Scientology OT Levels and the State of OT

[Administrator note: Thank you all for your responses to yesterday’s article. Clearly regular posts are well received so we shall continue. There have also been some excellent suggestions with regard to additional functionality. We are taking these on board and plan to bring some new features soon. Thanks again!

For the start of the weekend we bring you a nice long read that we’ll probably leave up for the weekend]



The subject matter of this article is primarily that of the state of OT. When posting comments, please bear in mind our moderation policy of not posting any comments that deal directly with the content of OT levels (data that would be considered confidential). In line with our policy we won’t publish comments containing such. 

By Morris Adams

This post is about the question “What is an OT?”, and what the Scientology OT levels are in relation to this question. This is a subject that I know a lot of us are very interested in.

I would like to break this down into a few different pieces. Just to make it clear in advance, I have not quoted LRH exactly and have paraphrased from my own recollection of what I have read and listened to.

I will break down my comments into the following topics:

  1. What is the state of OT ? (From my understanding and from LRH’s writings and lectures)
  2. What are my experiences with the OT levels? (This is for background, so there is more reality between you and me.)
  3. The chronology of the Scientology OT levels starting from 1967.
  4. Is OT 3 real?
  5. Why haven’t people been demonstrably becoming OT?
  6. OT levels in the RCS today
  7. What about the future of OT?

What is the State of OT?

Just like a number of you have stated in the past, in this blog and in other blogs, a person who is OT is not someone who is “a lot more causative” or “ecstatically keyed out all the time”, or some other nebulous thing. It is a person who can do obvious but fantastic and super-normal things, like move objects without touching them, and be “exterior” to such an extent that he or she can see exactly what you are doing no matter where you are and where he or she is; and tell you with accuracy what you have in your pocket, or what word of a book you are now pointing at, etc. It is doing obvious “super-human” things with accuracy and repeatability, with no intervening physical means, either obvious or hidden (although a “beam” put out in order to move something could possibly be considered a physical thing – but I would guess that you wouldn’t see it).

The state of OT is not some vaguely defined, airy-fairy state where you see visions or communicate with ghosts or something like that. It is not something that is really there when an MAA or Reg at Flag says: “You are an OT, so act like one!” No, the person saying this, and the person it is being said to are most definitely not OT. My current opinion, after many years of believing otherwise, is that there is not a single OT on planet Earth. Way too bad.

In the Philadelphia Doctorate course lectures, 1952, LRH expected (so he said) that half of the people getting auditing then would be stably exterior within 50 hours of auditing. One of the things he said is that such a person could go to a library (without a body) and not only read a book there, but read one that was still unopened and on the shelf, at any page. And also get the thoughts and attitudes of the other people who had read that particular page of that book.

And then, after the person was stably exterior, the next auditing step was “lifting exercises”, where the person, from outside the body, was gotten to first lift his little finger, then his hand, then his arm, and finally his entire body while exterior – that is, he would actually “levitate”. The idea was that he would be picking up his body from outside, with beams. From the tape, it sounded like LRH really expected this to happen, and to not be so difficult! And because he expected this to happen with nearly 50% of the people being audited, I assumed that he could do this himself (although he never specifically said this). How else could he expect this to happen with another person? (By the way, I never heard of anyone who could actually do this.)

My Experiences With the OT Levels

Here is a little background on my track in Scientology, just to give some of you more reality on me. The names and places have been changed (or omitted) to protect the innocent.

I did the 1969 version of the OT levels within 3 – 4 months of my first finding out about Scientology. They were completely unreal to me, as well as their delivery being very out-tech. I got no gains from them, only losses. But I persisted. I went on staff at an Advanced Org some years after that and ended up having a lot of interaction with other people who were on the advanced courses – Grade 6 through old OT 6. I myself continued grinding away at OT 3 and later OT 3 Expanded (after doing what was called at the time OT 7 EP) – basically getting nowhere. But my earlier huge win from Grade 2 kept me going.

I went to Flag for some repair at one point, soon after NOTs came out, and immediately started getting NOTs auditing. Then Solo NOTs came out and I started doing that. From that point forward, I have audited on Solo NOTs for (literally) a few thousand hours. It was rough but I did get gains from it over the years. But I never experienced the total blow out win of my original Grade 2 session.

Then some time ago, after I became independent, I started auditing myself again on Solo NOTs. I got very much better results and gains on my own than when I was doing it within the “Church”. Also, over the years, I have audited others on NOTs and seen it really work as described in the NOTs HCOBs.

I have very minor personal experiences with the state of OT. About the only one that would really qualify is this. Once I happened to be giving a guy a metered interview who was currently on the old OT 6. He put his wallet down on the table before picking up the cans. As he was drawing his hand back, the wallet followed his hand and fell onto the floor, but he wasn’t touching it. There was a distinct space between his hand and the wallet. We both looked at each other in amazement.

Chronology of the OT Levels starting in 1967

In 1967, after having put out the Clearing Course (and possibly OT 1 and OT 2 – I don’t remember the years for these exactly), LRH researched and developed OT 3 (listen to Ron’s Journal 67) By 1969 he had put out the OT levels thru OT 6 (old OT 6). I am not certain when the old OT 7 came out as a separate OT level, but most of its processes can be found in other LRH books.

OT 5 and OT 6 were real OT levels, designed to give a person real OT abilities like the ones talked about in the PDC (Philadelphia Doctorate Course) and the book Creation of Human Ability. These levels were never cancelled. (BTW, the materials of these levels are available on Wikileaks.)

The Indie Scientologist Claudio Lugli gave a series of talks at the DROR Mission in Haifa (the first independent Scientology mission) in 2012 where he talks about these old OT levels in one of his episodes. All of these talks are well worth listening to. Here is the link:

In 1979 and 1980, LRH developed NOTs. The reason for NOTs was because people were not making it on the real OT levels 5 and 6. The reason for THIS was because of the “stuff” that is handled on NOTs. In the late 70’s I saw numerous people who were not making it on OT5 and OT6, who were instead put back to do more OT3, and then put back to do MORE OT3, and then put back to do EVEN MORE OT3. NOTs – which is similar to OT3, but not the same thing – was the missing step.

As far as I know the old OT 5 and OT 6 were never cancelled by LRH. But since NOTs came out, they haven’t been being done either.

Also as far as I know, LRH never called NOTs OT5, and never called Solo NOTs OT7; and never called the course (?!?) for Solo NOTs OT 6. I believe that someone else made these up. And I also don’t know who put the current OT 9 thru OT 15 (or whatever) on the revised Grade Chart that came out in the mid to late 80’s. But I also suspect that it had nothing to do with LRH.

And as for the current (multiply revised) OT 8, I never did this. But my opinion is that it is some weird add-on to Solo NOTs cooked up by someone else besides LRH, perhaps maybe based on something LRH said or commented on (I admit I could be wrong on this point, and I hope I haven’t offended anyone who has done OT 8 and had good wins).

I myself have never solo audited on the old OT 5 and OT 6. But I have worked, as a staff member, with many people who did. Maybe, once someone really finishes Solo NOTs, then he/she will actually be able to do the old OT 5 and OT 6. But I don’t think anyone has really finished Solo NOTs yet (I may possibly be wrong about this. I don’t want to invalidate anyone who has actually finished it.). One thing I am sure of is that no one who is currently in the RCS today has really finished Solo NOTs, or is really even capable of doing it. I myself am still auditing on Solo NOTs, with very good results – better than I ever had when I was doing it inside the “church”.

Is OT 3 Real?

This is a subject dear to many of our hearts!

I have spent a lot of time auditing myself on OT 3. And I have worked, as a Scientology staff member, with many other people who were auditing themselves on OT 3. And also, I have known many other people who I didn’t work with, who audited themselves on OT 3.

The first thing I want to say is that, regardless of whether or not the description of the OT 3 incidents and their consequences is real, I have found that the “tech” of it – the procedure that a person is supposed to do concerning it – works. By that I mean that the procedures produce results. Doing the procedures as stated ends up with various startling things happening. This has happened with me, it’s has happened with people I have audited on OT3 Review (that is, doing the OT3 procedures on another person, where I am the auditor and the other person is my “PC”). And I have seen many people change in front of my eyes as they were auditing themselves on OT 3 (as well as many others who did not change). When I say “change” I mean that the person’s appearance changed – the darkness or cloudiness or fuzziness around their faces went away to a noticeable degree, they looked brighter, their eyes were brighter, the girls looked prettier and younger (which is all I really care about – just kidding!)

So regardless of how bizarre or preposterous the OT 3 incidents may seem, and how ridiculous the supposed end results of these incidents were – where every person is supposedly carrying around “things” that were the direct result of these incidents, and that influence that person’s activities, awareness, thoughts and emotions – a lot of people, applying the OT3 procedures, have gotten dramatic, beneficial and lasting results.

Let me say here a very important thing. I am talking from my own reality – what I have observed regarding myself and what I have observed in others. For someone who has not experienced this for himself, and particularly for someone who has not gotten any personal wins from auditing, or seen others get wins from auditing, no amount of talking, arguing, describing, philosophizing, analogizing, preaching , etc. will convince another person that OT 3 is true. That is not possible. It is a complete waste of time – both for you and for the person you are trying to convince. The only thing that will “convince” them is their own personal experience.

My own personal reality is not very great on whether or not the OT 3 incidents happened as LRH said they did. It is moderate at best. But my personal reality on what LRH says are the results of the OT 3 incidents, here and now, ARE very real to me personally. And when I did the OT 3 procedures on myself – and when I now do the Solo NOTs procedures on myself – they work, for me. I feel better, I get rid of things – big things – that were bothering me right now. I get rid of things that are getting in the way of my relationships with other people. I feel more compassion for other people, I am more interested in what other people think and experience, I feel like I can do more of the things I want to do. And I AM doing more of the things I want to do (for example, posting on this blog).

Why Haven’t People Been Demonstrably Becoming OT?

First of all, people haven’t been doing the real OT levels, as I mentioned above. And the people who did do them in the 70’s weren’t getting results because of the NOTs “stuff” in the way.

Second, the definition of OT was perverted by the “church” in the 80’s and 90’s, for both PR and control purposes. For PR purposes, by granting status to certain people by calling them “OT”. And then for control purposes, by berating such a person who was not doing what a staff member wanted him to do, by telling him he was “not being OT”.

I still think that achieving the state of OT, or a part of it, is possible. For example, really being exterior; being able to “be” places without a body and really be there; moving objects without a physical intermediary; getting inside another person’s body (but not necessarily doing anything bad to them – although if I got into Miscavige’s body, I’m not sure what I would do. Megan Fox’s body, that’s another story entirely!)

I myself am going for really finishing Solo NOTs and after that I don’t know. I expect that I would be at least pretty much free from the perpetual cycle of life and death at that point – I am serious. But really OT? I don’t know.

Sometimes I wonder if there is still something missing to get to this state, that LRH hadn’t discovered yet before he dropped his body. Sometimes I wonder if he is working on that even now and that is why he hasn’t come back to clean up the mess that the “church” has become. I wonder a lot of things.

Sarge’s comments at the end of Marty’s last book make me wonder what did happen to LRH at the end. Also that he would make so many obvious mistakes concerning ethics and its administration, and the stat system – which in my opinion was a recipe for disaster from the beginning.

And how could he be able to levitate in 1952, and be so exterior then, and then in the 1980’s rely on Miscavige as the only person who could tell him what was going on, and that he couldn’t just look for himself. And how could he have allowed Miscavige onto such a high position in the early 80’s and not seen that he was psychotic, when he himself had developed the SP/PTS tech and knew how important it was.

But I don’t wonder about whether OT 3 or NOTs work or are valuable, because I observe these things directly.

OT Levels in the RCS Today

Basically, I think that no one in the RCS today is making it on the OT levels. Not only are they not making it, but they can’t possibly be able to do its procedures properly. Or the procedures necessary for any real auditing for that matter.

I think that all of the supposed wins that you see written up in fliers or emails sent out by the various “church” staff and public are ALL DELUSION. These people are not really having wins, not really going up the Bridge and not really making case gain. (I know I said that wins are very subjective, and here I am saying that the people who are saying they are having wins are not really having them. But I am talking here as an auditor who has seen people have wins, and heard people talk about wins. And the people I have actually seen and audited don’t look or sound at all like the people who are in these flyers and emails.)

The reasons for this no-case-gain-in-the-RCS situation are (1) the RCS is run by a suppressive person, so all the lower ranks are PTS; (2) the “granting of beingness”, an essential part of the Auditor’s Code, is something that has been completely thrown out the window by the current RCS. Can you imagine someone in the RCS really granting you beingness like LRH means it, and like an auditor is supposed to do it? For those of you who are auditors, you know that real auditing won’t happen if you are not truly granting beingness to your PC; (3) loads of out-tech – things that would make LRH turn over in his grave, if that were a possibility; (4) and particularly on OT 3 and NOTs. The granting of beingness is essential for OT 3 and for NOTs to work. Without this, they WILL NOT WORK. They will most likely just MAKE YOU WORSE (as I have mentioned in my previous blog post). Not only is the typical Scientologist in the RCS today unable to really grant beingness, but the very unfortunate thing, from my experiences of being on the Solo NOTs course numerous times over the last 30 years, is that “granting of beingness” is not stressed enough – hardly at all – by LRH in the NOTs and Solo NOTs materials. I don’t know the reason for this. Maybe it was because he gave his “notes” to someone else to write up and they left this out. Or maybe he thought that if you were a real auditor you would already know you had to do this. Or maybe this was part of what was wrong with him toward the end. I don’t know. But when someone else pointed this out to me after I was out of the “church” and had again started auditing myself on Solo NOTs, my auditing went many, many times better than when I was inside the “church” – because of this one single point.

What About the Future of OT?

Which brings me to the final point on this post: What is the future of the OT levels and the state of OT in Scientology? Well, I think it can happen – that real OT states (gradients to being a “full” OT) can happen, in the near future, on planet Earth. It is partially up to us now to try it out, to work at it, like Dani Lemberger or Trey Lotz or others out in the Indie field. The thing that bothers me the most is why LRH didn’t seem to be really OT at the end of his life. But – maybe – that was not really LRH, if you know what I mean? (I don’t know the answer to this one).

99 thoughts on “Scientology OT Levels and the State of OT

  1. Great article. Good to see you still auditing and having great wins. I did OT 8 in 2005. Even if we didn’t get it all, which seems to be the case, I enjoyed the level and in my opinion the bit we did was pure LRH. The tech people who delivered it were at that time honest first class individuals. Can’t say the same about the IAS.

  2. I did not see nor meet any OT’s that I was impressed with. I have met WOGS more capable, friendly and causative than any OT’s I got to know in Scientology. Perhaps it is due to PTS however, after grinding away for years on NED – I gave up completely on the Bridge. It was costing a fortune with nothing back in return. I looked around and evaluated for myself the people that had reached Clear and OT and decided I would not waste any more money or time on this side of the Bridge because I saw no valuable products.
    I started the training side but when I got to Method 9, I felt the E-Meter was not what I thought it was. After working on E-Meter drills for way too long – I realized the “reads” were more subjective than scientific.
    I appreciate the opportunity to speak freely here about it I had to withhold my true opinion of this while I was still in and it feels go to let er fly!
    Does anyone else feel the way I do?

    • Hi IM,
      What you say here is very real to me. I would love to comm. with you directly about some of these points. If you want to, send your email address to scnafrica and she will forward it to me. Then I will write to you directly.

      • Moderator, this comment is not for public posting.

        [Moderator: thanks for your input. It was noted and it works perfectly for us ;)]

    • Indie Auditor Trey Lotz gave me permission to share his pc’s win with you all. Here it is:
      Suzy had been an experienced auditor in D.C and had
      achieved the state of Clear, but had
      dropped off the bridge for many years.
      She decided to get back on the bridge and due to her hard work and
      persistence, has completed L11, L12, The Solo Course, she audited herself on OT 1-3, has
      completed Original OT 7, NOTS DRD, Certainty Processing, and finally NOTS!
      She has reread all the basic books and has been listening
      to LRH tapes daily. She is now auditing on SOLO NOTS.
      She put off writing a success story for a while until she
      had some perspective on how
      her auditing wins were manifesting in her life.
      It is important to me that my pcs are winning in life as well as in
      session, and in both respects, Suzy has done fantastically!
      Here is her success story:
      OT V, Audited Nots, is hard won but is also most stabilizing in terms of reaching the OT state.
      My auditor, Trey, and I had to confront every session as a team, ready for battle with the elements of the reactive universe.
      As they say, it’s not for sissies!
      Patience, fortitude and persistence were needed, but my abilities were enhanced along the way by gaining volumes of those very same qualities.
      We left no stone unturned in our search, and under those stones I found new abilities and a new viewpoint from which to live the game.
      Some of my abilities are; I took up guitar and then the bass guitar, I learned music theory ( thanks to Bob)
      and I have developed an inquisitive and curious mind about subjects that I thought were beyond my comprehension and participation.
      Subjects such as politics, world affairs, physics, philosophy, the environment and foreign languages.
      I am even considering going back to college.
      Trust me, I was not any kind of a student and only had interest and reality on the 7th dynamic.
      I have had wins on that dynamic as well. After the Ls I collaborated on a musical comedy (never been a writer!)
      and I just had a meeting with a Broadway producer who is nurturing the project.
      I was most concerned with being an OT alone without any other OTs in the environment I am in.
      I wondered how I would handle the world of dramatizing humanoids that I knew I had to coexist among.
      My best ability gained was to KNOW to stay connected up with the truths I’ve discovered by getting onto my Solo Nots auditing.
      And I cannot stress enough the training route.
      I study or listen to source everyday. It’s a great tool, if you’re enturbulated, pick up any HCOB or tape, and you WILL blow charge.
      It is 50% of your case gain, 50%! You gotta love that!
      Thank you to LRH, and his stunning generous genius.
      And Thank you to Trey (oh, Great One!) and Randy (Grand Boopah of Training).
      I’m writing this because you all care so much.

  3. A great post, Morris. Thank you. Because I’ve been putting together from all the input coming in on this blog and other blogs, that while one may not be able to fly to the moon once OT, there were still enormous benefits to be had from the auditing. (I have flown out from planet Earth, not to the moon per se but definitely left here. And this was before I had even heard of Scientology!)
    I would like to progress more up the Bridge now as a result of this post of yours. There are a couple of good auditors here in Joburg who are out and I would entrust myself to them. Two, I know, would grant me the necessary beingness.
    So thank you so much for this. I’ve gotten comfort and more confidence about going further up the Bridge. I’m one of the lucky ones who received good auditing and had wonderful auditors, bar only one or two whom I got myself removed from before any ‘damage’ could be done. I’ve ‘come out’ scoring but had decided that I wanted no more of it. I’m now having a rethink.

  4. Dear Morris,
    Great article, really….
    After OT 5 I received out tech and it went seriously wrong to say the least, if you don’t mind me asking which Indies would you recommend me to resume my Bridge? The truth being that I am terrified to join any group now as I recently recovered my life in part and I am aware of the risk of starting again. I don’t mean to offend any one btw it is just plain terror of going back to hell, thats all.

    • Laurie, I can recommend Trey Lotz, Silvia Llorens, Randy Smith, Gary Weber. I’m sure there are other very good auditors out there but I haven’t had personal comm with them yet.

  5. Hi Laurie,
    I’d like to comm with you directly about this, if it is OK with you. If you send your email address to ScnAfrica, she will forward it on to me, and then I will write back to you.

  6. Hi Morris, my research has shown that everything you have stated is real for most OTs. The lack of expected results even though there was some gains.
    I did the OT levels through OT7 and have repaired a number of failed OT5s and OT7s. The failure to grant beingness to that which is being audited on the OT processes is the primary reason for the lack of results, the high incidence of illness including cancer, and aberrated behavior on the part of too many OTs.
    With the help of many volunteers and friends, I have developed OT processes which grant beingness and include full application of the Auditor’s Code and produce immediate results for people who were “considered” by the church to be at the bottom of the bridge.
    The primary difference between the church processes and the ones we have developed is we treat that which is dealt with on the OT levels as a resource rather than something dangerous.
    I respect the desires of this blog to avoid any mention of confidential materials but you can read every detail of that confidential material on
    The material is freely available to all who wish to use it and you can get all of your questions answered by people who are using Spiritual Rescue Technology on the

    • Hi David,
      Thank you very much for your reply.
      I would really like to talk to you more about some of your points here, but since they involve confidential data, I think it would be better if we did this as a private email exchange.
      Per ScnAfrica, if you will give her your email address, she will pass it on to me and I will write to you directly about these things.

    • As a new “pc” and solo auditor on Spiritual Rescue Technology, I can testify that the difference between RCS and this tech is huge. Granting beingness is the real point, thank you Morris for raising it. As an OT3 (done in the Church) I can compare the wins and the peace I get from David’s tech with the “robotic” handling proposed in RCS.
      I wish you to have now a flourishing life!!

  7. Morris, awesome post mate! Frankly its the subject of OT and the potentiality it offers that gets my juices flowing better than anything else! I have so much to say on this but this time I will keep it short and sweet.
    1. Ive had partial bridge in the church and out. The two are NOT the same. There is tech missing of such importance it is simply mind blowing!!
    2. Ive been soloing for the last year. The wins have been out of this world. Its rediculous I know. Over the top, manic perhaps? No, just real and solid.
    3. I know others can have all of the above if they reach for it and the basic laws of sessions and the axioms are applied.
    To all fellow seekers dont stop, you are all closer than you th

    • Thank you Sheeplebane.
      It’s great to hear that you are continuing to solo with great wins!
      I have to say I am very curious about the missing tech. If confidential, could you contact ScnAfrica and we can exchange emails outside of this blog post?

      • And could you cc me on the comm? I can handle confidential OT level data as I have audited both inside the church and out in the Indie world on OT VII. For the record, I’ve had good gains on it, but some of the NOTS tech was not put on the OT VI course for those studying to audit on OT VII, which was bad.

      • Vinaire, it is important for you to understand who this blog is for. We’re not here to congratulate ourselves on our cleverness but primarily to be a place a doubting Scientologist can come. While you are probably correct it is unpalatable and repels the very people we wish to reach. Please understand.

  8. I know “OTs” that have phobias or are still afraid of spiders or get uncomfortable seeing a snake on TV.
    I too had my greatest wins on Grade II and the grades in general. I have not done OT levels, but had some FPRD, which in retrospect seemed to contradict some basic auditing axioms.
    If I got a read on something that was the same or similar to something I come across in a lecture, I was not sure if that was a genuine incident of mine or if it was somehow construed from what I have studied. So I always trusted recalls that were “unique” more.
    What you write on OT3 makes a lot of sense to me, and I have seen changes in people close to me as they have gone up the Bridge and OT levels – but in the field of ARC, less misemotions, better granting of beingness, etc. rather than actual OT phenomena which seems totally missing.But I have also seen others that seems to have changed little or even become more downtone while going up the Bridge.
    I do not think it is fair to say that no auditors currently auditing within the Church grants beingness. I think many do and are loved for it. The ones that do sees to be the ones most requested by PCs.
    I realised long ago – when I was still in the SO that whenever I did things that I did not wholeheartedly agree with and went against my own beliefs and morals, I would end up in trouble sooner or later. So I decided to follow my heart and do to others as I would like them do to me.
    This has not made me a wealthy man, but I think a rather happy one.

    • Hi Freedomfan,
      I realize that I was very harsh in my comments about auditing in the current “church”. The last time I was at Flag – some years ago, but after 2000 – I got some NOTs review and had a great win. Actually it was second best-ever session, after the Grade 2 session I described in my earlier post. I was lucky enough to get one of those auditors you are talking about – or someone like him/her – as well as a really good C/S.
      But to really go up the Bridge, you need a lot more than a one shot deal of getting a good auditor for a few hours. And I would imagine that such auditors are all gone by now. How could any honest and ethical (in the good sense) auditor put up with the “three sweeps” nonsense, for example? Plus so much other out-tech, of which the non-auditor (non-thetan, really) Miscavige is the “source”.

  9. Great article Morris. My reach for the tech has been tentative and your open honest down to earth comm softened the edges a bit more. Thank you.

  10. Good day everybody for now you can call me Deo short for “Demeter” still connected to some Scientologist`s is good standing with…
    Not wanting to give my fiends more grief than they already have , shame then they will have to disconnect from a dear old friend .
    I hope i can rekindle some of you and in all bring something to this community
    The subject of OT is a really hot one , all the work is “considered confidential”
    Not if you have internet and people like oldauditor aboard .
    It is probably not wise to keep trying to hide the tech , it is already in public domain , and it`s hidden nature that got us into trouble …
    The Church insidious trick to get Scientologist not to talk about tech to each other, perverting the good old keep SNC working to also mean that you cannot even speak to each other regarding the tech and the only Authority on the tech is the Church . Remember this one ? the more AUTHORITY the less knowledge ?
    So not to key in the Keyed-in further and to let you mull over the fact, and deep worry that we all have, – do we actually have the right tech? and was it applied correctly ?
    Very Very unlikely .
    We will play nice for now and keep the status quo “considered confidential”
    So what about a OT ? if you are not really really Clear ? will you stay OT or what ?
    Because we have not seen a real clear a round ,for a long long time.
    What we have is a key out clear . In time the bank will collapse on the person again.
    The clear bracelet charm apparently does not stop or even slowdown the process.
    Idle Morgue i feel for you , you are not the first and will not be the last person that comes to your conclusions .
    Morris OT phenomenon is a gradient and it starts right at the bottom if you did not get any at the beginning it is unlikely that you will suddenly get this huge and elusive OT cog

    • I believe you are right when you ask if ‘we have the correct tech’.
      As far as I know this blog shouldn’t even exist.
      KR are supposed to be used.
      Well, as auditors and probably as public, your knowledge of Admin procedures may be low. I admit it and I understand it.
      I do understand the feeling Morris describes, but I can also say that if he realized Scnsts (staff members) were ‘controlling’, he should have reported it.
      Not having done it, was an overt by omitting. And O/Ws are one of the reasons for blowing. O/Ws also prevent case gains and wins.
      I was Dissem Sec and later, TU Liaison Officer at the Lisbon Org.
      I didn’t do much of my job as Dissem Sec… as a beginner it was simply overwhelming to take ALONE Division 2. We were 7 (including some SO members from Spain) taking a Class V org.
      Lisbon Staff Members are Heros! I salute them.
      As a result of not being able to Reg and also not complying with the huge backlog, I was literally put out of the org. The FBO-more reported on the ED (a SO member) who had done it and he was punished at the SO base in Denmark (wearing black clothes, a SO procedure, I was told).
      I am telling you this to say that meantime, I was able to learn some admin tech.
      And I love it. And I can spot many flaps Morris went about.
      A Field Auditor doesn’t have exactly the same responsibility as an Intern Auditor.
      An Intern Auditor must know some minimum about Admin. Otherwise he is not a part of the org. Morris, it seems to me, was not a part of the Org, a staff member, Nevertheless, I believe he studied KSW.
      I wonder if any of you watched the event that launched The Basics.
      There you will see the flaps that there were in the materials.
      Claudio Lugli talks about the era that started with the Basics. Check the link Morris shared when Lugli was in Israel.
      The reason why, every staff member was calling in, he brings about, is not really correct: To stop the Bridge.
      The CSI had to recover from the huge investments that were made at Bridge Publications and at the New Era Publications. They needed to put everything on the hands of the public in order to get the return of the investment.
      If you check the link ”about us” at the Bridge Publications website, you will see that it is State of the Art printing tech, both on the US and Europe.
      The other reason is logic: If you know and understand the basics of Scn, and if you know what you are doing in Scn, you will progress faster. And the Basics are exactly that. The basics. Not that Mr Miscavige corrupted the Bridge.
      If you check which materials are The Basics, you will realize that having done it, straightened up the beginning as entering Scn for everybody.
      Of course it was not what LRH designed.
      I don’t know the previous Bridge. I know only the one that is being used nowadays.
      I agree that there may not be one single full OT in this planet.
      The OT Levels are exactly that: Levels of ability and of awareness.
      A full OT will be reached if and when somebody completes OT XIII – Power on all Dynamics
      until then, you guys are all preOTs. Partial OTs. It’s hard to confront it.
      You may even say that I am removing beingness. But that is a fact.
      My point here is that some how, the correct tech and/or the correct application
      of the tech from the auditor up to the C/S is missing. And that becomes an Admin problem because nobody seems to have reported it and therefore nobody handled it.
      There is the DofP and the DofT and nothing has been so far reported. Nothing that I could have read here.
      Plus, there is an Ethics Office in every org.
      An auditor is not really a public. He is a staff member, even if still at study.
      In LisOrg, my org although I live in Germany for 12 years now, KSW was really taken seriously and mastered.
      I can’t believe that so many people become frustrated with Scn.
      It is a shock for me.
      My suggestion is:
      Write down your O/Ws and get back on service and report everything you know is out tech and out ethics. No wonder people spend money for almost nothing.
      Good luck.
      Look, I beg you to recall your contract as you entered Scn.
      It says that you are not allowed to talk about Scn. You agreed with it. I don’t care if it is right or wrong.
      If you consider that that contract is wrong, you shouldn’t have signed it.
      So, missing to comply with your own acceptance, is an overt on the 1st Dynamic.
      You gave your word. And you are not respecting your own word.
      You see how many overts I could spot so far?
      Morris appeals for the right of speaking.
      Why he didn’t use that right/duty (there are no rights without duties) when he was on service or as a staff member?
      This post seems to me like I am working for General Motors and I come out to talk about some wrongs of some people in the company and to prevent the GM to fall on my back, I say that I am using my right of Freedom of Speech.
      Let me tell you that Freedom is about Responsibility.
      If you are responsible, no limits to your freedom can be imposed.
      The right to talk outside an org about events that happened in that org is as de per si, an overt. That is why it is necessary to appeal for a right.
      However, a Right is nothing to appeal for. A right is something that you have.
      If you need to appeal for a right, you are violating that right.

      • Hi guttendorf you are right this blog should not exists
        It pains me and troubles me deeply , let me tell you why
        If KSW was in, this blog will not exist
        If cruel and dishonest declares and disconnections did not exist this blog and many other similar blogs will not exist
        This blogs exists because you and other like you created this mess and are responsible for it, Yes it is called a overt
        Life gets easier when you delete those who make it difficult, but they don’t go away —Shame on you

    • I have been Clear for over two decades and my bank has no collapsed on me. I don’t expect it to, either. I am Clear meaning I’m no longer reactive, no longer keyed in. However, I’m not Clear as described in Dianetics. I have some of the abilities: I hardly every get ill, I have stable emotions yet have free emotion and cry or get angry or anything else at appropriate times. I’m mainly happy without being theetie wheatie.
      I reckon I good for OT auditing.

      • Hi Goodchoices880
        I assume that you received the levels had some Ned , realized some cog of some sort or other, that i believe is also “considered confidential” , You were send for the clear certainty rundown and you purchased a bracelet ? The abbreviated process, of a gat clear

        What i am about to tell you is “considered confidential” so confidential that it was taken out of the confidential materials , But thanks to SP`s that publish “considered confidential” material you can now find out for yourself on the big web .
        I have it form a reportedly good source by the name of LRH that there is no such thing as a CLEAR only “Keyed out Clear” until the PC have solo audited “considered confidential” damm …

        “The clearing course ” OK i said it shame on me .
        What happens in the clearing course ? “considered confidential” This is getting ridiculous i mean we are talking about the state of clear ? Not about some ghost and things that hangs on to you or follow you with a ball and chain
        Yikes i hope ghosts and things is not “considered confidential”

        But i will give you a hint at what was suppose to be the clearing course i have not seen the gat course …

        Remember the Clear hands congress , the one where OVERTS and WITHHOLDS made a debut ? It is said that the reason for all this bad stuff is the “GPM” Please slap my fingers for verbal teching , ouch that hurts , ok go to source and find out for yourself ….

        Is this not OT 2 ? my god do i walk a tight rope here or what ?

        Goodchoices880 if you are not a theta clear OT1 will get you in good and you will start with negative gain as pointed out in above discussions
        It turns out the clearing course in not optional
        Being a theta clear is essential, there are different types of clear ….

        So How many OT`s is Theta clear ? it used to be this big thing !!
        I would love to know ….

      • Hi goodchoices880
        I tried to answer you but got moderated by the moderators
        I know this link at the bottom is good it was published on this blog in the past so i have all intension that you will get this.
        It says it is a study of bad SP Mayo , however if you work through this study that must have taken many hours of research to compile there is a surprising conclusion .
        Carefully look how clears was made in the 60s , a reference is also made as to why OT,s is having trouble . This is probably closer to source as anything currently called gat Scientology

  11. I first discovered Dianetics in 1997. I read Dianetics and it was very real to me. I had a very good win on my dianetics demo. From the win, I was convinced.It was savior and a life saver. I did a couple of entry level courses in the cos , ups and downs and personal values and integrity. I saw the quality of data was high, (much above normal) at least in principle. Long story short, while on course, things I saw and experienced were definitely not sane. I began to question,….. and again long story short, was declared PTS. I was sold science of survival and PTS/SP, Dianetics home study and Into to Scn Ethics on the way out. I was devastated.
    Anyways, to make the best out of a bad situation, I did the homestudy courses several times over in the next few months.
    I particularly liked the s o s.
    Five months later, I met someone who told me about the fz.
    That was anther savior. He told me about and gave me his copy of the Free Spirit Journal and I was elated.
    I connnected with the fz.and auditors.
    Got lots of phone auditing.
    Got and read all the scn books. Also some tapes.
    I soaked it all up.
    Then I in the last couple of yrs, I began to realize that I was doing my own version of scientology, (being a truth seeker) and read 100s of books for 27 yrs prior to Dianetics.
    Much similar to what and how Hubbard did his research prior to 1950.
    I realized that I was applying applied the formula for understanding as explained in “How to Study a Science” in New slant on life, And I see that I did that to a very extensive degree.
    So after being in the fz for 17 yrs and evaluated a lot of points of view, I have come to the conclusion of a hypothesis that scn is fairly good as far as it goes, ( it is a good start) ( and there is nothing else on earth that even comes close to what scn has to offer, but the serious and bonafide student need sto use his head and needs to go farther. It is my hypthesis that scn is missing the Jesus and Bible factors, and some other complementary data.
    The intelligent student of this subject of life mastery, needs to sort through and glean Hubbards work for the good stuff, or stuff of practical value, ( and quit hanging on to coat tails or looking for “gurus” to follow ) and think for himself and read and study lot of other work or material and will take responsibility for his own future and make his own bridge.
    It is my hypothesis that OT is a level or dimension of the kingdom of God or kingdom of Heaven. Same as stable clear, and stable peak states.
    And Jesus allegedly said “No one enters the Kingdom of Heaven, except through me.”
    And: “In my Father’s house are many mansions.”.
    And those who are luke warm will be spewed out of the mouth of God.
    (Does that sound like a “crash”?
    It is my hypthesis that no one goes stable clear or OT without Jesus and not likely without doing a lot of his own homework and gaining a lot of other essential knowledge besides scn. .

  12. Interesting post. Thanks for writing it.
    I agree with much of what you say. But I have a different take on some of your comments.
    First of all I think that a thetan can really mock just about anything up and then make it real to himself. I disagree with you on calling the wins that people have within the RCS as delusional.
    There is infinity valued logic. Something is not just black or white, right or wrong, in-tech or out-tech. There are gradients. For example there are people I am sure that are getting tone arm action from the auditing they get inside of the cult and are getting wins from that auditing. To say they are delusional is unfair. I do believe that there are many out-points that make the current participants “pts” or whatever you might want to call them, but I still feel they can be making some case gain inside of the cult.
    I did OT 3 many years ago and when I read the indoctrination material I thought “this is bullshit” but I decided I would audit it and see if I got any results and I did. Once after auditing on OT3 I was taking a bus home and was waiting at a bus stop very keyed out and I felt very exterior and that I could pervade things. I was leaning against a wall and a couple of kids were making a lot of noise at the bust stop and being very antagonistic. Someone who lived nearby must have called the police on them because within a matter of minutes about 5 cop cars came screeching up to the bust stop. Several cops got out and started questioning these guys and it looked like they had blood on their minds. I was just watching all of this unfold and was quite entertained and still very keyed out. I saw the “lead cop” looking around as if trying to decide what to do with these kids and he looked at me and we instantly went into communication. He came over to me and asked me what these guys had been up to as if turning over all responsibility to me to decide their fate. I said that they really weren’t doing that much and he turned around and called of his dogs and they all left. It may not sound like much but it was a very “OT” experience for me. I decided that as long as I was getting results from the techniques I would not worry too much on the theory behind it.
    I think a person is on a very slippery slope when he states that others wins are delusional. I think that many people outside of Scientology also have very spiritual wins. I do think that people still inside the cult are having wins and “case gain”.
    As to whether true OT is possible or not I don’t know if anyone knows for sure. As you say , nobody seems to have made it yet including LRH. For him to speak so confidently of it in the PDC lectures is a bit dishonest in my opinion.

    • Good points, Tony.
      Yes, I was probably too harsh on people still in the RCS and whether they are getting case gain or not. I was certainly expressing some of my own charge on the subject.
      There are probably some who are getting case gain in the RCS today, and some (the majority in my opinion) who are not. I certainly would not want to route in to Flag to continue my own bridge progress.

      • Yeah Morris I wouldn’t go there either for any case gain. I just thought calling them delusional was a bit over the top. A lot of us were there not too long ago and I wouldn’t say that I didn’t get anything out of it. The peripheral bull shit with regging and all of that makes it an unpleasant place to go for enhancement.

  13. Great posting, lots to say about this subject.
    1) I seem to recall in an early lecture LRH, possibly the PDCs, that the State of OT was a “postulated” state, which to me means LRH formulated what an ultimate state would be like, set that as your goal and align all processing actions to that. While he speaks of these abilities as fact, I know of no hard evidence that any of these abilities are reproducible or demonstrative.
    2) Is OT3 real? Ultimately up to the individual to decide. I took a very pragmatic approach to the level, very much like an auditor. I had a job to do and I did it. As an experiment I did have a look at that area of my track during a session – no firsthand recall and not a thing to be seen on the meter – zip, nada, zilch. It is real to me that SOMETHING happens while auditing the OT3 processes, exactly what I cannot say for sure. Did I get something out of it? Yes, for sure. Am I glad I did it? Yep. Do I have OT powers as a result? Nope.
    3) Consider this, OT3 (and OT2 to a certain degree) is the first level where I am told I have something in my case, not based on personal inspection or reality. LRH and tech staff automatically assume you are afflicted with the negative results of the OT3 incident. No one even checks for a reading item; it is simply a matter of “fact” – “You’re here, so you gotta OT3 case.”
    4) If the OT3 incident DID happen and is REAL, and is the cause of all of mankind’s woes, then I would think it would be at the top of your list of incidents to run out as an engramic incident (as opposed to addressing the OT case). Yet, based on personal experience and discussions with others, this never occurs on the Bridge. I find this very odd.
    5) Finally, I think LRH was a very able guy and I do think he had good intentions in pursuing routes to Clear and OT. I also think things went a bit south along the way, an over time more and more insanity crept in. Did he discover the “route out”? I personally doubt it. That does not mean Scn has nothing to offer however.

    • Hi Statpush,
      Very interesting things you bring up. I want to think about your points (3) and (4) a little more.

  14. I wish to comment only on one statement in this write up that I feel is quite misleading and I happened to be directly involved with it at the time.
    NOTs was not developed because people were not making it on OT 5 and 6. It was developed because LRH got extremely ill in 1978. He busted Paulette Ausley who was his auditor and called for David Mayo to be brought to La Quinta from Flag to audit him.
    During the course of the auditing, LRH complained that it was not improving his condition and concluded that the assist program (that included Dianetics R3R) was wrong. He then outlined for Mayo what to do in session and this was then compiled into NOTs and other issues like Dianetics Forbidden on Clears and OTs. This is the genus of NOTs, not any failures on the part of others on old OT 5 and 6.
    LRH did direct RTRC to make NOT’s “OT V” and Solo NOTs “OT VII.”

    • Very interesting Mike!
      I did not know these things, particularly about LRH directing that NOTs be called OT V and Solo NOTs OT VII. A couple of points I’d like to bring up though:
      It is very weird that the Solo NOTs COURSE, where you are just studying stuff and not auditing yourself, is called OT VI. It is training and doesn’t have a case EP, like the other OT levels.
      Regardless of whether or not NOTs was developed as a remedy for people not making it on the old OT V and OT VI (and I don’t dispute your explanation here), NOTs and Solo NOTs are definitely necessary for anyone to be able to do the old OT V and OT VI. The sequence OT III, OT IV, old OT V, old OT VI did not work, of this I am sure . But, also, I am not sure if the sequence OT III, OT IV, new OT V, new OT VI, new OT VII, new OT VIII, old OT V, old OT VI will work.
      From my observation and experience, NOTs and Solo NOTs are “necessary” to be able to go OT, but perhaps not “sufficient” (to throw in some mathematical terminology here).

    • Mike,
      I know a little bit about what became NOTs.
      True Paulette audited Ron on Dianetics. Actually New Era Dianetics which had been developed earlier that year.
      I know because I worked on compiling the original packs for our course room then later that year was the discovery that more than the 2% or something like that had gone clear on Dianetics.
      Then later when Ron got ill Paulette tried auditing him on NED but that didn’t go well and the reason why is covered in the first HCOB relating to NOTs.
      For years we had been auditing Pre OTs on R3R.
      In fact many of the cases who were audited on the HSDC pilot were Pre OTs. Same with many of the test cases on Xdn.
      Class VIII included a procedure known as Milazzo named after the town in Sicily were the RSM was docked for a short time which consisted of running a Pre OT who was having trouble with III on R3R
      In other words Hubbard Standard Dianetics seemed to work on Pre OTs in the hands of a highly skilled auditor until NED was developed.
      Anyway the difficulty that Ron himself and other Pre OTs were having running NED according to the above HCOB was the reason why Ron developed a Dianetic Procedure that was specific to OTs.
      Whether he called the OT DRD which was developed in 1980 “New OT IV” and separated audited NOTs and the Solo NOTs course and Solo NOT into “New” OT Levels.
      The fact is that there is no HCOB that even mentions this change that I am aware of.
      So you’ll excuse me Mike if I apply the HCOB on How to Defeat Verbal Tech until I actually see one.
      All I know is that in RJ 39 he calls NOTs “new OT VII” which makes sense because it is a prerec to “new OT VIII”.
      There is no HCOB that I’m aware of that cancels the original OT Levels.

  15. Thirty years ago there were a number of large break away Independent groups in the United States. I spent some time at one and did quite a bit of auditing. The big item then was NOTs. Many people were auditing NOTs, full time. The original OT levels were available also, discreetly, and it was easy to obtain photocopies of the original handwritten levels of OT 5 and OT 6.
    Many people did NOTs and original OT 5 and OT 6.
    It was very interesting, and it was liberating to no longer be shacked by the central organization, but, in all honesty, nothing approaching the state of Operating Thetan, as defined by L. Ron Hubbard, was obtained.
    IMO, just as much, or more, can be accomplished with a comm course graduate, using the OT processes in a book such as Creation of Human Ability, as can be accomplished with someone whose been running NOTs procedures everyday for years.
    Frankly, I think many people would be better off skipping the negative gain side of the OT levels (which is all the OT levels inside Corporate Scientology), and concentrating solely on the positive gain procedures.

    • I would add that, IMO, both OT 2 and OT 3 are evaluative and both violate the spirit of the Auditors Code.
      The idea of auditing, as originally presented, was to invite the person to look at his environment and his mind without an imposing authoritative evaluation.
      Telling a person that he has an OT 2 or OT 3 case, or a NOTs case, and that this case is a problem that must be handled before he can do OT exercises, is a giant evaluation, and, IMO, often a wrong evaluation.
      Who’s to say what someone can or cannot do? or what is or is not the person’s case?
      From my examinations of this subject and its history, it’s apparent to me that there were as many, or more, gains from OT type POSITIVE GAIN processes, such as SPACATION, in the 1950s, then there were gains from the OT levels of the 1970s.

      • Interesting points, B.V.
        I myself have seen that I have (had) an OT 3 case and still have a NOTs case. I can’t imagine anyone living on this planet NOT having one. But again, this is my opinion and based on my own experiences..
        If I mock up (envision) myself doing, for example, Creative Processing from the PDCs, before having done OT 3 and NOTs, I see myself getting into a LOT of trouble and not being very happy about the results, to say the least.
        I have never done the SPACATION process (which is descibed in the PDCs). This seems like a really good process that can produce a lot of positive gain; and I can’t see it having any bad consequences (again, my opinion).
        I think, as far as really achieving OT states (or gradients of OT states), we ourselves as independent Scientologists have to work this out. We don’t have LRH to hold our hand any more, but we do have a lot of material from him that we can use.

      • Hi Morris,
        It didn’t occur to most people that they had an OT 3 case before LRH told them they had an OT 3 case. And most were doing just fine without being told.
        After they were TOLD, then, they HAD an OT 3 case.
        Similarly, between 1968 and 1978, people who had completed OT 3 believed they had no more OT 3 (or NOTs type) phenomena as a problem, in other words, no more case of that type.
        Then, in 1978/1979, LRH TOLD them that they DID have more case of that type, and, suddenly, most of those people DID have more case of that type.
        Some have suggested that this is LRH’s case that has been superimposed upon Scientologists as their case, when it may not be their case.
        I think you’d be surprised – without the giant authoritative evaluations cited above – how much fun, and gain, many people can have with materials from the early and mid 1950s.

      • Remoteviewed,
        IMO, auditing past exterior is mainly a problem if there’s an upset due to auditing past a release point.
        In corporate Scientology, of the 1970s, “exterior” was made over complicated.
        Only a very few people, from my observation, really had difficulties associated with exteriorization. The pattern is: A few have a problem and a remedy works on some of those few, then the remedy is adopted for all, and the problem is also adopted for all. Pretty soon anyone with certain symptoms is judged to need an “Int RD.” People bog on that, and then remedies are made for that, then remedies for the remedies.
        This, along with *telling* people their case (OT 2, OT 3, etc.), rather than *asking* them, was one of the drawbacks of LRH trying to make the Bridge into an assembly line run by a central organization.

      • Remoteviewed,
        Formatting is making it difficult to have a conversation, and this is off topic (sorry, host) but the hidden data line was always part of Scientology, and, per the system LRH covertly established, “Advices,” and other back channel LRH orders, were always senior to non-confidential policy.

      • BV,
        Audited a lot of Int RDs and End of Endless on PCs and with the exception of a very few most of them had the phenomena described in Ext and High TA and *needed* the rundown.

      • Final message in this segment to Remoteviewed (too cumbersome),
        I’m not completely discounting the idea of situations occasionally arising from leaving and/or re-entering the physical body, just noting the exaggerated importance, installed, by corporate Scientology, on the topic.
        Yes. I’ve seen people nearly hysterical because they have that dreaded thing called “high TA.” It’s not easy being married to an e-meter!
        LRH’s inspiration for this RD is speculative but interesting, as it may be found in the pages of a book he recommended during the 1952 PDC lectures. The book was called, ‘The Master Therion’, and is also known as ‘Magick, in Theory and Practice’ by Aleister Crowley. (If curious, search, when in the text, for “body of light.”)
        Good chatting with you.

      • BV,
        Honestly I find a comparison of Ext and High TA or anything Scientological to anything related to to the teachings of Thelma a bit of a stretch.
        Hubbard’s connection to Aleister Crowley the “Beast” is usually exaggerated due to fact that Hubbard knew Jack Parsons the head of the Agape Lodge in Pasadena and because he makes an obscure reference to them and the book “The Master Therion” actually “Message of the Master Therion” in a PDC lecture:
        That and the fact that Hubbard assisted Parsons in Babalon Working which is embellished by Miller to such a degree that it is almost comical.
        The fact is a more accurate description of what *actually* happened can be found in the following book:

    • I agree with you somewhat B.V.
      Back in the old days we had a good time running R1-9 (The Grand Tour) Remedy H (not Preparation H 😉 ) Black and White, Creative Processing and other OT Processes.
      Though problems with auditing PCs past exterior showed up on many on cases.
      Personally I think that was the key reason for no longer using these processes at lower levels.
      Trouble with Ext and not enough auditors who were trained enough to resolve it.
      Fact is I remember PCs being hung up for weeks waiting to get Int resolved.
      Probably worse now. That is if any PC ever go ext there any more.
      One thing I noticed just before I left were there were fewer cases who went exterior on the Squirrelly “Golden Age of Tech” “auditing”.

      • Regarding levels like CC and OT II. Fact is they had been working on finding the correct series of GPMs that achieved Clearing through out the ’60′s and the ones on the Clearing Course and II seemed to work for me at least.
        So did III and IIIX.
        You can say what you want about them if you wish.

      • Hi RV and BVO (not enough Reply buttons at the lower-levels 😉 ),
        RV, great that you actually audited on these processes in the old days! And that CC, OTII, III and IIIX worked for you. The lists of “items” on CC and OTII certainly can be looked at as arbitrary, or “LRH’s idea”, but I know an awful lot of work and auditing went into finding them.
        BVO, I had the following over-all experiences with getting auditing in orgs – once I was no longer able to get auditing at a mission – which would tie in with your comments, and which I am certain messed up a lot of people.
        (I just realized that some of what I want to say here might give away some people’s identities and possibly provide clues for OSA rodents. So I will mention only one of the 2 or 3 major points I am thinking of. I would love to have a little “off-line” discussion with both of you. You can write to ScnAfrica about how we can do this, if you are interested.)
        So here is one of those points, but a very big one.
        .For many, many years my case was very screwed up (as was and is the situation with many, many people). Over 20 or more years of being on lines at Flag, I traveled there maybe 15 times. Each time I would get there, I would fill out a “Red Form” at the Registrar, describing what it was I wanted handled on my current trip. I really had only one main thing I wanted to get handled, and I would write this down every time I showed up.
        EVERY TIME (except for my last trip to Flag around 2000), what I put on the Red Form was COMPLETELY IGNORED. Instead, I got whatever the “flavor of the day” was, or just some rote, cookie-cutter handling. Never ONCE (literally) did I get an interview about what it was I wrote down on the Red Form. Nor did I get any interview, in session or out (other than occasionally a completely perfunctory one) about the thing I wanted to get handled, and which my attention had been completely stuck on for decades. The attitude seemed to be: “Actually listen to the PC? Hahaha!, What do you think we are, crazy?”.
        This viewpoint is directly contrary to what LRH has written in the C/S series and other places. You, RV and BVO, having a lot of experience, probably know the LRH Issues I am talking about.
        If this one single point – actually listen to the PC and try to really find out what is going on with him/her – had been done, then the cases of tens of thousands of people would probably not have gotten nearly as screwed up as they were screwed up
        I have observed second hand even LRH being guilty of this – C/Sing people remotely without making sure probing, in-depth interviews were done to find out what was really going on. So LRH was guilty in some cases of violating his own technical principles.
        And BVO, I well remember the crazy times when Int/Ext came out. Everyone was getting it if there was even the slightest hint of a somatic or viewpoint that sounded like it could possibly be “Out Int” (and even when there wasn’t!). I remember times when PCs were kept in session for hours and hours, because you weren’t supposed to end the session until the full Int Rundown was done – no matter how long the session went on.
        Some crazy days. But LRH was certainly trying to figure it out and using the only real thing he had to figure it out with – the experiences of PCs. Our role as PCs at that time also included, in a lot of cases, the role of “guinea pig” (but I’m not complaining about this).
        Anyway, enough said (at least here on this blog). I hope these comments help in some way.

  16. I never did OT VII in the church, only in the indie field, but from what I understand here are two of the things that set them apart:
    A. Overrun and invalidation of FNs and EPs. In the church, Solo Auditors have to use the 3 swing FN and church NOTs materials have been altered to remove specific references that prevent overrun.
    B. There’s a bulletin in the indie pack that says you don’t interrupt NOTs for anything! Anything at all. I’m sure this issue is gone in the church pack. It would have to be gone to allow the sec checking and “preps” and auditing people on stuff without using techniques meant for anyone OT III and above.
    Doing these two things to people is plain evil.

    • Hi Juggernaut,
      Great that you did OT VII in the indie field and never in the “church”.
      I totally agree with you – doing those two things to people is definitely evil.

      • Hi Morris – thanks for answering my comment. Coming back here after a few hours, I realized you have been answering everyone’s comments and I’m impressed with your thoughtfulness. I also wanted to thank you for the great article.
        Anyway, didn’t want to mislead you, I’m not done with OT VII, I just started. My wording was a bit weird. Doing NOTs in the indie field is wonderful! I was in apathy when I was still in the church, because I knew I would never ever be able to go up the bridge, and now I can do it without the godawful bankruptcy, overruns, wrong indications, sec checking, etc etc.

      • Great, Juggernaut!
        I think your comment makes a lot of people feel better about getting Solo NOTs in the indie field, including myself.

    • This may be unpopular information but both those situations stem from LRH orders.
      A. HCOB 21 July 1978 (See also 1978 Tech Dict.) defines FN:
      “Floating needle is a rhythmic sweep of the dial at a slow even pace of the needle. That’s what an FN is. No other definition is correct.”
      Rhythmic is interpreted as being 3 swings.
      B. For background on interrupting NOTs, if you’re interested, do an Internet search on “Jesse Prince, the ever changing tech,” and then, while in the document, do a search on the terms “NOTs” and “checks,” and you’ll see that former high level Sea Org Exec and tech person, Jesse Prince, witnessed the order/’”Advice” from LRH.

      • Still hearsay.
        Unless he can actually produce that “Advice”.
        You get all kinds of Ron supposedly said this and that yet no documentary evidence that he said it.
        One of the reasons I left the Church was that it was constantly being run on some “Hidden Data Line” and that the Sea Org had become a Priesthood with Miscavige being the worst offender.
        True there is a lot of stuff that was issued as “Advices”, “Directives and “Orders” but none of them are senior to actual HCOBs and PLs. So as far as I’m concerned they can be disregarded. Especially if they go against what is considered *Standard* Tech and Policy.
        More especially those things appropriately known as SP Directives.

      • @ Remote
        I so agree with what you say about “hidden data line” enough with this…

      • Hi Laurie Dim,
        If you ever decide you want to know the full details of the contents of Scientology’s doctrine, including the confidential parts, much of that information is available.
        Deciding that you’d rather not know, unfortunately, doesn’t make it cease to exist, or cause it to cease affecting people’s lives.
        However, if you know about it, and understand it, there may be occasions when you could help another, which is the reason for bothering with any of this in the first place.

  17. When you scrape away the sci-fi you are left with processes rooted in guided imagery and visualisation – ie. established therapeutic psychological techniques.
    What’s more interesting is Hubbard’s about-face.
    You aren’t actually the creator of all your problems afterall. Your problems are caused by others. The fault lies with those people over there. It’s not you. It’s them.
    Sounds like a lesson in Blame. Victim. Irresponsibility.
    Geir wrote several brilliant articles on this subject.

    • mwesten,
      I don’t see where Ron made an “about face” as you say.
      Original Dianetics was run single flow i.e. what was done to the PC. Later on came the data on DED/DEDEX later known as Overt Engrams or Flow 2 then triple flows came in the late ’60′s followed by 4 flows thus one has the possibility that one’s problems could related to several flows involving another or others interactions.
      Thus what you and Isene see as an “about face” is just a progression and advancement.

    • ‘You are responsible for your own condition.’ I believe that this is correct, however, common sense is involved.
      For example, if you are playing with explosives, and you make a mistake, and blow yourself up, you are responsible for your error. You are not responsible for the chemical formulas of the explosives, or the engineering to develop the machines to mine the raw materials, let alone what others are using these things for.
      Same with a rape victim. They may hold some responsibility for ‘pulling it in’, but this does not absolve the rapist, in the least.
      As for ‘case’, I assume that we can agree that we all agreed (to some degree) to be in this universe. I doubt that we each totally designed it. So, we are down to a multi-valued logic system of responsibility, ethics, tech and God knows what else is involved to resolve it.
      Any datum can be extracted out of a subject, out of context, and can be made fun of. It doesn’t prove much. The subject has to be taken as a whole, and applied with good judgement. I have yet to see something made that is student / idiot proof.
      With regards to a number of comments, I find OT-2 a great example (in my particular case). It was totally unreal, as something personal, but it produced totally awesome results.
      Another interesting thing is that the e-meter is supposed to read on your awareness level, or just below it. (In other words, you should be up to it.) Is the meter being evaluative, or is it being used to help? Is the PC there to be helped in the first place?
      The bridge has been described as a workable gradient. Is it perfect? Is it useful? Does it help?
      Aberration is, pretty much by definition, a very convoluted subject, and made difficult to resolve.

  18. A great write-up. I certainly understand the force that drives people to want to believe in something greater than themselves and to postulate greater unattained states of being. I get it. I don’t even necessarily disagree. It certainly seems like there has to be something greater to life than just what we see.
    BUT…it is quite a condemnation on the subject of Scientology — in my opinion — that after decades of giving and receiving what are supposed to be HIGH POWER OT PROCESSES in the form of L Rundowns and NOTS, the best we can point to as evidence of OT abilities is some minor instances of maybe having moved a small objects.
    I really don’t mean this derisively at all. I as much as anyone would LOVE to see evidence that the Bridge delivers what LRH promised, believe me, I really really would.
    Morris, your write-up is so well-written and pan-determined, I really appreciate it.
    For me personally, it’s been decades since I’ve had any real involvement with the Church. My wife is involved, but only superficially and mostly for social / business interests. I’ll never let my kids get seriously involved…mainly because I just cannot get past the outpoint that LRH did not seem to be a beneficiary of the tech he created.
    Morris, I know you acknowledge this fact and I appreciate that you don’t make any serious attempts to rationalize it, and you just let it lay as it is, but I can’t help but to keep coming back to this point.
    We’re all still in a state of HOPING that Full OT, or even shades of it, are even possibly achievable? LRH has been dead for almost 30 years…and we are still HOPING that the fruits of his work even exist?
    SCN is supposed to be engaged in an all-out effort to Clear the planet…and we are all still merely HOPING that such a state-of-being is even possible?
    The Church says that LRH had everything (even the highest OT levels) all figured out from Day 1 and that the next 30 years of R&D was just undercutting so that everyone else could get in on the action. LRH himself claimed to be able to pop out of his body at will and visit all sorts of places and the Bridge was the 100%-taped route for all others to be able to do the same thing…and 30, 40, 50 years later we are all still HOPING that such a state of being is even POSSIBLE?
    I just can’t get over it.
    I don’t believe I will ever go back to the Church or to Scientology in general because I just can’t get over how much a scam it seems to be…because of this one fact of what was promised, and how it clearly was not deliverable.
    NOT that’s it’s not therapeutic. NOT that there aren’t wins to be had. But if the guy who created all of it said it did all these amazing high-level things…yet everyone who has EVER been involved has only had (relative to the promise) some low-level wins…and the man who created off of it, DEMONSTRABLY did not receive the fruits of his own work….how do I justify participating?
    How do I go on HOPING that I will achieve a state of being that LRH himself did not achieve?
    The only reason we DO the levels is because we believe LRH figured it out. But if we can SEE from LRH’s own life (particularly the end) that he DID NOT figure it out…then what is our basis for continuing to believe that he did?
    What is our basis for continuing to hope that the states of being he promised are still possible, when he himself did not achieve it?
    I know I’m repeating myself…but whatever.
    Everyone is free to practice what they like. It’s not my place to invalidate others desires or dreams or goals. But luckily this is an open forum for thoughtful discussion, and I very much appreciate that.
    Is it healthy to continue participating in HOPES that something greater can be figured out? Just because someone is engaged in delivering the current OT levels to public (Dali / Trey) that doesn’t make them any more capable of figuring out the rest of the path than anyone else has been in the last 50 years.
    The whole basis of Scientology is that LRH figured it out, we don’t have to question how or why he came to rise above the bank, he just did and that’s that, and that alone is all the explanation anyone ever needs for why he was able to “tape the route” when no one else did.
    What route? Route to what? Route to where? He clearly didn’t make it. So how can anyone else? Okay, I’m done beating on that horse for now.
    Similar subject, but slight tangent. I listened to Marc Headly’s 2nd interview with Jeff Augustine. The data about how strongly people at Int believe LRH is coming back really struck me. I’ve always thought the party line was that LRH was going off to Target 2. I have NEVER, NEVER heard it publicly said that we should be expecting LRH to return to Earth and pick up where he left off. Can any of the vets comment on this discrepancy between whether LRH was supposed to go off to Target 2 and whether he was supposed to return? I’m really curious to know how the “he’s coming back” idea caught on. Marc said that LRH told this to Ray Mithoff…but the public has NEVER been told this. So any thoughts on this would be appreciated.

    • David,
      VERY thought provoking comments. I just want to address one thing, out of the many things you said (even if there was one point you kept coming back to).
      As I am continuing to do Solo NOTs, I am having wins and gains, and my life and “spiritual state”. if I can call it that, is continuing to get better. In my opinion I am moving toward some OT state, even if slowly.
      So I plan to continue with this, I still have the personal goal to go OT, and I want to continue to work at it, even though I am still “digging the ditch” in a manner of speaking. But the “dirt” is definitely coming out of the ditch, and I see that there is still more “dirt” that should come out.
      What state I will be in when I finish Solo NOTs (assuming I do, which is still a real possibility to me), I don’t know. I HOPE (yes, hope, as you said) it will be somewhere in the OT realm – able to be exterior, perhaps.. I don’t know. But for me it is still a productive thing to do right now.
      I just wanted to give you a little more of my personal reality on this. I really very much appreciate your comments.

      • Who of you remember Izzy ?
        He was a supervisor for many years at the old org in JHB
        Did you know that he was deaf ? Or in the least very hard of hearing ?
        He was CSed by LRH himself while LRH was in SA .
        Izzy told me that a process was run on him for many days , yes days and the auditor reported nothing is happening. LRH told the auditor to go on with this one process , and after long hours of running one process Izzy`s hearing switched on as well as sight — now that will be theta hearing and sight .
        The last i spoke to Izzy it was still on !
        That process was —- book and bottle —-

  19. Consider that this physical universe is a subset of a non-physical universe, and that the non-physical protects the integrity of the physical for various reasons which inter alia include that this is a learning lab. Then possibly you may see why so called OT phenomena are not in evidence. So called miracles are rare but not completely absent.
    Another aspect is that we are awareness of awareness units which utilise various activity constructs to play games here. The mind-body is not an entity – it is an activity. You could possibly say we are thetaning (verb) – NOT Noun. The “self” is an activity and most of us are very concerned about the self and whenever some epiphany is had due to the self being absent – the self claims it had the epiphany. This could be called an ego trap. So the very next time you have some win due to the absence of the ego-self – don’t write a success story.

    • Hi Martin,
      Are you a scientist of some sort? (No disrespect. I like science and scientists.)
      I have to admit, I don’t completely duplicate what you are saying here. But some of it that I do get is very interesting.

  20. OP: “regardless of whether or not the description of the OT 3 incidents and their consequences is real, I have found that the ‘tech’ of it – the procedure that a person is supposed to do concerning it – works. By that I mean that the procedures produce results.”
    I think a good way to analyze this situation is assuming that, even though LRH detected something real, his description of the OT 3 incidents has “decoding errors” (an idiom used in remote view).
    Decoding errors occur when a remote viewer perceives something that is real at the target, but the description of this perception is not entirely correct. The perception is real, but the description of it is only partially accurate. For example, if someone describes a city with tall skyscrapers as a mountain range, that is a decoding error. The perception is correct in terms of the topology, but the characterization of it as a mountain range is incorrect. Also, if a person places trees or animals in a barren natural landscape, that is a decoding error. The perception of a natural landscape is correct, but the conscious mind added things that it thought would be normal for a natural landscape.

  21. Nice topic. I’d like to comment somewhat methodically on this subject as it is central to the reason most people become Scientologists and is central in evaluating whether the Church is selling real OT abilities or pie in the sky. Since I left the church last year, my ideas of what is an OT have greatly expanded and clarified. Being free of the bubble that confines thinking within the church is wonderful.
    This will become a somewhat metaphysical dissertation. Sorry, but that is the nature of the beast.
    What is the state of OT? By definition it is Cause.
    As spiritual beings, thetans, consciousness…your ‘native’ state is cause. So how come you are not fully cause as a human being? Why can’t you exteriorize at will, see thru walls and levitate your latte? What exactly is different about you as human vs you as pure causative theta?
    In all of LRH’s writings, there is one enormous concept that specifically resonates with me as the answer to this question. It is from the PDC Lectures and 8-8008. The concept is composed of 3 words:
    Differentiation, Association, Identification.
    LRH did not greatly elaborate on these specific concepts, but I view them as the largest breakthru of the philosophy of Scientology.
    Here is how the concept explains the state of OT. We start with you as pure cause theta.
    As pure cause theta, you are not effect, not located in space and time, and not subject to limitations of a physical universe. You are infinite creation and everything is a part of you. The state might be thought of as a peaceful stillness, a oneness, or a serenity … despite being composed of infinite creation. Pure cause is devoid of judgment and thinking.
    Your journey to becoming human starts with Differentiation. This means taking a part of the infinity of yourself and assigning it ‘over there’. It becomes separate. And with parts of the infinity of yourself separated out and assigned some ‘over thereness’, space is created.
    The parts of infinity that have been separated out are Associated into a sequence. They are organized up into moments. This moment is assigned to be before that moment, etc. This is a tricky process requiring thought and logic, as you can’t have one moment be all cats and the next moment be all cars. You are creating time and it has to flow smoothly. If you can get things all properly Associated into a logical sequence, and then limit your attention to a series of ‘present time’ moments, you will have succeeded in creating the illusion of time. This creates things that persist and the ability to have.
    With things persisting, you can play the game of making things survive. Now we are almost there in becoming a human, and understanding what is OT for a human.
    Differentiating and Associating can be done on a massive scale, and primarily as an automaticity. In this universe, there are zillions of new ‘moments’ created every second. New ‘moments’ are generated automatically according to set rules, which we know as the laws of physics. The universe would be completely predictable and without free will, except that Thetans are involved with making life forms survive. This is done at a completely different level than the automatic generation of new moments a zillion times per second. The efforts of Thetans to make life forms survive is done in terms of seconds, days and years. It is done ‘over the top’ of the blazing stream of automatic moment creation, and it is primarily done via direct influence on a brain. You don’t feed your life form by mocking up a latte, you stimulate the brain to make the body walk to the counter at Starbucks.
    This relationship with a human body and the interaction with its brain is Identification. This is the final phase for pure cause to be a human. With Differentiation and Association one has created space and time, and with Identification one can experience all that the life form would experience. With Identification, one can no longer create anything at will, one is limited to what the life form is capable of. The creator becomes what he has created.
    In summary, the reason you are not OT, and why you cannot levitate your latte, is that you are already automatically mocking up the latte sitting on the table obeying the law of gravity. The latte is recreated a zillion times per second, persisting moment to moment according to the rules and rationalities that create time itself. For you to break into that grand Association machine and violate the laws to levitate a latte would be humongous leap for a thetan that is primarily Identified with the survival of a single life form. Small random violations of the laws do occur, but not major consistent violations that would upset the whole structure of time by breaking the basic agreements that create new moments. If you were to go around the planet creating miracles of magnitude, your feats would either somehow get logically associated into the rationality of time (by the unconscious automaticity of all thetans who observe) or there would be a breakdown in the time stream for those who observe, or more likely, those present would refuse to observe what they cannot rationalize.

    • I have to say, Paul, that this is brilliant! I am at a loss for words, at the moment.
      I was just about to say more, but I want to re-read this and think about it and digest it first, before I say anything else.

      • Thanks Morris, I am happy to have the opportunity to exchange on this subject. As you concluded in your great post, it is up to us to now to work at it, try it out and come up with a path to real OT. When I left the church last year, my main reason for leaving was that I did not feel that this subject was complete. I don’t think that LRH had the whole route taped. And it’s a sure bet that useful development of the subject will never happen within the confines of the RCS. I am grateful for the insight that I did obtain, and full of playful curiosity now that I can freely think, investigate and write about whatever I chose. It’s a pleasure to see others addressing the subject with an open mind.

    • Brilliant! To get mass on that watch the movie Matrix to see the glitches represented in CGI. Its a great analogy.

  22. The history of science has many examples of incorrect theories that still lead to workable technology. The first radio transmissions were said to work via an invisible medium called the “ether”. We now know that ether doesn’t exist – but radio continues to work.
    I did OT 3 and audited NOTs a quarter of a century ago, and had some lasting gains from them. A metaphor comes to mind (rather autobiographical) of a wimpy kid trembling under the bedclothes night after night because he thinks there might be monsters in the dark. Then one night someone coaxes him to actually look. And he finds there’s no werewolf in the wardrobe, no man-eating octopus under the bed – they were just monsters of his own creation. I gained certainty that there was nothing in my universe to be afraid of. In those days NOTs as delivered in the CofS was still on-source, and my auditor was the late Harry Bloomberg who I think trained directly with David Mayo. Harry had a wonderfully light-hearted approach to this level, and never a hint of evaluation. The auditing room is not a course room: just do the process, don’t waste time discussing theory.
    As Mike says above, NOTs originated with sessions that Mayo gave to LRH who was close to death in 1978. His account of this is available in several places on the web. When Hubbard complained of certain phenomena, Mayo as a good auditor did not evalute or invalidate, but addressed what was real to his preclear. And the techniques they developed are likely to work on any preclear with that type of case. With hindsight, some researchers might be able to shed more light on the reasons why Hubbard had those difficulties, and I’m inclined to agree with Dennis Stephens’ interpretation in his lectures on Dissociation and The Surprise Game.
    But always, the beginning and the end is what helps the preclear (or preOT, to be pedantic). Take theories, mine especially, with a grain of salt and just listen to the radio.

    • David,
      My view is that Ron ran into similar phenomena covered in RJ 67 that he came upon prior to his discovery of Section III which is probably why he called NOTs the “second Wall of Fire”.
      Anyone who is trained on those levels can note the similarity between OT III and NOTs.
      Personally I think Mayo himself booby trapped the level by insisting that OT III should only be run to a win of some kind and that the person should be pushed onto NOTs ASAP.
      IMHO I don’t think anyone can achieve the full EP of NOTs unless they’ve rehabilitated their intention per original OT VII and expanded OT III to completion.

  23. sounds fun i hope someone can figure out OT cause the church obviously hasn’t
    always wondered what kind of games or universes would be created if OT powers were real
    always thought copyrights, patents and confidentiality are for cowards and a-holes

    • Good article, Mabu. I have had similar thoughts over the years, particularly about anyone actually demonstrating OT abilities.
      Have you seen the movie “The Men Who Stare at Goats”?

      • Morris Adams: “Have you seen the movie ‘The Men Who Stare at Goats’?”
        Not yet. I’m torrenting one copy.
        I’m knowledgeable of psychic (paranormal) attack techniques. Unfortunately, easy to do by everybody. 😦

    • Read this, WOW!

      This is to me the most intuitive article I’ve ever seen

      I’ve been asking myself those questions, what power would you have, what would you do with it? I’ve asked scientologists about this and nobody has a clue they just spend decades and fortunes hoping to become godlike with no freaking clue of what to do with it or what a problems it could create

  24. Dear Morris,
    I read your post with high interest. I agree with you on some issues, but disagree on others.
    I agree:
    – The state of OT does exist.
    – Nobody has achieved it via Scientology. In the memoir of Otto Roos he mention the fact that people were able to exhibit and experience OT powers, but with no consistency. My own experience is that this is true. I was able to perform some major fits in front of witnesses.
    – Granting beingness is a must for auditing. Without it there is no real case gain.
    – NOTS auditing does create case gain.
    – The old OT levels help one exteriorize.
    – Good use of the meter might help/.
    I disagree:
    – LRH was a con man. He stumbled upon a workable technology and used it for whatever it was worth.
    – LRH was not an OT. In fact he was not even Clear. He never availed himself of his own Technology. That is why he died the way he dies: an old schizophrenic.
    – LRH was not a scientist. His theories are glib and mostly unproven. The proven stuff only was proven AFTER he presented it as facts.
    – The story of OT3 is impossible and improbable. In fact it is the height of NOT granting the PC beingness. You are telling the PC what to think, instead of letting him get to it himself.
    – Because of that it is not clear why NOTS works. I have my theory about it, but in keeping with the policy of this blog I will not discuss it here. I would just say that they would work most better had they not been based upon a falsehood.

  25. so is it too early to discuss the ethical issues if OT powers become real?
    talk about a box of worms bigger than the imaination, lol
    this would cause and solve more problems than computers can simulate

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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