By Jim Logan

Taking one of the simplest definitions of an Overt Act from a lecture, Wisdom as an Auditor, given on 28 April 1964, one can apply this and get a pretty clean view of, as well as an understanding for some situations that otherwise appear to be very complex.

Here’s the definition: “Now, if we want to understand what an overt act is, we go around to the other side of the coin and we find out it was a communication he didn’t want to deliver, he delivered…you’ve now perverted the ARC theta line, you see; you’ve perverted the theta line by causing it to carry harm.”

An Overt Act in the run of living also includes sometimes a judgment call on this idea of “harm”, of course as it considers all Dynamics and decisions to act, weighing the greatest good for the greatest number of Dynamics.

But, just taking the utter simplicity of this meaning, where one perverts the ARC theta line, the positive theta line, witnessing some of the “meltdowns” that occur with individuals, even groups of individuals interacting, they become very simply instances where a person through carelessness or malice, twists an R, that is, alters it in some way and then delivers a communication with a low A for the receipt point and off it goes, this bit of nasty.

The result on that person doing it is apparent sooner or later: they lessen their own reach, their own ability to communicate and with that, they don’t grasp things they can’t really look at and end up with problems in areas, trouble, strife, stress, and all manner of ills that befall a person.

Looking at the wild melee that is the blogosphere related to things Scientology, from the “natter boards” to the “Dead Agent sites” (either DM generated or among the ex/antis) on those that are working the “natter boards” on either side of these arguments there are perversions of R, low A, and streams of C that are meant to harm the other or others.

The result is that these sites, these low scale ARC spots, termed “entheta”, are just that – perversions of theta and theta lines (these beings are after all, basically good) and as they commit these continuous and continuing Overt Acts they get darker and darker to the point where they blow off, themselves rejecting the black gooey mess that has been wrought, leaving it parked on their Time Tracks and working to forget all this stuff becoming less aware of it and by that, less aware overall.

Scientology as a subject is a study of the truths of existence. The road to Clear, the path to OT is paved with truth.   It is a subject that reveals to oneself the truth and the lies following it that led to any present adverse circumstance, but mostly it recovers the actual truth and with that looked at as it is, the lies themselves dissolve.

What has struck me lately, with the above definition applied, is that any being, innately, recognizes themselves when they deliver that comm that has harm in it and no matter the justification or rationalizing of it, they themselves go down the chute into the darker obtuse states that I don’t think any thetan really enjoys.

There is a way out.   The return of the freedom to act can begin with the easy step of just not delivering that communication that is intended to harm.

16 thoughts on “Harm

  1. Everything Jim says is right on. But it’s a view from the top of the bridge. When you have lot’s of rightness and very little if any case, and it’s easy to make subtle differences between similar things.

    For someone with more case, they don’t clearly see the difference between two similar things, or in some case even dissimilar things, and can easily arc break, and commit overts and pass along entheta and not isness.

    Lot’s of people in the C of S are starting on their bridge. They have lot’s of case, and lot’s of incomplete cycles of action in their case and mind. For them, many dissimilar things look similar and they can easily act inappropriately.

    That’s the whole point of getting clear and OT, to be able to make those fine differences. To become saner, and to act with more arc and truth, and less notisness and lies.

    I agree with Jim, that if a being can recognize the truth, and whether or not something will bring harm, they would not do it. But people are often broken pieces and have case, and either don’t recognize the truth or don’t actually care about the consequences of their act.

    Many beings are not on either the source or effect point of a comm line and have moved off of it, and are acting more reactively than analytically.

    For people that are at a sufficient point to simply change their minds when called on something, that’s great, but a large number of people are not there yet.

    That’s why we have ethics and justice, to enforce the channels beyond the push of their reactive bank, to work on keeping their behavior in line, and to attempt to get them to communicate at a higher level than their case would normally push them to.

    For someone in good shape, yes they will communicate in a way to improve things, for someone not, they will attempt the opposite unless there is sufficient pressure to get them to not do what they feel at the moment must be done.

    It’s a real world of many broken pieces and a few players.

    It’s important to act on the actual truth of something, you can with a great deal of deft handling bypass a person bank, and work with them, but for most people they usually fall victim to their bank, when it keys it, and will attempt to dramatize it. This goes all the way back to 1946 Dianetics, written about later in Dianetics, Original thesis.

    We work hard to validate the rightness, and at the appropriate gradient to keep in the channel of doing more right, and continuing forward, step by step, till they too are at the top of the bridge and can easily just by looking act the right way, and say the right things.

    You have to see the person in front of you when you adjudicate this.

    One of the things that happens for some people who have finished Solo Not’s – OT VIII et al, is that they don’t really see all the gain they have received to get where they are , and think that people don’t need to do for themselves what they did, that the other person can just change their mind. But that didn’t work for them, and it won’t work for someone else, – the way out is the way through, not just changing your mind, when your mind controls you, and not you yet controlling your mind.

    It’s a C/Sing point and not everyone has that point down. To get the gains you have to do the work. Period. There is no shortcut on the way to total freedom.

    I know other people are not like me, I worked hard and did many things over many years to get to where I am. If others did similar work, then they got there too, but if they didn’t then they need to earn just like I and everyone else has to.

    I know that because I’m a trained and interned C/S and C/Sing basics tell me to look at the actual case, and abilities of the person in front of me, not myself and my abilities when working on them.

    We used to get people auditing the other person on the engrams on their case, and sometimes we get people handling others at a higher gradient than they should, because of the false date that ” everyone is just like me”.

    Well, no two people are like each other, we are all different, but abilities and case level can be seen, and worked with.

    So I agree with Jim, it depends on which person we are talking about how much that will apply.

    Much love for every one of you unique wonderful people.


    • Hey Doc, you said what I was thinking, just so much better!!

      “One of the things that happens for some people who have finished Solo Not’s – OT VIII et al, is that they don’t really see all the gain they have received to get where they are , and think that people don’t need to do for themselves what they did, that the other person can just change their mind”

      Absolutely, in fact one of the excersizes I do for myself is to think back to the pre bridge me, and compare that person to me now. It is the same basic person, just more that basic person, and so much better. And you are right, it does take work, and study and lots of it and I know there is much more to do, but it is so worth it and enjoyable.

      What I have failed to realise in the past, is the extent that charge can have on a being, in regards to his thinking and acting, and just how vital it is to get auditing done as a mainstream activity

      Find yourself and love yourself is something that seems to be generally agreed upon to be a worthwhile activity and that is exactly what going up the Bridge does. With the caveat that this is done outside the suppressive influence of Daves religion.

    • Well Doc, one of the things I see with this simple definition is the applicability at the lower levels – even in daily conversation and the helping of others as they attempt to sort out their various problems.

      An overt is also defined as a “solution” to a problem. A way of dealing with some difficulty. It falls under the Fundamentals of Thought material on the Actual Cycle of Action where it comes in as a “counter-create” against (that’s an operative term) some other creation. It’s a “not-is” and use of force against rather than an “as-is” and a finding out what is the truth of the original creation.

      If you can get a person to describe what they think is the problem and then get how they’ve handled it, what their considerations are about it, then you can start to peel off the counter-creates, the “solutions” that use force, even overts and work to get to a clearer view of the problem – that is, a closer approach to an “as-it-actually-is” of the difficulty.

      Harming something is a means of solving it that falls short of confronting it fully. It’s an effort to stop, to resist and with that of course begins the sticking on the track of the whole thing and the forming of “mind” to carry it along.

      It is a high level discovery, yes, but it goes “all the way down” too and the concepts of “problem” “solution” “itsa” those solutions to free up attention and gain a better view of the actual is-ness of the problem is very much a Level O, Level I type area of address.

      That’s how I am working to use this data presently. In fact, I had a friend the other day that isn’t a Scientologist, not trained in auditing but merely shown some of the Auditor’s Code points of no inval/eval, use this basic material of “describe the problem, how have you tried to solve it, itsa this and that” to help another person, also not a Scientologist, to get a more direct view of what was ailing them as a problem. Eventually the person got a result of the spotting of an earlier similar problem and the mistaking of “identity” with the current one and there was a palpable “blow” of mass. Since then, way less worry and upset and that’s exactly what’s supposed to happen.

      It’s high level to be sure, but reaches way down to the workaday-world of people in front of us trying to get along, also.

    • JDW:

      I’ve often been exasperated by OTs who suggest that it’s only necessary to “change my mind” in order to resolve something. From the height at which they view things, I’m sure this is true.

      And oddly enough (or perhaps not) I’m guilty of the same thing. In many cases, I’ve simply assumed that everyone thinks as I do. Normally I don’t have much trouble “changing my mind”. I just look at the situation and alter my viewpoint. And assume others can as well. But apparently, it is a much rarer ability than I thought. “Stuckness” is apparently the norm rather than the exception.


    • JDW wrote: “One of the things that happens for some people who have finished Solo Not’s – OT VIII et al, is that they don’t really see all the gain they have received to get where they are , and think that people don’t need to do for themselves what they did, that the other person can just change their mind. But that didn’t work for them, and it won’t work for someone else, – the way out is the way through, not just changing your mind, when your mind controls you, and not you yet controlling your mind.”

      Clears and OTs can be impatient or annoyed with new Scientologists because they aren’t yet where they are supposed to be case-wise. (A comparable magnitude might be an adult who is unwilling to have a conversation with a child until that child is old enough to be interesting.)

      This was especially exaggerated for non-Scientologist staff and crew in the church who were told “no case on post” as an alternative to receiving processing. The other staff and crew knew these people had charge, buttons, ridges, BPC, ARCXs and all of the rest — but with no solution available other than “no case on post” or “do what you’re doing while you’re doing it.”

      The reverse can also be true of what JDW wrote. New Scientologists aren’t aware of the thousands of hours of training and auditing that went into going up the Bridge to Clear or OT. These new people (or non-Scientologists alike) still have their own reactive mind and so forth which makes the idea of erasing these things almost a reality break due to lack of personal reality on the subject.

  2. Harmful communication is higher on the tone scale than no communication at all.

    Yet, Scientologists both in and outside of the church seem quite willing to resort to stopping communication than to work through and up the tone scale.

    The PC or student who calls you up randomly to tell you how much he/she hates you is still reaching. It’s when they stop reaching that you have a “broken piece” on your hands.

    • Jonathon,
      Is a reach with a nasty comm intended to harm, that usually isn’t duplicatable by the receipt point of such a comm as it violates their Reality for example, a reach, or does it result in withdraw – less comm?

      I think you’ve pointed up another aspect of this that is as well, very simple and basic and also goes all the way up the scale as well as extending way down there – intention.

      It seems that for most of us living in this milieu that when we intend harm it just doesn’t seem to fly so well for either the effect point or the source point. Aside from some of the ramifications of Nietzsche’s theorizing “beyond good and evil” I think it’s easily demonstrated that beings do better when they aren’t out to do in someone or something.

      Those reaches you’ve remarked on, while they may be “reaches” FOR Scientology, they have the trouble of smacking at it that then, by the mechanics of life those beings have already agreed to, puts it out of reach. They withdraw from an area they have meant harm toward.

      These are the complexities beings have engaged in and now are in mystery about – batting at the problems rather than as-ising and miring in more deeply.

      • Jim,

        On people reaching for Scientology, it seems that bad reach works like a presser beam while good reach would work like a tractor beam. However, there could also be a mixed reach where on one level the person wants Scientology and case gain while at the same time fearing or being hesitant about it and tries to push away while reaching. PTSness also results in indecision.

        On whether communication is harmful or not, there are people who will twist the meaning of a communication around in order to insist some harm was done. They are ARC breaky (due to M/W/Hs) and, thus, assume the communication was intended to harm even when the intention from the source-point was complimentary or helpful.

        Mechanically speaking, isn’t the tone level of a communication part of its significance as compared to the mass (or reality) of the message? That is, shouldn’t a communication really have a neutral tone regardless of how many insults, cuss words or exclamation points used?

        — Jonathon

        • The mechanics of it and the variations of them are explored in the PDC tapes and 8-80, 8-8008.

          These communications are all done with some kind of flowing of particles. That flow, its characteristics, smooth, rough, simple, or with gradients of complexities is what the message interacts with. That “significance” that goes across usually has something to do with the type of particle wave. It doesn’t have to necessarily, as you can say really nasty stuff with a particle flow that is nothing but nice, and not the 1.1 manifestation either, but really intending it and making it have a particle and flow characteristic that is nice. That violates lots of agreements we’ve arrived at at this point since “nasty” includes the “nasty” type mechanics of the wave form.

          Yeah, the PDC tapes and those books delve into this and open the door for a person to view and find out for themselves how they are making this stuff, how they shape their particles and flows and such.

          Those tapes go over in detail they Affinity Scale (the Tone Scale) in terms of wave characteristics and the addition of the “message” and so forth.

          TR 8 explores some of the aspects of the varying intention with an unexpected/not usual “message” where you intend and “flow” one thing but say another.

          Understanding the theory of it and doing drills with it a thetan can gain more cause over what it is they are putting out to others.

          This can go from the bottom to the top so to speak, from TR1 on a Comm Course up through TR 8 on an Upper Indoc Course all the way to the original OT VII and beyond.

          It’s really the guts of our interactions and the “how to” of a number of the Factors recently posted here.

  3. I think a lot of these “harmful” communications out in the Field stem from mutual ruds, so to speak. A guy gets his scrotum kicked by “Scientology” (the Church) or an org or something. This sits and festers. The guy typically hasn’t much education in Scientology. So he sits out here with his pet “done-to-me”. Then he reads some entheta or another out here, and goes along with it. In other words, because of his “injured” state of mind (can you say service fac?) he agrees with the entheta he encounters, rather than negating against or ignoring it. I’ve seen this countless times. It’s also funny how this manifests most often in attacks on LRH and his character, rather than the workability of Scientology. LRH is an easy target compared to Scientology. Likewise the Church (where the criticism is mostly deserved).

    Interestingly enough, one can also go too far in this. Being thumped by the Church or an org, one can take the viewpoint that it’s all one’s own fault and the responsibility is all on one’s own shoulders when it’s not. In any situation like this, a certain amount of the responsibility for what happened belongs to you, directly. You opened your big mouth, or you were there and communicated or whatever. But you weren’t the only one there. Other beings signed on to be your oppressors as well. The process of suppressing you is a cooperative one. Being able to properly assign the exact amount of responsibility to each party involved (including oneself) is part of the route out, as far as I’m concerned.


  4. JIm: Very insightful article, thanks. And some equally interesting comments above from Doc, Paul, etc.

    This is a hot subject that deserves some attention in these days of disorder in the ranks of the Corp church and those no longer in the bubble.

    This subject of overts is a razor sharp sword that can: A) cut the chains that free a spiritual being from great suffering and open the doors to previously unimaginable heights.

    B) Serve as the weapon that cuts down a stellar being – introverts and seeks to reduce the being to utter dispair and hopelessness.

    History has proven this sword to be equally effective in the service of either aim.

    When used to achieve A) it is simple and something of beauty. The auditor audits standardly, PC and auditor have great wins, life improves, smiles and greater joy and abiity is had by all.

    (B) When used for destructive purposes the SP attacks – forcefully seeking to introvert the being into their case. (overt track) And suddenly heros are charged as a criminal and put in chains, heroines are proclaimed to be whores, the clowns laugh and ridicule the entire procession while the villian rises to a self serving throne as the ignorant, terrified and blind applaud the specticle of the parade.

    Welcome to Earth and the story of human existence spanning every age, from cave dwellers through biblical times and into the 21st century, George Bush – Obama America.

    Point in fact is that every being on this planet has a overt track. If we did not the Bridge (as such) might not have been necessary. I suggest we’d all be in rather good shape, or certainly a whole lot better.

    That said, I believe it is possible for anyone who wants to move smartly and swiftly through greater levels of spiritual freedom to do so – starting this very moment. And that two simple actions will help make that a rapid reality.

    The first action is to end cycle on the past and all concerns about overts and W/H right now. A full, Tone 40 acknowledgement.

    Whatever is there can and will be handled with standard tech, gradiently, compassionately, thoroughly, and with love and kindness IN SESSION, at the right time, with the right auditor, supervisor, or ethics terminal, all the way from the Comm Course up and through the highest OT Levels.

    LRH did not put PUNISHMENT – ridicule, embarrasment or introversion on the bridge as a step anywhere.

    So we (The Earthlings) have an overt track, so we burnt a few villages and fried a few friends, enemies, innocent bystanders, puppy dogs and children. That’s for you, your auditor, C/S and Source to help you deal with. NOBODY ELSE ON THIS MUDBALL PLANET, that’s for sure.

    Finally, it is importat to understand that any one – repeat ANYONE – from the Pope, the King, the General, MAA, RTC on down to the baker – anyone seeking to introvert you into your overt track is forwarding an SP LINE. (including yourself if you insist on doing so)

    A standard LRH auditing is an open hand offering knowledge, understanding, forgiveness, peace of mind, dignity, recovery of ability and yes! even love. The SP Line is promoting your destruction and spiritual freedom demise.

    I do not have an LRH reference for you in regards to the above. It’s just my opinion, to be perfectly honest. All I can say is it has gotten me many amazing wins. In fact, next step is L10 any Oh my! You gotta know I can’t wait for the subject of “overts” to come up in those sessions. Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeks.

    But the DIFFERENCE is I know that LRH put that level there for me to emerge as a more free being. So there will be no DM prison camps waiting for me at the Examiner’s desk.

    And even if there was I’d just punch the little f ck in the mouth – let the blood fly (mine or his) on the way out the door to happiness – overts be damned!

  5. Anyone perceiving any communication as “harmful” must be on the overt act-motivator sequence. In other words, the communication wouldn’t be harmful unless the recipient hadn’t already been guilty of communicating harmfully and pulling in the motivator.

    This is especially exaggerated when observing people like David Miscavige and Marty Rathbun. They are on some sort of stuck one-way flow receiving “harmful” communication. Yet, it appears they created their own problems with other people. No one hated these two jackasses until they started (allegedly) punching people and screaming harmful communication at them. Now Marty and Dave live in constant fear the same will befall them!

    Scientology is shrinking because people stopped communicating. They have become seemingly paranoid, worried about every possible “harmful” communication. Every compliment becomes 1.1 in their eyes. Every playful comment appears to hide ridicule, scorn and invalidation.

  6. Jonathon. I wouldn’t put Marty Rathbun and David Miscavige on the same bag. On the beginning Marty has made a big work of freeing us. When he wrote the “31 factors” it was immensely true (now he removed it from his blog.). Now Marty has a weird position.
    But Miscavige has never been good. Always a Tyrant.

    • FG,

      FG wrote: “On the beginning Marty has made a big work of freeing us.”

      If you’re an ex-Scientologist, then I would expect you to go into agreement with Marty. He did reveal a lot about David Miscavige’s management, but in the end he thought he would “free us” by destroying the church and, later, attack L. Ron Hubbard and the entire subject. His “big work” was an Overt Product regardless of his intentions.

      FG wrote: “But Miscavige has never been good. Always a Tyrant.”

      I’m not in a position to defend DM as someone who was declared in 1994. However, he did one thing right and that is to keep the church solvent. IAS straight donations miss the point of why Scientology exists, but so did Marty and his wife when they requested straight donations for their legal war chest.

      I was declared by the church and banned from Marty’s blog. DM and Marty are both low-confront victim types. They both assert by example the false idea that all Scientologists are fragile little turds with no personal confidence or the ability to communicate with “ordinary” people.

      We can hope DM’s replacement won’t make the same mistakes.

      — Jonathon

  7. In the past two or three months, I’ve had at least four ex-Scientologists from Marty’s blog attempt to contact me one way or another.

    I don’t understand why they are trying to contact me. I can communicate with anyone about anything. I’m not difficult to reach. Tweet me on Twitter (no DMs) and I will respond almost immediately.

    I am willing to continue to explain why Scientology is awesome, but I doubt they are willing to receive that communication. If they wanted to tell me that the Bridge doesn’t go anywhere or that Standard Tech doesn’t work, then they’re contacting the wrong person. I have zero experience with Standard Tech. Most ex-Scientologists are much further up the Bridge than I am.

    — Jonathon

What is your view?

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s