What will the future bring for Scientology?

The latest blog post by Marty, “Standard Scientology“, was quite a bombshell judging by the fallout – 700 comments in three days. I usually only skim through Scientology related blogs. This one I both read and left a few comments. And in doing so, I came across a comment by the nick, “NolongercareaboutScn” that I found succinct and quite true:

Scientology cannot deliver on the major promises of the states of Clear and OT. Instead it DELIVERS some temporal life improvements (which are not without value) while continuing to SELL advanced states of being that it cannot and never has delivered.

If the written promises of the tech were more aligned with the results, or if the results of the application of the tech were more aligned with the written promises, then the entire subject would be more worthy of serious consideration.

As it stands today, Scientology as a subject is a hoax. Hundreds of thousands of dollars are charged for promised results that are not and never have been delivered, specifically the states of being described as Clear and OT.

In the business world, that is called fraud. Elsewhere it is sometimes called religion. What it looks like from here is a fraudulent business pretending to be a religion, regardless of the branding of those doing the delivery.

When I say “quite true”, it is because many of the gains I have gotten in Scientology have lasted for decades and may last until I die or longer. While there are temporal gains for sure, gains like recovering my creativity, improved communication skills and freedom from shame, blame and regret are so far permanent.

But the description that Scientology is a fraud is correct – because it has never delivered the states of Clear or OT while it continues to sell these states as real, attainable and delivered. In the business world, that is a felony.

I should add that I agree fully with Marty’s blog post. And it makes one ponder what the future will bring for Scientology.


If you have been tracking the Sciosphere – with the Church’s accelerating demise as passangers are vacating the Titanic, formerly Scientology friendly blogs turning critical and the independent field is marked by infights, fractioning and shrinkage – the future does look bleak.

In a year from now I doubt there will be many blogs or forums left promoting Scientology, except for perhaps the die-hard Milestone Two. The Church will be shrinking ever faster while battling mounting court cases.

But does it matter? Does it matter if Scientology fades further until it isn’t even a social joke?

562 thoughts on “What will the future bring for Scientology?

  1. Both temporal and eternal as adjectives are human abstractions which are meaningful only in the context of human existence. I do not believe that these are particularly meaningful in the context of the physical processes roiling around us.

    1. The physical processes would fall under “temporal” would they not? By defintion. If something is ‘proceeding’, that implies the movement of particles in space…..

  2. The best of Scientology shall be preserved in KHTK, which is basically a relatively more organized approach to the subject of the mind.

  3. Does it matter if the Church of CO$ fades or becomes a social joke.
    No it doesn’t.

    But it does matter if we lose the tech. There are gains to be had from the tech that you cannot get as quick and stable anywhere else that I know of.

    Yes the claims of Clear and OT are exaggerated. This needs to be adjusted to “Clearer” . And remove the OT part as it is total bullshit. Just tell people you get clearer and clearer as you uncover and get more insight into youself.

    The demise started with the word Church and it will end because of the word Church.

  4. That was a a really good article at Marty’s.

    Here’s my guesses for the next twenty years: the remaining hardcore followers will join Milestone Two or Ron’s Org even if they disagrees with some of their extreme views and will offer to help. All they all will continue practicing the tech.

    “Oh yeah, we used to spar over such issues at Geir’s place. They never got the good that was in the tech. And hey, can you help me pick up an ashtray with just my mind? … You can’t? … Hmm … Must be suppression…”

    DM will bolt, erase his fingerprints, and get the underwater gold he most likely stowed away on his numerous diving expeditions. Next, he’ll get plastic surgery and vanish to an international safe house to die of something like lung cancer or cirrhosis before Monique gets her can of whoop-ass spinach open with the Popeye fight song playing.

    The Nation of Islam will try to take over the church and its assets, and the Department of Homeland Security will find a way to crush in through the back door.

    The church will then try to reform under a visionary leader crying “KSW FOREVER!” and then crumble under the draining of assets brought on by the never ending lawsuits with the 14 Narconon lawsuits leading the charge.

    Geir and Annette will live happily ever after. The Rathbuns and Rinders will raise their babies.

    Susan Meister’s bones and bullet-opened cranium will never see sunlight to prove to the world once and for all that R2-45 was no joke on the Apollo.

    And some 14 year old will find an original copy of Self Analysis from 1951, and follow its original directions and wish an organization that delivered the promises it contained existed.

    And THANKFULLY there will be no baby in a carriage will be smoking Kools with a messenger holding an ashtray for him.

    And Tony Ortega, Mark Bunker and Tory Christman will open a dude ranch in Clearwater and die drinking mint juleps – living the dream.

    1. Hey kat, you do a pretty good job of keeping ‘up’, bro.! 🙂

      Where there is real ‘heart’, there’s evidently not much need for animosity, is there?

      After all, who really needs to add ‘viruses’ (poisons) to their stash? 🙂

        1. Hi William, Katageek, I would like to be your friend too on FB, if you so wish. We have some of the same friends, thank you
          – Dee Findlay

        2. “I’m William Roy Harper. I’m on Facebook and friends with Chris,Vin, Geir, and Annette. You too if u want.”

          Where’s the “like” button? Oh, here we go, *LIKE*

        3. Thanks for the invite William. I’m keen to do that up the line. Still heavily committed to work deadlines at the mo’. My wife Dorothy handles facebook and all business related comm on my behalf.

          Geir’s blog is the only one I enjoy visiting, and usually when I take a meal break.

          Keen to meet up there WHEN things quieten down. Thanks again bro’ 🙂

          Calvin B. Duffield, Durban, South Africa

  5. It doesn’t really matter in the long run since the internet has so much to offer in ways of thinking, helping and discovering.

    I believe that if some of the workable tech would survive, be Re-named, turned into a business and available for those who want, that what works will survive. They will have to be up-front on the true history. Should someone make it available and it works with no abuses plus low fees, then those people may get what they’re looking for through those alternative methods. Otherwise it has been turned into a joke, through exposure, and will be laughed out of existence.

    Marty’s blog has kept me busy for days. Very exciting even. A major breakthrough it seems in the scientological blog field.

    1. +1. Marty seems to be doing better and better. You’ve made a good point about the internet. Scientology came out and was developed just in time for the advent of the Information Age. I am more curious about that fact than I am about Scientology. The Information Age could have carried Scientology across the Earth like a tsunami or crushed it as it has. I wonder if all tyrannies on Earth are put on notice or whether the next Xenu will somehow and in someway get control of the Information Age?

      1. I believe what’s great in life is the surprises of what the future may bring. Keeps us on our toes and in present time, heh?

  6. i do agree the church sells what apparently they can’t deliver, however, i believe the tech as Ron wrote it DOES work. i also believe there comes a time when a being reaches a level when the church can no longer take you “higher”, it’s then up to the being itself. In my case, i have noticed that as i go through the day i encounter something and will go back to a process e.g. in super power or OT8, etc. I think there comes a time when we have to handle our own cases.

    1. “I think there comes a time when we have to handle our own cases.”

      Bingo! This is the root premise of my parenting. My children have been handling their own cases their whole lives. Scientology, power processes, OT levels are all additives to this datum you’ve so smartly written. All of Scientology is one great big fallacious appeal to Ron’s authority and completely unnecessary unless one remains in the tunnel of Scientology. Then one must partake of the placebo and vociferously agree that the Emperor’s clothes are quite beautiful.

      1. That line struck me too Chris. “I think there comes a time when we have to handle our own cases.” Right ed. 🙂 How true.

        When I was into metaphysics, new age stuff for 25 years, so much was beneficial and I took the best from most. But then I’m easy! Sum up, there is so much helpful info out here and one just has to evaluate for ones self, once you are free from a controlling entity.

  7. Here are portions of another comment that was posted on Marty’s current thread, which expresses my point of view very well:

    Grasshopper | August 20, 2014 at 5:19 pm |

    …Marty is right in that the way things are now, there is no single Standard Tech if by that you mean a taped set of techniques that take someone from A to B. There are themes in Scientology that you can benefit from if you do as I have come to espouse, which is to practice Scientology technology with Love and the intention to make things better.

    As noted from my comment in the previous post, the Code of Honor point “Never compromise with your own reality” can be interpreted as evil or goodness depending on how you want to look at it. Surely, the “it’s evil!” interpretation can be made, considering how many people in Scn have refused to look outside their box and have taken any datum contrary to their world view as a threat to their existence and, I guess, manhood. So, okay – take that interpretation. But, it can also be interpreted in Love, which means what a lot of coaches will tell you, popular songs will tell you, even Victor Frankl will tell you, which is to be true to yourself, don’t go along with the crowd just to go along with the crowd. Don’t throw rocks at Jews or Christians or Muslims just because people tell you they are evil. Don’t share “Hate” on Facebook just because your “crowd” is into the Hate…

    To me it is a very positive point of view, but here we see people, including Marty, citing this one line as proof that Scientologists are trained not to look.

    You can take anything at all, and interpret it in any way at all. For example, you can laud a high school football coach as being a great mentor to the kids in his program, giving them purpose, and teaching them life lessons that they will take with them into the rest of their lives. OR – you can view the exact same coach, in the exact same program, with the exact same kids, as a demon who is forwarding his career on the backs of kids, and who are setting these kids up for life-threatening injuries and sanity-destroying brain damage, damage that is inseparable from the game itself. Your choice.

    That is very much the same with Scientology. You can choose the positive, or you can choose the negative…


    1. Dearest Marildi.

      Remember, Susan Meister wasn’t murdered on the Apollo by an assistant football coach. She was one-shot cleared by an assistant football coach. It’s all how you look at it as mentioned above. You can choose the positive or you can choose the negative for Susan’s R2-45 coaching experience. And her room was in Coach right?

      See even more proof you are right. She was in “coach”!

      Coach: (verb) to give instruction or advice to in the capacity of a coach; instruct:

      And if you clear words JUST RIGHT you will see LRH’s COACHING AS JUST RIGHT.

        1. Yep, bated breath, especially in awe and interest. Had to look that one up me love. 😀

      1. Dearest KT,

        Aside from the fact that you’re a good story teller (you are!), and that there was a cover-up done by some “assistant coaches” – was there any evidence that Susan Meister was murdered by an assistant coach rather than some rogue player?

        1. There is no evidence I know of. She did die on the ship with a bullet in her head according to witnesses.

          I think a more likely story was something like she was was offed by Ron for any number of possible reasons: sexual favors, discovering crimes and threatening to expose him, pregnancy, she went crazy and was a danger to the ship yada, yada, yada,

          I think it’s likely he offed her to silence her in a moment of magnanimity.

          BUT that is still in question in spite of the depth of effort and lies he told to control and withhold her body from her father (Cholera), so I went with “assistant coach” instead of coach.

          And it had to be at least an assistant coach (scientologist) since the deed was done on the ship. Unless you believe a Entheta-Ninja-Pirate climbed aboard and did it.

          You gotta watch out for those Entheta-Ninja-Pirates.

    2. One can take the positive interpretations or the negative ones. Or, one can look at the actual results and assess which interpretation was the ruling view and figure out why that came about.

      1. I think what Grasshopper was saying was that positive interpretations do get positive results.

        Btw, isn’t it possible you yourself got positive results due primarily to your own positive interpretations at the time?

          1. Okay, I’ll buy that. 😉

            So that’s one thing that should be corrected by the Neo-scientologists. (Not as good as your “sciosphere,” though. 🙂 )

        1. The point I was making was that all the while Scientologists has such an extreme difficulty looking beyond their reality, one must be a scientologists to try to convince others that LRH really did teach people to look for themselves.

            1. marildi
              ‘I didn’t quite get that.’ Being somebody or something IN one’s CONSIDERATION means that one is looking at and acting in
              life through that. So, one may then ‘convince’ others. Without
              that consideration one is ‘what is’, can get into a com freely
              with another and can tell another when asked why s/he is more
              natural than others that there was a ‘tool’ that helped her/him
              to do so. That is, it helped the ‘looking for the me’.
              (this is how i get the above..Geir may say if it is what he meant
              or not)…my understanding of the above was aided by what he
              said before “being some’body’ or some’thing’ does not mean much
              to me…” in an earlier com he said ‘ I AM ME’. To me it communicates the natural and free Life ‘using’ considerations
              with the ability to communicate freely.

    3. You may relax on this one, girl! 🙂 There are a significant number of us who feel precisely as you have shared here.

  8. “…it makes one ponder what the future will bring for Scientology.”

    The question brings to mind an email newsletter I got yesterday from the Observation Mountain Academy, an Independent scientology group in British Columbia, Canada. It was written by their Course Supervisor. Here’s a portion of it. (Note the wonderful humor in the punchline sentence I put in all caps).


    I was told back in 1981 that I was the first sup in the history of VanF (a Class 4 Org) to actually make a Class 4 auditor, and in those couple of years I made several, as well as many other auditors, from HQS to Solo. I think I can say there are people in the world today who are Clear and OT because of the work we did in that Academy in 1981 and ’82. The shame of it is that they have gone Clear and OT in a squirrel organization, and may as a result need some help as they leave the Church, to get those case states fully and properly realized. That job has fallen, in our sector, into the inbox of one Doug Davidson, if I may say, an illustrious and skilled auditor who can be trusted with any case. I would let Dougie audit me in a cave with no meter and no worksheets, by failing candlelight.

    There is also the task of straightening out and correcting the false data and mis-applications in the auditor training performed by the Church in the last 30 or more years. These auditors, as they leave and come out into the Field, need help, because, I expect, they will find themselves unable to make Clears as easily as they should using the training they’ve received. I believe the Church is training auditors to prolong the Bridge and keep the PC paying through the nose because it’s easier than regging new public.

    This corrective training is among the jobs we’ve undertaken at our little Academy.

    The existing scene is far from Ideal, but I can only say that it would make no sense to me for us to refuse whatever delivery we are capable of because we lack a full library, because we have limited space, because our sup (myself) is rusty to say the least and was never highly trained to begin with. The truth is, you could WIAC my courseroom right now and I would likely die of old age in Qual. If we had a Qual.

    It’s been a year, one of close comradeship and discovery. We at the Academy have spent countless hours and evenings huddled over e-meters, in conversation, surrounded by red-on-white, Chinese Schooling the Evaluator’s Know-How Chart, dining together, wining together, and discovering what exactly is our part in all this. We seem to be that first outpost people go to when they leave. We give them a place where they can relax and de-stim, we offer them metered interviews, we bring them into the courseroom where they can simply absorb some Source and have a few cognitions, we deliver whatever they need, and if we can’t deliver it we pass them along to them that can. WE LAUGH AND SAY WE ARE LIKE THE OLD UNDERGROUND RAILROAD, EXCEPT SO FAR WE’VE BEEN MOSTLY SENDING WHITE GUYS SOUTH, TO COEUR D’ALENE!

    In Observation Mountain Academy in this past year students have studied the e-meter drills and drilled many of them, and have discovered what appear to be serious deviations from standard tech as developed and written down by Ron. It appears as if “HCOBs” have been issued since 1982 which interpret the definition of an FN, the apparent result of which interpretations has been to prolong a PC’s progress and even undo gains.

    That’s all I have to say right now. This writing newsletters is hard and exacting work. I’ll leave you with what has become my personal war cry: We’re the high-toned bastards the bastards could never get rid of!

    I think Ron would simply have said, “We Come Back.”

    Dave Soroka
    Observation Mountain Academy
    Late August, 2014.

  9. Geir, how do you know that your lasting gain would have not surfaced in you by other means than Scientology?

    Scientology makes one think that every gain is Scientology’s merit and every fall is your fault. Yet on you by yourself can make changes and I believe if you wanted a change in yourself you end up finding ways to make it happen.

    Like a new born bird that get kicked out of his nest by the mother as he was too shy or afraid to fly. It is correct to say his mother helped him overcome his fears by pushing him out but is wrong to say that he can fly because of her, It is his nature.

    Others walked your path and didn’t got your gains, so it was not the path, it was you. The path may have helped but your gains where in you.

    1. This is pretty much what I have written many times. So, you are preaching to the choir ☺

      One never knows if other paths could have accomplished the same, though I am sure there are many such paths. But it would be folly to disregard any and all things that help in any situation by that line of reasoning.

    2. Hello, that’s what happens with any initiatory system or fraternity, like gnosis or freemasonry. It’s not specific to Scientology, as any other social phenomena to which it is subject. But that’s what a lucid observation means, I liked your question. +10

    3. Different systems basically provide different frameworks for looking. What brings gains is your own looking. But the framework has a role to play in getting you to look.

      1. “Different systems basically provide different frameworks for looking.”

        This is a nice clean statement. I am looking closely at it (now) for any roughness. At first glance, it seems to me that systems provide both the filter and the context AKA frame of reference. Knowledge seems to rely on context for consistency. Again, knowledge boils down to conditioned, relativity, and impermanence. If I can live with this statement then I seem to have achieved immanence without hope. Does this type of analogy communicate to you?

        1. Many people have totally ignored the philosophy of Scientology, while benefitting from Scientology auditing.

          The important part of Scientology are the questions asked that make a person look, and nothing more. Those questions may be included in KHTK’s mindful meditations.


          1. Hubbard also covers this theory in HCOB “The Magic of Communication” (pulling this off the top of my head as I have to run and can’t look it up just now). If you need me to look it up after while, I can. I believe it is indexed in Vol X Case Supervisor Series.

            1. At your service, Geir. 🙂

              Basically, “looking” is an integral, essential and fundamental part of auditing.

              From HCOB 30 Apr 71, “Auditing Comm Cycle”:

              “This is the auditing comm cycle that is always in use:

              1) Is the pc ready to receive the command? (appearance, presence)
              2) Auditor gives command/question to pc. (cause, distance, effect)
              3) Pc LOOKS [my emphasis] to bank for answer. (itsa maker line) 4) Pc receives answer from bank.
              5) Pc gives answer to auditor. (cause, distance, effect)
              6) Auditor acknowledges pc.
              7) Auditor sees that pc received ack. (attention)
              8) New cycle beginning with (1).”

  10. Brickbats, dead cats and rotten tomatoes still getting thrown at L. Ron Hubbard’s ‘now’ much maligned works.

    Baby out with the bath water? Christ deserved crucifixion?

    What tone is it, that one sinks to, when one betrays him / her who has demonstrably helped you?? (warts ‘n all!)

    Perhaps only needs to look in the mirror for the answer/s??

    Tools. That’s all they are. Use ’em to create, if you have the vision/creativity/heart. Or use ’em as the naysayers urge you to ——— just destroy!

    The mirror, can provide the most telling answer of all.

  11. The hope of apparent freedom kept us trapped – level by level. Until you broke free all by yourself realising your “gains” were inversely proportional to the money, time and energy spent.

    1. I feel for you Anette. I was spared the obvious REAL ‘reverse’ scientology, trauma and anxiety that you and countless others
      were put through!

      Nearly all the gains that I personally achieved, in the early 70’s (pre the MustDamage era!) came from the Comm course, and simply duplication of the basic materials, on my own. the ARC triangle, tone scale, AXIOMS, logics, The Factors, practical and applied principles of auditing, (about 100 hours)

      I still have those gains today and have built upon those, much the way Geir has done.

      For me, the biggest single gain (made independent of scn.) is the realization to end the cycle of ‘taking self and others so seriously’

      At the end of the day, we can just fall into the popular trap of being/ becoming a ‘victim’, or we can step back, as Geir has coaxed in a myriad of terms: “Fuck it” “So what?”.”Let go” etc.

      Anette, let’s stay honest about this. There are a ton of imposters, fraudsters, control freaks, mind-controllers and criminals, out there, whose ONLY game is ‘predator seeks prey’ ”Reverse scn”, is just another two bit imposter, in the vast mix.

      Lovely to see how far you have come since you put all that betrayal behind you. 🙂

      — Calvin.

      1. …in my view it is impossible to create being a ‘victim’ without also
        creating being the ‘victimizer’ …one can show one is a victim outside and then comes the ‘mirror’ to show what is inside…it is
        the inside on which the ‘law of attraction’ is based… until one
        is not creating either…then the apparency of inside and outside
        drops and one is natural and spontaneous…

        …when one is ‘stuck’ on one side of the dichotomy, one needs
        to confront the other side – life as a trick puts it there over and
        over until finally one gets ‘unstuck’…

        …one (as intangible life-force) learns to create and handle the
        ‘physical’ and being confident in this ability one recognizes that
        it is one (as intangible life-force) DOING that…then comes the
        ‘realization’ I AM … i am the creator…

        1. …one ‘solution’ is proper and CAREful bullbaiting…otherwise life ‘out there’ is going to provide that CARE…

          …it is ONE life…just Life-force with the Ability to create ‘roles’ in
          pairs…when one sees it, one also sees that one is able to take
          up a role in which case one instanly starts to create the ‘opposite’
          as well…

        2. Okay Sis’. Thoroughly said! 🙂 Mebbe it’s just my frog-kicks, here, but have you any idea as to what Anette went through?

          The recognition of her having made an “origination”, would have helped with perhaps a more acceptable response?

          I hope I’ve made a subtle point here. Perhaps an open apology, may put this to rest with all concerned?

          L, Ray. 🙂

          1. Okay, Ray. i was not addressing ‘Anette’, i put there the way
            i see how this mechanism works. …an ‘origination’ in my view
            is ‘first person singular’ ( ‘ I ‘ feel this or that ). In her com
            the ‘us’ is based on agreement and at that moment ‘sympathy’
            and ‘sympathy exciters’ enter, which alone can result in
            staying in that part of the ‘game’. The ‘you’ to me sounds more
            like a comment and not an origination either.

            I am learning tremendously lot here from Geir and the commentors. If anyone feels that i write something which
            may sound as ‘me’ ‘hurting’ him or her, then i would love
            to clarify that with the person him/herself. I would love to
            improve my com skills in this way and also learn whatever
            comes up.

            Going back to the mechanism…the cognition and the ‘realization’
            that ‘one’ is neither a ‘victim’ nor a ‘victimizer’ but free-life-force
            itself with the ability to ‘pic’ any ‘thought-concept’ and create
            ‘through’ that is instantenous (does not have ‘time’ in it). So one
            is then ‘life-force’ and it is very ‘real’ then. For me the ‘never
            compromise your own reality’ means that. That is: ‘reality’ is
            Life-force…for me (as an ‘in-the-divine’ = individual) it is expansion
            and learning and to the extent it gets ‘realized’ to that extent
            i am that ( expansion on the/as the Dynamics ).

            I am learning from Geir’s posts. From this one also.

            Sheldon: ” Would it help if I say sorry?”
            Raj : “Yes it would”
            Sheldon: “Hmmm, you should work on that”.

            If you still feel that i should apologize or anyone else feels
            concerned in the above, i am ready to listen to that person.

            1. Thanks Sis’. Perhaps keeping things ‘real’ (simple) may eliminate the complexity! That is, just to say some thing directly, leaving wordy explanations out of it. You know, it enables ‘duplication’, to occur with better better connection to your recipient/s.

              L, Ray. 🙂

            2. Origination:
              When i first posted here on Geir’s place, i said that i love scientology ( it may be in the Tolerance thread if i recall it well).
              Had it not been so, i would have clarified the ‘where’ as i do
              not like my ‘attention units’ get stuck…and i do that in other
              areas of life as well.
              Some five years ago when i finished co-auditing Self-Analysis.
              the realization was: pure theta plus ‘seeing’ ‘bank-agreements’.
              Some may say that it is ‘key-out’…i have no idea, it has been so
              ever since. I would like to thank Ron for that fantastic ‘tech’.
              My PC’s realization was that it is all ‘love’. With that she continued
              on her Bridge with a Class 5 auditor.
              Since then no-one has ever asked me to do this or that which
              did not sound ‘theta’.
              I never forget my ‘teachers’…Ron is one of them. No-one can ever
              take from me what i ‘learnt’, for example how to do business. With
              that ‘knowledge’ i could help lots of business people in this or that.
              Consequently, their business lives improved and could come and
              stay with me and pay for teaching them English. Sure there is a
              lot more to learn but the simplicity of the basics allows this process
              to happen in Life. In several other areas as well. The ‘game’ part.

              The ‘awakening’, which was spontaneous, was different. With that
              the ‘socially conditioned’ collapsed. That part which was still there
              and i had been still using for this or that ‘reason’. When that
              part collapsed, an intuitive and spontaneous ‘knowing’ arouse,
              which is still ‘expanding’ as i am acting in Life. Adyashanti’s ‘teachings’ helped a lot in understanding and acking my first-hand
              experiences. So, i thank him here for that. I can thank some
              others too, whom you may not know.

              When i put there my com about that mechanism, the reason for
              that was that i do not understand why one does not clarify in/for
              oneself just completely that part of Life which looks to be re-occuring. i am not saying that i ‘know’ and ‘do’ it more or
              better than another…there are re-occuring things in my life too..
              and i know that to the extent i do not do the job, they will. Echart
              Tolle, to mention another great ‘teacher’ explains it very well e.g.
              in The Power of the Now. Or Geir by saying that one can be
              conscious of what one is creating and stop doing that.

              Thank you for listening to me reading the above.

            3. “Thanks Ray, right. i am going to do that!”

              Marianne, I don’t always understand your posts, but I always understand your cheerful and upbeat attitude. +LIKE+

            4. Chris “Marianne, I don’t always understand your posts, but I always understand your cheerful and upbeat attitude.”

              Me too Marianne! 🙂

    2. How much were you able to create money, time and energy
      before starting in scientology?
      How much has it improved during the process?
      How much are you able to create money, time and energy now
      all by yourself?

        1. …not necessarily…as one may not be aware of having the ability
          of creating money, time and energy…during the process one gets
          more and more aware and able…more active and expert you may
          say…so the real ‘gain’ is the ability to create and handle the
          physical part of life gradually and the inversely proportional is
          that ‘part’ which is the you-ability-theta not identifying…to the
          degree of the loss of identification, the ability-gain is proportional..

          …’loss, learning and gain’

            1. Thanks Anette, i get it. For me reasoning is one mind-tool in which
              i am still improving. Being aware for me is ‘underlying’ the tool and
              there are other ‘tools’ as well. Like the wavelength of Art on which
              you take your beautiful pictures.

            2. Anette: Thank you.
              Marianne: Its flow is pure kindness. Good to be on its receiving
              side. A smoother, finer flow than reasoning. Isn’t it closer to who
              you and i are? Btw, i saw pics of some meals you can cook and
              the fresh juices you make. They look like you are mastering it!

        1. …as much as one’s attention is more on ‘quantity’ instead of
          ‘quality’ …or even the latter one just comes as natural…(not using
          it as a tool-concept)

  12. I try to keep up with the sciosphere, I also self audit and get big gains from it.

    I think Scientology will evolve into something better, by squirreling, the rest of the world calls squirreling collaboration and it’s more effective by nature than trying to hoard, copyright, patent and monopolize.

    I remember reading in your 6 months out pdf you said as much about their errors in setting expectations, similar things voiced in the various youtube testimonies from Jason b, Brian c and so many others.

    The thing that concerns me in the sciosphere is more people becoming polarized, always saying %100 of anything Scientology is bad, those people are lost.

    1. Good point.

      The good in Scientology is not going to get lost. It will be preserved in KHTK as much as possible.


  13. Future will bring more money and fresh “meat” for Scientology. Young generations without horizon, without perspectives, without hope, without brain…I’m afraid they will be the new soldiers for Mr.Miscavige Army.

  14. “But does it matter? Does it matter if Scientology fades further until it isn’t even a social joke?”

    My, how far we have deviated, Geir. From the “original purpose.”

    Remember it?

    Simply to TRAIN! COMPETENT auditors, who can do the job of “freeing man” into what were considered more “desirable states.”

    At the outset, I think we all wanted and many achieved “that”.

    As for Marty, I think he still has a lot of work to do, personally, to achieve a “desirable state.” “Friends”, who actually help and support you, in order to “move on up a little higher”, certainly don’t expect to be stabbed in the back!!

    The viscous and wholesale gang rape and attempt to brutally slaughter MS2, was orchestrated by none other than DM’s former ‘enforcer’, Marty.( — “fair game” the ‘tool’ of choice!)

    “Popular” revolutions, don’t necessarily “free” one, it seems

    I still hold to making friends based on their “tone” level, and it pans out in practice. REAL friends, also have your interests at heart, fortunately. How else could we expect to survive, without the love and care, of those who matter in our lives?.

    So here’s the bottom line, Geir. My only answer to your above question, is:

    Is there any ‘workable system’ (warts ‘n all), in place, (in any meaningful volume), that can be actively and enthusiastically supported, which can deliver on that stated “original purpose” ?

    1. I believe lots of systems deliver desired states in Greater volume than Scientology. Buddhism is one example that covers many such systems.

      One thing regarding using the tone scale in choosing friends; scientology is supposedly the most effective way of raising a person on the tone scale. How come they are the worst of friends when push comes to shove?

      1. Good morning, Geir. Helpful to see your views.. And I agree with your last sentence. Problem with those ‘products’, (if you can call them that), is, they definitely fell short of a ‘desirable’ state! 🙂

        Truth is, ‘those’, didn’t really move ‘up’ the scale at all, did they?

        Hell, ‘spotting’ some one on that scale, is not a wrote exercise, either. And they could could be from ANY background, religion, educational level, or persuasion, for that matter.

        I feel the trick is, how ‘aware’ one is, in picking up the ‘vibes’ emanating from the person, and whether their speech and actions, suggest they can be trusted!

        Anyone, really ‘switched on’, is capable of doing that ! 🙂

        Perhaps ‘switched on’, is a more accurate term for ‘awareness’?

        BTW, just “chillaxing”, today, for a bit of R & R! 🙂

        1. I do find it odd that people who have trained and audited for decades end up as worse friends than the average man on the street. Not just “no better than” but actually “far worse”. And many of them do claim to lead a happier life. Yet they end up as the worst of the worst friends when you really need a friend. Is the tech so frail that its effects can be so easily nullified? Or are there other factors that are more important when choosing friends than position on the tone scale?

          1. Scientology makes one more and more “self-centric”. The craze for OT levels is just that. It is the craze for status for oneself.


          2. Geir: “I do find it odd…”
            Calvin: – Again, Geir, I do agree with you completely!

            That one is, in fact, dealing with the “peculiarities” resting in a person’s unique mind, and all the ‘decisions’, they have arrived at,
            as a result of their scn experience/s.

            I have seen exactly what you have just described, with quite a few, and pondered the cause/s.

            I have come to the conclusion,(just recently), that ‘tools’, intelligently used, can indeed produce outstanding results, especially in the hands of a genuine expert!

            Indeed, I’m sure you have witnessed, a ‘sharpshooter’ using a gun, or an archer, bowler, dart thrower, hitting the bulls-eye! Or what aboutthe incredible ‘knife thrower’, at the circus, delivering deadly daggers around the revolving form of his female assistant, as the audience looked on with nervous trepidation?

            “The tone scale”, for me, is no more than an index, which if used in expert hands, allows you another dimension to confirm your ‘gut feel’, about the character of someone. After all, during a session, with any given pc, when you watch someone come up the scale, invariably in the same order, (albeit sometimes ‘seemingly’ skipping in their ascent), you realize you are privy to
            what the ‘ol man discovered, and codified, some 60 years earlier.

            Back to your point, though Geir. … I can only conclude that some have just NEVER “broken through.”

            An attestation that “I have achieved state (blank), is nothing more than an attestation. The question is, IS one more.’switched on’ thereby, and functioning as a ‘friend’, is expected to be? Or has one just gone through the motions, the system, and ended up ‘throwing a dagger’, into someone supposed to be a friend?

            Maybe we need to ask a different question here?

            Do we need a bit of training, in the REAL friendship department?


            1. My experience tells me that there are other factors than tone scale position that monitor how good a friend a person is. I have seen many times that people quite low on the scale are excellent friends in need. War comradeship is just one example.

            2. Sure. Again, I agree with you. The Tone scale is, only a tool, a means of ‘measuring’, certainly not the ONLY tool. I guess though, (make that ‘know’, rather 🙂 ) that certainly some of us are more adept, at using specific tools, then others prove to be!

              I just popped in to MS2, after a long absence and saw the latest post by Tom Martiniano. He makes the above point, via a most horrific, sobering example. Some cause for us to be making a few re-assessments in our paradigms, perhaps?


            3. Yes Geir…you see the ‘good’ in any person because you ‘live’
              from that…and you have got also skills to help others to improve
              and excell in different skills, as the examples of your coaching
              prove that. So, as it looks to me, another factor is the common

          3. “. . . Yet they end up as the worst of the worst friends when you really need a friend. . .”

            While a Scientologist and also a Sea Org member, I wrote a disconnection letter to a friend who had years before audited and helped me after an injury. This was at the direction of my MAA. I am ashamed of writing that letter.

            Years later, when my own winds of fortune changed within the SO, and at a time when I could have really used a friend, and having supposed good friends in my organization and even within Qual itself, I was dismayed that no one would defend or support me or even have a kind word for me at my own Committee of Evidence. There was a farce of an investigation but everyone in the SO kind of knows that an investigation is supposed to support the foregone conclusion of why a person is guilty. Even my “statistics” which were perennially up were challenged and carted away. Yes, after tallying my statistics (not an easy task, there were a lot) it was found that I had falsely reported them and that they were more numerous than I had reported. Somehow that made sense to the convening authority, my boss who was in trouble with DM and needing a “head to put on a pike.” It didn’t save his job but he ruined mine which jarred me into reality to reevaluate my life in the SO.

            Years have passed since then and years ago, I contacted that old friend and apologized for the letter I wrote, rekindled that old friendship and we are friends since that time and in contact today, as in today. This comment of Geir’s about friendship in Scientology is so very conditional and performance based and group sanctioned as to hardly qualify as a friendship by any human standard. “Friendship” is a good subject to visit and I’m glad that Geir did it. This really deserves another look. Possibly a new OP thread.

            1. My wife fucking loves me.

              And yet, I know if she and her best friend and I were in a crashing airplane with two parachutes … that … um …

              It wouldn’t go well for ME.

              And I wouldn’t have it any other way.

            2. katageek

              Perhaps a new type of parachute should be invented where the
              stripes allow two embracing persons to jump together? Perhaps it has already been invented? I donno (just to give you
              a metaphor and a practical application).

      2. “…did not move up the scale at all ” to whoever it may concern…

        i can tell ‘my’ example and ‘my’ practise

        doing the ‘mood drills’ i blew ‘compulsary’ aesthetics which brought
        about a huge relief and a much sharper awareness. Still, i felt that
        it was not ‘complete’. There was some very deep sorrow inside.
        So, continuing the com drills, i cried. When you train, you are not
        ‘supposed to put your case’ there. Well, that sorrow was there and
        i wanted to get to its bottom. Adamantly. i had never seen anyone
        crying in any course-room but for me it did not mean a barrier.
        So, i got a Clear auditor as a Trainer to do a drill. At a point the
        sorrow blew. Drilling a bit on i felt a huge power. i did not realize
        then what it was, the SUP seeing that said: ‘keep it up’. i smiled and said: ‘how the hell can ‘ i ‘ do it, it is so huge’. Recalling it now
        with my present awareness, it was the ‘power of raw life-force’
        itself. A bit later i finished the course.
        In my view, to gain the ability to ‘spot’ tones on the full !Tone Scale
        one cannot be ‘stuck’ in any of them…the bottom source in being
        stuck is ‘the aesthetic’ flow in that tone. (btw. Ron writes about it…
        i cannot recall the reference). So, Aesthetics as such needs to
        be met and freed. When it happens, one finds oneself on the
        top of the scale as ‘theta’. From then on spotting Tones is not
        conceptual ! but natural.
        This ‘natural’ is then ‘practised’ (is allowed to function)…it may
        happen that the ‘i-know-it-better-what-and-how’ wants to
        ‘take over’. For me the difference between ‘permanent and
        temporary gain’ can be understood in practising this ‘allowing’.
        The ‘gain’ is forever permanent as it is the ‘knowing and able’
        quality of Theta itself.

        I got an advice early on while training from another trainee. It was
        a ‘waiting for’ sit…there was no other trained around to do an
        action with me…the trainee said: ‘you need to be responsible
        for your own immediate training’. It instantly came through. I went
        to the course-room and said to the supervisor: ‘ i want it now’. He
        went out, some phone-calls and the proper person arrived. From
        this i forever learnt and has been practising the truth of that advice. The above example of practising the Tone Scale is one
        of them.

        My view: BEAUTY when ‘freed’ one can spot ‘tones’ and make
        friends with anyone by DECISION. As one sees this ‘beauty’ at the
        core of each tone and is free to act accordingly.

        1. …i meant the above as a response to a sentence-part racing wrote as it turns out from my post and it fell under your post Geir.
          …actually it is not bad as i am interested in what both of you say
          to it.

          1. Wow, Sunshine!

            Hmm..Well just gotten up from a few hours snoozing! (R & R.) I must say I enjoyed your re-counting of the earlier drill sessions.

            It actually astounds me just how MUCH in terms of gains, occur during any of the training drills. Yours were indeed quite spectacular, and just shows how powerful their effects can be.

            Personally, I did my very first session of TR-O, in 1971, in Durban Org, with Paul Davis, a Dianetics intern. His entire family, were Sns, including his father, Reg, who was professor of the English faculty at our top university. (The coolest, most unpretentious & good-humored cat, you could ever wish to meet!)

            This was the then “standard”, rough, tough, no compromise,time of ‘drilling’. It was a period of “making Auditors”, as their main focus

            And the results spoke volumes to me of the inherent power of these drills. At that point, me, a totally ‘green’ student, had never even conceived, or imagined, what I was embarking on.

            Of course, In retrospect, ‘green’, was good, since there was no baggage or resistance, to what unfolded, during that first session.

            2 hours later, a calm, exteriorized being, sat opposite the intern.

            “I”, had just discovered “me”, in ONE session. 🙂

            1. Fantastic!!! I love it all what you write! One part i find extremely
              useful as i saw it in other areas of life too when one starts to do
              an exercise, a technique, this is: ‘no baggage or resistance, to
              what unfolded’.
              Congratulations ray!

            2. For you, Sis’… I TR-O de bull! 🙂

              By de way, speaking of how useful “NO baggage” can be, how is the kung fu coming on?

            3. …haha, stopped it as there is a ‘lighter’ way of ‘working’ than
              the ‘hard’ work…(for me, at this point)

            4. Awwww! Sis’ ?? It’s the discipline, Sunshine, the discipline, that one is really “acquiring.” That applies to any worthwhile endeavor, which can lift you up to extraordinary heights, in ANY field!

              L, Ray. 🙂

            5. ..yes, yes, sure! for me those four months helped to confirm that
              ‘control’ as start-change-stop, getting an order and giving an order is in harmony. I kind of needed to get the assurance of
              the ‘getting an order’ on the level of the body and thought…as
              in dealing with people i mostly give orders rather than get.
              The root meaning of discipline is from Latin ‘disciplina’ which
              is teaching, learning from ‘discipulus’ which is pupil. Well, it is
              my main activity in life. As for the physical excercise part, i can
              train at home. As i said, this is the case with me now, which may
              change! Thanks for your care!!

            6. Good for you, Sunshine! You are probably aware, that it takes at least 3 months of consistent application (practice) to form a habit. This is especially true regarding the application of effort ‘hard work’. The literally ‘life changing’ effects of continuing this consistent application (discipline), can equip, or set one’s life up for real quality in fitness and health, that can transcend the ‘norm’ in expectations, while growing ‘usefully’ old.

              A potent ‘fountain-of-youth metaphor: ..”Age is just a number.” 🙂

            7. Speakiing of ‘fountain-of-youth’s, Sis’. here is a potent little number that can perk ‘up’ even the most ‘flagging’ of once ‘red-blooded’ males, if you follow the moves. (hint,hint) 🙂

              Check out the vid: “Alizee – Moi Lolita – Live (HQ)

      3. ‘when push comes to shove’ perhaps one needs to get the ability
        to effectively create, uncreate and use force to be friends with
        …when i feel that i am ‘pushed’ it means that i am still creating
        force unconsciously in that issue…as i cannot perceive anything
        without creating it… when it becomes then conscious, the
        force disappears.
        …when another is still pushing and pushing, it is dramatization…saying a yes then to that dramatization ( i get you)
        may ease that dramatization. It can even stop, as in the ‘i get YOU’
        the person is acknowledged at last as being that YOU and also
        the ‘show-part’ is acked which may not have been acked before
        that’s why it has been put there over and over.
        This is how i see it from practice now. It is connected to Beauty
        and also the Joy of being skilled in Creating. When Creating-Creation is acked like in a theater, there is Joy.
        …as i am getting more and more aware of it in different areas of
        life, this Joy is expanding…looks to be a never ending process.

        1. A most deserving, and ‘light’ acknowledgement to YOU, Sis’ for sharing that beautiful revelation.

          L, Ray. 🙂

          1. Haha..thanks ray! i have way too many examples as those years
            were a continuous success. Perhaps because i realized early on
            that it was by the way i acted in life was the only! ‘pulling in’ factor
            because of which when another asked ‘how do you know it’,
            or ‘how is it that you are doing well’ some enrolled for a course or
            got auditing. I mention this as i agree with Geir…in my wording:
            when one is what is, one is acting and behaving as such, for me
            no additional ‘selling’ is necessary. It includes the competence of
            an auditor who is recovering the needs of another and offers a way to fulfill it.
            i put there some wins, first because i myself love reading such
            from any area of life, second, because each word i have written
            so far about scientology are my true experiences, that is ‘proofs’
            of the workability of the tech i am familiar with. Now that i have expressed it several times, i feel i stop with this unless someone
            asks me a question.

            1. Thanks, Sis’. All beautifully shared too! 🙂

              Okay the, here’s a question, then. (And believe me when I say, your answer will speak to me, more of your application from the heart, than any other significance!)

              Q: What Auditor training have you acquired, to date? (Any further wins to share, — please do.)

            2. Book One Auditor, on the Training side i did the Upper-Indoc. I co-audited the Objectives and Self-Analysis. That’s all about
              official training. I finished the Route to Infinity course, that was
              the last one. I studied several other courses. Read the Basic
              Books and Lectures. Tremendous number of Bulletins as when any interest came up on my side during any course, i read a lot which were in connection with that. I was allowed to do that and i had huge! gains out of that, which raised my awareness in that topic. This i find another key in studying. Not much as i am writing it down as i see it now.
              Another win: there is no ‘data’ as such in my mind. That is when
              i finished a course or an auditing cycle, what there remained was
              ‘awareness’ and ‘action’. Another huge win was the Student Hat.
              Its outcome was very fast reading, looking at a page and ‘seeing’
              its essence, spotting another’s misunderstood word either in reading or in com in life as well. Just ‘intuitively’. That is all now
              ray…there are a lot-lot more. One more thing, which i found and
              still find a source of possible misunderstandings: conceptual
              understanding…concepts are one ! layer of consciousness and
              they need to be cleared when one wants to get ‘free theta’. Concepts are for use freely in any topic and need to be treated
              as such. The ‘free use’ of them is only possible when the concept
              is ‘cleared’ first. My example: i can use scientology concepts
              ‘freely’ and at the same time use concepts like from meditation
              also ‘freely’. In this way i can ‘compare’ and ‘talk’ in both ways,
              depending on the ‘audience’. In this way i see that any ‘word’,
              ‘concept’ is truely a ‘pointer’ and cleared, you get the ‘source,

            3. Brilliant, Sunshine! Now that’s what I call ‘application’!!

              I also enjoy my real freedom, in being able to think creatively and use ANY tools or references, from ANY field, as I choose. Any dogmatic, ‘you must’s’, given to me, are instantly recognized as such, and unless there be intrinsic value contained, given the old familiar ‘heave – ho’.

              Individually, I believe we really do have a heartfelt ‘need’, to follow a ‘purpose’, which we feel can take us on ‘that’ journey, of self realization and passion which ultimately fulfills us! Wouldn’t you agree? 🙂

              Speaking of passion, check out the vid: “Alizee Moi Lolita – Live (HQ) “. Enough to perk ‘up’ any flagging, formerly ‘red-blooded’ males! Eh? Wotchoo think, Sis? 😉

            4. Haha…i got it earlier when you first advised to watch it! i agree,
              this girl is fantastic! i put it here again AND i have just found a
              new one as a ‘continuation’…this girl is sure on the ‘path’ of
              ‘know-how’ of ‘helping out’ longer…don’t you think so?

            5. haha…she sings: ‘Getting there can be tricky’

              Geir said earlier: ‘it takes a certain attitude’…yeah!
              I wish to thank you Geir for providing your place here and for
              putting here lots of lots of which i myself call ‘treasure thoughts,
              ideas, coms’ which for me have allowed to get ‘gains’ in the form
              of cogs, actions and a multitude of aspects of looking at Life…you
              may not have always been aware of how valuable it is that you
              share ‘yourself’ here and its effects it generates! Thank you!

            6. Thanks, Sis! Yes, isn’t she just mesmerizing? Alizee, has done for France, what Britney Speirs did for the US. Her background–she was a very talented child dancer, and earlier won a competition with her design for a bold child’s drawing to decorate an AIRLINER. The prize honored her win by actualizing her design on the plane!! (check out her biography.)

              Her ‘”Moi Lolita” look (my little girl) was crafted entirely by her visionary manageress, who immediately saw her potential, as Europe’s answer to Britney, and the rest is history.

              Predictably, today she has come to a place, where, since ditching the sexy image, created by her former manageress, she is now struggling to find acceptance in the new pop market.

              Gone is the relaxed, enticing temptress, and in it’s place a more serious, somewhat bitter. artist, coming to terms with the “harsh realities” of what the fickle fan base really want!

              Well, her joyful performances of yesterday are preserved for all to continue enjoy.

              L, Ray. 🙂

  15. I hope the future will bring an open source of SCN Tech, because it deserves to be philosophically discussed to its very core, and ex scientologists, freezoners and informed critics shall inherit that responsibility. There is a percentage of correlation between SCN and the objective scientifically proved reality that need to be enlightened, even if it is a small percentage (say 20%). Then, the sciosphere will touch earth, the bubble will collapse, and its true value will remain, opened to upgraded sciences and coaching facts in order to accomplish its new purpose: improve life.

    I’m such a naive dreamer.

      1. Hover Source, Oh yes, a dreamer you be! But that’s a notch up compared to being a ‘bot, wouldn’tcha say? 🙂

        Geir and I got into a discussion on friendships, earlier in this post, and it brings the whole question (of friendship) directly under the glare of the spotlights.

        Geir made the point of some highly ‘accomplished’ scns turning out to be “the worst of the worst friends” he had ever seen.

        — And I agreed with him completely!

        (The topic was entered by references to using the ‘tone Scale’ as a guide to choosing friends.)

        We diverged from that point, but I mentioned the topic of ‘friendship’ could perhaps be addressed via a bit of ‘training’ in itself.?

        Chris, even felt it deserved to be given a post of its own. And I agree! It would certainly bring some BPC to view, at the very least, but at the end of the day, some airing, and mebbe some relief for many ‘affecteds, as well.

        I would like to make a start here, with FOUR broad questions:

        Q1: Why is it ‘considered’ necessary, or inevitable, to SHUN someone, just because one finds them disagreeing with you?

        Q2: Have you NOTICED, that this occurs, right across the human spectrum, regardless of religious persuasion, but ironically, occurs broadly among Scns & exe’s alike?

        Q3: What makes it possible, for TRUE friendships to survive, and even strengthen under such an ‘assault on realities’ ?

        Q4; Should my suggestion to ‘train’ (practice) the ‘art’ of friendship, be given any merit / attention, based on the premise that most people find ‘true friendships’, really desirable?


        1. Q1: Why is it ‘considered’ necessary, or inevitable, to SHUN someone, just because one finds them disagreeing with you?

          I believe that depends on the case or maturity of the person who SHUNS others. Disagreement usually leads to decrease in communication but not actual shunning.

          Q2: Have you NOTICED, that this occurs, right across the human spectrum, regardless of religious persuasion, but ironically, occurs broadly among Scns & exe’s alike?

          People out Scientology have cases too.

          Q3: What makes it possible, for TRUE friendships to survive, and even strengthen under such an ‘assault on realities’ ?

          The practice of mindfulness.

          Q4; Should my suggestion to ‘train’ (practice) the ‘art’ of friendship, be given any merit / attention, based on the premise that most people find ‘true friendships’, really desirable?

          All one needs to practice is mindfulness. It straightens out one’s case too.


          1. Make that SUB topic, rather, Vin. (with respect to Geir and his OP)

        2. Whatever that could improve life and it is not solipsistic has merit. I will give you credit to this idea of training friendship. I have been researching for a while, and relatively quickly people shun me when they get to know my viewpoint about something touchy (for them), and they didn’t even share so clearly what they think about my viewpoint, so I could show them better. And all was just written communication. I think it has the same root of the flaming issues:

          I think it has something to do with cognitive dissonance to disagreement, to egocentrism (self-serving bias), some other phenomenons like the Dunning-Kruger effect, and a lack of proper education on logical interpretation and dialectics. Also, if you formulate your “true friendship” into some form of LOVE in degrees, you may think about a formula of decaying. Think about it, a training about the art of love.

  16. crik……crick……crickit……crickt…………??

    Huh? Oh,…Okay then…. perhaps the “sub topic” has no real ‘sustenance’ in it after all?

    Alrighty then, back to the drawing board we go!!!

    Wait! Of course — I got it now — silly me!! I forgot all about that age old basic premise!! –( Numbskull!! )

    I was TOTALLY off the mark about this, folks. (sorry) 🙂

    Nope! It’s clearly NOT “true friendships”, that arouses our interest

    Uh, uh! I forgot awllll about zee “conditioninkkkk!!!” Jawoll!!
    (vhy didn’t I seee it in ze first place, dumbkopfph?)

    Vee need adversaries, opponents, enemies, fightink und argumentzz und contestz much muoore zen vee need “True Friendshipppps”.

    MUCH muoore interestink, don’t you sinkkk???

    My sincere apologies for wasting ‘valuable’ contest opportunities!


    1. …haha…haha…your ability to play for the single purpose of
      playing is beyond win-lose games…coupled with your unique
      humour haha…well…
      …dozens and dozens of life examples came up for what a ‘friend’
      means…also checked its root meaning and in the TheFreeDictionary there is an interesting Word History part i did
      not know about. It was worth reading it! Haha…i am hesitating
      to write here a ‘gain’…i would like first my friend-posters to communicate their views. Thanks, ray!

      1. Wonderful, Sunshine. Do you know you are not just responsible?

        You’re also responsive as well. Thanks for ending the silence around the ‘morgue’ here 🙂 I was beginning to think some of our more lively posters may have keeled over! (permanently!) 🙂

        I was also fearing that I might have even put a few asleep!

        Worse, I have studied hypnotism, and putting one into a trance, as you know, has definite liabilities. One cannot mess with these things willy nilly, you know?

        Oh, and now, thank you for your inputs about ‘friend’. A pretty good start, indeed. Though, perhaps we might do better to shift this conversation over to e-mail. I certainly don’t need any unwanted summons to court, for putting unsuspecting fellow blogsters, into a heavy somnambulant state. 🙂

        L, Ray.

        1. Ray, I think some of us more lively posters are just preoccupied for the time being.

          For now, I’ll leave you all with this quote that has been falsely attributed to the Buddha:

          “Chill, dude, you gotta let that shit go!”

          Can you believe it? Everybody here knows that was a Geir Isene quote. 🙂

  17. Much earlier in this thread Marianne Toth posted that “one ‘solution’ is proper and CAREful bullbaiting…”

    This immediately brought to mind the review on Tony’s blog, of the new book by Peter Bonyai. What struck me there, was a description of “bullbaiting” that was completely wrong as far as I’m concerned.
    A couple of years ago I went to my local org to get a refund, and the Treasurer was so glad to see me. I had been his first coach on TR0 and had bullbaited him to a good win evidently, because he still remembered me years later.
    This was NOT what was described in the review, which seemed more along the line of caving the student in and making him suppress himself, rather than facilitating his emergence as himself and helping him build up his actual confront and “being there”.
    This leads me to believe there may not be many people who can now see to auditors being trained, if this is how “bullbait” is taught….
    Instead we have ‘contagion of aberration’ presented as the ‘standard tech’.

    I’d also like to comment on a recent experience with Milestone Two. I was giving them the benefit of the doubt as there are some people over there I like, who, from a distance, I think are good auditors. I like Ingrid, Chris Black was actually recommended to me by Marty a couple of years ago, and I think Tom Martiniano’s heart is in the right place. I’ve had no reason to think Jim was off the beam. I haven’t seen these people badmouth anyone.

    But a recent experience in which I made a short comment to the effect that Marty was “advocating for complete freedom”, a phrase another poster had used, got my comment deleted and a sharp rebuke essentially about how illogical my comment was and how it would have “insulted the intelligent people” on that blog, and the Mod didn’t want the thread going in the direction of discussing
    the ‘anti-LRH” person in question.
    I made the post because one poster in particular who is a big deal over there apparently, had already taken the thread in that direction, twice, without rebuke.
    I commented to that effect, and this comment was left up but of course makes little sense without my first comment.

    To make an already long story short, I am starting to think that MS2 has been compromised, or that perhaps it has been a fifth column operation to start with, set up by you-know-who, starts with O, ends with A, which is what some have thought from the start….. The poster I mentioned seems to be working very hard to position Marty with Miscavige.



    1. Here is my original post, and the Moderation that took place:
      “Just a short comment. At risk of making myself unpopular here, I think it is not quite right to position Rathbun with Miscavige. I have followed Rathbun’s blog for some time, and his trend is exactly to “advocate complete freedom”, perhaps to excess, but hat is what he has been doing. He is a bit like the “Krishnamurti” of the people who have left the CoS. Currently he is rejecting the idea that any “organized religion” can in any sense ‘save’ humanity. This rejection does not make him similar to Miscavige, if that’s what you mean. As Steve said above, “Ron said to advocate complete freedom is the solution”.

      ** Your comment has been edited/moderated as it does not belong here. Further, due to its illogic, it will insult intelligent people on this blog, resulting in the thread going off to discuss the anti-Scientology and anti-LRH person you are defending. ** MILESTONE TWO MODERATORS
      iamvalkov says:
      September 1, 2014 at 5:04 am
      That’s fine. I posted what I did because the thread had already gone off in that direction.

    2. Val,
      I’d give Lana the benefit of the doubt on the O*A label. Her feelings are clearly expressed in this paragraph:

      ‘We true Scientologists out here in the field had a rough couple of decades. We’ve had our asses kicked all over the internet. We’ve been invalidated and maligned, sabotaged, infiltrated, tricked, deceived and just plain screwed with, so we’re not in the position or mood to Kumbaya and make sure everything is theetie-weetie. It is not the way things are.”

      The Scots never had it easy. The true Scotsman has an even tougher time.

      1. I went back to MS2 to read some of the comments and discovered the post was written by Tom M., not Lana.

        Tom is a certifiably true Scotsman and there will be brogue on his last breath.

        1. The comments in question were posted by a “Paul”, whose nick is “scatjappers”. That is what I replied to, whereupon the “pogrom” came down from the “moderators”.
          True Scotsman or not, I tend to like Tom M. and can relate to him.
          My point is, there are several people involved over there and some of them may be what Lenin called “useful idiots”. That there are are several very sincere people over there, I have no doubt. Because of the way it came down around my post, I started to think the group may be tainted.
          Time will tell, I think. Since I have not met any of them personally, I am just giving impressions here. I could be completely ‘off’.

          1. Val:”Because of the way it came down around my post, I started to think the group may be tainted.”

            I think they were being fairly consistent with a “true believer” beingness in that they are trying to be faithful to the tech AND admin (admin: a real source of ‘labeling’ abberation [“He’s an SP; that one’s a PTS…”etc]).

            Right from the outset they made it clear who was welcome there and who wasn’t. They really aren’t deviating from an ‘On Source’ mentality. No org, ever, would have allowed you to enter its walls and talk about considering the merits of a guy like Marty who has publicly disavowed LRH and Scientology, so I would expect the same from a group that is trying to put a ‘best org’ there.

            I didn’t get any feeling it was tainted beyond having the old blinders on. I think you need to consider that in their viewpoint even you as a general LRH supporter would be a complete PTS dumbass in need of severe ethics for considering the merits of other philosophers, not to mention (gasp!) your psychology, psychiatry and deviant blog associations.

            We’ve moved on; they stay stuck in time. The twain will not meet. The best we can do is let them be and behave the way they want to be and behave. They’re not a malicious bunch and they will probably attract people who can get benefit from the level they (MS2) are operating at. That sort of a preselection factor will mean very few people, but that’s the way it always was and they will have to live with it or dissolve as a result of it. Considering Ron’s Orgs have survived to a degree (splintering issues aside), these guys may be around for a while too.

            There is tech and qual talent there. Tech won’t be their assured undoing, that would come from trying to “manage by stats”.

            1. Thanks 2nd. I do not share your viewpoint because I have posted there before without a problem. It is true I ‘defended’ Marty to a point. However what struck me is that they in this case did not follow their own stated rule of keeping “entheta” off the blog by, first, allowing “scatjappers” to post what he did. then posting ad hom about me, and signing it as the generalized “Moderators”.

              To me these are glaring ‘inconsistencies’ as Vinnie would call them. So I think they have their own version of “OSA” and I just saw it in action. They have already failed to “Maintain good relations with the environment”, in this case, me.

              It is too bad because as you say, there are some terrific people associated with “MS2” label, some, I believe, great auditors, like Ingrid and Chris. These people are and will continue to do a lot of good for their pcs.
              But MS2’s ‘response’ (reaction) to me was the CoS all over again. I suppose they are feeling embattled, but it seems to me they have in their midst someone who is creating a dangerous environment.

              It can be rationalized as you did, but that doesn’t wash with me.

              They are talking the talk, but already failing to walk the walk. I suppose they are responding to the condition they perceive to themselves to be in, but I have the feeling they are not going to get over it.

              They are compromised as far as I’m concerned. I’d sooner go to a Ron’s Org, to check them out, at this point. Maybe I would find them objectionable too, but somehow I doubt it would be in quite the same way.

            2. “They are compromised as far as I’m concerned. I’d sooner go to a Ron’s Org, to check them out, at this point. Maybe I would find them objectionable too, but somehow I doubt it would be in quite the same way.”

              Hi Valkov,

              I have some minimal contact with Ron’s Org. Bill Robertson was brilliant, crazy, and L Ron Hubbard’s most adamant fanatic. I am both revulsed at the same time as I am drawn to and admire his single minded dedication. A few years ago, I had thought that Marty was going in this direction, but today I see that is not true. Short version, I don’t see a reason to expect a different reception at Ron’s Org as you are getting elsewhere in Scientology.

            3. Thanks Chris. The fine point in all this is that I don’t care what anyone personally thinks of Marty or LRH, but whether and how it affects their treatment of others. Perhaps it is not possible to separate the two, in which case there is nothing to discuss as far as I’m concerned.
              The fine point is, can they deliver auditing to a certain ‘standard’. There was some discussion recently on Marty’s, about the possible meanings of the term ‘standard tech’. There was some conclusion that it meant “capable of achieving the desired results” or level of quality, achievement, etc., that is considered acceptable or desirable I don’t recall the exact wording.
              From the common English, it means ” a level of quality, achievement, etc., that is considered acceptable or desirable.”

              In my opinion, none of admin tech or LRH opinions etc are “standard tech”. For my own purposes I think of standard tech as strictly limited to the auditing methodology as taught on the Class VIII course.

              So the issue is not the ‘reception’ I get when I mention Marty or LRH or anything else, but the quality of the auditing I receive from them or anyone else. They may have a shrine at which they worship an idol of LRH for all I care. That may be what keeps them auditing well, I don’t know, don’t care. Like Buddhists have statues of Buddha. Oh, well.

              Hubbard had his ideology. Tough t sh*t. Maybe the distinction is too fine? Swell. It is a distinction I see, whether anyone else does or not.

              The test is, can they audit me just as well if I badmouth LRH a little? Or defend Marty in some mild way when someone on their blog badmouths him in what appears to me a false way? If they can’t, f*ck’em. They are not the real thing as far as I’m concerned. They are not the ‘tech’ I’m looking for.

              Perhaps I’m setting an impossible standard. Too bad.

            4. VAL: “The fine point is, can they deliver auditing to a certain ‘standard’.”

              I have come to the conclusion that all “auditing” must be done solo. Any assistance given should only be in terms of guiding how to “solo audit.” This is the prime consideration that underlies the development of KHTK.

              Use of E-meter is not safe. It also creates dependence. I find mindfulness to be more accurate than e-meter. There is a certain ‘standard’ with which ‘solo auditing’ may be delivered to oneself with the use of mindfulness. I believe that all Scientology processes may be delivered to oneself through KHTK approach much more efficiently. That is a project that I plan to embark on.


            5. Vin, I am pretty paranoid when it comes to “groups”, but for my purposes I am at this time a firm believer that I am at the stage where group work is a real necessity for me. And probably for many other people. It’s that “auditor + pc” thing, like doing TRs etc. There is a synergy that speeds up progress. It may no longer be needed after a while, but is needed at the beginning.

            6. Yes. I believe based on someone’s post, that in TIR, because they are not allowed to use any Scn terms, they call the equivalent of “Clear”, “the Turning Point” or something like that. I think this refers to a stage at which a person is more able to work solo.

            7. “They are talking the talk, but already failing to walk the walk. I suppose they are responding to the condition they perceive to themselves to be in, but I have the feeling they are not going to get over it.”

              I’ve followed your conversation with 2ndtransformer and note your surprise at your treatment. Both of you make good points. My 3rd point of view if I may add, is that you are cleanly witnessing Scientology Technology in action. It mimicks in tech L Ron Hubbard’s mind in life. LRH was a lot of things and these lots of things are mirrored in Scientology. So while good people like Dexter, Aida, etc., use the tools they spent a lifetime learning, the Scientology Tech as a whole, when applied standardly, as a whole, results in the phenomena that you are witnessing as a whole. In summation, my opinion is that these zealots are walking the walk. The more zealous, the more so.

            8. Read the thread on MS2 to know what I’m talking about. They essentially have a tacit consent thing going on. I guess in scn lingo, it’s called mutual out-ruds? This led them to violate their own standard of “no entheta on this blog”. I commented on this, and got censored and censured. THis surprised me because until bnow, I have posted there without a problem and have gotten good responses from Logan and some others. I haven’t posted a lot, but I have been encouraging to them about their expressed ideals. This time they dropped the ball. They tolerated ‘entheta’ when it was directed at Marty by one of their posters, and then at me. True colors?

              In fact, Marty has been very helpful to me personally with his feedback on his blog. He has more than met the standard I’m talking about, by the honesty of his communications with me.

            9. I shall be happy to have Marty help me out with KHTK, or any of you guys.


            10. I agree to a point. I do not agree that “scientology” and “the tech” are conterminous. What a lot of people refer to as “Scientology” includes a lot of Hubbard’s opinions, flights of fancy, imaginations, etc which the literals take as “gospel”. They have no concept of appropriateness to the situation. It’s as though Jesus farted at the Last Supper, and from then on that sect farted during their
              Communion ceremony or whatever. You had to bring one of those fart-gag pillows just in case you didn’t have the requisite gas to pass at the requisite moment.

            11. “What a lot of people refer to as “Scientology” includes a lot of Hubbard’s opinions, flights of fancy, imaginations, etc which the literals take as “gospel”.”

              Well then, we’ll just keep at it until our misunderstandings unravel.

            12. Hubbard promoted an ideology. He infererd this ideology was from a higher level of awareness, a more ‘enlightened’ level. I distinguish this from the “nuts and bolts” of how to audit and the basic theory of “how to know”. Never was much interested in his ‘ideology’.

            13. “It can be rationalized as you did, but that doesn’t wash with me.”

              I used to expect too much from Scientologists. Not speaking for you but for myself, the next layer of improper computation that I handled after breaking with Scientology is the firmly buried assumption that there are correct ideologies. Or written another way, if I searched enough, I would come across a good, better, maybe best technology of the mind, spirit, etc.,. My newest (admittedly) model of my world is one of fluidity where the games are invented as we go. Think how we played as children – fluidly. So I can box up a frame of reference (I first wrote “reverence”hahaha) and strive for consistency and completeness and live in my estimation hobbled like that, or I can unseal my assumptions, grant beingness and validity to other’s points of view and reap tolerance on every flow in the bargain. Seems a no brainer, . . . which is lucky for me. hahaha

            14. Val:” So I think they have their own version of “OSA” and I just saw it in action.”

              That much I’d agree with. Tom did mention they had drawn up lists of names and checked them twice. Now they know who’s naughty and nice.

              I re-read your first post because I thought I’d maybe misinterpreted you but in that post you said ” I am starting to think that MS2 has been compromised, or that perhaps it has been a fifth column operation to start with, set up by you-know-who, starts with O, ends with A,…”

              I took that only as you thinking they’d been infiltrated by OSA whereas your concern also is now apparent that they have simply slipped from a moral highground devoid of OSA-like thought and action; slipped on that banana peel of standard admin and now they’ve compromised themselves.

            15. I don’t know which it is, I don’t personally know any of them. It could be either, I suppose. There are some who think they were OSA-inspired from the start. It would only take one smart and patient infiltrator to subvert the entire group. Anyway, I just know my perception of the one incident I posted about. It reeks of something bad to me, namely the whole “enemy line” thing. It is unnecessary. Someone in there is creating the “dangerous environment”.

            16. 2nd, If they slipped from a moral high ground, it could be because of OSA influence one way or another. I can think in that kind of crazy way because members of my family were associated with some US intelligence agencies around the time of the Korean war, and that kind of activity is unfortunately all too real. Double and triple agents etc. Real crazy paranoid sh*t.

              Book recommendation: “Mole Hunt: How the search for a phantom traitor destroyed the CIA”, I believe it’s called.

            17. “If they slipped from a moral high ground, it could be because of OSA influence one way or another.”

              The points you are making are right on the OP and I think important to explore for the sake of showing how there are more than a few ways to understand this. There is a way to understand Scientology’s fail from the view of its intrinsic dishonesty. Scientology is dishonest. Not OSA and not Miscavige and not the old Marty but the subject itself. We want to say that good things align with our beliefs and bad things don’t but when dealing with an ideology which is congenitally dishonest, it is my belief that the ensuing psychotic behavior is congenital. This doesn’t have to be the only explanation but if we look at it from outside rather than from within then I think this helps bring consistency to our understanding.

            18. Chris, I find it interesting that no-one has commented on the first part of my post, about Coaching. Specifically, coaching the “bullbait” part of TRs.

              It is the ‘contrary datum’ to your theory of congenital dishonesty as being the essence of “scientology”.
              I coached that guy and others, the way I was taught to do it around 1972. The guideline was “I want to improve your ability”. We didn’t say that in doing TRs; that was the “r factor”for the CCHs on the HQS course, but of course that was, and must be, the intention in coaching. That requires the Coach to have his “Act One” in. Marty posted about this a couple of years ago now. The “Act One”, I mean.
              If Scientology was essentially dishonest, it would not be possible for Act One to be a basic requirement of successful auditing?

              The congenital dishonesty, if there is any, is in the the nature of the people “practicing”. This kind of person, left to his own devices, will degrade any practice or ideology they try to apply. Can’t help it. How else to explain the degradation of TR Bullbait into the “beat down” it apparently has become?

              And I can’t help but associate this with Sea Org attitudes because it was NOT the kind of ‘scientology’ I learned to practice back in the early 1970s, from oldtimers who were NOT Sea Org but were Clears and also well-trained by the old ways. They had their Act One IN and transmitted it. You coached the student in front of you for his/her benefit using careful obnosis of the effect you were having on him/her, and coached him to a “win”.
              That was clearly not what Peter Bonyai was subjected to. It seems the “overboarding” attitude pervaded and degraded all training.

            19. Your points are well taken and I have no disagreement with believing the success as you’ve described it. I also had success coaching and word clearing. I had a particular affinity and knack for using method 9 to a good result. My friend Aida Thomas uses her class 8 tools as well to a good result. I admit I could be wrong, my opinion is that scientology is not good at the core and going all PTS to the bad people who wreck it. I think it works to the degree that it does because of good people of good will who love and help others using a few tools of an ideology in spite of it being rotten at the core. Glad half empty or half full-maybe. It’s just my opinion, but I don’t think bad people are wrecking scientology. I think a few good people are making the crazy, inconsistent mess work somehow, anyway. My opinion odd this cannot be done broadly because the subject is virus laden and finally craps out the more standardly one is admonished to use it. In other words, the longer one uses it, the worse the iteration becomes.

            20. Chris, let’s pretend we’ve never discussed scientology before. Would you explain specifically what you mean when you say it is “bad at the core.”

            21. My too long answer got lost when the power winked out then back on, better for everyone. here’s a shorter version: Your points are well taken and I don’t challenge your successes on bullbait, etc., as I’ve also had success. At one time I thoroughly enjoyed and had a knack for running an enthusiastic method 9 word clearing.

              Maybe my opinion is over in the glass half full, half empty category, I dunno. For me, I think Scientology works because a few people as you’ve described love and help others and take any tools they have to do it. They are able to help using Scientology in spite of Scientology’s rotten core. I do not think of Scientology as a basically good discipline which is being ruined by rotten people. I see well meaning people using Scientology tools to help and helping in spite of, then using it further and not helping as much and finally only spurred on by their initial successes and running on hope continuing on despite all the evidence they should re-evaluate. This is because Scientology is harmful at its core, not necessarily at its edges. My opinion, of course, but I don’t think of Miscavige nor of OSA as the odd anomaly, I think of them as the future of Scientololgy. Nevertheless, a good hearted zealot like Tom M. (I know him from years ago, he was a high energy and robust guy and also did the RPF) may take what is good and reform Scientology into something sustainable, but I don’t actually think so. Without the promise of OT, it can never compete with a Christianity’s eternal life with Jesus nor the Muslim’s, well, you know something good – pie in the sky when you die. As an ideology, without the OT levels delivering what they promised, to deliver the promised land on this side of death, Scientology has no long run appeal. My damn answer was still too long, sorry.

            22. I hear you saying no more than you are pessimistic about human nature, but are somehow projecting part of the ‘blame'(that same nature) into scientology.
              I see scientology as dangerous as a gun or knife or any weapon. My family in Korea supporetd themselves and put food on the table by hunting, but they refused to kill people as a rule. They were offered a bounty by the Japanese Governor for Kim Il Sung, but they refused, saying they did not hunt people.
              How many people are capable of using Scientology in a constructive way? I have no idea.
              As for X-tianity or Islam, ditto. However I believe X-tianity was spread by the sword, and I doubt that many people believe in it as such.
              I saw a Facebook post that most Muslims view “Islamic” terrorists the same way that most Christians view the Westboro Baptist Church. I think that’s about right.

              You seem to feel a minority can use Scientology positively. I disagree, because by actual count, decent Christians and decent Christian churches outnumber the Westboro type significantly. Just as the majority of Muslims are not Jihadist terrorists.
              And most governments, no matter their faults, do not resemble North Korea’s. But the Sea Org does.
              I have never been a love-filled nice guy, but I was able to coach TRs decently, just as you were able to do word clearing well. But I had to be taught how to do it, inspite of myself.

            23. Val, I saw your post regarding what you read on Ortega’s blog about coaching bullbait. What can I say except this kind of disinformation is usual on that blog. (TR-0 was described there as a staring contest, as another example.) To my way of thinking, there could have been a number of factors at the bottom of what happened with that particular individual, or with any individual. Btw, if I remember right, he did the TRs course before he joined the SO.

              More to the point of the blog post, I think scientology as a subject and practice will evolve the way so many other fields have. Take Chiropractic as an example. There was a “founder” of that particular tech, and gradually many variations of those techniques were developed by others – all calling themselves chiropractors. Their success simply depends on how well they deliver and get products. The same kind of thing will probably occur for practitioners of scientology, whether they call it that or something else.

              My idea of what the future will bring to Scientology was further crystallized recently due to a couple of things. One was that I read several posts by otherwise harsh critics who admitted that if they needed help for themselves or someone else, they would turn to scientology and find a good auditor.

              The other thing was an article I read by Bob Ross, an old-timer and a founding Scientologist who worked closely with LRH. Regardless of whether the tech is or isn’t perfect, he made it clear that since the 50’s it has been and will continue to be recognized even by non-scientologists as having a lot of truth and workability to it – because it gets results. Here’s the relevant portion of the article:

              “Even though there is no public acknowledgement of LRH by the psychological community, every psychologist and psychiatrist had a copy of Dianetics hidden on his bookshelf. As more and more people recalled life in the womb and past lives, it became OK to talk about such things. After-death experiences, for example, became respectable. Then medical researchers, without mentioning Dianetics, proved that what was said in operating rooms was recorded by patients and so could affect them. The Primal Scream by Janov is easily recognized as coming from Dianetics. Berne’s Games People Play puts one in mind of Service Facsimiles. And, so on.” http://www.freezone.org/LRH/bob_ross.htm

            24. marildi, “what can I say but….”? That sounds like an attempt at defense of something…..
              I suggest you read the whole story on Bonyai over there.
              It is NOT “disinformation”. It is the way TR0 bullbait was actually practiced on him. In his own words, not Tony’s or anyone else’s:
              “In retrospect, this ability was a blessing and a curse. It was undoubtedly useful to have greater tolerance to provocation, but it also blocked proper emotional reactions. It also had a hidden side effect (at least on me): I had a better tolerance of the crazy things going on in the Church. I was not disturbed too much by them, and I was able to put up with much more than I should have. This contributed to my prolonged stay in the Church by making me more susceptible to its indoctrination.”

              He was the product of bullbaiting done that way, regardless of whether it was Sea Org bullbaiters or Org staff or org trained public. It was done wrong. THAT is my point. His experience is NOT “disinformation”. It IS the way SCIENTOLOGY WAS APPLIED TO HIM. It is the BAD WAY Scientology was applied to him, regardless of who applied it. It was at best poor, wrong-headed coaching, misapplied Scientology. It is NOT “inherent” in Scientology to get this result, this kind of product. It is like I was telling Al 4-5 years ago, he is an overt product.

              I attribute these wrong attitudes as emanating from the Sea Org. I could be wrong, but the Scientology tech I was taught, pre-S.O. Scientology, was not THAT.

            25. Val, I’m in total agreement with what all you said. You should know that by now, after all the posts you’ve read of mine. I didn’t mean that the Hungarian guy was the one putting out disinformation – I meant that Ortega accepts and forwards a lot of disinformation. But I should have said MISinformation in this case, because believe me, I have seen first-hand how much out-tech can go on in the course rooms. But not just in the SO – and that’s what I meant by many different factors could have accounted for what happened to that guy. I don’t doubt at all that it happened.

            26. OK. I don’t see “many different factors”. I just see things being done wrong. I leave it to the sociologists to account for it all. To me it’s “academic”, unless it can fix the problem.

            27. I know what you mean. As I expressed on Marty’s, I’m not so much into debates and “academic” discussions any more, because that has been seen to go round in circles.That’s why I’ve decided that basically the proof is in the pudding and time will tell how scientology fares in the world.

              My hunch would be that those who adhere the closest to basic principles and standard tech the way Mary Freeman described it in this video will do the best, as well as those who improve and/or build on where LRH left off.

            28. Those people who are defending Scientology are not looking at the following facts.

              (1) Scientology tech is hastily put together and it lacks poka-yoke.

              (2) Focus should be on improving Scientology Tech with poka-yoke.

              (3) One should move forward (from Scientology) and invest in the improvement of Tech.

              (4) Recognize that KHTK is such an attempt.



            29. I find that the farther the practice of Islam is from Saudi Arabia, for example, in Malaysia, the less terror there is in it.

              Similarly, I find that the farther the practice of Scientology has been from Source, for example, in Missions, the less dishonesty there is in it.


            30. Chris:”We want to say that good things align with our beliefs and bad things don’t but when dealing with an ideology which is congenitally dishonest, it is my belief that the ensuing psychotic behavior is congenital.”

              That’s a very stimulating proposition. In a good way.Simply put, this could just be evidence of the phenomena of long term suppression.

              Consider, for instance, if you had a very good product or service and were basically a decent, honest sort. Call your product or service “x”. If you were in a society that was intent on suppressing “x” to the point that every time you mentioned “x” you received a beating, or worse, then you might begin being cagey – less honest – in your disbursement of “x”. Basically, the suppression by that society takes you from a point of being honest, to less honest, to being a liar, and even to becoming criminal.

              If we can talk about lifetimes of such suppression and degradation of character towards congenital lying and criminality then we have an interesting foundation for something like this abberant behavior in Scn to lie on the basis of “greatest good”. In fact, very greatest part of the lying is definitely not for the “greatest good” but for some ass covering or sales deceit. More evidence of lying as a tool to escape suppression.

              What I’m getting at here is how easy it was for certain Scientologists to rationalize this lying behavior. Here I’m talking about the liars and those somehow party to the lie, not those interested in the potential value of Scientology’s “x”. But if the participants in scientology generally came from a track search for knowledge, ability and possibly power, it would be easier to see how the antisocial behaviors can so easily be restimulated to replace the initial urge on entering the group which was in the form of “to help” or “to be helped”.

              Then, of course, there was surviving within the group, itself, which tended to dramatize a variant of that supposed earlier societal suppression in the form of crazy attacks and counter attacks between posts and hats over quantity and quality of products.

            31. “What I’m getting at here is how easy it was for certain Scientologists to rationalize this lying behavior.”

              I’m with you. I lived this opposite vector that I’m spouting against now. I never seem to see Hubbard’s sci-fi books mentioned especially not mentioned is the series MISSION EARTH. Like Valkov’s interest in the lack of comprehension toward his remarks about bullbaiting, in hindsight, I find MISSION EARTH to be the most interesting work on Hubbard including all the anti-Hubbard works printed through the years. MISSION EARTH is a look into Hubbard’s heart like no other and reveals his attitude toward himself, toward his closest followers, toward those who wouldn’t listen to him because he was never credentialed, his motivations for his actions – both good and bad. Sometimes I think I’m the only one who was riveted by the series and yet I know that I’m not. It wasn’t just good storytelling, it was both autobiographical and a thinly veiled metaphor for his real life. And the allegory explains why he did the things in the dishonest ways that he did them… OJ Simpson couldn’t be the water boy for Hubbard’s version of “if I DID IT.” Hubbard is crying out to tell his side of the story and this is how he chose to do it. I highly recommend this fun and satirical series for anyone wanting to know the mind of Hubbard.

            32. Chris, you have written some excellent, rational and very eloquent posts here. I must acknowledge that. 🙂


            33. “Chris, you have written some excellent, rational and very eloquent posts here. I must acknowledge that. :)”

              Vinay, you are kind to say that. Writing here and at your blog has been and continues to be a unique learning experience for me. I’ve both changed as a person and improved my writing skills through years of practice. My points of view are mirrors of the many excellent opinions that I’ve had the good fortune to read. I have been illuminated and elevated by my friends here. I feel at home here and at your place. Let’s continue.

            34. “That’s a very stimulating proposition. In a good way. Simply put, this could just be evidence of the phenomena of long term suppression.”

              Possibly. In business I have many pressures that can turn my own attention to cutting corners but really, the corner cutting piles up and none of it has long run value if I want to stay in business and keep my reputation and credit. Hubbard would never come to that same conclusion and knuckle under “to the man” as I have. The thing is that I have decided to keep the social contract with my peers and Hubbard refused to do that. He howled about all his reasons and how everybody was against him right down to his own faithful wife and children. Then after a while, people kind of were, but never to the degree that he imagined. And at pretty much any point, he could have stopped lying about the claims for Scientology and the pressure would have eased. But rather he told more lies upon more lies. He said he was finding out about government dirt and it seems to be true that MK Ultra was one such activity. But he went on the lam and to use his own nomenclature, because he was so PTS to his own out ethics. Anyways that’s my own theory and may be totally wrong. In my mind, brave leaders front up to the suppression, long term, short term, they don’t run away, they stay, they live within the rules as best they can and they begin to chip away at social injustice, and they go to jail when the strong messages need to be sent as an example to their adherents. They don’t hide while their wives and disciples take the heat for them. From this angle, Hubbard don’t look so good to me.

              Considering a question like “is math invented or discovered?” I could apply that to Hubbard and ask “Did Hubbard invent or did he discover Scientology?” And then I could also ask, “Who in the world is most responsible for the ruination of Scientology?” And I get the same name – Hubbard. So much for my search and discovery. I should give someone else a turn.

  18. For the people who are defending Scientology’s horrible results by saying that it was incorrectly applied, there is a point where you have to step back and realize that Scientology itself is responsible for its own results.

    All the study tech, all the Qual corrective actions, the false data stripping, the threats of being declared for “non-standard” and “squirrel” applications with high crimes and other ethics and “justice actions” – produced the way Scientology is being applied.


    No amount of second-guessing and blaming the people who tried to apply Scientology will change the factual every day reality that Scientology has created for itself after 64 years of 10s of thousands of people earnestly attempting to do something good with it.

    When you take a subject that is to be applied to the letter, with as many threats and punishments for not doing so as Scientology has, then you can not blame the person doing their best to comply with Scientology’s demands. There is a point where you have to conclude, after seeing all the results it has produced around the world for 64 years, that Scientology tech, ethics and admin is rotten to the core. And THAT is why you see the horrible results it has achieved.

    The horrible results of Scientology are not the fault of Scientologists. They are caused by Scientology itself.


    1. This is logic like “The guy died because of the KNIFE that he was stabbed with.”

      So you should get rid of all those knives in the kitchen, you crazy fools!

      Typical Alanzo logic. But not even SPECIOUS logic this time! He’s slipping even from his usual standard.

        1. I don’t think so. To put it more basically, his lack of logic boils down to a refusal to differentiate the meanings of the word “scientology.” Always has been, always will be. It would spoil his whole schtick to do otherwise.

      1. Marildi wrote:

        This is logic like “The guy died because of the KNIFE that he was stabbed with.”

        Yet another off the wall comparison of Scientology to something that is not like Scientology at all.

        Scientology is not like a knife. A knife does not come with tens of thousands of pages of instructions on how to use it 100% standardly, nor is there any kind of claim made that if you do step “a”, “b”, and “c”, to the letter, then you will get specific result “D” which includes “Cause over Life” or “the ability to communicate with anyone on any subject”.

        That’s not a knife.

        That’s not even close to a knife.

        Try again, Marildi. This is fun.

        What else is my logic like?


        1. Just for you, Al, I’ll draw a little picture.

          Knives are sometimes working just fine, superbly so. And then they get redesigned, in which case they may or may not be “new and improved.” It’s up to the consumer to determine that. Some make a bad choice on which design they pick and then take no part of the responsibility and, in so doing, act accordingly.

          Even with a well designed knife, some consumers will follow the directions and not cut themselves or anybody else – others won’t.

          Still others are disposed to focus on the poorly designed knives, and on stories about people who were cut – no matter what the circumstances were, or which knife was used. Those people refuse to accept anything about how well some particular design has worked for many people. It might put them out of business. Or should I say, out of the limelight they’ve gotten used to. 😛

          Anyway, that’s about all the time I’ll spend on re-iterating what I’ve already said many times. But you go ahead and carry on to your heart’s content. Some people will eat it up.

    2. Alanzo


      “The horrible results of Scientology are not the fault of Scientologists. They are caused by Scientology itself.”

      And the script they strictly adhere to, live by, all of it, is written by……..? Completely understandable why it is failing as a religion, except for those few left who blindly believe. Calling it as it is, a business, similar to psychology, some tech could survive. However, the founder made sure that it will not survive as it is today. Too bad.

  19. Marildi, I hate to push this button except for the thingy Mark Rathbun said about you having SO MANY IP addresses.

    … hmmm …

    Is u spy 4 hire?

    I was given that title for awhile. I finally found out why.

    It seems that DMs Father and I both have an obsession with the Exergenie and approached the company at the same time to work for them.

    Weird. Freaking. Universe.

    I dropped out when I saw DM’s dad worked there cuz I promised my wife that my efforts with Scientology would stay online and working for the same company as DMs dad did not seem very drama free. So I quietly backed away and became a blog supporter rather then work for a company where DMs father was a partner.

    I PRESUME this is why Rathbun called me a spy and for a good cause. The coincidence is “too close” to NOT do so and something the church would actually be likely to DO. I tried to find out if that was the case, but Rathbun didn’t reply, so I’ll probably never know.

    And I really don’t want to. Being a “spy” gives me a good amount of distrust among ex-scientologists which means LESS drama.

    So … thanks Mark!

    Anyway …

    I suggest you guys buy an exer-genie from Ronnie M. The thing is the most flexible piece of exercise equipment ever invented. It also went to the moon with our astronauts. I’ve switched to the TRX for my clients, but will bust out my old Exer-Genie with my clients soon. I have a 1968 model exert-genie, the current model and some competitor knockoffs.

    Buy one from Ronnie and if you can’t understand how to use it, let me know and I’ll Skype you on how to use the thing. It isn’t user friendly and takes about four sessions to figure it out.

    The Exer-Genie can deliver a 500 Pound Squat, a Complete Resistence Gym, a Running Track, a suspension trainer like TRX and a stretching tool.


    1. Hi KG. That threw me for a loop about him saying I having so many IP addresses, and what he implied that could mean – OSA! But later I found out that this is not uncommon at all due to certain internet technicalities that I don’t fully understand. You would think Marty would know about that by now.

      Btw, I never ever thought you were an OSA agent. Marty’s powers of observation are sorely lacking sometimes.

      1. He’s just a guy trying to get by.

        His last entry “Reality Check” sounded weird though. It sounded like

        “Hey, I’ve got some super cool stuff coming but It’s too secret to tell you all. Get ready … here it comes … did I TELL you I’m not going to tell you what it is? … Good. Cuz it’s awesome …”

        Naming such an article “reality check” was a bit creepy. I wanted to say. Reality check? With a Marty-netics just on the horizon and you named it REALITY CHECK?

        But I have to say as an obsessed Scientology Watcher (which I am one) I have enjoyed his books and watching him evolve. And I do like how ballsy he is.

        And I hope he and Mosey are happy with their smurf and that their lives go well.

      2. We have Comcast/Xfinity internet and wi-fi at my house and I believe that has no single fixed IP address and results in shifting IP addresses. Or something like that, I’m no geek so take my explanation with a grain of salt.

    2. KG:”Is u spy 4 hire?”

      Normally I’d just have an eye roll at such a comment but from you, a former star of OSA label collection, I just have an LOL.

      Marildi is first and foremost a muse, and if Phil ever gets into a rut he should just give Marildi a buzz. Before you know it he’ll be sorted out and pheeling phine.

      Blogspaces do not get more counterpoint than when Marildi is probing the logic of the posters. A poster’s thoughts may be right or wrong but by time they’ve been peeled back by Marildi’s inquisitive mind they’ll be completely exposed. Sometimes the light hurts or the counterpoint is frustratingly unrelenting, making it easier to drop a label like ‘OSA plant’ than accept that someone can have a disparate, possibly unagreeable view that they will passionately attempt to keep in perspective.

      You could even say that the stats of the blogger spike when posters of counterpoint like Marildi and Valkov are posting and those same posting stats are very often seen to languish when they aren’t. (As an aside, would you ever think of putting an OSA label on Valkov? I doubt it.)

      That Marty gets snarly and drops the O bomb indiscriminately is his own character problem and, personally, I won’t defend it any more than I defend the flaws of LRH. I do find it somewhat reprehensible that: a) the O bomb gets dropped when someone is simply trying to put a viewpoint there that is supportive of a value being maligned by the OP, and b) heavy handed moderation of comments tends to ensue. A lot could be said of the pros and cons of that type of moderation, but it really comes down to the same argument as Val started about the moderation at MS2: it’s their sandbox and their rules for the would-be castle makers. That pretty much has to be accepted and in such a venue the limitations on freedom of speech must be understood.

      I will give Geir great credit for having perhaps the most open blog and for being able to take it on the chin once in a while, too. A good Norveegan jaw. Ja. Joost retty for a fight, ja?

      1. Aw, 2x, thank you. You should post more often. 🙂

        And you spoke my mind where you wrote:

        “I will give Geir great credit for having perhaps the most open blog and for being able to take it on the chin once in a while, too.”

        That’s so true! And that’s why we all keep coming back.

      2. It was just a question 2ndxmr.

        One she DIDN’T answer!


        But I don’t think she is. But she ees a mystery noh?
        Noh peekchure … no … BookFace …

        … she ees either OSA or NEENJA! Weech one Marildi?

        OSA or Ninja?

        We have ways of making you post!

        1. KG, you want me to deny I’m from OSA? And also prove I’m not a communist? 😛

          But I will admit that I’ve been called Ninja Lady (endearingly 😉 .

        2. … she ees either OSA or NEENJA! Weech one Marildi?
          OSA or Ninja?

          Living in fear is an God awful way to live, tho some apparently have to do it, for whatever reason. What a shame! When I personally came out in the open, it was the greatest feeling of freedom.
          It’s fear that scientology’s tech instills in you, being an ex, a spy, or a friend of, and until one looks at that, one remains stuck and degraded, imo. This fear is relied on by the cherch to control one.

          1. “Living in fear is an God awful way to live, tho some apparently have to do it, for whatever reason. What a shame! When I personally came out in the open, it was the greatest feeling of freedom.”

            Great quote deE. — I’ve been there.

            1. Thank you Chris. I was there for too long. The more fearless I become or am, the better I can speak and be open about my own experiences or feelings on a subject.

              I don’t get into technical discussions because of either lack of interest, desire, or the ability to debate. However, I do enjoy reading others who do and I learn from them, or am simply entertained. 🙂

            1. Vin: “And all of them don’t like the Discussion Policy. They should read and word clear it.”

              “More than one” Ha, a good one and makes sense too! 🙂

              They certainly wouldn’t read, let alone follow, a squirrel policy when they have the ONLY ONE tech from source.

            2. The criterion for any policy should be not “source” but a “lack of inconsistency.” A source can be aberrated. A “lack of inconsistency” ensures a lack of aberration. Hubbard was inconsitent ine his behavior and therefore aberrated. He had a big chip on his shoulder.


            3. “He had a big chip on his shoulder.”

              Well you would too if you only got a 1/2 day off every other week if your stats were up and if your senior approved your CSW. Mary Sue wasn’t one for letting Ron have time off either.

            4. Vin: “A source can be aberrated………….” You are right and most ex’s know that or learn it quickly.

              I was being facetious on the quote of maybe ‘more than one’ who post under the same name. Die hard scientologists cannot or will not believe, nor listen to what others say because their tech and they are the Only Ones. Do you get me now? 🙂

              Ah yes, Poor Ronnie!

            5. Marildi doesn’t care for Discussion Policy because it is not by her Dear Source “LRH”. She doesn’t care for consistency (lack of outpoints).

              If her Dear Source has outpoints, she just doesn’t see them.

            6. Vin, thank you for using different words to express what in essence I said and you did it better. Therefore I know you now understood me.
              You must also know why I don’t talk to you much, because I apparently fail to communicate properly to you in the right professional or tech words.

              Vin, I’m not worried about it, hopefully you’re not either. 🙂

            7. Vin:”And all of them don’t like the Discussion Policy. They should read and word clear it.”

              Since this slanted, generalized and derogatory comment would be contrary to discussion policy I must assume it is just an ‘observation’ and not bound by the rules of discussion policy.

              Therefore I will reply with an ‘observation’, which is that discussion policy loses credibility to the degree that you, personally, depart from being a model of your policy model. Anything less and you become the “Do as I say not as I do” asshole that you regularly portray Hubbard to have been.

              That’s a mould we all have to break and it starts by being mindful of one’s own communication, even when that communication seems to be just a joke or that the other person takes themselves too seriously. That type of an excuse is the sort of defense of action that bullies take. If you want to walk that walk then you must be prepared, in turn, to occasionally walk into a slap upside the head. Personally, I’d rather not waste bandwidth or time on that kind of shite. There are many interesting things to explore where we should all be able to co-create and contribute, even if we disagree. And when we reach an impasse on agreement then we all need to be able to just agree to disagree and let it end.

              Also, when someone does offend by doing something contrary to good blog exchange, then I would suggest that instead of just saying “That is a violation of discussion policy” you instant hat them with something like “For the benefit of congenial communication, please apply this advice: (a copy of the pertinent discussion advice) instead of (perceived discussion deviation)” Perhaps after a while a saner discussion will ensue.

              On the other hand, since it only takes a few days to destimulate from being struck upside the head, one can always use a smarting ear as one’s means of getting smarter. 🙂 Choices.

            8. 2ndxmr: “Personally, I’d rather not waste bandwidth or time on that kind of shite. There are many interesting things to explore where we should all be able to co-create and contribute, even if we disagree. And when we reach an impasse on agreement then we all need to be able to just agree to disagree and let it end.”

              Awesome! That sounds like a great new game to play here on Geir’s. I think if truth be told, all of us are bored with the old game.

              So for example, let’s forget about discussing scientology’s past and take up the topic of the OP – scientology’s future. I don’t think too much has been said about that so far on this thread.

              Love that idea of “a co-create.” What a concept!

              I doubt that even Vinnie would prefer to “use a smarting ear as one’s means of getting smarter.” 🙂

            9. 2ndxmr: “Personally, I’d rather not waste bandwidth or time on that kind of shite. There are many interesting things to explore where we should all be able to co-create and contribute, even if we disagree. And when we reach an impasse on agreement then we all need to be able to just agree to disagree and let it end.”

              MARILDI: “Awesome! That sounds like a great new game to play…”


              Sounds like the same old “self-centric” shit to me! 🙂 .


            10. Vin:”And all of them don’t like the Discussion Policy. They should read and word clear it.”

              2X: “Since this slanted, generalized and derogatory comment would be contrary to discussion policy I must assume it is just an ‘observation’ and not bound by the rules of discussion policy.”

              Discussion Policy applies to discussions and not to debates. You should word clear it too.

              When there is no intention to discuss in the first place, the Discussion Policy cannot be applied. Discussion Policy is applied on Vinaire’s Blog. That blog is quite productive in terms of research in knowledge.


            11. Some people are just stuck on attacking or defending Hubbard the ‘Source’. They smart and bitch. They need to get themselves unstuck and behave normally. There is a big world out here.


            12. 2ndxmr: “Personally, I’d rather not waste bandwidth or time on that kind of shite. There are many interesting things to explore where we should all be able to co-create and contribute, even if we disagree. And when we reach an impasse on agreement then we all need to be able to just agree to disagree and let it end.”

              This is a self-centric viewpoint that can only debate but cannot discuss. The idea of cooperating is foreign to it. It is rolling in shite but doesn’t know it. It has never succeeded in amounting to anything. It is like Hubbard the ‘Source’.



          1. Vinaire asked:

            “Could there be several different people behind that name?”

            I’ve thought this more than once, as well.

            There is 1 Marildi that stays on the subject and rarely engages in ad hom. That Marildi is probably looked down on by the other Marildi’s as too “reasonable” about out-ethics and the suppression of the Scientology Religion on the Internet.

            Then there is another one who spews suppressive generalities, and engages in desperate dead agent discrediting of a person’s character – ignoring, and distracting off of, any statement or point made in the discussion.

            There’re probably a couple more Marildi’s, too.

            They’re not too bad, really. They commit very few spelling or grammatical errors, stick very well to their “suitable guise” as an ex-SO word clearer, and are very consistent in their mission to dead-agent any highly trained or experienced scientology critic with the Appeal to Authority logical fallacy.

            The Marildi Account is probably OSA’s “A Team”.

            Alanzo (:>

            1. “Looks like 2ndxmr has come under Marildi’s thrall, or is he just PTS to OSA?”

              The Marildi Account can have that effect on people.


            2. Vin 1):”“Self-determination” = lack of inconsistency”

              Vin 2):”My preferred approach to helping another person is no longer Scientology, Idenics or Word Clearing.

              My preferred approach is Mindful Discussions.

              If the other person does not want to participate in a mindful discussion that is his ego and his loss.”

              Vin 3):”Looks like 2ndxmr has come under Marildi’s thrall, or is he just PTS to OSA?”

              The inconsistency between comment 2) (…preferred approach is Mindful Discussions) and comment 3) is good evidence that you are not operating at a level of comment 1), self-determination.

              Of course, you are welcome to explain how your rant is an example of mindful discussion but that horse is rather dead and would not respond to being further beaten. What I would suggest is that you apply mindfulness to re-establishing your equanimity and then apply it again to the task of becoming the model of what you desire from others.

              Me:”Therefore I will reply with an ‘observation’, which is that discussion policy loses credibility to the degree that you, personally, depart from being a model of your policy model. Anything less and you become the “Do as I say not as I do” asshole that you regularly portray Hubbard to have been.”

              Vin, keep on shitting the same old bricks and you will build a wall that makes you unknowable.

            3. Multiple LOLs!

              And a good summation of what passes for “discussion” and “logic” by some of the regulars here. Too bad! Such a waste of opportunity here on Geir’s.

            4. 2NDXMR Thanks for this ‘Vin, keep on shitting the same old bricks and you will build a wall that makes you unknowable.’ LOL!

              Maybe not understood, or mis-understood, whatever, as I’m not interested in learning or using another man’s interpretation of Scio gobble gook. I think of him as a professor trying to teach the class. And yes, may have a button on that, but dislike the repeated make wrong instead of just talking, allowing or letting it go.
              Thanks for putting it so succinctly.

  20. To be fair, I should add to what I said that it may simply be that he gets a little paranoid at times – which I can understand. But I agree with Valkov that he is honest. (Brutally so sometimes! 🙂 )And with you too about the ballsy bit.

    But yeah, the current blog post is Marty at his cryptic best!

        1. If you LOOK at your Avatar, it looks a lot like the ninja mask BUT WITH LIPS PAINTED ON.

          Yeah, I’m the only one who noticed the painted lips. Why?

          I can’t tell you that …

    1. “. . . he gets a little paranoid at times – which I can understand.”

      It’s not paranoia if they are really out there and they are really trying to destroy you. I myself, have even offered to get in the octagon with him for cage fighting. Maybe that has something to do with my earlier failures to get a comment posted on his blog. But people change. I’m changing. Marty’s changing. I no longer feel bitter toward him, mainly because he’s not the person he used to be, that person I didn’t like. I’m no longer the person I used to be, that person I didn’t like who felt bitter.

      1. Chris: “…I’m no longer the person I used to be, that person I didn’t like who felt bitter.”

        Lovely comment to read. 🙂

  21. “Self-determination” = lack of inconsistency

    There is no other self-determination. Hopefully, the future may bring that.

  22. I define inconsistency as follows on my blog:


    I find the following observation from Scientology very interesting.

    “Attention is aberrated by becoming unfixed and sweeping at random or becoming too fixed without sweeping.” ~ L. Ron Hubbard

    We define “inconsistency” in KHTK as follows.

    An inconsistency is something that fixates or disperses one’s attention.

    Attention helps us become aware of things. Normally we can freely direct our attention and put it wherever we want. But when we cannot do so we are faced with an inconsistency,

    When a person’s attention is fixed, or when it is dispersed, he is faced with some inconsistency.

    When a person is consistently running into problems with relationships, finances, or in living, then there are inconsistencies in that area. Other areas of inconsistencies can be school subjects, such as, mathematics, that one simply cannot focus on.

    The solution is to look more closely at the area that is causing the attention to become fixed and/or dispersed and narrow down the inconsistency. As you become aware of the reason underlying the inconsistency, your attention gets freed up and returns to your control.

    Pursue inconsistency (non-optimum attention) to discover what is amiss.

    It requires all available attention to carefully follow the trail of non-optimum attention inside the mind. Therefore, it is important to have one’s attention optimum with respect to the physical environment before taking a deep look at the mind. Reference: Recognizing Objects.

    If you find that it is getting uncomfortable to look at the mind, then step back and look at the physical environment until the attention is optimum. Then you may go back to looking at the mind.

    To resolve non-optimum attention fully one needs to look at the factors stacked up in the mind. These factors are interwoven with other factors in a complex manner. Complexities of the mind cannot be resolved through thinking alone.

    However, it is possible to un-stack the mind by letting it do so. Mind is like a coiled spring. It uncoils itself when it is not interfered with. This principle is violated when one makes assumptions and pushes the mind. A much safer approach is to:

    Allow the mind to un-stack itself. It is like letting a coiled spring to uncoil itself.

    All one has to do is to follow the points of non-optimum attention without forcing the mind . When left to itself the mind will bring up data that needs to be looked at. As one looks, questions may arise, and one may consult appropriate references, or carry out experiments to resolve the inconsistency.


  23. Geir! Did you see that a video was posted for you on Marty’s current thread, by Cat Daddy? He wrote, “This one is for Geir Isene.” http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2014/08/31/reality-check/#comment-316883

    It’s a little 10-minute talk by Eckhart Tolle on the subject of betrayal and the example given is 2D betrayal, but Tolle makes it clear it would apply to any person in one’s life. I’m not sure why Cat Daddy posted it for YOU (does he even know you?) but I think everyone here will find it to be of interest too.

  24. A person who cannot conceive of “unknowable” is stuck in self.

    It is like the inability to conceive of “zero” because one is stuck in one.

    Such a person is self-centric and selfish. See

    A Model of the Mind

  25. The concept of THETAN is self-centric. I comes from a self-centric mind.

    Those who ar identifying themselves with the concept of Thetan are self-centric in nature..

  26. 2ndxmr’s complaint seems to be that I am not applying the approach of mindful discussions to him. I didn’t know that he wanted that. I shall be very happy to get into mindful discussion with him.

    The first thing to understand is that a mindful discussions is not a one way street. They are two-way just like communication is. So if anyone wants to participate in a mindful discussion they should do the following exercise.

    Mindfulness 1: Observe without Desires

    1. Vin:”2ndxmr’s complaint seems to be that I am not applying the approach of mindful discussions to him.”

      I doubt if anyone reviewing our personal communications would find that mindfulness is sorely lacking, or that your reply here is other than another weak attempt to spin from the real point – which is your own general lack of mindfulness when it comes to dealing with someone you are in conflict with. At this point you temporarily find yourself in conflict with me because I gave you fair notice and advice on how to handle your credibility loss and you haven’t yet taken a proper measure to handle it.

      Like many people, I admire the effort you’ve gone to to provide a working method for self-help through mindfulness. And my only complaint about your discussion policy is how you attempt to use it in blogs other than your own, especially when your answer to some chastisement is “That is a violation of discussion policy”. Certainly, other blogs could benefit from some of the advices and some people might be more willing to adopt them if they were presented in an acceptable manner. But, I reiterate – and please apply some mindfulness to this – you must be the model of what you seek to achieve.

      1. 2ndxmr: “which is your own general lack of mindfulness when it comes to dealing with someone you are in conflict with.”

        I admit I find it very difficult to be mindful in an environment that doesn’t give a hoot about mindfulness.

        I find it much easier to be mindful outside this blog.

        So what is that conflict again? Let’s discuss it with mindfulness. 🙂

        1. Vin:”So what is that conflict again?”

          Perhaps you’ve lost track of it but my suggestion to you was that your credibility was only as good as you practiced and were a model of what you desired from others. To which you un-mindfully replied “Looks like 2ndxmr has come under Marildi’s thrall, or is he just PTS to OSA?

          Yes, I would be willing to mindfully discuss the problem you encounter in “I admit I find it very difficult to be mindful in an environment that doesn’t give a hoot about mindfulness.” As you say, in an environment that doesn’t give a hoot about mindfulness, remaining mindful may be a great challenge. However, saying that the environment as a whole doesn’t care for mindfulness is in itself a generalization that would not bear up to mindful inspection. And therein lies a problem in that you are prone to saying things that don’t bear up to mindful inspection – and that is why it is fully incumbent upon you to be the first to fully apply mindfulness if you want others to apply it as well.

          And if they don’t, it is further incumbent upon you to not succumb to anything less than a mindful reply or no reply.

          1. 2ndxmr: “your credibility was only as good as you practiced and were a model of what you desired from others.”

            OK. Let’s take a good look at what you just said. Being mindful is being part of rational. Vinaire very much desire that others on this blog act rationally. Others won’t act rationally because Vinaire is not acting rationally.

            Does that argument sound rational to you? Am I to be blamed for people not being mindful on this blog?


            1. Vin:”Am I to be blamed for people not being mindful on this blog?”

              No, you must be the example of what can be attained if rationality is not lost.

            2. Now, here is an interesting thought or question:

              Does Scientology promote mindfulness?


            3. Here is another interesting question.

              Did Hubbard practice mindfulness?


            4. It would seem that if Hubbard did not practice mindfulness then no Scientologist, who is operating on source, would practice mindfulness, no matter how much mindfulness I practice, or Buddha practiced.



            5. Vin:”It would seem that if Hubbard did not practice mindfulness then no Scientologist, who is operating on source, would practice mindfulness, no matter how much mindfulness I practice, or Buddha practiced.”

              If you fall back on this justification you will fall away from mindfulness. How could any observer ever see any lasting value in practicing mindfulness if they don’t see a continuous example of it? Would Buddha’s followers have stayed on the eight-fold path if Buddha did not?

            6. Wrong question.

              The correct question is, “What is holding 2ndxmr back from practicing mindfulness?”

              I think we are way past the influence of Vinaire here.


            7. Vin:”The correct question is, “What is holding 2ndxmr back from practicing mindfulness?””

              Really. Wow! Well, then, please excuse me from further communication as I go and contemplate my lack of mindfulness.

            8. All you have to do is start applying mindfulness. You’ll soon find out why you are unable to apply it.


            9. “please excuse me from further communication as I go and contemplate my lack of mindfulness.”

              Hey 2NDX, Can I go with you? I’ll bring my bliss along and see what we can come up with. 😀

            10. I am not forcing anything on you De, but apparently you have chosen me to be a restimulator for some reason. Please take a good look at what is restimulating you.


            11. Somewhere along the line, Dee has found her voice and come into her own. Well done! 😉

            12. I laud De for that. Now she needs to look at the right reasons.

              I am not her enemy. I am not trying to suppress her either.


            13. Yes, the things is I am not giving her any advice. She has taken upon herself to react to some supposed advice I am giving her.


            14. And I quote: “…Now she needs to look at the right reasons.”

              You are coming from your views and telling her what she needs to do. I’d say Dee needs to do only what SHE decides is needed.

            15. Right now De is wrong targeting me. I have no idea why she is doing that. She need to look at this situation.


            16. “Right now De is wrong targeting me. I have no idea why she is doing that. She need to look at this situation.”

              And I quote again, “…She needs to look at this situation.”

              Can you see why she might be targeting you – correctly?

              And you might be coming across as condescending. Even if you don’t mean to.

            17. Marildi, you seem to be trying to inflame this situation instead of helping to resolve it. Why is that?


            18. “Marildi, you seem to be trying to inflame this situation instead of helping to resolve it.”
              Whoa Vin, not the case. Step out of your head for a moment and see the discourse. It’s just the opposite.
              “Why is that?”
              Who cares why? it’s happening in present time, well minutes actually and all is fine. I’m not worrying about it, are you?

            19. Vin: She need to look at this situation.

              Vin, I think it is the other way around. Not a problem with me as I did say “Thanks” Take care, be happy! 😀

            20. These are old communications. If you feel fine the I am happy. 🙂


            21. “Dee needs to do only what SHE decides is needed.”
              Right on…
              Vin – Marildi does know and can use her ‘granting’ ability. 🙂

              Come to think about it. It was one of my hubby’s greatest gifts to me in our 22 year relationship. His attitude with others as well and I watched this. Maybe I’m finally learning to emulate that. Also his standing up to negativity and falsehoods.

            22. Speaking of advice Marildi, thanks.

              I believe advice is best given when asked for.
              I’m not an angel that never gave some advice, mind you, but when asked for and given, it should then be recognized, otherwise for naught.

              Now consulting is another matter. It’s not easy to trust on the net tho an important element in life. Thank goodness for close friends.

            23. “Now consulting is another matter. It’s not easy to trust on the net tho an important element in life.”

              You got it, girl. There is definitely that limiting factor about the net. And the choice of what we want to communicate is ours alone.

            24. Now that sounds like an advice. Looks like it is acceptable to De. It is not restimulating her. That’s good. 🙂


            25. Vin: “Now that sounds like an advice. Looks like it is acceptable to De.”
              Sounds to me as making common sense, not advice. There is a difference.

            26. De, could you please explain to me your original concern again, Was I giving you some advice that upset you. What happened, really? The situation doesn’t seem to be not very clear to me. Thanks.


            27. Vin: I am not her enemy. I am not trying to suppress her either.
              Hey Vin, I don’t believe you an enemy or trying to suppress. It’s the attitude of do as I say = control issue.

              “chosen me to be a restimulator for some reason.”
              Lol, good one. Well yes, you remind me of people who tried to control me, thus my silence and holding back, and I’m not taking it anymore, haha. You may figure, figure on that and it’s OK.
              I’m more a worthy old gentlewoman than an ex scion. I glad to be a free spirit, so to speak. I hope this helps to know where I’m coming from, and hey, thanks for the help, really! 🙂

            28. De, I am really happy for you that you have found your voice. 🙂


            29. De, I am really happy for you that you have found your voice. 🙂

              Thanks Vinaire! Me too!

            30. M: “Somewhere along the line, Dee has found her voice and come into her own. Well done! 😉

              Thank you Marildi. 🙂 Time heals and change is good, eh? The right thyroid medicine helps some too. 😀

      2. 2ndxmr, if you so much care for mindfulness then are you making any effort to apply mindfulness?

        Mindfulness is originally from Buddha. So, don’t blame me that I am turning you off from it. Take a good look at yourself buddy.


        1. Vin:” I admit I find it very difficult to be mindful in an environment that doesn’t give a hoot about mindfulness.”

          Vin:”Take a good look at yourself buddy.”

          Please re-apply the moment of mindfulness that produced the leading comment.

      3. +1 ‘you must be the model of what you seek to achieve.’

        Right on…. I personally learn best from watching, listening and seeing how others behave or what they say. Like a good monkey, no less I have leaned much this way. I look up to models like Geir, Marty, Alanzo and many commentators, take what fits for me and try to improve my writing or increase my knowledge. Otherwise ‘Fu*k It’ or ‘So What’ is always at hand. 🙂

        1. You seem to be doing quite well ! You are way above the need for mindfulness it seems. Ignorance is bliss indeed!

          1. Vin: “You seem to be doing quite well ! You are way above the need for mindfulness it seems. Ignorance is bliss indeed!”

            Yes, I am well above the need for extreme control of my communication, call it what you may. Also I’m reminded by you of that control issue I left, along with the making wrong, you do so well to me and others. Not to mention your great ability to evaluate, invalidate, denigrate which is not becoming to a person of your supposed caliber. That’s why I’m not impressed with the demand to follow your teachings, sorry.

            I’d rather be ignorant in bliss than be stuck in my head! Indeed! 😀

            1. You are grossly mistaken that these are my teachings. You seem to be practicing some A=A=A. You are not free from Scientology thinking yet.

            2. Vin: You are grossly mistaken that these are my teachings.

              No, these are what I pick up from your comments, not your teachings. Hope that is clear. I have looked at your teachings only a bit, but am not interested. My button is your attempted control that I should follow or read or even understand them as an answer to so many comments from me and others, instead of writing what you are thinking at present. You seemed to stop doing that for awhile and could talk normal, then began pushing it again.

              If Geir says we should follow your mindfulness with our communication on his blog, then so be it. 🙂 If he said yes, I’d have a choice then to study it or leave. Agree?

            3. De I am not trying to control your communications. I really don’t know what your confusion is.

              I understand I am safe enough terminal for you to come after me. That is ok with me. You should flex your newfound muscles.


  27. If a person has an overwhelming desire to put another down, as in a debate, then no mindful discussion is possible.

  28. I do not wish to put 2ndxmr and marildi down. I would like to engage with them in productive discussions.

    A productive discussion is not possible with people who have their minds made up that they are right.

  29. This blog is set up for debate from the very beginning. It supports the style of putting each other down.

    Right there it is impossible to apply mindfulness in this blog. It is up to the blog owner whether he would support mindfulness.

  30. What I would like to understand is why most people on this blog are intent on putting the other person down?

    This is obvious even from the latest posts from 2ndxmr and marildi, which are written with the attitude of ridicule.

    Why is that so?

            1. May be because the love and attention for self is bigger than the love and attention for scientology tech. Life is where your attention is, imo .

  31. I think that Scientology auditing takes away the initiative of certain preclears to such a degree that they no longer want to learn anything on theri own. They become so dependent that they just want to be fed cognitions.

    To ask such preclears to learn mindfulness would be asking too much.

  32. To think that the mindfulness exercises on Vinaire’s Blog are professorial makes me laugh. How lazy can a person be!

  33. De is wrong targeting me for whatever reason. She thinks I am giving her advice or forcing her to do something when I am not.

    Now Marildi seems to be encouraging De in this situation, instead of trying to resolve De’s confusion. Why is that?

    1. Why? Because I don’t see that she is confused. She isn’t – she’s very clear on what she perceives. Just because it doesn’t conform to what you perceive doesn’t mean you know her better than she knows herself.

      1. Marildi, I shall prefer that you stop being a third party. Let De and I resolve it.


        1. LOL! Maybe you could show by example how that is done, instead of interjecting your opinions on most of my comm cycles with others. Just look at this thread alone, for example.

          1. Please, let me request you again not to start acting like a third party between De and I. We are perfectly capable of handling it ourselves. I like De and we can settle it easily.

            Please look at LRH PL on third party again. Thank you.


            1. I looked, and the term doesn’t fit. Here, you can clear it.

              “The law would seem to be: a third party must be present and unknown in every quarrel for a conflict to exist.” (HCOB 26 Dec 68)

              But Dee doesn’t need any help from me or from anybody. I mainly wanted to ack her. You keep pulling me into the exchange by writing comments to me. I’ll be happy if you leave me out of it now.

            2. “…a third party must be present and unknown in every quarrel for a conflict to exist….”
              Guess not all know the tech, but are smug smart.

              That was for you Vin. It’s not like a gang bang, one person sticks up for me and you have a problem?

              History in the making, Marildi and agree, but we are talking as human beings here and if I ever thought otherwise, well I’m sorry M.

            3. I believe that this kind of an encouragement can inflame a conflict, when things are not sorted out fully. I am still trying to sort it out with De.


            4. Vin: I believe that this kind of an encouragement can inflame a conflict”
              Really? The only conflict I see is you not understanding and sorry about that. I believe this has been sorted out fine and hope all is well with you.
              I gave my opinion and told you how I feel. I don’t hold anything against you. If you could just read, accept or understand what I say, we don’t have to agree, and it’s fine. Thanks for the discourse or whatever it’s called, more like just talking I’d say. We can let it go now, eh? Peace from all the Gods. 😀

            5. Let me see if I understand you correctly. You want me to be sorry that I restimulated you on a third flow. Please help me sort this out. Are you making me responsible for you getting restimulated on a third flow?


            6. What was the actual conflict De? I am still not sure how you needed to be defended from me, and how Marildi saved you. Could you please explain that. Thank you.


            7. Vin “..how Marildi saved you. Could you please explain..”

              OK, The actual conflict was explained in an earlier comment, you know the control thing and my speaking out?

              M. didn’t save me from anything, she joined as a friend sort of support like, showing she understood what I was saying. I’m sure you understand how simple that can be, if not sorry.

            8. My understanding is that some restimulation to do with some control thing occured on a third flow with you. Is that correct? Was it on the third flow?


            9. Vin Is “that correct? Was it on the third flow?”
              I’m finished discussing this, thanks. It’s all in the text, if you need to figure. 🙂

            1. Vin, just to clear up the karma part. It was when M mentioned that you have joined someone’s side, or words to that effect and now it’s coming back to you. That’s what I meant. Sorry wasn’t clearer. It’s in the record here to read if need.

            2. Now that would be third party, wouldn’t it? Marildi was contributing to inflaming the conflict.


  34. Now here is an interesting question, “If a person’s case gets restimulated on a third flow, who is responsible?”

    Muslim men get restimulated at the sight of women. So they force women to cover themselves up completely in burqa. Are women to be made responsible for muslim men feeling restimulated at their sight?

  35. Mindful discussions would have to deal with day-to-day dramatizations in such a way that the situation progresses toward better understanding.

    1. I wake up to more than 50 comments on this old thread….

      A long thread showing every reader how to not defuse a conflict. While Vinaire preaches Mindfulness to everyone else, this very thread has become an example of him being incapable of practicing the same. It shows Vinaire not able to let go. He must get the final word. He must be right – even when letting it go and simply walk away from the discussion would be the right action that would defuse the conflict.

      The “practice what I preach, not what I practice” while remaining Holier Than Thou is not very workable. Bookmark this thread as an example.

          1. Sigh…… there just HAS TO be a “game”, Geir!
            Nothing we can say or do, is going to change ‘that’ mind-set, me thinks. 🙂

    1. Marildi, this could be really useful for you. You can check to see if LRH really wrote NOTS or if it was instead written by someone else.

      Now, all that works that say “L. Ron Hubbard” can actually be verified by you. That way, you can know better the work LRH actually did himself or was handed off to someone else.

      Pretty cool!

      Teachers could even use this to see if students had others write papers for them.

      The possibilities are endless.

      1. Sweet of you to think of me, KG. Yes, that thing is cool. And if it really works, then I shall be forever exonerated. Go for it! 😉

        Btw, many issues were written by others for LRH, but still needed his approval, and that is common knowledge. Mayo claimed he had written the ones on NOTs, which may well have, but the real dispute was over whether or not he had been the one to develop that tech. I think it was Dan Koon, who was directly on those lines, that stated LRH had dictated to Mayo not only what to write up as the tech for NOTs but how to audit LRH in his own sessions.

        The thing tI think would be interesting to test out would be the LRH books. They seem to have very different styles to them – but I do believe some authors can do that. And in any case, it wouldn’t be a truly significant matter to me. One of the main things I give LRH great credit for is gathering together all the talented people he did, and organizing their findings along with findings from down the ages into some amazingly workable methodologies. (You’ll just have to take my word on that because you are too chicken to try. 😛 )

          1. Ditto kiddo!

            As for games, you were right in that other comment, where you said “there just HAS TO be a ‘game’!” Thing is, we want to play a better game than the one we’ve been playing. I think 2X sparked the idea, and everybody seems to be in agreement. Whoddathunk? 🙂

      2. @KG

        Get a copy of “The Poisonwood Bible” by Barbara Kingsolver and test the program against different chapters within the book. It’s a great read and a fine example of how an author can assume a valence for a character. In the case of this book she flips between the character valences, so it would be very interesting if the program could identify a single hand within the numerous apparent hands.

    – Joe Cartoon

    Do what I like, I like what I do.
    I kinda hope you like it too.
    If ya don’t, I aint gonna do stuff I don’t like – just for you
    Cuz, dancing monkey that aint me.
    Dancing monkey don’t never get to be king.
    Dancing monkey don’t dance to their own soul
    Dancing monkey don’t never get to be Kong.

    I’m gonna go where I’m gonna go.
    I’m gonna reap whatever I so.
    It might be good, it might be bad.
    Might be kick-ass, it might be sad.
    But I may never make it up the mountain.
    Cuz the rock is heavy and Father Time is countin’.
    Father time well he aint a real nice guy.
    But I’d rather die trying then just trying not to die.

    I got no fear of failure.
    I find a boat I fuckin’ sail it!
    I got me a girl whore in every port.
    They call me on the phone “Say Joe baby can I have some more?”


    So I’m gonna tread where I’m gonna tread.
    I won’t repeat what I just said.
    You go your way, I’ll go mine.
    The sun’s gonna shine, we’re gonna shine.
    I just don’t want to waste no more time.
    If you want to dance with monkeys I’ll be kind.
    But if you just want to shoot me off my building
    Oh, just remember that’s it’s you, not me, you are killing.

    Do what I like, I like what I do.
    Kinda hope you like it too.
    If you don’t FUCK YOU. Find another monkey to dance for you.
    Cuz dancing monkey, that aint me.
    Dancing monkey don’t never get to be king.
    Dancing monkey don’t dance to their own soul.
    Dancing monkey don’t never get be … KONG.

    1. The song is deeply profound especially when viewed with the cartoon. Watch what happens to the monkey and Gorilla.

      It embodies “Amor Fati” – the love of fate. The willingness to face ANY reality with your boots on.

      1. KG, you have expressed this view over the years, and I can appreciate how it could be of great workability and value for some people – and I commend you for having the ability to see its value and make it work for you. To each his own path!

        1. Thank you Marildi.

          I want to ask you something.

          Why do you hide yourself? Why do you not have a Facebook page? Surely if your technology is so powerful, it would allow you to dance with your cyber friends rather than being a mere ominous voice out of the darkness.

          Why so secret? What will you lose? And why can’t your tech keep you from losing it?

          1. The answer is simple. I still have friends as both CoS public and staff and I haven’t wanted to put myself in a position where they would have to disconnect from me. I’d like to be there for them if the time comes when they need someone to talk to about the church, or whatever. It would be more of a blow to some of them than it would be for me, to have to disconnect from me.

            As for Facebook, I had a page for a while but got so many unwanted comms from people I used to know in the church, mostly wanting to get me back on lines or sell me stuff! So I closed my account rather than having to deal with that.

            Btw, you may not know this but most of the regulars on this blog know my full name, where I live, my phone number, my history in the church and otherwise. They even know something about my sons and have posted on facebook about one of them. So I’m not as “secret” as it might seem.

            Think about it. If I were an OSA agent, why would I have written so much consistently contrasting the church with core scientology, damning the former and praising the latter?

            1. Back atcha! And I mean it too!

              (Even though you are a heathen. 😀 )

            2. Well, it was the worst I could say, as a true believer myself. ;)

            3. Maybe Marildi and I can be personal friends through e-mail. I shall never out her to the Church of Scientology if that is her concern.

            4. “If I were an OSA agent, . . .”

              About a year ago, I got it in my head that you were, or as Vin chimed in, “the many you” were OSA. But since that time, as I learned more and understood more, I changed my mind and I don’t think that anymore. Marildi is right that she comes out in private, etc., and I appreciate that vulnerability about her. Having taken 15 years after being declared a suppressive person to even begin to confront my scene toward, as Marildi might say, “COS and Scientology” for a combination of factors and fear being one of them, I find myself in no position to challenge nor judge Marildi’s path.

            5. Chris: “myself in no position to challenge nor judge Marildi’s path.
              I feel similar on that.


    “I would say that the strongest statement regarding the principle of the individual is that of Nietzsche’s philosophy and his idea of the Superman.

    “This has been a greatly MIS-represented point of view.

    “There has been a general tendency to confuse Nietzsche’s view of the Superman with his view of the Master Man.

    “They’re not the same.

    “Nietzsche speaks of the naive man animal. POWERFUL in his life who lacks however, the sense of the spirit. Then there is what he calls the ‘Man of the Decadence’ the man who is questioning man’s problems and so forth. The intellectual. The Socratic man or as he says … the SICK man.

    “The Superman combines BOTH principles. Both has the courage to live and the wit to question life – to query it. Thomas Mann in all of his writings, this is his ideal.

    “The ideal of the man with the intellect and the words that KILL that NAME life. That know all its faults. And yet, has the course and sympathy to LOVE life with its faults, and in its faults and BECAUSE of its faults.”

    – Joseph Campbell

      1. His best work is “Thus Spake Zarathustra.” I suggest reading a chapter a day. HE IS EASY TO MISUNDERSTAND.

        Look at the Nazi’s. Dumbest Nietzsche fans EVER. They didn’t get him AT ALL.

        A good book on it for people who don’t have time to decode the INTENTIONALLY off-putting text Nietzsche wrote to purposely confuse is “What Nietzsche Really Said.”

        Here is the key…

        You have to read what Zarathustra SAYS and observe what his character Zarathustra DOES to unlock the meaning of Zarathustra.

        His view on pity has been ruthless attacked and misunderstood. Pity to Nietzsche is the act of making something alive IGNOBLE and offering help in the name of that ignobility.

        He didn’t put up with that notion AT ALL.

          1. Yes. It is good and puts him in a more accurate history.

            For example:

            “In 1886 Nietzsche broke with his publisher Ernst Schmeitzner, disgusted by his antisemitic opinions.”

  38. In the current environment there is no reason why one should be hiding oneself from the Church of Scientology.

    Marildi may have other reasons. Maybe hiding oneself from the critics of Scientology.

    I do not think that the critics of Scientology are dangerous at all.

    1. Maybe Marildi is fat and ugly and that is why she doesn’t want to be seen or identified. But this may not be the reason.

      She could, in fact, be beautiful like Cinderella.

    2. I think I understand now why Marildi does not want to expose herself on Internet. But I would like to be a personal friend. 🙂

      1. You’ll have to work on your discussion policy first.

        (Kidding! 😀 )

        Btw, Vinnie, you and I have already had email comm here and there. I remember one time on a group email – you, me, Rafael and Chris were comparing our favorite beers. Remember? Oh, and this started out on the subject of some exercise you had discovered that tested one’s “health age” or something like that. And then it got into the subject of beer and its effects.

        1. Marildi, can you send me some likeness of yours so I can have some mass. Please don’t make it too different from what you look like. 🙂

          1. Okay. I shall first apply mindfulness to it. (That’s speaking in Vinaireese. 😉 )

            1. LOL!

              Okay, hows this? (And Jack Lemmon sort of remind me of you. 😀 )

            2. Actually, katageek had me spotted long ago when he likened me to Xena, the Warrior Princess:

            3. Yes, that’s me. Understated, demure, and refined. And sweet.

              And now, enough of this fun making! I’ve got battles to attend. 🙂

            4. Scared? You should be in terror!!

              Hey, you clean up pretty good. Love the black shirt and white tie look. Kinda gangsterish – but I know you better. You’re too cultured! 🙂

              Talk to you all you roughnecks later.

            5. Good picture of you Marildi, just as I would imagine. heh! You do well in battle to be sure! 😀

            6. You ain’t so bad yourself! I’ve seen you can hold your own. 😀

  39. Marildi, I don’t know your story except for what you have written.

    I honestly never thought you were OSA until Marty brought that “many IP addresses” thing up. Then Alanzo mentioned the many voices of Marildi.

    It sucks to be misunderstood.

    I’m in Dallas, so the next time you are in town, there is a vegan meal on me for you. Afterward, we can go dancing at Sons of Hermann Hall if it’s a Wednesday.

    And thank you for calling me heathen. Cuz … I AM!


    Remember, I have said your religion has some good ideas. The notion of LRH stated about 1. Be able to confront anything and 2. Don’t make someone confront something they cannot is good advice. It Is at the heart of Nietzsche’s “Amor Fati.” It’s not Hubbard’s invention, but he repackaged it nicely.

    In the Lojong proverbs confronting goes like …

    “When all the world is filled with evil transform all mishaps into the path of Bodhi.”

    In Zarathustra it sounds like …

    “Courage is the best slayer. Courage that attacks. For it slays even death itself, for it says ‘Was THAT life? Well then, ONCE MORE!'”

    And in Geir’s blog it goes…

    “So what?”

    Confronting is the greatest gift of the universe regarding liberation.

    Enlightenment IS the ACT of Confronting. Always has been.

    “Just sit. Nothing special.”

    1. KG: “It sucks to be misunderstood.”

      Did you know that according to the tech, there is no greater amount of negative emotional charge than having – or being given – a “wrong item”?

      In some of the comments you posted back when you had been labeled OSA, you seemed to be unaffected by it, but I could feeeeel the “bypassed charge” (as it’s called). Felt my own too, a few times!

      But I have to admit, some of Marty’s recent remarks about me (and there have been several!) have raised my confront – and thickened my skin. He hasn’t banned me, though – yet! 🙂

      There is definitely more freedom of speech here on Geir’s. In fact, it’s almost entirely unrestricted. (Thank you, Geir!)

      1. More on confronting…

        KG: “Confronting is the greatest gift of the universe regarding liberation…Just sit. Nothing special.”

        LRH said that too – “The world begins with TR0.” The drill is to “Just sit. Nothing special” (paraphrased 😀 ).

        Hey, maybe LRH got that whole idea from you – in one of your former lives. (See? I know all your buttons.) But now you’ve repackaged it yourself, into – “So what?” 😉

      2. Marildi: There is definitely more freedom of speech here on Geir’s. In fact, it’s almost entirely unrestricted. (Thank you, Geir!)

        It’s nice to follow it. I agree and thank Geir too. 🙂

    2. And thank you for the invitation, KG! I hope I can take you up on it some time. I love dancing! Vegan food too.

      Sons of Hermann Hall? Reminds me of a time when I was a little girl. One summer, the family all drove to a small town in central Washington State, population 300-something – one store, one gas station. That’s where my Aunt, Uncle and cousin lived. And on Saturday night everybody went to the “Grange dance.” It was so strangely familiar to me – though I had never been to such a thing (this lifetime 😉 ). I had an immediate, huge affinity for the fiddle- playing little band – and the dancing.

      Here’s some dancing for you that I think is a great example of how much fun dancing can be. You’re gonna like it.

  40. For me, the future of Scientology follows the past and goes the way of other ideologies. No better and no worse. To the degree that men and women can think for themselves and value others and their environment, we have a chance. And to the degree that we lean on ideologies to do our thinking for us, endless dark ages ensue. I’ll remember this thread for its evidence of the power and durability of fixed ideas, mental models, and ideologies. For even in the face of open hostility and a desire on all parts to simmer down that hostility, the urge to defend and promote one’s own ideology and getting in the final shot was stronger than a desire for peace.

    1. Wow, Chris. I must have missed that. Or we interpreted differently. Can you be specific?

      1. Okay. You must be talking about my comments to katageek. I can see how you might look at it that way. But I was teasing him, in part, and otherwise just finding it interesting how my “ideology” (if you want to call it that) and his were comparable. If he felt I was “getting in the final shot,” he is welcome to tell me about it and I’m sure we can straighten it out. But I will be surprised if he has anything on it. Even though I teased him about his “buttons,” I don’t really think he has any about scientology. Disagreements, yes – but not buttons, really. He’s always seemed able to discuss it easily.

        1. Thanks for looking that over but this is not just you Marildi. This is not picking on you. Others do this as well. Vinaire for one. In the middle of making nice, being apologetic, also using that venue to install links to his blog, where if you would only understand him, then the manners wouldn’t matter. And I’m not picking on him either. I am just saying that aside from a few mental changes mostly we argue forever giving our “foes” the brush of they so richly deserve. That’s how I see especially for us who have been highly trained in Scientology, to be polite but insincere when discussing other’s feelings or beliefs. Garrulous again.

          1. “That’s how I see especially for us who have been highly trained in Scientology, to be polite but insincere when discussing other’s feelings or beliefs.”

            Okay, then what or how do you think we should be discussing – assuming for the sake of argument that we would be capable of it.

            But let’s hold off for tonight since it’s getting so late. We can sleep on it.

      2. “Wow, Chris. I must have missed that. Or we interpreted differently. Can you be specific?”

        I’ve already been garrulous and am worn out from my own repartee. I enjoy being social and I am happy that tempers settled down but I don’t particularly see a meeting of minds, rather a cessation of hostilities, which of course is good. But it remains that the future of Scientology is to do endless authoritarian combat with the will of its people. The future of Scientology might endure as say a society of The Borg if the will of its members can be permanently broken and modified to a hive mentality. Islam is enjoying such an age of success promoting and enforcing just such an agenda of Sharia. I do not think and I do not hope that such a society can endure unless mankind can be genetically reprogrammed to be docile in that direction. Possibly artificial intelligence (AE) is the next and more superior evolutionary step. But for now, ideologies hold a strong grip on the psyche of Man with no end in my sights. I know, you want me to be specific and quote the passages above where with swords sheathed we made nice but still pretended the other agreed when we quoted or linked our ideologies. Anyway, that’s what I’m referring to, those passages above. Valkov has accused me of pessimism and maybe he’s right. But is it pessimism if I have a correct appraisal of man’s inability to learn from his mistakes? Am I missing some glaring evidence that Man is trending away from his wildly destructive and wasteful behavior? Is it possible that Man is hardwired in such a way that he can learn and modify his own social behavior within only a very narrow scope of possibilities? As I wrote, I have been garrulous. I should give another a turn.

        1. Chris: “I’ve already been garrulous and am worn out from my own repartee.”
          Oh love it! After looking up these words I found myself! Haha, Thanks Chris, love to read your garrulity.

          I understand what you are saying in your several posts about not seeing a meeting of minds necessarily but a cooling off, if hot, better understanding, or not in some case, then moving on.

          This blog will be remembered by me for all the learning I’ve gottn’ and gettn’, also the fun stuff like using, f**k it and so what. A great ‘course like’ in itself.

          Most important for me is ability to exchange communication even if I can’t discuss properly or with subject knowledge.

          Thanks guy/als for helping 😀

        2. Good god that was brilliant.

          YES, YES absolutely. Man’s biggest problem is our “ignorance” which is not a lack of knowledge, but being sure of just what aint so.

          Hubbard was the king of creating an “Ignorance of Certitude.” We all do it to some degree. Vinaire is doing it with his KHTK. I do it. The preachers who kept me living in Jesus Land did it.

          I agree with you that this is brain driven and we have to evolve out of it.

          Christopher Hitchens believed this. He said we are all pretty much fucked until there are a LOT more people with pre-frontal cortexes that are large enough to deal with reality in a mature manner.

          So what are to do while waiting for Superman?

          I read Zarathustra.

          To me, THAT’S exactly the point Nietzsche is making in his book.

          What the FUCK do we do while we are still collectively stupid?

          At the end, his prophet Zarathustra realizes exactly what you point out Chris. He realizes that fellow-suffering with the smart people of his day is pointless.

          It was his last “sin.”

          And he walks away from the lot of them with his friends from the animal kingdom. Joyfully, and with the strength of a day’s full sun.

          1. Vinaire believes in the following.

            “All certainties are relative. This statement does not degrade any certainty we have. It simply means that one can always come up with a better certainty.

            That is how science makes progress. Einstein declared the speed of light to be a universal constant. This is a certainty for now, but there may possibly be a wider context in which the speed of light is a special case.

            Similarly, in the field of spirituality, we cannot be absolutely certain that self or soul is permanent. The phenomenon that is described as self or soul must be open to further investigation.

            There is little progress possible for a person who believes his certainties are absolute.

            One can always improve upon a certainty one has. “

            The Quest for Certainty .


            1. Is there some charge here? This point has come up again and again. Why is this bothering you?


            2. It’s just pointing at something that seems somewhat compulsive. Would you rather I didn’t point out such on my blog?

            3. I don’t see it as advertizing. I see it as expressing my viewpoint in detail.


            4. “charity of your choice”
              Oh goodie, and it would be a substantial amount if continued at current rate. Thanks.

            5. I can give money directly to Dee here since she is in Clearwater.


            6. Currency = hugs.

              Now that would be touching! Tee, hee, very nice! A good bargain?

            7. …haha, amazing! we are at a timeless topic: does one have a
              ‘you don’t leave me much choice now’. Of course not! Did you
              really think you ever had?

            8. I see mind as a multi-dimensional matrix of definitions and logics. There are uncountable path through this matrix that comprise of options. These options are reduced as choices are made.

            9. ‘choosing’ already divides the world into ‘two’…this way the ‘one’
              has a hard time to get out of the ‘matrix’…

              ‘decide’ is life-force all along…it can be ‘continuous’, there is no
              division in it…’one’ in this way is kind of ‘flowing’ with the ‘One’…
              “one’s” life is much more interesting then, as this Life-flow is
              putting there such possibilities which when one is ‘choosing’,
              or has ‘chosen’ something will stay kind of hidden…
              (just a recent example: a friend has been put on the floor completely…that is on the surface a no-choice situation…the
              instant ‘he’ ‘surrendered’ to it, he got a new opportunity by Life…
              also, his creativity started to boost…)

            10. Is this a question to me? Then you are kidding me. From your
              question i see that you already know the answer. Also, in a
              much earlier com with Geir you gave the answer based on
              your experience.

        3. Yes, I wonder about those kind of things myself. I’m not a good one to chide anyone else about pessimism about humanity.
          Book recommendation: “Demonic Males”, by I forget who, but should be easy to find. It is a study of chimpanzee societies based on the discovery that chimp and human DNA are 99% alike, and that seems to correlate to similar patterns of violence and imperialism which appear to be gratuitous, and unique among the great apes. But perhaps there is hope –
          Remember the bonobo discussion?

          1. “But perhaps there is hope –Remember the bonobo discussion?”

            Just barely. Bonobo, chimps, and man fork from one branching fork of primates. (Please no forking jokes) Getting murderously angry as well as the rest of the spectrum of emotions seem to be physically quantifiable and somewhat predictable. Evolution occurs at different rates depending on environmental conditions. I wonder if the environment of the Information Age will produce an acceleration in the mental evolution of Man? Does Man provide the conditions necessary for his own mental evolution? Is there a Renaissance in Man’s near future? Or is there a coming dark age? Must these two alternate?

            1. The Internet and cellphones are the opiate of the people, as well as a fantastic medium for transmission of enlightening information. Whatever will happen is likely to happen a lot sooner and faster don’t you think?.

    1. Regarding Chris’ point friend … what does KHTK stand for?

      Knowing .. How .. to … KNOW.

      One last bit on Zarathustra. It’s easy to be brave in fiction.

      Heroes are much braver in fiction and never die. Batman can fight for decades without guns in fiction. In fact, he can fight guns with a twelve year old!

      And if Zarathustra were real, he would eventually get lonely and return to his cave to be with his friends.

      But he would be a lot better at dealing with their delusional bullshit as well as his own.

      “Zarathustra, I just know that the spirit of St. Phallus is talking to you…”

      “Pass the wine,” said Zarathustra staring at Andromeda.

        1. Chris made the point above Vin. He nailed it. So did Nietzsche. So did Godel.


          Oh, here, I’ll put it this way.

          KTHK fails just as good as Scientology. It fails just as good as Zen. It fails just as good as Christianity. It fails just as good as Nietzsche. It fails just as good as Rathbun’s future “Marty-Netics.”

          It’s fails just as good. Really. It’s not a disagreement I have with your philosophy as much as my realization that all philosophies and tautologies are bullshit.

          1. That’s a whole lot of failing going on, hah! I like your points.

            The thing I noticed on the many blogs I look at is, there is No One who promotes their own blog and philosophy as Vin does. My 2 cents.

          2. As I see there is no other option but to enjoy the bullshit.

            But you seem to be resisting something. Could you please explain that!


          3. “Oh the humanity of it all!”
            Ren Hoek

            If each one fails just as well as the others, how is that any different than saying each one succeeds just as well as the others?

            1. Yes I see what you mean. But my take is in the real world, there are shades of grey, not everybody this or everybody that…..

              A concrete example is, if everyone had a college degree(what used to be the Holy Grail in the USA) a college degree would not necessarily be an advantage in terms of career success and paying the bills, saving for retirement etc.
              On the other hand, “a chicken in every pot” which was a presidential election slogan of Herbert Hoover’s in 1928, would definitely be far better than no chicken at all in any pot.

            2. I’m very pessimistic about that. All those guys in the polluting industries and corporations have college degrees, as well as the politicians who enable them have college degrees. They use whatever intelligence they have to evade regulation.
              I think the problem is, you can’t educate for conscience very well. Of course I’m looking at the US scene.
              In US politics, money still talks
              There is hope though. Just now the US Senate is planning to introduce a Constitutional Amendment to nullify a SCOTUS ruling which allowed corporations to heavily influence elections with their spending. If this Amendment is passed, it will go a long way towards getting corporate money out of politics.

            3. Geir: “If everybody had a college degree…”

              Uh huh? The irony in this,Geir, is that the Bushman (nomads) of South West Africa, DON’T! (not even, in most cases, ANY formal education at all) Just a simple, workable existence that provides for their basic needs. And IN real harmony with nature.
              (And there are other, similar, nomadic human “earthlings”.)

              Conversely, we “educated” ones, mostly haven’t a clue what “living in real harmony with nature” actually means!!

              It appears we have a ‘held-down-seven’ (perception block) preventing us from really being “in -touch” with Earth and her overwhelming majority of species.

              That eco-“unfriendly” perception block, the exclusive preserve of “Mankind”? ………….. “I WANT”

              Broadly speaking (from Earth’s/ Nature’s symbiotic “viewpoint”)

              ….am I WRONG about this ??

            4. “If everybody had a college degree, then maybe we could solve the climate issue.”

              I applaud your nations willingness to give anyone who wants to go there a college education Geir.

            5. “I applaud your nations willingness to give anyone who wants to go there a college education Geir.”

              +1. American education is stupid expensive and there is never a shortage of complaining from education that they are underfunded. Education in America is big business. Texas, where KG lives, is the friendliest to students (I think) and it’s still stupid expensive.

            6. Chris: “Another irony….”

              “Dead wrong, Chris! How many toxic chemicals have been produced, and pumped into our atmosphere today alone, bro?

              Toxic pollution, water, waste and sewerage, decimated the river fish, and wound up in the ocean? Uncontrolled microwave radiation already killed off the primordial defense (immune) systems of countless life organisms, including man and ‘his’ animals with unprecedented increases of deadly cancers?

              Of course you are totally ‘free’ to dismiss the content of this ‘rant’, and make it ‘personal’.

              Shifting the focus, from being ‘sensible’ to what you’re attempting to do, is sad, indeed.

              If you lived in my part of the world, (South Africa) or say the squalor in India,you may begin to appreciate exactly how
              fucked up, mankind can get, (even with his college degrees) when his priorities (money, power, greed, want) get totally out of sync. with the natural order, and how crucial it is, in maintaining a balance of population (species) control.

              To close, I am a strong activist in the preservation of threatened species, and harmful exploitation of natural resources, affecting those fellow ‘earthlings’, who DON’T have a voice, as we DO.

              Do you even care about that, Chris?? Or is what “you” WANT, more important?

              Wakey, wakey, Chris!.. Although totally convinced otherwise, this planet DOESN’T just belong to ‘man’, you know?

            7. The conventional wisdom in the Western Christian traditions is that God gave Man “dominion” over nature, as though Man was somehow above it all, and that we could endlessly piss in our soup and it would still nourish us and we would still survive…..
              The relevance in terms of regard and consideration for all the dynamics should be obvious.

            8. ” . . . and that we could endlessly piss in our soup and it would still nourish us and we would still survive…..”

              All things do this. All lifeforms, move ahead along their path for as long as they can. When the food is gone or the environment is too poisoned with waste, they die. Others take their place. This a basic high school biology experiment on populations using pond water kept in a jar by the window. Mental sophistication brings about a measure of forethought. Maybe Man is the most capable of forethought. I wonder if it will be enough to stave off the ruination of our environment and the end of ours and other species?

            9. “Us? Not so much.”

              I don’t really agree with the twist that Man is unforgivable for his destruction. I think that Man pollutes as a by-product and not as an evil. Same as a whale shitting in the ocean. Because Man is a more capable polluter compared to other species, is this a reason to be disgusted or discouraged with him?

              So come back around to my earlier comments about Man’s ability (or not) to learn from his mistakes. Does he? Did Calvin drive an automobile or take public transportation or turn on his computer or light bulb without a thought to how this would affect the rest of us today? Is Calvin a lying hypocrite because he preaches conservation and then shits where he eats? No. He’s just being a natural human. Can man learn and work around his forward push toward ultimate destruction? I so do not know.

              What I really think is that anticipation, prediction, forethought, foresite, planning, preparedness, care, caution, etc., are new developments in evolution. Will these abilities produce behaviors that stave off extinction in a new and novel way like never before in the history of life on Earth? In the known history of Man, it has not. For there is no old government on Earth. Probably you and I won’t live to see if Man succeeds, but very soon I think our progeny will. It’s fun to think what Man might become given enough time to un-cross these diminishing resource vs. expanding pollution curves. But if not, then, well, try again later as some think we already have done and failed many times in the past.

              I think Hubbard is wrong to assert that in all the millenia Scientology is Man’s only chance. I think good mindful science and education is Man’s best chance. Scientology failed to handle even itself, let alone all the hopes of Mankind.

            10. That’s what I meant. Man supposedly has the ability to reflect upon what he is doing and causing. Supposedly.

            11. Ahh … sanity prevails. Valkov, perhaps this is a good time, just to reflect on the Ol’ man’s discovery of the “comm formula”, which became the indispensable tool of effective auditing ?


              Speaking of “auditing”, I bet there are other life forms around on our planet, who could do with a little ‘counselling’, over what ‘we’ have done to their ‘needs’ too.

              The whole gamut of what happens, when we ‘fail’ to ‘duplicate’, what, how, why, we only have a ‘contributory role’ to play, in the perpetuation of this incredible life sustaining planet we share, with countless other species of inhabitants.

              How come, Val, we seem to be The Only Actively Dumb Species
              *(TOADS) ? We seem to be alone, in not ‘getting’ (duplicating),
              how to harmonize our ‘existence’ in nature, without (eventually) destroying it for practically all other habitat dependent species?

              * (with sincere apologies to the above mentioned actual species, for using their somewhat innocuous ‘term’, in a derogatory sense!! 🙂 )

            12. Maybe we really are “not from around here”? Maybe we are strip-miners, or slash and burn agriculturalists, from another galaxy? Nobody here but us “thetans”?

            13. Valkov: “Maybe we really are not from around here?”….

              — Calvin: ..That sits well in the hypotheses, doesn’t it? 🙂

              Still doesn’t excuse our ‘aberrated’ (departure from rationality) decimation of our habitat of “all” just to satisfy our proclivities to assert (exert?) our “wants” & domination of ALL! …Does it?

              If we’re not learning from our mistakes, (NOT observing the consequences of our notions and actions) ..duh! . den we jus’ like, um, er, repeats, ’em, huh?

  41. In my reality, I seem to be violating the gradient of promotion, along with gradient of understanding.

    Your point taken. 🙂

    1. What I’m holding back is that “Thus Spake Zarathustra” is mostly Scientology without the mind control, bullshit notions and false promises. The book lacks a tone scale and a Thetan, but look at chapter 42 at the end. It’s funny that Hubbard dissed him while lifting or using Nietzsche’s ideas as his own.

      That said, Nietzsche hated authoritarian structures and would have most likely abhorred Scientology as a religion. Remember, this guy CHOSE TO BE STATELESS.

      And I find it hilarious that Rathbun dissed him recently.

      Find the comparable terms in Scientology …

      Will to Power = ?
      Eternal Return = ?
      Superman = ?
      Courage = ?

          1. All I know for sure is something I read on this blog somewhere. I wish I remembered the writer. I think it was Chris. I wrote it down on a card sans the author’s name.

            “The only thing I know for sure is that whatever frame of reference or thought I can create is not the whole picture.”

            1. I love this quote:

              ‘If you want to know something, go elsewhere. I you want to
              un-know everything, then sit and listen’. (Adyashanti)

  42. I think that everyone is trying to understand, and then write for others what they understood. Even Nietzsche did that. In some that pressure is more than it is in others.

    I am going to curb that pressure now as far as I am concerned and just focus on writing for myself on my blog and addressing confusions on as they come up in conversation with others.

    1. Karma is pure tautology.

      noun: (in Hinduism and Buddhism) the sum of a person’s actions in this and previous states of existence, viewed as deciding their fate in future existences.
      informal:destiny or fate, following as effect from cause.

      Karma is a egotistical attempt on the personal level to reconcile the net sum zero of Karma at the physical level. Hubbard preached Karma as a social and political tool.

        1. “Karma is 2 + 2 = 4,” minus 4 = 0

          But when we try to apply this, we find out this doesn’t work out at all. Life is not really like balancing a checkbook because that simplistic equation is the wrong equation. It is rather like a Julia or a Mandelbrot set. A few degrees of separation make the result too complicated to follow without a God computer. When we embrace this fractal, Karma can come back into view; However, the result will never be so even handed as a linear arithmetic problem. There will be a resultant answer, yes. But the resultant answer may seem mysterious enough to impel us to coin phrases such as “God moves in mysterious ways, his wonders to perform.” In summation, it’s all in there. But how long and how far to dig it out? This is the hard work ahead for us in science.

            1. Kamma is intention, Vipāka is consequence, then you got kammavipāka. A theravada buddhist explained that kamma is a person’s intention of crossing a street, Vipāka was the outcome of being hit by a car, because he was stupid enough.

            2. Good post Hover Sauce, but that arithmetic is too simplistic. If it were that simple then prediction would be simple and accurate.

            3. It doesn’t seem to simplistic to me. The variable factor is “stupidity”, How does one compute that?

            4. It doesn’t seem to simplistic to me. The variable factor is “stupidity”, How does one compute that?

              My point is that the sum total of what is going on in one’s life is not simple arithmetic, it is complicated arithmetic. The complication is due to the enormity of the processes going on. Maybe not knowing this is the basis of stupidity. Or maybe thinking that a person getting run over by a bus is due to stupidity is stupid. Regardless, I maintain that whatever engine drives roiling space-time is enormous, hence the complications.

            5. OK I get it. I agree. The theory of ‘karma’ seems to me to have little or no predictive value for that very reason. Like trying to predict the exact motion of one molecule in a cloud of gas.

            6. It is not a predictive tool, it is a doctrine of the “here and now”. The Vipaka is the correct concept of the misused “karma” on popular culture, and it could be seen as the result of our actions that gives us a new experience that promotes a predisposition again (kamma). The “stupidity” concept means that there is not predestination on crossing that street (and there is not predestination at all), the person being hit by a car has made something wrong to get on that situation, even if that means not being careful enough (a gradual loss of awareness). Another better example would be: Kamma is wanting to help people and create a better world. Vipaka is being a scientologist, and being trapped.

            7. Vipaka is telling someone he is stupid, and getting a bad reaction. Kamma was the motivation to do so. And yes, a theravada buddhist said stupid as an example, as if that doesn’t happen so often, no sir, buddhists are very kind people and they never insult anyone’s ego. (irony would be kamma)

            8. “. . . no sir, buddhists are very kind people and they never insult anyone’s ego.”

              I tried to follow that but I’m not familiar with those terms so I didn’t. Fair dealing and good manners is good to practice in life but is it a guarantee of a particular result? I say no. Karma is a mental, conceptual, contextual, and metaphorical tool. If we let go of all context, all meaning goes with it. We can only value a tool for its consequences for a particular use.

            9. “It is not a predictive tool, it is a doctrine of the “here and now”.”

              I think it’s a predictive tool. It predicts that a person reaps what they sew, and yet they sometimes do and they sometimes do not, thus my saying that idea is not that simple and to the degree that we try to standardize it, it can be seen to be inconsistent, sort of like palm reading.

            10. Karma is essentially a very complex cycle of action that is moving forward towards its completion in slow motion. There is a sense of inevitability associated with it. If that cycle is hindered then all kind of repercussions result from it. Again those repercussions force the movement of that cycle toward its completion.

              For example, a person borrows some money. To complete that cycle the debt needs to be discharged. If it is not discharged as it was agreed upon then various repercussions come about. This cycle continues to influence all those associated with it, one way or another, until that debt is discharged.

            11. Parents raise their children with care. Children owe their parents for that care. When parents are old and vulnerable they need care. Children have to pay that debt to their parents to complete the cycle. If that doesn’t happen, and such incomplete cycles start to build up, then the social fabric starts to break down.

            12. When a person with a ‘problem-body’ dies, and a person is born with ‘good-body’ but with memories of that ‘problem-body’ do we have the continuation of the same soul whose wishes are now fulfilled because of some good karma? The answer is not so simple. The only fact here is that a memory of another life is there. Whether it is the same soul can only be speculated.

            13. The actual karmic cycle is that of the combinations of chromosomes that bring about a certain person. If you look objectively, there are physical atoms and molecules that go into the construction of the new body. Then there are also spiritual “atoms” and “molecules” in the form of memories and considerations that go into the construction of the new soul. There are infinite number of permutations and combinations in which all these factors combine to produce a person.

            14. So, a person is what he is. His memories are what they are. Memories are part of the current configuration of body and soul. One has to make the best out of the cards he is dealt with in this life, rather than trying to figure out why he is the way he is. Is this the result of some karma? Yes. But that karma is beyond that one person’s actions. It is karma at a much larger, universal scale.

    1. And all the levels of earthly atmosphere are “air.” They are not the same density of air though are they? The personal need for certainty drives the density of belief. Belief is to ideology as electromotive force is to electron.

  43. Nietzsche overman is very different from Scientology OT.

    “The love and acceptance of one’s path in life is a defining characteristic of the overman. Faced with the knowledge that he would repeat every action that he has taken, an overman would be elated as he has no regrets and loves life. Opting to change any decision or event in one’s life would indicate the presence of resentment or fear; contradistinctly the overman is characterized by courage and a Dionysian spirit.”

    1. Yup. He can’t change the Universe. He can’t fly. He can’t pick up ash trays with his head. He just CONFRONTS it with a LOVE of life.

      It’s important to not that Nietzsche didn’t believe in a multiverse.

      He believed in eternal return: that the universe was just an old fashioned record that played the same universe over and over like a Netflix movie.

      So he chose to FACE that reality. He chose to love it.

      “So that was life? Once more then!”

      After all, he faced it a million times before right? He was strong enough then, so is he now.

      But when you consider a MULTIVERSE, where anything with you is possible, it makes it even more fun.

      And Nietzsche is at his best when he is wrong. He uses circular reasoning, unsupported statements and all kinds of bad reasoning.

      And he knew that.

      “A Book for All and None.”

      1. I don’t want to rewrite the whole post on Nietzsche here that I have just published on my blog. You can see it there.


      2. “And Nietzsche is at his best when he is wrong. He uses circular reasoning, unsupported statements and all kinds of bad reasoning.”

        Kind of like me!

        1. “And Nietzsche is at his best when he is wrong. He uses circular reasoning, unsupported statements and all kinds of bad reasoning”

          “Chris: Kind of like me!”

          If he also contradicts himself regularly, then me too !!!

            1. Why do I feel like doing Tequila shots and singing with you tonight Rafael?
              We´ll get it done some day Bro 🙂

  44. Basically, Nietzsche was very dissatisfied with the current morality and the condition of man. He dreamed of evolution of man toward Übermensch, a state that transcended the current state of man. Nietzsche was looking for coherency and consistency in nature.

    “While Nietzsche injects myriad ideas into the book, a few recurring themes stand out. The overman (Übermensch), a self-mastered individual who has achieved his full power, is an almost omnipresent idea in Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Man as a race is merely a bridge between animals and the overman. Nietzsche also makes a point that the overman is not an end result for a person, but more the journey toward self-mastery.” ~ Wikipedia

    The word “self-mastery” is the key to understanding the above passage correctly. Übermensch was not created by adding, training or inculcating “desirable” characteristics in man. Übermensch was an evolution brought about by reducing man to his natural state.

    To Nietzsche, Übermensch was a state in which man was congruent with his natural self.


    “The eternal recurrence, found elsewhere in Nietzsche’s writing, is also mentioned. “Eternal recurrence” is the possibility that all events in one’s life will happen again and again, infinitely. The embrace of all of life’s horrors and pleasures alike shows a deference and acceptance of fate, or Amor Fati. The love and acceptance of one’s path in life is a defining characteristic of the overman. Faced with the knowledge that he would repeat every action that he has taken, an overman would be elated as he has no regrets and loves life. Opting to change any decision or event in one’s life would indicate the presence of resentment or fear; contradistinctly the overman is characterized by courage and a Dionysian spirit.” ~ Wikipedia

    We may understand the character of Übermensch by looking at self per “A Model of Self.”

    A self as made up of a multi-dimensional matrix of “definitions and logics.” This matrix was distorted as social, cultural, and moral contexts were forced in place. Such distortions then reduced the potential of man and made him behave irrationally. This was the current state of man. By resolving such inconsistencies man could be propelled toward the state of Übermensch.

    For Nietzsche, a resolution of the social, cultural, and moral contexts was necessary to evolve man toward Übermensch.


  45. Übermensch of Nietzsche is just the opposite of the Operating Thetan of Hubbard.

    Übermensch is reality-centric (congruent), whereas OT is self-centric (narcissistic).

    1. Oh, I don’t know Vin … What IS that upset at the end of 42?

      And I’ll complete the Scientology word association game I put above. They aren’t EXACT but they do connect.

      Will to Power = Theta
      Eternal Return = Time Track
      Superman = Homo Novis
      Courage = Confront


      Chapter 42

      All “It was” is a fragment, a riddle, a fearful chance–until the creating Will saith thereto: “But thus would I have it.”–

      Until the creating Will saith thereto: “But thus do I will it! Thus shall I will it!”

      But did it ever speak thus? And when doth this take place? Hath the Will been unharnessed from its own folly?

      Hath the Will become its own deliverer and joy-bringer? Hath it unlearned the spirit of revenge and all teeth-gnashing?

      And who hath taught it reconciliation with time, and something higher than all reconciliation?

      Something higher than all reconciliation must the Will will which is the Will to Power–: but how doth that take place? Who hath taught it also to will backwards?

      –But at this point in his discourse it chanced that Zarathustra suddenly paused, and looked like a person in the greatest alarm. With terror in his eyes did he gaze on his disciples; his glances pierced as with arrows their thoughts and arrear-thoughts. But after a brief space he again laughed, and said soothedly:

      “It is difficult to live amongst men, because silence is so difficult– especially for a babbler.”

      1. “… and why does Zarathustra speak differently to his disciples than unto HIMSELF?”

        That there is one smart cripple. Yes sir.

          1. There is no magic power. There is only reality clean and untwisted… and then whatever is beyond it. 🙂


        1. Well, Zarathustra speaks differently to cripples because they have to clean up their self from all the alter-is first. They have to remove all the charge screwing up their self first.

          Now, once the person is in his pristine natural self then to him the teaching would be different.


      2. I have to read the whole book to get the context and to fully understand what Nietzsche is talking about. However, from a cursory glance, it seems to be the question about, “Does reality come from will, or will come from reality?” Which one of these two concepts is the superset?

        This is at the heart of my essay on Nietzsche’s philosophy on my blog.

    1. Fascinating what these boys (and girls?) have have ‘uncovered’, Val.

      What I find equally fascinating, is how the one pic, closely resembles a “zoom-in”, of the neuron/axon electrical firings of the brain in action!

      Indeed, perhaps the microcosm of the patterns of atomic / molecular activity, mirror the grander “version”, the scientists are grappling with in that presentation?

      That is, if absolutes (infinitesimally small / large) are as unapproachable as infinity?

      FACTOR 1. …..”Before the the beginning, was a Cause and the entire purpose of the Cause was the creation of effect”

      (The Factors, logics, Axioms, impart a degree of rationality to permit an ‘immortal being’ to escape the limitations of a ‘mind’ entrapped by self imposed limitations to perceive, pose and resolve the ‘problems’ of MEST.)

      Still handy ‘tools’ to achieve ‘understanding’, don’cha think? 🙂

      1. In the overwhelming scale of possible “Xenu’s”, who might, or might not be as common as the names “John”, or “vinaire”, you might be missing some other ‘clear’ identifying feature, other than “Galactic Overlord”!

        Mebbe those ‘GO’s’ turn out to as common as ‘weeds’ for all we know ? 🙂

        1. Could there be some metaphysical significance to Xenu? For example, can we think of infinite regress that is stopped by the idea of Xenu?

          We try to stop thinking of infinite regress by using inherently inconsistent concepts, such as, “Unmoved mover,” and “Uncaused cause.” We may therefore dream up of an “Unruled ruler.” or Ded-Dedex.


            1. Infinite regress is when you ask what caused the First Cause, and ask about the cause of that cause, and so on till cows come home.


            2. Lol Vinay, your way of touching deep philosophical concepts like this one is hilarious . Well, I guess that we are not up to the consciousness level to assert if there is a first volitive cause of the big bang or if there is any purpose involved for this big amount of energy movement amongst Galaxy superclusters. So, instead of denying the existence of an uncaused cause, unmoved mover or any kind of unruled ruler I would go for increasing my own capability to look what is out there even if it is unfamiliar to my current frame of reference. imo.

            3. That is correct. So I would put the infinite regress under “no awareness” part of the dichotomy “awareness – no awareness.” Then all I have to do is to deal with the universe of awareness only.


    2. Neat.
      Took my telescope out yesterday and tried a new set of eyepieces and also my new spectroscopy filter. Wonderful sights. Eager to tale up astrophotography. Looking at objects far, far away brings perspective to life 😊

    3. Off-topics are just fine here. I am holding the posting till Wednesday as I will hold a talk on Scientology and my book on Tuesday and think this blog post serves well as the one on top.

  46. Of all the dichotomies in this universe, the most interesting dichotomy is “awareness – no awareness.”

    For awareness, “no awareness” acts as the ground state. We may say that whatever arises in awareness transitions from the ground state of “no awareness.”

    If you are out in interstellar space with nothing else as a reference point, you could be still or moving at the speed of light, and you would know no differently. In short, you will have no awareness of your motion in the absence of something else to compare it to.

    Awareness depends on relative motion. When there is no relative motion there is no awareness.

    We may identify the ground state as “no relative motion” and “no definition”. Awareness may then be referenced from this ground state as the “degree and characteristics of relative motion”.

    Awareness is the degree and characteristics of relative motion.

    The whole universe appears in awareness because of its relative motion. There is no reference point in awareness that can be totally fixed.

    There is no absolute static that one can be aware of.


  47. Hi Geir. Just a day or two before your new OP release.

    Having just reviewed some of David Mayo’s, video presentations, has once again confirmed to me, that NO real progress is possible, in the rehabilitation of a being having become degraded, (through any cause whatsoever), without that rehabilitation including the inseparable triangles of ARC / KRC.

    Simply stated, let’s remember that it is the “rudiments”, which play a qualifying role in determining whether a person is sessionable, for auditing, or not.

    That, of course, would translate to a person “heavily ARC – Xn”, BY or WITH scn. not being able to progress with that subject, (or any other “blameworthy” cause), until such upset had been correctly identified, indicated, and/or handled and the “charge” released therefrom. That of course, would also have to include the other “out-ruds”, which may also inhibit or prevent, or even be militant against a free “flow”, of theta (ARC) taking place.

    It is all basically simple stuff, really. However, the simplicity of the basics of auditing, have now been set upon, by those who have a different agenda/ set of “values” to serve!

    “Duplication”. What fortitude is required to just continue to do that, in spite of the noise and clamor to discontinue?

    Yet how “else” may we truly “understand” anything? 🙂

    1. I believe it is indeed possible for a person to progress despite ARCXs, PTPs or MW/Hs. I have seen people in really bad shape, down and out, come to their senses given the right coaching in their special situation. And sometimes they come to their senses all on their own.

      1. Thanks for that Geir. Yes again, to what you have said.

        However, do you agree with the notion that it is really only possible to “understand” following “duplication” ??

        1. Can I understnd a person’s point of view without duplicating what he says? I will let that hang for a bit and get back with my answer.

            1. Hi Val,,

              You mean to just skip the symbols and go straight to Know? I bet Geir is OT enough to have done that many times. Why do you suppose he’s comm lagging? 😉

              Or, if we don’t want to use any scientologese, we could call it telepathy, a perfectly good non-scn word.

              Actually, Geir has been posting with the pro-gang lately, over on Marty’s. Yay, Geir!

          1. Impossible to miss your level of ‘duplication’ -touche!
            Not to mention the kopykat intro’s either
            Evals, invals and glass shards in the mix, complete the pix!

  48. …the power of clear presence ( no thought), life-flow and love
    can work miracles ( i saw that working despite of ‘degradation’).
    In fact, no matter what the cause of de-‘grading’ is…life when
    pure sees life as pure in ‘another’ and this alone produces

    1. Well I never!.. More evidence of ‘duplication’ .. this time we see that it produces ‘change’. Btw, as-is-ness, (seeing something as it is), implies that self same ‘duplication’, to have occurred. 🙂

      1. …thanks ray…i am also looking at the question Geir asked and
        your answer to me too…it truely helps raising my awareness in
        this question…thanks!!!

Have your say

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s