DM's "New" Quad Grades

[Tanstaafl]

Don't you guys know anything? A Clear is "a being who no longer has his own reactive mind".

Sheesh!

Snuffy - you know they can do amazing things with rhinoplasty these days!

 

[marty]

Good job you never worked on CCRD tech lines, Vinaire!

So what are all the case and other factors that inhibit the ability to think clearly. How clear is clearly? Is clear important as a "base camp" on the way to the OT summit? What about the stability of the state?

Cheers
tanstaafl

Tansaafl, this is a post I made on an older thread "10,000 on solo NOT's NOW!"
Slightly out of context here but it is all that needs to be said on what is a Clear as far as Im concerned.


I feel the state of Clear is something achieved and there after never lost. It remains with the person having achieved it there after.
The confusion is in the various abilities LRH has assigned over the years being associated with the state. These by observation are definitely not stable or even consistent from pc to pc.

My perspective on the validity of the clear status as a state and as a stable state comes solely from the CCRD. Aside from all the other stuff said about the state of clear the CCRD must by definition contain all the the clear attributes necessary to be determined in order to establish if someone is clear. Since the CCRD is the only means of establishing certianty then the attributes covered by the CCRD are the only measure of whether a pc is clear.

The CCRD requires only two things to be established.
1. That the person had a very specific cognition
2. that this occured while on dianetics (in any of its forms).

In dianetics one handles each picture/chain by fully running them. At some point through the process of confronting these pictures he will have the "cognition" about his relationship to these pictures. The CCRD establishes this to have happened and the person then attests to clear. There is no other measure applied.

So these two things are the only two things in todays line up that constitutes if some one is clear. Ones dramatisations, mental tone, recall, general health or any of the other multitudes of ways clear has been measured by are irrelevant in the establishment.

One still has engrams and mental machinery that can impact on the individual but this in no way alters or makes transient and unstable that cognition. Whether or not the person is able to exihibit a higher condition of existence is different from individual to individual but the cognition is the same and remains with them stably.

The challenge in the CCRD is in establishing that the pc had the cognition. Many pcs will give the wording of this cognition in there auditing or even in the CCRD 2WCs but did they actually cognite on this as a result of confronting and handling there mental image pictures on dianetics. That is the point which requires real care.

 

[Zinjifar]

Don't you guys know anything? A Clear is "a being who no longer has his own reactive mind".

Sheesh!

Whose does he have?

Zinj

 

[Snuffy]

The answer I always got when I asked about OTs continuing to have problems when they were supposed to have gotten rid of their bank was that they still had bank on all the other dynamics, and that "clearing" meant only that you were clear on the 1st dynamic.

So there. (I guess ...)

 

[Snuffy]

Snuffy - you know they can do amazing things with rhinoplasty these days!

And you know, if anyone other than that silly yellow-feathered giant bird could see me, then I might consider it.

But until then ....

 

[Vinaire]

Tansaafl, this is a post I made on an older thread "10,000 on solo NOT's NOW!"
Slightly out of context here but it is all that needs to be said on what is a Clear as far as Im concerned.


I feel the state of Clear is something achieved and there after never lost. It remains with the person having achieved it there after.
The confusion is in the various abilities LRH has assigned over the years being associated with the state. These by observation are definitely not stable or even consistent from pc to pc.

My perspective on the validity of the clear status as a state and as a stable state comes solely from the CCRD. Aside from all the other stuff said about the state of clear the CCRD must by definition contain all the the clear attributes necessary to be determined in order to establish if someone is clear. Since the CCRD is the only means of establishing certianty then the attributes covered by the CCRD are the only measure of whether a pc is clear.

The CCRD requires only two things to be established.
1. That the person had a very specific cognition
2. that this occured while on dianetics (in any of its forms).

In dianetics one handles each picture/chain by fully running them. At some point through the process of confronting these pictures he will have the "cognition" about his relationship to these pictures. The CCRD establishes this to have happened and the person then attests to clear. There is no other measure applied.

So these two things are the only two things in todays line up that constitutes if some one is clear. Ones dramatisations, mental tone, recall, general health or any of the other multitudes of ways clear has been measured by are irrelevant in the establishment.

One still has engrams and mental machinery that can impact on the individual but this in no way alters or makes transient and unstable that cognition. Whether or not the person is able to exihibit a higher condition of existence is different from individual to individual but the cognition is the same and remains with them stably.

The challenge in the CCRD is in establishing that the pc had the cognition. Many pcs will give the wording of this cognition in there auditing or even in the CCRD 2WCs but did they actually cognite on this as a result of confronting and handling there mental image pictures on dianetics. That is the point which requires real care.

Ah! So that's what CLEAR COG meant. I never knew about it.

.

 

[Tanstaafl]

Tansaafl, this is a post I made on an older thread "10,000 on solo NOT's NOW!"
Slightly out of context here but it is all that needs to be said on what is a Clear as far as Im concerned.


I feel the state of Clear is something achieved and there after never lost. It remains with the person having achieved it there after.
The confusion is in the various abilities LRH has assigned over the years being associated with the state. These by observation are definitely not stable or even consistent from pc to pc.

My perspective on the validity of the clear status as a state and as a stable state comes solely from the CCRD. Aside from all the other stuff said about the state of clear the CCRD must by definition contain all the the clear attributes necessary to be determined in order to establish if someone is clear. Since the CCRD is the only means of establishing certianty then the attributes covered by the CCRD are the only measure of whether a pc is clear.

The CCRD requires only two things to be established.
1. That the person had a very specific cognition
2. that this occured while on dianetics (in any of its forms).

In dianetics one handles each picture/chain by fully running them. At some point through the process of confronting these pictures he will have the "cognition" about his relationship to these pictures. The CCRD establishes this to have happened and the person then attests to clear. There is no other measure applied.

So these two things are the only two things in todays line up that constitutes if some one is clear. Ones dramatisations, mental tone, recall, general health or any of the other multitudes of ways clear has been measured by are irrelevant in the establishment.

One still has engrams and mental machinery that can impact on the individual but this in no way alters or makes transient and unstable that cognition. Whether or not the person is able to exihibit a higher condition of existence is different from individual to individual but the cognition is the same and remains with them stably.

The challenge in the CCRD is in establishing that the pc had the cognition. Many pcs will give the wording of this cognition in there auditing or even in the CCRD 2WCs but did they actually cognite on this as a result of confronting and handling there mental image pictures on dianetics. That is the point which requires real care.

Thanks for that Marty.

When I got into Scn I was studying all the material on OT from the early 50's so I never had much attention on Clear. Years later I was absent-mindedly walking my dogs when a mock-up auditor appeared in front of me out-of-the-blue and says "Did you go Clear in a past-life?" at which I started to feel very embarrassed and couldn't keep a huge stupid grin off my face; then I remembered what happened. I am absolutely certain I went Clear. I'm also certain that I overran and I'm fairly certain that as a result I have mocked up parts of the bank again.
Anyway, I'm hoping to get some auditing soon and maybe get the whole thing addressed/rehabbed at which time I reserve the right to totally reverse my viewpoint.

Cheers
tanstaafl

 

[Bea Kiddo]

Tansaafl, this is a post I made on an older thread "10,000 on solo NOT's NOW!"
Slightly out of context here but it is all that needs to be said on what is a Clear as far as Im concerned.


I feel the state of Clear is something achieved and there after never lost. It remains with the person having achieved it there after.
The confusion is in the various abilities LRH has assigned over the years being associated with the state. These by observation are definitely not stable or even consistent from pc to pc.

My perspective on the validity of the clear status as a state and as a stable state comes solely from the CCRD. Aside from all the other stuff said about the state of clear the CCRD must by definition contain all the the clear attributes necessary to be determined in order to establish if someone is clear. Since the CCRD is the only means of establishing certianty then the attributes covered by the CCRD are the only measure of whether a pc is clear.

The CCRD requires only two things to be established.
1. That the person had a very specific cognition
2. that this occured while on dianetics (in any of its forms).

In dianetics one handles each picture/chain by fully running them. At some point through the process of confronting these pictures he will have the "cognition" about his relationship to these pictures. The CCRD establishes this to have happened and the person then attests to clear. There is no other measure applied.

So these two things are the only two things in todays line up that constitutes if some one is clear. Ones dramatisations, mental tone, recall, general health or any of the other multitudes of ways clear has been measured by are irrelevant in the establishment.

One still has engrams and mental machinery that can impact on the individual but this in no way alters or makes transient and unstable that cognition. Whether or not the person is able to exihibit a higher condition of existence is different from individual to individual but the cognition is the same and remains with them stably.

The challenge in the CCRD is in establishing that the pc had the cognition. Many pcs will give the wording of this cognition in there auditing or even in the CCRD 2WCs but did they actually cognite on this as a result of confronting and handling there mental image pictures on dianetics. That is the point which requires real care.

Dear Marty,

Thank you for this. While all of this is true. I hate to burst anyones bubble. If you have read my story, its covered in there slightly. But one of the many things that made me decide to get the f@#$rk out of there was the Clear thing.

I went through every single Clear folder in the org I was in to determine who was validly Clear and who was not, pretty much based on what you have written here - checking for the clear cog, and did they go Clear on some form of Dianetics. The only other thing that we had to check for was number of hours of Dianetics. Too little = Clear state questionable.

80% of the clear folders I looked at were not Clear.

Then, after I had just finished all of that, a new flap and past life Clears supposedly didnt really exist either. So then it would require going through every one of those folders again to redetermine who was past life, this life, etc.

Screw it all, I say. Every one of them was offlines and needed recovery. WTF on checking Clear first? WASTE OF TIME. They needed RECOVERY first.

Whatever, I am out and good riddance. Stupid Def of Clear changed so much.

I was on tech lines. I know of what I speak.

Arbitraries cancelled????? F off.

Sorry, ranting here..... I chall crawl off into a corner now and beat some sense into it....

 

[The Oracle]

Right. That is all a clear is. That is all. Someone who no longer has their own reactive mind.

Anything else added to that is a hidden standard.

Now, I understand without that as a buffer the OT3 case sets in. That explains some things with people but not everything. O.K., maybe it explains a lot, but still not everything.

The point is, the process' are uniform, the gains to E.P. are usually uniform.

But the end product cannot be determined. This is one error, and I tend to see errors where other see "intentional scams".

But this is one error between Dianetics and Science of Survival where prediction about an end product through processing has been made very clear.

People are much more complex and variable I think, than originally thought with the original research. Or, Hubbard for whatever reason as an auditor produced uniform results with P.C.'s where other's did not.

But Dianetics was written in 1950 and Hubbard did not get onto unraveling implant data until the early 60's.

The only thing uniform about people at all is what is in the implant content.

That is the only uniform particles you can manage.

All other particles cannot be predicted with uniform results.

You read about what a person can be expected to be after clear and you see this is not true.

For a long time this has just been blamed on a person's ethics.

If a person did not turn out the way they were descibed in the book they must be "out ethics".

This is a flaw.

There are flaws in the equations.

It's not a bad thing there were flaws in the early research. It is a good thing he moved forward with research and tapped in to other dimensions.

But corrective materials should have been issued broadly to explain so people could understand better the changes.

The "new" advances were kept top secret and by invitation only so only a person going there who was into thinking at all could connect the dots and figure things out for themselves.

That is every persons responsibility.

But what if a person wasn't thinking and could not wonder and connect dots and put 2+2 together?

They were just left dangling and disspointed and in mystery.

And nobody else could answer the questions. You HAVE to think for yourself and figure things out for yourself because many things are very vague.

But this idea that anyone that didn't turn out text book clear as in the book is, must be "out ethics" is a huge flaw. Enormous.

That could be one item on the list. But that list needs to be extended with a lot more items on it.

 

[The Oracle]

Dear Marty,

Thank you for this. While all of this is true. I hate to burst anyones bubble. If you have read my story, its covered in there slightly. But one of the many things that made me decide to get the f@#$rk out of there was the Clear thing.

I went through every single Clear folder in the org I was in to determine who was validly Clear and who was not, pretty much based on what you have written here - checking for the clear cog, and did they go Clear on some form of Dianetics. The only other thing that we had to check for was number of hours of Dianetics. Too little = Clear state questionable.

80% of the clear folders I looked at were not Clear.

Then, after I had just finished all of that, a new flap and past life Clears supposedly didnt really exist either. So then it would require going through every one of those folders again to redetermine who was past life, this life, etc.

Screw it all, I say. Every one of them was offlines and needed recovery. WTF on checking Clear first? WASTE OF TIME. They needed RECOVERY first.

Whatever, I am out and good riddance. Stupid Def of Clear changed so much.

I was on tech lines. I know of what I speak.

Arbitraries cancelled????? F off.

Sorry, ranting here..... I chall crawl off into a corner now and beat some sense into it....

Thank you for posting this. Thank you very much. This was a huge help for me and I find your "rants" to be very intelligent and helpful.

 

[Alan]

But Dianetics was written in 1950 and Hubbard did not get onto unraveling implant data until the early 60's.

Not true!

History of Man covers Implants. That was written in the early 50's.

All an Implant is - is an incident.

Easily run with Dianetics.

Alan

 

[Vinaire]

Right. That is all a clear is. That is all.

Now, I understand without that as a buffer the OT3 case sets in. That explains some things with people but not everything. O.K., maybe it explains a lot, but still not everything.

...

Well, some things are clearing up for me now.

I never went on to OT levels, and I was told that I was Clear (on CCRD) in 1999. So, what happened to my OT case? What is it like to have one's OT case set in?

Could it be that I went clear on Dianetics back in 1970, and my OT case set in after that. I tried to handle it with Dianetics on Flag but was very discouraged and thought myself to be a dog pc.

Then blinkless TR0 helped me, but my case kept bothering me. The New Vitality RD at the end of 1975 helped but I still had attention on may case. Then I had Grades in late seventies, but I still had attention on may case.

The attention on my case did not go away until I completed the Running program in 1981.

Since then I have had no attention on my case. I went in 1999 to get CCRD which went very fast. Probably, it just verified my state of Clear. So, what happened to my OT Case?

.

 

[Alanzo]

Right. That is all a clear is. That is all.

Now, I understand without that as a buffer the OT3 case sets in. That explains some things with people but not everything. O.K., maybe it explains a lot, but still not everything.

The point is, the process' are uniform, the gains to E.P. are usually uniform.

But the end product cannot be determined. This is one error, and I tend to see errors where other see "intentional scams".

But this is one error between Dianetics and Science of Survival where prediction about an end product through processing has been made very clear.

People are much more complex and variable I think, than originally thought with the original research. Or, Hubbard for whatever reason as an auditor produced uniform results with P.C.'s where other's did not.

But Dianetics was written in 1950 and Hubbard did not get onto unraveling implant data until the early 60's.

The only thing uniform about people at all is what is in the implant content.

That is the only uniform particles you can manage.

All other particles cannot be predicted with uniform results.

You read about what a person can be expected to be after clear and you see this is not true.

For a long time this has just been blamed on a person's ethics.

If a person did not turn out the way they were descibed in the book they must be "out ethics".

This is a flaw.

There are flaws in the equations.

It's not a bad thing there were flaws in the early research. It is a good thing he moved forward with research and tapped in to other dimensions.

But corrective materials should have been issued broadly to explain so people could understand better the changes.

The "new" advances were kept top secret and by invitation only so only a person going there who was into thinking at all could connect the dots and figure things out for themselves.

That is every persons responsibility.

But what if a person wasn't thinking and could not wonder and connect dots and put 2+2 together?

They were just left dangling and disspointed and in mystery.

And nobody else could answer the questions. You HAVE to think for yourself and figure things out for yourself because many things are very vague.

But this idea that anyone that didn't turn out text book clear as in the book is, must be "out ethics" is a huge flaw. Enormous.

That could be one item on the list. But that list needs to be extended with a lot more items on it.

TI -

I'm wondering, with all your emphasis on magic and all the other "other-dimensional" arts, why you haven't studied more about hypnosis?

This would fall right in with what Crowley and Hubbard studied, and there is a whole bunch of data to study about it.

It really gives a new perspective on what auditing is and what incidents are, etc. It does not invalidate auditing at all.

Why won't you look in that area?

 

[The Oracle]

PS. I said materials should have been published to inform people. Of course, that was presuming Hubbard knew and understood these things yet did not communicate them. It is quite possible Hubbard himself was unable to do this because he himself did not know or understand why. To assume he knew everything and understood everything is flaw in itself.

 

[The Oracle]

TI -

I'm wondering, with all your emphasis on magic and all the other "other-dimensional" arts, why you haven't studied more about hypnosis?

This would fall right in with what Crowley and Hubbard studied, and there is a whole bunch of data to study about it.

It really gives a new perspective on what auditing is and what incidents are, etc. It does not invalidate auditing at all.

Why won't you look in that area?

I understand hynosis completely. Anyone that has had to unravel implanting material would understand hypnosis. Anyone who understands a being in overwhelm would understand hypnosis. It is simple other determinism when a person's own has been discounted.

 

[nexus100]

Well, some things are clearing up for me now.

I never went on to OT levels, and I was told that I was Clear (on CCRD) in 1999. So, what happened to my OT case? What is it like to have one's OT case set in?

Could it be that I went clear on Dianetics back in 1970, and my OT case set in after that. I tried to handle it with Dianetics on Flag but was very discouraged and thought myself to be a dog pc.

Then blinkless TR0 helped me, but my case kept bothering me. The New Vitality RD at the end of 1975 helped but I still had attention on may case. Then I had Grades in late seventies, but I still had attention on may case.

The attention on my case did not go away until I completed the Running program in 1981.

Since then I have had no attention on my case. I went in 1999 to get CCRD which went very fast. Probably, it just verified my state of Clear. So, what happened to my OT Case?

.

Guys tend to drop it between the couch cushions. Women usually have it in their purse somewhere.

 

[The Oracle]

Well, some things are clearing up for me now.

I never went on to OT levels, and I was told that I was Clear (on CCRD) in 1999. So, what happened to my OT case? What is it like to have one's OT case set in?

Could it be that I went clear on Dianetics back in 1970, and my OT case set in after that. I tried to handle it with Dianetics on Flag but was very discouraged and thought myself to be a dog pc.

Then blinkless TR0 helped me, but my case kept bothering me. The New Vitality RD at the end of 1975 helped but I still had attention on may case. Then I had Grades in late seventies, but I still had attention on may case.

The attention on my case did not go away until I completed the Running program in 1981.

Since then I have had no attention on my case. I went in 1999 to get CCRD which went very fast. Probably, it just verified my state of Clear. So, what happened to my OT Case?

.

You are saying it does not exist. I believe you.

 

[Alanzo]

I understand hynosis completely. Anyone that has had to unravel implanting material would understand hypnosis. Anyone who understands a being in overwhelm would understand hypnosis. It is simple other determinism when a person's own has been discounted.

This is not what hypnosis is.

I think we may have run into the first barrier to study here - already knowing all about it.

There are hundreds of years of write ups and lots of research on hypnosis, way more than L Ron Hubbard ever spoke or detailed.

This is a huge MU for you, and for many of those who have been in Scientology.

I'm not trying to put you down, or to insult you. I am saying something that I believe might help you.

Find a book or website on hypnosis that has nothing to do with L Ron Hubbard and read it.

 

[Tanstaafl]

Since then I have had no attention on my case. I went in 1999 to get CCRD which went very fast. Probably, it just verified my state of Clear. So, what happened to my OT Case?
.

Tut tut Vinaire - inviting case evaluation?!

It's not for me to say, but I will say that I experienced what seemed to be caselessness in one lifetime in China a few centuries ago. If it's a key out you've experienced then may it last much longer than mine did.

 

[Bea Kiddo]

Since then I have had no attention on my case. I went in 1999 to get CCRD which went very fast. Probably, it just verified my state of Clear. So, what happened to my OT Case?

.

Did you ever think about the fact that "case" is only what you concieve it to be? So in your mind, maybe its not case.

But OT case is supposed to be other beings. And they may have taken on your valence. So they will be very hard to find.

Wouldnt it be wild to find out your valence, your very beingness was all a BT's in the first place?

Sorry, I went into the valence of a Scientology reg. Now give me your wallet.