WHERE ARE THE OT'S?

Joe van Staden

New Member
WHERE ARE THE OT’s?

OT; Operating Thetan – the promise of Scientology. In general terms OT is described as a spiritual state above clear. It is knowing and willing cause over life, thought, matter, energy, space and time (MEST). The state of OT implies the ultimate state a thetan can aspire to – the highest level of enlightenment – a state of total freedom. It is claimed that Scientology methodology, as outlined in terms of “the bridge”, is capable of taking the pre-OT, step by step, to full OT.

No disrespect intended to the many dedicated, good intentioned, individuals who have given years of their lives to the C of S to realize the dream of making real OTs. Yes, many people attest to living better lives due to their involvement in Scientology and I am personally witness to this happening. However, up to date, there are no signs of real OT’s being made. Perhaps in another 60 years?

As I see it, if ever a state of “homo-novas” is to emerge out of the current human condition it won’t be because of C of S activity. By the way, if there are any real C of S made OT’s running around I am sure, not only Scientologists, but the whole world would love to know about it.

Having said that raises a couple of questions, not least of which is; is a “higher state of being”, as implied by the term OT and as described by other teachings even possible? My personal opinion is, yes. The basis for my answer is rooted in several inexplicable life experiences culminating in two particular observations made over the years.

• The prevailing human perspective (mindset) determines how we see our world. How we see our world determines how we experience it, which in turn determines our responses and behavior.

• Whatever it is we are looking at it is possible to see it differently and consequently experience it differently, which then opens the door to a different perspective – a different “reality” and different responses.

What I am saying is that perhaps it is time to look at the subject of OT from different angles. By changing our current view on OT so also will our approach to addressing the matter change. As far as our history or current involvement with Scientology is concerned, this does not mean “throwing out the baby with the bathwater”. In other words, keep the positives of Scientology and drop the negatives, the nature and extent of which will vary a great deal from one individual to the next.

As we proceed to look at the concept of OT from a different angle it seems that a closer look at the nature of theta – consciousness – is required. (The preference here is to use the term consciousness rather than theta or thetan). Reference to several unique characteristics of consciousness (theta) will not only put a different spin on the idea of OT but also reveal its relevance to all of existence.

Get the picture of pure white light entering a prism on one side and exiting on the other side as a spectrum of various colors, each color having a different vibration. That’s an analogy of what happens to consciousness. Pure consciousness enters “something” with a similar function as that of the prism. This something then transforms the pure consciousness into a spectrum of consciousness – various levels of consciousness – each level having a different vibration.

Four factors in particular require clarification.

1. What is meant by pure consciousness?

2. What is a spectrum of consciousness?

3. What is this “something” analogous to a prism that transforms 1 into 2?

4. How else might OT be described?


What follows is a condensed version of each factor.

1. What is meant by pure consciousness? It is consciousness that is completely un-oriented – consciousness that can not be defined or located in terms of time, space, meaning relevance or value.

There are two fundamental states of consciousness: consciousness which is un-oriented and consciousness that is oriented. The consciousness we are familiar with and to which we can relate is oriented – defined and finite – always experienced within a particular context. The consciousness “behind it” is un-oriented – undefined and infinite – beyond context.

Actually un-oriented consciousness is indescribable in terms of human logic and reason, language and symbols. Using terms like un-oriented consciousness, a static, God, the unifying field or Brahman is necessary to enter into communication on the subject of “IT”, but no such label really describes “IT”.

Everything we perceive and experience – everything in existence; mind, matter, energy, time and space, form and meaning, are the result of un-oriented consciousness having entered that “something” and then exited as oriented consciousness. Beyond typical human orientation based on material realism – logic and reason – it’s a case of a nothingness being transformed into a somethingness. It is the transformation from the infinite and immeasurable, into the finite and measurable that gives us existence and the reality we experience from day to day. .

It can be said that pure consciousness is nowhere and no-when to be found, yet, everything – all that is – depends on “IT” for existence.

2, What is a spectrum of consciousness? Consider the phenomenon of H2O being transformed from steam to water and then to ice as the temperature drops. In a way, this transformation from steam to ice may be described as steam collapsing into ice. Such a collapse would be dramatically evident if the temperature in a steaming sauna were to suddenly drop to minus 100oC.

In science there are various theories regarding waves and particles. A comment by Stephen Hawking on the subject is revealing. He says, ‘Waves and particles are concepts created by humans which aren’t necessarily concepts which nature is obliged to respect by making all phenomena fall into one category or the other’. Nonetheless, the concept of waves and particles is conveniently descriptive of certain phenomena. For instance, the idea of a wave collapsing into a particle, works well to make the point of something insubstantial and beyond containment collapsing into something much more solid and locatable. .

Using these two analogies – steam collapsing into ice and a wave collapsing into a particle – is a case of un-oriented consciousness collapsing into oriented consciousness – pure consciousness collapsing into a point of view, a particular identity, a sense of self, a fixed location, me, I, ego. Referring to Scientology terminology we can say that it’s a case of theta collapsing into a thetan.

And the point is? When reference is made to a spectrum of consciousness it is only applicable to oriented consciousness. Oriented consciousness isn’t an absolute, there are varying degrees of oriented consciousness that can be depicted as various levels on a scale – a spectrum.

To some extent a comparison can be made between the scale of oriented consciousness and the various scales of Scientology but, essentially the scale of oriented consciousness is very different.

Every aspect of existence is measurable on the scale of oriented consciousness, the details of which are much too lengthy to go into here. Nonetheless, certain fundamentals are worth mentioning.

Toward the top end of the scale, where consciousness is minimally oriented – just after un-oriented consciousness had been transformed into oriented consciousness – concepts such as time and space, cause and effect, the self and reality are fluid and “steam-like” – minimally defined and not to be taken literally. Toward the bottom end of the scale such concepts are fixed, solid and “ice-like” – maximally defined – and should be taken literally. In between the top and bottom ends of the scale are many levels – many shades of grey.

In practical terms, someone closer to the top end of the scale has a much wider attention span – a wider sense of now – than someone lower down. In a tennis match, for instance, a champion (someone closer to the top end of the scale) playing a wannabe (someone closer to the bottom) will be far more able to connect the dots connecting past, present and future. Consequently the champion is more in touch – more in the present, than the wannabe. What the champion experiences as happening now, in the present, the wannabe sees in terms of past and future. The wannabe’s view is that nothing can be done about the past and the future is a mystery. On the other hand the champion, having a wider sense of now, is capable of using what the wannabe has given up on and capable of anticipating what the wannabe can only guess at.

Note: Being maximally oriented is not the same as being well oriented. Being maximally oriented is being maximally enmeshed in MEST. Being well oriented means being in present time and in touch in an ever changing world.

3. What is this “something” analogous to a prism that transforms 1 into 2 – un-oriented consciousness into oriented consciousness? In the simplest of terms it is a “disturbance”, an event in which variation, change and or difference takes place. Call it the instant of creation even though it’s not really an instant or any unit of time, it is timeless. This is “the place” where time along with every other aspect of existence is created – where possibilities are turned into probabilities and then into reality. It can also be called the “infinite now”.

Imagine un-oriented consciousness – pure consciousness – as a pond; the water smooth as a mirror. Now imagine dropping a pebble into the pond resulting in a display of ripples. In terms of consciousness the disturbance results in vibration (ripples) where before there was none, giving us oriented consciousness.

Oriented consciousness – the consciousness we are familiar with – is essentially the experience of variation, change and difference. The point being that in the complete absence of variation, change and difference, of any kind whatsoever, of what will we be aware, of what will we be conscious? The reason we see or experience anything is due to the variation, change and difference (the ripples/vibration) that separate one thing from another – one event from the other. In the total absence of VCD we have total sameness. And as indicated in the Scientology axioms and other ancient works, this amounts to As-isness. .

4. How else might OT be described? To begin with, however the state of OT is described it can not be as an absolute. Whether the state of OT is viewed in general terms or in terms of a particular context – 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th dynamic, for instance – there are degrees of being OT. The view here is that the less consciousness is oriented in terms of time, space, meaning, relevance and value the more “OT” the individual is. In a way becoming more OT amounts to a specific oriented viewpoint un-collapsing back in the direction of pure consciousness – becoming less oriented in terms of MEST, value and significance.

Less oriented consciousness is higher up the scale of oriented consciousness, it is “closer” to the instant of creation – it is “closer” to God by any other name – so to speak.

The key indicator that we are becoming less oriented and more OT is when we become the “experience” more than we are being the “experiencer”. The sense of being the experiencer less coincides with being less defined in terms of a particular self – identity, I, me, ego.

Consider for a moment the C of S’s commitment to entice its members to buy status and putting the highest value on a defined identity – a certificated experiencer – the finite self, and it should tell one the direction in which the church is headed.

Toward the bottom end of the scale is where the self is synonymous with the “ice-like” well defined experiencer. Higher upscale as the sense of self fades and consciousness becomes less oriented – the experiencer becomes the experience – “steam-like” and less defined. Transformation from being the experiencer to being the experience is essentially what “getting in touch” means. It means letting go of a singular fixed point of view – a finite sense of self – to become enabled to assume a wider perspective – a wider sense of now.

A simple practical example of being the experience more than the experiencer would be loosing oneself totally in the music. All attention – consciousness – is transferred to the exquisite beauty of melody and voice. In that moment we let go – forget – who we are. We have become the music. Whenever sex is experienced as exceptional and mind-blowing, for instance, is when you are being the experience more than the experiencer. Put simply, this is when you are able to experience the sensations of both partners at the same time.

The following scenario tells the story of Jack, a man who has succeeded in letting go most of his reliance on identity and related “baggage” that has kept him oriented lower down scale. He has become what one might call a free spirit – someone who is very much “in touch” with a wide sense of “now” and is well in sync with a constantly changing world. Many will say Jack is “very OT”. Consequently, when Jack set out on a journey to visit a friend living on the other side of a large forest, it was far more likely that he would become the experience rather than be the “experiencer” of the journey. .

Due to his exceptional presence in the present his sense of now is wide enough to encompass much of what he is likely to encounter on the journey. It is unlikely that he will be unpleasantly surprised by anything. As Jack moves through the forest he is already, to a large extent, experiencing the journey in full within his extraordinarily wide now. As jack proceeds through the forest his intention and desire is minimally separated from him actually having what he wants, which is to get to the other side. Nonetheless, there is still enough separation between the moment of departure and the moment of arrival to qualify the journey as a time-space-oriented life experience. From where Jack is on the oriented consciousness scale, in terms of his journey, his experience is likely to go as follows:

On arrival at a stream in flood that needs to be crossed, Jack will, without effort or stress, simply use the big old tree that just happened to have fallen across the stream ten minutes earlier. He did not necessarily think beforehand that a fallen tree would serve as a bridge for getting across the stream – it just happened. He probably did not even entertain the idea that the stream might be in flood until he arrived on the scene. Actually, he made no effort to ensure that the path he intended taking was secure and passable. He did not feel compelled to be in control. At some level, Jack was aware of his connection to the environment. All he had to do was maintain his intent and focus on reaching his destination. Somehow Jack sensed that the continuously changing environment was on his side. Of all the many possibilities that might have turned into reality only those which supported his intent was realized, such as the tree falling across the stream.

After three hours into the journey and only ten minutes after feeling the first hunger pangs, would you believe it, in the middle of nowhere, Jack spots a pear tree laden with ripe fruit. Not even the sudden downpour of rain, soaking him to the bone, could put him off his stride. Deep down, Jack knew that the water falling from the heavens had its place in the overall scheme of things. As it turned out, the rain served to put out a forest fire rapidly spreading in his direction. And of course, in less than ten minutes the rain stopped, the sun appeared and within no time at all, Jack’s clothes where completely dry.

Is this magic? Not really. But so it would seem from a typical human-oriented perspective around the middle of the scale. Because of Jack minimally being Jack and maximally being the experience of the journey through the forest, he is very much part of the landscape and in touch. He is very much in sync with his environment and what is happening. His sense of existence resonates with the vibration of the forest. When it really comes down to it, Jack is “being” the environment – he is “being” the journey and he is very close to being the outcome as well. In other words, he is the experience far more than he is being the experiencer. He is not caught up in being an individual named Jack negotiating a variety of obstacles on his way to somewhere. He moves through the forest minimally burdened by the logic of a fixed identity – a self, me, I, ego. His intention is clear, he is not confused by the constant “chatter” in his head of conflicting viewpoints. His focus is not compromised or restricted by a need to be in control and a mindset constantly analyzing his position.

The example of Jack’s walk through the forest may be an exaggeration to make a point and somewhat beyond typical human experience. Yet, we have all had our moments of magic – moments when things uncannily just went our way – when the laws of nature seem to have been suspended in our favor. .

Whether in life generally or within the context of a particular event or endeavor, who hasn’t had at least one exceptionally “lucky day”? It may have been while playing golf and getting that hole in one. Or, being seated next to a company MD on a plane trip whose business you have been after for years. And, as it turns out, in conversation he realizes you have just the product he is currently looking for. Some people have gone through periods where, in spite of unforeseen circumstances, they invariably arrive on time for their meetings. If the meeting was set for 10 am, regardless of traffic or unfamiliarity with the terrain, they enter the venue of the meeting at 10, give or take a minute. How about the guy who plucked up the courage to ask a girl he just met out on a date this coming Saturday. She regretfully informs him that she is going out with her parents on that day. Having lost out on a date with the girl he decides to go to the movies with a buddy.

With several huge movie complexes in the city, each running around 5 or 8 movies at a time, imagine everyone’s disbelief and the guy’s dilemma of having to explain how he wound up at the same movie and seated, in a packed movie house, right next to the girl he asked for a date earlier that week.

All the examples above are based on actual events.

Are such incidents and thousands like them taking place around the world everyday simply coincidence? Whatever the argument in favor of coincidence it fails to explain the context related nature of such synchronicity. In other words, should one pay attention it will be noticed that often in cases of “coincidence” the individual will be repeatedly “uncannily lucky” in a particular sphere of his or her life. As for instance in the case of the guy, who regardless of circumstances, always seems to arrive on time – without really trying.

The appropriate question: Is it possible to widen the extent of our “OT” experiences – can we increase the extent of our “luck” and extend it to other spheres of our life? The answer to this question is to be found in the reason why such “magical co incidents” seem to be beyond our control. Here is the thing; let’s say something inexplicably wonderful and “magical” happens in our life, the natural response of the mind is to try and explain it – the inclination is for the self, the me, the I, the ego to get control of the “magic” – to become enabled to make it happen “at will”. When that happens, the actual source of the “magic” is bypassed and put in danger so to speak. And what is that actual source? It is that “something” which is analogues to the prism in which possibilities are transformed into reality. Revisit point 3 mentioned earlier. .

In the simplest of terms, as I see it, to become more OT begins with letting go of the self we think we are – the identity we think we cant do without – the me which is so precious to us – the I we constantly assert and confirm through our daily activities.


Joe van Staden
 

Veda

Sponsor
The term "thetan" and the term "Operating Thetan" or "OT" are Hubbardisms, and Hubbard defined them.


From the Scientology 'Tech Dictionary':

"Operating Thetan, a thetan exterior who can have but doesn't have to have a body in order to control or operate thought, life, matter, energy, space and time... an individual who can operate totally independently of his body whether he had one or didn't have one... a being at cause over matter, energy, space and time, form and life. Operating comes from 'able to operate without dependency on things'... ability to operate functionally against or with MEST and other life forms... this state of being is attained by drills and familiarity after the state of Clear has been obtained."


You're proposing keeping the Hubbardisms but changing the definition. Of course, Scientology Inc. already does that. The usual steps are:


1) Promise super human abilities

2) Take money, gain confidence, assert influence over the eager future Scientology superman&god

3) Take more money, and exert more influence

4) Eventually explain that what Hubbard originally said actually meant something else, or that "OT" really means something else.


Now to be "bend-over-backwards" fair, in Magic(k) and Mysticism there's an idea called "confusing of the planes." There is the physical plane and the spiritual plane. The physical plane is regarded as being, essentially, an illusion. One pounds one's illusory fist on the illusory table to prove that the illusory table is real, etc. From this comes a certain contempt for those unenlightened materialists who demand "proof." And this view is what Scientology taps into with its various (after the money had been taken) explanations and justifications.

A simple explanation is that we are just too dense to see the more rarefied side of things and, once acclimated to that more rarefied side, are much too rarefied to interact in a manner that would be convincing to the average dense dweller on the material plane.

And, by itself, at least that could be an honest explanation.

But that's not what Scientology does. Scientology is not an honest subject. Scientology promises one thing and doesn't deliver and then proceeds to weasel-word about it.


Since I know you're not weasel-wording, and are trying to help people, my suggestion is to abandon the Hubbardisms. :)
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
..

Scientologists have attained the state of OT, but (like Clear) only on the first dynamic.

As soon as somebody walks in the room (3rd dynamic) they are ordinary again.

This explains why a Scientologist can never demonstrate an OT ability.
 

olska

Silver Meritorious Patron
You do know, don't you, that "pure white light" is the COMBINATION of all the other colors on the spectrum? so when "pure white light" enters the prism, the prism could be said to "break" (separate) the "pure white light" into its component parts...

and actually that's a fair analogy for what the practice of "scientology" does to consciousness and the mind: it breaks it, it separates the whole into pieces.

Pieces which can easily be observed in the behavior and attitudes of scientologists (current and ex-), to often be not very functional....

just sayin
 

ILove2Lurk

Lisbeth Salander
. . .

WHERE ARE THE OT’s?

OT; Operating Thetan – the promise of Scientology. In general terms OT is described as . . .

<snip>

tl:dr

With all due respect, here's a shorter version . . . or so as I've been told:

  • See clearly without body's eyes
  • Hear clearly without body's ears
  • Speak loudly without body's vocal chords
  • Read books in the library remotely without a library card
  • Full detailed memory of one's entire existence (maybe not what you had for breakfast each day)
  • Knock hats off heads at 50 paces
  • Pull the air covers off planets
and more importantly . . . :coolwink:

  • Not cower in the reg's office
  • Not get upset when a KR or goldenrod arrives in the mailbox :omg:

PS: Honestly, I only attained the last two. :nervous:
 

Anonycat

Crusader
. . .



tl:dr

With all due respect, here's a shorter version . . . or so as I've been told:

  • See clearly without body's eyes
  • Hear clearly without body's ears
  • Speak loudly without body's vocal chords
  • Read books in the library remotely without a library card
  • Full detailed memory of one's entire existence (maybe not what you had for breakfast each day)
  • Knock hats off heads at 50 paces
  • Pull the air covers off planets
and most importantly . . . :coolwink:

  • Not cower in the reg's office
  • Not get upset when a KR or goldenrod arrives in the mailbox :omg:

PS: Honestly, I only attained the last two. :nervous:

One of the funniest to me, was that you'd remember every moment of everything from the past 4 quadrillion years, and with 57 perceptions too!

The first time I heard that joke as a kid, I thought: Now who can verify that? It would take 4 quadrillion years of pondering the past.

That's why I never got interested in it; the stunning stupidity of it all. Other than observing the strangest ever prank perpetrated on the public, and an evergreen source of hilarious stupidity. Of course there is the dark side, which is not funny. Scientology -- when you want some evil with your stupid.
 

Leon-2

Patron Meritorious
Yep.

I've said for years - on his board and elsewhere - that the biggest barrier to becoming OT is a person's insistence on being who he thinks he is. That is the biggest trap by far.
 

Jump

Operating teatime
Yep.

I've said for years - on his board and elsewhere - that the biggest barrier to becoming OT is a person's insistence on being who he thinks he is. That is the biggest trap by far.


I hope someone gets past that trifle soon, this waiting fir the first OT to appear is taking a long time . . .

:drama:
 

Student of Trinity

Silver Meritorious Patron
[T]he biggest barrier to becoming OT is a person's insistence on being who he thinks he is. That is the biggest trap by far.

I think I can imagine how that could conceivably be true. On the other hand it could also be that attitude which is the trap: in pursuit of fantasy superpowers, you give up being yourself.
 

Anonycat

Crusader
I think I can imagine how that could conceivably be true. On the other hand it could also be that attitude which is the trap: in pursuit of fantasy superpowers, you give up being yourself.

Believing that you can become Godlike and a super-spirit, is a much bigger trap than reality.
 

Veda

Sponsor
130px-JoeVanStaden-3.jpg

Joe van Staden.


Birth of the Sea org: (Obviously written, awhile back, for Independent Scientologists. I thinks Joe's views have changed somewhat since then. It does provide some historic background.http://scientolipedia.org/info/Joe_Van_Staden_-_Birth_of_the_Sea_Org,_Pt._1


Joe van Staden has written at least one article aimed at Scientologists and Independent Scientologists, with the apparent aim of weaning them off Scientology, or coaxing them out of the Scientology box. The one I read - on the South African (Independent) Scientology blog - was very helpful to most of those reading it. I was surprised that the blog moderator permitted it. Since then, unfortunately, that particular blog seems to have tightened up its moderation (censorship) policy.

Point is, Joe appears to be one of the good guys.

I've taken the liberty of editing his post below:

WHERE ARE THE OT’s?

-snip-

there are no signs of real OT’s being made.

-snip-

As I see it, if ever a state of “homo-novas” is to emerge out of the current human condition it won’t be because of C of S activity.

-snip-

Having said that raises a couple of questions, not least of which is; is a “higher state of being”, as implied by the term OT and as described by other teachings even possible? My personal opinion is, yes.

-snip-

What I am saying is that perhaps it is time to look at the subject of OT from different angles. By changing our current view on OT so also will our approach to addressing the matter change. As far as our history or current involvement with Scientology is concerned, this does not mean “throwing out the baby with the bathwater”. In other words, keep the positives of Scientology and drop the negatives, the nature and extent of which will vary a great deal from one individual to the next.

As we proceed to look at the concept of OT from a different angle it seems that a closer look at the nature of theta – consciousness – is required. (The preference here is to use the term consciousness rather than theta or thetan).

-snip-

There are two fundamental states of consciousness: consciousness which is un-oriented and consciousness that is oriented. The consciousness we are familiar with and to which we can relate is oriented – defined and finite – always experienced within a particular context. The consciousness “behind it” is un-oriented – undefined and infinite – beyond context.

Actually un-oriented consciousness is indescribable in terms of human logic and reason, language and symbols. Using terms like un-oriented consciousness, a static, God, the unifying field or Brahman is necessary to enter into communication on the subject of “IT”, but no such label really describes “IT”.

-snip-

Imagine un-oriented consciousness – pure consciousness – as a pond; the water smooth as a mirror. Now imagine dropping a pebble into the pond resulting in a display of ripples. In terms of consciousness the disturbance results in vibration (ripples) where before there was none, giving us oriented consciousness.

-snip-

The key indicator that we are becoming less oriented and more OT is when we become the “experience” more than we are being the “experiencer”. The sense of being the experiencer less coincides with being less defined in terms of a particular self – identity, I, me, ego.

-snip-

The appropriate question: Is it possible to widen the extent of our “OT” experiences – can we increase the extent of our “luck” and extend it to other spheres of our life? The answer to this question is to be found in the reason why such “magical co incidents” seem to be beyond our control. Here is the thing; let’s say something inexplicably wonderful and “magical” happens in our life, the natural response of the mind is to try and explain it – the inclination is for the self, the me, the I, the ego to get control of the “magic” – to become enabled to make it happen “at will”. When that happens, the actual source of the “magic” is bypassed and put in danger so to speak.

-snip-

In the simplest of terms, as I see it, to become more OT begins with letting go of the self we think we are – the identity we think we cant do without – the me which is so precious to us – the I we constantly assert and confirm through our daily activities.


As I mentioned earlier, IMO, using the term "OT" is problematic, however, if this message was originally meant for Scientologists, its use may be understandable.
 
Last edited:

Jump

Operating teatime
Joe van Staden has written at least one article aimed at Scientologists and Independent Scientologists, with the apparent aim of weaning them off Scientology, or coaxing them out of the Scientology box. The one I read - on the South African (Independent) Scientology blog - was very helpful to most of those reading it. I was surprised that the blog moderator permitted it. Since then, unfortunately, that particular blog seems to have tightened up its moderation (censorship) policy.

Point is, Joe appears to be one of the good guys.

I've taken the liberty of editing his post below:


<snipped for brevity>

As I mentioned earlier, IMO, using the term "OT" is problematic, however, if this message was originally meant for Scientologists, its use may be understandable.


Thanks Veda, that explains a lot. It puts a magnifying glass on the lie of OT and the Scientology cult. The cult tries to inject adherents with a 'me' that is defensive, ready with affrontery and indignation. Instilling 'number of repetitions equals certainty' is the basis of intolerance and failure to see another's point of view.

The quoted final paragraph is really the antithesis to the scientology doctrine; but could equally be replaced by the admonishment to 'grow up'.
 

Veda

Sponsor
Thanks Veda, that explains a lot. It puts a magnifying glass on the lie of OT and the Scientology cult. The cult tries to inject adherents with a 'me' that is defensive, ready with affrontery and indignation. Instilling 'number of repetitions equals certainty' is the basis of intolerance and failure to see another's point of view.

The quoted final paragraph is really the antithesis to the scientology doctrine;

Very true.

but could equally be replaced by the admonishment to 'grow up'.


IMO, the primary message seems to be to continue to explore the mysteries of consciousness.

That would seem to be an invitation to keep growing. :)
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
. . .



tl:dr

With all due respect, here's a shorter version . . . or so as I've been told:

  • See clearly without body's eyes
  • Hear clearly without body's ears
  • Speak loudly without body's vocal chords
  • Read books in the library remotely without a library card
  • Full detailed memory of one's entire existence (maybe not what you had for breakfast each day)
  • Knock hats off heads at 50 paces
  • Pull the air covers off planets

and more importantly . . . :coolwink:


  • Not cower in the reg's office
  • Not get upset when a KR or goldenrod arrives in the mailbox :omg:

PS: Honestly, I only attained the last two. :nervous:


LOL .

Cool post!

You are actually giving the true definition of an OT.

Scientologists (COS, Indies, et al) do not like when that happens. They get fidgety and start sputtering out OTHER ways of trying to explain what "OT" means. Scientologists, with all their word clearing, simply cannot clear the word "Clear" or "OT"--the very reason they are a Scientologist!

ps: I actually pulled the air cover off the planet earlier today. But then I realized that my favorite show is on TV tonight so I postulated going back in time and undid it.
 
Last edited:
Top