-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
EGO
I accept your apology for confusing the illusions of ego with "I"
which is absolute and is all things conscious or asleep.
Ego is not a THING, it is a function of a thing, namely the I, and
the I gets all involved with the functions of the ego, to survive in
space time as a self determined or other determined unit.
What is missing from all these discussion is an analysis of AGENCY.
Just as we can be certain we see (or are) red, we can also be
certain we are agent.
Sense of agency leads directly into sense of the true Self, the
responsible one.
There is a reason one feels guilty, and thus lives in shame.
There may be illusions obscuring a clear view to this, but it is
powered by the truth of an allmighty I AM, or SOMETHING IS.
That agency may be a conscious reflection or even usurpation of a
higher agency that powers even the I, we admit that without further
argument.
But that higher power is the GROUND of I, not a higher I.
Those that hope to doff responsibility however by handing it over
to the ground of all being, are in for a long haul of pain.
The ground of all being gave full responsibility to you, so I
suggest you use it.
"Source sources only when will casts."
What is also left out are the perceptions of perfect certainty that
exists in consciousness and IS consciousness.
It's too hot to handle.
Running "I am not that" is a waste of time, unless one also runs "I
am that, certainly". One may be wrong, but eventually one becomes right
on the matter.
The ego is a small piece and function of the totality of existence,
that the I has come to think that's all it has, self image is somewhat
good to describe this.
Auditing self images is also cool.
But the problem is not that the self is wrong about being that or
this, it's error is in thinking it is this and NOT that.
It is this AND that.
And that grows big very fast.
Concentrating on I AM NOT, or what I am NOT goes down hill very
fast.
It isn't true I is NOTHING, it is true that I is ALL.
Something exists, that is certain.
That which is certain, agent and gives a damn is the true *I* even
in its illusion of abject finiteness.
Homer
Pip <pip1010@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Ego is a latin word meaning "I". Ego is also one of the three
> constructs in Sigmund Freud's structural model of the psyche.
> In spirituality the ego is often associated with mind and the sense of
> time, which compulsively thinks in order to be assured of its future
> existence, rather than simply knowing its own self and the present.
>
> The spiritual goal of many traditions involves the dissolving of the
> ego, allowing self-knowledge of one's own true nature to become
> experienced and enacted in the world. This is variously known as
> enlightenment, Nirvana, Presence, and the "Here and Now". Eckhart Tolle
> comments that, to the extent that the ego is present in an individual,
> that individual is somewhat insane psychologially, in reference to the
> ego's nature as compulsovely hyperactive and compulsively (and
> pathologically) self-centered. However, since this is the norm, it goes
> unrecognised as the source of much that could be classified as insane
> behavior in everyday life. In South Asian traditions, the state of
> being trapped in the illusory belief that one is the ego is known as
> maya or samsara. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ego_%28spirituality%29 ***
>
> Like the four blind men describing an elephant, descriptions of the ego
> never seem to tell the whole story. So what is the ego? Both
> discussions below are relevant and Carol makes a good point and preface
> for my view of the ego. The qualities ascribed to the ego like
> arrogance, pride, or posessiveness are often called "ego" but ego
> itself is something deeper, some more nebulous structure from which
> these traits arise. The simplest description might just be that ego is
> one's "self image" which might be strong, healthy, confident, or weak,
> defensive, overbearing etc. It consists of one's story, memories,
> personality, and situation. Confusion comes from "ego" meaning "I",
> while the attributes of the ego structure being discussed are NOT one's
> sense self awareness and existence but something else. So for this
> discussion ego is not the real "I" but only those aspects of one's mind
> and personality that one mistakenly takes oneself to be.
>
> So the ego is a false self which might be describes as the various
> identities or programmed characteristics which one identifies with.
> When a set of beliefs, memories, and goals are taken to represent ones
> true beliefs memories and goals then we can say that the being is under
> the control of the false self. One's existence or real "I" is a self
> knowing state whereas what one feels and believes about oneself and what
> one takes oneself to be may indeed be false, and certainly is, if it is
> anything other than the real I. But then what is the real I? It is
> possible to conceive of the real I to some degree, as one can conceive
> of the Static, but the concept is of course not the thing. The problem
> is that most of what we think of as being "ourselves" may be only
> characteristics of our bodies, our circumstances, our memories, our
> stories, our personality, and all the things which we HAVE, DO, or are
> BEING (portraying). Yet all these things can and do change. Virtually
> all these things change lifetime to lifetime and yet our essential
> nature, our true self affirming "I" does not. You can see this right
> now - you are always you even when you have other bodies and other
> personalities - that's the real "I". The question then arises whether
> ANY beliefs, memories, or characteristics can represent the true self.
> The answer is, not unless the being has recognized what it is. While
> these things are creations of the true self, unless they are informed by
> the realization of truth in present time, they only represent an
> evolving beingness, a character in a story who is continuously
> transformed by its personality and circumstances.
>
> But we can take this deeper. What allows us to not see what we are? To
> have a "false self" or to get falsely self-identified in the first
> place? I believe that not seeing what we really are starts as a sense
> of separation from our own experience. One can say of any aspect of
> one's own experience "I experience that". The I and the "that" are
> separate. This may be the ultimate illusion. This opens the door to
> finding something to be (since one has in a sense forgotten what one
> is) and identifying with it, ie strongly believing, assuming, and acting
> as if one is that, be it a body, mind, character, story etc. Ideas like
> oneness and "I am everything" are often expressed by those claiming to
> have regained their original perspective as a self illuminated eternal
> being.
>
> So those advocating the end of the ego may be pointing the way to
> spiritual freedom but by declaring that the ego as "I" is an illusion or
> non-existent, as I have done, they are treading on sacred ground.
> The ego they are referring to is of course the false self, but as Carol
> describes below, ideologies clash without proper duplication. Perhaps
> the easiest route is to notice what one is NOT until one has a
> realization. This would be an unlimited process. One way to look at
> this is that the "NOT" is already the postulate in effect, so one is
> taking it over and theoretically getting free of it at some point. We
> are actually everything but we are identifying with something we assume
> exists but does not. Another viewpoint is that this process eventually
> exhausts the possibilities, or the ego itself, so that only the truth
> remains. Also if one questions all identifications, all things one
> believes one IS, and all concepts of reality continually, this may also
> be a valid path to waking up from the virtual reality dream we are in as
> well.
>
> "I ask you only to stop imagining that you were born, have parents, are
> a body, will die and so on. Just try. Make a beginning - it's not as
> hard as you think." -Nisargadatta Maharaj
>
> "All you have to do is get past the idea that you're a human being on
> planet Earth. Flush that belief out of your system and a huge mass of
> backed-up mental sewage automatically gets flushed out with it." -Jed
> McKenna
>
> Pip
>
>
> that's like calling a tree a forest when it is only one attribute of a
> forest ecosystem although it is a microcosm of the forest and posseses
> some of the characteristics of the forest.
>
> Clearing Archive Roboposter wrote:
>
>>CB Willis (cbwillis@adore.lightlink.com) wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>"Ego" is a very ambiguous word in the history of psychology, world
>>>religions, and metaphysics. Sometimes it has a positive healthy
>>>connotation akin to soul or healthy individuality, other times it has an
>>>undesirable or derogatory connotation akin to arrogance or
>>>worldly-physicalworld self. So you have to know a tradition and how it
>>>defines "ego", not mix traditions or desirable/undesirable connotations
>>>and have broad historical awareness when you hear the term.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Prayer, meditation, contemplation, prayer intentions, postulates,
>>>affirmations are a complex set of subjects. There is great danger that
>>>one from outside of a tradition will misdefine and misunderstand, and then
>>>argue against his own misdefinition and misunderstanding, with the
>>>questionable purpose of setting his own view off against or in contrast to
>>>some other view that he has now in effect trashed.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>My preferred interpretation of Scn "thetan" is more like Hindu "atman" or
>>>pure consciousness, spirit.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>And I understand "theta" as spiritual substance in a classical sense.
>>>But I've been told countless times that my understanding on these misses
>>>LRH's view/definition. My view is more like Scn if I had invented it.
>>>Sort of like the Society for Creative Anachronism (SCA) - the group that
>>>acts out days from the middle ages as they should have been lived.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>I think however that LRH modeled "thetan" in large part on, or was
>>>inspired by, Kant's "transcendental unity of apperception."
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>My partial definition of Kant's "transcendental unity of apperception"
>>>is a self that is a priori or prior and beyond sense experience and
>>>logic, with an ability to look AT the contents of thought, and includes
>>>self-consciousness or self awareness. This was a step beyond Descartes'
>>>systematic doubt and his "I think, therefore I am." So what is prior to
>>>and beyond sense experience and logic? Traditionally that would be
>>>spirit, self as spirit.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>In Scn, sometimes ego in an undesirable sense as in arrogance or excessive
>>>pride or narcissism etc. get tangled up with thetan. I consider that a
>>>liability and a failure to differentiate, but it does make for certain
>>>kinds of "games" in life, people having an experience, and all who stand
>>>witness then have an opportunity to see the consequences, how all that
>>>tends to unfold. As Phil would say, "People are doing their demo in
>>>life."
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Carol
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>jacksonmoore69@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Please help me understand
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>By auditing the past we are clearing the losses of the "being"
>>>>individual. Of course this is placing "share of attention" on these
>>>>areas of Duress and we of course can expect future slumps after
>>>>auditing as a result. (A thetan creates what they postulate and
>>>>validates whatever they put their attention on)
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>It appears that the Thetan realises with more clarity that they are
>>>>'source' and do not need to Prayer or Connect to a source point.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>Is this the premise behind all auditing type schools??
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>On the other hand - there are those that use the brotherhood of the
>>>>universe - the infinite energy - an with meditation and intention,
>>>>prayer and whatever ...do well in life.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>A true Scientologist may beleive they are falling into the oneness
>>>>trap...a long term trap.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>However many people in a very loving way - say how many wins they have
>>>>had from this path...
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>Hardcore scios are the first to ridge against most other non scio
>>>>things including oneness - we know they are awkward to be around and
>>>>we know they have individuated.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>In Jungian or any other ology - this is the ego talking.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>Are we supposed ti audit this ego and make IT more aware...simply
>>>>because..
>>>>WE THINK WE ARE A THETAN - THE I ....NOT PART OF AN OTHER...
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>A few of you guys have said that god is a duality and we are both "at
>>>>one" and "ourselves" simultaneously..
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>Or is it more correct to say...
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>"we are all connected to the infinite...but we are all individual and
>>>>this is how the glory of the infinite realises its own wonder..." or
>>>>some stuff like that
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>And if one person wants to exteriorise and realise they ARE a thetan
>>>>(ie exteriorise the EGO to validate erroneously that we are super
>>>>individual) then they may be subject to the ultimate CON
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>That we can enforce everlasting life by empowering the ego through
>>>>auditing the ?thetan? so that this ego can have everlasting life which
>>>>was the original erroneous goal of the ego in teh original scriptures
>>>>(refer to the story of aladdin and the lamp - aladin is the poor boy
>>>>that wants to improve his lot by askiing the infinite wisdom, genie,
>>>>BUT the bad guy wants the lamp for himself to have all the power for
>>>>himself and thus wishes he has all the power of the genie and is thus
>>>>destroyed in the attempt)
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>This is the ancient way of describing hw the ego realises it can have
>>>>the knowledge of GOD AS the ego instead f connecting with source.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>On the tone scale we may easily say - well at tone 400 (not tone 40)
>>>>400!!, you are the one source (hyperthetically) - But that is theory.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>Are we just trying to enforce everlasting life by figuring out HOW the
>>>>ego (thetan) failed in past eons..when we should be validating TRUE
>>>>SELF.. straight off and placing most attention on that and ignoring
>>>>most of the negative other than giving it acks..
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>TRUE SELF??? - is this the being that is part of the whole magic of
>>>>the universe and can make an impact onteh universe with infinite
>>>>loving power. With no ego and unlimited forgiveness and love can we
>>>>use the theta energy or whatever you want to call it to truly move
>>>>mountains...Shift galaxies (lovingly).
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>Do WE live forever - operative word WE collectively and simply ebb and
>>>>flow from each other...am I truly NOT YOU (i don't think so) - this is
>>>>even proven in Scientology as auditing case from a % of the population
>>>>is enough to handle the condition.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>Thanks for reading
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
- - --
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Feb 5 23:04:09 EST 2011
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Aug 30 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore843.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)
iD8DBQFXxa7pURT1lqxE3HERAspaAJ9Q/7x8Vz/W614vPACSmzioZ8zMnwCeL7u+
XpMJan5sUCq60Ythb1UBHLs=
=G0e+
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Aug 30 22:52:12 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore843.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)
iD8DBQFXxkZcURT1lqxE3HERAsbSAJwKdqTMJJS50Zdl3eaDCn3VvGkHfQCgyKiZ
16sIgouyOfllb4uzG2BxAA8=
=jCa2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, August 30, 2016
Monday, August 29, 2016
ANDREA (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Well its been a good week of dramatizing on my favorite Nemesis One
Assholes, but I gotta go back to work.
Dave, some last words of wisdom for you.
Women should be fed to the snakes that advise them.
A RELATIONSHIP is where two people RELATE to each other, they tell
each other about themselves (auditing), they share what has happened to
themselves (auditing), what they have done (auditing), their vision,
plans, dreams and goals (auditing) and they engage in CO CREATION with
each other on common goals.
Auditing is a way to enhance relating, relating to yourself first,
relating to another in your auditor second, and everyone else around you
third. AS an auditor it is a way to help others help others to relate
better with themselves and each other.
If someone doesn't want to have their relating enhanced or learn
how to enhance the relating of others, then chances are they are
either a God or a shallow facsimile of a human being living in
fear of REAL relating.
Andrea says she loves herself just as she is. Bullshit, she is lying
through her teeth. You do her no favor by letting her get away with it.
Every human being on Earth is a seething cauldron of fear and self
hatred and hatred for others and for the All That IS.
Maybe a few who have spent a life time handling the condition
have risen above it, but they will be the last to claim they have,
and they can be counted on the fingers of a few hands.
Andrea is not one of them.
That fear and self hatred and hatred of everything else is covered by
the facade of human tones in the 0 to 4 range.
"The hypocrisy on Earth is so thick, you can hammer nails
into it and hang pictures of smiling faces from them." - Adore.
Beneath that is the true tone of the immortal being, usually down
around hanging on a cross somewhere forever for free. "Prove it!" they
say. That's how you know them.
If you love Andrea, then you will make sure not to fall for her
bullshit, for it will ruin both you and your children, and everyone else
you, she and them touch in this life.
Once she comes up tone to admitting that she needs help and wants to
help and that help is available, she will have done well to get her butt
up to -1 on the awareness characteristic chart.
Until then you are screwing a facade pretending to be real.
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 ====================
Mon Aug 29 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/andrea
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)
iD8DBQFXxF1pURT1lqxE3HERApAEAKCG91Xf40B6TcZJSyGn2bvvCiZeGgCgjLEM
desnO52RlHMYsbG6liBXUrw=
=YFiW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Well its been a good week of dramatizing on my favorite Nemesis One
Assholes, but I gotta go back to work.
Dave, some last words of wisdom for you.
Women should be fed to the snakes that advise them.
A RELATIONSHIP is where two people RELATE to each other, they tell
each other about themselves (auditing), they share what has happened to
themselves (auditing), what they have done (auditing), their vision,
plans, dreams and goals (auditing) and they engage in CO CREATION with
each other on common goals.
Auditing is a way to enhance relating, relating to yourself first,
relating to another in your auditor second, and everyone else around you
third. AS an auditor it is a way to help others help others to relate
better with themselves and each other.
If someone doesn't want to have their relating enhanced or learn
how to enhance the relating of others, then chances are they are
either a God or a shallow facsimile of a human being living in
fear of REAL relating.
Andrea says she loves herself just as she is. Bullshit, she is lying
through her teeth. You do her no favor by letting her get away with it.
Every human being on Earth is a seething cauldron of fear and self
hatred and hatred for others and for the All That IS.
Maybe a few who have spent a life time handling the condition
have risen above it, but they will be the last to claim they have,
and they can be counted on the fingers of a few hands.
Andrea is not one of them.
That fear and self hatred and hatred of everything else is covered by
the facade of human tones in the 0 to 4 range.
"The hypocrisy on Earth is so thick, you can hammer nails
into it and hang pictures of smiling faces from them." - Adore.
Beneath that is the true tone of the immortal being, usually down
around hanging on a cross somewhere forever for free. "Prove it!" they
say. That's how you know them.
If you love Andrea, then you will make sure not to fall for her
bullshit, for it will ruin both you and your children, and everyone else
you, she and them touch in this life.
Once she comes up tone to admitting that she needs help and wants to
help and that help is available, she will have done well to get her butt
up to -1 on the awareness characteristic chart.
Until then you are screwing a facade pretending to be real.
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 ====================
Mon Aug 29 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/andrea
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)
iD8DBQFXxF1pURT1lqxE3HERApAEAKCG91Xf40B6TcZJSyGn2bvvCiZeGgCgjLEM
desnO52RlHMYsbG6liBXUrw=
=YFiW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, August 22, 2016
ADORE785 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
CHRIST AND SANTA
> Anyhow, if we stick to the basic definition of bigotry as defined in
> Adore: "I am blessed and you are eternally damned because my
> God/Prophet/Doctrine is better than your God/Prophet/Doctrine' then it is
> pretty easy to see the bad apples from the good ones.
Adore's actual definition of bigotry is the idea that oneself or
another is irredeemably morally inferior and deserves to suffer forever
for the acts of a finite while.
God is not a god of behavior, quite frankly he doesn't care what
the hell you do.
If you were God and you made little schmucks and gave them free
will, would YOU wait around to see which were good and which were bad
and punish FOREVER those that were bad merely as an example to others?
And all because you were lonely and only wanted good people
around you?
Even a half way decent God would destroy the intractable
miscreants, not punish them forever because that serves THEM
no purpose of redemption.
Punishing people to set an example to others is evil.
People have Christ and Santa confused. Santa cares about good and
bad little boys. Believe it or not, Christ doesn't.
Homer
Sat Aug 14 19:04:39 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Aug 22 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore785.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)
iD8DBQFXuyLqURT1lqxE3HERAl1yAJ4zznUe2mHZ6zJVEiyctxILNrYR5ACfbQYc
TtcUZZXSMGEqb0VOggzDw64=
=T3vG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
CHRIST AND SANTA
> Anyhow, if we stick to the basic definition of bigotry as defined in
> Adore: "I am blessed and you are eternally damned because my
> God/Prophet/Doctrine is better than your God/Prophet/Doctrine' then it is
> pretty easy to see the bad apples from the good ones.
Adore's actual definition of bigotry is the idea that oneself or
another is irredeemably morally inferior and deserves to suffer forever
for the acts of a finite while.
God is not a god of behavior, quite frankly he doesn't care what
the hell you do.
If you were God and you made little schmucks and gave them free
will, would YOU wait around to see which were good and which were bad
and punish FOREVER those that were bad merely as an example to others?
And all because you were lonely and only wanted good people
around you?
Even a half way decent God would destroy the intractable
miscreants, not punish them forever because that serves THEM
no purpose of redemption.
Punishing people to set an example to others is evil.
People have Christ and Santa confused. Santa cares about good and
bad little boys. Believe it or not, Christ doesn't.
Homer
Sat Aug 14 19:04:39 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Aug 22 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore785.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)
iD8DBQFXuyLqURT1lqxE3HERAl1yAJ4zznUe2mHZ6zJVEiyctxILNrYR5ACfbQYc
TtcUZZXSMGEqb0VOggzDw64=
=T3vG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADOR1012 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
BEFORE AND AFTER
Run using round robin model session 2,
"Get the idea there is NO BEFORE LIFE."
"Get the idea there is SOME BEFORE LIFE."
"Get the idea there is NO LIFE ."
"Get the idea there is SOME LIFE ."
"Get the idea there is NO AFTER LIFE."
"Get the idea there is SOME AFTER LIFE."
E/P: Relief. Preclear becomes more aware of how his and other's
beliefs affect their own sense of well being in the present and their
sense of well being about their past and their future. He will start to
let go of certain beliefs just because they make him feel bad.
This process replaces "How to you feel about your future?" which is a
deadly powerful process, but it flunks on three accounts, one it is a
question, two it requires 2wc from the preclear, and three it isn't
running a dicom.
CONFRONT AND EMBRACE
Confront is not quite the same thing as embrace, confront tends to
lead into endure, or acceptance through resignation.
We are looking for the ability to embrace life including the future,
without restraint or conservatism. Confront is missing 'putting it
there', knowingly, willingly, with intenet and motivation, and full
awareness of consequences because they are being put there too.
The ability to put the all-that-is there with gusto, flair and vigor.
Thus one might try,
"Get the idea of NOT embracing life."
"Get the idea of embracing life."
Standardize it to
"Get the idea of NO embracing life."
"Get the idea of SOME embracing life."
Remember SOME does not mean a small amount of, it means more than
zero. Infinite love is some love.
CAUSAL CONTEXT
The being is looking for the context in which he lives, that is where
he is, when he is, and WHY he is there.
He has wrong answers for all of these, and giving and receiving
wrong answers to these questions are primary overts and motivators on the
whole track and in present life. They seem to be the primary weapon in
the drive to sink other beings and one's self.
Wrong answers to core questions do people in, people are done in, so
they are sinking from wrong answer to core questions! :)
The WHY is the causal pathway that led him to where he is today, the
purposes, motivations, volitions, intentions and actions, his and others,
that led him to right where he is now.
Hubbard said that on a mean day he might ask the preclear over and
over again "What are you doing in a body?"
The preclear's persistence in all its forms is MADE of wrong answers
to these questions, so one might think running such a process might be
useful.
But then all the preclear does is give wrong answers, so his tone
goes down and down and down.
Remember every time the preclear is given a command or question
that he can not execute or answer correctly he takes a loss.
You can not make a win out of a series of losses.
A low tone preclear will keep giving the answer that makes him feel
the worst as he is just sure the right answer will kill him with misery.
So feeling bad then worse is used as a divining rod to the next
wrong answer that he fears the most for surely it will him.
So 10 million wrong answers followed by the the one correct answer,
well your preclear will be long dead before he gets there.
He has a computation to the effect that life is too vile to
contemplate, so the reason why he is in life has to be worse, because
"Bad can not come from good."
If life is bad then how can the creator of life be good?
You see, so that's a MAJOR service fac computation on his case
that causes him to only look for bad answers to why he is here,
and only then on days when he wants a final reason to kill himself
before that bad answer fully dawns on him.
If you ask him instead "What wrong answer have you had to why are
you in a body?" he will say "Oh I am not wrong about it, I *KNOW* why I
am in a body, God is testing me so I can be suitable for him...,"
Since no one could possibly embrace such a test for himself,
especially a test resulting in 'eternal damnation' for failure,
believing in such a thing reduces his responsibility level to zero for
being tested, and thus for being here.
Thus the preclear will never come up above covert hostility,
suppressed unexpressed resentment and 'Let's cheat!' on the matter.
So we have to take a more standard approach, one that runs the
static at the level of causal conception, from nothing there (native
state), to something there (manifestation), and back again, over and
over. Eventually he will SEE why he is here in the process of
manifesting all these false why's, as any manifestation at all is
based on a wrong why to get to persist.
Theorem zero: All persistence is caused by a wrong why.
Theorem one: Anything he claims he can't have, he doesn't want. In
other words can't = won't.
The basic underlying question is simply 'Why am I here?'
If feels he can't find out, he doesn't want to know.
So one runs the don't want to know, rather than the can't
until he contacts his *WON'T* forever, and then it will start
to run out.
He has burnt himself out on this one qestion with impossibilities,
incredibilities and wrong why's forever for free.
A few quadrillion years later he still has not found the right
answer and is busy spending his time foie-grasing everyone around him
with all his wrong ansdwers.
Rest assured he is terrified of finding out the answer, which
includes who or what he is and why he is or did the things he did.
Wrong answers cause a being to feel doomed.
And Oh, he has been so wrong for SO LONG on this one, the very
OLDNESS of it gives him the qualms, because even an immortal would
be dead by now after that long a time.
"Why am I here" is one of those questions where ANY human answer is
bound to be a wrong answer, and so of course he feels doomed if he 'finds'
it.
That's because any wrong answer leads to feeling doomed because it
causes persistence forever in time, which of course is looking forward
to a hell forever.
And so he can only seek it with great trepidation and the certainty
it might be better off not knowing.
He is quite convinced that should he ever find out why he is alive,
and here on Earth as a mortal animal, he would die.
And if he knows for certain that he is doomed, why look at the
final demise in detail? Better to just let it happen when it wants and
how it wants never see it coming.
Test indeed, mostly a test of courage in the face of untenable
and indecent Truths that exist only to violate his sovereign desire.
Awareness of Truth has become opposed to Decency on the tone scale,
and no man will live up to a level of decency higher than the indecency
he perceives in the Truth that created him.
But its an indecent innocence that then causes decency to spiral
into indecency forever and ever amen.
He knows this, so he will choose to not know the truth so he can
remain decent and innocent.
That's called a Service Fac Computation, run it R3SC.
"How have you used ... to make others wrong, dominate them or make
them guilty or succumb."
So he has an AND on knowing and not knowing why he is here at the
same time forever for free.
Some of the answers he contemplated in the search for his causal
context were SO outrageous they simply burned out his incredibility, so
he came to contemplate that there WERE NO reasons why he is here, there
was no prior cause, there was no prior existence at all, certainly not
anything friendly with intent and motivation orchestrating creation, he
just is, and that's it bud.
And someday he will become isn't, and that will be his final it.
Some of the answers he contemplated to why is he here were based on
ideas of love, caring, nuturance, lessons to learn etc, or hate,
punishment for wrong doing, underserving ness, or wild divine
inscrutable mixtures of both.
The idea that he as a GodSoul has ridden a dicom into a place
called HeavenHell is not beyond his understanding, but he is no longer
human at that point, as he knows that no human would have chosen to be
human.
He may sense that *SOMETHING* has a sense of humor around here, but
it ain't him, and he isn't sure he want's to meet this thing, let alone
find out it is himself.
It's one thing to be afraid of monsters, its quite another to BE a
monster who has it in for himself, especially one with an eternal sense
of humor.
"Tragedy and Travest, Romance and Sin,
Miracles and Majesty, that's where I have been.
Tragedy and Travesty, Romance and Song,
Miracles in Majesty, that's where I have gone."
Deciding that there is no reason at all to be found for his
existence here on earth in a mortal body, his mind could think no
further on the matter of his mortal/immortal/eternal future because
without a past there can be no future.
Not knowing why the past lead to the present, there is no way of
knowing where the present is going to lead into the future.
Let alone have any control over it.
Not being able to to PUT HIMSELF THERE, well then, who or what is?
That leads to being an average meatball who simply never thinks
about it any more.
Run,
"Get the idea there is NO reason."
"Get the idea there is SOME reason."
SYNC
If you have ever seen the phenomenal affect that going in and out
of sync has on you and the meter during a solo session, and your
willingness and ability to continue the session, you know that staying
in sync and getting back into sync is critical to auditing success.
Getting back into sync can make a needle go from totally stuck to
free falling again in one re-command of the item you were last on.
Items that you are just SURE should be reading but aren't, can be
loosened up by quickly going back and forth between the NO and SOME
item.
Before running dicoms, sync was not an issue, because by asking
"get the idea of love" over and over again, sync would go in and out by
itself, and the refusal to run the other side "get the idea of hate"
would eventually jam the session.
When the preclear came to hate the session enough, his needle would
'float' and he would be sent to the examiner for attestation, and upon
being asked about the session the preclear would say "I loved it!"
In part that's because in normal human life you can't love without
hating in equal measure what threatens the life and well being of what
you love.
Trying not to hate ends up in no love.
Thus all bullets are dicoms, one side to protect, help and enhance
your friends, and the other side to destroy, harm and de-enhance the
enemies of your friends.
Trying to love everyone is a trap and results in ending up hating
everyone and then in no feeling at all.
It's not that no one deserves your hate, no one deserves your love
either.
So its either freely given or it isn't.
So running the dicom in sync is some what critical.
When running the dicom back and forth one can get out of sync and
stay out of sync if one's commands get wrong-way-to relative to the
preclear's bank.
Preclear is ready for A, auditor gives B, or preclear is ready for
B and auditor gives A. That's wrong-way-to.
The preclear may be trying to follow your lead, but the bank won't,
the bank is going back and forth on the dicom at its own pace and sync,
and nothing can change it, so the session must track the bank's sync
properly in order to erase it.
Trying to change the bank's sync to match the auditor is will lead
to disaster and is an auditing high crime.
When running model session 2, the preclear usually gives the OK
when he has sensed the change in sync in himself, and thus it is safe
for the auditor to follow suit and give the next command.
Sometimes though when running dual, staying in sync can become a
problem because you may start the preclear with NO, and he ends up
talking about NO and then SOME.
So when he finally says OK has he just finished NO, or has he just
finished SOME?
If he has just finished NO, you should next ask him SOME.
But if he has gone to SOME by himself (and finished it), especially
after a long ramble, you need to now give him NO again.
Your preclear may be more picky about you giving him the next
expected command in sequence rather than the command that most fits his
present sync.
Dual preclears will tend to mockup and tell you about whatever they
want, so they will be adjusting their own sync as auditing goes along.
You will have to figure out for yourself if you should give the next
command in sequence or the next command that matches where you perceive
his sync to be.
This really shouldn't be a problem too often as long as the preclear
is swinging along smoothly and enjoying the process, if you ask him the
wrong sync, he will simply answer the right sync, and you can adjust from
there if he continues to answer out of sync from you.
If lost or confused, just start with NO again.
The preclear is always ready to make nothing out of everything. :)
Homer
06/06/16 Monday 8:20pm EST
06/09/16 Thursday 1:24pm EST
08/22/16 Monday 5:57pm EST
Thu Jun 9 13:41:03 EDT 2016
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Aug 22 17:58:22 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1012.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)
iD8DBQFXu3V/URT1lqxE3HERAj0kAKDMrMqlwtkUqEVIdcQ/4nal4sJ4QACgh8oW
Ioa3xACWx7+0jVlwnO89jBU=
=8arz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
BEFORE AND AFTER
Run using round robin model session 2,
"Get the idea there is NO BEFORE LIFE."
"Get the idea there is SOME BEFORE LIFE."
"Get the idea there is NO LIFE ."
"Get the idea there is SOME LIFE ."
"Get the idea there is NO AFTER LIFE."
"Get the idea there is SOME AFTER LIFE."
E/P: Relief. Preclear becomes more aware of how his and other's
beliefs affect their own sense of well being in the present and their
sense of well being about their past and their future. He will start to
let go of certain beliefs just because they make him feel bad.
This process replaces "How to you feel about your future?" which is a
deadly powerful process, but it flunks on three accounts, one it is a
question, two it requires 2wc from the preclear, and three it isn't
running a dicom.
CONFRONT AND EMBRACE
Confront is not quite the same thing as embrace, confront tends to
lead into endure, or acceptance through resignation.
We are looking for the ability to embrace life including the future,
without restraint or conservatism. Confront is missing 'putting it
there', knowingly, willingly, with intenet and motivation, and full
awareness of consequences because they are being put there too.
The ability to put the all-that-is there with gusto, flair and vigor.
Thus one might try,
"Get the idea of NOT embracing life."
"Get the idea of embracing life."
Standardize it to
"Get the idea of NO embracing life."
"Get the idea of SOME embracing life."
Remember SOME does not mean a small amount of, it means more than
zero. Infinite love is some love.
CAUSAL CONTEXT
The being is looking for the context in which he lives, that is where
he is, when he is, and WHY he is there.
He has wrong answers for all of these, and giving and receiving
wrong answers to these questions are primary overts and motivators on the
whole track and in present life. They seem to be the primary weapon in
the drive to sink other beings and one's self.
Wrong answers to core questions do people in, people are done in, so
they are sinking from wrong answer to core questions! :)
The WHY is the causal pathway that led him to where he is today, the
purposes, motivations, volitions, intentions and actions, his and others,
that led him to right where he is now.
Hubbard said that on a mean day he might ask the preclear over and
over again "What are you doing in a body?"
The preclear's persistence in all its forms is MADE of wrong answers
to these questions, so one might think running such a process might be
useful.
But then all the preclear does is give wrong answers, so his tone
goes down and down and down.
Remember every time the preclear is given a command or question
that he can not execute or answer correctly he takes a loss.
You can not make a win out of a series of losses.
A low tone preclear will keep giving the answer that makes him feel
the worst as he is just sure the right answer will kill him with misery.
So feeling bad then worse is used as a divining rod to the next
wrong answer that he fears the most for surely it will him.
So 10 million wrong answers followed by the the one correct answer,
well your preclear will be long dead before he gets there.
He has a computation to the effect that life is too vile to
contemplate, so the reason why he is in life has to be worse, because
"Bad can not come from good."
If life is bad then how can the creator of life be good?
You see, so that's a MAJOR service fac computation on his case
that causes him to only look for bad answers to why he is here,
and only then on days when he wants a final reason to kill himself
before that bad answer fully dawns on him.
If you ask him instead "What wrong answer have you had to why are
you in a body?" he will say "Oh I am not wrong about it, I *KNOW* why I
am in a body, God is testing me so I can be suitable for him...,"
Since no one could possibly embrace such a test for himself,
especially a test resulting in 'eternal damnation' for failure,
believing in such a thing reduces his responsibility level to zero for
being tested, and thus for being here.
Thus the preclear will never come up above covert hostility,
suppressed unexpressed resentment and 'Let's cheat!' on the matter.
So we have to take a more standard approach, one that runs the
static at the level of causal conception, from nothing there (native
state), to something there (manifestation), and back again, over and
over. Eventually he will SEE why he is here in the process of
manifesting all these false why's, as any manifestation at all is
based on a wrong why to get to persist.
Theorem zero: All persistence is caused by a wrong why.
Theorem one: Anything he claims he can't have, he doesn't want. In
other words can't = won't.
The basic underlying question is simply 'Why am I here?'
If feels he can't find out, he doesn't want to know.
So one runs the don't want to know, rather than the can't
until he contacts his *WON'T* forever, and then it will start
to run out.
He has burnt himself out on this one qestion with impossibilities,
incredibilities and wrong why's forever for free.
A few quadrillion years later he still has not found the right
answer and is busy spending his time foie-grasing everyone around him
with all his wrong ansdwers.
Rest assured he is terrified of finding out the answer, which
includes who or what he is and why he is or did the things he did.
Wrong answers cause a being to feel doomed.
And Oh, he has been so wrong for SO LONG on this one, the very
OLDNESS of it gives him the qualms, because even an immortal would
be dead by now after that long a time.
"Why am I here" is one of those questions where ANY human answer is
bound to be a wrong answer, and so of course he feels doomed if he 'finds'
it.
That's because any wrong answer leads to feeling doomed because it
causes persistence forever in time, which of course is looking forward
to a hell forever.
And so he can only seek it with great trepidation and the certainty
it might be better off not knowing.
He is quite convinced that should he ever find out why he is alive,
and here on Earth as a mortal animal, he would die.
And if he knows for certain that he is doomed, why look at the
final demise in detail? Better to just let it happen when it wants and
how it wants never see it coming.
Test indeed, mostly a test of courage in the face of untenable
and indecent Truths that exist only to violate his sovereign desire.
Awareness of Truth has become opposed to Decency on the tone scale,
and no man will live up to a level of decency higher than the indecency
he perceives in the Truth that created him.
But its an indecent innocence that then causes decency to spiral
into indecency forever and ever amen.
He knows this, so he will choose to not know the truth so he can
remain decent and innocent.
That's called a Service Fac Computation, run it R3SC.
"How have you used ... to make others wrong, dominate them or make
them guilty or succumb."
So he has an AND on knowing and not knowing why he is here at the
same time forever for free.
Some of the answers he contemplated in the search for his causal
context were SO outrageous they simply burned out his incredibility, so
he came to contemplate that there WERE NO reasons why he is here, there
was no prior cause, there was no prior existence at all, certainly not
anything friendly with intent and motivation orchestrating creation, he
just is, and that's it bud.
And someday he will become isn't, and that will be his final it.
Some of the answers he contemplated to why is he here were based on
ideas of love, caring, nuturance, lessons to learn etc, or hate,
punishment for wrong doing, underserving ness, or wild divine
inscrutable mixtures of both.
The idea that he as a GodSoul has ridden a dicom into a place
called HeavenHell is not beyond his understanding, but he is no longer
human at that point, as he knows that no human would have chosen to be
human.
He may sense that *SOMETHING* has a sense of humor around here, but
it ain't him, and he isn't sure he want's to meet this thing, let alone
find out it is himself.
It's one thing to be afraid of monsters, its quite another to BE a
monster who has it in for himself, especially one with an eternal sense
of humor.
"Tragedy and Travest, Romance and Sin,
Miracles and Majesty, that's where I have been.
Tragedy and Travesty, Romance and Song,
Miracles in Majesty, that's where I have gone."
Deciding that there is no reason at all to be found for his
existence here on earth in a mortal body, his mind could think no
further on the matter of his mortal/immortal/eternal future because
without a past there can be no future.
Not knowing why the past lead to the present, there is no way of
knowing where the present is going to lead into the future.
Let alone have any control over it.
Not being able to to PUT HIMSELF THERE, well then, who or what is?
That leads to being an average meatball who simply never thinks
about it any more.
Run,
"Get the idea there is NO reason."
"Get the idea there is SOME reason."
SYNC
If you have ever seen the phenomenal affect that going in and out
of sync has on you and the meter during a solo session, and your
willingness and ability to continue the session, you know that staying
in sync and getting back into sync is critical to auditing success.
Getting back into sync can make a needle go from totally stuck to
free falling again in one re-command of the item you were last on.
Items that you are just SURE should be reading but aren't, can be
loosened up by quickly going back and forth between the NO and SOME
item.
Before running dicoms, sync was not an issue, because by asking
"get the idea of love" over and over again, sync would go in and out by
itself, and the refusal to run the other side "get the idea of hate"
would eventually jam the session.
When the preclear came to hate the session enough, his needle would
'float' and he would be sent to the examiner for attestation, and upon
being asked about the session the preclear would say "I loved it!"
In part that's because in normal human life you can't love without
hating in equal measure what threatens the life and well being of what
you love.
Trying not to hate ends up in no love.
Thus all bullets are dicoms, one side to protect, help and enhance
your friends, and the other side to destroy, harm and de-enhance the
enemies of your friends.
Trying to love everyone is a trap and results in ending up hating
everyone and then in no feeling at all.
It's not that no one deserves your hate, no one deserves your love
either.
So its either freely given or it isn't.
So running the dicom in sync is some what critical.
When running the dicom back and forth one can get out of sync and
stay out of sync if one's commands get wrong-way-to relative to the
preclear's bank.
Preclear is ready for A, auditor gives B, or preclear is ready for
B and auditor gives A. That's wrong-way-to.
The preclear may be trying to follow your lead, but the bank won't,
the bank is going back and forth on the dicom at its own pace and sync,
and nothing can change it, so the session must track the bank's sync
properly in order to erase it.
Trying to change the bank's sync to match the auditor is will lead
to disaster and is an auditing high crime.
When running model session 2, the preclear usually gives the OK
when he has sensed the change in sync in himself, and thus it is safe
for the auditor to follow suit and give the next command.
Sometimes though when running dual, staying in sync can become a
problem because you may start the preclear with NO, and he ends up
talking about NO and then SOME.
So when he finally says OK has he just finished NO, or has he just
finished SOME?
If he has just finished NO, you should next ask him SOME.
But if he has gone to SOME by himself (and finished it), especially
after a long ramble, you need to now give him NO again.
Your preclear may be more picky about you giving him the next
expected command in sequence rather than the command that most fits his
present sync.
Dual preclears will tend to mockup and tell you about whatever they
want, so they will be adjusting their own sync as auditing goes along.
You will have to figure out for yourself if you should give the next
command in sequence or the next command that matches where you perceive
his sync to be.
This really shouldn't be a problem too often as long as the preclear
is swinging along smoothly and enjoying the process, if you ask him the
wrong sync, he will simply answer the right sync, and you can adjust from
there if he continues to answer out of sync from you.
If lost or confused, just start with NO again.
The preclear is always ready to make nothing out of everything. :)
Homer
06/06/16 Monday 8:20pm EST
06/09/16 Thursday 1:24pm EST
08/22/16 Monday 5:57pm EST
Thu Jun 9 13:41:03 EDT 2016
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Aug 22 17:58:22 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1012.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)
iD8DBQFXu3V/URT1lqxE3HERAj0kAKDMrMqlwtkUqEVIdcQ/4nal4sJ4QACgh8oW
Ioa3xACWx7+0jVlwnO89jBU=
=8arz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, August 17, 2016
HOM56 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
DELICIOUS ANGER
Homer:
>> When anger because beautiful, literally dripping in
>> gorgeousness, you will be free of the anger problem.
Lyn Keller (lynmore@pacbell.net) wrote:
>I'll admire it tomorrow - right now I'm too pissed. (joking)
OK, just to clarify Delicious Anger is not something one does to
anger, the anger itself changes from pain to pleasure, and drips in
glory and beauty and majesty.
It's a visionary experience.
>> Most have a long ways to go. Anger is still dark and evil
>> for them.
>Most people are stuck looking at the consequences of their
>anger.
There are many different tone levels of anger.
Adore discriminates between Classy Anger and UnClassy Anger, but
really they go up and down the tone scale in octaves. Just like there
are many G's on the piano scale, there are many angers in different
octaves on the tone scale.
The basic difference between Classy Anger, one octave up from human
life, and Unclassy Anger, is the intent to cause permanent damage. The
intent to help is gone, and is replaced by the intent to harm, punish
and destroy FOREVER.
Anger is basically an effort to stop. One can stop by destroying
the other entirely, or permanently wounding, crippling or disabling
them, or one can stop with firmness and good humor.
"Class is an attitude,
That *ALL* should live forever and be my friend."
Lower octave anger throws Class to the winds and says "To hell with
you.!"
It's a form of disowning the other person as one's friend.
So one can deal with lower tone angers merely by kicking them up an
octave or two by as-ising the intent to destroy forever as a means of
stopping, and replacing it with the intent to help and make laugh as a
means of stopping.
>Not easy when you're IN anger or IN a rage. Takes
>practice :).
Depends on which octave you are operating out of.
In part UnClassy Anger arises because you yourself feel under
threat of permanent damage, and thus are inclined to use threat of
permanent damage in return.
Change the consideration on personal permanent damage, and you no
longer need to use permanent damage in return.
The item is "Permanent Damage". Spot it, and the anger will rise
an octave to Delicious Anger.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Aug 17 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/hom56.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)
iD8DBQFXtItqURT1lqxE3HERAsy7AKCuLF+3B2/aVwYFE7a1Tzp8sWmH2ACgjgvO
tSwW5qWfRRypbu1QQGpGRKg=
=QWU7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
DELICIOUS ANGER
Homer:
>> When anger because beautiful, literally dripping in
>> gorgeousness, you will be free of the anger problem.
Lyn Keller (lynmore@pacbell.net) wrote:
>I'll admire it tomorrow - right now I'm too pissed. (joking)
OK, just to clarify Delicious Anger is not something one does to
anger, the anger itself changes from pain to pleasure, and drips in
glory and beauty and majesty.
It's a visionary experience.
>> Most have a long ways to go. Anger is still dark and evil
>> for them.
>Most people are stuck looking at the consequences of their
>anger.
There are many different tone levels of anger.
Adore discriminates between Classy Anger and UnClassy Anger, but
really they go up and down the tone scale in octaves. Just like there
are many G's on the piano scale, there are many angers in different
octaves on the tone scale.
The basic difference between Classy Anger, one octave up from human
life, and Unclassy Anger, is the intent to cause permanent damage. The
intent to help is gone, and is replaced by the intent to harm, punish
and destroy FOREVER.
Anger is basically an effort to stop. One can stop by destroying
the other entirely, or permanently wounding, crippling or disabling
them, or one can stop with firmness and good humor.
"Class is an attitude,
That *ALL* should live forever and be my friend."
Lower octave anger throws Class to the winds and says "To hell with
you.!"
It's a form of disowning the other person as one's friend.
So one can deal with lower tone angers merely by kicking them up an
octave or two by as-ising the intent to destroy forever as a means of
stopping, and replacing it with the intent to help and make laugh as a
means of stopping.
>Not easy when you're IN anger or IN a rage. Takes
>practice :).
Depends on which octave you are operating out of.
In part UnClassy Anger arises because you yourself feel under
threat of permanent damage, and thus are inclined to use threat of
permanent damage in return.
Change the consideration on personal permanent damage, and you no
longer need to use permanent damage in return.
The item is "Permanent Damage". Spot it, and the anger will rise
an octave to Delicious Anger.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Aug 17 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/hom56.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)
iD8DBQFXtItqURT1lqxE3HERAsy7AKCuLF+3B2/aVwYFE7a1Tzp8sWmH2ACgjgvO
tSwW5qWfRRypbu1QQGpGRKg=
=QWU7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, August 16, 2016
ADORE335 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
RELIGION
>>> Religion is based upon a faith that magical moments have
>>> actually occurred, and that they can or will again.
>
>> Wow, does this guy have an MU.
>>
>> Homer
>>
>
> What is the MU (misunderstanding) here?
>
>
> Carol
>
That religion is fundamentally faith based.
Perhaps one could get enough of a pure definition of faith to make
it right, but the general definition of faith is belief without
evidence, belief based on desire etc.
If one sees God, one has all the scientific evidence that one
needs.
Seeing God or seeing space/time, what's the difference?
Seeing myself is all I need to know that I exist with perfect
certainty. Getting others to agree is irrelevant.
Getting others to see God also, may be a problem, that they can't
replicate the experiment doesn't invalidate one's own experiment.
There is an inner world and an 'outer world'. Most think that the
world displayed in consciousness, the physical universe, is more actual
than the consciousness that experiences it, or the source of that
consciousness. They in fact believe that the outer world IS the source
of that consciousness. That's sort of like pulling a balloon inside out
and claiming to have a handle on the all that is.
The world displayed on the conscious TV screen is not the source or
cause of the existence of the TV screen.
The virtual reality seen in the VR helmet, is never the source and
cause of the VR helmet.
The outer world has no evidence for its objective existence at all
in fact, but most meatballs can't be that honest, although a few will
admit it.
Once conscious units start to seek honestly for evidence that other
conscious units exist besides themselves, they ultimately give up
searching in the outer dream world that pretends to such actuality, and
start seeking it through the inner world. Those still lost in looking
outwardly for truth will never get it.
They are what is meant by a lost soul, they define where and what
they are by what they see in their outward dream.
There is no truth in outthereness of any kind.
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 Jun 17 19:18:04 EDT 2006
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Aug 16 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore335.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)
iD8DBQFXsznqURT1lqxE3HERAmeiAJ9uOst90ojnx6eLr4UKYY27GcXorgCbBoFB
NQILHc0ZMVeAZNp185D+97M=
=p1vE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
RELIGION
>>> Religion is based upon a faith that magical moments have
>>> actually occurred, and that they can or will again.
>
>> Wow, does this guy have an MU.
>>
>> Homer
>>
>
> What is the MU (misunderstanding) here?
>
>
> Carol
>
That religion is fundamentally faith based.
Perhaps one could get enough of a pure definition of faith to make
it right, but the general definition of faith is belief without
evidence, belief based on desire etc.
If one sees God, one has all the scientific evidence that one
needs.
Seeing God or seeing space/time, what's the difference?
Seeing myself is all I need to know that I exist with perfect
certainty. Getting others to agree is irrelevant.
Getting others to see God also, may be a problem, that they can't
replicate the experiment doesn't invalidate one's own experiment.
There is an inner world and an 'outer world'. Most think that the
world displayed in consciousness, the physical universe, is more actual
than the consciousness that experiences it, or the source of that
consciousness. They in fact believe that the outer world IS the source
of that consciousness. That's sort of like pulling a balloon inside out
and claiming to have a handle on the all that is.
The world displayed on the conscious TV screen is not the source or
cause of the existence of the TV screen.
The virtual reality seen in the VR helmet, is never the source and
cause of the VR helmet.
The outer world has no evidence for its objective existence at all
in fact, but most meatballs can't be that honest, although a few will
admit it.
Once conscious units start to seek honestly for evidence that other
conscious units exist besides themselves, they ultimately give up
searching in the outer dream world that pretends to such actuality, and
start seeking it through the inner world. Those still lost in looking
outwardly for truth will never get it.
They are what is meant by a lost soul, they define where and what
they are by what they see in their outward dream.
There is no truth in outthereness of any kind.
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 Jun 17 19:18:04 EDT 2006
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Aug 16 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore335.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)
iD8DBQFXsznqURT1lqxE3HERAmeiAJ9uOst90ojnx6eLr4UKYY27GcXorgCbBoFB
NQILHc0ZMVeAZNp185D+97M=
=p1vE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, August 15, 2016
GDW (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
GUNS, DRUGS AND WAR
It is absolutely impossible to eradicate all guns on the planet at
this time.
Therefore SOMEONE will have guns.
It is tempting to try to put ALL the guns in the hands of an elite
group of "all good and all powerful beings" who will protect the rest of
us from the bad guys.
However if you put out a job request for an "all good, all powerful
being" every criminal in the state will apply.
They say that Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely. The implication is
that no one can hold power for long without becoming a criminal. This is
not true, any one of you could manage the reigns of power forever and not
become a criminal.
The problem then is not whether any particular being or group of
beings will succumb to Corruption, Temptation and Seduction, but whether
their personel department can filter out the beings who apply for work in
your Power Center with pre-existing hidden criminal intent.
It's one thing to be all good and all powerful, quite another to be
all wise and all seeing.
Can you tell the bad guys? Can anyone?
It follows absolutely therefore, that once lawmakers outlaw criminals,
criminals will become lawmakers. If you give absolute power and authority
over the productive populace to any one group of people, in order for them
to protect the good from the bad, then the bad will naturally be attracted
to positions within the central power authority because it's the only
place they can safely hide.
Criminals know a good thing when they see it.
Once criminals get elected or weasel their way into positions within
the central authority they start to weed out the good, and soon the
central authority is totally over run by criminals who now have total
control over the populace to protect the bad from the good.
Therefore, although it may appear to be an ideal scene that only
the cops, army and government officials have guns, and no one else does,
this is in fact possibly the single most dangerous situation you could
have for long term democracy to prosper and flourish.
Shortsightedness can be measured directly by the tenacity with
which a person holds to this ideal scene.
The ONLY way to prevent criminals from taking over the power
centers, is to make the power center less attractive to them, by making
it less powerful. One does this by distributing the power center across
the whole population. Thus if guns and knives and bullwhips are to
exist, then they must be owned by everyone, and the police, the army and
the government must be answerable to the people, by force and escrowed
encryption if necessary.
Once the people can not fight back, the country is gone.
As for drugs,
"Drugs are bad for children, drug wars are worse."
As for marijuana, pot is better for children than cigarettes and
alcohol are for adults.
I support the legalization of pot in all its uses, and a total end
to the war on drugs on all fronts.
How many children and have died and families ruined from drugs?
How many from wars on drugs?
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith News, Web, Telnet Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 SunOS 4.1.4 Sparc 20 Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com info@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Aug 15 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/gdw.script
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)
iD8DBQFXsehqURT1lqxE3HERAmlyAKCSOawtla4Y/OTHFypKXRNEIUAs1ACcCSxZ
s13SC1sTbrMrugoM1boBIlI=
=SQRn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
GUNS, DRUGS AND WAR
It is absolutely impossible to eradicate all guns on the planet at
this time.
Therefore SOMEONE will have guns.
It is tempting to try to put ALL the guns in the hands of an elite
group of "all good and all powerful beings" who will protect the rest of
us from the bad guys.
However if you put out a job request for an "all good, all powerful
being" every criminal in the state will apply.
They say that Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely. The implication is
that no one can hold power for long without becoming a criminal. This is
not true, any one of you could manage the reigns of power forever and not
become a criminal.
The problem then is not whether any particular being or group of
beings will succumb to Corruption, Temptation and Seduction, but whether
their personel department can filter out the beings who apply for work in
your Power Center with pre-existing hidden criminal intent.
It's one thing to be all good and all powerful, quite another to be
all wise and all seeing.
Can you tell the bad guys? Can anyone?
It follows absolutely therefore, that once lawmakers outlaw criminals,
criminals will become lawmakers. If you give absolute power and authority
over the productive populace to any one group of people, in order for them
to protect the good from the bad, then the bad will naturally be attracted
to positions within the central power authority because it's the only
place they can safely hide.
Criminals know a good thing when they see it.
Once criminals get elected or weasel their way into positions within
the central authority they start to weed out the good, and soon the
central authority is totally over run by criminals who now have total
control over the populace to protect the bad from the good.
Therefore, although it may appear to be an ideal scene that only
the cops, army and government officials have guns, and no one else does,
this is in fact possibly the single most dangerous situation you could
have for long term democracy to prosper and flourish.
Shortsightedness can be measured directly by the tenacity with
which a person holds to this ideal scene.
The ONLY way to prevent criminals from taking over the power
centers, is to make the power center less attractive to them, by making
it less powerful. One does this by distributing the power center across
the whole population. Thus if guns and knives and bullwhips are to
exist, then they must be owned by everyone, and the police, the army and
the government must be answerable to the people, by force and escrowed
encryption if necessary.
Once the people can not fight back, the country is gone.
As for drugs,
"Drugs are bad for children, drug wars are worse."
As for marijuana, pot is better for children than cigarettes and
alcohol are for adults.
I support the legalization of pot in all its uses, and a total end
to the war on drugs on all fronts.
How many children and have died and families ruined from drugs?
How many from wars on drugs?
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith News, Web, Telnet Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 SunOS 4.1.4 Sparc 20 Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com info@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Aug 15 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/gdw.script
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)
iD8DBQFXsehqURT1lqxE3HERAmlyAKCSOawtla4Y/OTHFypKXRNEIUAs1ACcCSxZ
s13SC1sTbrMrugoM1boBIlI=
=SQRn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Sunday, August 14, 2016
ACT79 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
ALIEN IMPLANTS
Session Notes 9/21/94
ACT - 79
21 September 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
I went into session tonight, not doing as bad as yesterday, but the
forces were beginning to run on pretty strong. Anoxia, couldn't breath,
couldn't burp, thing in throat was beginning to crush the hell out of
me.
Last night I went in doing really bad, had been terminal and
sinking all day. I came out doing well, on
"Something on Immortal Bodies."
Tonight I went in, not doing as bad, TA high though, very jammed,
but I felt accessible.
I fooled around for a bit trying to get the needle to just move,
let alone come down, and the forces got more and more crushing in
throat, like dying for no reason at all.
Finally I started running,
"What aren't you making more of?"
"How could you make this worse?"
This started to run well. I could see the forces in my throat that
were clamping off my life, they obviously have something to do with "not
talking about something", and deciding never to reveal something no
matter what.
I started auditing,
"Something MISSED."
Now you know missed doesn't mean BYPASSED, or gone by, or didn't
see, the way most people think it means. It's a Scientology misnomer
but it audits as 'Wondering if others know'.
It is the action of wondering and not wanting others to know you
are wondering, that jams up the masses so hard. Or worse it can be a
wondering if others know and you WANT them to know, but you just can't
figure out if they do know.
Sometimes people are so dense, asleep or robotic that no matter how
much you try to communicate something to them, you just can't figure out
if they got it or not.
That's a positive missed withhold, rather than a negative missed
withhold.
(Reference ADO11.memo at fpt.rahul.net/pub/homer/act/ado11.memo)
Anyhow people have 'missed' associated with overts, as in missed
withholds, but it can also be associated with motivators, as in someone
did you in and you can't tell if others know. Missed can also be
associated with co excused overt/motivator pairs where what someone is
doing to you now, you did to another like you in a past life.
Problems can also be missed, you wonder if others know if you have
a problem or not. Sometimes you want them to know, and they are too
dense to get the message, sometimes you don't want them to know, but
your tummy is getting fat, so you think maybe people have noticed.
So its common for people to associate 'missed' with overts,
motivators and problems and the like, but actually in a broader sense
missed means any kind of wondering if others know or not.
So when I started running "Something missed" I was looking for any
kind of wondering at all.
That's when I ran into the forces jamming back up into the back of
my throat on "never reveal under any conditions." I started looking at
"things that I knew that I shouldn't know and didn't want others to know
I knew". That lead to thinking about implants, which read a bit, and
that lead to "Alien Implants" which lead to "Alien Implants IN THIS LIFE
AS A BABY."
Now of course that is absurd. I mean I do have my collection of
metal caps to wear on my head to keep alien force fields out, but not
even I would consider such an incident as an actual serious happening.
However it started running. The forces started to come apart,
there was clearly a withhold there. Something I wasn't supposed to know
about, and certainly was never supposed to tell anybody else about, and
something I was wondering if *I* had found out about, or if others
suspected I knew.
This ran out to a marvelous win for the night, although I never did
get it to run the somatic out completely. No pictures, but a lot of
force came off. Also checked "Earlier Similar Universes", "implanted in
this life" in earlier runs through this one. I did get vague
impressions of people standing around my bed as a child, chanting
magical incantations, saying "He will become God of the Universe" etc,
but mainly because I actually read a letter containing all this as
something that my parents SHOULD do around my crib, written by my
Ancient Aunt Skipper, on Father's side. So this was clearly a suggested
set of 'memories', and they have no other reality.
So I still don't know what's up, and I am sure this key out I am in
at the moment will last exactly until the next cave in drives me into
session again, but I will tell you something,
Something's up.
And that is probably the most important message of clearing.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Aug 14 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act79.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)
iD8DBQFXsJbqURT1lqxE3HERAt1tAJ4kGfHCTZZVPt0Aa03nCUVRYok/0gCeM+eX
tDR+k3Ec8QI9Vd6fhJhaaNk=
=g7cB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
ALIEN IMPLANTS
Session Notes 9/21/94
ACT - 79
21 September 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
I went into session tonight, not doing as bad as yesterday, but the
forces were beginning to run on pretty strong. Anoxia, couldn't breath,
couldn't burp, thing in throat was beginning to crush the hell out of
me.
Last night I went in doing really bad, had been terminal and
sinking all day. I came out doing well, on
"Something on Immortal Bodies."
Tonight I went in, not doing as bad, TA high though, very jammed,
but I felt accessible.
I fooled around for a bit trying to get the needle to just move,
let alone come down, and the forces got more and more crushing in
throat, like dying for no reason at all.
Finally I started running,
"What aren't you making more of?"
"How could you make this worse?"
This started to run well. I could see the forces in my throat that
were clamping off my life, they obviously have something to do with "not
talking about something", and deciding never to reveal something no
matter what.
I started auditing,
"Something MISSED."
Now you know missed doesn't mean BYPASSED, or gone by, or didn't
see, the way most people think it means. It's a Scientology misnomer
but it audits as 'Wondering if others know'.
It is the action of wondering and not wanting others to know you
are wondering, that jams up the masses so hard. Or worse it can be a
wondering if others know and you WANT them to know, but you just can't
figure out if they do know.
Sometimes people are so dense, asleep or robotic that no matter how
much you try to communicate something to them, you just can't figure out
if they got it or not.
That's a positive missed withhold, rather than a negative missed
withhold.
(Reference ADO11.memo at fpt.rahul.net/pub/homer/act/ado11.memo)
Anyhow people have 'missed' associated with overts, as in missed
withholds, but it can also be associated with motivators, as in someone
did you in and you can't tell if others know. Missed can also be
associated with co excused overt/motivator pairs where what someone is
doing to you now, you did to another like you in a past life.
Problems can also be missed, you wonder if others know if you have
a problem or not. Sometimes you want them to know, and they are too
dense to get the message, sometimes you don't want them to know, but
your tummy is getting fat, so you think maybe people have noticed.
So its common for people to associate 'missed' with overts,
motivators and problems and the like, but actually in a broader sense
missed means any kind of wondering if others know or not.
So when I started running "Something missed" I was looking for any
kind of wondering at all.
That's when I ran into the forces jamming back up into the back of
my throat on "never reveal under any conditions." I started looking at
"things that I knew that I shouldn't know and didn't want others to know
I knew". That lead to thinking about implants, which read a bit, and
that lead to "Alien Implants" which lead to "Alien Implants IN THIS LIFE
AS A BABY."
Now of course that is absurd. I mean I do have my collection of
metal caps to wear on my head to keep alien force fields out, but not
even I would consider such an incident as an actual serious happening.
However it started running. The forces started to come apart,
there was clearly a withhold there. Something I wasn't supposed to know
about, and certainly was never supposed to tell anybody else about, and
something I was wondering if *I* had found out about, or if others
suspected I knew.
This ran out to a marvelous win for the night, although I never did
get it to run the somatic out completely. No pictures, but a lot of
force came off. Also checked "Earlier Similar Universes", "implanted in
this life" in earlier runs through this one. I did get vague
impressions of people standing around my bed as a child, chanting
magical incantations, saying "He will become God of the Universe" etc,
but mainly because I actually read a letter containing all this as
something that my parents SHOULD do around my crib, written by my
Ancient Aunt Skipper, on Father's side. So this was clearly a suggested
set of 'memories', and they have no other reality.
So I still don't know what's up, and I am sure this key out I am in
at the moment will last exactly until the next cave in drives me into
session again, but I will tell you something,
Something's up.
And that is probably the most important message of clearing.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Aug 14 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act79.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)
iD8DBQFXsJbqURT1lqxE3HERAt1tAJ4kGfHCTZZVPt0Aa03nCUVRYok/0gCeM+eX
tDR+k3Ec8QI9Vd6fhJhaaNk=
=g7cB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Saturday, August 13, 2016
LOGIC4 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
LOGIC
(This posting was written in reponse to the following
argument presented by Carol B Willis, who once said "syllogisms
never did much for me."
Indeed.
All that comes from God is all good.
Man came from God.
Man is not all good.
The intent is to indicate that God, being the creator
of the monster, knowing the monster would probably sin, is not
accountable for the actions or outcomes of his monster.
In other words even though the monster is culpable and punishable
for its crimes, the knowing willing creator of the monster is not.)
LOGIC 4
Take a piece of paper. Draw a big circle on it that covers most
of the paper. Consider that this circle represents and contains the
AllThatIs. There can be nothing outside of this circle that IS.
Draw a circle inside this circle that contains everything that IS
GOOD. Everything outside of this circle IS NOT GOOD.
Draw a circle that contains everything that IS created by God.
Draw a circle that contains everything that IS Man or related to
Man.
Is the Man circle completely inside the God circle?
Is the God circle completely inside the Good circle?
Then ALL of Man *MUST* be inside the Good circle.
End of Story.
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 ====================
Sat Aug 13 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic4.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)
iD8DBQFXr0VpURT1lqxE3HERAv5iAJ9W9G5XnT0DI9wCuq4pI8lXcn41hwCeOmeF
NSneKC7aFHEWRYuznzBsPjM=
=5z0T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
LOGIC
(This posting was written in reponse to the following
argument presented by Carol B Willis, who once said "syllogisms
never did much for me."
Indeed.
All that comes from God is all good.
Man came from God.
Man is not all good.
The intent is to indicate that God, being the creator
of the monster, knowing the monster would probably sin, is not
accountable for the actions or outcomes of his monster.
In other words even though the monster is culpable and punishable
for its crimes, the knowing willing creator of the monster is not.)
LOGIC 4
Take a piece of paper. Draw a big circle on it that covers most
of the paper. Consider that this circle represents and contains the
AllThatIs. There can be nothing outside of this circle that IS.
Draw a circle inside this circle that contains everything that IS
GOOD. Everything outside of this circle IS NOT GOOD.
Draw a circle that contains everything that IS created by God.
Draw a circle that contains everything that IS Man or related to
Man.
Is the Man circle completely inside the God circle?
Is the God circle completely inside the Good circle?
Then ALL of Man *MUST* be inside the Good circle.
End of Story.
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 ====================
Sat Aug 13 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic4.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)
iD8DBQFXr0VpURT1lqxE3HERAv5iAJ9W9G5XnT0DI9wCuq4pI8lXcn41hwCeOmeF
NSneKC7aFHEWRYuznzBsPjM=
=5z0T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Thursday, August 11, 2016
ADORE752 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
WHAT IS I?
You are your intention and the agent source of pursuing that
intention.
Look to consciousness of personal agency to find self.
I = The Agent One.
This will make Buddha turn over in his grave, but you are that
which desires.
Some people have become the effect of their desires, particularly
later ones, second on the chainers, but basically nothing exists that
wasn't created via the I's intention that something be created, and then
the acceptance or absence of a veto afterwards.
Once the I wants it, he can even have other's create things
and desires for him.
Source sources only when will casts.
The I says 'let there be something', he has no clue what it is
going to be. If he likes it, he keeps it, if he doesn't like it, he
let's it go.
Unless he likes having things he doesn't like :)
In which case he blames it on you.
But then his suffering results from attachment to suffering.
Homer
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Tue Apr 20 18:13:21 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Aug 11 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore752.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)
iD8DBQFXrKJqURT1lqxE3HERAiPlAKCD2w9NPG7yEv1rvGEB5B3/euWkVwCeIWjr
N1kJEGDA97NT8ANLR9cN3j8=
=kkhW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
WHAT IS I?
You are your intention and the agent source of pursuing that
intention.
Look to consciousness of personal agency to find self.
I = The Agent One.
This will make Buddha turn over in his grave, but you are that
which desires.
Some people have become the effect of their desires, particularly
later ones, second on the chainers, but basically nothing exists that
wasn't created via the I's intention that something be created, and then
the acceptance or absence of a veto afterwards.
Once the I wants it, he can even have other's create things
and desires for him.
Source sources only when will casts.
The I says 'let there be something', he has no clue what it is
going to be. If he likes it, he keeps it, if he doesn't like it, he
let's it go.
Unless he likes having things he doesn't like :)
In which case he blames it on you.
But then his suffering results from attachment to suffering.
Homer
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Tue Apr 20 18:13:21 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Aug 11 12:06:02 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore752.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)
iD8DBQFXrKJqURT1lqxE3HERAiPlAKCD2w9NPG7yEv1rvGEB5B3/euWkVwCeIWjr
N1kJEGDA97NT8ANLR9cN3j8=
=kkhW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, August 10, 2016
ADORE820 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
GOOD AND BAD
(Read the quoted article below first.)
Fascinating.
Since the AllThatIs encompasses the good and bad circles, by
putting God inside the good circle, (All that comes from God is good),
one then makes God subservient to the All That Is.
Then since man encompasses both good and bad, that makes man, part
inside the good and part outside the good circle, meaning that man is
not encompassed fully by God.
Which then makes man bigger than God by definition.
That something which was imprisoned by good should try or presume
to punish that which was bad would be an egregious overreach of its
position and mandate in life.
Does bad try to punish good for being good?
If so, that would be a similar overreach.
Thus we conclude that it is NOT true "that all that comes from God
is good," we admit that God encompasses both good and bad, and thus
rightly encompasses all of man, and thus God might also as well be
considered to BE the AllThatIs.
That way there is nothing outside of either God or the AllThatIs,
because God = the AllThatIS.
But if God encompasses both good and bad, and man encompasses good
and bad, then why would we expect God to punish man for badness and not
himself also?
For the good side to try to punish the bad side, is an effort of
one part of a dicom to control and subsume the other.
A dicom is a DIchotomy of Comparable and Opposite Magnitude.
The effort on the part of good to punish the bad, is good TRYING to
encompass bad, rather than CREATE bad from a higher position of creating
both.
Thus God, which encompasses both good and bad, neither punishes
himself, nor man. God loves man as he is, just as God loves himself
as he is, both good AND bad.
That is the difference between divine love and human love.
Divinity is a wide open door, it will turn no one away, it accepts
all without distinction, but neither will it call after those that turn
away themselves.
Since we all came from Divinity, why would anyone turn away from
divinity, and for how long?
That's a question, don't burn yourself out with it.
Questions about the nature of the GodSoul, are the mechanism by
which we turn away from divinity and keep ourselves here.
Homer
homer@lightlink.com wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> LOGIC
>
> Take a piece of paper. Draw a big circle on it that covers most
> of the paper. Consider that this circle represents and contains the
> AllThatIs. There can be nothing outside of this circle that IS.
>
> Draw a circle inside this circle that contains everything that IS
> GOOD. Everything outside of this circle IS NOT GOOD.
>
> Draw a circle that contains everything that IS created by God.
>
> Draw a circle that contains everything that IS Man or related to
> Man.
>
> Is the Man circle completely inside the God circle?
>
> Is the God circle completely inside the Good circle?
>
> Then ALL of Man *MUST* be inside the Good circle.
>
> End of Story.
>
> 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
Thu Nov 25 13:24:33 EST 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Aug 10 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore820.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)
iD8DBQFXq1DqURT1lqxE3HERAi8eAKC6gF0hfR7vGHqtOUx2Kep/wWpaYACfax3W
OsLee2jXOAHbxZ3Ldg7p3Uc=
=RQVj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
GOOD AND BAD
(Read the quoted article below first.)
Fascinating.
Since the AllThatIs encompasses the good and bad circles, by
putting God inside the good circle, (All that comes from God is good),
one then makes God subservient to the All That Is.
Then since man encompasses both good and bad, that makes man, part
inside the good and part outside the good circle, meaning that man is
not encompassed fully by God.
Which then makes man bigger than God by definition.
That something which was imprisoned by good should try or presume
to punish that which was bad would be an egregious overreach of its
position and mandate in life.
Does bad try to punish good for being good?
If so, that would be a similar overreach.
Thus we conclude that it is NOT true "that all that comes from God
is good," we admit that God encompasses both good and bad, and thus
rightly encompasses all of man, and thus God might also as well be
considered to BE the AllThatIs.
That way there is nothing outside of either God or the AllThatIs,
because God = the AllThatIS.
But if God encompasses both good and bad, and man encompasses good
and bad, then why would we expect God to punish man for badness and not
himself also?
For the good side to try to punish the bad side, is an effort of
one part of a dicom to control and subsume the other.
A dicom is a DIchotomy of Comparable and Opposite Magnitude.
The effort on the part of good to punish the bad, is good TRYING to
encompass bad, rather than CREATE bad from a higher position of creating
both.
Thus God, which encompasses both good and bad, neither punishes
himself, nor man. God loves man as he is, just as God loves himself
as he is, both good AND bad.
That is the difference between divine love and human love.
Divinity is a wide open door, it will turn no one away, it accepts
all without distinction, but neither will it call after those that turn
away themselves.
Since we all came from Divinity, why would anyone turn away from
divinity, and for how long?
That's a question, don't burn yourself out with it.
Questions about the nature of the GodSoul, are the mechanism by
which we turn away from divinity and keep ourselves here.
Homer
homer@lightlink.com wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> LOGIC
>
> Take a piece of paper. Draw a big circle on it that covers most
> of the paper. Consider that this circle represents and contains the
> AllThatIs. There can be nothing outside of this circle that IS.
>
> Draw a circle inside this circle that contains everything that IS
> GOOD. Everything outside of this circle IS NOT GOOD.
>
> Draw a circle that contains everything that IS created by God.
>
> Draw a circle that contains everything that IS Man or related to
> Man.
>
> Is the Man circle completely inside the God circle?
>
> Is the God circle completely inside the Good circle?
>
> Then ALL of Man *MUST* be inside the Good circle.
>
> End of Story.
>
> 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
Thu Nov 25 13:24:33 EST 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Aug 10 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore820.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)
iD8DBQFXq1DqURT1lqxE3HERAi8eAKC6gF0hfR7vGHqtOUx2Kep/wWpaYACfax3W
OsLee2jXOAHbxZ3Ldg7p3Uc=
=RQVj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, August 9, 2016
ADORE697 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
THE 8 DYNAMICS
I agree there is some need to clarify the actual dynamics as laid
out by Ron.
Part of the problem is that the dynamics tend to confuse spirit and
MEST, the phyiscal universe of matter, energy, space and time.
Both can have groups for example, but MEST (6) is below SPIRIT (7)
so, which groups are we speaking of, spirit groups or MEST groups?
Confusing the two is dangerous.
Starting at the top we have Source which is 8, that is easy.
Below that we have spirits which is 7, that too is easy.
But spirits can act alone, or in groups, so we assume there is a
gradient scale of co operation there in the 7th.
Then spirits like to create MEST which is 6, and from here it is
MEST all the way on down.
MEST breaks into Life which is 5, but there is plant life 5a, and
animal life which is 5b.
Animal life has as a subset of it, human life, and so we have
mankind which is 4. For a monkey, the group of all monkeys would be 4,
and man would be on the money's 5th.
Now amongst man, we have groups, starting with planetary man
itself, then ethnic groups, one's country (vaginabush), state, town,
schools, work groups and family.
The family is special because it is a creative dynamic for making
other man, and thus we can call the special group of people connected by
a blood line the family which then is the 2nd dynamic, which includes
all ancestors, mates, children and future heirs and sex.
Love and marriage have nothing to do with it, other than love
exists on all dynamics, and marriage is a social pretense. Sex is
generally restrained to the second dynamic, except when it is used for
pleasure outside of the realm of making children.
Notice even in a commune, everyone related by blood, and by
agreement everyone related by law (in-laws) are part of family and part
of a person's 2nd dynamic.
Apparently since we all had the same mother eons ago,
everyone alive today is part of family, but that is a bit
extreme.
Notice that groups are a subset of man, and family is just another
group, special only in its blood line and creative aspect.
Then on the first dynamic we have the single body. Many take the
first to mean the spirit plus the body, but spirits on the 7th have
bodies just like cowboys have horses, and people have cats. A body is
just another pet.
So the body is a 1st dynamic TO A BODY, but is a 5th dynamic to a
spirit.
Looking from the bottom up, the first group that a body belongs to
is family as a child. It then grows up to belong to family as a parent.
The next group that people generally belong to is the group of
other families, or one's closest community where raising children is the
primary activity.
The next group up would be work and career groups, what the being
is careening around life doing to survive.
Then you get all manner of groups up through country, race,
religion and man himself. Then you get life, MEST, spirit and Source.
Homer
Clearing Archive Roboposter <roboposter@lightlink.com> wrote:
>
>
> Now here's a thread dear to my heart!
>
> "Out 2D" is inevitable, with rare exceptions.
>
> This is not becaue "the Second Dynamic is too hot", as Ron copped out on the
> subject.
>
> It's, like every other problem subject, a matter of misunderstanding. In
> this case, of severe misdefinition.
>
> When, in my review of Ron's errors, I came to the Dynamics, I found that he
> had followed the insanity of the world. He left three contextually similar
> but factually distinct activities collapsed together. To accommodate this
> he had to create the second dynamic. Do not forget that he was not firm is
> its place, describing it as a sort of sub-group (3rd Dn). Or that his own
> "2D was a lifelong shambles.
>
> The 3 elements of "2D" are sex, love/marriage and children.
>
> Sex is a body thing, plain and simple. So I placed it accordingly, in the
> 1st D(omain - couldn't have confusion over 'which Dynamics, Ron's or
> Allen's, no could we?)
>
> Sposes and children really are a sub-group. But a group nonetheless, and
> one as often abused, sabotaged and sacrificed as any other. So I put it
> into Groups where it belongs.
>
> As you can see, this leaves only Love/Marriage, and it begins to appear that
> the 3rd Dynamic is actually the 2nd Domain. And so it is, because when you
> recognize that Love/Marriage is actually an attempt to meld beingnesses into
> a new consciousness, you have to place Love/Marriage into the Spiritual Domain.
>
> Once you get it together like this, you see that what a particular
> relationship looks like is a function of the inter-Domainal agreements of
> those involved, and nobody else's business.
>
> Of course, there are a few other adjustments I found necessary, and I like
> infinity, so I let the number of Domains work out to the same quantity of
> "8" that Ron brought from the Mission. The major difference is, I wasn't
> left with a need to add further units to include ethics, etc.
>
> -0-
>
>
> --=====================_849385467==_
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
> Acceptance Services Center, ntc.
>
> P.O. Box 390696 Mountain View CA 94039
> Fax: 415/964-2090 Tel: 415/ 964-3436
>
> Speaker: Allen
> speaker@netcom.com
>
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ASC/ UPGRADE: THE DOMAINS
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
> The Domains: Spheres of Action in Life
> 9/86; 5/17/94
> Non-commercial copying permitted.
>
>
> Sometimes it is easier to look at complex things one section at a
> time. This is particularly true of life.
>
> Life is both large and complex. It encompasses everything you
> encounter, and its inter-relationships are nearly infinite. Trying
> to figure it out is intimidating to say the least. Even just
> trying to isolate and analyze your own personal life, actions and
> relationships can be a dizzying task.
>
> The problem of confronting life often seems too vast in scope. But
> therein lies a large part of the solution: one of the biggest
> reasons people have difficulty putting their lives in order is the
> failure to narrow the scope by cutting the problem down into
> manageable segments.
>
> As you grow to adulthood you reach ever further into life,
> increasing your spheres of participation and influence. The extent
> of the influence you develop is your domain.
>
> A domain is a sphere of influence: a territory, realm or zone over
> which one has taken control or over which one exercises
> jurisdiction.
>
> Domain is the playground; dominion is the power or authority.
>
> Influence may be limited or extensive, but it can always be divided
> into several topical areas, such as self, the environment, etc.
> Each area can then be examined separately. Once you have analyzed
> the various parts of life as it relates to you, you can usually
> harmonize them fairly easily.
>
> We have divided life in general along topical lines. There are
> individuals, families, groups, other life forms, and so forth.
> This means that we can list a set of domains that will work for
> everyone, whether a particular person is active in all of them or
> not.
>
> The following list, admittedly arbitrary, is a logical division of
> life into spheres of action --domains. Action rather than
> beingness, because when we speak of living we are really talking
> about doing things. Spheres rather than circles, because when we
> think, we don't limit our concepts to two-dimensional flatness.
> And, domains rather than boundaries, because we should not try to
> be mechanical or overly structured in describing this concept.
>
> The idea here is to go beyond the ideas of "moving in certain
> circles" and of having clear and defensible boundaries, to
> envisioning ourselves immersed in and interactive with the self-
> weaving fabric of life itself.
>
>
> The Domains
>
> 1. PERSONAL 5. ENVIRONMENT
> 2. GROUPS 6. IDEAS
> 3. HUMANITY 7. AESTHETICS
> 4. LIFE FORMS 8. AETHEREAL
>
>
> A more detailed listing with subdivisions follows. It should not
> be considered all-inclusive or absolute. Some people insist on
> rearranging it a bit.
>
> Notice that each domain, as you progress "outward" from the
> personal, is part of the next, and that the AEthereal folds back
> into the personal.
>
>
> The Domains: A Categorical Listing
>
> 1. PERSONAL
> Self-identity
> Persona
> Personality
> Body
> Survival supports
> water
> food
> sex
> shelter
> Possessions
> money
> Activities
>
> 2. GROUPS
> Family
> Friends
> Vocations
> Social
> sports
> religious
> political, etc.
>
> 3. HUMANITY
> Gender
> Genetic sub-group
> Planetary genre
>
> 4. LIFE FORMS
> Animals
> Plants
> Others
>
> 5. ENVIRONMENT
> (Consensus):
> Materials
> Structures
> Locations
> Situations
> Energy
> Time
> Space
>
> 6. IDEAS
> Attitudes
> Opinions
> Understandings
> Beliefs
> Realities
> Constructs
>
> 7. AESTHETICS
> Art
> Emotions
> Ethics
> Integrity
> Principles
> Marriage
>
> 8. AETHEREAL
> Entities
> Creator
> Prime Paradigm
> Essence
> AEther
>
>
> Save this post. This list is used in conjunction with several of
> the Acceptance technical applications, including the Standings
> Procedures.
>
> If you're already using a similar construct, you should consider
> this posting an upgrade. See the post ASC/ NOTICE: TECH UPGRADES!
> dated 5/17/94.
>
> Be advised that there may be details in this post that conflict
> with other similar constructs, and that not all of the terms used
> herein are defined herein. A more complete version will be
> released soon, which will explain the major differences and provide
> needed definitions.
>
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Aug 9 19:03:35 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore697.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)
iD8DBQFXqmFHURT1lqxE3HERAjFeAKCBp+IZ9YGnp8lL5/mMaELggpSWvwCgvG3x
Dn34YP9Wh3pcgV5lhWtWaKQ=
=zO/l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
THE 8 DYNAMICS
I agree there is some need to clarify the actual dynamics as laid
out by Ron.
Part of the problem is that the dynamics tend to confuse spirit and
MEST, the phyiscal universe of matter, energy, space and time.
Both can have groups for example, but MEST (6) is below SPIRIT (7)
so, which groups are we speaking of, spirit groups or MEST groups?
Confusing the two is dangerous.
Starting at the top we have Source which is 8, that is easy.
Below that we have spirits which is 7, that too is easy.
But spirits can act alone, or in groups, so we assume there is a
gradient scale of co operation there in the 7th.
Then spirits like to create MEST which is 6, and from here it is
MEST all the way on down.
MEST breaks into Life which is 5, but there is plant life 5a, and
animal life which is 5b.
Animal life has as a subset of it, human life, and so we have
mankind which is 4. For a monkey, the group of all monkeys would be 4,
and man would be on the money's 5th.
Now amongst man, we have groups, starting with planetary man
itself, then ethnic groups, one's country (vaginabush), state, town,
schools, work groups and family.
The family is special because it is a creative dynamic for making
other man, and thus we can call the special group of people connected by
a blood line the family which then is the 2nd dynamic, which includes
all ancestors, mates, children and future heirs and sex.
Love and marriage have nothing to do with it, other than love
exists on all dynamics, and marriage is a social pretense. Sex is
generally restrained to the second dynamic, except when it is used for
pleasure outside of the realm of making children.
Notice even in a commune, everyone related by blood, and by
agreement everyone related by law (in-laws) are part of family and part
of a person's 2nd dynamic.
Apparently since we all had the same mother eons ago,
everyone alive today is part of family, but that is a bit
extreme.
Notice that groups are a subset of man, and family is just another
group, special only in its blood line and creative aspect.
Then on the first dynamic we have the single body. Many take the
first to mean the spirit plus the body, but spirits on the 7th have
bodies just like cowboys have horses, and people have cats. A body is
just another pet.
So the body is a 1st dynamic TO A BODY, but is a 5th dynamic to a
spirit.
Looking from the bottom up, the first group that a body belongs to
is family as a child. It then grows up to belong to family as a parent.
The next group that people generally belong to is the group of
other families, or one's closest community where raising children is the
primary activity.
The next group up would be work and career groups, what the being
is careening around life doing to survive.
Then you get all manner of groups up through country, race,
religion and man himself. Then you get life, MEST, spirit and Source.
Homer
Clearing Archive Roboposter <roboposter@lightlink.com> wrote:
>
>
> Now here's a thread dear to my heart!
>
> "Out 2D" is inevitable, with rare exceptions.
>
> This is not becaue "the Second Dynamic is too hot", as Ron copped out on the
> subject.
>
> It's, like every other problem subject, a matter of misunderstanding. In
> this case, of severe misdefinition.
>
> When, in my review of Ron's errors, I came to the Dynamics, I found that he
> had followed the insanity of the world. He left three contextually similar
> but factually distinct activities collapsed together. To accommodate this
> he had to create the second dynamic. Do not forget that he was not firm is
> its place, describing it as a sort of sub-group (3rd Dn). Or that his own
> "2D was a lifelong shambles.
>
> The 3 elements of "2D" are sex, love/marriage and children.
>
> Sex is a body thing, plain and simple. So I placed it accordingly, in the
> 1st D(omain - couldn't have confusion over 'which Dynamics, Ron's or
> Allen's, no could we?)
>
> Sposes and children really are a sub-group. But a group nonetheless, and
> one as often abused, sabotaged and sacrificed as any other. So I put it
> into Groups where it belongs.
>
> As you can see, this leaves only Love/Marriage, and it begins to appear that
> the 3rd Dynamic is actually the 2nd Domain. And so it is, because when you
> recognize that Love/Marriage is actually an attempt to meld beingnesses into
> a new consciousness, you have to place Love/Marriage into the Spiritual Domain.
>
> Once you get it together like this, you see that what a particular
> relationship looks like is a function of the inter-Domainal agreements of
> those involved, and nobody else's business.
>
> Of course, there are a few other adjustments I found necessary, and I like
> infinity, so I let the number of Domains work out to the same quantity of
> "8" that Ron brought from the Mission. The major difference is, I wasn't
> left with a need to add further units to include ethics, etc.
>
> -0-
>
>
> --=====================_849385467==_
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
> Acceptance Services Center, ntc.
>
> P.O. Box 390696 Mountain View CA 94039
> Fax: 415/964-2090 Tel: 415/ 964-3436
>
> Speaker: Allen
> speaker@netcom.com
>
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ASC/ UPGRADE: THE DOMAINS
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
> The Domains: Spheres of Action in Life
> 9/86; 5/17/94
> Non-commercial copying permitted.
>
>
> Sometimes it is easier to look at complex things one section at a
> time. This is particularly true of life.
>
> Life is both large and complex. It encompasses everything you
> encounter, and its inter-relationships are nearly infinite. Trying
> to figure it out is intimidating to say the least. Even just
> trying to isolate and analyze your own personal life, actions and
> relationships can be a dizzying task.
>
> The problem of confronting life often seems too vast in scope. But
> therein lies a large part of the solution: one of the biggest
> reasons people have difficulty putting their lives in order is the
> failure to narrow the scope by cutting the problem down into
> manageable segments.
>
> As you grow to adulthood you reach ever further into life,
> increasing your spheres of participation and influence. The extent
> of the influence you develop is your domain.
>
> A domain is a sphere of influence: a territory, realm or zone over
> which one has taken control or over which one exercises
> jurisdiction.
>
> Domain is the playground; dominion is the power or authority.
>
> Influence may be limited or extensive, but it can always be divided
> into several topical areas, such as self, the environment, etc.
> Each area can then be examined separately. Once you have analyzed
> the various parts of life as it relates to you, you can usually
> harmonize them fairly easily.
>
> We have divided life in general along topical lines. There are
> individuals, families, groups, other life forms, and so forth.
> This means that we can list a set of domains that will work for
> everyone, whether a particular person is active in all of them or
> not.
>
> The following list, admittedly arbitrary, is a logical division of
> life into spheres of action --domains. Action rather than
> beingness, because when we speak of living we are really talking
> about doing things. Spheres rather than circles, because when we
> think, we don't limit our concepts to two-dimensional flatness.
> And, domains rather than boundaries, because we should not try to
> be mechanical or overly structured in describing this concept.
>
> The idea here is to go beyond the ideas of "moving in certain
> circles" and of having clear and defensible boundaries, to
> envisioning ourselves immersed in and interactive with the self-
> weaving fabric of life itself.
>
>
> The Domains
>
> 1. PERSONAL 5. ENVIRONMENT
> 2. GROUPS 6. IDEAS
> 3. HUMANITY 7. AESTHETICS
> 4. LIFE FORMS 8. AETHEREAL
>
>
> A more detailed listing with subdivisions follows. It should not
> be considered all-inclusive or absolute. Some people insist on
> rearranging it a bit.
>
> Notice that each domain, as you progress "outward" from the
> personal, is part of the next, and that the AEthereal folds back
> into the personal.
>
>
> The Domains: A Categorical Listing
>
> 1. PERSONAL
> Self-identity
> Persona
> Personality
> Body
> Survival supports
> water
> food
> sex
> shelter
> Possessions
> money
> Activities
>
> 2. GROUPS
> Family
> Friends
> Vocations
> Social
> sports
> religious
> political, etc.
>
> 3. HUMANITY
> Gender
> Genetic sub-group
> Planetary genre
>
> 4. LIFE FORMS
> Animals
> Plants
> Others
>
> 5. ENVIRONMENT
> (Consensus):
> Materials
> Structures
> Locations
> Situations
> Energy
> Time
> Space
>
> 6. IDEAS
> Attitudes
> Opinions
> Understandings
> Beliefs
> Realities
> Constructs
>
> 7. AESTHETICS
> Art
> Emotions
> Ethics
> Integrity
> Principles
> Marriage
>
> 8. AETHEREAL
> Entities
> Creator
> Prime Paradigm
> Essence
> AEther
>
>
> Save this post. This list is used in conjunction with several of
> the Acceptance technical applications, including the Standings
> Procedures.
>
> If you're already using a similar construct, you should consider
> this posting an upgrade. See the post ASC/ NOTICE: TECH UPGRADES!
> dated 5/17/94.
>
> Be advised that there may be details in this post that conflict
> with other similar constructs, and that not all of the terms used
> herein are defined herein. A more complete version will be
> released soon, which will explain the major differences and provide
> needed definitions.
>
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Aug 9 19:03:35 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore697.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)
iD8DBQFXqmFHURT1lqxE3HERAjFeAKCBp+IZ9YGnp8lL5/mMaELggpSWvwCgvG3x
Dn34YP9Wh3pcgV5lhWtWaKQ=
=zO/l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
THE ANATOMY OF A SERVICE FAC
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
THE ANATOMY OF A SERVICE FAC
So how does confront increase affinity?
You know its like you can't audit a preclear over out ruds.
So you gotta F/N the session before it starts with ruds,
then you can restim the preclear in a controlled manner, send the
TA soaring then bring it back down to an F/N again.
But what of the preclear whose TA is 5.5 and stuck still,
and all the 2wc and ruds and check lists and other bull shit
doesn't touch it?
Confront, confront, confront....
Accept, Accept, Accept, you will be askimilated.
The issue is not confront, maybe holding your position in space, or
even a controlled non confront, that's a kind of confront too. Close your
eyes and don't look on purpose and be there.
But really the answer lies in knowing the structure of case and not
running garbage bullshit that might help the well behaved noodle become a
better behaved noodle.
What we are looking for are pinpoint precise moments when the
preclear's acceptance level for undelightful surprise was violated by an
severe life threatening unprediction, resulting in shock, timeless
incredibility, certainty something is true, certainty it is impossible,
loss of self confidence at prediction, not knowing one's context,
where/when one is and why, unsuccessful why finding for the failure to
predict, and a postulate that the only way to handle was to not handle and
be elsewhere physically, emotionally, mentally or spritually justified by
a computation or many.
Every key in has one or more of these pinpoint moments of violated
acceptance level of undelightful surprise, shock, why finding, failure,
loss of confidence followed by a 'safe solution' which later becomes a
major problem of its own.
Confronting usually addresses the later problem and its masses and
causes nothing but confronting the later problem.
Spoting the later problem AS A SOLUTION to the earlier surprise
may work if it takes one back to the actual surprise which then
will run out naturally.
That's why one never audits a preclear for long on what his problems
are, but directs their attention to what solutions they have had to that
problem, how they have tried 'to handle' it including by not handling it
and running away.
THAT audits the original problem because the solutions bring him
back to the true exact WHAT.
LIFE IS FULL OF SURPRISES, delightful and undelightful.
Every being has a fair chosen tolerance for unprediction, but being a
total knowingness too much unprediction results in worry and doubt about
self which spirals out of control very quickly.
He starts to go down tone so fast he can only stop the decline by
slamming on the brakes via a computation.
Scientology is very confused on their wrong and useless definition of
confusion, a jumble of particles, and missses completely on the moment of
UNEXPECTED UNDELIGHTFUL SURPRISE and lack of prediction and loss of
confidence and the CHOICE to handle shock by seeking sympathy, withdrawing
with hope of counter-coaxing, or going into oblivion, rather than running
it out back up to disaster, ruin, and eventually putting it there and then
letting it go.
This may be the WHY that scientology failed, a confusion on the
anatomy of the bank, which is not a held back confusion but a held back
UNEXPECTED SURPISE and sense of eternal violation of acceptance level for
surprise born of self casting doubt ("Whoa this is bad, I wonder how bad
it can get?!") and the apparency that one did not, could not, would not,
should not, had better not 'put it there'.
This happens on good surprises too. It might not seem that way but
unexpected heavens are just as bad as unexpected hells. So you have to
audit unexpected losses and gains.
Once a being goes into 'can not predict' he can't get back his
confidence and equanimity born of a strong acceptance level, and down the
tubies he goes, self determined life changes and all.
I have been soloing this sequence without a meter, its quite
startling, present time starts to go critical mass on the various
components of the event, and one can't stop it from reviving, all of them,
all at once.
Hell that's better than 40 years of chronic no case gain. :)
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: Tue Aug 9 03:13:23 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1022.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)
iD8DBQFXqYKTURT1lqxE3HERAitYAJ0RBOGn9reVNyog0zOvOFvMD7L55gCeKii/
9gI8J6VojiOVWmVIba1r1R4=
=RdEE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
THE ANATOMY OF A SERVICE FAC
So how does confront increase affinity?
You know its like you can't audit a preclear over out ruds.
So you gotta F/N the session before it starts with ruds,
then you can restim the preclear in a controlled manner, send the
TA soaring then bring it back down to an F/N again.
But what of the preclear whose TA is 5.5 and stuck still,
and all the 2wc and ruds and check lists and other bull shit
doesn't touch it?
Confront, confront, confront....
Accept, Accept, Accept, you will be askimilated.
The issue is not confront, maybe holding your position in space, or
even a controlled non confront, that's a kind of confront too. Close your
eyes and don't look on purpose and be there.
But really the answer lies in knowing the structure of case and not
running garbage bullshit that might help the well behaved noodle become a
better behaved noodle.
What we are looking for are pinpoint precise moments when the
preclear's acceptance level for undelightful surprise was violated by an
severe life threatening unprediction, resulting in shock, timeless
incredibility, certainty something is true, certainty it is impossible,
loss of self confidence at prediction, not knowing one's context,
where/when one is and why, unsuccessful why finding for the failure to
predict, and a postulate that the only way to handle was to not handle and
be elsewhere physically, emotionally, mentally or spritually justified by
a computation or many.
Every key in has one or more of these pinpoint moments of violated
acceptance level of undelightful surprise, shock, why finding, failure,
loss of confidence followed by a 'safe solution' which later becomes a
major problem of its own.
Confronting usually addresses the later problem and its masses and
causes nothing but confronting the later problem.
Spoting the later problem AS A SOLUTION to the earlier surprise
may work if it takes one back to the actual surprise which then
will run out naturally.
That's why one never audits a preclear for long on what his problems
are, but directs their attention to what solutions they have had to that
problem, how they have tried 'to handle' it including by not handling it
and running away.
THAT audits the original problem because the solutions bring him
back to the true exact WHAT.
LIFE IS FULL OF SURPRISES, delightful and undelightful.
Every being has a fair chosen tolerance for unprediction, but being a
total knowingness too much unprediction results in worry and doubt about
self which spirals out of control very quickly.
He starts to go down tone so fast he can only stop the decline by
slamming on the brakes via a computation.
Scientology is very confused on their wrong and useless definition of
confusion, a jumble of particles, and missses completely on the moment of
UNEXPECTED UNDELIGHTFUL SURPRISE and lack of prediction and loss of
confidence and the CHOICE to handle shock by seeking sympathy, withdrawing
with hope of counter-coaxing, or going into oblivion, rather than running
it out back up to disaster, ruin, and eventually putting it there and then
letting it go.
This may be the WHY that scientology failed, a confusion on the
anatomy of the bank, which is not a held back confusion but a held back
UNEXPECTED SURPISE and sense of eternal violation of acceptance level for
surprise born of self casting doubt ("Whoa this is bad, I wonder how bad
it can get?!") and the apparency that one did not, could not, would not,
should not, had better not 'put it there'.
This happens on good surprises too. It might not seem that way but
unexpected heavens are just as bad as unexpected hells. So you have to
audit unexpected losses and gains.
Once a being goes into 'can not predict' he can't get back his
confidence and equanimity born of a strong acceptance level, and down the
tubies he goes, self determined life changes and all.
I have been soloing this sequence without a meter, its quite
startling, present time starts to go critical mass on the various
components of the event, and one can't stop it from reviving, all of them,
all at once.
Hell that's better than 40 years of chronic no case gain. :)
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: Tue Aug 9 03:13:23 EDT 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1022.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)
iD8DBQFXqYKTURT1lqxE3HERAitYAJ0RBOGn9reVNyog0zOvOFvMD7L55gCeKii/
9gI8J6VojiOVWmVIba1r1R4=
=RdEE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)