-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
GOD AND THE HIGH US.
Dennis,
Let's simplify this.
Forget dreamball vs meatball.
We are all bozo's on this bus, OK?
Forget zero dimensional vs multi dimensional.
Forget perfect certainty vs false certainty.
Forget proof vs faith.
Forget virtual vs actual.
Forget static vs kinetic.
I seek understanding how someone could exteriorize and see the
world without eyes, how they could move the marble without physical
means, how they could communicate telepathically, and live before and
after the body dies.
I find present day physics falls short in even allowing these kinds
of phenomena, let alone providing a prediction on an experimental route
to possibly uncovering them.
Maybe I am wrong on that matter, but we are going to forget right
vs wrong also.
So I start off on an intellectual journey to find another
understanding of the cosmic all that not only provides possibility that
these things might exist, but provides a direct experimental route to
uncovering them if they do.
This isn't about beliefs, this is about science and where to put
the research funds trying to uncover whether the paranormal exists
(which I do not know), and how to get it under our control (which also I
do not know).
From my 30 years of fruitless study, I have come up with a best bet
for the new understanding, again it is not a matter of belief or faith,
for I work only in perfect certainties of which there are precious few.
I know I exist, I am not sure anyone else does, but I seem to think
something else must exist to account for everything going on that I can
see myself not creating.
This journey then is my effort to theorize about the nature of that
something else, be it virtual or actual, physical hard reality or
simulation.
I am not married to any particular theory, I am married to
succeeding in my goals which is to discover if the paranormal is actual
and how to control it to the good of all.
Thus I reject outright any theory that say this can not be done,
and I do not waste time with people who ally themselves with such
theories.
Here is the short form of Adore, a summation of an alternate theory
of existence, unproved, and perhaps unprovable, and which even if true
may never lead to my goals with the paranormal.
The AllThatIs, outside of which there is nothing, consists entirely
of one thing, that for a better word we shall call Source or God.
This God is a multi I-AM being, that means it is more than one
single being, an infinite number in fact.
God is one thing with an infinite number of I-AM's, an infinite
headed hydra if you will.
We call all these beings, the High-US.
Each individual I-AM is called a soul and can create a space time
avatar and incarnate into it at will. In this state the soul usually
has lost sight that the space time avatar is it's creation or it's
choice of donment made by someone else.
To don means to put on, to adorn one's self with the beingness of
the avatar.
Thus Souls are God incarnation.
In fact all of life is God incarnation.
Thus we call these beings GodSouls, to indicate two functions in
one entity.
God can neither create nor destroy anything, but it can change the
'polarization' of its own substrate from unconscious to conscious, which
then becomes an individual being, something we call a conscious unit or
will. That would be a single GodSoul.
God has two functions, the One and the Many, the Source and the
Sourcer, the Creator and the Creature, the God and the Soul, and the
Author and the Character.
The God function acts as source of creations, however the Source
function only sources when the Soul casts. Thus everything is created
via the command intent of a manifesting Soul.
God does not cause Souls to manifest, Souls come and go in
manifestation under their own nature. The Source merely ties them all
together and gives them the ability to do this, as Soul and God are one
and the same stuff, one thing, two functions.
The God function also ties all Souls together into a matrix of
direct communication with each other. God is like the silicon substrate
in which the souls, the transistors and other components, are eternally
etched,
Notice souls are not created, they just turn on and off.
Sleep and awake.
Souls, while manifesting, that is conscious, can cast universes of
space and time into existence, along with objects in those universes,
matter and energy.
These physical manifestations, every one of them, is an avatar for
some soul that chooses to enter carnation in a universe, from quarks on
up to Galaxies and everything between. The entire space and time of a
single universe has a soul governing it. As matter forms and changes
state the Souls inhabiting these forms live and die and go on to live
again in another form, evolving consciousness as they do.
When the physical avatar dies, be it a molecule or a human being,
the being reverts from the Soul state to the God state.
It is then free to design or partake in another avatar according to
the rules of the game. Souls don't have to use their own avatars, they
can and do like to use those created by others.
There are at least two very different basic tracks of souls
evolving at this time in this universe. The first are the souls
occupying physical objects from quarks, on up to galaxies including the
human body and all material or biological forms.
Every layer of functionality born of complexity can be and is taken
on by a conscious unit as its avatar.
Thus each atomic particle has a soul, and each atom has a soul, and
the molecule the atom is in has a soul, and the cell has a soul, and all
the parts of the cell have souls, and the organ that contains the cell
has a soul, and each eye ball has a soul, and the brain has a soul, two
in fact, one for left and one for right, the whole body has a soul.
None of which is me and thee.
These souls tend to be simple in evolution, always conscious, but
rarely self aware. A soul being a heart would be conscious AS a heart,
but it couldn't think about it, or wish differently.
That is why we call them elementals, they are happy being what they
are being.
As the soul of a physical complexity passes through a more complex
organism, some of the more complex soul's abilities are transfered to
the less complex soul, so that in its next life time, it may be better
able to take on a more complex organization. This is how this kind of
spiritual evolution works. This has nothing to do with Darwinian
evolution of the physical form but takes place along side it.
Thus the various souls comprising a dog say, will all evolve just a
little bit upwards as the dog spends it's life in the presence of a
human master. The upper layer of souls in a dog, cat, dolphin etc, can
actually attain self awareness via such interactions.
If you have ever called a dog over to you, and it gave you that
'Who me?' look, you know that dog has made it to self awareness.
There is no sin in the first class of souls.
The second kind of souls are those that are devolving downwards,
the OT's become humans. They entered the universe long after it was
created, and have become involved in the already ongoing game of
physical evolution, in which they are losing.
This is because they have come to confuse themselves with the
physical universe objects they have gotten involved with, to the point
of thinking they are the object.
They have confused someone else's avatar as their own.
That is like the cowboy that has ridden a horse for so long, he
thinks he is the horse. The horse is the horse, it is a huge cluster of
elemental souls of the first kind evolving upwards.
The cowboy is a soul of the second kind, evolving downwards
thinking it is a horse.
The cowboy knew at one time it was a soul free of incarnation, then
became a farmer of horses, then an owner of horses, then through
propitiation, sympathy, pity and regret, finally BECAME a horse by
blending in with and thus usurping the controls from the elemental horse
cluster that normally controlled the horse.
For very complex evolved souls, such as the cowboy or human being,
there is a transition period after death containing both heavens and
hells.
The heavens are universes of ideal well being, and living an ideal
life doing what the soul would have wanted to do the most as he would
have wanted to do them.
The hells are caused by the being's wishing eternal separation from
one or more others, including self.
The heavens go on for a while, then they start to turn into hells,
bugs start crawling around his skin, the beautiful waters turn polluted
and have terrible things in them, the exquisite architecture turns to
rubble for as far as the eye can see, mountains turn into endless cubic
miles of vaccuum cleaner dust and enmest, and streets of living social
concourse turn to desolate loneliness.
The being dives back into the delusion that he is a horse or a body
never fully completing the cycle of the hells burning off.
Thus beings have many life times of incompleted hells stacked up on
each other, making it harder and harder to run a body. Eventually they
can't run a body any more, and they start to sink into oblivion.
Such souls may become infestations in bodies, demons, devils etc,
for a while, and they may fear becoming molecules, but those guys are
all evolving upwards and enjoying it, the soul we are talking about is
sinking fast right on past them on the way to total darkness.
There is no sin in the first class of souls, there is only sin in
the second class.
Minus a true confession, ALL of the second class are devolving
downward.
Sin is wallowing in apparent separation of God and Soul, and of souls
from each other.
Darkness is separation from the light.
Light is born of unanimous class, pride and majesty.
Thus beings are sinking under the weight of their most detested
terminals (people), those they have separated from *FOREVER*.
You can not cast another into the darkness or wish for it, without
trying to create that darkness and casting it on them, thus the soul
sinks under his own created darkness that he could never give away.
Because the soul is God incarnation, and because nothing gets
created until a soul intends it to be, it is not possible for God to
manifest anything that doesn't come through a Soul. Thus all the powers
of God exist for and are activated through the Soul. Thus a Soul can do
anything a God can do by definition.
Source sources only when will casts.
Thus prayer for change is not a request to a higher power to do
something for us that we can not do ourselves, but a direct invocation
of eternal God power through the Soul itself.
But that eternal God power is the power of the High-US, thus the
ENTIRETY of the HIGH-US must be invoked before it can be considered an
invocation of God the everyone.
When ever you send a prayer up to God, you get back a spam report
saying do it yourself.
But Souls no longer know how to do it themselves, as they have long
ago fallen into sin, which is believing in separation of God and Soul,
and wishing for separation of (other) souls from God.
This is a double whammy, they believe they are not God and can not
do what God can do.
That's sin one.
And then they want God to separate them from their most detested
terminals FOREVER FOR FREE.
That's sin two.
Three strikes and you are out.
They believe that God is something different, higher, apart from
the Soul, and worse the Soul's prayers are now mostly directed at asking
God to destroy or punish something or someone for them FOREVER, or to
protect themselves from their most detested terminals.
Such prayers of self protection might work if they were of the
form:
'God, please make Dufus nice and be my friend', but usually they
are of the form 'I hate Dufus, and hope you do too, and here's why, so
please get rid of Dufus for me, I do not want him in my Heaven forever
more and neither should you.'
You see that is wishing for permanent separation of one Soul,
namely himself, from another most detested Soul.
And then wishing that God would separate the detested soul from God
into hell or death forever.
"God if you were righteous, you should hate as I hate."
That's sin three.
Universes are created as a unanimous decision amongst all the Souls
in that universe.
Those coming in later acquiesce to those agreements or else they
can not enter. Since a universe IS just a constellation of agreements,
to enter into a universe IS to enter into those agreements. Thus if you
disagree you can't enter.
Class is an attitude, that all should live forever and be my
friend. Cool is the ability to maintain class.
All universes are made of Class (friendship), Pride (craftsmanship)
and Majesty, (the impulse towards majestic practical jokes of
magnitude.)
'Most detested people' break the soul's sense of that original
unanimity, of friendship with everyone involved, no matter how detested
they have become now.
Either the soul thinks "I didn't ask HIM in," which is denying
outright one's responsibility for condition, or he thinks "Well I regret
inviting him in, it was a mistake, now I want him out for good."
Again the soul is denying responsibility for failing to see the
consequences of his earlier invite.
Anyhow trying to kick another out of the game is usually just an
attempt to win a game one feels one is now losing.
"If it were for him, I would be winning this game, so if I could
just uninvite him out of the game, I would win it!"
Sounds good, but carried to its logical extreme, the way to
win any game is to uninvite the whole opposing team to take a long
walk off a short pier.
If you wanted a game you could not lose, you should have created it
that way in the first place.
It was YOU who wanted a game that was infinite odds against you,
and you were so grumpy the day you realized you couldn't make the odds
infinite, so now you are trying to win by cheating?
Cheating is basically trying to take back a unanimous invite,
either of the rules of the game, or of the opposing players themselves.
But here's the joke.
The way to kick anyone out of a game, is to invite him in! If one
can operate the power of the original invite, any soul can kick any
other soul out, because that other soul is in the game BECAUSE of the
continuing invite from the first soul. If the first soul ceases his
unanimity of invite for any other particular soul, he can kick any soul
he wants including himself out of the game.
Of course the kicked out soul can just invite himself back in
again, if he invites everyone else in at the same time including the guy
who just kicked him out.
Any soul that can take full causal responsibility for the original
invite to form a connection and relation (a co shared game), can simply
cease that connection and relation any time he withdraws the invite.
But the original invite was done with affinity, so you can't
uninvite someone you have no affinity for any more, someone you would
never have invited into the game in the first place if you had known
better.
Of course the other soul wouldn't have invited YOU into the game
either had he known better, so neither of you would ever have been in
the game, and both of you would have been happy without having to invite
anybody.
So you see, when the game ends, everyone is friends again.
"This dream ends forever when the circle of friends are all holding
hands again."
That doesn't mean any particular soul has to wait until everyone
makes up, all he has to do is make up himself, be that circle of
friends, INVITE THEM ALL IN AGAIN, know it will be in the end as it was
in the beginning, and the soul goes timeless, eternal, and he's out to
do what ever else he wants.
The best way to remove someone from the game so they aren't
bothering you any more, is to remove yourself from the game!
THUS THE ONLY THING HOLDING A SOUL HERE ARE HIS MOST DETESTED
BEINGS, the one's he doesn't want to be here, because he is trying to
kick them out rather than invite them in!
The problem is he no longer knows who his most detested beings are,
and he no longer knows who considers him THEIR most detested being.
Thus he sinks, actually SEEKING permanent oblivion forever.
Now you understand what Majesty is, Master of JEST.
Jokes of Eternal Self Treason.
He wants other people out forever, never to have been in, in the
first place, and so he can't get out, because he can't bring himself to
invite them in again!
No invite, no exit.
HE CAME IN ON A UNANIMOUS INVITE, HE CAN ONLY GET OUT ON A
UNANIMOUS INVITE.
Practice coming in through invitation puts you out prior to the
game because you have to BE out inorder to issue an invite to come in.
Trying to come in tends to put you out, and trying to get out tends
to stick you in. The state with the highest affinity wins.
So in fact if he did contact the unanimous invite to be in, he
couldn't stay in, because he needs his most detested beings to remain
here.
He can't stay in any game without being STUCK in the game by trying
to get out due to detesting the game or its players. This is because
detesting the creation of a state precludes contact with the high
affinity of having created the state in the first place.
Thus he can no longer contact his own affinity and choice to
create and enter the game and invite everyone else in, and thus can't
withdraw the choice.
One withdraws a choice by permeating it in its every aspect
including willingness and afinity for what is being chosen.
Notice this means he has to CHOOSE his most detested termimals,
those he wishes were nver in the game forever for free, in order to
dislike the game just enough to be able to stay in it by being unable to
leave it.
Thus spotting ones most detested terminals, and one's hight
affinity choice to chose them and assign them as such and put them
there so he can then later hate them, is probably the most powerul
auditing there.
Recognition of repsonsibility for most detested terminals.
The instant having a most detested terminal becomes a win of prior
creation of them rather than a failure of present destruction of them,
the connection and relation between the soul and his destested terminal
will vanish.
One might ask why a being would engaged in the obviously dangerous
gambit of choosing to hate a game enough to get stuck in it so he can't
remember his way out which is to create being in again.
Sinking into oblivion forever for free is a kind of havingness, it
is a way to stay in a dream after getting quite fed up with waking up
all the time and losing the universe.
People just simply wake up and go eternal when they contact the
love of the original invite.
Both of these attitudes in the soul, "I didn't invite you in!" or
"I want you out forever" are denial of full responsibility for who is in
his universe and how they came to be there,
He is trying to operate responsibility for kicking them out,
without operating responsibility for letting them in, in fact originally
BEGGING that they come play with him.
Since the way to kick them out, is to invite them in again, and let
go of it, the unwillingness to invite them in, and to have invited them
in, in the first place, leaves him stuck with them and stuck in the
universe himself.
His unwillingness to ever have had them be in his universe prevents
him from contacting his OWN original unanimity with the others in the
same universe for who or what is in the universe.
Thus having separated himself off from the God power of unanimity,
the Soul's God power can not flow and prayers (intentions) remain
"unanswered."
The very idea of a prayer to a higher power is assertion of
separation between God and Soul and denial of responsibility for one's
own existence in the AllThatIs.
THUS PRAYING TO A HIGHER GOD IS SIN.
If you want something, do it yourself.
The basic prayer is to have the universe.
If you think you didn't make it, or are unwilling forever to have
had it made by anyone, you can never vanish it.
You can only vanish that which is beautiful.
Thus spot the ugly, until the ugly becomes beautiful because
the ugly allowed you to have the beautiful for a while.
The ruse always ends, so you needn't worry about it going on
forever.
You don't actualy want it to last forever, so it won't, but
more to the point it can't. All whiles persist because of this
ruse and it is in the end erasing.
It might take a while though.
And you can always give a kick to keep it going.
"Grrrr!, all that ugly, I do hate it so..."
Thus if you can't shake hands with all the players after the game
is over, the game ain't over.
And thus hells consist solely of those wishing others into hell
forever.
For a while is fine, forever, and you end up there yourself.
You can get the agreement of the High Us to create a hell for a
while for someone, if it benefits the victim and the rest of existence,
but punishment forever benefits no one, and destroys the soul's
sovereign desire that things only exist for a while.
Thus all hells only last for a while, because eventually the
sinner, wishing death and damnation off on his most detested beings,
sees his error, regrets it and gives it up.
No hell can out survive a true confession.
No hell can out survive the cesssation of the invite to create it.
But he may bounce off the bottom of oblivion a few times before he
sees the light and coughs up his most detested terminals.
One of which will be himself.
So Dennis you think I could make any money selling this divine
vision as a religion or sumptin' to the masses?
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: Mon Nov 28 17:18:46 EST 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore716.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)
iD8DBQFYPK1GURT1lqxE3HERAk1jAJ0RmxxFtsGk9uW2mgoi4u7u/QqyWQCfZwf3
1vPrL/B9Ukr/XvME89k5BwI=
=XVYG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, November 28, 2016
Tuesday, November 22, 2016
README.txt (fwd)
ART MATRIX - LIGHTLINK
PO 880 Ithaca, NY 14851-0880
(607) 277-0959 Voice
(607) 277-8913 Fax
(607) 277-5026 Modems
homer@lightlink.com E-mail
jes@lightlink.com E-mail
07/21/11 6:17pm
Copyright (C) 2011 Homer W. Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
This material may be copied freely.
FOR THE EYES OF HIS HOLINESS, THE DALAI LAMA.
Dear Sir,
Please find enclosed a description of a new discovery about the
nature of consciousness, the consequences of which are probably
uncountable.
There are two complete versions, one for the average person in the
VAL directory, and one written for Arthur C. Clarke before his death a
few years ago.
If this material is not for you, feel free to give it to anyone
that might be able to benefit from it.
This is on the web at http://www.lightlink.com/theproof.
There is also some fun stuff on fractals.
Yours in good faith,
Homer Wilson Smith homerwsmith@lightlink.com
Jane Elizabeth Staller jes@lightlink.com
www.lightlink.com
www.artmatrix.com
www.clearing.org
www.adore.com
www.lightlink.com/theproof
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Nov 22 00:06:01 EST 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/clarke/README.txt
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
_______________________________________________
Clear-L mailing list
Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
PO 880 Ithaca, NY 14851-0880
(607) 277-0959 Voice
(607) 277-8913 Fax
(607) 277-5026 Modems
homer@lightlink.com E-mail
jes@lightlink.com E-mail
07/21/11 6:17pm
Copyright (C) 2011 Homer W. Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
This material may be copied freely.
FOR THE EYES OF HIS HOLINESS, THE DALAI LAMA.
Dear Sir,
Please find enclosed a description of a new discovery about the
nature of consciousness, the consequences of which are probably
uncountable.
There are two complete versions, one for the average person in the
VAL directory, and one written for Arthur C. Clarke before his death a
few years ago.
If this material is not for you, feel free to give it to anyone
that might be able to benefit from it.
This is on the web at http://www.lightlink.com/theproof.
There is also some fun stuff on fractals.
Yours in good faith,
Homer Wilson Smith homerwsmith@lightlink.com
Jane Elizabeth Staller jes@lightlink.com
www.lightlink.com
www.artmatrix.com
www.clearing.org
www.adore.com
www.lightlink.com/theproof
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Nov 22 00:06:01 EST 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/clarke/README.txt
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
_______________________________________________
Clear-L mailing list
Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, November 21, 2016
LOGIC2 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
CB Willis (cbwillis@adore.lightlink.com) wrote:
>The foregoing 2 posts by Homer refer to a way of thinking that's too
>limited for what I want to say.
If you use an IS statement to say something, you MUST remain
inside of the boundaries of the definition of IS and IS NOT.
It is quite possible that language and IS statments are not
suitable for what you want to say, but THEN DON'T USE LANGUAGE AND IS
STATEMENTS TO SAY IT.
>I could spend all day refuting each point
>and have comments at every juncture, but frankly I don't have the
>inclination and feel it would be fruitless for reaching agreement even if
>I documented all my comments. While your presentation may be persuasive in
>one sense, mine would be persuasive in another sense.
Well until we see a presentation on how Logic is useless and
without value, I doubt we will see how persuasive you can be.
I don't think you can do it.
I think if you tried you would make a laughing stock out of
yourself.
>In scn terms, the demand that I adhere to those standards without
>qualification "ARC-breaks" me and "my itsa line" in in real life.
>Anyone else is welcome to their own viewpoint. If there's enough
>misalignment on fundamentals, there are some futures you just can't build
>together. Why try to build a future on fundamentals you don't agree with?
People who build their futures on illogic are not sane.
All I ask is that if you use statements that PRESUME logic is
valid and useful, then obey the laws of that logic.
The minute you say ".... is true" or ".... is false" you
have asserted that logic is valid because you issuing IS statements,
If you assert that logic is valid and then deny logic is valid,
you are talking nonsense that not even you understand.
The very statement "Logic is not valid" is an IS statement
that assumes logic is valid to even make its statement.
You may know what you are trying to say, but you aren't saying
it.
A no one else can get it either.
Except those that like to fancy their own hallucinations of what
you mean are similar to yours.
Homer
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Nov 21 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic2.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)
iD8DBQFYMyl7URT1lqxE3HERAi6kAKCbFPtwhaYQCrtnB0SQfK9xq9F8DQCfQHCy
YM+FY1DwTzXNxvUT4Nqd4XY=
=UWpA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
CB Willis (cbwillis@adore.lightlink.com) wrote:
>The foregoing 2 posts by Homer refer to a way of thinking that's too
>limited for what I want to say.
If you use an IS statement to say something, you MUST remain
inside of the boundaries of the definition of IS and IS NOT.
It is quite possible that language and IS statments are not
suitable for what you want to say, but THEN DON'T USE LANGUAGE AND IS
STATEMENTS TO SAY IT.
>I could spend all day refuting each point
>and have comments at every juncture, but frankly I don't have the
>inclination and feel it would be fruitless for reaching agreement even if
>I documented all my comments. While your presentation may be persuasive in
>one sense, mine would be persuasive in another sense.
Well until we see a presentation on how Logic is useless and
without value, I doubt we will see how persuasive you can be.
I don't think you can do it.
I think if you tried you would make a laughing stock out of
yourself.
>In scn terms, the demand that I adhere to those standards without
>qualification "ARC-breaks" me and "my itsa line" in in real life.
>Anyone else is welcome to their own viewpoint. If there's enough
>misalignment on fundamentals, there are some futures you just can't build
>together. Why try to build a future on fundamentals you don't agree with?
People who build their futures on illogic are not sane.
All I ask is that if you use statements that PRESUME logic is
valid and useful, then obey the laws of that logic.
The minute you say ".... is true" or ".... is false" you
have asserted that logic is valid because you issuing IS statements,
If you assert that logic is valid and then deny logic is valid,
you are talking nonsense that not even you understand.
The very statement "Logic is not valid" is an IS statement
that assumes logic is valid to even make its statement.
You may know what you are trying to say, but you aren't saying
it.
A no one else can get it either.
Except those that like to fancy their own hallucinations of what
you mean are similar to yours.
Homer
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Nov 21 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic2.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)
iD8DBQFYMyl7URT1lqxE3HERAi6kAKCbFPtwhaYQCrtnB0SQfK9xq9F8DQCfQHCy
YM+FY1DwTzXNxvUT4Nqd4XY=
=UWpA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE574 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
THE NO CASE
Bud McDermot <self@location.org> wrote about Phil:
> I really would like to hear you explain the difference between the
> philosophy or belief system, and the fraud, crime wave etc.
> I've always gathered that you believed scientology had a flawed basis,
> but what is a better view of it?
> It would be good if you were more communicative of this rather than just
> appearing to emphasize one thing to achieve your point.
Forget it, Phil is a computing psychotic, dramatizing endlessly
about his hallucinations on the subject of Hubbard's more endless evil
intentions.
Everyone has a case, but to Phil, Hubbard was not only a dog pc,
but also a dog messiah.
Whether OT III happened or not, or some equivalent, is an
interesting question, it deserves further study and respect, not
ridicule.
Dropping down from Eternality and peace into Immortality and fear
of hell forever, and further down into mortality and fear of death
forever, is way worse than any physical or mental implant that one could
throw at a being anyhow.
Black V's are Black Infinity cases.
The Black V has no future, *THAT'S* what he can't or won't see.
Most of the nut cases on this group are "dramatizing NO" cases. NO
space opera, NO implants, NO war, NO other civilizations, NO melding, NO
joining, NO merging, NO compacting of beings together, NO nothing. They
have withdrawn from so many different places, times and universes, that
the only place they can be is in their heads.
Get on a meter and assess for how many 'NO's there have been.
Interiorization is exteriorization from everywhere else by going
deeper in.
Consider the sargasso sea, there you find Phil spouting off on a
log of driftwood amongst the seaweed and dead fish who listen
attentively.
People thus live their lives as dots in a universe of endless
universes.
Eventually they all become marbles on the thetan plane, rolling
around and around the drain to hell.
Run,
Spot Alone. Spot NO Alone.
Spot Together. Spot NO Together.
Denial of some cosmic history or another is one great big co
excused withhold, if you won't mention how I did this to others, I won't
mention how you did this to me.
Who did what to whom in the end is irrelevant, that's a desert of
death with no results because the being's own choice is at cause.
And above that there is no cause, as not only is the static
spaceless and timeless, it is also causeless.
Hubbard made a serious mistake in defining the static as spaceless,
timeless, massless, and energyless, but nonetheless had cause, could
make postulates. We are *WAY* down from static by the time the illusion
of cause comes into play. I mean so far into the abyss, that we have
forgotten we jumped, who we are, where we came from, *THEN* we get the
idea of cause.
"Man this place is dark, I think I will be cause around here!"
A zillion years later he's digging tar out of the bottom of the
abyss with a pick thinking "Who or what is cause around here and why is
it such an asshole?" Adore calls that religious insanity.
Run,
Cause - NO Cause
Causelessness - NO Causelessness
Timeless Cause - NO Timeless Cause
Causeless Time - NO Causeless time.
Phil has been asked politely to stop spewing his garbage on
alt.clearing.technology a number of times, he often goes away for a
while to 'preen his integrity' as he calls it, another notch in front of
a crazy house mirror, but then he comes back just as fucked up as
before.
You can tell this because he puts down Scn, without constructing
something better, faster and more accurate.
Nothing ever changes with the psycho.
We been up to something these last zillion years, what was it?
Don't like the axioms? Then build some new ones that don't start
with Q1: Hubbard was a nut case, Q2: Hubbard was an evil nut case, Q3:
Hubbard was a con man, and Q4: everyone interested in him has been
conned and brainwashed by him.
Perhaps something like the following.
Q1: Hubbard had a case.
Q2: Case is fear of future.
Q3: Future is an illusion.
Q4: Seek Eternality via Spacelessness, Timelessness, Causelessness
and Effectlessness.
Take 10 minutes of *NOTHING*.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun Mar 16 16:29:15 EDT 2008
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Nov 19 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore574.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)
iD8DBQFYMIZ7URT1lqxE3HERAtreAKChx2Q0KKHY6L2QXp9fRNc6wZnzuwCfeyqR
pz/oMarxjUpZ4sf6faNPo/E=
=E3L1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
THE NO CASE
Bud McDermot <self@location.org> wrote about Phil:
> I really would like to hear you explain the difference between the
> philosophy or belief system, and the fraud, crime wave etc.
> I've always gathered that you believed scientology had a flawed basis,
> but what is a better view of it?
> It would be good if you were more communicative of this rather than just
> appearing to emphasize one thing to achieve your point.
Forget it, Phil is a computing psychotic, dramatizing endlessly
about his hallucinations on the subject of Hubbard's more endless evil
intentions.
Everyone has a case, but to Phil, Hubbard was not only a dog pc,
but also a dog messiah.
Whether OT III happened or not, or some equivalent, is an
interesting question, it deserves further study and respect, not
ridicule.
Dropping down from Eternality and peace into Immortality and fear
of hell forever, and further down into mortality and fear of death
forever, is way worse than any physical or mental implant that one could
throw at a being anyhow.
Black V's are Black Infinity cases.
The Black V has no future, *THAT'S* what he can't or won't see.
Most of the nut cases on this group are "dramatizing NO" cases. NO
space opera, NO implants, NO war, NO other civilizations, NO melding, NO
joining, NO merging, NO compacting of beings together, NO nothing. They
have withdrawn from so many different places, times and universes, that
the only place they can be is in their heads.
Get on a meter and assess for how many 'NO's there have been.
Interiorization is exteriorization from everywhere else by going
deeper in.
Consider the sargasso sea, there you find Phil spouting off on a
log of driftwood amongst the seaweed and dead fish who listen
attentively.
People thus live their lives as dots in a universe of endless
universes.
Eventually they all become marbles on the thetan plane, rolling
around and around the drain to hell.
Run,
Spot Alone. Spot NO Alone.
Spot Together. Spot NO Together.
Denial of some cosmic history or another is one great big co
excused withhold, if you won't mention how I did this to others, I won't
mention how you did this to me.
Who did what to whom in the end is irrelevant, that's a desert of
death with no results because the being's own choice is at cause.
And above that there is no cause, as not only is the static
spaceless and timeless, it is also causeless.
Hubbard made a serious mistake in defining the static as spaceless,
timeless, massless, and energyless, but nonetheless had cause, could
make postulates. We are *WAY* down from static by the time the illusion
of cause comes into play. I mean so far into the abyss, that we have
forgotten we jumped, who we are, where we came from, *THEN* we get the
idea of cause.
"Man this place is dark, I think I will be cause around here!"
A zillion years later he's digging tar out of the bottom of the
abyss with a pick thinking "Who or what is cause around here and why is
it such an asshole?" Adore calls that religious insanity.
Run,
Cause - NO Cause
Causelessness - NO Causelessness
Timeless Cause - NO Timeless Cause
Causeless Time - NO Causeless time.
Phil has been asked politely to stop spewing his garbage on
alt.clearing.technology a number of times, he often goes away for a
while to 'preen his integrity' as he calls it, another notch in front of
a crazy house mirror, but then he comes back just as fucked up as
before.
You can tell this because he puts down Scn, without constructing
something better, faster and more accurate.
Nothing ever changes with the psycho.
We been up to something these last zillion years, what was it?
Don't like the axioms? Then build some new ones that don't start
with Q1: Hubbard was a nut case, Q2: Hubbard was an evil nut case, Q3:
Hubbard was a con man, and Q4: everyone interested in him has been
conned and brainwashed by him.
Perhaps something like the following.
Q1: Hubbard had a case.
Q2: Case is fear of future.
Q3: Future is an illusion.
Q4: Seek Eternality via Spacelessness, Timelessness, Causelessness
and Effectlessness.
Take 10 minutes of *NOTHING*.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun Mar 16 16:29:15 EDT 2008
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Nov 19 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore574.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)
iD8DBQFYMIZ7URT1lqxE3HERAtreAKChx2Q0KKHY6L2QXp9fRNc6wZnzuwCfeyqR
pz/oMarxjUpZ4sf6faNPo/E=
=E3L1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
ECO7 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Now I know you all don't like cops, but we have one on our system
and on this list, F. Brackin, and although I imagine that he and I
don't see eye to eye on about a million and a half different things,
he's a good guy and definitely one of Ithaca's finest.
As part of the effort to make downtown Ithaca safer for crime, I
had discussed with him providing an anonymous crime reporting e-mail
address, so that people could report crime without fear of
repercussion. This includes crime within the city and within the
police department itself.
I know this sounds like a 'Squeal Line' and frankly it is. But
it's meant to give good people a safe method of reporting crime to the
cops. However since it is anonymous, bad people can also abuse it by
false reports or turning in good people who happen to be toking or
whatever.
We haven't implemented it yet, but its still something I want to
do.
Comments are welcome.
Homer
You can stop reading now and hit the next button, there is
nothing further for intelligent mature reasonable or civilized people
below this line.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
</rant on>
THE SQUEAL LINE
Marijuana happens to be the Holy Sacrament of my religion.
Alcohol on the other hand is the Unholy Anti Sacrament.
Drugs should not be illegal in any case, because they are a
health problem and not a criminal problem. It's not criminal to smoke
a flower or snort some poppy dust.
Drugs may be bad for you, but they are not criminal.
Knowing that drugs are bad for you, and going out and selling
them to people in order to get them hooked against their will is
criminal.
But going out into a forest, and picking up a hooch bud and
smoking it is not a criminal thing to do.
Criminality is a very clear cut thing.
Criminality is the effort to enforce on you an unfair exchange
transaction against your will, either through force or deceit, treason
and treachery.
For example it is the effort to convince you that you are about
to engage in a fair exchange transaction that is in fact a rip off,
and is intended to be a rip off.
Killing you outright of course is the ultimate rip off, as is
enslaving you, either spiritually, mentally, emotionally or
physically. Drugs can be a form of physical enslavement.
Criminals can't produce, they can only consume.
They are the picture perfect dictionary definition of "Consumes
more than he produces."
Once they run out of their initial allotment of energy, they have
to consume what others produce in order to keep going.
The last effort of a spiritually dying being trying to give, is
to take.
Criminality is an effort to produce by taking your production
instead.
This is very clear cut, very mathematical. The criminal always
knows what he is doing.
The criminal will tell you that you have lots of duties and no
rights, and that he has lots of rights and no duties.
He can't produce by sowing, so he tries to 'produce' by reaping
what you have sown.
The criminal tries to make his, the fruits of your labor against
your will.
People will tell you how bad drugs are for people. In general
this is true. It is true of alcohol, tobacco, cocaine, speed, heroin
and novocaine.
In lesser degrees it is true of pot, shrooms and LSD.
Drugs are poisons that have a benefit. Thus they form a
dangerous double edged sword.
Some drugs like cocaine are very very bad for you. Cocaine in
particular makes you feel like you had perfect parents. It allows you
to feel like you had a perfect upbringing with no trauma or
unreasonableness at all, and you can look on all the nonsense of other
people with understanding. But then when you come down, its an
electronic hell that is hard to describe.
Cocaine can also kill you, you can do too much of it. You can
think if you do just a little bit more, you will hit that perfect
high, its like a inifinitely annoying little itch that just needs to
be scratched, and you do that little bit more and your central nervous
system just collapses and bye bye being.
Rats in a cage will drink cocaine impregnated water to the
exclusion of eating food or drinking anything else. They will
continue to drink the cocaine water until they starve to death.
This is what you are up against if you do cocaine.
Alcohol is similar, too much of it and your breathing will
stop, but usually the body pukes it up before it gets that bad.
Pot is almost impossible to kill you or overdose, and pretty soon
you smoke yourself straight which is like real boring. Most pot heads
slow down too so they become MUCH better drivers and coordination is
not thrown off. Driving accidents would go way down if pot bars
replaced alcohol bars.
The down side of course is more people would find religion and
give up the rat race and war games.
But all drugs have their down side.
Herion and the opiates are too horrible to imagine.
So its real easy to see why people start considering these drugs
bad and making them illegal. But the demand remains and criminals
step in to profit from that demand and the higher prices. Governments
too start to profit from the drug trade to fund their foreign wars,
and the whole thing just becomes a huge exercise in corruption,
temptation and seduction.
You can control criminality with illegality, but you can not
control addiction with illegality, and when you try, you make it
impossible to control criminality with anything, because you guarantee
that the criminals will always have more money, guns, and lawyers than
the government.
The government has to fight for every tax penny it gets, drug
war lords have money shoveled in their faces by everyone they meet.
Whose going to win?
But there's another lesson to be learned here.
A long time ago there was something called the Opium Wars. The
Emperor saw that the British were importing opium into his country
presumably in order to get them all addicted. So he declared war on
the British which turned out to be one of the bloodiest wars on the
planet and went on for YEARS.
So how many died or were tortured from the opium?
How many died or were tortured in the war?
How much pain did the opium cause?
How much pain did the war cause?
Did it get rid of opium?
So this is a tenet of my religion.
"Drugs are bad, drug wars are worse."
And remember that when someone starts ragging on pot in
particular, its almost a sure bet they are in a rotten mood because
they had caffein in the morning to wake up, they smoked cigarettes
*ALL* day long to work, they had brandy in the evening to 'unwind' and
took aspirin to kill the headache at night to go to sleep.
So please, do my God a favor and spot the hypocrisy where it is
ok?
Although I believe that drugs should not be illegal, in general
one must take full responsibility for the fact that they are and keep
your use of them to yourself. That means don't do them in public,
don't flaunt them, don't trade them with people you don't know, and
don't endanger yourself or others concerning them. You just help the
enemy win if you do.
AND DON'T MAKE A LIVING FROM THEM.
Anyone who has a vested interest in making a profit from drugs is
in fact in direct cahoots with the war criminals who made and keep
drugs illegal in the first place in order to profit from them. You
think the mafia wants drugs to become legal? They pay senators
millions of dollars a year to vote against legalization.
If some turkey thinks he's cool and tokes or trades out in the
open on the commons, and he gets caught, and those around him come
under suspicion and investigation, and its traced back and back, and
some brave producer in the fields is busted and the plants are
destroyed, then the wise ass turkey in the street has committed a
grave sin against my personal religion.
And the wrath of my God is not easy to watch that befalls on the
wretch who makes such a transgression.
Therefor if you are a good person who is quietly breaking
criminal laws written by criminal lawmakers that inure only to the
benefit of criminals, it is your duty to do so responsibily and
quietly and not ever ever get anyone else in trouble for it. This is
not a war where you go out into the middle of battle field, toking a
joint, with your stupid middle finger up in the air, you know what I
mean?
And if someone is doing something stupid that is endangering
things, for himself and for others, you take him aside and you explain
to him very clearly that what he's doing is not ok, and that he has to
stop it. If he claims that you are butting in on his profits, then he
is a criminal pure and simple and you turn him into the police
yourself.
Good people who are not used to anonymous communications tend to
be terrified of them, because they know anonymity can be abused by the
bad.
But frankly the bad are more terrified of anonymity, and if you
start turning in people who are stealing, beating on their children or
worse, or making an unreasonable profit from drugs that shouldn't be
illegal in the first place and making an ass of themselves in the
process then you will in fact take a big chunck out of the real crime
in the world, and make your own life safer to do the right thing, even
if its only to toke in your bedroom or the gorge.
Remember drugs are a Holy Sacrament, you don't just do them
because you can or its cool, and you certainly don't use them to prove
what a flying asshole you are.
If necessary you use them to help you find the God State within
you, or why you are all tied up in knots from a society gone mad.
They are for personal reflection and enhancement, they are not
for kicks or escape.
Also remember that when something desirable with a high demand
like pot is made illegal, lots of truely criminal elements step in to
profit from this. They have no interest in enhancing communication
with their inner selves, let alone for your well being.
They don't care that drugs have a poison aspect to them (ALL
drugs!) and need to be used only as Holy Sacrements, all they care
about is maximizing their profits.
Half the time they don't even USE the drug and hold it and its
users in contempt.
These people are real bad news, and they will ruin it for you and
the rest of your good friends if you just stand back and don't do
something about it NOW.
It's these people who get the cops and the drug dogs called in,
its not your buddies off toking in the woods listening to the sounds
of the waterfall or smelling the columbines.
I don't particularly buy into the idea that we are our brother's
keeper, but we are our own keeper, and criminals get away with what
they do because the good are afraid of them and don't know how to
communicate that fear in an effective manner.
They are also afraid that when the laws are criminal themselves,
that they might go down with the baddies, if they report them.
How many of you would feel comfortable inviting a cop into your
home. Not many right? That's because there are so many bogus laws,
that almost everyone is doing something wrong about something. The
cops know this, that's why when they come to your door and you invite
them in, they often refuse, they don't want to know about it.
If we just got rid of the surface layer of bogus laws to the
point where 80 to 90 percent of us felt totally comfortable with the
cops in our homes, the whole face of society would change.
Getting rid of the drug laws and the drug cold war would go a
LONG ways towards making this a peaceful place again, and the crime
rate would go way down because the communication and affinity levels
between civilian and cop would soar and the criminals wouldn't stand a
chance.
Homer
</rant off>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith News, Web, Telnet Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 E-mail, FTP, Shell Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com info@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Send mail to majordomo@lightlink.com saying
unsubscribe commons-L To unsuscribe from commons-L
subscribe commons-L-digest To subscribe to the digest
subscribe commons-L-announce To subscribe to the annnounce only list
index commons-L To get index of archives
get commons-L 199801 To get a specific archive
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Nov 16 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/eco7.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)
iD8DBQFYLJH7URT1lqxE3HERAkVuAKC9f33BHbZ0USp1Cl2ZxaL+dOMz3QCeLR0m
UO6bnHTf6zThsjYl1uU8bFw=
=kXjO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Now I know you all don't like cops, but we have one on our system
and on this list, F. Brackin, and although I imagine that he and I
don't see eye to eye on about a million and a half different things,
he's a good guy and definitely one of Ithaca's finest.
As part of the effort to make downtown Ithaca safer for crime, I
had discussed with him providing an anonymous crime reporting e-mail
address, so that people could report crime without fear of
repercussion. This includes crime within the city and within the
police department itself.
I know this sounds like a 'Squeal Line' and frankly it is. But
it's meant to give good people a safe method of reporting crime to the
cops. However since it is anonymous, bad people can also abuse it by
false reports or turning in good people who happen to be toking or
whatever.
We haven't implemented it yet, but its still something I want to
do.
Comments are welcome.
Homer
You can stop reading now and hit the next button, there is
nothing further for intelligent mature reasonable or civilized people
below this line.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
</rant on>
THE SQUEAL LINE
Marijuana happens to be the Holy Sacrament of my religion.
Alcohol on the other hand is the Unholy Anti Sacrament.
Drugs should not be illegal in any case, because they are a
health problem and not a criminal problem. It's not criminal to smoke
a flower or snort some poppy dust.
Drugs may be bad for you, but they are not criminal.
Knowing that drugs are bad for you, and going out and selling
them to people in order to get them hooked against their will is
criminal.
But going out into a forest, and picking up a hooch bud and
smoking it is not a criminal thing to do.
Criminality is a very clear cut thing.
Criminality is the effort to enforce on you an unfair exchange
transaction against your will, either through force or deceit, treason
and treachery.
For example it is the effort to convince you that you are about
to engage in a fair exchange transaction that is in fact a rip off,
and is intended to be a rip off.
Killing you outright of course is the ultimate rip off, as is
enslaving you, either spiritually, mentally, emotionally or
physically. Drugs can be a form of physical enslavement.
Criminals can't produce, they can only consume.
They are the picture perfect dictionary definition of "Consumes
more than he produces."
Once they run out of their initial allotment of energy, they have
to consume what others produce in order to keep going.
The last effort of a spiritually dying being trying to give, is
to take.
Criminality is an effort to produce by taking your production
instead.
This is very clear cut, very mathematical. The criminal always
knows what he is doing.
The criminal will tell you that you have lots of duties and no
rights, and that he has lots of rights and no duties.
He can't produce by sowing, so he tries to 'produce' by reaping
what you have sown.
The criminal tries to make his, the fruits of your labor against
your will.
People will tell you how bad drugs are for people. In general
this is true. It is true of alcohol, tobacco, cocaine, speed, heroin
and novocaine.
In lesser degrees it is true of pot, shrooms and LSD.
Drugs are poisons that have a benefit. Thus they form a
dangerous double edged sword.
Some drugs like cocaine are very very bad for you. Cocaine in
particular makes you feel like you had perfect parents. It allows you
to feel like you had a perfect upbringing with no trauma or
unreasonableness at all, and you can look on all the nonsense of other
people with understanding. But then when you come down, its an
electronic hell that is hard to describe.
Cocaine can also kill you, you can do too much of it. You can
think if you do just a little bit more, you will hit that perfect
high, its like a inifinitely annoying little itch that just needs to
be scratched, and you do that little bit more and your central nervous
system just collapses and bye bye being.
Rats in a cage will drink cocaine impregnated water to the
exclusion of eating food or drinking anything else. They will
continue to drink the cocaine water until they starve to death.
This is what you are up against if you do cocaine.
Alcohol is similar, too much of it and your breathing will
stop, but usually the body pukes it up before it gets that bad.
Pot is almost impossible to kill you or overdose, and pretty soon
you smoke yourself straight which is like real boring. Most pot heads
slow down too so they become MUCH better drivers and coordination is
not thrown off. Driving accidents would go way down if pot bars
replaced alcohol bars.
The down side of course is more people would find religion and
give up the rat race and war games.
But all drugs have their down side.
Herion and the opiates are too horrible to imagine.
So its real easy to see why people start considering these drugs
bad and making them illegal. But the demand remains and criminals
step in to profit from that demand and the higher prices. Governments
too start to profit from the drug trade to fund their foreign wars,
and the whole thing just becomes a huge exercise in corruption,
temptation and seduction.
You can control criminality with illegality, but you can not
control addiction with illegality, and when you try, you make it
impossible to control criminality with anything, because you guarantee
that the criminals will always have more money, guns, and lawyers than
the government.
The government has to fight for every tax penny it gets, drug
war lords have money shoveled in their faces by everyone they meet.
Whose going to win?
But there's another lesson to be learned here.
A long time ago there was something called the Opium Wars. The
Emperor saw that the British were importing opium into his country
presumably in order to get them all addicted. So he declared war on
the British which turned out to be one of the bloodiest wars on the
planet and went on for YEARS.
So how many died or were tortured from the opium?
How many died or were tortured in the war?
How much pain did the opium cause?
How much pain did the war cause?
Did it get rid of opium?
So this is a tenet of my religion.
"Drugs are bad, drug wars are worse."
And remember that when someone starts ragging on pot in
particular, its almost a sure bet they are in a rotten mood because
they had caffein in the morning to wake up, they smoked cigarettes
*ALL* day long to work, they had brandy in the evening to 'unwind' and
took aspirin to kill the headache at night to go to sleep.
So please, do my God a favor and spot the hypocrisy where it is
ok?
Although I believe that drugs should not be illegal, in general
one must take full responsibility for the fact that they are and keep
your use of them to yourself. That means don't do them in public,
don't flaunt them, don't trade them with people you don't know, and
don't endanger yourself or others concerning them. You just help the
enemy win if you do.
AND DON'T MAKE A LIVING FROM THEM.
Anyone who has a vested interest in making a profit from drugs is
in fact in direct cahoots with the war criminals who made and keep
drugs illegal in the first place in order to profit from them. You
think the mafia wants drugs to become legal? They pay senators
millions of dollars a year to vote against legalization.
If some turkey thinks he's cool and tokes or trades out in the
open on the commons, and he gets caught, and those around him come
under suspicion and investigation, and its traced back and back, and
some brave producer in the fields is busted and the plants are
destroyed, then the wise ass turkey in the street has committed a
grave sin against my personal religion.
And the wrath of my God is not easy to watch that befalls on the
wretch who makes such a transgression.
Therefor if you are a good person who is quietly breaking
criminal laws written by criminal lawmakers that inure only to the
benefit of criminals, it is your duty to do so responsibily and
quietly and not ever ever get anyone else in trouble for it. This is
not a war where you go out into the middle of battle field, toking a
joint, with your stupid middle finger up in the air, you know what I
mean?
And if someone is doing something stupid that is endangering
things, for himself and for others, you take him aside and you explain
to him very clearly that what he's doing is not ok, and that he has to
stop it. If he claims that you are butting in on his profits, then he
is a criminal pure and simple and you turn him into the police
yourself.
Good people who are not used to anonymous communications tend to
be terrified of them, because they know anonymity can be abused by the
bad.
But frankly the bad are more terrified of anonymity, and if you
start turning in people who are stealing, beating on their children or
worse, or making an unreasonable profit from drugs that shouldn't be
illegal in the first place and making an ass of themselves in the
process then you will in fact take a big chunck out of the real crime
in the world, and make your own life safer to do the right thing, even
if its only to toke in your bedroom or the gorge.
Remember drugs are a Holy Sacrament, you don't just do them
because you can or its cool, and you certainly don't use them to prove
what a flying asshole you are.
If necessary you use them to help you find the God State within
you, or why you are all tied up in knots from a society gone mad.
They are for personal reflection and enhancement, they are not
for kicks or escape.
Also remember that when something desirable with a high demand
like pot is made illegal, lots of truely criminal elements step in to
profit from this. They have no interest in enhancing communication
with their inner selves, let alone for your well being.
They don't care that drugs have a poison aspect to them (ALL
drugs!) and need to be used only as Holy Sacrements, all they care
about is maximizing their profits.
Half the time they don't even USE the drug and hold it and its
users in contempt.
These people are real bad news, and they will ruin it for you and
the rest of your good friends if you just stand back and don't do
something about it NOW.
It's these people who get the cops and the drug dogs called in,
its not your buddies off toking in the woods listening to the sounds
of the waterfall or smelling the columbines.
I don't particularly buy into the idea that we are our brother's
keeper, but we are our own keeper, and criminals get away with what
they do because the good are afraid of them and don't know how to
communicate that fear in an effective manner.
They are also afraid that when the laws are criminal themselves,
that they might go down with the baddies, if they report them.
How many of you would feel comfortable inviting a cop into your
home. Not many right? That's because there are so many bogus laws,
that almost everyone is doing something wrong about something. The
cops know this, that's why when they come to your door and you invite
them in, they often refuse, they don't want to know about it.
If we just got rid of the surface layer of bogus laws to the
point where 80 to 90 percent of us felt totally comfortable with the
cops in our homes, the whole face of society would change.
Getting rid of the drug laws and the drug cold war would go a
LONG ways towards making this a peaceful place again, and the crime
rate would go way down because the communication and affinity levels
between civilian and cop would soar and the criminals wouldn't stand a
chance.
Homer
</rant off>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith News, Web, Telnet Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 E-mail, FTP, Shell Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com info@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Send mail to majordomo@lightlink.com saying
unsubscribe commons-L To unsuscribe from commons-L
subscribe commons-L-digest To subscribe to the digest
subscribe commons-L-announce To subscribe to the annnounce only list
index commons-L To get index of archives
get commons-L 199801 To get a specific archive
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Nov 16 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/eco7.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)
iD8DBQFYLJH7URT1lqxE3HERAkVuAKC9f33BHbZ0USp1Cl2ZxaL+dOMz3QCeLR0m
UO6bnHTf6zThsjYl1uU8bFw=
=kXjO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, November 14, 2016
JUNGLE LOVE
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
JUNGLE LOVE
She is trying to be an angel while fucking a dog, namely you, so
her sexual performance will be a bit off.
Certainly nothing to write home to mother about.
Worse she's been taught that sex is bad and so therefore having an
orgasm is bad, so she will try to have children without ever having an
orgasm.
By having children she fulfills her social contract of justifying
her existence, and by never having an orgasm, being fridig, she keeps
herself pure.
The man on the other hand HAS to have an orgasm to have children,
and he too feels degraded by the orgasm, but unlike the woman the orgasm
is required of him.
Thus the woman uses this degradation of the man against the man for
the rest of their lives.
This kind of woman thinks she is better than the man and will find
every fault she can in the man to prove it so.
People who can not partake freely of the more ecstatic experiences
of their physical existence will also find them selves lacking in the
love department also. Without sexual love between parents, there is
very little other emotional love than can grow in its absence.
So while he is a super nova of demanding and explosive sexual
energy, she is more like a cold burnt out dwarf star.
Children born of such marriages do not do well.
Most relatively sane people who as spirits can embrace their
temporal physicality are into extreme jungle love.
Children feel safe in that environment even if they get their
titties tickled once in a while.
The total physical separation between parent and baby or child
during sex is sick as sick comes.
Children know how to say no if it gets too much for them, and
parents who are into jungle love real time have no interest in 'abusing'
their children, only in teaching them by direct experience how to get
involved in jungle love themselves when they grow up.
You don't have to eat the child in order to teach them how to eat
by letting them be involved in the whole process of you eating yourself.
from hunt to toilet.
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: Mon Nov 14 15:00:24 EST 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1030.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)
iD8DBQFYKhfYURT1lqxE3HERAsymAJ49oJdDi+3cse5p85ffOvir6+Hk8QCgzYh0
Syh2dt2/zgRVKMBecbBuSv8=
=aAny
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
JUNGLE LOVE
She is trying to be an angel while fucking a dog, namely you, so
her sexual performance will be a bit off.
Certainly nothing to write home to mother about.
Worse she's been taught that sex is bad and so therefore having an
orgasm is bad, so she will try to have children without ever having an
orgasm.
By having children she fulfills her social contract of justifying
her existence, and by never having an orgasm, being fridig, she keeps
herself pure.
The man on the other hand HAS to have an orgasm to have children,
and he too feels degraded by the orgasm, but unlike the woman the orgasm
is required of him.
Thus the woman uses this degradation of the man against the man for
the rest of their lives.
This kind of woman thinks she is better than the man and will find
every fault she can in the man to prove it so.
People who can not partake freely of the more ecstatic experiences
of their physical existence will also find them selves lacking in the
love department also. Without sexual love between parents, there is
very little other emotional love than can grow in its absence.
So while he is a super nova of demanding and explosive sexual
energy, she is more like a cold burnt out dwarf star.
Children born of such marriages do not do well.
Most relatively sane people who as spirits can embrace their
temporal physicality are into extreme jungle love.
Children feel safe in that environment even if they get their
titties tickled once in a while.
The total physical separation between parent and baby or child
during sex is sick as sick comes.
Children know how to say no if it gets too much for them, and
parents who are into jungle love real time have no interest in 'abusing'
their children, only in teaching them by direct experience how to get
involved in jungle love themselves when they grow up.
You don't have to eat the child in order to teach them how to eat
by letting them be involved in the whole process of you eating yourself.
from hunt to toilet.
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: Mon Nov 14 15:00:24 EST 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1030.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)
iD8DBQFYKhfYURT1lqxE3HERAsymAJ49oJdDi+3cse5p85ffOvir6+Hk8QCgzYh0
Syh2dt2/zgRVKMBecbBuSv8=
=aAny
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Sunday, November 13, 2016
ADORE31 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
THE PRIME DIRECTIVE
The basic prime directive on demonstrating OT powers is
"If you want to be accepted by people, don't do anything that
exceeds their acceptance level."
So what you demonstrate is relative to the crowd you live in,
that includes the whole planet, its space alien lords, and who knows
what demons and deities on higher planes that might be looking in.
First rule is don't miss withholds. If you come across as
KNOWING SOMETHING, they WILL crucify you. Hell *I* will crucify you
as my basic modus operandi is "to crucify anyone who makes a claim to
wisdom, let us see now how close they are to their God."
If it were safe to demonstrate OT powers, they would be widely
available and demonstrated. The very fact that so few have them and
even fewer want anyone to know that they do have them is absolute
testimony to how dangerous it has been to have these powers, use them
and let others know.
The people who don't have such powers and are the most eager to
receive proof from others are the one's who were the most involved in
making such powers and demonstrations dangerous and thus are the least
worthy of having such demonstrations.
They are "What power? What past life? What overt?" cases.
Thus don't ignore the hecklers, *THEY* are the ones who created
the problem in the first place.
Those seeking proof of the *EXISTENCE* or possibility of OT
powers want that proof so they can crush it out of existence.
Telepathy in particular will miss withholds on criminal or
governmental elements (same thing) as they will wonder if you know or
not what they are up to.
Telekinesis, telepathy, remote viewing are all basic weapons of
war, each side will want you to be their lab rat to find out why you
can do it and no one else can. You become a matter of significant
national security to them as your powers can benefit their criminal
ends.
It's one thing to demonstrate powers that no one will take
seriously, but demonstrate something serious and to the point, and you
won't last long.
If you can move the marble on the table, you can kill someone at
10 feet. *ANYONE* knowing this will become very afraid of you, lest
they anger you, as they know how much THEY would love to kill someone
with their minds, and soon they will take to scheming how to kill you
first before you kill them. Of course they will worry if you know
because you are telepathic, so that will speed the process of your
demise.
Or they will pick on your loved ones who do not have power to
keep you at bay.
First they will try to enslave your powers to their ends. Then
they will try to imprison you so no one can use your powers. Then
they will try to kill you as you are just too dangerous to have
around.
OT powers no longer are available because of the danger of having
them. It's that simple actually, there is no inability, just superior
unwillingness.
If you want to have them back, you need to solve the Prime
Directive first, which is basically how to have power, use it, and
have it not be more dangerous than it is worth.
OT powers make the person who has them dangerous, that is a good
thing, but BEING dangerous is itself a danger to the being, the
solution to date has been to not be dangerous by not having powers.
This is the 'schmoo effect', just how undangerous do I have have
to be in order to be safe?
Once a Prime Directive is in place in a being, powers will start
coming back automatically. The thetan is sitting on the volcano like
some guy sitting on the top of Pandora's Box trying to keep it closed.
Once the prime directive is in place, the guy can get off the box, and
it will start to open on its own accord letting everything out.
The Prime Directive Rundown can open Pandora's Box faster than
the pc wants it opened, so don't mess around with this stuff, either
do it for real or don't do it.
"What power would you have?"
"What would you do with it?"
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 ====================
Sun Nov 13 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore31.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)
iD8DBQFYKJ17URT1lqxE3HERAtAMAJ9QYaBQrr0V7YsA8stWK1o2Nds1zACdFpQJ
d6xS/J3mMOAgxNzdedSnGlg=
=oENn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
THE PRIME DIRECTIVE
The basic prime directive on demonstrating OT powers is
"If you want to be accepted by people, don't do anything that
exceeds their acceptance level."
So what you demonstrate is relative to the crowd you live in,
that includes the whole planet, its space alien lords, and who knows
what demons and deities on higher planes that might be looking in.
First rule is don't miss withholds. If you come across as
KNOWING SOMETHING, they WILL crucify you. Hell *I* will crucify you
as my basic modus operandi is "to crucify anyone who makes a claim to
wisdom, let us see now how close they are to their God."
If it were safe to demonstrate OT powers, they would be widely
available and demonstrated. The very fact that so few have them and
even fewer want anyone to know that they do have them is absolute
testimony to how dangerous it has been to have these powers, use them
and let others know.
The people who don't have such powers and are the most eager to
receive proof from others are the one's who were the most involved in
making such powers and demonstrations dangerous and thus are the least
worthy of having such demonstrations.
They are "What power? What past life? What overt?" cases.
Thus don't ignore the hecklers, *THEY* are the ones who created
the problem in the first place.
Those seeking proof of the *EXISTENCE* or possibility of OT
powers want that proof so they can crush it out of existence.
Telepathy in particular will miss withholds on criminal or
governmental elements (same thing) as they will wonder if you know or
not what they are up to.
Telekinesis, telepathy, remote viewing are all basic weapons of
war, each side will want you to be their lab rat to find out why you
can do it and no one else can. You become a matter of significant
national security to them as your powers can benefit their criminal
ends.
It's one thing to demonstrate powers that no one will take
seriously, but demonstrate something serious and to the point, and you
won't last long.
If you can move the marble on the table, you can kill someone at
10 feet. *ANYONE* knowing this will become very afraid of you, lest
they anger you, as they know how much THEY would love to kill someone
with their minds, and soon they will take to scheming how to kill you
first before you kill them. Of course they will worry if you know
because you are telepathic, so that will speed the process of your
demise.
Or they will pick on your loved ones who do not have power to
keep you at bay.
First they will try to enslave your powers to their ends. Then
they will try to imprison you so no one can use your powers. Then
they will try to kill you as you are just too dangerous to have
around.
OT powers no longer are available because of the danger of having
them. It's that simple actually, there is no inability, just superior
unwillingness.
If you want to have them back, you need to solve the Prime
Directive first, which is basically how to have power, use it, and
have it not be more dangerous than it is worth.
OT powers make the person who has them dangerous, that is a good
thing, but BEING dangerous is itself a danger to the being, the
solution to date has been to not be dangerous by not having powers.
This is the 'schmoo effect', just how undangerous do I have have
to be in order to be safe?
Once a Prime Directive is in place in a being, powers will start
coming back automatically. The thetan is sitting on the volcano like
some guy sitting on the top of Pandora's Box trying to keep it closed.
Once the prime directive is in place, the guy can get off the box, and
it will start to open on its own accord letting everything out.
The Prime Directive Rundown can open Pandora's Box faster than
the pc wants it opened, so don't mess around with this stuff, either
do it for real or don't do it.
"What power would you have?"
"What would you do with it?"
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 ====================
Sun Nov 13 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore31.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)
iD8DBQFYKJ17URT1lqxE3HERAtAMAJ9QYaBQrr0V7YsA8stWK1o2Nds1zACdFpQJ
d6xS/J3mMOAgxNzdedSnGlg=
=oENn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Saturday, November 12, 2016
ACT56 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
OT'S AND VIOLENCE
ACT - 56
18 March 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
In thinking about the problem of what to do with super powers
should I ever manage to get them, the following comes to mind.
As people begin to wake up to what reality is all about, they go
from being a no power Black 5 case to to being a full OT. First they
regain the ability to make mockups in their own universe with crystal
clarity, then in the OS2 universe where they can share them with others,
and then in the OS3 universe where they can manifest things that all can
see and the Scientists can measure.
Each level of ability has its corresponding measure of
responsibility and ethics that go with having the ability.
It is ridiculous to assume, as most humans do, that for some
abilities if you have that ability, you must NEVER use it.
The truth might be more like, if you have an ability, you have a
DUTY to use it in its proper time and place, however rare that might be.
For example its not true that nuclear weaponry should NEVER be
used, only that maybe it should rarely be used against people. Using it
against incoming asteroids is a different matter.
So each ability has with it a proper time and place for its use, and
a set of duties and rights that go with it.
At a higher level, when you have disengaged from all your
agreements and contracts, of course all Duties are ended, so there is no
compulsion moral or otherwise to do anything.
But while in the game, duty and ability are closely connected, and
the more a being is aware of his duties, and generates duties for
himself to hold a sacred trust to, the more ability will come to him,
including the ability to kill others at a distance.
The raw facts are that if you have the ability to throw sparks at a
distance or even marbles around a room, then you have the ability to
kill people at a distance whether or not you want it, and like all other
areas of life, there will be pressures both ethical and unethical for
you to use and not use these abilities.
The real problem comes in that OT's become dangerous long before
they have the ability to do such obvious OS 3 abilities like throw a
spark. A tremendous amount of OT ability and growing time is spent in
the OS 2 band which has to do with sharing mockups with others, and
effecting the mockups OF others, even if they can't do it themselves.
All of OT VII for example used to be devoted to 'Projection of
Intention' which simply put is the ability to intend that others intend
things.
Thus if you want someone to do something, you don't FORCE him to do
it with brute force of will, but you subtly project into him the
intention to do it, and he takes it on as his own and does it.
Even if you only limited yourself to creating intentions in others
that they would normally agree with, you still have a very wide margin
for creating effects that would otherwise go uncreated.
However with a fully developed ability to project intention, such a
being could get just about anyone to do just about anything.
Thus it is at OT VII that the government really starts to get
worried. Below OT VII you are mainly getting a being OUT of the
universe. But at OT VII and above you are bringing him back IN with
power to spare.
The government doesn't like losing people across its slave camp
walls, which is what the lower Bridge accomplishes, but it really
dislikes having people around who can direct the minds of others merely
by thinking at them, however subtly.
You also have to understand the fact that as a being goes more OT,
he becomes more and more pan determined which means he begins playing
BOTH sides of the game against each other. He loses his intention that
one side win, and regains his intention that the game go on. So an OT
will have a tendency to fight for the underdog no matter who he is, good
guy or bad guy.
There is nothing more boring than a Perfect Golden Age forever for
free.
Now the truth is that the ever present background forces of chaos,
destruction and enturbulation from the physical universe alone are quite
sufficient to erode any permanent peace beings might think they have
won, so it is rare that the OT needs to give the 'bad' side of the game
any help. But OT's are more concerned with the Artistry of History
rather than everyone having a 'good time', so if one should decide that
the canvas could use a volcano here or there, well then a volcano there
will be, along with all of its eruptions and death and demise.
Just as an exterior pc can move the anchor points of space around
him so to be anywhere he wants to be, an OT can move the anchor points
of possible future HISTORY around him, so that the direction of the flow
of consciousness through history is changed and history takes another
course.
All it takes is changing the decisions that some people make.
If a planet becomes too engrossed in the 21 kinds of Evil, or was
it 16, I forget, then there are OT committees who will start the clean
slate process for the planet and everything will get kind of shoveled
under to start anew. And yes beings die during these times.
So KILLING people is not some kind of fundamental no no to an OT,
in fact they are quite able see that sometimes NOT killing people is a
high crime of magnitude.
Now most humans will admit that killing people in self defense is
an acceptable and even morally mandatory kind of behavior, especially if
you are defending yourself, your family, your children, your wife, your
country, or some ideal.
We don't have to wait for the law to sanction our killing in these
circumstances, and on the other side we don't have to obey the law when
during times of war it directs that we kill at its bidding. The LAW
doesn't enter into it.
Believe it or not the law exists to control the government, not the
people. Yes the law says what people may or may not do, but really what
it is saying is what the GOVERNMENT may or may not do when people do the
things that OTHERS have decided they should not do.
There is however no moral mandate for PEOPLE to follow the law,
there is only a moral mandate for the GOVERNMENT to follow the law.
Each individual is Sovereign. Of course he has to accept the
consequences of breaking the law if he is at odds with other Sovereigns
in the group, but Sovereign individuals can choose to do anything they
want to and accept any consequences they want to, its not a moral
problem.
When the GOVERNMENT starts breaking the law though, then you have a
moral problem because they are in violation of a sacred trust. The
GOVERNMENT AGREED to uphold the law, the individual sovereign did not.
Of course low tone cases try to twist this around, usually because
they work for the Government and they want the Government to be
Sovereign and the people to be cattle.
So the point of all this is that if you have various abilities of
some kind, the only source of guidance and control over those abilities
is yourself and your own internally generated sense of duty.
A being can find that he has ENORMOUS power to affect how things
turn out long before he enters the OS 3 range of demonstrable physical
abilities. An OS 2 Class being who can project intention does not
affect things by brute force of will, or total mind control, he just
doesn't have that kind of power. He can however nudge the course of
history just ever so slightly here or there and thus create enormous
effects many years down the road.
History is full of murder, mayhem, torture, chaos and destruction.
If you take the responsibility to nudge that history a little bit off
its chosen course of death, perhaps to lessen the pain of life for
everyone, you will find that although FEWER people get murdered perhaps,
DIFFERENT people also get murdered. Thus your choice to change the
course of history is a choice that this new group of innocent victims
gets destroyed rather than the original group of innocent victims that
would have gotten it had you left things alone.
But there is a more subtle problem which has to do with power and
how people GET power in the political process. It might be very
tempting to just off some head of state who is causing more trouble than
he is worth, perhaps make him slightly less attentive one day so he
trips down a flight of stairs and breaks his back, or push the idea ON
THE MENTAL PLANE to some would be freedom fighter or assassin that he
really does have the courage to go through with it. You see OT's in the
OS 2 class have a LOT of power, because they draw upon the operating
power of millions of people. One thought can effect a whole continent.
But the problem is that once this despot is removed, someone else
will take his place. In the first place people don't take the deaths of
their leaders lightly, it's really hard to just kill someone who has
been causing a stir for a long time without creating an even bigger stir
yourself. There will be investigations, and power plays, and civil
instability, perhaps even civil war, and then how many will die?
Civilization is a highly balanced system of good and bad, and you
can't just rush in like an elephant and take out the King Pin bad guy
without possibly knocking down the whole house of cards. Life is like a
deadly chess game, and OT's with the power to play the chess game, and
the power to move and take each other's pieces, know this damn well.
Its fine to just take out the Evil Queen, but look what happens next.
The OT can ride bigger waves, but he still can't ride a tsunami.
One of the biggest problems is the guy that takes the place of the
guy you knocked off. HE didn't have the power to remove the despot, so
now he is in a position of power that he didn't have the ability to
attain for himself, because you had to make it available to him.
The original guy at least got there on his own forte, so he may
have been evil as hell, but at least he wasn't stupid or a coward or
inexperienced. You knock him off and some asswipe from the lower ranks
swaggers into position and he thinks he knows it all, that fate and the
gods are on his side, and all of a sudden HE is making moves in the
chess game that will destroy everyone, and the OT won't be able to stop
the process.
So that's the first thing to look out for when you want to take
someone out from the game of life, who is going to replace him, and how
worthy of that position will he be?
You also want to make the final down fall of your guy so smooth and
slick that it seems absolutely normal in the flow of history so that
people drop him and the whole subject the next day and get on with their
lives. For example killing JFK was NOT the way to do it, they will be
investigating that one FOREVER and eventually those that had a hand in
it will fall.
On the other hand look at Romania. They took Ceausescu and his
wife out back and shot them, and then forgot all about them the next
day. So the OT's who were playing that game did it right, they made a
clean cut surgical strike out of it and there is very little left to mar
the rest of history that follows. But it took those OT's a LONG time to
make that move and they probably did so with a certain amount of
trepidation, as with the rest of the fall of communism.
Now you see the fall of communism is still a problem. It had to
go, but its one thing to bust apart a parliament with only a few lives
lost, and quite another to bring the entire fragmented nuclear arsenal
under control when it is now owned by highly separate warring ethnic
parties loyal to no one but themselves and their own personal timetables
for Armageddon.
I assure you there are OT's sweating at the table of the chess game
of life over this one.
Everytime they make a move, people live, people die, and hopefully
the course of History is imbued with a little more Artistry.
So anyhow, when a new born OT first starts wandering out into the
real world, and he sees what is really going on, and he sees that he can
actually DO something about it, he finds himself in an enormous arena of
death, murder, mayhem, torture, chaos, enturbulation and entheta. Life
immediately becomes a self defense proposition to him.
He, his family, his friends, his country, his whole damn race, all
of life on Earth and everything decent that ever stood, are being
threatened with an early grave from any one of a number of sources. The
new OT's first impulse is to dive in shooting, with both six guns
ablaze. You see he CAN shoot, he's got the power back again.
He finds though that it just doesn't work out that easily, he takes
out one bad guy, and something else shifts that he didn't see and
suddenly all those friends he was trying to help and protect are crushed
in the relentless stream of History. It's new course had an unseen
twist.
Every new OT wants to just take out all the bad guys, but he finds
that he CAN'T take out ANY bad guys without also taking out good guys.
If he does nothing, he is accountable for NOT doing anything when he
could.
If he does something, he is accountable for DOING something when
maybe he shouldn't have. Either way people die, often good people,
usually more good people than bad people. That's because there ARE more
good people than bad people and most of the killing is random.
The OT can't stop the killing completely, he CAN shift it possibly
to LESS killing, but that will ALWAYS shift it to DIFFERENT killing, so
he will have to make a choice to let things be and have more killing, or
take action and have less killing but probably have innocent people
killed now that before were safe. Some of whom will be his closer
friends.
So you know auditing all this is a good thing. Rather than making
a new born killer out of someone, what it does is show him the source of
his rage, and puts it all back into his control again, so that he is not
going out on murderous rampages either has a human or as an OT. He can
become a master chess player at the game of Life and Death again, and
actually do the world some good.
So let's not go screaming about how Homer is a death monger, the
people who do this are just broadcasting their own unpulled regrets
along this line.
You know you don't have to go OT to become involved in killing
people. All you have to do is become President.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sat Nov 12 16:13:30 EST 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act56.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)
iD8DBQFYJ4X6URT1lqxE3HERAqi2AKDNH4RKWRtQk8PMO1dy7Uzw4PDxZwCeIBnO
Qe6BHXqMF2cToHhQr00MOfc=
=q7vC
-----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))
OT'S AND VIOLENCE
ACT - 56
18 March 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
In thinking about the problem of what to do with super powers
should I ever manage to get them, the following comes to mind.
As people begin to wake up to what reality is all about, they go
from being a no power Black 5 case to to being a full OT. First they
regain the ability to make mockups in their own universe with crystal
clarity, then in the OS2 universe where they can share them with others,
and then in the OS3 universe where they can manifest things that all can
see and the Scientists can measure.
Each level of ability has its corresponding measure of
responsibility and ethics that go with having the ability.
It is ridiculous to assume, as most humans do, that for some
abilities if you have that ability, you must NEVER use it.
The truth might be more like, if you have an ability, you have a
DUTY to use it in its proper time and place, however rare that might be.
For example its not true that nuclear weaponry should NEVER be
used, only that maybe it should rarely be used against people. Using it
against incoming asteroids is a different matter.
So each ability has with it a proper time and place for its use, and
a set of duties and rights that go with it.
At a higher level, when you have disengaged from all your
agreements and contracts, of course all Duties are ended, so there is no
compulsion moral or otherwise to do anything.
But while in the game, duty and ability are closely connected, and
the more a being is aware of his duties, and generates duties for
himself to hold a sacred trust to, the more ability will come to him,
including the ability to kill others at a distance.
The raw facts are that if you have the ability to throw sparks at a
distance or even marbles around a room, then you have the ability to
kill people at a distance whether or not you want it, and like all other
areas of life, there will be pressures both ethical and unethical for
you to use and not use these abilities.
The real problem comes in that OT's become dangerous long before
they have the ability to do such obvious OS 3 abilities like throw a
spark. A tremendous amount of OT ability and growing time is spent in
the OS 2 band which has to do with sharing mockups with others, and
effecting the mockups OF others, even if they can't do it themselves.
All of OT VII for example used to be devoted to 'Projection of
Intention' which simply put is the ability to intend that others intend
things.
Thus if you want someone to do something, you don't FORCE him to do
it with brute force of will, but you subtly project into him the
intention to do it, and he takes it on as his own and does it.
Even if you only limited yourself to creating intentions in others
that they would normally agree with, you still have a very wide margin
for creating effects that would otherwise go uncreated.
However with a fully developed ability to project intention, such a
being could get just about anyone to do just about anything.
Thus it is at OT VII that the government really starts to get
worried. Below OT VII you are mainly getting a being OUT of the
universe. But at OT VII and above you are bringing him back IN with
power to spare.
The government doesn't like losing people across its slave camp
walls, which is what the lower Bridge accomplishes, but it really
dislikes having people around who can direct the minds of others merely
by thinking at them, however subtly.
You also have to understand the fact that as a being goes more OT,
he becomes more and more pan determined which means he begins playing
BOTH sides of the game against each other. He loses his intention that
one side win, and regains his intention that the game go on. So an OT
will have a tendency to fight for the underdog no matter who he is, good
guy or bad guy.
There is nothing more boring than a Perfect Golden Age forever for
free.
Now the truth is that the ever present background forces of chaos,
destruction and enturbulation from the physical universe alone are quite
sufficient to erode any permanent peace beings might think they have
won, so it is rare that the OT needs to give the 'bad' side of the game
any help. But OT's are more concerned with the Artistry of History
rather than everyone having a 'good time', so if one should decide that
the canvas could use a volcano here or there, well then a volcano there
will be, along with all of its eruptions and death and demise.
Just as an exterior pc can move the anchor points of space around
him so to be anywhere he wants to be, an OT can move the anchor points
of possible future HISTORY around him, so that the direction of the flow
of consciousness through history is changed and history takes another
course.
All it takes is changing the decisions that some people make.
If a planet becomes too engrossed in the 21 kinds of Evil, or was
it 16, I forget, then there are OT committees who will start the clean
slate process for the planet and everything will get kind of shoveled
under to start anew. And yes beings die during these times.
So KILLING people is not some kind of fundamental no no to an OT,
in fact they are quite able see that sometimes NOT killing people is a
high crime of magnitude.
Now most humans will admit that killing people in self defense is
an acceptable and even morally mandatory kind of behavior, especially if
you are defending yourself, your family, your children, your wife, your
country, or some ideal.
We don't have to wait for the law to sanction our killing in these
circumstances, and on the other side we don't have to obey the law when
during times of war it directs that we kill at its bidding. The LAW
doesn't enter into it.
Believe it or not the law exists to control the government, not the
people. Yes the law says what people may or may not do, but really what
it is saying is what the GOVERNMENT may or may not do when people do the
things that OTHERS have decided they should not do.
There is however no moral mandate for PEOPLE to follow the law,
there is only a moral mandate for the GOVERNMENT to follow the law.
Each individual is Sovereign. Of course he has to accept the
consequences of breaking the law if he is at odds with other Sovereigns
in the group, but Sovereign individuals can choose to do anything they
want to and accept any consequences they want to, its not a moral
problem.
When the GOVERNMENT starts breaking the law though, then you have a
moral problem because they are in violation of a sacred trust. The
GOVERNMENT AGREED to uphold the law, the individual sovereign did not.
Of course low tone cases try to twist this around, usually because
they work for the Government and they want the Government to be
Sovereign and the people to be cattle.
So the point of all this is that if you have various abilities of
some kind, the only source of guidance and control over those abilities
is yourself and your own internally generated sense of duty.
A being can find that he has ENORMOUS power to affect how things
turn out long before he enters the OS 3 range of demonstrable physical
abilities. An OS 2 Class being who can project intention does not
affect things by brute force of will, or total mind control, he just
doesn't have that kind of power. He can however nudge the course of
history just ever so slightly here or there and thus create enormous
effects many years down the road.
History is full of murder, mayhem, torture, chaos and destruction.
If you take the responsibility to nudge that history a little bit off
its chosen course of death, perhaps to lessen the pain of life for
everyone, you will find that although FEWER people get murdered perhaps,
DIFFERENT people also get murdered. Thus your choice to change the
course of history is a choice that this new group of innocent victims
gets destroyed rather than the original group of innocent victims that
would have gotten it had you left things alone.
But there is a more subtle problem which has to do with power and
how people GET power in the political process. It might be very
tempting to just off some head of state who is causing more trouble than
he is worth, perhaps make him slightly less attentive one day so he
trips down a flight of stairs and breaks his back, or push the idea ON
THE MENTAL PLANE to some would be freedom fighter or assassin that he
really does have the courage to go through with it. You see OT's in the
OS 2 class have a LOT of power, because they draw upon the operating
power of millions of people. One thought can effect a whole continent.
But the problem is that once this despot is removed, someone else
will take his place. In the first place people don't take the deaths of
their leaders lightly, it's really hard to just kill someone who has
been causing a stir for a long time without creating an even bigger stir
yourself. There will be investigations, and power plays, and civil
instability, perhaps even civil war, and then how many will die?
Civilization is a highly balanced system of good and bad, and you
can't just rush in like an elephant and take out the King Pin bad guy
without possibly knocking down the whole house of cards. Life is like a
deadly chess game, and OT's with the power to play the chess game, and
the power to move and take each other's pieces, know this damn well.
Its fine to just take out the Evil Queen, but look what happens next.
The OT can ride bigger waves, but he still can't ride a tsunami.
One of the biggest problems is the guy that takes the place of the
guy you knocked off. HE didn't have the power to remove the despot, so
now he is in a position of power that he didn't have the ability to
attain for himself, because you had to make it available to him.
The original guy at least got there on his own forte, so he may
have been evil as hell, but at least he wasn't stupid or a coward or
inexperienced. You knock him off and some asswipe from the lower ranks
swaggers into position and he thinks he knows it all, that fate and the
gods are on his side, and all of a sudden HE is making moves in the
chess game that will destroy everyone, and the OT won't be able to stop
the process.
So that's the first thing to look out for when you want to take
someone out from the game of life, who is going to replace him, and how
worthy of that position will he be?
You also want to make the final down fall of your guy so smooth and
slick that it seems absolutely normal in the flow of history so that
people drop him and the whole subject the next day and get on with their
lives. For example killing JFK was NOT the way to do it, they will be
investigating that one FOREVER and eventually those that had a hand in
it will fall.
On the other hand look at Romania. They took Ceausescu and his
wife out back and shot them, and then forgot all about them the next
day. So the OT's who were playing that game did it right, they made a
clean cut surgical strike out of it and there is very little left to mar
the rest of history that follows. But it took those OT's a LONG time to
make that move and they probably did so with a certain amount of
trepidation, as with the rest of the fall of communism.
Now you see the fall of communism is still a problem. It had to
go, but its one thing to bust apart a parliament with only a few lives
lost, and quite another to bring the entire fragmented nuclear arsenal
under control when it is now owned by highly separate warring ethnic
parties loyal to no one but themselves and their own personal timetables
for Armageddon.
I assure you there are OT's sweating at the table of the chess game
of life over this one.
Everytime they make a move, people live, people die, and hopefully
the course of History is imbued with a little more Artistry.
So anyhow, when a new born OT first starts wandering out into the
real world, and he sees what is really going on, and he sees that he can
actually DO something about it, he finds himself in an enormous arena of
death, murder, mayhem, torture, chaos, enturbulation and entheta. Life
immediately becomes a self defense proposition to him.
He, his family, his friends, his country, his whole damn race, all
of life on Earth and everything decent that ever stood, are being
threatened with an early grave from any one of a number of sources. The
new OT's first impulse is to dive in shooting, with both six guns
ablaze. You see he CAN shoot, he's got the power back again.
He finds though that it just doesn't work out that easily, he takes
out one bad guy, and something else shifts that he didn't see and
suddenly all those friends he was trying to help and protect are crushed
in the relentless stream of History. It's new course had an unseen
twist.
Every new OT wants to just take out all the bad guys, but he finds
that he CAN'T take out ANY bad guys without also taking out good guys.
If he does nothing, he is accountable for NOT doing anything when he
could.
If he does something, he is accountable for DOING something when
maybe he shouldn't have. Either way people die, often good people,
usually more good people than bad people. That's because there ARE more
good people than bad people and most of the killing is random.
The OT can't stop the killing completely, he CAN shift it possibly
to LESS killing, but that will ALWAYS shift it to DIFFERENT killing, so
he will have to make a choice to let things be and have more killing, or
take action and have less killing but probably have innocent people
killed now that before were safe. Some of whom will be his closer
friends.
So you know auditing all this is a good thing. Rather than making
a new born killer out of someone, what it does is show him the source of
his rage, and puts it all back into his control again, so that he is not
going out on murderous rampages either has a human or as an OT. He can
become a master chess player at the game of Life and Death again, and
actually do the world some good.
So let's not go screaming about how Homer is a death monger, the
people who do this are just broadcasting their own unpulled regrets
along this line.
You know you don't have to go OT to become involved in killing
people. All you have to do is become President.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sat Nov 12 16:13:30 EST 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act56.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)
iD8DBQFYJ4X6URT1lqxE3HERAqi2AKDNH4RKWRtQk8PMO1dy7Uzw4PDxZwCeIBnO
Qe6BHXqMF2cToHhQr00MOfc=
=q7vC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Friday, November 11, 2016
ADORE612 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
AGING AND BROKEN DRAMATIZATIONS
Ted Mayett <ars.to.tedmayett@xxmmxxspamgourmet.com> wrote:
> Agreed, if they proved they could look through walls they would
> surrender their lives to the System. But dammit, if wogs can age in a
> stunning fashion, so can an OT. It would unusual, uncommon to be
> robust at 100 years old, but it would *not* be suspicious.
'Aging' as you describe it is a function of broken dramatizations.
One gets pain when one dramatizes and fails.
Some people don't fail, they dramatize freely, and never get a
broken dram, They are thus pain and psychosomatic free, but also empty
in the head except for the dramatizations.
Those who are at least trying to break their dramatizations go
black V, suffer terribly, and have a very hard time of it physically.
Psychosomatic = broken dramatization.
This is because the dramatization is of a valence in
an engram, but the out of valent position feels no pain as
it was the victor. But when the dram is broken the pc falls
back into the in valence of the engram where of course there
is pain and damage.
Homer
Thu Aug 7 22:06:58 EDT 2008
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Nov 10 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore612.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)
iD8DBQFYJKj6URT1lqxE3HERAlv4AKDGnZ2R4CQdLQNCb389nOS5q+mSewCfZYNK
jROJkcv0FJrEsTiWXMf9XOY=
=GCc8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
AGING AND BROKEN DRAMATIZATIONS
Ted Mayett <ars.to.tedmayett@xxmmxxspamgourmet.com> wrote:
> Agreed, if they proved they could look through walls they would
> surrender their lives to the System. But dammit, if wogs can age in a
> stunning fashion, so can an OT. It would unusual, uncommon to be
> robust at 100 years old, but it would *not* be suspicious.
'Aging' as you describe it is a function of broken dramatizations.
One gets pain when one dramatizes and fails.
Some people don't fail, they dramatize freely, and never get a
broken dram, They are thus pain and psychosomatic free, but also empty
in the head except for the dramatizations.
Those who are at least trying to break their dramatizations go
black V, suffer terribly, and have a very hard time of it physically.
Psychosomatic = broken dramatization.
This is because the dramatization is of a valence in
an engram, but the out of valent position feels no pain as
it was the victor. But when the dram is broken the pc falls
back into the in valence of the engram where of course there
is pain and damage.
Homer
Thu Aug 7 22:06:58 EDT 2008
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Nov 10 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore612.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)
iD8DBQFYJKj6URT1lqxE3HERAlv4AKDGnZ2R4CQdLQNCb389nOS5q+mSewCfZYNK
jROJkcv0FJrEsTiWXMf9XOY=
=GCc8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE146 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SHADOWS
"The physical universe is a display of pretty colored lights in
the fabric of God." - Adore
Everyone is familiar with shadows.
If you place a 3 dimensional object in the light of a 3
dimensional sun, you will get a two dimensional shadow.
If you place a 2 dimensional object in the light of a 2
dimensional sun, you will get a 1 dimensional shadow.
O <- 2 dimensional sun
+----+
| | <- 2 dimensional object, a square
| |
---------- +----+
^
|
1 dimensional
shadow
Shadows are always 1 dimension less than the object that casts
the shadow.
So if you place a 4 dimensional object in the light of a 4
dimensional sun, you will get a 3 dimensional shadow!
It has been claimed that the 3 dimensional physical universe and
all its objects is in fact a 3 dimensional shadow cast by the true 4
dimensional universe in the light of the 4 dimensional light of God.
We are condemned to live in the real 3D shadows of the actual 4D
world until we wake up.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Nov 9 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore146.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)
iD8DBQFYI1d7URT1lqxE3HERAuY8AJ9trqwDlBUX3GvGjNqbZxHHO7VuzwCgiQTp
DvonixughhGsBEDK45Nf4PE=
=3aWs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
SHADOWS
"The physical universe is a display of pretty colored lights in
the fabric of God." - Adore
Everyone is familiar with shadows.
If you place a 3 dimensional object in the light of a 3
dimensional sun, you will get a two dimensional shadow.
If you place a 2 dimensional object in the light of a 2
dimensional sun, you will get a 1 dimensional shadow.
O <- 2 dimensional sun
+----+
| | <- 2 dimensional object, a square
| |
---------- +----+
^
|
1 dimensional
shadow
Shadows are always 1 dimension less than the object that casts
the shadow.
So if you place a 4 dimensional object in the light of a 4
dimensional sun, you will get a 3 dimensional shadow!
It has been claimed that the 3 dimensional physical universe and
all its objects is in fact a 3 dimensional shadow cast by the true 4
dimensional universe in the light of the 4 dimensional light of God.
We are condemned to live in the real 3D shadows of the actual 4D
world until we wake up.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Nov 9 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore146.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)
iD8DBQFYI1d7URT1lqxE3HERAuY8AJ9trqwDlBUX3GvGjNqbZxHHO7VuzwCgiQTp
DvonixughhGsBEDK45Nf4PE=
=3aWs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ACT9 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
RULES, GAMES AND OT'S
ACT - 9RA
8 July 1993
Revised and Expanded 9 July 1993
Copyright (C) 1993 Homer Wilson Smith
Life is a game.
Games have freedoms, barriers and purposes.
Games also have players.
Players have abilities and limitations that they can use to play
the game.
Games also have rules. Rules delimit what any player or 'piece'
can do in the process of playing the game.
Games have penalties that occur to players who break the rules.
The game of life has players of many different levels and kinds of
ability.
Like Chess, some people are like Pawns, some like Knights, some
like Bishops and Rooks, and some like Queens etc.
Each has its purpose, usefulness, and sphere of control.
A person might be a Lavender Seller on the street. He might be a
Pawn. His options for movement and control are limited, but in a pinch
he can be the winning card, especially when operating in tandem with
another more powerful person.
Another person might be a world leader or President. He might be
more like a Queen who has almost unlimited freedom of movement and
sphere of control.
In some sense, some players are more 'valuable or important' to the
game than others, in that they have more or less effect on the over all
strategy. However a properly placed Pawn can be endlessly more
important than a poorly placed Queen.
Besides, a Queen alone can not win against the opposition no matter
how decimated the other side is. But a Queen with a Pawn can.
However a Queen and a Bishop might be able to do it easier, so if
the Queen had the choice she might sacrifice the Pawn to keep the
Bishop. So a Bishop is more 'important' than a Pawn, but all pieces are
useful. (In chess the Pawn can BECOME a Queen, so it is more
complicated than I have made it out to be.)
Now let's take this analogy one step further. Let's say that
everyone on Earth is a Pawn, no matter what rank or position in life
they hold. As Ron liked to say, everyone on Earth is a Homo Sap.
But there is this higher state of being called Homo Novis or a
Grade IV release. In the game of life this might be like being a Knight
on the Chess board.
And then there is another higher state called CLEAR, and those who
make it to this state become Bishops or Rooks in the game of life.
Further there is an even higher state called OT, and those who are in
that state are Queens.
Now it might be that a Pawn has a very ego centric view of life, he
may not be aware that life is a game, or that there are other players
with other abilities such as Bishops and Queens. He may have the view
that everyone is a Pawn and SHOULD be a Pawn. Or, if he is a more
advanced Pawn, he may be aware that there are other higher players in
the game and he may even chose to serve those players in their efforts
to win the game.
Each piece in fact may have their own dream of becoming a bigger
and better piece, so that they may be more successful in the game of
life.
Just as the lowly Pawn dreams of one day having the power to jump
wildly across the board to the opposing King's position and squash the
enemy in one stroke, the lowly human wishes to become OT and dispense
with his enemies in one stroke too.
But THAT PARTICULAR ROLE AND ABILITY IS NOT AVAILABLE, EITHER IN
THE GAME OF CHESS OR THE GAME OF LIFE, NO MATTER HOW OT YOU ARE!
A Pawn has no hope of becoming an all powerful being who can kill
his opponent in one fell swoop because THAT WOULD BE BREAKING THE RULES
OF THE GAME! But he does have hope of becoming a Bishop or a Queen in
an orderly fashion where he will have more than enough power to keep
himself interested in the game of life, AND IN DUE TIME SQUASH HIS
ENEMIES IF THEY DON'T SQUASH HIM FIRST.
Being a Queen is no guarantee of winning the game of chess, and
being an OT is no guarantee of winning the game of life.
Being an OT is merely a guarantee of being able to play a BIGGER
game. It is a guarantee of getting what you WANT, namely a bigger game.
Your probabilities of winning or losing remain about the same. Of
course the being who can PLAY the bigger game easily will be able to WIN
the lesser games easily, that's why he can play the bigger games. But
beings tend to rise to a level of trouble that keeps them on their toes.
So becoming an OT is no guarantee of safety, unless you decide to become
an OT and yet continue to play a Pawn's game.
In fact ANY absolute guarantee of winning any game is BREAKING THE
RULES!
It isn't a game if you can win just as easy as you please.
Preclears are exactly the same way. They are afraid of losing in
the game of life. The penalties of losing the game of life are
horrible, enough to make anyone not want to play. But the lowly Pawn
has no choice.
Thus such beings want power and ability to scare their enemies away
or crush them out of existence, and so secure a 'better' future for
themselves.
By 'better' they don't mean able to play a BIGGER GAME, but having
a game they can more easily win. They are trying to make the present
game SMALLER by becoming bigger themselves.
This is not itself a problem.
But if you ask them what powers they want and how they would use
them they will invariably give you things that break the rules of life.
They want power to WIN the game of life in one move, not expand
their ability to PLAY the game of life in many moves!
They want power to get rid of the game, to get rid of having to
play.
They want to win the game in order to end it, not to play it more.
They would rather win and end the game than have a long drawn out
volley.
They don't want to play the game of life, they want to end it, and
never have to play it again.
So they are trying to go OT, not to become more able, but to not
need to have to BE able. They hope by becoming more able they will be
able to wipe out all their enemies for ever and thus have peace. But
such an all powerful move on the chess board would clearly be breaking
the rules of the game.
Some people want to go OT just so that they can LEAVE the game.
That is fine, but most of them want to smash their enemies first, to
teach them one last lesson, and THEN leave the game. They don't want to
leave the game and leave the game still running.
Some fear they might run into the game and get trapped in it again
in the future if they just leave it still running.
So it still adds up to wanting to go OT so that they can DESTROY
the game.
One doesn't win a game by ending the game. One ends the game by
winning or losing the game, within the rules of the game.
You can also leave a game, as long as you are willing to leave the
game running for others to play.
The main thing that gets you stuck IN a game is your desire to
DESTROY the game before you leave it.
But that breaks the rules of the game!
And that includes the game of life.
AN OT IS A BEING WHO HAS MAXIMUM POWER WITHIN THE RULES OF LIFE!
And he depends on the Lavender Seller to do his job just as the
Queen depends on the Pawn.
That is the sum totality of what the Prime Directive is. It is the
rules of life within which you may exercise your OT powers with out
breaking the rules of life.
This implies that life has rules for higher 'pieces' even if no one
is presently occupying those pieces.
It also implies that if you break the Prime Directive you will end
up in the penalty box, as no one will allow you to play and break the
rules. You just don't stand a chance. The game is bigger than any
player while in the game, so if you try to break the rules you will be
canned. End of Story.
A Queen may be powerful, but you will never catch her making an
illegal move. The WHOLE congregation would be down on her in a moment,
good guys and bad guys alike!
In the game of life, the GAME and its RULES are all.
Cheaters are removed instantly. Oh sure, cheating can happen on a
small scale, individuals cheat all the time, ITS PART OF THE RULES THAT
YOU CAN CHEAT IN SOME ARENAS. But try to cheat the rules themselves,
and bang, you're in the penalty box without appeal.
The game is perfect and it doesn't tolerate breaking the rules.
The fact is that no player CAN break the rules, although he can
want to real bad.
Thus any power that you have as an OT must already exist within the
playing rules of the game you are playing. Thus if you have a power as
an OT you can be sure that it is within the rules of the game. And of
course, if the rules of the game set out a certain pattern of power for
a given piece, then that piece must have that entire set of powers.
This means that if you are looking for more power as a piece, you
must first determine what the power package is for the next piece up,
and then step into that role as a whole.
Pieces and power packages are laid out in a very long gradient
scale from human to OT. You needn't go full OT tomorrow in order to
advance in the game of life today.
Thus to audit this, one needs to get the preclear to understand
that there are higher pieces than he is presently being, and that they
have well defined rules of operation. He won't be able to step into
those shoes, those higher rules of operation, as long as he is straining
at the rules trying to operate power in violation of those rules.
If he wants power only so that he can not have any enemies, he will
never get any power. Power is the ability to play against enemies, not
merely not have them. You can do that too, but not IN the game. This
game implies two sides with play between them.
There is a difference between WANTING TO HAVE enemies so that you
can vanquish them, and wanting to vanquish them because you don't want
to have enemies.
In other words you can have more power as long as you want it to be
more able to PLAY the game and not WIN the game. People who have lost
the game too much for too long get sick of playing the game. They want
to WIN for a change.
However the way out is the way in. They will never increase their
ability to WIN the game except by increasing their ability to PLAY the
game. This will lessen how often they lose and thus increase how often
they win up to a point.
An optimum point.
Remember that a being who is winning too much and too often is just
as unhappy as a being who is losing too much and too often. There's no
ACTION in either winning or losing. There is only action in play.
It may not seem that way to someone transfixed by the horror of
losing, he would gladly trade that for the 'horror' of winning. But
this is an aberration that people have developed to make sure that
everyone wants to destroy the game, thus guaranteeing that they
get stuck in it.
So the point is that advancement in the game is always an
advancement into another power package which defines a playing piece.
Your preclear thinks he needs auditing to 'get his powers back', but woe
to him if he ever did, because what he would do with those powers would
break every rule in the book.
No the power is already there. He need merely step into the role
that has that power. A Pawn can become a Queen, but only if it can
fully understand what power package a Queen represents and how to use
it. Usually the Pawn wants the power of the Queen to do something else
besides play a fair game. So of course he gets no power at all.
Thus auditing is ALWAYS in the direction of UNDERSTANDING.
Specifically, understanding of the game you are in, or wish to step
into. This understanding encompasses understanding of the rules of the
game, and the nature or 'beingness' of the combatants. Once you know
completely well what a Queen can do and why, you can then DECIDE to step
into the Queen beingness. If that involves having super Pawn abilities,
why then you will have super Pawn abilities.
Thus you do not get auditing to get powers that you do not now
have, but to get UNDERSTANDING of the game piece that does have those
powers. Once you have that understanding, you can occupy that game
piece or not as you will.
That is why auditing goals and opp goals, terminals and opp
terminals and the various being, doing and havings that go along with a
goal is so important. By specing out the nature of the game that the pc
wants to play or has been playing, he can more accurately determine the
nature and quality of the power packages both he AND HIS OPPOSITION
would have to have in order to HAVE A GOOD GAME.
He actually has to understand both sides, its never a case of 'I
can melt you with my mind and you gotta just stand there and take it',
unless that scenario arises as a proper win state within the game. Its
always a case of vanquishing your enemies AFTER wanting to HAVE enemies
to vanquish, who might be able to vanquish you first. You can have
games in which you always win, but why bother? In any case, THIS game
of life ain't such a game.
So if you want to go OT all you have to do is step into your next
level up OT game shoes. The only catch is that you must understand
completely those game shoes before you do, and also the game shoes of
your elected opposition. If you don't, you just won't be able to make
the move.
This is the purpose of auditing, not to return powers to the pc,
but to return or deliver understanding of higher game positions to the
pc with their attendant powers. The pc is then free to CHOOSE to adopt
that role and power package.
The higher the game piece, the more power is attendant upon it.
But so too does your opponent have more power. Power is therefore not a
way to make life easier.
It is however a way to create more action.
It IS a way to make life more LIVABLE, DESIRABLE and PLAYABLE. You
aren't complaining because you are losing, you are complaining because
ALL YOU DO IS LOSE, and there is little to no self determined action to
boot.
The action is all theirs, and they are squashing you, you see?
You are cowering in the corner and they are slashing you to pieces.
That's not a good sword fight.
Its a case of LOSING TOO MUCH. There is no will to play any more.
Thus good auditing will rehabilitate your present power package so that
you can become a skilled player again at the level you are presently
occupying. You might still lose, but you won't lose ALL THE TIME, and
you will have fun even if you ARE losing, because the action level will
be so high, and it won't be FOREVER.
Then once you can be and play the level of the game you are at, you
can then aspire to the next piece, one game level up. You can leave
your days of being a Pawn behind and become a Knight, etc.
Many people want to become full OT just to solve their problems
with being a Pawn. They want to move mountains so that they don't have
to starve to death for want of a job or money or a girl friend etc.
Or they want to kill the gods for letting their cat die.
Body games are Pawn level games. You don't need to be an OT to
start winning again at the Body game. If you are still worried about
starving to death, AS A CHRONIC LONG TERM THING, and you aren't having
any fun doing it, and you are starving at a low action level, rather
than starving at a high action level, then you need to get auditing on
your PAWN level, not your Queen level.
Once you are a competent player again on the Pawn level, THEN you
can consider stepping up to the Knight level or higher.
The higher you go the more power you have, also the more opponents.
Some of those opponents will be players still at the lower levels of the
game who don't want you to be at the higher level of the game or who
doubt you really are.
Each game level has its power package which you need to master, and
often game pieces of one power level look upon the power packages of
higher game pieces with awe, fear and trepidation. Doubt too.
Like the lowly limited Pawn, the lowly human preclear is not
allowed to move things with his mind (except his body) or kill people at
a distance. But there may be a piece in the game of life who, like the
Queen in Chess, has this ability to move anywhere and kill anyone. Or
dump mountains into oceans.
But just as a Queen would not move without good reason, and would
not waste a move, or use her power except in the line of duty, people
who have and have mastered such powers would never use them except in
the playing of their game. It's their move. They will do what they
will with it.
Imagine someone demanding you shoot your side arm just to prove you
can.
You would not expect a Queen to make a move just to PROVE that she
could. It would be a waste of a move and lessen her chances of playing
the game by perhaps forcing an early lose.
In the game of life you can't take back your moves, once you move
you're done. If you don't want to be done for, you have to make the
right move every time. Making a move in a certain direction ONLY to
prove that you can, especially to someone else, is not a good idea and
is not playing the game to win. It's doing something else.
Proving your abilities to yourself or to others MAY be a good move
in the game of life, in which case you would probably do it. But you
would do it because TO YOUR MIND IT WAS A GOOD MOVE IN THE GAME OF LIFE
and not because of the loudness of the yammerer demanding proof.
Some people who don't have special powers doubt those that do.
So the Pawn who can only move forward one square at a time may
doubt the Queen can move in any direction she chooses.
So here's this White Queen and she is supposed to move forward one
square to take a Black Pawn, and the Pawn is saying, 'Prove to me you
can move left or right, or I won't believe you can!'
Poor Pawn. Who cares? The Pawn is Queen food.
So the Queen moves forward one square to take the Pawn and the Pawn
says, 'See I told you, you couldn't move left or right!'
Those seeking proof of OT powers, or that the Queen can move left
and right, need to be there when the Queen DOES move left or right or
even diagonally FOR HER OWN REASONS.
Then they will have their proof.
There is no other way.
08/14/13 Wednesday 3:43pm EST
And finally remember that a REAL OT is not a game player, but a
game CREATOR, and if he can put the game there, surely he can create any
power package he wants for himself. And frankly whatever power package
you are sitting in was created or accepted by you when you WERE a REAL
OT before this game started.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Nov 8 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act9.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)
iD8DBQFYIgX7URT1lqxE3HERAlyqAJoD8g+gajR42qWU0gsE0sKcFvpXfQCfdznV
c/LFHmM13eKl1C/x+3I3NPY=
=HMLO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
RULES, GAMES AND OT'S
ACT - 9RA
8 July 1993
Revised and Expanded 9 July 1993
Copyright (C) 1993 Homer Wilson Smith
Life is a game.
Games have freedoms, barriers and purposes.
Games also have players.
Players have abilities and limitations that they can use to play
the game.
Games also have rules. Rules delimit what any player or 'piece'
can do in the process of playing the game.
Games have penalties that occur to players who break the rules.
The game of life has players of many different levels and kinds of
ability.
Like Chess, some people are like Pawns, some like Knights, some
like Bishops and Rooks, and some like Queens etc.
Each has its purpose, usefulness, and sphere of control.
A person might be a Lavender Seller on the street. He might be a
Pawn. His options for movement and control are limited, but in a pinch
he can be the winning card, especially when operating in tandem with
another more powerful person.
Another person might be a world leader or President. He might be
more like a Queen who has almost unlimited freedom of movement and
sphere of control.
In some sense, some players are more 'valuable or important' to the
game than others, in that they have more or less effect on the over all
strategy. However a properly placed Pawn can be endlessly more
important than a poorly placed Queen.
Besides, a Queen alone can not win against the opposition no matter
how decimated the other side is. But a Queen with a Pawn can.
However a Queen and a Bishop might be able to do it easier, so if
the Queen had the choice she might sacrifice the Pawn to keep the
Bishop. So a Bishop is more 'important' than a Pawn, but all pieces are
useful. (In chess the Pawn can BECOME a Queen, so it is more
complicated than I have made it out to be.)
Now let's take this analogy one step further. Let's say that
everyone on Earth is a Pawn, no matter what rank or position in life
they hold. As Ron liked to say, everyone on Earth is a Homo Sap.
But there is this higher state of being called Homo Novis or a
Grade IV release. In the game of life this might be like being a Knight
on the Chess board.
And then there is another higher state called CLEAR, and those who
make it to this state become Bishops or Rooks in the game of life.
Further there is an even higher state called OT, and those who are in
that state are Queens.
Now it might be that a Pawn has a very ego centric view of life, he
may not be aware that life is a game, or that there are other players
with other abilities such as Bishops and Queens. He may have the view
that everyone is a Pawn and SHOULD be a Pawn. Or, if he is a more
advanced Pawn, he may be aware that there are other higher players in
the game and he may even chose to serve those players in their efforts
to win the game.
Each piece in fact may have their own dream of becoming a bigger
and better piece, so that they may be more successful in the game of
life.
Just as the lowly Pawn dreams of one day having the power to jump
wildly across the board to the opposing King's position and squash the
enemy in one stroke, the lowly human wishes to become OT and dispense
with his enemies in one stroke too.
But THAT PARTICULAR ROLE AND ABILITY IS NOT AVAILABLE, EITHER IN
THE GAME OF CHESS OR THE GAME OF LIFE, NO MATTER HOW OT YOU ARE!
A Pawn has no hope of becoming an all powerful being who can kill
his opponent in one fell swoop because THAT WOULD BE BREAKING THE RULES
OF THE GAME! But he does have hope of becoming a Bishop or a Queen in
an orderly fashion where he will have more than enough power to keep
himself interested in the game of life, AND IN DUE TIME SQUASH HIS
ENEMIES IF THEY DON'T SQUASH HIM FIRST.
Being a Queen is no guarantee of winning the game of chess, and
being an OT is no guarantee of winning the game of life.
Being an OT is merely a guarantee of being able to play a BIGGER
game. It is a guarantee of getting what you WANT, namely a bigger game.
Your probabilities of winning or losing remain about the same. Of
course the being who can PLAY the bigger game easily will be able to WIN
the lesser games easily, that's why he can play the bigger games. But
beings tend to rise to a level of trouble that keeps them on their toes.
So becoming an OT is no guarantee of safety, unless you decide to become
an OT and yet continue to play a Pawn's game.
In fact ANY absolute guarantee of winning any game is BREAKING THE
RULES!
It isn't a game if you can win just as easy as you please.
Preclears are exactly the same way. They are afraid of losing in
the game of life. The penalties of losing the game of life are
horrible, enough to make anyone not want to play. But the lowly Pawn
has no choice.
Thus such beings want power and ability to scare their enemies away
or crush them out of existence, and so secure a 'better' future for
themselves.
By 'better' they don't mean able to play a BIGGER GAME, but having
a game they can more easily win. They are trying to make the present
game SMALLER by becoming bigger themselves.
This is not itself a problem.
But if you ask them what powers they want and how they would use
them they will invariably give you things that break the rules of life.
They want power to WIN the game of life in one move, not expand
their ability to PLAY the game of life in many moves!
They want power to get rid of the game, to get rid of having to
play.
They want to win the game in order to end it, not to play it more.
They would rather win and end the game than have a long drawn out
volley.
They don't want to play the game of life, they want to end it, and
never have to play it again.
So they are trying to go OT, not to become more able, but to not
need to have to BE able. They hope by becoming more able they will be
able to wipe out all their enemies for ever and thus have peace. But
such an all powerful move on the chess board would clearly be breaking
the rules of the game.
Some people want to go OT just so that they can LEAVE the game.
That is fine, but most of them want to smash their enemies first, to
teach them one last lesson, and THEN leave the game. They don't want to
leave the game and leave the game still running.
Some fear they might run into the game and get trapped in it again
in the future if they just leave it still running.
So it still adds up to wanting to go OT so that they can DESTROY
the game.
One doesn't win a game by ending the game. One ends the game by
winning or losing the game, within the rules of the game.
You can also leave a game, as long as you are willing to leave the
game running for others to play.
The main thing that gets you stuck IN a game is your desire to
DESTROY the game before you leave it.
But that breaks the rules of the game!
And that includes the game of life.
AN OT IS A BEING WHO HAS MAXIMUM POWER WITHIN THE RULES OF LIFE!
And he depends on the Lavender Seller to do his job just as the
Queen depends on the Pawn.
That is the sum totality of what the Prime Directive is. It is the
rules of life within which you may exercise your OT powers with out
breaking the rules of life.
This implies that life has rules for higher 'pieces' even if no one
is presently occupying those pieces.
It also implies that if you break the Prime Directive you will end
up in the penalty box, as no one will allow you to play and break the
rules. You just don't stand a chance. The game is bigger than any
player while in the game, so if you try to break the rules you will be
canned. End of Story.
A Queen may be powerful, but you will never catch her making an
illegal move. The WHOLE congregation would be down on her in a moment,
good guys and bad guys alike!
In the game of life, the GAME and its RULES are all.
Cheaters are removed instantly. Oh sure, cheating can happen on a
small scale, individuals cheat all the time, ITS PART OF THE RULES THAT
YOU CAN CHEAT IN SOME ARENAS. But try to cheat the rules themselves,
and bang, you're in the penalty box without appeal.
The game is perfect and it doesn't tolerate breaking the rules.
The fact is that no player CAN break the rules, although he can
want to real bad.
Thus any power that you have as an OT must already exist within the
playing rules of the game you are playing. Thus if you have a power as
an OT you can be sure that it is within the rules of the game. And of
course, if the rules of the game set out a certain pattern of power for
a given piece, then that piece must have that entire set of powers.
This means that if you are looking for more power as a piece, you
must first determine what the power package is for the next piece up,
and then step into that role as a whole.
Pieces and power packages are laid out in a very long gradient
scale from human to OT. You needn't go full OT tomorrow in order to
advance in the game of life today.
Thus to audit this, one needs to get the preclear to understand
that there are higher pieces than he is presently being, and that they
have well defined rules of operation. He won't be able to step into
those shoes, those higher rules of operation, as long as he is straining
at the rules trying to operate power in violation of those rules.
If he wants power only so that he can not have any enemies, he will
never get any power. Power is the ability to play against enemies, not
merely not have them. You can do that too, but not IN the game. This
game implies two sides with play between them.
There is a difference between WANTING TO HAVE enemies so that you
can vanquish them, and wanting to vanquish them because you don't want
to have enemies.
In other words you can have more power as long as you want it to be
more able to PLAY the game and not WIN the game. People who have lost
the game too much for too long get sick of playing the game. They want
to WIN for a change.
However the way out is the way in. They will never increase their
ability to WIN the game except by increasing their ability to PLAY the
game. This will lessen how often they lose and thus increase how often
they win up to a point.
An optimum point.
Remember that a being who is winning too much and too often is just
as unhappy as a being who is losing too much and too often. There's no
ACTION in either winning or losing. There is only action in play.
It may not seem that way to someone transfixed by the horror of
losing, he would gladly trade that for the 'horror' of winning. But
this is an aberration that people have developed to make sure that
everyone wants to destroy the game, thus guaranteeing that they
get stuck in it.
So the point is that advancement in the game is always an
advancement into another power package which defines a playing piece.
Your preclear thinks he needs auditing to 'get his powers back', but woe
to him if he ever did, because what he would do with those powers would
break every rule in the book.
No the power is already there. He need merely step into the role
that has that power. A Pawn can become a Queen, but only if it can
fully understand what power package a Queen represents and how to use
it. Usually the Pawn wants the power of the Queen to do something else
besides play a fair game. So of course he gets no power at all.
Thus auditing is ALWAYS in the direction of UNDERSTANDING.
Specifically, understanding of the game you are in, or wish to step
into. This understanding encompasses understanding of the rules of the
game, and the nature or 'beingness' of the combatants. Once you know
completely well what a Queen can do and why, you can then DECIDE to step
into the Queen beingness. If that involves having super Pawn abilities,
why then you will have super Pawn abilities.
Thus you do not get auditing to get powers that you do not now
have, but to get UNDERSTANDING of the game piece that does have those
powers. Once you have that understanding, you can occupy that game
piece or not as you will.
That is why auditing goals and opp goals, terminals and opp
terminals and the various being, doing and havings that go along with a
goal is so important. By specing out the nature of the game that the pc
wants to play or has been playing, he can more accurately determine the
nature and quality of the power packages both he AND HIS OPPOSITION
would have to have in order to HAVE A GOOD GAME.
He actually has to understand both sides, its never a case of 'I
can melt you with my mind and you gotta just stand there and take it',
unless that scenario arises as a proper win state within the game. Its
always a case of vanquishing your enemies AFTER wanting to HAVE enemies
to vanquish, who might be able to vanquish you first. You can have
games in which you always win, but why bother? In any case, THIS game
of life ain't such a game.
So if you want to go OT all you have to do is step into your next
level up OT game shoes. The only catch is that you must understand
completely those game shoes before you do, and also the game shoes of
your elected opposition. If you don't, you just won't be able to make
the move.
This is the purpose of auditing, not to return powers to the pc,
but to return or deliver understanding of higher game positions to the
pc with their attendant powers. The pc is then free to CHOOSE to adopt
that role and power package.
The higher the game piece, the more power is attendant upon it.
But so too does your opponent have more power. Power is therefore not a
way to make life easier.
It is however a way to create more action.
It IS a way to make life more LIVABLE, DESIRABLE and PLAYABLE. You
aren't complaining because you are losing, you are complaining because
ALL YOU DO IS LOSE, and there is little to no self determined action to
boot.
The action is all theirs, and they are squashing you, you see?
You are cowering in the corner and they are slashing you to pieces.
That's not a good sword fight.
Its a case of LOSING TOO MUCH. There is no will to play any more.
Thus good auditing will rehabilitate your present power package so that
you can become a skilled player again at the level you are presently
occupying. You might still lose, but you won't lose ALL THE TIME, and
you will have fun even if you ARE losing, because the action level will
be so high, and it won't be FOREVER.
Then once you can be and play the level of the game you are at, you
can then aspire to the next piece, one game level up. You can leave
your days of being a Pawn behind and become a Knight, etc.
Many people want to become full OT just to solve their problems
with being a Pawn. They want to move mountains so that they don't have
to starve to death for want of a job or money or a girl friend etc.
Or they want to kill the gods for letting their cat die.
Body games are Pawn level games. You don't need to be an OT to
start winning again at the Body game. If you are still worried about
starving to death, AS A CHRONIC LONG TERM THING, and you aren't having
any fun doing it, and you are starving at a low action level, rather
than starving at a high action level, then you need to get auditing on
your PAWN level, not your Queen level.
Once you are a competent player again on the Pawn level, THEN you
can consider stepping up to the Knight level or higher.
The higher you go the more power you have, also the more opponents.
Some of those opponents will be players still at the lower levels of the
game who don't want you to be at the higher level of the game or who
doubt you really are.
Each game level has its power package which you need to master, and
often game pieces of one power level look upon the power packages of
higher game pieces with awe, fear and trepidation. Doubt too.
Like the lowly limited Pawn, the lowly human preclear is not
allowed to move things with his mind (except his body) or kill people at
a distance. But there may be a piece in the game of life who, like the
Queen in Chess, has this ability to move anywhere and kill anyone. Or
dump mountains into oceans.
But just as a Queen would not move without good reason, and would
not waste a move, or use her power except in the line of duty, people
who have and have mastered such powers would never use them except in
the playing of their game. It's their move. They will do what they
will with it.
Imagine someone demanding you shoot your side arm just to prove you
can.
You would not expect a Queen to make a move just to PROVE that she
could. It would be a waste of a move and lessen her chances of playing
the game by perhaps forcing an early lose.
In the game of life you can't take back your moves, once you move
you're done. If you don't want to be done for, you have to make the
right move every time. Making a move in a certain direction ONLY to
prove that you can, especially to someone else, is not a good idea and
is not playing the game to win. It's doing something else.
Proving your abilities to yourself or to others MAY be a good move
in the game of life, in which case you would probably do it. But you
would do it because TO YOUR MIND IT WAS A GOOD MOVE IN THE GAME OF LIFE
and not because of the loudness of the yammerer demanding proof.
Some people who don't have special powers doubt those that do.
So the Pawn who can only move forward one square at a time may
doubt the Queen can move in any direction she chooses.
So here's this White Queen and she is supposed to move forward one
square to take a Black Pawn, and the Pawn is saying, 'Prove to me you
can move left or right, or I won't believe you can!'
Poor Pawn. Who cares? The Pawn is Queen food.
So the Queen moves forward one square to take the Pawn and the Pawn
says, 'See I told you, you couldn't move left or right!'
Those seeking proof of OT powers, or that the Queen can move left
and right, need to be there when the Queen DOES move left or right or
even diagonally FOR HER OWN REASONS.
Then they will have their proof.
There is no other way.
08/14/13 Wednesday 3:43pm EST
And finally remember that a REAL OT is not a game player, but a
game CREATOR, and if he can put the game there, surely he can create any
power package he wants for himself. And frankly whatever power package
you are sitting in was created or accepted by you when you WERE a REAL
OT before this game started.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Nov 8 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act9.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)
iD8DBQFYIgX7URT1lqxE3HERAlyqAJoD8g+gajR42qWU0gsE0sKcFvpXfQCfdznV
c/LFHmM13eKl1C/x+3I3NPY=
=HMLO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)