Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology
From: pilot@hiddenplace.com (The Pilot)
Subject: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 38 - EARLY OCT 98 PILOT POSTS TO ACT
Date: 9 Oct 1998  14:00:12


POST38.txt 

SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 38 - EARLY OCT 98 PILOT POSTS TO ACT

posts to ARS+ACT are in Archive 37

==========================================

Contents:

 subj : Super Scio Tech - Exteriorization
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Production And Expansion
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Ralph's OT 8
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Oleg On Postulating
 subj : Super Scio Tech - What Turns It On Is The Correct Target
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Running Ridges
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Homer On Asthetics
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering CBW's Tech Poll
 subj : Super Scio Tech - The Mindwalker Computer Meter Demo
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Chakras, Locationals, Lisa, Etc (attn Lightning)
 subj : Super Scio Tech - On Emotion (Attn Christine)


==========================================

subj : Super Scio Tech - Exteriorization


EXTERIORIZATION

On 14 Sep 98, azeric <azeric@pop.flash.net> wrote on subject
"An easy gradient to exteriorizing."


> azeric wrote:
> > 
> > I thought up a process that may help to exteriorize a being.
> > I was trying to come up with an easy gradient to exteriorizing and so I
> > thought I would pass this along.
> > I have read about parts of this process in the Pilot's book, but then I
> > added a part to make it easier for me.
> > 
> > I was doing mockups of my body-- with my eyes closed-- and then I
> > imagined having a viewpoint in one of the mockups. Then I imagined
> > myself pushing balls of energy at my 'real' body.
> > After repeating this several times( the pushing energy at my body )----
> > the idea/perception of having a viewpoint outside of my body started to
> > feel more real.
> 
> Just in Case it was not clear--- I was imagining pushing balls of energy
> from my viewpoint in my mocked up body into my real body.
 

This is good.  I'll work it into one of the later chapters.

Another good one is a black and white variation suggested to me
by the same person who had made an earlier suggestion on doing
black/white on a mocked up body.  This variation is to have black
energy flow out of the physical body into the mockup and white
energy flow from the mockup into the physical body.

For beginners, it is safest to run the first process of chapter 11
(drilling ext/int on a nearby mountain) before attempting anything
else on exteriorization because it lets them flatten the 
interiorization button which might otherwise require an ext/int
rundown.

Since looking at the body can sometimes cause a beginner to snap
into it, it is important to flatten interiorization first even
if the process seems a bit unreal.  We don't want the person to
have a bad first experience associated with the phenomena.


Thank You,

The Pilot


==========================================


 subj : Super Scio Tech - Production And Expansion


PRODUCTION AND EXPANSION


If you only produce for today, you are not mocking up the
future and so you will not expand.  But if you do nothing
in the present, then you will have nothing but dreams of
a future that never comes.

Any post, unit, or organization really has two products, an
immediate product and a long range one.

The immediate product is your direct production.

The long range one is your basis for expansion.

A technical division in a Scientology org, for example, would
have auditing as its short range product and training auditors
as its long range one.

The typical (non-Scientology) sales and marketing division
in the business world would have sales as its short term
product and marketing as its long range one.

Now let us say that you have a trucking firm.  The daily
shipping is the short term product.  The long range one is
expanding your routes, facilities, and equippment.

Or consider the American railroads in the nineteenth century.
You can easily divide them into 3 categories.  First there
were the ones that simply delivered a product but did not
try to expand.  Some of them on good routes did quite well
but they would always be gobbled up by some expanding giant.
Then there were the big schemes that concentrated on expansion
only without much attention to delivery.  These would end
up in chronic bankruptcy.  And finally there were the ones
who divided their resources between these two activities,
and there you have your Vanderbuilts and so forth.

The key is to mockup both present and future.

And so you need to maintain two goals and products, one that
is where you are and another that is aimed at where you
are going.

It is not just that an organization has a planning staff
for long range targets, each and every area has this twofold
aspect.  Simply making dinner requires both future oriented
actions (shopping) as well as the actual cooking, and if
you want your task to be easier you shop for the week instead
of for today only.

You can always drive an immediate stat up by sacrificing
the future.  You can do it once in an emergency, but never 
on a regular basis.  That's cutting your own throat.

So operate with an eye towards the future.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - Ralph's OT 8


RALPH'S OT 8

Recently Ralph has been expanding and improving the freezone OT 8
that has been out on the net for awhile.

------

For those who are confused about the various OT 8s, there are 4
of them out on the net.

a) the bogus one about Jesus being a pederast

b) Adrian's description of the modern CofS OT 8 which is basically
the original OT 1 (which is also on the net) that consists of
mapping out your recent lifetimes.

c) The "why thetans mockup" bulletin of 1969 which I believe is
by LRH and may indicate his intentions for the original OT 8
(old numbering, probably OT 13 in new numbers) but which is not
actually a level, just some nice ideas in an HCOB.

d) The "identities" OT 8 which Ralph has undertaken to improve.
Note that I think that this one is really a freezone development.
It doesn't quite have Ron's style, but it looks like a reasonable
rundown.  It has many bright ideas, but it also has weaknesses 
and there is much room for improvement so I'm glad that Ralph has 
taken it on.

I have some suggestions and criticisms that might help.  

The original rundown struck me as being almost right but needing 
a lot of work to get it into shape, and I've been too lazy to
roll up my sleeves and dive into it.

First and foremost, it needs more R-factor and statement of
targets.

The original sprawls around between handling valences (in the
sence of being in one's Mother's valence), identities (in the
sense of "roles" as used by Carol), fragmentation, entities,
8th dynamic stuff, and so on.  Reorganizing it into smaller
sections with more specific targets would be a definite 
improvement.  The current version is asking for anyone but
a pro to get all tangled up and confused.

Note that it references the "Time track of theta tapes",
which are a good reference for this sort of thing.  But that
title only was put on them when the modern cassettes came
out (one of the reasons that this could not have been written
by Ron), these are actually the History of Man lectures
from the middle of the HCL (Hubbard College Lecture) series.
They were transcribed recently by Freezone Bible.  But they
are only a small piece of a larger lecture series.  See
the other lectures in New R&D volumes 9 and 10, especially
"How to audit a theta line".

I'd better quote Ralph's posts at this point so that people
will know what I'm talking about.  I'll quote them in
their entirity and then put my comments at the end.

---------------


> From: ralph@hilton.org (Ralph Hilton)
> Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology
> Subject: OT8
> Date: 21 Sep 1998 11:28:48 -0400
> Message-ID: <36146e45.156680617@mgate.telekabel.at>

(following is the complete text of the post - I have omitted
the customary ">"s because it gets annoying when these
go on for pages of material)

I've been working on an expansion of the OT8 that has been earlier posted.

Here's the Alpha version:

OPERATING THETAN SECTION VIII

Study:

1. Time Track of Theta tapes.
2. The Manual of Straightwire in Tech Volume One. 
3. HCOB 18 November 1959 "1st Melbourne ACC Material".
4. HCOB 19 December 1980 "Rehab Tech".

Auditing:

1. On each reading terminal from the following run the processes:

Spot a difference between yourself and _____ .
Spot a similarity between yourself and _____ .

Alternate repetitive to the EP of universe separation.
 
Spot the situation or problem each terminal has solved for you. If reading then
get the prior confusion to the first time ever and spot the first instant of the
first prior confusion. 

A. A person or object in this L/T or on the backtrack whom you have identified
as or who represented the 8th Dynamic to you.

B. A person who looked/looks like you.

C. A person who looked/looks dissimilar to you.

D. A person who is how you wanted/want to be.

E. A person who is how you don't/didn't want to be. 

F. A person who you'd never want to be.

G. A person who you want to be. 

H. A person who you identify as self (me).

I. A being who is close in true identity to you.

J. A being who has the same experiences as you.

K. A being who solves things as you have done.

L. A being you are or have been junior or subordinate to as a thetan or in life.

M. A being you are or have been senior to as a thetan or in life.

O. A person who postulates as you do.

P. A person whom you postulate for.

Q. A person who may have postulated for you. 

2. Review identities encountered in auditing or out of session.

For each identity check on the meter if it is actually your own identity - just
check "Is it true?" "false?". If it doesn't resolve easily then prepcheck the
identity.

For each identity that is actually your own run the identity handling steps in
step 4, A to C below.

Run until any uncertainties about identities encountered in auditing or life are
resolved.

3. Rehab and clean up of past powerful identities.

For each identity found: 

A. Roughly date and locate the identity.

B. Put in rudiments "In the identity of ___" These are not run as "Was there an
ARC break?" but as "Is there an ARC break?"

C. Check "Concerning that identity are there any fixed connections to other
beings?"

Handle each connection found with rudiments if it just an old unhandled
connection with a being that isn't SP. If the being is SP then run the following
handling:

a. Ask Are you being monitored?

b. If the answer is no then go to step d.

c. Establish comm with the monitor and ask the same question: Are you being
monitored? Continue until you have the top of the monitor command chain.

d. Direct the monitor to notice and let go of any created particles that belong
to you with particular emphasis on particles of admiration or disdain. This
doesnt require force. The monitor cannot help but comply as ownership gets
as-ised. 

e. Notice and let go of any created particles that belong to the monitor with
particular emphasis on particles of admiration or disdain.

f. Get the monitor to notice and let go of any created particles that belong to
others with particular emphasis on particles of admiration or disdain.

g. Get the monitor to get others to notice and let go of any created particles
that belong to him with particular emphasis on particles of admiration or
disdain.

h. Get the monitor to run the above steps 4 - 7 on all beings that he is
currently suppressing or monitoring and have them then do the same, including
this step, with any that they are suppressing or monitoring.

i. Have the beings above release and exchange misowned particles with each other
and oneself.

j. Extend your time and space to encompass all the universes involved in the
above chain throughout times and spaces.

k. Intend these beings to notice who they are. Ask What are you?, Who are
you? with any that dont cognite easily.

l. Direct them to pervade the Pre-OTs understanding of the technology of
auditing.

m. Direct these beings to resolve any interpersonal conflicts they have using
this tech. It is probably easier at first to direct their attention through
rudiments, key grades processes then engrams, implants, NOTs and as-ising
misownership in creations.

C. Check "As ______ (identity) is there a keyed out OT state? If so then rehab
with standard rehab tech per HCOB 19 December 1980.

The identities to handle with the above steps can be found using various
questions. The following is just an initial starting point - more questions can
be added:

A. One's identity in Incident 2
B. One's identity in Incident 1.
C. Has Scientology existed before? Get one's identity at that time.
D. Have similar practices to Scientology existed before? Get one's identity at
that time.
E. Have I been involved in earlier awareness expansion? Get one's identity at
that time.
F. Have I been involved in Magic? Get one's identity at that time.
G. Any other enhancement practices? Get one's identity at that time.
H. Lifetimes when one was particularly successful.
I. Identities where one was OT.
J. Identities where one was exterior to games.

4. Run the following processes using alternate repetitive straightwire.
 
A. Spot a truth in self.
Spot a truth in others.

B. Have another spot a truth in you.
Have another spot a truth in him/herself.

C. Spot a reality you have solved with a lie.
Spot a reality you have not solved with a lie.

D. Spot a reality you have substituted for a truth.
Spot a reality you have substituted for a lie.

E. Spot a reality another has substituted for a truth.
Spot a reality another has substituted for a lie.

F. Spot a reality you postulated for another.
What did it solve for you?
What did it solve for him/her?

G. Spot a reality another has postulated for you.
What did it solve for him/her?
What did it solve for you?

H. Have another spot a reality another has postulated in him/herself.
What did it solve for him/her?
What did it solve for you?

I. Locate a reality you found safe.
Spot the truth about it (to a blow, SBD or larger, F/N).

J. Locate a reality another found safe.
Spot the truth about it (to a blow, SBD or larger, F/N).

K. Locate a reality another found safe for you.
Spot the truth about it (to a blow, SBD or larger, F/N).
Have the other person spot the truth about it (to a blow, SBD or larger, F/N).

L. Locate a reality you have found safe for another.
Spot the truth about it (to a blow, SBD or larger, F/N).
Have the other person spot the truth about it (to a blow, SBD or larger, F/N).

M. Spot a reality you can create for yourself.
Postulate a truth for it.

N. Spot a reality you can create for another.
Postulate a truth for it.

O. Spot a reality you can have another create for you.
Postulate a truth for it.
Note: Steps P. - S. are brackets. Each set should blow down on the let go step.
End on a win, cog or big change and then do the next step.

P. Create a future for someone.
Place them in it.
Postulate some truth about it.
Now let go of it.

Q. Create a future for yourself.
Place yourself in it.
Place another in it.
Postulate some truth about it.
Now let go of it.

R. Recall a truth you agreed didn't happen.
Spot the exact truth in it.
Spot any lie in it.
Now let go of it.

S. Spot present time moving forward.
Notice thetans agreeing with it.
Spot any agreements you have with it.
Now let go of it.
Spot a different present time.
Notice thetans agreeing with it.
Spot any agreements you have with it.
Now let go of it.
Spot a different present time.
Notice thetans agreeing with it.
Spot any agreements you have with it.
Now let go of it.

5. Run the following processes to F/N cog VGI's.

A. Spot each portion of your theta that was abandoned.

B. Spot each portion of your theta that you asserted was not yours.

C. Spot each portion of theta that you asserted was yours that wasn't.

D. Spot your PT creations in this MEST universe.

E. Spot PT creations that were not yours in this MEST universe.

F. Spot any old creations that are hung up.
Spot the truth about these to a blow.

G. Spot yourself as a source for various things in this and other universes to
full certainty.

H. Spot another 8th Dynamic creation as independent from yourself.
Spot where it is.

I. Spot points where you have experienced joy or ecstacy in creating in this
lifetime and on the backtrack.

J. Spot  other beings you feel high ARC or love for.
Spot the truth in these beings (each reading terminal to an F/N).

K. Spot some theta you have created.

L. Create some theta. Uncreate it (to a read as it blows off however small it
is).

Redo steps A. to L. above until the TA floats or a true unkillable F/N appears
and you have had a revelation regarding truth or 8th Dynamic creation.

--

Ralph Hilton
http://Ralph.Hilton.org

(end of 1st post)

--------------------

(following this Ralph posted the following warning)


> From: ralph@hilton.org (Ralph Hilton)
> Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology
> Subject: OT8 expanded - URGENT
> Date: 22 Sep 1998 18:30:32 -0400
> Message-ID: <3608208a.24528125@mgate.telekabel.at>
 
Regarding the expanded OT8 I posted.

Please DO NOT RUN BEYOND STEP ONE. I have run step 1 with no problems and have
got others throught it.

The processes I posted were an alpha version.

I ran the processes for a while and posted for testing and it seemed ok.

Step 2 is possibly ok. Step 3 is over-restimulative.

I've been on step 3 the last few days and tonight I hit very heavy somatics.

I have an idea on how to handle but its very heavy.

My body is going through a lot of pain.

I've done many thousands of hours of solo and for this level to kick so hard is
significant.

Hang on for a bit. I'll try and sort it out.

--

Ralph Hilton
http://Ralph.Hilton.org

(end of 2nd post)


-------------------

(then he resolved the trouble with this next post)

> From: ralph@hilton.org (Ralph Hilton)
> Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology
> Subject: OT8 addition
> Date: 24 Sep 1998 12:51:47 -0400
> Message-ID: <36116ff4.100273245@mgate.telekabel.at>

The following are 3 steps I have added to the expanded OT8 section three
"identity handling" (I have changed the letters to numbers as it is more
readable:


5. Run alternate repetitive to F/N, expansion of space:

a. Spot 3 spots in the space and time of the identity.
b. Spot 3 spots in present time.

6. Run Power Processes 4 to 6 in the space and duration of the past 
identity. One shifts a bit into that time and space to run the processes. 
The purpose of this is to regain aspects of ones own theta stuck in 
that past time and space.

POWER PROCESS 4     

(a)  Tell me a source.     
(b)  Tell me about it.
(c)  Tell me a no source.     
(d)  Tell me about it.

This is run to an EP of recogition of sources with F/N and a 
brightening of the space. The EP isn't reached on the awareness 
that one is source. The EP is an ability to recognize sources.

POWER PROCESS 5     

(a)  What is?
(b)  What isn't?

This is run to F/N and a shift into present time.

POWER PROCESS 6

(a)  Tell me an existing condition.      
(b)  Tell me how you've handled it.

This is run to a reviv of the incident that the theta is stuck 
in followed by a stable shift into awareness of present time.

7. After step 6 there will probably be quite a bit of dissociated 
theta composed of aspects of self plus NOTs case that has now become 
available. BTs would be handled with standard NOTs. Dissociated theta 
may have out ruds, out-int or valences which needs handling but 
generally will re-intregrate of spotting the point of separation. 
One may find that some of the theta/BTs comes into P.T. sometime 
after running step 6 so it is best to put a little attention out for
this for a few hours after session and just handle off the meter 
as it appears.

_________

The full amended version is now on http://ralph.hilton.org/ot8r.htm

--

Ralph Hilton
http://Ralph.Hilton.org

(end of 3rd post)

-------------------------------------------

COMMENTARY AND SUGGESTIONS


My first problem is with section 1.  It uses the 1st Melborne ACC
valence splitter technique and aims it at any reading terminal.

You can probably get away with this, but the questions are
general enough to pick up reading terminals for which valence
handling is not the ideal action.  For example, you might get
people he is ARC broken with or has heavy O/W on.  It still
might run but it is not ideal.

You can run this way using a more general repetative question
because the pc will pick up on terminals that have the appropriate
charge to be handled.  Or you can be more specific in your
selection of terminals so that you get ones which will run
well on this process.

A nice general version, and a good "softening up" action for
this area would be to go to a crowded place and spot similarities
and differences between you and other people.

A good subjective version would be to spot similarities and
differences between yourself and your parents in this and
earlier lifetimes.  If you leave the pc loose to hunt around
on various parents it will work whereas running it on "Mother"
might not flatten properly.  And doing it this way avoids
the need for doing a good assessment and getting a reading
terminal.

This could be done on many classes of terminals (running each
with a general repetative process) such as employers etc.

For picking up a specific terminal that really flattens
properly, you might be better off asking specifically for
a collapsed valence using an opening question such as
"Whose characteristics might you be copying?".  Then take
any reading answers and run them on the process.

----

Ralph's monitor process is really good.  Spotting who is
monitoring the monitor is very smart and might handle
the endless proliferation of these.  I had "watchers"
coming up endlessly for weeks on solo nots.  And I ran
into more during my own research later.  Eventually I
turned this stuff off by going after the source with 
the "Control Entity" handling that is in chapter 6 of 
Super Scio.  But Ralph's approach is quicker and
easier.  In any case, the Solo Not's handling on these
kind of things is totally inadequate because the copies
just keep showing up endlessly.

However this is really an OT 7 extension.  Going back
to my earlier remark on R-factors and targets, it would
be best to have a clearly labled advanced entity handling
section which has this and other techniques specifically
aimed at entities.

This monitor business does seem appropriate for the
level because there seems to be something on it concerning
watching others and watching split theta lines, but that
gets us into fragmentation which I'll talk about next.


-----

Everything I ran that was connected to fragmentation
eventually turned on heavy somatics until I found the
"Point to the being you divided from" process.

I came up with all sorts of corrections, elaborate
handlings, platens, processes, and things and I
would turn the somatics off and be able to go on
for awhile and then I'd turn on somatics again.

With the above command, you can fool around with
fragments in the sloppiest manner and still get
away with it comfortably.  Without it you can't let
a pin drop or else you'll get sick.

So please add that one in as a safety net.  Any
time you start having difficulty or turn on somatics 
while handling a fragment, have it "point to the
being you divided from".

-----

The last few sections again need more R-factors and
could be further subdivided and possibly also expanded
so as to handle the various targets completely.

-----

Hope this helps,

The Pilot


==========================================


 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Oleg On Postulating


ANSWERING OLEG ON POSTULATING

On 15 Sep 98, "Dopertchouk, Oleg" <olegd@ea.com> replied to my earlier
post "Super Scio Tech - LOOKING AT THE GPM RESEARCH AGAIN"


> > Next, it is almost the admin scale coming into play.
> > He postulates this goal and it doesn't manifest
> > immediately.  So he looks around and says "what
> > can I mock up to achieve this".
> 
> Just one question:
> Why doesn't it manifest immediately?
> 
> If there's no counter postulate somewhere I don't really see why should
> there be any problem with achieving the goal immediately. Any time lag would
> indicate some vias/alter-is going on.If there *are* counterpostulates then
> how that is different from a GPM? IMHO any goal that is not achieved
> immediately is a problem of sorts (as in postulate+counter-postulate). Just
> my $0.02Cdn.
> 
> Thanks for a great posting!
> 
> Cheers,
> Oleg


As I've said elsewhere, I think that all GPM phenomena is late on
the track.  It is a solution to the fact that the being is already
failing to make his postulates stick or else why wouldn't he simply
postulate what he wants without getting into all of this mess.

So it is not the reason that his postulates fail, it is a consequence
of the fact that they are already failing.

I would say that the being himself drops below zero with the
collapse of home universe and that's about 7 major universes before
this one.  GPM phenomena does run anywhere near that early.
Even the clearing course implant at 4 quadrillion is recent
track by comparison.


Affinity,

The Pilot


==========================================


 subj : Super Scio Tech - What Turns It On Is The Correct Target


WHAT TURNS IT ON IS THE CORRECT TARGET


Recently Ralph developed and posted a very nice expanded version 
of the OT 8 that has been up on the net, and I'll talk about
that in another post.

Then he posted a warning that he had had trouble with one of
the steps and turned on some strong somatics.

Then Heidrun responded by suggesting that his somatics were
coming from smoking and that he should handle that.

Then Ralph fixed the problem in the rundown and posted a
correction which handled the trouble.

Since Heidrun is often spot on, it shocked me to see her
make such a flagrant mistake.

She has probably already figured this out, but if she can
slip up on this one, how many other people are going to miss
it too?

So I thought that I'd better expound a bit on the subject.

----------------------

IF YOU ARE PROCESSING SOMETHING AND SOMETHING TURNS ON, YOU
DO NOT LOOK FOR ANOTHER SOURCE.

Ron had an early example where a PC turned on a fever while
running through an engram back in the days of the first
Dianetic Foundation.  A doctor wanted to stop processing the
PC and treat the fever and Ron insisted that the incident
be flattened first after which the fever was found to be gone.

From this, Ron formulated the fundamental rules -

THE WAY OUT IS THE WAY THROUGH

and

WHAT TURNS IT ON WILL TURN IT OFF.


Now of course there are exceptions to these rules.  As Homer
is quick to point out, if you stick your head up your ass,
you do not handle it by trying to push it the rest of the
way through.

In practice, we do not continue to overrun the PC in a
misguided effort to turn off the overrun phenomena.

So sometimes you do have to change the action you are doing,
especially if you are researching a rundown that might still
have some bugs in it.

But you never change targets and go hunting for some other
source if you have turned something on with a process.
If it turned on, then the source is always the area you are
working on.  Maybe you pull your head out of your ass instead
of pushing it in deeper, but you certainly don't choose
that moment to worry about whether or not your car needs oil.

The only exception would be a really random event that had
nothing to do with the process being run, such as the
ceiling collapsing on the PC.  And even then I'd wonder
about his pulling it in at exactly that moment.

Usually you just flatten the process or you do a corrective
action.  You can even get away with going at the same
target from a slightly different angle (as we see Ron doing
in early demo tapes on mockup processing), but you never
shift targets while something is happening.

If something turns on, you are sitting right on top of the 
source of it, so don't go chasing after something else.


Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - Running Ridges


RUNNING RIDGES


I came up with a simpler way of describing how to handle a
ridge or a stuck flow and found a fanstastic process as a
result.

First, the simplified description.

If you can't push or pound something out of the way, you next
choice is often to try pushing it back and forth until it
comes loose.  In processing we do this by alternating on
two sides of something.  For example, alternating getting the 
idea of being rich and of being poor or making more and less
of something alternately.

This is one of the basic concepts of 1950s processing, but
I don't think that it was every really stated in a clear 
and simple manner.  One of the best descriptions is in the
Certainty Processing chapter of COFHA, and another is the
tape where Ron discusses rising scale processing in the PDC
lectures, and yet he never quite lays this out in its basic,
most general form.  I would say that I learned this idea by 
osmosis when I was studying the tech rather than having
a simple clear reference.

Even the self clearing book doesn't lay this one out in such
a simple manner (I will have to work the above paragraph
into it somewhere).

Once I had the simple statement, I realized that there are
many more applications of this.

The Mest universe could be looked upon as a ridge which has
gone solid.  We have the old "make it more solid" command
(especially in vogue in the late 1950s).  That one could
be thought of as having the pc do consciously what he is
doing on automatic, because he seems to be keeping everything
solid compulsively.

So I applied the above paragraph to it and came up with
the following -

Pick an object in the room.  Alternately:

a) Make it more solid
b) Make it less solid

Run it a few times on one object and then pick another object
and repeat.

This runs really well and gives some really interesting
feelings.

Next I did this with mocking up a picture and alternately
making it more and less solid.  Again facinating.

Then I used it as a variation on Then and Now solids (16th
ACC).  That process has you alternately mockup a picture
and use a "picture" off the track (for clears and people
without a compulsive time track, just remember something 
visually).  In Ron's version, you just make the picture
more solid and in this new variation you alternate making
it more and less solid a few times.  I've run the original
version before and its kind of nice, but the enhancment
makes it really spectacular and for me it turned on all
sorts of perception changes.

Then came the really big surprise.

I decided that it would be neat to use this on exterior
perceptions.

I began by spotting a few objects that I liked outside.
You could use anything that works for you to turn on
a vague (possibly half right) exterior perception.
Once I had a bit of a perception (in my usual half
assed uncertain manner), I selected an object to
alternately make more and less solid.

I picked a car and made it more solid.  That was nice
and easy.  I've run that before.

Then I made it less solid and turned on an incredible
grief charge.  I almost started crying and had no
idea why.  So I kept running the process.  And after
a little while the grief flattened and I realized
that it had been restimulating the loss of home universe.

And I suddenly saw this universe (really the whole chain
of universes subsequent to home universe) as a substitute
for home universe once it was gone.

Home universe was really a collection of individual home
universes interconnected.  Think of a suburb where everybody
has their own house and they do with it what they want
but they also visit each other and have some public
buildings too.  And then the town burns down and we
all have to move in together in a dormatory, getting
in each others way and so forth.

Once home universe had collapsed, we started grabbing
these substitute universes and hanging on for dear life, 
making them more solid and so forth because it was all we 
had left.

It was interesting that this did not get stirred up by
doing the first process above.  But if one is looking
at the object with one's eyes, it still looks solid to
the eye even though one is making it less solid mentally.
But looking with an exterior view, the eyes aren't keeping
it there, so you see it fade and that is wild.

Note that when you run this, you make it less solid
rather than simply vanishing it.  You should keep it
there faintly.

Also, I assume that you have to alternate this with
making it more solid, that is what restores your havingness
and gets you through it.  And I think that you will
find that you can get it a lot more solid by alternating
this way with makeing it less solid than you ever could
by simply drilling make it more solid repetatively.

It is also interesting that only the exterior perception
version turned this on and not the mockups or recalls.
Its the first time I've seen radically different behavior
in processing an exterior view than with doing the same
thing on a mockup.

That was strange enough to be worth a further experiment.

And an experiment was possible since I still get a little 
twing of loss the first time I make a particular object 
(spotted exterior) less solid.  In other words, the heavy 
grief charge flattened but there is still a little something 
there.

So I used the process where you spot an object (exterior)
and then make a copy along side of it (this is a 3rd ACC
process and I put it in one of the later chapters of self 
clearing, it is a nice drill).

I experimented a bit and found that making the original
less solid would give the slight feeling of loss but
makeing the copy less solid would not.  And it doesn't
matter which one you make less solid first, it is always
the original which has the loss feeling even if you start
by making the copy less solid.  

I even tried drilling make it less solid on a large array 
of copies before making the actual one less solid and
it still gave that little feeling of loss. 

I would be very interested in knowing whether or not
other people get this same loss reaction on this
process.  I suspect that some people will get other emotions
such as anger or fear on this one.

I would also say that this produced some of the fastest
perception changes of any process that I've used.


Affinity,

The Pilot


==========================================


 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Homer On Asthetics


ANSWERING HOMER ON ASTHETICS

On 16 Sep 98, Homer Wilson Smith <homer@lightlink.com> responded to
my earlier post on "Super Scio Tech - On Ethics And Asthetics (Attn Homer)"

> The Pilot (pilot@hiddenplace.com) wrote:
> 
> > So nowardays I always put Ethics as 9th and Asthetics as 10th.
> 
> Adore claims there is a 'Wall of Fire' on the Asthetics dynamic.
> 
>      Homer


If you mean more OT 3 & Nots, I don't think so.

But if you mean that asthetics is one of the hottest and most
heavily charged topics, I agree.

Probably the heaviest invalidations are having ones asthetic
creations invalidated.

Back in my teens and twenties, trying to write stories or
compose music was like touching a live wire.  I could do it
but there was an agony associated with doing so.  This was
even true after going keyed out OT in 68.

But gradually the charge cooled down.  Grades helped.  Running
implant platens helped.  Even doing Nots helped.  It seemed
like an accumulation of gains rather than a specific handling.

So I can't point to a specific action as the cure.  But I
don't turn on that charge anymore.

In fact I will demonstrate how comfortable I feel on this
by boring everybody with a poem -


ABOUT HORSES WHO FIGHT FOR THE WRONG SIDE

What is their cause?
What is their purpose?
Only to be fed.
And to feel a gentle hand,
While dying.


Best,

The Pilot


==========================================
 

 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering CBW's Tech Poll


ANSWERING CBW'S TECH POLL

>Forwarded message:
>Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:15:19 -0700 (PDT)
>From: "C. B. Willis" <cbwillis>
>Subject: Posted Tech poll
>Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology
>
>
>[cbw:]
>: My wild guess is that, of the tech posted on the net that people do
>: sincerely try out and run, they assess maybe 1-5% of it as excellent and
>: worthy of adding to their repertoires to run on self, co-processors,
>: clients or students. I actually think it's closer to 1%.  That assessment
>: is based on their experience of the process, and if they are
>: professionals, then add their understanding of CASE and elegant resolution
>: of case, their understanding of the workings of spirit, their intuitive
>: estimation of how this process will run on others. 
>
>I'd like to take a poll of clear-l/ACT readers: 
>
>What percentage of tech posted from the archives, posted to clear-l/ACT,
>posted to web sites, posted to private clearing lists
>have you run personally, assessed as excellent, 
>AND/OR have added to your actual working repertoire?  
>
>Survey the situation, give your intuitive assessments,
>and add coments if you like.
>
>- CBW


What you are missing is the benifit to be gained from studying
other's tech.  This is extremely important and makes for a broader
viewpoint and ability to think.

Individual practitioners will have their favorite tools, and many
are working in different frames of reference where much work would
be needed to blend in something else.

But the understanding gained is invaluable.

I find this true of reading Carol's posts, for example.  She brings
a fresh, non-Scientological view to the table that I find quite
important even though I don't use much of her techniques directly.

More than anything else, we are learning to think and see
things from a broader perspective, and that is essential for
tech finders.


Affinity,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - The Mindwalker Computer Meter Demo


THE MINDWALKER COMPUTER METER DEMO


On 23 Sep 1998 02:23:48 -0400, in alt.clearing.technology nic@mindwalker.co.uk
(Nic Ford) wrote:

>Press release (or should it be  net release?)
>
>My website now contains details and a downloadable file for the new meter
>computer interface.
>
>Regards,        Nic Ford
>
>Nic Ford
>The Computer Film Company
>

They left out the URL so Ralph Hilton got it from them and posted
it.

> The URL is http://www.mindwalker.co.uk/compinterface.htm


I tried out the demo and it is a good beginning.

If the bar is meant to show TA position, then the numbering is
wrong, it did not match what was displaying on the dial.

Does the dual dial configuration represent two inputs or does it 
allow one to see the needle at 2 different sensitivities 
simulaneously (which would be a nice feature).

A help selection on the menu would be nice.  I really didn't
understand all the controls.

A configuration option for optionally using sliding scale sensitivity
adjustments (quantum style) would be nice.  Same for cushioned
vs light meter actions.

Changing the sensitivity didn't seem to affect the replay.
One of the values of replaying a read would be to see it at
a different sensitivity.

Is it responsive enough to accurately show a wildly slashing
R/S or the kick and curl of a dramtic long RR?  You can probably
hack your replay data file to test and demostrate the extremes
without needing to find preclears who can react appropriately.

Also, how sensitive is it to CPU performance?

I tested on a 486/100 and booted under 1) DOS, 2) OS/2, and
3) Win95.  It seemed fine under either DOS or OS/2 but I
thought that the display hesitated a few times under Win95
which might be because a 486 is a bit slow for handling the
excessive Win95 overhead (on DOS code Win95 runs about 5 times
slower than DOS and 4 times slower than OS/2).

As a default you should assume that the mouse is on COM 1 and the
modem is on COM2.  The only way I could get mine to work was to 
overtype the CFG file before starting the program.  It was even
worse in a DOS session under OS/2 where not only the mouse but
also the keyboard stops working when you map the modem to COM 1
(OS/2 is a bit more sensitive to device configuration, luckily
you can just kill the Dos session and restart it without rebooting).

Systems that don't have a mouse on COM 1 are almost non-existant
in the US.  Only microchannel uses non-standard mouse configurations
and even IBM has gone over to normal clone style architecture
on their newer PCs.

I think that this product is very much needed.

I hope that you can get the price down with volume.


Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - Chakras, Locationals, Lisa, Etc (attn Lightning)


CHAKRAS, LOCATIONALS, LISA, ETC. (Attn Lightning, JimC etc.)

On 2 Oct 98, Lightnin80@aol.com responded to JimC on 
subject "Lisa McPherson".  

He was continuing a discussion about the possibility that 
her original problem (that got her put on the introspection 
rundown) was related to the chakras.  

I would say that it is the other way around, namely that one's
body or energy systems or anything else gets screwed up as a
result of one's own postulates, in other words one audits the
PC at cause over these systems rather than at effect.

I think that one need look no further than a massive ARC break
with Flag and what she percieved of as Scientology to find out 
why she began spinning.  The closest I ever came to a psychotic
spin was when I was on staff and somebody told me that I was in
enemy.

> In a message dated 98-10-02 08:45:03 EDT, jimc@sonic.net writes:
> 
> > > Any suggestions as to the handle ?
>  
> > Hi Lightnin,
>  
> > I would use locational assists at first.
> > Then OT-TR0
> > Then, objectives and TR-0

Yes, good.  I would say locationals and similar assists and also 
maintain 2 way communication.  Then do things like TRs and an 
objectives co-audit as a first action after coming out of the spin.

 
> Hi Jim 
> 
> Interesting call, I recently had what is called a
> Chakra tuning, it had a much more effective result
> than the many locationals I've had and was faster
> and a most pleasant experience than touch assists.

Interesting.  I would say that it is both inappropriate and
out-gradient on somebody who is spinning.  But a touch assist
is not the right action for that either.  You need to use the
correct tools for the job in question, don't use a drill when
a saw is needed.

But I am interested in that comment about it being faster and more
pleasant than a touch assist.  In that case we are in the right
area and I'd like to hear more.

From another post of Lightnin's, he mentions that he used a
set of 7 tuning forks to get the vibrations to align the Chakras
with.  That puts it into the family of processes where one reaches
into the body and this might have real potential for bringing
about physical well being.

My question is what are the freequencies of the tuning forks
used.  

> > I'm not a CS.
> > I think that the Pilot would be able to answer
> > this much better.
> > I know that he doesn't think much about OT-TR0
> > but for me it has worked wonders with body problems.

Don't let me invalidate anything that works for you.
I think that OT TR0 might leave the person too free to
get into trouble and prefer giving somebody a drill to
do such as spotting things with their eyes closed.
  
> Pilot has adressed Chakras before and admits to 
> understanding very little on the subject, and have as
> you did here suggest that it is a body problem and 
> a matter of energy etc etc taking the same tact as 
> LRH who if I read correctly had all the symptoms of
> premature Kundalini moving up only thru one channel.

This is possible, but I suspect that the energy system only
gets screwed up after ones postulates have set one up for
this.  In other words, first one's intentions decay, then
one's energy messes up, and finally this manifests as 
illness in the body.

 
> If one of LRH's last communications is really his about
> needing a body that would allow him to finish his work
> is actually his.....
> 
> (a whole nother subject as to the disintegration
> of that comm line)
> 
> I would suggest that a good read of what the effects 
> and symptoms premature Kundalini looks like and 
> what the effects are when force is used to move
> it thru the system.
> 
> LRH I believe in his early years messed about with
> Kundalini and jammed himself up good, his references
> too "up the pole" is to me a description of Kundalini
> as it rises up the spine and hits the Third Eye and then
> the Crown Chakra, brilliance is released as we all were
> witness to in his early writings, his study of the Vedas
> produced what is still my favorite book Fundamentals of
> Thought with its desciption of the cycle of action so simple
> yet so powerful, I mark it as a point that my life changed
> subtly in ways I'm still yet processing.

I doubt that he even knew of Kundalini in the the early
days.  Ron seems to show a spotty knowledge of metaphysical
writings.  Remember that the materials were much harder to
come by back in the 1930s and 40s.  I don't think that
Crowley had much knowledge of it either, but I'm not an
expert on him and maybe someone who knows could clarify
this.

I think that a lot of the metaphysical ideas that appeared
in the 1952-4 timeframe are due to ACC students who had
studied various other practices suggesting things to Ron.

There was actually an ongoing effort to research metaphysics
in those days and pickup anything which worked and incorporated
it into Scientology.  I knew one old lady back in 1966 who
still searched for metaphysical books and mailed them to 
Ron whenever she found a good one.

Here is a quote from lecture 18 of the 16th ACC "Auditing 
Techniques: Simulous-Response" of 28 JAN 57 (on cassette as
"Anatomy of Cause") -

# Every once in a while somebody asks me what I do with
# all of the new material and ideas which come in to my 
# office and into organizations, and so on. What do I do
# with these things? I listen. I read it."
# 
# "We are on the road of truth, so anything that comes up
# along the line becomes Scientology, you see? If it is
# true, if it does work, if it is functional and so forth,
# why, that's it!"
 
------
 
> The channel that Kundalini moved thru in LRH was that
> of the fire and passion, the other channel that it missed 
> was that of water and compassion the cooling aspect
> of Kundalini in essence he burnt himself out and the flame
> now consumes his creations such as the Church.
> 
> He followed the flight of the Phoenix and in those lectures
> so apropriately called The Phoenix Lectures he burned 
> brilliantly and after that well I leave that to your discernment
> but my opinion is he only chased past glory and in an effort
> to defend it he created a militaristic organization and dumped
> into it what he himself could not integrate into himself.
> 
> May the sweet gentle caring soul that was LRH rest in peace
> as well as the warrior and fighter and pioneer who dared to
> push the envelope of understanding of himself and others
> let not, that flame ever die for with it will go free men and women
> forever.
> 
> But let us learn to temper that fire and thirst with the cool 
> water of compassion lest we go the same route.
> 
> Love Lightnin
>  
> > Jim
 

I think that energy drills in general are fairly high up on
the scale.  Beginners are better off dealing with thoughts
and postulates which are more basic anyway and are less likely
to get them into trouble.  I put some in self clearing, but
only in the later chapters.  However, energy does need to
be mastered eventually.  I just think that somebody needs to
be above the reverse vector band where energy has a tendency
to backlash before they work these too intensively.

As far as "going up the pole" is concerned, Ron's description
of a worm climbing a pole in a flatland and getting to see
the terrain for the first time seems to come from a sceen
exactly like that in Hal Clements science fiction novel
"Mission of Gravity" which was popular in those days (it
appeared in Astounding Sci Fi where Ron was being published).
Just a simple analogy really.


Affinity,

The Pilot


==========================================


 subj : Super Scio Tech - On Emotion (Attn Christine)


ON EMOTION (ATTN CHRISTINE)

On 29 Sep 98, Christine Norstrand <xine@lightlink.com> posted
on subject "Emotion"


> I have been thinking about what Ralph said the other night about something
> missed on the Bridge and we'd better find it.  Genius and terrifying crazy
> at the same time.  Ralph admits to it.  It's true for me, too.  

Yes, I fit that one as well.

In my teens I had a great deal of affinity for the mad scientist
mockup, it fit the way I felt.  Unstable genius.

Eventually, on expanded grade 2 after clear, I ran a whole track
overt of burning down a laboratory.  I went clear OT on it, meaning
that the track lost its solidity and vanished (not actually gone
or errased, just no longer compulsively created so that its only
there when I mock it up - comes from ceasing to alter-is the time
of overts in an effort to put them before the motivators).

That fits that wierd L12 assessment - mad scientist - bang -
what horrendous overt? - burnt down laboratory so that they
couldn't have my work - bang - clear OT EP.

That cooled things down considerably.  I'm much more at peace
with the world now.

But there is still something.  I have such a compulsion to find
truth and get out of the trap that I tend to jump into restimulation
in the hopes of finding answers.  Sometimes the simple acts of
living life such as opening the mail or finding a spoon to stir
the coffee are like chalk grating against a blackboard.  It's
a protest at being trapped here.  Then I have to pull myself
back into ARC by spotting things I like or whatever so that
I can have fun here instead of futily banging my head against
the bars of the cell.  That's why I find Homer so easy to
duplicate, but I wouldn't let myself stay in that viewpoint
because the body does get sick if you bang its head against
the bars for too long.


> I think it
> has to do with a tacit attitude toward emotion that results in an emotional
> shut-off, not that one *can't* feel emotion but one chooses, and
> continually chooses, paths that prevent it.  This long after the situation
> that warranted it is gone.


I think that emotion is one of the biggies and its almost
totally missed on the modern bridge.

As I've said before (and Ron hints at in the early theories
of Thought, Emotion, and Effort), a godlike being could at 
first only be abberated by thought because he couldn't be hurt
and he couldn't suffer from loss.  But eventually he decays to
the point where he cannot mockup well enough to always recreate
something if it gets ruined or destroyed, and then he can start
having losses.

Once he has lost too many bodies, he mocks up pain and engrams 
as a way to keep from loosing them (jerk your hand out of
the fire instead of getting it burnt off).

So the secondaries would run earlier on the track and would
not be handled by going clear and ceasing to flinch from
the force in mental pictures.

There would be a corresponding state for loss and emotion,
where one no longer flinched from the losses, but I don't
have it yet and I don't know anyone who does.

One could probably reach it by gradient running of incidents
of loss.

Speaking of incident running, I had a lot of Dianetics after 
clear.  On further reflection, it was running somatic chains
that gave problems in Dianetics after clear.  I got good
gains from narratives and from secondaries.

 
> I have a theory.  And I don't think there's any way of verifying it one way
> or the other because I don't think you'd get an honest answer out of anyone
> in the church.  But it's supported by my experience as a C/S both in and
> out of the church as well as on this list.  Here it is:  
> 
> Certain people do well in Scientology / Clearing.  For example, people who
> are not literate, very literate, don't make it, no matter what else is
> going for them.  But literate and educated people come and go, don't they.
> By the time they reach the upper bridge, well they were just so OT they
> just *knew* it was the path to total freedom, cuz they were all so OT.  And
> I believe that.  
> 
> Some of these cases are from nowhere -- they have high goals and they get
> the resulting GPM but still they make it.  I think there is a common factor
> in their environment -- something that creates a necessity level that they
> be "OT".  How many emotionally shut off, but very powerful OT execs, have
> you met?
> 
> But what does OT mean, it means capable of creating effects of being very
> perceptive.   And I think this comes from living in a dangerous environment
> and that not just many, but *most* upper bridge people did come from a
> childhood environment where they were abused, physically and emotionally,
> and the only way to survive was to know who they really are.  

I can probably be characterized as having an emotional shutoff as
well.  I was raised by an intelligent and caring family who were
into metaphysics and were knowlegeable about practical things
such as accounting.  But my father died while I was young so
of course I shut down a bit, knowing that it was better not to
get too attached.

> And going
> along with that is exteriorization, moving out of the body, the body where
> most of emotion resides.  We address this in Int but I don't think we
> handle it there.  

I don't think that most of the emotion will be found to be in the
body at basic.

I can get really strong emotions listening to music or watching a
movie, and I'm very detatched from the body at those times.  In
those cases I find emotions very enjoyable (even low toned ones) and
don't suppress them.

Somebody might make a crack about spectatorism, so I will suggest
that they exteriorize, find a mountain and sit on it, grab the
mass of the mountain (very important) and drill feeling deep 
grief, rage, fear, etc.  You can feel deep emotions that way,
but the thing is that its fun.  Deep down we like this stuff.

It is specifically having emotions in the body that I tend to 
associated with undesirable loss.
 
 
> Yes, this is certainly true for me personally, before anyone even says it.
> But from what I know about some of the people here, things they've just
> mentioned that were little flag remarks, I'm not alone.  Of course, I fully
> expect Enid to walk in and say she had a wonderful childhood studying
> philosophy and everything was just ducky.  But that would be an exception.  
> 
> For me, emotions are a tidal wave.  I can control them by moving out of my
> body and observing them, or changing my mind about them, or creating a
> different one, or any number of solutions.  I can do physical work that
> keeps my attention in the present.  I can touch my toes and nose at dance
> class.  But body awareness and activities that actually evoke the emotions
> that are in this body, nah, I'd rather chase ideas.  
> 
> Now before I kick in the OT ser facs too much about how OT everybody here
> is and they never really had a case cuz they're such ethical beings, I want
> to be clear that I'm talking the body's case, the emotions and emotional
> shut off that are in the body, that the being is tacitly in agreement with
> and so never gets handled.  I'm talking first, 1) about processing the GE,
> to a greater or lesser extent and more importantly, those areas of case
> that the GE and the being share, those areas of mutual out ruds where they
> don't want to look, and then, 2) about the way we are tapped into the body
> politic of archetypal/cultural experiences that reside on the genetic line
> and that we may not be willing to experience because of personal history.
> 
> I realize I'm talking about my own experiences a lot here and I'm waiting
> for an offer of a GPM session.  That offer, if made, will be made by
> someone who himself a grown-up man who was an abused child.  But I'm not
> talking the being's case here, I'm talking about the emotional shutoff that
> exists in the body and that many of us came into Scientology to avoid.  If
> it were wholly the being's case, it would get handled somewhere along the
> line.  But I don't think it is. 
> 
> I have used that ability (and it is an ability) to avoid relationships and
> protect myself.  And I have worked really hard at being responsible, and
> fulfilling my duties, and doing all the right things.  Those are good
> things.  They were originally solutions, even if now freely chosen and I
> think what they solve/solved needs looking at.  And what's missed is that
> they solve a physical emotional state -- I can, if pressed, come up with
> the changes that occur under chronic physical and emotional abuse -- the
> amygdala *permanently* (according to recent research) decreases in size,
> long duration high levels of adrenelin change the body's functioning.  But
> I think you see where I'm going with this.  
> 
> It's the GE's TLT case that hasn't been addressed because of the person's
> mutual out-ruds not to look in the area.

I think that the thetan's own case on loss is greater than his case
on engrams or GPMs ever was.  Those are both solutions to loss (you
mockup the progression of valences in a GPM as a solution to losing
as a single valence).

Ron said that you could turn heavy grief on on anybody by orienting
them to the loss of home universe ("the time when the stars fell
down").

Except for running a few secondaries and assists, the entire area
is completely missed on the the orthodox bridge.

 
> I don't know how many OTs I've talked to who came into S. for that
> "something" that they felt was missing, went through the whole staff
> experience of fulfilling expectations and working hard and being ethical,
> and finally woke up to their own purposes.  In other words, they learned
> what their own needs were and decided to meet them.  As part of following
> that spiritual goal, they are actually caring for themselves, often in art
> or music or poetry (the emanation that most closely approximates the
> spirit) because that is the closest thing there is to love.  
> 
> That solves it for the being, but it doesn't solve it for the GE or the
> mass of BTs that is the body (depending on your orientation).  
> 
> Let's see, Alan left home when he was 2 or something to make his fortune in
> the world.  I wonder how things were before that.  Homer got on famously
> with his Mom.  LaMont grew up in the abusive neighborhood from hell.  KG,
> well KG.  All folks who have made their way in Clearing and become opinion
> leaders.  
> 
> At least for a couple of them, it looks like it got handled.  Was it an
> aside to something else (enough charge on enough chains), or something
> directly addressed.  As a being, and 14 years out of the church, I feel
> like I just stood up after sitting in an emotional lotus position for a
> real long time and the blood is flowing back.  It's a good thing but don't
> expect me to run.  
> 
> Christine


There is much that is worth looking into in this area.

------

After writing the above, I was feeling quite gutzy (I had just
completed expanding the CC platen which I'm putting out in another
post) and decided to dig into this area a little further.

Carelessly, I was standing around outside waiting for something
and decided to see if I could pull a bit more chare off of my
father's death.  I had run it as a secondary years ago and it
didn't seem to have much charge left, so I just started doing
mockups of him and blowing them up without any formal session
or anything.

It seemed difficult to do, but as I said I was feeling my oats
and not worrying about it.  And then I got distracted and left
the process unflat.  And I didn't worry about that either or
bother to flatten it later that night.  I didn't confront the
fact that there was heavy suppressed charge on it.

When I woke up the next morning I had a bad cold.  Just classic
textbook about colds coming from loss.

Then I flattened the process and bailed out on a mild win.
It didn't turn off the cold but I started getting better.
I figured that I'd need to go earlier similar to really clean
it up and I didn't want to start another process in the area
until the body was back in shape.

The message here is that all the phenomena about loss and
secondaries are still kicking full force on my case despite
all the various processing I've done.  Definitely a missed
area that needs to be followed up on.



Affinity,

The Pilot

==========================================

All the above were posted with the following trailer -

------------------
The free Self Clearing Book, The Super Scio book, and the
"SCIENTOLOGY REFORMER'S HOME PAGE" are all over the net.

See The Self Clearing Homepage for URLs to these sites
http://fza.org/pilot/selfclr.htm or
http://www.proweb.co.uk/~tech/clear.htm

Or see The Pilots Home Page at http://fza.org/pilot/index.htm

Some translations are available, see
In German  - www.sgmt.at/pilot.htm
In Hungarian - www.extra.hu/self/index.html
In Russian - http://www.user.cityline.ru/~cisergem/ and www.aha.ru/~espinol
  and http://www.tagil.ru/~sk/pilot/pilot.html.

The MASTER LIST OF LRH TAPES which I posted recently is available both at 
fza.org and at http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/tapes.html

All of this week's posts will be collected in Super Scio Archives
#37 and posted to ACT.  See the Pilot Archives at FZA.ORG.

Note that some of my posts only go to ACT.  I cannot be reached by email.
I watch ARS and ACT for messages with Pilot in the subject line.

------------------



