Elements of Wins

Discussion in 'Evaluating and Criticising Scientology' started by Dulloldfart, Apr 7, 2019.

View Users: View Users
  1. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    This is a response I figured should be in its own thread.

    Let's see. I'll take a wild stab at general components of wins from auditing, where the win or completion may consist of one or more of these elements. In the order I think of them:

    1. Nothing at all, really.

    2. The "stopping banging my head against the wall" type of win; "thank God that's over"; i.e., it's only a positive in the sense that it's ceasing an repetitive negative.

    3. Status: "Wheeee, now I'm OT III", or whatever.

    4. An apparently-valuable (to oneself, at the time) cognition. Run-of-the-mill cogs are ten a penny after "F/N Cog VGIs" (stupidly) got enshrined into Scn tech, but I'm looking here more at session-ending "wowza" cogs that kinda occupy one's mind for hours, days, even years afterwards. Now, since this category includes the hundreds of people who just know for certain they were Jesus Christ, truth doesn't have to be included although it might.

    5. A genuine ability gained. A personal one comes to mind here: the ability to acknowledge someone for something. After maybe 1000 hours on TRs over 14 years I was doing a proper Pro TRs course at New World Corps in LA in 1986, and my TR2 sucked. It had sucked in life generally, not just in doing the drill. I just felt odd acking or complimenting anyone for anything. So, on this TR2 I did hours and hours of drilling and word-clearing, no change after a week or two. It was nearly at the point of getting thrown off course (I was a sup taking a break for training, so it would have been a disaster). I then addressed it with some False Data Stripping, at the time not in wide use. After an hour (?) I dug up some apparent past-life incident -- real, imaginary, who knows? -- with the false datum that "only God can acknowledge", that blew the whole thing. After that I had zero trouble with acking people for things: my entire life up to that point I had continuous trouble with it, my entire life since, now 30 years later, nada, zilch.

    What happened exactly? Hard to say. I've given/received hundreds of hours of FDSing since then, with no comparable wins. Cogs galore but significant abilities gained, not really. It's tempting to say, "Ah, it was just necessity level kicking in" or some biochemical equivalent, but it can't really be proved either way.

    Here's another one that comes to mind. This was 2007, maybe, when I was putting together new modules for what is now PaulsRobot3. I think this was Dipoles. I was sitting on a bus and thought I'd try out the be/do/have question I (now) sometimes use to get a charged topic to address (flash answer): "What do you most want to be, do, or have in life?". Dipoles involves alternately acting out the positive and negative poles related to one's topic. Since it also includes Rub & Yawn, doing it on a bus without attracting unwelcome attention means it was really sloppy in terms of technical excellence. Anyway. I addressed looking at attractive women. I'm a hetero man, but for my entire life up to that point, age 57, I felt awkward openly looking at attractive women, and tried to do it covertly. Ten minutes of Dipoles, with nothing apparently momentous happening beyond a bit of charge coming off, and it fixed it. Never had a problem with that thing since.

    6. Um ... nothing else comes to mind right now, although others might have good ideas.

    I'll post again looking at my auditing wins and try to break them down against the above list.

    Comments welcome. :)

    Paul
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
    • For you For you x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  2. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    I got auditing in the CofS from 1972 to 1986 in the SO at AOSHUK, from raw public up through OT III, including maybe 200-300 hours of pre-NED Dianetics and 250+ hours of Expanded Grades, mainly 0-2. Very, very little repair or non-Bridge actions. I had another couple hundreds of hours of sec checks at NWC/ITO 1986-1996. Some more later outside the CofS, but let's just look at the CofS stuff, in terms of those elements above.

    EDIT: It's very hard to look back 40 years and analyse specific wins! The two I gave in the previous post were very specific before-that-point-in-time and after-that-point-in-time, but for actions (like Grade 0, or 1, or 2) that spanned weeks/months? Hmmm. Overall one can say one has improved in interpersonal relations, but who's to say what would have happened in another life situation of holding down a job, maturing etc.

    Paul
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2019
  3. Hatshepsut

    Hatshepsut Crusader

    I had never liked Dianetics. It made me feel massy. Couldn't figure out why it would work.

    I was looking at these gruesome death photos in a particular cold case last week. I joined a group that was retrieving all the data police had seemed to have missed or ignored. I was focused as we are all asked to comment on motive and accomplices who'd escaped detection. I thought to myself that I was gettin too macabre. I was fascinated so many others kept joining the group of armchair detectives on the True Crime site. The last case was that of the Watts family in Denver.

    I was passing my attention over and over the scene of the girls'' bodies being extracted from those oil batteries, and I was fixating on physical evidence. My goal was to be sure of the initial cause of death. I had to look closely and supply myself the imagery to supplant the 2700 page discovery report.

    Something went release. Must have been my awareness was 'going in'.....'going in'....'going in'...way too intensely. Bedding and clothing I was inspecting displayed the helpless process that a dying body's organs go through. It's just, at a point, my too fixed attention embedded in the abhorrent just 'released'. My consciousness was ejected from the mass of feelings and decisions I'd been accumulating. I had the common, 'I am Me' and not 'that' exterior experience.

    I glossed over past deaths in early auditing with not much effect as I wasn't identified with it any longer. I hadn't noticed I got a rehab of the I Am Me cog with eacj separations from coincident of viewpoint. I just kept rehabbing that I am Awareness,.... the additives are misconceptions about identity. Maybe grilling one's attention into a matter, over and over, to a point of exhaustion, causes some natural spring-back phenomena where it's impossible to view the situation any seriouser.
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2019
  4. pineapple

    pineapple Silver Meritorious Patron

    A hypothetical question: Would BT's (assuming they exist) account for multiple pc's claiming to be the same famous person?

    If Jesus dies and later picks up another body, 1) do all the BT's from the first body go with the thetan (the person who actually was Jesus) to the second body, or 2) can some BT's scatter and go to other bodies? If 2), wouldn't this provide an explanation for multiple Jesuses or Cleopatras, or Julius Caesars, etc.? They would have copies of the "real" Jesus's pictures, so a pc could pick them up in session and think he'd actually been Jesus when he was only sharing BT's. This would be "Wrong ownership/Not your incident" stuff.

    I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest this. Does LRH say BT's always stick together or something? If so he was overlooking a good opportunity.

    I never did the OT levels and have never dealt with BT's, so I don't know scio-think on this, or "squirrel-think" either.

    NB: This is a hypothetical question. Please don't accuse me of believing in BT's, promoting scn, etc.
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2019
  5. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    the purpose of dianetics was to go clear. If you read dianetics, that was the end goal, or freedom from aberrations or a clear mind or freedom from psychosomatic illness. Or now having a high IQ.

    How many hours of dianetics auditing did you receive?

    Not sure what you mean by massy, as that was never discussed in dianetics.
     
  6. Hatshepsut

    Hatshepsut Crusader

    Too many hours. My experience in Dianetics was so so. And one day I just no longer identified as being anything but Me. I separated out for some reason. Big time. This didn't happen during session or while running R3R. I can't say I cared too much about Clear at any given time. I cohabited with older OTs who helped develop processes back in Phoenix in 1953. I felt their life situations were somewhat pitiful. I didn't think their gains were that stable. While there were no stars in my eyes, I wanted some gems I did recognize.

    I regard most things as a property belonging to some valence. In a release state where the mind moves off and away, it will take some associated conditions with it.
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2019
  7. strativarius

    strativarius Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband

    Oh, I'm just the opposite, I put a lot more faith in dianetics processing than scientology. Maybe it's because I did the standard dianetics course and was the dianetics c/s at London Org for a spell and it was 'my baby', or maybe it was because there was a kernel of truth in that 'talk therapy' (I can't think of the correct term for it right now) had the potential ability to defuse physical and emotional trauma. The fundamental premise that you return to painful incidents in your past and review them and go back on a chain to the earliest occasion of that type, and that this would be beneficial, made perfect sense to me, whereas shit like 'from where could you communicate to a kitchen table' didn't.
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2019
    • Like Like x 3
    • LOL LOL x 1
    • List
  8. RogerB

    RogerB Crusader

    Well, Hats, I never did get along with Dianetics either! And, as you say, running the shit only caused me to build up mass . . .

    Years later, I got the answer why.

    Firstly, the going "Clear" and/or the purported "State of Clear" is erroneous bullshit, but a very good selling point!

    Alan Walter is famous for saying: "Clear of what!?"

    Maybe a more accurate statement of what is or can be attained is to say: "Freedom from the unwanted effects of the 'mind'" . . . or, even, "At cause over (Hubbard's putative) Mental Image Pictures."

    And it was this state in the above paragraph I did obtain in 1959, when I hit the holographic recording of a traumatic past life death and, because of the tech being employed at the time, I came to being able to experience the old event and became at cause over its existence and possible affect on me.

    The trap with Dianetics is an error built into its concept and how it is run.

    Its proposition is that you are to "return to the incident in time, and you are ordered to 'run through the incident'." The error in this is that it makes you smaller than the incident's moment in time since you are caused to be "in" the incident to move through it. That action dots you and reduces your power.

    For guys like you who have had big gains and ascension from using other, earlier techs or practices (and gaining wisdom from study as you have done is a very valid and empowering practice), or for guys who by whatever means came to being at cause over their mental content or at least being no longer automatically buried in it . . . doing Dianetics on it is a monster "cleaning a clean" and it does mis-direct one's spiritual Life-Force (attention/awareness) trying to solve a wrongly indicated thing that cannot now be resolved. Hence one's Life-Force builds up and becomes encysted as "charge." And that's the mass we developed trying Hubbard's screwy tech.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Love Love x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  9. DagwoodGum

    DagwoodGum Cosmic Recyclable

    I used to wonder if the exact opposite of what Hubbard claimed in Dianetics was true?
    What if the first of many similar incidents on a chain was not the most charged in a certain amount of cases?
    What if the related "charge" built as the chain developed and some of the later incidents were by far the most traumatic?
    Then the commands would change from "recall an earlier similar" to "recall a similar incident" until one stumbled upon the anchor incident wherever it may lie on whatever chain, if there even would be one based on whether any of it had any practical application or results.
    Hubbard had no contingencies for "other truths" inconsistent with his claims such as charge building as a chain develops through time rather than drawing on the force of the first incident?
    Hubbard had fixed ideas that we were supposed to swallow without critical analysis and Dianetics was the first on our chain, typically, and stopped us dead in our tracks without real evidence.
    Heresy, I know, complete heresy!
    Hence my caped squirrel avatar.
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  10. DagwoodGum

    DagwoodGum Cosmic Recyclable

    Rog,
    And the key difference in believing that charge CAN build on a chain rather than leaching on to the power of some purported "basic basic" for it's power simply because of some pompous declaration of such by Hubbard could be a simple case of charge accumulation with the bulk of the charge anchored late on a chain and unresolved by running the first incident.
    What if having one's attention redirected from a real incident he has charge on onto an earlier incident, whether real or imaginary, only serves to distract the pc and gets him lost in a maze where he loses track of what he had been charged up about so he is led to believe that its now flat when in fact it isn't?
    I experienced no changes from chasing charge to earlier similar. Just looking for the incident with the biggest read and addressing that rather than skipping off of that way too early in some obsessive quest to get to the earliest could be part of the failures of Dianetics. One hasn't been allowed to get the real charge off of what one really has charge on.
    The difference in perspective would be a foundational basis for a new "science of the mind" and religion by some brilliant new upstarts.
    Christian religions have branched away into all new religions with much less divergent points of view than this.
    Just an idea. Why can't new clam religions form from the congregating of former Scientologists in a hybrid religion of their own design, minus the horrible aspects?
    Plagerizing Scientology? No, what would be kept from the clams could all have come from the public domains where others post freely about Scientology. They have no tech secrets anymore.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2019
  11. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    "whereas shit like 'from where could you communicate to a kitchen table' didn't."

    cracks me up strat, LOL. Reminds me of book and bottle, supposed to go exterior, LOL

    what is it's weight, what is it's temperature..........

    I can't believe I ran the process for hours and hours and then on another. What a complete waste of time all for Hubbard's bullshit of sublime of going exterior, LOL
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    • List
  12. strativarius

    strativarius Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband

    Oh god, don't remind me. The first auditing I ever had was from a squirrelly sort of guy who lived near me when I was about 16 years old. I used to go round to his house (mainly because I fancied his wife big time) and he ran me on that for hours and hours. Unfortunately, I fell ill with glandular fever, and next time I went into the local org I mentioned it and the poor guy got declared - mainly because he came to visit me when I was ill in bed and started doing all this Rosicrucian mumbo-jumbo, drawing crosses on my forehead with his index finger, and weirdo stuff like that.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2019
  13. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Some procedures, especially solely-talk ones with l-o-n-g lists of questions requiring an answer each time, seem designed to do nothing more than fill up (paid) session time. Robert D once told me he used to have the problem with new people that they'd get referred to him by a chiropractor friend because they wanted something addressed, but after a session or two (R3X: over-the-telephone R3R <yuck> with 6-direction process <good> but no Rub & Yawn <not good>) they'd be happy with the result and then wouldn't be interested in addressing more -- so I can understand some post-Scn guru happily piling on long lists of experimental questions that may or may not do anything but certainly consume hours of session time.

    Were these "from where could you communicate to ___" variations like that? I remember "Process S2", where the blank was "a victim", was supposed to be wonderful, but in my limited experience it was a complete dud.

    Paul
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2019
  14. RogerB

    RogerB Crusader

    Yep . . . as I wrote recently on my forum :p . . . "many of the wonky conditions one suffers are the result of our earlier dumb answer solution."

    Or, put more politely: "Existing conditions are the result of our earlier propositions erroneous or otherwise."
     
  15. RogerB

    RogerB Crusader

    And you survived all that !?! . . . Man, you is made of robust stuff! :p
     
  16. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Hey Rog,

    Have you got any other categories to add to those in my OP?

    Paul
     
  17. RogerB

    RogerB Crusader

    In red above . . . That R/D came out in June, 1959 as Formula 10 . . . The trick was to do an assessment for an item and run repetitive: "from where could you communicate to (item)" . . . but if you could not get a hot item by assessment, the bulletin instructed you to run "A Victim" as the item.

    Hubbs grandly stated in his best promotional bent: FORMULA 10 -- AN APPROACH TO OT

    Well, it happened that, when we got that newly released R/D in Oz by way of the new releases (July-August) I was run on that process using "A Victim" as the item . . . and that was the session that blew me out of my sox, head, and PT physical universe into the spiritual realm of past life/death experience.

    Ummmm, it made a new man of me :D
     
  18. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Hah! Very interesting. Thank you.

    Paul
     
  19. RogerB

    RogerB Crusader

    You posted this while I was a) in the middle of writing my post above, and b) interrupted by one of my forum members needing a little coaching..

    Yes your item 5) could/should be expanded "endlessly" . . . so many abilities regained and at various levels. One could do a list of types and levels of such. (I'll take a stab).

    And below this Positive Gain scenario, there is the "Freedom from unwanted effects," and "freedom from unpleasant experiences."

    It is a big subject.

    I'll take my time and write it up in a word doc so any interruptions (they are fast and furious at the moment due to events I'm dealing with) don't cause a hang up in the middle of a live post :eek:

    The info I'll put in it will be based on both my own experience and that of facts as observed to have occurred for/with others.
     
  20. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Ah, here's one deserving of its own category.

    6. "Feeling good"/blown out/exterior etc. This often (usually?) accompanies what is usually called "blowing of charge", and may obviously accompany #4 and #5 but doesn't have to. It seems to be spiritual in nature -- related to one's subtle-energy bodies -- but this is hard to prove.

    On a meter this would show as a blowdown or series of, but in life it is often seen as physical discharges like yawning/sighing/laughter/muscle twitches etc (as in Rub & Yawn). In Scn an auditor is taught to discount TA motion that occurs during body motions, so the most visible indicators (yawns etc) are thrown away! Stupid.

    I have no idea about accompanying biochemistry like dopamine changes, and don't really care at all. A high/blowout from a big dissipation of charge is nothing like a high from eating chocolate or whatever, although if one has never experienced one it's hard to get across.

    Paul