Conviction without wisdom

l_ron_hubbard

Some food for thought from LRH:

“Now, the next one is: ‘Does Scientology have any religious conviction?’ Well, again we have the matter of a body of data having an opinion and it doesn’t have an opinion. I know a lot of witch doctors who  make more sense than a lot of priests, and I know a lot of priests that make a lot more sense than a lot of preachers, and I’ve seen the history records and found out that the Roman Empire didn’t kill many Christians. As a matter of fact, in one year, Christians killed more Christians in the city of Alexandria than the Roman Empire executed during all of the existence of the Roman Empire. Yes, one hundred thousand Christians were killed in one year by Christians in Alexandria. Well, that’s because of a conviction without wisdom. Because there must have been some kind of a conviction running counter to some kind of a conviction. And as far as having an opinion of this sort of thing is concerned, you can look on it on the basis of – this demonstrates there must have been real bad ARC around there someplace. But beyond that and the fact that it might be slightly amusing to you as a datum actually means nothing to the body of data.

“So a Scientologist’s political and religious convictions would be those that he held to be true and that he had been trained in. I mean, so he’s trained to be democratic in his viewpoint and he’s trained to be a Protestant. Why, he’s certainly democratic in his viewpoint and a Protestant, unless he sees fit to alter his convictions to some degree or another because a greater wisdom seems to have penetrated those very convictions. But what would he do in that case?  He’d probably simply modify or better his convictions.

“Now, one of the oldest things that was ever given into the training of wise men, that I know of, was simply this: The basic faith in which the individual was trained and the basic political allegiance of the individual must not be tampered with by the order training him. And it was the order itself which laid that down.

“That’s an old, old one. They were training very wise men and that was the first thing that they made sure that they did. They did not tamper with their early religious convictions or their political allegiances – did not tamper with those things.

“If the individual cared to alter these things himself, nobody was going to tell him to or tell him not to. Nobody was even going to vaguely persuade him to. It might be that in the course of his study that he found certain things that men did laughable or confusing or he found certain things that men did remediable, but nobody was standing around trying to lead him in to a higher religious or political conviction.

“And that is the case very much with Scientology – very, very much the case.”

– L. Ron Hubbard, lecture Consideration, Mechanics and the Theory Behind Instruction, 20 July 1954

Advertisements

24 responses to “Conviction without wisdom

  1. Great post Marty.
    Maybe DM could M-9 this reference. It seems he wants to handle us on our religious convictions.
    ARC,
    Alex

  2. Amen. Thank you for this posting.

  3. Thank you Marty 🙂

    I always marvel at your ability to take the words of great people like MLK, Malcolm X and Ron here and make them your own!

    Even though I heard this lecture….like about a million years ago. You are able to add new life to to these words.

    Sometimes reading your blog is like an intensive of auditing 🙂

    To me what Ron says here is what Scientology is all about!

    Rock on dude. You’re doing a great job!

  4. Great quote. That’s the Scientology I signed up for. Amen indeed.

  5. Concerned Citizen

    I find it interested that apparently some people watching this whole thing unfold from the outside, find our opinions “more trustworthy” than the other “pro and against camps”

    On the Texas Independents post, someone inquired about Scientology and mentioned that we are “more trust worthy” in their view, because we are more “middle of the road”.

    That just before we get labeled extremist!!!
    If that doesn’t say something…

  6. Marty…just reading that quote by Ron brings back some memories for me. Memories of times in the SO when I was on public lines and fought to let others believe in what they believed in without insisting they believe what Ron wrote. Fighting to allow my students to find out for themselves the truth, to find out for themselves if it worked for them. And I fought for that right using the writings of Ron himself as reference.

    I had somewhere around the time I got started on my OT levels, forgotten about that. It became, instead, an insistence that one believe everything unconditionally. When I look at it, around OTlll was when that started as in order to actually do the level, you have to believe unconditionally, what Hubbard says..and it just gets worse and worse on that point. One is not allowed his own viewpoint or to question, without being told there is an MU and then, if that handling doesn’t work, to Ethics. Wow. And then, I’m just realizing the effect that has had on me. And then New OTVlll, a total invalidation if the meter doesn’t give the answer that the C/S thinks it should be. I hadn’t quite looked at it all in this way till I read that quote.

    I remember one time when I had a pretty high position in the org dealing with Celebs. Stevie Wonder’s personal assistant had come in and I was the one handling him. I found the guy’s ruin, which simply that the guy couldn’t read. I worked out a program for him to go to ABLE and learn how to read and study. Boy, did the Dissem Sec get on my butt about that. Why? Because I wasn’t getting any money from him that minute for the org’s services. I fought back, insisting that we needed to just care for the guy and help him in the area he needed help in which would result in future org services. That wasn’t good enough. Result? Blown public..of course.

    I fought to just leave people alone. Let them have some gain, let them decide for themselves. I had forgotten, thru the fog of OT indoctrination, nutty Sec checks, unjust ethics “handlings’ what is was truly like to care for people and let them be.

    My head truly gets screwed around on some of this stuff…you can read so much that Ron wrote that is beautiful, caring and indicative of a great philanthropist. Then there’s the other side…which stands in contradiction to each other. Like the Creed of the Church of Scientology..the line that states thatWe of the Church believe that “all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely. to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others” in direct contradiction with the listing of a Suppressive act as “public disavowal of Scientology or Scientologists in good standing with Scientology organizations” and indeed in contradiction to KSW 1 which does not even allow for the possibility of Ron being wrong about any of the tech.

    Sorry for the long rant, but your blogs have opened up some long buried losses for me.

    • Thank you for sharing this. This is precisely where I am coming from. If I have a pc that blows out with persistent F/N, and brings it to the next session, I do like LRH says in C/S Series
      “One day the pc comes into session with a dial-wide, floating, swinging F/N and anything you say or do doesn’t nothing whatever to disturb that F/N. It’s a real Release, man. It may last weeks, months, years. Tell him to come back when he feels he needs some auditing and chalk up the remaining hours (if sold by the hour) as undelivered. Or if sold by result, chalk up the result.”
      And I mean it. And sometimes its days, and sometimes its months, and sometimes I reckon it will be years. Is that possible in the “church”? I think they disregard the power of the tech so much that they look disdainfully upon anyone insisting on his right to have, test, and benefit from his gains. I’m sorry they lost someone with your obvious appreciation of the tech and ability to impart it to another. But, I am glad you are still here man.

    • Some people (quite a few, actually) have said that the lower levels of Scientology, through Power or Clear or so, are beneficial, but the OT levels of whatever vintage are worthless. Do you concur?

  7. As more as you quote source (LRH), as more Scientologists you’ll win over. LRH wasn’t anti-auditing in the field. Auditing is always better than no auditing.

  8. To CC: Not so strange, so far I found no outpoints in these forums (Pro-Scientology/Anti Cult). On Miscavology (crazy word) web, they are plenty. You dont need to read the data series to spot out points when they are so gross. I have read through most of CSIs webs and I am not impressed. Those looking for answers and some REAL background should take a look here and linked pages. CSI have never given any background to anything. Stuff I´ve wondered about for more than 25 years have been answered, maybe not in full, but it´s a very good start! Keep up! ARC RK.

  9. Great quote. Very usable.

  10. Recently I heard a wonderful Tibetan lama discussing enlightenment and how one of the KEY components was kindness. Without kindness you cannot have wisdom. Perhaps the biggest thing I’ve found in reading this blog – vs the other “pro and against camps” is how kind people are to each other. And how happy the independents are to reach out to their friends, to help each other. And working towards stopping the complete cruelty rampant within the church management (disconnection, lack of civil rights, etc etc) — is itself a KINDNESS to the perpetrators. It prevents further negative karma which will effect them for many lifetimes.

    • Yeah. You would think that in a subject that has over and over been explained in detail by its Founder as predicated wholly upon Affinity, Reality, Communication and Understanding that folks would get that ancient lesson. Thanks for sharing.

  11. Hi Marty,
    My wife had a great observation and I wanted to pass it on here as I feel it relates to your article here. “An individual who has been subjected to enforced affinity, reality and communication has an interrupted self-determinism. By enforced affinity, reality or communication is meant the demand on the individual that he experience or admit affinity, reality or communication when he has not felt it.” LRH from Science of Survival page 297. The COS enforces now affinity. ( come to the event! mandatory breifing, etc.) enforces reality ( COS are in affluence when we are not, SP’s “bad” etc) enforce communication. ( badgering phone calls, you must donate money to get up the Bridge etc) they also inhibit the other persons ARC. You can’t like this type of person, you can’t have that reality, your reality must conform to our reality , the COS says you cannot communicate any negative eval of the COS. It cuts these communications and enforces their communications. LRH says on the next page; “Anytime a person is made to agree (by threat or deprivation) to another’s reality and yet does not feel that reality himself, an aberrative condition exists.” LRH

    • Alex, great observation. That is why, on whole, you have a weird sort of Reverse Scientology being run. Look at the ability gained for Grade Zero. How could it possibly be that an organization that purports to produce that ability the spends untold effort telling the person with whom he can and can’t communicate and what he can and cannot communicate about. It has almost become that diametrically reversed each step up the Bridge, with each of its abilities reversed in some fashion. Your reference is right on. Thanks.

  12. I thought about the great tradition of free speech reading this post and the responses today.

    I read the following in the Sunday on-line version of the Wall Street Journal. Called ‘Free Speech Personified’, by Bruce Cole, it discusses the famous Norman Rockwell painting ‘Freedom of Speech’, painted in 1943.

    From WSJ: “In ‘Freedom of Speech,’ however, Rockwell found a subject that is active and public, a subject he could grasp and shape into his greatest painting forging traditional American illustration into a powerful and enduring work of art…
    …Rockwell focuses attention on the standing speaker whose age, worn and stained jacket, rough hands with dirty fingernails, and plaid shirt set him apart from the neat coats, ties and white shirts of the older men in the audience. Although he is a working man, this figure, his face reminiscent of Lincoln’s, is unafraid to voice his opinion—which we suspect is contrary to that of the others in the room. Standing tall, his mouth open, his shining eyes transfixed, he speaks his mind, untrammeled and unafraid. In Rockwell’s vision he has become not only an active public participant in democracy, but a defender of it. He is the very embodiment of free speech, a living manifestation of that abstract right—an image that transforms principle, paint and, yes, creed, into an indelible image and a brilliant and beloved American icon still capable of inspiring millions world-wide.”

    I have had to really consider why freedom of speech is not allowed by the current Church (Management). This is a most basic outpoint. If you dare disagree with current management then there is no freedom to speak. You can be attacked so as to be silenced. This betrays the most fundamental right many of us in this country believe. When the Church trammels on that right it ignites righteous anger at this sundering of our most basic liberty. And that just pisses alot of people off, many who previously had no particular ill-will towards the Church. People of goodwill are understandably angered. And this, by the way, is the first step towards totalitarianism and outright oppression. This is happening in current day Iran. With an educated people and half its citizens under age 30, Iran’s leaders violently suppress their Freedom to speak. If you don’t think it can happen in Scientology, look again, it is already happening now.

    Marty and Geir and Thoughtful are in that great American tradition of Freedom of Speech. The Church management is welcome to respond to what is reported on these sites. However it does not. It just attacks in crazy and wild generalizations or threatens parishioners with disconnection if they dare to view or discuss these issues. What are they so afraid of? The Church should stand up and debate the issues, rather than hiding behind their cloak of Religious Righteousness

    • UnDisturbed, great comment. Have you looked at that painting recently? Look it up on the net. That guy in the smudged jacket and dirty finger nails, that is the guy I think LRH wanted Scientologists to be – not the status and class oriented white shirts which the current church tries to create.

  13. The world seems brighter. Very nicely done site and Marty with regards to your post on the Church being welcome to respond, unfortunately this will not happen. This is the tune I have been singing to my entire career in Scientology and it is just not accepted. Many just give up on trying after just plain no answers or the “your disaffected crap.” There are people want answers and want accountability. I know the world certainly feels a lot lighter anyway for myself.

  14. Tawnya G. Fondren

    Dear “Marty”,

    Does this gig pay well or are you doing it for the coverup/cause?

  15. Tawnya:

    What I like about your post is “Marty” is not afraid to show your opposing view.

    Ask yourself why the Church will not allow the same.

  16. This quote got me thinking about dissemination, and how this question comes up in dissemination a lot. I’ve talked to a few people about Scientology in the past few days and I felt very free to give an honest viewpoint about it.

    Before, I’d feel like I had to be on the defensive and watch what I say because I could get in trouble. But now I just talk, and I never used to talk about Scientology to wogs.

    It’s kind of like when I used to sell DMSMH on the street. If the I/C was hovering over me I wouldn’t sell because I felt like I had to “do it right”. Then she’d walk away and I’d sell some books because there wasn’t a comm barrier there. If the guy asks me if I liked Scientology I’d “read” him and find out where he was at somewhat, and give him an honest answer, but also in a way that would appeal to him.

    There’s too much robotism on this book selling patter everybody’s being drilled on. All LRH refs can apply and nobody can cross order you to not use all refs and tapes on dissemination.

    And this relates to the situation with franchise missions right now. They’re required to go through this whole checklist and get an “RTC pass”, before they can open. I’m not sure but I think it’s before they can even open. It’s like the I/C is hovering over you making sure you look and act pristine and you can’t just get in comm with public and make friends with them and get them up the bridge with honesty and ARC.

    This I’m convinced is the mechanism LRH was thinking with when he wrote HCO PL ETHICS AND MISSIONS, which goes into no heavy ethics to be used on missions. Miscavige needs to back off franchise missions and give them some room to breath. They want to help and you’re just getting in their way Miscavige.

    I just talked to my dad who was Course Sup at Palo Alto mission in the early 70’s. They had 12 students on course at a time all the time and 4 full time auditors in the chair all the time. He told me this non-chalantly and when I told him that’s better than the vast majority of most orgs he started getting pissed off, like for real.

    Scientologists are going to fly off the effing deep end I think, especially when this group is 1000 strong and growing exponentially. Once you grasp the damage done by Miscavige, well, you need a cigarrette or something.

    • You know Steve Hall and I compared notes when we first re-met early this year. We both recognized that our abilities to disseminate were vastly improved by simply realizing we needed to talk about the warts associated with the church with honesty – instead of tap dancing around them. It is difficult not to interest someone on the subject if you are honest.

  17. Yes that’s true honesty and openness actually works. Answer peoples questions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s