What's new

The State of Clear

As an outsider who has been observing Scientology on the internet for a couple of years now, my impression is that there are two aspects of 'clear' that are probably real.

1)
If a person is serious about trying to solve certain problems in their life, there's a decent chance that they'll succeed in doing so, at least to a fair degree. If the person is talented or has other basic long-term advantages, and they've mainly been suffering from short-term bad luck, then the odds of their success are quite high. Practically anything can be the apparent cause of this success, if it gives such a person the confidence to try hard to succeed. So for some people, it can seem as though Scientology has really turned their lives around. For most of those people, almost anything else could also have turned their lives around, because what really turned their lives around was their own efforts.

On the other hand, they probably did need something to trigger those efforts, by giving them hope and encouragement. Insofar as Scientology may have done that triggering, that's a real merit in Scientology. It's just not any kind of evidence that Scientology really works, beyond giving hope and encouragement. The basic truth is that it's not very hard to make the able more able, because the able tend to get more able on their own, anyway, because that's what being able is all about.
.

Love your posts and very intelligent take on matters even when I disagree.

2)
There seems to be an 'auditing high' — the feeling/mental state of being 'blown out'. It might be partly assisted by e-meter electric currents, though this is debatable, and the e-meter is clearly not a necessary element. The auditing high is probably related somehow to hypnosis, though it's not really an adequate explanation to say simply that auditing is hypnosis, because nobody really knows exactly what hypnosis is. .

I don't think there is a such a thing as an "auditing high". Read the stories of those who suffered under continual sec checks in the RPF. They didn't get high. This also
indicates that the idea of the e-meter currents having such an effect is wrong.

Then if one looks at the effect of bad auditing this can be devastating. Think of a
spiritual attack and rape.

In therapy a wrong indication for example can be deadly. Try and recall what you may have read of lets say SO members told they are degraded beings, SPs, criminal etc, and note they believe such concepts, and how it affected them. And that is outside therapy! One hopes. :(

There can be highs in auditing. End of session, end of process, end of program, end of level etc. Generally these tend to be somewhat permanent.

[snip]

All these individual variations make it hard to study auditing effects rigorously, just as it is hard to study hypnosis. All the efforts I've seen towards critically assessing auditing have aimed at determining whether or not it produces the tremendous results promised by Hubbard. I'm not aware of any serious studies directed simply at determining what the auditing high is like, and how it works. Hubbard's theoretical explanations, in terms of engrams and charge and what-not, are almost certainly complete nonsense. But there seems to be a real effect there, whose real explanation is probably interesting, though probably not all that important, because it probably has nothing to do with making objective progress towards any great goal.
.

Hubbards on engrams and charge are not complete nonsense.

Lets say in an earthquake the apartment building you live in was destroyed. You
don't know if your wife was there at the time. You would experience fear, dread,
pain, anxiety and many other reactions up to possibly unconciousness. This would all come under the label " Charge". When you find your wife wasn't there and is still alive all this charge would dissipate in an instant and you will be in a life affirming glorious state. This may be considered a high, but is really more about the resolution of a temporary matter.

Lets say you were addressing in auditing your problems relating to women. And you cognited, that this resulted from your mother telling you that women wearing makeup were whores and evil. You may then be in a state to no longer have problems related with women. This state would probably last all your life at least. :)

This can't be described as an auditing high.

Your comments that the able can improve because they are able are well said IMO. However, the above scenario may not be resolved by all those who are able.
Maybe by some.

Lets bring this up to another level, perhaps fantasy, perhaps some sort of reality:

Lets say the mother, was beaten by her husband when pregnant, and he called her a whore because she wore makeup. and was evil. And she never wore makeup again. :(

Thats her engram. And she repeated the content to her son, perhaps while the father beat him for dating a cheerleader. :)

[snip]

The problem with doctrinaire Scientology is that it's trying to turn a limited, short-term good feeling into a road to eternal salvation. Twenty minutes of auditing can make you feel great, apparently, but twenty years of auditing will not make you a god — or anything noticeably more than an average human being, for that matter.

Its oversold. Does it lead to eternal salvation? Lets say the jury is out on that
one.

Does it lead to better ability is a better question.

It can.

That is one reason that people should differentiate between CO$ and the subject.

Please sign the petition. :)
 
Christians routinely claim to believe in a life as an immortal spirit. For almost all of them those are words of which they are attempting to convince themselves as having truth. Some few more are 'dramatizing the state' acting in a manner which they may believe demonstrates their 'spirituality'. A very very few have recognized their own actual spiritual nature and observe life, not as an incarnate being, but as a spiritual being experiencing life through incarnation. Hildegard of Bingen & Meister Eckhart are two notable examples of this latter group.

I see the state of clear as being much the same thing. ...

Senator, you're no Meister Eckhart.

Perhaps I'm just cynical, but I'm afraid I don't buy these distinctions you claim to see so clearly in others, between attempting to believe, dramatizing a state, and recognizing a truth. That's delusion. Nobody can do more than believe. If you think you know, you're kidding yourself with wishful thinking. Is that the state of "clear"?
 
Last edited:
It's interesting that when a critic makes a criticism of Scientology, they are often asked by Scientologists to provide evidence or proof, yet here we are discussing 'Clear', and your hands are empty of any evidence or proof. As regards belief, all we know for sure is that you believe you are experiencing this state.

So:

  1. Hubbard's definitions of 'Clear' have been dismissed.
  2. It cannot be completely or definitively described to another.
  3. No test exists to detect it.
<snip...>
Firstly, let me say that I'm enjoying this discussion. We should do this more often, discussion of these things is so much more interesting than reading anti-scientology slogans.

I'd like to respond to your 3 points above;

Hubbard's definitions of 'Clear' have been dismissed.

Not all definitions have been dismissed, just the over-hyped, postulated but never achieved attributes that Hubbard saddled himself with
long before anyone had actually gone "Clear". He made up a bunch of stuff about a postulated state.

It cannot be completely or definitively described to another.

This is not quite right, IMO, it can be and I've done it many times. Getting it completely and definitively understood is the problem.

No test exists to detect it.

Lol, try telling that to anyone who has done a DCSI or CCRD. The "testing" there is arduous and rigorous but is only a test of whether or not the person has achieved what was expected from within the scientological paradigm. There is no test outside of the scientological paradigm that I know of, it's a state of being that exists for the Clear much moreso than it does for observers. Some Clears seem quite clear, some seem murky as hell to outside observers. Clear is a state of mind. :biggrin:

<...snip>
Clear is fundamentally a state of being and as such can only be genuinely known and understood for one's self through one's own experience, not through any process of mind or external observation of another.


Mark A. Baker
I agree with Mark's statement above.
 
Senator, you're no Meister Eckhart.

Never claimed to be. Perhaps you need to refresh yourself as to the meaning of an analogy? A thing doesn't have to be true to prove to be a useful aid to understanding. Perhaps a review of the Bohr atom might serve as an aid to understanding how that works.


Mark A. Baker :)
 
...Then if one looks at the effect of bad auditing this can be devastating. Think of a spiritual attack and rape....

Truer words may have never been spoken. At least by a scientologist.

Now then Terril, can you see why not just a few individuals have called for, and continue to call for, some type or form of independent review & accountability of scientology auditors?

And if not, why not? Victims of Spiritual attack and Spiritual rape (via scientology auditing) want to know.

Apocalyptic
 
Senator, you're no Meister Eckhart.

Perhaps I'm just cynical, but I'm afraid I don't buy these distinctions you claim to see so clearly in others, between attempting to believe, dramatizing a state, and recognizing a truth. That's delusion. Nobody can do more than believe. If you think you know, you're kidding yourself with wishful thinking. Is that the state of "clear"?

That's where the wheels fell off Marks wagon.

painted-into-a-corner.jpg
 
Never claimed to be. Perhaps you need to refresh yourself as to the meaning of an analogy? A thing doesn't have to be true to prove to be a useful aid to understanding. Perhaps a review of the Bohr atom might serve as an aid to understanding how that works.

Dan Quayle never claimed to be Jack Kennedy, either. He just kept making analogies that struck other people as kind of inflated.
 
Japanese twins? I'll show you Japanese twins ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vj1SyWntdo4


Mark A. Baker

I will go with Marks' Japanese twins - ANY day! :yes:

And, with those twins in close proximity I doubt I would EVER have the slightest concern for whether "clear" exists, what "definition" of clear might make sense, and if anyone anywhere has EVER "attained" ANY "definition" of the supposed state.

On that, I see that one has to FIRST agree on WHAT the state actually means. Once THAT has been done, which is unlikely really, then we might take a look at various people and determine whether such has occurred or is even possible.
 
Nice clip. Here's one that is very rich in pure Theta. The steps and gestures are quite easy to learn.

Could someone out there please refresh my memory.

What the fuck is "pure Theta"????????????? :confused2:

Maybe I have been out of the Scientology loop for too long. :duh:

Or, my Scientology indoctrination has lost it's bite.

I must admit that I NEVER felt comfortable using the excessively "clickish" Scientology nomenclature.
 
Could someone out there please refresh my memory.

What the fuck is "pure Theta"????????????? :confused2:

Maybe I have been out of the Scientology loop for too long. :duh:

Or, my Scientology indoctrination has lost it's bite.

"pure theta" is a state achieved by masturbation - and a true scientologist - if they have theri ethics in - can do it mentally.

Repetition of this leads to "clear" ( which I have been told is in the eye of the beholder). So clear is a belief, a state, a reality, and whatever else the believer says it is, oh, and it is also pure "theta".
 
Only as you choose to take the analogy offered as literally true. I made no such claim. ...
It communicates a perspective. That is all.

Here's an analogy, then.

Most police forces handle protesters by giving them flowers and candy. A few riot cops hand out pillows and sleeping bags. The very bravest of peace officers will actually attempt to hold their ground in the face of a mob, by waving wet noodles.

I think what you're doing here is kind of the same. :yes:
 
Only as you choose to take the analogy offered as literally true. I made no such claim. :)

It communicates a perspective. That is all.


Mark A. Baker

Student of Trinity understood your specific comment in the same way I did. It is not an analogy, though it was preceded by one. It is a straightforward claim.

"Perhaps I'm just cynical, but I'm afraid I don't buy these distinctions you claim to see so clearly in others, between attempting to believe, dramatizing a state, and recognizing a truth. That's delusion. Nobody can do more than believe. If you think you know, you're kidding yourself with wishful thinking. Is that the state of "clear"?

Perhaps you weren't clear in your own mind about what you were trying to say?

Bedtime for me and the bear.

Goodnight all.
 
Could someone out there please refresh my memory.

What the fuck is "pure Theta"????????????? :confused2:

Maybe I have been out of the Scientology loop for too long. :duh:

Or, my Scientology indoctrination has lost it's bite.

I must admit that I NEVER felt comfortable using the excessively "clickish" Scientology nomenclature.

It's something Scientologists believe in which cannot be defined, communicated, or validated.

:omg: When used by me, it's sarcasm.
 
Top