Reference: Scientology Processes (Part 1)
Once a person can comfortably recognize items in the present per Being Objective, he may start on the mindfulness exercises per The 12 Aspects of Mindfulness. Only when he is well into the mindfulness exercises should he be asked to recall items from the past.
For therapy purposes, an accurate recall is a response given by the mind to some item or question. It is not digging into the mind, or imagining what might have happened. It is letting the mind respond freely, and when there is no response then recognizing that fact.
As a first step, the person needs to recognize that a valid recall is per the definition above. When no immediate response appears, but just a feeling of something there, then the person should simply wait patiently until the response appears. If the reponse does not appear in reasonable time then move on. The response may become available later.
.
EXERCISE
Purpose: To identify valid recall in the mind in response to an item or question.
-
Start from the beginning of the following list.
-
Read an item, or have somebody call it out to you.
-
Notice if an immediate response to the item appears in the mind.
-
If there is no immediate response, but just a feeling of something there, then wait patiently for the response to appear.
CAUTION: Do not go digging into the mind, or imagine what might have happened.
-
If there is a response, then acknowledge it by nodding to yourself.
-
If there is no response then simply move to the next item on the list.
-
Repeat steps 2 to 6.
-
When the list is completed you may start from the beginning again. Additional and older memories may show up when you are going through the list a second or third time.
-
You may do this exercise as often and for as long as it is comfortable.
-
You may also extend this list with items that are general in nature.
.
LIST: Look at the following instances one at a time:
Can you recall a moment when…?
- You were happy.
- You climbed a tree.
- You ate something good.
- You received a present.
- You enjoyed a laugh.
- You helped somebody.
- You threw a ball.
- Something important happened to you.
- You played a game.
- You jumped down from a tree.
- You won a contest.
- You laughed loudly.
- You met someone you liked.
- You flew on a plane.
- You were at a beautiful place.
- You jumped into a pool.
- You enjoyed a beautiful morning.
- You went for a walk.
- Somebody teased you.
- You sat in a coffee shop.
- You danced with joy.
- You raced with someone.
- You completed something important.
- You were pleasantly surprised.
- You met somebody after a long time.
- You were caught in a rain.
- You heard a thunder.
- Someone smiled at you.
- You played with a pet.
- You held someone’s hand.
- Someone picked you up.
- You were spinning around.
- You read a good book.
- You felt breeze on your face.
- You saw a beautiful flower.
- You smelled a rose.
- Somebody called you.
- You were in a play.
- You sang aloud.
- You watched a movie.
- Your team won.
- You rode with friends.
- You visited a beautiful garden.
- You played in water.
- The weather was stormy.
- Somebody gave you a hug.
- You liked somebody.
- You slid down a slide.
- You ran toward someone you liked.
- You enjoyed beautiful weather.
.
Comments
Here is an old comment that fits here.
“When there is sensory or mental input, the mind immediately puts up considerations that match that input. A thinking mind looks through those considerations, without being aware of them. However, a looking mind becomes aware of the considerations that are brought up and recognizes them for what they are.
“When the input is so unique that no matching considerations can be found, the thinking mind feels strained and ends up generating new considerations. This may be called dub-in. But, a looking mind simply recognizes the fact that no matching considerations exist.”
This seems like the resonance phenomenon that occurs with waves. It is more likely with simple waves than with complex wave structure. So, when a question is simple, it seems that one is more likely to get an immediate response in the mind.
This can be applied to auditing or to discussions, by formulating one’s questions such that they produce simple wave functions in terms of awareness.
The more objective a question is, the better response one may receive from the mind.
Many years ago I read an article about a holographic process to store multiple images in a storage medium, essentially creating a set of overlaying pictures in the holographic recording medium.
Essentially you could have individual holograms of, say, an apple, an orange and a pear in the same film location.
The significance of this was that it was supposedly possible to extract the holographic image of a single one of these by “stimulating” the film with the reflected laser light from the real object. I thought a good name for this would be “content resonant memory”. I’ve tried a number of times to find anything current on this process but have not found a thing, so I don’t know if the original article was factual or speculative, but regardless, this is much the way the mind seems to work with pictures.
A few years ago I took another look at this mechanism and decided to approach it from the idea of “concepts” to handle areas which did not have picture content. This I called “concept resonant memory” as it behaved identically in a “recovery-by-resonance” way but evoked memories of a very different character. They could go very deep and they rarely had associated or accompanying picture content.
Very interesting!
Nothing much about how memory is stored or recalled is like we were taught, especially in Scientology. The following is a stimulating playlist from TED Talks.
http://www.ted.com/playlists/196/the_complexity_of_memory
To me, the most radical departure from Scientology teachings about memory is that memory seems to be stored throughout the brain. What this means is that a memory is not stored like a snapshot as we were taught. Memory is accumulated in bits and reassembled when “recalled.” This is Nature’s efficiency. To oversimplify, 72F degrees or a certain shade of blue need only be stored one time. Hubbard taught that memory is not stored in the brain. He even went to far as to say that if a single memory were stored on a single atom, then the human brain would only have storage capacity to hold 3-4 months of memories. I won’t delve into all the ways in which Hubbard’s assumption is wrong. Suffice it to say that erasing a single memory would be no easy task since it seems to be stored all over the brain in fractured bits.