Сообщение Timecops » 14 июл 2012, 07:44

Web auditing at any place of the planet http://webauditing.org/



This is the history and a description of how Advanced Ability V came about.

In 1978 Ron was being audited on NED and he got ill. The more they tried to repair and handle with NED, the worse the condition became. The bank got beefed up, reads became smaller and smaller, then things stopped reading on the meter that should have read, his TA got high and stuck, somatics increased and the illness became severe. Sensitivity by can squeeze was very high and metabolism low. That was the result of trying to run engrams and engram chains with NED on someone whose case level was above clear.

I was urgently called out to where he was as it was considered that his life was in danger and when I arrived there was a doctor in 24 hour attendance.

The first thing I did was to look at the folders to see what had been happening in the recent sessions to try to figure out what the main BPC could be. I did a little assessment, found what read and indicated it as by-passed charge. This produced a small F/N and some immediate relief. That was the first assist. From the assessment and from folder study it became apparent that the main error was that an OT was trying to run engrams as his own when, if a person was clear then he would not have any engrams to run. It also became apparent from the way the engram chains had been running that there were indicators of jumped chains and the content of the incidents showed that these incidents belonged to different people or a different BT from one incident to another. One of the early sources of BPC that I checked on a meter was whether the incidents that he had been trying to run were misowned by him as his charge when they really belonged to BT/Cs. That read and indicated and started to bring the TA down and produced an F/N. That's one of the basic principles of AAV, the idea that a person who is clear or above, when asked to run something, especially a secondary or engram, will apparently find incidents and will often get mental image pictures or facsimiles to run. Thus you get the apparency that you can run Dianetics on a clear or above. If they are not his own incidents, they are misowned incidents. So, one of the early steps of the rundown is the location of incidents, especially engrams, which the person has tried to run as his own when they weren't. Early on the rundown it's not as important to locate whose incident (i.e., which BT it belonged to), as it is to locate the fact and have the PreOT recognize that he tried to own it as his own when it wasn't his and tried to run it as his own when it wasn't his.

This goes back to the axiom about ownership and persistence; assigning other authorship to a picture or saying that one created it when he didn't, causes a persistence (and it causes an increase in mass and solidity). If it is somebody else's picture and the PreOT tries to run it as if it is his own, that will add mass to it and the more he tries to run and erase it, the more mass is added to itbecause it is furthering the lie that it is his picture or that he created that picture when he didn't.

Early in the sessions it became apparent that an early action that should be done on AAV is to date/locate the point when the PreOT went clear. That in itself tends to blow off a lot of charge from the engram running after clear. After having date/located the point when the person went clear, you then ask the PreOT if he tried to run incidents after that point as if they were his own (when they weren't). The PreOT will usually scan up through his auditing track and blow off locks from his auditing track and will have cognitions about considerations he made in auditing and about why he had difficulty when he did and so on. It also clears up a mystery for him as to how come he "still had pictures after he was clear." Very often you have to clean the button "invalidation of clear" because the PreOT having gone clear at a certain point and then later, encountering BT/C's pictures or masses, will have decided he wasn't or couldn't have been clear after all. So there is often an invalidation or invalidations of his/her clear state that need to be cleaned off. Sometimes there is also invalidation by others. Usually, almost routinely, there are invalidations by the PreOT.

Doing the above brings about a resurgence, a rehabilitation of the state of clear, or similar. That's the essence of the first steps of the rundown.

One of the reasons why people who have completed III can get into trouble running engrams is because they thought that, having completed III, they must not have any more BTs/Cs. What a person achieves on III is not getting rid of all BTs/Cs. What they do achieve on III is that they get rid of those BTs/Cs who were:

a) hung up in incident II or I (which is not true of all BTs/Cs), b) sufficiently aware and awake that the PreOT could communicate with them readily and they could communicate in turn with the PreOT.

On III, PreOTs usually clean up the BTs/Cs that: are readily available and can readily go into communication and who have incidents II and I.

An early discovery on this level was that there's an earlier incident I; there's an earlier incident I that most PreOT don't run on III simply because it would never occur to them that there was an earlier one and incident I is labeled as "Start of track" in the materials. There's an incident I which occurred in an earlier universe than this one. On the subject of earlier universes, this is the fifth or sixth universe and incident I is at the "start of track" in this universe, so it isn't by any means basic on the chain.

The PreOT on III actually only skims the fat off and leaves all the others. It's not that the PreOT didn't try hard enough, he just wasn't aware of them and there's no way he would have been aware of them. An error that has often occurred in the AOs is that of forcing a person to go on trying to find and run more III. That can cause a pretty heavy mess up because it results in restimulation of BTs/Cs that ARE NOT AVAILABLE TO BE RUN ON III. When that has occurred one must repair the BPC of having been forced to go on and other out rud type BPC and rehab their completion of III.

Another phenomenon relating to BTs is that they are very suggestible. If you ask a BT for something the BT will try to produce it. They are not aware of being so suggestible. You ask or demand and the BT will try to produce what you asked for. So, even if the BT didn't have an incident II, if the PreOT demanded that the BT find it, the BT would produce something and even try to run it. It wouldn't be incident II, it would be whatever the BT thought he should come up with. If you asked a BT for "jello" with some intention and impingement, the BT would produce a picture - it wouldn't necessarily be a picture of what you or anyone else would think was jello, it would be whatever the BT came up with as "jello" although the BT didn't have a clue what jello was. Thus whatever a BT produces in response to a demand is not necessarily what one would expect, it is simply whatever occurred to the BT on your suggestion. Obviously if you demanded of a BT an engram regarding a "broken leg" the BT would produce a picture or an incident. It may not have anything to do with a broken leg. It may not have anything to do with any incident that has ever happened. It is just whatever the BT happened to think of when you asked for it. Thus demanding incidents of BTs when trying to run engrams can result in false incidents, dub-in and the weird nonsensical pictures that pcs get when being run on uncharged chains, overrun or forced to run something that is not available to be run. These symptoms have often occurred on PreOTs trying to run Dianetics or engrams after they went clear. The same symptoms can have other causes too; any of the usual Dianetic errors can produce the same symptoms. The PreOT might have a pain in his arm; an attempt is made to run "pain in the arm." The auditor asks for an incident that could have caused "pain in the arm" and weird pictures, strange shapes, masses and pressures turn on and the "pictures" shift and change around. Sometimes it can make some kind of sense in a weird manner or it can make no sense whatever. But there are no runnable incidents and there is no resolution of the somatic that they were trying to run out - and there is usually an increase of somatics, at least temporarily. Those are the indications of a PreOT trying to run engrams when he has none and BTs are being restimulated (who also do not have those incidents). It is also the result of BTs mocking things up because they are so highly suggestible. They are highly suggestible because they are in such a low state of awareness. As a person goes lower and lower in awareness he becomes groggy or dopey, below that there is a sleep-like state and lower there are various hypnotic or trance states in which the being is very suggestible - and there are much lower states of awareness, too. The point is that the lower the awareness, the more suggestible the person is. Suggestibility and other-determinism go hand in hand, also. The less aware a being is of what is going on, the more he responds to suggestion or command. In the "jello" example the BT is not aware that you said "jello" to him and that he mocked up "jello," that sequence just happens and the BT is not aware of it - except possibly in some very dim, distant, remote dream-like state. The mocking up of "jello" just happens automatically because the BT is way below awareness of what is going on. In summary, a BT will produce something (usually dub-in) when it is demanded that he do so. That is largely due to BTs being so suggestible and partly due to another factor.

The PreOT and the BTs are in contact with each other on a physical (body) telepathic basis. Telepathic communication occurs much more readily via a body than it does otherwise. In other words two people might not have enough power to be able to communicate telepathically but a PreOT can very easily communicate telepathically with a part of his body or with a BT in his body or connected to it. For some reason it puts them into direct contact via the body. Thus when aPreOT thinks a question such as asking for an incident, the BTs in or on his body will readily respond to the PreOT's think - they are in direct physical telepathic communication with the PreOT. This also makes it hard for the PreOT to sort out what thoughts are his and what aren't and causes other problems of confusion of identity.

When a clear is audited on engrams there is another phenomenon that can occur. Sometimes the engram or incident being asked for just happens to exist on some BT's time track; it goes into restimulation and the picture/incident turns on. It apparently runs. But if the PreOT makes the mistake of thinking that it is his incident (very easy to do), there is a misidentification of the PreOT and the BT and misownership of the incident occurs. Furthermore, other BTs tend to copy the picture/incident/engram and misown it as there own, resulting in persisting pictures or masses - normally they fade out in from 3 10 days, but it can be pretty confusing.

The points covered in the above paragraphs explain why, when a clear is audited on engrams, even though the clear doesn't have incidents in engram form, the clear readily "finds" incidents and pictures to run (even though these pictures usually don't make sense). The mere fact of the auditor asking for an engram to run, let alone insisting or demanding that one be found, might be sufficient for the PreOT to think there should be one and the BTs (in direct telepathic contact with the PreOT) obligingly produce their pictures or dub-in.

When you are auditing a case on AAV that has had engram running after clear those are the symptoms and phenomena that need to be cleaned up. There is usually considerable relief in doing so - much mystery is resolved and there is usually a considerable lightening up of pressures and somatics and masses.

So far we have covered: date/locating the PreOT's clear state and cleaning up any invalidation of it, cleaning up and repairing any misownership of incidents by the PreOT during Dianetic auditing subsequent to clear and we looked at some of the theory and manifestations.

After the actions covered above, the next part of the program consists of getting into a more detailed repair of past auditing. Specific sessions or auditing by a specific auditor are taken up and repaired with the appropriate correction/repair/BPC list.

For repair of a Dianetic session or chain or a period of Dianetic auditing, the Dianetic repair (L3) list is used. For L & N, its repair list (L4) is used - and so on. The repair list is assessed and handled by indication - on a Dianetic repair, for example, no further engram running is done or attempted even if the BPC found is "incident left unflat." That is INDICATED, NOT RUN. But at this point the PreOT is aware of the mechanism of misownership and is able to differentiate between himself and BTs. He therefore won't misown these again. At this point of the rundown you aren't trying particularly to blow BTs, though many of them do blow during this repair. You are trying to repair the BPC of them having been messed up on running (or trying to run) false chains or false incidents, wrong items, uncharged items and earlier similars demanded when there was no earlier similar. That produces a considerable amount of relief and usually gets rid of a lot of somatics - especially the vague, changing massy variety commonly resulting from rough auditing.

How one should go about doing this repair could be made very complicated; it's usually very easy and simple. Often all one has to do is to bring the subject up and the PreOT will start talking about a rough session or sessions or a chain or engram that never resolved in auditing. This past auditing repair is NOT just repair of engram running after clear; it includes any past auditing, whether it occurred before or after clear, that is charged.

The usual procedure is to locate a rough session or chain and using the appropriate repair list, assess and indicate the first reading line, then have the PreOT locate the BT or cluster that has that BPC and indicate it to the BT/C. That will normally produce an F/N. There may be more than one BT so affected and other BTs may need to be located that have the same BPC and indicate it to them, too. Continue assessing the list and handling it as above until that session or chain is handled or the PreOT is no longer interested in.

This repair step could be overdone in that it could be done past the point where the PreOT is no longer interested in the action. PreOT interest is the major indicator and must be present. One always consults the PreOT's interest before and during this step.

Very often during this step of locating and indicating BPC BTs will blow off simply on the correct indication of BPC. Although you can blow a lot of BTs, the main purpose of this repair action is to untangle the BPC due to auditing errors compounded by_ misownership. It's something like straightening out a tangled can of worms. Until the BPC on past auditing is handled there is a liability in proceeding on with other major actions on AAV. Auditing itself can be viewed as a time track and until earlier charge is handled, later charge will hang up and not blow. On AAV if there is BPC left on earlier auditing and one proceeds on with another or other major actions and then makes an error, the BPC can be pretty explosive or it can block progress. Thus there is a rule:


That rule is modified by not continuing to repair past the point of PreOT interest - which prevents one from overrunning the repair actions.

Should any later action or session bog, the first thing to suspect is that there is an error in the session and the next thing to suspect is that there is some unhandled BPC from earlier auditing that wasn't repaired and locate and repair it. Next to an error in the current session, an error in an earlier session is the most frequent cause of a bog or upset during AAV auditing. This is VERY useful for the auditor to know and will enable one to quickly and effectively recover from a bog.

Most of the somatics that come up were not charged in the first place (i.e. not charged as Dianetic chains), weren't reading, often register as wrong items. Part of the reason for this is that the PreOT was trying to handle somatics that had other causes than Dianetic engrams. They're often pressures or masses that were caused by BT/cluster restimulation. A pressure in the head, for example, is probably due to the restimulation of BTs/clusters in the head and not due to a chain of engrams relating to the head. Although the restimulated BTs are in the head and the PreOT's head is hurting,what is wrong with those BTs is not necessarily anything to do with a head or heads. Thus trying to run anything to do with "a head" or "pressure in the head" would be a wrong item/wrong chain. If they tried to find incidents on their tracks to do with heads, that isn't going to run or resolve the PT pressure and would only complicate the BPC. One of those BTs in the head might have "pain in the foot" or something else, completely, wrong with it. So there can be quite a tangle on PreOTs that have had a lot of Dianetic auditing after clear. What you are trying to do at this stage of the rundown is to untangle the tangle.

A frequent source of BPC on PreOTs is when they were asked for an earlier similar when there was none or when it wasn't charged. Don't repeat this error during AAV. Questions usually F/N rather quickly and often without having to go earlier similar. Most things blow on clears and above by recognition or some brief discussion. Overrunning F/Ns, especially on ruds on a clear or above, can result in the feeling that he/she can't blow anything/can't get rid of anything. Also asking for an earlier similar when none exists if pushed, can only result in a jumped chain.

Thus clears and PreOTs frequently have considerable BPC on being asked for earlier similars. Usually it's just the PT occurrence that's charged. Asking for or demanding an earlier similar that doesn't exist is a frequently reading line and a frequent source of BPC that's encountered when repairing past auditing. And when you are doing a repair on past auditing and found a reading line, if it doesn't F/N on indication, there might be an earlier similar in an auditing session but it is unlikely that there would be anything earlier than auditing sessions that was similar. So if the PreOT goes BIs when you are asking for an earlier similar, be alert for and ask whether you are "asking for an earlier similar when there isn't any earlier similar?"! It will clean up and F/N on indication.

The most thorough way to clean up past auditing is to make a list of all the pc's past auditors (by name), noting the read on each as the PreOT names the auditor (or by assessing the list for reads). Include on the list "solo auditing," "self-auditing" and "ethics actions" - these often being heavily charged.

Start with the biggest reading name and repair that auditor's auditing, then take the next biggest reading and so on. This list could be made up from the PreOT's folders if these were available but that is factually not as effective as simply having the PreOT recall and tell you the names of his past auditors (which also gives the read on each as he recalls them).

You start with a reading/charged auditor, find out what auditing that auditor did and use the appropriate correction list or lists to repair that auditing. You might also need to additionally use an LlC if it was rough auditing.

There are two main indicators that you use during this action a) what the meter reads on and b) what the PreOT is interested in.

Using "Full Flow Tables" and FESes are mostly a waste of time and although that has been done earlier, it is not as effective as asking the PreOT and usually gets into a lot of unnecessary, uncharged and uninteresting actions - thus it tends to create BPC, rather than get rid of BPC.

As a note, when you repair a listing or L & N action there frequently is no right item to be found because each BT would have had a different item for the list or no item for the list, or, any item found could be right for one BT but wrong for everyone else. So repairing past L & N usually consists of getting rid of wrong items/wrong indications, rather than finding new items.

When "self-auditing" or "solo auditing" read, simply repair them as above using the appropriate (or most appropriate) repair list or ask the PreOT what the BPC or error was.

Repair lists can be too heavily depended upon. Much of the time the PreOT can spot what the error was or what the BPC was. Always accept and go by the PreOT's data and consult the PreOT.

A special note regarding solo on III. Aside from the usual errors or sources of BPC one would expect on III, there are also sources of BPC that one could expect in view of the AAV data so far, e.g., trying to run a BT/cluster on Incident II or Incident I when it didn't have them, when it was hung up in some other incident entirely, or when it had an earlier Incident I or when it only ran copies of other BTs' Incident II or Incident I. Sometimes a BT has read on " trying to run incident II (or I) when it wasn't reading?" and there is the additional question that came from original AAV research of "an earlier universe?" It turned out that some BTs were hung up in an earlier universe, not in this universe.

Mostly these BTs blow simply on Indication of the right BPC without any further action being required. The reason for that is that the BTs that you are encountering at this stage of the rundown, although they are low in awareness, are sufficiently high in awareness that they could almost run whatever was taken up in the past auditing that you are now repairing. Or they were aware enough that they could at least respond to it in a kind of a way, even though they couldn't run it. So they're almost ready to blow and usually, for example, it's sufficient for the BT to realize he was trying to run one thing when he was actually hung up in something earlier or that he was out of PT and he wakes up and takes off!

Whether you have completed all the steps/actions of repairing past auditing or not, do not continue this step if the PreOT loses interest in it. That is an indication either that this step is complete or that you have made an error that you need to repair before continuing. When successfully completed this step of repairing past auditing usually results in a pronounced resurgence for the case!

A later addition to the beginning steps of the AAV program is the assessment and handling of a 53 as the first action and review and clearing up of any misunderstoods on III as the next action followed by repairing any BPC on III before actually getting into AAV.

That completes the theory and description of the first major part of the rundown. Doing these steps thoroughly and well makes it possible to go on to successfully do the following steps of AAV. Conversely any trouble later in the rundown will often trace back to another BT or cluster who was hung up in some BPC in past auditing.

With the advent of tremendous amounts of sec checking and heavy ethics actions over recent times, it can be predicted that there will be much to clean up on PreOTs who have experienced these actions. The amount of BPC that could result from a lot of accusative sec checking and the tremendous amount of misownership of overts, cleaned cleans, asking for earlier similars when there was none, degradation, wrong items/wrong indications, etc., could be enormous. Enough to roboticize many PreOTs. But it could be handled using these same past auditing repair steps and would result in a spectacular resurgence.

David Mayo

Web auditing at any place of the planet http://webauditing.org
Сообщений: 1946
Зарегистрирован: 25 июн 2011, 15:42

Вернуться в Free Zone english materials

Кто сейчас на форуме

Сейчас этот форум просматривают: нет зарегистрированных пользователей и гости: 5