Progressive Tech after Scientology - Idenics

[The Oracle]

Thank you for the reference BB :love5:

 

[Alanzo]

Theillusioness -

Interesting reply.

A whole swath of text, with no real indication of any answer at all to any specific inquiry I made.

See, this is why critical thinking skills are good. If there was any meat or merit to be had, then when we scratched the surface of the feel-good truthiness, we would have exposed real substance underneath.

Instead we get this.

Hubbard hated it when people questioned him, for the same reason.

Thanks.

 

[The Oracle]

Alanzo,

The idea of exorcism has been around for thousands of years, it is even alluded to in the bible.

Hubbard wasn't the first person to originate that idea.

He also wasn't the first person to discover the idea of BT's.

This isn't about critical thinking, it's about being well read and well informed.

My thinking doesn't have anything to do with the fact that I have researched knowledge from a host a different sources.

Excorcism is biblical ancient stale dated information, Hubbard did not invent it.

The Jehovahs Witness have their text on the OT3 incident and BT's. That has been around way before the Dianetics books.

You can attack Hubbard all you want for the way he repackaged information and connected the dots, put psycometry into dime store practice.

He was the not first to come across psycometry, excorsism ideas, or theories about traumatic incidents on the track or even the idea of engrams and psycosomatic illness.

 

[Veda]

Theillusioness -

Interesting reply.

A whole swath of text, with no real indication of any answer at all to any specific inquiry I made.

See, this is why critical thinking skills are good. If there was any meat or merit to be had, then when we scratched the surface of the feel-good truthiness, we would have exposed real substance underneath.

Instead we get this.

Hubbard hated it when people questioned him, for the same reason.

Thanks.

For Alanzo, Gnosis, and others -

For a balanced look at the Crowley/Hubbard connection, I suggest - for starters - obtaining a copy of the book, 'L. Ron Hubbard, Messiah or Madman?', preferably the 2nd or 3rd edition (1992, 1996). The relevant chapters are 'L. Ron and the Beast', Part one, chapter 3, for a look at the "dark side," and 'L. Ron and the Beast Revisited' Part two, chapter 14, for a mostly positive look at the Crowley/Hubbard connection, and the earlier sources from which they both borrowed. The 2nd and 3rd editions are not available on the NET, and so a trip to the library or, more likely, Amazon Books, is necessary, if anyone wishes to get a copy. Note: Sometimes, book sellers confuse the rush-to-print (shorter) 1987 hardbound, 402 page 1st edition with the hardbound, 464 page 3rd edition. Make sure you get either the 460 page Paperback 2nd edition, or best, the 3rd edition.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/156980009X/ref=sib_dp_pt/104-4760059-6679912

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._Ron_Hubbard:_Messiah_or_Madman?

This thread contains a number of informative links, and some useful information:

http://forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=510

Link to an examination of the 'Brainwashing Manual'. See pages 90 and 91, in the 'Notes' section, of 'Brainwashing Manual Parallels', for some more Crowley-related information:

http://www.xenu-directory.net/critics/ambry1.html

Hope this helps.

P.S. There is no editorializing in these titles. It was Crowley who called himself 'The Beast', and Hubbard who called the 64 page 1955 booklet, 'The Brainwashing Manual'.

Strangely enough, the two items are related.

Hubbard borrowed much from Crowley, who had borrowed much from others. Both added their own innovations, and - unfortunately - their own negative twists.

Yet, Hubbard did something Crowley did not do - Hubbard crafted his Work into the form of (also Hubbard's language), a "Psychopolitical operation." The document, 'Brainwashing Manual Parallels in Scientology' examines this area.

Two additional items,

Aleister Crowley's 'The Universe: The 0 = 2 Equation':

http://www.lilytears.com/spirituality/thelema/qabalah/universeequation

Some info on 'Magick'/Scientology "OT data" correspondences, from the End Note #74, page 91, of 'Brainwashing Manual Parallels in Scientology':

http://www.freewebs.com/slyandtalledgy/Brainwashing Manual Parallels.pdf

 

[Terril park]

What she says.


basicbasic 30 Jan 2001

NOTS AND THE BIBLE

The Xenu story "body thetans" and Nots auditing has come in for much ridicule . Here.I’d like to put aside the Xenu story,perhaps class that as mythology, ,and look at the relationship between Nots and the excorcising of demons as presented in the Gospels. One point about the Bible is that it is as well as a religious text,a historical document. Further an authorititive one in that there are several accounts of the same person and events from multiple sources. There are many references to exorcisms,including multiple possession. There is the question of what if any are the differences between a demon and a "body thetan" or entity.They are both non material yet alive in some way, both affect the possessee adversely in some way,both can be gotten rid of by simple commands, both can exist as multiples or clusters. Collectively they seem to have troubled man throughout his existance.As far as I can see there is not such a lot of difference. Considering the Gospels have come down to us through many versions, translations ect,none of which were contemporary with Christ, there is remarkable similarity, to Nots auditing, if that was also the original intention of Christ.

"In the evening at sundown,they would bring all the sick and demon possessed to him……On such occasions he cured many people afflicted with various diseases and drove out many demons." Mark 1-32.

"And summoning his 12 deciples he gave them authority to drive out unclean spirits and to heal every disease and every ailment." Matthew 10-1

"And his reputation spread through the whole of Syria.They brought him evertone who was ill,who suffered from any kind of disease or was in intense pain,who was possessed,who was epileptic,or a parylytic,and he cured them" .Mathew 4-24.

These are a few examples. These show that driving out demons was a separate goal different to curing ,epilepsy,disease,paralysis,pain ect.This was probably relieving the person with regard to mental or spiritual issues. Councelling if you like which is still practiced today in confessional and in exorcism.

CLUSTERS

In some instances multiple possession is encountered and handled.This is parrallelled by the auditing of "clusters" on Nots.

"Mary,the one from Magdala,from whom seven Demons had taken their leave…." Luke 8-2

"Jesus questioned him :"What is your name?" "Legion" ,he said,because many demons had entered him.They kept begging himnot to order them to depart into the abyss……and they bargained with him to let them enter those pigs.And he agreed.Then the demons came out of the fellow and entered the pigs…." Luke 8-30

"When an unclean spirit leaves a person,it wanders through waterless places in search of a resting place.When it dosn’t find one it says,I will go back to the home I left.It then returns,and finds and finds it swept and refurbished.Next it goes out and brings back seven other spirits more vile than itself,who enter and settle in there.So that person ends up worse of than when he or she started." Luke 11 -24

It seems multiple possession was quite common.The last reference seems to be giving an explanation of why that would be.It is also parralel to the phenomena of having audited one of a cluster using Nots ,there are several more entities who have the same pictures,incidents copied among themselves.And they remain.

TEACHING

Christ actually taught his Deciples to also drive out demons. See mathew 10-1 above.

Also see below Mark 9-38 , Jesus is called teacher.

"He called his 12 together and gave them power and authority over all demons and to heal diseases." Luke 9-1

"He formed a group of twelve to be his companions,and to be sent out to speak,and to have authority to drive out demons." Mark-14

Also disciple means one who recieves instruction.As I understand it Christ was a man so could not rely on devine powers to excorcise demons. He used words, much as auditors do. His disciples certainly were not devine and he taught them how to drive out demons. It also seemed an important part of his mission. Bringing his version of the "Tech" to people, perhaps?

COMMANDS

Well in Luke 8-30 you have him bargaining with demons,to let them go into pigs. Here is another example.

"But Jesus yelled at it,"Shut up and get out of him." Mark 1-25.

This latter is a bit abrupt. In that it is similar to the "Thetan hand" technique of Nots.

The Scholars of the Westar institute:-

Jesus undoubtedly made remarks during the exorcism of demons. Because they were not incantations or magical formulae, the disciples did not preserve his actual words. As a consequence,scholars conclude that words such as those found in 1-25 represent the story tellers’s idea of what Jesus would have said in expelling a demon. This cold mean these words were simple questions or commands such as found in auditing. As in everyday use,and thus not remarked on. They are lost it seems unless new archaelogical treasures are discovered.

SQUIRRELLING

Here is a section from Mark 9-38

"John said to him,"Teacher,we saw someone driving out demons in your name,so we tried to stop him,because he wasn’t one of our adherents" Jesus responded,"Don’t stop him!……….In fact whoever is not against us is on our side……."

Sigh!…..If only COS had this same attitude. Note the addressing of Jesus as Teacher. It looks like Christ is teaching an early form of nots here.

CONFIDENTIALITY

From Luke 8-16 "No one lights a lamp and covers it with a pot or puts it undera bed;rather one puts it on a lampstand,so that those who come in can see the light. After all, there is nothing hidden that won’t be brought to light,nor secreted away that won’t be made known and exposed."

Here is another point COS could have learned from.

So those who wish to mock Nots,you get very close to mocking your friends or your own tradition. Religion generally, and Christianity in particular has been usurped and taken over by Rulers governments and different factions. One well known example being the Take over by Constantine, in 325 A.D , who instigated the Vote on whether God was 1 or 3,by a council of bishops at Niceae. Thus some parts of the tradition are given prominence over others at different times. I was very surprised at the very many refs.to casting out of demons. I have only quoted a fraction of them. Yet this tradition is not spoken much about. I was raised in Christian schools althiough I am not one.
I was never told much of this, in fact can remember nothing.

bb Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology

 

[The Oracle]

Thanks for the references BB :love4:

 

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

About your success with meditation, I decided to start a Meditation Thread and compile some data there. Would you please contribute? Thank you!

 

[Veda]

I'm not aware of anyone here who has said that "all auditing is hypnosis".

What has been said is that:

1. Auditing can be rightly categorized as a form of hypnotherapy

2. Many, maybe even most, auditing processes produce hypnotic states

These are different concepts than "All auditing is hypnosis"

Yes.

Thus the urgings to find out about hypnosis from sources other than L Ron Hubbard.

The first thing to do is isolate and intellectually quarantine Hubbard's definitions of hypnosis, while seeking out any other definition from anywhere else.

When you do that, you will find that many definitions have already been provided to you on this board, in this and other threads. You will begin to find lots of other information you can use to contrast and compare with what you know from Hubbard.

You can do a google search on the word, for instance.

And while I agree that it is important to precisely define the word so that we know what we are talking about (that's why I've tried my best to do it) there is something real in the human experience, even your own human experience, that the word is standing for.

What is it?

The problem is still there - to different people, the word means different things. And no one has yet to compile all those different definitions, in a nice neat list, so that they may be purused.

Plus, the subject of consciousness, and states of consciousness, and "altered states," is never an easy discussion topic.

So, remind us, again, what is your definition, and then tell us what it is, "that is real in human experience, that the word [with your definition] is standing for."

 

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

What she says.


basicbasic 30 Jan 2001

NOTS AND THE BIBLE

The Xenu story "body thetans" and Nots auditing has come in for much ridicule . Here.I’d like to put aside the Xenu story,perhaps class that as mythology, ,and look at the relationship between Nots and the excorcising of demons as presented in the Gospels. One point about the Bible is that it is as well as a religious text,a historical document. Further an authorititive one in that there are several accounts of the same person and events from multiple sources. There are many references to exorcisms,including multiple possession. There is the question of what if any are the differences between a demon and a "body thetan" or entity.They are both non material yet alive in some way, both affect the possessee adversely in some way,both can be gotten rid of by simple commands, both can exist as multiples or clusters. Collectively they seem to have troubled man throughout his existance.As far as I can see there is not such a lot of difference. Considering the Gospels have come down to us through many versions, translations ect,none of which were contemporary with Christ, there is remarkable similarity, to Nots auditing, if that was also the original intention of Christ.

"In the evening at sundown,they would bring all the sick and demon possessed to him……On such occasions he cured many people afflicted with various diseases and drove out many demons." Mark 1-32.

"And summoning his 12 deciples he gave them authority to drive out unclean spirits and to heal every disease and every ailment." Matthew 10-1

"And his reputation spread through the whole of Syria.They brought him evertone who was ill,who suffered from any kind of disease or was in intense pain,who was possessed,who was epileptic,or a parylytic,and he cured them" .Mathew 4-24.

These are a few examples. These show that driving out demons was a separate goal different to curing ,epilepsy,disease,paralysis,pain ect.This was probably relieving the person with regard to mental or spiritual issues. Councelling if you like which is still practiced today in confessional and in exorcism.

CLUSTERS

In some instances multiple possession is encountered and handled.This is parrallelled by the auditing of "clusters" on Nots.

"Mary,the one from Magdala,from whom seven Demons had taken their leave…." Luke 8-2

"Jesus questioned him :"What is your name?" "Legion" ,he said,because many demons had entered him.They kept begging himnot to order them to depart into the abyss……and they bargained with him to let them enter those pigs.And he agreed.Then the demons came out of the fellow and entered the pigs…." Luke 8-30

"When an unclean spirit leaves a person,it wanders through waterless places in search of a resting place.When it dosn’t find one it says,I will go back to the home I left.It then returns,and finds and finds it swept and refurbished.Next it goes out and brings back seven other spirits more vile than itself,who enter and settle in there.So that person ends up worse of than when he or she started." Luke 11 -24

It seems multiple possession was quite common.The last reference seems to be giving an explanation of why that would be.It is also parralel to the phenomena of having audited one of a cluster using Nots ,there are several more entities who have the same pictures,incidents copied among themselves.And they remain.

TEACHING

Christ actually taught his Deciples to also drive out demons. See mathew 10-1 above.

Also see below Mark 9-38 , Jesus is called teacher.

"He called his 12 together and gave them power and authority over all demons and to heal diseases." Luke 9-1

"He formed a group of twelve to be his companions,and to be sent out to speak,and to have authority to drive out demons." Mark-14

Also disciple means one who recieves instruction.As I understand it Christ was a man so could not rely on devine powers to excorcise demons. He used words, much as auditors do. His disciples certainly were not devine and he taught them how to drive out demons. It also seemed an important part of his mission. Bringing his version of the "Tech" to people, perhaps?

COMMANDS

Well in Luke 8-30 you have him bargaining with demons,to let them go into pigs. Here is another example.

"But Jesus yelled at it,"Shut up and get out of him." Mark 1-25.

This latter is a bit abrupt. In that it is similar to the "Thetan hand" technique of Nots.

The Scholars of the Westar institute:-

Jesus undoubtedly made remarks during the exorcism of demons. Because they were not incantations or magical formulae, the disciples did not preserve his actual words. As a consequence,scholars conclude that words such as those found in 1-25 represent the story tellers’s idea of what Jesus would have said in expelling a demon. This cold mean these words were simple questions or commands such as found in auditing. As in everyday use,and thus not remarked on. They are lost it seems unless new archaelogical treasures are discovered.

SQUIRRELLING

Here is a section from Mark 9-38

"John said to him,"Teacher,we saw someone driving out demons in your name,so we tried to stop him,because he wasn’t one of our adherents" Jesus responded,"Don’t stop him!……….In fact whoever is not against us is on our side……."

Sigh!…..If only COS had this same attitude. Note the addressing of Jesus as Teacher. It looks like Christ is teaching an early form of nots here.

CONFIDENTIALITY

From Luke 8-16 "No one lights a lamp and covers it with a pot or puts it undera bed;rather one puts it on a lampstand,so that those who come in can see the light. After all, there is nothing hidden that won’t be brought to light,nor secreted away that won’t be made known and exposed."

Here is another point COS could have learned from.

So those who wish to mock Nots,you get very close to mocking your friends or your own tradition. Religion generally, and Christianity in particular has been usurped and taken over by Rulers governments and different factions. One well known example being the Take over by Constantine, in 325 A.D , who instigated the Vote on whether God was 1 or 3,by a council of bishops at Niceae. Thus some parts of the tradition are given prominence over others at different times. I was very surprised at the very many refs.to casting out of demons. I have only quoted a fraction of them. Yet this tradition is not spoken much about. I was raised in Christian schools althiough I am not one.
I was never told much of this, in fact can remember nothing.

bb Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology

NOTS was developed to handle the (BTs) case of collapsed black magicians. It appears there were tons of black magicians in Biblical days.

 

[The Oracle]

The strongest argument presented before the Romans to crucify Christ was that Christ was a black magician.

 

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

A Quote from Crowley

Gnosis,

About high magick, the best example of high magick I can think of would be Hubbard and his putting magick into the hands of the average man.

If he had called it magick, he would not have been able to disseminate it the way he did, and he would not have been able to put it into the hands of as many people.

But from my viewpoint, Scientology is a practice of magick and breaking black magick spells.

There is nothing in the final product that wasn't being practiced by the Gnostics thousands of years ago.

But that knowledge was edited from the texts early on.

Many of the Scientology symbols are Gnostic symbols.

I believe Hubbard was propelled by Jack Parsons and Crowley, but he certainly packaged it in a way that magick was no longer only to people in secret societies.

I think everyone in Scientology has been introduced to magick and has had the chance to practice it in a way that has been acceptable to them marketing wise.

Anyone who had read Crowley or Parsons or Claude M. Bristol would know that Hubbard did not stand alone in his theories. Not even with phsycometry.

When people attack the subject of Scientology they attack hundreds of writers and groups as far back as the Gnostics.

People come up with answers, as long as people can think and ponder they will come up with answers.

They will get attacked because there cannot be one answer for everybody here, there are too many people here from too many different places.

But there are plenty of people here that know about magick, even if it just because they know they have been the effect of it.

If you have eaten vegetables, you have been the effect of magick.

Put a seed in the dirt.

A flower appears.

Fruit appears from the flower.

That is magick.

Here's a good quote:

"5. Now what is Magick? Magick is the science and art of causing change to occur in conformity with the Will. How do we achieve this? By exalting the will to the point where it is master of circumstance. And how do we do this? By so ordering every thought, word and act, in such a way that the attention is constantly recalled to the chosen object."

Is that what Ron was trying to achieve with Tone 40 of postulates?

 

[Veda]

NOTS was developed to handle the (BTs) case of collapsed black magicians. It appears there were tons of black magicians in Biblical days.

I'm not sure that I would use the term, "black magician," but -

Don't you mean, "NOTS was developed to handle the (BT) case of *a* collapsed black magician"?

A "collapsed black magician" who was living in hiding, after his extensive personal covert "dirty tricks" Intelligence Network had attracted the attention of the United States government, which didn't like having its offices broken into, and its documents stolen?

A "collapsed black magician" whose personal "dirty tricks" Intelligence Network - under his instructions, and following his "Intelligence tech" -attempted to frame innocent people, destroy people's careers, destroy people's sanity, infiltrate, and burglarize homes and offices?

A "collapsed black magician" who, in the 1950s, had loved to lecture and write on the topic of practical psychology?

Who, in 1938, shortly after writing the unpublished book, 'Excalibur', had written that his "real goal" was to, "smash [his] name into history so violently that it will take a legendary form"?

Whose "real goal," ultimately, infected and dominated even his most positive work from the 1950s?

Who left behind a "mixed bag" of words and techniques for others to sort out?

*That* "collapsed black magician"?

Mmmmm... Well, that is an interesting way to think about it.

If that's what you mean...

 

[Veda]

Here's a good quote:

"5. Now what is Magick? Magick is the science and art of causing change to occur in conformity with the Will. How do we achieve this? By exalting the will to the point where it is master of circumstance. And how do we do this? By so ordering every thought, word and act, in such a way that the attention is constantly recalled to the chosen object."

Is that what Ron was trying to achieve with Tone 40 of postulates?

For himself, and *his* Will, definitely.

P.S. How extensively has the poster, theillusioness, examined the writings of Aleister Crowley? I made the inquiry, but never did receive a response.

I do know that theillusioness' study of the writings of Hubbard is very incomplete.

 

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

Hello Veda,

I would have said "a" collapsed black magician, if I were not aware of another person who also has black magic track and could only be handled with NOTS before any other tech could work.

 

[Veda]

Hello Veda,

I would have said "a" collapsed black magician, if I were not aware of another person who also has black magic track and could only be handled with NOTS before any other tech could work.

Well, Ok. I'm glad this other person is doing better.

However, mainly, I was referring to "NOTs" having been developed in 1978, when David Mayo was attempting to handle the then bedridden Hubbard's problems.

It was later packaged and sold as the "2nd Wall of Fire," and *everyone* was told that they had the "NOTs" problem or "case," a "case" that would - they were told - require years and many thousands of dollars to resolve, but once resolved would have "removed the final barrier to full OT."

Now, almost thirty years have passed, and "NOTs" - frankly - did not deliver what it promised, but, it did produce a collection of people, seemingly endlessly preoccupied with the "problem" of "body thetans."

 

[Alanzo]

Veda Wrote:

The problem is still there - to different people, the word means different things. And no one has yet to compile all those different definitions, in a nice neat list, so that they may be purused.

Plus, the subject of consciousness, and states of consciousness, and "altered states," is never an easy discussion topic.

So, remind us, again, what is your definition, and then tell us what it is, "that is real in human experience, that the word [with your definition] is standing for."

I agree that the problem is still there. And I don't pretend to think I can fix this problem. But I will do my best to give my understanding of this state in words for you.

My definition is derived from the description found in the Scientific American article on Hypnosis: a state of mind produced by extended concentration on one thing to the exclusion of other things in the immediate environment.

It is a state of heightened awareness on one thing to the exclusion of everything else.

This state of mind can be contrasted by a different state of mind - the state of mind you enter while walking down the street, looking both ways before you cross the road, looking around at the environment, window shopping etc.

A hypnotic state is a state very definitely characterized by being awake and aware. It's just that it is a state of mind of being awake and aware of one thing, to the exclusion of other things going on in your environment.

If you've ever meditated, if you've ever done TRs, if you've ever been "IN SESSION", even if you've ever HAD REAL GOOD SEX, then you have experienced this state of mind. If you have ever done repetitive religious rituals, danced with dervishes, or deeply prayed, you've experienced this state.

It is human. It is normal. It is familiar. But it is distinct from other states of mind.

Hubbard would tell you that by entering this state of mind alone, then you would be going more "unconscious". This is false. He would tell you that you are entering a state where your "reactive mind" is dominant. Again, this is false. In this sate, you are very conscious, but you are conscious of one thing to the exclusion of other things. Hubbard would warn you away from these states (while putting you in them).

This is as much as I can say about this. I would only distinguish that I am not saying anything about SUGGESTION when I describe hypnotic states above, because the two are different.

About that, I can only say hypnotic states carry a characteristic of "intellectual unguardedness". And thus, they are vulnerable to suggestion.

There's a lot more to learn about the subject of suggestion.

This is the best I can do right now.

Don't say I didn't try.

 

[Alanzo]

The function of TRs

The function of TRs in an auditing session is to induce a hypnotic state in the pc.

The intent is to place a pc in an auditing environment with no distractions to the auditing command, and no distractions to the pc concentrating on the incident in his mind.

Evaluation and Invalidation distracts from this. So does session noise such as auditor chatter, hand gestures, auditor being "interesting" or calling attention to himself. Outside noises can "break the spell" of being IN SESSION, as well. All these things needed to be guarded against, mostly to keep the PC in a hypnotic state while running processes.

The expert use of TR's places the pc's attention where it needs to be, it puts him IN SESSION: Interested in own case and willing to talk to the auditor.

This is why Hubbard said auditing could not occur without good TRs.

I should say that hypnotic states can be very therapeutic. Hubbard's challenge was to teach auditors to put pc's into hypnotic states without telling them that was what he was doing. So he developed TRs and told them to drill them, drill them, drill them.

I also think this is one reason why Hubbard was the only one to be able to think up new technology - he was hiding this hypnotic aspect. And if no one knew the hypnotic aspect, then they weren't going to be able to think up good tech, were they?

 

[tarbaby]

what he said!

How'd you get so smart, Alanzo? I couldn't have said it better myself. And I'm glad I don't need to try.

The function of TRs in an auditing session is to induce a hypnotic state in the pc.
The intent is to place a pc in an auditing environment with no distractions to the auditing command, and no distractions to the pc concentrating on the incident in his mind.
Evaluation and Invalidation distracts from this. So does session noise such as auditor chatter, hand gestures, auditor being "interesting" or calling attention to himself. Outside noises can "break the spell" of being IN SESSION, as well. All these things needed to be guarded against, mostly to keep the PC in a hypnotic state while running processes.
The expert use of TR's places the pc's attention where it needs to be, it puts him IN SESSION: Interested in own case and willing to talk to the auditor.
This is why Hubbard said auditing could not occur without good TRs.
I should say that hypnotic states can be very therapeutic. Hubbard's challenge was to teach auditors to put pc's into hypnotic states without telling them that was what he was doing. So he developed TRs and told them to drill them, drill them, drill them.
I also think this is one reason why Hubbard was the only one to be able to think up new technology - he was hiding this hypnotic aspect. And if no one knew the hypnotic aspect, then they weren't going to be able to think up good tech, were they?

 

[Alanzo]

Dennis wrote:

How'd you get so smart, Alanzo? I couldn't have said it better myself. And I'm glad I don't need to try.

No kidding!

You write a post and all you get back sometimes are the sounds of crickets and wolves, and the wind blowing cold through the trees.

It's hard. No one believes you. Others attack you. You feel like you are getting no where. You feel misunderstood and all alone.

So you trudge on sadly.

And nobly.

Alanzo

 

[The Oracle]

Gnosis,

I wouldn't be able to translate for anybody.

But Hubbard used the word intention and Crowley used the word WILL.

I can relate better to the word WILL because for me that implies desire. I can just think better with desire.

A person can have / use intention all the way up and down the CDEI scale.

I find I can only function effectively from the viewpoint of desire and my will seems to be within my grasp.

Will has integrity and is whole and is a product of want.

Intentions can be vague, confusing, and even synthetic.

I don't state this as a truth or a matter of fact for anyone beyond myself.

A 1.5 can have intentions but in the enforce band he is very far removed from desire.

I have found to survive very well one must only remain on a line of desire. To win cooperation one must only appeal to another's desire.

All the rest of randomity that exists off that line is a chaos.

"You can't always get what you want............ was a song written by someone who always got what they wanted.

All thetans really need is a game.

Want / Will / Desire however you care to phrase it, has it's own universe of dynamics and charma.

You have to become a bit of a commander of that universe.

Violating other people's wants, invalidating other people's wants, enforcing wants on other people, ignoring other people's wants, these are all actions that can cause you to loose command over your own wants.

You have to grant license to other's wants in order to have license to your wants.

That means confronting other peoples wants whether it violates you reality or not.

It also means having an understand of flows and knowing what is an other to other flow and not yours.

It means "Let it be".

You have to understand finally people are who they want to be, where they want to be, and doing what they want to be doing even if it looks like a motivator flow to you.

But Crowley has this universe of WANT and WILL very much under his command.

He just specialized in this area the same way Les Dane specialized in Big League Sales.

In fact, to begin to exist at all you must find out what someone else WANTS and needs, and give it up to them.

There is as much pleasure if not more in realizing other peoples wants as your own.