iv-18-22.txt

From International Viewpoints (IVy) Issue 18 - August 1994
See Home Page at http://home8.inet.tele.dk/ivy/


Giving versus receiving

Auditing (Gains from training vs auditing)

By Todde Salen, Sweden

Hubbard often said that 'more than 50% of the gains from the SCN
(Auditing) technology you get from training' and stressed the
importance of training. (Training is giving auditing, flow 2) Teaching
others to audit is making others give auditing to others (F3)

Few Scientologist (and ex-SCNists) have enough Reality on this stable
datum to get for themselves the training necessary to achieve the
major part of the gains available from the technology for themselves
and others. I would say that one major reason so few realized the
importance of this datum, was because of fundamental misunderstoods
on the subject of Auditing/Training and going OT.

The first and most important misunderstood stems from not
understanding
the relationship between the thetan and the dynamics. This
misunderstood
mainly was reflected in the misconcept of the 'I' and from
this came a confusion on the subject of going OT.

Neither in processing nor in training were the pcs and/or Auditors
of the Church of Scientology clearly taught the difference between
the Human 'I' (the 'human-nature' or 1st Dynamic with
symbiotes) and the 'true self' (The bodhi-nature or thetan.)(1)


This does not mean that Hubbard omitted this knowledge from the
materials
he left behind. But it does mean that thousands of human beings that
reached for knowledge and wisdom through Scientology were denied some
basic insights into life and livingness that could have helped
them to better understand and use the knowledge LRH gave us.

Going OT

On a tape recorded lecture Hubbard even more clearly defined the
subject
of 'Going OT' in relationship to the human I and the dynamics.
He expanded the concept of Universes (In Scientology 8-8008 -
under 'Universes' page 28 - he talked about the
universe of the Individual vs the MEST-Universe (2)) by introducing
the concept of 3 Universes:

1U = The Universe of your own (Home-Universe)

2U = The (home) universe(s) of another or others

3U = The agreed-upon universe(s) (where all the dynamics belong),
one example of which would be the 6D, which we often call the MEST
universe, or the physical universe.

He mentioned that to attain OT it was necessary to reach the state
of OT in all these three Universes. It was not enough to attain OT
in your own home-Universe (which you really always have been, but
regain when you become clear enough to be able to separate your own
Universe out of the other universes.)

In Scientology 0-8 p.28 he states: 'The Goal of processing
is to bring an individual into such thorough communication with the
physical universe, that he can regain the power and ability of his
own considerations (postulates).'

If you increase your understanding of these facts it should become
obvious to you that more than 50% of the gains of the technology are
available only through training and actual delivery of the gains of
the technology to others (2nd universes).

It should also dawn on you that your own true beingness (thetan) is
not mainly invested into the 1st dynamic, but that your 'true
self' is to a greater extent hiding in other dynamics than the
1st dynamic.

If you do realize this you may get enough goals and purposes oriented
in the direction of getting trained and thus contributing to creating
a real future for the technology on this planet and thus a real future
for mankind on this planet (= the 3rd empire).




(1)Ref: Scientology 8-8008 p. 25 'Identity vs Individuality'
- 'The most common confusion on the part of a pc is between himself
as an identified object and his beingness.'


(2)Also see Creation
of Human Ability p. 187-188, and The Factors.

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun May  7 06:06:01 EDT 2023 
FTP://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/ivy/iv-18-22.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.