The Three Basic Scientology Beliefs - Belief #1

I concur on this to this extent: if only scientology is used as a framework for understanding, then that narrow set of definitions does produce bad thinking. However, a broad-based understanding can be achieved by using multiple frameworks. My writing is filled with terms from Christianity, Huna, Hindu yogas, Buddhism, scientology, Hermetic magic, Yoruban Ifa, and many other isms and anities. By not locking into any one nomenclature, I avoid being owned by one fixed set of ideas. Heh, you should see the glossaries in my last two books; they are almost a course in spiritual thought all by themselves.

Well, you seem to be demonstrating the positive side of mixing ideas and "mixing practices."

Before involvement with Scientology, the Incredible String Band also mixed ideas and practices. The song above was one of many before their involvement.

The enforced inhibition on "mixing," ultimately hurt their music.

Fortunately they are now ex Scientologists are able to play their music freely again.

Could you possibly provide a link to one of your books?

Some songs from their earliest involvement with Scientology when, IMO, they were briefly helped by scientology.








​
 
Last edited:
Belief One

This can be best stated as:

The future of every man, woman and child, for all eternity depends solely on what we accomplish realizing the goals of Scientology. If we fail we all will suffer and die for endless eternities. We will die horrible deaths over and over forever.

The condition of people, governments, medicine, science, education and even the entire universe, taken as a whole, is horrible, decayed, dying and failing. This will only get worse if it continues unaddressed and unhandled.

Therefore, the actions of Scientology are more important than anything anywhere at anytime past, present or future. There is nothing that even takes a close second-place.

As a spiritual being, I am eternal, and must come back into new bodies over and over. I will continue in this cycle of rebirth and death, with pain and with suffering, for all eternity UNLESS I succeed with Scientology.


This is the "gloom & doom" basis of Scientology beliefs. The view is basically that everything is horrible, and will remain horrible, UNLESS Scientology wholly succeeds in its mission, because ONLY Scientology has the information and methods that can stop the gloom and doom from happening. It is that simple. It is typical SALVATION MENTALITY WHERE, we, the Church of Scientology, have accurately described the state of salvation and only we, the Church of Scientology, offer the correct path to reach that state of salvation. Notice the emphasis on “we”? There is often this slant to get you to view yourself as part of something bigger. That is what the member mentally attaches onto. He or she attaches onto this ideal or valuable goal that reeks of constant threats of doom and gloom.

Corollary Belief 1A:

Therefore, we are justified in doing anything to anyone if it safeguards our continued existence and contributes to our success. All considerations are minor compared to this. Nothing else matters, and no other person or group matters compared to this.

Corollary Belief 1B:

Concerns such as friendship, family, personal goals and even health are far secondary to the success of the Scientology movement.


These ideas, which come to exist as an intertwining set of firmly held beliefs in the minds of Scientologists, are based on the numerous writings and lectures by L. Ron Hubbard. Each new member contacts these ideas very early on during their Scientology experience, and each member constantly encounters similar ideas as they continue through their studies and involvement with Scientology. It would be a fair statement to say that these ideas are constantly driven into their minds on a non-stop basis. For staff members, there is also endless additional repeated indoctrination into these ideas through regularly scheduled staff meetings, staff briefings, Church events, study orders, Orders of the Day, and course training. The way Scientology training is arranged, with strict training methods, and which allows for no questioning, disagreement or discussion, well ensures the total acceptance of ALL ideas. Partial acceptance of ideas is not allowed; only 100% complete absolute agreement is tolerated and acceptable. A "pick and choose" mentality is unallowable in the Church of Scientology. As you will see this is based on another, later discussed basic belief, that Scientology methods are 100% workable and effective, but only if applied exactly and completely, without alteration, as L. Ron Hubbard directed them to be applied. Therefore, all avenues for "picking and choosing" are blocked. There is only ONE correct way. There is no possible validity given to anything other than what Hubbard declared as true, and what he instructs members to do. That notion is also part of the official Church of Scientology mindset. This mindset is carefully and systematically nurtured in each adherent.

For example, in Scientology there is a procedure called "Chinese School" where the members all line up and chant words and ideas in unison, words and ideas that some Scientology leader wants to ram into their little heads.

"3. Chinese School (staff or div staff all together in front of a big org board chanting together the hats, duties and products of the org as visible on the org board). (HCO PL 9 March 1972 Issue III DEV-T AND UNHATTEDNESS)

This method is commonly used with any idea, including the basic beliefs discussed in this section. A group of Church members line up, and chant each key point together. They do this day after day until they can each recite the idea, phrase or sentence without error. This is one of many different aspects of the strict Scientology indoctrination method. Though, the primary methods of indoctrination occur with the way Scientology training occurs.

Simply and clearly stated, in Scientology training or study the LRH materials are always beyond question. They are viewed as "wholly perfect". They are viewed as "beyond any possibility of error". If you have a question then you are instructed to find your misunderstood word(s), or get more mass on the subject by demonstrating principles and ideas. If you disagree with any topic by Hubbard, then you must first complete the above previous two steps, and if still disagreeing, then get disagreements addressed and handled with auditing, or corrective actions in the Qualifications Division, and if still disagreeing, then get sent to ethics to “clean up your out-ethics” by writing up overts and withholds (or get the overts and withholds pulled in sec-check auditing). Disagreement is not allowed, accepted or tolerated in any form. That aspect of Scientology is very important, and one must understand this about them to truly comprehend what “makes them tick”.

The theory involved here, the accepted belief, is that the "data is perfect", it always works if properly understood and applied, and it can only be a case of “problems with the student” that prevent understanding, agreement, great results and wide-eyed enthusiasm for what was studied. Every student clears up the meaning of words, demonstrates principles, receives coaching on study materials, receives checkouts, and applies other study techniques such as metered word clearing, clay demonstrations, and drawing diagrams. It is strictly forbidden to ask another student, or the course supervisor about what anything means in Scientology. It is forbidden for a Course Supervisor to answer any questions from students with anything except, "what do your course materials state?" or "what is your misunderstood word"? The ONLY correct action in Scientology is to get the student to study the materials until the student understands, agrees with and greatly enjoys the materials. This acts to heavily reinforce and condition the student with certain very specific ideas. This point cannot be over-emphasized enough. Disagreement, of any type, is not tolerated. Only wide-eyed enthusiastic agreement is desirable and acceptable by the group. In Scientology, this is called VGI’s (an acronym for “Very Good Indicators” – happy, smiling, uptone, enthusiastic, wanting to talk Scientology up to others, etc.). Scientology indoctrination was carefully designed by Hubbard to ensure that.

In Scientology, the various ideas and concepts are repeated over and over and over until the member has them firmly planted in their minds; until he or she "understands" them, agrees with them, and especially, asserts them as undeniable and indisputable facts. This is a basic Scientology study method, enforcing the use of repetition:

"NUMBER OF TIMES OVER THE MATERIAL EQUALS CERTAINTY" (HCOPL 8 May 1969 Issue I IMPORTANT STUDY DATA)

So, of course, Scientology "learning" methods involve making members go over some subject or idea as many times as necessary until the person is "certain" about the subject or idea. "Certainty" is a vital concept in Scientology. “Certainty” generally means having total agreement with the ideas of Scientology.
there is supposed to be no belief in scientology, it is supposed to be science. What you state is Hubbard's classical rhetoric.
 
It is evident that you do not understand what I am talking about. This is not a personal attack, but please understand that disbelief is another type of belief. Someone on here posted that Hubbard was at the height of his powers around 1954. Also note that he credited other people in the same period. Later of course he failed to process the Source process in Grade 5 beyond the first (incomplete) cognition.

Hubbard lied when he wrote that scientology is the only way. Just as he lied when he wrote that he discovered all of it, and is 'source' of all of it. Much is other people's work. Most of Grade 5 for example is the work of John McMaster. Do your research on this and similar; don't demand that I 'prove' it somehow. That would constitute abuse.

I happen to know someone who has told me much about his previous life as a scientologist (and not as Hubbard, ha ha!). You could claim that he is lying or delusional; that would support your position on this issue. Frankly I don't care what you think. Crowley, in declaring that logic is a liar, hit upon a truth: that the thinking mind is a liar. It is also an entity, one of the subcenters of the human body apparently unnoticed after another subcenter, the solar plexus entity, was declared by Hubbard to be the 'Genetic Entity'.

I also know someone in Mexico who was a thug/hit man for the church last lifetime. He struggles to remember details. His overts obscure recall; but he is working on it.

I dislike religions. They are formulated to control 'cattle' and indeed treat their adherents as chattels. But religions are usually based on spiritual experiences and ascensions; and the groups formed around such were later highjacked by criminals. I despise the Church of Scientology, just as I despise the Catholic church (and most Christian groups), Buddhist churches, and Ifa as a religion (it's not. It's a magickal system). What I support are therapeutic processes that work, and magickal knowledge that can be applied. Yes, I am an initiate, if you know what that word means. So please do not lump me in with everything you hate about that damned Church of Scientology. I hate that crap too. :)
 
Well, you seem to be demonstrating the positive side of mixing ideas and "mixing practices."

Before involvement with Scientology, the Incredible String Band also mixed ideas and practices. The song above was one of many before their involvement.

The enforced inhibition on "mixing," ultimately hurt their music.

Fortunately they are now ex Scientologists are able to play their music freely again.

Could you possibly provide a link to one of your books?

Some songs from their earliest involvement with Scientology when, IMO, they were briefly helped by scientology.








​

Veda,
My books are not online. Give me an email address and I'll send you both of the latest books.
Ed
 
It is evident that you do not understand what I am talking about. This is not a personal attack, but please understand that disbelief is another type of belief. Someone on here posted that Hubbard was at the height of his powers around 1954. Also note that he credited other people in the same period. Later of course he failed to process the Source process in Grade 5 beyond the first (incomplete) cognition.

Hubbard lied when he wrote that scientology is the only way. Just as he lied when he wrote that he discovered all of it, and is 'source' of all of it. Much is other people's work. Most of Grade 5 for example is the work of John McMaster. Do your research on this and similar; don't demand that I 'prove' it somehow. That would constitute abuse.

I happen to know someone who has told me much about his previous life as a scientologist (and not as Hubbard, ha ha!). You could claim that he is lying or delusional; that would support your position on this issue. Frankly I don't care what you think. Crowley, in declaring that logic is a liar, hit upon a truth: that the thinking mind is a liar. It is also an entity, one of the subcenters of the human body apparently unnoticed after another subcenter, the solar plexus entity, was declared by Hubbard to be the 'Genetic Entity'.

I also know someone in Mexico who was a thug/hit man for the church last lifetime. He struggles to remember details. His overts obscure recall; but he is working on it.

I dislike religions. They are formulated to control 'cattle' and indeed treat their adherents as chattels. But religions are usually based on spiritual experiences and ascensions; and the groups formed around such were later highjacked by criminals. I despise the Church of Scientology, just as I despise the Catholic church (and most Christian groups), Buddhist churches, and Ifa as a religion (it's not. It's a magickal system). What I support are therapeutic processes that work, and magickal knowledge that can be applied. Yes, I am an initiate, if you know what that word means. So please do not lump me in with everything you hate about that damned Church of Scientology. I hate that crap too. :)
"What I support are therapeutic processes that work, and magickal knowledge that can be applied. Yes, I am an initiate, if you know what that word means. So please do not lump me in with everything you hate about that damned Church of Scientology. I hate that crap too. :) "

Good luck with that. I hope you and Veda find success, not for me.
 
It is evident that you do not understand what I am talking about. This is not a personal attack, but please understand that disbelief is another type of belief. Someone on here posted that Hubbard was at the height of his powers around 1954. Also note that he credited other people in the same period. Later of course he failed to process the Source process in Grade 5 beyond the first (incomplete) cognition.

Hubbard lied when he wrote that scientology is the only way. Just as he lied when he wrote that he discovered all of it, and is 'source' of all of it. Much is other people's work. Most of Grade 5 for example is the work of John McMaster. Do your research on this and similar; don't demand that I 'prove' it somehow. That would constitute abuse.

I happen to know someone who has told me much about his previous life as a scientologist (and not as Hubbard, ha ha!). You could claim that he is lying or delusional; that would support your position on this issue. Frankly I don't care what you think. Crowley, in declaring that logic is a liar, hit upon a truth: that the thinking mind is a liar. It is also an entity, one of the subcenters of the human body apparently unnoticed after another subcenter, the solar plexus entity, was declared by Hubbard to be the 'Genetic Entity'.

I also know someone in Mexico who was a thug/hit man for the church last lifetime. He struggles to remember details. His overts obscure recall; but he is working on it.

I dislike religions. They are formulated to control 'cattle' and indeed treat their adherents as chattels. But religions are usually based on spiritual experiences and ascensions; and the groups formed around such were later highjacked by criminals. I despise the Church of Scientology, just as I despise the Catholic church (and most Christian groups), Buddhist churches, and Ifa as a religion (it's not. It's a magickal system). What I support are therapeutic processes that work, and magickal knowledge that can be applied. Yes, I am an initiate, if you know what that word means. So please do not lump me inwith everything you hate about that damned Church of Scientology. I hate that crap too.

By any chance have you read Filbert's Excalibur Revisited?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ed8
By any chance have you read Filbert's Excalibur Revisited?

Veda,
Yes, I love excalibur revisited. Good stuff. Some of it is obscure unless you understand how group minds function. Filbert's book gave me a key piece of knowledge which clarified amazing amount of material for me. :)
-Ed
 
Veda,
Yes, I love excalibur revisited. Good stuff. Some of it is obscure unless you understand how group minds function. Filbert's book gave me a key piece of knowledge which clarified amazing amount of material for me. :)
-Ed


He changed his mind about some things since writing it forty years ago, and described himself as being naive about some things at the time.

I read it almost forty years ago, and even ran some of my "PCs" on some of his processes, incliding one directed at communicating with the "higher self.


Video added.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ed8
Veda,
Yes, I love excalibur revisited. Good stuff. Some of it is obscure unless you understand how group minds function. Filbert's book gave me a key piece of knowledge which clarified amazing amount of material for me. :)
-Ed

People's results with "Excalibur Revisited" seem to have been mixed. I once knew someone who used "Excalibur Revisited" as the basis of an auditing practice on the Isle of Wight (just off the south coast of the English mainland) and claimed to get good results, whereas someone else I knew less well claimed not to have had much success with it - and he was a pretty competent auditor, so I'm not sure what the reason was. My last auditor had a copy of the work (which was how I got to hear about it) and let me browse through it once.

Intrigued by what I had seen I downloaded a pdf of the work from the "Freezone America" website and toyed with the idea of running Filbert's "Last Ditch" rundown, but I suppose I lacked the self-discipline and the solo auditing chops to tackle it and it didn't happen. I'd like to know if anyone else had a go at it and got anywhere with it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top