Corrections and Advances in More Workable Tech

RogerB

Crusader
I was caused to write and post this, this morning, in answer on another forum.

Maybe we can now have two similar threads creating a firestorm . . . this one and Leon's current effort with Scientology Explained (by him) . . . :biggrin:
______________________

This on the topic of Dennis Stevens and TROM

Fellas,

In 1957, when I collided with Scn, Dennis was in Sydney Australia at the center, then called the American College of Personal Efficiency. He had come out from England with an OK from Jack Parkhouse (who ran the London ops for LRH) to train the early Book 1 guys on the latest Scn. Marcus Tooley who owned the center, stated he also been to London be trained. (Though he, like Hubbard, was a bit of a fraud.)

To be noted is that Peter and Yvonne Gillham attended the 1[SUP]st[/SUP] course on the latest pro training (the came up from Melbourne).

When it came time for graduation and certification, “London” reneged on the deal as by then a HASI was being set up in Melbourne . . . . much upset and “carry-on” ensued.

That’s all past tense.

Dennis was (he might still be alive, I don’t know) a dedicated Scn and well versed in its basic principles. Those were the days when we learned ALL the axioms, Factors, logics and pre-logics verbatim!

I say all the above in the context of his orientation and operating paradigm-cum-belief system.

Dennis, as far as I know, stayed in Australia (though I believe he did do a return visit to the UK . . . those were the days when you went by ocean liner . . . 3 weeks.

When LRH blew from running own goal GPMs and sold everyone on the idea that it was all implants (May, 1963) and in the context of the later released “tech” of “real Clear” based on handling the “implanted R6 GPMs” and OT2 line-plot items, etc., etc., . . . . and to be noted that after all this when folks had “done it” BUT STILL HAD CASE AND STUFF THAT HIT THEM . . . many, like Dennis, trotted off to do their own, “better, more thorough” research/development than Hubbard’s to get the “REAL” why/what of the case we still had to be resolved.

Dennis’s TROM is an effort in that direction.

I’ve seen, checked many of them. They do NOT get the job done.

You will experience change, even putative benefit from doing them . . . but they fail to deliver what the developer thought, felt or promised.

There are some technical reasons for this. Two key reasons being: a) the R/Ds do NOT handle nor fully discharge the built up, jammed up spiritual Life Force accumulated as CHARGE, MASS and FORCE on the items addressed and, b) the underlying Identity or Beingness you created and became to practice or express the “items” are not properly addressed or handled, if at all (one of Hubbard’s BIG failures on own goals is that he did not address the identities he stated were the items of the GPMs . . . but left their existence and all their charge intact).

The biggest and most catastrophic error of all is that none got the basic scenario that has to be addressed . . . that is, the scenario upon which all the ideas of suffering unwanted experiences and wrong answer changes to truth or purity of self that have been implemented that then led to the individual’s present circumstance.

I have often said: our existing condition is the result/product of the solutions we have implemented along down the time trail.

Too be noted is the point that the address to the “line plot” idea of it being the case to handle does produce some change for an individual. But then, so did R6EW, the CC materials and OT2 . . . but how far did that get folks?

You will also get such change by getting a dictionary and running through all the words and concepts related to doingness, thought, decisions, etc., . . . . all you have to do is “repeat” (as in knowingly re-create or intend the concept---see tape five of my 2009 FZ Conference in Pasadena) and you will lift off the surface charge, have some cognitions, and feel relief!

Holidays also give you that result . . .

Thus, for those guys who LOVE significance . . . things like TROM are a great “thrill” . . . but by actual test, those R/Ds do not get the job done as they do not properly or fully handle or dissipate the built up, locked up CHARGE . . . and totally miss the underlying basic.

Indeed, my observation is that most folks I have spoken to about these type techs, both in and out of the Cof$, do not have a full and proper comprehension of actually what “charge” IS. That is, what is the “stuff” of it.

Rog

//
 

RogerB

Crusader
I've not done a ditty for those interested in quite a while.

This below I did for a gang of folks I help with the application of Knowledgism.

We exchange regular emails and exchange info and advice . . .


Today’s ditty is on the subject of “BLOWING BY INSPECTION.”

You will see in the email dialogue below, folks can have various views on it and various degrees of success and/or understanding of what really is the phenomena.

Thus, the first thing to address is the actuality of where this phrase and notion comes from. Like many things that have been carried forward from our “earlier practice” . . . it’s a bit of a bum steer.

Hubbard was famously glib and superficial in his research and presentation of his “findings” therefrom. Indeed in the early days, much was commented on with newly devised terms and words not defined or explained at the time they were first used or introduced.

In any event, by the time that we figured it out that we had been over-running PCs (in the early 1960’s: actually addressed in 1964) and the admonition to stop at the sight of an FN was introduced . . . both quickie Grades and “blowing by inspection” became a pandemic.

By 1968, folks were proud to be able to boast about a) the speed with which they could/had done “the Grades” or Grades processes and b) their prowess at “blowing by inspection” (BBI) . . . it was considered a mark of “their power as a Thetan!!!!”

So, it came to be, a matter of pride to be able to say you were able to BBI, even when you didn’t understand what the hell had happened.

And, of course, like all verbal tech, it became part of our parlance . . .

Now having set you up with some of the history, I’ll slot my comments and explanation into the dialogue below . . . mine in red.
____________________________

From ***** (one of my folks I help)

Thanks, it’s in no small part due to the efforts and writings that you post and that of others too. I do read the emails you send and see how it fits into my reality and universe.

That whole blow by inspection thing (BBI) is an area I have been researching, ever since T** ****’* posted about his ability to "blow by inspection." I have spent some time on it now and reading what/how others are achieving it certainly helps, along with what I am achieving myself. I still can't say with clarity how it occurs other than it does or appears to(?).##1 see below as ##1

I have been mistaken in the past for thinking that BBI had taken place, only to be confronted with the same situation weeks later. ##1 see below as ##1) Best described as being able to be totally present, having complete presence with the incident or being in co-harmony. I would say here that with some of the Kn processes (DOTs Prescence 3 I think) which asks the first few questions of "where are you, what are you, who are you, name the identity, describe the identity, consequences etc" I tend to be presented with the WHOLE incident at once. It can take me a few minutes to understand and appreciate it but then it appears to blow. I still continue with the process but towards the end of the rundown, I pre-empt the last part about the identities. (actually the best part about the run down ). ##2 see note below #2

I also find that asking for ownership helps, I did mention that in my earlier email.
_______________________

On the number 1’s above . . . well something “blew” but not necessarily IT. . . . whatever the “it” was that appeared to blow but came back.

Here is some omitted data on the presence and appearance of case. Again, something other tech’s never delineated.

In present time, one can have what we refer to as A PRESENT TIME ACTIVATOR . . . that is, it is something in your present (it could be anything perceived or that you or another is doing or thinking or projecting) that is triggering into involuntary replication (i.e., restimulating and activating) something bigger, deeper and earlier on your case. In Kn, we also refer to it as a PRESENCE TIME ACTIVATOR. Presence Time is something I have to yet write up for you, but in essence, it means the SPAN OF TIME OF YOUR PRESENCE which can be enormous . . . we are capable of spanning and being present in the past-present-and -future all at once.

The fact is, present time activators can be either almost un-noticeable or quite heavy things you really feel. Either way, they can be very easy to go free from when spotted . . . and that which they are activating which was being suffered (which is the real deal on the case to get handled) de-accesses and “keys out”!!

Thus this can be (not always) the actuality of a BBI.

Now let’s look at a true full blowing and erasure of a case issue.

Note the delicious language Alan used in his final command in his Shock, Mass, Confusion, and Force Handling R/Ds . . .

“Permeate it, fully experience it and have it dissipate into free life force.”

That’s pretty good, but I tend to like “permeating it, fully experiencing, and recovering my spiritual Life-Force back to being under/within my full knowing control and volition and in positive alignment with those I choose to relate to. I also like to look to handling the others involved in the incident or event handled such that their spiritual Life-Force is restored to being under their full knowing control and positively aligned with those they choose to associate.”

That’s a rather big statement and, of course, very much different to the notion of the old “get rid of mantra” and the blowing of stuff, Beings, entities, case, charge and all the rest! . . . . Umm, I do find it is a much better proposition to be enhancing situations versus “getting rid of” by whatever means.

In this vein, it would be good for you all to re-read the dialogue between Alan and me on the subject of our creating the “New Axiom One.” You’ll note it delineates a large number of vital (used here to mean both essential and of life and vitality) attributes and quality characteristics of we spiritual Presences.

Also note that in our “Pillars of Spiritual Power” (I have yet to do a ditty on them) RELATIONSHIPS AND ALIGNMENT are featured strongly and it is these elements of life with the attributes delineated in New Axiom One that we really ought be (I do) restoring when we are handling stuff and eliminating charge and case issues.

Thus these factors following speak to your notes above I refer to as number 2 . . .

What the writer is correctly referring to is that he does fully “open the thing up: such that he’s with it and throughout it and able to relate to and align it and its parts . . . this under his knowing control.

The definition of CHARGE that I like is the one in Alan’s “Secrets” book . . . it’s the definition he uses to introduce the first time newbies to what we are doing:
(I write from memory here) “Charge is negative spiritual life-force that has become unknown to you and is out of your control and thus impeding you or stopping you attaining your positive wants.”

Thus the key in all this is the action of you recovering to you, your spiritual life-force and having it aligned positively under your full knowing control.

Personally, I’ve not seen the typical BBI do that. Though that is not to say one cannot discharge the actuality and causes of what has brought about the hang up and accumulation of charge by “instant” permeation and perception . . . I’ve often done that once I’ve gotten close enough to the thing to permeate and or fully experience/perceive the thing. And it does happen with an almost instant snap and pop! But the deal is that it IS done with real understanding of what has been addressed and a re-alignment of the life-force involved.

The mere “inspection” that folks speak of when they talk of BBI is too often just contact and a change of condition and/or perception of what is there misconstrued as “it blew.” But, they have not actually recovered their knowledge or control in the area or relative to the entity “blown.”

Even in the case of handling “entities” . . . the ideal deal is have a full understanding of the relationship or no-relationship brought by your address to the Being . . . to simply “blow it” in the sense of “get rid of” is less than ideal and can be a reason why guys who talk of how they handle entities by BBI are also the guys who are reporting having continued problems with “entities” . . . either “newly acquired” or upset returns.

Number 3 . . . honoring correct ownership is of paramount importance . . . it is, indeed, an essential element of the truth necessary for the resolution of any case area. Charge will not correctly be restored as life-force under full knowing control if it is being mis-owned and run by or in the terms of its wrong sourceness.

Hope this gives some insights into the “real deal.”

Rog
 
Top