What's new

How Dangerous is New OTVII (Solo NOTs)

Veda

Sponsor
-snip-

I thought of them as Entities, Spiritual Beings who were my PCs. Of course I audited "BTs" to blow, as one does in scientology, the difference being I simply audited them until they were "squared around" and ready to leave.

-snip-

You were evicting beings from their body and, somehow, they - after being "squared around" - were all "ready to leave."

Since the EP is no more BTs, were you acting as an auditor or as an evicting landlord?

Or a bit of both?

An honest landlord would acknowledge his role as the landlord (or, in this case, the lord of the body). He might like to think of himself as compassionate, and might like to think that he's "squaring" it "around" with the tenants he's evicting, but he does evict them.

They go. He stays.
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
That's seems to be how it works in *your* scientology.
I've never audited an Entity who wasn't grateful to be freed from the condition they found themselves in, maybe they were lying whenever they expressed gratitude or maybe I just imagined that.
Interesting analogy about Bodies, Thetans and Body Thetans though.
I don't think in terms of landlords, tennants and housing when considering this subject.
To me the body I run is more like my car; I don't live in it, I use it to get around.
 

Ted

Gold Meritorious Patron
Yes, Veda, I understand that many have approached auditing Entities as you describe above, it possibly accounts for some of the trouble some people seem to have with them.

I didn't say that I failed to blow them or thought of them as Spiritual Teammates or Guardian Angels etc. I thought of them as Entities, Spiritual Beings who were my PCs. Of course I audited "BTs" to blow, as one does in scientology, the difference being I simply audited them until they were "squared around" and ready to leave. I once heard an "OT VII" describe his auditing as "like blowing them out of the water with a Howitzer", I just shook my head in disbelief and have never spoken to him since.

I have always disliked the Hubbardian attitude towards "BTs", it rang false to me when I first heard it and it rings false to me still. I never adopted that lofty, I'm-greater-than-thou attitude when addressing Entities or any PC. (Of course, I am guilty of having done that many times in life as concerns other "whole people".)

When it comes to auditing others, to me, the Auditors Code and my own Integrity trumps all else.

Was my approach scientology or was it squirreling?

What I did in my 34 years of intense study and auditing was, per my understanding, scientology. It's possibly not scientology per your definition or viewpoint. It's possibly not per some other's definition either but that never caused me any problems, to me I was a practicing scientologist.

I have many Certs and Awards and Commendations to this effect. They mean little to me nowadays (except as an historical record) but I think that receiving a KSW #1 Award from the Snr C/S Int for the standardness of my auditing would belie your idea that I wasn't doing scientology.

As I've said many times here, I no longer audit others nor practice scientology. My only interest in contributing to this thread lies in the direction of bringing about better understanding of Auditing on OTVII.


Panda, I believe that anyone who has shown success with scientology techniques would resonate with your writing above.
 

Veda

Sponsor
That's seems to be how it works in *your* scientology.
I've never audited an Entity who wasn't grateful to be freed from the condition they found themselves in, maybe they were lying whenever they expressed gratitude or maybe I just imagined that.
Interesting analogy about Bodies, Thetans and Body Thetans though.
I don't think in terms of landlords, tennants and housing when considering this subject.
To me the body I run is more like my car; I don't live in it, I use it to get around.

No, it's L. Ron Hubbard's Scientology that's being described, sans denial, sans PR, sans self-deception.

"My car"... note that it's your car.

Not the car of the transient that you found asleep in the back of your car when you left the door unlocked. You gave him a sandwich and a few bucks, but you sure as heck got him out of your car.

That's all.

No PR.
 

Challenge

Silver Meritorious Patron
Why not just look at what is there without adding any thoughts, emotion and effort; and without avoiding, resisting or suppressing; and looking totally non-judgmentally without excuses and justifications.

What would happen then?

.

"Blowing By Inspection".
They throw you a spark and go about their business.

Challenge
 

Ted

Gold Meritorious Patron
You can do better than that.


Veda, you are like a broken record.

I dunno why you insist that everyone who partakes of the scientology buffet must consume it all. You know damn well some of that stuff needs salt, garlic, ketchup, and other condiments to make it ones own. Even then, we are never gonna eat all that stuff. Some people just don't like fish, brussels sprouts, carrots, and so on. Some of the offerings will give a bellyache. Some will make a person feel healthy and strong.

And don't insist that everyone hold their forks in their right hands.
 
Panda, I believe that anyone who has shown success with scientology techniques would resonate with your writing above.

Absolutely. In particular failure to adhere to the Auditor's Code would be "squirreling", dangerously so. Panda's approach IS the correct procedure according to "standard tech".


Mark A. Baker
 

Gadfly

Crusader
Can a being be as-ised?

Vin, according to the theories of OTIII, "blowing" doesn't mean that the being "as-ises". It "leaves your space". As it leaves your space, the "feeling" is similar to "charge blowing". And, from a certain perspective charge IS blowing - just not yours - but up to that point you incorrectly identified the charge as your own. That is all. It (entity) is no longer there to affect you from the level of any other "reactive mind".

What gets BLOWN is the entity's "unconscious and chronic connection" to you. You don't as-is anything other than the entity's connection to you and your own previous mis-identification of the "bank" or "energy", as your own. Like anything else from a Buddhist slant, it is just another "thing" one has falsely identified with that needs to get sorted out. I suspect that it naturally sorts out during valid meditation techniques designed to unravel mis-identification. Of course, Hubbard would claim that NONE before him EVER found a way to address this SEVERE problem. Yawn! I doubt it though. Hubbard makes it a big deal. I doubt it is really that big of a deal.

I don't necessarily subscribe to all of that, but THAT is the theory.

As I have said elsewhere, there are "entities" EVERYWHERE. Anyone can "tune into them" if you so desire. It becomes a bit futile trying to "help them all", as some others have implied in this thread, because there is no end to them. To me, there are many things that can be helped right in the world around one. There is no need to start digging into "invisible realms" to locate areas that have problems and could use a helping hand.

Also, I have exorcised "ghosts" before, though in these cases, they weren't "BTs", but recently dead humans who had suffered traumatic deaths, and who were "stuck" in the incident and location of the incident (due of course to his or her own consideration about it all).

When I was doing my grades I spent a few weeks putting my attention "out there", and found that "living entities" exist at every level of creation. If one didn't "filter" it all out, all of the endlessly available "thought patterns" coming from these nearly endless number of buggers, you would be bombarded with constant "messages" and "energy", making any living of any normal life entirely impossible. Simply, it just isn't relevant. Of course, one can go out and "handle" and "help" them if you want to, but the evolution of these entities never stops, and they will "progress" regardless. The physical body has very limited sensory appartus, that while tuning in to certain frequencies of energy, necessarily OMITS the MAJORITY of ENERGY that is actually out there and available for perception. But, other sensory apparatus are required to "tune into" these other ranges of energy.

If the BTs exist as Hubbard says, as largely unconscious spiritual beings, who were "once human", then who knows what else might "free them". For instance, I sometimes do a meditation where I fill myself with white-yellow light of amazing "love". It is affinity out the top of the tone scale. I invite it to enter every aspect of my space. Things always pop and snap and "blow" when I do that. I don't doubt that this simple exercise enables many to vanish. If you understand that when I do this I am overwhelming all in my space with complete "granting of beingness" and "well-wishing", I suppose that some of these buggers could "wake up" and head off to new adventures.

Also, yes when I audited OTIII, I also treated them just as any other "person", with auditor code IN, full granting of beingness, and my attitude was to "help" them overcome whatever was keeping them "stuck" where they were. But, they will ALWAYS be there. I mentioned this on another thread. The ONLY possible EP of OTVII is that one no longer has any attention on or tendency to go the effect of "other life forces" in ones space. They will always be there. Who cares? But that IS the problem! Many people have a real big problem with other "entities" existing in "ones space". People DO care! And thus, that type person needs to spend many hundreds or even thousands of hours auditing what really shouldn't be a problem at all!
 
Last edited:

Veda

Sponsor
Absolutely. In particular failure to adhere to the Auditor's Code would be "squirreling", dangerously so. Panda's approach IS the correct procedure according to "standard tech".


Mark A. Baker

Is there anything about "Blow it" in the Auditor's Code?

Mmmm. Gee, ya think maybe the "upper level" tech violates the auditor's code?
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
Vin, according to the theories of OTIII, "blowing" doesn't mean that the being "as-ises". It "leaves your space". As it leaves your space, the "feeling" is similar to "charge blowing". And, from a certain perspective charge IS blowing - just not yours - but up to that point you incorrectly identified the charge as your own. That is all. It (entity) is no longer there to affect you from the level of any other "reactive mind".

What gets BLOWN is the entity's "unconscious and chronic connection" to you. You don't as-is anything other than the entity's connection to you and your own previous mis-identification of the "bank" or "energy", as your own. Like anything else from a Buddhist slant, it is just another "thing" one has falsely identified with that needs to get sorted out. I suspect that it naturally sorts out during valid meditation techniques designed to unravel mis-identification. Of course, Hubbard would claim that NONE before him EVER found a way to address this SEVERE problem. Yawn! I doubt it though. Hubbard makes it a big deal. I doubt it is really that big of a deal.

I don't necessarily subscribe to all of that, but THAT is the theory.

As I have said elsewhere, there are "entities" EVERYWHERE. Anyone can "tune into them" if you so desire. It becomes a bit futile trying to "help them all", as some others have implied in this thread, because there is no end to them. To me, there are many things that can be helped right in the world around one. There is no need to start digging into "invisible realms" to locate areas that have problems and could use a helping hand.

Also, I have exorcised "ghosts" before, though in these cases, they weren't "BTs", but recently dead humans who had suffered traumatic deaths, and who were "stuck" in the incident and location of the incident (due of course to his or her own consideration about it all).

When I was doing my grades I spent a few weeks putting my attention "out there", and found that "living entities" exist at every level of creation. If one didn't "filter" it all out, all of the endlessly available "thought patterns" coming from these nearly endless number of buggers, you would be bombarded with constant "messages" and "energy", making any living of any normal life entirely impossible. Simply, it just isn't relevant. Of course, one can go out and "handle" and "help" them if you want to, but the evolution of these entities never stops, and they will "progress" regardless. The physical body has very limited sensory appartus, that while tuning in to certain frequencies of energy, necessarily OMITS the MAJORITY of ENERGY that is actually out there and available for perception. But, other sensory apparatus are required to "tune into" these other ranges of energy.

If the BTs exist as Hubbard says, as largely unconscious spiritual beings, who were "once human", then who knows what else might "free them". For instance, I sometimes do a meditation where I fill myself with white-yellow light of amazing "love". It is affinity out the top of the tone scale. I invite it to enter every aspect of my space. Things always pop and snap and "blow" when I do that. I don't doubt that this simple exercise enables many to vanish. If you understand that when I do this I am overwhelming all in my space with complete "granting of beingness" and "well-wishing", I suppose that some of these buggers could "wake up" and head off to new adventures.

Also, yes when I audited OTIII, I also treated them just as any other "person", with auditor code IN, full granting of beingness, and my attitude was to "help" them overcome whatever was keeping them "stuck" where they were. But, they will ALWAYS be there. I mentioned this on another thread. The ONLY possible EP of OTVII is that one no longer has any attention on or tendency to go the effect of "other life forces" in ones space. They will always be there. Who cares? But that IS the problem! Many people have a real big problem with other "entities" existing in "ones space". People DO care! And thus, that type person needs to spend many hundreds or even thousands of hours auditing what really shouldn't be a problem at all!


Excellent post, Gadfly.

In actual life, we have so many people around us, who need help. My wife is one of those who is very much bothered by this fact. But I am not. I simply do what I can to help others and that's that.

I like what you said about the EP of OT VII that one no longer has any attention on or tendency to go the effect of "other life forces" in one's space, which will always be there.

The idea seems to be that one gets rid of all selfishness and starts to live as and part of all dynamics. That makes sense to me. Buddha was doing that. He was extremely compassionate.

Are there OT VIIs who are selfish? Who are focused on winning their games no matter what happens to others?

Anyway, on the other question that I posed, isn't there a beginning of beingness (see Factors #1 and #2)? I have noted that as "the manifestation of prime consideration" in one of my recent posts to Panda Termint.

If there is beginning (manifestation) to beingness, then can there be an end (dissolution) to beingness as well?

I seem to think, "Yes."

.
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
People can decide to alter Scientology, and add compassion where there was none, but it's their add on.

And good for them.

But it's not Scientology anymore, it's another subject.

Agreed.

It took me a while to fully embrace this view, but you're right Veda: if you just pick the good bits out of Scientology and discard the rest it's not Scientology any more.

Paul
 
Last edited:

Gadfly

Crusader
People can decide to alter Scientology, and add compassion where there was none, but it's their add on.

And good for them.

This is an example where an "additive" is a GOOD THING! :thumbsup:

In usual Scientology, any "additive", or "added inapplicable datum" as this is called in the Data Series, is considered to be a "bad thing". It is considered, per strict KSW-think, as a "thing to be prevented", "stopped" and "handled". Hubbad made it quite clear that the whole thing (i.e. the subject of Scientology) was quite perfect "just as it is", and "adding to it" could only make it worse, reduce its effectiveness or minimize its value to the world and peoples of the Universe.

Interestingly, as Veda pointed out, adding COMPASSION to Scn would be a VERY GOOD THING, indeed. But, within Hubbard's tight, strict, and rigid framework, could that even be possible? :confused2:

Sadly, the answer seems to be "no". :ohmy:
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
This is an example where an "additive" is a GOOD THING! :thumbsup:

In usual Scientology, any "additive", or "added inapplicable datum" as this is called in the Data Series, is considered to be a "bad thing". It is considered, per strict KSW-think, as a "thing to be prevented", "stopped" and "handled". Hubbad made it quite clear that the whole thing (i.e. the subject of Scientology) was quite perfect "just as it is", and "adding to it" could only make it worse, reduce its effectiveness or minimize its value to the world and peoples of the Universe.

Interestingly, as Veda pointed out, adding COMPASSION to Scn would be a VERY GOOD THING, indeed. But, within Hubbard's tight, strict, and rigid framework, could that even be possible? :confused2:

Sadly, the answer seems to be "no". :ohmy:

Is it adding compassion or removing callousness?

Scientology consists of a lot of additives to Buddhism.

.
 

Gadfly

Crusader
Is it adding compassion or removing callousness?

Scientology consists of a lot of additives to Buddhism.

I wasn't even considering Buddhism. Just taking Scientology, as it is, in the form it is as delineated by Hubbard, adding "compassion" to THAT mix would be considered "wrong", because it is an "added inapplicable datum". Adding compassion to Scn would be an Data Series "outpoint" from a strict KSW viewpoint.

Scientology can never "evolve" because it is stuck in the tight little restrictive box of KSW.
 

Minuet #1 in G

Patron with Honors
I applaud that, truly! :clap:

Personally, for me, it is to get the other person, totally independently, looking for themselves. Per that criterion you are doing the right thing.

But, I don't want any dependence on any e-meter either.

Lastly, I don't want any dependence on any auditor either.

The most sincerest and honest way that I can express myself is through the following:

LOOK & NOTICE
EXPERIENCE
ATTENTION
VIEWPOINT

But this is far from complete. I have to walk my talk, and there is still a long way to go.

.

Hear hear
 

RogerB

Crusader
The Next Part of the Exercise

Sorry I've been a little slow in getting back to you all on this :) but here is the next part.

On Feb. 5, in post #131, I posed the following question that you might look to answer for yourselves.
"the first question: What is a life?"

It is a specific question, and will likely have sparked an instant answer. If you will, you might now recall that answer. There is no right or wrong in this, by the way. Your answer is your answer. You are not being judged here.

>

>

>

>


Now, here is the second part of the exercise.

The question is: What is life?

Look at you instant answer to this question . . . . . .

>

>

>

>

Now compare your answers to each question . . . . . notice any difference?

Did you notice that the two questions of the exercise are quite different, even if in some respects, similar?

Notice that by the addition of just one tiny concept or word, the question is changed. It directs your attention, your "mind" differently?

In this case it was a very common, very familiar oft used concept that was added . . . so common it often gets in the way of folks' ability to actually inspect with exactitude.

This little exercise is also an example of the precision with which one needs to craft processing commands. And also an example of the need to be precise with the language we use.

Here is another example.

In Scn, if you look at the use of the Prep Check buttons, you'll see questions phrased as:

"On (subject/item) has anything been suppressed?" Etcetera.

A better wording is: "Connected to (subject/item) has anything been suppressed?"

You see this latter worded question is rather specifically more inclusive and likely to bring to view items, issues the first question would miss.

I raise these points because, in the exchange Vin and I had on the issue of him "not answering the question," what is clear in the sequence of posts is that he (automatically?) altered the question asked of him into a different question.

I will not get judgmental on why this might be, but simply state the observation.

It is an issue that all who would seek truth ought be alert to . . . the framing of questions, and the terms upon which you inspect and look at what it is you seek to understand will determine the outcome of your investigation.

RogerB
 
Top