Homer Wilson Smith
HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
Thu May 24 14:47:53 EDT 2018
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
NO Auditing is a technical term, it doesn't mean that no auditing
is taking place. It means that the ACTIONS and apparencies of auditing
are taking place, often lots of it, but no case gain is being made. It
might as well be that NO AUDITING is being done.
The preclear has two time tracks, his primary time track which he
is trying to audit out, and a second time track of the auditing done to
erase the primary one.
When a preclear has had lots of NO AUDITING, the auditing time
track is empty, regardless of the hours spent in session, which show up
instead in the primary time track rather than the auditing time track.
So when he goes to finally audit out his auditing, a necessary
step, there is nothing there to audit. You can't even repair the no
auditing, or rehab it, because there was NO auditing to repair and no
wins to rehab.
So if SOME auditing is taking place, regardless of the amount of
repair and rehabs incurred, there will be latent wins and actual wins.
They will manifest strongly along the way and at the end of the
cramming, and the auditing time track will be full and robust and the
preclear will be happy as if it had been a smooth ride the whole way.
So you can't waste auditing by getting SOME auditing no matter how
misguided, rough or overrun or bypassed. Once the rehab and repairs are
done, the latent wins will come out as if the errors were never made.
THERE IS NOTHING LIKE A CORRECT INDICATION TO RAISE THE DEAD.
So BAD auditing is not NO auditing, BAD auditing is great auditing
once the rehab and repair is done.
The ONLY way you can waste auditing time, is to deliver NO
So the next time you run into a Class XII NO Auditor, spot the no
auditing up front and go find a bum in the street to audit you.
The *RELIEF* will be miraculous.
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu May 24 12:00:02 EDT 2018
Send mail to archive at lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the HomerWSmith-L