David Mayo's Contribution to SOLO NOT'S is ?

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Claire, Terril was THREATENING TO OUT ME. On the false premise that I have practically outed myself. Which is NOT TRUE.

If you read my last post, please read why I am supporting Mayo and not supporting Terril's allegiance to Marty Rathbun. Mayo cannot speak out now, he has a gagging order on him. Marty can speak out. One of most respected people in Scientology and the splinter movement whose popularity was duplicated by the growth of the AAC across the world and who inspired many to leave is in silence, whilst Rathbun and Rinder are able to talk freely and put down Mayo's contribution to NOT's, which he cannot dispute. Rathbun and Rinder were part of the Scientology takeover with Miscavige, well documented by the likes of Jesse Prince, who helped offload a lot of people and break up families.

Rather than attack me, attack the data.

If Terril is asking for proof (which he has further back on this thread) that Rathbun is guilty of any wrong doing, then I'm afriad he is either pretending to be very naive or is negating the last 30 years of Scientology legal history. Can you see now why so many find his comments distasteful?

And that is exactly why he should not talk to you. He should not have responded to your attacks (and you did mention that you knew him, mentioned it right here on this forum) thus.

Absolutely. We're agreed.
 

David Mayo

Patron with Honors
mrinder | February 14, 2011 at 11:52 pm | Reply

"Not that you need confirmation Marty, but as you know, I did the same exercise and confirm everything you say here.

But beyond that, IF Mayo had in fact developed NOTs, he surely would have made some other remarkable breakthroughs on the subject and would never have taken the payoff from the church and gone windsurfing."

Didn't know David Mayo was a windsurfer. That gives me a whole new level of respect for him. Marty's idea of exercise or sport is sitting on his can drinking beers, fatally injuring fish he'll never clean, prepare or eat.

A payoff from the Cult to go windsurfing? The equipment costs less than many fishing rods and the sport is free. Anyone that can learn to personally handle and maneuver wind or ocean waves without the assistance of a motor in a physically challenging sport that doesn't hurt the environment has my respect. Good on him.

Thank you Gottabrain!

Now here's something I will comment on.

I started windsurfing 10 years before Rin's pontifical pronouncement suggests, in about 1984. No payoff from any of the 3M's required. Just a love of nature (sailing among turtles, blue Flying Fish and sometimes a Tiger shark). This followed a recognition that exercise is an invaluable part of becoming/remaining healthy.

I also realized that three of the factors to a good life are: exercise, a healthy diet and reduction of stress[/B]. My wife and I practiced and promoted those with, dare I say, astounding results!

And a new life, not entangled in "knots" (wink, wink, say no more) began!

"Mr. Squirrel"
 

David Mayo

Patron with Honors
Re: Harmonics of Clear HCOB

Has the original "Harmonics of Clear" HCOB by Mayo ever surfaced on the Internet? I've looked through all my old materials and haven't been able to find it anyplace.

I remember seeing it back in the day, right after it came out. It would be an interesting read today.

ILove2Lurk

Someone out there has it, 'cos I've seen it on one of the sites a few years ago.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
Thank you Gottabrain!

Now here's something I will comment on.

I started windsurfing 10 years before Rin's pontifical pronouncement suggests, in about 1984. No payoff from any of the 3M's required. Just a love of nature (sailing among turtles, blue Flying Fish and sometimes a Tiger shark). This followed a recognition that exercise is an invaluable part of becoming/remaining healthy.

I also realized that three of the factors to a good life are: exercise, a healthy diet and reduction of stress[/B]. My wife and I practiced and promoted those with, dare I say, astounding results!

And a new life, not entangled in "knots" (wink, wink, say no more) began!

"Mr. Squirrel"



I agree David (lovely to hear from you BTW) ... those 3 things you mention are the only basics I need.

:yes:

Life really doesn't have to be that complicated and taking things too seriously can seriously damage health!

I often think of you and Julie when I'm gardening.

:heartflower:
 

David Mayo

Patron with Honors
Sometimes your irony is way out there, AnonKat. :omg:

I'm as much of a Hubbard or PTS/SP tech supporter or believer as I am the Unibomber.

But I am greatly disappointed in Mike Rinder. For a while there, it looked like he had some remorse and was coming around. These last few posts of his were terrible.

I like David Mayo. I like him because I was in the SO in the 80s when he was declared. I like him because he made such a big stink that we even knew about it in the most sheltered areas of the SO. I like him because he made me think, he made me question back when I was a Ronbot myself. I like him because even back then, all the propaganda and lies OSA fed us could not make us forget all the issues Mayo had written, his position, the tremendous amount of research he did, and could not deny the fact that L Ron was very ill more than once and in no position to be developing anything at the time David Mayo was auditing him.

I like David Mayo because I once signed a Liability formula for a woman who had infiltrated his group back then, and when I spoke to her personally, she admitted she actually liked how David Mayo ran things, without the stat pushes, the controls, the fear and intimidation. I like him because he and his group were so kind and warm that the woman who was sent as a spy ended up with strong enough doubts that she left the Cult altogether because of him.

David Mayo was the first person responsible for my learning that L Ron did not write or develop many things and that these SP declares were wrong.

He's quite a bit of alright in my book.

Ooh, Gottabrain, you an me has got to go windsurfing together someday! Well, I could'a chosen something other than windsurfing, like snow boarding or ..., but, um, argh, shuffling my feet, that Rin chappie from the first day he stepped aboard the Appolio never did anything constructive. IMHO:omg:
 

David Mayo

Patron with Honors
Re: Misc. Ramblings of a personal experience

I got a call from my FSM, Richard Royce, in 1979 telling me to get my ass to Flag because Ron "has done it! We now have NOTs which handles everything! It is what everyone was looking for when they signed up for Scientology."

I got down there as an old OT VII and started getting my NOTs. The word was that the sessions were very short and you would blow out with a floating TA but that you could get 3 or 4 sessions a day.

It was asserted that just one 10 or 15 minute session handled as much case as a complete action such as a life repair or one of the grades. We were given vitually no theory but merely started receiving NOTs auditing.

For many years, I believed the pundits were correct. NOTs seemed wonderful. It seemed as if huge sections of case were erased in a matter of minutes. A movement was started in the late 80's or early 90's claiming that Mayo had left out parts of the theory so a big push was made to get everybody back in to receive what were called the New Steps" On these New Steps, we were put on a meter and we read the theory while the auditor watched the meter for reads.

For me and most others, this seemed to be very successful. Reading the theory seemed to cause a floating Tone Arm and big wins to occur. With the theory under one's belt, NOTs auditing seemed to run deeper. All the way through 1993, my last auditing with C of S, I thought that audited NOTs was a great level.

ONE POINT of SKEPTICISM As the years rolled by, I did not understand why NOTs had replaced the older OT levels, OT III Expand through OT VII. I did not see how OT VI, a course room activity could be an OT Level. Furthermore, what was run on NOTs did not look like anything which could possibly cause a person to increase their "OT abilities". I finally decided that the changes to the "Bridge" were done mainly for money purposes, not to make beings more OT. It was obvious that cutting the previous OT Levels and replacing them with audited NOTs and Solo Nots went against the policies of KSW.

THE FIRST SEEDS OF DOUBT AS TO THE VALIDITY OF "THE BRIDGE" WERE PLANTED IN ME AT THIS POINT IN 1993.

As to who was the primary author of NOTs, David Mayo or LRH, I have no inside information. I knew with certainty that Mayo was a "good hat" and never bought into the notion that he was a suppressive person or a squirrel. That certainty also contributed to my waking up to the misrepresentations being made by C of S.

These many years later, I have transformed completely as regards NOTs. I now feel that whatever gains that are available through Scientology tech, come from the lower level materials such as doing TRs, getting a life repair, doing objectives or doing one's Grades. To me, the upper level stuff was manly put there to endlessly generate income for C of S. I now believe that any gains made on NOTs are small, compared to what is available on the lower bridge and that running NOTs endlessly for year after year with no end in sight is harmful to the cases of spiritual beings.
Lakey

Um, almost but ...
 

Terril park

Sponsor
Some asked for this. Don't think I've seen the cancelled HCOB
written by Mayo on this subject.


"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."



http://www.ivymag.org/iv-01-02.html

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 confus ion 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 (presum ably 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 reac tive 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.
 

RogerB

Crusader
I saw it at Saint Hill when it was first issued. I don't recall ever seeing it since, including online.

Paul

Yah, I recall seeing it when on lines circa 1980-2-3.

It made sense to me at the time; but that was in the context of the $cn paradigm and data set.

Alan C. W. made some comments on ESMB on the matter that really summed up the deal . . . "Clear of what?"

Of course there are "gradients of clear" :yes: . . . . there's lots of things those interested will be getting "clear" of for quite some time to come :yes:

Hubbard's error was always in his assertions of absolutes of accomplishment. :duh::duh: Which, when folks didn't have it when they were supposed to have arrived . . . . err, umm, caused various degrees of wonderment and consternation.

R
 

Idle Morgue

Gold Meritorious Patron
I would not go OT because of what I saw with the OT's. Arogant, uncaring, mean and unloving.

Now that I had enough time in the Cult and have done my own research with my very bright and accurate mind, I can clearly see that this evil Organization makes people on staff do things they normally would not do. Everyone is spinning trying to help themselves and each other but they make mistakes. Some are HUGE mistakes. "The person around an SP gets so restimulated, they cannot detect the real SP" They make mistakes. LRH, DM and the TECH are the SP's.

If we did not need an 8th dynamic to survive, there would be NO religions anywher. The fact of the matter is that we do need an 8th dynamic. LRH is not it. Find your higher power (God) however you need to find it. You do need one, that is a fact. Surrender to the fact that Scientology gets everyone to make mistakes to hurt themselves and others. Forgive yourself, forgive others. Surrender to you higher power and start your spiritual journey again. You have much wisdom now You know that there is such a thing as "mind control" and it has been used on you to get into the heap full of fail that we all got into by doing Scientology.

It all begins with surrender, forgiveness and love.

Much love to you all! :heartflower::flowers::flowers2::heartbeat::love8::kiss::love2::bighug::grouphug:
 
I would not go OT because of what I saw with the OT's. Arogant, uncaring, mean and unloving.
You may feel that way, and in some cases I agree you are correct, however, I disagree that this is true of the majority of OT's. I can say that however many of my friends that are OT's and dropped me like a hot potato when my skin color became goldenrod, I don't see them in the way you describe. I see them as deluded, misinformed and doing what they believe is the right thing, however hurtful it is on the recieving end. Good people shooting at the enemy, who are being shot back at by other good people who also view them as the enemy. Sad, but such is life.

Mimsey
 

SomeGuy

Patron Meritorious
Thank you Gottabrain!

Now here's something I will comment on.

I started windsurfing 10 years before Rin's pontifical pronouncement suggests, in about 1984. No payoff from any of the 3M's required. Just a love of nature (sailing among turtles, blue Flying Fish and sometimes a Tiger shark). This followed a recognition that exercise is an invaluable part of becoming/remaining healthy.

I also realized that three of the factors to a good life are: exercise, a healthy diet and reduction of stress[/B]. My wife and I practiced and promoted those with, dare I say, astounding results!

And a new life, not entangled in "knots" (wink, wink, say no more) began!

"Mr. Squirrel"


I'm glad to see you graduated.

May you enjoy a long and peaceful existence.
 
G

Gottabrain

Guest
Ooh, Gottabrain, you an me has got to go windsurfing together someday! Well, I could'a chosen something other than windsurfing, like snow boarding or ..., but, um, argh, shuffling my feet, that Rin chappie from the first day he stepped aboard the Appolio never did anything constructive. IMHO:omg:

:thumbsup: Oh yippee, David, I'd LOVE to go windsurfing with you! :dance2:

You'd love my lake windsurfer. It's custom made with a middle fin.

(It's really nice to hear from you again, David. I've really missed you. :blowkiss:)
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
You may feel that way, and in some cases I agree you are correct, however, I disagree that this is true of the majority of OT's. I can say that however many of my friends that are OT's and dropped me like a hot potato when my skin color became goldenrod, I don't see them in the way you describe. I see them as deluded, misinformed and doing what they believe is the right thing, however hurtful it is on the recieving end. Good people shooting at the enemy, who are being shot back at by other good people who also view them as the enemy. Sad, but such is life.

Mimsey

There are no OTs.

:)
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
..

3355-1271618487.jpg

. . . random BUMP. I'm actually looking for the discussion on the evolution of the definition of the "floating needle". Anyone seen it lately?
 
Top