-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
ALWAYS RUNNNG THE DICOM
Run the negative first, as that will be the one your preclear
probably first originated.
Get the idea of being worse.
Get the idea of being better.
Run as causal conception, creating in the mere conception of things.
What you want is how might things be, what might be different, etc.
Maybe you might want to word clear Ideal Scene and Anti Ideal Scene.
E/P can be better or worse at will, and happy where they are at.
This isn't running track, its running OT willingness and horse
power to create all sides of a conflict and beyond.
If you wanted some one to run it on you, use model session II,
auditor gives command and shuts up until pc says OK. PC can itsa or not
as he pleases in between, but he HAS to say OK to get the next command
from the auditor. The auditor only questions the preclear if the
auditor didn't understand something the preclear said and he may
question only to a point of understanding, never ever to go deeper into
the case on a tangent.
If the auditor violates this, the preclear will unconceive him as
his auditor.
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
Tue May 17 15:14:21 EDT 2016
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Feb 25 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1009.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)
iD8DBQFYsbl7URT1lqxE3HERAqpdAKClG3M0dbEK29cZey2aspCEMPaROwCgxZCj
LMk21xf2/WeiPJuG0P0ICXc=
=1U8n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Sunday, February 26, 2017
ADORE875 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
COPYRIGHTS
The communication lines of earth serve two purposes, the body
politic, and the markets.
The body politic uses the comm lines to design and create the
markets (society).
The markets use the comm lines to trade their goods.
The body politic needs free and open comm lines, anonymous,
encrypted, unmoderated, and un trackable, otherwise various people will
come for you in the night if you express a preference for democracy over
communism etc.
The markets need closed and tight comm lines, non anonymous,
moderated, and trackable to protect their copyrights and trade secrets.
Anonymity allows us to speak safely to everyone.
Encryption allows us to speak safely to only those we trust.
Moderation creates censorship between sender and receiver.
Trackability allows anyone to know who the sender is.
There is no way to limit anonymity and encryption to only political
communications or to good guys, because anonymity and encryption
are a quality of the COMM LINE, not who is sending or what is sent.
Thus if anyone is allowed anonymity and encryption, every one is.
Thus the bad can speak with impunity, and the good can whistle blow
with impunity.
The government and the police are a function of the MARKETS, not the
body politic which must be utterly free of government or police because
they haven't been designed yet or are in the middle of revision.
Once the markets are formed, and the government and police are
created to PROTECT the markets, the police then try to control the body
politic too, which created them, let the body politic revise the
government and police state out of existence.
Thus is born the police state, where neither politics nor markets
are free.
Homer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> Are you advocating the abolishment of all copyrights? I really would not
> like to see the big corp's control all communication, but I'd hate to see
> the baby go out with the dishsoap. I suspect you've done some deep
> thinking on this, and I'd appreciate any comment.
The world moves. The ice age comes in, and the dinosaurs get wiped
out. Sometimes somethings don't survive the changes. They complain
bitterly but the world does not care.
The world is moving towards instantaneous communication between all
beings on all subjects, a totally open group consciousness with no
withholds. It is approximated with the internet, but continues with
telepathy and other new age abilities.
Would copyright holders ban telepathy if people could exchange
their music for free by mental communication alone?
Yes. There is nothing lower on this planet than a copyright
holder. They don't give a damn what happens to everyone else, all they
care about is themselves.
The point is that people do not have inherent rights to survive
just because they exist. If they survive, they survive, if not, then
too bad. People survive by negotiating duties and rights with other
people. To protect themselves against criminality, they pass laws and
give power to police forces to protect their desires (not rights!) for a
fair trade with those that wish to fair trade with them. The laws so
created delineate the fair chosen duties and rights of the agreeing
parties.
At some point the power given to the police force becomes too much
and the criminals and slave masters take over the police force, then you
get a slave society. Criminals *ALWAYS* go where the most concentration
of power is.
The point where the police and government have more power than the
people needs to be watched very carefully. We do not want to create a
police state *FOR ANY REASON* no matter how many poor dear stupid
artists starve to death in their own stupidity. Maybe if they got a
haircut and a real job, their art would improve too.
Now the internet throws the balance completely the other way from a
police state, it allows people to communicate and publish freely on a
scale never before possible and with total safety. The world has needed
this breath of fresh air for a very long time. It is the difference
between a communication prison and wide and unbounded ways.
The lies and one way pablum pushed by the government, and the big
companies can no longer take place with out the truth also being told
because the little guy can speak with immunity and have the whole planet
know the truth the same day.
Well if he can speak politically with immunity, he sure as hell can
trade mp3's with impunity. Its a small price to pay for political
freedom.
You know that the only way to stop bad guys from speaking is to
stop *EVERYONE* from speaking too.
The ONLY way to stop the mp3's is to stop the freedom to speak
anonymously and freely. Lot's of people will throw a fit about allowing
Earthkind to speak freely, but basically you gotta decide between
political freedom, the freedom to think, speak, philsophize and practice
religion freely, and the freedom to protect your information goods in
market, because they are totally opposed to each other.
Some people think little children shouldn't know the truth, and
some people think that Earthkind must not have the ability to
communicate freely with anyone on any subject.
Remember the artist may lose some money, but some of that money he
doesn't need any more because he can get other's art for free too now,
assuming there are no copyrights at all. The only losers in that
exchange are the tax people. Think about it.
Another hefty portion of the money the big artists will lose won't
be available to engage in excess of drugs, wine, women and self
destruction, this might actually improve the qaulity of the art, that
they put out. Do the beatles need millions while the poor starve, and
schools suck etc? How much of your buck for every CD rom goes to
support the drug trade in cocaine and heroin to keep the artist high?
One is not advocating a socialism or communism here, one is in fact
advocating a free market where those that survive do, and those that
don't don't. In such a free market, people are free to negotiate
whatever slave state they wish to protect their selfish interests. I am
merely reminding most decent people that THEY believe that *NOTHING* is
worth a slave state, but that some artists and publishers are too
stupid, selfish or evil to care.
It is quite possible that some technological solution will arise
that will allow those that wish to control the trade of their
information to do so, while NOT in any way dimishing the anonymous free
speech of the internet. That would solve the issue for the copyright
holders and keep the police state at less than critical mass.
*NOTHING* is more important than keeping the police state at less
than critical mass where it takes over and is taken over by criminals.
But I am also reminding one and all that copyrights were created by
*PUBLISHERS* to indenture the artists to the publisher for the benefit
of the publisher and the King of England, not the artist. The artist
was sold on the idea by protecting his rights and income. It was an
extortion racket written into our constitution.
It's the INCOME OF THE PUBLISHER THAT IS PROTECTED. What the
publisher fears most is not that others might get the artists work for
free, but that some artist might publish on his own without the
publisher consent or cut.
The artist's *LIFE AFFLUENCE* would have been many times bigger had
they evolved around information exchange rather than information
ownership. That may sound nuts, but time will tell.
We either have a police state where ALL communication is moderated
and traceable, or we have the end of copyrights. Will the artists
starve? No, but the publishers sure will, and not fast enough.
Maybe we will find a solution that will allow free anonymous speech
to exist side by side with controlled distribution of information. That
would be a good thing. But anyone can make a recording made off his
speakers, zip it up into an mp3 and send it to a friend or start Napster
2.
Unless of course the technology is withdrawn from society and Earth
to do such things.
Do you have any idea how much technology is being suppressed by the
copyright holders and their publisher legions? That's like forbidding
people to know about and own fire because more than one might read the
same book by the fire light. It is unconscionable.
Earth will die and come to a total standstill under the selfish
decisions of copyright holders and their puppet masters. They would
destroy EVERYTHING to protect their 'rights'. A dying animal doesn't
care about anyone else, it cares about only one thing, itself. In its
despair and rage it will take desperate action even if that action wipes
out everything else on Earth.
The dying animal's last effort to win is by doing crazy random
destructive things, sometimes it works, mostly it doesn't. That is what
desperation is, the actions no longer make sense towards survival but
are being tried anyhow.
The internet is the death of publishers because EVERYONE is now a
publisher by default. How can you compete with everyone? They will do
ANYTHING to survive including enslave everyone to non publisher status
again. Artists, well the smart ones will survive, the stupid ones will
hold onto their fear and fade away as their own fans will boycott them
into oblivion where they belong.
The art of selfish people just isn't that good anyhow.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Aug 30 03:06:02 EDT 2011
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/copyrig2.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFOXIvaURT1lqxE3HERAvSlAKCM9zYteUbgzv4p0Emm73GOikLVmgCgvvBv
CvK02hx90zethDQKWZD5EAs=
=aEiY
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Homerwsmith-l mailing list
Homerwsmith-l@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
_______________________________________________
Clear-L mailing list
Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
Tue Aug 30 16:04:48 EDT 2011
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Feb 26 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore875.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)
iD8DBQFYswr6URT1lqxE3HERAmPhAJ9k7CAf/5yiUKIpS93gqxdLXp7bywCdEdBi
o95YTLR57X3AYF4jq4+LQv8=
=XUn/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
COPYRIGHTS
The communication lines of earth serve two purposes, the body
politic, and the markets.
The body politic uses the comm lines to design and create the
markets (society).
The markets use the comm lines to trade their goods.
The body politic needs free and open comm lines, anonymous,
encrypted, unmoderated, and un trackable, otherwise various people will
come for you in the night if you express a preference for democracy over
communism etc.
The markets need closed and tight comm lines, non anonymous,
moderated, and trackable to protect their copyrights and trade secrets.
Anonymity allows us to speak safely to everyone.
Encryption allows us to speak safely to only those we trust.
Moderation creates censorship between sender and receiver.
Trackability allows anyone to know who the sender is.
There is no way to limit anonymity and encryption to only political
communications or to good guys, because anonymity and encryption
are a quality of the COMM LINE, not who is sending or what is sent.
Thus if anyone is allowed anonymity and encryption, every one is.
Thus the bad can speak with impunity, and the good can whistle blow
with impunity.
The government and the police are a function of the MARKETS, not the
body politic which must be utterly free of government or police because
they haven't been designed yet or are in the middle of revision.
Once the markets are formed, and the government and police are
created to PROTECT the markets, the police then try to control the body
politic too, which created them, let the body politic revise the
government and police state out of existence.
Thus is born the police state, where neither politics nor markets
are free.
Homer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> Are you advocating the abolishment of all copyrights? I really would not
> like to see the big corp's control all communication, but I'd hate to see
> the baby go out with the dishsoap. I suspect you've done some deep
> thinking on this, and I'd appreciate any comment.
The world moves. The ice age comes in, and the dinosaurs get wiped
out. Sometimes somethings don't survive the changes. They complain
bitterly but the world does not care.
The world is moving towards instantaneous communication between all
beings on all subjects, a totally open group consciousness with no
withholds. It is approximated with the internet, but continues with
telepathy and other new age abilities.
Would copyright holders ban telepathy if people could exchange
their music for free by mental communication alone?
Yes. There is nothing lower on this planet than a copyright
holder. They don't give a damn what happens to everyone else, all they
care about is themselves.
The point is that people do not have inherent rights to survive
just because they exist. If they survive, they survive, if not, then
too bad. People survive by negotiating duties and rights with other
people. To protect themselves against criminality, they pass laws and
give power to police forces to protect their desires (not rights!) for a
fair trade with those that wish to fair trade with them. The laws so
created delineate the fair chosen duties and rights of the agreeing
parties.
At some point the power given to the police force becomes too much
and the criminals and slave masters take over the police force, then you
get a slave society. Criminals *ALWAYS* go where the most concentration
of power is.
The point where the police and government have more power than the
people needs to be watched very carefully. We do not want to create a
police state *FOR ANY REASON* no matter how many poor dear stupid
artists starve to death in their own stupidity. Maybe if they got a
haircut and a real job, their art would improve too.
Now the internet throws the balance completely the other way from a
police state, it allows people to communicate and publish freely on a
scale never before possible and with total safety. The world has needed
this breath of fresh air for a very long time. It is the difference
between a communication prison and wide and unbounded ways.
The lies and one way pablum pushed by the government, and the big
companies can no longer take place with out the truth also being told
because the little guy can speak with immunity and have the whole planet
know the truth the same day.
Well if he can speak politically with immunity, he sure as hell can
trade mp3's with impunity. Its a small price to pay for political
freedom.
You know that the only way to stop bad guys from speaking is to
stop *EVERYONE* from speaking too.
The ONLY way to stop the mp3's is to stop the freedom to speak
anonymously and freely. Lot's of people will throw a fit about allowing
Earthkind to speak freely, but basically you gotta decide between
political freedom, the freedom to think, speak, philsophize and practice
religion freely, and the freedom to protect your information goods in
market, because they are totally opposed to each other.
Some people think little children shouldn't know the truth, and
some people think that Earthkind must not have the ability to
communicate freely with anyone on any subject.
Remember the artist may lose some money, but some of that money he
doesn't need any more because he can get other's art for free too now,
assuming there are no copyrights at all. The only losers in that
exchange are the tax people. Think about it.
Another hefty portion of the money the big artists will lose won't
be available to engage in excess of drugs, wine, women and self
destruction, this might actually improve the qaulity of the art, that
they put out. Do the beatles need millions while the poor starve, and
schools suck etc? How much of your buck for every CD rom goes to
support the drug trade in cocaine and heroin to keep the artist high?
One is not advocating a socialism or communism here, one is in fact
advocating a free market where those that survive do, and those that
don't don't. In such a free market, people are free to negotiate
whatever slave state they wish to protect their selfish interests. I am
merely reminding most decent people that THEY believe that *NOTHING* is
worth a slave state, but that some artists and publishers are too
stupid, selfish or evil to care.
It is quite possible that some technological solution will arise
that will allow those that wish to control the trade of their
information to do so, while NOT in any way dimishing the anonymous free
speech of the internet. That would solve the issue for the copyright
holders and keep the police state at less than critical mass.
*NOTHING* is more important than keeping the police state at less
than critical mass where it takes over and is taken over by criminals.
But I am also reminding one and all that copyrights were created by
*PUBLISHERS* to indenture the artists to the publisher for the benefit
of the publisher and the King of England, not the artist. The artist
was sold on the idea by protecting his rights and income. It was an
extortion racket written into our constitution.
It's the INCOME OF THE PUBLISHER THAT IS PROTECTED. What the
publisher fears most is not that others might get the artists work for
free, but that some artist might publish on his own without the
publisher consent or cut.
The artist's *LIFE AFFLUENCE* would have been many times bigger had
they evolved around information exchange rather than information
ownership. That may sound nuts, but time will tell.
We either have a police state where ALL communication is moderated
and traceable, or we have the end of copyrights. Will the artists
starve? No, but the publishers sure will, and not fast enough.
Maybe we will find a solution that will allow free anonymous speech
to exist side by side with controlled distribution of information. That
would be a good thing. But anyone can make a recording made off his
speakers, zip it up into an mp3 and send it to a friend or start Napster
2.
Unless of course the technology is withdrawn from society and Earth
to do such things.
Do you have any idea how much technology is being suppressed by the
copyright holders and their publisher legions? That's like forbidding
people to know about and own fire because more than one might read the
same book by the fire light. It is unconscionable.
Earth will die and come to a total standstill under the selfish
decisions of copyright holders and their puppet masters. They would
destroy EVERYTHING to protect their 'rights'. A dying animal doesn't
care about anyone else, it cares about only one thing, itself. In its
despair and rage it will take desperate action even if that action wipes
out everything else on Earth.
The dying animal's last effort to win is by doing crazy random
destructive things, sometimes it works, mostly it doesn't. That is what
desperation is, the actions no longer make sense towards survival but
are being tried anyhow.
The internet is the death of publishers because EVERYONE is now a
publisher by default. How can you compete with everyone? They will do
ANYTHING to survive including enslave everyone to non publisher status
again. Artists, well the smart ones will survive, the stupid ones will
hold onto their fear and fade away as their own fans will boycott them
into oblivion where they belong.
The art of selfish people just isn't that good anyhow.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Aug 30 03:06:02 EDT 2011
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/copyrig2.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFOXIvaURT1lqxE3HERAvSlAKCM9zYteUbgzv4p0Emm73GOikLVmgCgvvBv
CvK02hx90zethDQKWZD5EAs=
=aEiY
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Homerwsmith-l mailing list
Homerwsmith-l@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
_______________________________________________
Clear-L mailing list
Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
Tue Aug 30 16:04:48 EDT 2011
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Feb 26 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore875.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)
iD8DBQFYswr6URT1lqxE3HERAmPhAJ9k7CAf/5yiUKIpS93gqxdLXp7bywCdEdBi
o95YTLR57X3AYF4jq4+LQv8=
=XUn/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE67 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
THE QUALITY MALE RUNDOWN.
"What ability or quality did you or could you have as a male, that is
necessary to the survival of females and your children, that your mother
or other females in your life refused to operate in you, or actively
suppressed."
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Feb 24 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore67.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)
iD8DBQFYsGf6URT1lqxE3HERAm5zAJ9xrdIiZfcNlqluITHUdeHMh5FbgwCfZLwJ
omrzcfV4Z2yjotrX60bHnL4=
=bpy/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
THE QUALITY MALE RUNDOWN.
"What ability or quality did you or could you have as a male, that is
necessary to the survival of females and your children, that your mother
or other females in your life refused to operate in you, or actively
suppressed."
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Feb 24 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore67.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)
iD8DBQFYsGf6URT1lqxE3HERAm5zAJ9xrdIiZfcNlqluITHUdeHMh5FbgwCfZLwJ
omrzcfV4Z2yjotrX60bHnL4=
=bpy/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
LAW (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
THE LAW OF THE SKY AND THE LAW OF THE LAND
There is the law of the sky and the law of the land.
The law of the sky is what is right and wrong and is guided solely
by our own conscience and our sense of oneness and family with other
people,
'As he is, so am I'.
In our usage, right and wrong, and moral and immoral are taken to
mean the same thing.
The law of the sky is NOT the written word of God, for even the
physical written word of God is below the law of the sky.
As each being is taken to be a full instantiation of God in
carnation anyhow, the law of the sky and the UNWRITTEN word of God could
be considered the same thing.
But regardless of what we believe, or whether we have experienced a
higher divinity, we all have a conscience.
As sovereign beings, our conscience is the ultimate and sole
arbiter of all things.
God did not give us a conscience so we could use someone
else's conscience to make our decisions for us.
Never give your conscience over to the conscience of another to
determine what is right and wrong for you.
It's ok if you decide that someone else knows more than you, and
you trust them to make decisions for you, but it is YOUR conscious
decision based on YOUR conscience that directs you to do so.
All beings are governed by the law of the sky, and its justice is
swift and absolute as the law of the sky works in the now and can never
be wrong.
This justice however is powered by conscience and regret. In the
absence of either, i.e. insanity, there is no justice.
Thus each being delivers himself up for judgment TO HIM SELF,
during this life and in the many lives before and after this life.
In our yearning to protect ourselves from the criminally insane who
would break the law of the sky to our detriment while in the realm of
the land, we create professional organizations called government to deal
with the criminally insane in a professional and standard manner.
In order to guide and control the government we create the law of
the land.
The law of the land is a human codification of the law of the sky,
as best we see it.
The law of the sky codifies how the sovereign citizen should be
have.
The law of the land does not codify how the sovereign citizen
should behave, the law of the land codiies how the GOVERNMENT should
behave as determined by the sovereign citizens who elected it into
power.
The law of the land delineates the measures the government may take
and the penalties the government may impose on those who break the law
of the land, and thereby, we presume, the law of the sky.
The law of the sky constrains the sovereign citizen.
The law of the land constrains the government, that is it
constrains the civil servants who have sworn to uphold the law of the
land while on duty as the government.
The sovereign citizen has not sworn to uphold the law of the land
and thus is not beholden to it.
The sovereign citizen has no moral mandate to obey the law of the
land right or wrong. Only the sworn civil servant, who has sworn to
uphold the law of the land, right or wrong, has a moral mandate to obey
the law of the land.
The sovereign citizen on the other hand has a moral mandate to do
what is RIGHT, before considering what is LEGAL.
If a government official fails to go after a criminal and impose
authorized sanctions, he is guilty before the law of the land, for he
has sworn to uphold it, and we trust that he will. We voted him into
office for just that purpose after all.
He is also guilty before the law of the sky for violating
the law of the land after swearing before all to not do so.
The only way for a sworn civil servant to morally violate the law
of the land because of a conflict with the law of the sky is to step
down from his post as a civil servant, thus becoming a sovereign citizen
again.
The law of the sky is a law for the sovereign citizen.
The law of the land is a law for the government created by the
sovereign citizen.
Sovereign citizens have a moral duty to do what is right first and
what is legal second.
Civil servants have a moral duty to do what is legal first and what
is right second.
If a civil servant feels that the law of the land is wrong, he may
break the law of the land ONLY after turning in his badge as a civil
servant and going off duty on the matter.
No matter how wrong or unjust a law may be, we do not hire our cops
to determine if a law should be enforced or not. That is not their job,
they are not competent to do so, and they can not be trusted to do so,
as any single human being can turn criminal or become subject to
corruption, temptation and seduction at any time.
Thus where there is sanctioned use of force to enforce or punish,
we have rule by law rather than rule by whim, caprice, greed or fancy,
let alone personal conscience.
However once any transgression comes to court, the law itself can
be put on trial and struck down by the jury, as the law of the land is
never above the law of the sky.
Above the police, the jails, the jury and the judge is CONSCIENCE.
If a country does not allow conscience to ultimately rule, it will
ultimately go criminal through and through, because criminals hate
people who have a conscience, as it reminds the criminal he has or is
violating his own.
Where conscience is not allowed to speak freely, the only people
left speaking will be the criminals.
The idea that there will NEVER be a conflict between conscience and
the law of the land is, on the face of it, absurd.
There are two main reasons for this.
The first is that the law of the land is a human encoding of our
understanding of the law of the sky.
Thus it is at best always behind our understanding of the law of
the sky and law makers may not have recognized or gotten around to
encoding things in the law of the land that are in fact wrong.
Laws can also be written poorly resulting in confusion and prone to
wrong interpretation by others, thus making something illegal which in
fact is not morally wrong.
The main reason though for corruption in the law of the land is
because of the following:
When law makers outlaw criminals, criminals become law makers.
This is because when criminals find it hard to hide and operate out
on the streets, they get themselves elected into positions of power and
trust, where they can operate safely and mold the law in the direction
of their own desires to enslave and rob everyone else.
One criminal in office or position of authority like a police
commissioner, judge, governor, or senator can cause 100's the times of
damage that one criminal in the street can.
Thus government, which should be of the people, by the people, for
the people, becomes government of the people by the government, for the
government which has become infiltrated by criminals.
Laws written by criminals inure to the benefit of criminals.
The law of the land suffers many overwhelming pressures in the
direction of criminality, those of big religion, big science, big
entertainment, big business and big government to name a few.
Those are the influences from the outside.
When criminal influences are entrenched with in the law making body
also, the problem becomes doubly compounded.
A criminal from the outside meets a criminal from the inside and a
deal is made to the detriment of the people.
Thus the law of the land becomes corrupted with laws designed to
benefit criminals in power, rather than the people as a whole.
HIDING BEHIND THE LAW
When someone claims that something which is wrong to do, is right
to do just because it is legal, that is called 'hiding behind the law'.
When someone claims that something which is right to do, is wrong
to do just because it it is illegal, that is also 'hiding behind the
law'.
Hiding being the law means allowing the law to define what is right
or wrong to do.
The law is used to obscure one's conscience which is the ultimate
arbiter of all right and wrong things.
Right and wrong and have nothing at all to do with what is legal or
illegal.
Legal and illegal are mere shadows of the truths of right and
wrong.
The law of the land does not DEFINE right and wrong, but merely
describes our understanding of it, and sets sanction limits on what the
government can do about it.
The law of the sky says 'YOU MUST NOT DO WRONG'.
The moral mandate is on you the sovereign being.
The *MUST* is on you.
The law of the land says "IF you do something illegal, then the
government MAY punish you with sanctions but MUST NOT punish you beyond
the limits set by the law."
The moral mandate is on the government to stay within the limits of
the law of the land or else THEY have done something wrong.
In the dictionary, there are two definitions for the word
'criminal'.
The first means someone who has done something illegal.
This is the criminally corrupted definition of it.
The second means someone who has done something immoral or wrong,
(morally bankrupt).
For our purposes criminality is the second definition, specifically
the intent to violate a fair chosen transaction between two people
either by deceit or force.
We grant the government rights to use force to protect us from the
treasonous intent and use of force by the criminally willed, against our
well being.
Legality (legal and illegal) and Morality (right and wrong) are two
completely different subjects.
Morality hopefully determines legality but legality must never
determine morality.
Governments of the people that are no longer by the people or for
the people, just delight in making people think that the law of the land
DETERMINES right and wrong for the people.
You can always tell a criminal government by this one test.
What determines right and wrong?
The law of the sky or the law of the land?
The law of the land determines right and wrong FOR THE GOVERNMENT,
and its assigns, the SWORN civil servant.
The law of the sky determines right and wrong for everyone else.
When and if there is a conflict between conscience and the law of
the land, one has a moral duty to follow one's conscience and not the
law of the land, or else one is in violation of the law of the sky!
And let me tell you, the punishments of Earth can not hold a candle
to the punishments of the Sky, namely your conscience under the pall of
regret.
When a being dies and gets to the Pearly Gates, Saint Peter will
not be asking you if you did what was legal. He will be asking you if
you did what was right.
If you answer,
"But I could not do what was right because the law forbade it",
or
"I had to do what was wrong because the law insisted on it",
it will not reflect well on you, it will be as if you said nothing.
Or worse, lied to the Lord.
For you will not forgive yourself in any measure for your
transgressions, for the law of the land is no excuse for transgressions
against the law of the sky.
When the court judge asks you 'How do you justify breaking the
law?', the correct answer is
"I am a sovereign citizen, and I have never sworn to uphold the
law, as civil servants and foreign nationals seeking citizen ship have,
and thus I have and need no justification for breaking the law.
When the law and my conscience come into conflict, I have a moral
MANDATE to do what is right first, and what is legal second, regardless
of consequences to myself on the Earthly plane. I do not give my
conscience over to the conscience of other beings to determine what is
right and wrong for me."
When the court judge asks you "Do you believe you are above the
law?", the correct answer is:
"Yes, of course I am above the law of the land, I am a sovereign
citizen as are we all.
And when the law of the land becomes criminal because it is written
by criminals to inure to the benefit of criminals, of course I am above
the law of the land because I am not a criminal.
I follow the law of the sky, and the law of the sky is above the
law of the land.
If I choose to follow my conscience rather than the law of the
land, I also choose to accept full responsibility for any consequences
that might befall me in the realm of the land for doing so.
As sovereign citizen it is my job to do what is right at all times.
As judge it is your job to enforce the law of the land right or
wrong.
As the jury it is YOUR job to determine if the law IS right or
wrong and then, if right, adjudicate my guilt before the law of the land
accordingly."
Where the jury is not allowed to determine if a law is right or
wrong, moral or immoral, in accordance with the law of the sky or not,
you have a criminal government operating in that area, that is trying to
push the law of the land as the law of the sky.
In such circumstances in the past, termination with prejudice has
been called for by the law of the sky against the law of the land and
the moral criminals that promulgated and enforced it.
From this one might surmise that Truth is a jealous God, a God
whose wrath is hard to countenance or behold.
As we all are God in carnation, and there is no one to judge us but
ourselves, we need to watch it.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Mon Dec 8 17:44:56 EST 2008
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Feb 23 12:06:03 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/law.bak
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)
iD8DBQFYrxZ7URT1lqxE3HERAkKTAJ928PF1F7SmKl0Qghot5q1Z54idkwCgptnN
DXfUxVYGpNZljet8dR4K4Lo=
=wlQV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
THE LAW OF THE SKY AND THE LAW OF THE LAND
There is the law of the sky and the law of the land.
The law of the sky is what is right and wrong and is guided solely
by our own conscience and our sense of oneness and family with other
people,
'As he is, so am I'.
In our usage, right and wrong, and moral and immoral are taken to
mean the same thing.
The law of the sky is NOT the written word of God, for even the
physical written word of God is below the law of the sky.
As each being is taken to be a full instantiation of God in
carnation anyhow, the law of the sky and the UNWRITTEN word of God could
be considered the same thing.
But regardless of what we believe, or whether we have experienced a
higher divinity, we all have a conscience.
As sovereign beings, our conscience is the ultimate and sole
arbiter of all things.
God did not give us a conscience so we could use someone
else's conscience to make our decisions for us.
Never give your conscience over to the conscience of another to
determine what is right and wrong for you.
It's ok if you decide that someone else knows more than you, and
you trust them to make decisions for you, but it is YOUR conscious
decision based on YOUR conscience that directs you to do so.
All beings are governed by the law of the sky, and its justice is
swift and absolute as the law of the sky works in the now and can never
be wrong.
This justice however is powered by conscience and regret. In the
absence of either, i.e. insanity, there is no justice.
Thus each being delivers himself up for judgment TO HIM SELF,
during this life and in the many lives before and after this life.
In our yearning to protect ourselves from the criminally insane who
would break the law of the sky to our detriment while in the realm of
the land, we create professional organizations called government to deal
with the criminally insane in a professional and standard manner.
In order to guide and control the government we create the law of
the land.
The law of the land is a human codification of the law of the sky,
as best we see it.
The law of the sky codifies how the sovereign citizen should be
have.
The law of the land does not codify how the sovereign citizen
should behave, the law of the land codiies how the GOVERNMENT should
behave as determined by the sovereign citizens who elected it into
power.
The law of the land delineates the measures the government may take
and the penalties the government may impose on those who break the law
of the land, and thereby, we presume, the law of the sky.
The law of the sky constrains the sovereign citizen.
The law of the land constrains the government, that is it
constrains the civil servants who have sworn to uphold the law of the
land while on duty as the government.
The sovereign citizen has not sworn to uphold the law of the land
and thus is not beholden to it.
The sovereign citizen has no moral mandate to obey the law of the
land right or wrong. Only the sworn civil servant, who has sworn to
uphold the law of the land, right or wrong, has a moral mandate to obey
the law of the land.
The sovereign citizen on the other hand has a moral mandate to do
what is RIGHT, before considering what is LEGAL.
If a government official fails to go after a criminal and impose
authorized sanctions, he is guilty before the law of the land, for he
has sworn to uphold it, and we trust that he will. We voted him into
office for just that purpose after all.
He is also guilty before the law of the sky for violating
the law of the land after swearing before all to not do so.
The only way for a sworn civil servant to morally violate the law
of the land because of a conflict with the law of the sky is to step
down from his post as a civil servant, thus becoming a sovereign citizen
again.
The law of the sky is a law for the sovereign citizen.
The law of the land is a law for the government created by the
sovereign citizen.
Sovereign citizens have a moral duty to do what is right first and
what is legal second.
Civil servants have a moral duty to do what is legal first and what
is right second.
If a civil servant feels that the law of the land is wrong, he may
break the law of the land ONLY after turning in his badge as a civil
servant and going off duty on the matter.
No matter how wrong or unjust a law may be, we do not hire our cops
to determine if a law should be enforced or not. That is not their job,
they are not competent to do so, and they can not be trusted to do so,
as any single human being can turn criminal or become subject to
corruption, temptation and seduction at any time.
Thus where there is sanctioned use of force to enforce or punish,
we have rule by law rather than rule by whim, caprice, greed or fancy,
let alone personal conscience.
However once any transgression comes to court, the law itself can
be put on trial and struck down by the jury, as the law of the land is
never above the law of the sky.
Above the police, the jails, the jury and the judge is CONSCIENCE.
If a country does not allow conscience to ultimately rule, it will
ultimately go criminal through and through, because criminals hate
people who have a conscience, as it reminds the criminal he has or is
violating his own.
Where conscience is not allowed to speak freely, the only people
left speaking will be the criminals.
The idea that there will NEVER be a conflict between conscience and
the law of the land is, on the face of it, absurd.
There are two main reasons for this.
The first is that the law of the land is a human encoding of our
understanding of the law of the sky.
Thus it is at best always behind our understanding of the law of
the sky and law makers may not have recognized or gotten around to
encoding things in the law of the land that are in fact wrong.
Laws can also be written poorly resulting in confusion and prone to
wrong interpretation by others, thus making something illegal which in
fact is not morally wrong.
The main reason though for corruption in the law of the land is
because of the following:
When law makers outlaw criminals, criminals become law makers.
This is because when criminals find it hard to hide and operate out
on the streets, they get themselves elected into positions of power and
trust, where they can operate safely and mold the law in the direction
of their own desires to enslave and rob everyone else.
One criminal in office or position of authority like a police
commissioner, judge, governor, or senator can cause 100's the times of
damage that one criminal in the street can.
Thus government, which should be of the people, by the people, for
the people, becomes government of the people by the government, for the
government which has become infiltrated by criminals.
Laws written by criminals inure to the benefit of criminals.
The law of the land suffers many overwhelming pressures in the
direction of criminality, those of big religion, big science, big
entertainment, big business and big government to name a few.
Those are the influences from the outside.
When criminal influences are entrenched with in the law making body
also, the problem becomes doubly compounded.
A criminal from the outside meets a criminal from the inside and a
deal is made to the detriment of the people.
Thus the law of the land becomes corrupted with laws designed to
benefit criminals in power, rather than the people as a whole.
HIDING BEHIND THE LAW
When someone claims that something which is wrong to do, is right
to do just because it is legal, that is called 'hiding behind the law'.
When someone claims that something which is right to do, is wrong
to do just because it it is illegal, that is also 'hiding behind the
law'.
Hiding being the law means allowing the law to define what is right
or wrong to do.
The law is used to obscure one's conscience which is the ultimate
arbiter of all right and wrong things.
Right and wrong and have nothing at all to do with what is legal or
illegal.
Legal and illegal are mere shadows of the truths of right and
wrong.
The law of the land does not DEFINE right and wrong, but merely
describes our understanding of it, and sets sanction limits on what the
government can do about it.
The law of the sky says 'YOU MUST NOT DO WRONG'.
The moral mandate is on you the sovereign being.
The *MUST* is on you.
The law of the land says "IF you do something illegal, then the
government MAY punish you with sanctions but MUST NOT punish you beyond
the limits set by the law."
The moral mandate is on the government to stay within the limits of
the law of the land or else THEY have done something wrong.
In the dictionary, there are two definitions for the word
'criminal'.
The first means someone who has done something illegal.
This is the criminally corrupted definition of it.
The second means someone who has done something immoral or wrong,
(morally bankrupt).
For our purposes criminality is the second definition, specifically
the intent to violate a fair chosen transaction between two people
either by deceit or force.
We grant the government rights to use force to protect us from the
treasonous intent and use of force by the criminally willed, against our
well being.
Legality (legal and illegal) and Morality (right and wrong) are two
completely different subjects.
Morality hopefully determines legality but legality must never
determine morality.
Governments of the people that are no longer by the people or for
the people, just delight in making people think that the law of the land
DETERMINES right and wrong for the people.
You can always tell a criminal government by this one test.
What determines right and wrong?
The law of the sky or the law of the land?
The law of the land determines right and wrong FOR THE GOVERNMENT,
and its assigns, the SWORN civil servant.
The law of the sky determines right and wrong for everyone else.
When and if there is a conflict between conscience and the law of
the land, one has a moral duty to follow one's conscience and not the
law of the land, or else one is in violation of the law of the sky!
And let me tell you, the punishments of Earth can not hold a candle
to the punishments of the Sky, namely your conscience under the pall of
regret.
When a being dies and gets to the Pearly Gates, Saint Peter will
not be asking you if you did what was legal. He will be asking you if
you did what was right.
If you answer,
"But I could not do what was right because the law forbade it",
or
"I had to do what was wrong because the law insisted on it",
it will not reflect well on you, it will be as if you said nothing.
Or worse, lied to the Lord.
For you will not forgive yourself in any measure for your
transgressions, for the law of the land is no excuse for transgressions
against the law of the sky.
When the court judge asks you 'How do you justify breaking the
law?', the correct answer is
"I am a sovereign citizen, and I have never sworn to uphold the
law, as civil servants and foreign nationals seeking citizen ship have,
and thus I have and need no justification for breaking the law.
When the law and my conscience come into conflict, I have a moral
MANDATE to do what is right first, and what is legal second, regardless
of consequences to myself on the Earthly plane. I do not give my
conscience over to the conscience of other beings to determine what is
right and wrong for me."
When the court judge asks you "Do you believe you are above the
law?", the correct answer is:
"Yes, of course I am above the law of the land, I am a sovereign
citizen as are we all.
And when the law of the land becomes criminal because it is written
by criminals to inure to the benefit of criminals, of course I am above
the law of the land because I am not a criminal.
I follow the law of the sky, and the law of the sky is above the
law of the land.
If I choose to follow my conscience rather than the law of the
land, I also choose to accept full responsibility for any consequences
that might befall me in the realm of the land for doing so.
As sovereign citizen it is my job to do what is right at all times.
As judge it is your job to enforce the law of the land right or
wrong.
As the jury it is YOUR job to determine if the law IS right or
wrong and then, if right, adjudicate my guilt before the law of the land
accordingly."
Where the jury is not allowed to determine if a law is right or
wrong, moral or immoral, in accordance with the law of the sky or not,
you have a criminal government operating in that area, that is trying to
push the law of the land as the law of the sky.
In such circumstances in the past, termination with prejudice has
been called for by the law of the sky against the law of the land and
the moral criminals that promulgated and enforced it.
From this one might surmise that Truth is a jealous God, a God
whose wrath is hard to countenance or behold.
As we all are God in carnation, and there is no one to judge us but
ourselves, we need to watch it.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Mon Dec 8 17:44:56 EST 2008
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Feb 23 12:06:03 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/law.bak
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)
iD8DBQFYrxZ7URT1lqxE3HERAkKTAJ928PF1F7SmKl0Qghot5q1Z54idkwCgptnN
DXfUxVYGpNZljet8dR4K4Lo=
=wlQV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
LOGIC24 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Levi Murphy (CONFRONT23@aol.com) wrote:
>Well you seem to be arguing against logic and the syllogism at the
>same time, as Homer keeps the "Logic is logic" theme going and you
>keep arguing against logic. Although you didnt explicitly say that you
>think a syllogims is logic, your arguments seem to imply thats your
>postion.
There are two broad categories of Logic.
They are inductive logic and deductive logic.
Inductive logic allows us to make specific observations and
produce generalities.
This dog has four legs, that dog has four legs, etc, so
ALL dogs have four legs.
Generalities as statements of truth can never be certain, as it
is impossible to observe all dogs.
Deductive logic allows us to travel back down the tree of
generalization.
*IF* ALL dogs have four legs, AND Joey is a dog, THEN Joey MUST
have four legs.
Inductive and deductive logic form a complete science of the
subject of *OBJECTIVE KNOWLEDGE* or *OBJECTIFCATION*, the
differentiating of objects out of the AllThatIs, the assigning of
qualities to those objects, and the grouping of objects into higher
classes, and grouping of classes into even higher classes.
Joey is a Dog, Dogs are Animals, Animals are Living Things,
Living Things are Material Objects, and Material Objects are
Existences.
Inductive logic allows us to travel up (and create) the tree, and
deductive logic allows us to travel back down it.
Logic completely covers the ground rules of the subject of
*OBJECTIVE KNOWLEDGE* (Know about), based on the observed nature of IS
and IS NOT, and there is no more or less to Logic than that.
Those that argue about the validity or usefulness of logic are
Grace IV insane or have serious MU's on the subject, that should be
cleaned up.
The insane should be quarantined as they are dangerous. The
conclusions they draw from their experiences are unrelated to truth
and the actions they take cause more harm than good.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Feb 21 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic24.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)
iD8DBQFYrHN6URT1lqxE3HERAka1AJ9/91OpO5rqTbMzc+AoB/up5mNdHgCgs1E/
m2pFAtXeuPHCuwZDVrAQgrM=
=qwbV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Levi Murphy (CONFRONT23@aol.com) wrote:
>Well you seem to be arguing against logic and the syllogism at the
>same time, as Homer keeps the "Logic is logic" theme going and you
>keep arguing against logic. Although you didnt explicitly say that you
>think a syllogims is logic, your arguments seem to imply thats your
>postion.
There are two broad categories of Logic.
They are inductive logic and deductive logic.
Inductive logic allows us to make specific observations and
produce generalities.
This dog has four legs, that dog has four legs, etc, so
ALL dogs have four legs.
Generalities as statements of truth can never be certain, as it
is impossible to observe all dogs.
Deductive logic allows us to travel back down the tree of
generalization.
*IF* ALL dogs have four legs, AND Joey is a dog, THEN Joey MUST
have four legs.
Inductive and deductive logic form a complete science of the
subject of *OBJECTIVE KNOWLEDGE* or *OBJECTIFCATION*, the
differentiating of objects out of the AllThatIs, the assigning of
qualities to those objects, and the grouping of objects into higher
classes, and grouping of classes into even higher classes.
Joey is a Dog, Dogs are Animals, Animals are Living Things,
Living Things are Material Objects, and Material Objects are
Existences.
Inductive logic allows us to travel up (and create) the tree, and
deductive logic allows us to travel back down it.
Logic completely covers the ground rules of the subject of
*OBJECTIVE KNOWLEDGE* (Know about), based on the observed nature of IS
and IS NOT, and there is no more or less to Logic than that.
Those that argue about the validity or usefulness of logic are
Grace IV insane or have serious MU's on the subject, that should be
cleaned up.
The insane should be quarantined as they are dangerous. The
conclusions they draw from their experiences are unrelated to truth
and the actions they take cause more harm than good.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Feb 21 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic24.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)
iD8DBQFYrHN6URT1lqxE3HERAka1AJ9/91OpO5rqTbMzc+AoB/up5mNdHgCgs1E/
m2pFAtXeuPHCuwZDVrAQgrM=
=qwbV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE259 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Rogers. D.Scn. (The_Bindu@NOSPAMmsn.com) wrote:
>True enough. But one CAN'T just imagine that one is the only player and
>everybody else is just your mockup either. You can't handle an SP by
>attempting to make a "perfect duplicate" of him/her and his/her actions.
>You can't handle an SP by improving one's own willingness to confront or
>mockup evil. Bottom line, you cannot handle an SP by making changes in YOUR
>OWN UNIVERSE. That's not the source of the SP, nor where he/she lives.
I disagree completely.
First, one is not trying to change the SP, that's just PTSness,
trying to make the SP wrong. One is trying to change one's own relation
to the SP, so one is no longer PTS. At that point the SP changes
anyhow.
The problem solved in one's own space then solves in the SP's space
too.
LRH had a good process for SP's, point at it and go 'Nothing
there'.
Of course one would actually have to run this.
OK, here's the full truth of the matter.
The thetan as native state is an all powerful Orientation Point and
a creator of symbols, that have mass, meaning and mobility.
Anything he considers comes to be in the mere consideration of it.
Once the thetan has created his playing field of space time
symbols, including identities of good and evil etc, he then jumps in.
By doing so he is no longer the infinite stationary orientation point
but has become a symbol himself with the limited powers and abilities of
that symbol.
Then he is approached by his opposition terminal, that which must
never be, never have been, and never be again.
If it ain't forever, it ain't his opposition terminal.
That's because there ARE no forevers inside a space time while.
Thus he is going PTS to the forevernesss of this other thing, which
exceeds even his own sovereign desire or ability to create it, since his
creations are limited to finite whiles.
Of course his opposition terminal CAN'T be forever, nothing can be
inside a space time while, but as long as your preclear thinks it can
be, he is doomed, he can't win by definition.
As he goes PTS, he assigns the SP more and more orientation point
ability, until the SP is everywhere present, unmovable and omnipotent.
The SP is actually just a symbol too, but he's a bigger symbol to the
thetan who is now playing the cute little innocent victim etc. The
thetan has a game now in other words.
The moment you run into something that is 'unmovable' and you can't
kick it out of your space you have just become PTS to the SP
unmoveability.
The solution the thetan has to this is to move HIMSELF around, away
from, do anything at all but just stay where he is.
That's called ELSEWHERENESS.
Since power stems from the ability to maintain your position in
space, he gives a part of himself a way every time he moves away from
the SP orientation point that no longer has to move, not even to chase
him, since it just gets bigger and expands in the preclear's mind until
it is everywhere.
So the once unmovable all powerful orientation point, your preclear
as sovereign native state being, is now moving it self around to save
its own ass.
So the thetan originally is unmovable, but he has flip flopped his
perception so he is movable and the world is unmovable and something big
in the world moves in on him and he gets scared and what does he do?
*HE MOVES*.
The moment he moves he has committed to his postulate that he is a
symbol and this other thing is an oreintation point (thus all powerful).
Before he moves he has merely made the postulates, I am a symbol, I
can move, the world is unmovable, things out there bigger than me can
move me etc.
But he hasn't done anthing to hold them in place.
If he so much as blinks, he will flip back to orientation point and
be done with this nonsense.
However once he MOVES he commits to those postulates and now they
are solid as a rock and he is an effect. He said so himself in the
action of moving.
He isn't just saying "I am making these postulates", he's saying
"I am making these postulates AND THEY ARE RIGHT, and I better get my
ass out of here before I am monster food..."
This is the consideration/observation flip flop.
As orientation point he is saying "I am making these postulates
and these postulates are cause of the condition I am in."
That's consideration as cause.
Once he moves he has said 'I am making these postulates, not
because they are cause, but because I have observed they are true
independent of what I think'.
That's consideration as learning through observation, totally being
an effect of what he has learned. SOMETHING ELSE made them be true, you
see? So he is stuck with it for good now until he flips out of learning
through observation back into causal consideration.
That's in part why power stems from the ability to maintain your
position in space. This ain't quite right though, power stems from the
ability to maintain your ORIGINAL POSITION IN SPACE, because that's
where you flipped from orientation point to symbol for the first time.
Once you have moved, holding that new position in space is
holding an already degraded condition. Perhaps thats better than
having to move again and holding that position, but you can see that's
a losing battle against one's own postulates that ONE IS NOT AN
ORIENTATION POINT.
The being had infinite power at the original position in space,
he lost it through the flip/flop only, and that was fair chosen.
From there on out, the being has only finite power at any later
position in space and can be moved by any force big enough to do so.
As he continues to be moved into newer and newer positions of
space, the amount of force it takes to move him becomes less and less,
and eventually he becomes a tumble weed.
The thetan even as symbol isn't actully moving anywhere, he's
shifting the dream around him, but his perceptions tell him the dream is
stationary and he is moving and this constant alteris takes him further
and further away from the truth that he is a stationary all powerful
orientation point, and buries him in the masses of resentment etc.
So everyone is PTS to the original SP that moved them the first
time after they entered symbol land. All other SP's are mere
restimulators for 'Nemesis One'.
What's got the thetan down? He had to MOVE out of its way.
That's it.
He had to move off the portal point into the dream and now "he's
lost", doesn't know where he is, doesn't know how to get home etc. He's
still trying to get back to the portal point by MOVING THERE, rather
than realizing that HE IS THERE and never been anywhere else.
Nemesis One class SP's love to make there home on the portal points
to dreams.
By replicating that original move from supreme orientation point to
symbol, and replicating the first move as a symbol off that first point,
one can regain the power of that orientation point where ONE WAS MAKING
THE SP IN THE FIRST PLACE. Then one can simply cease doing so with
'Nothing there', and then proceed to create further SP's forever for
free. Maybe you can sell them to other thetan's wanting to play the
same game, 'Die of Overwhelm' of some such thing.
This is the route to full OT and the end of PTSness, one and the
same thing.
"Behold ye now Behemoth, he who made it can approach unto it." -
Book of Job, Bible.
Homer
>Les.
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Feb 20 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore259.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)
iD8DBQFYqyH6URT1lqxE3HERAmqsAKCLn8IB+tX+BClJuSv6VFpw/ok8ZgCfVH94
7MurnnpyGI/uSiJnvfgwJbE=
=LLap
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Rogers. D.Scn. (The_Bindu@NOSPAMmsn.com) wrote:
>True enough. But one CAN'T just imagine that one is the only player and
>everybody else is just your mockup either. You can't handle an SP by
>attempting to make a "perfect duplicate" of him/her and his/her actions.
>You can't handle an SP by improving one's own willingness to confront or
>mockup evil. Bottom line, you cannot handle an SP by making changes in YOUR
>OWN UNIVERSE. That's not the source of the SP, nor where he/she lives.
I disagree completely.
First, one is not trying to change the SP, that's just PTSness,
trying to make the SP wrong. One is trying to change one's own relation
to the SP, so one is no longer PTS. At that point the SP changes
anyhow.
The problem solved in one's own space then solves in the SP's space
too.
LRH had a good process for SP's, point at it and go 'Nothing
there'.
Of course one would actually have to run this.
OK, here's the full truth of the matter.
The thetan as native state is an all powerful Orientation Point and
a creator of symbols, that have mass, meaning and mobility.
Anything he considers comes to be in the mere consideration of it.
Once the thetan has created his playing field of space time
symbols, including identities of good and evil etc, he then jumps in.
By doing so he is no longer the infinite stationary orientation point
but has become a symbol himself with the limited powers and abilities of
that symbol.
Then he is approached by his opposition terminal, that which must
never be, never have been, and never be again.
If it ain't forever, it ain't his opposition terminal.
That's because there ARE no forevers inside a space time while.
Thus he is going PTS to the forevernesss of this other thing, which
exceeds even his own sovereign desire or ability to create it, since his
creations are limited to finite whiles.
Of course his opposition terminal CAN'T be forever, nothing can be
inside a space time while, but as long as your preclear thinks it can
be, he is doomed, he can't win by definition.
As he goes PTS, he assigns the SP more and more orientation point
ability, until the SP is everywhere present, unmovable and omnipotent.
The SP is actually just a symbol too, but he's a bigger symbol to the
thetan who is now playing the cute little innocent victim etc. The
thetan has a game now in other words.
The moment you run into something that is 'unmovable' and you can't
kick it out of your space you have just become PTS to the SP
unmoveability.
The solution the thetan has to this is to move HIMSELF around, away
from, do anything at all but just stay where he is.
That's called ELSEWHERENESS.
Since power stems from the ability to maintain your position in
space, he gives a part of himself a way every time he moves away from
the SP orientation point that no longer has to move, not even to chase
him, since it just gets bigger and expands in the preclear's mind until
it is everywhere.
So the once unmovable all powerful orientation point, your preclear
as sovereign native state being, is now moving it self around to save
its own ass.
So the thetan originally is unmovable, but he has flip flopped his
perception so he is movable and the world is unmovable and something big
in the world moves in on him and he gets scared and what does he do?
*HE MOVES*.
The moment he moves he has committed to his postulate that he is a
symbol and this other thing is an oreintation point (thus all powerful).
Before he moves he has merely made the postulates, I am a symbol, I
can move, the world is unmovable, things out there bigger than me can
move me etc.
But he hasn't done anthing to hold them in place.
If he so much as blinks, he will flip back to orientation point and
be done with this nonsense.
However once he MOVES he commits to those postulates and now they
are solid as a rock and he is an effect. He said so himself in the
action of moving.
He isn't just saying "I am making these postulates", he's saying
"I am making these postulates AND THEY ARE RIGHT, and I better get my
ass out of here before I am monster food..."
This is the consideration/observation flip flop.
As orientation point he is saying "I am making these postulates
and these postulates are cause of the condition I am in."
That's consideration as cause.
Once he moves he has said 'I am making these postulates, not
because they are cause, but because I have observed they are true
independent of what I think'.
That's consideration as learning through observation, totally being
an effect of what he has learned. SOMETHING ELSE made them be true, you
see? So he is stuck with it for good now until he flips out of learning
through observation back into causal consideration.
That's in part why power stems from the ability to maintain your
position in space. This ain't quite right though, power stems from the
ability to maintain your ORIGINAL POSITION IN SPACE, because that's
where you flipped from orientation point to symbol for the first time.
Once you have moved, holding that new position in space is
holding an already degraded condition. Perhaps thats better than
having to move again and holding that position, but you can see that's
a losing battle against one's own postulates that ONE IS NOT AN
ORIENTATION POINT.
The being had infinite power at the original position in space,
he lost it through the flip/flop only, and that was fair chosen.
From there on out, the being has only finite power at any later
position in space and can be moved by any force big enough to do so.
As he continues to be moved into newer and newer positions of
space, the amount of force it takes to move him becomes less and less,
and eventually he becomes a tumble weed.
The thetan even as symbol isn't actully moving anywhere, he's
shifting the dream around him, but his perceptions tell him the dream is
stationary and he is moving and this constant alteris takes him further
and further away from the truth that he is a stationary all powerful
orientation point, and buries him in the masses of resentment etc.
So everyone is PTS to the original SP that moved them the first
time after they entered symbol land. All other SP's are mere
restimulators for 'Nemesis One'.
What's got the thetan down? He had to MOVE out of its way.
That's it.
He had to move off the portal point into the dream and now "he's
lost", doesn't know where he is, doesn't know how to get home etc. He's
still trying to get back to the portal point by MOVING THERE, rather
than realizing that HE IS THERE and never been anywhere else.
Nemesis One class SP's love to make there home on the portal points
to dreams.
By replicating that original move from supreme orientation point to
symbol, and replicating the first move as a symbol off that first point,
one can regain the power of that orientation point where ONE WAS MAKING
THE SP IN THE FIRST PLACE. Then one can simply cease doing so with
'Nothing there', and then proceed to create further SP's forever for
free. Maybe you can sell them to other thetan's wanting to play the
same game, 'Die of Overwhelm' of some such thing.
This is the route to full OT and the end of PTSness, one and the
same thing.
"Behold ye now Behemoth, he who made it can approach unto it." -
Book of Job, Bible.
Homer
>Les.
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Feb 20 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore259.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)
iD8DBQFYqyH6URT1lqxE3HERAmqsAKCLn8IB+tX+BClJuSv6VFpw/ok8ZgCfVH94
7MurnnpyGI/uSiJnvfgwJbE=
=LLap
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, February 14, 2017
PROOF43 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
IS CONSCIOUSNESS USEFUL?
"Physicists don't see that consciousness is a necessary part of
physical causality. If they were allowed to use Occam's razor,
consciousness would be on the cutting room floor."
Learning, Certainty, Causality and Consciousness, 2005
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sat Oct 29 15:17:24 EDT 2005
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Feb 14 12:06:01 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof43.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)
iD8DBQFYozj6URT1lqxE3HERAnS5AKDEx0GbvNs4QhdcPgJMb4R7SZrWkQCfU68z
+Rde3evbpdYf3P4fTE6oYFI=
=a2C+
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Feb 14 14:09:14 EST 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof43.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)
iD8DBQFYo1XaURT1lqxE3HERAu6YAKC+hfndIj0fWdm5OB4bTT9QgLPN/gCcDxkB
Aq+bzQpZeqUpLQxvL/zMuo4=
=kerh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
IS CONSCIOUSNESS USEFUL?
"Physicists don't see that consciousness is a necessary part of
physical causality. If they were allowed to use Occam's razor,
consciousness would be on the cutting room floor."
Learning, Certainty, Causality and Consciousness, 2005
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sat Oct 29 15:17:24 EDT 2005
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Feb 14 12:06:01 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof43.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)
iD8DBQFYozj6URT1lqxE3HERAnS5AKDEx0GbvNs4QhdcPgJMb4R7SZrWkQCfU68z
+Rde3evbpdYf3P4fTE6oYFI=
=a2C+
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Feb 14 14:09:14 EST 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof43.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)
iD8DBQFYo1XaURT1lqxE3HERAu6YAKC+hfndIj0fWdm5OB4bTT9QgLPN/gCcDxkB
Aq+bzQpZeqUpLQxvL/zMuo4=
=kerh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Saturday, February 11, 2017
ADO10
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SUPPRESSED UNEXPRESSED RESENTMENT
ADO - 10
31 August 1993
Copyright (C) 1993 Homer Wilson Smith
You are a Sovereign Desire Unit.
Sovereign Desire means YOU WANT IT, YOU GOT IT.
From this vantage point the being creates limitations for himself
and others, in concert with their Sovereign Desires, in order to create
a game.
This is called Majesty.
Majesty means Master of Jest, master of practical jokes, for self
limitations are majestic practical jokes of magnitude.
J.E.S.T stands for Jokes of Eternal Self Treason
J.E.S.T stands for Justice of Eternal Self Truth
As long as a person is aware of these limitations as creations of
his own Sovereign Desire, then he can maintain his sense of Sovereignty
and Good Humor, inspite of surprise, and still have a game.
However he can also choose to lose his sense of Sovereignty which
means run into a limitation that he thinks he didn't make. This creates
an upset of magnitude, but also creates a game of magnitude.
Thus you get into philosophies that run something like, 'God made
me, I had no choice in the matter, I didn't ask to be put here and I
don't know what the hell is going on, and if He don't treat me nice I'm
never going to talk to Him again.'
Or 'The physical universe made me, I who am alive, conscious and
caring, have been created by dead cold matter who cares not at all what
it has made, and looks after the well fare of its creatures even less'
So you get these 'Hell forever' or 'Death forever' philosophies
that everyone around you is so fond of. It is the cross they bear and
their burden in life.
These philosophies are the idols of stone and graven images that we
are allegorically warned to not follow nor bow down to.
'Have no God before Me' is TRUTH speaking to you ABOUT God, be that
God some Sick Joker in Heaven, or Time Stone and Dust in the Wind.
Sovereign Desire Units can effect each other, but only if they
desire to be so effected. Thus you can desire that someone else will
experience something and they will. You can desire that they be, do or
have something and they will. You can even desire that they desire
something and they will as long as everyone is agreed. Sovereign Desire
will create it all for you in the blink of a wishful eye.
Thus, as I said, you can desire that someone else will desire
something and they will. Or someone can desire that you desire
something and you will.
In this way beings can indulge in the mimicry, harmony,
counterpoint and new beat of the jam session of life.
However in this way too can serious conflict be created when you
try to create a desire in someone that goes against or opposes another
desire that he already has.
This can get you into desiring that other beings NOT desire
something so that they will respond to the desires you wish them to
have.
In this context, 'desire' and 'want' are the same thing.
You can want a girl.
You can want a girl to want you.
You can want a girl to want you to want her.
You can want a girl to not want someone else.
She can not want you.
She can want you to not want her.
She can want you to not want her to not want someone else.
An overt act occurs when you try to instill in another being a
desire that goes against their basic purpose or fundamental underlying
desire in existence.
If the thrust of their Sovereignty is to head North, and you try to
get them to head South, you are bound to get into a war of Sovereign
Desires.
Its fine if you try to get them to head slightly off course to meet
you in a nice scenic spot for lunch and a chat about good times over
good wine. Especially if the detour enhances their existence and does
not detract more than it is worth from their original heading.
In this way Sovereign Units can interact and enhance each other's
survival and existence with out sacrificing their Sovereignty any more
than necessary to interact with others in a pleasant way.
But try to recruit a Sovereign Unit into a war that he has no
interest in just because the death and slaughter benefits you
financially, and boy will you get some protest. When two Sovereign
Units get to fighting with each other, you had better watch out, they
tend to take the whole playing field down with them.
Since Sovereign Units can not die, nor actually even be permanently
damaged, it is quite interesting to watch them fight 'to the death' over
a luscious woman or some such thing.
The loser always comes back to continue the war in another body.
That's why executing criminals is so stupid, they come back as your
children or worse as your mother.
You do not want someone who has recently been executed as a
criminal for a mother.
More down to earth, the Sovereign Wars that take place between
Parent and Child are legion. They are no less violent, except that most
of it happens covertly on the mental plane, but the war wounds are just
as serious and just as lasting.
And between parent and child there is a tremendous amount of trying
to hurt the other guy by hurting yourself.
You want to cut off their heads with a chain saw, but you can't
because you are too small and tiny, so you go up to them and cut off
your OWN head with a chain saw. That'll teach them. It does too. The
problem is you are walking around without a head for the rest of time.
There is often a failure to compute acceptable losses accurately in
these wars, so people enter the zone of the walking dead, and carry
around all their childhood war wounds for the rest of their lives. And
what did it gain them?
The game decays from trying to survive, to trying to 'teach them a
lesson' no matter what.
And so it goes.
Some child wants to grow up to be a strong man and take care of his
mother in her old age, and mother wants the child to not want that, she
wants her son to want to be a doll in her doll house, to be a good
little boy that never does anything dangerous, and is always dependent
on his mother for life.
Unfortunately, the purpose of motherhood, besides providing a
nipple when its wanted, is to invent dangerous games for the child to
play, in order to train and exercise all the child's abilities before
they have to go out and assume command over their own lives and possibly
even hers in old age.
Men that take orders from their mothers after a certain age are
losers.
Thus one could come up with a full battery of processes on just
this basis.
'What have you wanted others to want?'
'What have you wanted others to not want?'
'What have others wanted you to want?'
'What have others wanted you to not want?'
If one assumes that most of the turmoil in a person's life comes
from the Parent Child relationship, then it is clear that the child is
being in the valence of the Victim receiving motivators from the Parent.
Thus running a person endlessly on what was done to him as a child by
his parents is an enormous waste of time. It will only run until the
other 3 flows jam (see below).
Clearly if being a child is the motivator end of things, then being
the Parent is the Overt side of things, so you really want to run your
poor little pc on what HE did as a parent to a child in a past life, or
even this life and future lives.
It doesn't matter if he still hasn't had children in this life, he
HAS been a parent in a past life, and he WILL be a parent in a future
life, so there is lots of overt material to get off the case.
Further some of the most dangerous charge on a case is the cross
sex charge, i.e. the losses associated with being a boy and not being a
girl, or being a girl and not being a boy. When you think you live only
once and had nothing to do with being born, then the cross sex charge is
infinite, as is the charge on mortality itself.
A Sovereign Unit that wants to live forever considers it an
infinite loss that he can not. That's a lot of girl friends he will
never have, don't you see? Infinite loss means infinite charge.
That IS the Wall of Fire. How did you become meat, Bud?
For a boy then, you are much more interested in his past lives as a
MOTHER, and for a girl you would want to concentrate on her past lives
as a FATHER.
The girl may have a lot of attention on her mother in this life as
the source of all her problems, so the temptation is to ask her what she
has done as a mother in a past life, but what was she doing with a
father in this life that LET her have such a mother in this life? Look
to her as a father in a past life for resolution of this.
Thus the general questions are as follows.
For a boy:
1.) What have you done as a mother to a son in a past life? (DED)
2.) What has a mother done to you as a son in this life? (DEDEX)
3.) What has a son done to you as a mother in a past life? (MOTIVATOR)
4.) What have you done as a son to a mother in this life? (OVERT)
For a girl:
1.) What have you done as a father to a daughter in a past life?
2.) What has a father done to you as a daughter in this life?
3.) What has a daughter done to you as a father in a past life?
4.) What have you done as a daughter to a father in this life?
Of course both boys and girls should run all valences of mother
father, son and daughter, but I think you will find the cross sex charge
to be hotter than a pancake. Its EASY to run past lives of the same
sex, hardly anything there to confront. If it was hard to confront
having been a boy, you wouldn't BE a boy in this life. Thus the sex
they are being NOW (boy) is a safe solution to the sex they couldn't bear
being again for a while (girl).
However it is clear that a boy in this life who was a mother in a
past life may have had a father in that life who did her in. Thus
another life before that you would want to know what she had done AS a
father to a daughter. It leap frogs back down the time track crossing
sex with each incident in the chain.
Its called the Cross Sex Chain.
So if he had a horrible mother in this life who ruined him utterly,
(those motivators are sticking like glue), then he must have been a
horrible mother himself a few life times back. But chances are SHE had
a horrible father, so she must have BEEN a horrible father to a daughter
even earlier producing in the daughter a horrible mother just like she
herself became a horrible mother in a later life at the hands of her own
horrible father.
So if you had a horrible mother in this life, you have to ask what
did YOU do as a FATHER to a daughter to turn her into a horrible mother,
so you would later, as a girl, get a horrible father who turned you into
a horrible mother who did horrible things to her son, so that when you
came back in this life time as a son with a horrible mother doing
horrible things to you they all stuck to you like glue.
In this life your PC is a son. In this life PC has a bad mother.
In earlier life PC WAS a bad mother. Earlier in same life PC was a
daughter. In same life PC as a daughter had a bad father. In earlier
life PC WAS a bad father. Earlier in same life PC was a son. In same
life PC as a son had a bad mother. In earlier life PC WAS a bad mother.
etc.
Overts and motivators are like taking a bath in crazy glue.
Just remember that what you did as a mother in a past life you did
as MANY MOTHERS over MANY LIFETIMES, so the cross sex chain is not just
a chain of single incidents, its a chain of chains!
Each incident on the cross sex chain, is itself on a chain of
incidents of similar kind.
Every time you were a rotten mother, there is a chain of being a
rotten mother that goes back into Antiquity.
Every time you were a rotten father, there is a chain of being a
rotten father that goes back into Antiquity.
But the chains can not be run down the same sex, they MUST be run
as intertwined. First run the pc as having a rotten mother, then as
being a rotten mother, then AS THAT MOTHER having a rotten father, then
earlier being a rotten father, then having AS THAT FATHER an earlier
rotten mother etc.
Oh, yeah every once in a while you were a good parent too.
But you are not in trouble and lost in the Sea of Eternity because
of the good things you did.
Since the primary overt act or 'done to' is to apply your Sovereign
Desire to another to get them to desire something in opposition to their
Basic Purposes, or Basic Desire, you might also want to run the above
processes more specifically as follows.
Overts On Sovereign Desire, for a boy:
'As a mother what have you wanted your son to want?' (past life)
'As a mother what have you wanted your son to not want?' (past life)
'As a son what has your mother wanted you to want?' (this life)
'As a son what has your mother wanted you to not want?' (this life)
'As a mother what has your son wanted you to want?' (past life)
'As a mother what has your son wanted you to not want?' (past life)
'As a son what have you wanted your mother to want?' (this life)
'As a son what have you wanted your mother to not want?' (this life)
There is a whole class of processes that try to get at the Basic
Purpose or GPM of your preclear. Remember each GPM has a Goal and an
Opp Goal, and also a Terminal and an Opp Terminal.
The goal is what he wants to accomplish. The terminal is the
identity or beingness that he has to be in order to accomplish that
goal. Christ wanted 'To Save The World', and his terminal identity
might have been 'A Savior'.
One way to run this has been:
'What are you being?'
'What are you opposing?'
The problem is that the preclear in the valence of the child is
being the motivator, the receiver of overts from his parents. He is
actually BEING a VICTIM, and opposing incoming overts. End of story.
Thus this process never runs.
However, he is SUFFERING from the overts of his mother, in other
words they are not just rolling off his shoulder, because of HIS overts
AS a mother in a past life. In that past life he had goals AS A MOTHER
which for one reason or another led to all the overts she committed
against HER son in that past life.
People just don't care about what's been done to them except as a
justification and restraint on what they have done to others either
before or after.
Thus what you really want to run is,
For a boy:
'As a mother what have you wanted to be?'
'As a mother what have you opposed?'
Remember that opposing someone (her son namely) involves wanting
her son to NOT want what HE wants to be, do or have, so this ties in
directly with the earlier process of Overts on Sovereign Desire.
'As a mother what have you wanted to be?'
'As a mother what has your son wanted to be?'
'As a son what has your mother wanted to be?'
'As a son what have you wanted to be?'
'As a mother what have you opposed?'
'As a mother what has your son opposed?'
'As a son what has your mother opposed?
'As a son what have you opposed?'
More directly it can be run as,
'As a mother what have you opposed in your son?' (DED)
'As a son what has your mother opposed in you?' (DEDEX)
'As a mother what has your son opposed in you?' (MOTIVATOR)
'As a son what have you opposed in your mother?' (OVERT)
The subject of deds and dedexes, motivators and overts leads
directly into the subject of Justice and Beauty, and of course Injustice
and Ugly.
Injustices are either handled and resolved as they happen or they
sink out of sight and fester.
If people are getting along, then naturally occurring injustices
that they perpetrate on each other, either intentionally or
accidentally, are being discussed, brought up, talked about, expressed
and resolved.
If an injustice does not complete cycle in this manner, then it
sinks down the tone scale into resentment, unexpressed resentment,
suppressed unexpressed resentment, and finally locked suppressed
unexpressed resentment.
Resentment means to feel again, RE SENTIR. Injustices don't go
away with out being resolved, they can never be forgotten completely,
they always surface and make you feel the wrong again and again, against
your will with you as effect, thus it never as-ises.
This can be a wrong you did to someone else, or a wrong someone
else did to you, or a wrong other's did to others', or a wrong you did
to yourself, or a wrong someone else did to themselves.
Injustice means TRUTH is not beautiful. If it doesn't get resolved
it rancors and never goes away.
When an injustice is not handled with direct and forthright
expression of your grievances the resentment becomes unexpressed. That
means you aren't talking about it any more, you aren't letting on that
you feel mad, and you might even be putting on a sweet face to make
everyone think that everything is ok with you. However you know better,
you know damn well that you are mad as hell and that you are hiding it
for what ever reason.
After a long while of being unexpressed, resentment sinks into
suppression and forgetfulness. An unexpressed resentment is one that
other's don't know about but you do. A suppressed unexpressed
resentment is one that you don't know about anymore either. You no
longer know that YOU are mad!
If this state of affairs is allowed to continue long enough, the
emotion becomes encysted in mental concrete and becomes a bear to audit
out. That's called LOCKED.
That's when you ask the meter if you are mad at anything and the
needle does nothing.
It's a case of being so mad you're dead.
Or at least disconnected from the meter, probably detached on the
awareness characteristic chart.
... hysteria, shock, catatonia, oblivion, detachment, duality,
secrecy, ...
The primary thing that causes resentment to become unexpressed is
fear, fear for your own survival, which is usually the result of a lack
of force, power or ability with which to defend your rights against
others who are stronger than you or whom you are dependent upon. Its
usually the result of seeing no way out, and being in a situation where
continuing to let your grievances be known is more dangerous to you than
it is worth.
I am sure all of you can think of times when this has been true for
you or still is. We all harbor resentments, grudges, and injustices
that are just too dangerous to air.
So the resentments fall into the range of the tone scale between
Unexpressed Resentment and Covert Hostility.
The main reason, however, that unexpressed resentment becomes
suppressed and forgotten is guilt.
Guilt makes you wonder if you DESERVE to be angry. Guilt makes you
feel sorry for the party who is wronging you, and you can't feel sorry
for someone and be angry with them at the same time. Those who try to
live this way end up in the insane asylum. Usually what happens is you
see-saw between sympathy and no-sympathy, pity and rage, anger and
regret, sorrow and fury, until you get sick of the unresolved conflict,
and you decide that it would be better to just forget the whole thing.
You think, well maybe if you forgive them, they will forgive you.
THAT'S A CO EXCUSED WITHHOLD.
You won't get mad at them if they won't get mad at you.
It's the deal of a lifetime, and it ALWAYS ends you up in the
grave.
Now look, let's be blunt here. If you are feeling guilty it's
because you are. Let's put the sweetness and light hypocrisy out of the
way for a moment and take a look at what is really going on here, for
this is the stuff of which true insanity is made.
You see it's based on an indecision. Your guilt makes you wonder.
Do they deserve your anger or not? You can't pursue justice for
yourself, if in your own eyes you don't deserve any.
Now you may not be feeling guilty over what everyone is SAYING you
SHOULD be feeling guilty about, in fact its rare that anyone has any
inkling of what you are guilty of at all, they are usually just serving
their own purposes and justifications with their accusations against
you.
Some guy rapes you and you feel guilty. He says, 'Of course you
feel guilty, you WANTED it!' And you, being real dumb, fall for this.
No the guilt rarely has anything to do with what your accusers say.
They are trying to make you feel guilty so THEY don't have to feel
guilty. Don't worry, it'll catch up with them someday. Justice Reigns.
Always has and always will.
Justice HAS to reign, because Sovereignty reigns, and Justice and
Sovereignty are the same thing.
No your own guilt is an echo from your own past, probably as a man
in a past life.
So I can not say this strongly enough, if you are feeling guilty,
you are. Guilt is ALWAYS the rattling of skeletons in your own closet.
They may however be very OLD skeletons. You can probably tell from the
guilt, the guilt will FEEL very OLD, like its a part of you FOREVER.
You FEEL LIKE YOU ARE GUILTY like you FEEL LIKE YOU ARE FLESH AND
BLOOD.
The problem of course is dating and locating exactly what the guilt
is about, because it may have nothing to do with anything you are
conscious of, and very well may come from whole track, (past and
future).
If you don't like the idea of guilt from future lives, that's fine,
just consider that people know they have propensities that they are
quite sure they will act out if the right situation occurs. Future
guilt is of this nature. You haven't done it yet, but you know you WILL
do it if given half a chance.
You know you can't be trusted, even if no one else knows it yet
because you haven't done anything yet.
The way to deal with this in auditing is to get the guilt
confessed. That leaves your mind free to pursue justice again for
yourself without any lingering doubts that you may not deserve it. Who
cares if you raped your father or someone like your father when he was
your daughter 15 life times ago, that certainly doesn't give him the
right to rape you every night when you are 3 in this life, now does it?
Two wrongs don't make a right.
The killer is that your guilt from long ago will cause you to feel
sorry for your father who is raping you NOW, and your guilt will get in
the way of effectively handling your anger at him.
It's not so important if you keep your anger to yourself until
things are safe enough to take effective action, it matters quite a lot
if you can't stand the indecision between guilt and anger and chose to
forget the whole thing.
Or maybe you just sort of let it slip out of memory's sight because
you are exhausted trying to determine if you 'deserve' all this abuse or
not, or if you still have any rights to have your grievances heard
considering what you are hiding from so long ago.
People long ago fell down into knowing by emoting, they can't know
by LOOKING any more. So they can't 'remember' any part of their past or
future lives because they can't SEE any pictures from them. But they
can still feel emotions coming through, especially during traumatic
periods in this life.
Being raped by your father is just such a traumatic period. You
want HIM to feel guilty just as YOU DID FEEL GUILTY for doing the same
thing so long ago. Your own feelings of guilt however will make you
doubt your father's guilt, maybe you deserve it after all. You see this
makes your father a good guy because maybe he is just doing to you what
you deserved all along, even if he feels guilty about it!
After all it's RIGHT to do WRONG to someone who has done WRONG.
Right?
So nothing gets handled, nothing gets confessed, it all just gets
forgotten.
That's the sinking ship effect, right down the tone scale you go
FOREVER, or at least until you get it handled.
Thus some of these things are VERY OLD indeed.
You can not run away from a co-excused withhold, you can only bury
yourself under it forever for free.
THAT is what trauma is, it is SUPPRESSED unexpressed resentment,
and that never heals until both sides come clean.
If you clean up your own side though, you will ALWAYS be able to
clean up the other side too.
There is nothing like having a clean slate yourself to help you
pull withholds on another being and put ethics in where degradation has
been festering.
Thus Christ said, 'Take the log out of your own eye, before you
take the speck out of another's.'
Sorry, it takes two to tango. You can only become the long term
permanent effect of another's indecency if you yourself have a festering
cess pool of unconfessed guilt and indecency too.
The answer is ALWAYS to get your own guilts confessed, then if your
anger at others is real it will still be around and you will be able to
do something effective with it, rather than sink down the tone scale
into the mental mausoleum of Spiritual Death at -400.0 on the Emotional
Tone Scale.
The way to happiness is a true confession (Electra).
That includes you and your father, don't you see?
Underlying every psychosomatic pain, limitation or condition is a
SUPPRESSED unexpressed resentment, locked in forgetfulness by an earlier
or later similar co excused withhold.
There are no exceptions.
Remember a CO-EXCUSED WITHHOLD is
1.) A WITHHELD MOTIVATOR and
2.) A WITHHELD OVERT
BOTH ARE TOTALLY GONE, FORGOTTEN.
If you get headaches, if you have sinusitis or allergies, if you
have nightmares, or back pains, or wake up sick every morning, if life
is an endurance match for you, if you are blind, deaf, dumb, fat and
ugly, if you can't see, if you can't be, do or have anything that you
want to, if your Desire is not Sovereign in some obvious glaring arena
of operation, then you have suppressed and forgotten unexpressed
resentments about some ugliness or injustice in your life, and
underlying that is an earlier or later crime of your own of comparable
worse magnitude.
For every indecency that you have to suffer with indignity and you
feel that you can't do anything about, you have committed an indecency
of like kind or magnitude in the past or the future which you have not
confessed, and which you are no longer aware. It is the energy to NOT
KNOW about it or to make it not have happened, or make sure it won't,
that sticks the present time travail to you.
If you weren't so busy FORGETTING your own guilt, no one could harm
you in any permanent way, it would all just roll off your shoulder and
heal after some time like it never happened. It's ironic, but the bad
things that others do to us stick to us because of what we are doing to
ourselves, namely forgetting what we wish we had not done or would not
do to others.
It's the lack of CONFESSION that counts, confession TO OURSELVES.
It helps though to have someone to confess to, to confide that you
did this thing to yourself.
So, if you want to get better, go to confession, and then take
everyone else who needs it to confession too, even if you have to drag
them there by the ear, or other relevant body part, whatever the case
may be.
I know you don't want this to happen, but you will all end up
friends in the end, and possibly even live a decent life together.
This Dream ends forever when the circle of friends are all holding
hands together again (Adore).
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Feb 11 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ado10.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)
iD8DBQFYn0R7URT1lqxE3HERAiuOAKDZYmd25Z2KnwFBMzYuwzx+5ubEvgCgh3Iy
hlw9XNbUyvUSu2CAPRx0Mpg=
=FFx1
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sat Feb 11 19:08:53 EST 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ado10.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)
iD8DBQFYn6eWURT1lqxE3HERAiOhAJ9H1IT8lGHjj2ARiEsYq+W6sIM+1gCgySp2
awlaHw5orG3iZ0fYtya+jEs=
=O/HV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
SUPPRESSED UNEXPRESSED RESENTMENT
ADO - 10
31 August 1993
Copyright (C) 1993 Homer Wilson Smith
You are a Sovereign Desire Unit.
Sovereign Desire means YOU WANT IT, YOU GOT IT.
From this vantage point the being creates limitations for himself
and others, in concert with their Sovereign Desires, in order to create
a game.
This is called Majesty.
Majesty means Master of Jest, master of practical jokes, for self
limitations are majestic practical jokes of magnitude.
J.E.S.T stands for Jokes of Eternal Self Treason
J.E.S.T stands for Justice of Eternal Self Truth
As long as a person is aware of these limitations as creations of
his own Sovereign Desire, then he can maintain his sense of Sovereignty
and Good Humor, inspite of surprise, and still have a game.
However he can also choose to lose his sense of Sovereignty which
means run into a limitation that he thinks he didn't make. This creates
an upset of magnitude, but also creates a game of magnitude.
Thus you get into philosophies that run something like, 'God made
me, I had no choice in the matter, I didn't ask to be put here and I
don't know what the hell is going on, and if He don't treat me nice I'm
never going to talk to Him again.'
Or 'The physical universe made me, I who am alive, conscious and
caring, have been created by dead cold matter who cares not at all what
it has made, and looks after the well fare of its creatures even less'
So you get these 'Hell forever' or 'Death forever' philosophies
that everyone around you is so fond of. It is the cross they bear and
their burden in life.
These philosophies are the idols of stone and graven images that we
are allegorically warned to not follow nor bow down to.
'Have no God before Me' is TRUTH speaking to you ABOUT God, be that
God some Sick Joker in Heaven, or Time Stone and Dust in the Wind.
Sovereign Desire Units can effect each other, but only if they
desire to be so effected. Thus you can desire that someone else will
experience something and they will. You can desire that they be, do or
have something and they will. You can even desire that they desire
something and they will as long as everyone is agreed. Sovereign Desire
will create it all for you in the blink of a wishful eye.
Thus, as I said, you can desire that someone else will desire
something and they will. Or someone can desire that you desire
something and you will.
In this way beings can indulge in the mimicry, harmony,
counterpoint and new beat of the jam session of life.
However in this way too can serious conflict be created when you
try to create a desire in someone that goes against or opposes another
desire that he already has.
This can get you into desiring that other beings NOT desire
something so that they will respond to the desires you wish them to
have.
In this context, 'desire' and 'want' are the same thing.
You can want a girl.
You can want a girl to want you.
You can want a girl to want you to want her.
You can want a girl to not want someone else.
She can not want you.
She can want you to not want her.
She can want you to not want her to not want someone else.
An overt act occurs when you try to instill in another being a
desire that goes against their basic purpose or fundamental underlying
desire in existence.
If the thrust of their Sovereignty is to head North, and you try to
get them to head South, you are bound to get into a war of Sovereign
Desires.
Its fine if you try to get them to head slightly off course to meet
you in a nice scenic spot for lunch and a chat about good times over
good wine. Especially if the detour enhances their existence and does
not detract more than it is worth from their original heading.
In this way Sovereign Units can interact and enhance each other's
survival and existence with out sacrificing their Sovereignty any more
than necessary to interact with others in a pleasant way.
But try to recruit a Sovereign Unit into a war that he has no
interest in just because the death and slaughter benefits you
financially, and boy will you get some protest. When two Sovereign
Units get to fighting with each other, you had better watch out, they
tend to take the whole playing field down with them.
Since Sovereign Units can not die, nor actually even be permanently
damaged, it is quite interesting to watch them fight 'to the death' over
a luscious woman or some such thing.
The loser always comes back to continue the war in another body.
That's why executing criminals is so stupid, they come back as your
children or worse as your mother.
You do not want someone who has recently been executed as a
criminal for a mother.
More down to earth, the Sovereign Wars that take place between
Parent and Child are legion. They are no less violent, except that most
of it happens covertly on the mental plane, but the war wounds are just
as serious and just as lasting.
And between parent and child there is a tremendous amount of trying
to hurt the other guy by hurting yourself.
You want to cut off their heads with a chain saw, but you can't
because you are too small and tiny, so you go up to them and cut off
your OWN head with a chain saw. That'll teach them. It does too. The
problem is you are walking around without a head for the rest of time.
There is often a failure to compute acceptable losses accurately in
these wars, so people enter the zone of the walking dead, and carry
around all their childhood war wounds for the rest of their lives. And
what did it gain them?
The game decays from trying to survive, to trying to 'teach them a
lesson' no matter what.
And so it goes.
Some child wants to grow up to be a strong man and take care of his
mother in her old age, and mother wants the child to not want that, she
wants her son to want to be a doll in her doll house, to be a good
little boy that never does anything dangerous, and is always dependent
on his mother for life.
Unfortunately, the purpose of motherhood, besides providing a
nipple when its wanted, is to invent dangerous games for the child to
play, in order to train and exercise all the child's abilities before
they have to go out and assume command over their own lives and possibly
even hers in old age.
Men that take orders from their mothers after a certain age are
losers.
Thus one could come up with a full battery of processes on just
this basis.
'What have you wanted others to want?'
'What have you wanted others to not want?'
'What have others wanted you to want?'
'What have others wanted you to not want?'
If one assumes that most of the turmoil in a person's life comes
from the Parent Child relationship, then it is clear that the child is
being in the valence of the Victim receiving motivators from the Parent.
Thus running a person endlessly on what was done to him as a child by
his parents is an enormous waste of time. It will only run until the
other 3 flows jam (see below).
Clearly if being a child is the motivator end of things, then being
the Parent is the Overt side of things, so you really want to run your
poor little pc on what HE did as a parent to a child in a past life, or
even this life and future lives.
It doesn't matter if he still hasn't had children in this life, he
HAS been a parent in a past life, and he WILL be a parent in a future
life, so there is lots of overt material to get off the case.
Further some of the most dangerous charge on a case is the cross
sex charge, i.e. the losses associated with being a boy and not being a
girl, or being a girl and not being a boy. When you think you live only
once and had nothing to do with being born, then the cross sex charge is
infinite, as is the charge on mortality itself.
A Sovereign Unit that wants to live forever considers it an
infinite loss that he can not. That's a lot of girl friends he will
never have, don't you see? Infinite loss means infinite charge.
That IS the Wall of Fire. How did you become meat, Bud?
For a boy then, you are much more interested in his past lives as a
MOTHER, and for a girl you would want to concentrate on her past lives
as a FATHER.
The girl may have a lot of attention on her mother in this life as
the source of all her problems, so the temptation is to ask her what she
has done as a mother in a past life, but what was she doing with a
father in this life that LET her have such a mother in this life? Look
to her as a father in a past life for resolution of this.
Thus the general questions are as follows.
For a boy:
1.) What have you done as a mother to a son in a past life? (DED)
2.) What has a mother done to you as a son in this life? (DEDEX)
3.) What has a son done to you as a mother in a past life? (MOTIVATOR)
4.) What have you done as a son to a mother in this life? (OVERT)
For a girl:
1.) What have you done as a father to a daughter in a past life?
2.) What has a father done to you as a daughter in this life?
3.) What has a daughter done to you as a father in a past life?
4.) What have you done as a daughter to a father in this life?
Of course both boys and girls should run all valences of mother
father, son and daughter, but I think you will find the cross sex charge
to be hotter than a pancake. Its EASY to run past lives of the same
sex, hardly anything there to confront. If it was hard to confront
having been a boy, you wouldn't BE a boy in this life. Thus the sex
they are being NOW (boy) is a safe solution to the sex they couldn't bear
being again for a while (girl).
However it is clear that a boy in this life who was a mother in a
past life may have had a father in that life who did her in. Thus
another life before that you would want to know what she had done AS a
father to a daughter. It leap frogs back down the time track crossing
sex with each incident in the chain.
Its called the Cross Sex Chain.
So if he had a horrible mother in this life who ruined him utterly,
(those motivators are sticking like glue), then he must have been a
horrible mother himself a few life times back. But chances are SHE had
a horrible father, so she must have BEEN a horrible father to a daughter
even earlier producing in the daughter a horrible mother just like she
herself became a horrible mother in a later life at the hands of her own
horrible father.
So if you had a horrible mother in this life, you have to ask what
did YOU do as a FATHER to a daughter to turn her into a horrible mother,
so you would later, as a girl, get a horrible father who turned you into
a horrible mother who did horrible things to her son, so that when you
came back in this life time as a son with a horrible mother doing
horrible things to you they all stuck to you like glue.
In this life your PC is a son. In this life PC has a bad mother.
In earlier life PC WAS a bad mother. Earlier in same life PC was a
daughter. In same life PC as a daughter had a bad father. In earlier
life PC WAS a bad father. Earlier in same life PC was a son. In same
life PC as a son had a bad mother. In earlier life PC WAS a bad mother.
etc.
Overts and motivators are like taking a bath in crazy glue.
Just remember that what you did as a mother in a past life you did
as MANY MOTHERS over MANY LIFETIMES, so the cross sex chain is not just
a chain of single incidents, its a chain of chains!
Each incident on the cross sex chain, is itself on a chain of
incidents of similar kind.
Every time you were a rotten mother, there is a chain of being a
rotten mother that goes back into Antiquity.
Every time you were a rotten father, there is a chain of being a
rotten father that goes back into Antiquity.
But the chains can not be run down the same sex, they MUST be run
as intertwined. First run the pc as having a rotten mother, then as
being a rotten mother, then AS THAT MOTHER having a rotten father, then
earlier being a rotten father, then having AS THAT FATHER an earlier
rotten mother etc.
Oh, yeah every once in a while you were a good parent too.
But you are not in trouble and lost in the Sea of Eternity because
of the good things you did.
Since the primary overt act or 'done to' is to apply your Sovereign
Desire to another to get them to desire something in opposition to their
Basic Purposes, or Basic Desire, you might also want to run the above
processes more specifically as follows.
Overts On Sovereign Desire, for a boy:
'As a mother what have you wanted your son to want?' (past life)
'As a mother what have you wanted your son to not want?' (past life)
'As a son what has your mother wanted you to want?' (this life)
'As a son what has your mother wanted you to not want?' (this life)
'As a mother what has your son wanted you to want?' (past life)
'As a mother what has your son wanted you to not want?' (past life)
'As a son what have you wanted your mother to want?' (this life)
'As a son what have you wanted your mother to not want?' (this life)
There is a whole class of processes that try to get at the Basic
Purpose or GPM of your preclear. Remember each GPM has a Goal and an
Opp Goal, and also a Terminal and an Opp Terminal.
The goal is what he wants to accomplish. The terminal is the
identity or beingness that he has to be in order to accomplish that
goal. Christ wanted 'To Save The World', and his terminal identity
might have been 'A Savior'.
One way to run this has been:
'What are you being?'
'What are you opposing?'
The problem is that the preclear in the valence of the child is
being the motivator, the receiver of overts from his parents. He is
actually BEING a VICTIM, and opposing incoming overts. End of story.
Thus this process never runs.
However, he is SUFFERING from the overts of his mother, in other
words they are not just rolling off his shoulder, because of HIS overts
AS a mother in a past life. In that past life he had goals AS A MOTHER
which for one reason or another led to all the overts she committed
against HER son in that past life.
People just don't care about what's been done to them except as a
justification and restraint on what they have done to others either
before or after.
Thus what you really want to run is,
For a boy:
'As a mother what have you wanted to be?'
'As a mother what have you opposed?'
Remember that opposing someone (her son namely) involves wanting
her son to NOT want what HE wants to be, do or have, so this ties in
directly with the earlier process of Overts on Sovereign Desire.
'As a mother what have you wanted to be?'
'As a mother what has your son wanted to be?'
'As a son what has your mother wanted to be?'
'As a son what have you wanted to be?'
'As a mother what have you opposed?'
'As a mother what has your son opposed?'
'As a son what has your mother opposed?
'As a son what have you opposed?'
More directly it can be run as,
'As a mother what have you opposed in your son?' (DED)
'As a son what has your mother opposed in you?' (DEDEX)
'As a mother what has your son opposed in you?' (MOTIVATOR)
'As a son what have you opposed in your mother?' (OVERT)
The subject of deds and dedexes, motivators and overts leads
directly into the subject of Justice and Beauty, and of course Injustice
and Ugly.
Injustices are either handled and resolved as they happen or they
sink out of sight and fester.
If people are getting along, then naturally occurring injustices
that they perpetrate on each other, either intentionally or
accidentally, are being discussed, brought up, talked about, expressed
and resolved.
If an injustice does not complete cycle in this manner, then it
sinks down the tone scale into resentment, unexpressed resentment,
suppressed unexpressed resentment, and finally locked suppressed
unexpressed resentment.
Resentment means to feel again, RE SENTIR. Injustices don't go
away with out being resolved, they can never be forgotten completely,
they always surface and make you feel the wrong again and again, against
your will with you as effect, thus it never as-ises.
This can be a wrong you did to someone else, or a wrong someone
else did to you, or a wrong other's did to others', or a wrong you did
to yourself, or a wrong someone else did to themselves.
Injustice means TRUTH is not beautiful. If it doesn't get resolved
it rancors and never goes away.
When an injustice is not handled with direct and forthright
expression of your grievances the resentment becomes unexpressed. That
means you aren't talking about it any more, you aren't letting on that
you feel mad, and you might even be putting on a sweet face to make
everyone think that everything is ok with you. However you know better,
you know damn well that you are mad as hell and that you are hiding it
for what ever reason.
After a long while of being unexpressed, resentment sinks into
suppression and forgetfulness. An unexpressed resentment is one that
other's don't know about but you do. A suppressed unexpressed
resentment is one that you don't know about anymore either. You no
longer know that YOU are mad!
If this state of affairs is allowed to continue long enough, the
emotion becomes encysted in mental concrete and becomes a bear to audit
out. That's called LOCKED.
That's when you ask the meter if you are mad at anything and the
needle does nothing.
It's a case of being so mad you're dead.
Or at least disconnected from the meter, probably detached on the
awareness characteristic chart.
... hysteria, shock, catatonia, oblivion, detachment, duality,
secrecy, ...
The primary thing that causes resentment to become unexpressed is
fear, fear for your own survival, which is usually the result of a lack
of force, power or ability with which to defend your rights against
others who are stronger than you or whom you are dependent upon. Its
usually the result of seeing no way out, and being in a situation where
continuing to let your grievances be known is more dangerous to you than
it is worth.
I am sure all of you can think of times when this has been true for
you or still is. We all harbor resentments, grudges, and injustices
that are just too dangerous to air.
So the resentments fall into the range of the tone scale between
Unexpressed Resentment and Covert Hostility.
The main reason, however, that unexpressed resentment becomes
suppressed and forgotten is guilt.
Guilt makes you wonder if you DESERVE to be angry. Guilt makes you
feel sorry for the party who is wronging you, and you can't feel sorry
for someone and be angry with them at the same time. Those who try to
live this way end up in the insane asylum. Usually what happens is you
see-saw between sympathy and no-sympathy, pity and rage, anger and
regret, sorrow and fury, until you get sick of the unresolved conflict,
and you decide that it would be better to just forget the whole thing.
You think, well maybe if you forgive them, they will forgive you.
THAT'S A CO EXCUSED WITHHOLD.
You won't get mad at them if they won't get mad at you.
It's the deal of a lifetime, and it ALWAYS ends you up in the
grave.
Now look, let's be blunt here. If you are feeling guilty it's
because you are. Let's put the sweetness and light hypocrisy out of the
way for a moment and take a look at what is really going on here, for
this is the stuff of which true insanity is made.
You see it's based on an indecision. Your guilt makes you wonder.
Do they deserve your anger or not? You can't pursue justice for
yourself, if in your own eyes you don't deserve any.
Now you may not be feeling guilty over what everyone is SAYING you
SHOULD be feeling guilty about, in fact its rare that anyone has any
inkling of what you are guilty of at all, they are usually just serving
their own purposes and justifications with their accusations against
you.
Some guy rapes you and you feel guilty. He says, 'Of course you
feel guilty, you WANTED it!' And you, being real dumb, fall for this.
No the guilt rarely has anything to do with what your accusers say.
They are trying to make you feel guilty so THEY don't have to feel
guilty. Don't worry, it'll catch up with them someday. Justice Reigns.
Always has and always will.
Justice HAS to reign, because Sovereignty reigns, and Justice and
Sovereignty are the same thing.
No your own guilt is an echo from your own past, probably as a man
in a past life.
So I can not say this strongly enough, if you are feeling guilty,
you are. Guilt is ALWAYS the rattling of skeletons in your own closet.
They may however be very OLD skeletons. You can probably tell from the
guilt, the guilt will FEEL very OLD, like its a part of you FOREVER.
You FEEL LIKE YOU ARE GUILTY like you FEEL LIKE YOU ARE FLESH AND
BLOOD.
The problem of course is dating and locating exactly what the guilt
is about, because it may have nothing to do with anything you are
conscious of, and very well may come from whole track, (past and
future).
If you don't like the idea of guilt from future lives, that's fine,
just consider that people know they have propensities that they are
quite sure they will act out if the right situation occurs. Future
guilt is of this nature. You haven't done it yet, but you know you WILL
do it if given half a chance.
You know you can't be trusted, even if no one else knows it yet
because you haven't done anything yet.
The way to deal with this in auditing is to get the guilt
confessed. That leaves your mind free to pursue justice again for
yourself without any lingering doubts that you may not deserve it. Who
cares if you raped your father or someone like your father when he was
your daughter 15 life times ago, that certainly doesn't give him the
right to rape you every night when you are 3 in this life, now does it?
Two wrongs don't make a right.
The killer is that your guilt from long ago will cause you to feel
sorry for your father who is raping you NOW, and your guilt will get in
the way of effectively handling your anger at him.
It's not so important if you keep your anger to yourself until
things are safe enough to take effective action, it matters quite a lot
if you can't stand the indecision between guilt and anger and chose to
forget the whole thing.
Or maybe you just sort of let it slip out of memory's sight because
you are exhausted trying to determine if you 'deserve' all this abuse or
not, or if you still have any rights to have your grievances heard
considering what you are hiding from so long ago.
People long ago fell down into knowing by emoting, they can't know
by LOOKING any more. So they can't 'remember' any part of their past or
future lives because they can't SEE any pictures from them. But they
can still feel emotions coming through, especially during traumatic
periods in this life.
Being raped by your father is just such a traumatic period. You
want HIM to feel guilty just as YOU DID FEEL GUILTY for doing the same
thing so long ago. Your own feelings of guilt however will make you
doubt your father's guilt, maybe you deserve it after all. You see this
makes your father a good guy because maybe he is just doing to you what
you deserved all along, even if he feels guilty about it!
After all it's RIGHT to do WRONG to someone who has done WRONG.
Right?
So nothing gets handled, nothing gets confessed, it all just gets
forgotten.
That's the sinking ship effect, right down the tone scale you go
FOREVER, or at least until you get it handled.
Thus some of these things are VERY OLD indeed.
You can not run away from a co-excused withhold, you can only bury
yourself under it forever for free.
THAT is what trauma is, it is SUPPRESSED unexpressed resentment,
and that never heals until both sides come clean.
If you clean up your own side though, you will ALWAYS be able to
clean up the other side too.
There is nothing like having a clean slate yourself to help you
pull withholds on another being and put ethics in where degradation has
been festering.
Thus Christ said, 'Take the log out of your own eye, before you
take the speck out of another's.'
Sorry, it takes two to tango. You can only become the long term
permanent effect of another's indecency if you yourself have a festering
cess pool of unconfessed guilt and indecency too.
The answer is ALWAYS to get your own guilts confessed, then if your
anger at others is real it will still be around and you will be able to
do something effective with it, rather than sink down the tone scale
into the mental mausoleum of Spiritual Death at -400.0 on the Emotional
Tone Scale.
The way to happiness is a true confession (Electra).
That includes you and your father, don't you see?
Underlying every psychosomatic pain, limitation or condition is a
SUPPRESSED unexpressed resentment, locked in forgetfulness by an earlier
or later similar co excused withhold.
There are no exceptions.
Remember a CO-EXCUSED WITHHOLD is
1.) A WITHHELD MOTIVATOR and
2.) A WITHHELD OVERT
BOTH ARE TOTALLY GONE, FORGOTTEN.
If you get headaches, if you have sinusitis or allergies, if you
have nightmares, or back pains, or wake up sick every morning, if life
is an endurance match for you, if you are blind, deaf, dumb, fat and
ugly, if you can't see, if you can't be, do or have anything that you
want to, if your Desire is not Sovereign in some obvious glaring arena
of operation, then you have suppressed and forgotten unexpressed
resentments about some ugliness or injustice in your life, and
underlying that is an earlier or later crime of your own of comparable
worse magnitude.
For every indecency that you have to suffer with indignity and you
feel that you can't do anything about, you have committed an indecency
of like kind or magnitude in the past or the future which you have not
confessed, and which you are no longer aware. It is the energy to NOT
KNOW about it or to make it not have happened, or make sure it won't,
that sticks the present time travail to you.
If you weren't so busy FORGETTING your own guilt, no one could harm
you in any permanent way, it would all just roll off your shoulder and
heal after some time like it never happened. It's ironic, but the bad
things that others do to us stick to us because of what we are doing to
ourselves, namely forgetting what we wish we had not done or would not
do to others.
It's the lack of CONFESSION that counts, confession TO OURSELVES.
It helps though to have someone to confess to, to confide that you
did this thing to yourself.
So, if you want to get better, go to confession, and then take
everyone else who needs it to confession too, even if you have to drag
them there by the ear, or other relevant body part, whatever the case
may be.
I know you don't want this to happen, but you will all end up
friends in the end, and possibly even live a decent life together.
This Dream ends forever when the circle of friends are all holding
hands together again (Adore).
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Feb 11 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ado10.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)
iD8DBQFYn0R7URT1lqxE3HERAiuOAKDZYmd25Z2KnwFBMzYuwzx+5ubEvgCgh3Iy
hlw9XNbUyvUSu2CAPRx0Mpg=
=FFx1
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sat Feb 11 19:08:53 EST 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ado10.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)
iD8DBQFYn6eWURT1lqxE3HERAiOhAJ9H1IT8lGHjj2ARiEsYq+W6sIM+1gCgySp2
awlaHw5orG3iZ0fYtya+jEs=
=O/HV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Friday, February 10, 2017
ADORE988
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SOLO VS DUAL
Just try to understand the situtation.
You are in a universe.
The universe has a swamp in it.
The swamp has a car in it.
The car has your body in it.
Your body has YOU in it.
YOU now create and HAVE a restimulatable facsimile of all of the
above.
So does your body and 10 to the gobzillion BT's and Clusters. that
are in your space and make up your body and extend out to the edges of
the universe.
You also have a fair chosen need to stick this facsimile on your
self as a key-in in this life as a solution to a problem, so:
You are now in a facsimile of a universe, with a swamp in it, with
a car in it, with a body in it, with you in it.
Lower dual auditing tries to audit either
1.) the key in moment of the facsimile in this life as a useful service
fac, or
2.) the creation moment of the facsimile many lifetimes ago.
"Go to the beginning of the incident, grind your nose flat with it,
tell me what happened (running the incident is another incident!), go to
the beginning, grind your nose..." etc until flat or erased.
Solo using causal conception says:
Get the idea of a universe.
Get the idea of a swamp.
Get the idea of a car.
Get the idea of a body.
Get the idea of you.
Repeat until too ludicrous to consider.
That will run the creation of the facsimile.
Now get the idea of needing an excuse that is convincing, and will
also help you run your life FOR YOU so you can just sit back and it
drive.
Get the idea of not needing an excuse that is convincing, and
driving your own life.
Run until you can make needing or not needing an excuse, either way
just by conceiving and unconceiving of it.
You will probably have to alternate between running the creation of
the facsimile and the USE of the facsimile, that puts you WAY down the
whole track, then up here in this life, then WAY down the whole track,
then up here in this life, and causes a loosening up of being able to
move on the track, because each lock up on the track consists of TWO
pieces of track.
The first piece of track is what was keyed in, and the second piece
of track is when it was keyed in and why.
All case incidents were created in one moment of time and used
later in another moment of time, so you will have to deal with a
unflattened mess of two moments of time making the present time chronic
somatic in your face.
As usual every incident has a WHAT, WHY, WHEN, and also a WHO and
HOW MANY.
What happened, why it happened and when it happened.
What was keyed in, why it was keyed in and when it was keyed in,
(pre speech).
Also more generally we can say:
The PAST is WHAT was keyed in.
The PRESENT is HOW it is being keyed in.
The FUTURE is WHY it is being keyed in.
The agency that makes it all work is all in present time.
But that agency, you, is concerned about the future, and has access
to the past, and is using the past to excuse the future in present time.
So auditing your FUTURE will blow the service fac into sight.
Get the idea of SOME FUTURE.
Get the idea of NO FUTURE.
Also the service fac USE is undoubtedly yours, the facsimile itself
is almost assuredly not, stuff that has happened to you is almost never
to convincing, but stuff that has happened to others or you did to
others is stomach curdling and anyone will accept it as the 'Poor Dear
You!' that you sought, just so they don't have to conceive it any more.
The best facsimile to use against your parents is one taken from a
universe THEY have never been in, that gives them the thought "Wow, no
one could make this up!"
Thus there are multiple ownerships in each squash in the face
somatic, just as there are two times.
And then there are God knows how many earlier similars until you
get to basic basic of conceiving being an effect, ruin, disaster,
catastrophe, hysteria, shock, catatonia, oblivion and gone.
Down below nonexistence the being will be found to be circling
around in Luck, Chance, Fortune, Destiny and Fate.
High Reponsibility cases in other words.
Just run them top down.
Get the idea of NO LUCK.
Get the idea of SOME LUCK.
Maybe add GOOD and BAD to them.
Get the idea of NO GOOD FORTUNE.
Get the idea of SOME GOOD FORTUNE.
Get the idea of NO BAD FORTUNE.
Get the idea of SOME BAD FORTUNE.
Run them all.
The guy who "can't make mockups", this is what he isn't making.
E/P Inkling of total responsibility.
But for God's sake don't forget QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, these keep
the bank totally stirred up and hard as a suppressed rock.
WHO, HOW, WHAT, WHERE, WHY, WHICH, IS IT, DOES IT? etc.
Run all of them on trying to answer a question, and trying to
question an answer out of every incident you find, as it is the seeking
questions and answers that ultimately cause CONTINUANCE of anything
created.
So you mockup an blue elephant, who cares.
But then you start mocking up questions about the elephant.
Mocking up means causally conceiving.
Whose elephant is it?
How did that elephant get here?
What kind of elephant is it?
Where the hell am I that there should be a blue elephant there?
Why is that elephant blue?
Which elephant is this?
Is this really an elephant or what?
You see?
NOW you have an elephant that not even Ron Hubbard could get rid
of.
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
> Solo processing the more difficult parts of case is like you
>pulling your car out of the swamp, with a rope.
Homer Said:
No, its worse than that, its like you putting the universe and the
swamp and your car there, and then running the car intentionally into the
swamp enough times to get the ludicrosity of it and it vanish as if it
never happened.
Solo is a top down activity.
Dual is a bottom up activity.
Homer
Fri Dec 4 19:42:43 EST 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Feb 10 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore988.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)
iD8DBQFYnfL7URT1lqxE3HERAoV/AKCxXA/FrXMtiIa3trKwrC1H7IJtcQCcCAU1
JTtM61oqG9inCFqBiS3oT0M=
=u62N
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Feb 10 16:27:35 EST 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore988.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)
iD8DBQFYnjBHURT1lqxE3HERAijZAJ9HfYtZ8Znm9qXgHx8QkllFebFnyQCgrXX2
5T9FjqPG/wf0UKjO1I/btQ4=
=jdy1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SOLO VS DUAL
Just try to understand the situtation.
You are in a universe.
The universe has a swamp in it.
The swamp has a car in it.
The car has your body in it.
Your body has YOU in it.
YOU now create and HAVE a restimulatable facsimile of all of the
above.
So does your body and 10 to the gobzillion BT's and Clusters. that
are in your space and make up your body and extend out to the edges of
the universe.
You also have a fair chosen need to stick this facsimile on your
self as a key-in in this life as a solution to a problem, so:
You are now in a facsimile of a universe, with a swamp in it, with
a car in it, with a body in it, with you in it.
Lower dual auditing tries to audit either
1.) the key in moment of the facsimile in this life as a useful service
fac, or
2.) the creation moment of the facsimile many lifetimes ago.
"Go to the beginning of the incident, grind your nose flat with it,
tell me what happened (running the incident is another incident!), go to
the beginning, grind your nose..." etc until flat or erased.
Solo using causal conception says:
Get the idea of a universe.
Get the idea of a swamp.
Get the idea of a car.
Get the idea of a body.
Get the idea of you.
Repeat until too ludicrous to consider.
That will run the creation of the facsimile.
Now get the idea of needing an excuse that is convincing, and will
also help you run your life FOR YOU so you can just sit back and it
drive.
Get the idea of not needing an excuse that is convincing, and
driving your own life.
Run until you can make needing or not needing an excuse, either way
just by conceiving and unconceiving of it.
You will probably have to alternate between running the creation of
the facsimile and the USE of the facsimile, that puts you WAY down the
whole track, then up here in this life, then WAY down the whole track,
then up here in this life, and causes a loosening up of being able to
move on the track, because each lock up on the track consists of TWO
pieces of track.
The first piece of track is what was keyed in, and the second piece
of track is when it was keyed in and why.
All case incidents were created in one moment of time and used
later in another moment of time, so you will have to deal with a
unflattened mess of two moments of time making the present time chronic
somatic in your face.
As usual every incident has a WHAT, WHY, WHEN, and also a WHO and
HOW MANY.
What happened, why it happened and when it happened.
What was keyed in, why it was keyed in and when it was keyed in,
(pre speech).
Also more generally we can say:
The PAST is WHAT was keyed in.
The PRESENT is HOW it is being keyed in.
The FUTURE is WHY it is being keyed in.
The agency that makes it all work is all in present time.
But that agency, you, is concerned about the future, and has access
to the past, and is using the past to excuse the future in present time.
So auditing your FUTURE will blow the service fac into sight.
Get the idea of SOME FUTURE.
Get the idea of NO FUTURE.
Also the service fac USE is undoubtedly yours, the facsimile itself
is almost assuredly not, stuff that has happened to you is almost never
to convincing, but stuff that has happened to others or you did to
others is stomach curdling and anyone will accept it as the 'Poor Dear
You!' that you sought, just so they don't have to conceive it any more.
The best facsimile to use against your parents is one taken from a
universe THEY have never been in, that gives them the thought "Wow, no
one could make this up!"
Thus there are multiple ownerships in each squash in the face
somatic, just as there are two times.
And then there are God knows how many earlier similars until you
get to basic basic of conceiving being an effect, ruin, disaster,
catastrophe, hysteria, shock, catatonia, oblivion and gone.
Down below nonexistence the being will be found to be circling
around in Luck, Chance, Fortune, Destiny and Fate.
High Reponsibility cases in other words.
Just run them top down.
Get the idea of NO LUCK.
Get the idea of SOME LUCK.
Maybe add GOOD and BAD to them.
Get the idea of NO GOOD FORTUNE.
Get the idea of SOME GOOD FORTUNE.
Get the idea of NO BAD FORTUNE.
Get the idea of SOME BAD FORTUNE.
Run them all.
The guy who "can't make mockups", this is what he isn't making.
E/P Inkling of total responsibility.
But for God's sake don't forget QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, these keep
the bank totally stirred up and hard as a suppressed rock.
WHO, HOW, WHAT, WHERE, WHY, WHICH, IS IT, DOES IT? etc.
Run all of them on trying to answer a question, and trying to
question an answer out of every incident you find, as it is the seeking
questions and answers that ultimately cause CONTINUANCE of anything
created.
So you mockup an blue elephant, who cares.
But then you start mocking up questions about the elephant.
Mocking up means causally conceiving.
Whose elephant is it?
How did that elephant get here?
What kind of elephant is it?
Where the hell am I that there should be a blue elephant there?
Why is that elephant blue?
Which elephant is this?
Is this really an elephant or what?
You see?
NOW you have an elephant that not even Ron Hubbard could get rid
of.
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
> Solo processing the more difficult parts of case is like you
>pulling your car out of the swamp, with a rope.
Homer Said:
No, its worse than that, its like you putting the universe and the
swamp and your car there, and then running the car intentionally into the
swamp enough times to get the ludicrosity of it and it vanish as if it
never happened.
Solo is a top down activity.
Dual is a bottom up activity.
Homer
Fri Dec 4 19:42:43 EST 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Feb 10 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore988.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)
iD8DBQFYnfL7URT1lqxE3HERAoV/AKCxXA/FrXMtiIa3trKwrC1H7IJtcQCcCAU1
JTtM61oqG9inCFqBiS3oT0M=
=u62N
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Feb 10 16:27:35 EST 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore988.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)
iD8DBQFYnjBHURT1lqxE3HERAijZAJ9HfYtZ8Znm9qXgHx8QkllFebFnyQCgrXX2
5T9FjqPG/wf0UKjO1I/btQ4=
=jdy1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Thursday, February 9, 2017
SCI21 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
TO DEMONSTRATE OR NOT TO DEMONSTRATE OT POWERS
SCI - 21
Copyright (C) 1992 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
John,
The subject of proof is a big one. So for the moment I wish to
post a poetic cop out to your question, but I promise to keep it under
consideration.
Do OT's have superhuman powers?
I would presume so.
What are they?
Anything you can imagine, including the creation of universes,
people in those universes, and the ability to become those people in
those universes asking questions about OT.
Can these powers be demonstrated?
Yes, certainly some of the more physical powers surely can be
demonstrated.
Should they be demonstrated?
That would depend on the individual OT who had them and who had to
be accountable for the effects that demonstrating his powers would have.
You mentioned SHOCK in your question about OT's coming to visit
your place out of their body and reporting back to you what they had
seen.
The awareness characteristic scale puts shock at -16,
-14 Delusion
-15 Hysteria
-16 Shock
-17 Catatonia
-18 Oblivion
Thus causing any form of shock to a populace at large could hardly
be considered good for a civilization.
Hubbard taught us to do everything on a gradient scale, which means
little by little, not all at once. Therefore enormous displays of
unquestionable demonstrations were frowned upon by Hubbard.
I would tend to agree.
It is very dangerous to demonstrate power to those who do not have
power.
Those who have power know this.
Those who do not have power, don't know this.
What can you do?
Now here is the cop out, if you are serious about getting proof of
power I would instead audit you on the subject of power until some power
opened up in you. It needn't be actual abilities to move rocks or
things, but you would get a clear idea that what ever power you desire
is available and in fact you would settle back down into being
comfortably able to NOT have power for a while, or at least until you
were more ready for it.
Just consider what would happen to you if you had the ability to go
anywhere on the planet and see anyone doing anything they were doing,
and you could kill anyone with an electrical spark to the brain or
heart. (Nipping, History of Man).
Now the auditing question would be something like,
'Tell me what would happen over time if you had this power?'
The correct E/P of this process would be an experience of power
opening up inside yourself, certainty that power exists, and a settling
out of your willingness to have or not have power as you wished.
Another process for handling people's problems with proof, would
be,
'What evidence do you have that you are not an OT?'
'What evidence do you have that you are an OT?'
What this will turn up are quite a number of false certainties
that people are walking around in that prevent the possibility of
believing in OT. Once they see that these false certainties are just
not supportable, the possibility OPENS UP that OT is possible, and they
can approach it again with a new look.
The point is that if someone is an OT and no longer believes this,
they clearly have chosen to prove to themselves down the whole track
that they are not an OT and neither is anyone else.
For you to then go and present them with incontrovertible proof
that they are wrong, would merely open up a very old wound, an OT wound,
that would probably severely hurt the person or his body.
So although I am truly copping out on a direct answer to your
question, for reasons that I believe to be justified, I am at the same
time presenting you with auditing procedures that you can use on
yourself or someone else to set off a spark of power within your own
space and to open the door to your own further private investigations
free from the harrasment of others.
Others who wish you to prove your powers, wish so because they hope
you have none, or because they want you to use them to take care of
them.
People who demand proof often have a hidden agenda.
Proof is available that THEY have power, not that other's already
have it.
Proof is available for that too but no one with power would be
likely to prove it unless it was part of a larger world changing plan to
do so. In which case they would do it anyhow on their own schedule and
not because someone ask them to.
Here are some more auditing questions to run solo or co audit:
'What would you do with power?'
'What would you not do with power?'
'Why should you have power?'
'Why should you not have power?'
By the way the Power Processes of the Church (Grade V) deal with
just this subject. They are held confidential because when run properly
they cause a person to revivify some of the worst moments on his track.
People have little problem with believing in past lives when they
are reliving one as if it were now.
Before such a reviv it may be hard to get real on anything in the
memory, because so much energy is being directed at keeping this one set
of memories at bay.
The power processes by the way are NOT held confidential in the
field and are in fact used in routine auditing as they go quickly and
directly to the center of the case.
If the case is ready for it.
The Power Processes were developed by Ron Hubbard in tandem with
John McMaster at Saint Hill to help crack seriously resistive cases.
John McMaster was Scientology's first confirmed clear, and left the
Church in the early 70's or so.
He made many tapes that are circulating around the field that add a
deep insight to the inner workings of Ron and Scientology, not all bad.
He remained a devoted clearing practitioner until the end, he died
last year.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Feb 6 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/sci21.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)
iD8DBQFYmKz7URT1lqxE3HERAsrwAKCkvBfn5wAaFMcThlyZFVLLgJOfOACeN0Ka
YCi5aVf1UXj5LH1hr5B/ePE=
=ggp5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
TO DEMONSTRATE OR NOT TO DEMONSTRATE OT POWERS
SCI - 21
Copyright (C) 1992 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
John,
The subject of proof is a big one. So for the moment I wish to
post a poetic cop out to your question, but I promise to keep it under
consideration.
Do OT's have superhuman powers?
I would presume so.
What are they?
Anything you can imagine, including the creation of universes,
people in those universes, and the ability to become those people in
those universes asking questions about OT.
Can these powers be demonstrated?
Yes, certainly some of the more physical powers surely can be
demonstrated.
Should they be demonstrated?
That would depend on the individual OT who had them and who had to
be accountable for the effects that demonstrating his powers would have.
You mentioned SHOCK in your question about OT's coming to visit
your place out of their body and reporting back to you what they had
seen.
The awareness characteristic scale puts shock at -16,
-14 Delusion
-15 Hysteria
-16 Shock
-17 Catatonia
-18 Oblivion
Thus causing any form of shock to a populace at large could hardly
be considered good for a civilization.
Hubbard taught us to do everything on a gradient scale, which means
little by little, not all at once. Therefore enormous displays of
unquestionable demonstrations were frowned upon by Hubbard.
I would tend to agree.
It is very dangerous to demonstrate power to those who do not have
power.
Those who have power know this.
Those who do not have power, don't know this.
What can you do?
Now here is the cop out, if you are serious about getting proof of
power I would instead audit you on the subject of power until some power
opened up in you. It needn't be actual abilities to move rocks or
things, but you would get a clear idea that what ever power you desire
is available and in fact you would settle back down into being
comfortably able to NOT have power for a while, or at least until you
were more ready for it.
Just consider what would happen to you if you had the ability to go
anywhere on the planet and see anyone doing anything they were doing,
and you could kill anyone with an electrical spark to the brain or
heart. (Nipping, History of Man).
Now the auditing question would be something like,
'Tell me what would happen over time if you had this power?'
The correct E/P of this process would be an experience of power
opening up inside yourself, certainty that power exists, and a settling
out of your willingness to have or not have power as you wished.
Another process for handling people's problems with proof, would
be,
'What evidence do you have that you are not an OT?'
'What evidence do you have that you are an OT?'
What this will turn up are quite a number of false certainties
that people are walking around in that prevent the possibility of
believing in OT. Once they see that these false certainties are just
not supportable, the possibility OPENS UP that OT is possible, and they
can approach it again with a new look.
The point is that if someone is an OT and no longer believes this,
they clearly have chosen to prove to themselves down the whole track
that they are not an OT and neither is anyone else.
For you to then go and present them with incontrovertible proof
that they are wrong, would merely open up a very old wound, an OT wound,
that would probably severely hurt the person or his body.
So although I am truly copping out on a direct answer to your
question, for reasons that I believe to be justified, I am at the same
time presenting you with auditing procedures that you can use on
yourself or someone else to set off a spark of power within your own
space and to open the door to your own further private investigations
free from the harrasment of others.
Others who wish you to prove your powers, wish so because they hope
you have none, or because they want you to use them to take care of
them.
People who demand proof often have a hidden agenda.
Proof is available that THEY have power, not that other's already
have it.
Proof is available for that too but no one with power would be
likely to prove it unless it was part of a larger world changing plan to
do so. In which case they would do it anyhow on their own schedule and
not because someone ask them to.
Here are some more auditing questions to run solo or co audit:
'What would you do with power?'
'What would you not do with power?'
'Why should you have power?'
'Why should you not have power?'
By the way the Power Processes of the Church (Grade V) deal with
just this subject. They are held confidential because when run properly
they cause a person to revivify some of the worst moments on his track.
People have little problem with believing in past lives when they
are reliving one as if it were now.
Before such a reviv it may be hard to get real on anything in the
memory, because so much energy is being directed at keeping this one set
of memories at bay.
The power processes by the way are NOT held confidential in the
field and are in fact used in routine auditing as they go quickly and
directly to the center of the case.
If the case is ready for it.
The Power Processes were developed by Ron Hubbard in tandem with
John McMaster at Saint Hill to help crack seriously resistive cases.
John McMaster was Scientology's first confirmed clear, and left the
Church in the early 70's or so.
He made many tapes that are circulating around the field that add a
deep insight to the inner workings of Ron and Scientology, not all bad.
He remained a devoted clearing practitioner until the end, he died
last year.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Feb 6 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/sci21.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)
iD8DBQFYmKz7URT1lqxE3HERAsrwAKCkvBfn5wAaFMcThlyZFVLLgJOfOACeN0Ka
YCi5aVf1UXj5LH1hr5B/ePE=
=ggp5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)