ESMB has entered archive mode. All posts and threads that were available to the general public are still readable. The board is still searchable. 

Thank you all for your participation and readership over the last 12 years.

If you want to join in the conversation, please join the new ESMB Redux at www.exscn2.net.



Past Life Talk With Pat Krenik-Free Zone Scientology

Discussion in 'Freezone, Independents, and Other Flavors of Scien' started by Andy Nolch, Jul 21, 2019.

  1. Andy Nolch

    Andy Nolch Patron

    How can you tell who someone was in their past life?
    Listen to Free Zone auditor Pat Krenik talk about this interesting topic.
    The Indie Scientology Podcast has mind blowing guest interviews, Free Zone success stories, secret briefings and much much more. Hosted by Andy Nolch the space cowboy. Available on most podcast apps & Youtube. Remember, what you thought was impossible, is possible!
     
  2. strativarius

    strativarius Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband

     
  3. Wilbur

    Wilbur Patron Meritorious

    Andy,

    How can you be a Scientologist and not believe in past lives? The whole of the subject of Scientology is predicated upon the existence of past lives. The WHOLE OF IT.

    If you didn't have past lives, then what is the mechanism by which you lost your OT powers? And if that mechanism doesn't involve past lives, then of what utility is auditing? As you know, OTIII is about something that happened 75 million years ago that affects you in present time, and the point of OTIII is to audit out the influence of that PAST TRACK. But even the grades are based on the existence of past lives. You couldn't get messed up enough in one lifetime to require hundreds or thousands of hours of auditing to be able to exteriorise from a body. So I don't understand in what sense you can believe in Scientology or call yourself a Scientologist without at least a belief in the LIKELIHOOD of past lives. It's like calling yourself a Christian, but rejecting the divinity of Jesus Christ.
     
    JustSheila, Type4_PTS and screamer2 like this.
  4. screamer2

    screamer2 Idiot Bastardson

    "It's like calling yourself a Christian, but rejecting the divinity of Jesus Christ."

    No, it's not quite like that.
    Such a statement implies that $cientology is a religon.
     
    JustSheila likes this.
  5. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    What is a Scientologist? Is it someone who:
    • Simplistically believes every word Hubbard said, the CofS publishes, gets as much auditing/training as possible? or
    • Read a book once, thought it rubbish, but is forever in Central Files? or
    • Someone who has found bits of Scientology useful, uses them, and considers himself a Scientologist? or
    • Someone who has found bits of Scientology useful, uses them, although he doesn't consider himself a Scientologist? or
    • ...
    There are many possibilities, with no one definitive answer. Death and pregnancy are fairly black/white. Scientologisticness isn't.

    Paul
     
  6. F.Bullbait

    F.Bullbait Oh, a wise guy,eh?

    or...

    Someone pretending to be a Scientologist all the while wondering 'wtf is going on here?'
     
  7. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    Hubbard, regarded as "Mankind's greatest friend" and hero of the galaxy, told people they were Scientologists and praised them for being Scientologists. For some people that's enough to stick them in the identity of "Scientologist" for the rest of their lives.


    The average Scientologist towers above the saints and sages of centuries past.
    [​IMG]


     
    Type4_PTS and lotus like this.
  8. Wilbur

    Wilbur Patron Meritorious

    I would say that, as a bare minimum, you have to believe in/"have reality on"/think very likely/be willing to suspend any disbelief on the existence of the whole track, and hence of past lives. You can be a Dianeticist without believing in any of that, but it's such a core fundamental of Scientology that its a sine qua non for calling yourself a Scientologist. EVERY process in Scientology is based on the assumption that you have a whole track. Even the theory of Objectives Processes doesn't really make sense without that assumption, since there isn't enough that happens to a person within one lifetime to knock them that far out of PT that they couldn't just postulate themselves back into PT.

    In fact, step just slightly outside of DMSMH, and even Dianetics itself quickly requires the existence of whole track. Because, again, if the state of Clear exists, then 8 year old children would more or less exhibit its characteristics. Their memories couldn't be that loused up simply because of prenatal engrams. How many parents do you know that stuck a coathanger inside the pregnant mother, whilst saying "you can forget about all of that"? Even as I read DMSMH for the first time, although I liked the IDEA of earlier/similar, and thought the idea that unconscious memories would be aberrative was nifty, I still couldn't see what that had to do with me, really. I'd stubbed my toe on a pavement a few times, and had one or two moderately serious accidents as a child, but nobody was standing over me saying "it's all jumbled up" or "he won't remember a thing". With hindsight, the DMSMH story COULDN'T be a full explanation for the aberrations that you find in most people. So even Dianetics, in any coherent form, has to be predicated upon past lives.

    I don't see how Andy can say, in one video, that he is here to put in ethics on the planet (or something loosely equivalent), and in another say that he's not sure about past lives. Either you are a Scientologist or you are not. And if not, then the idea of putting in ethics on the planet has no meaningful foundation. Unless what he means is, he's not sure about people who claim they are Jesus or the Buddha (or Maitreya?).

    Wow, that was a bit tl;dr for such a trivial point, but there you go.
     
    lotus likes this.
  9. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    That's very black and white of you.

    When I joined ESMB in 2007, I considered myself a Scientologist. Today I consider myself not a Scientologist. But for many years in the middle I couldn't really say.

    Maybe mine was an extra-squishy experience.

    Paul
     
    Wilbur and strativarius like this.
  10. strativarius

    strativarius Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband

    Me pretty much the same. I left around 1974 but it took about twenty years to completely decompress and then take the final plunge and open a 'forbidden' book - Kaufman's 'Inside Scientology'. With that the light came on and I was well and truly an ex-scientologist.

    For the intermediate years, although I was 'out' I was still doing stuff like placing an injured body part against whatever it was that had injured it, or if I had a headache I'd 'have the same thing wrong with another person' and all kinds of shit like that.
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2019
  11. lotus

    lotus stubborn rebel sheep!

    Paul has a good point but I am with Wilbur...the past live and time track are the very core belief of Scientology. Everything, yes everything that one could do, process, learn, is fundamentally based on this belief..even bt's exorcisme is...

    If one doesn't believe in past live he can't go far on the bridge...only a few major courses and this is it.

    Yes there are many shades of believers in any belief system...but like Christians do believe in christ , a scientologist must believe on the time track per LRH and the tech based on it. Otherwise he sson becomes an Ex-Scientologist :)

    Nice topic of discussion though.
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2019
    Tanchi, Wilbur and pineapple like this.
  12. pineapple

    pineapple Silver Meritorious Patron

    The first three things I learned in scn were:

    1) You are a spiritual being, therefore

    2) You are immortal, and therefore

    3) You have lived before.

    I think these points were pushed before anything else because they are ideas that many people find it easy to agree with. Reality is agreement, and Hubbard found some things people could easily agree with to get them on board with his reality.

    At the mission where I got started, all the scn books were sitting out in reception where anyone could pick them up and browse, and we did. (They weren't shrink-wrapped as I hear they are now.) So I looked into "Have You Lived Before This Life" and "History of Man" before I even did the Comm Course.

    I think we were to a degree pre-selected for believing in at least the likelihood of past lives. If you couldn't accept the idea that you might have lived before, I don't think you'd have hung around long in an environment where that sort of thing was taken for granted.

    Later, on the HSDC, I read that people who couldn't run past lives "seldom reach basic on any chain" and therefore need a past life remedy. One remedy was to list "What (attitudes/emotions/sensations/pains) would make one unwilling to look at past lives?" and run the reading items R3R (run them as Dn chains).

    I never knew anyone who needed a past life remedy. Everyone I audited went whole track easily. I ran lots of Dns as an auditor before I ran any as a pc, and when my turn came I went whole track easily too.

    I now think the reason we all ran track so easily is that what we were really doing was just making stuff up, though I certainly never admitted this to myself at the time. I knew there was the possibility at least some of it wasn't real, but I didn't worry about that. Hubbard says (in DMSMH?) that if the pc is running dub-in it will eventually run out and he'll start running the real stuff.

    I think what actually happens is that the dub-in (fantasy) you're running begins to SEEM more real the more of it you run. The dub-in is accepted by the auditor, who mustn't "invalidate or correct the pc's data," and this has the effect of tacitly validating it as real.

    I think Hubbard knew what he was doing here. He wanted pc's to indulge in hundreds of hours of fantasy because he knew it would eventually impair their ability to distinguish fantasy and reality and make them more willing to accept whatever he said, no matter how bizarre, the Xenu story being the ne plus ultra. He said that "engram running gives the most case gain," and from the late 60's through the 70's he kept increasing the amount of Dns you needed to run to get up the bridge.

    So yes, I think past lives are an essential part of scn. If you call yourself a scngst but don't believe in past lives, then I think you're redefining scn in a way Hubbard wouldn't have approved of at all. Past lives were an essential part of his scheme to control us.
     
  13. screamer2

    screamer2 Idiot Bastardson

    Hubbard was trying to con others into running Crowleyian Magick rituals for him.

    Might want to look into that.
     
  14. PirateAndBum

    PirateAndBum Gold Meritorious Patron

    Andy, you suck as an interviewer. It's the Andy show where Andy tells his guest what he thinks about everything looking for agreement.
     
  15. Dotey OT

    Dotey OT Cyclops Duck of the North - BEWARE

    Andy, in my opinion you should talk less. Trust me on this one. I think the more that you speak, well, people can see.
     
  16. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    Andy - there is a disconnect from what LRH states the whole track contains, what comes up in auditing and reality.

    Hubbard says much about space opera whole track mis-adventures, and the big cataclysm at 75 million but completely over looks the recent cataclysms on our own planet such as the Younger Dryas die off. That was a mere 12,800 years ago. Modern humans were alive then. Were this a valid science of the mind and his whole track researches valid, these various cataclysms should have come up. The closest he comes is the Free Being tape which he surmises that an OT could have ripped off the air cover, freezing the mammoths, and giving the planet a twist so they were closer to the north pole. Could have. Not did.

    I don't recall any other references to that period of time, and I have done the shsbc and listened to all those tapes. If the Younger Dryas is a disaster of such a great magnitude that it would wipe out 90% of mammals weighing over 100 lbs on the North American continent, wouldn't you think it would have come up in the hundreds of tapes, thousands of pages he authored? How many pc folders did he read and yet - crickets.

    The big problem with any auditing (or hypnotic) research is feeding data to the subject. It taints the result. Hubbard tainted it far and wide with his books, tapes, HCOBs spreading stories of past lives and space opera.

    The science in Scient-ology was pseudo science at best.

    Mimsey
     
  17. JustSheila

    JustSheila Crusader

    Great post, Mimsey. You have a clever mind and sometimes see contradictions that the rest of us miss. This is a huge one. Why is it that we were willing to believe such absolutely absurd things Hubbard claimed that were so far in the distant past but were completely blind or unwilling to see the contradictions right in front of us in the recent past - things Hubbard obviously knew nothing about ?

    Hubbard never had a good, rational explanation for even one of the mysteries of recent human history. His personal recall was absolutely useless.
     
    Type4_PTS likes this.
  18. lotus

    lotus stubborn rebel sheep!

    I concour and told the same to Mimsey one day
    He was given a hard time on the board regarding his questions .

    His mind and thoughts are constantly evolving and he brings some very interesting questions.
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2019
    JustSheila likes this.
  19. programmer_guy

    programmer_guy True Ex-Scientologist

    And I think that was the real reason Hubbard told Scientologists that they should go up both sides of the Bridge.
    Gee, I guess why he said that! :D
     
    Type4_PTS and lotus like this.
  20. Andy Nolch

    Andy Nolch Patron

    no you heard me wrong, i do believe in past lives, but i dont believe when certain people say stuff like they were LRH in their past life, i think thats a little to uncertain to speak of those specifics, i have some ideas of who i might have been but im not gonna say them until ive done some fact checking