Now your next level of Release that was acceptable to the world at large–that man is a spiritual being. Now that is in decay. That has been known and has been suppressed, and has been suppressed since 1879, Professor Wundt, Leipzig, Germany. I always like to remember the man’s name. Man was an animal and he was nothing but an animal and therefore it was all right to kill him, maim him, shoot him, do anything you possibly could to him because he was “Nyaa, no good,” see? Now this is something like some of the Christian philosophy that was advanced in the second or third century A.D., that man was conceived in evil and was evil so it was perfectly all right to kill him, maim him, harm him, do anything you wanted to. Do you see these things as justifications? Justifications for overts, no more than that.
So you have the entire, what is laughingly called “field of philosophy”–it is a field too, out there in the rain, man. You have what is laughingly called a field of philosophy embracing now uniformly, the idea that they’re dealing with rats or something. Well, they’re not going to make very much progress and they could get themselves into one awful bloody revolution. I’m not using that as a swear word, I mean a bleeding revolution. They could, they could be cut down in the streets, man. Because the Christian has not yet found out that the psychologist is an atheist. And there is atheism being taught right in the colleges and there’s a bunch of bigoted Christians going to find out about that someday and they’re going to get mad. Fortunately for psych–for psychology it is such an inarticulate subject that it hasn’t made itself sufficiently plain to be understood that it’s an atheistic subject.
But if your psychologist were ever to succeed he would have to come closer to the truth than the brain is all that is there, and a man is dead forever. Because it’s very unpopular, very unpopular. But suppressives would like it, and so psychology, psychiatry and things like that tend to be supported by governments rather than by the populace. The populace think anything is better. They think psychology is silly. But governments employ it. So you see suppressives employ these nontruthful subjects or subjects which prevent philosophic advances, or subjects which prevent releasing.
So your actual–you’d be surprised how far you could go just doing this–you actually could move in to the whole subject on the subject convincing somebody that man was a spiritual being. See, he’s already halfway agreed with it. “Well, you’re a Christian, aren’t you?”
“Oh yes, yes, yes.” You know he knows better than to say he’s not a Christian. He gets an c.
Well, you find even in Christianity–you know the whole subject of reincarnation was barred very recently by the Roman Catholic Church–very recently. Only in the last few hundred years. They carried reincarnation right along with them, pockety – pock. They said the guy who hadn’t been good enough had to come back and live it all over again. And somehow or another they dropped that, they had an edict of Scrantes?[sic] Or something, I don’t know, some stupid edict by which they abolished wisdom.
Now, therefore that man is a spiritual being and not an animal–you could become very involved with as an argument–but if somebody bought the idea, if somebody bought the idea that he was a spiritual being rather than an animal, you have then got a state of Release. He’s released from an untruth that could trap him. Now very possibly–very possibly, this is where you could use exteriorization, but I do not advise it. What’s useful at this point is Dianetics. Because a person goes rapidly back, but it’s a little bit ahead of itself; don’t you see? There isn’t a perfect answer to this.
Ah, a guy goes back and only runs so many engrams and there he is sitting on the parapets of the castle, you know, watching the enemy march across the plain. And he says, what am I doing here, this is obviously me. And he makes it up out of his own head that he must be an immortal being because he has lived before quite obviously. Dianetics will bring people up to that point. But, this is a release from this lifetime. A person is released from the very narrow span of just one lifetime. And that is a terrific release because the death of–the terrible consequences of death fall away, he stands around and laughs as the funerals go by, you know.
I mean, I remember a long time ago I was–I had to pull off the road–I had to pull off the road down in Arizona to let a funeral go by. And boy, people’s eyes were streaming so that it looked like rain falling out behind that funeral. And boy, everybody was real sad. And I sat there and watched this, you know. And I just got through gauging on some researches into the immortal nature of man, you know. But it suddenly looked so silly to me that I sat there and laughed like a fool for about ten minutes. I couldn’t get the car going again, I didn’t dare drive. It just suddenly seemed so funny. All of this action with regard to this one thing, you see, such a production. And of course it was a very big funeral and a very sad one for a banker. Of course they–I knew he’d never get to heaven. I know he would be back there stirring it up again.
Anyhow, you, in that fashion would take people out of the one–lifetime idea. And that is your–a tremendous breakthrough that is available to you because it’s a release from the idea of one lifetime. There is a breakthrough for concentration which is quite acceptable to the society in which we exist.1
- Hubbard, L. R. (1966, 16 August). Releases and Clears. Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, (SHSBC-438). Lecture conducted from East Grinstead, Sussex. ↩