-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
>Heather:
>>I don't know what UCP is.
Universal Clearing Process
Its actually pretty simple.
Doing = Knowing + Wanting.
You take what you know about your own abilities, and where you are,
add into that what you want and where you could be, and from that you
compute what to do.
Much of what you know comes from where you have been, so between
where you are, where you want to be, and where you have been, you can
get a pretty good process going.
Rote approaches to the process suck rocks, but underlying most
spot and poofing lies,
"Where am I?"
"Where could I be that I want to be?"
"Where have I been?"
By 'where' we don't me only your literal space/time location, we
mean it in the broadest possible meaning, the total gestalt of how
things are for you in the Cosmic All.
Once one's mind gets to a certain state, the round robin on those
questions become almost automatic and there is a calmness to it. The
being is no longer 'auditing', he's just operating.
It's when he CAN'T answer the questions that the process fails, and
does not resolve by further running the questions on not being able to
run the questions.
"Where are you? I don't know?"
"Where could you be? I don't know!"
"Where have you been? Didn't know that either!"
You see that won't run.
Such a case needs to study the whole question/answer mechanism of
the mind and how it is and has been in service to his desire to survive,
start, change, stop, etc.
Starting something is actually change. So is stopping something.
So really its all change, the common denominator to existence in time is
seeking to change, whether they are cycles of start, change or stop.
Survival in time is constant change. People try to survive by not
changing, they remember the BEINGNESS of native state, but it doesn't
work in time which is constant BECOMINGNESS.
Hubbard said the answer to the question is the question itself, but
few understood that.
For example take a native state being who can do nothing but
survive because he is above time and has not identified or become
attached to any space/time temporal life form like a body.
Now he can take interest in forms, and even take sides, and play
the game of defence/offence in the service of this form, to help IT
survive. But his own survival is not in question. And frankly he is
playing to play, not to win or lose, he doesn't give a damn about
winning or losing, he just wants to dance the dance, do the moves.
But say one day something happens, and he ASKS
"Hey how come I am not surviving so well anymore around here!"
You see the question pre postulates that he isn't surviving!
A postulate is any thought about how things are that CAUSES things
to be that way.
So to the degree that he asks the question, he commits to the pre
postulate and so starts to not survive!
So the answer to the question "Why am I not surviving?" is "Because
you are asking "Why am I not surviving?"."
The question is the answer.
Now you might think that is silly, he was already not surviving
before he asked the question "Why am I not surviving?"
But its not usually that way.
A God Postulate is that postulate the being THINKS is true because
he has OBSERVED it to be true, when in fact it is really true only
because he thinks it is true.
It is called a God Postulate, because once the being can spot it,
he can change his mind about it and thus end the condition he has been
suffering from NO MATTER HOW BIG.
He has observed that the condition is true only after it became
true by first postulating that it was or wondered if it MIGHT BE you
see, and then reversed the order of cause and effect and claimed he
believes it is true because he has observed it to be true.
Wondering if something might be is enough of a postulate to make
the thing maybe be. Got it?
So he looks to see if it is being, and whaddya know there it is,
but misses how his wonder put it there.
Thus something happens one day, and he postulates he is not
surviving very well, which isn't at all true, but then BECAUSE HE HAS
POSTULATED IT AND WORRIED ABOUT IT, it becomes true, and THEN he
observes he isn't surviving very well, and so then he becomes convinced
he knows he isn't surviving very well because he observed it to be true.
This little bit if chicanery puts him later on the chain because the
truth is he postulated he isn't surviving BEFORE he observed it to be
true!
POSTULATE -> OBSERVATION -> CONVICTION.
A God QUESTION then is that question that follows the God Postulate
and commits to its truth by efforts to solve it.
Every time he asks the question, it re postulates that the
condition which the question is about is true! You can't get rid of
something you claim you aren't creating in the first place!
Its one thing to simply cease the creation through as-isness and
total responsibility for creation, quite another to say you didn't make
it but now have to get rid of it by doing (creating) something MORE.
Each and every engram, secondary or lock has a God Postulate at its
center, followed by a God Question that keeps the postulate in force and
the engram, secondary or lock in restimulation.
That is the sum totality of it.
An engram is a moment of physical injury due to too much or too
little of something, usually force. You break a leg, starve to death
etc.
A secondary is a moment of loss caused either by being separated
from team mates, help, co operating partners, other survival assets, or
from those you love or by being forced to be around those you detest.
Secondaries can also be caused when those you love turn against you.
Death, departure and reversal are the basic secondaries.
They all add up to *SEPARATION* which is an illusion.
Moments of loss are called secondaries because although they don't
contain physical injury or force in themselves, they often carry a
'whallop' that comes from the restimulation, replay, of earlier moments
of physical pain or injury inluding prenatal engrams and injuries off
the whole track prior to this life.
Both the being and body have tons of engrams that aren't even
theirs!
So engrams to restimulate are easy to come by.
At the center of any engram or secondary will be God Postulates
galore followed by their God Questions.
A lock is any moment that reminds you of a secondary or engram, and
causes you to feel again something of what you felt during the original
incidents, and of course reminds you of the questions that were created.
Since the mind is the agent in charge of asking questions and
getting answers, the mind keeps the bank in restimulation forever to the
degree that it continues to ask God Questions without as-ising them.
One as-ises a God Question by recognizing that the pre postulate
implied by the question is the answer to its own condition, and that any
further seeking of answers to the question is an alter-is of the truth
resulting in further persistence of the conditoin under question.
Exteriorization from the body can only take place with
exteriorization from the MIND that one is using to guarantee the body's
survival.
As long as one is attached to the body's survival on a must happen
basis, one is attached to the body!
The mind is used to compute questions and answers. Each question
re-postulates a limitation, I have to do this to get that etc.
The native state being creates things in the very conception of the
desire for them, desire is sovereign. The body has to chase and work for it.
For a native state being desire, conception and having are not
separated by time.
For a body, they are.
Thus getting into the game of 'working for it', attaches one to the
mind that does the question/answer cycle, and thus to the body that
benefits from it and in whose service the question/answer cycle is
enslaved to.
Since the answer to any God question is the question itself, and
its pre postulates, engaging in the question/answer cycle in the service
of desire is actually engaging in endless Q&A.
Q&A is a Scientology term that essentially means to get off the
subject.
You ask your preclear "Tell me about Mama."
"Well she hated babies."
"Tell me about babies."
"Well they are fat and ugly."
"Tell me about being fat and ugly."
You see? Whatever happened to tell me about Mama? The preclear
barely touched the subject and now you are off on a whole mess of other
subjects. Each time you touch a subject without 'flattening' it,
getting all the charge off, you merely leave it in restimulation and
make the preclear worse.
If you have the question, you already have the answer, why are you
overruning it by looking for another answer! That's the definition of
Q&A.
Since survival or change demands time, time is continued by the
endless quest for survival and change via the Q&A of the mind seeking
survival and change.
Chasing survival via change and time works up to the point it
doesn't.
Given an infinite amount of time, ALL chase ends up in the drink.
A timeless being as-ises questions in the making of them, and seeks
not the survival of anything because it HAS the survival of everything
it wants.
But the survival of the timeless being is not the survival of the
temporal being which involves change.
The temporal being survives by changing through time itself, and by
changing its present state into a future state of sow and reap cycles.
Should a temporal being start to seek no change, it will die shortly and
thus change anyhow. Once you sow, you HAVE to reap, once you reap, you
HAVE to sow, lest you die, so change is constant in the survival of the
temporal being.
But the timeless being is not BECOMING, he is just BEING, so there
is no change to his survival. It is in fact quite immutable and
satisfactory, forever for free as Adore would say.
The being maintains the timeless BEINGNESS by as-ising questions as
they arise rather than by seeking answers to them. Time is created by
the alter-isness of the question into a seeking for the answer. That's
an alter-is because the question IS the answer and all further seeking
is a waste of time.
Question ----> time -----> Answer
All aberration is waiting for an answer to a question - LRH, When
in Doubt Communicate.
All time is a waste of time!
Except it is fun and it does have a purpose.
Basically a native state being is in a state of perfect havingness.
When he falls from perfect havingness then he has to ask "why?" and
start to fix it. Then he is in time seeking to fix a lackingness now by
seeking a better future survival, you see?
That's Q&A.
So the mind is constantly taking native state perfections and
reducing them to non havingnesses, desires, wantingnesss and
destitutions, and then trying to make up for the lack now by getting
them in the future.
The goal then in clearing is not to answer questions, but to spot
and poof questions to run them out.
Each question posits a limitation. The 'seeking to find' or 'to
look for' the answer to these questions commits power to those
limitations, thus solidifying them like a rock.
Running the goals 'To Find' or "To Look for" can be beneficial, but
the WHAT that is being sought is the answer to questions.
Trying 'To find your keys' equals "Where the hell are they?"
As each question is spotted, and the limitation noted, the being
comes to see how the question commits to the pre postulate of
limitation, and how the pre postulate of the limitation CAUSES the
limitation and how his-after-the-fact observation of the limitation,
thus verifying it, is bogus.
Thus each limitation is in turn erased resulting in an ability
regained.
To your average human being, the above is all too incredible to
behold.
But a God become human could not work any other way.
The E/P of eternity is 'no need to do anything'.
It's not worth doing if its not done from eternity anyhow :)
The primary doing of course is question asking, in eternity
questions don't last long enough to answer!
Or the answers are perhaps created first, and the questions created
second in the twinkle of an eye.
"I AM the great I AM!"
"Now let's see, who am I again?"
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Jul 31 14:17:52 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore165.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)
iD8DBQFbYKfQURT1lqxE3HERAvbuAKDR2zNjkxgosnxDMsGYmUnv35jtrgCgvTZr
/m4j/pP9hoFs3AbUV7/6WZY=
=y3sP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, July 31, 2018
Sunday, July 29, 2018
ADORE610 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
DHARMA
Dharma means The Path, the path to awareness of truth and the way
to personal freedom.
This path consists of brutal honesty with one's self and
willingness to know the truth whatever it may hold.
Our Immortal Ruin is the result of lies and self deceits, and our
salvation from ruin is the result of true lies found and let go.
"You seek the Grand Spring Phrases,
and so shall you find,
for the true lies will free you,
to operate as you kind." - Adore www.adore.com
To spring means to spring from jail.
Dharma treason is any violation of those principles of honesty.
Dharma treason is an effort to win the debate through cheating.
Cheating consists of:
Ad Hominem. It is quite alright to call someone a pedophilic
drunkard, but not alright to then claim he is wrong about the existence
of exteriorization BECAUSE he is a pedophilic drunkard.
Name calling is fine, but don't add those names into your
syllogism, or else you are in dharma treason and out of the debate.
Assertions. Any effort to establish the truth by asserting things
over and over again is strictly low ball.
In particular asserting things you can not possibly know, is a
direct violation of personal integrity. You may have no evidence for
exteriorization, that doesn't mean there is none or no one else has ever
found evidence for it.
In general you should remember that continued claims that
spirituality is bogus reflects more upon your own crassness and
shallowness of experieence than it does on the truth.
Put up or shut up. Demanding that people provide evidence or proof
for claims is Dharma Treason. If they provide evidence or proof, fine,
if they don't you lose. Any intent or effort to FORCE someone to put up
or shut up is criminal Dharma Treason and will get you out of the debate
for a very long time.
Confusing evidence with proof is also strict Dharma Treason.
Strawmen. Arguing against something that someone didn't say is
dharma treason if done intentionally to confuse the issue, or done out
of an inability to face the issue.
Intending to make wrong. Trying to make someone wrong no matter
WHAT he says, is dharma treason.
Refusing to admit the existence of perfect certainty where it
properly exists is Dharma Treason.
Asserting perfect certainties where they can not exist is Dharma
Treason.
Failure to recognize that science can only disprove general
theories, and not prove them is Dharma Treason. Thus we seek evidence
that either bolsters the possibility of a theory, or ruins it utterly.
No general theory can be proven, but any theory can be disproven.
Failure to grant beingness to the dangers of demonstrating OT
powers that can be used as weapons of war is Dharma Treason as it
violates the Prime Directive admonishing us not to demonstrate OT powers
to those who don't have them. But it's ok to help those who want them
to understand why they don't and put them on their own path to regaining
them.
Doubting a perfect certainty is Dharma Treason.
Asserting that an uncertainty is a perfect certainty is Dharma
Treason.
Dharma Treason is the path towards failure.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sun Jul 29 18:32:04 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore610.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)
iD8DBQFbXkBlURT1lqxE3HERAtOkAJ0SU0I9KufjmhTfB4xPFy4zEfxgyACfcs2h
670sH3gl2vNTRQofArQTQ/Y=
=aJSw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
DHARMA
Dharma means The Path, the path to awareness of truth and the way
to personal freedom.
This path consists of brutal honesty with one's self and
willingness to know the truth whatever it may hold.
Our Immortal Ruin is the result of lies and self deceits, and our
salvation from ruin is the result of true lies found and let go.
"You seek the Grand Spring Phrases,
and so shall you find,
for the true lies will free you,
to operate as you kind." - Adore www.adore.com
To spring means to spring from jail.
Dharma treason is any violation of those principles of honesty.
Dharma treason is an effort to win the debate through cheating.
Cheating consists of:
Ad Hominem. It is quite alright to call someone a pedophilic
drunkard, but not alright to then claim he is wrong about the existence
of exteriorization BECAUSE he is a pedophilic drunkard.
Name calling is fine, but don't add those names into your
syllogism, or else you are in dharma treason and out of the debate.
Assertions. Any effort to establish the truth by asserting things
over and over again is strictly low ball.
In particular asserting things you can not possibly know, is a
direct violation of personal integrity. You may have no evidence for
exteriorization, that doesn't mean there is none or no one else has ever
found evidence for it.
In general you should remember that continued claims that
spirituality is bogus reflects more upon your own crassness and
shallowness of experieence than it does on the truth.
Put up or shut up. Demanding that people provide evidence or proof
for claims is Dharma Treason. If they provide evidence or proof, fine,
if they don't you lose. Any intent or effort to FORCE someone to put up
or shut up is criminal Dharma Treason and will get you out of the debate
for a very long time.
Confusing evidence with proof is also strict Dharma Treason.
Strawmen. Arguing against something that someone didn't say is
dharma treason if done intentionally to confuse the issue, or done out
of an inability to face the issue.
Intending to make wrong. Trying to make someone wrong no matter
WHAT he says, is dharma treason.
Refusing to admit the existence of perfect certainty where it
properly exists is Dharma Treason.
Asserting perfect certainties where they can not exist is Dharma
Treason.
Failure to recognize that science can only disprove general
theories, and not prove them is Dharma Treason. Thus we seek evidence
that either bolsters the possibility of a theory, or ruins it utterly.
No general theory can be proven, but any theory can be disproven.
Failure to grant beingness to the dangers of demonstrating OT
powers that can be used as weapons of war is Dharma Treason as it
violates the Prime Directive admonishing us not to demonstrate OT powers
to those who don't have them. But it's ok to help those who want them
to understand why they don't and put them on their own path to regaining
them.
Doubting a perfect certainty is Dharma Treason.
Asserting that an uncertainty is a perfect certainty is Dharma
Treason.
Dharma Treason is the path towards failure.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sun Jul 29 18:32:04 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore610.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)
iD8DBQFbXkBlURT1lqxE3HERAtOkAJ0SU0I9KufjmhTfB4xPFy4zEfxgyACfcs2h
670sH3gl2vNTRQofArQTQ/Y=
=aJSw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
SCI22 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
WHY IS SELF AUDITING DANGEROUS?
SCI - 22
Copyright (C) 1992 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
The Church frowns very heavily on something they call self
auditing, or the running of processes on yourself.
There is also Soloing, which is a higher level form of self
auditing under the direction of a C/S that is used on many of the
Clear and OT levels.
Most of auditing involves two people auditing each other, or in a
circle of three people.
I audit you, you audit someone else, and they audit me.
But people can and do co audit, I audit you, and then you audit
me.
One of the problems with any auditing is that it often takes an
auditor of higher level to audit a pc of lower level. This is
obvious, if you can't confront something, how are you going to help
someone else confront the same thing?
Of course if you are higher than your pc, then when it comes time
for them to audit you, it isn't going to work, because a lower level
pc really has a hard time auditing a higher level pc.
So there are problems with co audits, but it is still done.
Often people say 'to hell with this', I am just going to go off
and do this by my self. This is usually the result of repeated no
auditing from their auditors, or auditing is just too expensive, or
they live on a deserted island, literally or figuratively.
'No auditing' is a term that Ron invented to describe what many
auditors do, they audit you, but the pc considers that no auditing is
being done because the auditor is auditing what the auditor wants to
audit, and not what the pc wants to audit and needs to audit to get
better.
When people leave the church after many years it is usually a
case of tons and tons of auditing that was no auditing.
They are out of money and their case is as big as it was before,
or they found their case 'going up the Bridge with them'. That means
the pc was getting stronger but their case was getting stronger too.
Ron frowned on no auditing mightily, but since he is not around
anymore to kick butt, it can get kind of rampant.
Now the question comes up, why can't people help themselves, why
do they NEED an auditor? Why can't they just take the processes, like
R3R in Dianetics and run it on themselves. You know, find a moment of
loss, pain or unconsciousness, go to the beginning of it, scan through
to the end of it, tell yourself what happened, and do it until it
erases or gets heavier, in which case you go earlier similar E/S.
Well running Dianetics on yourself is like putting your own nose
to the grindstone and often just restimulates more charge than it
releases, although during moments of great loss and sorrow, just
running the thing out on yourself may be your only option.
Ron did it, and he showed others how to do it in the Handbook for
Preclears.
But most people were just not up to doing it, and in general if
you stick your nose in your bank that way, you will merely get your
nose ground off.
But this is mainly a matter of the nature of Dianetics which
validates the bank and engrams etc, rather than any inherent flaw in
self auditing.
In fact at higher levels of the Bridge soloing is not only the
method of choice, it is absolutely mandatory as the material is so hot
you just can't deal with it with any one else around.
But if you haven't done your lower levels properly you are more
likely to screw it up than do it right because your confront and self
confidence just won't be high enough to face the tiger's lair alone.
Tigers eat you, and so does bank, as it is the immortal recording
of everything that has ever eaten you.
Or that you have eaten.
So there are processes that are more amenable to self auditing,
more properly called solo auditing.
In general if it is a process you should be running alone or CAN
run alone then it is called solo auditing, if it is a process that you
shouldn't be running alone or CAN'T run alone, (but ARE running alone)
then it is called self auditing.
So why is solo auditing dangerous?
Well the bank consists of everything that you never confronted,
it is the accumulated record of your unconfronted unwillingnesses.
It therefore has a lot of pain in it.
The basic solution that thetans have had to the bank, and which
is why the bank is persisting in the first place, is ELSEWHERENESS, or
running away from it. There is also a certain crushing things out of
existence called not-isness.
Elsewhereness is sort of the opposite to AS-ISNESS. As-isness
causes vanishment, elsewhereness causes persistence.
I mean if you make something, and you then run away from it,
certainly it will come after you.
So the thetan is running away from his bank and his experience,
and this is why the bank is persisting, and why he can't contact it
and so he becomes a 'What Bank?' case.
You know, a skeptic.
Ok, so this person gets some hint that maybe he is not as well
off as he might be and he wants you to give him a process to run to
make him more real on this bank, blow some charge and start him on his
way back to full OT.
So you give him,
'Why would you want to stay?'
'Why would you want to leave?'
((or
"Spot a reason to be here."
"Spot a reason to not be here.")) -hws
Now you could run this with him, and charge him for your time,
maybe $10.00 per hour, or you could tell him to go solo the thing
alone, maybe in his apartment or even out on a street walking around
looking at people.
So he takes you up on this and out he goes into college town and
starts running to himself,
'Why would I want to stay?'
'Well all the pretty girls.'
'Why would I want to leave?'
'Well all the fumes.'
'Why would I want to stay?'
'Well there's lots of good food in the world.'
'Why would I want to leave?'
'Well there's AIDS and disease and hunger and horrible things.'
'Why would you want to stay?'
'Well I love good music.'
'Why would you want to leave?'
'Well I might get mugged or raped... GULP!
Now all of a sudden he has tripped something real to his own
case, his own overt motivator chains come into restimulation. Rather
than continue on with the process, momentarily he is diving deep into
this material realzing more and more that he really doesn't want to
stay at all.
So what does he do?
He LEAVES. The PROCESS.
He starts to dramatize the process itself at the auditor, himself
in this case, and he ceases to run the process.
This is a flagrant break of the auditor's code, as it is stopping
a process before it is flat or reached E/P. In fact the very first
time the process 'bit' or produced change in the pc, he changed the
process, or Q & A'ed with it by getting the hell out of the auditing
session.
Now if an auditor were there to pull him through, he could be
coaxed to talk about his worries and concerns about muggings and rape,
and this would blow some of the charge he has on it. He might then be
willing to continue running the process with
'Why would you want to stay?'
As it is, alone, he is over restimulated and he doesn't know to
confront the charge and that it will blow by itself, if he just "be's"
there with it (he hasn't learned this lesson yet), so he goes,
'Stay! are you crazy, who would ever want to be here!'
So he blows (leaves) the process, he blows his own solo session,
he blows auditing, he blows Scientology (the SUBJECT, not the Church),
and he eventually blows his life.
This is no small thing as he is dramatizing the entire
fundamental modus operandi of his bank all at once, which is TO LEAVE.
Picture it this way, that's about a super nova's worth of "I'm
outta here!"
Lots of people when they 'leave' Scientology (not the Church) do
so because they blew a process during a session, and then they blew
the session, and then they blew their posts, and then they blew their
religion.
These are the easy cases to fix, you just pick up the auditing
question where it left off and run it to E/P.
Now as a solo auditor you gotta know these phenomenon cold,
especially if you are running higher level GPMS or entities because
these things have kilovolts of charge on them that can make your body
fold up and want to die.
The bank is full of memories OF dying, when they turn on, bang
there he is dying again. That's a reviv.
He doesn't realize he is dying THEN, he thinks he is dying NOW.
The body can't tell an engram of an execution from the real
thing. It FEELS the same to the body, even though the engram is
harmless and the real thing is deadly. Sometimes the heart can start
racing and the body just KNOWS it's about to kick off from heart
failure and it takes extraordinary confront to be cool with the
manifestation while it runs itself out.
(By the way deep SLOW IN BREATHS will help stabilize the
pounding. Very fast out breaths, and LONG SLOW in breaths.
I been there and lived through it, so listen closely. The heart
pounds on the out breath and cools out on the in breath.
Afterwards, if you make it through, you will feel like new
again.)
So look, you shouldn't be playing around with clear tech unless
you are professional about it. You can set people back by leaving
stuff in restimulation because you and your pc scared the hell out of
yourselves and took for the hills in the middle of an auditing
command.
It's not so bad if you only come back and finish what you
started.
Those of you who have left the Church should ask yourself, perhaps
on a meter,
'Did you leave the Church because of no auditing?'
'Did you leave the Church because of blowing auditing?'
If either indicates, please get it cleaned up.
There is nothing wrong with being a member of the Church.
There is only something wrong with bad auditing, no auditing, or
blown auditing.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jul 27 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/sci22.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)
iD8DBQFbW0GDURT1lqxE3HERAgVTAJ9SNS/LNu2EgXSqkNG0c+wnYInuLACff47k
FZj7lJ3lA4tjCJnD83/B5j8=
=ZfvR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
WHY IS SELF AUDITING DANGEROUS?
SCI - 22
Copyright (C) 1992 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
The Church frowns very heavily on something they call self
auditing, or the running of processes on yourself.
There is also Soloing, which is a higher level form of self
auditing under the direction of a C/S that is used on many of the
Clear and OT levels.
Most of auditing involves two people auditing each other, or in a
circle of three people.
I audit you, you audit someone else, and they audit me.
But people can and do co audit, I audit you, and then you audit
me.
One of the problems with any auditing is that it often takes an
auditor of higher level to audit a pc of lower level. This is
obvious, if you can't confront something, how are you going to help
someone else confront the same thing?
Of course if you are higher than your pc, then when it comes time
for them to audit you, it isn't going to work, because a lower level
pc really has a hard time auditing a higher level pc.
So there are problems with co audits, but it is still done.
Often people say 'to hell with this', I am just going to go off
and do this by my self. This is usually the result of repeated no
auditing from their auditors, or auditing is just too expensive, or
they live on a deserted island, literally or figuratively.
'No auditing' is a term that Ron invented to describe what many
auditors do, they audit you, but the pc considers that no auditing is
being done because the auditor is auditing what the auditor wants to
audit, and not what the pc wants to audit and needs to audit to get
better.
When people leave the church after many years it is usually a
case of tons and tons of auditing that was no auditing.
They are out of money and their case is as big as it was before,
or they found their case 'going up the Bridge with them'. That means
the pc was getting stronger but their case was getting stronger too.
Ron frowned on no auditing mightily, but since he is not around
anymore to kick butt, it can get kind of rampant.
Now the question comes up, why can't people help themselves, why
do they NEED an auditor? Why can't they just take the processes, like
R3R in Dianetics and run it on themselves. You know, find a moment of
loss, pain or unconsciousness, go to the beginning of it, scan through
to the end of it, tell yourself what happened, and do it until it
erases or gets heavier, in which case you go earlier similar E/S.
Well running Dianetics on yourself is like putting your own nose
to the grindstone and often just restimulates more charge than it
releases, although during moments of great loss and sorrow, just
running the thing out on yourself may be your only option.
Ron did it, and he showed others how to do it in the Handbook for
Preclears.
But most people were just not up to doing it, and in general if
you stick your nose in your bank that way, you will merely get your
nose ground off.
But this is mainly a matter of the nature of Dianetics which
validates the bank and engrams etc, rather than any inherent flaw in
self auditing.
In fact at higher levels of the Bridge soloing is not only the
method of choice, it is absolutely mandatory as the material is so hot
you just can't deal with it with any one else around.
But if you haven't done your lower levels properly you are more
likely to screw it up than do it right because your confront and self
confidence just won't be high enough to face the tiger's lair alone.
Tigers eat you, and so does bank, as it is the immortal recording
of everything that has ever eaten you.
Or that you have eaten.
So there are processes that are more amenable to self auditing,
more properly called solo auditing.
In general if it is a process you should be running alone or CAN
run alone then it is called solo auditing, if it is a process that you
shouldn't be running alone or CAN'T run alone, (but ARE running alone)
then it is called self auditing.
So why is solo auditing dangerous?
Well the bank consists of everything that you never confronted,
it is the accumulated record of your unconfronted unwillingnesses.
It therefore has a lot of pain in it.
The basic solution that thetans have had to the bank, and which
is why the bank is persisting in the first place, is ELSEWHERENESS, or
running away from it. There is also a certain crushing things out of
existence called not-isness.
Elsewhereness is sort of the opposite to AS-ISNESS. As-isness
causes vanishment, elsewhereness causes persistence.
I mean if you make something, and you then run away from it,
certainly it will come after you.
So the thetan is running away from his bank and his experience,
and this is why the bank is persisting, and why he can't contact it
and so he becomes a 'What Bank?' case.
You know, a skeptic.
Ok, so this person gets some hint that maybe he is not as well
off as he might be and he wants you to give him a process to run to
make him more real on this bank, blow some charge and start him on his
way back to full OT.
So you give him,
'Why would you want to stay?'
'Why would you want to leave?'
((or
"Spot a reason to be here."
"Spot a reason to not be here.")) -hws
Now you could run this with him, and charge him for your time,
maybe $10.00 per hour, or you could tell him to go solo the thing
alone, maybe in his apartment or even out on a street walking around
looking at people.
So he takes you up on this and out he goes into college town and
starts running to himself,
'Why would I want to stay?'
'Well all the pretty girls.'
'Why would I want to leave?'
'Well all the fumes.'
'Why would I want to stay?'
'Well there's lots of good food in the world.'
'Why would I want to leave?'
'Well there's AIDS and disease and hunger and horrible things.'
'Why would you want to stay?'
'Well I love good music.'
'Why would you want to leave?'
'Well I might get mugged or raped... GULP!
Now all of a sudden he has tripped something real to his own
case, his own overt motivator chains come into restimulation. Rather
than continue on with the process, momentarily he is diving deep into
this material realzing more and more that he really doesn't want to
stay at all.
So what does he do?
He LEAVES. The PROCESS.
He starts to dramatize the process itself at the auditor, himself
in this case, and he ceases to run the process.
This is a flagrant break of the auditor's code, as it is stopping
a process before it is flat or reached E/P. In fact the very first
time the process 'bit' or produced change in the pc, he changed the
process, or Q & A'ed with it by getting the hell out of the auditing
session.
Now if an auditor were there to pull him through, he could be
coaxed to talk about his worries and concerns about muggings and rape,
and this would blow some of the charge he has on it. He might then be
willing to continue running the process with
'Why would you want to stay?'
As it is, alone, he is over restimulated and he doesn't know to
confront the charge and that it will blow by itself, if he just "be's"
there with it (he hasn't learned this lesson yet), so he goes,
'Stay! are you crazy, who would ever want to be here!'
So he blows (leaves) the process, he blows his own solo session,
he blows auditing, he blows Scientology (the SUBJECT, not the Church),
and he eventually blows his life.
This is no small thing as he is dramatizing the entire
fundamental modus operandi of his bank all at once, which is TO LEAVE.
Picture it this way, that's about a super nova's worth of "I'm
outta here!"
Lots of people when they 'leave' Scientology (not the Church) do
so because they blew a process during a session, and then they blew
the session, and then they blew their posts, and then they blew their
religion.
These are the easy cases to fix, you just pick up the auditing
question where it left off and run it to E/P.
Now as a solo auditor you gotta know these phenomenon cold,
especially if you are running higher level GPMS or entities because
these things have kilovolts of charge on them that can make your body
fold up and want to die.
The bank is full of memories OF dying, when they turn on, bang
there he is dying again. That's a reviv.
He doesn't realize he is dying THEN, he thinks he is dying NOW.
The body can't tell an engram of an execution from the real
thing. It FEELS the same to the body, even though the engram is
harmless and the real thing is deadly. Sometimes the heart can start
racing and the body just KNOWS it's about to kick off from heart
failure and it takes extraordinary confront to be cool with the
manifestation while it runs itself out.
(By the way deep SLOW IN BREATHS will help stabilize the
pounding. Very fast out breaths, and LONG SLOW in breaths.
I been there and lived through it, so listen closely. The heart
pounds on the out breath and cools out on the in breath.
Afterwards, if you make it through, you will feel like new
again.)
So look, you shouldn't be playing around with clear tech unless
you are professional about it. You can set people back by leaving
stuff in restimulation because you and your pc scared the hell out of
yourselves and took for the hills in the middle of an auditing
command.
It's not so bad if you only come back and finish what you
started.
Those of you who have left the Church should ask yourself, perhaps
on a meter,
'Did you leave the Church because of no auditing?'
'Did you leave the Church because of blowing auditing?'
If either indicates, please get it cleaned up.
There is nothing wrong with being a member of the Church.
There is only something wrong with bad auditing, no auditing, or
blown auditing.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jul 27 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/sci22.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)
iD8DBQFbW0GDURT1lqxE3HERAgVTAJ9SNS/LNu2EgXSqkNG0c+wnYInuLACff47k
FZj7lJ3lA4tjCJnD83/B5j8=
=ZfvR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, July 24, 2018
ADORE641 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
LEARNING TO TALK
Children are taught how to talk on this planet just long enough to
understand the meaning of the words "Shut up you little shit machine!"
They are taught the meaning of words so they can understand what
NOT to say, think or feel.
"Don't say that!"
"Don't think that!"
"How dare you feel that way."
"Say you are sorry right now, or I will MAKE you sorry!"
"That's none of your business."
You know parents want their children to always tell the truth, all
the while the parent is lying to the child on a full time basis. Only a
very stupid parent, which is most of them, think the child doesn't know
he is being lied to.
They want the child to be gentle, kind and polite, and the whack
the tarnation out the kids behind when he isn't.
I once heard someone say to a child "How can you say that to your
mother, she's your one and only mother!"
Right, you see the mother knows the child is expendable, if she
doesn't like the child she can just get rid of it and create another
one. So the child has no bargaining power.
To the child however, the mother is the one and only mother, and
that's heavy to be stuck with someone you want to kill, cuz you can't
parenticide her without taking yourself out in the process.
The first moment the child wishes death or damnation off on the
parent, a new murderer has been born even if its over something as
simple as a piece of candy or a bath the kid doesn't want to take.
Generally the child will go on to regret it, then repeat it, then
regret it, until there is no more left to feel.
In one breath the parent will tell the child there are no monsters,
and in the other breath make sure the child doesn't know or see
something lest he spend the rest of the week in nightmares.
Children make these things up in their little minds you see, then
they worry about nothing for the rest of time.
It's the NO MONSTER case that has the kid scared out of its wits.
He understands the monster, its the NO MONSTER he can't figure out.
Parents, they have outgrown the nightmares, they know what is truth
and what is imagination, and thank God alcohol is still legal.
Truth is, parents believe that truth is bad for kids, because the
parent knows they can't face the truth themselves.
Used to be a long time ago, they would take bodies they didn't like
and lie them down tied to a bed of slow burning wood and grass. Then
they would light the thing from the feet end and let it burn.
By the time the fire got to the knees, the being wasn't in a very
good mood, and sometimes you can get one of these things looking you
right in the eyes when you are going to bed at night.
They are still alive, but man do they want you dead, and there is
NO talking them out of it.
Talk about if looks could kill.
So there are things parents aren't talking about to their kids,
because if they did the parent might freak out and lose it completely,
and thus not be able to take care of the kid.
I mean imagine having to take care of kid with things LOOKING at
you during the night.
So for the sake of the kid, the parent lies and maintains a wall of
silence about him.
The kid in return learns simply to not relate to his parents
because they will lie and tell him the monsters and sorrows are not
important.
How many times have to seen someone tell someone else not to cry?
Crying just drives adults hysterical. Crying is the ONLY way out of
this prison of tar and amber, and people just won't have it no matter
what.
Every time YOU feel like crying, you gotta go somewhere where
someone won't come along and pull a crying police on you, or dump
hysteria about it all over the place, or LAUGH at you for being silly.
It's hard enough simply to get your average person to SHUT THE FUCK
UP and simply do nothing when you are crying. They at least just gotta
ask what is wrong. Like they really want to know.
Lord God don't do that to people.
The fires of hell lick high on non cryers.
And they got no water to put out the fires!
In hell, your tears are the only coolant there is.
The more you cry the better off you are.
TRYING TO STOP CRYING OR LAUGHING, YOURSELF OR IN OTHERS, IS
SUPPRESSIVE AND A HIGH CRIME.
Sorrow is inverted love, and when one can not express sorrow one
can not express love.
It is as simple as that. If you want a life of no love, make damn
sure you never cry again.
There are just about three things you need to know about sorrow.
Sorrow is an expression of love. Supression of sorrow means
supression of love.
Dry eyed sorrow never heals.
And an excess of sorrow laughs, and an excess of laughter weeps.
Wanna laugh? Cry. Wanna cry? Laugh.
Dig it and don't leave it.
If you want to feel deeply, if you want your future to be full of
'limitless undying love', then you had been be able to cry and laugh,
for both are love in carnation.
Otherwise your future will end up being limitless undying despair
and inability to sigh or breath.
"Pining is unsighable bitter noble melancholia, mostly on the
subject of non operating divine operating religions." - Adore
Sorrow is love interiorizing into crucifixion, and laughter is love
exteriorizing from crucifixion.
In and out, you see?
When someone dies say HELLO to them, not good bye, they are OUT.
When someone is born, say GOODBYE, they are IN for the count.
If you can go a whole day on Earth without cracking up into sorrow
and laughter over something, you are well on your way to earning your
PhD in death and damnation.
And if you are never contacting deep emotion in your dreams, what
ARE you doing with your life that is so important then?
Pretending you got it together?
Leave that to parents who bred without a license and are losers on
their way out.
Most of a person's this life time case surrounds all the different
things he never felt and talked about with his parents, and they never
talked about with him.
Take any child of any age, and find out all he words he is old
enough to understand, but has never heard of, and you will find all the
subject areas that his significant others have been carefully stepping
around making sure the kid doesn't find out about them.
Parents are supposed to be team mates in the quest for survival in
life. They are supposed to be our best friends, not our biggest problem
in life.
Kids that live their entire lives wanting to kill their parents and
then feeling sorry for them and guilty about it, end up able to feel
nothing and sick as hell, dependent on drugs, doctors and hospitals.
There are lots of doctors in hell, where everyone is patient as
hell, as a patient in hell.
And all those conversations, all that RELATING, that should have
gone on between parent and child and didn't, is just so much wasted
goals and dreams and co operation in the games of life.
You might as well have poured your life down the drain.
The toilet would probably over flow when you flushed, even a
toilet's got pride.
Thus any auditing directed at recovering what should have been said
and by whom amongst parent and child will go a long ways to recovering
the *LIVING* being for the pc.
You know the kind that run on white light instead of drugs, alcohol
and medicine.
Unexpression is the death of a being.
"Spot something NOT or talked about."
"Spot something said or not talked about."
End result of such auditing will be the white light turning on
again, with the dazzling blue auras, and the rose emmanations from the
heart and the golden temper we been dreaming about.
Almost anyone has seen small momentary sparks of blue, rose and
gold in their space while thinking about something.
That's YOU buddy, that's what you are like full time when you are
clear enough to see forever.
You know being clear isn't about being free from aberration, or
regaining a few abilities here and there, its about dripping beauty, and
gorgeous light, and stunning power, where one's very attention is a
piercing search light of glorious undauntable fondness into the darkness
of the obsidian glass, tar and amber around you, and you can watch it
blow away as sparkling fairy dust.
Yes even fondness for parents, for they were just kids who didn't
say things to their parents too.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Jul 24 13:28:00 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore641.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)
iD8DBQFbV2GgURT1lqxE3HERAsGRAJ0eoO2s4d8y5QtPTWB7T1J09s6VsACfU0NH
rS8wbQ5tkQ4hIE3duAd8mhc=
=ng84
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
LEARNING TO TALK
Children are taught how to talk on this planet just long enough to
understand the meaning of the words "Shut up you little shit machine!"
They are taught the meaning of words so they can understand what
NOT to say, think or feel.
"Don't say that!"
"Don't think that!"
"How dare you feel that way."
"Say you are sorry right now, or I will MAKE you sorry!"
"That's none of your business."
You know parents want their children to always tell the truth, all
the while the parent is lying to the child on a full time basis. Only a
very stupid parent, which is most of them, think the child doesn't know
he is being lied to.
They want the child to be gentle, kind and polite, and the whack
the tarnation out the kids behind when he isn't.
I once heard someone say to a child "How can you say that to your
mother, she's your one and only mother!"
Right, you see the mother knows the child is expendable, if she
doesn't like the child she can just get rid of it and create another
one. So the child has no bargaining power.
To the child however, the mother is the one and only mother, and
that's heavy to be stuck with someone you want to kill, cuz you can't
parenticide her without taking yourself out in the process.
The first moment the child wishes death or damnation off on the
parent, a new murderer has been born even if its over something as
simple as a piece of candy or a bath the kid doesn't want to take.
Generally the child will go on to regret it, then repeat it, then
regret it, until there is no more left to feel.
In one breath the parent will tell the child there are no monsters,
and in the other breath make sure the child doesn't know or see
something lest he spend the rest of the week in nightmares.
Children make these things up in their little minds you see, then
they worry about nothing for the rest of time.
It's the NO MONSTER case that has the kid scared out of its wits.
He understands the monster, its the NO MONSTER he can't figure out.
Parents, they have outgrown the nightmares, they know what is truth
and what is imagination, and thank God alcohol is still legal.
Truth is, parents believe that truth is bad for kids, because the
parent knows they can't face the truth themselves.
Used to be a long time ago, they would take bodies they didn't like
and lie them down tied to a bed of slow burning wood and grass. Then
they would light the thing from the feet end and let it burn.
By the time the fire got to the knees, the being wasn't in a very
good mood, and sometimes you can get one of these things looking you
right in the eyes when you are going to bed at night.
They are still alive, but man do they want you dead, and there is
NO talking them out of it.
Talk about if looks could kill.
So there are things parents aren't talking about to their kids,
because if they did the parent might freak out and lose it completely,
and thus not be able to take care of the kid.
I mean imagine having to take care of kid with things LOOKING at
you during the night.
So for the sake of the kid, the parent lies and maintains a wall of
silence about him.
The kid in return learns simply to not relate to his parents
because they will lie and tell him the monsters and sorrows are not
important.
How many times have to seen someone tell someone else not to cry?
Crying just drives adults hysterical. Crying is the ONLY way out of
this prison of tar and amber, and people just won't have it no matter
what.
Every time YOU feel like crying, you gotta go somewhere where
someone won't come along and pull a crying police on you, or dump
hysteria about it all over the place, or LAUGH at you for being silly.
It's hard enough simply to get your average person to SHUT THE FUCK
UP and simply do nothing when you are crying. They at least just gotta
ask what is wrong. Like they really want to know.
Lord God don't do that to people.
The fires of hell lick high on non cryers.
And they got no water to put out the fires!
In hell, your tears are the only coolant there is.
The more you cry the better off you are.
TRYING TO STOP CRYING OR LAUGHING, YOURSELF OR IN OTHERS, IS
SUPPRESSIVE AND A HIGH CRIME.
Sorrow is inverted love, and when one can not express sorrow one
can not express love.
It is as simple as that. If you want a life of no love, make damn
sure you never cry again.
There are just about three things you need to know about sorrow.
Sorrow is an expression of love. Supression of sorrow means
supression of love.
Dry eyed sorrow never heals.
And an excess of sorrow laughs, and an excess of laughter weeps.
Wanna laugh? Cry. Wanna cry? Laugh.
Dig it and don't leave it.
If you want to feel deeply, if you want your future to be full of
'limitless undying love', then you had been be able to cry and laugh,
for both are love in carnation.
Otherwise your future will end up being limitless undying despair
and inability to sigh or breath.
"Pining is unsighable bitter noble melancholia, mostly on the
subject of non operating divine operating religions." - Adore
Sorrow is love interiorizing into crucifixion, and laughter is love
exteriorizing from crucifixion.
In and out, you see?
When someone dies say HELLO to them, not good bye, they are OUT.
When someone is born, say GOODBYE, they are IN for the count.
If you can go a whole day on Earth without cracking up into sorrow
and laughter over something, you are well on your way to earning your
PhD in death and damnation.
And if you are never contacting deep emotion in your dreams, what
ARE you doing with your life that is so important then?
Pretending you got it together?
Leave that to parents who bred without a license and are losers on
their way out.
Most of a person's this life time case surrounds all the different
things he never felt and talked about with his parents, and they never
talked about with him.
Take any child of any age, and find out all he words he is old
enough to understand, but has never heard of, and you will find all the
subject areas that his significant others have been carefully stepping
around making sure the kid doesn't find out about them.
Parents are supposed to be team mates in the quest for survival in
life. They are supposed to be our best friends, not our biggest problem
in life.
Kids that live their entire lives wanting to kill their parents and
then feeling sorry for them and guilty about it, end up able to feel
nothing and sick as hell, dependent on drugs, doctors and hospitals.
There are lots of doctors in hell, where everyone is patient as
hell, as a patient in hell.
And all those conversations, all that RELATING, that should have
gone on between parent and child and didn't, is just so much wasted
goals and dreams and co operation in the games of life.
You might as well have poured your life down the drain.
The toilet would probably over flow when you flushed, even a
toilet's got pride.
Thus any auditing directed at recovering what should have been said
and by whom amongst parent and child will go a long ways to recovering
the *LIVING* being for the pc.
You know the kind that run on white light instead of drugs, alcohol
and medicine.
Unexpression is the death of a being.
"Spot something NOT or talked about."
"Spot something said or not talked about."
End result of such auditing will be the white light turning on
again, with the dazzling blue auras, and the rose emmanations from the
heart and the golden temper we been dreaming about.
Almost anyone has seen small momentary sparks of blue, rose and
gold in their space while thinking about something.
That's YOU buddy, that's what you are like full time when you are
clear enough to see forever.
You know being clear isn't about being free from aberration, or
regaining a few abilities here and there, its about dripping beauty, and
gorgeous light, and stunning power, where one's very attention is a
piercing search light of glorious undauntable fondness into the darkness
of the obsidian glass, tar and amber around you, and you can watch it
blow away as sparkling fairy dust.
Yes even fondness for parents, for they were just kids who didn't
say things to their parents too.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Tue Jul 24 13:28:00 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore641.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)
iD8DBQFbV2GgURT1lqxE3HERAsGRAJ0eoO2s4d8y5QtPTWB7T1J09s6VsACfU0NH
rS8wbQ5tkQ4hIE3duAd8mhc=
=ng84
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, July 23, 2018
ADORE981 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
FAITH vs CERTAINTY
Faith is a waste of time in a world powered by perfect certainties.
Arguing about the existence of god is a waste of time because all
consiousness is god in carnation.
Beyond that there is no god to be had, and if there were one could
never know about it with certainty.
Theorem 0: Learning with perfect certainty across two different
objects is impossible.
Lemma 0: If God and Soul are two different objects they would
forever remain a theory to each other.
Homer
Fri Oct 23 16:30:22 EDT 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Jul 23 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore981.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)
iD8DBQFbVfuDURT1lqxE3HERAg4cAKChETxJ221Tx7UVzfZeqM7St8kNswCgsMLD
FD79z5SoO+4irM2m45CWur0=
=QpHX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
FAITH vs CERTAINTY
Faith is a waste of time in a world powered by perfect certainties.
Arguing about the existence of god is a waste of time because all
consiousness is god in carnation.
Beyond that there is no god to be had, and if there were one could
never know about it with certainty.
Theorem 0: Learning with perfect certainty across two different
objects is impossible.
Lemma 0: If God and Soul are two different objects they would
forever remain a theory to each other.
Homer
Fri Oct 23 16:30:22 EDT 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Jul 23 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore981.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)
iD8DBQFbVfuDURT1lqxE3HERAg4cAKChETxJ221Tx7UVzfZeqM7St8kNswCgsMLD
FD79z5SoO+4irM2m45CWur0=
=QpHX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Sunday, July 22, 2018
ADORE287
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
INFINITE CHARGE
LRH talked about 8-8008, attaining infinite ability, by taking the
infinite ability of the MEST universe and reducing it to zero, and the
zero ability of the thetan and increasing it to infinity.
Yet little auditing addresses the issue of 'infinite' charge.
The reality set that says we "live but once and die and that's it
bud," leads to infinite charge.
Specificially it leads to a loss of an infinite future, or more
correctly an infinite number of finite futures (whiles). You don't want
one girl friend forever, you want an infinite number of different girl
friends each for a while.
Get the idea of "girl friends never more," that's infinite charge.
The charge created is not infinite in a static sense. However,
while mortal, the charge created in present time will always be bigger
than the pc.
We call this charge unlimitedly finite charge, as much
as you can conceive, but always finite, no upper finite limit.
So when we talk about infinite charge, remember that's a misnomer,
you can't have infinite charge, but there is no upper limit to the
amount of finite charge you can have.
Thus no matter how big the pc gets, the charge will always be
bigger than he. This scares the daylights out of the pc, he spreads his
wings to fly and gets crushed down without mercy, which makes him feel
regaining his eternality is impossible.
This state of the pc's charge always being bigger than the pc is
called the bank going up the bridge with the pc. Pc gets lots of
auditing and wins, bank is still bigger than he is, and there is no end
in sight period.
He gets disheartened, feels auditing works but will take forever
etc, resulting in massive session dread and heart rendering despondency
about his future.
He becomes a squirrel trying to find a route that will make the
forever pass by faster and cheaper.
Well that's because the proper reality sets are not being audited,
in particular the mortal reality set, either his own or others. Other's
infinite charge will overwhelm him just as his own will.
"Jesus Christ, look at all those meatballs!"
Bam, he's stuck, he just can't wrap his wits around infinite
charge, either his own or others.
That's why auditors who haven't ever been in this state can't audit
it, and can't help but ridicule it instead. Don't even bother going to
them, if they have never been in the state, they can't help you out of
it, they will just make you worse.
If you can't mockup being a meatball, you can't confront a
meatball. If you can't confront a pc, you can't help him, end of story.
Of course there is no eternality to regain, timelessness is the
core nature of the being, of course he is going to 'live forever', but
not in time where forevers are detested, even pleasurable ones. (Spot a
detested pleasurable forever, until real on this point and why.)
"Everyone lives forever where there is no time.
No one lives forever where there is time.
Hurry is a waste of time.
The hurry of impending mortal doom obscures the hurry
of impending eternal doom.
Joke.
J.O.K.E. means Justice Of Kindship Excaliper. " - Adore.
The issue then is regaining his perspective on how he creates the
mortal reality set, regaining his perspective in such a way that he
doesn't automatically make more charge the bigger he gets.
Remember a native state being is a total knowingness. That doesn't
mean he knows everything, it means he knows how to create anything.
There is no teaching him how to create. That's just built in, and part
of that built in is the mechanism of humor.
There is no creation without humor, and there is no humor without
creation.
Native State is the Imp Soul.
So humor is not a secondary thing. It is the driving impulse
behind manifestation.
Native state can create jokes forever for free, so once you get him
back to this area, it will lock on and flow. But he won't be a human
being any more.
He has to see the humor to the joke. This is a matter of
understanding.
LRH said that admiration was the universal solvent, this is true,
it is admiration of humor that does the trick.
Admiration = High Appreciation of Ludicrous Demise.
You *CAN'T* be happy in a one and only single while. People
without infinite futures don't have a present time either. The best
they can do is spend their one and only single while digging a grave for
them to cry themselves to death in at the end of the dig.
That is in fact the entirety of what your meatball is doing,
preparing a grave for himself of one kind or another.
It is a matter of understanding the joke, it is not a matter of
force. Using force to throw off a mortal bank will merely result in
infinite charge crushing you back down again.
Struggle or throwing a fit won't get you there.
Getting the joke is more like getting a nervous cat to come to you
and sit in your lap.
The pc has the qualms about laughing and crying.
Particularly never ending laughter and crying.
Low tone people ridicule and throw contempt on the apparent
out of control vulnerability of endless laughing and crying.
They know SOMETHING is ridiculous around here, and right they
are, its them, divine humor is ridiculous out the wazoo.
But it is also Love forever for free, so suck it up.
The more you cry the more you love, the more you love the more
you cry. And laugh, for the two are one.
The pc has the qualms about locking onto Source point, and flowing
creation again.
Run,
Go to a funeral.
Try VERY hard not to laugh or cry.
E/P laughter and tears until absolute peace regains (and potential
power to create again.)
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sun Jul 22 17:32:28 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore287.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)
iD8DBQFbVPfsURT1lqxE3HERAmHtAJ9NEzHvig7z3LQLORPCvZorhxFefgCfQNfq
06cowGmlCLPhrO8Rzpnk+XE=
=Dqte
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
INFINITE CHARGE
LRH talked about 8-8008, attaining infinite ability, by taking the
infinite ability of the MEST universe and reducing it to zero, and the
zero ability of the thetan and increasing it to infinity.
Yet little auditing addresses the issue of 'infinite' charge.
The reality set that says we "live but once and die and that's it
bud," leads to infinite charge.
Specificially it leads to a loss of an infinite future, or more
correctly an infinite number of finite futures (whiles). You don't want
one girl friend forever, you want an infinite number of different girl
friends each for a while.
Get the idea of "girl friends never more," that's infinite charge.
The charge created is not infinite in a static sense. However,
while mortal, the charge created in present time will always be bigger
than the pc.
We call this charge unlimitedly finite charge, as much
as you can conceive, but always finite, no upper finite limit.
So when we talk about infinite charge, remember that's a misnomer,
you can't have infinite charge, but there is no upper limit to the
amount of finite charge you can have.
Thus no matter how big the pc gets, the charge will always be
bigger than he. This scares the daylights out of the pc, he spreads his
wings to fly and gets crushed down without mercy, which makes him feel
regaining his eternality is impossible.
This state of the pc's charge always being bigger than the pc is
called the bank going up the bridge with the pc. Pc gets lots of
auditing and wins, bank is still bigger than he is, and there is no end
in sight period.
He gets disheartened, feels auditing works but will take forever
etc, resulting in massive session dread and heart rendering despondency
about his future.
He becomes a squirrel trying to find a route that will make the
forever pass by faster and cheaper.
Well that's because the proper reality sets are not being audited,
in particular the mortal reality set, either his own or others. Other's
infinite charge will overwhelm him just as his own will.
"Jesus Christ, look at all those meatballs!"
Bam, he's stuck, he just can't wrap his wits around infinite
charge, either his own or others.
That's why auditors who haven't ever been in this state can't audit
it, and can't help but ridicule it instead. Don't even bother going to
them, if they have never been in the state, they can't help you out of
it, they will just make you worse.
If you can't mockup being a meatball, you can't confront a
meatball. If you can't confront a pc, you can't help him, end of story.
Of course there is no eternality to regain, timelessness is the
core nature of the being, of course he is going to 'live forever', but
not in time where forevers are detested, even pleasurable ones. (Spot a
detested pleasurable forever, until real on this point and why.)
"Everyone lives forever where there is no time.
No one lives forever where there is time.
Hurry is a waste of time.
The hurry of impending mortal doom obscures the hurry
of impending eternal doom.
Joke.
J.O.K.E. means Justice Of Kindship Excaliper. " - Adore.
The issue then is regaining his perspective on how he creates the
mortal reality set, regaining his perspective in such a way that he
doesn't automatically make more charge the bigger he gets.
Remember a native state being is a total knowingness. That doesn't
mean he knows everything, it means he knows how to create anything.
There is no teaching him how to create. That's just built in, and part
of that built in is the mechanism of humor.
There is no creation without humor, and there is no humor without
creation.
Native State is the Imp Soul.
So humor is not a secondary thing. It is the driving impulse
behind manifestation.
Native state can create jokes forever for free, so once you get him
back to this area, it will lock on and flow. But he won't be a human
being any more.
He has to see the humor to the joke. This is a matter of
understanding.
LRH said that admiration was the universal solvent, this is true,
it is admiration of humor that does the trick.
Admiration = High Appreciation of Ludicrous Demise.
You *CAN'T* be happy in a one and only single while. People
without infinite futures don't have a present time either. The best
they can do is spend their one and only single while digging a grave for
them to cry themselves to death in at the end of the dig.
That is in fact the entirety of what your meatball is doing,
preparing a grave for himself of one kind or another.
It is a matter of understanding the joke, it is not a matter of
force. Using force to throw off a mortal bank will merely result in
infinite charge crushing you back down again.
Struggle or throwing a fit won't get you there.
Getting the joke is more like getting a nervous cat to come to you
and sit in your lap.
The pc has the qualms about laughing and crying.
Particularly never ending laughter and crying.
Low tone people ridicule and throw contempt on the apparent
out of control vulnerability of endless laughing and crying.
They know SOMETHING is ridiculous around here, and right they
are, its them, divine humor is ridiculous out the wazoo.
But it is also Love forever for free, so suck it up.
The more you cry the more you love, the more you love the more
you cry. And laugh, for the two are one.
The pc has the qualms about locking onto Source point, and flowing
creation again.
Run,
Go to a funeral.
Try VERY hard not to laugh or cry.
E/P laughter and tears until absolute peace regains (and potential
power to create again.)
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sun Jul 22 17:32:28 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore287.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)
iD8DBQFbVPfsURT1lqxE3HERAmHtAJ9NEzHvig7z3LQLORPCvZorhxFefgCfQNfq
06cowGmlCLPhrO8Rzpnk+XE=
=Dqte
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
SESSIO11 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
ladyv (ladyv@dynamism.org) wrote:
> And yet.. I have never felt I was channelling from some other source,
>the creation flows from me.
I have always felt the creation flows from something bigger than
me, I am in awe of it.
> Homer spoke of the being's themesong and I got goosebumps.
Yes, one's Theme Song sings the song of *TRIUMPH*, of absolute
satisfaction with the excellence of Self.
It can not be surpassed in one's own eyes, and our purpose for
manifestation is to share our song with others, as every melody we
write, everything we do is woven with the echos of our own Theme Song.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jul 21 12:00:01 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/sessio11.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)
iD8DBQFbU1iCURT1lqxE3HERAvhVAKCI4UHdJESl3l24kiTzVBLvP8Wc5wCggNtC
dUZTAyrDYvJUrtJHKaQUcV0=
=dXSh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
ladyv (ladyv@dynamism.org) wrote:
> And yet.. I have never felt I was channelling from some other source,
>the creation flows from me.
I have always felt the creation flows from something bigger than
me, I am in awe of it.
> Homer spoke of the being's themesong and I got goosebumps.
Yes, one's Theme Song sings the song of *TRIUMPH*, of absolute
satisfaction with the excellence of Self.
It can not be surpassed in one's own eyes, and our purpose for
manifestation is to share our song with others, as every melody we
write, everything we do is woven with the echos of our own Theme Song.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jul 21 12:00:01 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/sessio11.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)
iD8DBQFbU1iCURT1lqxE3HERAvhVAKCI4UHdJESl3l24kiTzVBLvP8Wc5wCggNtC
dUZTAyrDYvJUrtJHKaQUcV0=
=dXSh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Friday, July 20, 2018
ADORE992
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
RUNNING SEPARATION
This is about the below attached posting by Hubbard.
Better to run,
Get the idea of being separate.
Get the idea of not being separate.
Or
Get the idea of NO separation.
Get the idea of SOME separation.
Powerful stuff, the joke is present theory will tell you
that the being is a God Soul, meaning one side of him is God
and the other is the Soul.
The God sides of all souls is the same God, but the soul side
of each soul is eternally individual.
Thus we say that the AllThatIS is a Multi I-AM being.
An infinite number of infinite minds...
This allows separate souls to interact and share dreams via
resonation between them, not outwardly through created dreamtime, MEST
and maya, but inwardly using the God substrate that connects everyone
instantly and eternally.
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
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015, Clearing Archive Roboposter wrote:
>
> R2-48 Separateness
>
> References
> Creation of Human Ability (R2-48)
>
> Description
> This is a key process attacking individuation. In his effort to control, a
> being spreads himself further and further from the universe, and in his
> failures to control, withdraws from things he has attempted to control but
> leaves himself connected with them in terms of "dead energy". Thus we get
> the manifestation "buttered all over the universe."
> This was the process that told me that we are not natively sprung from one
> "common body of theta". If you run separateness, accentuating the
> difference in unity of a being from other beings and things and spaces, he
> continues to gain in tone. If you run this process in reverse, how he is
> the same as, or is connected to various items, he continues to dwindle in
> tone. By handling this latter process, one can press a being down into the
> rock-bottom state of aberrations. We have long known that differentiation
> was the keynote of sanity, and that identification was the basis of
> aberration. This fact is utilized in processing by running separateness.
>
> It can be concluded that the being is an individual separate from every
> other being and that he has never been part of any other being. There are
> many "phony" incidents implanted on the track whereby an individual is made
> to feel that he is a result of an explosion having occurred to a larger
> body. He is also made to feel that he was at one time "whole" and is now
> only a splinter of himself. This is only an effort to reduce him. He has
> always been himself, he will always be himself, down to a time when he is
> entirely identified with this universe, at which time he would no longer
> be himself simply because he would no longer be conscious.
>
> It seems that aberration can only occur by enforcing Basic Truth. Here we
> discover that the individual, being separate, is then forced to be
> separate, and so develops a complex of "the only one" and tries to fend off
> the rest of the universe from himself and finally merges with it, with this
> impossibility of fending it off. All you have to do is accentuate truth and
> force it home as another determinism is order to create an aberration.
> There is some basic truth then, in whatever is wrong with a being, and of
> course the basic wrongness is that he is not a static.
>
> Separateness is best run by having the person out in an open place,
> inhabited by a great many people, as in R2-46 and R2-47.
>
>
> Commands
> "Point out some things from which you are separate."
> "Point out some more things from which you are separate."
>
>
> End Point
> Run the process until a realization occurs, or an ability is regained.
>
> Cautions
> None
>
> ================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
> Mon Dec 28 00:06:02 EST 2015
> ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/christine/Separateness
> Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
> ================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
> Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
> Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
> Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
> Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
> not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Clear-L mailing list
> Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
> http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
>
Mon Dec 28 19:34:14 EST 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jul 20 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore992.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)
iD8DBQFbUgcCURT1lqxE3HERAvExAJ9NHE3QnigJAEuT0324ERh1BNU23wCdHE62
qi1PgH0bahpAosxLAKTGm1o=
=SDRP
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Jul 20 14:38:37 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore992.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)
iD8DBQFbUiwtURT1lqxE3HERAlB6AJ90hDaJRkIozMT+lhE4BQfHAWoxUgCfR+RQ
eWS1BH8KPOIfG+9IzfdTqHo=
=Ravx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
RUNNING SEPARATION
This is about the below attached posting by Hubbard.
Better to run,
Get the idea of being separate.
Get the idea of not being separate.
Or
Get the idea of NO separation.
Get the idea of SOME separation.
Powerful stuff, the joke is present theory will tell you
that the being is a God Soul, meaning one side of him is God
and the other is the Soul.
The God sides of all souls is the same God, but the soul side
of each soul is eternally individual.
Thus we say that the AllThatIS is a Multi I-AM being.
An infinite number of infinite minds...
This allows separate souls to interact and share dreams via
resonation between them, not outwardly through created dreamtime, MEST
and maya, but inwardly using the God substrate that connects everyone
instantly and eternally.
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
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015, Clearing Archive Roboposter wrote:
>
> R2-48 Separateness
>
> References
> Creation of Human Ability (R2-48)
>
> Description
> This is a key process attacking individuation. In his effort to control, a
> being spreads himself further and further from the universe, and in his
> failures to control, withdraws from things he has attempted to control but
> leaves himself connected with them in terms of "dead energy". Thus we get
> the manifestation "buttered all over the universe."
> This was the process that told me that we are not natively sprung from one
> "common body of theta". If you run separateness, accentuating the
> difference in unity of a being from other beings and things and spaces, he
> continues to gain in tone. If you run this process in reverse, how he is
> the same as, or is connected to various items, he continues to dwindle in
> tone. By handling this latter process, one can press a being down into the
> rock-bottom state of aberrations. We have long known that differentiation
> was the keynote of sanity, and that identification was the basis of
> aberration. This fact is utilized in processing by running separateness.
>
> It can be concluded that the being is an individual separate from every
> other being and that he has never been part of any other being. There are
> many "phony" incidents implanted on the track whereby an individual is made
> to feel that he is a result of an explosion having occurred to a larger
> body. He is also made to feel that he was at one time "whole" and is now
> only a splinter of himself. This is only an effort to reduce him. He has
> always been himself, he will always be himself, down to a time when he is
> entirely identified with this universe, at which time he would no longer
> be himself simply because he would no longer be conscious.
>
> It seems that aberration can only occur by enforcing Basic Truth. Here we
> discover that the individual, being separate, is then forced to be
> separate, and so develops a complex of "the only one" and tries to fend off
> the rest of the universe from himself and finally merges with it, with this
> impossibility of fending it off. All you have to do is accentuate truth and
> force it home as another determinism is order to create an aberration.
> There is some basic truth then, in whatever is wrong with a being, and of
> course the basic wrongness is that he is not a static.
>
> Separateness is best run by having the person out in an open place,
> inhabited by a great many people, as in R2-46 and R2-47.
>
>
> Commands
> "Point out some things from which you are separate."
> "Point out some more things from which you are separate."
>
>
> End Point
> Run the process until a realization occurs, or an ability is regained.
>
> Cautions
> None
>
> ================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
> Mon Dec 28 00:06:02 EST 2015
> ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/christine/Separateness
> Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
> ================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
> Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
> Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
> Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
> Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
> not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Clear-L mailing list
> Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
> http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
>
Mon Dec 28 19:34:14 EST 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jul 20 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore992.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)
iD8DBQFbUgcCURT1lqxE3HERAvExAJ9NHE3QnigJAEuT0324ERh1BNU23wCdHE62
qi1PgH0bahpAosxLAKTGm1o=
=SDRP
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Jul 20 14:38:37 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore992.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)
iD8DBQFbUiwtURT1lqxE3HERAlB6AJ90hDaJRkIozMT+lhE4BQfHAWoxUgCfR+RQ
eWS1BH8KPOIfG+9IzfdTqHo=
=Ravx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
CAN'T and WON'T
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
CAN'T AND WON'T
Run,
"What can't you do?"
"What won't you do?"
"What can you do?"
"What will you do?"
Or,
Get the idea of I can't.
Get the idea of I won't.
Get the idea of I can.
Get the idea of I will.
E/P: Able and willing to be unable and able, willing and unwilling.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Jul 20 14:16:35 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1046.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)
iD8DBQFbUicDURT1lqxE3HERAjs9AJ9WvPHBXcbfIDfn9DVJG4rIsIuQOQCeKoVu
ku9jG/uHrDda0enk4qyJM58=
=1Q6l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
CAN'T AND WON'T
Run,
"What can't you do?"
"What won't you do?"
"What can you do?"
"What will you do?"
Or,
Get the idea of I can't.
Get the idea of I won't.
Get the idea of I can.
Get the idea of I will.
E/P: Able and willing to be unable and able, willing and unwilling.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Jul 20 14:16:35 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1046.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)
iD8DBQFbUicDURT1lqxE3HERAjs9AJ9WvPHBXcbfIDfn9DVJG4rIsIuQOQCeKoVu
ku9jG/uHrDda0enk4qyJM58=
=1Q6l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Thursday, July 19, 2018
ADORE344 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Significantly clarified and corrected in (( )).
PERSONAL INTEGRITY version 2.0
Personal integrity is knowing what you know, and not knowing what
you don't know.
((There is a phrase problem here in that
'Knowing what you do not know' and
'Not knowing what you do not know'
can mean the same thing, depending on how you read them.
We want to people to know what they know, and know what they do not
know as much as possible, but we do not want people pretending to know
things they do not know, we want people to 'not know what they don't
know and stop pretending to know it.'))
Personal integrity includes NOT knowing what you can't know, and
knowing what is obvious.
Willfull out personal intengrity is a spiritual High Crime.
Out personal integrity leads to sickness.
The sickness is 'Just Desserts' for commission of a High Crime.
The sickness is not enforced externally, it follows naturally,
Justice is you get what you postulate.
People have long known that lying is no good for you. Generally
lying is considered any form of saying that something is false which is
true, or saying something is true which is false.
However we wish to draw your attention to a different kind of
lying, namely saying that something which is certainly true or false is
*UNCERTAIN*, or saying something which is uncertain is certainly true or
false. THESE lies are what make people sick.
No one has ever told you that before.
Its the creation of uncertainties from certainties and the
creation of certainties from uncertainies that are the problem.
Merely reversing the truth of a certainty from true to false
causes little problem in comparison.
The primary acts of willfull out integrity are
1.) Enforcing a false certainty.
2.) Doubting a true certainty
MAKING A CERTAINTY OUT OF AN UNCERTAINTY
((The definition of a false certainty below is unclear.
It has two distinct meanings.
1.) A false certainty is something one is certain is true, but
turns out later to be false. This can not in fact happen, because if
the fact IS false, one could never have been certain it was true in the
first place.
Thus we say there are 'no false certainties'.
People get into this trouble by confusing THEORY with direct
perceptions. Direct percertions are always certain and always right.
THEORY is never certain and can never be known to be right.
By thinking they are 'certain' a theory is right, people then set
themselves up to be proven wrong later when the theory turns out to be
false, and thus people get the idea that they can be certain of
something that is false.
2.) A false certainty is something that a person claims to be
certain of but is in fact not a certainty for them, regardless of its
truth value. A person claims they are certain God exists. God may
exist but they aren't certain of it. That's a false certainty. The
CERTAINTY is false, not the truth of what the certainty is about.))
It is not possible to have a true certainty turn out false. If it
turns out false, it was never certain. But people can enforce an
uncertainty into a certainty, which then becomes a false certainty(2),
even if it turns out later to be true!
Any 'certainty' that turns out to be false later was never a true
certainty in the first place, but an act of willfull out integrity.
Once false certainties(2) are spotted, the person can tell that he was
never truly certain of it in the first place and knew it.
Remember that just because a certainty is a false certainty,
doesn't mean the claimed fact is in fact false! It merely means the
person hasn't reach a true certainty on it yet.
MAKING AN UNCERTAINTY OUT OF A CERTAINTY
Doubting a true certainty is a high crime. Truth is a jealous God.
If something is true, and you know it is true, and there is no
possibility of it being false, then you deserve what you get if you
doubt it willfully.
Doubt creates evidence in its own favor (self casting), this locks
the person into the doubt.
Since doubt is self casting, it is easy to doubt a true certainty,
and thus to turn a true certainty into a false uncertainty.
Turning true certainties(2) into false uncertainties, or turning
true uncertainties into false certainties are both forms of willfull out
integrity and lead ultimately to ludicrous demise. At the end of the
chain the being will be found in wonder.
Wondering why he is sick.
To clear this up find and run the following items per tech of
choice.
Certainty
Uncertainty
Doubted Certainty
Doubted Uncertainty
False Certainty
False Uncertainty
Making certainties into false uncertainties.
Making uncertainties into false certainties.
Making true certainties wrong, and false certainties right.
Making true uncertainies wrong, and false uncertainties right.
And full CDEINR scale on certainty and uncertainty, with
particular attention to enforced, inhibited, NO, denied and refused
certainties and uncertanties.
Remember that 'NO" certainty doesn't mean he's got an
uncertainty, it means he has made nothing out of certainty!
E/P all personal integrity operatingness nominal again, knows
what he knows, and knows what he doesn't know, and comfortable
not knowing.
ANDS AND NEITHERS
Beings are dramatizing dicoms in ANDS and NEITHERS, not in ORS.
The basic dicoms are love and hate, beauty and ugly and good and
evil, but there are many more specific to the person such as respect
and contempt, blessingness and damningness, integration and
disintegration etc.
He won't be dramatizing loving or hating his mother, but loving
AND hating his mother. This forms a ridge, one effort that does both
at the same time. Thus when he loves his mother, he will be
dramatizing the effort of the ridge, and when he hates his mother he
will be dramatizing the same effort!
Aberration is in the illogic of the situtation, loving by hating,
and hating by loving.
The ridge gets buried in NEITHERS, neither loving nor hating his
mother. So eventually there is nothing there.
The person won't feel anything about his mother. That's a
neither, neither love nor hate. Once that is removed, the underlying
ridge of LOVE AND HATE will surface with great turmoil and anguish.
You can't love by hating, and you can't hate by loving, it will
take the person a while to figure this out.
If you can get the person to separate them in time and effort, he
will start to do better. Now I love her, now I hate her, now I love
her, now I hate her with a different effort for each one. That's
sane.
Any serious ridge will be found to be an AND not an OR. It is
tempting to think that the person is being good and fighting evil, or
being evil and fighting good.
But if he has a RIDGE on the matter, which includes all GPMS, he
is actually dramatizing both sides at once. He, as good, can't get
into a fight with evil without being the evil side also, if only to
invite it in and fight it.
This is a lower harmonic mockery of pandeterminism at work.
Thus auditing being good or evil won't fly, but auditing good AND
evil will.
Remember the AND is buried under a NEITHER, being neither good
nor evil, that's a final solution to the problem of the AND.
Assess for NEITHER, or AND. Which ever reads find the item pairs
that go with it, and run them as neithers or ands. Running each side
back and forth as Hubbard originally suggested may not work as well.
Running what problem did you have with your mother, and then what
problem did your mother have with you is running an OR, its running
either you had a problem with your mother or your mother had a problem
with you.
Running what is it between you and your mother, is running an
AND, its running what you both did to each other at the exact same
time. Only these form ridges or any merit to run.
When did you try to cripple someone?
When did someone try to cripple you?
That's an OR you see?
When did you and another try to cripple each other at the same
time?
That's an AND.
Ridges that have different time stamps in either side of the
ridge don't stay together long once the ANDS are run. Its the AND
ridges that have the same time stamp in both sides that are the
foundation of case.
What does the guy want AND not want at the same time? We are not
talking about oscillation, vacilation, indecision, waivering flip
flopping, equivocation, those don't form ridges that have any solidity
to them.
We want what he wants and doesn't want at the same time. Thus
his effort to have it will be the same effort to not have it. THAT
forms a ridge.
No it is not logical, and yes it is hard to conceive, and perhaps
one won't believe it until one sees it, but that's why case is so
persistent, its nuts. It exceeds our sensibilities.
Applied to the above posting on personal integrity, look for
ridges where the guy is both certain AND uncertain at the same time
about the same thing. That will drive him crazy.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sat Jul 15 15:06:33 EDT 2006
Mon Sep 20 16:25:22 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Jul 19 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore344.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)
iD8DBQFbULWDURT1lqxE3HERAuVpAJ41wt6AX0lO9Q/tj0S2UHtl6MNl8QCgxAnC
xSW/hjsWOojwJfywSvQ48L0=
=Gomb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Significantly clarified and corrected in (( )).
PERSONAL INTEGRITY version 2.0
Personal integrity is knowing what you know, and not knowing what
you don't know.
((There is a phrase problem here in that
'Knowing what you do not know' and
'Not knowing what you do not know'
can mean the same thing, depending on how you read them.
We want to people to know what they know, and know what they do not
know as much as possible, but we do not want people pretending to know
things they do not know, we want people to 'not know what they don't
know and stop pretending to know it.'))
Personal integrity includes NOT knowing what you can't know, and
knowing what is obvious.
Willfull out personal intengrity is a spiritual High Crime.
Out personal integrity leads to sickness.
The sickness is 'Just Desserts' for commission of a High Crime.
The sickness is not enforced externally, it follows naturally,
Justice is you get what you postulate.
People have long known that lying is no good for you. Generally
lying is considered any form of saying that something is false which is
true, or saying something is true which is false.
However we wish to draw your attention to a different kind of
lying, namely saying that something which is certainly true or false is
*UNCERTAIN*, or saying something which is uncertain is certainly true or
false. THESE lies are what make people sick.
No one has ever told you that before.
Its the creation of uncertainties from certainties and the
creation of certainties from uncertainies that are the problem.
Merely reversing the truth of a certainty from true to false
causes little problem in comparison.
The primary acts of willfull out integrity are
1.) Enforcing a false certainty.
2.) Doubting a true certainty
MAKING A CERTAINTY OUT OF AN UNCERTAINTY
((The definition of a false certainty below is unclear.
It has two distinct meanings.
1.) A false certainty is something one is certain is true, but
turns out later to be false. This can not in fact happen, because if
the fact IS false, one could never have been certain it was true in the
first place.
Thus we say there are 'no false certainties'.
People get into this trouble by confusing THEORY with direct
perceptions. Direct percertions are always certain and always right.
THEORY is never certain and can never be known to be right.
By thinking they are 'certain' a theory is right, people then set
themselves up to be proven wrong later when the theory turns out to be
false, and thus people get the idea that they can be certain of
something that is false.
2.) A false certainty is something that a person claims to be
certain of but is in fact not a certainty for them, regardless of its
truth value. A person claims they are certain God exists. God may
exist but they aren't certain of it. That's a false certainty. The
CERTAINTY is false, not the truth of what the certainty is about.))
It is not possible to have a true certainty turn out false. If it
turns out false, it was never certain. But people can enforce an
uncertainty into a certainty, which then becomes a false certainty(2),
even if it turns out later to be true!
Any 'certainty' that turns out to be false later was never a true
certainty in the first place, but an act of willfull out integrity.
Once false certainties(2) are spotted, the person can tell that he was
never truly certain of it in the first place and knew it.
Remember that just because a certainty is a false certainty,
doesn't mean the claimed fact is in fact false! It merely means the
person hasn't reach a true certainty on it yet.
MAKING AN UNCERTAINTY OUT OF A CERTAINTY
Doubting a true certainty is a high crime. Truth is a jealous God.
If something is true, and you know it is true, and there is no
possibility of it being false, then you deserve what you get if you
doubt it willfully.
Doubt creates evidence in its own favor (self casting), this locks
the person into the doubt.
Since doubt is self casting, it is easy to doubt a true certainty,
and thus to turn a true certainty into a false uncertainty.
Turning true certainties(2) into false uncertainties, or turning
true uncertainties into false certainties are both forms of willfull out
integrity and lead ultimately to ludicrous demise. At the end of the
chain the being will be found in wonder.
Wondering why he is sick.
To clear this up find and run the following items per tech of
choice.
Certainty
Uncertainty
Doubted Certainty
Doubted Uncertainty
False Certainty
False Uncertainty
Making certainties into false uncertainties.
Making uncertainties into false certainties.
Making true certainties wrong, and false certainties right.
Making true uncertainies wrong, and false uncertainties right.
And full CDEINR scale on certainty and uncertainty, with
particular attention to enforced, inhibited, NO, denied and refused
certainties and uncertanties.
Remember that 'NO" certainty doesn't mean he's got an
uncertainty, it means he has made nothing out of certainty!
E/P all personal integrity operatingness nominal again, knows
what he knows, and knows what he doesn't know, and comfortable
not knowing.
ANDS AND NEITHERS
Beings are dramatizing dicoms in ANDS and NEITHERS, not in ORS.
The basic dicoms are love and hate, beauty and ugly and good and
evil, but there are many more specific to the person such as respect
and contempt, blessingness and damningness, integration and
disintegration etc.
He won't be dramatizing loving or hating his mother, but loving
AND hating his mother. This forms a ridge, one effort that does both
at the same time. Thus when he loves his mother, he will be
dramatizing the effort of the ridge, and when he hates his mother he
will be dramatizing the same effort!
Aberration is in the illogic of the situtation, loving by hating,
and hating by loving.
The ridge gets buried in NEITHERS, neither loving nor hating his
mother. So eventually there is nothing there.
The person won't feel anything about his mother. That's a
neither, neither love nor hate. Once that is removed, the underlying
ridge of LOVE AND HATE will surface with great turmoil and anguish.
You can't love by hating, and you can't hate by loving, it will
take the person a while to figure this out.
If you can get the person to separate them in time and effort, he
will start to do better. Now I love her, now I hate her, now I love
her, now I hate her with a different effort for each one. That's
sane.
Any serious ridge will be found to be an AND not an OR. It is
tempting to think that the person is being good and fighting evil, or
being evil and fighting good.
But if he has a RIDGE on the matter, which includes all GPMS, he
is actually dramatizing both sides at once. He, as good, can't get
into a fight with evil without being the evil side also, if only to
invite it in and fight it.
This is a lower harmonic mockery of pandeterminism at work.
Thus auditing being good or evil won't fly, but auditing good AND
evil will.
Remember the AND is buried under a NEITHER, being neither good
nor evil, that's a final solution to the problem of the AND.
Assess for NEITHER, or AND. Which ever reads find the item pairs
that go with it, and run them as neithers or ands. Running each side
back and forth as Hubbard originally suggested may not work as well.
Running what problem did you have with your mother, and then what
problem did your mother have with you is running an OR, its running
either you had a problem with your mother or your mother had a problem
with you.
Running what is it between you and your mother, is running an
AND, its running what you both did to each other at the exact same
time. Only these form ridges or any merit to run.
When did you try to cripple someone?
When did someone try to cripple you?
That's an OR you see?
When did you and another try to cripple each other at the same
time?
That's an AND.
Ridges that have different time stamps in either side of the
ridge don't stay together long once the ANDS are run. Its the AND
ridges that have the same time stamp in both sides that are the
foundation of case.
What does the guy want AND not want at the same time? We are not
talking about oscillation, vacilation, indecision, waivering flip
flopping, equivocation, those don't form ridges that have any solidity
to them.
We want what he wants and doesn't want at the same time. Thus
his effort to have it will be the same effort to not have it. THAT
forms a ridge.
No it is not logical, and yes it is hard to conceive, and perhaps
one won't believe it until one sees it, but that's why case is so
persistent, its nuts. It exceeds our sensibilities.
Applied to the above posting on personal integrity, look for
ridges where the guy is both certain AND uncertain at the same time
about the same thing. That will drive him crazy.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sat Jul 15 15:06:33 EDT 2006
Mon Sep 20 16:25:22 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Jul 19 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore344.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)
iD8DBQFbULWDURT1lqxE3HERAuVpAJ41wt6AX0lO9Q/tj0S2UHtl6MNl8QCgxAnC
xSW/hjsWOojwJfywSvQ48L0=
=Gomb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, July 18, 2018
ADORE446 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
OT MOTIVATION AND HUMAN MOTIVATION
My answer to this has always been that OT powers come from OT
motivation and human powers come from human motivation.
Subdeath, human motivation is taking care of the body.
Thus subdeath, pcs want OT powers to better be able to take care of
the body.
They are playing the game of offend/defend.
Those playing a game can never have enough power to put the game or
the playing field there in the first place.
So one has to shift from game player into game creator if you
want to be able to create the football or move the goalpost with your
'mind'.
Homer
Michael (mickel1234@blueyonder.co.uk) wrote:
>"Michael" <mickel1234@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:cuXBh.2251$I46.548@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>> "Curiosus" <curiosus@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
>> news:1171761720.403831.277260@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>> The Operational Tree
>>>
>>>
>>> Once a time there was a Happy Tree living in a beautiful country
>>> Earlier generations of trees contributed establishing a fertile soil
>>> So the Happy Tree was very healthy and mighty,
>>> He had enthralling conversations with his fellow trees around
>>>
>>> One day he saw birds flying high in the sky and began envying them
>>> He was sensing a terrible injustice here
>>> Why should birds be free and allowed to play with the winds,
>>> When himself was trapped here, his roots imprisoned in the soil?
>>>
>>> So he formed the goal to become as free as the birds, and was yelling
>>> "I want to operate like the birds! I want to be an Operational Tree!"
>>> "Psychia-Trees tell us we were born from the mud, that is a lie!"
>>> "The ground is a Tree-Trap! I want to be free from the Prison-
>>> Ground!"
>>>
>>> He began searching how he could possibly free himself from the ground
>>> So he trained foxes and rabbits digging into the ground
>>> And they worked so well that they succeeded uprooting his roots
>>> As soon as he felt his roots free, he began walking through the forest
>>>
>>> He yelled to his fellow trees: "See, now I am Clear from the mud!"
>>> "Follow me and become Clear yourself! then become Operational Trees!"
>>> So more and more rabbits and foxes were organized and trained
>>> And soon there were many trees walking through the forest
>>>
>>> Then the Happy Tree began flapping his roots to fly like the birds
>>> Alas despite many efforts never he was able to fly in the sky
>>> He was no more nurtured by the fertile ground and began decaying
>>> He became very angry and upset, still pretending but unable to do it
>>>
>>> One day the sky was invaded by deadly black clouds
>>> He was hit by a lightning which turned him into ashes
>>> And the ashes contributed fertilizing the clay
>>>
>>> --
>>> Curiosus
>>> http://www.geocities.com/curiosus_2005/index.htm
>>>
>>
>> WOT!!!!!!!! No Super OT powers!
>> You mean I've spent 25 years of my life hoping they will turn on any day,
>> I can't believe my mince pies.
>>
>> I WAS GOING TO SAVE THE WORLD.
>>
>> You mean I've been lied to? this is incredible.
>>
>> Barman! Line em' up and keep em' coming, I've a long sad story to tell
>> you.
>>
>> God Almighty :)
>> Mike
>Alternatively, I would think that the way to resolve the matter of "Who Am
>I?" or "What am I?" would involve identity processing, removing the false or
>substitute self, the "little me" as it is sometimes called.
>Only when a person can know beyond any shadow of a doubt their real self can
>the matter be resolved as to if "I am doing all this" as an OT in other
>words.
>If this is a virtual reality we live in then one would need to know the code
>before you could (as an individual) change things.
>On the other hand one might find that they do not have to do anything.
>Best
>Mike
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun Feb 18 15:05:33 EST 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Jul 18 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore446.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)
iD8DBQFbT2QDURT1lqxE3HERAs0mAJ41RGzGykYJMRacWcGpsTyngj8xTwCfS+1b
G39MXT3lE7e2FCtlDZoQEcw=
=oLrF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
OT MOTIVATION AND HUMAN MOTIVATION
My answer to this has always been that OT powers come from OT
motivation and human powers come from human motivation.
Subdeath, human motivation is taking care of the body.
Thus subdeath, pcs want OT powers to better be able to take care of
the body.
They are playing the game of offend/defend.
Those playing a game can never have enough power to put the game or
the playing field there in the first place.
So one has to shift from game player into game creator if you
want to be able to create the football or move the goalpost with your
'mind'.
Homer
Michael (mickel1234@blueyonder.co.uk) wrote:
>"Michael" <mickel1234@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:cuXBh.2251$I46.548@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>> "Curiosus" <curiosus@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
>> news:1171761720.403831.277260@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>> The Operational Tree
>>>
>>>
>>> Once a time there was a Happy Tree living in a beautiful country
>>> Earlier generations of trees contributed establishing a fertile soil
>>> So the Happy Tree was very healthy and mighty,
>>> He had enthralling conversations with his fellow trees around
>>>
>>> One day he saw birds flying high in the sky and began envying them
>>> He was sensing a terrible injustice here
>>> Why should birds be free and allowed to play with the winds,
>>> When himself was trapped here, his roots imprisoned in the soil?
>>>
>>> So he formed the goal to become as free as the birds, and was yelling
>>> "I want to operate like the birds! I want to be an Operational Tree!"
>>> "Psychia-Trees tell us we were born from the mud, that is a lie!"
>>> "The ground is a Tree-Trap! I want to be free from the Prison-
>>> Ground!"
>>>
>>> He began searching how he could possibly free himself from the ground
>>> So he trained foxes and rabbits digging into the ground
>>> And they worked so well that they succeeded uprooting his roots
>>> As soon as he felt his roots free, he began walking through the forest
>>>
>>> He yelled to his fellow trees: "See, now I am Clear from the mud!"
>>> "Follow me and become Clear yourself! then become Operational Trees!"
>>> So more and more rabbits and foxes were organized and trained
>>> And soon there were many trees walking through the forest
>>>
>>> Then the Happy Tree began flapping his roots to fly like the birds
>>> Alas despite many efforts never he was able to fly in the sky
>>> He was no more nurtured by the fertile ground and began decaying
>>> He became very angry and upset, still pretending but unable to do it
>>>
>>> One day the sky was invaded by deadly black clouds
>>> He was hit by a lightning which turned him into ashes
>>> And the ashes contributed fertilizing the clay
>>>
>>> --
>>> Curiosus
>>> http://www.geocities.com/curiosus_2005/index.htm
>>>
>>
>> WOT!!!!!!!! No Super OT powers!
>> You mean I've spent 25 years of my life hoping they will turn on any day,
>> I can't believe my mince pies.
>>
>> I WAS GOING TO SAVE THE WORLD.
>>
>> You mean I've been lied to? this is incredible.
>>
>> Barman! Line em' up and keep em' coming, I've a long sad story to tell
>> you.
>>
>> God Almighty :)
>> Mike
>Alternatively, I would think that the way to resolve the matter of "Who Am
>I?" or "What am I?" would involve identity processing, removing the false or
>substitute self, the "little me" as it is sometimes called.
>Only when a person can know beyond any shadow of a doubt their real self can
>the matter be resolved as to if "I am doing all this" as an OT in other
>words.
>If this is a virtual reality we live in then one would need to know the code
>before you could (as an individual) change things.
>On the other hand one might find that they do not have to do anything.
>Best
>Mike
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun Feb 18 15:05:33 EST 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Jul 18 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore446.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)
iD8DBQFbT2QDURT1lqxE3HERAs0mAJ41RGzGykYJMRacWcGpsTyngj8xTwCfS+1b
G39MXT3lE7e2FCtlDZoQEcw=
=oLrF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, July 17, 2018
PROOF2 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
C. B. Willis (cbwillis@netcom.com) wrote:
>Homer Wilson Smith (homer@lightlink.com) wrote:
>: There is no evidence that the external universe exists at all
>What could count as said evidence?
The Proof says that looking at effects do not prove cause.
Therefore since the only way we can know about the alleged physical
universe is through its effects in our consciousnesses, there is no
way to prove with certainty that the physical universe exists.
The physical universe is therefore at best a theory to explain the
consistency (and horror) of our conscious experiences.
"Every time I come to this corner, that building is still there,
and when I leave, even though my conscious picture of the building
disappears, the *BUILDING* remains."
They have posited an external persisting actuality that existed
prior to themselves, of which they are in fact made, and out of which
they arose, and which is the source of their experiences of it when they
are in close causal contact with it, like looking at it and being
impinged upon by its light rays etc.
They know when they sleep and dream of the same corner, that the
*BUILDING* is not actually there, and there are no light rays etc, but
they can see the picture anyhow, because it is being replayed from
memory etc. In fact they will say they can't experience anything
without having had it impinge on them first from the external 'actual'
world during the waking state.
As far as theories goes, it has stood the test of time very well,
and is very useful in predicting things that happen to us. But that
could be expected of any well designed virtual machine, or Holodeck.
However this present theory of external mechanics has a very hard
time dealing with exteriorization, materialization, telekinesis, trans
life memory etc. These violate the very premise that consciousness IS
but a process in the collection of parts called the body/brain system.
Although it would probably be possible to devise a more complex
physical theory that allowed for the above phenomenon, either through
positing some kind of 'remote reach' on the part of consciousness, or
total independence but cooperation of consciousness and matter, at that
point Occam's Razor would indicate that it might be more fruitful to
pursue the holographic projection theory.
Meatballs like to think there is only MEST, out of which
consciousness arose, dreamballs like to think there is only
consciousness out of which virtual projections of MEST arose.
If one assumes for a moment the dreamball theory of virtual
projection, one is immediately faced with the problem of what is the
nature of this thing that projects space and time? Does it have space
and time itself? If not, what is it? How can something exist that has
zero dimensions, no space or time? Meatballs have a hard time with
this.
Actually everyone does, because the static can not be concieved, as
conception is inherently a projected phenomenon and must therefore
conceive within the bounds of the nature of projection, which is multi
dimensional kinetics.
Anything conceived is already a projection on the part of the
static.
Adore says the static projects what the static is not, at worst a
fanciful assertion, at best an interesting statement of the problem to
be overcome in understanding how the projection works.
It should be understood that the thetan does not need to understand
how the projection works in order to use it, he is 'skilled' at the
process natively without understanding, he can just DO it. This is the
total knowingness of LRH, not someone who 'knows about everything' but
someone who can create things to know about, without worrying about how
he does this.
Just like a child doesn't have to be taught how to breath or cry.
Thus it is a giant step for a person to finally understand that the
SOURCE of what he experiences can not be described in terms of what he
experiences, space, time, matter, energy, forces, motions, etc.
He has been thinking for a long time that the pictures in his
consciousness somehow represent the external world that they allgedly
track. In his conscious experience he sees space and time with objects
in it, so he figures there must be something awfully similar to what he
perceives, namely space and time with objects in it out there to account
for the fact that this is what he sees.
He thinks his conscious unit is like a video camera, if he sees a
car on the TV screen of his conscious unit, there must be something
very similar out there in the actual world or else why would he be
seeing it? He knows he is seeing only his conscious experience at all
times, but he figures it was meant to show him the actual world, so
although he is always looking at a TV screen of the world, he figures
it must represent the actual world in some real way.
He expects geometrical similarity between his conscious experiences,
and the actual world out there.
If the external physical universe exists, then of course he is
right.
If its all a virtual projection, then he is dead wrong, because
the source of the projection has none of the qualities demonstrated in
the projection itself, no space, time, mass, movement, force etc.
The meatball theory thinks that an actual 'out thereness' is
causing him to see an 'out thereness' in his conscious rendition.
The dreamball theory thinks that an actual 'in hereness' is
projecting a virtually real 'out thereness' with the pretense that the
out thereness is causing him to see it.
We notice this is not God lying to the Soul, this is the GodSoul
lying to itself.
Its a major paradigm shift equivalent in magnitude to the shift
that occured when men realized that the Earth was not the center of
the universe, and the Sun did not revolve around the Earth, or that
the Earth was not flat.
Only now, its "out there ain't out there, out there is a
projection of out there from in here".
That's a big jump for a stupid PhD.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Jul 17 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof2.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)
iD8DBQFbThKCURT1lqxE3HERAtM1AKCH6Q+YZN1sgwWm6DqKhuGLmz14vQCcCbCZ
ZNOfUY2feKmL6JmC0xkf8ec=
=DRn2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
C. B. Willis (cbwillis@netcom.com) wrote:
>Homer Wilson Smith (homer@lightlink.com) wrote:
>: There is no evidence that the external universe exists at all
>What could count as said evidence?
The Proof says that looking at effects do not prove cause.
Therefore since the only way we can know about the alleged physical
universe is through its effects in our consciousnesses, there is no
way to prove with certainty that the physical universe exists.
The physical universe is therefore at best a theory to explain the
consistency (and horror) of our conscious experiences.
"Every time I come to this corner, that building is still there,
and when I leave, even though my conscious picture of the building
disappears, the *BUILDING* remains."
They have posited an external persisting actuality that existed
prior to themselves, of which they are in fact made, and out of which
they arose, and which is the source of their experiences of it when they
are in close causal contact with it, like looking at it and being
impinged upon by its light rays etc.
They know when they sleep and dream of the same corner, that the
*BUILDING* is not actually there, and there are no light rays etc, but
they can see the picture anyhow, because it is being replayed from
memory etc. In fact they will say they can't experience anything
without having had it impinge on them first from the external 'actual'
world during the waking state.
As far as theories goes, it has stood the test of time very well,
and is very useful in predicting things that happen to us. But that
could be expected of any well designed virtual machine, or Holodeck.
However this present theory of external mechanics has a very hard
time dealing with exteriorization, materialization, telekinesis, trans
life memory etc. These violate the very premise that consciousness IS
but a process in the collection of parts called the body/brain system.
Although it would probably be possible to devise a more complex
physical theory that allowed for the above phenomenon, either through
positing some kind of 'remote reach' on the part of consciousness, or
total independence but cooperation of consciousness and matter, at that
point Occam's Razor would indicate that it might be more fruitful to
pursue the holographic projection theory.
Meatballs like to think there is only MEST, out of which
consciousness arose, dreamballs like to think there is only
consciousness out of which virtual projections of MEST arose.
If one assumes for a moment the dreamball theory of virtual
projection, one is immediately faced with the problem of what is the
nature of this thing that projects space and time? Does it have space
and time itself? If not, what is it? How can something exist that has
zero dimensions, no space or time? Meatballs have a hard time with
this.
Actually everyone does, because the static can not be concieved, as
conception is inherently a projected phenomenon and must therefore
conceive within the bounds of the nature of projection, which is multi
dimensional kinetics.
Anything conceived is already a projection on the part of the
static.
Adore says the static projects what the static is not, at worst a
fanciful assertion, at best an interesting statement of the problem to
be overcome in understanding how the projection works.
It should be understood that the thetan does not need to understand
how the projection works in order to use it, he is 'skilled' at the
process natively without understanding, he can just DO it. This is the
total knowingness of LRH, not someone who 'knows about everything' but
someone who can create things to know about, without worrying about how
he does this.
Just like a child doesn't have to be taught how to breath or cry.
Thus it is a giant step for a person to finally understand that the
SOURCE of what he experiences can not be described in terms of what he
experiences, space, time, matter, energy, forces, motions, etc.
He has been thinking for a long time that the pictures in his
consciousness somehow represent the external world that they allgedly
track. In his conscious experience he sees space and time with objects
in it, so he figures there must be something awfully similar to what he
perceives, namely space and time with objects in it out there to account
for the fact that this is what he sees.
He thinks his conscious unit is like a video camera, if he sees a
car on the TV screen of his conscious unit, there must be something
very similar out there in the actual world or else why would he be
seeing it? He knows he is seeing only his conscious experience at all
times, but he figures it was meant to show him the actual world, so
although he is always looking at a TV screen of the world, he figures
it must represent the actual world in some real way.
He expects geometrical similarity between his conscious experiences,
and the actual world out there.
If the external physical universe exists, then of course he is
right.
If its all a virtual projection, then he is dead wrong, because
the source of the projection has none of the qualities demonstrated in
the projection itself, no space, time, mass, movement, force etc.
The meatball theory thinks that an actual 'out thereness' is
causing him to see an 'out thereness' in his conscious rendition.
The dreamball theory thinks that an actual 'in hereness' is
projecting a virtually real 'out thereness' with the pretense that the
out thereness is causing him to see it.
We notice this is not God lying to the Soul, this is the GodSoul
lying to itself.
Its a major paradigm shift equivalent in magnitude to the shift
that occured when men realized that the Earth was not the center of
the universe, and the Sun did not revolve around the Earth, or that
the Earth was not flat.
Only now, its "out there ain't out there, out there is a
projection of out there from in here".
That's a big jump for a stupid PhD.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Jul 17 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/proof2.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)
iD8DBQFbThKCURT1lqxE3HERAtM1AKCH6Q+YZN1sgwWm6DqKhuGLmz14vQCcCbCZ
ZNOfUY2feKmL6JmC0xkf8ec=
=DRn2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, July 16, 2018
WHAT McMASTERS SAID
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
WHAT McMASTERS SAID
What McMaster said was that the preclear is ultimately PTS to a
WHAT not a WHO.
A what is a class of who's.
Margaret my mother is a who.
MOTHERS are a what.
Thus trying to solve PTSness by disconnecting from a who is nuts.
You find a who and you run
WHAT does WHO represent to you?
Once you find the WHAT, you complete it with
WHO else presents that WHAT to you?
Once the what and all the associated who's are fleshed out, the
preclear has something to work with by running all grades and all flows
on the WHAT.
Particularly the WHAT HE IS BEING OR HAS BEEN when he
suppressed others at their beck and call.
One finds that the preclear actually desires to be suppressed,
there is an aesthetic to it.
So he closes terminals with a particular who that represents the
what, perhaps many similar who's, and provkes them into picking on him,
making him 'PTS'.
This allows him to suffer without anyone noticing the real HOW he
is bringing it about and why.
Suffering comes from two things,
1.) Out of valence dramatizations that fail,
2.) In valent dramatizations that succeeed.
In the first case, he calls up the engram, goes into the 'winning'
valence and feels better, usually triumph, until he either regrets
dramatizing on others, or is forced to stop dramatizing by a stronger
counter force.
With the engram called up, he feels good while out of valence, but
feels the pain of the incident when he crashes back into valence.
That's the Anger/Regret cycle we all fear and have never run out.
In the second case, the winning valence is himself in the engram,
because he got sympathy for it during the incident from the Golden Ally.
That sympathy is more valuable to him than being in the winning
valence, because who cares about triumpth when he's got the girl of his
life crying for him.
So underlying any suffering at the hands of people he is being PTS
to, one finds the Golden Ally that makes the suffering desirable.
The preclear closes terminals with the SP in order to 'prove the SP
wrong', and provoke the SP to pick on him, thus suppressing him, but the
preclear then puts on the sympathy engram to create the suffering in
order to get the sympathy from the Golden Ally.
He HAS to have the SP crushing him down, becuase that's what made
the GA cry for him.
The SP makes the apparency of the preclear being an innocent
victim real.
No SP, no GA.
No GA, no reason to get up in the morning, at least in the universe
he is living in.
But he still won't get better until you audit out who and what HE
is being the Golden Ally to?
Being a Golden Ally to someone else, is the overt tht sticks the
motivator to him permanenty.
Giving someone sympathy is the biggest act of covert hostility
there is.
"(You think you are suffering now, wait until I get through with
you), you poor dear thing..."
Hubbard said in Advanced Procedure and Axioms:
"ALL sympathy must be removed from the case."
All 5 flows.
But who is going to get up in the morning if he isn't worried about
something for someone?
Total erasure of all sympathy is total peace.
Hubbad also said that the reason one is stuck
in a body in sub death tones of controlling, owning, being
responsible for bodies and lower is because of the cycle
that goes like his:
1.2 No Sympathy (Rage)
.9 Sympathy (Regret)
.8 Propiation (Amends)
0 BECOMING A BODY.
Usually a dead one, the preclear enters into the facsimiles of the
body and tries to regrant it life, failing that the preclear decides the
best way to take care of a body is to BE one, and micro manage its every
move from there on out.
This simply a basic life continuum on bodies.
The aesthetics to bodies was astounding on early parts of the
track.
And the regret was nightmarish.
Kill one accidentally by loving it too hard, and oh boy, away you
go.
So if you want to deal with someone's PTSness, audit out the Golden
Ally, the Hero, Villan, Victim triangle, on all flows.
And the aesthetic DECISION to get involved in them.
What's the upside of being down?
You won't have a human being left.
And he won't give a damn.
And he won't be worrying others, or fall for other's worrying him,
and he won't get involved in concerts of effort and concern.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Jul 16 00:16:51 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1045.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)
iD8DBQFbTBw0URT1lqxE3HERAqGhAKDO6CRyoxjx834cxLxrO9Xndf3HWACbBSyf
bQF40JjG91ZwvJLfbtR/s+o=
=Cn68
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
WHAT McMASTERS SAID
What McMaster said was that the preclear is ultimately PTS to a
WHAT not a WHO.
A what is a class of who's.
Margaret my mother is a who.
MOTHERS are a what.
Thus trying to solve PTSness by disconnecting from a who is nuts.
You find a who and you run
WHAT does WHO represent to you?
Once you find the WHAT, you complete it with
WHO else presents that WHAT to you?
Once the what and all the associated who's are fleshed out, the
preclear has something to work with by running all grades and all flows
on the WHAT.
Particularly the WHAT HE IS BEING OR HAS BEEN when he
suppressed others at their beck and call.
One finds that the preclear actually desires to be suppressed,
there is an aesthetic to it.
So he closes terminals with a particular who that represents the
what, perhaps many similar who's, and provkes them into picking on him,
making him 'PTS'.
This allows him to suffer without anyone noticing the real HOW he
is bringing it about and why.
Suffering comes from two things,
1.) Out of valence dramatizations that fail,
2.) In valent dramatizations that succeeed.
In the first case, he calls up the engram, goes into the 'winning'
valence and feels better, usually triumph, until he either regrets
dramatizing on others, or is forced to stop dramatizing by a stronger
counter force.
With the engram called up, he feels good while out of valence, but
feels the pain of the incident when he crashes back into valence.
That's the Anger/Regret cycle we all fear and have never run out.
In the second case, the winning valence is himself in the engram,
because he got sympathy for it during the incident from the Golden Ally.
That sympathy is more valuable to him than being in the winning
valence, because who cares about triumpth when he's got the girl of his
life crying for him.
So underlying any suffering at the hands of people he is being PTS
to, one finds the Golden Ally that makes the suffering desirable.
The preclear closes terminals with the SP in order to 'prove the SP
wrong', and provoke the SP to pick on him, thus suppressing him, but the
preclear then puts on the sympathy engram to create the suffering in
order to get the sympathy from the Golden Ally.
He HAS to have the SP crushing him down, becuase that's what made
the GA cry for him.
The SP makes the apparency of the preclear being an innocent
victim real.
No SP, no GA.
No GA, no reason to get up in the morning, at least in the universe
he is living in.
But he still won't get better until you audit out who and what HE
is being the Golden Ally to?
Being a Golden Ally to someone else, is the overt tht sticks the
motivator to him permanenty.
Giving someone sympathy is the biggest act of covert hostility
there is.
"(You think you are suffering now, wait until I get through with
you), you poor dear thing..."
Hubbard said in Advanced Procedure and Axioms:
"ALL sympathy must be removed from the case."
All 5 flows.
But who is going to get up in the morning if he isn't worried about
something for someone?
Total erasure of all sympathy is total peace.
Hubbad also said that the reason one is stuck
in a body in sub death tones of controlling, owning, being
responsible for bodies and lower is because of the cycle
that goes like his:
1.2 No Sympathy (Rage)
.9 Sympathy (Regret)
.8 Propiation (Amends)
0 BECOMING A BODY.
Usually a dead one, the preclear enters into the facsimiles of the
body and tries to regrant it life, failing that the preclear decides the
best way to take care of a body is to BE one, and micro manage its every
move from there on out.
This simply a basic life continuum on bodies.
The aesthetics to bodies was astounding on early parts of the
track.
And the regret was nightmarish.
Kill one accidentally by loving it too hard, and oh boy, away you
go.
So if you want to deal with someone's PTSness, audit out the Golden
Ally, the Hero, Villan, Victim triangle, on all flows.
And the aesthetic DECISION to get involved in them.
What's the upside of being down?
You won't have a human being left.
And he won't give a damn.
And he won't be worrying others, or fall for other's worrying him,
and he won't get involved in concerts of effort and concern.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Jul 16 00:16:51 EDT 2018
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1045.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)
iD8DBQFbTBw0URT1lqxE3HERAqGhAKDO6CRyoxjx834cxLxrO9Xndf3HWACbBSyf
bQF40JjG91ZwvJLfbtR/s+o=
=Cn68
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)