Alter-Is in LRH-Books: Book of Case Remedy
For this I will publish a post from the news-net: love
Forum: alt.religion.scientology Thread: Lurkers: RE: alterations to The Book of Case Remedies
Date:03/10/2000 Author:Virginia McClaughry firstname.lastname@example.org
Hi all, SQUIRRELING IN THE BOOK OF CASE REMEDIES
It has come to my attention that there has been some squirreling of the tech in The Book of Case Remedies.
I am comparing two different versions of this book. The first version is copyright by L. Ron Hubbard, revised in August of 1975; the second version is copyright 1991 by L. Ron Hubbard Library.
In my squirreled 1991 version, in the Preface it says:
".In this new edition, the chapters found in the original appear as Book One. The opening chapter has been revised according to notes written by Ron in 1968, including update of its chart of gradients of case advancement per the modern Grade Chart."
In my 1975 by L. Ron Hubbard version it says in the Preface:
".THE BOOK OF CASE REMEDIES becomes, with Ron's H.C.O. Bulletins of 9 November 1967 and 13 January 1968, a new book and a new technical breakthrough. This expanded edition contains all the material of 1964. It also releases new technology resulting from upper level discoveries by L. Ron Hubbard."
So, according to the preface in BOTH books, my earlier version (1975 by L. Ron Hubbard) should contain all of the updates and revisions that Ron specified.
The first chapter of both books is entitled "The Tradition of Scientology". On page 10 of my squirreled 1991 version, the heading at the top of the page says "Release Differs from Clear". On page 12 of my 1975 by L. Ron Hubbard, the same section is entitled "CLEAR DIFFERS FROM O.T." Just a minor detail you say? Read on.
Here's the squirreled 1991 version:
"Release Differs from Clear
So OT was the state of beingness.
Release was a gradient condition. (A gradual bettering.) During studies of the past year, all this disentangled and became understood, and for the first time was easy to express.
Release is not a gradient up to OT. Release is a gradient up to Homo novis only. Homo (man) novis (new). This is a desirable improvement. Very desirable for anyone.
An entirely new thing has to be done to make an Operating Thetan.
But one had to know how to make one to find out about one. And Routine 6, the process that makes Clear, starts, really, at Homo novis. Certainly Routine 6 runs best on a Homo novis. The proof is that those Scientologists who have been pretty well released don't have any trouble at all with Routine 6; and those who haven't been released, and particularly those who have had few gains in processing, have a pretty awful time of it with Routine 6.
They get a bit along with it, but it's like watching a pygmy wrestle with an elephant."
Ok, now let's compare the "same" section in my 1975 by L. Ron Hubbard version:
"CLEAR DIFFERS FROM O.T.
So O.T. was the state of beingness.
Clear was a gradient condition. (A gradual bettering.) During studies of the past year, all this disentangled and became understood, and for the first time was easy to express.
Clear is not a gradient up to O.T. Clear is a gradient up to Homo Novis only. Homo (man) Novis (new). This is a desirable improvement. Very desirable for anyone.
An entirely new thing has to be done to make an Operating Thetan.
But one had to know how to make one to find out about one. And Routine 6, the process that makes an O.T., starts, really, at Homo Novis. Certainly Routine 6 runs best on a Homo Novis. The proof is that those Scientologists who have been pretty well cleared don't have any trouble at all with Routine 6; and those who haven't been cleared, and particularly those who have had few gains in processing, have a pretty awful time of it with Routine 6. They get a bit along with it, but it's like watching a pygmy wrestle with an elephant.
Thus, although we have Routine 6, my task has been to bring preclears up to clear and then send them onward to O.T."
Hmmm, just a slight alteration there. There's more, much more.
Just following the above section in the new and improved squirrel
version is another short section entitled "Release" which ISN'T in my 1975 version, and then the section entitled "The Levels to OT".
Here's the 1991 L. Ron Hubbard Library squirreled version:
"The Levels to OT
This is done - and very doable it is - by moving the being up to a few basic wins with ordinary processing (up to Grade IV) and then moving the preclear up to Clear and then going for OT.
To stretch a point, one is really clearing from ARC Straightwire to Grade VI; but clearing, now that I've had a chance to refine it, is itself a process that takes skill and ability both to run and receive. And one has to get the being up to doing that. So a being who can do that is a "Release," which reaches up to Grade VI."
All right, now let's take a look at my 1975 by L. Ron Hubbard version:
"THE LEVELS TO O.T.
This is done - and very do-able it is - by moving the being up to a few basic wins with ordinary processing (up to Level III) and then moving the preclear up to clear (Level IV) and then going for O.T. which is Level VI (V being skipped, but left in place because it contains a known type of technology, not needed, but necessary to know the existence of).
To stretch a point, one is really clearing from Level I to Level IV; but clearing, now that I've had a chance to refine it, is itself a process that takes skill and ability both to run and receive. And one has to get the being up to doing that. So a being who can do that is a "Release," which reaches up to Level II."
Besides the rather gross and obvious changes, I've also noticed some very subtle alterations as well. For example, Ron always referred to the state of Operating Thetan as "O.T." (notice the period after each letter), whereas C.S.T. dba L. Ron Hubbard Library always uses just "OT", without the periods. Ron says "clear" (without caps), RTC/CST say "Clear" (capitalized). Ron says "Homo Novis" (novis capitalized), RTC/CST say "Homo novis" (novis is not capitalized, and the entire phrase is ALWAYS italicized). Look at the last sentence of the squirreled "The Levels to OT" above, and look at where it says "Release," No, that's not my typo, the com ma and end quote have actually switched places from the original version.
Let's be VERY GENEROUS here (but certainly not REASONABLE), and let's just say that all these alterations are NOT intentional, and that someone just made some INNOCENT mistakes here. Gee, I wonder what Ron would have to say about that?
"In the presence of suppression, mistakes occur. That is another factor in suppression and an indicator of someone who is a potential trouble source - they will make mistakes. People making mistakes or doing stupid things is evidence that a suppressive person exists in that vicinity.
All illness, in greater or lesser degree, and all foul-ups stem directly and only from a PTS condition."
Gee, it looks like Ron was pretty specific about this point - he didn't leave too much wiggle room did he Robert? Just a minor detail here, but. "It is a high crime to permit suppressive and PTS people in Publications Orgs or departments or in Department 16 (Division 6, advertising) as these will starve both the public and the org."
Well, maybe the above listed outpoints are the only ones in the book. Maybe the rest of the book is pure, on-source LRH tech, let's see...
Well. on page 28 of my squirreled version under the heading of "The Main Point", the last part of the sentence says: ".to be successful in releasing, clearing or making OTs."
In my 1975 version it says: ".to be successful in releasing, healing, clearing or making O.T.'s."
Just below at the end of the same section, it says (squirreled version): "So, to release, clear or make OTs one has to be an expert on blows, their cause and cure."
1975 version: "So, to release, heal, clear or make O.T.'s one has to be an expert on blows, their cause and cure."
Oops, the words HEAL and HEALING were taken out. Were there some LEGAL ramifications to leaving those words in? Perhaps that is the justification for altering LRH's words here.
Ok, let's get into the meat and potatoes of the book, the actual remedies themselves. Well, let's just start at the beginning of the remedies, which is chapter six, Table of Remedies.
On page 38 of my 1991 squirreled version, is the first actual remedy - Remedy A. At the bottom of the page is a small note. It says: "*Procedure modified per HCOB 9 Nov. 67, REVISION OF REMEDY A, REMEDY B, AND S AND Ds."
On page A-1 of my 1975 is the actual HCOB itself. Great! Now we can VERIFY whether the 1991 version is accurate or not.
So let's see, all of Remedy A is perfect, just exactly the way it is in my older 1975 version. Ok, let's look at Remedy B. Beautiful! No changes at all. Ok now let's check S & D - oh-oh.
In HCOB 9 Nov. 67, REVISION OF REMEDY A, REMEDY B, AND S AND Ds (which is contained in my 1975 L. Ron Hubbard version but not my 1991 squirreled version) it has Remedy A, Remedy B, and then right after Remedy B it has S & D - just like the title of the HCOB. But in my 1991 squirreled version, the section on S & D is completely missing. Well, maybe it just wasn't important. Let's see what it says:
"S & D
Search and Discovery of Suppression is called an "S and D." It locates the suppressives on the case."
Whoops. how did THIS get left out? Well, let's see what else is in there.
".Therefore I researched further and developed what we will now use as an S & D. It is one of these killer processes. It is VERY strong. So it isn't to be carelessly done.
The real question for an S & D was established only when I found a purpose all Suppressives have in common and is a very fundamental effort in suppressives. This effort by suppressives, when found, then permitted me to form the question.
The key S & D question is: "Who or what has attempted to unmock you?"
Unmocking (an effort to reduce or make disappear) is the primary effort of suppressives."
Wow! How did THAT get left out? Interestingly enough, in new tech volume 8, p 131, this same HCOB carries a special note "(Note: To be reprinted for insertion in every copy of The Book of Case Remedies)"
Obviously LRH wanted ALL of this data in The Book of Case Remedies, so how come not ALL of it made it in the book?
I just noticed that on the very next page of my 1975 L. Ron Hubbard version is ANOTHER HCOB. It is HCOB 13 January 1968, S & Ds. Wow!
Another HCOB dealing with S & Ds, that isn't in my new and improved squirrel version. Maybe it contains some more useful data. Let's look, shall we:
"There are three types of S & D (Search and
Discovery). These are used to nullify the influence of Suppressive persons or things on a case so the person will be able to be processed and will no longer be P.T.S. (a Potential Trouble Source). People who are P.T.S.
became that way because of suppression by persons or objects. Insanity is also remediable by S & Ds where the person can be processed.
In the body of the HCOB, Ron describes three types of S & D, each with it's own specific question: S & D TYPE U - "Who or what has attempted to unmock you?" S & D TYPE S - "Who or what are you trying to stop?" S & D TYPE W - "Who or what are you trying to withdraw from?"
Then near the bottom it says: ".Properly listed the results are magical. If they are not magical, then listing tech is badly out and should be re-studied from ALL materials and tapes on the subject."
How did all of these vital pieces of Ron's tech get left out of a New & Improved version of The Book of Case Remedies? One would hope that these alterations were not intentional, because if they were, they would of-course fall into the following
Using Scientology (or perverted and alter-ised tech and calling it Scientology) harmfully so as to bring about disrepute to an org, group or Scientology itself.
Issuing alter-ised Scientology technical data or information or instructional or admin procedures, calling it Scientology or calling it something else to confuse or deceive people as to the true source, beliefs and practices of Scientology. Acts calculated to misuse, invalidate or alter-is legally or in any other way the trademarks and service marks of Dianetics and Scientology.
Intentional and unauthorized alteration of LRH technology, policy, issues or checksheets.
Developing and/or using squirrel processes and checksheets.
Severe breach of ecclesiastical and/or fiduciary duty as an executive or corporate official of any Scientology or Dianetics organization which has resulted in severe harm, loss or disrepute for Scientology or the organization.
Violation or neglect of any of the ten points of Keeping Scientology Working, as listed here:
- One: Having the correct technology.
- Four: Teaching correctly the correct technology.
- Six: Seeing that the technology is correctly applied.
- Seven: Hammering out of existence incorrect technology.
- Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications.
- Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology.
- Ten: Closing the door on incorrect application.
Acting in any way calculated to lose the technology of Dianetics and Scientology to use or impede it's use or shorten it's materials or it's application.
Withhold of vital information. Obstruction of vital technical or management information lines in such a way as to deny people tech data, prevent students and pcs moving up the Bridge, or obstructing the relay, disclosure or free distribution of vital information so as to prevent it's arriving amongst the public and orgs in terms of results.
Suppressive acts are clearly those covert or overt acts knowingly calculated to reduce or destroy the influence or activities of Scientology or prevent case gains or continued Scientology success and activity on the part of a Scientologist. As persons or groups that would do such a thing act out of self-interest only to the detriment of all others, they cannot be granted the rights ordinarily accorded rational beings.
In closing, I would like to quote one final thing from my 1991 RTC/CST version of The Book of Case Remedies.
"It is with great pride that we present this new edition of The Book of Case Remedies.
The Editors, 1991"
(Notice that the title of the book is now italicized)