Русская версия

Site search:
ENGLISH DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Comment on Beingness Processing - B580524

37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 (Issued at Washington)
All Staff Field Offices


I recently received the following from an HGC auditor:

“Dear Ron,

“I am writing to congratulate you on the development of the Beingness processes outlined in HCO Bulletin of May 2, AD 8.*HCO BULLETIN OF 2 MAY 1958

“These are wonderful processes and I thank you for them.

“Not as a report, but purely as clinical data I want you to know what happened in seven and a half hours of using them.

“Nine major valences came off the case, including the weak one and the strong one. All the important ones stripped off clean. Plus the fact that the service facsimile keyed out. This person is not a clear, yet, but is a brand new person.”


The best solution to valences is beingness processing.

Help on valences is excellent, even phenomenal and should not be ignored. Problems of Comparable Magnitude to a selected person cannot be ignored. But an understanding of valences gives us a new look at processes.

In the first place a valence is a beingness. Bad, crazy or superb, a valence is still a beingness.

A thetan has a basic personality. But if this is too thoroughly invalidated, a thetan assumes some invented valence. And if this is invalidated he then eventually completes the DEI Scale on Beingness.

The things wrong with a thetan are the lower harmonics of the characteristics of a thetan. You could say carelessly that the only thing wrong with a person is himself. Let us say more accurately that the only thing wrong with a person is his abandonment of self and the assumption of other selves. Because there is a self, the assumption of selves is possible.

We find that the APA or OCA is a picture of a self What self is another matter. All selves other than true self are less honest and ethical since the thetan has a poorer opinion of others than he does of himself in the basic state.

To change an APA or OCA it is necessary to shift selves.

It is fascinating that theft of objects is really an effort to steal a self. Objects represent selves to others. Thieves and what they steal cannot be understood by the logic of their material needs. They steal tokens of selves and hope to assume thereby another self. It is sometimes not amusing to me to be missing my lecture notes or a book from my shelf. This is covert theft of beingness. People sometimes get anxious to be me — I know not why. They wind up stealing my things. The theft is irrational. The articles were not later cherished and all were put away or thrown away when the beingness did not materialize. Perhaps it is bad taste to mention this from my personal viewpoint but from where else should I look? And it has all happened to you, too. Thesenselessness of the items selected probably puzzled you when they were stolen. But they were identified with you. You couldn’t be stolen, so you lost your wife, your husband or your little trinket, “meaningless” perhaps to anyone but you.

A person has to discover he can’t be you before he steals your things without credit. When he discovers he still isn’t you, he damns you to all. He finally cannot be you, so he wastes you. And thus the DEI Scale of beingness is completed.

One answer to this is never be a desirable you. And never get famous. A far better answer is to understand it, for by understanding alone you can prevent it.

Thus, the major tears of the world are based on beingness. Insanity, heartbreak, bitter lives all stem from the same source.

There is also an acceptance level of beingness, based on a viewpoint of an already alloyed beingness. Some people can only have the beingness of the criminal or the insane. Thus there is yet another door to cracking cases, another latchstring to the problem of Man.

There is also the problem of acceptable beingness, probably more important than acceptance level. What Beingness is acceptable to various people in the pc’s life?

There is also such a thing as taking on another’s unwanted beingness to help him or her. Such as taking a psychosomatic.

We have had many beingness processes. Like we did at first with help, we missed a point. The preclear does not know what “help” means. And he does not know what beingness means. He is below cognition level on them. All help or beingness actions he undertakes are reactive, not analytical.

To overcome this, one enters the case of the pc at the Inhibit end of the DEI Scale. He has the pc waste the item in brackets. He asks the pc to waste help, to waste the help of another, to have another waste help for himself and so on.

Thus it is with beingness. Have the pc waste it.

Man tears his idols apart trying to get a bit of desirable beingness. Every thetan wants to heal at sight; so they crucified Christ. And sold pieces of the cross.

A pc who assumes the aches of another wishes to be that other. He is short on beingness. He accepts it obsessively.

Wearing Empress Eugenie’s hats is understandable. What woman wouldn’t be an empress? But wearing the crooked back of the Hunchback of Notre Dame isn’t quite so comprehensible — if you don’t know Scientology.

One follows knowing assumptions of beingness with unknowing assumptions. The thief knows not why he steals. The bishop knows little of why he cherishes the bit of the True Cross.

And none of them know, so invalidated has it become, that each has a basic beingness, complete. And that beingness is important to you. It is the best beingness there is. And it is important to me, how important can only be viewed through these eyes that see the magnitude of the job. Why should anyone steal when he can have the best there is for the asking? And why steal from me and thee for we alone in all Man’s history can give him the priceless gift of himself.

Just as the thief knows not why he steals, so does the archbishop fail to know why he dons a robe.

To abandon life is to waste all beingness. There is the preclear who sits at succumb. Try it on a pc. You’ll be surprised.

This is one of the OT steps on which I am working for the 20th ACC.