You WOG!

You lowly wog, down-toned, 1.1, downstat, no case gain, rock-slammer, stage 4, ethics bait, ethics particle, theetie weetie, suppressive person.

I, a Homo Novis, upstat, in-ethics and up-toned OT see you for what you are – a degraded being that should be disposed of, quietly and without sorrow.

Labels. Stickers. Classifications.

You get why people hate Scientology?

115 thoughts on “You WOG!

  1. Ever notice how these labels can be used for positive purposes- “I notice client is downtone, and set out to help him” or can be used to invalidate a person “you are downtone!” ?

    It’s the best, single best, easy, example to use when explaining the overt-motivator to a new person!

      1. Axiom 100: Language is the symbolization of effort.
        Axiom 101: Language depends for its force upon the force which accompanied its definition.
        (Note: Counter-effort, not language, is aberrative).

        1. Axiom 121: Every thought has been preceded by physical action.
          Axiom 65: The process of thought is the perception of the present and the comparison of it to the perceptions and conclusions of the past in order to direct action in the immediate or distant future.
          Corollary: the attempt of tought is to perceive realities of the past and present in order to
          predict or postulate realities of the future.

        2. From Message 5859

          DN AXIOM 99: THETA FACSIMILES can recombine into new symbols.

          DN AXIOM 100: Language is the symbolization of effort.

          DN AXIOM 101: Language depends for its force upon the force which accompanied its definition. (Note: Counter-effort, not language, is aberrative.)

          DN AXIOM 102: The environment can occlude the central control of any organism and assume control of the motor controls of that organism. (Engram, restimulation, locks, hypnotism.)

          DN AXIOM 103: Intelligence depends on the ability to select aligned or misaligned data from an area of randomity and so discover a solution to reduce all randomity in that area.


          (1) Past impressions may combine in different ways to provide new interpretations to perceptions. Units of interpretations may be called symbols.

          (2) This is obvious in language where communication occurs through symbols called words, and new words are created by combining concepts in new ways.

          (3) Language is symbolization of impressions created by effort (directed motion).

          (4) Force expressed through language comes from the force connected with the symbols (their definitions).

          (5) Attention, computation and resulting directions to motor controls may be overpowered by the engramic impressions from the environment.

          (6) Solution is composed of aligning motion and data so as to reduce all randomity in an area.

          (7) Intelligence is the ability to come up with solutions.


      2. Sea Org members are paid next to nothing, and endure sub-standard food and living accommodations. But one of the ways that they DO get “paid” is with validation and flattery–that they are the “elite of the planet”, etc. LRH was the one who started with this, and it is evident that this technique does work
        with a certain percentage of people in getting them to work long, long hours for free.

        But one big drawback is that these Sea Org members come to really believe all this flattery and strut around arrogantly being “superior”. They do this to other Sea Org members in lower orgs, to Non-SO orgs, to public, not to mention mere Wogs.

        This method of payment by flattery, while perhaps successful in the short term toward obtaining free labor, ultimately set into the DNA of the organization a fatal flaw that is resultIng in its destruction.

        For a Sea Org member, believing that one is superior to just about every one else, while being, in actual fact, a self-indentured slave, creates a constant state of cognitive dissonance about how they are spending/wasting their lives. The vast majority eventually leave staff, but while they are there, they tend to really assert this superiority thing.

        This also leads to the inability of SO individuals and organizations from accepting ANY criticism or correction from inferior people, ie, every person in the world if you are the one in charge of that church.

        1. I really agree 100%, this is the real ruin of that organization and the reason it will collapse. They are made blind to any evidence and reality as they live in a allucination and so are really not effective in really bringing Scientology to the planet. Really a sad story of betrayal of all humanity,

        2. I think I may recall this happening to me. Someone was trying to persuade me to do something. They told me that because I was aware that scientology worked it proved I was in the top 1% of the people on this planet. I sensed it was an attempted at flattery and ignored it. I wonder how many other people it was tried on.

      3. Okay, I didn’t really differentiate between terms that would be based in “cilinical judgement” being used negatively and “separators” being used negatively.

        Wog was a very unfortunate choice of term for a separator – classic mistake. It already had a lot of negative baggage attached to it from British history. (Though I’ve used it jokingly with friends along with squirrel as an in joke, which actually blows charge on it anyway)

        ANY separator word- such as “civilian” as used commonly in the police and medical fields- can be used negatively.

        “degraded being” can be used positively, but not AT someone. I can recognize someone is a degraded being with goal to see if they want help removing that degredation, or as a reality note that my dealings with them will have recognize that.

        Anyway, the real point was that there are a lot of these terms which can have a valid use in a given context- my wife can snap me out of an anger moment that has no real justification with a “can you pull that comm off at 4.0 instead of 1.5?” and noting a tone when having a conversation can let you pull it up in gradients instead of trying to toss 3.5 at 1.1 and missing.

        But using these terms outside that- as a damaging attack- is a really good example of OM. Maybe it’s “I need to feel better, so I will attack you to pump myself up” as a basis. Or maybe it’s something else.

        1. Excellent comment! I believe it demonstrates a view of the bigger picture and thus is more fair and more intelligent.

          1. Or it can be a desperate attempt to not confront the very specific and very real way it is taught and applied in Scientology.


            1. Your glass is always half-empty rather than half-full, isn’t it Al?

      4. Geir….in my reading when one finds the real personal reason/the real why/consideration of part-icipating IN an organization, one is OUT of it automatically. The lesson to be learnt why one goes and joins (agrees to) seems to have its origin way back, in one’s first creation out of one’s first viewpoint. When one finds it, it blows the whole chain. Then there is no in/out, shame, blame, regret (shame of not being ME, blaming another for not seeing ME for what I am and no more regret that I have agreed to not being that ME).
        Can you say that when it is the case, one has “got off it” as Alan Watts says?

      5. Yeah, no problem Geir.
        “I am so happy you are not a wog anymore” ~lol

        Seriously though, I always disliked this word and the way Scientologists used it to degrade others.

        Phil de Fontenay

  2. From the thread OT 8:

    Per: Yea right Chris, It does take some observation of self and then some criticalness too.. But mainly, still, it was ment as a joke which apparently some missed, even though I found it pretty obvious. Probably a matter of tone level.

    Vinaire: I think it is unjust evaluation to say “probably a matter of tone level.” I question this theory of tone level.

    Really Vinaire… I suggest you try to crack the same joke at someone who is in grief and someone who is angry and someone who is happy and then see for yourself who will take it serious and who will take it as a joke.. Have fun.. Love, Per

    NB: I am not trying to make just evaluations. Correct evaluations only use data, not opinions.

    Vinaire: It is this kind of evaluation that makes Scientologists detestable. Such evaluations do not help anybody.


    The above is an interesting exchange. It is like using that hypothesis for hypothesis sake. It then comes across as a valueless, purposeless evaluation.

    LRH came up with this hypothesis simply to evaluate pc’s so they could be helped in a session. Its value lies only within a session and not outside a session.


  3. Geir, it is truly unfortunate that Scientology took some very wrong approaches and thus some very wrong turns as a movement. LRH himself, no matter his intentions, contributed to that – although others took it to a level far beyond what he may have started, whether by honest mistake on his part or not.

    I just wish that the amount of time and thought you and others put into emphasizing the dark side of Scn would be shifted to what its unsurpassed potential actually is, which not all others are aware of but you are. Because even though I believe it is necessary to be cognizant of wrongnesses so as to not perpetuate them, I believe as well that after a certain maximal point we in fact perpetuate what we put a lot of attention on and grant life to.

    LRH knew of the dangers of Scientology early on, in the 50’s, and warned of them:

    “It [Scientology] is not IN ITSELF [my emphasis]an arbitrary, fascistic police force to make sure that we all think right thoughts. It’s a servant of the mind, a servo-mechanism of the mind. It is not a master of the mind. Scientology will decline and become useless to man on the day when it becomes the master of thinking. Don’t think it won’t do that. It has every capability in it of doing that. Contained in the knowable, workable portions before your eyes, there are methods of controlling human beings and thetans which have never before been dreamed of in this universe. Control mechanisms of such awesome and solid proportions, that if the remedies were not so much easier to apply, one would be appalled at the dangerousness to beingness that exists in Scientology.” (PDC Tape 20 “Formative State of Scientology, Definition of Logic”)


      1. Scientology consists of much ground breaking work by Hubbard.

      2. Scientology introduces a whole new plateau to addressing the problems of the mind.

      3. The work on this breakthrough is, however, far from complete.

      4. The success from the application of Scientology is far from consistent.

      5. Any lack of success gets blamed on the practitioner of Scientology.

      6. Unmanageable difficulties seem to exist in the application of Scientology.

      7. Correction lists have become a part of “Standard Scientology.”

      8. A closer look at Scientology shows a lack of application of the principle of poka-yoke.

      9. Looking is the key to successes in Scientology auditing.

      10. Scientology does not seem to put emphasis on Looking.

      11. Scientology takes up Looking on TR0 exercises and Obnosis, but it fails to treat Looking systematically, and fails to highlight its importance in auditing.

      12. The principles of Looking were first elucidated by Buddha 2600 years ago.

      13. Looking, when applied as mindfulness, seems to provide poka-yoke to Scientology processes.

      14. The principles of Looking are presented on this blog under the heading: KHTK Looking.

      15. KHTK incorporates Buddha’s original exercises.

      16. KHTK plans to take a look at the various processes in Scientology.

      Only by being critical of Scientology can we come up with better solutions. We should not stop at the level LRH took it too. We should continue to improve upon it.

      I do not think that the good in Scientology will be lost. It may continue under another label but it will continue. The bad in Scientology ought to be left behind.


      1. You should read more carefully, Vinaire. I wasn’t objecting to criticism of Scientology, just to it being overdone with negative results.

        As for the criticisms in your list above, you have done no research to support them – they are simply your figure-figure conjectures.

        1. Marildi you can justify Scientology as much as you want. But the progress will take place. I predict that Scientology will not persist in its present state. The good in Scientology will continue but maybe under some unrecognizable label.


          1. Vinaire, I do not do an A=A on the philosophy Scn and the corruption of it that took place. And I’m not at all against improvement and progress either. But sometimes statements made with that intention are based on a lack of correct understanding of Scn to start with.

      2. Vinaire says; “I do not think that the good in Scientology will be lost. It may continue under another label but it will continue. The bad in Scientology ought to be left behind.”

        Or perhaps under no name at all as the good in it finds its way from person to person, through science, through religion, through human endeavor. Let us not forget that at the heart of it, it was experimental with much trial and error. It is through trial and error that we find the best there is and bring that forward into the realm of wisdom.

        I consider myself extremely fortunate to have witnessed and participated in this amazing adventure in the efforts of mankind to transcend and expand beyond previous limits. Every failure is an opportunity to learn and to find what does work well. Every gain brings us closer to our longing for release and joy. I have nothing but gratitude to every person who found release, every person who didn’t, every person who suffered, every person who experienced joy, to the sincere and brave, and the frightened and hurt, and every person that participated in this grand experiment. Some of us will seek to way to end the failed efforts, some will seek to bring the best of it to others, some will go their way with greater insight and best and the worst will unfold into a new tomorrow.

        1. And the very small percentage have achieved and will achieve what it was predicted at the beginning.
          But of course that will not be recognised….

          1. Perhaps. What is probably more accurate is to say: what will be recognized is what CAN be recognized and that is the main limitation that bars recognition. One can see what what can see and that’s what there is to work with. .

            1. “What is probably more accurate is to say: what will be recognized is what CAN be recognized and that is the main limitation that bars recognition.”
              Right on that….
              “”One can see what what can see and that’s what there is to work with. .””
              And that is not much to continue with, I am sad to say that knowledge will not take one out of the MEST, There are immense amount of barrier- traps laid out which when seen-experienced looks real authentic spiritual paths but in fact they are lead to dead end.
              But each person needs to walk and do walk on their own designated path

            1. Vinaire, while that phrase sounds catchy, it is self-evidently untrue.

            2. John – you “stole” my line…
              – I saw it too..


            3. From where I sit Self appears to be important to the degree it is not understood. You may disagree with this and that is OK.

              My focus is not on myself but on those methods that help one understand oneself better.



            4. Once self is reduced to a perception point, everything loosens up considerably. We no longer have a self now. We just have a very fluid perception point.


            5. V… we are on the same page on this..100% right.. and the agreements or disagreements have no importance what so ever… since agreements or disagreements do not add to the original idea-thought concepts they are useless, in fact they have use in the MEST is to solidify that idea make it permanent …and who needs that? Those who operate in the MEST.

        2. Thanks Maria……beautiful, just beautiful!
          “I have nothing but gratitude to every person….” ….me too! An example from way back when
          I was listening to someone giving a talk in a scientology gathering. He was well qualified, used
          references in the proper way. At one point he said something which sounded stupid, false, far from truth. And I spotted that and had an instant evaluating/judging thought:
          “How can a qualified person say that?” I was about to raise my hand and stop him (thinking
          that it will be the best for all the others too who may or may not have recognized that stupidity),
          when “something” STOPPED me. It was a complete STOP. All of a sudden I had a very profound “View”, a kind of “Holistic picture” in which I saw that he was doing/saying exactly what
          he needed to do/say, the other people in the audience needed to see/hear that, moreover, this
          “view” was so huge that it went far beyond the persons involved in the room…it happened to touch on all….That was an instant in life, when I KNEW/WAS CERTAIN OF that everything/everybody is co-operating for the sake of all, there is no stupid/good/bad/valuable/useful….the list is endless……one is in co-operation with all other ones and one “gets out of it”
          exactly what one needs to get out of it in each instant……to see that it is so, one only STOPS (creating the past) and STOPS (resisting the present). Then one is in the Grace of Life, actually one IS grace then.

          A little game if you like:
          “some of us will seek the way to end the failed efforts, some will seek to bring the best of it to others”………hold it for an instant and then let it fall from mind to the body and the heart………

          what do you get……..?

    2. When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe — never permit an “open- minded” approach. If they’re going to quit let them quit fast. If they enrolled, they’re aboard, and if they’re aboard, they’re here on the same terms as the rest of us — win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have been tough, dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It’s a tough universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers survive — and even they have a hard time. We’ll survive because we are tough and are dedicated. When we do instruct somebody properly he becomes more and more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are afraid to offend, scared to enforce, we don’t make students into good Scientologists and that lets everybody down. When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in her eye into a fixed, dedicated glare and she’ll win and we’ll all win. Humor her and we all die a little. The proper instruction attitude is, “You’re here so you’re a Scientologist. Now we’re going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what happens. We’d rather have you dead than incapable.”” (L Ron Hubbard, Keeping Scientology Working Series 1, HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1965)

        1. Yeah, it took him only 12 years to completely contradict himself.

          And the force of policy and his justice system – “crimes, High Crimes and Suppressive Acts”, expulsion Fair game and everything else he created, enforces this later reference from KSW, not the earlier reference that Marildi quoted.

      1. “If they’re going to quit let them quit fast.” – LRH

        So how come Miscavige does not follow that? Oh, yeah, Miscavige no longer makes auditors.

        You did notice that this was about making auditors, right?

    3. Marildi.. I agree with you…. Why not looking what works?
      Here is something from my blog which was also translated into Italian and posted at

      When we are judging evaluating invalidating any incoming action or thoughts considerations coming from others than in fact we are judging, evaluating how we our-self think on those subject and that is not necessarily or positively the same reality of the other person have on the same matter.
      But it only seems we judge evaluate the other person because that information, but the evaluation is ours and that person never ever said anything like our evaluation is: So in fact that evaluation how that person is would be a big LIE and any evaluation of any incoming data is only our own reality and nothing more.
      To believe in our evaluation that how real things are for others That would be on untruth a fabrication on invention of the bank: the mind in order to blame others and that judgment that evaluation will not make that person that: what we believe in: how we judged that person that is not that persons universe-reality but we incorrectly erroneously believe that and that is a pure undiluted “lie”.
      It is our own reality our own beliefs opinions principals, views, policies, theories and philosophies what we believe in and that is our reality which is expression as our judgment evaluation.
      Just think, if one would not know understand the meaning what is good or bad, important-unimportant, being a fat cow, or how a drunk behaves, what it takes being a redneck, a know it all, or when one recognize that someone is acting irrational stupid or if we would not know understand how we our-self feel, than we would not be able to understand how others feel and we than could not judge evaluate their behavior.
      In fact when one judges others that judgment indicates explains points out how self thinks what one believes in how one see the world.
      This makes it understandable that we don’t judge others at all we only judge evaluate how we think on that matter what others communicate to us, or what we see when we look around..
      Example would be if I look at a young woman and say she is beautiful, yes I have judged expressed my reality but it is only my reality that she is lovely.
      So next time judge or evaluate somebodies thinking….. FIRST Better look inside your own universe because as that evaluation judgment pin-points where is one’s own case is..

      1. + 8
        In my reality we are here to be FULLY human, that is to be a willing/knowing/loving cause of being human, in which case one finally knows how it is being created by the one and by all other ones. That is one knows how one is creating one’s body/emotions/mind, as well as gets familiar with how others are doing that by understanding their realities through live communication, the base of which is the affinity/love towards oneself in the first case.
        One LOVES one’s creations/abilities/inabilities/values/lack of values=accepts oneself first
        before one is able to accept/love/allow others to be what they think/know/do…….
        With this one knows that one is an infinite source of creation and only part of this is to be human.
        One can only know that through one’s experience. The best “journey” ever!

  4. What you are pointing out is a case of extreme polarity and its manifestations. It’s sad that scientologists, who are supposed to get better by studying and processing, generally end up so polarized.
    But you can turn it the other way round too: Say to a hardcore critic that you think good of whatever small aspect of scientology and you’ll see a reaction very similar in character to what you describe in this blog post.

  5. Scientology would be fine if we take out of it the fixation on individuality.

    Individuality as a concept may exist. There is nothing wrong with that concept. But why be fixated on it.

    The problem of evaluation and invalidation would disappear if the fixation on individuality is taken out of the equation. The example in the OP cannot exist when this fixation is gone.


    1. Isn’t any fixation out of fear of change? What’s in the root of fear of change?

      1. Marianne……… the root of fear is VALUE… the fear is losing the valued item regardless what is that.
        Fear of change is because when one believe believes that what one has ones outlook, reality on life, how he/she sees thing is so very valuable treasured and have so importance, has so much meaning that one do not want to part with those valued things –persons.
        And don’t want to change because do not recognises the value in the new reality presented.
        Example: rich man seldom want different life because believes he has everything already.
        When one is poor has nothing that person looks for change.

        1. Thank you Eliz, got it, agreed. It follows from this that one must value and desire TRUTH (that is awareness) more than any-THING else and take the risk of “loosing” (at the bottom of it) all viewpoints, especially the most valued one, the” I ” (that fixes one to be an individual). What remains is an AM=AWARENESS which simply “knows” in a particular situation what is “needed”
          and is doing that. The beauty of it is that when one is not afraid of loosing one’s “identity” any more, one can BE any identity, can pick up any viewpoint, create/uncreate any viewpoint as
          one is in “no-position”. Experience just gets “infinite”. How do you see it?

          1. Marianne .. yes my dear… people value the solid MEST universe so much that they cant let it go… Their fear of the so called nothingness is so huge because that fear and the False values they can’t see that there is much more than those miserable considerations which holds them into the MEST so solidly.. Having value is the core and the base for rest of the considerations and agreement.
            Yes the ‘’I’’ is the very valuable consideration and that consideration is the basic-basic lie to which the rest of them piled an: the Lies galore.

          2. Marianne Here is something more on “FEAR”.

            Cognition: one only has worries, have fears terrors, one only dreads have anxiety about the future, any upcoming events happenings if there is value importance of losing something is there, in the presence of that event…
            Just think about what one fears most: Losing things which one feels is has importance and needed for the the continuum of the bodies survival in the MEST Universe: like the body, fear of old age, of illness, death, loss of beloved partner, children, loss of memory, to lose a job, loss of one’s shelter, income, one’s ability to provide for the body.
            Not being accepted into the ‘’RIGHT Circles where one can gain, not acknowledged for ones accomplishments: that is on indication of lose, not invited by the “right “ people of importance: one would not gain some value than, what to wear what to eat has great importance-values, how one looks, what ones knows has huge value.
            Each persons has fear accordance what that person hold “valuable”: fear of cars, airplanes: possibility of an accident, floods, fire, because of that one must have all sort of insurance, even one makes a contract with marriage license so the person who is considered very valuable is tied down: have to remain.
            The Fear of not being trusted is very heavy, being attacked, left alone, there is fear not having enough to eat, drink, etc…
            To lists what one fears would be impossible to compile it would be too long and would not accomplish ones goal to erase ones fear.
            But one can audit out in session the “values”, what one holds valuable and why: what and who made one to believe those items-considerations has value-importance. That works and it’s the confrontations of such a list gives powerful sessions and the cognitions just pour in like water in the tropical down pour.
            When those reasons, considerations assumptions are confronted in session and as-ised than fear simply vanish from ones universe..
            The assigned power to things and to others, that they are better are valuable therefore their hold importance and needed toward ones survival when those considerations are erased fear to will vanish from ones universe.
            Of course one must confront first of all what one “LOVES “the most since those things holds the most value and the possibility of their loss causes the greatest fear.

            I have blown-erased value from my universe about 13-14 years back..
            I do have understanding what fear is but no reality how that feels like since the MEST has no value… none what so ever….since I have no fears I speak openly becases I have no fear that I could be losing … hehehe… the value of having good, nice manners in order to be accepted as one of the group member too has vanished…

            1. Thank you Eliz, got it all……..manners….when one sees through the theta lines that connect the members in a group and one has no more consideration that I must be/or need this or that…..that’s quite a freedom….
              question: what do you like/appreciate best in your present “state of being”?

          3. the freedome to do anything I please that includes communication on any level but of course there are no levels in communication..we all communicate telepathically hehehe we just play the game that we communicate with sounds-words… that is the addition to the original ”thought” communication therefore that is the ”lie”

            1. Eliz, You are not a facet of the jewel, but the jewel itself! And of course, each of us is that!
              It’s a joy to listen to you!

    2. V…..”Once self is reduced to a perception point, everything loosens up considerably. We no longer have a self now. We just have a very fluid perception point.”

      That is fantastic, well put.. Somebody asked to write about my self and that was interesting since I know there is nothing to write about so I wrote back ” I only have view points”.

  6. I have modified my understanding of SELF as follows:

    All perception ends as knowledge. Knowledge has many layers, such as, experience, information, hypotheses, theories, principles and axioms. Considerations arise as the perception point interacts with knowledge. As considerations become fixed, the perception point becomes a “center of consideration” analogous to the concept of “center of mass” in Physics. This is SELF.


    1. Vin, yes, the perception point is fluid…..I wouldn’t even name it a point….it’s just fluid….

      1. M… that is even a better since fluid dont have a point . By the way i am waiting for you answer in my email address. By the way I be going to hungary in the last month of spring.. you and I we should meet and have lunch or dinner?

          1. Sorry Vin… that post was for Marianne… she is hungarian too.. but you and I we are in the spiritual what ever that is I have no doubt about that…V.. I enjoy sharing space-universe with you

        1. Great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do you feel my theta kissess?
          Will talk about the details in email……I know we will have F U N !!!!

          1. hehehe…I got them…. please Marianne your theta kisses are like the Saint Bernads woof woof and no jumping on me please my body is only 125 pd. 🙂 I am only a whippet a small grayhound!

            1. You want me to “laugh my head off” ? What shall I do without a head? And you like big dogs? Me too!

  7. I have added the following to the PHILOSOPHY PROJECT.


    [When confronted with perception, the desire to know results in interpretation, speculation, conjecture, assumption, etc. These are considerations, which acquire name and form. This then gives rise to language and human knowledge.]

    FORTY-ONE: Considerations may be categorized as interpretation, speculation, conjecture, assumption, etc.

    FORTY-TWO: Considerations are generated by a desire to know.

    FORTY-THREE: “God,” “Prime Mover Unmoved” “Uncaused Cause,” “Supreme Being,” “Unconditioned Being,” etc. become considerations when they are given name and form.

    FORTY-FOUR: Thus, considerations come into existence as name and form.

    FORTY-FIVE: Thus there is language and human knowledge.


    1. The whole PHILOSOPHY PROJECT is available at my blog, of course. All you to do is click on my name here and then click on DISCUSSIONS link.


  8. Geir said: Labels. Stickers. Classifications. You get why people hate Scientology?

    Yes I do. While I enjoy exploring realms that seem to be beyond consensual reality, I really don’t have a disdain for all things consensual reality as worthless. I believe it is disdain, whether voiced in a positive way or a derogatory way that is at the heart of this. For the life of me I cannot see what the difference is in being able to mock up one’s own universe, participate in this one or another. I think it may be the dismissal of creation as being “poor” or “worthless” or “stupid” or “blind” or whatever one chooses to call it that triggers the upset.

    I talk to lots of people who have never had any experience with Scientology or any transcendental religion or spiritual works. This is what I get from them as a response to these types of concepts: It sounds like these religions are saying that these ideas, these creations, these manifestations, this knowledge are nothing and are worthless — that human behavior is foolish and deceptive and misguided and lost and nothing more than a bunch of confused and dissonant clutter that needs to be cleaned up — and if you disagree then you are just being a smarmy little MEST ridden self all caught up in paltry interests, destined for oblivion.

    I think it was LRH that said that too much truth all at once is degrading. I agree that it is degrading, but I disagree that it because it is too much truth. I think it is that truth is used in an untruthful way, a way that does not inform and release but confuses and maligns.

  9. Maria as usual you write beautifully, love reading your posts…
    The truth is never degrading, in fact sets the being free
    What the problem is with the confrontation of reality.
    By now the truth has been forgotten because that immense amount of additives piled up on the basic information. Which consist mostly what should be right or what is wrong and again the ‘’right or wrong’’ has been established by what the person can or can handle-confront what they experience.

    1. Salvation???? More like intimidation and introversion! Of course, he would assert that anon was seeking to introvert and intimidate and he certainly could make an argument for that. Low ARC? Again, he would argue that you have to match tone levels to get ARC. Angry. Yep. OTs can get angry last time I looked. BUT would I want to be anything like this individual? NO. Would most people? Probably not. Would I want to cosy up to this guy? NO. But you know, there are those who would consider this strong, tough, and powerful. Especially the guffawing and hearty laughter. But the message is clear. If you don’t agree, if you are trying to stop us in any way, then you are insane. Period. Not much room for discussion or sorting anything out.

  10. Elizabeth, this I agree with: The truth is never degrading, in fact sets the being free.

    That is why I say that when truth is put forth in a way that degrades, whether or not the individual’s level of confront is “up to it,” it is not truth. Example: to go to a young woman with her newborn baby in her arms and tell her, “this is nothing more than an illusion or delusion and you are nothing more than a degraded being slavishly locked into being a body, and this continued connection will result in you being stuck in a dwindling spiral trap of your own failure to take responsibility and to confront the truth” isn’t likely to result in a freedom for her. In fact, it may simply reduce her affinity for her baby, for herself, for her existence and her attempt to work with this “truth” may very well result in a state of doubt and maybe even misery. To my way of thinking that is degradation. She may just as easily reject what you say, and if you press on her, she will come to dislike you, and if you keep at it, insisting that she has a lack of confront and that she is unable to see truth at all, she may come to hate you as you seek to dismiss her existence as a lie — for her own good. And then she will not want anything to do with you unless you are her mother or a loved one and she doesn’t want to banish you from her life.

    1. Maria communicating with words is the cause of ALL ARCB’x all the wars, killings, everything which is called the Bank…. Words and the misunderstanding their meanings.

      1. Well then I guess I should stop participating on these blogs and quit speaking to people.

        1. hehehe… long as we have the body planted here … we do what the rest of the folks do . 🙂
          About blogging I have learned incradible amount… insigh to things of things which otherwise I would never gained…

      2. One why perhaps is :
        1. a word is a symbol ( of an item)
        2. a word has a definition
        3. define: limit (root meaning)

        4. directed : from A to B on a route
        5. force: the capacity to cause physical change, energy, strength, or active power
        6: effort: directed force

        Axiom 100: Language is a symbolization of effort.

        From this follows that a word is indeed a “capsule” of energy/active power. By clearing to
        the root all the MU-s, one will be energetic and have power.
        Causing another a misunderstanding by a word lessens the energy and the power of that person.
        Feeling less is less affinity. Less affinity is less communication.

        In my experience, when a truely free being uses words, the pure energy that “sorrounds” the
        being is very powerful, more powerful than the words, and as that pure energy is the same
        (core) in each of us, words then matter much less than that core. When that “pure energy” “awakens”, as it is more powerful than the force in the words, it is able to
        “burn/melt” that force and only the free use of the symbol and the item remain. (my experience).

        1. The above is meant as an answer to Elizabeth saying that “communicating with words is the cause of ALL ARCB’x”.

            1. Thanks! It’s much more fun when there is an instant back-com (from you in this case) than waiting because of a long com.lag. But that’s also fine, those mest objects and considerations have value in the “big game”.

  11. V…..I wonder what you doing when sorting out your inconsistencies?
    Just because we use different terminology than you … your process is not better than mine just different..
    So go in sort out the inconsistencies you have about that statement you made…

  12. Elizabeth, an inconsistency for me is something that doesn’t seem to make sense. So I look at it totally non-judgmentally.closer and closer, until it starts to make sense.

    It is like Super Study Tech.. Instead of going to the dictionary, I look at everything associated with that inconsistency… what is out there… what are my considerations associated with it… what is on Internet or in Wikipedia about it… and so on.

    That is the simplicity of it.


    1. V… I do the same, almost the same, the only difference is I ask the questions and I get the answers from the universe it-self.

      1. I don’t ask any questions. I just look closer and closer at the inconsistency and contemplate over it till it all comes together.


        1. It seems work for both of us what and how we do and that is where the value is.

          1. I look also at the considerations prevalent in the society, in science, in mathematics, and in other subjects too.


            1. V…“I look also at the considerations prevalent in the society, in science, in mathematics, and in other subjects too”.
              I am very aware that your interest has wider in range than mine, I have started out “looking” long time back in 73 why I have behaved as I have than, but now I look -examine the reasons anything whatever comes my way… the “I’’ seems become only a decoration when I write: in communicating.
              There is no further interest knowing that consideration that “I’’ since there is nothing there to know about that item.. That has been as ised-blown but the desire to understand the universe has remained.. there is nothing beside that existing.

    2. What is to you the difference between looking in a dictionary to looking at Internet and Wikipedia?


      1. Dictionary is included. It is not excluded. Ishould have said:

        “Instead of [just]going to the dictionary” 🙂

        The key to it all is non-judgmental looking. When one is looking using Hubbard’s materials, for any materials, as a filter, then it is judgmental looking.


        1. What is to you the difference between looking in a dictionary to looking at Internet and Wikipedia? Per

  13. Szervusz….. You have figured it out well. The axiom is correct.
    Words to me are becoming barriers since they are via in communication… Just thing… one has already communicated and that only takes a fraction of “time”
    Here is what I have explained to somebody yesterday; we are in the spiritual universe regardless what one thinks that one is human and has a body and lives on Planet Earth… that is only a consideration a projection of considerations.
    So we are in the Spiritual universe where one-ness is. So there are no singular terminals, because of that the so called intention-communication is received instantly.
    Let’s go from here: we are playing the game the make believe that I need to send that communication from ‘’’my body’’’’ to ‘’’your body’’’ which are an this mocked up place called Earth and plus while we are ‘’there’’ we DO NEED machine to convey our communication and we also need words which we invented and agreed that we understand and we also agreed that we can’t communicate without..
    With all the mocked up action We have in fact pile up adding complication in order to create a game which is creating singularity… distance… agreements.. huge amount of complicated vies… that is playing a game and nothing more..
    The part of the game is when the person say: ”” I don’t understand you, or you are not correct, you are wrong, and this is the way it is”” etc…. etc… etc..
    Denial of understanding is part of the game…. So is having ARCB’x
    I figure you will understand this… love you kid..

    1. Thanks Eliz….I love both the one-ness universe and this created universe….indeed, if
      one really LOOKS, it is completely empty (what a relief to see that! and also that “each of us” can CREATE….). I love when one creates!
      Just “looked at” today the Spiritual Universe where it looks like there is no need for com.
      “below it” is the instant live com. “layer”, one “layer” down is the “fluid” com, under it is completely empty – but! looks like this “fluid” can fixate as a viewpoint and from top to bottom mock up mest… least at this point ” I ” experience it this way…..the “journey continues”….

  14. M….
    The emptiness itself is on illusion a consideration on agreement that it is… emptiness do not exist.
    In order to understand emptiness-void one must confront that item in order to understand what is the reason it was created, was agreed an… and what are the reasons it is used for….
    Emptiness is the opposite side of “solid solidity” one can’t exist without the other that is the law of the MEST universe…..
    Fullness its apposite is emptiness…. so to know the reasons one must explore that so called –“empty” than one will understand the Solid=MEST universe also.

    1. Thanks….my above description was not precise as it’s not easy to desribe it…by empty I meant no and all creations at the same time, that is no-thingness and all-thingness co-exist…..
      I created and then confronted the concept of emptiness (before writing this). What I get is that the reason for this concept is, that Oneness is LOVE and it has the infinite ability to Create,,,,this is a huge power and ability….can create first very “light” illusions….then more and more solid illusions…by now it is so solid, that this solidity cannot be “tolerated” any more….given that the “pure, fine energy is still pouring”, the solid-solid has little time to exist….evolution is expected and those who can tune onto this pure energy of love…..

      1. not in my reality one-ness is not love… and love is not glue, it is used as such but that is not true love… true love do not unite… because only thing can unite which is made out of something, therefore that is a MEST consideration…. we have different reality on love..

  15. Eliz, I am on it what you mean……
    And ONE-ness doesn’t mean “unite”, love is certainly not a “glue”…..
    To sum up:
    True Love=The Source=Creating=You=ME=Non-separatedness=Non-division
    When one is creating, one is Love (source). That’s why ” I ” ask ” a ” You” to create. The only “place” one ( “the person”) can create from is the core of One-Self (Love). When one is “fast” creating, one gets a deeper and deeper reality of the Core=LOVE.
    There is the phrase “fall in love”. “Falling into the core”. When one, or the seemingly seperated “two ones” fall into it “at the same time”, the illusion of time is gone, that’s TONE 40. True Love.
    “We” are that all the time….the “journey” is to REALIZE that….Truth/Love/True Reality

    1. Eliz….a little differently….
      The Source=True Nature
      When one is Tone 40, there is Silence. This Silence is the Source of All Creations. When the “one” is that Silence (Stop-not do-not-resist) continuously, it’s the Realization of True Nature.

      No ” I ” – realization of True nature
      When one (the person) understands one’s creations, the illusion of ” I ” (separatedness) is
      gone. By that, which is realized (the Flow), understanding (ARC) continues towards “other” creations.
      When all is understood (full ARC) – it’s ONE-ness.

      The Game
      One (the person) creates so that another one by understanding that creation (ARC) can experience the Source (ME=YOU=SOURCE).

      When one (the person) is in LOVE (total ARC) with all the Creations of the ONE, one is LOVE.

      That’s my experience…..

  16. Marianne I dont have your reality on that consideration which you call love… far from it.

    1. Right Eliz…to me it’s not a consideration but a lot of big “no-mind/spiritual glimpses” of it. In fact,
      it’s my actuality (almost continuous living experience).
      I read your love-hate post. Can you write here what LOVE is to you?

  17. OK.
    A question: what do you get when you as-is something? I observed it used as an MU by some.
    What do you see when you see something as-it-is?

  18. I thought this song spoke of the true heart of man, the heart that rises above ideologies and fear and conflict. It is fitting as a reminder, fitting because we are once again in the Christmas season. It is about a most unusual event that happened during World War 1 and its message is very clear.

Have your say

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s