Are the basics forgotten?
When I was thrown out of 'the Church of Scientology ' in 1983) I was 'lost' to quite an extent with no friends in Denmark apart from Scientologists. Having been labelled a Suppressive Person I thought I would "damage" other Scientologist if I talked to them!. I did have one interesting advantage over some others in a similar position. In 1957 I taught to different people on twenty-six different weeks the basics of Scientology, such as ARC, communication, affinity, reality, the tone scale, the cycle of action, stable data and confusion. The course was taught in the evenings and each evening students were given homework where they were supposed to use the principle they had learnt to improve their and their friends and relations daily life. That was 6 months of helping different groups of people to understand the basics of Scientology. It really taught me those basics! Things that worked in life! So when I was thrown out of the so-called "Church" of Scientology (1983) I knew that Scientology was based on what I regarded as facts. So although I couldn't understand why the so-called "Church" of Scientology was behaving the way it did I knew the basics worked. In fact I used them to get a job, two jobs in fact. It's perhaps worth noting that I got these jobs even though I was in a foreign country and did not speak Danish well.
Mind you when I was thrown out, apart from carrying with me this conviction that the basics of Scientology worked, I carried with me a lot of other stable data which if, after years of experience and thinking, I now reject. In fact some of it I regarded as wild fantasy.
I might add as a bit of background data that my communication was very low in the beginning of my time in Denmark and remains a little bit sub optimum to this day. In all these years therefore I have never been one to discuss with other people bits and pieces of Scientology, although I have read other people's opinions in forums and on the Internet. So when I left, apart from having some basics of Scientology which remained with me, I also carried forward a lot of – well I might as well be honest and say Scientology rubbish. And again, lacking good communication abilities, I have not sorted it out by talking it over with others but by just thinking in my own little private space over many years and reading things on Internet.
There is an analogy here. Have you ever watched a building going up, an office block or block of flats? It seems to be ages that they spend on the foundations (a nearby block of offices and dwellings which is going up has two floors of underground parking and I watched that "getting nowhere" for ages). The foundations are important but once they put there you don't see them, you don't think much about them. The foundations (basics) of Scientology are important. But what gets talked about? For years it was the latest auditing discoveries/techniques (possibly now it's progress on the latest ideal Org!). It is rarely the basics, the foundations.
The sad part about this, to my mind, is that many who have seen some of the gross outnesses in the Church of Scientology and have left were not very much aware the basics as mentioned above and how to apply them in ordinary everyday situations. As I once mentioned the Church of Scientology is a little like a mousetrap, but the bait in the mousetrap is the most nutritious and tasteful Gorgonzola cheese. So the art is how to get out of the trap and take your ration of the cheese with you. I feel that that is what I have achieved for myself and it is why I'm working fairly hard (for an old man on a pension) to make sure that they are preserved.
Antony's personal Gorgonzola cheese locator
The gems are not always easily understood. I don't believe that's the fault of Scientology but is often due to the fact that the majority of us have been brought up in environments which are slightly, or some time strongly, suppressive. We often have been brought up and lived in environments where we have learnt certain "facts" which had become for us stable data. It should be noted here that according to the Scientology theory of stable data and confusion, stable data is not necessarily true. It is just something that has been accepted as stable.
So to get anywhere with this one needs to realise that some of the things we regard as true possibly are not.
The last year or so I have delved into the early days of Scientology. If you want to continue to progress with clearing out false data you may have about Scientology I suggest you share some of the discoveries I've made.
Here are the links to what I have dragged up:
Some time ago I got links to 40 PDF files of early Scientology books, and recently I have managed to get a friend to place them on this homepage, and the direct link is: http://www.antology.info/first-editions.php .
A friend has reviewed some of the most important early books and these reviews are posted on Scientolipedia as follows:
Some years ago now a friend of mine (now deceased) told me that he regarded Ron as being at his best from an auditing technical point of view in 1959. More recently I searched through the 1959 LRH lectures and found a series where he was talking to students in 1959 on the first level of auditor courses (HPA = Hubbard Professional Auditor was the title in Great Britain). Usually he was lecturing either to what you might call the general public or to highly trained auditors and what he discussed and how he talked varied with whom he was talking to. Those lectures are valuable to those who know a good deal about Scientology but have not had auditor training. I recently put them in my dropbox, and at the moment you can find them at the following link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/hvvg62mml9so8sx/AACm51ESHHETiJ4xGs2wtEf1a?dl=0 [due to space limitations on dropbox these are only available for a short time from putting them there on the 10th of July 2017].
ADDED 31st July 2017: a friend of mine has written a very good review of those Special HPA lectures. The link to it is: http://scientolipedia.org/info/Special_HPA_Lecture_Series . It contains a long-term link for the lectures.
Looking through this article after I had written most of it it occurred to me that I never really noticed any big sudden case changes from Scientology technology; case changes for me all came on a slow gradient scale. This article is written from that viewpoint. I know many people get a big change in the beginning and that big change is their Gorgonzola that holds them in the trap or parts of it (a stable datum for them). I'm afraid I don't have a glib answer for people looking for that sort of Gorgonzola outside of the so-called "church". I can only suggest they use the basics of Scientology as applied to life to search for more Gorgonzola. In brief, communicate, persisting in communicating approaching closer to the receipt points reality level, staying at the top of the three methods of "controlling" others, namely enhancement (the "church" is tending over to the other two levels, use of force and nullification).
Of course not all of Scientology data is accurate, so you do have to use your own common sense sorting it out. In fact you might even dare to use some of Ron's data to help you sort it out! I'm thinking of the Data Series which has some useful things in it.
