-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
ALPHA MAN
> Lets bypass the whole mutual reality "prove it to me" paradigm for a
> moment. So if you were the only person on the face of the earth, what
> would constitute evidence and proof - of anything? In this case what is
> reality? What is objectivity? What is truth? Is not it all in your
> head - life, the universe, all that is? Does the appearance of other
> people suddenly make that not so?
There is a particular point on the tone scale where the being
starts to believe that mockups have actual external existence like they
look like they do. 26.0 Apparencies are reality, more properly called
Realities are Actualities. Reality is what seems true, actuality is
what is true. A distinction septoids refuse to make, which is necessary
to their continuance.
They see space so they think there is space.
They forget that holograms of space don't take up any space.
It's like the kid with his face too close to the arcade game screen,
who suddenly forgets its a screen, and thinks the characters are truely
'out there'. Or he puts on a virtual helmet and suddenly he is a 'What
virtual helmet?' case.
The proof breaks the illusion, at least it provides clear evidence
that the world is a dream, because it shows that self luminous
consciousness can not be a process in a space time machine, like the
brain. That doesn't prove the brain doesn't exist, only that conscious is
not a process in it and thus has its own independent existence.
At that point however, it can easily be proven that there never will
be any evidence for the external physical universe because you can never
learn with certainty about A, the physical universe, by looking at B,
namely your dream image of it.
As long as all you can see is your consciousness, all you can know
for certain is your consciousness, no matter WHAT it represents to you
about what is rendered in it, like a space time universe out there.
In a sleep dream, one would never claim one's consciousness of the
dream was a function of the brain IN THE DREAM, because consciousness
can't be caused by anything in one of it's own dreams.
But in the waking state, people think its not just a dream, that
external referents are actual and preceed the existence of consciousness,
that the brain is actual, and thus that consciousness can be caused by
that brain.
Like Hubbard said in the factors, the being assumes a viewpoint of
dimensions, then extends dimensions and dimension points to view, and then
considers HE IS those dimension points and depends for his existence on
their existence. Since dimension points can die, the being concludes he
must die with them, as he IS them.
Run,
Make a mockup of something, consider it is cause of your existence.
E/P Spin bin.
Homer
>
> Pip
> _______________________________________________
> Clear-L mailing list
> Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
> http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
>
Tue Feb 15 15:48:02 EST 2011
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jun 27 03:06:01 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore848.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)
iD8DBQFVjktaURT1lqxE3HERAtwJAJ0U+Gz7THsKYMb+dQj1y4E+mxQRFQCgtWDL
RnCCYn5J5+SUkBFA+jiIuuU=
=V0qb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Saturday, June 27, 2015
ADO14 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
CONSIDERATION AND OBSERVATION
THE GOD POSTULATE
ADO - 14
15 July 2001
Copyright (C) 2001 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
((This posting confused from really bad terminology, in particular
confusions between postulate and considerations.
Present day technology goes like this:
GodSouls as creator create in the mere conception of things, we can
call this causal conception.
Causal conception breaks into two kinds, postulates and
considerations.
Postulates put things there, considerations relate posted things to
each other.
Postulates are Scientolgy's Q1 in operation:
Theta can create space and time, and locate objects in them.
Notice to locate here means to put there, not to find something by
looking for!
Q1b: The favorite game of a thetan is to locate (place) an object in
a space and time, and then forget where he put it, thus spend the rest of
the game looking for it until he locates (finds) it.
A GodSoul as creature (human) tries to locate his keys by looking
until he finds them. They are always in the last place he looks because
he stops looking one he finds them. Not knowing where something is is
called LOST.
A GodSoul as creator locates his keys where he wants them, and there
they are BECAUSE he put them there regardless of where they were before he
located them. To locate in this sense means to put something there in
space and time exactly and only where you want it to be by mere conception
alone. A GodSoul as creator has an impossible time losing and then
finding things, because they are always exactly anywhere he conceives they
are.
These confusions between the various words are underlined a few times
through out the posting without rewriting the entire posting in correct
terminology.
Simply exchange conception for consideration, and you will
fix most of the problems.
Later in the posting it starts to discriminate properly between
postulates and considerations, but not consistently, so you will have to
understand the usage of the words from the context in which they are
used.))
The CONSIDERATION / OBSERVATION FLIP FLOP
A dicom is a DIchotomy of Comparable and Opposite Magnitude.
Beauty and Ugly, Love and Hate, Good and Bad are common dicoms.
The verb TO LOCATE is a dicom as we have shown above.
To locate means to put it there causally.
To locate also means to find where it was put (by another).
The verb TO DETERMINE is also a dicom to itself, it has two
different and completely opposite meanings.
The first meaning of the verb TO DETERMINE is to be the cause of:
"To determine the course of history", "whether or not it rains is
determined by how much water there is in the air", etc.
The second meaning of the verb TO DETERMINE is to be the effect of:
"To determine what is going on and take appropriate action."
Determination in this second sense is learning by looking, by being an
effect of pre existing causes, to determine (learn) what those causes
must be from the effects they have on you.
The first meaning of TO DETERMINE is TO CAUSE TO BE TRUE.
The second meaning of TO DETERMINE is TO LEARN WHAT IS TRUE.
In the first sense determination is causation, being cause of what
is.
In the second sense determination is observation, learning what is
true by being effect of existing causes.
The ONLY way to learn about anything is to be the effect of its
cause. If it has no causal effect on you, you can never even know it
exists. Thus learning is always learning by being an effect of the
cause inherent in what you are learning about.
Learning means "it is cause, and you are effect".
Creation means "you are cause, and it is effect".
The word 'because' is a joke, as it says BE CAUSE, but when
learning about cause through observation of effects, one is effect and
not cause.
When one says "I know it is because I observe it is" one is not
being cause except to solicit impingements of effects in order to learn.
When one says "I know it is because I consider it is", one is in
fact being cause.
The flip flop from creating something by causitive consideration,
(determining it into existence), over to observation, (determining that
it is through its effects on one) is what Scientology calls Alter-Is,
and what Adore calls the Consideration Observation flip flop.
CONSIDERATION AS CAUSE:
The being is a God operating in the void constructing things there.
At first all that exists is the being and the void. Then the being
says 'Let there be Light' and there is light. It BECOMES true that
'there is light' BECAUSE the being said so. Before the being said there
was light, there was no light, it was false that 'There is light'.
By saying 'Let there be light', by the mere act of considering that
there IS light, the being thus CREATES light and CREATES the truth that
'There is light'.
After the being has created light by considering there is light, he
can then observe the light and verify that indeed light was created
exactly as he considered it.
CONSIDERATION -> BEING CAUSE -> EXISTENCE -> BEING AN EFFECT ->
OBSERVATION -> VERIFICATION OF CONSIDERATION.
Further the being considers AND observes that the statement 'There
is light' is true BECAUSE he considers it true.
He observes both his consideration that it is true, and the fact
that it is true, and the causation between his consideration that it is
true and the fact that it is true.
He can see ALL THREE.
CONSIDERATION -> CAUSATION -> FACT
Adore calls this Looking by Knowing. The being knows it is true
first, and thus it becomes true (as he is a God operating in the void)
and he can then look at it and observe that it is true just as he knew
it.
This is determining what is true by being a cause and this is how a
God being operates in the void.
Knowing -> Causation -> Existence -> Being and Effect ->
Observation -> Verification
OBSERVATION AS EFFECT:
Usually the human operating as a human, not as a God, considers
something is true because he observes it is true. This is knowing by
looking. This is determining what is true by being an effect, i.e.
learning, study.
The being in this state goes out into the pre existing world,
already created by someone or something, and he lets it impinge on him.
These impingements are his observations of what is out there already
existing. He does not consider that he created what is out there, in
fact he considers that what is out there was already out there, only he
didn't know it, but now he wants to find out about it through the
solicited impingements of observation. This is Knowing by Looking and
is the opposite of Looking by Knowing as the God operates.
Consideration and observation thus form a dicom.
One creates by consideration, then one observes what one created to
verify that the consideration worked.
((Tecnically speaking one creates via conceiving, one puts
something there with a postulate conception, and one relates them to
each other with a consideration conception. At the time this posting
was written this clarification had not yet been made.
Thus in this posting 'consideration' means creating either through
postulates or considerations both of which come to be through mere
conception.))
Consideration is an outflow, a creative putting it there in a
while.
Observation is an inflow.
Observation is solicited impingement.
According to Adore, a postulate and a consideration are not the
same thing, but we often use them interchangeably.
Strictly speaking a postulate is a posted beingness, it is creating
a color form and posting it to the void in order to observe it.
A consideration is the postulation of relation between two or more
posted beingsness, in particular a causal relation.
The being posts A, then posts B, then considers that A causes B.
When one assigns cause between two different posted objects, we
call that casting cause. True cause remains with the caster, but the
apparency is that cause is now out there beween the two objects and the
caster is an effect of their cause!
The purpose of clearing is to clear postulates and considerations
from the being until he becomes the void again. Probably long before he
reaches that point he will consider that he has had enough of clearing,
he is in fine shape, and wishes to become reengaged in the game of life
again.
The game of life is the game of postulation and consideration, and
in particular engagement in the game of the consideration/observation
flip flop by which the being makes the games of life persist in
space/time.
Any space/time game stream is a persisting bubble in the void of
the Eternal.
THE GOD POSTULATE
For the purposes of clearing, a god postulate is a postulate that a
being considers is true because he has observed it to be true, when in
fact it is true because he considers it is true.
Postulate and considerations are causitive, they CREATE in the
moment of postulation or consideration what is postulated or considered.
((Unless otherwise stated, 'consideration' here means either
postulate or consideration, both of which are subsumed under
conceptions, as in 'A God creates in the mere conception of things.'))
A consideration posts to the void what is being considered.
A consideration can be withdrawn, deposted from the void, if the
being does NOT flip flop it into an observation by being the effect of
it.
All considerations or postulates that post to the void are then
observed. The being only runs into persistence of what was posted if he
denies that his consideration was cause of what he observed.
Persistence is caused by flip flopping from
Looking by Knowing to Knowing by Looking.
A being first creates something by posting to the void, which then
becomes true by virtue of his having posted it.
The being can then after the fact of creation consider that these
things were true before one created them, and that one merely observed
that they were true independent of one's own consideration of them.
Thus one moves from causitive consideration into learning by
observation.
The purpose of clearing is to spot the God postulates on the case,
and get the person to recreate the Consideration / Observation flip flop
on them, until he is able to operate the flip flop and eventually let go
of the postulate and consideration package at will.
While there are trillions of postulates and considerations on a
case, there are only a few really serious God postulates that are
overwhelming the preclear. Once a God postulate is formed, millions of
other postulates will form and encrust around the God postulate. These
other postulates are secondary in nature, derive their power from the
God Postulate, and can not be changed by a simple act of recognition and
willingness.
A true God postulate can be changed by merely unconceiving of it.
Once a God postulate is found and released in session the secondary
encrusters will blow off over time by themselves en mass.
The God postulates on a case are not trivial nor self evident,
therefore auditing is a serious and skilled activity, for the fate of
the being hangs in the balance, by his own choice of course.
This does not mean that one needs help in such matters, although in
the beginning being audited by another who has reality on the above
matters can greatly facilitate case gain.
There is nothing wrong with help, help is a good thing unless it
has been turned into harm and a bad thing. Any preclear who doesn't
WANT help has a problem.
But in the absence of available or quality help, then going it
alone is possible and necessary. Don't ever let other's stupidity stop
you from putting them there in a while. :)
You can also help them to help you.
But don't ever let anyone invalidate your ability to help yourself,
or their own inability to help anyone in the first place, but also you
are beholden to find and create help wherever you can.
In truth, the main need for others is to provide to the clueless
newbie a bit of indoctrination and orientation about how it all works
and the underlying theory of it all.
Once anyone is oriented towards total responsibility as the
solution to all things, he will start walking relentlessly in that
direction regardless of the 'help' offered to or enforced upon him.
We are not talking about indoctrination through force, as the being
does not need force to believe this stuff. This is in fact part of the
problem with this material, it resonsates so closely with what the being
wants to believe anyhow, that there is great danger that the being will
merely settle for belief in these matters rather than operational
certainty followed by concrete results in his own life and in the lives
of others.
Belief is for losers.
Certainty is for those who would operate as Gods in the void.
But at the top, truth and desire are in accord, so look forward to
it. Put your sojourn in the valley of death and lies there in a while,
and get on with it.
God postulates are powerful. How will you know when you have found
one?
Well God postulates are powerful. Frankly a being can't survive a
God postulate, so when you find that stone that is sinking your vessle,
take a moment to sit with it and just consider the possibliity that it
is a God postulate and that you don't have to be the effect of it. If
that doesn't work, there is a bigger God postulate underlying it.
It is not endless, you can do this, and once you find one or two,
you will find your Star Drive coming back on line again and real power
returning to you.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sat Jun 27 16:35:30 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ado14.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)
iD8DBQFVjwkTURT1lqxE3HERApBVAJ9IRvusPIMhTVV/ZDTf5OwZv/Ej1QCfb+D0
CBYomuJ11V0z6Tya41Ejvq8=
=Wc2u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
CONSIDERATION AND OBSERVATION
THE GOD POSTULATE
ADO - 14
15 July 2001
Copyright (C) 2001 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
((This posting confused from really bad terminology, in particular
confusions between postulate and considerations.
Present day technology goes like this:
GodSouls as creator create in the mere conception of things, we can
call this causal conception.
Causal conception breaks into two kinds, postulates and
considerations.
Postulates put things there, considerations relate posted things to
each other.
Postulates are Scientolgy's Q1 in operation:
Theta can create space and time, and locate objects in them.
Notice to locate here means to put there, not to find something by
looking for!
Q1b: The favorite game of a thetan is to locate (place) an object in
a space and time, and then forget where he put it, thus spend the rest of
the game looking for it until he locates (finds) it.
A GodSoul as creature (human) tries to locate his keys by looking
until he finds them. They are always in the last place he looks because
he stops looking one he finds them. Not knowing where something is is
called LOST.
A GodSoul as creator locates his keys where he wants them, and there
they are BECAUSE he put them there regardless of where they were before he
located them. To locate in this sense means to put something there in
space and time exactly and only where you want it to be by mere conception
alone. A GodSoul as creator has an impossible time losing and then
finding things, because they are always exactly anywhere he conceives they
are.
These confusions between the various words are underlined a few times
through out the posting without rewriting the entire posting in correct
terminology.
Simply exchange conception for consideration, and you will
fix most of the problems.
Later in the posting it starts to discriminate properly between
postulates and considerations, but not consistently, so you will have to
understand the usage of the words from the context in which they are
used.))
The CONSIDERATION / OBSERVATION FLIP FLOP
A dicom is a DIchotomy of Comparable and Opposite Magnitude.
Beauty and Ugly, Love and Hate, Good and Bad are common dicoms.
The verb TO LOCATE is a dicom as we have shown above.
To locate means to put it there causally.
To locate also means to find where it was put (by another).
The verb TO DETERMINE is also a dicom to itself, it has two
different and completely opposite meanings.
The first meaning of the verb TO DETERMINE is to be the cause of:
"To determine the course of history", "whether or not it rains is
determined by how much water there is in the air", etc.
The second meaning of the verb TO DETERMINE is to be the effect of:
"To determine what is going on and take appropriate action."
Determination in this second sense is learning by looking, by being an
effect of pre existing causes, to determine (learn) what those causes
must be from the effects they have on you.
The first meaning of TO DETERMINE is TO CAUSE TO BE TRUE.
The second meaning of TO DETERMINE is TO LEARN WHAT IS TRUE.
In the first sense determination is causation, being cause of what
is.
In the second sense determination is observation, learning what is
true by being effect of existing causes.
The ONLY way to learn about anything is to be the effect of its
cause. If it has no causal effect on you, you can never even know it
exists. Thus learning is always learning by being an effect of the
cause inherent in what you are learning about.
Learning means "it is cause, and you are effect".
Creation means "you are cause, and it is effect".
The word 'because' is a joke, as it says BE CAUSE, but when
learning about cause through observation of effects, one is effect and
not cause.
When one says "I know it is because I observe it is" one is not
being cause except to solicit impingements of effects in order to learn.
When one says "I know it is because I consider it is", one is in
fact being cause.
The flip flop from creating something by causitive consideration,
(determining it into existence), over to observation, (determining that
it is through its effects on one) is what Scientology calls Alter-Is,
and what Adore calls the Consideration Observation flip flop.
CONSIDERATION AS CAUSE:
The being is a God operating in the void constructing things there.
At first all that exists is the being and the void. Then the being
says 'Let there be Light' and there is light. It BECOMES true that
'there is light' BECAUSE the being said so. Before the being said there
was light, there was no light, it was false that 'There is light'.
By saying 'Let there be light', by the mere act of considering that
there IS light, the being thus CREATES light and CREATES the truth that
'There is light'.
After the being has created light by considering there is light, he
can then observe the light and verify that indeed light was created
exactly as he considered it.
CONSIDERATION -> BEING CAUSE -> EXISTENCE -> BEING AN EFFECT ->
OBSERVATION -> VERIFICATION OF CONSIDERATION.
Further the being considers AND observes that the statement 'There
is light' is true BECAUSE he considers it true.
He observes both his consideration that it is true, and the fact
that it is true, and the causation between his consideration that it is
true and the fact that it is true.
He can see ALL THREE.
CONSIDERATION -> CAUSATION -> FACT
Adore calls this Looking by Knowing. The being knows it is true
first, and thus it becomes true (as he is a God operating in the void)
and he can then look at it and observe that it is true just as he knew
it.
This is determining what is true by being a cause and this is how a
God being operates in the void.
Knowing -> Causation -> Existence -> Being and Effect ->
Observation -> Verification
OBSERVATION AS EFFECT:
Usually the human operating as a human, not as a God, considers
something is true because he observes it is true. This is knowing by
looking. This is determining what is true by being an effect, i.e.
learning, study.
The being in this state goes out into the pre existing world,
already created by someone or something, and he lets it impinge on him.
These impingements are his observations of what is out there already
existing. He does not consider that he created what is out there, in
fact he considers that what is out there was already out there, only he
didn't know it, but now he wants to find out about it through the
solicited impingements of observation. This is Knowing by Looking and
is the opposite of Looking by Knowing as the God operates.
Consideration and observation thus form a dicom.
One creates by consideration, then one observes what one created to
verify that the consideration worked.
((Tecnically speaking one creates via conceiving, one puts
something there with a postulate conception, and one relates them to
each other with a consideration conception. At the time this posting
was written this clarification had not yet been made.
Thus in this posting 'consideration' means creating either through
postulates or considerations both of which come to be through mere
conception.))
Consideration is an outflow, a creative putting it there in a
while.
Observation is an inflow.
Observation is solicited impingement.
According to Adore, a postulate and a consideration are not the
same thing, but we often use them interchangeably.
Strictly speaking a postulate is a posted beingness, it is creating
a color form and posting it to the void in order to observe it.
A consideration is the postulation of relation between two or more
posted beingsness, in particular a causal relation.
The being posts A, then posts B, then considers that A causes B.
When one assigns cause between two different posted objects, we
call that casting cause. True cause remains with the caster, but the
apparency is that cause is now out there beween the two objects and the
caster is an effect of their cause!
The purpose of clearing is to clear postulates and considerations
from the being until he becomes the void again. Probably long before he
reaches that point he will consider that he has had enough of clearing,
he is in fine shape, and wishes to become reengaged in the game of life
again.
The game of life is the game of postulation and consideration, and
in particular engagement in the game of the consideration/observation
flip flop by which the being makes the games of life persist in
space/time.
Any space/time game stream is a persisting bubble in the void of
the Eternal.
THE GOD POSTULATE
For the purposes of clearing, a god postulate is a postulate that a
being considers is true because he has observed it to be true, when in
fact it is true because he considers it is true.
Postulate and considerations are causitive, they CREATE in the
moment of postulation or consideration what is postulated or considered.
((Unless otherwise stated, 'consideration' here means either
postulate or consideration, both of which are subsumed under
conceptions, as in 'A God creates in the mere conception of things.'))
A consideration posts to the void what is being considered.
A consideration can be withdrawn, deposted from the void, if the
being does NOT flip flop it into an observation by being the effect of
it.
All considerations or postulates that post to the void are then
observed. The being only runs into persistence of what was posted if he
denies that his consideration was cause of what he observed.
Persistence is caused by flip flopping from
Looking by Knowing to Knowing by Looking.
A being first creates something by posting to the void, which then
becomes true by virtue of his having posted it.
The being can then after the fact of creation consider that these
things were true before one created them, and that one merely observed
that they were true independent of one's own consideration of them.
Thus one moves from causitive consideration into learning by
observation.
The purpose of clearing is to spot the God postulates on the case,
and get the person to recreate the Consideration / Observation flip flop
on them, until he is able to operate the flip flop and eventually let go
of the postulate and consideration package at will.
While there are trillions of postulates and considerations on a
case, there are only a few really serious God postulates that are
overwhelming the preclear. Once a God postulate is formed, millions of
other postulates will form and encrust around the God postulate. These
other postulates are secondary in nature, derive their power from the
God Postulate, and can not be changed by a simple act of recognition and
willingness.
A true God postulate can be changed by merely unconceiving of it.
Once a God postulate is found and released in session the secondary
encrusters will blow off over time by themselves en mass.
The God postulates on a case are not trivial nor self evident,
therefore auditing is a serious and skilled activity, for the fate of
the being hangs in the balance, by his own choice of course.
This does not mean that one needs help in such matters, although in
the beginning being audited by another who has reality on the above
matters can greatly facilitate case gain.
There is nothing wrong with help, help is a good thing unless it
has been turned into harm and a bad thing. Any preclear who doesn't
WANT help has a problem.
But in the absence of available or quality help, then going it
alone is possible and necessary. Don't ever let other's stupidity stop
you from putting them there in a while. :)
You can also help them to help you.
But don't ever let anyone invalidate your ability to help yourself,
or their own inability to help anyone in the first place, but also you
are beholden to find and create help wherever you can.
In truth, the main need for others is to provide to the clueless
newbie a bit of indoctrination and orientation about how it all works
and the underlying theory of it all.
Once anyone is oriented towards total responsibility as the
solution to all things, he will start walking relentlessly in that
direction regardless of the 'help' offered to or enforced upon him.
We are not talking about indoctrination through force, as the being
does not need force to believe this stuff. This is in fact part of the
problem with this material, it resonsates so closely with what the being
wants to believe anyhow, that there is great danger that the being will
merely settle for belief in these matters rather than operational
certainty followed by concrete results in his own life and in the lives
of others.
Belief is for losers.
Certainty is for those who would operate as Gods in the void.
But at the top, truth and desire are in accord, so look forward to
it. Put your sojourn in the valley of death and lies there in a while,
and get on with it.
God postulates are powerful. How will you know when you have found
one?
Well God postulates are powerful. Frankly a being can't survive a
God postulate, so when you find that stone that is sinking your vessle,
take a moment to sit with it and just consider the possibliity that it
is a God postulate and that you don't have to be the effect of it. If
that doesn't work, there is a bigger God postulate underlying it.
It is not endless, you can do this, and once you find one or two,
you will find your Star Drive coming back on line again and real power
returning to you.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sat Jun 27 16:35:30 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ado14.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)
iD8DBQFVjwkTURT1lqxE3HERApBVAJ9IRvusPIMhTVV/ZDTf5OwZv/Ej1QCfb+D0
CBYomuJ11V0z6Tya41Ejvq8=
=Wc2u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, June 23, 2015
ADORE965 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SCARCITY
Scarcity is the absence of things within easy each.
A being who can create in the mere conception of things, has no
scarcity.
Native state knows no scarcity.
But native state beings like to engage in games.
Games place time and chase between conception and havingness,
combined with conditions upon attainment, namely doing the right thing.
Thus all games are games of scarcity.
In order to get food he must hunt.
If food were not scarce, he wouldn't have to do anything, the food
would be there at all times for him.
There are gradient scales of scarcity.
The first level is he has to go out and hunt in order to bring in
food. Having food has become a game, and he has to win the game each
day in order to eat.
If he continues to win the game to his satisfaction he may consider
that food is not scarce, but in fact it is much scarcer than if he could
create food in the mere conception of it.
Games can be fun at this level, as fun is high action chase towards
a goal with reasonable expectation of winning.
The next level of scarcity would be if sometimes he fails to bring
home food because he can't find any or can't catch it.
This can be less fun, because he NEEDS TO WIN in order to play the
game each day. Every day he fails to get food means the next day's play
will be slightly less energetic, competent and accurate.
If he has high stores of food, he can weather a few failures, but
eventually if his stores get too low, he will start to worry and sag in
life.
Fun is also high morale and feelings of self confidence and self
sufficiency to his own survival and the survival of those he cares
about. As successes wane, morale suffers, worry sets in, and worry and
fun are opposed.
The last level of scarcity is he starves to death because he fails
too often.
Now a being in good shape can create games of scarcity and chase
in the mere conception of things, and if he loses the fun in one such
game, he can create others anew.
But down lower, stuck in a body, worried about being mortal,
certain games, like eating, become paramount to WIN rather than merely
play, because if he doesn't win the game of eating, he will die, and so
he won't be able to conceive of or play any other games ever again.
Thus games of scarcity become themselves SCARCE.
When a being has a serious scarcity of games in general, he will
tend to hold onto the game he still has at all costs.
That means he will take to NOT WINNING games in order to keep the
game around. He has to make sure that he doesn't lose it either too
because every time he wins or loses a game, he is out of game, and if
games are hard to come by, he will begin to panic because there are no
more games to play.
Thus GAMES have become scarce to him.
So if you find your preclear stuck in a scarcity of something, it
can be anything, underlying that scarcity is a scarcity of scarcities,
that he can chase after.
If (games of) scarcities are not scarce, he can always move on to
another game if one becomes hopeless.
CHASE
Chase is desirable.
If he has too much of something there is no chase.
If he has too little of something there is no chase either.
You might think if a preclear complains about having a scarcity of
money or girl friends or whatever, that the way to remedy this scarcity
is to have him mockup girl friends until he can have girl friends again.
Near native state that might work, but not near the bottom.
In fact the way to get him to solve the scarcity of girl friends is
to have him mockup scarcities of things including girls until he can
create SCARCITIES again in the mere conception of things.
Then he can say, oh to hell with girls, I want BOATS, and chase
after them instead.
Now he is worried about not having boats, but girls will be all
over him begging him to get a boat, because GIRLS have a scarcity on
partying on boats.
You see?
This whole universe is ass backwards, and everything your preclear
says about what is wrong with him is ass backwards with it.
You solve his future by solving his present time scarcities, by
getting him to mock up OTHER FUTURES with OTHER present time scarcities.
The future is chase.
Chase is chase after scarcity.
To rehabilitate any being you need to make sure that *CHASE* itself
isn't scarce or your preclear will give up chasing, and that's death.
Fun is optimum high action chase.
Glum is stuck in glue "Which way do I go, which way do I go?"
If his future is glum, he has developed a scarcity of chase, a
scarcity of scarcities to chase after.
By getting him to mockup new futures of scarcities and chases, he
will let go of his present future of scarcities that aren't getting him
anywhere.
This is much harder when the scarcity is FOOD, because not all
chases are of equivalent importance, its easy to replace girls with
boats in order to rehab girls, but what are you going to do to
replace FOOD?
Nonetheless somewhere some OTHER chase is in ruins that can
be fixed that will fix the problems he is having with money, jobs,
food etc, unless of course he is stuck in a dust bowl, or nuclear
waste land, at which point you might want to rehabilitate his ability
to chase new bodies on new planets.
So this can go very high very fast if things are dire for him.
Anyhow rehabilitating chase goes a long ways towards straightening
out a normal life in a normal environment, as his own aberrations are
keeping him down more than the radiation clouds are.
MEATBALLS AND DREAMBALLS.
A meatball is someone who thinks he lives but once and dies forever
and that's it bud. Meatballs are terrified of living in a hell forever,
the pretense of death is their way out.
A dreamball is someone who thinks his consciousness is eternal, and
that involvement in temporal games and heavens and hells last only a
while.
The meatball is shutting down his life preparing to be no more.
The dreamball is opening up his life, preparing to be forever,
above time and in time, as long as he wishes, as many times as he
wishes.
On the surface the meatball is afraid of not having a future, but
underneath he is afraid of HAVING a future because he seems to have lost
control over it.
So while the meatball pretends to feel the final safety of no
future, the dreamball suffers wild eyed vertigo looking out on an
infinite future.
An infinite future is not in one infinite while in time, but is an
infinite number of finite whiles in time with eternal rest in between
each.
Eternal happiness comes from an operational balance of work
and rest.
Each future while is a cycle of scarcities and chase towards wanted
goals in time.
One gets stuck in any particular while to the degree that one fails
to span the duration of the while, and the responsibility for invoking
it, and fails to conceive of new whiles in the future, lest they go bad
too.
Dare to love.
He does not need endless amounts of more time in the present time
while, oh no, this while is WAY over run, he is still playing games he
could have won eons go but was afraid there would be no more games.
So this while is rife with trying not to win AND trying not to lose
at the same time, every game that is left running.
No, you need to get him to start conceiving and mocking up entire
new whiles from beginning to end, and then he will start to feel good
about whiles again, they become WORTH WHILE to him again, and then he
won't get stuck in time the way he has been in this one.
A while that is not worth while is a waste of time :)
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
Wed Feb 18 13:11:59 EST 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Jun 23 03:06:02 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore965.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)
iD8DBQFViQVbURT1lqxE3HERAkpLAJ9UTtqXX2DsMSzVJ8v/XeXi3j5yZgCgkdAq
ROJU5hLm+EDcypBmvXGmlls=
=uW6v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
SCARCITY
Scarcity is the absence of things within easy each.
A being who can create in the mere conception of things, has no
scarcity.
Native state knows no scarcity.
But native state beings like to engage in games.
Games place time and chase between conception and havingness,
combined with conditions upon attainment, namely doing the right thing.
Thus all games are games of scarcity.
In order to get food he must hunt.
If food were not scarce, he wouldn't have to do anything, the food
would be there at all times for him.
There are gradient scales of scarcity.
The first level is he has to go out and hunt in order to bring in
food. Having food has become a game, and he has to win the game each
day in order to eat.
If he continues to win the game to his satisfaction he may consider
that food is not scarce, but in fact it is much scarcer than if he could
create food in the mere conception of it.
Games can be fun at this level, as fun is high action chase towards
a goal with reasonable expectation of winning.
The next level of scarcity would be if sometimes he fails to bring
home food because he can't find any or can't catch it.
This can be less fun, because he NEEDS TO WIN in order to play the
game each day. Every day he fails to get food means the next day's play
will be slightly less energetic, competent and accurate.
If he has high stores of food, he can weather a few failures, but
eventually if his stores get too low, he will start to worry and sag in
life.
Fun is also high morale and feelings of self confidence and self
sufficiency to his own survival and the survival of those he cares
about. As successes wane, morale suffers, worry sets in, and worry and
fun are opposed.
The last level of scarcity is he starves to death because he fails
too often.
Now a being in good shape can create games of scarcity and chase
in the mere conception of things, and if he loses the fun in one such
game, he can create others anew.
But down lower, stuck in a body, worried about being mortal,
certain games, like eating, become paramount to WIN rather than merely
play, because if he doesn't win the game of eating, he will die, and so
he won't be able to conceive of or play any other games ever again.
Thus games of scarcity become themselves SCARCE.
When a being has a serious scarcity of games in general, he will
tend to hold onto the game he still has at all costs.
That means he will take to NOT WINNING games in order to keep the
game around. He has to make sure that he doesn't lose it either too
because every time he wins or loses a game, he is out of game, and if
games are hard to come by, he will begin to panic because there are no
more games to play.
Thus GAMES have become scarce to him.
So if you find your preclear stuck in a scarcity of something, it
can be anything, underlying that scarcity is a scarcity of scarcities,
that he can chase after.
If (games of) scarcities are not scarce, he can always move on to
another game if one becomes hopeless.
CHASE
Chase is desirable.
If he has too much of something there is no chase.
If he has too little of something there is no chase either.
You might think if a preclear complains about having a scarcity of
money or girl friends or whatever, that the way to remedy this scarcity
is to have him mockup girl friends until he can have girl friends again.
Near native state that might work, but not near the bottom.
In fact the way to get him to solve the scarcity of girl friends is
to have him mockup scarcities of things including girls until he can
create SCARCITIES again in the mere conception of things.
Then he can say, oh to hell with girls, I want BOATS, and chase
after them instead.
Now he is worried about not having boats, but girls will be all
over him begging him to get a boat, because GIRLS have a scarcity on
partying on boats.
You see?
This whole universe is ass backwards, and everything your preclear
says about what is wrong with him is ass backwards with it.
You solve his future by solving his present time scarcities, by
getting him to mock up OTHER FUTURES with OTHER present time scarcities.
The future is chase.
Chase is chase after scarcity.
To rehabilitate any being you need to make sure that *CHASE* itself
isn't scarce or your preclear will give up chasing, and that's death.
Fun is optimum high action chase.
Glum is stuck in glue "Which way do I go, which way do I go?"
If his future is glum, he has developed a scarcity of chase, a
scarcity of scarcities to chase after.
By getting him to mockup new futures of scarcities and chases, he
will let go of his present future of scarcities that aren't getting him
anywhere.
This is much harder when the scarcity is FOOD, because not all
chases are of equivalent importance, its easy to replace girls with
boats in order to rehab girls, but what are you going to do to
replace FOOD?
Nonetheless somewhere some OTHER chase is in ruins that can
be fixed that will fix the problems he is having with money, jobs,
food etc, unless of course he is stuck in a dust bowl, or nuclear
waste land, at which point you might want to rehabilitate his ability
to chase new bodies on new planets.
So this can go very high very fast if things are dire for him.
Anyhow rehabilitating chase goes a long ways towards straightening
out a normal life in a normal environment, as his own aberrations are
keeping him down more than the radiation clouds are.
MEATBALLS AND DREAMBALLS.
A meatball is someone who thinks he lives but once and dies forever
and that's it bud. Meatballs are terrified of living in a hell forever,
the pretense of death is their way out.
A dreamball is someone who thinks his consciousness is eternal, and
that involvement in temporal games and heavens and hells last only a
while.
The meatball is shutting down his life preparing to be no more.
The dreamball is opening up his life, preparing to be forever,
above time and in time, as long as he wishes, as many times as he
wishes.
On the surface the meatball is afraid of not having a future, but
underneath he is afraid of HAVING a future because he seems to have lost
control over it.
So while the meatball pretends to feel the final safety of no
future, the dreamball suffers wild eyed vertigo looking out on an
infinite future.
An infinite future is not in one infinite while in time, but is an
infinite number of finite whiles in time with eternal rest in between
each.
Eternal happiness comes from an operational balance of work
and rest.
Each future while is a cycle of scarcities and chase towards wanted
goals in time.
One gets stuck in any particular while to the degree that one fails
to span the duration of the while, and the responsibility for invoking
it, and fails to conceive of new whiles in the future, lest they go bad
too.
Dare to love.
He does not need endless amounts of more time in the present time
while, oh no, this while is WAY over run, he is still playing games he
could have won eons go but was afraid there would be no more games.
So this while is rife with trying not to win AND trying not to lose
at the same time, every game that is left running.
No, you need to get him to start conceiving and mocking up entire
new whiles from beginning to end, and then he will start to feel good
about whiles again, they become WORTH WHILE to him again, and then he
won't get stuck in time the way he has been in this one.
A while that is not worth while is a waste of time :)
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
Wed Feb 18 13:11:59 EST 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Jun 23 03:06:02 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore965.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)
iD8DBQFViQVbURT1lqxE3HERAkpLAJ9UTtqXX2DsMSzVJ8v/XeXi3j5yZgCgkdAq
ROJU5hLm+EDcypBmvXGmlls=
=uW6v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Re: ADORE870
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
HAPPINESS BY DYNAMICS
Put your preclear on a meter and run all reading items.
Remember all flows, don't just run it for the preclear, run it for
the preclear's conception of everyone else too. He may be happy with
his family, but not happy with other's families. Reword to taste, and
run with all you got.
1.) Are you happy about being yourself?
2.) Are you happy with your ancestors?
Are you happy with your grand parents?
Are you happy with your parents?
Are you happy with your mate?
Are you happy with your children?
Are you happy with your grandchildren?
Are you happy with your blood line family?
Are you happy with your heritage?
Are you happy with your legacy?
3.) Are you happy with the groups you belong to?
Are you happy with your school?
Are you happy with your town, city, county, state, country?
4.) Are you happy with being a part of humanity or mankind?
Are you happy with your sex?
Are you happy with your age?
5.) Are you happy with being an animal life form?
Are you happy with the plant kingdom?
6.) Are you happy with being a part of the physical universe?
Are you happy with your planet?
Are you happy with your solar system?
Are you happy with your galaxy?
Are you happy with your space time universe?
7.) Are you happy with being a spirit?
Are you happy with being a conscious unit?
Are you happy with being a part of the High US?
7a.) Are you happy with the Aesthetics in your life?
Are you happy with the Ethics in your life?
Are you happy with the Decency in your life?
Are you happy with Truth?
Are you happy with Honor?
Are you happy with Dignity?
Are you happy with Honesty?
Are you happy with Awareness?
Are you happy with Faith?
Are you happy with Certainty?
Are you happy with Knowledge?
Are you happy with Personal Integrity?
Are you happy with Individuality?
Are you happy with Volition?
Are you happy with Intention?
Are you happy with Purpose?
Are you happy with Coexistence?
Are you happy with Freedom?
Are you happy with Sovereignty?
Are you happy with Manifestation?
Are you happy with UnManifestation?
Are you happy with Eternal Sleep?
8.) Are you happy with the Infinite?
Are you happy with the AllThatIs?
Are you happy with Authorship?
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Jun 23 18:08:54 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore870.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)
iD8DBQFVidj3URT1lqxE3HERAhb6AKDPwDOOnPtR4KnJyfNRtNVmMZSMpQCfaCxv
JnaFZwthWN0J5qUyo1cakjQ=
=RkRY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
HAPPINESS BY DYNAMICS
Put your preclear on a meter and run all reading items.
Remember all flows, don't just run it for the preclear, run it for
the preclear's conception of everyone else too. He may be happy with
his family, but not happy with other's families. Reword to taste, and
run with all you got.
1.) Are you happy about being yourself?
2.) Are you happy with your ancestors?
Are you happy with your grand parents?
Are you happy with your parents?
Are you happy with your mate?
Are you happy with your children?
Are you happy with your grandchildren?
Are you happy with your blood line family?
Are you happy with your heritage?
Are you happy with your legacy?
3.) Are you happy with the groups you belong to?
Are you happy with your school?
Are you happy with your town, city, county, state, country?
4.) Are you happy with being a part of humanity or mankind?
Are you happy with your sex?
Are you happy with your age?
5.) Are you happy with being an animal life form?
Are you happy with the plant kingdom?
6.) Are you happy with being a part of the physical universe?
Are you happy with your planet?
Are you happy with your solar system?
Are you happy with your galaxy?
Are you happy with your space time universe?
7.) Are you happy with being a spirit?
Are you happy with being a conscious unit?
Are you happy with being a part of the High US?
7a.) Are you happy with the Aesthetics in your life?
Are you happy with the Ethics in your life?
Are you happy with the Decency in your life?
Are you happy with Truth?
Are you happy with Honor?
Are you happy with Dignity?
Are you happy with Honesty?
Are you happy with Awareness?
Are you happy with Faith?
Are you happy with Certainty?
Are you happy with Knowledge?
Are you happy with Personal Integrity?
Are you happy with Individuality?
Are you happy with Volition?
Are you happy with Intention?
Are you happy with Purpose?
Are you happy with Coexistence?
Are you happy with Freedom?
Are you happy with Sovereignty?
Are you happy with Manifestation?
Are you happy with UnManifestation?
Are you happy with Eternal Sleep?
8.) Are you happy with the Infinite?
Are you happy with the AllThatIs?
Are you happy with Authorship?
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Jun 23 18:08:54 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore870.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)
iD8DBQFVidj3URT1lqxE3HERAhb6AKDPwDOOnPtR4KnJyfNRtNVmMZSMpQCfaCxv
JnaFZwthWN0J5qUyo1cakjQ=
=RkRY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ONETRUTH (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
One Basic Operating Principle.
(From ADORE, A Divine Operating Religion)
Copyright (C) 1985 by Homer Wilson Smith
ADORE has one basic operating principle.
It is all encompassing and admits to no exceptions.
Nor does it admit to any competitors. There can not be more than
one basic operating principle. There may be other ways of saying the
same thing, but the underlying truth is ONE truth, regardless of how it
is said in what age or what language.
It can be wrong, but either it is wrong or it is right.
The only way to determine which way it is, is to apply it and see
if it works. Does it open your doors? Can you vanish your unwanted
conditions? Can you make more if you should so want?
If you don't operate it, you can't judge if it works or not.
To say that ADORE does not work, is to say this one operating
principle does not work. To say you are looking for a better way, is to
say that there is some other operating principle closer to the truth or
more workable than this one, which there may be.
Any exception that people take to ADORE, any disagreement they have
with ADORE, any complaint they have with ADORE can only be with this one
single solitary operating principle.
Of course there will be those who will try to overwhelm you and
create unwanted conditions for you by the barrel full, in order to prove
to you that you have failed and that your operating principle does not
work.
They will do this regardless of what operating principle you chose.
However if your operating principle does work, you should be able
to apply it to THEM as just one more unwanted condition. Perhaps this
is the final test of any basic operating principle underlying Eternal
Omni Sovereignty.
In the end, when the far future is here and those of us who are
going to make it to our Sovereignty and Freedom have done so, we will
look back on all the truths and operating principles we have tried and
thrown away. We will also look upon the ones we saw fit to carve in
stone so that others might not throw them away because they worked.
I believe that among those that will still be revered will be this
one present operating principle of ADORE.
The WAY IN is the WAY OUT.
Thus if you deny ADORE or its usefulness to your lives, you are
saying there is another WAY OUT besides the WAY IN.
Maybe there is a back door to your prison, but the front door by
which you entered it still there.
Maybe there is another way out, but the way in will be there for
Eternity in this and all future games that you enter.
It can be no other way.
You can not be IN a game without ENTERING a game.
To deny this is to deny full responsibility for your condition.
The ENTRANCE is always there.
People who look for EXITS have lost sight of the ENTRANCE.
Responsibility is a big thing.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jun 21 03:06:02 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/onetruth.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)
iD8DBQFVhmJaURT1lqxE3HERAgcYAJsHCIIlaQGJphpgtK5++w3JRaZx6QCglyBP
L+JS8vePq8Jt4Ucf45PCbBI=
=T2UY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
One Basic Operating Principle.
(From ADORE, A Divine Operating Religion)
Copyright (C) 1985 by Homer Wilson Smith
ADORE has one basic operating principle.
It is all encompassing and admits to no exceptions.
Nor does it admit to any competitors. There can not be more than
one basic operating principle. There may be other ways of saying the
same thing, but the underlying truth is ONE truth, regardless of how it
is said in what age or what language.
It can be wrong, but either it is wrong or it is right.
The only way to determine which way it is, is to apply it and see
if it works. Does it open your doors? Can you vanish your unwanted
conditions? Can you make more if you should so want?
If you don't operate it, you can't judge if it works or not.
To say that ADORE does not work, is to say this one operating
principle does not work. To say you are looking for a better way, is to
say that there is some other operating principle closer to the truth or
more workable than this one, which there may be.
Any exception that people take to ADORE, any disagreement they have
with ADORE, any complaint they have with ADORE can only be with this one
single solitary operating principle.
Of course there will be those who will try to overwhelm you and
create unwanted conditions for you by the barrel full, in order to prove
to you that you have failed and that your operating principle does not
work.
They will do this regardless of what operating principle you chose.
However if your operating principle does work, you should be able
to apply it to THEM as just one more unwanted condition. Perhaps this
is the final test of any basic operating principle underlying Eternal
Omni Sovereignty.
In the end, when the far future is here and those of us who are
going to make it to our Sovereignty and Freedom have done so, we will
look back on all the truths and operating principles we have tried and
thrown away. We will also look upon the ones we saw fit to carve in
stone so that others might not throw them away because they worked.
I believe that among those that will still be revered will be this
one present operating principle of ADORE.
The WAY IN is the WAY OUT.
Thus if you deny ADORE or its usefulness to your lives, you are
saying there is another WAY OUT besides the WAY IN.
Maybe there is a back door to your prison, but the front door by
which you entered it still there.
Maybe there is another way out, but the way in will be there for
Eternity in this and all future games that you enter.
It can be no other way.
You can not be IN a game without ENTERING a game.
To deny this is to deny full responsibility for your condition.
The ENTRANCE is always there.
People who look for EXITS have lost sight of the ENTRANCE.
Responsibility is a big thing.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jun 21 03:06:02 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/onetruth.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)
iD8DBQFVhmJaURT1lqxE3HERAgcYAJsHCIIlaQGJphpgtK5++w3JRaZx6QCglyBP
L+JS8vePq8Jt4Ucf45PCbBI=
=T2UY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
HOM35 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
TELL ME ABUSE
Last night while going to bed, I started to think about the going
whole track problem I have and I started to think "This is
ridiculous", just find the worst moment of charge in this life, turn
it around and go past track on it Electra style.
As I was dozing off I started to run,
Tell me abuse while having a mother.
Tell me abuse while being a mother.
Tell me abuse while having a father.
Tell me abuse while being a father.
Tell me abuse while having a parent.
Tell me abuse while being a parent.
Tell me abuse while being a child.
Tell me abuse while having a child.
"Tell me abuse" meant all flows.
It ran very deep at the somatic level with no significance,
didn't actually find any abuse, no actual incidents etc, but it
clearly unwound some of the crushing force on the center of my spine
that I suffer from.
It should be continued with son, daughter, husband and wife.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The paths of lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 cross in Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com the line of duty. http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jun 20 03:06:01 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/hom35.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)
iD8DBQFVhRDaURT1lqxE3HERAnzfAJ9C5i7H63uGmcWbha13FTA9FsRW0QCffAGy
OCL4CF3brRAioWGyGUNAYLk=
=xNl1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
TELL ME ABUSE
Last night while going to bed, I started to think about the going
whole track problem I have and I started to think "This is
ridiculous", just find the worst moment of charge in this life, turn
it around and go past track on it Electra style.
As I was dozing off I started to run,
Tell me abuse while having a mother.
Tell me abuse while being a mother.
Tell me abuse while having a father.
Tell me abuse while being a father.
Tell me abuse while having a parent.
Tell me abuse while being a parent.
Tell me abuse while being a child.
Tell me abuse while having a child.
"Tell me abuse" meant all flows.
It ran very deep at the somatic level with no significance,
didn't actually find any abuse, no actual incidents etc, but it
clearly unwound some of the crushing force on the center of my spine
that I suffer from.
It should be continued with son, daughter, husband and wife.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The paths of lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 cross in Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com the line of duty. http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jun 20 03:06:01 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/hom35.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)
iD8DBQFVhRDaURT1lqxE3HERAnzfAJ9C5i7H63uGmcWbha13FTA9FsRW0QCffAGy
OCL4CF3brRAioWGyGUNAYLk=
=xNl1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE197 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
ARGUS
Argus was a Greek mythological hero with 100 eyes.
God the Great I AM, is not just one I AM.
God is a Multiple I AM being.
To find other souls, contact your own, and there will be the others.
The world, the All-That-Is is the body of God.
Each soul is an eye of God, an individual I AM.
As an "I" of God, each soul is God in Carnation.
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 ====================
Fri Jun 19 03:06:01 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore197.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)
iD8DBQFVg79aURT1lqxE3HERAqprAKCCGcw4HuGq7z5Ot2bMsr6C84xgmACfXjTQ
+3F0KMSPCRfts2VdTpdt8qo=
=tPmC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
ARGUS
Argus was a Greek mythological hero with 100 eyes.
God the Great I AM, is not just one I AM.
God is a Multiple I AM being.
To find other souls, contact your own, and there will be the others.
The world, the All-That-Is is the body of God.
Each soul is an eye of God, an individual I AM.
As an "I" of God, each soul is God in Carnation.
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 ====================
Fri Jun 19 03:06:01 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore197.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)
iD8DBQFVg79aURT1lqxE3HERAqprAKCCGcw4HuGq7z5Ot2bMsr6C84xgmACfXjTQ
+3F0KMSPCRfts2VdTpdt8qo=
=tPmC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE92 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
POLICY ON KILLING
Here is my policy of killing.
Ant's and spiders are protected species in our house. If they
become too much trouble, I will leave honey outside to redirect the
ants there, and I will catch the spiders and put them on a plant or
take them outside. I will go out of my way to not kill ants and
spiders, even when trying to kill other insects. There are no
poisonous spiders where we live, and although I am deathly afraid of
them, I admire their ugliness and wish them well.
Flys I generally leave alone *UNLESS* they land on me, then they
become immediate fair game. At night in bed if there is a fly in the
bedroom it will be declared fair game whether or not it has landed on
me, because in general they will either land or buzz me and thus wake
me up. Sleep is sacrosanct, so the fly goes whether or not it is
guilty. If I can get the fly out of the room through the window or
the door first, then the fly lives. If the fly population gets out of
control I will hang fly strips to kill them indescriminately.
Bees and wasps I generally leave alone and welcome unless they
form a large nest where we need to work. I was once stung by a whole
nest of hornets and it wasn't pleasant. None the less I consider them
beneficial both to me and others and as long as they pose no immediate
danger as a nest I let them be. As single entities in the grass, they
are still dangerous but I generally watch out for them and leave them
alone.
Cockroaches are generally declared fair game, mostly because
there are so many of them. I will leave out roach motels pretty much
everywhere in our house. If I see a roach, in general I will chase it
and kill it, but sometimes I won't, depending on my mood and the
general background number of them.
Mosquitoes are always declared fair game, and if I see one I will
take all measures to hunt it down and kill it with out exception.
Male mosquitoes however are left alone or captured and taken outside.
Most other flying bugs, moths and insects are generally protected
and left alone.
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 Jun 17 03:06:02 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore92.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)
iD8DBQFVgRxaURT1lqxE3HERAnSTAJ413VQCdk1bAPetY9nr3mi52tMUAACg1MTp
KgBJapTo/tLtivgK+qmpxb0=
=U0MF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
POLICY ON KILLING
Here is my policy of killing.
Ant's and spiders are protected species in our house. If they
become too much trouble, I will leave honey outside to redirect the
ants there, and I will catch the spiders and put them on a plant or
take them outside. I will go out of my way to not kill ants and
spiders, even when trying to kill other insects. There are no
poisonous spiders where we live, and although I am deathly afraid of
them, I admire their ugliness and wish them well.
Flys I generally leave alone *UNLESS* they land on me, then they
become immediate fair game. At night in bed if there is a fly in the
bedroom it will be declared fair game whether or not it has landed on
me, because in general they will either land or buzz me and thus wake
me up. Sleep is sacrosanct, so the fly goes whether or not it is
guilty. If I can get the fly out of the room through the window or
the door first, then the fly lives. If the fly population gets out of
control I will hang fly strips to kill them indescriminately.
Bees and wasps I generally leave alone and welcome unless they
form a large nest where we need to work. I was once stung by a whole
nest of hornets and it wasn't pleasant. None the less I consider them
beneficial both to me and others and as long as they pose no immediate
danger as a nest I let them be. As single entities in the grass, they
are still dangerous but I generally watch out for them and leave them
alone.
Cockroaches are generally declared fair game, mostly because
there are so many of them. I will leave out roach motels pretty much
everywhere in our house. If I see a roach, in general I will chase it
and kill it, but sometimes I won't, depending on my mood and the
general background number of them.
Mosquitoes are always declared fair game, and if I see one I will
take all measures to hunt it down and kill it with out exception.
Male mosquitoes however are left alone or captured and taken outside.
Most other flying bugs, moths and insects are generally protected
and left alone.
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 Jun 17 03:06:02 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore92.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)
iD8DBQFVgRxaURT1lqxE3HERAnSTAJ413VQCdk1bAPetY9nr3mi52tMUAACg1MTp
KgBJapTo/tLtivgK+qmpxb0=
=U0MF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
PROOF33 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
USEFULNESS OF MODELS
Phil Scott (philscott@philscott.net) wrote:
> YOU have dreamed up your construct to screw with on these issues,
>and thats fine.
>
> Its just that once outside of the entire cluster fuck, all that
>thinking and figuring blows away like junk mail....and one sees all those
>wasted trees and stamps.
The idea is that people are already stuck in a mind set, i.e.
desire plus view of the cosmic all, which acts as sort of a jail cell to
their desire.
By giving them a different construct, it creates cracks in their
own jail cell, allowing light to shine through. Doesn't matter if they
accept the new construct or no construct etc, it matters that their
original one have a crack in the wall.
Your approach is to run processes on them until the constructs
crack.
My approach is to offer other plausible alternative constructs
until their false certainty in any of them cracks. Then they can let go
and look, probably even run your processes better.
I approach existence and clearing like any scientist, we observe,
we make models, we see if the models make predictions, if so, we look
for those phenomenon too, if we find them, we continue along that path.
Oh yeah and we use Occam's razor to shave in the morning.
There are perfect certainties along this path, I AM, I WANT, I KNOW
and I DO, and I find that useful as a standard of certainty against
which to compare all other ideas. With a standard of perfect certainty,
one can no longer get stuck with 'certainties' that are 'false'.
The whole idea of a perfect certainty is an anathema to a sinking
being. He can't handle them at all because of the perfect 'false'
certainties he is shunning.
The perfect certainty that perfect certainty is impossible or
useless is a symptom of a broke, beaten and cowardly mind.
I AM is certainty of I AM. To denigrate this amazing fact as
aggrandizing the supremity of the ego is suppressive and one would have
to question the motives of anyone who might do so.
Ayn Rand's book Anthem told the story of two children trying to
find the word they had forgotten because it didn't exist in the language
any more, the word "I".
Whatever the nature and intent of the AllThatIs, consciousness of
"I AM!" is certainly part of it, and a good and highly desirable part of
it.
From this certainty of "I AM" comes The Proof that the I-AM is not
a state determined space/time multi dimensional machine such as
envisioned by the meatballs.
We use standard meatball theory to prove it!
Now admittedly the individual I-AM is not the AllThatIs, and
admittedly the whole perception of 'I' may be drenched in illusion, and
delusions about illusions, but the I is not a nothing, and the illusions
are more indication that the I is a something, as a nothing can't have
illusions, and the more we contemplate these things, the more the false
certainties fall away and the mind is free to see what is as it is.
SOMETHING EXISTS AND KNOWS IT.
Is that aggrandizing existence? Shame on me.
Fun models to play with are not intended to replace existing mental
jail cells, but to break them open by giving the being a datum of
comparable magnitude so he ceases to hold onto one as if it was the only
one in the world.
The world however is a co-dream shared by many dreamers, lucid and
not, we do survive this life, even if not on Earth, consciousness did
not arise out of MEST, and consciousness is not merely a process in MEST
(brain).
Illusions of MEST and dimensionality arose out of consciousness, we
think there is space because we see space, and such things do not fit in
the meatball model at all, but do fit in the dreamball model, and hence
scientifically the model is useful.
There can't be an ultimate downside to having a model that is more
accurate than not. Even the model that all models are useless is a
model and thus wind between the ears, arrogant, conceited and vain all
rolled up into one.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Jun 16 03:06:02 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof33.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)
iD8DBQFVf8raURT1lqxE3HERArbqAJwOiC/Tba2LsTPnKAcxWS0CT2nZoQCfcKk2
2TacTyl6o6j8ruA6A6WcrhM=
=tkDj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
USEFULNESS OF MODELS
Phil Scott (philscott@philscott.net) wrote:
> YOU have dreamed up your construct to screw with on these issues,
>and thats fine.
>
> Its just that once outside of the entire cluster fuck, all that
>thinking and figuring blows away like junk mail....and one sees all those
>wasted trees and stamps.
The idea is that people are already stuck in a mind set, i.e.
desire plus view of the cosmic all, which acts as sort of a jail cell to
their desire.
By giving them a different construct, it creates cracks in their
own jail cell, allowing light to shine through. Doesn't matter if they
accept the new construct or no construct etc, it matters that their
original one have a crack in the wall.
Your approach is to run processes on them until the constructs
crack.
My approach is to offer other plausible alternative constructs
until their false certainty in any of them cracks. Then they can let go
and look, probably even run your processes better.
I approach existence and clearing like any scientist, we observe,
we make models, we see if the models make predictions, if so, we look
for those phenomenon too, if we find them, we continue along that path.
Oh yeah and we use Occam's razor to shave in the morning.
There are perfect certainties along this path, I AM, I WANT, I KNOW
and I DO, and I find that useful as a standard of certainty against
which to compare all other ideas. With a standard of perfect certainty,
one can no longer get stuck with 'certainties' that are 'false'.
The whole idea of a perfect certainty is an anathema to a sinking
being. He can't handle them at all because of the perfect 'false'
certainties he is shunning.
The perfect certainty that perfect certainty is impossible or
useless is a symptom of a broke, beaten and cowardly mind.
I AM is certainty of I AM. To denigrate this amazing fact as
aggrandizing the supremity of the ego is suppressive and one would have
to question the motives of anyone who might do so.
Ayn Rand's book Anthem told the story of two children trying to
find the word they had forgotten because it didn't exist in the language
any more, the word "I".
Whatever the nature and intent of the AllThatIs, consciousness of
"I AM!" is certainly part of it, and a good and highly desirable part of
it.
From this certainty of "I AM" comes The Proof that the I-AM is not
a state determined space/time multi dimensional machine such as
envisioned by the meatballs.
We use standard meatball theory to prove it!
Now admittedly the individual I-AM is not the AllThatIs, and
admittedly the whole perception of 'I' may be drenched in illusion, and
delusions about illusions, but the I is not a nothing, and the illusions
are more indication that the I is a something, as a nothing can't have
illusions, and the more we contemplate these things, the more the false
certainties fall away and the mind is free to see what is as it is.
SOMETHING EXISTS AND KNOWS IT.
Is that aggrandizing existence? Shame on me.
Fun models to play with are not intended to replace existing mental
jail cells, but to break them open by giving the being a datum of
comparable magnitude so he ceases to hold onto one as if it was the only
one in the world.
The world however is a co-dream shared by many dreamers, lucid and
not, we do survive this life, even if not on Earth, consciousness did
not arise out of MEST, and consciousness is not merely a process in MEST
(brain).
Illusions of MEST and dimensionality arose out of consciousness, we
think there is space because we see space, and such things do not fit in
the meatball model at all, but do fit in the dreamball model, and hence
scientifically the model is useful.
There can't be an ultimate downside to having a model that is more
accurate than not. Even the model that all models are useless is a
model and thus wind between the ears, arrogant, conceited and vain all
rolled up into one.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Jun 16 03:06:02 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof33.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)
iD8DBQFVf8raURT1lqxE3HERArbqAJwOiC/Tba2LsTPnKAcxWS0CT2nZoQCfcKk2
2TacTyl6o6j8ruA6A6WcrhM=
=tkDj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE729 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SELF EVIDENCE
We know that data moves across space and time from event to event,
from object to object, same thing, by cause and effect. The cause from
an earlier event makes an effect, impression, imprint on a later object,
which then can be used to study the first object.
One thus learns about the original referent which sourced the data
in a causal messenger wave (ie photons), by looking at a symbol for the
referent, which is ANOTHER event or object a distance way, both in space
and in time.
Symbols are LATER in time from the referent, by the time the symbol
comes to be, the referent is gone, because its moment of time is gone.
Later times are new referents even if they look the same.
Let's call the referent R1, and as it is replicated through time,
R1 becomes R2, R3, R4, R5 etc.
Some time later when R1 has become R7, the cause wave hits the soon
to be symbol object changing its state according to the nature of R when
it was R1. At that moment when the symbol is impinged upon by R1, R1 is
completely gone, it doesn't exist any more. R1 has been replaced by R7
which the symbol doesn't know exists yet.
Thus the symbol can only track the PAST of the referent. By
tracking we mean changing state due to the nature of the referent a
while back.
The causal messenger wave sourced by the referent passes through a
remote object (namely the soon to be symbol) and changes it, thus the
symbole learns something about the referent, namely how the referent
caused the symbol to change state.
The rendition zone is the area of the symbol that was actually
affected, and the change itself is the rendition, or data imprint, that
is made on the symbol as a causal result of the referent.
It's pretty clear to see that learning about a referent by looking
at later effects in a symbol remote from the referent provides evidence
and theory about the referent, at best, total nonsense at worse.
One renders the nature of the referent on the symbol, namely on the
rendition zone of the symbol.
One interprets the nature of the referent from the rendition on the
symbol.
The referent 'teaches' something about itself to the symbol via
rendering something in the rendition zone of the symbol.
Referent -> Rendition -> Symbol.
The symbol and those observing the symbol, 'learn' something about
the referent, via interpretation of the rendition in the rendition zone
of the symbol caused by the referent.
Symbol -> Interpretation -> Referent.
This process of teaching and learning is called indirect
perception.
It is also clear that a conscious observer can't even see the
symbol unless the symbol has an effect on the consciousness of the
observer who then becomes merely another symbol in the chain of symbols,
as the causal messenger wave propagates through the observer out further
into space and time.
In this case the observer's consciousness is the rendition zone,
and the rendition is the conscious experiences the observer has as 'a
result of' the original referent.
The observer and his consciousness have become an effect of the
original referent.
Thus the symbol of final authority in any learning event must be
the observer himself, more specifically his consciousness, and its new
state as a result of the impinging cause originating from the referent.
But one is still left with the question how does a conscious
observer observe his own consciousness?
If a conscious experience like red and green are separate events
from the observer who sees these events, then again the imposition of
space, time, dimension, or difference of any kind between experience and
experiencer makes them two different objects, and thus there is no
direct contact between them.
Thus one would have to postulate yet another causal messenger wave
between conscious experience and experiencer and yet another rendition
zone in the experiencer that is NOT his consciousness, and yet another
rendition in the experiencer which is NOT his conscious experience.
You see this leads to an infinite regression.
Thus by reductio ad absurdum the postulate that experience and
experiencer are two different objects must be wrong.
Thus the being can see his own consciousness because he has direct
perception of it, because he IS IT.
He has allowed his conscious experience, which he can directly
perceive, to be enslaved to be used as a symbol for something else not
it, namely referents out in the alleged phyiscal universe.
Ultimately the process of learning about referents by looking at
symbols which are different from the referent must end somewhere, or
else we just have dominoes falling forever each one the effect from the
earlier one, and none of them certain about anything, because being an
effect does not prove there was a cause.
Thus we say that consciousness is self luminous, it can see itself.
because it IS itself, the seer and seen are one.
Thus the conscious experiencer is the same object as the conscious
experience of red and green, and it is a grand illusion that perceiver
and perceived, that the I and red and green, are two different objects
from each other.
This means that the conscious experiencer can see the referent
directly (his conscious experience) without having to look at or be yet
another later symbol.
Thus the original referent (red and green) BECOMES the symbol of
final authority, the I learns about the referent by looking at the
referent!
That is the definition of direct perception, looking at what you
are looking at, rather than something else representing what you want to
look at.
This is called a self symbolizing event, a referent that is also
its own symbol.
One could also call this a self referencing event, a symbol that is
also its own referent.
One could also call this a self evidential event.
"The existence of a fundamental operating actuality is self
evident." - Sufi
The existence of the referent is self evidence for its own
existence. One doesn't need to look at a later symbol to find out about
the referent!
But the only thing that could possibly be 'self' evident, is
whatever 'self' is.
For nothing can be self evident across a space time distance.
Thus anything whose existence or nature is self evident to you,
MUST BE YOU.
Thus you are anything you can see or experience.
That red and green out there, that's you looking back at yourself.
That's what you look like in a mirror.
Your consciousness is acting like a holographic mirror, and
everything you see in the mirror is just you, what you look like at that
moment.
Thus we conclude that self evident, self symbolizing, self
referencing and self luminous all mean the same thing.
Technically they all mean no separation between referent and
symbol, no two different objects referring to each other. One doesn't
learn about the referent by looking at ANOTHER symbol later in space and
time, one learns about the referent by looking at the referent directly
RIGHT HERE NOW.
It also means the referent and symbol are tracking each other IN
PRESENT TIME, in the NOW, thus there is no space or time between the
referent event and the symbol event.
Physical tracking between referent and symbol is always across a
space time distance, thus referent and symbol MUST BE two different
objects, and can only act as evidence and theory to each other.
Conscious tracking between experiencer and experience, looker and
looked-at, seer and seen, perceiver and perceived, is instantaneous, a
no time event, or else you couldn't see the perceived as it would
already be gone by the time 'it' got to you.
And this process of conscious learning is also called direct
perception.
There is more to self luminousness than mere self referencing or
self symbolizing events, and that is the difference between mere BEING
and KNOWING.
One could in theory have a self referencing chain of pure cause and
effect that effected only pure BEINGNESS.
Self luminousness adds KNOWING into the mix of mere self
referencing beingness.
Dominoes falling are a causal chain of mere beingness, nothing
knows anything, everything is simply in what ever state it is in, and
the various states change according to the cause wave moving through the
dominoes.
But no domino KNOWS anything, although its mere beingness could be
considered symbolic 'knowledge' about the nature of what caused it to
fall. But such knowledge would be unverifiable evidence and theory at
best.
So yes consciousness is self referencing, as there is a kind of
learning that is causeeffect in the same moment, but consciousness is
also self LUMINOUS, in that it knows what is causing it to know.
Consciousness can see not only the red and the green directly, it
can also see the causal agency between the red and the green and one's
certainty there are two different colors causing it to see that there
are two different colors!
That is quite impossible in a purely mechanical universe of parts
interacting via cause and effect across a space time distance.
That's because each effect can only see itself, and effect does not
prove cause.
The conscious universe, the perceiver can see the CAUSE AND THE
EFFECT and can see that the cause is indeed the cause of the effect.
Cause is existence of red and green.
Effect is certainty of two different colors, AND the certainty that
two different colors are causing the effect.
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
Tue Mar 2 03:41:21 EST 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Jun 15 03:06:02 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore729.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)
iD8DBQFVfnlaURT1lqxE3HERAsiBAJ4hpy54B9goEMjb0wqtBmYcMNTLPACgtVXv
IiOALULH0SM8hgVaG1aRa9k=
=UJuI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
SELF EVIDENCE
We know that data moves across space and time from event to event,
from object to object, same thing, by cause and effect. The cause from
an earlier event makes an effect, impression, imprint on a later object,
which then can be used to study the first object.
One thus learns about the original referent which sourced the data
in a causal messenger wave (ie photons), by looking at a symbol for the
referent, which is ANOTHER event or object a distance way, both in space
and in time.
Symbols are LATER in time from the referent, by the time the symbol
comes to be, the referent is gone, because its moment of time is gone.
Later times are new referents even if they look the same.
Let's call the referent R1, and as it is replicated through time,
R1 becomes R2, R3, R4, R5 etc.
Some time later when R1 has become R7, the cause wave hits the soon
to be symbol object changing its state according to the nature of R when
it was R1. At that moment when the symbol is impinged upon by R1, R1 is
completely gone, it doesn't exist any more. R1 has been replaced by R7
which the symbol doesn't know exists yet.
Thus the symbol can only track the PAST of the referent. By
tracking we mean changing state due to the nature of the referent a
while back.
The causal messenger wave sourced by the referent passes through a
remote object (namely the soon to be symbol) and changes it, thus the
symbole learns something about the referent, namely how the referent
caused the symbol to change state.
The rendition zone is the area of the symbol that was actually
affected, and the change itself is the rendition, or data imprint, that
is made on the symbol as a causal result of the referent.
It's pretty clear to see that learning about a referent by looking
at later effects in a symbol remote from the referent provides evidence
and theory about the referent, at best, total nonsense at worse.
One renders the nature of the referent on the symbol, namely on the
rendition zone of the symbol.
One interprets the nature of the referent from the rendition on the
symbol.
The referent 'teaches' something about itself to the symbol via
rendering something in the rendition zone of the symbol.
Referent -> Rendition -> Symbol.
The symbol and those observing the symbol, 'learn' something about
the referent, via interpretation of the rendition in the rendition zone
of the symbol caused by the referent.
Symbol -> Interpretation -> Referent.
This process of teaching and learning is called indirect
perception.
It is also clear that a conscious observer can't even see the
symbol unless the symbol has an effect on the consciousness of the
observer who then becomes merely another symbol in the chain of symbols,
as the causal messenger wave propagates through the observer out further
into space and time.
In this case the observer's consciousness is the rendition zone,
and the rendition is the conscious experiences the observer has as 'a
result of' the original referent.
The observer and his consciousness have become an effect of the
original referent.
Thus the symbol of final authority in any learning event must be
the observer himself, more specifically his consciousness, and its new
state as a result of the impinging cause originating from the referent.
But one is still left with the question how does a conscious
observer observe his own consciousness?
If a conscious experience like red and green are separate events
from the observer who sees these events, then again the imposition of
space, time, dimension, or difference of any kind between experience and
experiencer makes them two different objects, and thus there is no
direct contact between them.
Thus one would have to postulate yet another causal messenger wave
between conscious experience and experiencer and yet another rendition
zone in the experiencer that is NOT his consciousness, and yet another
rendition in the experiencer which is NOT his conscious experience.
You see this leads to an infinite regression.
Thus by reductio ad absurdum the postulate that experience and
experiencer are two different objects must be wrong.
Thus the being can see his own consciousness because he has direct
perception of it, because he IS IT.
He has allowed his conscious experience, which he can directly
perceive, to be enslaved to be used as a symbol for something else not
it, namely referents out in the alleged phyiscal universe.
Ultimately the process of learning about referents by looking at
symbols which are different from the referent must end somewhere, or
else we just have dominoes falling forever each one the effect from the
earlier one, and none of them certain about anything, because being an
effect does not prove there was a cause.
Thus we say that consciousness is self luminous, it can see itself.
because it IS itself, the seer and seen are one.
Thus the conscious experiencer is the same object as the conscious
experience of red and green, and it is a grand illusion that perceiver
and perceived, that the I and red and green, are two different objects
from each other.
This means that the conscious experiencer can see the referent
directly (his conscious experience) without having to look at or be yet
another later symbol.
Thus the original referent (red and green) BECOMES the symbol of
final authority, the I learns about the referent by looking at the
referent!
That is the definition of direct perception, looking at what you
are looking at, rather than something else representing what you want to
look at.
This is called a self symbolizing event, a referent that is also
its own symbol.
One could also call this a self referencing event, a symbol that is
also its own referent.
One could also call this a self evidential event.
"The existence of a fundamental operating actuality is self
evident." - Sufi
The existence of the referent is self evidence for its own
existence. One doesn't need to look at a later symbol to find out about
the referent!
But the only thing that could possibly be 'self' evident, is
whatever 'self' is.
For nothing can be self evident across a space time distance.
Thus anything whose existence or nature is self evident to you,
MUST BE YOU.
Thus you are anything you can see or experience.
That red and green out there, that's you looking back at yourself.
That's what you look like in a mirror.
Your consciousness is acting like a holographic mirror, and
everything you see in the mirror is just you, what you look like at that
moment.
Thus we conclude that self evident, self symbolizing, self
referencing and self luminous all mean the same thing.
Technically they all mean no separation between referent and
symbol, no two different objects referring to each other. One doesn't
learn about the referent by looking at ANOTHER symbol later in space and
time, one learns about the referent by looking at the referent directly
RIGHT HERE NOW.
It also means the referent and symbol are tracking each other IN
PRESENT TIME, in the NOW, thus there is no space or time between the
referent event and the symbol event.
Physical tracking between referent and symbol is always across a
space time distance, thus referent and symbol MUST BE two different
objects, and can only act as evidence and theory to each other.
Conscious tracking between experiencer and experience, looker and
looked-at, seer and seen, perceiver and perceived, is instantaneous, a
no time event, or else you couldn't see the perceived as it would
already be gone by the time 'it' got to you.
And this process of conscious learning is also called direct
perception.
There is more to self luminousness than mere self referencing or
self symbolizing events, and that is the difference between mere BEING
and KNOWING.
One could in theory have a self referencing chain of pure cause and
effect that effected only pure BEINGNESS.
Self luminousness adds KNOWING into the mix of mere self
referencing beingness.
Dominoes falling are a causal chain of mere beingness, nothing
knows anything, everything is simply in what ever state it is in, and
the various states change according to the cause wave moving through the
dominoes.
But no domino KNOWS anything, although its mere beingness could be
considered symbolic 'knowledge' about the nature of what caused it to
fall. But such knowledge would be unverifiable evidence and theory at
best.
So yes consciousness is self referencing, as there is a kind of
learning that is causeeffect in the same moment, but consciousness is
also self LUMINOUS, in that it knows what is causing it to know.
Consciousness can see not only the red and the green directly, it
can also see the causal agency between the red and the green and one's
certainty there are two different colors causing it to see that there
are two different colors!
That is quite impossible in a purely mechanical universe of parts
interacting via cause and effect across a space time distance.
That's because each effect can only see itself, and effect does not
prove cause.
The conscious universe, the perceiver can see the CAUSE AND THE
EFFECT and can see that the cause is indeed the cause of the effect.
Cause is existence of red and green.
Effect is certainty of two different colors, AND the certainty that
two different colors are causing the effect.
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
Tue Mar 2 03:41:21 EST 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Jun 15 03:06:02 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore729.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)
iD8DBQFVfnlaURT1lqxE3HERAsiBAJ4hpy54B9goEMjb0wqtBmYcMNTLPACgtVXv
IiOALULH0SM8hgVaG1aRa9k=
=UJuI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE940 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
LIFE REPAIR
This is New Clearing Technology.
INDOCTRINATE THE PRECLEAR INTO AS MUCH OF THE FOLLOWING AS
NECESSARY TO GET THE PROCESS TO RUN, BUT NOT ONE WORD MORE.
The End Phenomenon of Life Repair is:
Awareness of Truth and the way to Personal Integrity.
Integrity means knowing what you know, and knowing what you do not
know. It may have other meanings, but without this meaning in
operation, any others will never be attained.
We want a simple and totally non evaluative process to run on the
brand new preclear off the street, a process that can be run on someone
you just met by accident on the concourses of life, with noticeable and
astounding results.
Sessions should last between 20 and 90 minutes at most, and take
place every 3 or more days apart. Less than 3 and the preclear will
still be in the previous session getting wins. Too many more than 3
days, and he will be bogged down in life out rudiments again, upsets,
problems, withholds, wars of make wrong etc.
That said the results of this process are firm and stable, and at
the end of this process, the preclear will be able to deal with incoming
realities properly rather than being ruined by them. It may however
take you and the preclear more than one session to accomplish this,
perhaps 10 at most.
The auditor is allowed to run the process, ask the questions, give
the commands, but is forbidden to answer the question or execute the
command for the preclear.
Totally non evaluative technology is hard to come by because of a
number of reasons.
First the very fact that you are running a given process on the
preclear indicates an evaluation by the C/S and the auditor that the
preclear needs to have the process run on him.
This indicates that the preclear is presently not operating with
the E/P of the process, but that at the end of a reasonable (financially
supportable) amount of time of running the process, he will be operating
in life with the E/P of the process.
At the end of session the preclear should be happy with the money
spent for that session, which is charged by the session not the hour,
and within a few days the preclear should feel serious return on
investment coming from what you did with him during that session.
EVERY SESSION MUST SHOW POSITIVE RETURN ON INVESTMENT AT THE END OF
THAT SESSION OR WITHIN A FEW DAYS MORE.
AT THE VERY LEAST, AT THE END OF EVERY SESSION THE PRECLEAR SHOULD
SEE THAT THE DOOR TO POSITIVE RETURN HAS OPENED AND IS LOOKING FORWARD
TO ITS FULL FRUITION OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS FOR THAT SESSION.
HE IS EXTROVERTED WATCHING THE POSITIVE RETURNS COME IN.
IF YOUR PRECLEAR IS HUNKERED DOWN ENDURING AUDITING, SESSION AFTER
SESSION, CLEARING ONLY HIS BANK ACCOUNT ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS, WAITING
FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN THAT WOULD MAKE HIS EXPENDITURES FOR SESSION
TIME WORTHWHILE, THEN YOU ARE A SUPPRESSIVE AUDITOR THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN
OUT BACK AND SHOT IMMEDIATELY.
There is a SHORT time delay measured in a few days, between a
session and full return on investment for that session to make itself
apparent.
Second, every process needs a necessary modicum of indoctrination
at the beginning of it, such as what we are doing in this posting,
including word clearing the words of the process, and clearing the basic
concepts of the process that will be used.
Words and concepts used in a process may be different than their
normal loose English usage, so such differences need to be clarified and
understood by the preclear.
If a preclear can't change his definition of the word God to mean a
watermelon, he is in trouble.
Beyond that, once the session starts, the auditor asks the
questions, gives the commands, and the preclear responds.
A violation of this is a High Auditing Crime, no matter how
reasonable it might seem at the time.
Answering a question for the preclear WILL result in an ARC break
later.
The more the preclear begs for an answer, the more they will
crucify you later if you give them one.
In session means the preclear is interested in his own case and
willing to talk to the auditor.
Out of session means the preclear is not interested in his own case
or not willing to talk to the auditor.
Out of sessionness is either an IMMEDIATE present time problem,
such as needing to pee, which you should allow to be handled, or two way
comm'd to a release per standard tech, or withholds, or an ARC break.
Handle ARC breaks with "What would you like me to know about you?"
Once you find the item or items, make SURE the preclear KNOWS you
understand and know what he wanted you to know, even if you have to give
it back to him in your own words. That's called a super ack.
Then continue with the process.
You do NOT super ack during normal session processing.
In normal processing, giving back to the preclear what he just said
is called echo auditing and will cause the preclear to go out of
session. He expects you to get it the first time.
If he asks if you got it, say yes, and then continue.
On a new preclear, they will be very sensitive about withholds,
sexual pecadillos etc.
Indicate to the preclear you do not need to know them unless the
preclear wants you to know them, but that the preclear should indicate,
if he can, that there is something he is not talking about and let it go
at that. This will greatly relieve the new preclear who will start
spilling the beans anyhow as things progress.
Notice, in session means the auditor asks the questions, and the
preclear gives the answers.
Out of session means, the preclear asks the question and the
auditor gives an answer.
It is OK for the preclear to ask a question in session, but it is
NOT OK for the auditor to answer it, unless it is a question about the
procedure.
Preclear questions DURING SESSION need to be handled with standard
TR (Training Routine) procedures.
SPECIFIC PROCESS INDOCTRINATION
A being is an operating system of desire and view.
Desire is what he wants, his goals, and are the source of his
emotion, feelings and drive through out the day.
View is his view of the Cosmic All, the AllThatIs.
Views are opinions, bets, beliefs, convictions and perfect
certainties.
Your preclear will have desires and views along all 8 dynamics or
action from himself to The Infinite.
The 8 dynamics of action are self, family, groups, mankind, life
forms, MEST, Spirit and The Infinite.
He will also have desires about his views and views about his
desires.
Your average preclear will be found to be in a state where his
views constrain, invalidate or make impossible his desires,
Thus coming to believe his views with great conviction, he has
retired, submerged or outright buried his desires that were not
consistent with his views.
This is the opposite of how a God works.
The human makes his desires subservient to his views.
The human rearranges his desires to accomodate his views.
A God makes his views subservient to his desires.
A God rearranges his views to accomodate his desires.
Views consist of considerations as to what is true and what is
false about the nature of things, ranging from himself, up through the 8
dynamics to The Infinite.
Views thus consist of items of belief in true and false, right and
wrong, desirable and undesirable.
Beliefs fall into 5 categories, and the preclear thus has 5
'buckets' into which he has tossed all of his beliefs.
The 5 buckets are:
1.) Perfectly Certain is true.
2.) Probably true.
3.) No clue if true or false.
4.) Probably false.
5.) Perfectly certain is false.
More bullshit will never be found on Earth than in those 5 buckets.
Preclears confuse perfect certainties with convictions.
Convictions can be wrong, because convictions gain their 'evidence'
from overwhelming force. The more it knocks him unconscious, the more
he is just sure it is true.
FORCE is the pretense of cause in the physical universe.
Force is a mask over the underlying eternal postulates that are the
true cause.
Perfect certainties are self obvious and can not be wrong, because
perfect certainties gain their evidence from direct perception which is
capable of continuous present time reverification.
The preclear must be drilled on the difference between conviction
and perfect certainty until he no long confuses the two.
For the record, the term 'perfect certainty' is redundant.
For anything your preclear says is true, ask if him he would be
willing to bet his eternity in hell forever on it.
If yes, then ask him if he would be willing to bet EVERYONE ELSE'S
eternity in hell on it.
If yes, then probably the item is a perfect certainty.
If no, then its not.
Get him to spot a perfect certainty, then a conviction, until he
can notice the difference between a deeply held belief and a direct
present time perception of a perfect certainty.
"Spot two different colors in the environment.
Are you perfectly certain there are at least two different colors
there?
Good."
At some point he will get honest with himself, and recognize the
facility of perfect certainty within himself. That is NOT the E/P of
the process, that merely allows him to continue the process with honest
answers.
However, since the facility of perfect certainty is what makes him
conscious and not a machine, it's an important first step towards
awareness of anything, let alone truth and the way to personal
integrity.
Now what we want the preclear to do, figuratively, is to dump the
confused contents of all his buckets on the ground in one big messy
pile.
Then one by one, individually inspect each item of knowledge and
replace it into its correct bucket, based on his present time mature
adult judgment.
Once all items have been reevaluated by the preclear and are in
their correct bucket, his awareness of actual truth and personal
integrity will be restored.
Life is a path on the way to greater evolution as a spirit, towards
spiritual sovereignty, which starts with the ability to TAKE full
responsibility for all things and actions as one's own, whether one
'created them' or not.
To take means to see a silver dollar on a table that is not yours,
and TAKE it, so that it becomes yours.
Theft of things might normally be considered bad, but for a God,
theft of responsibility for all things is normal operating procedure as
long as the being allows other's to take full responsibility for all
things at the same time.
The Many in time are related via the One in Eternity, the same way
the Many heads of the hydra are related to the One body.
Inside of time the Many look like they have only individual
responsibility.
But from Eternity, the view is of One responsibility.
Thus the way from the Many to the One is theft of responsibility
while leaving it there for others to take also.
"All choose that all should choose, and that all should choose
more." -Adore
That's like taking the silver dollar for yourself, but leaving one
on the table for someone else to take too.
If you can put it there, put the silver dollar there, so that
someone else can also put the same silver dollar there, who now is
responsible for the silver dollar being there?
The path of life through spiritual evolution towards sovereignty,
has been ruined by various views, which views where then used by the
being to submerge his desires related to life and walking that path.
The being has 'chernobled' his true desires with his questionable
views.
To chernoble means to bury in concrete, in this case 'mental mass.'
The impulse to chernoble desire with view results from high
appreciation for ludicrous demise.
It is a game of the Imp Soul, who wishes to play the game of
seeking God while getting tied up playing the games of life instead.
Eventually the Imp Soul ends of seeking God by seeking death.
By running the Life Repair process fully to a complete E/P, that
walk of Life on the path towards the game of evolution will no longer be
ruined, and his High Appreciation for Ludicrous Demise will be restored.
Rather than walk in anger, fear and sorrow, he can walk in
Living Peace.
Living Peace is a kind of serenity of beingness that still allows
for high action without the hysteria about doom.
And so too will be restored his get up and go, because now he has
reoriented himself with what the games of life are about, fun and not
shackels on his feet to trip himself up, during the game of evolving
back towards sovereignty.
In other words he can pick himself up in life and walk that path
again without getting sucked into the drama of really bad life games.
Before that he is sitting in a mess, doing life as best he can, but
no spiritual evolution is taking place and the PURPOSE of life games are
lost to him.
The process is NOT an effort to rehabilitate any particular life
game of survival on any dynamic, but to rehabilitate WHY the preclear is
involved in life games in the first place, win or lose, and how to
readjust himself in the game stream, not for maximum wins in life games,
but for optimum play.
By desiring to play, he will put life games there rather than
playing them to get rid of them forever.
He does this BY TAKING FULL RESPONSIBILITY and failing to bury his
desire with his views.
As a side result, the win/lose ratio of life games will change
markedly, along with what games he chooses to play, but more to the
point, the preclear will have his get up and go operational again and
will be feeling good and enjoying the path to greater SPIRITUAL
evolution, on the 8 dynamics of action.
Love is such a game. Love is an emotion, a warm and powerful
feeling that drives the efforts to enhance the future of yourself and
another across all dynamics.
It is the Many seeking the One, via interacting with other Manys.
while retaining itself as one of Many.
Feeling good about get up and go in time, and certainty that one is
now SPIRITUALLY evolving properly towards Eternity, is the return on
investment of this process.
THE PROCESS
"Tell me something true."
"What evidence do you have for this?"
"What bucket does it belong in?"
"How does knowing it is true make you feel?"
"Tell me something false."
"What evidence do you have for this?"
"What bucket does it belong in?"
"How does knowing it is false make you feel?"
Two way comm between preclear and auditor is critical to this
process, let the preclear hash it out, he took a long time to get all
his beliefs in place, it will take him some time to release them all.
The feeling question is also CRITICAL to the process.
The preclear will start off with desire being subjugated by view.
Eventually he will realize that his VIEWS are killing his will to
live.
He will eventually have to decide between believing what is killing
him, or looking deeper until he finds a more palatable view to forge
ahead with.
He will realize he ran into this conflict long ago between what he
thought was true and what he really desired was true, and he made the
wrong choices to deal with the conflict by bowing to the view and
suppressing his desire.
He chose the idea that view is sovereign and desire is not.
The truth is, desire is sovereign and view is not.
He will have to learn that desire CREATES views, even those views
that suppress desire.
Majesty is the sovereign desire that desire not be sovereign FOR A
WHILE.
Thus the concentration on taking responsibility for total
irresponsibility.
The guy choose to not know he choose, this process will start to
run that out for good.
Eventually once the process is completed, after one or many
sessions, including between session background solo time, and running
the process on his friends and getting them to run it their friends, he
won't accept any view that makes him feel bad.
We are dealing with a fundamental operational aspect of the mind.
That consists of asking is this true, and do I like it?
He has never before been willing to consider that the fact he
didn't like an idea, was itself evidence that the idea was not true NO
MATTER WHAT OTHER EVIDENCE HE THOUGHT HE HAD THAT IT WAS TRUE.
Meatballs won't understand that statement, so don't piss them off
by showing it to them.
But in fact it is impossible to have something be true that you do
not like.
So either the idea is not completely true, or you do like it and in
fact wanted it from an Eternal perspective.
Thus a clear being is one whose desire and view are in perfect
accord.
When a being can finally find accord between his desire and view,
his willingness to take responsibility for those views goes up to the
point where he CAN take responsibility for them, and thus create or not
create views as he wishes, including views that send him right back into
the auditor's chair.
Since views ARE ALL THAT ARE MAKING A PERSON FEEL BAD, once this
process completes, he will be running in the strong interest and
positive emotion range most of the time, and will be able to handle
crushing emotional losses as positive influences to his spiritual
evolvement back to absolute Sovereignty rather than as crushing blows to
his future enjoyment of life.
Everything lives in a 'while', by putting the thing in a while,
even if he doesn't know the beginning or end, he pops himself out
of that while and the inevitable loss of what is in the while.
By doing this with everything in his life on an on going basis,
he starts to take responsibility for things by putting them in their
while, and thus he can handle the ending of the while BECAUSE HE
ALREADY ORDAINED IT, even if not knowing when. That is part of his
ordainment of that while.
"Spot something you love."
"Put it in a while."
E/P: Torrents of love and laughter.
Joy does not come from playing, winning or losing the games of
life, it comes from spiritual advancement back to sovereignty.
In games of life happiness comes from playing, overcoming not
unknowable barriers towards known purposes.
The games of spiritual evolvement, happiness comes from being able
to take responsibility for anything the games of life throw at you,
whether play, win or lose, each successful action of taking
responsibility being one more step towards sovereignty, the ultimate and
inevitable outcome.
Being able to CREATE games is more enjoyable than playing,
winning or losing them.
What is being tested is not how well or good a being can live, nor
how compassionate he can be, but by how able he is to take full
responsibility for all conditions of existence, and all actions on all
dynamics whether good or bad.
If his house gets robbed, and he says 'Well I didn't do that, HE
did that!', then he starts a cycle of karma from that moment on, that
continues and commits to the idea that he can be an effect of causes
that he had nothing to do with, leaving him less and less able to
control others directly on the physical, emotional mental and spiritual
planes.
So he is more likely to get robbed again, and he will get involved
in all kinds of life games having to do with anti robbery etc.
In the meanwhile his emotional tone is future tainted with the
worry about being robbed again, and others being robbed. He will
eventually solve this emotional irritation by making robbery right, and
taking to robbing others.
That ain't sovereignty.
If he takes full responsibility for the robbery, he is saying HE
caused the other guy to do it, even if only after the fact, for no
reason at all, then he can step out of the consideration that he is an
effect of unwanted causes, and thus regain a touch of his absolute
eternal sovereignty.
*THAT* is spiritual evolution.
It's not about being good, the being as A CHARACTER is trying to be
good against evil he would never create.
It's about being AUTHOR, the being as AUTHOR creates grand
tapestries of good and evil.
One can only get stuck in a tapestry of dicoms, by siding adamantly
with one side and refusing to while the pair, put it there.
CHARACTERS do that, back themselves and hide in the corners of one
side of a dicom, not Authors.
One doesn't have to go out and BE evil, but one does have to be
willing to write the story of his life so its a better story.
He can't do that without being willing to put it there AS HIMSELF,
as the effect of some other authorship.
God is authorship, that's Sovereignty.
Grand tapestries of good and evil.
Got it?
If you want control of your life, you have to author it, into a rip
roaring good story, not an easy win against your most detested enemies.
You think God the Author detests any character in its story?
He loves them all equally because they TOGETHER make a good story.
What? I thought evil was a BAD thing!
Yes to a character it is, but not to an Author.
Without evil Authors would be out of business as not even
the good would read a book that had only good characters in it.
Therefore worship your most detested enemies as yourself, lest your
life become boring as hell, or you get eaten by the bad you would never,
could never, should never have created.
Your entire track from the beginning of time to where you are
sitting in your chair right now is a composite of all the times you
either took full responsibility for something or didn't.
Those things you did take full responsibility for vanished with no
wake left in time, so all that's left is ...
Which way are you going to turn?
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Jun 23 17:27:00 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore940.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)
iD8DBQFVic8kURT1lqxE3HERAu52AJ0XJ+Gom7+GhZGVYtyiZTXWveRStQCfcedM
oZrrbzMDWcHZPwWTUDfn+iY=
=Gurx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
LIFE REPAIR
This is New Clearing Technology.
INDOCTRINATE THE PRECLEAR INTO AS MUCH OF THE FOLLOWING AS
NECESSARY TO GET THE PROCESS TO RUN, BUT NOT ONE WORD MORE.
The End Phenomenon of Life Repair is:
Awareness of Truth and the way to Personal Integrity.
Integrity means knowing what you know, and knowing what you do not
know. It may have other meanings, but without this meaning in
operation, any others will never be attained.
We want a simple and totally non evaluative process to run on the
brand new preclear off the street, a process that can be run on someone
you just met by accident on the concourses of life, with noticeable and
astounding results.
Sessions should last between 20 and 90 minutes at most, and take
place every 3 or more days apart. Less than 3 and the preclear will
still be in the previous session getting wins. Too many more than 3
days, and he will be bogged down in life out rudiments again, upsets,
problems, withholds, wars of make wrong etc.
That said the results of this process are firm and stable, and at
the end of this process, the preclear will be able to deal with incoming
realities properly rather than being ruined by them. It may however
take you and the preclear more than one session to accomplish this,
perhaps 10 at most.
The auditor is allowed to run the process, ask the questions, give
the commands, but is forbidden to answer the question or execute the
command for the preclear.
Totally non evaluative technology is hard to come by because of a
number of reasons.
First the very fact that you are running a given process on the
preclear indicates an evaluation by the C/S and the auditor that the
preclear needs to have the process run on him.
This indicates that the preclear is presently not operating with
the E/P of the process, but that at the end of a reasonable (financially
supportable) amount of time of running the process, he will be operating
in life with the E/P of the process.
At the end of session the preclear should be happy with the money
spent for that session, which is charged by the session not the hour,
and within a few days the preclear should feel serious return on
investment coming from what you did with him during that session.
EVERY SESSION MUST SHOW POSITIVE RETURN ON INVESTMENT AT THE END OF
THAT SESSION OR WITHIN A FEW DAYS MORE.
AT THE VERY LEAST, AT THE END OF EVERY SESSION THE PRECLEAR SHOULD
SEE THAT THE DOOR TO POSITIVE RETURN HAS OPENED AND IS LOOKING FORWARD
TO ITS FULL FRUITION OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS FOR THAT SESSION.
HE IS EXTROVERTED WATCHING THE POSITIVE RETURNS COME IN.
IF YOUR PRECLEAR IS HUNKERED DOWN ENDURING AUDITING, SESSION AFTER
SESSION, CLEARING ONLY HIS BANK ACCOUNT ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS, WAITING
FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN THAT WOULD MAKE HIS EXPENDITURES FOR SESSION
TIME WORTHWHILE, THEN YOU ARE A SUPPRESSIVE AUDITOR THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN
OUT BACK AND SHOT IMMEDIATELY.
There is a SHORT time delay measured in a few days, between a
session and full return on investment for that session to make itself
apparent.
Second, every process needs a necessary modicum of indoctrination
at the beginning of it, such as what we are doing in this posting,
including word clearing the words of the process, and clearing the basic
concepts of the process that will be used.
Words and concepts used in a process may be different than their
normal loose English usage, so such differences need to be clarified and
understood by the preclear.
If a preclear can't change his definition of the word God to mean a
watermelon, he is in trouble.
Beyond that, once the session starts, the auditor asks the
questions, gives the commands, and the preclear responds.
A violation of this is a High Auditing Crime, no matter how
reasonable it might seem at the time.
Answering a question for the preclear WILL result in an ARC break
later.
The more the preclear begs for an answer, the more they will
crucify you later if you give them one.
In session means the preclear is interested in his own case and
willing to talk to the auditor.
Out of session means the preclear is not interested in his own case
or not willing to talk to the auditor.
Out of sessionness is either an IMMEDIATE present time problem,
such as needing to pee, which you should allow to be handled, or two way
comm'd to a release per standard tech, or withholds, or an ARC break.
Handle ARC breaks with "What would you like me to know about you?"
Once you find the item or items, make SURE the preclear KNOWS you
understand and know what he wanted you to know, even if you have to give
it back to him in your own words. That's called a super ack.
Then continue with the process.
You do NOT super ack during normal session processing.
In normal processing, giving back to the preclear what he just said
is called echo auditing and will cause the preclear to go out of
session. He expects you to get it the first time.
If he asks if you got it, say yes, and then continue.
On a new preclear, they will be very sensitive about withholds,
sexual pecadillos etc.
Indicate to the preclear you do not need to know them unless the
preclear wants you to know them, but that the preclear should indicate,
if he can, that there is something he is not talking about and let it go
at that. This will greatly relieve the new preclear who will start
spilling the beans anyhow as things progress.
Notice, in session means the auditor asks the questions, and the
preclear gives the answers.
Out of session means, the preclear asks the question and the
auditor gives an answer.
It is OK for the preclear to ask a question in session, but it is
NOT OK for the auditor to answer it, unless it is a question about the
procedure.
Preclear questions DURING SESSION need to be handled with standard
TR (Training Routine) procedures.
SPECIFIC PROCESS INDOCTRINATION
A being is an operating system of desire and view.
Desire is what he wants, his goals, and are the source of his
emotion, feelings and drive through out the day.
View is his view of the Cosmic All, the AllThatIs.
Views are opinions, bets, beliefs, convictions and perfect
certainties.
Your preclear will have desires and views along all 8 dynamics or
action from himself to The Infinite.
The 8 dynamics of action are self, family, groups, mankind, life
forms, MEST, Spirit and The Infinite.
He will also have desires about his views and views about his
desires.
Your average preclear will be found to be in a state where his
views constrain, invalidate or make impossible his desires,
Thus coming to believe his views with great conviction, he has
retired, submerged or outright buried his desires that were not
consistent with his views.
This is the opposite of how a God works.
The human makes his desires subservient to his views.
The human rearranges his desires to accomodate his views.
A God makes his views subservient to his desires.
A God rearranges his views to accomodate his desires.
Views consist of considerations as to what is true and what is
false about the nature of things, ranging from himself, up through the 8
dynamics to The Infinite.
Views thus consist of items of belief in true and false, right and
wrong, desirable and undesirable.
Beliefs fall into 5 categories, and the preclear thus has 5
'buckets' into which he has tossed all of his beliefs.
The 5 buckets are:
1.) Perfectly Certain is true.
2.) Probably true.
3.) No clue if true or false.
4.) Probably false.
5.) Perfectly certain is false.
More bullshit will never be found on Earth than in those 5 buckets.
Preclears confuse perfect certainties with convictions.
Convictions can be wrong, because convictions gain their 'evidence'
from overwhelming force. The more it knocks him unconscious, the more
he is just sure it is true.
FORCE is the pretense of cause in the physical universe.
Force is a mask over the underlying eternal postulates that are the
true cause.
Perfect certainties are self obvious and can not be wrong, because
perfect certainties gain their evidence from direct perception which is
capable of continuous present time reverification.
The preclear must be drilled on the difference between conviction
and perfect certainty until he no long confuses the two.
For the record, the term 'perfect certainty' is redundant.
For anything your preclear says is true, ask if him he would be
willing to bet his eternity in hell forever on it.
If yes, then ask him if he would be willing to bet EVERYONE ELSE'S
eternity in hell on it.
If yes, then probably the item is a perfect certainty.
If no, then its not.
Get him to spot a perfect certainty, then a conviction, until he
can notice the difference between a deeply held belief and a direct
present time perception of a perfect certainty.
"Spot two different colors in the environment.
Are you perfectly certain there are at least two different colors
there?
Good."
At some point he will get honest with himself, and recognize the
facility of perfect certainty within himself. That is NOT the E/P of
the process, that merely allows him to continue the process with honest
answers.
However, since the facility of perfect certainty is what makes him
conscious and not a machine, it's an important first step towards
awareness of anything, let alone truth and the way to personal
integrity.
Now what we want the preclear to do, figuratively, is to dump the
confused contents of all his buckets on the ground in one big messy
pile.
Then one by one, individually inspect each item of knowledge and
replace it into its correct bucket, based on his present time mature
adult judgment.
Once all items have been reevaluated by the preclear and are in
their correct bucket, his awareness of actual truth and personal
integrity will be restored.
Life is a path on the way to greater evolution as a spirit, towards
spiritual sovereignty, which starts with the ability to TAKE full
responsibility for all things and actions as one's own, whether one
'created them' or not.
To take means to see a silver dollar on a table that is not yours,
and TAKE it, so that it becomes yours.
Theft of things might normally be considered bad, but for a God,
theft of responsibility for all things is normal operating procedure as
long as the being allows other's to take full responsibility for all
things at the same time.
The Many in time are related via the One in Eternity, the same way
the Many heads of the hydra are related to the One body.
Inside of time the Many look like they have only individual
responsibility.
But from Eternity, the view is of One responsibility.
Thus the way from the Many to the One is theft of responsibility
while leaving it there for others to take also.
"All choose that all should choose, and that all should choose
more." -Adore
That's like taking the silver dollar for yourself, but leaving one
on the table for someone else to take too.
If you can put it there, put the silver dollar there, so that
someone else can also put the same silver dollar there, who now is
responsible for the silver dollar being there?
The path of life through spiritual evolution towards sovereignty,
has been ruined by various views, which views where then used by the
being to submerge his desires related to life and walking that path.
The being has 'chernobled' his true desires with his questionable
views.
To chernoble means to bury in concrete, in this case 'mental mass.'
The impulse to chernoble desire with view results from high
appreciation for ludicrous demise.
It is a game of the Imp Soul, who wishes to play the game of
seeking God while getting tied up playing the games of life instead.
Eventually the Imp Soul ends of seeking God by seeking death.
By running the Life Repair process fully to a complete E/P, that
walk of Life on the path towards the game of evolution will no longer be
ruined, and his High Appreciation for Ludicrous Demise will be restored.
Rather than walk in anger, fear and sorrow, he can walk in
Living Peace.
Living Peace is a kind of serenity of beingness that still allows
for high action without the hysteria about doom.
And so too will be restored his get up and go, because now he has
reoriented himself with what the games of life are about, fun and not
shackels on his feet to trip himself up, during the game of evolving
back towards sovereignty.
In other words he can pick himself up in life and walk that path
again without getting sucked into the drama of really bad life games.
Before that he is sitting in a mess, doing life as best he can, but
no spiritual evolution is taking place and the PURPOSE of life games are
lost to him.
The process is NOT an effort to rehabilitate any particular life
game of survival on any dynamic, but to rehabilitate WHY the preclear is
involved in life games in the first place, win or lose, and how to
readjust himself in the game stream, not for maximum wins in life games,
but for optimum play.
By desiring to play, he will put life games there rather than
playing them to get rid of them forever.
He does this BY TAKING FULL RESPONSIBILITY and failing to bury his
desire with his views.
As a side result, the win/lose ratio of life games will change
markedly, along with what games he chooses to play, but more to the
point, the preclear will have his get up and go operational again and
will be feeling good and enjoying the path to greater SPIRITUAL
evolution, on the 8 dynamics of action.
Love is such a game. Love is an emotion, a warm and powerful
feeling that drives the efforts to enhance the future of yourself and
another across all dynamics.
It is the Many seeking the One, via interacting with other Manys.
while retaining itself as one of Many.
Feeling good about get up and go in time, and certainty that one is
now SPIRITUALLY evolving properly towards Eternity, is the return on
investment of this process.
THE PROCESS
"Tell me something true."
"What evidence do you have for this?"
"What bucket does it belong in?"
"How does knowing it is true make you feel?"
"Tell me something false."
"What evidence do you have for this?"
"What bucket does it belong in?"
"How does knowing it is false make you feel?"
Two way comm between preclear and auditor is critical to this
process, let the preclear hash it out, he took a long time to get all
his beliefs in place, it will take him some time to release them all.
The feeling question is also CRITICAL to the process.
The preclear will start off with desire being subjugated by view.
Eventually he will realize that his VIEWS are killing his will to
live.
He will eventually have to decide between believing what is killing
him, or looking deeper until he finds a more palatable view to forge
ahead with.
He will realize he ran into this conflict long ago between what he
thought was true and what he really desired was true, and he made the
wrong choices to deal with the conflict by bowing to the view and
suppressing his desire.
He chose the idea that view is sovereign and desire is not.
The truth is, desire is sovereign and view is not.
He will have to learn that desire CREATES views, even those views
that suppress desire.
Majesty is the sovereign desire that desire not be sovereign FOR A
WHILE.
Thus the concentration on taking responsibility for total
irresponsibility.
The guy choose to not know he choose, this process will start to
run that out for good.
Eventually once the process is completed, after one or many
sessions, including between session background solo time, and running
the process on his friends and getting them to run it their friends, he
won't accept any view that makes him feel bad.
We are dealing with a fundamental operational aspect of the mind.
That consists of asking is this true, and do I like it?
He has never before been willing to consider that the fact he
didn't like an idea, was itself evidence that the idea was not true NO
MATTER WHAT OTHER EVIDENCE HE THOUGHT HE HAD THAT IT WAS TRUE.
Meatballs won't understand that statement, so don't piss them off
by showing it to them.
But in fact it is impossible to have something be true that you do
not like.
So either the idea is not completely true, or you do like it and in
fact wanted it from an Eternal perspective.
Thus a clear being is one whose desire and view are in perfect
accord.
When a being can finally find accord between his desire and view,
his willingness to take responsibility for those views goes up to the
point where he CAN take responsibility for them, and thus create or not
create views as he wishes, including views that send him right back into
the auditor's chair.
Since views ARE ALL THAT ARE MAKING A PERSON FEEL BAD, once this
process completes, he will be running in the strong interest and
positive emotion range most of the time, and will be able to handle
crushing emotional losses as positive influences to his spiritual
evolvement back to absolute Sovereignty rather than as crushing blows to
his future enjoyment of life.
Everything lives in a 'while', by putting the thing in a while,
even if he doesn't know the beginning or end, he pops himself out
of that while and the inevitable loss of what is in the while.
By doing this with everything in his life on an on going basis,
he starts to take responsibility for things by putting them in their
while, and thus he can handle the ending of the while BECAUSE HE
ALREADY ORDAINED IT, even if not knowing when. That is part of his
ordainment of that while.
"Spot something you love."
"Put it in a while."
E/P: Torrents of love and laughter.
Joy does not come from playing, winning or losing the games of
life, it comes from spiritual advancement back to sovereignty.
In games of life happiness comes from playing, overcoming not
unknowable barriers towards known purposes.
The games of spiritual evolvement, happiness comes from being able
to take responsibility for anything the games of life throw at you,
whether play, win or lose, each successful action of taking
responsibility being one more step towards sovereignty, the ultimate and
inevitable outcome.
Being able to CREATE games is more enjoyable than playing,
winning or losing them.
What is being tested is not how well or good a being can live, nor
how compassionate he can be, but by how able he is to take full
responsibility for all conditions of existence, and all actions on all
dynamics whether good or bad.
If his house gets robbed, and he says 'Well I didn't do that, HE
did that!', then he starts a cycle of karma from that moment on, that
continues and commits to the idea that he can be an effect of causes
that he had nothing to do with, leaving him less and less able to
control others directly on the physical, emotional mental and spiritual
planes.
So he is more likely to get robbed again, and he will get involved
in all kinds of life games having to do with anti robbery etc.
In the meanwhile his emotional tone is future tainted with the
worry about being robbed again, and others being robbed. He will
eventually solve this emotional irritation by making robbery right, and
taking to robbing others.
That ain't sovereignty.
If he takes full responsibility for the robbery, he is saying HE
caused the other guy to do it, even if only after the fact, for no
reason at all, then he can step out of the consideration that he is an
effect of unwanted causes, and thus regain a touch of his absolute
eternal sovereignty.
*THAT* is spiritual evolution.
It's not about being good, the being as A CHARACTER is trying to be
good against evil he would never create.
It's about being AUTHOR, the being as AUTHOR creates grand
tapestries of good and evil.
One can only get stuck in a tapestry of dicoms, by siding adamantly
with one side and refusing to while the pair, put it there.
CHARACTERS do that, back themselves and hide in the corners of one
side of a dicom, not Authors.
One doesn't have to go out and BE evil, but one does have to be
willing to write the story of his life so its a better story.
He can't do that without being willing to put it there AS HIMSELF,
as the effect of some other authorship.
God is authorship, that's Sovereignty.
Grand tapestries of good and evil.
Got it?
If you want control of your life, you have to author it, into a rip
roaring good story, not an easy win against your most detested enemies.
You think God the Author detests any character in its story?
He loves them all equally because they TOGETHER make a good story.
What? I thought evil was a BAD thing!
Yes to a character it is, but not to an Author.
Without evil Authors would be out of business as not even
the good would read a book that had only good characters in it.
Therefore worship your most detested enemies as yourself, lest your
life become boring as hell, or you get eaten by the bad you would never,
could never, should never have created.
Your entire track from the beginning of time to where you are
sitting in your chair right now is a composite of all the times you
either took full responsibility for something or didn't.
Those things you did take full responsibility for vanished with no
wake left in time, so all that's left is ...
Which way are you going to turn?
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Jun 23 17:27:00 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore940.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)
iD8DBQFVic8kURT1lqxE3HERAu52AJ0XJ+Gom7+GhZGVYtyiZTXWveRStQCfcedM
oZrrbzMDWcHZPwWTUDfn+iY=
=Gurx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, June 22, 2015
ADORE95 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
RESISTENCE AND PERSISTENCE
CB Willis (cbwillis@adore.lightlink.com) wrote:
>Kathie Lynch (kathielynch@cox.net) wrote:
>>Resisting something only means you will
>>end up with just that.
>A popular misconception. You MAY end up with that, but you may not.
>If you think of many things you've "resisted" to some degree in this life,
>you didn't end up with all of them, and probably won't manifest them
>henceforth either.
That people 'win' by using force resisting things, doesn't mean
they didn't sink deeper into the spiritual quicksand of life, by doing
so.
People climb the mountain, and are triumphant that they got to
the top, but they fail to see that they and the mountain have sunk
together down into the abyss.
Thus the small view is they are higher up, the big view is
they and everything involved are lower down.
Now Carol you may in fact be right, if you are, then all of
scientology is completely and utterly wrong.
So you should understand what Scn is saying.
Anything 'vanquished' by resistance and force in space and time
leads to a permanent impression called a ridge that the person keeps
along with him forever afterwards, not only as a lesson learned, but
as a shield against becoming that which he resisted.
One resists the murderer by shooting him first, but one lessens
ones space so one can not BE the murderer and simply cause him to toss
his weapon into the bay.
Meatballs always think they are winning when in fact they are
losing. They are winning as humans, but losing as gods.
Their fate is monster food.
>If one buys the idea that resisting something means you will end up with
>that, he will create resisted circumstances more often, will also fear
>that happening, so it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, an adopted
>postulate of not-necessarily-true data, inadequately examined data.
The problem of resisting resistance, fearing resistence etc, is
an important one, not to be lightly sloughed off as you are doing.
Resisting resistence is in fact necessary to making any
resistence persist at all, it is thus part of the excaliper and grand
design of how the thetan created and jumped into the spiritual
quicksand in the first place.
Play with cornstarch in warm water until you understand how
struggle in quicksand makes things solid and more rigid.
You can roll a *LIQUID* cornstarch blob up into a ball as long
as you keep it moving, the moment you let it rest it melts into a puddle.
If you stick your finger into it, it solidifies, if you relax
it melts. The ultimate chinese finger trap.
The actual quicksand of life is more complex than the cornstarch
mechanism, one needs to study the caps lock key to understand it
further.
>It would pay not to be so fast and loose with the new age slogans.
>"The unexamined life...." - Socrates
You teach best what you most need to learn.
Homer
>- CBW
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Jun 22 16:42:27 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore95.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)
iD8DBQFViHMzURT1lqxE3HERAnJ5AJ9xAcqxAn8k7hHQ+44NopH2LD97mwCgor7c
JSxmnP86d02Rl06s0rdtd8c=
=2bO0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
RESISTENCE AND PERSISTENCE
CB Willis (cbwillis@adore.lightlink.com) wrote:
>Kathie Lynch (kathielynch@cox.net) wrote:
>>Resisting something only means you will
>>end up with just that.
>A popular misconception. You MAY end up with that, but you may not.
>If you think of many things you've "resisted" to some degree in this life,
>you didn't end up with all of them, and probably won't manifest them
>henceforth either.
That people 'win' by using force resisting things, doesn't mean
they didn't sink deeper into the spiritual quicksand of life, by doing
so.
People climb the mountain, and are triumphant that they got to
the top, but they fail to see that they and the mountain have sunk
together down into the abyss.
Thus the small view is they are higher up, the big view is
they and everything involved are lower down.
Now Carol you may in fact be right, if you are, then all of
scientology is completely and utterly wrong.
So you should understand what Scn is saying.
Anything 'vanquished' by resistance and force in space and time
leads to a permanent impression called a ridge that the person keeps
along with him forever afterwards, not only as a lesson learned, but
as a shield against becoming that which he resisted.
One resists the murderer by shooting him first, but one lessens
ones space so one can not BE the murderer and simply cause him to toss
his weapon into the bay.
Meatballs always think they are winning when in fact they are
losing. They are winning as humans, but losing as gods.
Their fate is monster food.
>If one buys the idea that resisting something means you will end up with
>that, he will create resisted circumstances more often, will also fear
>that happening, so it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, an adopted
>postulate of not-necessarily-true data, inadequately examined data.
The problem of resisting resistance, fearing resistence etc, is
an important one, not to be lightly sloughed off as you are doing.
Resisting resistence is in fact necessary to making any
resistence persist at all, it is thus part of the excaliper and grand
design of how the thetan created and jumped into the spiritual
quicksand in the first place.
Play with cornstarch in warm water until you understand how
struggle in quicksand makes things solid and more rigid.
You can roll a *LIQUID* cornstarch blob up into a ball as long
as you keep it moving, the moment you let it rest it melts into a puddle.
If you stick your finger into it, it solidifies, if you relax
it melts. The ultimate chinese finger trap.
The actual quicksand of life is more complex than the cornstarch
mechanism, one needs to study the caps lock key to understand it
further.
>It would pay not to be so fast and loose with the new age slogans.
>"The unexamined life...." - Socrates
You teach best what you most need to learn.
Homer
>- CBW
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Jun 22 16:42:27 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore95.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)
iD8DBQFViHMzURT1lqxE3HERAnJ5AJ9xAcqxAn8k7hHQ+44NopH2LD97mwCgor7c
JSxmnP86d02Rl06s0rdtd8c=
=2bO0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)