SHSBC-113 ren 119 20 Feb 1962 WHAT IS A WITHHOLD
Levi Murphy wrote in COSinvestigations@egroups.com :
SHSBC-113 ren 119 20 Feb 1962 (Level 2 tape)
WHAT IS A WITHHOLD
[Clearsound checked against old reels. This lecture has
many omissions in the clearsound version. The omissions
are marked ">".]
> OK. You have, by the way, seen an example of sec checking
> on rudiments, as opposed to prepchecking, and you had three
> or four rudiments live on the other session, the first session
> you saw, you remember that? The earlier session, same pc.
> And the auditor just swept these by grandly - you remember -
> and you gasped with horror - you remember gasping slightly
> with horror?
> And today you saw me handling them with sec checking, and
> going in and straightening up every rudiment or trying to,
> and bypassing prepchecking. We never got to prepchecking,
> did we? We never got to our business at all. If it is
> all right with you Fred, we will now ask the pc.
> You understand, this is not preordained particularly - it
> just isn't taped so as to give you and example of which is
> which - it just turns out that you now have an example of
> which is which.
> All right, which session gave you the most gain, Fred?
> Fred: The first one.
> The first one. We handled the whole ruddy lot with
> prepchecking, didn't we? And in the other one we never got
> any auditing done to amount to anything. Go ahead and tell
> them what you told me at the end of the session about having
> the areas confused.
> Fred: Well - you'd asked me about the withhold on something -
> had to do with money, and I had three different areas, you
> notice, the Center Theatre, The American Theatre Association,
> a big area there, and this area here. And I wasn't sure about
> which area the withhold was in. And on Thursday, in prepchecking,
> coming around to "What about such and such", the number one
> question - every time you came around to the number one question,
> I knew where I was. I could locate myself kind of on the track,
> and what are we working on together here. I knew where I was
> every time the number one question came around. We got a new
> number one question, we had it narrowed down to one area and
> cleaned that up before we went on to something else. This time
> I wasn't sure and like I say - well gee - where? you know? what?
> Something like this.
> Okay, All right, good enough.
> Okay, you see this? Well we learn what we learn. That was
> not scheduled to teach you these two things. You should
> understand these are live sessions, they're not demonstrations.
> You learn what you learn out of something like this. Of course
> I feel silly when I don't get a pc pressed on forward.
> I didn't intend actually to run into this much crash on this,
> and frankly an hour or an hour and fifteen minute session is a
> very short session for me. I normally will audit three to five
> hours in a session. And I'm having to scale my sessioning down,
> see, and that's a demonstration.
> Frankly, it it my opinion after this session, that the
> more you monkey around with rudiments except for havingness
> why the less auditing you're going to get done. That's just
> what we sort of meet. That does not apply to 3D criss cross,
> but we've got prepchecking now, and it is a highly precise
> activity, and I don't think that sec checking even vaguely
> compares to it. That's my opinion. I couldn't get it off
> the launching pad. If we'd gone on auditing, I would've given
> him a break and said "Well none of this is clear, none of these
> things are null". I would've given him a break and we would've
> had a cigarette. I would've brought him back into it and started
> a new session. See? I would've ended that session and started
> a new session instantly, and I would have swung right into the
> rudiments. "All right, this one's live and this one's live",
> I would've told him, see? And then I would've come down on
> prepchecking and I would've said "Well, what about money?", or
> "What about taking money?" or "What about this subject?",
> because this seemed to be the subject we were on. And then I
> would have gone ahead and cleaned it up by area and type of
> withhold and so forth, and I would have cleaned it up properly.
> But I was trying to clean that up with the who and the when,
> if you will notice, just who and when, and man it didn't spring
> did it? So scrub it. It didn't spring. If I can't do it, I can't
> expect you to. Okay?
> There's no substitute, apparantly, for just full dress parade,
> clean zone, troups to colors, prepchecking. Get a zero, proceed
> from the zero, go to your one. Proceed from your one to your
> one sub one. You know? Whatever it is. There's no substitute
> for it.
> I've run a couple of sessions since I was that ... Well, I ran
> another session particularly, I was just standing on my head. I
> could've been sitting there knitting, like the children's tutor
> does, teaches in school without strain.
> This requires no strain on the auditor. This puts quite a strain
> on the auditor. You don't know where you are going. And this
> other ... I ran a 3 and a half hour prepcheck session, terrific
> numbers of withholds blowing off the line, just giddy, there was
> nothing to it - Sunday night. I woke up ready to go to a dance
> There wasn't anything to this on the auditor. Okay?
> Do we have ... Peter, is that ... that's all right ...
> Oh, we didn't put that demonstration on, did we? Oh you
> did, well three cheers, that's a good experience, that's a
> good experiment, thank you, thank you very much.
All right. This is Saint Hill Special Briefing Course.
What's the date?
Thank you. What's the month?
Oh, thank you. What's the year?
Audience: A.D. 12.
A.D. 12. All right. All right. We will let you away with
that. Thank you very much.
> Special Briefing Course Saint Hill, and we have some
> new students in our midts. We have some new students
> in our mitt. And I think you actually should ...
> We shouldn't introduce some of these. (laughter). Well,
> here's the one we can introduce: Hazel Booker, stand up!
> And Essie Shaefer, stand up!
> And somebody we're glad to see, you haven't seen for a long
> time, Jim Skeleton, stand up!
> And here are two students that I must empathize - I'm very
> glad to see here and were ... we let them on in spite of their
> HDA, HCA classification, (laughter), and so forth, but we did
> let them on course, so you be kind to them, and that's Jan and
> Dick Halpern, stand up!
[later on in the lecture]
Hm. God, man. Well, you don't have to clean it up in one
session, but you have to make sure that you've got another
> You notice that I had about two or three rudiments banging
> there in that demonstration today and even "missed a withhold"
> is banging and the pc didn't spit at me, because the pc
> knows I know that they're missing. The pc knows I know
> where we're going on this sort of thing - has confidence
> in me.
[yet later on still]
But anyway ...
> As you get this straight across the boards, we find that
> a hundred trillion years ago, why ...
Well, let's take an example.
> We had it mentioned in session today.
[even more later]
> I'll give you an example out of your session today.
> We had two or three periods of explanation when I wasn't
> doing prepchecking. In view of the fact that I wasn't doing
> prepchecking, I of course could never get to the bottom of
> it. I was just crippled, you see, because I couldn't slide
> in the What. Because, during rudiments I was avoiding Whats
> and I certainly wasn't prepchecking, I was sec checking -
> doesn't work.
Lots of Squirreling!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't think they (RTC) like the fact that LRH said Sec Checking doesn't work... on a Level 2 tape that teaches how to sec check.
Änderungsstand: 18. Mai 2001 - Copyright ©
2001 by Andreas Groß, Schweiz
Bitte Informieren Sie uns über Änderungen oder Fehler