David Mayo

Posted on August 17th, 2012

Website about David Mayo

(Taken from a lecture by David Mayo given on December 2, 1993 – concerning how a personality is formed.)

I’ll be using the term “personality” in the usual sense of the word: a package of characteristics that typify a person and distinguishes that person from other people; it makes that person a unique person. Some of these are behavior patterns; some are emotional patterns; some are thought patterns; some are speech patterns and so forth. They make up a package of qualities that you tend to know as the person – it is what the person has become or is being.

Fundamentally, you could say that a person isn’t any of these characteristics that I described. For example, if you say an angry person, a person fundamentally isn’t angry – isn’t fundamentally an angry person. But a person can be angry. Or, as is stated in some languages, they have anger.  That is possibly more accurate, certainly it is useful or therapeutic to say have in connection with an emotion rather than to say be. In English we tend to use the verb be and say “I am angry”. Now if I were to say, “I am a man”, that would be more accurate than to say, “I am angry” – because “I am angry” says that is what I am: anger. It does tend to cause a misidentification. A person starts thinking of himself as the unwanted emotion or other unwanted characteristic.

If you say, “I have anger”, it, tends to give you a little more distance between yourself and the emotion that you are experiencing.  You could say: “I am experiencing anger”, or “I am experiencing fear”, and that would be better than saying “I am angry” or “I am afraid”.

You can use this. Actually some psychologosts and some New Age people use that differentiation as one of their main tools. They take a person and ask him what is the matter with him. He says, “I have a bad temper and I am often angry.” So they say: “OK, Say: ‘I have anger’ not ‘I am angry’. Say: ‘I have anger’.” They teach the person that whenever he is angry he is to pause and to say: “I have anger”, or “I am experiencing anger”. Sometimes, to go along with that, to say: “But, I am not the anger itself. I am me, but I am experiencing or I have this emotion.” Or, “I have such and such sensation”. To try to deliberately work on the amount of distance between themselves and the unwanted emotion or the unwanted sensation or feeling.
Read the rest of this entry »

  • PDF
  • Добавить ВКонтакте заметку об этой странице
  • Мой Мир
  • Facebook
  • В закладки Google
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • email
Posted on June 14th, 2012

Website about David Mayo

Technical Purity

I am frequently asked whether we practice “Standard Tech”. Unfortunately, the term “Standard Tech” has been so abused that in order to give a comprehensive answer, I feel it is necessary to clarify a distinction between “Standard Tech” and “Technical Standards”.

For many years there has been a great deal of talk about “Standard Tech”. Yet term in actual use today is more frequently used to mean “what the orgs are doing” or “the latest change”. There is nothing standard about that. Often these changes are heralded as the “latest breakthrough from LRH” only to be later cancelled as “an alter-is by another”. Sometimes these cancellations are changed, then re-issued, sometimes not.

Most are familiar with this having occurred in recent times regarding the changes in the grade chart, the HRD, NOTs and Solo NOTs. But this has been going on for years.

For example, Expanded Dianetics was released as an LRH breakthrough at the time, only to be cancelled years later as “alter-ised by another”.

Power processing was taken out of use and orgs and Scientologists were told that LRH would be replacing Power with his latest breakthrough, “Super Power”. (In this instance, Super Power was never released.)

Each of these changes was done in the name of “Standard Tech”, but the result has been constantly changing tech.

Here at the AAC we are devoted to keeping our technical standards high, to safeguarding the purity of the tech and ensuring that it is applied for the benefit of the pc.

We have completed 12 people on Advanced Ability VII (which the Church of Scientology refers to as Solo NOTs), while the Church is just now announcing their first completion. Why is this?

This devotion to the purity of the tech and a personal refusal to compromise was one of the main reasons for my departure from the Sea Org and the Church of Scientology. As this part of the story has not been told before and as there have been many false and maligning reasons put forward by certain persons in the Church of Scientology/RTC, I feel it is important to clarify some important issues.

First, let us review some very basic technical rules:

  • One very important fundamental is that Man is basically good.
  • Other very important fundamental rules are: that the tech must be applied in the direction of raising the self determinism of the pc, it must be applied for the benefit of the pc, and that it must be done with ARC. When auditing is applied on the above basis, the being’s basic goodness and rightness are validated, he is helped to become more himself, and gainsinevitably result.

To do otherwise results in invalidation of the being, his basic goodness and his self deter-min-ism That is a dramatization of other earlier practices which did not have Man’s best interests at heart such as mind control, implanting etc., – efforts to change the being through the use of force.

As I had devoted some 23 years of my life to the tech, it was with considerable horror, repugnance and disgust that I saw instances of “black dianetics and scientology” within the Church. Read the rest of this entry »

  • PDF
  • Добавить ВКонтакте заметку об этой странице
  • Мой Мир
  • Facebook
  • В закладки Google
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • email

This interview with Ian Waxler was taken in Los Angeles CA, March 2012.

  • PDF
  • Добавить ВКонтакте заметку об этой странице
  • Мой Мир
  • Facebook
  • В закладки Google
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • email
Posted on September 12th, 2011

  • PDF
  • Добавить ВКонтакте заметку об этой странице
  • Мой Мир
  • Facebook
  • В закладки Google
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • email
Posted on April 15th, 2010

Saturday, 13 March 2010 01:24

A year ago today I had just completed the eval that resulted in this (http://www.scientology-cult.com) website. A year later, we’ve come a long way.

The truth is coming out and a pattern of heavy deceit has emerged. It is no exaggeration to say that David Miscavige has been lying to us from the start with nearly unimaginable malice… a malice that freely lied to LRH for the last five years of his life, that took out Mary Sue Hubbard and made her an outcast, that destroyed the lives of so many Scientologists and now the repute of Scientology as a whole. The more we learn, the more the treason roils before us like a mushroom cloud.

So today, on the anniversary of LRH’s birthday, it is surely fitting to learn more about LRH’s final years. I received this document from a friend just tonight and read it for the first time. I believe it was written some time ago. I don’t know how old it is. But it’s from the auditor who saved LRH’s life in 1978 and it is certainly time his story was told.

Thoughtful

Recollections

By David Mayo

AS YOU PROBABLY ARE aware, I used to hold the post of Senior C/S Flag. That was until the end of 1978. Let me start this narrative article from that point.

In September of 1978. I was sitting in my office one day C/Sing some folders and a messenger came into the office with a telex which was one of these very secret “your eyes only” telexes. So I grabbed some clothes, raced off to the airport at Tampa and caught a plane to Los Angeles. I arrived in Los Angeles at night. As I’m sure you all know, the Sea Org places a great significance on what they call security. There was to be one security-cleared person meeting me at the airport and nobody else was supposed to know he was coming to meet me. It was very confidential and I had to go with him. I was still quite mystified as to why I was being called to California. We took off down the highway and headed off toward Palm Springs.
Read the rest of this entry »

  • PDF
  • Добавить ВКонтакте заметку об этой странице
  • Мой Мир
  • Facebook
  • В закладки Google
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • email
Posted on January 16th, 2010

  • PDF
  • Добавить ВКонтакте заметку об этой странице
  • Мой Мир
  • Facebook
  • В закладки Google
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • email
Posted on January 16th, 2010

Palo Alto, California, 28 August 1986
Interview with David Mayo by Russell Miller,
the British writer and journalist.

My first contact with Scientology was through a High School teacher who loaned me some of the books. This was in Auckland, New Zealand. I joined the org as an employee in late ’59. I was a student at the time. The org was in two parts, HASI [Hubbard Association of Scientologists International] and HCO [Hubbard Communications Office]. HCO was Hubbard’s own office within the org. I worked for HCO starting from end ’59 and I started having correspondence with him. The lady who had hired me, Betty Turnbull, was in charge of HCO and her husband, Frank, was in charge of the HASI. LRH was displeased with Frank and Hubbard started sending me letters expressing displeasure and asked me to do an investigation. They ended up quitting or were fired. He accused them of being Communists and they were in the org to try and destroy it and sabotage his plans.
Read the rest of this entry »

  • PDF
  • Добавить ВКонтакте заметку об этой странице
  • Мой Мир
  • Facebook
  • В закладки Google
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • email
Posted on January 16th, 2010

In late 1978, the state of “dianetic clear” was announced. Within a few months two other “states of clear” were introduced: the state of “natural clear” and the state of “past life clear”.

This change had two immediate consequences:

1. The number of people attesting (correctly or falsely) to having attained the “state of clear” increased enormously.
2. During and after that period, there was a considerable amount of upset and confusion about the “state of clear”.
Read the rest of this entry »

  • PDF
  • Добавить ВКонтакте заметку об этой странице
  • Мой Мир
  • Facebook
  • В закладки Google
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • email
Posted on January 14th, 2010

David Mayo 8 February 1986 Auditing without an e-meter.

David Mayo was the senior spiritual technical person who L. Ron Hubbard initially entrusted to oversee the whole Scientology spiritual practice legacy in 1982, when the aging Hubbard realized he didn’t have many years left. Mayo’s title was the Senior Case Supervisor International. Mayo fell from grace just months after the April 1982 20 page despatch from Hubbard where Hubbard detailed to Mayo what Hubbard wanted. Read the rest of this entry »

  • PDF
  • Добавить ВКонтакте заметку об этой странице
  • Мой Мир
  • Facebook
  • В закладки Google
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • email
Posted on December 12th, 2009

8 Dec 83

Dear Mark,

The following are brief accounts of what I consider to be the more germane points of:

a) the events leading to my removal from the post of Snr C/S Int and the subsequent CommEv, declare etc., and

b) the visit from Geoff Shervell in August ’83.

Summary of events leading to my removal

This story probably starts at the end of ’81 when several apparently unrelated events occurred.

It starts with the re-opening of a comm line from LRH to and from CMO INT and others in late 1981 after a period of almost two years of little to no comm from (or to) LRH (from Feb ’80 to Sept ’81). Unfortunately, although the comm line was re-opened in late ’81, it was a very limited comm line in that all communications travelled through Annie Broeker, Pat Broeker to David Miscavige and back up in reverse order. Pat and Annie were living with LRH and David Miscavige was living primarily at CMO INT. Other than Pat and Annie, no one, including Miscavige, knew of LRH’s location. Miscavige would receive a phone call from Pat Broeker and then would go to a restaurant or parking lot and meet Pat Broeker to pass the mail. Thus, there was no way for any comm to get to LRH without it going through those persons.

I was one of four people who originally received and sent comm via that line in Sept/Oct ’81, these comms from LRH and to LRH were technical. Read the rest of this entry »

  • PDF
  • Добавить ВКонтакте заметку об этой странице
  • Мой Мир
  • Facebook
  • В закладки Google
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • email
Copyright © 2017 SPIRITUAL FREEDOM Zone All rights reserved. Amazing Grace theme by Vladimir Prelovac.