Search Results

Introduction: Scientology is the study and training of the fundamental principles of life. This education allows you to acquire and deepen this knowledge – it is truly a school of life. Books, the Bridge, Life The Bridge of Scientology consists of two essential elements: training and auditing. Both are necessary – one complements the other. Training doesn't exist just to make auditors. Studying and training are fundamentally important for a thetan because they provide stable data that help them better understand themselves, others, and thus life itself – leading to greater control over their own life. You can compare it to flying: an airplane can be repaired, maintained, cleaned, and brought into perfect condition. You can do "Reach and Withdraw" with the aspiring pilot and use auditing to free them from fears, dislikes, or false attitudes about flying. But if they want to fly, they still need solid training. Of course, they could try to teach themselves how to fly – but with structured training, it’s easier, safer, and more efficient. In other words: auditing and training complement each other and are inseparably connected. A society also essentially functions through education. Scientology is training in the fundamental principles of life. This training does not stand above other forms of education in the sense of being “more important,” but it offers a basis that helps make everything else more understandable and easier to apply. It’s worth acquiring and deepening this knowledge – it truly is a school of life. L. Ron Hubbard wrote down many of these fundamentals in his books. From personal experience, I can say: when you read them again after a few years – especially after further auditing or upon reaching the OT levels – you see much more in them. Auditing expands your reality, which makes the content of the books clearer and more applicable. The books are available digitally, and we also provide some in printed format. The printed editions are available in German and French; unfortunately, we only have a few in English. However, we do carry many used English books. You can download the books directly here: https://www.ronsorg.space/books The book “ Boots In The Sky – The Tale of Erica and Max Hauri” is now also available in English and can be obtained exclusively from us. Much love, Max Hauri

Ron's Org, Grenchen, Switzerland The Ron's Org, original free, independent Blog is happy to present many articles from L. Ron Hubbard's works. These articles will help you understand life better and do more with it. Sometimes understanding takes some effort, but it is rewarded by the fact that you can apply it. New data or knowledge allows you to see things differently and therefore live better. If you are curious about what is behind the categories, here is a brief overview that will help you choose the one you prefer. Individuality: We are all different and yet we have one thing in common: our mind. It works the same way for everyone. Family: Family, love and children are the pillars of our societies. Understanding them and being able to improve them is the wish of all human beings. Group: We are all part of a group governed by the same natural laws. It is possible to learn and apply them. Society: Today's society is very diversified. It has problems all over the world and it is possible to understand them, no matter where you come from. Life: Life is within us and around us. Everyone has the right to respect for their own kind. Discover, learn these rights and make life better for everyone! Exact sciences: Science is there to help Man to evolve and not to destroy him in the name of vested interests. Make your own opinion. Buddhism: Buddhism is a religion without a god, but with a guideline to follow to access higher levels of consciousness; accessible with Scientology. Dianetics: It opens the doors to the universe of the mind and what can be done to make trauma disappear and the true self emerge. Scientology: Every religion or culture has a piece of truth. Scientology combines these truths into a technology for the betterment of all. Technology: Every action, science and work has a well-defined technology for achieving a valuable result acceptable to all. Increase your knowledge, apply it, and enjoy the result. Please feel free to contact us with any additional questions. We, from Ron's Org, original free, independent Blog will be glad to answer. Your happiness is important to us! Ron's Org Grenchen – Switzerland +41 32 513 72 20

Introduction: Below is a letter from L. Ron Hubbard to the President of the John Howard Society in St. John's, Newfoundland, which also works with the Royal Commission of Canada. L. Ron Hubbard talks about Judiciary or Rehabilitative Dianetics, which could be advantageously applied in prisons, thus drastically reducing criminality. A challenging text today - but a fascinating topic.While translating it, I had to think of my newsletter from December, Prison Planet Earth . What if this principle is applied to us? "We might find then that insanity should be prohibited as a defense, but that at the same time all criminality defined as intentional harm against the society should be classified as a greater or lesser extent of insanity and that the criminal should be, as you suggest, uniformly detained for treatment. And we find also, as we examine this problem and see the disastrous effects of early and unqualified releases from prison upon the society, that a criminal should be detained until it could be ascertained with great certainty that he would not further victimize the society." In fact, I too have come to believe that a criminal had better prove that he is no longer one and not be given another chance in response to his pleas. As Ron says, forgiveness is not a high-sounding “virtue”: "If there is any saintly quality, it is not to forgive. “Forgiveness” is a much lower level action and is rather censorious." (From " What is Greatness " ) However, we have the tech to grab ourselves by the scruff of the neck and pull ourselves out of the mud. We really do. We have the chance, let's grab it. Much love Max Hauri Insanity as a Defense Professional Auditor's Bulletin – PAB 28 – 11 June 1954 from L. Ron Hubbard Mr. D. M. Clouston, President The John Howard Society St. John's, Newfoundland   My dear Mr. Clouston: I wish to thank you for your forceful letter on the subject of your testimony as it may be given before a Royal Commission of Canada on the subjects of "Insanity as a Defense" and "Criminal Sexual Psychopaths". You state that the Royal Commission of Canada has been set up for the purpose of inquiring into and reporting upon two questions: Whether there should be any amendment to the Criminal Law of Canada relating to "Insanity as a Defense". Whether there should be any amendment to the existing Laws of Canada relating to "Criminal Sexual Psychopaths". As I understand it, you intend to advance the fact that only a trained therapist with those detectors which may be at his disposal is competent to make a fair analysis of a person's degree of sanity and in the second case that you intend that, for arbitrary punishment now being imposed, periods of detention should be set during which the prisoner should receive therapeutic treatment (preferably Scientological) and dis­charged only when found free from the criminal tendencies for which he was detained. It is very encouraging that a Royal Commission should see fit to enquire into these ranges of justice, and it is quite heartening to find that it would invite a man of your calibre to express his views. It may be that something definite may emerge from this and it would appear to be a very hopeful view. You asked me whether or not I think your approach is sound and to invite appropriate suggestions as I may care to make. And I wish to thank you for this opportunity and your courtesy. On page 402 of Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health [ NdT: In the Ron's Org edition: Chapter 10, page 301: Dianetics – Past and future – Judiciary Danetics.] there begins a three page essay on "Judiciary Dianetics" with which, I believe from your letter, you seem to have some acquaintance. For whatever they may be worth to you, may I give you my general comments on this matter. The whole subject of "insanity" in law is adrift since it is a chip launched into the already existing definition of criminality. Any confusion as to where to place insanity in law comes about through the basic definition in law itself of insanity and criminality. Law defines criminality more or less as "action despite knowledge of right and wrong" and "insanity" as an inability to differentiate between right and wrong. If law is based upon the idea that all people are selfish and self-centred, then we can differentiate between criminality and insanity. But if law were to consider man a social animal, basically it would have to consider that any act which was intentionally harmful would stem from a frame of mind which omitted dif­ferentiation of right from wrong. No man, in other words, who was sane in the fullest sense of the word would be motivated by actions which victimized his group or community since he would realize that he, with the others, would suffer for these activities. And even in a practical sense it is apparent that the thief in committing criminal acts strengthens the necessary force of law in the area and so further inhibits his own freedom. This is a problem, mainly, of the degree of enlightenment of law itself. It is a matter of what standard the law or the society, the will of which is represented by the law, is willing to recognize a higher standard of conduct than that enforced by law these many years past. Society is more and more inclined toward the understanding of criminality as "antisocial". Jurisprudence may content itself to remain with its definition that insanity is the inability to differentiate right from wrong. But this view may be broadened through such inquiries as that of the Royal Commission and by the public's own pressure, which actually such a Commission represents, to account insanity as, simply, the inability to differentiate. In the United States certain patterns of thought of recent years have obstructed the growth of justice. Chief amongst these has been a dwelling upon the "criminal mind" as a mind which is strangely distinct and different from the minds of others who are not criminal. But a slightly clearer view should demonstrate that even the "criminal mind" falls within law's own definition for insanity: the inability to differentiate right from wrong. It is obviously wrong for a being to harm his own species, his own group, his own society. Therefore, a being who would commit harmful acts is not differentiating between right and wrong and must at least savor of insanity. Here we have a problem of "where to draw the line". At what point does an individual cease to be sane and become criminal? At what point, then, does he cease to be criminal and become insane? Custom from which law itself was born has long proposed the solution to this problem in its own definition for insanity. In order to classify criminals, we would have to classify crime. We would discover that crime was subdivi ded into accidental and intentional crime. Society punishes crime only when it considers the crime to be intentional. If the crime is intentional, then the intent also included the intention of harming the society. Thus a criminal action, by a broad sweep, could be said to be an insane action – and all within the definition of law itself. It could be defined that when a man descends to intentionally harmful action against his fellow he has descended at least into the upper band of insanity. Law could cleave open a path for itself by applying the classification of "insane" to criminals. In view of the fact that past systems of punishment have not reformed criminality or abated it, law seems more inclined to take this view and would take it could it be demonstrated to them that this inability to differentiate right from wrong could be altered to the betterment of society. As prison systems have been found to produce even more hardened criminality than they have remedied, it is entirely possible that law might comfortably entertain a change of view on the subject and treat criminals for what they are: mentally deranged persons. With this other choice law finds itself often betrayed. That choice is the permitting of criminals to escape law by reason of "insanity". If a criminal is proven insane he is permitted, at least to some degree, to escape the penalty which would ordinarily be incurred by his act. Law, by retaining this segregation, defeats its own ends and deprives itself of its prey. Only in the face of an almost complete misunderstanding of insanity could the people engaged in government be persuaded that the label "insane" should permit criminals to escape punishment. Thus, to that degree, insanity itself seems to be feared and is tolerated. The blunt and terrible truth is that so long as insanity can continue to be used as a defense it will invite criminals into that state of being. Further, such laws as provide an escape from punishment thus unharness the energies of many against their fellow men who would otherwise be curbed. For example, a slightly insane person by reason of his "mental state" might feel it unnecessary to obey law which actually was within his full understanding. It is far from right that law should provide an escape for the guilty on such grounds. By concentrating its attention upon the fact that insanity, if proven, will permit a person to escape justice, law is overlooking the fact that crime apparently stems uniformly from an inability to differentiate to a degree which a sane man would ordinarily consider sane. Law is faced with the enigma of insanity as a means of thwarting justice. And thus insanity must continually be disproven in the field of criminality. Whereas, it is time that criminality be proven to be insanity. I have worked with many criminals and have been, in order to observe criminality, a police officer for a short time. And it is my very close observation that anyone subject to criminal tendencies is, in a much broader sense, insane, and that his insanity reaches much wider than the field of crime, but invades hallucination, persecution and mental disabilities which are in themselves symptoms of insanity. The insanity of the criminal has its incidence in a conviction that the first group, the family, has no function or need for him and develops upon the recognition that the society does not want him. This is apparently the genus of that antisocialness we call criminality. The insanity is further developed by continuous association with others who are of the same conviction and who form groups, which groups are motivated by a need for revenge against the society. Current methods of punishment and police handling only deepen this conviction, and it can be said so far as jail sentences are concerned that the more punishment a criminal receives, the more insane he becomes on the very subject of his criminality. Thus the society victimizes itself by bringing from the realm of delusion into the starkness of reality the fact that the individual is not wanted by any of his fellows save a few of his most intimate associates. By joining hands in their thirst for revenge against the society which rejects them, these criminals then form societies of their own. And the final result of this dwindling spiral is the deterioration of the society as a whole under duress of laws which, seeking to repress the few, suppress the many. Without such criminal gangs people such as Hitler, who depended utterly upon them for his ascent to power, would themselves be powerless. Thus the subject of criminality moves intimately into the field of government. We might find then that insanity should be prohibited as a defense, but that at the same time all criminality defined as intentional harm against the society should be classified as a greater or lesser extent of insanity and that the criminal should be, as you suggest, uniformly detained for treatment. And we find also, as we examine this problem and see the disastrous effects of early and unqualified releases from prison upon the society, that a criminal should be detained until it could be ascertained with great certainty that he would not further victimize the society. This last strikes directly at the parole system which is an unhappy one at best, and would make it the complete responsibility of parole boards to insure the society against further criminal acts on the part of the released prisoner. In the absence of a remedying treatment and practical means to effect it, such a course as this would be considered inhuman in the extreme. Even a hardened judge might recoil from the idea that insanity should never be used as a defense, and the intention to incarcerate criminals for their lifetime, if necessary to insure society against their depredations. These are very strong measures. Today, however, several experiments have demonstrated that treatment for criminality can be administered at very little cost to the state. This cost is as small as a few cents per prisoner. By means of group processing a great deal has been done in this field. The treatment itself is administered by magnetic tape recordings. The problem could not have been solved as long as individual application of therapy remained a necessity by reason of technology. But with the advance of group processing, the majority of criminals could be rehabilitated and freed by parole boards using sanity as their criteria without injury to the society. Even though this processing would not be effective upon all criminals to which it was administered, according to present standards and practices, it would at least be effective upon the majority. With regard to the second part of the purposes of the Royal Commission of Canada, it is my own opinion that laws relating to "Criminal Sexual Psychopaths" should be no different from laws relating to other criminalities. For the sexual psychopath, as Sigmund Freud long ago recognized, is a mentally ill person. In both these matters, we find the law capable of advancing to the degree that it is willing to accept its responsibility to the society at large. It is the purpose and function of law to safeguard the citizens of the society against the depredations or criminal practices of the few. If the law is totally responsible it would act to totally insure the citizenry against crime. This cannot be done by suppression of the citizenry at large, for this is the regulation of the many to monitor the few. Even without Scientology, without adopting its practices, law could be far more effective in safeguarding the society as a whole simply by reclassifying what it means by "criminal" and firmly observing its own definition for "insane". With Scientology, once it has segregated out the criminals and the insane, once it has made its purpose distinct and clear, its detention of criminals until they were once more social could be resolved by the administration of tested processes to the criminals and the release of those who had responded on a group level. This, however, is a very long view and is far too firm a stand to expect from the judiciary, as these cannot but go by the customs of the people whom they serve. A long mile could be commenced upon this road, however, by demonstrating that groups of prisoners detained in prisons could undergo individual change by a rearrangement of their ideas and by releasing those so benefitted into the society and by tracing their course until it was firmly established whether or not they had become social. With this step and with the evidence thus brought into being it might very well follow that a broad evolution in law would ensue. I wish to thank you very much for writing me. I hope you will let me hear more about this as I am intensely interested. My very best, L. Ron Hubbard

Introduction: “My Philosophy” is a wise text. The first principle  of my own philosophy is that wisdom is meant for anyone who wishes to reach for it. It is the servant of the commoner and king alike and should never be regarded with awe. We often hear that patents for free energy are being bought up. We also hear that inventors who develop such machines or devices are visited and that they then distance themselves from this research. Others have been murdered. There are also rumors that the FBI confiscated his materials after Nikola Tesla's death and that HAARP was later built on these foundations. Well, we may speculate about that. But my gut feeling tells me that there may be some truth in such statements. Where there's smoke, there's fire... Whether the above is true or not, the fact is that dark forces, often disguised as 3-letter organizations (APA, AMA, CIA, IRS, NSA, etc.) have worked hard, and may still be working, to change and destroy Scientology. “My Philosophy” is a wise text. This quote from it is profound and I don't doubt for a second the veracity of these words and maybe it's not just “selfish scholars”: "Selfish scholars seldom forgive anyone who seeks to break down the walls of mystery and let the people in. Will Durant, the modern American philosopher, was relegated to the scrap heap by his fellow scholars when he wrote a popular book on the subject. ‘The Outline of Philosophy’. Thus brick bats come the way of any who seek to bring wisdom to the people over the objections of the ‘inner circle’." The enemies that Scientology has are also the enemies of all sincere and peace-loving people. These psychopaths have created tremendous material resources and structures over the centuries just to create and maintain war, misery, poverty, disease, etc. Poverty is caused by a false and evil monetary system, and if we were allowed to correct it, we earthlings would be living in material abundance within a few years.  Back when I was studying the monetary system, the scales fell from my eyes. It made me realize the value of Scientology across the board, and people have never had a better friend than Ron. "So my own philosophy is that one should share what wisdom he has, one should help others to help themselves. and one should keep going despite heavy weather for there is always a calm ahead. One should also ignore catcalls from the selfish intellectual who cries: ‘Don’t expose the mystery. Keep it all for ourselves. The people cannot understand.’"  – L. Ron Hubbard The Ron's Org is working hard to ensure that Ron's Tech and Admin are available to all and that there are orgs where you can receive the appropriate training. The Ron's Org gives everyone the opportunity to study and apply the technology and wisdom. It is how we can thank Ron for his work. Follow the Ron's Org on Telegram, using this link: https://t.me/+ChuKP12Vwm9kNWJk Much love, Max Hauri My Philosophy By L. Ron Hubbard – 1965 Also available on this website as "Inspiration" in "Media Center " The subject of philosophy is very ancient. The word means: „The love, study or pursuit of wisdom, or of knowledge of things and their causes, whether theoretical or practical.“ All we know of science or of religion comes from philosophy. It lies behind and above all other knowledge we have or use. For long regarded as a subject reserved for halls of learning and the intellectual, the subject, to a remarkable degree, has been denied the man in the street. Surrounded by protective coatings of impenetrable scholarliness, philosophy has been reserved to the privileged few. The first principle of my own philosophy is that wisdom is meant for anyone who wishes to reach for it. It is the servant of the commoner and king alike and should never be regarded with awe. Selfish scholars seldom forgive anyone who seeks to break down the walls of mystery and let the people in. Will Durant, the modern American philosopher, was relegated to the scrap heap by his fellow scholars when he wrote a popular book on the subject. ‘The Outline of Philosophy’. Thus brick bats come the way of any who seek to bring wisdom to the people over the objections of the ‘inner circle’. The second principle of my own philosophy is that it must be capable of being applied. Learning locked in mildewed books is of little use to anyone and therefore of no value unless it can be used. The third principle is that any philosophic knowledge is only valuable if it is true or if it works. These three principles are so strange to the field of philosophy, that I have given my philosophy a name: SCIENTOLOGY. This means only ‘knowing how to know’. A philosophy can only be a route to knowledge. It cannot be crammed down one’s throat. If one has a route, he can then find what is true for him. And that is Scientology. Know Thyself… and the truth shall set you free. Therefore, in Scientology, we are not concerned with individual actions and differences. We are only concerned with how to show Man how he can set himself or herself free. This, of course, is not very popular with those who depend upon the slavery of others for their living or power. But it happens to be the only way I have found that really improves an individual’s life. Suppression and oppression are the basic causes of depression. If you relieve those a person can lift his head, become well, become happy with life. And though it may be unpopular with the slave master, it is very popular with the people. Common man likes to be happy and well. He likes to be able to understand things, and he knows his route to freedom lies through knowledge. Therefore, for 15 years I have had Mankind knocking on my door. It has not mattered where I have lived or how remote, since I first published a book on the subject, my life has no longer been my own. I like to help others and count it as my greatest pleasure in life to see a person free himself of the shadows which darken his days. These shadows look so thick to him and weigh him down so that when he finds they are shadows and that he can see through them, walk through them and be again in the sun, he is enormously delighted. And I am afraid I am just as delighted as he is. I have seen much human misery. As a very young man I wandered through Asia and saw the agony and misery of overpopulated and underdeveloped lands. I have seen people uncaring and stepping over dying men in the streets. I have seen children less than rags and bones. And amongst this poverty and degradation I found holy places where wisdom was great, but where it was carefully hidden and given Out only as superstition. Later, in Western universities, I saw Man obsessed with materiality and with all his cunning. I saw him hide what little wisdom he really had in forbidding halls and make it inaccessible to the common and less favoured man. I have been through a terrible war and saw its terror and pain uneased by a single word of decency or humanity. I have lived no cloistered life and hold in contempt the wise man who has not lived and the scholar who will not share. There have been many wiser men than I, but few have travelled as much road. I have seen life from the top down and the bottom up. I know how it looks both ways. And I know there is wisdom and that there is hope. Blinded with injured optic nerves, and lame with physical injuries to hip and back, at the end of World War II, I faced an almost non-existent future. My Service record states: ‘This officer has no neurotic or psychotic tendencies of any kind whatsoever,’ but it also states ‘permanently disabled physically.’ And so there came a further blow… I was abandoned by family and friends as a supposedly hopeless cripple and a probable burden upon them for the rest of my days. I yet worked my way back to fitness and strength in less than two years, using only what I knew and could determine about Man and his relationship to the universe. I had no one to help me; what I had to know I had to find out. And it’s quite a trick studying when you cannot see. I became used to being told it was all impossible, that there was no way, no hope. Yet I came to see again and walk again, and I built an entirely new life. It is a happy life, a busy one and I hope a useful one. My only moments of sadness are those which come when bigoted men tell others all is bad and there is no route anywhere, no hope anywhere, nothing but sadness and sameness and desolation, and that every effort to help others is false. I know it is not true. So my own philosophy is that one should share what wisdom he has, one should help others to help themselves. and one should keep going despite heavy weather for there is always a calm ahead. One should also ignore catcalls from the selfish intellectual who cries: ‘Don’t expose the mystery. Keep it all for ourselves. The people cannot understand.’ But as I have never seen wisdom do any good kept to oneself, and as I like to see others happy, and as I find the vast majority of the people can and do understand, I will keep on writing and working and teaching so long as I exist. For I know no man who has any monopoly upon the wisdom of this universe. It belongs to those who can use it to help themselves and others. If things were a little better known and understood, we would all lead happier lives. And there is a way to know them and there is a way to freedom. The old must give way to the new, falsehood must become exposed by truth, and truth, though fought, always in the end prevails. L. Ron Hubbard, 1965

Introduction: This incredible story of the number zero breakthrough, laid the foundation for modern mathematics , influencing everything from algebra to calculus, and eventually shaping the number system that the entire world uses today. A few years ago, I showed Ian a church in Bern. Our conversation turned to an inscription on the wall, written without any punctuation. Ian explained to me that, in the past, there were no spaces between words.  itwaswrittenlikethisandwentonwithoutanyspacesatall. The invention of spacing between words was clearly a major breakthrough! But it gets even more interesting – the origin of the empty space between words actually comes from religion, from the practice of clearing the mind. Meditation helped achieve a desired emptiness. It also contributed to a healthier connection between Thetan and body. It’s all about the right distance. This healthy distance is beneficial. One of the reasons why auditing works is that by looking at something and communicating with it, you create a certain distance. Using the communication formula "Cause-Distance-Effect," a gap is formed between the person and the problem – something that was once overwhelming and too close suddenly gains space. Below is an insightful text from Indian professor Manjul Bhargava.   At the beginning, there was TR 0: Today there is an INVITATION! I invite you all to join in every last Wednesday of the month at 07 pm ! TR 0 gives you that zero point in the stress of everyday life.   Much love. Max Hauri The Incredible Story of the Number Zero  From Upanishads to Brahmagupta – The Journey of Number 0. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Osp-g6_fmkI Most people are not aware that Zero is India's contribution – and a very important one. The general public often does not fully understand what it means that India contributed Zero, why it is such a significant discovery, or how exactly it came to be in India. That story is truly incredible. I believe it demonstrates the power of multidisciplinary thinking and the importance of understanding ancient Indian knowledge – not just in terms of its historical significance but in how knowledge itself develops over time. It is also a fascinating story because Zero first emerged in India before spreading across the world. How did the concept of Zero originate? It actually began in ancient Indian philosophy . The first instance of the idea of Zero can be found in Indian philosophical texts – particularly in the Upanishads and various ancient Buddhist scriptures , which explored the power of meditation. What was the goal of meditation? It was to achieve a state known as Shunyata  – emptiness, or "zeroness". The objective was to clear the mind of emotions, ego, and thoughts to attain a certain state of connection between mind and body. This is the first recorded use of the word shunya , which later came to mean "Zero." Shunyata – the state of emptiness – dates back thousands of years. This is the earliest known appearance of the concept of zero  in world literature. The evolution of Zero: from philosophy to mathematics There were several key milestones in the development of zero. Philosophical Zero  – The first stage was the conceptual idea of zero, emerging in Indian philosophy through meditation and the notion of shunyata. Linguistic Zero  – The next major development was transforming this concept into a written symbol . The earliest recorded symbolic representation of zero appeared in the field of linguistics . The great grammarian Panini , who laid the foundations of modern linguistics, introduced a symbol for the empty syllable  – a syllable that represents nothingness. This symbol, known as avagraha (ऽ) , was a kind of linguistic Zero , marking an absence in speech and language. From linguistics, zero made its way into poetry . When poets needed a symbol to represent a pause or an empty beat in a poetic rhythm, they used the avagraha. Similarly, in music , when notating a rest (a pause in sound), this same symbol was used. At this point, zero existed in philosophy, literature, linguistics, and poetry , but it had not yet been adopted in mathematics . Zero enters mathematics By around the 3rd century CE  [Common Era] , Indian mathematicians began considering the idea of using a symbol to represent nothingness in calculations . The first known instance of this appears in the Bakhshali Manuscript (circa 300 CE), where Indian numerals – including Zero as a dot (•)  – were used in calculations. At this stage, Zero was still just a placeholder . It was not yet regarded as an independent number but simply a tool to help write numbers correctly within the Indian numeral system. By the 4th century , the concept of zero had already entered public consciousness. For example, in the 4th-century Sanskrit novel Vasavadatta , the night sky is poetically described as being filled with "Zero dots" scattered across the heavens  – a reference to how Zero was represented in writing at the time. However, it was not until Aryabhata , around the year 499 CE , that zero became a key part of mathematical computations. Aryabhata used the digits 0-9 to simplify astronomical calculations. This was a revolutionary step toward the number system we use today. Even then, Zero was still viewed as a placeholder rather than a full-fledged number. Brahmagupta: The moment Zero became a real number The final breakthrough came in 628 CE , when the Indian mathematician Brahmagupta formally defined zero as a number in its own right. Brahmagupta was the first to write mathematical rules for zero, such as: Any number plus Zero equals the number itself. Any number multiplied by Zero is Zero. He demonstrated that zero could be treated like any other number in arithmetic. This was a turning point in human history  – for the first time, zero was recognized not just as a placeholder but as a number with its own properties. This breakthrough laid the foundation for modern mathematics , influencing everything from algebra to calculus, and eventually shaping the number system that the entire world uses today. Fields Medalist and renowned Number Theorist Prof. Manjul Bhargava

Introduction: Judgment consists of familiarity and the ability to evaluate relative importances. Judgment consists of the importance of the fact with relationship to its surroundings. You will do to the extent that you recognize and observe and evaluate. You know why it is there and what it is and what it does. The more laws there are, the less judgment there is. Judgment Excerpt from: lecture " Rehabilitation of Judgment" given by L. Ron Hubbard on the 13 November 1959 You can't have a bunch of slaves and not have super moral codes and laws. Do you see that? In the absence of judgment you have to have all kinds of laws. And you can just put it down in your book that the more laws there are, the less judgment there is. In living a free life there is one thing that you give up. You give up to some degree a security against getting hanged. Because if a slave follows down an exact grooved course of conduct and always minds and obeys all the laws, every single law, he never gets hanged or punished, does he? Usually he makes it. He's good, safe, stupid and weak.… Never moves a hair out of line. But there's a security connected with that. In a loose way it's analogous to the fellow who holds down a job and gets a regular pay check and it's a fairly safe job and he isn't liable to be fired off of it. He never drives any, he never drives any Mercedes-Benz, but he always eats, see. Life doesn't have any peaks, but doesn't have any abysses, either. See? Security. An unchanging monotony. Nothing really wrong with it. It's a method of living. One obeys certain laws and subscribes to certain codes and after that he's OK. Judgment is the factor which has to be substituted for law. And a man can be as free as his judgment is rehabilitated. And that's as free as he'll ever get, 'cause oddly enough he himself will discover himself making a mistake and then put laws on himself. If you don't do it for him, he'll do it for himself. He'll say, "Well, I must never do that again," as he washed the bashed-in head of the baby. See? He just says, "I must never do that again." He has said in essence, without putting "Article four, section eight code penal infanticide, the slaughtering of babies shall be accompanied by punishment," you see. That isn't the way he phrased it. He just says, "Well, that's a bad act. A bad, stupid, senseless act and I am guilty of having accomplished one and therefore after this I shall not do this." He makes up his own law and he says, "I shalt not kill babies." Bang. Get the idea? Men, they live within their own area. He almost never says to himself another thought. He says, "Well, if I'm going to be around babies I've got to raise my judgment with regard to them." He doesn't do that. He usually puts on the emergency brakes and makes up a law. He doesn't really make an effort to further understand what he is having difficulty with and he is liable to makes laws about. So you see there were two choices he could make as he bashed the babies head in. One of them was to make up a law; "Infanticide. I shalt not commit infanticide here and after as aforestated me." See that was one direction. And he had an entirely different choice which was, "Here and after as a aforestated, if I can commit actions of this character with the consequences appertaining thereto, and I better not be so damned stupid about it, I better find out something about this and I had better increase my judgment on the subject of babies." Judgment consists of familiarity and the ability to evaluate relative importances. Relative importances. Guy jumps on deck with a knife in his teeth, you don't want any stimulus response machine which just shoots him because he might be a friend of yours who was simply skin diving. You don't want a stimulus response machine that simply polishes him off. You want judgment enough. Well, judgment consists of the importance of the fact with relationship to its surroundings. There he was, there he is, what are you going to do? Well you're going to do to the degree that you recognize and observe and evaluate. You know why he is there and what is he and what he's doing. That all depends on fairly quick observation. The more laws you have, the less you observed. You settle into the security of just following the law and one day the law goes out of style and there you are still following the law. And all of your aberrations are just laws that have gone out of style. L. Ron Hubbard

Introduction: Why "Reality is a bitch"? Reality, as part of the ARC triangle, is not the simplest component. It's the most fallacious part, because a person only sees “their own reality”, and the lower tone someone is, the more right they must be. Reality is a Bitch "Reality" is that part of the ARC triangle that one thinks is the simplest component. Reality is the most deceptive part because a person only sees "their own reality," and the lower someone is, the more they must be right. They have so little theta that they cannot afford to be wrong. A thetan must always be more right than wrong. If you convince someone that they are truly wrong, you overwhelm them in the worst way. An auditor must understand this very well. For someone to confront being wrong, one must first build up theta, improve and expand their healthy basis of being right. To some extent, one could also call "wrongness" "unreality." Reality is also the part that the thetan does not want to see and is often bent to fit their own perspective. Simply put, one could say they do not want to see it. It is their direct refusal to see what is. A little more than 30 years ago, I had a very important cognition. It is not really mine – it is from Ron. I recognized what Ron said because I was ready for it. In fact, it was not the first time I had studied that lecture, but years earlier, I had not seen it. I could only recognize it because I did not know whether I or the others were wrong. I spent about half a year searching for an answer. At that time, I was dealing with the monetary system and interest rates. It is an extremely fascinating topic, but apart from me and Scientologists in general, no one seems to understand it. The solution is ingenious and tested. But just because I read it and evaluate it as correct does not mean that it actually is. And the fact that my friends, Scientologists, see it the same way does not make it any more correct, especially when so many non-Scientologists do not see it that way. Do Scientologists simply agree with me because I am an opinion leader? In this lecture, I learned that people below 0.5 (Grief) on the Tone Scale can only be reached through effort – that is, through physical energy. As long as a threat exists (e.g., no product = no wage; or a direct punishment), they will do something. If this physical effort is missing, very little happens. We should not let this irritate us. People between 0.5 and approximately 2.2 (no assigned emotion) can be "motivated" with emotion. You can scare them, intimidate them, or make them angry. Our society is full of such emotions. The fear of disease can drive people to the most unexpected actions; a concept of an enemy is incredibly motivating. Someone stuck in sympathy is hard to stop, as is someone seeking revenge. Insurance companies thrive on this. There are even proverbs that fit, such as "Fear is a bad advisor." People who are above 2.2 on the Tone Scale can be reached through reason. Only above 2.2 does one begin to see reality more and more. One can evaluate, accept, reject, etc. True understanding becomes part of the game. One is willing to see both or multiple sides, and also willing to gather more data on a subject to achieve real understanding. One can also change their opinion. They can simply look and see what is. In another lecture, Scientology 0, dated September 25, 1963, Ron says: "… this the guy doesn’t believe his eyes and he goes off and says something else. And this practically breaks their hearts down in South Africa because it wrecks one of their stable data, which is 'if they could see it with their own eyes, then they would know'. And that doesn’t happen to be true. " … "You could think of many instances where people see things with their own eyes and don't believe them. In fact, they're probably more numerous than the reverse. So, you never count on that as a stable datum. There's not even any particular sense in being terribly good to prove to people you are good. Because if they're saying you are bad to that degree, then they are incapable of the power of observation to determine when you're good." Ron's statement is fundamental. When spreading Scientology, we often fail because we assume that the other person sees and understands our reality. The following statement from Ron must also be considered to round off the topic. He repeatedly states: "Reality is proportional to the charge that has been erased." He explicitly speaks of charge and not significance. It is not about significance. It is not about what one has experienced, who one was, what one has done, or with whom one was. It is solely about dissolving the associated energy and charge. Erased charge moves a person up the Tone Scale, and – summed up in one sentence – it is the only thing Scientology aims to achieve. The above is fundamental auditor knowledge. I can only recommend taking this training. Much love, Max Hauri

Introduction: Principle of Dangerousness: An extremely interesting aspect that Ron discusses in this article has fascinated me ever since I read The Creation of Human Ability. Dear Friends, An extremely interesting aspect that Ron discusses in this article has fascinated me ever since I read The Creation of Human Ability. Elsewhere, he writes that Scientology does not aim to create "good people." However, one should not assume that "bad" is the opposite of "good." Rather, Ron defines a "good person" as someone who blindly obeys and does everything they are told. The processes described in the book, on the other hand, promote independent thinking and empower individuals. From my own experience—both as an Auditor and as a Preclear – I can fully confirm this. I believe that someone who has achieved self-determinism knows for themselves what is "good." Much love. Max Hauri Principle of Dangerousness Excerpt from the lecture "The Role of Laughter in Processing", given by L. Ron Hubbard on July 5, 1954. There's principle in processing: The principle of dangerousness. We find that an individual declines at length into a state of mind whereby he believes that the only way he can occupy a space or continue to occupy a space or be permitted to go out of a space that he is occupying is by the passport of his own dangerousness. And when an individual is no longer dangerous, when he is no longer dangerous he then conceives the environment to be dangerous to him to such a degree that he has to stay where he's put and that he can't be where he wants to be. Things are too dangerous and therefore he cannot move himself around freely and as the definition of self-determinism is moving things around at will, we of course find this individual intimately overcome because he cannot move himself around at will. Why? He isn't sufficiently dangerous to guarantee an open passage on the courses he would like to take. On the other hand, the environment itself is sufficiently dangerous to him that he can be stopped or chased out. So we have this ratio in progress as almost a total therapy in itself. See, we talked about laughter as a total therapy. All right. Now something a little more serious, a little more down scale, you see, than laughter is this item of dangerousness. So if the sanity of your preclear could be said to depend upon any self determinism, could be said to depend upon the ratio of his own dangerousness compared to the dangerousness of his environment. When the environment is total danger, and an individual is no danger, you have somebody who is in very bad shape indeed. A badness of shape which is impossible to conceive, even to an auditor. Simply because it's never totally existed. It's an absolute. And let's get the other extreme – an individual who is totally dangerous to his environment and where nothing in his environment is dangerous to him. Also a totality which an auditor would find very difficult indeed to see. In the first place he would go out of the band of dangerousness before he would achieve that level.  It would go on a 50-50 basis. He's just as dangerous to the environment as the environment is to him and then he would go up to being able to reject the environment at will. And so we would have him passing out of the band of dangerousness. Just like that – he'd go right on out of it. You see that? All right. This ratio of dangerousness is an interesting principle. It was first written up in Excalibur in 1938 and the rule which was written up and which underlies this observation is: – a man's ability is dependent upon his belief in his dangerousness to his environment. It is only when an army man or a part of a military unit is convinced that he is no longer dangerous to the enemy that he falls apart. Beware having anything to do with a company, regiment, or division that has had any part in a rout. They will steal you blind and cut your throat in the dark no matter who you are or what. Their pride in self is gone. It's the most fantastic deterioration which you've ever witnessed in your life. Troops, they say, have to be seasoned but let's say it better than that. Troops have to have watched the enemy run under fire before they are really cocky troops. Now that's seasoning and they found out that they didn't run under fire. They have to find out these things before they are good. But there is dangerousness to the environment and you will find out any preclear that comes to you who's case is hard to handle has this as a basic factor in the case. This case believes the entire environment to be dangerous and no part of it to be safe. And a little higher on the tone scale than that believes that laughter is very dangerous, deadly and impossible.   Assist It might have better been expressed as capability but that was the way it was expressed in Excalibur in 1938. Says many, many workable principles. One of the earliest times you will run into it is when you have somebody who is out of communication and you're trying to get them to strike at your hand. We can administer to a cat, to a dog, to a horse, psychotherapy in this degree. And what do you know, it's very workable, very certain, sure fire psychotherapy. We get the animal to take a push or a little movement forward toward us at which moment taking great care not to be too rapid and so frighten this beast, we withdraw and we find the next time the person or beast is more willing to move overtly and then we withdraw more rapidly. We can do this with a hand. We can put our hand down alongside of a sick person who is almost totally out of communication, and they move their hand as though to push against our fingers and we retreat a little bit with our fingers. We find out they get a little bit more overt – this is curious to them and they'll get a little bit more overt and we retreat again a little harder. And the first thing you know, we find them picking up in consciousness and picking up in general activity and they then begin to conceive themselves as being at least slightly dangerous to their environment. I have brought children out of tantrums and cats out of neurosis and preclears into communication with this type of an activity. Get them to make a slight forward move at which moment I permit my hand to retreat. To give you some idea how early this can be worked. It worked on my little boy when he was about a month and a half old. He was not doing well. So, I was a little bit concerned with him and started to think about I wonder what the dickens I could do. All of a sudden it occurred to me – this fact of dangerousness and so I let my hand retreat – this is the youngest I ever worked, I worked it on other babies older than this but not on a month and a half for heaven sakes and I let my hand retreat from him a few times and he all of a sudden found out this was happening and this little boy hadn't done much in the way of laughing, he'd been very serious indeed, you see, and all of a sudden he broke out into a smile and we did this a few more times and I acted very terrified indeed and he broke out into a roaring laughter through the whole thing. It was the finest thing he ever saw and so on and then he became, as they quite ordinarily do, very affectionate and so on. It just raises them up unbelievably and that was the end of his real stomach trouble. There was no further stomach trouble after that. This was about 15 minutes of processing. The results are fast and they're good.   L. Ron Hubbard

Introduction: We all want a civilization without insanity, without crime and without war, like L. Ron Hubbard. A wonderful article on “What is Greatness?” And our third TR 0 – Eye Contact evening, to which all are invited. A civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where Man is free to rise to greater heights, are the aims of Scientology.  – L. Ron Hubbard We all live in a world where we too often turn a blind eye to everyday crime. But we must not allow the brutal and draining entheta to consume our inherent theta and turn it into entheta itself. Ron rightly says that confronting evil – or entheta – requires an extraordinary ability. It is truly unfortunate, and I often see many people adopting the survival strategy of burying their heads in the sand just to live a somewhat pleasant life. Ron makes it very clear: In order to clear a person, it is crucial to increase their theta. There is a simple equation: the less theta someone has, the less they can confront or handle. In other words, all the brutal and shocking crimes – many of which are committed, supported, and protected by governments – are nearly impossible for most people to confront. Sadly, our judicial system can only confront small crimes, those committed by the average citizen. When it comes to crimes involving billions, brutal wars, and terrorist attacks, there are no judges. That’s why the saying is far truer than we might like to admit: " The small are hanged, while the great go free."  We have the tools to transform this planet into a proud and ethical world. One of the best tools we have is TR 0. It expands space, theta, and the ability to confront. Those who have achieved significant, stable gains with TR 0 know that if only this were practiced in elementary school, we would be much closer to the goal mentioned above. In a recent email, I announced that on the last Wednesday of every month, we would hold an informational evening on Training Zero. We are now expanding this so that everyone who wishes can practice TR 0 on this evening. We want to turn this evening into an Eye Contact Event.   I want to thank everyone who is helping make the goal of Scientology a reality. It is amazing how much support we receive, and we work every day to apply Ron’s technology in a way that would make him proud.   Please join us and bring someone along from time to time.   The next Training Zero Information and Eye Contact Evening will take place on Wednesday, February 26, 2025, at 7:00 PM at Ron’s Org Grenchen.   Below, you will find the well-known article by L. Ron Hubbard, "What is Greatness" .  Much love Max Hauri What is Greatness? Article by L. Ron Hubbard from Certainty Magazine 13-3 [March 1966] The hardest task one can have is to continue to love one's fellows despite all reasons he should not. And the true sign of sanity and greatness is to so continue. For the one who can achieve this, there is abundant hope. For those who cannot, there is only sorrow, hatred and despair, and these are not the things of which greatness or sanity or happiness are made. A primary trap is to succumb to invitations to hate. There are those who appoint one their executioners. Sometimes for the sake of the safety of others, it is necessary to act, but it is not necessary also to hate them. To do one's task without becoming furious at others who seek to prevent one is a mark of greatness – and sanity. And only then can one be happy. Seeking to achieve any single desirable quality in life is a noble thing. The one most difficult and most necessary to achieve is to love one's fellows despite all invitations to do otherwise. If there is any saintly quality, it is not to forgive. "Forgiveness" is a much lower level action and is rather censorious. True greatness merely refuses to change in the face of bad actions against one – and a truly great person loves his fellows because he understands them. After all, they are all in the same trap. Some are oblivious of it, some have gone mad because of it, some act like those who betrayed them. But all, all are in the same trap – the generals, the street sweepers, the presidents, the insane. They act the way they do because they are all subject to the same cruel pressures of this universe. Some of us are subject to those pressures and still go on doing our jobs. Others have long since succumbed and rave and torture and strut like the demented souls they are. To re-save some of them is a dangerous undertaking. Were you to approach many ruling heads in the world and offer to set them free (as only a Scientologist can) they would go berserk, cry up their private police and generally cause unpleasantness. Indeed, one did – he was later assassinated by no desire of ours but because of the incompetence of his own fellows about him. He could have used Scientology. Instead, he promptly tried to shoot it down by ordering raids and various berserk actions on Scientology organizations. That he was then shot had nothing to do with us, but only demonstrated how incompetent and how mortal he really was. As we become stronger, we can be completely openhanded with our help. Until we do, we can at least understand the one fact that greatness does not stem from savage wars or being known. It stems from being true to one's own decency, from going on helping others whatever they do or think or say and despite all savage acts against one; to persevere without changing one's basic attitude toward Man. A fully trained Scientologist is in a far better position to understand than a partly trained one. For the Scientologist who really knows is able not only to retain confidence in himself and what he can do, but also can understand why others do what they do and so knowing, does not become baffled or dismayed by small defeats. To that degree, true greatness depends on total wisdom. They act as they do because they are what they are – trapped beings, crushed beneath an intolerable burden. And if they have gone mad for it and command the devastation of whole nations in errors of explanation, still one can understand why and can understand as well the extent of their madness. Why should one change and begin to hate just because others have lost themselves and their own destinies are too cruel for them to face. Justice, mercy, forgiveness, all are unimportant beside the ability not to change because of provocation or demands to do so. One must act, one must preserve order and decency, but one need not hate or seek vengeance. It is true that beings are frail and commit wrongs. Man is basically good but can act badly. He only acts badly when his acts done for order and the safety of others are done with hatred. Or when his disciplines are founded only upon safety for himself regardless of all others; or worse, when he acts only out of a taste for cruelty. To preserve no order at all is an insane act. One need only look at the possessions and environment of the insane to realize this. The able keep good order. When cruelty in the name of discipline dominates a race, that race has been taught to hate. And that race is doomed. The real lesson is to learn to love. He who would walk scatheless through his day must learn this. Never use what is done to one as a basis for hatred. Never desire revenge. It requires real strength to love Man. And to love him despite all invitations to do otherwise, all provocations and all reasons why one should not. Happiness and strength endure only in the absence of hate. To hate alone is the road to disaster. To love is the road to strength. To love in spite of all is the secret of greatness. And may very well be the greatest secret in this universe. L. Ron Hubbard

Introduction: If you observe people's sexual behavior and look at this tone scale, it becomes clear that promiscuity, perversion, sadism and deviant practices are at the bottom of the scale. The Second Dynamic, especially sex, is a recurring topic of discussion in our society. Unfortunately, certain groups have received state support for sexual aberrations in recent decades. Strictly speaking, neither the state nor the church has any business in matters of sex and the Second Dynamic. I have nothing more to say on this. Much love, Max Hauri Sexual Behavior Excerpt from the book "Science of Survival" by L. Ron Hubbard, with tone scale In this current culture, sexual aberration is very high. Anything which is hidden and highly regulated in a culture will become aberrated. There is considerable confusion in the American and European cultures about sex; since there was so much perversion and promiscuity and maltreatment of children that the erroneous conclusion was reached that the remedy for this lay in further regulation; whereas, in reality, it was the regulation which caused the derangement of the dynamic. It will be noted, in observing the behavior of human beings, and on this chart of the tone scale, that promiscuity, perversion, sadism, and irregular practices fall far down the line. Free Love falls, also, in this very low band; since man is relatively monogamous and since it is non-survival not to have a well ordered system for the creation and upbringing of children, by families. A society which falls into this 1.1 band of the tone scale can be expected to abuse sex, to be promiscuous, to misuse and maltreat children, and to act, in short, much in the way current cultures are acting. It is of vital importance, if one wishes to stop immorality, and the abuse of children, to de-aberrate this dynamic for the whole group of the society, to say nothing of individuals. At the highest MEST point of the tone scale, 4.0, one finds monogamy, constancy, a high enjoyment level, and very moral reactions toward sex; but one also finds the sexual urge acting to create more than children, and so comes about a sublimation of sex into creative thought. At 3.5 on the tone scale, we have a high interest in the opposite sex, and constancy, but we do not have so great a sublimation. At 3.0 on the tone scale, we have some falling off in sexual interest, but we have an interest in procreation and children. At 2.5 , we have some disinterest in procreation, not for any reason beyond a general failure to be interested in much of anything. The sexual act can be adequately performed, given the physical ability. At the band of 2.0 , we begin to get a disgust for sex, a revulsion toward sex, mostly when irregularly practiced. At the 1.5 band of the tone scale, we find sex appearing as rape; we find the sexual act being performed as a punishment. At 1.1 on the tone scale we enter the area of the most vicious reversal of the second dynamic. Here we have promiscuity, perversion, sadism, and irregular practices. We have no enjoyment of the sex act, but a hectic anxiety about it. The sex act cannot truly be enjoyed whether performed regularly or irregularly. Here is Free Love, easy marriage and quick divorce, and general sexual disaster. People at this level on the second dynamic are intensely dangerous in the society, since aberration is contagious. A society which reaches this level is on its way out of history, as went the Greeks, as went the Romans, as goes modern European and American culture. Here is a flaming danger signal which must be heeded if a race is to go forward. At 0.5 , we have impotency and anxiety about sex, with only occasional efforts to procreate. On the second dynamic we get occasional resurgences, from 0.5 up the scale, which quickly relapse. It is interesting to note here the application of the principle of the dwindling spiral to the second dynamic. On any of the dynamics and on any column of this chart, when the individual sinks below the 2.0 level, the dwindling spiral rapidly carries him down through 1.5, 1.1, 0.5 , to death. This is particularly evident on the second dynamic. The 1.1 individual, engaged in frantic pseudo-sexual activity today, will in a very near tomorrow, much nearer than he suspects, find himself or herself at the 0.5 level of impotency and anxiety. The organs of sex, at the 0.5 level, become relatively useless; indeed, this second dynamic tone scale is closely applicable to the endocrine activity of the individual and the form and condition of the physical body. The woman who in her teens was at the 1.1 level of the scale will not have a well enough developed pelvic structure or endocrine system to permit her bearing children with ease. Difficult births are a normal result of too long a residence in a low band of the tone scale during the formative period of the body. Easy births can only be expected with women who are relatively high on the tone scale. It is noteworthy that the 1.1 to 0.5 area of the tone scale finds the muscles, particularly the sexual muscles, without tonus. The nymphomaniac and the satyr are extremely slack-muscled, and the tonus around 0.5 is almost non-existent. In the pretended death band there is, of course, no effort to procreate. Along the -1 band [-1 is just below death, below 0 on the Scale] , where the organism as an organism is dead but the cells still survive, it is interesting that ejaculation and sexual activity occasionally take place immediately after the death of the individual, which gives some index of the strength and force of this dynamic. Life is denned, in cytology, as an unending stream of protoplasm from the beginning of life itself until now. Down through the ages as a continuous genetic stream, this protoplasm is modified by natural selection and environmental conditioning, as well as by what seems to be outright planning, from generation to generation. Because life is so dependent upon this lifeline, it is very easy to place too great an emphasis upon the sexual act, the thing which keeps this lifeline in a continuous stream. L. Ron Hubbard

Self-determination vs Self-determinism Introduction: Ron NEVER used the word “self-determination”, which also applies to the English word “self-determination”. Thanks to the complete digitization and scanning of all documents, this can be easily proven. Ron used a word that does not actually exist in English: “self-determinism”. Learn the difference between self-determination and self-determinism. This newsletter has different impacts depending on the language. My native language is German, and I discovered a remarkable translation error since Scientology started being translated into German. It’s a type of "false friend." [False friend is a term from interlinguistics that refers to word pairs from different languages that look very similar but have different meanings in their respective languages. For example, the English word "warehouse" sounds like the German "Warenhaus," but it actually means “storage facility” or “wholesale store.”] Ron NEVER used the word "self-determination". Thanks to the complete digitization and scanning of all documents, this can be easily verified. Ron used a word that technically doesn’t exist in English: "Self-Determinism." Note: The adjective in both languages is "self-determined" (selbstbestimmt). Difference between Self-determination vs Self-determinism Self-determination The term Self-Determination is one you would typically look up in a standard dictionary. The word often invites people to invent their own definitions or interpret it in a dramatic way. Here are the definitions from the Wordbook: self-determination, n. 1. direction from within only, without influence or force from without. 2. the deciding by the people of a nation what form of government they shall have, without reference to the wishes of any other nation, especially one to which it has been subject. Definition 1. comes relatively close to the meaning of  self-determinism but does not capture Ron’s definition. Self-determination is often understood in the sense of: "I decide what I do! No one tells me what to do!"—a rather simplistic or even childish interpretation of the term. In reality, Self-determination is more about something granted from the outside, whereas Self-determinism refers to a higher, more desirable state. Self-determinism Axiom 111: Self-determinism consists of maximum affinity, reality, and communication. Axiom 117: The components of Self-determinism are affinity, communication, and reality. You can find further definitions here: http://www.slovary.pro/en.php?search=self-determinism&submit=Search If Self-determinism is defined as "maximum affinity, reality, and communication," it must be high on the scale. In other words, it corresponds to values of 4.0 or higher on the Tone Scale. Here’s a particularly relevant excerpt from the book " Introduction to Scientology " by Richard DeMille, who worked closely with Ron at the time and also authored the book " How to Live Though An Executive ." Attributes of Self-Determinism  Excerpt from Introduction to Scientology by Richard DeMille, in collaboration with L. Ron Hubbard      Some of the attitudes of self-determinism, as stated in the Hubbard Chart of Attitudes and elsewhere, are listed here. The self-determined individual: Survives, is Right, is Responsible, Wins, Controls objects, Perceives the minds of others, is Truth, is Faith (Trust), Knows, Causes, is Free, Creates, changes and uncreates Space, Creates, changes and uncreates Time, Creates, changes and uncreates Energy, is a source of Motion, Creates, changes and uncreates Illusions. or: What Self-Determinism Is Not Perhaps we should say something about what self-determinism is not. Again, we avoid mis­understandings by clearing away previous con­ceptions before discussing present conceptions. Self-Determinism is not selfishness. Self-Determinism is not selflessness. Self-Determinism is not arrogance, pride, willfulness, stubbornness, bigotry, zealotry, ego­mania, or fascism. One must be self-determined in order to understand self-determinism. Self-Determinism is a principle which can be understood in direct proportion to the degree to which it is experienced. A man who has signed ninety-nine-percent of his self-determinism over to his environment can read about self-determinism until he is black in the face, but he will understand only one-per­cent of the thing he is reading about. The student is asked, again, not to be in too big a hurry to understand what is meant by self- determinism. All of Scientology is a study of self-determinism. Self-Determinism is a principle which must be used, not merely talked about. One does not become self-determined by hanging a sign on one's body which says "Self-Determined!" any more than the government can make everyone rich by printing lots and lots of money. This kind of "wealth" and this kind of "self-deter­minism" are only a mirage. Self-Determinism is on a gradient scale. The higher one goes on that scale, the more one man­ifests creativity, perceptivity and sanity. Such high-scale behavior can be recognized easily only by high-scale beings. Low-scale beings al­most inevitably fail and refuse to recognize high-scale behavior. This may sound, at first, like the rankest snobbism, but the student will discover for himself – and, therefore, is not even asked to take the word of the present writer for the fact – that those who live on the bottom of the sea cannot fully consider the life of the birds. Fortunately, if the fish take a strong enough interest in con­sidering their own lives, they may rise to the top of the water and grow wings. This is known as processing. Contradictions of Self-determination Self-determination has evolved in our society into a concept that can be used both to avoid control and to exert control over others. The right to self-determination is often taken to absurd extremes. Without delving into specifics, it seems politically incorrect to even question this right. For a Scientologist, the question may arise: Can one require someone to take a course or undergo auditing? In our society, there are thousands of similar questions – any parent can sing a song about them.  It seems almost absurd to debate whether it is unreasonable to require someone to participate in a course or take auditing, while at the same time we accept paying all taxes to the state, adhering to written and unwritten laws, and, in extreme cases, even going to war to kill other human beings – an action that, under different circumstances, would be punishable by long prison sentences or even the death penalty.  Can auditing other-determine a poor Homo sapiens at all? From my perspective, this is the wrong viewpoint, the wrong flow. The correct flow is this: In this vast shark tank, we are helping an individual regain their true self-determinism!  It’s wonderful to end one year and begin a new one with this cognition! The Hubbard Chart of Attitudes is part of the Handbook for Preclears and can be obtained in the Ron's Org, as well as the book Introduction to Scientology . Much love Max Hauri An Analysis of Self-determinism Excerpt from the book Advanced Procedure and Axioms from L. Ron Hubbard. The goal of the auditor with his preclear is not the release of a psychosomatic, not the improvement of appearance, not greater efficiency or better interpersonal relations. These are incidental. The goal of the auditor with the preclear is the rehabilitation of the preclear's self-determinism. In order to understand this goal, let us examine some data and have a thorough understanding of what self-determinism is. Before Dianetics there were vague pushes in that direction but the state itself lacked definition and definitely had no bridge built to it. Self-determinism is that state of being wherein the individual can or cannot be controlled by his environment according to his own choice. In that state the individual has self-confidence in his control of the material universe and the organisms within it along every dynamic. He is confident about any and all abilities or talents he may possess. He is confident in his interpersonal relationships. He reasons but does not need to react. On the tone scale, we have at the optimum level, I am , at the lowest level, I am not . Between we have, from the optimum level down, varying degrees of I am and I am not . The lower one goes, the more I am not there is and the less I am . Here is the graph of the state of beingness and the state of not beingness. Not beingness is death. This is a range from 20.0 down to 0.0. Full self-determinism along every dynamic is found at 20.0. A complete other-determined individual is at 0.0. A gradient scale lies between. There is a parallel column on the tone scale to the I am , I am not gradient scale. This is the I know , I know not scale. I know is at 20.0. I know not is at 0.0. Between these lie, as one descends , I understand, I am trying to understand, I will not understand, I am afraid to understand, I cannot understand, I know not. Another parallel scale would be, I have trust at 20.0 and I trust nothing at 0.0. As one descends, one reaches less and less trust and more and more distrust until we have death. The mystic for millennia has been talking about faith. He never built a bridge to it. He made a fundamental error in converting faith into have faith . When he said have faith he invited understanding, then confusion of understanding, because one does not understand faith . One is faith. The source, content of and contact with faith is you . The result of this mystic error – and it is a very gross error – was to place individuals so far down the tone scale that "love" and propitiation became bywords and hocus pocus the order of the day. Here is a 1.1 religion. It is afraid to understand because it has to have faith, but it is not faith because faith is not understanding. Hence the general confusion at 1.1. A by-product of this is the fact that individuals who thus have faith are running too slow. You get esp, hypnotism, mixed-up facsimiles with others, martyrdom, physical illness and all manner of unwanted things at this slow speed. It is too close to the static of death at 0.0, and its people are awfully dead, ineffective and irrational. People who are trying to have faith are not faith. Thus they fear (1.1) and propitiate (1.1) and are generally confused. One will not buy unreason at 20.0. They began by knowing faith and then became confused by having faith explained. Because of spectacular successes (rare as rarity), the mystic continued to strive for something he already had because he had no way to get back to where he was. The enormously successful points of being faith in the sea of unsuccessful having faith kept the mystic striving. It is possible now to achieve faith , or regain what one has lost. I am, faith , I know are at 20.0 on up. At 20.0 on the gradient scale they are at optimum unity with MEST (the physical universe) but as they rise from 20.0 they become less and less effective on MEST until top static is reached at 40.0. The scale is a circle. 40.0 and 0.0 are the same, so it is possible to go two ways towards death. One is less well off at 21.0 than he is at 20.0 since the MEST is dwindling away. The austere but spindly and weak mystic who dwells upon abstracts is less able to know . There is an entire scale above 20.0, which matches the scale below 20.0 in undesirability. The organism slows down above 20.0. The static is thoroughly unobtainable with one's body, evidently, for the static at the top in a pure state 40.0 is, for one thing, a -270 degrees C. A person who relaxes to not being in body is at first assailed by counter-efforts and then begins to chill. The various phenomena of mysticism are in the main explained by this scale. When one forsakes individuality on the way up, he, of course, can commingle with thoughts and other individualities. When he slows down below toward 0.0 he is again getting confused in his individuality, shifts valences easily, is hypnotic and is in a generally undesirable condition. Another prime error has been made and is part of our culture, both religious and scientific, and that is the error of single source. At 1.1 single source looks to be the case. Also at 39.0. At neither point, however, is there any clear view. All life forms are not from a single source. The ideas of Nirvana, Valhalla, Adam, the original cell, each is now rather completely disproven. There is a source for every genetic line. By this is meant both a theta (thought static) and MEST form. There are as many sources as there are living organisms, each line distinct and individual. The similarity of form in a species is due to similar environments and age of the class, not single source. A negative proof lies in the finding that health, sanity and effectiveness exist where the greatest self-determinism can be rehabilitated. A positive proof is that, if it were single source, the discovery of the genetic line facsimiles, the blueprint of the body, should permit just one individual to go back and clear the original upsets for the whole human race. It has been tried several times. It affects none but the preclear. His source is the very model of self-determinism. What then are you trying to do with your preclear? You are rehabilitating him from a state of partially I am not to I am , from understand to know , from distrust to trust. If you only concentrated upon distrust in others of him and his distrust of others, his enforced faiths on others and the enforced faith of others on him, and with his trust and distrust on all dynamics, particularly self, and de-sensitized such facsimiles, your preclears would be at around Ten at least. Occluded cases may be only broken trust cases for the preclear cannot trust himself, thus cannot trust his recalls. Run trust-distrust, and enforced and broken "know" and "I am" and "faith" in Act Four. L. Ron Hubbard

Introduction: I'm an optimist, but I can't close my eyes to reality: Prison Planet Earth. Ron puts it very positively, but he is right. Without going into details: It's precisely in the teachings mentioned that we have a huge need to act. Ron's lecture "Auditing Communication Cycles" tells you a lot. Read Max Hauri's introduction letter to this article, below. Prison Planet Earth Excerpt from the lecture: "Auditing Communication Cycles" Saint-Hill Special Briefing Course 320 given by L. Ron Hubbard on August 6, 1963. Every once in a while somebody says, "Well, why don’t you…" something or other, something or other, something or other – that’s the crux of the situation – "Why don’t you change all administrative actions? Why don’t you alter all Central Organizational lines?" "Why don’t you…" so forth. "Why don’t we change everything in the course?" and so on. What they’re dealing with is a problem they actually don’t see the breadth and depth of. And that problem is this: The character of this planet and the population hereon makes it practically impossible to do anything with this planet. Now, I’m not taking off from a failure point. The stress and thought and prevention and cure and this and that which you have to go into on this planet to get anything done and running is absolutely fantastic. Now, you want to ask why this is? Well, we can go into that in a moment. But those of you who have on the backtrack an experience of you just get some guys together and you do something – you see? Well, that’s been a common experience, and you still tend to operate in that zone and sphere of influence. In other words, you said, "Well, it was very easy. We just whistle up Joe, Bill and Pete, and the four of us will go down there and fix up the signboards, and that’ll take care of that," see? And you’re all set, see? But that was yesteryear and elsewhere. And you apply that basic feeling to this planet and you’re in trouble at once. Why? This planet is part of a larger federation – was part of an earlier federation and passed out of its control due to losses in war and other such things. Now, this larger confederacy – this isn’t its right name, but we have often called it and referred to it in the past as the Marcab Confederacy. And it has been wrongly or rightly pointed to as one of the tail stars of the Big Dipper, which is the capital planet of which this planet is. Now, all this sounds very space operaish and that sort of thing, and I’m sorry for it, but I am not one to quibble about the truth. This gets in people’s hair every now and then, and I don’t see any point in lying in order to be acceptable. It just doesn’t seem to be a right way to go about things, particularly in the realm of science. I don’t think a scientist should tell a bunch of scientific (quote, unquote) lies in order to be an acceptable scientist. It doesn’t seem to me to be a sensible proceeding. However, be that as it may, these various planets united into a very vast civilization which has come forward up through the last two hundred thousand years, is formed out of the fragments of earlier civilizations. Now, I can’t tell you accurately, exactly what these blokes are up to or where they’re from, but this isn’t quite germane to this galaxy. That’s the first thing you should know about it; it isn’t quite native to your track. You find a type of mental implanting and that sort of thing going on here in the last couple of hundred thousand years which are not native to your earlier track. Now, this is all very important; it’s very important, because they have a terrible problem. They have the problem of people who are native to this galaxy and aren’t used to this kind of thing, and they have the basic problem of "How do you kill a thetan?" And that’s a terrible problem to men who have very, very guilty consciences and blood on their hands – great problem. Probably the best way to hide your overts is to give somebody amnesia, you see (then they don’t know what you’ve done to them), and then tell them something else has happened. Well, this is a dramatization of a very craven intelligence, and that is what is going on here. Now, the fellow who conforms to that society is in no vast trouble. Perhaps some bloke who has a military record against them, and that sort of thing, might possibly (no matter what he did) find himself unable to satisfactorily conform. But the point is that their ideal is the conformist. Now, these conformists are pretty weird, and the personnel of that particular society is pretty scummy, to say the least. Let’s supposing you were in the last shambling wreckages of a red-light district: you’d have high-toned personnel, compared to the personnel which makes up the other planets I’m talking to you about. High-toned personnel, much higher toned than their average run. They practice cannibalism. The stuff you get on race tracks – once in a while some pc will run into race tracks and race-track drivers – this Roman-circus-type entertainment, don’t you see? All that kind of stuff – that’s all out of this zone and area. We’re still with that planetary system. So, they specialize in the fellow who will conform. Now, he ordinarily is a "worker" who is content to draw wages and not do another single, blessed thing – you know, never really get up, improve his lot, you see, and keep on plugging along somehow, or even slump into indigence. He’s still their choice of personnel. So this leaves, this leaves the brilliant artist, the brilliant engineer, the manager, the genius, the criminal, the pervert, non persona grata. And they sentence these people – the upper class (that is to say, the brighter gent) because they can’t control him and they’re afraid of him, and the lower class because it’s too vicious even for them – and they condemn these people to perpetual amnesia. "Dead forever," they call it – the problem of killing a thetan – and wrap them up in mothballs and ship them down here, and here we are. And that is the population of this planet. All right. Here’s a population, then, of minimal workers, maximal managers, artists, geniuses, criminals and perverts. What you going to make out of this lot, huh? Now, those are the blokes you’re talking to when you say "Add up the left-hand column of the ledger." Well, of course, the artist says he could add it up much more prettily. The guy who actually, in his own right, was a very skilled manager, he says he could devise a much better system – it’s true, too; he probably could. If the bird is a criminal, he’s just sitting there trying to figure out how he can add it up so he can short you. And there’s your zone of operation; there is your response to 8-C in trying to get an organization running. It’s all alter-is, because the basic crime was nonconforming. The basic crime wasn’t being a criminal; the basic crime was not conforming. Well, actually, this group has gone ahead and made up, up until recent times, a totally different civilization than the civilization which planted it here. In the last ten thousand years, they have gone on with a sort of a decadent, kicked-in-the-head civilization that contains automobiles, business suits, fedora hats, telephones, spaceships – quite interesting, but a civilization which looks an almost exact duplicate, but is worse off than the current US civilization. Therefore, you find the current US and Western civilization rather restimulative, because it has moved up to look like the Marcabian civilization. It’s been moving up here rather rapidly. And now we’re at a point, a very high level of restimulation, because the automobile design, the train design, ship design (why, they’ve got ships in those areas, look just like the Queen Mary, you see?), and the fire engines and the stuff you do with men’s clothes particularly – all of these things are the same image. So you’re going into a highly restimulative era, I mean in time a highly restimulative era, but we do not have this people … missing 14.51  because we’ve not had this before. See? We’ve been moving up through strata of civilization, but we hadn’t matched this one. And remember that this society at the present time looks dangerous; it looks very dangerous. One of the highest crimes you could pull in that Marcabian society, probably even today, is income tax; you make one comma wrong and it’s "dead forever." Sounds weird, doesn’t it? So, they got everybody paying income tax – awful restimulative. Probably nothing much wrong with income tax if it were administered as a tax, but it isn’t; it’s administered as a punishment, even on this planet today. Well, it’s one of their prime punishments in the Marcabian civilization. … But here you are; that is the point. Here you are; that is this planet. Every once in a while you get mad at government on this planet, when in actual fact you’re mad at the Marcabian government. And there’s a great deal of confusion. Every once in a while somebody will get awfully furious with an organization, very furious with an organization here on this planet, when they have actually identified the organization with the Marcabian civilization. Now, you start hitting people here with restimulative materials of this particular type, and it restimulates a terrific unreality; it restimulates amnesia. I have to ask you this: How hard do you have to hit somebody to bring about amnesia? Let’s take Joe out here and let’s just see how hard do we have to hit Joe in order to bring about amnesia on his part so he doesn’t know who he is, where he is, or anything else. How hard would we have to hit him? Boy, that’s pretty hard. It’s almost unbelievable force is used to handle a thetan and put him into this kind of condition. I’ve been hit with some awful heavy force in this universe without losing my mind or forgetting who I am, see? So it’s pretty heavy duress. And you restimulate that very easily by telling people things. It gets awful unreal. But you would find, if you gave them the actual dope, that they would be far more in agreement with you than if you gave them just a touch of the dope, do you see? You won’t find the citizens of this planet very far in disagreement with what you’re doing. So, therefore, you’ve got some kind of an explosion going. Well, these guys are not going to blow their own show. See? They’re not going to do anything peculiar about it. They’ve probably got us all sized up, if they know anything about us at all. They probably have some dim idea of what we’re doing, and saying, "Oh, yes. Ho-hum." And give the devil his due: They might even say, "Well, hey, what do you know? Those guys might be producing a type of technology which we ourselves desperately need." Look at that. See, now, they know the problems exist. They couldn’t have had any decent solution, or they wouldn’t have taken the route to solution which they have. They are beings, too; remember that. So when we look at all this: you are (1) organizationally handling people who are revolutionaries. They are nonconformists. Probably the common denominator of this planet is revolution. Probably the one thing you could always start on this planet would be a revolution, because it’s a state of perpetual revolution. Trying to hold any organization together of any kind whatsoever becomes almost impossible, because everybody you’re dealing with is a nonconformist. All right. So far goes the civilization. There are just those few statements on the thing I thought you might find of interest. We’re dealing now with "What is an auditor?" You are handling, therefore, the roughest case that you could find in the universe, because the rehabilitation of the individual demands that you rehabilitate his knowingness. If his knowingness does not increase independently, he himself does not get well. You see, electrical charge on the case is simply a symptom that measures his knowingness. If he’s got too much charge, his knowingness is way down. See, that’s an indirect measure of the amount of knowingness of the individual.  L. Ron Hubbard Dear Friends, 2024 is coming to an end, and a new year is beginning. I am an optimist, but I cannot close my eyes to reality. Changes are on the horizon for the coming year; that is undeniable. There are so many pressing issues and unresolved problems. Let us take a look at Logic 24 : The resolution of the philosophical, scientific and human studies (such as economics, politics, sociology, medicine, criminology, etc.) depends primarily upon the resolution of the problems of the human mind. – L. Ron Hubbard. Ron puts it very positively, but he is right. Without delving into the details, it is clear that we have significant work to do in the areas he mentioned. Whether all the solutions we receive in 2025 will be in your and my best interests remains to be seen. However, one thing is clear: we would be unwise to rely solely on the authorities. It is far more reasonable to improve our own lives and immediate surroundings — to support and strengthen our first, second, and third dynamics. Another important, stable truth for me is this: Every person is capable of producing or creating far more than they need for themselves to live. A simple example from the past is the father who could create enough to support an entire family. At the same time, every family member contributed their share. The idea that one could live entirely on social benefits, universal basic income, or similar "aids" without any personal effort is fundamentally flawed. We all have the ability to contribute and create more than we require for ourselves. This is a basic principle. It is fundamentally wrong to believe that one should not have to contribute anything in order to live. In my opinion, there is a evil intention behind the belief that one can earn money simply by having money. For this very reason, interest was fundamentally forbidden in the three major religions (Christianity, Islam, and Judaism). Unfortunately, these prohibitions were not consistently enforced; instead, they were weakened through loopholes or abolished entirely. The introduction of interest and fiat money — unlimited money printing — has led to wars and will continue to cause conflicts. The real evil intention here is to make money without having to work for it. It is a selfish mindset, focused solely on taking without giving back. The fundamental contract every person has is to create at least as much as they need for themselves. It is precisely these psychopathic capitalists and their imitators who make it difficult for ordinary workers to receive fair exchange for their labor. They have created and perpetuate a system in which they continuously skim the cream off the top while others must work for them. This is the fundamental problem we face on this planet with this particular type of Thetan. Their presence here is certainly no coincidence. Ron has clarified what is happening on this planet for me through numerous lectures, books, bulletins, and policy letters. But I have also learned a great deal through auditing — both directly from the insights gained and indirectly because auditing has removed charge. This has increased my reality, allowing me to see things that were previously hidden or unbearable to acknowledge. For this, I am very grateful, even though one often cannot openly discuss the reality because it seems too unreal to the average person. There is a lecture by Ron with the harmless-sounding title "Auditing Communication Cycles," which an auditor studies early in their career at Level 0. It’s not for the faint of heart! The entire lecture is attached; an excerpt can be found above. For the New Year, I wish for collaboration and initiative to bring new people into Ron's Org, spreading and applying the Tech. This is not Ron's planet, nor is it my planet — it is our planet. Together, we can succeed. Happy New Year! Max, Erica, Melinda, Dirk, Verena, Jean, Sibylle, and Henrietta