Q and A about Ron Hubbard, Bill Robertson, Scientology, the Free Zone and Ron's Org

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

2. Jim kept mentioning we are the creators of the universe/s and I understand that in some way. But it sounds as if he believes there is no such thing as the original Source (what I used to refer to as God).
Having a Chistian background, though a very open-minded one, I find myself unable to accept that. When I consider that we are all parts or sparks of Source and we are all one ultimately, I still believe that the whole is more than its parts (like a melody can be more than the single notes). What is your take on that? The only honest answer is that I don't know! Most certainly, back in the mists of time (and there have been many universes, LONG before the 'Big Bang', which is relatively recent if it happened at all!), we were all god-like beings with immense power and ability. Our current state is a very fallen, small and restricted one. What happened before that, I have no strong idea.

Dipping in briefly, there's a snippet I once heard vaguely relating to this. I cannot now place where it came from, it may've been a contactee account. What was hinted at, purportedly, is that God, or "The Source", though it is the Creator force (of which we are a part), is not in fact the be all and end all. As the source and also the convergence of All-that-is, it's not the beginning, so nor the ultimate end. Something existing above and beyond Source. What that might be is unknowable, because supposedly it's even beyond those high up in Spirit. They don't know either.

A theory, a claim, or just an idea, I don't know. Whether it's even true, I wouldn't like to guess. But just the thought of it kind of blows the mind a little bit.

[Foxie Loxie]

This makes me think of a comment, I believe by Linda M. H. She had a conversation with an "insider" who mentioned she "wouldn't want to know" about the darkness that lies out beyond all the Universes! :confused: I suppose that is why it seems "safer" to just remain within the box of a Belief System; that way one does not have to think about what might be!! :idea:

[Icare]

1. It has been said that Hubbard's books have been altered and one should try and buy a really old one. I managed to get a copy from 1985/1986. Is that old enough or should I try finding an even older one?Everything started to be altered round 1982. Bill Robertson drew the line at that year, that the only materials he would ever use or refer to in his ongoing research were 1981 or earlier.


2. Jim kept mentioning we are the creators of the universe/s and I understand that in some way. But it sounds as if he believes there is no such thing as the original Source (what I used to refer to as God).
Having a Chistian background, though a very open-minded one, I find myself unable to accept that. When I consider that we are all parts or sparks of Source and we are all one ultimately, I still believe that the whole is more than its parts (like a melody can be more than the single notes). What is your take on that? The only honest answer is that I don't know! Most certainly, back in the mists of time (and there have been many universes, LONG before the 'Big Bang', which is relatively recent if it happened at all!), we were all god-like beings with immense power and ability. Our current state is a very fallen, small and restricted one. What happened before that, I have no strong idea.


3. Jim says by reading/doing dianetics alone one can become clear, so obviously I'm going to try. But he also says not everyone is a thetan. What does one do if one finds out one is actually not a thetan?
What then?Jim's talking nonsense if he ever said that. He always had a bit of a problem explaining things clearly, so maybe that's not what he meant!

A 'thetan' is simply a word for a soul or spirit. Nothing else. Hubbard coined the term because in everyday language, the words 'soul and spirit' are so very much misunderstood and misused. So he started from scratch, as it were, and used a new word which he defined clearly.

Every human has a soul or spirit as part of their composite make-up, and a soul or spirit (a 'thetan') is what YOU are. Guaranteed, with no exceptions! :) It's fundamentally eternal and indestructible, and has its own memory throughout all time, though all kinds of things can happen to it during its existence.



Dear Bill, it took me ages, but I have finally found where Jim says that about dianetics. My computer skills are extremely limited, so I don't know how to get a quote over here from the other thread, so I just copied it:

"dianetics by itself can make you go clear

jim "

It's in post 392.



And the thing about not everyone having a thetan is around post 423.

Quote:

"[...]

thetans (eyes of a spirit) are being dumped on this planet from many systems ... not just this galaxy ... it is on the rim of this galaxy so it is a handy place to dump unwanted material ... but that is real Thetans, (remember the spirit is outside the box using the thetan to see inside the box) .. The GE's just keep making bodies ... but the number of Thetans that are here are only those that are dumped here ... so the amount of bodies being created here is happening much faster than they can dump Thetans here so that is why you get more GE's than Thetans ..

[...]

jim..."

Now if that is the case that means somebody who works with dianetics could find out he hasn't got a thetan, no?


P.S. That little joke of yours made me chuckle all afternoon. :)

[Bill Ryan]

"dianetics by itself can make you go clear

jim "

It's in post 392.

Yes, that's correct. :thumbsup:


And the thing about not everyone having a thetan is around post 423.

Quote:

"[...]

thetans (eyes of a spirit) are being dumped on this planet from many systems ... not just this galaxy ... it is on the rim of this galaxy so it is a handy place to dump unwanted material ... but that is real Thetans, (remember the spirit is outside the box using the thetan to see inside the box) .. The GE's just keep making bodies ... but the number of Thetans that are here are only those that are dumped here ... so the amount of bodies being created here is happening much faster than they can dump Thetans here so that is why you get more GE's than Thetans ..

[...]

jim..."

Now if that is the case that means somebody who works with dianetics could find out he hasn't got a thetan, no?

That's a bunch of pure nonsense from Jim. He does NOT write well, and understands much less then he thinks he does. That's not a good combination!

He has some interesting intuitions about some things, which he has great trouble putting into words. And he has some very wild (and wrong!) ideas that he then turns into statements that aren't helpful to anyone.

He's not done a lot of auditing, and doesn't understand a lot of Hubbard's work (and none of Bill Robertson's, which he's totally unfamiliar with). Most of his ideas are from having read Hubbard's early books, and then kind of going off on his own.


P.S. That little joke of yours made me chuckle all afternoon. :)

:)

[kanishk]

I was also misdirected because of this. But then I realized its not correct. Jim actually never gone through books also. In 2017 I gave him all the materials, books and audio lectures etc that he never had. Came to know that he never read even basic books also. Even after spending some time in Church he never allowed to get auditing.

He had many spiritual things happened to him from childhood and eventually found Scientology, but unfortunately he was never allowed or been kept away from getting any auditing or receive any courses. I think church tried many kinds of things on him so that he dosent get audited. And also put in an idea somehow in him that he doesn't need auditing, that getting an auditing will ruin his case.

I believe his supernatural experiences and the things he learned from it. They are truly amazing. They really happened to him, and he connected it with the Axioms of Scientology and dianetics.

I feel there is a some kind of programming put into him or maybe some entities are used to program him to keep blocking the way forward spiritually. And there are people similer to him too. Maybe this infiltrated Church is also working on spiritual realms to block the spread of Scientology technology as like on physical realms altering the books and technology etc.

[Bill Ryan]

I was also misdirected because of this. But then I realized its not correct. Jim actually never gone through books also. In 2017 I gave him all the materials, books and audio lectures etc that he never had. Came to know that he never read even basic books also. Even after spending some time in Church he never allowed to get auditing.

He had many spiritual things happened to him from childhood and eventually found Scientology, but unfortunately he was never allowed or been kept away from getting any auditing or receive any courses. I think church tried many kinds of things on him so that he dosent get audited. And also put in an idea somehow in him that he doesn't need auditing, that getting an auditing will ruin his case.

I believe his supernatural experiences and the things he learned from it. They are truly amazing. They really happened to him, and he connected it with the Axioms of Scientology and dianetics.

I feel there is a some kind of programming put into him or maybe some entities are used to program him to keep blocking the way forward spiritually. And there are people similer to him too. Maybe this infiltrated Church is also working on spiritual realms to block the spread of Scientology technology as like on physical realms altering the books and technology etc.

Yes, many thanks. That's all very well put. (And it's correct!)

Jim (jiminii) is a good guy, and always meant well, but he was retired from the main forum because he was causing a degree of chaos (and even upset) with his frequent mis-statements, mis-explanations, and misunderstandings. We've left all his posts in place, but he is NOT to be regarded as an authority on the subject. That's pretty important.

[Bill Ryan]

Thx a lot for opening and continuing this thread, it's a pleasure to read your responses to some of these questions.

Would you like to talk a little more about your experience with Ron’s Org (Scientology)?

Yes, for sure. My answers here won't be too in-depth or technical, or else many people reading this might not be able to follow me very easily (or, maybe not at all :) ). You're most welcome to PM me, if you like (as is anyone else with quite some background knowledge already), and I can probably enlarge on some of this to quite some degree.

What is your opinion about L. Ron Hubbard?




The words of Ken Ogger ('The Pilot') come to mind: "L. Ron Hubbard was a self-taught intuitive genius."




I think that says it perfectly.
What do you know and/or think about

1. Hubbard’s early contacts with black magic, Aleister Crowley, Jack Parsons (the rocket scientist) etc.



I think he wanted to investigate (and experience) what many people call 'the occult', primarily because he wanted to know and learn as much as he possibly could about the powers and limitations of the mind. So he simply explored everything he could at that early time, turning over every stone.

In Hubbard's later work, as you may know, he created a number of processes and procedures that would DEFEND against 'black magic', and/or remedy its harmful effects on people. In order to do that, one has to understand how black magic works. Hubbard was most definitely not any kind of 'black magician'.
2. Dianetics



When properly and ethically applied, it can work miracles, and easily, too.

I say 'when properly and ethically applied'. Here's an EXACT analogy.

If you take your car to an auto mechanic for repair, you need to know that not only are they skilled and competent, but that they're also ethical, and won't rip you off. And some mechanics DO rip people off... in three possible ways:


They can simply overcharge for work that another might do for half the cost, or less.
They might do unnecessary work, and then bill you for all the extra parts and labor.
They might even create a problem, or deliberately leave a problem unrepaired, so that after paying $500 for the work, they know you'd have to come back a month later and spent another $500 on something that they knew was going to cause the next problem. If a mechanic was really unscrupulous (and very clever), they could easily get you coming back for more 'necessary' work, month after month after month.

3. Scientology in the 1950s (PDCs etc.)



A lot of Hubbard's early work, and the body of techniques he developed, was very powerful indeed. But one of the problems with some of that was that it didn't work 100% reliably on absolutely everyone... maybe just most people.

He wanted to create a methodology that trained (but maybe relatively inexperienced) councilors (called 'auditors') could do with equally inexperienced newcomer clients, and achieve dependable, predictable results each time. So in the mid- to late-1950s (if I have my dates right), he refined his approach, carefully codified it all, and some of the early but very powerful 'hit-and-miss' techniques were relegated to be deployed only optionally.
4. Scientology in the 1960s (OT levels, Sea Org)



The 'OT levels' were all valid, and technically worked extremely well. But round about that time, or beginning at that time, Hubbard started to become more and more paranoid — not without some good reason, as just about every government and/or agency was after him, and there were serious ongoing attempts to infiltrate the 'Church'. (Note that the infiltrations eventually succeeded, in the late 70s and early 80s.)

Hence the 'Sea Org' was founded, which was regimented in a quasi-military way, although in many respects it soon became very clear that Hubbard went way over the top in his defensive response.

I do recommend this excellent book by Peter Moon, the author of the 'Montauk' series. He was in the Sea Org in the 1970s, and writes this fascinating autobiographical account of all his experiences, including with Hubbard both directly and indirectly. Don't be put off by the terrible title! :)

The Montauk Book of the Dead
https://amazon.com/Montauk-Book-Dead-Moon-Peter (https://amazon.com/Montauk-Book-Dead-Moon-Peter)

5. Hubbard in the 1970s and 1980s (was he replaced by a double or clone?)



I don't think he was 'replaced' in the way that some have asserted he might have been. But rather like Saddam Hussein (and maybe many others!) he may well have had a couple of body doubles in play. Logically, that might make a lot of sense. But I've never heard that reported seriously by anyone whose word I trust.
6. Strange circumstances about Hubbard’s hideout and death



Yes, many strange circumstances. Here's one video, a 2003 seminar presentation by Allen Wright (who was a friend of mine, and knew a lot of stuff) — called When did L. Ron Hubbard die?


http://avalonlibrary.net/When_did_L._Ron_Hubbard_die%3F_Allen_Wright_Ron's_Org_Convention_2003.mp4

It's 33 mins long. The video quality isn't the best, but it's well worth listening to for anyone with some interest in the topic. As best I know, this is the first time it's been posted in the public domain. It's part of my (quite extensive) personal library, and is nowhere on YouTube or on any other site.
7. The OT3 Story




Well, it seems wild, and all logistically impossible. But all I can say is that if one 'audits' (processes) using the prescribed techniques and procedures, real things are released and real benefits result. That's definitive. So, pragmatically speaking, it works very well. The whole 'backstory' may not really matter too much.

Here's a very silly, deliberately exaggerated analogy. It's NOT a very good analogy — at all! For many reasons — but you may get the point I'm making.

You go to a doctor with a stomach complaint. He says, "Ah, a big bad boogie-woogie bird has visited you in your sleep and laid its eggs inside you. Just take these antibiotics." So you take the antibiotics.... and then, next week, you're much better. :)8. “Old” and “New” OT levels (NOTs)



The 'old' OT levels worked just fine (and they still would, though few people do them any more). When the 'new' OT levels were developed and substituted — NOTs, meaning OT5, and then OT7 — they constituted an incomplete procedure, and one that could (by its nature) NEVER complete.

That's why it simply (and literally) never ended. Some people did three sessions a day on OT7, every day, for 15 or more years. OMG. One might figure they'd have realized that there was something wrong!

Another analogy, this time an exact one again: it's like trying to empty a bath tub with the taps still on. One has to find a way to turn the taps OFF... and then empty the bath.

That's what 'Captain' Bill Robertson did (see the next question below) when he researched and developed the successor-replacement for OT5 and OT7 in 1986, which he called 'Excalibur'. That was a piece of breakthrough brilliance, and it works perfectly.

There's no need now for ANYONE to do OT5 and OT7. If they do, they'll just get into the hamster-wheel never-ending thing again.
9. Captain Bill Robertson




I knew him personally: not well, but I spent some time with him and talked with him many times. I was privileged to have had that opportunity to do so. He was a remarkable, powerful man, of the highest integrity. I have the greatest respect for him, and for all his (very extensive) post-LRH research work which extends all the OT levels many magnitudes further.
10. Upper OT Levels above OT8



They all do exactly what they say they'll do, all the way to the last levels Bill Robertson developed, in 1990. He took all the basics of Hubbard's research, and built on that with new discoveries and insights of his own that extended the entire 'Bridge' really a very long way. The entire edifice he developed was 100% entirely logical and sound.

[James Newell]

This is a very good writeup Bill. I agree with pretty much everything. One small point, they didn't codify the processes until the mid sixties, when he came out with the basic grade chart. I could add details but you did such a concise job why push it.

[James Newell]

If one has some questions Re Scientology or Dianetics I might be of assist. I am high up in the Ot Levels and have also trained on the L's. I am an interned Class VIII and I have audited many thousands of hours on others ( Hundreds of people). So ask away and I'll tell you my opinions or direct you to a tech reference. I left the Church a few years ago and still am actively auditing and training.

[Bill Ryan]

Thanks for your specific response to all my questions and items, also for the very interesting video.

Based on my own experiences and investigations I agree with you in most of your findings and opinions. Original Scientology is a fascinating workable technology.

One of the things I don’t fully understand yet is the fact that, on one hand, Hubbard was able to come up with this spectacular workable technology by himself without getting confused and distracted by all the insanity and false data we face here on this planet. On the other hand he became kind of psychotic later in his lifetime and lost complete control over his own creation. In order to fully understand him and his appearance on planet earth, we probably need some more (maybe still hidden) data regarding his background and the game he was/is involved in.

What do you think?

Well, I was never in the 'Church', and never knew Hubbard. But of course, I've heard all the stories.

James Newell (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/member.php?30394-James-Newell) (see his post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?59276-Q-and-A-about-Ron-Hubbard-Bill-Robertson-Scientology-the-Free-Zone-and-Ron-s-Org&p=1260190&viewfull=1#post1260190) above) may be able to say more.

Four responses to the question! All of them may apply.


Some of the reports will definitely be exaggerated. One of the things that definitely occurred — because Scientology processing is such a necessarily exact thing — is that if processing mistakes were made, and someone ended up more upset as a result (and this can most definitely happen), then that person might easily get super-vehemently-critical of Hubbard.

Many (or most!) of those posting on the ex-Scientology forums definitely don't seem in very good shape. Whatever happened with those people, something went badly wrong. I feel I can state that as a fact.



Peter Moon, in his excellent and fascinating Scientology autobiography The Montauk Book of the Dead (https://amazon.com/Montauk-Book-Dead-Moon-Peter) (see my answer #4 in my post above (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?59276-Q-and-A-about-Ron-Hubbard-Bill-Robertson-Scientology-the-Free-Zone-and-Ron-s-Org&p=1260127&viewfull=1#post1260127)) addresses this question himself. He explains in some detail how many of the excesses (and in some cases, sheer insanity!) displayed in the Sea Org did NOT originate from Hubbard, but from others senior in the organization. I believe (but do not know for sure) that James Newell might corroborate this, at least in part.



I once asked this very question to someone I knew well, an 'old-timer' who'd been in the 'Church' since 1952: a wonderful man, who was highly skilled and trained, had known Hubbard personally, and had seen just about everything. (He'd left the Church' many years ago, after it had been taken over in the early 1980s.)

He pointed out that Hubbard had done a great deal of his research and development on himself, including experimental processes that he'd abandoned because they didn't work, or didn't work well enough. The very rough analogy (not a good one, but you get the point!) is like a brain surgeon trying out new procedures on himself in the mirror. :) If things go wrong, he may learn a lot, but there'd be scars, and maybe some residual malfunctions.



As some reading this may well understand (from their own experience!) Hubbard was certainly under attack almost ALL THE TIME, including from entities — which Scientology has all the processes and understanding needed to address and handle. But Hubbard himself never completed all the necessary research into entity handling. This is important to understand. That was continued and extended in the mid- to late-1980s by Bill Robertson, and is now complete.

[James Newell]

I agree once again with you Bill: Capt Bill completed the upper levels and may the universe never be the same. It will be a BETTER game.

[Gracy]

[...]


THE ROLE OF THE EARTH
November 1952
[excerpts, fair use]

I [LRH] took a little girl one night during a demonstration and put her on the E-Meter - started questioning her and the next thing you knew this little girl was shaking in such a degree that the chair legs were rattling against the floor - I was going at her about something just to show the class what the series of questions would be about current life - and she said: "You mustn't ask me any questions. You mustn't ask me any questions. You mustn't. You mustn't. You mustn't."

"Where are you?"

"I am sitting before a big panel... I didn't use to sit there - I am sitting there right now. This - that's me. I - I sit in front of this panel. This is my job! This is my job. I am not supposed to tell you what my job is, but there's this panel." and so forth.

I said: "It's a communicator switchboard"

"No-ooo!" and she just starts going on .

I said: "Well, you wouldn't mind telling me the codes that go across the panel..." and she passed right straight on out. She'd never heard of bodies in pawn or other governments or invader forces or anything of the sort. So I snapped her around and carried on with the rest of the questioning, and was simply able to do so because I happened to know - this is a very funny thing to say - but I happen to know her commanding officer! And gave her - silly, isn't it - and gave her the messages which had gone across her panel an hour before, at which moment she quieted down.

And she says: "Well, I'll probably be taken all to pieces in the morning". And so I said: "No, you will not be." And she wasn't. But she was a communicator who was running a communications switchboard. She's a communicator in a system known as the space stations.

[...]

... the being, in this case, occupies at least two bodies, one on Earth and the other in front of a communication panel on a space station somewhere in the solar system's asteroid belt.

Off the wall?

As much as time travelers or trans-dimensional entities or ETs from the Pleiades or Orion or a Duncan O'Finioan vaporizing "enemies" in the jungles of Vietnam by holding hands with fellow vaporizers (wonder if they sang Kumbaya?).

It would have been even more interesting if the space station communicator were also being audited at the same time LRH was auditing the little girl on Earth.

So, jim's theta body may not be receiving auditing on Earth, but may be receiving auditing via one or more of his bodies in other locations.
I find this interesting. for starters, if the space station communicator were also being audited at the same time, would that process also translate to mean "audit"? I mean like, if this expanded out to where this little girl had 10 lives going on all at once, all across time and space, and all of them being audited at the same time, would all of those auditors know that they are doing scientology, by definition?


not to get technical, but likeley, Hubbard himself would only be known to the little girl point of view here on earth? They might all be doing the same thing but inspired by different people in their realm and called something different? would this be like looking at the busy legs of an octopus, all in coopration with the main brain but not realizing, or recognizing each other cos of their limited point of view? like the blind men describing the elephant. All of them are right what they sense but only in a limited way.


What I am trying to get at is might there be a bigger picture here? sorry I am not so good at trying to explain some things.

[Bill Ryan]

[...]

THE ROLE OF THE EARTH
November 1952
[excerpts, fair use]

I [LRH] took a little girl one night during a demonstration and put her on the E-Meter - started questioning her and the next thing you knew this little girl was shaking in such a degree that the chair legs were rattling against the floor - I was going at her about something just to show the class what the series of questions would be about current life - and she said: "You mustn't ask me any questions. You mustn't ask me any questions. You mustn't. You mustn't. You mustn't."

"Where are you?"

"I am sitting before a big panel... I didn't use to sit there - I am sitting there right now. This - that's me. I - I sit in front of this panel. This is my job! This is my job. I am not supposed to tell you what my job is, but there's this panel." and so forth.

I said: "It's a communicator switchboard"

"No-ooo!" and she just starts going on .

I said: "Well, you wouldn't mind telling me the codes that go across the panel..." and she passed right straight on out. She'd never heard of bodies in pawn or other governments or invader forces or anything of the sort. So I snapped her around and carried on with the rest of the questioning, and was simply able to do so because I happened to know - this is a very funny thing to say - but I happen to know her commanding officer! And gave her - silly, isn't it - and gave her the messages which had gone across her panel an hour before, at which moment she quieted down.

And she says: "Well, I'll probably be taken all to pieces in the morning". And so I said: "No, you will not be." And she wasn't. But she was a communicator who was running a communications switchboard. She's a communicator in a system known as the space stations.

[...]

... the being, in this case, occupies at least two bodies, one on Earth and the other in front of a communication panel on a space station somewhere in the solar system's asteroid belt.

Off the wall?

As much as time travelers or trans-dimensional entities or ETs from the Pleiades or Orion or a Duncan O'Finioan vaporizing "enemies" in the jungles of Vietnam by holding hands with fellow vaporizers (wonder if they sang Kumbaya?).

It would have been even more interesting if the space station communicator were also being audited at the same time LRH was auditing the little girl on Earth.

So, jim's theta body may not be receiving auditing on Earth, but may be receiving auditing via one or more of his bodies in other locations.
I find this interesting. for starters, if the space station communicator were also being audited at the same time, would that process also translate to mean "audit"? I mean like, if this expanded out to where this little girl had 10 lives going on all at once, all across time and space, and all of them being audited at the same time, would all of those auditors know that they are doing scientology, by definition?

not to get technical, but likeley, Hubbard himself would only be known to the little girl point of view here on earth? They might all be doing the same thing but inspired by different people in their realm and called something different? would this be like looking at the busy legs of an octopus, all in coopration with the main brain but not realizing, or recognizing each other cos of their limited point of view? like the blind men describing the elephant. All of them are right what they sense but only in a limited way.

What I am trying to get at is might there be a bigger picture here? sorry I am not so good at trying to explain some things.

Yes, interestingly complicated! :bigsmile:

My best answer is that one kind of focuses one's telepathic communication with intention. One kind of 'aims' it, like an arrow. And that 'aim' can be specific in any way one wishes: space, time, other dimensions, or any combo of those.

The recipient of the communication need not know anything other than there's a message reaching him or her, and then a conversation ensues. This can often go on below the level of conscious awareness of the recipient. (But permission to interact is still obtained, of course.) It's subtle stuff.

When doing this kind of thing, the E-meter is VERY useful to kind of guide one, rather like an aiming feedback device. (A pendulum might work as well, but the E-meter is more precise!) What happens is that when that contact is made, there's a 'read' (a significant movement) of the E-meter needle to the right.

The stronger the read, the better the contact. It's a little like playing that child's game of 'hot and cold'. One kind of zooms in that way, and it can be impressively accurate.

[Hervé]

[...]
I find this interesting. for starters, if the space station communicator were also being audited at the same time, would that process also translate to mean "audit"? I mean like, if this expanded out to where this little girl had 10 lives going on all at once, all across time and space, and all of them being audited at the same time, would all of those auditors know that they are doing scientology, by definition?

not to get technical, but likeley, Hubbard himself would only be known to the little girl point of view here on earth? They might all be doing the same thing but inspired by different people in their realm and called something different? would this be like looking at the busy legs of an octopus, all in coopration with the main brain but not realizing, or recognizing each other cos of their limited point of view? like the blind men describing the elephant. All of them are right what they sense but only in a limited way.

What I am trying to get at is might there be a bigger picture here? sorry I am not so good at trying to explain some things.
Hello Gracy May, no easy answer to your question beside some "everything is possible" and your guess is as good as mine.

A bigger picture is always possible but, as a reverse comparison, it mostly seems like the splitting of personalities all cohabiting within a single body and unaware of the existence of the other personalities and keeping switching from one to the other on cue. If that makes sense? "Auditing" in that case consists of re-integrating the split pieces back into the original, non-split one and, yes, each one being re-integrated would affect the others.

Whether on earth, above or below it, the main divide is between the enslavement, robotization and mind control of humans via MKultra, mass hypnosis, psychotronics, etc. and the undoing of such with various therapies. In the end, whether scientology or some other therapies, the key factor is: is it beneficial with some therapeutic values? Does it work? Is it yielding the intended, expected result?

[James Newell]

Way back in the early fifties Hubbard started to run into a bunch of stuff, stuff that wasn't politically correct, like past lives, oob phenomena etc. Even the Dianetics book is too far out still for many re prenatals. Yes the fetus knows and is aware.
He basically jumped into a **** storm. When he outed the intell agencies for mkultra stuff, in Science of Survival in 1951, he called it PDH for pain, drug, hypnosis. He made more high level enemies.

He found it was best to handle some basic aberrational areas first before you get on the rickety ladder of handling spirits etc. He called it the grade chart. These handled give a good base to confront the other areas. Instead of standing on a rickety ladder you have a stable building and you add good stable floors as you go up

Clear IS a very real state. It is quite significant to you that you attained something important as a being. Those who say Clear is nothing or the OT states are BS have missed very big areas. Too bad for them. You can't do one level with reality without getting in the earlier level, seems there is a self protect built in.

The above tape excerpt was part of the research, thanks to all that helped. They were brave souls.

And alas the now Church of Scientology is a real estate scam. Oh well some can and will do something about it.

[Gracy]

Maybe i should have waited til i finished slowly going through this thread to ask questions but the little girl being audited by Hubbard really caught my attention. Mainly the last 2 lines.


It would have been even more interesting if the space station communicator were also being audited at the same time LRH was auditing the little girl on Earth.

So, jim's theta body may not be receiving auditing on Earth, but may be receiving auditing via one or more of his bodies in other locations.

I was thinking for the space station communicator to be also audited would take a separate event, but Bill are you saying here Hubbard could have audited both?


My best answer is that one kind of focuses one's telepathic communication with intention. One kind of 'aims' it, like an arrow. And that 'aim' can be specific in any way one wishes: space, time, other dimensions, or any combo of those.

The recipient of the communication need not know anything other than there's a message reaching him or her, and then a conversation ensues. This can often go on below the level of conscious awareness of the recipient. (But permission to interact is still obtained, of course.) It's subtle stuff.


is this like "spooky action at a distance"? But how does the emeter get involved at a distance?



Or if I understand Herve right, maybe there is only 1 being in this case, but a bein that has been fragmented? if this is the case can any one of the splits be audited or would it have to be done on the original being? Or all of them at the same time? This makes my head hurt:)





A bigger picture is always possible but, as a reverse comparison, it mostly seems like the splitting of personalities all cohabiting within a single body and unaware of the existence of the other personalities and keeping switching from one to the other on cue. If that makes sense? "Auditing" in that case consists of re-integrating the split pieces back into the original, non-split one and, yes, each one being re-integrated would affect the others.

[Hervé]

[...] This makes my head hurt:)
[...]
I am sorry about that :(

A deeper digging into the "anecdote" should make it obvious that the actual individual being audited is the space station communicator who was being questioned via the little girl's body on earth... fearing of getting into trouble with her hierarchical superior/manager for not obeying his/her order of not answering any questions. So, yes, "spooky action at a distance."

The E-Meter registers changes in electrical energy flows which can be influenced by "thoughts"/emotions whether the thoughts/emotions are originating from the little girl or the communicator... you know... telepathy....

Now, the point I was trying to make is if the communicator was also being audited and being asked about what she was doing down there on earth? (after all, apparently, Hubbard was looking at her ticker messages board over her shoulder on that space station; being buddy with the commanding officer [could be a DUMB station for all I know]) and answering something to the effect of:
"Oh, well, I am monitoring the developments of Hubbard's research in Dianetics and reporting it here..."
In which case, the little girl becomes an "alien spy."

[Bill Ryan]

is this like "spooky action at a distance"? But how does the emeter get involved at a distance?
[ ... ]This makes my head hurt :)


Yes, it's interesting! Let me see if I can explain it better.

The principles of auditing any other being at a distance are EXACTLY the same as (for instance) a kinesiologist or a healer of any kind operating as a 'surrogate'.

In Kinesiology, for instance (muscle testing), a remote practitioner can muscle test themselves (or even another person) when their attention is tuned into their client who may be on the other side of the world. This is commonly done.

Dowsers using pendulums do exactly the same thing, and so do Radionics practitioners.

It's all 'spooky action at a distance' (Einstein's phrase to describe non-local communication or influence), but that's how telepathy works as well. It's all entirely non-physical. There are no 'particles' traveling around anywhere. It's all instant, no matter how great the distance.

But (for instance, just as an example), if I'm auditing you remotely, I can have the meter at my end of things, and I'd still see your 'reads' (needle movements on the meter dial) as if you were connected to it yourself. It's an exact parallel to the remote muscle-testing thing.

It's not the meter that operating remotely. (Or doing anything 'spooky'!) The meter is ONLY connected to me. But it's ME who's tuned into YOU.

The 'relay' thing is just an extension of this principle, like connecting invisible wires together in a circuit.

Again, as an example, I could be auditing you at a distance, and you could in turn be talking to a friend in the same room. If you were acting as an auditor yourself (and asking your friend certain questions and listening carefully to the answers), if I was tuned into you, who's tuned into them, I'd see their reads, too.

It's all very miraculous and remarkable, but this is commonplace, and also very reliable. After one gets used to it (again, as do dowsers, healers, kinesiologists and radionics practitioners — and remote viewers, too, for that matter), one takes it in one's stride, and it's just another tool to use in the process of helping others.

[johnf]

I had a short conversation with my brother last summer, about the MSM idea that the e-meter is used to electroshock people into thinking they are experiencing past lives came up.
My brother happens to be an engineer, so I started the conversation with the statement that the e-meter is basically an ohm meter.
Then I went on to explain how asking questions directs the persons attention to an area of stress
and that contact discharges the memory, thereby lowering the bodies resistance. The expressions on his face were
something else, almost as accurate as a metered session. Well actually those expressions are indications of success as much as the meter actions. As well as his statement that well that actually sounds pretty good!
In this case a release of charge around false data, and a heartfelt cognition.


I still have a whole area of questions around the actual source of the axiom's, the factors, etc. The tech itself seems to have come from an entirely different source than the personality that delivered the information on the tapes. The idea that we are multi leveled, complex creatures is a good idea to keep in mind when looking at this subject. Hubbard liked to impress people by throwing out these anecdotes
like the story about the girl being audited about the control panel, without the definitions and explanations.

I had a roommate for a while that was in the sea org, and he said that Hubbard mentioned an L group. My friend was saying that these beings
were a source of a lot of the information that became the technology. The phonetic syllable el, as in elevated, elated, and of course the infamous
Elohim, has a very interesting role in various languages, and religious ideas. When I looked up L group I ran into a channeling handbook by L/L research, the group that was the source of The Law of One material. So I realize how controversial this is but the persistence of that syllable is pretty interesting stuff. The other side of this was my roommates conversations he had with his own L group which was a particular collection of the new age ascended masters. He was certain that these groups were the same. Hubbard seemed to have accepted a particular challenge concerning the information being shared, and that was shaped by his personality, and by the collisions with various power groups on the planet. I remember numerous people in the eighties and nineties insisting that Hubbard started out channeling. Q is another interesting letter with associations with Hubbard and, well other controversial things.



John

[Bill Ryan]

I had a short conversation with my brother last summer, about the MSM idea that the e-meter is used to electroshock people into thinking they are experiencing past lives came up.

Well, they'd have to be very sensitive. :)

I've had my meter for 24 (twenty-four) years, and its first pair of AA batteries lasted 21 (twenty-one) years.

That's how VERY little current it uses. It's so totally tiny, it would need a highly specialist device to measure it. I don't think you could electroshock a mosquito with it!

[johnf]

I had a short conversation with my brother last summer, about the MSM idea that the e-meter is used to electroshock people into thinking they are experiencing past lives came up.

Well, they'd have to be very sensitive. :)

I've had my meter for 24 (twenty-four) years, and its first pair of AA batteries lasted 21 (twenty-one) years.

That's how VERY little current it uses. It's so totally tiny, it would need a highly specialist device to measure it. I don't think you could electroshock a mosquito with it!


Yes, agreed,I am surprised that it uses AA's, that puts a helpful scale on the subject.


John

[Gemma13]

I came across this the other day and was intrigued from many perspectives and angles. I don’t know anything about auditing but was curious as to thoughts about the ability for this channeller to now consciously flip instantaneously back and forth with an entity she has been traditionally trance channeling for years. This is still quite an anomaly for her which she explains in the video and then (with a dose of embarrassment) demonstrates this new ability repeatedly. She’s basically gone from dial-up to WIFI.

The entity channeled is “White Cloud”, who is believed to be part of her soul group. She also channels a Federation of Light group who gave her a [false] predication years ago that destroyed her credibility; but she has continued on and over the years explanations have been given, so she has retained a following. This new skill is only with “White Cloud”.

I’m curious about this because of the “little girl” story recently mentioned in this thread. So, if this channeller was being audited and she flipped back and forth like she does in the video, what would this mean as far as auditing goes?

There is an intro and then "usual" channelled info for 16 minutes. Then the explanation and demonstration starts.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lchEdpuW5o4

[Hervé]

[...]
I’m curious about this because of the “little girl” story recently mentioned in this thread. So, if this channeller was being audited and she flipped back and forth like she does in the video, what would this mean as far as auditing goes?
[...]
I may not understand the question correctly so forgive me if I am off the mark with my answer.

Auditing can get to the bottom of what's going on in actuality with Blossom Goodchild's case in very short order by ruling out the many possible scenarios which could lead to the same apparent result being displayed here and which mostly fall under the category of "possession."

All that by determining if White Cloud and Blossom are two separate beings or some combinations of a "being" + entity attachment as in some variations of the "Bodies in Pawn (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?59276-Q-and-A-about-Ron-Hubbard-Bill-Robertson-Scientology-the-Free-Zone-and-Ron-s-Org&p=681680&viewfull=1#post681680)" manipulation.

A being is "auditable," an entity isn't because it's mostly an automaton. It would be like trying to run an auditing session on "Alexa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Alexa)" or some AI.

Where things can get complicated is when an AI is controlled by a smart "being"... like a doll body is:
THE ROLE OF THE EARTH
November 1952

A 5th Invader Force officer carries a doll. They don't carry bodies, they carry dolls. Their identification is a doll. It's a very little flimsy mechanical affair that you can make talk and walk and so forth: they're cute, they are about 1 metre tall, they're very light - you don't use oxygen in saucers. You have this little doll and the thetan energy that a fellow puts out is quite sufficient to monitor the control switchboard in the back of the doll, that's all. And he tunes it up: He's got his wavelength tuned to it and so on and he can walk it around...

[hence all these stories of computers going berserk and people fearing computers getting intelligent, etc...]

[petra]

I had a roommate for a while that was in the sea org, and he said that Hubbard mentioned an L group. My friend was saying that these beings
were a source of a lot of the information that became the technology. The phonetic syllable el, as in elevated, elated, and of course the infamous
Elohim, has a very interesting role in various languages, and religious ideas. When I looked up L group I ran into a channeling handbook by L/L research, the group that was the source of The Law of One material. So I realize how controversial this is but the persistence of that syllable is pretty interesting stuff.

I'm shocked at the idea of an "L group" because for a while, I was seeing the letter L everywhere (similar to how people who have pareidolia see faces everywhere). I don't imagine there's a word for people who see L's all over the place though (ha ha). It's a personal thing, but I felt I should contribute that anyway.

There may also be some meaning with the fictional Kal-El (aka Superman). I mean, his whole family is named El... :/

[kanishk]

I was thinking of sharing this from many days on Naadi leaf reading thread. But now seeing this thread active again and related to the topic of this thread I am sharing it here instead.

I asked a question to Maharshi Kagabhujanda/ Kagapujandar infolink (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kagapujandar), on 23rd Jan 2019.

QUESTION:
"In person born on 9th of July 1987 in America, Lafayette Ron Hubbard is reincarnated; who in his previous life invented Scientology. How much will I be helped in my spiritual journey by the works of this person in this life?"

ANSWER (I guess Naadi reader sent me the recorded answer from his memory not exactly text to text. Because when I asked dictate it to me again over phone he said he forgot in which bundle the answer was written):
"Brother, you asked about person being reincarnated again. He really came back, he is currently doing some research and telling various things, what he is saying is correct. If you want to get further information you can ask. You can get followup. Means Guruji is telling its True."

[Bill Ryan]

I was thinking of sharing this for many days on the Naadi leaf reading thread (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?64742-Naadi-Shastra-My-experience-with-Destiny). But now seeing this thread active again and related to the topic of this thread I am sharing it here instead.

I asked a question to Maharshi Kagabhujanda/ Kagapujandar infolink (http://www.kagabujandar.org/english_sre_kagabujandar.html), on 23rd Jan 2019.

QUESTION:
"In person born on 9th of July 1987 in America, Lafayette Ron Hubbard is reincarnated; who in his previous life invented Scientology. How much will I be helped in my spiritual journey by the works of this person in this life?"

ANSWER (I guess Naadi reader sent me the recorded answer from his memory not exactly text to text. Because when I asked dictate it to me again over phone he said he forgot in which bundle the answer was written):

"Brother, you asked about person being reincarnated again. He really came back, he is currently doing some research and telling various things, what he is saying is correct. If you want to get further information you can ask. You can get followup. Means Guruji is telling its True."

Well, that's interesting. 10-15 years ago, there was a guy in Germany called Andreas Buttler, who created a bit of a stir. He stated clearly that he was the reincarnation of Hubbard, and repackaged the enormous body of work of scientology into one book, which he called Spiritologie (or 'Spiritology', in English). You can read it here:


http://avalonlibrary.net/ebooks/Spiritologie_English.pdf
http://avalonlibrary.net/ebooks/Spiritologie_Deutsch.pdf

I know several highly experienced Free Zone scientologists who were convinced by his story. He had quite a bit of regular auditing, done by someone highly trained and qualified, and we were told by his auditor that all seemed to check out.

And the Spiritologie book, which condensed everything down into just a relative handful of powerful processes (some of which were confidential), was clearly the work of someone who was extremely aware and inspired — whether one agreed with the principles or not. (And many did not, it has to be said.)

But he became very controversial. To his credit, he forcefully denounced the Church as it had become under David Miscavige after Hubbard had died. But he was very arrogant and a bit of a showman, and of course some said that was evidence that he WAS Hubbard. :)

I personally challenged him at a conference, and had a lengthy standup debate with him from my seat in the audience. He became publicly very angry with me, and it was quite a scene. I kept my cool, but he behaved quite badly in the view of a lot of people there. That was a factor that influenced many who'd not yet formed a definite opinion about him to cease lending him credibility. It was actually quite a tipping point in how he was perceived.

Buttler and Spiritologie continued, and there were some diehard adherents who swore blind that they had got huge benefit from his new processes. But it didn't end well. One of Buttler's principles at the core of Spiritologie was that we create everything we experience, 100% of it, total responsibility. But he fell on bad times, and became very ill. He was unable to do anything about it, and in the end he publicly retracted everything he had ever said and done. He may be still alive, but he's out of the picture now.

I don't know for sure when he was born, but when I met him in 2008 he was definitely older than 21. I'd have said he was more like 35-40. In his book, he hints that he was born in 1966, which might need a bit of explaining!

I once had an e-mail exchange with a colleague of mine in Russia, where Ron's Org is VERY strong and well-established. I told my friend about Buttler claiming to have been Hubbard. "Ah yes," came the reply. "We've got seven of them here." :)

I should end this with another anecdote, relayed to me recently by another friend, also highly qualified and trained. He went into a solo session (think of it as remote viewing) to find out whether Hubbard really had returned here, alive in a different body.

He got the information, that he said was pretty clear and detailed, that this person was currently in Russia, knew that he had been Hubbard, was himself highly trained now, and was keeping a low profile about his identity. That has to be theoretically plausible. (I mean, people do reincarnate!) The last I heard, my friend was intending to check into this some more. All very fascinating stuff.

[johnf]

I was thinking of sharing this for many days on the Naadi leaf reading thread (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?64742-Naadi-Shastra-My-experience-with-Destiny). But now seeing this thread active again and related to the topic of this thread I am sharing it here instead.

I asked a question to Maharshi Kagabhujanda/ Kagapujandar infolink (http://www.kagabujandar.org/english_sre_kagabujandar.html), on 23rd Jan 2019.

QUESTION:
"In person born on 9th of July 1987 in America, Lafayette Ron Hubbard is reincarnated; who in his previous life invented Scientology. How much will I be helped in my spiritual journey by the works of this person in this life?"

ANSWER (I guess Naadi reader sent me the recorded answer from his memory not exactly text to text. Because when I asked dictate it to me again over phone he said he forgot in which bundle the answer was written):

"Brother, you asked about person being reincarnated again. He really came back, he is currently doing some research and telling various things, what he is saying is correct. If you want to get further information you can ask. You can get followup. Means Guruji is telling its True."

Well, that's interesting. 10-15 years ago, there was a guy in Germany called Andreas Buttler, who created a bit of a stir. He stated clearly that he was the reincarnation of Hubbard, and repackaged the enormous body of work of scientology into one book, which he called Spiritologie (or 'Spiritology', in English). You can read it here:



http://avalonlibrary.net/ebooks/Spiritologie_English.pdf
http://avalonlibrary.net/ebooks/Spiritologie_Deutsch.pdf


I know several highly experienced Free Zone scientologists who were convinced by his story. He had quite a bit of regular auditing, done by someone highly trained and qualified, and we were told by his auditor that all seemed to check out.

And the Spiritologie book, which condensed everything down into just a relative handful of powerful processes (some of which were confidential), was clearly the work of someone who was extremely aware and inspired — whether one agreed with the principles or not. (And many did not, it has to be said.)

But he became very controversial. To his credit, he forcefully denounced the Church as it had become under David Miscavige after Hubbard had died. But he was very arrogant and a bit of a showman, and of course some said that was evidence that he WAS Hubbard. :)

I personally challenged him at a conference, and had a lengthy standup debate with him from my seat in the audience. He became publicly very angry with me, and it was quite a scene. I kept my cool, but he behaved quite badly in the view of a lot of people there, and that was a factor that influenced many who'd not formed a definite opinion about him to cease lending him credibility. It was actually quite a tipping point in how he was perceived.

Buttler and Spiritologie continued, and there were some diehard adherents who swore blind that they had got huge benefit from his new processes. But it didn't end well. One of Buttler's principles at the core of Spiritologie was that we create everything we experience, 100% of it, total responsibility. But he fell on bad times, and became very ill. He was unable to do anything about it, and in the end he publicly retracted everything he had ever said and done. He may be still alive, but he's out of the picture now.

I don't know for sure when he was born, but when I met him in 2008 he was definitely older than 21. I'd have said he was more like 35-40. In his book, he hints that he was born in 1966, which might need a bit of explaining!

I once had an e-mail exchange with a colleague of mine in Russia, where Ron's Org is VERY strong and well-established. I told my friend about Buttler claiming to have been Hubbard. "Ah yes," came the reply. "We've got seven of them here." :)

I should end this with another anecdote, relayed to me recently by another friend, also highly qualified and trained. He went into a solo session (think of it as remote viewing) to find out whether Hubbard really had returned here, alive in a different body.

He got the information, that he said was pretty clear and detailed, that this person was currently in Russia, knew that he had been Hubbard, was himself highly trained now, and was keeping a low profile about his identity. That has to be theoretically plausible. (I mean, people do reincarnate!) The last I heard, my friend was intending to check into this some more. All very fascinating stuff.


If he is back I certainly hope he has learned from what has happened in the wake of his activities last time.
The idea that he is laying low appeals to me ,however it is really sad what groups do with public figures.
I have to be rather suspect of my interest in that one personality, it can be a big distraction from living my life and

following higher principles.


John

[Gemma13]

[...]
I’m curious about this because of the “little girl” story recently mentioned in this thread. So, if this channeller was being audited and she flipped back and forth like she does in the video, what would this mean as far as auditing goes?
[...]
I may not understand the question correctly so forgive me if I am off the mark with my answer.

Auditing can get to the bottom of what's going on in actuality with Blossom Goodchild's case in very short order by ruling out the many possible scenarios which could lead to the same apparent result being displayed here and which mostly fall under the category of "possession."

All that by determining if White Cloud and Blossom are two separate beings or some combinations of a "being" + entity attachment as in some variations of the "Bodies in Pawn (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?59276-Q-and-A-about-Ron-Hubbard-Bill-Robertson-Scientology-the-Free-Zone-and-Ron-s-Org&p=681680&viewfull=1#post681680)" manipulation.

A being is "auditable," an entity isn't because it's mostly an automaton. It would be like trying to run an auditing session on "Alexa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Alexa)" or some AI.

Where things can get complicated is when an AI is controlled by a smart "being"... like a doll body is:
THE ROLE OF THE EARTH
November 1952

A 5th Invader Force officer carries a doll. They don't carry bodies, they carry dolls. Their identification is a doll. It's a very little flimsy mechanical affair that you can make talk and walk and so forth: they're cute, they are about 1 metre tall, they're very light - you don't use oxygen in saucers. You have this little doll and the thetan energy that a fellow puts out is quite sufficient to monitor the control switchboard in the back of the doll, that's all. And he tunes it up: He's got his wavelength tuned to it and so on and he can walk it around...

[hence all these stories of computers going berserk and people fearing computers getting intelligent, etc...]



Thanks Herve. Not knowing about auditing I hesitated posting this as I didn’t think it would fit. But I’m glad I did now as I didn’t know about the Greenbaum Speech and that is a great take-away for me. :thumbsup:

[Ron Mauer Sr]

deleted post

[James Newell]

The details are fairly unimportant. The Basics are what are important. The Basics are in the in Axioms of Scientology and Dianetics. The communication formula is a basic also. The Laws of Auditing are important too. Study those with discernment and duplicate and understand.

[kanishk]

I was thinking of sharing this for many days on the Naadi leaf reading thread (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?64742-Naadi-Shastra-My-experience-with-Destiny). But now seeing this thread active again and related to the topic of this thread I am sharing it here instead.

I asked a question to Maharshi Kagabhujanda/ Kagapujandar infolink (http://www.kagabujandar.org/english_sre_kagabujandar.html), on 23rd Jan 2019.

QUESTION:
"In person born on 9th of July 1987 in America, Lafayette Ron Hubbard is reincarnated; who in his previous life invented Scientology. How much will I be helped in my spiritual journey by the works of this person in this life?"

ANSWER (I guess Naadi reader sent me the recorded answer from his memory not exactly text to text. Because when I asked dictate it to me again over phone he said he forgot in which bundle the answer was written):

"Brother, you asked about person being reincarnated again. He really came back, he is currently doing some research and telling various things, what he is saying is correct. If you want to get further information you can ask. You can get followup. Means Guruji is telling its True."

Well, that's interesting. 10-15 years ago, there was a guy in Germany called Andreas Buttler, who created a bit of a stir. He stated clearly that he was the reincarnation of Hubbard, and repackaged the enormous body of work of scientology into one book, which he called Spiritologie (or 'Spiritology', in English). You can read it here:



http://avalonlibrary.net/ebooks/Spiritologie_English.pdf
http://avalonlibrary.net/ebooks/Spiritologie_Deutsch.pdf


I know several highly experienced Free Zone scientologists who were convinced by his story. He had quite a bit of regular auditing, done by someone highly trained and qualified, and we were told by his auditor that all seemed to check out.

And the Spiritologie book, which condensed everything down into just a relative handful of powerful processes (some of which were confidential), was clearly the work of someone who was extremely aware and inspired — whether one agreed with the principles or not. (And many did not, it has to be said.)

But he became very controversial. To his credit, he forcefully denounced the Church as it had become under David Miscavige after Hubbard had died. But he was very arrogant and a bit of a showman, and of course some said that was evidence that he WAS Hubbard. :)

I personally challenged him at a conference, and had a lengthy standup debate with him from my seat in the audience. He became publicly very angry with me, and it was quite a scene. I kept my cool, but he behaved quite badly in the view of a lot of people there. That was a factor that influenced many who'd not yet formed a definite opinion about him to cease lending him credibility. It was actually quite a tipping point in how he was perceived.

Buttler and Spiritologie continued, and there were some diehard adherents who swore blind that they had got huge benefit from his new processes. But it didn't end well. One of Buttler's principles at the core of Spiritologie was that we create everything we experience, 100% of it, total responsibility. But he fell on bad times, and became very ill. He was unable to do anything about it, and in the end he publicly retracted everything he had ever said and done. He may be still alive, but he's out of the picture now.

I don't know for sure when he was born, but when I met him in 2008 he was definitely older than 21. I'd have said he was more like 35-40. In his book, he hints that he was born in 1966, which might need a bit of explaining!

I once had an e-mail exchange with a colleague of mine in Russia, where Ron's Org is VERY strong and well-established. I told my friend about Buttler claiming to have been Hubbard. "Ah yes," came the reply. "We've got seven of them here." :)

I should end this with another anecdote, relayed to me recently by another friend, also highly qualified and trained. He went into a solo session (think of it as remote viewing) to find out whether Hubbard really had returned here, alive in a different body.

He got the information, that he said was pretty clear and detailed, that this person was currently in Russia, knew that he had been Hubbard, was himself highly trained now, and was keeping a low profile about his identity. That has to be theoretically plausible. (I mean, people do reincarnate!) The last I heard, my friend was intending to check into this some more. All very fascinating stuff.


O, then I will dig deep into it and ask questions again in details so get clarity for myself atleast. And also I dont have the exact text of what was written as answer and exact translation of what Naadi reader actually wrote in Tamil as question; he did not dictated to me, and then he was also not able to find that leaf again. Because sometimes texts fade away too. I can understand one can create a mask on spirit level also.

[Ed Dawson]

Hubbard would occasionally mention the existence of "group minds", but didn't seem to have followed up on how they functioned. Years later along comes Rupert Sheldrake writing about "morphic fields / morphogenetic fields". These are the same things, under different names. These are fields of agreements, plus shared disagreements which define their edges or limits. I usually use Sheldrake's name for them morphic fields.

These morphic fields as I explained are formed of shared agreements, and shared beliefs, among members (people) of the field. These agreements/beliefs often require 'explanation' to make any sense whatsoever. False narratives are invented which give the 'why' of particular beliefs. Someone thinks up a reason why, and it becomes imbedded in the morphic field of some group, and is accepted as truth. It is accepted more readily if it already contains elements which are previously accepted; this allows the new narrative to be inserted into the group. I call these narratives "Morphic Field Legends".

Let me be blunt here: tens of millions of years ago the dinosaurs were killed by a comet or meteor, not by nuked volcanos. There were no humans, and almost no divine spirits (aka thetans) on the planet. You didn't experience the incident. I didn't experience the incident. The incident did not happen here on this timeline. But you can run the incident. You can call up the charge (trauma) and run it out (release it). Yes, you can audit (process in a therapy session) a fake incident in order to access some charge (trauma). Morphic field legends can be released/erased in session. I even wrote it up many years ago here: http://www.censorthis.com/ouran/GD41.html

Ed




What is this (OTIII):


Yes, as far as I can see that's LRH's handwriting, and these are his research notes -- his own session data. Much of his research was done solo at first, and after that he would put together processes to address what he felt he had found, and test them out on volunteers to see if it actually worked.

The OT 3 stuff is pretty way out (and has been very often ridiculed by critics), but those who have run processes on it report that the processes seem to work, and that a very great of charge is released.

My own take on it is that it seems hard to believe, but in pragmatic auditing terms it does seem to work. I asked my own auditor (at the time) about this many years ago -- whether all this was 'real'.

His reply was wise. He said: "I don't know whether it's real, or whether any of that really happened. But that may not matter. You don't have to believe anything. Thousands of people have reported that it works for auditing purposes, and all I can tell you is that people who run the processes get a great deal of expanded awareness and ability from it. And that's all that counts."

[TomKat]

Let me be blunt here: tens of millions of years ago the dinosaurs were killed by a comet or meteor, not by nuked volcanos. There were no humans, and almost no divine spirits (aka thetans) on the planet. You didn't experience the incident. I didn't experience the incident. The incident did not happen here on this timeline. But you can run the incident. You can call up the charge (trauma) and run it out (release it). Yes, you can audit (process in a therapy session) a fake incident in order to access some charge (trauma). Morphic field legends can be released/erased in session. I even wrote it up many years ago here: http://www.censorthis.com/ouran/GD41.html

I can be more blunt. Story (significance) has no bearing on recovery of beingness. Only erasure of mass (lost beingness) can do that.

[not_a_millenial]

The topic of Scientology took my interest so I read the book Dianetics. The book paints a picture of a process which mere novices can use to clear each other of significant mental baggage. On the other hand it fails to provide a usable handbook for them to do so. I would expect for example a skeleton outline of a session, instructions what to focus on and some basic list of questions to run.

I've understood from this forum that it turned out it is not that easy for untrained people to generate significant results.
Could you please elaborate? Is it possible e.g. for a married couple to apply this method and experience gains? What kind of gains are realistic and in what amount of time? Can we expect them to clear each other? Should they only go for a release? What kind of attitude should they have at the beginning? What should they focus their first sessions on? What is the best material to study after the Dianetics book? What material should one study before starting practical sessions? Could one start right away?

The next question I have with the LRH's model is the question of ethics. As the model finds the source of abberration in what had been done to us, it brings focus on being the subject rather than the object of action. Does LRH suggest the best way to be abberration-free is to impose oneself on others rather than let them impose themselves on me? This paints quite a law of the jungle picture to me. This model then seems to explain out why the elites treat the populus the way they do.

[TomKat]

The topic of Scientology took my interest so I read the book Dianetics. The book paints a picture of a process which mere novices can use to clear each other of significant mental baggage. On the other hand it fails to provide a usable handbook for them to do so. I would expect for example a skeleton outline of a session, instructions what to focus on and some basic list of questions to run.


There was a book that came out in about 1974 called Dianetics Today. It gives the procedure along with sessions that go into previous lives. That should probably be your next Dianetics read.


I've understood from this forum that it turned out it is not that easy for untrained people to generate significant results. Could you please elaborate? Is it possible e.g. for a married couple to apply this method and experience gains? What kind of gains are realistic and in what amount of time? Can we expect them to clear each other? Should they only go for a release? What kind of attitude should they have at the beginning? What should they focus their first sessions on? What is the best material to study after the Dianetics book? What material should one study before starting practical sessions? Could one start right away?

The best book to start is called Self-Analysis. You can do it on yourself, but it actually works better in a co-audit with your partner. Don't even start a co-audit without memorising the Auditor's Code. By the way, nobody has ever TRULY achieved Clear. But CLEARER is an admirable goal.


The next question I have with the LRH's model is the question of ethics. As the model finds the source of abberration in what had been done to us, it brings focus on being the subject rather than the object of action. Does LRH suggest the best way to be abberration-free is to impose oneself on others rather than let them impose themselves on me? This paints quite a law of the jungle picture to me. This model then seems to explain out why the elites treat the populus the way they do.

Hubbard said a lot of things, among them that a healthy person has to feel dangerous to his environment. I think that's just a fancy way of saying one must feel a certain amount of personal power to remain sane. I've noticed when people feel powerless, for instance in a relationship, they can act quite insane. He also said that in the end what goes around comes around, i.e., karma. That's why Dianetics is run with all 4 flows, you must find an incident chain: 1) as a victim, 2) as a perpetrator 3) as a witness of others to others, 4) self to self. I think that's all in Dianetics Today.

[James Newell]

The basic procedure of Dianetics works quite well, but it is a bit complex for many. I took courses on how to do Book one as it is called and can deliver it. Nowadays I deliver a more streamlined version for new people and they receive the auditing from me and get good gains. To train you to do book one is best done by reading that book a few times and take a plunge.
On the subject of Ethics, it is a very good system and if applied correctly can move you out of unwanted conditions in life. I would say Ethics is a kind of a bridge from subjective to objective universe. You can direct message me if you have more questions.

[wegge]

I’ve recently read „Levels of Energy“ by Fred Dodson.

The book is similar to „power vs. force“ by Hawkins and supposedly also to Hubbards emotional tone chart? Although Dodson mentions that Hubbard caps his chart, whereby the two other authors go higher on, into a godly/enlightened realm.

My basic questions are, is there any material where Hubbard talked in depth about the emotional tone chart?

Dodson mentions that the Bhagavad Gita already described a emotional tone chart, are you aware of that?

Has anyone ever attempted a comparison of these modern writers of tone charts/scales?

[Bill Ryan]

Is there any material where Hubbard talked in depth about the emotional tone chart?Yes, a whole book:


https://projectavalon.net/Science_of_Survival.pdf

https://projectavalon.net/Science_of_Survival.pdf

[TomKat]

Scientology teaches people are in a "fallen" state. I'd like to point out that this is diametrically opposite to other belief systems that teach people are evolving. In those belief systems, with every lifetime we grow spiritually. In scientology, with every lifetime we shrink spiritually -- unless we use scientology to un-do the "devolution."

[Bill Ryan]

Scientology teaches people are in a "fallen" state. I'd like to point out that this is diametrically opposite to other belief systems that teach people are evolving. In those belief systems, with every lifetime we grow spiritually. In scientology, with every lifetime we shrink spiritually -- unless we use scientology to un-do the "devolution."Well, I think that's 100% true. Everything in my own experience supports that.

But it's not inevitable, like some kind of cosmic law. One could see it as a kind of trend. It's just something that's very likely to happen.

It's easy to understand. It's merely an accumulation of what could be called unfinished business.

Each time we fail to complete something, or tell an untruth (also an "incompletion", unless we repair it and "come clean"), or do something that's dishonest (even if it's tiny), or in some way harmful to another person... it's like another brick in the wall. These "bricks" can be very tiny, but they gradually accumulate.

To change the metaphor, they weigh us down and hamper or impede our natural abilities and awareness.

This doesn't just happen across lifetimes. It can happen in one life (this one!), as well. This is often how come more elderly people have less energy. It's not always that they're in some way infirm. It can often be simply that they're carrying so much around.

So the way to remedy this is to complete the incomplete stuff. But do do that, one has to remember what it all was. And that can be difficult or impossible without specifically targeted counseling processes (including regression techniques) that help one to fully understand, face up to and heal what's happened in the past. That "past" might be several decades ago, or a couple of lifetimes ago, or a few million years ago. The principles are exactly the same.

There's a lot to "clean up" sometimes, but it really does work.

And one can test it easily. Look in the mirror (metaphorically!) and make a little list of who one might possibly write to or talk to to apologize about something. Even if it's very small. And then do that.

Or, say something to someone that you've been holding back (as long as it's kind!). Or even, do something round the house or garden that you've been putting off for a few months. And then see how much energy you suddenly have again, and how great you feel. That same thing works across lifetimes, as well.
:happy dog:

[James Newell]

Once upon a time we could build planets, now we worry when the postman comes late...

[kanishk]

Once upon a time we could build planets, now we worry when the postman comes late...


Remembered the story in book called The Enlightenment


:playball: The Enlightenment part 0 A Handbook of Illusion by D. Alan Holmes A vital Bestseller for those who can recognize Truth :popcorn:



https://www.unicusmagazine.com/PDF/the_enlightenment.pdf

[TomKat]

Is this practical for the newer generations?
I have read it may not be needed for indigo children,
is this true?


It's possible that indigo people, being emotionally difficult, will get more out of it than others. Nobody NEEDS auditing, though. It's just a way of clearing up emotional issues, like psychology, but much more effective -- psychologists mainly just explain why you are how you are,and then push you off onto a psychiatrist to prescribe meds such as anti-depressives. Another option that works better than either mode is shamanism, where you travel in the dream world and work things out in metaphor.

[TomKat]

Bill, thanks for sharing your viewpoint on this! A few quick (?) questions:

I remember a past post, when you mentioned finding pre-1970 Dianetics books to audit, but they aren't easy to come by. Would you mind sharing your PDF on Book One? Or do you have recommendations on legit auditing centers?

How does this relate to Dolores Cannon's method, if at all? When I couldn't find the original Dianetics book, I researched working with Cannon. Her waitlist is years long at this point and sadly, meeting with one of her student's teachers did not work for me. But I do wonder if there is any cross between.

Thanks! :)

Gary Douglas' Access Consciousness is based on scientology "group processing," and you might find it more acccessible than scientology.
https://www.accessconsciousness.com/

[TomKat]

Scientology teaches people are in a "fallen" state. I'd like to point out that this is diametrically opposite to other belief systems that teach people are evolving. In those belief systems, with every lifetime we grow spiritually. In scientology, with every lifetime we shrink spiritually -- unless we use scientology to un-do the "devolution."Well, I think that's 100% true. Everything in my own experience supports that.

But it's not inevitable, like some kind of cosmic law. One could see it as a kind of trend. It's just something that's very likely to happen.


Well, it could be both. On some level we grow spiritually with every incarnation, but we also get more baggage.

One thing Hubbard taught that I've found to be true, is the concept of winning valence (persona). I had a big red cat and 2 other cats of different colours. The red cat was the top cat of the house, and the other cats knew it. I later identified the 2 other cats' reincarnated selves and they were both red, including the female (rare). Of course the original red cat came back as a different colour, as the colour meant nothing to him.

[TomKat]

I have never been in the Church of Scientology, and am considered by them to be one of their enemies (http://projectavalon.net/The_Scientology_Enemies_List.pdf).

Church of Scientology banned in Russia:

https://greatgameindia.com/russia-bans-scientology/

[Mashika]

I have never been in the Church of Scientology, and am considered by them to be one of their enemies (http://projectavalon.net/The_Scientology_Enemies_List.pdf).

Church of Scientology banned in Russia:

https://greatgameindia.com/russia-bans-scientology/

One of many actually, they are just the most recent case. The "church" in Russia is in full control of the government. It's truly laughable, what they try to do is to limit the competition, while doing the exact same thing they accuse others of trying to do :)

https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2016/june/no-evangelizing-outside-of-church-russia-proposes.html


Earlier reporting (June 29): Christians in Russia won’t be allowed to email their friends an invitation to church or to evangelize in their own homes if Russia’s newest set of surveillance and anti-terrorism laws are enacted.

The church is in full control, it's authoritarian and it won't allow anyone else to have any access to their sheep, or their sheep's money for that matter. I don't see any difference from what other churches are being accused of, such for example the Scientology church.

I don't know anything about Scientology church, and i feel odd about them, there's something not right in general.

But i feel the same about organised orthodox religion and church, there's something wrong there as well.

I suppose it's important to separate the information that exists on its own, and which may have actual real value as it is, from 'churches' and fakes religions created when someone picked up the knowledge and repackaged it into a business.. I guess?

[James Newell]

I think that with all that is going on in this world that at this time that they ban the COS at this time is kinda interesting. Maybe Russia knows something we don't.
I also think if they treated their ex members better and people in general that they wouldn't have nearly the problems they have. They still give me some **** every now and then because I practice the technology of Scientology out of the church.
Plus they don't follow their own policies and should return the monies they owe me which is quite an amount.

So having said all that the Actual practices without the organization is very good and I am glad I have done what I have done.And also deliver what I do. Also there is no mention of all the Ron's orgs they have Through out Russia, They aren't mentioned at all in this.

I also bet with their money and lawyers Scientology will get through this.

[TomKat]

I have never been in the Church of Scientology, and am considered by them to be one of their enemies (http://projectavalon.net/The_Scientology_Enemies_List.pdf).

Church of Scientology banned in Russia:

https://greatgameindia.com/russia-bans-scientology/

One of many actually, they are just the most recent case. The "church" in Russia is in full control of the government. It's truly laughable, what they try to do is to limit the competition, while doing the exact same thing they accuse others of trying to do :)

https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2016/june/no-evangelizing-outside-of-church-russia-proposes.html


Earlier reporting (June 29): Christians in Russia won’t be allowed to email their friends an invitation to church or to evangelize in their own homes if Russia’s newest set of surveillance and anti-terrorism laws are enacted.

The church is in full control, it's authoritarian and it won't allow anyone else to have any access to their sheep, or their sheep's money for that matter. I don't see any difference from what other churches are being accused of, such for example the Scientology church.

I don't know anything about Scientology church, and i feel odd about them, there's something not right in general.

But i feel the same about organised orthodox religion and church, there's something wrong there as well.

I suppose it's important to separate the information that exists on its own, and which may have actual real value as it is, from 'churches' and fakes religions created when someone picked up the knowledge and repackaged it into a business.. I guess?

The difference between Scientology and orthodox religions: Scientology breaks up families andcoerces people into going into extreme debt. If you grow up some type of christian, you just go to church or not, and lead your life, nobody wanting all your money. So Scientology is a CULT, not just a religion. It's a business masquerading as religion, using cult-building techniques to generate more income.

[TomKat]

How did a garden variety psychopath wrest control of the Church of Scientology from its founder, L. Ron Hubbard?

from Lois Reisdorf who was there

LWYVLrqVvmE

basically, the great wise man allowed himself to be manipulated into betraying everyone he'd trusted for decades

[Wilbur2]

I have never been in the Church of Scientology, and am considered by them to be one of their enemies (http://projectavalon.net/The_Scientology_Enemies_List.pdf).
The difference between Scientology and orthodox religions: Scientology breaks up families andcoerces people into going into extreme debt. If you grow up some type of christian, you just go to church or not, and lead your life, nobody wanting all your money. So Scientology is a CULT, not just a religion. It's a business masquerading as religion, using cult-building techniques to generate more income.That's right. After I left the Church of Scientology, I briefly joined the Mormons out of curiosity. I didn't really believe any of it, but I wanted to compare getting into the Mormons with getting into Scn, so I tried it out for a while. In the place where I was at the time, in the UK, they were lovely. The head of the local "Branch", the Branch President, told me, "Always put your family first, church second." I was doing a PhD at the time, and the Mormons were very supportive of that fact. One thing I will say about the Mormon Church is that it is very supportive of its members getting educated and getting a good career.

The Jehovah's Witnesses, on the other hand, try to prevent their members from having good careers, and try to stop their members from going to university (although they have just done a volte vis on that, apparently, because they are bleeding so many members). Scientology simply couldn't give a rat's arse about your future. They want all the money you currently have, and any money you can muster from borrowing. They couldn't give a rat's arse whether you can pay that money back to the banks or not. When I left, I got into about £15,000 worth of debt, in the early 1990s and in my early 20s, just to pay off a stupid "freeloader debt" to the Church of Scientology for leaving staff. I needn't have paid it, and shouldn't have, but at the time I was still into the cult mindset.

I nearly ****ed up my bachelor's degree, working night shifts to try and pay back all the debt I was in. At one point, I had to attend a Local Education Authority hearing, to beg them to fund me repeating my second year at university, because I'd had to pull out of the second year. I told the LEA hearing that the reason I'd pulled out was because of extreme debt to a cult. One of the panel members asked, "Was it Scientology?" I knew at that point I was going to get the funding, hahaha. This panel member went on a rant about the damage that Scientology does to people, so she'd evidently come across them. But I can definitely vouch for TomKat's view on the difference between Scientology and orthodox religion. After Scientology, if ever I went to a Christian church I'd be thinking, "Dear me, they're not very good at recruiting, are they? I've been here an hour, and they still don't have my name, address and telephone number."