I gotta make a few comments here.


      What items you run is much more important than how you run them,
but using questions to run items is death.

      Death, death, death.

      For example who and what questions are rampant in Scientology, but
even Scientology offers different ways of running the same thing.

      So rather than run "What did your mother do to you?" you could run
'Tell me something your mother did to you", which is a command, or
simply 'Spot something your mother did to you."

       We call the 'Spot item' form of command the canonical form, as it
will always work, but there might be times when other forms might work
better or be more grammatically correct.

       And if a preclear can't spot squat, use

       "Get the idea of..."

      Conceiving of things will brings all the memories forward you could
ever want and postulates and considerations.

      Notice "Get the idea of" does NOT include an implicit "Tell me
about it..."

      If he wants to tell you about it he will.

      If you aren't sure whether the preclear is going to talk or not,
use the OK protocol, which means the auditor doesn't say anything until
the preclear says OK, meaning that's the end of that command cycle
whether the preclear said anything or not.

       Auditor: Get the idea of a dog.
       Prclear: OK
       Auditor: Thank you

       Auditor: Get the idea of a dog.
       Preclear: God I hate dogs, oh yes yak yak. OK,
       Auditor: Thank you.


      The issue of questions in auditing is a serious matter, as the bank
runs on questions, they are the cylinders of the bank's car, and you
can't push one cylinder around without moving all (the trillions) of
other ones too.

      Every time you ask a preclear 'What's the matter', well he's got a
trillion years of matter to hand you, all in deep failed question churn.

      Who, how, what, where, when, why, which, is it, can it could it,
would it, should it, has it, will it, and does it, along with a lot

      Thus question asking about one item, restimulates ALL items there
ever were or ever will be at the core level of the big queetion answer

      The ITEM does not cause the restim, the EFFORTS TO ANSWER THE

      That's because heavy efforts to answer questions are common to all
items.  It's the WANTING TO KNOW AND WANTNG TO NOT KNOW that drives the
bank.  ANd he ain't got repsonsibility for either side of it.

      The bank creators knew that truth seekers would be a problem,
eventually finding their way to clear, so they made sure that seeking,
searching, finding, looking for, discovering and question asking were
charged to the hilt.

      Seeking, searching, finding, looking for and discovering ANSWERS is
the way to death.

      Seeking, searching, finding, looking for and discovering QUESTIONS
is the way back to life.


      Don't you see?

      Your preclear thinks that

      Questions are the problem and answers are the solution.

      The clear understands that

      Answers are the problem, questions are the solution.

      Thus even if the item is a proper item to be running, the amount of
charge stirred up by QUESTION ASKING will often swamp the amount of
charge coming off that item, and the preclear is worse for the wear.

      Thus for any item, we first canonicalize it, then try to create a
form to run it in that is as far way from asking a question as possible.

      We want auditing COMMANDS, not questions, always, always, always.

      If the preclear can honestly say 'I don't know' to the auditing
command, then it is too close to a question.

       The big joke here is we do not want to audit BY asking questinos,
you want to audit asking questions by NOT asking questions.

       When it comes to auditing questions, asking questions is deadly,
because it just give the preclear another question!

       Questions lead to losses in auditing every time the preclear
can't answer one.

       "Aud: What dogs have you known?"

       "PC: I don't know!"

       "Aud: Get the idea of a dog."

       "PC: Sure OK, that's easy."

      The percentage of failed auditing cycles determines whether the
preclear blows charge or accumulates more than he blows because of the

      Any failure of an auditing command is an incomplete cycle
and leads to wandering away if you don't get it completed, that's
called Q&A.  Fail to go left, so you right instead. Bleccch.

      Aud: "What question are you asking?"
      PC:  "I don't know."

      Aud: Get the idea of asking a question.
      PC:  OK, got it.

      Self auditing, or figure figure as LRH calls it, is mostly the
preclear asking questions of himself over and over, and is a deadly
waste of time, and not at all related to solo auditing where one is
trying to spot and erase the question asking altogether.

       "Spot a question" might work, but it assumes the
preclear is able to see.

      "Spot not being able to spot a question," might also work but it
makes the preclear go for the exact right question to release his case.

      "Get the idea of asking a question." works marvelously.

       Why not just create questions forever for free until he
is no longer stuck on the one he is trying to find and stop

       Source has no answers and no questions.

      If you can break the hold of questions and answers IN GENERAL on
the mind of the preclear, surely he will release from SPECIFIC questions
he hs been killing himself with for eons, you see?

      The basic solo auditing program, if you wish to work on specific
items, is simply:

       1.) Spot something of notice.

       2.) Spot a question about that item.

       Repeat 2 until no more, then go back to 1.

       E/P: No questions, no answers. Wise. At peace.

       As a reminder, complete canonicalization of an item would involve
both the NO and the SOME forms.  Often the SOME won't run until the NO
runs first, and staying in sync is critical to really running the two
way flows out.

       Spot NO   item.  (Pretended NO, not-ised)
       Spot SOME item.

       The preclear is never aberrated by a stuck one way flow, but by TWO
stuck one way flows, IS *AND* ISN'T.

       So you will eventually find yourself running,

       Spot NOT item AND SOME item at the same time.

       "Spot NO AND SOME MOTHER."


       NOT KNOW.

       LRH had a fantastic process that seems to be given little attention
in the Church standard line up, and which in fact should be run on the
Church itself by those having a problem with it.

       Spot a condition or item and then run:

       "What do or could you not know about that item."

       First we canonicalize it to:

       "Spot something you could or do not know about that item."

       This is a rough one, because it offers a contradiction to the
preclear, how can he tell you something he doesn't know, if he doesn't
know it?

       For example,

       "Tell me something you could or don't know about your mother?"

       Well if you don't know it, how can you tell it?

       This process is NOT meant to find answers for you about your
mother, but to find QUESTIONS!

       So the preclear may not know how old she is, but he can say

       "I don't know how old she is."

       "I don't know where she was born."

       "I don't know if she was raped by her father."

       But you see each of these are QUESTIONS in disguise.

       "How old is she?"

      "Where was she born?"

      "Was she raped by her father?"

      So why not approach the item directly simply by running

      "Spot a question you have or could have about your mother."

      This form runs exactly the same thing, gets right to the point, the
questions, and gets the preclear to not know the answers anyhow, BECAUSE

       Nothing will chill out a somatic faster than getting all the
questions off of it.

       Spot a condition.  Tell me a question you have about that

      Remember the questions are a deceit, they are an effort to KEEP THE
SOMATIC AROUND by pretending to want to find out about it, so he can
PRETEND to do something about it.

       A service facsimile is an excuse for not expressing a resentment by
asking a question.  The E/P of running out the service fac is 'Operating
Solo Cool'. - Adore

       It isn't necessary to find any answers to get better, it is only
necessary to spot the missed or bypassed questions that are causing the

       That's a big statement, dig it and don't leave it.

       Once the preclear settles into this, he will suddenly be able to
spot and feel when his bank is convulsing with its fountain head of
question asking, even if he hasn't a clue what the question is.  It will
be ALL his questions.

      When this convulsing is chilled out, the bank will stop growing
more solid every living second the preclear is alive.


      The Power process are merely running the top 3 items on the
Awareness Characteristic Chart, SOURCE, EXISTENCE and CONDITIONS.

      Source is what is cause or not cause.

      Existence is what is or what isn't.

      And Conditions are how things are or are not causally connected or
conditional upon each other.

      For example, a condition to getting across the river is to have a
bridge there.  Or a condition to staying alive is being able to eat, and
a condition to being able to eat is to be able to hunt or grow food.

      These causal necessaries to change existence from how it is to how
you might want it to be, form a web of 'travel' that the being must
causally walk to get from where he is to where he wants to be.

      Thus conditions are not just more of existence, they are the
'barriers' of getting from one existence to another.  The same barriers
that make up the freedoms, barriers and purposes of games.

      So scientology runs Power Process 4 as

      Spot a Source, Spot a not Source.

      Well that's pretty close to canon isn't it?

      We would run instead

      Spot NO source.  Spot SOME source.

      Grammar isn't too important, as these ideas are beyond language and
words, but get the preclear running it however he feels comfortable with
the commands.

       Scientology runs Power Process 5 as

       What is?  What isn't?

       Flunk.  Into the garbage pail you go.

       Run it as:

       Spot NO is.         Spot SOME is.
       Spot NO something.  Spot SOME something.
       Spot NO nothing.    Spot SOME nothing.

      Remember NO means PRETENDED NOTHING THERE.

      Scientology runs power process 6 as

       Spot an existing condition
       Tell me how you handled it.

       This is pretty close to canon, but misses the NO.

       This also tends to confuse condition with UNWANTED existence, which
is not what it is meant to run, as condition is meant to be defined as
it is used on the awareness characteristic chart.

       Spot NO condition, Spot SOME condition
       Spot NO handle,    Spot SOME handle

       Spot NO problem,   Spot SOME problem.
       Spot NO solution,  Spot SOME solution.

       OK, now one last comment.

       The power processes simply run the top 3 items of the
awareness characteristic chart.

      Why keep it secret?  You have already published the chart.

      What else do you expect people to do with it except canonize it and
run it?

      Why not run ALL the items on the chart the same way, using straight
auditing form?

       Spot NO oblivion,    Spot SOME oblivion
       Spot NO criminality, Spot SOME criminality

      If you really want power to be handled for good, run the whole
chart from bottom to top multiple times using NO and SOME.

       That will give you a power clear like no one has seen before.

       Here is the full awareness characteristic chart.


- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith     The Paths of Lovers    Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF        Cross            Internet Access, Ithaca NY    In the Line of Duty
Thu Sep 23 14:46:07 EDT 2010

================ ====================
Sun Jul 19 03:06:02 EDT 2015
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 Jul 21 20:33:10 EDT 2015