*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
Hi David,
I posted this quote because you mentioned the book, "Handbook for
Preclears". I thought it would be good to have LRH's take about his
own book. Other than the reference made to the book, I also thought
the viewpoint about what one is in the small (narrow context) context
that LRH talks about is a good and valid statement of what we can all
consider about ourselves and in a small context about what we can
become in a larger context. Imagination is limitless. That
statement is a good invitation for one to expand their imagination to
the limits in creating their conclusions from what was said.
Having read the book, cover to cover, it certainly is not a guide for
getting all the way out. I would classify it as a guide to being a
good preclear, ready to make the best of one's approach to start on
the trek to going Clear in Scn and probably most paths.
I don't disagree with anything that you have said. Each of us has
our own specific events of experience that only we will encounter and
therefore only will we have data, our own data which we have gathered
and then conclusions thereupon if we so desire. Nothing wrong with
any of that.
Paul/Level 5 in progress
On Aug 1, 2012, at 5:36 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 20:38:56 -0400
From: "David M. Pelly" <[email protected]>
To: TROM List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [TROM1] To David and all
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Thanks Paul,
But....
That sounds like a good sales pitch.
If we were tied down with cotton lint, I think most of us would be
free.
Even LRH himself, did not resolve his case.
Talk is cheap.
Let me put things into perspective:
In my 15 yrs in this business I have only met one person who, to
the best of my knowledge, ( that means getting to know the person
in cyber space and not in person) I would give a good pass mark
to, in Scientology.
Say a 7 or 7.5 out of 10.
I would give a small number a barely pass mark.
Say between 5 and 5.5, and a few a 6.
All the rest I give a flunk.
I would offer some credit that scn probably brought the rest of
them up from a "0" or a "1" to a "3" or "4" out of "10".
And now they are improved from a 0 to a 4 they think they are homo
novus, or homo illuminous.
Such success is relative.
This does not mean that I do not appreciate the work Hubbard did,
but things have to be put in perspective and you have call a spade
a spade.
It saved my life when nothing else would.
To use an analogy I feel like I have been pulled out from a stormy
sea and being bashed against the rocks and am now lying on a dry
beach.
But I am still not any where as near as able as I know I should be.
For the most part, Scientology helps but does not work. It takes a
lot more data to make it work.
Like Hubbard said in Dianetics, he blazed a trail though the
jungle. (That is a far cry from a bridge or a road.) (And things
were not a heck of a lot better after he retired.)
Scientology can cure some forms of insanity but far from all.
The main disease or form of insanity that scientology cannot cure
is the asshole disease.
From my evaluation of the products of scientology, I have met,
the large majority are still assholes and have a very poor sense
of right and wrong.
Though the process of evaluation I am certain enough that they were
assholes before they got into scientology and that is why they got
into scientology and they are still assholes after they got out of
scientology.
So something is definitely wrong. To cure the asshole disease you
have to go sources like the bible and other books of comparable
magnitude. It cures a lot of other problems too.
The true worth of a person is not determined by his valence or his
behavior on good roads and good weather or if he can blow a lot of
hot air and talk a good line.
The true worth of a person (in this case a person means a
scientologist) is determined ---
- by his ability to know right from wrong?
-how he conducts himself during conflict and disagreement?
-by his mental stability?
-by how he stands up on long and extended miles of bad road and bad
weather?
-in times of adversity; is he an asset or a liability?
-by how well and thorough he did his scientology and how well he
has completed the cycle of learning.
The vast majority of scientologists I have met are only intelligent
enough to argue to defend their ignorance, stupidity, their
insanity, their overts, their false and limiting operating data,
their case and their right to be that way.
I look at the bridge this way:
It is similar to defining definitions, if you can't define the word
in your own words, you flunk.
If you can't build a better bridge, of your own design and your own
words, you flunk.
To all people who think standard scientology tech and standard
processing, and standard TROM , is the only way and must not be
changed because it is gospel, ( absolute truth) is not in
accordance with the Hubbard scale of human evaluation. (That is a
very workable chart or datum.)
Such state of mind, for two points, is on the order of "not
wanting change" and "not thinking" .
"Not wanting change" and "not thinking" are near or at 0.5.
The third point on this issue is not having the right data and not
completing the cycle of learning. ( i.e. Not having done their
homework. )
In contrast to:
Tone level 4 column "M" is "Search for different viewpoints, in
order to broaden reality, changes reality", column "T" is "high
concept of truth" and all the other qualities of tone level 4,
across the chart.
David
_______________________________________________
Trom mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
