iv-20-05.txt

From International Viewpoints (IVy) Issue 20 - January 1995
See Home Page at http://home8.inet.tele.dk/ivy/



Responsibility?

By Otto Roos, Holland

Ref. IVy 18, page 32, 'Scn - a workable system'.

THE OVERALL CONCEPT of this article seems clear. Basically the same
is said in 'Keeping Scientology Working'(1)(KSW).
The article makes one wonder, though, who this Hari
Seldon is that he considers himself capable of making statements
like 'that so very few human beings have been able to assume
responsibility
for the Technology that Hubbard gave to us' (page 32, col 1, para.4)

He then informs us that Hubbard would have said that 'he tried
to train us into understanding the tech, but that we still do
not understand' (page 32, col 2, para. 5). Hari Seldon apparently
has the case handling technical qualifications to in his article tell
us 'what Hubbard really tried to get across' (page 32, col
1). Are we to assume that LRH himself was incapable of doing what
Hari offers us gratuitously?!

Application?

He tells us that 'if you know how to apply the tech you
will get the results it was designed to achieve' (page 32, col
1, last three lines).

One can continue to look through this article in this manner and find
more of these type of arrogant assertions.

True dedication

I don't know who is hiding behind the Hari Seldon name. It is not
a person who is aware of the untold number of people who spent years
of their lives to learn to duplicate this technology and who did
just that!

I myself spent years being personally trained by LRH, and training
many students under his supervision, all the way from Dianetics
to Class XII, as well as being Senior Case Supervisor, Class VII to
XII.

Personally I have witnessed LRH expressing his happiness about his
Flag auditors. People who spent years to tens of years in training
to become good auditors! People who did understand the technology.
In fact guys and girls who like myself, in innumerable WELL DONE to
VERY WELL DONE sessions so marked by LRH C/S, caused him to be
delighted.

When the X to XII R/D's had been fully tested/run, he himself
expressed
his satisfaction about the arrival of 'the perfect auditors'!
He was also happy in the earlier years when the Class VIII, and years
before that when the Power Processing Class VII auditors came on the
scene! (None of this is rumour line, I witnessed and was part of it
as student, auditor, supervisor, case officer, review auditor,
cramming
officer and C/S.)

We were a happy and able bunch, in fact in the even earlier years
of the ACC's, and the BScn Courses, KSW, though not even written
as policy, was the rule more than the exception among the
professionals!

Not all Flag auditors became Class XII's. No, but up to the level
of their training, from Dianetics on up, many did become
excellent auditors! They did live KSW, understand and apply
tech. Many of them still do!

The tech not working?

Hari then says 'the only reason ... Technology does not seem
to work...' (page 33, col 1, para. 2, #4). Who said that 'it
does not seem to work'? In the IVys one reads about disaffection
with the ethics procedure of the church, but one does not read much
about people complaining because 'the tech doesn't seem to
work'.

In fact, it is only because it does work and because all
the IVy readers know this and try to rescue it, that
they even bother to write to IVy at all. The only thing that
keeps us together is this tech and our knowing that it works!

It may come as a surprise to Mr. Seldon, but I assure him that I and
many many others can make it work! That I have done this for
many tens of thousands of hours as auditor, solo auditor, LRH research
auditor (of all the OT levels Hari Seldon has run and a lot he hasn't)
and that I have known many Flag and other auditors up to 'the
standard of The Standard'.

I myself have always been a staunch supporter of the Standard (in
fact my appointment by LRH was to assure exactly that, to increase
adherence to this thing called 'The Standard'!) I have
made my goofs and I have had to swim for it (in the old days of
overboarding
on the first VIII Course in Corfu!), but like many of my fellow
students came through! None of us ever doubted that the tech worked,
and not many of us failed in acquiring the skills to make it
work!

None of the auditors who dedicated their whole lives to our technology
need to be told the things this arrogant, invalidative, and
patronizing
article is trying to ram down one's throat!

New technology

The article says that 'we do not need new Technology'.
What utter nonsense! LRH had a group of Research auditors who did
nothing but, under his directions, look for and find new technology.
The art and nature of the exact counter effort which had to be handled
as one went higher up the Awareness Levels (the OT levels, the Class
X to XII procedures, The Upper Level Developments from Power
Processing
on up, to NOTs, OT8 and beyond!) had to be found and technology to
handle these new areas had to be developed and tested. The same had
also happened in earlier Goals running days.

In the latter years the research, especially when handling the basis
of insanity, was done by a group of Class XII auditors, personally
hand trained by LRH who he himself called 'the perfect auditors'.
Those 'perfect auditors' could, Mr. Seldon, apply the
tech and they also trained others.

If Hari Seldon is so convinced that 'if you know how to
apply it you will get the results it was designed to achieve'
(page 32, col. 1, last lines), he is hereby invited to show where
in the world a TRUE book I Clear can be found. An individual
who truly has all the characteristics of the Book I Clear. As Hari
cannot do this then, according to his article, Nobody has ever
been able to apply the Tech, as no such clear was ever produced!

I know how to and can apply the technology. There will not be many
who would refute that. But there are many others who, within the
limits
of their training, have done so, can do, and do do exactly the same.
Yet, the Book I Clear has never been produced by anyone, including
LRH! This only means the Tech is lacking somewhere along the line.
'Lacking' only in the sense that 'it is not complete',
hence new tech must (has been and is being!) be found. New
Tech must always be found in each developing science. The processes
of further development cannot ever stand still!

There are only a very few auditors who have co-researched under LRH
on the further development of areas beyond NOTs. (Much of which,
strangely
enough, was found before the development of NOTs!) These new
areas of aeons old unhandled counter effort each need their own
procedures.

Blame?

I do not blame the CofS because 'I did not go OT'. I have
spent my whole life in the Tech. Also in daily life I have been and
am successful and very much OT, if we may define this state
as merely a certain level of effective CAUSE! Much of this is
due to the training I received when it was still available!

I am very grateful indeed for this privilege. So, how can one not
hold this church accountable when it makes further training and going
up the levels unavailable to many!? When access is being denied to
the correct technology which we, according to the article, should
have!

Indeed we should have it. There are those of us, Mr. Seldon,
who do have it, who lived and trained in the days before a group
madness
drove out many well meaning, well trained, very dedicated people,
who did work on the lines of KSW. Some of these dedicated people
are not now in a similar position of being able to increase their
skills in the same manner as people like myself could. (I recently
discussed this with Steve Bisbey, an old time C/S, who also regretted
the passing of the old training days under the Flag Rules.)

The unbelievable absolute arrogance to blame and to talk down to some
of the dedicated people, who want nothing better than to train
and train and train, for 'failing to grow from the ARC triangle
to the KRC triangle' (page 33, col 2, last 3 lines) is absolutely
appalling! That many of the people mentioned left the church not
wanting
to compromise their integrity, as a result of which they no longer
had immediate access to standard training, cannot be swept aside by
merely telling them to 'accept responsibility'. They just
did not want to continue living a lie, not even for the sake of
'receiving their training and Upper Levels'! Now, that, Mr.
Seldon, is LIVING STANDARD TECH and BASIC TRUTH!

There are a lot more people than your article implies who do
command the Tech to a high degree. There are also lots of people
who would want nothing better than to reach just that level of grasp.
That the road has been shut is not their responsibility. Nor
will that road remain shut for ever!

What tech qualifications, Mr. Seldon, entitle
you to dish out preachings, make wrongs, and invalidations under the
cover of a pseudonym!?

(1)First issued 7th
February 1965, this Policy Letter of Ron's became a bit of a joke
in some quarters, since one was required to read it and check out
on it for every small or large course one took in the church.Ed.

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Mar 31 00:06:03 EDT 2023 
FTP://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/ivy/iv-20-05.txt
WWW://www.clearing.org
BLOG://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
Send mail to [email protected] saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but 
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.