guanoloco
As-Wased
There's been a lot of talk about the sources of Dianetics and Scientology, antecedents and things of this nature, whether or not Elron Elray plagiarized the material, and so forth. Others have posted how interesting all of this is and I find myself identifying with that sentiment so I wanted to gather together, all in one place, various things I've read of different people who developed specific tech pieces.
The goal here is to name sources with the appropriate links to where people state that so-and-so specifically developed *blank*.
Here's a great start from Peter Soderqvist from The Scientology Forum: Scientology Philosophy >> LRH did not discover anything!:
Some support to this stuff is from the NOTs Scholars Home Page:
And Criminal Time Track: A History of High Crimes Against Scientology:
The goal here is to name sources with the appropriate links to where people state that so-and-so specifically developed *blank*.
Here's a great start from Peter Soderqvist from The Scientology Forum: Scientology Philosophy >> LRH did not discover anything!:
I claim further that he is not the author of the tech, he was only one of many, but he organized all this knowledge!
Soderqvist1: John Mac Master makes even a stronger claim that L. Ron Hubbard couldn't audit! These quotes are unusual long but it is worth reading them because it is lot of information in it!
Messiah or Madman? Page 181 - 183 By Bent Corydon
Despite the poverty and some disillusioning experiences with high Church officials, we were - at the time - still full of enthusiasm for Hubbard and "his tech." This was partly because he and "the tech" had been so well presented by the words and example of Hubbard's key representative: John McMaster. McMaster was the most prominent person (other than Hubbard, of course) in Scientology while we were in England (1967-1969). His work at Saint Hill Manor in England probably contributed more to the financial success of Scientology - during the mid- to late sixties - than any other individual. When we arrived there the place was a hum of enthusiastic activity. Lectures by John McMaster were given in the chapel to overflowing crowds of enthusiastic students. McMaster's talks were evidence to me that he had attained and experienced something paranormal, existential, or whatever words people use in a vain attempt to convey whatever is considered a true "religious experience." John's glow of affection, and his other spiritual qualities, seemed evidence of the achievability of the most cherished dreams of Scientologists. The fact that he was Hubbard's representative and "the world's first real Clear" gave credence to Hubbard's many written claims. John's talks and "presence" reminded each listener of their own brushes with this "reality of our true godlike nature." Besides the realm of individual spiritual abilities and the like, McMaster spoke of world peace, of creating a new civilization based on love and understanding. He told me in a recent interview:
I was so excited about the function of auditing and its potential for assisting individuals to become more able and aware, that I was willing to overlook Hubbard's faults, as they gradually became known to me. That was up to a point of course, the final point being my realization that his intentions were entirely self serving I saw that he was in it for money and personal power, and his actual intentions were not as
stated. The basic function of auditing is a wonderful thing, but Hubbard perverted it. The idea of counselling has been around for an awfully long lime. What is the Socratic method but a form of auditing?* He asked me if I would go and promote the subject, and I did. I didn't know at the time what he really intended to do with it.
He got the technology to a point where he had a sort of assembly line as he called it. And he told me he was putting all these "square ball bearings" on the beginning of the assembly line, and then turning them into "round ball bearings" at the other end. That was his idea of "standard tech."
But there is magic in auditing. Good magic.
The important thing is not that the magic was abused - that needs to be pointed out - but that the magic should be brought to life.... For a period of time, Hubbard trusted me implicitly with the technology and so on, and relied on me for the information because, although he did a lot of talking, he couldn't audit He could not audit.
He had to resort to a sort of black magic hypnosis. This was to try and convince the person that he was making gains. Then, of course, after about three weeks the person collapsed. And this was explained by Hubbard as being because there was a suppressive person around the corner, causing him to lose his "gains" He couldn't audit, so he had to use somebody for auditing research.
At this point in time, I was the one he used. I would give him the information and then he would write the bulletins. He couldn't tell me what to do, because he didn't know himself. I had to do all the difficult cases; to go and review them, and this is where we found out so many things. I had a wonderful sort of learning ground, if you like. This was partly because I had to learn to leave behind in Saint Hill Manor all the negative things he said about the people who I had to go out and handle. I had hundreds of students and pre-clears, and I had to be absolutely free from his ideas when I closed the door of that manor.
It was the "good magic" which my wife and I had observed and experienced, and the example of John and a few others that motivated us as we crossed the Atlantic in late 1969.
Soderqvist1: Jeff Hawkins has met the legendary John Mac Master!
Certainty, Knowingness and Blind Faith May 25, 2010 by Jeff Hawkins
I remember one of my first experiences in Scientology was a "Congress" in 1968 at the Masonic Temple on Wilshire, where John McMaster ran "Grand Tour" from Creation of Human Ability as a group process: "Be near Earth. Be near the Moon. Be near the Sun," and so on. Well, did I actually exteriorize and leave my body? Who knows? I felt giddy, even exhilarated at the thought that it might be possible.
http://leavingscientology.wordpress.com/2010/05/25/certainty -knowingness-and-blind-faith/
Soderqvist1: David Mayo also claims that there are many sources to the tech!
DAVID MAYO AFFIDAVIT Copyright (C) 1994 David Mayo
10. The technology of Dianetics and Scientology is a product of the efforts of many people, including myself, and among others, Melanie Murray, Julie Mayo, Merrill Mayo, Dona Haber, Brian Livingston, and Phoebe Mauer. Moreover, I am the primary source of NOTs and SOLO NOTs
11. During my affiliation with the Church of Scientology, I only attributed discovery and authorship of the tech to L. Ron Hubbard because I was compelled to do so as an article of faith of the Church. It is the policy of the Church to require all tech to be attributed to L Ron Hubbard
http://holysmoke.org/dm/dmayo005.htm
Soderqvist1: David Mayo claim further that the problems with Hubbard's case stems from Ned and his OT3. And OT3 is at least inaccurate, and possibly complete incorrect, and upper OT levels doesn't exist contrary to what Hubbard has said, etc!
Soderqvist1: that can explain why David Miscavige hasn't the faintest clue how to interpret Hubbard's research notes, because they maybe no more than scribbles by a disturbed old man!
Soderqvist1: Allan walter is another witness!
OPENING PANDORA'S BOX by Alan walter
We can estimate that several 100's of millions of dollars has been invested to uncover their knowledge and discoveries. Almost all of these prime movers and shakers over the last 50 years were connected to receiving coaching and processing either directly or indirectly from these masters. It must be understood that these masters weren't just masters in these fields but in other fields as well. They were philosophers in the fullest sense. Philosophers study life and all the aspects of life. A true philosopher has not only studied life but has lived life to its fullest.
Their greatest betrayal came when L. Ron Hubbard stated in a narcistic Policy letter, Keeping Scientology Working, dated 7 February, 1965, that he and only he discovered the exercises, drills and procedures. At the time though we were shocked by this Policy Letter, but at least the tapes, books and bulletins still had their acknowledgements of the different discoverers of the exercises, drills and procedures. Sadly, over the next 20 years all mention of these originators and sources were erased by Hubbard's people who also set about attempting to destroy their reputations, this was done by false accusations, vilification and false destructive stories about them.
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=33&highlight =Pandora%27s+Alan
ON THE SHOULDERS OF GIANTS
All of us knew that we were walking on the shoulders of giants and that most of the knowledge and wisdom we studied was more than 2000 years old. A lot of the knowledge had been lost but has now been rediscovered.
One of the most difficult things to do is report accurately. For example: I and several other Scio's had dinner with Chuck and Ava Berner at the Forrest Row Hotel, it was June 1964, the night before Chuck and Ava were to meet with LRH to go over this new discovery they made to do with study. We were all enthralled with what they had discovered. Imagine the shock we had when LRH told us in a the lecture that night that he had made a momentous discovery in the field of study. The data he gave was almost word for word with what the Berner's had discussed with us the previous night. There was no mention of the Berner's who were in the audience. They were devastated. What made me sick was I made LRH right to do this......I did not support the Berner's.....I simply went elsewhere. I put my own survival above my honor......what a price I was to pay for that. Not only me but all of us.......for I believe that is the moment that LRH went to the dark-side.
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=33&highlight =Pandora%27s+Alan&page=2
Yes, I originated the Locate and Indicate Tech and the Correction List Tech. The 1st one was L4. List Corrections. The 2nd was L1 - ARC Break Handling. From those came the other Correction Lists. The GPM Tech was failing on almost everyone........it got so bad that often on a Monday morning 90% of the students in the Z unit were home in bed sick or in hospital. Poor old Herbie and Reg Sharpe had to go around to the hospitals and houses to recover them. I was finished with my check sheets so I offered to clean up all the failing students.......my auditing room was the "boiler room" - every day I would have lines of people needing sessions.......some unconscious, (they used to put them in a wheel barrow to bring them to me.) It was during this time (45 years ago) I created the correction Lists.....L4 first and L1 second. I got so accomplished at fixing cases that it rarely took me more that 10 mins to get the clients indicators back in and their case condition sorted out. LRH came by one day and saw the line of people waiting for me to clean them up - even saw a couple of unconcious people being brought in a wheelbarrow. He asked me what I was doing - I told him - gave him my Correction Lists - hatted him on how to do it - the rest is history. Ethics or Qual also did not exist in those days.
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=74875&postcoun t=42
Some support to this stuff is from the NOTs Scholars Home Page:
David Mayo on the Origin of NOTs
David Mayo worked with L. Ron Hubbard to create the NOTs levels. In early 1996 he wrote a letter introducing himself to the alt.religion.scientology community, in which he summarized his history with the Church. In this excerpt from his (never published) letter, Mayo describes how he came to co-author the NOTs material.
In late 1978, I was hurriedly and secretly whisked off to California and driven blindfolded in the night to a secret location in the desert at La Quinta, near Palm Springs. Hubbard's health had deteriorated. I was told that his blood pressure, breathing rate and heartbeat were low, a medical doctor who was also a Scientologist, Gene Denk, was in attendance, standing by to restart his heart with electric shock. I was told he had been like this for about a week, was getting worse and over the past day had been slipping into and out of a coma. When I first saw him he was lying on his back, unmoving, neither speaking nor responding when spoken to, with his eyes open staring at the ceiling and not moving. The doctor told me that there was nothing he could do for Hubbard and now it was up to me. I started with techniques that required no verbal response, then minimal verbal response doing short but frequent sessions, changing to techniques that required more participation on his part as his condition improved, which happened rapidly. Within a week he was getting out of bed, walking and beginning to yell again. Hubbard and others said that I had saved his life. Skeptics might say that it was not due to the techniques I used and was mere co-incidence but it would be difficult to convince me of that.
I continued to audit Hubbard developing procedures and later co- authoring the descriptions and theoretical explanations of what would later be called `NOTs'(tm). That started out to be a write up of what I found to be wrong with Hubbard's past auditing and how I repaired it. In my mind that was a remedy for what had been done incorrectly, rather than a new `OT' level or levels. In this auditing, I found that much of his case trouble came from his NED auditing and his OT III solo auditing --though there were also errors in some other levels. The case manifestations that I found, (errors and charged areas) how I found them and what I did to repair and correct these matters would require a lengthy explanation. For now, suffice it to say that this auditing that I did on Hubbard (and later tested on a some other persons) using the e-meter and scientological theory and methods and the phenomena I observed, demonstrated --at least to me-- that the information in the OT III story was at least inaccurate and possibly completely incorrect. In view of the awe in which I held Hubbard and his theories about the mind and the spirit at that time, that discovery required a giant mental leap and change of viewpoint for me. It was not the first time that I had had such an heretical thought. I distinctly recall my momentary disbelief when I first opened an OT III pack and began to read the galactic story. Hubbard's statement that `reality is proportional to charge off' and my strong belief in his rightness in other matters, forestalled deeper skepticism for the time being.
When I started to write up the discoveries, phenomena and procedures developed during that auditing the above is more or less what I initially had in mind to describe in regard to the repair (remedial) auditing that I had done that assisted Hubbard's recovery. I felt that these observations and methods would be valuable to other scientologists who had been run extensively on Dianetics and on OT III and so would likely need the same repair that Hubbard had needed. Furthermore, there was a new discovery and positive technique that I had begun developing in those sessions which I thought would be of general benefit in improving a person's ability to think logically. Neither of these two points is adequately described in the final rendition.
Hubbard has always thought that his case was representative of other people's cases and that what had been run on him in his auditing should be run on others. I recall him once saying that he had a `standard case'. This is one factor that influenced the presentation of the NOTs materials. There were other factors and there is a lot more to this story none of which is necessary to include here.
During the 1978, 1979 time period I also became involved in supervising Mary Sue Hubbard's auditing and sometimes auditing her myself. At some point, Hubbard decided to keep me at there (La Quinta, California) to continue auditing him and overseeing Mary Sue's auditing, instead of returning to the position I had in Clearwater, Senior Case Supervisor Flag. He created a new position and appointed me `Senior Case Supervisor International.'
From 1979/1980 forward into 1982, I began to develop and release new technical procedures and began a long term project of `studying and researching, reviewing and correcting and possibly replacing the existing levels and developing new ones,' (a near paraphrase of how Hubbard described my work in a memo he wrote on or about April 14, 1982, in which he outlined what he expected me to continue to do in the event of his death). Until that time and even for a few months after, Hubbard thought highly of my work, frequently commended me and considered me to be his replacement for `technical' (i.e., relating to auditing techniques) matters. He went further in that memo, to say that it would be up to me to develop OT VIII (which contrary to PR statements, did not exist at that time) and subsequent levels. I was rather dismayed by this news as I had really been expecting him to do that; I wondered, if he as `The Founder' of the subject had not managed to develop these OT levels and the OT powers he had claimed for them, how could he expect me to able to fulfil his obligation --he had just tossed me the ultimate Hot Potato!
And Criminal Time Track: A History of High Crimes Against Scientology:
4 June 1991 Memorandum Opinion And Order in RTC v Robin Scott:
This motion revives the issue of authorship of certain Scientology scriptures called NOTs. RTC argues that the "work made for hire" doctrine, as codified by the Copyright Act of 1976, necessarily imputes authorship of NOTs to Hubbard whether he or David Mayo actually created the materials.
The thrust of the defendants opposition is that Mayo was not an employee of Hubbard when Mayo developed the NOTs materials.
The court finds that it is an established fact that Mayo substantially participated in the drafting of NOTs. Ordinarily the creator of a written work is the author. However, the Copyright Act of 1976 treats "works made for hire" differently. If the written work is a work made for hire, "the employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered the author." 17 U.S.C. section 201(a).
RTC submitted documents to the court showing that Mayo was hired by CSC to perform work under the supervision of Hubbard. The court rejects that Hubbard was Mayo's employer but finds that CSC was his employer. It was established by the court that:
NOTs is based on Mayo's auditing of LRH. The Church literally follows everything Hubbard said, therefore, Hubbard's suggestions and criticism regarding the earlier drafts of NOTs would be adopted verbatim by CSC. Moreover, as reflected in the excerpted transcripts of the tapes, Hubbard actually exercised his right to control by making suggestions and criticisms.
The court determined that Mayo was an employee of CSC acting within the scope of his employment when he drafted NOTs, thus his substantial contribution to NOTs constitutes work made for hire under the Copyright Act.
Last edited: