True enough.
Have you ever noticed when a person walks into a room, all the attention goes on them. Some may call it charisma, but the real answer is PRESENCE.
So, what is presence?
Presence is simply being totally there for the client, unconditionally. Including them in your space and being completely willing to be at complete effect so that the client can totally deal with whatever force/mass is in realtime being handled.
It sounds oh, so very simple, doesn't it ?
Well it is, providing you are operating in a completely safe environment.
YOU DO NOT LEARN THE VALUE OF PRESENCE IN SCIENTOLOGY.
How to program a robotic zombie
Scientology training has TR's (Training Regimens). These do NOT teach you how to be present, or how to process.
TR-0. The great bedrock of all Scientology training. This comes in 3 phases.
First there is 2 hours of just sitting there with your eyes closed.
Then there is 2 hours of sitting there, silent, eyes open. Some poor sods had top do 2 hours of UNBLINKING. That was nothing but sadistic torture.
Finally there was Bullbait. The purpose was basically to "flatten" any obvious buttons you may have that might get triggered by the client.
Well, NONE of this taught you anything about presence, or even "being there".
In fact, you will find, almost universally, the processor may have parked their body there but were thousands of miles away. The LAST place they want to be is THERE, especially when you have some psychotic supervisor doing anything they could (and they often did!) to break you down.
The actual outcome is a fix-eyed, emotionally desensitised drone who will robotically run a repetitive process on a client.
And so it goes on and on.
On TR 1 & 2 you learn how to mangle and butcher a comm cycle and TR 3 & 4 you learn how to robotically run a repetitive process , completely blanking out any client originations and getting them to obey you (answer the command)
You come to the "Upper- Indoc " TR's Here you are physically manhandling the client back and forth to carry out your commands.
Wait a minute, isn't processing supposed to be FOR the client, addressing THEIR wants?
So, what on earth are they doing learning how to manhandle a client into submission and obey their commands?
I suppose that TR-8 produces the most change in a processer. After all, screaming at an ashtray can be considered quite theraputic. It does bring home to the processer that force and intention are completely unrelated.
In Corfu we did drills over a distance of 100 metres where we ran this drill, with some interesting variations. The purpose was to teach officers on the bridge how to communicate with crew on the fo'castle when the intercom was broken. You would be amazed how giving a command in a normal voice could be understood and complied with over an extended distance.
That basically covers why Scientology could not and did not produce real processers.
The real successful auditors were those who were willing to have their clients win BIG. It was unconditional.
Here are two actual examples;
Terry was a taciturn Kiwi, he did NOT suffer fools gladly. He did the SHSBC in 1965 and joined the Sea Project in Las Palmas. There were a couple of occasions when Hubbard was screaming at all and sundry about some trifling point and Terry had to be quietly nudged away before he told Hubbard that he (Hubbard) was a fucking idiot.
Anyway, at St Hill, our "low-wattage" senior c/s decided Terry needed a full CS-1. Remember, Terry was a SHSBC grad who had done lots of processing.
Terry was asked "What is an ARC Break"?
At this point, Terry's eyes hooded over and he quietly said, "Perhaps it would be easier if I demonstrated one"
At which point he flung the cans at the auditor (who was cringing and cowering) and tipped the table over on top of him and stormed out the room.
I was given the job of running the next session.
So, I drew a line through the proposed c/s instruction and wrote a new one "2WC with pc."
I sat down with Terry and said, "OK, what do you want to look at in this session"?
Terry said "What"??
So I told him it was his session, he was paying for it, so was there anything in particular he wanted to look at.
Terry burst out laughing and said " Fuck me! Real processing at last!
Terry went to the examiner telling them it was the best session he had ever had.
I got a cramming order for failing to follow the c/s instructions.
The other example was a young 14yo lad who was considered borderline catatonic. He had not spoken to anyone for years.
So we sat down in an suditing room. I didn't bother with a meter and the two of us sat there not saying a word
FOR FIVE HOURS.
Finally he made a few mumble type comments and then the dam opened. He talked non-stop for about 30 minutes, all sorts of things, anything and everything. I didn't bother writing any of it down, I was just THERE for him.
After the session he went down the stairs and said to his parents "Are you ready". They said yes and set off. After about four paces they realised that he had spoken to them!.
I mention these two cases to show what presence is all about.
Some experienced processers have developed some level of presence, but for the delivery of Power, there were very few who had it. John Mac certainly did. A few of the 1966 interns could really deliver, but in the main, when you were processing in an environment and your own baggage is up front and in the way, you will not achieve for the client the wins they richly deserve.