*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
Thank you Robin, (sent by *[email protected]*)
But it's a bit of a stuck valence.
"IN SESSION, the definition of in session is interested in own case and
willing to talk to the auditor. When this definition describes the
session in progress, then of course the PC will be able to as-is and
will cognite. (HCOB 26 April 73 issued I)"
And the yardstick is whether good indicators are in (or indicators are
improving).
I'll go and have a bath and see if I can wash the *instructor valence *off.
All best wishes,
Ant(ony).
*[email protected]*
www.antology.info
*Jernbanevej 3F 4th*
*DK 2800 Lyngby*
Telephone: (+45) 4588 8869
On 16-02-2017 07:47, The Resolution of Mind list wrote:
Dear Ant,
your wish shall be granted - I give you (and me ;-) a break.
Best
Robin
P.S.: In the meantime Marcus, who as "a thetan basically knows",
being PC, auditor and case-supervisor in personal-union
will find out for himself the 'modus operandi' which is
most beneficial and effective for him.
----
On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 05:59:44 +0100, <[email protected]>
wrote:
Today's Topics:
1. Re: On the wording of auditing questions - (Re: TROM Digest,
Vol 148, Issue 15) (The Resolution of Mind list)
2. To Robin: Re: Help L4 - Update (The Resolution of Mind list)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 18:45:42 +0100
From: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [TROM1] On the wording of auditing questions - (Re: TROM
Digest, Vol 148, Issue 15)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
Dear Robin et al. (this is originating from
*[email protected]**)*)
Is there something more basic than definitions? (By the way I like the
first sentence in the last definition you give here.)
There is something more basic than definitions (in my humble opinion).
Purpose is more basic.
I regard the purpose of auditing (certainly in my universe) as to
relieve the preclear of charge so that he can have more fun and a better
game.
It might not be a bad idea to let the PC "roam around in his mind". I
started a new preclear recently. I started by running the first straight
wire question "Remember something". I didn't really have a chance to
clear the meaning of the question/command as all good robot auditors are
supposed to. I told him that the process I wanted to run was: "Remember
something". And he was off. I was a little bit flummoxed by this,
remembering the principal that inflow and outflow should be roughly
equal for optimum communication. Anyway to stop me feeling guilty I
occasionally said "Thank you. Remember something". This went on for
about 50 minutes and the preclear was in a very high state, in very good
communication and we chatted about this and that for the next half hour;
you couldn't keep him down! What he was doing was Itsaing.
There is a part of Scientology which is probably forgotten or unknown to
most people. In short it's called Indicators.*There are Good Indicators
and Bad Indicators. **An auditor should know what the indicators are
and **
**continue a procedure as long as the indicators are good until you
get an **
**endpoint. *
Once upon a time I was an HPA course instructor (this was before
instructors were were forbidden, being replaced by supervisors who
answered your questions by saying "look it up in your materials").
Robin must stop making statements which jog me into my instructor
valence. I will never get anything done if he goes on like this.
All best wishes,
Ant(ony).
*[email protected]*
*www.antology.info*
*Jernbanevej 3F 4th*
*DK 2800 Lyngby*
Telephone: (+45) 4588 8869
On 15-02-2017 11:10, The Resolution of Mind list [an alias Robin uses
;-) ] wrote:
*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
Hi Ant,
as always one must use discernment. I agree as far as the concentration
on wording and interpretation of meanings can be overemphasized.
There must be a healthy balance between session control and granting
the PC freedom for his own interpretations. If you would extrapolate
the
idea of granting freedom to its extreme, one would not be allowed to
use process commands at all. Just let the PC roam around in his mind
and let him talk on whatever his attention and interested is leading
him.
Some key sentences out of the definitions for Processing and Auditing:
(The full definitions are at the end for reference)
*The purpose of the auditor is to give the
preclear certain and exact commands which the preclear can follow and
perform.*
*the principle of making an individual look at his own existence, and
improve
his ability to confront*
*the action of asking a preclear a question (which he can understand
and answer)*
*directing the pc?s attention on his own case*
**the process of bringing a balance between freedom and barriers. *
Auditing is a game
of exteriorization versus havingness. (Abil 25)*
Best regards
Robin
PROCESSING, 1. called ?auditing? by which the auditor (practitioner)
?listens and
commands.? The auditor and the precle ...
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
