ADORE314

THE GO OT NOW CLUB

jacksonmoore69@hotmail.com wrote:
>A question - (sincere, I know there is alot of sarcasm on this site) ,
>Do you spend alot of time cleaning up 'OTs' that have left the Cof S?

No, I do not audit others, except Jane.

>Is this a routine or general issue? As I have lost interest in going OT
>generally and feel it is better to just go OT in some other fashion ,
>or better still, not subjugate myself to the concept of OT (I am sure
>old time mystics wouldn't have obsessed over the idea)

Most people who desire to go OT have no clue what it is.

A being who is total cause over things will recreate himself as an
aberrated human being pretty quick, but one more tailored to optimum
survival in this day and age.

The purpose of an unlimited being is to create and enjoy
limitations.

All postulates are postulates of limitation lower than Serenity of
Beingness on the tone scale. Thus one can not postulate that one is
serene. Serenity results from postulating nothing, ceasing to postulate
completely.

Remember the tone scale has two halves, the top half from
Sovereignty down to Amusement, and the second half from Serenity down to
death.

Postulates and considerations are BELOW Serenity and set up
the flows, and universes for everything below that.

Everything below Serenity is CREATED, everything that is above
Serenity is Eternal.

Most who want to go OT, want super normal powers to protect their
fragile body or life. They are sub death, living out a solution to
prior regretted body deaths, and they want a better or more powerful solution.

They want OT powers to make sure that 'Must never happen agains',
never happen again, or 'Must never NOT happen agains' never not happen
again. :)

Anyone stuck in, to or around a body is sub death, engaged in
failure, pity, shame, accountability, blame, regret, controlling,
protecting, owning, punishing, approval from, needing, worshipping,
sacrificing to, and/or hiding from bodies.

Actually those are the ones in good shape, the vast majority think
they ARE a body, BEING OBJECTS, or lower at the bottom of the scale.

OT's create problems, humans try to solve them and eventually
fail, in part because they first fail to take full responsibility for
the problem BEING THERE by PUTTING THERE and thus keeping a finger on
the original moment of time, and then second by using DOING SOLUTIONS of
force, mass, energy and not-isness to solve these problems LATER IN TIME
to the problem's original moment of creation.

The original intent of the OT is to create a game that would never
end. They know full well this is impossible, but the OT tries to design
a game that will extend the encompassing while that the game lives in
for as long as possible, and then PRETENDS even to himself that it is
FOREVER in time.

He who can create the marble, can move it.

To what end though?

OT powers flow effortlessly from OT motivations, but stick like
glue from human motivations.

So first seek the answer to what is an OT and what does it want,
and there you will find you ARE an OT with all the OT power you could
ever want.

Know by not knowing.

Going OT is mostly erasing being human and its motivations.

"Who or what would create a human?"

EP is no longer human.

And forget the question asking, run instead

"Get the idea of creating yourself human."

First and foremost solve and reoptimize the sub death game of care
of the body, then of each of the other material dynamics which are just
bigger "bodies."

An OT is a CREATOR of games, not a game player.

Taking playing games seriously is a bitch.

Been there, done that, bought the tombstone.

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 22:37:41 EST 2006

_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE315

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 sine 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 BECOMING.

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.

BECOMINGNESS 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 bottom 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
ever 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 assigns 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
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE288

PERSISTENCE AND LIES

Phil Scott (philscott@philscott.net) wrote:

Phil is not a scientologist. Do not expect to learn any
significant scientology from him.

Scn and Adore have a very definite point of view regarding the
relationship between Native State and Manifestation, between static and
kinetic, between Eternality and Temporality.

Whether one agrees with this point of view or not is a matter of
doctrinal differences.

Meatballs think they are meat, dreamballs think they are not.

Which is crazier, the meatball that thinks it is a dreamball, or
the dreamball that thinks it is a meatball?

> Hubbard said lies make things persist... bzzzzzzzzzttt.

Scn holds that persistence in time is caused by alter-is of
original manifestation. Of course the Eternal state lasts forever, and
it is the only actuality, Basic Truth. But that's not PERSISTENCE which
is persistence IN TIME.

Anything manifested is mere reality, not actuality, color forms in
consciousness at best, and they can vanish upon inspection unless
carried further into the machinations of time.

Humor results from the assertion that a mere reality is an
actuality.

The imposterousness results in preposterousness.

This is the basic modus operandi of Native State for an actuality
to assert a reality, for an Eternality to assert a Temporality as an
actuality, and hold it to be so.

An original manifestation can be made to persist in the TEMPORAL
state via the addition of significance, which is the first lie, and then
by denial of desirability which is the second lie, then by question
asking, which is the third lie.

Guy makes something, that's a posted beingness, a postulate.

That's a vanishing truth, he let's go of it, and it's gone.

But instead the guy says well now this thing is an ashtray used to
hold cigarettes made by Reynold's Tobacco Co. That's an added
significance, take a look at an ashtray until you forget who made it and
what its FOR. When it becomes just an IS, it will start to vanish on
you personally. The added significance is a consideration, CON SIDE, to
side together, to assign cause of, use for, intent of, purpose etc to.

To consider means to conside, to side or put together in relation.
The relation is a CREATED relation, just as the original manifestation
was a created manifestation.

Ashtray - Cigarette, two objects consided together form a
persisting manifestation via added significance tieing them together.

Time is introduced by the added significance because its a CHANGE
from the original manifestation. You see the thetan made something with
no idea what it is, then INVENTS what it is after the fact. Sort of
like song writers who write the music first and words second. First
they get the song, then they figure out what its about!

"Hmm, nice tune dude, I wonder if this is going to be a love song
or not?"

This added significance results in a persisting truth.

"WHAT IT IS" is an added significance and produces a persisting
truth.

It is an ashtray used to hold cigarettes made by Reynolds Tobacco
Co, and its persisting, and that's the Truth. Its a temporal truth
however, a CREATED truth. The ashtray was created out of whole cloth,
out of nothing by the being, as was the added significance.

Then he says I HATE ashtrays, and cigarettes, I didn't make these,
I WOULDN'T HAVE, COULDN'T HAVE, SHOULDN'T HAVE made these things, they
only kill people with cancer etc, WHY DO THEY EXIST?

"Why is it," means "It is, Why?"

The question itself locks into existence the ashtray and cigarette.
You can't ask why is it, without assuming it is, and thus CAUSING it to
be. The QUESTION is locking in the persistence! That's the joke and
the 'God Postulate'.

A 'God Postulate' is that postulate which the pc thinks is true by
observation but which is actually true by consideration. In other words
he thinks he has observed something to be true before he considered it
to be true, when in fact he considered it true first and THEN observed
it to be true. By getting the sequence right, the pc can then retract
the causal postulate and be done with the persistence.

Read that again until you understand it. The world persists
because the pc has causality ass backwards. Its not off by just a
little bit, its 180 degress wrong way to.

So he's denying he made or agreed to the things, that's a lie, and
then he's asking a question pretending the question isn't the answer to
itself, and that's another lie.

So now you have a persisting lie.

He hates ashtrays and cigarettes, he has no responsibility for
their existence, and he has no clue why they continue to exist or how to
get rid of them. Lie, lie, lie, lie.

Then he throws a lot of force on the thing and blacks it out, and
there ain't no more ashtray or cigarette and never was. He becomes a
'What ashtray? case'.

That's a not-isness or a vanishing lie.

Anything the pc is protesting has an original manifestation, an
added significance, and then followed by a denial of desirability,
question asking and finally forceful making nothing of.

The question asking starts with 'Why is it?' or "What did I *DO*
to cause this?" and continues with "What should I *DO* to end it."

The first question creates and validates the past, and the second
question creates and validates the future.

Nowhere is the being simply being with it NOW, until distracted and
it vanishes.

Being with it NOW is a waste of time you see, he ought to be
be getting on with thinking about what he should DO about it to
get rid of it as soon as possible, you see?

So guess whose face it sticks to.

Thus all persistence is persistence of lies.

Since ANY manifestation is a limitation of Native State, ANY
manifestation is a loss, so all persistences are persistences of loss,
and all losses are lies.

"ALL manifestation is a pock mark on the face of God" - Sufis

The being engages in manifesting losses for fun, practical jokes on
self. He seeks to get lost so he can play the game of finding his way
home. He will be so glad to get home he will be glad he left.

There is an aesthetic to dischord and resolve, agony and amusement.

He will however make it very hard to find his way home, much too
much fun being stuck in tar with his friends.

"Thrill is always the effort to get lost, Romance is always the
effort to get home, Halcyon is bemused relief on the verge of time." -
Adore.

He can maintain having fun, as long as he maintains ethics to his
aesthetics. Yes there is unethical aesthetics. Inpsiration is proper
application of agony and amusement in proper balance. Life is a canvas
of art work, the paints are agony and amusement. So you can see that a
masterpiece would need to have a proper balance.

Address to case then is to find out what conditions the pc is
suffering from, and bring them back up from 'not there' (not-isness) to
'there' (is-ness), and then spot the question asking, denial of
desirability, and added significance (alter-isness) on the creation
until it is returned to a pure manifestation or as-isness. Then the guy
lets go and it vanishes.

So you have this stair case the guy has walked down from the
master's throne to the ball floor of hell.

NATIVE STATE - Unmanifest - Basic Truth

Manifestation - AS-ISNESS - created but vanishing truth.

Added Significance - ALTER-ISNESS - persisting truth

Denial of responsibility and desirability, question asking - MORE
ALTER-ISNESS - persisting lie.

Use of DOING, and force to destroy, make nothing of, or nail out of
existence - NOT-ISNESS - vanishing lie.

The above is all THEORY until you have tested it out. It
indicates a clear path to produce changes in a pc or one's own life.
If it doesn't work, then its probably wrong. If it does work, then
its probably a good bet its worth knowing and developing.

Remember at best all THEORY's are persisting truths.

Homer

Fri Sep 16 00:54:57 EDT 2005
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE447 (fwd)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


OT POWER

The fundamental OT power is AS-ISness.

People want to move the marble, but they don't want to *VANISH*
it.

Sheesh, just could never make another one like it, you know?

But as-isness involves the RECREATION of the marble in its own
space time and point of original creation.

So if you can vanish the marble, you can create it.

If you can create the marble, you can vanish it.

Then if you want to move the marble, you vanish it, then recreate
it someplace else.

That's how you move the marble.

You see, now THAT's OT power.

You really want some?

There is no OT power within game playing, everyone is stuck with
the power of their BEINGNESS.

There is only OT power in game creation, everyone has the full
power of their OT BEING.

By shifting from Creature to Creator, the being is free to adjust
his BEINGNESS however at anytime, but he changes the nature of the
game in doing so, and has heavy agreements with others not to do so,
that he feels bound to keep.

But OT's don't create to win. They create to PLAY, to not win.

But not necessarily lose either.

The human will try to change his beingness to better win.

The OT will change his beingness to better play.

If you were playing a game that you designed, how would you have
designed it? So you could win alla time?

Trying to back out of a game is not the way to get out of the
game. PLAYING the game full tilt will bring you back to your OT BEING
as game creator because playing was your intent when you made the game
and when you first enjoined yourself to play it.

Playing a game full tilt is the fastest way of exteriorizing from
the game.

Then your problem is not getting out, but staying in the play.

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 Feb 18 17:17:19 EST 2007

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Aug 24 03:06:01 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore447.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 v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFSGFtaURT1lqxE3HERAvyxAJ45Wj9PZ50LPXOCnzb8DNVPSv+vhACdEznV
jXqQA9zH2rigkFxyDEkIN7c=
=F2uP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE473 (fwd)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

LEARNING AND UNLEARNING

Michael (mickel1234@blueyonder.co.uk) wrote:
>I can see that, so it is a process of extraction then? from all the things
>that got us into our present situations, as a person extracts themselves
>from all this stuff they become more aware of their Spiritual nature and do
>not rely on mind pictures anymore, or should I say are not controlled or at
>the effect of the mind.

On learns through life that being unable is good for one.

This needs to be unlearned at every point we learned it.

Every lock, secondary, engram is a moment of learning, postulates
made to commit to that learning, all of which needs to be unlearned.

The bank is held in place by dramatizing the learning we did
during the incidents that are in chronic restim. We call this being
in the winning valence (even if it is our own to gain sympathy), and
that 'learning' of how to win needs to be as-ised.

This has nothing to do with physical universe learning, which is an
intentional game of learning, this has to do with spiritual ability,
which comes as a total knowingness which doesn't have to be taught how
to operate properly.

The total knowingness knows very well how to operate and how to
screw itself to the nearest tree. Everything learned by the total
knowingness about how to operate is a nail in its cross.

So don't confuse the thetan and body, the thetan gets better by
unlearning, the body gets better by learning. Two different worlds, two
different games.

Homer

Sat Mar 24 01:28:45 EDT 2007

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Aug 23 03:06:01 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore473.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 v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFSFwnaURT1lqxE3HERAsZPAKDQskw1lyOAoZh1vz31neCUEwdDNgCgv4ON
dZ/XMyFLK76nLIIRXRrLdLE=
=AtcX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE156 (fwd)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Carol,

Do you see anything wrong with a mind that can hold
the following 3 statements to be true at the same time?

1.) All that comes from God is all good.

2.) Man came from God.

3.) Man is not all good.

Anyhow, Carol believes that God *INTENDS* only the positive sides of
all dicoms, goodness, light, love, kindness, humanness etc, and that the
negative sides are the unintended although predicatable incidental
consequences of ignorance and finiteness.

Adore claims that God (OT's) intend both sides of all dicoms,
that there is no unintended anything including ignorance or
finiteness.

Thus if a God intentionally creates both humanness and inhumanness,
that God must be a different order of creature than that which would only
create humanness.

Thus the idea that God is good is false, as is the idea
that beings are basically good.

Both God and beings are basically Divine, and Divinity is
as far from human as it gets.

The lights in heaven are bright, but the human understands them not,
as only the OT can encompass the impulse towards Majesty, Master of Jest,
which creates both good and evil in royal splendor.

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 ====================
Thu Aug 22 03:06:01 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore156.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 v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFSFbhaURT1lqxE3HERAuDeAKCq9Vl9IVgo7YRuZwgkPbWqmjY8GwCgj0nk
tf4nt4uEh5LVMG5i7sTFwlo=
=MoJ4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE409 (fwd)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


MUST CREATE

If a person is afraid to stop creating because they will then fall
into absolute native state never to create again, then they are on a MUST
CREATE forever.

FOREVER's and NEVER's are the only source of all insanity as they
violate the WHILE that contains them.

Can create -> must create -> must not create -> can't create ->
sinking towards uncausing on the tone scale.

Must create is just one more trick the thetan uses to keep himself in
THIS game, never to play another, until he let's go of this one.

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

Sat Nov 25 21:14:51 EST 2006

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Aug 21 03:06:01 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore409.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 v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFSFGbZURT1lqxE3HERAgmIAJwLpTa0Bt/yXPk+1CBGhdZI2p2nVQCgv9U/
T/SYk8C0dFcDDnfY/iqX+X0=
=BxL/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

exm50.memo (fwd)

((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))

SOLUTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND PROBLEMS

EXM - 50
ca. March 1992

Copyright (C) 1992 A Voice of the Free Zone (Electra)
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.

A CONDITION is an AS-ISNESS. It is something you have created
which you don't particularly care if you have or not. If you create it
again, or make more of it, it will vanish. Or if you just be with it
quietly, gently and slowly, it will fade away.

((For some serious hardball conditions you really need to just BE
with them for a while for them to loosen up.))

A PROBLEM is a CONDITION that you have created which you have
postulated that you don't want. This of course causes it to stick,
mainly because you are refusing to make more of it.

A SOLUTION is a CONDITION that you have created which you DO want.
This also causes it to stick, because again you are not making more of
it for fear it might disappear, and it is solving some problem for you.
The way you make it, but not by making more of it, is you say something
ELSE is making it for you, so woe is you, you lucky dog.

Problem conditions also persist because usually you consider that
you did not create them, which is a denial of responsibility which is
enough of an alter-is to cause a persistence.

Solution conditions persist for the same reason, only this time you
DO want them, but again you are denying you created them because you
don't want others to know you did, so that they will accept them as a
persisting solution to what ever problem you are trying to solve with
them.

Solutions are usually BAD conditions that normally you wouldn't
want, except that they are solving some worse problem for you, so they
become good that they are bad and not under your control.

Getting sick to get out of school is a classic solution condition
that is created to solve the problem condition of mental exhaustion at
school. Being sick is a persisting bad condition, but its a GOOD bad
condition, because it gets you out of school, and since 'you aren't
making it', your parents wouldn't stand for it if you were, it persists
like crazy.

Denial of responsibility causes persistence, as does altering the
original 'don't care about it' that you created the thing with.

The opposite of "don't care about it" is "I want it" or "I don't
want it."

"I want it" means it's a solution condition. "I don't want it"
means it's a problem condition. Both persist due to the desire aspect,
and denial of responsibility for creating it.

This tends to form a cycle on the track that eventually buries you
under all of your solutions and problems that you have ever created and
denied responsibility for.

The result is you become buried under a pile full of CONDITIONS,
and each one is either a solution or a problem or both to you, and so
you are very unwilling or unable to get rid of them no matter how much
you scream you don't want them.

Your very first problem condition was itself earlier a solution
condition, a solution namely to the problem of not having any problems.

The purpose of auditing is to bring all problem conditions and
solution conditions back to being just conditions, at which point the pc
can cause them to vanish by re-operating the creation of them.

The cycle goes like this. Say you have a PROBLEM condition with
your mother. She always wants you do your homework no matter how stupid
it is and she refuses to help you with it because she can't do it
herself. To solve this problem you INVENT another condition such as to
develop a learning disorder, making it mandatory that she help you with
the work and realize for herself how hard it is. This second condition
is a SOLUTION condition.

But then this solution condition becomes a problem condition of its
own when you start to fall behind in class because of your learning
disorder. So you invent another solution condition which is to take
remedial lessons with a tutor specially trained in teaching slow
learners.

This solution condition becomes a problem condition when the cost
of the tutor begins to stretch your family's budget. Your father
invents a solution condition to this problem by taking out a loan and
going into debt. This becomes a problem condition when his debt limit
is reached and he is also fired from his job for other reasons. The
final solution condition is to give you away to an orphanage. By this
time you wonder what you ever did to 'deserve all this'.

Each unwanted condition that you have is persisting because it is
presently a solution condition to an earlier problem condition. THAT
problem condition was also a solution condition to an earlier problem
condition etc. This goes back down the time track to the first problem
which you invented yourself for fun.

The way to run this, and in fact the way to open any case who
really wants to get going, is to have your pc list out all his unwanted
conditions on all 4 planes of existence.

Say he says 'sinusitis' as one condition.

Then run,

(1) 'What have you used your sinusitis for?'
(2) 'What have you used for your sinusitis?'

If he doesn't understand that question, you can make it as wordy as
you want until he does understand it. If YOU don't understand the
question, get your pc another auditor.

For example,

(1) 'What have you used your sinusitis to solve?'
(2) 'What have you used to solve your sinusitis?'

(1) (2)
PROBLEM COND - SOLVED BY - SINUSITIS - SOLVED BY - SOLUTION COND

Sinusitis starts off

(1) being a solution condition and then becomes
(2) a problem condition.

Conditions, problem conditions, and solution conditions, exist on
all 4 planes of existence: physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual.
Sinusitis is the physical aspect of the condition. Find out what the
emotional aspect is. Find out what IDEAS are associated with the
sinusitis. Find out what feelings of irresponsibility go with the whole
thing.

Conditions do not have to be just in your body, but can and do
exist across all 16 dynamics and all the interactions between them.
Body conditions are just one aspect of the parent/child game that has
the most visibility at this time, probably due in large measure to the
money made by the aspirin and medical drug companies providing chemical
solutions to your spiritual problems. These solutions then become
problems, as your pc will quickly attest to in session.

You can ask your pc,

'With respect to your sinusitis,

'What effort have you done?'
'What effort have you withheld?'
'What emotion have you felt?'
'What emotion have you withheld feeling?'
'What idea have you had?'
'What idea have you withheld?'
'What responsibility have you admitted?'
'What responsibility have you withheld admitting?'

Word them as you wish, and by all means change the tense of the
questions from past to present and even future tense as you see fit.
Ask your pc.

You should also run the 8 flows of forgetfulness on this, because
not only do his own overts and withholds affect him, but so do all the
O/W's of others in his environment.

'With respect to sinusitis,

1.) 'What have you done to a Child as a Parent in a past life?'
1.) 'What have you withheld from a Child as a Parent in a past
life?'

2.) 'What has a Parent done to you as a Child in this life?'
2.) 'What has a Parent withheld from you as a Child in this life?'

etc. I presume you know the rest by now, if you don't, flunk.

Once a condition, like sinusitis, is flat, go on to the next
condition that your pc is interested in. Your pc will continue to give
you new conditions as he remembers old ones he momentarily forgot about,
and he will also realize anew that certain things that he had just
always accepted as being part of being a human being on Earth are really
dire straights that ought to be audited out.

A common one is, 'being mortal', 'being in a body', 'can't remember
my past lives, or inbetween lives, or even this life back to the crib.'
I mean if he can't remember sucking on tits or a bottle, he really is in
bad shape. Also any 'Black 5' condition or inability to make mockups.

Any case can be opened brutally with,

'What unwanted conditions do you have?'
'What have you used them for?'
'What have you used for them?'

The purpose of this is to get the SOLUTION/PROBLEM aspect off the
CONDITION, at which point the pc can vanish the condition by making it
again, because there is no longer a vested interest in having it
(solution) or not having it (problem).

Remember the SOLUTION aspect came first, THEN it became an unwanted
PROBLEM to him. All a solution condition is, is a WANTED condition.
All a problem condition is, is an UNWANTED condition. Since thetans
love problems, many solution conditions are actually wanted problems.
They become problem conditions when they become unwanted problems.

He can't get rid of the problem when it crosses from wanted to
unwanted, because he fails to recreate the WANTING of it, he just slides
into NOT WANTING it, and so gets stuck with it.

You can get rid of anything by making it again. The catch is you
have to do it in the right order.

A pc can create pain. It will only persist after he stops making
it if he denies having made it in the first place.

A Grade I, problems release, should be able to recognize the source
of problems and make them vanish. This means at its extreme, that he
should be able to mock up and unmock conditions at will in his body and
his surroundings, consider them to be problems or not at will, and then
mock up other conditions as solutions to his problems, until they too
become problems to him. He should be able to ruin his Grade I at will
and come back in and get it audited out all over again!

If he has a problem with money, ask what that is a solution to.

No one in the Church has ever attained Grade I.

It is unlikely that anyone on planet Earth has attained Grade I,
Permanent Cert.

DANGER

Eventually your pc will run into DANGEROUSNESS on his track. He
will know for certain that you and him are beginning to tread where
Angels dare not go, and he will wonder if he should progress.

The primary way to limit a thetan is to make him believe, or for
him to make HIMSELF believe that something out there or in here, is more
dangerous to him than he is to it. People have spent billions of years
getting the pc to accept that he is more dangerous to them than they are
to him, so he had better limit himself if he wants to be acceptable to
the population at large.

Once they have the pc so limited that he can't be dangerous to
anybody, they tell the pc that there is something over there that is SO
dangerous he had better not go near it for everyone's sake, but that for
a price they will help him stay safe and protected in their confines.

It's a con game, and probably the oldest one in the book. You run
it out as usual, by getting the pc to own up when he did it to others
either before or after it was done to him.

Just how dangerous is a thetan? The answer is open, because NO ONE
has answered it yet. This is a bottomless pit that your pc will make
enormous gains on if he has the presence to audit it. If he doesn't, he
will fall into it, become it, and dramatize it, probably on you.

You will find your pc considers there are things too dangerous to
know, look at, feel, do, think about, communicate, etc. Also things too
dangerous to NOT know, NOT look at, etc.

One way to get at this is simply the brutal way, for example, ask
your pc,

((The following are worded as Listing Questions, but I don't think
Electra meant them to run as Listing Questions, so reword them as you
think proper.))

'What is too dangerous to .........'

Say he says, 'well its too dangerous to look at certain things.'

So then you run,

'What is too dangerous to look at?'

Let your pc list out all these things that have been too dangerous
for him to look at.

Say he says, 'evil eyeballs looking back at me!'

So then you run,

'Tell me about the danger of looking at "evil eye balls looking
back at me." '

(1) 'How is this a solution to you?'
(2) 'How is this a problem to you?'

or

(1) 'What have you used this to solve?' (as a solution)
(2) 'What have you used to solve this?' (as a problem)

Run this until your pc is less hot on the subject of 'evil eye
balls looking back at me.' Keep listing for and running this on other
things too dangerous to look at, until the pc is less hot on the danger
of looking at things. Then take up anything else your pc considers 'too
dangerous to ........'

Your pc wants to be dangerous. The only way to be safe, is to be
so dangerous no body would want to come near him. He has wanted to be
dangerous to his parents, the government, the enemies of the land, his
bullies, his teachers, the physical universe, the Devil, GOD, animals,
girls, boys, you name it, there are lots of things he wants to be
dangerous to. He can be as dangerous as he wants to be, and in fact he
IS exactly as dangerous or undangerous as he has chosen to be.

There is nothing more dangerous than a full OT.

Ain't that sweet.

There is a point however where he can be TOO dangerous to things,
even in his own estimation. No one will play with him if his every look
kills.

So run the following with him,

'Who or what have you wanted to be dangerous too?'
'How dangerous would you want to be to them?'

You will eventually find that your pc considers that he is the most
dangerous thing there is to himself and others. This is total
responsibility AND IRRESPONSIBILITY kicking in at the same time!

He's pissed, man, at what he did to himself. He sees he has all
this ability to do himself in, but he is wondering if it was such a good
idea to use it.

He sees that it is all just him, making his own bug a boos, and he
gets into a 'well I am ABLE to, but would I be WILLING to?!'

It is one of those endless bottomless pits of 'just what would I be
willing to do to myself?' He is trying to see his future, by out
inventing the horrible condition he finds himself in, in this universe.

Many pc's wonder if they will ever escape from this universe, to
them it may be FOREVER. They wonder what others are or were willing to
do themselves. Maybe he will escape, but maybe others chose a harder
game, one they will lose forever.

It sure can seem that way, and there is a lot of fear and horror
associated with free wheeling responsibility. The problem here is not
absolute power, which the pc does have, but with WILLINGNESS. Just how
much is your pc willing to do himself in? Is he willing to do himself
in forever?

Your pc will have tremendous ARC Breaks on the subject of what
OTHERS have been willing to do to themselves. It knocks the socks off
his sense of total responsibility. He figures 'NO ONE would be willing
to do THAT to themselves, BUT THERE THEY ARE, therefore they aren't
totally responsible for their condition, therefore I'm not either'.
Remember, what others do to themselves is part of your condition. They
are doing it in your dream after all, right? You had to let them in.
Would you let someone in your dream who was going to destroy themselves
forever on a lark?

Thus your pc has a problem with freedom and total responsibility.

If he gets free, he will be able to do himself in again, like he
did last time (he is being audited, no?) and if he does himself in
again, maybe he will do it worse than before and NEVER get out.

Thus, being stuck in this universe, as a no-case-gain-worm-ona-
stump, can be, for a while, a safe solution to the problem of what he
would do to himself if he ever got free and was able to make another
game for himself, one he might NEVER get out of. This attitude of
course keeps him in this game forever or for as long as it continues.

Thus those with an eye to humor and wisdom might conclude that one
way a pc could stick himself in a game forever, is by making himself SO
AFRAID of sticking himself in a game forever that he chooses to hold on
forever to the game he has, so that he never gets that powerful again.

It's a joke of magnitude that only an OT could appreciate.

Or be willing to do to himself!

In fact, it takes a tremendous amount of power to keep an OT in a
game for long, he has to be holding on to it VERY HARD, and what better
way to get an OT to hold on to a game forever than to convince himself
that he may lose everything if he loses the hold he has on the game he
is in.

Therefore, this is no small matter, its got to do with HOW the OT
got this game to persist for as long as it did. He just didn't want it
to end, at all costs. Too many friends here or some such sad thing.

He wasn't willing to have the game end for himself and leave every
else behind forever. So he had to find some way to stay. Making
himself terrified of getting out was one way that seems to have worked.

The subject of willingness therefore is a big subject to your pc.
It is the solution to all things, but also can be the biggest problem
your pc has in session. He needs to be willing to make things again in
order to vanish them, but he is afraid once he gets back his total
willingness, he will THEN make something he can never unmake.

Of course ANYTHING can be unmade by just making it again, that's
sort of a safety release on this or any game, so the only way he could
create a game he could never get out of, would be to hide this basic
truth that exercising willingness to make things AGAIN vanishes them.

So you see he CAN get out of any game he can create, but he may set
it up so that he doesn't know how, and he does that only because he
doesn't want the game to end. Not quite yet.

Electra

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Aug 20 12:06:01 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/electra/exm50.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
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE418 (fwd)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

DOES CLEARING WORK

The question does clearing work can be broken down into
two sub questions.

1.) Does truth work, i.e. will the truth set you free?

2.) Is there a workable approach (clearing) to finding that truth?

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

Mon Dec 18 22:32:11 EST 2006

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Aug 19 03:06:01 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore418.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 v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFSEcPaURT1lqxE3HERAvd3AKCxE79QHpg2JhEfS/5MAsIuSQ0VqQCaA7uM
06avQC50xcV8IVLlPwzgIZY=
=gt+h
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

MIRA

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


MIRA

We apparently live in a universe whose highest pleasures are fine
wine and unconsolable sorrow.

The sorrows are unconsolable because our very conception of the
Cosmic All is a violation of our Sovereign Desire.

Every comm line you make will one day be taken from you.

Life consists of an endless stream of expected and unexpected
interuptions in relationship.

You will be crying after that cat forever until you meet up with it
again and whap it across the valley for getting itself killed under the
tire of a car.

I mean that's why we spent so much time taking care of it so it could
waste us a big one in the end for no good reason, right?

Perhaps then you can snuggle up with it again, and be reconciled.

"This universe treats love the way the oceans treat sand castles in
the sand." - Adore

Run

Spot NO CHANGE.
Spot SOME CHANGE.

OR

Get the idea of NO CHANGE.
Get the idea of SOME CHANGE.

Run it on all flows, creatively and historically, for better or
worse, past, present and future.

Don't even think about running this solo, find a friend.

No friends, no auditing. Friends first, auditing second.

Oh of course, if you are God in carnation, you can solo it, but if
all you are is a human turd basket, then no.

Get real.

Of course if you are a God in carnation, you could probably create
a friend too, that would be an interesting change.

And certainly creating a friend would be easier than trying to solo
CHANGE alone.

The being is caught in a CHANGE/NO CHANGE reality.

Everything is changing, and that isn't changing.

He is using CHANGE (flows) to create NO CHANGE (stuck ridges).

Then he is using NO CHANGE to change others via sympathy.

Time is the basic change, and boy does he have the brakes on time.

He is no longer putting time there, time is putting him there and
everything he does put or find there, time eventually takes away from him,
usually in worse shape than he found it.

He is trying to stop knowing, looking, emoting, effort, thinking,
eating, death, sex and mystery.

He does this by crushing these things, making nothing of them,
not-ising them, and nailing them out of existence with FLOWS.

Anything but adore them.

Ridges produced by colliding flows (change) produce the illusion of
no change, almost static.

All aberration is the effort to vanish something by not-ising it
with flows, force and mass.

But there is no freedom, freedom to choose what you experience, out
of that faux static. A ridge radiates one thing, pain and misery,
continuously, constantly and forever.

Although the ridges LOOK like they are not changing, they are white
hot from the vibration of being smashed together so hard and so long.

All your preclear has to do is LOOK for vibration, get faster
himself, and he will see the writhing motion in the stillness of the
ridge.

Like magma under high pressure it may look like it is going nowhere,
but changeless it is not.

He has turned linear change (colliding flows) into oscillatory
change (ridges) and considered the hard stuff that results to be no
change.

The route to a death spiraling marble is a tortuous amount of
squishing and squashing, over a long period of time.

Thus in auditing a ridge, one can alternately spot that it is not
changing, namely its still there as a ridge, and that it is changing, in
that it is wiggling and squirming and radiating pain and light
continuously.

That the ridge continues to writhe is CHANGE, that it never lessens
in intensity or improves in quality is NO CHANGE.

And yes, your preclear considers the apparent NO change to be actual
NO change, and it becomes his not so hidden standard, because it is what
he is trying to kill FOREVER AT ALL COSTS, and thus what is killing him
for being in his own line of fire.

THERE IS NO GETTING BETTER WITH OUT RUNNING OUT THESE APPARENCIES
OF NO CHANGE.

All charge of importance is covered under the apparency of no
no charge and no change.

How does one run out NO CHANGE?

By getting honest and creating it, of course, as he already is, with
CHANGE IN COLLISION, and then by direct postulate.

Now NO CHANGE usually refers to pretended no change, on the CDEINR
scale.

Curious, Desire, Enforce, Inhibit, *NO*, Refused, and Sub Refused.

Yes Goober, there is a Sub Refused, watch for it on the meter, it
won't read and release unless you get it, especially upsets and ARC
breaks.

"Has some affinity been sub refused?"

Most people don't want to run that deep, but most people don't
really want to get better either.

They want to change without changing.

So they have this classic AND going, change AND not change at the
same time. Then the whole thing sinks down into oblivion on a NO AND and
Sub Refused AND, and they wonder why they feel malaise all day long.

Or engage in the fine wine too much.

Try going straight some time.

Then find out how loud you can scream your love across the
universe.

Maybe the cat will hear.

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

======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sun Aug 18 20:27:01 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore946.memo
Send mail to archive.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 v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFSEWZVURT1lqxE3HERAp3zAJ9t6Y8fHADrNMtzcT5yX3DMsuC93wCdFGnY
V8/uzJmIz3QDMGMa3sdtF8o=
=5ls4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE43 (fwd)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


NEED, FEAR and TROM

One can apply need and fear to Trom.

Fear to Be Known Fear to Not Be Known
Fear to Know Fear to Not Know

Need to Be Known Need to not Be Known
Need to Know Need to not Know

When you get both sides going at once, you gotta problem.

When you find an item, it will produce strong somatics and
physical releases.

Homer

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Aug 16 03:06:02 EDT 2013
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore43.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 v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFSDc9aURT1lqxE3HERAvESAKDAGiHm8b/7YwoFVMXut36q+QPjlgCeLThJ
8PdPi9g+KDqTjwxmCGUqj7I=
=qLI+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l

ADORE737

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, but only theory made of model and evidence.

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 B changed state truly because of
A, or because of a third party C causally above 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, and if God is messing with you then all bets
are off.

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 created in the 3rd party
actual universe.

Usually what is virtualized in a virtual universe are not only the
existence of the objects in the virtual universe, but the existence of
any 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 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 pathways 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.

A conscious unit CAN NEVER BE AWARE OF HOW IT WAS IN THE PAST,
except through the mechanical trick of memory, which is fundamentally
uncertain.

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 originating 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.

Everything this is the effect of something prior, and everything is
the cause of something later.

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, in other words 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
of 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 and 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 an object. 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.

Remember renditions do not have to LOOK like the original referent,
only be causally connected to the original referent.

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.

The change of state, the new state plus what is left of the 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
can effect, all one can ever learn about past objects by looking at the
present state 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.
between the referent and the symbol.

ORIGINAL REFERENT AND SYMBOL OF FINAL AUTHORITY.

The prior object in the causal chain you are trying to learn about
is called the original referent.

The later 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 is 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, but then 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 of causal events,
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 direct conscious experience which is a self
symbolizing event, the referent experience itself becomes the symbol.
That's how consciousness learns about itself.

You do not look at some later other experience to know about the
frist original earlier experience, you see it directly.

LEARNING BY BEING AN EFFECT

Where there is no effect, there is no learning.

Where there is learning there is always an 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.

This is 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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l