Date: 29 Jan 1999 04:00:23
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology
From:
[email protected] (The Pilot)
Subject: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 46 - LATE JAN 99 PILOT POSTS
POST46.txt
SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 46 - LATE JAN 99 PILOT POSTS
[There were so many interesting reponses to post45/46 that
I decided to reply immediately]
==========================================
Contents:
subj: Super Scio - On Scienotology (Attn podkayne, CBW, Perry)
subj: Super Scio - To Warrior On HCOPL 23 fEB 70RA
subj: Super Scio - About Level 0 PABS (attn Rob, Martin)
subj: Super Scio - To Keith On Minton
subj: Super Scio Humor - Archeologist Finds Cabbage Scroll
subj: Super Scio - On The Italian Translation (Attn Bruno)
subj: Super Scio Tech - Preparation For Advanced Processes (Attn Beth)
subj: Super Scio Tech - To Bill On How Long To Run A Process
subj: Super Scio Tech - The Tibetan Book Of The Dead (Attn Robert)
subj: Super Scio Tech - More On Taking Sins (Attn Heidrun)
subj: Super Scio Tech - Answering SwampFox On Self Clearing
subj: Super Scio Tech - FOLLOWUP ON BETWEEN LIVES
==========================================
subj: Super Scio - On Scienotology (Attn podkayne, CBW, Perry)
ON SCIENOTOLOGY (Attn podkayne, CBW, Perry)
On 28 Jan 99,
[email protected] (Podkayne-Xenu) posted on
topic "Re: HARBOURING SELFISH THOUGHTS" (referring to an earlier
post by scienotology)
> In article <
[email protected]>,
[email protected] (C. B.
> Willis) wrote:
>
> > Insightful and calmly paced indeed.
> > I wonder if Pilot is writing them? - CBW
> >
> >
> > Perry Scott (
[email protected]) wrote:
> > : I don't know how many other people are reading these trolls by
> > : "Scieno"tology, but I find them quite insightful. I often catch
> > : myself saying "If only CoS would listen AND DO these things, the
> > : 'Internet Problem' would disappear." Sigh.
>
> That's how I felt about most of the AOLBoard Scns. JDavis excepted.
>
> --
> "Dear Joe. I'm sorry but no go on coming out of isolation yet"
> -- Sacred Co$ Scripture
> Read more Heinlein
No, I haven't been writing these scienOtology posts. But I
find them enjoyable. This is what the CofS should be doing if
they had any sense and could confront their past overts.
So, as Heidrun was also saying, this is much more than a troll.
It is really a demonstration of what Scientology should be.
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj: Super Scio - To Warrior On HCOPL 23 fEB 70RA
TO WARRIOR ON HCOPL 23 FEB 70RA
On 28 Jan 99, Warrior <
[email protected]> posted on
subject "Re Scientology policy needed"
> >Warrior wrote:
> >>
> >> I am looking for HCO PL 23 February 1970 "The LRH Comm Weekly Report".
> >>
> >> Anyone have a copy of this?
>
> In article <
[email protected]>, roger says...
> >
> >Perhaps i'll be able to get my hands on it, unsure. Should be on OEC Vol 7.
> >
> >roger
>
> I have the first US printing (1974) OEC Vol 7, and it's not in there.
> Perhaps it is in a later printing, but I would tend to think not. I
> believe the issue is a limited distribution. I would not have known
> the date and title of the issue if it weren't for the fact that it is
> referenced in another policy letter.
>
> I would really like to see what the HCO PL says.
>
> Warrior
> See
http://www.entheta.net/entheta/1stpersn/warrior/
I checked my 1976 OEC Volumes.
The HCOPL appears in the index by title as 23 FEB 70RA which means
that it was revised once prior to 1976. There is no volume or page
number reference (and it does not appear in the index by date)
and therefore it is not included in the OEC volumes (that is the
case with about 2/3rds of the HCOPLs that have LRH Comm in
the beginning of the title). Therefore, as you say, it seems
to be limited distribution and not easily available.
I do have the feeling that I read it when it came out. In
those days, mimeo dumped everything new that came out into
everybody's in basket regardless of distribution. (the setup
and subsequent cleaning of a mimeo machine take as long as
running a hundred copies, and people jumped from post to
post, so print one for everybody and toss 50 in the files
as long as you are setting up to run it off anyway).
Of course truely confidential tech and GO only stuff was
not mimeo'd locally (hardcopy mailed to the Cl 8 C/Ses etc.).
The vague idea I have of what was in this and other LRH comm
issues I saw in those days is that it was pretty much just worrying
about stats and PR flaps and pushing staff onto flag services and
so forth rather than hot GO style topics.
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj: Super Scio - About Level 0 PABS (attn Rob, Martin)
About Level 0 PABS (attn Rob, Martin)
On 26 Jan 99,
[email protected] (Martin Hunt) posted on
subject "Re FZ Tech Lover 0/11 Level 0 Academy Pack"
> In article <
[email protected]>,
>
[email protected] (Rob Clark) wrote:
>
> >On 22 Jan 1999 19:20:03 -0000, Secret Squirrel <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>A Freezone Bible Supporter
> >
> >>Here is a complete Level 0 Academy pack from the 1970s
> >>being posted in 11 parts. Contents below following the
> >>FZ Bible mission statement.
> >
> >what happened to the level 0 PABS? they were part of the st. hill special
> >briefing course.
>
> The SHSBC is way up the training bridge from Level 0. Many
> of the PABS (Professional Auditors Bulletins) can be found
> in the red vols, posted to ars previously.
>
> --
> Cogito, ergo sum. Just the FAQs:
http://scientologysucks.lron.com
>
> "...you are replying to an off-topic forged message that was posted
> by a 'bot. The person whose name appears in the From: header of that
> message almost certainly did not post it. Many regulars on a.r.s.,
> including me, have been victims of these forgeries.
>
> This appears to be a CoS plot to discredit critics by associating us
> with racist and pro-Nazi statements that we did not in fact make."
> - Ron Newman
The pack they posted has the individual PABS among the
materials. The Level 0 PABS book went out of print once
the expanded packs like this started coming out in the
1970s. Up until then there was no easy way to get the
PABS that had to be studied as part of doing the course
(the tech vols didn't come out until about 1975) so the
book was a necessity.
I don't think that there was anything in the level 0 pabs
book that isn't in the pack, but I'll check if I can find
my old copy (which is burried somewhere in the boxes of
stuff in my house).
And let me take this opportunity to welcome and encourage
"Tech Lover" who posted the pack.
"The work was free, keep it so".
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj: Super Scio - To Keith On Minton
TO KEITH ON MINTON
On 28 Jan 98,
[email protected] (Keith) replied to my post on
"Super Scio - To Bob Minton on Credibility"
> Posted by:
[email protected]
> ----------------------------
> Followup msg to:
> 27 Jan 1999 04:00:39
> alt.clearing.technology
>
[email protected] (The Pilot)
> <
[email protected]>
>
>
> >Hypothetically speaking, if you were to suddenly gain
> >control of the CofS copyrights, would you dump them
> >into the public domain, drop the judgements against
> >Grady etc., and encourage putting all the stuff up
> >at websites? Or would you have some other agenda?
>
>
> I have always questioned Bobs motives myself. He comes
> on the scene handing out cash and obtains the status of
> savior in the media. He breaks up a twenty year marriage
> , takes over FACTnet and has a major incident with a shotgun.
> It reminds me of what LRH wrote about anti-social personalities.
>
> IMO,
>
> Keith
> --------------------------------
> "WInning battles, people, is what we pay admirals and generals for."
> Tom Clancy
> --------------------------------------------------
>
http://www.teleport.com/~kew
>
http://www.teleport.com/~kew/simtelnet1999/ Latest Simtel Software Uploads
> List
I take the opposite tactic, looking for the best in people
and only reluctantly seeing that there is a major outpoint.
I put up with CofS outnesses for decades and supported Int.
Management despite the endless outnesses and only reluctantly
decided to take action.
I do not like the anti-social personality HCOB because I
saw it abused and turned into witch hunting so many times.
As far as I can see, it does not fit the majority of the
critics, although it might describe a very few people on
each side of the struggle. But Miscaviage probably lines up
better with it than Minton.
However I agree with you in that Bob's motives do have to
be called into question. Right now it seems like he is
spreading false data and playing mindgames with the critics
and that is very hard to fathom unless there is some hidden
purpose behind his actions.
I really hope that Bob will come through and prove me
wrong in this.
And on the same note, I really hope that DM will prove
me wrong too, showing himself to be good hearted and
willing to reform the orgs.
Sometimes I wish for things far beyond the realm of
possiblity.
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj: Super Scio Humor - Archeologist Finds Cabbage Scroll
Humor - ARCHEOLOGIST FINDS CABBAGE SCROLL
From an anchient scroll found in the ruins of Los Angeles:
And so did it come to pass that in the year 50 Anno Dianeticus,
Lyingman Spurtcock did come to the court at Gilman to offer
council to Lord Davey, prince of the Cabbage People.
"Your Standardness," Lyingman proclamed, "It is time for
us to elevate Hubbard into a god. Let us call a great council
of all the faithful that we mightest accomplish this noble deed."
"Let it not be the faithful for they are fools, but only
those who are upstat in our eyes" replied the Davey.
And few indeed were adequately upstat, but after dilligent
searching, the nobles Starkpee and Wrathburn were found
to be the upstatliest within the realm and were duely
appointed to the council.
And in the fullness of time did the council meet and debate
the issues contingent upon the glorious elevation of the
sacred LRH.
"First and foremost, these wives have to go," said the
Cabbage master. "The first is evil, the second a communist,
and the third has been to jail".
"But then where did the children come from?" asked
Starkpee.
True to his name, Wrathburn yelled "No Backflash! Just
MAKE IT GO RIGHT!".
"I have it", said Lyingman. "Our beloved founder
postulated them into existance."
"Very Well Done," said Davey. "That lets us make
Ronnie a virgin too."
"Next is the scotch. He really used to pour it down
at parties," continued the prince.
"Butterscotch" said Lyingman.
"What?" asked Starkpee, who was a mite slow.
"Butterscotch candies at parties. Instead of drinking
he ate them."
"Score another one for Spurtcock" said Davey. "And
what about the cigarettes in the LRH offices?"
This set them all to pacing around, rending at their
clothes and tearing at their hair.
Starkpee grabbed an e-meter and tried to take a reading
but it would not stop rock slamming.
Wrathburn began banging on a file cabinet until Davey
threatened him with the RPF.
Davey himself, becoming bored, began sketching a picture
of bodies falling into a volcano.
"I have it!" yelled Lyingman. "They were planted there by
the evil psychs!"
With this there was much congradulations and backslapping
all around.
"There is a moral to this," announed Davey. "A spurting
cock is better than stark pee any day!"
Beyond this point the scroll has been gnawed by rats and
is unintelligible.
Humorously,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj: Super Scio - On The Italian Translation (Attn Bruno)
ON THE ITALIAN TRANSLATION (Attn Bruno)
On 12 Jan 99, "Bruno Bertoncin" <
[email protected]> posted on
subject "help on translating Pilot's Self Clearing into italian"
> Hallo everybody, hallo Pilot
> am an ex-staff member from italian Narconon.
> As I agree with what stated in "The Scientology Reformer's Home Page", I
> would like to put on the Web a new site as a point of reference for
> everybody (especially italians) who share the same reformer goal. The accent
> will be on what can be done rather then simply attacking the Church of Scn.
> I just started Pilot's Self Clearing Book, and I think it would be great to
> have an italian translation wich everybody could download from the site.
> I already translated the Preface and Chap.1 and 2 and I would like to have
> the full translation available before putting my site on the Web.
> Is there anybody who could help me translating some chapters of the book?
> Anybody who would like to help me or is interested in or have any
> suggestion, please mail me at
[email protected].
>
> Thank you, Pilot, for your book
> ARC, Bruno Bertoncin
Excellent. Let me encourage this.
ARC,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj: Super Scio Tech - Preparation For Advanced Processes (Attn Beth)
PREPARATION FOR ADVANCED PROCESSES (Attn Beth)
On 27 JAN 99, Beth Guest <
[email protected]> asked
on subject "Attn Pilot"
> Dear Pilot,
>
> Firstly:
>
> I would welcome your opinion on the book
> "The Pied Pipers of Heaven" by L Kin.
>
> Do you think the data in it is correct?
I keep meaning to get a copy, but I haven't gotten around
to it yet. What I've read of it online seems good.
> Secondly:
>
> I read your processes about a) taking on another's karma and also b) the
> objectives concerning "put the ceiling there" etc in your recent posts.
>
> Just *reading* the processes seemed to blow me away - so much so I
> daren't even think about them.
>
> I have a gut feeling that if I started to run these I would end up well
> I am not sure but feels BIGGGGG.
>
> What safeguards should one take before running processes where - I am
> assuming - one might end up out of the body/PU/game/life/the universe
> and everything/whatever?
>
> Last time something of this order of magnitude happened I was scared
> silly - had a huge win but was still scared silly! (Running Alan
> Walter's Celebration of Wins process solo) Have since run out the fear
> but I just don't fancy getting into this kind of stuff (again?) solo
> without having some guidelines about what to do. If I was with someone I
> trusted e.g. husband, what would he/I do if, for example, the PU
> vanished for me? (or similar)
I haven't worried about this kind of thing.
I did however have the body disappear out from under me once.
I described that in the first section of Chapter 9 of Super Scio.
After drifting around for a bit I suddenly remembered everything
and snapped back, much to the relief of the girl who was running
around yelling for me.
Around 1960, Van Vogt wrote a Sci Fi book called "The Silkie".
It is the first one he did after Scientology (he had stopped
writing during the 50s while he was involved). Near the end
there is a description of briefly exteriorizing from the
physical universe, described very much in Scientology terms
(not used otherwise in the book) and very real sounding to
someone such as myself who has fooled around with CofHA etc.
So I suspect that it is a real description and he had his own
experience along these lines.
Otto Roos also had a dematerialization story (Fran Deitch was
the witness) and Bob Thomas also talked of exteriorization
from the physical universe.
So these things are wild and wonderful but since one is connected
to the games here and probably has many things unresolved, the
effect is brief and one slides back in.
However, it does occurs to me that if I'd been better prepared I
might have achieved something fantastic instead of simply having
an interesting experience. And the same could be said for the
others, since they all seemed to have the same kind of tale
of a brief and amazing experience where they didn't think
to try for anything beyond the wonder of the experience
itself.
I would say that your best preparation is the after death
rundown I put in the post about between lives a few days
ago. Note that the rundown can be done without dropping
the body, it is simply an arrangement of what I thing would
be most useful after dropping the body. It should be just
as useful if the body should vanish or one should step
further out.
Also note that you can be exterior to the physical universe
while continuing to reach into it and remaining connected,
just like being exterior to the body while continueing
to run it. The feeling is that you are no longer affected
by the game but yet can see both sides and laugh at it
and still play and have fun. I had that briefly for a
few months but it was unstable. However it still helps
me to recall that time whenever I start getting too tangled
up.
If somebody is with you when you disappear, it might help
you orient if they call your name.
> Thank you for your posts in general.
>
> They always feel to me full of space, safety, optimism, affinity and a
> touch of humour but sensible too. I like that last bit very much i.e.
> feet on the ground/lack of BS- especially if you don't mind my saying
> so. Perhaps a reaction against the "We will 100X the stats in the next
> 10 minutes and Clear London in our coffee break" days in the church.
>
> (I don't follow some of your jokey ones but the rest to me are like
> that)
>
> Thanks
> --
> Beth
Thank you for the compliment.
Affinity,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj: Super Scio Tech - To Bill On How Long To Run A Process
TO BILL ON HOW LONG TO RUN A PROCESS
On 28 JAN 99,
[email protected] (Bill Maier) asked on
subject "Pilot: Am I doing this correctly?"
> I have been running the processes from your self-clearing handbook.
> In general this has gone quite well. However, I find I do have some
> difficulty in spotting when to end a process.
>
> One particular situation that seems to arise frequently is this: I run
> a process for a relatively short time, say 3 to 5 minutes, and then
> have a small cognition. Is this too short a time to run a process?
> Should I accept the win and move on, or continue the process to a
> bigger win?
>
> Bill
It is not too short a run. The most important is to keep
winning and build up momentum rather than try to get every ounce
out of a process.
The org has this wrong idea that a grade is only run once and
therefore they struggle to do it to perfection the first time.
But the wild keyouts and momentary OT abilities never appeared
while being excessively thorough, at least not that I know of.
The biggest gains per unit of time were always on doing a fast
pass through the grades, not quickies where nothing was run,
but fast light runs to nice cognitions. The preclears would
always love it and the real problem was that they would run
out of grades quickly. And then they would have trouble later
because they were supposedly Clear but had barely started
handling their case.
They never realized that there were many more grades that
could be done or that they could cycle back and do these
things again and again.
Each time you work over an area you go deeper, you don't
get the same kind of thing at all unless you are overrunning.
Straightwire after grade 4 or after clear runs like dynamite
and opens up whole track like crazy. And on a third pass its
even better.
There is an "under run" phenomena where one feels one's
attention pulled back or feels a bit irritated or too chared
up. If that is happening, you are cutting it too short.
And of course there is overrun, which is a bit more distinct
and easy to spot. If you are hitting that freequently,
then certainly learn to take the earlier wins.
Inside those boundaries, you have flexibility and you should
see what gives you the biggest gains, spending more time
on each process or doing more processes in the same
time period.
I don't think that there is anybody who could run something
like communications all the way down to basic on a single
pass. Obviously, one will go further on communication
after confronting withholds and upsets and so forth.
So do whatever is building up your horsepower the fastest
without worrying too much about how long you run each
process.
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj: Super Scio Tech - The Tibetan Book Of The Dead (Attn Robert)
THE TIBETAN BOOK OF THE DEAD (Attn Robert)
On 28 Jan 99,
[email protected] (RDucharme) posted on
subject "Re Super Scio Tech - BETWEEN LIVES EXPLORATION"
> At 13:41 27/01/99 -0500, The Pilot wrote:
>
> >
> >There have been various attempts to describe the between
> >lives area. I would suspect that these are all vague half
> >truths and not entirely accurate, but are well worth reading
> >non-the-less so as to be properly prepared.
> >
> >The best is Evan's translation of "The Tibetan Book of the
> >Dead". A nice second look with some insights of its own
> >is "The American Book of the Dead" by E.J. Gold. Monroe's
> >books are also highly recommended. And there are lots
> >of interesting books in the new age section in the
> >bookstores.
> >
>
> On this I consulted my OT client Bill, who spent a year in northern India
> among the Tibetan Buddhists (that's where they mostly are now since they
> were evicted by the Red Chinese). He considers himself an expert on the
> Tibetan Book of the Dead.
>
> He told me that the book by Gold is among the best translations, but that
> Evan Wertz's translation is flawed, and that the Tibetan monks told him that
> too. He recommends against it. He said the best translation is by Robert
> Thurman (Uma Thurman's, father by the way). He also highly recommends the
> book Theory of Eternal Life by Rodney Collins.
Actually it's W.Y. Evans-Wentz. He give a huge amount of footnotes
and interpretations and comparisons of different versions of the
book. I suspect that anyone who followed a particular version
religiously would not like the Evans version. It's like having
a Bible passage where Moses parts the red sea and then saying in the
footnotes that the Catholic Vulgate has the Archangel Michael
parting it and the so and so version has God parting it for Moses
but the such and such version has Moses himself doing the parting.
Gold's book is not a translation, it is a complete rewrite in
a modern American Context, Bardo (between lives) Movie Theatres
and so forth. I enjoy it but it is a bit shallow and lacks a
lot of useful ideas that can be found in Evans.
I'll have to keep my eye out for the Thurman version. I'm not
sure if it's one of the others that I've skimmed through.
And I'll look for Collins' Eternal Life as well.
> Some things he said include:
>
> � He knew Gold personally and said that he used to make E-meters in Scn.
How about that!
> � Processwise, he leans toward the LRH repetative processes that go
> something like "If you were to die tomorrow, what would you regret not
> having done?" and "If you were waiting to be reborn, what kind of a life
> would you set up". He said there were a couple of others along the same line.
Nice.
> � He highly recommends the book "The Tibetan Book of the Dead for Reading
> Aloud" by Jean Claude Von Italie. It just recently came out and is put out
> by North Atlantic Books of Berkeley California. He says it's the best book
> in print on the subject. He recommends that as the first book to read on
> the subject.
I would have said Gold's, but I'm not familiar with Italie's.
> � The best way to leave the body at death is out through the top of the
> head and not through other parts of the body like the hands, feet, anus, etc.
In exteriorization, its best to just be out as in be (not move) 3 feet
back of your head.
Next best is, I feel, rolling out sideways as in Monroe.
Third, pushing out through the back of the head rather than going
forward through the 3rd eye area which has implants and energy
fields associated with it. Ron had people put a beam up against
the inside of the forehead and push themselves out the back of the
head as step 2 of one of the early SOPs.
The old Sugmad material has you exit through the third eye using
the 6th chakra and since Eck picked up this stuff they probably
do it that way too. I've played around with that and Ron is
right about the 3rd eye area being messed up.
Anyone who'd choose to exit through their ass is pretty crapped up.
> � The first moment of death is the most important for orientation.
I agree.
> � He's had a near-death experience and he can also exteriorize at
> will. He says the two are totally different experiences. He says
> the body acts as an orientation point to keep the being focused.
Again I agree (I've had one near death experience this lifetime).
I've also had that one time the body dematerialized and that is
yet a 3rd different feeling.
> � Buddhists can't get releases like is done in clearing tech,
> but they spend all their time doing basic processes, and so
> become adepts that way.
Yes. But that is why they only make small progress in each
liftime and have estimates of huge numbers of lifetimes to
make it out.
----------
A most interesting discussion.
Best,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj: Super Scio Tech - More On Taking Sins (Attn Heidrun)
MORE ON TAKING SINS (Attn Heidrun)
On 28 Jan 99, Heidrun Beer <
[email protected]> responded to
my earlier post on "Super Scio Tech - TAKING OTHER'S SINS"
> On Wed, 27 Jan 1999 13:41:40 -0500 (EST), The Pilot wrote:
>
> >
> >TAKING OTHER'S SINS
> >
> >
> >I was thinking of this business of Jesus taking on everyone's
> >sins. That is more than just forgiveness. It is more than
> >simple responsibility. It is an "I will carry that man's
> >burden". Or, even better, "I will take that man's Karma".
> >
> >And I do think that Jesus had something, I don't think
> >that its just made up stories or an R6 dramatization.
>
>
> Jesus had a lot!! (Before the squirrels took over, of course.)
>
> It's more than Karma in my opinion - he postulates a one-ness
> (there are many bible quotes which back this up).
>
> If people were at one with each other, they wouldn't make a difference
> who it is who is hungry or in pain. They would simply keep working
> until hunger and pain are eliminated from planet Earth.
>
> In a functioning body also nobody would distinguish which cell
> in the tissue has trouble with an invading germ (or a nutritient
> deficiency or any other problem). Nobody says "Cell no. 3.251.672
> in the left leg has hit a hot oven and hurts. Now let's have a look
> how it will resolve this."
>
> No! The body's perception is "I HURT!" - and all cells immediately
> start working in unison to move cell no. 3.251.672 out of the
> dangerous area.
>
>
> Jesus says:
>
> "Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the
> least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." (Mt 25:40)
>
>
> I think there is more to this than logical thinking. A spiritual
> being who has cleaned his own universe and trained his telepathic
> perceptions, will develop a kind of nerve system for the larger
> spiritual organism he is part of. S/he will FEEL the needs, the
> pain, the guilt of any other part of this organism. Of course
> also the joy and success!
>
> To a great part it is a matter of organizing. I am thinking about
> these things for a very long time, and I have found that with a
> really consequent application of the oneness-idea one's practical
> life comes to a halt, because he would never stop helping somebody
> and would exhaust himself in no time.
>
> Probably the unconditional oneness and love called "Christ Consciousness"
> will have to use tools like lines, terminals, hats, the org board etc.,
> if it wants to be a blessing and not a catastrophy.
>
> Heidrun Beer
>
> Workgroup for Fundamental Spiritual Research and Mental Training
>
http://www.sgmt.at
Yes, I agree wholeheartedly.
But I wonder if you missed the point of the process as a
process.
Of course he has a tremendous one-ness.
But it is this specific point of saying "I will take that man's
fate unto myself" that I think is the action which carries you
through.
This is the end of Dicken's Tale of Two Cities. I want him to
go free so I will let myself be executed in his place.
Except, of course, that you should as-is his fate after taking
it instead of suffering it.
But I'm still taking baby steps with this one.
Affinity,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj: Super Scio Tech - Answering SwampFox On Self Clearing
ANSWERING SWAMPFOX On Self Clearing
He posted this to the FZA Discussion Board at fza.org.
Note that these are difficult for me to pick up, but
this one seemed like it needed a reply.
> Self Clearing, response to The Pilot
>
> By Swampfox (Swampfox) on Wednesday, January 27, 1999 - 07:07 pm:
>
> The Pilot asked 10 questions in his Jan 99 Pilot Posts 2/2
> entitled "Questions for People Running Self Clearing"
>
> 1. What previous processing or training have you had in
> Scientology or metaphysics or other mental practices?
>
> 2. How far have you gotten with the book?
>
> 3. Are you still working with it?
>
> 4. What was your biggest win on it?
>
> 5. What was your biggest difficulty?
>
> 6. Would the materials have been easier in a different sequence?
>
> 7. Was there something you didn't understand or disagreed with?
>
> 8. Was there something that was extremely enlightening?
>
> 9. Are you having fun with it, or is it a chore to work with?
>
> 10. Do you have any suggestions for improvements?
>
> In response:
>
> 1 Previous training.
>
> I was 99% through the NED course when they stopped training me.
> The course supervisor threw me out of the course. I also did the
> HQS course and did a false attest on the DCSI. I also had a
> seriously bad "Ethics" handling after the DCSI, and 36 hours
> of HGC "Livingness Repair" which was an attempt to handle the
> ARC break of the above "Ethics" without actually addressing the
> "Ethics" handling. I haven't really started up the bridge.
You may need to take some charge off the mishandling.
It might help just to describe it. Share your story on ACT
or clear-l or whatever.
Another thing that might blow some charge would be to mockup
the mishandling in various locations and blow it up.
The CofS sometimes has trouble handling the ARC breaks they
create because they reject the idea that they might be wrong
and you can't get rid of the charge in session with an auditor
who is making the pc wrong.
A thorough handling by a professional would be good, but
I am assuming that it might not be practical right now. You can
do these things solo but you need to know a lot, so I'm suggesting
that you do a little bit to cool it down and then leave a
full handling for later if you can.
> 2 How far did I get with the Self Clearing book?
>
> I got up to the Chapter 2, Reach and Withdraw. After that I
> bogged down.
(see number 5)
> 3. Am I still working on it. No, I bogged down, I
> wasn't really getting anything out of it.
>
> 4. What was my biggest win on it. Doing process 1.1. This
> revitalized me, and seemed to rehab, or at least validate,
> some wins I had earlier in life and in Scientology objectives.
> More on this in #8.
This indicates that you can get good results solo.
> 5. Biggest difficulty? The materials just seemed to drag.
> My real interest has allways been Dianetics. The cognitions I
> had doing the processes were no bigger than the ones I have
> reading the newspaper.
If something needs to be run and the processes are not coming
close, then of course it seems like a drag. More below.
> 6. Easier in a different sequence? I am still waiting for
> Dianetics.
It's in Chapter 28, "Incident Running".
The ideal sequence is not the same for everybody. And you
were training on NED, so you may have something sitting there
that has your attention and is ready to run.
If it is simply that you were sold by the sales hype and
think your whole case is Dianetics, then leave it for later
because there are faster ways to make the same gains.
But if you have some incidents sitting there ready to run,
then go ahead and handle them as a sort of assist. I would
not recommend doing a major Dianetics style action (health
form kind of stuff) without first doing lots of recall
processes (self clearing chapter 6). But you can certainly
handle an incident if it seems needed.
As an alternative to doing real Dianetic incident running,
there is an exceptionaly good assist which is to alternately
a) Spot something in the incident
b) spot something in the room
If you persist on this one it will bring up conversations
and everything out of unconsious periods. It seems to
work well on Clears without getting into the troubles
they sometimes have on R3R. And it seems capable of
flattening late life operations and things without the
usual difficulties associated with being too late on
the chain.
> 7. Something I didn't understand or disagreed with. Not really
> a problem.
>
> 8. Something extremely enlightening? Yes, I realized that
> when a person is putting out points, he is sometimes bypassing
> the physical universe. And that is where the excitement is.
> When I was about 16, I shot a duck with a 22 guage rifle, and
> the duck was about 1/4 mile away, and flying, and I was standing
> in a moving boat. I created a beam down the barrel of the rifle,
> and when it intersected the duck, I adjusted for the speed of
> the duck and fired. The duck dropped. I can't say that I rehabilited
> that ability, it only existed for a moment 30 years ago.
> But I acknowledged myself for doing it, and several other
> things I have done over the years.
Very good.
It seems like some techniques are working for you.
At start, there might only be a small set of things that
really work. Going at it solo, there is less that is in
the band of accessibility. As you have wins on what can
be run, more things will become accessible.
If a chapter seems to be going nowhere, then drop it and
move on. Just don't skim too much too fast. Take your
time. If something is ready to run, it will seem interesting.
Don't worry about missing out on things because you can
pick these up at a later time (and they will seem of more
interest when it is time to handle them).
> 9. Having fun? No, I bogged down in the next chapter.
>
> 10. Any suggestions for improvements? No, I am not qualified.
> But I do have a question. I was reading "Clearing the Body/Mind"
> by Adrian Hansen. In Chapter 5 (page 3 of 10) she stated that
> "certain aberrations are precipitated by outside
> influences, such as other peoples' stuff, and "disembodied
> entities" that are picked up from them "telepathically"! I
> just read that a few days ago, and I think that may be what
> stopped me from doing Self Analysis and later Self
> Clearing. While doing Self Analysis for the first time, I
> had a huge win on "Recall a time when you were happy." I
> shot up in tone (which is how the mind responds) and then
> immediately got the impression that that was not the way
> things were all the time, and immediately dropped down to a
> tone much lower. Now I don't think that the "impression" I
> got originated from me. Maybe it came from and entity, or a
> bt or something. But because I did not question the
> thought, my mind responded to it as if it were my own. And
> that mystery could be why I could never figure out why the
> session went bad, and why most future sessions went bad.
> Well, right now I am presenting the above theory, but I am
> asking, not telling. Could this be an "entity" phenomena,
> and how should I handle it. I just had this cognition
> earlier today, so I haven't given myself enough time to
> test my theory.
It could be an entity phenomena, and you can blow one with
"point to the being you divided from" or "who are you"
as discussed in chapter 38. But entities are not primary
sources, they only feed your own stuff back to you, and
I would suggest that it is better to leave these for later
unless there is a particular one nagging at you, in which
case you can blow him off as an assist.
You can also get stuff like this from a person who is
acting suppressively towards you. That is discussed in
chapter 24. But again, a "suppressive influence" is
not primary source on a person's case, they just talk you
into keying in more stuff than usual.
Trying to audit over a problem or upset or a bad loss
can have this effect.
For problems, see chapter 15.
For upsets, see chapter 21.
For a loss, the easiest assist is to mockup copies of what
(or who) was lost in various places and blow them up.
If you were a complete beginner, I would suggest getting
some professional handling. But since you have had some
training, you should be able to run the process if you
can find the right one to run, and you probably have
enough familiarity with rudiments and so forth to have
a bit of a feel for what needs to be handled.
Good Luck,
The Pilot
==========================================
subj: Super Scio Tech - FOLLOWUP ON BETWEEN LIVES
FOLLOWUP ON BETWEEN LIVES
My recent post on Between Lives (including an after death
rundown) seems to have generated a lot of interesting
responses.
==============
On 28 Jan 99,
[email protected] (MegaSquirrel) posted
> Thanks for this great post, Pilot. This definitely belongs in the
> hall of fame of tech posting, along with my other favorite from
> archive #18, Ron's research line (courage processing and Ron mocking
> up his own opposition, etc)
>
> If or when I do this rundown for real (after dropping the body) and if
> I can avoid the between-lives implant, I'm gonna try to escape into
> the galaxy at large and reincarnate into a space empire aristocracy,
> and come back here with a space fleet and blow the prison machinery to
> bits. Hehe
Looking forward to it! I will watch X-Files in anticipation.
> On 27 Jan 1999 04:00:22,
[email protected] (The Pilot)
> wrote:
>
> >
> >BETWEEN LIVES EXPLORATION
> >[snip]
===================
On 28 Jan 99,
[email protected] (Pierre) posted
> Pilot wrote: (with lots of snips)
I snipped more since my post is in the pilot archives.
> >BETWEEN LIVES EXPLORATION
>
> >On of the biggest problems is to avoid a crash in havingness
> >due to the loss of the body.
>
> >I would suggest that one's first action on dropping the
> >body is to immediately work to raise havingness before
> >one's perceptions begin to fade or one begins to go unconsious
> >or one starts following tunnels or whatever looking for
> >the light.
>
> >Next would be to raise perception and further improve
> >havingness.
>
> >AD-2) Run either simple alternate spotting or mental
> >reach and withdraw (chapters 1 or 2 of self clearing)
> >on the enviornment around the body which one has dropped.
>
> I snipped much of good stuff, keeping the parts I'm
> aligning my comments on.
>
> The drop of havingness is _not only_ because of dropped
> body. Especially if the being was ext to the body
> during that lifetime.
>
> The loss of havingness is also regarding possessions
> and people.
This is a good point.
A skilled practicioner or advanced student might be up
to putting his ruds in, but it is too much to expect of
most people.
One could, however, extend the handling of loss to running
possessions and people as well as the loss of the body.
> Let's have a look at Rudiments and possible out-rudiments.
> there are many variations to this (this *very fast* cycle).
>
> Visiting people, the being perceives they cannot
> communicate with him. He's not the terminal for them anymore,
> even though he tries to communicate with them (like some
> "ghosts" try to) Thus ARCX - defined also as "unfinished
> cycle(s)".
Often people do manage to communicate with people they are
very close to when they die. This is the most common of
the stories one hears in metaphysics.
> Thus Problem, his identity unmocked, versus him trying
> to mock himself up. Finishing cycles - impossible to finish
> cycles.
>
> Part of the solution is examining what he didn't
> do, or didn't communicate to them, Witholds.
>
> And what he did, and shouldn't have done, Overts.
>
> Follows Evaluation and Invalidation, which are the
> counterparts of the Grade IV, computations and serv
> facs. "What identity he should be in order to succeed
> next time", etc. (the "just before this lieftime" serv
> fac, on which the person aligns his behaviour, might
> be interesting to examine).
>
> Now he's ready for ...
>
> >Next, the western tradition is that you are met by
> >friends and family who have died (usually this is
> >at the end of the tunnel). The Tibetan material
> >says that you will be met by benificial entities
> >(even if you resist going down any tunnels). Other
> >traditions generally have some kind of similar
> >meetings with guides or whatever.
>
> meeting with kind thoughts/entities/guides/Gods, etc that
> approve how he mocks himself up now, and...
>
> >I would suspect that all of these are seeing the
> >same thing from different perspectives and with
> >different dub-in layered on top of an actual truth.
> >In other words, you will run into something which
> >either is a friendly force or is pretending to
> >be a friendly force (be careful) at this stage.
>
> yes...
>
> >But this could also be bait for a trap, so take
> >care.
> >
> >After the benevolent entities, the Tibetan materials
> >say that the nasty ones will show up. Here you
> >can use the scary form if needed. But even with
> >demons I'd be inclined to talk first and to process
> >unless they are determined to make trouble.
>
> the nasty, opposite terminals can show up. At some point
> we have terminal-opterm situation, and he's ready for GPMs
> and implants of all kinds
A very interesting point. The benevolent and wrathful
ones form a terminal-opterm relationship. I hadn't
thought of that before and it is worth digging into.
> >According to them, near the end of the nasty ones,
> >they will try to judge you and you should reject
> >the judgement. There also seems to be a judegement
> >step in most of the other traditions and the
> >Tibetan advice seems good for this.
>
> yep, like the O/Ws above.
>
> >Eventually, according to the book of the dead, all
> >this stuff will die down and you can go about the
> >business of looking for a nice body which has some
> >money in an area where religious studies are
> >possible.
>
> so, all the stuff dies down, aesthetics take up.
> We could say also that in this little time span the
> being is coming towards "Know" on the K to M scale,
> from wherever he was on that scale, all the ridges
> platted on the scale blowing up into view. Like
> coming into Present time...
>
> and now the being is ready for the show:
>
> >According to Ron, there will be between lives
> >implants, and they will try to sucker you in with
> >nice pictures of pearly gates or whatever and then
> >hit you with an implant
>
> not "hit with", the being is in for a show, like going
> happily to the movies. At the other end he's all ready
> to take a new body, with all things sorted out, and
> quite a program for the next life...
An interesting point. There is a facinating video
called "Orchestra" that shows up on Bravo on Cable TV
sometimes. A real between lives show.
> > and you should just sidestep
> >these and look for a body on your own because they
> >wouldn't actually help you find one but just dump
> >you back here to look for yourself after wiping
> >your recall.
>
> oh, well, at some point the recall is dumped into
> common (genetic) pool, quite a mish-mash. It's not so
> much the fact he cannot recall, but the fact it's
> entagled with a lot of other mess (pictures, ridges..)
>
> >According to some of the other spiritual traditions,
> >and also according to Monroe, souls will tend to
> >cluster together and form some sort of shared
> >mockup and exchange data before selecting a new
> >lifetime.
>
> Yes, at that show one cannot buy ice creams nor
> pop-corns, but...! - one gets some great clustered time
> tracks, as a bonus.
>
> >In the meantime, the after death rundown should be
> >practiced, not only against the possiblity of dying
> >by accident, but also to make it safe to unmock the
> >body if you get up to that level. That one time
> >where my body did vanish left me feeling that it was
> >unsafe to do that, because I forgot so much while I
> >was in that state that I might not have remembered to
> >come back if the girl hadn't been there calling me.
>
> Well, it's important in order to get "safely" into that
> area to have one's case sorted out and having no out-
> ruds (at least!) with the environment. Otherwise "it"
> sticks.
Yes. I think that one needs to get as much run out as
possbile before dropping the body.
> Anyway, I just wanted to add the (Out)-rudiments perspective
> to your post. Thanks for posting!
>
> >Good Luck,
> >
> >The Pilot
>
> Pierre
====================
On 28 Jan 99,
[email protected] (RDucharme) posted
At 13:41 27/01/99 -0500, The Pilot wrote:
> >At the top one materializes and dematerializes real
> >bodies at will. That makes you senior to any cycle
> >of life and death. I'm not there yet, but its
> >where we are going. You don't need to die to do
> >this, instead you unmock the body and then mock it
> >up again.
>
> The people who mock OTas a state where you just push marbles around and so
> don't think they have any use for it, miss the value of OT as stated above.
> To me the ultimate prize of earthly life is where one has attained the
> ability to stably mock up a body and have it communicate with other bodies
> at will. I'm not there yet either, but I have no doubts it can be
> accomplished in one lifetime with present technology if a person
> concentrates on that goal. That's not to say there aren't greater heights
> to reach for, but once one has reached that ability, one is free from the
> need to be limited by bodies' goals and perceptions, while being able to
> experience the various games afforded by an earthly existence. Seems that
> willingly mocked up bodies could be a whole fascinating game in itself.
> Maybe a society of such beings could be formed for the purpose of delevoping
> and delivering a workable bridge to that state. I can imagine the political
> fireworks that kind of a group might encounter though, if it got too well
> known amongst the rabble.
>
> My thanks to the Pilot for once again for providing stimulating discussions
> to this news group at a time when it needed a shot in the arm.
>
> Robert
Exactly. At the very top (above even mocking up and unmocking
bodies at will), I think that we mock up and exchange interesting
realities. There is a shadow of this is people creating web sites
for each other to view.
====================
On 28 Jan 99, "Scott Douglas" <
[email protected]> posted
> I began my search of and with Scio due to an NDE (30 years
> ago) followed up (six months later) with an attempt to
> explore "Life After Death". On the LAD attempt, I decided
> to direct my attention inward (rather outward and upward).
> I believe the reason for this was that I was exterior and
> thought I needed a change in position/direction. It was
> also obvious to me that most people did the out/upward move
> and that wasn't working (in general).
>
> I do not disagree with anything the Pilot has said, but
> would like to offer the following observations:
>
> 1. Loss of the mass of the body may or may not have anything
> to do with recall of the between lives experience. There is
> a shifting of attention and identity when one leaves this
> level of experience. It's almost as though I (or you or
> anyone) has created a matrix of identities through which we
> view this set of realities. When one leaves that set of
> identities, one tends to lose interest in this level of
> reality. I, personally, believe it is the loss of this
> matrix (and/or the gaining of another) that causes the loss
> of being able to relate (memory) one to the other.
There is something to this also. But this could also be
described as loss of the frame of reference. My earlier
post on Frames of Reference does seem applicable to this
area and it was running a bit of that which seemed to
inspire the various advanced posts that I did recently.
If you mockup various frames, just using simple movies
and tv shows for material, and practice shifting between
them, then at a higher level you retain awareness and
recall even though you don't use other frames within
an individual frame.
This fits my idea that we should be awake at some higher
level but instead we are unconscious there.
> 2. The set of processes the Pilot lays out in his memos are
> interesting and might be helpful. I have established TR0 as
> the basic process by which I have (and will) view the
> changing environment of life without a body. The KISS
> principle is very helpful when dealing with (high)
> randomnity. I wonder whether simply placing oneself
> (imaging/imagining) within the reality of non-corporal life
> (using TR0) would be helpful in managing the process in real
> "time".
Yes, TR 0 is a key basic. I think that this is what the
Tibetans describe as the yoga of the clear light where one
performs the-sitting-face-to-face immediately upon dying and
hopes thereby to get out immediately.
> Pilot wrote:
> <<There have been various attempts to describe the between
> lives area. I would suspect that these are all vague half
> truths and not entirely accurate, but are well worth reading
> non-the-less so as to be properly prepared.>>
>
> I agree. I recently made my own foray into the area
> (written up at
>
http://fp.tcsn.net/smdouglas/personal/Between_Lives_Experien
> ce.htm) and as I recall the experience, although real to me,
> it doesn't have the solidity of 3DH as when I recall an
> incident when I was 21 or 9. It does have the solidity of
> most of my whole track recalls.
I'm looking forward to reading it this weekend (right now I'm
rushing to get this batch of posts done).
> Thanks to the Pilot for his AD RD.
>
> ....Scott
========================
This is a facinating area.
My best to all of you,
The Pilot
==========================================
These were all 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 the current posts will be collected in Super Scio Archives
#46 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.
------------------
