This Post from Oleg Matveev, Moscow e-mail: inbox@olegmatveev.org web: http://www.olegmatveev.org web: http://om.ability.ru ICQ: 137429867 SMS: +7 903 1149340 Skype: algis-om mailing list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theta-tech/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Tone Scale Items Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Tone Scale Items By Robert Ducharme February 23, 2004 >From a post to the R3X thread on the Freezone America Board: Posted on Monday, February 23, 2004 - 01:17 pm: It pays to assess the tone scale as a source of charge. A lot of people seem to indicate on anger and fear, but those are among the more obvious dramatizations in society. The other tones may actually indicate more strongly, which is why assessment pays off. What running out a tone level does is to take any out-of-controlness off that tone level and so the person can afterwards dramatize that tone or not at will if he so chooses. What else running it does is to take all the overts and motivators off of the item so that it is then clean of any hidden postulates. I find that practically every item you can name is classifiable under one tone level or another. So why not start by running out the entire tone level rather than running "fear of cats" or "sadness about death" or "angry at parents" etc.? Why not run "fear", "grief", and "anger"? Robert D. Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. Paul's Squirrel Academy: Telepathic Metering 4 Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Telepathic Metering 4 By Robert Ducharme October 30, 2003 >From a post to the Freezone America Board: Posted on Thursday, October 30, 2003 - 12:06 pm: The funny thing about telephone auditing is that anybody could do it and it would expand the auditing field tremendously, and yet I note so little being mentioned about it. As for "telepathic metering", nothing could be simpler or more natural, providing one has a sensitive enough meter. I use a Clarity meter with a homemade clear plastic tone arm disk and the sensitivity set at 32. I can't imagine that anybody here couldn't get reads telepathically when auditing someone. And the reads are quite reliable. When I see a blowdown, I know something has changed for the Pc. When I see an F/N, I know that an end of cycle has been reached. I used to (and sometimes still do) have an often recurring dream, that I was finding piles of valuable and not so valuable coins on the ground and everybody else around walked by ignoring it it all while I got busy scooping it up. I don't know if that was a metaphor for the tech I've been using or the financial gains from doing that, however moderate. In any case, I see a virtually unlimited market for people who would like to get over deaths of loved ones or past traumas and mishaps, locate the cause of their children's depression, clear up their floundering relationships, etc. There are many avenues by which to advertise this - new age publications for starters. I'm only one person and I have no way of being able to handle that many potential PCs, not to mention students, on my own. There's a whole world out there that is suffering and wishing for answers. We don't need to start with formal orgs. We could start with processing out peoples' engrams and past upsets. Do it with dianetics and it can all be done easily by phone. One possible bridge for the beginners (whether auditors or PCs) would be to clear up their entire present lifetimes with four-flow lock scanning on all the stressful incidents of this lifetime, done using the tools and techniques contained in the R3X write-up. That alone could keep a lot of people busy for a long time. Whatever is done, any action is better than no action. The only thing I would caution people to do is to get formally trained somewhere (Rey Robles' place in Sedona, Arizona, for instance) so that one can be equipped to have and maintain a continuous streak of successful sessions. Nothing is more depressing for an auditor than to give his Pcs loses. Auditors with continuing overts on auditing will eventually quit the practice altogether one way or another. The best way of ensuring a perfect track record is to make sure that no session is ended off with anything less than an F/N and VGIs - or at the very least a flat point and a red flag. I believe we have the makings of an internet-centered org with the telephone as the main vehicle for auditing. People only need to believe that it can be done. Once enough people found out and told other people about this, then there could be an eventual critical mass reached where it would become "the thing to do", and eventually at some point, even the mainstream media could no longer ignore scn tech. But the way to start is by doing something that one has certainty on (Dianetic auditing, for instance) and building on that. I'm reminded of two old sayings: "Every journey begins with the first step." and "Watch out for that first step, it's a doozie." :-) The latter one can be mitigated with proper formal training. Robert D. Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. aul's Squirrel Academy: Telepathic Metering 5 Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Telepathic Metering 5 By Robert Ducharme November 14, 2003 >From a post to the Freezone America Board: Posted on Friday, November 14, 2003 - 07:41 am: Why everyone doesn't just try out telepathic metering is a mystery to me. It's very simple. You just get on a meter - I use the Clarity at sensitivity 32 - and run a simple process like Straightwire on another person while holding the cans and watch for meter reactions. That's all there is to it. There's no mental preparation, no "right thinking", no ceremonial dancing, or any other additive needed. You just audit as usual except that you're holding onto the cans instead of the pc. Now I won't guarantee you can do L&Ns successfully this way (I won't say you can't, either) but it is very useful when doing Dianetic auditing and you want to keep track of how the pc is progressing. I find it invaluable for this purpose. But now I don't have to rely on the pc's conscious reality. I can immediately tell if a process is not flat yet or if something is changing in the pc's space. The added bonus is that the auditor I can better track with a pc the way only auditors who can see PCs' pictures have been able to do so without doing this. Those are the auditors who have had a reputation for being a cut above everyone else. But now anyone can have that advantage with the help of the meter. Robert D. Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. Paul's Squirrel Academy: Telepathic Metering 3 Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Telepathic Metering 3 By Robert Ducharme September 5, 2003 >From a post to the Freezone America Board: Posted on Friday, September 05, 2003 - 09:58 pm: I wouldn't get my hopes up too high that the reads would necessarily coincide [i.e. with the auditor and pc each holding a set of cans simultaneously]. I would just try the solo cans and practice using the meter telepathically for a while until it becomes obvious that the reads are on the Pc and not the auditor. I use the meter mainly for simple things like detecting areas of charge and spotting release points and EPs. For more exacting uses like spotting specialized meter phenomena like D/Ns and rocket reads, I think it would be wise to stick with the traditional method. Because I deal mainly in engram running rather than Scn-style processing, I don't need to worry about exotic reads. I just want to know if and how much something reads on the Pc, and what in general is going on in the Pc's universe from moment to moment during a process. Robert D. Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. Paul's Squirrel Academy: Shock Moment Handling Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Shock Moment Handling By Robert Ducharme April 20, 2003 Shock moment handling: Sometimes an incident contains a moment of heavy shock that doesn't resolve readily with other processing. It can be handled with this rundown. The shock moment handling is simple. It's done with Multiple Viewpoint Dianetic Processing as applied to the shock. It's done only after all the other handling on the incident, as previously outlined, has been completed. 1. First the Pc is asked if there is a moment of shock. If there is one, then the next steps apply. If there's more than one, the initial one is the most important and should be taken up first (unless unusual circumstances dictate otherwise). 2. The Before/After process ("Spot a moment before the shock" "Spot a moment after the shock" done 1,2,1,2..) can be done on the shock in order to open it up and make it more accessible. 3. The Over/Under process [Ed. note--now called "Above/Below Process"] can be run on it to lighten the charge. 4. Next the Pc is given the command: "Move through that moment of shock from beginning to end" repetitive to flat point. 5. The Pc is then asked to name the relevant other viewpoints (persons involved) in the incident. 6. The Pc is then asked to assume the viewpoint of the first person and given the command "from the viewpoint of ...(person's name)...move through that moment of shock from beginning to end" repetitively until flat. 7. The same is done with each of the other relevant viewpoints in the incident (perpetrators, helpers, onlookers, etc.). Some need to be taken singly while others can be grouped together. 8. I then have the Pc take a pan-determined viewpoint and run the incident from that perspective. 9. Check if there are any later shocks that are relevant and run those too if necessary. Usually running the initial shock is sufficient. That is normally enough to take care of any shock in an incident. Shocks persist because of confusion of ownership. The above process is aimed at sorting that out. Havingness as well as all the other auditing basics still apply. Robert Ducharme Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. Paul's Squirrel Academy: Shift Handling Checklist Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Shift Handling Checklist By Robert Ducharme April 20, 2003 SHIFT HANDLING CHECKLIST: 1. Before/After process on the shift 2. "Move thru that moment of shift from beginning to end." 3. Viewpoint after shift 4. Viewpoint before shift 5. Viewpoint of others 6. Viewpoint of creations 7. Pan-determined viewpoint 8. Viewpoint of aesthetics 9. Viewpoint of ethics 10. Viewpoint of Being 11. Viewpoint of Infinite Being (All That Is) 12. Viewpoint of Source (of All That Is) 13. Viewpoint of Static ("As Static, experience that moment of shift from beginning to end") 14. Viewpoint of Static run backwards. 15. Handle any unwanted feelings from the incident. 16. Check back on the present status of any phrases, feelings, or shocks noted down on the work sheet from later incidents and handle accordingly. 17. Handle goals. There are always at least two as relates to the item. 18. Get and handle computation. There is always at least one. (If the Pc if insists there is none and none can be found, then it may be better to let it go at that, but that's very rare. Finding a computation can sometimes be tricky.) 19. Run "Responsibility" process on incident. 20. Scan four flows from basic to PT. 21. Scan the item itself: "Scan out the item _____ wherever you find it exists in the universe" or any similar command. (This step works on high-level Pcs, but it's still experimental at this time as to who it can be used on.) 22. Ask Pc how the item is. 23. Scan session 24. Run havingness processes. End of checklist. Robert Ducharme Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. Paul's Squirrel Academy: Running Rudiments with R3X Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Running Rudiments with R3X By Robert Ducharme June 19, 2003 >From a post to the R3X thread on the Freezone America Board: Posted on Thursday, June 19, 2003 - 07:10 am: Running Rudiments with R3X Style Processing This is a procedure that should have been included in the R3X writeup. When a Pc starts out a session keyed in by the recent past, instead of running three rudiments (ARC Break, Missed Withhold, PTP) I simply have the Pc scan the recent past out. Normally that will be the period since the last session. It's simply running R3R narrative style with the Over/Under process [Ed. note--now called "Above/Below Process"]between the first set of commands and the last set of commands. The commands for this are: 1. Move to the beginning of that period of time. Scan through to the end of that period of time. (Done once) 2. Get that period of time and put it above you, below you, right of you, etc. (Until the process is flat) 3. Move to the beginning of that period of time. Move through to the end of that period of time. (Done until flat) This method works every time, and because of the Over/Under [Above/Below] process , does not run as shallow or hang up on engrams as simple lock scanning might, and does not take an inordinate amount of time to complete. I don't like to take up single incidents, but I will make exceptions if the situation warrants it. I don't have anything against the use of the standard rudiments, but when auditing without [the Pc holding the cans], it's better to have a process that doesn't depend on following or indicating reads. Robert D. Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. Paul's Squirrel Academy: New Bulletin Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Dramatizations By Robert Ducharme October 10, 2003 From: A post to the FreeZone America Board: Posted on Friday, October 10, 2003 - 10:56 pm: When I run a Pc on an item, I will make sure to leave each incident flat before moving on to the next incident, unless of course the Pc brings up the next incident, at which time he should be run on that. If the Pc brings up several incidents at one time though, I will normally handle them all at once. I don't run "marathon sessions" any more. One to two hours is average for a Dianetic session. Often a chain will be run over the span of several sessions. I always make sure to leave the session with the incident flattened. But until the entire chain is completely flat and the shift run, the Pc may still dramatize the item between sessions, and often will. Often the key-out from the session will last a couple of days after which the dramatization will resume. Of course, if the chain is abandoned, it will eventually "key out", and the person will normally feel the same after the item has been run as before, or maybe somewhat better, but the item will still be far from completely handled. So, between sessions, dramatizations of the item can be expected in many cases. But it's usually no worse than before the chain was started on. If the item is run, even on four flows, on just this lifetime, or a few lifetimes back without going further, no matter how "wonderful" the EP was, the item will likely continue to plague the Pc. Any further "handlings" on the item other than continuation of the chain will only be more solutions upon solutions - in other words, Q and A. The item, to be handled correctly, MUST be taken to its pre-MEST basic incident and the shift handled. Sometimes you can get away with not handling the shift, but too often that will end up with a still-charged basic that will rob the Pc of benefit of the full E.P. (item stably no lon ger an issue; Pc takes full responsibility for its initial creation; regained aspect of self previously tied up in maintaining the item) I'd much rather be safe than sorry. No harm is done by running the shift handling commands once even if they're already flat. Now I've been talking here about life ruins, not just wimpy items that one runs on things like the Dianetic drug rundown. I only run items that really indicate to the Pc. Dianetic drug rundowns are something else. Robert D. Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. Paul's Squirrel Academy: Auditing as a Career Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Auditing as a Career By Robert Ducharme August 28, 2004 From: "Robert D." Date: Sat Aug 28, 2004 3:53 pm Subject: Auditing as a career Many people got trained in the church for the purpose of devoting their lives to a career in the field of Scn as an auditor. Unfortunately the church experience has been a bitter disappointment for most. And we see very few of these people practicing their craft in the free zone. The main reasons for this include: 1. Disinterest in the subject, 2. Preferred interest in other areas, like family, higher-paying jobs/careers, etc., 3. Fear of the church's influence, 4. Ignorance regarding marketing, 5. State laws regarding counseling, 6. An inability to achieve 100% reliable results on their clients. Numbers 1 and 2 are understandable. Some people don't like auditing just like some don't like art or engineering while others do. Some would rather be involved in a "real world" profession that has already gained acceptance and automatically pays high salaries. Some simply don't like the idea of dealing with peoples' cases. Number 3 is understandable from the standpoint that one's close friends and loved ones may be involved directly with the church and one would rather remain "in the closet" regarding free zone activities in order to not jeopardize those relationships. I consider personal freedom a high price to pay for maintained relations, but it's that individual's choice to make for his own reasons. As far as fear of retaliation by the church for "squirrel" activities is concerned, well, I suppose that tends to happen only in areas heavily populated with Scios (with a capital "S") like Los Angeles. I don't know how founded these fears are, but I would tend to look for some way out of that box and "start living". Number 4 is also understandable. An auditor on his own has to pull himself up by his own bootstraps, pushing a profession that has little agreement in the wog world. But there are enough scios (with a small "s") outside the church alone to provide one with clientele. But there is also a proliferation of publications that are tailor made for an auditor to pitch his trade. Such magazines as the ubiquitous pulp new age and health magazines, some of which are distributed free, are possible avenues of advertisement. The practice of bringing a resolution to a troubled mind is a valid, valuable and a viable one. The more people find out about it, the more viable it will become in time. Number 5 should not become an impediment. In Florida we are fortunate that counseling laws are liberal. Anyone can legally call himself a counselor. In some states one must meet certain educational criteria and be certified by the state to call himself a counselor and charge a fee. An option is to become a minister and come under the cloak of religion. The Universal Life Church offers ministerial certificates on demand. Number 6 has unfortunately been a valid impediment -- that is until the advent of R3X. What R3X does is to open the doors to the possibility of running Dianetic counseling on anyone and everyone with equal success. No, not equal results, but equal degree of success. In other words, the tech IS so standard that it applies to everyone across the board whether they have had set-up procedures or not; whether they are non-Scios, intermediate Scios, or pre-OTs. As LRH once said in HCOB 7 April 1960, "Engram running from 'away back' works so well that I probably would not have advanced auditing technically to any degree, if people at large had been able to apply Book One engram running as given in 1950." Of course LRH was missing a few factors that could have brought that about, like havingness, a rote basic procedure, debugging techniques, engram running by chains, TRs, metering, admin, a standard course with checksheet, and study tech. So now one can achieve results with R3X that are as predictable as those of a dentist or optometrist. It's up to us as to how widespread we want the knowledge of Dianetic counseling as an acceptable professional practice to become. Robert D. Copyright (c)2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Charged Terminal Rundown Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Charged Terminal Rundown By Robert Ducharme December 24, 2003 >From a post to the R3X thread on the Freezone America Board: Posted on Wednesday, December 24, 2003 - 10:59 am: SCANNING TERMINALS BY FOUR FLOWS: CHARGED TERMINAL RUNDOWN I've been testing out this process lately with great success. Scanning used to be a standard procedure in the early '50s and then it was dropped. Why it was dropped is easy to understand. By itself it's a flawed process. It tends to run shallow. Running into engrams can stop the process in its tracks and throw the PC into an overwhelm. If not run properly it can restimulate areas of life that would be better left undisturbed for the time being. Yes, I'm familiar with potential shortcomings of lock scanning. They are not anything to be concerned about though, and never come up as a problem in a standardly run R3X session. The results of scanning terminals by four flows, although nowhere near as spectacular as contacting whole-track basic-basic on a chain and running it out, nevertheless are spectacular enough in their own right. I've seen it magically clear up relationships, whether intimate, casual, work, or otherwise. I've never tried, but I suppose it could be run on various dynamics too, but I'd rather wait to do that thoroughly with R3XD. Procedure The first thing one does do is to determine which terminal is to be run. That can be arrived at with 2-way comm or assessment. Usually parents are good terminals to start with, with later terminals often being restimulators of the parents. Next the span of time to be addressed should be established: the entire lifetime on the subject of the terminal, or just a segment of time. Breaking it down by segments and running it segment by segment, usually from the later segment on the track (closer to present time) to earlier, is the more conservative approach. I limit the use of this technique to only this lifetime. Engram running by chains is still the mainstay technique in my arsenal, but when this lifetime needs to be destimulated, scanning periods of time, whether in general or with particular attention to specific terminals, is my technique of choice. The next thing is to give the PC an R-factor of what is expected on flows 2 and 3. Flows 1 and 4 are self-explanatory. Flows 2 and 3 can but do not necessarily include the terminal being run. In other words, it's a wide open command that allows for anything the file clerk is willing to present. So if the terminal is "your father", the "another or others" can be anybody, father or otherwise. It is important that the PC allow the file clerk to present whatever needs to be viewed. Forcing a particular image or scene into view by the PC is not part of the process and only detracts from it. Also the term "With regard to..." is made sure to be understood by the PC. It means the same thing as "On the subject of _____" or "With respect to _____", or "Concerning _____" or "As regards _____". The best approach is to first run the 6 Direction Process [Ed. note--now called "Above/Below Process"] to EP on the terminal itself before doing the scanning. If one does this step, it is done right after assessing for which terminal to run. I do this step to reduce the charge on the terminal at the beginning in order to make the scanning easier. Besides, it might key out earlier-similar whole track terminals, so it wouldn't hurt to add this step every time. Commands on general terminals like "a father" as opposed to "your father" are better since they don't limit the parameters of time. Specific terminals will work, but general terminals that represent the specific one, are always better. Sometimes I'll make an exception and use specific terminals though, as with certain co-workers for instance, but that's a judgment call. Qualifying adjectives like "terrible" or "stupid" or "good" etc. are never used in this process. (References for this can be found in the 1st Melbourne ACC lectures) So that process would go: "Get the concept of a father" "Alright" "Put it above you" "Good" "Put it below you" "Good" "Put it to the right of you" "Good" "Put it to the left of you" "Good" "Put it in front of you" "Good" "Put it in back of you" "Good" etc., etc..... When the person has EP'd on it, he will find that he has to actively put the picture there -- that the automatically occurring charged facsimiles will have vanished. Here are the scanning commands: Move to the beginning of that period of time. From that point forward to _____, with regard to _____, scan through all the incidents where... (Flow 1)...you experienced stress. (Flow 2)...you caused another or others to experience stress. (Flow 3)...others caused others or themselves to experience stress. (Flow 4)...you caused yourself to experience stress. This process is done in conjunction with the 6 Direction Process [Ed. note--now called "Above/Below Process"] . With few exceptions, I always end off with the scanning command once more to make sure the period of time in question is flat. What the 6 direction process does, essentially, is to extricate the PC from identification with the terminal or incident. If a certain incident shows up that is particularly charged, like a heavy engram or secondary, it is wise to stop and address that single incident until flat, and then return to the more general scanning. As always, running havingness, at least at the end, is important when running these processes. Also, scanning the session at the end is always a good idea. Robert D. Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Differences Between R3R and R3X Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Differences Between R3R and R3X By Robert Ducharme April 20, 2003 With R3R the auditor tends to end off on a late-on-the-chain win. With R3X the auditor always asks for an earlier incident regardless of wins. The two additional questions besides the "earlier-incident" question, are "Is there an earlier incident - possibly before the beginning of time - where you had the feeling of ...(item).....?" for a pre-MEST basic, and "Is there an earlier incident - possibly around the original separation from theta (or "split-off from Static" or something to that effect) where you had the feeling of ......(item)....?" for Basic-basic". With R3R the auditor tries to get the PC to an earlier incident first chance he gets. This has at least two liabilities and is a bad policy. With R3X the auditor flattens each incident along the way per narrative incident running technique. With R3R the chain ends with the asking of a postulate. With R3X the moment of shift (the earliest one) is asked for. I never ask for a shock any more BTW, only a shift as that is more causative and earlier. With R3R you can't use additional tools. With R3X ample use is made of the Over/Under [Ed. note--now called "Above/Below Process"] and Before/After process, and occasionally Alternate Confront. The O/U process tends to undercut running of heavy masses and series of incidents, the B/A process tends to open up occluded incidents and rapidly and painlessly dispatch single incidents, and A/C tends to reveal the hidden underpinnings of grinding incidents. I rarely have to resort to the latter any more. The O/U is the most powerful and useful process of the three as far as I can tell. You can also shift over to entity handling if it's appropriate. With R3R you can't run anybody above Grade 4. With R3X you don't have to worry about who you run whether in the pre-OT or "non-interference" zone. With R3R you hopefully get a resolution of the item, most likely as a late-on-the-chain key-out. With R3X you get a permanent resolution of the item by reason of the Pc taking full responsibility for it along all dynamics. In addition, the Pc recovers long-lost aspects of himself from the incidents. With R3R the commands are rote. With R3X the commands are always fitted to the needs of the moment. R3R is used mainly for handling somatics. R3X is used for mainly spiritual expansion. With R3R you ask for the beginning of the incident.With R3X you ask for the point just before the incident began (so as to include the shift/shock of every incident). With R3R you ask for "an earlier incident". With R3X you ask for "another incident", except in instances the auditor would determine the word "earlier" to be more apt for the given situation. Robert Ducharme Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Do the Usual Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Do the Usual By Robert Ducharme April 19, 2002 >From a post to the R3X thread on the Freezone America Board: Posted on Friday, April 19, 2002 - 01:40 pm: WHEN CONFRONTED WITH THE UNUSUAL, DO THE USUAL I gave a session to a Pc who had previously achieved an "ascencion experience" or "epiphany" (I hate to call it simply "exteriorization"). Three days later he started having chronic tired feelings. So I had him run the whole period of time with a combination of R3R narrative and Over/Under [Ed. note--now called "Above/Below Process"]. Afterwards he said he still was stuck on the part about the crash. So I had him get that point of crash (coming down) and did the O/U process on that until it went flat. He cognited, reluctantly, on his own participation in the whole debacle. Afterwards he said he felt back on top again and his tired feelings and headache were suddenly gone. He just realized that staying on top of things required him to maintain a certain level of ethics in order for him to accomplish that. Several times I was tempted to revert to some other process (though I knew better) since the O/U process was taking some time (about 180 commands in all), but in the end persistence in sticking to the same process paid off. Two lessons were evident here: 1. Adding complexities to a Dianetic processing program like correction lists, int/ext, prepchecking, L&N, etc., not to mention DCSI or Clear Certainty R/D was not needed to handle this type of problem. Dianetics in one form or another is a universal solvent for problems. 2. Persistence on one course rather than deviating from procedure pays off. For all practical purposes, Over/Under, Before/After and narrative style Dianetic R3R are interchangeable in Dianetic sessions, though they each serve specific functions. I've never run into any problems in interchanging them. Robert D. Copyright (c)2002, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: New Bulletin Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Dramatizations By Robert Ducharme October 10, 2003 From: A post to the FreeZone America Board: Posted on Friday, October 10, 2003 - 10:56 pm: When I run a Pc on an item, I will make sure to leave each incident flat before moving on to the next incident, unless of course the Pc brings up the next incident, at which time he should be run on that. If the Pc brings up several incidents at one time though, I will normally handle them all at once. I don't run "marathon sessions" any more. One to two hours is average for a Dianetic session. Often a chain will be run over the span of several sessions. I always make sure to leave the session with the incident flattened. But until the entire chain is completely flat and the shift run, the Pc may still dramatize the item between sessions, and often will. Often the key-out from the session will last a couple of days after which the dramatization will resume. Of course, if the chain is abandoned, it will eventually "key out", and the person will normally feel the same after the item has been run as before, or maybe somewhat better, but the item will still be far from completely handled. So, between sessions, dramatizations of the item can be expected in many cases. But it's usually no worse than before the chain was started on. If the item is run, even on four flows, on just this lifetime, or a few lifetimes back without going further, no matter how "wonderful" the EP was, the item will likely continue to plague the Pc. Any further "handlings" on the item other than continuation of the chain will only be more solutions upon solutions - in other words, Q and A. The item, to be handled correctly, MUST be taken to its pre-MEST basic incident and the shift handled. Sometimes you can get away with not handling the shift, but too often that will end up with a still-charged basic that will rob the Pc of benefit of the full E.P. (item stably no longer an issue; Pc takes full responsibility for its initial creation; regained aspect of self previously tied up in maintaining the item) I'd much rather be safe than sorry. No harm is done by running the shift handling commands once even if they're already flat. Now I've been talking here about life ruins, not just wimpy items that one runs on things like the Dianetic drug rundown. I only run items that really indicate to the Pc. Dianetic drug rundowns are something else. Robert D. Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. Paul's Squirrel Academy: New PC Assessment Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: New PC Assessment By Robert Ducharme September 12, 2004 >From a private e-mail to and from Robert on the subject of how to find out what to run on a new client: At 11:06 AM 9/11/2004 -0700, you wrote: >Hi Robert, > >It's a question of writing about something that is probably so obvious >to you, but isn't obvious to someone who has not audited a lot of >people. > >Someone telephones you and says, "Er, hello, is that Mr. Ducharme?... >My name is Mrs. Jones. I got your name from Dr. Kendrick, who >suggested that I call you." > >What happens next? "Tell me, Mrs. Jones, what seems to be the >problem?" Or, "Mrs. Jones, who are the main people in your life?" >Or, "Mrs. Jones, what is your attention on?" >Or, "Mrs. Jones, what causes the most stress in your life?" > >Would you first go for terminals? Feelings? Periods of time generally? > >Please give a bit more detail. > >Paul It's very intuitive. I just give a D of P interview and find out what needs to be handled. It's like one does Book-1 auditing. You 2-way comm with the person to find out what the person's needs are.and then handle them. I don't have any complicated system, but if anyone needs one, the R3RA model will do. When I run out of troublesome incidents (like father's death, or operations, or his past regarding his suppressive boss), I will normally do life scanning, then do whatever chains need to be addressed, and when I know the person can run basic-basic with the shift, I can then go on to running the dynamics. Robert Copyright (c)2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Other Topics Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Other Topics By Robert Ducharme April 20, 2003 OTHER TOPICS Remote Metering Because of the phone processing setup, I use the meter on myself while running the Pc, and have been doing so for years. That way I can telepathically track with the Pc much more easily than otherwise. It's an ability that anyone is capable of. It's important to get a good Free Zone meter and set the sensitivity relatively high. On the Clarity meter I always set the sensitivity at 32 for remote metering. Not Indicating F/Ns When Dianetics is audited without a meter, one needn't indicate F/Ns. I figure why not follow the same method whether a meter is used or not. I never indicate F/Ns because I audit remotely by phone and use a meter remotely and telepathically by holding onto the electrodes myself. I have found no liability to not indicating F/Ns, plus it eliminates the meter dependency factor as well as wrong indications. Handling of Rudiments Of course the drugs-alcohol-aspirin-sleep-food issues still apply. As to problems, ARC breaks, and missed withholds, if the Pc has out-ruds, I merely have him lock scan from the previous session to present time. I accomplish that with the help of the Over/Under process. The commands are: 1. Get a concept of that period of time. 2. Put it above you..... (etc. with the Above/Below process) 3. "Move to the beginning of that period of time" "Scan through to the end of that period of time." That's the basic formula, but the auditor can tailor-make the procedure to suit the Pc and the circumstance. Robert Ducharme Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: R3X as a Total Tech Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: R3X as a Total Tech By Robert Ducharme December 5, 2003 >From a post to the R3X thread on the Freezone America Discussion Board: Posted on Friday, December 05, 2003 - 02:06 pm: R3X AS THE COMPLETE TECH R3X is not everything, but it is a complete tech. By that I mean that a Standard Dianetic auditor with no other training could apply nothing but R3X and handle anything a Pc could come up with. Ruds needed? Scan out the recent past. Life repair needed? Scan out periods of time with regards to certain subjects, like relationships, parents, school, work, etc. Mid ruds or end ruds needed? Scan the session out and take it from there. Entities bothering the Pc? Just continue to run the incident until the entity is freed. There are, of course, several ways of directly handling entities if need be, which from my experience, rarely happens, and which I won't go into here. Issues hard to come by? Scanning out the present lifetime section by section will keep the Pc busy improving his case until his ability rises to where he can tackle past lives. What I'm saying is that one could practice as nothing but an R3X auditor and be able to handle anything and everything that the Pc comes up with. And the need for a separate C/S is not absolute. Because of the simpicity of the approach, one can do quite well C/Sing his own work. Non-Clear auditors would probably be better off using a C/S, however. Not only that, but with R3X, one can handle every level from "raw meat" FORMER mental patients (don't want to deal with people while they're still on medications) to high level pre-OTs who've completed their bridges. And to tell you the truth, I find such former mental patients to be among the best Pcs. They tend to have plenty of obvious issues to work on, make noticeable gains, and are extremely grateful for the service provided, having already experienced the best the psychs had to offer, which is pitifully little and still in the dark ages. I have two such persons on my lines at this time (referrals from Dr. Herring) and they are both making excellent progress. What all that means is that anybody who is a Dianetic auditor could make a viable practice out of auditing. Yes, I believe in training even though I don't deliver it myself, but that's easily available, whether in Sedona, or with the Metapsychology people (www.tir.org), or with any of a number of Free Zone groups. The Free Zone can debate issues until Doomsday, but things will only start happening on a large scale when each individual in the Free Zone takes up the responsibility by either getting trained, training, auditing, receiving auditing, promoting the tech, or any combination of those. What I've done is outline a very simple, relatively quick, yet very effective way in which that could be done. Robert D. Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: R3XD Auditing the Dynamics Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: R3XD Auditing the Dynamics By Robert Ducharme April 20, 2003 AUDITING THE DYNAMICS Once a Pc can be counted on to reach basic-basic, he can be started on the dynamics. This is essentially what Revenius was referring to when he originally named the process Routine 3 Expanded by Dynamics. I caught on a year later and started doing this action, and it has been a resounding success. The dynamics are run out one after the other in order 1 through 8. The basic command is ".....an incident where you experienced the ...(number)... dynamic." One would start by getting the dynamic defined. Next step would be to ask the Pc to expand his space to encompass the ...(number)... dynamic. That would be followed by the command "Locate an incident where you experienced the ....(number)... dynamic." This should always be taken back to basic-basic and the shift handled. If a person wants to go even further along this line, he can also do each of the dynamics through again, but this time "as the viewpoint of the All That Is", with the commands changed to fit that format. Robert Ducharme Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: R3XD Name Change Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: R3XD Name Change By Robert Ducharme November 12, 2003 >From a post to the R3X thread on the Freezone America Board: Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 08:44 am: I've decided to change the name of the R3XD process to R3X, or Routine 3 Expanded. This is to clear up any confusion on what it is. The original intention by Revenius was to run the dynamics with an engram-running technique. He had stated as much in his posts and I dismissed it at the time thinking it couldn't be right because it would encompass too much and would most likely be overwhelming or run too shallow. So I wound up just writing up the process I was doing at the time and called THAT R3XD. Exactly one year later, a client, a non-Scio psychic lady who had never heard of Revenius and little about Scn, told me that a being she perceived to be Ron was telling her he wanted me to run my process on the dynamics. The attempt to convey a message despite the lady's lack of knowledge of Scn concepts like "dynamics" was not the most simple to do. But to make a long story short, I eventually understood and afterwards applied it - with phenomenal success. So now I would like to make R3XD the process where the dynamics are run, as originally intended, and R3X the basic process itself as run on any item, whether all the way through to the shift or not. That way, the original intent of the term can be applied and put into proper perspective, and a distinction can be made between that and the basic process used. My apologies for any further confusion this change might cause. Robert D. Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. Paul's Squirrel Academy: Above/Below Process Not as Tiring Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Above/Below Process Not as Tiring By Robert Ducharme April 26, 2002 >From a post to the R3X thread on the Freezone America Board: April 26, 2002 [Ed. note--Revised to replace "Over/Under" with current name of "Above/Below"] Dianetic auditing is peculiar in that it is very mechanical and linear. As such it can require effort and so be very emotionally tiring for the Pc. The A/B process, on the other hand, bypasses a lot of needless efforting on the part of the mind in running incidents, so you get the same benefits without the exhaustion. The arbitrary here is not the Pc's case but the process. A/B is a workhorse process that has no equal. It is what makes it possible for me to run raw meat on Dianetic auditing effectively and efficiently. Just this morning I got a raw meat Pc to run out the last 13 years with regards to her work, which had a lot of misemotional content connected with it. That got done in the span of one hour. I could never have done that without the A/B process. Of course I always wrap up a segment of time with scanning to make sure it's all flat and nothing else surfaces, which it often does. By the end of the A/B running, the Pc is normally ready to scan such relatively large periods of time. But what CAN definitely cause the track to temporarily occlude is asking for earlier incidents before the later incident is flattened. Of course flattening each later incident doesn't preclude the inclusion of separate incidents as earlier beginnings. Robert D. Copyright ©2002, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology™. Dianetics™ and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. Home -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Above/Below Process Shortens Time Spent in Handling Chains Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Above/Below Process Shortens Time Spent in Handling Chains By Robert Ducharme May 21, 2004 >From a post to the R3X thread on the Freezone America Board: Posted on Friday, May 21, 2004 - 09:01 am: [Revised 9/21/04 to update the name of the process to the current one of "Above/Below"] SHORTENING THE DURATION OF A SOMATIC CHAIN Unburdening a Chain with the Above/Below Process More and more I've been applying the Above/Below process to the chain of incidents run with R3X. If the person is running a dynamic as a chain, I will have him get the terminals related to the chain and run that. For instance, on the first dynamic, I'll say "get the concept of a self" (or a first-dynamic identity). It doesn't matter which self the pc deals with, whether it's his or another's. Whatever the mind presents at the moment is the best thing to use. The concepts can tend to change from command to command, and that's okay too. Then it's "Put it above you" "Good" "Put it below you" "Good", and so on. On running terminals one runs the process past F/Ns to the point where no further change occurs - per the Auditor's Code. The latter is very important to getting superior results from this process. For a chain like "fear", I'll say "Get the concept of any and all terminals--people, places, objects, energies, spaces, situations, creatures, etc.--that you associate with fear." Then I will give the Above/Below process commands on that. Running this process tends to speed up the running of an engram chain. It can be done on the same item on more than one occasion too. Unburdening the Dynamics with the Above/Below Process I think it's good to run the dynamics on the Above/Below process anyway, regardless of whether one runs R3X on them or not. It's not stable or dramatic like R3X, but it definitely has its benefits. One could go through the dynamics one after the other in succession and then start with the first again on through to the eighth, and continue this until no more charge is had. That would be a quick key-out way of clearing the dynamics, but it would be well worth doing regardless. I've had great success with running "an entity" (7th dynamic) on this process, by the way. It doesn't necessarily replace running the entities' cases should that need come up, but it greatly reduces their overall influence and sets a case up for running the entity case. For non-Dynamic items, it may be possible to add flows to the process. I haven't worked that out yet so I won't speculate on how the commands would go. Robert D. Copyright (c)2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Abridged Recap of R3X Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Abridged Recap of R3X By Robert Ducharme April 20, 2003 Brief overview First I run the item by R3R, with the provisos I outlined below in the differences between R3R and R3X (in other words, per the standard R3X procedure up to the shift). Then, when I've gotten the Pc to basic-basic, I ask for the shift moment (equivalent to the shock moment of PAB 80 that Ron never pursued any further). There will ALWAYS be one. I then get the Pc to assume the viewpoint of each of the dynamics at that moment and then view the shift from each of those vantage points (the list has been updated on formerscio). That's the most crucial part of the shift handling process. It's like each of the dynamics doing a contact assist. Next I ask for the main goals (which cause the persistence) and flatten those by repeater. Then I ask for a computation (which justifies the game's perpetuation) and flatten that by repeater. Then as a final touch, I run "Responsibility" on the incident. By this time the Pc is ready to take honest and full responsibility for the incident along all dynamics. Then to "polish off" the end product I have the Pc scan his track on the given item on each of the 4 flows. I always end off with the scanning of the session and two havingness processes. That's basically all there is to it. >From the Start to the Shift Run the item as one would with R3R as modified by the R3X write-up. Be sure to flatten each incident along the way. R3X up to the basic incident is basically run with the rules of the R3R narrative procedure except for the "earlier incident" command. If the Pc says there is no earlier incident to a MEST universe incident previously run, ask "Is there an earlier incident, possibly before the beginning of time..." or "...in the Theta Universe..." --whatever indicates to the Pc-- where you had the feeling of ...(item)...?" All items have their basis in the Theta Universe. Even body problems have comparable concepts in Theta incidents. If the Pc says there's no earlier incident but has not hit basic-basic, ask: "Is there an earlier incident, possibly around the original separation (individuation, breakoff) from Static (Source, yourself -- whatever indicates) where you had the feeling of ...(item)...?" The basic incident should have a pleasant pre-beginning. If the incident starts unfavorably, then have the Pc look for an earlier beginning until he finds a point before the bad feeling starts. When the basic incident, hopefully basic-basic, has been flattened completly, the auditor asks the Pc for a moment of shift, the first one, and asks to Pc to describe it (like "from what to what?"). Handling the Shift The following is the checklist of points covered in the shift handling as I do it now. It's a rudimentary list and is only an adjunct to the full writeup of the R3X process found on the Freezone America web site www.freezoneamerica.org. I run this process on people on an almost daily basis and have been doing so for the last several years. The process, when done correctly, will resolve the item in question smoothly and flawlessly every single time. Each individual action is done to the E/P of F/N, cognition, VGIs. No need to insist on what the cog was, though. Doing so (or any roteness) can be annoying to the Pc. * before/after process on the shift * "Move thru that moment of shift from beginning to end." * viewpoint after shift * vp before shift * vp of others (Others can always be found after the shift if not before, and should be run regardless of Pc interest in that one) * vp of creations (This is the MEST equivalent. Any creations, energies, agreements, etc. will do) * pan determined vp * vp of aesthetics * vp of ethics [ * vp of games (...or not. I've dropped it as a command) ] * vp of being * vp of infinite being (All That Is) * vp of Source (source of All That Is, source of all consciousness) * As Static ("As Static, experience that moment of shift from beginning to end") * As Static backwards ("As Static, experience that moment of shift backwards from the end to the beginning.") * Check for any undesirable feelings from the incident and handle. By this time there are normally none left. * Check for goals and handle. There is always at least one pair of goals in opposition as relates to the item. You may have to start the Pc out on repeating one goal first until the opposing goal becomes more real to him, at which time you have him repeat both. * Get and handle computation. There is always at least one. (If the Pc if insists there is none and none can be found, then it may be better to let it go at that, but that's very rare. Finding a computation can sometimes be tricky - especially when running the dynamics.) * Run "Responsibility" process on incident. The Pc should wind up taking full responsibility for the basic incident. * Check back on the present status of any phrases, feelings, or shocks noted down on the work sheet from later incidents and handle accordingly. By now they should all be flat. * Scan 4 flows from basic to PT. * Scan the item itself: "Scan out the item ..... wherever you find it exists in the universe." or any similar command. (This step works on high-level Pcs, but it's still experimental at this time as to who it can be used on.) (I have dropped this step too.) * Ask Pc how the item is. * Ask him if he could recreate it again if he wanted to. (This is an optional step.) * Run havingness processes. Robert Ducharme Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. Paul's Squirrel Academy: Dianetic R3X Checksheet September 14, 2004 Revised September 21, 2004 Version 1.02P Print Version This checksheet is based on Robert Ducharme's write-ups on R3X that are currently webbed at http://www.freewebs.com/paulsr3x PRE-REQUISITES: 1. Student Hat or Clearbird equivalent (NOT the BSM or equivalent)Student sign_________________________ 2. Full TRs Course (0-9)Student sign_________________________ 3. Metering CourseStudent sign_________________________ 4. Book 1 Course or similarStudent sign_________________________ 5. HSDC or NED CourseStudent sign_________________________ 6. Is in PT competent at Study Tech, TRs, metering and basic Dianetic auditing with full adminR3X Course Sup sign_________________________ BRUSH-UP: Before starting this checksheet, the student must be a competent student and auditor. There is NO basic auditor training on this course--no meter drills, no Auditor's Code, no Auditor Admin--only items about R3X. If the student needs any brush-up on Study Tech, Metering, Basic Auditing, or Dianetic theory as covered on a regular Dianetic Course like NED, this must be done before starting this course. HOW THIS COURSE IS STUDIED: Study Tech is to be applied in full throughout this course. "Demo" would usually mean just drawing something out in a diagram for oneself. It could include working something out in clay for oneself--it does not need to be checked out by another. Per the PL "Use of Demonstration", it does NOT mean shuffling a few paper clips around. The clay demos are checked out by the supervisor, and are marked "Sup pass" accordingly. The theory items marked "Student" (in the onscreen version, not the print one) need to be understood by the student, but are not star-rated. All the items marked *rate (*Article in the print version) are to be *rated, with no fast flow allowed. No exceptions. This includes anyone labeled "fast flow" or "superliterate" or anything else. Some drills are done by the student alone; some with a coach. Drills are continued until the student can perform perfect procedure at length. The purpose is to equip the student to deal correctly with whatever may come up in an R3X session. Many drills on this course are done by the student without a coach. In these drills, the completed worksheets are passed by the supervisor. The final drill MUST also be passed by the supervisor. No exceptions. Student's Name_____________________________________________ Date Started_________________ Date Completed_________________ The sign-off lines are for the person concerned to put his initials and date. The date is important, and it should be clear what the year is although it is not necessary to repeat it on each line. "PA 8/22" or similar is what is intended. The pre-printed "N/A" on a sign-off line means "Not Applicable". But every one of the blank sign-off lines is applicable, and each one needs to be signed and dated by the person concerned, depending on which column it is in. Initials and Date Stdnt Coach Sup SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION TO R3X 1 . *Article 12/5/03 R3X as a Total Tech _____ _____ _N/A_ 2 . Demo What you will be able to handle as an R3X Auditor _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 3 . Demo Who you will be able to help as an R3X Auditor _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 4 . Article 11/12/03 R3XD Name Change _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 5 . Demo The difference between R3X and R3XD _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 6 . Article 4/20/04 Meter TA Knob Preparation _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 7 . Practical Cut a plastic disc and affix it to the TA knob of your meter, per the article. _____ _N/A_ _____ SECTION TWO: STARTING OFF--THIS LIFETIME R3X 1 . *Article 8/2/04 Starting R3X _____ _____ _N/A_ 2 . Demo Simple R3X procedure on a this-lifetime incident _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 3 . Drill Simple R3X procedure on a this-lifetime incident, with a doll, meter, and keeping admin including the above/below shorthand: 1. Have pc locate the incident, spot duration, move through, recount it, all with no problems _____ _____ _N/A_ 2. Run the six-step Above/Below procedure to EP, all with no problems _____ _____ _N/A_ 3. Have pc move through incident again, and then run Above/Below process, a couple of times to VGIs, all with no problems. _____ _____ _N/A_ 4. Have pc locate the incident, spot duration, move through it, recount it, it's scanty or occluded. _____ _____ _N/A_ 5. Run the Before/After process to EP, then continue with steps 1 and 2 as usual to EP. _____ _____ _N/A_ 6. Drill TR-4ing the pc on any aspect of the incident still remaining, and handling it with Above/Below as usual. _____ _____ _N/A_ 4 . Article 4/26/02 Above/Below Process not as Tiring _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 5 . *Article 4/23/02 Lock Scanning in R3X _____ _____ _N/A_ 6 . Demo Demo the advantages of lock scanning over single-incident technique _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 7 . Clay Demo Scanning out various subject tracks of the pc's with R3X _____ _N/A_ _____ 8 . Article 5/27/02 R3X on a Child _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 9 . Demo Running a lower gradient than lock-scanning: A/B on a charged terminal to EP; then A/B on the terminal and pc together to EP; then A/B on the period of time. _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 10 . *Article 4/20/03 Lifetime Clearing _____ _____ _N/A_ 11 . Demo Finding charged terminals and associated periods of time from the pc, and running them with R3X (A/B and scanning) _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 12 . *Article 6/19/03 Running Rudiments with R3X _____ _____ _N/A_ 13 . Drill Use a doll and a meter and worksheets, but no coach. Handle an out-rudiment situation with the pc by moving through the appropriate recent period of time once; do the A/B process; then move through the recent period of time until flat. _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 14 . *Article 12/24/03 Charged Terminal RD _____ _____ _N/A_ 15 . Drill Use a doll and meter and worksheets, but no coach for all this series of drills. They are drills in getting familiar with the patter. Drill finding out from the pc a list of charged terminals and determining which one to address first. Immediately running the A/B process on that terminal, preferably in the general version, before starting any of the scanning procedure _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ Establishing the span of time (in this lifetime) to be addressed _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ Explaining to the pc what is expected on Flows 2 and 3 _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ Running R3X on that terminal for the first period of time on Flow 1 _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ Running R3X on that terminal for the next periods of time on Flow 1 _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ Running R3X on that terminal for the periods of time on Flow 2; then 3; then 0 _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 16 . *Article 5/21/04 Above/Below Process Shortens Time Spent in Handling Chains _____ _____ _N/A_ 17 . Drill Use a doll and meter and worksheets, but no coach for this drill. Drill the patter for running all terminals associated with an item on the A/B process. _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 18 . Drill Using a doll and meter and worksheets but no coach, drill unburdening the dynamics with the A/B process. _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 19 . *Article 4/20/03 Shock Moment Handling _____ _____ _N/A_ 20 . Demo Handling a heavy this-lifetime shock moment that hasn't otherwise resolved _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 21 . *Article 8/8/04 Lifetime Scanning _____ _____ _N/A_ 22 . Demo Demo when you would need to interrupt Lifetime Scanning to do R3X on a single incident _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 23 . Drill Lifetime Scanning, with a doll, meter and worksheets and a coach. The coach indicates TA motion and no-motion and answers for the doll. Drill using the full wording for the commands as you would with a real pc. 1. Scanning out a recent period of time the pc has been complaining about, including the Above/Below Process. _____ _____ _N/A_ 2. Scanning out the past week, or month, including the Above/Below Process. _____ _____ _N/A_ 3. Scanning out this year so far from the beginning of the year, including the Above/Below Process. _____ _____ _N/A_ 4. Scanning out the period of time that the pc has known a particular (charged) terminal, including the Above/Below Process. _____ _____ _N/A_ 5. Scanning the first ten years of life, from birth on, no flows, including the Above/Below Process. _____ _____ _N/A_ 6. Scanning the above, but starting with the Above/Below Process on the period of time. _____ _____ _N/A_ 7. Scanning the above, but starting with the Above/Below Process on heavily charged terminals, either singly or as a group. _____ _____ _N/A_ 8. Lifetime scanning, in ten year increments, on Flow 1, with the Above/Below Process as usual. _____ _____ _N/A_ 9. Lifetime scanning, in ten year increments for flow 2, then 3, then 0. _____ _____ _N/A_ 10. Handling a heavy this-lifetime shock moment that hasn't otherwise resolved _____ _____ _N/A_ SECTION THREE: FULL R3X PROCEDURE 1 . Demo Each command of R3X Procedure as you are studying it (remember, these are diagram-type demos and not shuffling paper clips around) _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 2 . *Article 4/20/03 R3X Procedure _____ _____ _N/A_ 3 . Drill Full R3X procedure, including the shift handling. Use a doll, meter and worksheets, but no coach. The main purpose of this drill is to get familiar with the patter and procedure. _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 4 . *Article 8/26/04 Special Attention Process _____ _____ _N/A_ 5 . Clay Demo Why these additional commands (Special Attention Process) can dig up more charge after the pc says the incident is "flat". _____ _N/A_ _____ 6 . Drill With a doll, meter and worksheets but no coach, drill using the Special Attention Process: 1. After "flattening" an incident with General R3X, running with the Blank Command (plus the usual Above/Below process) _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 2. ...the Effort Command.... _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 3. ...the Emotion Command.... _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 4. ...the Thought Command.... _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 5. ...the Comm Line Command.... _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ SECTION FOUR: ADDITIONAL DATA RE R3X PROCEDURE 1 . Demo As you are studying the next issue, demo the important points of EACH of the 32 headed sections. _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 2 . *Article 4/20/03 Additional Notes _____ _____ _N/A_ 3 . Article 4/20/03 Additional Processes _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 4 . Article 4/20/03 Other Topics _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 5 . Demo The benefits/liabilities of not indicating F/Ns in R3X _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 6 . Article 10/10/03 Dramatizations _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 7 . Article 4/19/02 Do The Usual _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ SECTION FIVE: RECAP OF R3X PROCEDURE 1 . Article 4/20/03 Abridged Recap of R3X _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 2 . Article 4/20/03 Differences Between R3R and R3X _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 3 . Article 4/20/03 Shift Handling Checklist _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 4 . Demo Using the shift-handling checklist when you are very familiar with the procedure to make sure you don't omit a step on a pc _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ SECTION SIX: C/S'ING, PROGRAMMING 1 . Article 4/20/03 R3XD: Auditing the Dynamics _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 2 . Article 2/25/03 Possible Items _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 3 . Article 7/28/03 A Rehab with R3X _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 4 . Article 2/23/04 Tone Scale Items _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 5 . Article 9/12/04 New Pc Assessment _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 6 . Demo Where to get items to run on a pc. Include two-way comm on the pc's current life. _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 7 . Essay How an auditor could never run out of items to run on a pc if the pc remains willing to be audited. _____ _N/A_ _____ SECTION SEVEN: TELEPHONE AUDITING AND TELEPATHIC METERING 1 . Article 6/28/04 Telepathic Metering _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 2 . Article 10/30/03 Telepathic Metering 1 _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 3 . Article 11/14/03 Telepathic Metering 2 _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 4 . Article 4/26/02 Telepathic Metering 3 _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 5 . Article 4/26/02 Telepathic Metering 4 _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 6 . Article 9/5/03 Telepathic Metering 5 _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 7 . Clay Demo Telepathic Metering and how the mechanics of it might work _____ _N/A_ _____ 8 . Drill 1. Face to face, COACH holding cans (plugged into the meter), student produces needle actions on coach as in E-Meter Drill 16 (The Production of Needle Actions), mainly trying to produce falls, until he knows he can get reading items on the coach. _____ _____ _N/A_ 2. Face to face, COACH holding cans, student assesses lists by Tone Arm (as in E-Meter Drill 23) until he knows he can get reading items on the coach. Use any lists. _____ _____ _N/A_ 3. Face to face, STUDENT holding cans, student produces needle actions on coach as in E-Meter Drill 16, mainly trying to produce falls, until he knows he can get reading items on the coach (the coach's items reading, not the student's, while the student is hooked up to the meter). If the student has a dirty needle getting in the way, clean it as in E-Meter Drill 17 and 20. Coach must also ensure student's TR-0 is in on the coach. If needed, False Data Strip the subject of telepathic metering, including studying a simple text on the subject, but this is not a mandatory step before attempting the drill. _____ _____ _N/A_ 4. Face to face, STUDENT holding cans, student assesses lists on coach by Tone Arm until he knows he can get reading items on the coach. _____ _____ _N/A_ 5. Using a telephone, not in the same room, STUDENT holding cans, student produces needle actions on coach until he knows he can get reading items on the coach. _____ _____ _N/A_ 6. Using a telephone, not in the same room, the student holding the cans, student assesses lists on coach by Tone Arm until he knows he can get reading items on the coach. _____ _____ _N/A_ 7. Repeat drills 5 and 6 with a different coach, doing earlier drills 4, 3, 2, 1 if needed with the new coach to get through drills 5 and 6. _____ _____ _N/A_ 8. Repeat drill 7 with a third coach or as many as needed. The purpose of the drill is not to "find coaches who read well" but to demonstrate to the student that remote metering is possible on almost anyone. _____ _____ _N/A_ 9. When you know with certainty that you can do telepathic auditing, and the Supervisor agrees, get a Sup Pass on it. _____ _N/A_ _____ SECTION EIGHT: AUDITING R3X AS A CAREER 1 . Article 9/26/02 Auditing Business Idea _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 2 . *Article 8/28/04 Auditing as a Career _____ _____ _N/A_ 3 . Demo How auditing others relates to the greatest good _____ _N/A_ _N/A_ 4 . Essay How one could make a living as an R3X auditor and whether this would be beneficial _____ _N/A_ _____ SECTION NINE: FINAL THEORY DRILL 1 . Drill With a coach, meter, worksheets and full admin, drill full R3X procedure until confident and competent. The drilling can cover anything studied on the course, but must as a minimum include: 1. Running this-lifetime R3X on a new person, encompassing: 1A. Assessment (by meter and/or interest) for charged terminals and items _____ _____ _N/A_ 1B. Running with lock-scanning and A/B both generally and with four flows _____ _____ _N/A_ 1C. Handling a heavy shock-moment that doesn't resolve with simple R3X handling _____ _____ _N/A_ 1D. A Charged-Terminal Rundown _____ _____ _N/A_ 2. Full R3X Procedure, encompassing: 2A. R3X procedure going whole-track on routine incidents _____ _____ _N/A_ 2B. Use of the Special Attention Process on heavily-charged incidents/implants _____ _____ _N/A_ 2C. Full shift-handling procedure in the basic-basic area _____ _____ _N/A_ 2D. R3XD: Auditing the Dynamics procedure _____ _____ _N/A_ Drill Sup gives pass when he is confident student can do all the procedure. Sup does not have to witness the student doing every single little piece that the coach drills. _____ _____ _____ SECTION TEN: PRACTICAL Note: Students may audit other students for their auditing requirements, except for item #5, which requires a raw pc. C/S Signs: 1 . Practical Audit R3X this lifetime on someone, face-to-face or remotely, to a good result. This may take one session or it may take more than one session. _____ _N/A_ _____ 2 . Practical Audit full R3X procedure including the full Shift handling on someone, face-to-face or remotely, to a good result. This may take several sessions. _____ _N/A_ _____ 3 . Practical Receive R3X procedure, remotely by telephone, to a result and the personal certainty that it works. _____ _N/A_ _____ 4 . Practical Audit full R3X procedure on someone, including the full shift handling, remotely by telephone, to a good result. _____ _N/A_ _____ 5 . Practical Procure a non-Scio raw-meat pc yourself, through your own out-reach actions, and audit him/her on R3X, by telephone with remote metering, to a good result. _____ _N/A_ _____ SECTION ELEVEN: COURSE COMPLETION STUDENT ATTEST: I have applied study tech throughout this course and I have honestly completed every item of this checksheet, as well as its prerequisites, and I am confident I can audit any normal person on R3X. Signature__________________________________ Date__________ THEORY SUPERVISOR ATTEST: I have trained this student to the best of my ability, and he/she is competent to audit any normal person on R3X. Signature__________________________________ Date__________ AUDITING SUPERVISOR ATTEST: I have supervised this student's auditing on this course, and he/she has demonstrated competence at auditing R3X and has completed each of the practical requirements of this checksheet. Signature__________________________________ Date__________ CASE SUPERVISOR ATTEST: I have C/S'd this student's auditing on this course, and he/she has demonstrated competence at auditing R3X and has completed each of the practical requirements of this checksheet. Signature__________________________________ Date__________ Optional QUAL CHECK if there is a separate Student Examiner/Review section: QUAL IN: Signature__________________________________ Date__________ QUAL OUT: Signature__________________________________ Date__________ Return checksheet to the student for safe-keeping. R3X Checksheet version 1.02P Print Version. September 14, 2004 Revised September 21, 2004 Copyright (c)2004 by Paul Adams http://www.fzglobal.org or http://www.freewebs.com/fzglobal END OF CHECKSHEET This checksheet may be copied for personal use in the Freezone, but may not be published in any form (e.g. in print, on a web site, on a CD or DVD) without the express written permission of the author. The only locations authorized to display this checksheet are Paul's Squirrel Academy and Paul's R3X. If any others are authorized, they will be listed here. Please report any offenders to the author. Copyright (c)2004 by Paul Adams. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Additional Notes Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Additional R3X Notes by Robert Ducharme April 20, 2003 Grinding and Earlier Beginning If an incident seems to be grinding, check for an earlier beginning. You could also ask him if the charge is coming from that incident or from elsewhere. If it's coming from that incident, then it's probably an earlier beginning, even if it's an earlier incident the Pc identifies as part of the incident being presently run. As a last resort, the alternate confront process can always be used. But it's always best to stick with procedure as much as possible rather than to go into unusual solutions. Incident getting worse When the Pc says that the incident got worse or stronger after the last pass through, you can ask him if he means that it got clearer or more real. If so, that should count as erasing, not more solid. An incident needs to be confronted before it's left for an earlier one. Yes, that's important. One really wants to be running OTs with bright 3D perceptions of these incidents. One is erasing charge but the incidents don't disappear. At this level the Pre-OT is actually restoring communication and reach into the locations and times of the incidents. Revenius The whole idea is to disconnect the incident from the charge. Every incident can and should be run in the manner the narrative incident is run in the R-3R materials. Acknowledgments Acknowledgments (e.g. good, fine, alright, okay, thank you) need to be given after every command has been carried out and every question answered by the Pc. The reason is basically because it makes the Pc feel like he has been heard and smoothly completes the cycle of communication. The only exception to this rule is when having the person doing a mockup during a havingness process. To acknowledge the mockup would tend to as-is it prematurely. Definitions A Pc must fully understand each command before running it. If there is any doubt about any word, it should be defined. Any good dictionary can used for this. Before defining the term, I will ask the Pc what he thinks the definition is. This will get him to compare his past concepts of it with the common meaning. It will also validate his knowledge about it if he is right. In any case, I have found doing that to be a more causative and interesting way of defining known words because of the active rather than passive role it promotes. It causes him to look and create rather than just passively think about and accept it. Previously unknown words are a different matter, and are handled without this step. Erasing or going more solid Incidents usually go through a bell curve pattern over a series of recountings where the incident may appear to get more solid, with TA rising, reach a peak, and then wane to erasure. The initial rise in TA is usually only the result of the Pc encountering more charge in the incident. When in doubt, the auditor can always ask something like "Is the charge coming from this incident, or elsewhere?" Each incident needs to be discharged before asking for an earlier similar, otherwise the earlier incidents can tend to run shallow or be blocked from view by the charge connected to the later incidents on the track, drawing the Pc's attention toward them and away from earlier track. Failure to consider this phenomenon has been one of the major weak points of the old R3R system. Yes, that was covered in Class 8 but never really exported from there. Revenius Pre-MEST universe incidents These incidents have far more charge to them because in that realm there is more free theta and more ability to create that charge. The pre-MEST area should be the minimum target for any auditor processing an advanced Pc. Physical universe incidents are minor by comparison. Clears and above normally have little trouble accessing this realm. When accessing pre-MEST incidents, Pcs will notice that time as we know it becomes nonexistent or irrelevant. Also it should be really stressed that the PCs postulates on the early track are much stronger. So when you're getting up into the OT realms you could well get more charge off repeating the postulates than anything else. Revenius To ask for time or duration will often get a confused response from the Pc., which is why I have dropped those steps. The incident that must not be unmocked When the pc says that the as-isness of a particular incident will result in the destruction of the universe (or God, or oneself, or the auditor, etc.), you may rest assured that that's nothing but a postulate put into the incident to keep the pc from looking and thereby as-ising it, and that the universe will in fact not blow up or vanish. At least we've been lucky so far. Auditor Zero Attitude The secret to great auditing as opposed to good or average auditing lies in zero attitude - no attitude, full TR-0 - during the session. The auditor must be completely without emotional reaction for the period of the session lest his case get entwined with the Pc's, even if only on a telepathic level. This means that the auditor must be totally non-judgmental in words and thoughts. "Positive emotions can stick you as an ally and get a propitiative PC." Revenius Roteness of Commands and Clears A fatal error in running Dianetics on Clears occurs when the Pc is fast while the auditor is rote. The auditor will say: "Move to that incident". Pc: "I'm there..." (itsas about it and blows it by inspection). Auditor: "What is the duration of the incident?" etc. etc. If the auditor is not tracking with the Pc, obnosing the situation, watching the meter for BDs and querying them, or running rote commands just to be following procedure blindly, he can cause the Pc to unwittingly dub in an incident, creating protest charge in the Pc and mess up the session. When dealing with advanced and fast Pcs, the auditor must follow the Pc's lead, not the other way around. The auditor must at the same time, however, remain in control of the session. The Shift The Shift is an interesting phenomenon. It evidently contains no time, and yet it contains all the postulates in the incident. It is the "prior cause" in the incident, and so is the important part of it. When the incident is run to a flat point, the shift will still be there. Rarely though, it will be blown along with the incident. But the shift still needs to be asked for. If the auditor asks for a shift and the Pc gives an at-effect experience, he should be wary of this and ask for the point where the Pc was feeling "like himself", and then have him move forward to find the shift moment. This is similar in many ways to finding the misunderstood word, i.e. going back to the point where one felt comfortable with the text and moving forward to the blank area. The transition point is the misunderstood word. That could also be called the moment of shift. The blank period following the M/U is comparable to the Dianetic incident. Blow the prior confusion and the blank period following blows with it. Shock or Shift? I have used both terms, and both work. However, the term "shift" is more cause than the term "shock". They usually occur pretty much simultaneously, but sometimes the shock occurs after the person creates the postulates and then shifts. The end result can still be erasure of the item, but the responsibility level tends to be higher when "shift" is used. The shift is what the Pc considers to be the single most significant part of the incident - at least by the end of the handling. Alternate Confront Process, Use of This process is extremely useful in unblocking stuck areas of track. The commands are: "What part of that (incident, shift, or whatever) would you be willing to confront?" and "What part of that...would you rather not confront?" This is done to an EP. Like everything else, don't overrun. The EP usually happens fast. When the Pc "Blows the Shift" Along with the Incident I have determined that EVERY basic incident contains a shift point. It may appear to be blown, but it should be found and run anyway. I would probably choose to cancel any future R3XD with someone who refused to run a shift after reaching basic-basic than to continue to process without handling shifts. The Influence of Personal GPMs on Present Time Normally the GPM will start out being "way back on the track", but then as it is run, it will tend to encompass the entire track including present time. The Pc will often say things like "This is the story of my life", or "This has been the story of all my existences along the track", or "this incident is still happening right now". This apparency will blow off as soon as the postulates are discharged and the shift cleaned up. This term "personal GPM" could get confusing. We're dealing with an engram that's significant in the Actual GPM and could be a joining of several chains on several dynamics. It's a point of significant valence shift in the living of the GPM. ? Revenius I have since come to the conclusion that what one is dealing with in R3XD is nothing less than Actual GPMs, that is, self-created basic GPMs. The reason I refrain from using the term "Actual GPM" is because it has certain connotations from the old GPM tech from the 1960's which could be confusing. The term "GPM", however, I still maintain is a proper word for what R3XD deals with, despite what some "authorities" may maintain. The evidence of that is in comparing the definitions of the GPM from the Tech Dictionary and from some of the GPM lectures with what is being run with R3XD, and in the fact that no mental mass will stand up to the R3XD procedure properly run by the book. Indicating F/Ns Since I have been auditing this procedure almost exclusively by phone, I have cut out F/N indications entirely. I have found absolutely no liability to doing this. What I do instead is to thoroughly acknowledge the end of cycle. So instead of saying "Your needle is floating", I might say something like "Very good. Alright." or something similar to let the person know I completely agree with his end of cycle. Like everything else in auditing, it should be spontaneous and heartfelt, not rote, even if it's predictable. Preclears tend to benefit from very standard session procedure but it will bog down a fast running OT. Revenius Through the "No Earlier Incident" Block The R3R procedure is usually run in such a way that the auditor will accept almost any win as a basic incident. This leaves the Pc with a mere key-out instead of an erasure, no matter how significant the cognition or how early on in the MEST universe it happened. This must be balanced with the rule of not pushing the Pc past his capabilities. It's even deeper than erasure really. I would go for restored ability to pervade the space and time of the incident. - Revenius When the command "Is there an earlier incident where you had the feeling of...(item)...?" is used, and there is a read, you can ask "Did you think of something when I asked that?" and 2-way comm it. Steering is an option, but I'd rather keep the Pc from being meter dependent, so I use that method as last resort. If I get a "No" response but the meter did read, I will ask "Did you you have a thought flash by right when I asked that?" or something like that, and pursue that. If nothing shows up, I will then ask (always with good TR-1) "Is there an earlier incident before the beginning of time where you had the feeling of ...(item)...?" If the Pc is well set up, this question should read big time. So then you run the pre-MEST universe bank back earlier similar, earlier similar, until there is nothing earlier. Then you ask for the flow zero incident with the command "Is there an earlier incident where you caused yourself to have the feeling of ...(item)...?" If it doesn't indicate to the PC, then you run the shift on the incident just run. If at any time there is a bog on running the shift of that incident, one place to look at is an earlier incident again. Sometimes it will surface when running the later shift triggers it. This phenomenon rarely occurs though. If the incident already handled seems to the Pc like it might be the basic, the auditor can give the Pc the R-factor that the E/S question is routine and may not indicate. The earliest incident I've ever seen people run has been the "Original Separation from Theta" incident as mentioned on the "Individual Track Map" in the Tech Bulletins, which evidently is on everybody's track. Each Pc seems to have a unique take on it, but the basic story is similar from Pc to Pc. Not every Pc is ready to run this incident. Some run it the first time they have a session. Once a Pc runs this incident, it will thereafter probably be "basic-basic" for all or most subsequent items run thereafter. This is good and will lead to accelerated positive case change for him. Apparently basic-basic can have many aspects, each of which may constitute a GPM incident in itself. Through the Past Life Barrier If the pc has never run past lives but is willing to, you can get him started when he has no earlier incident this lifetime. You give him the E/S command and hope for the best. The following are some methods of approach when he does not respond favorably to the E/S command: 1. You give him the "earlier similar" command, check the meter for an instant read, and then you can ask him if a picture, thought, or feeling flashed in his mind when you asked the E/S question. Then you follow that up. 2. You can ask him if he can still feel the somatic he started the session with. If so, you can ask him to use his imagination and tell you what sort of scenario might explain or accompany the picture, thought or feeling he has. The same means can be used to open up blank areas of track like operations or implants. Then you get the Pc to "make up a story" about what the incident would be like if it were to have happened. Then you run him through it again and again until his reality on it picks up and the incident eventually flattens. Pay special attention to areas he talks about that gets good reads and have him expand on those. Handling of Feelings From the point of asking for feelings in the shift on forward, all feelings are put into a statement (postulate) form by the preclear and then repeated until flat. The preclear can, and should, change the wording if it changes for him to something more appropriate while repeating. (Always preface the questions with "in or around that moment of shift...) For example, "fear" can become "I can't confront anything," or "This is more than I can bear," or "I have to avoid this situation at all costs". Fear could also be simply "I am afraid". The Pc should break down the feeling into its component parts if possible, but he should not be forced into an unreality either. I always try to get the Pc to get the phrase down without using the name of the emotion (like "afraid") in that phrase. If possible, the Pc should repeat the postulate as though he were making it in present time: "I can't confront" rather than "I lost my ability to confront". But this a judgment call. If he's not stating it as if it's present time then he's looking back on it and isn't as-ising it. You can shift tenses for him. For example if he says "I lost my confront" you could lead in with "Get the point where you are losing your confront -- what's the postulate you are making?" - Revenius Also, qualifiers should be eliminated such as "I feel like" or "I guess". The idea is to get the Pc as close to duplicating the original postulate as possible. Again, if it's real to the Pc, he can run a statement like "I feel..." and see where it leads. Best to let the Pc be the final judge, or at least not force him into a direction that is unreal to him. After they have been repeated a few times, I will ask the Pc "How does the feeling of _____ seem to you now?" If it is flat, I will go on to the next feeling. If it is not flat I will have the Pc look at the feeling as it is now (I ask "What does the feeling seem like now?") and have him turn that feeling into a statement form and repeat that until flat. Postulates often contain a pronoun such as "I" or "me" or "you". If the Pc doesn't know what to look for and needs help, the auditor can suggest possible phrases in question form like "I can't _____ any more?" or I'm unable to _____?" or "I'll never _____ again?". If Pc still cannot find wording for the feeling, then he can be started out by having him use the phrase "I have to _____" or "I have to avoid _____" along with the appropriate ending, and have him repeat that. Another way is to lightly suggest some possible phrases to him. The stable datum here is that all feelings are basically postulates. If it is a feeling of pain or physical sensation, there may be no words for that yet (this rarely occurs. Just have the preclear feel that feeling in the sense of accepting it and letting it follow its cycle to completion). After you ask, "How does it seem now?" it may be in a form which can be run as a postulate by repeater technique. You don't want to be handling present time somatics with the repeater technique, so if there is any question about that, ask if that somatic is part of the pre-MEST incident being handled or if it's only present time. Dichotomies It doesn't hurt to ask if a feeling being run has an opposing side like "I hate you" and "I love you", or "I can't _____" and "I must _____". If it does, the two sides are run by repeater technique 1,2,1,2,1,2 to a flat point. In fact, sometimes it's necessary to run the opposite side for it to blow. Op-Term Feelings It's also good to check for any feelings any opposition terminals had and run those out too by getting the Pc to repeat the op-term phrase from the op-term's point of view. Yes, plus the other dynamics. Let's say you start in with a feeling of degradation about an RPF assignment. You'd want to pick up the emotions and postulates throughout his group. These things are part of the telepathic aspect of the incident that needs to be addressed and would block an EP if left there. Another point that needs to be thrown in is the old "Stuck pictures" from '68 . Incidents can hang up on those points and earlier Dianetics was a bit too rote to get them. Stuck pictures are normally handled by using the Before/After process. ADDITIONAL NOTES SINCE THE WRITEUP OF 29 APRIL 2000 The Primary Purpose of this Process It must be kept in mind that the primary purpose of running R3XD is not to take away a person's items and restimulations. The purpose is to locate and discharge GPM masses at their source, thus bringing about maximum case gain per session hour. It may appear to be just a "negative gain" process at first glance, but it acts positively in restoring a being's full responsibility for his creations. The end result is a greater degree of OT ability. Basic and Basic-Basic Any incident can act as a "basic" as long as the charge is keyed out. I consider the "Original Separation from Theta" incident to be basic-basic. Any later incident, with no apparent earlier incident on the chain where the charge is at least keyed out, I call a basic. Stuck Picture If Pc complains of a "stuck picture", give him the commands, "Spot a moment before the picture", (ack); "Spot a moment after the picture" , (ack) repetitively, done 1, 2; 1, 2; 1, 2; etc. until the picture frees up. Entity Interference with Session If the presence of an entity is found to be interrupting the session, find out if it's in present time or in the incident. If the entity is in the incident, ignore the entity and follow standard procedure. If the entity is in the present, use entity handling tech and return the Pc to the standard session as soon as possible. Entity handling, as relates to this procedure, is not a priority and so should not be done unless the standard session becomes stalled as a result. No Auditor's Ego For maximum results, the auditor must be completely egoless during the session, which means full attention on the Pc, and muzzled auditing with minimal communication, and no flippant remarks, jokes, or questions that are not pertinent to the sessions, i.e. no communications that take the Pc's attention away from his case. The auditor's curiosity is not important, his understanding is. Questions aimed at clarifying possible misunderstoods by the auditor are permissible in order to avert a break in reality in the session and to keep the auditor tracking with the Pc. Pc Trying to Solve his Problem Once in a while the Pc will attempt to offer a solution or try to justify the situation, as by looking at it philosophically rather than run through the incident or shock moment one more time. This should be viewed as an effort to alter-is rather than as-is and should not be countenanced. If this gets in the way of the session, the pc might well be given an R-factor on what is expected of him, and then the standard procedure continued. Session Problems/No Correction Lists Needed In all the time I've been auditing this process I've never needed a correction list for a session problem. At the first sign of trouble I simply ask the Pc what's going on, and I find that the Pc knows and will arrive at the answer if asked for it properly. The rule here is, "If you know the tech, you'll know which questions to ask". Auditor Faith The auditor should have faith in himself and in the process, and persist through any problems that might arise. Above all, the auditor should never panic, but always remain in control. Auditor's negative reaction can be sensed by the Pc. If the auditor is truly stumped - which should rarely - if ever, happen, he should end session, reassess the situation, and resume when ready, preferably within 24 hours. Not Repeating Truthful Statements The repeater technique for the shift moment is done on statements with charge on them. If they're compulsive or lies, such as "I have to avoid pain" or "I'll never be the same again", then it can be repeated. If they're truths and uncharged like "I'm at cause" or "I'm not a victim", they should not be repeated as they will not as-is (unless of course there's a compulsive element to it). Sometimes the Pc has to have it clarified as to what is expected when "postulates" and "feelings" are asked for. Incomplete Sessions Incomplete sessions can be emotionally troubling for the pc and should be handled as soon as possible, preferably within 24 hours. If, after hours of auditing a chain, the Pc becomes exhausted to where his ability to function is lowered, it may be best to call off the session and resume at a later time when the Pc can function more optimumly. But this should not be done if it can be avoided, and the Pc should be returned to session as soon as possible. Blowing Charge by Inspection Use of this ability should not replace the detailed knowledge of incidents, especially when dealing with the basic on the chain. If a Pc appears to be "glibbing" his way through, he may have to be hatted on the value of thoroughly reexperiencing the incident as it was when it was first created. Those who are used to running NOTs procedure eventually get to a point where they "spot and poof" charge on incidents without going into any detail. This may or may not achieve the deep level as-isness required for deep case change. It may be on the same order as blowing a lock on a chain, which is fine for removing present time restimulation, but is different from recovery of abilities, which is the goal of R3X. Ideally, the Pc should be able to reexperience incidents in 3D holographic detail. In pre-MEST incidents, the existence of things may be more conceptual than substantial, but the impact is greater because of the higher degree of responsibility for creation in that era. The more thoroughly and exactly that can be re-experienced the better, especially if it contains pain and other heavy sensations. This is not to say that a Pc should be slowed down because things happen fast for him. The right speed is whatever speed works best for the Pc. Shallow Sessions When running chains of incidents that end with a MEST universe basic, I prefer to run straight Dianetic R3X rather than go into shift handling. Either way will work, but I generally prefer to reserve shift handling for pre-MEST incidents where the Pc can take responsibility for the whole incident and all viewpoints in it. In the case of running chains to a basic that is this lifetime or some other MEST universe lifetime, all 4 flows should be run on the item just as is done in R3R. Robert Ducharme Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: A Rehab with R3X Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: A Rehab with R3X By Robert Ducharme July 28, 2003 >From a post to the R3X thread on the Freezone America Board: Posted on Monday, July 28, 2003 - 03:03 pm: My Pc who had completed clearing of the 8 dynamics on R3XD told me that he was "flying high" (to use his term) for a good while after our last session a few months ago. I suppose it could be called an ascended or ascension state. He also told me that some time ago since then he suddenly crashed from that state. It happened when a big business deal he was counting on fell through. He hadn't reached that ascended state since that time. So I thought this would be a great opportunity to investigate this phenomenon and see how things would develop as a result of processing it. First thing I asked him was when that crash occured and to tell me about it. I then asked him what major feeling was involved in the incident and he said "loss". Then I asked him for the postulate that brought on the crash. He said "It can't all keep going right" and "You've got to have something fall apart" So, using the R3X procedure we ran "It can't all keep going right" as an attitude. There was a long chain of that pattern of events throughout MEST universe existence and stemming from early on in the Theta universe. I had him eventually return to the basic-basic on the chain. I won't go into the details, but he saw exactly how that attitude was created from an effort to make nothing out of other thetans' creations. As a result of the processing, he had gained some new insights he hadn't realized before. After the processing was over I asked him about his former ascended state and he said that it felt like it was fully rehabbed. And of course with each item run there is also a certain amount of theta one newly regains after having parked it on the time track for so long. Robert D. Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Auditing Business Idea Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Auditing Business Idea By Robert Ducharme September 26, 2002 >From a post to the Yahoo formerscio list: From: "Robert D." Date: Thu Sep 26, 2002 9:22 pm Subject: Auditing business idea Here's an idea I just thought about recently for promoting one's auditing practice, that seems to have every reason to be workable. Get with a major Unitarian Church, Unity Church, or some major New Age store and set oneself up as a spiritual healer for a few set hours a week, say on Saturday afternoons from 1 to 6 pm or something like that. Do a few simple dianetic sessions on people with traumas on their cases (kind of like they do with Book-1 at orgs) and give out business cards afterwards. The sessions would be free, but they would sure know who to go to for further assistance if they needed it in the future. And they would know who to refer their friends to. Doing Dianetic auditing the way I prescribe, narrative style with the help of Over/Under process when needed, would make for fast clearing of people's problems in short order. I just handled an old friend today, on his son's death from lingering effects of a stroke. It took about 15 minutes to clear up a continuous condition of depression and grieving that had been going on ever since it became apparent to him that his son was going to die. At the end of the session said he was feeling happy and was amazed by the fact that I could do this and told me he'd tell others about me. I'd told him before what I did, but it took this kind of event for it to really sink in. With the simple techniques I use and have outlined on the R3XD writeup and in the formerscio archives, I can successfully handle any case that presents itself whether advanced or "raw meat". I see no reason whatsoever why a trained Dianetic auditor couldn't make a living practicing his craft. I find it a crying shame that more don't. I'd love to see more competition in the field. And I'd like to see an association of what could be called "general clearing practitioners" like myself, not people who are tied to a "fixed bridge system" (though that is necessary in its own right), but people who can deliver whatever it is people want delivered and can do it all expertly. We really do need to make greater inroads into the raw public arena. Robert D. Copyright (c)2002, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Auditing as a Career Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Auditing as a Career By Robert Ducharme August 28, 2004 From: "Robert D." Date: Sat Aug 28, 2004 3:53 pm Subject: Auditing as a career Many people got trained in the church for the purpose of devoting their lives to a career in the field of Scn as an auditor. Unfortunately the church experience has been a bitter disappointment for most. And we see very few of these people practicing their craft in the free zone. The main reasons for this include: 1. Disinterest in the subject, 2. Preferred interest in other areas, like family, higher-paying jobs/careers, etc., 3. Fear of the church's influence, 4. Ignorance regarding marketing, 5. State laws regarding counseling, 6. An inability to achieve 100% reliable results on their clients. Numbers 1 and 2 are understandable. Some people don't like auditing just like some don't like art or engineering while others do. Some would rather be involved in a "real world" profession that has already gained acceptance and automatically pays high salaries. Some simply don't like the idea of dealing with peoples' cases. Number 3 is understandable from the standpoint that one's close friends and loved ones may be involved directly with the church and one would rather remain "in the closet" regarding free zone activities in order to not jeopardize those relationships. I consider personal freedom a high price to pay for maintained relations, but it's that individual's choice to make for his own reasons. As far as fear of retaliation by the church for "squirrel" activities is concerned, well, I suppose that tends to happen only in areas heavily populated with Scios (with a capital "S") like Los Angeles. I don't know how founded these fears are, but I would tend to look for some way out of that box and "start living". Number 4 is also understandable. An auditor on his own has to pull himself up by his own bootstraps, pushing a profession that has little agreement in the wog world. But there are enough scios (with a small "s") outside the church alone to provide one with clientele. But there is also a proliferation of publications that are tailor made for an auditor to pitch his trade. Such magazines as the ubiquitous pulp new age and health magazines, some of which are distributed free, are possible avenues of advertisement. The practice of bringing a resolution to a troubled mind is a valid, valuable and a viable one. The more people find out about it, the more viable it will become in time. Number 5 should not become an impediment. In Florida we are fortunate that counseling laws are liberal. Anyone can legally call himself a counselor. In some states one must meet certain educational criteria and be certified by the state to call himself a counselor and charge a fee. An option is to become a minister and come under the cloak of religion. The Universal Life Church offers ministerial certificates on demand. Number 6 has unfortunately been a valid impediment -- that is until the advent of R3X. What R3X does is to open the doors to the possibility of running Dianetic counseling on anyone and everyone with equal success. No, not equal results, but equal degree of success. In other words, the tech IS so standard that it applies to everyone across the board whether they have had set-up procedures or not; whether they are non-Scios, intermediate Scios, or pre-OTs. As LRH once said in HCOB 7 April 1960, "Engram running from 'away back' works so well that I probably would not have advanced auditing technically to any degree, if people at large had been able to apply Book One engram running as given in 1950." Of course LRH was missing a few factors that could have brought that about, like havingness, a rote basic procedure, debugging techniques, engram running by chains, TRs, metering, admin, a standard course with checksheet, and study tech. So now one can achieve results with R3X that are as predictable as those of a dentist or optometrist. It's up to us as to how widespread we want the knowledge of Dianetic counseling as an acceptable professional practice to become. Robert D. Copyright (c)2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. Paul's Squirrel Academy: Lifetime Clearing Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Lifetime Clearing By Robert Ducharme April 20, 2003 Lifetime Clearing I've been having a tremendous amount of success with a new pattern of processing. It works for people new to clearing tech as well as people who have been involved in the practice a long time. People seem to really like this and keep coming back for more since they know they are getting permanent wins on areas that are most real to them, and within a relatively short period of time. I attempt to form a solid auditing base by clearing the person of this lifetime's engrams, secondaries and locks. I run this type of processing until he is relatively flat enough on this lifetime's issues to go on to other styles of processing. I start by an in-depth assessment of the case. Then I get which areas of the case are of greatest interest to the PC and in need of handling. Then I run them this lifetime on R3R narrative with the help of the Over/Under process. So, if they have an issue with an area in their life, I'll have them get the period of time and have them scan it with R3R narrative and Over/Under [Ed. note--now called "Above/Below Process"] . Here's a typical example of how I will do it: Auditor: Which area of your life are you most interested in addressing? PC: My father. Auditor: Tell me about your relationship with your father. PC: It was horrible. I have a lot of charge on him. I have all my life too. [In other words, a very charged terminal for the PC] Auditor: Okay. So let's run your father, okay? PC: Okay. Auditor: I'll start with the Over and Under process on your father, okay? [Because the terminal is so charged, I will undercut the scanning by addressing the terminal with O/U first. I will then go on to scanning periods of time acceptable to the PC, with regards to the terminal. In cases where the terminal is not so charged (like places of work) then I will skip the terminal step and run the period of time regarding the terminal right away.] PC: Alright. Auditor: Okay. Now get the concept of your father (or 'a' father, in case of several of them if you want him to take them all at once). Anything that comes to mind as you run this process is fine. PC: Okay. Auditor: Good, now put it above you...... ( etc. etc. to E.P.) Auditor: Now get a concept of you and your father together. PC: Okay. Auditor: Good. Now put them above you.......( etc. etc. to E.P.) Auditor: Now we'll run your past with regards to your father. PC: Okay. [With 2W/C, auditor determines the length of time and which years are to be handled. It depends on the amount of charge and the PC's interest. I start with whatever period of time the PC is most interested in, and go from there.] Auditor: Get a concept of that period of time with regards to your father. PC: Okay. Auditor: Good, now put it above you....( etc. etc. to E.P.) Auditor: Move to the beginning of that period of time. PC: Okay. Auditor: Move through to the end of that period of time with regards to your father. PC: Done. Auditor: Did anything come up as you were scanning? [You want what came up as he was scanning, not 'what happened' in the incidents, which may be flat by now] PC: Yes. Auditor: How charged did it seem? PC: Not very. [At this point the auditor has the choice of reverting back to the O/U process or continuing to have the PC scan, depending on the severity of the charge. Auditor always ends with a final scan through to make sure that period of time with regards to that subject is completely flat.] Auditor: How does that period of time regarding your father seem now? PC: It's flat. [Auditor at this point moves on to the next action. Session is ended per the R3X writeup end of session processes.] And that's basically how a typical session goes. The session is tailor made by the auditor for the PC's individual case before each session, but follows the same general format of addressing periods of time regarding charged terminals with a combination of narrative style dianetics and the Over/Under process. Robert Ducharme Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Lifetime Scanning Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Lifetime Scanning By Robert Ducharme August 8, 2004 From: "Robert D." Date: Sun Aug 8, 2004 12:59 pm Subject: Lifetime Scanning Lifetime Scanning is a process that combines R3X and lock scanning. Lock scanning is a technique that LRH first wrote about in early 1951 (Volume 1 HCOBs). It has the advantage of being able to sweep across a large segment of time, like years. It was a definite advancement of the tech. It was discovered to have a few major drawbacks though: 1. It was strictly light processing in that only locks were run with it. Engrams and heavy secondaries did not fare so well with it. They had to be avoided. 2. It tends to run shallow. 3. It can be tedious and time consuming, depending on the PC's ability to scan. Lifetime scanning is R3X as applied to large segments of this lifetime in lock scanning fashion without the drawbacks that previously plagued lock scanning. With Lifetime Scanning the entire life can be systematically scanned out. I have found the result to be a this-lifetime clearing of the individual. I have found this technique to work well on people whether they have had a lot, little, or no previous processing. Lifetime Scanning Technique I like to start out by addressing a period of life that the PC complains about, usually recent times. I may start out with scanning the past week or month, then run since the beginning of the year, and then the fairly recent past period of time that might have been turbulent if it warrants special attention. Sometimes the duration of present relationships are good to scan out. This is all a matter for the person wearing the C/S hat to determine. Lifetime Scanning truly begins with the scanning of the first few years of the person's life. Usually ten year increments are acceptable and workable, but that can be adjusted for the individual. I like to have the PC start by scanning without any attention to flows before I run it on flows. The commands for this procedure are: Auditor: "Move to the beginning of that period of time" (birth being the beginning of the first segment) PC: (ack) Auditor: "From that point forward to ten years old, move through to the end of that period of time" [auditor can add "and tell me when you're done" if he wishes] After the PC goes through the scanning process, the auditor then goes into the Above and Below process ("Get that period of time and put it above you.....below you...." etc.) to a release point. Then the auditor has the PC scan through that period of time again. These two steps are repeated as needed. Alternate Approach It's possible to start the PC out with the Above/Below process and then scan afterwards. If the time period is very heavily charged and the auditor thinks the PC will have a rough time scanning the first time, that can be done. Running Into Charged Areas When the PC runs into a charged area that stops him from scanning further, the auditor can temporarily change direction and run the PC on R3X on that single incident until it's flat, and afterwards resume the lifetime scanning. This procedure can be continued until the entire lifetime is flat. Then one starts all over again by running the periods of time 4 flows. That is done using the following commands: Auditor: "Move to the beginning of that period of time" PC: (ack) (Flow 1) Auditor: "From that point forward to ten years old, scan through all the incidents where you experienced stress" (Flow 2) Auditor: "From that point forward to ten years old, scan through all the incidents where you caused another or others to experience stress" (Flow 3) Auditor: "From that point forward to ten years old, scan through all the incidents where others caused others or themselves to experience stress" (Flow 0) Auditor: "From that point forward to ten years old, scan through all the incidents where you caused yourself to experience stress. This is followed up the same way as the previous run-through with no flows. The only difference is that the auditor should say "Get that series of incidents..." instead of "get that period of time". A minor point, but it's meant to minimize any possible confusion for the PC. The commands above are the ones I prefer to use. If the auditor feels more comfortable using the flow commands that are more close to R3R, that will work too. Running Lifetime Scanning this way, general scanning first and then running the four flows afterwards, is a gradient approach. The auditor can also go straight into running the four flows right away if it's warranted. I use the button "stress" because it encompasses anything that involves resistance - which is the basic makeup of the bank. Robert D. Copyright (c)2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Lock Scanning in R3X Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Lock Scanning in R3X By Robert Ducharme April 23, 2002 >From a post to the R3X thread on the Freezone America Board: Posted on Tuesday, April 23, 2002 - 02:55 pm: One way of addressing case is with lock scanning. Some drawbacks to lock scanning, however, include: 1. It is a tedious process, requiring many passes through; 2. It tends to run shallow; 3. Running it can be overwhelming to a heavy case and so cause the track to temporarily occlude. The positive aspect is that instead of taking one incident at a time as with straight Dianetic auditing, one can handle a whole series of incidents with the same theme. The way to have the positives in this case, while leaving the negative aspects, behind is to incorporate the Over/Under process [Ed. note--now called "Above/Below Process"]. A typical session incorporating lock scanning might sound like this: A = auditor P= Pc (processee) Pc's marriage is in trouble and needs to be addressed and scanned out: A. How long have you been married? P. 12 years. A. Okay, I'd like for you to get the concept of that whole period of time with regards to your marriage. P. Yes, I've done that. A. Good. Now I'd like you to take that segment of time regarding the marriage and put it above you. P. Yes. A. Good. Now put it below you. This continues for all six directions, over and over again - above, below, right, left, front, back, above... etc. until a full EP is reached. A. Alright. Now move to the beginning of that period of time. P. Yes. A. Good. Move through to the end of that period of time with regard to (or "on the subject of") the marriage. P. Yes. (At this point the Pc will often say that the period was blank or clean, at which time that part of the session is ended. A. What happened? P. A few things came up....... At this point the auditor can decide whether to keep scanning (if it's pretty light) or resume the O/U process. A. Okay, now I'd like you to take what's left of that segment of time regarding that marriage and put it above you.... (etc.) This is done until the whole period is flat. Cognitions and changes should abound throughout this procedure. Full EPs should occur. The rules for running narrative R3R apply here except for the inclusion of O/U. If a lot of the track being run is occluded, you can use the Before/After process a few times to loosen the pictures: "Spot a moment before the _____ (incident, period of time, series of incidents, etc.)" "Spot a moment after the incident"; "Spot a moment before the incident" etc. Various subject tracks of the Pc's can be scanned out like Scn, religion, mother, father, childhood home, individual friends, etc. The idea is to clean up this lifetime on various subjects. This is very good especially for people who have a lifetime filled with locks and secondaries, and running individual incidents would be too time consuming. Also, the O/U process is not as tiring as the R3R procedure, and so the Pc does not get drained of energy as quickly as with R3R. I just had a brand new client today who knows nothing of Scn or clearing tech and I started her out with this method. First I had her do the Over/Under process on the charged terminals (husband of four years in this case) and then proceeded as stated above. Robert D. Copyright (c)2002, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Meter TA Knob Preparation Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Meter TA Knob Preparation By Robert Ducharme April 20, 2004 >From a post to the Free Zone America Board: Posted on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 09:42 pm: Making a disk for the Clarity Meter. I've been using a clear plastic disk with my Clarity meter for a long time. It helps me to make use of the higher bands of the sensitivity setting with far better control of the needle than otherwise. Making it is really simple. One goes to a grocery store bakery section and picks up some baked goods in a plastic container with a flat clear plastic surface at least 5 inches in diameter. Remove the tone arm knob by unscrewing with small screwdriver. Mark a circle on the plastic with a pointy magic marker (preferably the erasable kind). This can be done by tracing around something circular like a masking tape roll or a magnifying glass. Mine is 4" in diameter and extends beneath the bottom of the meter by a bit over a half inch. Then find the exact center of the disk area and punch a hole in the middle with a sharp instrument like an awl and cut out a hole the size of the knob the tone arm rests on with a knife or razor blade. Dead center can also be found by tracing the circle using a compass. Then double-side tape the tone arm to the disk, and replace the tone arm with disk onto the meter. Next, enjoy your croissants (or whatever) while testing out your new tone arm disk. :-) Robert Ducharme Copyright (c)2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Above/Below Process Shortens Time Spent in Handling Chains Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Above/Below Process Shortens Time Spent in Handling Chains By Robert Ducharme May 21, 2004 >From a post to the R3X thread on the Freezone America Board: Posted on Friday, May 21, 2004 - 09:01 am: [Revised 9/21/04 to update the name of the process to the current one of "Above/Below"] SHORTENING THE DURATION OF A SOMATIC CHAIN Unburdening a Chain with the Above/Below Process More and more I've been applying the Above/Below process to the chain of incidents run with R3X. If the person is running a dynamic as a chain, I will have him get the terminals related to the chain and run that. For instance, on the first dynamic, I'll say "get the concept of a self" (or a first-dynamic identity). It doesn't matter which self the pc deals with, whether it's his or another's. Whatever the mind presents at the moment is the best thing to use. The concepts can tend to change from command to command, and that's okay too. Then it's "Put it above you" "Good" "Put it below you" "Good", and so on. On running terminals one runs the process past F/Ns to the point where no further change occurs - per the Auditor's Code. The latter is very important to getting superior results from this process. For a chain like "fear", I'll say "Get the concept of any and all terminals--people, places, objects, energies, spaces, situations, creatures, etc.--that you associate with fear." Then I will give the Above/Below process commands on that. Running this process tends to speed up the running of an engram chain. It can be done on the same item on more than one occasion too. Unburdening the Dynamics with the Above/Below Process I think it's good to run the dynamics on the Above/Below process anyway, regardless of whether one runs R3X on them or not. It's not stable or dramatic like R3X, but it definitely has its benefits. One could go through the dynamics one after the other in succession and then start with the first again on through to the eighth, and continue this until no more charge is had. That would be a quick key-out way of clearing the dynamics, but it would be well worth doing regardless. I've had great success with running "an entity" (7th dynamic) on this process, by the way. It doesn't necessarily replace running the entities' cases should that need come up, but it greatly reduces their overall influence and sets a case up for running the entity case. For non-Dynamic items, it may be possible to add flows to the process. I haven't worked that out yet so I won't speculate on how the commands would go. Robert D. Copyright (c)2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. >Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 21:30:12 -0000 >From: "underdogfreezone" >To: DianeticR3X-owner@yahoogroups.com > >--- In DianeticR3X@yahoogroups.com, "Robert D." wrote: > > dear robert and all, >let me say hello. >i think R3XD destroys the myths about what can and can not be done >in the field of spiritual enhancement. the rules set up over the >last 50 plus years simply no longer apply when using this tech. a >very productive path of research stopped in march 1952 with the loss >of "Dianetics" as a copy right practice. the direction of the >research changed forever. R3XD has rekindled this research path from >1952 while those who use other complicated tech (and i was one of >them for 34 years) have reached a dead-end. most striking of these >myths is the focus of R3R on a limited sliver of experience in a >sequence to an end. forget it. no little sliver and tight focus >please. after just a little R3XD you will get the next incident >needed regardless of sequence (or anything else) to resolve the >case. no incident is so heavy or complicated that it can not be >flattened. i think i broke a record with over 9 hours of R3XD over >several days on one incident. this is after i have had hundreds of >hours of R3XD. no other system could contact and handle what R3XD >routinely does. i am skilled in several other techs and studied >several more. > >live life and have a good time. > >underdog Yahoo! Groups : DianeticR3X Messages : Message 4 of 12Yahoo! My Yahoo! Mail (This is a corrected copy with the one unfinished sentence completed) So, let's say you're a Standard Dianetics or NED auditor, where do you go from there? How do you get started on R3X. Well, here are the major things that make R3X different from R3R (and R3RA). Learn these techniques, practice them, and you'll be an R3X auditor. • With R3R the auditor is not allowed to run the process on Clears. • With R3X the auditor has no such restrictions. If a PC is in the non-interference zone, it might be wise to respect that, but I have seen instances where chronic somatics that turned up there were then discharged with R3X so that the PC could therafter comfortably continue • With R3R the auditor tries to go earlier similar after two passes through an incident. • With R3X the auditor always flattens the incident he is running before moving on to the next one • With R3R the auditor always asks for an earlier incident.. • With R3X, it's not a fixed rule, but normally the auditor asks for another incident when handling before MEST universe incidents and an earlier incident for pre-MEST incidents. • With R3R the auditor accepts late-on-the-chain incidents as basic. • With R3X, when the PC has been running past lives, but has run out of track to run on a chain and has not gone before his point of entrance into the MEST universe, the auditor specifically asks for an earlier incident before the beginning of time, and eventually for "an earlier incident, possibly around the original separation from Static (or Source)..." (whole-track basic-basic). The auditor steers the PC as necessary. • With R3R incidents are handled with R3R commands done repetitively. • With R3X, to speed things up, the auditor is permitted to use the above and below process*(1), (which I heretofore called the Over and Under and Six Direction process) between passes through the incident.*(2) This process can be used any time the scanning takes more than a couple of runs through or the auditor suspects there is underlying charge and the PC is scanning glibly. • With R3X the auditor is permitted to use the before and after process*(3) as needed, like when the auditor wants to open up the incident to clearer view than the "duration" command provides.*(4) • With R3R, when the PC gets flashes of several incidents, especially when running this lifetime, the auditor has him choose one to run. • With R3X, during those times, the auditor recognizes that all the pictures have the same theme and so is permitted to run the whole group as one incident lock-scan style, referring to it in the command as a "series of incidents" (as in "move to the beginning of that series of incidents", etc.), employing the above/below process as mentioned above. • With R3X the auditor is permitted to use the alternate confront process*(5) as needed, as in the rare cases when the incident begins to grind. • With R3R the auditor must continue down the chain to an "E.P." if at all possible, or else red flag the folder for a continuance within 24 hours. • With R3X the auditor is permitted to end off mid-chain after the last incident (as well as all the previous incidents) run has been flattened. • With R3R the auditor ends the process with asking the PC for a postulate • With R3X the auditor ideally finds basic-basic and runs the shift-handling procedure after flattening the incident. This fact does not preclude the auditor from being able to end a chain with a recent past incident and running the item 4 flows if the PC is not up to confronting his whole track. • With R3X the auditor will give the additional Special Attention commands*(6) after having "flattened" heavy incidents like severe traumas, implants, and GPMs. This practice uncovers heretofore undiscovered and deeply rooted insidious charge that remains even after an incident is apparently flat. • With R3X the session is ended with a scan through it at the end, a valid and valuable practice that has gone out of style in Scientology since the 1950s. • With R3R the auditor may run the three rudiments at the beginning of the session. • With R3X, if the PC needs rudiments run, the auditor has the option of simply having the PC scan his recent past to an F/N if he so chooses. • With R3R the goal is to get to the basic incident as soon as possible and erase that. • With R3X every incident along the way is reduced of charge in order for the basic incident to be more easily accessed and run. If the PC's attention and interest is on an earlier incident, then that of course takes precedence. • With R3X some of the commands have minor alterations, so those should be studied. *, *(2), *(3), *(4), *(5), *(6),: These procedures will be outlined in future posts, but they are already outlined in the tech writeups I mentioned previously as well as at which. is the latest version of the R3XD writeup and the Freezoneamerica message board under the thread of "Clearing Tech: testing, validation, refinement, research, development". REQUIREMENTS FOR AUDITING R3X In order to be fully qualified to deliver R3X, aside from studying the R3XD data as written up on the Free Zone America web site, an auditor would ideally have done the Standard Dianetics R3R or R3RA course. This would mainly include training/study on TRs, the Auditor's Code, metering, theory about the mind, time track theory, and R3R commands and procedure. The TRs are necessary in order to train the auditor to be there comfortably and confront the session environment without becoming fidgety or reacting to the PC's data or behavior. The end goal of TR-0 is where the auditor is able and willing to maintain session presence indefinitely without becoming emotionally reactive throughout. that session. The auditor getting upset, impatient, ARC broken, bullying, or otherwise behaving in a manner that is disruptive to the PC, especially while the PC is in session and in a vulnerable state, is fatal to the session and harmful to both parties. In addition, the TRs give the auditor practice in delivering a command with tone 40 (clear) intention, use of acknowledgments, ability to cope with distracting comments, and ability to handle various situations that come up in sessions. The Auditor's code is necessary because they are the rules that keep the PC in session. It needs to be known, fully understood thorough and through and remembered, not just read through once or twice. Metering is necessary in order to maintain a smooth session. A lot can be done with dianetics without a meter, but for really smooth, professional results time after time, use of a meter is important. With a meter the auditor can, for instance, tell when the PC has truly released an incident as opposed to when he is merely backing off from it. This knowledge can prevent bypassed charge from being created and getting in the road of session progress. The meter is a simple device. The needle only goes in two directions -- right and left. Generally speaking, a needle motion to the left (rising) means the PC is encountering mass from the bank but not yet confronting it, while a needle motion to the right (falling), the PC is recognizing the contents of the mass and is either partially or fully erasing the mass that was being pulled in. The best way to become good at using a meter is simply by using it regularly. Practice makes perfect. The theory about the mind can be gotten by reading the book Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health. Additional concepts about the spiritual aspects of man can be gotten from Scientology 8-8008 and other LRH books. The important thing is recognizing that the PC is basically a thetan and not a body or anything else. A thetan can be anything without becoming it. When he becomes it is when he gets into trouble. DMSMH gives a lot of data about how the mind works, while the other books give a lot of data about the soul or spirit as distinct from the body. When giving sessions, as when working on a car as an auto mechanic, it's best to know as fully as possible what one is dealing with. The same goes for the time track. One should know as much as possible about what to expect when adventuring along the time track with the PC. The book A History of Man gives one a good grounding on the subject of the time track. Another excellent source of data on this is the two "Time Track" bulletins (HCOBs 15 May 63 and 8 June 63). The R3R commands and procedure are contained on HCOB 24 June 1963 entitled Routine 3-R Engram Running by Chains. The knowledge and the practice of this adds the finishing touches on the apprentice dianetic practitioner. The modern version of the commands can be found in HCOB 28 June 1978 RA revised 15 Sept 1978. A good and complete text on modern style Dianetics can be found in the book Dianetics Today, published in 1974. For a thorough knowledge of the most up-to-date methods, one should consult the NED series HCOBs of 1978. But one could do more than adequately with just the data as contained in the book Dianetics Today. The main idea is, not to be loaded down with extraneous data, but to have a good working knowledge of the commands. That can be found on one bulletin. All the information necessary to run R3R, which includes all the above information, can be found at http://www.freezoneamerica.org/downloads/files.html under the heading of Clearbird Publishing. Ideally, however, one would at some point get and read the original LRH materials. When one has a grasp of these fundamentals, one can then begin to transfer over to R3X. The full writeup is contained on the Free Zone America web site at http://www.freezoneamerica.org/r3xd.html This web page is linked to the page containing various techs at http://www.freezoneamerica.org/Technology/index.html I have also written various essays on R3X in the R3X thread, which is on the Free Zone America message board found at http://www.freezoneamerica.org/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi One should not allow oneself to be intimidated by all the data I mentioned above. All that's needed to run R3X is a basic knowledge of the mind as contained in DMSMH, ability to use a meter, ability to be there comfortably in a session without emotional reaction (like panic, being startled or thrown off, etc.), ability to communicate properly, knowledge of and adherence to the Auditor's Code, knowledge of the R3R commands, and knowing the few but vital bits of additional data as contained in the R3XD write Paul's Squirrel Academy: Special Attention Process Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Special Attention Process By Robert Ducharme August 26, 2004 From: "Robert D." Date: Thu Aug 26, 2004 1:24 pm Subject: Special Attention process The Special Attention process is used whenever the PC has encountered an area of track that is particularly charged and occluded. One would use this process on heavy engrams, implant incidents, GPMs, or any incidents that are unusually charged. Normally, this-lifetime incidents are not charged enough to need this process. This process makes use of the thought-emotion-effort scale, effort being the most readily perceived by the PC and therefore the first of the three buttons used. Even before effort, however, comes occlusion. So the first command is aimed at the blank area of the track. After thought has been handled, there may still be comm lines extant. These are handled with the comm line command. Sometimes this command indicates, sometimes not, but it comes up often enough that it's still worth a try. The purpose of this process is to penetrate through the occlusions of heavily charged areas. It works quite well in doing this. The commands may seem numerous, but they do work, and the PC can quickly adjust to them. The process is run only after the incident has been flattened with the usual R3X commands. The commands for this process are as follows: Blank Command: "Move to the beginning of the incident." "With special [or particular] attention to anything hidden, suppressed, overwhelming, invisible, or occluded, move through to the end of the incident." Effort Command: "Move to the beginning of the incident" "With special attention to any force, energies, masses, resistance, efforts, or impact, move through to the end of the incident." Emotion Command: "Move to the beginning of the incident" "With special attention to any emotions, feelings, or reactions, move through to the end of the incident." Thought Command: "Move to the beginning of the incident" "With special attention to any thoughts, fixed ideas, decisions, postulates, questions, or (implanted) commands, move through to the end of the incident." Comm Line Command: "Move to the beginning of the incident" "With special attention to any comm [or communication] lines, move through to the end of the incident." These commands are not fixed in stone, and can be varied according to need. For instance, with the "effort" command, one could include "violence" or "flows" if deemed appropriate. But a balance has to be struck between being too extensive and too brief with the commands. The Special Attention commands are run in the same way as the (general) R3X commands. One runs the command once through, then runs the Above/Below process until flat, then runs the Special Attention command once again. One does this until that Special Attention command is flat. One then proceeds on to the next command, etc. Robert D. Copyright (c)2003, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Starting R3X Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Starting R3X By Robert Ducharme August 2, 2004 From: "Robert D." Date: Mon Aug 2, 2004 5:59 pm Subject: Getting Started on R3X As I mentioned previously, one way to get started on R3X would be to simply find an incident on a PC (an abbreviation which could stand for processee or processing client and not necessarily pre-clear). The procedure is simple. Just start a session as you normally would, and find an isolated incident like a divorce, a death in the family, an upsetting event, etc. Run the incident just as you would any narrative incident, except for the additional options. Remember that with R3X you always have the option of sticking strictly with R3R procedure too. R3X simply gives you the additional options that have been time-tested and proven to work standardly in PC after PC. If you were to run the incident R3X style, the procedure would go something like this: Auditor: "Move to that incident." PC: "Okay". Auditor: "What is the duration of the incident?" Auditor: "Move to a point just before the incident began." PC: "Okay." Auditor: "Good." "Move through to the end of the incident." PC: (scans through the incident) "Okay". Auditor: "Alright. What happened?" PC: (tells auditor what took place) (At this point the auditor has the option of using the Before/After process if the PC's data is too scant or occluded. This is done to a release point.) Auditor: "Okay. Now get that incident and put it above you". PC: "Yes". Auditor: "Good. Put it below you". PC: "Yes". Auditor: "Good. Put it to the right of you". PC: "Yes". Auditor: "Good. Put it to the left of you". PC: "Yes". Auditor: "Good. Put it in front of you". PC: "Yes". Auditor: "Good. Put it in back of you". PC: "Yes". Auditor: "Good. Put it above you" PC: "Yes". etc., etc., etc. done to a release and flat point. Then... Auditor: "Move to the beginning of the incident". (The PC should know to move to the same point as before) PC: "Okay" Auditor: "Good." "Move through to the end of the incident." PC: "Okay" Auditor: "Good. What occurred that time?" (The question can be varied as "What came up that time?", "What did you get?", etc. The idea is that the auditor wants to know what the PC newly saw as he scanned through, not necessarily the whole story parroted back.) By this time the incident should be flat and the PC should have VGIs. If it's not, it's okay to use TR-4 and query the PC as to what aspects of the incident are left. Then the Above/Below process is used again, followed by another scanning. This is done until all the charge in the incident has vanished. If, in the rare case where there appears to be any lingering bad feeling to the incident, the auditor can ask the PC if the charge is coming from that incident or an earlier (or another) one. If it's still coming from that incident, then it's safe to go through the procedure again. Otherwise, running the earlier similar incident would probably be the next thing to do. If you want to do a narrative 4 flows, fine. I'm not that concerned about getting 4 flows in on this-lifetime narrative incidents. Besides, doing Lifetime Scanning 4 flows (as mentioned in the R3X thread of the Freezoneamerica board) would cover pretty much anything from this lifetime that needs to be run. A system of notation I use for the Above/Below process is the following done on letter-sized college ruled paper. A |||| | B |||| | R |||| | L |||| F |||| B |||| Robert D. Copyright (c)2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Telepathic Metering Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Telepathic Metering By Paul Adams June 28, 2004 >From a post to the Yahoo freezoneaoint group: [the post has been edited for this article on the R3X checksheet. The full article is available at http://www.fzglobal.org ] > One of the major points of disagreement with RD's practice is > that he holds the cans while auditing someone else. That far outweighs > less important points. Thank you very much, XXXX, for your thoughful and sensible comments. I really appreciate it. For the rest of my e-mail, "you" refers to the reader, and not specifically to XXXX. Any time up till six months ago I would have completely agreed on that point. For several years I had sometimes come across Robert's posts about getting reads like that, and my idea of how impossible it was completely overshadowed anything else that he was saying. I never saw any posts from anyone saying they had been getting auditing from Robert and how messed up they were as a result; and Robert kept saying how it always worked very well on his pcs. But it was all so impossible that I couldn't even begin to accept what he was saying at face value. Or even look at it. An analogy: It is said that what Galileo saw in the early 17th century was so disturbing for some officials of the Catholic Church that they refused to even look through his telescope; they reasoned that the Devil was capable of making anything appear in the telescope, so it was best not to look through it. If you think it is preposterous of me to position Robert with Galileo, well, point taken, but it's really not that important compared to the rest of it, so let's continue. About six months ago I started doing a lot of reading in subjects that interested me, but are outside mainstream thought. Subjects like homeopathy, dowsing.... ...The point is that there is a whole wealth of data in the world outside of Scn that deals with effects being caused at a distance.... ...but even most Scientologists accept the idea of action at a distance through "theta" or "postulates". There is a famous book by Abb? Mermet called "The Principles and Practice of Radiesthesia", written (in French) in 1935. I read an English translation. The subject of dowsing for water is probably familar to most, to a lesser or greater extent. An expert dowser can locate water flowing one hundred feet underground, as well as such details as the direction of flow, the flow rate, and how drinkable it is. If he is practised in it, the same dowser can determine the same information from one hundred miles away. You might think this is getting ridiculous, but remember that these same dowsers probably think practising Scientologists are a bunch of freaking weirdos too. It is difficult to have affinity for a subject you have no reality on or communication with. Abb? Mermet used a simple pendulum held in his hand to determine information at a distance, and he was an acknowledged master at it. His book contains dozens of testimonials from professionals in more normal fields, attesting to his accuracy, whether in locating water underground from a thousand miles away, diagnosing illness over a similar distance, or locating the body of a missing person. Abb? Mermet considered himself a simple priest, and did not speculate too much on how the information he could pluck out of thin air, so to speak, was available to him. If one wishes to speculate, one is faced with the fait accompli of the feasibility of map dowsing, where an expert dowser can locate an item on a map in front of him, without ever having seen the location portrayed on the map. Possible theories include those like.... But the idea of a person's emotional charge reading on a meter connected up to the body of a distant auditor, while being in excellent ARC with that auditor on the telephone at the same time, while the auditor has all his attention devoted to the task at hand, is not nearly as far-fetched as locating a heap of inanimate iron ore buried a hundred feet down from a hundred miles away. The dowser isn't on the telephone with the iron ore, isn't personally concerned with its welfare, and is using a lump of wood or metal on a string, not an ultra-sensitive electronic instrument! Anyway, after reading a pile of books on dowsing and other fields, I grew comfortable with the idea of "plucking information out of thin air", at least as a possibility. That doesn't mean I became an instant expert at it, just that I believed it was possible for others to do it. Some weeks later I came across Robert Ducharme again. This time I did not automatically bounce off what he wrote, because what he said he did no longer sounded impossible to me. I read what he said with interest. I actually dug up every single post of his I could find anywhere, and read all of it. He does talk about other subjects, but mostly he talks about R3X and R3XD. There are three big problems with R3X or R3XD. Most importantly, in general consideration anyway, is that he holds the cans and says it's the pc reading on the meter and not himself. Secondly, although it can be run in a normal session in the same room, he normally runs it over the telphone, with the auditor at home and the pc wherever. And third, although it is based on sound Scn principles and practices, it is not standard R3R. And he runs it on Clears and OTs. Ten weeks ago, I wanted to get some auditing. Apart from some great gains on the Clay Table processes of Pro Trs, I hadn't made any real case gain since OT3 in about 1980. I'd had maybe two hundred hours of sec checks in the SO, but that doesn't count. I checked with Ralph over prices for NOTs, but with travel and living expenses it was too much money for me. I looked at RD and R3X/R3XD. This time I didn't have a problem with the remote metering. I didn't know if he could do what he said he did, but I didn't have a theoretical problem with it any more. Similarly with the telephone auditing. I know from personal experience that if you have good ARC with the person at the other end of the phone, and your attention is fully on that person, you can pick up a surprising amount of information. As for the "improvement" on R3R, well, maybe. I mean, LRH improved on R3R with NED. I didn't know if R3X did what RD said it did, but I didn't have any theoretical problem with it. And that left this: I didn't understand how you could beneficially run Dn on a Clear or OT. But I had had hundreds of hours of R3R before 1978 when the Dn Clear HCOB came out, and it seemed to run OK then, so maybe it was possible to some extent. Whether or not it worked I didn't know, but no-one said it was bad. All there was on the Internet was several years' worth of Robert banging the drum saying how he'd been auditing it for years full-time with no problems and how uniformly good it was; and everyone else saying how impossible it was for Robert to be doing what he said he was doing without offering any criticism beyond that. I've been involved with several "impossible" things in my life. Scientology is one of them. So I called Robert and a few days later I was in session. So far I have had about 25 hours of R3X/R3XD. I had a session today, in fact. I've booked the next session, I'm paid up to date, and I anticipate many more sessions. I'm a happy camper. I think it's great stuff, and it reaches parts that other auditing doesn't touch. Yes, if I were full OT7, L's completion, and Class VIII, I would be in a better position then to evaluate the full "standard" bridge. So what? If money had been no object, I would probably have been camping out at Ralph's for the past two months. But I like being able to lie on my own bed in my underwear and have a great session handling some real basic Actual GPM stuff, in a relaxed style that even clears up any faintest traces of session BPC. As for it all being impossible, well OK, so it's impossible. I don't care if it's impossible. We're doing it. Paul Adams Copyright (c)2004 by Paul Adams. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Telepathic Metering 1 Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Telepathic Metering 1 By Robert Ducharme April 26, 2002 >From a post to the Freezone America Board: Posted on Friday, April 26, 2002 - 10:23 am: I have no special preferences as to who I process as long as they are cooperative. I do many that are raw meat [as well as Scios]. I just give them a basic R-factor and handle them according to their cases. Usually I have to clean up this lifetime first before getting into past existences. I used to run Dianetic auditing and Idenics by phone without a meter. I was forced into that position because of my location, which is distant from main Scn areas, the closest one being Miami. All I would do would be to ask the Pc for the data I needed at the moment. That worked quite well. Then I began to use a meter on myself and found that I was able to pick up reads telepathically. I recently wrote an article in the Free Spirit magazine about that technique, which I will post here at some time in the future. Telepathic metering is simple and based on the premise that communications impinge and that that impingement, however subtle, will register on the meter. I use a Clarity meter and use it with the sensitivity up to 32, which is quite a bit higher than the normal range (normal being about 8). I have found that, with this technique, for the purpose of auditing, I could know everything I needed or wanted to know about the Pc's responses during the auditing procedure. I can even run repetitive processes, which I haven't been able to do without a meter. I just don't indicate floating needles for obvious reasons, but nobody seems to mind. Robert D. Copyright (c)2002, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul's Squirrel Academy: Telepathic Metering 2 Paul's Squirrel Academy Presents: Telepathic Metering 2 By Robert Ducharme April 26, 2002 >From a post to the Freezone America Board: Posted on Friday, April 26, 2002 - 04:17 pm: Subject: Telepathic auditing & John McMaster One point I am adamant about is that telepathic auditing is doable by ANYBODY. All one needs is a good Free Zone meter, and the desire and willingness to do it. I'm sure John Mac did telepathic auditing with the Pc on the meter or with no meter. I'm also fairly sure that he didn't use a meter on HIMSELF to audit others. Doing the latter is what makes all the difference when one has only average telepathic perceptions. It's a lot easier to do than one might think. It's just not within the reality of the average Scio, even though it's within his capability. Robert Ducharme Copyright (c)2002, 2004 by Robert Ducharme. All Rights Reserved DISCLAIMER: This site is not connected to or endorsed by the Church of Scientology(tm). Dianetics(tm) and Scientology are service marks and trademarks reportedly owned by Religious Technology Center, and permission was not sought for their fair use here.