The following first appeared in the private email list IVy-subscribers,
which was available to all those who subscribed to the
printed magazine, International Viewpoints.
See Home Page: http://www.ivymag.org/

From: PJSpickler@aol.com
Received: from PJSpickler@aol.com
       by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.21.) id q.b7.2e93b4d3 (17228)
        for Tue, 18 Feb 2003 19:57:32 -0500
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 19:57:32 EST
Subject: IVySubs: Nothing personal
To: ivy-subscribers@lightlink.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ivy-subscribers@lightlink.com

**  ivy-subscribers relaying  **

Hello, anyone!
  I've decided to seize the moment, or the day (carpe diem), and spend a
few moments talking about the L. Ron Hubbard-generated Scientology Code of
Honor.  This code, due to its popularity, has been exercised both in thought
and deed for quite a few years.  I think the most important thing one could
say about the code, or know about it rather, is something that Mr. Hubbard
emphasized on more than one occasion.  I repeat, on MORE THAN ONE OCCASION.  
Well, you ask, what is it he emphasized on more than one occasion?

  He emphasized that the Code of Honor is NOT a moral code.  Long pause.  
Is not a moral code.  Now you all know what a moral code is, and you know
it's a code that delineates rights and wrongs and may even suggest
punishments suitable to the violation of a moral code.  The Ten Commandments,
for example, is a moral code.  The laws of most countries are moral codes.  
And the thing about moral codes that Mr. Hubbard emphasized is that a moral
code gets enforced.  And he made that point repeatedly: that moral codes are
enforced; whereas, coming back to the Code of Honor, it is not and never was
a moral code.  It has some wonderful and lofty ideas or ideals within it, but
these must be treated as a luxury that each person or group may wish to
express.  But not -- NOT, I repeat -- because the code is filled with
"rights" (what is right) and in absence of those ideas other forms of
behavior are wrong.

  No, I can't emphasize too strongly how much Ron went to the trouble in
both staff lectures and in the original statement of the Code of Honor to
point out that its use is a luxury, and that the whole idea of it gets
destroyed if and when individuals and/or groups start enforcing it and
turning it into just another moral code, which is just another name for a big
fat old Service Facsimile in which an individual or a group uses ideas to
make themselves right and others wrong.

  In fact, if you look at what the Church of Scientology has become, you
will notice that both its founder and his church at some point in time
commenced enforcing the Code of Honor on staff and public.  One of the
problems with that sort of thing is that there are four flows regarding
something like the Code of Honor, and unfortunately those who try to enforce
it usually have failed to notice the other three flows.  Anyway, I'm hoping
that this information about the Code of Honor will be well-received and
understood by all the concerned parties.  

  Every few years, now that I've been writing to and for the IVy list long
enough to make that statement have some truth, it does in my opinion become
necessary, in my efforts to help keep our lovely list as clear as possible,
in spite of the degenerated democracy of the Internet, to mention the subject
of the Service Facsimile.  On the Scientology Grade Chart that is or was the
main heading for what was called Grade 4.  In the past, and with a high sense
of humor motivating my sometimes-suspect efforts, I held a Service Facsimile
contest for the list and those who were willing to get the idea to make sure
not only that everyone would know what a service facsimile was but could spot
one in action and could also notice if they themselves might be at times
"service fac'ing" someone else or someone's writings on this list.  

  So: one of the many definitions of the Service Facsimile, and that's
about all I'm going to mention at this time, is what someone uses to make
themselves right and another or others wrong.  That's a somewhat limited but
at the same time comprehensive definition of what a Service Facsimile is, and
something that can be easily and even sometimes humorously observed, both in
ourselves and in others.

  Service Facsimiles have the dubious distinction of ranking high in the
list of harmful intentions or purposes, as well-delineated in the tech of
that rundown called Expanded Dianetics.  Anyway, there hasn't been any hue or
great cry for another Service Facsimile contest to see who could come up with
the quintessential service fac, but it always lurks in the background as a
possibility.  It was even said by someone that my starting a Service Fac
contest on this list was my service fac to get even with all the people that
were writing in using service facs.  I took that with a grain of salt, but
there's probably some truth in it.

  Anyway, that's probably enough said about this interesting and probably
one of the most popular activities of the human race.  I take it that all
will understand that I have not created a new absolute in which there must
never in any universe or at any time or any occasion when it's OK to make
yourself right and another wrong.

  In this new paragraph let me also say that soon I shall get back to the
previous posting, entitled "Is ARC still popular?     it must be," and
especially to talk some more about the 1958 Clear procedure.  But just as a
point of interest, and hopefully humor, on the subject of one of the
activities that thetans do obsessively, compulsively, continuously, and
unconsciously, namely, the action of "keeping it from going away," for some
visible proof of the nature of this beast sometime or another take a look at
what you have accumulated in your dwelling.  If you have a garage, look in
your garage; if you have a basement, look in the basement; if you have
closets and storage rooms and an attic space, take a look in there.  If you
have a back yard or a carport or any place that can be called a space, just
look around, and in no time at all, hopefully humorously, you'll get a look
at the myriad of things that you are keeping from going away.  This of course
is the visible side of keeping it from going away; but in terms of what we
used to and perhaps still call "case," you can be sure that its persistence
is brought about because something or someone is simply automatically,
unconsciously, obsessively and continuously keeping it from going away.  And
now you can see why that was such a powerful thing to handle in the direction
of clearing someone.

  In the next posting, I'd really like to talk about this some more, and
try to explain what I'll simply call "the NOTs effect" and why its presence
cut short the longevity of the 1958 state of Clear.  I'd like also to discuss
the different processes that were used in that procedure and how they work
together to help someone to the state of Clear.  As procedures go in the
history of Scientology, I've always thought of the 1958 Clear Procedure as
one of the most pure and elegant approaches to the Scientology notion of
helping the able to become more able.

  I close now with many thanks for your kind attention, and looking forward
greatly to further moments here in the Philosophers' Corner.  I remain
insincerely yours . .  . .

Home Page: http://www.ivymag.org/ - with extensive links to FZ!


From: PJSpickler@aol.com
Received: from imo-r03.mx.aol.com (imo-r03.mx.aol.com [])
       by gem.lightlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id AAA00045
       for Fri, 21 Feb 2003 00:06:33 -0500
Received: from PJSpickler@aol.com
       by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.21.) id q.1a1.11202ece (2519)
        for Fri, 21 Feb 2003 00:05:56 -0500
Message-ID: <1a1.11202ece.2b870db4@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 00:05:56 EST
Subject: IVySubs: Another viewpoint
To: ivy-subscribers@lightlink.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ivy-subscribers@lightlink.com
Precedence: bulk

**   ivy-subscribers relaying   **

   One of the super things about IVy subscribers' list is the diversity of
viewpoint; and here's just a touch of that diversity.

   Well, recently Phil Spickler wrote to the list and had quite a bit to say
about the Code of Honor and about Service Facsimiles.   And here's another
Phil Spickler who would like to say that he also thinks that it's OK if
anyone enjoys enforcing the code of Honor to do so, especially if they can
get away with it; and since service fac'ing is one of humankind's favorite
pasttimes, one should certainly feel free to indulge in a bit of that
activity if one takes it into one's head to do so.

   Now I also think it's true that L. Ron Hubbard once mentioned that the
dwindling spiral of thetans losing all their gigantic and native power and
sense of immortality started, eons ago, when somebody in playing the kinds of
games that immortals with unlimited powers played convinced some other thetan
that he had been damaged, which caused the other thetan to think, "Oh my
gosh!  Gee whillikers!  Perhaps I've misused all my power, and I ought to cut
back a little (or a lot)."  And while that was happening, the thetan that had
gone out of its way to convince the other that he had truly and really been
hurt, damaged, etc. etc., while hidden from view had a real evil look on his
thetan face, which included a big grin and a lot of laughter at having gotten
away with it.  And so we now have this notion that damage is really possible
and that there really are victims,  while in fact immortals, whether they're
pushing around human bodies or dashing about through other universes and
other spaces, can only  apparently be damaged or injured, and then only by
their own consideration.

   And so the rest is history, finally leading to delicate, easily-injured,
squeamish, low-force human beings, who are forever crying, "I've been
injured!  I've been wronged!  I've been harmed!" as just about everybody in
the human sector is making somebody else wrong for something or other.

   Well anyway, if you like Mr. Hubbard's story, it explains how we all got
to be human.  I think it's pretty close to spot-on, but very unpopular, as
human are daily encouraged to live by such lowly standards as security and
"be careful" and "don't get your feet wet" and "don't take any chances" and
"play it safe" and "don't ever use much force" and "be quick to cry 'I'm
injured!  I'm hurt!"  I'm harmed!  I'm a victim!'"

   Anyway, all you folks out there dig what I'm talking about, as well as
Ray Krenik, who in one of his recent postings reminded me of how it all got

   Good evening, from

Home Page: http://www.ivymag.org/ - with extensive links to FZ!