Grass Roots Movement

paradox

ab intra silentio vera
paradox said:
Yes, of course. Despite the fact that not one (black hole, white whole, wormhole, dark matter, dark energy) has ever been physically observed; only "artist representations" or "artist interpretations." Yes, one can prove virtually anything one wants with mathematics, not unlike the case with statistics. Whether or not there is any actual correspondence with the physical universe. If you ever get a chance I do recommend viewing the Universe: The Cosmology Quest vid. If nothing else than just for kicks. :whistling:

Space, your basic space-defining color, is black. The color of a black hole, it's most distinguishing feature is that it's black. So, 'ow you s'posed to see 'em?

After further consideration, I have to back peddle a tad. Perhaps black holes have been factually observed, i.e. at the center of every Idle Org [aka Ideal Morgue etc]; particularly of the financial sort, since the global economy is now based on a purely monetized, similarly non-material, conjured-from-thin-air [ala modern astronomy] currency system. But that's for another topic. :eyeroll:
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
Looks like we lost some posts here. Anyway I have revised and updated both KHTK 1A and 1B on my blog. I have also updated KHTK 1A on this thread, and here is the updated KHTK 1B, which addresses the objection about thinking posted earlier (but now missing) from Ogsonofgroo.


.


I have now modified further this essay on my blog.

KHTK 1B: LOOKING vs. THINKING

The related exercise seems to be much better positioned now.

.
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
Here is another simple exercise that may be done KHTK style. Please follow the theory given in KHTK 1D: LOOKING: PRACTICE


Exercise A-1

LOOK AT WHAT THE MIND BRINGS UP NATURALLY IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS. DO NOT EXPECT AN ANSWER. DO NOT SPECULATE IN THE ABSENCE OF A RESPONSE. IF THERE IS NO RESPONSE TO A QUESTION, SIMPLY MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ACTION.


1. THINK OF SOMETHING SENSIBLE.

2. LOOK AT WHAT IS SENSIBLE ABOUT IT.


(a) Ask question 1.

(b) If a response appears in the mind then ask question 2. Then go back to step (a).

(c) When no response appears, end the exercise.

Exercise A-2

LOOK AT WHAT THE MIND BRINGS UP NATURALLY IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS. DO NOT EXPECT AN ANSWER. DO NOT SPECULATE IN THE ABSENCE OF A RESPONSE. IF THERE IS NO RESPONSE TO A QUESTION, SIMPLY MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ACTION.


1. THINK OF SOMETHING BAD THAT IS IMPORTANT.

2. THINK OF SOMETHING BAD THAT SOMEBODY ELSE THOUGHT WAS IMPORTANT.


(a) Ask question 1.

(b) Ask question 2. Then go back to step (a).

(c) When no response appears, end the exercise.


These exercises may be run solo, or with the help of a guide.

It is interesting to note that only looking is required. No talking is necessary.

.
 
Last edited:

The Great Zorg

Gold Meritorious Patron
TGZ's recently revived method for enduring life:

Meditate: meditate on the idea of accepting everything, everywhere, exactly as it is perceived or sensed.

Continue to meditate, sitting quietly until you have not a single thought on your mind.

Continue to meditate until the realization or awareness of not having a single thought on your mind passes, creating a true state of "no thought".

Open your eyes.

My usual reaction when I open my eyes is: HF! Everything is brighter, clearer, quieter, safer, more colourful and warmer.
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
TGZ's recently revived method for enduring life:

Meditate: meditate on the idea of accepting everything, everywhere, exactly as it is perceived or sensed.

Continue to meditate, sitting quietly until you have not a single thought on your mind.

Continue to meditate until the realization or awareness of not having a single thought on your mind passes, creating a true state of "no thought".

Open your eyes.

My usual reaction when I open my eyes is: HF! Everything is brighter, clearer, quieter, safer, more colourful and warmer.


Excellent!

I have tried to capture that method in the exercise in this essay.

KHTK 1B: LOOKING vs. THINKING

The purpose is not to get rid of all thoughts, but to practice LOOKING. As one looks more, the type of thinking known as "figure-figure" gets less and less.

.
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
Here is another exercise you may like to check out KHTK style. Ref: KHTK 1D: LOOKING: PRACTICE


Exercise A-3

LOOK AT WHAT THE MIND BRINGS UP NATURALLY IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS. DO NOT EXPECT AN ANSWER. DO NOT SPECULATE IN THE ABSENCE OF A RESPONSE. IF THERE IS NO RESPONSE TO A QUESTION, SIMPLY MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ACTION.



1. “WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO LOOK AT?”

2. “WHAT WOULD ANOTHER LIKE TO LOOK AT?”

3. “WHAT WOULD OTHERS LIKE TO LOOK AT?”

4. “WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO LOOK AT IN YOURSELF?”



(a) Ask these questions in sequence. Then go back to the starting question.

(b) When no response appears, simply move to the next question.

(c) When no response appears to any of the questions, end the exercise.

This exercise may be run solo, or with the help of a guide.

Only looking is required. No talking is necessary.

.
 
Last edited:

Vinaire

Sponsor
PM me if you need a guide and you don't have one.

Skype works worldwide.

I shall help you become a guide too.

.
 
Last edited:

Vinaire

Sponsor
KHTK versus Scientology

A sort of a breakthrough has been made with KHTK 1D. KHTK provides natural unburdening of the mind as compared to “shoveling of the mind” as in Scientology.

KHTK is very error-tolerant because it follows the natural direction that the mind prefers to take. Hence no special training is required other than what is noted in KHTK essays.

Some of the Scientology procedures may be used beneficially with KHTK approach after proper modification and testing. This is going to be a continuing KHTK project. KHTK essays may be accessed on VINAIRE’S BLOG. See the link in my signature.

Scientology is basically a shot gun. KHTK takes the danger out of it.

If special focus on some unwanted condition is required than go to an IDENICS practitioner. I wish IDENICS proceures were freely available. One would still be able to make a living as an Idenics practitioner.

.
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
Why do people want others to listen to their woes? Do they really? Or, they are just looking for a safe space and a bit of encouragement?

Psychoanalysis was all about talking. Grade 0 auditing is not only about listening to a person talk, but also about encouraging the person to talk. Auditing in general is about encouraging a person to provide their most intimate thoughts. Is this necessary?

I think that in both cases the purpose has been to get a person's thoughts in order to analyze them and determine the person's state of mind. Auditing took it farther than psychoanalysis. But does this help the person?

I think that it is a very flunky idea to think that one can analyze another person's case for him. This kind of an idea makes a person more and more dependent on another instead of being helped. This is not good. This is very flunky.

What really helps in a friendship? It is not really analyzing for the person. It is not even listening to the person, for that is just what appears to be. Actually, a friend simply provides a safe space in which a person can look. It is looking that brings about the relief.

The problem is not with one's inability to analyze one's situation. It may appear to be so, but that is not usually the case. The problem is one's inability to look by oneself. What helps one is a bit of guidance and encouragement.

You don't have to give out your intimate details. You don't have to compromise your privacy. You have to tell your friend very little and he can still guide you with that skimpy information by encouraging you to look.

It is looking, and not talking and giving away your intimate details, that brings about relief.

The idea of "confront" in Scientology is for the birds.


PS: It is true that some people insist on talking. Such persons are not looking. So, they have to be weaned off talking by getting them to study and unddrstand KHTK 1B.

.
 
Last edited:

Vinaire

Sponsor
Here is another exercise you may like to check out KHTK style. Ref: KHTK 1D: LOOKING: PRACTICE


Exercise A-4

LOOK AT WHAT THE MIND BRINGS UP NATURALLY IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION. DO NOT EXPECT AN ANSWER. DO NOT SPECULATE WHEN THERE IS NO RESPONSE IN THE MIND. WHEN THERE ARE NO FURTHER RESPONSES, SIMPLY END THE EXERCISE.



1. “LOOK AT A MOMENT OF EXHAUTION. LOOK AT WHEN IT WAS.”

2. “LOOK AT ANOTHER MOMENT OF EXHAUTION. LOOK AT WHEN IT WAS.”



(a) Ask question 1 or 2 as appropriate.

(b) When there is a response continue with step (a).

(c) When there are many responses coming up, have the person look at them one by one, by simply saying, “continue.” You don’t have to keep repeating the question.

(d) When no response appears to the question, end the exercise.

This exercise may be run solo, or with the help of a guide.

Only looking is required. No talking is necessary.

.
 
Last edited:

uniquemand

Unbeliever
I think you have a total misunderstanding of auditing, Vinaire, if you think it's just about getting a person to talk.

Hubbard hits it very, very early in the tech vols with the "itsa" business.

You are trying to get the person to look (itsa) and tell you what he sees (report). Then you acknowledge. The idea is to have the person continually itsa'ing. The report line is necessary because many people will keep things at a distance from themselves, rather than re-experiencing the situation with all it's emotion and force, etc., but when they report, they tend to engage the material. This is also the reason for repetition. The first rehearsal is exactly that: they are telling you something they have rehearsed to themself a million times, maybe told friends about a million times, all without inspecting the thing again. The theory is that it was never fully inspected, because there was too much going on, they were overwhelmed, at the time (or too little going on [plus/minus randomity]), and so the thing was never let go of, because there is unfinished business there. So they look again. They report again. This is continued until change ceases, and "end phenomena" are present.

It's not "just getting them to talk": far from it.
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
I think you have a total misunderstanding of auditing, Vinaire, if you think it's just about getting a person to talk.

Hubbard hits it very, very early in the tech vols with the "itsa" business.

You are trying to get the person to look (itsa) and tell you what he sees (report). Then you acknowledge. The idea is to have the person continually itsa'ing. The report line is necessary because many people will keep things at a distance from themselves, rather than re-experiencing the situation with all it's emotion and force, etc., but when they report, they tend to engage the material. This is also the reason for repetition. The first rehearsal is exactly that: they are telling you something they have rehearsed to themself a million times, maybe told friends about a million times, all without inspecting the thing again. The theory is that it was never fully inspected, because there was too much going on, they were overwhelmed, at the time (or too little going on [plus/minus randomity]), and so the thing was never let go of, because there is unfinished business there. So they look again. They report again. This is continued until change ceases, and "end phenomena" are present.

It's not "just getting them to talk": far from it.


Well, what I have found is that the "report" aspect and "acknowleding" each bit is unnecessary in the KHTK approach, because the actual relief comes from looking. Just being with the person and encouraging the person to look is much more efficient way to go. This is what friends do.

Hubbard's approach was diving into the mind and digging deeply. KHTK approach is simply taking the layers off as they become available and not digging into the mind at all. There is a big difference.

Hubbard's approach puts one into tricky, stressful and dangerous situations that are not error-tolerant. KHTK avoids all those situations and is very error-tolerant.

Hubbard is forcing people to look according to his own computations. He is trying to get around the self-protective features of the mind. You may get some spectacular results this way, but this beefs up the resistance in the mind and also makes one dependent on the auditor. OT levels do not make one independent. They make one very dependent on an ego system of Hubbard's design.

KHTK is simply encouraging people to look by following the attention patterns of the way the mind wants to unfold or un-stack itself.

This "reporting" feature may be important in Hubbard's method, but it is not important in KHTK. There is no reason to keep pc folders. Each KHTK session, or friendly discussion, may start totally fresh and new from wherever a person's attention is at. The KHTK exercises may be done in any sequence and as many times as one wants.

The repetition is necessary only for digging into the mind. This is not done in KHTK. If a question is repeated in an exercise, it is simply to see if another response to that question is available. A response is not expected as in Scientology where one repeats the question until one gets the right response to make the needle F/N. In KHTK if there is no response available to a question, one simply drops the question, or one may simply discuss the question while encouraging the person to look if a person has his attention in that area. There is no boring or drilling in KHTK as it is in Scientology.

The basic KHTK principles are laid out in KHTK 1A, 1B and 1C. KHTK 1D shows how KHTK princles make the application of other therapies much safer. I am now reviewing subsequent KHTK essays.

I understand auditing. I simply do not want to continue with that eror-prone and self-defeating approach.

.
 
Last edited:

Vinaire

Sponsor
Overrun and upsets won’t be there if a session is conducted for client’s benefit, and not to satisfy some theory.

There is no Reactive Mind opposing you. It is simply a matter of looking and un-stacking the mind layer by layer.

It is reverse engineering of how the mind got stacked up in the first place.

.
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
Here is another exercise you may like to check out KHTK style. Ref: KHTK 1D: LOOKING: PRACTICE


Exercise A-5

LOOK AT WHAT THE MIND BRINGS UP NATURALLY IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION. DO NOT EXPECT AN ANSWER. DO NOT SPECULATE WHEN THERE IS NO RESPONSE IN THE MIND. WHEN THERE ARE NO FURTHER RESPONSES, SIMPLY END THE EXERCISE.



1. “LOOK AT AN EXPERIENCE. LOOK AT WHEN IT WAS.”

2. “LOOK AT ANOTHER EXPERIENCE. LOOK AT WHEN IT WAS.”



(a) Ask question 1 or 2 as appropriate.

(b) When there is a response continue with step (a).

(c) When there are many responses coming up, have the person look at them one by one, by simply saying, “continue.” You don’t have to keep repeating the question.

(d) When there are no further responses, simply check the question once again, and then if no response appears, end the exercise.

This exercise may be run solo, or with the help of a guide.

Only looking is required. No talking is necessary.

.
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
These exercises that are being presented here are based on Grade 0 processes of Scientology. They are highly experimental in nature. They are totally safe to experiment with as long as KHTK approach is used.

I am sure you can test and modify these exercises to greater efficiency as long as you stick to the basic KHTK principles.

.
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
"Spotting in TIME" seems to mean establishing the correct sequence of events either on the local canvas or in a much larger context.

"Spotting in TIME" doesn't mean coming up with some arbitrary set of numbers of years, months, days, etc. That is simply bullshit.

.
 
Top