Some notes on running OT III

[Veda]

Veda,

I know most of the Freezoners in my country and many in mainland Europe, and whilst the OT levels are part of the Bridge, I can't think of anyone who was told about OTIII not being about this that or the other or being about this ... yada yada- but just do it at their own leisure.

Can you give actual examples of a Freezone practitioner who does what you say, what they actually did, who it was to, the results etc etc? Who is the 'they' you are referring to? Most people I know were happy to move onto 3 and never had it evaluated for them. I know of people who found out they didn't have it. You are the only person doing otherwise. Please give examples.

You want examples? No, I'm not going to take the time. Find your own. They're plentiful.

OT 3, the "Wall of Fire," IS an evaluation - a major evaluation.

You write that you know of people who say they "didn't have it?" In such places as the "Standard Tech Freezone" and "Ron's Orgs," usually, that's means, they - as beings - "didn't have it," (weren't there personally for "Incident 2") but their "BTs" were - and do have "Incident 2."

Per Hubbard's instructions - per the tech - everyone has an "OT 3" case, consisting of "BTs" with "Incidents 2, and 1." There are no exceptions. No one can "not have it." Otherwise, you're "squirreling."

From my experience, even in the "Freezone," most people doing these levels are in a highly suggestible state, have been hyped to the hilt, and are extremely excited upon beginning their first session, where they will be contacting the most important incidents in the history of the Galaxy.

It is PRed to outsiders as being not this and not that - all the PR lines for public consumption could be placed in alphabetical order, if anyone wanted to take the time.

Frankly, some parts of the Freezone and Ron's Orgs are so flakey that almost anything is possible.

What they have not done is evolve the subject, just made it a bit softer.

They still worship Hubbard, and - to outsiders - still insist they do not.

And they still love and cherish the Implantology of the "Clearing Course," "OT 2," and "OT 3."

"They," in this case, is not a generality; it's a state of mind.

Such folks love shared realities and agreement. So the word, "they" is appropriate.

And that's part of the problem. What to do about the "they-people," who run in flocks and love to think alike? And, yet, have their own "cognitions," within certain boundaries, and guided by the framework of the Commodore Hubbard/Emperor Xenu "Bridge," play-act - like little kids - at "self discovery."

Argue with such people? About what?

They only reason *they* are an issue at all, is that they're fonts of bad advice, and sometimes innocent people, following that bad advice, are negatively affected.

The scene in $cientology (Scientology Inc.) is worse, so it's probably good that the "they-people" have a place to go - a "kinder and gentler" place.

The hope is that - amongst the "they-people" - are some nascent individuals, who'll sooner or later will find their own individuality.

When that happens "they" won't be "they-people" anymore.

And I hope that comes true for all of you - maybe, in time, it will.

 

[Terril park]

You want examples? No, I'm not going to take the time. Find your own. They're plentiful.

OT 3, the "Wall of Fire," IS an evaluation - a major evaluation.

You write that you know of people who say they "didn't have it?" In such places as the "Standard Tech Freezone" and "Ron's Orgs," usually, that's means, they - as beings - "didn't have it," (weren't there personally for "Incident 2") but their "BTs" were - and do have "Incident 2."

Per Hubbard's instructions - per the tech - everyone has an "OT 3" case, consisting of "BTs" with "Incidents 2, and 1." There are no exceptions. No one can "not have it." Otherwise, you're "squirreling."

From my experience, even in the "Freezone," most people doing these levels are in a highly suggestible state, have been hyped to the hilt, and are extremely excited upon beginning their first session, where they will be contacting the most important incidents in the history of the Galaxy.

It is PRed to outsiders as being not this and not that - all the PR lines for public consumption could be placed in alphabetical order, if anyone wanted to take the time.

Frankly, some parts of the Freezone and Ron's Orgs are so flakey that almost anything is possible.

What they have not done is evolve the subject, just made it a bit softer.

They still worship Hubbard, and - to outsiders - still insist they do not.

And they still love and cherish the Implantology of the "Clearing Course," "OT 2," and "OT 3."

"They," in this case, is not a generality; it's a state of mind.

Such folks love shared realities and agreement. So the word, "they" is appropriate.

And that's part of the problem. What to do about the "they-people," who run in flocks and love to think alike? And, yet, have their own "cognitions," within certain boundaries, and guided by the framework of the Commodore Hubbard/Emperor Xenu "Bridge," play-act - like little kids - at "self discovery."

Argue with such people? About what?

They only reason *they* are an issue at all, is that they're fonts of bad advice, and sometimes innocent people, following that bad advice, are negatively affected.

The scene in $cientology (Scientology Inc.) is worse, so it's probably good that the "they-people" have a place to go - a "kinder and gentler" place.

The hope is that - amongst the "they-people" - are some nascent individuals, who'll sooner or later will find their own individuality.

When that happens "they" won't be "they-people" anymore.

And I hope that comes true for all of you - maybe, in time, it will.

Veda, you are constantly invalidating the wins of those who do upper levels.
And your actions are not working.

Alan has posted how he has no or little belief in the Xenu story, and so have I and Paul. We and many have had wonderful wins on them. I've posted
many stories of these wins.

You have posted wins!

You have never given an example of someone suffering from these levels.

Time form place and event?

 

[Veda]

Veda, you are constantly invalidating the wins of those who do upper levels.
And your actions are not working.

Alan has posted how he has no or little belief in the Xenu story, and so have I and Paul. We and many have had wonderful wins on them. I've posted
many stories of these wins.

You have posted wins!

You have never given an example of someone suffering from these levels.

Time form place and event?

You glom onto other people, and seek to identify yourself with other people.

I don't know what you believe or don't believe, because I don't trust you, and I don't trust your judgement.

 

[Tanstaafl]

You glom onto other people, and seek to identify yourself with other people.

I don't know what you believe or don't believe, because I don't trust you, and I don't trust your judgement.

I'm sure Terril doesn't need me to stick up for him, but FWIW, he has been helpful and friendly towards me. He hasn't tried to push anything on me. As I understand it, he doesn't get any reward for promoting the FZ - there is no FSMC. I've spoken with a couple of people in the FZ and Terril seems to be highly regarded. If you don't trust his judgement then that's fair enough, but I don't think there's anything on this forum that would bring Terril's trustworthiness into question.

 

[Pascal]

Veda, you are constantly invalidating the wins of those who do upper levels.
And your actions are not working.

Alan has posted how he has no or little belief in the Xenu story, and so have I and Paul. We and many have had wonderful wins on them. I've posted
many stories of these wins.

You have posted wins!

You have never given an example of someone suffering from these levels.

Time form place and event?

Exactly! Scientology works! Who cares why or how! So we touch walls, remember stuff and banish freeloading beings off our arses! We get better doing so! And anyone who disagrees is insulting our inteligence as human beings and better say it outright instead of 1.1ing.:mad:

 

[Veda]

Advocates of the Commodore Hubbard/Emperor Xenu "Bridge" - in the "Standard Tech Freezone" - typically, do two things:

1) They encourage others onto the Xenu Bridge.

2) They insist that "OT 3" is not about "Incident 2," or "Incident 1," but about "exorcism."

When it's suggested to them that the phenomena of "OT 3" might be "handled" in another way, they know that can't be so, since "OT 3" IS about "Incident 2" and "Incident 1."

Some people want to be told what to think, and what to see.

The objective was not to discover, but to be told, while pretending to be on a path of discovery.

In the posts and the links found on this thread, and on this forum, you have plenty of information and insight.

It's not what you're looking for.

Yay!


Can I get a cert for flunking "Veda's Rondroid Litmus test?"

Alright, one last try - to bring this to a slightly more productive level:

Firstly, this is not a "test." It's, mainly, an attempt to convey ideas and information.

When a person - essentially - "gives his mind over" to something, it might be wise to examine that something first.

There's much to examine: Hubbard's August 1938 letter to his first wife, that discussed his recently written unpublished manuscript 'Excalibur', that begins, "Dear Skipper," and goes on to describe his "real goal"; his 'Affirmations', that began in the 1930s and continued at least until 1946; his letters to others, including the FBI, notably during the 1950s; his Dianetic and Scientology writings and taped lectures, with attention to his maxim of "using enemy tactics" - and along with being willing to lie (an "enemy tactic" in itself) to his own followers (the Scientologists), he was also willing to "use enemy tactics" on them, in a fuller sense. (Thus, many of the various "aberrative" situations, and manipulative and destructive behaviors, described in Dianetics and Scientology, were used by Hubbard on Scientologists.)

To take a breather from the above, there is the positive side: And that could simply be called "the best" in the subject, and, although, largely derived from other sources, including early Dianeticists and Scientologists, to deny this "Best" part is to deny an important part of over-all picture of Scientology.

And back to the negative: There's Hubbard's (self-titled) 1955 'Brainwashing Manual', that serves as perhaps the most glaring example of his "using enemy tactics," and it goes on.

And, jumping up to Hubbard beginning to call himself "Source," then deciding to become "The Commodore" and start the "Sea Organization," invent Xenu, and all the rest of it - and then there is this thread on OT 3. And the main point being made, right now, is that OT 3, as presented by Hubbard, was, primarily, about his telling people the contents of their own minds and their own spaces. Someone can - creatively - attempt to make OT 3 about other things, but if it's about other things, then there are better ways of dealing with those other things than OT 3.

OT 3 is about Hubbard telling people that they are the effect of "Incident 2" and "Incident 1," and having them accept that, and then be grateful for being so told.

And that's why other ways of "handling" the "phenomena" of "OT 3," rather than "doing Commodore Hubbard's OT 3," ("Incident 1 and 2"), are considered impossible - by, as you say, the "Rondroids" - since the "phenomena" of "OT 3," ARE, primarily, Hubbard's "implanting" of "Incident 1 and 2" in the minds of Scientologists.

AND, this doesn't mean that there are no "phenomena" - of a spiritual nature -that can influence a person's space, or that "entities," and other things, including what are traditionally called "elementals," to such things as created "thought-forms," and an entire range of interesting "phenomena," do not, or can not exist.

It only means that L. Ron Hubbard became a kind of implanter, after he decided to become "Source" and the "Commodore." And that one, to be wise, should be aware of that.

 

[Div6]

Alright, one last try - to bring this to a slightly more productive level:

Firstly, this is not a "test." It's, mainly, an attempt to convey ideas and information.

When a person - essentially - "gives his mind over" to something, it might be wise to examine that something first.

There's much to examine: Hubbard's August 1938 letter to his first wife, that discussed his recently written unpublished manuscript 'Excalibur', that begins, "Dear Skipper," and goes on to describe his "real goal"; his 'Affirmations', that began in the 1930s and continued at least until 1946; his letters to others, including the FBI, notably during the 1950s; his Dianetic and Scientology writings and taped lectures, with attention to his maxim of "using enemy tactics" - and along with being willing to lie (an "enemy tactic" in itself) to his own followers (the Scientologists), he was also willing to "use enemy tactics" on them, in a fuller sense. (Thus, many of the various "aberrative" situations, and manipulative and destructive behaviors, described in Dianetics and Scientology, were used by Hubbard on Scientologists.)

To take a breather from the above, there is the positive side: And that could simply be called "the best" in the subject, and, although, largely derived from other sources, including early Dianeticists and Scientologists, to deny this "Best" part is to deny an important part of over-all picture of Scientology.

And back to the negative: There's Hubbard's (self-titled) 1955 'Brainwashing Manual', that serves as perhaps the most glaring example of his "using enemy tactics," and it goes on.

And, jumping up to Hubbard beginning to call himself "Source," then deciding to become "The Commodore" and start the "Sea Organization," invent Xenu, and all the rest of it - and then there is this thread on OT 3. And the main point being made, right now, is that OT 3, as presented by Hubbard, was, primarily, about his telling people the contents of their own minds and their own spaces. Someone can - creatively - attempt to make OT 3 about other things, but if it's about other things, then there are better ways of dealing with those other things than OT 3.

OT 3 is about Hubbard telling people that they are the effect of "Incident 2" and "Incident 1," and having them accept that, and then be grateful for being so told.

And that's why other ways of "handling" the "phenomena" of "OT 3," rather than "doing Commodore Hubbard's OT 3," ("Incident 1 and 2"), are considered impossible - by, as you say, the "Rondroids" - since the "phenomena" of "OT 3," ARE, primarily, Hubbard's "implanting" of "Incident 1 and 2" in the minds of Scientologists.

AND, this doesn't mean that there are no "phenomena" - of a spiritual nature -that can influence a person's space, or that "entities," and other things, including what are traditionally called "elementals," to such things as created "thought-forms," and an entire range of interesting "phenomena," do not, or can not exist.

It only means that L. Ron Hubbard became a kind of implanter, after he decided to become "Source" and the "Commodore." And that one, to be wise, should be aware of that.

We have the letter of the word, and we have the spirit of the word.

Any one offering words, if enforced, could be 'a kind of implanter'.
Of course, that depends more on the kind of 'box' the recipient is in, and tone level. Which brings us to the spirit of the word. Is it intended to entrap, or to free?

To me OT 3 is NOT about Inc 1 and 2. That is ancillary to the main point, which is "the primary mistake thetans made was thinking they were one".

Wrong assignment of identification, leading to inablility to as-is, leading to being more and more 'solid', leading to more and more effect.

OT3 was supposed to be 'confidential'. Not because it is wacky data (the Mormons have a far stranger eschatology to my mind; the book of Revelations reads as a drug induced nightmare, as another example) but because it will not work as a process on a case that is not properly set up for it.

So yes, I would way the the CoS has failed to deliver on OTIII in many many ways, and are now simply a dramatization of LRH's ser facs. I have no argument with that.

But, if there are better ways of dealing with the phenomenon of compulsive mis-assignment of cause spiritually, then please (as I asked before) do share.

I cannot believe that such information is best with held from people looking and ready for such answers.

 

[Veda]

We have the letter of the word, and we have the spirit of the word.

Any one offering words, if enforced, could be 'a kind of implanter'.
Of course, that depends more on the kind of 'box' the recipient is in, and tone level. Which brings us to the spirit of the word. Is it intended to entrap, or to free?

To me OT 3 is NOT about Inc 1 and 2. That is ancillary to the main point, which is "the primary mistake thetans made was thinking they were one".

Wrong assignment of identification, leading to inablility to as-is, leading to being more and more 'solid', leading to more and more effect.

OT3 was supposed to be 'confidential'. Not because it is wacky data (the Mormons have a far stranger eschatology to my mind; the book of Revelations reads as a drug induced nightmare, as another example) but because it will not work as a process on a case that is not properly set up for it.

So yes, I would way the the CoS has failed to deliver on OTIII in many many ways, and are now simply a dramatization of LRH's ser facs. I have no argument with that.

But, if there are better ways of dealing with the phenomenon of compulsive mis-assignment of cause spiritually, then please (as I asked before) do share.

I cannot believe that such information is best with held from people looking and ready for such answers.

There are many alternatives for those willing to look.

Alternatives, without the psychological hooks - hooks so deeply embedded in you, that you no longer notice them.

The information has already been made available on this thread, and other threads - search it out, look it over, think about it, or not.

It's up to you.

 

[haiqu]

I was aware that Hubbard used such drugs as Barbiturates during the late 1930s, when he would record, and then play his self-hypnotic 'Affirmations' back to himself, with a Soundscriber.

Horsepiss. From WikiPedia:

"The SoundScriber was a dictation format introduced in 1945."

haiqu

 

[haiqu]

There are many alternatives for those willing to look.

Alternatives, without the psychological hooks - hooks so deeply embedded in you, that you no longer notice them.

The information has already been made available on this thread, and other threads - search it out, look it over, think about it, or not.

It's up to you.

You're making the standard logical error of appealing to authority (yourself, since you refuse to cite alternatives) as someone who knows better than this. It isn't working at all.

And even if by some vague chance this were true, Scientology tech contains the solution anyhow. Hubbard stated several times that the last action one will need to do is run out the effects of auditing.

Get specific, or get a clue. But begging the question is non-productive. Oh, and some references to your quotes would be useful, since I've never had access to Hubbard's private mail to others in the '30s and '40s and I'm quite curious as to WHO claims to have had this access, and when (i.e. are they relying on old memory of something read covertly?), and what barrow they were pushing when they revealed it.

haiqu

 

[Veda]

Horsepiss. From WikiPedia:

"The SoundScriber was a dictation format introduced in 1945."

haiqu

In 2007, "Soundscriber" is a general term for sound recorder. Sixty years ago, it was a brand name.

Before that, there were "Dictaphones" with the wax cylinder.

Sound recording has been around for some time.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

 

[Alanzo]

You're making the standard logical error of appealing to authority (yourself, since you refuse to cite alternatives) as someone who knows better than this. It isn't working at all.

And even if by some vague chance this were true, Scientology tech contains the solution anyhow. Hubbard stated several times that the last action one will need to do is run out the effects of auditing.

Sorry, I just have to point this out:

In your first paragraph above, you accuse Veda of committing the "standard logical error" of appealing to authority.

In your second paragraph you use the same "standard logical error" (don't you mean "logical fallacy"?) and appeal to Hubbard's authority by saying "And even if by some vague chance this were true, Scientology tech contains the solution anyhow. Hubbard stated several times that the last action one will need to do is run out the effects of auditing."

Are you sure you know what the logical fallacy of appealing to an authority is?

Get specific, or get a clue. But begging the question is non-productive. Oh, and some references to your quotes would be useful, since I've never had access to Hubbard's private mail to others in the '30s and '40s and I'm quite curious as to WHO claims to have had this access, and when (i.e. are they relying on old memory of something read covertly?), and what barrow they were pushing when they revealed it.

haiqu

Are you sure you know what begging the question is?

 

[Div6]

There are many alternatives for those willing to look.

Alternatives, without the psychological hooks - hooks so deeply embedded in you, that you no longer notice them.

The information has already been made available on this thread, and other threads - search it out, look it over, think about it, or not.

It's up to you.

Well, on that we can agree.
Like I tell my wife, there is nothing wrong with looking.

Hubbard was a flawed character....tragic, in some ways really. But the "tech" is really just a body of data. "Significance can stand independant of mass."
So I see trying to invalidate the tech by "dead agenting" LRH as just an attempt at mis-direction.

My experience is that the OT III materials enable me to look further, deeper, and with more integrity.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[Tanstaafl]

Well, on that we can agree.
Like I tell my wife, there is nothing wrong with looking.

Amen.

Hubbard was a flawed character....tragic, in some ways really. But the "tech" is really just a body of data. "Significance can stand independant of mass."
So I see trying to invalidate the tech by "dead agenting" LRH as just an attempt at mis-direction.

Amen again.

 

[Veda]

-snip

So I see trying to invalidate the tech by "dead agenting" LRH as just an attempt at mis-direction.

-snip-

There is no attempt to "invalidate" or "dead agent," only to accurately and fully describe.

All the documents earlier listed are relevant to understanding Scientology.

It's obvious that you don't want to know the totality of Scientology doctrine, or its actual history, or the contents of key background documents.

You are marching towards "Total Freedom" while wearing blinders, and "following the closely taped path."

You've handed over your mind to something you haven't fully examined and don't fully understand. Your thoughts are shaped by Scientology lingo which you use repeatedly and, IMO, to a large extent, unconsciously.

In creating the deeply secretive subject and operation of Scientology, it was "Commodore" Hubbard's "Intention" that Scientology not be fully examined or fully understood.

You're faithfully following the "taped path," and you're obeying "Commodore" Hubbard's "Command Intention."

You are being a Scientologist.

 

[Div6]

There is no attempt to "invalidate" or "dead agent," only to accurately and fully describe.

All the documents earlier listed are relevant to understanding Scientology.

No doubt. I've read them.

It's obvious that you don't want to know the totality of Scientology doctrine, or its actual history, or the contents of key background documents.

Your evidence of this? Do you claim to know what I have or have not read?

In creating the deeply secretive subject and operation of Scientology, it was "Commodore" Hubbard's "Intention" that Scientology not be fully examined or fully understood.

And how are you privy to the inner circle of his intentions? Evidence please.

You are being a Scientologist.

There was a time when I would have been proud that some one acknowledged that. About 20 years ago. But it seems you have a problem
with the freedom it provides, independant of organizational bias.



<note some comments snipped>

 

[Bea Kiddo]

I'd say running out the effects of auditing is easy: stay away from it. Go live life for a while.

 

[Veda]

There is no attempt to "invalidate" or "dead agent," only to accurately and fully describe.

All the documents earlier listed are relevant to understanding Scientology.

It's obvious that you don't want to know the totality of Scientology doctrine, or its actual history, or the contents of key background documents.

You are marching towards "Total Freedom" while wearing blinders, and "following the closely taped path."

You've handed over your mind to something you haven't fully examined and don't fully understand. Your thoughts are shaped by Scientology lingo which you use repeatedly and, IMO, to a large extent, unconsciously.

In creating the deeply secretive subject and operation of Scientology, it was "Commodore" Hubbard's "Intention" that Scientology not be fully examined or fully understood.

You're faithfully following the "taped path," and you're obeying "Commodore" Hubbard's "Command Intention."

You are being a Scientologist.

-snip-

And how are you privy to the inner circle of his intentions? Evidence please.

By reading and listening to Hubbard's words, many times, each time with a more developed understanding. And by studying his actions.

You should try listening to Hubbard's lectures after having carefully read the 1938 Excalibur/Skipper letter; other documents of the 1930s and 1940s; the 1950s FBI letters, and other correspondence of the 1950s; the (Hubbard's title) 'Brainwashing Manual' of 1955; the 'Manual of Dissemination of Material' (not confidential, but for the first time, hints at the template of a secretive subject, and at the "philosophy" of harassment, and "attack"; and then there is a wide assortment of Confidential Policy and tactical issues of the 1960s and 1970s.

And more.

It took me several years to sort through, decode, and begin to understand these documents.

For example, reading the extent of Hubbard's "Scientology (covert) Intelligence tech" took quite a while. Recognizing that Hubbard had not only applied, and ordered applied, these writings to the outside world, but also had directed their ideas and methods, internally, onto Scientologists - this took some time.

Look, no matter how you or I see things, there are inherent problems in our attempting to communicate. I don't expect you suddenly change what you think and believe.

Take the time - quite a bit of time - to examine and reflect upon the documents mentioned, and related writings, and critiques of these writings, and then, perhaps, a discussion would be worthwhile.

 

[Div6]

By reading and listening to Hubbard's words, many times, each time with a more developed understanding. And by studying his actions.

You should try listening to Hubbard's lectures after having carefully read the 1938 Excalibur/Skipper letter; other documents of the 1930s and 1940s; the 1950s FBI letters, and other correspondence of the 1950s; the (Hubbard's title) 'Brainwashing Manual' of 1955; the 'Manual of Dissemination of Material' (not confidential, but for the first time, hints at the template of a secretive subject, and at the "philosophy" of harassment, and "attack"; and then there is a wide assortment of Confidential Policy and tactical issues of the 1960s and 1970s.

And more.

It took me several years to sort through, decode, and begin to understand these documents.

For example, reading the extent of Hubbard's "Scientology (covert) Intelligence tech" took quite a while. Recognizing that Hubbard had not only applied, and ordered applied, these writings to the outside world, but also had directed their ideas and methods, internally, onto Scientologists - this took some time.

Look, no matter how you or I see things, there are inherent problems in our attempting to communicate. I don't expect you suddenly change what you think and believe.

Take the time - quite a bit of time - to examine and reflect upon the documents mentioned, and related writings, and critiques of these writings, and then, perhaps, a discussion would be worthwhile.

Yeah, it is apples and oranges here. I have read all that you refer to...in some cases several times. It is all very interesting when looking at his life.

What that has to do with running OT III I do not know.

Does case gain exist? Or like Alanzo, is there "no such thing"?

 

[Bea Kiddo]

I think case gain exists: Through training and education only, though. My 2 cents. Sorry to interrupt y'all.