The unexpected liabilities of being trained in a suppressive environment

(Originally posted by OldAuditor on October 7, 2010 – comments are included)

In my occupation as an auditor helping recovering Scientologists, I frequently encounter highly trained Sea Org executives with unexpected blind spots in their ability to apply standard tech to their daily lives.

These are intelligent and very decent people who have spent many years trying to do what is right in an increasingly insane church environment. Most of them feel very strongly about the necessity of using standard tech, but when it comes to application of same, something interesting happens.

In a conversation with an old friend yesterday, I suddenly grasped the enormity of the curse which has been laid on unsuspecting Scientology Staff and public by current church management. This is the curse:

Getting trained in actual, verifiable spiritual truths in a suppressive environment is an insidious form of mind control.

The student can see that the material is true, but is forbidden or is prevented from applying the material standardly and is forced into a robotic state where conflicting realities cannot be resolved and independent thinking shuts down.

Example One:    Student learns the characteristics of a suppressive person including “Methods used by the subject to control others”. Student realizes that certain people in his environment and the current head of the church are Suppressive persons and feels great relief at this discovery. Student is severely reprimanded and punished for attempting to name suppressive senior scientologists as Suppressive. Student learns to keep mouth shut if she wants to go up the Bridge and attain “Spiritual Freedom”.

Example Two:    Student does various PTS/SP courses and has the certificates to prove it. Student is unable to recognize suppressive people in daily life and falls prey to them on a continuing basis. Student can recognize higher tones but is blind to the danger of lower tone levels. Students who are immersed in an environment where “No Sympathy” is the highest tone level seen have an altered frame of reference for viewing life energy, which is what tone level represents. The false enthusiasm of 1.1 or the glee of insanity is the nearest substitute for cheerfulness they can recognize.

It seems that getting access to real spiritual data is only part of the equation. Being allowed to experiment with it and using it to produce real results is what is requires to achieve mastery of the subject.

In a suppressive environment, every precaution is taken to prevent the student or PC from using their abilities in a self-determined way. Try doing an assist or helping someone study in a church environment and you will get severely reprimanded for your squirrel activity. Try relying on your OT abilities and refusing a squirrelly off-policy and semi-criminal reg cycle and you will be threatened with an “ethics handling”.

The real problem is that even after leaving the church, the hapless staff member or public person has no idea of the inadequacies of the training and coaching they have received.

(The PC or OT who receives auditing in this environment is an object of pity from those of us who remember when tech was really standard and produced results.)

A suppressive environment will find ways to pervert and worsen even the best of spiritual technology.

Fortunately, you can get patched up quite easily when you find an independent Scientology practitioner who has your interests at heart and follows the Auditor’s Code.

Number of views:238

4 Comments

Watchful Navigator  on October 7th, 2010 Edit comment

Thank you, thank you THANK YOU!!! Getting this truth blows charge. I have observed these truths myself.

I wouldn’t say that “no-sympathy” is the “highest” tone level around, but I would say it predominates. Many good staff and sups stay at “conservatism” (on which LRH reminds us this is where death first enters in) – “Cautious of asserting truths. Social lies” – i.e. playing it “safe”. The rest are indeed cowed and ill associates of the “no-sympathy” (mostly post-GAT ‘Flag-trained’) DM-bots.

For a person who worked his heart out 15 years to make a “safe environment” for people to cognite and go free in, this has been especially troubling. “Heartbreaking” doesn’t begin to describe it.

The only thing useful about such an environment is the bullbait that it offers to a sane, well-intentioned person, to keep one’s wits around psychotics (pity the day when it becomes easier to walk into a psych ward and offer help than to do so in a “church”). But in order to get even that much out of it, you have to spot it for what it is, first. If as this article says, you’re using the modern “Scientology” courseroom as a “model” for correct tech application, then you may well be doomed to fail.

Thanks Davey for your macho, ‘roid-rage’ version of “tough Scientology”. Where human compassion (help) has been degraded, downgraded and re-positioned as some version of pitiful “sympathy” (see some translations work on tone scale charts if you don’t believe this is literally true).

“Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.” applies here, but “ye” must be “DOers” and not simply “hearers” of the word!

I cherish the day when the “luciferian hubris” that Davey has implanted in the flock is replaced by the warm, human compassion that sincere Scientologists recognize as the overwhelmingly fundamental impulse in any being, “to help”.

This article provides a good starting point for such a reform. Let’s help.

Centurion  on October 7th, 2010 Edit comment

Well written, and some very good points are made. Yes, I can agree that you are not allowed freedom of observation or of critical thought inside an org.

Having almost wound up in a spin bin over such, I am glad to report that the confusion has blown off, and my eyes are wide open. The fact that tech is available in the independent field away from all the insanity is the one true salvation in all of Scientology.

The church will not clear earth. Not in a million years. If such will be achieved, it will be because of individual practitioners and their skills. Want to see a good auditor in the field? He will be hard to book with once he gets his name out there. People will be clammering.

When was the last time you saw an HGC at the nearest Idol Org busting out at the seams?

I think I did once in the year 1990. My last visit to an HGC at the church was in 2006. It was dead. Once PC was being gang regged right there in the lounge. She ran out of hours and was in the middle of something. She was using credit cards, and had none left. Her wins were slowly dwindling right there in front of the whole room. It was pathetic to see. I was almost looking at myself in that scene, years ago. The other PC was laying down, and was so BI’s it was not funny. I remembered him as a top reg at one of the WISE groups. Always on top of things…always cheerful. He was caved in and looked hopeless. “Is that what I was heading for?”, I thought to myself.

Right then and there I looked around and told myself I was done. No more.

Now I look forward to the independent practice of Scientology, detached from the implant station of squirel tech as arranged by DM.

I am slowly getting ready to start back up the Bridge, and for the first time in years, I am looking forward to it as the true voyage of spiritual discovery it was meant to be. Not a trip to a McDonalds brand version of mass marketed spiritually backwards, misapplied mind control.

We can win.

Centurion

Independent Scientologist  on October 16th, 2010 Edit comment

Interestly, my wife was ordered to redo her PTS/SP course as part of a completely off-policy handling that removed her from post, and while studying the various bulletins listing the key characteristics of an SP cognited that David Miscavige fit every one.

So now she’s out of the church, and I’m out of the church.

But we are both lucky that the black tar pit that the church has sunk into hasn’t altererd at all our knowingness that LRH’s tech works when properly applied.

Also, athough my auditor training was all post-GAT, but I think I can be corrected without too much difficulty.

Ron Matlock

OldAuditor  on October 16th, 2010 Edit comment

You wrote: “athough my auditor training was all post-GAT, but I think I can be corrected without too much difficulty.”

I am sure that you can. In fact I expect that my C/S and others will come up with a correction list to handle the charge and wrong indications that students experienced during GAT training. In many ways it was a suppressive action using both correct and incorrect data without distinguishing between the two.

Sorting out the incorrect data is a training action but handling the inval and eval and the suppressive acts can easily be done with a tailored list.

You acquired a lot of technical know-how in spite of a suppressive training environment. You should consider getting the wrong indications and false data handled so you can put your knowledge to use confidently. The independent field can use more auditors!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *