By Jim Logan
Over the past little bit I made the effort to read the Bhagavad-Gita (derivation: Bhag “god” or the “lord” the “supreme” and gita – the song or the song of the supreme). This is a part of the canon of what Western Indologists of the 19th Century named “Hinduism” and what is called Sanatana Dharma (eternal- truths/principles) in Indian religious philosophy. From there I studied Robert E. Hume’s materials on the Upanishads (down-near-beside, “upa” “ni” “shad” or the “secret doctrine, the esoteric doctrine communicated to those seated near beside, of the Vedas – ancient Indian “veda/knowledge”). These materials expound on and reveal the meanings of the Vedas and encompass some of the most fundamental truths of life. I read several of his translations and one other translated by another, Max Muller.
I then started to read Siddhartha Gautauma’s Buddhism* and the multifaceted branches of texts and interpretations of his teaching, first written down some hundreds of years after he’d left that body. Apparently, the Buddha had studied the Vedas and wisdom of India as a young man, so there is a thread of continuity in the materials and study of the one enhances the context of the other I found.
What Gautauma was supposed to have done is, following a life of luxury, then extreme austerity to the point of near death, he sat down and was able to just be there and confront the myriad experiences, including his own consciousness and mental states and eventually came to cognition that HE was not all the things that he looked at, thought about, created, avoided, held onto, and had become in varying degree.
He was an “emptiness” a “nothingness” and all the rest was a “somethingness”.
His “not-self” included the assumed identities, the entirety of created somethings.
He apparently was able to look, more or less as a Static and able to separate out from all the considerations and postulates and opinions about the products of life, of the Static. He, apparently very much aware of awareness, differentiated perception as “consciousness” from that ability to create something to be conscious of and recognized it would seem, the source of the “woiks” to speak colloquially. (That’s my understanding applying the materials of Scientology – knowing how to know – to my study of these data and translating the basics of Buddhism as apparently relayed by the Buddha to his followers.)
*Aside from the very, very basic material of the Four Noble Truths of the Buddha, among other materials I read two of the texts of one of the “baskets” of materials – that is, two of the texts from the “Abhidharma” basket/collection (Pitaka in Pali) or “about the dharma/truths” that is part of the canon of various of the branches of Buddhist schools. I am by no means either a scholar of the huge body of work of the many branches of the religious philosophy and practice that is modern or ancient Buddhism, or a Buddhist so please, I mean no offense to one or the other if I have suggested something that doesn’t coincide with either one or the other’s understanding of the broad work that comprises the many, many schools of thought in Buddhism, (or Hinduism for that matter).
Something I realized as I was reading these materials, which is actually mentioned in many places in the same bodies of work, is that while there are countless rituals described, and countless more made up and part of very many different schools of practice of these data, there is the awareness that a being can by-pass all this ritual and attain to states of knowing that are the aim of the myriad forms. The Buddha himself sat down under a tree and after a lot of hours, days, weeks, he had attained quite the cognition, after all. He didn’t require umpty-ump vias or rituals or “forms”.
As it happens, while continuing my study of the St. Hill Special Briefing Course I came to a tape recorded on 19 September 1961, Q&A Period- PreHav, Sec Checks, ARC Break Process and came across some data applicable to my realization about all the “rituals” associated with not only the two religions I’d been looking at, but very much related to my own experience as a Scientologist in present time.
Here’s some of the communication from this tape, from Ron Hubbard:
“So what the hell, you don’t monkey around with a bunch of forms. You know, “If you just swing that incense pot, you know, you swing that incense pot, and if the people down there in the choir box all say, ‘Ohm, mani padme hum, mea culpa’ at the right time, you know, you’ll get Clears.” Well, let me tell you, they’ve been swinging incense pots and saying “mea culpa” for two thousand years and we got – haven’t got Clears. We got something else. Right?
“So you go putting ritual ahead of getting auditing done and you will always be wrong!
“Now, there are times to use good form, and that’s when everything is sailing along fine. Anybody can use right form. But I will say something about my ancient familial lineage and my dear cousins, the British. They very often continue to use form when they ought to be doing something else. And this has been a failure, hasn’t it? You look down the line. That’s just a failure. They’re going to do it this way when they ought to be doing something, right now, desperately. You got the idea?
“Form can get in your road. Form gets – got in the road of Roman administration. It’s gotten so much in the road of American administration today that if the form of asking their wife that night isn’t obeyed by the American diplomat attending the conference, of course – he, of course, can’t have anything to say in the next day’s conference.”
“Now, that’s simply beside the point. I’m giving you a little bit of a roasting. And the roasting is this: That if you go around thinking form is going to get you out of trouble, but you should be getting out of trouble by wit, you’re going to be wrong. Always put getting the job done ahead of doing it according to the rules. Because the rules will only fit the majority of cases. But remember the majority of cases leave a minority that the rules don’t handle. Always the case.
“You’ve always got to remember that no matter how much you know about auditing, how many rules you have learned about auditing, how disciplined you get, how you can finally get to a point of where you put the key in the chest and wind yourself up, and then run for two hours, that you’re going to run into situations which that will not get you out of. Because you are disciplined, because you are well trained, because you do know what you’re doing, you can keep your wits about you when anybody else would have gone to hell in a balloon. But that you can do that, does not excuse you from using your noggin. It doesn’t excuse you for a moment for not being clever, for not realizing and reading the handwriting on the wall.”
Carrying on with what LRH has stated above, this is applicable not only to auditing and the fallacy of GAT, I or II, but also to the situation many Scientologists find themselves in relation to GAT, I or II and as well the administration by David Miscavige of the Church of Scientology and his view of Scientology itself.
There are many a Scientologist who are hamstrung, tied up and fettered in doing something about what they observe as outpoints in the administration, by the rituals that are the Ethics/Justice policies of Scientology. They can’t commit “high-crimes” and speak up about DM or any of the multifarious illogics they encounter from the top down to their very own interview with some bat-witted MAA at Flag asking them about whether or not they wore a towel in the sauna or exposed their bum to some innocent passerby.
Instead, they’ll sit in the situation of having as a resolution to the issues at hand, the “following of policy” which indeed is not policy at all, but a ritual, a “form” that is in the way of being effective and which Ron Hubbard himself, in that very same policy says “DON’T DO”. He also very clearly says the same thing in this tape.
I faced the same dilemma some years back after following assiduously the policy on A-E and over more than a decade and a half came to the point where I’d finished the steps, had it stated so in writing from the IJC, and then was refused restoration to good standing and assigned arbitrarily invented steps from F-J. I ended at J and resolved my dilemma.
I decided to continue to be a Scientologist, study, audit, disseminate and carry on without need of the “license” to survive that David Miscavige refused to provide. I spoke out then about the crazy-wide departures from Scientology that he perpetrates and have continued to do so. I have according to some pedantic idiocy, committed “high-crimes” in my actions it would appear to whomever.
Alas, I have forsaken“ritual” and eliminated vias galore and become more effective. Just like Ron Hubbard recommends. In that time I’ve completed auditing from Clear up to Solo NOTs, studied and restudied thousands of lectures, honed my skills as an auditor and am well on my way to finishing the Briefing Course after all these years, audited a whole bunch, trained others and have done more Scientology in these past 8 years than I’ve ever done.
I heartily encourage other Scientologists (particularly those “on the fence” or “under the radar”) to follow his lead and rather than slave to some “ritual” some “form”, actually DO real Scientology and be effective with this incredible body of work. It’s really, way, way more fun and gets one and his Dynamics further on down that road.
P.S. I also built my own cabin in the woods and spent this last summer getting it ready to be enjoyed by many of my friends and of course my lovely Lana and the boys. Yay! I sure hope to see many others there and have and will work to have a safe place where maybe you too can come, ease up, study, audit and even go fishing. Or simply be there and do nuttin’, as you please.