Yeah just wait until my extreme views overwhelm Washington, DC in November. Or sooner. It is Barack Insane Obammy who has the extremist views.

It wouldn't be the first time in history wild-eyed violent terrorist radicals sought to overthrow a state founded upon the rule of reason and the application of law & civil liberty. :bigcry:

Still, check back come November. Things change. :)


Mark A. Baker
 

Mystic

Crusader
Baked things are baked. There is no truth for them...yet, only "viewpoints, opinions, considerations, ideas, etc. and on down their list of classified thought."

Baked ones are often scared doodooless of their emotions.

The baked are so baked they think everyone else is as baked as they are and that, of course, no one who is not baked can see anything for what it is/is not.

 

Winston Smith

Flunked Scientology
It wouldn't be the first time in history wild-eyed violent terrorist radicals sought to overthrow a state founded upon the rule of reason and the application of law & civil liberty. :bigcry:

Still, check back come November. Things change. :)


Mark A. Baker

Yeah, like in NOVEMBER 2008.
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
bump for the n00bs. Mayo's description of how the definition of Clear has changed is very interesting, and is a major klew
 

skollie

Silver Meritorious Patron
Why does someone who is supposed to be clear need to be told he/she is clear. :confused2:


Marion Paow, Mike Sutter and this time along with a third guy, Hansuili Stahli, showed up at our door steps in Italy in the middle of the night. They immediately informed Claudio that Tiziano and Jamie were just with Marty in Texas, and that the situation got out of their control, that his folders where look at by Ray Mithoff, and that Tiziano was absolutely NOT CLEAR, but that without any doubt Marty told him he was.

http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/
 

nexus100

Gold Meritorious Patron
I knew I should have aspired to Chicken Clear. :D

I have read this thread and it is a good read. :thumbsup:

Chicken clear buckaaa is the highest state of buckaaaa clear, being assigned that buck buck buck buckaaaaaaaaaa state by Head Rooster Hubbbbbbucckaaaaa himself.
 

Stat

Gold Meritorious Patron
Auditors are above Clears. No? Auditors are also most valuable beings on the planet. And look how it worked out for many of them.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
Chicken clear buckaaa is the highest state of buckaaaa clear, being assigned that buck buck buck buckaaaaaaaaaa state by Head Rooster Hubbbbbbucckaaaaa himself.

2840547491_bcc194c66e_o.jpg
 

Veda

Sponsor
Interview with David Mayo, 1986: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/miller/interviews/mayo.htm

Article by David Mayo on Clear, 1991: http://www.ivymag.org/iv-01-02.html
_________________________________________________________________
START QUOTE


Clear

By David Mayo, USA.

In late 1978, the state of "dianetic clear" was announced. Within a few months two other "states of clear" were introduced: the state of "natural clear" and the state of "past life clear".

This change had two immediate consequences:

1. The number of people attesting (correctly or falsely) to having attained the "state of clear" increased enormously.
2. During and after that period, there was a considerable amount of upset and confusion about the "state of clear".

There were those who considered that a dianetic clear was not a "real clear" and that the only "real clear" was one who (like them) had done the Clearing Course. Some felt that they had gone clear in their last lifetime. Some felt that dianetic clear explained why they had never been able to run dianetic auditing successfully. A large number of auditors, C/Ses, and others felt that there were a lot of people falsely attesting to the state of clear and either

a. Felt unethical about letting the person attest, or
b. Tried to handle it and ended up involuntarily invalidating the pc. No matter how this was "handled", it has persisted as a problem. So we can at least assume that there are aspects of it that haven't been taken into account and handled.

Let us examine more closely what happened in late 1978 and early 1979. LRH was being audited and concluded that one of the things wrong with his case was that he had been audited on dianetic auditing after he had attained the "state of clear" (which he at first thought had occured in objective processing). He then issued a bulletin forbidding the running of dianetic auditing on clears and made various other technical and administrative changes.

He cancelled the state of "keyed out clear" by stating that it was the same state as "clear". He changed the definition of "clear" (and subsequently changed it several more times). He order ed that the folders of pcs (and the pcs themselves) who might have gone clear in orgs and missions be routed to Advanced Orgs. This action resulted in an emptying out of the orgs and missions and a flood of people arriving at the AOs.

At first, people were being declared clear regardless of what they thought they had gone clear on or when this had occurred. More importantly, they were being declared clear regardless of the state of case or condition they were in. In fact, one bulletin went so far as to advise that case and ethics trouble could be caused by a person having attained clear without having the state acknowledged. As a result, many persons who were declared clear were actually in very poor condition. This practice reflected badly on the "state of clear" and the workability of the tech. It caused a great deal of upset and confusion on the subject of clear.

At that time there was a shortage of instructions on how to handle dianetic clear technically and a general lack of data on the new subject of "dianetic clear". However persons accused of mis-handling dianetic clear were handled with heavy ethics. The "invalidation of clear" was named a Suppressive Act, while permitting someone to attest falsely was also a serious ethics offense.

A step in the procedure for handling these new clears was to establish the date when the person went clear. Sometimes the date so found would be before scientology or even prior to the pc's lifetime. When LRH heard that some persons considered that they had attained the "state of clear" in an earlier practice such as Buddhism, he became very upset. He stated that the idea that a person could go clear through any other means than scientology was "suppressive". At a certain point, he also got upset at the fact that people were concluding that they had gone clear in scientology auditing. So he specified that a person can validly go clear only in dianetic auditing. He handled the "earlier than this life time" clears by deciding that they either went clear in their last lifetime in dianetic auditing (presumably if they were young enough for this to be possible) or had attained a new state he dubbed "natural clear". His new theory was that some people had never been anything but clear. However, he refused, thereafter, to issue any further clarification of what he meant by this assertion.

Throughout this period, the definition of clear and/or dianetic clear kept changing - in the direction of dilution. Thus people came to expect less and less from the "state of clear", while the number of new clears (and thus new arrivals at AOs and Gross Income) steadily increased. None of the new definitions of "clear", and none of the new techniques for handling clears or programming them for further actions, really solved any of the problems caused by the advent of dianetic clear.

It is of interest that the definition of "clear" had already been changed several times between its first definition in DMSMH (The book, Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health, 1950, by L. Ron Hubbard) and the time the idea of "clear" was put forth. In DMSMH, a clear was said to be 4.0 on the tone scale, with no aberrations (held down sevens), no psychoses, neuroses, nor psychosomatic illnesses. The clear was said to have eidetic recall and highly enhanced perceptions and creativity. Although this chappie didn't have any OT powers, he was definitely quite a phenomenon!

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.

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.

"Clears" have always had trouble explaining why they still act reactively at times, or a lot of the time, and why they still have problems in life and in getting along with people. The amount of mileage you can get from the notion of a "cleared Cannibal" is very limited. Even a cleared cannibal, if he were really clear, would get along wonderfully in life, never manifest misemotion, and love all his fellow beings, even as he was having their bodies for dinner!

The idea of "harmonics of clear" is quite accurate. The main reason why LRH blew up at the idea of "harmonics of clear", as expressed in the HCOB I wrote, was, as he told me, that this idea tended to leave him open to the charge that the claims he had made in DMSMH and elsewhere concerning the "state of clear" were fraudulent.

The truth appears to be that there are various stages of release, at each one of which you are clear-er than you were. A person experiencing the glee of insanity is clear-er than someone who is just completely unconscious. It was PR and marketing considerations that led Hubbard to decide that certain people were "clear" at a certain point, and that they therefore had no reactive mind. However this assertion is a lie, and a very destructive one, one that denies case gain to a great many people and provides a too-convenient rabbit button for pc's, auditors and C/S's who are having trouble with the pc's case. The claim that case and ethics problems can be caused by being clear was:

1. Absurd on the face of it.
2. A declaration of open rabbitting season.

Trying to define "clear" is difficult because it is being done over a lie. We either have to restore the meaning of clear to its original absolute meaning (which means that there aren't any clears in existence), or we have to say that what people have attested to as clear is actually only a state of release or reduction.

We can say that the purpose of auditing is to clear aberrations and that if all aberrations were cleared, a "state of clear" would be attained. The concept of "clear" is useful as an ultimate goal, like the goal of perfect happiness or of perfect anything. It is a direction in which to continue to progress. It is not an attainable state (at least given our present level of technology).

Another part of the problem is that the states of release and clear are only subjective. Asking an aberrated person to decide when he feels or thinks that he is no longer aberrated, is asking for a delusory "cognition" from the start. At one time [ca. 1959. Ed.], LRH postulated that the state of clear could be objectively proven by the presence of a "free or floating needle" and a TA position of 2.0 (Female) or 3.0 (Male). But this was an unverified guess that did not stand the test of time.

Perhaps what we have been calling "clear" is "no longer chronically affected by engrams" or "engrams no longer in chronic restimulation." As such, the state would be more accurately described as a state of release or as a state of reduction. In other words, it would mean that the majority of a person's aberrations had gone into abeyance.

Regardless of what the state is named, the recognition that a person can continue to be come clear-er, restores hope and makes progress possible again.


END QUOTE
________________________________________________________________


When I was auditing people outside the C of S, I would always end off (usually after a lengthy program) when the person was doing very well, and acknowledge the person. My "R Factor " was that "You're done." I never had a "bad indicator" when giving that "R factor." People were delighted to put down the cans and LIVE LIFE.

Here's an old link that describes one such period. On one side of my auditing room, I had a small photo of Hubbard fondling his filterless Kools, on another wall a photo of Francois Rabelais, and another wall a photo of Aleister Crowley. Strange and interesting - transitional - times.

So I know what it's like to audit someone to "Clear" and then steer him/her away from the Hubbard labyrinth that follows. Another auditor I admire, Pam Kemp, did much the same thing, and there have been many others. As far as I know, none of them called themselves Freezoners or Scientologists - usually the term counselor or auditor sufficed.

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=186836&postcount=67
 

Hatshepsut

Crusader
Clears have done the L12 successfully unburdening charge. Maybe you'd have to clear every hat you ever wore in any game before you are totally free of trappings. I have noticed that lots of ancient practices seemed to be directed at helping the spirit of man escape from containments he did not want to be in. Escaping bodies, planets, minds, sectors, universes, prisons, emotional states, etc. I have no doubt that there were some successful mystical and magical tactics in the past. I do however believe they would have been boobytrapped by now. That is my opinion. It also seems to be my experience.

Over and over I have heard stories of where what used to work or was once a way out is now somehow sabotaged. WHO sabotaged it? I'd like to be able to say it is a flow 0 but am not too sure of this. :no: That a person is clear in an area doesn't necessarily mean he will remain stably exterior or untrapped. Remember the old heirarchies of Mest Clear. Clear. Theta Clear. Cleared Theta Clear. Keyed Out Clear, etc. Seems real enough....:confused2:

Assuming 100% responsibility for items used to work to exteriorize a person in release stages from the dynamics he was interiorized into. Can't employ the technique to the same ends any more. Doesn't work. You get in trouble for taking responsibility for someone elses stuff....even though you may be more than willing. Maybe at one time this mechanism didn't act as a barrier.
 

Veda

Sponsor
-snip-

Over and over I have heard stories of where what used to work or was once a way out is now somehow sabotaged. WHO sabotaged it?

-snip-

Stories?

What you're hearing is mostly people who were once young, who've since confused the enthusiasms of their youth with a long ago Scientology now viewed with rose-colored glasses.

Who sabotaged it?

Primarily, Hubbard sabotaged it. Why? Because he was doing something other than what he told the starry-eyed Scientologists he was doing, and because he never did have the stairway to heaven, that he told people that the had, in the first place.
 
Top