Possibly Helpful Advice


Including what we found in Scientology before it became a cult
Vista

Miscavige’s knee-jerk SP declare miscalculation (Part 4)

Continuing with this series, I have had more insight into my belief that Miscavige’s knee jerk SP declare program is part of a campaign to ensure planetary clearing doesn’t occur.

Problems, Invalidation, and Evaluation

Being shown one of Scientology Inc’s top-secret declares usually results in a PROBLEM for the parishioner, because the parishioner, at some point in the past, made a decision…a postulate…that they would associate with or befriend or parent the person who’s now being labeled a Suppressive Person.

That’s a postulate. The church’s presentation of a Suppressive Person declare is a counter-postulate.

Per the Tech Dictionary: 1. a problem is postulate-counter-postulate, terminal counter-terminal, force-counter-force. It’s one thing versus another thing. You’ve got two forces or two ideas which are interlocked of comparable magnitude and the thing stops right there. All right, now with these two things one stuck against the other you get a sort of a timelessness, it floats in time. (6111C21) 2. a problem is a postulate-counter-postulate resulting in indecision. That is the first manifestation of problems, and the first consequence of a problem is indecision. (6107C11) 3. a multiple confusion. (6107C03) 4. an intention counter-intention that worries the preclear. (HCOB 23 Feb 61) 5. a problem is the conflict arising from two opposing intentions. A present time problem is one that exists in present time, in a real universe. (HCOB 3 Jul 59) 6. something which is persisting, the as-is-ness of which cannot be attained easily. (5408CM20)

Since the problem suddenly appeared in the parishioner’s universe in present time, it qualifies as a present time problem.

The parishioner has a postulate to associate with this person. The church, through lies and the application of force, has the counter-postulate that you don’t associate with the person.

There’s more complications to the problem. If you’ve had a business or even social association with the declared person, there’s a co-motion there.

What? You’ve never heard of co-motion? That’s because there’s no definition of co-motion in the Technical Dictionary. Listen to lecture  6110C11 PROBLEMS INTENSIVE ASSESSMENT (SHSBC 069). LRH also talks about co-motion in lecture 6110C24 CLEARING (SHSBC 074).

My definition: Co-motion can be defined as mutual motion toward an agreed-upon goal.

A husband and wife team usually manifests co-motion. True team members, such as those on a soccer team or baseball team, manifest co-motion, at least when it comes to the sport. In the movie Independence Day, mankind manifested co-motion in its opposition to the aliens.

The church and its parishioners are now not in co-motion. The parishioners are trying to achieve freedom. The church is solely trying to attain their wallets. Those are mutually contrary activities. Therefore more and more parishioners find their involvement in the church is a problem.

Also, in lecture 5611C29 THE SCALE OF HAVINGNESS, LRH talked about how cancer comes about, describing it in terms of a second-dynamic or sexual upset. Those are co-motion factors, as described in the lecture PROBLEMS INTENSIVE ASSESSMENT 6110C11. So when the church slams a parishioner or now ex-parishioner with a problem that interrupts the co-motion of a family, or the co-motion of a marriage or the co-motion of a group, understand that the implanting of the problem can result in illness or death. I don’t wish that on anyone. Only Miscavige does.

Additionally, the delivery of the news that a family member or friend is declared is an invalidation by the church of the parishioner’s postulates to associate with the person.

So, to stay in good with the church, the parishioner has to NOT-IS the relationship with the now-declared person.

Notice that getting dragged into an Ethics Office, being shown a declare that is riddled with lies and exaggerations, and being told you can never again talk to, communicate with or associate with the person is not a therapeutic action. The parishioner is not allowed to un-do or erase his postulate to associate with the person. He’s just told with force to disassociate from the now-declared person. He must not-is the association and must not-is the postulate to have the association.

NOT-IS-NESS, 1. trying to put out of existence by postulate or force something which one knows, priorly, exists. One is trying to talk against his own agreements and postulates with his new postulates, or is trying to spray down something with the force of other is-nesses in order to cause a cessation of the is-ness he objects to. (PXL) 2. not-is-ness is the effort to handle is-ness by reducing its condition through the use of force. It is an apparency and cannot entirely vanquish an is-ness. (PXL) (Technical Dictionary)

Scientology AXIOM 18 tells us what the continued practice of not-isness brings about. THE STATIC, IN PRACTICING NOT-IS-NESS, BRINGS ABOUT THE PERSISTENCE OF UNWANTED EXISTENCES, AND SO BRINGS ABOUT UNREALITY, WHICH INCLUDES FORGETFULNESS, UNCONSCIOUSNESS, AND OTHER UNDESIRABLE STATES.

And since the third dynamic is simply an agreement (ref: PAB 147 1 November 1958 COMMUNICATION COURSE), then the business of declaring and disconnecting people based on generalities, arbitraries, and lies results in aberrations forcefully injected into the parishioner’s third dynamic as well as his postulates and agreements. A parishioner will then dramatize those aberrations in the Scientology third dynamic or he will blow the Scientology third dynamic.

The church is forcefully compelling the parishioner to not-is and invalidate his own postulates regarding the parishioner’s association with the now-declared person.

If you’re familiar with HCOB 24 September 1979 RA FLYING RUDS IN CRAMMING, you know that invalidation and evaluation are considered rudiments…and you know from your experience in session that invalidation and evaluation are not flown as part of the standard session rudiments.

But if a parishioner has been forced to invalidate his own postulates…or if he considers that the church has invalidated his postulates…it’s very likely he will be audited over an out-rudiment of invalidation.

If the parishioner is told to disconnect from someone that the parishioner knows is not a ravenous drooling monster, the parishioner is likely to be audited over an out-rudiment of evaluation.

I know an OT VIII who has the viewpoint that “everything the church does is right and pure”. So she never ends up flying the problem, invalidation or evaluation rudiments. She was on endless OT VII because of what the church told her that her problems were.

This is important:

The church has no rudiments program for handling parishioners who’ve had to disconnect from someone unjustly or who have been falsely declared suppressive. It certainly has no rudiments program for handling staff members who have had to disconnect from parishioners that were unjustly or falsely declared suppressive.

So those parishioners have been and are being audited over out-rudiments. And those staff members are trying to work over out-rudiments.

As I pointed out in my last post in this series, in C/S Series 1, AUDITOR’S RIGHTS, in the section SESSIONS FAR APART, LRH warns that auditing over out-ruds can develop mental mass.

USING AUDITING TO ADD TO A PRECLEAR’S MENTAL MASS IS AN ANTI-PLANETARY-CLEARING ACTION.

And if you know anything about Goals-Problem-Mass technology, a problem suspends mass in time and space and burdens the pc with the mass of thwarted goals. That’s an anti-planetary clearing process, too.

Finally, the church’s approach to declaring people doesn’t just lay a present-time problem on the parishioner. In many cases, it lays a problem of long duration on the parishioner.

For example, let’s say you and another Scientologist are James Cameron fans. You’ve traded DVDs or have a standing date to meet to watch James Cameron’s next film release. You can’t return his DVDs because you’re not allowed to contact him. You can’t accept his return of your DVDs because you’re not permitted to communicate or associate with him. And the next time James Cameron releases a film, all of a sudden, you don’t have a buddy to go see the film with. Problems, problems, problems.

Feel crappy after leaving Flag?

Now you know a little more about why.

Stay tuned for part 5.

— written by Plain Old Thetan

Number of views:4392
  

4 Comments

Bitter Defrocked Apostate  on October 16th, 2012

Brilliant!

ronbible22  on October 16th, 2012

Plain Old Thetan, you’re good and your knowledge of where to find tech is impressive. I had a big win from this article. It was the reference on cancer. I had cancer a few years ago and took a good look at it and came up with a why of 2D troubles. Thanks now I can look at LRH reference, and I may have if it was on the BC.

Keep writing; we need the truth.

I do have a queation, who is controlling DM? I met him years ago he is not smart enough to do all of the damage he has done.

PlainOldThetan  on October 16th, 2012

Ron: Lecture 5611C29 is in the HOW TO PRESENT SCIENTOLOGY TO THE WORLD lecture set. It’s one of the mystical missing lecture sets from the Church’s CD lecture offerings. That lecture set wasn’t on the BC. I “studied and worked during my course period and outside of class” when doing the Briefing Course. Some of that study was on materials not on the SHSBC checksheets. I remember one day I was studying, sitting on the floor, outside the ASHO HGC. Some arrogant Sea Org member upbraided me for studying while sitting on the floor outside of the crowded pc waiting room because it “looked degraded”. So I wrote the idiot up, citing the above phrase which is on EVERY SHSBC checksheet. Never heard from the idiot again.

As for your other question, I covered most of the “he didn’t do it by himself” question in a lengthy comment I put on a blog post at this site: /?p=9979. We learned recently how Miscavige made scads of money by investing it outside church lines with questionably ethical financial advisors. So, like Hitler, Miscavige has surrounded himself with morally weak underlings who have associated with him in order to suck off their share of what they perceive as “power”.

The problem with Miscavige making scads of money by investing it offlines is that the official line given to in-church Scientologists during the high-pressure Ideal Org donation campaigns is that “invested money is wasted because it could be going to Clear the planet if you’d only donate it to the Ideal Org campaign. Therefore investing your money is out-ethics.” If Miscavige has millions of bucks invested with high-powered financial people, why doesn’t he pull it all out and contribute to the flow of Clearing the Planet?

It’s because he needs a financial cushion to hide in Aruba when the FBI makes its move against the Int Base.

SamU  on October 17th, 2012

I’m looking forward to the co-motion of part 5. Thanks for the time you put into this series. It really helps my understanding of how failed auditor like DM can have so much power over other Scientologists and especially auditors.

Leave a Comment


7 × = seven