Reality Check

Folks who have been following the journey I have been sharing on this blog and in my books over the past five years might want to know something about a subject that I have not mentioned in quite some time.  I probably will not mention it again.  But, I interrupt the flow of the discourse here for this brief message in the interest of giving a balance to the picture of the direction that I have been sharing.  When events of 2015 are in full roar I don’t want people to get the idea that all I have written over the past two years was some sort of diversionary ruse.

I have practiced what I have been sharing.  If one seeks equanimity and expansion of awareness, I continue to recommend it.  But, you might want to know that I have also drawn from other traditions on longer term work.  Those disciplines understand that in order to increase the ability to confront sufficient to truly face the unknown, one must exercise proficiency in overcoming major sources of oppression.  It has to do with ascendency of power over force and the art and science of critical point analysis application.

Work along that line must necessarily not be broadcast for the foreseeable future.  Thus, none of what I refer to here has been disclosed anywhere, not even to my closest friends.  It has nothing to do with any current legal proceedings and is unrelated (as am I) to the scientology infotainment lampooning industry (whose main useful purpose is attention distraction).  If you hear rumors or ‘inside skinny’ about what this parallel work entails, you are hearing lies or the imagination of someone still caught in the scientology hallucinatory cause syndrome.

In the interim, I inform you that nothing about any of this is inconsistent with what I have written over the past two years.  Just as certainly, many spectators will be sure that is not the case when they witness that 2015 and 2016 make 2009 and 2010 look like child’s play.

184 responses to “Reality Check

  1. the way out is the way through.
    darren

  2. Looking forward to it.

  3. I didn’t get any inside skinny. And, I look forward to more interesting times… 2015 and beyond.

  4. The show is just getting started.

  5. I expect there will be protest every step of the way.

  6. Stear clear of the Barak makers.

  7. Oh Marty, this sounds exciting. Something more to look forward too. Thank you.

  8. And, the very best of wishes in your work.

  9. Good luck with that, Marty. Hope it delivers you to where you want to go.

  10. Your insightful and panoramic views in the books/blogs you have
    written so far have been extremely helpful to all of us, so any
    “diversionary ruse” is not perceived IMO.
    Looking forward to next year and you continuing with the
    research and writing and whatever else you have up your
    sleeve. Wish you nothing else but good luck in these endeavours.

  11. This from Don Juan (Carlos Casteneda), “The Fire from Within”:

    By understanding the nature of man, they (the ancient Toltec seers of Mexico) were able to reach the incontestable conclusion that if seers can hold their own in facing petty tyrants, they can certainly face the unknown with impunity, and then they can even stand the presence of the unknowable.

    “The average man’s reaction is to think that the order of that statement should be reversed”, he went on. “A seer who can hold his own in the face of the unknown can certainly face petty tyrants. But that’s not so. What destroyed the superb seers of ancient times was that assumption. We know better now. We know that nothing can temper the spirit of a warrior as much as the challenge of dealing with impossible people in positions of power. Only under those conditions can warriors acquire the sobriety and serenity to stand the pressure of the unknowable.”

    • Not sure what happened to my post, but I will try again…. You might think again about quoting Castaneda. His work was fiction. Here is a good article that should shed some light on things–plus, the parallels with Hubbard/Scientology are quite interesting: http://www.salon.com/2007/04/12/castaneda/

      • I remember the big hub bub regarding Castaneda back in the day..Interesting to read it in full. Thank you. Huge parallels. Same Bull Shit spit out.

      • I know all about who Casteneda was. If you really want to get an earful read Sorcerer’s Apprentice: My Live with Carlos Casteneda by Amy Wallace.

        Doesn’t matter. I personally find the quote above to be true. Similarly with things from Hubbard. I stand true to my own personal reality and experience. Other people’s opinions are not my yardstick.

        • That is evident and refreshing.

        • Wise Fool…..””Other people’s opinions are not my yardstick.””
          you are so right… no ones opinion, beliefs, cognitions not even LRH’s or any wise personages’ -philosopher are ”yardsticks” should be measure, to compare too whatever that maybe.
          I really like that and if you dont mind I share my view with you:
          Even cognitions are only the truth for the one who had them: example LRH’s Axioms, since they were his cognitions and when I had cognitions on the same subject, most of them are very different..
          thank you!! Elizabeth

  12. BTW, pointing out your “critical point analysis” plan is probably a “shot across the bow” for some people… maybe, I don’t know. But, for me, it sounds like a lot of fun…

    You have walked the walk before ever talking the talk. In my book, that gives you carte blanche. I am looking forward to ANYTHING.

  13. Thanks for the heads up. More power to you.

  14. Shhhhhh I won’t tell anyone Marty.. You can tell me. I won’t tell a soul. I can keep a secret. It’s the friends I tell that can’t keep their damn mouths shut!

  15. To be honest, I do not understand. Cannot grasp the message.
    The only thing I understand is “expansion of awareness”. But this point is very difficult to attain. To be honest here too, since I woke up with around of the age of 10 I accumulated more knowledge and experience. But my awareness did not increase very much.

    • The reason may be this or that .. awareness as usual is looking what you see (with the body or as a spirit) .. try simply to communicate with a bird or a tree or a stone .. or simply with a fly .. and look at it .. your awareness will expand ..

      Shortly I had a fly in my home, I told her as my new pet, because she was very interested in me and my home .. she did never nerve me as flys normally do .. she came at my fingers per order ..

      Interestingly, but this fly did only want to get her baby flies alive .. and after they are born and lived for some days, she did left me ..

      I am an idiot. I know. But the story itself is true. It is really happened as said above. In any case the fly did enjoy me .. I enjoy also stones and trees and birds .. and give them always a hello ..

      Awareness Scale ends by LRH at source .. what is that? .. this fly was on source, because she could convice me not to kill her .. so I did not .. but it was not source .. it was a way where I accept source ..

      What I mean is that awareness goes with communication .. awareness expands with communication ..

      • Yes, maybe.
        The point of my communication here is that I did not pass the “reality check”. Seems due to lack of awareness what Marty is addressing.

  16. Are you working on another book that may come out in ’15 or ’16?

  17. This is a bit off-topic, Marty, but haven’t heard much about any forthcoming books. Can we still expect to see something in the near future?

  18. Over at tony’s

    media_lush • a few seconds ago

    somebody might want to let Mark Rathbun know that it looks like someone’s set up a fake facebook account…

  19. “It has to do with ascendency of power over force and the art and science of critical point analysis application.”

    That brings to mind what I read somewhere. If I remember it right, Buddha used four methods of teaching. For the beginning student, he taught what is true. The next level student was taught what is not true. Next, what is both true and not true. And for the most advanced student, what is neither true nor not true.

    • Marildi –

      I have troubling believing that you “just brought this to mind”. Firstly, it was not the buddha who taught this but Nagarjuna who came after the buddha approximately 150 years later. In a VERY complicated teaching which about 600 AD Chandrakirti wrote texts explaining it.

      And then Shantideva in approximately 800 AD – further explained it. These branches of Tibetan buddhism are found in parts in other forms of buddhism.

      All of which came after the words of the buddha were written down. That started I believe 100 to 200 years after his death. With the Pali canon. What you have quoted is not part of the Pali canon to my knowledge.

      BUT somehow you have remembered this as if its as simple as opening a pop top can of beer.

      Wow.

      I am comfortable with whatever Marty wishes to do or not. Whatever he wishes to share or not.

      So far, I’ve always learned something from Marty. He points in interesting directions.

      That’s the most I can wish for for myself and others. Learning which will perhaps help lessen the suffering of beings and increase their happiness.

      Windhorse

    • marildi,

      Somewhere in the prior post’s comments I wrote (and concluded),

      “I miss the old days when true miss cabbage operatives were trounced on.

      It appears they’re more sophisticated now. No surprise given the depths of POB’s coffers. They are so obvious, though. Ugh….

      I don’t have the time available to call them out or read through their bullshit endless diatribes. I’ll leave it at that.”

      All I can say ‘marildi’ is that you sure fit the bill. Your VFP is to drive away real ‘theta’. That’s my quarter.

      • +1

      • T. G. what is the REAL THETA? your definition please?

        • no bullshit

          • T.G. Since I am so new.. I really dont know how to apply such a theta.
            Do you spread it on your morning toast or you use it as a mouthwash?
            I never read anything like that in the basic courses, must be a real high level OT stuff. weeeeeeell I just have to wait tilI get at your level, I guess, till I reach that plateau I stick with Marildi because in the past 3 years she has written lots of good informative post.🙂🙂🙂

            • When her plug is pulled, she is going to feel like she has been 86’d from the Labor Day bikini beach party for out-aesthetics and attempted mental anguish.

            • More bullshit. Your website has been up since May, 2011.

              Quote: “T.G. Since I am so new.. I really dont (sic) know how to apply such a theta.”

              So much yack I want to hack…

              • T.G.. I am new to having Bullshit as theta that I dont know… Well go and be sick if you must… All I did is stood up for my friend Marildi and you did not like that.. just toooo bad.
                Yes I have a blog since than and that do not contain Bullshit but the basic-basic cognitions which LRH has talked about. I dont joke about cognitions, auditing, technology Entities… if you care to comment on any of the 238 post by all means please do and we can communicate on theta level and that would be most welcome. So Tom it is up to you if you are up to that is! Best to you Elizabeth SOLO AUDITOR.

                • I’ll bet a dollar to donuts that you and your “friend” marildi are OSA. You follow the same pattern I’ve witnessed countless times.

                  You remind me of the classic- OTVIII.

                  Never heard from that synthetic identity again…………..

                  You do not qualify responding to. Nor your ‘friend.’

                  • BTW, Your obvious purpose and product is distraction and dispersal.

                    I have no doubt.

                    Shouldn’t I just say ‘Hi POB’!

                    • +1
                      Pain in the neck , Elizabeth , I have been dying to say it for a while, so there it is. Let it go already , whatever your agenda is.

                    • Tom Gallagher, if you guys think it is distraction and dispersal, why do you keep egging it on and adding to it?

                  • TOM I am fine with that you are not my friend and just to set the record straight I never been on staff, not even in my dream..
                    I am not a classic -OT VIII there is a bit more than that… Posting is like bullbating, You put out bad you get back the same… and even in life the same happens, when you feel hate than the whole world seem to hate you back. So I put affinity in your space , loads of it,🙂 like it or not you got it! May all your needs to be answered! . Best Elizabeth

              • It sounds like you didn’t notice the sarcasm. The 3 smileys should have been a hint.

    • marildi,

      ” If I remember it right, Buddha used four methods of teaching. For the beginning student, he taught what is true. The next level student was taught what is not true. Next, what is both true and not true. And for the most advanced student, what is neither true nor not true.”

      This is not what the Buddha taught. The Buddha had the ability to tailor his message to each monk. Thus you can think of the Pali Canon as a roadmap rather than a pyramid. Where you start is not important. You can always find the way to the destination city. It is thus more important to know where you are going.
      My wige has ordered the book End of Suffering by Targ. I will read it and Nagarjuna to get more understanding of the broader issue.
      This broader issue seems to involve the use of logic to reach a destination. In other words, the use of the map mentioned above.
      By the way, it is a real strech to call monks “students”. The main division is between “householders” and monks. Householder is used to specify one who has obligations of family etc. Monk is a very poor English translation. It really means one who has “gone forth” in serious search of the path.

      Kind Regards,
      GMW

      • Maybe you should write Targ. I thought it was pretty clear in my comment that it was “what I read” (as well as I could remember it). And then I found again where I read it – an excerpt from Targ’s book. I thought maybe someone would comment about THAT. Anyway, I’m off now to enjoy the holiday.

        • Marildi –

          While you might have assigned a quote to Buddha which was actually written by Nagarjuna, I think this is an innocent mistake.

          I’ve read the first 150 or so pages from The End of Suffering book and when it reports on Nagarjuna’s philosophy, there are a lot of problems I have with it when I compare these interpretations to Nagarjuna’s writings themselves.

          I find Targ’s interpretation of Nagarjuna’s writings to be highly derivative, and very “New-Agey, feel-good truthy”, without the rigor or serious dismantling of reality that Nagarjuna employed in his “Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way”, for instance.

          I’ve read that book twice, and it is very difficult, but Targ’s interpretation in The End of Suffering makes conclusions and interpretations that Nagarjuna himself did not make.

          And George is right, Nagarjuna wrote 700 years after Buddha died, and he created a re-interpretation of Buddhism, adding Conventional and Ultimate truth, and all kinds of other things that were not there before. His ideas are useful are useful in many ways, and I do not believe they are necessarily false at all, but they do not exist in the written texts attributed to Buddha’s teachings.

          I am not saying that Nagarjuna was a “squirrel”. Impermanence and change are fundamental understandings in Buddhism and apply to everything, including the Dharma itself. While it is important to do your best to get exactly what Buddha taught, above all, you are to use your own discernment. Because as the dhammapada says, “you work out your own salvation with diligence”.

          I do not think you meant any harm or anything nefarious with the quote you gave. I know that you are a person with good intentions.

          And you certainly have a right to your own opinion of what you read, and how you understand Buddhism.

          Alanzo

          • ALANZO +++++++ great post validating Marildis good intention, kind of you!

          • Alanzo: “While you might have assigned a quote to Buddha which was actually written by Nagarjuna, I think this is an innocent mistake.”

            Thanks, Al, but that’s not actually what happened. All I wrote was that I had read something about how Buddha taught, and after that I found again what I had read – which was something about how Buddha taught. That’s all.

            I didn’t say (or even remember) who wrote it or that HE said Nagarjuna wrote it – and I said nothing about those things. What occurred was I had done a google search on 4-valued logic to find out more about it, and I skimmed over several articles that came up, with my attention on the specifics about 4-valued logic. Thus, I couldn’t recall even where I read the thing about how the Buddha taught.

            You also wrote: “While it is important to do your best to get exactly what Buddha taught, above all, you are to use your own discernment. Because as the dhammapada says, ‘you work out your own salvation with diligence’.”

            The only point of my first post above was that the blog post reference to “critical point analysis application” reminded me of what I had read about ‘a teaching method’ that seemed to me to fit into that concept. Putting the two concepts together was actually kind of a win for me in “working out my own salvation,” as you put it. All the commentary that followed was completely unexpected as it was not what I wrote and it missed the actual point of what I wrote. I guess I could have been more clear. Anyway, if this doesn’t clear it up, so be it!.🙂

          • Alanzo,
            I am in a catch up game here because the book by Targ arrived only yesterday afternoon. I read part of “The End of Suffering” last night.
            I liked what I read and I agree that it only gives a very surface interpreation of Nagarjuna. I think clearly Nagarjuna was a genius because he was able to summarize a lot of the Buddha’s teaching.
            The part about the four valued logic and the “lemmas” put me into a research mode. In Theravada, the Buddha gives special credit to two of his early teachers – Alara Kalama and Uddaka Ramaputta.
            They are mentioned in the Pali Canon. Alara Kalama taught Gotama about the levels of meditation which were in legacy. Alara Kalama taught Gotama about “nothingness”. Gotama wanted to go higher so he met with Uddaka Ramaputta who taught him about the level called “neither perception nor non perception”. Gotama was still not satisfied so he set out on his own with the blessing of his teacher. When Gotama achieved enlightenment, the first person he wanted to see was Uddaka Ramaputta who had died. Clearly the Buddha wanted to tell Ramaputta about a higher level. This level turned out to be beyond logic and the Buddha was reluctant to even try to teach it.
            Naragjuna was writing when Pali was starting to decline and when Sanskrit
            was the new language. I think the “Conventional Truth” and “Ultimate Truth” probably have some basis in Pali but I need to research that in more depth.
            In Theravada we use “Void” rather than emptiness. The Buddha liked to used the “Void” as a working construct.
            Buddhagossa wrote in the 4th Century AD and he was trying to get Pali back in style from its decline. Mahayana had been succesfully launched and Theravada was looked down upon as the “lesser vehicle”. We actually like to be called the “lesser vehicle” because it is a level of concentration anyway.
            Targ gives, as most do, only a very cursory interpretation of Theravada.
            In fact, as I study more about Mahayana, I suspect that there truly is a wide
            difference.
            Btw, we have very, very special reverence for Uddaka Ramaputta in Theravada. He is truly is our special person. I think he was present at the Buddha’s presentation by his father after his birth. He died just before Gotama’s enlightenment so we have a tear in our eyes for him.

            GMW

            • Thank you so much for this, George.

              I did not know that Buddha named his teachers and what he learned from them.

              I am right now studying Buddhagossa’s Abhidharma, and am experimenting with its techniques in watching consciousness in my meditation.

              I have not yet picked a form of Buddhism to concentrate on. For the last many years, I have been studying the different strains available to me as an English speaking American in 2014, and trying out each strain in a solid, substantial way to see which of them I fit with best.

              I’ve studied and tried out Zen, a slight amount of Theravada using the Mahasatipathana Sutta (in English, of course), Vipassana meditation on selflessness, some teachings from the Thai Forest tradition, Tibetan Mahamudra and other Teachings from the Dalai Lama, especially “Meditation on Emptiness”, as well my study of the Abhidharma.

              I take each one at a time, and study it for months or years, studying mostly at night and meditating in the morning.

              I’ve avoided “Pure Land” and a few others which appear to me to be too faith/belief and worship-based branches.

              I just can’t hack that.

              I’ve read that Nagarjuna was so influential since the 2nd century that almost every school of Buddhism has claimed him for their own. I know that the Tibetan Mahamudra people say that he used Mahamudra to achieve enlightenment in one lifetime, while also writing and doing all the other things he did.

              I don’t really believe everything I read in Buddhism.

              I am even starting in on Sam Harris’ book when it arrives next week – a total non-religious view of Buddhism written by a prominent atheist.

              With all of these approaches, I see both true and false, neither true nor false, false, and true.

              I’m like a pig in shit!

              It’s awesome.

              Alanzo

              • Alanzo,
                Your study is admirable. My wife and I started out about 15 years ago as
                a team to study Buddhism. We are still learning and going full steam ahead.
                We concentrated on Theravada after much study and many discussions with monks of all different traditions. We met a former German monk who had left the Sangha, but is a great meditation teacher. We currently follow the Thai forrest tradition with Ajahn Chah. We are very comfortable with Theravada and we know a lot of monks in Sri Lanka. Ib fact, one Sri Lankan monk convinced us to study Pali. We are supporting members of the Pali Text Society in England. It was difficult to study Pali, but we found that English is in fact a very weak language. German is somewhat better.

                Alonzo said:
                “I don’t really believe everything I read in Buddhism.”

                I have a diffucult time as well in certain passages. There are vivid descriptions of Buddha’s super powers in many Suttas. Theravada does not require an acceptance of any miracles or a cosmology. In the end, it is the day to day practice that counts. My take now is very simple. In my last retreat, I concentrated on the techniques required to reach even higher levels.
                Buddhism needs to be taken to its limit.

                GMW

                • Very cool, George.

                  The Thai Forest Tradition!

                  I am familiar with this through Thanissaro Bhikkhu (Geoffrey DeGraff) and his website accesstoinsight.org.

                  http://www.accesstoinsight.org/

                  What do you think of him?

                  Alanzo

                  • Alanzo,
                    We love him! In fact, we have recommended him to our friends. I have read “Wings to Awakening” at least three times. The monks at our Vihara
                    passed out copies for free. My wife is planning a visit to San Diego.

                    GMW

                    • Cool. He’s a very clear writer.

                      And there is a retreat he created for Tricycle on the ten perfections a few years ago that has more views than any other last I checked.

                      Very clear speaker, too.

                      These are my hidden standards for Buddhist teachers: Must be clear writers and clear speakers.

                      Then, and only then, will they have a chance to communicate to me something I might find valuable. (:>

                      Alanzo

  20. Very intriguing. Thank you.

    On my own journey I have come to two critical points:

    1. I faced the fact that for me, despite reaching “clear,” Scientology very clearly installed some definite mental aberrations — problems that did not exist before Scientology, and which subsided the more I disconnected from Scio-think.

    2. I learned that while the “tech” remains stuck in the 1950s and 1960s, “wog” science has advanced. It is now possible to distinguish, by brain activity, actual memories from false memories. Any clear or OT volunteers willing to put their Whole Track memories to the test? (I’d be willing to be a participant in such a study.)

    Marty, I’ve thanked you before and will no doubt do so again, since you have been a major healing factor in my life.

    • FOFT,

      Re:

      2. I learned that while the “tech” remains stuck in the 1950s and 1960s, “wog” science has advanced. It is now possible to distinguish, by brain activity, actual memories from false memories. Any clear or OT volunteers willing to put their Whole Track memories to the test? (I’d be willing to be a participant in such a study.

      My reply: I would be very interested in such a test.

      Where is the data on the test to distinguish false memories from real memories?

      Dio

      • It is always your memory if you had the memory .. it is only the question from where you picked it up .. there are a lot of ways to find memories in this universe .. and after finding them it is is yours ..

        Lets say you find some memories of Napoleon. A lot of people did. From where you got it? From TV. From Books. From School. From a talk. From your mind. From your ability to pick up pictures and memories of others.

        There is always a talk about some people who saw an accident, and then asked what they memorize about .. and is mostly quite different what they have to say .. the best is always given from the person who can go back to the original accident and watch it again .. then telling about .. but that is another sort of memory, because it is looking .. the memory here is only to remember or know where it really was .. place, time etc ..

        There is always the possibility of Dub-In .. and that is memory you create yourself for some reason or another ..

        The check of all is maybe (for my analysis) that you can find the anchor points in that memory .. which means place and time etc ..

        There is a process given from LRH on Admiration and the Renaissance of Beingness .. which erases all installed or forced memories (which is another possible way of memory) .. the process erases false or wrong anchor points .. if you did the process, you will never again remember this memory .. but you will have the memory of erasing a memory from which you do not know anymore .. do it also with caution ..

        • Note: Do it with caution, because you can erase something which makes up your current life behaviour .. or a protest .. or disagreement .. and you will not find it again ..

          I wrote once in this blog that you forgot anyway when you die. It was not accepted. Okay. It was called as my conditioning. Maybe or not, but the process works very simple ..

      • Dio, you might find “The Art of Changing the Brain” by James Zull interesting, and it should have some references to the research I alluded to. In real memories — reconstructions of events one actually experienced — more areas of the brain are active than in false memories.

        The following article gives some information too. It correctly points out that memory is not a record pulled from a sort of file drawer (which is somewhat the Scientology model) but rather a reconstruction developed when needed or triggered. See http://www.theguardian.com/science/neurophilosophy/2012/jan/27/1.

        The preceding article also talks about some of the methods now established that can create and study false memories. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deese%E2%80%93Roediger%E2%80%93McDermott_paradigm. The techniques may shed some light on various lists used in auditing.

        Scientific evidence, as it stacks up over time, increasingly fails to support Hubbard’s models of the mind, physics, geology, evolution — reality in general. That is the opposite of what one would expect had Hubbard actually cracked the secrets of the universe.

        For Scientology to maintain even a pretense of being scientific, it is obliged to account, in its own models, for current scientific evidence. As Carl Sagan and others commented, extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. Scientology has not — and I believe never will — stepped up to the plate on that.

  21. Wishing you good fortune, success and happiness in whatever your future endeavor entails.

  22. Marty, thanks for this important post that included this quote of yours: “witness that 2015 and 2016 make 2009 and 2010 look like child’s play.”

    I agree in so much as that statement coincides with all that is going on within these human affairs spheres that include geopolitical, economic and, yes, spiritual stuff.

    Americans (Hubbard supporters too) and others so influenced should be prepared for ‘BOHICA’.

    Hubbard certainly got the American hegemony thingy wrong…….

    The East is rising again. The west (and that includes scientology) are subject to ridicule and decline.

    Natural law takes its inevitable course.

  23. Wishing you the best!

  24. I’m so clueless that I don’t even have a guess. I’m sure it will be something positive and interesting so I wish you the best, as always.

  25. whatever you are up to could never cancel the good you have been doing ,
    I ,too, wish you only the best.

  26. Well I won’t wager a guess as to what is up for 2015. The fact that it is only 4 months away is terrifying. Time has started to get away from me. I remember as a child a day was almost unbearable, and waiting a week for things seemed like eternity, now being an adult with kids time flies so fast I feel like I am constantly behind!
    But I digress. I look forward to what you have up your sleeve. I am sure it will be good.
    One more digression if you will indulge. One of the great things about working in the SO and being on the RPF was getting to work with so many people from around the world. I learned to swear in about 10 different languages and saw so many American idioms bastardized that I can’t keep track of all the stories. But one time on the RPF, a german fellow was in session with his American Twin and it wasn’t going well at all. He wanted to reassure his twin that it was gonna be alright, so meaning to say “Don’t worry I’ve got an Ace up my sleeve.” He said, “Don’t worry I’ve got my sleeve up my ass!” Needless to say that was probably the best auditing ack that guy ever got.
    Look forward to what’s next.

  27. This sounds interesting. I can’t wait…!

  28. Marty – come on with intention and write something about it .. because it is the old OT VII goal .. the original goal for the Bridge of the most old timers .. something which is currently down .. because you have to follow other intentions .. which has nothing to do with being a scientologist in the first place .. you may find better words than me ..

    You may have trouble to go down to this matter because it is difficult, but it is at last everything about the Bridge from LRH .. but I want you to go to it, because I will see and read comments about .. sharing meanings about ..

    I thought, and read your blog, because it seems possible here to share meaning about what we have tried to do .. very interestingly ..

    In the church when you said something which became not grasped, it was always said: I give it to the C/S .. the C/S did grasped then something else because writer (report) did not get it what you have said ..

    Your blog gives a change to erase misduplications of others .. so go on and let us clear this mind to mind communications which had nothing to do with intention .. you may found better words for it ..

  29. change mean chance

  30. Buddha explained how to handle insult and maintain compassion.

    One day Buddha was walking through a village. A very angry and rude young man came up and began insulting him.

    “You have no right teaching others, he shouted.” You are as stupid as everyone else. You are nothing but a fake.”

    Buddha was not upset by these insults. Instead he asked the young man “Tell me, if you buy a gift for someone, and that person does not take it, to whom does the gift belong?”

    The man was surprised to be asked such a strange question and answered, “It would belong to me, because I bought the gift.”

    The Buddha smiled and said, “That is correct. And it is exactly the same with your anger. If you become angry with me and I do not get insulted, then the anger falls back on you. You are then the only one who becomes unhappy, not me. All you have done is hurt yourself.”

    “If you want to stop hurting yourself, you must get rid of your anger and become loving instead. When you hate others, you yourself become unhappy. But when you love others, everyone is happy.”

    The young man listened closely to these wise words of the Buddha. “You are right, o Enlightened One, “he said. “Please teach me the path of love. I wish to become your follower.”

    The Buddha answered kindly, “Of course. I teach anyone who truly wants to learn. Come with me.”

    .

    This story is for those on this blog who refuse to follow the Discussion Policy.

    .

    • Vin, re: Buddha explained verse. It was terrific!
      Then the bottom line hit which is baffling again, but of course, I am one of those refusing to be controlled. Are you the Buddha?😀

      • How do you conclude that Discussion Policy is other-determined control? Looks like you have a button on being controlled.

        Please take another look at that policy. Thanks.

        Discussions and what needs to be avoided
        .

        • Vin, I’ve read it. It is your Own advice and Imo, you’re welcome to follow it. Thanks you.

          • What makes you say it is my advice, and why is that a reason not to follow it?

            I think I am missing you logic here. You are not following it just because you think it is written by me.

            Do you evaluate something for itself or by its supposed source?

            >

            • Vinnie.. We are adults.. Adults get passionate when they are discussing subjects that they have different opinions. We have Exs, Indies, Scientologists..and critics here.

              Marty is giving a voice to all. He is moderating. The discussion policy is for those wishing to follow it. For those who do not it shouldn’t be forced upon us.

              People argue..Maybe not you, but others do.

              Scientology is a hot button for many. If I had a child who has been forcefully disconnected from me and someone is saying that the policy was discontinued I will scream.. Bull Shit!

              • hi B… hehehe ” V…..”Do you evaluate something for itself or by its supposed source?”” he want to audit you… those are auditing questions!

              • Baby, I see many people simply dramatizing their cases on this forum, instead of taking this opportunity provided by Marty to learn something. Here is what I see:

                “When a person is vehemently defending a viewpoint instead of discussing it rationally, he could be using that viewpoint as a “solution” to some confusion. He is afraid that if his “solution” gets shaken, the confusion would overwhelm him.

                “But when there is no confusion, no “solution” needs to be defended. One can look at any datum calmly.

                “So the person could be asked gently, “Does this viewpoint seem to solve some confusion?” And if so, the discussion could be used to help resolve that confusion.

                .

                • I absolutely am not confused whatsoever how I feel that Ron was a conman who created an evil cult. No one could ever convince me otherwise.

                  My way of being polite is to not respond to many who are fragile and still enslaved by Hubbard.

                  I speak 2 languages English and Bitch… so I doubt that I will ever ask someone.. ” Does this viewpoint seem to solve some confusion?” It just ain’t me.

              • Elizabeth could be asked, “Does this Genghis Khan valence seem to resolve some confusion for her?”
                😉

          • De, I leave it to your own ability to comprehend it. Either you can grasp it, or you can wait for the right experience to come and convince you. In the mean time I shall continue to support rationality.

            • your brand of rationality… hehehe since in your reality every other person should be running to your blog and dive into it and do those exercises but if we dont we are doooooomed! that is your reality! moslek alak.

            • Vin: ” De, I leave it to your own ability to comprehend it”
              I’ll take that and thank you.

      • Please see Vinaya Pitaka (Wikipedia) which contains monastic rules recommended by Buddha for Sanghas. The Discussion Policy is like a monastic rule that promotes self-discipline.

        My name is based on Vinaya Pitaka.🙂

      • No de.E he was the village idiot and still is.

  31. comments are in wrong order .. it makes no sense anymore ..

  32. I admire the persistence and intellectual honesty with which you approach your spiritual path. And I most especially appreciate you sharing it with us.

  33. Hi Marty! As 2009 and 2010 were unbeliable, in terms of The squirrel busters, PIs, etc. Then 2015 and 2016 should be quite interesting. I so appreciate you and Mosey sticking your necks out to bring light to this so dark cult.

    As you know, I am one VERY upset Mom that has your back. I will be happy to help you when needed,

    Cindy P

  34. Needless to say that ‘rumors’ will be discarded immediately.

    Thank you for being open about your views. I will continue to share them via this blog. Wish you the best Marty.

    • Even if the RUMOR has it that TOM CRUISE will leave the church he will make that announces in 2015 same time when his new movie will be out and that would bring immense extra publicity for him? $$$$$$
      DM’s world will fell apart, and with that scientology …??
      Betrayal is a heavy stimulant!
      Just imagine what will happen when the Pillar =T.C. which is holding up the roof over the Church and staff had suddenly gone?
      Because when Tom Cruise will make that move, that will be the wake up call for scientologist inside the church.
      We all have brought that brick back with us when we left the church since each of us were a building block which made the Church of Scientology, unfortunately DM made Tom C. a pillar, but that pillar was not the whole building!
      Any building can survive be without one pillar, but not without the foundation: us.

  35. Marty,
    You know I’ve been mulling this craziness over and over, and I sort of end up coming to the same conclusion: That beyond the Anti/Pro, Disclosures/Apologies and nauseam debate, we still have the fundamental problem that a lot of people have yet to connect the dots personally out of the field of consciousness.
    So we have the phenomena of hungry ghosts or even hungry trolls. I don’t think anybody is going to let go until that is done.
    Thanks for caring.

  36. I don’t really understand your post, but it makes me want to stay tuned. I like the direction you’ve been going. I hadn’t heard any rumors either way, so the above post is rather mysterious to me.

  37. I have great respect for Marty and Monique.

    But I am a bit unpredictable and wierd, Onley thing I know Marty Rathbun is honest

  38. Jean-Francois Genest

    Awesome! Thank you!
    The Chinese Bamboo Tree in action.

    The rooting system & network of your “Chinese Bamboo Tree” is thick, strong, and widely spread out. I understand you, and continue to support you. May good wind fill your sails.

  39. You’re a good man, MR! Many are working toward 2015 and beyond.

  40. Oh. Mystery! spread the net of mystery and the curious those who want to know will fall into it!
    Mystery is one of the most powerful traps ever created in the implant and can hold and holds the Entity-Spirit, Soul -Thetan for ever..
    And there is no such a thing as UNKWON, but un-confronted.

  41. Not sure why I am always looking for promises for things I’ve never seen before. I’m all stupid. I admit it.

    I would rather be sorry for something I did, than for something that I didn’t do.

    • Oracle…”Not sure why I am always looking for promises for things I’ve never seen before. I’m all stupid. I admit it.””
      stupid you are not…
      In my reality we are looking for things we know they exist and hopping that we can find them around the corner when we get around that corner it will be there!
      But no matter what promise others make, how intriguing is that promise that still not be ours because we have not put it there. We can only find what we have forgotten we had.
      Best to you wishing you a wonderful adventure rooting out you lost treasures!

  42. You never cease to keep me interested in your path. I enjoy how well you document each step and describe the scenery along the way.

  43. This is kind of a premature Acknowledgment, but VVWD. Continue.

  44. Interested and ready for all that you have to offer!

  45. I’m looking forward to it. Good luck and have fun.

    Mark

  46. Thank you for letting me join the blog. It sounds like I found it just in time. Best of luck with all your plans.
    Granny

  47. Aye! Tis something greater than all that is great; this path to illumination.

    Heros old and new grace the sky of our aspirations.

    Like a poem praying to be born, this prime directive of conscious evolution becomes the pole star of our lives.

    Through the varied paths and byways we tread, we wend our way back home.

    Home: where love is plentiful, where sacrifice is common place.

    Home: where the cosmic light is the foundation of all.

    Home: where kindness is the natural melody sung by all embodied beings in all levels of existence.

    Home: where every new moment is the only miracle required to inspire.

    Home: where adversaries are blessings in disguise.

    Home: where the infinitude of all manifest and unmanifested “realities” are the playground for bliss.

    Home: where the heart finally finds itself ablaze with cosmic power.

    Home: where power is a word that means service to all sentient beings.

    May your days smile all the while.

    Love,
    Brian

  48. SadStateofAffairs

    Looking forward to whatever is coming. Go for it.

  49. Good on ya Marty. Sorry I haven’t been around much but right there with you as always. Love to Mosey…btw, any news on the forthcoming book(s)?

  50. Well Marty you got me intrigued.

    Of course I am just guessing at what you have in mind, or even what you are actually talking about in your post. Without your definitions of some of the terms you have used, it makes the game more difficult, but then again you never invited us to play a guessing game. And it would likely be better for the effectiveness of your “project” if we did not.

    You have used the term “critical point analysis”. Hmmm… I like the sound of that. What I have grasped as a concept for that is that it is somewhat related to “data eval/why find” concepts. Using some kind of tech to identify the exact target, the exact tool, the exact tech, and the exact timing, to produce a well defined result, with minimum wasted resources.

    Sort of like “Zen meets data eval.”

    It is the inventor/problem solver in me that wants to take a bite of that.

    It is going to be interesting to see where you go with whatever it is that you are planning, (or already executing.)

    Eric

  51. Alanzo,
    “These are my hidden standards for Buddhist teachers: Must be clear writers and clear speakers.”

    We also love Ajahn Sumehdo who is now 80 and retired. However, some of
    his podcasts are available. I lost track of him since he moved to Thailand but there is a Buddhist Monastery from the tradition of Ajahn Chah which used to be
    north of London, England. He started the monastery in the 1980’s.

    GMW

  52. Kendrick Moxon, and yes The Angry Gay Pope is a fucking retard

  53. This one is for Geir Isene

  54. Interesting thing has occurred to me over the last few weeks.

    I am losing any desire to disagree directly with anyone. There is a bit of a wording problem with this. I still have, if not more, of my own thoughts and opinions based on observation and evaluation. I still have the purpose to help others and help make the world a better place. This is not an ‘everyone is ok’ or a ‘que sera sera’ attitude.

    It is also not an ‘I’m so far above everyone that there is no use arguing’ attitude either. Far from it. It is a bit difficult to explain. It’s not that I agree with everything and everyone. It’s not a lack of being able to confront disagreement. I just have no desire or intent to say “No, you’re wrong, this is how it is”. That mode of communicating, 90% or more, just reinforces any erroneous data the individual may be holding on to. Not that I am certain I ‘am right all the time and that’s that’, either. It also puts people into a mode that the info they have for me is more likely to be skewed or altered, and it may be information that I need or want. This would be a loss for me.

    No, it’s something else. It isn’t due to a set of incident chains or considerations or a particular realization I have had. It is something that has been building, or more accurately, something stuck that has been dissolving away. It is not something I am gaining, it is something undesirable that is dissolving away.

    Example: Alanzo, Conan, Brian, Marty and even Marildi And Val often have opinions that I don’t share. But they are not really wrong and need to be corrected. They have their viewpoint according to their available data, experiences, past and present, and their purposes, short and long term. If I think they are missing some info, then I will offer it. Maybe it will help them discover that their opinions need adjustment, or it will trigger them to give me some info that will straighten out an error of mine.

    Argument? Whwhwhwhy? Does more damage than good, either way. I don’t mind others arguing. It’s entertaining and occasionally I learn something. No problem.

    This is not a loss of ability, it is a release from that draw to combat. It is a release from that conflict that is no longer needed. If at some moment for a particular purpose, I need to argue, I can assume that identity, for just as long as I need it. Then it’s gone again.

    Life really can be simple, life can be fun.
    Feels good, Mark

    • Check out the new and improved Discussion Policy.🙂

      Discussions and what needs to be avoided

      .

      ________________________________

      • Thanks Vin.
        Your study into the discussion policy is a study into human nature and aberration.

        The discussion policy is like ethics in that it is a personal thing. Once enforced it becomes a moral policy. It can not be enforced, only offered. You win, and the other one wins, when it ‘indicates’ with them and ideas flow more freely.

        How many are capable of looking at their opinion, and another’s opinion, accurately and freely from a third person viewpoint, even if they try. The idea of erasing one’s viewpoint, of being completely open and seeing everything just as it is, sounds noble and pure, but this ability would be useless without the ability to assume any viewpoint easily at any time for any purpose.

        The key word in this last sentence is useless, or ‘use’, which implies DOING, ACTION, PURPOSE. Activity requires a viewpoint of some sort or another, whether up down, good bad, pro or con. A broad and enlightened viewpoint is actually the ability to choose any viewpoint at any time, according to purpose. The ability to change one’s viewpoint according to need or wish.

        To honestly and gainfully engage in any discussion, one must have control and freedom over his own viewpoints.

        Exercise for anyone reading this now.
        FIND A VIEWPOINT THAT WAS GIVEN (OBSERVED, SUGGESTED, STRESSED, ENFORCED)TO YOU. Just one. Go ahead, it’s easy and very eye opening. From a sibling, a parent, a childhood friend, a co-worker, spouse, a teacher, a TV show, news, textbook, non fiction writings.
        Go ahead, just one, for now. It’s actually kinda fun. Think of it as a game, a puzzle.
        Mark

        • PS: Vin.
          I like your explanation of the principles involved in discussion and how knowledge is accumulated.
          Mark

        • christianscientology

          Hi Vinaire

          This statement in your “discussions and what needs to be avoided” – “that a person has a form that occupies space”, is none other than a viewpoint.

          Superman is “a person” but does not occupy space in the agreed upon meaning. In fact many of the enterties that might exist on the seventh dynamic and above would not necessarily occupy space, but nevertheless could be classified as PERSONS.

          • Pip,

            (1) Space is the dimension that measures the extent of form.

            (2) Awareness has the form of a wave that has a wavelength. Space is needed to describe that wavelength.

            (3) Viewpoint is a manifestation of awareness.

            (4) A person has a viewpoint.

            (5) Therefore, a person extend in space.

            Regards,
            Vinaire

            • Hi Vinaire
              I am struggling with your definition of space “space is the dimension that measure the extent of form”. As I am sure you are aware LRH defined space as “viewpoint of dimension” and that is a definition I can duplicate.
              If I visualize a point at a distance from myself then space is created between me and that point. The size of the point does not affect the space that is created, so I would suggest that space proceeds form and all that is needed to create space are dimension points after which one can place form in
              space.
              Love and ARC
              Pip

              • Hi Pip.

                Let’s try to duplicate the definition given by LRH a bit better.

                LRH says, “Space is a viewpoint of dimension. It doesn’t exist without a viewpoint.” We then look up LRH definition of viewpoint, “Viewpoint is a point of awareness from which one can perceive.” Well, who is perceiving? According to LRH, it is the thetan, “the awareness of awareness unit which has all
                potentialities but no mass, no wave-length and no location.” What is “awareness of awareness”? So we look up awareness, “the ability to perceive the existence of… awareness itself is perception.”

                Here we get into a circular definition. Awareness is perception. The ability behind that is also awareness. And so we get into an infinite regress. Until we have a proper definition of awareness, we do not have a proper definition for thetan, viewpoint and space.

                Hubbard pretends to give a definition to space and to thetan but it is subject to a proper definition of awareness. He leaves that definition open to subjectivity. That makes the subject of Scientology quite subjective and unprecise.

                I shall give you my definitions.

                AWARENESS: A disturbance that arises from non awareness. It is the fundamental essence.

                FORM: The fundamental form is that of a wave. It has a frequency, wavelength and period.

                EXTENT: The fundamental extent of a form is determined by its wavelength.

                DURATION: The fundamental duration of a form is determined by its period..

                DIMENSION: (root meaning “to measure”) It is the measure of what is there.

                SPACE: Space is the dimension that measures the extent of a form.

                TIME: Time is a dimension that measures the period of a form.

                BEINGNESS: Beingness is made of essence and form. The fundamental essence is awareness. The fundamental form is light (electromagnetic wave).

                SPIRIT: Spirit comes from a condensation of awareness.

                BODY: Comes from a condensation of light.

                SELF: Self is made of spirit and body.

                I am open to discussions on these definitions.

                Please meditate on the above to see if you can get out of the infinite regress hidden behind “Unmoved mover” and “Uncaused cause.”

                I shall soon be addressing this with a post on my blog.🙂

                Regards,
                Vinaire

    • Mark, it seems there are a few of us who have come to similar conclusions – all around the same time. I’ve heard of this kind of “mysterious” phenomenon. Anyway, you expressed the idea so well!

      And I liked the “even” in your statement that “even Marildi And Val often have opinions that I don’t share.” Coming from a man of your insight, that’s a real compliment. Thanks for all your contributions.

      • Thanks Marildi.
        You said: “Coming from a man of your insight….”
        I am humbled by your compliment.

        Check out the Viewpoints exercise. Guarantee it will leave you smiling and feeling lighter.
        Mark

    • Life can be simple and fun.

      There seems to be an undercurrent of discontent begging for company. It says, “I’ve been in the wrong place at the wrong time, so you must have been too.”

      The problem I have with the beggars for resentment, is that I do not have a significant history of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Or the wrong place at the right time, or the right place at the wrong time. A few minor situations I thought might have been that way, turned out to always have me realize, as right as right can be, I have been in the right place at the right time.

      When people effort to turn you against you “past”, they are working to make you think your timing is off. Maybe you do end up in the wrong place at the wrong time, or the right place at the wrong time, and it’s a TIME thing.

      I have always had a sense when it is time to move on, when I am in the wrong place at the wrong time, I move, fast. It is a sixth sense and a timing sense. It is like dancing with time, and it is simple and fun.

      My trust in people, has very little to do with mental health standards or religion or status’. I can tell when I cross the path of a person that always seems to be in the right place, at the right time. And for what it is worth, that is my highest standard of affinity for another human being. It may be wrong, it is just the way I roll.

      So I am repelled by people screaming that they have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, and trying to convince me that I have been too. It has nothing to do with Scientology and was something I began to think with long ago and way before L. Ron Hubbard crossed my path.

      Then, there are those that think themselves a “higher power” because they have a different view, and want to influence you as a “higher power”.

      The problem with me, is that I have awareness of higher powers, a very keen awareness, and it is a different kind of religion that I can’t explain here. Not of one God. Or even many, which I think there are, in the form of a higher power. And it is very much a game.

      People can be opposite in every way and still be higher powers, and I will be able to trust both of them.

      This probably will not even translate across time.

      I see Marty as a higher power, Karen, Mike, the Judge down in Texas that oversaw these legal issues. A person can be for, or against Scientology and still be a higher power. It is not about viewpoint or attitude or religion of beliefs . It is something else that is not easy to translate, and it has nothing to do with holding a position in space, or making people listen to you, it has to do with seeing the person trust in themselves. And not in a Narcissistic way, but in a way that they live by what they say and can admit they have always been in the right place at the right time. Without doubts and fear. Even if that changes every week.

      And not belief in a fanatical or hysterical way, that is some kind of bizarre copy off.

      I do not see David Miscavige as a higher power. That sums up my problem with him. My life is still simple and fun. It is only about being in the right place at the right time.

      • I guess the higher power thing is noticing when people are really in the moment, and involves them being able to keep up with time too.

        It is not a challenge to keep up with matter, energy, or space. Robots can do it now.

        Time? That is a tell all.

      • How many people has Marty dragged into present time? A whole fucking lot. That’s a benefit.

        How many people are out here dragging people into the “the past”? A whole fucking lot.

        The people stuck back there in time can not keep step with time, it went on as a particle too fast for them to duplicate it and move on.

        In a sick way I guess, I mistrust people that can not dance. That can not keep time on a piano. That can not keep time or stay on top of time. Not with the words, not with the ideas, not with the steps.

        When someone is ahead of time, that is the most amazing talent for me to see. That is where I am won over with faith.

    • Hey Mark, this is a cool win. And just think, you didn’t even have to pay tons of money for the L’s to get this win. Less Service Facs in the world, the better it is.

  55. Mark, I stopped fighting and arguing long before my time in Scientology, I learned it as unnecessary .. it does not say that others have not tried it with me .. it is a game involved .. if you are clever you can go out of it ..

    Let me speak out something which I could never get really, although I was 41 years in Scientology .. I did never agree to fight against suppression or SPs .. did never arguing with them .. but let him alone ..

    A lot of us know about the fixation of the Church about suppressors as the enemy (now I am allegedly also one for the church) .. my wife was at Flag, and they tried to convice she that I am an SP, and that that would be the only reason why life does not run well .. I said to her, yeah, life does not run well if you find not the real suppression and put it away or handle it ..

    I would say in my own past I got about 1000 indications about my living in a suppressive environment .. a lot of auditing was used to fix that up and find the real SP .. never found .. but my answer was ignored. I said I will and do not live with such a fixation on possible enemies around me .. as a result of that, I got never permission for the OT levels (hurray – because here I had only learned of other suppressors) .. another form of disconnection ..

    Do not think that I did arguing with the church about .. for me is fighting a trap which leads to more traps .. if you are free of it, or becoming free of it, you will know what you know .. and if you know what you know there is no point to fight an enemy or suppressor, because he would not go with you if you do not agree with him .. you can do that none verbal .. as you said ..

    A note beside of that: I learned in my 41 years only one thing, that I have to be in LRHs mind for going up the Bridge .. I had always sorry for him, that he did build up such a game ..

    • Hello my Friend.
      I see what you are saying.

      If you push a boulder up a hill, your foot slips, you fall and the boulder rolls over you. It is your own energy you put into the boulder that crushes you.

      A simplistic metaphor, for sure, but nearly an exact description of what happens when one is plagued by SPs or BTs.
      Mark

  56. comment to my comment: 1950 an so on LRHs work was not this way. It was a small psychotherapy where you could give up some misbehaviour or misemotion. A lot of people were on drugs – hippie scene ..

    Later LRH came up with whole track and past lives. But he gave us only his track or his accepted track out of his views ..

    It worked still as a psychotherapy .. but your tothaches were now run down to 750 billion years and was the product of an implant with bears or apes or white lights .. he wrote lots of list of yes and no .. great or not great ..

    Than he came up with his PTS/SP stuff .. basically it goes down of his own research about havingness ..

    Havingness was not part of psychotherapy at this time .. it is more religious and belongs to your believing in realities ..

    So he came then up with lower condition (although it was then misused like mad from everyone when you did not agree) .. on this way it became true that you must have Overt Withhold because of your disagreement .. at this time became LRHs mind the universal mind .. my view ..

    Unfortunately LRH could not produce a real Clear as he promised in his first book .. some strange confusion did occur .. out of whatever he did invent OT I .. which is nearly the same as Waterloo Station process on the Objectives .. not quite different .. then OT II shows nothing of his SHSBC work about GPMs .. one can do that with benefit .. but you can also go away with nothing .. it is a very internal thing to look at such stuff ..

    But you are not very much OT after it .. now he came up with OT III, which is a joke, because whether Hawaii nor Las Palma did exist at the time where LRH did locate the incident which did cause the R6 bank .. maybe it was a nightmare of LRH that other thetans could influence him ..

    For my view it is very visible that LRH was influenced by other thetans. It begins with his books in early 50th. He got some public, but most of them had real trouble .. mere weak people .. hippies on druggies .. or wives which were beaten after alcoholic excesses .. something like that .. not so much normal people .. quite normal, because why should somebody ask for help when all is basically okay ..

    Ruth Minshull wrote some books which caused interest, in the way that all can benefit from LRH works. Reading Ruth Minshull is positive, reading LRH is how bad it all is and will become .. and especially he did always correct his view in producing Clears .. my conclusion was always that he wanted me to have his mind .. go with his rules and sight of live ..

    Sorry for this comment .. but I wanted to say that once .. I know I am an idiot, but I tried to be clever .. but I was not ..

    • Very good summery….. from your post..
      “Later LRH came up with whole track and past lives. But he gave us only his track or his accepted track out of his views ..””
      That is fact 100 percent for example the AXIOMS ARE HIS COGNITIONS TOO!
      If one as I have really goes into solo auditing will find I have totally different concept from his on the same matters.

  57. Here is a short and sweet evaluation of the Sea Org and RPF.

    (1) If a person is heavily dramatizing, he needs to be taken out of that restimulative environment and then helped with sorting out his case.

    (2) This seems to be the basis of “Introspection Rundown” where a person is put in isolation. But introspection is the last thing that person should be doing when in isolation. He should simply be allowed to rest without restimulators.

    (3) Sea Org was initially an experiment in inducing high necessity level to key out one’s case.

    (4) The reasoning behind the first RPF was to allow a “low necessity” place where a highly restimulated person could destimulate and sort out his case.

    (5) High necessity level does key the bank out, but there is a limit to it.

    (6) The RPF program was the safety net for the person who crossed the limit in 5 above

    (7) Both Sea Org and RPF lost their purpose gradually after Sea Org moved to the land.

    (8) Sea Org started to degrade those who crossed the limit in 5 above.

    (9) People start getting assigned to RPF as a punishment for political reasons and not for rehabilitation. This may have started with the List 1 project when Hubbard lost his marbles.

    (10) RPF became a low cost labor supply pool rather than a place where rehabilitation could occur.

    (11) With this shift in purpose RPF became a place for conditioning instead of rehabilitation.

    (12) And that is how it is today.

  58. Thank you Vinaire and Elizabeth Hamre for your acknowledment .. I felt in some fashion bad about my comment after sending it out .. I thought it is not the way how I should speak .. but in the sense of this thread I wanted to say what my reality is .. tried to say it here .. so I thought to get a very bad response – or none .. it is not happened .. but then I got tears in my eyes .. some happiness did occur because some friends are around who can share to some degree my view .. thank you ..

    Let me say – my whole bridge since 41 years was filled with PTS/SP work. I got more ethics handlings than auditing. But I have never seen an E/O who did really grasp about what he has spoken. In this way of communication I saw that the picture of the enemy must be invented .. which does not say that there are not counter intended people (thetan) around .. they are there .. but they have no powers as long you give them no powers .. that is all what I have learned .. but there was no E/O who has accepted that ..

    Nearly everyone which I had as a friend was fpr the church a suppressor and would stop me on my Bridge progress. Would never become an OT which such guys around. Would always introvert into my mind .. would create my case over and over again .. as long I would not fight against the enemies of Scientology ..

    LRH and Scientology was absolutely total truth.

    Let say again – Axiom 1 is not true, If it were true then there were at one point trillions an more thetan there .. and all of them were idiotic because of starting a childish fight for creations ..

    My truth is a lttle bit different. In my view there were 3, 7, 11, 13, 17 intentions for having a game .. call them all gods .. and out of that were more and more and more thetan there ..

    Let me tell something out of my auditing .. it is maybe sci-fi or true. Does no matter at all. A Universe, not like the Mest universe, because it was plain and had no planets or galaxies .. it was simply plain and you had only one ground .. maybe I have once invented Tolkiens story (but it is the same) you did it all at one plateau with concurent intensions .. but the universe did die finally .. because in all the fights the intention did die .. and so this universe did collapse .. it became a lost place .. no game anymore .. some are still there for hoping that Life comes back ..

    So you may see how we get lost thetans .. not BTs .. the story from LRH describes freaky thetans who build up nearly everything of you .. but in any way is a BT the same as a lost thetan .. a thetan we have failed to help in a time when he needed help .. and this is what I have learned .. OT III and above will never handle it .. what I mean is, you can always have a thetan around you who has meanings .. but he will only restimulate you of all the lost thetans which you have failed to help .. and the BT will remind you on that ..

    Doesn’t matter it goes from Axiom 1 which do not hold the reality .. it is not really true .. but for LRH it was ..

    Sorry for this comment, but I look it in this way .. will nobody disturb ..

    • Friend, you are a good man.

      I don’t think Scn Axiom 1 and the concept of thetan, as LRH put it together, holds very well My model of the universe is described on my blog.

      • BY now we all know that only one reality exist in this universe and that is yours: By your belief every one else in this universe should use your twisted that poor replica you have made out of which you have stolen from LRH’s tech and other methods that so called useless tech which only would take any user to dead end stimulation.
        You are the example of that stuff you have stuck in.

    • Friend old kid! dont ever apologise for your reality It is yours, your universe and that is your havingness: your life!
      And dont ever compromise your reality since again that is your life!

      ‘Friend……”So you may see how we get lost thetans .. not BTs .
      .”””””” the story from LRH describes freaky thetans who build up nearly everything of you .. but in any way is a BT the same as a lost thetan .
      . a thetan we have failed to help in a time when he needed help .””””
      . and this is what I have learned .. OT III and above will never handle it .. what I mean is, you can always have a thetan around you who has meanings .. but he will only restimulate you of all the lost thetans which you have failed to help .. and the BT will remind you on that ..
      E……You are 100 percent right on that, I have given sessions to many of these wonderful Souls and all of them were stuck in some incident and when confronted that incident had a wonderful cognitions and with that cognitions in place they become free!
      LRH was wrong on that topic …. really wrong.
      Our universe where we operate is the Spiritual Universe and we co-share this universe with those Beings who dont have a body.. need one in order to believe that they have a life only if they have a body.
      BEST Elizabeth

  59. Friend, you have taken quite a long journey to get to where your are now. Thanks for sharing it. Your head and heart is outside of the madness and you can see around you. Self and pan determined. Not ruled or controlled by others. Enjoy your freedom.

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