*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
Has life a therapeutical value?
Some years ago somewhere I came across material - I think it
was an excerpt from one of Ron Hubbard's writings or a transcript
of one of his taped lectures (unfortunately I can't remember which
one that was) - where Ron was stating that not only auditing but
life itself has a therapeutical effect on human beings.
The statement was only kind of marginal note in that particular
context of writing or lecture of his. Nevertheless it got me hooked
somehow and I remembered it every now and then since.
I was wondering what that means and did not see any convincing
evidence, examples or confirmations in my life or others lives.
So I abandoned the issue, only to get reminded of it again and again.
Then, not so long ago, I made up my mind realizing that I might have
had not looked good enough. At closer inspection there seemed to be
some truth in the notion that life is indeed therapeutical.
It might appear as a complete contradiction to what people experience
in their lives when looked at it from a short term perspective or a
superficial point of view. In that case life appears to be rather
aberrative to the being, or better to say, to the being's mind.
Why is that? I made an attempt to analyze this by starting out with
what I regard as agreed upon reliable data.
What do we have in that respect?
Well, let's compare life as an activity with auditing (or any other
mental practice that claims therpeutic value).
Under the assumption that auditing, counseling, processing, ... has
a positive impact on a persons case - and this assumption is supported
by various reports from individuals - such a comparison makes sense.
How does living compare to e.g. auditing?
In order to answer this question I want to extract the main components
of auditing and then try to establish their pendants or analogies
in the activity of living.
The definition for an auditing session is closely related to the
definition of "to be in session" (seen from the side of the pre-clear
(PC) or client). According to Ron Hubbard this is defined as:
"Being interested in ones own case and willing to talk to the auditor."
What could that mean in terms of life and livingness as a session?
- The PC of course is the person living his or her particular life.
- The auditor is the one who delivers the process and conducts the
session. The process is delivered by following certain procedures
with defined rules, often just asking questions or giving commands
according to a predefined pattern. Sometimes the pattern is not present
in a fixed form, instead the auditor has some freedom regarding the
form (like for e.g. in 2way-comm).
In life the auditor is the sum total of the beings and objects that
surround the PC and challenge him. Life poses the questions or
commands in form of problems for the PC to solve. It gives him various
lessons to be learned, challenges to be mastered ...
In practice life can be seen as a mix of solo-session and externally
audited session.
- "Being interested in ones own case" correspondents of course with
being interested in ones life in general. The person totally indifferent
or disinterested in ones own well being will probably not even consider
to be audited or after some time blow the therapy. In life such a person
- in an extreme instance - might commit suicide. Or a less drastic
mode of conduct in life may be characterized by out-ethics and diversion
from the higher purposes by means of e.g. taking drugs, being addicted
to games playing, indulging in passive activities like consumption,
entertainment a.s.o. in an overly manner. (Suicide is just kind of
shortcut; end-result is more or less the same.)
- Phenomenons of ARC-breaks, PTBs (Present Time Problems), bypassed charges
can occur very similar no matter if we look into auditing or life.
- What about overrun, underrun, end-phenomenons, potential gains or wins
when comparing running a processes in a session or "running a life"?
First of all a session is usually much shorter in time than a lifetime.
(However, that must be related somewhat because you might have to
pay (money = time) for an auditing session and/or give session time in
return as an exchange or at least you have to invest some of your time
in advance in order to establish the beingness of an auditor and
acquire the technical know-how by means of study/training - which may
consume a significant amount of your time).
Anyway, the class of all sessions are usually a subset of the class of
all the life activities. This already establishes a kind of hierarchical
order here upon which we could already state that life - in that
auditing is a part of life - has therapeutical merits.
A session however (if it's a good one), might be considered more
effective and directed precisely towards weak-points in a certain
case. A session has a short timespan compared to a whole lifetime
but can yield a most formative experience with a deep positive impact
on the PC. On the other hand people have experienced situations in their
lives that had an impact of comparable or even greater magnitude.
Some individuals however have tremendous wins and cognitions just from
assimilating data by learning.
So, as far as I'm concerned, there is no clear line of seniority
to be seen here.
The superficial perception that life is being non therapeutical or even
aberrative, in my opinion, comes from not running long enough along
a once chosen path. It is the desire for "instant gratification" which
hinders people to continue along a line persevering enough. They
stop at the smallest of obstruction sometimes and divert into something
else. Call it Q&A. In auditing that would be a gross mistake.
One of the most fundamental things ever found out by Ron certainly is
this paradigm:
"Whatever switches it on, does switch it off as well."
Or in other words: "The way out is the way through."
One continues a process as long as it produces change.
A process not continued long enough leaves the PC in a undesirable
state of restimulation. In life people often do not make progress
(case gain), they merely get old and their tone level goes down.
They stay childish instead to mature and grow. The reason is Q&A.
The deeper root-cause for this might be found in myriads of partly
contradicting believe-systems with low actual relevance and truth-
content. They are held in place by intentional conditioning and
indoctrination exerted by dark influences unbeknown to the individual
which is caught in a maze of lies.
It seems to me that the difference between those people who make case
gain by just living and the others which only get older is to be found
in their attitude towards life in general.
I want to interject a practical example here to decrease the level of
abstraction. Imagine someone who wants to build up his body and/or wants
to improve his physical fitness. He decides to buy a subscription to
a fitness-center. This costs him some money, costs him time to get there,
costs him time to lift weights or sit an a training-bicycle sweating
like crazy just to get nowhere. He might some times be extremely bored
or have the feeling that what he does here is not reasonable any more.
He'd rather like to spend the time with his family/friends and save
the money for a new car or whatever.
Corollary he decides to rearrange his life in order to solve the dilemma.
He changes his attitude and thus his strategy changes.
He gets himself a cheap bicycle which he uses to get to work every day.
He choses a route which leads him through nature avoiding the city
traffic as far as possible. That's uplifting for his spirits, serves
him well not only physically but also emotionally.
It turns out that he actually needs no new car any more, he
even can sells his old one for a good price because all together he is
more up-tone now which furthers his communication skills.
He improves along all dynamics. His family and friends are happy too.
We see synergy at work here.
Now let's jump back into the main-routine which is the subject of
comparing auditing and life in terms of therapy usability.
PCs sometimes might forget living because they are so busy with
their (solo-)auditing. What circumstances would support
a smooth integration of auditing in our life?
Or even better! is there some realistic opportunity to substitute
auditing at all by just living with a proper attitude?
I ask this questions because something makes me wonder. If I look
at the track records of the lives of great people in the field of self
realization and self-improvement there seem to be certain patterns to it.
Let's just take L. Ron Hubbard, Dennis H. Stevens, Napoleon Hill for
example.
The common denominator here is that those personalities were all very
bright minds, ingenious in their ways, inventive and curious. They all
gifted us with an heritage which has great value for us who study their
materials and they had produced technologies which proved to be workable
to a certain degree for certain people.
I repeat: "to a certain degree!"; "fort certain people!"
All of those works had inherent errors, contained some truth
and some untruth as well and thus were limited in their workability in a
way that not even the creators of those works for themselves could attain
what was claimed or promised by them.
Those people had of course put their heart-blood into their works, had
dedicated almost all, or at least large parts, of their lives to their
works.
It is completely conceivable that they could not easily accept any
criticism
of their works.
But they themselves did not get to the end-phenomenons they had
claimed for their techniques (OT in case of LRH; 'Nirvana' in case of DHS;
success and riches in case of N. Hill (Author of "Think and Grow Rich"
and other works which mark the blueprint for most of the following
self-help
literature published after 1939)).
At least I have reason for serious doubts in this respect.
LRH (1911-1986)[75] and DHS (1927-1994)[67] both were physically in very
bad
shape when they left their bodies *before* very old age. Just listen to
their
most recent tapes and you see what I mean.
A latin idiom says: "Mens sana in corpore sano" ("a healthy mind in a
healthy
body").
Other examples: Ken Ogger (The Pilot), author of "Self Clearing" and
"SuperScio" - committed suicide.
Geoffrey Filbert, author of "Excalibur Revisited" - an excellent book with
some valuables in it. But unfortunately most of the text is a reflection of
a hateful mind and vainglory.
I've not yet come to conclusive answers to my questions yet. Search is
still in progress. I just wanted to loosely list thoughts and preliminary
conclusions I've come up with up to this point in time. Nothing is written
in stone. I claim the right to change my mind any time I see fit.
Everything
is fluid.
I guess there will not be definite answers anyway. Each step forward toward
a supposed truth reveals even more questions.
The good news about this is:
As long as this goes on, progress will go on as well.
About a month ago, I was inspired and triggered to do this write-up, by
stumbling
upon a paper written by an entity with the name (or pseudonym) of "James".
The document can be downloaded as .pdf from the web.
Search for "living-from-the-heart.pdf". I hope you may find it as revealing
and inspiring as I did.
ARC
Robin
P.S.: Other very interesting material from the same source (James)
is this one here: "james_wingmakers_sovereign_integral.pdf".
But be warned! Can be disturbing. This data has the potential to
disrupt your current believe-system severely or at least force you
to readjust it considerably .... which, on the other hand, can be
extremely beneficial as well :-)
------
Additional Notes (added 06:24 07.04.2016):
By reasonable assessment one may (preliminary) state the following:
Life is, when lived with a proper attitude (which can be derived from study
and/or any workable mental technology), therapeutical. It is insofar of
significance if we are aware that living a life is our main purpose.
We do live for the sake of life. But we do normally not audit or getting
audited just for the fun of it. It is a chore, like brushing teeth.
Auditing, study, training are valuable tools to prepare us for the
challenges
of life. They are preparatory actions equal to cleaning up the rudiments in
the session's frame of reference.
The session or any other arranged situation, like we find when we e.g.
do training drills like TR-0 to TR-4 or else, resembles a "laboratory
environment". This is not the real thing. It is never as rough as the
real thing. It is like a pilot being placed in a flight-simulator.
There is enough support, from own experience and from what we can see in
others, for the above statements. Haven't we seen people passing drills
or attesting to a certain level by originating the proper cognitions and
F/N-ing and then later failing in their lives exactly at that problems
which had been "resolved"?
They have perhaps honestly attested to something or passed the drill,
got certified perfectly all right. But still ... I've seen it happen
to myself and seen it on others. We did not live up to what was expected
according to the state gained.
Afterwards the most fantastic justifications had been invented in order
to go on with living a lie.
Robin
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
