Subject: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 59 - JUNE 28, 99 PILOT POSTS TO ACT Date: 28 Jun 1999 04:00:23 From: pilot@soda.csua.berkeley.edu (The Pilot) Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology POST59.txt SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 59 - JUNE 28, 99 PILOT POSTS TO ACT These went to ACT only. I felt obliged to respond to some of the topics under discussion immediately. ========================================== Contents: subj : Super Scio - TO SAFE ON MARCHING subj : Super Scio - FREEZONE LIBRARIES subj : Super Scio - To Safe, MegaSquirrel, Casper, Tom, Etc. subj : Super Scio - Continuing The Mensa Discussion subj : Super Scio Tech - On Self Clearing and CCRD subj : Super Scio - To R. Winn on Self Clearing subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Homer on Clear OT subj : Super Scio Tech - To Joanne On Spotting Points In The Body subj : Super Scio Tech - A Great Statement (Attn Rogers) subj : Super Scio Tech - To Aaron on Continuous Creation subj : Super Scio Tech - To Th8an on Between Lives subj : Super Scio Tech - HELPFUL HINTS ON TRS AND METERING ========================================== subj : Super Scio - TO SAFE ON MARCHING TO SAFE ON MARCHING First, I want to validate you for standing up and fighting. Second, I want to ask you to ease up on trying to push the old timers into motion. Many of them stood up and fought very hard and lost. Especially Enid, who stood up there as a direct target, attempting to create a reformed church of Scientology in plain view and fight off CofS on the grounds of Religious Freedom and got smashed badly back in the 1970s. I don't know the entire story. But she is somebody to respect and to learn from. You cannot expect direct support from any organizations in Southern California. If somebody is actually operating a group and delivering service and getting people trained and audited, they are not going to stand up and ask the CofS to come and smash them. Having a group is different from operating as an individual. They have to have cash flow to operate, so there is money changing hands and they do not even have the slight protection of non-commercial status. They are a visible target, easily counter-picketed. They are already infested with OSA agents and subject to dead agenting and black PR. And they are easy targets for lawsuits. And frankly, we need those groups to stay in operation and keep delivering. You don't even dream of sacrificing one for the sake of a picket unless it is the ultimate picket with tens of thousands bringing the house down. Because if you risk them, you have to win, completely, then and there. Do not sacrifice your Queens and Rooks unless it is a forced sequence that leads to immediate checkmate. And as a wise chess player once said, "I prefer to sacrifice my opponents pieces." If you make a strong showing, you can expect covert support. And it will be covert. Individuals showing up and grabbing signs as individuals rather than as representatives of the various groups. But that is only for a strong showing. A march of a hundred would seem too dangerous because the groups want to call zero attention to themselves. My best guess is that a thousand is the right number to draw covert support. That swells the ranks considerably. If you started an hour long march from CC to the complex, showing signs as you walked along Hollywood Blvd. and then Sunset, I think that huge numbers would peak at you from cars and around corners, decide that this was it, and swell your ranks. Maybe I'm dreaming, but I think that you would have five thousand by the time you surrounded the complex, because the others would know and be watching and making go/no-go decisions. That would not just be the covert groups but also many fence sitters. And to set that up, one of the things you would do is buy a few big newspaper adds and put up signs in shop windows so that the fence sitters who were out of comm knew to come and look. But they would not be part of the initial crowd and they will be too scared to join a small march. If you do a march of a hundred, it is for the purposes of PR and your target should be to get press coverage of the religious freedom issue and to promote fza.org so that some of the fence sitters will begin lurking here and starting to wake up. Your real target should be to build up the potential for that march of a thousand. Your evaluation of whether to do the 100 march or not should be based on whether or not it is the best move towards bringing about the bigger march. My own feeling in the matter is that promoting fza.org is less risky. That is something that everyone can do covertly without putting their ass on the line, and so it can be done immediately even by those who are afraid of the CofS. Shy people can even palm an fza.org sticker and leave it on a lampost while waiting for the light to change. Imagine if everyone around CC and the complex saw a sticker every time they crossed a street. Of course they would be continually scrapped off, and continually put back on again. And if the fence sitters saw these continually around LA, they would eventually get on the net and look. And it could be "Save Scientology" or "Stop CofS Squirreling" or "Reform Scientology" or "Save The Tech" as an alternative to "Free Scientology" on the line above the "see www.fza.org." Really many different ones should be used so as to hit different people's realities. The real problem is comm lag. It was a great disappointment to me that things moved so slowly when I dumped Super Scio onto the net. Although Super Scio is unitelligible to new people, it is right where Scientologists live and I expected it to act as an immediate indicator and bring about big changes fast. I talked about "if the Catholics copyrighted the bible" and indicated the religious freedom issue. I repeated that occasionally in my posts and it was a YEAR before it started echoing back. I talked about points for reform. It was ages before others started spreading it around. And yes, I know you were one of the ones who picked it up, that is very much appreciated. My point is that it took TIME. I indicated what I feel are key tech points such as the grades being basic and needed again after OT. People comm lagged. I pointed out the ease of doing everything solo. Again I've picked up lots of agreement, but it took time and many are still Q & Aing about this. I talked about the need to both retain LRH in unadulterated form AND to extend the tech and the research line and - well you see what its like right now. And yet the mountain did start moving. Cornelius (ARS) and Homer had the book online immediately. Many said nice things. Even Roland wrote a nice message to me. Critics gained respect for Freezoners. More tech and less LRH bashing happened on ACT. Paul setup fza.org and had a huge impact - but again his work spread slowly, taking months to pickup support. It is a snowball rolling down hill. Eventually it will sweep the fanatics away like an avalanch. But everything is taking an order of magnitude longer than I initially expected. Based on previous experience, in a year everybody will be screaming for a march of a thousand. That was in the back of my mind when I first made the comment. I felt it was time for people to begin to kick the idea around. As you can see, only a small number will accept such an idea immediately. You have to keep your enthusiasm up during that period and keep repeating the communication and pushing without going down tone and without getting into arguments or inval. Think of it as doing TR 4 until the pc does the command. And we have to promote outside, there are not a thousand active on this newsgroup. I certainly wouldn't oppose your march of a hundred if you want to try and speed things up that way. I'd be rooting for you and certainly do a drive by. And if it turned out that a thousand came out of the woodwork and swelled your ranks, why I would too. But in the meantime, don't piss off the people who might help when the time is right. Think of it as changing the course of history. Big things change course very slowly. PS. If you do have a march, the right hat for the critics is to come and film you and act as witnesses. That provides you with extra protection and support and yet they are not really in the march, and I'm sure they'd love to have pictures. ARC, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio - FREEZONE LIBRARIES FREEZONE LIBRARIES As various people have pointed out, there are legal dangers to practicing our religion freely in the face of CofS copyright terrorists. If CofS made ALL LRH works available in an UNCENSORED form to all Scientologists, even if they have been declared as squirrels and enemies or belong to unorthodox sects going by other names, and if they did so at normal book and tape prices, then it would indeed be their right to collect reasonable royalties on copyrighted materials. But instead they: 1. Will not sell to unorthodox Scientologists, especially those declared as "suppressives". 2. Will not sell supposed "confidential" materials or materials of limited distribution even to members in good standing. 3. Exercise censorship in removing and altering materials. 4. Do not make all materials available. 5. Issue these at exhorbinant prices in the range of five times or more higher than is normal in the publishing and recording industries. Since these materials are a matter of religious practice, these inhibitions are a violation of Religious Freedom as guaranteed by the constitution and any legal attempt to protect these by copyright under these circumstances would be constitutionaly invalid. However, the copyright laws are on the books and are valid under normal conditions. Therefore it becomes a matter of RELIGIOUS PROTEST to ignore these in this case and demand a Constitutional Interpretation by the Supreme Court that would recognize our right to practice our religion under the Bill of Rights. This is not meant as an attack upon the copyright system. If the CofS would agree to a royalty of ten percent on the sale price of any non-orthodox publications of LRH works, and did not censor, control, or inhibit the production and sales of such works, there would be no religious persecution and no grounds for violation of copyrights. However, the copyrights ARE currently used for RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION and thus are being used in violation of our consitiutional rights. For this reason, I support Freezone Bible's RELIGIOUS PROTEST whereby they make religious materials available outside of the control of the Orthodox Fanatics who attack all other practicioners of the Scientology Religion. For those who believe in this, the most important part is The Availability of the Religious Scriptures. Therefore, the first target is to get everything posted to the net via the newsgroups in easy to handle text format. This ensures that uncensored complete copies of all materials will exist all over the world, saved by any individual who wishes to ensure the free practice of the Scientology religion. That is the first target, and once it is achieved, no attempt at suppression can fully succeed because the materials will be everywhere. But we have not reached that point yet. It would be better to get this done first before starting fights that might make it more difficult to complete this task. It is more improtant to be true to our faith and get the job done rather than to make martyrs. It would be good if there was a web server from which believers could download zip files of all the Fzba posts and also those files of religious materials such as the tech volumes that were posted by non-believers who have come to our aid. But such a server, even if legal, would be a target for the CofS fanatics who will use any means, fair or foul to prevent this. The right action, if there is a legal location, would be to bring up a server for a short period occasionally, only leaving it online for a few weeks and removing it before CofS has the opportunity to infiltrate it or dead agent and ruin the operators, for we are well aware that they will use illegal means if necessary to stop us. This should be a simple thing, possibly just an HTML index page and a huge collection of zip files that can easily be carried on a CD Rom and transfered to different ISPs without a lot of work. On a periodic basis, perhaps once every three months, it could be brought online for a few weeks, each time at a different location and removed before CofS brings its heavy guns to bear. Whenever it comes online, the address could be advertised here and all supporters, especially new supporters, could rush to complete their tech collections up to the level currently achieved by Fzba. The biggest problem, which this would solve, is that a freezoner, discovering the net for the first time, has no easy way to pick up the megabytes of material that were posted last year. I doubt that fzba itself would get involved in such an activity because they already have the enourmous job of getting these materials onto the net for the first time. Whomever is doing this obviously has enourmous libraries of materials and they should not be risked until their entire contents have reached the net. Anyone who is directly involved in bringing up a server like the one described needs to remain secret because CofS will certainly send agents from its Office of Special Affairs (OSA) to ruin them. If someone chooses to do this, please do not involve any visible targets such as openly practicing freezone groups in this endevor. But please do support Fzba in its efforts to end the CofS suppression of the Scientology tech. There are three thousand tape transcripts, many of which still need to be posted. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio - To Safe, MegaSquirrel, Casper, Tom, Etc. TO SAFE, MEGASQUIRREL, CASPER, TOM, KGB ETC. Hi guys, See the separate posts I wrote on Marching and Libraries. I wanted to thank you again and to encourage you to keep your enthusiasm up. If there were a dozen for each of you, we would do it. Just imagine that everything that was being talked about last week had ten times the response. That would start a feedback which would bring more on board. When you tip the scales, things begin to escallate fast. We've got to get more people on the net, especially fence sitters who are ready to make the jump. Give old friends a call. Don't try to sell them or handle them, just ask them to take a look at the reformer's home page and see what they think. Talk with them later after they've had a chance to read and to think about it a bit. I think that your selection of targets was excellent, just not enough troups to take the hill. I am getting tired of staying out of sight. The trouble is that I only feel that I have one shot to make an open push for reform. After that they start fighting dirty, I get pissed, and I end up as a super version of Perry Scott or something like that. Not exactly the role I want to play. I would like a real reform, but the minimum is a truce where they let the freezone have the materials too and get out of their way. That allows the research to move forward. I would not care if they labled me a suppressive and squirrel as long as they stayed out of the way and did not object to the materials being spread around. I would spout LRH and insist that I knew better and they would spout LRH and insist that they knew better and we'd all have a lot of fun and maybe find our way to real OT someday. But I think Homer is right and they'd launch everything they've got against me. I do not even want to speculate in public about how I'd handle that, I don't want to put it out there as a mockup that might gather agreement. There are already too many people who want to see them in ruins. So you might say that I'm being careful for their sake. On a positive note, there have been a lot more new people coming on recently. We may have gone over some sort of hump. Give it a little bit of time and try not to get your ass blown off meanwhile. PS. I've noticed two different Megasquirrel email addresses. Are you using two or is somebody playing games? PPS. I've rushed trying to get some posts out quickly because I think this business you started was very important. Hopefully I haven't written anything too hastily. All the Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio - Continuing The Mensa Discussion CONTINUING THE MENSA DISCUSSION On 24 Jun 99, VoltR@ctinet.net (RDucharme) responded to my post on "Super Scio - Scientologists in Mensa" > Excellent points made on the subject of mensa-narcissism-intelligence. I'm > saving it to show certain people who are incessantly fixated on their looks. > (I'm glad Christine isn't reading this) > > I know one of the great cognitions of my pre-Scn era was how desolate > intelligence by itself was as a character trait. Wisdom (the ability to see > things from a perspective that encompasses more than just the obvious) is so > much more desirable. A high IQ does not guarantee the latter. > > The thing that has kept me from joining up with Mensa all this time was the > narcissistic image they project. They're like body builders who are into > that for the sole purpose of showing off their muscles and constantly > compare themselves with others via their bodies. That's a death trap - a > make-others-wrong-and -self-right mechanism. I wonder how many Mensa > members compare I.Q.s as though they were muscles or sex organs. I wonder > how many Mensa members are emotionally balanced. As it stands now, their > image is that of a group of self-absorbed, elitist intellectuals, showing > disdain for the other 98%, while accomplishing nothing of any value as a > group (who ever heard of any project of any worth being backed by a group of > Mensa members?). Aside from that, I wonder how many artists, musicians, > authors, public speakers, managers, successful businessmen, and opinion > leaders are excluded on the basis of a test that measures left-brain activity. > > If Mensa had a valid purpose beyond self-reflection (as identity), then I > might have been more inclined to seek them out. > > Robert Typically the really smart people join it because it puts a stop to any invalidation of their intelligence. The "passed Mensa's tests and used to be a member" looks great on resumes. And the card is a lot cheaper and easier to get than collecting university degrees. But most of the active membership are busy stroking themselves. So the really smart people drop out as soon as they have the membership card. The real status button is to be so smart that you get in and then you snobishly drop out because they are too dumb. One of the famous Mensa dropouts was Issac Asimov. However, at some point he let them talk him into reactivating his membership when they promised to fill a hall with a crowd of adoring high IQ fans. Typical Asimov. I really liked Christine's idea of setting up a Freezone Scientologist in Mensa SIG. That would be worth reactivating my membership for. But I can't be the organizer or have my name plastered on it openly for obvious reasons. I don't even know what it takes to get one of these SIGs created (I didn't stay in long enough), but if somebody wants to create it needs votes or something, just post it on the newsgroup. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - On Self Clearing and CCRD ON SELF CLEARING AND CCRD On 23 Jun 99, "Michael Hunsaker" forwarded a message recieved at fza into the newsgroup on subject "(Fwd) Attn: Pilot" > I cant't get the moment when I actually went Clear, one moment > indicates when it seemed I lost "all" my abberations(on NED). > The fact is that after NED I could keep key out my case. I wasn't > depessed anymore for no reason, just got pissed when I got > really hit. But I'm still not sure that I'm fully cause on doing it > fully aware and be able to do that eternally. Maybe David Mayo is > right on gradients of Clear? Don't you have a self clearing CCRD? > What should I run now, engrams, or continue with the next processes? > I hope to get an answer soon, as I'm bogged. Self clearing was such > a relief after being continously bogged in the CoS for money reasons, > group abberations and probably my own case(but one goes to the > Church for handling the case, not for being blamed for it, especially > if one pays a fortune for it!!!!!!!!And I paid sums with a lot of > zeros, without getting what I was promised.) My question when to > stop engram running or when one can consider oneself Clear with > certainty might be also interesting for others who are doing self > clearing(I've seen too many attesting Clear for MU's and probably > money reasons, it's so easy to attest Clear immediately instead of > selling all your properties or working the whole year your ass > off for going into session a few hours!!!!!!!). Thanks for your > fantastic work, it might be a milestone in really clearig the planet. I would say that there are distinct and stable states that one attains. The state generally achieved on Dianetics is confront of the force in mental image pictures and awareness that one puts the force there. An easily observed side effect is that incidents of big impact to not seem to have any more kick or importance than incidents of minor impact. It is other factors besides the force involved which make an incident seem significant or trivial. It is not the end of abberation. There are other states to be attained and other things to be confronted besides force. The thetan was already very abberated when force began to effect him. It didn't occur to me to put in a CCRD because I think it is a side effect of having heard too much sales hype on "clear" which gives wrong data. Maybe I'll have to reconsider that and talk more about states attined etc. as well. Incident running still works after clear. There are other non-confronts besides the non-confront of force which will still run out of incidents and there are the postulates etc. which are still there to be looked at. However it would be the wrong approach to use immediately after clear or right after any of the more advanced states like clear OT. And it is a slow technique, so it is something that one uses occasionally when it feels like the right time to dig in that manner. I would say that you should a) rehab the last big win on incident running (it might or might not be clear or a further state subsequent to clear, or even a preliminary state. Don't worry about it, just rehab the win). Then, b) check if there is a clear state (confront of force) and rehab that (whether or not it is the same state as above), and if it is not there yet, again don't worry about it but recognize that you will come to it eventually. It sounds likely that you have reached clear, but even if you haven't, the gains on dianetics sound big enough that you should move on to something else. So do the rehabs and then continue on with the book. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio - To R. Winn on Self Clearing TO R. WINN ON SELF CLEARING On 18 Jun, 99, Zero responded to R. Winn's message on "SelfClear: INTRO" > Welcome: > If you survive, you will survive it as a clear. > tom > > R Winn wrote: > > > HI, > > I'm located in Southeast Michigan, USA and was very interested in > > Scn in the mid 70's. Have read a great many Hubbard books but not all. > > Did the Student hat, TR's, and a partial study course. Wanted to become > > an Auditor, but found the Org to be to "cultish" and decided to leave. I > > am very pleased to see that clearing is not being left to one group and > > was very surprised to know that there is a great number of others with > > similar interests! Also looking for training in Auditing-like > > activities. > > I'm am currently in the first 2-3 chapters of SelfClearing. Working > > on spotting spots. > > > > Thank You for this space. Hi and welcome. Hopefully Tom only meant that in the sense of "survive" as you might "survive" a tough class in school. It does take some determination to get through it on your own. But as you've probably noticed, the freezone and the ACT newsgroup are full of wild and highly individualistic people who are just learning to be themselves without external restraints. If you take a group of kids and over control them and march them around for too long, they run a bit wild when the controls are released. Things will settle down eventually. It just takes time for people to learn to live with each other without a slave driver cracking the whip over them. Anyway, I expect that you'll have a great deal of wins with the book. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Homer on Clear OT ANSWRING HOMER ON CLEAR OT On 25 Jun, 99, Homer Wilson Smith posted two responses to "Super Scio Tech - CLEAR AND THE TIME TRACK" Since they are short and related, I'm including both his messages even though only the second is a question. > The Pilot (pilot@soda.csua.berkeley.edu) wrote: > >The time track retains its solidity until clear-OT. The > >solidity is the result of alter-is of time. Most especially > >it occurs because of pushing incidents out of sequence to > >justify overts, but other alter-ises are possible. > > Signifcant statement. > > Homer > The Pilot (pilot@soda.csua.berkeley.edu) wrote: > > >CLEAR AND THE TIME TRACK > > Pilot, > > Are you a Clear OT? > > As I remember the definition of Clear OT was able to > stay out of a body while it is being hurt. > > Homer Yes, I officialy attested at CofS to the confidential definition of Clear OT. They had decided that I was stuck in a win on the huge blowout I had when I got expanded grade 2 (which was my second time through grade 2, and of course I had already run others through grade 2 when I got run on expanded 2). And I had complained that the state had turned off while getting dianetics as part of my setups for OT levels at the AO. And I was full old OT 7 by this point and felt really good about it but I was also a little bit disappointed because the grade 2 state hadn't come back and I felt it was in some way higher than the the state I was in after OT 7. I had kind of put up with that while doing the OT levels because I thought it would come back stabily when I hit the appropriate level, and of course it didn't. And so they decided that they had better really rehab it right and get whatever it was fully acknowledged. I mentioned that it seemed like the track was gone after that point and that's when the auditor ran out and got the confidential HCOB on it. The HCOB only says "no track". It does not say "able to stay out of a body while it is being hurt". Either that is PR or it is from something else in the 1950s. I think that that might have been said about "theta clear". But there were lots of varying statements about theta clear in the 50s and it might really be a half dozen different states. I can think of a number of different states I've hit which could be called theta clear. I put a whole list in Super Scio. But we have lousy definitions for these things. As far as your "stay out" question goes, for me the answer is that I can sometimes, it is unstable and so I might have an unstable key-out on whatever state gives that result. Also sometimes I find its my somatic and the body has nothing to do with it and if I'm outside stabily, I've got the somatic where I am rather than in the body. That is a wild one. Other times, its the body's somatic and I can be out and feeling that the somatic is over there in the body. And then there are times when I do snap on a body somatic and even times when I turn on my own somatic and sort of dive into the body for havingness and to hide from the somatic. There is a real mixed bag here of different phenomena. And of course there is also the business of somatics from entities. But I can generally blow those off fairly quickly. That is usually the first thing I look for because it handles so fast. I should really make a comment here about the Dianetics I got after the clear OT state. I got a whole lot of it as part of a dianetic assist and it was just great and very helpful and it did not mess up the Clear OT state. It was funny, because I was not running up and down on a track and yet I could easily pickup incidents to run on the specific somatics (this was the time I got stabbed and ended up in the hospital - described in Super Scio). That would bring my confront up on particular somatics and they would blow. But note that I had an auditor who was being very light and careful, never forcing and accepting errasures by inspection and so forth without pushing it. Then they did more dianetics at AO as part of my setups, and it screwed up the clear OT state. They were trying to be thorough. Nowardays I happily run incidents solo. But I don't use anything as formal as R3R. The trick is in only doing as much as you need to do - maybe date/locate and duration plus a few scans through and any and all steps skipped whenever they don't feel like they are needed. In other words, knowing all these tricks that help in running an incident, you just do whatever you need to get it in full view and blown. I would not trust an auditor to run me through an incident with formal R3R. I might trust one who was using less formal incident running techniques. So my general observation is as follows: You can make great gains from dianetics even after clear OT. But you can also get into trouble doing that. The most dangerous in this case is an auditor who has trained in rote procedure and is good at getting his commands done. Safest is to do these things solo. Or to be run in a loose manner with more flexibility and less push. A clear doesn't flinch at incidents. Everything we do to keep a lower level case from bouncing out of an incident is a reverse action on a clear. It gets him to mockup what isn't there. And clears don't bounce out due to non-confront. Sorry to leave this a bit vague but we are still learning. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - To Joanne On Spotting Points In The Body TO JOANNE ON SPOTTING POINTS IN THE BODY On 23 Jun 99, "Joanne Barre" continued our discussion with a post on "The Pilot...background,jb" > Thank you for the info...I don't know what background would be helpful. The following was good. The other question would be if he has had any processing or metaphysics or anything, but my impression from your answer is that he has not. > My dad had 1 massive and 2-3 minor strokes. This was 5 weeks ago. > He is in a re-hab hospital. They are very open to family member's > interaction. He is being released in 2 weeks because his progress > is too slow. I am looking forward to seeing more progress, faster, > when he gets home. That is were he wants to be. His body is 67yrs, > his appearance prior to the stroke was good, now his brain is swollen, > so he sleeps a lot, and has a hard time focusing. He is paralyzed on > his left side, so blockage from stroke on right side of brain. He can > talk when he has a mind to, he began eating 4 days ago. He doesn't > cooperate with therapists very well, unless encouraged by family member. > > He remembers incidents from time past more readily than current incidents, > he names EVERY person he sees or is asked about. He isn't very lucid > very long. I have been doing touch assists. Very good. > Unknowingly, I have been doing some light recall. Again, good, and the more the better, with emphasis on pleasure moments. > I will have him spot inside his body. Please tell me exactly how > to suggest this to him ( he has never been very open to an > unconventional idea). It doesn't require a belief in the spirit. The brain has nerves running into the affected areas, and there are problems with them. The "mind", whether thought of as a separate spirit or simply thought of as the higher brain functions, is senior. Therefore, in pushing into the area himself mentally, he is forcing the lower brain and nerves to rebuild their connections. There are many nerves and many cells in the brain, others can take over for the ones that were damaged if he keeps pushing into the area. But they will not do so unless he keeps reaching into the area himself. Of course I feel that there is more to it than this, but that is beside the point. The drill is good for both bypassing the switchboard and for encouraging the switchboard to reconnect and strighten out. So use a switchboard analogy where the connections are established by repeated use. > I asked him if he wants to live, this was 5 weeks ago, and he > said he did. Hope he hasn't changed his mind. He is a great guy! > (and very interesting presently) Thank you again for your help. > I really appreciate it very much. > > Joanne All the best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - A Great Statement (Attn Rogers) A GREAT STATEMENT (Attn Rogers) On 24 Jun 99, "Rogers" responded to my post on "Super Scio Tech - ON PME'S, PLUGS, CBR, & INC 1" > Great and helpful post! > > The Pilot wrote in message ... > > >Anything that is blocking you, controlling you, or impacting > >on you is something that you are also doing, now in present > >time, to others on an unconsious basis. And that is where > >most of your horsepower is going. > > > Yes. And let's not overlook that one is also, now in present time, doing it > to SELF as well as others. By our agreements we are all interacting on this > stuff, but primarily, there is no reason to assume otherwise than: WE, > directly, or indirectly via our agreements, are the main blocker, > controller, impacter and reducer of horsepower of OURSELVES. And it is WE > who have bound ourselves to the agreements. > > I think the basic concept (in a games context) underlying the ethical > fair-play of a thetan, is that there is NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SELF AND > OTHERS. That is a great way of putting it. Let's remember this one. > This is the basic explanation for having charge on all 4 flows, as well as > why our actions reflect back on self. > > Les. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - To Aaron on Continuous Creation TO AARON ON CONTINUOUS CREATION On 25 Jun 99, "Aaron Bair" responded to my post on "Super Scio Tech - A NIFTY ADVANCED PROCESS - CREATION CLEANUP" > Pilot, > > > Creation Cleanup Process: > > > > a) What would it be an overt to create > > b) What would it be nice to create > > I like this process. I like it a lot. > > I'll attempt to recreate the experience. > > My first instinct was to add modifiers to it. "As a businessman what > would..." That doesn't work. I persisted in running it until I got > the cog that the button is CREATE. A games-role seems incapable of > creation. > > Then, "Duh! It all starts with the spirit, the being himself." Very > interesting I'm 6 commands into this process and doing it wrong and I > get two decent cogs. > > Then, "I'm just me." Again, DUH! I already knew that, why did it > just dawn on me now that I wasn't "a businessman" or a "business > owner" or a whatever? > > "I'm not a thing. I'm not a role. I'm not a game. I'm not a title. > I'm not a symbol. I'm no-thing. These are all creations." Created > things, roles and titles that I'm being pop into view. A cascade of > things that are suddenly "not me" -- but apparently were two seconds > ago. > > "I just have all that." Like a person has a ham sandwich or a pair of > skates, you can be fond of them but they aren't very important. How > hard is it to find another ham sandwich? > > This is a decent win. In the old days I'd just hang it up here and be > happy. But in this case I know I wasn't even doing the right process, > and this seems about as objective as you can get so I don't perceive > much danger in trying the real process. > > A. What would it be an overt to create? > > Bzzzzt. > > Create? What the fuck is create? These are all created things. What > the hell is it to simply create? I don't know. > > I know a created thing can not create. A creation must be a strictly > spiritual activity. (I can barely take that in. It must be true but > its like unthinkable. I was never just a body? It just doesn't > register.) > > Okay. Problem. I can't run the process because I don't know what > "create" means except in terms of game roles. > > Mock-up someone creating. > > "you have to just kind of put it there. You picture it and make the > picture real." > > "Oh, hey. Its like I picture something up here (1st universe) except > you picture it out there (shared universe)." > > "OH!" Feel woosy. You aren't supposed to do that! > > That must be the process. > > A. What would it be an overt to create? > > Eeeek! Voices, alarms, > bells--something--is going off. "I'd better not try that again!" > > B. What would it be nice to create? > > "Oh good, something nice. I can do something nice. There > shouldn't be anything wrong with creating something nice." > > B. What would it be nice to create? > > "lessee, lessee. Nice. There are kids in the park, I bet they'd like > a 10 gallon bucket of black-cherry flavored ice cream in a big wooden > barrel full of ice to keep it cold and plastic spoons and bowls. Just > put it on that table ..." > > "Christ! I what if I actually did it!?!" > > For that brief moment I could feel the restraints. Amazing. Its a > very active sort of group program. "To be one of us, you must never > ___" Of course then the whole area shut down and I can't get that far > anymore. Its just something I can't allow myself to do. > > Its interesting because I can still run "As a god what would ..." And > if I consider myself "a god" or something I can run the process. > > But just creating things as myself is not allowed. It's thought-crime > that will get you booted or something. > > If I focus on the alarms and bells that go off, I can make out a few > of the sentiments--but there seem to be thousands and thousands: > "Don't!" > "You can't cause chaos like that." > "You are messing things up." > "Get out!" > "we want it THIS way." > --- > > I enjoyed it very much. Thanks for sharing! Great. > > It occured to me that we should have some axioms about > > reality. So I thought of the following: > > > > Axiom R1: Reality is being created now. > > > > The mechanics of reality are the continuous creation of > > consecutive nows, each in a new unit of time. > > I'm having a conflict here. What about all that alter-is stuff? Damn good question. Now we're really onto something. Alter-is keeps you from ceasing to create it. Alter-is doesn't itself make the creation persist. It causes you to make the creation persist. See the axioms of creation in archive 47. Looks like this gives us a second axiom of reality: Axiom R2: Reality is compulsively created until it is as-ised. > How many way's are there to make a creation persist? Another good question. Maybe there is only one, and that would be not ceasing to create it. And then we get a profusion of reasons for not ceasing to create something, the most significant of which is that we don't have the as-isness of it and conscious choice in creating it or not creating it and therefore compulsively keep it created so that we wouldn't loose it until we get the as-isness. > Are you saying everything that persists is being continuously created? Yes. > Is "reality" a special case? Seems like it. > Doesn't time itself fall into the created-thing category? Probably not. It might be just a side effect of alter-is and persistance. Ron has said that any second postulate introduces time. But maybe each persisting creation has its own "time" as a side effect of the alter-is but these individual "times" are grouped together in some fashion into a composite time where the consecutive change of one thing and the consecutive change of another are made to "track together", and that correlation of time could be a created thing. We ourselves have consecutive time streams that do not track with each other or with mest time except to the degree that we make these things track together. But we're way over my head now and I'm going to have to think some more about this. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - To Th8an on Between Lives TO TH8AN ON BETWEEN LIVES On 24 Jun 99, th8an@yahoo.com (th8an) posted on topic "Between Lives for PILOT My first post (th8an)" > Hello! > > I just found FZA Monday (jun21). What a huge relief! I'm > excited about life again! I'm very excited at the prospect of being > able Clear myself and my family(beyond words!). I haven't been able to > think about much else! Strangely enough I had decided the nite before > that I was just going to audit myself!(before i found the FZA). > > My last contact with the CoS was in 1986. I went down to do > the CCRD but got sec checked instead. Which burned up my money. They > could'nt understand why I had such a failed purpose, and blew. Of > course to actually do the CCRD I'd have cough up more moola! (I was > already loaned to hilt!) They coerced me back by saying the auditor > wouldn't be able to audit anymore! I came back, let them finish, gave > my f/n (under protest!) and slid out...and havent been back since. > Enough about that.... Yes. CofS is just wasting the tech, pouring other's money and enthusiasm down the drain with sec checks and other stops instead of delivering. > I've started the Self Clearing course and will start the > processes as soon as I get myself sessionable. Too many late nites > reading the FZA, your archived posts etc.. > I'm stoked!! I cant thank you enough... > > The actual subject of this post is regarding the BETWEEN LIVES > area. I have been reading some of your posts about this. I was a > little disturbed to learn that it's possible even after reaching OT to > black out after dropping the body and loose the control of ones > destiny. To me this is unacceptable! I intent to have total and > complete control of my state, location, tone and abilities by the time > I blow this body! (I have a Looong way to go!) I dont want to go thru > all this shit again! > > I have some thoughts on the subject. You mention you've read > some books on OOBE such as Monroe's. So have I. All have been > disappointing to me because of the lack of control, insight and > perceptions, with the exception of ONE: "Adventures Beyond the Body" > by William Buhlman available on www.amazon.com. His > understanding,experiences and theories make me wonder if he's not on > to something. > > His theory is of a multi dimensional universe, some areas of > which coexist in the same time and space but are separated and > differentiated by wave length(frequency). We live in the dense outer > layer. The dimensions get higher in frequency as you go up and are > seperated by a mebrane that opens up like a tunnel as beings pass > through. The higher frequency layers are senior to lower. The lower > freq layers are built on the framework of the upper ones and can not > exist without them. Higher frequency layers can only be perceived by > being who has raised his resonant frequency. Actually he passes thru > the membranes (tunnels) as he raises his frequency and new layers, > universes or areas come into view that are not perceivable at lower > wave lengths. Higher frequency areas are much more malleable to > thought, lower denser areas are not. > > This theory intrigued me since I remember LRH talking about > Statics having no wave length(8-80). Is this in native state or do we > have wave length at lower levels? Can we vary our frequency? It has > been suggested that at body death we go the frequency level that > matches our chronic wavelength at death. This is different for all of > us. It has also been suggested that remembering experiences at > different frequency layers(dimensions) is difficult. Bill Buhlman says > that he just gives the self command "I raise my frequency now" and off > he goes! I do not have the case or training level to experiment with > this yet! > > Do you? Is this theory all wet? To me it had the ring of truth. But at > this time, I'm still somewhat stuck in this Damn body (Althought I > consider myself an"outtie"). Could a RD be developed to give us > control over our frequency? Or do some have control of that already? > > I wont be satisfied until I know exactly what goes on in the > Between Lives Area. I think its vital! > > I'm happy to be in the FZ! > > th8an@yahoo.com Ron also talks about percieving on different freequencies, mostly in tapes of the 1950s. A thetan wouldn't have a wavelength, but he would percieve on wavelengths and be carrying around junk that was tuned to different wavelengths. I don't think that we are really talking about "wavelength" in the true physics sense here, but it is probably the closest word. A lot of the metaphysical groups talk about vibration levels and whatever. When one tries to "tune into things", one is probably matching "wavelengths". I think drills are possible here. We are still in the "fooling around with" stage on this one. I'll try playing with it some more (I do fool around with this kind of stuff) and you can see what you come up with too. But for now I would suggest treating it as experimental, and suggest that you also run self clearing or other processing for case gain. Based on experimenting with other energy systems (Ron's anchor points, the Hindu Chakras, etc.), you shouldn't concentrate too much on energy structures because it pushes you towards agreeing instead of getting free from the constraints. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - HELPFUL HINTS ON TRS AND METERING HELPFUL HINTS ON TRS AND METERING There were traditions in teaching TRs and Metering back in the 1960s which often resulted in the equivallent of the modern Class 12 skill level early in training. Some of these factors were never well identified or written down and they disappeared with the heavy loss of auditors and old timers in the 1969 timeframe. This was "solved" by the introduction of "Hard" TRs which further messed up TRs training. When TRs were finally debugged and strightened out in the 1970s, these things had already been forgotten and instead a long and difficult road through pro TRs had become the order of the day. THE MOST SIGNIFICANT FACTOR IN TRS TRAINING IS TO COACH THE BEING RATHER THAN THE BODY. Now this is almost too obvious to mention. And in fact it was too obvious and never did get mentioned properly. And yet all the top auditors, the ACC grads, the Class 7s, the BC graduates, and most people who were coached by them just simply did it this way. I know that I picked it up, and I would coach my students that way when I was cramming officer, and I never noticed it as something special which I was doing. And so it was never actually mentioned or beefed up, we just did it that way, sort of picking it up by osmosis. And I will bet that those sharp old timers picked it up from Ron in the early days, again by osmosis and immitation, and nobody, including Ron, quite realizing how important this was or getting it down on paper as a formal procedure. And I must have seen later body oriented TRs coaching numerous times and felt that something was wrong and yet not been able to put my finger on what it was. But I could see that people were grinding on endlessly to reach skill levels that we often attained on nothing more than two or three light passes through the TRs, and even then they were often robotic. TRs just ain't that difficult, and the gains are fantastic. I know people who've gone clear on a second light run of TR0 on an HQS course. They realized that they were mocking up the pictures that the coach was restimulating by bullbaiting and they stopped mocking them up. You mess this up by putting the student's attention on his body with your flunks. You make it fast by always expressing the reason for a flunk in such a way that it draws the student's attention outward and gets him to operate as a thetan instead of a body. You push a button and the student twiches. You never, ever flunk him for twitching. Instead, on seeing a twich, you would funk him for what he as a being is doing, which might be flinching at or non-confronting what you said or whatever. You must get him to confront what you say rather than sitting there and suppressing the body from reacting. You want him to have zero attention on his body and all his attention on you as the pseudo-pc that he is supposed to be auditing. This applies to all the TRs. Let's take TR 1 where the student is learning to say something to the coach and actually deliver it across the distance with intention. Maybe the student says it too weakly and it doesn't get there. The foolish coach flunks him for "saying" it too weakly and the student proceeds to make the body say it louder and tries to get "the body" to speak with more "intention". The smart coach says something like "It didn't reach me" or anything that puts the student's attention outward, so that the student works on reaching the coach rather than working on making the body say it a certain way. It is a subtile difference, but if you start coaching the body you will find that you are drilling the body's circuits and teaching a course in posture and elocution and if you coach the being you will find that you are drilling an OT and the body manifestations begin to fall away rapidly because you are validating the being. ------------ The second bug came in with trying to do two hours of TR 0 (or OT TR 0) unbullbaited without any reaction. LONG MANY HOUR RUNS OF TR 0 UNBULLBATIED ARE AN ATTEMPT TO FLATTEN "BE A STATIC" RATHER THAN DRILLING TRS. And auditor can and must be able to sit there comfortably for two hours handling a session. But he does not sit there in a state of zero randomity. He is running a session. You can polish up a pro by expecting two hours of TR4 without a flunk. People can do this. It is easy once the student's buttons have been flattened and his comm cycle has been cleaned up. You could even have a sort of TR4W, with W standing for "wait" where the coach intentionally sits there quietly with long comm lags and the student has to maintain his intention and session presence rather than being entertained by bullbaiting. But if you insist on pure unbullbaited TR0 with no randomity for too long a period after the student has gotten his TR zero in, you slide over into flattening tolerance for minus randomity, tolerance for no-game conditions, and "be a static". It actually acts like an overrun, turning on mass and driving the TA high. The other TRs do not really overrun like processes. The student can get invalidated by continuing too long past a big win and you can rehab that, but you don't see the other overrun phenomena, a being can do anything forever and these are drills. But with unbullbaited zero, you are not asking him to "do anything forever", instead you are asking him to "do nothing forever" and we are pushing straight up against early track and separation from static. There will be a point where his TR zero really came in. He can sit on this point for ten minutes and all is well. But if you ask him to sit on it for two hours, he is going to start mocking things up for randomity. This might flatten eventually, there are high states where the thetan can have being a static. But most people get throught two hour runs of zero randomity with suppress or by running OT drills covertly to raise havingness or whatever. It is not actually pure TR 0. Sometimes they even make big gains doing this, holding corners of the room or spotting spots in the coach's body or whatever, but the student is given absolutely zero instructions on doing anything like this. And so we have a free-for-all where he might be doing something helpful (holding corners actually is very good and mixes in well, I don't want to stop people from doing this) but he might also be doing something screwy like talking to an imaginary friend to pass the time. The important point is that you have moved out of the band of drilling confront and are over-running into something else. You can rehab (we used to do that in TR's debugs) or you can wait a few days until the restim on static cools down and it will usually run as a confront drill again. --------- OTHER IMPORTANT POINTS: These are known but sometimes get forgotten. Flatten buttons by precise duplication until the button no longer reacts. Even mass bullbaiting flattens quickly with big gains if the group can be made to flatten a button precisely. Unfortunately, it is rare that a group will do this properly unless they are all professional auditors. Since this is not needed as a session skill, it was dropped. But if it should happen on TRs that the student does overhear a remark from another student and breaks up or whatever, a good coach should try and get the other student to repeat the remark and they should flatten it. In other words, if you accidentally get into a bit of mass bullbaiting, go ahead and flatten the button if possible. Bullbaiting must be rough. Even on new people. Don't mince around. At one time bullbaiting was pulled from the HAS (comm course) and you never saw a course's stats crash so fast. And they soared back up as soon as rough bullbaiting was put back in. New people, even the highly proper and conservative ones, just love it as long as they get to do both sides, pushing buttons as well as getting them pushed, and as long as there is an air of doing it for good intentions to get people's confront up. On bullbaiting, anything can be flattened. The old R6 students used to chant GPM end words at each other (and not in sequence or with any auditing protections) and they would get through it. It might be better not to do this with new people (at least not on purpose - they will hit very heavy stuff accidentally), but don't be afraid of pushing any button, it will flatten. On new people, being a coach bullbaiting the student is actually a bit of a grade zero process. They are blowing their own communication stops by saying things they would not normally confront saying in ordinary conversation. The "lightness" on a TRs course for new people is in the gentleness of handling, validation of wins, and not staying on one TR too long. But the expectations and demands for skill should be maximum strength. You get what you validate. On any level of TRs course, the coach should validate it when he first feels that the student's TRs have come in on the particular drill. Don't leave him wondering if he's got it right because he will slide back off of it. Except for a first course, you do not want to pass the student until you see that he can maintain the TR for a while, because you need a stable result. But let him know that you are feeling good about how he is doing it. You bullbait again on TRs 3 and 4. His buttons are much more exposed while he is trying to do something rather than just sitting there. Often you get a lot of suppress on 0 bullbaited, and having him do something at the same time stops this. On TR 3 he will sometimes get away with things by putting them on a circuit. So you get more on TR 4 because he can't handle originations intelligently while letting a circuit run the session. You don't send him back to 0 for more bullbating because he will just suppress again. Really TR 3 and 4 should each be done once for comm cycle handling (no heavy bullbaiting) and again with maximum bullbaiting. And on TR 4, you emphasise intelligent and adroit handling of originations as covered in the PAB rather than robotic not-isness of the origination. -------------- A "Pro" TRs course: As I mentioned, you get what you validate. A pro course should begin with a light pass through, giving maximum validation and bailing out early on good wins. Then I would recommend a pass through the "permissive coaching" variation in the 1963 HCOB that the org unfortunately cancelled (it is in the old tech volumes and the freezone 1963 tech volume). This does not substitute for real TRs, but it is an excellent drill for getting the student to observe the fine points and raising his awareness. This can be done in a day, it is not an endurance pass. Then listen to some demo sessions. Then go for broke, emphasising naturalness as well as precision and flawlessness. If necessary you could do this in two passes, but I think that most people could make it in one. Do not go for 2 hour marathons on unbullbaited zero. It might take 2 hours before it goes in (unlikely), but when the student's got it and can maintain it for a few minutes, give him a pass. The coaching should be rough and demanding as far as holding a standard for excellence, but it should be high ARC and done in a high toned comradly way rather than invalidating. After normal TR 4 is excellent, do TR 4 with admin. Then do TR 4 with a meter and admin. Finish up with an endurance version of TR 4 (TR 4W as mentioned above), and it might as well be with admin. Include occasional bullbaiting and convoluted hard to handle originations, but also punch up this business of being able to tolerate long comm lags from the pc without having to do something. This one should be two hours by the clock because you need the ability to sit there in session. But keep the long marathons out of the lower TRs. Everything up to this last step should go fast. ----------------- METERING: The biggest bug I have seen in people trying to learn to read a meter is that they ask the meter instead of the pc. The meter doesn't have a case. It will not itself "read" on the question. Only the pc reads and you have to ask him, and the meter will report his reaction. Almost all beginning students have their TR1 going into the meter when they first try to assess. In truth, it is easier to assess by looking at the pc while also having the meter dial in your line of vision than it is to attempt to get the meter to read while staring down at it. TR 4 with a meter helps a lot. Just putting the student back on TR 1 without a meter generally does little good because you are not handling what is putting his TRs out. But the easiest solution is generally to do the instant read drill but only coach the TR 1 aspect of it until it goes in. Hope this helps, The Pilot ========================================== These posts were posted with the following trailer - ------------------ The free Self Clearing Book, The Super Scio book, and the "SCIENTOLOGY REFORMER'S HOME PAGE" are all over the net. See The Self Clearing Homepage for URLs to these sites http://fza.org/pilot/selfclr.htm Or see The Pilots Home Page at http://fza.org/pilot/index.htm Some translations are available, see links at fza.org Also see the new www.fzint.org website. All of the current posts will be collected in Super Scio Archives #59 and posted to ACT. See the Pilot Archives at FZA.ORG. Note that some of my posts only go to ACT. I cannot be reached by email. I watch ARS and ACT for messages with Pilot in the subject line. ------------------