The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[Blue Spirit]

Odds and Ends

Yes, having the right connections is important. You will make it -- wherever or whatever "it" happens to be for you.

No doubt ACW could be a dominating, ornery cuss. We met some years ago looking at the possibility of me working with him and his people. His reputation had preceded him. Yet, we had been respectfully in touch on a.c.t.

I went to Dallas to meet. Over lunch it was readily obvious to me that this guy was a very good auditor. This is something I might have guessed at in reading his internet postings, but that would have been just a guess considering the 3P that preceded him.

I say that he was obviously a good auditor not because either of us had any coffee shop auditing going on, but because there was a free give and take in the communication cycle and a relaxed freedom to examine own thoughts, that is out of the norm for most of what passes for communication IRL. In social conversation, people don't usually access how they really think and feel.

In my experience, scientologists are among the more difficult people to audit. Many have misunderstoods and expectations that are sometimes just downright weird. It's like before session they are pretty much themselves, then when they pick up the cans you are auditing someone else, the pc valence. Talk about implants, there it is! Scientology delivered as implantology. It seems that as time marches forward, fewer and fewer people have a clue as to the ideal scene for a session. Auditing a pc off the street, or one setup through a Mission, was way different than auditing an SO member. The deeper in Scientology, it seems, the greater the opportunity for misunderstoods and weird expectations.

Part of the implant says the higher classed the auditor the better. I have always encouraged my students and pc's to find someone they can talk to, someone who they feel comfortable with, someone who they trust. There has to be a mutual degree of comfort and trust in this working relationship called auditor/pc. A fantastic process is along the lines of, "Tell me your story. Tell me so I can understand it. If I don't understand something, I ask a few questions. Okay?" Then just kick back and listen. And really make an effort to understand. It doesn't take a classed auditor to do that. It takes a friend or a fellow human being.

As a pc I have always wanted my auditors to win. In turn, I have won big. I know other people have, too. Sometimes the wins and gains and enlightenments are so huge no one, not the auditor, not the C/S, not L. Ron Hubbard, would really understand. I am still twigging on stuff I achieved more than 30 years ago. Some of my most enlightening moments in auditing have been in the presence of student auditors. Give me someone I enjoy talking to, and a little bit of guidance when I stumble. That's all I need.

And to end off on this post, I find the following quote exactly expresses how I feel about good auditing:

But oh! the blessing it is to have a friend to whom one can speak fearlessly on any subject;
with whom one’s deepest as well as one’s most foolish thoughts come out simply and safely.
Oh, the comfort—the inexpressible comfort of feeling safe with a person—
having neither to weigh thoughts nor measure words,
but pouring them all right out, just as they are, chaff and grain together;
certain that a faithful hand will take and sift them,
keep what is worth keeping,
and then with the breath of kindness blow the rest away.
— Dinah Craik, A Life for a Life, (1859)​

A nice poem of Truth, that one.

I was a bit slow to take decades to find a good processor.

ACW had one aberration shared with LRH (probably more than one) and that

is that I know of two who contributed to Knowledgism who were not acknowledged.

In full agreement with you, Dart said to me that "I don't care what Class someone is, but just ask them if they can process."

The worst auditor I ever had is a Class-8 and one of the best I ever had (wish I'd stayed with him) was a Class-4 in the field.


Your understanding Ted, is really appreciated and is helping me.

 

[Blue Spirit]

I'm Not Sure I Could Get Used To That !

Gee, Carmelo, I'm not sure I could get used to no Reg calls on Wednesday

and Thursday. It would just be too quiet and minus randomity !

On the other hand the rattlesnakes might be preferable to the Reg Snakes,

which is exactly what those Fucking bastards are.

 

[Ted]

(I don't understand "3P" and IRL ??)

3P = Third Party

IRL = In Real Life, not internet

 

[Ted]

Just to be clear...

The "poem" that I quoted is prose, 1859, Victorian-style prose. Because of the way I formatted it, and have seen it formatted elsewhere, and the way it reads, it looks like a poem.

I first read the quote some years ago in a book called Native American Wisdom. The statement was attributed to an American Indian. Last year I decided to use it in a book I was editing. That caused me to question the authorship. I searched the internet to find the prose came from Dinah Craik's A Life for a Life.

I have not read the book and might never. If I take up a study of Victorian culture or history of that period, this might be a place to start.

Quoting From Victorian Web
The two novels most in demand at the libraries in the year 1859 were George Eliot's Adam Bede and Dinah Craik's A Life for a Life. Taking Craik on her own terms, we might briefly compare these two books not as literature but as popular fiction — as stories that were read by a great many people, and that gave to those readers a picture of the world and a set of images that could influence their own perceptions of the possibilities for human action.

A Life For A Life Go to pages 270/271 to find the quote in context.

 

[lkwdblds]

On the Class of your auditor

A nice poem of Truth, that one.

I was a bit slow to take decades to find a good processor.

ACW had one aberration shared with LRH (probably more than one) and that

is that I know of two who contributed to Knowledgism who were not acknowledged.

In full agreement with your post, Dart said to me that "I don't care what

Class someone is, but just ask them if they can process.

The worst auditor I ever had is a Class-8 and one of the best I ever had

(wish I'd stayed with him) was a Class-4 in the field.


Your understanding Ted, is really appreciated and is helping me.

(I don't understand "3P" and IRL ??)

Blue - I was looking at the "Class" of one's auditor. If an auditor is "Standard", and he or she is runing you on a particular thing such as Dianetics or the Grades 0-IV, I believe it should not make any difference if that auditor is merely that class which is required or of a higher class. Based on what sort of affinity is able to be establish between the pc and the auditor, that could possibly lead to one auditor getting better results than another but the determining cause would not be "class" but rather ARC and standardness of the auditor's TR's and comm cycle.

One area where class could conceivably play a part is if something goes wrong. A higher classed auditor has more tools available to spot the oupoint which occurred, pull out the appropriate list and do the needed correction and do this all "seamlessly" with no jerks and without pulling the pc's attention off the session. When I was only a Dianetic auditor I was not able to do correction lists or fly ruds or pull withholds, etc. and there lingered in the back of my mind the question, what if something goes wrong, what will I do? This probably manifested itself as a bit of uncertainty showing through my TR's.

Probably this is what my former nemises and now respected Class VIII mentor, Don Keeler, probably saw when he pulled me off the interneship and said I lacked certainty. In those days, C/S'es did not tape an auditor's sessions so he could not see me being nervous or apprehensive but he could probably detect it in my after session write ups. Don was perceptive to see that I was nervous and uncertain in worrying about something going wrong.

Since I blew all my charge on Don the other day I will not natter but I believe that without any reactive content involved behind my statement I can still give my opinion that if I had been in his position I think it would have been better if he had gone after improving my certainty in cramming rather than booting me off the course. Anyway, he was the C/S and a Class VIII C/S. no less, and it was his call to make and he made it as he saw fit.

SUMMARY Theoretically, if you get a Class IV action from a fully standard Class IV or a Class VI, VIII, or even a XII, it should not make any difference as to the kind of results you get. If there are differences, the IV can get better results than the VIII and vice versa and if this consistently happens, then if both auditors are standard it would be intangibles which cause the difference to occur. The intangible probably would concern the pc feeling "safer" with one auditor than the other. Safeness could be caused by gender, someone not wishing to discuss their 2D with a person of the opposite sex for example, or "bedside manner" or some intangible such as one of the auditors being an old friend of the family. I hope this helps!
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Gee, Carmelo, I'm not sure I could get used to no Reg calls on Wednesday

and Thursday. It would just be too quiet and minus randomity !

On the other hand the rattlesnakes might be preferable to the Reg Snakes,

which is exactly what those Fucking bastards are. :

ON REGGING: Oy Vey, such a topic! Probably "regging" is one of the most charged buttons amongst ex Scientologists. Along my journey through Scientology, regging changed. It was always tough and never reasonable but it got much tougher along the way.

Other organizations, particularly car dealers are known for hard regging. In the car business, the "T.O.", turnover to a salesperson of a higher rank is nearly always used. The car dealers' tech manual states that once the prospective buyer walks out the door of the dealership, he will probably never be seen again, even though he assures them he will be back.

Scientology overcame this stop which car dealers have to deal with by making their product a monopoly which you can not buy anywhere else. Not only could it not be purchased anywhere else but it was promoted as not existing elsewhere at any price. This, which all we exes bought into, turned out to not be the total truth. The valid parts of Scio tech do exist elsewhere, parts in the Tao, parts in this Eastern religion, parts in one guys book on philosophy, parts in this New Age Religion and parts with Tony Robbins or some other self help guru or orgainizations such as The Toastmasters.

Hubbard created a self help business by reviewing all of this material, isolating the things that worked, sorting them out as to relative importance and repackaging them in a logical order into easy to use books, packs and audio tapes. He did not much more than this BUT ALSO DID NO LESS THAN THIS. A lot of Hubbard haters dismiss him as doing nothing of value but doing what I described above is a valuable service to people and people are willing to pay for the goods and services generated from Hubbard's "research".

Hubbard's research was not carried out using large random samples of people and "double blind" testing with or without placebos as is done in Universities. He researched by looking through the works of others, observing what worked and what did not and also be trying things out by runing them on himself, Nibs or Mary Sue but mostly himself. THE RESEARCH BOILED DOWN TO IF IT WORKED ON HUBBARD'S CASE, THEN RESEARCH WAS COMPLETE AND IT WAS CLAIMED TO BE SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN.

Working on Hubbard's case is not a substitute for rigorous scientific research. Such a substitute for research such as this is going to find a large number of humans who's cases respond as Hubbard's did and a large number who don't.

Maybe Hubbard was aware of this and thought, Oh, what the hell, if I can appeal to 1/2 or 1/3 of the public that is enough to start a gigantic movement which will lead me to riches or maybe he believed that it would actually apply to everbody. I am just guessing that he believed the first scenario of it not working for everybody but then decided to apply it in the field as if it did work for everybody. This dual approach, understanding that in the physical universe something worked for a large portion of the poplulation but by no means everybody but then going ahead and proceeding as if it did work on everybody is so typically LRH. He never agreed with the physical universe and sought to impose his will on it and remake it the way he wanted it to be.

Returning to regging, regging then became the game of servicing the 33% to 50% whose cases reacted similarly to Hubbard's own case and then selling the remaining percentage of people on the concept that that they had something wrong with them and needed to get themselves straightened out so that their cases would also respond favorably to the tech being offered.

Thus the Pack on the "Hard Sell" was created, carefully stating that it was a hard sell and not a crush sell when in actuallity it was the hardest crush selling of all time. Thus the "PTS to the Middle Class" bulletin came out mocking and belittling prudence, planning, saving and trying to create a reserve all as passe virtues of a middle class which was boring and degraded. Thus postulate checks, borrowing from several banks on the same day, overcharging credit cards and ALL the tools at Hubbard's disposal came into play in an all out campaign to change the physical universe to fit into Hubbard's way of thinking.

AS A SIDE NOTE, ALL OF THESE POLICIES WERE IN TOTAL DISAGREEMENT WITH HUBBARD'S OWN POLICIES ON FINANCE AND MANY WISE PEOPLE BEING REGGED INSISTED THEY WANTED TO FOLLOW RON'S HCOB'S ON FINANCE!! In my opinion, neither Ron, nor his minions of regges ever figured out a suitable reply to deal with this conflict between policy and regging! The best they could come up with was that Policiy was only for the MEST universe but when investing in "THETA" it did not apply. Some regges even said that money invested in theta would come back four times larger to the donor in 4 to 6 weeks. These handlings were bought by many but to many others they were seen for the weak "ad hoc" arguments which they were. (ad hoc means something which is devised to explain away a specific situation at hand and has no other use).

Needles to say, the crush regging employed by the C of S has resulted in regging huge amounts of money for the church but there is a tremendous cost attached to a lot of this money. LRH knew that to reg large amounts of money this way, service had to be given, excellent results had to be obtained, etc. otherwise refunds would be requested and lawsuits would ensue. After LRH, the managment did not believe in that precept and is imploding by its failure to deliver proper exchange among other things.

Do you think management is working on beefing up more delivery and exchange so that its parisioners can achieve gains? Of course not, instead they are concentrating on how to obtain donations with no strings attached so that the money is given as a complete donation and no exchange of any kind has to occur in return for the money. Well there is some exchange, you do get a lapel pin to wear or a plaque to hang on your wall. Amazingly, a lot of people are falling for this and once again we need to salute the 19th century showman P.T. Barnum for recongnizing what big suckers people can be played for. A game of collecting large sums and not providing comparagle exchange in return is doomed to fail and fail very rapidly and on a grand scale. (Just lookd at Bernie Madoof to see how it works.) It is inevitable that any organization operating on that basis can not survive long and must fail. It is living on borrowed time!
Lakey

 

[RogerB]

Some Comments on the Above

I got a PM suggesting I should stick my nose in on this

I was away on business last week for several days, and got way behind in my reading

So here are a few quick comments.

On TR0 versus Presence:

I was going to get into this on the thread I started under the title "Screwy Tech."

TR0 is named "Confronting," which is unfortunate; that and the fact that the instructions tell you the following:

PURPOSE: To train student to confront a preclear with auditing only or with nothing. The whole idea is to get the student able to be there comfortably in a position three feet in front of a preclear, to be there and not do anything else but BE there.

You clever folks can check out the rest of the instructions as covered in the "TRAINING STRESS." Clearly written in the instruction is to "be three feet in front of the preclear."

If one goes to a dictionary for the definition of "confront" we find it is not a very friendly way to relate to people Check it out!

Also note that "CONFRONT" is at 2.0 on the "Reality Scale" which is also the level of Antagonism!

So, the whole basis of TR0, Confronting, as trained and practiced is that of drilling the student to be separate to, opposite, and to "confront" using nothing else but auditing and the ability to be "there" (three feet in front of the PC) and confront.

This at a minimum breeds and reinforces separateness and fixes the student in and at a low mood level relationship.

Compare this to ACW "Presence Process."

Firstly, one defines and obtains a clear understanding of what presence means and is. In essence, it is defined (in the materials as well as in dictionaries) as meaning being here, now. Though there are some other wonderful meaning of the word that also apply.

So, having defined what the word presence means, the student is simply asked/told to "Be here."

This opens up a whole panoply of expansion and mood up-lifting opportunities.

Rather than staying separate and at a rather low mood, the student can rise to his optimum in emotional relationship and also up to being at one with the coach. This, of course, is the ultimate of "presence, here, now" and of a loving relationship in which one can fully and perfectly duplicate the emanations/communications of another

It is a process that can and does restore to the individual the ultimate of his power of presence and volition in that respect. That is, the ability to choose to be present with at the level optimum for any circumstance.



On the issue of having been stuck with connections or relationships (as was mentioned in the context of taking too long to leave or having not been able to leave due to considered allegiance) . . . this little tech point might help.

Recall your original postulate/decision to join and the reasons why you considered it was "survival" to do so. Blow/erase that consideration, (and the consequences of the decision might also need to be addressed) and the whole thing will evaporate.

AS to "the Ranch," well Alan had always said that the best way to learn (auditing) was to have the guy or gal do some of it, some very easy, basic foolproof stuff; and then to give some of the explanation/theory of what it was all about. That way the student had something to relate the theory to.

And the processes used as the clients first actions at the ranch are so simple, and marvelously effective, that wins all around are routine.

Indeed, one of my favorite actions when working with former Scn trained (TR'ed to death) auditors is to take them through the exercise above vis a vis the nonsense of TR0 and why it has screwed people up.

Once they understand the notion that totally, wholly, fully being present with another would/could be being at one with them at where they are, I give them the command: "As a spiritual Being, be present."

Note that "as a spiritual Being" touch.

Try it

There is a guy on this board for whom I ran that command at the ranch with the result of his "zorch" being blown

And with this handling I have totally salvaged the cases of former Scio folks that were screwed up. One guy went exterior and totally, wholly present during TR0 . . . that was the bad news . . . the church turned that into a problem, telling him he couldn't do anything more of processing or training until he had an "out-int" handling for $x$x$x$xxx, which in his younger years he did not have. That was the end of his Scn career Talk about dull stupid tech!!!

At the ranch we would have ack'ed the huge win and done the "Celebration of Wins Handling" . . . (I mentioned this R/D at the end of my FZ presentation in Pasadena) . . . so as to put the regained ability under the full knowing control of the guy!

That's it for now . . . I'm off to handle other traffic

RogerB

 

[Blue Spirit]

Thank You Roger

Roger your wisdom is appreciated, and I'm more and more disentangling myself from Scientology.

The difference in my understanding between "TR-0" and "Presence" I

addressed above and you have been able to make it still more clear.

I noticed while doing "TR-0" in the fairly recent past it worked best when I just skipped the Confront concept and decided

to be really interested in the being who was my partner. Those wins also were apparent in the young lady

I was with and she could be there better when I did this and felt safer too. All that was obvious on her face.


Another point is being in session recently with a person of Real Presence caused me to be totally there in session and

had the results that my Presence coming up to a natural and easy comfortable actuality. It could be said from a

Scientology viewpoint that the first two sessions alone gave me more gain on TR-0 than many hours of drilling it.

Isn't that interesting ? To say nothing of case gain.


Another Win occurred because of those sessions, which is now processing looks much easier and in reach of my own

capabilities, rather than this far off concept of "maybe I'll get there someday" idea. That comes from too long a runway as

has been mentioned above so simply and with reality by Carmello. She did hit the nail on the head, didn't she ?


When I got my Pilot's license that was one of the key aspects of success was having you actually flying the plane from the

start while you were studying the books also. In fact one of the key elements of that game is to get you to take the plane

around the airport solo when you just might be able to do it without crashing ! That was for building confidence.

(warning: if you do this wear an old shirt that day and take an extra shirt !)


It also goes without saying that those who made the runway way too long had nothing but SUPPRESSIVE motives >DM.


Additionally, I just re-read Dart Smohen's Story on "Paul's Rabbit" and it

really communicated to me this time, including the TR-0 thing. Full understanding.

This was a win because I'm starting to be able shake off the Scientology Indoctrination.

This feels so very good to be able to perceive newly and freshly after so many years.

Sadly, I really had to hit bottom before demanding enough change to change.


PS: That Carmello looks like a pretty hot number. I wonder if my wife would mind if I asked her for a date ?

 

[Blue Spirit]

A Few Modifications To Your Writeup

ON REGGING: Oy Vey, such a topic! Probably "regging" is one of the most charged buttons amongst ex Scientologists. Along my journey through Scientology, regging changed. It was always tough and never reasonable but it got much tougher along the way.

Other organizations, particularly car dealers are known for hard regging. In the car business, the "T.O.", turnover to a salesperson of a higher rank is nearly always used. The car dealers' tech manual states that once the prospective buyer walks out the door of the dealership, he will probably never be seen again, even though he assures them he will be back.

Scientology overcame this stop which car dealers have to deal with by making their product a monopoly which you can not buy anywhere else. Not only could it not be purchased anywhere else but it was promoted as not existing elsewhere at any price. This, which all we exes bought into, turned out to not be the total truth. The valid parts of Scio tech do exist elsewhere, parts in the Tao, parts in this Eastern religion, parts in one guys book on philosophy, parts in this New Age Religion and parts with Tony Robbins or some other self help guru or orgainizations such as The Toastmasters.

Hubbard created a self help business by reviewing all of this material, isolating the things that worked, sorting them out as to relative importance and repackaging them in a logical order into easy to use books, packs and audio tapes. He did not much more than this BUT ALSO DID NO LESS THAN THIS. A lot of Hubbard haters dismiss him as doing nothing of value but doing what I described above is a valuable service to people and people are willing to pay for the goods and services generated from Hubbard's "research".

Hubbard's research was not carried out using large random samples of people and "double blind" testing with out without placebos as is done in Universities. He researched by looking through the works of others, observing what worked and what did not and also be trying things out by runing them on himself, Nibs or Mary Sue but mostly himself. THE RESEARCH BOILED DOWN TO IF IT WORKED ON HUBBARD'S CASE, THEN RESEARCH WAS COMPLETE AND IT BECAME SCIENTIFICALLY PROVED.

Working on Hubbard's case is not a substitute for rigorous scientific research but a research substitute such as this is going to find a large number of humans who's cases respond as Hubbard's did and a large number who don't.

Maybe Hubbard was aware of this and thought, Oh, what the hell, if I can appeal to 1/2 or 1/3 of the public that is enough to start a gigantic movement which will lead me to riches or maybe he believed that it would actually apply to everbody. I am just guessing that he believed the first scenario of it not working for everybody but then decided to apply it in the field as if it did work for everybody. This dual approach, understanding that in the physical universe something worked for a large portion of the poplulation but by no means everybody but then going ahead and proceeding as it did work on everybody is so typically LRH. He never agreed with the physical universe and sought to impose his will on it and remake it the way he wanted it to be.

Returning to regging, regging then became the game of servicing the 33% to 50% whose cases reacted similarly to Hubbard's own case and then selling the remaining percentage of people on the concept that that they had something wrong with them and needed to get themselves straightened out so that their cases would also respond favorably to the tech being offered.

Thus the Pack on the "Hard Sell" was created, carefully stating that it was a hard sell and not a crush sell when in actuallity it was the hardest crush selling of all time. Thus the "PTS to the Middle Class" bulletin came out mocking and belittling prudence, planning, saving and trying to create a reserve all as passe virtues of a middle class which was boring which was degraded. Thus postulate checks, borrowing from several banks on the same day, overcharging credit cards and ALL the tools at Hubbard's disposal came into play in an all out campaign to change the physical universe to fit into Hubbard's way of thinking.

AS A SIDE NOTE, ALL OF THESE POLICIES WERE IN TOTAL DISAGREEMENT WITH HUBBARD'S OWN POLICIES ON FINANCE AND MANY WISE PEOPLE BEING REGGED INSISTED THEY WANTED TO FOLLOW RON'S HCOB'S ON FINANCE!!
In my opinion, neither Ron, nor his minion of regges ever figured out a suitable reply to deal with this conflict between policy and regging! The best they come come up with was that Policiy was only for the MEST universe but when investing in "THETA" it did not apply. Some regges even said that money invested in theta would come back four times larger to the donor in 4 to 6 weeks. These handlings were bought by many but to many others they were seen for the weak "ad hoc" arguments which they were. (ad hoc means something which is devised to explain away a specific situation at hand and has no other use).

Needles to say, the crush regging employed by the C of S has resulted in regging huge amounts of money for the church but there is a tremendous cost attached to a lot of this money. LRH knew that to reg large amounts of money this way, service had to be given, excellent results had to be obtained, etc. otherwise refunds would be requested and lawsuits would ensue. After LRH, the managment did not believe in that precept and is imploding by its failure to deliver proper exchange among other things.

Do you think management is working on beefing up more delivery and exchange so that its parisioners can achieve gains? Of course not, instead they are concentrating on how to obtain donations with no strings attached so that the money is given as a complete donation and no exchange of any kind has to occur in return for the money. Well you do get a lapel pin or a plaque to hang on your wall. Amazingly, a lot of people are falling for this and once again we need to salute the 19th century showman P.T. Barnum for recongnizing what big suckers people can be played for. A game of collecting large sums and not providing comparagle exchange in return is doomed to fail and fail very rapidly. It is inevitable that any organization operating on that basis can not survive long and must fail. It is living on borrowed time!
Lakey

A few notes to add or subtract from your writeup, most of which I agree with:

LRH's bigtime time aberration was "KNOW BEST". He had to control ALL and

everything with that attitude. Which demonstrates that he was not up to

having full confidence or certainty in all he did, and therefore had to be an AUTHORITY.

The concept of Middle Class PTSness is very real me as I observed it in

spades from my own observation before I ever heard of Scientology.

Therefore I recommend the bulletin "More On PTSness" from about 1982.

I'm not College educated and have usually used my Knowingness to do new

things. I therefore fully respect Hubbard's method of Empirical research.

Also know that he researched with more than the 3 persons you named as I

saw specified "Research Folders" in the HGC at Flag in 1975.

These were supposed to take precedence of service over paying customers by policy

but often did not in actual day-to-day operations.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

The really good auditors of Scientology (during the 60s and 70s, which was when I was "in") were all huge beings including you in their space, making everything safe. If an earthquake or aftershock occurred during a session, it was OK.

We / they never bought the words to TR0, we bought the ambient culture, which was tacit. A two hour confront was Hell, but a two hour just being there enjoying the other being was a walk in the park. Blinkless Hard TR) was painful and non productive. Just sitting and enjoying a friend is huge treat.

Roger your wisdom is appreciated, and I'm more and more disentangling

myself from Scientology.

The difference in my understanding between "TR-0" and "Presence" I

addressed above and you have been able to make it still more clear.

I noticed while doing "TR-0" in the fairly recent past it worked best when I

just skipped the Confront concept and decided to be really interested in the

being who was my partner. Those wins also were apparent in the young lady

I was with and she could be there better when I did this and felt safer too.

All that was obvious on her face.

Another point is being in session recently with a person of Real Presence caused me to be totally there in session and

had the results that my Presence coming up to a natural and easy comfortable actuality. It could be said from a

Scientology viewpoint that the first two sessions alone gave me more gain on TR-0 than many hours of drilling it.

Isn't that interesting ?


Additionally, I just re-read Dart Smohen's Story on "Paul's Rabbit" and it

really communicated to me this time, including the TR-0 thing. Full understanding.

This was a win because I'm starting to be able shake off the Scientology Indoctrination.

This feels so very good to be able to perceive newly and freshly after so many years.

Sadly, I really had to hit bottom before demanding enough change to change.

 

[Blue Spirit]

You Got That Right

The really good auditors of Scientology (during the 60s and 70s, which was when I was "in") were all huge beings including you in their space, making everything safe. If an earthquake or aftershock occurred during a session, it was OK.

We / they never bought the words to TR0, we bought the ambient culture, which was tacit. A two hour confront was Hell, but a two hour just being there enjoying the other being was a walk in the park. Blinkless Hard TR) was painful and non productive. Just sitting and enjoying a friend is huge treat.

You certainly got that right !

All of the Big Beings left Scientology for good cause long time since.

Anybody that left after 1983 I'm suspicious of including myself !

I recall that one time in the early seventies a Big Being got irked with me and

hit my chest with a flow that actually hurt.

Of course most on this site wouldn't believe that as there is no OT, he says while whistling.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

PS: That Carmello looks like a pretty hot number. I wonder if my wife would mind if I asked her for a date ?:

Cramming Mister!

You need to star rate every copy of Playboy Magazine from day one to present.

Then do clay demos on ......

after that, at your expense, we'll get you an inflatable doll

 

[Blue Spirit]

O.K.

Cramming Mister!

You need to star rate every copy of Playboy Magazine from day one to present.

Then do clay demos on ......

after that, at your expense, we'll get you an inflatable doll

Well OK, but only if it is a top-of-the-line realistic inflatable doll that says sexy things to me.

 

[RogerB]

Roger your wisdom is appreciated, and I'm more and more disentangling myself from Scientology.

The difference in my understanding between "TR-0" and "Presence" I
addressed above and you have been able to make it still more clear.

You are welcome

Sadly, I really had to hit bottom before demanding enough change to change.

Sounds a little like "Demand for Improvement" . . . .

PS: That Carmello looks like a pretty hot number. I wonder if my wife would mind if I asked her for a date ?

Carmelo is that guy who was sporting the pug at the FZ convention

And yes, he is a hot number!

R

 

[DartSmohen]

The really good auditors of Scientology (during the 60s and 70s, which was when I was "in") were all huge beings including you in their space, making everything safe. If an earthquake or aftershock occurred during a session, it was OK.

We / they never bought the words to TR0, we bought the ambient culture, which was tacit. A two hour confront was Hell, but a two hour just being there enjoying the other being was a walk in the park. Blinkless Hard TR) was painful and non productive. Just sitting and enjoying a friend is huge treat.

The first thing to remember about processing is "Who is it for"?

Your function as a processor is the work WITH the client so that the two of you can be bigger than the force/mass/charge they are dealing with.

For this to happen, you need to be there, present, UNCONDITIONALLY for the client. You have to be willing for any and every effect to come to view and work WITH the client to discharge it.

Probably the worst thing that can happen is for the processor to go "absent" on the client. It really is a spirit killer. Has this ever happened to you as a client? All of a sudden you see that the processor has a "glazed" look, or they have been running a rote process and suddenly start giving a wrong command. What does it tell you? The processor is not there, they are somewhere else.

This usually happens when the processor is not prepared for the session, or is under pressure or stress from outside the processing room. They have attention tied up on "issues" etc.

Do these processors ever get cleaned up? No, they carry on until they are ground into the dust. Then they quit.

That is why in Knowledgism, particularly at the Ranch, the staff do presence drills at the start of each working day, processors regularly co-process. Students do presence drills before study.

So when "processing" is delivered to a client for the benefit of the organisation, rather than the client, the "processor" and the organisation become greater than the client. This is a negative process and is, in fact, implanting.

I have commented at length on the differences between Kn and Scn on other threads.

They are there to be read, if you wish.

Dart

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

The first thing to remember about processing is "Who is it for"?

Your function as a processor is the work WITH the client so that the two of you can be bigger than the force/mass/charge they are dealing with.

For this to happen, you need to be there, present, UNCONDITIONALLY for the client. You have to be willing for any and every effect to come to view and work WITH the client to discharge it.

Probably the worst thing that can happen is for the processor to go "absent" on the client. It really is a spirit killer. Has this ever happened to you as a client? All of a sudden you see that the processor has a "glazed" look, or they have been running a rote process and suddenly start giving a wrong command. What does it tell you? The processor is not there, they are somewhere else.

This usually happens when the processor is not prepared for the session, or is under pressure or stress from outside the processing room. They have attention tied up on "issues" etc.

Do these processors ever get cleaned up? No, they carry on until they are ground into the dust. Then they quit.

That is why in Knowledgism, particularly at the Ranch, the staff do presence drills at the start of each working day, processors regularly co-process. Students do presence drills before study.

So when "processing" is delivered to a client for the benefit of the organisation, rather than the client, the "processor" and the organisation become greater than the client. This is a negative process and is, in fact, implanting.

I have commented at length on the differences between Kn and Scn on other threads.

They are there to be read, if you wish.

Dart

I would say the worstest auditor is the one with a big space, but a judgement **in the background of what is right and wrong**.

I remember a black hole of a processor who "knew" the real truth, versus my real truth. (initials EW, you know him)

Unfortunately, I bought his dichotomy over my own. I proceeded to lose a half million dollars in the next year. Finding the out listing item, I fixed the problem.

NOT finding a processor, who can grant you FULL beingness, or at least wider and deeper than you go, is the crux of some people's problems as PCs.

Allowing the PC the full breath and depth of their discoveries is beyond most processors of upper level clients, no matter their good intentions.

What you wrote / said about presence drills daily should fix the out point I noticed.

 

[Blue Spirit]

Slight Change

You are welcome





Sounds a little like "Demand for Improvement" . . . .

YES



Carmelo is that guy who was sporting the pug at the FZ convention

And yes, he is a hot number!
R

Roger, you need to get some glasses.
The guy with the Pug was with the Hot Lady known as Carmello.
I've begun to wonder about you Roger.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Roger, you need to get some glasses.
The guy with the Pug was with the Hot Lady known as Carmello.
I've begun to wonder about you Roger.

They seek him here,
They seek him there,
Those Frenchies seek him everywhere,

Is he in Heaven?
Is he in Hell?
That damned elusive,

Pimpernel

 

[SweetnessandLight]

Oh Scarlet!

LOL!!! Carmelo's a composite personality! Ar, har har har!

Roger, thanks for chiming in , you are so right about the loaded word "confront" vs, practicing presence, which I think all the Spiritual traditions worldwide adhere to, nurture and foster. Trust Corporate Scientology to get that wrong.

Dart, so good to hear your perspective, always.

It is said that just being in the presence of a great healer is healing, or just being in the presence of a great teacher is transformational. Being in the presence of a "big being", in our lingo here. I would add that just having their thoughts rest upon you is pretty damn powerful, too, in my humble experience.

Some of us on this thread have direct personal experience of this! Hi Lakey! It's all about really connecting with someone who is a caring person.

Bluey, I think you're on a good path. Be big yourself! This board, and especially this thread, is dripping with theta, overflowing with it. Can't you feel it sometimes? Connecting with that collective loving spirit and goodwill can help break through barriers and obstacles, repair and re-pave over old hurts from the past, so that life is not such a bumpy ride. We want you to flourish and prosper, and succeed at your chosen goals. Can't you feel that we want that for each other, and our families, and our groups, and the world? I can feel it, it's so strong here sometimes I feel I can bite it and chew it like taffy (and it has a very sweet taste!)

Just for the purposes of the cognoscenti on this thread, (ah hem) I want it known for the record that I "left" Scientology (although I was never really "in") in 1982, out of loyalty for a talented big being, Bent Corydon, when I saw what Corporate Scientology was doing to him and his mission franchise, family, staff and public. Seriously, I have probably always been a squirrel, to the extent that I ever "practiced" Scientology tech with my friends who were in. But I did "get it" early on that all was not right with upper management, even when Ron was still around, but in hiding. One of the outpoints that kept me from joining up. I think it's contributing to evil to let the bad guys win, even if it earns some personal gain, like "going up the bridge".

I think that qualifies me as "trustworthy", by this narrow definition! Should we create a secret handshake for the Old Guard?

(This is so the reverse of "never trust anybody over the age of 30" )

That's it, Carmelo! From now we can call you "Scarlet", after the Pimpernel! Male or female, what does it matter, attractive is as attractive does! Carmelo is one attractive being!

 

[DartSmohen]

I would say the worstest auditor is the one with a big space, but a judgement **in the background of what is right and wrong**.

I remember a black hole of a processor who "knew" the real truth, versus my real truth. (initials EW, you know him)

Unfortunately, I bought his dichotomy over my own. I proceeded to lose a half million dollars in the next year. Finding the out listing item, I fixed the problem.

NOT finding a processor, who can grant you FULL beingness, or at least wider and deeper than you go, is the crux of some people's problems as PCs.

Allowing the PC the full breath and depth of their discoveries is beyond most processors of upper level clients, no matter their good intentions.

What you wrote / said about presence drills daily should fix the out point I noticed.

The person you refer to (EW) is typical of a handful of "processors" who use "knowledge" (or what they think is knowledge) to try and establish some form of control over another. In each case (of the few) I have encountered, they are low self esteem, have major insecurity issues, crave acknowledgement and usually have a personal agenda, particularly in reference to the opposite sex. They want to become "gurus to a small but misguided bunch of followers and wallow in the "adoration" they think they deserve. In other words they try and form a cult around themselves.

In almost every case they manage to fail. They are incapable of creating a positive future, but parasite off those who align with them. Pretty soon their "followers" see through them and split off, often a lot poorer both financially and spiritually.

The true measure of a good processor is that they can and do create a future, having lots of clients they themselves have found and developed. Poor processors either have no developed clients of their own, or they try and hive off clients from a practice they were connected to.

Alan was a master processor. He would go to a new place, hire a room, get people in, give them a talk and from that first night develop a bunch of clients, to the point where he had to set up a centre just to handle the flow of people coming in.

Dart