Smilla

Ordinary Human
I'm not looking to grow. I'm not a plant. I am looking to "actualize". I have lifelong dreams that I have not lived. These don't include perfect calculation, eidetic recall, etc. My goals are basically to live in my own home, decorated like a starship, but built in a sequoia tree, near the sea. I don't think that my goals need to be static, but I would like to live this one for a while.

Perhaps you are misreading what I am saying, and associating it too strongly with what Hubbard was saying. I never understood being Clear to mean you were a functional robot who was always Hap Hap Happy as Fucking Hell living in a John Madden-size house, 2.5 cars in the yard, life used to be so hard type of thing. I'm talking about approaching your goals without living in a state of "enturbulation" (though being able to roll with unexpected or unwanted changes as they arise, which is likely).

We are all so different. I'm lucky in that I pretty much have everything I ever wanted. I really hope you get what you want. Believe in it. Go for it.

Smilla xx
 

GreyWolf

Gold Meritorious Patron
Ya see, it is a problem wuth any absolute. Like 100% Standard tech. Like the EP of pro tr's is the ability to communicate with anyone about anything. It is all BS. Oops. My own absolute.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
Ya see, it is a problem wuth any absolute. Like 100% Standard tech. Like the EP of pro tr's is the ability to communicate with anyone about anything. It is all BS. Oops. My own absolute.
You are right. People are not machines - however much Hubbard liked to think and treat them so. The difference between any two people is immense. That's one reason of many why 'the bridge' and 'standard tech' is nonsense.
 

x-x

Patron with Honors
"It is also significant that the attributes of a clear, as described in DMSMH, were never actually attained, although in reading DMSMH, one might be led to believe that they were. When people started attesting to clear, the definition was watered down to the vague generality "at cause over mental MEST as regards the first dynamic". This definition can mean many different things to many different people. Anyone is at least somewhat causative over his own mind. So anyone can find an interpretation of this definition of "clear" that he can attest to. The states of "MEST Clear", "Theta Clear", "Cleared Theta Clear", "Clearing Course Clear", "Clear-OT", and, finally, "Dianetic Clear", and "Word Clear" were equally absolutistic when first stated, but when people started attesting to them, the definition of each, or the criterion for allowing a pc to attest to each, was similarly watered down. This sequence has been repeated over and over throughout the history of scientology." Quoted from David Mayo

To understand Clear you need to understand Mind Body Thetan.

Clear is a state where the thetan (you) doesn't have a bank. It is clear cut.
Other phenomena connected with the body are handled on the Pre OT levels.
One needs to be clear to handle these, however in recent times people even on OT 7 have been told they are not clear, having failed a clear check.

First of all any right indication should produce vgi's. The fact that some of these people, on this Board, have gone sour and been declared is not a good indicator. It seems to me, as a side note, that some in the Church want to believe in SPs, this is a games condition. So they are happy when someone is declared, end of story. I tend to wonder why Minuet in G and Feral made it go right for so many years to do their Solo Nots and regular trips to Flag, I would have thought that regardless of what they say now they would have been making case gain. And I was told I was not clear despite having had fantastic gain of OT 4, and put back onto Dianetics, but the difference was that after I had spent some time in the wilderness, more or less having decided to question Scientology, I came back to reading the Tech Vols and R & D, and then a friend Peter Sparshot who was an old Saint Hiller, reviewed my folder and found some hours for me in it, and within ten minutes after a correction list was run based around an origination I was making, I got the ep of the Clear Check on the first ask of the question that followed. And then I was given OK by RTC to go back onto OT levels.

I have to wonder why experienced auditors were so willingly discarded when GAT came in, and indeed there is a web page on the numbers of declares of Class X11 auditors originally trained by Ron as well as another on the declares of former staff at Saint Hill which makes you wonder. Well you would wonder if there was a suppressive intent to get rid of people.

Indeed I was thinking of making a post about purges, just as a side note, I have I am afraid written KRs about others when we had purges in the past, and I can see how relatively green staff, can sabotage people higher on the bridge than them and with more policy and tech knowledge than them.

Clear and OT are theta states, so don't apply hidden standards to them.

You can't understand the OT levels until you do them as there is an increase in theta perception and a change in beingness.

Thus what David Mayo has written above is utter crap. However I believe he is a valuable being and I want him rehabilitated.
 
Last edited:

uniquemand

Unbeliever
Your statement, IMO, is based on theory. Practically speaking, have you EVER seen documentation showing that ANY SINGLE PERSON HAS EVER BEEN CLEAR?

Aside from that, you should format replies to indicate that you are quoting another person, rather than me, when you do that. I never made any claim to speak for Mayo, and I didn't write that quote.

The idea that a person has been clear, but then was disabled by bts, is just a justification for the failure to achieve Hubbard's expected abilities of Clear (and then OT). Please don't try to foist that crap off on ex-scientologists.
 
Thus what David Mayo has written above is utter crap. However I believe he is a valuable being and I want him rehabilitated.

Having met and spoken with David I find his comments far more credible than anything you have had occasion to post. :eyeroll:


Mark A. Baker
 

Winston Smith

Flunked Scientology
Smilla, would you like to talk about unicorns with me? I am more clear on unicorns than I am on "clear," but that is not saying much. Let's hear it for unicorns! Do they have an organization for "clears" called "uniclears?"

On this clear stuff, I think maybe when you getz older, likz me, much former stuff just does not bother you, so you enter the realm of "WTF" which is I gather similar to "clear."

But Unicorns will always be more interesting.
 

PeterMan

Patron with Honors
Why would someone want to be a Clear?

When you go to the petting store, do want the perfectly symmetrical dog or the dog with one ear flopped over?

2845282904_d9208966e8.jpg
... or ...
Poodle.jpg
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
I know when I'm dating, I'm looking for a woman with as much baggage as possible, and preferably one who can't stop thinking about it, associating me with it, and taking it out on me.

Much better than a woman who sees me as I am, treats me in accord with the way that I treat her, and who takes responsibility for her own state of mind.
 

nw2394

Silver Meritorious Patron
Having met and spoken with David I find his comments far more credible than anything you have had occasion to post. :eyeroll:


Mark A. Baker

Really, I find Mayo's comments to be rubbish too - not that I really want to discuss it in this environment.

Nick
 
Really, I find Mayo's comments to be rubbish too - not that I really want to discuss it in this environment.

Nick


I'm sorry to hear this, Nick, as I for one would be interested in hearing your views on the matter. Even on those occasions when we don't agree I generally find your comments to be stimulating.


Mark A. Baker
 

Mystic

Crusader
Oh great! A thread about something that doesn't exist.

Yes, Mr. Mayo, there will always be confusion regarding Hubbard-thing's so-called "Clear", as there is no such thing other than a momentary delusion.
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
The thread is about something that DOES exist, Mystic, although it only exists as a goal or a concept, since a method of reaching a permanent "state" has not been demonstrated to exist. The "tech" developed, so far, hasn't delivered the goal or concept as stated in any of scientology's materials in any way that can be proven.

Is the goal desirable? Is it attainable? I think Mayo's thoughts are relevant, obviously, or I wouldn't have started the post off with them.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
The thread is about something that DOES exist, Mystic, although it only exists as a goal or a concept, since a method of reaching a permanent "state" has not been demonstrated to exist. The "tech" developed, so far, hasn't delivered the goal or concept as stated in any of scientology's materials in any way that can be proven.

Is the goal desirable? Is it attainable? I think Mayo's thoughts are relevant, obviously, or I wouldn't have started the post off with them.
It's partly to do with being in the right place with the right people doing the right thing. A charitable, compassionate, open-minded attitude towards others and life in general. Doing what you love to do, giving and receiving love without reserve. It's not about re-shuffling the contents of the mind per Hubbard's ideas. People are about much more than mind. It requires daily rededication and alignment. The most important thing is kindness. Not needing to be first. Has to be created and accepted in every moment. Just what I have learned.
 

AlphOhm

Traveler of time/space
Mayo, OP snippet:

LRH correctly stated that absolutes are unattainable. And the notion of "clear" is an absolute. It's like the notion of "clean" or "pure". When is water pure? When it has only one part per million of arsenic and rat poop? Nowhere in the universe is there water which is 100% pure. To obtain complete Clarity would require a complete as-isness of any universe the thetan was in and a return to complete native state. Everyone does have a reactive mind - his own reactive mind. That's why one flies ruds and goes E/S and gets off BPC on anyone regardless of their point on the grade chart. The mechanics of the reactive mind continue to exist all the way up.

So per Mayo there are "no clears" until cleared theta clear is passed and native state is restored/revisited?

Is this an absolute?

Also, I am suspicious of the "Everyone does have a reactive mind"--David has examined "everyone"?
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
Well, native state is a postulated state of existence, rather than something that I've ever seen demonstrated. I think he's talking about an objective for "processing", rather than a destination that's been arrived at. Sort of like I try to clean my room/apartment, but is it ever totally clean? Hard to say. It's an objective I strive for (though factually, I'm not the cleanest bachelor you ever met). I think he's sort of saying that you clear up what's there to clear up, and then move along smartly. When something else crops up, you clear it up, pull the string and see if something else is attached and clear it up.
 
Top