Well Mike, I don’t have any valid arguments against that analysis of yours.

Marildi,  you know I hold a high respect for you. You do have a very brilliant mind,  and I really admire your passion. You and me are very much alike in so many ways. But I am afraid that Mike DO have a very valid point and argument right there.

I’ll take you step by step through LRH’s continuing circling around the Bridge , and his constant changing of definitions and processes to achieve an ideal state that always seemed to escape his reach.

1. 1950- The DMSMS ‘Clear’. Per the, “The Clear” chapter (I have read the book at least 10x cover to cover,  by the way,  and have accumulated at least 10,000 hours of BK-1 auditing alone , 1x , the “Best Book one auditor” that earned me a free course and a stay at the Freewinds with a paid plane ticked as well) a Clear has :

A. No psychosomatic illnesses of any kind.

Fact : A lot (and I do mean a lot) of Clears and OTs , specially OTs,  have died of cancer over the last 30-40 years. I frequently see ‘OTs’ manifesting different kind of body ills. The fact is that a “Clear” has no special abilities at all as regards to not getting ill ; none. They get sick just as any “normal” individual.

B. Has total visio and sonic recall,  a perfect memory.

Fact : Their memory is no better than your “normal” human being. In fact,  many “wogs” has a better memory. My own memory sucks,  and believe me,  my background is intense,  with a 140 IQ.

C. ” A clear can be tested for any and all psychoses, neuroses, compulsions and repressions (all aberrations) and can be examined for any autogenic (self-generated) diseases referred to as psycho-somatic ills. These tests confirm the clear to be entirely without such ills or aberrations. Additional tests of his intelligence indicate it to be high above the current norm. Observation of his activity demonstrates that he pursues existence with vigor and satisfaction.” LRH from DMSMH,  chapter,  “The Clear”.

Really ? No repressions , compulsions,  neuroses , illness,  and an IQ quite above the current  norm ?

Not in a million years. In fact,  I wouldn’t recruit myself most “Clears” and “OTs” to work for me. Many are just not  causative enough  to pass my tests. Of course,  there are exceptions,  but are so rare indeed. And the ones that I DO can work with them,  were always effective and competent before Scientology.

The definitions of Clear kept on being modified by LRH,  but not to downgrade it,  or to “tone it down”. Rather the opposite ; he upgraded it , and made it even more encompassing , more “high-level”.

Here is a quote from Ability magazine from 1957 :

” DEFINITION OF A CLEAR: A thetan who can knowingly be at cause over Life, Matter, Energy, Space and Time, subjective and objective.”

And another one from Ability in 1958 :

“A CLEAR. A person at willing and knowing cause over his own life, his body and his surroundings and without a reactive or subconscious mind.”

Not only those modified definitions are more all-encompassing than the Bk-1 one,  but actually are the definitions that later on became the one for the OT.

After 1957 , LRH started to call BK1 Clears as “Mest Clears” , and the “real” Clear became the “Theta Clear” himself. If you remember,  LRH attempted to produce a stable “Theta Clear” since early 1951 with his SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) beginning with SOP III described in the PDC lectures. Before that you had “Black and White” processing and “Ridge-Running” which basically addressed “entities” , he later found out , the “black masses” allegedly being them (the “BTs”). 

Then it came SOP V , SOP VIII,  SOP 8-C , SOP 8-D , and STILL no stable Theta Clears.

Then he just abandoned it all and started researching “Objectives Processes” as the remedy to achieve them.

As to producing Clears,  we have have dozens of different procedures. You had your”Clearing Procedures” Issue one and others. Then you had “Engram Running” again after and with the 22th ACC. Then you had “Clearing by Valences”. Then you had “SOP Goals” the forerunner of GPM processing at the SHSBC. Within that period you had “The Rock running” which almost no Scientologist whatsoever understood what the hell the Rock was all about.

It actually has to do with GPMs,  but I am not to make a Technical dissertation out of this post. 

Nothing,  absolutely none of those processes produced stable Clears. LRH kept on finding another “barrier” to its achievement. Having to discover Another “Breakthrough” that explained why anybody except him was incapable of producing a “stable” Clear.

Then he decided to tackle GPMs at the BC. We now had “First GPM Clears” , “Third GPM Clears” , etc. It wasn’t an absolute thing at all. A 4-5th GPM “Clear” was considered an OT. It was all about Goals now. The most complicated and long procedure that one ever want to engage in. Pages and pages of “Goal Listings” , hundreds of items. The phenomena of “Out-List” by the ton.

Nothing in Scn , absolutely nothing is as complicated as GMP running ; Actual GPMs , I mean.  Just imagine having a pc list hundreds of goals (“to be intelligent” , “to be holly” , “to oppose religious people” , ”to be rich” , “to tech them a lesson” , etc, etc) , then assessing the list by elimination , then “Tiger drilling” (basically your modern “Prepchecking process) them until you get only a “reading” (usually a “Rocket Read”)  goal out of hundreds! Then finding the “Terminal” pursuing such a goal. Then finding it corresponding “Uppterm” ( the terminal pursuing a goal opposing ours). Those terminals (Terms and Uppterms , called RIs) were supposed to “Rock Slam” when correctly found. Now , one was supposed to find the next pair of goals (the PC’s and that of the opposing terminal) ,and pair them in turn to their corresponding Terms and  Uppterms. And to keep doing that procedure until you had the complete Line Plot ( the way all those goals and
terminals were put together) of that particular GPM which was put together based on one specific goal.

Today , in “modern” Scn , auditors are supposed to be so stupid , according to dear LRH , that he had to resort at the end to “Correction Lists” , a “Model Session” , and “Repetitive Process” (besides “Listing and Nulling” and Ruds running) so that “Judgment” never had to be an essential ingredient to be a “good” auditor. Cause “only” LRH was intelligent enough to actually understand and be able to apply , “Standard Tech”.

He decided that the “Actual Goals GPMs” were 10,000x (not only 1,000 as many class VIII think) more important than the “Implanted GPMs”. Those implanted GPMs were totally discarded. All the “Routines” (the different processes to address the R6 bank) were about “Actual GPMs” (the actual goals than one had over our whole track).

Then he suddenly turned everything around,  AGAIN,  and decided that the Implanted GPMs WERE important now,  and created what we now call,  “The Clearing Course” (The C.C for short) that strictly addressed Implanted GPMs identified as “Basic-Basic” now. The first actual and official “Clear” was produced at last with the C.C . His name ? John McMaster. LRH himself proclaimed John as the first actual Clear in 1966 , 16 years after the publication of DMSMH.

Here another quote from 1958 :

” By Mest Clear is meant a BOOK ONE CLEAR. Here we defined clear in terms of facsimiles. This is a rather simple mechanical definition. It said in effect that so far as human beings were concerned our preclear finally arrived at a point where he had full color-visio-sonic, had no psychoses or neuroses and could recall what had happened to him in this lifetime. This is almost a baby-talk sort of clear.”

And here is a quote from an HCOB from 1978 revised at 1980. It is allegedly a confidential issue. But confidentiality is for the birds. Besides,  what I want to quote is what LRH called in that bulletin,  “The non-confidential definition”. Here is is :

” The following definition of Clear  is non-confidential and may be ( and has been )used in promo or other publications given Issue Authority for release.DEFINITION OF A CLEAR:A BEING WHO IS UNREPRESSED AND SELF DETERMINED. ”

Now I am really confused ; wasn’t  OT III about recovering our “Self-determinism” and about “Freedom from overwhelm” ?”Unrepressed” is the same as “Not-overwhelmed” for all practical purposes.

Do you see what I am  getting at,  dear Marildi ? LRH keeps running in circles every time. Actually Q&Aing with research.

First ,one allegedly handled ALL BTs at OT III,  its alleged EP from 1967 through the ’70s. Then LRH found that BTs under the effect of drugs were getting in the way to fully and stably achieving the EPs of original OT IV-VII. Then he discovered “dormant BTs” that were getting in the way to those levels,  and that we now had to address before addressing OT VIII.

OT VIII allegedly would handle Amnesia in the whole track,  and was the “first actual OT level” , all previous ones just becoming “Pre-OT” ones. Then you open your course pack to discover that it is all bull-shit,  and that the only total recall that you are going to have,  and with FULL PERCEPTICS, is that time when you finally opened the 3-10 pages course pack,  and discovered it was all a big  lie.

And no,  dear Marildi,  OT VIII, original OT VIII,  didn’t just handle the “reason” why one doesn’t have full whole track recall ; it actually was supposed to bring it about. Listen to the class VIII lectures (the original ones,  unedited) and read it by yourself. OT VIII,  the 1969-OT VIII, allegedly DID handled amnesia,  Period. In fact the whole research of it was based on that. And it used processes from the “History of Man” to work with that,  not only reading the book to do nothing with it as in NEW OT VIII,  the squirrel version that DM and Ray Mithoff put together.  Ray as always, just followed DM’s orders as a good robot.

No,  dear Marildi. Let’s start applying some logic and common sense here. Let’s use some real science as I am 100% sure  that you know and can use. Better wake up and smell the coffee dear. There are things that obviously you are not observing, and  not confronting here.

And you know,  that I know that Scn has hundreds of workable stuff ; hundreds. Capable of producing great wins,  great changes if,  and only if applied honestly. But LRH claimed a ton of things he wasn’t even near capable of producing neither achieving himself. He was either hallucinating,  or in denial,  or stuck in a Service Fac. But he never found the fundamental answers as regards Clear and OT. He just never did ; period. A lot of workable things ? Oh yes,  he did. A lot of valuable principles?  Oh yes,  he did as well.

The solution to Clear and OT ? No,  he did not. Not even close dear,  not even close.

So my advice?  Start researching another path with the workable tools that you already have. Do not stay stuck with Scn. Not you. Spend 5-10 years at Solo-NOTs,  and you’ll understand my point. Not really worth it from my perspective.

Assigning other entity besides oneself the “cause” of anything is going in the wrong direction. If New OT VII’s EP is “Cause over Life” , which I don’t observe in many OT VII friends of mine,  then it can only mean that those “BTs” were getting in your way to be Cause. Therefore,  by logic,  the BTs were the cause of all your difficulties. That’s an arbitrary assignment of Cause. There is something grossly wrong with that viewpoint. And needing 5-7 years , and in some cases even more , to get rid of ALL your BTs is just going in the direction of more complexity , and not towards simplicity. And it is also going in the direction of surrendering your innate ability to be cause (potential cause , at least) , and  placing the “reasons why” of one’s difficulties in something exterior to our own beingness. I am really sorry , but that is for the birds : I am not interested in complexity. 

Do I believe in “Spiritual infestations” ? Yes,  I do. I have no scientific “proof” whatsoever,  but I have definitively met a few very nasty ones,  and not with an emeter , but a VERY real “close encounter”. Psychic phenomena runs in my family. Besides , “demonic possession” is as old as civilization itself. But spending years getting rid of all of them ? Now,  there is something VERY wrong with that. And even having to do it in order to be “Cause over life” , is even stranger and weirder. 

The fact is that 99.9999 % of most “OTs” mostly guide themselves through e-meter reads,  and not through any direct experience and perception. No OT III that I know of,  and I know quite a lot,  has ever “seen” his own Incident II or I. Neither have any of them “seen” the incidents were they were allegedly implanted with the C.c , and OT II incidents.EVERYTHING is about “reads”. Don’t you find that too convenient? Too odd?

One just sit with the e-meter , and mentally read lines supposed to be (most “OTs” don’t even know this point ) “Implanted goals” from a specific GPM that allegedly contain as much as 200 of these modified goals. One “Spot the light” , and  “spot the thetan” at the time , and that implanted goal is supposed to lose its “power” through “repetitive Tech”. One is guided exclusively by reads , fully trusting LRH about those incidents being true regardless of the fact , that there isn’t any single “OT” that has ever actually seen those incidents as a DNs experience. Why is that so ? Cause only LRH was “un-aberrated” enough to see them. We lowly humans beings , with  a totally fucked up memory of whole track incidents , had to wait for OT VIII in order to have any whole track recall at all. The only problems was , that once we reached such an “actual” OT level , it was basically about the subject of “misconceptions” and “wrong ownership” , just as the rest
of the OT levels. 

The truth is Marildi,  that Scn doesn’t stand the test of Science in many of its aspects. Specially about Scn’s cosmology.

My life passion is Science and math. I was raised with it,  and I have studied it intensely. I can’t just accept anything just because any human says so.  And the fact of having wins with the OT levels can’t be construed as the cosmology of it is true. That would be a totally unscientific assumption.

This is only intended as “food for thought” dear. You know that I am quite all right with whatever you choose to believe.

Take care. See you around.Sorry for any grammar horrors ; I just wrote it very fast w/out putting much attention in spelling.

Best regards,
TC

!

You are most welcome, dear Ann.

I fully understand about the SO thing ; I was there myself. And thanks for opening the comm line.

I only wish that you would accept Assists fromsomeone you trust. Theydo helpa lot to speed recovery, and at least makes life more bearable and less painful. I’ve helped a few cases who had cancer, and they all did -incredible good under an Assist program.

Simple stuff, you know? Touch Assist, Nerve Assist, Body Comm, locationals, “Take a Walk” done daily. I am fully aware about the enturbulations that the world of Scn has brought to your life. I wouldn’t mention those Assists if I wasn’t 100% that they do help , and could help you to make it easier for you.

One thing that I just have too much trouble forgiving LRH for, is the amount of suffering that I see on many in the Field. I try to find it in my heart to be compassionate to him, forgiving, responsible. But God, it is so difficult for me sometimes. When I see families separated, broken apart, I just can’t understand why the hell he had to be so authoritarian, so excluding , so “whilte and black” about Scn.

I wish that I could help others heal their wounds,unstickfromthe past, and tofinda new path in their lives full of joy and the “Spirit of Play”. It all has been so pointless.

I myself got into Scn not to help myself ; not at all. I came with the idea to learn how to help my family and others. I left a promising career as a student of engineering to engage in the “Let’s Clear the planet” lofty game. For a several years , I just played that game. There wasn’t anything more important than that in my mind. A dear friend of mine who left this world for a better elsewhere and I , used tothinkand wonderhow “Target II” would be. We were supposed to be fully “opetational” by then, and probably would have to use a “doll body” to do the job on those “aliens wogs”. :-))))

Habe you ever heard anything more naive than that, dear Ann ?

I abandoned all my life passions : Science and math, scientific research, writing, music and art. All of that was put on “hold” , because nothing had more priority than clearing the planet. Everything else could wait. Even though that I always felt incredible good and happy about helping others, there was always this sadness, this sensation of loss.

I can’t believe that I guy like me, fully trained in the scientific methodology, in mathematical logical reasoning, in the subject of “proof” as taught in advance math ; could fall for all that “let’s save the planet” bullshit. For all that “the wogs and us” attitude, thinking that we were a “superior” caste “freer” and “saner” than everybody else.

Then you wake up one day, and realize that you have miserably wasted the better part of your life being just a cult member. And that’s painful, VERY painful and disheartening. Suddently, all one stable datums are shaken to the ground. One doesn’t find any anchor points to create any space with ; there is just this big emptiness.

One begin to blame LRH, to hate him , or at least to be very angry at him. One’s life becomes bitter, becomes resentful. But one day one realizes that it was US that held the cult(ish) attitude in the first place. That it was US that surrendered our capacity for observation, and our personal integrity , and that just blindly trusted our lives to one single individual. Because we all thought (most of us) that such an indivudual was god-like and totally incapable of any major errors in judgement.We were indoctrinatedinto thinking that such an individual was right about everything he ever wrote about. That Scientology was life itself. That it had all the answers to existence.

When we have learned to fully trust in our own judgment, in our capacity to observe , in other words, self-respect and selfesteem ; only then we’ll be “cult impervious”. Cause the seed for a cult(ish) approach to things is in all of us humans.

Anyway, just think about it (about those Assists) , and you can contact me at any time , if you want to. I can teach them over Skype to any friend of yours, or to any family member. It will not cost you anything. With a cup of coffee I’ll be just fine. :-)))

I’ll keep on praying for your recovery. Take care

Much love,
Peter

Hi Theta Clear,Thank you from my heart.I tend to look at things differently if I feel an evaluation coming along.My bad,have to learn not to flee,the eval is not part of a GOI’s target.I will tuck your email safely away,it is a comfort knowing I can write you.Your prayers mean a lot, any type of assistance in that dept is gratefully accepted.I did have some amazing times in SO,but I got royally screwed too! You can reach me at abwatson@cox.net if you ever want.Love Ann.

Yep. Some just live a life, in order to be devoured by a predator. Example:- COBfodder!

Dear Mwesten,

Thanks for the communication and your best wishes.

I really love to have friendly arguments with intelligent people like you who use sensible arguments backed up by reason and not by misemotion. Even though I don’t share all your viewpoints, I see that you are honest in your assertions, and believe in what you say, which is the important factor.

I do agree that LRH took us by the hand to attempt to take us to unreachable-by-Scientology heights. Were his motives ill-intentioned ? About that we can only speculate.

But I can’t defend the indefensible as much as I might want to. I have a duty to truth before to any living being. There is a lot of truth in many of your assertions.

That being said, Scn is composed of hundreds of parts, and not all of them are destructive or useless. Many are highly workable and useful. And ifthatpointis not understood, all the good research from which we can still get a lot from will be lost, and all because of human emotion. Does that seems sensible to you?

It has been a pleasure.

Best Regards,
Peter

Dear Gtsix,

Thanks for the communication.

Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear enough about what I meant by “normal scientific methodology”. First of all, I wasn’t trying to “defend” Scn. I am an individual with a large background in Science and higher math ; I need not to defend anything , I prove things to others using sensible arguments, logical reasoning, and appealing to common sense.

What I meant was, how can you “prove” wins and gains? How can you “prove” that an individual has improved himself with Scn oranyotherphilosophyfor thatmatter? That’s a highly subjective issue. You can’t use an osciloscope, oran electricalmeasuring device to “test” that.

You would have to test a very large group of individuals in a very large social experiment. You would have to know every little detail about their lives- their general attitudes, their abilities or lack thereof in any area, etc, etc- then as counseling was progressing, inspect their lives in general to ascertain how it is different now. That kind of “experiments” tend to have many subjective aspects to it, and largely depend on the researcher’s own attitides and opinions about what is right or wrong, what is “good” or “bad” , to have any unbiased and objective assessment at all.

I wasn’t talking about Faith at all. There is no Faith involved in doing an Assist on anyone and seeing with your own eyes how has the individual improved with it. There is no Faith involved in drilling someone in TRs, and seeing how he can now communicate with others in a more effective and positively influencing matter. There is no Faith involved in getting a very bogged student at school, and helping him find and clear his misunderstood words, and seeing with your own eyes how he unbogs, and recover his interest and ability to apply that subject.

But how do you “prove” that to others in a strictly scientific way using your normal lab methods ? See my point ?

How do you “prove” a past life experience ? Those things are very subjective. One would need to design a test not necessarily following your normal scientific methodology.

I have helped hundreds of people live a much better and fulfilling life just by applying Scientology principles to them. They became more happy, more ethical, more able to handle work, with an improved health, more certain about themselves, with an improved self-esteem amd self-respect. Many are still my friends, and every time we met, they keep on bringing the subject up of how well they did at the time they did the services with me , and how those changes remained stable throughout the years.

How do you “prove” that to others ? Is it even necessary to “prove” it, in the first place ?

I am an applied philosopher who apply Scn and whatever works to help my fellow beings , and to help myself improve my conditions in life. I am not a Scientologist per se.

Some things are just a matter of testing them for ourselves , with a totally unbiased and non-defensive attitide, and decide based on our OWN observations, whether or not it worked for us. THAT was my whole point.

I think you missed my point about deciding whether to be just a normal human being or choose Freedom. I am not into this bullshit of calling anyone a “Wog”. I am not into a cult(ish) frame of mind regarding Scn. For me, every living being is special and unique.

My point is and was, that pursuing a path, ANY PATH, leading to higher spiritual awareness and abilities, IS a very worth pursing endeavor. One that take us from a normal human existence towards something higher, and a lot more enjoyable. That we must always strive to improve ourselves, and EVOLVE as beings, instead of just comforming to a dull and very much limited existence.

I hope that I had made myself clear enough. By all means keep on that concept about thinking and observing for yourself ; there is really no other way to live. I really like people who are alive ; I don’t like robotized individuals at all.

Success in your path.

ARC, TC

Thanks for the comm, Roger.

I don’t think that the concept of “Clear” started off as fiction per se, but mostly as an ideal that had never been achieved. Something to strive for. Whether LRH wanted or not to “con” others is totally subjective, and no more than an opinion, either in his favor or against him.

I like to deal in facts that I can measure. Wins/gains, that’s something that can be measured. It is all about wins and doing better in life. That’s what this philosophy game is all about. Dealing with these ideals right from the start is out-gradient to me, and not real to most people. I mean, priest-like individuals were most part of their lives, studying and doing “rituals” to achieche a higher level of spiritual awareness and abilities. It took them years!!!

Those ideals are a lot about discipline, real discipline, and only those honest enough who have mastered the human virtues, are ready for them, as fortunately, those states are earned. They not just given away.

No matter how much auditing one does, no matter how many BTs one get rid off, w/out having achieved a very ethical attitide towards others, no real OT(ism) is possible. OT is not about being powerful, or about moving objects with your mind. It is about responsibility for others, for all life. It is about being a real leader, with the well being of others becoming more important than our own. Where one can embrace all life. And that takes what it takes to achieve.

There is no such a thing as an “asshole Clear” , or a “Service Facky OT”. There are no real Clears and OTs in Scn ; PERIOD.

My whole point is that there ARE many valuable concepts, processes and procedures in Scn. And that who researched and compliled them, and his character, has nothing to do with workability. Something either works or not. There are MANY workable parts in Scn. Why try to invent a wheel somebody else has already invented ? (Or compiled and organized) Just because one is ARC broken ? Is that even sensible ?

Mu advice is to test, in a totally unbiased , non-defensive way , every Scn datum , one at a time. Test it, and decide based on your OWN independent observations whether is workable or not. I believe very much in giving credit to that who deserves it. That’s being intellectually honest.

Been a pleasure exchanging comms with you, Roger. Much success to you.

ARC, TC

Dear John,

What I am or not, or who I am or nor, is not of your god-damned business buddy.

And speak only for yourself. Don’t want to read my comments , then don’t read them. Nobody is forcing you to do so. Funny that you even took the time to read my post and even to write about it, even though that you consider it “not woth noticing it”. That’s kind of contradictory, don’t you think?

TC

Nice to meet you too, dear Ann.

Thanks for your honesty. I am really sorry that you had such bad experiences with Scn. If it is not for you, that’s quite all right. Use whatever parts you do find helpful, if you feel comfortable with it.

I know what you mean, believe me. I know about suppressive policies and attitudes that abound in the SO. I was in the SO myself. An asshole CMO yelled at me one time, and I almost moped the floor with his body. Next day, I sent them all to hell, and just routed out.

Scn has its destructive parts as well ; I am quite aware of that.

Sorry if my comments came as an evaluation. That wasn’t my intention. I really hope that you become physically well. If you need someone to talk to, please don’t hesitate in contacting me. I promise no Scn. You can get me at thetaclear68@yahoo.com

My blessings to you. I’ll pray for your recovery. Take care.

Best regards, Pete

p.s. I wrote you a longer reply but it disappeared somehow. Anyway, my comment above is still the “bottom line” in all this. 🙂