Hatshepsut
Crusader
...
A new process
- Thread starter haiqu
- Start date
nozeno
Gold Meritorious Patron
haiqu
Patron Meritorious
Nice, haiqu . . . very well done. And a nice write up.
R
Speaking of nice write-ups, I've just read this thread of yours:
The Tech Error of ’62-’63—How it Went Negative
and watched the embedded videos. I was particularly impressed with part 5/5 which mirrors and expands upon some of my own discoveries, to wit the "Celebration of Wins" and "Futures Alignment" steps.
I'll take these points one at a time:
"What powers or abilities did you recover?" — A step I often omit or gloss over, but one I'll take more care with in future auditing.
"Have you ever used that power/ability to impress another?" — Fuckin' A+!! This is Gold, m'boy.
"Are there any associated unpleasant sensations?" — Nice, this gets added to my standard checklist.
"Are there any associated pleasant sensations?" — More nuggets of Gold!! Thank you once again, very astute stuff.
------------
Continuing with the original process mentioned in this thread, I went back and ran the Power Processes and Power Plus in Quad flows on Saturday, then ran my own process in Quads. This expanded the whole effect out much more broadly.
One new aspect that came out of it was that I'm now solidly exterior with no visible case anywhere I look. I'm starting to get the idea that this might be the highest state I've experienced as yet in auditing. And that's saying something, since I attested to Theta Clear in the 70's. No ability to levitate stuff or anything yet, but I consider this quite possible now. Hahaha, fuck there's a great little hidden standard.
Q: "What would have to happen for you to know that Scientology works?"
A: "Uhhh, I'd have to be able to make my cigarette lighter float in mid-air ..."
One of the things I found myself doing was travelling up the future time track and undoing earlier bum postulates about how life will be from now on. This seemed almost an obvious thing to do when I finished the process. Maybe it should be added in formally as a final step.
I was able to view life from a completely different place at the end. What you and Alan would call an "Ascension Experience." Have no idea how applicable this process is to anyone else's case, but it sure cracked mine wide open.
[ Note to the usual naysayers, DBs, SPs, failed cases and assorted negative denizens of ESMB: BRING IT ON!! I need to key some case in so I can find something else to run. Your help is truly appreciated. ]
Last edited:
RogerB
Crusader
haiqu, I bow to you, Sir
Here's a little dilly for you.
"Connected to the (ability/power regained-cum-ascension state) . . .
Pick up each ability/power recovered and run help on it. Run it quad flows:
"How could you use (recovered ability/power) to help another?" etc.
Since you are so positive
you should get very good mileage out of that one Note this really does align one's future vis a vis the recovered abilities/powers.
AS part of the wins handling one should also pick up abilities/powers recovered and run "Responsibility" on them.
Rog
haiqu
Patron Meritorious
haiqu, I bow to you, Sir
Here's a little dilly for you.
"Connected to the (ability/power regained-cum-ascension state) . . .
Pick up each ability/power recovered and run help on it. Run it quad flows:
"How could you use (recovered ability/power) to help another?" etc.
Since you are so positive
Note this really does align one's future vis a vis the recovered abilities/powers.
AS part of the wins handling one should also pick up abilities/powers recovered and run "Responsibility" on them.
Rog
Just came straight from the Idenics website, where I bought a copy of Mike's new book. And now this! Well, what have we here ... running Help and Responsibility on this? Yes, I like it. Should stabilize the state nicely.
I'll start off by listening to 5802C04 19ACC-12 "Clear Procedure VII: How to Find a Preclear, Responsibility and Help" first if that's all right with you, and run these later today. Once I've had some sleep — it's 6:35am here and I'm not really sessionable.
Thanks for your continued interest and support!
RogerB
Crusader
you wrote: "if that's all right with you" . . . Certainly
You are your own man/lady . . . and I observe with a rather clever sense of what is a good dose of smarts, so do as you know is right Rog
Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
haiqu, I bow to you, Sir
Here's a little dilly for you.
"Connected to the (ability/power regained-cum-ascension state) . . .
Pick up each ability/power recovered and run help on it. Run it quad flows:
"How could you use (recovered ability/power) to help another?" etc.
Since you are so positive
Note this really does align one's future vis a vis the recovered abilities/powers.
AS part of the wins handling one should also pick up abilities/powers recovered and run "Responsibility" on them.
Rog
Rog, you are a never-ending font of practical wisdom. Thanks for this.
Mark A. Baker
haiqu
Patron Meritorious
Certainly
/thetan
. . . and I observe with a rather clever sense of what is a good dose of smarts, so do as you know is right
Rog
Ran all of this tonight, from "What powers / abilities did you recover" right down to responsibility. For that last step I used the Responsibility Trio from HCOB Vol III p 190. (Scn: Clear Procedure Issue One—Step Five)
This certainly threw the cat amongst the pigeons once more, and I've found a whole shipload of stuff to deal with as a result. None of it was uninspected or unknown, but comprises issues that I'd "put on the back burner" for when I could handle them. I also rediscovered a viewpoint (valence, identity) from the 80s—the most productive time of my life—that was quite pro-survival. However, since it didn't lead to the result I was after at the time, I'm somewhat wary of donning it yet again.
I think the next thing might be some Creative Processing, or maybe an Idenics demo session with Mike. I've already completed OT III and some of the old OT VII processes, and have zero further interest in BTs or NOTs type auditing, so looking for actual gains processing now. Also making good inroads on the "Wall of Tapes" and expect to complete the BC lectures later this year, with special interest in the GPM research materials.
Any further input or suggestions will be considered, of course.
Last edited:
RogerB
Crusader
Well, H, while "the GPM research material" is "interesting" . . . . and also depending which version of it you are referring to . . . but both are disasters of error.
I lived through and processed all that stuff when first released in '62-'63.
A more true rendition of what that area of case "structure" is and is about is in my thread: "Corrections and Advances in More Workable Tech"
here: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=20627
As I have written and said, Hubbard's big error with his "GPM" stuff is that he really did not process at all or correctly what he found.
Crazy, but that is the fact of it.
You'll see it when you read up on the own goals GPM stuff . . . he'd get a Goal, list for some composite identities (in a bum way) and do nothing with the important items found!!!!
. . . . and then got upset and abandoned the area of "research" of case that is in fact the most important to a Being!!
Rog
I lived through and processed all that stuff when first released in '62-'63.
A more true rendition of what that area of case "structure" is and is about is in my thread: "Corrections and Advances in More Workable Tech"
here: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=20627
As I have written and said, Hubbard's big error with his "GPM" stuff is that he really did not process at all or correctly what he found.
Crazy, but that is the fact of it.You'll see it when you read up on the own goals GPM stuff . . . he'd get a Goal, list for some composite identities (in a bum way) and do nothing with the important items found!!!!
. . . . and then got upset and abandoned the area of "research" of case that is in fact the most important to a Being!!Rog
haiqu
Patron Meritorious
Wow, what a night
I've just spent five hours amongst hundreds of drunken revellers at an Australia Day Eve theme party. One thing that came out of it was that I am now ROCK STABLE in confusing and random environments, and any "agenda think" I might have had previously is gone. I'm just cleanly observing events as they occur with no figure-figure or evaluation at all.
Did a major favour to some random strangers—they arrived inappropriately dressed and couldn't get a cab, so I ran them home to change—and lent a stable, non-evaluative ear to a couple of distressed and disoriented people. I also opened comm with a gay girl who I've seen many times before, and found her to be quite friendly.
At one point a drunk young girl with whom I had been talking for 15 minutes or so was seen leaving with some random guy, and I got a fleeting memory of how that would normally give me a knot in the stomach and that old sinking "oh no" feeling. Then I looked at the situation and thought, "Well, at least they found each other, for whatever that's worth. Good for them!" Within five minutes she was back standing next to me, saying how she almost left with some guy but that he was "too young for her."
All in all I felt myself to be far more part of the proceedings than an outsider, for once in my life. By setting aside my own immediate wants and offering help to those who needed it, I discovered a genuine ARC flow that I can't recall ever having felt before.
I've just spent five hours amongst hundreds of drunken revellers at an Australia Day Eve theme party. One thing that came out of it was that I am now ROCK STABLE in confusing and random environments, and any "agenda think" I might have had previously is gone. I'm just cleanly observing events as they occur with no figure-figure or evaluation at all.
Did a major favour to some random strangers—they arrived inappropriately dressed and couldn't get a cab, so I ran them home to change—and lent a stable, non-evaluative ear to a couple of distressed and disoriented people. I also opened comm with a gay girl who I've seen many times before, and found her to be quite friendly.
At one point a drunk young girl with whom I had been talking for 15 minutes or so was seen leaving with some random guy, and I got a fleeting memory of how that would normally give me a knot in the stomach and that old sinking "oh no" feeling. Then I looked at the situation and thought, "Well, at least they found each other, for whatever that's worth. Good for them!" Within five minutes she was back standing next to me, saying how she almost left with some guy but that he was "too young for her."
All in all I felt myself to be far more part of the proceedings than an outsider, for once in my life. By setting aside my own immediate wants and offering help to those who needed it, I discovered a genuine ARC flow that I can't recall ever having felt before.
haiqu
Patron Meritorious
I have the HCOB Vol XIII compilation with most of the bulletins Ken Ogger listed as missing from the main volumes. Also, all but two of the complete set of SHSBC lectures.
Will read that right now.
As I have written and said, Hubbard's big error with his "GPM" stuff is that he really did not process at all or correctly what he found.
You'll see it when you read up on the own goals GPM stuff . . . he'd get a Goal, list for some composite identities (in a bum way) and do nothing with the important items found!!!!
Rog
I'm not planning to run actual GPMs but find the subject quite interesting for several reasons, not the least of which was the huge change in my case felt when I first defined the term GPM. There was a huge "ca-ching, click" and a whole pile of stuff vanished. I didn't just read a definition, but traced the whole HCOB chain of earlier definitions until I really got what it meant. Drove my HSDC supervisor crazy but I was intent on understanding it because it was a key concept.
This was before the days of HCOB volumes, so I was digging through all the academy's indexed collection of original mimeo issues. God knows, I probably read some issues that were restricted.
I've also had very good wins with a technique I read once (internet, but author escapes me right now—some Yugoslav guy?) where you just get the opposing item and switch viewpoints until it reduces. This is, in fact, the basis for the handling of the "separate/join" pair at the start of this thread. It matters not one whit whether they're a GPM pair, since it doesn't get into line plots at all.
Taking out whole packages might be useful if one could reliably and safely plot them in toto but there apparently isn't any way to do that. I semi-agree that the packaged "implant" stuff is comparatively weak in effect.
RogerB
Crusader
Nice to see a fellow Ozzie having so much fun and wins!
Where are you, Syd or Mel? or where?
Rog
haiqu
Patron Meritorious
OK, the key to your referred thread seems to be this statement:
"What should have been located and addressed was: WHAT WAS I DOING IN PRESENT TIME TO SCREW UP MY PRESENT TIME!! For the fact is, that is where I live and should be playing the game: not in the past!"
First, let me say that I had already read this and have some comments on it that I didn't share at the time. OK, it's time to get that withhold off.
Regardless of this viewpoint being a hangover from Dianetics running, when LRH researched that material he wasn't Clear yet. Naturally he would assume the past held the key, because he wasn't looking at life from a timeless, open-tracked, Godlike and serene standpoint. He had the idea of Clear in theory, but how one who is Clear (you and me) sees things is not how he, or anyone else in 1962-63 saw it.
I take it you're more of a "holographic universe" kind of guy nowadays, and that's all well and good. In fact these are some of the very reasons that Idenics holds an interest for me today. But I don't believe it could have been researched any other way at the time, and unfortunately you had the honour of being one of the guinea-pigs who paved the way for those of us who weren't lucky enough to have been born 10-20 years earlier.
I do get it. And to prove that, I refer you to Geoffrey Filbert's description of the various phases or eras of Scientology. Being a man of the world I'll assume you've read it, but if not I'd be happy to provide a link.
Given the choice of being there first-hand or attempting the reconstruction of (what was left of) the truth from 1975 onward as I had to do, I'm sure I'd rather have been you. It may have sucked, but so did everyone's progress, just in different ways.
So the point is, is that GPM data useful now? Well, since it was never used we can assume that only future researchers will really know for sure. And since the church frowns on research and holds these texts (sorry, Scriptures) dear to their bosom, it will be up to the squirrels. Brave souls like Ken Ogger, and thee and me. And since I don't intend to run this stuff on anyone else, your POV is commended, with the caveat that it might NOT be the POV necessary to handle a case which hasn't yet been Cleared.
But then again, isn't this shit way over the head of anyone at a lower echelon anyhow?
"What should have been located and addressed was: WHAT WAS I DOING IN PRESENT TIME TO SCREW UP MY PRESENT TIME!! For the fact is, that is where I live and should be playing the game: not in the past!"
First, let me say that I had already read this and have some comments on it that I didn't share at the time. OK, it's time to get that withhold off.
Regardless of this viewpoint being a hangover from Dianetics running, when LRH researched that material he wasn't Clear yet. Naturally he would assume the past held the key, because he wasn't looking at life from a timeless, open-tracked, Godlike and serene standpoint. He had the idea of Clear in theory, but how one who is Clear (you and me) sees things is not how he, or anyone else in 1962-63 saw it.
I take it you're more of a "holographic universe" kind of guy nowadays, and that's all well and good. In fact these are some of the very reasons that Idenics holds an interest for me today. But I don't believe it could have been researched any other way at the time, and unfortunately you had the honour of being one of the guinea-pigs who paved the way for those of us who weren't lucky enough to have been born 10-20 years earlier.
I do get it. And to prove that, I refer you to Geoffrey Filbert's description of the various phases or eras of Scientology. Being a man of the world I'll assume you've read it, but if not I'd be happy to provide a link.
Given the choice of being there first-hand or attempting the reconstruction of (what was left of) the truth from 1975 onward as I had to do, I'm sure I'd rather have been you. It may have sucked, but so did everyone's progress, just in different ways.
So the point is, is that GPM data useful now? Well, since it was never used we can assume that only future researchers will really know for sure. And since the church frowns on research and holds these texts (sorry, Scriptures) dear to their bosom, it will be up to the squirrels. Brave souls like Ken Ogger, and thee and me. And since I don't intend to run this stuff on anyone else, your POV is commended, with the caveat that it might NOT be the POV necessary to handle a case which hasn't yet been Cleared.
But then again, isn't this shit way over the head of anyone at a lower echelon anyhow?
haiqu
Patron Meritorious
Nice to see a fellow Ozzie having so much fun and wins!
Where are you, Syd or Mel? or where?
Rog
Sunny Melbourne, home of the umbrella industry.
RogerB
Crusader
OK, the key to your referred thread seems to be this statement:
"What should have been located and addressed was: WHAT WAS I DOING IN PRESENT TIME TO SCREW UP MY PRESENT TIME!! For the fact is, that is where I live and should be playing the game: not in the past!"
First, let me say that I had already read this and have some comments on it that I didn't share at the time. OK, it's time to get that withhold off.
Regardless of this viewpoint being a hangover from Dianetics running, when LRH researched that material he wasn't Clear yet. Naturally he would assume the past held the key, because he wasn't looking at life from a timeless, open-tracked, Godlike and serene standpoint. He had the idea of Clear in theory, but how one who is Clear (you and me) sees things is not how he, or anyone else in 1962-63 saw it.
I take it you're more of a "holographic universe" kind of guy nowadays, and that's all well and good. In fact these are some of the very reasons that Idenics holds an interest for me today. But I don't believe it could have been researched any other way at the time, and unfortunately you had the honour of being one of the guinea-pigs who paved the way for those of us who weren't lucky enough to have been born 10-20 years earlier.
I do get it. And to prove that, I refer you to Geoffrey Filbert's description of the various phases or eras of Scientology. Being a man of the world I'll assume you've read it, but if not I'd be happy to provide a link.
Given the choice of being there first-hand or attempting the reconstruction of (what was left of) the truth from 1975 onward as I had to do, I'm sure I'd rather have been you. It may have sucked, but so did everyone's progress, just in different ways.
So the point is, is that GPM data useful now? Well, since it was never used we can assume that only future researchers will really know for sure. And since the church frowns on research and holds these texts (sorry, Scriptures) dear to their bosom, it will be up to the squirrels. Brave sould like Ken Ogger, and thee and me. And since I don't intend to run this stuff on anyone else, your POV is commended, with the caveat that it might NOT be the POV necessary to handle a case which hasn't yet been Cleared.
But then again, isn't this shit way over the head of anyone at a lower echelon anyhow?
All fair comment, H.
I got on Scn lines in 1957. First went holographic in 1958.
The own goals GPMs were run extensively during 1962 and on until April 1963.
The Games Matrix stuff on my threads don't require a person the be "clear." And "Clear" is a subject I'll discourse on about one of these days . . . as others have here; but for now I'd say the question really is: clear of what?
In any event, I'd say the real deal we have to address is the Being's own positive prime dreams, aspirations, goals, purposes and wants. They are what fire him/her up . . . and they are the basis of all the charge on the case.
Bold statement that, and later I'll write on demonstrating why it is the key to the case . . . though it has come up on other threads I've been on.
So, once a person has handled what's pissing them off, and they have attention free and available to address where all their power lies and/or has been encysted, then hit the prime dreams, goals, wants etc., and restore the person's true powers.
R
haiqu
Patron Meritorious
Cool.
I can see how that would have been for you.
I prefer this definition: A being who is at cause knowingly and at will over mental matter, energy, space and time as regards the first dynamic.
It's not a particularly lofty state in absolute or OT terms, but certainly a step above the majority of humankind. IOW the guy is now on the plus side of the survive/succumb pair and not doing himself in.
OK, here's my take on that, with nary a thought about it. A well done Class VIII Life Repair, Drug R/D and maybe a Purif (and I have some serious doubt about that last being mandatory) keys out enough crud so that you can audit and get to Clear, per the above definition. At that point is a HUGE missing real-world step, which consists of going forth and creating the life you actually wanted, using your newly found viewpoint.
Instead, an artificial series of must-have "OT levels" are proffered, taking the guy's attention away from his actual life. This is in addition to any and all artificial "ethics cycles" and regging and "we gotta save the planet!" and god-only-knows that the Pc gets mired into by being part of a game that, instead of being a servomechanism or facilitator of truth, becomes a boat anchor and a distraction.
Having had the cognition, "Hey, I'm running someone else's case! WTF are you doing, am I supposed to run out the case of everyone on this planet or something?" as I did, the C/S should calmly end off and send the guy out to live again. And only after hitting some real world individual difficulties should he then show up, of his own volition, to handle those items with a bespoke program. That program might then comprise the levels to OT III, but without the out-ARC "handling" that BTs are generally given it would then be a doddle.
I can't comment on the Route One COHA steps as mentioned in HCOB 2 April 65 "The Road to Clear" (HCOB Vol VI p 19) because I haven't done them yet, but I'm really not expecting any miracles.
So, once a person has handled what's pissing them off, and they have attention free and available to address where all their power lies and/or has been encysted, then hit the prime dreams, goals, wants etc., and restore the person's true powers.
R
I'm with you, buddy. Except that the technology to do those steps lies elsewhere. And it will mostly be training, not auditing.
Last edited:
Dulloldfart
Squirrel Extraordinaire
I have something similar in the Dipoles module at PaulsRobot. But you can pretty much run the procedure (I found it works well as a Rub & Yawn procedure so one runs it while it's discharging stuff and stops when it EPs — and also one doesn't get into running uncharged pairs) without using the module. It's written up on ESMB at http://forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=455178&postcount=229.
Paul
haiqu
Patron Meritorious
I don't recommend this. Paul has missed the "represent" step in his dipole running. "To have a lovely family" isn't any part of a pair that will do you much good, I'm afraid, and can't be successfully opposed (in terms of dichotomies). By "represent" I mean WHO OR WHAT would want that, the answer to the above might be "a parent" or "an unhappy child" as real world examples.
Sorry mate, I call 'em as I see 'em. It might do some people some good, but it's weak technically so my personal viewpoint on it this advert—having been dropped into an active thread I started—must be stated.
"There's toadstools in my dustbin ..."
Last edited:
Dulloldfart
Squirrel Extraordinaire
That's fine. You're running your tech on different rules to me. I don't have any arbitrary musts other than if it's discharging carry on till it's flat and if it isn't discharging change something or drop it. I'm only interested in whether something works in practice, not whether it accords with someone's theory.
"To have a lovely family" might be heavily charged for someone, and might be completely uncharged for someone else. The thing is to take what comes up in the order it appears, not run off a canned list of what is "supposed" to be hot.
As for what is a "true" dichotomy, again, I've found it useful to go with what comes up, and what works. I'm not trying to dig down into the woof and warp of basic creation, or something, but to just get charge off for anyone who wants easy methods of doing so.
Paul
haiqu
Patron Meritorious
A couple of posts back I mentioned that there was some Yugoslav guy who had come up with a variation on GPM running. The guy I referred to was Zivorad Slavinski, and I believe the subject was called Aspectics.
Can't really recommend a website for further reading, since he seems to have dropped that and moved on into a touchy-feely "meridian therapy" called PEAT which he is marketing globally.
Best to stick to the source of the technology, which is LRH (as assisted by many, many others).
Can't really recommend a website for further reading, since he seems to have dropped that and moved on into a touchy-feely "meridian therapy" called PEAT which he is marketing globally.
Best to stick to the source of the technology, which is LRH (as assisted by many, many others).
Similar threads
