Question on Natural Clear

Leland

Crusader
Well, I have one of those, too. Fully filled out up to and including New OT8. :biggrin:

Oh, come on, really?

Where'd you get all the money for you and your wife to do all those services Panda? I'm sure it wasn't by playing guitar on the sidewalks of Europe???
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
Oh, come on, really?

Where'd you get all the money for you and your wife to do all those services Panda? I'm sure it wasn't by playing guitar on the sidewalks of Europe???
No, it was playing guitar and singing my tits off, 7 nights a week in Pubs, Bars and Clubs in Sydney.
Ask anyone who knows me. :)
 

Leland

Crusader
No, it was playing guitar and singing my tits off, 7 nights a week in Pubs, Bars and Clubs in Sydney.
Ask anyone who knows me. :)

WoW.....amazing.

I don't believe you though.

How could you have paid for 6 month checks....and trips to Flag...and all that?

Or did you finish before the 6 month checks came out?
 

JustSheila

Crusader
No, it was playing guitar and singing my tits off, 7 nights a week in Pubs, Bars and Clubs in Sydney.
Ask anyone who knows me. :)

:yes: I confirm. Panda and wife are talented and versatile, having branched off and succeeded in several different musical areas. They have a knack for knowing what different crowds want and giving them that and a whole lot more. They are talented entertainers. Panda has been in the music industry for decades and knows everything from sound systems to every style of music. Both sing well. Panda plays a few instruments well. Panda's wife (can I say your name here?) is highly creative and organized. They're a great team. Many of us have seen their shows, including me! Great fun. :dance2:
 

TheOriginalBigBlue

Gold Meritorious Patron
I'd have to check the time period, but maybe PTS to the middle class policy letter or tech came out about the same time period. :confused2:

to justify what you say for hubbard to make it true, to keep people in.

I think it is a given that LRH was always financially motivated if that is what you mean. Maybe he was devious enough to dangle this out there knowing people would use it to skip straight to OT and then he could tangle them all up in expensive corrective actions after the fact.

I was trying to make a point that for the person attesting to Natural Clear at the time the cost saving aspect could be very inviting. Maybe knowing you were going to save a couple grand in 1978 (adjusted for inflation) dollars in itself was enough to FN on the attest.

But he also went on that price increasing binge and a property buying spree and ratcheted up the Birthday Game stat push about the same time - while the staff were on rice and beans.

My personal theory is that he was already having undetected micro strokes and was in the early stages of dementia. It would explain a lot about DM also. If I had to work closely with a senile LRH from the age of 16 I probably would have danced on his grave and claimed the throne as well deserved payback. Then I would start to clean up all the insanity like stop promoting the Clear Completions stat - only by then, my mind would probably be pretty much gone also.
 

JustSheila

Crusader
The cost-saving aspect may have been an early motivation, but shortly after past-life clear and natural clear were announced, there was also the announcement that clears would be doing grades.

So clears didn't end up missing much of the bridge at all, no matter how they attested. Just a bit of Dianetics is all, and then there was NOTS, which was supposedly at first for clears who could not / did not run Dianetics, so at the end of the day, since NOTS was so much more expensive, the past life and natural clear attests ended up paying more anyway.
 

TheOriginalBigBlue

Gold Meritorious Patron
Look at the history of this. There was a log book, big hard-cover thing, with numbers and names, kept in a Saint Hill Qual filing cabinet. It was the historical record, THE ledger. When someone got declared Clear his name got added as the next number. If someone died it made no difference as they were still the 147th person (say) to get their name in the book.

Along with this, the latest names got into the Auditor mag, with the tag line "Now there are ____ Clears!" That tag line was misleading: it didn't mean that the current number of members in the Clear club was ___ , it meant that ___ people had had their names hand-written on paper in this logbook. In a sense it wasn't even false if you believed that when people died they still retained their, er, Clearness.

Fast forward to 1980 or so, with the Clear fiasco, and it all fell apart. But the above is how it started off.

Paul

Right, the distinction between number of certs vs number of living n breathing Clears. And for never-ins: the concept that the Clear count included people who had died but remained Clear sans body is consistent Scientologically. If we are going to dial down into the details like that there is also the question of reversion. Engrams created non-Clears in the first place so if a Clear gets more engrams but can't clean them up and gets aberrated again, is the stat adjusted?
 

pineapple

Silver Meritorious Patron
Right, the distinction between number of certs vs number of living n breathing Clears. And for never-ins: the concept that the Clear count included people who had died but remained Clear sans body is consistent Scientologically. If we are going to dial down into the details like that there is also the question of reversion. Engrams created non-Clears in the first place so if a Clear gets more engrams but can't clean them up and gets aberrated again, is the stat adjusted?

IIRC, didn't LRH say in DMSMH that if a clear got more engrams -- though this wasn't too likely -- he could audit them out himself?

I haven't read the book in 35 years. If I can find an old battered used copy somewhere I think I'd like to read it again. It might be interesting from my current perspective, i.e. now that I know that a lot of it is horseshit.

Used copies of DMSMH used to be very common in bookstores, but it's a long time since I've seen one. Maybe scios are buying them up (or stealing them?) so there won't be old copies around that conflict with the revised version? I wouldn't put it past them at all. I know they stole and destroyed anti-scn books when I was in.
 

Helena Handbasket

Gold Meritorious Patron
IIRC, didn't LRH say in DMSMH that if a clear got more engrams -- though this wasn't too likely -- he could audit them out himself?
IMHO the reactive mind is a sort of "flypaper" that engrams stick to. A clear CAN have engrams, but they're not so "sticky" any more, and can be removed by inspection.

Perhaps most of the engrams a clear has after going clear is simply those that were out of restimulation, not available to be picked up, and generally no trouble at all for the person. When one does pop up, it can be removed easily, without a formal session. New engramic experiences would be a little more difficult, but without a full "bank" to help hold it in place, it's still rather easy.

And if a clear is clear, what does ze need the OT levels for? The quick answer is that even a clear is still at the effect of the reactive minds of OTHERS.

Just my 5.6 Hungarian Forint.

Helena
 

Veda

Sponsor
IMO, essentially, Hubbard's basic behavior didn't change from the very beginning.



Hubbard hiding out in Queens, New York, in 1973:

LRH_Queens2.jpg



__________​


Hubbard's mistress from 1951 was interviewed by BBC television for the late 1990s 'Secret Lives' Program, and told of seeing Hubbard in 1951 after an absence of a few months. She described him as having long hair and fingernails like talons.

See 7:50 - 8:30:



But he bounced back.


___________​


Hubbard at the 1979/1980 New Years party at "X" in Hemet, California:

michael-douglas3.jpg


Monthly price increases began in 1976.

After the July 1977 FBI raids, Hubbard briefly regressed into his "Incident 2" (the 75 million years ago super engram), which was his 1966/67 explanation to himself, and to others, for his failures in Southern Africa (his failure to, as the reincarnation of Cecil Rhodes, find his buried treasure and make Rhodesia a Scientology country where he - in the background - could "pull the strings.")

In the wake of the 1977 movie hit Star Wars, Hubbard, once again clutching onto "Incident 2" - the super engram necessary to explain his failures - in this case his failure to apply his spying and covert dirty tricks tech without it massively backfiring on him - wrote the "Incident 2" themed screenplay Revolt in the Stars, and this was to be made into a hit movie much like Star Wars. The difference would be that it would be loaded with whole track implant significance that would send the "wogs" streaming into their local orgs for handling. It was a bad idea for a number of reasons and was eventually dropped.

In its place - as Hubbard hid out from the FBI - came Battlefield Earth, followed by the Mission Earth series. Feeling betrayed by wife #3 Mary Sue (who committed the sin of getting caught while following his secret instructions), Hubbard had apparently regressed back to the time before Mary Sue, a time when he was writing pulp science fiction and promoting Dianetics as the route to Clear. Writing was Hubbard's therapy.

The more successful Scientology Missions (Scientology franchises) had become rich, and Hubbard wanted their money and property. Hubbard's "discovery" of Dianetic Clear, past life Clear, and Natural Clear, all served to move people out of Missions and "up lines" to Advanced Orgs and Flag. Ultimately, this wasn't enough, and Hubbard ordered the looting of the Missions themselves.



___________​



In 1978, Hubbard decided that "keyed out Clear is Clear," and that Dianetic Clears should not do PP, R6ew, and CC.

In 1970, Hubbard had written of Dianetic Clear:

"Only about 2 percent actually go clear on Dianetics. A Dianetic Clear as any other Dianetic PC now goes up through the Grades of Scientology and on to the proper Clearing Course. The Dianetic Clear of Book 1 was clear of somatics. The Book 1 definition is correct. This is the end phenomena of Dianetics as per the Classification Chart and Book 1."

A Clear of somatics Clear!

And don't forget those (actual) GPM Clears, with "one GPM Clears" and "two GPM Clears" and "three GPM Clears," and, I think, Hubbard was supposed to have made "5 GPM Clear."

And then - if I recall correctly - there was the lecture, 'The Story of Dianetics of Scientology', where Hubbard stated that he had made the first Dianetic Clears in 1947, and that these were Theta Clears. At the time of that lecture, Book 1 Clears were not regarded as being as Clear as the Clears then being produced. They were said to have been Theta Clears (stably outside the body), but later became (1970) Somatic Clears, but then with keyed out Clear being redefined as Clear (1978), and hundreds of Scientologists deciding they had "gone Dianetic Clear in 1947 after having been audited by Ron," and going "up lines" with checkbooks in hand, they became acceptable as Clears somehow...

And it goes on and on...

Hubbard left Scientologists with a whole lot of loose-ends, each tightly shrink-wrapped in cellophane as "LRH datums."

This can become perplexing to them, IF they omit the rest of the "Tech" left to them by Hubbard. It's really the senior Tech of Scientology, and can be found in this booklet http://warrior.xenu.ca/Brainwashing-front.jpg , and it overrides all the loose-ends, leaving a Scientologist will a contented sense of total certainty.

Turns out that the loose-ends are just a medium, used as a means to an end. Hubbard's system of mental-healing only needs to "work" up to a point, since it was only a front and a medium, or means, for something else.

That something else was inadvertently revealed in his 1938 'Excalibur' letter and in his 1946 'Affirmations':

"I have high hopes of smashing my name into history... [so] that it will take a legendary form... That goal is the real goal as far as I am concerned."

"Your psychology is advanced and true and wonderful. It hypnotizes people. It predicts their emotions, for you are their ruler."


Sometimes, when people leave organized Scientology, that part of the tech is largely "dropped out." This leaves the person with a bunch of the tech loose ends, and there sometimes follows a struggle to make sense of the various loose ends. This can be a frustrating exercise if the rest of the tech - the "total package" - is not taken into consideration.



_______________​


David_Mayo.jpg


Excerpts from a 1989 article by David Mayo on Clear:

( Complete article - 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.

-snip-

"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
__________________________________​
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
WoW.....amazing.

I don't believe you though.

How could you have paid for 6 month checks....and trips to Flag...and all that?

Or did you finish before the 6 month checks came out?

Lol. Why would you doubt me? I'm telling you the truth!

I audited Solo NOTs for many years, right up to 2004.

The trick with "6 month checks" is to only show up for them every 4 years or so. :coolwink:

It's a system, once you understand the system it's not that hard to get ahead despite it.
 

phenomanon

Canyon
Back in the 70s there was an "I Want to Go Clear Club" that was used as a come-on device by reges at Saint Hill. The "club" didn't exist beyond an idea and flyers that we sent out by the thousand to lower-level (non-Clear) peeps on the comm lines. The flyer had lines to fill in name, address, training and processing done, some biographical data, "date you intend to arrive to start services at Saint Hill" (I think), and (hopeful) here's my payment schedule. I was a Letter Reg for a few years and sent out these things for a while. Every now and then someone would fill one out and send it back. It got filed in the CF folder, all grist to the regging mill.

Note that in my post I used a lower-case "c" for club, not wishing to imply there was an actual Clear Club if anyone remembered the old IWTGCC. :)

Paul


I remember it well. It was a big deal all over the US. The Mission Network as well as the Orgs promoted the IWTGCC heavily.
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
But didn't you get ethicsed? What did they say to you when you did show up?

Helena
Think about it. Which would you rather do; waste 12 weeks (or more) jumping through hoops and spending $50K minimum a year complying with a ridiculous, arbitrary "order" or do a 3 day Conditions Trip every 4 years?

I chose the latter.

What did they say? "You're a bad boy!"

What did I say? "Mea culpa".

As I've said several times, those 6 month checks are murder on Solo Auditors, once I'd escaped Flag I used to routinely spend 2 or 3 weeks of Solo Auditing cleaning up the BPC from those infrequent visits to the "Mecca of Technical Perfection". I always got VWDs from the Solo C/S's on those clean-up sessions. :)
 

George Layton

Silver Meritorious Patron
Chuck has a tendency to minimize and mock any possible positive outcomes of Dianetics or Scientology processes. I can understand this, but I think it doesn't really help, because it doesn't embrace the fact that many of us experienced very positive changes in our perception, awareness, understanding, behavior and affect as a result of having done some (but not all) processes in the Church's arsenal. Thus, it can come across as bigoted, or stupid, since it addresses only lowest-common-denominators of critics of the Church, without understanding why people stayed and pursued the things that were positive. No doubt there were suckers in the Church, but I wasn't, nor were many of the people I knew. We were ignorant, perhaps, of the origins of the subject, and only later, much to our chagrin, did we find out we didn't have to tolerate abuse in the service of our quest for enlightenment. Suckers implies that there was nothing there to be had, though, and this is both untrue, and a disservice to those who know better.

My own take on the Natural Clear issues is that it is TRUE that some people never were anything other than serene and competent and sailed through their lives without "held-down sevens". It is ALSO true that Hubbard only recognized this because he saw it as a way to get these people to pay a lot of money fast for the OT Levels. Much like many other phases of Scientology's progression, they sold out the possibility of future gain for the reality of present financial gain or social control. Short-term thinking, coupled with paranoid delusion and narcissism are rarely healthy.

For David Mayo's thoughts on the matter, read his Clear


Living life is experiencing positive changes in our perception, awareness, understanding and behaviors. scientology is a system of mechanics that attempts to take credit for those experiences.
 

Helena Handbasket

Gold Meritorious Patron
do a 3 day Conditions Trip every 4 years?
I see. So they assigned you a condition, you did the condition, and that was the end of it. (Were you actually doing the auditing every day or nearly every day?)

I had no idea a conditions trip lasted 3 months.

I was C/Sed to start New OT 6, but I thought if I finished New OT 5 and was such a mess, I had no business going on to my next level. (They probably thought I'd be gushing over the opportunity to go on to, like wow, New OT 6, but I was underwhelmed.) I insisted on getting some sort of cleanup instead. (They gave me FPRD, which I don't consider to be auditing. This was a major part of my decision to walk out forever.)

Minor derail: a condition is the condition of the assignee in respect to (or in the viewpoint of) the assigner. The condition is not what the assignee is in the eyes of the entire world. While the assignee is in the condition the assigner assigns, it's also true that the assigner has a condition in respect to the assignee (for example, that MAA is a real liabilility). But the lack of authority on the part of the assignee keeps that from having much meaning.

Helena
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
I see. So they assigned you a condition, you did the condition, and that was the end of it. (Were you actually doing the auditing every day or nearly every day?)

I had no idea a conditions trip lasted 3 months.

I was C/Sed to start New OT 6, but I thought if I finished New OT 5 and was such a mess, I had no business going on to my next level. (They probably thought I'd be gushing over the opportunity to go on to, like wow, New OT 6, but I was underwhelmed.) I insisted on getting some sort of cleanup instead. (They gave me FPRD, which I don't consider to be auditing. This was a major part of my decision to walk out forever.)

Minor derail: a condition is the condition of the assignee in respect to (or in the viewpoint of) the assigner. The condition is not what the assignee is in the eyes of the entire world. While the assignee is in the condition the assigner assigns, it's also true that the assigner has a condition in respect to the assignee (for example, that MAA is a real liabilility). But the lack of authority on the part of the assignee keeps that from having much meaning.

Helena

Yes, I audited at least 6 sessions a day, every day, except when I was at Flag or on a persistent FN that wouldn't quit.

I didn't say a Conditions trip lasted 3 months I said "waste 12 weeks (or more) a year". That was in reference to the 6 month checks ie 2 a year at around 6 weeks a pop.

Flag routinely promised that you'd be in and out in 2 weeks on 6MC but that was never the case for anyone I knew.

They often assigned Treason (betrayal after trust) for this sort of stuff. How hard is it to just do the Conditions? It's a helluvalot less arduous than paying the freight on Flag's "license to survive".
 
Top