.ll 72
.fo off
.co on 
.ce ((Editor's comments in double parenthesis - Homer))
.ce Copyright (C) Flemming A. Funch
.ce Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes
Technical Essay # 38 - FAF 25 February 1991

.ce Ownership

The subject of ownership on OT levels is often mis-understood.

When one goes Clear one realizes that one is mocking it (case) up. It is an assumption of
responsibility for case.

If one is to advance from that state it is logical to assume that one wishes to advance further
up the various scales; that is further up towards pan-determinism, full responsibility which is
'create', full knowingness, source, and so forth.

Responsibility means 'the ability and willingness to assume the status of full source and
cause for all efforts and counter-efforts on all dynamics.' or 'the determination of the cause
which produced the effect', or 'to admit causing'.

Now, many preOTs forgot about these things when they started to assign other ownership to

When one is Clear one has cleared the case from one's own viewpoint. All further case will
be held from other viewpoints and is therefore still persisting. To clear that case we need to
take the viewpoint into consideration. We can no longer assume that it is seen from the
preOTs viewpoint. It will almost exclusively belong with other viewpoints, that is, it is on
higher dynamics.

If that is not taken into consideration the preOT will misown that charge, meaning that it won't
as-is because he doesn't get the exact viewpoint.

That does not, repeat not, mean that the preOT isn't fully responsible for the case. As a matter
of fact he put it all there himself. But not from his own viewpoint.

So, it is not all 'somebody else's' case. It is all from other viewpoints, but it is all your full

If you run any scrap of case after clear without assuming responsibility for it - you are mis-
owning case. You are on your way down in responsibility, not up.

Take the concept of entities. After clear we can regard any particle of case as a being, or
more correctly as an alter-ised viewpoint. That is in the final evaluation something you
created. By clearing it you will either as-is it or have it return to its appropriate position.
However, if you regard it just as somebody else you need to get rid of you've missed the

Other people aren't stuck in your space, you didn't create them. What you created was
representations of their viewpoints. They did the same thing in their universes. You can look
at those viewpoints, see what is being held from that viewpoint, and thereby as-is unwanted
persistences. If you as-is the viewpoint it often gives the impression of either blowing away
from you, or coming back to you.

If you regard an entity as 'doing something against you, so you just need to get rid of it' you
are not taking responsibility for it. Remember, responsibility means 'to admit causing.' An
entity is a symptom, what is most interesting is 'How come you carry around entities?'.

If you have an unwanted phenomenon in your space, pointing out the viewpoint it is being
held from is only half the story. You can throw that viewpoint away and get a temporary
release. But if you don't take over the creation of that viewpoint you didn't finish it. That might
or might not be done in conjunction with 'blowing' the viewpoint, but it must be done at some

Assigning ownership can be used as a way of escaping responsibility, but that is not its

If a preOT is committing overts he might establish that the intention to do that is associated
with a certain entity or identity. That will help resolve it. However, that in no way releases him
from the need to take responsibility for using that entity or identity.

Attacks from implant stations or postulate thetans, or influences from weird entities don't
change the clear cog. You are mocking it up. Assigning other authorship is not valid as an
escape, only as a tool in as-isness.

'Ownership' is a misleading word to begin with. 'Viewpoint' would probably be more

Other viewpoints can be regarded as entities, identities, or attention units, it is still
fundamentally the same thing we do with them.

OT level case is all your case on higher dynamics, it is not others' case.