New OT levels vs Original OT levels

Riddick

I clap to no man
.



.

Old bridge or new bridge? Hard to choose. I think we need to get a professional opinion from a Doctor...




One fish
Two fish
Red fish
Blue fish

Old fish
New fish

This one has a little star
This one has a little car
Say! What a lot
of fish there are.

.

MAYBE WE SHOULD UPDATE RON'S BRIDGE TECH?

One bridge
Two bridge
Standard bridge
Squirrel bridge
Old bridge
New bridge

This one has a movie star
This one's EP is quite bizarre
Say! What a lot
of bridges there are.


.


oh gawd, you had to remind me. how many times doing the TR's did I say Do Fish Swim? Do bird's fly?

thousands, and thousands. What a waste of time.
 
D

Deleted member 51

Guest
.

I am getting confused.

If Sneakster's "sole purpose" in posting on ESMB is to "handle over-restimulated" DBs who post here---maybe I should stop DevT'ing him with questions and just solicit OT SUCCESS STORIES from all the people he has "handled"?

Just trying to help flow power to power. LOL.

.

.
In all fairness, HH, Sneakster posted that quite a few years ago.

We’ve all changed our views on things to a greater or lesser degree , even you.

I believe Sneakster is here to discuss things. I don’t believe he has any ulterior motives beyond friendship and finding common ground with others. There’s nothing wrong with that.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
In all fairness, HH, Sneakster posted that quite a few years ago.

We’ve all changed our views on things to a greater or lesser degree , even you.

I believe Sneakster is here to discuss things. I don’t believe he has any ulterior motives beyond friendship and finding common ground with others. There’s nothing wrong with that.

Sure what you said could be true. But I am not trying to guess, I prefer to just ask the person directly.

If you are Sneaker's spokesperson, answer this: Why can't Sneakster speak for himself or answer simple questions? He famously demands that others answer his questions with edgy "commands" like "DOCS OR STUFU!". He gets damn nasty, if we are going to be honest about it.

I appreciate all the times you try to cover for Sneakster. In my humble opinion you would help him far more if you prompted him to step up and respond to simple questions for himself.

Open conversations are healthy. People can learn and grow. Hiding from questions on a DISCUSSION WEBSITE is not an awesome idea, LOL.

.

.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
.
Maybe you should invite him to your house for a cocktail. Get in comm, if you will. Would you consider it? :coolwink:
/

LOL!!

Sure, okay. He's invited for drinks!

I am committed to using Ron's 2-way-com technology to raise all 3 corners of the ARC triangle, on this planet.

I am hoping he will attend because even if the ARC break doesn't get handled, I still need his signature on my Liability Formula for having asked him non-standard questions.

.

.
 

Veda

Well-known member
-snip-

Open conversations are healthy. People can learn and grow. Hiding from questions on a DISCUSSION WEBSITE is not an awesome idea, LOL.

.
Wouldn't prohibiting Independent Scientologists, and even actual corporate $cientologists, from participating in this DISCUSSION WEBSITE, be contrary to the advice you just gave?

Have we lost Haiqu?

His posts - through sometimes combative - did stimulate some interesting exchanges, and result in some responses (to him) that provided informative and helpful content.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
.

oh gawd, you had to remind me. how many times doing the TR's did I say Do Fish Swim? Do bird's fly?

thousands, and thousands. What a waste of time.
.

Yes, a monumental waste of time!

I can understand an introductory Communication Course done by new Scientologists on the first 1 or 2 days of starting Scientology. There could be lasting benefits for some.

Looking at someone when talking to them. Not original, but a good idea.
Saying things clearly and loud enough that others can hear you. Not original, but a good idea.
Acknowledgements. Not original but a good idea to let people know you heard them.
Getting a question answered. Not original but a good idea.
Resolving distractions (originations) during a conversation. Not original but a good idea.
But after that, why do grown adults need to spend the next the next 30-40 years need to keep repeating these drills? That makes no sense whatsoever. The only explanation which makes sense is that it's magical thinking. The reason the perfect auditing commands did not work is because the auditor did not ask the perfect auditing questions with perfect TRs.

And the perfect e-meter did not work because the auditor was not calling out "items" properly---impinging on the ban---so they need to do more TRs.

Because the commands work and the e-meter works. So by process of elimination, it must be the Scientologist's fault. They falsely attested on that first day in Scientology that they knew how to do the TRs.

Madness. (and unimaginable stupidity)

/
 

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
Wouldn't prohibiting Independent Scientologists, and even actual corporate $cientologists, from participating in this DISCUSSION WEBSITE, be contrary to the advice you just gave?

Have we lost Haiqu?

His posts - through sometimes combative - did stimulate some interesting exchanges, and result in some responses (to him) that provided informative and helpful content.
.

What happened? Did you prohibit Haiku from participating in the discussion(s) here?

Was he banned?

Or did someone else prohibit Haiku from posting? Who has the power to do that?

Are you blaming P&B? LOL LOL LOL

Your imaginary mythology about Indies being prevented from posting is not borne out by any facts.

.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation.
.

What happened. Did you prohibit Haiku from participating in the discussion(s) here?

Or did someone else prohibit Haiku from posting? Who has the power to do that?

Are you blaming P&B? LOL LOL LOL

Your imaginary mythology about Indies being prevented from posting is not borne out by any facts.

.

Oh nooooo .... has Veda upset another delicate indie?

:LOL:

@Veda, you must learn how to deal with these people diplomatically ... PM me and I'll do my best to teach you privately.
 

Veda

Well-known member
.

What happened? Did you prohibit Haiku from participating in the discussion(s) here?

Was he banned?

Or did someone else prohibit Haiku from posting? Who has the power to do that?

Are you blaming P&B? LOL LOL LOL

Your imaginary mythology about Indies being prevented from posting is not borne out by any facts.

.

I didn't prohibit Haiqu from posting.

This MB needs many viewpoints expressed.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
Oh nooooo .... has Veda upset another delicate indie?

:LOL:

@Veda, you must learn how to deal with these people diplomatically ... PM me and I'll do my best to teach you privately.
.

It would be really cool if Veda asked for and was granted his own thread to handle Indies. Nobody would be allowed to post there besides Veda and Indie Scientologists.

I would support that.

Then we can all watch and see if he knows how to "handle" an Indie or if they blow on his "SP" ass as well. LOL

I don't think that Indie Scientologists will like Veda any better than they like the Jokers&Degraders and other assorted ex-scn "SP"s here on this site.. I just think that it might take a little longer for the Indie to get enturbulated and blow. In a sense maybe Veda's tech is more com laggy? LOL

.
 
Last edited:

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
I didn't prohibit Haiqu from posting.

This MB needs many viewpoints expressed.
.

100% agreed. But apparently Haiku does not agree with you because when they encountered "many viewpoints" (that were not their own) you are saying they blew, right?

Why don't you go try and recover Haiku? Perhaps you might want to check bus and train stations first?

.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 51

Guest
Sure what you said could be true. But I am not trying to guess, I prefer to just ask the person directly.

If you are Sneaker's spokesperson, answer this: Why can't Sneakster speak for himself or answer simple questions? He famously demands that others answer his questions with edgy "commands" like "DOCS OR STUFU!". He gets damn nasty, if we are going to be honest about it.

I appreciate all the times you try to cover for Sneakster. In my humble opinion you would help him far more if you prompted him to step up and respond to simple questions for himself.

Open conversations are healthy. People can learn and grow. Hiding from questions on a DISCUSSION WEBSITE is not an awesome idea, LOL.

.

.
You’ve asked him before what he thought of Scn, etc. He answered you, sincerely and with no attitude. He won respect for that here for months. Did you forget?

You are asking Sneakster about something he said years ago. Why are you hung up on it? It has nothing to do with anything now.
Let it go.

Yup, Sneakster is snippy and defensive sometimes. He doesn’t have your literary skills. Few people here do. So you want to suck him into a literary boxing ring online where you’re a prize fighter. How is that fair?
And you want me to encourage it? Not a chance!

We now have about half a dozen members who have recently started posting who have mixed views on Scn. They also like this forum to chat with each other. Well I’m getting tired of seeing only the same eight or ten posters and I’d like to see some fresh posts and even some Newbs. Sneakster is one of the recent posters. Why not take a deep breath from past skirmishes and let him settle in without having to feel he has to defend himself?
 

Riddick

I clap to no man
.


.


Yes, a monumental waste of time!

I can understand an introductory Communication Course done by new Scientologists on the first 1 or 2 days of starting Scientology. There could be lasting benefits for some.

Looking at someone when talking to them. Not original, but a good idea.
Saying things clearly and loud enough that others can hear you. Not original, but a good idea.
Acknowledgements. Not original but a good idea to let people know you heard them.
Getting a question answered. Not original but a good idea.
Resolving distractions (originations) during a conversation. Not original but a good idea.
But after that, why do grown adults need to spend the next the next 30-40 years need to keep repeating these drills? That makes no sense whatsoever. The only explanation which makes sense is that it's magical thinking. The reason the perfect auditing commands did not work is because the auditor did not ask the perfect auditing questions with perfect TRs.

And the perfect e-meter did not work because the auditor was not calling out "items" properly---impinging on the ban---so they need to do more TRs.

Because the commands work and the e-meter works. So by process of elimination, it must be the Scientologist's fault. They falsely attested on that first day in Scientology that they knew how to do the TRs.

Madness. (and unimaginable stupidity)

/
yep, it's madness. Just like DM had everybody who had gone up to OT8 to redo their basics. Madness, that explains DM no doubt, and even LRH.

What gets me is LRH told Sarge he failed. No shit. Maybe the Indies didn't get the message.
 

Riddick

I clap to no man
Did the old OT levels produce a OT or did the new OT levels produce a OT?

If so, where are they and who are they?
 

Bill

Well-known member
I didn't prohibit Haiqu from posting.

This MB needs many viewpoints expressed.
I agree totally. Never thought otherwise.

If someone doesn't like my viewpoint, I love to discuss it with them.

If they decide to leave instead, well, that's not my problem.
 

Veda

Well-known member
Let's un-derail this thread and get it back on track.

There has on occasion been some conversation amongst Scientologists about where the upper OT levels might be, and when they are likely to be released. Despite Pat Broeker's claim at the event of LRH's passing, apparently there do not exist any further levels written up after OT VIII. Pierre Ethier would disagree with this, but he's not infallible and seems to have taken LRH's "PR statements" - an act of kindness if there ever was one - about having made notes of levels up to OT XV to heart. If one does a thorough investigation it becomes plain that these levels are mostly a fantasy.

Ignoring the works of others like Capt. Bill Robertson, some have mentioned the possibility that the next thing to do after OT VIII would be the original OT levels. That's an interesting claim, because Original OT IV requires one to have done the Clearing Course, and the vast majority of pre-OTs these days have not done this route, having gone Clear on NED.

As Janis Gillham Grady - one of the "original four" members of the CMO - noted in a recent online interview, the Original OT levels are quite theta and fun, at least compared to NOTs which has a tendency to extend for years and involves 6-monthly Sec Checks and exorbitant expense. And despite my having attested Clear without having done the CC, my late C/S had the prescience to put me through it anyhow, a gift for which I can never thank him enough.

So, I'm now on Original OT IV and finding it quite enlightening. I no longer have a C/S and I'm running it solo, a method I don't recommend to the average bear. But since I'm not the average bear, it's a valid route for me. "What's true for you is true ... for you." - LRH

Since I am no longer bothered by "fleas" I will leave the decision of whether to run NOTs or Excalibur for a future date. The OTs I have admired most on my journey were impressive already well before NOTs was released, and that's good enough for me. And frankly I don't really have the desire to audit every being in the universe either.
To clarify, I think Janis Grady was referring to the original upper levels, meaning the discontinued upper levels, notably OT 5, 6, and 7.

Original OT 4, having to do with "whole track implanting," as told to the "Pre-OT" by L. Ron Hubbard, probably would not qualify as real "fun" and "theta," IMO. (I know you're enjoying original OT 4, but, when all is said and done, it results in a person being lodged even more securely into the inside of L. Ron Hubbard's head. No doubt, you don't want to hear that, but it's the truth.)
For starters, here's a segment of a recent post that addresses to OT levels:

During the 1960s, Franklin Jones had been an auditor at the New York Org, and then done the OT levels at the Advanced Organization in Los Angeles.

In his first book, The Knee of Listening, 1971 edition, chapter 12: The search for release from the mind: Scientology, he described Scientology at length.

Below is an small except relevant to this discussion.

________________________________________Begin quote__________________________________________​

Scientology made use of a peculiar technique called "auditing." A trained person sat with you and, by careful use of a pattern of direct questioning, sought to remove the force which certain key experiences in your past had on your daily life. My friend had experienced great benefits from this method, and he had been led to re-experience his birth, the violence of which he felt had determined a kind of nervous and aloof quality in him all his life. Now he felt particularly "cleared" of the force of that experience and all kind of other reactions that he had retained as unconscious controls on his behavior.

Scientology sought by these means to relieve a person from the machinery of memory and unconscious reactivity so that he could eventually attain a state called "clear." In the state of "clear" the reactive or unconscious mind was supposed to be entirely eliminated as a force...

But when I actually performed the Clearing and O.T. levels I found that they continued to deal only with the content of the mind. And that content was continually identified with the peculiar cosmic politics favored by Ron Hubbard. Thus I felt that these levels never dealt with the fundamental problem of the mind itself, prior to any content. In fact. they only led people deeper and deeper into a fanciful, paranoiac dilemma in which they were indoctrinated into the mentality of a cosmic political holocaust.

...It was only on the upper levels, when the activity of auditing had degenerated into exercises of pure nonsense, that I realized what I had in fact led myself into...

I saw that Scientology was actually a political entity created along the lines of a fanciful interpretation of history. Its goals were political, not spiritual. Thus, its leading concern was power, not wisdom or realization.



____________________________________________End of quote__________________________________________​


I had an old friend who did (original) OT 7 in 1970 or 1971 and, when he attested, stated that he had already done the process fifteen years earlier. He was briefly in some hot water for that. (It was regarded as an invalidation of the tech.)

Have you considered doing Route One from the Creation of Human Ability?

Here's a link to the antecedent of Route One's Grand Tour from the year 1911. It involves spanning attention, "mock ups" (visualization), specialized mock ups where a person attempts to place a mock up of the same size of a physical object, in the same space as the physical object, and more. The idea is to expand consciousness to the planets and, ultimately, to the stars.

The word "Nuit," in this 1911 collection of processes, means "infinity."

*​

Years ago, outside of Scientology Inc., of course, I ran this 1911 collection of processes, somewhat (not completely), on myself, and also on a person who was curious about "the Bridge." I took this person from ARC S/W to Objectives, to R3R Dianetics, and then through the Lower Grades. During a time out, we did a (very interesting) but discontinued (Listing) Help process from the 1950s, then Filberts exteriorization "Leapfrogging" process, and, then Filbert's process to handle the "ARC break" with the "Higher Self," plus - at the person's request, to satisfy his curiosity - a little NOTs. At no point did I subject this person to Hubbard's "case" or to the malevolent mind games he plays on Scientologists, except to briefly expose him to this aspect of Scientology so as to inoculate him from it.

Carl Gustav Jung addresses his Higher Self
After the schism of '82/'83, with so many previously silent people now communicating (sans the constraints of Scientology Inc.), with documentation such as the Shannon biographical materials, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, being available (exposing Hubbard as a major prevaricator), along with the large amount of previously secret LRH cloak and dagger tech now available due to a federal court order, plus all of Hubbard's handwritten "Advanced Course" materials being available, for review, plus the NOTs materials, and more, it seemed, at the time, to be a good idea to also review the actions of the Grade Chart, and to see what auditing the various grades of that chart would be like, free of oppressive organizational red tape.

One thing I realized during this period was that Hubbard had not only "used enemy tactics" (per his confidential instruction), on his perceived enemies, but also on his loyal followers. And he had used (internally) his cloak and dagger (covert Intelligence) tech (supposedly only for use externally) on his own followers.

Link to the Creating a (mental) vacuum ("clearing"), then filling the vacuum (implanting) thread.

Hubbard, as an "implanter," hit his stride during the mid 1960s and beyond.
Having known "OTs" from the 1950s (from the - relatively - saner time of 1953 through 1960), from my observation, they were much more "OT" than the "OTs" of the latter 1960s, who were contaminated with Hubbard's "case" and mind games.

This is why I suggested looking earlier, before the 1960s, and even before Scientology, for some true "OT" processes.











 

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
You’ve asked him before what he thought of Scn, etc. He answered you, sincerely and with no attitude. He won respect for that here for months. Did you forget?

You are asking Sneakster about something he said years ago. Why are you hung up on it? It has nothing to do with anything now.
Let it go.

Yup, Sneakster is snippy and defensive sometimes. He doesn’t have your literary skills. Few people here do. So you want to suck him into a literary boxing ring online where you’re a prize fighter. How is that fair?
And you want me to encourage it? Not a chance!

We now have about half a dozen members who have recently started posting who have mixed views on Scn. They also like this forum to chat with each other. Well I’m getting tired of seeing only the same eight or ten posters and I’d like to see some fresh posts and even some Newbs. Sneakster is one of the recent posters. Why not take a deep breath from past skirmishes and let him settle in without having to feel he has to defend himself?

I don't have any problem with what you said. And I am hardly "hung up" on Sneakster or anything he has said.

But once in a while when he gets particularly snippy and tries to defend the sociopathic criminal Hubbard too much--I am sometimes tempted to ask him if he is still here to "handle" people. I think that's a wholly appropriate question.

It's curious that he refuses to answer that. Because he seems to be continuously trying to "HANDLE" people here. Hmmmmm, what a coincidence! LOL

.
 
Top