UCP CO-AUDIT FIELD REPORT:
THE HOBO

The Hobo writes:

Konchock,

We have been co-auditing for a week.  There are many questions but, I'll try to keep it brief.  Command 1: I try to mentally stay in the designated place but, sometimes this seems to be only an entrance to another incident and then other times it takes me to present time and I start similarities and differences without the benefit of a co-audit command and then back to the incident.  My question is: Is this acceptable or should I stay in the earlier time and look for more data before going to present time?  At times I start telling my auditor how I feel about behavior characteristics of "people" and not about the incident I reached by command 1.   Am I avoiding the incident?  Of course only I know that but, I would appreciate any feedback.

Command 3.  Where might you be?  Generally I look for a place or time in the future where the past is no longer the norm and all pertinent problems are replaced by calm, sane behavior.  I do find that ,where might you be? is becoming more fluid and real than in the beginning.

I don't want to write confusing questions so to put it in a nutshell, should we as co-auditors keep a tight rein on where and what the client is doing or give the first command and let him run wherever he wants with it?  I must tell you one of us pretty much stays with in the command structure and the other mosttimes seems to be totally out of it.

We have both feel we have gotten gains from the first 5 hours.  Thank you for your attention and help.

The Hobo

P.S  Do you think you could mock up and put on the net a realistic session that co-auditors could learn from?

==========================
Konchok replies to The Hobo:
==========================

Dear Hobo:

Thank you very much for writing!

I am VERY GLAD you are co-auditing.

>Konchock,
>We have been co-auditing for a week.

Fantastic!

A big win for me!

>There are many questions but, I'll try to keep it brief.  Command 1: I try to mentally stay in the designated place

Don't worry about it.  The whole point of the command/question is to get you to look at what your attention is already on.  If your attention goes to something else, NO PROBLEM!  Obviously, your attention is NO LONGER stuck there!  If something else comes up, don't fight NOT to look at it.  There are NO WRONG answers, places, etc.  If there is more to look at in the first place, you can always go back and look at it some more, as often as you like.

Sounds to me like you are "trying to do the right thing" or "trying to do what I'm told" or something on that order.   That qualifies as a GREAT place to look at!  TA abounds!

>but, sometimes this seems to be only an entrance to another incident

Fer sure!

A=A . . . and OFF YOU GO!

>and then other times it takes me to present time and I start similarities and differences without the benefit of a co-audit command

And you probably don't have to be told to breathe either!

You *GOT* the hang of it!

>and then back to the incident.

Way cool!

The SESSION itself is certainly a place.  ANYTHING you notice about the session or HOW you are doing it or how you FEEL about it is grist for the mill of the session itself.  Other possibilities of how you could feel or react or do the auditing itself are probably very productive things to look at in the sesssion.   Using auditing to look at auditing works great!

>My question is: Is this acceptable or should I stay in the earlier time and look for more data before going to present time?

You look at a place [past or possible] as long as you have attention on it.  When you no longer have attention/interest there, it's time for a new place.  Sometimes that takes a LOT of comparisons of similarities and differences.  Sometimes an instant inspection is all that's needed.  YOU know where your attention is.  You don't follow the auditor.  He follows you.

>At times I start telling my auditor how I feel about behavior characteristics of "people" and not about the incident I reached by command 1.

I'd say that behavior characteristics of people are CRITICAL elements of places, events etc.  Anything you notice about yourself, your feelings, your somatics, or OTHERS is plus points.

>Am I avoiding the incident?

It doesn't sound like it to me.

It sounds to me like you are looking, seeing, duplicating and itsa'ing.

Of course, if you have attention on things that you have avoided in the past or might avoid in the future, they are VERY useful areas to address.   YOU PICK what YOU WANT to look at.

>Of course only I know that but, I would appreciate any feedback.

If your attention went there, you must have attention on that.

By definition, it must be appropriate.

Of course, "wondering if you are doing it right" . . . sounds like a "place" to me :-)

I'll bet there's some BIG TA lurking there somewhere!

> Command 3.  Where might you be?  Generally I look for a place or time in the future where the past is no longer the norm and all pertinent problems are replaced by calm, sane behavior.

OK.  As an observation of your behavior, that's a perfectly valid statement.  However, I would not make that into a rule of how it "should be."  It's almost certain to change as your tone level changes.   Other places that frequently come up are:
*You could be stuck right where you are now and never get out of fixed conditions.
*Things COULD get a lot worse.
*Your entire frame of reference could change.
ETC.!

Don't worry about it.  Pick ANYTHING your attention is on or goes to and look at that.  As you work with UCP, what you look at will CONSTANTLY CHANGE . . . AS *YOU* CHANGE.

Maybe there are some times in the past where you longed for calm sane behavior and no problems :-)

Don't hesitate to look at them if you have attention on them.

>I do find that ,where might you be? is becoming more fluid and real than in the beginning.

Way cool!

You're getting used to the process and what YOU DO to make it work.

Fixed ideas coming off.
Possible Reality is setting in!

> I don't want to write confusing questions so to put it in a nutshell,

If you're confused, confusing questions are probably the appropriate next step.

You might look at places where you didn't want to be confused.

>should we as co-auditors keep a tight rein on where and what the client is doing

NO.  A tight rein is NOT the idea.  Let him look at WHATEVER comes up as long as he has attention on it.  Place, time, element, theme, incident, thought, question, event, WHATEVER.

>or give the first command and let him run wherever he wants with it?

Let him go to WHEREVER his attention is.  ONLY he knows that.  Your function is simply to keep him going if he bogs or runs down, and to get him to LOOK at what is happening if he loses track of what he is doing and starts BEING his case instead of LOOKING at it.

>I must tell you one of us pretty much stays with in the command structure and the other mosttimes seems to be totally out of it.

NO PROBLEM.

YOU BOTH *ARE* AUDITING!

That is the CRITICAL fact.

Whatever you are doing now is going to change anyway as you run it.

The more you work with it, the more you will have the "hang" of it, and the more fluid your attention will be, and the more you will look at the session itself and see in the session what you also see in the other parts of your life . . . and the more you will be able to pick it all apart and see it for what it really is . . . and how you create it yourself . . . and can uncreate it at will!

> We have both feel we have gotten gains from the first 5 hours.

WAY COOL!

I know you want to "figure out" how it works.   I think it's impossible not to be curious and try to see and predict.  Please give it a good 24 hours each before you press yourselves too hard for "results," because I am VERY sure that WHAT they are and HOW they happen will be a SURPRISE!  If you are doing each session to a "full circle" EP, I am CERTAIN you will have *UNDENIABLE* MAJOR CHANGES within that time frame.  THEN you will get SERIOUS because you will SEE the changes and be CERTAIN of them.  BEST OF LUCK!

>Thank you for your attention and help.

>The Hobo

You are VERY WELCOME!

>P.S Do you think you could mock up and put on the net a realistic session that co-auditors could learn from?

I can make useful examples of questions and answers, to illustrate points, but I don't think I could mock up a realistic session.  I think the only realistic session would be a REAL session.  They NEVER seem to turn out the way I would expect or predict them to . . . that's apparently the nature of CASE . . . you just DON'T know what it is until it's GONE.  If you want to tape some of your sessions, maybe they could be available on a small-image video feed with sound.  I hadn't thought of that before, but it would be possible.  It would take a HUGE file to record a full session, however, even in a very small frame format.  I don't know that people would want to expose themselves publicly in that fashion.

THANK YOU FOR CO-AUDITING!

Konchok

==========================
Second email from The Hobo:
==========================

konchock,

I'd appreciate your comment on the following: Session lasts for
approximatly 1 hour per client.  The initial command (Tell me a place you
have been) is given about five or six times.  I had some dianetic auditing
25 to 30 years ago and as I remember it incidents took a lot longer time to
erase and EP was very noticeable.  I assume this is meant to be LIGHT
processing and so EP is not so dramatic.  Is EP looked for each time or only
the end of session?  Thank you for your energy sharing.

The Hobo

=============================
Konchok replies to second email:
=============================

> I'd appreciate your comment on the following: Session lasts for
>approximatly 1 hour per client.

That's rather short in my experience.  Typical sessions are usually in the 1.5 to 2 hour range, and may go to three sometimes.  On the other hand, I have seen an occasional 45 minute session . . . usually a continuing wrap-up of some big win.  It's not how long it takes, it's whether you complete it to EP.

>The initial command (Tell me a place you
>have been) is given about five or six times.

It could be five or fifty.  It's not how many times you ask it, it's what the client DOES.  The number of times it's asked is quite likely to change radically with more sessions.

>I had some dianetic auditing
>25 to 30 years ago and as I remember it
incidents took a lot longer time to
>erase and EP was very noticeable.

Don't expect it to run like dianetics.
Sometimes heavy incidents come up.
Sometimes not.

>I assume this is meant to be LIGHT
>processing and so EP is not so dramatic.

It's meant to HANDLE YOUR CASE.  Some sessions will be "light."  Some sessions will likely be so "heavy" it will be VERY difficult for client OR auditor to remain conscious.  The EP's do NOT tend to be so DRAMATIC however, in the sense of sudden valence shifts and the GLEE or ELATION of the DUB-IN SYMBOLS "cognition" that cultech typically spawns.

>Is EP looked for each time or only
>the end of session?

Each session is run to ONE session EP of "FULL CIRCLE" understanding.  See Techtalk #9, "Typical Session Pattern."   Each individual question cycle is run ONLY until you have no more attention/interest in it . . . then you go to the next question.

>Thank you for your energy sharing.

>The Hobo

You're welcome.

Thank you for auditing.

I hope you'll keep co-auditing . . .
and keep me posted on how it goes.

Best Wishes,

Konchok Penday
Technical Writer, GODS CHURCH
<konchok.penday@net-prophet.net>

FOR MORE INFORMATION GOTO GODS CHURCH:
http://net-prophet.net/godshome/godshome.htm
"Get Your Ducks in a Row @ net-prophet.net!"