The basic answer to the question stated below is yes, the being
has been dealing by not dealing.  Auditing gets the being to spot
the not dealing, and the mass and energy blows off, leaving him
able to deal again.

     He didn't HAVE to shut it all out, he thought life would be better
doing so, factually he turned out wrong, life would have been better
if he had kept track of all his losses.

     The preclear deals by not dealing.

     The clear deals by dealing.


Hash: SHA1 wrote:
>#1.  Do you believe, (either owing to your first hand experience, or
>owing to the theoritical soundness of the idea) that *merely allowing
>another human being to recount their personal experiences in life (in
>your presence*) is useful to that human being's fundamental well being
>as well as their ultimate psychological/spiritual growth? (in the
>presence of the absence of judgement of the beholder, called the
>auditor, or as the case may be, called you.)

      The issue is based on what the being did during the original

      Hubbard said he made a facsimile and later used it to recreate
the conditions of the incident in order to elicit symapthy or fend off
contra survival affects in the environment, other people.

      Adore says the being handled the original incident with
not-isness and postulates about the benefit of limitations and, is in
fact still there in the past, not just stuck in a facsimile in the

      The intent of auditing is to get the being to reevaluate his
postulates which may have been a good idea at the time, but probably
no longer serve him in the present game.

      Notice this is very different that coming to terms with the
loss NOW.  Its not enough to accept now what happened and what you did
in the incident.  One has to figure out what one should have done
in the first place back then knowing what you did then!

      That's a much bigger order.

      Used to be we could pretend to be crippled so the recruiting
forces would leave us alone, and then undo it every evening when we
went to bed at night.

      Then one day the recruits raid us during the night and find out
we aren't crippled at all, and so it became useful to be crippled all
the time just in case.

      Thus one is stuck on old postulates of the advantage of being

      Looked at a local meatball recently?  Sheesh.

      So we want the being to go back to the past and reevaluate some
of those postulates so that he can rewrite the incident rather than
throw a lot of force at it and duck it like it never existed.

      Rewriting the incident to a satisfactory 'what he should have
done then', will not rewrite physical universe history but will
rewrite his personal state as if he had actually done the right thing
at the time.  Mostly eschew the flinch.

      This is pure magic, unbelievable until it is experienced.

      On top of that the being gets back all the enturbed theta he used
to cement the not-is in the place and all the ensuing nonsense that
happened later because of his non confront.

      So he gets back all this energy he packed away into black tar,
obsidian and crazy glue and he gets to be as if it never happened in
the first place.  Quite a deal for a few hours of properly done


Thu Jan  5 00:05:10 EST 2006

================ ====================
Sun Oct 20 03:06:02 EDT 2013
Send mail to saying help
================== ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

Tue Oct 22 16:31:56 EDT 2013