Category Archives: Scientology

Word Clearing Method One Outpoints & Half Truth

Posted on by

Method 1 Word Clearing was the first method developed in the early seventies. It has some basic assumptions which we will examine here. The method consists of assessing a list of subjects and asking for misunderstood words in these subjects. It was a further development of what was known in the sixties as Remedy B. But unlike these remedies–which were mere assist actions–word clearing was ritualized in 1972.

See also the article ‘Word Clearing  Rituals’ . Remedy B was an assist done where needed. Method 1 was a generalized procedure for everyone.

Assumptions

Regardless of whether these are valid or true we list the assumptions:

Method 1 assumes that everyone has misunderstoods and holes in their education.

Method 1 assumes that that a reading subject contains misunderstood words. One of the subjects listed is for example sex and who knows whether it reads on slang word, a withhold or a hidden desire.

Method 1 assumes that a misunderstood word on the list of subjects, is also a subject that contains misunderstood words.

Method 1 assumes there must be chains of words in a reading subject.

Outpoints

There is no check in Method 1 to be sure that the read on the subject is the same as the read on the misunderstood word.

Method 1 omits the essential step to achieve the proclaimed EP–recovery of one’s education–which would be to restudy the subject after the misunderstoods have been cleared.

It also violates the principle of ‘inspection before the fact’, as there may be someone who does not need their education recovered.

Outpoints are often what is omitted. The biggest omission is the role of false data contained in a subject. How can you clear an education or a subject without taking this aspect into account?

The standard procedure when getting a read on a subject would have been to ask about the subject to see what the read was on. Then if it concerned difficulties with the subject or confusions about it or anything pointing to the presence of misunderstood words one would be asking for a misunderstood word in the subject.

False attests

The proclamation that Method One Word Clearing leads to the recovery of one’s education is a half truth at best due to omitting the re-study requirement. To require the student to attest to: “Recovery of one’s education” without this, is setting the stage for dishonesty.  

Earlier Tech

The earlier remedies A & B did not suffer from these outpoints, see the 1964 bulletin on Definitions Processing. Despite these outpoints many people report great wins and results, but where it goes sour, the above may be the reasons.

References

HCO B 12 Nov. 1964  DEFINITION PROCESSES

HCOB 30 June 71RC I1 Rev. 3.3.89 Word Clearing Series 8RC STANDARD C/S FOR WORD CLEARING IN SESSION METHOD ONE

HCO PL OF 25 SEPTEMBER 1979RB Word Clearing Series 34
METHOD ONE WORD CLEARING

Word Clearing Rituals

Posted on by

I have been working the last few months on a scientology research project – as part of a new book – aiming to scrutinize scientology by logically applying it to itself.  The discovery of ritual Word Clearing is a relatively small part of it. In Scientology Word Clearing has become “prescription only”, meaning it is has to be done in a rigorous ‘holy’ never to be questioned manner, anything else is an ethics offense.

Method 8 Shock

I looked up the bulletin on Word Clearing Method 8 and to my astonishment I found sneaked into the text a complete invalidation of the student who is familiar with and knows the meaning of a word such as an average literate person. It was embedded in the following paragraphs:

“Method  8 is an  action  used  in  the  “Primary   Rundown” where  one is studying Study  Tech  or  where  one  is  seeking  a  full  grasp  of  a subject.  Its End Product  is SUPER-LITERACY. The steps are these: Usually an alphabetical list of every word or term in the text of a paper, a chapter or a recorded tape is available or provided.
1.   The  person  looks  up  each  word  on  the  alphabetical  list  and  uses each  in sentences until he has the meaning conceptually.
The words are looked up in a big dictionary. “
HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JUNE 1972 Issue IV Word Clearing Series 41  METHOD 8

Enforcing such a ritual as the above is a covert invalidation of the knowingness of the being, who knows the definitions. If not that, then it is at least an unnecessary burden and waste of time for the student, stretching the runway.

Primary Rundown

For some reason I had not noticed this before, but in an internet forum recently the Primary Rundown was being discussed and drew my interest. I had started that rundown in 1972 and had ended up in an endless chain of words to be cleared. I don’t even remember how it ended. So it is perhaps not surprising that some attention units got stuck there. I had been using the two volume World Book dictionary, a big dictionary, just like it said in the above bulletin.

The idea of clearing up the meaning of words and the effect of misunderstoods had been firmly established since the summer of 1964. This was when LRH did a course in photography and had many realizations about studying and gave a series of lectures on his findings. In the earlier Scientology materials the clearing of words outside of the context of clearing auditing commands is never mentioned.

It appeared to be a rather simple discovery that blanks in memory were caused by misunderstood words, however when the relationship between overts and the misunderstood word or symbol was revealed its true significance became apparent.

First Bulletin on PRD

Anyway back to the PRD, I looked up the first bulletin on the subject namely: HCOB 30 March 1972 The Primary Correction Rundown, Vol VIII, p.65  and it states the following simplicity:
… STUDY TAPES.
(a) One time through picking up and looking up every word even faintly in doubt of or when not understanding, going back to find the word that was missed.
(b) Then going through the Study Tapes for content with Method 4 at the end of each tape.

This bulletin says it all, it is a simple and very doable action and won’t take very long in fact it would speed up one’s study and improve the quality. All the following HCOBs however start to complicate the action until one had created a formidable ‘rundown’ out of a simple action, which was already covered in the 9 July 1964 lecture on Data Assimilation.

Here is the origin of what was later blown up to a large and impressive rundown, the Primary Rundown.

Source

“You see how important nomenclature is? But a comprehension of the nomenclature which is used is primary to the study of anything. Now, for instance, I’m studying a parallel course to get insights into study of Scientology. And a very, very smart thing – an extremely smart thing to do – is to take a page of material and look over it for words you don’t know – words that don’t instantly react to you. Circle each one of those words or make a list of each one of those words and look up and study their definitions or ask people and get definitions for them. Find out exactly what those words mean. Don’t tackle the subject of the page. Just tackle the nomenclature of the page. Get that nomenclature slick as a whistle, tackle the subject, you’ll find out the subject was very easy. From Studying: Data Assimilation L. Ron Hubbard 9 July 1964

All this raises some serious questions. What would be behind such blatant alter-is and over complication even as early as 1972? Why was the primary rundown later almost forgotten? Did they realize the blunder, but would rather obscure it rather than admit. Some few researchers have hinted that LRH was already replaced at the end of 1965.

Researchers such as Michel Snoeck, http://www.wiseoldgoat.com/ lists a lot of material on the history of the PRD but seems to have missed these points.

The next article will take up Method 1 Word Clearing

Theory of the State of Clear

Posted on by

Abstract:

  • the central theoretical model of scientology revolves around the concept of the reactive mind and its absence in the state of clear.
  • Scientology theory is developing but consistent throughout the first 25 yrs, after 1976 serious inconsistencies arose.
  • coincident with the above change is the involvement of the CIA
  • Operating Thetan was and is in essence the original concept of the state of clear.
  • the state of clear (dianetic clear) as defined in the latest version is unverifiable
  • the basic assumption of scientology’s state of clear is revealed here perhaps for the first time
  • conclusion

If there is one concept, that defines scientology then it is Hubbard’s postulated state of clear. The book Dianetics: The modern science of mental health audaciously put out a theoretical, ideal state of man and postulated that there must be a single source of all dysfunctional behavior (aberrations). The entire construct rests on the assumption that all aberration and psychosomatic ills stem from a single source which was named the engram, the main constituent of ‘the reactive mind’. The ‘experimental evidence’ provided at the time was the simple observation that hypnosis seems to work, most of the time, as in post-hypnotic suggestion.

The entire history of scientology revolves around this concept of clear and the ceaseless attempts to establish such a state and to prove it. There were book one clears, MEST clears, theta clears, first goal clears, third goal clears, near clears, keyed-out clears, dianetic clears, past life clears, natural clears, scientology clears.

In this article we attempt to shine some light on the nature, politics and difficulties of establishing and verifying supposed state of clear.

Chronology

The scientology state of clear cannot be understood without consulting the chronology of the subject.

“A clear has no reactive mind and operates at total mental capacity, an unaberrated person.” This ideal theoretical state was also described as a completely self-determined individual and as a being cleared of enforced and unwanted behavior patterns and discomforts.

The state of clear was first defined and postulated, as above, in 1950. When this ideal and absolute state could not be reached in practice, as quickly became evident, new approaches were invented and the target shifted for a while towards increasing general spiritual and mental abilities.

In 1952 the goal was theta clear and then cleared theta clear. The latter was the equivalent to what later was named operating thetan. The standard operating procedure consisted of creative processing and postulate processing.

In 1954, the time the book ‘Creation of Human Ability’ was published, the clear was a theta clear i.e. ‘An individual who, as a thetan, is certain of his identity apart from that of the body, and who habitually operates the body from outside.’

In 1955 Hubbard wrote: “A clear, by definition, is somebody who does not have any engrams in present time with him. By actual practice a clear would have to be a stable thetan exterior since the body itself is composed of energy masses which unfortunately contain engrams.” That was called the one-shot clear, which was a thetan exterior. (Dn 55)

In December 1957 clear was defined as follows: ‘A thetan who can knowingly be at cause over Life, Matter, Energy, Space and time, subjective and objective’. (Scn Clear Procedure Issue One) This definition of clear was later separated out into the definition of OT which you could consider a generalized statement of the vedic siddhis or powers of the gods.

In the 1958  clear procedure, the preclear was made to make mockups until he got rid of the automaticity. Clear was defined as: ‘null on all mockups. He knows he is mocking up bank. He can mock up bank.’ (mockup: a–‘knowingly’–created mental holographic image)

In 1959 he described three grades of clear, book one clear, theta clear and OT the latter he said was a rather esoteric level, hard to reach. But at that time was under the general heading of clear.

1960 “When the tone arm reads at  clear  for  the  person’s sex no matter what one attempts to restimulate on the case you have a clear.” HCOB Responsibility-Key to all cases.

In 1963 it was discovered that the reason people weren’t clear or staying clear is that there were unresolved valences. Extremely sophisticated techniques were developed between 1960 and 1963 to address this phenomenon in the form of Goals Problem Masses (GPMs).

Hubbard by now had concluded that the earlier attempts to make a clear by taking over the creation of the time track (creative processing) was of no value and the following years were devoted to handling the implanted GPMs and the actual GPMs were forgotten or left alone. Engrams were mere locks on these heavy charged designer implants which formed the core of the reactive mind.

All that, was researched and it culminated in the Clearing Course, where the being had to run out certain implanted GPMs, which had a very intricate and complex pattern, in solo sessions to reach the state of clear.

By then, in 1965, the definition of clear was given as: ‘a thetan who can be at cause knowingly and at will over mental matter, energy, space and time as regards the first dynamic (survival for self)’. At that time all the lower grades were a requisite to clearing and the state could exclusively be attained on the Clearing Course at an Advanced Organization.

After clearing the next levels called OT levels from OT I – OT III were all concerned with clearing up charge on the various entities. then the thetan was exteriorized at OT IV and started to operate at OT V and VI, with rehabilitated intention at OT VII.

The Stanford Research Institute and the CIA

So far everything is quite reasonable and makes sense. In the early seventies this was what scientology consisted of and it was at that time that Ingo Swann, Harold Puthof and some others did all these levels up to and including OT  VII and they were CIA and got involved with the Stanford Research Institute and dramatically showed the power of these OTs. Ingo managed some impressive feats. He affected the readings of a magnetometer encased in solid concrete five feet beneath the foundation of the Varian Hall of physics at Stanford University where the experiment took place. In a remote viewing session he observed the planet Jupiter, and reported amongst other details, to have seen bands of crystals, similar to the rings of Saturn. This was prior to the Voyager probe’s visit there in 1979. What he said was supported later by observations by NASA’s Galileo spacecraft of clouds of ammonia ice crystals and rings of Jupiter.

The reason I mention this detail is that obviously the military and the government got very interested in the fact that scientology could produce abilities such as Ingo demonstrated.

Technical Anomalies

In terms of scientology theory development it was practically completed by 1970 the last Hubbard lectures were on the Flagship Apollo, in December 1975. There is also some evidence that Hubbard, from 1976-1977 onward, was no longer in control of the church.

In the following years in particular since 1978, significant technical anomalies arise the first of which was a re-definition of the main concept namely ‘reactive mind’ and ‘the state of clear’. These are anomalies because the reactive mind core had been researched extensively by Hubbard in the late sixties and was found to consist of GPMs. From 1978 onward the reactive mind was all of a sudden consisting merely of engrams–the GPM kernel component was dropped without even a comment. This covert re-definition of the reactive mind made it possible to declare the possibility of attaining the state of clear on Dianetics.

The definition of clear had been changed numerous times before, as can be seen from the chronology sketched above. The new and final definition of clear was: a being who no longer has its own reactive mind. The difference with earlier definition changes was that L. Ron Hubbard always gave a full explanation of the changes. Well there was some attempt at an explanation such that the nature of a being was very complex and was not a single entity and that there are beingnesses, valences or personalities which could be the source of aberration. The definition of clear was supposed to apply only to the one entity, the first dynamic. And one had to be cleared on all dynamics. All this however did not explain the complete change in the definition and structure of the reactive mind.

Later in the early ‘80s the OT levels beyond OT III were completely taken out of the scientology line up and substituted with ‘pre-OT’ levels, effectively denying people the OT abilities which the CIA had been so interested in.

At the beginning of the millennium I found out that the Power Processes – contrary to what Hubbard had said – could be run on dianetic clears. That was the first time I started to suspect there was something wrong with ‘dianetic’ clears. I myself had reached the state of clear on the Clearing Course Solo Auditing. Later in my practice I re-instated the original route to clear based on eradicating certain GPMs. In 2006 this was one of the reasons for leaving the Rons Org group, based in Switserland, where I was a senior technical member.

If the clear does not have its own reactive mind then there must be other reactive minds capable of influencing it, but how do you verify such a state in the presence of other minds?

Basic Assumptions, and testing of the State of Clear

There is a basic assumption underlying the theoretical state of clear, which I will elucidate in the following. The test of clear has always been whether s/he/it can consciously create or re-create a reactive mind. (Tech Dictionary, Clear def. 9) For many years now something equivalent to the clear cognition has been promoted all over the new age and esoteric scene namely “you create your own reality” which didn’t make the testing easier to say the least.

 A positive proof would require the demonstrated ability to consciously create a reactive mind. In creative processing one could make an individual consciously create a mental image picture of a moment of pain. But it would be very hard if not impossible to consciously create the unconsciousness part of the engram, let alone the entire reactive mind including all the GPMs and whatever else that may contain. Per Hubbard’s data from the sixties the reactive mind kernel is an entity that all beings have in common (GPM), therefore he also stated that there never had been a real clear in this universe.

The negative proof would require exposing the candidate to an x number of potential restimulators of reactivity and see whether the state including its Floating Needle would last. From a scientific viewpoint if the claim to be clear cannot be falsified (K.Popper) than it remains questionable.

We are not even going into the difficulty of distinguishing one’s own reactive mind from theorized other reactive minds.

What has been done in actual practice is to accept a clear cognition–the realization that one is creating one’s own troubles/engrams accompanied by an FN, VGIs.

Now here, and that also goes for the state of clear attained on the clearing course, the assumption is that once one is aware of the automaticity of creating mental images of charged situations like those containing trauma with pain and unconsciousness one will stop doing it.

We now have pin pointed exactly the basic assumption of scientology: If one becomes familiar with and aware of creating mental holograms one will stop doing it and can no longer be the unwilling, unknowing effect of a reactive mind.

This is the central unproven assumption underlying the supposed scientology state of clear.

In scientology the reactive mind is equated with the unconscious mind. One area of the unconscious which scientology avoided was the subject of sleep and dreams. Another omission is not taking into account evil intentions as part of the procedure to reach the state of clear. Per definition a clear should have no bad computations which would throw the analytical mind a curve.

All this however does not make less of the value of the philosophical excursions and factual discoveries of various mental phenomena and their solutions that were made in scientology between approximately 1950 – 1970.

The MGT Institute for Consciousness Exploration Approach

Our solution to the exposed clear conundrum has therefore been to drop the whole theoretical idea of clear in favor of a more practical approach. At the MGT Institute for Consciousness Exploration we have developed and tested the concept of personal harmony.

We found that by using what we call the Universal Imagination Processing© technique–based on creative processing, postulate processing and concept processing–combined with Traumatic Incident Reprocessing and a few other techniques on the various charged issues or disharmonies that someone is experiencing in his or her personal life one can reach a relatively stable state of personal harmony (first domain). This also includes some education of the principles involved in leading a harmonious life also taking into account to some degree the influences of the other domains on the individual’s life.

There is no generic state that is valid for everyone, the key is living in harmony with one’s own considerations and that can be tested by an individual.

http://www.mgtconcepts.com/personal-harmony.html

All this is fully described in the “The Self-Explorer’s Handbook”, Caspar de Rijk, BoD 2015.  ISBN 978-3-7392-2254-7     https://goo.gl/fWFPUR

The immortal LRH – a recurrent phenomenon?

Posted on by

by Caspar de Rijk, Class IX, former Solo CS AOSHEU

The latest new LRH ‘Lafayette Ron Hubbard’, did something that none of the precursors have done. Taking on the legal name of L. Ron Hubbard is a bold assertion and a fresh alternative to the L.Ron Hubbard as a trademark. See on www.lronhubbardrising.com

There are more bold assertions:

“…I have researched and discovered an entirely new Technique and processes, that literally have infinite application to Standard Auditing and Solo Auditing, as well as to Pre-OT’s and OT’s alike…. THIS IS NAMED THE INFINITY TECHNIQUE…. things are about to change and all the hopes and dreams of what we once believed in and with Scientology, are not only about to be realized, but be surpassed.”

Then there is a datum presented in the (in)imitable LRH style as a new axiom: “THE QUALITY AND CHARACTER OF A THETAN CONSISTS OF A THETAN’S WHOLETRACK EXPERIENCE.” He also adds: “The nature of this axiom is so basic and all-encompassing, that it evaded my detection for all of these years. It is wild. It aligns all of the data.”

This ‘axiom’ violates the scientology principle of considerations being senior to mechanics. The quality and character of a thetan is composed of considerations about its own beingness. These would tend to determine what the being would experience and not the other way around.

He also enthusiastically states: “…IN LIGHT OF THIS NEW DATA, IT HAS BEEN DISCOVERED THAT PHYSICAL UNIVERSE MEST AND MENTAL MEST STEM FROM AND ARE COMPOSED OF SAME SOURCE. IT IS THE TRUE STATIC.”

But the veteran scientologist of course knows that this is old hat and fully covered in the first three axioms of Scientology.

Déjà vu

Now here’s the history lesson and déjà vu…

Ten years ago, in 2008 at the last broad Freezone Convention held in Europe near Magdeburg, Germany, a young man by the name of Andreas Buttler presented himself as the reincarnation of LRH.

It was on the 9th of May that year, that he presented his book SPIRITOLOGIE. Spiritology he defined as the science of the origin, infinite potential and the full rehabilitation of the spiritual being.

In his book he announced the great breakthrough that scientology now is going to be run from the 8th dynamic INFINITY. And all techniques are run from that viewpoint and incidentally doing away with the need for the pre-OT levels altogether.

The basic axiom of Spiritology was:

“ALL – AND BY THAT I MEAN AS A MATTER OF FACT PRECISELY THAT, NAMELY ALL – WHAT YOU PERCEIVE AND EXPERIENCE IS EXACTLY THAT, WHICH YOU OUT OF YOURSELF, THROUGH YOUR OWN CAUSAL THINKING CREATE, AND INDEED EXACTLY … NOW”

Based on this he developed a whole series of processes and the main one was a type of Creative/Concept /Postulate Processing which many people then started using all of the world with great results.

This formed the basis of the famous INFINITY RUNDOWN restoring the infinite powers of the spiritual being, the Pan-determinism rundown and the Absolute Zero Rundown (True Static).

I had been running a Freezone Rons Org for about four years and then turned it into a Spiritologie Org.

In 2013 however Andreas Buttler had gotten physically ill and as he himself could not have overlooked any adverse ‘causative thoughts’ he concluded that his belief that ‘there was always the thought, the concept or the idea, before anything would manifest’ must have been wrong. He then promptly withdrew the book, the subject and everything connected – incl. his own past identity–and that was the demise of ‘Spiritologie’ as far as he was concerned.

We didn’t agree with his downfall but as he was the originator and holder of the marks, we had no choice but to abandon the Spiritologie label, but we kept up the spirit of truth.

The infinity procedure and the infinity rundown.

An uncanny similarity. To me it feels like what Patricia Krenik of Freezone Elma–who of course knew about Spiritology– is doing now, I was doing then.

Nevertheless I wish them success. There is nothing wrong with postulate processing. It is the highest level processing there is, straight from the first three axioms.

Since the beginning of 2014, after we had said bye bye to the last guru, we, Claudia Moser and myself being dedicated truth seekers did a lot of further research, broadened the subject, improved the techniques, clarified the 8th dynamic concept and developed four Consciousness Exploration Routes. We realized that truth is not limited to what one guru reveals. We discovered that there are many other superb sources of wisdom and consciousness technology such as the Vedic scriptures to mention just one.  We discovered that we are multi dimensional beings living in a holographic fractal universe. Further we learned that any problems encountered in the three dimensional world are best solved from the perspective of the higher dimensions (higher self or zero domain)

We summarized all that in December 2015, in Multi Genius Technology for Consciousness, Volume I, titled “The Self-Explorer’s Handbook”. The principal technique we called Universal Imagination Processing©.

We are just pointing out here that there is another alternative for consciousness exploration still based on the proven processing concepts from the old Hubbard school. See  <www.mgtconcepts.com>

Open Scientology

Posted on by

Position statement (addressed to those familiar with Scientology terminology)

We are ex-scientologists. We have no connection to the Church of Scientology. We feel free however to use any useful scientology technology for consciousness expansion. Thus we promote Open Scientology, which was the idea in the early years, when different researchers and experimenters contributed to the development of the subject. With open scientology we of course include the concept of open sourcing scientology.

Along with this come some definitions and the new abbreviation: XSCN which has several meanings one of which is Experimental Study of Consciousness and Noetics.

XSCN

Exterior to Scientology, meaning in the first place being outside the sphere of influence and control of the Church of Scientology, independence and freedom from doctrinal narrow-mindedness characteristic of Ecclesiastical Scientology.

XScn also stands for a version of Scientology which is not limited to the first seven dynamics but includes the eighth dynamic in full.

It also means exterior to religion and science. Both science and religion are belief systems based on certain dogmas or axioms. X-Scn is to always be aware that consciousness itself will always be senior to any stabilized or semi-permanent models or statements of belief.

Due to the infinite nature of consciousness there will always be new or improved techniques, models and routes to expand consciousness, XScn thus also stands for a new standard i.e. Experimental Scientology, which is open to new input, ideas, improvements and even better than ‘standard’ technology, of course without discarding any proven principles or technology.

This is in line with the continual changes, improvements and development we have witnessed all through the history of the subject before and after its ‘standardization’ which were all based on actual experience or experiments. Just think of all the experimental work that went into GPM research.

And finally the X is an ancient symbol for transformation and change.

LRH

Ron Lafayette Hubbard, a controversial source of inspiration, an eclectic and visionary. A man who collected, (re)assembled, developed and disseminated a considerable and varied body of consciousness expansion technology, borrowing from Eastern Philosophy, Freudian, Jungian and Rogerian psychology as well as from the 19th Century New Thought Movement. A man who also fathered the derelict church of scientology.

Scientology

A word with several distinctly different meanings and subdivisions, including a trademark:

The obvious meaning of the word is: the science studying knowledge and science in general.

Scientology sounds a lot better than epistemology and would have been the word of choice if it had not been contaminated by a cult. The word Scientology was first used in a scientific context in 1871, by Stephen Pearl Andrews and should never have been trademarked.

According to Dr. A. Nordenholz, Scientology is the science of the character and soundness of knowing and knowledge (knowingness).

According to L.R. Hubbard it was the science of knowing how to know further defined as the study and handling of the spirit in relationship to itself, universes and other life. This definition could equally apply to many other spiritual philosophies including sanatana dharma, buddhism, theosophy or antroposophy, to mention a few.

Nordenholz Scientology

Scientology: The science of the quality and adequacy of knowing and knowingness, was developed by Dr. A. Nordenholz, which is a neo-Kantian, epistemological, axiomatic, philosophical dissertation and scientific treatise but does not provide techniques of consciousness exploration.

Hubbardian Scientology

The body of knowledge and spiritual technology assembled, interpreted, developed and disseminated by L. Ron Hubbard and affiliates during the years 1950 – 1986. It started as a relatively open system but ended up as a closed system around 1965 with the issuance of a ‘Keeping Scientology Working’ Policy.  Geoffrey Filbert, a compeer of Hubbard’s asserted that the original Hubbard disappeared in December 1965 and was replaced. Others stated or surmised that the same happened around 1972. All this is questionable and it may just be that Hubbard was disappointed and changed, from being open and in touch with other scientists, psychologists and psychiatrists to protective conservation mode in his later years.

Ecclesiastical Scientology

A gradually altered-version of the original Hubbardian Scientology, which took place since 1965/1972. Some claim that the issue of Keeping Scientology Working was the first signal of more dogmatic lines of thought entering the subject.

Neo/Post-Hubbardian Scientology

These are various re-interpretations and developments based on Hubbardian Scientology. One Neo-Hubbardian who is continuing in the footsteps of LRH is Class XII, Pierre Ethier who is/was allegedly (re)-constructing an Upper Bridge beyond OT VIII. Then there is Ralph Hilton of Scientology Austria, who is researching OT 9 upwards.

There is  an LRH contemporary and former partner who published a complete scientology lineup that is different from Hubbard’s in many respects which we could refer to as Filbertian scientology. (G.C.Filbert). There was Captain Bill Robertson, now represented by the so called Rons Orgs, who created another full range of alternative OT levels. There was Ken Ogger aka the Pilot who again developed a diferent range of scientology materials.

There are / were several more off shoots such as Dianology (Eductivism), , Dynamism (Enid Vien), TROM, Idenics, Identics, Transformational Processing, Knowledgism, DEEP, Polar Dynamics, PEAT (was influenced by Scientology) etc.

Buttlerian scientology (Spiritology) was another shortlived, neo-Hubbardian development stressing the eighth dynamic. It was based on the doctrine that all that you perceive and experience is exactly what you, out of yourself and through your own causal thinking, are creating, right now. The idea was to give adepts (ZEN like) a high caliber truth to come to terms with, under high pressure, which some, but not everyone, responded to with great results.

Axioms/Principles

The key philosophical principle states that all that is, is considered by individual or collective consciousness into being. This opens the practical possibility to change that what is, by re-consideration.

Spirit, Mind, Body

Man and the universe are holographically projected by a thetan (consciousness unit) through an individualized as well as collective energetic mind structure, embedded in Absolute Consciousness.

Mind Structure

Many, if not all inhabitants of Earth seemed to have a background of having been electronically implanted in earlier lives with certain automatic response patterns. This is at least what shows up in the sessions.These implants are called GPMs (Goals Problem Masses) and have a pattern that makes certain goals postulated by the being instantly countered by opposition. In order to free a being and restore super and higher dimensional perceptions and  abilities these have to be addressed and discharged.

Scientology Technology

An accumulation of various technologies (techniques) published under Hubbard’s name. Book One Dianetics, Standard Dianetics, New Era Dianetics, New Era Dianetics for OTs, Scientology technique 80, Technique 88, Creative Processing, Effort Processing, Advanced Procedure, SOPs, SOP Goals, GPM processing, Clearing procedures, Grades processing, pre-OT levels, L10,11, and 12 etc.

Standard Technology

In 1968 a streamlining of technology took place which was called Standard Tech and was rigorously enforced as the only permissable version of uniformly working scientology technology.

We use the following definition of Standard Tech by L. Ron Hubbard: “Standard Tech is that tech which has absolutely no arbitraries”.

Examples of arbitraries

Based on this definition, given during the Class VIII course, we can confidently state that the first arbitrary that could appear would be that only Hubbard can produce, discover or declare standard technology.

It therefore also makes sense to assume that LRH actually did turn over his technical hat before his passing. Some evidence of that can be found in the writings of David  and Julie Mayo.

Another arbitrary would be to assume that technology could not be improved or that a working technology has to be “kept working”. History has already shown that even the E-Meter could be improved.

Everyone has the same implanted mental structures would be another arbitrary. Apart from the likelyhood that many would share the same implants, if whole sale implanting occurred in particular regions of the galaxy.

Someone saying these implants can only be handled by repeater technique and when the pattern is known, may be another arbitrary.

Clear

There have been many definitions of the state of clear and there are different types of Clear.

The basic idea comes from the verb to clear which means to remove people or things from a place where they are not wanted. It is therefore necessary to specify what was cleared of what. In Dianetics and Scientology it was recognized that it may not be possible to actually clear out all charge from trillions of years of accumulated charge on the time track.

Thus the realization occurred that instead of attempting to erase all incidents on the time track, it would suffice to bring the thetan (spiritual being) into such a state of confidence and ability that it could at a glance erase anything which would show up as charge stemming from self generated computations and considerations.

Such a state – evidenced by a clear cognition – may occur while doing dianetics or through running specific implanted GPMs.

Release

Research has shown that there exist certain abilities and awarenesses which follow a natural graded sequence and which all together add up to a high level of personal harmony and relative stability.

When these abilities and awarenesses have been unequivocally attained the spiritual being can almost certainly stay out of trouble or get out of trouble rather smoothly, thus being able to create a generally harmonious personal life.

One of the favorable results of the type of processing which enhances these abilities is that one almost naturally can stay out of any implanted idiocies and stay in power. (Self Determination)

We have specialized in Power Processing and what we call the original Bridge which consisted of Dianetics, Grades, Power, Power Plus, R6 EW and Clearing Course.

Upper Bridge

Fact is that the scientology bridge to total freedom was never completed during LRH’s lifetime. There are however several ‘ascension’ routes available. We deliver original OT I – VII and OT VIII. We also repair any mishaps or failures  from COS misapplications.

The highest level of processing – as per the axioms – would be considerations processing and also this is available.

Alternatively there are the new MGT Consciousness Exploration Routes, which are unlike the scientology routes not limited to the seven dynamics, but reach into the eighth dynamic. (Ref. Multi Genius Technology for Consciousness Vol. I, The Self-Explorer’s Handbook.)

Guidance

Supervision and guidance is available on all levels at the MGT Institute and all programs are tailored to the individual.

 

The work on this blog is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Service Rationale

Posted on by

The MGT Institute for Consciousness has opened its academy again for those who wish to study the ‘classic’ Scientology training levels from Academy Level 0 to Class IX.

We are exterior to Scientology, we do not identify with Scientology or identify ourselves as scientologists. We are not connected to the Church of Scientology (CO$). Our position is that we can use anything out of scientology, just like we use other applicable spiritual technology.

The MGT Institute operates on a multiple viewpoint system (multi genius technologies) so anyone studying here understands that other subjects are also taught in the same or in adjacent spaces and a high degree of tolerance for different viewpoints is required.

One important thing to understand is that scientology is not a singular. Scientology is a word which denotes a complex which consists of a church, a paramilitary naval organization, management organizations, a religion, a philosophy, a social-spiritual movement, a founder, several brilliant but unnamed researchers, two sciences (a psychology), a number of spiritual and mental technologies and a number of derivatives, and a history from 1950 to the present.

Scientology has been defined in several ways, one of those definitions is: ‘That branch of psychology which treats of (embraces) human ability.’ LRH

If we just limit ourselves to technology then there are several distinctly different versions of Hubbardian Ecclesiastical Scientology, there is an official Scientology™ church version. There is Robertsonian scientology promoted and delivered by so called Rons orgs. There is something less clearly defined, known as independent scientology, meaning not depending on the church but technology-wise often rather close to the technology delivered in the church.

There is the science of consciousness known as Nordenholz scientology of 1934.

There are the KSW (Keeping Scientology Working) and non- or pre-KSW versions of Hubbardian scientology. There is a variety of Hubbard, L. Ron Hubbard an individual and L. Ron Hubbard as a trademark and there is the L. Ron Hubbard Library. L. Ron Hubbard library is a property of the Church of Spiritual Technology and it has legal license to authorize the complete re-writing  or editing of the works of L. Ron Hubbard.

There are Neo-Hubbardian and Post-Hubbardian developments of scientology technology.

One Neo-Hubbardian who is continuing in the footsteps of LRH is Class XII, Pierre Ethier who is (re)-constructing an Upper Bridge beyond OT VIII. Then there is Ralph Hilton of Scientology Austria, who is researching OT 9. There was Ken Ogger aka the Pilot who developed a range of scientology materials. There are probably several more. Another one was Andreas Buttler, who claimed he had been Hubbard in his last lifetime and developed his scientology version and called it Spiritologie. But Buttler gave up all claims and quietly withdrew in 2013.

There is even an LRH contemporary and former partner who published a complete scientology lineup that is different from Hubbard’s in many respects. This we could refer to as Filbertian scientology. (G.C.Filbert)

Then there are the various technologies (techniques) published under the Hubbard name. Book One Dianetics, Standard Dianetics, New Era Dianetics, New Era Dianetics for OTs, Scientology technique 80, Technique 88, Creative Processing, Effort Processing, Advanced Procedure, SOPs, SOP Goals, GPM processing, Clearing procedures, pre-OT levels, L10,11, and 12 etc.

We recognize L.Ron Hubbard as the polymath he was, but also see the mad genius aspect. The genius part played mostly between 1950 – 1965, thereafter the madness started to show in his harshness, paranoia and claiming he was the only source of scientology technology when the facts – now known – clearly show other sources and that many brilliant researchers assisted in the development of that technology.

We see scientology essentially as an incomplete subject that pretended to have the route out completely taped, a very valuable collection of research data, some proven technology and some things to be investigated further.

We have people on lines with all kinds of different backgrounds, some studied Robertsonian Scientology (Capt Bill Robertson’s technology), or Spiritologie and switched to ‘pure’ Hubbard tech and vice verse. Some people may study other spiritual technology or different types of processing or use different kinds of galvanometers or other  biofeedback instruments.

Therefore certain technical choices must be made.  Such choices are always made in full agreement with the being, after having been fully advised of the possibilities, conditions and implications.

Terms and Conditions, Exchange Rates

We deliver only, what we call, binary training, in scientologese it is called the twin system.

Our schedules are published on www.mgtconcepts.com

Courses should be booked at least one month in advance and an enrollment form filled out.

Courses are charged at € 50 per day.

A minimum of 7 days must be prepaid at the time of booking.

The NOTs, Scientology (Review) Auditing and Power Processing Class IX rate is € 95 p. hr. Rates may vary per auditor usually € 65 – 95  per hr.

The Class IX Senior Case Supervisor is the highest authority on scientology technical matters.

Scientology, what is wrong with the right of disconnection

Posted on by

It is questionable whether it is even possible to completely disconnect from one’s fellow human beings. In a limited sense it may even be considered a human right not to allow communication from another, if this communication is not desirable or negative. In fact such disconnection is not uncommon. It occurs in religious contexts like amongst Jehova’s Witnesses and is also known as religious shunning. It is found in families beyond any religious context, for various reasons. It is met in political contexts as in countries severing diplomatic ties. Historically the practice of ostracism goes all the way back to ancient Greece.

One could say there is nothing intrinsically wrong with disconnection in the sense that anyone has the right to communicate or not to communicate as part of self determination or free will.

But the ‘disconnection’ practiced in Scientology is of a different kind and inconsistent with Scientology’s own advertized beliefs and principles. This is what scientologists themselves should be made aware of.

Scientology, what is wrong with the right of disconnection_Page_1_Image_0001What we are talking about is the practice of disconnection from family members as it is done in Scientology nowadays. This would not have been allowed and was frowned upon in the early seventies. Scientologists who had trouble with family members were admonished to always seek to handle by proper communication and disconnection was only used as a last resort.

To explain this fully we will need to review some Scientology principles and specialized terminology.

Hubbard and thus Scientology adopted in 1965 the view that some small percentage of mankind is anti social in the extreme and that these people are psychotics and do not respond to treatment.

Hubbard referred to such people as Suppressive Persons and promptly started to also use this same label to get rid of staffmembers or others who would not quite agree with him or ‘were damaging scientology’ for example by ‘failures to keep scientology working’,‘continued membership in a divergent group’, ‘informing fellow staff members and others that one is leaving staff’or ‘initiating a breakaway group’ etc.

A person, a scientologist who was connected to such a person became known as a potential trouble source or PTS.

The rule was when a PTS was found he or she had to handle or disconnect.

In September 1983 the Church issued a bulletin that changed the way scientologists had been dealing with family members who were no longer in agreement with the Church. In this bulletin the reader is subtly misled (through source bias, confirmation bias) and suggested to read over the internal inconsistency. It states on the third page:

“When an Ethics Officer finds that a Scientologist is PTS to a family member, he does not recommend that the person disconnect from the antagonistic source. The Ethics Officer’s advice to the Scientologist is to handle.”

Further down it actually defines the characteristic of the person (SP) to be disconnected from as one whose normal  operating basis is one of making others smaller, less able, less powerful. A person who does not want anyone to get better, at all.

On the next page an example is given which shows that instant disconnection is required when the antagonistic source–which incidentally could also be a family member– is labeled SP by the organization itself.

The internal inconsistency was that the text said clearly that disconnection is used only on a persons whose normal  operating basis is one of making others smaller, less able, less powerful.

Scientology, what is wrong with the right of disconnection_Page_2_Image_0001This could obviously not be said of old-time Scientologists, people who had been personal friends of LRH, former high ranking Sea Org members, OT VII’s, and even Class XII auditors who were declared SP by the Church, without invalidating the workability of the technology. Therefore this rule was sneaked in in such a way that it could actually be denied that there was such a rule.

Requiring scientologists to disconnect from any scientologist who dared to question or criticize church management or demand reform of some kind and was therefore declared to be an SP, can be understood as an attempt to protect the leadership of the Church.  For this purpose the concept of SPs was redefined to include people who tell the truth about L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology and Scientologists.

So what is wrong with disconnection in Scientology, is the same thing that is wrong in many cults, governments and closed groups which try to prevent the membership from looking too close into the doings (intrigues) of their leadership.

See LRH original viewpoint on disconnection as expressed in a letter to the Australian Board of Inquiry  LRH Letter re Disconnection

 

Scientologics

Posted on by

Scientologics I call the concept of applying plain logic and common sense to a broad subject generally referred to as Scientology.

There is a difference first of all between scientology as a subject and an organization officially named the Church of Scientology. The church is sometimes referred to as a sect, this is incorrect. A sect is by definition a split off. Correct is that the church of Scientology has over the years given birth to several sects. A few examples are the Ron’s Orgs, also referrred to as Freezone, the American Independents, Knowledgism, Landmark Forum etc.

Scientology is the title of a book written around 1934 by Dr. A. Nordenholz and contains a philosophical treatise and outline of a science of knowing.

Hubbardian Scientology is a collection of philosophical and religious views and techniques for increasing spiritual and mental awareness and abilities assembled, re-interpreted and invented by the late L.R Hubbard.

Hubbard did not follow the academic tradition of acknowledging and referencing his sources. He didn’t follow ‘proper’ scientific experimental procedure and only published his conclusions. Many of the principles of the actual Dianetics and Scientology counseling, could for example be derived from Carl Rogers work1. Some elements trace directly to Freud and Jung.

But L.R. Hubbard inspired many and indeed forwarded and created new approaches in mass marketing spirituality, with concepts like self-analysis and ‘do-it-yourself or with a mate’  psycho-therapy. As a young psychology student in 1970 at Utrecht University, I was inspired, it promised adventure and was more attractive than listening to my professor declaring psychology to be the soulless “study of behavior and the forms of organization of that behavior”.

The first few years 1950-1954 Hubbard started a break away movement of independence from the orthodox psychoanalysts and he was one of the first to cry out against psychiatric abuses such as pre-frontal lobotomies long before Psychiatrist Thomas Szasz wrote “The Myth of Mental Illness” (1961)

Some facts are…

that he inspired a spiritual movement and established a church, which was not christian science but it had scientific appeal.

It was instrumental to get a large number of people to experiment with their own minds and investigating the spiritual realms when this was not so common in the fifties.

He obviously used many sources and was not given to credit each one specifically but stressed his own mixn catharsis analysis, but with a fresh approach not only in marketing, but also int

The treatment of the subject in the media is as characteristic of modern media, full of generalities and imprecise statements and a mix of true as well as false data.

In Germany the state officials or politicians consider Scientology to be anti-democratic due to a Hubbard stating that “…democracy gave us inflation and income tax.” Considering the

1Counseling and Psychotherapy, Carl Rogers (1942)

Personal

I have spent 25 years in the Sea Org and had a lot of fun and a good game, giving lots of counseling sessions to people mostly with great results.

I left when Miscavige became abusive and directly affecting my own life. I did the PTS/SP course in the RPF at Flag in Clearwater and left the Sea Org on graduation from the course, leaving no doubt as to my opinion of what was going on and who the real suppressive was.

Scientology Disconnection

I lost all contact to my ex-wife and two daughters since I voiced my opinions on radio and tv in the Netherlands since 2004. Soon after my first public utterances, at first still aimed only towards reform of the church, I received letters of disconnection from my daughters.

Perhaps this church is more christian than I thought, as even in the New Testament things like this are described, for example in Matthew 10, 34-37:

  1. Don’t imagine that I came to bring peace to the earth! I came not to bring         peace, but a sword.
  1. I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.

 36.  Your enemies will be right in your own household!

  1. If you love your father or mother more than you love me, you are not worthy of being mine; or if you love your son or daughter more than me, you are not worthy of being mine.

 Caspar de Rijk, ex-scientologist and Sea Org Member, Class IX

 

Holy Cows, Scientists and Scientologists

Posted on by

We will look at the following: Science and scientology are actually religions! 

It is not accidental that the words scientist and scientologist have several letters in common. Even though this may come to some as an inept comparision there are some similarities that warrant a brief moment of contemplation.

Some scientologists consider anybody not part of their world as inferior and uninformed. But arrogance is found amongst both types. I remember meeting B.F. Skinner while attending a congress on Programmed Instruction in London as a young psychology student and saying to myself what an arrogant fellow. This was based on his behavior and way of talking and that his theory was the only possible explanation.

L. Ron Hubbard was a smart man and original thinker. He was publishing every discovery made by his co-workers as his own work. So do some scientists.

However this is not the point I wish to make. There is a much more important common denominator of scientists and scientologists. They both have strong belief systems. Each of these groups have characteristic holy cows and let me try and tell you the principal ones.

The scientologists believe that considerations or thought in general is senior to the material universe and that nobody will ever be able to master their thought or find the truth without auditing, which is what they call their method to find out.

Scientists on the other hand have an absolute trust and confidence in what they call the scientific method. They strongly believe that the only way to find out or gain real knowledge of the material universe is by the experimental method.

Both groups thus have limited themselves considerably in their methods of acquiring truth. Holy cows are religious, one could say therefore that scientology and science are both religions, quod erat demonstrandum.

De Nada, 2014 March 11th