| Short Hatting | Glossary | Successes | Deep Processing | GPM Tech Study |

The Karma Buster Process
Explore The Dark Side of Your Karma

To get an idea of what Karma Buster is about in terms of gains, read the Successes Section.

A Short Hatting on Karma Buster

The most basic hatting for PCs on Karma Buster is the page on 'States of Mind'
A background study in LRH GPM tech, that is the theoretical basis for this work, can be found here: GPMs: The Adventurous Routine 2-12

What we address are "identities the person has been or has fought".
The quote is one of LRHs definitions for GPMs. These identities, thus, would include own identities and any identity
the person has had some kind of problematic relationship with, present and past.

Entity: In Karma Buster we address Entities. Synonyms in Scn are 'valences', 'ridges', 'terminals', 'opposition terminals,' identities,' 'circuits,' machinery.'
Elsewhere we mainly used the term 'identities' or IDs. Sometimes these ridges have lost all of their 'personality' and lifelike characteristics because they have been utterly squashed so we only have left what can be identified as a ridge or a mental mass. Therefore we prefer to call them Entities rather than Identities; but you will see these words used as synonyms. We also use the term "a Character" about such an entity. A Character, in this context, is understood to be a fictitious personality. That is how it is used in literature and story telling. What routinely happens during Karma Buster is that what is first contacted as an entity can be developed into an identity or character. Once its 'personality' is established and recovered, the entity is addressed as a character, a beingness.

The entities we are interested in are not defined as BTs or Clusters. The entities we we are interested in are seen as creations of the PC*. The PC is ultimately cause and his postulates, efforts and emotions are the senior factors of anything accumulated in his theta-body or space. The entities we are interested in are holograms or simulations of persons the PC has been or fought; but they are often squashed and not-is-ed into small ridges.
One theory of why PC carries them along is that PC uses or has used them to do certain routine tasks or uses them as stimulus-response mechanisms to handle dangerous situations. They are "bureaucrats of the mind" with one single function: the execution of one certain function or goal. Like a bureaucrat they are stuck with or stuck in a 'Hat.' It has a goal, purposes, policies, plans, etc. down the admin scale to 'valuable final  products.' So rather than operating on the goal only, they operate on a whole admin scale or hat. When the PC moved on, he forgot to "dis-create" them (to as-is them.) Later on, these 'old hats' can become very inapplicable and aberrating**. In the true GPM structures you will see the PC forming new hats and vigorously fighting his old hats that now are identified with the enemy.

* The Entities we address are consistent with the description given by LRH in "A History of Man." Here is a quote: They [the entities] are probably just compartments of the mind which, cut off, begin to act as if they were persons. Here is an inexhaustible source of study and speculation which I leave to another."
We believe this study and the processes developed  from it will answer the questions that could be raised.

** Another quote from A History of Man: "The Theta Being is the "I", it is WHO the preclear is. If all the entities and beingnesses of the preclear were hydrogen balloons locked up inside him and each had a name and identity, the auditor might be confused and the preclear IS confused as to who "I" is. But if the preclear were suddenly opened and all the balloons let loose, the "I" balloon would be the theta being, it would be who the preclear always thought he was anyway. All others are simply modifiers." and  
"...unless the preclear is obviously insane, these sub-personalities are not distinctly units in themselves but only color the activities of the theta being."

===
Another way of looking at these 'characters' can be extracted from Logics (logic 4 and 21 quoted below.) The entities are 'facsimiles of states of being.'  It means we use these simulated beingnesses as representations, facsimiles or holograms to calculate the behavior of others. Apparently this function of creating simulations of perceived dangerous characters and enemies is an everyday natural function of the mind. We use it to create simulations of co-workers, celebrities and loved ones as well. It is used in predicting behaviors and having ready-made responses. They are all representations used in all the calculations of behaviors and efforts needed to predict life with its dangers and pleasures. It is a form of "behavioral mathematics," if you will. We use it in order to predict life, survive and, hopefully, thrive.

(Logic 4: A datum is a facsimile of states of being, states of not being, actions or inactions, conclusions, or suppositions in the physical or any other universe. |Comments: 'Facsimile' is the central word. According to the dictionary it means, exact copy, such as a photo or photo copy. From Latin 'fac' and 'similar', originally meaning 'make similar'. The human mind is capable of making facsimiles of anything and does so in order work with problems on a mental level.

Logic 21. Mathematics are methods of postulating or resolving real or abstract data in any universe and integrating by symbolization of data, postulates and resolutions.
In Logic 4 we saw how the human mind works with facsimiles  to solve problems. Mathematics takes this principle to the extreme by using symbols and formulas. Mathematics defines 
the abstract 'universe' to which it applies. It then defines things so they can be expressed numerically. Now you can do very precise calculations and predictions in that limited 'universe'. It's like a computer program. It lacks human emotion and intelligence but is very useful in its special field.)

These 'facsimiles of states of being' are  not "the GPM structure." as such, but it is most certainly the pool from where GPM terminals are recruited, so to speak, when the right "chemistry of adhesive forces" is present. When self-created identities get stuck or hung up against each other in a fight we certainly have a serious problem; we get a pair of GPM terminals. Over eons of time we have gotten stuck with a very little percentage of these types of problems.

The pairs/problems form reactive structures with each other, called the line-plots. The adhesive force is goals in opposition or conflict. The goals as adhesive forces operate outside of time. Another adhesive force, we believe, is the PCs hunger for a story or a destiny. You can extract all the dramas of the world from the GPM case. Your own GPM case comprise the blueprint for your destiny, your Karma. The timeless nature of the GPM goals means that they can get activated at any time the PC operates on similar goals and purposes.  The goals in a GPM form a pattern of related conflicts.  It is a chain of problems and solutions. We have layer after layer of opposing goals. The layers stick together as well, as a goal in one layer has a stuck conflict with a goal in the next layer. (See "line-plots" in glossary.) All goals and conflicts in one GPM are related to the same topic or theme. It's "all about sex," "all about military life," "all about politics," or whatever. Once one layer has become an irresolvable problem of equal forces, a new solution is found (a new but related course or goal) which starts the forming of the next layer. What we get is a goals-problems-mass, or simply a "super problem." The opposing and adhesive forces cause the 'facsimiles of being' to be squashed completely as do the PCs efforts to discard of them by not-is-ing them.. We now have a PC with ridges — or entities as we prefer to call them.

When he tries to operate as an OT he soon collides with all these skeletons in the closet. They comprise his "Karma."

Getting Started
The way to get started on taking this mess apart is to address this lifetime conflicts the PC is stuck in. That is what is explained on the States of Mind page. It is also what the LRH process R2-12 sought to address.

The main tool used in Karma Buster is Effort Processing (developed by LRH in 1951.) We use Effort Processing on the two opposing entities, one after the other. There isn't much written on how Effort Processing was originally run. The best reference thus far found, is in the book "A History of Man" (1951).  It describes in chapter 2 how "entities" can and should be run on Effort processing. Another issue is "Self-Determined Effort Processing" from 1951. It goes more to how to run it -- as does the book, Advanced Procedures and Axioms (1952). Although the principles are laid out we have found new ways to use these principles. To get it to an effective tech, different approaches have been applied to see what works the best.

From glossary:  An Entity is like a hired bureaucrat. It has one duty and basic function only: to succeed in executing the goal it has been entrusted by the Being. A whole hat or admin scale has been formed around this goal. It is therefore not enough just to address the goal. Also, like you see in government, the "bureaucrat of the mind" will hang around and draw a paycheck in the form of theta energy forever if nobody higher up releases it from its duties. It is a machine or robot the Being has built and granted life to -- originally out of convenience or perceived necessity (the latter can happen after traumatic incidents and shocks.) But now it has taken on a life of its own and may later on be in severe conflict with its master or with other entities.

********************

Full Glossary
The glossary covers different approaches to GPMs, not all current.

Problem:  The basic anatomy of a problem is goal-counter goal; intention-counter intention; identity-opposing identity. It could also be seen as a multiple confusion; or one confusion that is hung up against another comparable confusion. We mainly work with, one identity hung up against a conflicting or opposing ID.

Goal: A postulated direction or end result. An expressed or unspoken persistent intention that at some point was implemented or acted upon. In Super Problems processing, all goals in the same GPM have to end on the same word, called the Keyword. Goals used are in the form "to [verb] (Keyword)". Examples: "to earn wealth"; "to spend wealth"; "to waste wealth"; "to steal wealth". As all these goals have the Keyword or Theme "Wealth" in common they belong to the same "Wealth GPM".
A goal is something one saw as a desired end-result or activity and worked on or towards. "To hunt wolves" is a goal. "To fear wolves" is not a goal.

GPM Goal: One key difference between a postulated goal (an analytical goal) and a GPM goal is: A GPM goal contains effort. It is something one has worked on for a very long time. It will have countless incidents connected to it. It contains typically a lot of effort and passion, including addictions and major cravings, and only little reason. It's a degree of obsession and not under the Being's analytical control in present time. One could say it's a petrified goal. It's petrified into an obsessive effort. In running these goals, addressing the effort is crucial.

1. Goals-Problem-Mass (GPM): A layered super problem. A GPM consists of a series of dichotomies (problems as: goal/counter-goal) related to the same Theme. Each dichotomy in an old GPM was at some point abandoned unresolved as it became too much of a conflict, a lost war. Initially the conflict was replaced with a new goal within the Theme, usually less ambitious. This goal soon got opposed and we have a new dichotomy related to the same Theme. As this process of solutions and new problem continues, we get layers of unresolved conflicts that have built up very resistive masses and patterns of efforts in the person's mind.

2. The Goals Problems Mass: A GPM is a super problem of sorts that has layers and mental mass to it. There are numerous GPMs stored in a person’s mind. Each GPM is a collection of old conflicts and games-conditions. The basic elements of a GPM are: a goal and the identity pursuing the goal (self in some form); a counter-goal and the identity behind it (the opponent). Such a pair is called a dichotomy. A GPM, furthermore, contains a series of such similar dichotomies, one layered on top of the previous one. These conflicts are all held together by a common subject matter or Theme. Big examples of GPMs in action are, as mentioned, the Cold War (Theme: world supremacy); the Middle East conflict (Theme: the land of Palestine) or a stormy marriage headed for divorce (Theme: marriage). The problems and conflicts in one GPM are all related as they are fights over the same subject matter, the same Theme. Both sides want to win the game they are playing, be it in politics, war or in life. The super-problem of the GPM in play is constantly being added to and made even harder to resolve as these kinds of conflicts are intimate parts of living and surviving. GPMs do, however, also exist as completed matters on the track. At some point the game is declared ended. The local convenience store owner may at some point on his track have been a player in the game of “world supremacy”. It hasn’t bothered him much lately. He gave up on that Theme eons ago. Once one walks away from a Theme completely the GPM is "ended" or simply stored on the track as part of one’s history. Yet, even in this case it can be restimulated and come back into play; say, when the store owner plans for supremacy in the local convenience store market. A GPM, in other words, contains a wealth of experience and patterns on how to react to things and handle opposition related to its Theme. It’s a recipe for how to be, do and have in that regard.

Theme: Broad subject matter of long-term engagement, passion, attraction or addiction. The most basic Themes are the basic driving forces that define an individual. The Eight Dynamics could be said to be the most basic Themes; only, they form a theoretical model and each individual has his/her own passions, affinities, and long-term engagements that should be found and cleaned up. All the elements of a given Theme has a certain quality in common. It is best described as a unique affinity, wavelength or "feel". Runable Themes may be less than "eternal games, urges or attractions"; the bottom line is that the person has been preoccupied  with it for some time. If the person brings up something that sounds like a Theme, whether it's "overweight", "smoking", "insanity in the family", "sex life", "my job". "marriage", "collecting stamps", etc., it can and should be run, as long as it's charged, as it unburdens the case.

Keyword (same as End-word): A noun that one finds or makes up to capture the Theme. Once the Theme is established, one has to find a charged Keyword. It's "the name of the game" inside the GPM, so to speak. One usually tries a few variations to find the most charged version. If the Theme is "getting rich", one has to find a noun for that. One may try versions like "Richness" "Wealth" "Wealtiness" "Abundance" "Excess" and anything else that pops into the person's head. The person may have to repeat words a few times to check them out. One should try for Keywords that are timeless and general (conceptual) and check them for charge. If the Theme is "Cars", one can use "Cars" as Keyword, of course, if it reads. One can also try things like "Machinery", "Vehicles", "Transportation means" and the like, as cars have existed for less than 150 years and the charge may go back to "Bicycles" or "Spaceships", etc. in the PCs mind.
Notes: To turn an adjective or verb into a noun, use suffixes, like "-ness" (rich-ness) or "-ing-ness" (accumulat-ing-ness), etc. One can usually run any Keyword that is charged and simply take up refinements later. It's called a Keyword, because it gives access to the different layers of information in the GPM. Timeless Keywords, such as concepts and conditions, will give access to very early content. The best reading Keyword, is however the one to choose. Dictionary definitions of Keyword (n.): 1. A significant or descriptive word. 2. A word that serves as a key to a code or cipher. (American Heritage). 3. A significant word from a title or document used especially as an index to content. (Miriam-Webster).  

Repeater Technique (RT): Repeating and duplicating a charged idea or concept. The idea is verbalized as a direct statement the ID would use. The idea is repeated until it's flat. The person may have to try a few similar statements to find its most charged version and run that. It's run along these lines: "Repeat [charged statement, say the goal]: 'to waste wealth'", "thank you". "Repeat, 'to waste wealth'", "thank you". "Repeat [statement] and at the same time get any emotion"; "thank you" "repeat [statement] and at the same time get any sensation"; "thank you'; etc.
Note: When finding goals and fixed ideas, the act of finding them may blow the charge (on a meter you would see BD F/N). Once the charge is blown, doing Repeater Technique would be pointless.

Repeater Technique, Revised (RTR): Repeating and duplicating a charged idea or concept. The idea is verbalized as a direct statement the ID would use. The idea is repeated until it's flat. The person may have to try a few similar statements to find its most charged version and run that. The action should be continued to get F/N VGIs.

It's run along these lines: "Repeat [charged statement, say the goal]: 'to waste wealth'", "thank you". "Repeat, 'to waste wealth'", "thank you". Till somewhat flat.
Then: "Is there a certain emotion or sensation connected to that statement?" You sort it out. "Now, repeat the statement and put that emotion or sensation into it." "thank you." This is done to a new flatpoint. Sometimes the PC may have to yell it out loud to duplicate an intense emotion.
Then: "Is there a picture or scene connected to that statement?" You take whatever PC gives you. Then: "Inspect that pix/scene closely and acknowledge it." Instead of 'inspect' one can use 'admire', 'permeate', confront', etc., depending on PC and situation. Also, the ack can be varied according to PCs attitude towards scene.)
When asking for picture/scene, you are basically asking for an incident in which the statement is embedded as a reactive command. It may or may not develop into a full fledged incident. If it F/Ns with VGIs you leave it at that. If it develops into an incident, you can run Alternate Confront, Alternate Responsibility on it.  Or you can use this full "Scn Handling for Incidents." It includes and expands on Alt Confront/Alt Responsibility. It is from Melbourne ACC of 1959:
What part of that scene/incident could you [waste]
What part of that scene/incident would you rather not [waste]                (flat)
Use these levels of Havingness scale:
Waste
Have
Confront
Contribute to
Admit Causing
Be able to withhold
Create
Don't get stuck in running one level. If PC runs out of answers you move on to the next. You will find one or a few of the levels on this havingness scale that are really hot. In theory that could be meter assessed beforehand but this is not necessary.|

Spotting Technique (Spot): 1. Mentally locating and duplicating repeatedly the same emotion, sensation, location, etc. until it's flat. When spotting locations, one can ask for emotions, sensations and location, as explained under Repeater Technique.
2. Spotting consists of focusing one's attention narrowly on one phenomenon in the mind. It consists of tuning in to that item, stir it a bit, and perceiving it repeatedly from its actual source. The person never tries to create things not already there. It's all about perceiving what exists.
One can ask client to make it stronger (amplify it.) One can also ask to location of a phenomenon, ask PC to describe it as to form and energy manifestations, etc. Also, using the question, "how does it seem to you now?" routinely helps PC to itsa and as-is what's there.
In steps: 1. Identify it. 2. Spot it repeatedly 3. Make it stronger 4. Spot its location 5. "How does it seem to you now?"

Six-Direction Process (6-Dir): The Pc is asked to get the concept of a charged item, be it an incident, a time period, a terminal/ID, or even a resistive energy phenomenon the PC has encountered in his energy field. Then PC is subsequently asked to place it Above him, Below him, To the Right, To the Left, In Front of him, Back of him (6 directions). This is done to a flat point. It could go like this:
“Get the concept of that ID.” “Put it above you.” “Put it below you.” “Put it out to the right of you.” “Put it to the left of you.” “Put it out in front of you.” “Put it to the back of you.”
When running IDs it's advisable to first ask the PC, "assume a higher self/viewpoint."

"Put it in the wall." A simple technique used to handle emotions and sensations. If PC experiences a strong emotion from an ID one can do the following: "Put that emotion into the wall." "While placed there, can you feel it?" "Can you make it stronger/weaker?" "Can you change it to [another] emotion?" It can be useful if an emotion or sensation is too strong to comfortably handle. The original idea was for the PC to realize that he did not need a body to experience emotions and sensations (from PDC.) Our use is mainly to handle very strong emotions/sensations clearly coming from an ID.

Identity (ID): A specialized Beingness. Each major goal is executed by its own specialized ID. The ID was in part formed to automatically manage that goal to a degree of success. The fixated IDs we address have become mental machines or "robots" if you will. A specialized ID is found by asking PC: "Who or what would [goal]?" "Who or what would 'spend money'?" Answer: "a shopper", which is the ID found in this particular case. Once an ID is formed, it can over time solidify. Very old goals make very solid IDs. Taking the old IDs apart is therefore part of processing a persistent dichotomy. Synonyms: Valence, Hat, Beingness.
2) An ID is like a hired bureaucrat. It has one duty and basic function only: to succeed in executing the goal it has been entrusted by the Being. Also, like you see in government, it will hang around and draw a paycheck in the form of theta energy forever if nobody higher up releases it from its duty. It is a machine or robot the Being has built and granted life to -- originally out of convenience or perceived necessity (the latter can happen after traumatic incidents and shocks.) But now it has taken on a life of its own and may later on be in severe conflict with its master.

Entity: (synonymous to Identity) An Entity is like a hired bureaucrat. It has one duty and basic function only: to succeed in executing the goal it has been entrusted by the Being. A whole hat or admin scale has been formed around this goal. It is therefore not enough just to address the goal. Also, like you see in government, the "bureaucrat of the mind" will hang around and draw a paycheck in the form of theta energy forever if nobody higher up releases it from its duties. It is a machine or robot the Being has built and granted life to -- originally out of convenience or perceived necessity (the latter can happen after traumatic incidents and shocks.) But now it has taken on a life of its own and may later on be in severe conflict with its master or with other entities.

GPM Triangle: shows the relationship between the Being and the two polarities in the GPM dichotomy. The identity (ID) on each side is surrounded by mental mass held in place by the goal and the ID. Often it is found to be a collection of incidents related to the goal.
The  procedures are designed to get the Being to examine his relationships to the two sides, one at the time. As the Being gradually regains control of the dichotomy, he will experience considerable discharge. In processing each side, the PC is asked to "assume a higher viewpoint;" that is the top beingness called 'the Being' in the illustration. One can also ask "assume a pan-determined viewpoint," "assume a higher self" and the like if that communicates better.

Be-3 EP: At some point, during the process, the two sides will apparently unify with the Being. The compartmented situation is permanently erased. The poles have melted down. This is the End Phenomenon of that dichotomy. We call it "Be-3 EP" for short as the 3 apparent Beingnesses are united into the original one that formed/adopted, and held in place, the two opposing sides.

Pan-determinsm: is the ability to regulate the considerations of two or more identities, whether or not opposed. (Creation of Human Ability R2-42)

Static or Theta Body: (same as Tao in Chinese philosophy)

Prior Confusion: Things stick in time because of a prior confusion. The confusion occurred minutes, days, weeks or longer before the problem. It is possible to undo stuck solutions, such as GPM goals, by processing such out-of-control periods. There is typically an accumulation of several prior confusions for each goal. They seem to add up and reach critical mass at some point. At the center of a confusion, we look for instances of complete overwhelm. The goal is in place and stuck as a solution to, or result of, the situation as it existed. Once the prior confusions are discharged, the person is free to change his/her mind about it and can let go of old irrational goals.

Grudge: An apparent justified moral conclusion the person holds strongly against another. It's a fixed idea surrounded by strong emotions and various out rudiments. The question "Is there something [ID-1] couldn't forgive [ID-2]?", is used to uncover heavy out rudiments between the two sides. First, we want the exact fixed idea verbalized that the person is holding. Any additional out rudiments, beginning with wrong indications, are then picked up and handled.

Fixed Idea (FI): Opinions a person holds to be absolute vital or true. FIs routinely replace rationality and ability to freshly look at a situation. FIs of special interest in the process are irrational "make-wrongs", justifications, insistence on own rightness, old grudges, etc. Even self-defeating ideas may have to be run. Such ideas tend to persist and lock the old identities in "survival patterns" and conflicts. The FI should be verbalized as the direct statement the ID used or could have used. It's not an emotion, attitude, action, or thing. Nor is a description an acceptable substitute.

File Clerk: Mechanism of the mind which acts as a data monitor. It monitors the person's memories, analytical and reactive.  One can get instant answers or “flash answers" directly from the File Clerk in response to charged questions. Usually, these answers are correct and reliable. In the process we use the File Clerk extensively to find GPM goals, IDs and Fixed Ideas. Occasionally, when starting to process, say, a goal, it may not work out or seem right. If so, one simply goes back and corrects the goal and reviews the ID found. One can now continue the process with the correct goal.
Note: One need not use formal L&N as there are multiple goals in the GPM. Pick a goal that reads well. "Wrong Item" reactions could rarely occur, just as it can occur in picking somatics in Dianetics. It does not pose any serious risk.

Repairs: In case a person feels uncomfortable, "charged up" or sickly after the process, repair is called for. The most basic repair action is to go back, a couple of steps before the troubles started, and verify all actions done, going forward. One verifies/corrects formulations of goals, IDs, etc. and runs the correct goals/IDs as now found, using the basic steps of the process. Also, make sure both sides of a dichotomy were taken to EP. Once a Theme is repaired, additional dichotomies for that Theme should be looked for. If recent errors is not the problem, one can make up a list of previous processed Themes (all Themes or only those processed recently) and find one or more Themes needing additional dichotomies found and run. An assessment list, especially for the process, does not exist at this point. Until available, one can use L1C and L4s (including L4BRB) to find any additional by-passed charge.
If a session ended well, and the Be-3 EP was obtained, discomforts next day or so, may well be due to that another dichotomy in the same GPM has been activated. One problem (pair) was handled; the super-problem of the whole GPM still has some ways to go.

The Line Plot: The GPM gets initially formed step by step as the person lives through the eons. One conflict comes to an end and gets layered as sediments and fossils at the bottom of the sea. This happens when the person stops pursuing a certain goal and modifies it. A new conflict based on the modified goal on the same Theme comes into play, only to be layered on top of the previous one in due time. It starts with a big idea and no thought of opposition. Just like an artist with the goal 'to create Beauty.' Over time, he may have to modify his goal time and again to stay in the art game. The goal will step by step degrade to less ambitious ones due to the opposition. From being the postulate of a free spirit it eventually becomes that of a trodden down player that, despite all, still has a passion for art and beauty. From his original dream of being the greatest artist who ever lived he has become a shy assistant in an art store sweeping the floors.

Below is a fictive example related to a woman’s marriage. It shall be noted that the "Marriage GPM" is not a record of one marriage with its ups and downs. It's a composite of the woman's whole track marriage history as it’s grouped in her mind. It will thus include many different identities, periods and scenarios on both sides of the dichotomies. Yet, the woman has this blueprint that very well may determine the fate of her current marriage. It shall be noted that goals and identities have to be found individually for each person to have any value (1). The below is thus only meant as an illustration:

[Girlfriend in love] to create the perfect marriage –><–to break up the future marriage [Future mother-in-law]
[Wife in love] to establish the perfect marriage –><– to cast doubt in the perfect marriage [Woman’s old friends]
[Realistic wife] to sustain a good marriage–><– to “supplement” the marriage [Cheating husband]
[Angry wife] to defend a challenged marriage–><–to ignore a good marriage [Army recruiter]
[Troubled wife] to scrutinize the marriage–><–to sabotage the marriage [Drinking husband]
[Resigned wife] to pretend a good marriage–><–to "test" the marriage [Potential lover]
[Furious wife] to break up the marriage –><–to try saving the marriage [Amendful husband]

As you can see, countless movie scripts could be built over this GPM. When you hear people “are playing games” with each other, you often find they are operating on old goals and identities that don’t serve anyone’s interest. They are dramatizing their GPM cases. Also note, the original opposition goal was “to break up the marriage”. As the GPM came to an end it briefly became the wife’s own goal. This is the sad proof of the maxim “What you resist you become” and also why it’s such a good idea to get one’s GPM case handled. Add to the example above that the wife’s husband has his own GPM case related to marriage that can look and play out quite differently from hers and you will know why marriages can be troubled. There is another thing to note about the series of goals in the example. Each goal runs on a cycle of action. It starts with the intention to succeed doing the goal. The opposition will, at some point, make the person give up on it and decide on a change of tactics, which is the next goal down in the Line Plot. The succession of goals runs likewise on a cycle of action until “to break up the marriage” ends it all. The original Line Plot of a basic GPM is formed in chronological order. The pattern of goals is, however, repeated many times on the time track and often out of the original sequence. As it exists in the present it can best be described as s sorting system that sorts experiences and efforts related to the Theme. The GPMs could be said to float in time. They are in part being used as a portable reference library each time the person meets a challenging situation. The person has this library of ready-made responses whether they fit the situation or not. It’s a well known observation that “history repeats itself”, be it in marriage or politics. Each time a new marriage or era is begun, it starts with high hopes and high in the Line Plot. All possibilities are open. As things develop, more incidents and charge are added to the already existing goals pursued earlier. The identities behind them become more and more mired into fixed ideas and set expectations. You see the whole spectrum play out when young and visionary people rebel against the establishment run by solid citizens.

Success from Pilot Project

As an explanation to the testimonial below, I have these comments:
Much of the charge was run out using Effort Processing (first published by LRH in Sept 1951.)
By isolating two terminals in opposition and running out the efforts of the one side and then running out the efforts of the other side an amazing amount of residing charge could be blown. Even on high level PCs there are tons of "boring" charge there. Sometimes you get the scenarios that Heidrun tells about. But much of it is "digging a ditch" similar to what is described on the Clearing Course.

Best,
Rolf
http://rolfdane.com

Heidrun's Account:

I would like to share some more impressions and wins from the research GPM running that Rolf Dane is doing
with me.

Much is non-verbal, just energy flows. No command phrases and pictures, or they have been run out in previous
auditing, but still plenty of masses (frozen energy flows) left in my space.

My visio of such mental constructs is developing (professional mediums like James van Praagh keep
saying that their psychic perceptions arrive "translated" into images that match their human "vocabulary").

For instance, one ID took the shape of a totem pole, with the faces of the people combining the ID
visible on it, and disappearing when their specific influence had been run out.

One ID's black and golden energy representation contained motion, a very aggressive "jackhammer"
like rhythmic energy flow directed at me. In one of the drills I had to take control of that motion
and could freeze it in time. The idea that I could reach out to such an opposing ID and have an effect
on its most substantial component part was a major breakthrough for me, an ability that I feel has
spilled over into present life.

One version of GPM running contains not only the use of admiration (a beautiful counterweight to
so much ugly charge being handled), but also a question for the ideal scene of the ID on both
sides of the GPM. I had some most beautiful visions on this question.

It brought back an old concept of mine: that even our worst opponent is actually a God who is just
having a bad time, and that even if we cannot doanything for him in the physical universe, we still
can hold up the vision of his original constructive and brilliant self, from which he fell away, but
TO WHICH HE CAN RETURN, at a moment of his own  choice and at his own pace.

Then today the most incredible storage container of aggression got emptied out. It had been bothering me
for my whole life. Again I had a vivid visio of it - a container resembling an agricultural silo, on which
a door opened, and then a tar like black and horrible stream, massive like a waterfall but in slow motion,
came down at me, who was looking up to it. Thank God I have a clever auditor who manoevred me out of its
way, so I could watch it flow away from a distance.

I have seen many fascinating things in session, but there was only one thing as impressive as this one -
when I watched a whole procession of dark hooded beings slowly scuffling out of the space of my daughter
in a very dark night-like environment (this was not even a session - I was somehow invited to watch this
event across a 100 kilometer distance.)

Today after session, if I had been an aero plane, the trimming would have required readjustment. I kept
getting the feeling that I was soaring up like a balloon. Couldn't really enjoy it as I had work
to do and needed to focus on the ground, but still it was awesome :-) 

Best,

Heidrun Beer

The research GPM running Rolf is doing with me has some interesting effects. I am not sure whether it comes from
handling GPMs, or from using effort processing, or both.

It is very different from the effects of significance auditing. I could not say that I am gaining specific
abilities, or that I am handling previously charged subjects or people better than before.

It is more a general increase in energy, but very markedly so.

Also I feel bigger - not blown out like after a session, but generally bigger during ordinary activities.

Especially the handling of MEST has changed very much.What used to be a big house now looks nearly like a
doll house to me. I have the feeling that I surround the house and have to reach inside with thetan tweezers
if I want to find or do something in a certain room.

Not always of course, and not totally so, but the feeling is there most of the time.

Cleaning a room is like wiping out a bowl with a finger. The room feels much smaller than me, I have
to reach inside to clean it, and the effort I have to apply is very delicate - any more effort, and
I would bust the walls or destroy furniture!

This is especially nice as MEST work used to exhaust me very fast. It felt like needing 200% of my
energy. Now it feels like needing 20%.

Same with the outside space. We are currently having a very early onset of winter, 20 centimeters of snow
in two days, and with no more husband and no more cleaning lady and two very lazy kids I thought I would
be totally overwhelmed with snow shoveling.

Not so! I cleaned two parking lots and all of our usual winter walkways, to the downstairs basement,
to the firewood place and to the chickens, and it looked like a small job - but objectively I know
that it was a BIG job, or at least I used to see it as a big job :-))

My body feels stronger too. Some of the credit for this might have to go to this spring's 10 bottles
of chelation therapy, but still...

Rolf, any possible explanation for this?

Best,

Heidrun Beer

Best,


Heidrun Beer

I had a session with Rolf too. What is interesting is the attention to efforts what could be often missed when running grades especially without any dianetics. I had good results with this fast auditing. The theory behind it is very clear to me - we are erasing efforts in mind space. I like it. This type of auditing sure works.