-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
ASSIGNMENT OF QUALITIES II
OK, so we have this conscious unit, a looker looking at his looked
ats, and we stick him in the head of a human body and connect his
consciousness to the sensory system of the body.
That means that now, rather than his looked ats being pure
imagination, dreaming or hallucination, they are causally connected to
events in the alleged physical universe.
You know, photon bounces off object, hits retina, travels along
brain pathways and eventually gets displayed as color and intensity in
the the conscious unit's looked at display.
So this guy is sitting there aiming his eyes at an apple on a
table in the physical universe, and he's seeing a red apple in his
consciousness.
The red apple that he actually sees in his consciousness is the
symbol, and the physical universe apple on the table is the referent.
Presumably the physical referent is a causal precursor to the
conscious symbol, and the state of the symbol is trackiing the
referent properly. For example if the physical apple changes color,
the conscious experience (symbol) will change color in tandem.
Tracking between symbol and referent is also called necessary
dependable followingness.
If there is no casaul pathway between symbol and referent then
there is no guarantee that the tracking will continue for long,
even if it continues forever.
Thus causation is what brings NECESSITY to dependable
followingness.
Now we know that the symbol and referent are two different events,
two different objects, existing and happening in two different
spaces and times.
The referent happens before the symbol in time determined by the
speed of light travel from apple to eye, and the speed of impingement
through the brain system.
The referent is also in a different place in space than the
symbol, because the referent is out there in the physical universe,
whereas the symbol is in here in the conscious universe, even though
the symbol LOOKS like it is out there where the physical apple
allegedly is.
We know that the symbol is not actually out there, because if it
were the looker couldn't see it, distance in space or time between
looker and looked at creates blindness by making direct contact
impossible.
Across a distance in space or time, everything remains forever a
theory.
Lastly we know that the symbol has its own qualities, different
than the referent, but that some of the qualities of the symbol may be
similar to those of the referent, and other qualities of the symbol
that the referent doesn't have, may be used to refer to qualities in
the referent that the symbol doesn't have.
Take color and frequency for example, as described below.
Color is a quality of the symbol which the symbol has and the
referent does not have, which is used to refer to frequency of light
reflecting off the referent, which the referent has and the symbol
does not.
So let's take a look a what some of those qualities of the symbol
are that are used to refer to the referent.
EXISTENCE
The first quality is existence. The symbol exists.
The conscious looker exists, and his looked ats exist, he can see
them and he needs no further proof. Someone else may doubt that he
sees them, but if he does see them, they must exist, as they couldn't
be seen if they didn't exist.
They don't just exist 'for him', if they exist for anyone, they
must exist for everyone whether they know it or not. In other words
if it is true for Goober that Goober sees a red apple, it must be true
for everyone that Goober sees a red apple.
This quality of existence in the symbol is then attributed to the
referent: because I see a conscious apple, there must BE a physical
apple.
Our whole concept of existence, what it is, what it means, what
it's ramifications are, come directly from our experience of the
existence of our conscious experiences.
If our conscious experiences did not exist, we would never have
come up with the idea of existence in the first place because we could
never have experienced something that existed!
How else could you experience something that existed, except
through the existence of your own conscious experiences of its
existence.
Our sense of existingness comes directly from our conscious
experience of the existence of our conscious experiences.
Since we have never seen any physical object EXCEPT via its
symbol in our conscious experience, assignment of any existence to the
physical object that exceeds the existence of the conscious symbol is
meaningless or arbitrary. Certainly not based on experience!
You can't experience something that has more existence than
the existence of your conscious experience of existence.
Sometimes you can have an indirect experience of something's
existence. The table may not look visually to real to you, but then
you bump into it and feel the pain. The realness of the pain
convinces you of the realness of the table more than the original
visual of the table did.
So all reality, actuality, or existingness that we assign to the
referent physical universe comes directly from the existingness of our
conscious experiences.
In other words the physical apple can not be more real, more
actual, have more existingness than the conscious experience by which
we learned of the apple in the first place.
Thus the assertion that the physical universe is real, but our
conscious experiences are not as real is delusive inversion.
CERTAINTY
The next quality that the conscious symbol has is certainty of
existence.
Not only does the conscious sysmbol exist, but the looker KNOWS
it exists without question, without doubt, without second thought.
This is the quality of learnability with perfect certainty.
Now we know that if looker and looked at are two different
objects separated by space or time distance, then the looker can never
see the looked at directly.
The looked at is NOT THERE for him.
The best the looker can do is wait for an impingement and then
theorize back into time about the possible nature of the source of
that impingement.
In this case the looker changes state as a result of the
impingement from the alleged remote source. The looker's change in
state is the symbol, and the alleged remote source is the referent.
Since one can not learn with certainty about the referent by
looking at or being a symbol for it, space and time between looker and
looked at make perfect certainty of looked at impossible.
Since the existence and nature of the conscious looked at IS
perfectly certain to the conscious looker, we are forced to conclude
that in the case of consciousness, the looker and looked at are one
and the same thing, not separated by a space or time distance.
Thus although the red apple LOOKS like it is out there, relative
to the looker, that out thereness must be an illusion, and the
entirety of consciousness and what it is conscious of must exist in a
zero dimensional, spaceless, timeless existence.
However the looker, seeing its perfect certainty of its
experience of the apple, then assigns perfect certainty to the alleged
physical referent.
Thus not only does the conscious looker then consider that the
physical apple exists, he concludes that the physical apple exists
with *CERTAINTY*. He has no doubt about the symbol, so he has no
doubt about the referent.
At all times and all places this is a very serious form of mind
broke, because it is impossible to attain certainty of a referent, via
certainty of a symbol.
Certainty of the referent is not certainly implied by certainty
of the symbol.
Consciousness *IS* certainty-of.
Since the only thing a looker can be conscious of is his own
conscious experiences, namely his a conscious looked ats, therefore
the only thing that a looker can be certain of is his own conscious
looked ats, his conscious experiences or symbols, in this case, of the
physcial universe.
With regards to a zero dimensional conscious unit perceiving
objects separated from him in a multi dimensional space time
continuum, the conscious symbol is always certain, the referent
remains forever a theory.
COLOR FORM
The next quality that the symbol has which is mistakenly assigned
to the referent is color.
Color, like redness, is a quality of being on one object, the
looked at.
The ability to reflect photons of a given frquency is a causal
quality of relation, between two different objects, physical apple and
physical photon.
Color in the conscious symbol is used to represent frequency of
reflected photons in the physcial universe. Intensity of color in
consciousness is used to represent amplitude of energy of those
photons or number of them per second.
There are no photons in imagination, dreaming or hallucination.
The lamp does not light the room in your dreams.
Conscious looked ats are self luminous, if they were illuminated
by something else, you couldn't see them at all. You could only
become a symbol for them according to the impingement on you of their
reflected or emmanated causal messenger wave.
Being a symbol for a referent is not the same thing as SEEING THE
REFERENT!
The fact that you see your looked ats with certainty proves that
you ARE them, and there is no via between them and you seeing them.
Thus color and perception of color is a zero dimensional
conscious phenomenon that has no place, CAN have no place in the multi
dimensional physical world with distance and time separating lookers
and looke ats.
Thus there is no color in the physical universe, only waves of
energy of different frequencies all made of the same stuff.
OUT THERENESS
The fourth quality of the conscious symbol that is assigned to
the physical referent is out thereness.
If you ask someone where his conscious experiences are he will
point vaguely in the area of his head, but if you ask him where he
sees the red apple, he will point out there where he thinks the
physical apple is.
Now our conscious color forms certainly LOOK like they are out
there, and thus because we see space we think there is space.
But in fact if our conscious pictures were out where they look
like they are, we couldn't see them, because imposition of space and
time between looker and looked at creates the blindness of no direct
contact.
Being a symbol for a referent at a distance from you is not the
same thing as SEEING the referent directly.
However the illusion of space is so strong in our conscious
looked ats, that we are just sure the physical referent must also have
space and be out there. I mean where else could it be?
The *PHYSICAL* apple has to be *SOMEWHERE*, right? What better
place than out there!
Some people will even go so far to say that the reason we see
conscious experiences of space is because there IS space. How else
could we have represented the actuality of physical space if not
through the conscious experience of space?
However certainty of experience does not provide certainty of the
physical referent, and worse THERE CAN BE NO CERTAINTY of physical
referent as certainty is the sole purvue of the conscious experience.
Thus claiming we see space because there is space is putting the
cart before the horse and is another case of very dangerous delusive
inversion.
It asserts that the nature of our consciousness is determined by
the nature of the physical universe. That consciousness EXISTS in
order to accuratly display the physical universe.
Eventually they will tell you that consciousness is MADE of the
physical universe, and a being is rolling around the drain to hell at
that point, the inversion is just too great to survive for long as a
causitive unit.
Love and shame can not of force and mass be made.
The truth is that consciousness had the ability to create
illusions of space (and time), and thus decided to employ the ability
in its game creation.
Actual space was never created, but the illusion of space between
looker and looked at was used to invite the idea that space did in
fact exist so beings could get lost playing in it.
I mean what fun is it knowing you have NEVER gone anywhere. You
couldn't get lost even if you wanted to.
You can't get lost when you ARE your home.
THREE DIMENSIONAL GEOMETRICITY
Out thereness is really just a subset of the 3 dimensions of
space.
Thus not only do you have here and there (depth), you also have
left and right (width) and up and down (height).
Now it might be pretty easy to see how here and there are
illusions, if you just consider the looker IS the looked at, but how
do you explain left and right or up and down.
I mean maybe there is no distance between you and the square you
are looking at, but the square is definitely a square and has a left
to right width of a foot or so.
So imagine that that the being is a light source, a source of
conscious light. And imagine the being has painted on himself a zero
dimensional point, a complete picture of the world all around him in
360 degrees.
Then imagine the painted up being is inside a perfectly mirrored
metal sphere.
The light leaves the being, gets colored as it goes through his
surface, heads out to the metal ball with the mirrored inside, and
reflects back off the mirrored surface and heads back to the being.
When the light reaches the being, he 'sees the world' that is painted
on him.
So seeing the world is like a being seeing himself in a spherical
mirror.
But now make the radius of the spherical mirror smaller and
smaller until it vanishes to zero. Thus the whole size of the being
plus mirror is zero. He is still going to see his own reflection lit
by his own self luminousness.
That's a really bad analogy but might help to understand how
something of no dimensions and thus no size, could none the less
project and reflect and see a multidimensional world of apparently
infinite size.
TIME
The last quality of the conscious symbol that is collapsed onto
the referent is timeingness, or change.
A physical universe machine can only be in a state. Since no
state proves the existence of a prior state with certainty, a machine
can never know with certainty that it is changing state! Thus a
machine can never know with certainty that time exists.
Yet consciousness certainly can know that not only does its
symbols exist, but they change! Thus the conscious looker assumes
that because he experiences time in his consciousness, there must BE
time in the physical universe referent.
So the five qualities of the symbol are
1.) Existence
2.) Certainty
3.) Color
4.) Out thereness, space
5.) Time
Each of these are then assigned to the physical universe
referent, even though the true referent may not have any of these
qualities at all!
What is the source of our zero dimensional conscious pictures?
Is it a multi dimensional physical universe as represented to us
in our looked ats, or is it perhaps something else entirely?
At 28.0 on the tone scale, the being descends down through
apparencies are reality.
The apparencies are the actualities of his conscious symbols,
existence, certainty, color, out thereness and time.
In going below apparencies are reality, the being considers that
his symbols refer to referents that actually have those qualities.
He forgets that he is dealing with the alleged referents solely
via his symbols, and eventually comes to consider that the symbols are
nothing, and the referent is the only something there is.
A meatball is a symbol that thinks it is made of the referent.
That's like a TV set thinking it is made of the stuff one sees
displayed in the TV set.
You can't get more inverted than that.
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 Feb 17 23:49:47 EST 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Aug 31 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore445.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)
iD8DBQFfTR6FURT1lqxE3HERAvaUAKCrP6vfTgkhmwduQLQe1nW//pb2EACcD+Gw
+6eG/LW3o1WIy4oeCiLlp7s=
=GOYJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, August 31, 2020
Sunday, August 30, 2020
ADORE744 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I CLAIM
I claim that if you co audit the OT Power Protocol Process
alternated with NOT KNOW SOMETHING as needed, for a maximum of 100
hours, across a number of days, an hour or two a day, or every few days,
with someone who is a competent co auditor who has and knows how to use
an e-meter, your worry about whether OT powers exist or not, will change
to a worry about what to do with them once they come back.
OT POWER PROTOCOL PROCESS
http://clearing.org/archive?/homer/power
If 100 people out of a truely random sample try this, more than 50
percent will successfully attain the E/P as stated in less than 100
hours, another 25 percent will not but will remain interested in
continuing the process further, and another 25 percent will abort and
never complete.
This I claim, and would consider a good bet, although I could be
wrong about the percentage of successes.
Homer
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun Apr 4 23:13:15 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Aug 30 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore744.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)
iD8DBQFfS80FURT1lqxE3HERAjJ5AKC596b7SdacIVEYAa5F7I7u2XcP2ACfXgqh
R6k776m27nbB2qBifxMs6zM=
=oOnl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
I CLAIM
I claim that if you co audit the OT Power Protocol Process
alternated with NOT KNOW SOMETHING as needed, for a maximum of 100
hours, across a number of days, an hour or two a day, or every few days,
with someone who is a competent co auditor who has and knows how to use
an e-meter, your worry about whether OT powers exist or not, will change
to a worry about what to do with them once they come back.
OT POWER PROTOCOL PROCESS
http://clearing.org/archive?/homer/power
If 100 people out of a truely random sample try this, more than 50
percent will successfully attain the E/P as stated in less than 100
hours, another 25 percent will not but will remain interested in
continuing the process further, and another 25 percent will abort and
never complete.
This I claim, and would consider a good bet, although I could be
wrong about the percentage of successes.
Homer
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun Apr 4 23:13:15 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Aug 30 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore744.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)
iD8DBQFfS80FURT1lqxE3HERAjJ5AKC596b7SdacIVEYAa5F7I7u2XcP2ACfXgqh
R6k776m27nbB2qBifxMs6zM=
=oOnl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE943 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
OWNERSHIP II
> So one is laying cause for cognition at the feet of their auditor?
Yes. The truth is co cause, the computation is that co cause is
NECESSARY.
It's one thing to want help, its quite another NEED HELP.
In this world sometimes people NEED HELP, it can happen, but people
with a controlling intent will tell you need help when you don't, that
you CAN'T DO IT ALONE, and worse that you SHOULDN'T DO IT ALONE, because
it's dangerous, wrong, bad for their income, bad for the group, etc. So
they turn needing help into an ethical imperative.
> Do not wish to be beholden to anybody?
Not forever.
> On the Chart of Human Attitudes at the top of the scale one owns
>the auditor, "Owns All", but there are viewpoints in that scale which
>emcompass "All that is".
Yes, the hard part is PUTTING THE HELP THERE as fully responsible.
My responsibility and put there level at the time I was in the
church was literally negative.
Even today its only analytical, actually putting there the death of
Mira, or any part of my life is zip, beyond horrifying. No willing to
take responsibility for. Wanna kill whoever was :)
> I am co-auditing for free, so it that okay?
As long as there are no agreements to not discuss YOUR OWN case or
gains or understandings out of session, except maybe for a sunsetable
while, and as long as both parties are considering they are getting a
fair exchange for the work they put into each other.
Remember as auditor, you can help forever for free, because its an
out flow. The practicality of doing so may be limited for he who would
outflow must inflow too.
But as a preclear, being helped and helped and helped, is a degrade
and eventually the preclear goes into a refused help.
Kids do this with their useless mothers, who won't let the kid help
himself, because the mother feels useless if the kid can be self
sufficient.
It's psycho, but the kid gets to 'refused to be helped,' and starts
to feel useless also. This sits on top of volcanic matricidal feelings.
Homer
Wed Mar 20 11:47:41 EDT 2013
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Aug 29 12:00:02 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore943.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)
iD8DBQFfSnuDURT1lqxE3HERAkMbAJ4gHpLZowAMMmbE/VuBMAzASG031wCghwv4
PPJdnO7SNYyA88jQAk9OPOc=
=15qR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
OWNERSHIP II
> So one is laying cause for cognition at the feet of their auditor?
Yes. The truth is co cause, the computation is that co cause is
NECESSARY.
It's one thing to want help, its quite another NEED HELP.
In this world sometimes people NEED HELP, it can happen, but people
with a controlling intent will tell you need help when you don't, that
you CAN'T DO IT ALONE, and worse that you SHOULDN'T DO IT ALONE, because
it's dangerous, wrong, bad for their income, bad for the group, etc. So
they turn needing help into an ethical imperative.
> Do not wish to be beholden to anybody?
Not forever.
> On the Chart of Human Attitudes at the top of the scale one owns
>the auditor, "Owns All", but there are viewpoints in that scale which
>emcompass "All that is".
Yes, the hard part is PUTTING THE HELP THERE as fully responsible.
My responsibility and put there level at the time I was in the
church was literally negative.
Even today its only analytical, actually putting there the death of
Mira, or any part of my life is zip, beyond horrifying. No willing to
take responsibility for. Wanna kill whoever was :)
> I am co-auditing for free, so it that okay?
As long as there are no agreements to not discuss YOUR OWN case or
gains or understandings out of session, except maybe for a sunsetable
while, and as long as both parties are considering they are getting a
fair exchange for the work they put into each other.
Remember as auditor, you can help forever for free, because its an
out flow. The practicality of doing so may be limited for he who would
outflow must inflow too.
But as a preclear, being helped and helped and helped, is a degrade
and eventually the preclear goes into a refused help.
Kids do this with their useless mothers, who won't let the kid help
himself, because the mother feels useless if the kid can be self
sufficient.
It's psycho, but the kid gets to 'refused to be helped,' and starts
to feel useless also. This sits on top of volcanic matricidal feelings.
Homer
Wed Mar 20 11:47:41 EDT 2013
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Aug 29 12:00:02 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore943.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)
iD8DBQFfSnuDURT1lqxE3HERAkMbAJ4gHpLZowAMMmbE/VuBMAzASG031wCghwv4
PPJdnO7SNYyA88jQAk9OPOc=
=15qR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Friday, August 28, 2020
adr434.memo (fwd)
The bit about problems in this life having some origin
in a past life goes like this.
A long time go we did something that was regretted but not
confonted. In fact the whole concept of reoperation got a bad name.
The solution was to make nothing of the event as if it
had not happened. Thus a hill was created in front of our ongoing
spiritual progess. Each lifetime people try to climb their hill but
often tend to make it bigger. Or they try to detour around it only
to find themselves hopelessly lost and off track.
Eventually everyone comes back to their hill.
Everyone makes it over one day.
Perhaps to handle yet
another hill as we may all have more than one. But often the
theme of a single particular life time will be a single particular hill,
and a little observation of a life's problems will show the approximate
subject matter of the hill in question.
The complete handling of that one lifetime's hill is sufficient cause for
a major celebration and a self administered pat on the back.
Once the soul comes to grips with the fact that he has hills
and has handled
one or two terminatedly, which means forever, further hills in further
lifetimes do not seem so bad and the soul starts to look forward
to his or her eternity with charm.
Sometimes people dig a hole IN their hill and make their home there,
never to come out. This is called 'I have lived but once.'
I guess Earth could be considered one large mountain range.
homer adore-l@ualtavm 9/11/89 No subject
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Aug 27 06:06:02 EDT 2020
FTP://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/adore/adr434.memo
WWW://www.clearing.org
BLOG://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
_______________________________________________
Clear-L mailing list
Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
in a past life goes like this.
A long time go we did something that was regretted but not
confonted. In fact the whole concept of reoperation got a bad name.
The solution was to make nothing of the event as if it
had not happened. Thus a hill was created in front of our ongoing
spiritual progess. Each lifetime people try to climb their hill but
often tend to make it bigger. Or they try to detour around it only
to find themselves hopelessly lost and off track.
Eventually everyone comes back to their hill.
Everyone makes it over one day.
Perhaps to handle yet
another hill as we may all have more than one. But often the
theme of a single particular life time will be a single particular hill,
and a little observation of a life's problems will show the approximate
subject matter of the hill in question.
The complete handling of that one lifetime's hill is sufficient cause for
a major celebration and a self administered pat on the back.
Once the soul comes to grips with the fact that he has hills
and has handled
one or two terminatedly, which means forever, further hills in further
lifetimes do not seem so bad and the soul starts to look forward
to his or her eternity with charm.
Sometimes people dig a hole IN their hill and make their home there,
never to come out. This is called 'I have lived but once.'
I guess Earth could be considered one large mountain range.
homer adore-l@ualtavm 9/11/89 No subject
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Aug 27 06:06:02 EDT 2020
FTP://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/adore/adr434.memo
WWW://www.clearing.org
BLOG://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
_______________________________________________
Clear-L mailing list
Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, August 24, 2020
ADORE777 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
07/29/10 Thursday 4:21pm EST
WHO OR WHAT IS CAUSE AROUND HERE?
Homer wrote:
> No, the only thing we can effect is each other. But in fact that
> too is an illusion, because if we follow 'each other' up the threads
> towards source, we end up being part of the same causal being, the big
> "I-AM", the High Us from Adore.
Homer:
This kind of messy description of things makes me nervous.
It is not true we are one being, it is not true we are many beings,
it is true we are one thing who has many beings.
The finger and hand analogy works well in this case.
The separation of the fingers is not an illusion, they are separate
individual fingers.
The oneness of the hand is also not an illusion, it is one hand.
But the seperate fingers DO connect to the one hand in such a way
as to make a whole thing that is both one and many.
Thus individuality is never lost, but neither is connectedness
between individuals.
They can act independently, but they can also act in unison or in
covert agreement with each other.
Covert agreement is when I cause you to be able to cause effects in
me.
It looks like you are cause of the effects, which you are, but I am
cause of you being able to have access to me to cause effects in.
Thus if you cause an effect in me, mock something up for me,
we are both 'responsible' for my condition, even though I didn't
have a clue WHAT you were going to mockup for me, or even when.
Once I say 'have at it', the causal door in then open for you to
mock me up as anything you want any time you want.
You are repsonsible in that it is your will and mockup.
I am responsible in that it is me you are mocking up as something,
via my causal permission that you can do so.
BOTH ARE ACTS OF INDEPENDENT CAUSE between two different beings via
the One that connects them.
It can be argued that the fingers can not act without drawing power
from the hand, and this may be true. Thus each finger is an agent of
the One.
But the One is a multi One, each finger can have its own
independent existence free from influence from any other finger.
Further, although the finger draws its ability to act from
the hand, it is the FINGER that acts, not the hand.
Thus "Source Sources only when Will Casts." - Adore
The fingers form the High US, the hand forms Source, and the
fingers and the hand form the AllThatIs.
Homer
Thu Jul 29 16:32:06 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Aug 24 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore777.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)
iD8DBQFfQ+QFURT1lqxE3HERAph4AKCnrU0fdaMohsW8gUYcaKCWBO7JlACcDibZ
M5Y1s+KDTzQYbLDaliAxk6Q=
=FxAz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
07/29/10 Thursday 4:21pm EST
WHO OR WHAT IS CAUSE AROUND HERE?
Homer wrote:
> No, the only thing we can effect is each other. But in fact that
> too is an illusion, because if we follow 'each other' up the threads
> towards source, we end up being part of the same causal being, the big
> "I-AM", the High Us from Adore.
Homer:
This kind of messy description of things makes me nervous.
It is not true we are one being, it is not true we are many beings,
it is true we are one thing who has many beings.
The finger and hand analogy works well in this case.
The separation of the fingers is not an illusion, they are separate
individual fingers.
The oneness of the hand is also not an illusion, it is one hand.
But the seperate fingers DO connect to the one hand in such a way
as to make a whole thing that is both one and many.
Thus individuality is never lost, but neither is connectedness
between individuals.
They can act independently, but they can also act in unison or in
covert agreement with each other.
Covert agreement is when I cause you to be able to cause effects in
me.
It looks like you are cause of the effects, which you are, but I am
cause of you being able to have access to me to cause effects in.
Thus if you cause an effect in me, mock something up for me,
we are both 'responsible' for my condition, even though I didn't
have a clue WHAT you were going to mockup for me, or even when.
Once I say 'have at it', the causal door in then open for you to
mock me up as anything you want any time you want.
You are repsonsible in that it is your will and mockup.
I am responsible in that it is me you are mocking up as something,
via my causal permission that you can do so.
BOTH ARE ACTS OF INDEPENDENT CAUSE between two different beings via
the One that connects them.
It can be argued that the fingers can not act without drawing power
from the hand, and this may be true. Thus each finger is an agent of
the One.
But the One is a multi One, each finger can have its own
independent existence free from influence from any other finger.
Further, although the finger draws its ability to act from
the hand, it is the FINGER that acts, not the hand.
Thus "Source Sources only when Will Casts." - Adore
The fingers form the High US, the hand forms Source, and the
fingers and the hand form the AllThatIs.
Homer
Thu Jul 29 16:32:06 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Aug 24 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore777.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)
iD8DBQFfQ+QFURT1lqxE3HERAph4AKCnrU0fdaMohsW8gUYcaKCWBO7JlACcDibZ
M5Y1s+KDTzQYbLDaliAxk6Q=
=FxAz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Sunday, August 23, 2020
ACT75 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
TROM VI
((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
MAJOR GPMS
ACT - 75
11 August 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
The following GPMS mentioned in TROM are listed out here.
To Create, To Love, To Admire, to Enhance, To Help, To Feel, To
Control, To Own, To Have, To Protect, To Understand and To Tell.
Sessioning consists of word clearing and understanding each GPM of
4 Games, spotting and creating examples of all 4 Games in your past,
present and future until flat, and then running the 4 overts and 4
motivators for each GPM.
Order of GPMS is arbitrary, so run the ones that interest you, and
certainly come up with your own. You should know the pattern cold by
now, and be able to write these down from memory.
Remember,
FORCED TO can be run as PREVENTED FROM NOT.
FORCED TO NOT can be run as PREVENTED FROM.
FORCING TO can be run as PREVENTING FROM NOT.
FORCING TO NOT can be run as PREVENTING FROM.
Have fun.
Four Games Conditions on To Be Created and To Create
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Created (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Create (SD)
2.) To Be Not Created (SD) <-----> 3.) To Create (SD)
3.) To Create (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Created (SD)
4.) To Not Create (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Created (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Created 1.O Forcing to Create
2.M Forced to Be Created 2.O Forcing to Not Create
3.M Forced to Not Create 3.O Forcing to Be Created
4.M Forced to Create 4.O Forcing to Be Not Created
Four Games Conditions on To Be Loved and To Love
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Loved (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Love (SD)
2.) To Be Not Loved (SD) <-----> 3.) To Love (SD)
3.) To Love (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Loved (SD)
4.) To Not Love (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Loved (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Loved 1.O Forcing to Love
2.M Forced to Be Loved 2.O Forcing to Not Love
3.M Forced to Not Love 3.O Forcing to Be Loved
4.M Forced to Love 4.O Forcing to Be Not Loved
Four Games Conditions on To Be Admired and To Admire
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Admired (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Admire (SD)
2.) To Be Not Admired (SD) <-----> 3.) To Admire (SD)
3.) To Admire (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Admired (SD)
4.) To Not Admire (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Admired (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Admired 1.O Forcing to Admire
2.M Forced to Be Admired 2.O Forcing to Not Admire
3.M Forced to Not Admire 3.O Forcing to Be Admired
4.M Forced to Admire 4.O Forcing to Be Not Admired
Four Games Conditions on To Be Enhanced and To Enhance
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Enhanced (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Enhance (SD)
2.) To Be Not Enhanced (SD) <-----> 3.) To Enhance (SD)
3.) To Enhance (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Enhanced (SD)
4.) To Not Enhance (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Enhanced (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Enhanced 1.O Forcing to Enhance
2.M Forced to Be Enhanced 2.O Forcing to Not Enhance
3.M Forced to Not Enhance 3.O Forcing to Be Enhanced
4.M Forced to Enhance 4.O Forcing to Be Not Enhanced
Four Games Conditions on To Be Helped and To Help
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Helped (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Help (SD)
2.) To Be Not Helped (SD) <-----> 3.) To Help (SD)
3.) To Help (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Helped (SD)
4.) To Not Help (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Helped (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Helped 1.O Forcing to Help
2.M Forced to Be Helped 2.O Forcing to Not Help
3.M Forced to Not Help 3.O Forcing to Be Helped
4.M Forced to Help 4.O Forcing to Be Not Helped
Four Games Conditions on To Be Felt and To Feel
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Felt (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Feel (SD)
2.) To Be Not Felt (SD) <-----> 3.) To Feel (SD)
3.) To Feel (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Felt (SD)
4.) To Not Feel (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Felt (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Felt 1.O Forcing to Feel
2.M Forced to Be Felt 2.O Forcing to Not Feel
3.M Forced to Not Feel 3.O Forcing to Be Felt
4.M Forced to Feel 4.O Forcing to Be Not Felt
Four Games Conditions on To Be Controlled and To Control
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Controlled (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Control (SD)
2.) To Be Not Controlled (SD) <-----> 3.) To Control (SD)
3.) To Control (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Controlled (SD)
4.) To Not Control (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Controlled (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Controlled 1.O Forcing to Control
2.M Forced to Be Controlled 2.O Forcing to Not Control
3.M Forced to Not Control 3.O Forcing to Be Controlled
4.M Forced to Control 4.O Forcing to Be Not Controlled
Four Games Conditions on To Be Owned and To Own
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Owned (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Own (SD)
2.) To Be Not Owned (SD) <-----> 3.) To Own (SD)
3.) To Own (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Owned (SD)
4.) To Not Own (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Owned (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Owned 1.O Forcing to Own
2.M Forced to Be Owned 2.O Forcing to Not Own
3.M Forced to Not Own 3.O Forcing to Be Owned
4.M Forced to Own 4.O Forcing to Be Not Owned
Four Games Conditions on To Be Had and To Have
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Had (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Have (SD)
2.) To Be Not Had (SD) <-----> 3.) To Have (SD)
3.) To Have (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Had (SD)
4.) To Not Have (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Had (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Had 1.O Forcing to Have
2.M Forced to Be Had 2.O Forcing to Not Have
3.M Forced to Not Have 3.O Forcing to Be Had
4.M Forced to Have 4.O Forcing to Be Not Had
Four Games Conditions on To Be Protected and To Protect
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Protected (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Protect (SD)
2.) To Be Not Protected (SD) <-----> 3.) To Protect (SD)
3.) To Protect (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Protected (SD)
4.) To Not Protect (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Protected (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Protected 1.O Forcing to Protect
2.M Forced to Be Protected 2.O Forcing to Not Protect
3.M Forced to Not Protect 3.O Forcing to Be Protected
4.M Forced to Protect 4.O Forcing to Be Not Protected
Four Games Conditions on To Be Understood and To Understand
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Understood (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Understand (SD)
2.) To Be Not Understood (SD) <-----> 3.) To Understand (SD)
3.) To Understand (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Understood (SD)
4.) To Not Understand (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Understood (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Understood 1.O Forcing to Understand
2.M Forced to Be Understood 2.O Forcing to Not Understand
3.M Forced to Not Understand 3.O Forcing to Be Understood
4.M Forced to Understand 4.O Forcing to Be Not Understood
Four Games Conditions on To Be Told and To Tell
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Told (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Tell (SD)
2.) To Be Not Told (SD) <-----> 3.) To Tell (SD)
3.) To Tell (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Told (SD)
4.) To Not Tell (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Told (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Told 1.O Forcing to Tell
2.M Forced to Be Told 2.O Forcing to Not Tell
3.M Forced to Not Tell 3.O Forcing to Be Told
4.M Forced to Tell 4.O Forcing to Be Not Told
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Aug 22 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act75.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)
iD8DBQFfQUEFURT1lqxE3HERAt2RAJ9yHhcDo6mFIhVUK9fDbvPR9gQgNACg1Jch
AeXsrUmbFOKXYyVgzeLnmwU=
=3eCV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
TROM VI
((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
MAJOR GPMS
ACT - 75
11 August 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
The following GPMS mentioned in TROM are listed out here.
To Create, To Love, To Admire, to Enhance, To Help, To Feel, To
Control, To Own, To Have, To Protect, To Understand and To Tell.
Sessioning consists of word clearing and understanding each GPM of
4 Games, spotting and creating examples of all 4 Games in your past,
present and future until flat, and then running the 4 overts and 4
motivators for each GPM.
Order of GPMS is arbitrary, so run the ones that interest you, and
certainly come up with your own. You should know the pattern cold by
now, and be able to write these down from memory.
Remember,
FORCED TO can be run as PREVENTED FROM NOT.
FORCED TO NOT can be run as PREVENTED FROM.
FORCING TO can be run as PREVENTING FROM NOT.
FORCING TO NOT can be run as PREVENTING FROM.
Have fun.
Four Games Conditions on To Be Created and To Create
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Created (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Create (SD)
2.) To Be Not Created (SD) <-----> 3.) To Create (SD)
3.) To Create (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Created (SD)
4.) To Not Create (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Created (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Created 1.O Forcing to Create
2.M Forced to Be Created 2.O Forcing to Not Create
3.M Forced to Not Create 3.O Forcing to Be Created
4.M Forced to Create 4.O Forcing to Be Not Created
Four Games Conditions on To Be Loved and To Love
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Loved (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Love (SD)
2.) To Be Not Loved (SD) <-----> 3.) To Love (SD)
3.) To Love (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Loved (SD)
4.) To Not Love (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Loved (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Loved 1.O Forcing to Love
2.M Forced to Be Loved 2.O Forcing to Not Love
3.M Forced to Not Love 3.O Forcing to Be Loved
4.M Forced to Love 4.O Forcing to Be Not Loved
Four Games Conditions on To Be Admired and To Admire
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Admired (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Admire (SD)
2.) To Be Not Admired (SD) <-----> 3.) To Admire (SD)
3.) To Admire (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Admired (SD)
4.) To Not Admire (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Admired (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Admired 1.O Forcing to Admire
2.M Forced to Be Admired 2.O Forcing to Not Admire
3.M Forced to Not Admire 3.O Forcing to Be Admired
4.M Forced to Admire 4.O Forcing to Be Not Admired
Four Games Conditions on To Be Enhanced and To Enhance
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Enhanced (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Enhance (SD)
2.) To Be Not Enhanced (SD) <-----> 3.) To Enhance (SD)
3.) To Enhance (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Enhanced (SD)
4.) To Not Enhance (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Enhanced (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Enhanced 1.O Forcing to Enhance
2.M Forced to Be Enhanced 2.O Forcing to Not Enhance
3.M Forced to Not Enhance 3.O Forcing to Be Enhanced
4.M Forced to Enhance 4.O Forcing to Be Not Enhanced
Four Games Conditions on To Be Helped and To Help
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Helped (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Help (SD)
2.) To Be Not Helped (SD) <-----> 3.) To Help (SD)
3.) To Help (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Helped (SD)
4.) To Not Help (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Helped (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Helped 1.O Forcing to Help
2.M Forced to Be Helped 2.O Forcing to Not Help
3.M Forced to Not Help 3.O Forcing to Be Helped
4.M Forced to Help 4.O Forcing to Be Not Helped
Four Games Conditions on To Be Felt and To Feel
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Felt (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Feel (SD)
2.) To Be Not Felt (SD) <-----> 3.) To Feel (SD)
3.) To Feel (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Felt (SD)
4.) To Not Feel (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Felt (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Felt 1.O Forcing to Feel
2.M Forced to Be Felt 2.O Forcing to Not Feel
3.M Forced to Not Feel 3.O Forcing to Be Felt
4.M Forced to Feel 4.O Forcing to Be Not Felt
Four Games Conditions on To Be Controlled and To Control
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Controlled (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Control (SD)
2.) To Be Not Controlled (SD) <-----> 3.) To Control (SD)
3.) To Control (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Controlled (SD)
4.) To Not Control (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Controlled (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Controlled 1.O Forcing to Control
2.M Forced to Be Controlled 2.O Forcing to Not Control
3.M Forced to Not Control 3.O Forcing to Be Controlled
4.M Forced to Control 4.O Forcing to Be Not Controlled
Four Games Conditions on To Be Owned and To Own
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Owned (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Own (SD)
2.) To Be Not Owned (SD) <-----> 3.) To Own (SD)
3.) To Own (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Owned (SD)
4.) To Not Own (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Owned (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Owned 1.O Forcing to Own
2.M Forced to Be Owned 2.O Forcing to Not Own
3.M Forced to Not Own 3.O Forcing to Be Owned
4.M Forced to Own 4.O Forcing to Be Not Owned
Four Games Conditions on To Be Had and To Have
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Had (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Have (SD)
2.) To Be Not Had (SD) <-----> 3.) To Have (SD)
3.) To Have (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Had (SD)
4.) To Not Have (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Had (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Had 1.O Forcing to Have
2.M Forced to Be Had 2.O Forcing to Not Have
3.M Forced to Not Have 3.O Forcing to Be Had
4.M Forced to Have 4.O Forcing to Be Not Had
Four Games Conditions on To Be Protected and To Protect
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Protected (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Protect (SD)
2.) To Be Not Protected (SD) <-----> 3.) To Protect (SD)
3.) To Protect (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Protected (SD)
4.) To Not Protect (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Protected (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Protected 1.O Forcing to Protect
2.M Forced to Be Protected 2.O Forcing to Not Protect
3.M Forced to Not Protect 3.O Forcing to Be Protected
4.M Forced to Protect 4.O Forcing to Be Not Protected
Four Games Conditions on To Be Understood and To Understand
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Understood (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Understand (SD)
2.) To Be Not Understood (SD) <-----> 3.) To Understand (SD)
3.) To Understand (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Understood (SD)
4.) To Not Understand (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Understood (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Understood 1.O Forcing to Understand
2.M Forced to Be Understood 2.O Forcing to Not Understand
3.M Forced to Not Understand 3.O Forcing to Be Understood
4.M Forced to Understand 4.O Forcing to Be Not Understood
Four Games Conditions on To Be Told and To Tell
Being One Being Two
1.) To Be Told (SD) <-----> 4.) To Not Tell (SD)
2.) To Be Not Told (SD) <-----> 3.) To Tell (SD)
3.) To Tell (SD) <-----> 2.) To Be Not Told (SD)
4.) To Not Tell (SD) <-----> 1.) To Be Told (SD)
THE MOTIVATORS THE OVERTS
1.M Forced to Be Not Told 1.O Forcing to Tell
2.M Forced to Be Told 2.O Forcing to Not Tell
3.M Forced to Not Tell 3.O Forcing to Be Told
4.M Forced to Tell 4.O Forcing to Be Not Told
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Aug 22 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act75.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)
iD8DBQFfQUEFURT1lqxE3HERAt2RAJ9yHhcDo6mFIhVUK9fDbvPR9gQgNACg1Jch
AeXsrUmbFOKXYyVgzeLnmwU=
=3eCV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, August 17, 2020
SCI 21
TO DEMONSTRATE OR NOT TO DEMONSTRATE OT POWERS
SCI - 21
Copyright (C) 1992 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
John,
The subject of proof is a big one. So for the moment I wish to
post a poetic cop out to your question, but I promise to keep it under
consideration.
Do OT's have superhuman powers?
I would presume so.
What are they?
Anything you can imagine, including the creation of universes,
people in those universes, and the ability to become those people in
those universes asking questions about OT.
Can these powers be demonstrated?
Yes, certainly some of the more physical powers surely can be
demonstrated.
Should they be demonstrated?
That would depend on the individual OT who had them and who had to
be accountable for the effects that demonstrating his powers would have.
You mentioned SHOCK in your question about OT's coming to visit
your place out of their body and reporting back to you what they had
seen.
The awareness characteristic scale puts shock at -16,
-12 Disaster
-13 Inactuality
-14 Delusion
-15 Hysteria
-16 Shock
-17 Catatonia
-18 Oblivion
Thus causing any form of shock to a populace at large could hardly
be considered good for a civilization.
Hubbard taught us to do everything on a gradient scale, which means
little by little, not all at once. Therefore enormous displays of
unquestionable demonstrations were frowned upon by Hubbard.
I would tend to agree.
It is very dangerous to demonstrate power to those who do not have
power.
Those who have power know this.
Those who do not have power, don't know this.
What can you do?
Now here is the cop out, if you are serious about getting proof of
power I would instead audit you on the subject of power until some power
opened up in you. It needn't be actual abilities to move rocks or
things, but you would get a clear idea that what ever power you desire
is available and in fact you would settle back down into being
comfortably able to NOT have power for a while, or at least until you
were more ready for it.
Just consider what would happen to you if you had the ability to go
anywhere on the planet and see anyone doing anything they were doing,
and you could kill anyone with an electrical spark to the brain or
heart. (Nipping, History of Man).
Now the auditing question would be something like,
'Tell me what would happen over time if you had this power?'
The correct E/P of this process would be an experience of power
opening up inside yourself, certainty that power exists, and a settling
out of your willingness to have or not have power as you wished.
Another process for handling people's problems with proof, would
be,
'What evidence do you have that you are not an OT?'
'What evidence do you have that you are an OT?'
What this will turn up are quite a number of false certainties
that people are walking around in that prevent the possibility of
believing in OT. Once they see that these false certainties are just
not supportable, the POSSIBILITY opens up that OT is possible, and they
can approach it again with a new look.
The point is that if someone is an OT and no longer believes this,
they clearly have chosen to prove to themselves down the whole track
that they are not an OT and neither is anyone else.
For you to then go and present them with incontrovertible proof
that they are wrong, would merely open up a very old wound, an OT wound,
that would probably severely hurt the person or his body.
It could kill them.
So although I am truly copping out on a direct answer to your
question, for reasons that I believe to be justified, I am at the same
time presenting you with auditing procedures that you can use on
yourself or someone else to set off a spark of power within your own
space and to open the door to your own further private investigations
free from the harrasment of others.
Others who wish you to prove your powers, wish so because they hope
you have none, or because they want you to use them to take care of
them.
People who demand proof often have a hidden agenda.
Proof is available that THEY have power, not that other's already
have it.
Proof is available for that too but no one with power would be
likely to prove it unless it was part of a larger world changing plan to
do so. In which case they would do it anyhow on their own schedule and
not because someone ask them to.
Here are some more auditing questions to run solo or co audit:
'What would you not do with power?'
'What would you do with power?'
'Why should you not have power?'
'Why should you have power?'
By the way the Power Processes of the Church (Grade V) deal with
just this subject. They are held confidential because when run properly
they cause a person to revivify some of the worst moments on his track.
POWERFUL moments.
People have little problem with believing in past lives when they
are reliving one as if it were now.
Before such a reviv it may be hard to get real on anything in the
memory, because so much energy is being directed at keeping this one set
of memories at bay.
The power processes by the way are NOT held confidential in the
field and are in fact used in routine auditing as they go quickly and
directly to the center of the case.
If the case is ready for it.
I mean what power do you want really?
Which power has the most charge on failure on it?
If I knew the answer to that, should I speak it?
Just critical mass it, and send it out into the world?
Unadorned with anything to soften it, unprotected by any kind
of double talk?
At what point does the preclear go "Whoa! Enough already..."
To know it is to never be able to forget it, to never be able to run
away from it ever again.
"The ability to..."
Oh you want the second half do you?
The Power Processes were developed by Ron Hubbard in tandem with
John McMaster at Saint Hill to help crack seriously resistive cases.
John McMaster was Scientology's first confirmed clear, and left the
Church in the early 70's or so.
He made many tapes that are circulating around the field that add a
deep insight to the inner workings of Ron and Scientology, not all bad.
He remained a devoted clearing practitioner until the end, he died
last year.
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
SCI - 21
Copyright (C) 1992 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
John,
The subject of proof is a big one. So for the moment I wish to
post a poetic cop out to your question, but I promise to keep it under
consideration.
Do OT's have superhuman powers?
I would presume so.
What are they?
Anything you can imagine, including the creation of universes,
people in those universes, and the ability to become those people in
those universes asking questions about OT.
Can these powers be demonstrated?
Yes, certainly some of the more physical powers surely can be
demonstrated.
Should they be demonstrated?
That would depend on the individual OT who had them and who had to
be accountable for the effects that demonstrating his powers would have.
You mentioned SHOCK in your question about OT's coming to visit
your place out of their body and reporting back to you what they had
seen.
The awareness characteristic scale puts shock at -16,
-12 Disaster
-13 Inactuality
-14 Delusion
-15 Hysteria
-16 Shock
-17 Catatonia
-18 Oblivion
Thus causing any form of shock to a populace at large could hardly
be considered good for a civilization.
Hubbard taught us to do everything on a gradient scale, which means
little by little, not all at once. Therefore enormous displays of
unquestionable demonstrations were frowned upon by Hubbard.
I would tend to agree.
It is very dangerous to demonstrate power to those who do not have
power.
Those who have power know this.
Those who do not have power, don't know this.
What can you do?
Now here is the cop out, if you are serious about getting proof of
power I would instead audit you on the subject of power until some power
opened up in you. It needn't be actual abilities to move rocks or
things, but you would get a clear idea that what ever power you desire
is available and in fact you would settle back down into being
comfortably able to NOT have power for a while, or at least until you
were more ready for it.
Just consider what would happen to you if you had the ability to go
anywhere on the planet and see anyone doing anything they were doing,
and you could kill anyone with an electrical spark to the brain or
heart. (Nipping, History of Man).
Now the auditing question would be something like,
'Tell me what would happen over time if you had this power?'
The correct E/P of this process would be an experience of power
opening up inside yourself, certainty that power exists, and a settling
out of your willingness to have or not have power as you wished.
Another process for handling people's problems with proof, would
be,
'What evidence do you have that you are not an OT?'
'What evidence do you have that you are an OT?'
What this will turn up are quite a number of false certainties
that people are walking around in that prevent the possibility of
believing in OT. Once they see that these false certainties are just
not supportable, the POSSIBILITY opens up that OT is possible, and they
can approach it again with a new look.
The point is that if someone is an OT and no longer believes this,
they clearly have chosen to prove to themselves down the whole track
that they are not an OT and neither is anyone else.
For you to then go and present them with incontrovertible proof
that they are wrong, would merely open up a very old wound, an OT wound,
that would probably severely hurt the person or his body.
It could kill them.
So although I am truly copping out on a direct answer to your
question, for reasons that I believe to be justified, I am at the same
time presenting you with auditing procedures that you can use on
yourself or someone else to set off a spark of power within your own
space and to open the door to your own further private investigations
free from the harrasment of others.
Others who wish you to prove your powers, wish so because they hope
you have none, or because they want you to use them to take care of
them.
People who demand proof often have a hidden agenda.
Proof is available that THEY have power, not that other's already
have it.
Proof is available for that too but no one with power would be
likely to prove it unless it was part of a larger world changing plan to
do so. In which case they would do it anyhow on their own schedule and
not because someone ask them to.
Here are some more auditing questions to run solo or co audit:
'What would you not do with power?'
'What would you do with power?'
'Why should you not have power?'
'Why should you have power?'
By the way the Power Processes of the Church (Grade V) deal with
just this subject. They are held confidential because when run properly
they cause a person to revivify some of the worst moments on his track.
POWERFUL moments.
People have little problem with believing in past lives when they
are reliving one as if it were now.
Before such a reviv it may be hard to get real on anything in the
memory, because so much energy is being directed at keeping this one set
of memories at bay.
The power processes by the way are NOT held confidential in the
field and are in fact used in routine auditing as they go quickly and
directly to the center of the case.
If the case is ready for it.
I mean what power do you want really?
Which power has the most charge on failure on it?
If I knew the answer to that, should I speak it?
Just critical mass it, and send it out into the world?
Unadorned with anything to soften it, unprotected by any kind
of double talk?
At what point does the preclear go "Whoa! Enough already..."
To know it is to never be able to forget it, to never be able to run
away from it ever again.
"The ability to..."
Oh you want the second half do you?
The Power Processes were developed by Ron Hubbard in tandem with
John McMaster at Saint Hill to help crack seriously resistive cases.
John McMaster was Scientology's first confirmed clear, and left the
Church in the early 70's or so.
He made many tapes that are circulating around the field that add a
deep insight to the inner workings of Ron and Scientology, not all bad.
He remained a devoted clearing practitioner until the end, he died
last year.
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
SCI21 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
TO DEMONSTRATE OR NOT TO DEMONSTRATE OT POWERS
SCI - 21
Copyright (C) 1992 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
John,
The subject of proof is a big one. So for the moment I wish to
post a poetic cop out to your question, but I promise to keep it under
consideration.
Do OT's have superhuman powers?
I would presume so.
What are they?
Anything you can imagine, including the creation of universes,
people in those universes, and the ability to become those people in
those universes asking questions about OT.
Can these powers be demonstrated?
Yes, certainly some of the more physical powers surely can be
demonstrated.
Should they be demonstrated?
That would depend on the individual OT who had them and who had to
be accountable for the effects that demonstrating his powers would have.
You mentioned SHOCK in your question about OT's coming to visit
your place out of their body and reporting back to you what they had
seen.
The awareness characteristic scale puts shock at -16,
-12 Disaster
-13 Inactuality
-14 Delusion
-15 Hysteria
-16 Shock
-17 Catatonia
-18 Oblivion
Thus causing any form of shock to a populace at large could hardly
be considered good for a civilization.
Hubbard taught us to do everything on a gradient scale, which means
little by little, not all at once. Therefore enormous displays of
unquestionable demonstrations were frowned upon by Hubbard.
I would tend to agree.
It is very dangerous to demonstrate power to those who do not have
power.
Those who have power know this.
Those who do not have power, don't know this.
What can you do?
Now here is the cop out, if you are serious about getting proof of
power I would instead audit you on the subject of power until some power
opened up in you. It needn't be actual abilities to move rocks or
things, but you would get a clear idea that what ever power you desire
is available and in fact you would settle back down into being
comfortably able to NOT have power for a while, or at least until you
were more ready for it.
Just consider what would happen to you if you had the ability to go
anywhere on the planet and see anyone doing anything they were doing,
and you could kill anyone with an electrical spark to the brain or
heart. (Nipping, History of Man).
Now the auditing question would be something like,
'Tell me what would happen over time if you had this power?'
The correct E/P of this process would be an experience of power
opening up inside yourself, certainty that power exists, and a settling
out of your willingness to have or not have power as you wished.
Another process for handling people's problems with proof, would
be,
'What evidence do you have that you are not an OT?'
'What evidence do you have that you are an OT?'
What this will turn up are quite a number of false certainties
that people are walking around in that prevent the possibility of
believing in OT. Once they see that these false certainties are just
not supportable, the POSSIBILITY opens up that OT is possible, and they
can approach it again with a new look.
The point is that if someone is an OT and no longer believes this,
they clearly have chosen to prove to themselves down the whole track
that they are not an OT and neither is anyone else.
For you to then go and present them with incontrovertible proof
that they are wrong, would merely open up a very old wound, an OT wound,
that would probably severely hurt the person or his body.
It could kill them.
So although I am truly copping out on a direct answer to your
question, for reasons that I believe to be justified, I am at the same
time presenting you with auditing procedures that you can use on
yourself or someone else to set off a spark of power within your own
space and to open the door to your own further private investigations
free from the harrasment of others.
Others who wish you to prove your powers, wish so because they hope
you have none, or because they want you to use them to take care of
them.
People who demand proof often have a hidden agenda.
Proof is available that THEY have power, not that other's already
have it.
Proof is available for that too but no one with power would be
likely to prove it unless it was part of a larger world changing plan to
do so. In which case they would do it anyhow on their own schedule and
not because someone ask them to.
Here are some more auditing questions to run solo or co audit:
'What would you not with power?'
'What would you do with power?'
'Why should you not have power?'
'Why should you have power?'
By the way the Power Processes of the Church (Grade V) deal with
just this subject. They are held confidential because when run properly
they cause a person to revivify some of the worst moments on his track.
People have little problem with believing in past lives when they
are reliving one as if it were now.
Before such a reviv it may be hard to get real on anything in the
memory, because so much energy is being directed at keeping this one set
of memories at bay.
The power processes by the way are NOT held confidential in the
field and are in fact used in routine auditing as they go quickly and
directly to the center of the case.
If the case is ready for it.
The Power Processes were developed by Ron Hubbard in tandem with
John McMaster at Saint Hill to help crack seriously resistive cases.
John McMaster was Scientology's first confirmed clear, and left the
Church in the early 70's or so.
He made many tapes that are circulating around the field that add a
deep insight to the inner workings of Ron and Scientology, not all bad.
He remained a devoted clearing practitioner until the end, he died
last year.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Aug 17 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/sci21.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFfOqmFURT1lqxE3HERAipfAKCinR6UlfsYekzRPG6JJSiwQjbLdACfe38n
FNLVJn7jemftIMHSoCcsXEE=
=HNjI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
TO DEMONSTRATE OR NOT TO DEMONSTRATE OT POWERS
SCI - 21
Copyright (C) 1992 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
John,
The subject of proof is a big one. So for the moment I wish to
post a poetic cop out to your question, but I promise to keep it under
consideration.
Do OT's have superhuman powers?
I would presume so.
What are they?
Anything you can imagine, including the creation of universes,
people in those universes, and the ability to become those people in
those universes asking questions about OT.
Can these powers be demonstrated?
Yes, certainly some of the more physical powers surely can be
demonstrated.
Should they be demonstrated?
That would depend on the individual OT who had them and who had to
be accountable for the effects that demonstrating his powers would have.
You mentioned SHOCK in your question about OT's coming to visit
your place out of their body and reporting back to you what they had
seen.
The awareness characteristic scale puts shock at -16,
-12 Disaster
-13 Inactuality
-14 Delusion
-15 Hysteria
-16 Shock
-17 Catatonia
-18 Oblivion
Thus causing any form of shock to a populace at large could hardly
be considered good for a civilization.
Hubbard taught us to do everything on a gradient scale, which means
little by little, not all at once. Therefore enormous displays of
unquestionable demonstrations were frowned upon by Hubbard.
I would tend to agree.
It is very dangerous to demonstrate power to those who do not have
power.
Those who have power know this.
Those who do not have power, don't know this.
What can you do?
Now here is the cop out, if you are serious about getting proof of
power I would instead audit you on the subject of power until some power
opened up in you. It needn't be actual abilities to move rocks or
things, but you would get a clear idea that what ever power you desire
is available and in fact you would settle back down into being
comfortably able to NOT have power for a while, or at least until you
were more ready for it.
Just consider what would happen to you if you had the ability to go
anywhere on the planet and see anyone doing anything they were doing,
and you could kill anyone with an electrical spark to the brain or
heart. (Nipping, History of Man).
Now the auditing question would be something like,
'Tell me what would happen over time if you had this power?'
The correct E/P of this process would be an experience of power
opening up inside yourself, certainty that power exists, and a settling
out of your willingness to have or not have power as you wished.
Another process for handling people's problems with proof, would
be,
'What evidence do you have that you are not an OT?'
'What evidence do you have that you are an OT?'
What this will turn up are quite a number of false certainties
that people are walking around in that prevent the possibility of
believing in OT. Once they see that these false certainties are just
not supportable, the POSSIBILITY opens up that OT is possible, and they
can approach it again with a new look.
The point is that if someone is an OT and no longer believes this,
they clearly have chosen to prove to themselves down the whole track
that they are not an OT and neither is anyone else.
For you to then go and present them with incontrovertible proof
that they are wrong, would merely open up a very old wound, an OT wound,
that would probably severely hurt the person or his body.
It could kill them.
So although I am truly copping out on a direct answer to your
question, for reasons that I believe to be justified, I am at the same
time presenting you with auditing procedures that you can use on
yourself or someone else to set off a spark of power within your own
space and to open the door to your own further private investigations
free from the harrasment of others.
Others who wish you to prove your powers, wish so because they hope
you have none, or because they want you to use them to take care of
them.
People who demand proof often have a hidden agenda.
Proof is available that THEY have power, not that other's already
have it.
Proof is available for that too but no one with power would be
likely to prove it unless it was part of a larger world changing plan to
do so. In which case they would do it anyhow on their own schedule and
not because someone ask them to.
Here are some more auditing questions to run solo or co audit:
'What would you not with power?'
'What would you do with power?'
'Why should you not have power?'
'Why should you have power?'
By the way the Power Processes of the Church (Grade V) deal with
just this subject. They are held confidential because when run properly
they cause a person to revivify some of the worst moments on his track.
People have little problem with believing in past lives when they
are reliving one as if it were now.
Before such a reviv it may be hard to get real on anything in the
memory, because so much energy is being directed at keeping this one set
of memories at bay.
The power processes by the way are NOT held confidential in the
field and are in fact used in routine auditing as they go quickly and
directly to the center of the case.
If the case is ready for it.
The Power Processes were developed by Ron Hubbard in tandem with
John McMaster at Saint Hill to help crack seriously resistive cases.
John McMaster was Scientology's first confirmed clear, and left the
Church in the early 70's or so.
He made many tapes that are circulating around the field that add a
deep insight to the inner workings of Ron and Scientology, not all bad.
He remained a devoted clearing practitioner until the end, he died
last year.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Aug 17 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/sci21.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFfOqmFURT1lqxE3HERAipfAKCinR6UlfsYekzRPG6JJSiwQjbLdACfe38n
FNLVJn7jemftIMHSoCcsXEE=
=HNjI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Thursday, August 13, 2020
REFERENTS AND SYMBOLS IV
SYMBOLS AND REFERENTS IV
A symbol is an object that is used to symbolize or refer to a
referent.
A referent is an object that is symbolized or referred to by a
symbol.
QUALITIES
An object is anything with qualities, that is it has a set of
qualities called a quality set.
NOTHINGS AND SOMETHINGS
A nothing is an object with no qualities, it has an empty quality
set.
A something is an object with some qualities, it has a non empty
quality set.
TWO DIFFERENT OBJECTS
Symbols and referents are TWO DIFFERENT OBJECTS that are used to
symbolize and be referred to by each other.
As two different objects, a symbol and referent have two different
quality sets, the symbol has its own set of qualities and the referent
has its own other set of qualities.
Two different objects implies two different quality sets and two
different quality sets implies two different objects.
Some of the qualities in one set may be the same as the qualities
in the other quality set, but at least one quality must be different or
else both quality sets would be identical and thus not the quality sets
of two different objects.
MAPPING
Some of the qualities of the symbol may be MAPPED onto the
qualities of the referent, thus the symbol can be used to refer to the
referent.
One can thus know directly a quality of the referent by looking at
the quality of the symbol that is mapped to it.
Red ink on paper can thus be used to refer to red light at 700
nanometers shining on the wall from a prism.
CAUSAL PATHWAYS
There is always a causal pathway between a referent and a symbol.
Without the causal pathway, the symbol would never have been
conceived to refer to the referent.
Thus we have the idea that a referent/symbol pair implies
causation.
We take this opportunity with malice aforethought to extend this
idea to assert the converse that by definition causation implies
referent/symbol pairs.
Thus ANY two events in a causal pathway are referent and symbol to
each other.
The earlier event is a referent, and the later event is the symbol.
ORIGINAL REFERENT AND SYMBOL OF FINAL AUTHORITY
Even if there are many causal events between the original referent
and the final symbol, the symbol is still the causal offspring of the
original referent and can thus be validly considered a symbol for the
referent including all which that entails as detailed below.
DATA CONTENT
The later event contains data about the earlier event, thus the
symbol has data content referring back to the referent.
Thus one can infer from the nature of the symbol back to the nature
of the referent.
MECHANICAL LEARNING, LEARNING ABOUT CAUSE BY BEING A EFFECT
LEARNING ABOUT A BY LOOKING AT B
This is called learning about the referent by looking at the
symbol, and is the definition of mechanical learning, learning by being
an effect.
THEORY AND PERFECT CERTAINTY
Such inference however is never certain, as the inference from
symbol back to referent depends on the unprovable assumption that the
symbol was in fact caused or affected by the referent.
CAUSAL DISTANCE AND DATA FALL OFF
The data content of the symbol falls off in proportion to its
causal distance from the referent.
Causal distance is distance in space, time and number of
intervening events, called causal hops, between referent and symbol.
Spacetime distance implies causal distance for there has to be at
least TWO events for there to be space or time between them.
Non zero causal distance implies non zero spacetime distance,
because two events that happen in the same space *AND* at the same time
are considered to be one event, with causal distance zero between them.
DISTANCE IMPLIES NOT LEARNING WITH CERTAINTY
One can not learn with certainty about any referent by looking at a
symbol removed from the referent by a causal or spacetime distance.
MECHANICAL LEARNING AND CONSCIOUS LEARNING
Mechanical learning is learning about a referent by looking at
later symbols.
Learning across TIME.
Conscious learning is learning about a referent by looking at the
referent directly in present time.
SELF SYMBOLIZING REFERENTS and SELF REFERENCING SYMBOLS
Conscious mockups (of color form say) are self luminous or self
symbolizing.
It is possible for a referent to be used to symbolize itself.
This is called a self symbolizing referent or a self referencing
symbol.
PERFECT CERTAINTY
As such the referent and the symbol are not two different objects
but one and the same object. Since they have identical quality sets,
the data content of the symbol is an exact match with the truth of the
referent and thus a perfect certainty can be obtained about the referent
by looking at the symbol because the symbol IS the referent.
Notice that since a self symbolizing referent and its symbol
(namely itself) are one and the same object there can be no space, time
or causal distance between them.
CAUSEEFFECT
Where normal referents and symbols relate to each other by cause
and effect across a causal distance, a self symbolizing referent relates
to its symbol by causeeffect across no causal distance.
Causeeffect is when cause and effect are one and the same event.
CAUSAL CHAINS
All mechanical phenomenon are causal chains of referent and symbol
operating across a 4 dimensional spacetime causal distance.
One learns mechanically about referents by looking at later
symbols. This gives rise to theories and probabilities about the
referent but no perfect certainty.
SCALAR ZERO DIMENSIONAL SPACE
All conscious phenomenon are causal chains of self symbolizing
(self luminous) referents operating within a zero dimensional, no space,
no time, no causal distance called a SCALAR MANIFOLD.
A scalar manifold is an intentional oxymoron, as manifold means
many fold or 1 or more dimensions.
A scalar object is a qualitatively different kind of an object
than a manifold because manifolds have extensions in each dimension but
scalars do not.
Even if a manifold has a zero length extension in any dimension,
it still has the dimension and remains a manifold.
Thus a {3x4x0} manifold is a 3 dimensional object of 0 volume.
However a {} scalar is a 0 dimensional object of *N/A* volume.
N/A means no applicable.
A object can be scalar and still be a something as the universe
shows us, because the universe is scalar.
DIRECT AND INDIRECT PERCEPTION
One learns consciously about referents by looking directly at the
referent universe by using DIRECT PERCEPTION of the cause itself.
This IS perfect certainty.
Learning about a referent by looking directly at the referent is
called DIRECT PERCEPTION or conscious seeing.
Machines learn about a referent by studying one of its later
symbols and is called INDIRECT PERCEPTION.
Machine's can not see, they can only infer possibilities.
All mechanical learning in the physical universe is through indirect
perception.
THEORY MODEL AND EVIDENCE.
Indirect perception can only give rise to THEORY MODEL and EVIDENCE.
ACTUALITY AND REALITY
Actuality refers to what IS TRUE, Reality refers to what
we THINK is true.
The purpose of investigation is to bring our sense of reality closer
to actuality.
If there were actual space, time or causal distance between a being
and his color mockups, he would not be able to SEE them.
If the mockup of two different colors you made out there 10 feet in
front of your face were actually out there, not just in illusion of out
there, you wouldn't be able to see them.
You would only be able to BE something different as a result of
them, from which you might then infer back to their possible existence.
Is that how you see a red mockup? An inference from an effect in
yourself?
Or do you just see the red mockup period.
Yes seeing the red IS an effect in yourself, but are you learning
about the red by looking at the secondary effect, or by looking directly
at the red?
Since you can see your mockups, they aren't out there where they
look to be.
When people say that something is not out there, others tend to take
this to mean the thing doesn't exist at all.
When we say that color mockups are not out there, we mean only that
they are not out there, they do exist, but not out there where they look
like they are. The distance between perceiver and perceived is illusory,
holographic in nature.
Thus conscious perception of space is a reality of space, not an
actuality of space.
And thus consciousness has no dimension of any kind, and no
space/time or causal distance between Looker and Looked At.
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Mon Jan 2 20:47:30 EST 2006
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
A symbol is an object that is used to symbolize or refer to a
referent.
A referent is an object that is symbolized or referred to by a
symbol.
QUALITIES
An object is anything with qualities, that is it has a set of
qualities called a quality set.
NOTHINGS AND SOMETHINGS
A nothing is an object with no qualities, it has an empty quality
set.
A something is an object with some qualities, it has a non empty
quality set.
TWO DIFFERENT OBJECTS
Symbols and referents are TWO DIFFERENT OBJECTS that are used to
symbolize and be referred to by each other.
As two different objects, a symbol and referent have two different
quality sets, the symbol has its own set of qualities and the referent
has its own other set of qualities.
Two different objects implies two different quality sets and two
different quality sets implies two different objects.
Some of the qualities in one set may be the same as the qualities
in the other quality set, but at least one quality must be different or
else both quality sets would be identical and thus not the quality sets
of two different objects.
MAPPING
Some of the qualities of the symbol may be MAPPED onto the
qualities of the referent, thus the symbol can be used to refer to the
referent.
One can thus know directly a quality of the referent by looking at
the quality of the symbol that is mapped to it.
Red ink on paper can thus be used to refer to red light at 700
nanometers shining on the wall from a prism.
CAUSAL PATHWAYS
There is always a causal pathway between a referent and a symbol.
Without the causal pathway, the symbol would never have been
conceived to refer to the referent.
Thus we have the idea that a referent/symbol pair implies
causation.
We take this opportunity with malice aforethought to extend this
idea to assert the converse that by definition causation implies
referent/symbol pairs.
Thus ANY two events in a causal pathway are referent and symbol to
each other.
The earlier event is a referent, and the later event is the symbol.
ORIGINAL REFERENT AND SYMBOL OF FINAL AUTHORITY
Even if there are many causal events between the original referent
and the final symbol, the symbol is still the causal offspring of the
original referent and can thus be validly considered a symbol for the
referent including all which that entails as detailed below.
DATA CONTENT
The later event contains data about the earlier event, thus the
symbol has data content referring back to the referent.
Thus one can infer from the nature of the symbol back to the nature
of the referent.
MECHANICAL LEARNING, LEARNING ABOUT CAUSE BY BEING A EFFECT
LEARNING ABOUT A BY LOOKING AT B
This is called learning about the referent by looking at the
symbol, and is the definition of mechanical learning, learning by being
an effect.
THEORY AND PERFECT CERTAINTY
Such inference however is never certain, as the inference from
symbol back to referent depends on the unprovable assumption that the
symbol was in fact caused or affected by the referent.
CAUSAL DISTANCE AND DATA FALL OFF
The data content of the symbol falls off in proportion to its
causal distance from the referent.
Causal distance is distance in space, time and number of
intervening events, called causal hops, between referent and symbol.
Spacetime distance implies causal distance for there has to be at
least TWO events for there to be space or time between them.
Non zero causal distance implies non zero spacetime distance,
because two events that happen in the same space *AND* at the same time
are considered to be one event, with causal distance zero between them.
DISTANCE IMPLIES NOT LEARNING WITH CERTAINTY
One can not learn with certainty about any referent by looking at a
symbol removed from the referent by a causal or spacetime distance.
MECHANICAL LEARNING AND CONSCIOUS LEARNING
Mechanical learning is learning about a referent by looking at
later symbols.
Learning across TIME.
Conscious learning is learning about a referent by looking at the
referent directly in present time.
SELF SYMBOLIZING REFERENTS and SELF REFERENCING SYMBOLS
Conscious mockups (of color form say) are self luminous or self
symbolizing.
It is possible for a referent to be used to symbolize itself.
This is called a self symbolizing referent or a self referencing
symbol.
PERFECT CERTAINTY
As such the referent and the symbol are not two different objects
but one and the same object. Since they have identical quality sets,
the data content of the symbol is an exact match with the truth of the
referent and thus a perfect certainty can be obtained about the referent
by looking at the symbol because the symbol IS the referent.
Notice that since a self symbolizing referent and its symbol
(namely itself) are one and the same object there can be no space, time
or causal distance between them.
CAUSEEFFECT
Where normal referents and symbols relate to each other by cause
and effect across a causal distance, a self symbolizing referent relates
to its symbol by causeeffect across no causal distance.
Causeeffect is when cause and effect are one and the same event.
CAUSAL CHAINS
All mechanical phenomenon are causal chains of referent and symbol
operating across a 4 dimensional spacetime causal distance.
One learns mechanically about referents by looking at later
symbols. This gives rise to theories and probabilities about the
referent but no perfect certainty.
SCALAR ZERO DIMENSIONAL SPACE
All conscious phenomenon are causal chains of self symbolizing
(self luminous) referents operating within a zero dimensional, no space,
no time, no causal distance called a SCALAR MANIFOLD.
A scalar manifold is an intentional oxymoron, as manifold means
many fold or 1 or more dimensions.
A scalar object is a qualitatively different kind of an object
than a manifold because manifolds have extensions in each dimension but
scalars do not.
Even if a manifold has a zero length extension in any dimension,
it still has the dimension and remains a manifold.
Thus a {3x4x0} manifold is a 3 dimensional object of 0 volume.
However a {} scalar is a 0 dimensional object of *N/A* volume.
N/A means no applicable.
A object can be scalar and still be a something as the universe
shows us, because the universe is scalar.
DIRECT AND INDIRECT PERCEPTION
One learns consciously about referents by looking directly at the
referent universe by using DIRECT PERCEPTION of the cause itself.
This IS perfect certainty.
Learning about a referent by looking directly at the referent is
called DIRECT PERCEPTION or conscious seeing.
Machines learn about a referent by studying one of its later
symbols and is called INDIRECT PERCEPTION.
Machine's can not see, they can only infer possibilities.
All mechanical learning in the physical universe is through indirect
perception.
THEORY MODEL AND EVIDENCE.
Indirect perception can only give rise to THEORY MODEL and EVIDENCE.
ACTUALITY AND REALITY
Actuality refers to what IS TRUE, Reality refers to what
we THINK is true.
The purpose of investigation is to bring our sense of reality closer
to actuality.
If there were actual space, time or causal distance between a being
and his color mockups, he would not be able to SEE them.
If the mockup of two different colors you made out there 10 feet in
front of your face were actually out there, not just in illusion of out
there, you wouldn't be able to see them.
You would only be able to BE something different as a result of
them, from which you might then infer back to their possible existence.
Is that how you see a red mockup? An inference from an effect in
yourself?
Or do you just see the red mockup period.
Yes seeing the red IS an effect in yourself, but are you learning
about the red by looking at the secondary effect, or by looking directly
at the red?
Since you can see your mockups, they aren't out there where they
look to be.
When people say that something is not out there, others tend to take
this to mean the thing doesn't exist at all.
When we say that color mockups are not out there, we mean only that
they are not out there, they do exist, but not out there where they look
like they are. The distance between perceiver and perceived is illusory,
holographic in nature.
Thus conscious perception of space is a reality of space, not an
actuality of space.
And thus consciousness has no dimension of any kind, and no
space/time or causal distance between Looker and Looked At.
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Mon Jan 2 20:47:30 EST 2006
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Sunday, August 9, 2020
ADORE41 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
POCK MARK ON THE FACE OF GOD
Homer:
>> All Consciousness is a pock mark on the face of God.
Ouran:
>Very pithy! Well said! It's tone made me laugh aloud too! :)
Well its not original with me, came from a Sufi book called 'The
only dance there is'.
It flies in the face of the dicom pushers like Carol who insist
that God is Good, True, Beautiful, Light etc, that all Evil, Lies, Ugly,
Darkness comes from man and that we should all strive to become like God
perfect, strong and nice, forever and ever Amen.
I mean how far can you push dicoms on a one way flow before you go
nuts?
The essence of auditing is to find the dicoms one is dramatizing,
see that each dicom is a pair of wings around a central void, and visit
the void once in a while.
The void between the dicoms is the Throne of the Author.
Again we run into the problem of unmanifestation, is the void Good?
Well it sure beats suffering forever. But from the void comes both Good
and Evil in a tapestry of authorship. So is that good? Are Author's
good?
The answer is, there are two kinds of good, Godly good and human
good.
"Virtue for the Creator is not Virtue for the Creature" - Olaf
Stapleton, Starmaker
Is the Creator Good? Should the Creature AS A CREATURE strive to
be like the Creator? If a creature created other creatures and put them
on a planet to fight out their wars of ignorance and free will, would we
look upon that as Godly?
If you believe in God the creator, then your whole life, and
the entire universe you and everyone else lives and dies in,
is the fruit of this Creator.
Is that Good?
So again we have this problem that there are two classes of dicoms,
the dicoms that describe the Native State (Creator) in its unmanifest
phase (Peace, Truth, Beauty, Goodness), and the dicoms that Native State
Manifests such as Good-Evil, Truth-Lies, Beauty-Ugly.
Hubbard said that theta was natively closest to Beauty, thus in
some way aligning the top of the tone scale and total unmanifestation
with Beauty, and the bottom of the tone scale and total manifestation
with Ugly.
In this sense all dicoms are actually dicoms of UnManifestation
descending down into Manifestation, where UnManifestation are all the
positive dicoms like good, truth, beauty, light, peace etc, and
Manifestation is all the negative dicoms like evil, lies, ugly, darkness
and worry.
This drives the manifestation pushers crazy, for they are selling
"But Manifestation is GOOD!"
Manifestation is Good? Here I have a self nailing Cross to sell
you.
Adore says that all persistence is of persisting lies.
There is a common tendency to give both sides of all dicoms equal
value and weight. Love is one side, Hate is another, who cares which
one you choose?
Adore says this is not true.
Adore says that all positive dicoms fade away into sleep at the top
of the tone scale. Descend into dream time and you get peace, beauty,
love, light etc, descend further and you get worry, ugly, hate, darkness
etc.
The whole scale is a scale of Truth and Lies, where Truth is sleep
and total unmanifestation, and everything lower in dreamtime is some lie
creeping in or another.
Love is therefore more right and desirable than Hate, but the Peace
that Passeth all Understanding in the Big Snooze at the very top makes
Love look like hell.
The question then remains, why would the unManifest decide or
choose or find value in Manifesting nothing but lies and pock marks on
the face of God?
Adore's answer is relatively complex and esoteric but it all boils
down to one thing "Humor", it feels so good to get Home again, one is
glad one left.
Adore says
"SAFE is Hell and High Water via Eternal Omni Awesome Peace."
This says that there is no place to go, no place to get lost to, so
we are always 'safe' no matter where we are, and that we cycle back into
hell and high water after visiting eternal omni awesome peace (big
snooze) because of this impulse to manifest humor.
We spend most of our time in Hell and High Water.
Humor is basically high appreciation for ludicrous demise.
Ludere means game.
All manifestation is ludicrous demise.
Majesty (Master of Jest) is the impulse towards creating humor via
ludicrous demise.
Adore says that Majesty is the only thing that can bring the total
unmanifest, living at the top of all positive dicoms, to manifest and
engage in the negative side of those same dicoms.
If it weren't for majesty and the impusle towards humor via
ludicrous demise, the peace that passeth all understanding would never
move into manifestation, not even to experience love, light, beauty,
and goodness.
For they are all debased compared to Eternal Omni Awesome Peace.
"ALL consciousness is a pock mark on the face of God."
So if we consider Native State as Author/Creator, we can see that
Beauty, Goodness, Truth, and Peace for it, is to create a world of
strife between the worldly dicoms of similar name but completely
different character.
Goodness for a creature DOES NOT include the impulse towards
creation of humor through ludicrous demise for itself and everyone else.
So the worldly dicoms of good and evil are in fact wings of a dicom
that have a central void to them, which is the Author's throne, as he
can cast entire universes into existence at will using both in tapestry.
Is it evil to create a tapestry of good and evil?
Is it good to create a tapestry of good and evil?
Is it Humorous?
Adore says yes it is humorous, and it is that added component of
Humor that renders the Godly goodness different from the human goodness.
God has no compassion as humans understand it. God knows no one
can get lost forever or hurt forever, and God only writes universes for
himself anyway to jump into. So yes God has a kind of compassion, he
KNOWS he is infinitely and eternally safe, but its not the kind of
compassion that humans take kindly too nor even understand.
He is safe from total destruction, but not from total
pain by His own devisings.
"Who me? *I* certainly never did this to myself!"
"I couldn't have, wouldn't have, shouldn't have, and if you suggest
I did, I will nail you to a cross until you admit you didn't either!"
That's human 'goodness' for you.
Homer
Wed Jan 11 14:23:30 EST 2017
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Aug 9 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore41.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)
iD8DBQFfMB2FURT1lqxE3HERAlwuAKCVYd7n5GHfvPsHFVa/h3Xatle4QACfdP6R
snfrfIBJsb//l1Y39j8e9N8=
=BMRx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
POCK MARK ON THE FACE OF GOD
Homer:
>> All Consciousness is a pock mark on the face of God.
Ouran:
>Very pithy! Well said! It's tone made me laugh aloud too! :)
Well its not original with me, came from a Sufi book called 'The
only dance there is'.
It flies in the face of the dicom pushers like Carol who insist
that God is Good, True, Beautiful, Light etc, that all Evil, Lies, Ugly,
Darkness comes from man and that we should all strive to become like God
perfect, strong and nice, forever and ever Amen.
I mean how far can you push dicoms on a one way flow before you go
nuts?
The essence of auditing is to find the dicoms one is dramatizing,
see that each dicom is a pair of wings around a central void, and visit
the void once in a while.
The void between the dicoms is the Throne of the Author.
Again we run into the problem of unmanifestation, is the void Good?
Well it sure beats suffering forever. But from the void comes both Good
and Evil in a tapestry of authorship. So is that good? Are Author's
good?
The answer is, there are two kinds of good, Godly good and human
good.
"Virtue for the Creator is not Virtue for the Creature" - Olaf
Stapleton, Starmaker
Is the Creator Good? Should the Creature AS A CREATURE strive to
be like the Creator? If a creature created other creatures and put them
on a planet to fight out their wars of ignorance and free will, would we
look upon that as Godly?
If you believe in God the creator, then your whole life, and
the entire universe you and everyone else lives and dies in,
is the fruit of this Creator.
Is that Good?
So again we have this problem that there are two classes of dicoms,
the dicoms that describe the Native State (Creator) in its unmanifest
phase (Peace, Truth, Beauty, Goodness), and the dicoms that Native State
Manifests such as Good-Evil, Truth-Lies, Beauty-Ugly.
Hubbard said that theta was natively closest to Beauty, thus in
some way aligning the top of the tone scale and total unmanifestation
with Beauty, and the bottom of the tone scale and total manifestation
with Ugly.
In this sense all dicoms are actually dicoms of UnManifestation
descending down into Manifestation, where UnManifestation are all the
positive dicoms like good, truth, beauty, light, peace etc, and
Manifestation is all the negative dicoms like evil, lies, ugly, darkness
and worry.
This drives the manifestation pushers crazy, for they are selling
"But Manifestation is GOOD!"
Manifestation is Good? Here I have a self nailing Cross to sell
you.
Adore says that all persistence is of persisting lies.
There is a common tendency to give both sides of all dicoms equal
value and weight. Love is one side, Hate is another, who cares which
one you choose?
Adore says this is not true.
Adore says that all positive dicoms fade away into sleep at the top
of the tone scale. Descend into dream time and you get peace, beauty,
love, light etc, descend further and you get worry, ugly, hate, darkness
etc.
The whole scale is a scale of Truth and Lies, where Truth is sleep
and total unmanifestation, and everything lower in dreamtime is some lie
creeping in or another.
Love is therefore more right and desirable than Hate, but the Peace
that Passeth all Understanding in the Big Snooze at the very top makes
Love look like hell.
The question then remains, why would the unManifest decide or
choose or find value in Manifesting nothing but lies and pock marks on
the face of God?
Adore's answer is relatively complex and esoteric but it all boils
down to one thing "Humor", it feels so good to get Home again, one is
glad one left.
Adore says
"SAFE is Hell and High Water via Eternal Omni Awesome Peace."
This says that there is no place to go, no place to get lost to, so
we are always 'safe' no matter where we are, and that we cycle back into
hell and high water after visiting eternal omni awesome peace (big
snooze) because of this impulse to manifest humor.
We spend most of our time in Hell and High Water.
Humor is basically high appreciation for ludicrous demise.
Ludere means game.
All manifestation is ludicrous demise.
Majesty (Master of Jest) is the impulse towards creating humor via
ludicrous demise.
Adore says that Majesty is the only thing that can bring the total
unmanifest, living at the top of all positive dicoms, to manifest and
engage in the negative side of those same dicoms.
If it weren't for majesty and the impusle towards humor via
ludicrous demise, the peace that passeth all understanding would never
move into manifestation, not even to experience love, light, beauty,
and goodness.
For they are all debased compared to Eternal Omni Awesome Peace.
"ALL consciousness is a pock mark on the face of God."
So if we consider Native State as Author/Creator, we can see that
Beauty, Goodness, Truth, and Peace for it, is to create a world of
strife between the worldly dicoms of similar name but completely
different character.
Goodness for a creature DOES NOT include the impulse towards
creation of humor through ludicrous demise for itself and everyone else.
So the worldly dicoms of good and evil are in fact wings of a dicom
that have a central void to them, which is the Author's throne, as he
can cast entire universes into existence at will using both in tapestry.
Is it evil to create a tapestry of good and evil?
Is it good to create a tapestry of good and evil?
Is it Humorous?
Adore says yes it is humorous, and it is that added component of
Humor that renders the Godly goodness different from the human goodness.
God has no compassion as humans understand it. God knows no one
can get lost forever or hurt forever, and God only writes universes for
himself anyway to jump into. So yes God has a kind of compassion, he
KNOWS he is infinitely and eternally safe, but its not the kind of
compassion that humans take kindly too nor even understand.
He is safe from total destruction, but not from total
pain by His own devisings.
"Who me? *I* certainly never did this to myself!"
"I couldn't have, wouldn't have, shouldn't have, and if you suggest
I did, I will nail you to a cross until you admit you didn't either!"
That's human 'goodness' for you.
Homer
Wed Jan 11 14:23:30 EST 2017
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Aug 9 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore41.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)
iD8DBQFfMB2FURT1lqxE3HERAlwuAKCVYd7n5GHfvPsHFVa/h3Xatle4QACfdP6R
snfrfIBJsb//l1Y39j8e9N8=
=BMRx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Saturday, August 8, 2020
GOD MAN WOMAN CHILD and APPRECIATION
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
GOD, MAN, WOMAN, CHILD and APPRECIATION
What does the baby/child appreciate about the woman/mother?
What does the woman appreciate about the baby?
What does the woman appreciate about the man?
What does the man appreciate about the woman?
What does the man appreciate about the God?
What does the god appreciate about the man?
What does the god appreciate about the child at the next
level up?
What does the child appreciate about the god at the prior
level down?
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: Sat Aug 8 00:56:17 EDT 2020
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1059.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)
iD8DBQFfLjBxURT1lqxE3HERAoLBAKCu5QQLUtnPily/hMIItrcByUGeFACfYxiU
On9eSeLOjxQDFXIVTX8xQzI=
=p+Is
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
GOD, MAN, WOMAN, CHILD and APPRECIATION
What does the baby/child appreciate about the woman/mother?
What does the woman appreciate about the baby?
What does the woman appreciate about the man?
What does the man appreciate about the woman?
What does the man appreciate about the God?
What does the god appreciate about the man?
What does the god appreciate about the child at the next
level up?
What does the child appreciate about the god at the prior
level down?
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: Sat Aug 8 00:56:17 EDT 2020
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1059.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)
iD8DBQFfLjBxURT1lqxE3HERAoLBAKCu5QQLUtnPily/hMIItrcByUGeFACfYxiU
On9eSeLOjxQDFXIVTX8xQzI=
=p+Is
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, August 5, 2020
ADORE854 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
DEATH AND SORROW
Regardless of whether one can or does know what has happened or
will happen after death, the CHARGE on death and not knowing is enormous
and can be audited out with confession and the cessation of suppression
of sorrow.
Since there is no real evidence for physical mechanics and some
significant evidence that the world is a dream in the mind of a multi I
AM super consciousness, the preclear can at least be audited on all the
false evidence he has for death until his mind is free of enforced
conclusions on the matter.
The only reason the preclear believes in death at all is he has
identified himself with one of his dream avatars, namely his body, and
it is obvious the avatar will die one day as it is made of parts.
An avatar is here defined as a symbol for a referent being.
But if the body is a dream, then there is no way the existence of
the conscious unit could be causally dependent on the existence of
something the conscious unit is dreaming about, namely the alleged
physical universe, as the avatar is the conscious unit's creation, and
not the other way around.
He can also be shown both meatball and dreamball theories in detail
to give him multiple different datums of comparable magnitude on the
subject, and gotten to look at his unawareness of choice for being here.
Running NO and SOME on lies, choice, and sorrow will begin to open
up the charge so he can see what he is up against. It is easy to assume
that because we can not remember, and that we sorrow over death, that
therefore death must be real. The dreamball theory is not easy to wrap
one's wits around, but it becomes easier with the proof which refuses to
allow you to fall below 50/50 on the matter, and a few visions of the
beautific eternal, and evidence starts to mount that we do in fact have
a future head of us.
http://www.lightlink.com/theproof
Most meatballs can't handle it. Some very few can.
Once free of the brainwashing and solidly at the 50/50 point, then
he can see for himself, should truth choose to talk to him.
But he's got to listen quiety you know.
Truth talks thunderously with great beauty, but softly none the
less.
And asserting what you do not know, and what you can not know will
not help, for Truth will not even pay attention to those still
committing dharma treason to defend their spiritual decrepitude.
Homer
Thu Sep 3 15:05:05 EDT 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Aug 5 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore854.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)
iD8DBQFfKteEURT1lqxE3HERAt03AJ9RKIEsNGa+MsFhe05CMwjVH7oqcgCffS2q
BwlscHXC6TxSLnoDGV+gPG4=
=i0M7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
DEATH AND SORROW
Regardless of whether one can or does know what has happened or
will happen after death, the CHARGE on death and not knowing is enormous
and can be audited out with confession and the cessation of suppression
of sorrow.
Since there is no real evidence for physical mechanics and some
significant evidence that the world is a dream in the mind of a multi I
AM super consciousness, the preclear can at least be audited on all the
false evidence he has for death until his mind is free of enforced
conclusions on the matter.
The only reason the preclear believes in death at all is he has
identified himself with one of his dream avatars, namely his body, and
it is obvious the avatar will die one day as it is made of parts.
An avatar is here defined as a symbol for a referent being.
But if the body is a dream, then there is no way the existence of
the conscious unit could be causally dependent on the existence of
something the conscious unit is dreaming about, namely the alleged
physical universe, as the avatar is the conscious unit's creation, and
not the other way around.
He can also be shown both meatball and dreamball theories in detail
to give him multiple different datums of comparable magnitude on the
subject, and gotten to look at his unawareness of choice for being here.
Running NO and SOME on lies, choice, and sorrow will begin to open
up the charge so he can see what he is up against. It is easy to assume
that because we can not remember, and that we sorrow over death, that
therefore death must be real. The dreamball theory is not easy to wrap
one's wits around, but it becomes easier with the proof which refuses to
allow you to fall below 50/50 on the matter, and a few visions of the
beautific eternal, and evidence starts to mount that we do in fact have
a future head of us.
http://www.lightlink.com/theproof
Most meatballs can't handle it. Some very few can.
Once free of the brainwashing and solidly at the 50/50 point, then
he can see for himself, should truth choose to talk to him.
But he's got to listen quiety you know.
Truth talks thunderously with great beauty, but softly none the
less.
And asserting what you do not know, and what you can not know will
not help, for Truth will not even pay attention to those still
committing dharma treason to defend their spiritual decrepitude.
Homer
Thu Sep 3 15:05:05 EDT 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Aug 5 12:00:04 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore854.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)
iD8DBQFfKteEURT1lqxE3HERAt03AJ9RKIEsNGa+MsFhe05CMwjVH7oqcgCffS2q
BwlscHXC6TxSLnoDGV+gPG4=
=i0M7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, August 4, 2020
ADORE523 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SEARCHING FOR THE ARCX
I have very good reality on my first dynamic, but I do not
appreciate myself, always up to my nose in water and I can't breath
through my nose.
My second dynamic is a disaster, hated my parents both of whom
bombed out early leaving me with foster parents who were zombie zoners,
I mean just no one home at all, whom I hated more, and disconnected from
at first chance.
Never knew my grand parents, and could care less about the
Tennessee swamp dwelling sub protoplasm that calls itself relatives on
my mother's side. No clue about my father's side.
Since I debonded with most of life during the second dynamic
disaster of my early years, my mate is non existent, and no children,
and no dreams or affinity for either should I find them.
Most sane people WANT to have children, but they also WANT to be
alive.
My second dynamic was sort of like a nuclear war that spread out
and destroyed or poisoned all my other dynamics.
My third dynamic is almost non existent. Having no family, the
groups that are made of families, both my parents group mates, and my
own group mates are non existent with no real hope of ever existing or
being repaired. I lost everything of my family's groups when I was
deported to my foster parents, and THEIR framily group mates were brain
sucking zombie zoners.
I do have some operating group mates on the
work/production/activity parts of life, running Lightlink Internet, and
we are about to put in a 10 million dollar super computer.
But frankly every goal I can think of fills me with inertia.
I do it because I have to in order to not starve to death.
Beyond that human relationships are scarce and far between, like
two survivors lost at sea crossing each other's paths in life rafts that
can hold only one. That's me and Jane, we have floated together for 23
years.
As for the fourth dynamic, mankind is a loose cannon which should
be bolted down or cast overboard. Probably no more dangerous PTS item
in the universe, next to asteroids, plague and tsunamis.
If mankind survives it will not be because a majority of it
deserved to do so, but because a very small minority pulled it through
in spite of itself.
I kind of like to think I am part of that minority, but MAN DO
I HATE IT, because I do not particularlly want to survive myself.
Staying alive seems to be the cheaper route pain wise both
for myself and for those that care about me and depend on me to
be around for them.
If it weren't for them I would off myself immediately.
I have lots of affinity for the 5th dynamic in general, cats, mice,
dogs, horses, plants, etc. It's gory out there and hard to stomach when
you find equal beauty in the eater and the eaten. I also have lots of
affinity for some bodies, but not my body which seems to be retarded,
dumb, blind, stupid and genetically damaged and can't breath.
I have almost no affinity for the physical universe, too big, too
complex, almost impossible to understand even simple things like special
relativity, and the spaces and times involved are so vast they leave
everyone in solitary confinement for the rest of time.
In particular my hatred for the MEST universe is all the more so
that I believe I am MADE of MEST.
That's as high as I go in this life, I have no reality on the
seventh dynamic, for now we are postulating something that exists
outside of machines and space time parts.
They may exist, but I have zero reality on it, and even less
affinity that it should exist and I be SO separated from it.
How the fuck did that happen?
Your stupid meter reading yet?
As for the eighth dynamic, I gave up on God a long time ago as a
fatherly being who cared about me or anyone for that matter.
God the father belongs in jail for child abuse.
As for anything else that might come under the notion of supreme
creator or infinity, its all 100 percent unreal to me. I can think
ANALYTICALLY with it, but its not based on any experience that is
lasting or accessible at will.
Most of my writings 'come to me' after sessions, they may sound
good, but they might as well be a birdie chirping in my ear telling me
what to write.
I make a good scribe, that's about it.
So the ARCX with the AllThatIs is clearly spread across the 8
dynamics.
The Communication is enforced, I HAVE to be conscious, the affinity
is negative down around useless, apathy, sorrow and propitiation, and
that's just the social facade.
True sub death tone is probably can't hide.
My agreement with the AllThatIs is negative, totally opposed, next
time it wants to crucify someone, let is choose someone other than me
thank you.
My communication with the AllTHatIs is completely blocked,
recognition, perception, communication, orientation are all completely
zero.
Understandings seem to be all over the place, but none of them do
me any good, so I will trust they are all bogus.
Enlightment is non existent.
Body is a total walking disaster area, can't breath, can't sleep,
can't work, can't find reason to move. A long ways from 'Breathing is
sufficient reason to be.'
Energy is empty, or negative turned against me.
Higher than that, production, prediction, activity are all
substitute goal nerve crushers, that I do for others, sacrifice in case
some day there turns out to be any intelligent life on Earth or
anywhere.
I am not glad I exist, I am not happy to be, and I do not enjoy my
time, life is not worthwhile.
Although I am not truely suicidal, it get that way sometimes when I
am fumed and can't breath at all, but I do spend 10 percent of my time
considering how, if and why to suicide or kamikaze.
Thinking about kamikaze tends to make the suicidal thoughts
go away :)
Everything else in my life is a waste, I ain't going to waste my
death.
I am told I have post partum depression, I have been depressed ever
since I was a baby.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun Jun 24 23:09:29 EDT 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Aug 4 12:00:03 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore523.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)
iD8DBQFfKYYEURT1lqxE3HERAq81AJ4oH6WazKGq75wLMNPQtI+HTLouMgCff1V+
W294bMu653wNwoM4HNasz7c=
=7pzZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
SEARCHING FOR THE ARCX
I have very good reality on my first dynamic, but I do not
appreciate myself, always up to my nose in water and I can't breath
through my nose.
My second dynamic is a disaster, hated my parents both of whom
bombed out early leaving me with foster parents who were zombie zoners,
I mean just no one home at all, whom I hated more, and disconnected from
at first chance.
Never knew my grand parents, and could care less about the
Tennessee swamp dwelling sub protoplasm that calls itself relatives on
my mother's side. No clue about my father's side.
Since I debonded with most of life during the second dynamic
disaster of my early years, my mate is non existent, and no children,
and no dreams or affinity for either should I find them.
Most sane people WANT to have children, but they also WANT to be
alive.
My second dynamic was sort of like a nuclear war that spread out
and destroyed or poisoned all my other dynamics.
My third dynamic is almost non existent. Having no family, the
groups that are made of families, both my parents group mates, and my
own group mates are non existent with no real hope of ever existing or
being repaired. I lost everything of my family's groups when I was
deported to my foster parents, and THEIR framily group mates were brain
sucking zombie zoners.
I do have some operating group mates on the
work/production/activity parts of life, running Lightlink Internet, and
we are about to put in a 10 million dollar super computer.
But frankly every goal I can think of fills me with inertia.
I do it because I have to in order to not starve to death.
Beyond that human relationships are scarce and far between, like
two survivors lost at sea crossing each other's paths in life rafts that
can hold only one. That's me and Jane, we have floated together for 23
years.
As for the fourth dynamic, mankind is a loose cannon which should
be bolted down or cast overboard. Probably no more dangerous PTS item
in the universe, next to asteroids, plague and tsunamis.
If mankind survives it will not be because a majority of it
deserved to do so, but because a very small minority pulled it through
in spite of itself.
I kind of like to think I am part of that minority, but MAN DO
I HATE IT, because I do not particularlly want to survive myself.
Staying alive seems to be the cheaper route pain wise both
for myself and for those that care about me and depend on me to
be around for them.
If it weren't for them I would off myself immediately.
I have lots of affinity for the 5th dynamic in general, cats, mice,
dogs, horses, plants, etc. It's gory out there and hard to stomach when
you find equal beauty in the eater and the eaten. I also have lots of
affinity for some bodies, but not my body which seems to be retarded,
dumb, blind, stupid and genetically damaged and can't breath.
I have almost no affinity for the physical universe, too big, too
complex, almost impossible to understand even simple things like special
relativity, and the spaces and times involved are so vast they leave
everyone in solitary confinement for the rest of time.
In particular my hatred for the MEST universe is all the more so
that I believe I am MADE of MEST.
That's as high as I go in this life, I have no reality on the
seventh dynamic, for now we are postulating something that exists
outside of machines and space time parts.
They may exist, but I have zero reality on it, and even less
affinity that it should exist and I be SO separated from it.
How the fuck did that happen?
Your stupid meter reading yet?
As for the eighth dynamic, I gave up on God a long time ago as a
fatherly being who cared about me or anyone for that matter.
God the father belongs in jail for child abuse.
As for anything else that might come under the notion of supreme
creator or infinity, its all 100 percent unreal to me. I can think
ANALYTICALLY with it, but its not based on any experience that is
lasting or accessible at will.
Most of my writings 'come to me' after sessions, they may sound
good, but they might as well be a birdie chirping in my ear telling me
what to write.
I make a good scribe, that's about it.
So the ARCX with the AllThatIs is clearly spread across the 8
dynamics.
The Communication is enforced, I HAVE to be conscious, the affinity
is negative down around useless, apathy, sorrow and propitiation, and
that's just the social facade.
True sub death tone is probably can't hide.
My agreement with the AllThatIs is negative, totally opposed, next
time it wants to crucify someone, let is choose someone other than me
thank you.
My communication with the AllTHatIs is completely blocked,
recognition, perception, communication, orientation are all completely
zero.
Understandings seem to be all over the place, but none of them do
me any good, so I will trust they are all bogus.
Enlightment is non existent.
Body is a total walking disaster area, can't breath, can't sleep,
can't work, can't find reason to move. A long ways from 'Breathing is
sufficient reason to be.'
Energy is empty, or negative turned against me.
Higher than that, production, prediction, activity are all
substitute goal nerve crushers, that I do for others, sacrifice in case
some day there turns out to be any intelligent life on Earth or
anywhere.
I am not glad I exist, I am not happy to be, and I do not enjoy my
time, life is not worthwhile.
Although I am not truely suicidal, it get that way sometimes when I
am fumed and can't breath at all, but I do spend 10 percent of my time
considering how, if and why to suicide or kamikaze.
Thinking about kamikaze tends to make the suicidal thoughts
go away :)
Everything else in my life is a waste, I ain't going to waste my
death.
I am told I have post partum depression, I have been depressed ever
since I was a baby.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun Jun 24 23:09:29 EDT 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Aug 4 12:00:03 EDT 2020
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore523.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)
iD8DBQFfKYYEURT1lqxE3HERAq81AJ4oH6WazKGq75wLMNPQtI+HTLouMgCff1V+
W294bMu653wNwoM4HNasz7c=
=7pzZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, August 3, 2020
ETERNAL DESPONDENCY
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
ETERNAL DESPONDENCY
INDOCTRINATION:
Humans for the most part are an ugly group of assholes.
Your peclear is eternally despondent about who or what he is.
Temporal Forevers kill.
Conception is causal.
PROCESS:
Run,
What have you not conceived?
What have you conceived?
What are you not conceiving?
What are you conceiving?
What will you not conceive?
What will you conceive?
Don't conceive something.
Conceive something.
E/P: Understandings,
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Aug 3 14:11:46 EDT 2020
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1058.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)
iD8DBQFfKFNjURT1lqxE3HERApqEAJ9yHsTqttM3FWI/EGV7YyAHFHNdrwCffGTR
YnFheFPngCT0Kr99CE2GIkA=
=yL9X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
ETERNAL DESPONDENCY
INDOCTRINATION:
Humans for the most part are an ugly group of assholes.
Your peclear is eternally despondent about who or what he is.
Temporal Forevers kill.
Conception is causal.
PROCESS:
Run,
What have you not conceived?
What have you conceived?
What are you not conceiving?
What are you conceiving?
What will you not conceive?
What will you conceive?
Don't conceive something.
Conceive something.
E/P: Understandings,
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Aug 3 14:11:46 EDT 2020
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1058.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)
iD8DBQFfKFNjURT1lqxE3HERApqEAJ9yHsTqttM3FWI/EGV7YyAHFHNdrwCffGTR
YnFheFPngCT0Kr99CE2GIkA=
=yL9X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)