Per Schioettz: From Freedom to Fear - and Back - SP-PTS
Добавлено: 26 апр 2012, 15:52
Auditing at any place on the planet http://webauditing.org/
From freedom to fear - and back
March 23, 2011
by Per Schioettz
"SP" - "PTS" Series 1
In 1968 I started in DK Org on the communications Course. There was a fantastic free atmosphere and a lot of joy and fun. There were many people in the organization every evening doing drills, talking, discussing, having sessions and doing courses and listening to old timers lecturing. It was the first time I was in such an uptone group with so much fun. The attitude to others in the group and to people outside the group was very friendly; people were looked at as friends and as people one could really give a hand with what one had learned. The term "Suppressive Person" was never heard of, was never voiced and lived a very non visible life maybe in some hidden policy letter or the background of one single persons mind.
This went on for a couple of years and then I went onto the Briefing Course. This was THE technical course to do those days. We were more than a hundred students every day. I studied from 9 to18 every day, seven days a week. We were all studying and auditing and also listening to "The Wall of Tapes" some 700 taped lectures by L Ron Hubbard. This was also a fantastic time. It was a very international course and I made friends from all over the world, and several of those are still my friends and we still keep in touch.
This was a technical course with a lot of stress on "red on white" (tech) and not very much interest in most of "green on white" (policy) meaning rules and regulations. In fact there was an attitude that "green on white" was for admin staff only. We, the tech people, didn't "lower" ourselves to such trivial pastime as reading policy. (If we could avoid it, we would rather work with the real thing "The Tech").
I leaned the effect of that attitude the hard way when I one year later found myself as HGC auditor in Cop Org. I had problems with one PC and got into some kind of fight with the C/S. Those days when C/Ses couldn't get a case to fly, it was, as a routine, assumed that the auditors TRs or metering were out. Mine were NOT. I did endless TRs and meter drills, the case still didn't budge.
Finally the C/S and I went to Athena, situated in Copenhagen Harbour. Athena was the training and cramming vessel for Europe. The C/S and I showed up with the PCs folder. Merle Goodman and Judy Thiery were the people running the course and cramming operation of the ship, and they were GOOD. They were also the first people to observe and report to Ron about the language barrier in Europe.
When they had interviewed the C/S and me and studied the auditing in the folder they said: "Gentlemen, you are going to confront some "green on white !!" " Bang! (What's this? What do they mean? We are tech guys - please). Slowly it dawned on both of us that somewhere remotely hidden away in the dark backside of our sculls were a very unfamiliar subject called "resistive cases" and between those, one called "PTS"... This was an eye opener for us looking at this phenomenon from a tech point of view. We studied the stuff, and had some great wins and relief now knowing that we could not necessarily handle every one case in the universe. This was our reality and a huge change for us.
Around the same time people started talking about "SP"s and how awful they were and how they totally messed up the games for others in general and us specifically because we were in the freeing game, "which they hate".
I was very puzzled about this. One of the main reasons I had "gone into" Scientology was the saying: "Man is basically good". But apparently here were some who were not basically good but basically evil. "SP"s are basically bad! There was no mistaking this, and there was no end to all the blame they were given, even for our own mistakes. Awful. I remember in 1982 when I had finally left the Sea Org, my X-wife was struggling on OT III, being in fear of any connection to anyone, who might be an "SP" and she would be sent to ethics and taken off her auditing. New confessionals, new eligibility checks etc. etc. costing endlessly. How can you go free when operating in a tone level of Fear? Or even attempt that?
This fear of the "SP"s even though they were only considered being about 2 1/2 percent of the population, caused endless speculations and conspiracy theories even within this "Church". The fear and suspicion became worse and worse. Ron pointed out that these cats and the psychiatrists were the enemies of Scientology and his operations. THEY were the reason Scn. didn't expand faster etc. etc. When the Data Series came out I could really see this as a "Why is God". And I always wondered that he didn't see this himself. He really had a blind spot there. But actually, that is what is to be expected when someone makes himself smaller because of others communications, opinions, behaviours, etc., etc.. You don't see clearly anymore. (And a wrong indication only makes things worse).
"Disconnect or handle" was the watch word, and neither of them worked very well if at all. Disconnection can only have temporarily effect in case you take the person out of a very restimulative area, but you still have to handle HIS situation sooner or later. (Or rather HE has to). The usual handling is mostly running rudiments with the PC at effect, poor sod, see what they did to you. Doesn't work.
With the New Era of Free Tech it has become possible to handle these situations with the client at CAUSE. Handling with the client at EFFECT only, in my opinion and experience, makes the negative aspects more solid and he will not get out of it until he takes responsibility as CAUSE.
Many of my clients have proven this point to great satisfaction. No more proof is needed. There should be no more looking back. There is no more need to fear any of these so-called SPs. There is a way back, or forward to freedom again.
Everybody are members of "fields". Spiritually connected by similar attitudes, ideas, experiences etc. If you handle a person's negative contribution to a field, the others, being connected to the same field, will lose the negativism too. The field will turn more positive. This is the reason that you will have the PTS clients "SP"s turn to him again, but this time in a positive way. This is one of the EPs I see daily and which was promoted in the "Church" but I never saw it there. Now it is available to anyone and everyone who wants to recreate the freedom, or rather to live the freedom again, because freedom is the NATURAL state, not being PTS. You are BIG. You are FREE. You are YOU...
____________________________________________________________________
Capaciousness
March 23, 2011
by Per Schioettz
"SP" - "PTS" - series 2
Capaciousness is here defined as the ability to encompass new viewpoints. So, if one person thinks the Earth is flat, and somebody else comes along with the viewpoint that it is round as a ball, a capacious person should be able to encompass this new, foreign, and very strange viewpoint.
In Figure 1 you can see that illustrated. The person has his own viewpoint (A), but there is also room for new and different viewpoints. The foreign viewpoint is effortlessly taken in because there is capaciousness (B).
The two viewpoints can now be evaluated in relation to each other, particularly if they contain data of comparable magnitude. (The idea that the Earth is flat can be compared with the idea that it is spherical, but not with the idea that "I know best" or "carrots are healthy"). When they are being evaluated and compared and "touched", there is a possibility of learning something new, and of understanding the new stuff, and realizing what it encompasses and implies.
In another example, own viewpoint could be "I don't have any fixated ideas" and suddenly the wife or the friend says: "What you are saying, I have heard many times before, it seems like a fixed idea". If there is room for that other viewpoint, meaning there is capaciousness, then now is a chance of evaluating the two viewpoints in relation to each other.
For example, one could ask oneself: "Why is she saying, it seems like I have a fixed idea?", "What am I saying or doing that makes her have that opinion?" When there is sufficient capaciousness to encompass one additional or several other viewpoints, then there is a chance of evaluating further, get familiar with the territory, and getting a better understanding of what is happening and how one is responding - and then one can progress in one's own development. That was Figure 1.
Figure 2 (A) shows a person who isn't capacious, who doesn't have room for a new, different, foreign, or provocative viewpoint (B). He will promptly reject the new and different viewpoint (C) - WITHOUT in any way evaluating, analyzing, feeling, or in any other way sensing the other viewpoint. It is rejected immediately, there is no room, it doesn't even enter his space - and that would be the first requirement for evaluating it.
It can be extremely frustrating to deal with a "Figure A - Non Capasciousness" person if you really want to introduce him to a way of doing something; something you KNOW will help him with what he is trying to accomplish. Maybe you actually have more experience with the subject than the other person. Any educator has experienced this. Not until he gets the student to be willing to contain a new viewpoint in his space, will the student be able, in any way, to learn something new.
You will often notice this in situations where it is taking a person an exorbitant amount of time to learn something new. The new data can be repeated again and again. At some point one might get lucky and repeat it at a time when the student is suitably high on the tone scale, where there is more room and more capaciousness. Suddenly it sinks in. Capaciousness has appeared.
When studying something new, a lack of capaciousness can give problems that might not have been noticed before. A lack of capaciousness, which often shows itself as fixated or stuck ideas, won't make room for the new ideas that inevitably will surface when studying something new.
The person who isn't capacious, Figure 3 (A), but only has room for one viewpoint at a time, might also, when a new viewpoint appears (B), immediately reject his own old viewpoint and take on the new one (C). The old viewpoint is rejected IMMEDIATELY. The new one is not evaluated, it is not being examined and analyzed or felt out, it hasn't really been perceived.
He doesn't have room for two viewpoints, and he is so uncertain about the one he has, that he immediately rejects it in favor of the new viewpoint. This kind of person can seem very naive and easily controlled by authority.
If you are vacationing in a cabin without electricity, and you ask such person to go and find the "kerosene vacuum cleaner", he will probably start looking for it immediately. His own viewpoint, that vacuum cleaners run on electricity, not on kerosene, gets rejected the moment you give him the idea of the kerosene vacuum cleaner. He will be very uncertain about his own views because of the very small, or totally lacking, capaciousness.
He might seem like somebody who will "learn" new things with lightening speed, but his understanding of those new things is found in a very small place. The new ideas are accepted with closed eyes, plugged ears, and an unfeeling rigidity. If you check his understanding he might be able to rattle off the accepted viewpoint, but he will not be able to use it for anything sensible, since he hasn't understood it, examined it, or felt in his heart what it is about.
Capaciousness is obviously very important if one wants to learn new things. The inability to contain new viewpoints is the biggest barrier, also when it comes to the mutual understanding between people. If you can't contain one other viewpoint, how can you possibly contain a whole other person with many other viewpoints?
In marriages and other close relationships between people it often happens that a viewpoint can't be contained. The viewpoint is rejected by some kind of judgment: "That idea of yours is crazy", "You are crazy", "Do you really believe that yourself?"
If the different viewpoint is accepted and one's own viewpoint is rejected instantly because of lacking capaciousness, then the judgment will often be about oneself. "My idea is crazy", "Where did I get that from, I better reject it immediately, or the others will think I am stupid". "Others are smarter than me", "I am stupid". Here goes the self-invalidation, the making self smaller, the true source of PTS-ness. (There might not be an "SP" within miles... !!!)
When ideas are rejected without being felt or analyzed, then we often need a reason for it. We need an explanation, mostly for ourselves. Lack of room is not seen as a reason, so we invent reasons.
The rejection of new viewpoints from others can be explained with: "I know best", "Don't think you are something", "Anything new is dangerous", etc., etc.
Own viewpoints can be rejected and the rejection justified with: "I lack confidence", "I can't trust myself", "Nobody can understand my views", "Communication is of no avail".
How is your own capaciousness? Is it large? Do you find it very easy to make room for the viewpoints of others, or for your own? Are you listening to other's viewpoints? Are you listening? Are you interested?
Try to sense your own capaciousness over the next couple of days. Feel it. What happens when other viewpoints are impinging, trying to enter your space? What do you do with them? What do you do with your own viewpoints? Notice what is happening.
If you suddenly find yourself in a group where two or more people are talking at the same time, then you can be 100% certain that at least one person isn't listening. Who is it? Is it yourself? Are you interested, or are you trying to be interesting? Where is your capaciousness? Where is the other person's capaciousness?
Evaluating viewpoints, own or others, mainly consist of seeing differences, similarities and identities. Sometimes this can be hard and another person's guidance (coaching) can be very beneficial. See the article "How can I gain more freedom". "SP" - "PTS" Series 3.
You can get much enjoyment out of observing your own capaciousness in relation to other people and other viewpoints. It will get bigger simply because you start observing it. You notice it and it will be allowed to develop. There will be space for the capaciousness, and then there probably aren't many more limits after that. Freedom is NOT a quantity even though some might want to persuade you about that. Freedom is a QUALITY, a quality of viewpoint monitored by your capaciousness.
Try it!
________________________________________________________
How to gain more freedom
May 14th 1996
by Per Schioettz
"SP" - "PTS" - Series 4
I often heard the expression "Free me from (this)" and "Free me from (that)". If there really are a lot of things in a persons daily life he wants to be free from then he is guaranteed not a happy person. Freedom is not freedom FROM this or that or a whole lot of things. Freedom ought to be freedom TO do or be or have what you want..
Opinions and facts
In relationships persons often express an OPINION about another person. The other person might take this opinion as a fact and thereby loose some of his freedom because the opinion was a limiting opinion. (Ex.: "It's dangerous to travel"). (Fact, one definition, there are several: A fact is something which can be proven to exist by visual evidence. Opinion: Some-thing which might or might not be based on a fact).
Invalidation
If dad tells Peter "You are quite stupid", and Peter somehow or other buys this, and later knowingly or unknowingly acts upon this, by f. inst. not taking the education he wants, then we are talking about self-invalidation, and Peter has lost some of the freedom he could have, at least in choosing education. Everybody is on a daily basis bombarded with others opinion about this, that and the other. We love to give good advice, and every time we connect to others opinions and act accordingly (as if it were facts), which means we do not follow our own ideas, or listen a bit to ourselves, then we loose something of ourselves and get weaker and smaller and less ourselves. People who actively work on enforcing own opinions onto others could be called suppressive, but the person having opinions forced onto him is the one who makes himself smaller, no one else can. The suppressive has a misunderstood. He thinks that freedom is a quantity and therefore he has to keep others down in order to get the freedom for himself. Freedom is a quality - please!!
Integrity
Integrity means wholeness, all of it - without things missing, a condition where nothing has been removed is corrupted or damaged. If a person has undamaged integrity then he hasn't given away any of himself. He exists in his wholeness as himself. If he compromises with his own honesty, his own wishes and perception of himself, then he looses integrity. If he adopts others opinions about himself (unexamined) then he has given something of himself away. You could say that he has shrunk, he has become less himself.
Loss of identity
Some people live to a high degree for others and by other people's opinions causing their own personality to disappear.
The more he obeys others opinions, commands and orders and take onto himself others characteristics, behaviour patterns ideas and thoughts, the less free he will be and the more he looses his integrity. He will listen less and less to his own inner dialog, his intuition and feelings. This will eventually end up in self-denial, self-hatred and self-defeating and then again in less freedom. We all do, or have done this to a greater or lesser degree depending on who the other person is.
Ethics and philosophy
Everyone has an ethical philosophy which they live by. It's their guidelines for what is OK to do in life. It could be "I will not engage in shoplifting" or "I'm OK and have my right to be here". These are more or less known to the person consciously. Suppression or loss of integrity and thus freedom is a result of lack of ethical philosophical codex. If the ethical codex contains: "I will listen to others opinions and then carefully consider if they shall be mine too", then you have a chance to not blindly accept others commands, opinions, perceptions etc., and loose integrity and freedom.
Yours or mine?
If you want personal enhancement by f. inst. personal development or therapy etc. etc., then it is extremely important that you are very sure that it is your own ideas, thoughts, behaviour patterns etc. that you start handling. If it really is others opinions and ideas, which you have taken on, then it's a waste of time.
Yours
If you find something which is not your own, but something you have been persuaded to think by others or have borrowed from others, then it is actually possible to cut the connection to these things again. If Peter feels suppressed by his fathers who says: "You are quite stupid", then that is the father's opinion, not Peters. He must therefore CUT the connection to that opinion and realize that it is not his and "send it back to the father" right here and now. Note carefully that he doesn't cut the connection to his father; that would violate the universal solvent of all problems: Communication!!
Mine
There could be a small danger here, namely if you disconnect from something which IS you own. Then you will never get it handled as you believe it isn't yours and have disconnected from it. Why handle others stuff? But this very small danger is not difficult to get around as long as you get a little practice in this.
Procedure (for self or clients)
First you must realize which persons, places or situations etc. you feel caused you to make yourself smaller. For each of them in turn, you write down all the different ideas, thoughts, behaviour patterns, commands, unethical actions, opinions etc. etc., picked up from that person or terminal or in that situation. Then in your own universe you actually CUT the connection to these items, realizing it's not yours and seeing whose it is at the same time. If you come across something you have already disconnected from earlier, just acknowledge that. Finally you sign this "document" that you have actually disconnected from these things. The whole action can take some hours or weeks or months depending on the clients case shape, but it is extremely important to do it very early for instance in a life repair, if not as the very first action.
Why?
When all this is done you ought to find out what has been missing on your written or unwritten ethical codex, which caused that you allowed your integrity to become less. Write it down as an addition to you ethical code. If this is kept in times to come (eternal now's) then it will act as a guarantee that you never again will allow your freedom to be lessened or taken away.
Example
Here is an example of a handling Peter did regarding his father. It's a very ordinary example from a situation which is very common:
I, Peter Hansen, do hereby cut the connection to my fathers:
1. Invalidation by saying I am stupid.
2. Talking badly about me to my friends
3. Attempts to decide:
My education
How to spend MY money
With whom I can date
My hairdo
Which books I should read
When to go to bed
4. Lack of communication
I realize that these are my fathers and not my characteristics
Signed
Peter Hansen
Addition to my ethical codex:
It's my right to decide about my own life.
Signed
Peter Hansen
When this is done for all items you should experience more freedom and a growth as a person, again depending on state of case. The most incredible results have occurred with this handling, including the "suppressors" friendly approach to the client. If there is no change or not a lot of growth, then there are still unhandled items or you have disconnected from something which is yours. The ability to "disconnect" can be very low in the beginning. Don't fret. It picks up pretty quick and in the end the client will stay de-PTSed with constant expanding freedom as THE result.
Is this difficult?
If it turns out to be hard to handle this way, then another approach is needed first. What has happened is that the client has to a very large degree gotten his own personality mingled into others so it's almost impossible to find head or tail in any of them. He can't see what is his and what's Daddy's. In this case, again depending on the case level, objective processes might be called for or other handling by case study. But it's in my experience very darned few that do not respond to this handling.
More freedom
If all this has been handled and everything, not ones own, is gone, and the feeling of more freedom is there, then it's time to look at things one wants' enhanced which are ones own. But don't be surprised if you never see the client again. He might expand his freedom forever...
Freedom to...
The new freedom should be used for doing new things to be better and to expand interest areas in life. "Free me from..." is only valid when it's not ones own stuff one wants to be free from. Your own mental garbage heap is you own responsibility and you are the only one who can handle it.
Last step
I have used one more little action. In the above example I asked Peter to write down:
"How is the real Peter...". This has almost always ended up in line charge galore and then tears of joy.
Note: I do not use a meter of any kind for these handlings. It complicates things and it's my opinion that if you can't get behind the clients shirt and feel, using yourself as a meter, then don't even try. In one case I had to get the meter out and null a list of ("SP") items which kept growing. That's it !
Have fun!
Per Schioettz "Class IX"
____________________________________________
How could so many be so stupid
March 25th 2011
by Per Schioettz
"SP" - "PTS" Series 5
Have you ever seen mass-PTSness? Many, many people being PTS to the same one person or one group of persons or one thing, etc..? There are stellar examples of this in present society and in history too. I don't think there has been any time - on this planet - where there were not examples of mass-PTSness.
What is this phenomenon anyway? Let's take one of the stars: Adolph Hitler, "Der Fuehrer". There is no question of his bad deeds - I am sure. If in doubt, consult history books, films and videos and go see some of the World War II museums in Germany and France. You will know what I mean.
Where did Hitler get his power from? The people of course, you might say, and rightly so. Everybody admired him (at least in the beginning) for his fantastic (and fanatic) ideas of a free German people, only the people didn't see that the freedom was to be his, as he stole the freedom from the people, who gladly gave their power to him by having them agree to his mad ideas and adopting these crazinesses. This is how the people made themselves PTS to Mr. Hitler.
If you can agree to the above explanation, then suppose everybody had turned his/her back to Hitler. What power would he then have? Nothing !! All the power he ever had was given to him by the people. Had all of them, from Eva von Braun to the 14 years old private soldier in Hitler's army, all of them, turned their back to him, he would have remained a snotty little corporal in a jail in Austria.
You can take any and every big bad terrible "SP" in history, like Napoleon and Stalin, just to mention a few more, and see that the pattern is exactly the same. Had everyone turned their backs to these cats, they would have had no power, nothing, silts, nada.. People would be free. These war lords have a strange idea that you can get peace by making war.. how weird..
It is said, and I believe in that, that man is basically good. It doesn't say beings, it says MAN, that means to me people on this planet. People being humanoid, members of the human race... Man. (or even mankind). And any men on other planets too, and woman... (I do believe that it should encompass all beings too).
But some of these men and women act like nobody told them that they are good, good and decent down deep. To me it seems like they think that freedom is a quantity not a quality, and they better get whatever they can lay their dirty hands on. Then when they do this, people around them makes themselves smaller and go all effect of these cats.
These cats CAN be helped. If you can get them into my auditing chair, then I know how to handle them, and it will be a pleasure for me to do so. They ARE good people, but they are stuck in an incident which they keep creating in the now. They think that the incident "then" is "now" and that the "now" is "then". Being in that incident looking at the future, forward from then, they get a terrible sight with death and destruction and no freedom, so they better start grabbing. All you have to handle is THAT incident, and they will be out of it instantly. The source "creating", the existence and the conditions they see and create, will be gone, when they move to the present now. We have what's needed of knowledge, and we can even start with ourselves actually WITHOUT turning our backs to anyone or anything.
______________________________________________________________
Latent gains
April 3. 2011
by Per Schioettz
"SP" - "PTS" Series 6
A very interesting aspect of handling "PTS"ness with people who has had a lot of auditing over their "PTS"ness has appeared. With "lot of auditing" I mean Life Repair, Dianetics, Grades, Power, Clearing and OT- levels.
It can be different from case to case but the common denominator is, that auditing took place whilst there were several, even many unhandled "PTS"-items on the case.
Of course, as "PTS"- ness is a Resistive Case Point, these people did not have big gains through their auditing, and very often they were pushed on, to the next grade or level as it was assumed that their case would crack there.
They were promised abilities individually or en-mass pr. the Gradation Chart, but every one of them had abilities promised which they did NOT attain. They had wins and cognitions, but these did not manifest themselves in real life. Their lives did NOT change after the auditing in the way it was promoted that it should.
Quite a few of them fell off The Bridge or found another bridge to follow or even went onto some false bridge which did not take them across anything.
What is very amazing is, that when they finally got their "PTS"- ness handled, all the earlier expected gains and changes in life started to show up, one by one. One case got his abilities gained from grade 0, communication, "rehabbed" and his level of communication changed drastically WITHOUT the "PTS"- handling ever touching the issue of communication.
Same thing happened with another person who was dramatizing a lot of Service Fac.'s. After some "PTS"- handling, he completely stopped this and stopped making everybody around him wrong. His life took a new turn and he expanded his job into a totally new area for him. Amazing and wonderful to watch.
____________________________________________________________________
Relationships
by Per Schioettz
Here is how I have helped 2D relationships getting over upsets, or splitting up in full understanding of why:
I have them both, each in his/her room, make a clay-demo of the upset clearly showing the PROBLEM, i.e. intention and counter-intention etc. until I understand it and can SEE it. (Discussing it you can just forget, as when he starts talking about what aunt Eveline did and she denies, you will be lost... !!!).
Then we bring it all together in one room. And I have them both explain TO ME. Then they can ask ME questions about the others demo and we get anything missing demoed. (No demo-touching except for the person own demo).
Then comes this question to one of them. "I want you to change something in YOUR demo which will help the problem in the other demo". Usually they say NO, CAN'T, but we work with it and find just one small little thing they can change, which is real. Then same question to the other. Back and forth, back and forth. At some point they start taking things away as the sit becomes clearer.
All the times I did this (around 20) they always ended up with the same thing left in BOTH demoes, AND THAT IS THE WHY: Magic!!!
Then we can work out a handling which both can agree to.
I think that 5 cases decided to "divorce" in full understanding and the rest went back on rails, some of them with a 2D admin scale. . I know of some of them still who are still together, a couple of them 20 years after this handling.
It might happen that you will have to take one of them or both into session and fly some ruds, (NOT together, havn't seen that work). The entire handling took from 4 to 20 hours.
Copy- and user rights: All rights for everyone... have fun, it's great.. Source http://www.ivymag.org/WebIVy/PerSchioettz.htm
From freedom to fear - and back
March 23, 2011
by Per Schioettz
"SP" - "PTS" Series 1
In 1968 I started in DK Org on the communications Course. There was a fantastic free atmosphere and a lot of joy and fun. There were many people in the organization every evening doing drills, talking, discussing, having sessions and doing courses and listening to old timers lecturing. It was the first time I was in such an uptone group with so much fun. The attitude to others in the group and to people outside the group was very friendly; people were looked at as friends and as people one could really give a hand with what one had learned. The term "Suppressive Person" was never heard of, was never voiced and lived a very non visible life maybe in some hidden policy letter or the background of one single persons mind.
This went on for a couple of years and then I went onto the Briefing Course. This was THE technical course to do those days. We were more than a hundred students every day. I studied from 9 to18 every day, seven days a week. We were all studying and auditing and also listening to "The Wall of Tapes" some 700 taped lectures by L Ron Hubbard. This was also a fantastic time. It was a very international course and I made friends from all over the world, and several of those are still my friends and we still keep in touch.
This was a technical course with a lot of stress on "red on white" (tech) and not very much interest in most of "green on white" (policy) meaning rules and regulations. In fact there was an attitude that "green on white" was for admin staff only. We, the tech people, didn't "lower" ourselves to such trivial pastime as reading policy. (If we could avoid it, we would rather work with the real thing "The Tech").
I leaned the effect of that attitude the hard way when I one year later found myself as HGC auditor in Cop Org. I had problems with one PC and got into some kind of fight with the C/S. Those days when C/Ses couldn't get a case to fly, it was, as a routine, assumed that the auditors TRs or metering were out. Mine were NOT. I did endless TRs and meter drills, the case still didn't budge.
Finally the C/S and I went to Athena, situated in Copenhagen Harbour. Athena was the training and cramming vessel for Europe. The C/S and I showed up with the PCs folder. Merle Goodman and Judy Thiery were the people running the course and cramming operation of the ship, and they were GOOD. They were also the first people to observe and report to Ron about the language barrier in Europe.
When they had interviewed the C/S and me and studied the auditing in the folder they said: "Gentlemen, you are going to confront some "green on white !!" " Bang! (What's this? What do they mean? We are tech guys - please). Slowly it dawned on both of us that somewhere remotely hidden away in the dark backside of our sculls were a very unfamiliar subject called "resistive cases" and between those, one called "PTS"... This was an eye opener for us looking at this phenomenon from a tech point of view. We studied the stuff, and had some great wins and relief now knowing that we could not necessarily handle every one case in the universe. This was our reality and a huge change for us.
Around the same time people started talking about "SP"s and how awful they were and how they totally messed up the games for others in general and us specifically because we were in the freeing game, "which they hate".
I was very puzzled about this. One of the main reasons I had "gone into" Scientology was the saying: "Man is basically good". But apparently here were some who were not basically good but basically evil. "SP"s are basically bad! There was no mistaking this, and there was no end to all the blame they were given, even for our own mistakes. Awful. I remember in 1982 when I had finally left the Sea Org, my X-wife was struggling on OT III, being in fear of any connection to anyone, who might be an "SP" and she would be sent to ethics and taken off her auditing. New confessionals, new eligibility checks etc. etc. costing endlessly. How can you go free when operating in a tone level of Fear? Or even attempt that?
This fear of the "SP"s even though they were only considered being about 2 1/2 percent of the population, caused endless speculations and conspiracy theories even within this "Church". The fear and suspicion became worse and worse. Ron pointed out that these cats and the psychiatrists were the enemies of Scientology and his operations. THEY were the reason Scn. didn't expand faster etc. etc. When the Data Series came out I could really see this as a "Why is God". And I always wondered that he didn't see this himself. He really had a blind spot there. But actually, that is what is to be expected when someone makes himself smaller because of others communications, opinions, behaviours, etc., etc.. You don't see clearly anymore. (And a wrong indication only makes things worse).
"Disconnect or handle" was the watch word, and neither of them worked very well if at all. Disconnection can only have temporarily effect in case you take the person out of a very restimulative area, but you still have to handle HIS situation sooner or later. (Or rather HE has to). The usual handling is mostly running rudiments with the PC at effect, poor sod, see what they did to you. Doesn't work.
With the New Era of Free Tech it has become possible to handle these situations with the client at CAUSE. Handling with the client at EFFECT only, in my opinion and experience, makes the negative aspects more solid and he will not get out of it until he takes responsibility as CAUSE.
Many of my clients have proven this point to great satisfaction. No more proof is needed. There should be no more looking back. There is no more need to fear any of these so-called SPs. There is a way back, or forward to freedom again.
Everybody are members of "fields". Spiritually connected by similar attitudes, ideas, experiences etc. If you handle a person's negative contribution to a field, the others, being connected to the same field, will lose the negativism too. The field will turn more positive. This is the reason that you will have the PTS clients "SP"s turn to him again, but this time in a positive way. This is one of the EPs I see daily and which was promoted in the "Church" but I never saw it there. Now it is available to anyone and everyone who wants to recreate the freedom, or rather to live the freedom again, because freedom is the NATURAL state, not being PTS. You are BIG. You are FREE. You are YOU...
____________________________________________________________________
Capaciousness
March 23, 2011
by Per Schioettz
"SP" - "PTS" - series 2
Capaciousness is here defined as the ability to encompass new viewpoints. So, if one person thinks the Earth is flat, and somebody else comes along with the viewpoint that it is round as a ball, a capacious person should be able to encompass this new, foreign, and very strange viewpoint.
In Figure 1 you can see that illustrated. The person has his own viewpoint (A), but there is also room for new and different viewpoints. The foreign viewpoint is effortlessly taken in because there is capaciousness (B).
The two viewpoints can now be evaluated in relation to each other, particularly if they contain data of comparable magnitude. (The idea that the Earth is flat can be compared with the idea that it is spherical, but not with the idea that "I know best" or "carrots are healthy"). When they are being evaluated and compared and "touched", there is a possibility of learning something new, and of understanding the new stuff, and realizing what it encompasses and implies.
In another example, own viewpoint could be "I don't have any fixated ideas" and suddenly the wife or the friend says: "What you are saying, I have heard many times before, it seems like a fixed idea". If there is room for that other viewpoint, meaning there is capaciousness, then now is a chance of evaluating the two viewpoints in relation to each other.
For example, one could ask oneself: "Why is she saying, it seems like I have a fixed idea?", "What am I saying or doing that makes her have that opinion?" When there is sufficient capaciousness to encompass one additional or several other viewpoints, then there is a chance of evaluating further, get familiar with the territory, and getting a better understanding of what is happening and how one is responding - and then one can progress in one's own development. That was Figure 1.
Figure 2 (A) shows a person who isn't capacious, who doesn't have room for a new, different, foreign, or provocative viewpoint (B). He will promptly reject the new and different viewpoint (C) - WITHOUT in any way evaluating, analyzing, feeling, or in any other way sensing the other viewpoint. It is rejected immediately, there is no room, it doesn't even enter his space - and that would be the first requirement for evaluating it.
It can be extremely frustrating to deal with a "Figure A - Non Capasciousness" person if you really want to introduce him to a way of doing something; something you KNOW will help him with what he is trying to accomplish. Maybe you actually have more experience with the subject than the other person. Any educator has experienced this. Not until he gets the student to be willing to contain a new viewpoint in his space, will the student be able, in any way, to learn something new.
You will often notice this in situations where it is taking a person an exorbitant amount of time to learn something new. The new data can be repeated again and again. At some point one might get lucky and repeat it at a time when the student is suitably high on the tone scale, where there is more room and more capaciousness. Suddenly it sinks in. Capaciousness has appeared.
When studying something new, a lack of capaciousness can give problems that might not have been noticed before. A lack of capaciousness, which often shows itself as fixated or stuck ideas, won't make room for the new ideas that inevitably will surface when studying something new.
The person who isn't capacious, Figure 3 (A), but only has room for one viewpoint at a time, might also, when a new viewpoint appears (B), immediately reject his own old viewpoint and take on the new one (C). The old viewpoint is rejected IMMEDIATELY. The new one is not evaluated, it is not being examined and analyzed or felt out, it hasn't really been perceived.
He doesn't have room for two viewpoints, and he is so uncertain about the one he has, that he immediately rejects it in favor of the new viewpoint. This kind of person can seem very naive and easily controlled by authority.
If you are vacationing in a cabin without electricity, and you ask such person to go and find the "kerosene vacuum cleaner", he will probably start looking for it immediately. His own viewpoint, that vacuum cleaners run on electricity, not on kerosene, gets rejected the moment you give him the idea of the kerosene vacuum cleaner. He will be very uncertain about his own views because of the very small, or totally lacking, capaciousness.
He might seem like somebody who will "learn" new things with lightening speed, but his understanding of those new things is found in a very small place. The new ideas are accepted with closed eyes, plugged ears, and an unfeeling rigidity. If you check his understanding he might be able to rattle off the accepted viewpoint, but he will not be able to use it for anything sensible, since he hasn't understood it, examined it, or felt in his heart what it is about.
Capaciousness is obviously very important if one wants to learn new things. The inability to contain new viewpoints is the biggest barrier, also when it comes to the mutual understanding between people. If you can't contain one other viewpoint, how can you possibly contain a whole other person with many other viewpoints?
In marriages and other close relationships between people it often happens that a viewpoint can't be contained. The viewpoint is rejected by some kind of judgment: "That idea of yours is crazy", "You are crazy", "Do you really believe that yourself?"
If the different viewpoint is accepted and one's own viewpoint is rejected instantly because of lacking capaciousness, then the judgment will often be about oneself. "My idea is crazy", "Where did I get that from, I better reject it immediately, or the others will think I am stupid". "Others are smarter than me", "I am stupid". Here goes the self-invalidation, the making self smaller, the true source of PTS-ness. (There might not be an "SP" within miles... !!!)
When ideas are rejected without being felt or analyzed, then we often need a reason for it. We need an explanation, mostly for ourselves. Lack of room is not seen as a reason, so we invent reasons.
The rejection of new viewpoints from others can be explained with: "I know best", "Don't think you are something", "Anything new is dangerous", etc., etc.
Own viewpoints can be rejected and the rejection justified with: "I lack confidence", "I can't trust myself", "Nobody can understand my views", "Communication is of no avail".
How is your own capaciousness? Is it large? Do you find it very easy to make room for the viewpoints of others, or for your own? Are you listening to other's viewpoints? Are you listening? Are you interested?
Try to sense your own capaciousness over the next couple of days. Feel it. What happens when other viewpoints are impinging, trying to enter your space? What do you do with them? What do you do with your own viewpoints? Notice what is happening.
If you suddenly find yourself in a group where two or more people are talking at the same time, then you can be 100% certain that at least one person isn't listening. Who is it? Is it yourself? Are you interested, or are you trying to be interesting? Where is your capaciousness? Where is the other person's capaciousness?
Evaluating viewpoints, own or others, mainly consist of seeing differences, similarities and identities. Sometimes this can be hard and another person's guidance (coaching) can be very beneficial. See the article "How can I gain more freedom". "SP" - "PTS" Series 3.
You can get much enjoyment out of observing your own capaciousness in relation to other people and other viewpoints. It will get bigger simply because you start observing it. You notice it and it will be allowed to develop. There will be space for the capaciousness, and then there probably aren't many more limits after that. Freedom is NOT a quantity even though some might want to persuade you about that. Freedom is a QUALITY, a quality of viewpoint monitored by your capaciousness.
Try it!
________________________________________________________
How to gain more freedom
May 14th 1996
by Per Schioettz
"SP" - "PTS" - Series 4
I often heard the expression "Free me from (this)" and "Free me from (that)". If there really are a lot of things in a persons daily life he wants to be free from then he is guaranteed not a happy person. Freedom is not freedom FROM this or that or a whole lot of things. Freedom ought to be freedom TO do or be or have what you want..
Opinions and facts
In relationships persons often express an OPINION about another person. The other person might take this opinion as a fact and thereby loose some of his freedom because the opinion was a limiting opinion. (Ex.: "It's dangerous to travel"). (Fact, one definition, there are several: A fact is something which can be proven to exist by visual evidence. Opinion: Some-thing which might or might not be based on a fact).
Invalidation
If dad tells Peter "You are quite stupid", and Peter somehow or other buys this, and later knowingly or unknowingly acts upon this, by f. inst. not taking the education he wants, then we are talking about self-invalidation, and Peter has lost some of the freedom he could have, at least in choosing education. Everybody is on a daily basis bombarded with others opinion about this, that and the other. We love to give good advice, and every time we connect to others opinions and act accordingly (as if it were facts), which means we do not follow our own ideas, or listen a bit to ourselves, then we loose something of ourselves and get weaker and smaller and less ourselves. People who actively work on enforcing own opinions onto others could be called suppressive, but the person having opinions forced onto him is the one who makes himself smaller, no one else can. The suppressive has a misunderstood. He thinks that freedom is a quantity and therefore he has to keep others down in order to get the freedom for himself. Freedom is a quality - please!!
Integrity
Integrity means wholeness, all of it - without things missing, a condition where nothing has been removed is corrupted or damaged. If a person has undamaged integrity then he hasn't given away any of himself. He exists in his wholeness as himself. If he compromises with his own honesty, his own wishes and perception of himself, then he looses integrity. If he adopts others opinions about himself (unexamined) then he has given something of himself away. You could say that he has shrunk, he has become less himself.
Loss of identity
Some people live to a high degree for others and by other people's opinions causing their own personality to disappear.
The more he obeys others opinions, commands and orders and take onto himself others characteristics, behaviour patterns ideas and thoughts, the less free he will be and the more he looses his integrity. He will listen less and less to his own inner dialog, his intuition and feelings. This will eventually end up in self-denial, self-hatred and self-defeating and then again in less freedom. We all do, or have done this to a greater or lesser degree depending on who the other person is.
Ethics and philosophy
Everyone has an ethical philosophy which they live by. It's their guidelines for what is OK to do in life. It could be "I will not engage in shoplifting" or "I'm OK and have my right to be here". These are more or less known to the person consciously. Suppression or loss of integrity and thus freedom is a result of lack of ethical philosophical codex. If the ethical codex contains: "I will listen to others opinions and then carefully consider if they shall be mine too", then you have a chance to not blindly accept others commands, opinions, perceptions etc., and loose integrity and freedom.
Yours or mine?
If you want personal enhancement by f. inst. personal development or therapy etc. etc., then it is extremely important that you are very sure that it is your own ideas, thoughts, behaviour patterns etc. that you start handling. If it really is others opinions and ideas, which you have taken on, then it's a waste of time.
Yours
If you find something which is not your own, but something you have been persuaded to think by others or have borrowed from others, then it is actually possible to cut the connection to these things again. If Peter feels suppressed by his fathers who says: "You are quite stupid", then that is the father's opinion, not Peters. He must therefore CUT the connection to that opinion and realize that it is not his and "send it back to the father" right here and now. Note carefully that he doesn't cut the connection to his father; that would violate the universal solvent of all problems: Communication!!
Mine
There could be a small danger here, namely if you disconnect from something which IS you own. Then you will never get it handled as you believe it isn't yours and have disconnected from it. Why handle others stuff? But this very small danger is not difficult to get around as long as you get a little practice in this.
Procedure (for self or clients)
First you must realize which persons, places or situations etc. you feel caused you to make yourself smaller. For each of them in turn, you write down all the different ideas, thoughts, behaviour patterns, commands, unethical actions, opinions etc. etc., picked up from that person or terminal or in that situation. Then in your own universe you actually CUT the connection to these items, realizing it's not yours and seeing whose it is at the same time. If you come across something you have already disconnected from earlier, just acknowledge that. Finally you sign this "document" that you have actually disconnected from these things. The whole action can take some hours or weeks or months depending on the clients case shape, but it is extremely important to do it very early for instance in a life repair, if not as the very first action.
Why?
When all this is done you ought to find out what has been missing on your written or unwritten ethical codex, which caused that you allowed your integrity to become less. Write it down as an addition to you ethical code. If this is kept in times to come (eternal now's) then it will act as a guarantee that you never again will allow your freedom to be lessened or taken away.
Example
Here is an example of a handling Peter did regarding his father. It's a very ordinary example from a situation which is very common:
I, Peter Hansen, do hereby cut the connection to my fathers:
1. Invalidation by saying I am stupid.
2. Talking badly about me to my friends
3. Attempts to decide:
My education
How to spend MY money
With whom I can date
My hairdo
Which books I should read
When to go to bed
4. Lack of communication
I realize that these are my fathers and not my characteristics
Signed
Peter Hansen
Addition to my ethical codex:
It's my right to decide about my own life.
Signed
Peter Hansen
When this is done for all items you should experience more freedom and a growth as a person, again depending on state of case. The most incredible results have occurred with this handling, including the "suppressors" friendly approach to the client. If there is no change or not a lot of growth, then there are still unhandled items or you have disconnected from something which is yours. The ability to "disconnect" can be very low in the beginning. Don't fret. It picks up pretty quick and in the end the client will stay de-PTSed with constant expanding freedom as THE result.
Is this difficult?
If it turns out to be hard to handle this way, then another approach is needed first. What has happened is that the client has to a very large degree gotten his own personality mingled into others so it's almost impossible to find head or tail in any of them. He can't see what is his and what's Daddy's. In this case, again depending on the case level, objective processes might be called for or other handling by case study. But it's in my experience very darned few that do not respond to this handling.
More freedom
If all this has been handled and everything, not ones own, is gone, and the feeling of more freedom is there, then it's time to look at things one wants' enhanced which are ones own. But don't be surprised if you never see the client again. He might expand his freedom forever...
Freedom to...
The new freedom should be used for doing new things to be better and to expand interest areas in life. "Free me from..." is only valid when it's not ones own stuff one wants to be free from. Your own mental garbage heap is you own responsibility and you are the only one who can handle it.
Last step
I have used one more little action. In the above example I asked Peter to write down:
"How is the real Peter...". This has almost always ended up in line charge galore and then tears of joy.
Note: I do not use a meter of any kind for these handlings. It complicates things and it's my opinion that if you can't get behind the clients shirt and feel, using yourself as a meter, then don't even try. In one case I had to get the meter out and null a list of ("SP") items which kept growing. That's it !
Have fun!
Per Schioettz "Class IX"
____________________________________________
How could so many be so stupid
March 25th 2011
by Per Schioettz
"SP" - "PTS" Series 5
Have you ever seen mass-PTSness? Many, many people being PTS to the same one person or one group of persons or one thing, etc..? There are stellar examples of this in present society and in history too. I don't think there has been any time - on this planet - where there were not examples of mass-PTSness.
What is this phenomenon anyway? Let's take one of the stars: Adolph Hitler, "Der Fuehrer". There is no question of his bad deeds - I am sure. If in doubt, consult history books, films and videos and go see some of the World War II museums in Germany and France. You will know what I mean.
Where did Hitler get his power from? The people of course, you might say, and rightly so. Everybody admired him (at least in the beginning) for his fantastic (and fanatic) ideas of a free German people, only the people didn't see that the freedom was to be his, as he stole the freedom from the people, who gladly gave their power to him by having them agree to his mad ideas and adopting these crazinesses. This is how the people made themselves PTS to Mr. Hitler.
If you can agree to the above explanation, then suppose everybody had turned his/her back to Hitler. What power would he then have? Nothing !! All the power he ever had was given to him by the people. Had all of them, from Eva von Braun to the 14 years old private soldier in Hitler's army, all of them, turned their back to him, he would have remained a snotty little corporal in a jail in Austria.
You can take any and every big bad terrible "SP" in history, like Napoleon and Stalin, just to mention a few more, and see that the pattern is exactly the same. Had everyone turned their backs to these cats, they would have had no power, nothing, silts, nada.. People would be free. These war lords have a strange idea that you can get peace by making war.. how weird..
It is said, and I believe in that, that man is basically good. It doesn't say beings, it says MAN, that means to me people on this planet. People being humanoid, members of the human race... Man. (or even mankind). And any men on other planets too, and woman... (I do believe that it should encompass all beings too).
But some of these men and women act like nobody told them that they are good, good and decent down deep. To me it seems like they think that freedom is a quantity not a quality, and they better get whatever they can lay their dirty hands on. Then when they do this, people around them makes themselves smaller and go all effect of these cats.
These cats CAN be helped. If you can get them into my auditing chair, then I know how to handle them, and it will be a pleasure for me to do so. They ARE good people, but they are stuck in an incident which they keep creating in the now. They think that the incident "then" is "now" and that the "now" is "then". Being in that incident looking at the future, forward from then, they get a terrible sight with death and destruction and no freedom, so they better start grabbing. All you have to handle is THAT incident, and they will be out of it instantly. The source "creating", the existence and the conditions they see and create, will be gone, when they move to the present now. We have what's needed of knowledge, and we can even start with ourselves actually WITHOUT turning our backs to anyone or anything.
______________________________________________________________
Latent gains
April 3. 2011
by Per Schioettz
"SP" - "PTS" Series 6
A very interesting aspect of handling "PTS"ness with people who has had a lot of auditing over their "PTS"ness has appeared. With "lot of auditing" I mean Life Repair, Dianetics, Grades, Power, Clearing and OT- levels.
It can be different from case to case but the common denominator is, that auditing took place whilst there were several, even many unhandled "PTS"-items on the case.
Of course, as "PTS"- ness is a Resistive Case Point, these people did not have big gains through their auditing, and very often they were pushed on, to the next grade or level as it was assumed that their case would crack there.
They were promised abilities individually or en-mass pr. the Gradation Chart, but every one of them had abilities promised which they did NOT attain. They had wins and cognitions, but these did not manifest themselves in real life. Their lives did NOT change after the auditing in the way it was promoted that it should.
Quite a few of them fell off The Bridge or found another bridge to follow or even went onto some false bridge which did not take them across anything.
What is very amazing is, that when they finally got their "PTS"- ness handled, all the earlier expected gains and changes in life started to show up, one by one. One case got his abilities gained from grade 0, communication, "rehabbed" and his level of communication changed drastically WITHOUT the "PTS"- handling ever touching the issue of communication.
Same thing happened with another person who was dramatizing a lot of Service Fac.'s. After some "PTS"- handling, he completely stopped this and stopped making everybody around him wrong. His life took a new turn and he expanded his job into a totally new area for him. Amazing and wonderful to watch.
____________________________________________________________________
Relationships
by Per Schioettz
Here is how I have helped 2D relationships getting over upsets, or splitting up in full understanding of why:
I have them both, each in his/her room, make a clay-demo of the upset clearly showing the PROBLEM, i.e. intention and counter-intention etc. until I understand it and can SEE it. (Discussing it you can just forget, as when he starts talking about what aunt Eveline did and she denies, you will be lost... !!!).
Then we bring it all together in one room. And I have them both explain TO ME. Then they can ask ME questions about the others demo and we get anything missing demoed. (No demo-touching except for the person own demo).
Then comes this question to one of them. "I want you to change something in YOUR demo which will help the problem in the other demo". Usually they say NO, CAN'T, but we work with it and find just one small little thing they can change, which is real. Then same question to the other. Back and forth, back and forth. At some point they start taking things away as the sit becomes clearer.
All the times I did this (around 20) they always ended up with the same thing left in BOTH demoes, AND THAT IS THE WHY: Magic!!!
Then we can work out a handling which both can agree to.
I think that 5 cases decided to "divorce" in full understanding and the rest went back on rails, some of them with a 2D admin scale. . I know of some of them still who are still together, a couple of them 20 years after this handling.
It might happen that you will have to take one of them or both into session and fly some ruds, (NOT together, havn't seen that work). The entire handling took from 4 to 20 hours.
Copy- and user rights: All rights for everyone... have fun, it's great.. Source http://www.ivymag.org/WebIVy/PerSchioettz.htm