Îò: The Pilot Òåìà: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 47 - EARLY FEB 99 PILOT POSTS Äàòà: 5 ôåâðàëÿ 1999 ã. 7:00 POST47.txt SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 47 - EARLY FEB 99 PILOT POSTS ========================================== Contents: subj : Super Scio - Answering Anti-Cult On Spelling subj : Super Scio - Answering Pope Charles On The Clear Count subj : Super Scio - On The ARS CD Rom subj : Super Scio - To Ishmael on Bob Minton subj : Super Scio - Answering BigCog's Rant subj : Super Scio Tech - On Doing Research (Attn Thom) subj : Super Scio Humor - SAVING THE PLANET FROM RESTIMULATION subj : Super Scio Tech - To Phil On Between Lives subj : Super Scio Tech - To Dimitry subj : Super Scio Tech - On Various Advanced Ideas (Attn Rogers, Ian, Fredj) subj : Super Scio Tech - On Nanosecond Cogs (Attn Les & ndc) subj : Super Scio Tech - Ascension Experiences (Attn Alan, CBW) subj : Super Scio Tech - On The Self Clearing Survey subj : Super Scio Tech - Axioms Of Creation ========================================== subj : Super Scio - Answering Anti-Cult On Spelling ANSWERING ANTI-CULT ON SPELLING On 30 Jan 99, The.Galactic.Federation@ThePentagon.com (¸Anti-Cult©) continued the discussion on subject "Re: Super Scio Humor - Archeologist Finds Cabbage Scroll" > On 29 Jan 1999 16:33:47 -0500. > In Message-ID: <4.1.19990129132820.00a00a00@in.lightlink.com> > Christine Norstrand . > From: [clear-l] Art Matrix - Lightlink Electra Gateway V2.5. > Wrote on the subject: Re: Super Scio Humor - Archeologist Finds Cabbage > Scroll: > > >At 04:07 PM 1/29/99 -0500, you wrote: > >>Pilot needs an editor and a spell checker. Are these typos done on purpose? If > >>not, then how does his mind measure against his writings? > >> > >Spelling is its own thing. You either have it or you don't. It has > >nothing to do with intelligence or the ability to perceive, as you have > >just demonstrated. > > But... weren't Scientology supposed to make you spell better, with their > study tech, and the endless word clearing? > > Just curious this time, not trying to make fun or anything. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > ++++++++++++ SACRED CULT SCRIPTURE +++++++++++++ > > Some people who are deaf or blind might simply have a cluster > sitting on a nerve, and it's gone on so many years the nerve > atrophies. Catatonics may be suffering from this sort of knockout. > This explains why a tactile process works - you run tactile on the > bed, etc, after an accident and the guy comes out of it. > > --NED for OTs Series 22 > LRH;dm:kjm > Copyright (c) 1978 > by L. Ron Hubbard > ALL RIGHTS RESERVED > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > ******* Body thetans? We don't need no stinking Body Thetans! ******* > *********** http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/index.htm ************ > * Multimedia: http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/multimed/index.htm * > **** Public PGP key: http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/pgp.htm ***** > ******** The.Galactic.Federation@ThePentagon.com (Anti-Cult) ******** > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Study tech, word clearing, etc. did absolutely nothing for my poor spelling. Spell checking programs help enormously. But this does take time and trouble. So the Self Clearing book and Super Scio get spell checked but the ordinary net postings don't. There was a processing action I did on myself which helped. The action was to clean charge off of my protests about spelling. Except, of course, it was a bit of a squirrel action on my part, the org doesn't have a grade aimed at protest. My spelling used to be much worse. If somebody corrected me on the spelling of a word, that would really screw it up. I could neither remember the correction nor use my previous spelling and so it would end up going through incredible gyrations. And man, my protests at spelling were so heavy that I would never ever spell a particular word correctly again if I was ever corrected on it. That, thank goodness, went away when I got off the charge on protest. So my spelling has been getting better since then. Inch by inch it has been straightening out, but only slowly since I still do not like the area. Probably there is more charge that could be handled, but at least it is improving instead of getting worse. I went all the way through Solo Nots with spelling that would get worse every time somebody pointed out that I had mis-spelled a word. It would have been hilarious if my bad spelling had been coming from BTs. But of course it wasn't. Instead it was simple protest. But protest so heavily overcharged that it was not going to come up on a light touch. Hence the need for grades style processing that would pull off layers of protest rather than simply having a protest question on a correction list. So the entire orthodox bridge left this area untouched. As for my current bad spelling, a few years of being capable of learning to spell a word doesn't balance the damage of all the previous decades, especially as I'm much more interested in putting my time into other things. But I figure that a few more years will see me caught up with normal people in this area. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio - Answering Pope Charles On The Clear Count ANSWERING POPE CHARLES ON THE CLEAR COUNT On 28 Jan 99, wbarwell@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (William Barwell) responded to my earlier post on "Super Scio - The Unclearing Course" > In article , > The Pilot wrote: > > > >THE UNCLEARING COURSE > > > > > >From The Auditor issue 278 (US. / ASHO) > > > >There Are Now NEARLY 50,000 clears. > > > >They used to say over 50,000. > > > >Seems like the number is going down. > > > How many new Clears in #278? How about #277? > > Pope Charles > SubGenius Pope of Houston > Slack! #278 only lists 10. I'm not sure where I tossed #277. Maybe the number of clears is going down because they are removing SPs from the count. But they've never done that before, even David Mayo and Capt. Bill continue to be included in the clear count. And if they removed all the people who have been declared SP, the number would drop by a serious amount because there are so many of them (not counting the ones who have left but aren't officially declared). I would expect to hear "There are now almost 40,000 clears" if they did that. They can't bear to have a stat go down, so they would never reduce the count unless they were forced to. That means that it is "false declares" who must be removed so that they can be added in again when they do go clear. There must be thousands of them. My guess is that it is the "forgiveness step" of the new golden age. People confessing under pressure of sec checks that they had doubts about being clear and therefore being sent back down to lower levels to redo things. Perhaps they will continue from here on reclearing the same people over and over again in perpetuity. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio - On The ARS CD Rom ON THE ARS CD ROM On 31 Jan 99, Anonymous posted on subject "FREE complete CD-R ARS archives" > Praise XENU and pass the ARS archives! > > More than four years have gone by since Scientology Helena Kobrin's > doomed attack on the Internet with her criminal RMGROUP attack. > > To celebrate four years of resistance the Alt Religion Scientology > Central Committee (WDE) is distributing FREE copies of the entire > four-year ARS archives. Who says United States Federal Judges can > _really_ do anything to stop free speech? We don't! > > _Every post_ from all the characters you know and love(?) on ARS > completely uncensored and as complete as we can make them. > > Also included on this 650 Mb compressed CD-R will be all the > scientology texts and formerly secret "scriptures" posted to the > Internet by SCAMIZDAT, Vorlon, Zenon, Henson, and the rest of the > suppressive crew. Complete the entire set. Search for that missing > HCO/PL. Collect all your own posts in one place. Also included will > be some RealAudio _exclusives_ to this ARS 4-year celebration of > free speech disk. The entire Class VIII tape "Assists" side 2. And > there will be MORE! > > All I need is your address. A post office box or equivalent will > do. Follow it up to this message. (Of course don't do this if the > criminal scientologists don't already know it. Doh!) A most excellent idea! I would love to have one (probably one will work its way to me eventually if these are issued - I'm certainly not going to expose my address). But of course people might fear this as a trap (and it could well be one - everybody take care). So let me suggest that we apply some old style tech here - the old route 1 drill "find some places where you are not". This is playing zen style tricks on reverse vectors. So what you should do for everybody's protection is: When the time comes, annonce that you are NOT going to send out the CD and ask who would NOT like to recieve it. And then people (who are not keeping their addresses secret) should post their addresses with a statement that they DO NOT want the CD rom. And then let the reverse vectors take their course. (eg. the people who DO NOT want the CD will PULL IT IN!). And while we're at it, lets find some places where Xemu is not and send the CD there too. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio - To Ishmael on Bob Minton TO ISHMAEL ON BOB MINTON On 31 Jan 99, ishmael569@yahoo.com (Ishmael) responded to my post on "Super Scio - To Bob Minton on Credibility" > On 27 Jan 1999 04:00:14, pilot@soda.csua.berkeley.edu (The Pilot) wrote > thusly: > > } > }TO BOB MINTON ON CREDIBILITY > } > } > }Looks like you've lost it, and that is a shame. > > This coming form a man who is running a close second to Koos in the > mental capacity department. For the new folks: be sure to take a gander > at the Super Scio Self Clearing book. I like the part where he audits > his own chakras. Whadda hoot! > > }All you had to do was hold your position, repeat the > }message, and keep expanding your connections. > } > }Instead you're playing P.T. Barnum and trying to make > }a big circus of this, and since most people are here > }for a reason rather than for a show, the house is in > }an uproar. > > Okay, time out! Do you expect expect us (by "us" I mean the ARS > regulars including lurkers) to take you seriously? Your vested interest > and bias as regards things scientological is pretty obvious to me at > least. Of course you're criticizing Bob Minton. He's one of the most > active and visible debunkers of scientology around. And isn't that what > the "freezone" and the other splinter groups really have a problem with? > If Bob Minton and others do a good enough job debunking scientology as > the pseudoreligious psedoscientific scam that it is, where does that > leave you? That's right, plain' with yer e-meter all alone! What do you mean "Of course you're criticizing Bob Minton." I occasionally say friendly and supportive things about Bob. I like the Dateline show about him last year. You wouldn't find me making nasty cracks about his affair with Stacy because I don't think its any of our damn business and I wish them well, let them get some joy out of life. And I think that the sign wacking incident was OSA's fault, not Bob's. Although we are a bit sideways of each other, we are not in opposition, and if I have any vested interest, it is in seeing him continue to push at the orgs for their outness and draw OSA's fire because it helps my efforts. All I was criticizing was some things which I felt could be better handled, and even there I felt that it was constructive criticism that might help rather than an attack. > I've said it before and I'll say it again: you and your cohorts are no > better than the thugs and droids that comprise the "church" of > scientology international (CSI). Now this is an unjustified attack. Do I charge fortunes? Do I lock people up and dehydrate them? Do I employ slave labor in the RPF? Do I tell people to disconnect from friends and family? > }If the Marcabs wanted to sow dissention and keep loyalists > }and critics alike in perpetual unproductive infighting, > }they could not have hired a better agent. Yes I'm > }joking, but it sure does fit, now doesn't it; an external > }third force with its own agenda stirring the ants nest > }to keep everybody on both sides busily fighting amongst > }themselves. > > You're hilarious Flyboy, that was a real knee-slapper. But to answer > your question: no, it doesn't fit. You want it to fit I know, but it > doesn't. > > }In the hopes that you have simply slipped up rather than > }intended to create this effect, let's look at what > }needs to be done: > > Gee, Flyboy I suppose that Bob might have miscalculated the amount of > fallout as a result of the LT exposure but he's got a reactive mind and > BTs and stuff, so cut him a little slack. The error was not in miscalculating fallout but in presenting a weak case. > }1. Dorian > } > }If you and your cohorts made this character up, it's > }time to fess up, and do it in such a ways that people > }with laugh with you about it instead of at you, but > }do it. > } > }On the other hand, if there is somebody who is feeding > }you a line on this, then its time to make them put up > }or shut up and report what you find to the newsgroup. > }Testing him with the late reverse policies doesn't > }really prove anything, anybody could concoct his > }supposed analysis. > } > }Instead, take one of the 1950s tape transcripts that > }have been hitting the net. Demand that he show you > }his notes for orchestrating that. Do it without giving > }him time to write something up after the fact. Instead > }carry a tape transcript into the supposed room full > }of notes and have him find his material on the spot > }without advanced warning of which tape you are bringing. > }I'll be he can't do it. > > I actually like this idea! But tell me, sky-high guy, what would you do > if Bob did as you suggest and Ralph delivered the goods? Would you > throw away your super sciometer and become a mere mortal like the rest > of us? Wonderful question. I would ask for the analysis that lead to the Scientology axioms. And I would ask how the same group flipped around from a positive orientation to a black Scientology control operation. I would wonder if they had one hell of a "tech finder" (freezone term) in the early days and maybe later, one of the others, more of a control freak, bumped him off and took over. I would like to know their history and I would like to see that all the notes, especially the early ones, got published. > }2. Laura > } > }Again it's time for proof instead of unsubstantiated > }babbel. > } > }Speculations and guesswork are fun and ARS is just full > }of them. I enjoy that game myself. But it is not > }appropriate in this case. > > Whatever. > > }3. A Questions of Motives > } > }A clear statement of your intentions would be a good > }idea at this point. > > If you haven't grasped his motives and intentions by now I doub that you > ever will. > > }And let me ask the question that I think is uppermost > }in the freezone: > } > }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? > > Gee, I wasn't aware that Bob was in a position to own the crap. I > suppose that if he ever gained ownership of the sakred drek its > disposition would be up to the conspriatorial cabal that controls him > and all his actions. It is a hypothetical question. I don't think he is in a position to own it either, but his answer would illustrate how he is inclinded to operate. As far as the conspiratorial cabal goes, we all know that it is controlled by telepathic emanations from the great white whale who smells bad from eating too much fish. Therefore he will wish to dine on clam chowder so that he will smell better to attract the last remaining female great white known as Moby Vagina ... (sorry, I'm writing this too late at night). > }------- > } > }Remember that you are damaging Stacy's & Jessie's > }credibility along with your own and they have important > }experiences to relate. > > Huh? You're so full of it! > > }I don't mean this as an attack. I just think that > }it's time for you to do the right thing. > > I'm sure that Mr. Minton will take your well thought out and carefully > considered advice under advisement. LOL! Are you Bob's spokesman now? > Ishmael > > }Best, > } > }The Pilot > } > > **************** Meet me in Clearwater, December 5th, 1999. **************** > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Doubts of all things earthly, and intuitions of some things heavenly; this > combination makes neither believer nor infidel, but makes a man who regards > them both with equal eye.--Herman Melville > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > http://www.offlines.org/my_essay.html The Melville quotes are nice. Regards, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio - Answering BigCog's Rant ANSWERING "BIG COG"'S RANT On 30 Jan 99, "Big Cog" posted on subject "Pilots out-tech game" > I have read a lot of Pilots stuff. 99% of it is out-tech. Only to a standard tech fanatic, and most of LRH's work (CofHA for example) would be out tech on the same basis. Try listening to the 8th ACC (CofHA) tapes. Then do what Ron says on the tapes and self audit CofHA on yourself in the 1954 style (no meter etc., just run route 1 & 2 adjusting the processes as needed). Then come back and accuse me of out-tech. > It is a only-one-ego game! If that were true I'd be attacking all the other researchers as Ron did later (KSW) and saying that I'm the only source. Obviously false. > See how bright I am. Of course I'm bright. Processing raises IQ. You can be bright too. > I am better than Ron. I don't say that. I do say that I stand on his shoulders, building on what he has done so that I can reach higher. Although I do think that he slipped in the end, that may happen to me too, so I can't claim to be better. I see science as a progression of research, each researcher takes it a bit further. Was Faraday "better" than Newton? Probably not, but he carried the work forward at a critical point and certainly hit levels that were out of range in Newton's time. > I have seen the light - listen to me and you are going > to get free. No you are going to get confused. Listen to me AND to Ron AND to some of the other tech finders and you will at least have a chance. If you listen to only one you have no datum of comparable magnitude to evaluate the materials. And if you can't evaluate the materials and assign your own relative importances, then you will have no intelligence in an area (remember the axiom) and turn into a fanatic with no judgement. > Get some standard auditing - outside the Church. Here I agree. The expanded grades are excellent. > There is no easy way Unfortunately true. > - there is only one way to freedom: Standard scn tech. A fanatical remark. You need judgement. If you don't like my stuff, fine, then listen to some early ACCs. Freezone Bible has been posting a lot of the old tape transcripts. Study them AND apply them. With exasperation, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - On Doing Research (Attn Thom) ON DOING RESEARCH (Attn Thom) On 29 Jan 99, thomlove@my-dejanews.com posted on subject "Pilot! I have a question for you." > Hello. > > Your web page and posts inspired me to continue up the Bridge. > However, now I have a mystery to solve, and I hope you may be > able to shed some light on it. > > I'd like to know how you go about doing your research. It is > clear to me that at some point, we all have to get involved in > it. We can of course build up on what others have done, those > areas of charge which is applicable to us, but possibly we all > end up on our own 'thread' so to speak? Super Scio chapters 5, 6, 9, and 10 all have occasional sections where I discuss how I approached researching something and what steps I took. One gets this from LRH occasionally too, primarily in the early tapes. I'll try and write up some more at the end of this post. > I've done a few thousand hours of OT 3 at the Flag Org, most of > which resulted in little to no significant case change. The > sessions seemed fantastic, but there never was any kind of a case change. That is a huge amount of time. But it is a slow technique compared to handling the same thing with NOTS. And even NOTS (at least on solo NOTS where I could see the meter) produces low TA action compared to what is possible above clear. I did the old OT 4 to 7 and I saw incredible TA per hour (as Ron says, far beyond anything at lower levels). On solo NOTS it was usually barely adequate (maybe a bit better than Dianetics, but not as good as grades). And when I ran other OT style actions (old 50s stuff or my own stuff), I saw spectacular TA again, so its the process that is low in TA action. TA action indicates charge comming off the case and that in turn lets one predict how much case change to expect. I did have some spectacular gains from NOTS, but on the whole it is slow freight. > Recently, inspired by you, I've picked up my E-Meter and my > OT3 has been going very well, and the 'dream' of going up the > Bridge is back. Are you running more OT3? If so you should switch over to a NOTS style handling which is much faster for the same thing, assuming that there is more to handle in the area right now. And I hope you have at least been running cumulative cluster instead of grinding at inc 2 which is late track. If inc 2 is sticky, look for overt intentions of wanting mass implanting to occur to handle some problem or other (and best to look earlier, this has been done many times). And spot the earlier problem, prior confusion, etc. But read Self Clearing chapter 38 and Super Scio chapter 6. There is a second flow on this entities business. And you can spin in mis-assigning your own abberations to entities. > I'm also trained up to Class VIII and I have literally thousands > of hours of SO HGC auditing experience. I'm trying to be as > standard as possible, given the circumstances of being 'the > lonely only', as LRH puts it. Neither lonely nor only if you have the comm lines provided by the net. Welcome on board. You will want to go beyond standard. With that much training you should be able to gobble up the early tech fast with good reality. A lot of the early tapes are hitting the net. Don't think "we supplanted this stuff with standard tech". Instead see the broad cloud of knowledge and realize that a small bit of it was firmed up into a standard. > I have no desire to get 'weird', but I do know that the > tech by LRH, bless his heart, doesn't always work for > everyone in the same way. I'm not in any position, nor > do I desire to be in the position, of getting services > on the OT DRD at a SO org. I've audited the OT DRD on > others, so I suspect I could do that solo, reasonably well. Sometimes you just need to rehab the cogs you had while running others on a process. And certainly you could run anything on yourself that you've run others on. > I have no idea how to go about doing NOTS solo. I've copies > of the CofS discarded NOTS issues found on the net, which > helped me understand why I had so much trouble on OT3 at the > orgs. I'm studying them, but I'm aware they have flaws since > the CofS did revise them all. The very few revisions were just to get Mayo out of the picture. The significant error blamed on him (and maybe not even his error) which messed up the very early NOTS pcs was to assume that something was coming from NOTS and therefore run it as a BT without having a read. That was more a matter of interpretation and was, I believe, cured by the reference on "never run an unreading item" rather than by bulletin revisions. It was deadly as an audited action because the PC might put one there and assign cause to it under pressure from the auditor. Solo doesn't have this liability unless you start blaming them for things. The HCOBs that are on the net match the ones that I studied on the Solo Nots course. Of course they only give you about half of them on S/NOTS. They omit the ones on the specific audited rundowns, or in some cases they issued the theory section (without the rundown itself) as a separate HCOB to give to Solo Nots students. These bulletins were NOT revised after Mayo left. Only a few points of procedure and CSing were adjusted in the auditing of other people. Self Clearing chapter 38 pretty much sums it up, and there is Ralph Hilton's nice writeup too. Solo Nots was mostly just using the "valence technique" as described in one of the NOTS HCOBS, on whatever draws your attention (or whatever your attention avoids). This is a better starting action than the more formal rundowns. It's hard to imagine why anyone would need an auditor for this easy technique after doing the much more difficult OT3 style handlings. Although it is theoretically an L&N technique, it just doesn't have the liabilities or need much formality. You just ask "what are you". You should get a BD FN item fairly quickly. But actually you can do it unmetered and just take whatever feels like a good answer and it works just fine. If the "what" list is slightly flubbed, the BT gives more answers on the "who are you question" instead of answering "me" immediately. So you get another shot at it. And another if needed. Of course you can do a correction list if you get into trouble, either a list correction on the BT or the NOTS correction list on yourself. Again, the NOTS correction list on the net is the same one they give you to use with solo. But in practice, solo, these are always short easy lists and they list again on "Who" if there is any problem rather than needing a list correction. Since it is their list instead of yours, you don't have your own listing BPC to contend with if there is any difficulty. In my own opinion, you are simply stripping off and acknowledging layers of mocked up identity rather than doing a true listed list on them because it simply doesn't have the kick of mishandled L&N in the rare cases where you might flub. And in solo, going by attention instead of pushing for specific ones (as you might in a rundown), they come off in the best possible gradient and therefore seem easy to run. > The reason I feel I need to understand how personal research > is done, is that I suspect I may have to get involved in it. > I'd rather do the OT DRD, NOTS, and then Solo NOTS, but I don't > have the present materials at hand. If I had the material, maybe > I could go for it Solo. As mentioned above, the materials are on the net. But unless this area is acting as a road block, you'd be better off running CofHA solo. Even Ron says that trained people should do that (self audit CofHA) on the 8th ACC tapes and he was well aware of entities at that time (see the HCL lectures) but did not consider them to be worth bothering about. The best point to do Nots handling is when you notice them getting in your way and showing up to run. Then use the easy Nots techniques to get them out of your way. They do hold you back (to some degree) and obscure things and amplify somatics, but they are never the source or the real why. It is always the PC. The "heavy" restim of OT 3 and Nots that makes it dangerous to a lower level or unprepared case is not the restim of the materials, it is the wrong indication that entities are source on the PC's case. It is the PC, not his BTs, who is responsible for the condition he is in. And if you audit a PC at effect instead of at cause, you will spin him. If you tell a PC, "you poor victim, what is wrong is that you have been beaten up by those nasty so and sos", you will get the same worsening of case whether the so and sos are the nasty boys next door or the PC's BTs. The modern upper OT levels are unfortunately motivatorish, with the pc being a victim of implants and infestation. > Anyway. If you could explain how it is you go about looking > for areas of charge, it may help me quite a bit. Simply stumbling into charge is the hardest to handle. So the hardest route is to bumble around finding more charge. Best is to get yourself FNing. Do ruds. Do a 53 or GF if needed. I can't suggest that to beginners but you're an 8 so your should have no trouble doing this solo. Once you are flying, run processes. They will restim charge in the area they are aimed at. So you don't have to search for it, it presents itself quite readily. Of course after clear all charge is a shadow of what it was before and relatively easy to handle. The big gain is actually in the freeing up of one's postulates and large increases in awareness. There is the entirity of early Scientology. Some of the most wonderful processes. > I don't consider my case state at this point sufficiently > clear to do any personal research, but, sooner or later... Exactly. Get what is well mapped out first, that is much easier than trying to itsa something that you don't have the anatomy of. > Thanks. > > Thomas. > > "When in doubt, COMMUNICATE!" LRH Right on. > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- > http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own Now as to research: First there is the wealth of techniques on things that we do understand. Use the tech. Some of my "research" is a side effect of processing. You run good processes, that gives you cogs, sometimes the cogs reveal a new piece of the puzzel. That lets you devise new process to work the area uncovered, which in turn leads you further and so forth. That is the easiest way. Next you learn general tricks for taking charge off of something that you do not know the anatomy of. Even simple spotting drills, Itsa earlier similar itsa, and so forth help here. Doing this on something charged which you don't understand sometimes brings about understanding as well as relief. And you study Ron or myself or anybody who has good itsa. Just doing an LRH tape can bring about great cogs, and sometimes you see something, with hindsight, that was not obvious in the early days and go beyond what they were doing then. And use the material, don't just study it in the abstract. Then there is work on basic theory, trying to proceed forward logically as is done in the axioms. And then there is "wants handled". You have something sitting on your plate and your not sure of the source or anatomy. So you write down every potential source known to man or beast that might apply. Things like overts or entities or implants or whatever. And then run it like a green form, getting itsa or doing appropriate handlings when you know a better technique for handling what read. Researching an implant platen, if that comes up, is tough. Always take charge off first including the begining (prior to implanting) and similar overts or intentions to make people be good or whatever before attempting to list for items. Remember that during the middle period of the track everybody "knew" that the way to put people's ethics in was to implant them. Unlike entity handling, solo listing of implant items does have the liabilities of doing a listed list and you will need all your L&N skills. Again I'm assuming that you have a good knowledge of the BC and the modern research line as well as extensive skill. If you are typical of SO Cl 8s, you will have a huge blind spot on the early research line and your highest priority should be to remedy that. Do the PDC tapes (they have been on the net) and ACCs as courses for application. Run everything in them solo on yourself. Learn them like you were there and going to walk out and run them on a pc tomorrow. The tech is for use. Good Hunting, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Humor - SAVING THE PLANET FROM RESTIMULATION Humor - SAVING THE PLANET FROM RESTIMULATION The Loyalist Officers set up a 4th dimensional teletype and immediately began receiving the following document from the future: PLANETARY POLICY LETTER 1 JAN 2016 Remimeo Police Hats Judicial Hats CONFIDENTIALITY OF DATA Now that the Sea Org Rules The World, it is time to eliminate sickness by removing the source of sickness, namely, exposure to restimulative data. Just as OT 3 and NOTS must be kept secret, all other sources of restim must be kept secret as well. And now that we run the world government, we can enforce this. Therefore the following are hereby declared confidential, under penalty of law: 1. All data on taxation is hereby made confidential. Doing taxes is VERY restimulative. Therefore you will be protected from knowing about this subject. You just tell us how much you make. We tell you how much to pay. You can't ask how we calculated it, that is too restimulative, so you just pay up or else. Only IRS auditors may have access to this data. This also includes tax laws and the current tax rate. Taxes may not be discussed and you may not tell anyone else how much you have paid. 2. All data on automechanics is hereby made confidential. Automobiles are dangerous. People have gotten hurt trying to fix their own cars. They get upset at mechanics sometimes. This is obviously PTSness. We will save you from this. You will never know, nor be able to find out, anything about this subject ever again. Car hoods are to be locked by authorized government agents and only opened for government authorized mechanics to work on. All data on this topic is to be kept secret. The mechanics will pay appropriate fees to their local orgs for training and certification. No longer will you be confused by descriptions of the work done on your car. The mechanic will simply tell you how much to pay him and pass the org its percentage. 3. All data on computers is hereby made confidential. People are dying from M/Us related to computers. Only Sea Org staff are to manufature them. Only Sea Org staff are to repair or upgrade them. Only Sea Org staff are to program them. The programs will let you see what you are allowed to see. They will protect you from restimulation. To further protect you, the cases will be welded shut, there will be no command line access, and program compilers will be banned from the private sector. 4. All data on Metaphysics, Psychiatry, Space Aliens, and similar restimulative topics is hereby made confidential. 5. All data on the old non-Scientology religions such as Christianity is hereby made confidential. 6. All data on Sea Org executives including their names and personal habits is hereby made confidential. =========== At this moment the teletype broke down and the rest of the message was lost. Just another jokers & degraders fit, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - To Phil On Between Lives TO PHIL ON BETWEEN LIVES On 29 Jan 99, "P.Scott" responded to my earlier post on "Super Scio Tech - BETWEEN LIVES EXPLORATION" The earlier post he is quoting was mine, the complete text can be found in the Pilot archives at fza.org > >And so I would call on real seekers of truth to attempt to > >report back on whatever they can after death. > > My view is that many people do not reincarnate....most I think > don't...that's just a gut feel.... one can always inquire of his > 'conscience'..what the plan is....mine was to do had to be done this trip > and be off. I think most do, but maybe not on earth (unless it really is a prison that manages to hang onto most people). But that doesn't mean everybody does and I don't want to hold you back, so good luck. > One can help a dying person, preferrably a loved one, forgive each person in > their life as they are dying, then get all the saids said, all flows. untill > release.... then have all things forgiven on person by person basis..untill > ep (you can run this by hand squeezes and visual indicators)...and then RF > the person that it may be true, (but don't say it is true, because maybe it > isnt).....that a being is where it puts its thoughts, and that is why one > must forgive and 'let go'....and get all the saids, said..... and also RF > one can control his location that way and be free of anything thats > troubling... etc. > > Then ask the person to let you know from the other side what they can.....or > help, or send unmistakeable signs that they are in tact. > > and see what happens.....I doubt if you will be dissappointed. I'd make > sure the person is a kind soul though. Not a bad idea. > >I don't think that it will be easy. The idea would be to > >try to find out things and then to find some way to pass > >the data back here before reincarnating. > > > Its my view that our incarnation here is so stunningly pedantic, in so many > ways, that it occludes completely what the issues are on the other side, > while we are being here .... > > but.from the other side, however, the view is quite clear (exterior to ones > assumed identity, or beingness ....that can be accomplished this life > time.)..... one knows everything it seems....yet some things are not > known...and there is not a hell of a lot of material things to look at.... > not even beingnesses in my experience..... it may be that the 'Heaven' > desribed in the bible is a temporal thing as well, since beingness is > recognised..... > > supporting that biblically, is the statement that ' both heaven and earth > shall pass away' (paraphrased from memory) 'but my word shall go on > forever'. One is left then in the final analysis with life, but nothing > else. The complete circle from creation. > > Back to the 'other side' issue. > some things are not known...for instance that a being can be were its > thoughts are...that apparently was not known.... its both too pedantic to > consider knowing, and of no concern to a discarnate being.... except > apparently there is considerable aberation on some levels of the other > side....and in that context the insight is useful. > > Its a long story. Lets just say it may be like this...... if the person on > the other side is connected to you by lines of intent or whatever....and you > get your attention on someone that upset the person.... your attention will > go into that space, you will go into that space, but not be upset, because > maybe you never knew the person.... > > but the deceased who did know the person, will get quite upset......its like > you drag the spaces together but the discarnate person cannot see or know > whats wrong....just they are back on this upset again. . You will find > that in spotting this, there will be peace, and ones own inherited physical > weaknesses, inherited from the upset relative may dissapear.. > > Also apparently there is quite an ability to influence this side from the > other side, I think satanists know this quite well, and use the > data......... if you ask for signs and influence you may be quite surprised > at the results. > > The bible warns heavily against this activity..... I have not fathomed why > yet. it may be that in our grievous error here, if we get too much of > what we want, the error can become overwhelming....... or it may be that > erronious intent from this side attracts erronious intent from the other > side....and things can get nasty. Which book and which version of it? > We know it did with many of the satanist oriented types ... a chain of links > ive discussed earlier and were mentioned in some detail in the recently > posted piece by DeWulf. (hubbies oldest)..... there are seveal common > threads...namely the belief in the power of the individuated individual, > especially after death.... > > Lacking that occurance.... the contact can be quite rewarding. > (apparently ). > > I hesitated to mention these issues here, but they are already on the table > in spots so I am being specific. > > A Being can become quite powerful on these tactics..... LRH did, anyone who > had done ACW's spiritual teammates can attest to that, and anyone who does > my completely squirrely OT-3 type handling can attest to that...... > > It makes me quite nervous....because you see, we are in such gross error > here, this contact magnifies it. Whenever I look into areas where this is > practiced, one sees 3 stages.....first, joy at the progress....second, great > power, thirdly great decay, corruption and then destruction...takes about a > generation to cycle. It might be in whether one uses power to help or uses it to dominate. > We saw it with the third reich, the cult of scientology and hubbard so far, > Russia, and back through history..... the egypitians were an > exception....they went on for thousands of years....others are in various > other stages..... It my be best to admit we are idiots, and seek our > salvation directly on a via of christ consciousness to the mother load of > Life and skip all the error in between. > > (homers sessions on the subject are world class.... and to be sure, a few > notches up from where I was sitting at the time) Agreed. > >I know of cases where an OT picked up a new body and as a > >small child gave out some bit of data from their earlier > >lifetime. There are cases where a former life Scientologists > >has had processes rehabbed that had been run in the earlier > >life and the meter phenomena behaved appropriately. > > > When I was in sacramento doing the grades, I recalled a past live in a motel > about 40 miles away, all the details of the motel, the old coke machines, > the C shape, the walk throughs, the slope of the land, the stream behind > it.......so I spent an after noon and drove out there, wasn't too hard to > find.... but the coke machines were missing (the old ice water bath > type).... on the sidewalk though, one could see the old bolt anchors still > there, and the rust stains where the machines sat....the place had been > vacant for years, with weeds grown up...but everything else was the > same....it is possible I had seen the place before as a child, and was > halucinating the past life part, but I don't think so.. I don't think so either. Sounds real to me. > >But I know of nobody who has come through with good > >continuous recall. Even the OTs forget their previous > >life and then get back little bits of it. > > > >Of course in general people might not want to remember > >their former lives in detail. But somebody who was > >seeking truth would be an exception to this because they > >would want every bit of data that they could get their > >hands on. > > That is very true I think. Seeking the honest truth, screens out some of > the halucinations, I was a fat guy on welfare, and before that a cowboy in > Nevada, had a gun but never fired it, it was all holster worn with the > bluing worn off.....rode this lame horse around in the hot sun...mining > towns, an unglamorous existence, very detailed recalls of the last two > lives. > > When you can recall being Napolean the odds are against it being > true....what 50 million to one? So it goes no where. Maybe it goes to having copied a winning valence. > >Furthermore, the actual between lives sequence seems > >immensly harder to recall than the earlier lifetimes. > > Thats totally true in my case. > > >I've picked up bits of it (described in Super Scio) but > >it's nothing that I would trust my recall on. > > Same here...it does seem thought that one is definely here for good reason > with things that need to be done, I was slam dunked here......in my case to > help a few specific people that I had to run across first...and > secondly...to finish my learning curve on the liabilities of my long > error....a tall order..... it seems most of us have serious error going on, > extreme ignorance of all stripes....this experience it seems tends to kill, > or cure the problem.....those that don't learn on this trip get to come back > and either learn....or it seems to attach to the dark side and go down that > way.... I think that usually the lessons don't work. > >My working hypothesis right now is that we are still going > >through some sort of memory wipeout between lives despite > >any wishful thinking that the between lives implants have > >been eliminated or can easily be bypassed. > > I think this is about right..... any being who enters the other side as an > identity, or being attached to thoughs of what or who it is.....is > targetable by the energy fields associated with the identity. Don Juans > reference to slipping past the eagle may be relevant here. When I first read about the eagle years ago, the following occured to me. Let's say that there is something which swallows the between lives souls and regurgitates them rearranged and brainwiped. Let's say that a primitive medicine man of high awareness percieves this. Given his frame of reference he sees it as an eagle. Let's say that a science fiction writer percieves this. He sees the same thing as an alien implant base. Let's say that a primitive shepard sees this. Perhaps he sees souls burning in flames much as he roasts mutton over a spit. Perhaps the actuality cannot be described in 3 dimensional terms or our usual set of symbols. Whatever it is, slipping past it might not be a bad idea. > I'd say, if one is targetable.....its over. Don Juans discussion of > 'the double' .....and handing the eagle a false set of papers, may be > relevant here..... it was for me, to say the least. Worth considering. > >But it is also > >possible that this is simply coming about through some > >case factor or that there is some simple thing that we have > >not yet understood about the mechanics of memory. > > I think this true also...don't ask me to explain the apparent conflict, I > can't. > > >It is > >possible that the drop in havingness at death is enough > >by itself to cause forgetfulness unless it is remedied. > > > >As to what one might percieve between lives, there are > >various possibilities: > > > >a) The real world (Earth, etc.) > >b) Dreams > >c) Implant Pictures > >d) Other realities (including heavens & hells etc.) > >e) Shared Illusions > > the 'Magicians' series will have a process on that one of these days..... > modeled after the chapter 'Island of the Tonal'...in the book Tales of > Power, by carlos castaneda, his presentation is flawless...but the set up > took 20 years....I will try to shorten the set up time....... whats to be > seen is none of the above from what I can tell...Its out of the framework of > the construct of words or thought. > > > >I can hardly guess at the laws governing these various > >things or their relative degree of solidity. My advice > >is to be armed to the teeth with processes and to be > >both flexible and fearless, neither letting oneself be > >suckered into traps nor avoiding things. > > One must be up to 'seeing' it seems as well, and ideally 'seeing' > intent......and 'have no history', no self importance, and have his > power.... a power founded in silence.... processes may never even occur to a > person. They don't to me at that point. What occurs is the ability to > remain silent....no matter what, and intent....and impeccable. > > > >We have a large array of objective OT drills which would > >be very useful. Among the best are those in the first > >few chapters of Self Clearing. Simple alternate spotting > >(the locational or attention process) is extremely powerful > >in sorting out delusion from reality. The same goes for > >mocking up copies alongside of real objects. > > > >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. > > > >---------------- > > > >The After Death processing rundown. > > > >On of the biggest problems is to avoid a crash in havingness > >due to the loss of the body. > > Or better to not have to have anything while alive..... I think running > havingness on a person after session is an error of magnitude. Beyond no > havingness, ...is the ability to pervade everything....and that has been > left cleanly out of all of hubbards tech.....his tech confines a being to a > set of anchored spaces.....and worst the beingness of oneself... confined. > Having to have to be.... fatal in my view, he called Life a game! Life > is not a game, idiots create games.... saying Life is a game condenses the > infinite into a set of opterms...anchored opterms. > > I've stated it badly here, my earlier piece on havingness is more specific. Creative processes and comm processes tend to be destructive of havingness. The are among the most powerful processes and yet seem to need this balance. Many other types of processes do not need it. But from my view, pervading things is a havingness process, so perhaps we have a slightly different definition here. There are some havingness processes which are also control processes and some which are not. There may be liabilities to installing too much control. I am not happy with the marathon book and bottle type sessions run by one person on another even though the drill itself is very nice done solo for a brief period to a win. > One of the commonly described > >effects is that a person in good shape who is not heavily > >drugged when they die will come out with good exterior > >preception briefly and then will sink. This is described > >as the "swoon" in the Tibetan materials. One has a clear > >moment and then passes out and then comes briefly to > >consciousness again and so forth. Gold describes this > >as being like dropping a ball, and it keeps bouncing > >up again for awhile, but a bit lower each time. > > > >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. > > It may be too late if one dies in such bad shape...... it may be that if one > can be completely impeccable, silent, and intent here, with no personal > history.......that he can be also on the other side..... lacking that, all > the mind fornication tricks in the world may not help. > > It may also be that if one actually IS where is attention is, that with his > attention on 'Christ Consciousness".... Christ it seems, one may become one > with that space and likewise be still, and free. Again, not a bad idea. And on the eastern side there is "the pure land". There are many things to try. Hence the need to try and get a message back if you can so as to help others. > >Best is probably a variation on the first process of self > >clearing chapter 11 which is to pick a mountain and drill > >ext/int on it. > > Works great, also while driving in the desert....be about 50' below the > surface as you drive along.... then come out . Nice. > A mountain is a big mass and it is a good > >anchor point to keep things located. Have a favorite > >mountain and flatten the ext/int drill on it now before > >dropping the body. Then go a bit further and drill alternately > >being the mountain and simply holding it as an anchorpoint > >from a distance. > > I found that stuff of totally no interest...not even a > consideration....exterior from all identity (but not self)... could not care > less about percieving it.... again the notion of the anchor point is way > below the ultimte level one must attain to be free. imho We've always had this thing on needing to find which havingness processes worked for the pc. There is a variable here that is not well understood. Obviously yours are more in the pervasion band. > >You want an ideal state where you can use this mountain as > >needed for mass or orientation but you are not stuck in > >it or held back by it. > > That may be targeting to live life at the 'ghost' level, still concerned > with the material.... a mistake I think. That's why I included the following paragraph as well. Make sure you can also toss the damn thing if it seems appropriate. > >Some of the spiritualists worry > >about earthbound spirits who get too attached to the > >Mest around here. So flatten ext/int in advance and also > >drill mocking up copies of the mountain and throwing them > >away. You want it as a tool rather than a limitation. > > > >So, assuming these things have been flattened before > >dying, this gives us process AD-1 to be done when one > >exteriorized and floats above the body as it dies. > > > >AD-1) Alternately, a) look down at the dead body while > >reaching into the mountain as an anchor point, and > >b) be in the mountain, feeling the mass of it and > >look at the surrounding area. > > That would work...but may anchor the being to the material.. ... I like > total pervasion better....but any game is totally shot at that > point....whats left? > > I had it figured out at one time, but have since forgotten. > > Oh yes....it may be like this..... if you are still wanting to be in a > location, you have not learned your lesson yet....so its back into the meat > grinder.... if you want to know what its like to be free of all > that...determine to find out while you are still alive...it can be done. That is its own process, and again not a bad idea. > How does it 'feel'... well it doesn't....it is though, just hillarious to > look at what we are into now, and see the complete insanity of it.....I > guess the answer is that there is a life beyond having thoughts, and craving > sensation....and it is vaslty superior....but not even faintly like the > current existence.....a sort of etherial experience. (I snipped a big chunk of my earlier post here for brevity, its in the archives) > >After facing the impact of the incident, there still > >may be charge on the loss involved. It is important > >to flatten this and it would be best to use an easy > >technique that can be done in present time. So I > >would recommend the "blow it up" process from the first > >ACC. > > I think when old folks die, there is no grief, no impact...just a welcome > drifting way...a situation that a long old age it seems prepairs one for. Good point. Some are ready to depart. > >AD-5) Mockup the body (alive and well) in various places > >and blow it up. If you have trouble holding a stable > >position while doing this, locate youself above (or in) > >the aforementioned mountain and project the mockups > >from there. Continue as long as any grief turns on at > >blowing the body up. Note that you shouldn't be in > >the body that you're blowing up, just project the mockup > >various places. > > > >This can be run again with copies of the dead body, > >blowing those up too to get over any remaining flinch > >at the dead body. If a good bit of charge comes off > >on this, then check over the original version (alive > >and well) again to see if any more charge on the loss > >is now available to be run. > > > >Finally, we want to ensure retaining some recall, and > >there may be a tendency to forget simply because one > >no longer has the mass of the body to keep one oriented > >to the lifetime. > > > >The thing to do would be to pick some special moments > >in this lifetime and use them as anchor points to > >the recall. Again, these should be selected in > >advance and run through occasionally so that they > >are easy to connect with. > > I think all this effort to insure recalls and reconnection would be semi > workable, and useful to those alive ...but not a benefit to the being who > died....he's better off free...not concerned with the physical universe. I feel that the forgetting has lead to a general slow decline. One might drop all the baggage and rise a bit higher and yet not quite as high as the previous time one did that. > >Pick a half dozen or a dozen especially nice moments > >in time in the current lifetime, preferably ones > >which have some significance and will help you to > >remember other things when you want to. It might > >help to number these and think of the year they > >occured along with the sceen. > > > >When I talked about the possiblity of time being > >reset in Super Scio, I suggested that some key > >points be picked to act as triggers to recall in > >case you should find yourself going through the > >same lifetime again. The same list could be used > >for both purposes. > > > >For drilling this before death, shift into the > >mountain and recall the list of key moments from > >there because you will not have the option of > >recalling them from the body after dropping it. > > These processes are pretty bright...but I think would not exist, or be > totally different, if written from a postion of actually being exterior to > all that is. .... from that perspective there is no process.....except the > experience. > > One for instance would not be 'shifting into amountain' because there is > nothing to shift anywhere....... maybe at the 'ghost' level...this stuff > would be applicable...but then the 'ghost' level is one I'd hope one can > move beyond..... total pervaison takes one out the ghost range of beingness. > > >So the process would be: > > > >AD-6) Shift into the mountain, using it to remain > >oriented to PT, and recall each of the key moments > >in this lifetime (the one just completed). > > > >It might also help to mockup favorite posessions > >that have good recalls associated with them. > > > >The one time that my body dematerialized in this > >lifetime, I was extremely forgetful and very > >dimwitted. I described that in Super Scio chapter 9. > >In that case there was no impact and no implants, > >it was simply a side effect of being without > >the mass and energy of the body briefly. I expect > >that to happen after dropping the body. > > > >But in my one near death experience (also described > >in Super Scio), I was out with extremely clear > >perception and full intelligence, possibly because > >the body was still present and alive even though it > >had shut down completely. > > > >I think that in actually dropping the body, the > >high awareness state will be there briefly and > >then one will sink into the forgetfull not too > >bright state as the energy level drops. This > >would match the Tibetan description of having > >a good moment followed by the swoon. > > The swoon may be caused by the persons attention going onto those things he > knew, loved or hated....and so he dispursed to them..thus the swoon..... > another reason this whole havingness thing does not indicate to me. > > >I can't guarantee how effective the above drills > >will be in avoiding the swoon nor can I be sure > >that one would have enough time to complete them > >before sinking. > > Not needing anything, before you die, and willingly letting the body go may > be the best answer (don juan stepped off of a cliff... the ancient > tradition is to lay down and will death)...deliberately letting go...so > there is no need to hang onto and disburse back to the material..... > > I'm telling you guys....this whole havingness scenario, may be culturing > one into lower level exteriorization, as an identity....a big problem I > think. I think of myself as a toolmaker. The idea is to have tools that can be used if needed. You shouldn't be limited by your tools. And that is one of the reasons I believe in doing many processes lightly rather than grinding things. > >I do think that the processes > >should be capable of pulling you back up if you > >keep at them long enough, repeating the entire > >series a few times if necessary. But you might > >have to be able to continue them through a heavy > >period of mental fogginess. > > > >So drill the entire set of processes, AD-1 to 6 > >a number of times until you can do it easily. > >And then repeat it at least once a year so that > >it stays fresh in your mind and is at your fingertips. Even when I say "a number of times", I only mean a few hours each time, not the hundreds of hours that some would do on a single technique. (again I'm snipping a chunk of my earlier post for brevity) > >In the western tradition, one is drawn down a tunnel > >and rushes towards "the light at the end of the > >tunnel". In the Tibetan materials they suggest > >that you don't let yourself be pulled or pushed > >around but either remain unmoving or move in a > >reverse direction because these things are trying > >to get you to go to your fate rather than your > >desire. > > > ***An interesting point > > > >This is good advice. However, if I was feeling > >gutzy and fairly confident of shifting out of > >a flow or a picture and back to the mountain when > >I wanted, > >I might go along with something or even > >step into a possible implant just to see what I > >could learn. > > If there is an 'I" it will be devastated again on that stunt....if there > isn't an 'I' it won't care...it will see things for they are as it pervades > all. Perhaps one could avoid devastation while learning a lot. But note that I said "if I was feeling gutzy". I'm not advising that others try this unless they are as inclined as I am to take risks in gaining knowledge. > >I might also go into something while > >also holding an external anchor point (such as > >a mountain) on a similar basis. > > That would be safer.... if one is intent on remaining an 'I'..... > > > >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). > > *** thats interesting. > > >Other > >traditions generally have some kind of similar > >meetings with guides or whatever. > > Most are incontact with their guides now.... to one degree or another. > > >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. > > Some are met by demons.... I've a personal experience along those > lines...lets just say this old gunfighter and flat tracker went into abject > terror....at that point....trust me one doesn't have the guts..... Dr M > Scott Pecks book....'people of the lie' is also revealing on this issue. > > Dr Melvin Morse (pediatrician) wrote a few books, with afew accounts from > those went not to nice places...and what pulled them back.... very > revealing. I feel that I've talked with both angels and demons, but it might just be dub-in or imagination, nothing I'd insist on. Both types seemed interested in higher truths and finding a way out and neither seemed to have anything more than limited knowedge. Both types enjoyed learning a few processes. Only once did a demon bother me and I did mock myself up as a bigger demon and scare him off, that did seem to work. Of course during my long SNOTS overrun I would annoy such beings with endless "who are yous". I don't recommend that if you hit a real composite being who is operating rather than a fragment or whatever. > >I would further suggest that what looks like a > >relative or a savior or a benevolent godess should > >not be taken at face value. However, you may > >be dealing with a friendly force, so be polite > >and not offensive. Try doing some light processing, > >teaching, and exchange of knowledge and see how > >that goes. > > One is the junior G man in this situation I do believe....so far the way > around it from what I can tell is to either go with the flow.....or be > exterior to ones own identity at death, impeccable and still....the pervade > beyond all other entities..... > > some descriptions of beingness at that level terrifys humans......so I will > skip it here. > Most want to keep going through the meat grinder..... it so assuring. I like the challanges presented. Maybe I'll just get ground up again, hopefully after at least sending back some info. But we shall see. > Think of the alien in Sagan's "Contact" > >wearing a friendly form to put the heroine at ease. > >But this could also be bait for a trap, so take > >care. > > ***** words to the wise.... > > > > >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. > > **** well for those who just love the Game of Life....it looks like it will > get > interesting if this is true, and I think it is to one extent or another, > unless one can slip the whole mess. > > > >According to them, near the end of the nasty ones, > >they will try to judge you and you should reject > >the judgement. > > *** Very interesting...it is also the dark ones in this life who pass > judgements... all against the biblical admonitions.... and yes one should > not judge or be judged....Homers insight re: respect 'Christ Consciosness' > is interesting here as well. An excellent point. (more of my earlier post snipped) > >I would be inclined to explore these things and > >even to take chances, but also to hang onto > >anchor points and visit people and keep doing > >various processes. I would think that any process > >which you can remember would be worth trying again > >in the between lives area. > > It may be that one will not be thinking in word constructs, so will not be > running processes, one can be where its attention is though.... I don't generally run processes in word constructs. When I look around the room spotting things that I like, I just do that, I don't sit there saying "look for something you like", look at it, acknowledge myself, say the command again, etc. I just look around. That doesn't need words. Sometimes words are a helpful crutch, but you are right in expecting that one might not be thinking in word constructs. That even happens on keyouts sometimes, one is left without the words. But in the higher states one does not need to put one's thoughts into words. > the only tip I have is a biblical admonition.... it bailed me out for > reasons I don't understand....'turn away'... 'physically turn your face > away'.... that broke the tractor or whatever..... If I hadn't remembered > that, I may have been a gonner. A good point, and this indicates to me, it feels like something I knew once. This might be worth drilling a bit. > >It would be best to be loaded for bear before > >tangling with the between lives area. Learn as > >much as you can and process as much as you can > >first. Even if your body is in bad shape, I would > >recommend hanging on and processing as long as > >possible rather than dropping it. > > I on the other hand would recommend 'beingness drills'...then being beyond > ones identity.....no processes. I recommend beingess drills as well. There are quite a few in the self clearing book. But some processes work beyond one's identity. And there seem to be layers of identity. > >At the top one materializes and dematerializes real > >bodies at will. > > Thats said, I have yet to see it......I think we inhabit them...we dont' > mock them up...an opinion is all. As I mentioned in the original post, I've had this happen once. It is wild. Operating this way causatively would really be something. > >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. > > > >As I see it, there is no need to drop the body to > >continue research as Ron was reported to have done. > > Hubbard I believe died insane, much as he lived in many regards...he was on > an agenda that related a being to material universe contexts....a fatal > error in my view...from his dark side agenda....I DO NOT recommend one > follow in his path. > > Very Best Regards, Phil Scott > > >I suspect that that was just a shore story. But > >if one is stuck with the fact of the body having > >died, then use it as part of the research effort. > > > >And please try to report back whatever you find out. > > > >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. > > > >Good Luck, > > > >The Pilot Best Regards to you as well, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - To Dimitry TO DIMITRY On 29 Jan 99, "Dimitry Ivakhnenko" posted on "Pilot: End of the Game Handling" > Pilot wrote: > >TECH FINDER'S CERT FOR DIMITRI > > > > > >I have been reading your technical posts with great > >interest. I'll certainly be using some of these things. > > > >I'm very tempted to analyze them in detail, but I think > >that I shouldn't at this point. You are evolving into > >a tech finder in your own right and it would be a mistake > >for me to push you into following me too closely at this > >stage because you might abandon some line where I have > >a blind spot or too much case. > > > >On a monthly basis you should accumulate all your posts > >and make an archive post so that things don't get lost. > >See if you can get someone on ACT to carry these on a > >website. > > > >Mock up a cert for yourself. You have earned it. > > > > > >Affinity, > > > >The Pilot > > Recently I became aware of the frequent phenomena which I would call > "sudden end of the game". Imagine you are talking to someone and the > connection breaks, or you are watching a TV program and it suddenly > switches out. In response to the above Pilot's letter I also experienced > some anguish and anger for ending the unfinished game. Having fun of > this anger, I started dramatizing it, writing the mocking letter from > the position of most wisest, and suddenly the whole game blew, and I > experienced quite fresh and spacious no-game state. > > I thought of saving this method for further use, and came up with two > versions: > > 1. Mocking letters > > Alternately write letters from your game identity and another > player's identity, having fun of it. Exaggerate each role, > transforming each detail in absurd nonsense, until the whole game > blows. > > 2. Being the game > > The idea here is to return to the level where you can freely be or > not to be every terminal or observer in the game. I have borrowed the > layout from the book "Quantum Consciousness" by Stephen Wolinsky. > > To better distinguish the identities involved, select for them spots > on the floor. (Two identities are usually enough) > > Mockup the identities on corresponding spots. > > Alternately, walking to these spots and out of them, > > a) Be first identitity and dramatize it. > b) Be an observer, mocking asnd unmocking this game. > c) Be second identity and dramatize it. > d) Be an observer, mocking and unmocking this game. > > Have fun with these identities, pushing them to absurd. Have fun with > yourself, watching how you create the "serious" game out of thin air. > Isn't the life a game of the same kind? > > D.I. > -- > My site is under snail construction. Reply to dimitri@quanta.kiev.ua Perhaps I was too abrupt. But since you were (and are) doing so well, I thought it better to get out of the way and simply encourage you. I do expect that we will have many interesting techical discussions in the future. But it felt to me that this was a time for you to engage in an unrestrained outflow of ideas without having to sell me on all of them since you might venture into areas in which I have blind spots. You really should get your posts collected somewhere. I'm not certain if I have got them all. And in the long range you should plan on writing a self processing book. I enjoyed the above process. Affinity, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - On Various Advanced Ideas (Attn Rogers, Ian, Fredj) ON VARIOUS ADVANCED IDEAS (Attn Rogers, Ian, Fredj) On 31 Jan 99, "Rogers" posted on topic "Pilot" First let me remind people that I consider everything in the following areas to be highly speculative. > Hi Pilot! A couple of things. First of all, I know that there (hopefully) > will be other readers beside yourself, so some of my comments are not > exactly to you personally. > > In Super Scio #6A you said, "To the best of my knowledge, there were only > 10,000 individuals on the early track." And later on, "And don't make the > mistake of thinking that you're everyone else. You'd only be a small > percentage. Maybe one in a billion." > > All things being equal (or sort of average), that is to say, assuming all > these original individuals divided up in comparable orders of magnitude; the > ratio would remain constant. In other words, if the ratio was 1 to 10,000 > at the beginning, it would still be 1 to 10,000 - now! Therefore, one could > consider that one in every ten thousand is an "extremely close" early twin > of yours (as opposed to the other 9,999 who are still brothers/sisters > anyway). Good point. But I was thinking of two different levels of thing here. Maybe one in ten thousand would share early track with you but is truely a separate individual now (complete split, proceeding on as an independent being after the point of split). But maybe one in a billion (could be a lot considering that there are other populated planets etc.) might still be you (not a complete split but simply multiple operating points that you keep partitioned off from each other), like having more than one token in a game. These might have significant slop over of data between them. > Chances are that some of one's "twins" made different decisions and went on > a slightly different track. Some of them might be occupying Espinol bodies > (aren't these the "little green men" bodies?). The reason I mention this is > to stimulate tolerance for alien lifeforms. One way or another, it is > possible that one out of every ten thousand beings extant (no matter the > particular mockup/game/universe) is close theta kin. > > Enough on that. (Have you seen my other post on "Sevens & Time" by the way?) Yes and it is very interesting. It does seem to me that there are time rate differences between universes. But these might not be constant. Eienstein's general relativity gives me the idea that there might be a relationship between the time rate and the amount of mass, energy, etc. that is present in a universe, and that might be an increasing quantity, or even a decreaseing one as people abandon that universe. I also think of these computer games like "Civilization" where a large number of years pass on each move early in the game but there are multiple moves per year in the later stages when everything has grown more complex. I have a feeling that the early stages of a universe might be huge numbers of years in the universe's own terms but might flash by fairly quickly as far as the being is concerned. And of course there is the often observed feeling that the years are long in childhood and pass more quickly as one grows older. > Next. The proposed "reset time" incident where Ron and a thousand others > attacked the "guards." This seems a bit extreme. A violation of "hat don't > hit." It seems to me that we have to, just have to, get the between-lives > crew rehabilitated and out of the implant business. Periodically, some > group or other has collective meditation at a specific time on a specific > day. You know, world peace and stuff. Perhaps we could use the same > principle. I mean, what would happen if we were to telepathically transmit > (the gist of) the "Cosmic History" section to these guys. Or, at least, the > concept of the false data implants, penalty universes, Agreements Universe > entry point, false data in Jewel of Knowledge? (Actually, maybe we should > do the same to the Sea Org staff as well?) You know, not projecting as if > to force feed, but projecting the data for enlightenment purposes. Hatting > not hitting. (Hey, if there are any real thetans up there, there is a > 1:10,000 chance s/he's a twin anyway, be gentle.) > > What if, say every official fed-government holiday, we all performed our > projections at Noon C.S.T.? It need only take a minute. Certainly be a > good exercise of theta intention. This sounds like a fun idea and certainly can't hurt. I don't plan to promote it too hard or take it too seriously because it might not be a right action for some people and it might sound goofy to some and because we might just be playing with mockups. But I'll certainly give it a try. But I would suggest doing it for half an hour because it should be fun. This would be 11:00 AM on the Pacific coast and 2:00 PM on the East coast, which sounds good (not too many people off having lunch). Perhaps people might even run into each other, which could be very interesting. > Love, Les C. Rogers. ======================= On 30 Jan 99, skinnerian@minitel.net (IAN SKINNER) posted on topic "SuperScio-l: RE-SET TIME" > James Moore recently posted the Pilot's > article on re-set time... > It is proposed that the sudden leap forward in Scientology research that > occured > in 1952 was the result of time being re > -set at 1952 after he subject had already been developed for many years > more.It seems to me that if time had been re-set, then a similar leap > forward shouldbe observable in all subjects and areas, > not only Scientology. - I don't see any such evidence for this.Best, > Ian. This is an excellent question. But Scientology was pushing for knowingness and also being sloppy about research so that if ideas appeared, they would run with them immediately. Science is more careful and slow to proceed on intuition alone. And it takes time to experiment and develope new engineering and so forth. Therefore you would expect years of comm lag. But let us say that there was a sudden leap in insight amoung some Russian scientists concerning spacecraft in 1952. Would it not take a few years to sell the idea an a few more to develope the hardware to place a satillite in orbit? When Sputnik went up in 1957 it knocked America on its ass, it was a complete shock. Yes, the US was puttering around with V2s, but it would have been decades. A flight to the moon was an impossible sci fi pipe dream. It is impossible to guess whether or not there was an unusual number of brilliant inspirations at that time because of the delays inherent in carrying ideas into practice. And I think that there have been many time resets. We have been moving forward at an incredible pace in the last few centuries. It might be that we are used to a steady diet of progress that is augmented by repeated passes over the same time periods. Then again, maybe it is all just dub-in on my part. I'm not trying to sell this idea, just raising the possiblity in case it shows up in processing. =========== On 31 Jan 99, "fredj" responded to my post on "Super Scio Tech - BETWEEN LIVES EXPLORATION" > I will tell a story about something I found that I believed at the > time was of the between lives area. Anyway, my book one auditing > may not have been all that typical, my auditor was a theta clear, as she > liked to tell me. On a question that may have been, 'where would you like > to be and go there', I came up with seeing this on the moon. It came > up, so it was run. > I had read something on between lives clubs before this. > I saw what appeared to be an entrance to the moon that had a lot of bright > lights > like a city, perhaps not in the physical plane. There was a feeling of it > being a place > to be with others, like a bright and busy nightclub. There was a feeling of > sameness > of some kind amongst the people. People came here to pretend they were > alive without > living. People would pretend to have bodies, they weren't good at it, they > looked like > matchsticks. There seemed a weakness of not living. There was a fakeness > in everything, > but there were no worries. People would pretend to have lives and real > things like small bridges > and houses. It seemed to me that stupidity can exist after death too. > john Yes indeed. This was quite interesting. I have a feeling that there is a great deal of between lives stuff going on on the moon. It is a big thing hanging there in the sky for all to see so it would tend to attract attention and there are all sorts of old metaphysical and magical significances placed upon it. =============== Affinity, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - On Nanosecond Cogs (Attn Les & ndc) ON NANOSECOND COGS (Attn Les & NDC) On 30 Jan 99, "N. D. Culver" posted on subject "nanosecond cogs" > Les C. Rogers wrote: > >Don't invalidate those nanosecond cogs. > > Quantum mechanics in this PU says that the time > of collapse (realization) is proportional to the > number of entangled elements; fast cogs are > 'bigger' cogs. > > ndc Correct. One of the ideas in the quickie era was that the faster the result is obtained, the more stable it is. I believe that that was correct. Of course quickies then neglected to run the processes (faster not to bother!) and made a mess (turn on an FN and then skip everything!). So the orgs started grinding things to death in a counter reaction. But as far as I'm concerned, the faster you can hit a good cog, the better. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - Ascension Experiences (Attn Alan, CBW) ASCENSION EXPERIENCES (Attn ALAN, CBW) On 30 Jan 99, cbwillis@netcom.com (C. B. Willis) continued the discussion on "The De-Guru R/D was: Dear Pilot and Dear Dimitry" > Alan Walter (wisdom@cyberstation.net) wrote: > > : There is a long ago Universe which I call the Evil Being Universe > : that at one time dominated all life. > > Is that true? This sounds like a dangerous oversimplification like the Xemu story. Picking on one instance of something and saying that it was all pervasive and is the source. Probably it is like the Xemu business. Something (in the Xemu case it is mass implanting and criss cross putting of entities onto each other) which happened occasionally and which probably happened to everybody a few times but not the same incident for everybody at the same time. I could imagine times when beings who were being evil (at that moment) gathering together and trying to dominate all life (and perhapse having sub-universes mocked up as part of that) and I could further imagine that it is something that happens occasionally on the track. But as for a single all pervasive source, a unique one of a kind Evil Being Universe, that just doesn't feel right. Also it would seem to be better to identify the characteristics, actions, postulates, etc. that occur on the cause and effect sides of this domination and find some gradient process to knock those to pieces on a gradient. > : The Evil Being was the winning valence. > > : The two predominant operating basis of an Evil Being is Domination and > : Subjugation. > > : One of the problems of an AE is the Being goes into the winning valence of an > : Evil Being. > > Any AE? or just some AE's? > > Or a phony AE of inflated ego only? > > I'm hesitant to call the "AE" you describe a real AE. I think that she has hit the nail right on the head. This is the reservation I've had about Alan's discussion of AEs. Most of what he has said in the area is brilliant, but this one doesn't match my own experiences when I have hit very high states. But I tend to remain in an "Ascention Experience" for months before running into trouble. And eventually some old mechanism triggers (as Alan has mentioned in other writings), he is right about that, but it does not happen right away and it is not stimulous response. And this Domination-Subjugation business doesn't show up at all, it is just a wrong item for me. But I will walk into something eventually, just not that specific pair. So we are looking at a bug that crashes the state rather than a natural characteristic of the state. And maybe there is a series of things that can crash the state if one makes the appropriate overt postulate. In other words, somebody hits a superstate. Then they look around and say "boy I want to dominate so and so" and crash! down they come. The being makes the reverse postulate and then crashes himself. For me its not "dominate". The appropriate action would be to list for what reverse postulate was made that crashed the state. Except that it is a really hot listing question. Probably too dangerous in unskilled hands. So instead I decided to lightly Itsa, considering the area and spotting things, keeping the theory in mind, going back to it occasionally over the course of a few days until I should really know what it was. I did this on my really big AE in 1968 which lasted for months and crashed with a terrible thud. There was tons of case after the crash but all on things that hadn't bothered me before the crash. Over the years I've gradually pulled the charge off of these things (Alan's furies writeup helped among other things). Of course there was the occasional overt, but these also didn't crash the state. I've talked before of my big mistake in trying to push stats up as a solution to seeing case failures, but that didn't actually end the state. I finally got it, the exact moment that I went down and everything reversed. For this Alan has my thanks even though the dominate business was a wrong indication. I acted to keep data hidden and confidential and I did so out of fear of ethics rather than because I believed it was the right thing to do. And it was, as Alan might put it, a complete code break with my own deeper intentions and ethical codes and I kicked back against myself and went down in flames. I was DofT (Director of Training) and reading through the so called "post hat" which was really just a huge collection of HCOBs that had been accumulated by previous DofTs over the years (not really a proper post hat at all). And I came to an HCOB on the Heaven Implants (Hellatrobus) which had gotten in there in the days before confidentiality. This stuff was considered highly confidential in 1968 although that level of material (1963 implant data) is now in the modern tech volumes (but not in the old tech volumes). I really wanted to read it. I knew it wouldn't key me in. I was searching for truth and understanding and I figured it would help. But I remembered that an earlier DofT the previous year had started listening to upper level tapes. The academy tape collection not only included 1963 BC tapes that were then considered confidential (but are no longer) but also ones which are still confidential. I remember specifically that the BC tape called "Level VII" (23 FEB 65 in the master tape list) was on the flip side of one of the BC lectures included in lower level training (the tapes would have one lecture on each side) and we had to be careful that the students didn't mount the tape backwards. Anyway, this older DofT had started listening to these tapes and ended up in liability for 3 months walking around with a dirty grey rag all the time etc. (he was the 1st liability ever assigned in the org that I was at - that was immediately after the lower conditions came out). I wanted to avoid the same fate, so I decided to be a good boy and carried the pack off to qual where an upper level person could remove the offending HCOB safely and handle it. Of course I was flinching (at ethics) and backing down and going in reverse to my own postulates and beliefs. And it was like a darkness closed over me. And there was a bit of a funny perception of something at some higher non physical level. I had felt it shift one way at the moment when I had keyed out OT a few months before and at this moment I felt it swinging back in the opposite direction. It was like something which had begun to open was closing back down. But the worst part of the overt was that I'd let them remove the HCOB from the pack. So the next man on the post didn't even have the choice. I'd gotten away with simply not listening to confidential tapes that the academy had, and I probably would have gotten away with skipping the HCOB, but actually removing it was just too much. I'd pushed data out of sight not only from myself but from others. And if you have noticed how hot I am to get all the data out there to everybody, you can just imagine how badly that kicked back on me. I hope this helps others. And maybe Alan will consider doing a bit of revision to an otherwise excellent rundown. Affinity, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - On The Self Clearing Survey ON THE SELF CLEARING SURVEY Some responses have come in on my earlier post titled "Super Scio Tech - QUESTIONS FOR PEOPLE RUNNING SELF CLEARING" First let me offer my appreciation to Fredj, Azeric, and others who have answered this survey. I'm saving these carefully. It is a really big help to me to see which processes are working best and hearing how people are doing. More responses from others would be appreciated too. ======= One thing I learned was that the protest chapter needs more work. The Scientology expanded grades evolved over a long period. An area such as problems had multiple research passes done on it. In the early days they were running inventing problems of comparable magnitude. Later the handling was problems and incomplete communications. Even later it was problems and solutions. Other methods were used in between. Finally in 1970, instead of handling these one way only, all the various techniques were collected together to form an expanded grade on the area of problems. Unfortunately there was (and is) no grade on the subject of protest in orthodox Scientology. All that was used was a light handling of the protest button. My first pass at this was to find out that a being will mock things up to communicate a protest. That is correct, but there is more in this area. I need to take another pass at it and expand the handling and present it a bit better as well. Protest specifically seems to go extremely early (like communication) and be a major factor in the original reasons for decay. Although I spotted the heavy charge on protest while fooling around with the chakras (mentioned in Super Scio chapter 10 as Fred noticed), they are not the source of the charge but rather are bent out of shape by the charge in this area, as are many other things. Right now I am digging into the idea that one is attracting or even compulsively creating what one is protesting. That may predate the GPM pull in of one's own opposition and perhaps have lead to that later more complex abberation. So you can expect that I will beef that chapter up eventually. ======= Here are some answers to questions that were raised: > From: "fredj" > > >7. Was there something you didn't understand or > >disagreed with? > > In 4.4 you use 'think of'. I had already read Filbert's > comment that 'think of' 'turns on analytical machinery', > and that he prefers 'recall'. Ron considered that "think of" or "get the idea of" was simply a lighter gradient than "recall". Where it does "turn on analytical machinery", that is just comm lag filling the air with chatter before the command gets done. I think that "recall" on the same area would give an even longer comm lag but with silence and potential doping off while the person struggled to reach an answer. "Think of" is appropriate on areas that might be a bit too hard for recall and is a bit safer for solo in such cases. On chapter 4 specifically, it is before the chapter on recall and "think of" seemed quite appropriate. Personally, on an area where something is hard to spot, I will sometimes use a few commands of "think of" and then shift to recall as things become visible because that works faster. Note that recalling something is an answer to "think of", but doing it that way gives you a chance to warm up. > >10. Do you have any suggestions for improvements? > > Do so many processes have to be run as questions? Maybe not. I lean that way from processing others. > From an anonymous poster > > >5. What was the biggest difficulty? > My biggest difficulty is picking up the book. I love the book and I pick it > up when I need to work on something that happened in the present, but I > haven't made the time to do some serious work in it lately. This is a general problem with any kind of self help or self study. I'm good at doing these things on my own but I notice that a lot of people have trouble. Probably I should be a better salesman and stir up more enthusiasm to help one keep moving. That may be the book's biggest failing. Ron was great at generating excitement but I'm afraid to immitate him because too many hollow promises left a bad taste in my mouth. And yet the book should take people up to case states undreamed of in the modern CofS. There are things in there that are way above OT 7. > I also had trouble with the recall section. I usually have trouble with > recalls. I can't see pictures etc. I would like help on this if anyone has > ideas. Lightly recalling pleasure moments and not worrying too much about getting pictures is probably best. Recall should gradually improve if you do a bit of this occasionally. You could also drill recalling breakfast (or lunch, etc.) using "spot something in the incident", "spot something in the room" alternately. Also, strightening out dates and spotting the time sequence of things helps clear up recall. > >10. Do you have any suggestions for improvements? > I think leaving the word "GOD" out will be a good idea. I know freinds I > gave copies to, put the book down after reading that stuff. We were all > no-religion before coming to the scio world. I'm reluctant to leave out all spiritual orientation. If orthodox Scientology had more of that they might have avoided falling into abuse and exploitation. And yet I don't believe in worshiping a personified god nor do I like the moralistic self righteousness that often accompanies religion. Instead I feel the interconnection between all of us below the surface, a sort of universal mind or underlying life static. I'll try and think of ways of improving the introduction. ========= Again, Much Thanks, The Pilot ========================================== subj : Super Scio Tech - Axioms Of Creation AXIOMS OF CREATION Throught the early days, when the application of tech was loose and sloppy, the sporatic keyed out OT phenomena were present to let us know that we were close. When the tech was standardized and delivered in a ridgid manner, the keyed out OT phenomena disappeared. This means that we are close but not quite on target. Hence there must be flaws in the basics or else we'd see an increase in OT Phenomena as we adhered more closely to standard. I do not mean to say here that our primary goal should be to work towards achieving some parlor trick but rather to say that it is simply an indicator which is waving a red flag. And so I wish to revisit the best of all our basics, namely the Axioms. They must be close, else we would not have seen the OT phenomena in the first place. But there must be flaws, weaknesses, or omissions to account for the failure to make OT. The task is daunting. There are so many axioms and they are exceedingly good, Ron at his most insightfull during his best period of research. Therefore I chose a lesser target, Axiom 1 "Life is Basically a Static" and conentrated on that. And so this is not a replacement for Hubbard's brilliant set but rather a supplement that re-examines a fundamental from a different perspective. I plan on doing more work in this area, but here is my first sketch. THE AXIOMS OF CREATION 1. Life is capable of creation. Any amount of creation, no matter how rare, indicates that the potential exists. We dream. We invent stories. We think new thoughts. 2. That which creates is not itself a creation. Creations must be preceeded by something which is not itself created. 3. A lifeform must consit of a manifest component which is a creation and a creative component which is not. 4. That which is not created cannot be destroyed. Collarary: That which cannot be created or destroyed must be immutable and may therefore be termed static. 5. Underlying all life is a static component which remains immutable. Collorary: No matter how much is layered on top of this static, no matter what is done in an attempt to harm or diminish it, it remains complete, therefore it is only obscured and never truely diminished. 6. The static is not a creation but is a source of creation. Collorary: The static is not matter, energy, space, or time for these things are creations. Collorary: The static must be a nothingness. 7. At basic the static is one. Proof: In the absence of all creations, whether matter, energy, space, time, thought, life or any other manifestation, if there were two statics they would be the same static because there is no differentiation. 8. The static is balancing the nothingness with a richness of creation. Proof: The static chooses to create, else there would still be nothing. 9. The static manifests as many. Collarary: There must be a separation between the individual statics. Collarary: Creation makes possible a differentiation between the static and itself. Hypothesis: The static chooses to be many because it creates better that way. 10. The first act is one of separation 11. Identity is the separation of thought 12. Space is the separation of location 13. Time is the separation of events 14. Creation is the conception and/or projection of matter, energy, space, time, thought, life, and/or significance. 15. Perception is the observation of creation. 16. Awareness is the cognizance of creation. 17. The individual statics interact by the exchange of creations. Proof: If nothing is created, then there is no differentiation and therefore there are no individuals. If interaction were not desirable there would be no contact and each would create as an independent whole. Since this is not the case, it is obvious that the creations are interchanged. 18. Communication is the projection of a creation across a separation. 19. To participate in an exchange, the individual statics must recieve creations as well as projecting them. Hence the need for havingness to balance creation. 20. A creation cannot be permitted to vanish unless it can be recreated at will. Collarary: That which is not fully viewed tends to persist. ---------------- This is only a start. Best, The Pilot ========================================== All this weeks posts used 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 links at fza.org All of the current posts will be collected in Super Scio Archives #47 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. ------------------