Reviewed by Jim Keith
editor of
Secret and Suppressed: Banned Ideas
and Hidden History
from
SpunkLibrary Website
The Gods of Eden, authored by William Bramley, is one of the more
popular and talked-about recent books on UFOs and conspiracy. It’s
all over the place, and spoken of favorably by a lot of people who
should know better. What has not been talked about is that there is
a hidden purpose to the book, and that is to disseminate Church of
Scientology concepts to the UFO field. It’s not that Bramley
glancingly touches upon material also covered in Scientology; he
uses the bullhorn for basic, elementary Scientology principles
without mentioning their source, and does it again and again in the
pages of the book. I probably wouldn’t even mention the matter
except for the wide agreement which the book has engendered (even
Milton William Cooper references the book like it was UFO gospel)
--and people should know what they’re agreeing with.
The Scientology message begins with the overall theme of the book:
we are controlled, even “farmed” by extraterrestrials of evil
intent. This concept has been put forward by a number of writers
starting with Charles Fort, but Bramley’s other theorizing makes
plain where he got the idea: from L. Ron Hubbard, in such
non-introductory Scientology texts as History of Man, Creation of
Human Ability, and his taped Philadelphia Doctorate Course lectures.
Hubbard specifically warned about passing this “advanced” (read
science fiction-y) material on to the non-indoctrinated, and so Bramley carefully doesn’t cite these or any of the other
Scientology
materials dealing with what Hubbard termed “space opera”, i.e. tales
of past life experiences with civilizations in advance of current
Earth levels, except for a citation of the fairly homogenized Have
You Lived Before This Life? By being tight-lipped about the wilder
Scientology stuff, Bramley hews to the party line in this instance,
as he does with his other covert treatments of Scientology doctrine
throughout the book.
Chapter 2, “Orientation,” pgs. 7-9, gets the ball rolling with a
dissertation about the spiritual, as opposed to animal, nature of
mankind. I won’t argue the truth of this matter, but it is straight
Scientology “orientation,” one of the basic premises of the
“religion.”
(Having spent 13 years in the organization, partly at an
executive level, I can state that Scientology is less a religion
than a very clever mind control operation, so clever in fact, that I
think that Hubbard might have fallen for his own creation).
In Chapter 6, pg. 74, Bramley discusses the existence of a mystical
“Brotherhood” “engaged in a pragmatic program of spiritual
education.” Echoing Scientology PR terms he apparently identifies
“the original uncorrupted Brotherhood” of ancient times with
Scientology, or at least with the purposes of Scientology. It is
“scientific, not mystical or ceremonial,” which is precisely the
claim that Hubbard made, hence the name of his group, and it was,
“...a considerable body of accurate spiritual data, but it had not
succeeded in developing a complete route to spiritual freedom...”
This is more Scientology jargon, as can be easily determined by
reading any of the books pushing the subject or taking a look at the
Scientology “grade chart” defining the various steps of counselling,
claimed as the “road to spiritual freedom.”
The same goes for Bramley’s statement, again on page 74, that
“Brotherhood teachings were arranged as a step-by-step process [ala
the Scientology grade chart]. A student was required to
satisfactorily complete one level of instruction before proceeding
to the next one... This style of instruction was designed to ensure
that a student did not prematurely attempt difficult spiritual
feats or become overwhelmed by advanced level information...”
Again,
this is straight Scientologese, but this time related to Hubbard’s
theories on study and the application of the “gradient” approach,
i.e. easy before hard. This also provides a justification why
everything but the introductory levels are secret: they would
“overwhelm” someone who hadn’t done all the preliminary Scientology
counseling, and paid all the preliminary and considerable fees. How
much does Scientology go for these days? Last I looked, which was
about 10 years ago, it was something like three hundred dollars an
hour for most of the counseling. This is why a goodly percentage of
Scientologists choose the lockstep of virtually unpaid staff work:
staff is promised free counseling, although in my experience they
rarely get much of it.
Another point is taken from Hubbard’s theories of study on
page 76, where Bramley states,
“With a word substituted here and
a sentence omitted there, the semantic precision needed to
communicate an exact scientific principle will be lost.”
Again,
Bramley is virtually quoting Hubbard, particularly in the policy
letter titled “Keeping Scientology Working”, which rails on about
people who change the materials of Scientology. Scientology
makes a big deal about alteration of Hubbard’s written materials
by one jot or title.
Chapter 7, page 96 Bramley briefly touches upon “third parties”
involved in wars and other conflicts. Hubbard insisted in his “third
party law”, covered in the book Introduction to Scientology Ethics,
that third parties were always behind the scene in altercations.
In Chapter 9, page 108 Bramley chats about past lives, and shows
that he again buys the Hubbard scenario in detail, with post-death
disembodied spirits looking around for pregnant women to pick up new
bodies.
Chapter 10, page 119 mentions the Buddhist legend of the coming
avatar Mettaya (Maitreya?), who would create,
“a religion that would bring about
full spiritual liberation for all mankind... Mettaya would simply be
an individual with the knowledge and ability to get the job done.”
More covert references to Scientology and
Hubbard, provable by
reading one of the three Hubbard books referenced in the endnotes of Bramley’s book. This is Hubbard’s
Hymn of Asia, in which he claimed
he was Mettaya come to deliver the planet. The text was originally
supposed to be delivered at a Buddhist convention in the 1950s, no
doubt in an effort to convert Asia wholesale to Scientology.
Apparently the Buddhists got wind of Hubbard’s plan, since the
address was never given.
On page 220, Chapter 19, Bramley states,
“A properly-done
confessional can have a highly beneficial effect on an
individual...”
Bramley expands on the concept on pages 224-225 of
the same chapter. Properly-done? Perhaps with an E-Meter? Bramley
couldn’t be talking about the elements of Scientology processing,
which Hubbard started calling a “confessional” when Dianetics turned
into Scientology and incorporated as a religion, could he? On page
225 he talks about improper confessions, terming them “quickie
salvation,” echoing the terminology employed in Scientology for
abbreviated Scientology processing:
“quickie grades.”
Chapter 34, “Robo-Sapiens,” is a rehash of
Hubbard’s take on the
evils of psychiatry and psychiatric drugging. This was one of the
things that Hubbard was right about, but don’t get me wrong: Hubbard
was right about a lot of things. This is the glue that sticks one so
damnably well into the operation, that a lot of it works pretty
well, and that a lot of Hubbard’s insights were profound. And when
you feel you have even a tentative handle on Truth with promises of
a hell of a lot more to come (namely, the Advanced Levels), you’re
willing to ignore the absolute enslavement that you have to submit
to in thought, word, and deed.
I could go on listing sneaky Scientology references in Bramley—there
are no shortage—but frankly I’m bored with combing through the book.
As an ex-Scientologist more than familiar with the ingroup cant, I
can tell you that Bramley is, without a doubt, a Scientologist who
is trying to sell the Hubbard line throughout.
Gods of Eden is not that bad of a book, as UFO/conspiracy books go.
A lot of his history is pretty shaky and dependent upon funky
sources like AMORC, but I know the problems of sorting out truth and
fiction amongst conflicting reports on what’s been did and what’s
been hid. On this account, Bramley did a decent job. Knowing the
references that Bramley is utilizing, however, the originality of
his cosmic conception pales. Bramley, like most other true
believers, mouths the Scientology party line like a “Robo-sapians,”
but then, if you’ve known any Scientologists, you’ll find that they
all do. Hell, I did for the 13 years I was a Scientologist, until I
finally saw through the scam behind the space opera.
Not to suggest
that Bramley’s intentions aren’t honorable when he, like every other
Scientologist in the world, attempts to get “raw meat”—i.e. the
unprocessed in Scientology -- to surrender their personal judgment
and philosophy to the “pro-survival” doctrines of L. Ron Hubbard
intended to recover the “spiritual being’s” “total freedom.”
Everyone knows what the road to Hell is paved with. It may even be
that Bramley won’t deny what I have said, that his book is riddled
with hidden Scientologese. The point is that he doesn’t admit it in
the book, and like the evil extraterrestrial custodians he blames in
the book, he engages in some pretty sneaky mind control himself.
|