Subject: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 63 - LATE JULY 99 PILOT POSTS TO ARS/ACT Date: 29 Jul 1999 04:00:18 From: pilot@scientology.at (The Pilot) Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology POST63.txt SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 63 - LATE JULY 99 PILOT POSTS TO ARS/ACT The first 4 posts went to both ARS & ACT. The remainder went to ACT only. Best, The Pilot (aka Ken Ogger) ========================================== Contents: subj : Super Scio - Answering JimDBB on Monroe subj : Super Scio - Answering Michaelv on Handing Out Tickets subj : Super Scio - To Surver on the Dutch Translation subj : Super Scio - If It Isn't Fun subj : Super Scio Tech - Continuing on Needing LRH subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Xmech on Remote Attacks subj : Super Scio Tech - To Bryan on Infinity subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Thomlove on Tech Plans subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Stephen About OT 8 etc. subj : Super Scio Tech - The False Bridge of the Late '60s subj : Super Scio Tech - A Few More Nice Processes subj : Super Scio Tech - CYCLES OF ACTION subj : Super Scio Tech - NOTES ON THE R7 PRESENT TIME IMPLANT ========================================== subj : Super Scio - Answering JimDBB on Monroe ANSWERING JIMDBB ON MONROE On 14 Jul 99, Jimdbb@aol.com (JimDBB) responded to my post on "Super Scio Humor - SCIENTOLOGY HEAVEN" > >Subject: Super Scio Humor - SCIENTOLOGY HEAVEN > >From: pilot@echelon.alias.net (The Pilot) > > >HUMOR: SCIENTOLOGY HEAVEN > > > >Rudy Rodds woke up in the middle of the night and looked around > >fearfully. > > > >A dark form carrying a scyth was drifting towards his bed. > >And as it approached, it began to speak in a dreadfull voice. > > > >"It is January 15, 2325 and we regret to inform you that you > >died in your sleep last night. Since you are a Scientologist, > >we will lead you to the Scientology Heaven, in accordance with > >the Astral Peace Treaty of 2128." > > I think, Pilot, that there may be more than a bit of truth in this. > Discoveries made from research at the Monroe Institute show that the > afterlife is set up with afterlife areas which which are designed > for various belief systems. There may well be a 'scientology' after > life area. > > Robert Moen has two excellent books out based on his work at the Monroe > Institute and his afterlife research. These are published by Hampton > Roads publishers. > > The Monroe Institute was set up by Robert Monroe, the author of the classic, > "Journeys out of the body". > > JIMDBB Yes, I've read both of Monroe's Journeys books and a number of others that look at the afterlife this way too, and that was in the back of my mind while I was writing the humor post. I consider this more likely than the idea of a single heaven where only one sect, if any, out of all the world's religions had guessed right about it. The sad thing is that if this is true, the orthodox Scientologists probably would have created a heavenly RPF for themselves. Luckily there would also be a Freezone Heaven for them to excape to. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio - Answering Michaelv on Handing Out Tickets ANSWERING MICHAELV ON HANDING OUT TICKETS On 19 Jul 99, Michael Voytinsky asked on topic "Clams littering in New York's Times Square?" > Last week I was in New York for the second time, and once again > I took a walk through Times Square. > > Once again I saw the ground littered with tickets to "Orientation" > (for new readers of this NG - its Scientology propaganda film). > Yet I did not see any clams handing them out. > > Do the clams just run out onto the street, throw some tickets around, > and retreat back into the org, or what? > > -- > Michael Voytinsky > Ottawa Ontario Canada > http://www.igs.net/~michaelv It's New York. When I was on staff at the NY org back in the sixties, you'd just grab a pack of handouts on your way out the door and just hand them out while you were walking to the subway or going to get a hot dog or whatever. In those days it was an invitation to the public lecture. We called them "cordial invites" because it began something like "You are cordially invited to attend ..." Staff and students were not required to hand these out (at least not in those days) but many did so occasionally, and of course somebody on a promo type post might go out with a shopping bag full and FSMs were often talked into giving out lots. Often there was just a table full of these by the door and if you felt inspired (or somebody was twisting your arm), you might grab a bunch. Since it was New York, you go through about five hundred in a few minutes, just handing them to people as you go about other business. The crowd density around Times Square is fantastic and all the Al Bundy's will grab for tickets hopeing that its a free admission to one of the girlie shows. At least 40% end up in the trash baskets and 40% end up on the pavement. People who are handing them out as part of their post sometimes pick up the discarded ones, but people who have had their arm twisted into giving out a bunch on their way to the movies don't. I think that it was a lot smarter to have a live public lecturer than to be showing a canned movie. A good one could keep a crowd entertained, telling jokes and demonstrating things and giving a bit of a show. But of course you have to have somebody who is alive and real and can think fast on his feet, and you've got to let him talk about the subject without any restrictions. But it's hard to give such a lecture if you can't think for yourself. So I suppose that they had to change over to a film. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio - To Surver on the Dutch Translation TO SURVER ON THE DUTCH TRANSLATION On 14 Jul 99, surver@hotmail.com asked on subject "to the Pilot :Dutch translation selfclearin" > Greetings Ken Ogger! > > I am considering writing a Dutch translation of the Handbook for > selfclearing this summer vacation and have 2 questions: > > 1) Do you know of anybody else who is writing a Dutch translation ? > (note: Dutch is different from German) I haven't heard of any. If somebody is, I hope they will email you or announce it on the newsgroup. Note that people should post questions like this to both ARS & ACT because many on ACT don't read ARS. > 2) Is there a major rewriting of the handbook for selfclearing in > the near future ? (apart from the updates in your excellent postings)If > so, I`d better wait for the new version. I'm not planning a major rewrite. I do plan to do a second edition eventually, but it will mainly be an expansion, adding in the extra material that I've been putting out as updates. But that is long range, I don't know if I will be ready to do it this year. The biggest deficiency is in the chapter on Protest, which really needs the Protest/Admiration process that I put out later in a separate post. I'm sorry that I didn't find this one until after writing the book. > P.S. Thanks for the great book. Without you I`d still be crawling in > CofS doing endless and useless cycles. > > surver@hotmail.com Not entirely useless or we would not bother with the subject. But so much waste and so many backwards steps for each of the forward ones that it can be heartbreaking. Welcome. And I look forward to your translation. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio - If It Isn't Fun IF IT ISN'T FUN On 20 Jul 99, Beth Guest continued the discussion on "Random thoughts for LR1467" > In article , Jeff B > writes > > > I remember coming across this one at one point: "If you're not > > having fun, then it isn't Scientology." Anybody know where that's > > from? > > I was there when Diana said this. It was at an event in the UK. > > It indicates to me as being how it should be. > (?) > > -- > Beth I heard it as "If it isn't fun, it isn't Scientology". And I heard it in NY back in the sixties. The last time I heard it on staff was in '68 when Dave Ecker (who was running the org at that time) said it at a staff meeting. I'd certainly heard it many times before from various people, it didn't originate with him. But shortly after that things started getting really rough and the saying seemed to fade out of usage. I think that I heard it on a tape once, possibly one of the congresses from the 1950s, but I just can't pin it down. But when the statement was really in vogue ('66 to early '68 in my staff experience), it was applied. You tried to make staff fun. You tried to raise the group tone level. I remember Eunice Ford (she was running NY in 66 & early 67) cracking jokes to lighten the mood while doing an inspection. I remember Bob Thomas, while issuing some heavy orders at a staff meeting to fix a big screwup, doing it in such a way as to have half of the staff almost rolling on the floor with laughter, and yet getting his point across and getting the situation handled. There was none of this screaming and dramatizing and low toned behavior. The basic reference was Science of Survival and the tone scale. A group operating in Fear or Anger makes screwed up products. The tones below 2.0 are aimed in the direction of sucumb. It's not that you have to be meek or namby-pambie. A high toned group is often loud and rude as well as cheerful. But it is fun and there is a spirit of play rather than dead seriousness. Considering how much Ron said against being "dead serious", it is just amazing how serious the Sea Org later became. People used to drop by the org just to hang out. You could wander into the reception area just looking for someone to go grab a bit to eat or whatever. Later people were scared to do that. A registrar or a recruiter would pounce on you. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - Continuing on Needing LRH CONTINUING ON NEEDING LRH Seems like some people didn't get what I was saying last time. I was not talking about worshipping LRH. I was not talking about this sick idea of there only being one source. I was not talking about the later organizational insanities. I was not even promoting standard tech. In fact I was saying the exact opposite. I was talking about something quite different. I was talking about the need for a subject that organizes subjects. I was talking about the need for a broader base that embraces many different practices and implementations. That is what Scientology was once, in the days before standard tech and KSW. That is from the time when Ron called himself the great organizer rather than the source of the tech. Something went very bad later. He mentions on the Class VIII tapes (they were posted recently) that he got run on the Sources process from Grade 5 and the session went to hell. It's not that power can't be run on a clear. It's just that some half assed auditor horribly goofed up the session on Ron. And Ron's subsequent decision that what was wrong was that it wouldn't run on a clear obviously didn't correct the screwed up session but simply prevented it from ever being repaired. Therefore it was a major wrong indication. And we can assume that that happened in 1965 because that is when power was developed. And we can look with amazement at the fact that Ron put out one of the most spectacular processes and then couldn't be run on it himself. And my guess would be that Ron was listing it out of session while writing the HCOB and that the auditor then overlisted it and pushed a wrong item on him with disasterous results. But the plain fact of the matter is that Ron got messed up on the Sources process (by his own statement on the class VIII tapes) and that this happened in 1965 and that he then immediately issued the KSW policy stating that he was the one and only source of tech. Let me say that date again. 1965. That is when Scientology became hostile to tech finders. Until then it was THE tech finder's science. Of course much of the data goes back earlier. But it is individual pieces, one here and one there. There is a terrible problem with applying earlier metaphysics in a practical manner, I know because I grew up on metaphysics and the lack of workable processes just drove me up the walls. I remember searching for answers in my teens. I remember finding some too. And yet it was horribly difficult to try and apply anything. That is what Ron really gave us. Ways of organizing and processing the higher spiritual truths. It is nice to know that all is illusion, but how do you process it? How do you drill it? What can be done about it? The ideas do go back earlier. But how do you use them? The unifying platform was outlined in 1952 to 1954 and it makes all the difference. We have only two choices if we wish to make it all the way. a) Organize on the ORIGINAL Scientology base (NOT standard tech) b) Develope a new broad base of Clearing Tech Whatever base is used, it HAS to encompass Trom, Avatar, Standard Tech, Knowledgism, Dyamism, CBR, Zen, Gurdieff, and anything else under the sun that produces a workable result. Alternative b) is possible, but the work involved is tremendous and I don't see anybody doing it. Alan will probably scream at me for saying this, but I think that he is doing an implementation rather than evolving a complete new base. There is a big difference between developing a workable practice and developing something that allows the development of new workable practices. The broadness and strength of the original base is why so many divergent practices have evolved out of Scientology. One of the many "squirrel groups" that evolved from that base was Ron's own personal squirrel group known as standard tech. It is just an implementation. One of the infinity of possiblities that opened up. And of course I'm saying "squirrel" as a joke. According to the original concept of Scientology, the only thing that is squirrel is making unworkable processes. The only squirrel idea that I've ever seen on ACT is the idea of sec checking everybody telepathically. And that is not to say that all telepathic processing is unworkable or that all sec checking is unworkable, but is only to point out that nobody is going to get any case gain by having somebody else pull witholds (real or imagined) telepathically without talking to the person for real to let some charge come off. As far as I'm concerned, the most important thing here is to see the research line advance. It is a tough proposition. As I said last time, if one person could do it alone, Ron would have. But the standard bridge, despite producing case gain, falls short of producing real OT. And so it should be obvious that a group research effort is needed. Not just me, although I will happily and egotisically say that I'm smarter than everybody else and so on. And not just Alan, although he could also claim extreme smarts and unique contributions to the work. And not just ... - (I started listing names here and I realize that I just couldn't get all of them without going on for pages and pages. Nothing could do justice to the amount of significant ideas that are appearing on ACT. Even Phil has said some things that are unique and important in the research.) But how do we align all these wonderful ideas. Are we to end up as nothing more than an interesting footnote in the history books, or can we make the real breakthrough, the one that actually gets us out of the trap. We need a base broad enough to embrace the entire field. Not just one slant on things, but something broader that pulls together multiple viewpoints into a cohesive whole. That is what Scientology once was. The real sadness is that most Scientologists do not have a clue as to what Scientology really is (or maybe I should say was). They see this other thing which replaced it and used the same name and think it is Scientology. Scientology is the science of knowing how to know. Or, restating this in terms that others might understand, Scientology is the science of how to be what is now called a squirrel (by the CofS) in an effective and workable manner. Hope this helps, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Xmech on Remote Attacks ANSWERING XMECH ON REMOTE ATTACKS On 28 Jul 99, xmech@aol.com (XMECH) posted on subject "Pilot" > I have case question. I have been audited per the standard tech > though grade four, partial Ned drug run down, super power process Super power? Orthodox or the version posted to the net? > and some of the self clearing process CCH The wall as a spiritual > process. > > I contacted the COS to get auditor training. I did not leave the > church on good relations several years ago. I received a letter > stating I had committed suppressive acts from my prior experience > and a refund I received on some auditing I had done. > > I have over the last several months have had the feeling of being > followed. I had symptoms of being other determined in my body actions > and pains in parts of my body. Waked though the night with body jerks. > My thoughts do not seem to be my own at times or I have lost control > of my thinking. My certainty had been diminished. I have gone to a > remote place in the national forest to see if there was in fact someone > following me. I could not establish this due to fact several cars did > come down the logging road I was on. The symptoms went away till I > returned to my home the following day. > > Is it possible to be attacked by others in this way that would not > involve physical contact? If it is I require what ever data you may > have to relieve the condition. If not the same request. Others can impinge on somebody telepathically, but you have to let them in, so to speak. As somebody else pointed out, objective processes can be a great help in this case. The forest might have helped because going someplace different, especially with beautiful trees etc., causes one to look around with interest and acts like running an objective process. Simply looking around and touching and letting go of things can help cool these attacks down. External attacks can not hit you with anything that you do not have your own charge on. It is only restimulative rather than creation of new charge. Anything that reduces restimulation will therefore reduce the impact of the attack. My guess would be that you are not being followed or worked against in an active manner unless you are directly fighting with the org in lawsuits or whatever, and if the org were capable of creating much of an effect with black Nots, the critics would not be doing so well. It is possible that there are a few nasty postulates or even entities being tossed in your direction, but a bit of that even happens in everyday life in the big cities - people glaring at each other and launching zaps or hate flows just because somebody else got in their way while driving or whatever. You can pretty much shrug this off if you pull yourself together and maintain a stable postion, and the basic processes in the first few chapters of self clearing are quite good for this. Another thing you can do with a particular feeling is to mockup a crowd of people and then alternately project the feeling at them and then relax and let it go and not do that. This has two purposes - first it gets you at cause over mocking up the feeling, and second, the impingments that affect you most are ones you have also done to others, and this gets your confront up on doing it and on stopping it. Or just copy any pictures or feelings a few times, changing them around etc. until you re-establish yourself as cause over them. Things happening on the telepathic band are generally mild in comparison with real physical universe impacts. Think of walking into a room full of bad feelings. You really can feel it and it can make one feel a little bit sick, these things are not delusions. But compare that feeling to how sick you might feel if somebody else punched you in the stomach. If a CofS OT were capable of mental projections that were comparable to physical universe impacts, they would also be capable of moving physical universe objects. Rest assured that they can't even manage a shadow of that. In conclusion, yes there can be telepathic attacks, but the effect is generally mild in comparison with stubbing one's toe and a small amount of processing will generally get these off your plate. The one thing you don't want to do is to get overly worried, because that keys in your own charge. So do a little bit of processing and get your tone level up. Hope this helps, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - To Bryan on Infinity TO BRYAN ON INFINITY On 14 Jul 99, Bryan asked on topic "(Pilot) infinity" > Pilot. :) > > What do you make of "get the idea of infinity"? > > Thanks, > Arc, Bryan :) See "The mechanics of Universes" near the beginning of Chapter 5 of the Super Scio book. I talked quite a bit about infinities and infinite postulates there. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Thomlove on Tech Plans ANSWERING THOMLOVE ON TECH PLANS On 14 Jul 99, Thomlove responded to my post on topic "Super Scio - All Still Quiet" > Hello Pilot; > > I just returned from a working holiday to find all the changes that > have occurred. I'm disheartened that you were exposed the way you > were, but per the chart of motions in 0-8, that occurrence can be > turned to your advantage. Yes. Akido of the mind. The stronger the opponent, the more vigorously he shoots himself in the foot. Ron discusses this on one of the early tapes in the HCL series. > You can add me to the list who are willing to assist you if it ever > comes to that. I am located quite a distance away, but I'd be willing > to go to LA for a while if necessary. I don't know what exactly I > could do at the moment, but ... circumstances would have a factor > on that scene Much thanks. Hopefully there will be no need. > Will this change your operating basis, other than the anonymity > you were able to use? I mean, in the near future, would you be > planning an Academy of some sort to run others through an > Alternative Bridge, or that kind of setup? It could be a new > Briefing Course! when you think about it. Mass clearing requires > extensive application of what research discovers to see if it has > a mass application. Anyway, I know you know all that. I'm not planning this in the near future. As far as the long range goes, we shall see. In truth I am not ideal on repetative production. On staff, I was always best in Qual rather than Tech. In the software industry, I'm best at either design or troubleshooting rather than standard production. Basically I am problem solver and I need varying problems to keep me entertained. I would do best allied with somebody who could keep a standard production line going while I wore Qual and Research hats. My impression of Ron is that he was the same way. One of my current short range targets is to get a mass market publisher for self clearing. Unfortunately another of my weak areas is sales. I tend to downplay things rather than PRing the hell out of them. > I do have a question. What kind of case condition would be best > for someone to enter into handling the Penalty universes etc.? > You did this after NOTS, so it would be important to know if it > is best for someone to get into GPM processing at that stage, or > if it could be entered into at a lower stage, such as Clear, or > Grade 4, or OTIII, and so on. The penalty universes are fairly advanced as far as item handling goes and they probably have too much kick to them unless one is Clear. So I would say that the minimum is Clear plus good results flattening easier implant platens. And before starting on something this heavy, you'd want the case to be flying, which might mean doing or dusting off various grades. I don't think that Nots or OT 3 is needed, but there is the problem of the non-interfearance zone. A light gradient of using Nots as a rudiment and handling anything that one bumps into without doing OT 3 might be better than the orthodox sequence. I'm assuming that there will be some restimulation of entity phenomena as a side effect of running implant platens, so one would want to do a bit of a cleanup to handle anything in view. But an intense run on 3 or Nots tends to produce low TA action and the penalty universes produced incredibly high TA action, so they would be a better target (assuming they will run at all). I ran the actual GPM handling of Super Scio chapter 3 after running the penalty universes, so it is certainly not a prerequisite. Since we don't have a research history of running crowds of people through these things, my inclination would be to go with the pc's interest and monitor further by TA action and by what comes up on correction lists. > I'm presently trying to create a kind of checksheet for your > Super Scio Book, and your Self Clearing Book, to make it more > 'courseable'. I've intended this for my own study, but I can > see that it would be valuable to anyone who was serious about > getting into those areas you have expanded upon or discovered. > I don't know if that would be of any assistance to you or not, > but if you think so, when I'm done, I'll put it up here for you > to qual. It'll take a while... Very good. > I'm also trying to find processes in the early tapes to flesh > out the grades you proposed in your works. When that is done, > I'll post that for others to check out and qual. It could be a > very important advance to produce an Alternative Bridge with all > the grades fully fleshed out. We have the hindsight now that LRH > never had, and we have the freedom to do so that the CofS doesn't > have. Yes, exactly. As you probably know, I'm a fanatic for the 1950's tapes. Let's hope that fzba keeps them comeing. One of the things I want to avoid is obscuring the source materials that I'm working from, and that means that all the LRH stuff has to be out there for everybody. > Anyway, wishing you the best, and no doubts that you will get > the best. You deserve the acknowledgement. > > Thom Thank you. Also, in answer to another message - On 20 Jul 99, Thomlove asked on topic "Pilot" > Hello Pilot; > > Could you please post what the page format is for your two works, Self > Clearing and the Super Scio Book. I need to know what the page size is, > and what the font and font size is. My printout doesn't match properly > the page to page relationship in your List of Contents. > > Thanks. > > Thom There is none. These were posted to the newsgroups in pure text just like this message. At that time I was completely anonymous and not even in contact with the websites hosting them or the people who made some formatted versions of the books. There are some formatted versions on the net, but you would have to ask whomever did the formatting. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Stephen About OT 8 etc. ANSWERING STEPHEN ABOUT OT 8 ETC. On 20, Jul 99, "stephen" asked on subject "Pilot-CofS OT 8" > Dear Pilot, > > What do you think the current CofS OT 8 covers and why the Freewinds ? My best guess would be that it's the original OT 1 which is to map out one's recent lifetimes. The original OT I had already been replaced by the time of the Class VIII course. I believe that the old OT levels through OT VI were basically in place by that time. However, what we now call old OT VII had not yet been developed. But if you look at the Cl 8 transcripts posted to the net recently, you will see that LRH does discuss an "OT VII" which is not the later old OT VII. Let's call this the "original OT VII". That original VII was never release (and note that the hypothetical original OT VIII comes after it). He does not really describe it. But he makes one comment which he says is from the OT VII that he is developing, and the comment is that one can put the rudiments in on any time period. Considering that the mapping of recent lifetimes had already been bumped from OT I, and further hypothesising that he would not have dropped such a thing entirely, I would suspect that the original OT VII was to map one's recent lifetimes with the additional action of putting the rudiments in on each lifetime. This makes sense as a level. Assess for the dates of a lifetime, and then either fly each rudiment on it, or if needed do an L1C or perhaps some similar assessment that has some extra tailoring towards indicating bypassed charge about the lifetime. I can't guarantee where they would put this, whether at OT 8 or higher, but it would be a nice action to run. As for doing it on the ship, that makes it a bit easier to keep it confidential and to keep people under control, and if you want to send somebody to ethics, it is tough for them to blow. > Also do you think they really have any more OT levels and if so why > do they not release them ? At a minimum they have all the old levels that were bumped, such as the old OT I above and old IV to VII, plus whatever notes Ron left for the original OT VIII. That puts old OT VIII up at OT 13 at least. It is also possible that there are sketches for another half dozen levels, based on the huge amount of processes from the 1950s. As to why they don't release them, I can come up with lots of ideas - a) Maybe Ron left some orders for expanding or improving them but did not explain in detail and they don't know enough of the old 50s tech to safely expand them. b) Maybe they are simply going very slow because they know that there wouldn't be any more after these are released. c) Maybe MarCabbage tried to run one and couldn't do it, so he is afraid to deliver it to public. d) Maybe they are taking Ron's orders about St. Hill size seriously. e) Maybe Pat Broker has them hidden in a locker at the airport and wants them to pay him a few million for the key. f) Maybe the incompetants can't remember where they hid them for safekeeping. g) Maybe the conspiracy stories are real and the folks at the top do not want the levels to be released. > Best wishes, Stephen Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - The False Bridge of the Late '60s THE FALSE BRIDGE OF THE LATE 60's From the very first, Ron had hoped for an ultimate, a super technology that always worked on everybody. This should be obvious from DMSMH. And yet, in terms of handling the real world, the technology itself only produced sporatic results. What we got instead was a sort of "feel better" effect where the person could better face and handle something. That one can be produced consistantly. But sometimes they "felt better" and the real world changed, and other times they only "felt better" and undesirable conditions went on as before. This mixture of varying results persists to this day, and it permeates all the clearing technologies, not just CofS standard tech, but everything. It is something we have learned to live with and to work around. The solution was first spotted in 1970, and it was the concept of expanded grades. Instead of running to one release in an area, you went for hundreds of them, and sooner or later you would get past the simple "feel better" into a real world change. And this practice of accumulating many wins into a stable gain is not limited to modern expanded grades. It's there in self clearing and I think that you will see it in CBR's tech and ACW's and any of the others who produce a stable result. I think that we've all passed beyond the level of taking one quick win and bailing out. Certainly anyone who went through the quickie era in CofS would know better. But what people often miss in studying LRH tech is that this breakthrough is very late in the research line. It was NOT known prior to 1970. All of earlier Scientology is permeated by the idea that there would be one right process for something, and if you ran it properly, there would be a standard result which would be a physical universe change rather than just a "feel good." And remember that the Tech Degrades policy did not come out until 1970. Prior to that, Ron himself was the worst tech degrader of them all, continually saying that the previous processes were old and replaced and so forth. In the area of problems, for example, he was always looking for the one right problems process. And every one he found occasionally produced a spectacular result but usually only produced the mundane result of feel better. So he would discard it and find another problems process, assuming that there was something wrong with the previous one because it didn't always produce the big result. The final ultimate problems process was the one we know of as "problems and solutions." That was the ONLY process normally used on Grade 1 (problems) from 1965 until 1970. And it is the best of the problems processes, but used by itself, you will usually get a feel better instead of a real world change. But I should modify that slightly by saying that we were allowed to run other processes on problems prior to the introduction of standard tech. The older processes were not actually being stamped out. Although Ron had put out the wrong datum that FN equals a Grade Release, if the examiner, upon talking to the pc, felt that there was any doubt in the preclear's mind about having achieved grade 1, he would send the person back to get another problems process run to FN. Or at least that is how it was when I was auditing at the NY org, it might have been different at St. Hill. Furthermore, Qual was allowed to use any old problems process if problems was reacting on the green form. So the older tech was not quite gone or stamped out prior to standard tech. But it was looked upon as a deficiency, either in the auditor or in the preclear not really running deep enough or whatever. In other words, throughout the evolution of the tech, at any given time there was one right process for problems, and when a better one was found, it then became the one right process, and the others were things used by old timers or in special circumstances. With the introduction of standard tech, the slack which allowed for using other processes was removed and we were sitting there with the grades in their supposed ultimate simplest form, one process per grade run to one FN which was the grade release, and any deviation was something to be debugged and corrected. The result, of course, was "quickie grades" and a massive collapse as Scientology lost its ability to deliver solid gains. What any student of the 60s material needs to understand is that this search for the one right magic button permeates all the briefing course materials and most especially permeates the Class VIII materials. When Ron talks about drawing a narrow line across an ocean of data on the class VIII tapes, the ocean of data is 1950s Scientology and the narrow line is quickie grades. When expanded grades did come out in 1970, there was a bit of sweeping things under the carpet. Ron never liked to admit to mistakes and so he pussyfoots around the fact that he enforced quickies and concentrates on promoting the new breakthrough into expanded grades. And after all, the subject was a research line and he had simply made a mistake and corrected it. So we forgive and forget. Except that there is a huge problem with that. The 1960s material is just full of absolute statements. Things along the lines of saying that X is the one right why and Y is the one correct source for something. That entire way of thinking was put to the test and failed disasterously in 1969. The expanded grades philosophy is the exact opposite. Namely, that there are multiple "whys" in an area and that we get a stable and consitant result by running the pc that way. And this was never beefed up and highlighted even though it was the crucial difference between a tech that worked and one that failed. And now people in CofS study with a training methedology that requires absolute and literal minded acceptance of what Ron says as being perfect. And so they take these statements as absolutes and there is no good reference to hand them that says to take these things with a grain of salt. And, although the grades were expanded, the philosophy of looking at everything from this new viewpoint was never really presented clearly. We had learned for the first time that the research was cumulative instead of a linear evolution. And that makes all the difference in the world. The old way was to assume that running problems and solutions replaced running problems of comparable magnitude. The new way was to realize that they did not address the same exact target and that both needed to be run. Based on that philosophy, grade 6 needed to be expanded to include the GPMs of 1962 as a separate source with its own steparte handling and the GPMs of 1963 (which are quite different) as a separate thing, and the GPMs of 1964 as a separate thing, and so forth, and one would assume that NONE of these were handled by doing the clearing course (or by going Dianetic clear). If something ran with gains, it was addressing something that needs to be run. The message is that it is an accumulation rather than a one and only basic. Someday a few of us might start walking through walls and be able to state with certainty what minimum subset will get everybody through it all quickly. But for now, we need that ocean of data and we need to run every different handling under the sun on an area to get a stable result in the real world rather than a quickie feel good. Personally, I'm inclinded towards running lots and lots of different processes in an area as light and fast as possible, you can always take a second run through if you didn't get deep enough the first time. The one thing that we know for sure is that you do not make a stable problems release by running a hundred hours of one problems process no matter how good it is. But we used to get big stable releases in about 25 hours each when expanded grades came out by running lots of different processes on a grade. And so the proven datum is that attempting to be overly thorough with a limited process is the wrong way, and attempting to come at something from many different angles is correct. I do not know how far this can be short-cutted. It is possible to run too shallow and not get anywhere, but that is harmless and one can always take another pass through an area. The big blunder is in thinking that one has the one and only why and to grind it to death and bend things out of shape to force fit them into a limited theory. Hope this helps, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - A Few More Nice Processes A FEW MORE NICE PROCESSES Just some odds & ends that I thought I should get onto the net rather than sitting on. ===== A nice variation on SOP 8-C step 1 (places where you're not): Find some universes you're not in right now. ===== Handling Unconsciousness - Without actually going unconscious, alternately mockup or get the idea of being conscious & unconscious. Put unconsciousness on the far sides of walls etc. blanket cities with unconsciousness. blanket cities with not-know. ===== Mocking up goals for tomorrow. Mockup a goal for the next year and visualize doing it. Discard that and mockup a different goal & visualize doing it. Etc. Many times. Reasonable goals. Unreasonable goals. Possible actions. Impossible actions. Lots & lots. Make each sequence as real as possible, as if you were actually going to do it and achieve the goal. ====== Manipulating Spaces - Mockup two separate spaces. Connect & disconenct them from each other. Merge & separate them alternately. ============ Close your eyes. Spot a cloud in the sky. Alternately be the cloud and be yourself. ============ MOCKING UP HEALING The explanation is a bit complex, but actually running it is easy and it works like dynamite. Exterior, mockup healing people. Mockup somebody with something wrong and you put out a healing wave & they get better. Mockup specific people with specific ailments & you make them better. Have them feel happy at the healing. Occasionally have them thank you. Start with easy things and then work up to outrageous ones. Make limbs grow back. Make old people young. Have bodies rise up from the grave & become young and healthy. After you have done a lot of this in general, you can also work in some condition you'd like to handle on yourself. Mockup curing people of it. Lots of specific people. Mock them up in many different places and you hit them with a wave and they get cured. Alternate this with the general healing above. You do some on the specific condition, and then you do some in general and then some on that same specific condition etc. If a somatic turns on, concentrate on doing whatever healing it was that turned it on. Not on healing the somatic but on healing the thing you were mocking up healing when the somatic turned on. Especially if the somatic is a funny itching sensation that is often associated with healing. For example, you mockup curing somebody of glasses and you get a funny itching in your eyes, so you concentrate on mocking up curing people of glasses. Don't direct any of these mockups at healing your own body, do it all on others, flatten anything that turns on by continuing to mockup healing others. Trying to heal yourself can key in other things and you can run into stops that don't turn on when you mockup healing others. The idea is that as you build up your postulates to heal others, you heal yourself too as a side effect. Also, many conditions come about because you wished them on others and this reverses that flow. Sometimes you might suddenly remember a specific person that had that condition and you mockup healing them and you feel that this might have been somebody that you copied the condition from. For example, you are running a bad back and you suddenly remember that your father had a bad back and so you mockup healing him and you feel a lot of charge starting to shift around. If that happens, you should keep going back on that person and mocking up healing them until you have gotten off as much charge as possible. But you will probably need to do that by mocking up healing them a few times, and then mocking up healing others of the condition, and then you do them a few more times, and then some others, and then them again until the charge on that person with that condition seems gone. While handling something that turned on, you might still need to do a bit of the general version occasionally to keep the repetative mocking up of healing a specific condition running properly. The general version gets the specific version moving again when it flattens, so that you can keep running this deeper. =============== EFFORT AND INTENTION At the top one does things effortlessly. To the degree that effort is present, one also gets resistance. Consider TR 7 vs TR 9. Note that you can use force effortlessly. One tends to turn on efforting when one uses force or when one tries to put out strong intention, and that holds one back. The trick is to get the effort separated from these things. a) Pick some innocous but pleasant object. Alternately: b) mockup copies of it effortlessly c) strain (effort) to mockup copies of it After a few alternations, pick another object and repeat. Next pick a light and easy to move physical object. Alternately move it effortlessly and move it while straining to move it with effort. As in the first process, change objects occasionally and continue. ================ Have fun, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - CYCLES OF ACTION CYCLES OF ACTION The native cycle of action of a thetan is to be constantly creating. But once a being gets stuck in traps like this universe, he can't make his creations manifest instantly, and so he uses a cycle of Conceive-Project-Manifest. In more detail, this is: 1. Conceptual Create - 2. Repetatively projecting the Creation 3. Creation Manifest This could also be viewed as Be-Do-Have or Mind-Body-Product. In other words, you mockup something, and then you have to keep mocking it up until it manifests. Create-Survive-Destroy is an implant. In an unabberated cycle, the third step is not an absence (as in destroy) but a havingness (as in manifest). The abberation is - 1. Create - but it doesn't manifest immediately 2. Struggle, trying to keep it going but decaying 3. A decay down into destruction We should be able to just create & create & create, but the universe & group agreement resists manifesting the creations, hence the need for repetative create without sliding downscale before the creation will manifest. The big repetative cycle will occasionally need lesser cycles within it. As lesser cycles are completed, you must go back to the bigger cycle and resume from the point where you left off. Abberation is sliding off into a lesser cycle and not comeing back up to the bigger one, but instead moving off in the direction of the lesser cycle, which should have been a temporary action. In going from A to B, you hit point AX and find that C needs to be handled. So you do AX to C and then get back to AX and continue from AX to B as quickly as possible. You always keep the real target, B, in mind while you do the cycle with C. You must avoid going A to AX to C and then from C to somewhere else. In truth all destruction is an abberation, it is not the opposite of create. At basic, a being either creates something or he doesn't, and when he doesn't it is not there. This is not destruction. He can create it again when he feels like it, he has not destroyed it but simply stopped creating it. For example, you begin playing a Beethoven sonata at the piano. Then you stop. It is not destroyed. You can play it again when you feel like it, you have simply stopped playing for the moment. Destroy is a solution to having creations persist out of one's control, but it is undesirable to handle things that way, it becomes an even worse problem because now you have trouble mocking the thing up again when you want it. At the top, alter-isness does not bring about a persistance. Going back to the Beethoven example again, you take the melody and begin playing some jazz variations on it. The original is still available. You can have both. You can do one or the other at will. The original is not obscured by the altered version and the altered version does not persist any more than the original does. Which one you choose to play more often is a matter of taste and quality and asthetics and has nothing to do with the sequence of alterations. Persistance of the altered condition is yet another abberation. At a guess, this one is linked with abberations on consecutive time where the present obscures the past or something like that so that you have to keep the altered one around because you can't get back to the original. Also, the practice of not-isness, which could also be termed destruction, obscures the as-isness of things and would therefore lead to a persistance of alter-isness as the last vestige remaining of things which one doesn't want to loose completely. All of the above ideas started jumping into view when I got the idea that I was continuously implanting the create-survive-destroy cycle into others as part of the continuous PT implant. Get the idea of blanketing the planet with telepathic waves that make everybody think that the create-survive- destroy cycle is necessary to existance. Get the idea that you are doing it to each person on earth continuously and that they are doing it to you continuously and that others are doing it to each other continuously. There is a sort of flow zero on this as well. Get the idea that we are doing this to ourselves. And get the idea that we are only fooling ourselves in thinking that we are doing this to others and that the real effect of that is that we do it to ourselves without realizeing it. I'll talk more about the continuous PT implant in a separate post. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - NOTES ON THE R7 PRESENT TIME IMPLANT NOTES ON THE R7 PRESENT TIME IMPLANT See my earlier posting on "Tech Breakthrough" and the post on "Cycles of Action" that I'm also issuing at this time. The theory is that we are running a continuous PT implant in on each other. This implant holds reality solid and keeps us in agreement. It only works against somebody because he is doing it to others. It is a continuous telepathic flow below the level of consciousness and one is blanketing the planet and everyone on it with this flow. But let me warn you that this is still theory. I'm finding things on this and getting lots of cognitions, but it could still be only half right. This one is really hard to see and I'm only getting at it by approximating it in mockup form and following up on whatever seems to raise awareness, produce cognitions, and take off charge. I called this "R6" in the "Tech Breakthrough" post, but that was just a vague generality. It is not a pattern of terminals and oppterms along the lines of the 1964 GPMs or the CC of 1965, although it does have some characteristics of those. In honor of Ron's "Level VII" tape and to indicate that this is something like R6 but the next layer up, I've decided to start calling this thing R7. The exact anatomy of it is still unknown. I'm using R7 as a catchall for whatever the hell turns out to be in it. The primary characteristic is that it is being projected in present time, and so my first order of test and the way of running it is to mockup projecting something over the entire planet telepathically and see if something begins to react or come into view. The technique of mockup by approximation is do many mockups of something that is suspected to be there around the area that it is suspected to be in. The mockups that are close start getting drawn into whatever is really there and tend to be pulled around to match what is really there. You sort of go with the flow as you do this, letting things shift as they feel like shifting until the real thing becomes visible. Ron used this to bring GE anchor points into view. It also works for making things like chakras visible. There are other applications. The first suspicion that panned out on this R7 implant was Create-Survive-Destroy. I picked it because around 1956 LRH theorized that it had to be implanted. And yet it is true in the real world. You don't have to think about it or have charge for something to follow the create- survive-destroy cycle, it just happens in the real world even if nobody is watching. So it permeates everything, and it does so in PT rather than being a restimulation of some older implant. As soon as I started getting the idea of sort of beaming that one all over the planet, it felt like energy was shifting around and I started having cognitions like crazy on cycles of action and on C-S-D especially. That is all written up in the "Cycles of Action" post. And I started getting a picture with it. On create, a temple is created and then on survive it is overgrown by the jungle and begins crumbling and on destroy it is in ruins. And I started getting a rhythm on it. Create and Survive are fast and then destroy hangs there a bit. And the whole thing goes over and over, C-S-D, with the rhythm and that picture each time. And note that it is not really in words but is a language independent conceptual intention. After zeroing in on it, the next step is to alternately project it for a few cycles and not project it for a few cycles, with the idea being to cool down or stop one's continuous unconscious projection of it across the planet. As this begins to flatten I seem to get a feeling of pulling back on the "not project" step and after a few more alternations, there seems to be a feeling of real quiet. Once the outgoing wave flattens, you can alternate admiring and ignoring the incoming wave until it ceases to affect you. I fooled around with a lot of other concepts, trying to find another item of comparable magnitude to C-S-D. Often I got the feeling that I was hitting the edges but not quite close enough, and then I got "sleep" to run. And it expanded out into Awake-Working...-Sleep. And the rhythm was different, with working being the longest and sleep a bit shorter and awake being fast and crisp. And the time for the whole cycle is not quite the same as for C-S-D, but the two do run concurrently, so that there is a sort of asthetic inter-relationship of the two varying rhythms, like two different drums occasionally lining up together and then synchopating and then lining up again. And the picture I got on this one was like somebody (a peasant woman?) in a field, and they work and then they lie down in the field and sleep and then they are hit by some drops of rain and jump awake, and then the work again, etc. over and over. There is a hypnotic quality to the continual repeat, and a bit of a feeling of overrun because it goes on and on. Another of these is Alive-Dead-Forgotten. The long one is alive, dead is quick and forgotten is of medium duration. The picture seems to be of a seated man, who becomes a skeleton which is then covered by cobwebs. Another one that seems to be there is Rebellious-Overwhelmed- Agreeing. These seem to be steady state cycles. If there was only one terminal, it would flatten or otherwise give way under the impossiblity of holding an absolute perpetually. If there were two terminals, the tendency would be to flip flop eventually and begin to go down a GPM like progression. But three terminals seems to be enough to form a cycle that just loops on itself infinitely without change. Generally one of the three seems to hold for the bulk of the time but we swing throught he other two occasionally before getting pushed back into the one that is intended to persist. Then, in regards to physical universe laws, I found violation-delusion-mechanics. In other words, there is a moment when one might violate physical laws, and then it seems like the violation was a delusion, and then one is back into physical universe mechanics. And that reminded me of endless times where I'd mentally push at something and it seemed to move for a moment and then it seemed like that was just a delusion. It wouldn't work to hold the physical laws always absolute, but it works to allow momentary violations and then make it seem like they were delusions. The last one I've found so far is responsibility-abandonment-effect. In other words, whenever you abandon responsibility, you slide into effect until you take responsibility again. But in this form, it doesn't lead anywhere, but simply cycles around. At this stage I think that all the items will be in triads rather than opterm pairs. As far as I can see right now, these aren't even spiraling up and down, but just going round and round endlessly. I think there is a broader overall structure, perhaps threes of threes, but I'm not seeing it clearly yet. I'm sorry that this is still so incomplete, but it's heavy and highly occluded and I prefer to get my notes on something like this onto the net as fast as possible. Best, The Pilot ========================================== All of this weeks posts went out with the following header - ------------------ 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 #63 and posted to ACT. See the Pilot Archives at FZA.ORG. Individual posts to ARS are being double posted to ACT rather than cross posted to foil the spambot attack which takes good headers and attaches garbage messages to them. 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. ------------------