Home Page

woman_park

All Posts

Mathematics

Physics

BOOK: A Scientific Approach to Meditation

BOOK: A Logical Approach to Theoretical Physics

Course on Subject Clearing

KHTK Version of Scientology

Comments on Books

Research Data

.

December 24, 2015 – 5:24 PM Categories: Uncategorized | Comments Off on Home Page

PHOENIX LECTURES: Chapter 17

Project: Hubbard 1954: The Phoenix Lectures

This paper presents Chapter 17 from the book THE PHOENIX LECTURES by L. RON HUBBARD. The contents are from the original publication of this book by The Church of Scientology (1954).

The paragraphs of the original material (in black) are accompanied by brief comments (in color) based on the understanding from Buddhism.  Feedback on these comments is always appreciated.

.

TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION AND PRESENT TIME PROBLEM

Although you discover in examining existence that consideration is senior to all other things, you have in any preclear who is living in the physical universe, who is still associating with a body, an enforced mechanic. In other words, the mechanics of existence are enforced upon him consistently and continually. Therefore, mechanics are much more important to this individual than considerations. He goes on an inversion. He is found not really considering — he is not making a postulate and having something come true — he is trying to figure out who’s to blame — that’s one of the main things he’s trying to do. He’s trying to figure out when that ridge in front of his face is going to go away. He’s waiting until the auditor does something spectacular.

He’s doing a lot of things, but first and foremost he is contactable in the field of mechanics, not in the field of considerations. Considerations are prior to mechanics. This is obvious. But your preclear has gotten to a point where he is inverted on the subject and by his day-to-day living he is closer into contact with mechanics than he is considerations and yet there he is considering.

Well, he’s never going to recover from anything considering. He might figure he’s way out of the trap. He might think he’s way out of it, but as long as we approach the problem as really a purely mechanical problem of a set of convictions rather than considerations, we’ll be successful with the preclear.

Considerations are at the Theta end of the spectrum. Mechanics are at the MEST end of the spectrum. They are part of the same spectrum and they influence each other. Existence is made up of both considerations and mechanics. A person gets increasingly fixated as he goes down the Know-to-Mystery scale. Instead of considering he is operating more by convictions. He is prone to blaming others.

And the first and foremost of his convictions is that it is very aberrative to communicate. This he’s certain of. He may have lots of other certainties, but that one he’s actually very certain of and we discover that the only thing that is punishable in this universe is communication — non-communication is not punishable.

We discover that the inanimate object is not guilty. It was the animate object which was guilty. We discover that the driver who was going faster than the other driver was always to blame.

This, by the way, is not even vaguely true. It’s just the way people look at things to keep them turned around so that they don’t have to take responsibility and make everything disappear.

So, we discover, as we look over this problem, that our preclear is certain that if he communicates, he will be punished. He has communicated in the past. He has tried to talk to people. And he has met with the greatest contribution of psychiatry, for instance, the pre-frontal lobotomy. It would do just as much good to cut up some calves’ brains lying in the butcher’s window, as it would to cut up someone’s brain and psychiatry knows this. They know it very well. They have never made anybody well with pre-frontal lobotomies or trans-orbital leucotomies.

They go on doing it because a psychotic’s condition is desperate, and they compute that they of course have to be desperate in treating it. They have therefore nothing but solid failures behind them. That is not a condemnation. That is just the truth of the matter.

By the way, the only reason they do a pre-frontal lobotomy is — because people can often survive it. That is what is stated in the original case history on this.

Just as long as I’ve mentioned that subject, I might give you a little data on it. The first and original case history of this, and the only case history that’s quoted in psychiatry, is of an idiot blacksmith’s helper who approached the forge, and the forge exploded, and a crowbar flew through the air and drove into his right temple and came out at his left temple. And he survived this. You look in vain in that case history to discover whether anything happened to his idiocy. We find that no change occurred with regard to his idiocy. But a part of his brain had been removed and he did survive, and this is the sole authority to this day for doing prefrontal lobotomies.

In another case they did a pre-frontal lobotomy on a fellow, and they put him on display, and somebody asked him whether he noticed any change in himself as a result of the pre-frontal lobotomy. And he looked very solemnly and somewhat covertly around, and he said, “Yes. I’ve learned to keep my mouth shut.”

So that is the basic lesson anybody learns in this universe. They learn to keep their mouths shut, and it’s the wrong lesson. When in doubt, talk. When in doubt communicate. When in doubt shoot. And you’ll be very successful all the way along the line if you just remember that.

There’s no compromising with this. A thetan is as well off as he can communicate, and he’s no better off than that. And when a restraint comes upon his communication, then he starts to wind up and finish up and that is the end of him. So, our preclear sits there, and he is sure that if he communicates, he’ll be punished. Anything he says will be used against him. They’ve told him so for many lives. Anything that he cares to bring up — he knows that the person he brings it up to is going to make fun of it, going to dive on it, going to challenge him with it and so on. He’s certain of this, and that if he happens to impart any immediate secret of his existence, he knows it will undoubtedly be on the radio by four o’clock that afternoon. So, he will approach a session with considerable diffidence. He will not be sure what he should say. As an extremity of human duress which can be used to illustrate this, let’s take the case of a psychotic. This person had a terrible obsession. It was just a fantastic obsession. He would not talk because he knew that if he said anything, the person he said it to would carefully store it up and wait for the right time to use it against him. And this was all this person would tell you! This person would utter that sentiment in one way or another — it was a one hundred percent psychotic dramatization — but it lay straight across his communication line. This person was utterly insane, could not take care of the body or perform menial tasks or anything else, and yet this person would just go over and over that record — “Well, if I said anything you would store it up and you’d wait for the right time and you’d use it against me.” And then the person would clam up. Try to get him into communication again — he’d go through this same routine.

Well, let me assure you of something, a person doesn’t have to be psychotic to have that basic manifestation in this universe. They’re not even vaguely psychotic and they have it. They adjudicated their own sanity by knowing when to talk and when not to talk, and it starts to peel down to a point where they know. They know when not to talk, and when to talk. And then they know WHEN NOT TO TALK, you see, and when to talk. And then — silence. And that’s the way the cycle goes.

So, don’t for a moment suppose that Step 1 (Get into two-way communication with the preclear) is included as just a handy way to start a session. It’s processing.

Your preclear is accessible ordinarily on the Third Dynamic — groups. This is probably the last dynamic to fold up. They carry a social dynamic all the way through. Processing itself is a Third Dynamic situation, and so is aberration. It’s the thetan plus the body that can bring about an aberrative state. It’s the thetan plus the Sixth Dynamic, the physical universe, that causes a difficulty, and so on.

All right, we have then Two-Way Communication as Step 1 simply because it is the most difficult step. It is the most arduous step. And it is the step which was missed by everybody from the Aesculapians (Roman medicos) to the most recent psychiatry out of Wundt, Leipzig, 1869. Around that time in Germany they got started on the first idea that the mind could be approached on a scientific basis. That was the original premise of psychology, and a good one brought up by a fellow by the name of Wundt. There was nothing wrong with this. It was a good hunch. It has never been followed up by that particular field.

One of his convictions is that it is very aberrative to communicate because he will get punished if he communicates. So, he is very reluctant to talk freely in an auditing session. But the truth is that a person is as well off as he can communicate. Therefore, the first step in auditing is to get into two-way communication with the preclear. It is the most difficult step.

Scientific methodology was actually not, there and then, immediately classified, and if he had sat down and classified scientific methodology at that moment, he would have been all right. But what they did was unregulated, uncontrolled, wildcat experiments, fuddling around collecting enormous quantities of data, which data was supposed to amount to something one day. But that field was never able to do anything in the field of a two-way communication, never knew the parts of communication, and doesn’t to this day. They are more and more “The Only One”. They never solved communication, so they don’t go into communication. They don’t have Step 1.

When we come to psychoanalysis we find that in that field they used various methods — originally Breuer and Freud did — to produce a two-way communication, and then they went all out, and they decided, Gee, if you could just get somebody talking — but their first approach to it was the hypnotist’s and that is a very poor approach and not only a very poor approach, it’s a very inhibitive approach.

If you have ever had anybody as a preclear who had been hypnotized you would appreciate this, for instance, running 8D (8D: Standard Operating Procedure 8D, 1954. Primarily for heavy cases, the goal of this procedure was “to bring the preclear to tolerate any viewpoint.” See The Creation of Human Ability by L. Ron Hubbard.) Running this on “Where would a … be safe?” you could put in “hypnotist”. You’d get some idea of the aberrative nature of hypnotism.

In psychoanalysis they actually didn’t solve two-way communication. They got a system by which somebody simply talked endlessly, and talked, and talked, and talked, and there was no communication from the analyst. You may have seen the cartoon where one analyst is cheerful and he had been so every afternoon at quitting time, and the other analyst said, “My goodness. How can you be so cheerful sitting there all day long listening to those patients?” and the other said, “Who listens?” Psychoanalysis had this idea that if they could just make the person outflow, outflow, outflow, outflow outflow, this would solve it. It doesn’t solve it.

It’s TWO-WAY communication. What success psychoanalysis did have was just due to the fact that they did specialize in trying to get somebody into communication one way or the other. But they again didn’t have any idea of the anatomy of communication.

And we move on forward to various thoughts and philosophic endeavors on this subject and we discover that an individual very rarely is found in a good state of communication when he sits down on the couch and I don’t care who this person is, they’re just not in a good state of communication. They’re either obsessively communicating, or they’re inhibited — they haven’t got a good balance on this subject. And you take the most average preclear in the world, he’ll give you ordinarily just social responses. You say “How are you?” and he’ll say, “I am fine”, Forty-five minutes later the oddity is this person says to you, “I feel terrible”. You first got a social response, and then the preclear answered the question. The question sometimes, if you’ll notice it carefully, will come up as non-sequitur entirely, and, for instance, forty-five minutes after you ask him how he is he tells you. And the gap in between is filled with social responses. It’s just trained social response — a little machine. So that isn’t two-way communication with the preclear at all, is it? You’re talking to social machinery.

Well, you’ve done this all too often, much longer than you should have, in plain social activities. You went around to ask somebody about a loan or ask him about something or other, and you went on talking, and this person went on talking, and actually you were not talking to anybody and then you wake up with a great shock to discover that you have just been arguing with somebody, or been trying to make somebody be better, be nicer to you, be kinder to their neighbors or something of the sort, and after a long dissertation on the subject, and you think you’ve had a two-way communication with this person, he comes up with some completely disrelated remark, although he seems to have been agreeing with you. He seemed to have said “Yes, that’s fine, I’ll be a better boy,” or something of the sort. You just never reached an agreement, because the actual truth of the matter is if you’d reached an agreement with him he would have been a better person. You weren’t talking to anybody. You were talking to some social machinery. Well, that’s just in the social world.

How about an auditor? Should he be able to spot this? Well he should, but he would never spot it if he didn’t recognize that there was something very definitely there to spot, and that is: who’s talking? Are we talking to the preclear? Or are we talking to an education from Harvard? Are we talking to the preclear, or are we talking to Mama? It’s a nice thing to have a very, very high on the Tone Scale attitude toward preclears, but there’s one point there where the column (Chart of Attitudes) reverses, and that’s where it’s Trust at the top and Distrust at the bottom. When you’re working preclears, you keep with all the top buttons of the Chart of Attitudes except that one — you just reverse that column. It goes right straight across — Distrust is the top for an auditor as far as a preclear’s concerned, and it’s a remarkable thing how many times you can actually crack a case if you’ll just simply say, “How are you doing that?” or “What are you doing?” “Who is talking?” “Did you do that?” “Who touched the wall?” “How did you do that?” Once in a while you’ll find there’s a File Clerk (File Clerk: Dianetic auditor’s slang for the mechanism of the mind which acts as a data monitor. Auditors could get instant or “flash” answers direct from the “file clerk” to aid in contacting incidents) or something of the sort and he’s taking every response he gives you as a flash answer from the File Clerk. If he’s been trained in Dianetics he will sometimes do this to the exclusion of any answer himself. Well, these are social responses, and that is not a two-way communication. That’s two-way communication between you and a circuit maybe, or between you and a machine, but it’s not a two-way communication between you and the preclear, and it says specifically in Step 1 that we begin a two-way communication with the preclear. Well, how many ways could there be to start a two-way communication with the preclear?

One of the ways to do it is to talk about his problems. He’s fairly interested in these, and you get away from the social responses.

The hypnotist’s approach is a very poor approach because it is quite inhibitive. Also, simply getting a person to talk endlessly doesn’t solve it. A person usually gives trained social responses instead of communicating. One way to bypass the social machinery is to get flash responses. Here a “file clerk” type mechanism comes into play. Another way is to talk about his problems. He is fairly interested in these.

And he’s there because he’s being a problem, so we get step 2 as an assist to Step 1. Step 2: PRESENT TIME PROBLEM. But of course, Step 2 is more important than that. You sometimes miss on a preclear by processing him when he’s dog tired or he’s emotionally upset or something very bad has just occurred, and he wants to be processed so that he can run away from it, and if you don’t ask whether or not he has any Present Time Problems, you’ll miss sometimes, and have a whole session, or two or three sessions, wasted. I remember processing somebody who seemed to be rather frantic, and he finally came up with an astonishing fact. The case was not making progress, you see, and I got very interested in this and the person would not, just would not give me any clue. And I just kept pounding it and pounding it and talking about it any upset the person had in his current life — you know, yesterday or today, or something that’s going to happen tomorrow — I just kept talking about it, you see, and saying, “Is there anything that is occurring that I should know about,” and so on, because the behavior of the case just simply said that this case is so restive and so upset that he just doesn’t seem to listen to my auditing orders and he seems to be distracted all the time by something, and certainly this person is either completely off his base, or he’s really a psycho, or he has some very bedeviling Present Time Problem. And finally, the guy got the communication and gave me an answer. That processing session series was being very badly interrupted because he was being sued for divorce. He was being sued for divorce over the period I’d been processing him. And he would leave there and go down and talk to his lawyers and he wanted to keep this very secret, and he thought there was something very horrible about this, and so he wouldn’t even tell his auditor about it. Now, you see, he’s punished for communicating, and thus we get right back to that. He doesn’t impart the data about what’s going on because he’d be punished for communicating.

Occasionally you will run into someone for whom medicine could do something. The person has an acute illness of one sort or another and is so afraid of any possible treatment that would be offered to him medically, because medical treatment may not be particularly kind, that he has not told anybody about it.

This again will be giving him a sufficient Present Time Problem that he would not gain well in auditing and is the most important reason why you do not audit a person who should be getting a condition handled medically which can so be handled. But it is the fact that in this universe he is punished for communicating that makes this something to watch for and to see to it that a medical situation is handled medically before you do any auditing.

Step 2 is present time problem so we can use step 2 to help us with step 1. But there could be a problem the preclear may want to keep to himself. But you can guess from his behavior that there is something going on, which he is not telling you. It could be an embarrassing situation, or even a situation that requires medical handling.

In order for any gain or release to take place by reason of communication alone on any kind of subject there has to be a two-way communication, not one-way communication. Therefore, the neatest trick in the whole book of tricks of auditing is knowing how to start and continue a two-way communication. It is dependent in its skill on the auditor’s ability to grant beingness and actually talk on both sides of the conversation.

Communication is opened first and foremost by any sensory perception. Any sensory perception. Get the preclear to touch something — you have opened communication with the preclear. If you could take his hand and he could register the pressure of your hand on his hand, and this in the case of a semi-conscious person is very workable, you would be communicating with the preclear. A two-way communication doesn’t have anything to do with — and quite incidentally when it does — with words. It’s a communication. You’re there. He’s there. His trouble is inhibited communication, and the trouble you’re going to run into is getting a two-way communication started. Any perception can be used in a two-way communication. Just sight is enough. If he simply registers the fact that you are there in the room with him — if he’ll just look at you — that is a communication. If we define communication by: awareness across a distance, no matter how minute that distance is between the preclear and the auditor, we discover that starting a two-way communication is actually much easier.

Continuing with examples — “the worst it gets” type of situations — not that these are what you’ll be auditing — if you want to start a fairly perfect communication, of course, you would simply physically duplicate what the preclear’s doing. He’s lying still — you just lie down and lie still. You’d be surprised how odd this will seem to him after a little while. He’ll get real curious about you. He’ll go into communication with you. He picks up the stool and he heaves it at the door with a terrific crash. You pick up the stool and heave it at the door with a terrific crash. That’s a bottom-scale level of entrance into communication — mimicry — because of course duplication enters into the formula.

But if your preclear is sitting there in complete silence, do you think that if you pour out a great flow of words you’re going into communication with this preclear? No, because he’s putting out a communication already — silence. If you suddenly admit that as a communication, it will disturb him a little bit, and it’s likely to stir him up into a communication. If you will sit there silent while he sits there silent, sooner or later you’re going to go into communication. You can make a preclear enter into communication with you simply by doing whatever the preclear is doing.

A two-way communication can be started through any perception and not just through words. Any perception can be used in a two-way communication. In the worst case, mimicry may be used. You can make a preclear enter into communication with you simply by doing whatever the preclear is doing.

Now it’s necessary for you to turn around and have the preclear register a communication back. It’s just as important for the auditor to go into communication with the preclear as it is for the preclear to go into communication with the auditor, and the auditor can do it by mimicry because he knows how. It’s harder for the preclear to do it. Time spent at the beginning of a session just getting a two-way communication going until you really know you’re talking to the preclear and he’s talking to you is some of the best time you ever spent.

Opening Procedure 8-C is a considerable assist to this. Improvement of communication is the keynote of all auditing.

.

FINAL COMMENTS

The first situation you may encounter in an auditing session is that the person is very reluctant to talk freely. Instead he gives you trained social responses. Improvement of communication is the keynote of all auditing. Therefore, the first step in auditing is to get into two-way communication with the preclear.

A person is usually interested in talking about his problems. That may provide the entrance point to establishing two-way communication. But there could be a problem going on in present time with the preclear that he may not be willing to talk about, such as a divorce proceeding, or a medical situation. His behavior will give you clues to this. The trick then is to grant beingness and actually talk on both sides of the conversation.

A two-way communication can be started through any perception and not just through words. In the worst case, mimicry may be used. You can make a preclear enter into communication with you simply by doing whatever the preclear is doing. Time spent at the beginning of a session just getting a two-way communication going until you really know you’re talking to the preclear and he’s talking to you is some of the best time you ever spent.

.

March 27, 2020 – 7:00 AM Categories: Scientology | Comments (2)

Scientology/KHTK Axioms

Reference: KHTK Version of Scientology

The Axioms 1 – 10

The Axioms 11 – 20

The Axioms 21 – 30

The Axioms 31 – 40

The Axioms 41 – 50

The Axioms 51 – 58

.

March 26, 2020 – 3:20 PM Categories: KHTK | Post a comment

The Axioms 51 – 58

Reference: KHTK Version of Scientology

In the Scientology Axioms, written by L. Ron Hubbard in 1954, we have a condensation and a recapitulation of all the earlier Axioms and Logics, boiled down to a more practical, more fundamental and more forthright list. They compare best, perhaps, to the axioms of geometry; they are certainly as self–evident as that. But the axioms of geometry are really much cruder than the Scientology Axioms, since geometry proves itself by itself and the Axioms of Scientology prove themselves by all of life.

This paper presents Scientology Axioms 51 – 58 and the corresponding KHTK versions.

.

AXIOM FIFTY-ONE: Postulates and live communication not being MEST and being senior to MEST can accomplish change in MEST without bringing about a persistence of MEST. Thus auditing can occur.

Postulates and live communications are at the Theta end of the spectrum. Condensed energy is at the MEST end of the spectrum. It is silly to say that Theta is senior to MEST because both are part of a natural spectrum of energy. The problem occurs when theta condenses as a fixation.

Theta brings animation to MEST. It can do so only as long as Theta itself does not become fixated.

KHTK AXIOM 51: Postulates and live communication can bring animation to MEST as long as they themselves do not become fixated. Thus, auditing can occur.

.

AXIOM FIFTY-TWO: MEST persists and solidifies to the degree that it is not granted life.

MEST is persisting naturally. It stops being animated in the normal manner when Theta becomes fixated. We may call this as MEST becoming “solidified”.

KHTK AXIOM 52: MEST solidifies to the degree that it is not granted life.

.

AXIOM FIFTY-THREE: A stable datum is necessary to the alignment of data.

A stable datum is something already determined, and which is staying stable while other changes are happening around it. The background context acts as the stable data that helps align these changes.

KHTK AXIOM 53: A stable datum is necessary to the alignment of data.

.

AXIOM FIFTY-FOUR: A tolerance of confusion and an agreed–upon stable datum on which to align the data in a confusion are at once necessary for a sane reaction on the eight dynamics. This defines sanity.

The eight dynamics themselves act as stable datum that helps align data. A stable datum reduces confusion by aligning data. When people agree on the same stable datum then the confusion among them reduces and the interaction improves toward being more sane. One’s culture, religion, beliefs and fixed ideas act as stable data,

KHTK AXIOM 54: A tolerance of confusion and an agreed–upon stable datum on which to align the data in a confusion are at once necessary for a sane reaction on the eight dynamics. 

.

AXIOM FIFTY-FIVE: The cycle of action is a consideration. Create, survive, destroy, the cycle of action accepted by the genetic entity, is only a consideration which can be changed by the thetan making a new consideration or different action cycles.

The cycle of action in this universe is create, survive destroy. It is a very fundamental law of this universe.

KHTK AXIOM 55: The cycle of action of create, survive, destroy is fundamental to this universe.

.

AXIOM FIFTY-SIX: Theta brings order to chaos.

COROLLARY: Chaos brings disorder to theta.

The innate impulse underlying this universe have evolved this universe from raw energy to what we see today. This evolution is definitely in the direction of greater order.

KHTK AXIOM 56: The innate impulse underlying this universe is evolving the universe toward greater order.

.

AXIOM FIFTY-SEVEN: Order manifests when communication, control and havingness are available to theta.
DEFINITIONS:
Communication: the interchange of ideas across space.
Control: positive postulating, which is intention, and the execution thereof.
Havingness: that which permits the experience of mass and pressure.

Order manifests itself as the elements of this universe are increasingly aligned to achieve greater continuity, harmony and consistency. All elements are activated by their innate impulse and have the ability to align.

Alignment is accomplished through communication, control and havingness, where
Communication: the interchange of ideas across space.
Control: positive postulating, which is intention, and the execution thereof.
Havingness: that which permits the experience of mass and pressure.

KHTK AXIOM 57: Order manifests when communication, control and havingness are available to theta.

.

AXIOM FIFTY-EIGHT: Intelligence and judgment are measured by the ability to evaluate relative importances.
COROLLARY: The ability to evaluate importances and unimportances is the highest faculty of logic.
COROLLARY: Identification is a monotone assignment of importance.
COROLLARY: Identification is the inability to evaluate differences in time, location, form, composition or importance.

Ability to evaluate relative importances require the ability to recognize differences, similarities and identities and then aligning the data to ensure continuity, harmony and consistency. This is intelligence and judgment respectively.

KHTK AXIOM 58: Intelligence and judgment are measured by the ability to evaluate relative importances.

.

The above is a summary of states of being which can be used to create, cause to persist, or destroy.

Having agreed to the mechanics and retaining the agreements, the thetan can yet make innumerable postulates which by their contradiction and complexity, create, cause to persist, and destroy human behavior.

March 26, 2020 – 3:08 PM Categories: KHTK | Post a comment

PHOENIX LECTURES: Chapter 16

Project: Hubbard 1954: The Phoenix Lectures

This paper presents Chapter 16 from the book THE PHOENIX LECTURES by L. RON HUBBARD. The contents are from the original publication of this book by The Church of Scientology (1954).

The paragraphs of the original material (in black) are accompanied by brief comments (in color) based on the understanding from Buddhism.  Feedback on these comments is always appreciated.

.

AXIOMS (Part 4)

Having these Axioms, we are now particularly interested in this whole subject of truth and its actual use in auditing. We see immediately that any problem of any character or scope is the basic business of a Scientologist. If you have someone who wants to know about solutions, you had certainly better give him not a solution to a problem but the solution to problems, and that of course would be a basic and ultimate truth. Well, if you can describe a basic and ultimate truth, and describe it exactly, you have no problem at all in solving problems.

We see that failure to discover truth brings about stupidity. A person begins to believe he’s stupid if he can’t As-is.

We see that the discovery of truth would bring about an As-is-ness, by actual experiment, and thus we see that an ultimate truth would have no time, place or form. Whatever we had there would simply disappear if we discovered an ultimate truth. The ultimate truth is a perfect duplicate and therefore a Static. And, operationally, to achieve a Static would be to make a perfect duplicate.

We see that a lie as we understand it is an alteration of time, place, event or form, and that only lies persist.

We have to have a basic postulate, and then another postulate, before we get time. Two postulates. We can’t have time with one postulate unless it is the postulate that there will be time. That could be one postulate. But normally in operation we find that two postulates are necessary to achieve time.

Now which one of these postulates is going to persist if the two postulates deny each other: the second one is going to persist, because it is the time postulate.

Lying becomes an Alter-is-ness and becomes stupidity. In other words, we don’t discover where the thing is, we don’t discover exactly how it is, so we can’t unmock it, and there we are. The only thing that we can do with it possibly is to Not-is it or Alter-is it some more or do what a Black V does — just stir it around and hope it will disappear. He doesn’t As-is it. It doesn’t disappear.

Oddly enough, lying will develop into a stupidity. It also develops into a mystery — into this blackness which individuals are so upset about. It’s just an alteration of time, place, event or form after the fact of its having been created.

There would be two kinds of lie here. A mechanical lie does not lead to blackness. Mechanical lie: we mockup some space, and we put an object in that space and then we move it. The moment we’ve moved it we’ve lied about it. We’ve said it’s over there when as a matter of fact it was created in the first location. Now in view of the fact that there is only consideration this of course would bring about mechanically a lie. It doesn’t disappear, it doesn’t do anything peculiar simply by moving it around. The mere handling of energy does not bring about a stupidity. It takes another consideration than simply moving something to bring about an occlusion.

We are looking at the subject of truth and its use in auditing of the mind and subject clearing. If you are interested in truth, you must attain a viewpoint from which you can see things as they are. The ultimate truth is seeing things as they are without filters, because a lie is the filter made up of our considerations that we interpose.

Hubbard is assuming that if we get rid of all our filters (considerations), there would be nothing left to see. Everything will reduce to a Static. In other words, anything that could be considered (including the observer) will simply reduce to a potential state.

But that is just theoretical speculation. There is a universe out there. We postulate and devise hypothesis to explain that universe. Our understanding of the universe is as good as our postulates and theories duplicate the universe. Religions have always proposed different hypotheses and theories to explain the universe.

According to the best theory, the basic substance of this universe is energy that operates on its own impulse. It has a large spectrum from thought to matter. Time is the duration of that energy. This duration increases as energy condenses from thought to matter. A postulate is a thought energy that hardly has a duration. It does not persist if it duplicates the universe, but if it does not duplicate, it persists as an idea to be worked upon.

If two postulates deny each other, we may not know which postulate is the first and which is the second, but both are persisting as part of an anomaly in our understanding, which does not duplicate the universe. There is a lie underlying that anomaly. We have taken that lie for granted. It is an ALTER-IS-NESS or NOT-IS-NESS of some aspect of this universe. We discover it by following the anomalies in data. And when we discover it, the misunderstanding vanishes, and we duplicate the universe better.

When a person cannot even see the anomalies then it becomes difficult for him to discover the lie. He cannot AS-IS the situation. He is stuck with the lie. This develops into stupidity and mystery. That lie is an alteration and denial of time, place, form and event. ALTER-IS-NESS is a form of a lie, but it does not bring about stupidity, but NOT-IS-NESS does. A person NOT-ISES to justify some fixation, and that fixation is the cause of stupidity. Miracles are a form of mystery and stupidity because something about the universe is not understood, but it is explained away.

Now, anything to persist must avoid As-is-ness, and thus anything to persist, really to persist, must contain a lie. And we get the next Axiom:

IS-NESS that is persisting is being filtered through one’s considerations. It will be perceived more clearly if those filters are removed. These filters avoid AS-IS-NESS in order to persist. So, they are like lies.

AXIOM THIRTY-NINE: LIFE POSES PROBLEMS FOR ITS OWN SOLUTION.

Now what do we find here, in a problem? We find something which is persisting, the As-is-ness of which cannot readily be obtained and would be the definition of a problem. Now to solve that problem it would be necessary to get its As-is-ness. Well, how do we prevent something from being As-ised, in other words vanished? We introduce a lie into it.

There are problems in life. Some problems get solved. Others persist. The problems that persist are difficult to AS-IS. In other words, in these cases, it is difficult to see what is really there. Something is preventing AS-IS-NESS. That something is a lie and underlying that is a fixation.

KHTK AXIOM 39: Life poses problems for its own solution.

AXIOM FORTY: ANY PROBLEM, TO BE A PROBLEM, MUST CONTAIN A LIE. IF IT WERE TRUTH, IT WOULD UNMOCK.

When the preclear is being a problem, we know very well that there’s a lie somewhere on the track that he’s trying to obtain the As-is-ness of. It’s not necessarily his lie, but it certainly is a lie. And under Axiom Forty we get:

An “unsolvable problem” would have the greatest persistence.

It would also contain the greatest number of altered facts. To make a problem, one must introduce Alter-is-ness.

In other words, this problem must have been moved and shifted and shoved around considerably to be unsolvable.

We come across problems that appear unsolvable. We have to start with some postulate to solve such a problem. If a postulate is letting us nowhere close to a solution, then that postulate is not the truth. We need to come up with a different postulate. Such trial and error may finally lead to overcoming some fixation and finding the lie. The truth would be the solution.

KHTK AXIOM 40: Any problem, to be a problem, must contain a lie. If it were truth, it would unmock.

AXIOM FORTY-ONE: THAT INTO WHICH ALTER-IS-NESS IS INTRODUCED BECOMES A PROBLEM.

Any time you Alter-is something you’ve got a problem on your hands.

This whole universe, then, is a problem. Therefore, this whole universe must contain a lie to go on persisting the way it does. It certainly does contain Alter-is. It certainly does contain a lie. It contains a variety of lies about its creation, and there are all sorts of things about this universe which cause its persistence, and all of those things boil down to the one fact that it must be based upon a lie and it must be very definitely altered.

Axiom Forty-one tells us that it was alteration which brought the preclear into a problem, thus we find any child who has moved extensively, who has had his home changed, who has been shoved around to various parts of the world, eventually becomes a problem, first to the environment and then to himself.

Any time you ALTER-IS something you add another wrinkle to IS-NESS. This may generate or worsen a problem. The universe is not a problem, but its altered view is. We postulate that it was created. We don’t know if that postulate is correct.

When we say that the universe is persisting, it is actually our view of the universe that is persisting. It comes down to examining our considerations about the universe for ALTER-IS. It is the ALTER-IS we are not aware of, which causes a problem.

KHTK AXIOM 41: That into which alter-is-ness is introduced becomes a problem.

AXIOM FORTY-TWO: MEST (MATTER, ENERGY, SPACE, TIME) PERSISTS BECAUSE IT IS A PROBLEM.

It is a problem because it contains Alter-is-ness.

Your physicist is busily at work trying to unmock it but he is unmocking it by Not-is-ness. He’s using force to alter force, and because he keeps altering it, it all naturally just gets worse and worse. He will solve nothing with an atom bomb. He will simply make things go worse, more complicated, more confused, more dispersed. The atom bomb is a dead-end track and is folly, it is great folly.

If an atom bomb were introduced into a war the number of particles and the amount of MEST which would be altered, we would discover immediately, would have introduced a great number of lies into the situation, it would have deteriorated the society and everything else. If we were foolish enough, for instance, to atom bomb Russia, or if Russia were foolish enough to atom bomb the United States, enough confusion would have been introduced into the cultures of earth so that probably there would be no other choice but to sink into a barbarism, in the absence of an understanding of life itself.

MEST is a problem because it is an altered view of the universe. Scientology postulates that MEST (physical) universe produced by the Theta universe. This could be an ALTER-IS. KHTK, therefore, postulates that Theta-MEST is a single universe.

The physicist has been focusing only the physical aspect of the universe. He has been ignoring the innate impulse that underlies energy. The atom bomb simply releases this impulse in an uncontrolled, destructive manner. The same impulse is better controlled in the computer technology.

KHTK AXIOM 42: MEST (matter, energy, space, time) persists because its Theta aspect is being ignored.

AXIOM FORTY-THREE: TIME IS THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF UNTRUTH.

Time states the untruth of consecutive considerations.

I call your attention to interest, as an interesting thing to observe. There are two classes of interest, and we want to know why we’re thinking about this in terms of time, and this is because time is the basic lie behind all lies. We believe there are consecutive moments. We see consecutive motions and this all very pleasant — we agree to this — and it’s only when we have masked them with some vicious intent that we really get a kick-back from the progress of time.

But we discover here in the matter of interest that we have two facets: one is “interested”, and the other is “interesting”.

A thetan is interested, and an object is interesting. A thetan is not interesting. He is interested. And when a person becomes terribly interesting, he has lots of problems, believe me. That is the chasm that is crossed. That is the chasm, which is crossed by all of your celebrities, anybody who is foolish enough to become famous. He crosses over from being interested in life to being interesting, and people who are interesting are really no longer interested in life. It’s very baffling to some young fellow why he can’t make some beautiful girl interested in him. Well, she is not interested, she is interesting.

Time denotes duration of energy. This duration increases as the energy condenses from thought to matter. As a result, less condensed energy appears to be in motion compared to more condensed energy. We incorrectly focus on the duration associated with matter (condensed energy) only as the characteristic of time.

It seems that as energy gets more condensed it becomes “interesting”. A less condensed energy appears to be “interested”. When a person becomes more “interesting” he has become more condensed in his considerations. Fixations come about as considerations become condensed. The person then becomes more of a problem.

Consecutive moments appear only because of the play of energy of different condensations. A shock in time is a sudden shift in the gradient of energy.

KHTK AXIOM 43: Fixation is the primary source of untruth.

Fixation condenses consecutive considerations thus generating untruth.

AXIOM FORTY-FOUR: THETA (THE STATIC) HAS NO LOCATION IN MATTER, ENERGY, SPACE, OR TIME. IT IS CAPABLE OF CONSIDERATION.

We have put it right in there again just to drive it home well. There’s no time in this Static. Time is a lie.

Time can be postulated by the Static but is only a consideration and thereafter a thetan gets the idea that he is persisting across a span of time, and he is not.

He is not persisting. Objects are going across time, and energies and spaces are changing, but he is not. At no time does he actually change. He has to consider he is out of his head before he can be out of his head.

A Step V, or Black Five, is quite interesting in this regard. He is always thinking the auditor’s going to reach in and pull him out of his head. He’s waiting for something else to do it! Of course, you could probably hypnotize him and tell him that he was, and he’d probably react in various ways, but he has to say, “I am now out of my head,” and then he will be out of his head. But “waiting to see” whether or not he’s out of his head is complete nonsense. The only way that he can get anything done, is to consider that it is done, or consider that that is the condition which exists.

Static is the potential state of the Theta-MEST spectrum. Theta is thought energy part of the spectrum. It has vibration. It is not the same thing as Static. This conflation between Theta and Static is the key error in the hypothesis of Hubbard.

Time is the duration of energy. It is extremely small for thought energy. Considerations do not persist unless they are anomalous with the universe and are waiting to be resolved. A Thetan is the sum total of persisting considerations. This persistence (fixation) becomes a problem when it is not resolved. A persisting condition of the thetan is fixation on the body. The only way not to be “inside the body” is simply not to have any attention on the body.

KHTK AXIOM 44: Theta is the thought energy aspect of the Theta-MEST spectrum that constitutes considerations.

AXIOM FORTY-FIVE: THETA CAN CONSIDER ITSELF TO BE PLACED, AT WHICH MOMENT IT BECOMES PLACED, AND TO THAT DEGREE A PROBLEM.

Any time we fall away from Axiom One, which is repeated as Axiom Forty-four, we discover that we have less of a Static than before. In other words, we just place this Static, and it’s less of a Static. A thetan, then, can have a problem, just by being placed. Quite in addition to that he ceases to be quite as interested.

He himself, placing himself, can get away with it. This isn’t very hard for him to do. And he can perceive from this new place, and so forth, but as long as he is placed, he will be less than the Static. Just remember that. He is to that degree a problem.

When Theta is not Static, it is manifesting itself. In other words, its innate impulses are firing away. A thetan can have a problem only when it gets fixated and cannot resolve that fixation. He is then being more interesting than interested.

But if he can be fixated and un-fixated at will then there is no problem. He may be somewhat of a problem only during the period he is fixated.

KHTK AXIOM 45: Theta can consider itself to be fixated, at which moment it becomes fixated, and to that degree a problem.

AXIOM FORTY-SIX: THETA CAN BECOME A PROBLEM BY ITS CONSIDERATIONS BUT THEN BECOMES MEST.

A problem is to some degree MEST, MEST is a problem.

What is this MEST? We find that an interested thetan is a thetan, but an interesting thetan has become MEST. What is MEST? Well, it’s actually simply a composite of energies and particles and spaces which are agreed upon and which are looked at.

We have the difference between inflow and outflow. A thetan who is being interested is simply outflowing. Interested — outflowing. Interesting — inflowing. He wants the attention of others to flow in to him: interesting. That’s MEST. Attention of others flows to it. That doesn’t tell you that all MEST is is a series of trapped Thetans.

It says that it is a type of life which is being interesting, as opposed to something which is being interested in it.

Now, Number Forty-six: Theta can become a problem by its considerations, but then becomes MEST, is followed by this, that MEST is a problem, and will always be considered a problem, and is nothing else but a problem. MEST is that form of theta which is a problem. That’s all. Therefore, it is that form of theta which has a lie introduced into it. And so, of course, it is a problem.

When Theta is kinetic then, of course, it is energy of very low frequency, and there is corresponding space and time. But there is no matter.

As energy condenses, it starts to acquire properties that make it observable in terms of interactions. That makes it “interesting”. And that which is observing is the uncondensed thought energy. So, that thought energy is being “interested”.

Uncondensed energy can flow around very rapidly but condensed energy cannot flow or move that fast. That means problem is characterized by lack of motion and flexibility.

KHTK AXIOM 46: Theta becomes a problem by losing its motion and flexibility due to condensation.

AXIOM FORTY-SEVEN: THETA CAN RESOLVE PROBLEMS.

Resolution of problem means reversing the process of condensation. It is lessening the rate of vibration. It is calming down. It is becoming less fixated and more flexible. That process is occurring in the field of computers and robotics; but it is very much in its infancy.

KHTK AXIOM 47: Theta can resolve problems.

AXIOM FORTY-EIGHT: LIFE IS A GAME WHEREIN THETA AS THE STATIC SOLVES THE PROBLEMS OF THETA AS MEST.

Now that means that theta is the Static, and theta is the object? Yes, indeed. It can be both ways.

It all depends on which one is being interested and which one is being interesting. And we find that a preclear gets more and more solid the more interesting he becomes, and the more problem he becomes, the more problems he has and the more figuring he does on his problems, the more solid he is going to get.

“Theta as static” is the uncondensed energy. “Theta as MEST” is condensed energy. All energy is connected. The uncondensed energy can decondense the condensed energy. This is what happens when we help each other.

Energy get more condensed by being interesting and focused on itself. This is called interiorization. It decondenses by being interested in its environment and focused on others. This is called exteriorization.

KHTK AXIOM 48: Life is a game wherein Theta as un-condensed energy solves the problems of Theta as condensed energy.

AXIOM FORTY-NINE: TO SOLVE ANY PROBLEM IT IS ONLY NECESSARY TO BECOME THETA, THE SOLVER, RATHER THAN THETA, THE PROBLEM.

That is a very, very important Axiom. That tells you why SOP 8C Opening Procedure works. It works because the main form of theta which we find desirable, which has mobility, which has freedom, which is happy, which is cheerful, which has all those qualities on the top of the Chart of Attitudes is an observer of problems and a solver of problems. So if you get somebody to simply look around the environment, he will cease to be a problem and will become the solver of problems. That’s all. Just looking.

Get him to look around and recognize a few problems and he will feel better. Somebody then who is worrying about himself constantly, well, he’s all mixed up in a problem and his affinity is at a closure with this problem. He’s having an awful time. Well let’s take this and turn it around the other way and let’s have him observe himself as a problem, and we get that part of the process which is “Problems and Solutions”. And naturally, if we asked a thetan to be a solution often enough, he would eventually become a Static. That’s all. If we asked him to observe problems long enough, he would simply become a Static. In other words, he would go out of it both ways.

A Thetan could become a problem, more of a problem, more of a problem, more of a problem, more and more and more and more and more and more — static. You see he could go “out the bottom”.

Or, he could go: less of a problem, less of a problem, less, less — static. He could go either way. So there’s no avoiding it, you’re going to survive anyway, and so are your preclears, but we’re going to have a better world doing it.

The SOP 8C works by getting a person to looking at the environment and getting interested in others rather than have attention on oneself and be interesting.

The key point is extroversion. One may even look at oneself from an extroverted viewpoint. He can do that by viewing oneself as a problem in the context of the present time environment and by not getting sucked into the mind in its past.

KHTK AXIOM 49: To solve any problem it is only necessary to become extroverted in one’s attention rather than introverted.

AXIOM FIFTY: THETA AS MEST MUST CONTAIN CONSIDERATIONS WHICH ARE LIES.

In other words, there isn’t a single piece of MEST in the world which isn’t to some degree lying.

Looking at that, then, we find that the only crime that you could possibly commit in this universe is being there. It doesn’t matter where. This is the only crime that you could commit. And this is all your parents objected to, and this is all the preclear objects to when you’re auditing him, and he growls at you. They add tremendous significances into this, but all they object to is being there. Now if you ran SOP 8C, Opening Procedure, and you ran it very, very definitely with that postulate: to get the fact that the wall is there. Get the fact that the chair is there, that something else is there, etc., you’d be likely to knock your preclear flat at some point. I am not advising you to use this form of Opening Procedure. It’s a violent process. If you get almost any preclear and just have him stand in the middle of the room, and say “get the idea”, to that empty space out in front of you there, “that it’s there”, it’s there, it’s there — his mother will show up and eight or nine of his wives and all sorts of other things will show up all the way down the line. He’ll have all kinds of people standing in front of him. They’re all “there”. But that’s the only crime a thetan can commit. It’s a lie, you see. That theta can be THERE is a lie, and that’s the only bad thing that anybody has ever done is to be there. Now, that’s all, actually, that the body is doing. He’s got a body and he’s visible. He is being there. And we must have introduced a lie. And the basic lie which is introduced is Time.

It is interesting to note that it is the second postulate which persists, because persist means time, and it’s the second postulate which introduces time, and this becomes elementary. Now let’s look at this one: let’s take this fellow who’s awfully sick. He’s terribly sick. Boy, is he a problem. He’s a problem to himself, a problem to his family, and a problem to his auditor. He is a problem. He’s terrific.

You know that he must have had an original postulate that he was well before he could make the second postulate that he was sick. And you know the postulate that he was sick must have denied the postulate that he was well, and so his original sickness was a falsity and he knew it at the time he made it — he actually knew it well. He knew — when he said he was sick that day to keep from going to school—that it was a lie. He knew it was a lie and he got a persistence of the sickness and now here he is eighty-nine years of age and all crippled up and we find out that the basic postulate was the fact that he was well. How could sickness ever get any power except through wellness?

Now we look underneath every lie to find out that it was the truth — the Static itself — which gave it power. The lie has no power itself because it is a perversion. Persistence has no power that is not based on the Static itself. So, we have the basic lineup at all times and in all places, that the lie is empowered by truth. Truth must have existed, and a good condition or quality must have existed prior to a bad condition or quality.

As we study the problem of goodness and badness in the world, we find out that we must be studying the second postulate, because that is all that persists.

Now let’s take a situation where something is persisting — and it’s good. We could say that that looks as if it must have been based upon a prior postulate which was bad. But you can’t make a prime postulate which is a lie. If you’ll just get the idea that there are no postulates, that you’ve made no postulates of any kind, that there are no postulates which have been made — now make a postulate. That would be a prime postulate. That postulate can’t be a lie. Now make a second postulate denying the one you just made. That’s a lie. Now which one of these two is going to persist? Of course, the second one. And it is going to get its power from the first postulate.

It would not matter what the prime postulate was. That is not the point, here. We’re not going on the basis of badness or goodness. A consideration is a consideration.

Now, do we mean reach back on the track, and find these postulates? — reach back and run it out with straight-wire? No, because there is no time, and all address to the past — every address to the past and every address to the future actually is validating a lie. There’s only now. There’s never been anything else but now. There’s a consistent change and a consistent series of postulates going on which give us a continuance of now, but the continuance of now is a lie.

You can move objects around, and that’s quite honest, that’s not bad. But we’re looking at two kinds of lie here, and we discover that when we are trying to make a condition change, we simply have to postulate, as though it exists in present time, the opposite condition. So somebody who hates the human race — he must have loved them desperately by prior postulate. There’s no hatred like that which can exist between two brothers or a nation torn asunder in war. Well, that’s because they loved each other so well, you see. And so they can hate with violence. But what is their hatred depending on but the fact that they loved each other? So if we have somebody hating madly somebody named Bill — we would say, “Now, get the idea of loving Bill.” Grrrrr, he’d go. “Now, get the idea of loving Bill.” Grrrr. “Get the idea of loving Bill.” Grr. “Get the idea of loving Bill.” “Well, he’s not too bad a guy.” We wouldn’t necessarily restore love, but we’d certainly run out the hatred for Bill.

MEST is the energy that is persisting because it is condensed and focused on itself. This is the situation with the body. Theta is activating the body through considerations, but these considerations come and go quickly. None of them persist.

But fixations persist. A person who is interiorized has his attention fixed on his body and on the facsimiles in his mind. SOP 8C is simply pulling the person’s attention away from himself and putting it on the environment. As you pull the attention away, these facsimiles show up.

What is actually being objected to are these fixations that are persisting. You may call them lies because they vanish once recognized. The anomaly is persisting in the present. Whatever lie that brought that anomaly is also persisting in the present. That lie brought about a change from the opposite condition.

By repeatedly postulating the original condition we can run out the lie, and the anomaly that has been persisting.

KHTK AXIOM 50: Theta as MEST must contain fixations which are lies.

.

FINAL COMMENTS

The key error in Hubbard’s Theta-MEST theory is the conflation between Theta and Static. Theta-MEST spectrum is a spectrum of motion as stated by Hubbard. Static is the potential state of the Theta-MEST spectrum. Theta is thought energy part of the spectrum that has very low vibrations. It is not the same thing as Static. MEST is the physical energy part of the spectrum that has very high vibrations.

Time is the duration of energy. It is extremely small for thought energy, and extremely large for physical energy. Considerations do not persist, but objects persist. This is natural. Persistence of considerations is unnatural, which happens when considerations are anomalous with the universe and are waiting to be resolved.

A Thetan is the sum total of persisting considerations. The thetan becomes a problem when its persistence (fixation) is not resolved. A common fixation of the thetan is “fixation on the body”. Keeping attention extroverted is the solution.

.

March 26, 2020 – 6:45 AM Categories: Scientology | Post a comment

The Axioms 41 – 50

Reference: KHTK Version of Scientology

In the Scientology Axioms, written by L. Ron Hubbard in 1954, we have a condensation and a recapitulation of all the earlier Axioms and Logics, boiled down to a more practical, more fundamental and more forthright list. They compare best, perhaps, to the axioms of geometry; they are certainly as self–evident as that. But the axioms of geometry are really much cruder than the Scientology Axioms, since geometry proves itself by itself and the Axioms of Scientology prove themselves by all of life.

This paper presents Scientology Axioms 41 – 50 and the corresponding KHTK versions.

.

AXIOM FORTY-ONE: That into which alter–isness is introduced becomes a problem.

Any time you ALTER-IS something you add another wrinkle to IS-NESS. This may generate or worsen a problem. The universe is not a problem, but its altered view is. We postulate that it was created. We don’t know if that postulate is correct.

When we say that the universe is persisting, it is actually our view of the universe that is persisting. It comes down to examining our considerations about the universe for ALTER-IS. It is the ALTER-IS we are not aware of, which causes a problem.

KHTK AXIOM 41: That into which alter-is-ness is introduced becomes a problem.

.

AXIOM FORTY-TWO: MEST (matter, energy, space and time) persists because it is a problem.

It is a problem because it contains Alter-is-ness.

MEST is a problem because it is an altered view of the universe. Scientology postulates that MEST (physical) universe produced by the Theta universe. This could be an ALTER-IS. KHTK, therefore, postulates that Theta-MEST is a single universe.

The physicist has been focusing only the physical aspect of the universe. He has been ignoring the innate impulse that underlies energy. The atom bomb simply releases this impulse in an uncontrolled, destructive manner. The same impulse is better controlled in the computer technology.

KHTK AXIOM 42: MEST (matter, energy, space, time) persists because its Theta aspect is being ignored.

We see some Theta aspect of MEST in computer technology.

.

AXIOM FORTY-THREE: Time is the primary source of untruth.

Time states the untruth of consecutive considerations.

Time denotes duration of energy. This duration increases as the energy condenses from thought to matter. As a result, less condensed energy appears to be in motion compared to more condensed energy. We tend to focus on the duration associated with matter (condensed energy) as the characteristic of time.

It seems that as energy gets more condensed it becomes “interesting”. A less condensed energy is “interested”. When a person becomes more “interesting” he has become more condensed in his considerations. This leads to fixations. The person then becomes a problem.

Consecutive moments appear because of the play of energy of different condensations. A shock in time is a sudden shift in the gradient of energy. With fame, a person may shift suddenly from being interested to becoming interesting. This could act as a shock.

KHTK AXIOM 43: Condensation into fixation is the primary source of untruth.

Fixation condenses consecutive considerations stating them as untruth.

.

AXIOM FORTY-FOUR: Theta, the static, has no location in matter, energy, space or time, but is capable of consideration.

Static is the potential state of the Theta-MEST spectrum. Theta is thought energy part of the spectrum. It has vibration. It is not the same thing as Static. This conflation between Theta and Static is the key error in the hypothesis of Hubbard.

Time is the duration of energy. It is extremely small for thought energy. Considerations do not persist unless they are anomalous with the universe and are waiting to be resolved. A Thetan is the sum total of persisting considerations.

This persistence (fixation) becomes a problem when it is not resolved. A persisting condition of the thetan is fixation on the body. The only way not to be “inside the body” is simply not to have any attention on the body.

KHTK AXIOM 44: Theta is the thought energy aspect of the Theta-MEST spectrum that constitutes considerations.

.

AXIOM FORTY-FIVE: Theta can consider itself to be placed, at which moment it becomes placed, and to that degree a problem.

When Theta is not Static, it is manifesting itself. In other words, its innate impulses are firing away. A thetan can have a problem only when it gets fixated and cannot resolve that fixation. He is then being more interesting than interested.

But if he can be fixated and un-fixated at will then there is no problem. He may be somewhat of a problem only during the period he is fixated.

KHTK AXIOM 45: Theta can consider itself to be fixated, at which moment it becomes fixated, and to that degree a problem.

.

AXIOM FORTY-SIX: Theta can become a problem by its considerations, but then becomes MEST.

A problem is to some degree MEST. MEST is a problem.

When Theta is kinetic then, of course, it is energy of very low frequency, and there is corresponding space and time. But there is no matter.

As energy condenses, it starts to acquire properties that make it observable in terms of interactions. That makes it “interesting”. And that which is observing is the un-condensed energy. So, that thought energy is being “interested”.

Un-condensed energy can flow around very rapidly but condensed energy cannot flow or move that fast. That means problem is characterized by lack of motion and flexibility.

KHTK AXIOM 46: Theta becomes a problem by losing its motion and flexibility due to condensation.

.

AXIOM FORTY-SEVEN: Theta can resolve problems.

Resolution of problem means reversing the process of condensation. It is lessening the rate of vibration. It is calming down. It is becoming less fixated and more flexible. That process is occurring in the field of computers and robotics; but it is very much in its infancy.

KHTK AXIOM 47: Theta can resolve problems.

.

AXIOM FORTY-EIGHT: Life is a game wherein theta as the static solves the problems of theta as mest.

“Theta as static” is the un-condensed energy. “Theta as MEST” is condensed energy. All energy is connected. The un-condensed energy can de-condense the condensed energy. This is what happens when we help each other.

Energy get more condensed by being interesting and focused on itself. This is called interiorization. It de-condenses by being interested in its environment and focused on others. This is called exteriorization.

KHTK AXIOM 48: Life is a game wherein Theta as un-condensed energy solves the problems of Theta as condensed energy.

.

AXIOM FORTY-NINE: To solve any problem it is only necessary to become theta, the solver, rather than theta, the problem.

The SOP 8C works by getting a person to looking at the environment and getting interested in others rather than have attention on oneself and be interesting.

The key point is extroversion. One may even look at oneself from an extroverted viewpoint. He can do that by viewing oneself as a problem in the context of the present time environment and by not getting sucked into the mind in its past.

KHTK AXIOM 49: To solve any problem it is only necessary to become extroverted in one’s attention rather than introverted.

.

AXIOM FIFTY: Theta as MEST must contain considerations which are lies.

MEST is the energy that is persisting because it is condensed and focused on itself. This is the situation with the body. Theta is activating the body through considerations, but these considerations come and go quickly. None of them persist.

But fixations persist. A person who is interiorized has his attention fixed on his body and on the facsimiles in his mind. SOP 8C is simply pulling the person’s attention away from himself and putting it on the environment. As you pull the attention away, these facsimiles show up.

What is actually being objected to are these fixations that are persisting. You may call them lies because they vanish once recognized. The anomaly is persisting in the present. Whatever lie that brought that anomaly is also persisting in the present. That lie brought about a change from the opposite condition.

By repeatedly postulating the original condition we can run out the lie, and the anomaly that has been persisting.

KHTK AXIOM 50: Theta as MEST must contain fixations which are lies.

.

March 26, 2020 – 5:32 AM Categories: KHTK | Post a comment