The whereabouts of L. Ron Hubbard (page 1, index page)
This particular study aims to give an overview of the various thoughts and theories that go around in regards to the whereabouts of L. Ron Hubbard. The years 1972, 1977 and 1982 are the one's that often are named in relation to that someone other than L. Ron Hubbard had taken control over the subject of Scientology. The focus is put on the published sources and the things they relate, and to follow the tech line.
The main focus has been put on from which time on basic tech may have been counteracted. In particular that which has not been reversed since.
The years 1972, 1977 & 1982
- The missing ten months (4 Dec 72 - mid-Sept 73)
- HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-up” (Includes: The early 80's)
- The year 1982
- Introduction, brief overview, and a few notices
- ‘Standing Order’
- (1) The ‘SO #1 Line’, its original purpose, changes and the ‘LRH Communicator’
(Includes: L. Ron Hubbard about SO #1; ‘Standing Order’ line cancelled since 1986?)
- (2) An overview of ‘Standing Order’ notices published worthy of particular mention (chronological)
- Write to ‘International Management’ (1983-85)
- Write to ‘Executive Director International’ (ED Int) (1986-present)
- The original status quo
- Presentation of L. Ron Hubbard - The marking of a change (Sept 73)
- The initiative for an ‘official’ biography on L. Ron Hubbard? (since Jan 80)
- Into the 90's ...
- Present time ...
- Introduction and FO 3434
- Its origin (Rocks and Shoals, Mud Box Brigade & Rehabilitation Unit)
- ‘Deck Project Force’ (DPF) & ‘Estates Project Force’ (EPF)
- Authorship of FO 3434 and its subsequent series
- RPF working conditions
- A final note
Into artistry: Music (since 1973-74) and Cine (since 1976-78), and onward
- Music: ‘The Apollo Stars’ (Sept 73 - 2nd half 74)
(Includes notes about: ‘Ron's Journal 28’, ‘Space Jazz’, ‘The Road to Freedom’, ‘Mission Earth’ (1976-89))
- Cinematography: ‘The Secret of Flag Results’ (Dec 77) & ‘The Case He Couldn't Crack’ (autumn 78)
- (a) HCOB 21 Jul 78 “What Is a Floating Needle?”
- (b) HCOB 11 Apr 82 “Sec Checking Implants” (‘Still Needle’ phenomenon)
- (c) ‘Ten main needle actions’ versus ‘Sixteen main needle actions’ (1988)
- (d) Mark Super VII Quantum E-Meter (May 96)
Witch hunts during the late 70's and again during the early 80's
- ‘List 1 Project’ & ‘Rock Slams’ (1977-78)
- The dawning of ‘Religious Technology Center’ and new management (1982-83)
(Includes notes about: Knowledge report system established; Practice of Disconnection reinstated; Change of rules for Declares)
‘No-Interference Area’ outruled? (since Mar 82-Oct 83-Mar 84-Jul 85)
- (a) Where is HCOB 8 Mar 82 “Confessionals and the Non Interference Zone” ? and authorship
- (b) The ‘No-Interference Area’ being interfered with in an initially subtly manner (Oct 83 to Aug 90)
- The transitions of HCOB 23 Dec 71 “The No-Interference Area” (publication history)
- ‘New OT VII’ and the ‘6 months Sec Check’
- First mention of FPRD & introduction (includes notes on ‘Expanded Dianetics’)
- ‘Senior Security Checker’ versus ‘FPRD’
- Further annotations on the FPRD & studies
- A thin line between that which is revealed in auditing sessions and may turn actionable on the person
The official version of the death of L. Ron Hubbard (Jan 86)
- Official announcements and referrals from the Church of Scientology
- The ‘last’ Flag Order
- The incidence of the three wills (1979, 1982 & 1986)
- A few things to ponder about ...
Theorizing, summaries, and considerations
1973 - The turning point?
(Includes: ‘Full publication reference list’)
- 1970 - We have the technology
- The status quo of anno 1972 – Following the Tech, Admin and Publication line
Chronological overview with annotations
(Includes: Rougher times & attention on Sec Checking, Confessionals and reporting; Into artistry (music, film, and returning to writing fiction); The move ashore; The Tech line; Theorizing about Clear and OT; Photographic record)
Various theories exist concerning the whereabouts of L. Ron Hubbard in different time era's. It has amongst other been proposed that L. Ron Hubbard would have been replaced by an imposter, or may even have been ‘PDH’ed (Pain Drugs Hypnosis = brainwashed). The years that are in particular noted from which year he supposedly was not himself anymore vary from 1972, 1977, 1980, 1982 and some name 1984. The official version is that he passed away in 1986, and yes it has been questioned if this was really L. Ron Hubbard. This page is just a gathering of various rumours or conspiracy theories that have been proposed or that are going around. Alongside this I offer a chronological overview of various facts that have occurred in this same time frame. Foremost I have chosen to follow the tech line. With this I mean that I try to establish from which time on valid tech got invalidated or simply was dropped and not reversed by L. Ron Hubbard. All these theories may all be very nice, but if it be that there has been an imposter then one should ask oneself the question what the motivation would have been to go through all that trouble. For sure it would not have been done without a reason. Now L. Ron Hubbard lived for his technology, therefore the continued workability of this technology could be used as a measure of some sort to determine if he was still around or not. While going over these things one should also look past any possible bias and/or various claims made. You look, you don't listen.
Let's assume for a moment that L. Ron Hubbard indeed did develop a valuable technology that does better man. Then some could worry about some things, these some would then do all they can to maintain their already established control. And they may work along the line that certain knowledge should be available only for a few. Now what is the best way to achieve that purpose? Forbid this technology? This will not work, as people will grab on to it more arduously than ever before. Now what about continue to represent it as the real thing, but meanwhile implement officially approved changes. Distraction tactics also work very well. To make it stick you also have to coordinate a massive public relation acknowledging that what you want people to believe. It would be very smart to leave many false tracks behind you, many rumours contradicting eachother should be going around all over the place. In this respect I can confirm that it is very hard to determine what is head or tail. One person says this, and another says something else. That which is found on the Internet is rather confusion. Why should one believe one person and not the other? First of all one should actually establish what criteria should be used to determine which is correct.
My data is taken primarily from the printed materials. And as I explained earlier, it is my choice to follow the tech line. It actually comes down to ensure that we are still actually having and/or using the correct technology (reference KSW #1: HCO PL 7 Feb 65 “Keeping Scientology Working”).
Disclaimer
Various will not appreciate that I am delving in these things and are drawing attention to them. The reality is however that so very many different confusing stories are circulating out there on the Internet. I have simply made an attempt to sort out various and offer this information alongside various historical facts in chronological order. If these conspiracy theories are untrue then they will have to enervate themselves. As always data has to prove itself for its truthfulness or correctness. There may be arguments in favour of them and there may be arguments that counteracts them. Let it be very clearly understood that I investigate materials. If possible conclusions that I may draw are to be found offensive then this can not be helped. I follow the leads where ever they may take me. The attempt has been to enforce some logic on the occurrences. Please understand well that it has not been my intent to forward a particular interpretation of such rumours. It is all presented as-is. It can not be denied however that there are indications that seem to be in alignment of some of the claims made, but then this not mean either that we have to swallow all of it. I challenge any out there to actually think for themselves. Firstly I relate about the conspiracy theories that are around and secondly I relate about the historical facts. In my last chapters I play around with it and theorize a little. You however will have to figure out which is true for you.
Feel free to contact me about anything you may find that I would be in error about. I have received and do receive many advices and hints from people. If you have a good point, in time I will implement your information onto my pages.
These are years that are referred to as from which time L. Ron Hubbard (according to some) that he was not in control anymore of the direction that Scientology was taking onwards. Other years may have been noted, although the ones that I picked here are the significant ones.
The missing ten months (4 Dec 72 - mid-Sept 73)
It is reported by various that L. Ron Hubbard was not around during this time period. Ken Urquhart (LRH Personal Communicator) tells that he had accompanied L. Ron Hubbard to the airport. Reportedly 2 persons travelled with L. Ron Hubbard and stayed with him during that time span. These were Jim Dincalci (Flag Medical Officer) and
Paul Preston (acting as steward and body guard), a previous green Beret in the US army as a sergeant and then in the special forces.
We do have it confirmed from a variety of sources that indeed L. Ron Hubbard was not in reach during all of this time. Detailed testimonies and reports do exist from amongst other Ken Urquhart and Ken Dincalci (both confirmed). Then we have also various confirmations from people that relate about that L. Ron Hubbard was not to be seen.
The ‘Technical Bulletins’ volume X: 1972-1976 (1991 release) says on page 1: “1972 Late in the year, Ron left the Flagship and traveled to New York City to conduct an intensive sociological study.”. His return is then noted on page 469 at “1973”. However in ‘What Is Scientology?’ (1991 release) on page 765 we get a time indication, it says: “1973 Returning to the Apollo from several months spent in New York City doing sociological studies, Mr. Hubbard carried out research in the areas of vitamins and nutrition.”. Jim Dincalci also relates about this research with vitamins and various, but this was already during the time that he was not available We are also kept a little in the dark here as “several months” is not the same as ten months.
A strange story got posted on a newsgroup on the Internet on 12 February 1998 by an anonymous poster. We are actually being challenged: “You will scoff--at
first. You are welcome to scoff. But please read to the end of the
document, even if only to prove how righteous you are in scoffing”. Indeed at first there is much reason to actually scoff, which is actually exactly what I did. Then when one goes into it a little deeper things may not be that evident anymore. One has to admit that the person that put this together speaks from a certain know-how, or it must be that this person did some research in order to put a plausible fairy tale together. So, which is it? Many details can be confirmed for their historical accuracy, however this does not automatically mean that the conclusion drawn is correct as well! So, if it can be enervated, then let's try to get it enervated.
Now, why do I make this available here? It is not because of the story and the claims made themselves. It got however everything to do with the time era in which this supposedly occurred. Now, at which time got workable tech put aside and not counteracted and put back into use again!
Below you may consult this supposed fairy tale and test it for its accuracy:
Another story got posted on another newsgroup on the Internet on 14 December 2002 also by an anonymous poster using a remailer service. With this particular posting we really find ourselves in what is commonly referred to as conspiracy theories. The person that wrote it however does appear to be knowledgeable and did his homework. This all may just be inventive imagination or it may have various truths mixed into it. It does support the theory that since 1973 the ruling of the Scientology organization basically had been taken over by some other.
Yet another of such a writing circulated amongst the Scientologists so about mid-1983. It was spread through it being copied many times. Although it focuses on the happenings from the early 80's, we find also the following notice which puts us at about 1972-73:
“Don't expect Ron to save us. The SO 1 [write to Ron] line does not exist. For over ten years teams of persons have been answering your mail to Ron. The ‘signature’ is a rubber stamp. He is not running the Church of Scientology. He is not running to our rescue any longer.”
HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-up”
(Includes: The early 80's)
The 1977 argument finds its base in the consideration that this HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-up” was the last clean-up in the tech that L. Ron Hubbard was able to perform. That what drove various to this consideration is also that questions had been raised about if L. Ron Hubbard was actually behind New Era Dianetics (NED) and NED for OT's (NOT's), which respectively had been released in July and September 1978. Not to mention the rather significant change in that was considered a Clear (Dianetic Clear = Clear) abolishing Grade V, VA, VI and Clearing Course and thus the Scientology Clear this since September 1978.
Further it is noted that the Hubbard Association of Scientologists International (HASI) had gone defunct on 10 May 1977. For the sole reason that the Corporation Annual Report had not been send in to the Arizona Corporation Commission for the fiscal year that was ending on 30 April 1976. A Delinquent Notice (reminder) dated 22 January 1977 simply had been returned as it could not be delivered to the addressee for which reason the HASI corporations’ licence automatically got revoked on 10 May 1977 (see my copyright analysis on my A New Order page, or my Membership: HASI vs IAS page elsewhere on my site for details and documents). Then only 2 months later on 7 July 1977 the Scientology's headquarters in Washington, DC and Los Angeles (including the Guardian's Office) were raided by the FBI. It is reported that ‘thousands of incriminating documents’ were seized. Consequentially 11 persons (including Mary Sue hubbard) were charged for various legal misdoings supposedly concocted by the Guardian Office. And things went downhill.
Another observation is that starting from so about early 1977 we see indications that would confirm that references started to be released that would at first appear to have been written by L. Ron Hubbard, but were actually compiled by some assistant. We read in HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-up”: “If anyone helped compile it or wrote it, my name is followed by ‘Assisted by_____’ the person who helped get it back together at my directions.” LRH. Be it noted here that we never learn about if there had been any “directions” or of what nature these would have been! It is rather obvious that this turns matters rather vague and evasive in regards to actual authorship. The very earliest of such contributions from ‘assistants’ that I could find are from 13 January 1977, the assistant being Paulette Ausley. Further pertinent annotations/evaluation about these ‘assistants’ and the significance of HCOB 24 Jan 77 and its consequences can be consulted in the link here below (will open in separate window).
It is obvious that we have some odd indicators here. Why for instance was the HASI allowed to go defunct? An answer could be the copyrights of Scientology that thus far were kept by the HASI. With the HASI out of the way they resided (fell back) for a short while to the Church of Scientology of California (CSC). They afterwards transferred these copyrights back to ‘L. Ron Hubbard’ on 4 May 1978. But L. Ron Hubbard had already 20 years earlier –and by blanket assignment– assigned all of these trademarks and copyrights into perpetuity to HCO. Why would he have wanted them back? All these questions remain unanswered to this day.
Either way these combined happenings marked for various the beginning of the end of the old era.
The early 80's
The happenings that occurred since 1977 culminated into that what happened during the early 80's. So to say the former directly caused the latter! Nonetheless some support the 1980 argument that L. Ron Hubbard was still considered in control during the 70's, but that he was not from about 1980 or so and forward. May be the year is just chosen out of convenience? It has been reported that the person L. Ron Hubbard lastly appeared in public may be October 1979, some say January 1980. It is also reported that Mary Sue Hubbard lastly is claimed to have seen him somewhere in 1980. Then the first edition of the ‘Technical Bulletins’ volumes I-XII covers the period up till December 1979 (volumes published 1976-80). Some have decided to only use these volumes as valid tech. Or one may just like the round number that closes off the 70's decennium? It in itself is actually quite contradictorily in my opinion. If you want to accept/believe in a take over, you should not say from 1980 and onwards, you should start already in 1977. Those that support the 1980 argument then also do accept the technical breakthroughs of 1978 as valid technology.
I think it is odd that if you actually adopt this idea of a take over of the organization and pick the year 1980 for that, as at the same time you then disregard the serious setbacks of the Scientology organization during 1977 that caused the later developments, and thus you would still be favourable towards those socalled technical breakthroughs and various other introduced in the following year. It seems overlooked then that these involved technical changes that actually turned around various previous established basics! The main ones being:
Opposed to:
July 1978:
1.
New Era Dianetics (NED)
Standard Dianetics (1969)
September 1978:
2.
NED for OT's (NOT's), NED or Dianetics never run on OT's
Dianetics run on OT's (1970)
3.
Change in definition of Clear
(abandoning
Grade V, VA, VI & Clearing Course and thus abandoning the Scientology Clear)
Definition of Clear established (1965)
The year 1982
This is by far the most adopted option.
This year marks the founding and corporation of the Religious Technology Center (RTC). The book ‘What Is Scientology?’, (1992 release) relates on page 649 & 662:
1 JANUARY 1982
Formation of the Religious Technology Center. 16 MAY 1982: Religious Technology Center (RTC) incorporated. L. Ron Hubbard donated all trademarks of Dianetics and Scientology to RTC.
This new entity since then is regarded as the protector of Scientology. It is said to own all the trademarks and service marks and to control their licensing and use. This may all together not be entirely true however. The Religious Technology Center has to answer to another corporation registered as the Church of Spiritual Technology (CST) incorporated 28 May 1982. This CST holds the ‘L. Ron Hubbard Library’ registered copyright (not to be confused with the ‘L. Ron Hubbard’ copyright). This CST is also claimed (by some) to still own 8 of the most important trademarks. It is noted that the Church of Scientology does not make particular mention of this Church of Spiritual Technology corporation, the outward face is the Religious Technology Center.
The birth of the Religious Technology Center coincided with various new developments in the structure of the Scientology organization. A rough and hectic few years commenced (for details see chapter “The dawning of ‘Religious Technology Center’ and new management (early 80's)”. Consult here, link will open in separate window).
Either way these happenings motivated various to adopt that L. Ron hubbard since this time did not have control over his spiritual legacy anymore. Since then it is reported that
references that were released carrying the signature of L. Ron Hubbard were simply written by someone else.
Although this is proven to have started already at least so mid-1981 (consult my page “Non-LRH turns into LRH?”, see Scientology index page).
Considering the option that the openly advocated ‘take over’ by some RTC would in reality have been a probable diversion tactic, then we may conclude that it was a very successful action. The changes introduced in September 1978 could by some be seen as the most damaging one's. As I noted already the 1982 explanation is the most popular and accepted option amongst those who practice Scientology technology outside of the reign and control of the Church of Scientology. It is reported that in these groups for example Grade V, VA, VI and Clearing Course (VII) are very rarely delivered. However these used to be the standard steps that any had to do prior to September 1978. Often a choice still can be made between receiving Standard Dianetics or its replacement New Era Dianetics (NED). That what is being delivered is all subject to what those that run those various groups decided upon.
I elaborate on the consequences of the changes implemented in September 1978 in chapter “1978: The year of technical breakthroughs”, see especially “(2) The definition of Clear (Sept 78)” but also “(3) ‘New Era Dianetics for OT's’ (NOT's) (Sept 78)”.
‘Stanford Research Institute’ (SRI) and the ‘Remote-Viewing Program’ (Jun 72)
It has been proposed that the Church of Scientology had been taken over by US government forces due to the successful demonstrations of actual OT abilities by some Scientologists named Ingo Swann and Pat Price. In particular this was about remote-viewing. If any such experiments would have been successful, it can be safely assumed that various government agencies and other would be very interested. It likely would also increase the danger of infiltration and possibly even a seizure of the organization. Various secret agencies display these tendencies that no other than they themselves should be able to develop or have access to particular advantages. Either way it is fact that L. Ron Hubbard since the early 60's had made several announcements about an imminent danger of infiltration.
“... the United States government and the efforts of that government since 1955, stepped up since 1963, to seize Scientology rather than forbid or stop it ... .” LRH
(from HCO PL 14 Jun 65 Issue III “Politics, Freedom from”)
True is that the socalled OT levels did not get released until 1966. However research had been well on its way and there were some evident expectations. In 1963 L. Ron Hubbard wrote:
“We now have O.T. in direct and real sight with only a few hundred hours of actual skilled auditing intervening. This is an astonishing break through, a real by-the-boot-straps necessity level research sprint.
We are then only months away from having O.T.s, a year at the most.
No Scientologist need be told what that means.” LRH (from HCO PL 25 Jun AD13 “An International Objective” - probably unpublished HCO PL, only available as a manuscript)
The official releases of the various original OT-levels: OT I: Aug 66;
OT II: Sept 66;
OT III: Sept 67; OT IV, V, VI: Jan 68;
OT VII: Sept 70.
It was this Stanford Research Institute (SRI) that in about June 1972 had instigated a remote-viewing program headed by one Harold Puthoff. Rumours tell that this was financed by the CIA. It is said that Harold Puthoff was a Scientologist. He in its turn attracted 2 other Scientologists to this program, these were Ingo Swann and Pat Price. They went to do their OT levels in the Scientology organization and subjected themselves to experiments in the remote-viewing program that turned up with positive results. This may have caused that some wanted to make up this plan to then effectively infiltrate and take over the Church of Scientology. There are various theories about what the details would be about how this was done and what the results were. Much of it can not really be substantiated by proven fact. However we can make various observations when we study the history of the developments within Scientology. In essence this is what my project The Whereabouts of L. Ron Hubbard was aiming at to study.
A realistic aspect of it is most definitely the fact that we have seen changes in these series of the original OT levels. I address this in detail in below link: (will open in separate window)
Mind however that these are just theories. Some of it may be correct, some other may not.
Interesting notes and additional information about various is given by Jon Atack in a forthcoming book in following chapter: (link will open as a pop-up window)
Mind though that Jon Atack like his literary mentor and one time collaborator Russell Miller, may play fast and lose with the facts.
A historically accurate account we find in the following work for which I have received the permission of the author to quote various selections from: (link will open as a pop-up window)
Suspicious circumstances are also surrounding the fate of Pat Price:
“Wednesday, 16 July 1975 OT III Pat Price arrives in Las Vegas, en route first to SRI, then to Los Angeles. In Vegas, Price is met by an old friend named Bill Alvarez and his wife, Judy. The three check into the Stardust Hotel and go into the restaurant for dinner. Price begins to complain that he doesn't feel well, and tells the Alvarezes that someone ‘had seemed to slip something into his coffee’ at dinner in Washington the night before. Price soon feels so bad that he goes up to his room to lie down. He feels even worse and calls the Alvarezes. They come to his room and find him on the bed apparently in cardiac arrest. Bill Alvarez calls paramedics, who try without success to resuscitate Price. He is declared dead in the local hospital's emergency room. A mysterious ‘friend’ of Price's turns up at the emergency room with ‘a briefcase full of his medical records,’ which, along with the statements of the emergency room's physician, are enough to waive an autopsy—which would normally be performed on an out-of-towner who had died outside the hospital.”
(source: Jim Schnabel; ‘Remote Viewers: The Secret History of America's Psychic Spies’; Dell 1997)
Are these just coincidences or does it mean something else? More about the death of Pat Price can be found here (external link, last checked 10 December 2007, tell me if the link does not work anymore).
If in fact there is any truth in all this (and you have to make up your own mind about all that), then my question would be if this plan could have been carried out as long as L. Ron Hubbard would still be around? This in its turn raises some interesting issues. Namely it does coincide with that L. Ron Hubbard was out of reach during December 4, 1972 till mid-September 1973. Some tell that it was not the same L. Ron Hubbard that returned, others claim that he was in hiding for tax purposes. It is interesting to see how many contradicting information and theories that actually are going around in regards to these time periods. Probably the only viable criteria that can be used is to determine when some part of Scientology became less workable (because of implemented changes), or workable parts that were either invalidated, discontinued or replaced with other that may have acted against Tech basics.
Ingo Swann
“Ingo Swann: Ingo is a well-known modern artist whose works hang in many public and private collections and have been featured in several exhibitions. He states Scientology had a decisive influence on his art as he expanded his awareness and increased his abilities by going up the Grade Chart. Then in 1971 after Ingo completed Section III OT, he began demonstrating his regained OT abilities under strict scientific conditions with trained scientists. This included changing the state of objects at a distance without physical means. In 1975, among hundreds of other experiments, he did ‘out-of-the-body’ explorations of Mercury and Jupiter, astounding the scientific community with the remarkable accuracy of his descriptions of those planets later verified by unmanned rocket flights. Numerous articles and mentions of Ingo and his advanced abilities have appeared in newspapers and magazines, including ‘Time,’ ‘The Smithsonian,’ and ‘Psychic.’ He is Clear 2331, full OT VII, Class VI Auditor.”
(from ‘Advance! 44’, (Jan 77))
There are 2 articles/interviews with Ingo Swann found in the Scientology periodical Advance!. The full articles can be consulted here below: (links will open as pop-up windows)
He also appears at an OT Symposium (first ever) that “brings together a distinguished and very active group of OTs to discuss questions not only pertinent to the world-view of OTs, but also to all who are following Ron's Bridge to Clear and OT” (as printed in ‘Advance! 44’, (Jan 77), see pages 17-21). Participants were Heber Jentzsch, Chick Corea, Ingo Swann, Yvonne Jentzsch and Bonnie Bishop.
What happened with Ingo Swann? What is he doing today? I found the below posted on a forum on the Internet. It is probably correct.
“Ingo ceased involvement with Scientology in the early 1980s. ...
He was as much interested in, and influenced by, his involvement with the Monroe Institute as with Scientology, but did enjoy his role - for a time in the early/mid 1970s - as a ‘Scientology celebrity,’ being also a painter of some note.”
The Monroe Institute also made studies about remote-viewing or as Robert Monroe called it: Exteriorization.
A few links for further studies: (all external links)
A first mention of this level is made as early as August 1968 (see HCOB 26 Aug 68 “The Class VIII Course”).
1970: (a first criteria prior to release)
‘Clear News 33 (AOLA edition)’, [Jul/Aug 70] says in article “Ron Expands the Bridge”:
“You will also be glad to know that just as soon as I am very sure that we have Lower Grades Expanded back in to Scientology Class IV Orgs. And just as soon as I am sure that the Saint Hills are in a fully operative condition and are teaching all of those materials as they should, why, then we will release OT VII and OT VIII. We're not ready for those yet and I have done them, but I am not releasing them until we have Lower Grades Expanded fully worked over.” LRH (taken from “Ron's Address to The Grand National Convention in Los Angeles”, given on 21 Jun 70)
Sound snippet (0:38)
It is noted that the Expanded Lower Grades 0-IV got released only 4 days after this talk was given i.e. on 25 June 1970. Subsequently OT VII was released on 20 September 1970. (both dates are noted as such in ‘What Is Scientology?’, (1992 release))
Then ‘Clear News 44 (AOLA Edition)’, [Nov-Dec 70] on its frontpage says: “We're sure OT VIII is just around the corner and that it will be released as soon as we have a supply of OT VIIs with their cases totally completed.”.
1971: (a promise for release)
Then ‘Clear News 57 (AOLA edition)’, [May 71] says on page 1:
“OT VIII
OT VIII will be released soon and we want as many people as possible up to OT VII and full case completion, ready to go when OT VIII is released.
How soon OT VIII is released depends on how many are prepared for it. So it is the responsibility of each individual, not only for himself, but to all Scientologists and the rest of Mankind to get to OT VII with no Q&A. Don't let anything stop you – it's your own immortality and OT Power at stake.”
1973: (a further promise of 15 levels above OT VII)
Not much attention is given in the magazines to why OT VIII does not get released in this 1971-73 interim. One could though continue to prepay for it. Then we get the following notice from HCOB 30 Jul 73 “Scientology, Current State of the Subject and Materials”:
“There are perhaps 15 levels above OT VII fully developed but existing only in unissued note form, pending more people's full attainment of OT VI & VII.” LRH
Since this phrase has been frequently used as an argument as we see it displayed in the various Scientology periodicals whenever OT VIII is brought into the discussion. It is also since that time on that the messages in these periodicals change from ‘OT VIII – not yet released’ to ‘OT VIII and beyond – not yet released’.
We see for example in ‘Clear News 93 (AOLA edition)’ [ca Sept/Oct 73] written on page 3 in an article entitled “How to get to full OT Super Seven”: “And . . . . Ready for OT VIII! Then OT IX and OT X and above, when they are released!”. On that page it is further promoted: “FUTURE GAINS FROM OT?”, “What will be the gains above FULL OT SUPER SEVEN?”, and urging to do OT VII: “Help release the upper OT levels above Full OT VII. Go Full OT VII yourself, FAST!”. This all being in alignment with the notice from HCOB 30 Jul 73 “Scientology, Current State of the Subject and Materials”.
‘Clear News 97 (AOLA edition)’ [ca Nov 73] once again reminds on page 2 of:
“L. Ron Hubbard has said: ‘There are perhaps 15 levels above OT VII fully developed but existing only in unissued note form, pending more peoples’ full attainment of OT VI & VII.’ AOLA is expanding to hasten the release of this valuable data! Come to AOLA and fully attain VI & VII, now!”
Nonetheless besides it apparently having been proof run at the vessel Apollo it never came to an official release of the original OT VIII. One could however prepay for this level throughout the 70's. Then the announcement of “New OT VIII through XI” (see ‘Advance! 74’, [Mar-Apr 82], insert) will have permanently abolished the original OT VIII. As these new levels, as per the data that we have, were not the same action.
1977: (an explanation for not having released it)
Then early 1977 does make an attempt to explain some things with the issuance of HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-Up”:
“I have been engaged for some months now in a round-up of out tech issues.
And I have found, I am sorry to say, that mice have been gnawing at the pillars of the Bridge, putting up traffic barriers and false detour signs.”
And futher on in this same reference:
“X: ADVANCED GRADES
For a number of years people have wondered when OT VIII would be released.
Well, to tell you the honest truth, OT VIII has been in existence all those several years, and to it has been added a very large number of OT grades. None of them have been issued. Notes for all these grades are in existence.
What I have been waiting for is 2 or 3 months of free time to go over these materials and write them up and make them available through Advanced Organizations.
Now I will make a bargain with you. If you get all the tech straightened out and the orgs and flaps and emergencies off my lines and get your training in and your Word Clearing in and everything flying and this civilization even more thoroughly pointed in a civilized direction, you will buy me those 3 months’ worth of time so I will be able to afford the time to write up all these Advanced Levels I have researched. Do your job well and buy me these three months.
Is it a bargain?” LRH
The above notice was given in January 1977. Nothing apparent was happening for some time again regarding this. Had new“false detour signs” been given out?
1978: (a first step towards the later ‘New’ OT levels and further justification)
It was not until mid-1978 that we see the next development. In July 1978 a replacement had been released for Standard Dianetics which was New Era Dianetics (NED). Then we are notified in ‘LRH ED 298 Int’, 19 Sept 78 “A. D. 28, The Year of Technical Breakthroughs” that:
“An attempt to run NED on an OT resulted in a phenomenon which caught my attention, and on further investigation brought to light the fact that you cannot run NED, or any Dianetics for that matter, on a Clear (Dianetic or Scientology Clear) or above. Research into this paid off handsomely with a fantastic breakthrough for Clears and OTs. I have now developed an entirely new rundown called ‘NED for OTs.’ This deals with living lightning, the very stuff of life itself. Run exactly correctly by the book it produces remarkable results in the OT band, and has made it possible for me to now release OT VIII.”
And further notices in this same LRH ED:
“OT VIII
Although OT VIII has been researched earlier, I knew there was something that had to be handled before I could release OT VIII. ‘NED for OTs’ does just that, and now I am very pleased to announce the release of OT VIII, which will be available at AOs and Flag to OTs who have completed ‘NED for OTs.’ It is a Solo level which will fortify an OT already in excellent shape from NED for OTs.’”
We did receive here some sort of explanation why it thus far had not been released. This NED for OT's in fact does make for an extraordinary tale that contains factors that could be regarded as rather contradictory. I go into this in great detail on my page “Notes on NED for OT's and its relation to ‘Clear’”, this being part of my “David Mayo project pages”.
Noneheless in spite of these new discoveries and the given expectation that this “has made it possible for me to now release OT VIII” we were still in for a considerable wait.
Then a few months later it notes in ‘LRH ED 301 Int’, 17 Dec 78
“Ron's Journal 30, 1978—The Year of Lightning Fast New Tech”:
“OT VIII. This rundown was developed and will be available to OT VIIs who have completed their NED for OTs which is a prerequisite for OT VIII.”
And elsewhere in this same reference it says:
“OT VIII. Although several upper OT grades have been researched, pre-OTs were not ready for them and so they were not released. The needed link which makes it possible is NED for OTs which is its prerequisite. The upper levels above VIII will probably be released from time to time into the future. OT VIII's release is a real cap for the tech breakthroughs of ’78.”
1978-79: (OT VIII released??)
The 1979 edition (both the US and Denmark print) of ‘All About Radiation’ has an interesting notice in the section “About L. Ron Hubbard” on page 153. First it says: “January, 1968, saw the release of OT Sections IV, V and VI as a sequence of spiritual abilities to be reached. In September of 1970 came OT VII, ...”, so far all alright. But in the remainder of that sentence it states incorrectly: “..., and in 1978 L. Ron Hubbard released OT VIII.”. In the printing notices it says: “1979 Edition Produced & Released by LRH Personal Compilations Bureau”. An interesting error.
The text appears an adaptation taken from the introductory chapter “L. Ron Hubbard, Explorer of Two Realms” of the little book ‘Mission Into Time’ (Oct 73). It says in the original paragraph: “January 1968, then saw the release of OT Sections IV, V and VI as a sequence of astounding spiritual abilities to be reached. And, in September of 1970 came OT VII. OT VIII has yet to be released.”.
It appears that purposely the notice about OT VIII had been altered from this original to reflect a supposed release of OT VIII.
In relation to this is in addition also noteworthy to see that the (December) 1978 Grade Chart as found in ‘What Is Scientology?’ (1978 edition) actually does list OT VIII as if having already been released! The entry above it then lists ‘OT IX and Above’ which was indicated with ‘To Be Released’. OT VIII did not receive this notice:
(December) 1978
FOR DIANETIC AND SCIENTOLOGY PROCESSING
Preclear grades
Processes audited
Class of auditor required
Training required
↑
OT IX and Above
To be released
As issued
O.T. courses as issued
↑
OT VIII
O.T. VIII
Solo Auditor preferably HNEDA and classed
O.T. VIII course
↑
OT VII
O.T. VII
O.T. VII, Class IV or above
O.T. VII course
* HNEDA, Hubbard New Era Dianetics Auditor.
1982: (original OT levels dropped, OT levels redefined, changed time factor)
Then the announcement from early 1982 of “New OT VIII through XI” (see ‘Advance! 74’, [Mar-Apr 82], insert) made it rather clear that one had dropped the original OT VIII. In the same throw one had in January 1982 dropped the original OT IV-VII as well.
Just a few months later we get some more notices about these New OT levels from ‘LRH ED 342 Int’, 9 May 82 “Ron's Journal 35, From Clear to Eternity”. By now the OT levels below New OT VIII had actually been redefined.
It lists “six rough divisions of case gain”. Respectively # 5 & 6 say:
“5.
The pre-OT levels, leading to personal spiritual
freedom. These carry up through all NOTs, audited and Solo.
What is amazing here is that each one of these levels,
according to rave reports, has, each one, its own
spectacular level of gain.
6.
The actual OT levels beginning now with New OT VIII
and going on up.”
Pre-OT has earlier been defined as those that “through the advanced courses, is advancing to the full state of operating thetan” (from Primary Rundown Glossary (1972), see also 'Dianetics and Scientology: Technical Dictionary'). This is fairly broad. Grade IV completions also have been referred to as pre-OT's. Roughly one could say that those that commenced on the Solo Auditing levels (Grade VI) upto auditing on OT III can safely be called pre-OT's. In the writings prior to 1978 an actual OT III completion or higher is not in particular referred to as a pre-OT. This was thus redefined in December 1978.
It also gives a new indication of the time involved. In particular the notices regarding the higher OT levels are interesting.
“It doesn't take half an eternity. It doesn't take millennia—though this could be reasonably expected. It doesn't
take centuries. It only takes years.”
Divided up in these “six rough divisions of gains” up to Clear (indicated as “fourth level”) it remains however being rather speedy. Then:
“The fifth band now begins to really lengthen. To become a
Solo Auditor and go up through the levels to OT III could
take months. And through OT III can stretch out
considerably. And then audited NOTs and Solo NOTs really
adds time on. The gains of each point of progress can
make, according to reports of pcs, progress at the lower
end look like inches. Yet the lowest of these bands is
above any progress Man has made before.
Now when we get to band six, get ready for a long haul. It
won't happen in a minute.”
The reality factor put forward is basically:
“The higher the level,
the longer the time—because one is handling a higher band
of potential gain.”
I fail actually to see the logic in this argument in this last sentence. Remember it's just about removing barriers. Therefore the focus does not necessary has to be on “potential gain” versus “the longer the time”. I perceive rather that it should go swifter and swifter as already a multitude of barriers have been removed when one finally has arrived at these levels.
Mind also that the original OT levels did not take a considerable amount of time to complete. From OT I to OT VI could by some be completed in 3-6 weeks, although generally it may take a bit longer for most people. There have appeared such announcements in for example the periodical The Auditor. For the time involved in regards to the original OT VII the periodical ‘Clear News 41 (AOLA edition)’, [Nov 70] says on page 1: “OT VII sessions are short, averaging from 5 to 30 minutes, because the processes are so POWERFUL. So far, it has taken an average of 4 to 7 days to complete OT VII with an average of three sessions a day. It is a fast, yet thorough, trip out the top of the bridge.”.
This time factor as proposed in ‘LRH ED 342 Int’, 9 May 82 “Ron's Journal 35, From Clear to Eternity” also contradicts the rather proud sounding statement from ‘LRH ED 301 Int’, 17 Dec 78
in its title: “1978—The Year of Lightning Fast New Tech”.
As basically the former reference does confirm that it added a considerably longer time factor.
Additional notices (higher pricings, uncertainty factor - since 1978)
It may be noted here that also the cost involved for doing these levels increased rather dramatically during in particular the 1978-1983 time span.
It may also be noted that probably since so about 1978 an uncertainty factor had been introduced about when one should have completed some level. Things in particular turned insecure with the reinstatement and redefined use of the socalled Clear cognition in 1979. It sufficed to originate a certain concept/wording and one could then consider that one might be Clear, hence the development of the Dianetic Clear Special Intensive in the same year (it was in 1985 reissued as Clear Certainty Rundown) that had to sort of verify this. Then suddenly this could also result in that one skipped the remainder of the thus far standard steps that previously all had to do (in particular Grade V, VA, VI & VII appear skipped). (see at “(c) The ‘Clear Cognition’” on my page “David Mayo project (3a):
The definition of ‘Clear’”).
Now in regards to those higher OT levels there does not seem to be some particular exact end phenomena. One just does the laid out processes and continues running them. This is my general impression from those that I have talked to and have observed that are on these levels. The majority does not seem to know exactly where they are at. This is a change with the original bridge which was rather clearcut.
As one proceeds on the various steps in Scientology it should result in an increase of stability and certainty in oneself as a being in the degree that one unfolds more of oneself. This is not that what I perceive is actually happening with today's completions of OT levels. They may feel great, or so it may seem and they may be doing their thing in life, work or other, but there is a missing factor in regards to certainty in oneself. There appear to remain to exist obvious parts of knowledge and observations that has not actually become part of them. Some may understand where I talk about here. There can for instance be seen a difference in the nature of the success stories that we see printed in for example the earlier issues (prior so about 1977-78) from magazines such as Clear News and Advance!. A factor may also be that the information that is presently found in for example the ‘Technical Bulletins’ volumes in fact contain contradictory information, whereas the information prior to basically 1978 is rather clearcut (see my studies concerning the condition of Clear, new definition of Clear since 1978). We have for example New Era Dianetics principles that replaced those from Standard Dianetics. Much of the previous information is still present in the old issues, then later years have added different interpretations or standards. Both these exist simultaneously then in these volumes, which of course may work rather confusing. Another noteworthy happening is also the invalidation and final disappearance of the Primary Rundown.
I print here below again:
Opposed to:
July 1978:
1.
New Era Dianetics (NED)
Standard Dianetics (1969)
September 1978:
2.
NED for OT's (NOT's), NED or Dianetics never run on OT's
Dianetics run on OT's (1970)
3.
Change in definition of Clear
(abandoning
Grade V, VA, VI & Clearing Course and thus abandoning the Scientology Clear)
Definition of Clear established (1965)
The original OT VIII vs The end of the road?
A consideration could be made with that when we actually consult the circumscriptions for the abilities attained for OT VIII that one may would figure that it sounds pretty much like an end of cycle.
HCOB 26 Aug 68 “The Class VIII Course” says :
“The Class VIII Course will teach the entire subject of Scientology in its exact standard practical applications from ARC Straightwire to OTs. ...
How to handle exact data of the levels will be taught and data necessary to the level, as not doing standard actions are all that hang a case up, no matter what level a case is from—Straightwire to OT VIII.” LRH
Clear had been:
↑
Clear
Ability to be at cause over mental matter, energy, space and time on the 1st dynamic (survival for self)
Freedom from inability to be at cause over mental matter, energy, space and time. 'Stops' being nonsurvival on the 1st dynamic.
And OT VIII basically added upon and extended this:
↑
Section VIII OT
Ability to be at cause knowingly and at will over thought, life, form, matter, energy, space and time, subjective and objective
Freedom from inability to be totally free and at total cause as a being
Above entries are taken from June 1970 Grade Chart (see also December 1970 Grade Chart).
What else was there still to expect? The notices found in ‘Clear News 93 (AOLA edition)’ [ca Sept/Oct 73] on page 3 does attempt to make some rather wild and presumptuous guesses at it:
“*Exterior with full perception?* *Total Cause?* *Able to create and destroy MEST?* *Levitation?* *Telepathy?* *Teleportation?* *Total ARC?* *Intergalactic travel?* *Able the predict the future?* *Able to create new bodies?* *Able to ‘just know’ anything?* *?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*”
Either way this is all still entirely hypothetical. After all this is not what Scientology actually was about. In fact it is entirely irrelevant. It actually surprises me to see these kind of speculations printed in such a magazine and it all basically have been incited by this one sentence in that aforementioned HCOB from July 1973.
Assuming that any such abilities could/would manifest themselves when doing some OT levels, then the reports are that some particular OT level would not awake a predescribed ability. Any traits or awarenesses may manifest at random on any level and differ from person to person judging from the testimonies given by them. But again speculating or focusing about what some level would give for abilities is not doing Scientology. All it is actually about is removing mental barriers. As any person will have different such barriers it will be hard to determine in advance what will manifest in the person when some barriers do get removed or get shifted. Important is also to realize that we as persons are living on different levels in regards to intelligences and experiences. It is also a reality that you can not run that which does not fall in the awareness or range of some person.
This in essence also would explain why we have people having done some of these original levels that they as a person did not in particular change. And in later times even abandoned Scientology or turned against it. It requires your willingness, involvement and activeness. It was never about sitting in some chair and dreaming, “now am I going to go free”. It doesn't work that way, nonetheless many went about it that way. L. Ron Hubbard also made quite clear already very early that Scientology is foremost for the intelligent and the able. This is not without reason as this is what is required to reach full end phenomena. Just as it is with any other subject or study you launch on. It is however not said either that would you be fulfilling the intelligence and able criteria's that you would make a better job of it either. These just give you a set of additional tools, however you have to properly use them. Many in the degree that they get more and more information appear to start to assume things and in reality stopped being critical about things. A basic frame of mind then gets established. There is knowledge but it created the inability to actually think with the information. This can be commonly observed with university graduates and such. Understanding got nothing to do with amassing information. The former does not automatically come with the latter. New information has to be observed by you to find out if it is true for you, many fail to follow up on that.
There are various observations that I wish to pose here: (1) why were these speculations being made here and who originated this?, as to my knowledge they have not in particular been presented like that prior to this point in time; (2) the realization that L. Ron Hubbard had not been around during 4 December 1972 - mid-September 1973; (3) that upon the return of L. Ron Hubbard that suddenly each and every issue of the AOLA periodical Clear News had a photograph of L. Ron Hubbard presented on its frontcover starting with issue # 94 [ca Oct 73)], when this was never the case on any issue prior to this; (4) and as a matter of coincidence # 93 of the periodical was also the very last issue to make mention of details concerning achieved end phenomena's or what to expect on these levels above Clear.
Some have commented to me that photographs of persons increase their significance when a person may have died. It's just to keep memories close to some deceased person. In this case however L. Ron hubbard had returned after having been mysteriously completely out of reach with the organization for a period of about 9½ months. The coincidence is interesting as L. Ron Hubbard was not in particular anymore a public figure when he returned. New breakthroughs (releases) were not introduced anymore by him in person. He was also not present at important meetings or openings. He then also altogether had actually ceased lecturing in public. For that matter we don't see or hear about Mary Sue Hubbard either anymore. From here on out it were often their children that instead represented them, or for that matter David Mayo in regards to the release of NED for OT's and the later Solo NOT's.
It could also be perceived here that the original intent of OT VIII actually failed to have ‘solidified’. That repeatedly messages had gone out, about that it would be released soon, but that it failed to ever materialize could be seen as bad planning or may be even as odd. It means that L. Ron Hubbard had not foreseen this at the time, and we were not properly informed about it either. Hopes were kept high as one prepaid for it during the whole of the 70's (at least from October 1968 to October 1980, see price inserts in ‘Advance 2’ to ‘Advance! 66’). We are assuming here that L. Ron Hubbard actually was still around. We do have the option that some simply did not want the original OT VIII to be released. Instead, and much later, then something else was released.
Mention of OT levels above OT VIII (A brief chronological track)
The socalled L-Rundowns are claimed to have emerged from research into the levels above OT VIII. This may be so, or this may not be so. Reality is that they have not ever been considered by themselves as some OT level. The message also has been that one could receive these rundowns (lists) at various different points on the Bridge.
1971: The earliest instance of mention of levels above OT VIII (as attributed to L. Ron Hubbard) is found in HCOB 30 Aug 71 I “Student Completions”. It provides for the following interesting entries:
“27. OT VIII 3 points (when released).
28. OT IX 3 points (when released).
29. OT X 3 points (when released).”
This is found in the ‘Technical Bulletins Volume VII 1970-71’ (1976 release). It is attributed to as having been written and issued by L. Ron Hubbard. However a notice appears underneath it in this volume:
“[This HCO B was revised four times by issues not written by LRH, the latest of which is BTB 30 August 1971RD, Issue I, Revised 15 May 1975, Paid Completion Points – Pc Completions, Student Completions and Internship Completions.]”
It is unclear insofar or in which degree L. Ron Hubbard was actually involved with the original release of the HCOB version. After all HCOB's as a rule do not get cancelled by a minor issue-type such as an BTB. It was only resorted if the reference was not actually written by L. Ron Hubbard. An at a much later date released technical bulletin notes however the following:
“Board Technical Bulletin 30 August 71 Issue I RF Revised 24 September 76, RF-I, Issue I RF-I, I RF-2 are hereby cancelled. It is not valid anyway, nor any previous BTB on the subject of student, preclear or interneship Paid Completions as they and their series cancel an HCOB. BTBs cannot cancel HCOBs.”
(from HCOB 14 Jun 77
“Paid Completions Simplified”
)
In fact during December 1974 lots of HCOB's got cancelled or reissued as BTB's. Reason was that the HCOB issue-type would from January 1974 and forward be reserved for L. Ron Hubbard only.
1973: Then we have the in a previous section already mentioned HCOB 30 Jul 73 “Scientology, Current State of the Subject and Materials” providing for this one sentence:
“There are perhaps 15 levels above OT VII fully developed but existing only in unissued note form, pending more people's full attainment of OT VI & VII.” LRH
Although this is issued at a time that L. Ron Hubbard was said to be in hiding. And thus not actually around.
“OT VIII has been in existence all those several years, and to it has been added a very large number of OT grades. None of them have been issued. Notes for all these grades are in existence.” LRH
(from HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-Up”)
HCOB 31 Aug 74RA (Re-revised 9 April 1977) “New Grade Chart” added following the mention of OT VIII: “OT IX on up.”.
1978:‘LRH ED 301 Int’, 17 Dec 78
“Ron's Journal 30, 1978—The Year of Lightning Fast New Tech” notes:
“UPPER LEVELS. There are other OT levels above VIII but these will be released from time to time when people are ready for them. We're already higher than Man has ever been and it can get quite stratospheric.”
The (December) 1978 Grade Chart as published in ‘What Is Scientology?’ (1978 edition) is the first chart to actually note ‘OT IX and Above’ following OT VIII. Odd enough on the [December] 1980 Grade Chart it was reverted back to only mentioning ‘OT VIII and Above’.
1982-83: Later with HCOB 19 Jan 82 “New – Streamlined Classification and Gradation Chart” the original OT levels IV-VIII were dropped and the subsequent March 1982 (Temporary Issue)Grade Chart then lists other actions developed at a much later date as the ‘New’ OT levels IV-VII. This Grade Chart also added the mention of various additional levels and lists now up to ‘New OT XI’. Finally the October 1983 Grade Chart lists up to ‘New OT XV’ where it is still at today.
1986: The next mention about higher OT levels was in a speech by Pat Broeker given on 27th January, 1986 at a meeting held in the Hollywood Palladium that was arranged to announce the passing of L. Ron Hubbard to the Scientology public. He said: “New OT IX and X have also been finished and written up. There are several other OT levels that it is my job to compile.” & “We have a thick sheaf of LRH's notes for New OT XI, XII, XIII and so forth and then a stack about 5 feet high comprising the materials of subsequent OT levels!” (quoted in ‘International Scientology News 8’ [ca Feb-Mar 86]).
And these are basically all the notices there have been till this point in time.
It coincides quite perfectly with the exact time period that L. Ron Hubbard boarded a plane and was not seen during about 10 months. In fact #1 in the series actually matches that very day. Now, is this a situation of the cat has left the house and thus the mice are playing on the table? After all Sec Checking as a practice had been abolished since 1968.
Nonetheless during 2 December 1972 - 11 June 1976 we see the release of the following:
Integrity Processing Series 1-21 and related
(issued: 2 Dec 72 / 16 May 74)
Integrity Processing Form 1-12
(issued: 24 Dec 72 / 11 Jun 76)
Sec Checking (Security Checking) practically may be divided in 2 areas of use. These are for actual Security matters and there is the Benefit for the Case of the Individual as per regular auditing. The problem may be to keep these separated if some use, of in essence confidential information, would be resorted to.
As already mentioned the use for Security matters already had been abolished in 1968 and this for reason given that it wasn't very workable for that purpose. In regards to Benefit for the Case of the Individual we had already Expanded Dianetics (XDN) that amongst other already addressed ‘hidden standards’ and ‘responsibilty’ that was previously released in April 1972. So what called for Integrity Processing and what was its aim?
Brief historical notices
Its limitations outlined and noted as early as 1960:
“Before I would permit you to believe that the overt-withhold mechanism was a total way of life, I would point out that it applies only to a strata of existence and that it stems from failures to help. ...
The reason we run O-Ws is that most pcs are on O-W by Transfer, which is to say, when they kick George in the head they get a headache themselves. This makes them think they are George. We use O-W since it explains phenomena found at a low humanoid level.” LRH (from HCOB 22 Dec 60 “O-W a Limited Theory”)
HCO PL 26 Aug 68 “Security Checks Abolished” provides for 7 specific reasons why they had been abolished. I list 3 of them in the below:
“1.
We have no interest in the secrets and crimes of people and no
use for them.
4.
Low level cases do not react on actual crimes and so the
‘security’ furnished is often a false security.
5.
There is public criticism of security checking as a practice.” LRH
Consult this reference in full
here (link will open as a pop-up window).
Then 2 years later we have this again reinforced by HCO PL 15 Nov 70 “Confessionals”. It says very clearly in the first 2 paragraphs:
“HCOs may not do Confessionals or ‘Sec Checks.’
HCO may only do Meter Checks. This consists of putting the pc on
a meter and noting down the TA, state of needle and attitude of pc.” LRH
And the following 2 picked paragraphs say:
“Real criminals may have bad meters but crimes are often so unreal
to them that they do not read (meters needle read only on things
within the reality or borderline reality of a person). This permits
unskilled Sec Checking or Confessional actions to pass right by the
culprit. ...”
“An R/S still means crimes. All the other data is true and should
be known but POLYGRAPHS, LIE DETECTORS, METERS ONLY REGISTER AT THE
REALITY LEVEL OF THE BEING, and the reality level of a criminal is
too bad for reads to occur in a majority of cases. Thus the guilty
are falsely freed and the innocent are subjected to annoyance and
upset.” LRH
They appear not deemed very workable for certain purposes.
Then in November 1974 we get HCO PL 13 Nov 74 “HCO May Do Confessional Lists”. It notes: “Cancels HCO P/L 26 Aug 68, Security Checks Abolished”. The reference says:
“The right to do Integrity checks is given to HCO.
Any data, HCOBs, tapes relating to ‘security checking’ or ‘Integrity Processing’ may be done by HCO.
The practice of doing only meter checks is no longer required.”
With reason given:
“THE MAJORITY OF THE TROUBLES ORGS HAVE, TEND TO VANISH, WHEN HCO DEPT 3 USES CONFESSIONALS AND INTEGRITY LISTS CORRECTLY AND OFTEN WHENEVER TROUBLE MOUNTS UP IN THE ORG. ...”
When such checks went out, HCOs tended to disappear.
So the tech and use of checks are vital.”
Although HCO PL 15 Nov 70 “Confessionals” did say:
“Overts disclosed in sessions may not be used for justice
purposes. Therefore only crimes discovered by routine investigation
are actionable.” LRH
Either way it notes underneath this 1970 reference in the Organizational Executive Course volumes (1991 release): “[Editor's Note: LRH later gave HCO the right to do confessionals, providing that they are delivered and C/Sed by persons trained and qualified to do so. See HCO PL 13 Nov. 74, HCO MAY DO CONFESSIONAL LISTS, on page 638 in this volume, and HCO PL 6 Mar. 82R, CONFESSIONAL TECH POLICIES, on page 642.]”. (as a side note HCO PL 6 Mar 82 was written by David Mayo in his capacity of Senior C/S Int)
This ‘Editor's Note’ evidently refers to: “Too many cases, too many case programmes, have been fouled up by
non C/Sed Sec Checking or Confessionals in the past for the
practice to continue.” LRH (from HCO PL 15 Nov 70 “Confessionals”). But this 1970 reference also concluded:
“No meter or Sec Check or Confessional is sufficiently valuable to
use in detection of crime. The state of the meter itself is of
value since it tells one whom to investigate.
Thus neither Tech nor Qual should assist investigations but
should work on the case against proper C/Ses to get off the overts
and withholds for the case benefit.” LRH
And thus advised:
“HCOs should learn Investigatory procedures when looking for
criminals. Confessionals and Sec Checks will fail them and they
also mess up cases. Investigatory procedures are quite good enough.” LRH
Integrity Processing vs Confessionals, and a note about Correction Lists
“HUBBARD INTEGRITY PROCESSING SPECIALIST COURSE, purpose: to train the student to the level of an Integrity Processing Specialist who knows and can apply the tech flublessly and has the ability to increase a person's personal integrity and trust in himself and others by freeing him of past overts, withholds and missed withholds. The graduate of this course is awarded the provisional Hubbard Integrity Processing Specialist Certificate. (BPL 24 Dec 72R) Abbr. HIPSC.”
(from ‘Scientology Admin(istrative) Dictionary’*)
Defining references release history: (link will open as a pop-up window)
The first 5 forms are listed in ‘Technical Bulletins, Volume IX, Auditing Series’ (1976 release), pages 294-306. I have few data on the Integrity List Series, they are all assumably only issued under the BTB issue-type format during the 1st half of 1974 or thereabouts. Do you have any further data on these, then please contact me!
The bulk of the references that we find in the Integrity Processing Series & Forms appear to have been compiled or written by ‘Brian Livingston’. Where it has to be commented here that various later BTB reissues from the mid-70's either removed his name and turned it till just the mention of the composer initials ‘BL’, or his name and initials disappeared all together. The question is why. It is then noted that a person with this name appears on ‘SO ED 2192 Int’, 27 Jan 83 “List of Declared Suppressive Persons”, which lists 607 names who were declared during late 1982 and early 1983, we also find a ‘Vicki Livingston’. We in addition find him (not Vicki) listed on ‘Flag ED 2830’, 10 Sept 91 “Suppressive Persons and Suppressive Groups List”. What does this mean in regards to these Integrity Processing references, I am not sure really.
What becomes clear from the previous chapter is that Sec Checking as such had been abolished. Why then do we see an upsurge of Confessional auditing procedures during Dec 72-Jun 76? What justified it? Why does it coincide with the exact day that L. Ron Hubbard boarded on a plane and was out of reach for about 10 months? These are obvious and logical questions to ask. There are simply no LRH references that condones or asks for such an initiative. After all HCO PL 26 Aug 68 “Security Checks Abolished” did not get cancelled until HCO PL 13 Nov 74 “HCO May Do Confessional Lists”.
An interesting notice is found in HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-up”:
“E: SEC CHECKING AND INTEGRITY PROCESSING
Sec Checking means, unfortunately, ‘Security Checking.’ That it was so misnamed in its origins obscures the fact that Confessionals have been part and parcel of religion nearly as long as religion has existed. ...
In an effort to get around what was thought to be a public relations scene, the name ‘Security Checking’ was changed to ‘Integrity Processing.’ This was also a PR error because the actual truth of the matter is it originated as ‘Confessional’ and should have simply been changed back to ‘handling of confessions.’ ...
There should be no further confusion in this matter. ‘Sec Checking,’ ‘Integrity Processing’ and ‘Confessionals’ are all the exact same procedure and any materials on these subjects is interchangeable under these titles.
The materials when all recollected and consolidated and reissued will be under the title of ‘Confessionals.’ But even before that reaches you, you had better determine to become an expert in it, since an auditor's inability to handle this is a fast route to ‘how to win enemies and wrongly influence people.’” LRH
Accordingly we see that the Integrity Processing Forms changed to become Confessional Forms on 10 March 1977. The same is assumably also applied to the 22+ references that made up the Integrity List Series which changed to become Confessional Series.
The 20 Integrity Processing Series references received a different treatment, these appear to have been stripped from the notice of any Series notification in the reissues. This during 1 to 6 March 1977.
HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-up” says further in this chapter:
“It is highly self-protective both from the viewpoint of the auditor and the organization to have the proper metered handling of Confessionals fully in.
BTB 31 Aug 1972RA ‘HCO CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE’ clarified the matter but this bulletin was on a very limited distribution and is not known. It contains the tech I developed on Sec Checking in the autumn of ’72.” LRH
Nonetheless this was a non-LRH reference as it was reissued as a BTB. Anyone has a copy of this for me? The original HCOB version or any BTB version. Please contact me!
Note that it has since has been replaced with HCOB 30 Nov 78RB (Revised 13 October 2000) “Confessional Procedure”.
The defining reference BTB 4 Dec 72R (Revised 13 May 1975) –Integrity Processing Series 1R– “Definitions” lays out:
“DEVELOPMENT
In the early ’60s LRH developed the technology known as Sec Checking. As issued it was used for two purposes: as a general processing tool to clean up a pc's overts and withholds and as a security tool to detect out-ethics persons and security risks.
In 1970 this technology was refined and issued under the name of Confessionals.
In 1972 a complete update was done of basic O/W tech and the earlier procedures of Sec Checking and Confessionals. A new technology emerged—Integrity Processing.
Recently Integrity Processing has been reviewed as to its workability and most optimum usage by LRH and certain revisions have been made.”
I find no data that in 1970 or thereabouts “this technology” would have been “refined”. There are no references from L. Ron Hubbard nor others about these matters in this time period in this regard. We however do have a reference from him issued that year that actually limited the use of confessionals rather considerably. We have HCO PL 15 Nov 70 “Confessionals”, which basically is abolishing confessionals to be done by HCO. The advice given is “HCOs should learn Investigatory procedures” LRH.
This 1972 “update” had no involvement of L. Ron Hubbard that could be confirmed. In addition L. Ron Hubbard was out of reach during 4 Dec 72 to mid Sept 1973. Thus this “new technology” appears, per the indicators and the data at hand, to have come about and was as it seems worked out and pushed entirely by others.
“Recently Integrity Processing has been reviewed” must be referring to the time that this BTB was issued as this paragraph was newly added in this revision, thus May 1975. The bulk of the references in these series appear to have been revised on 13 May 1975. I am unable to get anything confirmed as if L. Ron Hubbard would have been personally involved with these Integrity Processing or related procedures in this time period. The references in this series that were revised in 1975 that I have been able to check upon also fail to make any mention of involvement of the person L. Ron Hubbard.
Note: If I would be in error about some things in the above or if I may have overlooked something, please correct me and send me specifics and data by email!
Correction Lists
“CORRECTION LIST, 1. a list of prepared questions on a mimeod sheet which is used by the auditor for the repair of a particular situation, action, or rundown. (BTB 7 Nov 72 I) 2. the various lists designed to find by-passed charge and repair a faulty auditing action or life situation. (HCOB 28 May 70)”
(from 'Dianetics and Scientology: Technical Dictionary')
Correction Lists are of an expertise nature (your skill in regards to applying the procedures correctly), whereas Integrity Lists are of a personal nature. These are not the same.
We saw amongst other the release of the following:
HCOB 27 Mar 72 I
Study Corr List 1
“Student Correction List”
HCOB 27 Mar 72 II
Study Corr List 2
“Course Supervisor Correction List”
HCOB 27 Mar 72 III
Study Corr List 3
“Auditor Correction List, Auditor Recovery”
HCOB 27 Mar 72 IV
Study Corr List 4
“Case Supervisor Correction List”
HCOB 27 Mar 72 V
Study Corr List 5
“Executive Correction List”
Only the 2nd one appears to have been an LRH original. The release history of each of the above can be consulted
here (link will open as a pop-up window).
Compare consecutively with:
HCOB 24 Dec 72 V
[Integrity Processing Form 5]
“Student Integrity List”
HCOB 24 Dec 72 IV
[Integrity Processing Form 4]
“Supervisor Integrity List”
HCOB 24 Dec 72 III
[Integrity Processing Form 3]
“Auditor Integrity List”
HCOB 24 May 73
[Integrity Processing Form 8]
“Case Supervisor Integrity List”
BTB 21 Apr 75
Integrity Processing Form 11
“Flag Representative Integrity List”
BTB 11 Jun 76
Integrity Processing Form 12
“LRH Communicator Integrity List”
In essence what reason was there to put together such Integrity Lists if there were already Correction Lists available? One has to consider that a socalled auditor is as said placed above his reactive mind*. If you use cramming* for correction his skill will show result, this would be in total disregard of his personal problems or own case. This is what I always used to hear, then in regards to this, why do we have Integrity Lists and why the excessive use and attention on Integrity Lists/Confessionals?
To say it bluntly what calls for and justifies Integrity Lists? Didn't we have already Expanded Dianetics (XDN)?
Various questions remain to be answered. As per my findings we are missing out on the presence of the person L. Ron Hubbard in any of this. Persistently claims are being made about his interference and involvement but thus far I am unable to positively confirm these.
Further reading and data on the continued development of these matters can be found in chapter “Sec-Checking (2): ‘False Purpose Rundown’ (FPRD) (Jun 84)”.
Vocabulary: AD13:
'After Dianetics 13': The book Dianetics was written and published in 1950. 13 years after Dianetics would give 1963. AO:
Short for ‘Advanced Organization’: A Scientology organization which services higher level auditing & training. AOLA: ‘Advanced Organization Los Angeles’: A Scientology organization which services higher level auditing & training, located in Los Angeles, USA. audit, auditing, auditor:
The application of Scientology processes and procedures to someone by a trained auditor (listener). The goal of the auditor is to make the receiver of the auditing look at incidents and reduce the mental charge which may lay upon them. The auditor may not evaluate and has to adhere to the Auditor's code. BTB: ‘Board Technical Bulletin’, these are the issues of the Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology. Issue-type for technical matters not written by L. Ron Hubbard. C/S:
‘Case Supervisor’. 1. That person in a Scientology Church who gives instructions regarding, and supervises the auditing of preclears. The abbreviation C/S can refer to the Case Supervisor or to the written instructions of a case supervisor depending on context. (BTB 12 Apr 72R) 2. The C/S is the case supervisor. He has to be an accomplished and properly certified auditor and a person trained additionally to supervise cases. The C/S is the auditor's “handler.”He tells the auditor what to do, corrects his tech, keeps the lines straight and keeps the auditor calm and willing and winning. The C/S is the pc's case director. His actions are done for the pc. (Dianetics Today, Bk. 3, p. 545) cramming: A section in the Qualifications Division where a student is given high pressure instruction at his own cost after being found slow in study or when failing his exams. The cramming section teaches students what they have missed. This includes trained auditors who wish to be brought up-to-date on current technical developments. HCO Area Secretary (‘HCO Secretary’ in early days):
Usually referred to as ‘HAS’. The HAS is in charge of the HCO Division (Div. 1) of the organization. He has the function of establishing the organization. HCO PL (Pol Ltr, P/L or PL):
‘Hubbard Communication Office Policy Letter’: since Jan 74 reserved for L. Ron Hubbard only, these address administrative issues. LRH:
An usual abbreviation for ‘L. Ron Hubbard’. O/W: (O-W) 'Overt/Withhold'. overt-withhold mechanism (overt-motivator sequence): 1. If a fellow does an overt, he will then believe he's got to have a motivator or that he has had a motivator. (Anatomy of the Human Mind Congress, Lecture #2, 6012C31) 2. The sequence wherein someone who has committed an overt has to claim the existence of motivators, the motivators are then likely to be used to justify further overt acts. (The Phoenix Lectures glossary) org, orgs:
Abbreviation for ‘organization(s)’. OT (Operating Thetan): 1. Willing and knowing cause over life, thought, matter, energy, space and time. And that would of course be mind and that would of course be universe. (SH Spec 80, 6609C08) 2. An individual who could operate totally independently of his body whether he had one or didn't have one. He's now himself, he's not dependent on the universe around him. (SH Spec 66, 6509C09) 3. A being at cause over matter, energy, space, time, form and life. Operating comes from “able to operate without dependency on things” and thetan is the Greek letter theta (θ), which the Greeks used to represent “thought” or perhaps “spirit” to which an “n” is added to make a new noun in the modern style used to create words in engineering. (Book of Case Remedies, p. 10) PDH, PDHed:
‘Pain Drugs Hypnosis’. A person is put into a trance through use of pain, drugs and hypnosis and is told things. Roughly it means you have become stimulus respons without realy having control of yourself anymore. preclear (pc): 1. A person who, through Scientology processing, is finding out more about himself and life. (The Phoenix Lectures, p. 20) 2. A spiritual being who is now on the road to becoming Clear, hence preclear. (HCOB 5 Apr 69) 3. One who is discovering things about himself and who is becoming clearer. (HCO PL 21 Aug 62) Abbr. pc. Q&A:
‘Question and Answer’. 1. When the term Q and A is used it means one did not get an answer to his question. It also means not getting compliance with an order but accepting something else. (HCOB 5 Dec 73) 2. The origin of the term comes from “changing when the pc changes.” A later definition was “Questioning the pc's Answer.” The basic answer to a question is, obviously, a question if one follows the duplication of the comm formula completely. Q and A is a failure to complete a cycle of action on a preclear. An auditor who starts a process, just gets it going, gets a new idea because of pc cognition, takes up the cognition and abandons the original process is Q and A-ing. (HCOB 7 Apr 64) reactive mind: 1. That portion of a person's mind which works on a stimulus-response basis (given a certain stimulus, it gives a certain response) which is not under his volitional control and which exerts force and the power of command over his awareness, purposes thoughts, body and actions. It consists of GPMs, Engrams, Secondaries and Locks. (Scientology Abridged Dictionary) 2. Stored in the reactive mind are engrams, and here we find the single source of aberrations and psychosomatic ills. (Scientology 0-8, p. 11) 3. ‘bank’: a colloquial name for the reactive mind. This is what the procedures of Scientology are devoted to disposing of, for it is only a burden to an individual and he is much better off without it. (Scientology Abridged Dictionary) 4. The reactive mind acts below the level of consciousness. It is the literal stimulus-response mind. Given a certain stimulus it gives a certain response. (The Fundamentals of Though, p. 58) Scientology Admin(istrative) Dictionary: This is the publication ‘Modern Management Technology Defined’ (first released 1976). Usually referred to as simply Admin Dictionary. Presently used editions of this book are identical to this first edition. Sec Check:
Abbreviation for ‘Security Check'. SO (Sea Org):
Abbreviation for ‘Sea Org(anization)’. This is the senior organization within Scientology that run the Advance Organizations and also see to it that Class IV organizations (lower level services) do function well. If needed they may send out missions to correct if things don't run smoothly.
The years 1972, 1977 & 1982
We are then only months away from having O.T.s, a year at the most.
