Understanding LRH

Veda

Sponsor
Yeah, well I think you hit the nail on the head there about why we part company at this point.

I desperately needed OT2. I mean I needed that. It wouldn't have been there without LRH's Bridge. There have been many other things that were good in Scn, life changing, but this one I needed.

-snip-

Nick

At some point you may find it worthwhile to examine what (in this lifetime, in Scientology) led to your mental state of "desperation" prior to doing, and during, "OT 2."
 

nw2394

Silver Meritorious Patron

There isn't any point in debating what it is like to see a colour with someone who has been profoundly blind all thier life,
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
There isn't any point in debating what it is like to see a colour with someone who has been profoundly blind all thier life,

Nice ser fac.

Allows you to dstract from the point while making the speaker wrong.

Can you do it again?

And again and again?
 

Bea Kiddo

Crusader
Many of the earlier PCs wanted their ruin handled. Their ruin was handled, they paid their money and left.

Such is the liability of that approach.

I don't promote on the basis of solving people's ruins. I look at what do they
want to achieve.

People can improve and improve and improve. With that approach I think people will stay and keep improving.

As Alan keeps on saying the accent needs to be on the positives.

I dont know about this "finding of peoples ruins" thing.

I guess I have no reality on it, cause it was never done on me. Born and raised in. Weird scenario.

Never found my ruin.

And if I did, would I wanna handle it?

Not with that tech.

Maybe in a library buried in books, suffocating, breathing, taking in information, getting buried again, over and over. Sure.

But auditing? Nah.
 

Veda

Sponsor
There isn't any point in debating what it is like to see a colour with someone who has been profoundly blind all thier life,

Don't you want to finish the sentence?

From a back cover of 'Advance!' magazine:

"Once in session, you will address and erase the epic catastrophe that occurred here 75 million years ago - a catastrophe so huge that it destroyed the sanity of every man, woman, and child, and impinges on each moment of your life to this day."

One of the tricks Scientology plays is to tell people 1) they "can't really remember without Scientology," 2) and "with Scientology," they can remember (ARC S/W, Dianetics, etc.); 3) but before too long, they're being told what to remember (CC - OT 3), with a little bit of actual "auditing" and "two way comm" around the fringes, so as to make them think it's their idea.

Make it very important, and essential to "survival!" and you've got 'em.

There is no nice way of saying that someone has been sucked into the Hubbo bad-Sci-Fi Vortex.

Still, if you ever feel like completing that sentence, go right ahead.
 

Div6

Crusader
I dont know about this "finding of peoples ruins" thing.

I guess I have no reality on it, cause it was never done on me. Born and raised in. Weird scenario.

Never found my ruin.

And if I did, would I wanna handle it?

Not with that tech.

Maybe in a library buried in books, suffocating, breathing, taking in information, getting buried again, over and over. Sure.

But auditing? Nah.

Uh....you just GAVE us your ruin over in that other thread.
Do you need to be "salvaged from ruin" and "brought to enlightenment"?
 

alex

Gold Meritorious Patron
Uh....you just GAVE us your ruin over in that other thread.
Do you need to be "salvaged from ruin" and "brought to enlightenment"?

If not THROW HER IN ETHICS!!

She's ethics bait as far as I can tell...
:coolwink:

alex
 

Div6

Crusader
If not THROW HER IN ETHICS!!

She's ethics bait as far as I can tell...
:coolwink:

alex

Dude,

No one is putting her down more than herself. Labeling someone is the 19th century practice.

She needs love. Unconditional and uncaring. If she wants to do anything beyond that, it is up to her.

She's got mine.


How about you?
 

alex

Gold Meritorious Patron
Dude,

No one is putting her down more than herself. Labeling someone is the 19th century practice.

She needs love. Unconditional and uncaring. If she wants to do anything beyond that, it is up to her.

She's got mine.


How about you?

As difficult as it is for me to personally express love, yes me too.

I was joking by the way....thus the winking smiley. (It was an apparently unsuccessfull attempt to play on the perverted application of "ethics" practiced by the Church)

I love you Bea. Unconditionally.

alex (no winking smiley now)
 

Terril park

Sponsor
Dude,

No one is putting her down more than herself. Labeling someone is the 19th century practice.

She needs love. Unconditional and uncaring. If she wants to do anything beyond that, it is up to her.

She's got mine.


How about you?

Mine too. Don't think she really needs us.

Maybe we need her?
 

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
From a back cover of 'Advance!' magazine:

"Once in session, you will address and erase the epic catastrophe that occurred here 75 million years ago - a catastrophe so huge that it destroyed the sanity of every man, woman, and child, and impinges on each moment of your life to this day."

One of the tricks Scientology plays is to tell people 1) they "can't really remember without Scientology," 2) and "with Scientology," they can remember (ARC S/W, Dianetics, etc.); 3) but before too long, they're being told what to remember (CC - OT 3), with a little bit of actual "auditing" and "two way comm" around the fringes, so as to make them think it's their idea.

Make it very important, and essential to "survival!" and you've got 'em.

There is no nice way of saying that someone has been sucked into the Hubbo bad-Sci-Fi Vortex.

:goodposting: :thankyou:
 

Bea Kiddo

Crusader
Dude,

No one is putting her down more than herself. Labeling someone is the 19th century practice.

She needs love. Unconditional and uncaring. If she wants to do anything beyond that, it is up to her.

She's got mine.


How about you?

As difficult as it is for me to personally express love, yes me too.

I was joking by the way....thus the winking smiley. (It was an apparently unsuccessfull attempt to play on the perverted application of "ethics" practiced by the Church)

I love you Bea. Unconditionally.

alex (no winking smiley now)

Mine too. Don't think she really needs us.

Maybe we need her?



Aww.... you guys is so sweet. :blush: :blush: :blush:

Really, I am fine.

Though my stories are all true, it does not mean I am not toughend up by it all. Really. I am doing fine.

But stories must be told.
 

Colleen K. Peltomaa

Silver Meritorious Patron
Yeah, well I think you hit the nail on the head there about why we part company at this point.

I desperately needed OT2. I mean I needed that. It wouldn't have been there without LRH's Bridge. There have been many other things that were good in Scn, life changing, but this one I needed.

When you say someone else's case phenomena - you're completely right. The actual thing that was bugging me about that area actually boiled down to (though I had no idea at the time I started) the fact that I wanted to release my wife and children of 75 million years ago from that god awful mess. I needed OT2 for that and it was, to be pedantic, their case. It was my emotional trauma though and I couldn't have done it without OT2.

After that session I cried like a baby. It was such a relief. It still brings a tear to my eye now.

With regard to the "idenics template" - well there isn't much prospect of me ever running it. I like Golstein's definition of identity and confusion. I think they are more general and less evaluative than Hubbard's equivalents. So it is not that I am not interested. However, Goldstein does not actually write up very much specific of his and Galusha's actual procedure and application style/rules/guide lines or whatever they actually are. AFAIK he expects people to pay him - well it won't be there for future generations like that. It is not that I can't afford to buy it. I just think the tech should be free. And, no doubt, Alan will now chip in on the thread and say "f you". Well, so be it. I have a long record of paying for whatever assistance with application I need and I have no objection to people charging handsomely for that.

Nick

I don't know anyone who posts on this board who says that there is not some workable tech. Even Veda, I believe, admits to some workability.

About tech being free, your viewpoint is acknowledged.

Whatever you needed OT2 for most likely could have been achieved much faster with Idenics. In any case, I am glad you are relieved of the trauma of that incident.
 

Colleen K. Peltomaa

Silver Meritorious Patron
Many of the earlier PCs wanted their ruin handled. Their ruin was handled, they paid their money and left.

Such is the liability of that approach.

I don't promote on the basis of solving people's ruins. I look at what do they
want to achieve.

People can improve and improve and improve. With that approach I think people will stay and keep improving.

As Alan keeps on saying the accent needs to be on the positives.


Sorry I did not get back to you sooner. I've been really busy spending all that money I got back from the CofS.

Besides, as a past lifer, I really had to go and take a look to see if what you said is true. For me personally I took the best of Ron's tech and then skedaddled out of there. I have not bellied up to an auditor since the late 40's until last week with Mike Goldstein. Had my first professional session since 1948, yay!

I agree with you that as long as you have a tech that a pc can use to keep improving, I personally don't know why they will ever want to stop, but some do, such is life on the planet. Too much havingness?
 

Nec_V20

Patron Meritorious
Colleen,

Alright, yes, there are probably people on this board who believe that none of the tech is workable. That's what's great about this board -- lots of viewpoints.

My cousin was one of the last German angling champions (before sport-angling was banned in Germany). He had been involved with fish and fishing all of his life.

He could explain every philosophy, political opinion or just about anything else in terms of fish or angling.

What I am getting at is that if one has been immersed in just about anything for long enough (for instance I have been a computer techie for about a quarter of a century) then one can use the vocabulary and the "concepts" of that immersion to make generally comprehensible analogous statements.

With regard to Scientology and LRH for instance my cousin would probably have said something like, "The fish stinks from the head". I would probably say something like, "Scientology has remained bug for bug compatible for almost 60 years", or, "Scientology is about as useful as write-only memory".

Even a non-angler or non-techie can glean from the statements above that the opinion expressed about Scientology is negative. Insofar the angling or techie terminology is a "workable" medium for articulating and conveying information.

What you should perhaps ask yourself is, how much of Scientology - as you know it - is "workable" as an analogy, and how much is literally interpretable as objective reality.
 

Colleen K. Peltomaa

Silver Meritorious Patron
Dude,

No one is putting her down more than herself. Labeling someone is the 19th century practice.

She needs love. Unconditional and uncaring. If she wants to do anything beyond that, it is up to her.

She's got mine.


How about you?

She has mine too. I had quite the habit of self-invalidation. When Yogi Berger was in town I got to meet up with him several times. Finally, he gave me a big Tone 40 "Flunk for self-invalidation". That cured me for several years.
 

Colleen K. Peltomaa

Silver Meritorious Patron
Colleen,

What you should perhaps ask yourself is, how much of Scientology - as you know it - is "workable" as an analogy, and how much is literally interpretable as objective reality.

[snipped

I don't understand what you are saying, would you please explain further.
 
Top