What's new

A First Question…

jibaro

Patron
I left scientology because I did not feel that I belonged and, perhaps, because I feared my issues would never be resolved. Since leaving I have been reading about Hubbard, dianetics and scientology, trying to make heads or tails of the whole thing.

Since I never witnessed any “wrong” doings inside the organization, I gave very little value to what some people out there were claiming and didn’t bother to hide the fact that I didn’t. To this day I’m not a detractor of scientology, or, rather, the church. They are not one and the same thing.

Reading some of the comments on this site and the information about idenics, I realized that I might be wrong. We always witness a small part of what we see. We don’t see what is hidden in the shadows and, even if we did, all we are capable of witnessing is a small portion of what is really going on.

This is not only true about us as individuals, it’s also true about us as a collective. We only have bits and pieces of the reality that surrounds us. What’s more, we can’t be sure that what the guy next to us says he saw is really true. There is just no way to ascertain that. The point of view of each of us is faulty because we apply our particular filters to what we see and give our particular twist, or interpretation, to it. It’s not that we want to lie, it’s that we are human and are not perfect, no matter what we want to believe.

There are those among us out there who have particular skills weaving tales. You see those people in politics weaving confusing interpretations of what is going on with our government. Some of them want us to believe that it’s all good, others, that it’s all evil and all shades in between. Each hands over as evidence particular interpretations of events that they weave together to give credibility to their tale. In the end, we don’t really know who is telling the truth, nor who we should believe, so, we must chose a reality and hope that it’s the right one.

The same thing happens with history. The winner, the person who has the power, gets to weave that tale. His version of what happened becomes accepted history. It’s what we are taught in school but there are those that dig into history and find certain details that permits them to weave their own tale. A tale that will be a better fit to their ends. Whether those ends are political, or just plain greed, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that they weave a tale and get other people to believe it.

In the end all they generate is confusion. We lose sight of what is true and we might never be able to find it. Because of that we are forced to walk our path in confusion. Never knowing if our steps are taking us in the right direction, or if we are going to fall of a cliff.

Because of this I have decided to abandon my efforts to find out the truth about a situation I seem to have lived in the 50’s where some one died in a dianetics center, perhaps in Elizabeth, NJ, while trying to get to Hubbard. For all I know that was the creation of an overactive imagination. In any case, what ever happened back there is not important. What is important is what I do with my life now.

So, in an effort to clear my mind of doubts, misinformation, programming, or any chains I may have accepted or acquired in my relationship with scientology, or similar philosophies, I would ask a couple of questions that some of you might be able to answer. In this writing I will try to ask an initial question. I will ask more as my understanding expands.

The question seems simple to me but, that’s from my point of view. Something that might be faulty.

I would like to know about the hook, the line and the sinker, that got us into scientology. I’m not talking about what keep people in, I’m talking about the basic stuff. What brought us into scientology.

In my case the hook and the bait were the book and the promises in it. Particularly the idea that I could recover lost abilities, learn the process to accomplish this and apply it to my family and friends.

I did not care much for the superman idea. I was not interested in turning into homosuperior, or any such thing. I though Hubbard was exaggerating things but, even so, I walked in, tried the process and saw enough possibilities to decide to continue my experience.

In time I realized that I was being pushed away from dianetics into something else that I did not like. I complied for a while but it became apparent that what I wanted could not possibly be found in the church. In the end, I walked out and have not returned, nor do I have plans to do so even though, from my point of view, there is no one else that has the tools they have.

So, what brought you in?
 
Last edited:

WildKat

Gold Meritorious Patron
What brought me in was the book, DMSMH, which I read through, and I thought it would help me with my ruin, which I found myself.

Dianetic auditing fell flat for me, it was a big disappointment.
 

jibaro

Patron
What brought me in was the book, DMSMH, which I read through, and I thought it would help me with my ruin, which I found myself.

Dianetic auditing fell flat for me, it was a big disappointment.

Yes, that's what got me in but the detail was that I would regain lost abilities having to do with my memory and seeing images in my mind.

Now, in my case, dianetics did not solve my problem because the organization was not interested in dianetics. They wanted me to become a scientologist and to apply those techniques. That meant that when I was auditing, instead of following what the pc gave me, I had to follow instructions from a person that was not in the auditing room with me.

I was failing my pcs because I was not allowed to practice dianetics as given in book one. I was auditing while wearing a straight jacket, so, I quit auditing.
 

Dean Blair

Silver Meritorious Patron
My mother read a few of Hubbard's books and got a wee bit of auditing. After she read DMSMH and several of the other books available she was gung ho and proselytized Hubbard and his tech to me.

I was in high school at the time and I really respected my mother and her beliefs about life so I went in and took the comm course and got a wee bit of auditing myself. I enjoyed the auditing because it was a form of basic psychology and the auditor simply asked me some two way comm questions about things going on in my life and did not evaluate or invalidate my answers. I felt acknowledged and enjoyed the fact that someone was interested in me and what I thought about things.

During this time I met some of the staff and became friends with them and was rather enthusiastic about what they were doing. I was asked to join staff and did so. My mom wanted me to become an auditor and so she paid for me to do the SHSBC (Saint Hill Special Briefing Course). I left for LA and did the training and when I returned after about a year I did in fact audit my mother through her grades.

It wasn't until I had been on staff for many years that I discovered the down side of it all and I assure you there is a very big down side to joining the cult.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Glad I read this. I actually had a similar thought for a thread.

What got us in...what kept us in?

I got in cuz my dad got me into it. He was involved when I was about 9. Later went back in when I was in high school.

He bought me a comm course and away i went.
 
Last edited:

jibaro

Patron
My mother read a few of Hubbard's books and got a wee bit of auditing. After she read DMSMH and several of the other books available she was gung ho and proselytized Hubbard and his tech to me.

I was in high school at the time and I really respected my mother and her beliefs about life so I went in and took the comm course and got a wee bit of auditing myself. I enjoyed the auditing because it was a form of basic psychology and the auditor simply asked me some two way comm questions about things going on in my life and did not evaluate or invalidate my answers. I felt acknowledged and enjoyed the fact that someone was interested in me and what I thought about things.

During this time I met some of the staff and became friends with them and was rather enthusiastic about what they were doing. I was asked to join staff and did so. My mom wanted me to become an auditor and so she paid for me to do the SHSBC (Saint Hill Special Briefing Course). I left for LA and did the training and when I returned after about a year I did in fact audit my mother through her grades.

It wasn't until I had been on staff for many years that I discovered the down side of it all and I assure you there is a very big down side to joining the cult.

If you look at the definition of psychology, you will find that dianetics is a form of psychology. It deals with how the mind works. The main difference, at least for me, deals with the fact that in dianetics the pc is suppose to be the source of the answers, while, in the practice of psychology the practitioner provides the answers and the patient is mostly invalidated.

So, you got in because your mother got in and you were hooked because the auditors listened to you but, you did not get dianetic auditing? Sounds like what you got was straight scientology auditing. Dianetics and scientology are not the same thing.

The question later will be about what got you to stay. Right now I'm looking as to how we got in.
 

jibaro

Patron
Glad I read this. I actually had a similar thought for a thread.

What got us in...what kept us in?

I got in cuz my dad got me into it. He was involved when I was about 9. Later went back in when I was in high school.

He bought me a comm course and away i went.

So, your father opened the door for you but, was there anything that you found attractive about it? Did dianetics have anything to do with it, or was it the scientology processes that got you into it? Or was it the friendly camaraderie and the positive attitudes observable between staff members?
 

Helena Handbasket

Gold Meritorious Patron
What I didn't like was:

>> I kept getting Scientology when I wanted Dianetics, and

>> When I DID get Dianetics, there was too much emphasis on "the body" and not enough on emotional engrams. Emotions affect hormone levels which cause us to feel good or bad in EXACTLY the same way physical pain does. Yet emotional engrams (later demoted to "secondaries") can be very crippling. It was tough to get this area addressed without constantly being shuffled off into a different area.

Helena
 
Last edited:

jibaro

Patron
What I didn't like was:

>> I kept getting Scientology when I wanted Dianetics, and

>> When I DID get Dianetics, there was too much emphasis on "the body" and not enough on emotional engrams. Emotions affect hormone levels which cause us to feel good or bad in EXACTLY the same way physical pain does. Yet emotional engrams (later demoted to "secondaries") can be very crippling. It was tough to get this area addressed without constatntly being shuffled off into a different area.

Helena

That's the way it went with me. I got the impression that dianetic was brought out when things got low to attract public. That's why I ask about how people initially got hooked. It's what brought me in. Yet, I knew people who went in because they were in a bad way and they heard that dianetic could help them get a grip on the world that had gotten out of their control. They read the dianetic book after joining the group.

What you describe shows a lack of interest in dianetics. If I understood that book correctly the first thing an auditor had got to get out of the way were the secondaries. They are suppose to be a barrier to the process, so, moving away from an available secondary makes no sense unless what is being done is something else. At least that is what I understood as an auditor.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
So, your father opened the door for you but, was there anything that you found attractive about it? Did dianetics have anything to do with it, or was it the scientology processes that got you into it? Or was it the friendly camaraderie and the positive attitudes observable between staff members?

Doing the comm course felt right. I really liked the TRs. I felt like I was getting some help. I'd had some pressures with schoolwork and this calmed me down a bit, just as Dad had thought it might.

I then got cchs and op oro by dup. Liked that a lot. Liked Hubbard's writings)had never encountered anything like them.

I'd been chafing a bit under the Catholic church I'd been attending. Original sin, their ideas on sex and birth control didn't sit well with me. Scn seemed like a breath of fresh air after that.

After a few courses came the help us save the world routine, so then they really got their hooks into me. But it's how I met my husband. That alone made it worthwhile.
 

jibaro

Patron
Doing the comm course felt right. I really liked the TRs. I felt like I was getting some help. I'd had some pressures with schoolwork and this calmed me down a bit, just as Dad had thought it might.

I then got cchs and op oro by dup. Liked that a lot. Liked Hubbard's writings)had never encountered anything like them.

I'd been chafing a bit under the Catholic church I'd been attending. Original sin, their ideas on sex and birth control didn't sit well with me. Scn seemed like a breath of fresh air after that.

After a few courses came the help us save the world routine, so then they really got their hooks into me. But it's how I met my husband. That alone made it worthwhile.

Yeah, the save the world routine was powerful stuff and, initially, scientology auditing seem to be fun and was productive. Particularly the communication course but the student hat didn't give me what I hoped. Everything I did after that was lack luster. I didn't feel like I needed those processes, though they were a waste of time. What I really wanted was to hunt down my engrams and to gain certainty over the origination's that came up during auditing. I mean, it seemed like this life did not exist. Everything that came up had to do with other lives and mostly with things that occurred a ridiculous long time ago.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
If you look at the definition of psychology, you will find that dianetics is a form of psychology. It deals with how the mind works. The main difference, at least for me, deals with the fact that in dianetics the pc is suppose to be the source of the answers, while, in the practice of psychology the practitioner provides the answers and the patient is mostly invalidated.

So, you got in because your mother got in and you were hooked because the auditors listened to you but, you did not get dianetic auditing? Sounds like what you got was straight scientology auditing. Dianetics and scientology are not the same thing.

The question later will be about what got you to stay. Right now I'm looking as to how we got in.

You obviously never had a psychological therapist or studied psychology because that's not true. You have it backwards, psychology is psychology which has nothing to do with dianetics/scientology. Equating hubbard's cult with real psychology is way off base. Hubbard's "processes" were designed to cognitively dissociate a person into a false euphoric state of depersonalization-derealization that can lead to psychotic breaks and suicides. Many Ex's have sought out real mental health therapy because of what scientology did to them.

Yeah, the save the world routine was powerful stuff and, initially, scientology auditing seem to be fun and was productive. Particularly the communication course but the student hat didn't give me what I hoped. Everything I did after that was lack luster. I didn't feel like I needed those processes, though they were a waste of time. What I really wanted was to hunt down my engrams and to gain certainty over the origination's that came up during auditing. I mean, it seemed like this life did not exist. Everything that came up had to do with other lives and mostly with things that occurred a ridiculous long time ago.

The comm course desensitizes a person from their natural emotions. It's the beginning of cultist indoctrination which is no surprise. Who needs all that HE&R right? What a load of twaddle. If you studied psychology in depth then you see dianetics & scientology is cultist thought reform and a very unhealthy dead end.

There is no such thing as engrams, clears, the reactive mind, case, et al. It's all hubbard's bait and switch pseudo-science that unfortunately many of us fell for. Hubbard was a sociopath. From reading history (last time I checked) sociopaths aren't interested in anyone's well being except their own at everyone else's expense.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
HE&R is not covered on comm course. It's only a no case on post thing and so it's part of staff statuses.

I enjoy discussing how we felt back then. Of course things are different now.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
HE&R is not covered on comm course. It's only a no case on post thing and so it's part of staff statuses.

I enjoy discussing how we felt back then. Of course things are different now.

That's the entire point of the comm course. Keep your "t.r.'s" in, no "he&r," normal emotional feelings are "low tone." How unauthentic. It's one thing to go over the same cultist crap repeatedly like wading in a kiddy pool full of sewage for years and years, quite another to look at what cultist indoctrination actually is in relation to scientology with simple clarity leaving that cesspool completely.
 
Last edited:

Helena Handbasket

Gold Meritorious Patron
What I didn't like was:

>> I kept getting Scientology when I wanted Dianetics, and

>> When I DID get Dianetics, there was too much emphasis on "the body" and not enough on emotional engrams. Emotions affect hormone levels which cause us to feel good or bad in EXACTLY the same way physical pain does. Yet emotional engrams (later demoted to "secondaries") can be very crippling. It was tough to get this area addressed without constantly being shuffled off into a different area.

Helena
That's the way it went with me. I got the impression that dianetic was brought out when things got low to attract public. That's why I ask about how people initially got hooked. It's what brought me in. Yet, I knew people who went in because they were in a bad way and they heard that dianetic could help them get a grip on the world that had gotten out of their control. They read the dianetic book after joining the group.

What you describe shows a lack of interest in dianetics. If I understood that book correctly the first thing an auditor had got to get out of the way were the secondaries. They are suppose to be a barrier to the process, so, moving away from an available secondary makes no sense unless what is being done is something else. At least that is what I understood as an auditor.
It usually went like this:

Now we're going to do Dianetics. You don't have to come up with items to run; here's a Health Form. We'll do one step at a time, and when we get to the end, we're done with Dianetics. No opportunity for you to say what's actually bothering you.

Helena
 

Leland

Crusader
It usually went like this:

Now we're going to do Dianetics. You don't have to come up with items to run; here's a Health Form. We'll do one step at a time, and when we get to the end, we're done with Dianetics. No opportunity for you to say what's actually bothering you.

Helena


I recall the Cult saying (during one of its bridge revampings and overhauls...) that the bridge was being "streamlined" to increase the speed up the steps.

Only what was necessary to run to achieve the result....was what I understood that to mean.

But the problem I see, looking back....and at my time of leaving, was that all the results....and "abilities attained" had been "homogenized" so to speak...or they were uniform.

But more so the people themselves ....the cult members became "uniform." Uniform in their thinking...acting....responses.....

I can see lots of reasons the cult did this....but one that stands out...was so no one had a chance to "stray".....which to me would have been good.

One major problem with the cult is people ARE NOT one size fits all.....
 
Last edited:

jibaro

Patron
You obviously never had a psychological therapist or studied psychology because that's not true. You have it backwards, psychology is psychology which has nothing to do with dianetics/scientology. Equating hubbard's cult with real psychology is way off base. Hubbard's "processes" were designed to cognitively dissociate a person into a false euphoric state of depersonalization-derealization that can lead to psychotic breaks and suicides. Many Ex's have sought out real mental health therapy because of what scientology did to them.



The comm course desensitizes a person from their natural emotions. It's the beginning of cultist indoctrination which is no surprise. Who needs all that HE&R right? What a load of twaddle. If you studied psychology in depth then you see dianetics & scientology is cultist thought reform and a very unhealthy dead end.

There is no such thing as engrams, clears, the reactive mind, case, et al. It's all hubbard's bait and switch pseudo-science that unfortunately many of us fell for. Hubbard was a sociopath. From reading history (last time I checked) sociopaths aren't interested in anyone's well being except their own at everyone else's expense.

I guess you never did a word clearing course, so here is one definition of psychology (there are many out there but they coincide):

  1. psychology definition. The science dealing with mental phenomena and processes. Psychologists study emotions, perception, intelligence, consciousness, and the relationship between these phenomena and processes and the work of the glands and muscles
  2. It's a science that deals with mental phenomena, isn't that what dianetics did? It studies and works with emotions, perception, intelligence, consciousness and so on, so, I would say that dianetics is very much psychology.


  1. Now, how about the existence of engrams, the reactive mind and so on? Psychology has the unconscious mind, the conscious mind, the ego, the id, they have patients and, to keep things short, they work with the experiences of their patients, their identities and so on. I would say that they work with the same things that dianetics work with. The main difference being that they tend to sugest solutions to their patients, while in the original dianetics the auditor was not suppose to do anything other than to guide their pc and listen.

    My comm course did not turn me into something else. It just showed me, to keep it short, how to control my reactions and how to talk to people. What tried to change me into something else were the policy letters, Hubbards philosophy and so on but that's a theme for a new question. Here I'm just trying to figure out what the hook, line and sinker was, so that I can heal any ill effects from my experience, if any.

Sorry I could not separate my comments from the definition. Tried but it just would not work before this point but I think that my point is clear.
 
Last edited:

jibaro

Patron
HE&R is not covered on comm course. It's only a no case on post thing and so it's part of staff statuses.

I enjoy discussing how we felt back then. Of course things are different now.

I'm afraid I don't know what HE&R is. I have a hard time with the letter soup I find in the internet. In any case, I'm not trying to be exact here because I can't. The main thing I wanted to handle, that did not improve, in the mission back home, was my memory and it's just as bad now as it was then. So, I might mach things together a little, sorry about that.:nervous:
 

jibaro

Patron
The Stupid Hat was completely worthless.


I don't believe in reincarnation but in my last lifetime I did. :)

Helena

Well the Stupid Hat:eyeroll: was not completely worthless for me. It taught me a few things that would have made me a better student if I had known them and which I have taught to my kids and friends but i did not gain the final result that I was led to expect. My doubts in electronics did not go away. I was still confused on what a ground really is and about the basic theory.

As for reincarnation, all my life I was exposed to spiritualism and my father was a pretty good medium. I have seen spirits and I have handled spiritual "attacks" on my person. I have also had experiences that would be called in scientology "exteriorizations". So I know that the spirit exists and that there is something to other lives.

The fact that there are a lot of charlatans out there doesn't mean that it's all a lie. My father used to tell me that he couldn't charge for his services. That anyone who did was a charlatan and that they would lose the talents they had because those talents were a gift and were not meant to be a source of income. So, even though he accepted some gifts from people, we were mostly poor.

The one thing I know for sure is that, no matter who you were or what you did before, the important thing is what you do with your life now. The past is like a lesson. We are supposed to learn from it, keep from making the same mistakes again, and grow.
 
Top