POWER PROCESSING.

[Smitty]

comment to Challenge

And thus it was and is. On the Class 8 tapes one will hear LRH say, and I paraphrase liberally " we are no longer interested in what the PC wants, we are only interested in applying standard tech". I did a double-take when I studied this, and I figgered it out by thinking " there is no conflict here. If standard tech is correctly applied, the PC will win, and he will be joyous".
Actually, it always worked for me as an Auditor. My PCs each and every one loved me, loved their auditing, had dial wide persistent F/Ns and TA floats, and wanted more and more and yet more auditing. Many of them are still "in", and still buying the auditing services. That is the real skill of the Cl 8. Keep 'em wanting more. Nevermind that what they got in to handle in the first place still hasn't been handled. Nevermind that he is all the way off the top of the Bridge, but is still lurking in his car on Sunset Blvd. whacking off as the girls pass. Nevermind that another got in as a 20 year old virgin, has done every service COS has to offer and is now a 45 year old virgin. The big win is that now they don't care. Like you say "puke".

I think that much of scientology processing, not all, pushes manic buttons with those who receive it. There is nothing spiritual about egocentricity, but that is the very thing that snares many people into scientology. If one were to address that person's concerns, they would not need scientology any more. That would end the addiction and disrupt the corrupt business model.

 

[Alan]

I don't think it was the height of Hubbard's insanity, Alan, I think that it was merely a contemporary "highest ever". His psychosis actually worsened and was a contributing cause to his death in January 1986. He died in a motor home with a cabinet full of drugs, 40 million dollars cash, fearful of anyone he did not know, and screaming at aliens and body thetans.

Ah! the long tortuous process of going nuts - ever rising stats!

His lunacy was contained to a few, by this time Jan 1986........in 1968 he hatted 100's up (Class VIII's) to pass on his lunacy..........in 1970-71 - he hatted 100's more (FEBC's) to continue the enforced realities - pity that freight train on venus didn't wake him up!

 

[Pierrot]

If one were to address that person's concerns, they would not need scientology any more.

That's an important point, Smitty. That should be the end result after any major action performed by the person, and finally after a whole program done - that the person doesn't need scientology, auditors, nor any practitionner in any discipline. All concerns adressed, the persons wins in Life by living Life.

 

[alex]

Am I the only peson around who doesnt think the point of scientology (or processing) is to handle someones life wants?

A person who has had their self restored to a higher level of operating should then be able to handle those "ruins" with ease.

Scientology is for the restoration, not the problem solving. The expansion and unsticking of the viewpoint and its creator, not hand holding in life.

Then off they go to live life, which is simply a set of problems, from their new perspective.

 

[Alan]

Am I the only peson around who doesnt think the point of scientology (or processing) is to handle someones life wants?

A person who has had their self restored to a higher level of operating should then be able to handle those "ruins" with ease.

Scientology is for the restoration, not the problem solving. The expansion and unsticking of the viewpoint and its creator, not hand holding in life.

Then off they go to live life, which is simply a set of problems, from their new perspective.

Are not the above a list of wants?

 

[Pierrot]

Am I the only peson around who doesnt think the point of scientology (or processing) is to handle someones life wants?

A person who has had their self restored to a higher level of operating should then be able to handle those "ruins" with ease.

Scientology is for the restoration, not the problem solving. The expansion and unsticking of the viewpoint and its creator, not hand holding in life.

Well, yes, alex - all person's concerns should be adressed to the full satisfaction of the person in life repair/progress program/return program/case cracking rd, whatever one calls it (I prefer calling it "auditing the person in front of you"). It takes one or two intensives average - and it's game over. Then one can talk about expansion and unsticking of the viewpoint, etc. do the Bridge, whatever. Which by the way is restimulating a new area by asking questions. One can of course wait till the fully "cracked" and beaming person gets restimulated by life again and comes back for a new life repair, and so on - I wouldn't like that as it would create dependency between the auditor and the pc. But - whichever shoe fits, eh.

 

[alex]

Are not the above a list of wants?

I guess my point is that what people express as wants would be best handled by the person themselves, and the point of processing is getting them to the point that they can, rather than addressing each ruin and hand holding them through it.

Not saying that kind of help is bad, but better done by the person themselves...

Similar to the old saw about teaching a man to fish...

Of course it would be an evaluation on the part of the processor and system, that the person didnt know how to deal with something....but it is usually fairly evident that they are not handling it..

It is as if the goal is teaching the skill rather than directing the use of it.

I have always seen scientology and offshoots as bypassing the person, because of demonstrated and expressed failures, and then putting in place with thier agreement new ways of operating.

But a persons "wants handled" are more the symptom of lack of something else, perception, confront, hatting, than specificly those particular ruins that only processing can handle, thus install the skills and abilities and the "wants handled" no longer are a problem?

I have always seen scientology as a system of building ability rather than exercising it. Life is where it is exercised. If someone does not get to the point that they can handle their wants themselves, then the system is a failure. (and you have a processing addict).

Handle the lack of abilities, let them then handle their wants.

 

[Smitty]

comment to Alan

Ah! the long tortuous process of going nuts - ever rising stats!

LOL!

His lunacy was contained to a few, by this time Jan 1986........in 1968 he hatted 100's up (Class VIII's) to pass on his lunacy..........in 1970-71 - he hatted 100's more (FEBC's) to continue the enforced realities - pity that freight train on venus didn't wake him up!

I discretely listened to the FEBC/Esto lectures as a staff member at GOWW. There were a few gems amid the piles of hay and manure, but overall it was just a supercilious harangue about how Hubbard has superior knowledge about running an organization, even though no organization he ever ran was stable.

 

[alex]

strangely one organization he created still exists even with out him there to keep it so...

tell me a source...

 

[Smitty]

comment to alex

strangely one organization he created still exists even with out him there to keep it so...
tell me a source...

And that organization is gradually falling apart. I don't think that is strange, it is logical, and it is justice.

 

[uniquemand]

strangely one organization he created still exists even with out him there to keep it so...

tell me a source...

Ah, but is it the same organization? Plus, since he's dead, it's no longer doing what it was designed to do (flow money to him). Show me a present source.

 

[degraded being]

Tell me a source...

"The Man"

He'll give you what you need
He's always there when I need some speeeeeed!

or pinks, greys, coke!!!! booze.

 

[Leon]

People often make the mistake of believing that, for example, a person should have no problems after he has had Grade One. The Grade Chart errs when it said that he should have none. A correct EP for the Grade is more like "enjoys problems and is cause over them".

Similarly with Grade Two -successful running of the grade should make the person able to withhold selectively. Compulsively not having any withholds would be an aberration.

And so it is with the other grades too.

Clear is not "has no bank". It is "able to create and uncreate a bank at will".

 

[Mark A. Baker]

The "have" really doesn't make any difference to the meaning of the command at all. Put it in or take it out as you wish. The concept is what you did (and your reactions etc.) at various times to try and fix it, whether the word "have" is in there or not. I know it is part of the construction of the present perfect tense if someone wants to get all grammatical about it, but it doesn't alter the concept at all.

Paul

Actually Paul, the grammatical form is the PAST perfect and it is significant.

Perfect means the action has been COMPLETED, i.e. terminated. Past tells you when it was completed, i.e. in the past. The grammatical form specifies the meaning exactly as Dart has laid it out.

I know this is somewhat "late on the chain" and that Dart has already "handled" the actual topic under discussion, but, nonetheless I thought it the "perfect" time to chime in.

By the way Dart, I owe you a special thank you. Your comment was particularly illuminating with regard to something I was just looking at this last Sunday with an auditor friend (Paul: NKW says Hi!). Your comment resulted in a significant addition to Total TA!


Mark A. Baker

 

[Dulloldfart]

Actually Paul, the grammatical form is the PAST perfect and it is significant.

Thanks for that, Mark. It is present perfect, but I was missing some nuances of its meaning, assuming what is said here is correct:
http://www.english-the-easy-way.com/Present_Tense/Present_Perfect_Tense.htm

It comes from doing KTL and thinking that now I know it all regarding grammar, even if I get sloppy sometimes.

I do now agree that it would be better to keep the "have" in the command. But I still think it would be clearer if "tried" or "attempted" were included in the wording.

Paul

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

People often make the mistake of believing that, for example, a person should have no problems after he has had Grade One. The Grade Chart errs when it said that he should have none. A correct EP for the Grade is more like "enjoys problems and is cause over them".

Similarly with Grade Two -successful running of the grade should make the person able to withhold selectively. Compulsively not having any withholds would be an aberration.

And so it is with the other grades too.

Clear is not "has no bank". It is "able to create and uncreate a bank at will".

Good post Leon. Pilot once said that Clear is the ability to confront the force in mental image pictures, and that's a useful concept too because it means you don't get into a games condition with your mind, i.e. compulsively running away from things in your mind that you're afraid to face.

Perhaps if Clear means what you say, Pilot's definition should be adopted for Release instead (currently, knows one won't get any worse).

 

[Alan]

strangely one organization he created still exists even with out him there to keep it so...

tell me a source...

Even stranger - LRH was not sole-source of that Organization - when all the other co-sources own up to their sourceness - that creation will vanish!

 

[Lesolee (Sith Lord)]

More Questions for Dart

Hullo,

What would you like to know about Cl VII ?

As I was the finest Cl VII auditor (and the highest qualified) who completed the course, I can probably answer your questions best for you.

Dart

Well that is too good an offer not to take up. I’m guessing nobody spotted it, as that thread was quite old.

The Power Processes are given as single flow in HCOB 11 May AD15 “The Power Processes”.

1. Should they be quad’ed up as shown on the Prometheus reports?
2. Did you ever run them quad?
3. Should one test the flow/command for read (per all the later unreading questions/items bulletins)

Some of you have logged on to the Prometheus Report, a website run by the Freezone which lists the commands for power processing. The problem is that they do not have all the commands exactly correct and judging from the way they try and run the processes, they may achieve some limited success, but all in all, they will just produce a mundane result. Finally, there are several errors in their statements

Could you be more specific, such as giving a few of the worst errors and giving the correct commands.

 

[DartSmohen]

Well that is too good an offer not to take up. I’m guessing nobody spotted it, as that thread was quite old.

The Power Processes are given as single flow in HCOB 11 May AD15 “The Power Processes”.

1. Should they be quad’ed up as shown on the Prometheus reports?
2. Did you ever run them quad?
3. Should one test the flow/command for read (per all the later unreading questions/items bulletins)




Could you be more specific, such as giving a few of the worst errors and giving the correct commands.

Hullo,

The Power processes were specific remedy actions for St Hill Execs. They were developed for a particular set of circumstances.Once ?Hubbard saw their success, he put mthem into the HGC for sale to the public. Originally they did not figure on any "Bridge".

The correct wording is as I laid out in this thread. The wording was EXACT. What some of these other parties have done is to subtly try and change the nuance by deleting a word or two. The changes were minor but were major in altering the concept of the command.

An example is; TELL ME HOW YOU HAVE HANDLED IT has been altered by dropping the word "Have", which completely negates the import of the command.

As for running them quad, well I have done so as it was required by the C/S, but how useful is it doing quad? How useful is mental masturbation? :confused2:

The problem is that once the "Bridge" was introduced and the C/S deciding what shold be run on the pc, you were not addressing their needs, therefore you were implanting them.

They can be run at any time on anyone. I have run them on a person who had no contact with Scn, no setups or any sort of processing.

Mind you, that person had the benefit if having done some Knowledgism, which as a body of knowledge and technology puts Scientology right in the Stone Age.

Speak with you next year.

Dart.

 

[Lesolee (Sith Lord)]

The correct wording is as I laid out in this thread.
...
An example is; TELL ME HOW YOU HAVE HANDLED IT has been altered by dropping the word "Have", which completely negates the import of the command.
...

Interesting. That's what the Prometheus report says now as well. There is no revision number or date on the Prometheus stuff but maybe they read your thread and corrected the process wording. :confused2:

I guess the point about the quad thing is that it was standard for the Co$ as well, so quad’ing it up is not, of itself, an alteration, although the exact wording of the commands may be debatable.

What’s really interesting is the quad thing applied to the EPs of Pr Pr 6. The pc was stuck in “one” incident, but we then reviv for each EP on each flow. In other words he was simultaneously stuck in four flows on the track. Bit of a head scratcher to be sure.


Thanks for the data, and HAPPY NEW YEAR.