THE CODE OF HONOR

L. Ron Hubbard wrote and issued The Code of Honor in 1954. It is appropriate only when there is no fixation on self, and one is willing to sacrifice oneself to uphold the Principle of Oneness.

.

Introduction

Hubbard introduces the code as follows:

“No one expects the Code of Honor to be closely and tightly followed.

“An ethical code cannot be enforced. Any effort to enforce the Code of Honor would bring it into the level of a moral code. It cannot be enforced simply because it is a way of life which can exist as a way of life only as long as it is not enforced. Any other use but self-determined use of the Code of Honor would, as any Scientologist could quickly see, produce a considerable deterioration in a person. Therefore its use is a luxury use, and which is done solely on self-determined action, providing one sees eye to eye with the Code of Honor.”

.

Code of Honor

1. Never desert a comrade in need, in danger or in trouble.

2. Never withdraw allegiance once granted.

3. Never desert a group to which you owe your support.

4. Never disparage yourself or minimize your strength or power.

5. Never need praise, approval or sympathy.

6. Never compromise with your own reality.

7. Never permit your affinity to be alloyed.

8. Do not give or receive communication unless you yourself desire it.

9. Your self-determinism and your honor are more important than your immediate life.

10. Your integrity to yourself is more important than your body.

11. Never regret yesterday. Life is in you today and you make your tomorrow.

12. Never fear to hurt another in a just cause.

13. Don’t desire to be liked or admired.

14. Be your own adviser, keep your own counsel and select your own decisions.

15. Be true to your own goals.

This is the ethical code of Scientology, the code one uses not because he has to but because he can afford such a luxury.

.

SCN 8-8008: Rising-Scale Processing

Reference: The Book of Scientology

Rising-Scale Processing

Please see the original section at the link above.

.

Summary

.

Comments

.

A Critical look at Beingness (Self)

Reference: The Book of Scientology

In Scientology, the tone scale deals with beingness as thetan. Beyond the tone scale there is simply theta as the ability to postulate and become aware. The individuality (as thetan) comes about when there is identification of theta (awareness) with postulates (thought). Now there is a tone scale. 

At the top of the tone scale, the identification occurs in passing and it is never permanent. As fixation enters the picture, the beingness starts to acquire a permanence and descends down the tone scale. Thus we get the tone-scale of affinity.

The ideal state of beingness occurs at the top of tone scale that contains no fixation. But Hubbard postulates a fixation when he considers the thetan to be eternal. When a person believes that he is, or has, a soul that lives forever, he is fixated on self in some manner. This fixation makes him subject to the laws of MEST. 

Hubbard’s Scientology addresses the fixation of the body; but it disregards the fixation on self. In fact, Scientology ends up reinforcing the fixation on self. Hubbard ends up railing against the MEST universe, without ever resolving it because of his own fixation on self.

Viewpoint comes about with the postulation of dimension points. In other words, all knowingness comes about through postulation only. How the postulation occurs in the first place is unknowable. When a beingness is postulated and made the source of postulates, we have an identification of the viewpoint with the dimension point. This is the beginning of self. Fixation comes about as the self starts to think itself to be permanent.

This fixation starts to resolve as one starts to see that the postulates have a oneness of continuity, consistency and harmony. Any violation of oneness cuts across the sense of ultimate freedom. A postulate cannot stand alone arbitrarily, such as, the idea of an eternal thetan. The ultimate freedom shall consist of the freedom to have or not have a beingness.

Doingness naturally accompanies beinginess. Doingness is the changing of dimension points. At the level of thought, doingness means reasoning. At the level of energy, doingness means communicating. And, at the level of matter, doingness means working and moving physical objects around.  

Havingness naturally accompanies doingness. Havingness is the resulting arrangement of dimension points. At the level of thought, havingness means arriving at a conclusion. At the level of energy, havingness means arriving at an understanding. And, at the level of matter, havingness means having the fruits of one’s labor.  

Havingness is the goal that is aimed at. At the accomplishment of the goal the doingness ceases. Therefore, some stability and duration is associated with havingness. Here the concept of time becomes very obvious. Hubbard considers time to be an arbitrary, but, like everything else, time derives its value from the equation of oneness.

Where the doingness towards a certain havingness is forcefully interrupted, we have a ridge that lasts until it is resolved. This is a fixation of attention, which is different from a satisfied sense of havingness. All human aberrations result from the fixation of attention and not from havingness.

.

Summary

To postulate is to generate thought that has substance, extents and duration. The extents are seen as space and the duration is seen as time. Hubbard erroneously believes that space exists by itself without substance. 

Furthermore, to have beingness is to identify with postulates. Hubbard erroneously believes that the beingness exists by itself without postulates or thought.

Such anomalous beliefs come about when a person thinks he knows when he doesn’t. This is the case with Scientology, It pretends to know when it doesn’t. This is because Scientology lacks the concept of the Unknowable.

How the postulates come about, we don’t know. Because all that we know is through postulates only.

.

Anomalies in Scientology

Reference: The Book of Scientology

Hubbard postulates space as “viewpoint of dimension.” But space is more like “dimension of substance.” In that sense, the void is the dimension of “nothing” which is a thought. Thought is not recognized as a substance, but thought is a substance. 

Viewpoint is the awareness of MEST. Viewpoint is theta, and space is MEST. Therefore, viewpoint cannot be space. The idea of MEST is essentially substance (matter and energy). The dimension of substance is space. The duration of substance is time.

Matter and energy are obviously different categories of substance. But thought is a category of substance too, because substance is anything substantial enough to be sensed. 

So, space is the “dimension of substance.” Space cannot be visualized in the absence of thought, energy and matter. Abstract, or mathematical idea of space is actually thought-space. It is the space occupied by thought. Similarly, we have energy-space, which is space occupied by energy; and matter-space, which is space occupied by matter. Matter is actually floating in the energy-space, and energy is floating in the thought-space. 

When Hubbard says, “Space is creatable by a thetan,” he is assuming a permanent individuality, called thetan. But thetan, or individuality, is a continually changing construct. We do have creation because we postulate; for example, the theory of relativity is based on the postulate that the speed of light is a universal constant. To postulate space one must postulate some thought. Such postulating of thought is the first condition necessary to action. 

Hubbard says, “Space can be considered to be the equivalent in experience of beingness.” But “being” is basically being aware; and when we consider beingness, it is looking at some postulates. Processing is basically straightening out beingness whose dimensions are defined by postulates.

Hubbard is critical of physics not having a good definition of space. This is because physics ignores “thought” as a category of substance. Hubbard does consider “thought,” but he does not clearly differentiate among thought as substance, thought-space and awareness.

Hubbard defines “dimension points” as points in space. Point is essentially a coordinate value of a dimension. The coordinate values are numbers representing length, width and height of substance. The idea of substance adds the coordinate of consistency (a degree of density, firmness, viscosity, etc.). These dimension points can change giving an illusion of motion. Similarly, viewpoint or awareness can change giving an illusion of motion.

Hubbard defines “anchor points” as points at the outermost boundaries of the space. A boundary implies a form carved out of substance. These anchor points refer to the “constraints” that define the boundaries.

Hubbard says, “A material of the universe can not exist in any universe without something in which to exist. The something in which it exists is space.” The container of space has to be made of postulated thought. The space is integral to thought as thought-space.

Substance is not something theoretical. It is defined by it being experienced. Thought, energy and matter are the categories of substance. Space is experienced only as the dimension of substance.

Hubbard says, “Space can be made coincidentally with any other space.” This can only mean that two different dimensions can be made to coincide. He then says, “Space is creatable or uncreatable by a viewpoint.” That means these dimensions are postulated. Hubbard seems to think that a person can postulate anything, regardless of it being inconsistent with other postulates.

And that anomaly is very fundamental to Scientology.

.

Summary

The fact of “Being” is basically being aware. When the “being”  is considering beingness, he is basically looking at his postulates.

The basic criticism of Hubbard is that he does not clearly differentiate among substance, space and viewpoint. Substance is thought, energy and matter. Space is the dimension of substance. And, viewpoint is awareness. Substance and space are part of MEST. But viewpoint is theta.

Hubbard talks about creation and uncreation, but that is just the activity of making postulates. Hubbard thinks that one can postulate anything arbitrarily. But postulates must not violate the principle of Oneness (continuity, consistency, harmony). Two contradictory ideas can not be both true, just like two particles of matter can not occupy the same place.

.

Scientology vs Buddhism

Reference: The Book of Scientology

The fundamentals of Scientology may be understood better by comparing them to the fundamentals of Buddhism.

Scientology believes in the narrative of Creator-creation, and considers Theta (thought) to have produced MEST (the physical universe). Buddhism, on the other hand, believes in the duality of Unknowable-knowable, and considers the universe to be the knowable part of this dichotomy. From the perspective of Buddhism, both Theta and MEST are constituents of this knowable universe, and the concept of Unknowable does not exist in Scientology. Thus, from Scientology perspective, everything will become known at some point in future. From Buddhist perspective, there will always be something more to know.

Scientology believes in the immortality of individuality (the thetan). From Buddhist perspective,

“The Absolute Truth is that there is nothing absolute in the world, that everything is relative, conditioned and impermanent, and that there is no unchanging, everlasting, absolute substance like Self, Soul, or Ātman within or without.”

The Buddhist concept of reincarnation is very different from Scientology concept of past lives. What continues from one life to the next is karma and not the individual.

Karma is essentially the influence on us from past lives. It is also the consequence of our actions in this life. Structurally, Karma is made up of unassimilated impressions in our mind. In Dianetics, we have mental impressions in the form of locks, secondaries and engrams. In Scientology, we have identification of thoughts (A=A=A) that messes up our thinking. At OT Levels, we have misconceptions that go deep into our postulates. These misconceptions lie at the root of all our aberrations. All these are included in the definition of Karma.

Scientology seems to be fixated on the survival of the individuality; and, therefore, it believes in the eventual immortality of the thetan. According to Buddhism:

“Two ideas are psychologically deep-rooted in man: self-protection and self-preservation. For self-protection man has created God, on whom he depends for his own protection, safety and security, just as a child depends on its parent. For self-preservation man has conceived the idea of an immortal Soul or Atman, which will live eternally. In his ignorance, weakness, fear, and desire, man needs these two things to console himself. Hence he clings to them deeply and fanatically.”

In Scientology, the very idea of immortality of thetan means that the uniqueness that makes one thetan different from another is very precious and it must be maintained at all costs. A thetan is basically a point of awareness without any fixation. Any uniqueness of a thetan considered immortal would be a fixation. This fixation on individuality makes Scientology limited in its ability to handle all human aberrations.

Scientology has many workable techniques but they can be improved upon.The removal of misconceptions pointed out above, will certainly bring about this improvement.

.