-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SPACE/TIME DIMENSIONALITY AND THE ILLUSION/DELUSION DICHOTOMY.
Actuality is what is true.
Reality is what we think is true.
Space/time dimensionality is a virtual reality projected into a non
dimensional actuality called the All-That-Is.
Hubbard called the non dimensional actuality Static, and the
dimensional virtual reality mockups.
He said that from Static was extended anchor points, dimension
points and points to view.
Some have interpreted this to mean that the Static CREATED
space/time in actuality, when in fact Static created the *ILLUSION* of
space/time in itself, in its own zero dimensional substrate.
Static, the All-That-IS, is a kind of infinite but non
dimensional holographic film that can hold the apparencies of finite
dimensional objects, such as space/time and the objects we find in it.
Now this view is very important.
For one it is in direct contradiction to the prevailing meatball view
which is that dimensionality is actual, that actuality has in fact many
more than the 3 or 4 dimensions of space/time that we normally experience.
The Scientists of the Rock are up to 12 dimensions mathematically at this
point and getting more lost every day.
The meatball theory claims that dimensionality and out there ness
are actual, and that the objects out there have actual cause that
interact between them. The ball bounces off the wall *BECAUSE* the
wall has cause over the ball, or both the wall and the ball have cause
between them.
In this view the conscious unit is a complexity of parts built
out of various actual external dimensional space/time objects like electrons,
protons and neutrons.
When that complexity of parts is busted apart the conscious unit
dies never to live again.
Further the conscious experiences, i.e. color forms, that the
conscious unit has, are used by the being as symbols to refer to
these external dimensional actualities.
His conscious color form of a car that he sees when looking at a
car is a symbol referring to an actual dimensional car existing in
actual dimensional space/time.
When he turns away from the car or closes his eyes, his conscious
color form of the car disappears, but the car remains.
Thus his conscious color form of the car and the car are two
different objects, each made of their own stuff. The conscious color
form of the car is the symbol, and the actual car is the referent.
Where the symbol has no external referent the being is 'seeing
something' that is not overlayed against an actual external
dimensional object that exists. If the being knows he is doing this,
we call it imagination. If he doesn't know he is doing it, we call it
hallucination.
These are natural and necessary conclusions to be drawn from the
underlying meatball theory that external dimensional objects are
actual and that conscious beings are MADE OF THEM.
Further meatballs tend to laugh at OT powers, because they know
very well that anything that is MADE OF various stuff will never have
ascendancy over that same stuff.
In other words if you are made of electrons, protons and
neutrons, you will never be able to have any cause over those same
things which those things don't already have.
So if there are no physical laws that say electrons can talk to
each other across a distance faster than the speed of light, you can
rule out any form of instantaneous telepathy etc.
If you are made of ball bearings, all you can ever hope or aspire
to be is a ball bearing or a cluster of ball bearings, banging around
together.
Thus to a meatball all talk of OT powers comes across as
clueless.
AND WITHIN THEIR PARADIGM THEY ARE QUITE RIGHT.
They have a problem however, which is that if someone did come up
with an OT power that they could demonstrate, the meatball wouldn't
have a theory in which to fit it, as their theory of external
dimensional actualities is completely lacking.
The dream ball theory however allows for OT powers, in fact it
claims that every ability IS an OT power.
Rather than postulate external dimensional objects as actualities
and conscious units as a made of them, the dreamball theory postulates
the conscious unit as a zero dimensional actuality which is a
projector of dimensional but virtual realities.
THE VERY ACT OF A ZERO DIMENSIONAL CONSCIOUS UNIT PROJECTING A
VIRTUAL DIMENSIONAL OBJECT IS AN OT POWER!
Thus the electron, neutron and proton do not in fact exist, have
never existed, never will exist, and in fact CAN NOT EXIST as external
dimensional actualities. They can only exist as virtual dimensional
realities, i.e. arcade game color forms in the conscious unit's eye.
In this model the conscious unit's experience or color forms are
non dimensional actualities, used as symbols for a non existent
dimensional virtual reality.
In this sense EVERYTHING the conscious unit sees is a
hallucination as there isn't and never was any actual external
referent to over lay the experience on.
From this point of view, any dreamer, whether sleeping or awake,
could be said to be hallucinating external dimensional virtual
realities, the only question left is does he know he is doing this or
not, and is it under his control.
Above 26.0 (Apparencies are Reality) on the tone scale, the
dreamer knows he is dreaming and is doing so knowingly, willingly and
with full awareness of the consequences. He knows he is actual, and
he knows his conscious experiences are symbolic actualites for virtual
realities that do not in fact exist, at all.
From this vantage point the being CHOOSES to go non lucid in his
dream and drops below 26.0 on the tone scale into Apparencies are
Reality.
Out thereness and external cause between objects become 'real' to
him, and he will argue strongly against the idea that there is a
meaningful difference between reality and actuality.
In this state the dreamer is no longer aware he is dreaming, he
considers out there ness and external cause to be actual, and he
considers himself to be MADE OF bits and pieces of that delusional
external 'actuality.'
Above 26.0 on the tone scale the conscious unit is engaging in
the creation of illusions of external dimensionality and knows it.
Below 26.0 on the tone scale the conscious unit is engaging in
delusion about illusion, namely that there is no illusion.
The track back to OT power over the physical universe and the All
That Is, is to start with recognizing where one is already operating
full OT power in the creation of the universe as it is.
YOU CAN'T CHANGE IT UNTIL YOU CAN PUT IT THERE.
Surely if you can put the universe there you can move the
mountain in the universe.
Once one can own and operate what one is already doing, i.e.
flip it from below 26.0 to above 26.0 on the tone scale, one is then
free to continue with that ability in what ever way one wants,
including creating grander illusions and diving deeper into the sea of
delusion about them.
The real OT is not the one who can move the marble on the table.
The real OT is the one who can put the table and marble there,
and limit himself until he can't move the marble any more, and starts
to post to a.r.s. as a septic.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Oct 24 03:06:02 EDT 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore132.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQh5NbURT1lqxE3HERAgSCAKCf85caqj3FS2lYMp4pAZsue7fYDwCggf4Z
onWd/8AHExcKuFeD9khQ+50=
=qWx0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
GOODNESS
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Richard Platek \(Lion\) (lion@lightlink.com) wrote:
>Homer asked, a while ago.
>> As I have said DEFINE GOODNESS.
>Homie,
>This is not a question. It's a HUGE process.
>You go first, and share results :)
Goodness starts at the personal level with pleasure and avoidance
of pain.
It extends to sensitivity to others to maximize the pleasure and
minimize the pain in the world.
Relative to others, goodness takes pleasure at other's pleasure,
and evil take pleasure at others pain etc.
Above that we have art, story telling, practical jokes, the
master of jest etc.
Here pain is created as dischord to enhance the ultimate resolve.
One can have pleasure without pain, but one can not have RESOLVE
without pain. Resolve is a special kind of pleasure most akin to
humor.
However a practial joke played on oneself is one thing, and
practical joke played on another without their permission is quite
another.
Thus incidents do not resolve, do not find the humor, until the
being finds the permission point where he either gave permission, paid
for the privilege of being duped or found out that he did it himself
as an act of self love.
Take a simple example of a mean practical joke.
I come up to you one day and I convince you beyond a shadow of a
doubt that your wife and kids are dead.
Later, a LONG time later, you find out quite by accident that it
was never true.
OK so now you feel better about them still being alive, but you
still feel rotten about having believed them dead, you don't
appreciate the joke that was played on you.
Getting to the HUMOR of the incident is necessary to resolve it
so that IT WAS WORTHWHILE, rather than a waste of time.
One can learn lessons from nasty jokes, mostly to make sure they
never happen again, but this does not make the joke worthwhile,
appreciation for the joke is still lacking. Only finding the humor
and willingness to have had it happen in the first place, makes the
joke worthwhile. One can even become willing to NOT learn the lessons
(which sink one anyhow with persisting wisdom) because one becomes
willing to have it happen again.
This is true resolution.
So there is the impulse to goodness (Class), and the impulse to
practical jokes (Majesty). The first is what human's call goodness.
The second is the goodness of God.
The Jokes are only worthwhile because God plays them on himself
with full permission.
For God to create a physical universe and then create a small
animal creature against its will, that has to kill to surive, and
place that creature in the physical universe to survive or die, only
to die in the end anyhow, would be an act of exceptional evil cruelty.
THERE IS NO LESSON THAT COULD BE LEARNED, NO ULTIMATE STATE
ATTAINABLE THAT COULD MAKE UP FOR AND RESOLVE THE ORIGINAL RAPE of the
being by God for having been created as such a thing.
It only becomes a Masterful Practical Joke because God did it to
himself. This can resolve.
But as a human, no human would do this to themselves.
So the God aspect is a dicom to the Human aspect of a being.
The God aspect creates himself as a human that would never do
such a thing to himself, so the human seeks to be come God to protect
himself from all the hurt he finds himself in. This of course is a
trap of non resolution. For the God he seeks to become would never
recreate himself back as a human again.
The human thinks of God as a super human, not as an Imp Soul.
The human wants a FATHER as a God, and to become such himself, a
protector of all who have been done wrong.
But the real God is not a super human, but a pre human.
Not a protector of humans at all, but a purveyor of disaster and
danger, of both sides of every dicom there is.
Thus one can only become that God by finding the motive and
beauty and humor to becoming human in a game you can't win, in the
first place.
By human of course I don't mean 'in a body' although that is
included, I mean that which is creature, that which is fragile,
physically, emotionally, mentally or spiritually.
Fragile means able to be hurt, caused to suffer, or damaged,
whether these be illusions or not.
The unfragile creator creates itself as fragile creature, and the
fragile creature comprehends it not, until it gets the joke, and it
self becomes the creator of itself as fragility incarnate again.
THEN the being is the unfragile God again.
The only way to BE God is to BE God creating itself as the
Creature.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Oct 23 03:06:02 EDT 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore162.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQhkHaURT1lqxE3HERAkkNAJ9DGPyUwJ6MS8+kcnLPbe7dfBamggCfQEyY
1lGC9sWudb/gO9nGYX4+Q4o=
=bgcv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Richard Platek \(Lion\) (lion@lightlink.com) wrote:
>Homer asked, a while ago.
>> As I have said DEFINE GOODNESS.
>Homie,
>This is not a question. It's a HUGE process.
>You go first, and share results :)
Goodness starts at the personal level with pleasure and avoidance
of pain.
It extends to sensitivity to others to maximize the pleasure and
minimize the pain in the world.
Relative to others, goodness takes pleasure at other's pleasure,
and evil take pleasure at others pain etc.
Above that we have art, story telling, practical jokes, the
master of jest etc.
Here pain is created as dischord to enhance the ultimate resolve.
One can have pleasure without pain, but one can not have RESOLVE
without pain. Resolve is a special kind of pleasure most akin to
humor.
However a practial joke played on oneself is one thing, and
practical joke played on another without their permission is quite
another.
Thus incidents do not resolve, do not find the humor, until the
being finds the permission point where he either gave permission, paid
for the privilege of being duped or found out that he did it himself
as an act of self love.
Take a simple example of a mean practical joke.
I come up to you one day and I convince you beyond a shadow of a
doubt that your wife and kids are dead.
Later, a LONG time later, you find out quite by accident that it
was never true.
OK so now you feel better about them still being alive, but you
still feel rotten about having believed them dead, you don't
appreciate the joke that was played on you.
Getting to the HUMOR of the incident is necessary to resolve it
so that IT WAS WORTHWHILE, rather than a waste of time.
One can learn lessons from nasty jokes, mostly to make sure they
never happen again, but this does not make the joke worthwhile,
appreciation for the joke is still lacking. Only finding the humor
and willingness to have had it happen in the first place, makes the
joke worthwhile. One can even become willing to NOT learn the lessons
(which sink one anyhow with persisting wisdom) because one becomes
willing to have it happen again.
This is true resolution.
So there is the impulse to goodness (Class), and the impulse to
practical jokes (Majesty). The first is what human's call goodness.
The second is the goodness of God.
The Jokes are only worthwhile because God plays them on himself
with full permission.
For God to create a physical universe and then create a small
animal creature against its will, that has to kill to surive, and
place that creature in the physical universe to survive or die, only
to die in the end anyhow, would be an act of exceptional evil cruelty.
THERE IS NO LESSON THAT COULD BE LEARNED, NO ULTIMATE STATE
ATTAINABLE THAT COULD MAKE UP FOR AND RESOLVE THE ORIGINAL RAPE of the
being by God for having been created as such a thing.
It only becomes a Masterful Practical Joke because God did it to
himself. This can resolve.
But as a human, no human would do this to themselves.
So the God aspect is a dicom to the Human aspect of a being.
The God aspect creates himself as a human that would never do
such a thing to himself, so the human seeks to be come God to protect
himself from all the hurt he finds himself in. This of course is a
trap of non resolution. For the God he seeks to become would never
recreate himself back as a human again.
The human thinks of God as a super human, not as an Imp Soul.
The human wants a FATHER as a God, and to become such himself, a
protector of all who have been done wrong.
But the real God is not a super human, but a pre human.
Not a protector of humans at all, but a purveyor of disaster and
danger, of both sides of every dicom there is.
Thus one can only become that God by finding the motive and
beauty and humor to becoming human in a game you can't win, in the
first place.
By human of course I don't mean 'in a body' although that is
included, I mean that which is creature, that which is fragile,
physically, emotionally, mentally or spiritually.
Fragile means able to be hurt, caused to suffer, or damaged,
whether these be illusions or not.
The unfragile creator creates itself as fragile creature, and the
fragile creature comprehends it not, until it gets the joke, and it
self becomes the creator of itself as fragility incarnate again.
THEN the being is the unfragile God again.
The only way to BE God is to BE God creating itself as the
Creature.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Oct 23 03:06:02 EDT 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore162.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQhkHaURT1lqxE3HERAkkNAJ9DGPyUwJ6MS8+kcnLPbe7dfBamggCfQEyY
1lGC9sWudb/gO9nGYX4+Q4o=
=bgcv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, October 22, 2012
ADORE753
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
CRITICS AND ASSHOLES
What's the difference between a critic and an asshole?
The critic blows his shit out his mouth.
Now look, I am not opposed to criticism, nor to honest skepticism,
but I am opposed to dangerous idiots and/or dharma criminals who would
destroy the safety of paranormal research whether they know it or not.
It is not in the interest of true critics and skeptics to tolerate
being associated with idiots and mental criminals who claim they are
critics too, but act like jackals and hyenas, motivated by cowardice and
fear, who are only looking out for their own selfish purposes regardless
of the possible consequences to others.
How can you tell an honest skeptic?
They want paranormal abilities to be true.
They can intelligently discuss, implement and enforce a sane prime
directive around the matter to deal with the obvious security issues.
They are not a 'no danger' case.
They can intelligently discuss hypotheticals.
They actually understand science, evidence, theory, prediction,
model, observation and what is verifiable and falsifiable. They know
the difference between existential statements and universal statements,
and which is verifiable and which is falsifiable.
They understand what the point of the argument is, and they never
digress into fighting strawmen.
They understand that the top of the tone scale is the same as the
bottom of the tone scale, the only difference is whether you are
choosing to be there, or think something else is putting you there.
They never engage in bad logic or dharma treason (efforts to cheat
in debate), nor do they ever assert the unassertable, not assert as
proven the unprovable. They never demean or belittle logic or its
absolute description of is and is-not.
They understand that the best way to enable paranormal abilities is
to first understand a theoretical construct, a cosmic world view, in
which they are physically possible.
They understand that paranormal abilities come with paranormal
motivations, and that paranormal abilities used with normal motivations
(protection of body, human survival etc) will either not work at all, or
will eventually come a cropper.
They understand that they have no idea whether the world is a dream
or not, and thus no idea whether the physical universe exists including
their eyes and their brain.
They understand they can be perfectly certain of all that they see
and experience in their consciousness, and that a machine can be certain
of nothing. Thus consciousness is not a spacetime gizmo, nor made of a
spacetime gizmo, nor a process in a spacetime gizmo.
They understand that spacetime and its zoo of gizmo's may very well
be a virtualization in a dream shared by many dreamers.
They understand that if the world is a dream, then God is the
dreamers.
They understand that physical materiality is an exquisite theory
killed by an ugly fact, consciousness.
They understand that two different objects can never be certain of
each other. Thus if God and Soul are two different objects, both will
remain forever a theory to the other.
They understand that God and Soul ARE one, that God and Soul do not
BECOME one.
They understand that WHAT THEY WANT TO BE TRUE IN A BEST OF ALL
POSSIBLE WORLDS had better be true, or else if they are eternal beings,
they will suffer their irritation with how things are forever and ever
amen.
Thus they understand that the search for how things are is based on
the search for how they want things to be.
They understand that eternality above space and time is ultimately
perfectly desirable, that immortality always leads to hells forever
stuck in one time stream, and that delusions of mortality is a ducking
out from a detested immortality.
They understand that the times where we had God power inside the
game all ended up in detested immortalities.
They understand that whiles (time streams) can not last forever,
but must always end one day. Thus there can be no hell forever, nor
heavens forever. Hells and heavens however can last a very long time.
Eternality is the ability to enter and leave many different time
whiles forever for free. Once in a time while however, it is usually
all down hill from there.
They understand that because all time whiles are finite in length,
wishing off or even conceiving of an infinite time while is a violation
of their own sovereign desire, and immediately puts them in the hell
they are wishing off on others FOREVER.
They understand no hell can outlast a true confession and
repentance. The hells one suffers are those one tried to inflict on
another and still are.
They understand that God and Soul are two different functions of
the same thing, Creator and Creature, and that the being as
Creator/Author, creates virtual universes in dreamtime for the same
being as Creature/Character.
They understand that good for an author is not good for a
character.
It is the purpose of the good author to put good and evil there in
grand tapestry and let them have at it.
It is never the purpose of the good character to put evil there,
but it is his resented purpose to have at it anyway.
They understand that because good is unwilling to put evil there,
and is also generally unaware that both good and evil wrote the story as
author, good almost never can win against evil. The way to vanish
anything is to PUT IT THERE, to admit creating it fully, and then do
something else.
They understand that trying hard results from a failure of
postulates.
They understand that the powers to create a universe is in general
used to create games, not play games. Thus if they want the god power
back they need to empower themselves with the correct protocols, which
includes both prime directives and MOTIVATIONS for using the power.
'Helping' people win their games is not one of them. Making a game more
winnable or losable might be. Improving the story of the game always
is.
They understand that proving to someone else that I have power,
will never prove to anyone that THEY can have power too.
They understand that one of the worst fears is that in proving a
power to another, the other will conclude that you do have the power,
but that they never will.
They understand that proving to another that THEY can have power,
is way harder than proving to another that you have power.
They understand that the first good step to proving to another that
they have or can have power is NOT to prove to them that YOU have or can
have power.
They understand that the present state of powerlessness is either
true powerlessness or the result of power used against itself.
They understand the possibility that Earth is a post armegeddon
spiritual war zone.
They understand that certainty of being a spirit comes first, and
ability to operate spiritual powers comes second. They understand that
those seeking to prove that they are spirits through the exercising of
spiritual powers are wasting their time.
They understand that chase is more desirable than having desirable
things in the mere conception of them.
They understand that the purpose of time it to place chase between
sovereign desire and the final having of what is desired.
Time is sovereign desire mildly turned against itself for a while.
They understand that suffering results from attachment to
suffering, nothing else.
They understand that nothing and no one is handing out justice
except their own postulates. Justice is you get what you postulate.
They understand that desire is sovereign, and that Majesty is the
sovereign desire to not be sovereign FOR A WHILE.
They understand that,
Sovereignty is you want it you got it.
Sovereignty is you got it, you want it.
They understand that belief is for losers, and perfect certainty is
for those who would operate.
Sometimes faith in SELF is necessary to operate without immediately
forthcoming proof. In the end native state IS proof.
They understand an honest skeptic doesn't need to believe anything
of the above, only understand it and want it to be true enough to seek
diligently whether it is true or not in the end.
An honest skeptic understands above all that shit comes out of his
asshole and not his mouth.
Anyone else violating any of the above should be shunned and
disavowed publicly by both sides.
It would be better to sleep in a bed full of black widows than to
have even one of these people as a trusted friend.
Homer
04/28/10 Wednesday 6:48pm EST
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Wed Apr 28 18:50:24 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Oct 22 03:06:02 EDT 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore753.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQhPBaURT1lqxE3HERAg2/AKCoH7M92yavYa+okDdMgTzdEKd63wCfWHSA
QV9KVIwmLQIvxucdBCf6jmI=
=nXif
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
CRITICS AND ASSHOLES
What's the difference between a critic and an asshole?
The critic blows his shit out his mouth.
Now look, I am not opposed to criticism, nor to honest skepticism,
but I am opposed to dangerous idiots and/or dharma criminals who would
destroy the safety of paranormal research whether they know it or not.
It is not in the interest of true critics and skeptics to tolerate
being associated with idiots and mental criminals who claim they are
critics too, but act like jackals and hyenas, motivated by cowardice and
fear, who are only looking out for their own selfish purposes regardless
of the possible consequences to others.
How can you tell an honest skeptic?
They want paranormal abilities to be true.
They can intelligently discuss, implement and enforce a sane prime
directive around the matter to deal with the obvious security issues.
They are not a 'no danger' case.
They can intelligently discuss hypotheticals.
They actually understand science, evidence, theory, prediction,
model, observation and what is verifiable and falsifiable. They know
the difference between existential statements and universal statements,
and which is verifiable and which is falsifiable.
They understand what the point of the argument is, and they never
digress into fighting strawmen.
They understand that the top of the tone scale is the same as the
bottom of the tone scale, the only difference is whether you are
choosing to be there, or think something else is putting you there.
They never engage in bad logic or dharma treason (efforts to cheat
in debate), nor do they ever assert the unassertable, not assert as
proven the unprovable. They never demean or belittle logic or its
absolute description of is and is-not.
They understand that the best way to enable paranormal abilities is
to first understand a theoretical construct, a cosmic world view, in
which they are physically possible.
They understand that paranormal abilities come with paranormal
motivations, and that paranormal abilities used with normal motivations
(protection of body, human survival etc) will either not work at all, or
will eventually come a cropper.
They understand that they have no idea whether the world is a dream
or not, and thus no idea whether the physical universe exists including
their eyes and their brain.
They understand they can be perfectly certain of all that they see
and experience in their consciousness, and that a machine can be certain
of nothing. Thus consciousness is not a spacetime gizmo, nor made of a
spacetime gizmo, nor a process in a spacetime gizmo.
They understand that spacetime and its zoo of gizmo's may very well
be a virtualization in a dream shared by many dreamers.
They understand that if the world is a dream, then God is the
dreamers.
They understand that physical materiality is an exquisite theory
killed by an ugly fact, consciousness.
They understand that two different objects can never be certain of
each other. Thus if God and Soul are two different objects, both will
remain forever a theory to the other.
They understand that God and Soul ARE one, that God and Soul do not
BECOME one.
They understand that WHAT THEY WANT TO BE TRUE IN A BEST OF ALL
POSSIBLE WORLDS had better be true, or else if they are eternal beings,
they will suffer their irritation with how things are forever and ever
amen.
Thus they understand that the search for how things are is based on
the search for how they want things to be.
They understand that eternality above space and time is ultimately
perfectly desirable, that immortality always leads to hells forever
stuck in one time stream, and that delusions of mortality is a ducking
out from a detested immortality.
They understand that the times where we had God power inside the
game all ended up in detested immortalities.
They understand that whiles (time streams) can not last forever,
but must always end one day. Thus there can be no hell forever, nor
heavens forever. Hells and heavens however can last a very long time.
Eternality is the ability to enter and leave many different time
whiles forever for free. Once in a time while however, it is usually
all down hill from there.
They understand that because all time whiles are finite in length,
wishing off or even conceiving of an infinite time while is a violation
of their own sovereign desire, and immediately puts them in the hell
they are wishing off on others FOREVER.
They understand no hell can outlast a true confession and
repentance. The hells one suffers are those one tried to inflict on
another and still are.
They understand that God and Soul are two different functions of
the same thing, Creator and Creature, and that the being as
Creator/Author, creates virtual universes in dreamtime for the same
being as Creature/Character.
They understand that good for an author is not good for a
character.
It is the purpose of the good author to put good and evil there in
grand tapestry and let them have at it.
It is never the purpose of the good character to put evil there,
but it is his resented purpose to have at it anyway.
They understand that because good is unwilling to put evil there,
and is also generally unaware that both good and evil wrote the story as
author, good almost never can win against evil. The way to vanish
anything is to PUT IT THERE, to admit creating it fully, and then do
something else.
They understand that trying hard results from a failure of
postulates.
They understand that the powers to create a universe is in general
used to create games, not play games. Thus if they want the god power
back they need to empower themselves with the correct protocols, which
includes both prime directives and MOTIVATIONS for using the power.
'Helping' people win their games is not one of them. Making a game more
winnable or losable might be. Improving the story of the game always
is.
They understand that proving to someone else that I have power,
will never prove to anyone that THEY can have power too.
They understand that one of the worst fears is that in proving a
power to another, the other will conclude that you do have the power,
but that they never will.
They understand that proving to another that THEY can have power,
is way harder than proving to another that you have power.
They understand that the first good step to proving to another that
they have or can have power is NOT to prove to them that YOU have or can
have power.
They understand that the present state of powerlessness is either
true powerlessness or the result of power used against itself.
They understand the possibility that Earth is a post armegeddon
spiritual war zone.
They understand that certainty of being a spirit comes first, and
ability to operate spiritual powers comes second. They understand that
those seeking to prove that they are spirits through the exercising of
spiritual powers are wasting their time.
They understand that chase is more desirable than having desirable
things in the mere conception of them.
They understand that the purpose of time it to place chase between
sovereign desire and the final having of what is desired.
Time is sovereign desire mildly turned against itself for a while.
They understand that suffering results from attachment to
suffering, nothing else.
They understand that nothing and no one is handing out justice
except their own postulates. Justice is you get what you postulate.
They understand that desire is sovereign, and that Majesty is the
sovereign desire to not be sovereign FOR A WHILE.
They understand that,
Sovereignty is you want it you got it.
Sovereignty is you got it, you want it.
They understand that belief is for losers, and perfect certainty is
for those who would operate.
Sometimes faith in SELF is necessary to operate without immediately
forthcoming proof. In the end native state IS proof.
They understand an honest skeptic doesn't need to believe anything
of the above, only understand it and want it to be true enough to seek
diligently whether it is true or not in the end.
An honest skeptic understands above all that shit comes out of his
asshole and not his mouth.
Anyone else violating any of the above should be shunned and
disavowed publicly by both sides.
It would be better to sleep in a bed full of black widows than to
have even one of these people as a trusted friend.
Homer
04/28/10 Wednesday 6:48pm EST
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Wed Apr 28 18:50:24 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Oct 22 03:06:02 EDT 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore753.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQhPBaURT1lqxE3HERAg2/AKCoH7M92yavYa+okDdMgTzdEKd63wCfWHSA
QV9KVIwmLQIvxucdBCf6jmI=
=nXif
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Friday, October 19, 2012
SUB DEATH
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SUB DEATH
The tone scale is a scale of wave frequencies that range from high
at the top to low at the bottom.
Waves are mathematical entities that change in time, usually from
positive to negative, up to down, or left to right, or something
similar.
Frequency is how often the wave does a complete cycle in a second.
Sound waves range from about 100 cycles/sec to 20,000 cycles/sec.
1 Hertz or Hz is 1 cycle/second, a KiloHz is 1000 cycles/sec, a
MegaHz is a million per second, GigaHz is a billion etc.
Radio waves go from about 500 KHz upto the GigaHz range, and Light
and X-rays are above that.
LRH kind of felt that emotions belonged in there somewhere, but
effort, emotion, thought and aesthetics may not be the same kind of wave
as electromagnetic radiation, but none the less, being a wave, it would
have the qualities of waves.
Waves have 3 basic qualities, frequency, amplitude and
interference.
Frequency is how often the wave cycles in Hertz.
Amplitude is how loud the wave is, or how big, or how far it swings
as it swings back and forth.
Interference is the result of two or more waves interacting with
each other producing harmonies and disharmonies.
First thing to notice is that a pure wave, usually a sin wave, is
always a harmony, as the only way you can have a disharmony is to have
two or more waves of different frequencies interacting.
Even then some mixtures produce richer harmonies, such as when you
mix a wave with one of its harmonics at 3/2 or 4/3 the frequency.
For example G and C on the piano are 3/2 and they form a perfect
fifth, so called because G is the 5th note in the C major scale.
But play C and some note that is 17/18's of C and you are going to
get a couple of cat's squalling.
Another thing about disharmonies is that some disharmonies can be
'resolved' into harmonies. The harmony that results is better off for
having been preceded by a disharmony. This gives disharmonies a 'raison
d'etre', a reason to be.
Finding a resolve for any particular disharmony is not easy, this
is what good art is about.
Find an exquisite disharmony, and then find an exquisite harmony to
resolve it.
Desire is for harmony, or for disharmonies that resolve into
harmonies.
Harmony is beauty, and disharmony is ugly.
Now generally people have 'high tone' confused with harmonious,
beautiful or pleasurable, and 'low tone' confused with disharmonious,
ugly or painful.
High tone means high frequency and low tone means low frequency.
Harmony, beauty and pleasure come either from single waves of *ANY*
frequency, or from discords and resolves of *ANY* frequency.
Thus one can take two very high tone beautiful waves and mix them
and get a very high tone ugly (undesirable) cacophony.
You see then that desire is for harmony and not for highness of
tone.
Now admittedly a high frequency single wave is more beautiful than
a low frequency single wave.
Get some regular sugar and some 10x sugar used for baking, and put
some of each on your tongue.
Both are sugar and both are sweet, but the 10x is a real trip, the
regular stuff is, well kind of normal.
So there is a natural tendency to want to go up the tone scale to
get to higher beauties, but if one is stuck in a high tone cacophony of
mixed waves of high frequency, then one can find solace in a harmony
lower down.
This is the essence of the tone scale trap.
Now Hubbard assigned various things to the various levels of the
tone scale, aesthetics and thought were way up, and then came action,
and pain, effort, and apathy and death and sub death etc.
Most of us consider that pain is undesirable, and would have a hard
time conceiving of beautiful or harmonious pain. But if pain is a
frequency of the tone scale, then as a PURE single frequency it would
have to be a harmony!
Mockup a harmonious pain.
Mockup a disharmonious pleasure.
So how come then pain is almost always a disharmony?
Because most body injuries consist of a complex mixture of many
slightly different incidents in restimulation resulting in a severe
disharmony of experience.
The worst disharmonies are mixtures of waves that are just slightly
off from each other in frequency.
Or try to listen to Chopin's and Tchaikovski's first piano
concertos together at the same time.
A body injury is sort of like hitting the keyboard with your fists,
of course you are going to get a loud disharmony.
One way to audit this is to take the injury and assess for HOW MANY
DIFFERENT FREQUENCIES MAKE UP THE PAIN.
Try it, the meter will read deeply when you get it right.
It may come out to a few or very many.
Say it comes out to 5.
Then one by one, or in groups, locate the single waves, or
harmonious collections of waves and run them out as beautiful pain.
Say two of the 5 were harmonics of each other, they would run out
together as a harmony of two different frequencies, leaving 3 left still
causing a disharmony.
Then two of them may run out again as a harmony of two waves,
leaving 1 left. Well that 1 HAS to be a harmony by definition, so run
it out the same way, and voila you have run out what looked like one god
awful disharmonious incident but which was in truth 3 separate harmonies
made of 5 different waves, making a disharmony.
In this way one runs out ugly undesirable pains, by separating them
into beautiful desirable components and running them instead.
If the pain isn't beautiful, it isn't ONE PAIN.
Trying to run it as one ugly pain won't work, as there is no such
thing.
OK so at the top of the tone scale the being creates in the mere
conception of things.
So one day he gets the idea of this great big beautiful space
forever for free with all these trees and flowers and green grass, and
scattered through out are these absolutely gorgeous little spiders,
trading jokes back and forth, each one preening itself, and gleaming in
the sun.
And he's just BEING there, and the space/time is just being there,
and the little spiders are all just being there having a good time.
You see that scene is a complex set of waves that all form a
gorgeous harmony for the being.
*THEN* he gets the idea that the spiders are dangerous and
poisonous and are out to get him. All of sudden, as one, the spiders
start to align in his direction and begin their approach.
He becomes absolutely certain that they are going crawl all over
him, go inside every body hole, bite him from the inside out, eat
him, and that he can't get away fast enough.
At that moment his space and time crystalize into hard persisting
rock and he can't make the scene disappear any more.
He can't wake up as he has fallen BELOW the original frequencies
that made up the original scene by adding in lower tone wave lengths.
Now he has a problem, and that problem consists of an even more
complex set of waves than the original scene, and that problem turns the
original gorgeous harmony into a deadly nightmare, a disharmony of
magnitude.
All he did was add some more waves into the original scene with his
postulates, waves that weren't quite in sync with his original scene,
and wham, he has a cacophony of terror and pain and undesirability like
has never been written in the books of man.
Remember the Wall of Fire.
This is the Wall of Bugs.
So he is still BEING there, counting the seconds to his assured
doom, and someone comes up behind him and taps him on the shoulder and
says 'Hey you see that small building over there, there is an arsenal of
anti spider bazookas in it, they are all locked up, but if we run and
break down the doors we will have enough weapons to kill all these
spiders no problem!"
All of a sudden his heart soars with *HOPE* again, for now he has a
possible solution to those spiders.
He has a game.
Lord save him.
So he has added in a whole mess more wavelengths into his scene
that have turned it from a nightmare disharmony of waiting to die, into
an exciting rip roaring fun time of killing and being killed.
Oh, he will recruit all his friends in to the war, they will
protect their women and children at all costs, they will devise better
weapons, and execute plans of daring do and kamikazee. The glory will
go down in history never to be matched again.
So what happened? Did he go up tone from the nightmare back into
being happy again at a higher tone?
No, he went downtone, he fell from a higher disharmony of being,
into a lower harmony of doing.
If he had gone up tone from the nightmare band he would have been
back where he could just change his mind about the scene and it would
have disappeared. BEING WOULD HAVE BEEN SUFFICIENT FOR THE SOLUTION.
Instead he fell down tone from the nightmare into a lower harmony
where DOING pretends to be sufficient for the solution.
Now DOING will NEVER be sufficient to any problem, any solution
created by doing will merely become another problem later on.
This is by sub intent by the way, the high tone original being
knows full well what he is doing even if he isn't consciously thinking
about it.
Thus by diving down tone from disharmonious being into harmonious
doing, he is guaranteeing to set himself up for a further disharmony at
the lower tone level when his solution finally becomes another problem.
He will then solve this new problem by falling down to an even
lower tone harmony with some new solution which then becomes another
problem later on and so forth.
So where is the guy headed at this point? Certainly not glory.
He is headed down into further problem disharmonies, solved by
LOWER TONE harmonies that then becomes LOWER TONE disharmonies, to be
solved by even LOWER TONE harmonies, until he goes out the bottom.
Assess for how many problem/solution cycles the guy is buried in
and you can spring him out of his present life which is a solution to
the problem of body death.
Notice we are not trying to exteriorize him from his *BODY*, we are
trying to exteriorize him from his *LIFE*. Oh hell, he can go back into
it any time he wants.
So a being creates a scene from a state of BEING.
This is a harmony.
Then he creates a problem in the scene from a state of BEINGNESS.
This is a lower disharmony.
Then he creates a solution in the scene from a state of DOINGNESS.
This is an even lower harmony.
And thus he has a game guaranteed never to end powered by the
dwindling spiral of problems and solutions which become problems etc.
Solutions based on BECOMINGNESS and DOING are headed down the spiral.
Solutions based on BEING and finally not BEING (Native State) are
headed up the spiral.
BEINGNESS is in time, BEING is out of time.
So what is SUB DEATH?
Hubbard marked death of the body at 0.0 on the tone scale.
Now clearly the thetan survives the body death, there is the thetan
outside the body moping over a perfectly good lost body.
A PRECIOUS BODY THAT HE WILL NEVER SEE AGAIN, NEVER TO
HARMONIZE WITH HIM AGAIN.
And you wonder why he is a Black V.
0.0 maybe zero heartbeats a second for the body, but it certainly
is not zero cycles per second for the frequency of the thetan, far from
it.
Since the thetan is still there and clearly functioning the thetan
must be SOMEWHERE on the tone scale above absolute zero at -400.0 on the
tone scale or spiritual death.
The thetan has a LONG ways to go between 0.0 body death and -400.0
spiritual death.
Now the death of the body is a PROBLEM to the thetan. Eventually
it became a SERIOUS problem to the thetan. More serious that even mere
mortals can conceive.
Early bodies were perfect and unique but fragile. They COULD live
forever, but once injured they would remain crippled FOREVER or even die
FOREVER.
We call this part of the track FRAGILE IMMORTALITIES.
Consequences became serious during this time of the track.
So when a thetan was at 0.0 on the tone scale with a dead body at
his feet, his one and only unique, never going to be another one like it
again, he was in sad shape.
I mean just think about your favorite dog or cat dying.
So he had a PROBLEM AND A DISHARMONY on the tone scale.
He eventually figured out all kinds of solutions to this problem,
most of which involved becoming the body itself and guiding it from
within, and losing sight of the distinction between the body and himself
to make himself more careful etc.
THE ENTIRE SUB DEATH AREA OF THE TONE SCALE IS JUST ONE THING:
TAKING CARE OF THE BODY AFTER HAVING DAMAGED A FEW TOO MANY.
These sub death solutions make him feel REALLY GOOD, and he was
just sure that they would end the problem forever for him.
But they were DOINGNESS solutions at a lower harmony on the tone
scale than death of the body. Thus the thetan entered into tone levels
BELOW 0.0 that were more harmonious at the time than what he was
experiencing at 0.0.
At 0.0 he's sad about the loss of an irreplacable love.
At -1.0 he's all happy and enthused about 'THAT will never happen
again!'.
He has found a solution to pity and those sad dying eyes looking at
him.
But man is he being CAREFUL.
Run happy carefulness, and happy carefreeness.
So SUB DEATH means that the thetan is living a solution to the
regretted death of prior bodies on the whole track.
HIS WHOLE LIFE IS A LOWER TONE HARMONY SOLUTION to the higher toned
disharmony of body death.
By slowing down his frequency the thetan has made himself feel
better by adding postulates of doingness on top of the insufferable
problem of BECOMINGNESS that he had with bodies dying on him.
Notice that BECOMINGNESS IS NOT BEING. BEING is free from
BECOMINGNESS.
BECOMINGNESS is BEING constrained by added considerations, like
"I am a goofball bumblefuck who couldn't keep a body alive if my
own life depended on it!"
But he's overjoyed at the chance to try, you see.
His BEING might have solved the problem for him, but his
BECOMINGNESS that he assings to himself, sure as hell isn't, so he falls
to the lower harmony of 'going to DO something about it, by gum!'
So now he comes back AS a body, he has fallen from HAVING bodies to
BEING bodies, and he gets born and he is all Rah!, he is going to take
care of this body, and punish those that don't take care of their
bodies, hang them out on crosses as examples to show people what happens
if you don't take care of your body, make a fortune selling nails while
he is at it and keep his body well to do, and he's going to start and
finance a whole war against non body care-ers, and Oh the glory of
it...!
And he falls lower, and lower, and lower and lower.
Lower means slower, eventually he becomes a rock.
"Eventually all become marbles on the thetan plane..." - Adore.
So notice anyone who is IN a body is sub death. They are blaming,
shaming, protecting, controlling, owning, punishing, worshipping,
sacrificing themselves to, hiding in, being, or taking care of bodies.
Imagine being responsible for the death of an ant.
Now imagine being responsible for the death of a body.
See the difference?
'Tis why you are in a body and not an ant.
Eventually they can't even control a body any more, they can't BE a
body, so they become PARTS of bodies, they become OBJECTS, and
eventually they can't even do that and they fall down to can't hide, and
eventually spiritual death.
"Do with me what you will, I deserve it, good bye dear body, I am a
total failure, sorry I let you down."
So that is what sub death means.
It is actually sub problem, falling down from a disharmony of
PROBLEM BECOMINGNESS to a lower harmony of SOLUTION DOINGNESS.
He's feeling better for a while, but he's going slower.
Find anything the person is doing, especially the things he has
great enthusiasm and steely eyed determination for, and find out the
higher disharmony becomingness that the lower harmony doing is a
solution for.
The person will exteriorize from his SOLUTION DOINGNESS and from
his PROBLEM BECOMINGNESS and regain his restorative BEING where all
problems dissolve naturally.
E/P is astounding peace.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Fri Feb 10 23:24:19 EST 2006
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Oct 19 03:06:01 EDT 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore315.memo.bak
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQgPvaURT1lqxE3HERAuFjAJwMB8uxelUdXTPSliPiL+EZK2fH3QCg1elv
7HOynjjCholWm58pzvnLl60=
=7EPZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
SUB DEATH
The tone scale is a scale of wave frequencies that range from high
at the top to low at the bottom.
Waves are mathematical entities that change in time, usually from
positive to negative, up to down, or left to right, or something
similar.
Frequency is how often the wave does a complete cycle in a second.
Sound waves range from about 100 cycles/sec to 20,000 cycles/sec.
1 Hertz or Hz is 1 cycle/second, a KiloHz is 1000 cycles/sec, a
MegaHz is a million per second, GigaHz is a billion etc.
Radio waves go from about 500 KHz upto the GigaHz range, and Light
and X-rays are above that.
LRH kind of felt that emotions belonged in there somewhere, but
effort, emotion, thought and aesthetics may not be the same kind of wave
as electromagnetic radiation, but none the less, being a wave, it would
have the qualities of waves.
Waves have 3 basic qualities, frequency, amplitude and
interference.
Frequency is how often the wave cycles in Hertz.
Amplitude is how loud the wave is, or how big, or how far it swings
as it swings back and forth.
Interference is the result of two or more waves interacting with
each other producing harmonies and disharmonies.
First thing to notice is that a pure wave, usually a sin wave, is
always a harmony, as the only way you can have a disharmony is to have
two or more waves of different frequencies interacting.
Even then some mixtures produce richer harmonies, such as when you
mix a wave with one of its harmonics at 3/2 or 4/3 the frequency.
For example G and C on the piano are 3/2 and they form a perfect
fifth, so called because G is the 5th note in the C major scale.
But play C and some note that is 17/18's of C and you are going to
get a couple of cat's squalling.
Another thing about disharmonies is that some disharmonies can be
'resolved' into harmonies. The harmony that results is better off for
having been preceded by a disharmony. This gives disharmonies a 'raison
d'etre', a reason to be.
Finding a resolve for any particular disharmony is not easy, this
is what good art is about.
Find an exquisite disharmony, and then find an exquisite harmony to
resolve it.
Desire is for harmony, or for disharmonies that resolve into
harmonies.
Harmony is beauty, and disharmony is ugly.
Now generally people have 'high tone' confused with harmonious,
beautiful or pleasurable, and 'low tone' confused with disharmonious,
ugly or painful.
High tone means high frequency and low tone means low frequency.
Harmony, beauty and pleasure come either from single waves of *ANY*
frequency, or from discords and resolves of *ANY* frequency.
Thus one can take two very high tone beautiful waves and mix them
and get a very high tone ugly (undesirable) cacophony.
You see then that desire is for harmony and not for highness of
tone.
Now admittedly a high frequency single wave is more beautiful than
a low frequency single wave.
Get some regular sugar and some 10x sugar used for baking, and put
some of each on your tongue.
Both are sugar and both are sweet, but the 10x is a real trip, the
regular stuff is, well kind of normal.
So there is a natural tendency to want to go up the tone scale to
get to higher beauties, but if one is stuck in a high tone cacophony of
mixed waves of high frequency, then one can find solace in a harmony
lower down.
This is the essence of the tone scale trap.
Now Hubbard assigned various things to the various levels of the
tone scale, aesthetics and thought were way up, and then came action,
and pain, effort, and apathy and death and sub death etc.
Most of us consider that pain is undesirable, and would have a hard
time conceiving of beautiful or harmonious pain. But if pain is a
frequency of the tone scale, then as a PURE single frequency it would
have to be a harmony!
Mockup a harmonious pain.
Mockup a disharmonious pleasure.
So how come then pain is almost always a disharmony?
Because most body injuries consist of a complex mixture of many
slightly different incidents in restimulation resulting in a severe
disharmony of experience.
The worst disharmonies are mixtures of waves that are just slightly
off from each other in frequency.
Or try to listen to Chopin's and Tchaikovski's first piano
concertos together at the same time.
A body injury is sort of like hitting the keyboard with your fists,
of course you are going to get a loud disharmony.
One way to audit this is to take the injury and assess for HOW MANY
DIFFERENT FREQUENCIES MAKE UP THE PAIN.
Try it, the meter will read deeply when you get it right.
It may come out to a few or very many.
Say it comes out to 5.
Then one by one, or in groups, locate the single waves, or
harmonious collections of waves and run them out as beautiful pain.
Say two of the 5 were harmonics of each other, they would run out
together as a harmony of two different frequencies, leaving 3 left still
causing a disharmony.
Then two of them may run out again as a harmony of two waves,
leaving 1 left. Well that 1 HAS to be a harmony by definition, so run
it out the same way, and voila you have run out what looked like one god
awful disharmonious incident but which was in truth 3 separate harmonies
made of 5 different waves, making a disharmony.
In this way one runs out ugly undesirable pains, by separating them
into beautiful desirable components and running them instead.
If the pain isn't beautiful, it isn't ONE PAIN.
Trying to run it as one ugly pain won't work, as there is no such
thing.
OK so at the top of the tone scale the being creates in the mere
conception of things.
So one day he gets the idea of this great big beautiful space
forever for free with all these trees and flowers and green grass, and
scattered through out are these absolutely gorgeous little spiders,
trading jokes back and forth, each one preening itself, and gleaming in
the sun.
And he's just BEING there, and the space/time is just being there,
and the little spiders are all just being there having a good time.
You see that scene is a complex set of waves that all form a
gorgeous harmony for the being.
*THEN* he gets the idea that the spiders are dangerous and
poisonous and are out to get him. All of sudden, as one, the spiders
start to align in his direction and begin their approach.
He becomes absolutely certain that they are going crawl all over
him, go inside every body hole, bite him from the inside out, eat
him, and that he can't get away fast enough.
At that moment his space and time crystalize into hard persisting
rock and he can't make the scene disappear any more.
He can't wake up as he has fallen BELOW the original frequencies
that made up the original scene by adding in lower tone wave lengths.
Now he has a problem, and that problem consists of an even more
complex set of waves than the original scene, and that problem turns the
original gorgeous harmony into a deadly nightmare, a disharmony of
magnitude.
All he did was add some more waves into the original scene with his
postulates, waves that weren't quite in sync with his original scene,
and wham, he has a cacophony of terror and pain and undesirability like
has never been written in the books of man.
Remember the Wall of Fire.
This is the Wall of Bugs.
So he is still BEING there, counting the seconds to his assured
doom, and someone comes up behind him and taps him on the shoulder and
says 'Hey you see that small building over there, there is an arsenal of
anti spider bazookas in it, they are all locked up, but if we run and
break down the doors we will have enough weapons to kill all these
spiders no problem!"
All of a sudden his heart soars with *HOPE* again, for now he has a
possible solution to those spiders.
He has a game.
Lord save him.
So he has added in a whole mess more wavelengths into his scene
that have turned it from a nightmare disharmony of waiting to die, into
an exciting rip roaring fun time of killing and being killed.
Oh, he will recruit all his friends in to the war, they will
protect their women and children at all costs, they will devise better
weapons, and execute plans of daring do and kamikazee. The glory will
go down in history never to be matched again.
So what happened? Did he go up tone from the nightmare back into
being happy again at a higher tone?
No, he went downtone, he fell from a higher disharmony of being,
into a lower harmony of doing.
If he had gone up tone from the nightmare band he would have been
back where he could just change his mind about the scene and it would
have disappeared. BEING WOULD HAVE BEEN SUFFICIENT FOR THE SOLUTION.
Instead he fell down tone from the nightmare into a lower harmony
where DOING pretends to be sufficient for the solution.
Now DOING will NEVER be sufficient to any problem, any solution
created by doing will merely become another problem later on.
This is by sub intent by the way, the high tone original being
knows full well what he is doing even if he isn't consciously thinking
about it.
Thus by diving down tone from disharmonious being into harmonious
doing, he is guaranteeing to set himself up for a further disharmony at
the lower tone level when his solution finally becomes another problem.
He will then solve this new problem by falling down to an even
lower tone harmony with some new solution which then becomes another
problem later on and so forth.
So where is the guy headed at this point? Certainly not glory.
He is headed down into further problem disharmonies, solved by
LOWER TONE harmonies that then becomes LOWER TONE disharmonies, to be
solved by even LOWER TONE harmonies, until he goes out the bottom.
Assess for how many problem/solution cycles the guy is buried in
and you can spring him out of his present life which is a solution to
the problem of body death.
Notice we are not trying to exteriorize him from his *BODY*, we are
trying to exteriorize him from his *LIFE*. Oh hell, he can go back into
it any time he wants.
So a being creates a scene from a state of BEING.
This is a harmony.
Then he creates a problem in the scene from a state of BEINGNESS.
This is a lower disharmony.
Then he creates a solution in the scene from a state of DOINGNESS.
This is an even lower harmony.
And thus he has a game guaranteed never to end powered by the
dwindling spiral of problems and solutions which become problems etc.
Solutions based on BECOMINGNESS and DOING are headed down the spiral.
Solutions based on BEING and finally not BEING (Native State) are
headed up the spiral.
BEINGNESS is in time, BEING is out of time.
So what is SUB DEATH?
Hubbard marked death of the body at 0.0 on the tone scale.
Now clearly the thetan survives the body death, there is the thetan
outside the body moping over a perfectly good lost body.
A PRECIOUS BODY THAT HE WILL NEVER SEE AGAIN, NEVER TO
HARMONIZE WITH HIM AGAIN.
And you wonder why he is a Black V.
0.0 maybe zero heartbeats a second for the body, but it certainly
is not zero cycles per second for the frequency of the thetan, far from
it.
Since the thetan is still there and clearly functioning the thetan
must be SOMEWHERE on the tone scale above absolute zero at -400.0 on the
tone scale or spiritual death.
The thetan has a LONG ways to go between 0.0 body death and -400.0
spiritual death.
Now the death of the body is a PROBLEM to the thetan. Eventually
it became a SERIOUS problem to the thetan. More serious that even mere
mortals can conceive.
Early bodies were perfect and unique but fragile. They COULD live
forever, but once injured they would remain crippled FOREVER or even die
FOREVER.
We call this part of the track FRAGILE IMMORTALITIES.
Consequences became serious during this time of the track.
So when a thetan was at 0.0 on the tone scale with a dead body at
his feet, his one and only unique, never going to be another one like it
again, he was in sad shape.
I mean just think about your favorite dog or cat dying.
So he had a PROBLEM AND A DISHARMONY on the tone scale.
He eventually figured out all kinds of solutions to this problem,
most of which involved becoming the body itself and guiding it from
within, and losing sight of the distinction between the body and himself
to make himself more careful etc.
THE ENTIRE SUB DEATH AREA OF THE TONE SCALE IS JUST ONE THING:
TAKING CARE OF THE BODY AFTER HAVING DAMAGED A FEW TOO MANY.
These sub death solutions make him feel REALLY GOOD, and he was
just sure that they would end the problem forever for him.
But they were DOINGNESS solutions at a lower harmony on the tone
scale than death of the body. Thus the thetan entered into tone levels
BELOW 0.0 that were more harmonious at the time than what he was
experiencing at 0.0.
At 0.0 he's sad about the loss of an irreplacable love.
At -1.0 he's all happy and enthused about 'THAT will never happen
again!'.
He has found a solution to pity and those sad dying eyes looking at
him.
But man is he being CAREFUL.
Run happy carefulness, and happy carefreeness.
So SUB DEATH means that the thetan is living a solution to the
regretted death of prior bodies on the whole track.
HIS WHOLE LIFE IS A LOWER TONE HARMONY SOLUTION to the higher toned
disharmony of body death.
By slowing down his frequency the thetan has made himself feel
better by adding postulates of doingness on top of the insufferable
problem of BECOMINGNESS that he had with bodies dying on him.
Notice that BECOMINGNESS IS NOT BEING. BEING is free from
BECOMINGNESS.
BECOMINGNESS is BEING constrained by added considerations, like
"I am a goofball bumblefuck who couldn't keep a body alive if my
own life depended on it!"
But he's overjoyed at the chance to try, you see.
His BEING might have solved the problem for him, but his
BECOMINGNESS that he assings to himself, sure as hell isn't, so he falls
to the lower harmony of 'going to DO something about it, by gum!'
So now he comes back AS a body, he has fallen from HAVING bodies to
BEING bodies, and he gets born and he is all Rah!, he is going to take
care of this body, and punish those that don't take care of their
bodies, hang them out on crosses as examples to show people what happens
if you don't take care of your body, make a fortune selling nails while
he is at it and keep his body well to do, and he's going to start and
finance a whole war against non body care-ers, and Oh the glory of
it...!
And he falls lower, and lower, and lower and lower.
Lower means slower, eventually he becomes a rock.
"Eventually all become marbles on the thetan plane..." - Adore.
So notice anyone who is IN a body is sub death. They are blaming,
shaming, protecting, controlling, owning, punishing, worshipping,
sacrificing themselves to, hiding in, being, or taking care of bodies.
Imagine being responsible for the death of an ant.
Now imagine being responsible for the death of a body.
See the difference?
'Tis why you are in a body and not an ant.
Eventually they can't even control a body any more, they can't BE a
body, so they become PARTS of bodies, they become OBJECTS, and
eventually they can't even do that and they fall down to can't hide, and
eventually spiritual death.
"Do with me what you will, I deserve it, good bye dear body, I am a
total failure, sorry I let you down."
So that is what sub death means.
It is actually sub problem, falling down from a disharmony of
PROBLEM BECOMINGNESS to a lower harmony of SOLUTION DOINGNESS.
He's feeling better for a while, but he's going slower.
Find anything the person is doing, especially the things he has
great enthusiasm and steely eyed determination for, and find out the
higher disharmony becomingness that the lower harmony doing is a
solution for.
The person will exteriorize from his SOLUTION DOINGNESS and from
his PROBLEM BECOMINGNESS and regain his restorative BEING where all
problems dissolve naturally.
E/P is astounding peace.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Fri Feb 10 23:24:19 EST 2006
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Oct 19 03:06:01 EDT 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore315.memo.bak
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQgPvaURT1lqxE3HERAuFjAJwMB8uxelUdXTPSliPiL+EZK2fH3QCg1elv
7HOynjjCholWm58pzvnLl60=
=7EPZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
THE SELF SYMBOLIZING EVENT
THE SELF SYMBOLIZING EVENT
Now we know in the physical universe (PU), the only way to see a
radiator (anything that radiates) is to receive and be affected by its
radiation.
In the absence of radiation it is impossible to see the radiator.
In the presence of 'seeing', all we can see is the radiation, no
matter how close we are to the radiator.
We also know that radiation is a second different object from the
radiator itself, thus if the radiator is the original referent, then its
radiation or its future effects, become the radiator's symbols of final
authority, anyone of which can be chosen to learn from about the
original referent radiator.
Thus we learn about the radiator by interacting with the radiation
which produces theoretical learning about the radiator.
The radiation as symbol is evidence for the radiator as referent,
and the radiator as referent is a model for the radiation as symbol,
(for how the radiation could be and got there in the first place.)
Evidence and model make up theory.
Thus learning by being an effect, by being a symbol of a causal
referent, never produces perfect certainty of the alleged causal
referent.
THE THIRD PARTY LAW
The third party law intervenes here, if A causes B to change state,
then by looking at B, we don't know if it changed state truly because of
A, or because of a third party causally between A and B that made B
change state AS IF A had caused B to change state.
The third party is the great hidden orchestrator.
The photon on your film plate may have come from a star, or it may
have been made by God mid flight to look like it had come from a star,
or it may be been an accidental spontaneous quantum flux that marked
that area of the film plate exposed when nothing had hit it at all.
Taking more film plates that all agree decreases the probability that
the spot is an accident, but does not reduce the probability to an
absolute perfect certainty.
Although Occam's Razor tells us to ignore third parties until
absolutely necessary, when one is trying to understand the nature of a
virtual universe, the third party rule becomes tantamount, because the
virtual universe IS a simulation or projection of the 3rd party actual
universe.
Usually what is virtualized in a virtual universe are not only the
actual existence of the objects in the universe, but the existence of
any actual cause between them. If the objects themselves do not
actually exist as represented, then surely actual cause between them is
also absent.
THE SELF SYMBOLIZING EVENT
The idea of a self symbolizing event is almost impossible to
conceive of until one actually takes a look at one. One couldn't just
imagine such a thing up out of whole cloth. What would it be like?
But look the easiest way to understand it is very simple, any 3rd
grader can get this.
You can't see the cube on the table directly, so you have to look
at the light rays reflected off it.
But you can't see the light rays directly, so you have to look at
your retina which has an image of the cube on it.
But you can't see your retina directly, so you have to look at the
resultant spread of data in the brain's visual cortex.
But you can't see your brain activity directly, so you have to look
at your conscious experience (rendition) of the cube.
But NOW YOU CAN SEE YOUR CONSCIOUS EXPERIENCE directly, there is no
further symbol to chase, because you aren't seeing your conscious
experience by looking AT SOMETHING ELSE.
Thus that last symbol, your conscious experience, then gets looked
at directly, as if it WERE the next symbol in line, but the next symbol
in line IS ITSELF.
Thus we call a conscious event a self symbolizing event.
Notice there is a cube rendered on your retina, just as there is a
cube rendered in your conscious experience.
Does the retina KNOW it is seeing a cube?
No the retina is merely being in a state, it isn't knowing
anything.
But your conscious experience is both being in a state and knowing
it is in that state.
Knowing about being is what we call self luminousness, or self
awareness.
Further there is no TIME between the state your consciousness is
being in, and the knowing it is in that state.
Any machine can be in a state, and then via causal pathway enter
another state that represents that it is in the first state. But the
two states of being and knowing about being are always separated by
a causal pathway and TIME.
Thus the state that the machine knows it is being, is a PRIOR
state, never the same state that the knowing about being is.
Thus a machine can only 'know' about itself in the past. NOW can
only know about THEN, and those are two different objects and thus can
not produce certainty and the causal pathway between them can neither be
perceived or verified.
The conscious being however can BE and KNOW IT IS BEING at the same
time because the whole process is timeless.
Yes there is still a causal pathway between the conscious state of
BEING and the causally related state of KNOWING BEING, but since the
referent IS the symbol, there is no time between cause and effect, and
thus the conscious unit can only be self aware of itself as it is NOW.
Thus self awareness for a machine is theoretical indirect awareness
of how it was.
Self awareness for a conscious being is perfectly certain direct
awareness of how it is NOW.
THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE
The entire PU is simply casual wave after casual wave rippling
through space and time from referent to symbol. Each symbol in turn
becomes its own referent and passes the causal wave onto the next symbol
in line.
Everything is a symbol to some earlier referent, and everything is
a referent to some later symbol.
Anything that is neither referent nor symbol, well just isn't
partaking in cause and effect.
We call these causal waves causal pathways. The sun emits a
photon, which hits an atom, which absorbs it, which starts to vibrate,
which emits another energy, which is picked up by a sensor, which rings
a bell, which is heard by a technician, who comes in and turns on a
light switch to see what all the hubbub is about, who writes down a
report, which is read by his supervisor who talks about it to a large
audience of scientists, who go home and do their own experiments with
their own photons and sensors.... etc
It just goes on and on forever. Causal waves probably never stop,
they just bounce around forever growing colder and colder as time goes
on.
Each moment of spacetime is called an event or an object, same
thing.
An event or object is simply a moment of spacetime in one state or
another. Even a totally empty moment of space time is an event or
object.
Every object in a causal pathway through spacetime has imprinted on
it a change in state that causally relates back to the nature of the
prior objects in the pathway. We call this a data imprint.
The data imprint happens in the rendition zone of the symbol
object, and is a rendering of the nature of the many prior referents
that were involved in the causal chain up to that point.
Remember that objects have quality sets which describe everything
there is to know about that object, including its position in space and
time, AND its relationships to other objects in the universe.
When an object has a datum about a prior object imprinted on it,
only part of its quality set is changed. That subset of the quality set
that gets changed is the rendition zone, the area that is changed. The
new set of qualities in that rendition zone forming the data imprint
itself is the rendition, the rendering of the nature of the prior causal
object.
Take a video camera attached to a computer, and the video camera is
aimed at a rubic's cube lit by the sun. The computer scans the video
image and turns it into a graphics display list.
A display list is a long list of the vertices of triangles, which
represent the image gleaned from the cube. The computer then sends the
display list to a rendering program which rerenders the data onto a high
resolution graphics screen, and voila, there is the 3D cube in 2D
projection.
Turning the data coming from the original cube into a display list
is an act of rendering in and of itself, and the display list is a
rendition in symbol form.
But then turning the display list back into a graphics image on a
CRT monitor is yet another act of rendering, and the image on the
monitor is the rendition, again in symbol form.
The cube is the original referent.
The display list is a later symbol. The display list has high data
content but almost nonexistent geometricity, or geometrical similarity
to the original referent.
The graphics image on the monitor is yet a later symbol. The image
also has high data content but with very high geometricity, as it looks
like the original cube.
Notice the monitor then becomes the symbol whose state is changed
by the data imprint imposed upon it by the computer.
It is NOT true that the whole monitor changes, most of the monitor
in fact is left quite alone, it is still quite recognizable as a monitor
for example. Its base and power cords, and what it is made of, and all
the its circuitry, remain as they were, although there are changes in
state in much of that also going on.
But the real change in state takes place on the glass surface of
the monitor where the image is finally rendered.
Thus that glass surface is the rendition zone, because it is that
subset of the monitor that actually gets changed when the causal wave
emanated by the computer gets done with the monitor and eventually
passes through and becomes heat going off into space.
Take another simpler example, there is a small refrigerator magnet
lying on a table.
It too has a quality set, including where it is, and what time it
is.
As time passes, let's pretend this object does not change much
except to move forward in time as all objects are doing. So it is
sitting there, going pocketa pocketa pocketa (LRH) in time and no other
change is taking place except moving along in time.
Then with your hand you take another magnet and move it near the
magnet on the table causing it to move towards you, then follow you a
bit, then stop moving once you remove your magnet far enough away again.
So the magnet was sitting there, doing nothing but keeping time,
and the suddenly it starts to change state, and it moves in an arc as it
follows your hand and ends up in a different place than where it
started.
Well that magnet is still a magnet, not much about it has changed,
but the small subset of its quality set that describes where the magnet
was and is, has certainly changed. THAT part of the magnet, and THAT
subset of its quality set, is the rendition zone of the event, and the
new state it is in, IS the data imprint about the object that caused it
to move.
In fact by studying its new position, and the course it took from
its old position to the new one, one could probably theorize quite a bit
about the nature of what had moved it. Thus the data imprint becomes
symbolic knowledge, knowledge encoded in symbol form, that can be used
to interpret back to the possible theoretical nature of the original
referent, the magnet that moved it.
One can ask an important question here with a subtle answer.
Once the magnet on the table is moved, and becomes imprinted with
data due to the nature of the causal referent, does that magnet actually
know anything about the causal referent.
Does the magnet KNOW, just because it IS?
Take a simpler example, it is very easy to imprint data or symbol
form knowledge on a symbol. Say we are in a class room with 20 other
kids and one's name is Julie. So I write on a piece of paper (the
symbol) the words 'This class contains a girl named Julie.'
Now clearly the words I write on the paper are symbols representing
the nature of the class, and clearly they got there because I saw Julie
walk in, so the causal pathway from Julie's presence to the words on the
paper is obvious, and the paper itself is the object with the imprint,
so it too has now become a symbol to the whole event.
Further we can say that the rendition zone is the area of the paper
where the words are written, and the words themselves are the rendering
or rendition on the paper of Julie's presence in the class.
Lastly someone can look at the symbol paper and read the symbol
words, and interpret them back to the nature of the referent they are
referring to.
So all the parts of a complete learning event are in place.
So here is the 64 dollar question.
DOES THE PAPER KNOW THAT JULIE IS IN THE ROOM?
Just because something has become or IS symbolic knowledge about
something prior, does it mean that same something KNOWS anything at all?
We are going to leave a deeper analysis of this question for later,
but the difference between BEING knowledge and KNOWING knowledge are two
very different things. Surely knowing knowledge would also imply being
knowledge, but any imprinted piece of paper can BE knowledge with out
knowing anything.
We say the paper has been imprinted with data or knowledge in
symbol form. The paper is the symbol substrate which suffers the change
in state representing the symbolic knowledge imprinted on it.
here:
The change of state, the new state plus the old state, IS the data
imprint, it is data about how the prior object caused the present object
to change state.
Alright let's continue.
By studying any particular object and its present state, we can
theorize about the causal nature of prior objects in the chain going
back to the beginning of time.
Notice that by studying the changes in state that such prior causes
effect, all one can ever learn about are causal qualities in the
preceeding events. If the preceeding events have qualities that do not
causally partake in the proceedings, you will never know about them by
looking only at the effects and changes in later objects.
THUS THE ONLY QUALITIES OF A REFERENT THAT YOU CAN LEARN BY BEING
AN EFFECT (SYMBOL) OF THAT REFERENT ARE CAUSAL QUALITIES OF RELATION.
ORIGINAL REFERENT AND SYMBOL OF FINAL AUTHORITY.
The prior object in the chain you are trying to learn about is
called the original referent.
The latter object in the chain you are trying to learn from is
called the symbol of final authority.
We call it a symbol because it's state is a causal function of the
prior referent.
We call it a symbol of authority, because it has authoritative data
imprinted on it via direct cause about the prior referent or chain of
referents. That's as close as close comes to authoritative veracity in
the physical universe.
We call it a symbol of FINAL authority, because no later symbol is
being inspected to glean the imprinted data about the prior referent.
We COULD use an earlier or later symbol to glean our knowledge of the
original referent, and whatever symbol we use becomes the symbol of
final authority for that particular learning event.
The symbol of final authority can be ANY symbol after the referent,
it is merely the one you choose to study in order to learn about the
referent.
The symbol of final authority happens to be you in case you hadn't
notice. If you don't insert yourself into the chain, take a reading
WITH YOUR OWN HAND so to speak, by being an effect of what is going on,
you won't even know the chain is taking place as it passes you by.
Thus for YOU to learn anything, YOU must become a symbol of final
authority for the referent you are trying to learn about.
In the case of a conscious self symbolizing event, the referent
itself becomes the symbol. That's how consciousness learns about
itself.
LEARNING BY BEING AN EFFECT
Where there is no effect, there is no learning.
Where there is learning there is always effect, and the effect IS
the learning.
No effect = no learning.
Learning = theory, because effect does not prove cause.
Correlation does not prove causation.
Radiation does not prove radiator.
Thus nowhere in the PU is there a perfect certainty.
Why exactly is this?
Because you are always trying to learn about event A earlier by
looking at event B later.
B is always separated from A by a finite amount of spacetime no
matter how small. And worse, B just simply isn't A, B is some OTHER
object that was either emanated by A, or was hit by A's radiation or
causal emanation, and which then caused B to change state.
Since learning by being an effect can only produce evidence, model
and theory, there can be no learning with perfect certainty anywhere in
the physical universe as long a you are trying to learn about A by
looking at B.
Notice the correct way to say that is 'trying to learn about A by
BEING B.'
If you and your consciousness aren't personally being the symbol of
final authority, you aren't learning anything period.
In any given causal chain, *YOU* have to be the symbol of final
authority, or YOU won't ever learn anything at all about that chain.
THE REFERENT AND SYMBOL CONTINUUM
In general all events that happen in the PU, pass on causal waves
through them, to the next event in line.
Thus each prior referent event immediately creates a different
later symbol event imprinted with the causal nature of the referent on
it. That symbol then becomes a referent event in its own right, as IT
passes on the causal wave to yet another symbol down the line.
We call this the referent and symbol continuum. Each causal wave
is a continuum of events, each one of which is a symbol to prior events,
and a referent to later events.
Each event in the causal chain is a symbol to events PRIOR to it
and therefore distant in spacetime no matter how small.
Each event in the causal chain is a referent to events LATER to it
and therefore also distant in spacetime, no matter how small.
Thus referent and symbol are ALWAYS two different objects, and thus
perfect certainty between them is impossible as learning between them is
limited to interpretation of evidence into theory and model at best.
Alright let's take a break, get some coffee and a donut.
Homer
Sun Mar 28 23:21:54 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Oct 19 00:06:04 EDT 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore737.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
_______________________________________________
Clear-L mailing list
Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
Now we know in the physical universe (PU), the only way to see a
radiator (anything that radiates) is to receive and be affected by its
radiation.
In the absence of radiation it is impossible to see the radiator.
In the presence of 'seeing', all we can see is the radiation, no
matter how close we are to the radiator.
We also know that radiation is a second different object from the
radiator itself, thus if the radiator is the original referent, then its
radiation or its future effects, become the radiator's symbols of final
authority, anyone of which can be chosen to learn from about the
original referent radiator.
Thus we learn about the radiator by interacting with the radiation
which produces theoretical learning about the radiator.
The radiation as symbol is evidence for the radiator as referent,
and the radiator as referent is a model for the radiation as symbol,
(for how the radiation could be and got there in the first place.)
Evidence and model make up theory.
Thus learning by being an effect, by being a symbol of a causal
referent, never produces perfect certainty of the alleged causal
referent.
THE THIRD PARTY LAW
The third party law intervenes here, if A causes B to change state,
then by looking at B, we don't know if it changed state truly because of
A, or because of a third party causally between A and B that made B
change state AS IF A had caused B to change state.
The third party is the great hidden orchestrator.
The photon on your film plate may have come from a star, or it may
have been made by God mid flight to look like it had come from a star,
or it may be been an accidental spontaneous quantum flux that marked
that area of the film plate exposed when nothing had hit it at all.
Taking more film plates that all agree decreases the probability that
the spot is an accident, but does not reduce the probability to an
absolute perfect certainty.
Although Occam's Razor tells us to ignore third parties until
absolutely necessary, when one is trying to understand the nature of a
virtual universe, the third party rule becomes tantamount, because the
virtual universe IS a simulation or projection of the 3rd party actual
universe.
Usually what is virtualized in a virtual universe are not only the
actual existence of the objects in the universe, but the existence of
any actual cause between them. If the objects themselves do not
actually exist as represented, then surely actual cause between them is
also absent.
THE SELF SYMBOLIZING EVENT
The idea of a self symbolizing event is almost impossible to
conceive of until one actually takes a look at one. One couldn't just
imagine such a thing up out of whole cloth. What would it be like?
But look the easiest way to understand it is very simple, any 3rd
grader can get this.
You can't see the cube on the table directly, so you have to look
at the light rays reflected off it.
But you can't see the light rays directly, so you have to look at
your retina which has an image of the cube on it.
But you can't see your retina directly, so you have to look at the
resultant spread of data in the brain's visual cortex.
But you can't see your brain activity directly, so you have to look
at your conscious experience (rendition) of the cube.
But NOW YOU CAN SEE YOUR CONSCIOUS EXPERIENCE directly, there is no
further symbol to chase, because you aren't seeing your conscious
experience by looking AT SOMETHING ELSE.
Thus that last symbol, your conscious experience, then gets looked
at directly, as if it WERE the next symbol in line, but the next symbol
in line IS ITSELF.
Thus we call a conscious event a self symbolizing event.
Notice there is a cube rendered on your retina, just as there is a
cube rendered in your conscious experience.
Does the retina KNOW it is seeing a cube?
No the retina is merely being in a state, it isn't knowing
anything.
But your conscious experience is both being in a state and knowing
it is in that state.
Knowing about being is what we call self luminousness, or self
awareness.
Further there is no TIME between the state your consciousness is
being in, and the knowing it is in that state.
Any machine can be in a state, and then via causal pathway enter
another state that represents that it is in the first state. But the
two states of being and knowing about being are always separated by
a causal pathway and TIME.
Thus the state that the machine knows it is being, is a PRIOR
state, never the same state that the knowing about being is.
Thus a machine can only 'know' about itself in the past. NOW can
only know about THEN, and those are two different objects and thus can
not produce certainty and the causal pathway between them can neither be
perceived or verified.
The conscious being however can BE and KNOW IT IS BEING at the same
time because the whole process is timeless.
Yes there is still a causal pathway between the conscious state of
BEING and the causally related state of KNOWING BEING, but since the
referent IS the symbol, there is no time between cause and effect, and
thus the conscious unit can only be self aware of itself as it is NOW.
Thus self awareness for a machine is theoretical indirect awareness
of how it was.
Self awareness for a conscious being is perfectly certain direct
awareness of how it is NOW.
THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE
The entire PU is simply casual wave after casual wave rippling
through space and time from referent to symbol. Each symbol in turn
becomes its own referent and passes the causal wave onto the next symbol
in line.
Everything is a symbol to some earlier referent, and everything is
a referent to some later symbol.
Anything that is neither referent nor symbol, well just isn't
partaking in cause and effect.
We call these causal waves causal pathways. The sun emits a
photon, which hits an atom, which absorbs it, which starts to vibrate,
which emits another energy, which is picked up by a sensor, which rings
a bell, which is heard by a technician, who comes in and turns on a
light switch to see what all the hubbub is about, who writes down a
report, which is read by his supervisor who talks about it to a large
audience of scientists, who go home and do their own experiments with
their own photons and sensors.... etc
It just goes on and on forever. Causal waves probably never stop,
they just bounce around forever growing colder and colder as time goes
on.
Each moment of spacetime is called an event or an object, same
thing.
An event or object is simply a moment of spacetime in one state or
another. Even a totally empty moment of space time is an event or
object.
Every object in a causal pathway through spacetime has imprinted on
it a change in state that causally relates back to the nature of the
prior objects in the pathway. We call this a data imprint.
The data imprint happens in the rendition zone of the symbol
object, and is a rendering of the nature of the many prior referents
that were involved in the causal chain up to that point.
Remember that objects have quality sets which describe everything
there is to know about that object, including its position in space and
time, AND its relationships to other objects in the universe.
When an object has a datum about a prior object imprinted on it,
only part of its quality set is changed. That subset of the quality set
that gets changed is the rendition zone, the area that is changed. The
new set of qualities in that rendition zone forming the data imprint
itself is the rendition, the rendering of the nature of the prior causal
object.
Take a video camera attached to a computer, and the video camera is
aimed at a rubic's cube lit by the sun. The computer scans the video
image and turns it into a graphics display list.
A display list is a long list of the vertices of triangles, which
represent the image gleaned from the cube. The computer then sends the
display list to a rendering program which rerenders the data onto a high
resolution graphics screen, and voila, there is the 3D cube in 2D
projection.
Turning the data coming from the original cube into a display list
is an act of rendering in and of itself, and the display list is a
rendition in symbol form.
But then turning the display list back into a graphics image on a
CRT monitor is yet another act of rendering, and the image on the
monitor is the rendition, again in symbol form.
The cube is the original referent.
The display list is a later symbol. The display list has high data
content but almost nonexistent geometricity, or geometrical similarity
to the original referent.
The graphics image on the monitor is yet a later symbol. The image
also has high data content but with very high geometricity, as it looks
like the original cube.
Notice the monitor then becomes the symbol whose state is changed
by the data imprint imposed upon it by the computer.
It is NOT true that the whole monitor changes, most of the monitor
in fact is left quite alone, it is still quite recognizable as a monitor
for example. Its base and power cords, and what it is made of, and all
the its circuitry, remain as they were, although there are changes in
state in much of that also going on.
But the real change in state takes place on the glass surface of
the monitor where the image is finally rendered.
Thus that glass surface is the rendition zone, because it is that
subset of the monitor that actually gets changed when the causal wave
emanated by the computer gets done with the monitor and eventually
passes through and becomes heat going off into space.
Take another simpler example, there is a small refrigerator magnet
lying on a table.
It too has a quality set, including where it is, and what time it
is.
As time passes, let's pretend this object does not change much
except to move forward in time as all objects are doing. So it is
sitting there, going pocketa pocketa pocketa (LRH) in time and no other
change is taking place except moving along in time.
Then with your hand you take another magnet and move it near the
magnet on the table causing it to move towards you, then follow you a
bit, then stop moving once you remove your magnet far enough away again.
So the magnet was sitting there, doing nothing but keeping time,
and the suddenly it starts to change state, and it moves in an arc as it
follows your hand and ends up in a different place than where it
started.
Well that magnet is still a magnet, not much about it has changed,
but the small subset of its quality set that describes where the magnet
was and is, has certainly changed. THAT part of the magnet, and THAT
subset of its quality set, is the rendition zone of the event, and the
new state it is in, IS the data imprint about the object that caused it
to move.
In fact by studying its new position, and the course it took from
its old position to the new one, one could probably theorize quite a bit
about the nature of what had moved it. Thus the data imprint becomes
symbolic knowledge, knowledge encoded in symbol form, that can be used
to interpret back to the possible theoretical nature of the original
referent, the magnet that moved it.
One can ask an important question here with a subtle answer.
Once the magnet on the table is moved, and becomes imprinted with
data due to the nature of the causal referent, does that magnet actually
know anything about the causal referent.
Does the magnet KNOW, just because it IS?
Take a simpler example, it is very easy to imprint data or symbol
form knowledge on a symbol. Say we are in a class room with 20 other
kids and one's name is Julie. So I write on a piece of paper (the
symbol) the words 'This class contains a girl named Julie.'
Now clearly the words I write on the paper are symbols representing
the nature of the class, and clearly they got there because I saw Julie
walk in, so the causal pathway from Julie's presence to the words on the
paper is obvious, and the paper itself is the object with the imprint,
so it too has now become a symbol to the whole event.
Further we can say that the rendition zone is the area of the paper
where the words are written, and the words themselves are the rendering
or rendition on the paper of Julie's presence in the class.
Lastly someone can look at the symbol paper and read the symbol
words, and interpret them back to the nature of the referent they are
referring to.
So all the parts of a complete learning event are in place.
So here is the 64 dollar question.
DOES THE PAPER KNOW THAT JULIE IS IN THE ROOM?
Just because something has become or IS symbolic knowledge about
something prior, does it mean that same something KNOWS anything at all?
We are going to leave a deeper analysis of this question for later,
but the difference between BEING knowledge and KNOWING knowledge are two
very different things. Surely knowing knowledge would also imply being
knowledge, but any imprinted piece of paper can BE knowledge with out
knowing anything.
We say the paper has been imprinted with data or knowledge in
symbol form. The paper is the symbol substrate which suffers the change
in state representing the symbolic knowledge imprinted on it.
here:
The change of state, the new state plus the old state, IS the data
imprint, it is data about how the prior object caused the present object
to change state.
Alright let's continue.
By studying any particular object and its present state, we can
theorize about the causal nature of prior objects in the chain going
back to the beginning of time.
Notice that by studying the changes in state that such prior causes
effect, all one can ever learn about are causal qualities in the
preceeding events. If the preceeding events have qualities that do not
causally partake in the proceedings, you will never know about them by
looking only at the effects and changes in later objects.
THUS THE ONLY QUALITIES OF A REFERENT THAT YOU CAN LEARN BY BEING
AN EFFECT (SYMBOL) OF THAT REFERENT ARE CAUSAL QUALITIES OF RELATION.
ORIGINAL REFERENT AND SYMBOL OF FINAL AUTHORITY.
The prior object in the chain you are trying to learn about is
called the original referent.
The latter object in the chain you are trying to learn from is
called the symbol of final authority.
We call it a symbol because it's state is a causal function of the
prior referent.
We call it a symbol of authority, because it has authoritative data
imprinted on it via direct cause about the prior referent or chain of
referents. That's as close as close comes to authoritative veracity in
the physical universe.
We call it a symbol of FINAL authority, because no later symbol is
being inspected to glean the imprinted data about the prior referent.
We COULD use an earlier or later symbol to glean our knowledge of the
original referent, and whatever symbol we use becomes the symbol of
final authority for that particular learning event.
The symbol of final authority can be ANY symbol after the referent,
it is merely the one you choose to study in order to learn about the
referent.
The symbol of final authority happens to be you in case you hadn't
notice. If you don't insert yourself into the chain, take a reading
WITH YOUR OWN HAND so to speak, by being an effect of what is going on,
you won't even know the chain is taking place as it passes you by.
Thus for YOU to learn anything, YOU must become a symbol of final
authority for the referent you are trying to learn about.
In the case of a conscious self symbolizing event, the referent
itself becomes the symbol. That's how consciousness learns about
itself.
LEARNING BY BEING AN EFFECT
Where there is no effect, there is no learning.
Where there is learning there is always effect, and the effect IS
the learning.
No effect = no learning.
Learning = theory, because effect does not prove cause.
Correlation does not prove causation.
Radiation does not prove radiator.
Thus nowhere in the PU is there a perfect certainty.
Why exactly is this?
Because you are always trying to learn about event A earlier by
looking at event B later.
B is always separated from A by a finite amount of spacetime no
matter how small. And worse, B just simply isn't A, B is some OTHER
object that was either emanated by A, or was hit by A's radiation or
causal emanation, and which then caused B to change state.
Since learning by being an effect can only produce evidence, model
and theory, there can be no learning with perfect certainty anywhere in
the physical universe as long a you are trying to learn about A by
looking at B.
Notice the correct way to say that is 'trying to learn about A by
BEING B.'
If you and your consciousness aren't personally being the symbol of
final authority, you aren't learning anything period.
In any given causal chain, *YOU* have to be the symbol of final
authority, or YOU won't ever learn anything at all about that chain.
THE REFERENT AND SYMBOL CONTINUUM
In general all events that happen in the PU, pass on causal waves
through them, to the next event in line.
Thus each prior referent event immediately creates a different
later symbol event imprinted with the causal nature of the referent on
it. That symbol then becomes a referent event in its own right, as IT
passes on the causal wave to yet another symbol down the line.
We call this the referent and symbol continuum. Each causal wave
is a continuum of events, each one of which is a symbol to prior events,
and a referent to later events.
Each event in the causal chain is a symbol to events PRIOR to it
and therefore distant in spacetime no matter how small.
Each event in the causal chain is a referent to events LATER to it
and therefore also distant in spacetime, no matter how small.
Thus referent and symbol are ALWAYS two different objects, and thus
perfect certainty between them is impossible as learning between them is
limited to interpretation of evidence into theory and model at best.
Alright let's take a break, get some coffee and a donut.
Homer
Sun Mar 28 23:21:54 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Oct 19 00:06:04 EDT 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore737.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
_______________________________________________
Clear-L mailing list
Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
Thursday, October 18, 2012
INFINITIES
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
INFINITIES
Your preclear has gotten involved in infinities.
At first it was an infinity of different spaces, objects and times.
This was outside the doorstep of Eternality.
Then lower down it became one infinite space and time.
This was Immortality.
Then it became an infinite loss of infinite spaces, objects and
times.
This was mortality.
It doesn't matter whether your preclear is a pigball, er I mean
meatball, or not, all beings go through the same dwindling spiral of
desire and havingness.
The desire of all beings is the freedom of eternality with an
infinite number of different infinite universes and futures to choose
from,
And if you recover the early childhood of your preclear where he
can't remember, there you will find that desire burning strong as ever.
But it can get crushed out pretty quick though, particularly in the
meatball, as the weight of the infinite losses along the whole track are
ready and waiting to key in at the first mis thought.
The fall from eternality to immortality was an infinite loss, one
starts with the ability to freely create or move among an infinite
number of infinite spaces and times, and ends up stuck forever in just
one infinite space and time.
The fall from immortality to mortality is another infinite loss as
one starts with at least one endless future of games and adventures, and
ends up with only one life.
The being thus has two levels of infinite loss weighing him down,
and in order to get him out of his depressions, he will need to start
thinking in terms of infinities of infinities again.
Thus you will have to go for the top, eternality, because the being
just won't dare go back to his last immortality, it was just too
horrendous to bear.
Eternality = infinities of infinities
Immortality = one infinity
Mortality = zero infinities.
He has been seeking peace (eternality) through death (mortality)
for a very long time.
He is trying to sleep or die INSIDE some of the space times he
still has available to him.
As he goes to sleep in one, he falls into a dream in the next
one down.
Thus your preclear is asleep at a number of different levels in a
number of different space times each one within the other.
You can call this dreams within dreams, each dream seeking to sleep
and never dream again. But each dream he goes to sleep in, he starts to
dream at the next universe down.
Even now he will tell you that the best dreams he has, are the
dreams where he is able to lie down and sleep within the dream.
Remember the top of the tone scale at native state is simply
eternal sleep.
So is the bottom of the tone scale.
At the top its fair chosen.
At the bottom its unfair unchosen.
In the meanwhile the being is trying to go to sleep forever IN TIME
or what's left of it for him.
But that leaves him impingable, anyone can come a knockin' on his
door because going to sleep in time marks you as the effect of
EVERYTHING, so of course you keep get woken up.
You are effect, everything else is cause, that's impingability.
Get it?
I have no idea how to run it, I would start by assessing for how
many sleeps within sleeps he is from Native State. This will be the
total number of universes he played games in, and then tried to die in
the universe rather than waking up to native state again.
It won't be infinite.
That will give him an idea of where he is and when he is.
Then get him to spot his upsets with 0 and only 1 infinity of space
and time.
Then get him mocking up an infinity of different infinite spaces
and and times.
Then get him mocking up an infinite number of beings like himself
all mocking up infinite numbers of different infinite spaces and times.
This should restore his ARC for infinity, as 1 finfinity was
never enough.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun May 2 01:09:54 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Oct 18 03:06:02 EDT 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore758.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQf6pbURT1lqxE3HERAhbGAKCiuF1WJWO9gEnDmigr92R7d9wZ5ACeL/dT
SX71SibrNcRQnQ6Pl4zWBxI=
=/ARw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
INFINITIES
Your preclear has gotten involved in infinities.
At first it was an infinity of different spaces, objects and times.
This was outside the doorstep of Eternality.
Then lower down it became one infinite space and time.
This was Immortality.
Then it became an infinite loss of infinite spaces, objects and
times.
This was mortality.
It doesn't matter whether your preclear is a pigball, er I mean
meatball, or not, all beings go through the same dwindling spiral of
desire and havingness.
The desire of all beings is the freedom of eternality with an
infinite number of different infinite universes and futures to choose
from,
And if you recover the early childhood of your preclear where he
can't remember, there you will find that desire burning strong as ever.
But it can get crushed out pretty quick though, particularly in the
meatball, as the weight of the infinite losses along the whole track are
ready and waiting to key in at the first mis thought.
The fall from eternality to immortality was an infinite loss, one
starts with the ability to freely create or move among an infinite
number of infinite spaces and times, and ends up stuck forever in just
one infinite space and time.
The fall from immortality to mortality is another infinite loss as
one starts with at least one endless future of games and adventures, and
ends up with only one life.
The being thus has two levels of infinite loss weighing him down,
and in order to get him out of his depressions, he will need to start
thinking in terms of infinities of infinities again.
Thus you will have to go for the top, eternality, because the being
just won't dare go back to his last immortality, it was just too
horrendous to bear.
Eternality = infinities of infinities
Immortality = one infinity
Mortality = zero infinities.
He has been seeking peace (eternality) through death (mortality)
for a very long time.
He is trying to sleep or die INSIDE some of the space times he
still has available to him.
As he goes to sleep in one, he falls into a dream in the next
one down.
Thus your preclear is asleep at a number of different levels in a
number of different space times each one within the other.
You can call this dreams within dreams, each dream seeking to sleep
and never dream again. But each dream he goes to sleep in, he starts to
dream at the next universe down.
Even now he will tell you that the best dreams he has, are the
dreams where he is able to lie down and sleep within the dream.
Remember the top of the tone scale at native state is simply
eternal sleep.
So is the bottom of the tone scale.
At the top its fair chosen.
At the bottom its unfair unchosen.
In the meanwhile the being is trying to go to sleep forever IN TIME
or what's left of it for him.
But that leaves him impingable, anyone can come a knockin' on his
door because going to sleep in time marks you as the effect of
EVERYTHING, so of course you keep get woken up.
You are effect, everything else is cause, that's impingability.
Get it?
I have no idea how to run it, I would start by assessing for how
many sleeps within sleeps he is from Native State. This will be the
total number of universes he played games in, and then tried to die in
the universe rather than waking up to native state again.
It won't be infinite.
That will give him an idea of where he is and when he is.
Then get him to spot his upsets with 0 and only 1 infinity of space
and time.
Then get him mocking up an infinity of different infinite spaces
and and times.
Then get him mocking up an infinite number of beings like himself
all mocking up infinite numbers of different infinite spaces and times.
This should restore his ARC for infinity, as 1 finfinity was
never enough.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun May 2 01:09:54 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Oct 18 03:06:02 EDT 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore758.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQf6pbURT1lqxE3HERAhbGAKCiuF1WJWO9gEnDmigr92R7d9wZ5ACeL/dT
SX71SibrNcRQnQ6Pl4zWBxI=
=/ARw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
THE FIRST OVERT
THE FIRST OVERT
At tone 30.0 (postulates) each I-AM of the multi being source is
100 percent responsible for his own creations but also those of everyone
else. All are responsible for all.
This is a fair chosen connectedness between the beings of the
operational group as they descend from Native state at tone 400.
The being later may have the idea there are things he is creating
knowingly, and things he is creating unknowingly (other's creations),
but they are all his. But at the top, each being replicates entirely
the creation of any other I-AM, including the idea 'I am causing this.'
Since each being is aware of the others, every creation then becomes a
'WE are creating this', or a "US is creating this."
By taking full responsibility FOR any creation at its moment of
appearance in his space, the being can thus own it and has 100 percent
control over it, just as he does over his 'own' creations, because even
other's creations are his own at this level.
Thus we have the KRC triangle, Knowledge, Responsibility and
Control, where Responsibility equals Control over. What one can take
full responsibility for and over, one can control, and what one refuses
responsibility for or over, one can not control directly.
Thus by taking responsibility for anything that appears he
maintains complete control over it, meaning he can create it, or
uncreate it, that is start, change or stop it.
So at tone 30.0, it doesn't matter who creates what, anyone can
start, change or stop it as if it is theirs, because it is, the multi
being has an US kind of attitude towards everything.
US created it, so US can change or stop it.
You might think this would lead to wars of creation and
discreation, when one being wants it and another being doesn't, but if A
creates it and B decides to uncreate it, A, as one of the US, will
simply take responsibility for its UNCREATION, and may or may not put it
back.
In other words if B decides to uncreate something, A will ALSO
decide to uncreate it, as will everyone else, because a decision to
uncreate something is a creation, an act of causation, that is then
shared by all.
As far as A or B is concerned, each being is essentially playing a
multi being game of US solitair with themselves, all of them.
As long as US put it there, US can change or stop it, it doesn't
matter which being of the multi being US does it, because they are not
thinking in those highly individuated terms at that level.
US includes ME and YOU, but at tone 30.0 it is US, not yet ME and
YOU without the US.
Now, one of the things the US can do is blame something that is
created on someone else.
It's fine for A to say B created this thing, no matter who did,
because of course it is true, B can take full responsibility for
anything created by anybody.
A saying that B created it does NOT imply that A did not also
create it. Thus full responsibility around the table continues to
pertain.
But it is not fine for A to say "B created this thing and I
didn't"!
A's operative postulate is not that B created it, but that A
didn't, so A has now elected himself an effect and has claimed by his
own creation that something can appear in his space that he had nothing
to do with, AND THUS CAN DO NOTHING ABOUT.
A can pull a sly trick, trying to maintain the illusion of 'total
responsibility' after it is long gone, by saying that indeed A chose to
let B into A's space so that B could create, but then B went and made a
mess, and A will say he 'didn't sign up for this', and so he points the
finger at B for creating it. That is not full responsibility.
Blame is simply saying I did not create this, YOU did.
Now you see we have a real ME and YOU, because YOU created it and
ME didn't.
Now B can say to A, "Yes I created it," and that would be the end
of it, because B could get rid of it. Notice A can't get rid of it any
more because A has denied creating it, refused TAKING full
responsibility for it from the US as his own.
B however might just decide to not get rid of it, just to piss off
A for being irresponsible. It would serve A right for giving away all
his powers to deal with anything, just so he could point the finger at
B.
However as long as B takes full responsibility for A's
irresponsibility, B can uncreate A's irresponsibility and return A to a
fully responsible state!
As long as each being takes full responsibility for shunting off
responsibility from themselves to another, the full US continues or is
restored quickly and nothing much happens from it.
This is true no matter who has done what to who, because since
anyone can end another's irresponsibility, and in fact CAUSED the
other's irresponsibility, it is just the US playing the beginnings of
the game of NOT US, but still playing NOT US as the US anyhow.
But if being A shunts responsibility over to B, and B says no way I
didn't create it, YOU did, and A says, well er, yes I did create it, but
I only created it because C caused me to, then A can get into an
infinite regression of shunting responsibility for shunting
responsibility.
A first shunts responsibility to B, who refuses it, but
then A shunts responsibility to C for having shunted to B.
If A shunts responsibility to B, but A takes full responsibility
for shunting to B, then nothing much happens, as A remains in total
control of what A is creating.
But if A shunts responsibility to B, and B doesn't accept that
responsibility and shunts it back to A, and A then shunts responsibility
to C for having for shunted responsibility to B, then A has started to
hand away all his responsibility for handing away all his
responsibility.
A can stop it any time by taking full responsibility for the last
shunt in the line of shunts, but if A makes an infinite regression out
of shunting shunting, then A no longer has control over his creations
made by others.
"I am not responsible for making it, and I am not responsible for
making myself not responsible, and I am not responsible for that
either," ad infinitum...
Shunt, shunt, shunt, shunt...
20 trillion years later A is still going
... shunt, shunt, nope not responsible for that either, shunt!
At any time A can simple take full responsibility for that last
shunt in line, which then presents him with the immediate prior shunt.
If A continues to take responsibility for each prior shunt as they show
up, A can unravel the whole thing back to Shunt One, at which point A
recovers his full responsibility and CONTROL of his own experience as is
his native right and state.
PUTTING IT THERE = FULL RESPONSIBLE CONTROL
If B puts something there, and A *TAKES* full responsibility for B
putting it there, by A putting it there too, then it becomes A's ALSO,
and so A can UNput it there if A doesn't like it.
That's responsibility equals control, you see?
But if A refuses to PUT IT THERE, and claims it is being forced
upon him by another, then A isn't operating responsibility for it, and
thus can't CEASE operating responsibility for it, and thus unput it
there any more. Instead he has to blame B and threaten B to get B to
remove it for A.
This creates a serious condition where A himself no longer believes
he is really an US, and A in fact believes himself to not be responsible
for his shunting control to B, that A HAD to shunt, or was made to shunt
by another such as C, or simply that calling it shunting was not valid,
that another, namely B, was in fact responsible for it and A wasn't.
You might think this would be worse if A had in fact originally
created the thing instead of B.
Blaming others for one's own acts is clearly a no no, but at these
high levels, there no "I created it and you didn't," so A blaming ANYONE
FOR ANYTHING no matter who created it starts the cycle of postulating
that A didn't create something and yet could be the effect of someone
else's creations.
So the cycle starts with A and B co creating something, it doesn't
matter who 'started it', and A blames B for the creation, "you did it
and I didn't."
Then B makes another mistake, rather than taking full
responsibility for A's shunt over to him, he denies responsibility for
what A created and shunts it back to A.
A now feels at fault and this stirs the emotion of guilt.
The guilt is a creation of *B* put onto A, and A has no choice but
to accept it, because A has already made the general postulate that B
can create something for A that A didn't create, and so A has to suffer
it rather than just vanish it.
Fault is defined, by responsible multi beings, as not taking
responsibility for something you or anyone else is responsible for.
Fault is NOT a result of what was created, that is simply
responsibility. A says, "Yep I created that there holocaust" and
everyone agrees that A and everyone else created it too, and that's the
end of it.
You see there is no fault in creating, NO MATTER WHAT IS CREATED,
as long as the creator takes full responsibility for creating it, and
also takes full responsibility for everyone else denying responsibility
for it, should that happen.
That's a big statement, dig it and don't leave it.
Others may try to make A guilty by saying A created it and they
didn't, but if A takes full responsibility for it, even if others
created it too, AND if A takes full responsibility for other's blame of
A, then A is not at fault and there is no guilt or consequence to A, as
A can vanish anything he is putting there with full responsibility,
including everyone else's intended blame and guilt.
If A is really good at it, this will include returning everyone
ELSE who is blaming him to a fully responsibility state.
These principles of what is or is not fault apply to any part of
the create, survive, destroy cycle.
*FAULT* doesn't have to do with WHAT is created, fault has to do
with failing to take responsibility for its creation, regardless of who
created it.
Yes the creation of blame and fault is a creation just like any
other creation, but if you take full responsibility for blaming then you
aren't at FAULT! You only end up at fault if you blame and mean it.
BLAME IS FAULT, FAULT IS BLAME, PERIOD.
If you blame B, *YOU* are at fault for blaming B!
Do you see now the difference between a human and a God?
Taking responsibility doesn't mean you claim you created it, it
means TAKING the act of creation as your own once it is created.
Taking responsibility means PUTTING IT THERE.
You can't change what you are not putting there, no matter who
'started' it.
Fault to a society of totally responsible beings lies only in
refusing to take total responsibility for anything.
Joke is you only get to FEEL the fault as guilt when OTHERS refuse
to take responsibility too and shunt it back to you. Your failed shunt
to another, then causes you to feel guilt and the other's do not. Now
we have a true ME (guilty) and YOU (not guilty).
GOOBER AND DUFUS
So Goober and Dufus are part of the multi being community, and
Goober creates a big evil mess in the middle of the AllThatIS.
There used to be a game between infinite multi beings of who could
mockup the worst evil amongst them. It was great fun, and each took
full responsibility for anyone's presentation. So of course everyone
won the 'worst evil mockup' award every time.
But on this day, Goober creates this evil mess, and the police come
up to him and say, "Sir, you created this evil mess, we need to take you
to jail to punish you for this." This is accountability on the tone
scale. Notice the police didn't deny that they also created it, so
there is no blame yet.
Goober then makes a mistake (on purpose to create randomity) and he
says "Oh dear Sirs, you are quite right it is a horrible sight that only
the strong can behold, but it wasn't I who created it, it was Dufus, I
saw him do it." This is blame on the tone scale.
The police then apologize profusely and proceed to create decimation
after holocaust after nuclear anihilation trying to track Dufus down and
bring him to justice. The collateral damage is horrendous, the number
of "fully responsible" beings (not) lying on the ground belching smoke
and debris, becomes uncountable.
Finally the police have Dufus corralled in some smoking corner of
what is left of civilization, and they are about to take him down, when
he says "But Sirs, I have been framed, it was Goober indeed who did this
evil, thing, and here is proof..." as Dufus rolls out the video tape of
Goober doing his dastardly deed.
Well that's not absolute evidence, but it was good enough for a
jury, and the police go back to Goober and say "You lied to us, you are
AT FAULT for creating this evil thing".
Now Goober isn't at fault of creating the mess, but he is at fault
for trying to get someone else in trouble for it and denying full
responsibility for it.
Goober feels guilty and punish worthy. This is regret (guilt) on
the tone scale.
Goober knows he has been caught in a shunt trying to get another in
trouble for is own deeds.
He has poisoned his own awareness of the US by claiming he didn't
do it, and Dufus did, so that when it comes back to him, it comes back
to him as: he did it and Dufus didn't, as fault!
Goober in his guilt, misses that Dufus is now denying
responsibility for the mess just as Goober did, but Goober fails to
refuse it back making Dufus guilty too, and so it sticks to Goober.
What are these others doing blaming Goober?
Well Goober blamed them for a mess, so Goober's general postulate
that others can do something that Goober didn't do, now comes back on
him exactly as he postulated, namely that others can do something to
Goober that Goober doesn't agree with or want, and GOOBER CAN NO LONGER
VANISH IT BECAUSE HE ISN'T PUTTING THERE, namely *TAKING* full
responsibility for it regardless of who created it.
Oy!
Goober now feels GUILTY, not for the evil mess mind you, no one
cares about that, but for trying to blame it on Dufus when it was his
own doing (ALSO).
THAT was not forgivable, particularly to a community of multi
beings that long ago stopped being able to take responsibility for
anything.
Taking responsibility for evil messes was one thing, but taking
responsibility for shunting responsibility? Shudder the thought.
And that includes Goober, who, because of his unspotted general
postulates about being an uncausing effect of others, still reigning,
now finds himself mysteriously unable to take full responsibility for
having shunted responsibility and the decimation, holocaust and nuclear
anihilation it caused while chasing down Dufus, and so he is stuck with
the guilt.
So the jury wants to take Goober out to crucify him, but Goober has
a bright idea. He has had this facsimile hanging around for a long time
of some really horrible thing that someone created that Goober had been
keeping as a souvenir of a good game.
Goober then wishes off the facsimile on the jurors hoping to stop
them in their tracks.
This is overt hate and murderous rage on the tone scale. Anything
to stop the jurors from acting against Goober.
This doesn't work however, as Goober no longer as the power to kill
with a wish or a glance, so instead Goober takes the facsimile on
himself.
Goober dons the facsimile and suddenly he looks all crumpled up,
and crippled, and cross eyed and incompetent, he can't think straight,
he is drooling out of both of eyes, and he walks into the jury and says
"See, I was incompetent due to this horrible abuse that was visited upon
me long ago, and I have suffered for years and years, please don't make
me suffer more, I apologize for the mess I made, please feel sorry for
me, and forgive me and let me go."
This is propitiation on the tone scale.
Well guess what, some of the jurors were the very people who
created the incident which Goober has a facsimile of, and they feel
sorry for Goober and let him go.
But notice Goober is now two deceits down, first he blamed Dufus
for his own doing (actually a co doing), and when he was caught with
that deceit, he blamed his facsimile for why he made the mess in the
first place, or why he blamed Dufus or for why he should be exonerated
anyhow.
One day a long time later, Goober meets one of the Jurors he
tricked, and he sees the Juror is really a good kind of guy and not
doing well, and Goober feels Sympathy for the Juror.
At that point Goober can no longer remember any part of this, and
becomes a human being in his next life being snide about auditing.
THE CYCLE OF BLAME AND BECOMING
So the cycle goes from Blame to Guilt (Failed shunt) to No Sympathy
(wishing off death or damnation on those that would punish him), to
covert hostility (covert effort to succumb with own facsimile in order
to get Sympathy or exoneration) to Sympathy for those who originally
wanted to crucify him, but who then later fell for his sympathy stance
or ploy, to Spiritual Death as a sovereign being as that is the final
nature of the facsimile he is wearing!
Spiritual Death is at -400.00 on the tone scale and can be measured
by the ratio between what you know for sure you are fully responsible
for, and everything else in the known AllThatIS.
One runs this cycle of BLAME - GUILT - NOSYMPATHY - COVERT
HOSTILITY - SYMPATHY - BECOMING DEAD on all dynamics by running out all
times the being KNOWINGLY shunted responsibility for *ANYTHING*,
regardless of "who created it," whether it came back to him or not.
Shunting means NOT PUTTING IT THERE.
Blame can come back as fault and guilt in two ways.
The first is called failed by force, that means mother was bigger
and stronger, and the child could not effect justice against mother's
selfish intent to rip the baby off of basic needs.
The child will first use reason against mother, then will try force
( overt hostility out of valence in murder engram, attempted murder,
zap, beam or whatever), then will use deceit (covert hostility in
valence in murder engram to make self sick and elicit mother's
sympathy.)
It does not matter at all whether the child is right or wrong about
his sense of injustice being violated, mother's refusal of the blame
will make the child feel guilty anyhow, not because of anything anyone
did to anybody, but because the child refused to take full
responsibility for mother's criminal intent and behavior.
Mother does wrong, and child feels guilty after blame doesn't work.
The worst mother gets out of it, is she feels smug.
The second is called failed by reversal, the child blames mother
for throwing out his favorite toy in the garbage pail, and mother says
"Oh but dear I didn't do that, it fell there accidentally when YOU
bumped the table, I would never throw out your precious toys." The child
has blamed and punished the wrong person unfairly, and now deserves
punishment back for punishing an innocent party.
Again the child will pull in a murder engram, and sit squarely in
it, in valence, so as to get VERY sick so mother will forget he just
tried to kill her for messing with his toys, and she will forget, and
nurse him through the sickness until everyone has forgotten everything
about what happened, and all is forgiven.
Whenever blame comes back to him as fault and guilt, then run out
the fair chosen use of the Service Facsimile to gain sympathy and
exoneration for his irresponsibility.
It doesn't matter whether mother threw away the toy or not, the
CHILD blamed mother for the missing toy rather than PUT IT THERE (the
missingness), and thus becomes liable to his own postulates that he can
be the unwanted effect of another.
Once the SPECIFIC irresponsibility is located, for mother and her
actions in the above, the preclear must then be taken back to the PRIOR
GENERAL irresponsibility for mothers and babies in general (I didn't
create or choose my mother or this baby body) and the dependency between
them and everything else involved in that incident and all earlier
similar incidents until such a thing could never happen again as the
preclear would be too fast to not take full responsibility for anything
any mother did to anybody before it could get to the guilt stage.
Here's another example.
Baby to Mother: I am starving to death, you failed to feed me this
morning (Blame, NO-Sympathy, shunted responsibility for needing food,
starving and mother's inattentive actions.)
Mother to Baby: Well you messed your pants and I had to change your
diapers, and the milk got over heated and burned so I had to throw it
away. (Fault and guilt on baby's part when mother refuses the shunted
responsibility and blames baby for messing pants. It's only reasonable
you know, if you are gonna mess your pants, you should expect to starve
to death.)
Baby (to mother): I wish you were dead. (Overt hostility, out of
valence use of death or near death engram against mother, wishing off
death or damnation on mother, intended and attempted murder which fails
as mother doesn't die so the baby is suddenly sitting IN valence in a
near or actual death experience. If you conjure it up to wish on
another, and the wish fails, well there you are sitting in a time you
were murdered and feeling like it. Don't call up engrams to use on
others, unless you intend to win. Don't call up death or damnation on
others, unless you get them to walk away with it! Otherwise YOU get
stuck in it, until you decide to let bygones by bygones and let it go.)
Continuing to try to wish off an engram on another, that continues to
fail, leaves YOU continually sitting in the engram. Thus the only way
anyone can end up in death or hell forever is to continue and fail to
wish death and hell forever off on another. The second you give up
trying to USE the engram to harm another, you pop out of it. Thus no
hell can out last a true confession.)
Baby to Mother: See how near death I am, you should be ashamed of
yourself and feel sorry for me. (Baby now in own valence in near death
engram, uses it to make Mother feel Sympathy. Since near death engram
is Mother's attempted abortion against baby, or suicide attempts during
pregnancy, it works, and mother feels sorry for baby for a while.
But eventually it doesn't work any more.
Mother to Baby: "Oh you are always sick and dying, its all in your
head." Baby tries harder and harder and eventually becomes permanently
sick dead or dying.
Mother is stuck permanently in No-Sympathy (blame of baby), and
baby is stuck permanently in near death trying to make mother wrong and
guilty.
Baby grown up: "Auditing costs too much and doesn't work".
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
At tone 30.0 (postulates) each I-AM of the multi being source is
100 percent responsible for his own creations but also those of everyone
else. All are responsible for all.
This is a fair chosen connectedness between the beings of the
operational group as they descend from Native state at tone 400.
The being later may have the idea there are things he is creating
knowingly, and things he is creating unknowingly (other's creations),
but they are all his. But at the top, each being replicates entirely
the creation of any other I-AM, including the idea 'I am causing this.'
Since each being is aware of the others, every creation then becomes a
'WE are creating this', or a "US is creating this."
By taking full responsibility FOR any creation at its moment of
appearance in his space, the being can thus own it and has 100 percent
control over it, just as he does over his 'own' creations, because even
other's creations are his own at this level.
Thus we have the KRC triangle, Knowledge, Responsibility and
Control, where Responsibility equals Control over. What one can take
full responsibility for and over, one can control, and what one refuses
responsibility for or over, one can not control directly.
Thus by taking responsibility for anything that appears he
maintains complete control over it, meaning he can create it, or
uncreate it, that is start, change or stop it.
So at tone 30.0, it doesn't matter who creates what, anyone can
start, change or stop it as if it is theirs, because it is, the multi
being has an US kind of attitude towards everything.
US created it, so US can change or stop it.
You might think this would lead to wars of creation and
discreation, when one being wants it and another being doesn't, but if A
creates it and B decides to uncreate it, A, as one of the US, will
simply take responsibility for its UNCREATION, and may or may not put it
back.
In other words if B decides to uncreate something, A will ALSO
decide to uncreate it, as will everyone else, because a decision to
uncreate something is a creation, an act of causation, that is then
shared by all.
As far as A or B is concerned, each being is essentially playing a
multi being game of US solitair with themselves, all of them.
As long as US put it there, US can change or stop it, it doesn't
matter which being of the multi being US does it, because they are not
thinking in those highly individuated terms at that level.
US includes ME and YOU, but at tone 30.0 it is US, not yet ME and
YOU without the US.
Now, one of the things the US can do is blame something that is
created on someone else.
It's fine for A to say B created this thing, no matter who did,
because of course it is true, B can take full responsibility for
anything created by anybody.
A saying that B created it does NOT imply that A did not also
create it. Thus full responsibility around the table continues to
pertain.
But it is not fine for A to say "B created this thing and I
didn't"!
A's operative postulate is not that B created it, but that A
didn't, so A has now elected himself an effect and has claimed by his
own creation that something can appear in his space that he had nothing
to do with, AND THUS CAN DO NOTHING ABOUT.
A can pull a sly trick, trying to maintain the illusion of 'total
responsibility' after it is long gone, by saying that indeed A chose to
let B into A's space so that B could create, but then B went and made a
mess, and A will say he 'didn't sign up for this', and so he points the
finger at B for creating it. That is not full responsibility.
Blame is simply saying I did not create this, YOU did.
Now you see we have a real ME and YOU, because YOU created it and
ME didn't.
Now B can say to A, "Yes I created it," and that would be the end
of it, because B could get rid of it. Notice A can't get rid of it any
more because A has denied creating it, refused TAKING full
responsibility for it from the US as his own.
B however might just decide to not get rid of it, just to piss off
A for being irresponsible. It would serve A right for giving away all
his powers to deal with anything, just so he could point the finger at
B.
However as long as B takes full responsibility for A's
irresponsibility, B can uncreate A's irresponsibility and return A to a
fully responsible state!
As long as each being takes full responsibility for shunting off
responsibility from themselves to another, the full US continues or is
restored quickly and nothing much happens from it.
This is true no matter who has done what to who, because since
anyone can end another's irresponsibility, and in fact CAUSED the
other's irresponsibility, it is just the US playing the beginnings of
the game of NOT US, but still playing NOT US as the US anyhow.
But if being A shunts responsibility over to B, and B says no way I
didn't create it, YOU did, and A says, well er, yes I did create it, but
I only created it because C caused me to, then A can get into an
infinite regression of shunting responsibility for shunting
responsibility.
A first shunts responsibility to B, who refuses it, but
then A shunts responsibility to C for having shunted to B.
If A shunts responsibility to B, but A takes full responsibility
for shunting to B, then nothing much happens, as A remains in total
control of what A is creating.
But if A shunts responsibility to B, and B doesn't accept that
responsibility and shunts it back to A, and A then shunts responsibility
to C for having for shunted responsibility to B, then A has started to
hand away all his responsibility for handing away all his
responsibility.
A can stop it any time by taking full responsibility for the last
shunt in the line of shunts, but if A makes an infinite regression out
of shunting shunting, then A no longer has control over his creations
made by others.
"I am not responsible for making it, and I am not responsible for
making myself not responsible, and I am not responsible for that
either," ad infinitum...
Shunt, shunt, shunt, shunt...
20 trillion years later A is still going
... shunt, shunt, nope not responsible for that either, shunt!
At any time A can simple take full responsibility for that last
shunt in line, which then presents him with the immediate prior shunt.
If A continues to take responsibility for each prior shunt as they show
up, A can unravel the whole thing back to Shunt One, at which point A
recovers his full responsibility and CONTROL of his own experience as is
his native right and state.
PUTTING IT THERE = FULL RESPONSIBLE CONTROL
If B puts something there, and A *TAKES* full responsibility for B
putting it there, by A putting it there too, then it becomes A's ALSO,
and so A can UNput it there if A doesn't like it.
That's responsibility equals control, you see?
But if A refuses to PUT IT THERE, and claims it is being forced
upon him by another, then A isn't operating responsibility for it, and
thus can't CEASE operating responsibility for it, and thus unput it
there any more. Instead he has to blame B and threaten B to get B to
remove it for A.
This creates a serious condition where A himself no longer believes
he is really an US, and A in fact believes himself to not be responsible
for his shunting control to B, that A HAD to shunt, or was made to shunt
by another such as C, or simply that calling it shunting was not valid,
that another, namely B, was in fact responsible for it and A wasn't.
You might think this would be worse if A had in fact originally
created the thing instead of B.
Blaming others for one's own acts is clearly a no no, but at these
high levels, there no "I created it and you didn't," so A blaming ANYONE
FOR ANYTHING no matter who created it starts the cycle of postulating
that A didn't create something and yet could be the effect of someone
else's creations.
So the cycle starts with A and B co creating something, it doesn't
matter who 'started it', and A blames B for the creation, "you did it
and I didn't."
Then B makes another mistake, rather than taking full
responsibility for A's shunt over to him, he denies responsibility for
what A created and shunts it back to A.
A now feels at fault and this stirs the emotion of guilt.
The guilt is a creation of *B* put onto A, and A has no choice but
to accept it, because A has already made the general postulate that B
can create something for A that A didn't create, and so A has to suffer
it rather than just vanish it.
Fault is defined, by responsible multi beings, as not taking
responsibility for something you or anyone else is responsible for.
Fault is NOT a result of what was created, that is simply
responsibility. A says, "Yep I created that there holocaust" and
everyone agrees that A and everyone else created it too, and that's the
end of it.
You see there is no fault in creating, NO MATTER WHAT IS CREATED,
as long as the creator takes full responsibility for creating it, and
also takes full responsibility for everyone else denying responsibility
for it, should that happen.
That's a big statement, dig it and don't leave it.
Others may try to make A guilty by saying A created it and they
didn't, but if A takes full responsibility for it, even if others
created it too, AND if A takes full responsibility for other's blame of
A, then A is not at fault and there is no guilt or consequence to A, as
A can vanish anything he is putting there with full responsibility,
including everyone else's intended blame and guilt.
If A is really good at it, this will include returning everyone
ELSE who is blaming him to a fully responsibility state.
These principles of what is or is not fault apply to any part of
the create, survive, destroy cycle.
*FAULT* doesn't have to do with WHAT is created, fault has to do
with failing to take responsibility for its creation, regardless of who
created it.
Yes the creation of blame and fault is a creation just like any
other creation, but if you take full responsibility for blaming then you
aren't at FAULT! You only end up at fault if you blame and mean it.
BLAME IS FAULT, FAULT IS BLAME, PERIOD.
If you blame B, *YOU* are at fault for blaming B!
Do you see now the difference between a human and a God?
Taking responsibility doesn't mean you claim you created it, it
means TAKING the act of creation as your own once it is created.
Taking responsibility means PUTTING IT THERE.
You can't change what you are not putting there, no matter who
'started' it.
Fault to a society of totally responsible beings lies only in
refusing to take total responsibility for anything.
Joke is you only get to FEEL the fault as guilt when OTHERS refuse
to take responsibility too and shunt it back to you. Your failed shunt
to another, then causes you to feel guilt and the other's do not. Now
we have a true ME (guilty) and YOU (not guilty).
GOOBER AND DUFUS
So Goober and Dufus are part of the multi being community, and
Goober creates a big evil mess in the middle of the AllThatIS.
There used to be a game between infinite multi beings of who could
mockup the worst evil amongst them. It was great fun, and each took
full responsibility for anyone's presentation. So of course everyone
won the 'worst evil mockup' award every time.
But on this day, Goober creates this evil mess, and the police come
up to him and say, "Sir, you created this evil mess, we need to take you
to jail to punish you for this." This is accountability on the tone
scale. Notice the police didn't deny that they also created it, so
there is no blame yet.
Goober then makes a mistake (on purpose to create randomity) and he
says "Oh dear Sirs, you are quite right it is a horrible sight that only
the strong can behold, but it wasn't I who created it, it was Dufus, I
saw him do it." This is blame on the tone scale.
The police then apologize profusely and proceed to create decimation
after holocaust after nuclear anihilation trying to track Dufus down and
bring him to justice. The collateral damage is horrendous, the number
of "fully responsible" beings (not) lying on the ground belching smoke
and debris, becomes uncountable.
Finally the police have Dufus corralled in some smoking corner of
what is left of civilization, and they are about to take him down, when
he says "But Sirs, I have been framed, it was Goober indeed who did this
evil, thing, and here is proof..." as Dufus rolls out the video tape of
Goober doing his dastardly deed.
Well that's not absolute evidence, but it was good enough for a
jury, and the police go back to Goober and say "You lied to us, you are
AT FAULT for creating this evil thing".
Now Goober isn't at fault of creating the mess, but he is at fault
for trying to get someone else in trouble for it and denying full
responsibility for it.
Goober feels guilty and punish worthy. This is regret (guilt) on
the tone scale.
Goober knows he has been caught in a shunt trying to get another in
trouble for is own deeds.
He has poisoned his own awareness of the US by claiming he didn't
do it, and Dufus did, so that when it comes back to him, it comes back
to him as: he did it and Dufus didn't, as fault!
Goober in his guilt, misses that Dufus is now denying
responsibility for the mess just as Goober did, but Goober fails to
refuse it back making Dufus guilty too, and so it sticks to Goober.
What are these others doing blaming Goober?
Well Goober blamed them for a mess, so Goober's general postulate
that others can do something that Goober didn't do, now comes back on
him exactly as he postulated, namely that others can do something to
Goober that Goober doesn't agree with or want, and GOOBER CAN NO LONGER
VANISH IT BECAUSE HE ISN'T PUTTING THERE, namely *TAKING* full
responsibility for it regardless of who created it.
Oy!
Goober now feels GUILTY, not for the evil mess mind you, no one
cares about that, but for trying to blame it on Dufus when it was his
own doing (ALSO).
THAT was not forgivable, particularly to a community of multi
beings that long ago stopped being able to take responsibility for
anything.
Taking responsibility for evil messes was one thing, but taking
responsibility for shunting responsibility? Shudder the thought.
And that includes Goober, who, because of his unspotted general
postulates about being an uncausing effect of others, still reigning,
now finds himself mysteriously unable to take full responsibility for
having shunted responsibility and the decimation, holocaust and nuclear
anihilation it caused while chasing down Dufus, and so he is stuck with
the guilt.
So the jury wants to take Goober out to crucify him, but Goober has
a bright idea. He has had this facsimile hanging around for a long time
of some really horrible thing that someone created that Goober had been
keeping as a souvenir of a good game.
Goober then wishes off the facsimile on the jurors hoping to stop
them in their tracks.
This is overt hate and murderous rage on the tone scale. Anything
to stop the jurors from acting against Goober.
This doesn't work however, as Goober no longer as the power to kill
with a wish or a glance, so instead Goober takes the facsimile on
himself.
Goober dons the facsimile and suddenly he looks all crumpled up,
and crippled, and cross eyed and incompetent, he can't think straight,
he is drooling out of both of eyes, and he walks into the jury and says
"See, I was incompetent due to this horrible abuse that was visited upon
me long ago, and I have suffered for years and years, please don't make
me suffer more, I apologize for the mess I made, please feel sorry for
me, and forgive me and let me go."
This is propitiation on the tone scale.
Well guess what, some of the jurors were the very people who
created the incident which Goober has a facsimile of, and they feel
sorry for Goober and let him go.
But notice Goober is now two deceits down, first he blamed Dufus
for his own doing (actually a co doing), and when he was caught with
that deceit, he blamed his facsimile for why he made the mess in the
first place, or why he blamed Dufus or for why he should be exonerated
anyhow.
One day a long time later, Goober meets one of the Jurors he
tricked, and he sees the Juror is really a good kind of guy and not
doing well, and Goober feels Sympathy for the Juror.
At that point Goober can no longer remember any part of this, and
becomes a human being in his next life being snide about auditing.
THE CYCLE OF BLAME AND BECOMING
So the cycle goes from Blame to Guilt (Failed shunt) to No Sympathy
(wishing off death or damnation on those that would punish him), to
covert hostility (covert effort to succumb with own facsimile in order
to get Sympathy or exoneration) to Sympathy for those who originally
wanted to crucify him, but who then later fell for his sympathy stance
or ploy, to Spiritual Death as a sovereign being as that is the final
nature of the facsimile he is wearing!
Spiritual Death is at -400.00 on the tone scale and can be measured
by the ratio between what you know for sure you are fully responsible
for, and everything else in the known AllThatIS.
One runs this cycle of BLAME - GUILT - NOSYMPATHY - COVERT
HOSTILITY - SYMPATHY - BECOMING DEAD on all dynamics by running out all
times the being KNOWINGLY shunted responsibility for *ANYTHING*,
regardless of "who created it," whether it came back to him or not.
Shunting means NOT PUTTING IT THERE.
Blame can come back as fault and guilt in two ways.
The first is called failed by force, that means mother was bigger
and stronger, and the child could not effect justice against mother's
selfish intent to rip the baby off of basic needs.
The child will first use reason against mother, then will try force
( overt hostility out of valence in murder engram, attempted murder,
zap, beam or whatever), then will use deceit (covert hostility in
valence in murder engram to make self sick and elicit mother's
sympathy.)
It does not matter at all whether the child is right or wrong about
his sense of injustice being violated, mother's refusal of the blame
will make the child feel guilty anyhow, not because of anything anyone
did to anybody, but because the child refused to take full
responsibility for mother's criminal intent and behavior.
Mother does wrong, and child feels guilty after blame doesn't work.
The worst mother gets out of it, is she feels smug.
The second is called failed by reversal, the child blames mother
for throwing out his favorite toy in the garbage pail, and mother says
"Oh but dear I didn't do that, it fell there accidentally when YOU
bumped the table, I would never throw out your precious toys." The child
has blamed and punished the wrong person unfairly, and now deserves
punishment back for punishing an innocent party.
Again the child will pull in a murder engram, and sit squarely in
it, in valence, so as to get VERY sick so mother will forget he just
tried to kill her for messing with his toys, and she will forget, and
nurse him through the sickness until everyone has forgotten everything
about what happened, and all is forgiven.
Whenever blame comes back to him as fault and guilt, then run out
the fair chosen use of the Service Facsimile to gain sympathy and
exoneration for his irresponsibility.
It doesn't matter whether mother threw away the toy or not, the
CHILD blamed mother for the missing toy rather than PUT IT THERE (the
missingness), and thus becomes liable to his own postulates that he can
be the unwanted effect of another.
Once the SPECIFIC irresponsibility is located, for mother and her
actions in the above, the preclear must then be taken back to the PRIOR
GENERAL irresponsibility for mothers and babies in general (I didn't
create or choose my mother or this baby body) and the dependency between
them and everything else involved in that incident and all earlier
similar incidents until such a thing could never happen again as the
preclear would be too fast to not take full responsibility for anything
any mother did to anybody before it could get to the guilt stage.
Here's another example.
Baby to Mother: I am starving to death, you failed to feed me this
morning (Blame, NO-Sympathy, shunted responsibility for needing food,
starving and mother's inattentive actions.)
Mother to Baby: Well you messed your pants and I had to change your
diapers, and the milk got over heated and burned so I had to throw it
away. (Fault and guilt on baby's part when mother refuses the shunted
responsibility and blames baby for messing pants. It's only reasonable
you know, if you are gonna mess your pants, you should expect to starve
to death.)
Baby (to mother): I wish you were dead. (Overt hostility, out of
valence use of death or near death engram against mother, wishing off
death or damnation on mother, intended and attempted murder which fails
as mother doesn't die so the baby is suddenly sitting IN valence in a
near or actual death experience. If you conjure it up to wish on
another, and the wish fails, well there you are sitting in a time you
were murdered and feeling like it. Don't call up engrams to use on
others, unless you intend to win. Don't call up death or damnation on
others, unless you get them to walk away with it! Otherwise YOU get
stuck in it, until you decide to let bygones by bygones and let it go.)
Continuing to try to wish off an engram on another, that continues to
fail, leaves YOU continually sitting in the engram. Thus the only way
anyone can end up in death or hell forever is to continue and fail to
wish death and hell forever off on another. The second you give up
trying to USE the engram to harm another, you pop out of it. Thus no
hell can out last a true confession.)
Baby to Mother: See how near death I am, you should be ashamed of
yourself and feel sorry for me. (Baby now in own valence in near death
engram, uses it to make Mother feel Sympathy. Since near death engram
is Mother's attempted abortion against baby, or suicide attempts during
pregnancy, it works, and mother feels sorry for baby for a while.
But eventually it doesn't work any more.
Mother to Baby: "Oh you are always sick and dying, its all in your
head." Baby tries harder and harder and eventually becomes permanently
sick dead or dying.
Mother is stuck permanently in No-Sympathy (blame of baby), and
baby is stuck permanently in near death trying to make mother wrong and
guilty.
Baby grown up: "Auditing costs too much and doesn't work".
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)