 |
|
|
---------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------
Copyright 1996
All commercial rights are reserved to the author, who currently wishes to remain anonymous and therefore is writing under the pen name of "The Pilot". Individuals may freely copy these files on the internet for their own use and they may be made available on any web server who does not charge for them and who does not alter their contents.
---------------------------------------------
Of the many research lines that were abandoned within Scientology, this one is probably the best known among highly trained auditors.
For those of you who are not already trained in the subject, it might be better to read document #4 first since that will present more basic material on auditing.
This document only discusses one of many abberative factors. It is presented first because it is the easiest one for trained auditors to understand (because there is already so much earlier material on GPMs that was researched by Ron) and because I hope to show them that the research is indeed incomplete (the materials here certainly should have been found in the 1960s) and that the research can indeed be continued by somebody other than LRH.
It began in 1959 when Ron started an investigation into people's goals which lead to the observation that many of a person's problems, overts, and upsets were connected with the goals that he was trying to achieve. The Saint Hill Special Briefing Course (SHSBC) was originally established to investigate and train auditors in the handling of goals. The lower grade processing was actually a spin-off of this research, being intended to deal with factors that were in the way of Goals processing.
The real source of trouble was soon worked out to be more than just a goal (you can have simple goals without problems). It was a mental mass formed by a goal and its opposition with the two sides jammed up against each other into a sort of super problem. Thereafter, these things were referred to as GPMs (Goals Problem Masses) to avoid confusing them with ordinary day to day goals which were not seen as a source of aberration (unless they locked up ontop of one of these GPMs).
A great deal of research was done into the anatomy of these things. The goal was found to have a terminal, which is the beingness that is used to do the goal. For example, the goal "To Keep Things Clean" might have "A House Cleaner" as the terminal. It was also found that there would be an opposition terminal or OPTERM. In this example it might be "A Slob". This research is recorded in the SHSBC taped lectures.
Soon they were putting together patterns of terminals and Opterms which showed how the person lived the goal. He would be one terminal and get opposed and fail and then try to be another terminal and fail again etc. until the goal was all bent out of shape and collapsed of its own weight, at which point the person would undertake a new GPM goal to try and solve the trouble he had gotten into with the first one.
These terminals and Opterms were referred to as "Reliable Items" or RIs because they reacted reliably over and over again on an E-meter and perhaps also because the person relied on these things. The pattern of these RIs as they opposed from one to the next was plotted as a pattern with arrows going from item to item and this eventually came to be called a "Line Plot".
In 1963 it was found that sometimes different people came up with the same pattern of Goals and RIs and that these particular patterns could also be found to react on other people. From this it was concluded that the patterns had been implanted hypnotically using electronics. These were thereafter referred to as "Implant GPMs".
This research line eventually lead to uncovering a large number of implanted patterns which included the ones that are currently used on the OT levels (and quite a few others, some of which can be found in the tech volumes).
Concurrently with researching the implanted GPMs, there was an attempt to find the person's own actual GPMs. These referred to his own abberated goals rather than ones which had been implanted. The implants were seen as gaining their force from the real ones. If you kick the person in the teeth electronically with a long list of goals, some of them will line up with his real goals and cause the implant to stick. The implanted GPMs were seen to be of only minor importance and low abberative power in comparison with the actual GPMs which were postulated by the person himself.
But the long and arduous research into actual GPMs simply lead to finding an even deeper implant, which is the one given in the clearing course. At that point, Ron apparently decided that it was all implants and abandoned the research line. Perhaps he meant to get back to it eventually, but if he did, it certainly hasn't been published.
I have been interested in this theory of Actual GPMs for decades, but it seemed always out of reach. Not only do the electronic implants interfere, but NOTS also makes wrong things react. Before I could get near these things, I had to go much further, handling things such as the early penalty universes which I will discuss in another write-up. Only after all this was I able to spot the real goal which I was actually operating on. The goal was "To Be Intelligent" and it was not only what I was doing, it was what I WANTED TO DO. And since then, I have learned a great deal about the Actual GPMs and that is what I will pass on to you here.
Working in the dark, it is difficult to find these things and take them apart. But once I got far enough to see how it all fit together, everything became easy. So you can't just go after this stuff with some rote procedure. You need to gain some understanding first. The good news is that once you know the pattern of these things, the goal becomes fairly easy to spot.
The full structure is not obvious in the current GPM because it is incomplete, you are still living it. So I had to get through the completed GPM that was just prior to the current one before I could really see how it all worked.
For me, the preceding GPM was the goal "To Be Holy" and the current GPM ("To Be Intelligent") was in opposition to it. Just think of an intellectual opposing holy men, or a scientist opposing priests and you will see what I mean.
Notice that both of these are "good" goals. You would never have a bad goal as an Actual GPM. The goal "To Be Evil" would never be used as an actual GPM, it exists only in implants.
But there is a brief tail end to the goal "To Be Holy" where I was trying to get away from the goal and my goal at that point could be stated as "To NOT be Holy". An in this section of an actual GPM, you might think that you have an evil goal, but that is incorrect. At that time in my existence (many lifetimes ago), I committed many evil acts, but got no satisfaction from them. It was not like they were contributing to a goal that I had and it did not feel like I was achieving anything.
A negative does not work as a goal. You can't live life with your whole purpose being "to be not holy". You get desperate. You search around wildly for a way out of this thing. And finally you realize that there was one thing that had been successfully opposing you and that was the intellectuals. And so you choose the goal "To Be Intelligent" because it solves the opposition of holy people. And so you begin a new GPM.
There is also another reason why you slide into the next GPM (and why the previous one becomes so decayed and degraded) and that is that you finally resort to committing horrible overts against the next GPM because it is successful in opposing you. In other words, as you live the goal to be holy, you keep running into intellectuals who give you a hard time and ridicule your faith etc. and finally you begin to do them in. And you loose all judgment in this and reach the point where you'll shoot any intellectual, even if they are on your side. And because of that, you do in friends and allies just because they were witty one day and seemed too smart. And these crimes have no real justification. And this is the basic source of that wild E-meter reaction known as the rock slam. And after you commit too many heavy overts against something, you have a tendency to flip over and become it.
Until I found this, I had a distaste for priests and holy men. It was due to my own horror at what I had become at the end of that GPM. Once this was cleaned up, I found that I had abandoned all of my ability to heal and to care for people along with that goal to be holy. It was only the end of the GPM that was horrible. These things go on for many lifetimes and the earlier ones back when I first started the goal were truly wonderful.
Perhaps the biggest gain I got out of finding this was the ability to hold the concepts of holiness and intelligence together without instinctively feeling that there was an inherent conflict between them. Of course you might be running on a different goal and wonder why I would even have a problem holding these ideas together, but rest assured that you will have something like this (maybe the conflict between freedom and responsibility for example) in your way.
From seeing what happened with the goal "To Be Holy", I can also predict how the current goal "To Be Intelligent" would have ended up if I hadn't found this out. I can already see that strong people (I would have said "dumb strong people" in the old days) are the ones that successfully harass and oppose intellectuals. Given a few more lifetimes on this goal and I would have reached the point of shooting all the strong tough guys, probably beginning in a reasonable manner with executing gang members but eventually even getting around to doing in the strong men in the circus. And when everything finally failed, I would try to not be intelligent and finally I would see that the only way to do that was to become strong and would launch myself into a new GPM with the goal "To Be Strong".
It should be obvious that the basic identity or terminal for the goal "To Be Intelligent" is "An Intelligent Person". And that the basic Opterm would be "A Stupid Person". But the opposition really fans out to point back at the previous GPM ("Stupid Priests") and forward towards the next one ("Stupid Strong Men"). And the basic identity is really too general for living life. Although these basic ones underlie the entire line plot (pattern of identities), you will have more specific items that you have used to try and accomplish the goal.
For the terminals, you will use things (in this example) like "a free thinker" or "a sharp operator". Opterms will be things like "stubborn fools" or "dumb bigots". Near the beginning of the goal, the Opterm is frequently but not always related to the previous GPM (opterms like narrow minded evangelists). Near the end, it is often related to the next GPM that is coming (opterms like dumb bullies). In the middle (the bulk of the items), the Opposition just sort of hunts around (opterms like stupid bureaucrats) with only the common characteristic of some sort of relation to stupidity (in this example) always being present.
Early on, there are many things that you consider are on your side, such as teachers (in this example). So you use these kinds of things as terminals (being "a brilliant teacher" for example). But these gradually fail. So you abandon them and they become part of the opposition. I had already reached the point where "Dumb Teachers" was an opterm for me in living this goal to be intelligent. You should be able to see from this that eventually it would have reached the point where anything that I might use to live this goal would have been abandoned and turned into an opponent. This is how the goal decays.
I can look back at the goal to be holy and see a complete decay. It eventually reached the point were I had evil priests and hypocritical evangelists as opterms and there was no identity left with which the goal could successfully be lived.
Here on Earth, one of these items will usually last for an entire lifetime and the shock of dying and hitting the between lives area is what causes you to give up on it and postulate a new beingness with which to accomplish the goal. This is one of the reasons you forget your past lives and putting together a lineplot of the current actual GPM will give you some recollection of who you have been before.
There are a few exceptions to this. You don't usually abandon an item if either the lifetime is very very short (dying in childhood) or the lifetime went so extremely well that you felt that you were winning and hung on to the same item. There is also the possibility that if things were really horrible, you might change items more than once in a lifetime, perhaps experiencing amnesia or a massive personality shift as a result.
Before Earth, you will find that you generally gave an item a much more thorough workout and held it for many lifetimes before you abandoned it. The GPMs used to decay much more slowly. It is the impact of the between lives area that makes you give up so easily.
4. HOW THE LINEPLOT FITS TOGETHER
You need to understand how the lineplot fits together, but you should not try to put one together yourself until after you have taken a great deal of charge off of the goal. One of the biggest mistakes in the SHSBC research into actual GPMs was to try and find the lineplot items before keying out the goal.
You can run problems, overts, etc. off of the goal until you feel better about it. You can actually make the goal FN (free needle) on an E-meter by these means and you can get to the point where you will begin to realize what the items are without searching for them. Then the lineplot becomes a very simple matter.
I don't know if you can develop a lineplot without using an E-Meter. Certainly you can handle problems and overts without one (and you need to be able to so that you can keep on advancing even if you are in a bodiless state). But the meter is a tremendous help in knowing that you've got the items right. Here I will assume that you have one and know something about the Scientology listing and nulling (L&N) technology. If not, then you can still make it by taking so much charge off of the goal with general processes (discussed later) that the items become super easy to spot. There are tricks for meterless listing (which I will discuss in another write-up), but they are not safe if there is too much charge kicking around in the area.
You can still make tremendous gains and take each of a series of GPMs to a state of release even without running any lineplots. But you still need to see how the lineplot works so that you know how the goal decays and can recognize the occasional line plot item that will show up if you run general processes on the goal.
The procedure would be:
a) find out what your current actual GPM is (discussed later, you may know it by the end of reading this write-up).
b) run general processes on the goal (discussed later) until you cognite (have a sudden realization) on what is the current item that you're being.
c) Now you can either do the lineplot or just continue on with general processes on the goal.
d) you begin the lineplot by taking the current item (which you will already have found) and working backwards in time back to the point where you postulated the goal.
Because of the way you run this, the item at the top of the page is the most recent and the one at the bottom of the page is the oldest. The is the reverse of how an implant platen would be written because there you would have the first (earliest) item implanted up at the top of the page and would be running forward in time as you went down the page.
In other words, as you look down the page, you have the items arranged in the order that you find them (most recent working backwards) and as you look up the page, you see them in the order that you lived them.
We write the things that you are being (the terminals) on the left side, and the things you are opposed by (the Opterms) on the right. The direction of the arrows shows successful opposition.
Here is a sample, with the "A"s being terminals and the "B"s being opterms and the higher numbers being later in time. The direction of the arrows shows successful opposition.
A4
\
---> B3
/
A3 <---
\
---> B2
/
A2 <---
\
---> B1
/
A1 <---
You would initially find item A4 which is, lets say, what you are currently being. You became this to solve the problems given to you by B3, which had successfully opposed you when you were A3.
Once you get this, you can then start at the bottom and see that you began by being item A1 and then B1 showed up and kicked your teeth in. So you became A2 to solve that and it worked, but then B2 showed up and successfully opposed you and so you abandoned A2 and became A3 etc. This is the pattern of current existence.
To make this a little more obvious, I will give you a piece of the lineplot I worked up on my goal "To Be Intelligent". Remember that this is an actual GPM and the items would be different for anybody else even if they were doing the same goal.
A SHARPIE
\
-----------> A MORALIST
/
A FREE THINKER <------
\
------> A LITERAL MINDED PERSON
/
A MAN OF LEANING <----
\
----> AN IGNORANT CLOUT
/
A FAST THINKER <------
etc.
This is just a slice out of the middle of a series of about 50 pairs of items which stretch back for about 16,000 years (I eventually found the dates and put together descriptions of the lifetimes) and I'm still living in the upper section of this GPM before it decays down to crushing strong men and attacking all other intellectuals as being too stupid to live.
To work backwards in time, you list "Who or what would a ... oppose". You can also use "solve" or "successfully oppose" or maybe even "handle successfully".
For me (because these are my items), it was obvious that a "Sharpie" could successfully oppose a "Moralist" and that a moralist would successfully oppose a free thinker, etc.
You then check this by working up from the earliest (at the bottom of the page) and seeing that each item is successfully opposed by or stopped by the one above it. If you do need to list the next item going up, the question would be "Who or what would a ... be opposed by" or "be stopped by".
For background information, I'll mention how I lived this bunch of items.
As a fast thinker, I was a Spanish soldier sent to the Americas (part of the conquistadors) and felt that I died in battle because of the ignorant clouts around me. So in the next lifetime I became a man of learning and joined a monastery and studied as a monk. But the literal minded priests did me in (the inquisition). So I rebelled against morality and became a free thinker. I spent that lifetime as a girl, a Spanish dancer and part time whore. Of course the moralists did me in so I became a sharp trader in the next lifetime so that I could take advantage of them and do them in etc. Of course there were overts here too. As a learned monk, I really ranted and raved at the peasants (ignorant clouts) and made their lives miserable. As a free thinker (dancer, etc.), I really twisted those literal minded noblemen and horny priests around my finger, etc.
If you hold off on trying to put the lineplot together until the goal is fairly well discharged, you will find that you can generally just spot each item in sequence. Only rarely will you have to list a couple of items before you get the right one (which will FN on the meter). One thing that does happen is that sometimes you miss a pair of items (because the one you are on can usually successfully oppose earlier opterms almost as well as it opposed the opterm it really was used against and the earlier ones are hot enough that they will react on the meter). In other words, as I was working back from a free thinker in the above lineplot, I might have come up with an ignorant clout as the opterm that it successfully opposed the first time I was working my way back and accidentally skipped the literal minded person and the man of learning.
The way you handle this is that you occasionally call off the lineplot items and see that they are all FNing on the meter and if the FN turns off, there is something wrong, usually a skipped pair of items (or a pair out of order). Usually the items are all correct because they did FN before, but the pattern of items might be slightly off.
The way you call it is you would say:
A sharpie would oppose a moralist A moralist would oppose a free thinker A free thinker would oppose a literal minded person etc. working down the page.
Then you work up the page calling them as:
A fast thinker would be opposed (stopped) by an ignorant clout An ignorant clout would be opposed (stopped) by a man of learning. A man of learning would be opposed by a literal minded person. etc.
You can call the items in any section of the lineplot like this and even work up and down (reversing the question) around a small area if there is some uncertainty. As you call off the items of your own actual GPM this way, they should make total sense to you and seem totally obvious because they are the anatomy of how you have been acting and living life. If it doesn't seem that way, they you haven't gotten the items right. Of course somebody else's items (mine in the example) might seem slightly wrong because they are not your items.
If you are having a bad day, or there are other errors, or the goal is still a bit charged up, the items might rocket read (RR) instead of FNing. That's OK. But if you're getting FNs and then an item RRs, there is probably an error (usually a missed pair or a pair out of order).
Your final target on this is to get an FNing lineplot (a complete plot with a persistent FN as you call all the items going down to the beginning of the goal and then back up to present time using the statements given above for calling the items).
This procedure is slightly different from the various Routine 3M procedures that Ron developed for finding lineplots. The exact R3M listing questions and methods lead to finding implanted GPMs and they don't work very well on Actual GPMs.
5. MORE THINGS CONNECTED TO THE GOAL
Besides the lineplot items, there are a number of other things closely connected with the goal which you use throughout the entire course of a GPM's existence.
There will be a basic computation, which we call a "Service Facsimile" (it was originally considered to be a facsimile or picture but now is known to be a computation and the person thinks it is performing a service for him in helping him to survive). This is what the individual uses to make others wrong.
There is a basic underlying Service Facsimile for the entire GPM. It is derived from using the basic characteristic of the Opterm to make others wrong. For me on the goal to be intelligent, the serv fac was "They're Stupid". In the previous GPM to be holy, it was "They're Evil". This is not a lineplot item. It endures for the entire course of the GPM.
In grade 4 processing, we try to get the Serv Fac by listing answers to the question "In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong". In some cases, you get the basic service fac which is part of the GPM. In others, you get a lock resting on top of it (maybe "their foolishness" or "other people's ignorance" etc.).
If you have found a basic serv fac by running grade 4 processes, you might be able to derive the basic terminal from it and figure out the goal from that. But sometimes you only you only have a lock rather than a basic one. Also, sometimes the basic service fac of an earlier GPM which is similar to the current one might have locked up onto the current one and show up on grade 4. One of the main actions of implant GPMs was to try and collapse together your actual GPMs so that you get things all tangled up.
Another thing connected to the GPM is a basic object which symbolizes the beingness of the GPM. For the goal to be intelligent, this might be a pair of glasses. For the goal to be holy, it might be a cross. This is a mental mass and the person will use it as his true viewpoint and spiritual body throughout the course of the GPM's existence. It is the token he uses to represent himself in the game, a bit like the player's tokens in a game of monopoly. He carries it from lifetime to lifetime and he will try to have a manifestation of it in the physical universe but this is not always possible.
For the individual, this object is solid as a rock and it is exceptionally pleasing to him. Ron stumbled on this in the late 1950s and labeled it "The Rock" but he did not have the anatomy of the GPM at that time and therefore all the attempts to audit it out failed. It was pretty much abandoned in the research after that, but it shows up here in our anatomy of the actual GPMs. It is interesting to note that this was the original point at which the meter reaction which we call a "Rock Slam" was discovered. The Rock of the current GPM will not produce a rock slam unless you are already into committing horrible unjustified overts against the next GPM that you are falling towards. But the rock of the previous GPM which you have already turned against will generally produce a wild RS on the meter.
You wouldn't have any luck auditing the rock until the GPM has been pretty much taken apart.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that everyone who wears glasses does so because of the goal "to be intelligent". We have always failed when we tried to label specific sources for general kinds of conditions. There are always many possible reasons and which one is correct is an individual matter. One person might wear them because of an engram (an might get rid of them on Dianetics) and another might have them because of an overt (and maybe could handle it on grade 2) and perhaps another has gotten them from implants or whatever. We might not even have all the possible reasons. All that I can say for sure is that if he is wearing them because they are the rock of the current GPM, you have no hope in hell of curing them with Dianetics or any other lower level processing. And you probably can't even get the guy to wear contact lenses.
This is why you never try to cure anything or promise any specific result with any level of auditing. You have no idea where his ailment is coming from and the odds are that it is not on the level you're going to do next. It is likely that you will fix something, but you can't guess in advance what that something will be.
When I first began running these, I believed the goals to be an individual matter. It was obvious that the items were my choice and were not implanted. I assumed that the same was true of the goals themselves.
But after running back through the goal to be holy and spotting the goal "To Be Powerful" just before that, I decided to try and see what this whole mess led back to by skipping backwards from one goal to the next by using a goal oppose style listing process. With the last two GPMs taken apart and the whole subject of actual GPMs fairly well cooled down, it seemed possible to do this (I don't recommend trying this before you take the last two apart).
The listing question used was "Who or What would (either the goal or the primary terminal) successfully oppose (or solve)". Any of the 4 variations of the question seemed to work and I generally checked that the others led to the same conclusion to help confirm that I had it right. Once the next earlier GPM was found, I only ran a bit of "what overt would (earlier terminal) do to (later terminal)" to get some of the worst charge off of it and then went on to the next goal. This was not enough to actually erase the GPM or restore abilities or open up my recall of the timeperiod, but it was enough to let me go earlier without getting buried under the weight of the thing. I don't recommend this as a good technique for making case gain. These things should be run thoroughly. But I got away with it and it was very useful as a research action.
I got way back to the goal "To be Free" which opposed "To be Godlike" which seemed to be the highest goal in the series. And then it went further back with Godlike opposing "To Be Enduring" and the goals seemed to be down at the bottom of the scale and working upwards as I went earlier. And eventually it cycled back through STRONG opposing INTELLIGENT opposing HOLY again and all the way back up to GODLIKE. The whole pattern had been repeating over and over again. So I tried to date the first occurrence of "To Be Godlike" and got 86 trillion years ago (which might be an implanted date rather than a real one). And there I found the start of this universe and incident I in its full form.
It would still be incorrect to say that these goals were implanted since running the implant doesn't seem to undo them. It would be better to say that these goals were "Suggested" and that they were built into the anatomy of the game of this universe and that we follow them because the underlying mechanics coax us into doing it.
It works like this: The game in this universe is "TO SURVIVE". The abberative implanted idea is that "ONLY ONE WILL SURVIVE AND THE REST WILL SINK INTO MUD". The destructive collarary that they show you is "TO BE THE ONE WHO SURVIVES, YOU MUST BE SUPERIOR TO OTHERS". Then they show you how to be superior to others. And it is by being godlike, holy, intelligent, strong, etc. And at a minimum, you can at least endure rather than sinking into the mud.
Then they show you the sequence of goals by means of having various figures (which are of significance from earlier universes) come out and state the goals and how they relate to one another. This is the real anatomy of incident I as given in OT3. If you have run this level, then just spot the charioteer saying "TO SURVIVE IS TO BE POWERFUL" and realize that you have been spotting a tiny slice out of a much bigger incident.
I hate to say it, but OT3 was researched in a very slipshod manner. Luckily, we get away with spotting only a tiny piece of incident I because the incident does not have much force or charge on it. It can hardly be considered a heavy implant. What it really is is a sort of welcoming ceremony or a sick course that people get put through as they come into this universe to show them how the game is setup down here.
Here is the little section of it that I am most certain of:
Waves of blackness & Snaps etc. Cherub blows horn. Priest comes out and says "TO SURVIVE IS TO BE HOLY" Priest looks in the direction that the previous character left in and says "TO BE HOLY IS TO SOLVE THE OPPRESSION OF POWERFUL PEOPLE". Priest looks the other way an says "TO BE HOLY IS TO BE OPPRESSED BY INTELLIGENT PEOPLE". Priest exits.
Waves of blackness & Snaps etc. Cherub blows horn. Scientist comes out and says "TO SURVIVE IS TO BE INTELLIGENT". Scientist looks to the side where the priest left and says "TO BE INTELLIGENT IS TO SOLVE THE OPPRESSION OF HOLY PEOPLE". Scientist looks to the other side and says "TO BE INTELLIGENT IS TO BE OPPRESSED BY STRONG PEOPLE". Scientist exits.
Waves of blackness & Snaps etc. Cherub blows horn. Athlete comes out and says "TO SURVIVE IS TO BE STRONG". Athlete looks to the side where the scientist left and says "TO BE STRONG IS TO SOLVE THE OPPRESSION OF INTELLIGENT PEOPLE". Athlete looks to the other side and says "TO BE STRONG IS TO BE OPPRESSED BY CRAFTY PEOPLE".
Note that I think the next one after strong is "To Be Crafty", but I wouldn't guarantee it. I also might be wrong about the charioteer and the goal "To Be Powerful" coming just before the goal to be holy because I haven't really run that goal yet either. I am, however, absolutely certain about Holy followed by Intelligent followed by Strong.
I wouldn't try to write out the whole thing because I went through the entire series in a very sloppy manner and I don't have a lot of confidence that I've got it right. I will give you the approximate pattern of goals that I found, but its up to you to run out the actual GPM that you are stuck in and the one before it and make corrections and adjustments as needed.
Any research of implant patterns really needs to be done by a team. Different people will have real certainty on different sections of the pattern and by putting together a composite, you should get the whole picture. As I understand it, the Clearing Course platens used in Scientology were put together by a group effort on the part of a few dozen people. The same needs to be done here. A complete and accurate platen will make it easier on the people who follow us.
But running this incident does not set you free from the goals. It just gives you an easy way to spot the actual GPM you're in the middle of and gives you some orientation to what's going on. The charge on the actual GPM does not come from the implant and does not vanish when you confront the implant. The charge comes from your own overts etc. in fighting against others according to this pattern.
You will also find out that you do not abandon these goals as you run them out. Instead, you become capable of doing more of them simultaneously. With the whole thing erased, you should be capable of being holy and intelligent and strong and free and responsible and enduring and godlike all at the same time. These are good goals. You were not implanted to give you the goals. You were implanted to set these goals in conflict and divide you against yourself.
There are some problems with the complete list of goals. First of all, this is a translation because the implant was not done in English and we may have different words for the same thing. Second, these are lived as actual GPMs and your exact statement of the goal may vary slightly each time you live through it in the cycle, so that our exact patterns may have diverged. And, of course, I probably made errors, especially in the form of missing goals or putting goals in the wrong sequence, because I was trying to skim through this without actually erasing them.
THE FOLLOWING LIST IS ONLY A STARTING POINT; DO NOT RELY ON ITS ACCURACY.
Each goal is opposed (or oppressed) by the next one in line and opposes (or oppresses or solves) the one above it. The first one (To be Godlike) oppresses the last one (To Be Enduring) so that the whole thing makes a circle. The big unjustified overts are from each goal against the one below it.
TO BE GODLIKE
TO BE FREE
TO BE RESPONSIBLE
TO BE CREATIVE
TO BE IMPORTANT
TO BE PERCEPTIVE
TO BE SUCCESSFUL
TO BE RIGHT
TO BE POPULAR
TO BE SKILLFUL
TO BE WISE
TO BE BEAUTIFUL
TO BE PRODUCTIVE
TO BE POWERFUL
TO BE HOLY
TO BE INTELLIGENT
TO BE STRONG
TO BE CRAFTY
TO BE INDEPENDENT
TO BE GOOD
TO BE ADVENTUROUS
TO BE ORDERLY
TO BE DIFFERENT
TO BE RESPECTED
TO BE HAPPY
TO BE ACQUISITIVE
TO BE SENSUAL
TO BE DOMINEERING
TO BE TOUGH
TO BE ENDURING
(maybe have 30 of 36 goals)
Other possible goals: causative, desirable, competent, lively, energetic, valuable, ethical, aesthetic, famous, proud, wealthy.
For the rare case who is in the inverted ending section of the GPM, you might have to run it as "TO NOT BE ...".
I will talk more about how to audit in the next write-up. For now I will simply mention that you usually run process commands repetitively, gradually working deeper until something releases.
On an area that is severely abberated, it is not enough to run one process or find only one key answer or only have a single new realization. You usually have to hit it from many angles and take lots of stuff apart to really dissolve a big area of mental charge. When you have something like one of these GPMs, it tends to fester and lots of lesser things lock up on it. You just keep chipping away at these with various processes and eventually the whole thing begins to crumble.
When I started cleaning up my goal to be intelligent, I simply used a hodge-podge of processes based on anything that had ever been tried by Ron in this area and throwing in other lower grades type processes where some part of the goal (usually the goal's terminal - in this case an intelligent person) could be worked into the command. Eventually, while slopping around this way, I realized what the previous goal was, what lineplot item I was currently dramatizing, and a lot of other stuff and eventually the goal was FNing on the meter and pretty much keyed out. Only then did I try to list out the lineplot.
For general use, and based on hindsight, I have tried to put together a reasonable rundown of processes that should be easier and faster than the exact steps I followed originally. But I must remind you that this has not been tested by a thorough research run on others.
To some degree, this is a streamlined set of lower grade processes aimed at a specific area. It is nowhere near as thorough as the expanded lower grades because we have a narrow target and we don't want the runway to be too long.
It should be possible for a trained solo auditor to run these on himself. It remains to be seen whether an untrained person could self audit them. I think it could be done if you had enough determination and desire to get through it. The monitoring factor is how specific are the commands Vs how much the person can confront. The very specific commands in the "Self Analysis" book can be self audited by almost anybody in the sloppiest manner and still produce results. Some of the vaguer lower grades processes can't even be solo audited unless you're way way up the scale. Here we have the advantage that the target is very specific and (if you have found the right goal) of maximum interest to the person.
In general, the process commands alternate between you, another person (meaning single specific people), and others (meaning groups or society). This tends to unstick self-centered viewpoints, gets you exterior to the actions of the terminal that you may be stuck in, and cleans up flows which go more ways than one (there is inflow that you receive, outflow that you emit, and the crossflow of your observing the interactions of others). Here I have simply put these in an alternating series of commands as was common in earlier auditing rather than trying to run each individual command repetitively to a point of release. I think that would be too arduous and unnecessary in this case. I tried it both ways and this seems to be the better choice.
These processes are especially important when you get back to earlier GPMs. I found that I could list the lineplot straight back into the goal to be holy (my immediately previous GPM) and you might need to do that first to get back through the decayed ending period of the goal, but I could not get any earlier by just running the lineplot. The goal was too long ago and to far outside of my current life. You need to run these general processes to get back enough recall and understanding of who and what you were when you did have the goal before you can really erase the GPM.
7.1 Objective Process
(Objective processes are run on the environment).
One of the reasons the goal decays is that as you live it, you gradually put the characteristic of the opterm into other people. If the goal is to be intelligent, then you tend to make others stupid. These processes are intended to turn that around.
There are two processes, each one is run separately. Do the action over and over again until something happens such as having a realization or suddenly feeling very good etc.
a) Find a crowded place, spot individual people, and postulate the ability of the goal's terminal into them. If, for example, the goal is to be intelligent, then you postulate intelligence into people.
b) Find a crowded place, spot individual people, and within each one, spot some remaining bit of the goal's ability (such as intelligence for example) that is still present in them and validate and encourage it. This is done telepathically. It doesn't matter if they really get the communication or if you just imagine it, what is important is your intention towards them and your recognition that there is at least a tiny remaining spark of the ability in everyone no matter how deeply it is buried (i.e. there is always some remaining shred of intelligence even in the most stupid person).
7.2 Simple Recall
Recalling the positive or pleasurable side of something tends to cool down the upsets and failures associated with the negative side. The earliest and most powerful manifestations of living a goal before it decayed were highly positive (this may not be easily visible in the current lifetime). We want to rekindle some of that strength before we get involved with any of the negative factors.
Also, we want to include an awareness of other people doing the goal when we run this. This not only gets the person off of a self-centered viewpoint, but it helps him look at the goal from outside.
This is a single process with the commands run alternately. Fill in the blank with the goal's ability. I.E. intelligent, holy, or whatever.
a) Recall being _____
b) Recall another being _____
c) Recall others being _____
7.2 ARC Recall
Affinity (liking), Reality (agreement), and Communication are a key basic in living life. We call this the ARC triangle and when all these three factors are present, we find that we also have Understanding. These can all be used to open up the persons memory a bit more and pull him further out of the negative factors into which he may have sunk.
There are 4 processes. Each one is run separately and has its own set of 6 commands that are run alternately.
Fill in the blank with the terminal (i.e. an intelligent person, a holy person, or whatever) of the GPM.
7.2.1 - Recall Communication
a) Recall a time you were in good communication with a(n) _____.
b) Recall a time a(n) ____ was in good communication with you.
c) Recall a time another was in good communication with a(n) _____.
d) Recall a time a(n) ____ was in good communication with another.
e) Recall a time others were in good communication with a(n) _____.
f) Recall a time a(n) ____ was in good communication with others.
7.2.2 - Recall Agreement
a) Recall a time you agreed with a(n) _____.
b) Recall a time a(n) ____ agreed with you.
c) Recall a time another agreed with a(n) _____.
d) Recall a time a(n) ____ agreed with another.
e) Recall a time others agreed with a(n) _____.
f) Recall a time a(n) ____ agreed with others.
7.2.3 - Recall Affinity
a) Recall a time you felt affinity for a(n) _____.
b) Recall a time a(n) ____ felt affinity for you.
c) Recall a time another felt affinity for a(n) _____.
d) Recall a time a(n) ____ felt affinity for another.
e) Recall a time others felt affinity for a(n) _____.
f) Recall a time a(n) ____ felt affinity for others.
7.2.4 - Recall Understanding
a) Recall a time you understood a(n) _____.
b) Recall a time a(n) ____ understood you.
c) Recall a time another understood a(n) _____.
d) Recall a time a(n) ____ understood another.
e) Recall a time others understood a(n) _____.
f) Recall a time a(n) ____ understood others.
7.3 COMMUNICATION PROCESS
It is beneficial to unstick the communication flows by drilling them a bit and pushing through any barriers. Here again we are interested in positive action rather than looking at any negatives.
It is best to imagine actually talking to someone and saying lots of specific things. The importance here is the volume of flow since that can push through barriers you may have set up. You can imagine saying all sorts of outlandish things, just keep the flow going. You can do a big outpouring of stuff on one command and when you run down, switch to the next command.
a) Imagine saying specific things to a(n) _____.
b) Imagine a(n) _____ saying specific things to you.
c) Imagine another saying specific things to a(n) _____.
c) Imagine a(n) _____ saying specific things to another.
d) Imagine others saying specific things to a(n) _____.
e) Imagine a(n) _____ saying specific things to others.
7.4 HELP PROCESS
Part of the goal's decay consists of the accumulated weight of failures to help others. But the anatomy of the trap is that the person takes each failure very seriously and holds on to them and never balances them off against the times he helped successfully. So you handle this by finding times he did help successfully.
When a person is heavily collapsed and the failures seem to far outweigh the successes, you are looking at the end of a long cycle. He always decayed from a state of power and you will find many successes if you go early enough. If you can spot earlier lifetimes where the victories were numerous, then it becomes easy. If not, you can still make it by spotting even the tiniest successes in this lifetime because they will reaffirm the great pile of positive actions that lay earlier out of sight.
a) Recall a time you helped a(n) _____.
b) Recall a time a(n) ____ helped you.
c) Recall a time another helped a(n) _____.
d) Recall a time a(n) ____ helped another.
e) Recall a time others helped a(n) _____.
f) Recall a time a(n) ____ helped others.
7.5 PROTECT PROCESS
Failures to protect are similar to, but usually more violent than failures to help. Here you will find the mass of love and loss, trust and betrayal, etc. If a child loses a parent, no matter how weak and small he is, he tends to feel that he failed to protect the parent from harm.
Again, you can't run the failures by simple recall. That will just sink the person under the weight of his losses. Instead, you must stir up the tremendous positive side. Even if recent lifetimes seem bleak, remember that we have all been around a long time and everyone has had their good periods as well as bad ones.
As in the other processes, run the commands alternately to a big win.
a) Recall a time you protected a(n) _____.
b) Recall a time a(n) ____ protected you.
c) Recall a time another protected a(n) _____.
d) Recall a time a(n) ____ protected another.
e) Recall a time others protected a(n) _____.
f) Recall a time a(n) ____ protected others.
7.6 PROBLEMS PROCESS
Now we're ready to look at one of the mechanisms by which a person will get himself screwed up. What happens is that he will have a problem and then he will solve it and cast the solution in concrete and that will get him into further trouble and lead to more problems. Eventually he has a huge stack of these things, and the older solutions don't even apply to anything anymore but he's still holding them all in place.
This is very intimate to the decay of the GPM. The reliable items (the things he tries to be) might even be looked at as a series of solutions to the opterms (the things opposing him). Here we are not looking for items or opterms, but sometimes one might come into view and should be carefully noted down.
The procedure is to spot a problem, and then spot one or more solutions (as many as will come off easily) and then spot another problem and its solutions, etc. Generally you will keep spotting earlier problems (but its OK if some are later) and solutions that are still in place but no longer appropriate will show up and dissolve which in turn will cause later problems (which came about because of the earlier solutions) to start falling apart and then suddenly the whole mess will fall apart.
This is complex enough that each direction of flow should be run as a separate process. Each process will have two commands. For solo use, you would repeat the solutions command as many times as seems indicated. If you run this on someone else (as in a co-audit), then simply alternating the commands works well enough and avoids the judgment point of determining if the PC has more solutions for that problem (he will just come up with the same problem again if there are more).
Fill in the blank with the goal's terminal (an intelligent person, a holy person, or whatever).
7.6.1
a) What problem might a(n) ____ have with another or others.
b) What solutions might a(n) ____ have to that problem.
7.6.2
a) What problem might another or others have with a(n) ____.
b) What solutions might they have to that problem.
7.6.3
a) What problem might a(n) ____ observer between others.
b) What solutions might a(n) ____ have to their problem.
7.6.4
a) What problem might a(n) ____ create for himself.
b) What solutions might a(n) ____ have to that problem.
Note that there are several ways to set up these questions (see the Scientology grade 1 processes). I have picked what seemed to be the most powerful variation.
7.7 OVERTS / WITHHOLDS
Here we hit the really causative side. The person does things and then he hides them and withdraws from action. Maybe he meant to do harm or maybe he was just getting away with something, or perhaps he even had good intentions and it went wrong. Often the person sinks to the point where he's holding himself back from doing anything because it might bring about harm.
So we ask for what the person has done, because we are working up a gradient scale of responsibility for doing things. We don't insist that the "done" be a harmful act because any admission of having acted is a positive step. The harmful acts should and will come up on these questions, but don't force it. And we alternate the "done" question with a withholding type question to unstick the continual withholding that most people live with.
Again we will run each direction of flow as a separate process.
The overts are among the most significant things that accumulate as one lives the GPM and raising one's confront on these may cause a significant amount of charge to unravel. This should make it possible to get a bit more exterior to the GPM, so we will add another flow at the end to help with this.
7.7.1
a) What might a(n) ____ do to another.
b) What might a(n) ____ hide from another.
7.7.2
a) What might another do to a(n) ____.
b) What might another hide from a(n) ____.
7.7.3
a) what might a(n) ____ do to others.
b) what might a(n) ____ hide from others.
7.7.4
a) What might a(n) ____ do to himself.
b) What might a(n) ____ hide from himself.
7.7.5
a) What might you do to a(n) ____.
b) What might you hide from a(n) ____.
Note that this last one is extremely important if your goal has already decayed significantly.
7.8 CHANGE
Change is an important button. If a person can't change, he can't get better.
Insistence upon and resistance to change are both significant sources of overts and a common underlying cause in many upsets between people.
The identities that one uses in a GPM are fixed solutions to the problems of living and therefore tend to resist change even when the change would be for the better.
7.8.1
a) What might a(n) ____ want to change in another.
b) What might a(n) ____ prevent changing in another.
7.8.2
a) What might another want to change in a(n) ____.
b) What might another prevent changing in a(n) ____.
7.8.3
a) what might a(n) ____ want to change in others.
b) what might a(n) ____ prevent changing in others.
7.8.4
a) What might a(n) ____ want to change in himself.
b) What might a(n) ____ prevent changing in himself.
7.8.5
a) What might you want to change in a(n) ____.
b) What might you prevent changing in a(n) ____.
7.9 UPSETS
Upsets generally occur between people because flows of affinity, reality, communication, or understanding are enforced or inhibited. Spotting exactly what is going on with these flows is the basic technique used in Scientology processing to handle upsets (which we call ARC Breaks) between people. The full list of what can happen to a flow to bring about an ARCX is: Curious, Desire, Enforce, Inhibit, No (e.g. the absence of), and Refused.
When an ARC Break happens, the reaction is generally all out of proportion to what actually occurred. When you get the person to spot that, lets say, he became upset because his communication was refused, he cools down a bit. And if you then work back to earlier similar upsets (because these things build up over time), you can really bring major relief.
In this case, we are not trying to handle a specific upset, but instead are trying to undercut the entire mass of upsets associated with a specific terminal.
To keep the runway from being too long, we will limit ourselves to the three most common buttons, which are inhibit, enforce, and desire since these should pick up enough for our purposes here (we are only handling a single terminal instead of trying to produce a full grade 3 release).
In this case, the different directions of flow are best handled by alternating commands rather than separate processes. By working a precise button (such as inhibiting communication) with a specific process, this should lead the person back to basic on a particular kind of upset and take it apart.
As a side note, this is a new procedure that is not currently part of Scientology's grade 3 processing. A generalized version of this (with all 6 buttons) should really be added to that grade. Furthermore, really early track ARCXs (prior to home universe) require adding Not-Know to the list of buttons.
7.9.1 Inhibited Communication
a) What communication might a(n) ____ inhibit in another.
b) What communication might another inhibit in a(n) ____.
c) What communication might a(n) ____ inhibit in others.
d) What communication might a(n) ____ inhibit himself from saying.
e) What communication might you inhibit a(n) ____ from saying.
7.9.2 Enforced Communication
a) What communication might a(n) ____ enforce on another.
b) What communication might another enforce on a(n) ____.
c) What communication might a(n) ____ enforce on others.
d) What communication might a(n) ____ force on himself.
e) What communication might you force on a(n) ____.
7.9.3 Desired Communication
a) What communication might a(n) ____ desire from another.
b) What communication might another desire from a(n) ____.
c) What communication might a(n) ____ desire from others.
d) What communication might a(n) ____ make himself desire.
e) What communication might you desire from a(n) ____.
7.9.4 Rejected agreement
* on this one reject seems to fit better than inhibit
a) What agreement might a(n) ____ reject from another.
b) What agreement might another reject from a(n) ____.
c) What agreement might a(n) ____ reject from others.
d) What agreement might a(n) ____ make himself reject.
e) What agreement might you reject from a(n) ____ .
7.9.5 Enforced agreement
a) What agreement might a(n) ____ enforce on another.
b) What agreement might another enforce on a(n) ____.
c) What agreement might a(n) ____ enforce on others.
d) What agreement might a(n) ____ force on himself.
e) What agreement might you force on a(n) ____.
7.9.6 Desired agreement
a) What agreement might a(n) ____ desire from another.
b) What agreement might another desire from a(n) ____.
c) What agreement might a(n) ____ desire from others.
d) What agreement might a(n) ____ make himself desire.
e) What agreement might you desire from a(n) ____.
7.9.7 Inhibited affinity
a) What affinity might a(n) ____ inhibit in another.
b) What affinity might another inhibit in a(n) ____.
c) What affinity might a(n) ____ inhibit in others.
d) What affinity might a(n) ____ inhibit in himself.
e) What affinity might you inhibit in a(n) ____ .
7.9.8 Enforced affinity
a) What affinity might a(n) ____ enforce on another.
b) What affinity might another enforce on a(n) ____.
c) What affinity might a(n) ____ enforce on others.
d) What affinity might a(n) ____ enforce on himself.
e) What affinity might you enforce on a(n) ____.
7.9.9 Desired affinity
a) What affinity might a(n) ____ desire from another.
b) What affinity might another desire from a(n) ____.
c) What affinity might a(n) ____ desire from others.
d) What affinity might a(n) ____ make himself desire.
e) What affinity might you desire from a(n) ____.
These 9 processes should be enough. If necessary, you can also run these buttons on Understanding. They can also be run on Reality either in addition to or in place of Agreement. Also, as mentioned earlier, more than 3 processes are possible on each button. This pattern of processes on the ARC triangle can also be run on the beingness/doingness/havingness triangle.
7.10 JUSTIFICATIONS
In this universe, the individual is struggling to survive and allows himself to commit his worst overts on that basis. Then he buries them under a heavy layer of justifications. Here you can get many answers on questions b and d for each answer to questions a and c respectively.
a) What would a(n) ___ do to ensure his survival b) what justifications would he have for that c) What would a(n) ___ stop others from doing to ensure his own survival d) what justifications would he have for that
7.11 RIGHTNESS and WRONGNESS
Now we want to clean up the "Service Facsimile" (the computation he uses to make others wrong).
7.11.1
This is a repetitive process. We run this first to take off charge.
a) How might a(n) ____ make himself right. b) How might a(n) ____ make others wrong.
7.11.2
Now we need to list for the answer. It will often be a computation in the form of "They're ....", but take whatever comes up. See the next write-up for more information on listing techniques if you are not already trained in this.
The listing question is:
a) What would a(n) ____ use to make others wrong.
Note that we do not limit the answers to this lifetime (as is usually done in grade 4). The limiter is needed there to keep him from sliding into multiple GPMs (which each have a different answer to this question). Here we get the same effect by referring to the specific GPM terminal.
7.11.3
If the previous question did not result in a basic answer in the form of "They're ....", then list the following:
a) From the viewpoint of a(n) ____, what is it about them that makes them so wrong.
7.11.4
Taking the most basic answer from the above listing question(s), run the following:
a) How would (..answer..) make others wrong.
b) How would (..answer..) make a(n)____ right.
7.12 VIEWPOINTS
Although this kind of processing is usually used on grade 0 in Scientology, it is actually a very advanced process and makes a good finishing touch in our handling of the GPM terminal. This should help you get exterior to it.
a) From where could you communicate to a(n) _____.
b) From where could a(n) ____ communicate to you.
c) From where could a(n) ____ communicate to others.
d) From where could a(n) _____ communicate to himself.
8. ADVANCED PROCESSES ON OPTERMS
By this point, the terminal should be fairly well cleaned up and a great deal of charge should have already been removed on the opterms, so that they should now be easy to run directly.
8.1 THE BASIC OPTERM
There will be a basic opposition terminal which is the opposite of the terminal. For intelligence it would be "a stupid person" or "stupid people".
We want the underlying characteristic rather than a specific opterm, so the listing question would be as follows:
a) What kind of people would a(n) ____ oppose.
This should yield the basic opterm. But there is a chance that you will come up with the prior opterm (the terminal of the previous goal - for example "stupid holy people").
If necessary, you can also list:
a) What kind of people would a(n) ____ be opposed by.
Again this should yield the basic opterm, but here you might get the future opterm (the terminal of the next goal - for example "stupid strong men").
If neither list yields the basic one, then spot the common underlying characteristic of both answers.
8.2 OPTERM PROCESS
Run this on the basic opterm found above.
a) what action or attitude would (opterm) have towards (terminal). b) what action or attitude would (terminal) have towards (opterm). c) what action or attitude would (terminal) have towards others. d) what action or attitude would others have towards (terminal). e) what action or attitude would (opterm) have towards others. f) what action or attitude would others have towards (opterm). g) what action or attitude would (opterm) withhold from (terminal). h) what action or attitude would (terminal) withhold from (opterm).
(this is based on the process Routine 3D whole track O/W by LRH).
8.3 FINDING THE NEXT GOAL
As you run the earlier GPMs prior to the current one, you will already have handled the next one later in time (because you are working backwards) and will know what it is.
But for the new GPM that you are living right now, you might not know what the next one is going to be. It might be obvious from the processing that has already been done on the goal, or it might be obvious from the general pattern suggested by Incident 1 (discussed earlier). But we can't guarantee that, because the goals were only suggested and your own postulate of each goal might vary slightly from the pattern.
There is also the question of how deep are you into the current GPM. Up near the top, you might not yet have any contact with the next one in the series and so you might need to skip any handling of it because there is nothing there to run. If you are already going out the bottom of the current goal, then there might be serious overts and charge on the next one that is coming up.
The following listing question can be used to find the next goal that is coming up in the future:
a) What Goal would successfully oppose the goal "...(current goal)...".
You can also get this by listing for the future opterm as follows:
b) What kind of a person would successfully oppose a(n).....
or even with
c) What kind of a person would be dangerous to a(n).....
Once you have a goal, you can get the terminal of that goal by listing "who or what would want ...(goal)...".
Once you have a terminal (in the case the future opterm will be the terminal of the next goal), you can get the goal by listing "what goal would a(n).... have".
You can work around with a number of these questions and satisfy yourself that the answers fit together and make sense. When you're finished, you should know what the next goal and its terminal (which is the future opterm of the current goal) are, or you can be satisfied that there is no future opterm in view yet.
On earlier GPMs, you already know the answers to these questions, so you just check them over to be sure that you've got everything right.
8.4 RUNNING THE FUTURE OPTERM
Now use the same process from 8.2 above but use the future opterm instead of the direct opterm.
This might not have a lot of charge when you're handling your present time GPM. But if you're near the end of the full cycle of decay, there will be horrible unjustified overts against the next GPM coming up and you might even turn on a Rock Slam meter reaction on this process.
If it seems necessary, you can run more processes on overts committed against the future opterm.
Also, if an RS does turn on, or (running without a meter) if you get very hateful and evil towards the future opterm, then spot and blow the earlier false purpose. Also, if needed, spot the original scene in incident one that set you up for this whole mess.
Once you are running earlier GPMs, you will already have run this area because the future goal will already have been processed. But you should check if there is any more charge on committing overts against the future opterm. If so, you could run an O/W process such as "what would (terminal) do to (future opterm)", "what would (terminal) withhold from (future opterm).
8.5 FINDING THE PREVIOUS GOAL
Now we want the goal that came before the one we're handling. The earlier one is solved by the current one.
List for the goal as follows:
a) What Goal would be successfully opposed by the goal "...(current goal)...".
You can also get this by listing for the prior opterm as follows:
b) What kind of a person would be successfully opposed by a(n).....
You can also use "solved by" in place of "successfully opposed by".
This works like step 8.3 above except that now you're looking backwards.
8.6 RUNNING THE PRIOR OPTERM
Now use the same process from 8.2 above but use the prior opterm instead of the direct opterm.
This may suddenly reveal a horrible mass of unjustified overts that you committed while you were doing the previous goal. If so, then get as much off as you can because this is what will really restore abilities and open up your recall of the earlier goal.
On earlier GPMs, this area can be very hot, so you might need to run an additional process:
a) what overt might ..(prior opterm).. commit against ..(terminal).. b) how would he justify that.
Also, if an RS does turn on, then spot and blow the earlier false purpose. Also, if needed, spot the original scene in incident one that set you up for this whole mess.
8.7 WHAT TO DO NEXT
By this point, the current GPM should probably be falling apart in your hands and you should have some awareness of the earlier GPM that you abandoned.
Now you should be able to do the lineplot easily (see above).
When you do the lineplot, run it all the way back into the decayed ending section of the previous goal (found in 8.5 above) and try to get back to the point where you made the postulate to not do that goal.
After running the lineplot, you can optionally go through it again and try to date and identify the lifetimes that go with the items. You should already have an idea of these from doing the lineplot, but it helps open up your recall to get the dates.
As a final step, date when you postulated the goal. Then search for and write down any other postulates you made concerning the goal.
After this you can either run the rock or just start running the next earlier GPM (which you should have identified above).
The rock is the basic object that symbolizes the entire GPM.
The person uses the rock as a substitute for himself.
He will often be carrying a decayed version of the rock around with him (for example, an intelligent person might be wearing glasses).
The thetan will have a mockup of the rock hidden in some mocked up space outside of the physical universe and will be relaying all of his communications to the physical body through it. He intentionally forgets and hides this out of fear that somebody will read his mind and zap it and destroy him. To some degree he uses this as a sort of high level spiritual body and its lifespan is the entire duration of the GPM.
You are not going to get rid of the rock early in processing. He has too much bound up in it and thinks that he will lose his memory and identity if its gone. And we have been through this cycle of goals many times, so that there will be earlier similar rocks which makes it tend to persist even after the current GPM is run out.
Here we will simply try and take some charge off of it and clean it up. This should only be attempted after fully processing the GPM and its lineplot.
On earlier GPMs, he is no longer using the rock that he had setup for them, but it is still important to process because he has a tendency to compulsively create anything that is similar to any rock that he once used. This tends to make the physical universe very solid and unmanageable.
There is a lot of early theory about the rock in the 20th and 21st Advanced Clinical Course lectures. These ACCs did not go well. The rumors are that the students came out looking like rocks. The problem was that the anatomy of the GPM had not yet been worked out and these things can't be run successfully without handling the GPM first.
It remains to be determined whether these rocks are consistent from person to person on the same goal.
9.1 FINDING THE ROCK
You can either list it from the goal or the terminal. The question would be:
a) What Object would represent ____
For example, on the goal to be holy, you could either fill in the blank with "a holy man" or "the goal to be holy".
Use the rock found to fill in the blank in the rest of the processes below.
9.2 PLEASING PEOPLE
In the ACCs, Ron found that the person was using the rock as a people pleaser. He would put it up in place of himself so as to attract admiration, etc. Of course there would be people who wouldn't admire it and that would make it stick.
9.2.1
a) what sort of a ____ would please people. b) tell me a person that would please
9.2.2
a) spot a time another admired your ____
b) spot a time another invalidated your ____
c) spot a time you admired another's ____
d) spot a time you invalidated another's ____
9.2.3
a) mock up crowds of people applauding and admiring the rock. Keep doing this until you feel very good.
9.3 HELP ON THE ROCK
Supposedly the rock helps you to survive.
a) how could a ____ help you
b) how could you help a ____
c) how could a ____ help another
d) how could another help a _____
e) how could a ____ help itself
9.4 PROTECTING THE ROCK
The rock can get lost or damaged and is a constant source of concern and fear.
a) how could a ____ protect you
b) how could you protect a ____
c) how could a ____ protect another
d) how could another protect a _____
e) how could a ____ protect itself
9.5 STOPPED MOTION
The rock tends to stop motion and therefor accumulates mass.
a) what motion of yours has a ____ stopped
b) what motion of another's has a ____ stopped
c) what motion of others has a ____ stopped.
9.6 RESISTANCE
a) What beingness would resist a _____
b) What beingness would ____ resist
9.7 OBJECTIVE EXTERIORIZATION FROM THE ROCK
For this you want to use an actual physical object. You may already have a copy of the current rock (glasses or a cross or whatever it is that represents your current goal). You will almost certainly not have one for the immediately preceding GPM (because you probably abandoned it with great determination), so you can either get one or make one out of clay or something. The important thing is to have some physical mass to work with.
Place the object on a table within easy reach. Part of the drill is to actually reach out and grab it and then withdraw your hand from it. You want to be moving your hand back and forth by at least a foot.
a) grab the object and keep it from going away.
b) let go of it.
c) grab the object and hold it absolutely still.
d) let go of it.
e) grab the object and (by mental projection) make it more solid.
f) let go of it.
9.8 WASTING THE ROCK
9.8.1
a) mock up a way to waste ____
9.8.2
a) mock up a way for another to waste ____
9.8.3
a) mock up a way for others to waste ____
9.9 HAVINGNESS MOCKUPS
This is based on the GITA (give and take) processing of the Philadelphia Doctorate course and the Remedy of Havingness used by Ron in the late 1950s.
Here you mockup great quantities of the rock in a sphere surrounding you. Keep making the copies more & more decrepit and decayed and changing their colors and getting more and more of them until you can get them to start flowing into the body in an avalanche.
Keep mocking up more and getting them to flow in until you feel satisfied and are willing to throw some away.
Then mock up more and have them flow outward in explosions and fly away into the distance.
When that seems to cool down, go back to the first step but this time mock up nicer copies and get them coming in in an avalanche until you get enough of them.
Keep alternating the inflow and outflow with better and better copies until you can handle wonderful beautiful (golden or whatever) copies and handle them easily.
9.10 Viewpoint Processing
a) from where could you communicate to a ____
b) from where could a ____ communicate to you
c) from where could another communicate to a ____
d) from where could a ____ communicate to another
e) from where could a ____ communicate to itself.
9.11 Memory
The thetan often uses objects as a repository for memory. In the special case of the rock, he dumps entire lifetimes of memory in there so that he can forget them without losing them completely.
a) What memories could a ____ store for you
b) What memories could a ____ store for another
c) What memories could a ____ store for others
d) What might you allow a ____ to forget.
9.12 Thought
The thetan also has a foolish tendency to let objects do his thinking for him.
a) What thoughts might a ____ have on your behalf
b) What thoughts could you have in the absence of ____
9.13 Obsessive Create
a) From where could you mockup a ____
b) From where could a ____ mock you up.
Run these alternately until command b suddenly seems ridiculous and something comes apart. Then do a few more of command A to stabilize the result. It seems absurd, but to some degree you're probably having the rock mock you up rather than vise versa.
Then run:
a) From where could another mockup a ____
b) From where could a ____ mock another up.
9.14 OT Process
Hold the object in your hands.
Close your eyes.
a) spot 3 points in the object.
b) spot 3 points in the room.
Do this alternately. Your perception does not have to be good or very real. Just keep spotting.
If you should suddenly feel like there is another copy of the rock off in some strange space somewhere, then add it to the process and spot 3 points in it as well (then you would be alternating between the object in your hands, the room, and this other distant object).
Early on in running this, the object in your hands will become much more real and solid than the rest of the room. Continue until either this effect stops (the object and the room are perceived uniformly), or you exteriorize from the rock with certainty.
An interesting point is that the godlike being up at the top of the pattern kicks back against the enduring people. You can see this in the early books of the Bible where God is always saying that the Children of Israel are a stubborn people and he keeps pushing at them to bend them to His will.
This oppression of enduring people means that when you were godlike, you could not endure and therefore ensures that the goal will decay. Also, you are continually bothered by the free beings who are out of your control and eventually you commit terrible overts against them. This is how the cycle starts.
Note that the people you might think are enduring or free in this example do not necessarily have those goals as their own GPMs. If you're being godlike and someone really gives you trouble, there is a tendency to assume that they are free beings (because the implant suggests it) when really it might be someone who is working on, lets say, the goal to be popular or even another person working on the goal to be godlike (but they look like they're free from your viewpoint).
There are earlier universes before this one (see the "Cosmic History"). Each of the last few universes had its own series of actual GPMs which formed the anatomy of the game in that universe.
The underlying goal of this universe is to survive. And it includes the twisted false idea that only one can survive, so you have to be superior to others.
The previous universe was the Magic Universe. The underlying goal there was To Enjoy. It was a hedonistic universe. The twisted false idea was that you gained pleasure at the expense of others. In other words, it was good to screw but bad to be screwed. This idea is still around even though it is blatantly false. All sorts of undesirable impulses ranging from sexual craziness to wanting to make others into slaves stem from this earlier universe.
When you came to this universe, you accepted the current goals series and it became the primary motivating factor. But just because you're living these GPMs doesn't mean that you completely abandoned the magic universe goals series. You continued to live them as well but they faded down to being a secondary factor and you tend to move through the items slowly and with little emphasis. Also, these earlier goals are very decayed because they have already been lived so many times and gotten worse on each cycle through the series.
I don't yet have a good handle on the magic universe goals series. It is obscured by the current series of actual GPMs. You need to know about these because you will see an occasional loose end sticking out that comes from there (the PC is living the goal "to be responsible" but he has a terrible urge to get drunk tonight, etc.). Don't go chasing off after the occasional stray bit of an earlier GPM that doesn't fit logically into the actual GPM you are running.
The individual's own causative behavior (as opposed to what he is forced into by others) stems from the following sources:
a) The current actual GPM.
b) The other GPMs he is still living in from earlier universes.
c) His own prior postulates which he believes he has to live up to.
d) Free Will. Never make the mistake of thinking that all behavior stems from aberration. The person can become interested in something. He can decide things without any prior cause. The difference here is that he can think about these things and change his mind if he wants to.
|
|
|
