Date: 30 Dec 1998 04:00:21
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology
From:
[email protected] (The Pilot)
Subject: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 43 - LATE DEC 98 PILOT POSTS
POST43.txt
SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 43 - LATE DEC 98 PILOT POSTS
==========================================
Contents:
subj : Super Scio - TECH TORNADO HITS ARS (Attn FZBN, Reformer, VofFS)
subj : Super Scio - Answering "A FRIEND" on Reform
subj : Super Scio - Appologies For Mistake (Attn Dave, Keith, etc.)
subj : Super Scio - Answering Boxingnut on Hubbard
subj : Super Scio - To Stephan On Reformation Workgroups
subj : Super Scio - Answering Meech on Purif Etc.
subj : Super Scio - To Bob on Audio Self Clearing
subj : Super Scio - On The Lensman Series
subj : Super Scio - Answering VY on the Russian Translation
subj : Super Scio Humor - A NEW YEAR'S TALE
subj : Super Scio - Answering Sarah on Push '99
subj : Super Scio Tech - Meter Physics
subj : Super Scio Tech - To Oleg on Self Clearing
subj : Super Scio Tech - On Creative Processing (Attn Sarah)
subj : Super Scio Tech - To Dimitry on Buddhist Concepts, Self Clearing, etc.
subj : Super Scio Tech - AN ENERGY FLOW DRILL
subj : Super Scio - THE A AND E SPECIAL - SCIENTOLOGY LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT
subj : Super Scio - ABC - THE MISSING STORY
==========================================
subj : Super Scio - TECH TORNADO HITS ARS (Attn FZBN, Reformer, VofFS)
TECH TORNADO HITS ARS (Attn FZBN, Reformer, VofFS)
On 24 Dec 98,
[email protected] (FreeZone Bible Network)
posted "FZBN - PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN - CHANGE PROCESSING"
> PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN - CHANGE PROCESSING
>
> The FreeZone Bible Network proudly supports the following groups:
> -> Freezone Bible Association
> -> Freezone Bible Society
> -> FreeZone Bible Studies
> -> Monastic Assembly of Secular Scientologists (MASS)*
> and all of the localized chapters found in many cities throughout the
> world.
>
> * secular: 1) (of members of the clergy) not belonging to a religious
> order 2) going on from age to age; continuing through long ages
>
>
> The Freezone Bible Association has done an outstanding job in creating
> a mission statement. We would like to repeat that statement for those
> that are not familiar with it.
>
> Reform Scientology and set the work free again.
>
> ML,
> FreeZone Bible Network
(snipped the excellent but many times quoted FZBA mission
statement and the actual post of the PAB)
Welcome on board.
This is very heartwarming.
It is still amazing to me that the CofS attacks these postings
instead of encouraging them. They act as a monopolistic
business instead of delighting at the spread of LRH materials.
And they offer little of substance on their own website.
PS. Is MASS a joke or is there actually a group by this
name?
----------
And on 19 Dec 98,
[email protected] posted
"Reform Scientology ! - trade the materials freely on the net!"
> Pilot, do you see What we have done? and that was not the
> last part at all!
Yes indeed. Very Well Done.
> This is just the beginning isn't it?
That's right. There seems to be about a 1 year comm lag.
FZBA started in early 98 and suddenly there are a host of
Freezone tech posters appearing.
> THE REFORMER
-------------
And on 22 Dec 98, Secret Squirrel <
[email protected]>
posted "FREE SCN 1/4 CLEARING COURSE MATERIALS"
> THE MATERIALS OF GRADE 5 THROUGH OT II POST 1 OF 4
>
> Posted to help free Scientology from SO and OSA.
>
> Posted in support of the Freezone Bible Society.
>
> Reform Scientology Now.
>
> The work was free, keep it so.
>
> ARC,
>
> The Voice of Free Scientology
Boy Oh Boy, the posting storm is gathering force.
---------------
And FZBA itself started posting the HCL lectures.
In fact its a full fledged TECH TORNADO!
Hallelujah!
Holliday Gift Giving.
Isn't it wonderful!
Happy New Year,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio - Answering "A FRIEND" on Reform
ANSWERING "A FRIEND" ON REFORM
On 22 Dec 98,
[email protected] (A Friend) posted on subject
"FZA REPOST: The Pilot: To David Miscavige"
> As a random lurker, and as a very long term Scientologist, I had to
> laugh when I read that message.
Random lurker or hatted up by OSA?
> I find it very hard to believe that anyone who knows anything about
> the Church in the 1990's would be as far afield in his analysis and
> review of David Miscavige as this person is.
I was a bit far afield. I was trying to be nice. Sometimes I
want to give him a chance.
> Wow.
>
> And he says he wants reform.
>
> That's done already.
>
> It was gotten through in the early 1980s.
>
> I gather that was missed by him.
I was at Flag when that supposed reform happened. It would be
better described as a purge similar to those done by Stalin.
The mission network was smashed by DM ranting at them like
a little Hitler.
The Finance Police destroyed the Scientology business
community.
People who at least had some knowledge of tech such as Mayo
and Franks were forced out, made to run around poles or
whatever until they gave up.
The RPF was full to the brim as DM established his power
base.
There was a need for reform at that time. But instead of
fixing what was wrong, DM and his chronies increaded the
outpoints and made them worse. A backwards reform that
could be better termed a Deform.
I saw a real reform once. It was in 1970. It was far too
little, and yet the subject boomed during that brief
period before the reforms were lost. That reform
included things like cancellation of penalties for
lower conditions, which lasted for about a year. I watched
an org almost double in size when that was done, people
came out of the woodwork to get back on staff. Its
a pity that the SPs in management couldn't bear to
live without the ability to crush their fellow staff
members.
> The most amazing reform btw I had seen, followed by regular and steady
> expansion into new countries on a yearly basis.
Ha Ha. Flag has never been the same since DM's "Reform"
crashed the stats.
> After reading this message/missive to David Miscavige, I must say I
> sincerely doubt this person ever really was a Scientologist.
Been drilling 1.1? Or is that your natural tone?
> At least not in this decade.
>
> If anyone is reading this or even participating in the newsgroup, you
> know the door is open.
>
> It always is, just a little, but sometimes that's all it takes to
> get back on the path.
>
> ARC
> A friend
Yes, open just a little. So that if the person has a hundred
grand to pay for services, you will let them petition and work
a few hundred hours of amends projects for the priviledge of
being allowed to give you a ton of money to be sec checked.
I don't block the path with any barriers. No doors, just
a big open archway labled "free self clearing book - download
it here".
Time to wake up.
The thetan you save may be your own.
The Pilot.
==========================================
subj : Super Scio - Appologies For Mistake (Attn Dave, Keith, etc.)
APPOLOGIES FOR MISTAKE (Attn Dave, Keith, etc.)
On 16 Dec 98, Dave Bird <
[email protected]> responded to
"Super Scio - THE A AND E SPECIAL - SCIENTOLOGY LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT"
> In article <
[email protected]>, Keith Henson
> <
[email protected]> writes
> >: There was no mention of things like Gerbode's success in
> >: hitting Helen for barratry or Mayo's win in gaining joint
> >: copyrights of the NOTS.
> >
> >WHAT! This is competely new to me. You say Mayo got joint
> >copyright for NOTs?
>
> There COULD be something new I haven't heard of, but this sure
> sounds like old news where Mayo was acknowledged as
> the joint writer BUT NOT THE JOINT OWNER (because he was being
> hired to write it so did not own what he wrote).
>
> |~/ |~/
> ~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
> P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
> O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
> O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
> L |{a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"}{/a}_____________|/_______| L
> and{a href="
http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/clam/lynx/q0.html"}{/a}XemuSP4(:)
Mea Culpa!
I used a half remembered old rumor.
I got this confirmed on other lines, David Bird's statement is correct
rather than mine.
But there was still pleanty that A&E could have said about
freezone and all we got was dead silence on that subject.
Happy New Year,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio - Answering Boxingnut on Hubbard
ANSWERING BOXINGNUT ON HUBBARD
On 21 Dec 98, boxingnut <
[email protected]> posted on
subject "Re FZA REPOST: The Pilot: About Clears etc."
> Thank you very much for your honest postings pilot. I personally can't
> reconcile the tech having any validity after learning of Hubbards
> pathological lies.
This pathological liar business puts a bit of a wrong slant
on it. He was a writer, a story teller, who was paid by
publishers to spin tall tales.
Then he stumbles on something real. The DMSMH phenomena are
real and easy to reproduce. Get some willing guinea pig and
do an age flash on them. Just "Answer with the first thing that
comes into your mind when I snap my fingers". Then "How old
are you (snap)". Likely as not, you will get an unusual answer
rather than their current age. If so, then you tell them "Move
to when you were ..." (the age they stated) and see what happens.
Be sure to send them through the incident a few times until
they stop freeking out on it.
Even Miller's book has stories of people who were impressed
with the wild phenomena.
I think that Hubbard was impressed too. But he wasn't a
scientist, he was a story tell and a promoter. So he beefed
it up and exaggerated a bit and made a whole bunch of wild
assertions that were mostly guesswork.
A lot of the things in the book are wrong per later Scientology
theories. The engram chains do not generally run back to
prenatal incidents, for example. In the mid 1960s, when I
got into the subject, the book was considered outmoded and
inaccurate but was read for the general presentation of
stimulous-response and reactive behavior. Nobody in an
org would claim that it was completely accurate. Until
"Tech Degrades" and "Standard Tech" and other fanatical
ideas caused the Scientologists to engage in some kind
of double think wherein the book was considered accurate
dispite its conflicts with later Dianetics and Scientology
tech.
I did a writeup on this once called "DMSMH from Hindsight"
which is in the Pilot archives.
> He just seemed to have been a user and con-man his whole
> life. I believe he was a spoiled child with a huge, overblown,
> and grandiose opinion of himself.
He did have a big ego. But so do I and lots of other folks.
To his credit, in the early days he encouraged others to
have confidence and certainty in themselves and did not
pretend to be the only source or the only one who was allowed
to think. Of course that changed later.
> His imagination was obviously very acute and it led to his
> success as a Science Fiction writer.
Certainly.
> His biggest thrill in life, it seems, was gaining peoples
> trust and confidence in order to control them.
I don't think so. Its hard to pin this down, but my feeling
is that his real thrill was in knocking peoples socks off
with wild ideas. The little kid who tells the others
something just to get their jaws to drop. Not a con man
but an attention hungry entertainer.
He said that admiration was the most valuable particle in
this universe. Not money but admiration. He wanted to
be famous and admired. He also warns against craving
admiration, possibly because he was already a slave to it.
> I can't separate the "tech" from the man.
I can.
What if Edison used to electrocute cats (true), would
that make the lightbulb less workable?
> To me, if Hubbard has no credibility, then how can his
> discoveries be valid.
Newton had all sorts of wild alchemistic ideas. You could
put those infront of a modern physics doctorate review
board (without telling them that it was Newton) and they
would certainly say he had no credibility.
Think of Hubbard as promoting something which should
become a science rather than as the scientist in his
own right.
> And yes I did experience what I'd call positive effects during
> auditing and a number of the courses I did. I recall doing one
> process after some repair auditing while at ASHO. It was something
> about "touch that wall and this and that" and my whole perception
> of the world around me changed instantly. I was seeing everything
> in blazing brightness and colour and felt like I was on top of the
> world! It was my seventeenth birthday that day and I thought it
> was the best present I'd ever received. I couldn't stop smiling
> the whole day.
Exactly. The effect is marvelous and its easy to do. I put
a whole bunch of processes like this in the first 2 chapters
of self clearing.
The big secret is that these work on a self audited basis without
having to pay big bucks or getting your ethics in according to
the org's twisted standards.
> It wore off by the next day but it was one hell of a natural high
> while it lasted.
Of course. A few minutes of good processing and then you
have a good day or two. Then you need another similar technique
to move another step forward. And so forth. Which means
that you need to be able to do these yourself and have them
at your fingertips rather than buying a one-shot supposed
permanent handling.
> I just don't know the whole story with Hubbard. On the one hand
> I can't see him putting so much work into the subject if it were
> a total fraud. He could have scammed plenty of money with a lot
> less effort it seems.
Yes, I'm sure he could have.
> His whole previous life, if you believe books like Russell
> Millers, was one series of cons, lies and exaggerations. He
> used people like kleenex.
Miller is accurate as to recorded facts but badly slanted.
Because of fanaticism, the org wouldn't talk to him. So its
a one sided view. I would love to see a really comprehensive
unbaised account of Hubbard, but everybody is so strongly
pro or con that what you get is extremes.
> I don't know if I believe in past lives anymore.
I went through a period of distrusting even that, wondering
if I was just mocking it all up, imagining things to remember
rather than actually remembering anything. Eventually I
proved it for myself (see Super Scio) but my proof was
subjective and wouldn't prove it to you. Bascially, I found
things in the history books which matched my recall. But
of course I could have looked at the history books first,
so it only proved it to me and not to other people. You
would have to do the same, and that would mean getting
enough accurate recall to come up with things that could
be looked up.
And the recalls are often inaccurate early on, being
distorted by charge and altered to fit what one is familiar
with. It was only a few years ago that I noticed the
gas lights in an incident I was running. Up until that
point, everything I'd run always seemed to have nice modern
electric lighting. Things like sitting in a tavern in
Constantinople with it lit up like a modern coffee shop.
Now I look back at the same incidents and the lighting
was terrible, torches or oil lamps or whatever, things
were horribly DIM indoors in the old days.
So you need to run lots of recall as a first step. And
then maybe you can prove it for yourself. I put an
easy solo technique in self clearing for this.
> I'm very cynical now. I snort whenever shows about ESP or
> UFO's pop up on the tube.
I have had some real ESP experiences.
And yet there is lots of BS and exaggerations and wild
guesswork in this area.
I have seen the exact same proofs used for Atlantis, UFOs,
and Hollow Earth (talk about off the wall ideas). All 3
were using the same source book (Donally's Ante-Deluvian
world - a good compendium of wild data) to prove different
theories. My conclusion was that Donally had really proven
that there was something fishy going on but that you could
spin up a hundred theories about what that fishyness meant.
The same goes for Charles Fort's wild collection of data.
> A number of people have mentioned to me that "one shouldn't
> throw out the baby with the bathwater". I'm not sure there
> is a baby.
Its hard to see it after its been thrown out.
> Maybe it's something more like a half formed mutant.
Now that is a possiblity. But even that serves to indicate
that there is something here which must be researched.
> Maybe there is no diamond in the rough. Maybe there is.
> All I know is I'd never trust Scientology again and despite
> everything I've personally experienced, I can't endorse the
> tech either.
Well I certainly don't trust the orgs. And policy has let
me down much too often. I find that the tech has a much
higher batting average, but even there I do not accept
things without question, it is far from perfect.
> It seems like you have far more positive experiences with the
> subject than I.
That seems to be the case. I had the advantage of getting
involved before Standard Tech and I was at an outer org where
old hands were keeping up the traditions from the early days.
And I trained as an auditor right away, which means that I
never swalloed various stupid ideas promoted by the registrars
and so forth.
> I'd like to hear more from you. E-mail me if you'd like.
I prefer to keep discussions out in the open on the newsgroup
for the sake of the lurkers.
> Boxingnut
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio - To Stephan On Reformation Workgroups
TO STEPHAN ON REFORMATION WORKGROUPS
On 16 Dec 98, "Stefan Siegmann" <
[email protected]> asked on
subject "This is to the Pilot and everyone who is realy intersted
in the reformation of the Curch of Scientology to a "free community
of scientologists"
> Hello Pilot,
>
> How do you think about forming a workgroup against CoS in the internet?
>
> I mean a dynamic connection of those who realy want to push the reformation
> of CoS forward?
Yes, do so by all means.
Actually there are a few in existance already.
Lots of people are doing things, both visible and behind the
sceens.
Big solid targets are delightful to the CofS who has big bucks
and big guns.
Instead we are fighting a gorilla action, small flexible groups
and insubstantial targets.
In my personal contacts (off the net), I have a small circle of
highly trained old time Scientologists who are backing me in
this. They in turn connect to other people.
On the net, I have finally setup covert email contacts with a
few people that I consider to be highly trustworthy, and they
in turn, of course, connect to other people.
I prefer, of course, to keep everything (especially technical
discussions) right out here on the newsgroup, the only exception
being tactical information which would aid the CofS in targetting.
> A circle of people who have the power to move forward to break the spell of
> the management.
>
> To get everyone out of the CoS and build up a new community without all this
> ballast of entheta!!
Personally I have a two pronged approach - 1) Bypass CofS by
encouraging Freezone Scientology, and 2) Handle by encouraging
an internal reform movement.
Both of these are supported by things like -
a) Getting Scientologists onto the net (promoting fza.org etc.)
b) Spreading free self clearing
c) Posting tech to the web (encourage FZBA etc.)
d) Pushing for reform (writing REFORM NOW on promo pieces and
sending them back to the org etc.)
And most important, by covert word of mouth from person to
person.
A really big help would be freezone exposure in the media.
Ralph almost pulled it off (filmed by ABC) but was blown
away by CofS offering celebritiy interviews to ABC (and
probably threats as well - the carrot and the stick).
Our story does need to be heard. It disgusts me that DM told
the IRS that Scientology "has no sects" and got away with it.
I wonder how many of the celebrities would support persecuting
other Scientologists if they realized that those were real
people who believed in the tech instead of evil squirrels?
> Where it is possible to handle freely in every aspect!
>
> Isn�t that a "starhigh goal"?
>
> But i know thai if the right people come together we will have a big win.
>
> The "free community of Scientologists"
>
> freedom
>
> Stefan
The right people are coming together bit by bit. The
wins are mounting.
One thing to allow for is the infernally long comm lags.
We are pushing at something which has a tremendous inertia
and where the comm lines are heavily suppressed.
My own observation is that you have to repeat something
over and over again and then suddenly it starts getting picked
up and begins to build like an avalanch.
So you have to take a firm position and persist in repeating
the communication until it gets through.
I think that right now the snowball is rolling and that sooner
or later a mountain is going to fall on DM's head.
Yours in Freedom,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio - Answering Meech on Purif Etc.
ANSWERING MEECH ON PURIF ETC.
On 15 Dec 98, "Meech" <
[email protected]> asked on
subject "Pilot: Can you give me some information"
> Hi,
>
> I am thinking about doing the Purification (Jogging/Sauna) part
> and the TR and Objectives course. Can you fill me in on how
> these are going to change me?
>
> I live in Amsterdam (The Netherlands)
>
> thanx,
> Jurgen
A TR's and Objectives co-audit is very nice. This gives one
an opportunity to learn basic auditing skills and these
processes help one to get into present time and improve one's
perception etc. This should be fun and helpful unless the
course is taught in an extremely poor manner.
As to the purif, I made gains when I did it but I have some
reservations.
There seem to have been some problems with the original version
and the first year of standard delivery at the complex in LA has
some horror stories associated with it.
When I did it, (slightly after that time), the case supervisors
were:
a) avoiding using niacin doses above 500 mg (despite the
bulletins calling for 5000). The rundown seemed to flatten
nicely at this lower dosage and there have been warnings on
the net about possible liver damage at high niacin dosages.
b) getting a competant medical checkup before starting and
tailoring the program (less exercise, etc.) as recommended
by the doctors for the individual.
c) Strong warnings to get out of the sauna immediately if
one felt overheated regardless of stats and stict admonishions
to not try to push to hard on this. One of the rules was to
take as many breaks as one felt like instead of doing
marathon sessions in the sauna.
d) Including a homeopathic tissue salt combination called
Bioplasma (available in health food stores) in addition to
the vitamins.
I do not know if they are delivering it this way now or if
they have gone back to the original rote standards which
might be dangerous.
I had some nice physical gains from the purif. The most amazing
was that cigarette tar from my lungs oozed out of my back
and put a heavy gloppy stain on the towel I was leaning
back against.
I do not feel that it did anything for my case, but I
don't have much of a drug history.
I wrote up some things on the purif in chapter 4 of Super
Scio.
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio - To Bob on Audio Self Clearing
TO BOB ON AUDIO SELF CLEARING
On 20 Dec 98,
[email protected] (Robert "bob" Hummels)
asked on subject "ATTN: PILOT audio"
> Pilot,
>
> I noticed an important question on ARS.
> It was a reference to how the CofS treats
> disabled person. After some thought,
> I asked the folks at FZA.ORG what their
> opinion would be about a RealAudio Version
> of your Self-Clearing book on the web-site.
> This would make a version possible for
> the blind. After posting this, I was
> also informed that Lynx has some type
> of Braille translator available.
>
> Thoughts/comments?
>
> bob
I'd be happy if somebody wanted to make a real audio of
the book. I don't know who would do the work or who
would have space to put it up, but it sounds like a good
idea.
A blind person I knew years ago had been given all sorts
of helpful software from some US Government program.
He could get ordinary text files read to him by his
sound board in his PC. But I'm not sure how good this
worked.
Another in a software department that I did some contract
work for had a hand held device that he held over an
ordinary CRT screen (on an IBM mainframe) and it beeped
at him (through an earphone) and with that he could
read ordinary text on the screen. He was a programmer.
Note that I made mention of disabled people and how to
alter the processes for them in the first chapter of
Self Clearing.
I do not believe in not-ising disabled persons or regulating
them to the scrap heap as down stats. I have known some
very able and intelligent disabled people.
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio - On The Lensman Series
ON THE LENSMAN SERIES
On 12 Dec 98,
[email protected] (LR1467) posted on subject
"Re The Lensman Series !!!"
> WHO SPEAKS FOR BOSCONE?
>
> Bob wrote re: There are 8 books in the Lensman Series:
>
> >Maybe....but amazon.com only has v.1 - v.6
> >and v.5 is not available from the publisher yet.
> >(I back ordered a copy though :)) They run $12.00
> >per book, plus shipping.
>
> The 6 books now considered to be the series (also in 1982 by Berkley) are
> Triplanetary, First Lensman, Galactic Patrol, Gray Lensman, Second Stage
> Lensman, Children of the Lens.
>
> In 73, Pyramid Books also listed Masters of the Vortex - the "final adventure"
> in the series (originally titled The Vortex Blaster.) In 78, Jove Books
> included Vortex and also Spacehounds of IPC in the series, making 8 total.
> Spacehounds is now listed as part of the Skylark series, I believe.
>
> Anyway, they are good reading.
>
> It appears that the author copyrighted them as books after their appearance in
> the scifi mag years earlier.
>
> After his death in 65, rights were obtained from his wife (the
> re-publishing by many paperback pubs in early 70's-80's.) I assume
> she has died also and maybe the rights are now with the offspring.
>
> Anyway, I may just order them myself. My old books are pretty worn from
> reading.
>
> Do they have Spacehounds listed? I loaned mine years ago and it never came
> home.
>
> The story about LRH saying these books were "right off the track" came from
> 1971, someone who knew him on Flag.
>
> LR - getting carried away with scifi trivia B-]
The original Lensman series was only 5 books begining with
First Lensman. Triplanetary was an "events leading up to" book
written after the original series, I think it dates from the 1950s
whereas the original series is from the 1930s.
Triplanetary bears the same relationship to the Lensman series
as does "The Hobbit" to "The Lord of the Rings".
Vortex Blaster is a disrelated story where the hero happens to
be a lensman.
These original 5 books form a cohesive whole, a single story in 5
volumes, and I recommend reading it in that manner.
Doc Smith's style is that of 1930s pre-Campbell Sci Fi and that
will put some people off, but these are great stories none the less.
Doc's mockup of the Lensmen is to a great degree OT as we
know it in Scientology. Even the Lenses themselves (which
come from a higher civilization) are later shown to be simple
crutches for beginners to learn how to focus their powers
of concentration and thereby work OT tricks rather than the
actual source of OT powers.
And the books progress through what might be called a series
of OT levels, First Stage Lensman, etc.
And eventually we learn that the higher civilization which
created the lenses achives their OT abiities by practicing
visulaization techniques, in other words mockup processing.
Certainly this was part of the groundwork leading to the
1952 concepts of OT.
Another interesting point is that in the story the heros
trace back through layers and layers of opposition to
eventually find the true villians who are back of everything.
Accounts of Doc from others who knew him (God knows where
I read these, it has been many years) generally seemed to
describe him as some kind of a polymath super genius who
was an expert in many fields.
I've been told that the Lensman books were extremely
popular on the SO ships in the early seagoing days and
were being passed around among the staff.
Note that one of the titles is "Galactic Patrol" and the
books do indeed contain the concept of a Galactic Patrol
of Lensmen (OTs) guarding civilization. That in turn
would seem to be part of the inspiration for the Galactic
Patrol Mutiny within the Sea Org in the late 70s which
lead to CBR's establishment of Freezone Europe.
The books are not only entertaining but also inspiring,
presenting very high ideals.
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio - Answering VY on the Russian Translation
ANSWERING VY ON THE RUSSIAN TRANSLATION
On 25 Dec,
[email protected] (MegaSquirrel) replied to VY's earlier
posting on "To THE PILOT Re the translation of the 'Super Scio' book"
Since he correctly guessed my intentions, I'll quote his reply
first.
> Unlike Tilman and Rob Clark, I don't think VY is an OSA plant, his
> desire to publish the book seems sincere. I think we should applaud
> him for his efforts.
>
> I'm not the Pilot's agent or anything, but I think he would like to
> see his works reach as many people as possible. Right now he's just
> giving all his stuff away for free on the net, and he also gave
> permission to a guy in California to sell English hardcopies on a
> limited basis (go see www.fza.org)
>
> There was a guy named Oleg who wanted to translate Self-Clear book and
> publish it in Russian. This was back in Jan. 1998
> Here is the Pilot's post in response:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > [snip]
> > I see your problem. I would very much like to see the book
> > get into the hands of the Russian people.
> >
> > But I do wish to retain the copyrights and do, in the long run,
> > expect to receive normal royalties on my writings when they are
> > published professionally.
> >
> > But now is not a time for taking profits and I wish to encourage
> > your efforts in this area. And I feel that the Russian people
> > deserve a break after the years of hardship.
> >
> > So publish your Russian edition. I will forego any royalties
> > on the first ten thousand copies.
> >
> > When your volume surpasses that, we will find some way to
> > handle it in a reasonable manner. I might well be out of
> > hiding by that point.
> >
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > The Pilot
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> from Pilot post archive 20, Jan 1998
Yes, I'll go along with this. I'll waive royalites on VY's first
ten thousand copies to encourage it to be published.
------
Here is VY's original posting and some more response from me.
On Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:43:30 +0300, "VY" <
[email protected]> wrote:
>Dear Pilot,
>
>I'm glad to inform you that your book 'Super Scio' is now being translated
>into Russian (and I'm one of the two translators working on it). About 25%
>of the translation is already done.
Excellent.
>So we, the publisher and the translators, ask you to grant your permission
>for the publication of the book. If the permission is granted, it will be
>published by the 'New Planet' publishers as a solid book with a large enough
>circulation. This publication is intended as part of a planned series of
>books on the subject of clearing technology written by former
>scientologists.
As above.
>As far as I know, you were in contact with other people on the subject last
>year. But they don't seem to have made much progress since then. We're
>prepared to offer the same conditions, i.e. 10% from the sales is yours when
>you reveal your identity. In this case please contact the publisher
><
[email protected]>. We have a strong intention to bring the publication to 'EP
>' and are planning to present the book in Sept. 1999.
Please pass this on to him.
>As we all know, the book contains a great deal of technical and experimental
>information, which apparently requires some scientology background, but some
>parts, especially 1,2 & 4, may be of great interest to a less prepared
>reader. So we decided to take the risk of issuing the book.
The book is excessively large for publication. You should probably
consider only doing the first 6 chapters. If popular, the rest could
be a sequal.
>In order to attract the reader's attention and make the edition possible the
>publisher made some conditions or, rather, wishes. The main point of which
>is how to present the book and make it more interesting and understandable
>to the reader.
>So, first of all, we ask you to write a preface to the Russian edition. You
>may know about the current situation in this country. And how much
>restimulation it is to the people and of what exactly. In fact, since 1913
>or so the emotional tone of the population has been constantly dropping and
>most practicing auditors know that it now lies somewhere between 0.5-1.5 on
>average. You've probably heard of such thing as the 'Basic Russian Engram':
>We (and of course the readers) would be very pleased if you say a few words
>about it.
Unfortunately I do not really have a lot of information.
Can you write up a bit more on this or point me to some good sources?
It was quite difficult to get the Scientology group engram that
I described on the Scientology Reformer's Homepage into view.
I really needed to do the "What is and isn't true" first just
to get a clear look at the subject.
>Another thing that the publisher would welcome is some kind of introduction
>for the novices on the basics of scientology. That would certainly make the
>rest of the book more interesting to a beginner. Especially so, because some
>parts of the book, e.g. Part II, are a real gem for all kinds of spiritual
>seekers.
As posted, the book is really aimed at people who are already
familiar with Scientology.
The best introduction for Chapter 1 is the Scientology Reformer's
Home Page. It might be best to include that as a prefix to the
chapter.
But both of these are aimed more at the politics of Scientology
rather than the tech.
Better would be to rearrange the sequence of the materials.
Place chapter 2 first. Then chapter 4 with its basics of auditing.
Next the Reformer's page and chapter 1 to advise of the current
situation. And finally the advanced materials of chapter 3, 5,
and 6.
In that sequence it would only need a short introduction to
Scientology since the auditing basics come early.
But note that the real introductory book is Self Clearing.
>Then, there are lots of references to other sources, especially the
> works by LRH. It might be a good idea to include in the book as an
> addition some extracts from his works (this is absolutely possible,
> because according to Russian laws you can quote up to 25 % of the
> original text). Could you please provide some guidelines as to what
> materials and quotes to include.
My first though is the story of how the monistary fell from the
PDC tapes and then a bit about secrets from Dianetics '55.
And perhaps something from Creation of Human Ability. And
a bit about the need to run past lives from the begining of
History of Man.
>And, finally, the book will require a comprehensive index and a good
>glossary. You may already have those, or some draft of them.
Not at all.
You could make an index by tagging important points in a word
processing program and generating it. Probably a short one
would suffice since the material is tightly grouped as to content.
As to a glossary, I have thought of doing one for Self Clearing.
Perhaps a single glossary could serve for both. The problem
is when will I get around to this. But you are right in that
it needs to be done so I will begin thinking about what should
go into it.
> Or you may just
>give us some guidelines about how to make them and what to include. Or, may
>be, some of those people, who prepared the internet editions of the book,
>have something of this kind.
Not that I know of.
>We would very much appreciate if you post it.
>
>Thank you
>and my best regards
>VY
An exciting project.
Even reduced to 6 chapters the extra material makes the book
seem huge. Perhaps it should only be the first 4 chapters.
And another thought is to include the first chapter of
Self Clearing in an appendix in case the new reader had
an urge to fool around with processes.
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio Humor - A NEW YEAR'S TALE
HUMOR - A NEW YEAR'S TALE
Casey Clam awoke with a grin on his face.
It was New Year's Eve AD 99 and the Dianetic Centennial
was about to begin.
And his stats had been up, so he even had the day off
with no obligatory courses to attend, a truely rare
treat.
He whistled "Onward Ethics Soldiers" as he dressed and
rakishly selected his Hub-the-poet beret instead of the
conservative Fedora that he usually wore.
He was a teller at a lending house, so called ever since
the word bank had gained a dirty connotation, and their
dress code was very strict. But he was free of that for
today.
Then he went down to the garage and climbed into the car
as he was required to do each morning. Of course it didn't
start because there had been no gasolene available to the
public for years. But standard tech works and no further
technology could be developed after Hubbard's death, so
there was no choice but to use a 20th century automobile
that burned a fuel long gone.
Next he ritually intoned the formula, assigning the car
a condition of Danger and announcing that he was going
to bypass and handle. Then he got on his bicycle and
rode off as he did every morning.
But this morning he had no obligations, so he decided
to go down to the supermarket and do some shopping.
It was only a few blocks, but he still nearly had an
accident, skidding dangerouly close to a new pit that
had opened up on Hollywood Boulevard. The highway
department had put up a big sign saying "This street
is Fixed", but as usual, he couldn't seem to agree
with the sign and the hole remained in his universe.
He could only hope for the day when he became OT and
could see the street as fixed when it was so labled.
Finally he was in the market picking through the poor
selection on the nearly bare shelves. Even so, he
found a fine treat in the form of a yummy choclate
cake along with the usual bags of theta rice and
superpower beans.
But when he headed for the checkstands, he couldn't
find Cinthia, his usual checker girl. So it was with
a sense of forboding that he entered an aisle managed
by a formidable looking woman with a fearsome frown on
her face.
"And what have we here? Choclate Cake? Could this be a
violation of Precept Number 4, Maintain a Healthy Diet?"
she said, staring pointedly at his slightly protruding
belly.
"Ah ... Uh ..." he stumbled.
"Should I call the store sec checker or do you want to
put that back?" she asked.
"I guess I'd better put it back, wouldn't want to be
out ethics after all" he said nervously.
So finally he ended up with nothing more than rice
and beans plus some soup whose cans could be donated
to the local auditor's association after he had eaten
their contents.
On his way out, he had to use the store's restroom.
That was when found out what had happened to Cinthia.
She was standing there, dirty and bedraggled with a
toothbrush in her hand as he exited the stall.
"What happened to you?" he asked.
"I'm not supposed to talk," she said, pointing to the
dirty grey rag around her arm. "They put me in liability
for letting downstats like you get away with cakes and
things."
He grimaced and walked off, wishing bitterly that he'd
thought to flush twice.
Then it was back to home, carefully balancing the bicycle
with its heavy load of rice and beans.
But he cheered up as he remembered that tonight he would
get to have the annual glass of champaign at the Org's
party. It was one of the few times when alcohol was
permitted and he did indeed like the stuff. Perhaps they
would even give out seconds considering that it was
the centenial.
But as he thought of the pleasant gaity that was
to come, he realized with horror that he had a
terrible present time problem, one that might
well ruin his life.
It was a misunderstood word actually, a word in a stupid
new years song, and he didn't know what it meant.
And they would sing the song again at the Org's
Party tonight.
He'd tried to look it up in the dictionary, but he
couldn't find Oldangsine. Perhaps it was a psych word,
maybe refering to Old Anxieties or something like that
which had been purged from the dictionaries as psych
entheta. Or maybe he wasn't spelling it right.
Whatever the reason, he had been unable to clear it up
himself on the sly and he didn't dare go to the word
clearer because he would have to admit that he'd had
a misunderstood all these years. In actual fact he'd
simply never noticed the word until last year, but
they wouldn't believe that. They'd be sure he'd had
MUs and it was sung at the org and everyone knows that
MUs lead to overts, so they'd insist that he had overts
on the org and put him in the RPF for sure.
And the aqueduct which fed Southern California was
crumbling again, so the state was hungry for RPFers.
Once in, he'd never get out again, there was just
too much work to do and too many ways to keep people
in.
Maybe he could brave it out again this year, but he
was sure it would show on his face, and there might
even be a real OT reading minds at the New Years party
and that would finish him for sure.
He couldn't risk it, he had to get the word defined
before tonight. And he couldn't miss the party either.
The only excuss was sickness and all sickness equals
PTS. Being declared PTS would certainly cost him
his job at the conservative lending house and he didn't
relish cleaning toilets for the rest of his life.
So he had to get the word defined.
But how?
Anybody he asked might betray him, and maybe they wouldn't
know the answer either.
He paced back and forth looking for an answer, going
from the bedroom with its Freewinds pillow cases to
the kitchen with its Mary Sue memorial teapot and
back again.
Finally he pulled up a hardbacked chair and sat in the
TRs postion, assuming the stare and praying intensely
"Please Ron, Help Me!"
And then he cognited on his one chance, a risky endeavor
but one so out of character for him that he might get
away with it even though it was grossly out ethics.
He would go to the Squirrel Easy that was rumored to
be hidden in an abandoned warehouse down on Hudson
Street. Surely the evil squirrels would know the
definition of that damn psych word.
Soon he was peddling his bicycle as fast as he could,
hurrying to cover the many miles to downtown before
it got too late.
Once at the door, he couldn't remember the password
that he'd heard whispered in the exective washroom
at the lending house. He was ready to start crying
when it finally came to him. "Mayonaisee" he cried
with a sense of triumph.
"Mock up a way to keep your yap shut until you're
inside the sound proofing" snarled the gatekeeper.
"Sorry," said Casey. "I've never been here before,
what to I do?"
"First you pays the admission. Then you take off
your clothes and put them in one of those lockers.
And put on this mask so nobody can recognize you."
In a short matter of time, Casey was stepping out
onto a huge dance floor and struggling mightily
to keep his TRs in at the sight of more nude bodies
than he'd seen in his entire life. Nude, that is,
except for the party masks that everyone was wearing.
He just stood there gaping for the longest time
until a girl came over.
"Shut your mouth, you'll catch flies," she said.
"FIrst time at a Squirrel Easy?"
He nodded dumbly.
"Well, you don't look so bad. Wanna make a deposit
in my bank?" she said, gesturing towards her crotch.
"Na.. Na.. No," he managed to squeek out. "I have
a squirrel question."
She laughted. "There haven't been any real squirrels
for years. The thought police would've shut us
down long ago if there were any here. We just practice
out 2D."
"Oh No!" he cried. "I'm in the RPF for sure unless
I can get a definition for Oldangsine."
"Hub Farts!" she exclaimed. "Well, let me ask around,
you paid the fee so you're at least entitled to some
help."
She went off and he just stood there, trying to keep
his TRs in without staring at all the banks that
everybody was parading around.
When she came back, she had another girl in tow.
He tried to resist but finally his confront collapsed
completely and he began staring down at her breasts.
"Those are just secondaries," he justified to himself,
"not the core of the bank."
"She knows a song that her mother taught her," the
first girl said. "This is the real origin of the
word before the org alter-ised it. Its by Alan
Sherman."
The other girl came up close to him and began to
sing in his ear. He had to lean close to hear her
over the dance music and that brought him dreadfully
close to passing out from the closeness of her breasts.
"There was a man, his name was Lang, and he had a neon
sign. Mr. Lang was very old you see, so they called
it Old Lang's Sign."
"At last", he thought, "I am saved. Now I know what
it means!"
He almost leaned over and kissed her, but he felt his
R6 restimulating and feared that his bank would rise
up. So instead he hurried towards the door, shouting
his thanks behind him.
It was getting dark as he pedelled home, but he still
had enough time to dress and make it to the org before
the party started.
And he was so keyed out that when the registrar asked
him for his New Year's resolution, he signed over an
entire ten thousand dollars. Money that he could ill
afford, but he didn't mind in his joy at escapeing
the RPF.
"You've managed to pay for HSSSC, the Hubbard Standard
Shoe Shining Course," the reg exclaimed with excitement.
And Casey beamed with joy as his resolution was
announced to the crowd.
"But my really big win will come later," he thought
to himself.
For at midnight, he planned to scream "Old Lang's
Sign" at the top of his lungs when they sung the song.
Here's To a Happy New Year of Joking and Degrading,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio - Answering Sarah on Push '99
ANSWERING SARAH ON PUSH '99
On 19 Dec 98, "Sarah Hefver" <
[email protected]> posted
on subject "Self-Clear push '99 (ATTN PILOT)"
> Whiteboy came up with the following idea for the latest push on the
> selfclearing book.Runs like this...
>
> Posters in every Student Union room within 30 miles advertising a free
> theraputic technique to get over whatever is bothering them,send a floppy
> disc and SAE to us and get the stuff by return post.
> We'll also be giving away the free study course from fza.org for those
> who need it.
>
> Working on the exact wording but...hey,its time to rock n' roll!
>
> Sarah
Good Idea.
I wonder if it could also be passed around like a chain
letter - "make 5 copies and send them to your friends".
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio Tech - Meter Physics
METER PHYSICS
There have been a few posts recently on ACT calling the e-meter
into question.
---------
On 26 Dec 98,
[email protected] (Nhcc1011) posted on subject
"E-Meter is reliable?"
> A Study of E-meter Frequency Response
>
> An Electrical Review by Perry Scott, BSEE
(snipped a very long and detailed analysis)
Thank you for the analysis.
If I understood correctly, you basically proved that the
meter is fairly insensitive to freequency.
Since it is supposed to be freequency insensitive, that would
seem to be desirable.
Personally, I would like to see some work done with EEGs and
freequency measurements (alpha, beta, theta waves, etc.) in
combination with meter measurements and known Scientology
process reactions (how does an FN or an RS look in terms of
waveforms etc.). I think that we might learn something.
But of course I'm into research and "squirrel" ideas.
As far as the meter goes, it is supposed to be measuring
resistance, not freequency or waveforms.
The system is undamped because we want to see an instantaneous
change in resistance (not a freequency but a one shot shift
in the resistance). However, you are probably correct in
indicating that "critical damping" (damping just enough to
kill any artificially introduced swing due to momentum) would
be better. However a computerized meter (below) would be
a better way to go.
> Of course, a modern system would dispense with the mechanical
> movement entirely and use an analog-to-digital converter inside
> a PC (a.k.a. SoundBlaster), displaying the result on the computer
> screen. It is also noted that a fully-loaded PC is also less
> expensive than an E-meter and you can even use it to surf the Web
> when you're done auditing your buddies.
Absolutely right.
> Hubbard's notion of "carrier waves" is pure unadulterated hoakum.
Here I have to agree. He was just misusing the term. I assume
that he called it that to explain why a small voltage was being
run through the PC. It is obviously not a carrier, just a
simple DC flow so that one can see how much the body resists
its passage (necessary in any resistance measurement).
I imagine that he was nagging at Matheson (or Don Breeding)
and they used a fancy term with lots of significance to get
him off their backs and he repeated it to the students.
For the lurkers, Ron was not trained in electronics. He
simply wanted something that indicated "charge" to help
find incidents and so forth. The first generation meters
(1952) were designed by Matheson (who was, I think, already
working on meters prior to Scientology).
These first generation meters did not quite do what they
were theoretically expected to do. For example, the tone
arm was really supposed to be measuring tone and it took
Ron and Matheson quite awhile to cognite that people did
not get cheerful when you drove their TA up to 4.0.
Eventually Ron and Matheson had a falling out (1954) and
use of the meter was abandoned. The argument might have
been about the "tone" readings because later in the 1950s
Matheson was still selling his meters with a booklet that
showed how driving the TA above 4 would make one cheerful
and improve one's wellbeing.
Around 1957, Don Breeding revisited the area and designed
the second (modern) generation of e-meters and they
came back into use in the subject. This was done at
Ron's request, but again the electronics were not done
by him.
--------
And also on 26 Dec 98,
[email protected] (Nhcc1011) posted
on subject "What do yuo think?"
> Biophysics and the E-Meter
> by Chris Schafmeister
(another long article, mostly snipped)
He primarily discusses membrane ion channels and how their
opening and closing might affect the body's resistance.
I'm not familiar with this area so I'm simply going to
assume that he has presented an honest and accurate
statement on the process involved.
I'm not sure that he proved anything except that the body's
resistance can vary. And I'm not sure if he is modeling
the process that we are actually measuring. Showing one
way that the resistance varies does not exclude other
methods.
Anyone who has done the emeter drills well can easily
observe two classes of reactions, one of which is a
purely physical one which auditors learn to ignore.
What I don't know is if Chris' model represents the
process occuring in a mental read or in a physical read.
I'm not prejudiced either way in this regard. Obviously
the meter cannot actually measure the thetan but only
measures how the body is affected by the thetan's impingement
and Chris' description would be as good as any for this.
But is it the right one and can we learn anything from that?
Perhaps this might be of use to somebody someday but I
can see little application right now. Then again, pure
research sometimes provides a key fact that becomes useful
later.
> One thing I did notice while I was holding onto the E-meter
> electrodes is that the needle would tend to jump up and then
> back down after erratic intervals of several seconds.
Stage 4 needle reaction. Nothing else will read while this
is going on.
> The person who was showing me the E-meter administered the
> standard Scientology "Pinch test". The "Pinch test" consists of
> pinching the E-meter holder and watching the meter react. Then
> about 30 seconds later the pincher tells the "pinchee" to remember
> the pinch and both watch the meter react. This can be repeated
> several times.
It almost always works. I've done these many times.
But you can't do it over an RSing needle. Or one that is
theta bopping. Or even an FN (well maybe you could read it
through a small FN or kill the FN by pinching him real hard
if you had a mean streak).
And of course it would be hopeless to do one over a stage 4.
The physical pinch might still react on the body motion,
but it would never react on recalling the pinch.
> What I noticed was that the needle remained as erratic as
> before the "Pinch test" and that we would watch the meter
> until a needle movement of appropriate size was registered
> before I was asked again to "remember the pinch".
>
> The response was far from instantaneous and personally
> indistinguishable from the meter response before the "test".
I'm sure it was indistinguishable. That's just the stage 4
going on with its regular pattern. See E-Meter Essentials,
which was posted to the net awhile ago.
The idiot doing the pinch test probably just sat there like
a dummy with a shit eating grin on his face. Just clueless
about what was going on.
The demonstrator's only hope was either to squirrel around
to turn off the stage 4 (which would get him in hot water
with ethics) or to have given an excuse and declined to do
the pinch test as soon as he saw the stage 4 when Chris picked
up the cans.
And I'm not sure that we even know what a stage 4 means.
Yet another point for further research.
> The crux of my theory is that a scientologist learns
> through feedback during auditing and feedback from the
> E-meter to exert control over the semi-automatic mechanisms
> that control enough membrane bound ion channels to change
> their body resistance enough to provoke a measurable
> response in the E-meter. It is biofeedback in its most
> basic sense.
Rediculous. But you probably need to be a student in a
loosly controlled academy where the students play around
and experiment to be sure of this. And it hasn't been
like that in CofS since the old days.
Students love to play at trying to influence the meter.
And actually you can do it. But it is by the exact
opposite means.
Knowing, for example, that you have a really good experience
which always FNs (maybe just your favorite sexual encounter),
you ignore what the auditor is saying and recall that
nice experience instead and thereby produce an FN to satisfy
the auditor who might be sec checking you or whatever.
Normally you don't do this as a PC because you want to
find things to run out. But you sure do try it as a
student, and sec checks and other obnoxious actions are
fair game for faking meter reads.
But my point is that any manipulations work in accordance
with what is know about the meter rather than contrary to
it. And this stuff works predictably on people walking
in off the street without any time for biofeedback training.
> If you control the E-meter, then the E-meter can not tell you
> anything that you don't already know.
Even if you don't control it, it can't tell you anything
that you don't already know.
The point is that it reacts on things under the surface that
you are not quite letting yourself know or remember. But
you can get to them just as well if you process a little
bit in the area to push your awareness deeper.
So all it really does is make it faster to asses for what
area to look in.
It is not an Oiji board.
> Using an E-meter to tell how you feel is just silly,
Quite true.
> but the real self delusion comes in when you use the E-meter
> to "verify" the many bizarre statements Hubbard made about
> ancient evil space emperors, evil spirits crawling all over
> you and past lives where you spent all your time wandering
> around biting things (I'm not joking) or polishing bricks
> (again, no joke).
Actually, here I have to agree.
The meter only reacts on "charge" rather than absolute truth.
A little kid imagines a monster under the bed. He gets very
upset about it. He does this for a year. For him the monster
is very real. Later he forgets.
As an adult you put him on the cans and ask him if there was
a monster in his childhood home and the needle goes bang.
You use it like a lie detector and asses for the appearance
of this monster and get a good description of the monster
that he has forgotten.
And you have a totally inaccurate view of what really happened.
If, on the other hand, you take off enough charge and run
enough recall processes, he remembers that he invented
that monster.
So the mear fact of emeter reads doesn't prove anything
or guarantee an accurate view of the whole track.
Then again, it doesn't disprove it either.
Personally I think that there is whole track and space
opera and so forth. But I wouldn't trust a meter to
map it out. If there is enough charge to make a meter
kick, then there is enough charge to distort one's
recall. So we'll just have to see what holds up in
the long run.
In the meantime, the meter does help one find areas that
have some kick to them and yet are accessible enough to
run processes on.
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio Tech - To Oleg on Self Clearing
TO OLEG ON SELF CLEARING
On 17 Dec 98, Antony Phillips <
[email protected]> posted a question
that "Dopertchouk, Oleg" <
[email protected]> sent to the self clearing list.
The subject was "SelfClear: A question and a handy trick"
> Hello!
>
> Just like the subject says, I have 2 things to share:
>
> 1. A question. First a little background information: I have been running a
> process from Self-Clearing (13.7 but i didn't do all processes in order) and
> came upon a somewhat puzzling situation. The process ran OK but didn't
> produce any cognitions or any particularly good feeling. I took a break for
> the day and after a while went to bed. Then, when I was lying there trying
> to sleep, i had some big realisation regarding my life and why do i behave
> the way i do. However, the realisation doesn't seem to have anything to do
> with the subject of the process at all.
> Now the question itself: should I continue running the process or was that
> the end phenomena?
The process was on change and stopped change. This is the kind of
thing which might cause something disrelated to release because a
change is no longer being stopped. And it is not unusual for an
unflat process to flatten while one is asleep. And sometimes there
are additional delayed cognitions on things.
So in all likelyhood, the process is done.
But the real test is emphirical, because it is also possible for
these things to be disrelated.
If it feels incomplete, then try running it some more with a great
deal of care to notice immediately if it feels like an overrun
when you try to do the command. If trying to answer the command
the first time gives you the feeling that you have to pull mass
back in to answer it, then immediately recognize that the process
is already done, acknowledge yourself for it, and drop it without
actually doing the command again.
If on the other hand, you now feel happy and satisfied with
the process, then take the win and move on.
> 2. Being a geek and having almost an unlimited spare time these
> pre-Christmas days, i decided to get hi-tech with self clearing and wrote
> this little C program that just prints a question from the process, reads my
> answer from the keyboard and records everything in a log file. My primary
> intention was simply to alleviate my problems with keeping worksheets and
> recognizing my own handwriting (yes, it's that bad).
> As it turns out this simple trick gave me much more that I bargained. As I
> don't have to keep track of what question to ask myself and most of other
> chores are gone, i can give the task of answering the commands my undivided
> attention. Becaus eof that the processes run much faster and the entire
> activity is much more fun.
> It is not the same as being audited by another person (hey i know that
> computer doesn't understand what i tell it), it still definitely feels like
> self-auditing. it is just much easier than the regular pen-and-paper self
> clearing as all the bookkeeping chores are gone.
> I thought I should share this tidbit so all other self-clearers can try it
> and hopefully benifit from it :)
This is nice.
I could imagine a website with an animated picture of a guru
that asked auditing questions and acknowledged the answers that
were typed in. Unfortunately the users would probably expect
too much and know too little to do well with this. The information
presented along with the processes in Self Clearing is essential
to doing it successfully.
> Cheers,
> Oleg
Affinity,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio Tech - On Creative Processing (Attn Sarah)
ON CREATIVE PROCESSING (Attn Sarah)
On 14 Dec, "Sarah Hefver" <
[email protected]> posted on
subject "Question of the week:December 14th"
(note that Sarah regularly posts questions for general
technical discussion. In this capacity she is acting
as a discussion group leader rather than asking her own
personal questions)
> (Beginner)
>
> What is Creative Processing?
Mockup or Visualization techniques. See the PDC tape transcripts
that have been posted to the net.
Note that "Visulizing" is really an oversimplification. One
should be mocking up sounds, tastes, smells, tactile sensations,
and so forth rather than just vision. And the idea is to be
actually creating the thing rather than simply perciving it.
Therefore "mockup" is really a better word for this than
"visualization", but this does exist in earlier practicies
and they usually call it visualizing even though the actual
drill is generally a full mockup rather than just picturing
an image.
> (Intermediate)
>
> Why did it fall into disuse?
a) Research errors
b) Difficulty in training auditors in the techniques
c) It is only 80% instead of 100% workable
Specifically, these are among the fastest and most powerful
processes ever developed. But occasionally they do not
work and it is very restimulative to a case if the auditor
tries to push the pc to do the command in this case.
Ron tried a number of times to correct this "flaw" and
always failed, never finding any way to use these techniques
safely in a rote and robotic manner so that it could be
taught to beginning auditors. And yet he and other
experienced auditors often produced fantastic gains using
these processes.
It has to be done lightly. You have to be willing to bail
out of a command that is out gradient and yet be able to
leave him on a win without his getting hung up on an incomplete
cycle of action. That requires real skill and judgement
that is beyond anything currently taught in CofS.
And it should not be run exclusively. You need to alternate
this with other techniques. Among other things, running
mockups only is usually destructive of havingness. So
balance and judgement are needed in the C/Sing as well
as the processing itself.
These are deadly in a standard tech enviornment because
they would be forced and flattened rotely. And yet they
are super processes as long as you don't ignore the 80%
workability factor.
> (Advanced)
>
> Why should it be run only on Clears?
> Clarify your answer.
I don't think that they should only be run on Clears.
However, one of the bugs is that the CC platen has CREATE
as a major item. So having the PC create (mockup) stuff
can be restimulative of implants.
So a clear is less liable to run into trouble with
creative processing than somebody who is not yet clear.
But really what we are doing is shifting the workability
percentage from perhaps 75% up to 85% by removing the
potential restim of implants from the picture. (my
statement above about 80% workability was really a vague
average - there are things like this which affect the
batting average and we don't have any solid numbers -
I'm giving you gut feeling based on experience using
these in assists on people etc.)
However, implants are never the real why on a case, just
an extra burden. Implants do not key in like clockwork.
People can create things without the implant keying in,
otherwise drawing pictures in kindergarden would kill
everybody off.
I suspect that the basic charge on the create button is
invalidation of one's creations. That is potentially
charged even on a clear, so you still need to handle
with kid gloves anytime you use creative processing.
Of course the big charge would be his invalidation of
other's creations on the early track, but that is probably
unreachable on most cases.
I just thought of one hell of a process. Mock up somebody
else creating something. Then alternately tell them
"that's beautiful" / "that's ugly". I'm blowing charge
just thinking about running it.
Best is to have the person do creative processing solo
and give him the licence to skip it if he doesn't feel
like it. That way he wouldn't grind himself in but
can make the big gains whenever they are available.
> Sarah
Nice set of questions.
Affinity,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio Tech - To Dimitry on Buddhist Concepts, Self Clearing, etc.
TO DIMITRY (Buddhist Concepts, Self Clearing, etc)
On 25 Dec 98, "Dimitry Ivakhnenko" <
[email protected]>
posted on subject "Pilot: The mechanics of processing"
> Dear Pilot,
>
> Here are the letters which I wrote to you last month, but managed to
> convey to a.c.t. only today. They are united by the idea of further
> intensive research into the mechanics of processing.
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Subject: Clearing technology: the next step forward
>
> What is the next step of clearing technology?
>
> It is viewing remnant illusions as they are.
Remnant of what?
All could be considered illusion, but that is not inherently
bad nor does it imply anything to handle.
I suspect that what you really wish to address here is illusion
that has gained an undesirable persistance.
>
> What are these remnant illusions?
>
> The illusion of self,
> the illusion of permanency,
> the illusion of happiness.
There is nothing inherently wrong with enjoying these illusions.
What is wrong is when they become fixed, when, for example,
self must be one thing and not another.
Some might say "but permanency itself implies an undesirable
persistance" and that is incorrect.
Visualize a fine and sturdy structure, perhaps a monument of
some sort. Postulate a tremendous, perhaps eternal, persistance
into it. View it and feel the wonderful persistance, knowing
that it will be there forever. Now discard the illusion (throw
the mockup away) allowing it to be gone in a flash.
This is the illusion of permanency. It is enjoyable. There is
nothing wrong with this.
But if the mockup persists beyond one's current and conscious
choice, then one has become trapped by illusion. That is what
is wrong.
Perhaps, for example, the person feels that having said that
the structure is permanent, he cannot now go back on his word
and vanish it. That is abberation. The permanency was nothing
more than a delightful illusion.
Under these circumstances, it does not help to shake the person
and say "but this permanency is but an illusion". And it is
extremely slow to simply contemplate the illusion of permanency.
He is slow to abandon it because he no longer sees that he
can invoke it at will.
So instead we coin a process such as the one above and he
does it a few times and the illusion is exposed.
This particular process is worth adding into the self clearing
book.
> Why self is an illusion?
>
> Processes that mention "you do", "you think", are essentially
> low-level. They grab the abstract generalization of "self", which is
> arbitrary, individual, and ever changing.
These are not necessarily low level.
Fixated self as isolated from all others is low level and a trap.
Broad self which is not identity or location but simply orientation
of illusion runs very high.
The illusion of self is seen by simply being two characters within
a story. Again, this is enjoyable. The trap is in becoming
locked within one of these characters.
> Imagine yourself standing in front of the skyscraper and shouting:
> "Hey, you!". Some people will show up and each time they will be
> different.
Exactly. The enjoyable richness of creation.
> Imagine yourself talking to a whirl: "Hey, you!". The next moment
> "he" dissolves and quite soon there again appears a whirl, which is
> neither "the same" nor "another one".
>
> When you generalize a lot of things under the heading of "you",
> it is impossible to view them as they really are, just processes without
> any self. They remain hidden in sealed black box.
This does not follow. If it were true we could not process.
Instead it is a gradient. The more limited and frozen the "you"
is, the less there is which can be seen from that narrowed down
viewpoint. And so the perception of truth is restricted but it
is never totally absent or there would be nothing left there to
talk to.
> How the illusion of self can be seen as it is?
>
> By using the exact language - a processual language devoid of
> generalizations.
Leave the generalizations and let the person float to his own
level of understanding. Instead of avoiding it, use it to
address him as he is now. And then loosen the bonds so that
"you" no longer means the fixed identity in a body but broadens
out to encompass all-that-is. In English the word is both
singular and plural.
> The previous giant step was to assume yourself as Cause.
> Thus the language became much more exact.
>
> The next step is to view experience as it really is, not in huge
> generalization like "I look", but as the bunch of processes that
> constitute it, intention, attention, focus, thought, feeling, feedback,
> etc.
>
> Why permanency is an illusion?
>
> There is really nothing truly permanent in the world. Each moment
> zillions of particles zoom in and out, and even that famous
> "consciousness" gets switched on and off many times a second.
>
> It is a useful generalization, and we can pretend that things remain
> exactly the same over time, "John" remains the same "John", "incident"
> remains the same "incident", "willingness" remains the same
> "willingness".
>
> How the illusion of permanency can be viewed as it is?
>
> For processing to become exact, it should use as much "assembler",
> fluid language, as much, as human grammar will allow.
>
> To adjust the image on your display, it won't help to consider it
> as some object. It is a process when zillions particles fly and hit the
> screen. It won't help to develop "his" "ability" to display. It must be
> taken apart in individual processes.
You can work with the generalization of permanency quite easily
as I presented in the process above. The trick is in how to work
with it for fast results.
Dropping down to the "assembler" level where one views details
is its own separate action. This too needs to be done, but not
all the time with everything, it takes too long.
> The obvious shortcut is that "we" improve "someone's" "ability" to be
> "Cause". What on Earth does that mean?
The narrowed illusions, pushing against each other in an upwards
direction, can leverage their way out of the trap.
I had an interesting vision when I considered this, perhaps it
is an old teaching story from some earlier life.
I saw a mirror above a pit, and the mirror shattered, falling
to the bottom. The individual shards cannot climb out of the
pit by themselves. And the mirror cannot be reglued at the
bottom, it lies too deeply in the darkness. But the mass of
the shards, pushing each other upwards, can work their way
out together until they are high enough for the mirror to
reform.
> The more exact approximation is that we are kind of running across
> broken ice, or climbing a sliding scale. Temporary processes
> launch one another fast enough, so that cumulatively they don't fade but
> build up, until they reach the qualitative change, and either launch
> another more stable process or cease it.
>
> The "preclear" becomes an "OT". One generalization changes to another.
> At best some useful temporary processes got launched, and some not-useful
> ceased. Which exactly? Let's confront it! What is critical in the
> quality of the processes?
>
> What is the illusion of happiness?
>
> There is a common notion that somehow a "person" can reach some
> "truly stable" eternal blissful state of "advanced abilities".
>
> Nope!
>
> Either you struggle in unpredictable flow of becoming, or you cease to
> be and stand on the shore. Becoming is a bizzare game with temporary
> gains.
>
> Striving for "happiness" in processing often locks one in a golden
> cage of "eternal bliss", which truly is a deteriorating slavery to
> receiving other-determined pleasure.
>
> How can the illusion of happiness be seen as it is?
Are you talking about the illusion of pleasureble sensation or
the joy of infinite creation?
There is a true happiness at the top, else why bother getting
out. But it is a joy of creation rather than a happiness within
the context of illusion.
> Freedom comes with utter dismantling of any cages of pleasure or
> grief, inherent in becoming of Alter-isness.
>
> Processing should ultimately recognize, that it's goal is to As-is
> becoming and cease completely its compulsiveness.
>
> The As-ising "evil" is a giant step forward, but it needs
> to be completed at once with As-ising of "good".
Good and Evil exist only within the context of a created
framework. One steps out of the frame, or one plays within
it as a game. What we wish is to free one from being trapped
within the frame.
> When, then, will we call somebody truly Clear?
>
> When there is no need of generalizations, the "assembler" processes
> are clearly seen as they are.
> When there is no need of "stable objects" language, the constant
> arising and falling away is seen as it is.
> When there is no need of "desirable-undesirable" simplified dichotomy,
> the whole interplay is seen as it is.
> When there is no need of being or not being, and any processes can
> freely start or cease.
>
> Then being is free.
>
> So what?
>
> All above are long discovered things. They are so simple that seem
> trivial and not worth a dime.
>
> However, for clearing technology to become truly effective, it should
> on its ultimate levels incorporate these truths.
>
> So that those who are ready will cross the ultimate frontier, to the
> absence of designations and forms.
> Are you ready?
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Subject: Pilot: Framework of Self-Clearing session
>
> Dear Pilot,
>
> There are some important points which are implied in your book, but
> I have not met them formulated as a part of Tech.
>
> It seems obvious that for processing to be effective, one needs such
> things as proper intention, proper emotional desire, proper
> concentration, and proper determination.
Not really true.
Even determining what is proper only exists within the context
of a framework of reality.
Some things will help and others will hinder, but these things
are not absolutes and might not be consistant from person to
person.
My first shot at this was the suggestions I placed in the
introduction to self clearing. Things such as forgiveness
help a great deal. If one were to study, for example, with
the plan to eventually accomplish vengance, I would expect
it to slow one's progress greatly. But I think that one
could still make gains in areas that were not contaminated
by that and the vengeful urges would eventually evaporate
as one continued to find truth.
> Studying Buddhist practices, I found special starting formulas widely
> used before any substantial practice. Their crucial role can also be
> observed in the mechanics of Buddhist dependent co-arising, or its
> Scientology equivalent, intention-emotion-effort scale.
>
> For some reasons the rudiments you describe are mostly "negative", they
> clear PT problems, upsets, etc.
An inheritance from modern Scientology, attempting to clear
the worst negatives out of the way as a minimum. Perhaps
there is more we can do.
> Where and how it is best to postulate the clear-cut intention and
> determination to win the process?
> How can one can develop a bit more concentration needed for the process?
> Maybe, something like a bit of 8-C will do?
> As I observed, this can really boost the gains of the process.
The book has many processes aimed at this. For example,
the process on being willing to find things out.
But I would worry about overrunning anything used regularly
at the beginning of each session.
Using "willing to find out" as an example, one could postulate
before each session that one wished to learn something new and
was willing to find that. And perhaps run a process on it if
one felt unwilling to find anything that day.
But if you did that regularly, you would push that one button
too hard and spend too much time on it to the exclusion
of other things.
And yet it is a good point to put oneself in a good mood
and with high intentions as one begins session. So perhaps
there is something I could add to the book on this.
At a minimum, one should at least be determined to finish
the process and to face up to whatever is revealed. I
suppose that I took such intentions for granted.
> Secondly, you recommend great processes as safety nets. However, I
> have not found a mention as to when exactly can I use them.
Whenever you feel a need to.
> What I would propose is to make a separate list of these processes and
> to use one of them at the end of each session, according to
> individual indications, which also have to be exactly formulated.
The individual indications will vary with the individual, both
as to their case and their skill and knowledge.
Using one at the end of each session is incorrect as it assumes
that something is wrong.
And yet there is something possible here too. For example,
if one feels a low havingness at the end of a session, it would
be good to run a havingness process.
But the best havingness process varies. We used to assess
for it by trying various ones until the best one for a particular
person was found. And that would only remain true for awhile,
eventually changing and requiring another assessment.
But the best one was usually the one he liked best, so
perhaps this is the way to choose.
Most of the processes in the early chapters are positive
havingness processes (among other things). So perhaps the
thing to do is to explain about havingness somewhere
around chapters 6 to 10 and then suggest that if one felt
a low havingness at end of session, then one should simply
run one's favorite process from the early chapters of the
book.
Perhaps there should be a checklist of things to watch out
for at session end such as low havingness, feeling depressed,
and so forth and suggestions for how to handle.
> In the Chinese practice of Tai Chi they simply use touching all the
> parts of the body at the end of session.
This is a positive havingness process. And a nice one. I should
probably add it to chapter 2.
> What do you think about using spotting spots in the body as a useful way
> to clear up any remnant restimulation?
Sometimes good, sometimes not. That is the trouble. If its
a favorite one of yours, then it is right for you, but maybe
not for everybody. And one always has to shift eventually to
avoid overrun.
> The third subtle moment is where one should place attention during the
> process? My initial research has shown how critical is to place
> attention not on the "content", as it does nothing in itself, but on the
> "inner process, viewed from outside".
Although the inner process is better, the content is often needed
as a gradient. And if the content is being non-confronted (rather
than simply considered to be trivial) it will block the process.
Looking only at the surface is much slower than viewing something
fully.
My own tendency is to look first at simple content to confront
it fully and then to step back to a higher viewpoint and look
deeper, both inward and also simultaneously behind or beyond
the content, but it is almost impossible to describe. Things
tend to release very fast when done in that manner.
> I think that the exact control of attention needs a lot of research,
> since it accounts for the vast difference in results.
Good point.
> All three above mentioned points as to starting, stopping, and
> maintaining session, are very raw and not much investigated,
> but I think that you will formulate them much better just observing how
> you do it yourself.
Yes, there is more to be learned here. We are still in a
research effort.
> And I am quite willing to continue pursuing this subject if you deem it
> worthy.
>
> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
> Subject: Pilot: The story of three kings
>
> Dear Pilot,
>
I dedicate this story to your miraculous intentions, emotions and
> efforts in the field of clearing.
>
> -----------------------------------
> The story of three kings,
> or Mowgli strikes back
> -----------------------------------
>
> D r a m a t i c p e r s o n a e
>
> Jungle King Yeah - Mr. Pilotist
> Desert King Nope - Mr. Buddhist
> City King Mowgli - Mr. Futurist
> Witty monkeys - useful automacities, a.k.a. abilities
> Dim-witted monkeys - unuseful automacities, a.k.a. service-facs
> Scale Chart - Intention-Emotion-Effort Scale, Dependent Co-arising,
> Neurological levels, Computer Principles, or whatever.
>
> T h e B e g i n n i n g
>
> Three brothers were born in jungle,
> Weak, little and hungry they were,
> And carried away by the monkeys
> Resided in lost city palace.
>
> The monkeys were wild, unrestrained,
> Without any reason or thought,
> Just few of them, trained in the circus,
> Could do very simple tricks.
>
> Away with those silly monkeys!
> Disgusted, said Desert King Nope,
> Am going far out to the desert
> And will try to survive on my own.
>
> And he went away to the desert,
> And trained himself somehow to walk,
> But as soon his leg got damaged,
> He had to start all this anew.
>
> Let's train the witty monkeys,
> Said playfully Jungle King Yeah,
> We'll train them in hundreds and thousands,
> Obedient to any commands.
>
> And he trained those silly monkeys,
> For a while they obeyed him,
> But as soon as he turned to another one,
> The previous forgot all again.
>
> And the third King of City, Mowgli,
> Discovered lost in the dust,
> The jewel of jewels, the precious,
> Sought after great Scale Chart.
>
> Spirit, Thought, Intention, Emotion,
> Effort, and Matter at last,
> I'll solve this ancient puzzle,
> And will build the Realm that will last.
>
> He selected the most witty monkeys,
> Discarding the rest for a while,
> He trained each monkey to do tricks,
> Not quite as his brother would do.
>
> The hidden sequence of actions
> He carefully observed,
> And learned better than monkeys
> Their secrets and resorts.
>
> He could control the monkeys
> And could do without them,
> And infinite was his kingdom,
> Contained in his own heart.
>
> And he said: for most witty I repeat for the ninety ninth time: for
> the ability to be stable, it should be known how it occurs.
>
> And delighted with his might and wisdom,
> the monkeys applauded him.
>
> F i n i s
> (For the serious people: That's All, Folks!:)
> (For the Kings: to be continued?!;)
Enjoyable. But the city king Mowgli is more to my liking
than the Yeah king of the jungle!
> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>
> Subject: Pilot: Objective change & flow control
>
>
> Dear Pilot,
>
> I found the modification of your "objective change" and "flow control"
> unbelievably useful in handling chronic somatics.
>
> The subjective techniques like incident running and entity handling
> tend to dub-in and flee, if the charge is really impressive.
>
> First I project in the body part the intention to be healed. Also I
> adjust the picture of me and others after the full healing, until it
> feels really attractive.
>
> If necessary, I spot the room space for better concentration.
>
> Then, extending what you have written in "Objective change", I either
> slowly repetitively move the body part, if it can move without hands, or
> repetitively press and depress the spot with the hand.
Excellent.
> For auditory (hearing) feedback, better grounding and to swamp out
> maverick thoughts, I track the movement with the words "rises, falls",
> or "up, down", or "presses, depresses", or anything of that sort.
I would not make this a formalized part of the procedure. If it
is useful, then do so, but you will find that eventually the
thought and deed are one and words become a distraction.
> When I get centered on the process, and it becomes familiar, I
> exteriorize a bit, as you have written in "flow control", and observe
> the intention-emotion-effort flow via the point, handling any blocks on
> its ways.
>
> It is exteriorization which gives the full picture of the flow, and thus
> allows to view it as it is.
Exactly.
> Another important point here is to continue the process steadfastly and
> continually despite any phenomena. Where any subjective abilities would
> flee in horror, the objective body ability to move holds on and runs the
> process to the end phenomena.
Certainly.
> To finish off one can play Yankee Doodle, clapping with hands on the
> body part, and go out well and happy.
>
> ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
> Subject: Reconstructing processes applied by Buddha
>
>
> Some thoughts flow in my mind, and I don't know anybody in the area of
> thousand kilometers who will understand them better than you.
>
> I would like to model the insight of Buddha.
>
> The essential subject seems to be dependent co-arising, which
> wonderfully includes observer-observed dyad of quantum physics, and
> intention-...-action sequence of Scientology.
> (For sound reference see
>
http://world.std.com/~metta/lib/ddp/wings/3h3.html#dependent4 )
>
> The way to comprehend this interplay seems to be mostly visual, since
> there are multiple mentions of vipassana - seeing-as-is, "knowledge and
> vision", "eye of Dhamma".
>
> The requisite is jhana, i.e. partial or full cessation of mind
> processes, via concentration on the theme (nimitta) of reflection.
> The easiest to observe basis of mindfulness is the body.
>
> So, how we can arrange the process?
>
> First, to formulate in a visual, audial, kinesthetic form the question
> about a single aspect of dependent co-arising, starting from
> the coarser ones, say the relationship between craving and feeling
>
> Second, to load it with intention, like a Zen koan.
>
> Third to track this relationship in and of itself, in the course of some
> repetitive body or breath action, switching between feelings and other
> perceptual systems, including visual model; meanwhile stopping other
> mental processes.
>
> Between short periods of tracking, determined by the span of attention,
> there will be regular breaks, to evaluate what is done, to scan
> feelings, to refresh visual-audial-kinesthetic model, and add another
> portion of intention.
>
> The cycle is repeated until one gains conscious mastery over the
> relationship, is able to create, maintain, and cease it.
>
> Then one goes to the next relationship, until one is able to fully
> master dependent co-arising.
Here there are two things, related but not closely related such
as feeling and craving. These then each have their own charge
as well as their interaction.
Simply going at them as a pair is going to be long and difficult.
Instead, begin with a light technique on each one individually.
For example, remove some charge on craving, perhaps by mocking
up more and less craving alternately. Then remove some charge
on feeling. Only after that attempt to work the two in
combination.
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Walking and Breathing Awareness Training
>
> Requisites: Some free space, either a short distance to walk back and
> forth, or a comfortable walking path with regular landmarks like trees
> or street-lamps.
>
> You stand under the first light
> You decide with clear intent:
> There I will go,
> Where the next street lamp glows,
> Keeping the breath in mind.
>
> Death can be quite close,
> This body a nuisance,
> For well-being of all who breathe,
> I will follow the road of those who awakened,
> And severe this vicious cycle.
>
> You spread the wings of your intent,
> And they carry you along,
> While you just note the wind,
> Tiny but mighty,
> Going through the tunnels of your nostrils.
>
> It goes in and out,
> And there is no other wind in the universe,
> Which can fill the sails of your soul
> With such a power and delicacy.
>
> So you don't stand in its way,
> You enjoy it like a theater,
> Where goes the best play in your life.
>
> And as the idle chatter stops,
> Your attention grows and widens,
> Simultaneously encompassing
> In-breath and out-breath of footstep.
>
> And when you arrive to the place intended,
> You scan in your memory,
> Like years gone by,
> That walk from the previous post.
>
> Then with the eye of your mind,
> Precise and encompassing,
> You scan all your feelings,
> Of whatever kinds,
> Backtracking their intentions.
>
> And like a hawk discerns the tiny mice,
> Like a master discerns his work,
> You learn your deeds,
> You learn your faults,
> What is needed and what's in excess.
>
> Having added another brilliant brick
> To the house of your timeless destiny,
> You aim for another street lamp
> And intend to go there clearly.
Nice. You could pay attention to breathing. Or you
could pick other things to pay attention to.
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Well, you have read the product of my urge to assimilate Buddha
> methodology, to make it young, vigorous and joyful.
>
> I wish the same to you,
>
> Dimitri
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> Subject: Pilot: Two advanced abilities of awareness unit
>
> Dear Pilot,
>
> This letter to you is quite a philosophical one.
>
> To make it worse, I'll often change the names.
>
> If you get in trouble, just run the process
>
> 957.467 oh) What names are you willing to have changed?
Ha!
But this made me thing of a powerful process.
What symbols are you willing to have change?
And also simply to visualize symbols having different meanings
than those normally assigned to them.
> Don't read the following advanced material until you have reached the
> end phenomena.
>
> Be attentive and don't skip the words:
>
> Two advanced abilities of awareness unit, or thetan
>
> Two meta-properties of self-organized singularity, or enturbulation.
>
> Meta means superb ones, not just popular gimmicks like telepathy or
> remote viewing.
>
> First meta-property: awareness, aka self-organization, aka feedback.
Awareness of awareness.
> To confuse it further, I will prefer the term "feedback".
> (I have already confused myself, have you? ;)
>
> So let's make a simple graphic example:
> The wind blows round the corner and the whirl winds.
>
> Now let's make it incomprehensible:
> In the presence of field flow heterogenity there
> appears a marginal effect of self-organized
> feedback singularity, or enturbulation.
Chaos theory.
> It is a feedback which makes it possible. Without it the singularity
> would just dissipate or dissolve, losing energy.
Yes. The feedback effects are important in chaos theory. As
are fractiles - function X applied to the result of function X.
Awareness of the awareness of breathing, for example.
Or as Ron was saying in 1951, find the effort behind the effort.
> In the human context,
> - the verbal feedback corresponds to ITSA;
> - there is an "equanimity" or "volume" of feedback,
> sometimes referred to as "exteriorization".
> It means that feedback is going on not on the most
> unstable "not-self" elements, but on the whole
> system.
A good point. The feedback loop expands beyond the limited self
to the broader self.
> - there is a phenomenon of launching feedback and
> including available inert masses in the cycle,
> sometimes referred to as "cognition".
>
> The phenomenon of singularity is marginal, remember, how often you
> experinced the air, and how often you saw windwhirls.
>
> The reason that I write all this nonsense is to show that the feedback
> ability is one of the most important to develop. Each moment you are not
> aware, you dissipate, and you can become independent of energy sources
> if you'll be fully aware each moment.
Oversimplified. There is more to be realized here. Especially
as to the relationship of energy and awareness. But it is a
good starting point.
> Second meta-property: tuning, aka concentration, aka absorption.
>
> Now lots of nice examples:
>
> 1) well-engineered computer virus can thrive on any computer and adjust
> to any operating system. Your precious book has successfuly traveled
> to me and feels quite good about it. Just now I apply principles from
> one area to another, and they do apply. The person tunes to society
> and is accepted there.
>
> 2) the receiver tunes in on the station, and the music results. The
> vibrating juicer tunes in to the small particles nearby, and they too
> start to rotate. The rotating magnets of dynamo-machine tune in to
> the electrons, and the current starts flowing.
>
> In more familiar processing context, doing each process, you tune in on
> particular theme, until it catches resonance and is included in "you" as
> a system.
This is food for thought.
> A good joke can be viewed as launching some rigid structure in the flow.
I hope you mean unstabilizing a rigidity rather than introducing
a new rigidity. At least that is how I see it. Humor is a great
tool.
> We can roughly delineate two ways:
>
> - either the system dissipates more and more, unreasonably tuning in
> without any feedback and thus foolishly losing itself.
>
> - or the system (self-organized singularity) trains itself to tune
> in on wider and wider spheres, until it tunes to all-that-is and
> ceases to exist as a marginal effect.
>
> Again, why I am writing this? Just to show you that you'd better stop
> whirling around ;) with endless abundancy of mental themes and try to
> develop tuning regardless of any theme.
>
> % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
> Subject: Pilot: Dichotomies and reality generators
>
> Hi Pilot,
>
> I just came upon your new version of 3.3 emotions procccess, had great
> wins, and started to play with it. Then I found your post on dichotomies
> and have some thoughts to say.
>
> Life can be seen as vibration of nothingness, permanent arising and
> going away, but with a perfect balance. If you'll take the integral of
> the whole area, it will be zero.
Exactly.
> In the human realm the basic dichotomy seems to be dreaming and
> perceiving. It seems like deep dream is an inversion of reality, and a
> person won't stand long without dreams.
I am not sure that they are opposite enough to be a dichotomy.
Certain features form a dichotomy, but in other aspects reality
is the same as a dream.
> There are quite a lot of interesting ideas in Castaneda's Nagual and
> Tonal theory and in Mahayana Buddhist practices of Nagarjuna school.
In both cases I have studied some of their material but not enough.
There is always so much that is of interest.
> There is a standing wave of outflowing reality and inflowing it via the
> black hole of awareness singularity.
Castaneda had an interesting description of an assemblage point.
So I drilled mocking up assemblage points in and out of the
body and for each had it inflowing and outflowing reality.
Oddly enough, it then seemed right for it to be two points,
a perception point which inflows and a projection point which
outflows and the distance between them allowed the distortions
which prevented a short circuit and as-isness. And it seemed
better to place this universe between them and have those
points be in their own strange space.
> I'm having lots of fun with the processes
>
> - I'm creating this
> - It's creating me
Most excellent.
> - It's a reality
> - It's a dream
>
> - It goes up
> - It goes down
>
> - It's outflowing
> - It's inflowing
>
> - It is
> - It isn't
>
> - It goes nearer
> - It goes further
>
> - It's outflowing life
> - It's sucking life
>
> - It's male
> - It's female
>
> - Time goes forward
> - Time goes backward
>
> - I cause it
> - It causes me
>
> The omega point of equilibrum seems to be the free choice of anything.
> Human being is usually light years from this.
>
> - It is empty
> - It is full
>
> - It is outside
> - It is inside
Indeed, I should beef up the self clearing chapter on the
power processes (Scn grade 5). These really fall into that class.
> Yet I suppose that such games, as effective as they are, are a far cry
> from the anticipated processes with bodily assisted changes of existence
> mode.
They are an important begining step in this direction. It was
the what is/ what isn't step of power that I think pushed me
over the edge into the begining of OT phenomena in 1968.
> However, this requires a fundamental work as to how we can restore
> the states once reached and construct new ones. The NLP work, when they
> track the feelings while going in the state, and then repeat the
> feelings,
I'm not familiar with NLP.
> needs to be combined with your drill of putting the state into
> the environment, and with some system of marking the state on multiple
> levels (chakras ?)
The chakras are only one of many scales and systems. Sometimes
they fit well and sometimes not. It depends what you mean by
"state" here, and I'm not entirely sure what you are targeting
with this.
> and arranging proper (kinesthetic -> visual ?)
> feedback. The long awaited research of reality generation, like
> visual->audial->kinesthetic, up->in front->down,
> intention->emotion->effort, observer <-> observed, will also be of great
> help.
>
> Then we would address not just mental opinions, but shift around the
> whole mode of being, and this will work like dynamite. LSD trips would
> seem like childish riding on the footboard of the tram in comparison
> with own Porshe.
>
> I have just tried simply marking and anchoring two opposite states in
> two places, about two meters apart, and rapidly changing between them.
> Seems much more integral than just mental considerations.
>
> I enjoy your emotion drills since they seem to be the beginning of the
> more whole-some processing on multiple levels.
>
> Let's investigate it!
Yes, there is much more to do here.
> Have a nice research,
>
> Sincerely yours and quite the reverse, Dimitri
>
> # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
> Subject: Pilot: Beyond the release
>
>
> What is a release?
>
> When a person's attention is directed solely to the content of the
> process, and it partially as-ises, then a person looses the foothold and
> has to start the process anew.
Not quite. He should take and enjoy the win. The weight or charge
is slightly reduced in one area and so another area may now be more
accessible.
Early on it is more important to accumulate wins and build up
momentum rather than going deeply in one area. If you reach
deeper, then that is good, but don't bog down trying to do so.
Just take the wins and move on. Suddenly reaching deeper will
become easy.
> I propose to track the process per se, track the rapture of release, and
> hang on the process to get to higher levels instead of endless exploring
> of different contents.
With this you might reach two layers deep instead of one, but
I doubt that you will reach bedrock in an area unless you are
already close.
As a release fades and an area again becomes exposed, it always
runs at a deeper level with more profound cognitions rather than
being a repeat of the same thing with different contents.
If it is the same old thing again with different contents, then
it is overrun on the particular area. One is sliding sideways
because there are too many other areas with more charge.
> What is confront?
>
> The words "confront" and "release" mean events, and don't say anything
> about what actually happens to the person.
>
> I propose to grow out of this talk "there goes bang, and then there is
> crash", moving on to trainable abilities.
>
> Let's use "depth of concentration" (meaning moving to the rapture of
> release and further to hapiness and equanimity), "awareness" (meaning
> ongoing flow of feedback), and "determination" or "intention" (meaning
> well-defined pointedness of efforts).
>
> How to develop awareness, or feedback flow?
>
> I propose to use "tracking speech" during the process, i.e. to say
> "touches", when the hand touches the wall, "mock-ups", when imagination
> mock-ups the object, etc. It's a golden way to keep feedback, with no
> identification as to any process.
Again the true awareness is beyond the statement of the words.
Do what you can with this technique, but you will pass beyond it.
Better to touch and become aware of the touching and then to
become aware of the awareness of the touching. The words are
a distraction to this.
Note that by this I don't mean awareness of the feeling of
the touching (that is it's own drill, but it is the content
rather than what is behind the content) but the awareness of
the touching itself.
> What about the session length in Self Clearing?
>
> I propose setting the exact desired outcome at the begining of the
> session and regular check as to how close it is. The probable session
> length should also be formulated at the beginning, to avoid constant
> checks as to "am I late to the ...?", "what time is it now?", etc.
Regular checks are probably a distraction.
The postulation of a desired outcome is good, except that the
Scn standard session around 1960 was to set a goal for the
session and it caused enough trouble that they abandoned it.
It might be workable in some cases but in others it might
stir up charge on goals or encourage one to set unreal targets
that cause one to invalidate one's real gains.
Better to go in with the simple determination to have some
nice gain and to end on a win one way or another. And to
allow adequate time to achieve that.
> Group Word Clearing
>
> I've found amazing to draw pictures of the concept in the group, and
> then to ask questions about each picture. It brings to surface lots
> of hidden structures and sets them in order.
Good idea.
> Words Game
>
> It's a wonderful game to get the previously unseen list of twenty
> unconnected words, and to imagine quickly in full color the story with
> all this words. It's a wide known trick to memorize words.
> The exceptional property of this process is that one can later check out
> the quality of his imagination, recollecting the whole story and writing
> down the words.
Sounds like fun.
> @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
>
> To make a resume, I would like to say that any activity can be a
> process, and the question is often not what do you do, but how do you do.
> So I would like to encourage you to explore inner depth of processes,
> finding an infinite source in each of them.
Yes. This is gradually becoming visible. Basics such as getting
on the two sides of something.
> Best wishes for Merry Christmas,
>
> Dimitri Ivakhnenko
>
>
[email protected]
>
http://victorian.fortunecity.com/degas/171/index.html (in Russian)
And a happy New Year,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj : Super Scio Tech - AN ENERGY FLOW DRILL
AN ENERGY FLOW DRILL
About 6 months ago I hurt my middle finger. I was cleaning
something and a spider hopped out and I hit him excessively
hard with the cleaning cloth. It was not a big deal, just
a minor pain in the knuckel.
It should have been gone the next day, but it persisted.
It was just a dull ache, but it would be there if I made
a fist tightly and I would notice it sometimes while
doing things like playing the piano. It was only a mild
annoyance, but it bothered me that it was not healing.
My feeling on the matter was that there was a solidity
begining to build up in that joint and that it might be the
start of arthritis.
So I tried various processes in the area including touch
assists, alternate spotting inside the finger (right and
left hands), running the incident, overts on killing insects,
and even blowing entities out of there. All ran fine but
there was no actual change in the physical condition.
I was trying things in idle moments here and there rather
than doing any kind of a thorough program. As I said, it
wasn't a big deal, just a bit perplexing. Certainly there
were other things such as protest at cleaning or maybe
a nutrional handling that I would have gotten around to
eventually if the thing handn't blown apart spectacularly
on the drill I stumbled upon.
I was listening to LRH talk about the tone scale on a
tape and he was mentioning that arthritis comes from
stuck flows. Now I've heard this before, and he wasn't
suggesting any particular drill on this, but it inspired
me to look at the stuck point in the knuckel as a ridge
and to consider how I might get it to start flowing
and unstick.
Now the idea of getting on both sides of a ridge and making
it flow and pushing energy around in the area etc. are all
there in the early tech, but it is a bit of a vague fumbling
around rather than a clear idea of exactly how to do this
right.
So I came up with a better way of doing this, and it
worked incredibly well.
Pick a point on each side of the ridge. Visualize energy
flowing from one point to the other and back again going
through the ridge each way, back and forth. Don't get
hung up on the ridge itself or fixate on trying to get the
ridge to flow, just flow energy through the ridge back and
forth in both directions. But pay attention to the ridge as
the energy goes through it.
In this case, I picked the fingertip on one side and the
base of the finger (where it connects to the hand) on
the other. I just picked these two points and held them
stable and began to move energy back and forth between
them, visualizing it going through the knuckel and
dissolving the stuck point as it went through.
I did this a lot of times with no reaction. And then
all of a sudden there were a dozen aches all over my
hand. And after another pass it all blew and the
condition was gone. I checked again the next morning
and it was totally gone and hasn't come back since.
I looked this over to consider what happened. It did
not seem to me that I was doing any case handling. It
did not seem to run like a process that was addressing
charge.
What it seemed like was that initially I was simply
visualizing an energy flow from point A to point B
and back again. For dozens and dozens of commands,
that was all it was. This went easily. I was not
flattening anything, just doing it repetatively with
precision. And then on the umpteenth repeat, I got
a real flow of energy and that actually hit the
physical ridge and blew it apart.
This parallels what happens on drilling exterior
perceptions. You get tons and tons of imaginary
views (and must not invalidate them) and then suddenly
you see something for real.
This leads to a general class of energy drill, flowing
back and forth through a ridge to blow it.
And it leads to the consideration that you mockup the
flow many times with the expectation that eventually
a "real" flow will occur.
A further hypothesis is that you might get an object
to move by flowing energy through it in a similar manner
until the energy suddenly becomes real and connects.
So instead of trying to lift a pencil by, for example,
permeating it with energy and trying to pull it up,
you would push a mockup of the pencil down below the
surface and put another one up above and move back
and forth between these.
I would suggest holding two mockups of the object
stabily as end points, one perhaps six inches or a
foot below the surface (table, chair or whatever it
is sitting on) and the other in the air above it.
Keep these in place as you do the drill. Then make
a third mockup of the object, permeated with energy,
and move it up and down between these two endpoints
passing through the physical object with attention
to connecting with the physical object and pulling
it along as you pass through it in each direction
(but don't get hung up on that, just move on through
each time with the intention there of it coming along).
And do it smoothly with precision, drilling precise
control rather than simply trying to jamb in energy.
I have tried that briefly and it has a wonderfully
good feeling to it. But I have been strangely reluctant
to drill this intensively. Probably I have to take
more charge and considerations off on the subject
of levitation with the processes that I put in Super
Scio chapter 7. Things like overts and entities and
so forth do need to be gotten out of the way on
something like this. But this drill feels like the
ultimate one.
There are lots of applications for this. Just get
on the two sides and flow back and forth until the
flow becomes real. It will definitely unstick ridges.
It remains to be seen whether it will move objects
as well. But in any case it is fun and easy.
So have fun,
The Pilot
==========================================
(this was posted around Dec 15 right after the A&E Special)
subj : Super Scio - THE A AND E SPECIAL - SCIENTOLOGY LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT
(Normally I only post periodically. This is an exception
because of last night's big A&E special).
THE A AND E SPECIAL - SCIENTOLOGY LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT
Hubbard was right, the press love dicotomies and conflicts.
Their bread and butter is to present an issue in black and
white terms with two sides in complete opposition.
On the whole I think that the A and E Invesigative Reports
special was pro rather than anti. But it presented the
extreme anti case fairly well anyway.
It covered the anti case just well enough to show how
dangerous it is to attack the CofS. And we know that that
is not quite true, the CofS footbullets are legendary.
There was no mention of a middle ground between absolute
fanaticism and attacking it as a fraud and scam.
There was no mention of freezone or splinter groups.
There was no hint that they persecute other Scientologists
who try to use the tech outside of the orthodox confines.
There was no mention of things like Gerbode's success in
hitting Helen for barratry or Mayo's win in gaining joint
copyrights of the NOTS.
The really embarassing questions that might wake up the
membership were not raised.
The critics did have some wins in mentioning the RPF,
the Crowley connection, financial irregularities, Snow
White, and the practice of Fair Game and Dead Agenting.
And Operation Clambake and the Net did get some promotion.
But much of the special was a PR tour de force by CofS,
and this time Rinder came off quite well and the rest of
it was celebrities saying how good they felt rather than
anything with real meat and substance to it.
On the whole it was shallow and disappointing. And the
level of research was poor despite the time and money
that must have gone in to producing such a high quality
film job.
The overall message that I saw was "love it or leave it",
and if you become a critic they will go after you with
everything they've got.
A fair weather friend but a dangerous enemy, so go off
quietly once you've had enough abuse.
But they made one thing very clear, which is that the
CofS cannot change and the tech cannot evolve now that
Hubbard is dead.
You can't have a science on that basis, and so it will
deteriorate into ritualized auditing.
We really need to get the freezone story out there. This
black and white dicotomy of fanatics verses critics only
serves to stiffen the members resolve to hang in there
and put up with the abuse for the sake of the tech.
Abuse that only exists to feed money and power to the
top so that they can work harder to stamp out free thought
and kill the research line.
Yours In Freedom,
The Pilot
==========================================
(This was posted around Dec 21, after the Sunday night ABC Special)
subj : Super Scio - ABC - THE MISSING STORY
ABC - THE MISSING STORY
Everything isn't black and white.
It is not just the loyal fanatics versus the evil critics.
There is a third side who believe in the tech but not in
the orthodox organization or the later abusive policies.
Imagine, if you will, a news report from the days of the
Protestant Reformation.
The reporters talk to Catholic Celebreties who of course
tell true stories about the goodness of Jesus and about
"Love Thy Neighbor". And they talk to the Lord High
Inquisitor who explains glibly about purging evil from
the planet.
And they interview the hardcore critics who make clear
their hated for God and Christianity while telling
true stories of the tortures performed by the Inquisition.
And these reporters very carefully avoid any mention
of the Protestants or the fact that there is an alternative.
That is what we saw on ABC's 20/20 on Dec 20, 1998.
It is not that they didn't know. There was Freezone footage
taped for that show.
But they knuckeled under to CofS pressure.
Although CofS hates mention of LISA and the RPF, they
are learning to live with that and there was no way that
they could keep that out of the show. And the dead
agenting, fair game, and disconnection got far better
coverage on the shallow A & E show last week, so that
was downplayed as well.
And CofS got ABC to keep the Xemu story out of the show
although they couldn't keep ABC from mentioning that
it is on the net.
But the big CofS victory was in purging any mention
of Freezone. They are VERY SCARED of that because
the public who does believe in the tech might bail
out on them if they could see that there was any
other choice open.
With threats of lawsuits and fair game, the CofS limited
ABC's coverage to the criticisms that have already
appeared in earlier news specials. And ABC does not
have a shallow investigative team.
So let me say what ABC was afraid to say:
THERE IS A REFORM MOVEMENT.
THERE IS FREEZONE SCIENTOLOGY.
THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE IN THE TECH WHO HAVE
BEEN ATTACKED ENDLESSLY BY THE COFS.
And of course there is a Free Self Clearing book
available on the Net.
Let me encourage Freezone Bible and other defenders
of the tech to post more LRH works to the internet
and get the data out to the majority of Scientologists
who no longer wish to be associated with the degraded
orthodox organization but who do need the materials
that CofS tries to suppress with copyright laws
and persecution of free Scientologists.
Auditors of the world arise, you have nothing to
loose but your certs.
Yours In Total Freedom,
The Pilot
PS. I'll be reposting some things for new visitors
who might be attracted to ARS by the show.
Normally I only post periodically and I'm making
an exception to get this message out.
==========================================
All of this weeks messages were posted with the following
trailer -
------------------
The free Self Clearing Book, The Super Scio book, and the
"SCIENTOLOGY REFORMER'S HOME PAGE" are all over the net.
See The Self Clearing Homepage for URLs to these sites
http://fza.org/pilot/selfclr.htm or
http://www.proweb.co.uk/~tech/clear.htm
Or see The Pilots Home Page at
http://fza.org/pilot/index.htm
Some translations are available, see
In German - www.sgmt.at/pilot.htm
In Hungarian - www.extra.hu/self/index.html
In Russian -
http://www.user.cityline.ru/~cisergem/ and www.aha.ru/~espinol
and
http://www.tagil.ru/~sk/pilot/pilot.html.
All of this week's posts will be collected in Super Scio Archives
#43 and posted to ACT. See the Pilot Archives at FZA.ORG.
Also, the individual posts to ARS are being double posted to
ACT rather than cross posted to foil the spambot. So if you
pick up a spam replaced one on ARS you can get the real one from
ACT or find a good one on dejanews.
Note that some of my posts only go to ACT. I cannot be reached by email.
I watch ARS and ACT for messages with Pilot in the subject line.
------------------
