and giggle. When I celebrate I grin and squeal with elation. When I empathize with another I match or amplify their expression.

      To me, this is a beautiful reward of living as a human being. If a simple pill assists me to be what I feel is my true self, why shouldn’t I be grateful?

      Finally, I LOVE feeling GENUINE.

      • I agree with you about chronic depression. Sometimes it is possible to identify a trigger that started the bad feelings, but sometimes they continue for no apparent reason and out of proportion to the trigger. If that depression persists, it is usually because the brain’s chemicals are out of balance. It no other interventions work, it seems very reasonable to supplement those chemicals as one would with a vitamin deficiency. When the chemical depression is relieved, you’re able to feel all your emotions as they should be.

      • Thanks a lot for posting this, Nancy!

        Yes, I posted a pretty broad generality covering a lot of ground and a lot of different drugs, legal and illegal. I have people in my family who take prescription drugs for anxiety, depression, and one who takes an anticonvulsant drug usually prescribed for epilepsy, although he does not apparently suffer from epilepsy. He apparently cannot adequately filter or modulate his sensory input which builds up “charge” which eventually overwhelms him, with unfortunate consequences. Much as happens with many autistic individuals. This drug has helped him a lot, to maintain an even keel in his life.

        I think there are important distinctions to be made along these lines of “emotions’, feelings, oversensitivity to the inflow of stimuli, etc. I think some of these kind of reactions originate in and “belong to” the body, some perhaps elsewhere. I actually do not know. But I am glad you have found something that works to relieve this for you.

        You apparently have found a pill that actually helps you experience your true emotions. This is good.

        Really the point I was trying to express is that “emotions”, “feelings”, and such are problematic in a lot of ways to a lot of people in our society, that’s all.

        • And thank you for understanding and relating. I agree with you that many human cultures view emotions as something to be “dealt with” rather than experienced. Thumb up to ya, buddy!🙂

      • Marty, why did you moderate out my reply to Palehorse? It merely promoted exercise, sunlight, and nutrition as an alternative to drugs for her depression, and pointed out that when a Clear has somatics, OT levels are the solution case-wise. What are you objecting to?

        • martyrathbun09

          Your Scientology, or psychiatric, style evaluation long-distance.

          • Marty, I’ve rewritten my reply to Palehorse 3 times now, and each time you’ve moderated it out. You say I’m evaluating. But my last rewrite contained zero evaluation. I merely shared some knowledge about scientifically validated, non-Scientology, non-drug remedies for depression. And I accurately stated that NOTS was developed for Clears still experiencing somatics. So, what is it you disagree with about my last rewrite? Is it the idea of alternatives to psych drugs? Is it that you think no one should do NOTS? Is it something else?

            • martyrathbun09

              I think your evaluation is worse than Hubbard ever accused psychiatrists of. That after three lengthy attempts you don’t see that is telling. Your continual accusations via your ‘are you saying?’ smacks of an OSA operation. I am not saying what you continually attempt to say I am saying. If you can’t understand me, then buy a dictionary.

            • It’s funny that when doctors couldn’t find the source of an Illness they said to a patíent. It’s all in your head and sating it was sychosomatic.That was an invalidation to say it was a Psychosomatic thing. Later science improved and neurological causes were found and treated.

              It’s funny how Doctors and Scientologists alike once could say to a clïent. that what you expierience is in fact not real and a product of your own mind.

              • Nice observation!

                I like reading other people’s views, since I don’t think I’d ever come to that realization on my own.

                I love hearing other people’s views especially new thoughts on things so plan as day, but which I’ve never observered. Great comment!

                And Palehorse’s story above, just amazing comments!

              • Medicine sure isn’t perfect, but it has come a long, long way in the last few decades. Perhaps part of the reason the psychs were the enemy (beyond Hubbard’s personal biases) was in part because they were the last resort for human behavior that could not be dealt with in any other manner. I suppose there is always a last resort in any endeavor or trying to solve problems.

                Nancy

                • Well they did terrible things, I first didn’t “duplicate”all the Psych stuff but now I understand, But there are TWO distinct Psychiatric philosophies.

                  Materialistic and Social Psychiatry, The Father of dutch Psychiatry:

                  “Schroeder van der Kolk is regarded as the founder of Dutch psychiatry and neurology. This paper describes his vitalistic views on the relation between body and soul, as formulated by him in a series of lectures. These lectures were intended to counteract the materialistic tendencies of some of Schroeder van der Kolk’s French and German contemporaries. It is argued that Schroeder van der Kolk can be regarded as the transition in Holland from the “Naturphilosophie” approach to the modern experimental approach in physiology.”

                  The materialistic ones sprouted eugenics, lobotomies and other unpleasant things.

                  Social Psychiatries goal was at least in the Netherlands to get a person back to socïety, back to work if possible.

                  http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/elsevier/jacobus-schroeder-van-der-kolk-1797-1862-his-resistance-against-Z1WBnkP2qr

                • American Psychyatry was pretty shitty in 1950ties America, And Partnered up with Christan institutions of that time you get “An American Horror Story”

                  Lesbians and Gays being shocked and worse

          • I don’t know a way to double-reply, but I sincerely want to thank both of you, Warren and Marty.

            Warren, I appreciate your promotion of exercise, sunlight, and nutrition as an alternative to meds. Indeed, I have (and DO) subscribe to such practices, and they certainly make a noticeable difference in my experience. However, the difference is not significant enough to replace the success of my current medical regimen. The cool thing is that the meds WORK! WOOT!😀

            One day, I may decide to explore the OT levels, but at this time, I am not convinced that they are so necessary as to warrant. Despite many believable and convincing attests to certainty about consciousness beyond our present human existence, it is not undeniable to me. In no way do I wish to denigrate the experiential truth of others who know without a doubt they are immortal beings; I am just not that certain, much as I would like to be. Fortunately, for skeptical nuisances such as myself, I have an eternity to find out! (I don’t buy into the dwindling spiral story, so I am blissfully unaware that this moment in time, according to LRH, may well be my/our last chance.)

            Marty, thank you so very much for moderating in such a way to avoid well-intentioned comments that would evaluate individual cases. Until I studied as an auditor, I never realized how influential such evaluation could be – yet the Church evaluates with the authority of God! (Whoever that is…) It can be terrible troublesome, especially for the seeker who has not decided upon a particular path. I thank you for being a staunch warrior. I feel very safe with you knowing you will call things as you see them.

            Warren, a few weeks ago, I asked Marty whether he thought doing the OT levels might be a waste of time. He told me that he could not evaluate that for someone without spending a great deal time with them. Of course, the SCN Bridge demands that course of action as appropriate for everyone. This may or may not be true. There is a great deal of poison to be sorted out from the good of Scientology. I do not have an up-to-date filter.😉

            Thank you both for speaking and acting in good conscience and in good faith. You have my admiration and appreciation. xoxo

            Nancy

        • Why in the world would you ever (eval – point out) that the solution (OT levels are the [one] solution when that is so far away for her and in fact and when in reality the solutions are right there for her. Nancy, You go girl. Don’t let anyone drag ya down!
          How mean Warren.
          Cece

          • Warren Marston

            Mean? Drag her down? You’ve got to be kidding!

            • Yes. I re-read it today. It was mean Warren to give her a solution she already told you she could not have (distance or something I don’t recall).
              She also told you she has a solution and you did not see that.
              Why in the world would you take someone beyond (or someplace else)where they want or need to be?
              Some held down 7 im thinking…
              Cece

            • It’s ok Warren, you are simply still giving a view that most of these people would have agreed with years ago. And like people who are giving up smoking, they judge people who smoke to bolster up there resolve.

              Warren you just have a little more time to separate out from “Scientology has all the answers,”

              Years ago, every single person on this blog considered psych drugs evil, and would have thought palehorse a victim not a person who found relief.
              I have family members that are probably alive because of these drugs.

              You being treated with antagonism is the same energy that Marty and others used before in fighting the ‘opposition to the truth’. Only now the opposition is towards mindless adherence to those doctrines once mindlessly adhered to.

              You were only trying to give a view that is reasonable, but not workable for palehorse. And you got a knee jerk reaction that has it’s cause in reacting against cult mentality which most people here were once part of.

              Marty, you sometimes are hard on people. I know you were protecting palehorse. You don’t need to protect with force anymore. That is a habit learned in all those years protecting Ron. Be a little nicer. LOL hugs

          • Golly, I would not have described Warren’s post as mean or trying to drag me (or anyone down). I just think he has a different point of view, and I think he is trying to offer it sincerely. I haven’t read his full reply obviously, since Marty has refrained from allowing it on his blog. I trust Marty’s judgment and feel that his blog should reflect what he feels is appropriate content. But I do not think that Warren’s promotion of the OT levels is anymore evaluative than accusing him of being mean.

            I hate to have started riff among good-hearted people here at Marty’s place. Cece, I appreciate your support and cheering me on. Thank you.

            Nancy

            • Warren Marston

              Nancy, thanks for understanding my actual intention. I wish you the best, and respect your right to make your own observations and decisions.

              • Warren, this has been an enlightening conversation for me. I understand you meant no harm in your communications that were not published, yet I do not disagree that Marty felt it was not appropriate for a public realm topic given we are talking openly about case data.

                I am open to learning and would enjoy engaging in a private discussion with you. Feel free to email me at Lisa.McPherson@hushmail.com.

                Nancy

    • Your list contains one “glaring” and regrettable error.

      A human being is part of a whole, called by us the Universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separated from the rest – a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circles of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.

      This is the true state of “clear” – the revelation that the ego is illusory – and its achievement is no further from you than the ground you walk on.

      (Dismiss this information at your own ignorance, and at my own pity).

      • Albert, I’m glad you regret my error. It shows you are at bottom a compassionate person.

        • I’m confused Valkov. What got shown – please describe a bit more.
          I thought Albert said his truth and you didn’t thank him.
          Cece

          • Cece, I found his post a bit condescending, a bit evaluative, although I think it was basically well-meaning. It wouldn’t be the first time I read something posted online, in the wrong way. My response may be considered a bit snarky I guess, and it might be right for you to call me on it.

            Albert, I apologize

  12. WOW, Marty, powerful post!

    Especially the last paragraph, “If you’ve been in Scientology culture for very long, I invite you to have and process for yourself some real emotion. Don’t try to repress it, suppress it, avoid it, evade it, escape it, conquer it or ‘causatively’ rise above it. Instead, feel it for all it is worth. See for yourself whether sometimes emotion can inform your conscience and your decisions and lead to more rewarding and meaningful activity on your part.”

    Marty, I’m not trying to spam your blog, but I must say that the more I read your recent articles, the more I’m struck at how much they begin to approach the subject of Idenics. Are you familiar with the name, John Galusha? If not, he worked with LRH in the 50’s & 60’s, and among other things, was a course instructor during many of the Congresses and ACC’s, as well as one of the earliest research auditors for LRH. At some point, John’s research took him down a different path towards a much truer simplicity than that of LRH’s, and this eventually led to the Idenics methodology. I mention this only because there’s a particular Idenics process utilized when a practitioner is working with a client that deals intimately with the subject matter of the above quoted paragraph. The results of doing so are quite remarkable for the person, as you suggest. I can state this unequivocally having experienced it myself both as a client, and now as a budding practitioner working with others.

    At any rate, I invite you take a look at it yourself, if you haven’t done so already. It personally helped me to overcome my 20+ years’ Scientology experience in under 2 months, and has certainly helped me to “move on up a little higher”. I’m sure you’ll find it interesting or enlightening at the very least.

    I truly enjoy reading your insights and witnessing your continuing evolution. Thanks for sharing and please keep it up.

    Best to you!

  13. This is one of the things that I struggled with and still do so many years after being in the Sea Org and especially the RPF where ALL emotion is hammered. If you smile or laugh or are happy while on the RPF then you get in even more trouble. It took me years to be able to be happy being happy. How twisted is that?

  14. Thank you, Marty. You continue to get down to the quick (living part) of the situation.

  15. I always had trouble with “never fear to hurt another in a just cause.”

  16. Yeah. very true. While there are numerous emotions clearly defined and organized by LRH on his Emotional Tone Scale, he also did an Awareness Scale which can be found on the Scientolgy Grade Chart. And they ARE two completely different things.

    Awareness is the ability to perceive the existence of something.

    Emotion consists of feelings that one experiences and/or outflows.

    The way I see it this idea of being “emotionless” is bogus, because everyone is at all times expressing or experiencing some emotion even if one is lucky enough to be experiencing Serenity of Beingness at the top of Hubbards scale. Emotion is sort of a “wave length” of feeling. There are many emotions.
    To my observation people who claim or aspire to be “emotionless” are usually dramatizing an emotion called “No Sympathy”. That emotion is only about a hair above the emotion called “Covert Hostility”. Small wonder then that these “emotionless” people can ” proudly” avow to “Never fear to hurt another in a just cause” (while at the same time demonstrating their misunderstanding of that line of Hubbard’s Code of Honor.
    Being stuck in this emotion of No Sympathy is sort of like being a psychotic. It could be called a form of mental illness, as apposed to mental health. The emotion also seems to be embodied in the image of “cold hardened steel” of the Sea Org. To my observation many Sea Org members, current and ex, dramatize this emotion. It is not a particularly pleasant one to observe or experience. But luckily for us there are many enjoyable emotions that one can feel and experience that actually “feel good”.

    • martyrathbun09

    • Where is love on the tone scale ?

      • Brian Thomas Lambert

        Real love is not an emotion. Real love is our nature.

        • That’s a good one to think about. You mean basically we are love. I found this since a long time to be more true somehow. I experienced some moments where my emotions were totally differenct than my feeling of immense love for somebody. It seemed to be a separate thing. I had a quarrel with a person and we argued and despite me saying bad things I felt inside my huge love for the other person. I was in our fight aware of the basic truth and I knew all what is said in that fight is just noise and won’t change my feeling for that person deep inside

        • Ron said that the Static has no quantity but has quality. The masters say the Static IS quality.

          Wisdom, love, joy, omniscience etc etc is what we are. These are not something to attain but something to remember. Because what we seek-happiness and love etc is our very own nature. These are the causeless attributes of the soul. And love is one of our attributes.

          When the endless modifications of the mind are neutralized, then these qualities become self evident, axiomatic.

      • In Scn terminology, love is called Affinity, which consists the entirety of the tone scale, and the different levels are the positive to negative scale/gradients of affinity/love.

        The normally used (outside Scn) definition of love is affection. Scn just puts it on a scale, e.g.

        Tone 4 affinity would be something like “OMG, I LOVE you so much, I want to spend every minute of the rest of my life with you! Life is awesome!” kinda thing.

        Tone 3 affinity would be something like “You are the love of my life, Harriet. I appreciate you cooking these excellent meals for me the same time every day. You are the very best wife I can imagine.”

        Tone 2 affinity would already be in the negative, like “Yes, I fucking love you but stop interrupting me, bitch! Can’t you see that I’m trying to work?! Shut the fuck up and wait for your turn!”

        Tone 1.4 affinity would be something like “I HATE you! You are disgusting! I want a divorce! Get out of my life NOW and never come back!”

        Tone 1.1 affinity would be “Of course I love you darling! You are the only women in my life!” (after a wild party with a bunch of drunk naked chicks in a strip bar the night before)

        …and so on.

        At least that’s the theory. You be the judge if it works that way in life.

      • Look at the ‘affinity scale’, and that may help a bit.

  17. gretchen dewire

    I think we are afraid 0f emotions because we see them as being out of control. We cant control our emotions or we spend alot of time trying to control our emotions. I think Rogers was getting people to a point where they could experience the proper emotion as per the circumstance. All according to the clients viewpoint of course. When that happens, a person feels ” more comfortable in his skin” so to speak. But just imagine if there were no emotions expressed, there would be no great art or music or theatre etc. Such a bland world. I think part of scientology did us a great disservice in not allowing us to feel the great depth of our humanness. In my opinion and experience anyway. I have really been tracking with you lately Marty.

  18. Standing ovation Marty! Thank you. I hope everyone here won’t mind if ai take this moment to share some of emotion today.

    I read on the Internet yesterday that Jim Lynch passed away, and I was very sad to read about that.

    Jim Lynch came to my home. This is a copy of one the notes I sent to Marty about it:

    “Marty,

    I think I kind of keyed the guy in a little bit.

    I asked him what his purpose was etc etc. Indicating he was running around and harming people.

    His tr’s went out several times and finally he could not look at me. Especially when I told him what happened to me in the Church.

    As he was leaving I asked him since he was doing “research”, did he have a comm line in with David Miscavige? Did he have stats? Did he KNOW all sides? And I was not antagonistic at all. But as he was leaving I reached out touched his arm and I kept my hand there. I said, “You have right to know.I am not interfering with your rights to know. Do you KNOW all the truth?

    Marty, He MELTED. And his eyes watered up a little bit. Like, some bit of human kindness really caused the guy to come unglued. Maybe he hasn’t been touched in years!

    And as he was leaving he asked me to please call him.

    Has anyone yet made an attempt to reach out and handle this guy? I felt like if I had had another two hours he would have flipped into the Independent Movement! He came off as extremely vulnerable. It was like he was BEGGING for someone to handle him.

    Maybe he is just getting worn down? Tired?

    I couldn’t believe how fragile he was.

    lv XXX”

    Yes, I found I had an affinity for this man, and when I reached out and touched him, he began to cry.

    I thought perhaps it was the holidays a few days away, he was all alone, I felt bad after he left, him being out in the cold in a strange city. I felt I should have cooked him something to eat, offered to put him up in the guest room. I prepared myself for the next time he would come back. I wanted to know more about him. I would invite him in next time. I would offer him coffee or tea. We could talk about things away from Scientology, his unique life and career. Perhaps even, I could get him to consider writing a book about his odd relationship with the Church of Scientology. I looked forward to seeing him come back. But, he will never come back.

    Little did I know he was dying of cancer and had six months left to live.

    Looking back, I am sure he knew.

    That the Church sent this man out in his final hours to work as a domestic terrorist, I find to be one of the most appalling indecent inhumane sadistic games the Freedom Mag people have wallowed in.

    My meeting with Jim Lynch was an emotional one for both of us.

    He was sent here as my enemy but once we came face to face, we both just kind of melted.

    I saw a side of him that I wish everyone could have known and seen.

    He was NOT the man we have seen on the videos harassing people.

    I am very sorry that some part of his life passed through this war zone. I know he left behind a wife and child, perhaps he was doing whatever he could to provide for them. God knows nobody will hire you when you are dying of cancer, they don’t want it on health insurance as a liability.

    I forgive him for whatever transgressions he made towards us, and I hope he can forgive us for the “Scientology” he experienced.

    There was something hugely aesthetic about him in person, on a quiet day at dusk.

    He was truly “taking it all in” in a sincere and devoted way.

    I could tell he was ashamed of himself.

    And now I am ashamed of myself, that I didn’t bring him for a cup of coffee and show better kindness and a better example, of what a Scientology can be with good intentions.

    • martyrathbun09

      You are a beautiful person. I am honored to have a friend in you.

    • I haven’t met you, but I second what Marty said about you being a beautiful person. I want to indicate that you touched him with your sincerely and your kindness. What you did is “the answer”.
      You gave him a gift which will not go unheeded in his journey.

    • Brian Thomas Lambert

      Oracle, that was the best post I have ever read here. What you did with this man is the answer to all.

    • Sweet of you to say…..

    • Cece (exed Mother of Sandy Kruchko)

      Thank you Oracle. That was really nice emotion.
      I felt it reading Tony’s Blog this morning. Jim was not a bad guy.
      You did just fine. Be nice to yourself🙂
      Cece

    • Beautiful, Oracle. To love in spite of all really is the secret of greatness.

    • Oracle, you are truly a unique and beautiful being. What you did for Jim Lynch most likely made a huge difference in his remaining months. You showed the kind of compassion that LRH speaks of in “What Is Greatness”.

    • Thanks all, I guess I am myself, not too crafty with words and need to wallow through them, what I meant to say, the message, you know, we work to improve our metering skills, our tr’s, our understanding of this body of data, our confusions, our mysteries, what I meant to say is, we need to give the best of our love. That too, is a skill and a gift and a talent. Maybe if I was doing a “why finding”, I would find this “omitted data”, to be a very significant one for myself at this time.

    • Dear Oracle
      You did your best to help Jim at that time,please have no regrets,lots of love to you and your family!
      Eric ALEXANDROU
      Brisbane ,Australia .

    • Roger from Switzerland Thought

      Wow !
      This is is so beautiful and full of kindness !

    • Bless your heart, Oracle. What a lovely person you are. Thank you for being you.

      Nancy

    • “I forgive him for whatever transgressions he made towards us, and I hope he can forgive us for the “Scientology” he experienced.”

      Oracle, please don’t neglect to forgive yourself.

    • Wow Oracle – now that is a very touching post and you are a good soul for admitting your humanness!!

    • Beautiful… I “feel” your emotions and cried for you and for him.

    • … Pure LOVE … MAGIC … Touching story!

  19. Marty, you have made numerous cogent and insightful observations regarding SCN and its meta-culture in the past, but i think this one is perhaps one of the more important ones.

    I have myself noted this anti-emotion phenomenon and have felt for a long time it is nothing good since it completely obviates the potential for compassion or even love in any of its forms.

    What kind of religion or spiritual movement can be devoid of compassion or love and still be considered a religion or of the spirit? Without our emotions we are naught but machines. Our potential is naught but being a greater or lesser cog in the greater machine.

    That line in The Code regarding “never fear to hurt another in a just cause” has been problematical for me from the first time i read it. Seems like one should always fear to hurt others in a just cause if what your doing has the potential to harm the innocent. Seems like an appeal to the fanatical to me and excuse, a mental blank check, to do ones will upon others no matter the consequences.

  20. Mike Eldredge

    You only speak for yourself Marty. I find it odd that you somehow feel you are speaking for some group of people that you have given the label Scientologist.

    • martyrathbun09

      Huh? I speak for myself.

      • well that clarifies if for me then. thanks

        • martyrathbun09

          Relooking at your original origination, perhaps I misunderstood you. I was answering the question as if you asked ‘who are you writing on behalf of.’ I see that perhaps you meant ‘who are you writing about?’. If it was the latter I am writing about Scientologists, including specifically you.

        • Come Marty you know me a lot better than that. I guess what you learned in RTC was quite different that what I did being in Scn. But then again I studied it and practiced it long before it became its current abomination and I do understand your point of view. I think what you are talking about is what people do who pretend to know something about the subject, you know that 1000 yard stare they call TRO instead of just looking at someone, I always found that amusing.

          • martyrathbun09

            I experienced your auditing first hand. Thus, I fully appreciate from whence this condescending evaluation issues. I reject it. Thanks all the same.

            • Well this is the longest conversation we have had in 20 years and much has transpired during that time for both of us. Im sorry that you feel my comments condescending, I just find the categorization an inaccurate observation and limited to your specific point of view. From what I recall of our auditing experience I would not have engaged in the activity for any other reason than actually caring about your well being at the time and I actually still do to this day.

    • Who the hell are you sweetheart ?

    • I know this is not the best of your love.

      • It seems it isn’t Marty who is speaking for some group of people but some others possibly:

        “By Mark Shreffler

        I got a comm a few days ago that suggested I comment about something that was said about Milestone Two on a public forum.”

        I’m not sure who is even posting here of their own origination, or who is being used as a puppet anymore. But I feel from your sudden hostility
        perhaps you were stirred up a little by someone else? This stirring seems to be part of a new culture.

  21. Brian Thomas Lambert

    I have found that embracing emotions, taking them in, allowing them to be, feeling them consciously is a very healing process.

    That does not mean abusing people with them in the name of honoring emotions.

    To put a mile high star on the importance of emotions in human life: Apple asks this one question when they start creating, designing a product. And the answer to this question is always gone back to in visual design and operating system as the pole star of focus.

    The question is, “how will it make people feel.”

    One of the most offensive and misused or used correctly words in scientology, in my opinion, is secondary.

    It made people feel that they were being “banky” when they lost a love one or disconnected from a loved one.

    All totalitarian regimes consider feelings and conscience a weakness. Otherwise how to justify all the atrocities? Your feeings are weakness please kill, disconnect, hate this person for the greatest good. And when you can harm others and feel good about it………… you get a pat on the back and approval from the group. And now you are a junk yard dog. Woof!

  22. I have a little to say regarding the line in the Code of Honor that states “never fear to hurt another in a just cause”.

    First of all, in the article that lays out the Code of Honor, that single line is followed by this, from Ron….

    “Never fear to hurt another in a just cause.
    If you want somebody to have a guy that is going to do a terrible job of managing, get someone who is afraid to hurt people. Get someone who can tear people to pieces any time it is indicated and you’ll have a good, smooth running organization. It is not because it is force that is required, but honesty. An individual who is afraid to hurt people is going to be dishonest to those people. He is afraid to hurt them so he will wind up hurting them more by a hundred times.”
    ……

    Maybe that will shed more light on it for some, maybe not. However I recommend that anyone who earnestly wants to test that for themselves, to see if it is true for them, really have a closer look. See if you can come up with examples of where it might be true and not true.

    As an example of a possible time where it may be true for most… A child has badly broken his arm. In order for the child to go through life with a useable limb, it is evident that the bone will have to be reset. In this scenario, you have no access to any medical assistance. The child wants you to fix the arm. You know that there are things that you could do to help, most of them painful (though physical pain is not necessarily the only “hurt” Ron is talking about here) Do you do nothing because you fear hurting the child?

    Suppose that someone has twisted their ankle and fallen down in a busy street. You tell them that they have to get off the street because it is not safe to be there. They whine and complain about the pain. (in this scenario we are not going to attempt to handle the physical pain) There is a big truck bearing down on you both, and he does not have time to stop.
    Do you get desperate and yell, “Look we have to get off this street or we are both going to die under the wheels of that truck!” Ah… but that may hurt his “feelings”… So, instead do you say… “OK OK you just lay here. Don’t cry, You should be Ok here, really”. I am just going to go stand over here on the sidewalk…

    Admittedly, these are two rather gross examples, but I am sure most anyone could come up with better ones of their own.

    My point is that the line of the Code is not necessarily wholly untrue. It is more likely the interpretation by the reader that may need work.

    We are talking about emotional tone here in this thread, so I will also mention that “emotional tone” has a lot to do with how one will interpret that line. As emotional tone changes so does how one views and interacts with one’s environment in general, and in this case, that line and its ramifications.

    I cannot state with certainty that I know for sure what Ron meant when he wrote that line in the Code of Honor, but I can tell you that I can find situations in which it would be true for me, perhaps true in a different sense or in different situations, but true none the less.

    Eric

  23. Brian Thomas Lambert

    The pat on the back and standing Ovation was always pure feeling always emotional.
    Sometimes feelings are also a mouse trap. Flattery for instance is a powerful tool to use. It makes us feel good.

    The Rishis say feeings travel faster than thought. Feelings can arrive before reason or thought. Feelings are more direct. Mind has so many on and off switches, biases and evaluations, judgements and catagories to sift through at lightning speeed. But feelings get their first. Just ask Madison Ave how to sell.

  24. Yes to this. I agree.

  25. Hi Marty;

    I never really had any trouble understanding the part played by ’emotion’, not really. I knew from my CofS days, and have total certainty on it now, that emotion is a basic, response that is instantaneous, or can be instantaneous because there is no filter between the situation and the emotional response, whereas reason requires a conscious evaluation to respond, which adds time. The volume of the emotional response may take time to build up, but the emotion is instant. To me, emotion predates reason, at least genetically, and is a more pure and honest response. Reasoning come after.

    One thing I also know; it doesn’t matter where you are on the bridge, OT 8 or on the Purif, (the first time.), you are NEVER free from the automatic responses on the tone scale. By that I mean tonal responses are instantaneous, and so there is no avoiding the response. A person acting 1.1 when hit back by anger WILL slip down into propitiation automatically.

    I think LRH’s uncovering of the tone scale is perhaps his greatest achievement, and I have a chuckle at how since then, others are ‘discovering’ those same responses.

    All my opinion of course.

  26. Ahhh yes… Emotions.

    It seems that the whole fascination with bodies is an attempt to experience things through them. I find that bodies not only experience emotions, they use them as a key means of communication, both internally and externally.

    We were attracted to bodies by their emotions. We wanted to experience what made them act that way (cry, be violent, laugh, etc). We have ended up being slaves to those emotions.

    I consider that here is a strong likelihood that much of the emotion that beings experience, while in bodies, is not being generated by themself at all, but rather by whatever levels of theta are running various aspects of the body itself.

    Leaving aside misemotion for a moment, I am not sure how truly “native to a being” emotions are at all. They are a communication via, in that they are expressed as flows of particular wavelengths, and It seems that as one moves up into the higher realms of spirituality I think one would tend to leave the lower tones and eventually all emotion behind.

    The “feelings” seem to get replaced with “beingnesses”. (no wavelength)

    So is emotion good, or bad?

    It is an integral part of life. To embrace life would necessitate the embracing of emotion.

    Eric

  27. I agree 100%. I have also encountered the same conclusion in my healing process. For a long time I was taught that emotions make us weak, when in fact the are the strongest resource we have. It reminds me of Spock from Star Trek.

    • I love Spock! (Die hard Original Star Trek fan, here!) Your Spock observation is a cultural example of what we humans know to be true when emotions are missing from real experience. Do you remember the episode when Capt. Kirk showed up on the Enterprise after he was presumed to be dead? Spock, in great surprise greeted him with an enthusiastic grin, and cried out, “Jim!” Spock fully became his human half for a moment when he learned his friend was indeed alive. It is telling that Spock was less inclined to suppress the expression of his joyous emotions rather than his darker ones in response to Jim’s death.

      Ah, life lessons via television…. ROFL!!!!

      Nancy

      • I love Star Trek.

        I think that being emotionless occasionally has it’s value, however emotion is what guides us to appropriate action and decisions with positive outcomes. Sociopaths lack the capacity for normal human emotion. While it enables them to achieve great feats (Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, Stalin), it comes with a disastrous price.

  28. Thank you for this.

    I am doing therapy for childhood abandonment (growing up practically without parents or a normal life in the cadet org). It consists largely, at least right now, of grief work. I had been numb, all bottled up. At first I was terrified to open that box and feel those emotions, I thought the pain would kill me. My therapist told me it’s ok, the body won’t let out more than I can handle. But I have to let it out, have to express it. It is exhausting work, but I actually feel more alive each time I do it. I also have a much better (more complete) recollection of my childhood since I started this process.

    With all due respect to the analysists, applying the tone scale and saying such and such is at so and so (or ‘ah, yes, I’m feeling bla tone right now’) is not feeling and expressing that emotion. Never mind where it might fit on somebody’s scale, just feel it.

    I don’t know where this anti-emotion culture in Scn came from, but I know I grew up with ideas like “banky”, “H, E+R”, “below 2.0 is death(=bad)”, “human (=bad)”, “ENTHETA! (=to be avoided at all costs)”, etc. The result? Fake enthusiasm. People not themselves. Numb. Out of communication with themselves and their bodies (if these two are really separate). Not really there.

    I find this idea of misemotion incomplete. I’m feeling the grief of childhood NOW, 30+ years later. Nothing in my environment to warrant it. But I just couldn’t/didn’t permit myself to express it before. Does that make it irrational? No, not expressing feelings, and instead surpressing them (particularly to pose as a “successful, up-tone Scientologist”), that’s irrational. There’s a time and a place, perhaps, but if you can’t feel it now because you simply have to function in a given situation, you must let it out later.

    It’s the door to other emotions and real happiness.

    • Brian Thomas Lambert

      Letting Go………….. You are courageous and authentic. Thank you for sharing your story. Thank you for doing the work. Sometimes all this spiritual mumbo jumbo is what some therapists call “spiritual bypass”.

      Reaching for the stars when you can’t even tie your shoes.

      • Thank you for your kindess and wisdom, Brian. I love your posts.

        Yes, my dad occasionally mentions “reaching for the stars”. Only the other day I suddenly realised that I don’t actually *know* that I am a spirit. Subjectively, when I really get down to being honest with myself. I only know what I’ve read or heard. So this work is liberating. Life feels vibrantly rich, increasingly so. Perhaps the dawn of my spirituality?

        I don’t care for the stars right now. All I want is to be whole.

        • Oh… I checked out spiritual bypass. Perfect description! Been down that road in all sorts of ways.

        • Letting Go, thanks for sharing that.
          “Subjectively, when I really get down to being honest with myself. I only know what I’ve read or heard.”
          I’ve been sorting out some of this myself and it is freeing and liberating to realize what I KNOW for myself instead of what I’ve read or heard.

      • Sorry about the many posts, I forgot something important I wanted to ask.
        Spirituality as a defence mechanism got me wondering… why is it we fear feeling so much? In general, not just with regard to spirituality. Why? So much that we try to have the good without the bad and end up with nothing or a sham or a very narrow range of shallow impressions to be quickly shut away. I guess there is more than one answer, but which would seem relevant to you?

    • Warren Marston

      In my first, long comment in this thread I said that Real Scientologists don’t suppress their emotions, and that the incorrect idea that “all emotion is misemotion” came entirely from Sea Org management, not tech trained auditors. It’s also an incorrect, cultish idea is that all psychotherapists harm people rather than help them. But that doesn’t mean that good psychotherapists accomplish more with their clients than good Real Scientology auditors do with theirs.

      (My definition for “Real Scientology” is “LRH Standard Tech delivered by high-toned auditors and C/Ses, for the benefit of their clients, in the absence of Sea Org Nazi cult dramatization.”)

      A fully trained Real Scientology auditor would have no trouble getting a preclear to cease suppressing his emotions and instead start to feel them so they could be discharged as you describe has occurred in your own therapy. There are specific techniques in Real Scientology to get this done.

      And Real Scientologists would never subject their children to the de facto abandonment that you describe.

  29. Imagine DM would shed tears out of compassion (like e.g. Dalai Lama) because he heard or saw something really sad that happened to people … or some of the “tough” SO members … hmmm, somehow I do really have problems to get this imagination …😀

    • Everything is in motion, the whole life is therefore motion (besides us or god or nothing or emptiness or the unmoving mover or whatever you call it). Tao of Physics says it very well (thanks Marty for the tip. That book is really good).
      Emotion is motion as the word itself already expresses it and is therefore life. It just doesn’t make sense to suppress emotion as such. I can change my emotion if I don’t like to create special effects e.g. yelling at somebody just because I feel a bit stressed and letting that motion flow in another direction. I can change that if I don’t like to target people around me with motions by my emotions. I could decide to just let go of that motion or let it flow instead holding onto it and then having it in my space passing it onto others. But that is all my consideration about good or bad behaviour or my free will about deciding that something is not aesthetic etc.

  30. I talked years ago to a Scientologist that told me every time she feels not „happy“ she goes to e.g. toilet and thinks of this or that until she is smiling again. (sitting in the course room with indicators of not being happy gets you into trouble)
    Yesterday on my job I had the emotion (still have today) of anger. This had been my honest emotional response to some inflow from my boss. Living that emotion is possible but then I have to find another job.
    But emotions and reactions can be interesting. One of my first experiences had been in a Disco. A really crowded dance floor. I had been angry about a situation and did let this feeling happen. Suddenly, while I was in the middle of the dance floor all the people around me went away from me and I had a 2 meter diameter space free on the floor. This did last a while and then I decided to cool down a bit and the people came close to me.
    This and some other similar experiences taught me to be a bit cautious with my emotions. As it also can happen that very fast the blood sugar level plunging down to a dangerous level if those emotional energies are too close to my body.

  31. I like this “emotion could be called the energy manifestation of affinity” (by marildi)

    Just wanted to throw this out there.

    The way I see it is there are two type of communications.
    Positive and negative.

    Allow me to elaborate.
    Negative communication is one which is not in alignment with reality. Consequently positive communication is one which is in good alignment with reality. These are not necessarily black or white. It is more of a gradient ‘thing’. “Highly acceptable alignment with reality” would be the top of the scale and “highly resentable deviation from reality” would be the bottom.

    (If LRH said something about this anyone is welcome to chime in)

    When I look at the ARC triangle I now think with negative an positive communication. Positive strengthens the triangle while negative … well … brings down ARC. This does not happen right away. When a lie (which is essentially a negative communication) is sold and accepted it can create temporary ARC. However upon discovering the lie (the negativeness of the communication) the ARC can crash very abruptly.

    I consider the “C” in ARC the key (and I kind of remember LRH going on about this but I don’t want to butcher his words by paraphrasing).

    Bottom line is that positive communication has the tendency to bring us together while negative communication (lies, illusions, etc) have repulsive effects as they eat away at the ARC triangle which begins with “+C” IMO.

    I could be wrong but I see a huge parallel between this scale of “+C” to “-C” and emotions.

    Ongoing love in this sense for example would be a sacred and secret “+C”.

  32. Joe Pendleton

    I just read the post, so here’s some of my two cents before I read the other responses (want to comm my thoughts while still “fresh” maybe).

    I do think that one lives “more of a life” by experiencing emotions as they occur while living and not resisting the emotions or making less of oneself for experiencing them.

    When you say “Scientology”, you do have to realize that MANY ideas about many things changed over the years in Scientology. I think LRH made valid points in SOS about emotions being “appropriate” (which is to say that death of a loved one can appropriately send one into grief, and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that, but it would VERY much hurt an individual’s ability to live life if he then felt that grief so intensely that it lasted every day for years and he was unable to experience OTHER emotions (like happiness or joy or even anger). There is a reason to sometimes feel depressed, but getting STUCK in it can ruin or end a life. Of course people can get stuck in a “positive” emotion as well. So, LRH’s ideas about removing the compulsion behind an emotion, thus allowing a being to be fluid on the tone scale as one lives life I think was a very good idea and processing to “unstick” one a very valuable activity.

    But like almost everything else in Scientology, eventually this idea became inverted and almost completely reversed. Yes, I do think it is OK to say that “an auditor doesn’t have a case”, as the idea behind that saying is that the auditor is the “free-er” of other beings and has to assume that role so that auditing in quantity can occur. But of course it can very well be taken to an extreme. As can “no case on post (what a laugh for staff members who have to put up with all the screaming at them and entheta). Ofcourse Ron himself was known to fly off the handle often. But when LRH said on the FEBC in 1971 or so that “the only barrier to production is human emotion and reaction”, he really crossed the line. The ONLY barrier? Not unhatted or crazy execs? Or unhattedness period? Of course Ron did add later on many other factors that screw up production in HCO PLs like Group Sanity, etc, BUT … the term “HE&R” sort of lives in infamy in invalidating ANY reaction that is considered indicating that a person is contra what comes from management. And as in so many things, the idea of HE&R and emotion generally in Scientology became a way to CONTROL both the reactions of people and their actual behavior. But I think early on, LRH had some wise things to say on the subject.

  33. Joe Pendleton

    Like to add one more thing on this subject. In my previous post, I noted that so much of Scientology has completely inverted from its earlier work. So, in 1952 or so, we find LRH putting much emphasis on a being’s ability to be fluid on the tone scale, able to move up and down as one lives life. And in 2013, the bulk of Scientologists (right up through OT8) are often emotionally frozen or really NUMB emotionally. And thus we see why it so easy for about thirty people (whom I have known from between 30 – 40 years) to immediately disconnect from me, “unfriend” me, on getting the word from another Scientologist who read what someone else wrote on an alleged declare order. Boom. Just like that. No inspection of the sit, nothing. Only one person of all the long term friends who disconnected from me even sent me a comm on it. A person who I was close to, worked with for years, said she heard about the ethics order “and so I must disconnect.” Her exact words. Cold, frozen, unfeeling, robotic. And she is an accomplished auditor too. And this group thinks that MORE people will now desire to be a part of it. There’s no amount of money in the world spent on ads that will ever make that happen.

    • Lemmings making a mad dash over the cliffs, into the sea. Is this the “abyss” LRH was talking about?

    • I am not so sure any more that they are numb so much as secretly terrified.

      • I look at it more as being robotic as in void of any emotion. Whether that be from terror or simply drilled in indoctrination as what is acceptable behavior. Even the success stories at Flag and the Ship have that void of emotion feel to them.

  34. Marty, Could you please update my address from carriej101@gmail to clfod1@lavabit.com

    Thank You!

    Mrs Libnish

    Carrie

  35. Great post! It really made me think (and feel).

    Small children are pure emotion. Experience the magic of watching them transform when happy, or watch them crumple in sadness. Over time we learn to be less expressive in situations where showing emotion will cause us problems with peers or someone in a superior position by age or rank. I think we can get confused and think that because we can’t express our emotion at the time that we shouldn’t experience them either

    As Marty said, using a trick can allow us to bypass an emotion for a while. But the effect of doing this habitually makes us numb and we can become fearful of the feelings we’ve skipped and stuffed away. If we’re lucky, something or someone will cause us to face our feelings and we’ll learn to express and enjoy our emotions fully.

  36. About emotions, that is interesting to compare Scientology with Buddhism.

    Emotions are classified differently in Scientology and in Buddhism.

    The classification depends on the goal of man.

    According to Scientology the goal of man is Survive!, thus emotions are classified in terms of survival.

    According to Buddhism the goal of man is happiness and to not suffer, thus emotions are classified in terms of happiness and suffering.

    According to Buddhism positive emotions help being happy and to not suffer, and love and compassion are at the top of the scale of positive emotions, when they are not plotted on the tone scale of Scientology.

    According to Buddhism the main negative emotions are ignorance, greed, hate, jealousy and anger. Only hate and anger are plotted on the tone scale of Scientology.

    According to Buddhism, our sufferings come from two main causes:
    – Negative emotions
    – Karmic imprints
    Negative emotions being the main cause.

    It could be said that Scientology is dealing primarily with karmic imprints (the reactive mind, past incidents) and does not process directly emotions, when Buddhism does not handle directly karmic imprints and negative emotions are the direct target of Buddhist techniques. Emotions are used as the “entry point of the case”.

    Scientology is processing the reactive mind in order to improve the tone level, when Buddhism is processing negative emotions in order to release karmic imprints.

    Eventually I have a question: is-it not possible to consider that Buddhist techniques and Scientology could be used in a complementary manner, Scientology being used to release karmic imprints and Buddhism being used to handle negative emotions and thoughts?

    • Curious

      It seems that much of Scientology’s address is focused on the past, while Buddhist tradition seems to concentrate on working with the present.

      Both aspects appear to have value. Both are perhaps hindered by not having the view or address of the other.

      I do not see how either could hinder the other if one had similar goals for both, and dropped any dogmatic adherence to either.

      Eric

      • Hi Eric,

        I agree.

        Actually I have already realized to some degree an integration of Buddhism with Scientology.

        In order to check the validity of the proposition: greed, hate, jealousy and anger are the main poisons that are at the source of our sufferings, I browsed my own experience with commands in the Self Analysis style, remembering times where I was acting under the influence of greed and jealousy.

        As a result I found that the main sufferings and wrongdoings of this lifetime were indeed caused by these emotions, something that was not spotted in my regular auditing in Scientology, maybe because greed and jealousy are not directly addressed by Scientology, as they are not on the tone scale.

        So it seems that the combination of Self Analysis with Buddhist teachings could lead to interesting results.

        I believe also that even a Clear could be still the effect of these negative emotions, as they come from the very fabric of the mind, even when there are no restimulated engrams.

        These native flaws of the human mind are well studied by Buddhism and by General Semantics.

  37. I’m currently exploring a notion that there are only two emotions. One I made and the other was given to me. Who gave it to me? That which created me. The two emotions are LOVE and Fear. I was given LOVE and I made Fear. Each emotion is a way of seeing and different worlds arise from different visions. The fact that I am where I ‘seem’ to be indicates that I choose to ‘see’ through what I made.

    Why did I make Fear when I already had LOVE? I made Fear to replace LOVE. What can I say, I had a very, very brief but very, very powerful moment of insanity. Fear, obviously, is a fragmented and fragmenting emotion. It seems to take many forms and each form has a different way of acting out in order to obtain satisfaction. The many levels and nuances of behavior stem from fragmented perception. The body is an effect where fragmented perception (fear) takes on form. Hence, the body serves as a standard of comparison by which an evaluation of acceptance, rejection or suitability is made with regard to acting out a ‘special’ form of fear.

    Please don’t mistake that I’m attempting to state truth here (not even ‘my truth’). I’m not. I’m just exploring a ‘What if…?”

  38. Kathy (Reed, Bagley) Orem

    This is a beautiful piece of work. Maybe what some Scientologists lost was honest outrage about the treatment of staff, disconnection as a policy. being fleeced, and being told non Scientologists were wogs.
    You are saying it like it is. Keep it up. I am sharing these
    contributions with my friends. .

  39. Roger From Switzerland Thought

    I would li that to have a deeper discusiion of that subject as I ‘m quite confused about it after 35 years of …you know what I mean .
    Until I reached the state of CLEAR I used to show and express my real emotions and thoughts in my Scientology environment. I had lots of troubles because of it ,as I wasn’t behaving per the book.
    After clear I became much stronger and expressed my emotions and thoughts more intense and got into more troubles.
    After OT3 I thought I was fully myself and fully demostrated myself and then had huge troubles in my Scientology environment.
    Then on ot4 i learned that still i’ve a huge case full of all kind of thougts and emotions not belonging to me and until i’m done with ot7 i will not know my real self and not be able to discern what is original and not !
    From OT 4 on I had no auditor listening o my originations but only interested in talking to my case and getting rid of it.
    The first auditor that listened to me was Marty.
    Nevertheless, after OT3 I attested to having handled my case and then I was told, this was just a joke to let me feel happy, but now it really starts !
    I never felt a real urge to continue my bridge as I never could understand it.
    And it’s only on OT8 that you finally know who you really are and know what your real emotions and thoughts are .
    But I bet you could take any ot8 and audit nots on him and you would find some nots case on him.

    My answer to those, perhaps imagined problems, is to enjoy life and fee my emotions !
    Any other thoughts about it ?

    • Roger, my current attitude is that I take full responsibility for all the brilliant, wonderful theta ideas and actions that happen in my life. As for all the aberrated, crazy, out ethics, stupid …. ideas and actions? …. why, I am simply laying the responsibility for those where it belongs …. on all those pesky and bothersome “hangers on” who just love living with my body, no matter how old it gets.

    • Roger, you wrote: “And it’s only on OT8 that you finally know who you really are and know what your real emotions and thoughts are.”

      Geir Isene wrote the following about OT VIII, on one of his blog posts:

      “Each level has its own specific end result. On OT 8, it is:
      ‘I now know who I am not, and am interested in finding out who I am.’
      And that is the end of the road. You don’t get to know who you are, what you are or anything positive. You get to know who you aren’t – and you are interested in finding out who you are. That’s it.” http://isene.me/2013/01/26/ot-8-follow-up/

      So it seems there are two different versions of the end result of OT 8?

    • Roger,
      Yes, great on your ability to maintain your emotions despite the BORGs attempts to corral you back into the pen.

      And please, by all means, continue to tell any Scientologist BORG to fuck off!!!

      Big hug.

  40. Mayo begins the lecture talking about having emotions

    • Correction it is a little further along then I remember now I am watching it again.

    • Thanks Marty for another thought prompting commentary and thanks Cat Daddy for posting this video.

      That said, I’m going to butcher an old saying: If you don’t know where you came from, you probably don’t know where you’re going.

  41. Win after Win after Win

    “Data provided by Yahoo! shows that searches related to Scientology spiked 299 percent in July compared to June, and searches for Leah Remini grew a whopping 946 percent. And the increased attention could be just for starters, as Remini says she isn’t going away.”

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/08/02/ex-scientologists-leah-remini-departure-has-church-on-ropes/#ixzz2ap1SdBQn

    http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/08/02/ex-scientologists-leah-remini-departure-has-church-on-ropes/

  42. “In processing that emotion, it might inform your conscience and influence you to decide to do something worthy about the situation. That in turn could result in your feeling some more pleasurable emotions.”

    “Spinoza criticises people who, believing “that man rather disturbs than follows the order of nature, that he has absolute power over his actions”, tend to adopt a misguidedly moralistic attitude. “They refer the cause of human weakness and inconstancy not to the common forces of universal nature, but to I know not what vice in human nature, which they therefore bewail, deride, despise, or more frequently detest.” Spinoza thought that it was more fruitful to understand our emotions and actions than to hate or ridicule them.”

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2011/mar/14/spinoza-understanding-emotions

  43. This was a great essay, Marty. We stopped participating in Scientology for two reasons: the way the parishioners acted and the way the staff treated us.

    We couldn’t stand the bizarre phenomena of the 2 emotion Scientologist: (1) euphoria over everything Scientology and (2) anger at anything that wasn’t euphoria over Scientology.

    The brainwashing, abusive tech of “conditions,” the restriction of free speech by only being allowed to talk about “theta” topics, the compulsive LRH quoting, the self-censoring in auditing that happened because if you made any negative comment about anything and especially your auditing you were subjected to vicious m/w/h checking, the diminishing of a human to the label of (pick one): post, tone level, PTS, SP, terminal, OT, pc, exSO, thetan, upstate, downstat, etc. created this phenomena. As did many other aspects of the “religion.”

    There were no individuals with thoughts and lives left.

    • martyrathbun09

      That pretty well summed it up right there: We couldn’t stand the bizarre phenomena of the 2 emotion Scientologist: (1) euphoria over everything Scientology and (2) anger at anything that wasn’t euphoria over Scientology.

  44. Spinoza’s Emotions

    i. Desire is the essence of man insofar as it is conceived as determined to any action by any one of its modifications. [I.e., when there is change, we become motivated, and that is called desire.]

    ii. Joy is man’s passage from a less to a greater perfection. [We feel joy when we improve our abilities to deal with what life hands us.]

    iii. Sorrow is man’s passage from a greater to a less perfection. [We feel sorrow when we find we are not able to deal with life.]

    iv. Love is joy with the accompanying idea of an external cause. [When something, or someone, gives us joy, we feel love towards that thing or person.]

    v. Hatred is sorrow with the accompanying idea of an external cause. [When something, or someone, gives us sorrow, we feel hatred towards that thing or person.]

    vi. Hope is a joy not constant, arising from the idea of something future or past about the issue of which we sometimes doubt. [When we detect the possibility of joy in an otherwise uncertain situation, we feel hope.]

    vii. Fear is a sorrow not constant, arising from the idea of something future or past about the issue of which we sometimes doubt. [When we detect the possibility of sorrow in an uncertain situation, we feel fear.]

    viii. Confidence is a joy arising from the idea of a past or future object from which cause for doubting is removed. [Confidence happens when hope conquers fear.]

    ix. Despair is sorrow arising from the idea of a past or future object from which cause for doubting is removed. [Despair happens when fear overwhelms hope.]

    x. Gladness is joy with the accompanying idea of something past which, unhoped for, has happened. [Gladness is the recognition that things have gone well.]

    xi. Remorse is sorrow with the accompanying idea of something past which, unhoped for, has happened. [Remorse is the recognition that things have gone wrong. It might include regret and even guilt, if we had some responsibility in the matter.]

    xii. Favor is love toward those who have benefited others. [It is the appreciation we feel towards good people.]

    xiii. Indignation is hatred toward those who have injured others. [It is the hatred we feel towards bad people.]

    xiv. Overestimation consists of thinking too highly of another person in consequence of our love for him. [This might include infatuation.]

    xv. Contempt consists in thinking too little of another person in consequence of our hatred for him. [To have contempt for someone is the same as despising them.]

    xvi. Envy is hatred in so far as it affects a man so that he is sad at the good fortune of another person and is glad when any evil happens to him. [Envy may include jealousy and lead to spitefulness.]

    xvii. Compassion is love in so far as it affects a man so that he is glad at the prosperity of another person and is sad when any evil happens to him. [This, which many would call love, is no doubt the most worthy emotion.]

    xviii. Self-satisfaction is the joy which is produced by contemplating ourselves and our own power of action. [Today, we might refer to this as self-esteem or self-worth.]

    xix. Humility is the sorrow which is produced by contemplating our impotence or helplessness. [Although humility sounds negative, it involves a realistic understanding of our limitations.]

    xx. Pride is thinking too much of ourselves, through self-love. [We often use the word to mean something positive, but traditionally pride is undeserved or excessive self-esteem.]

    xxi. Despondency is thinking too little of ourselves through sorrow. [This corresponds to that unrealistic sense of guilt that plagues so many people.]

    xxii. Self-exaltation is joy with the accompanying idea of some action which we imagine people praise. [Self-esteem based on others’ opinions of particular behaviors.]

    xxiii. Shame is sorrow with the accompanying idea of some action which we imagine people blame. [Like humility, but based on others’ opinions of particular behaviors. We call it guilt if it is entirely internalized.]

    xxiv. Benevolence is the desire to do good to those whom we pity. [Benevolence is the emotion behind our good deeds. Pity here does not carry the negative tone it often does today.]

    xxv. Anger is the desire by which we are impelled, through hatred, to injure those whom we hate. [Anger is the emotion behind aggression. It includes the desire for revenge.]

    From Spinoza’s Ethics (Elwes, Trans.)
    [All comments in brackets are my own.]

  45. Looking at the tone scale vs emotions I can’t help but wonder:

    Hate is on the tone scale along with several other emotions.

    If hate is there then where is love, compassion, caring and affinity?
    Some of these higher emotions are perhaps encoded into serenity of beingness, exhilaration, enthusiasm, cheerfulness on the higher range of the tone scale but the entire scale seems out of balance.

    From top to bottom the 14th entry of the scale is “Boredom” (@ 2.5 relative value). This is already pretty unoptimal of a condition if persistent. Then below that we have 45 other entries. #20 from top to bottom is already “Hate”.

    I can’t blame LRH for coming up with an unbalanced tone scale in such mass as we are in. However, he sure was awoiding the “L” word.

    “Serenity of beingness” at the top just doesn’t sound involved enough. The tonescale seems to communicate that we need to replace positive emotions with logic and sanity. The low range is full of negative emotions and the upper range calls for a Dimigod Spock.

    The ARC has Affinity in it. Love, compassion, and caring are form of Affinity but these seem to be suppressed.

    The question is: should one even have the goal to replace positive emotions with logic and sanity?

    Of course everyone needs to make their own decision about this but this sure seems to point at the direction that the man deemed all emotions as unwanted.

    It doesn’t seem to work out too good for SC to carry on with that idea. It sure has attracted the crazies.

    • Hello to an OT IV WOG. Your comment was the last thing I read last night before I laid my body down to sleep (sleep – a metaphor for death). This morning soon after I awoke (awaking from sleep – a metaphor for rebirth) I found myself mulling over a particular portion of your comment. This:

      “If hate is there then where is love, compassion, caring and affinity?
      Some of these higher emotions are perhaps encoded into serenity of beingness, exhilaration, enthusiasm, cheerfulness on the higher range of the tone scale but the entire scale seems out of balance.

      “From top to bottom the 14th entry of the scale is “Boredom” (@ 2.5 relative value). This is already pretty unoptimal of a condition if persistent. Then below that we have 45 other entries. #20 from top to bottom is already “Hate”.

      “I can’t blame LRH for coming up with an unbalanced tone scale in such mass as we are in. However, he sure was awoiding the “L” word.

      “ ‘Serenity of beingness’ at the top just doesn’t sound involved enough.”

      In contemplating what you stated here I was launched into a remarkable exploration of thought that I can’t even begin to convey in words, However, prompted by this exploration, and for whatever it’s worth, I do have some perspectives that I would like share with you.

      Throughout the process of my SC experience I gained many, many beneficial and useful perspectives (tools). LRH’s Tone Scale, for example, was, and continues to be, an enormously viable tool. While in SC there was a lot of integrating of other perspectives that took place but what I was integrating was originating exclusively from within the SC community. Nothing from outside of that community was being looked at as being worthy of integration. Upon my leaving SC, though, I soon began to integrate almost ubiquitously. Consequently, my interpretations of perception (my perspectives) aka, my belief system, entered into a mode of constant adjustment. Indeed, ever since my return to reading Marty’s blogs and all the profound comments contributed by others, like yourself…my belief system has been adjusting with increased rapidity. That noted, what follows is based upon my current but ever changing belief system. Take these perspectives as you will.

      Out in front of me right now I am mocking up a map (or scale) of what seems to be many different emotions. However, there are really only two emotions on this map and only one of them is Real. Near the top of this map that I see before me there is an imaginary line of demarcation. Above this line is Real. Below this line is Unreal. Above this line I have placed various symbols. To name a few…Love, Joy, Peace, Perfection, Freedom, Constancy, Certainty, Knowledge, Oneness, No consciousness, No existence, Home, Heaven and I would include LRH’s “serenity of beingness.” From where I seem to be i.e., below the line, I cannot begin to conceive what these symbols actually mean. Nevertheless they’re there and I’ve put them there. I am constantly drawn to them.

      Below the line…I’m looking at LRH’s Tone scale. On his scale, LRH drew a line of demarcation at 2.0 (antagonism) indicating that from 2.0 down was reactive and going up from 2.0 (beginning with boredom) was increasingly analytical. This works for me although I now describe it differently. As we know, LRH didn’t draw any line under serenity of beingness and I now interpret this as being a flaw. Because, as I now interpret it, everything below serenity of beingness is unreal. Meaning, everything below that line represents a fragmentation of Fear. Love is Real. Love is pure integrity. Fear is unreal. Fear is a constant state of dividing and subdividing (a constant state of fragmenting). Fear imprisons. The mest universe is the product of Fear. Thus, in mest, everything is in degrees of, everything is perceived and judged to be either more or less. Each frequency of Fear vibrating in a living form causes that form to manifest a behavior that is peculiar to the frequency of that particular form of Fear. And if it vibrates it’s mest. IMO, LRH did a better than good job of isolating enough of these frequencies to make a viable tool for understanding and predicting human behavior.

      When I view LRH’s tone scale (excluding serenity of beingness) I see a scale representing divisions and subdivisons of Fear. A scale of illusory frequencies. But, being that I very much seem to be located in the illusion of Fear, I find his scale, even though itself illusory, to be most useful. I do, though, have somewhat of a different interpretation of it than that of LRH’s.

      A quick way to explain my interpretation is to use a quote by Victor E. Frankl that I’ve become very fond of…”Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.” LRH’s tone scale, for me, is a scale that represents the ‘space’ that Frankl speaks of. From 2.0 down this space is completely walled off from the Being thus the Being always chooses the default response, which is consistently destructive and consistently reinforces the illusion as being real. From 2.0 and down the scale mest is very real and the Being is constantly validating that ‘realness.’

      Leaving 2.0 and going up the scale, the ‘space’ that Frankl identified, becomes increasingly more accessible to the Being and it enlarges. The Being is more and more able to thwart the tenacious and insidious default program consequently making increasingly more constructive choices. As the Being continues to move up the scale, the illusion, aka mest universe, is not misperceived as being ‘real.’ It’s recognized as the lie it is. Or, as LRH might describe it, it’s recognized as the second postulate.

      When a Being arrives at the very top of the Fear scale I believe something extraordinary occurs. I believe LOVE welcomes the Being back HOME. And there is no judgement to endure in returning as judgement belongs to Fear.

      • Hi Monte
        I enjoyed reading your post and it reminded me of yet another relative truth that we have all imbibed from LRH. The idea that “the common denominator of all life forms is SURVIVAL” and of course although this datum is real (agreed upon) it is not TRUE. The truth is that life cannot do anything other than survive for in essence LIFE IS ETERNAL.

        As this video by Neale Donald Walsch points out there are in fact only two emotions LOVE and FEAR.

        I have heard it suggested in Scientology that without winners and losers there would be a no-games condition but above Self determinism there is Pan-determinism which is the WIN-WIN scenario, the greatest game of all.

        C.S. Lewis has written that “to be ‘born again’ is an actual evolutionary step for mankind”. It is that point where a person moves from fear to love as their chronic disposition.

        Here is the Neale Donald Walsch video. Enjoy

        • Hi Pip,

          My apologies for such a lengthy delay in responding to you. My current work schedule has been encroaching heavily on my computer time.

          Thank you so much for the Neale Donald Walsh video. It was a pleasure to watch. I like Neale. Years ago I watched a movie that told Neale’s story and how he came to write the book, Conversations with God (you can find the movie trailer on YT). A wonderful story to be sure and one that moved me to modify some of my perspectives in my ever changing belief system.

          Pip, my now believing and having an understanding that there are only two emotions…Love and Fear (a Realness and an unrealness), is a fer piece from how I used to perceive and interpret what I thought to be numerous emotions. Through my training as a scientologist I came to view the emotion of fear as a particular wavelength that occupied a compartment on LRH’s tone scale. A compartment that Ron assigned the numerical position of 1.0 on his scale. For me to go from a consideration where I viewed fear as occupying its own compartment on a emotional tone scale depicting many such compartmentalized wavelengths to a consideration where the entire scale is viewed as being a depiction of the many manifestations of fear…well, that was quite a stretch! In order for me to make such a stretch as that there was a great deal of integration of perspectives other than my own, which consequently, brought about much adjustment in my own perspective and system of belief.

          Yo know Pip, as I’m writing this, it has occurred to me that, while I was being a scientologist, my primary task was to duplicate and assume LRH’s viewpoint. And my entire experience as a scientologist was geared to make me do just that. My personal viewpoint was considered by Ron and his church to be riddled with aberration and therefore unreliable and invalid. Consequently, myself and other folks coming into the church needed to be made over into Ron’s image (the system was most efficacious in doing that). In other words, to be made into mini-Rons with each individual being an extension of Ron and following Ron’s will. Ron’s will trumped all other wills

          LRH was a very powerful identity and unfortunately that identity decided to choose the path of fear instead of love. It was through fear not love that Ron chose to play one of fear’s versions of God. Understanding this I hold no grievance against Ron.

          I suppose the reason this came up for me right now is because I was looking at how unquestioning I was in my view that fear was just contained in a compartment on an emotional tone scale. Becoming curious as to why I was unquestioning it became clear that I was focused on duplicating Ron’s point of view as his point of view as I considered that his was always senior to mine. And if I thought otherwise it was, of course, due to my misunderstanding or not understanding something. Wow….while I was a scientologist, I really was spellbound!

          I realize that some could read what I’ve written here and think my perspective absurd but I also realize that even though many, many individualites can occupy the same bubble, that each individuals experience in the bubble is their own.

        • Pip, since watching the Neale Donald Walsch video you shared with me I’m now getting recommendations on my YT page for other NDW videos. There was one that caught my interest and it was a very enjoyable interview. I recommend it. If you’re interested the title is: Controversial author Neale Donald Walsch on InnerVIEWS with Ernie Manouse. It was uploaded Dec 2009 and is 26:58 mins.

          • Hi Monte

            Thanks for your last two posts both of which I found most enjoyable and interesting. That interview with Neale Donald Walsch I thought was superb, a classic example of someone with their TR’s in!

            I also experienced the feeling that all my understanding of life before I found Scientology was irrelevant in the eyes of the CofS. Looking back I think for me getting involved with Scientology was a replacement for the father I had never known (he drowned when I was 8). LRH definitely became my father figure.

            One of the definitions of a Scientologist, if I remember correctly, was and is “one who has found a way to a better life and is currently achieving it through the study of the works of LRH”. I smile to myself when I recall this definition when I put it alongside the saying “Better is the Enemy of Best” which is from the book “Death of a Guru” by Rabi Maharaj (well worth a read).

            There are great similarities between Scientology and Hinduism, in fact I would liken Scientology to “Cosmic Hinduism” and both share the boast of “the religion of religions” but as I point out to my Christian friends “Jesus did not come to start a new religion, he came to restore a relationship, firstly between me and God and as a result between me and my fellow man”, so His teaching is not a religion

            This would be my main observation about Scientology – it is looking through the telescope from the other end, the idea that if we can make peace with our fellow man we will somehow (miraculously) be able to make peace with our maker. It ain’t going to happen that way round. It is a bit like a rebellious child thinking if he can make it with his peer group somehow that will put it right with his parents.

            I also was “spellbound” when I was “in the org” in fact when I was in Scientology the truth was not that I was IN Scientology, I was OF Scientology, in the same sense as Christians say “be in the world but not of the world”

            Thanks again for a very interesting post. I feel this NDW video is well worth sharing on this blog, so here it is. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjAno8FwOPY‎

      • Hi monte,

        Very nice input. Thank you. Originally I wasn’t going to add more but since you commented, here is a little more elaboration. The problem I have with serenity of being is that it has the tendency to instill a form of removedness. Many of us tend to pick up and thereby carry a bit of mysticism and this can influence one’s expectations of the results/goals of auditing/SC. After OT II and III I started addressing these issues and realized that along with all the influence and confusion I need to also address my own expectations and get my mind straight about where I want to go with SC. To manipulate via postulates alone at first seemed like something to me that belonged into the upper regions of existence. Unleash my tone 40 and watch it all manifest. How simple right? However, I now realize that to strive for such would be actually selfish in a sense that one would not be bound by and agreed to the same rules which apply to everyone else. I realized that this is a shared universe where the game isn’t about how I can more efficiently assure the physical manifestation of my postulates but instead by how well do I get along with others and how well can I inspire fairness to my fellow men through my actions. Instead of questioning and controlling reality I began to accept it and sure enough it began to accept me even more. Serenity of beingness just isn’t something I can go for because it has the potential to remove one too much. If I want to stay in the game – which I do – I can’t continue on ideas which potentially separate me from reality because the ultimate end to that path is to be ejected from the game instead being at cause in a fair and compassionate manner. For this reason I chose not only to accept but to embrace reality as in this mortal realm/game that is all we have. Part of accepting reality is to realize that others also matter which automatically unlocks one’s affinity and thereby allow love to flow. I have at last realized that anything which propels me towards the imaginary or out of alignment with reality is actually contra survival in this game. Anything that supports or instills the idea of a god-like state is unreal and selfish in a shared universe. Therefore I’ve set out to get all of my information I have already filed in my mind into as much of an alignment with reality as possible. That is what I chose as the end goal for myself for which I’ve successfully used SC. Emotions will manifest and fluctuate just fine somewhere between the scale of death and thrive on their own. I think one needs to accept their emotions as part of reality. They are merely the physical “visible” manifestation of the minds match/deviation of one’s own subjective reality vs reality. When one is in alignment with reality love will happen. Suppressing it introduces a lie which then leaves us with just another deviation from reality. If one is to accept and embrace reality one by extension is accepting love/hate as well. Suppressing anything is only possible by lies as our mind is utterly unwilling to forget. We can only cover things up with lies which again causes deviation from reality. I hope this adds some useful clarification to my previous blurb.

        • Hello OT IV Wog,

          Your elaboration is very much appreciated. I found your perspectives to be most profound. Such wonderful food for thought!

          I’m particularly curious about this that you wrote: “The problem I have with serenity of being is that it has the tendency to instill a form of removedness.” And…”Serenity of beingness just isn’t something I can go for because it has the potential to remove one too much.” Then this…”I can’t continue on ideas which potentially separate me from reality because the ultimate end to that path is to be ejected from the game instead being at cause in a fair and compassionate manner.” To reiterate, such wonderful food for thought!

          I look forward to following your comments on Marty’s blog OT IV WOG.

  46. “To be an auditor I must be unaffected.” (I think y’all called that “pie face”)
    That’s what I learned. Ha!
    Awesome post and comments…truly!

  47. This piece of wisdom I discovered after my years connected to COS, and find it also to be missed/missunderstood in the church!

  48. Wow … GREAT POST!! This is a VITAL piece of WISDOM I discovered after my years in COS, where I find it to be missed/missunderstood!

  49. There was a point I started moving away from the church, and it started when I applied tech to receive love and give love. To receive understanding and give understanding.
    I went to a FSM (field staff member) seminar, and the speaker talked about help. He had a different angle though. He basically said the church was insane on the subject, talked about the “why” he found – which was failed help.

    I was hooked on both the problem (which I didn’t validate my feelings on enough before hand to really operate on it in the church) and the solution, which was to use auditing technology, communicating on the subject, to increase it as an ability. I am talking about help tech.
    Failed help leads to a submerging of the subject in life, to the person.
    Neurotic and psychotic alike don’t have reality on the giving and receiving of help (love by any other name would be as sweet).

    I got back my feelings and emotions, and as LRH said somewhere “help leads to evaluation and judgement” (sane evaluation anyway, what leads to actual happiness).

    I basically “left” the church as a disciple (?! for want of a better word) and attended it as a teacher, or guider.
    I figured the place was jam packed with neurotic and psychotic people. All love starved to a greater degree.

    So I know what emotions are, I had and shared them with my twin as we ran help on each other, and allowed each other to be fragile, vulnerable, outrageous, exhilarated, angry, sad, disappointed or chuffed.

    Thank you Marty for posting this, it really felt like a mirror of my journey, and that validates the wins more.

    I just got more case gain. It’s hard to love alone.

  50. Reblogged this on My LRH.

  51. Marty,

    Here’s another of your brilliant posts that’s given me a ‘free’ virtual session. Leaving me VVGI’s.

    This process conjured up when I knew I was losing my integrity to the BS I bought into-in the name of a religion called Cof$…and for that I am responsible, and for the consequences thereafter.

    As I’d became the antithesis of what I sought! Which was to be more spiritual, more aware, more caring, more compassionate & less involved with the material.

    So, when I had the realization I’d became what I disliked most about a lot of Scientologists and especially those who attained the upper OT’s, it clarified- the end.

    And. I was left with how to deal with what I’d become: cold, evaluative, unsympathetic and sometimes a downright bitch, not to mention very pissed-off.

    Then, with the help of my friend Carol, I came upon this blog, and you. And it has changed my life-I am better because of it, and the tears of joy are flowing. And, I love you, my friend. Midge

    • martyrathbun09

      🙂

    • Midge,

      I couldn’t agree more. What Marty has communicated and demonstrated has been spiritually cathartic.

      I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Thanks Marty for nurturing an environment to sort out some of this BS.

      By the way, I got my copy of ‘Ishmael’ yesterday. I look forward to the read

  52. Anon Girl observed sadness at IAS event at San francisco Org

  53. Been going through a tough time with a very manipulative person, one I need to be present for and have a close relationship with. For a long time, I felt so guilty about the resentment and bitterness that I felt toward this person whom I “ought” to love. My mind was in a tangled knot. It has only been since I have started to accept the emotions that I have been able to move toward healing.

  54. Marty’s amazing wife

  55. gretchen dewire

    Mabe we should start asking ” where is Marty Rathbun?”

  56. Pingback: Emotions III: The Tone Scale | Moving On Up a Little Higher

  57. Pingback: Emotions IV: The Top Of The Tone Scale | Moving On Up a Little Higher

  58. Would we need these emotions if all on the planet had their grades in or were OT 8? Wouldn’t we be exterior? But then would the universe even be here?

    I wish I could be exterior all the time and only acted out the emotions to make the people around me, that are at the mercy of their emotions, feel comfortable.

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