What's new

Real v. Imaginary.

Moonchild

Patron with Honors
The results people gain from examining their lives are not illusory. They CAN be instigated by auditing, but quite clearly (TM), sometimes the opposite can happen. The old quote of "the unexamined life is not worth living" I agree with. While it can be nice to sail through life without errors, and without problems, this is typically not the case for most people. The purpose of processing/auditing is to help the person redress errors, come out of confusions, and cease being stuck in charge/games-conditions.

It is always the being who does this work. Others can help him to orient, so that he can look, and complete incomplete cycles of action, or so that he can see the origins of some decision he made, and decide to end that decision, and either make some new decision, now that he has time to reflect, or decide that he hadn't fully understood what was happening in the first place, so any decision made without full comprehension would have been likely erroneous (although a stopped clock is right two times a day, except in the military).

The illusion is that the "pcs gains" are attributable to the auditor or to the "founder" of the "tech". The pcs gains are always a result of the pc looking, or the pc building some skill. The auditor can help orient, and the idea of the C/S training is to provide a schedule/program of steps to take to get the person looking "at the right thing", which isn't really necessary, IMO, so long as the communication channel is open and the rapport is good. The person knows where their attention is, and what they need to look at. It can help to suggest things, when a person is repressed from looking in specific directions, but this also runs the danger of the pc relying on the auditor to shape his reality.

I've had surprising success asking "Was there something you thought I should ask you about but haven't yet?" when sessions are bogging.


Thank you for this excellent and lucid post.
 
A PC isn't required to believe anything. If it's not real to you, no big deal. But then, to erase engrams you've got to get down to basic on the chain. Well, now naturally that's going to be whole track very, very often. You want to erase engrams like a good little boy don't you? Hubbard even had an HCOB where he mentions PCs who "stubbornly refuse" to run past-life incidents. What was that about increasing self-determinism?
 
Hubbard even had an HCOB where he mentions PCs who "stubbornly refuse" to run past-life incidents. What was that about increasing self-determinism?

The pc is likely just protesting his own out "reality". It's easy enough to run. Just have the pc run the stuff as imaginary. The charged stuff reads & runs, the non-charged stuff is dross. Run out the charge & let the pc make-up his own mind about what he wants to believe. No problems with differing "realities", that's for the pc to sort out on his own.

No worries.


Mark A. Baker
 

Veda

Sponsor
A PC isn't required to believe anything. If it's not real to you, no big deal. But then, to erase engrams you've got to get down to basic on the chain. Well, now naturally that's going to be whole track very, very often. You want to erase engrams like a good little boy don't you? Hubbard even had an HCOB where he mentions PCs who "stubbornly refuse" to run past-life incidents. What was that about increasing self-determinism?

Ah, but you're describing Scientology honestly, without the misleading rationalization and PR-coating that Scientologists often resort to.

Per Scientology, "What's true for you" etc., quickly is modified by the e-meter as a detector of "charge," modified further by the e-meter as a truth-detector that "will tell you," which eventually becomes the Scientology Xenu Bridge (the "upper levels"). At the "upper levels," a person is told things, and told they must "read" (make the meter react) or it's potentially "deadly."

Public service announcement:

http://forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=77478&postcount=14

Wikileaks, OT levels - usually takes a while, and several times, to come up:

http://www.wikileaks.org/leak/scientology-ot-levels.pdf

And, to any Scientologists, I have used e-meters, and do think they have some very limited usefulness; however, e-meters can also be used to trick and mislead.

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=94279&postcount=25
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
But then, to erase engrams you've got to get down to basic on the chain.

Well, that's what Hubbard said. I don't think it is necessarily true. It does happen that you're dealing with something and discharging it, and then something earlier pops up and you can't really see any more of the first thing you were dealing with because the earlier stuff is in the way. Then you "erase" the incident with an earlier or two until you reach "EP".

However, later you can address that exact same incident with a different technique that goes deeper than good old R3R or R3RA and often get a whole bunch more charge out of this "erased" incident.

The election of "basic on the chain" is often arbitrary. Take FPRD, for instance. I'm not suggesting it as a great technique, but simply using it as an example as one runs down a chain going E/S to F/N and EP. Then goes further E/S! Like, huh?

Dianetics has too much theory getting in the way. I think Hubbard just invented most of it with very little personal observation of real pcs. He was a noted packrat, keeping boy scout journals and so forth. I don't recall ever seeing a pc folder of one of his pcs prior to having orgs, or alternatively of any of his pc folders turned over to an org. I know he has audited people, and C/S'd people and I'm not querying that, but pre-1950?

Paul
 

Veda

Sponsor
The "Dianetic Past Life Remedy" (1970s Dianetics) goes, "What attitudes would make one unwilling to go earlier than this life.

"You get the best reading item, check for interest and run the item R3R. You re-access, check for interest and R3R. Continue to reassess and add to the list until the list is exhausted.

""Repeat the steps listing (separately and in this order) for emotions, sensations and pains that 'would make one unwilling to go earlier than this life'.

"Somewhere along the line, the pc will go earlier than this life."

Sustained "lack of interest" usually results in a 'Green Form' or some such.

Someone else can dig up the 'NED' handling for this, if so inclined.
 

Terril park

Sponsor
Well, that's what Hubbard said. I don't think it is necessarily true. It does happen that you're dealing with something and discharging it, and then something earlier pops up and you can't really see any more of the first thing you were dealing with because the earlier stuff is in the way. Then you "erase" the incident with an earlier or two until you reach "EP".

However, later you can address that exact same incident with a different technique that goes deeper than good old R3R or R3RA and often get a whole bunch more charge out of this "erased" incident.

The election of "basic on the chain" is often arbitrary. Take FPRD, for instance. I'm not suggesting it as a great technique, but simply using it as an example as one runs down a chain going E/S to F/N and EP. Then goes further E/S! Like, huh?

Dianetics has too much theory getting in the way. I think Hubbard just invented most of it with very little personal observation of real pcs. He was a noted packrat, keeping boy scout journals and so forth. I don't recall ever seeing a pc folder of one of his pcs prior to having orgs, or alternatively of any of his pc folders turned over to an org. I know he has audited people, and C/S'd people and I'm not querying that, but pre-1950?

Paul

I loved FPRD. One F/Ns the O/W chain. End of cycle. On then asks if there was an evil purpose behind that chain. New cycle even if related.

Whats the problem?
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
I loved FPRD. One F/Ns the O/W chain. End of cycle. On then asks if there was an evil purpose behind that chain. New cycle even if related.

Whats the problem?

The EP of an overt chain in "normal" auditing is different to the EP in FPRD. In FPRD it is something like "persistent F/N and spectacular release". In normal auditing it is something like F/N VGIs, all the justifications and misses off. Flying a rud should be even less for an EP.

I was commenting with regard to Dianetics that an "erased" incident or chain isn't.

Paul
 
Top