It takes time to unravel the scientology mindset. Perhaps it never happens, especially for those raised in it. I know I am still working to untangle my thoughts from those inculcated in me from a young age. And when one of the first ideas hammered home is that Ron has provided the answers to all of life’s problems and that all you need is to “do what Ron says,” it sets you on a path to formulating a world-view that is shaped in every way by “Ron.”
There is a defining characteristic of scientologists. Certainty. Certainty that they alone know the path to happiness and spiritual enlightenment. Certainty they know the answers to all of life’s problems – for themselves and every man, woman and child on this planet and anywhere in the universe. That certainty is built until it becomes an impregnable wall that repels all uncertainties, doubts or questions about whether scientology is right or wrong. In some ways, it is a comfort not having to think or worry about decisions or moral questions, but instead to be absolutely certain that you know the answers and the right thing to do at every turn.
L. Ron Hubbard was prolific. He wrote millions of words on scientology and delivered thousands of lectures. He explained things in invented terms and acronyms, creating a jargon that makes it difficult for outsiders to comprehend. It is a secret code for those inside the scientology bubble. There is little Hubbard did NOT expound on — from the origins of the universe to who is really trying to destroy planet earth. From how to relieve phobias, raise your child, cure cancer, increase your IQ and cure homosexuality to the correct method for washing windows (with newspaper). Virtually nothing escaped his special proclaimed expertise and he spoke of it all with unflinching certainty. Never one to understate his genius, Hubbard proclaimed his knowledge of life had surpassed everyone in history. His certainty is then a mantle assumed by his followers, who believe that by studying the words of Ron, they too have the only correct answers to every problem faced by anyone, anywhere, ever. They know they are superior beings to the “run of the mill homo saps” because they have learned all the answers. Hubbard even coined a term for scientologists — a new breed of man: “homo novis.”
Hubbard boasted that he was “not from this planet” and was the only person in all the quadrillions of years of existence to have unlocked the mysteries of life and solved the “bank” or reactive mind, the thing that prevents anyone from being all powerful. In his most important writing, hammered into every scientologist, Keeping Scientology Working, he announced: “Our technology has not been discovered by a group. We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise above the bank. We are dealing only in facts and the above is a fact…” Hubbard made clear, and asserted it was indisputable fact, that he had done what no man had ever been able to do. If you agree with this idea, as every scientologist does, then it is easy to agree with everything else he proclaimed.
The proof that this IS what scientologist believe is readily apparent. I was reminded of it by this recent promotional item.
“Source… puts you at cause–no matter the circumstances.”
“Get the tech of life and how to handle any situation, as LRH would.”
There is at least ONE glaring exception to the “almost everything” that Ron expounded upon: Love. It’s strange that he had no impulse to explain it away or something. I suppose that late-life issue on Sex and the Psychs, whatever its name was, was a feeble attempt, but NOTHING in the foundational issues and lectures. Could it be that he realized he didn’t have a clue? I’m told the Greeks had 4 words for LOVE; his best attempt seems to be the very weak-tea, “affinity”. I guess he didn’t understand it. Certaily, he showed no inclination towards FEELING it.
Agreed, at least one.
It’s instructive to consider the topics LRH didn’t think were worth pontificating on, and didn’t occur to him at all.
He wrote little to nothing on love, compassion, empathy, mindfulness, equanimity, suffering, and forgiveness.
A former scientologist has only to look at the writings of whom Hubbard claimed to be a reincarnation of to see all of these essential topics on our human experience expanded upon brilliantly.
Agreed.
OT
On the Important reading list on the front page of the site there is “Perfectly Clear – Michelle LeCaire”
It’s LeClaire though. 🙂
The good news is if you can find a crack in that facade, the whole thing comes down like a house of cards. I have had success by asking Scientologists to name one thing that Hubbard said that they disagree with, or even something Scientology management or Miscavige said or did that they disagreed with. It’s like finding a loose thread on a sweater and pulling on it. The whole thing starts to unravel.
Jeff. Great comment indeed. Many people have relatives who are still in and this could be a good piece of “tech” to use to get these people waking up. Great.
Good one.
I always very much enjoy reading your take on things. Your book Counterfeit Dreams is my Book One. It really did put my feet firmly on the road out and the writings on your blog, especially the one I believe called Thought Stopping (which was my first introduction to that term) was a blast of fresh clean air into my mind.
Jefferson, good advice.
Really, who gives a f**k what LRH would do. And if you don’t know what to do, and have to depend on what LRH would do in order to act, then you’re a fu**in puppet. If the philosophy you’re studying, in order to become more certain, doesn’t put you in a state of mind where you can make your own decisions based on what YOU think you should do…… Possibly you should look elsewhere.
This was eventually a deal-breaker for me.
Hubbard used to promote himself as a nuclear physicist.
While studying Scientology I gradually came to realize that his understanding of science was not even up to the level of the average 10th grader. In my early days in Scientology I assiduously word-cleared everything I disagreed with on the subjects of physics and chemistry. Eventually, I abandoned this after realizing that Hubbard was just plain wrong .
Another subject which he clearly knew very little about was history, but he used to write about it as though he was an expert. I will mention one instance which was particularly pernicious.
In one of the tapes that new staff members study, Hubbard states that he read The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon, a claim which I sincerely doubt. He says that he was shocked to find how the most crazy emperors were the ones that died in their beds while the ones that tried to do good were invariably murdered. He mentions Tiberius as, an old pervert who died a natural death and Caligula who made his horse a consul. From this, he says, he realized that in order for Scientology to survive, ethics must be very harsh.
So here are the problems with this. Out of the early emperors who could be considered tyrants, it is true that Tiberius died in his bed, but all of the others met with violent ends, namely Caligula, Nero and Domitian. In any event, Gibbon says very little about these early Emperors but begins with the heyday of the Roman Empire and the “Five Good Emperors”, starting with Nerva and ending with Marcus Aurelius. All of these emperors met with natural deaths and none were deposed.
So Hubbard.s assertions and conclusions were entirely false. And to make this the grounds for imposing a harsh system of ethics is truly dreadful.
I walked out the door of Mormonism last December and since then I have pondered numerous parallels between L. Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith. Both claimed to have inside knowledge about various areas but in reality were way off the mark. Both started out with a book(Joseph Smith-The Book of Mormon, L. Ron Hubbard-Dianetics) but then had to augument their position through introducing new teachings, many of which went against the original books they had written. I could go on with this but I don’t want to take up too much space on this blog.
Welcome out Alcoboy. Wishing you well in your new life.
Thank you.
I noticed the same thing about Rome. Also my daughter told me that Hubbard had the entire French Revolution wrong.
I agree about the physics part. One of the reasons I got in was I was interested in the possibility of Eastern thought to have an impact on Western physics (I had read The Tao of Physics and Dancing Wu Li Masters as a kid, along with Einstein and John A Wheeler) as well as the possible impact of Western thought on Eastern mysticism.
I never heard of the Buddha talking about establishing a “one to many relationship” or other engineering concepts that are native to me so I hoped maybe Scientology was like fast Buddhism.
Unfortunately, neither turned out to be the case. I never heard any CofSer claim to have ended the cycle of life, death, and rebirth. Not only did Hubbard provide no insight into physics but in one of the “Study Tapes” (the first course taken in the Scientology Academy lineup) Hubbard made clear his ignorance of one of the most fundamental physics concepts of the last century.
He criticized Einstein saying that there may be nothing to his work because light coming out of a prism must travel at different speeds in order to split so the Constant “C” isn’t really constant.
Except C is only a constant when traveling in a vacuum! When traveling through different media such as a prism it’s a totally different ballgame. I knew that when I was 12! Newton had mapped out how prisms work hundreds of years ago.
Hubbard was ignorant of the very basics of physics that even a smart schoolboy knows!
When I later ran across a copy of “All About Radiation” that Hubbard was a “nuclear physicist” I couldn’t even believe the outright lie. Except I had been lied to so often while in CofS that I believed it after all.
Yes – I also picked up on Hubbard’s nonsense about prisms and the speed of light.
I was originally a Physics Major so I knew this didn’t make any sense right from the get-go.
Hubbard liked to rail against Einstein , relativity and the concept that the speed of light is the absolute limit to how fast anything can travel.
It is very unfortunate for him that he was unable to prove any of these ideas.
Had he been able to do so then the Nobel Prize that he so craved would have been his for the taking. No doubt about it.
Exactly. I hear Hindus also take shots at Einstein from time to time as well. At some Hindu conference a couple of years ago the keynote speaker was saying things like “Well. Einstein almost got it right…” as though they have already outdone him.
Yet Einstein has model, math, and independent third party experiment (Michelesen Morley) backing him up. Many smart people in the West have been trying to prove Einstein wrong for a hundred years with little success.
If Hinduism could really provide clarification beyond Einstein I would be all for it. It would be a lifetime dream come true. But in spite of their posturing, no Hindu has ever produced the math nor experiment (nor even an untested model) to transcend Einstein.
I’m not sure Hubbard ever read a book cover-to-cover. I realized from areas and books that I have knowledge of, that he must have picked up what he knew of them either from skimming works, or second-hand from others who had actually done the reading and studying.
And then I finally found a quote from his second (“never had”) wife Sara who said that he wasn’t the type to sit down and work through others’ writings – he relied on her for his knowledge of Korzybski’s General Semantics, which obviously influenced his supposed “logics” and other early elements of Dianetics and Scientology. I’ve never seen clear evidence there was any book he fully absorbed – other than possibly one or two of Aleister Crowley’s works – but there is lots of testimony about how adept he was at picking up things from others in conversation, and then spinning it into erudite-sounding “teachings,” particularly in his lectures.
It’s possible that Gibbons was an assignment for a college class, or it could be he knew it partly through the summary history books of philosopher Will Durant – who he actually credits by name in Dianetics. I know Durant’s works were used as college texts circa 1930, though I doubt Hubbard thoroughly read whatever he was assigne, either, and instead gleaned his superficial and incomplete knowledge substantially from what was presented in class, or discussed with friends.
Hubbard learned Korzybski’s General Semantics not by reading “Science and Sanity” like I did as a 13 year old (one of the toughest reads ever) but was taught by his friend my early childhood hero Heinlein who was heavily into GS.
Heinlein’s short story “Gulf” inspired both Hubbard and I to learn GS (which Hubbard based Dianetics on).
Gene, typically Hubbard would have had several sources for his knowledge of Korzybski – the sort of thing that people around him were reading, even if he wasn’t. From what I can tell he relied a lot on picking up ideas from what was being discussed in his circles of sci-fi friends and acquaintances and, later, among the more intellectual of the followers who gathered around him at places like Saint Hill (there was apparently a circle that included Charles Berner, and his wife Ava, who later said that Hubbard didn’t come up with anything, it all came from those around him).
There’s definitely a clear account I’ve seen, that Sara Northrup was a student of Korzybski’s General Semantics and helped Hubbard in his understanding – I roughly quoted what I remember of her comment on him not being the type to work through books himself. That may have come after he was introduced to the author and subject, but probably contributed to the background that he used to produce his own supposed “axioms” and “logics,” for instance.
When I was in and on staff I saw many people “do what Ron said or he would do” many times but most of the time IF it went fine, I don’t know honestly if it was what he had said or the desperation of not ending up in further trouble.
Two very different things I would say.
Actually I wanted to write briefly how I managed to get over the indoctrinations. But short is not at all possible here, because it is a process over years and requires a constantly closer look at what determines the present actions. Among other things, to consciously let go of old belief patterns. Today I am SC-free. No piece of this adapted technology accompanies my life today, nor the corresponding language. Mike, I find it very valuable in naming things by name and also to describe the difficulties one has when one no longer belongs to the organization. Thank you for that.
“No piece of this adapted technology accompanies my life today, nor the corresponding language. ”
Great to hear this. You are special.
That cast-iron certainty is why I’m in no hurry to break the spell over the older people I know in the Org. Who wouldn’t want to go into their final stage of this life assured of something nice in the next. They also believe in a few other woo woos, so who knows if the whole edifice would come tumbling down or they would dig deeper into their other convictions.
Sorry I have to ask – english is not my mother tongue. But did I understand correctly that you don’t want the elderly people to not know the truth about Scientology because they will die soon and therefore better in a “happy certainty” than a hard wake up?
Sounds like that’s what he’s saying, and it makes sense to me. That ‘hard wake up’ would likely be too hard for them at this late stage in life.
So, you believe that someone is better off dying in a state of happy and comforting mental delusion? Drugs can do that for someone, you know. Personally, I strongly disagree. I believe every person is better off with truth no matter how late he or she connects with it. No matter at what stage of life it is revealed. At least the person gets to eliminate the lies from his or her thinking before dying. In other words, the person may not have found truth, but at least dies knowing what ISN’T truth. I think that would would be better in the end, if someone has lived life seeking truth. At least be able to eliminate what ISN’T true. And know that one tried, one sought it, but didn’t find it. No shame in that, I think. When something is important, its always better to know, even if one is dying. Lies are traps. Truth doesn’t always feel good but it is ultimately best, in the end, freeing. But that’s just me.
I see above you have left the org and all that entails. I don’t have that reality, but I have witnessed plenty of times my acquaintances expressing their certainties. What can I offer? Doubt, uncertainty, disconnection from all their Org friends, more time with me (*snark*), and then oblivion.
grisianfarce, what can you offer?
A viewpoint from which they can look, that’s what you can offer.
You don’t want to upset their certainty?
There are people walking around in mental institutions who are “certain” they’re Cleopatra or Napoleon. Just saying 🙂
If their “certainty” can be so easily shaken, how certain are they, really? Learning the truth about the cult would shake that certainty? Then they’re not very certain, are they? Sounds like anything could make them “lose their position in space” – eh?
Real certainty isn’t based on lies!
Anna,
My father was a lawyer who told me to NOT destroy another’s faith using the science i was so good at.. He said it was wrong to yank away the faith that a person lived by, unless I was prepared to fill the void with a better ‘faith’. Some older people cannot take change or let go of long held beliefs. i still think he was right.
I struggle with that idea , having lost a sister to disconnection. She is soon to be 70 years old. Her husband is fragile , her daughter is an ethics officer at flag and they have exploited well her natural control tendencies.
It has to be on a case by case basis . My sister would recover just fine , her no nonsense French upbringing would take over , but her family…. not sure.
They would require a lot of care and attention to get over it. The damage to their financial situation has been done , nothing to recover there , only the pain of having been had.
So yes , it is a struggle . I want her out but is it in her best interest .
I remember the first 6 months after leaving . The loss of sleep , the pain of disconnection , the exhalation of being finally free but the sense of betrayal and compassion for the ones left behind. We have all been there , it is not easy.
My dear friend Mario , an old timer , told me he didn’t have the courage to leave , he was too old and I had to respect it even if I was going to lose him. The pain is unbelievable, but it is the unintended or intended consequence of leaving. Who is ready for it , is the question.
If what they believed in was real you wouldn’t be able to “yank it away”. But, yes, it upsets people. They’ve got everything all squared around and you come along and with a few questions give them doubts and questions…”Most people can’t handle the truth!”…I get it. And this can pertain to politics, religion, their children, their spouses, and themselves…they can’t handle it.
Hubbard said knowledge is certainty. Of course the exact opposite is true. Certainty blocks knowledge.
Great observation
What a profound truth you just said. Read that again, “Hubbard said knowledge is certainty. Of course the exact opposite is true. Certainty blocks knowledge.”
So Johnny Carson was wise as well as funny! lol
The con man said, “knowledge is certainty”. But Johnny Carson said, “The exact opposite is true. Certainty blocks knowledge.”
I must agree this is an excellent observation and I hope that I will remember this for many years to come. Thank you very much for posting this.
I never get tired of seeing this picture of Hubbard. So this guy has the answer to everything?
I remember once coming across that photo of “Ron” while in the Sea Org. I was told in no uncertain terms it was a “fix” (this was long before photoshop etc). Of course I swallowed that.
Hubbard fooled me for almost twenty years. One day I was listening to one of his tapes and he said “This is how the thetan acts – theoretically.” That one word is all it took for me to re-examine all of Scientology. Hubbard could not ever prove that the thetan exists. In fact on the Philadelphia Lectures he says “You must use a Kinepetometer to see the thetan.” Well, if you find an old device and look through it, you never find the thetan. You might see an electrical wave or particle from the mind.
It is obvious, Hubbard started with a totally false assumption. So you could fully handle life and solve all problems if the theoretical thetan was real. So all you need to do to enslave someone is to convince them to believe in the theoretical thetan. It all falls apart for a variety of reasons which I won’t get into today.
A kinepetometer no less! That one passed me by. Ron, what a wag.
George,
I once did TR0 with a friend at his house. He’d never done Scn but was curious about it. I explained the drill and we did it. 10 minutes later I began the bullbait portion. About 10 minutes after starting his button was totally flat. At this point he and I exteriorised. I perceived he was exterior. It was “him” I perceived. It sure wasn’t his body. Sure my eyes saw his body across from me but it was “him” I perceived and the fact that he was out of his body. Oh and get this. He perceived I was exterior as well. No words were spoken only our personal perception of each other gave us this knowledge. We also perceived that each of us “knew” that the other “knew” exactly what each of us had just experienced. No words; just perception. So I can attest to having “seen” a thetan. I have never experienced such total certainty ever before or in the decades in Scn after.
We were so keyed out when we ended the drill we couldn’t shut up for a couple of hours.
Well. that is a nice story. I had an experience in auditing where I was in ancient Rome on a ship We were attacked by Pirates and I was killed. My thetan went into the clouds above the ship and watched the ship sink. From there I went onto OT VIII. During an Implant auditing session, I was again in Rome this time in a bath. Someone murdered me and my thetan went to the Temple. Blavatsky reports similar experiences among the “masters” My best buddy on OT VIII exteriorized into a wall!. Personally I am 100% Buddhist and our defintion of spirits is different from Western Culture. Scientology can be traced back to Iamblichus who wrote in the 4th century AD and was one who first talked about exteriorized thetans. He worked magic in the Chaldean culture. Too bad most of his books and others were all burned by Iraneus.
Pure Buddhism has the doctrine of “anatta” which has various translations. Some say no spirit or soul but this is not at all accurate. It really means “No ownership”. If you owned the thetan you could move objects. Objects like fire could not burn you. For the most part these definitions are not important. It is the practice that is important. There is an entire cosmology of spirits in Buddhism but no one knows if the texts are real. For example, the “Jataka” which is the definitive book on Buddha’s past lives was written about the 6th century AD. Only Hubbard was foolish enough to pay attention to the book because he was ignorant.
George. Thanks for sharing your incidents. Sadly, my experiences in session were not so good. Any “incident” run was vague and always felt I was mocking it all up. Glad to hear you got something out of it.
On a couple of occasions you say “my Thetan” which suggests you don’t feel it is you. The first time I went exterior I “discovered” it was me who was out of my body. It was I who was “viewing” or perceiving everything. And I “saw” my body so I definitely wasn’t it.
I never got as high up the bridge as you. Only made it to clear which state was taken away because of some change in the tech. Personally, my knowingness told me it was so more money could be gouged out of me.
You have your unique experience and that is great. I say “my thetan” because I do not believe in a thetan. By saying “my thetan” I emphasize that it is just a feeling. Most of my Scientology experience was feeling. I noticed that. Like I felt certainty. In Buddhism that is not valid experience. There is in Buddhism a sort of “platform” from which we view the world. It took me years to erode the platform and make it collapse.
George, from my experience as a Buddhist (Tibetan vajrayana) there is much debate about the doctrine of “anatta”. Certain Buddhist schools say the Buddha taught that there was a “self” and also taught there was a “no-self”. This appears to be a conflicting teaching but to make matters even more confusing it is also said that a “higher” teaching from the Buddha is that there is neither a “self or a no-self”. At first glance a person might think that these teachings are as convoluted as Hubbard’s ramblings. That would not be the case. With the Buddha there was no con involved. The only “con” the Buddha encouraged was CONtemplation. Something strictly forbidden in the scientology cult.
I fully get what you are saying about Buddhism and I went through it for fifty years. Confusion and contradictions. In the last twenty years I found a home in Theravada Buddhism with monks from Sri Lanka and Thailand. Finally just went to a few Suttas that carry the crux of the teaching. Stripped down all of the cosmology and all of the not needed definitions. Amazing results. My wife and I both hit the top of the curve. I hit it first about five years ago and she followed quickly. We had a rough time in the beginning learning Pali but it really helped. My teacher told me to learn it or else no progress. He was right for us. We spent years on “Dependent Origination” and that turned out to be the best strategy.
Do not give a rip about self or no self or spirit or no spirit or Nirvana or no Nirvana. We both meditate constantly. Second turning point was learning meditation from monks who failed over and over again. You get the drift. They were like us. All we ever did was fail and we leaned how to continue. We have about 300 books on Buddhism which we read. It was a very gradual slow movement to remove doubt
Some require the spectacles of religion to see clearly; others are born with good eyesight. The fact that “contentment criteria” vary so freely, person to person, is an awesome and confusing wrinkle of life.
The promise of lost wisdom in the cinerary heaps of ruined libraries is a harmless faith; who wouldn’t want to read Aeschylus’ lost plays or Alexander’s complete autobiography?
I worry whenever a Right Way is offered, whether it’s folded eight times or none. Theravada Buddhists have to trust Ashoka’s rock-inscribed, century-removed word; the same problem bedevils all disciples — changing the more ardent into mere “historicity” apologists.
The ultimate non-attachment is ditching masters and teachers and gurus and sages and oracles and commodores altogether.
And thank you very much Richard for your suggestion. I’ll check into it.
George, what would be your recommendation for the best Buddhist “Starter’s Book” that you think would best understood by a beginner to the subject?
In my opinion, “What the Buddha Taught” by Walpola Rahula. He passed but his book was popular in the 1970’s. It is very basic.
Joe P – A few years ago on Marty’s blog there was some discussion of Buddhism. Knowing little to nothing about it I went to my local library and came across a book called “Buddhism: A Way of Life and Thought” by Nancy Wilson Ross. I found it fascinating and hoarded it from the library for three months. It’s easy reading and relates many often humorous anecdotes from Buddhist lore and has a full index and glossary. I now have the paperback reprint which is available for $10 and Amazon has the “look inside” feature.
Thank you very much George. Will check it out.
You are welcome. Do you live in Thailand?
Glenn – Thanks for sharing your very unique experience. Many experiences don’t have a scientific explanation which is why they are called extra – sensory, para – normal, or super – natural. They can’t be recreated and measured in a laboratory so many people dismiss them. Hubbard promised all kinds of abilities but scientology never produced consistent results.
Richard. Thank you. I completely understand. I did many hours of TR0 and TR0 Bullbait since that time (always in course rooms, never in a private setting) but never once had a similar (or even close) result. And I mean hundreds of hours of drilling. I would tend to agree with you that it was kind of extra sensory but since my friend and I both experienced the EXACT same thing I cannot. Fact is that experience was more real than Life itself. Truly.
I have other such experiences and each and every one was never in a courseroom or in auditing session. Always in real life. But they were always the result of my applying the tech on my own and in real life situations.
Those successes were what kept me trying to get similar gains in auditing and training. Never happened so I finally left after 40 years trying.
Glenn – Hah! – I think we have duplicated each other in clamspeak. It’s not exactly what you are saying but I think it’s reasonable to assume that since scn has hundreds of mental processes or procedures that some of them might precipitate a paranormal experience for some people which gets them stuck in scn. People also have such experiences outside of scn or any other practice.
The exact nature of “I” remains a philosophical discussion, the Metaphysical Equation Of Everything. lol
More to the point of the topic, when I was in anything I wasn’t sure about now I assumed I would be sure about it (certain) later as I went up the bridge since Dear Old Ron had already figured all that shit out.
BTW – I quit soon after attesting to “Dianetic Clear” so happily enough of nobody got to tell me “Flunk! Do it over.”
Omit “of “. The computer tablet was thinking for me and I missed it in the edit.
Richard,
Going exterior on TR0 reminded me exactly who I am. I am myself and I am amazingly able. I am not any other entity or any other spiritual thing. And I am certainly not the body I have this lifetime. I’ve never studied religions or philosophies so cannot relate to the terms you have referred to. I have never referred to myself as my thetan, my spirit. I am me. I know it and there’s nothing more. Oh, and just to clarify. My exteriorization on TR0 was in my first week in Scn. I had not been exposed to any other procedures or training exercises previously. Hell, I hadn’t even read the TR0 bulletin. The supervisor merely explained the process and had us all do it. And he never once inferred one might go exterior on the drill. I can assure you there was no mind manipulation or implanting whatsoever.
In all my years in Scn I looked for others who had had the same experience on TR0 as I. Never came across anyone who had. So I’ve got to ask; did you ever go exterior on TR0?
The other day I found a video on youtube where Jason Beghe talks about his life in Scn. At the 12 minute point he shares the fact that he went exterior on TR0 and I nearly cried as here I’d finally found someone who did the same thing as me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHb0BZyF5Ok
I enjoyed your use of “Flunk, do it over again” remark. If I was told I actually had not gone Clear I’d have said “well Flunk you org. Since you are the professionally trained and experienced provider and promisor of that state then you fucking pay the cost on me doing it all over again.” LOL.
Glenn
“Pass!” Lol
If you are new to re-examining your scn experience I’m sure you will sort it out and hopefully be able to laugh at yourself once in awhile as you seem to do above.
When I started reading the scn blogs after watching Going Clear I decided to do some study of a few Eastern philosophies like Buddhism, Taoism and Nondualism so I just have a general overview. The supposedly all important question is “Who Am I?” as an investigation of the nature of self aware consciousness.
Kine-what? Is that an actual device, like the e meter, or a Scientology concept?
Hubbard was smoking dope on the Philadelphia Lectures, I think. He used the name Kinepetometer. Kine means motion; the rest is the measurement. This was in the 1950’s.
Sure Mike because people trusted this man, and didn’t thought was a liar and half truths deliverer. He build everything on getting trusted. And usually good people are more easy to trust others.
LmR, psychopaths (and con artist in general) are actually adept at getting people to trust them, or at least in exploiting peoples’ trust – even though they are the least trustworthy of people, and worse often actually even a danger to peoples’ personal interests and well-being.
“psychopaths seek our trust in order to take advantage of us.” (Oxford Studies in Agency and Responsibility, Volume 5)
I suspect that, similar to how false memories (such as can be created in auditing, and past life recall) can actually seem more vivid than real ones, untrustworthy psychopaths may often be better able to get people to trust them, than normal people who really can be trusted.
PeaceMaker. What a great comment, indeed. You nailed down and perfectly expressed how exactly should be. Congrats.
In my opinion (but this would need more and longer explanations) the reality we live in get created by ourself constantly. So the mind would creates memories or future events to fit with what is happening in that moment. Like if doing math the final result should be always zero (just to say) but you have still minus 6 or plus 12 still left and the mind has to generate a fast calculation to fit all back into zero. In other words a memory or future event gets created by the mind to fit with the present. But everything has always, is and will happen just in the now. Hope this last part is somehow clear (laughing).
I was so mentally broken down when I was moving away from the church that I could hardly see straight. The only thing I knew for sure was that I could not go back into the church of scientology and do any more of anything. I could not take one more bite of it. That’s all I knew and I barely knew why I felt that way – truly mentally broken. It came from years and years of swallowing the tech and knowing that I could “handle any situation as LRH would.” “What would LRH do” became a mantra I could no longer stomach. I wanted my soul back; I wanted ownership of myself back. I lost a son, a person I loved most in the world, because I could not tolerate holding the cans not even one more time and putting up with even one more dose of its “tech” that took me away from me. It’s been seven years since that fateful day/decision and I am still unraveling. I haven’t seen, hugged, talked with that son in any way for over six years. The insufferable consequences of that I persevere with and through every day of my life. But I have me now. And I can and still do unravel from it bit by bit.
This is an Organized-Crime-Style religion and if one gets out unscathed, they’re lucky.
Fortunately, Mike, you and others have informed millions and prevented many from going near this vile group. Your beginning statement is very well said and should be part of a book I hope you write, publish and sell millions of copies.
You describe this so well Mary. Thank you.
As for the book, I could write it, but the publishing and selling is another thing… 🙂
Mary you stated this well and so true for me too. Thank you. We have to stay positive that we will see our sons again………lots of love.
Mary, stay strong. You’ve come so far since you left. I think the church is unraveling faster as a result of the CV lockdowns, and that may mean seeing our kids sooner. This whole thing of knowledge is certainty and the only knowledge you need is Scientology is false. The think of, “What would Ron do” (and that is what I”ll do) is a way to train people NOT to think, NOT to look, NOT to have their own self determinism. LRH said that his tech gives you self determinism. That’s a lie. It gives them other determinism. It is a way to make robots and soulless walking zombies who never have to examine something, to think, to look, and to decide what to do. Ron has done all that for them.
well written
Exactly, Cindy. I think in the 70’s when I got in, being groomed into this “wise, let-us-help-you” “applied religious philosophy” was not uncommon for 20 somethings of the day looking for something other than the usual organized religion.
The church of scientology makes the usual organized religions look like spiritual panaceas.
Yes, Lois. I know you can relate; think of you often. ✨💖✨💫
Spot on, Mike
And when I realized this
I saw again
And thought again
By myself, for myself
Liberated!
Klaus
Thank you Klaus. Nice to hear from you!
Be well.
All the best to you and your family.
K
Simply and beautifully put
We don’t know each other, but I HAVE to tell you how very brave I think you are. You may not view yourself as such, but you ARE.
Your words “they owned me”…cut like a knife. Then to know you found within yourself the STRENGTH despite losing so much….to leave the way you did. You turned that doorknob & walked out…knowing what you’ve left behind, as heartachingly sad as it is. They could not stop you, despite their mindless attempt to try to keep you locked away & silent. You spoke out as did so many others, & allowed US ALL to hear your journey & what it costs you emotionally, physically, & financially. Talk about COURAGE…that’s you Mary Kahn.
My heart aches for the fact that they still “own” your son, that he has yet to see the truth & light of what COS is all about. My greatest pray & hope is that Sammy comes home to you and your husband this year.
As I’ve sad before, despite that it cuts us deeply to the very core of our being….”We cannot save someone who does NOT want to be saved”…… One day, somehow, someway….your son will come home to you.
You have my deepest respect Mary.
Beautifully put. Ditto!
Thank you so much✨✨💫
I am very touched and appreciate your thoughts and your prayers.
You are so very welcome, I pray & hope every day that what has been taken from you…your SON Sammy…is returned to your loving arms. That Lois’ son is returned to her family as well.
Mike & Leah really woke up a lot of people & everyone who spoke out did so from the heart….the pain on your faces was so easily seen & fully understood.
What Ramona N had said “NO church has the right to separate families”…& yet they continue to do so…..IF they were indeed a TRUE Church, they would not do so & would not do the Bull Baiting, Squirrel Busting & forced separations.
If I could wave a “magic wand” & have Sammy wake up & LEAVE to return to your loving family I would do so without hesitation!
.I will always keep you, Lois, Mike & so many others whose children are still under the spell of COS that they become enlightened…..hugs for you & your husband & family Mary….I sincerely mean that
Wow. Thanks so much✨💖✨
Well…..it has been said “it’s better to keep one’s mouth shut & be thought a fool….then to open one’s mouth & prove it”……
Seems like this hot air bag of wind open his mouth far too much……..a Sci Fi “writer of sorts” that manage to bamboozle thousands into believing his Sci Fi “story”……& start a new religion…..how sad is that.