-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
VALUES
George,
I can tell you Adore's view on this.
Values are motivations.
The motivations of a creator Author are not the motivations
of the creature character.
Thus the motivations for a being to move from eternality into time are
not the motivations of the being after he is in time which is mostly to
get the hell out, and failing that making the best of it through help
groups.
Adore says,
Eternal Home is Home,
Lost is Time.
Eternal Home is Cool.
Lost is Kind.
Now what that means is open to interpretation, but kindness
is an quality of the character, not the author.
Since the author is creating games for himself to play the part,
his intentions are not human as he is creating good and bad in artistic
and majestic tapestry.
Thus a God of Kindness is an oxymoron.
A God of good AND evil begins to make sense and matches the
nature of the universe we find our selves in.
Thus in studying values, if you as-is all the values you have as a
character, you might of course return to the author mode because the only
motivation left standing behind all the human values that are now seen
through is the motivation to come in.
Duplicating the motivtion to come in puts you out, if you have the
confront for what kind of character you might create next. :)
Is this what happened to you?
Can you verbalize the motivations of the home universe thetan
to come into the MEST universe as a character?
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
On Fri, 10 Dec 2010, George ~ wrote:
Hi, Homer -
Thank you for your suport on your forum, and for your validations.
I'm on vacation, so I have some time to play around with the wild world
of the web.
I posted something more about certainty of own universe, but it
occurred to me to say something more on it - your e-mail arrived exactly
as I was thinking of looking up your address, and provides me with an
easy opportunity to reply.
The very beginning of Scn 0-8 has that wonderful first few
paragraphs concluding with "But I think it's your purpose, too."
KRC is the senior triangle, and responsibility is key to certainty
on some manner, perhaps especially as it relates to one's own universe.
People like to follow leaders and be in groups, even though each is
their own being. I wonder how many good Scientologists have ever
seriously considered the purposes each operates on? Scn itself as-is-es
at some level, and one is left "on one's own."
I still find it interesting (curious) that in spite of having
posted my little piece about values as an immortal being in a couple of
places, and sending it out to two Scn friends as e-mail, no one has
mentioned values in their replies. It's that odd phenomenon, again - I
haven't made up a name for it yet, but maybe it has something to do with
as-is-ness.
Considerations about values was the important part - exterior was
just a bit of icing on the cake. Taking full responsibility for Scn and
for oneself and one's immortal life as a thetan is part of own universe.
It's funny ... I always thought that "OT" would be a big change,
something like a first flight on an airplane. One can look at it that
way, but it's the thought that counts, in that the thought is what makes
for OT. Couldn't be simpler - it's the consideration.
I'm sure I'll look back on this years from now and wonder what the
heck I was trying to say, so if it doesn't make sense, just scrap it.
Best,
George.
>From: homer@lightlink.com
>To: GeorgeCFL@hotmail.com
>Subject: Re: ACT16
>CC: homer@lightlink.com
>Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 01:29:46 -0500
>
>OK, I got this. Very cool.
>
>Monotony is an interesting tone.
>
>Homer
Fri Dec 10 15:47:48 EST 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Sep 29 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore828.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFWCrbqURT1lqxE3HERAs+fAJ9ciZqQ804YGbc21s1DuBnWIRHzYACgofEP
3sATg2TwiCV2SSjJgSJRBxk=
=ueHj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, September 29, 2015
Monday, September 28, 2015
NEW: HOW DO YOU ERASE POSTULATES?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
HOW DO YOU ERASE POSTULATES?
The question is wrong.
Postulates are self vanishing as persistence hasn't been conceived
yet.
The right question is how do you make postulates persist in time.
A postulate is a timeless creation, a thought.
Thought is not thinkingness.
A thought is 'There is an elephant!', a causal putting it there
which is fully and wholy responsibile for the elephant being there.
Thinking is, "Why is there an elephant?"
Question asking in otherwords.
Question asking about a postulated posting (creation) creates
persistence of that posting through time.
Why is it!? means IT IS!, WHY?
IT IS, creates the timeless elephant, asking why creates time and
continuation of the postulate because asking why it is presupposes it
is.
Then one continues the insanity by asking 'What should I do about
it?'
That's an effort to create something MORE to deal with the prior IT
IS.
You can't get rid of A at time 0, by creating B at time 1,2,3,4....
This is explained pretty well in all the postings about 'A CHASE
B'.
Click on the following and search for A CHASE B.
MURDERING
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archie.cgi?/homer/adore.892.memo
SUICIDE AND KAMIKAZE
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archie.cgi?/homer/adore.897.memo
THE CYCLE OF A THETAN
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archie.cgi?/homer/adore.900.memo
'A' puts the whole universe there minus a bridge across the river
via a postulate.
A postulate is causal conception, the God creates in the mere
conception of things.
He uncreates by unconceiving.
The thetan then, once inside A, decides that A is not complete or
could be better with a bridge across the river.
That's dissatisfaction with things as they are and the desire to
change them according to the vision statement of having a bridge there
too, but created by MEST force/effort rather than postulate.
The *EFFORT* then to create a bridge is the mission statement that
creates chase and time as all effort does.
Chase is effort through time via conditions between desire and
havingness.
Thus the use of effort to chase goals, changes in A, keep A going
by prepostulating that A exists and B doesn't and that one needs to
exert effort as game play to get the bridge there to complete A.
Notice games are freedoms/ability, barriers/conditions and
purposes/goals.
The top of the awareness characteristic chart is
Squirrel Power Grade V
SOURCE "Get the idea of a No Source/Source."
EXISTENCE "Get the idea of NOT-IS/IS"
CONDITIONS "Get the idea of NO CONDITIONS/CONDITIONS"
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi/?electra/acc.memo
Universe A and conditions are created by static postulate at
existence.
B is then chased via kinetic effort powered by spirit of play down
around games, action, sensation, force, matter, energy space and time
etc.
A is a true creation of the kinetic from the static.
The building of the bridge is a mere rearrangement of the kinetic
via force/effort long after denying that one put A there.
The postulate that A is there is self erasing, it has a very short
time to live unless one continues to refrfesh the postulate over and
over by worrying about improving on A via dissatisafaction, desire and
effort, thus creating time because one wants to play the game of chasing
the bridge.
Thus while the GodSoul (thetan) is busy creating the bridge via
effort as the Soul, it is also putting the whole universe there as the
God.
The God part of the GodSoul vanishes its involvement in the
original creation of A, by telling the Soul to quiece absolutely.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Sep 28 23:34:52 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore978.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)
iD8DBQFWCgbcURT1lqxE3HERAhYkAKCHVHErSRkpMF/YTemyWNFDh8DmuQCgjuph
hfKIaDIJ10D4QT+5nVpZCjo=
=BJTp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
HOW DO YOU ERASE POSTULATES?
The question is wrong.
Postulates are self vanishing as persistence hasn't been conceived
yet.
The right question is how do you make postulates persist in time.
A postulate is a timeless creation, a thought.
Thought is not thinkingness.
A thought is 'There is an elephant!', a causal putting it there
which is fully and wholy responsibile for the elephant being there.
Thinking is, "Why is there an elephant?"
Question asking in otherwords.
Question asking about a postulated posting (creation) creates
persistence of that posting through time.
Why is it!? means IT IS!, WHY?
IT IS, creates the timeless elephant, asking why creates time and
continuation of the postulate because asking why it is presupposes it
is.
Then one continues the insanity by asking 'What should I do about
it?'
That's an effort to create something MORE to deal with the prior IT
IS.
You can't get rid of A at time 0, by creating B at time 1,2,3,4....
This is explained pretty well in all the postings about 'A CHASE
B'.
Click on the following and search for A CHASE B.
MURDERING
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archie.cgi?/homer/adore.892.memo
SUICIDE AND KAMIKAZE
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archie.cgi?/homer/adore.897.memo
THE CYCLE OF A THETAN
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archie.cgi?/homer/adore.900.memo
'A' puts the whole universe there minus a bridge across the river
via a postulate.
A postulate is causal conception, the God creates in the mere
conception of things.
He uncreates by unconceiving.
The thetan then, once inside A, decides that A is not complete or
could be better with a bridge across the river.
That's dissatisfaction with things as they are and the desire to
change them according to the vision statement of having a bridge there
too, but created by MEST force/effort rather than postulate.
The *EFFORT* then to create a bridge is the mission statement that
creates chase and time as all effort does.
Chase is effort through time via conditions between desire and
havingness.
Thus the use of effort to chase goals, changes in A, keep A going
by prepostulating that A exists and B doesn't and that one needs to
exert effort as game play to get the bridge there to complete A.
Notice games are freedoms/ability, barriers/conditions and
purposes/goals.
The top of the awareness characteristic chart is
Squirrel Power Grade V
SOURCE "Get the idea of a No Source/Source."
EXISTENCE "Get the idea of NOT-IS/IS"
CONDITIONS "Get the idea of NO CONDITIONS/CONDITIONS"
http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi/?electra/acc.memo
Universe A and conditions are created by static postulate at
existence.
B is then chased via kinetic effort powered by spirit of play down
around games, action, sensation, force, matter, energy space and time
etc.
A is a true creation of the kinetic from the static.
The building of the bridge is a mere rearrangement of the kinetic
via force/effort long after denying that one put A there.
The postulate that A is there is self erasing, it has a very short
time to live unless one continues to refrfesh the postulate over and
over by worrying about improving on A via dissatisafaction, desire and
effort, thus creating time because one wants to play the game of chasing
the bridge.
Thus while the GodSoul (thetan) is busy creating the bridge via
effort as the Soul, it is also putting the whole universe there as the
God.
The God part of the GodSoul vanishes its involvement in the
original creation of A, by telling the Soul to quiece absolutely.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Sep 28 23:34:52 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore978.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)
iD8DBQFWCgbcURT1lqxE3HERAhYkAKCHVHErSRkpMF/YTemyWNFDh8DmuQCgjuph
hfKIaDIJ10D4QT+5nVpZCjo=
=BJTp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Sunday, September 27, 2015
ADORE602 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
THE SERVICE FAC
Mickel <mickel1234@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> At the moment we have movies like "What the bleep do we know" or
> "The Secret" which inform people that all they have to do is visualise
> what they want in their minds and the Universe will provide it.
>
> Most people who study this sort of thing (visualisation) are doing
> it from a first Dynamic viewpoint, me, me ,me.
A being can visualize that they can't visualize.
This happens during the key Service Fac incident of this life
during word formation.
Service Facs need at least the ability to understand words if not
speak, because they contain overts against logic. The injustice that is
'crass and blunt' as written in Advanced Procedurs and Axioms, is an
overt against logic, justifiying efforts to enslave, imprison or murder
the pc. It is a bottom scale moment for the perpetrator against the pc.
As a result of this injustice the pc first tries forthright action
and reason, but is beaten down by force and illogic that not even the
perpetrator buys. This outrages him more than the blunt and criminal
use of force.
"Fine, rob me of what is rightfully mine, but don't insult my
intelligence with ass backwards syllogisms as to why you are justified."
The outrage leads the pc to using covert efforts to succumb to win
his way against overwhelming and unpropitiatable odds, amongst which
covert efforts are the postulate that postulates don't work, and
visualizing that he can't visualize anything any more.
Both of which of course work just fine.
So he ends up a black V who can't postulate anything.
This incident of degradation also hides his awareness of prior
existence to the body, and he becomes mortal looking for proof that he
has lived before.
Now having lived before is not necessary to the service fac
incident, but I assure you that if you have lived before, this incident
will have restimulated the whole track in a whopping surprise that
didn't go unnoticed at the time.
Finding and running the Service Fac incident on this life, then
provides more proof than anyone could want for their whole track and
thus handles the prove it case, who will make you wrong forever until it
is run, as it is the only proof there is and the only proof there can
be.
The proof we seek of whole track lies in confessions not gleaned
about what we have done on the whole track.
These overts are not against people, places or things, nor even
against Truth per se, but against LOGIC.
Get the illogic that even the purveyor didn't believe off the
incident, and it will free up, and the pc will see how he fell into his
own bear trap.
"Christ my mother is doing the same thing I did many lifetimes ago,
what a piece of shit she, er I, er I mean we are...hmmmm"
Co excused withholds sink into oblivion like lead in tar.
Co excused withholds are followed by silence where there ought to
be a LOT of talk.
Co excused withholds leave people resigned but not resolved with
each other, glad to have escaped with their own lives for crimes
committed long ago, in return for forgoing punishing another for crimes
committed in present time.
What is the first thing that comes into most peoples head's if
asked what they want? MONEY! that's what, which is a grave error,
money is a form of energy, so these people who want money first, what
are they really asking for?
What people really want is to be sufficient unto their own
survival, with abundance and margin for error.
The low tone will want money without working for it, but they at
one time wanted to earn their keep.
Restoring confidence and pride in one's ability to survive and
produce more than one consumes is key to the recovery of a thetan.
But that lies at the heart of the Service Fac, the postulates about
postulates, and visualizations about visualization made at the time, and
in particular the crimes against logic that were shameless, brazen,
crass and blunt.
The guy with a service fac in full bloom is actually no longer
able to either live or die at will.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sun Sep 27 19:29:31 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore602.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)
iD8DBQFWCHvbURT1lqxE3HERAiMWAJwIlIJDvAfXAIcFQlLD+6mY7wtH1gCePEWI
jQHi030JIGFRGYXOR8yXqGg=
=qPxL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
THE SERVICE FAC
Mickel <mickel1234@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> At the moment we have movies like "What the bleep do we know" or
> "The Secret" which inform people that all they have to do is visualise
> what they want in their minds and the Universe will provide it.
>
> Most people who study this sort of thing (visualisation) are doing
> it from a first Dynamic viewpoint, me, me ,me.
A being can visualize that they can't visualize.
This happens during the key Service Fac incident of this life
during word formation.
Service Facs need at least the ability to understand words if not
speak, because they contain overts against logic. The injustice that is
'crass and blunt' as written in Advanced Procedurs and Axioms, is an
overt against logic, justifiying efforts to enslave, imprison or murder
the pc. It is a bottom scale moment for the perpetrator against the pc.
As a result of this injustice the pc first tries forthright action
and reason, but is beaten down by force and illogic that not even the
perpetrator buys. This outrages him more than the blunt and criminal
use of force.
"Fine, rob me of what is rightfully mine, but don't insult my
intelligence with ass backwards syllogisms as to why you are justified."
The outrage leads the pc to using covert efforts to succumb to win
his way against overwhelming and unpropitiatable odds, amongst which
covert efforts are the postulate that postulates don't work, and
visualizing that he can't visualize anything any more.
Both of which of course work just fine.
So he ends up a black V who can't postulate anything.
This incident of degradation also hides his awareness of prior
existence to the body, and he becomes mortal looking for proof that he
has lived before.
Now having lived before is not necessary to the service fac
incident, but I assure you that if you have lived before, this incident
will have restimulated the whole track in a whopping surprise that
didn't go unnoticed at the time.
Finding and running the Service Fac incident on this life, then
provides more proof than anyone could want for their whole track and
thus handles the prove it case, who will make you wrong forever until it
is run, as it is the only proof there is and the only proof there can
be.
The proof we seek of whole track lies in confessions not gleaned
about what we have done on the whole track.
These overts are not against people, places or things, nor even
against Truth per se, but against LOGIC.
Get the illogic that even the purveyor didn't believe off the
incident, and it will free up, and the pc will see how he fell into his
own bear trap.
"Christ my mother is doing the same thing I did many lifetimes ago,
what a piece of shit she, er I, er I mean we are...hmmmm"
Co excused withholds sink into oblivion like lead in tar.
Co excused withholds are followed by silence where there ought to
be a LOT of talk.
Co excused withholds leave people resigned but not resolved with
each other, glad to have escaped with their own lives for crimes
committed long ago, in return for forgoing punishing another for crimes
committed in present time.
What is the first thing that comes into most peoples head's if
asked what they want? MONEY! that's what, which is a grave error,
money is a form of energy, so these people who want money first, what
are they really asking for?
What people really want is to be sufficient unto their own
survival, with abundance and margin for error.
The low tone will want money without working for it, but they at
one time wanted to earn their keep.
Restoring confidence and pride in one's ability to survive and
produce more than one consumes is key to the recovery of a thetan.
But that lies at the heart of the Service Fac, the postulates about
postulates, and visualizations about visualization made at the time, and
in particular the crimes against logic that were shameless, brazen,
crass and blunt.
The guy with a service fac in full bloom is actually no longer
able to either live or die at will.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sun Sep 27 19:29:31 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore602.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)
iD8DBQFWCHvbURT1lqxE3HERAiMWAJwIlIJDvAfXAIcFQlLD+6mY7wtH1gCePEWI
jQHi030JIGFRGYXOR8yXqGg=
=qPxL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE761 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
DISINVESTMENT
You know this group consists mostly of people denigrating the
sanity, personal integrity and intelligence of others if they no
longer bet that the meatball theory existence of life is true.
They are like the people that said to Orville Wright "Well YOU
build an airplane and make it fly and show me, then I will consider it
possible."
If Orville had had that attitude his plane would never have been
built.
So it takes people to see beyond the status quo evidence and
continue until they find the new reality.
"Genius is the ability to pursue the idiotic to fruition."
If it does, do the naysayers and disinvestors deserve any proof?
Homer
Mon May 10 13:37:47 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Sep 27 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore761.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFWCBPqURT1lqxE3HERAkA2AJ4owxvvgfAnrETNWB0+pifYGEY57QCfXOvB
oE5XpjrsVCrjZ04he/1M0i0=
=VvDv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
DISINVESTMENT
You know this group consists mostly of people denigrating the
sanity, personal integrity and intelligence of others if they no
longer bet that the meatball theory existence of life is true.
They are like the people that said to Orville Wright "Well YOU
build an airplane and make it fly and show me, then I will consider it
possible."
If Orville had had that attitude his plane would never have been
built.
So it takes people to see beyond the status quo evidence and
continue until they find the new reality.
"Genius is the ability to pursue the idiotic to fruition."
If it does, do the naysayers and disinvestors deserve any proof?
Homer
Mon May 10 13:37:47 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Sep 27 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore761.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFWCBPqURT1lqxE3HERAkA2AJ4owxvvgfAnrETNWB0+pifYGEY57QCfXOvB
oE5XpjrsVCrjZ04he/1M0i0=
=VvDv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE174 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
DESCENT FROM NATIVE STATE
>homer@lightlink.com wrote:
>> That's because postulates don't postulate ability, they postulate
>>DIS ABILITY.
CB Willis (cbwillis@adore.lightlink.com) wrote:
>Those sound like really bum postulates to me.
>We can do better than that!!
Well you are missing what I am saying.
'Better than that' is native state, no postulates.
ANY postulate is a descent from being into becoming and is a
*DESCENT*.
Once one has descended, one can try to re ascend by postulating
oneself upwards, but one is fighting the postulates that caused the
descension in the first place.
Postulates are best erased, that allows a refloat back
to native state being, then things go well because one hasn't
descended so far, not because one is postulating positive things!
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sun Sep 27 19:17:25 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore174.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)
iD8DBQFWCHkGURT1lqxE3HERAuq9AJ9TiAlK4+Mi3wxuxrsLasy3ig7eiwCcC07q
M/vYnxMquHCxQIwYpbo3HE4=
=f2Jf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
DESCENT FROM NATIVE STATE
>homer@lightlink.com wrote:
>> That's because postulates don't postulate ability, they postulate
>>DIS ABILITY.
CB Willis (cbwillis@adore.lightlink.com) wrote:
>Those sound like really bum postulates to me.
>We can do better than that!!
Well you are missing what I am saying.
'Better than that' is native state, no postulates.
ANY postulate is a descent from being into becoming and is a
*DESCENT*.
Once one has descended, one can try to re ascend by postulating
oneself upwards, but one is fighting the postulates that caused the
descension in the first place.
Postulates are best erased, that allows a refloat back
to native state being, then things go well because one hasn't
descended so far, not because one is postulating positive things!
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sun Sep 27 19:17:25 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore174.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)
iD8DBQFWCHkGURT1lqxE3HERAuq9AJ9TiAlK4+Mi3wxuxrsLasy3ig7eiwCcC07q
M/vYnxMquHCxQIwYpbo3HE4=
=f2Jf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE150 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
UCP2
To expect has two dichotomous meanings.
To expect means to demand with expectation of accomplishment.
To expect means to predict what effect you will be of the future.
The first is a causal definition, the second is a waiting to be an
effect and can do nothing about it definition.
KP was a one of a kind obnoxious poster on a.c.t for many years, he
had a tendency to claim everyone was hallucinating but himself and even
taught me some things about name calling.
He had a process called UCP or Universal Clearing Process.
UCP was a good process and probably vital tech within a greater
context of a working body of technology.
However KP claimed that UCP was a one shot clear process, meaning
it was the only process one needed to clear either others or oneself,
and all other processes should be eschewed.
Similarities to TROM and Time Breaking of Dennis Stephens is
obvious.
It went something like this.
1.) Where have you been? Compare to 2 and 3.
2.) Where are you? Compare to 1 and 3.
3.) Where could you be? Compare to 1 and 2.
The word 'where' was defined wider than simply a spatial location
but more along the lines of the word 'How'.
I and everyone else on a.c.t eventually got sick of KP and we voted
and uninvited him from the a.c.t list. He then created his own at
alt.ucp which remains to this day a barren wasteland of delusive
hallucinators and KP sycophants.
UCP is a good process, for a while, but not at the expense of
destroying or making criminally insane the use of any other process.
You think "Keeping Scientology Working" is bad, you haven't seen
"Keeping UCP Working."
Below is my spoof on KP and UCP, my process is a workable process
for those that are 'where it is on the bridge' to run it.
Notice the process is run as questions which we don't do any more.
Questions kill.
It should be translated into the "Get the idea of" form.)) - Homer
UCP2
I have discovered a new unlimited one shot process that consists of
2 questions that will take everyone all the way up the bridge.
Each question is run until no interest, then the other question is
run, which should then open up interest on the first question, back and
forth etc.
They are:
"Where are you?"
"What do you expect of your future?"
Anyone who doesn't agree with this is a Mank Waster and a
Hallucive Delucinator.
Homer :)
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Sep 24 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore150.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFWBB9qURT1lqxE3HERAiV1AJ98G5lkTaauK0ZKGqCqnP3LfayYNACcCxIx
CnTsUJLxjWf3CLg23AaCVEU=
=4FrG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
UCP2
To expect has two dichotomous meanings.
To expect means to demand with expectation of accomplishment.
To expect means to predict what effect you will be of the future.
The first is a causal definition, the second is a waiting to be an
effect and can do nothing about it definition.
KP was a one of a kind obnoxious poster on a.c.t for many years, he
had a tendency to claim everyone was hallucinating but himself and even
taught me some things about name calling.
He had a process called UCP or Universal Clearing Process.
UCP was a good process and probably vital tech within a greater
context of a working body of technology.
However KP claimed that UCP was a one shot clear process, meaning
it was the only process one needed to clear either others or oneself,
and all other processes should be eschewed.
Similarities to TROM and Time Breaking of Dennis Stephens is
obvious.
It went something like this.
1.) Where have you been? Compare to 2 and 3.
2.) Where are you? Compare to 1 and 3.
3.) Where could you be? Compare to 1 and 2.
The word 'where' was defined wider than simply a spatial location
but more along the lines of the word 'How'.
I and everyone else on a.c.t eventually got sick of KP and we voted
and uninvited him from the a.c.t list. He then created his own at
alt.ucp which remains to this day a barren wasteland of delusive
hallucinators and KP sycophants.
UCP is a good process, for a while, but not at the expense of
destroying or making criminally insane the use of any other process.
You think "Keeping Scientology Working" is bad, you haven't seen
"Keeping UCP Working."
Below is my spoof on KP and UCP, my process is a workable process
for those that are 'where it is on the bridge' to run it.
Notice the process is run as questions which we don't do any more.
Questions kill.
It should be translated into the "Get the idea of" form.)) - Homer
UCP2
I have discovered a new unlimited one shot process that consists of
2 questions that will take everyone all the way up the bridge.
Each question is run until no interest, then the other question is
run, which should then open up interest on the first question, back and
forth etc.
They are:
"Where are you?"
"What do you expect of your future?"
Anyone who doesn't agree with this is a Mank Waster and a
Hallucive Delucinator.
Homer :)
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Sep 24 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore150.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFWBB9qURT1lqxE3HERAiV1AJ98G5lkTaauK0ZKGqCqnP3LfayYNACcCxIx
CnTsUJLxjWf3CLg23AaCVEU=
=4FrG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, September 23, 2015
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CODES
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Alan said:
> The Prime Code therefore had to precede the being's choice of "BE".
> For one only chooses a beingness to carry out a Postulate and Vision.
...
> By knowing this the Being can now play ALL games knowingly. A very
> big step forward.
If the being created everything based on a Code and then sought to
hide the Code from himself, why would it be of benefit to know the code
now?
If the being had wanted to know his own Codes, then he would have
known them, end of story.
Thus the choice to NOT KNOW an operating code, would itself be the
application of his code to himself and his knowing of his code, and if
the code didn't want to know itself then, why would it want to know
itself now?
I am not saying that Alan is wrong in these things.
I am saying that Alan speaks much and says little.
I would also surmise that at the very top all beings share the same
desire/want/vision, and then it splits into later individual
desires/wants/visions.
Thus finding individual codes for a being is missing the primary
earlier common code to all.
The individual codes create conflict amongst beings and a desire
that other's not exist or be in the same game stream or at all.
The top level code on the other hand is eternally unanimous and
thus creates prior willingness for everyone and anyone to be in one's
dream, no matter how apparently lousy they later turn out to be.
Thus auditing the top level common code is necessary to restoring
willingness, change, help, problems, creativity and responsibility.
In other words, friendly ARC towards everyone and everything
forever for free.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Wed Sep 23 15:09:35 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore977.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)
iD8DBQFWAvjvURT1lqxE3HERAq7tAKDUfUNY14VrYjPpJEDUn3s8HE4hywCg2qpN
ko7zqLLdE//X+BKY15H8foE=
=CBHg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Alan said:
> The Prime Code therefore had to precede the being's choice of "BE".
> For one only chooses a beingness to carry out a Postulate and Vision.
...
> By knowing this the Being can now play ALL games knowingly. A very
> big step forward.
If the being created everything based on a Code and then sought to
hide the Code from himself, why would it be of benefit to know the code
now?
If the being had wanted to know his own Codes, then he would have
known them, end of story.
Thus the choice to NOT KNOW an operating code, would itself be the
application of his code to himself and his knowing of his code, and if
the code didn't want to know itself then, why would it want to know
itself now?
I am not saying that Alan is wrong in these things.
I am saying that Alan speaks much and says little.
I would also surmise that at the very top all beings share the same
desire/want/vision, and then it splits into later individual
desires/wants/visions.
Thus finding individual codes for a being is missing the primary
earlier common code to all.
The individual codes create conflict amongst beings and a desire
that other's not exist or be in the same game stream or at all.
The top level code on the other hand is eternally unanimous and
thus creates prior willingness for everyone and anyone to be in one's
dream, no matter how apparently lousy they later turn out to be.
Thus auditing the top level common code is necessary to restoring
willingness, change, help, problems, creativity and responsibility.
In other words, friendly ARC towards everyone and everything
forever for free.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Wed Sep 23 15:09:35 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore977.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)
iD8DBQFWAvjvURT1lqxE3HERAq7tAKDUfUNY14VrYjPpJEDUn3s8HE4hywCg2qpN
ko7zqLLdE//X+BKY15H8foE=
=CBHg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, September 21, 2015
ADORE700 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
EARLY CLEARS
In alt.clearing.technology Richard Ford <doorman.ford@googlemail.com> wrote:
>LRH describes the wonderful world of the clear in great depth AND THEN
>ADMITS THAT THE FIRST CLEAR IS YET TO BE CREATED.
Having just read Dianetics again from cover to cover very
carefully, and for the 4th time or so, I would like to see the page and
line where he admits the first clear is yet to be created.
However later, as things progressed, his definitions of clear
changed upwardly many times, each time invalidating the levels of clear
defined earlier.
I personally have known quite a number of people who claimed to be
clear by one of many different definitions, but none of whom really had
control over their time track.
Even now, looking at the E/P's for higher states, more than one
says 'ability to confront the whole track', including those beyond OT
VIII. Uh, excuse me, just when exactly do I get the ability to confront
the whole track. Well its a gradient scale unfortunately, you get up to
where you can confront a whole section of this spiral, and suddenly find
a MUCH BIGGER spiral that just knocks you flatter than a bug.
I do believe in 1945 - 1951 that Hubbard was working on
dianetically 'easy' cases, those that could be cleared by HIS
application of book one dianetics, and both he (later) and I admit that
following book one by itself will work wonders on many people, but in no
way will it proceed to clear every one for many reasons, the least of
which is not the failure to run flow 2, overts.
People can only run so much whats been done to them, before they
barf.
If a guy has too many overts, he will start to collect motivators
(dones to him).
If the guy has too many motivators, he will start to commit overts.
The reactive effort is to keep the damage received and damage
delivered in life in balance.
Thus if someone comes in with the normal baggage of overts and
motivators and you erase all the motivators, but never touch the overts,
he will start to pull in MORE motivators and hard.
On the other hand if you run out only overts, as Hubbard himself
started doing in the 60's, then guy is left with too many motivators
unrun, and he will start to commit overts like crazy, faster than you
can run them out.
Since ridges always have two sides, and ridges are all that's
wrong with the bloke, you need to run both sides of the ridge,
overt AND motivator in order to blow it.
Getting the time order is critical in each incident.
Because a lot of preclears tended to hide behind their
motivators, and audit them endlessly, which of course pulled
in more motivators, Hubbard ordered that only overts could
be audited, as to even let a preclear claim something had
been done to him was itself an overt.
This is in fact true, but in real auditing, with real people,
who have no reality on the enormity of their own responsibility for
things, this is unworkable.
The preclear is HIDING in his motivators from his overts and
from committing any more, so you ask him 'what have you done'
and he will say 'I don't know, you tell me.'
You can persist, but any preclear can out persist any auditor
bar none.
Homer
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sat Jan 23 21:41:50 EST 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Sep 20 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore700.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV/tlqURT1lqxE3HERAloHAKCCXpeCsC5IkQLCMhaWWTDyDx7iJgCgr9KJ
cKmXRmxbAKqVJOZFRngZTxg=
=kHWq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
EARLY CLEARS
In alt.clearing.technology Richard Ford <doorman.ford@googlemail.com> wrote:
>LRH describes the wonderful world of the clear in great depth AND THEN
>ADMITS THAT THE FIRST CLEAR IS YET TO BE CREATED.
Having just read Dianetics again from cover to cover very
carefully, and for the 4th time or so, I would like to see the page and
line where he admits the first clear is yet to be created.
However later, as things progressed, his definitions of clear
changed upwardly many times, each time invalidating the levels of clear
defined earlier.
I personally have known quite a number of people who claimed to be
clear by one of many different definitions, but none of whom really had
control over their time track.
Even now, looking at the E/P's for higher states, more than one
says 'ability to confront the whole track', including those beyond OT
VIII. Uh, excuse me, just when exactly do I get the ability to confront
the whole track. Well its a gradient scale unfortunately, you get up to
where you can confront a whole section of this spiral, and suddenly find
a MUCH BIGGER spiral that just knocks you flatter than a bug.
I do believe in 1945 - 1951 that Hubbard was working on
dianetically 'easy' cases, those that could be cleared by HIS
application of book one dianetics, and both he (later) and I admit that
following book one by itself will work wonders on many people, but in no
way will it proceed to clear every one for many reasons, the least of
which is not the failure to run flow 2, overts.
People can only run so much whats been done to them, before they
barf.
If a guy has too many overts, he will start to collect motivators
(dones to him).
If the guy has too many motivators, he will start to commit overts.
The reactive effort is to keep the damage received and damage
delivered in life in balance.
Thus if someone comes in with the normal baggage of overts and
motivators and you erase all the motivators, but never touch the overts,
he will start to pull in MORE motivators and hard.
On the other hand if you run out only overts, as Hubbard himself
started doing in the 60's, then guy is left with too many motivators
unrun, and he will start to commit overts like crazy, faster than you
can run them out.
Since ridges always have two sides, and ridges are all that's
wrong with the bloke, you need to run both sides of the ridge,
overt AND motivator in order to blow it.
Getting the time order is critical in each incident.
Because a lot of preclears tended to hide behind their
motivators, and audit them endlessly, which of course pulled
in more motivators, Hubbard ordered that only overts could
be audited, as to even let a preclear claim something had
been done to him was itself an overt.
This is in fact true, but in real auditing, with real people,
who have no reality on the enormity of their own responsibility for
things, this is unworkable.
The preclear is HIDING in his motivators from his overts and
from committing any more, so you ask him 'what have you done'
and he will say 'I don't know, you tell me.'
You can persist, but any preclear can out persist any auditor
bar none.
Homer
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sat Jan 23 21:41:50 EST 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Sep 20 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore700.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV/tlqURT1lqxE3HERAloHAKCCXpeCsC5IkQLCMhaWWTDyDx7iJgCgr9KJ
cKmXRmxbAKqVJOZFRngZTxg=
=kHWq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Saturday, September 19, 2015
ACT74 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
TROM V
((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
TO BE SEEN - TO SEE
ACT - 74
11 August 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
Run on people with glasses.
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE SEEN AND TO SEE
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Seen (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not See (SD)
2.) To Be Not Seen (SD) <-----> 3.) To See (SD)
3.) To See (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Seen (SD)
4.) To Not See (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Seen (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Seen 1.O Forcing to See
2.M Forced to Be Seen 2.O Forcing to Not See
3.M Forced to Not See 3.O Forcing to Be Seen
4.M Forced to See 4.O Forcing to Be Not Seen
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE HEARD AND TO HEAR
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Heard (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Hear (SD)
2.) To Be Not Heard (SD) <-----> 3.) To Hear (SD)
3.) To Hear (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Heard (SD)
4.) To Not Hear (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Heard (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Heard 1.O Forcing to Hear
2.M Forced to Be Heard 2.O Forcing to Not Hear
3.M Forced to Not Hear 3.O Forcing to Be Heard
4.M Forced to Hear 4.O Forcing to Be Not Heard
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE TOUCHED AND TO TOUCH
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Touched (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Touch (SD)
2.) To Be Not Touched (SD) <-----> 3.) To Touch (SD)
3.) To Touch (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Touched (SD)
4.) To Not Touch (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Touched (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Touched 1.O Forcing to Touch
2.M Forced to Be Touched 2.O Forcing to Not Touch
3.M Forced to Not Touch 3.O Forcing to Be Touched
4.M Forced to Touch 4.O Forcing to Be Not Touched
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE SMELT AND TO SMELL
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Smelt (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Smell (SD)
2.) To Be Not Smelt (SD) <-----> 3.) To Smell (SD)
3.) To Smell (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Smelt (SD)
4.) To Not Smell (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Smelt (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Smelt 1.O Forcing to Smell
2.M Forced to Be Smelt 2.O Forcing to Not Smell
3.M Forced to Not Smell 3.O Forcing to Be Smelt
4.M Forced to Smell 4.O Forcing to Be Not Smelt
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE TASTED AND TO TASTE
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Tasted (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Taste (SD)
2.) To Be Not Tasted (SD) <-----> 3.) To Taste (SD)
3.) To Taste (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Tasted (SD)
4.) To Not Taste (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Tasted (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Tasted 1.O Forcing to Taste
2.M Forced to Be Tasted 2.O Forcing to Not Taste
3.M Forced to Not Taste 3.O Forcing to Be Tasted
4.M Forced to Taste 4.O Forcing to Be Not Tasted
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE EATEN AND TO EAT
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Eaten (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Eat (SD)
2.) To Be Not Eaten (SD) <-----> 3.) To Eat (SD)
3.) To Eat (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Eaten (SD)
4.) To Not Eat (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Eaten (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Eaten 1.O Forcing to Eat
2.M Forced to Be Eaten 2.O Forcing to Not Eat
3.M Forced to Not Eat 3.O Forcing to Be Eaten
4.M Forced to Eat 4.O Forcing to Be Not Eaten
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE FUCKED AND TO FUCK
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Fucked (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Fuck (SD)
2.) To Be Not Fucked (SD) <-----> 3.) To Fuck (SD)
3.) To Fuck (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Fucked (SD)
4.) To Not Fuck (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Fucked (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Fucked 1.O Forcing to Fuck
2.M Forced to Be Fucked 2.O Forcing to Not Fuck
3.M Forced to Not Fuck 3.O Forcing to Be Fucked
4.M Forced to Fuck 4.O Forcing to Be Not Fucked
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Sep 19 12:06:02 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act74.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV/YfqURT1lqxE3HERAnhLAKDIv5g7ROaM6PPd1d6B9/biuJNNrwCfVMCw
Hn9Or6xQ0a/TC8nxXg5hdv4=
=HAR5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
TROM V
((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
TO BE SEEN - TO SEE
ACT - 74
11 August 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
Run on people with glasses.
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE SEEN AND TO SEE
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Seen (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not See (SD)
2.) To Be Not Seen (SD) <-----> 3.) To See (SD)
3.) To See (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Seen (SD)
4.) To Not See (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Seen (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Seen 1.O Forcing to See
2.M Forced to Be Seen 2.O Forcing to Not See
3.M Forced to Not See 3.O Forcing to Be Seen
4.M Forced to See 4.O Forcing to Be Not Seen
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE HEARD AND TO HEAR
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Heard (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Hear (SD)
2.) To Be Not Heard (SD) <-----> 3.) To Hear (SD)
3.) To Hear (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Heard (SD)
4.) To Not Hear (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Heard (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Heard 1.O Forcing to Hear
2.M Forced to Be Heard 2.O Forcing to Not Hear
3.M Forced to Not Hear 3.O Forcing to Be Heard
4.M Forced to Hear 4.O Forcing to Be Not Heard
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE TOUCHED AND TO TOUCH
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Touched (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Touch (SD)
2.) To Be Not Touched (SD) <-----> 3.) To Touch (SD)
3.) To Touch (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Touched (SD)
4.) To Not Touch (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Touched (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Touched 1.O Forcing to Touch
2.M Forced to Be Touched 2.O Forcing to Not Touch
3.M Forced to Not Touch 3.O Forcing to Be Touched
4.M Forced to Touch 4.O Forcing to Be Not Touched
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE SMELT AND TO SMELL
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Smelt (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Smell (SD)
2.) To Be Not Smelt (SD) <-----> 3.) To Smell (SD)
3.) To Smell (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Smelt (SD)
4.) To Not Smell (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Smelt (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Smelt 1.O Forcing to Smell
2.M Forced to Be Smelt 2.O Forcing to Not Smell
3.M Forced to Not Smell 3.O Forcing to Be Smelt
4.M Forced to Smell 4.O Forcing to Be Not Smelt
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE TASTED AND TO TASTE
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Tasted (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Taste (SD)
2.) To Be Not Tasted (SD) <-----> 3.) To Taste (SD)
3.) To Taste (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Tasted (SD)
4.) To Not Taste (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Tasted (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Tasted 1.O Forcing to Taste
2.M Forced to Be Tasted 2.O Forcing to Not Taste
3.M Forced to Not Taste 3.O Forcing to Be Tasted
4.M Forced to Taste 4.O Forcing to Be Not Tasted
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE EATEN AND TO EAT
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Eaten (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Eat (SD)
2.) To Be Not Eaten (SD) <-----> 3.) To Eat (SD)
3.) To Eat (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Eaten (SD)
4.) To Not Eat (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Eaten (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Eaten 1.O Forcing to Eat
2.M Forced to Be Eaten 2.O Forcing to Not Eat
3.M Forced to Not Eat 3.O Forcing to Be Eaten
4.M Forced to Eat 4.O Forcing to Be Not Eaten
FOUR GAMES CONDITIONS ON TO BE FUCKED AND TO FUCK
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Fucked (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Fuck (SD)
2.) To Be Not Fucked (SD) <-----> 3.) To Fuck (SD)
3.) To Fuck (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Fucked (SD)
4.) To Not Fuck (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Fucked (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Fucked 1.O Forcing to Fuck
2.M Forced to Be Fucked 2.O Forcing to Not Fuck
3.M Forced to Not Fuck 3.O Forcing to Be Fucked
4.M Forced to Fuck 4.O Forcing to Be Not Fucked
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Sep 19 12:06:02 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act74.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV/YfqURT1lqxE3HERAnhLAKDIv5g7ROaM6PPd1d6B9/biuJNNrwCfVMCw
Hn9Or6xQ0a/TC8nxXg5hdv4=
=HAR5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Friday, September 18, 2015
ADORE199 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Questions are havingness.
Questions are like pretty baubles you wear on your wrist for all
to see.
When you answer a question it goes poof! It's gone.
That's a loss of havingness, you see?
Primary upset was with not knowing the answer to a question, all
the rest came afterwards, problems, overts, withholds, upsets, make
wrongs.
People think they need to answer a question to solve their case.
This is wrong, none of their questions will be answered until
long after they solve their case.
Once all the somatics are gone, all the worry, anger, fear,
sorrow and regret are gone, once you have melded your male and female
halves and are living and breathing a continuous orgasm, once you can
live in not know forever for free and not care, then you will come up
with answers to your questions.
So do your case a favor, throw your mind out the window, drop
kick it over the goal post and give yourself 10 points.
Not talking about questions of a scientific nature, but of a
spiritual nature, where am I, what am I doing here, What's the story,
Jerry? etc.
"The exact attitude with which one approaches answering a
question determines whether or not one gets an answer.
That exact attitude is Omni Sovereignty." - Adore
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Sep 18 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore199.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV/DZpURT1lqxE3HERAghrAJ9PKCaH+TYuGc6I56KUPX/bf+kuLACguG7b
wCb3lcWGNV/PHf1TvecP440=
=vw8k
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Questions are havingness.
Questions are like pretty baubles you wear on your wrist for all
to see.
When you answer a question it goes poof! It's gone.
That's a loss of havingness, you see?
Primary upset was with not knowing the answer to a question, all
the rest came afterwards, problems, overts, withholds, upsets, make
wrongs.
People think they need to answer a question to solve their case.
This is wrong, none of their questions will be answered until
long after they solve their case.
Once all the somatics are gone, all the worry, anger, fear,
sorrow and regret are gone, once you have melded your male and female
halves and are living and breathing a continuous orgasm, once you can
live in not know forever for free and not care, then you will come up
with answers to your questions.
So do your case a favor, throw your mind out the window, drop
kick it over the goal post and give yourself 10 points.
Not talking about questions of a scientific nature, but of a
spiritual nature, where am I, what am I doing here, What's the story,
Jerry? etc.
"The exact attitude with which one approaches answering a
question determines whether or not one gets an answer.
That exact attitude is Omni Sovereignty." - Adore
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Sep 18 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore199.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV/DZpURT1lqxE3HERAghrAJ9PKCaH+TYuGc6I56KUPX/bf+kuLACguG7b
wCb3lcWGNV/PHf1TvecP440=
=vw8k
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Thursday, September 17, 2015
HOM1 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
LIFE IS A GAME?
Adore considers that there are 3 levels of action.
1.) Sovereignty
2.) Routine/Dance
3.) Game
It is pretty hard to imagine motion powered by desire, where there
was not some form of Freedom, Barriers and Purposes imposed.
If one could just have something by wanting it (Desire is
Sovereign), then one would simply want something and one would have it.
Start and Finish would be the same moment of time, so no motion or
striving would be necessary.
Thus Freedoms, Barriers, and Purposes impose time between Start and
Finish.
At the next level down we add in gradients of havingness.
This defines a routine, a set of motions that one must go through
to produce an intended result at the end of the motions.
We still don't have a game, but only a routine or dance, with a
certain outcome, but it is a routine through time, starting with not
having and ending with having, at which point we move to another dance,
presumably taking our accumlated havingness with us to build on.
Games bring in uncertainty of outcome, they also bring in penalties
for losing, including the inability to play any further games, and also
competition, where someone wins by another losing.
Adore says the Basic Purpose is communication of art, this is the
same for all people. Harmony, Dischord and Resolve, are mathematical
absolutes with infinite variations. Adore calls these The Trio.
For example C major will always be a Harmony, and
C Major -> C major diminished seventh -> F Major will always be a
Harmony -> Dischord -> Resolve (another Harmony)
Or you can take a very simple C Minor -> G Minor and leave people
hanging with chills yet awaiting further resolution.
This is something like the 'Beautiful Sorrow' of Hubbard's 8-80.
Adore suggests that the 'purpose' of life is finding those
transitions from Harmony to Dischord to another Harmony again which
produce a resolve. Not all ending harmonies resolve the first two
harmony and dischord segments. So there is a real game here.
But the above pattern of chords can take place in an infinite
number of keys, not just C Major, and there are many other sequences
that are more complex that produce the same end result of Harmony,
Dischord and Resolve.
Sometimes when one is stuck in the dischord, one can not see any
possible resolve, let alone a starting harmony. One needs to see a
bigger picture. Go earlier, go later, go earlier, go later.
Spot NO earlier.
Spot SOME earlier.
Spot NO later.
Spot SOME later.
One very complex example of the above is Tchaikovski's Violin
concerto, the *WHOLE* thing, not some simple 3 chord progression within
it of which there are quite a few that stand on their own. But the
masterpiece is in the whole work, a trio that can be missed if one looks
only at the little melodies that come and go within it.
This same pattern obtains with stories, visual art, and life
itself.
Thus within the inviolable mathematical absolutes of beauty and
ugly, namely harmonics, we can have a infinite variety of
manifestations.
No thetan would just produce a dischord and leave it at that.
That is not the Sovereign issue of his desire.
(Issue as in to issue forth).
But he would produce a dischord followed by a resolve, in fact he
will go out of his way forever and ever to create or find these things.
GPMS seem to give a game sequence to allow forward motion when
loosing. If I can't win doing this, I will be and do this other...
This is all predetermined in the GPM. It's like building an arcade
game. That people take them seriously and make heavy charge out of
their losses seems to be a secondary aspect.
It is perhaps the Dischord part of the sequence.
Having a game with out GPMs kind of implies having a game without
rules or regulations or ways out when you loose. I guess you could all
make it up on the spot as you go along, but I have a feeling that these
major games are pretty much precreated in their entirety, designed to
fill a 'while', and as such are not ad libbed while they are being
played, at least not in the big picture.
Adore says that only Eternity can ad lib IN a while, therefore much
of the while is precreated before we jump into it to enjoy it so to
speak, but Eternity is always operating, and there is no reason why a
thetan can not spawn something new from that Eternity into the while he
is occupying.
In this sense, whiles change everytime thetans pass through them,
like a museum where they allow the crowd to change the Mona Lisa. or
rearrange the cave man display.
I also suspect that the really basic GPMs, whether implanted or
not, have to do with the fundamental operating characteristics of a
thetan, which is to know and to be known, to not know and to not be
known, so you will find that these have to do with questions and
answers, learning and teaching, knowing by looking/looking by knowing
and other parts of the very warp and weave of a functioning thetan.
Apparently even the GPM 'To have a game' has become a game, so a
being can finally lose even that game and be 'forever' unable to have
any more games.
You unmock these, and you unmock his existence in a space time
stream. As such these GPMS are not 'aberrations' but are the very
mechanism by which the thetan avails himself of 'persisting existence'.
They are of course aberrations in that they twist logic into
beautiful illogic, and it is those lies that keep the persistence going.
But at that level, the problem is not getting rid of them, but keeping
them around and making more! For they are the true hidden art upon
which the thetan hangs himself as a picture.
It is this hidden art that allows the free being to see the beauty
and humor to the suffering of the not so free being.
The not free being feels he is being laughed AT, but in truth he is
being laughed WITH, as it is *HIS* stunt he is pulling off for the
audience.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Thu Sep 17 16:06:54 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/hom1.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)
iD8DBQFV+x1eURT1lqxE3HERAoR0AJ4hk0M4MZEFT2l52csepVoXxsweZwCfZ0g2
Aqp3Bt5IbLd6OhbSgTC3I2I=
=f70l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
LIFE IS A GAME?
Adore considers that there are 3 levels of action.
1.) Sovereignty
2.) Routine/Dance
3.) Game
It is pretty hard to imagine motion powered by desire, where there
was not some form of Freedom, Barriers and Purposes imposed.
If one could just have something by wanting it (Desire is
Sovereign), then one would simply want something and one would have it.
Start and Finish would be the same moment of time, so no motion or
striving would be necessary.
Thus Freedoms, Barriers, and Purposes impose time between Start and
Finish.
At the next level down we add in gradients of havingness.
This defines a routine, a set of motions that one must go through
to produce an intended result at the end of the motions.
We still don't have a game, but only a routine or dance, with a
certain outcome, but it is a routine through time, starting with not
having and ending with having, at which point we move to another dance,
presumably taking our accumlated havingness with us to build on.
Games bring in uncertainty of outcome, they also bring in penalties
for losing, including the inability to play any further games, and also
competition, where someone wins by another losing.
Adore says the Basic Purpose is communication of art, this is the
same for all people. Harmony, Dischord and Resolve, are mathematical
absolutes with infinite variations. Adore calls these The Trio.
For example C major will always be a Harmony, and
C Major -> C major diminished seventh -> F Major will always be a
Harmony -> Dischord -> Resolve (another Harmony)
Or you can take a very simple C Minor -> G Minor and leave people
hanging with chills yet awaiting further resolution.
This is something like the 'Beautiful Sorrow' of Hubbard's 8-80.
Adore suggests that the 'purpose' of life is finding those
transitions from Harmony to Dischord to another Harmony again which
produce a resolve. Not all ending harmonies resolve the first two
harmony and dischord segments. So there is a real game here.
But the above pattern of chords can take place in an infinite
number of keys, not just C Major, and there are many other sequences
that are more complex that produce the same end result of Harmony,
Dischord and Resolve.
Sometimes when one is stuck in the dischord, one can not see any
possible resolve, let alone a starting harmony. One needs to see a
bigger picture. Go earlier, go later, go earlier, go later.
Spot NO earlier.
Spot SOME earlier.
Spot NO later.
Spot SOME later.
One very complex example of the above is Tchaikovski's Violin
concerto, the *WHOLE* thing, not some simple 3 chord progression within
it of which there are quite a few that stand on their own. But the
masterpiece is in the whole work, a trio that can be missed if one looks
only at the little melodies that come and go within it.
This same pattern obtains with stories, visual art, and life
itself.
Thus within the inviolable mathematical absolutes of beauty and
ugly, namely harmonics, we can have a infinite variety of
manifestations.
No thetan would just produce a dischord and leave it at that.
That is not the Sovereign issue of his desire.
(Issue as in to issue forth).
But he would produce a dischord followed by a resolve, in fact he
will go out of his way forever and ever to create or find these things.
GPMS seem to give a game sequence to allow forward motion when
loosing. If I can't win doing this, I will be and do this other...
This is all predetermined in the GPM. It's like building an arcade
game. That people take them seriously and make heavy charge out of
their losses seems to be a secondary aspect.
It is perhaps the Dischord part of the sequence.
Having a game with out GPMs kind of implies having a game without
rules or regulations or ways out when you loose. I guess you could all
make it up on the spot as you go along, but I have a feeling that these
major games are pretty much precreated in their entirety, designed to
fill a 'while', and as such are not ad libbed while they are being
played, at least not in the big picture.
Adore says that only Eternity can ad lib IN a while, therefore much
of the while is precreated before we jump into it to enjoy it so to
speak, but Eternity is always operating, and there is no reason why a
thetan can not spawn something new from that Eternity into the while he
is occupying.
In this sense, whiles change everytime thetans pass through them,
like a museum where they allow the crowd to change the Mona Lisa. or
rearrange the cave man display.
I also suspect that the really basic GPMs, whether implanted or
not, have to do with the fundamental operating characteristics of a
thetan, which is to know and to be known, to not know and to not be
known, so you will find that these have to do with questions and
answers, learning and teaching, knowing by looking/looking by knowing
and other parts of the very warp and weave of a functioning thetan.
Apparently even the GPM 'To have a game' has become a game, so a
being can finally lose even that game and be 'forever' unable to have
any more games.
You unmock these, and you unmock his existence in a space time
stream. As such these GPMS are not 'aberrations' but are the very
mechanism by which the thetan avails himself of 'persisting existence'.
They are of course aberrations in that they twist logic into
beautiful illogic, and it is those lies that keep the persistence going.
But at that level, the problem is not getting rid of them, but keeping
them around and making more! For they are the true hidden art upon
which the thetan hangs himself as a picture.
It is this hidden art that allows the free being to see the beauty
and humor to the suffering of the not so free being.
The not free being feels he is being laughed AT, but in truth he is
being laughed WITH, as it is *HIS* stunt he is pulling off for the
audience.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Thu Sep 17 16:06:54 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/hom1.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)
iD8DBQFV+x1eURT1lqxE3HERAoR0AJ4hk0M4MZEFT2l52csepVoXxsweZwCfZ0g2
Aqp3Bt5IbLd6OhbSgTC3I2I=
=f70l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, September 16, 2015
ADORE457 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
THE PROOF AND CERTAINTY
The certainty of the proof comes from the fact that the proof is
about certainty, and thus the proof is a certainty about certainty.
If certainty itself were not the subject of the proof, then
attaining certainty on it would be much less certain :)
The proof, other wise known as the machine certainty theorm, is
very simple:
Learning with certainty across a space time distance is impossible.
In order words a machine can't be certain of anything.
"There is only one Proof.
Learn it, love it, teach it, master it.
All can, but for some it may be a very long time between now and
then, for you can't move your house around town if you have locked
yourself inside it.
In Excelsis Deo." - Adore
((Jane has asked me to explain what the reference to moving your
hour around town means.
BEING can create, change and destroy BECOMINGNESS which is a
created identity in space time.
BECOMINGNESS is your 'house', what you are and live in as you play
the games of life.
If you get too stuck in your BECOMINGNESS, you won't be able to
reascend to BEING in order to create, change or destroy your existing
BECOMINGNESS, i.e. to "move your house around town."
The last line means 'In the most high is God', namely that the
being is God in carnation and if that a being has chosen to lock himself
in his own house and throw away the key, there is not much you can do
about it, as sovereign all knowing rights have been exercised, for a
while.
You can ask can it be forever?
We ask back would a sovereign being choose to destroy itself
forever, or risk itself forever, in or out of time?
So, don't worry, be happy.))
CERTAINTY
Understanding the proof involves knowing what we mean by learning,
certainty and space time distance.
For example although it might seem obvious what certainty is, one
really needs to consult an example of certainty in order to really come
to know it.
In the absence of any examples of certainty, it would probably be
quite hard to tell what a certainty was.
Having a standard of certainty then allows one to easily reject the
many false pretenses of certainty in the world.
At this point we ask the reader to engage in a thought experiment,
the kind made famous by Albert Einstein.
Consider for the moment, as you sit there reading this posting,
that you are in fact quite asleep in bed and dreaming, that everything
you see around you including this posting, is a conscious color form
with no actual physical referent on the other side of it. In a few
minutes you will wake up to the actual world, and remember this dream in
its entirety including every word of this posting.
Just by way of reminder, in a dream the conscious color form
experiences are actual, but the implied physical referents are not.
In the dream you may see an apple out there, but there isn't a
corresponding physical apple that the physical body can eat.
Now, while considering yourself asleep and dreaming, we enjoin you
to look around you and spot any object with at least two different
colors in it.
Before you saw the object, did you know for sure it had at least
two colors?
Are you sure you see two different colors?
Would you bet your eternity in hell you see two different colors?
Would you bet everyone else's eternity in hell that you see two
different colors?
Good.
That's a certainty, a certainty that there are (at least) two
different colors and you see them.
Notice that certainty of difference implies certainty of existence,
as a color can't BE DIFFERENT from another color without BEing in the
first place.
Thus not only have we defined certainty by direct observation of it
in operation, but also existence.
In fact since the two colors have an implied viewpoint, you should
be able to spot with certainty where you are looking at the colors from,
and spot the looker looking at the colors. The looker is as actual as
the colors that are being looked at, although the looker has no color.
The 'color' of the looker is agency, self awareness and "I AM!".
So now that we know what a certainty is, if someone asks you to say
something with certainty about the nature of certainty you can always
say "Well learning with certainty across a distance is impossible,
certainly!" We haven't proven that yet, but its true none the less.
That means by the way that there is no distance between you and the
two different colors you are looking at and know are different with
certainty, even though the illusion of distance between you and the
colors is very strong.
In fact not only is there no distance between you and the colors,
you in fact ARE the colors, looker and looked at are one and the same
object and event.
This is a very big deal.
On the order of discovering special relativity, the cure for
cancer, or finding God under your pillow.
So be aware in this matter that you know something of import.
Don't just throw it in the same bin along with all your other
knowledge.
If God is perfect, then looking upon a perfect certainty is
possibly looking upon a functional part of God.
Some have even gone so far to say that consciousness IS God Light.
LEARNING
Again we enjoin the reader to notice that before looking at the
above object with two different colors, the reader did not in fact know
how many colors the object had, one or more.
But after looking at the object in question, the reader was able to
determine with certainty that the object had at least two or more
colors.
That is learning, a coming to know, in this case with perfect
certainty.
Thus we have fully defined Learning with Certainty.
SPACE TIME DISTANCE
Space and time are both conscious experiences, but we
anthropomorphize them into allegedly actual phenomenon in the alleged
physical universe.
We like to think that because we SEE space and time, that therefore
there IS space and time OUT THERE.
By the way, long time ago, Godel wrote a paper claiming that
Einstein's theory of special relativity proved that time didn't exist at
all. No one took him seriously, they considered him a loon. But to
complete the lunacy, space doesn't exist either, so in truth spacetime,
both space and time, are illusions.
THE ILLUSION IS ACTUAL, but the implied external referent is not.
The picture of the car chase at the movies is actual, but the car
chase represented by the movie picture is not actual at that time.
Both space and time are dimensions, meaning collections of things
which are identical to each other in their nature, but different in fact
from each other. Like having two pennies, each one a perfect copy of
the other, but each none the less distinct.
Just so, points in space extending out from anywhere to anywhere
form a line of identical 'points in space', but each one is in a
different place relative to the end points of the line. Thus, in
conception anyway, we have a continuum of 'points of space' from one end
to the other, each identical to the other, but each one its own point in
space. Thus the only difference between two points in space is where
they are, and thus 'where they are' forms a dimension of otherwise
identical entities.
Same for moments of time forming a time line.
Now we run into a problem with distance because distance is a
consideration of how many points of space there are between two other
points forming the end points of the line segment.
We have learned in school that there are an infinite number of
points between any two points, no matter how close the two end points
are together, so we can't use 'how many points' as a measure of
distance.
Worse we have been taught that there is no distance at all between
any two 'adjacent' points on a line, yet the line has length. This is
problematic because if you have a million points with no distance
between them, that adds up to no distance! One million times zero =
zero.
Unfortunately, even if you had an infinite number of points with
zero distance between them, there would still be zero distance between
the first and last.
Zero rules, because zero times infinity is still zero.
And infinity thought it was so big.
So distance is a difficult concept, particularly if we try to
measure it in points between, but we don't need to deal with the
difficulties in order to understand the proof.
All we need to understand is TWO DIFFERENT POINTS which are not on
the same point.
In physics we have learned that a point in space and time defines
an event or object. Even if there is nothing there at that moment in
space or time, the space time point was there, and that is an event or
object enough to call it so.
If a photon or other material object passes through a space time
point, then that adds to the description of the event at that space time
point. Rather than just being a moment of space and time, it now also
consists of a photon passing through it at a given angle, speed and
frequency.
If a ball is just hanging out in space time, then at its position
in space AND time, we have an event consisting of a point in space and
time plus a ball.
Notice that can never change, that position of space AND time
will always have that ball in it.
When the ball moves in time, it may stay in the same point in
space, or it may move to a new position in space along with the
change in position in time.
Change implies time, and time implies change.
Thus changes are comparisons across two different space time
points.
Now here we have a weird one, that might take a moment to see the
sense of it.
An event is one point in space time and everything going on
in it.
A space time point itself is not changing and can not change, so an
event is not a change.
A change is a comparison between two different space time points.
A transition between two different space time points may
involve a change in time only as one space point moves through time.
Or a transition between two different space time points may
involve both a change in time AND a change in space.
In otherwords an event at (x,t) = (0,0) is a different event
and a different space time point than (x,t) = (0,1), even though
the space part of it didn't change, only the time part did.
An event at (x,t) = (0,0) is also a different event and a different
space time point than (x,t) = (1,1), because both the space part and the
time part changed.
If the space time points of two events are not different, then they
aren't two different events, the two events are actually one and the
same event. Get it?
We may have a more complex event because two events are embedded
into one space time point, but we consider there is only one event and
not two.
For example let's take a theoretical piece of 8 x 11 paper and mark
two points on it with a pencil at different locations.
Then let us fold the paper over on itself so those two marked space
points overlay each other exactly.
Then any event that happens at one of those two points will
instantaneously happen at the other, not because the transfer of event
is infinitely fast, but because they are the same point in space time
anyhow.
DISTANCE IS DIFFERENCE
The word distance therefore can be defined as that which puts
difference between two points in space or time or both.
That's deep, for now we can't say that two points that have zero
distance between them are two different points.
We don't care about how many points there are between any two
different points, we only care that they are two different points.
This is very important because the proof says that learning with
certainty across a distance is impossible.
What this means is:
Learning with Certainty across two different space time points is
impossible. That means one point can't learn about the other point with
certainty.
The above is true regardless of whether there is something or
nothing in those space time points or between them.
This is not an issue about the kind of stuff that might occupy
those space time points, but an issue strictly about the two space time
points being two DIFFERENT space time points.
Thus it does not matter what the world is made of, what kind of
'stuff' exists or is created INSIDE that space time continuum, learning
with certainty across a difference in space or time remains impossible.
This fact has nothing to do with the nature of the stuff within that
space time.
Thus we can conclude that if A and B are two different objects,
either because they are separated by two different points in space or
time, *OR FOR ANY OTHER REASON*, then A and B can never learn about the
other with certainty.
WHY?
Because A is not B.
A can only be A.
B can change state BECAUSE of A, but even then B remains B. How
does B know the change was caused by A? A remains forever a theory to
B.
All learning across a difference in space time involves one point
in space time receiving an impingement from another point in space time,
a certain amount of time LATER.
The speed of cause traveling from one space time point to another
is finite, namely c, the speed of light.
C is the speed of light because c is the speed of cause in this
universe, so light of course travels at that speed as light is a form of
cause moving through space and time.
Say we are sitting there, just being a point in space time, and
siting there, and sitting there, and suddenly we are also a photon for a
moment, then another moment later we are just a point in space time
again.
So a photon passed through us, causing us to change state from
'photonless' to photonfull'.
But does that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the photon came
from the next point over from us before it hit us?
We certainly could theorize so, its called the theory of
electromagnetism, first clearly elucidated by James Clerk Maxwell, but
why couldn't God have just fabricated the photon where we were for a
moment and vanished it? Why did it HAVE to come from somewhere else
first?
This is called the Third Party Law.
The Third Party Law states that in the absence of the ability to
directly see the NECESSITY between two different events A and B that
follow each other, then it is imposible to determimne whether A caused B
to change state, or whether some third event C caused both A and B to
change state in such a way that it LOOKED LIKE A caused B to change
state directly.
Since necessity between two different events can not ever been seen
directly across a distance it is impossible to determine with perfect
certainty the causal relation between the two events.
For any two events that follow each other, there may always be a
third or fourth or fifth party, unsuspected but present and operating.
causing the first two events to follow each other as if they were
causing it themselves.
IN other words the apparency is always that B follows A and
that A caused B.
We diagram this like so:
A -> B
This shows the direction of the flow of cause and of time.
The Third Party however is drawn like this>
C ---\
\ \
A -> B
That means C causes A and then a while later C causes B,
such that, for one who can't see C directly, it looks like A caused B.
That there isn't a third party remains always and forever a theory.
Because nec5A5A5C CAN be seen directly between conscious looker and
looked at, we know there must be no distance between them.
Causation is necessity between two events.
Certainty IS necessity. Necessity of truth born of directly
observed necessity of causation.
Look at the two different colors. Can you observe them *CAUSING*
you to know that they are different without possibility of error?
When the looker sees the two different colors and knows they are
in fact two different colors without possibility of error, that is
necessity of truth and causation operating, which results in perfect
continuously reverfiable certainty.
Certainty of necessity between two different events means certainty
of no possible intervening third party, for example between the fact of
there being two different colors and you learning there are two
different colors by direct perception.
That also means there is no TIME between the event of there being
two different colors and you seeing them as different, as the seeing of
the colors IS the existence of the colors.
Necessity of correctness can not operate across a difference or
distance and thus never across a dimension or space time.
A machine can only learn about A by looking at B, and thus
has no direct perception of A nor any necessity between A and B.
Homer
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun Feb 25 23:53:04 EST 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Sep 13 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore457.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV9Z7pURT1lqxE3HERAvyKAJ9KvYO3oDFoQkGslhmJDaKWQJ+F1ACglvkY
zp9nnk+FVK180GbI7blhJSA=
=Yby6
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Wed Sep 16 01:41:28 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore457.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)
iD8DBQFV+QEIURT1lqxE3HERAmh0AKCf8h6/lGiTBdAu9biboW7SQsto8ACgnkoI
gutD7EsfvDQmmrcWbJnEsmU=
=l6JH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
THE PROOF AND CERTAINTY
The certainty of the proof comes from the fact that the proof is
about certainty, and thus the proof is a certainty about certainty.
If certainty itself were not the subject of the proof, then
attaining certainty on it would be much less certain :)
The proof, other wise known as the machine certainty theorm, is
very simple:
Learning with certainty across a space time distance is impossible.
In order words a machine can't be certain of anything.
"There is only one Proof.
Learn it, love it, teach it, master it.
All can, but for some it may be a very long time between now and
then, for you can't move your house around town if you have locked
yourself inside it.
In Excelsis Deo." - Adore
((Jane has asked me to explain what the reference to moving your
hour around town means.
BEING can create, change and destroy BECOMINGNESS which is a
created identity in space time.
BECOMINGNESS is your 'house', what you are and live in as you play
the games of life.
If you get too stuck in your BECOMINGNESS, you won't be able to
reascend to BEING in order to create, change or destroy your existing
BECOMINGNESS, i.e. to "move your house around town."
The last line means 'In the most high is God', namely that the
being is God in carnation and if that a being has chosen to lock himself
in his own house and throw away the key, there is not much you can do
about it, as sovereign all knowing rights have been exercised, for a
while.
You can ask can it be forever?
We ask back would a sovereign being choose to destroy itself
forever, or risk itself forever, in or out of time?
So, don't worry, be happy.))
CERTAINTY
Understanding the proof involves knowing what we mean by learning,
certainty and space time distance.
For example although it might seem obvious what certainty is, one
really needs to consult an example of certainty in order to really come
to know it.
In the absence of any examples of certainty, it would probably be
quite hard to tell what a certainty was.
Having a standard of certainty then allows one to easily reject the
many false pretenses of certainty in the world.
At this point we ask the reader to engage in a thought experiment,
the kind made famous by Albert Einstein.
Consider for the moment, as you sit there reading this posting,
that you are in fact quite asleep in bed and dreaming, that everything
you see around you including this posting, is a conscious color form
with no actual physical referent on the other side of it. In a few
minutes you will wake up to the actual world, and remember this dream in
its entirety including every word of this posting.
Just by way of reminder, in a dream the conscious color form
experiences are actual, but the implied physical referents are not.
In the dream you may see an apple out there, but there isn't a
corresponding physical apple that the physical body can eat.
Now, while considering yourself asleep and dreaming, we enjoin you
to look around you and spot any object with at least two different
colors in it.
Before you saw the object, did you know for sure it had at least
two colors?
Are you sure you see two different colors?
Would you bet your eternity in hell you see two different colors?
Would you bet everyone else's eternity in hell that you see two
different colors?
Good.
That's a certainty, a certainty that there are (at least) two
different colors and you see them.
Notice that certainty of difference implies certainty of existence,
as a color can't BE DIFFERENT from another color without BEing in the
first place.
Thus not only have we defined certainty by direct observation of it
in operation, but also existence.
In fact since the two colors have an implied viewpoint, you should
be able to spot with certainty where you are looking at the colors from,
and spot the looker looking at the colors. The looker is as actual as
the colors that are being looked at, although the looker has no color.
The 'color' of the looker is agency, self awareness and "I AM!".
So now that we know what a certainty is, if someone asks you to say
something with certainty about the nature of certainty you can always
say "Well learning with certainty across a distance is impossible,
certainly!" We haven't proven that yet, but its true none the less.
That means by the way that there is no distance between you and the
two different colors you are looking at and know are different with
certainty, even though the illusion of distance between you and the
colors is very strong.
In fact not only is there no distance between you and the colors,
you in fact ARE the colors, looker and looked at are one and the same
object and event.
This is a very big deal.
On the order of discovering special relativity, the cure for
cancer, or finding God under your pillow.
So be aware in this matter that you know something of import.
Don't just throw it in the same bin along with all your other
knowledge.
If God is perfect, then looking upon a perfect certainty is
possibly looking upon a functional part of God.
Some have even gone so far to say that consciousness IS God Light.
LEARNING
Again we enjoin the reader to notice that before looking at the
above object with two different colors, the reader did not in fact know
how many colors the object had, one or more.
But after looking at the object in question, the reader was able to
determine with certainty that the object had at least two or more
colors.
That is learning, a coming to know, in this case with perfect
certainty.
Thus we have fully defined Learning with Certainty.
SPACE TIME DISTANCE
Space and time are both conscious experiences, but we
anthropomorphize them into allegedly actual phenomenon in the alleged
physical universe.
We like to think that because we SEE space and time, that therefore
there IS space and time OUT THERE.
By the way, long time ago, Godel wrote a paper claiming that
Einstein's theory of special relativity proved that time didn't exist at
all. No one took him seriously, they considered him a loon. But to
complete the lunacy, space doesn't exist either, so in truth spacetime,
both space and time, are illusions.
THE ILLUSION IS ACTUAL, but the implied external referent is not.
The picture of the car chase at the movies is actual, but the car
chase represented by the movie picture is not actual at that time.
Both space and time are dimensions, meaning collections of things
which are identical to each other in their nature, but different in fact
from each other. Like having two pennies, each one a perfect copy of
the other, but each none the less distinct.
Just so, points in space extending out from anywhere to anywhere
form a line of identical 'points in space', but each one is in a
different place relative to the end points of the line. Thus, in
conception anyway, we have a continuum of 'points of space' from one end
to the other, each identical to the other, but each one its own point in
space. Thus the only difference between two points in space is where
they are, and thus 'where they are' forms a dimension of otherwise
identical entities.
Same for moments of time forming a time line.
Now we run into a problem with distance because distance is a
consideration of how many points of space there are between two other
points forming the end points of the line segment.
We have learned in school that there are an infinite number of
points between any two points, no matter how close the two end points
are together, so we can't use 'how many points' as a measure of
distance.
Worse we have been taught that there is no distance at all between
any two 'adjacent' points on a line, yet the line has length. This is
problematic because if you have a million points with no distance
between them, that adds up to no distance! One million times zero =
zero.
Unfortunately, even if you had an infinite number of points with
zero distance between them, there would still be zero distance between
the first and last.
Zero rules, because zero times infinity is still zero.
And infinity thought it was so big.
So distance is a difficult concept, particularly if we try to
measure it in points between, but we don't need to deal with the
difficulties in order to understand the proof.
All we need to understand is TWO DIFFERENT POINTS which are not on
the same point.
In physics we have learned that a point in space and time defines
an event or object. Even if there is nothing there at that moment in
space or time, the space time point was there, and that is an event or
object enough to call it so.
If a photon or other material object passes through a space time
point, then that adds to the description of the event at that space time
point. Rather than just being a moment of space and time, it now also
consists of a photon passing through it at a given angle, speed and
frequency.
If a ball is just hanging out in space time, then at its position
in space AND time, we have an event consisting of a point in space and
time plus a ball.
Notice that can never change, that position of space AND time
will always have that ball in it.
When the ball moves in time, it may stay in the same point in
space, or it may move to a new position in space along with the
change in position in time.
Change implies time, and time implies change.
Thus changes are comparisons across two different space time
points.
Now here we have a weird one, that might take a moment to see the
sense of it.
An event is one point in space time and everything going on
in it.
A space time point itself is not changing and can not change, so an
event is not a change.
A change is a comparison between two different space time points.
A transition between two different space time points may
involve a change in time only as one space point moves through time.
Or a transition between two different space time points may
involve both a change in time AND a change in space.
In otherwords an event at (x,t) = (0,0) is a different event
and a different space time point than (x,t) = (0,1), even though
the space part of it didn't change, only the time part did.
An event at (x,t) = (0,0) is also a different event and a different
space time point than (x,t) = (1,1), because both the space part and the
time part changed.
If the space time points of two events are not different, then they
aren't two different events, the two events are actually one and the
same event. Get it?
We may have a more complex event because two events are embedded
into one space time point, but we consider there is only one event and
not two.
For example let's take a theoretical piece of 8 x 11 paper and mark
two points on it with a pencil at different locations.
Then let us fold the paper over on itself so those two marked space
points overlay each other exactly.
Then any event that happens at one of those two points will
instantaneously happen at the other, not because the transfer of event
is infinitely fast, but because they are the same point in space time
anyhow.
DISTANCE IS DIFFERENCE
The word distance therefore can be defined as that which puts
difference between two points in space or time or both.
That's deep, for now we can't say that two points that have zero
distance between them are two different points.
We don't care about how many points there are between any two
different points, we only care that they are two different points.
This is very important because the proof says that learning with
certainty across a distance is impossible.
What this means is:
Learning with Certainty across two different space time points is
impossible. That means one point can't learn about the other point with
certainty.
The above is true regardless of whether there is something or
nothing in those space time points or between them.
This is not an issue about the kind of stuff that might occupy
those space time points, but an issue strictly about the two space time
points being two DIFFERENT space time points.
Thus it does not matter what the world is made of, what kind of
'stuff' exists or is created INSIDE that space time continuum, learning
with certainty across a difference in space or time remains impossible.
This fact has nothing to do with the nature of the stuff within that
space time.
Thus we can conclude that if A and B are two different objects,
either because they are separated by two different points in space or
time, *OR FOR ANY OTHER REASON*, then A and B can never learn about the
other with certainty.
WHY?
Because A is not B.
A can only be A.
B can change state BECAUSE of A, but even then B remains B. How
does B know the change was caused by A? A remains forever a theory to
B.
All learning across a difference in space time involves one point
in space time receiving an impingement from another point in space time,
a certain amount of time LATER.
The speed of cause traveling from one space time point to another
is finite, namely c, the speed of light.
C is the speed of light because c is the speed of cause in this
universe, so light of course travels at that speed as light is a form of
cause moving through space and time.
Say we are sitting there, just being a point in space time, and
siting there, and sitting there, and suddenly we are also a photon for a
moment, then another moment later we are just a point in space time
again.
So a photon passed through us, causing us to change state from
'photonless' to photonfull'.
But does that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the photon came
from the next point over from us before it hit us?
We certainly could theorize so, its called the theory of
electromagnetism, first clearly elucidated by James Clerk Maxwell, but
why couldn't God have just fabricated the photon where we were for a
moment and vanished it? Why did it HAVE to come from somewhere else
first?
This is called the Third Party Law.
The Third Party Law states that in the absence of the ability to
directly see the NECESSITY between two different events A and B that
follow each other, then it is imposible to determimne whether A caused B
to change state, or whether some third event C caused both A and B to
change state in such a way that it LOOKED LIKE A caused B to change
state directly.
Since necessity between two different events can not ever been seen
directly across a distance it is impossible to determine with perfect
certainty the causal relation between the two events.
For any two events that follow each other, there may always be a
third or fourth or fifth party, unsuspected but present and operating.
causing the first two events to follow each other as if they were
causing it themselves.
IN other words the apparency is always that B follows A and
that A caused B.
We diagram this like so:
A -> B
This shows the direction of the flow of cause and of time.
The Third Party however is drawn like this>
C ---\
\ \
A -> B
That means C causes A and then a while later C causes B,
such that, for one who can't see C directly, it looks like A caused B.
That there isn't a third party remains always and forever a theory.
Because nec5A5A5C CAN be seen directly between conscious looker and
looked at, we know there must be no distance between them.
Causation is necessity between two events.
Certainty IS necessity. Necessity of truth born of directly
observed necessity of causation.
Look at the two different colors. Can you observe them *CAUSING*
you to know that they are different without possibility of error?
When the looker sees the two different colors and knows they are
in fact two different colors without possibility of error, that is
necessity of truth and causation operating, which results in perfect
continuously reverfiable certainty.
Certainty of necessity between two different events means certainty
of no possible intervening third party, for example between the fact of
there being two different colors and you learning there are two
different colors by direct perception.
That also means there is no TIME between the event of there being
two different colors and you seeing them as different, as the seeing of
the colors IS the existence of the colors.
Necessity of correctness can not operate across a difference or
distance and thus never across a dimension or space time.
A machine can only learn about A by looking at B, and thus
has no direct perception of A nor any necessity between A and B.
Homer
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun Feb 25 23:53:04 EST 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Sep 13 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore457.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV9Z7pURT1lqxE3HERAvyKAJ9KvYO3oDFoQkGslhmJDaKWQJ+F1ACglvkY
zp9nnk+FVK180GbI7blhJSA=
=Yby6
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Wed Sep 16 01:41:28 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore457.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)
iD8DBQFV+QEIURT1lqxE3HERAmh0AKCf8h6/lGiTBdAu9biboW7SQsto8ACgnkoI
gutD7EsfvDQmmrcWbJnEsmU=
=l6JH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
LOGIC27 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
PERFECT CERTAINTIES vs BETS
Just as there are perfect certainties that can not be wrong, just so
there are statements that can not be perfect certainties and can never be
perfect certainties.
Once one attains awareness of perfect certainties and becomes facile
spotting them or rejecting them, one can then easily spot when a statement
can never be a perfect certainty, and thus safely relegate it to a mere
probability or bet.
Thus one can no longer make the error of being certain of something
and finding out later that one was wrong as everything one holds true is
either a perfect certainty that can not be wrong, or a probabilistic bet
that can not be a perfect certainty.
This is called personal integrity.
Homer
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Sep 14 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic27.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV9vBpURT1lqxE3HERAhaeAJ9aMYWDHd6WIuJ+9yM9SjZ8XT+QmwCgm6FP
clJU7girWZk+uPUcXbCfqcw=
=vGMJ
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Wed Sep 16 00:59:16 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic27.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)
iD8DBQFV+PckURT1lqxE3HERAhN+AKCREjWZTcnxPqpOWpwHt1rfH9zDZQCgldpa
CTD0kEYX18zohstQK6Irihc=
=lzo1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
PERFECT CERTAINTIES vs BETS
Just as there are perfect certainties that can not be wrong, just so
there are statements that can not be perfect certainties and can never be
perfect certainties.
Once one attains awareness of perfect certainties and becomes facile
spotting them or rejecting them, one can then easily spot when a statement
can never be a perfect certainty, and thus safely relegate it to a mere
probability or bet.
Thus one can no longer make the error of being certain of something
and finding out later that one was wrong as everything one holds true is
either a perfect certainty that can not be wrong, or a probabilistic bet
that can not be a perfect certainty.
This is called personal integrity.
Homer
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Sep 14 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic27.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV9vBpURT1lqxE3HERAhaeAJ9aMYWDHd6WIuJ+9yM9SjZ8XT+QmwCgm6FP
clJU7girWZk+uPUcXbCfqcw=
=vGMJ
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Wed Sep 16 00:59:16 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic27.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)
iD8DBQFV+PckURT1lqxE3HERAhN+AKCREjWZTcnxPqpOWpwHt1rfH9zDZQCgldpa
CTD0kEYX18zohstQK6Irihc=
=lzo1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE80 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Karma
"Immortals who dislike Mortals have some karma to face.
Namely Mortals who dislike Immortals are despicable.
Karma is present time involvement with hidden shames of the past.
Shame is a waste of time.
So is karma."
From Adore.
This is about all Adore has to say about meatballs. Although
I do rib meatballs a lot, its actually bullbaiting more than
anything else.
Incipient Carrion dwellers are very special to me, since I used to be
one myself until my visioning when I was 21.
What the above says is that some Mortals take great exception to
Immortals. Immortals who find themselves beset by Mortals trying
to destroy or harm them thus need to study their own past lives when
they were Mortals too and did the same thing to other Immortals.
Remember Adore considers everyone is actually Immortal, but some think
they are Mortal, these are the 'Mortals'. They aren't really Mortal.
But since they are Immortal but think they are Mortal, they have
eschewed their Immortality, and thus Adore draws the inference, that they
eschew Immortality or awareness of such in others also.
This makes such Mortals suppressive as they will try to stop anyone
from getting involved in spiritual inquiry.
Many people are kind of on the fence, they think they are mortal,
but wish they were immortal and are interested in spiritual inquiry
as long as it doesn't involve blind faith which is a High Crime in
Adore. Adore does NOT consider this group as 'mortals'.
Adore says that the two groups can get really paranoid about
each other. The Immortals feel that the Mortals are out to
destory them because the Mortals have destroyed their own sense
of Immortality in themselves. The Mortals also feel the same
way about Immortals. Its anybody's guess who started it.
Adore says,
"You started them starting it."
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Sep 15 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore80.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV+EHpURT1lqxE3HERAvFFAJ9/q5LBGS6GkxjtXdl/Q6/uuKQUGwCgl1Q+
mjcmm688V6q8XwhZQrMB73E=
=rBJe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Karma
"Immortals who dislike Mortals have some karma to face.
Namely Mortals who dislike Immortals are despicable.
Karma is present time involvement with hidden shames of the past.
Shame is a waste of time.
So is karma."
From Adore.
This is about all Adore has to say about meatballs. Although
I do rib meatballs a lot, its actually bullbaiting more than
anything else.
Incipient Carrion dwellers are very special to me, since I used to be
one myself until my visioning when I was 21.
What the above says is that some Mortals take great exception to
Immortals. Immortals who find themselves beset by Mortals trying
to destroy or harm them thus need to study their own past lives when
they were Mortals too and did the same thing to other Immortals.
Remember Adore considers everyone is actually Immortal, but some think
they are Mortal, these are the 'Mortals'. They aren't really Mortal.
But since they are Immortal but think they are Mortal, they have
eschewed their Immortality, and thus Adore draws the inference, that they
eschew Immortality or awareness of such in others also.
This makes such Mortals suppressive as they will try to stop anyone
from getting involved in spiritual inquiry.
Many people are kind of on the fence, they think they are mortal,
but wish they were immortal and are interested in spiritual inquiry
as long as it doesn't involve blind faith which is a High Crime in
Adore. Adore does NOT consider this group as 'mortals'.
Adore says that the two groups can get really paranoid about
each other. The Immortals feel that the Mortals are out to
destory them because the Mortals have destroyed their own sense
of Immortality in themselves. The Mortals also feel the same
way about Immortals. Its anybody's guess who started it.
Adore says,
"You started them starting it."
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Sep 15 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore80.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV+EHpURT1lqxE3HERAvFFAJ9/q5LBGS6GkxjtXdl/Q6/uuKQUGwCgl1Q+
mjcmm688V6q8XwhZQrMB73E=
=rBJe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Friday, September 11, 2015
ADORE489 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
FAILURE TO HELP = NO AUDITING
Kevin Brady (gomorrhan@hotmail.com) wrote:
>Ouch. Well, I can understand how you'd be pissed if you feel that help has
>been refused from those you consider qualified to help. As even Hubbard
>understood, the only reason clearing practitioners run into real trouble is
>failure to deliver the results they promise.
Close.
Clearing practitioners never promise to deliver any results, they
only promise to deliver standard tech whether it produces results or
not.
The real item is:
Failure to grant beingness to the seriousness of the problem, and
blaming the *PC* for failure to handle it together with the auditor.
"Pc will not unburden if he auditor has no regard for the possible
severity of the problem." - Hubbard APA
My C/S at the Org didn't want me back in his HGC due to 'my
performance as a pc'.
Harry Palmer said I was weird, and not to teach anyone The Proof
because it would destroy their game.
Well maybe that's true, the proof did destroy every game I had,
"Hey Harry you wanna audit me on the proof?"
With Harry, long after the Org, I wanted to pay for one intensive,
see how it went, they insisted on 4 intensives, $12,000 dollars. Middle
of first intensive I walked out, never to return.
I couldn't go back, just couldn't do it.
Have you ever walked away from $10,000 of auditing waiting for you?
PC's can easily handle the failure of auditing to produce results
as long as the auditor does not blame the pc and the pc does not blame
the auditor, but both just accept the fact that neither knows what they
are doing.
They may eventually part ways, but they will part as friends and
continued collaborateurs in discovery.
It's ok to not know what you are doing, how else are we going to
learn? Its the false fact that we know it all, that this procedure
ALWAYS works, and if it doesn't then YOU must be an SP etc. These wrong
why's will produce an irrevokable ARC break between pc and auditor as
long as they continue.
As for Alan, he has said he wouldn't have me enturbulating his
noodle farm, but mostly he has refused to audit me because I won't sign
my rights to commmunicate for the rest of eternity over to him in a non
disclosure agreement. No big deal, Alan hasn't a clue anyhow, so no
loss there.
>For my part, part of the reason I'm trying to integrate "psych" viewpoints
>into my current investigations, and my unwillingness to accept "bt/cluster"
>things as being actual solutions, is because those who espouse those routes
>HAVE failed to help, dodging the actual charge on the case in an effort to
>skip past it and attribute everything to Xenu and his many minions. Getting
>really significant about personae and ostensible "whole track" events just
>seems a dead-end, wrong-track way, to me... so I take sage words from that
>direction with a grain or ten of salt. It's humorous to me when people who
>are dramatizing ser-facs (refusing help) try to get those they aren't
>helping to accept their justifications about "confidential" tech type
>"reasons" for failure of lower tech solutions to work. It's a sell-job of
>people who just won't roll up their sleeves and discharge the case that's
>there, instead searching for illusionary case that, of course, discharges
>with the greatest of ease (after all, it was just mocked up).
You gotta go where you gotta go. But next time you get bogged down
because you have made too much case gain and your BT's haven't try this.
Forget about Xenu and OT III, that evals for everyone and pisses
everyone off.
Picture yourself in a huge auditorium with no lights and you are at
the podium and you have no idea if anyone is in any of the seats.
Then just ask out loud, ok, anyone want some auditing?
Then audit in the dark for a while whoever or whatever comes up.
It can produce amazing results when done at the right moment.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Sep 11 16:00:14 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore489.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)
iD8DBQFV8zLPURT1lqxE3HERAnYwAKCTkVYSI2jCwsbhzajiFqEPTvI0RgCgkeQT
f2B4DOBH4l6kBeToE/IHlMQ=
=1hEk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
FAILURE TO HELP = NO AUDITING
Kevin Brady (gomorrhan@hotmail.com) wrote:
>Ouch. Well, I can understand how you'd be pissed if you feel that help has
>been refused from those you consider qualified to help. As even Hubbard
>understood, the only reason clearing practitioners run into real trouble is
>failure to deliver the results they promise.
Close.
Clearing practitioners never promise to deliver any results, they
only promise to deliver standard tech whether it produces results or
not.
The real item is:
Failure to grant beingness to the seriousness of the problem, and
blaming the *PC* for failure to handle it together with the auditor.
"Pc will not unburden if he auditor has no regard for the possible
severity of the problem." - Hubbard APA
My C/S at the Org didn't want me back in his HGC due to 'my
performance as a pc'.
Harry Palmer said I was weird, and not to teach anyone The Proof
because it would destroy their game.
Well maybe that's true, the proof did destroy every game I had,
"Hey Harry you wanna audit me on the proof?"
With Harry, long after the Org, I wanted to pay for one intensive,
see how it went, they insisted on 4 intensives, $12,000 dollars. Middle
of first intensive I walked out, never to return.
I couldn't go back, just couldn't do it.
Have you ever walked away from $10,000 of auditing waiting for you?
PC's can easily handle the failure of auditing to produce results
as long as the auditor does not blame the pc and the pc does not blame
the auditor, but both just accept the fact that neither knows what they
are doing.
They may eventually part ways, but they will part as friends and
continued collaborateurs in discovery.
It's ok to not know what you are doing, how else are we going to
learn? Its the false fact that we know it all, that this procedure
ALWAYS works, and if it doesn't then YOU must be an SP etc. These wrong
why's will produce an irrevokable ARC break between pc and auditor as
long as they continue.
As for Alan, he has said he wouldn't have me enturbulating his
noodle farm, but mostly he has refused to audit me because I won't sign
my rights to commmunicate for the rest of eternity over to him in a non
disclosure agreement. No big deal, Alan hasn't a clue anyhow, so no
loss there.
>For my part, part of the reason I'm trying to integrate "psych" viewpoints
>into my current investigations, and my unwillingness to accept "bt/cluster"
>things as being actual solutions, is because those who espouse those routes
>HAVE failed to help, dodging the actual charge on the case in an effort to
>skip past it and attribute everything to Xenu and his many minions. Getting
>really significant about personae and ostensible "whole track" events just
>seems a dead-end, wrong-track way, to me... so I take sage words from that
>direction with a grain or ten of salt. It's humorous to me when people who
>are dramatizing ser-facs (refusing help) try to get those they aren't
>helping to accept their justifications about "confidential" tech type
>"reasons" for failure of lower tech solutions to work. It's a sell-job of
>people who just won't roll up their sleeves and discharge the case that's
>there, instead searching for illusionary case that, of course, discharges
>with the greatest of ease (after all, it was just mocked up).
You gotta go where you gotta go. But next time you get bogged down
because you have made too much case gain and your BT's haven't try this.
Forget about Xenu and OT III, that evals for everyone and pisses
everyone off.
Picture yourself in a huge auditorium with no lights and you are at
the podium and you have no idea if anyone is in any of the seats.
Then just ask out loud, ok, anyone want some auditing?
Then audit in the dark for a while whoever or whatever comes up.
It can produce amazing results when done at the right moment.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Sep 11 16:00:14 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore489.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)
iD8DBQFV8zLPURT1lqxE3HERAnYwAKCTkVYSI2jCwsbhzajiFqEPTvI0RgCgkeQT
f2B4DOBH4l6kBeToE/IHlMQ=
=1hEk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Thursday, September 10, 2015
ADORE61 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
FEARLESS FUTURE
><homer@lightlink.com> writes:
>> The greatest OT power there is the ability to live fearlessly. I
>> don't mean bravely, I mean without fear of the eternal future.
Hoovph (hoovph@cs.comnospam) wrote:
>I disagree. We can do nothing but survive, and we're all in this together.
>There isn't any super-evil group that's trying to do away with all us *good
>people*, and we're not going to be dumped into any sudden unexpected change.
>Life just goes on, day after day, in much the same way. Always has, always
>will.
((Pig ugly stupid.
There are in fact large groups of beings in this and earlier
universes totally devoted to super evil intentions, like 'to destroy all
games for everyone forever.'
There are intentions so evil one is has not been allowed to think
or know about them, let alone talk about them, because a being creates
in the the mere conception of things, and conceiving such an intention
would start its implementation unless revoke immediately afterwards.
Sudden change is well on its way just in the form of natural
disasters, let alone man made disasters.))
Wild.
Survive? Survival as a marble rolling around the drain to hell
is survival alright, yes we can do nothing but survive. But can we
quiesce in pleasure whilst surviving eh?
If Atomic war happens, or a super controled slave state, or you
break your back and have to live in a body cast for your whole life,
or you get sent to Vietnam to die for the military industrial complex,
you will be singing a different tune.
You statement is *VERY* glib.
>> You might try running (if you haven't),
>>
>> Sovereignty and Non Sovereignty
>> Danger and Safety
>>
>Are these items to be run on four flows? Or just looking for reads on the
>words?
Spot and be with areas of Sovereignty and Non Sovereignty, Danger
and Safety on all flows, all dynamics, all universes of interest to you
and your body and your loved ones and everyone else.
Also spot "I am made" and "I make".
Homer
>Paul
- - --
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Sep 8 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore61.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV7wdpURT1lqxE3HERApo4AKCh/lXvMtU3/D2+ERmLqUiLWUOUhgCgiUwA
ZKP+o7zmFTe0NtlAJK0L/0w=
=CstV
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Thu Sep 10 17:07:13 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore61.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)
iD8DBQFV8fECURT1lqxE3HERAhVPAKCA3iX1j77bBkhF+Zfwb8RQzsklIACfVCnq
KbedLrrbPI03deZLvpyiEBg=
=cAyE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
FEARLESS FUTURE
><homer@lightlink.com> writes:
>> The greatest OT power there is the ability to live fearlessly. I
>> don't mean bravely, I mean without fear of the eternal future.
Hoovph (hoovph@cs.comnospam) wrote:
>I disagree. We can do nothing but survive, and we're all in this together.
>There isn't any super-evil group that's trying to do away with all us *good
>people*, and we're not going to be dumped into any sudden unexpected change.
>Life just goes on, day after day, in much the same way. Always has, always
>will.
((Pig ugly stupid.
There are in fact large groups of beings in this and earlier
universes totally devoted to super evil intentions, like 'to destroy all
games for everyone forever.'
There are intentions so evil one is has not been allowed to think
or know about them, let alone talk about them, because a being creates
in the the mere conception of things, and conceiving such an intention
would start its implementation unless revoke immediately afterwards.
Sudden change is well on its way just in the form of natural
disasters, let alone man made disasters.))
Wild.
Survive? Survival as a marble rolling around the drain to hell
is survival alright, yes we can do nothing but survive. But can we
quiesce in pleasure whilst surviving eh?
If Atomic war happens, or a super controled slave state, or you
break your back and have to live in a body cast for your whole life,
or you get sent to Vietnam to die for the military industrial complex,
you will be singing a different tune.
You statement is *VERY* glib.
>> You might try running (if you haven't),
>>
>> Sovereignty and Non Sovereignty
>> Danger and Safety
>>
>Are these items to be run on four flows? Or just looking for reads on the
>words?
Spot and be with areas of Sovereignty and Non Sovereignty, Danger
and Safety on all flows, all dynamics, all universes of interest to you
and your body and your loved ones and everyone else.
Also spot "I am made" and "I make".
Homer
>Paul
- - --
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Sep 8 12:06:01 EDT 2015
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore61.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)
iD8DBQFV7wdpURT1lqxE3HERApo4AKCh/lXvMtU3/D2+ERmLqUiLWUOUhgCgiUwA
ZKP+o7zmFTe0NtlAJK0L/0w=
=CstV
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Thu Sep 10 17:07:13 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore61.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)
iD8DBQFV8fECURT1lqxE3HERAhVPAKCA3iX1j77bBkhF+Zfwb8RQzsklIACfVCnq
KbedLrrbPI03deZLvpyiEBg=
=cAyE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE148 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Zinj (zinjifar@yahoo.com) wrote:
>If there is no MEST beyond our own minds; no causality beyond our own
>perception; then there is no 'suffer', no continue; no xxx trillion
>years; no 'next chance'; no 'comes along'; no 'disembark'.
Zinj was a pretty stupid guy. A WHAT DREAM? case.
You can dream pain, and you can dream and not know you are
dreaming, and you can choose and not know you chose.
There are beings who are lost in dreams of MEST.
Yes there is no MEST in actuality, but there are dreams of MEST,
virtual MEST, and as such a game of some sort is going on in the virtual
reality.
One can suffer quite a bit in the virtual reality, pain is real, as
pain is consciousness and not MEST.
Although time may be an illusory part of the virtual reality, one
can and does spend 'time' in the virtual reality. To the degree one
believes the virtual reality to be actual, one's suffering can not help
but get worse providing a kind of dwindling spiral of experience. The
thetan itself can never be damaged permanently or get lost, as there is
nothing to break or anywhere to go.
But the dream and its pain can go on for a very long 'time'.
It does not take the existence of dimensionality to make things
actual.
The zero dimensional static quite actual.
But its an actuality that lives to create virtual realities
that aren't actual in the stories they portray.
All we are saying is that existence is a zero dimensional multi
faceted operating actuality, and that its purpose and mode of operation
is to project dimensional virtual realities for the edification and
pleasure of its inhabitants.
"Source sources what Source is not." - Adore
To the degree that the being mistakes (purposefully) virtual
realities for actualities, the being will decay into deeper and deeper
limitation and pain.
The primary message of truth is "I am non dimensional".
The primary message of virtual reality is "I am dimensional".
Virtual realities also like to pretend to be fragile, unique
and precious.
Virtual realities are made of drama.
Drama is seriousness, importance, permanance and pain.
Seriousness means if you lose this game, there will never
be any more games for you forever and ever amen.
Importance means it has to be done now, you can't wait, you
MUST act or must not act as the case may be, thus the game can't
be escaped, the being is stuck in the game.
Permanance means once something is done or lost its forever.
Pain is, well if you don't know what pain is, you shouldn't
be reading this.
If you are dimensional, you can be busted apart and die. That
violates the fundamental sovereign desire of the being to live forever
above and outside of time.
We call this Eternality, while Immortality means stuck in one
time stream forever in time.
Mortality means live once, die once and that's it bud.
That results in a rage and slow burn of the soul that no one can
look on and bear the pain, the sorrow is oceanic.
Clearing wakes the being up to the dream, and gets him to spot his
mistaken considerations concerning virtual realities and actualities at
which point the persisting suffering that resulted from the mistakes
ceases to be.
The nightmare becomes a lucid dream, and the being starts to regain
his abilities to control his dream and the dreams of others, wake them
up too.
He can make spiders laugh at his jokes, and make babes come out of
the walls.
Persistence of virtual realities is itself caused by mistaking the
virtual reality for an actuality, and thus the more a being mistakes
virtual realities for actuality, the more a being gets stuck in
persistence, dreamtime and eventually suffering and finally
unconcsiousness, no longer able to dream but also no longer able to
'wake up' to the Big Snooze.
A being can be buried and die in a dream that he believes is not a
dream.
Space/time becomes his mausoleum.
That is why getting beings back up into lucid dreaming and getting
them to maintain it is so important.
Of course they choose to lose that lucidity, mostly out of the
thrill of getting lost, but we are here by their choice too to help them
regain it and find their way 'home' should it be their time.
"Thrill is always the effort to get lost.
Romance is always the effort to get home.
Halcyon (humor) is bemused relief on the verge of time..." -Adore
"Eternal Home is Home, Lost is Time.
Eternal Home is Cool, Lost is Kind." - Adore.
That last line means that if you are going to get lost, you better
keep your kindness (humor) about you, if you ever want to find your way
home again.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Thu Sep 10 01:20:54 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore148.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)
iD8DBQFV8RM3URT1lqxE3HERAoyKAJ9gJQWlIJpoJyalmsLMmBDP0eqzDACeNFGS
6IAVCJoW23qIQdwJIa29DO8=
=bIrI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Zinj (zinjifar@yahoo.com) wrote:
>If there is no MEST beyond our own minds; no causality beyond our own
>perception; then there is no 'suffer', no continue; no xxx trillion
>years; no 'next chance'; no 'comes along'; no 'disembark'.
Zinj was a pretty stupid guy. A WHAT DREAM? case.
You can dream pain, and you can dream and not know you are
dreaming, and you can choose and not know you chose.
There are beings who are lost in dreams of MEST.
Yes there is no MEST in actuality, but there are dreams of MEST,
virtual MEST, and as such a game of some sort is going on in the virtual
reality.
One can suffer quite a bit in the virtual reality, pain is real, as
pain is consciousness and not MEST.
Although time may be an illusory part of the virtual reality, one
can and does spend 'time' in the virtual reality. To the degree one
believes the virtual reality to be actual, one's suffering can not help
but get worse providing a kind of dwindling spiral of experience. The
thetan itself can never be damaged permanently or get lost, as there is
nothing to break or anywhere to go.
But the dream and its pain can go on for a very long 'time'.
It does not take the existence of dimensionality to make things
actual.
The zero dimensional static quite actual.
But its an actuality that lives to create virtual realities
that aren't actual in the stories they portray.
All we are saying is that existence is a zero dimensional multi
faceted operating actuality, and that its purpose and mode of operation
is to project dimensional virtual realities for the edification and
pleasure of its inhabitants.
"Source sources what Source is not." - Adore
To the degree that the being mistakes (purposefully) virtual
realities for actualities, the being will decay into deeper and deeper
limitation and pain.
The primary message of truth is "I am non dimensional".
The primary message of virtual reality is "I am dimensional".
Virtual realities also like to pretend to be fragile, unique
and precious.
Virtual realities are made of drama.
Drama is seriousness, importance, permanance and pain.
Seriousness means if you lose this game, there will never
be any more games for you forever and ever amen.
Importance means it has to be done now, you can't wait, you
MUST act or must not act as the case may be, thus the game can't
be escaped, the being is stuck in the game.
Permanance means once something is done or lost its forever.
Pain is, well if you don't know what pain is, you shouldn't
be reading this.
If you are dimensional, you can be busted apart and die. That
violates the fundamental sovereign desire of the being to live forever
above and outside of time.
We call this Eternality, while Immortality means stuck in one
time stream forever in time.
Mortality means live once, die once and that's it bud.
That results in a rage and slow burn of the soul that no one can
look on and bear the pain, the sorrow is oceanic.
Clearing wakes the being up to the dream, and gets him to spot his
mistaken considerations concerning virtual realities and actualities at
which point the persisting suffering that resulted from the mistakes
ceases to be.
The nightmare becomes a lucid dream, and the being starts to regain
his abilities to control his dream and the dreams of others, wake them
up too.
He can make spiders laugh at his jokes, and make babes come out of
the walls.
Persistence of virtual realities is itself caused by mistaking the
virtual reality for an actuality, and thus the more a being mistakes
virtual realities for actuality, the more a being gets stuck in
persistence, dreamtime and eventually suffering and finally
unconcsiousness, no longer able to dream but also no longer able to
'wake up' to the Big Snooze.
A being can be buried and die in a dream that he believes is not a
dream.
Space/time becomes his mausoleum.
That is why getting beings back up into lucid dreaming and getting
them to maintain it is so important.
Of course they choose to lose that lucidity, mostly out of the
thrill of getting lost, but we are here by their choice too to help them
regain it and find their way 'home' should it be their time.
"Thrill is always the effort to get lost.
Romance is always the effort to get home.
Halcyon (humor) is bemused relief on the verge of time..." -Adore
"Eternal Home is Home, Lost is Time.
Eternal Home is Cool, Lost is Kind." - Adore.
That last line means that if you are going to get lost, you better
keep your kindness (humor) about you, if you ever want to find your way
home again.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Thu Sep 10 01:20:54 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore148.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)
iD8DBQFV8RM3URT1lqxE3HERAoyKAJ9gJQWlIJpoJyalmsLMmBDP0eqzDACeNFGS
6IAVCJoW23qIQdwJIa29DO8=
=bIrI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)