6205C03 SHSpec-143 Prepchecking Here is how to make prepchecking not work: ignore the PC and omit the datum that it is easier for a PC to confront a think than a mass. A GPM is a thought chamber surrounded by mass. The PC is perfectly happy to look at the thought chamber but doesn't like looking at the mass, so he gets the thought first and confronts the mass an a gradient. This is why it is possible to get much deeper into the GPM with a goal than with an item. He can confront the goal because it is a thought. Running Routine-3, we have the PC confront all the little masses -- the lock items -- first, and then he will gradually get to where the goal starts showing up toward the end of the list. The goal ticks because it is surrounded by mass. Then you list the item and it appears towards the end of the list. You went into the GPM on the wings of thought and you follow through with the ugly burr and buzz of heat, cold and lightning: the somatics. This is like taking a jet plane to Africa. Eventually, you have to walk. But in running Routine 3DXX, you travel by thought only a short distance, using the prehav scale, take the first level that keeps banging; from then on it is all mass, listing items. The PC does the same thing with his withholds and missed withholds. Pc's will confront any quantity of thought and ideas. If the auditor doesn't push and shove, the PC will go nowhere except on the wings of thought, which don't really get the PC anyplace. In 1956, LRH noticed that lots of think-confront didn't change a graph much, it at all. By 1959, he had determined that you had to be able to confront the mass to get anyplace. The PC is working on second-hand thought anyway, pulled out of locks in the GPM. You will be fooled by such processes as Rising Scale Processing. In this process, though the process is pure thought-confront, if the PC made gains it is because he confronted some mass or changed position in the GPM. Every now and then, you do get some results with confronting thought, and because of your own willingness to go an confronting thought, you buy it as good procedure. But it is the rearrangement on mass that really produced the gain. It is the same in prepchecking. Every now and then you will get a good win by taking thought instead of deeds. You have to get action to get masses to move. The PC can add thinks to his case faster than you can pull them off. In a session, there is no doingness going on except thinking, so it is fine to take thoughts as session missed withholds. His thoughts in PT cancel out the "thinks" of past goals, which is why you have to keep ruds in while listing. Something in PT is much more important to the PC than something that happened a billion years ago, even though it is the billion years back stuff that aberrated him. But auditing is done in PT, and the PC is always trying to sell the auditor on the ideas that: 1. His thinkingness is what is wrong with him. 2. PT is far more important than anything the auditor is trying to go into. The auditor must not Q and A with his own human agreement with this. He must have certainty that the longer ago it happened, the more effect it had on the PC's aberrated state, and that doingness and havingness are more important than thinkingness. You clear up ruds as close to PT as possible, and you prepcheck as far from PT as possible. Given the goal of each procedure, that is the most effective thing to do. You don't have the time or inclination to clear up ruds on the whole track, because you are handling the whole track with beefier processes. Just because you can do something in ruds by pulling thinks, don't be fooled into supposing that running think will get you anywhere in prepchecking. In prepchecking, you have to get dones. There is a basic difference on importances between the auditor and the PC, concerning the location of the charge. In prepchecking, you cannot let the PC direct the questioning. He will stay close to PT and in think. If you don't have good auditor control, good prepchecking is impossible. You can key things out by shallow looks. This is fins for ruds, but you don't get any resurgence to speak of, no permanent change. If the PC is thinking about it now, he did it then. You must operate on the basis that the chain is long and has a basic that is unknown to the PC. All this is available to you by taking locks off the top and going back, under good auditor control of the PC. You only get charge off later incidents to the point where the PC can see earlier. The chain the auditor is getting the PC to go down has no R for the PC because he has no C with its further reaches. The withhold system [Steps 2, 3, 4, and 5 of prepchecking: when, all, appear, and who. See p. 186, above, and see HCOB 21Mar62 "Prepchecking Data -- When to Do a What" for more current procedure.] takes the charge off each incident; brings the incident to View so that he can as-is it and then go earlier. He will go earlier. God help you if you go into the GPM with this, but persevere. Find an incident that happened earlier. Memory is occluded by the most recent overt on the chain. Recovering memory of who one was in one's last life has virtually no therapeutic value, though it is very interesting to the PC and gives some resurgence. You are prepchecking chains of similar incidents. The charge is built up out of the first unknown. In Routine 3, you are dealing with packages of engrams called identities, so Routine 3 deals with whole lives of engrams all in a bundle, leading to the GPM. Prepchecking deals with chains of incidents, and when you get the earliest unknown, the whole chain will blow. The PC will know where things come from and will feel better. The permanent gains you can expect from adroit prepchecking are: 1. The PC understands his case better. 2. He sees where things come from. 3. He feels better about life, people, and the environment around him. Buy prepchecking doesn't solve the whole case, from one end to the other.