It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What is with Scientology?

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Duzey or cybertroy, could you briefly describe these levels to which you are talking about as I think it would give me a better understanding of the COS. I remeber reading something about members needing or striving to attain certain levels within the church. I also remeber reading something refering to this "structure" as being similar to a cult in which very few members who ever attain high levels ever leave the church. Is this due to the hard work and comfort that they attain through reaching these levels? Of course, the negative sites about Scientology say this is due to a much more sinister reason such as fear or the person being completely brainwashed. I would love to hear your thoughts on this.




posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 12:56 AM
link   
Sorry, I tend to have difficulty with brief


I can give you a general overview of the level concept, but I can't really go into detail because I've never been in the church. If I make any obvious mistakes, one of the others can correct me.

The idea is that you go through several stages on your way across the 'bridge', this apparently being the ultimate goal. The lower levels are focused at becoming ‘clear’; I think it's when you rid yourself of your 'engrams'. Then you get into the higher levels, where the really secret stuff kicks in. The highest levels remain unreleased by the church, if they are indeed part of Hubbard's writings.

You progress through the levels, and with each comes more advanced information. Sort of like a correspondence course, in that you only do one thing at a time, giving it your full concentration, and progressing when you fully comprehend it. There are also several courses you can take to learn more things. The reason behind this is that there is a learning/understanding curve, and if you don't get it right, everything that follows is messed up. I believe that is what Cybertroy and Azeari meant when they spoke of 'out gradient'.

This is because one of the keys to Scientology is communication. And that failures and problems most often are a result of misunderstanding of one sort or another (I think, I could've misunderstood). That's why they have a level system, and auditors to help you work through them and ensure you understand. This is also why they keep pressing the point that it is meant to be read, because just by me explaining this to you, I have projected my reality, which may be very different from yours, into what I've said. My preconceptions and understandings shape what I say and how I say it. So they are very leery of anyone messing with their tech. Understandable.

And while they do strive to obtain a higher lever, the ultimate goal, they do not 'need' to. I don't think they kick people out because they don't go clear. I guess you'd just keep being audited, but I'm not sure.


Opinions on your questions to follow. Have to think about that a little.

edited to change higher levels unreleased to highest levels unreleased

[edit on 20-1-2005 by Duzey]



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by cybertroy
Scientology isn't responsible for attacks on religion? Where did this information come from?


I hear you, man...that seems to have come from left field, with no data to back it up. There is certainly no history of the CofS attacking other religions.

Mind you, it's worth noting that - imho - the church's stand on religious freedom is largely self-serving. They want to maintain their status as an official religion, for tax purposes and to allow them to continue providing "counseling" without official certification. And there's nothing wrong with that, per se, but one shouldn't automatically assume altruistic motives.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 01:40 AM
link   
I think the structure of the church would be more accurately described as that of a very large, multi-national corporation. Many members work for the church to pay for their courses, if they don't have any money. They tend to receive very low wages.

There are a few reasons I think that higher-level members don't drop out as much. One is, as you mentioned, power and privilege. But also, for these people, the tech works, and they don't know they can still use it if they're not in the church. It's taken them many years, and a lot of money and hard work to get there, and it's difficult to admit that it's bad enough that you have to leave. It's not the church they don't want to leave, it's the tech. There is also some intimidation factor at work here too, for some.

The brainwashing is an interesting question, and one that I have often pondered. I'd like to change the word to conditioned though, as I think it is slightly more applicable. It is my opinion that there are some people that, for whatever reason, are easily swayed or led, and I think they gravitate to a structured environment, with strict rules laid out. In my opinion, and my opinion only, some of the techniques can be used in conditioning. That is not to say that they are not useful techniques if used for the proper reason. If a person were inclined to be led, and want to be told what to do, and an auditor were to act in an unethical manner, then yes, this could possibly happen. I am not saying that this does happen, only that it could, in my opinion.

Yes, if one looks at the church, not the tech, there are some cultish aspects about it. But if you use that term to describe Scientology, then I think you have to use the same term for all other organized religions as well. And also, I think the extent it would be cult-like would depend upon the mental state and self-confidence of the member, and not the church. I tend to view it as any other religion, just a unique one.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 04:31 AM
link   
The best thing to do, skychief - and I'm sure Troy will agree with this - is read books. Otherwise you're getting opinions...nothing wrong with opinions, of course, but by their very nature they tend to vary widely.

A good place to start is at the beginning: Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health. You can pick up a used copy for less than a buck at Amazon, it's also widely available at libraries and bookstores.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 08:14 PM
link   
I read the Dianetics book fully...and it is full of sound practices for healing WRONG thinking patterns.

I choose NOT to use their methhods however. I found an almost EXACT method that deals with this issue on a more spiritual levell.

This other method comes from Karol K. Truman....as she puts forth in her book....
'Feelings Buried Alive Never Die'
there is a follow up to this method called 'Healing Feelings'

When you read both of Mz Trumans books, AND the Dianetics book, you will find that they are SO similar they are virtually the same thing.Both focused on improving your life.
Mz trumans books are alot less wordy, and no big Religion was created from her methods. Hence WHY I like her methods better.

Both are all about healing wrong thought patterns that we may have wich hold us back from fulfilling our true and ultimate potential.
If reading Dianetics is not your cup of tea, but feel you could benefit from the self help nature of changing wrong thinking patterns you may have picked up as a child, try reading the Truman books.

[edit on 20-1-2005 by theRiverGoddess]



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 12:48 AM
link   
That's very interesting, RiverGoddess, I've never heard of those books or that author.

When you say "healing wrong thought patterns", do you mean as in what they try to do with Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)? I only ask because I had no success with CBT myself (others may find it useful, I don't know); the reason is that the counselor was trying to get me to change my conscious negative thought patterns, but the trouble was I didn't really have any of those. All my troubles were being caused by "subconscious" activity.

Can you descrive, briefly, what method is used to create this healing?

Have you actually used it, and if so what was the result?



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 01:50 AM
link   
Scientology shouldn't be regarded as a religion, it only became one for the tax benefits. In the 60s i think? im not sure, they started opening up "churches" or business's all around the united states, if they had one church in every state i think it was, then they could become a legal religion, thus benefitting from tax benefits. Crazy mother#ers.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 02:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Youngin
Scientology shouldn't be regarded as a religion, it only became one for the tax benefits. In the 60s i think? im not sure, they started opening up "churches" or business's all around the united states, if they had one church in every state i think it was, then they could become a legal religion, thus benefitting from tax benefits. Crazy *******.


True as far as it goes, but not the whole story, and your conclusion is questionable.

The other reason had to do with the provision of counseling services: ordained ministers can lawfully provide such services without psychological/psychiatric certification.

Whether it's a true religion or not very much depends on an individual's personal definition of the word. I would argue that it's no more and no less a religion than any other spritual practice.

Although I'm a Scientologist, I don't personally think of it as a religion, simply becuase to me the word religion equates to (to some extent, at least) "blind faith", and I don't play that. I avoid the word spiritual, too, since it has loads of weird connotations.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 11:14 AM
link   
I would have to agree with Azeari, whether it's a religion or not depends on your definition. I'm just using the term out of laziness and very loosely. For some in, it is their religion, for others it's just something that works for them.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 12:49 PM
link   
" Sunday Brunch"

For those anywhere near Orlando , a very knowledgable scientologist,
Ted Crammer, is having meetings on some sundays. Ted is highly trained in the subject, and a former very successfull "Mission Holder". A sort of
independant scientology organisation.

Hello:

This message announces the next series of Sunday morning brunches which I am
now dubbing "Second Sunday Brunch." I am pleased with how the first attempt
turned out and I am happy to report that the food was good and the company
enjoyable.

This will be the only announcement from me until the schedule runs out.

I will be having an 11:00 A.M. Sunday brunch at the International House of
Pancakes (IHoP), 4124 W. Colonial Dr., Orlando, FL on the second Sunday of
each month: Feb. 13, Mar. 13, Apr. 10, May 8, June 12, and July 10. I might
arrive solo, I might bring my wife or another guest. All guests are welcome
Scientological or not.

Ted Crammer
Original message follows:

+++
Hello:

I am looking for an undercut to auditing, co-auditing, training, seminars,
workshops, congresses, -- you name it -- a lesser commitment for myself as
well as anyone who might like to have some company of the Scientological
variety.

I believe that the undercut is expressed in LRH Policy wherein he states
that an organization needs to be a place where people are always welcome and
where they can come to relax and hang out like "old home week." I don't
recall the specific policies. Nevertheless, it's a good idea especially in
an environment where stat pushes and other pressures that belong to the
outside world have taken over.

In the Mission where I worked and later in the Mission I directed, Friday
nights used to be the best time of the week, the icing on the cake so to
speak. We'd have a graduation, acknowledge wins, gains, and completions,
blow everyone out of their heads -- even further -- with group processing,
and then go out dancing, or to a local pizza parlor to have a beer and shoot
some pool, or close down some eatery early in the morning with jokes and
laughter and up-toned conversation. There isn't any of that happening any
more as far as I know, certainly there isn't as much auditing or training
like days of yore, and, as the organizations grow more serious, not much
laughter and cutting up.

My observation: People are starved for real, live communication of the sort
that only a theta being can provide. Since we don't have an actual, physical
organization here and we are operating on a shoestring, I am proposing that
a Sunday Brunch might fill the bill and provide something needed and/or
wanted.

I will be having an 11:00 A.M. Sunday brunch at the International House of
Pancakes (IHoP), 4124 W. Colonial Dr., Orlando, FL on the following dates:
Oct. 31, Nov. 14, Nov. 28, and Dec 5. I might arrive by myself, I might
bring my wife or another guest.

If there is anyone who would like to yak up some Scientology, share wins and
gains of any variety, bitch and moan, talk OT phenomena, whatever, they will
find me there. If no one shows up I'll be gone within 30 to 45 minutes. If
anyone shows up to chat I could stay for hours.

I realize that this is a long trip for most of you but you might know
someone in Central Florida who would enjoy the connections and, if so, you
might pass this e-mail on. How's that sound?


Ted Crammer

For more information about services in the Freezone mail me,
Terril Park, at bbafzao@hotmail.com

To find out more about us and to join our
forum see our website at
www.freewebs.com...

Preserve, protect, promote the Tech
internationalfreezone.net...



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 01:16 PM
link   
TROY
Scientology isn't responsible for attacks on religion? Where did this information come from? On of my friends was Jewish and was still Jewish when he worked in the organization. He did the Matzaa thing. (hope I spelled it right)
TERRIL

Hi Troy, your descriptions of scientologists you've known matches quite closely my own. They in general really want to help their fellow man, and are usually very friendly. More than 95% of Freezoners were once COS members.

I believe that in the paperwork on the IRS settlement, COS executives stated that eventually scientologists would be expected to have scn as their only religion.

COS dosn't that I know of attack other religions. They do use the angle of religious freedom for PR purposes. Stenuously.

I have all new red and green volumes. ( repectively scientology technology,
and scientology policy)

I recently noticed changes to the "A-J" policies, ( categories of people not
allowed to do scientology in COS)

HCOPL 27 oct R. Revised 15 nov 1987

The old volumes had all revisions in different script, so that one could see the changes. The new ones don't. I happen to have a fair number of old issues etc. so I could spot this change.

This policy among other things has added, a year after LRH's official death!

"Efforts to involve philosophy with medical imperialism, psychiatric sadism, the BIGOTED CHURCHMAN ( my emphasis) , bring about a slowing of our progress. "

I don't believe LRH would write something so silly and so contrary to
the long time tradition of saying scn is non denominational and open to those of all faiths.

There are of course other alterations that can be commented on.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 11:46 PM
link   
Regarding this quote:

"Efforts to involve philosophy with medical imperialism, psychiatric sadism, the BIGOTED CHURCHMAN ( my emphasis) , bring about a slowing of our progress. "

I personally can't say for sure I have read the quote. But I did look up the word "bigot":

"Bigot", first definition I came to at dictionary.com:
"One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ."

The quote didn't say just "CHURCHMAN", it also said "BIGOTED." Let's say there was a churchman who was intollerant of Scientology. He might be a bit uncooperative, and actually fight Scientology. Couldn't that slow down Scientology's progress?

Troy



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 01:35 AM
link   
I think we're going round & round here.

We need to differentiate bewteen Scientology and the Church of Scientology, first off. They are not the same thing, not anymore, no way, not even close.

The only thing slowing down the Church's progress is the Church hiearchy. No external force is doing that.



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by cybertroy
The quote didn't say just "CHURCHMAN", it also said "BIGOTED." Let's say there was a churchman who was intollerant of Scientology. He might be a bit uncooperative, and actually fight Scientology. Couldn't that slow down Scientology's progress?


Looking at it from a different angle, by not wanting these people in and giving them a chance to overcome their preconceptions, the church is kind of slowing themselves down. I may be completely off base, but aren't levels 9 - 11 going to remain unreleased until the church goes through a rather large 'recruitment' phase? I had heard that the levels won't be released until the missions are all as big as St Hill (UK or US???) back in the eighties. If this is the case, then by putting even more restrictions on who can join, it will take even longer to reach that goal. It's like the carrot and the stick, but the church keeps making the stick longer


Could one of you 'scientology guys' let me know if I have heard this info correctly, thanks.



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azeari of the Radiant Eye
We need to differentiate bewteen Scientology and the Church of Scientology, first off. They are not the same thing, not anymore, no way, not even close.


You're absolutely right, that is an important distinction that needs to be made. I know you understand what I mean, but for others who may not, when I use the term Scientologist, I mean a person who believes in/uses the tech, not a member of the CoS. When I refer to the Church, I mean the current top exectives, not any average member of the church. As Azeari mentioned they are two very different things. You do not need to be a member of the CoS to be a Scientologist. The freezone is always an option, and in my opinion, the better one.



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Way back in the day, I did my senior research paper in college on Scientology. I urge any body in this or thinking of going into it to please investigate.

L.Ron Hubbard was a Science Fiction writer who once wrote under the name "Winchester Remington Colt". He also wrote a story called "The Blow Torch Murders". He lied about his education, he was a drug addict, and a tax cheat to such an extent that he had to float around on his boats ("sea org") because NO country would allow him in. He publicly said that he wrote 'Dianetics' off the top of his head, he also publicly stated that the best way to avoid tax was to 'start a religion'. His books remained on "bestseller lists" for a number of years because Scientologists were instructed to go buy them to keep them on the lists.

I would suggest reading some of his son's work - whom I believe goes by the name Ron DeWolf because he disowned his father. Very eye opening stuff.

My personal take on 'scientology' was that it was created as a tax dodge for L.Ron. The whole thing is basically a joke.
I normally try not to be overly critical of peoples beliefs, but this stuff---if you read the origins of it----is downright dangerous, and L.Ron had some serious problems (beyond just being "quirky").
So this is just where my research lead, I urge others to please read up on this before joining.



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Niki,

There is some truth in what you wrote, and I thought I'd give my take on it.

First, thank you for bringing up the point about the Church sending people to bookstores, I had totally forgotten about this until you mentioned it. They do it with movies as well, remember battlestar earth or whatever that piece of crap was called? I asked a local bookseller about this topic once, if he was aware of it. He wasn't, but told me that he doesn't sell Hubbard books because, unlike other publishers, you can't return unsold stock. That's another way they inflate the sales numbers.

As for Hubbard, yes, I think towards the end he did have some problems, and they could have been quite extensive, it's hard to know for sure, by that point he was completely isolated from all but a few. Maybe it was to hide the extent of the problem, but I don't know. And he did exagerate his education quite a bit. I don't know if this was him, or the church to make him sound better. But he did study religions, I think most sci-fi writers do for research. I've noted strong buddhist aspects, as have others.

My take on Dianetics and the start of Scientology, he thought he'd write a self-help book that was mainly a result of many other things taken from different areas and combined into one book, and he wrote it to make money. Self-help books tend to do very well, and he already had a known name. It became a huge bestseller, and took on a life of it's own. Books can do that, look at the Atkins Diet. Legions of cranky people all over North America, and all they really need is a good sandwich.

And I would also encourage to people to research anything they are thinking about joining thoroughly before doing so. That's just good practice. I think that's why Skychief started this thread. But if someone truly belives in Scientology and it works for them, then I don't see the harm in it. I would just urge people to avoid the Church at all costs, and explore in the freezone.



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 11:53 PM
link   
Niki, have you honestly read and understood any of Ron's self help books? Did you even take the time? Did you even try to apply it? Or did you read bad stuff off the internet and take it as true? I've seen it work right in front of my very eyes, I have felt it work.

Regarding this post:

"My take on Dianetics and the start of Scientology, he thought he'd write a self-help book that was mainly a result of many other things taken from different areas and combined into one book, and he wrote it to make money. Self-help books tend to do very well, and he already had a known name. It became a huge bestseller, and took on a life of it's own. Books can do that, look at the Atkins Diet. Legions of cranky people all over North America, and all they really need is a good sandwich. "

Duzey, are you saying he just piled a bunch of stuff into one book. That's a bit of an insult, Dianetic's had a goal, it wasn't just a bunch of stuff thrown together. Ron was a very literate person, he had a great command over vocabulary. He doesn't just ramble about nothing. And as a side note, he also had quite a sense of humor. And Dianetics is only one book, Ron wrote many books. I'll ask you, have you read and understood any of Ron's self help books? Or have you read a bunch of bad stuff and taken it as true?

And, so what he was a science fiction writer? What's the point? I mean, I can "read" both fiction and non-fiction books.


Troy



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 01:31 AM
link   
There's no doubt that there's a discrepancy between Hubbard's backgound and his claimed background. (As Duzey said, it's unclear whether this was down to the man himself or to the church...he certainly didn't, as far as I know, try to correct any incorrect data...)

Despite that, he did make some amazing discoveries. How exactly he managed it is unclear, but for a person seeking answers to certain "mysteries" of life that may not matter a great deal.




top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join