 How to study Scientology [message #277] |
Sun, 08 November 2009 11:40  |
|
The article "How to study Scientology" (Ability Magazine, Feb 1959) may very well be my second favorite piece by L. Ron Hubbard. It forms a basis for the study of the subject, ensuring personal integrity is maintained as one embarks upon the adventure of self. I only wish the article was in the beginning of every course offered. And yes, before even the policy "Keeping Scientology Working".
Let's dive into the issue a bit. In the first paragraph, LRH states:
"He should, before he starts to discuss, criticize or attempt to improve on the data presented to him, find out for himself whether or not the mechanics of Scientology are as stated, and whether or not it does what has been proposed for it."
In the article, Ron stresses how important it is for the student of Scientology to really find out for himself what is true for him and not accept anything because "authority said so". He goes on:
"There are two ways Man ordinarily accepts things, neither of them very good. One is to accept a statement because Authority says it is true and must be accepted, and the other is by preponderance of agreement amongst other people."
The stress is on your own personal observations and your own personal integrity; Daring to observe, daring to make up your own mind and draw your own conclusions:
"Data is your data only so long as you have evaluated it. It is your data by authority or it is your data. If it is your data by authority, somebody has forced it upon you, and at best it is little more than a light aberration. Of course, if you asked a question of a man whom you thought knew his business and he gave you his answer, that datum was not forced upon you. But if you went away from him believing from then on that such a datum existed without taking the trouble to investigate the answer for yourself--without comparing it to the known universe--you were falling short of completing the cycle of learning."
The first sentence in the paragraph above could be a real wake-up call for some people. If you accept data without personal inspection, you become aberrated. If you accept Scientology without making sure it is true for you, you will become more aberrated. I have done seminars to scientologists on this issue and have gotten a few "Oh, shit!" on this point.
LRH gives several examples in the article of accepting data without personal inspection and how awry that may go. There is no shortage of invitation for personal integrity in this article:
"Any quarrel you may have with theory is something that only you can resolve. Is the theory correct, or isn't it correct? Only you can answer that; it cannot be answered for you."
And Ron continues his challenge of authoritarianism:
"Authoritarianism is little more than a form of hypnotism. Learning is forced under threat of some form of punishment."
This sounds like the present Church of Scientology. Quite opposite to what Ron asks of a student of Scientology:
"You are asked to examine the subject of Scientology on a critical basis--a very critical basis."
Most scientologists I have asked to read the sentence above goes into some kind of confusion right there. No need to be confused as critical thinking is of course needed to uphold your personal integrity.
"So then we ask you to look at Scientology, study it, question it, and use it as we present it and you will have discovered something for yourself. And in so doing you might well discover a lot more."
And you should of course be able to reject any part of Scientology you do not find is correct upon thorough examination:
"When you have applied it as it should be, and applied as it is taught at the school, and still find it unworkable, it is your privilege to question it and, if you like, reject it."
If you are true to yourself, you cannot help doing good.
|
|
|
|
 Re: How to study Scientology [message #313 is a reply to message #283 ] |
Sun, 08 November 2009 16:58  |
 |
EP - Ethics Particle
Messages: 34
Registered: November 2009
Location: NE USA |
Red |
|
|
Martin wrote on Sun, 08 November 2009 06:36I agree with it completely. Thats why I love Ron.
Excellent perspective.
I agree too, Martin...but with a cautionary note.
Do you recall Ron saying that every angel has two faces? One black and one white - or words to similar effect.
Also, do you recall his warning not to confuse "Ronnie the person" with "Scientology"?
You are a good being and, to me, that shines through in your posting here and there. (yes, I am the same EP!).
Consider the possibility that what of Ron's utterances you assimilate and "love" are those that resonate and are reflected in your own inner mirror.
The old saying about "picking the fly specks out of the pepper" comes to mind.
Assuming pepper is of value, positive, beneficial and laudable - I suggest that beings such as you select out the pepper.
Fly specs are assumed to be worthless crap that sounds and looks as good (or maybe better) than pepper and potentially do damage to others including self.
I suggest that you and most others who post here choose or have chosen the pepper and reject the flyspecs.
Others are not so able or so inclined, in my observation and experience.
I also remember Ron saying that yes, he brought a PC into his (Ron's) universe and became the control center for the pair (auditor+PC) - but only until the PC's control center was re-established under the PC's own control - then (he said) I kick 'em the hell out!).
My question is, what residual "other determinism" could persist after the fact of being "kicked the hell out".
Just random thoughts on a Sunday morning...from your local Ethics Particle. 
ML,
EP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: How to study Scientology [message #2921 is a reply to message #277 ] |
Mon, 07 December 2009 03:01 |
 |
Vinaire
Messages: 601
Registered: November 2009
Location: Tampa Bay |
Blue |
|
|
From ABILITY 90, HOW TO STUDY SCIENTOLOGY:
Quote:"The first thing that a student has to find out for himself and then recognize, is that he is dealing with precision tools here in the courses. It isn't up to someone else to force this piece of information on him. The whole subject of Scientology as far as the student is concerned is as good or bad in direct ratio to his knowledge of it. It is up to a student to find out how precise these tools are. He should, before he starts to discuss, criticize or attempt to improve on the data presented to him, find out for himself whether or not the mechanics of Scientology are as stated, and whether or not it does what has been proposed for it."
I believe there is nothing wrong about discussing, criticizing and working to improve upon Scientology, but this should be attempted after an all out effort to understand Scientology.
A lot of us here are veterans of Scientology. We are not newbies. We are not doing our first course in Scientology. So any conditioning we have been subjected to about not discussing Scientology under any circumstance, should be recognized for what it is.
I have devoted considerable time in understanding Scientology Axiom #1 from the perspective of Vedas, and have finally been able to document my understanding near the end of SCIENTOLOGY AND GOD thread. The discussion on terms such as, God, Brahma, Nirvana and Static has really helped me formulate my understanding. Maybe this understanding will improve further as I get more input on this subject from others.
Others may have a different understanding of Scientology Axiom #1, and that is totally fine. Any understanding must come totally from one's heart. It should be totally integrated within a person with other understandings.
There are very helpful pointers in LRH's materials about Static, but nobody can say for sure what LRH's understanding was, and that their understanding is the same as LRH's understanding.
The point I am making here is that one can only come up with one's own interpretation of LRH's materials. Saying that one's interpretation is exactly the same as LRH would interpret it is very presumptuous. The intention behind such endeavor would most likely be to use authority to make one's interpretation more convincing to others. But why?
One should come up with one's best understanding of LRH's materials and verify it for themselves by making sure it is consistent with the understandings of other LRH materials. This is best accomplished through discussions with those similarly interested in improving their understanding. Any inconsistency would be an indicator of some missing understanding. And through discussions that may be improved.
And finally, it would be the results that would confirm or not confirm the understanding to be correct, and not some authority.
.
|
|
|
| Re: How to study Scientology [message #2941 is a reply to message #2921 ] |
Mon, 07 December 2009 18:58 |
| |
Vinaire
Messages: 601
Registered: November 2009
Location: Tampa Bay |
Blue |
|
|
From ABILITY 90, HOW TO STUDY SCIENTOLOGY:
Quote:"He should make up his mind about each thing that is taught in the school. The procedure, techniques, mechanics and theory. He should ask himself these questions: Does this piece of data exist? Is it true? Does it work? Will it produce the best possible results in the shortest time?
"There are two ways to answer these questions to his own satisfaction: Find them in a preclear or find them in himself. These are fundamentals, and every auditor should undertake to discover them himself, thus raising Scientology above an authoritarian category. It is not sufficient that an instructor stand before him and declare the existence of these. Each and every student must determine for himself whether or not the instructor's statements are true."
So, the above is Scientology data. Is this data contradicted somewhere else in Scientology by Hubbard... even if with some excuse clause?
If not, then how come Scientology has become so authoritarian in the Church of Scientology? Don't tell me it is not authoritarian, because I have personally experienced it. And don't try to convince me either that it became authoritarian after Hubbard's death.
Scientology started to become authoritarian in the 60s and 70s. I would be curious to know if there is Scientology data that contradicts the data in ABILITY 90. Or, if somewhere along the line some hidden data line got introduced.
What happened? Anybody knows?
Was Jihad the excuse?
.
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
