Subject: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 63 - LATE JULY 99 PILOT POSTS TO ARS/ACT
Date: 29 Jul 1999 04:00:18
From: pilot@scientology.at (The Pilot)
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology

POST63.txt

SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 63 - LATE JULY 99 PILOT POSTS TO ARS/ACT

The first 4 posts went to both ARS & ACT.  The remainder went
to ACT only.

Best,

The Pilot (aka Ken Ogger)

==========================================

Contents:

 subj : Super Scio - Answering JimDBB on Monroe
 subj : Super Scio - Answering Michaelv on Handing Out Tickets
 subj : Super Scio - To Surver on the Dutch Translation
 subj : Super Scio - If It Isn't Fun
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Continuing on Needing LRH
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Xmech on Remote Attacks
 subj : Super Scio Tech - To Bryan on Infinity
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Thomlove on Tech Plans
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Stephen About OT 8 etc.
 subj : Super Scio Tech - The False Bridge of the Late '60s
 subj : Super Scio Tech - A Few More Nice Processes
 subj : Super Scio Tech - CYCLES OF ACTION
 subj : Super Scio Tech - NOTES ON THE R7 PRESENT TIME IMPLANT

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - Answering JimDBB on Monroe

ANSWERING JIMDBB ON MONROE

On 14 Jul 99, Jimdbb@aol.com (JimDBB) responded to my post
on "Super Scio Humor - SCIENTOLOGY HEAVEN"

> >Subject: Super Scio Humor - SCIENTOLOGY HEAVEN
> >From: pilot@echelon.alias.net (The Pilot)
>
> >HUMOR: SCIENTOLOGY HEAVEN
> >
> >Rudy Rodds woke up in the middle of the night and looked around
> >fearfully.
> >
> >A dark form carrying a scyth was drifting towards his bed.
> >And as it approached, it began to speak in a dreadfull voice.
> >
> >"It is January 15, 2325 and we regret to inform you that you
> >died in your sleep last night.  Since you are a Scientologist,
> >we will lead you to the Scientology Heaven, in accordance with
> >the Astral Peace Treaty of 2128."
>
> I think, Pilot, that there may be more than a bit of truth in this.
> Discoveries made from research at the Monroe Institute show that the
> afterlife is set up with afterlife areas which which are designed
> for various belief systems.  There may well be a 'scientology' after
> life area.
>
> Robert Moen has two excellent books out based on his work at the Monroe
> Institute and his afterlife research. These are published by Hampton
> Roads publishers.
>
> The Monroe Institute was set up by Robert Monroe, the author of the
classic,
> "Journeys out of the body".
>
> JIMDBB

Yes, I've read both of Monroe's Journeys books and a number of others
that look at the afterlife this way too, and that was in the back
of my mind while I was writing the humor post.

I consider this more likely than the idea of a single heaven where
only one sect, if any, out of all the world's religions had guessed
right about it.

The sad thing is that if this is true, the orthodox Scientologists
probably would have created a heavenly RPF for themselves.

Luckily there would also be a Freezone Heaven for them to excape
to.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - Answering Michaelv on Handing Out Tickets

ANSWERING MICHAELV ON HANDING OUT TICKETS

On 19 Jul 99, Michael Voytinsky <michaelv@igs.net> asked on
topic "Clams littering in New York's Times Square?"

> Last week I was in New York for the second time, and once again
> I took a walk through Times Square.
>
> Once again I saw the ground littered with tickets to "Orientation"
> (for new readers of this NG - its Scientology propaganda film).
> Yet I did not see any clams handing them out.
>
> Do the clams just run out onto the street, throw some tickets around,
> and retreat back into the org, or what?
>
> --
> Michael Voytinsky
> Ottawa Ontario Canada
> http://www.igs.net/~michaelv

It's New York.  When I was on staff at the NY org back in the
sixties, you'd just grab a pack of handouts on your way out the
door and just hand them out while you were walking to the subway
or going to get a hot dog or whatever.

In those days it was an invitation to the public lecture.  We
called them "cordial invites" because it began something like
"You are cordially invited to attend ..."

Staff and students were not required to hand these out (at least
not in those days) but many did so occasionally, and of course
somebody on a promo type post might go out with a shopping bag
full and FSMs were often talked into giving out lots.  Often
there was just a table full of these by the door and if you
felt inspired (or somebody was twisting your arm), you might
grab a bunch.

Since it was New York, you go through about five hundred in
a few minutes, just handing them to people as you go about
other business.  The crowd density around Times Square is
fantastic and all the Al Bundy's will grab for tickets
hopeing that its a free admission to one of the girlie shows.

At least 40% end up in the trash baskets and 40% end up on the
pavement.  People who are handing them out as part of their
post sometimes pick up the discarded ones, but people who have
had their arm twisted into giving out a bunch on their way to
the movies don't.

I think that it was a lot smarter to have a live public lecturer
than to be showing a canned movie.  A good one could keep a
crowd entertained, telling jokes and demonstrating things
and giving a bit of a show.  But of course you have to have
somebody who is alive and real and can think fast on his feet,
and you've got to let him talk about the subject without any
restrictions.  But it's hard to give such a lecture if you
can't think for yourself.  So I suppose that they had to
change over to a film.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - To Surver on the Dutch Translation

TO SURVER ON THE DUTCH TRANSLATION

On 14 Jul 99, surver@hotmail.com asked on subject
"to the Pilot :Dutch translation selfclearin"

> Greetings Ken Ogger!
>
> I am considering writing a Dutch translation of the Handbook for
> selfclearing this summer vacation and have 2 questions:
>
> 1) Do you know of anybody else who is writing a Dutch translation ?
>    (note: Dutch is different from German)

I haven't heard of any.  If somebody is, I hope they will email you
or announce it on the newsgroup.  Note that people should post questions
like this to both ARS & ACT because many on ACT don't read ARS.

> 2) Is there a major rewriting of the handbook for selfclearing in
> the near future ? (apart from the updates in your excellent postings)If
> so, I`d better wait for the new version.

I'm not planning a major rewrite.

I do plan to do a second edition eventually, but it will mainly
be an expansion, adding in the extra material that I've been
putting out as updates.  But that is long range, I don't know
if I will be ready to do it this year.

The biggest deficiency is in the chapter on Protest, which really
needs the Protest/Admiration process that I put out later in a
separate post.  I'm sorry that I didn't find this one until after
writing the book.


> P.S. Thanks for the great book. Without you I`d still be crawling in
> CofS doing endless and useless cycles.
>
> surver@hotmail.com

Not entirely useless or we would not bother with the subject.
But so much waste and so many backwards steps for each of the
forward ones that it can be heartbreaking.

Welcome.

And I look forward to your translation.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - If It Isn't Fun

IF IT ISN'T FUN

On 20 Jul 99, Beth Guest <beth@guests3.freeserve.co.uk> continued
the discussion on "Random thoughts for LR1467"

> In article <gfQj3.10$_j.118732@WReNphoon4>, Jeff B <ka1ogm@gis.net>
> writes
>
> > I remember coming across this one at one point: "If you're not
> > having fun, then it isn't Scientology."  Anybody know where that's
> > from?
>
> I was there when Diana said this. It was at an event in the UK.
>
> It indicates to me as being how it should be.
> (?)
>
> --
> Beth

I heard it as "If it isn't fun, it isn't Scientology".

And I heard it in NY back in the sixties.

The last time I heard it on staff was in '68 when Dave Ecker
(who was running the org at that time) said it at a staff meeting.
I'd certainly heard it many times before from various people,
it didn't originate with him.  But shortly after that things
started getting really rough and the saying seemed to fade out
of usage.

I think that I heard it on a tape once, possibly one of the
congresses from the 1950s, but I just can't pin it down.

But when the statement was really in vogue ('66 to early '68
in my staff experience), it was applied.  You tried to make
staff fun.  You tried to raise the group tone level.

I remember Eunice Ford (she was running NY in 66 & early 67)
cracking jokes to lighten the mood while doing an inspection.

I remember Bob Thomas, while issuing some heavy orders at a
staff meeting to fix a big screwup, doing it in such a way as
to have half of the staff almost rolling on the floor with
laughter, and yet getting his point across and getting the
situation handled.

There was none of this screaming and dramatizing and low
toned behavior.

The basic reference was Science of Survival and the tone
scale.

A group operating in Fear or Anger makes screwed up products.
The tones below 2.0 are aimed in the direction of sucumb.

It's not that you have to be meek or namby-pambie.  A high
toned group is often loud and rude as well as cheerful.
But it is fun and there is a spirit of play rather than
dead seriousness.

Considering how much Ron said against being "dead serious",
it is just amazing how serious the Sea Org later became.

People used to drop by the org just to hang out.  You
could wander into the reception area just looking for
someone to go grab a bit to eat or whatever.  Later people
were scared to do that.  A registrar or a recruiter would
pounce on you.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - Continuing on Needing LRH

CONTINUING ON NEEDING LRH

Seems like some people didn't get what I was saying
last time.

I was not talking about worshipping LRH.

I was not talking about this sick idea of there only being
one source.

I was not talking about the later organizational insanities.

I was not even promoting standard tech.  In fact I was
saying the exact opposite.

I was talking about something quite different.

I was talking about the need for a subject that organizes
subjects.

I was talking about the need for a broader base that embraces
many different practices and implementations.

That is what Scientology was once, in the days before standard
tech and KSW.

That is from the time when Ron called himself the great organizer
rather than the source of the tech.

Something went very bad later.  He mentions on the Class VIII
tapes (they were posted recently) that he got run on the Sources
process from Grade 5 and the session went to hell.  It's not that
power can't be run on a clear.  It's just that some half assed
auditor horribly goofed  up the session on Ron.  And Ron's subsequent
decision that what was wrong was that it wouldn't run on a clear
obviously didn't correct the screwed up session but simply prevented
it from ever being repaired.  Therefore it was a major wrong
indication.

And we can assume that that happened in 1965 because that is
when power was developed.  And we can look with amazement at
the fact that Ron put out one of the most spectacular processes
and then couldn't be run on it himself.  And my guess would be
that Ron was listing it out of session while writing the HCOB
and that the auditor then overlisted it and pushed a wrong item
on him with disasterous results.

But the plain fact of the matter is that Ron got messed up
on the Sources process (by his own statement on the class VIII
tapes) and that this happened in 1965 and that he then immediately
issued the KSW policy stating that he was the one and only
source of tech.

Let me say that date again.  1965.  That is when Scientology
became hostile to tech finders.  Until then it was THE tech
finder's science.

Of course much of the data goes back earlier.  But it is
individual pieces, one here and one there.  There is a terrible
problem with applying earlier metaphysics in a practical
manner, I know because I grew up on metaphysics and the
lack of workable processes just drove me up the walls.

I remember searching for answers in my teens.  I remember
finding some too.  And yet it was horribly difficult to try
and apply anything.

That is what Ron really gave us.  Ways of organizing and
processing the higher spiritual truths.  It is nice to know
that all is illusion, but how do you process it?  How do you
drill it?  What can be done about it?

The ideas do go back earlier.  But how do you use them?

The unifying platform was outlined in 1952 to 1954 and it
makes all the difference.

We have only two choices if we wish to make it all the
way.

a) Organize on the ORIGINAL Scientology base (NOT standard tech)

b) Develope a new broad base of Clearing Tech

Whatever base is used, it HAS to encompass Trom, Avatar,
Standard Tech, Knowledgism, Dyamism, CBR, Zen, Gurdieff,
and anything else under the sun that produces a workable
result.

Alternative b) is possible, but the work involved is tremendous
and I don't see anybody doing it.  Alan will probably scream
at me for saying this, but I think that he is doing an
implementation rather than evolving a complete new base.

There is a big difference between developing a workable
practice and developing something that allows the development
of new workable practices.

The broadness and strength of the original base is why
so many divergent practices have evolved out of Scientology.

One of the many "squirrel groups" that evolved from that
base was Ron's own personal squirrel group known as standard
tech.  It is just an implementation.  One of the infinity of
possiblities that opened up.

And of course I'm saying "squirrel" as a joke.  According to
the original concept of Scientology, the only thing that is
squirrel is making unworkable processes.  The only squirrel
idea that I've ever seen on ACT is the idea of sec checking
everybody telepathically.  And that is not to say that all
telepathic processing is unworkable or that all sec checking
is unworkable, but is only to point out that nobody is going
to get any case gain by having somebody else pull witholds
(real or imagined) telepathically without talking to the
person for real to let some charge come off.

As far as I'm concerned, the most important thing here is
to see the research line advance.  It is a tough proposition.
As I said last time, if one person could do it alone, Ron
would have.  But the standard bridge, despite producing
case gain, falls short of producing real OT.  And so it
should be obvious that a group research effort is needed.
Not just me, although I will happily and egotisically
say that I'm smarter than everybody else and so on.  And
not just Alan, although he could also claim extreme smarts
and unique contributions to the work.  And not just ... -
(I started listing names here and I realize that I just
couldn't get all of them without going on for pages and pages.
Nothing could do justice to the amount of significant ideas
that are appearing on ACT.  Even Phil has said some things
that are unique and important in the research.)

But how do we align all these wonderful ideas.  Are we to
end up as nothing more than an interesting footnote in the
history books, or can we make the real breakthrough, the
one that actually gets us out of the trap.

We need a base broad enough to embrace the entire field.
Not just one slant on things, but something broader that
pulls together multiple viewpoints into a cohesive whole.

That is what Scientology once was.

The real sadness is that most Scientologists do not have
a clue as to what Scientology really is (or maybe I should
say was).  They see this other thing which replaced it and
used the same name and think it is Scientology.

Scientology is the science of knowing how to know.

Or, restating this in terms that others might understand,
Scientology is the science of how to be what is now called
a squirrel (by the CofS) in an effective and workable manner.

Hope this helps,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Xmech on Remote Attacks

ANSWERING XMECH ON REMOTE ATTACKS

On 28 Jul 99, xmech@aol.com (XMECH) posted on subject
"Pilot"

> I have case question. I have been audited per the standard tech
> though grade four, partial Ned drug run down, super power process

Super power? Orthodox or the version posted to the net?

>  and some of the self clearing process CCH The wall as a spiritual
> process.
>
> I contacted the COS to get auditor training. I did not leave the
> church on good relations several years ago. I received a letter
> stating I had committed suppressive acts from my prior experience
> and a refund I received on some auditing I had done.
>
> I  have over the last several months have had the feeling of being
> followed. I had symptoms of being other determined in my body actions
> and pains in parts of my body. Waked though the night with body jerks.
> My thoughts do not seem to be my own at times or I have lost control
> of my thinking. My certainty had been diminished. I have gone to a
> remote place in the national forest to see if there was in fact someone
> following me. I could not establish this due to fact several cars did
> come down the logging road I was on. The symptoms went away till I
> returned to my home the following day.
>
> Is it possible to be attacked by others in this way that would not
> involve physical contact? If it is I require what ever data you may
> have to relieve the condition. If not the same request.

Others can impinge on somebody telepathically, but you have to
let them in, so to speak.

As somebody else pointed out, objective processes can be a great
help in this case.  The forest might have helped because going
someplace different, especially with beautiful trees etc., causes
one to look around with interest and acts like running an objective
process.  Simply looking around and touching and letting go of
things can help cool these attacks down.

External attacks can not hit you with anything that you do not
have your own charge on.  It is only restimulative rather than
creation of new charge.  Anything that reduces restimulation
will therefore reduce the impact of the attack.

My guess would be that you are not being followed or worked
against in an active manner unless you are directly fighting
with the org in lawsuits or whatever, and if the org were
capable of creating much of an effect with black Nots, the
critics would not be doing so well.

It is possible that there are a few nasty postulates or even
entities being tossed in your direction, but a bit of that
even happens in everyday life in the big cities - people glaring
at each other and launching zaps or hate flows just because
somebody else got in their way while driving or whatever.

You can pretty much shrug this off if you pull yourself together
and maintain a stable postion, and the basic processes in the
first few chapters of self clearing are quite good for this.

Another thing you can do with a particular feeling is to
mockup a crowd of people and then alternately project the
feeling at them and then relax and let it go and not do that.
This has two purposes - first it gets you at cause over mocking
up the feeling, and second, the impingments that affect you
most are ones you have also done to others, and this gets your
confront up on doing it and on stopping it.

Or just copy any pictures or feelings a few times, changing
them around etc. until you re-establish yourself as cause
over them.

Things happening on the telepathic band are generally mild
in comparison with real physical universe impacts.  Think
of walking into a room full of bad feelings.  You really
can feel it and it can make one feel a little bit sick,
these things are not delusions.  But compare that feeling
to how sick you might feel if somebody else punched you in
the stomach.

If a CofS OT were capable of mental projections that were
comparable to physical universe impacts, they would also
be capable of moving physical universe objects.  Rest assured
that they can't even manage a shadow of that.

In conclusion, yes there can be telepathic attacks, but the
effect is generally mild in comparison with stubbing one's toe
and a small amount of processing will generally get these off
your plate.

The one thing you don't want to do is to get overly worried,
because that keys in your own charge.  So do a little bit of
processing and get your tone level up.

Hope this helps,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - To Bryan on Infinity

TO BRYAN ON INFINITY

On 14 Jul 99, Bryan <bryan_q@my-deja.com> asked on topic
"(Pilot) infinity"

> Pilot. :)
>
> What do you make of "get the idea of infinity"?
>
> Thanks,
> Arc, Bryan :)

See "The mechanics of Universes" near the beginning of Chapter 5
of the Super Scio book.  I talked quite a bit about infinities
and infinite postulates there.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Thomlove on Tech Plans

ANSWERING THOMLOVE ON TECH PLANS

On 14 Jul 99, Thomlove <Thomlovenetmail@netscape.net> responded to
my post on topic "Super Scio - All Still Quiet"

> Hello Pilot;
>
> I just returned from a working holiday to find all the changes that
> have occurred. I'm disheartened that you were exposed the way you
> were, but per the chart of motions in 0-8, that occurrence can be
> turned to your advantage.

Yes.  Akido of the mind.  The stronger the opponent, the more
vigorously he shoots himself in the foot.  Ron discusses this
on one of the early tapes in the HCL series.

> You can add me to the list who are willing to assist you if it ever
> comes to that. I am located quite a distance away, but I'd be willing
> to go to LA for a while if necessary. I don't know what exactly I
> could do at the moment, but ... circumstances would have a factor
> on that scene

Much thanks.  Hopefully there will be no need.

> Will this change your operating basis, other than the anonymity
> you were able to use? I mean, in the near future, would you be
> planning an Academy of some sort to run others through an
> Alternative Bridge, or that kind of setup? It could be a new
> Briefing Course! when you think about it. Mass clearing requires
> extensive application of what research discovers to see if it has
> a mass application. Anyway, I know you know all that.

I'm not planning this in the near future.  As far as the long range
goes, we shall see.

In truth I am not ideal on repetative production.  On staff, I
was always best in Qual rather than Tech.  In the software industry,
I'm best at either design or troubleshooting rather than standard
production.  Basically I am problem solver and I need varying
problems to keep me entertained.

I would do best allied with somebody who could keep a standard
production line going while I wore Qual and Research hats.  My
impression of Ron is that he was the same way.

One of my current short range targets is to get a mass market
publisher for self clearing.  Unfortunately another of my weak
areas is sales.  I tend to downplay things rather than PRing
the hell out of them.

> I do have a question. What kind of case condition would be best
> for someone to enter into handling the Penalty universes etc.?
> You did this after NOTS, so it would be important to know if it
> is best for someone to get into GPM processing at that stage, or
> if it could be entered into at a lower stage, such as Clear, or
> Grade 4, or OTIII, and so on.

The penalty universes are fairly advanced as far as item handling
goes and they probably have too much kick to them unless one
is Clear.

So I would say that the minimum is Clear plus good results
flattening easier implant platens.  And before starting on
something this heavy, you'd want the case to be flying, which
might mean doing or dusting off various grades.

I don't think that Nots or OT 3 is needed, but there is the
problem of the non-interfearance zone.  A light gradient of
using Nots as a rudiment and handling anything that one bumps
into without doing OT 3 might be better than the orthodox
sequence.  I'm assuming that there will be some restimulation
of entity phenomena as a side effect of running implant platens,
so one would want to do a bit of a cleanup to handle anything
in view.

But an intense run on 3 or Nots tends to produce low TA action
and the penalty universes produced incredibly high TA action,
so they would be a better target (assuming they will run at
all).

I ran the actual GPM handling of Super Scio chapter 3 after
running the penalty universes, so it is certainly not a
prerequisite.

Since we don't have a research history of running crowds of
people through these things, my inclination would be to go
with the pc's interest and monitor further by TA action and
by what comes up on correction lists.

> I'm presently trying to create a kind of checksheet for your
> Super Scio Book, and your Self Clearing Book, to make it more
> 'courseable'. I've intended this for my own study, but I can
> see that it would be valuable to anyone who was serious about
> getting into those areas you have expanded upon or discovered.
> I don't know if that would be of any assistance to you or not,
> but if you think so, when I'm done, I'll put it up here for you
> to qual. It'll take a while...

Very good.

> I'm also trying to find processes in the early tapes to flesh
> out the grades you proposed in your works. When that is done,
> I'll post that for others to check out and qual. It could be a
> very important advance to produce an Alternative Bridge with all
> the grades fully fleshed out. We have the hindsight now that LRH
> never had, and we have the freedom to do so that the CofS doesn't
> have.

Yes, exactly.  As you probably know, I'm a fanatic for the 1950's
tapes.  Let's hope that fzba keeps them comeing.  One of the
things I want to avoid is obscuring the source materials that
I'm working from, and that means that all the LRH stuff has to be
out there for everybody.

> Anyway, wishing you the best, and no doubts that you will get
> the best. You deserve the acknowledgement.
>
> Thom

Thank you.

Also, in answer to another message -

On 20 Jul 99, Thomlove <Thomlovenetmail@netscape.net> asked
on topic "Pilot"

> Hello Pilot;
>
> Could you please post what the page format is for your two works, Self
> Clearing and the Super Scio Book. I need to know what the page size is,
> and what the font and font size is. My printout doesn't match properly
> the page to page relationship in your List of Contents.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Thom

There is none.  These were posted to the newsgroups in pure
text just like this message.  At that time I was completely
anonymous and not even in contact with the websites hosting
them or the people who made some formatted versions of the
books.  There are some formatted versions on the net, but you
would have to ask whomever did the formatting.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Stephen About OT 8 etc.

ANSWERING STEPHEN ABOUT OT 8 ETC.

On 20, Jul 99, "stephen" <stephen@jaymusson.demon.co.uk> asked
on subject "Pilot-CofS OT 8"

> Dear Pilot,
>
> What do you think the current CofS OT 8 covers and why the Freewinds ?

My best guess would be that it's the original OT 1 which is
to map out one's recent lifetimes.

The original OT I had already been replaced by the time of
the Class VIII course.

I believe that the old OT levels through OT VI were basically
in place by that time.

However, what we now call old OT VII had not yet been developed.

But if you look at the Cl 8 transcripts posted to the net
recently, you will see that LRH does discuss an "OT VII" which
is not the later old OT VII.  Let's call this the "original OT VII".

That original VII was never release (and note that the hypothetical
original OT VIII comes after it).  He does not really describe it.

But he makes one comment which he says is from the OT VII that
he is developing, and the comment is that one can put the rudiments
in on any time period.

Considering that the mapping of recent lifetimes had already
been bumped from OT I, and further hypothesising that he would
not have dropped such a thing entirely, I would suspect that
the original OT VII was to map one's recent lifetimes with
the additional action of putting the rudiments in on each
lifetime.

This makes sense as a level.  Assess for the dates of a lifetime,
and then either fly each rudiment on it, or if needed do an
L1C or perhaps some similar assessment that has some extra
tailoring towards indicating bypassed charge about the lifetime.

I can't guarantee where they would put this, whether at OT 8
or higher, but it would be a nice action to run.

As for doing it on the ship, that makes it a bit easier to
keep it confidential and to keep people under control, and
if you want to send somebody to ethics, it is tough for them
to blow.

> Also do you think they really have any more OT levels and if so why
> do they not release them ?

At a minimum they have all the old levels that were bumped,
such as the old OT I above and old IV to VII, plus whatever
notes Ron left for the original OT VIII.  That puts old OT VIII
up at OT 13 at least.  It is also possible that there are
sketches for another half dozen levels, based on the huge
amount of processes from the 1950s.

As to why they don't release them, I can come up with lots
of ideas -

a) Maybe Ron left some orders for expanding or improving them but
did not explain in detail and they don't know enough of the old 50s
tech to safely expand them.

b) Maybe they are simply going very slow because they know that
there wouldn't be any more after these are released.

c) Maybe MarCabbage tried to run one and couldn't do it,
so he is afraid to deliver it to public.

d) Maybe they are taking Ron's orders about St. Hill size
seriously.

e) Maybe Pat Broker has them hidden in a locker at the
airport and wants them to pay him a few million for the
key.

f) Maybe the incompetants can't remember where they hid them
for safekeeping.

g) Maybe the conspiracy stories are real and the folks at
the top do not want the levels to be released.

> Best wishes, Stephen

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - The False Bridge of the Late '60s

THE FALSE BRIDGE OF THE LATE 60's

From the very first, Ron had hoped for an ultimate, a super
technology that always worked on everybody.  This should be
obvious from DMSMH.

And yet, in terms of handling the real world, the technology
itself only produced sporatic results.  What we got instead
was a sort of "feel better" effect where the person could
better face and handle something.  That one can be produced
consistantly.  But sometimes they "felt better" and the real
world changed, and other times they only "felt better" and
undesirable conditions went on as before.

This mixture of varying results persists to this day, and
it permeates all the clearing technologies, not just CofS
standard tech, but everything.  It is something we have
learned to live with and to work around.

The solution was first spotted in 1970, and it was the
concept of expanded grades.  Instead of running to one
release in an area, you went for hundreds of them, and sooner
or later you would get past the simple "feel better" into a
real world change.

And this practice of accumulating many wins into a stable
gain is not limited to modern expanded grades.  It's there
in self clearing and I think that you will see it in CBR's
tech and ACW's and any of the others who produce a stable
result.  I think that we've all passed beyond the level of
taking one quick win and bailing out.  Certainly anyone
who went through the quickie era in CofS would know better.

But what people often miss in studying LRH tech is that
this breakthrough is very late in the research line.  It
was NOT known prior to 1970.

All of earlier Scientology is permeated by the idea that
there would be one right process for something, and if you
ran it properly, there would be a standard result which
would be a physical universe change rather than just a
"feel good."

And remember that the Tech Degrades policy did not come out
until 1970.  Prior to that, Ron himself was the worst tech
degrader of them all, continually saying that the previous
processes were old and replaced and so forth.

In the area of problems, for example, he was always looking
for the one right problems process.  And every one he found
occasionally produced a spectacular result but usually
only produced the mundane result of feel better.  So he
would discard it and find another problems process, assuming
that there was something wrong with the previous one because
it didn't always produce the big result.

The final ultimate problems process was the one we know of
as "problems and solutions."  That was the ONLY process
normally used on Grade 1 (problems) from 1965 until 1970.
And it is the best of the problems processes, but used by
itself, you will usually get a feel better instead of a
real world change.

But I should modify that slightly by saying that we were
allowed to run other processes on problems prior to the
introduction of standard tech.  The older processes were
not actually being stamped out.  Although Ron had put out
the wrong datum that FN equals a Grade Release, if the examiner,
upon talking to the pc, felt that there was any doubt in
the preclear's mind about having achieved grade 1, he would
send the person back to get another problems process run
to FN.  Or at least that is how it was when I was auditing
at the NY org, it might have been different at St. Hill.
Furthermore, Qual was allowed to use any old problems
process if problems was reacting on the green form.

So the older tech was not quite gone or stamped out prior
to standard tech.  But it was looked upon as a deficiency,
either in the auditor or in the preclear not really running
deep enough or whatever.

In other words, throughout the evolution of the tech, at
any given time there was one right process for problems,
and when a better one was found, it then became the one
right process, and the others were things used by old timers
or in special circumstances.

With the introduction of standard tech, the slack which
allowed for using other processes was removed and we
were sitting there with the grades in their supposed ultimate
simplest form, one process per grade run to one FN which
was the grade release, and any deviation was something
to be debugged and corrected.

The result, of course, was "quickie grades" and a massive
collapse as Scientology lost its ability to deliver solid
gains.

What any student of the 60s material needs to understand
is that this search for the one right magic button permeates
all the briefing course materials and most especially
permeates the Class VIII materials.

When Ron talks about drawing a narrow line across an ocean
of data on the class VIII tapes, the ocean of data is 1950s
Scientology and the narrow line is quickie grades.

When expanded grades did come out in 1970, there was a bit
of sweeping things under the carpet.

Ron never liked to admit to mistakes and so he pussyfoots
around the fact that he enforced quickies and concentrates
on promoting the new breakthrough into expanded grades.

And after all, the subject was a research line and he had
simply made a mistake and corrected it.  So we forgive and
forget.

Except that there is a huge problem with that.  The 1960s
material is just full of absolute statements.  Things along
the lines of saying that X is the one right why and Y is the
one correct source for something.

That entire way of thinking was put to the test and failed
disasterously in 1969.

The expanded grades philosophy is the exact opposite.  Namely,
that there are multiple "whys" in an area and that we get
a stable and consitant result by running the pc that way.

And this was never beefed up and highlighted even though it
was the crucial difference between a tech that worked and
one that failed.

And now people in CofS study with a training methedology
that requires absolute and literal minded acceptance of
what Ron says as being perfect.  And so they take these
statements as absolutes and there is no good reference to
hand them that says to take these things with a grain of
salt.

And, although the grades were expanded, the philosophy of
looking at everything from this new viewpoint was never
really presented clearly.

We had learned for the first time that the research was
cumulative instead of a linear evolution.  And that makes
all the difference in the world.

The old way was to assume that running problems and solutions
replaced running problems of comparable magnitude.  The new
way was to realize that they did not address the same
exact target and that both needed to be run.

Based on that philosophy, grade 6 needed to be expanded
to include the GPMs of 1962 as a separate source with its
own steparte handling and the GPMs of 1963 (which are quite
different) as a separate thing, and the GPMs of 1964 as
a separate thing, and so forth, and one would assume that
NONE of these were handled by doing the clearing course
(or by going Dianetic clear).

If something ran with gains, it was addressing something
that needs to be run.

The message is that it is an accumulation rather than
a one and only basic.

Someday a few of us might start walking through walls and
be able to state with certainty what minimum subset will
get everybody through it all quickly.

But for now, we need that ocean of data and we need to run
every different handling under the sun on an area to get
a stable result in the real world rather than a quickie feel
good.

Personally, I'm inclinded towards running lots and lots
of different processes in an area as light and fast as
possible, you can always take a second run through if
you didn't get deep enough the first time.

The one thing that we know for sure is that you do not
make a stable problems release by running a hundred hours
of one problems process no matter how good it is.  But
we used to get big stable releases in about 25 hours
each when expanded grades came out by running lots of
different processes on a grade.

And so the proven datum is that attempting to be overly
thorough with a limited process is the wrong way, and
attempting to come at something from many different angles
is correct.

I do not know how far this can be short-cutted.  It is
possible to run too shallow and not get anywhere, but
that is harmless and one can always take another pass
through an area.

The big blunder is in thinking that one has the one and
only why and to grind it to death and bend things out of
shape to force fit them into a limited theory.

Hope this helps,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - A Few More Nice Processes

A FEW MORE NICE PROCESSES

Just some odds & ends that I thought I should get onto the
net rather than sitting on.

=====

A nice variation on SOP 8-C step 1 (places where you're not):

Find some universes you're not in right now.

=====

Handling Unconsciousness -

Without actually going unconscious, alternately mockup or get
the idea of being conscious & unconscious.

Put unconsciousness on the far sides of walls etc.

blanket cities with unconsciousness.

blanket cities with not-know.

=====

Mocking up goals for tomorrow.

Mockup a goal for the next year and visualize doing it.
Discard that and mockup a different goal & visualize doing it.
Etc.  Many times.  Reasonable goals.  Unreasonable goals.
Possible actions.  Impossible actions.  Lots & lots.
Make each sequence as real as possible, as if you were
actually going to do it and achieve the goal.

======

Manipulating Spaces -

Mockup two separate spaces.

Connect & disconenct them from each other.

Merge & separate them alternately.

============

Close your eyes.  Spot a cloud in the sky.  Alternately
be the cloud and be yourself.

============

MOCKING UP HEALING

The explanation is a bit complex, but actually running it is
easy and it works like dynamite.

Exterior, mockup healing people.  Mockup somebody with something
wrong and you put out a healing wave & they get better.  Mockup
specific people with specific ailments & you make them better.
Have them feel happy at the healing.  Occasionally have them
thank you.  Start with easy things and then work up to outrageous
ones.  Make limbs grow back.  Make old people young.  Have
bodies rise up from the grave & become young and healthy.

After you have done a lot of this in general, you can also
work in some condition you'd like to handle on yourself.
Mockup curing people of it.  Lots of specific people.  Mock
them up in many different places and you hit them with a wave
and they get cured.  Alternate this with the general healing
above.  You do some on the specific condition, and then you
do some in general and then some on that same specific condition
etc.

If a somatic turns on, concentrate on doing whatever healing it
was that turned it on.  Not on healing the somatic but on healing
the thing you were mocking up healing when the somatic turned
on.  Especially if the somatic is a funny itching sensation that
is often associated with healing.  For example, you mockup
curing somebody of glasses and you get a funny itching in your
eyes, so you concentrate on mocking up curing people of glasses.

Don't direct any of these mockups at healing your own body,
do it all on others, flatten anything that turns on by continuing
to mockup healing others.  Trying to heal yourself can key in
other things and you can run into stops that don't turn on
when you mockup healing others.  The idea is that as you build
up your postulates to heal others, you heal yourself too as
a side effect.  Also, many conditions come about because you
wished them on others and this reverses that flow.

Sometimes you might suddenly remember a specific person that
had that condition and you mockup healing them and you feel
that this might have been somebody that you copied the condition
from.  For example, you are running a bad back and you suddenly
remember that your father had a bad back and so you mockup
healing him and you feel a lot of charge starting to shift
around.  If that happens, you should keep going back on that
person and mocking up healing them until you have gotten off
as much charge as possible.  But you will probably need to
do that by mocking up healing them a few times, and then
mocking up healing others of the condition, and then you do
them a few more times, and then some others, and then them
again until the charge on that person with that condition seems
gone.

While handling something that turned on, you might still need
to do a bit of the general version occasionally to keep the
repetative mocking up of healing a specific condition running
properly.  The general version gets the specific version
moving again when it flattens, so that you can keep running
this deeper.

===============

EFFORT AND INTENTION

At the top one does things effortlessly.  To the degree that
effort is present, one also gets resistance.  Consider TR 7
vs TR 9.  Note that you can use force effortlessly.

One tends to turn on efforting when one uses force or when
one tries to put out strong intention, and that holds one
back.  The trick is to get the effort separated from these
things.

a) Pick some innocous but pleasant object.

Alternately:

b) mockup copies of it effortlessly

c) strain (effort) to mockup copies of it

After a few alternations, pick another object and repeat.

Next pick a light and easy to move physical object.
Alternately move it effortlessly and move it while straining
to move it with effort.

As in the first process, change objects occasionally and
continue.

================

Have fun,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - CYCLES OF ACTION

CYCLES OF ACTION

The native cycle of action of a thetan is to be constantly
creating.

But once a being gets stuck in traps like this universe,
he can't make his creations manifest instantly, and so
he uses a cycle of Conceive-Project-Manifest.  In more
detail, this is:

1. Conceptual Create -
2. Repetatively projecting the Creation
3. Creation Manifest

This could also be viewed as Be-Do-Have or Mind-Body-Product.

In other words, you mockup something, and then you have to
keep mocking it up until it manifests.

Create-Survive-Destroy is an implant.

In an unabberated cycle, the third step is not an absence
(as in destroy) but a havingness (as in manifest).

The abberation is -
1. Create - but it doesn't manifest immediately
2. Struggle, trying to keep it going but decaying
3. A decay down into destruction

We should be able to just create & create & create, but
the universe & group agreement resists manifesting the
creations, hence the need for repetative create without
sliding downscale before the creation will manifest.

The big repetative cycle will occasionally need lesser
cycles within it.

As lesser cycles are completed, you must go back to the
bigger cycle and resume from the point where you left off.

Abberation is sliding off into a lesser cycle and not
comeing back up to the bigger one, but instead moving
off in the direction of the lesser cycle, which should
have been a temporary action.

In going from A to B, you hit point AX and find that C needs
to be handled.  So you do AX to C and then get back to AX
and continue from AX to B as quickly as possible.  You always
keep the real target, B, in mind while you do the cycle
with C.  You must avoid going A to AX to C and then from C
to somewhere else.

In truth all destruction is an abberation, it is not
the opposite of create.

At basic, a being either creates something or he doesn't,
and when he doesn't it is not there.  This is not destruction.
He can create it again when he feels like it, he has not
destroyed it but simply stopped creating it.

For example, you begin playing a Beethoven sonata at the
piano.  Then you stop.  It is not destroyed.  You can
play it again when you feel like it, you have simply
stopped playing for the moment.

Destroy is a solution to having creations persist out of
one's control, but it is undesirable to handle things
that way, it becomes an even worse problem because now
you have trouble mocking the thing up again when you want
it.

At the top, alter-isness does not bring about a persistance.

Going back to the Beethoven example again, you take the
melody and begin playing some jazz variations on it.  The
original is still available.  You can have both.  You can
do one or the other at will.  The original is not obscured
by the altered version and the altered version does not
persist any more than the original does.  Which one you
choose to play more often is a matter of taste and quality
and asthetics and has nothing to do with the sequence of
alterations.

Persistance of the altered condition is yet another
abberation.  At a guess, this one is linked with abberations
on consecutive time where the present obscures the past
or something like that so that you have to keep the altered
one around because you can't get back to the original.

Also, the practice of not-isness, which could also be
termed destruction, obscures the as-isness of things
and would therefore lead to a persistance of alter-isness
as the last vestige remaining of things which one doesn't
want to loose completely.

All of the above ideas started jumping into view when
I got the idea that I was continuously implanting the
create-survive-destroy cycle into others as part of
the continuous PT implant.

Get the idea of blanketing the planet with telepathic
waves that make everybody think that the create-survive-
destroy cycle is necessary to existance.

Get the idea that you are doing it to each person on
earth continuously and that they are doing it to you
continuously and that others are doing it to each other
continuously.

There is a sort of flow zero on this as well.  Get
the idea that we are doing this to ourselves.  And get
the idea that we are only fooling ourselves in thinking
that we are doing this to others and that the real effect
of that is that we do it to ourselves without realizeing
it.

I'll talk more about the continuous PT implant in a
separate post.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - NOTES ON THE R7 PRESENT TIME IMPLANT

NOTES ON THE R7 PRESENT TIME IMPLANT

See my earlier posting on "Tech Breakthrough" and the post
on "Cycles of Action" that I'm also issuing at this time.

The theory is that we are running a continuous PT implant
in on each other.  This implant holds reality solid and
keeps us in agreement.  It only works against somebody because
he is doing it to others.  It is a continuous telepathic
flow below the level of consciousness and one is blanketing
the planet and everyone on it with this flow.

But let me warn you that this is still theory.  I'm finding
things on this and getting lots of cognitions, but it could
still be only half right.  This one is really hard to see and
I'm only getting at it by approximating it in mockup form
and following up on whatever seems to raise awareness,
produce cognitions, and take off charge.

I called this "R6" in the "Tech Breakthrough" post, but
that was just a vague generality.  It is not a pattern
of terminals and oppterms along the lines of the 1964 GPMs
or the CC of 1965, although it does have some characteristics
of those.

In honor of Ron's "Level VII" tape and to indicate that this
is something like R6 but the next layer up, I've decided to
start calling this thing R7.

The exact anatomy of it is still unknown.  I'm using R7 as
a catchall for whatever the hell turns out to be in it.

The primary characteristic is that it is being projected
in present time, and so my first order of test and the way
of running it is to mockup projecting something over the
entire planet telepathically and see if something begins
to react or come into view.

The technique of mockup by approximation is do many mockups
of something that is suspected to be there around the area
that it is suspected to be in.  The mockups that are close
start getting drawn into whatever is really there and tend
to be pulled around to match what is really there.  You
sort of go with the flow as you do this, letting things
shift as they feel like shifting until the real thing
becomes visible.  Ron used this to bring GE anchor points
into view.  It also works for making things like chakras
visible.  There are other applications.

The first suspicion that panned out on this R7 implant
was Create-Survive-Destroy.  I picked it because around
1956 LRH theorized that it had to be implanted.  And yet
it is true in the real world.  You don't have to think
about it or have charge for something to follow the create-
survive-destroy cycle, it just happens in the real world
even if nobody is watching.  So it permeates everything,
and it does so in PT rather than being a restimulation
of some older implant.

As soon as I started getting the idea of sort of beaming
that one all over the planet, it felt like energy was
shifting around and I started having cognitions like crazy
on cycles of action and on C-S-D especially.  That is
all written up in the "Cycles of Action" post.

And I started getting a picture with it.  On create, a
temple is created and then on survive it is overgrown by
the jungle and begins crumbling and on destroy it is in
ruins.

And I started getting a rhythm on it.  Create and Survive
are fast and then destroy hangs there a bit.

And the whole thing goes over and over, C-S-D, with
the rhythm and that picture each time.  And note that it
is not really in words but is a language independent
conceptual intention.

After zeroing in on it, the next step is to alternately
project it for a few cycles and not project it for a
few cycles, with the idea being to cool down or stop
one's continuous unconscious projection of it across
the planet.  As this begins to flatten I seem to get
a feeling of pulling back on the "not project" step
and after a few more alternations, there seems to be
a feeling of real quiet.

Once the outgoing wave flattens, you can alternate
admiring and ignoring the incoming wave until it ceases
to affect you.

I fooled around with a lot of other concepts, trying to
find another item of comparable magnitude to C-S-D.  Often
I got the feeling that I was hitting the edges but not
quite close enough, and then I got "sleep" to run.

And it expanded out into Awake-Working...-Sleep.  And
the rhythm was different, with working being the longest
and sleep a bit shorter and awake being fast and crisp.
And the time for the whole cycle is not quite the same
as for C-S-D, but the two do run concurrently, so that
there is a sort of asthetic inter-relationship of the
two varying rhythms, like two different drums occasionally
lining up together and then synchopating and then lining
up again.  And the picture I got on this one was like
somebody (a peasant woman?) in a field, and they work and
then they lie down in the field and sleep and then they are
hit by some drops of rain and jump awake, and then the work
again, etc. over and over.

There is a hypnotic quality to the continual repeat, and
a bit of a feeling of overrun because it goes on and on.

Another of these is Alive-Dead-Forgotten.  The long one is
alive, dead is quick and forgotten is of medium duration.
The picture seems to be of a seated man, who becomes a
skeleton which is then covered by cobwebs.

Another one that seems to be there is Rebellious-Overwhelmed-
Agreeing.

These seem to be steady state cycles.  If there was only
one terminal, it would flatten or otherwise give way under
the impossiblity of holding an absolute perpetually.  If
there were two terminals, the tendency would be to flip flop
eventually and begin to go down a GPM like progression.

But three terminals seems to be enough to form a cycle that
just loops on itself infinitely without change.  Generally
one of the three seems to hold for the bulk of the time but
we swing throught he other two occasionally before getting
pushed back into the one that is intended to persist.

Then, in regards to physical universe laws, I found
violation-delusion-mechanics.  In other words, there is
a moment when one might violate physical laws, and then
it seems like the violation was a delusion, and then one
is back into physical universe mechanics.  And that reminded
me of endless times where I'd mentally push at something and
it seemed to move for a moment and then it seemed like that
was just a delusion.  It wouldn't work to hold the physical
laws always absolute, but it works to allow momentary violations
and then make it seem like they were delusions.

The last one I've found so far is responsibility-abandonment-effect.
In other words, whenever you abandon responsibility, you slide
into effect until you take responsibility again.  But in this
form, it doesn't lead anywhere, but simply cycles around.

At this stage I think that all the items will be in
triads rather than opterm pairs.

As far as I can see right now, these aren't even spiraling up
and down, but just going round and round endlessly.

I think there is a broader overall structure, perhaps
threes of threes, but I'm not seeing it clearly yet.

I'm sorry that this is still so incomplete, but it's
heavy and highly occluded and I prefer to get my notes
on something like this onto the net as fast as possible.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

All of this weeks posts went out with the following header -

------------------
The free Self Clearing Book, The Super Scio book, and the
"SCIENTOLOGY REFORMER'S HOME PAGE" are all over the net.

See The Self Clearing Homepage for URLs to these sites
http://fza.org/pilot/selfclr.htm

Or see The Pilots Home Page at http://fza.org/pilot/index.htm

Some translations are available, see links at fza.org

Also see the new www.fzint.org website.

All of the current posts will be collected in Super Scio Archives
#63 and posted to ACT.  See the Pilot Archives at FZA.ORG.

Individual posts to ARS are being double posted to ACT rather than
cross posted to foil the spambot attack which takes good headers
and attaches garbage messages to them.

Note that some of my posts only go to ACT.  I cannot be reached by email.
I watch ARS and ACT for messages with Pilot in the subject line.

------------------
