The State of Clear

[Terril park]

Ah, Toady,

You're still a lot of fun, and really very good for a very good laugh.

This what you write above is quite right and on the ball yet, it is also a little off the ball and a little unkind.

You see, many who "went Clear" did go clear . . . . but the big question, and it is a question Alan and I have posted often is . . . . clear of WHAT!?

You see, these folks erased or came to cause over "something," and it is an undeniable gain . . . a huge and worthwhile change . . . the problem is that it is and was not well enough understood.

And so, the successful action was not able to be followed up on to get the rest of what is there that has to be handled

Yes, in truth, Hubbard stated the conditions of his purported state of Clear incorrectly . . . but that should not be used to invalidate the gains many good folks got. They got what they got, and for many it was worthwhile . . . it was for me.

But to infer that it was the magical supra-human state of Being he claimed it to be was either fraudulent, negligent or plain wrong . . . . certainly wrong and in error.

I remember Australia's first Clear (pre-CC days, Peter Crundall) in 1962 saying: "There's more to do"

He was right!

My sweet V calls me to dinner . . . I'm off.

Rog

Go Roger!

 

[Terril park]

Setting At's prose aside (which your sincere above post is in response to) we would merely suggest that any "undeniable gain....being a huge and worthwhile change" , that can be forgotten in time, is hardly the stuff to combat the original complaint of fraud, to begin with.

For example: ask any Clear, of say, 1960 thru 1980, that subsequently left scientology, what 'that' (years ago) undeniable, huge and worthwhile gain was ???, and you'll get a post-mortem, blank, scientology, stare, in response.

Can you see this Rog?

We think naught.

In the absence of a constant & continuing watering, the tree, that wasn't, dies.

Unlike true spiritual revelations.

Nuff said?

Apocalyptic

Try looking at the FZ suceess stories thread. You got good experiences both before and after clear.

Not arguing about clear per se. But people had fun.

The ultinate OT level?

 

[Emma]

What we need to do is take one control group of $cilon"clears", and another control group of the MAB Man/Toilet Paper/PT "clears", with another group of "WOGS" and swim them tantalizingly along the eastern coast of OZ within a baited population of Great Whites, with all of the "clears" postulating "safety", and see which group the Great Whites prefer... Largest remaining control group wins the pie, I'd even bake the pie... I shouldn't joke like this as I know it doesn't go over well on boards where people have been conditioned to taked everything so seriously!

Maybe I'm just humourless, but I don't think this is funny.

And no, I definitely don't "taked" everything so seriously.

Terril is a real person. I have my differences with him sure, but to characterise another human being as toilet paper, it's just not cool, not in my book.

 

[jenni with an eye]

What we need to do is take one control group of $cilon"clears", and another control group of the MAB Man/Toilet Paper/PT "clears", with another group of "WOGS" and swim them tantalizingly along the eastern coast of OZ within a baited population of Great Whites, with all of the "clears" postulating "safety", and see which group the Great Whites prefer... Largest remaining control group wins the pie, I'd even bake the pie... I shouldn't joke like this as I know it doesn't go over well on boards where people have been conditioned to taked everything so seriously!

Maybe I'm just humourless, but I don't think this is funny.

And no, I definitely don't "taked" everything so seriously.

Terril is a real person. I have my differences with him sure, but to characterise another human being as toilet paper, it's just not cool, not in my book.

Thanks Emma

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

I just LOVE reading and talking about the MANY contradictions of Hubbard and Scientology. That realm is so incredibly rife with examples.

It is surely tough walking that VERY THIN LINE of acceptable Scientology thought and behavior. Especially since the line is so blurry, always changing and contradictory!

Be this. Be that. Do this, do that. This policy says this, this policy says that. Sometimes I felt that being involved in Scientology was not unlike being made to jump through hoops, many hoops, hoop after hoop, and the fellow standing in the middle of the ring at the circus who was waving the whip and sending me around to each hoop was a CRAZED LUNATIC!

What was "Grade III" again? I truly can't remember. :confused2:

Grade III is "CHANGE" ....the ability to change (as in "change ones mind").

 

[Veda]

On the Scientology Bridge, upon attesting to "Clear," one is then told that he is "at risk," and needs to immediately complete the rest of the "Bridge" and, at least, reach "OT III." This may have been extended to "NOTs."

So Clear is not an end, but is a midway step to other "essential" and "vital to your survival" levels. Clear Scientologists are told that their being Clear places them in immediate danger.

Notice the last box, at the bottom - solo auditing after Clear - the fellow is seated at a table with a black cloud hovering over him.

http://www.freezoneearth.org/Clearbird/Clearbird2004/index.htm

This is a dirty trick to play on people, who've been led to believe that Clear was it.

 

[DagwoodGum]

Maybe I'm just humourless, but I don't think this is funny.

And no, I definitely don't "taked" everything so seriously.

Terril is a real person. I have my differences with him sure, but to characterise another human being as toilet paper, it's just not cool, not in my book.

Wasn't funny, though intended to be. TP is the abreviaton for toilet paper at my house and my summation of the state of "clear".

 

[DagwoodGum]

Go Roger!

I think the "gain", was that after supposed attainment of this "state of being", one no longer had the goal and one glowed with a sense of supreme attainment. Therefore the GPM aspect of it went bye. bye. It's a purely imaginary state as far as all evidence has indicated and as it wasn't worth the time the 1st time around, it makes me wonder why I would even bother with its rememberance these many years later. Not to mention dealing with all the very same people again... Maybe boredom or a morbid/post mortem curiousity? Yuck!!!

 

[RogerB]

On the Scientology Bridge, upon attesting to "Clear," one is then told that he is "at risk," and needs to immediately complete the rest of the "Bridge" and, at least, reach "OT III." This may have been extended to "NOTs."

So Clear is not an end, but is a midway step to other "essential" and "vital to your survival" levels. Clear Scientologists are told that their being Clear places them in immediate danger.

Notice the last box, at the bottom - solo auditing after Clear - the fellow is seated at a table with a black cloud hovering over him.

http://www.freezoneearth.org/Clearbird/Clearbird2004/index.htm

This is a dirty trick to play on people, who've been led to believe that Clear was it.

Yes . . . though the other side of the coin is that one might view the constant change as the "fruits of his continued research" . . . I tended to be in that camp when in . . . but now I simply see it as incompetent and deceitful original "research" and/or irresponsible and fraudulent promotion of his "thing."

A more honest statement would have simply been to say that improvement and personal gains were obtained . . . . but NO, the man had to shout about the end of all ills and supra-human states of freedom and abilities! And that is the part that is unforgivable.

R

 

[olska]

On the Scientology Bridge, upon attesting to "Clear," one is then told that he is "at risk," and needs to immediately complete the rest of the "Bridge" and, at least, reach "OT III." This may have been extended to "NOTs."

So Clear is not an end, but is a midway step to other "essential" and "vital to your survival" levels. Clear Scientologists are told that their being Clear places them in immediate danger.

Notice the last box, at the bottom - solo auditing after Clear - the fellow is seated at a table with a black cloud hovering over him.

http://www.freezoneearth.org/Clearbird/Clearbird2004/index.htm

This is a dirty trick to play on people, who've been led to believe that Clear was it.

When I was still on the fringes of scientology and still getting into conversations (albeit confrontational ones) with "terminals" in the orgs, I asked ...

in danger of WHAT? at risk of WHAT?

I'm sure it's no surprise that no one would answer the question, did they know? or just refuse to answer? does it matter? it's a trick!

 

[Gadfly]

When I was still on the fringes of scientology and still getting into conversations (albeit confrontational ones) with "terminals" in the orgs, I asked ...

in danger of WHAT? at risk of WHAT?

I'm sure it's no surprise that no one would answer the question, did they know? or just refuse to answer? does it matter? it's a trick!

Part of the whole "slant" of Scientology is that members are taught NOT to "ask questions". You are taught and heavily encouraged to "agree".

They are taught to "create a mystery" as a reg. If the person asks, "in risk of what?", the reg, who maybe has done some of the OT levels, will look at you, wink, act all-knowing, and say something vague like, "oh, you will be so AMAZED when you finally get there and DO OT III". The reg will add, "it explains and handles the reason WHY the 4th dynamic is so fucked up here on Earth, and ALL THROUGH THIS SECTOR of the galaxy!" Mystery - mystery - mystery. Leave it vague, and many people will fill in the blanks with their own hopes and dreams.

It is setup to manipulate people. It does.

 

[Dulloldfart]

When I was still on the fringes of scientology and still getting into conversations (albeit confrontational ones) with "terminals" in the orgs, I asked ...

in danger of WHAT? at risk of WHAT?

I'm sure it's no surprise that no one would answer the question, did they know? or just refuse to answer? does it matter? it's a trick!

I first became aware of this in the late 70s, I think. It was in some new HCOB that had just appeared in the baskets about how a Clear had to be told he was at risk. I had heard no technical stuff about it up to that point, so I assumed it was just some new kind of reg trick, the "Risk Roll."

Right up to today I have seen no Scn technical info that would make it true, i.e. how a supposed "Clear" would be more at risk (apart from the regging aspects) than anyone else.

Paul

 

[Veda]

I first became aware of this in the late 70s, I think. It was in some new HCOB that had just appeared in the baskets about how a Clear had to be told he was at risk. I had heard no technical stuff about it up to that point, so I assumed it was just some new kind of reg trick, the "Risk Roll."

Right up to today I have seen no Scn technical info that would make it true, i.e. how a supposed "Clear" would be more at risk (apart from the regging aspects) than anyone else.

Paul

I don't recall the exact date when "at risk" began to be used, but the "non-interference area" dates back to 1972. The idea is that a "Clear" can postulate, and can get into into nasty things such as "Incident 2," which - to beings at a lower awareness level - would be inaccessible.

 

[Challenge]

Grade III is "CHANGE" ....the ability to change (as in "change ones mind").

I don't disagree with this explanation of Grade 3 at all. Until I left cos in 1983 the Grade Chart and Grade Process sheets listed Grade 3 as " Fixed Ideas". Seems to me that " Change....the ability to change" communicates better than "fixed ideas".
IOW, one must ditch his 'fixed ideas' on a subject before he can 'change' his mind about it.

challenge

 

[Challenge]

I first became aware of this in the late 70s, I think. It was in some new HCOB that had just appeared in the baskets about how a Clear had to be told he was at risk. I had heard no technical stuff about it up to that point, so I assumed it was just some new kind of reg trick, the "Risk Roll."

Right up to today I have seen no Scn technical info that would make it true, i.e. how a supposed "Clear" would be more at risk (apart from the regging aspects) than anyone else.

Paul

When I read it I had already done OT levels, so my think on the 'risk' factor was: now the guy has run out the CC materials, he has opened up the OT3 phenom "case", and he needs to go further in his auditing to proof himself up against the impingement of his OT "case". (The CC implants happened in the middle of the OT3 series).
Isn't it joyous to be free of all the BS that we ran on ourselves while thinking we were "clearing the planet"? Not to even mention the BS that was run on us.

challenge

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

I first became aware of this in the late 70s, I think. It was in some new HCOB that had just appeared in the baskets about how a Clear had to be told he was at risk. I had heard no technical stuff about it up to that point, so I assumed it was just some new kind of reg trick, the "Risk Roll."

Right up to today I have seen no Scn technical info that would make it true, i.e. how a supposed "Clear" would be more at risk (apart from the regging aspects) than anyone else.

Paul

True as hell. Funny as hell. Heulluva lotta hell. Heh-Heh! (Highest-Ever-Hell Highest-Ever-Hell)

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

When I read it I had already done OT levels, so my think on the 'risk' factor was: now the guy has run out the CC materials, he has opened up the OT3 phenom "case", and he needs to go further in his auditing to proof himself up against the impingement of his OT "case". (The CC implants happened in the middle of the OT3 series).
Isn't it joyous to be free of all the BS that we ran on ourselves while thinking we were "clearing the planet"? Not to even mention the BS that was run on us.

challenge

And, here's the best part. . .

If Scientology miraculously managed to "CLEAR EARTH" (and all its 7 billion people) then the Earth would be at great risk (because of the Non-Interference Area).

Conclusion: If the earth is at great risk now...and still at great risk after Clearing the planet--why not save all the bother and just enjoy it as-is.

 

[Gadfly]

And, here's the best part. . .

If Scientology miraculously managed to "CLEAR EARTH" (and all its 7 billion people) then the Earth would be at great risk (because of the Non-Interference Area).

Conclusion: If the earth is at great risk now...and still at great risk after Clearing the planet--why not save all the bother and just enjoy it as-is.

Hoaxie, you are trying to apply logic to Scientology! It can't be done. There is no "logic" in Scientology - just Hubbard's often contradictory claims, and the people who blindlessly follow his claims.

enjoy it "as-is"; yeah I DO enjoy when Scientology "as-ises" (and thus VANISHES)!

 

[jenni with an eye]

Part of the whole "slant" of Scientology is that members are taught NOT to "ask questions". You are taught and heavily encouraged to "agree".

That was not my experience but, then again, I was considered a bit of a loose cannon who would never stop questioning things.

I asked the questions when I had 'em. I always insisted the answers be actual references.

I probably drove quite a few SO / Staff members crazy with all my questions and not stopping until I got the 'applicable' answer backed up with the appropriate reference.

They are taught to "create a mystery" as a reg. If the person asks, "in risk of what?", the reg, who maybe has done some of the OT levels, will look at you, wink, act all-knowing, and say something vague like, "oh, you will be so AMAZED when you finally get there and DO OT III". The reg will add, "it explains and handles the reason WHY the 4th dynamic is so fucked up here on Earth, and ALL THROUGH THIS SECTOR of the galaxy!" Mystery - mystery - mystery. Leave it vague, and many people will fill in the blanks with their own hopes and dreams.

It is setup to manipulate people. It does.

so true...and as always, there was my never ending questions...they were fully aware that I would not proceed until I had an acceptable answer that suited me

Even though I asked a lot of questions, I obviously never really asked the right ones. Oh well...


A very wise Old Timer gave me some very good advice years ago. When I started to act on this advice and really started using the same techniques back on them...they did NOT like it at all. .

 

[SchwimmelPuckel]

Part of the whole "slant" of Scientology is that members are taught NOT to "ask questions". You are taught and heavily encouraged to "agree"

That was not my experience but, then again, I was considered a bit of a loose cannon who would never stop questioning things.

I asked the questions when I had 'em. I always insisted the answers be actual references.

I probably drove quite a few SO / Staff members crazy with all my questions and not stopping until I got the 'applicable' answer backed up with the appropriate reference. <snip>

Hmm.. I may be off the mark, not having read all of this debate.

I was certainly taught not to ask questions.. I did too ask questions, and insisted that the answers were actual references.. But those 'actual references' that were allowable was strictly Hubbard, Hubbard and more Hubbard! - And then some additional Hubbard just to make sure.. All in writing of course.

That was how the 'scientology community' understood getting answers to qestions. Any other kind of questioning was rather effectiveley prohibited.

Heh.. I wasn't nearly as persistent with the questioning as you Jenni. I gave up and decided that the whole organization and community was nuts, evil and helplessly confused. Then I blew the hell outta there.