Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
Much has been made (by Scientologists and by others) of Scientology's emphasis on states. State of OT. Clear. Keyed out. Release. All those. This has backfired on the cult and on the ology itself by focusing other people's attention on what those people are alleged to be able to do. Exes and non Scn'ists call those "powers", Scientologists call them "abilities". Either way, the claims were inflated by Hubbard. And I say "inflated" rather than "made up" or "total bullshit" deliberately. But what most people in and out of Scn overlook is the mutability of those states.
A basic premise of and in Scn is that we were all once at "native state", became irresponsible, interiorized, collected an accretion of cosmic grief and bad karma (my wording-certainly not Hubbard's!) and ended up as meatballs, humanoids, homo sapiens, balls of fluff, etc. Hubbard's bridge is meant to address all that and make us all into homo novis, then, eventually, free of the whole mess. Now of course, it doesn't do that- though as you know, I personally think he makes a rather good beginning at it and was on to something, at any rate. This doesn't mean I'd advise anyone to drop half a million bux or a lifetime in a very nasty cult to achieve that, however- I wouldn't.
But take a look at the ideas and theories themselves.
Item: We were (the story goes) once at native state. Could do anything. It was awesome.
Item: Then we weren't. Over time, we fucked up enough to where we ended up at effect, subject to the whims of bodies, and not able to do much of anything other than move the body around.
Why? Because it's all mutable. It's all subject to change. So when I read or hear some Scn'ist saying "oh, once I hit OT, I'll be able to this and that and I'll be free." or I see some critic talking about the way Scn'ists think about that, it occurs to me that neither one of them is looking at the fact that if we got degraded and fell from Native State once, we can certainly do it again. So even if truly became free of one's case, able to move into and out of a body at will, that doesn't mean he or she will always be able to do that. Start fucking people over, making bad decisions, not confronting things, and that state won't last. It didn't before (according to Scn theory) so why would it NOW? So when people talk about how Hubbard acted like a whacko or what bad shape he was in when he died, I don't see ANY conflict there with Scn ideology. Because there isn't.
It's obvious to me, too, that all states and abilities and spiritual achievements are a matter of degree. (LOL! I almost wrote "decree"!) Some people are more capable than others. Or to use a non Scn example, some psychics are more psychic than others. Some saints or saddhus can perform more miracles than others or different types.
This is something that people tend to leave out when discussing how stupid THEY think trying to aim for the states of "OT" or "Clear" is. They try to make it all or nothing, it's all wowie zowie, it's all good, Scn'ists think that, they know they do because they did when THEY were Scn'ists. I think that's because the cult, and Hubbard, too, in his writing does too much carrot dangling. "Miserable now?" they say; "Well, you'll go OT and you'll do this and it will be fine." Sure, there are bulletins and taped lectures where Hubbard goes into the mechanics of how these things are won and lost and viewpoints and responsibility but when they're SELLING people their "packages", they don't ever mention this. They don't mention the mutability, they don't mention the matter of degree, they don't mention responsibility. Certainly, there's the OT preps but that doesn't do it either.
I think that anyone who's interested in doing Scn or is interesting in criticizing Scn is doing himself a disservice by not looking at the fact that states are mutable and a matter of degree and that this IS part of Scientology (though omitted by every reg when it comes time to sell the service).
A basic premise of and in Scn is that we were all once at "native state", became irresponsible, interiorized, collected an accretion of cosmic grief and bad karma (my wording-certainly not Hubbard's!) and ended up as meatballs, humanoids, homo sapiens, balls of fluff, etc. Hubbard's bridge is meant to address all that and make us all into homo novis, then, eventually, free of the whole mess. Now of course, it doesn't do that- though as you know, I personally think he makes a rather good beginning at it and was on to something, at any rate. This doesn't mean I'd advise anyone to drop half a million bux or a lifetime in a very nasty cult to achieve that, however- I wouldn't.
But take a look at the ideas and theories themselves.
Item: We were (the story goes) once at native state. Could do anything. It was awesome.
Item: Then we weren't. Over time, we fucked up enough to where we ended up at effect, subject to the whims of bodies, and not able to do much of anything other than move the body around.
Why? Because it's all mutable. It's all subject to change. So when I read or hear some Scn'ist saying "oh, once I hit OT, I'll be able to this and that and I'll be free." or I see some critic talking about the way Scn'ists think about that, it occurs to me that neither one of them is looking at the fact that if we got degraded and fell from Native State once, we can certainly do it again. So even if truly became free of one's case, able to move into and out of a body at will, that doesn't mean he or she will always be able to do that. Start fucking people over, making bad decisions, not confronting things, and that state won't last. It didn't before (according to Scn theory) so why would it NOW? So when people talk about how Hubbard acted like a whacko or what bad shape he was in when he died, I don't see ANY conflict there with Scn ideology. Because there isn't.
It's obvious to me, too, that all states and abilities and spiritual achievements are a matter of degree. (LOL! I almost wrote "decree"!) Some people are more capable than others. Or to use a non Scn example, some psychics are more psychic than others. Some saints or saddhus can perform more miracles than others or different types.
This is something that people tend to leave out when discussing how stupid THEY think trying to aim for the states of "OT" or "Clear" is. They try to make it all or nothing, it's all wowie zowie, it's all good, Scn'ists think that, they know they do because they did when THEY were Scn'ists. I think that's because the cult, and Hubbard, too, in his writing does too much carrot dangling. "Miserable now?" they say; "Well, you'll go OT and you'll do this and it will be fine." Sure, there are bulletins and taped lectures where Hubbard goes into the mechanics of how these things are won and lost and viewpoints and responsibility but when they're SELLING people their "packages", they don't ever mention this. They don't mention the mutability, they don't mention the matter of degree, they don't mention responsibility. Certainly, there's the OT preps but that doesn't do it either.
I think that anyone who's interested in doing Scn or is interesting in criticizing Scn is doing himself a disservice by not looking at the fact that states are mutable and a matter of degree and that this IS part of Scientology (though omitted by every reg when it comes time to sell the service).