-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
CAUSE AND CAUSE OF CAUSE
> There is something important about being aware. I also agree that the only
> thing I can be certain of is my own existence. But though I have always
> known about your proof, I do not "feel" that its internal logic implies that
> it has also opened a window into the mystery. That is, the cornerstone
> of certainty may not be the cornerstone of truth. That is not to say that it
> in fact is not, nor that it might not be the first step along that path.
Yes, certainty is probably a red herring, a secondary result of the
scalarness of consciousness, not the primary magic that is going on.
Scientology's idea of the truth is the static before the creation
of any kinetic, they call it Native State or Basic Truth.
Anything created then, kinetics, is all based in lies and
alter-isness, which takes the being away from as-isness (static) into
persistence of lies (kinetic, consequtiveness, here-thereness, cause
between objects out there etc.)
> Assuming there is such a thing as "truth", even if it is only a single
> solitary speck of certainty, or reality, I wonder if it can be proven, or
> even accessed in the way you do.
One maybe able to BE it, I don't know about KNOW it.
The whole point of the proof is to mock up Newtonian mechanics
so thoroughly that the being can see it is NOT what is going on
in consciousness, that breaks the fixation on maya, and allows the
being to ask well if not that, then what?
So I am not so much interested in what is, but what isn't, to free
my mind from being sucked into the delusion about illusion of what is.
The whole idea of question/answer is itself based in maya
mechanics, the mind is a Q&A machine based on Doing = Wanting + Knowing,
so perhaps transcendence of Q&A is necessary to become truth again.
Hubbard said "There is BEING, but man thinks there is only
BECOMING."
So we are back to that timelessness again, that none the less can
perceive time, illusion or not, but can not easily see its own
timelessness.
Albert Hoffman said he experienced the timelessness during his
first trip on LSD, but I never did, and never have.
The idea that the thing which perceives time is itself timeless is
interesting, but like everything in this area is an oxymoron and open
only to direct perception, not think about to describe 'how it works'.
We may see how timeless works, when we see it, but it may not be
effable.
So don't expect to write it up for Nature Magazine.
Though there certainly seems to be
> something, (more than nothingness, that is) in existence, I wonder if it can
> be gleaned from thought at all. What if it cannot be, and the wonderful
> patterns that very intelligent people create are not really pertinent? What
> if the certainty itself is the only manifestation of itself, and the
> engineering and inclusion of the rest of the universe is only an engineered
> pattern?
Not sure what you are saying, but seems like I have already said
that kinetics is all orchestrated illusion on the part of the static.
It is a common idea that there might be something can not be known,
or understood, but if so how would one ever know? So why assert it?
An unknowable cause doesn't really help us understand anything, or
better our control over it so we aren't just tumble weeds in the wind of
existence.
The other idea is that anything that can affect us can be known,
internal and external. That means we can spot any cause that we need to
to explain anything going on.
If something continues to exist that is not caused, then perhaps
that we will never know, because if there is no cause to it, then there
is no effect from it, and it can never be known and is completely
irrelevant to anything that exists because it isn't cause over it.
External science is concerned with one subject and one subject
only, cause. No cause, and science looks right by it as it might
as well not be there.
Something that has no cause over anything might as well not exist.
Same thing might apply to the scalar world, no cause, no
interest.
In the end our understanding of WHAT CAUSE IS, is probably
broken.
In the kinetic world we can define cause as NECESSARY dependable
followingness. But asking why is it necessary is like asking
why is cause cause.
We can see the end events that follow each other, we can even see
the dependability of the followingness, but not the NECESSITY in between
the events that makes them do so.
In a scalar universe the whole concept of followingness is absurd,
let alone necessary followingness, but we still look for the necessity
between things that are and things that become, and we are still looking
for the cause of cause.
Why is there cause?
Have we even yet proven to ourselves that cause exists, I think so,
personal agency is part of the perfect certainty pallete, but what is
the anatomy of cause that allows it to be cause?
> I will tell you about the time God spoke to me. It was about three
> years ago.
>
> I was getting my car from a garage in Manhattan. The rest of my
> family was waiting for me. We were going to a restaurant with friends a
> mile or so uptown on 3rd. Ave.. The attendant was a nice guy who also
> was a pastor at a small local church in Harlem. He had been there for
> months. Why was this night different from every other night? As I was
> about to get into the car, he told me out of the blue that God was going
> to speak with me.
>
> I am smug about certain things, I am a dick, you know, After, all,
> I had been to college. So I asked him such stupid questions as, "will
> he speak to me in English?". He took no notice of the light sarcasm and
> condescension (I am not really cruel or mean-spirited), but simply said
> he did not know. It did not register on me particularly at the time,
> but I was disconcerted. I left.
>
> We were late, as usual, so I dropped everyone off in front of the
> restaurant, and started looking for a parking space. There one was, on
> the avenue, just up the block. But then a car came around the corner
> and took the spot. I did not register it as odd at the time, but that
> car simply turned the corner and shot into that spot. Oh well, happens
> all the time. There was a car just a little farther up pulling out, so
> I got behind it. But it was a hydrant. Oh well, happens all the time.
> I turned the corner at 77th St. and at the corner of Lexington, saw
> another spot. But just as the light changed, a car appeared and took
> the spot.
>
> First profanity.
>
> I went around the immediate neighborhood for the next five minutes,
> and this happened three more time in quick succession.
>
> Second, third, fourth... nineteenth profanities.
>
> As I was steaming, I turned again onto 77th St from 3rd, and,
> midblock, the hairs on the back of my neck stood up. A wave of hilarity
> washed over me, and I realized, I laughed out loud, "Oh, I see you are
> speaking to me" It was a real rush. I was elated. I was leaning
> forward, half out of the seat. The light was green on Lex, and a spot
> was open right around the corner.
>
> Now I understand that headlines are the talk of the town,
> especially when they tell a tale of remarkable events, or rather
> remarkable coincidences. That these are merely the ones that do now and
> then happen and are thus noticed, among the billions that never do, and
> die unrequited. The risen hackles, the joy, the parking spot. All
> normal, or rather, unremarkable, eh?. Including the fact that the
> number seven figures into it all.
>
> But what about the pastor?
Sure, so communication happens between us all at the inward scalar
level, not bound by the outward limitations of kinetic cause, speed of
light, particles, messenger waves etc.
Scalar communication is more like two beings have the same idea at
the same time, because they ARE the same being in the scaler, with two
different instantiations in the kinetic.
The whole idea that God is a multi being, a Multi I-AM being, and
everything kinetic is an avatar for one of those beings, has wild
ramifications.
The only thing you can not know is something fundamentally
different than you at all levels, you and it are two different objects,
then you got theories to keep you warm in the night.
So rather than thinking about God talking you, perhaps reword it
into You/pastor/wholeshitloadofdrivers was talking to all of you,
and you were the only one to pick it up.
Don't know, I wouldn't presume to describe the paranormal beyond
the rudiments of Theory II which is more about what things are NOT than
what they are.
Einstein was pacing the floor one day worried to his wits end about
the ridiculousness Special Relativity applied to QM entanglement, and
Occam's ghost visited him and said 'Albert, don't worry. when you think
you have your theory all wrapped up and it all makes perfect sense, its
wrong. Keep going until its all ludicrous and impossible, then you are
on the right track."
The universe is like a Koan, its not meant to be understood, the
way kinetic mechanics and linear temporal cause is. Our whole mind is
built to understand linear temporal cause because that's how our
survival in this universe works. But the projector of the universe has
no concern with survival, it just is forever outside of time, and what
ever cause/mechanism there is to how or why it projects kinetics inside
of time is going to be just more oxymoronic nonsense to the kinetic
mind.
The more oxymoronic it is, the more people will 'get it' and the
more Nature will refuse to publish it.
So The Scientists of the Rock will be last to 'know' :)
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
Mon Apr 6 19:29:16 EDT 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jun 30 12:00:02 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore970.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)
iD8DBQFZVnWDURT1lqxE3HERAvD6AKChf1SxtHCANt7DMJCxe2L8gZos1wCfdDQA
3QYYCj3gdyGohPy9viEdIc4=
=X+t+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Friday, June 30, 2017
Thursday, June 29, 2017
LOGIC16 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
SELF DENYING SYLLOGISMS
If you state,
"Syllogisms don't apply to anything"
you are intending that this statement be used as:
"Syllogisms don't apply to anything.
Exhibit A is a syllogism
Therefore Exhibit A doesn't apply to anything"
The point is that merely MAKING THE STATEMENT syllogisms don't
apply to anything assumes and intends that they do.
People who build their philsophies around self denying statements
are all wind between the ears.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Jun 29 12:00:03 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic16.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)
iD8DBQFZVSQDURT1lqxE3HERAgNWAJ9dQbxU4XOzRdirkhe1iHNm95gpCQCgtsFo
L1lNc7qydWYYn/hBR/Y7dag=
=JkyZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
SELF DENYING SYLLOGISMS
If you state,
"Syllogisms don't apply to anything"
you are intending that this statement be used as:
"Syllogisms don't apply to anything.
Exhibit A is a syllogism
Therefore Exhibit A doesn't apply to anything"
The point is that merely MAKING THE STATEMENT syllogisms don't
apply to anything assumes and intends that they do.
People who build their philsophies around self denying statements
are all wind between the ears.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Jun 29 12:00:03 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic16.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)
iD8DBQFZVSQDURT1lqxE3HERAgNWAJ9dQbxU4XOzRdirkhe1iHNm95gpCQCgtsFo
L1lNc7qydWYYn/hBR/Y7dag=
=JkyZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, June 28, 2017
DIANETI0 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
DIANETICS TODAY
Page 104
"The key note of all synthetic valences is that a character has
been developed or created more or less out of whole cloth, possibly
with some small foundation, but certainly with exaggeration, which
puts into existence a being who never breathed or coughed or spat.
The police and newspapers are continually doing this. You
actually don't know whether criminals who have been arrested by the
police and tried in the newspapers were the people who were arrested
or not, since they are assigned a synthetic valence and are condemned
to be very bad people indeed.
Of course some of these criminals were or are bad, but the
chances are that amongst this legion of people arrested and tried in
the newspapers there were some who were quite deserving men and whose
actual character and behavior did not even vaguely compare with the
represented character.
We have a flagrant case of synthetic valences when newspapers and
other public media and even word-of-mouth gossip begin to tear to
pieces anyone's character and put in its place some synthetic
understanding which was never a real person. In this way we begin to
believe there are many more bad people in the world than there are.
In my own experience with bad men - and I have met several of
various nationalities - I have seen some men who could put up a rather
ferocious front, but I have never found one of them totally lacking in
human warmth. Yet were I to read the newspapers and popular books on
such people I would begin to believe it would be possible for a
complete demon to exist who would never respond to any decent impulse.
Yet I have even argued bandits into a more amenable state of mind. In
other words, you can actually create an effect on almost anybody. The
synthetic valence is an effort to tell you and others that beings can
exist who are so bad that no effect can be produced on them. Of
course this makes everybody subservient to them."
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Jun 28 12:00:03 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/dianeti0.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)
iD8DBQFZU9KDURT1lqxE3HERAk/oAKDMjsGx28j75JEGNqKQrRuKcv2NyQCg2lOY
1LlebupB6xsXye2eL51nXZU=
=17pL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
DIANETICS TODAY
Page 104
"The key note of all synthetic valences is that a character has
been developed or created more or less out of whole cloth, possibly
with some small foundation, but certainly with exaggeration, which
puts into existence a being who never breathed or coughed or spat.
The police and newspapers are continually doing this. You
actually don't know whether criminals who have been arrested by the
police and tried in the newspapers were the people who were arrested
or not, since they are assigned a synthetic valence and are condemned
to be very bad people indeed.
Of course some of these criminals were or are bad, but the
chances are that amongst this legion of people arrested and tried in
the newspapers there were some who were quite deserving men and whose
actual character and behavior did not even vaguely compare with the
represented character.
We have a flagrant case of synthetic valences when newspapers and
other public media and even word-of-mouth gossip begin to tear to
pieces anyone's character and put in its place some synthetic
understanding which was never a real person. In this way we begin to
believe there are many more bad people in the world than there are.
In my own experience with bad men - and I have met several of
various nationalities - I have seen some men who could put up a rather
ferocious front, but I have never found one of them totally lacking in
human warmth. Yet were I to read the newspapers and popular books on
such people I would begin to believe it would be possible for a
complete demon to exist who would never respond to any decent impulse.
Yet I have even argued bandits into a more amenable state of mind. In
other words, you can actually create an effect on almost anybody. The
synthetic valence is an effort to tell you and others that beings can
exist who are so bad that no effect can be produced on them. Of
course this makes everybody subservient to them."
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Jun 28 12:00:03 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/dianeti0.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)
iD8DBQFZU9KDURT1lqxE3HERAk/oAKDMjsGx28j75JEGNqKQrRuKcv2NyQCg2lOY
1LlebupB6xsXye2eL51nXZU=
=17pL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, June 26, 2017
HOM60 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
LOVE FOR CREATURE AND CREATOR
X. wrote:
>I gotta go do something for LaMMie.
Continuity of love.
Beings are a composite of creator and creature, they are the
creator of the creature identities they wear and wore in this life.
As such, we rarely get to know the creator as well as the creatures
the being is wearing, and our love therefore is more a love FOR the
creature than for the creator.
It is a love in fact between creatures loving each other, rather
than between creators loving each other.
So when LaMMie comes back next life time, it will be with a new
robe, a new adornment of creature aspects, and we will meet again, and
perhaps have a moment of recognizance, and again we will fall in love
with that next lifes trappings.
When he dies again, we lose those trappings, and our love is lost
with it, for the creature is gone, and thus is sorrow and despair.
Each Creator has a different flavor, the creatures they create
carry a bit of that flavor and a lot of their own temporal flavor
which is goregous enough in itself. We get lost savoring the creature
flavor and miss the creator flavor which is a higher and more
beautiful thing but lost in the loud gawdy experience of the creature
flavor.
We run into the same creator in another life time manifesting a
different creature flavor, and we fall in love all over again with the
creature flavor and miss the creator flavor, so we do not recognize
the same creator when we see it again.
As we ourselves become more clear and in contact with our own
Self as Creator, the many creatures we have been and mourned the loss
of give way to the continuity of love that is appropriate to the
Creator that we are, which is unique among others but never changes.
Being in better contact with our own Creator, we can be in better
contact with others Creators too. Thus we meet two people in two very
different lives, and we see the common Creator between them, "LaMMie
is that YOU?", "Nah, LaMMie was last lifetime, now its ..." and
suddenly we are relating not just to the present set of creations but
to the eternal being and it's and our eternal goals.
What was love between creatures is now love between Creators.
Thus continuity of love between creators is continuity of
intention across games, because the game that is being created is not
a one life time, one creature game.
Thus death should no longer be the loss of the game, but only the
present creature trappings, the game continues, the bigger game, which
once recognized, one can be grateful that one section is now done and
about to be replaced by a new section. It was about time for it to
happen anyhow wasn't it? Don't you see?
We hang onto the Creature for want of the Creator.
When people die, the sorrow is on the loss of the creator, we
ourselves are only able to know the creator through its creature
trappings, so when the creature dies, the creator is gone too. But this
is because we only know ourselves through our present creature, once we
see ourselves as we really are then death becomes merely another birth.
The prior life is the egg of the newborn of the next life.
Of course the egg has to break for the newborn to be born.
How's that for Christmas every day of the year?
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Jun 26 12:16:19 EDT 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/hom60.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)
iD8DBQFZUTNTURT1lqxE3HERAr5XAKDUccQ+AaAJAO1WwTjJamVjBaIgzACgpY5H
1RYBhxxy0rW/024SYKrPZ4k=
=ujzh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
LOVE FOR CREATURE AND CREATOR
X. wrote:
>I gotta go do something for LaMMie.
Continuity of love.
Beings are a composite of creator and creature, they are the
creator of the creature identities they wear and wore in this life.
As such, we rarely get to know the creator as well as the creatures
the being is wearing, and our love therefore is more a love FOR the
creature than for the creator.
It is a love in fact between creatures loving each other, rather
than between creators loving each other.
So when LaMMie comes back next life time, it will be with a new
robe, a new adornment of creature aspects, and we will meet again, and
perhaps have a moment of recognizance, and again we will fall in love
with that next lifes trappings.
When he dies again, we lose those trappings, and our love is lost
with it, for the creature is gone, and thus is sorrow and despair.
Each Creator has a different flavor, the creatures they create
carry a bit of that flavor and a lot of their own temporal flavor
which is goregous enough in itself. We get lost savoring the creature
flavor and miss the creator flavor which is a higher and more
beautiful thing but lost in the loud gawdy experience of the creature
flavor.
We run into the same creator in another life time manifesting a
different creature flavor, and we fall in love all over again with the
creature flavor and miss the creator flavor, so we do not recognize
the same creator when we see it again.
As we ourselves become more clear and in contact with our own
Self as Creator, the many creatures we have been and mourned the loss
of give way to the continuity of love that is appropriate to the
Creator that we are, which is unique among others but never changes.
Being in better contact with our own Creator, we can be in better
contact with others Creators too. Thus we meet two people in two very
different lives, and we see the common Creator between them, "LaMMie
is that YOU?", "Nah, LaMMie was last lifetime, now its ..." and
suddenly we are relating not just to the present set of creations but
to the eternal being and it's and our eternal goals.
What was love between creatures is now love between Creators.
Thus continuity of love between creators is continuity of
intention across games, because the game that is being created is not
a one life time, one creature game.
Thus death should no longer be the loss of the game, but only the
present creature trappings, the game continues, the bigger game, which
once recognized, one can be grateful that one section is now done and
about to be replaced by a new section. It was about time for it to
happen anyhow wasn't it? Don't you see?
We hang onto the Creature for want of the Creator.
When people die, the sorrow is on the loss of the creator, we
ourselves are only able to know the creator through its creature
trappings, so when the creature dies, the creator is gone too. But this
is because we only know ourselves through our present creature, once we
see ourselves as we really are then death becomes merely another birth.
The prior life is the egg of the newborn of the next life.
Of course the egg has to break for the newborn to be born.
How's that for Christmas every day of the year?
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Jun 26 12:16:19 EDT 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/hom60.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)
iD8DBQFZUTNTURT1lqxE3HERAr5XAKDUccQ+AaAJAO1WwTjJamVjBaIgzACgpY5H
1RYBhxxy0rW/024SYKrPZ4k=
=ujzh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Saturday, June 24, 2017
HOMER THE WHACK JOB
HOMER THE WHACK JOB
06/24/17 Saturday 4:55pm EST Revised.
Long, but new tech in middle.
In alt.clearing.technology John Dorsay <restimulator@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am interested in what Homer has to say. Do I expect to agree with
> him? No. But I want to understand what it is about these topics
> that holds his interest so strongly. And Homer has been willing to
> discuss them with me.
I was and still am a meatball.
I understand the physical theory very well, educated in math,
logic, biology, chemistry, psychology, physics, computer science,
electronics, philosophy, government and religion, and I grew up with
academic meatballs of many persuasions, including my father who was a
world reknown physiologist and chairman of the department of physiology
at NYU during the 50-60's.
He was an agnostic, brought up as a Christian, he kept a scientific
eye out for the need for God, and any evidence there might be for His
existence. He wrote a book called 'Man and his Gods' with a forward by
Einstein. My father's view towards Man and his Gods was not kind but
tempered by willing to see evidence if there was any.
I believe he wanted God to exist, but he experiences with life
and my mother, could not see his way to it.
He suffered from an excluded middle, he conceived that either the
Christian God existed, which was ludicrous, or there was no god at all.
He could not concieve that we are all God incarnation.
He summed up his feelings about God at the end of the book with a
short chapter entitled 'Into whatever abyss...' wherein he wrote "Man as
a fallen angel would be ludicrous." He was a consumate scientist loved
by everyone who knew him.
One night he was sitting by my bed, I was 5 or so, and I asked him
'Daddy where did I come from?' He told me about the willie and the
wendy, and that was that. I went zooming down my memory track to see if
I could remember being born or concieved or anything before birth and I
couldn't. That crashed me into being mortal as mortal comes.
When my father and mother died in the 5th grade or so, I fully
believed I lived but once and that was it bud. It made me unrecoverably
sour on life.
Having experienced little to nothing of a mother's love, I
certainly did not consider I had had "time enough for love", and
probably couldn't see ever having so no matter how many life times
I lived.
But I have never been able to accept 'mortality' as a given, even
though I would have bet on mortality up until 1972.
Nor have I ever been able to accept standard religions, offering a
God that created me against my will, dumped me in this universe to fend
for myself with Godless parents, in order to test me, or whatever his
sick agenda is.
And although I too wanted some people to enjoy hell forever, I knew
that a God of love would have another solution, and that a God the
Father would actually take care of his kids and not leave them to beat
up on each other, to test the bad and the good by letting the bad bang
up on the good.
I also have known since I was a kid that there was no experiment I
could do to prove I was or was not dreaming, as I could and had
replicated in a dream anything in the waking state, except mother's
love, including not being able to wake up when I wanted to and being
absolutely convinced I was awake when I was still dreaming.
I knew that I saw the world through the rendition engine of my
consciousness, eyes are not a glass window to the PU (physical
universe), and thus I knew I could never be certain of the PU.
That's because one can never be certain about A by looking at B no
matter how much B claims to look like A.
Then in 1972 I had a significant vision, I understood that I saw my
consciousness was capable of perfect certainty of some things.
I AM, I KNOW, I WANT and I DO,
And also I had direct perception of color forms like red and green
and all other conscious experiences, and simultaneously I saw very
clearly that a space time gizmo could not do so.
It became known as the machine certainty theorem (which google) or
The Proof for short.
Never mind the complexities of that, right or wrong, doesn't
matter, I do presently bet the vision is correct.
Bet's are bets, not certainties, and when one has to act, one does
have to follow one's gut.
The vision incicated to me that my consciousness was a zero
dimensional actuality that could be certain of itself and its own color
forms, because it wasn't limited by space or time, but I had an
impentrably hard time trying to figure out how that zero dimensional
graphics display could be interfaced with a 4D space and time graphics
engine, the brain.
My Cornell University professors in psych and engineering told me
that consciousness was merely a 'epiphenomenon', meaning a side result
of the brain, but it had no causal agency of it's own and could not
affect anything.
In otherwords I as a conscious unit was just an observer of things,
but had no causal efficacy myself. That sent me into a despondancy
about Cornell that I have never gotten over.
Obviously if this were true, that consciousness was the effect of
the brain, created by or arose out of the brain, but could not itself
effect anything, the whole of idea of consciousness and the word itself
would never be expressed by the brain through the mouth!
Consciousness has to be cause in order to see itself! And then it
has to be cause over the brain in order report that consciousness has
seen consciousness!
What, they think the brain sees consciousness and reports back?
Ok, that's fine even if abysmally stupid, because the brain can't
see anything unless the BRAIN IS THE EFFECT OF IT, which means that if
the brain can learn about consciousness, then consciousness must be
affecting the brain, and thus consciousness is cause of the brain
knowing about it.
Thus there is no way and no how that consciousness is a pure
epiphenomenon, caused by others things but of no cause in itself.
Epiphenominalism is brain dead meatballism at its finest.
There are 3 versions of 'epiphenomenalism'.
1.) Consciousness is a mere epiphenomena, meaning it can display
what is going on, but can not effect what is going on at all even though
it has the illusion it can, this is called the illusion of agency,
free will, and personal responsibility.
Agency means cause, who or what is cause around here and why is it
such an asshole?
This version of epiphenominalism says that cause can flow from the
physical universe to consciousness, but not back again.
Actual 'goings on' are only the brain responding in a standard
mechanical manner to inputs and outputs, consciousness might be able to
see this going on, but could never affect it, change it or even report
back about it.
Like dominoes falling, if we could know their exact starting state,
we could compute all future outcomes.
Well plus or minus quantum mechanics :)
This was the group my profs and many people in scientific
academentia adhere to.
A few of the more enlightened like to fancy that the randomness
entered by QM allowed for 'free will', but free will is not random
behavior, it is MOVTIVATED behavior, and randomness in freewill is not
necessarily desirable for someone out to get what he wants, survival.
For that you need tightly motivated and computed behavior that is right
every time, not randomness.
The idea that one can not prediect if someone will go right
or left while in the middle of judging, does not mean his
decision is random, as all conscious decisions are based on
desire and one's knowledge about how to get things done.
There are more ways to harm than to help, so flipping a coin
at every choice will not get you anywhere let alone a long and happy
life for you and yours.
Anyhow as I said above, if consciousness were a full epiphenomenon,
then consciousness would know what was going on in the brain, but the
brain would never know what was going on in consciousness, as cause can
not flow from consciousness to the brain, and certainly therefore the
brain could never express the existence of consciousness for that would
certainly be cause flowing from consciousnes back to the physical
universe.
2.) Consciousness is a partial epiphenomenon, that means it can
cause things in response to brain data coming into it, but only within
itself, it can't cause anything back out into the physical universe. It
consumes energy to light up, but can't then redirect energy back into
the world.
This is of course ludicrous for the same reason, because we are now
TALKING about consciousness via our brains and our mouths, and it is
unlikely that our BRAINS noticed we were conscious and self aware, and
therefore it must be our consciousness that noticed we were conscious
and started talking about it, which is clearly an outflow of cause from
conciousness through the brain into the actual world.
If a brain is talking about consciousness, the brain has been
affected by that consciousness as cause, or the brain would never
know about it. A might might be talking about a consciousness without
having ever experienced one or been the effect of one, but then
the brain would never know if what it was saying was true.
To know anything valid about anything you have to be the
effect of it in order to learn about it.
Your learning about it IS its effect on you.
3.) Consciousness is a full blown phenomenon as itself, interfaced
or not with the brain as the case might be.
My vision indicated that 3 was correct.
The part of my vision that indicated that consciousness was zero
dimensional FOR SURE, indicated either that the zero dimensional
consciousness was either interfaced with the 4D brain, or that the brain
didn't exist at all, the world really was a dream.
Suddenly a lot of things made sense from my own life, but more
importantly, once I understood the possibility that the PU was a dream,
then things like past lives, OT powers, who or what is God, all started
to fall in place inside the newly concieved dream ball theory.
I then ran into two sources of people who basically said the same
thing, one was Mahatma Rajiswar and the other was Ron Hubbard in the
Phoenix Lectures.
At first when I read the Phoenix lectures I was enraged at
'considerations take rank over the mechanics of existence.'
I went to the local group of OT's and said, "look you walk out in
front of a car and you die, no consideration is going to change that."
They said 'The world is a mockup, if you take back the postulate
that it is solid, it won't be solid for you. It may still be solid for
your body, but you will be able to move through your body and thus
exteriorize, and if you really take back the solidity postulate, your
body will be able to walk through the cars too."
Well that was it, at that point I understood that LRH was coming
from the dream ball model of existence. I was in TOTAL SHOCK, I
couldn't believe that anyone else was taking it seriously, and then the
Mahatma said the same thing, "the world is a theory", and people believe
what they want to believe in order to have a game.
Then I ran into HUNDREDS of books in the library all coming from
the same place. Old and dusty, as I guessed most wisdom was.
So my problem as a meatball was finding evidence for this dreamball
theory.
I KNEW I HAD NO EVIDENCE FOR THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE, something that
meatballs won't admit.
But I also had no evidence for the absence of the meatball
universe.
So I was at 50/50 on the matter, driving me nuts, as you can all
well attest.
Over the years after that, I started to have very heavy visions, or
ascension experiences, one after the other, each one staggering in
beauty, vertigo and power. Like earthquakes, they came at any time,
crossing the street, driving the car, going to sleep at night, in dreams
after dreams, waking up, going to school, I lived with my seatbelt on.
Nothing I could show another, never out of my body, but quite
enough to show me that:
1.) God was divine
2.) God WAS the AllThatIs
3.) God was US.
In otherwords we existed prior to any created condition and thus
either created it ourselves in tandem with others, or agreed to it later
if created earlier by others.
Further I saw that me, my conscious unit, was eternal, immutable,
and thus not creatable nor destroyable.
Athough my consciousness of consciousness OF kinetics, my
consciousness itself was static, spaceless, timeless, dimensionless.
Thus no one made me, I and everyone just simply always ARE.
Again proof? You gotta be there to see it.
I saw levels of divine friendliness to soften the hardest heart,
and divine frostiness to freeze it all over again to where it would
never thaw.
From there I started to figure out how we may have created and come
into our present condition.
Our present condition is highly charged, maybe even infinitely
charged due to the losses incurred by our belief we live only once.
Most meatballs are so charged on the subject of being mortal they
will tell you that mortality is a good thing.
But anyone who has gotten BY DIRECT VISION even vaguely close to
the freedom, beauty and power of his own indestructable eternality, will
tell you otherwise.
Sorry, proof is still only for those who have been there.
What proof of eternality can I show the time bound?
Now this has been a labor of love for 30 years, I got so sick in
1991 I thought I would never live to see the light of day. I was in bed
for 6 months, eating a yogurt every 2 days, writing, writing, writing,
cogniting, having 'primal quakes' as I called them, I couldn't get it
all down fast enough.
I went through crying, vomiting, laughing, crying, vomiting,
laughing, white light blazing out of the center of my body, rose and
golden light in my dreams while angels were talking to me.
Remember the movie Ghost, those little black guys that come to suck
down the bad guys when they died. I had them running all over my veins
inside my body, I knew it was time to leave. I asked Jane for
permission to die, and waited for it to happen. The crying and laughing
saved me however, as the charge disappeared into peace and physical well
being.
But not completely, after it was all over I was still a total mess
on the verge of collapse unable to breath.
That lasted for about 6 months, then I went for auditing with
Filbert which wasn't eactly pleasant, but again I had a visionary
experience that quelled the eternal fear in me about what I had done to
myself.
Anyone who claims to not be afraid of their future is lying.
I saw an eternal beauty that showed me in the end I am truely a
friend of myself, the AllThatIs, and everyone else, and visa versa.
But same self has some very adult tastes in unfriendliness.
Kind of an friendliness towards unfriendliness FOR A WHILE.
Before that moment it was just a phrase from Adore, but after that
it was real to me.
"Class is an attitude that ALL should live forever and be my
friend."
Now you gotta understand something about me, ever since the vision
that perfect certainty was a function of consciousness, I no longer
dealt in faiths or beliefs.
People ask me if I believe this or that, and I tell them, belief is
for Christians and losers.
I deal only in perfect certainties, of which there are only a
precious few:
I AM, I KNOW, I WANT, I CARE, I DO/CAUSE and I HAVE
As for proof of the dreamball theories, I am not sure that can be
proven any more than the meatball theory.
But I do bet that if one understands how one came into the
dreamtime, one should be able to figure out how to get out. Dreamtime
seems to be a chinese finger trap of sorts, coming in more puts you out.
Trying to get out, sticks you in.
Here is a statement of it from future tech that is not yet
written.
------------------------------------------------------------
THE INFINITE OUT AND THE FINITE IN
Out is always a state of infinite power.
In is always a state of finite power.
The infinite can only create the finite.
Finite means an unlimited finiteness, no upper limit but always
finite.
Since a marble is finite, you can never create an infinite number
of marbles in the same time, but you can create as many as you want at a
time, there is no upper limit, but always a finite number.
The purpose of the infinite is to create the finite, in the form of
space time whiles, an infinite number of them perhaps over eternity, but
each one always finite, only a finite number at a time, and only for a
finite while.
Once a while ends, it ends fully, it is gone it is as if never
been.
Any one finiteness can contain more finite creations inside it,
again an unlimited number, meaning no upper limit, but always finite.
Thus any particular finite while can become as complex as you wish
but never infinitely complex.
Using infinite power, beings create finite whiles, and GO INTO
them. They create them as orientation points and enter them to become
symbols, leaving the while behind to become itself their ultimate
orientation point as a proxy for the truth of themselves being the
actual orientation point for any while.
An orientation point is a source of symbols.
Symbols have objects created in a while that have mass, meaning and
mobility in space and time.
GOING IN AND COMING OUT OF A FINITE WHILE.
If one is out and wants in, one is using the infinite power of
being out to come in.
This always works in the mere conception of it.
If one is in and wants out, one is using the finite power of being
in to get out.
This never works.
IT CAN'T
If you conceive you are in and want to get out, you will be in by
the power of your own conception that you ARE IN, and WILL BE OUT.
ARE which exists now, overrides WILL BE which doesn't yet exist.
The now which has not time is always more powerful than time
which will be.
Now is infinite, time is finite.
If you conceive you are out and want to come in, you will be out by
the power of your own conception that you ARE out and WILL BE IN.
In and out are not two different places, but two different ways to
look from the same place, you.
Thus one can be out looking in, or one can be in looking (and
longing for) out.
By operating the infinite power to come in, one IS out coming in.
By operating the finite power to go out, one IS in trying to get
out but never making it.
This is because infinite power can cause (a transition to) finite
power, but finite power can never cause (a transition to) infinite
power.
Thus being in the middle of in and out, the struggle to get out
sticks you in.
But the struggle to get in as deep as you can will put you out.
You dive in deeper and deeper and deeper, and suddenly you just
find your self out at the first coming in.
The ludicrosity of coming in can then be enjoyed and continued, or
simply dropped with a change of mind.
Then you are out for good until next cycle.
THE POWER OF COMING IN
The power of coming in has an anatomy.
It is a complex movement from Static to Kinetic, Native state to
Manifestation, from Sleep to Dream, from God to Soul, from Author to
Character, from Creator to Creature, from Orientation Point to Symbol,
from Divinity to Humanity.
Who or what could, would or should conceive and create a human and
then become it not knowing it had done so?
The antomy of the power of coming in consists of conception,
agency, responsibility, intention, volition, willingness, motivation,
aesthetics, ethics, perfect certainty and logic.
Moving:
From unimpingeable peace, to relentless impinging hell fire.
From adoration to abomination.
Driven by High Appreciation for Ludicrous Demise.
Do you really want to get out to be that thing again.
Of course not in, would never want to be out.
Out wants to be in, and in wants to be in deeper.
But watch out, once in starts moving in again under
its own power, it will find itself out.
Then what?
Who are you going to call?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So I am still working in this research area, I have made lots of
case gain, most of it no thanks to Ron Hubbard or the Church, but the
basics are all there, and Ron was definitely coming from the same place
I am.
But Ron is not scientology, Ron merely channeled it from the Gods,
so scientology stands as a thing in its own right, if you can filter out
the ego alloying crap Ron added into it.
There is a technology for freeing people from the nightmare of the
dream, that technology is built into the very nature, the warp and weave
of the dream itself, the dream tells us how it is going to be. The way
in, is the way out.
Whether you call it scientology, or adore, or clearing, or
dreamballology, it doesn't matter, it is all the same thing.
Chemistry is chemistry no matter where or who you deal with, or
what name they give to it.
Chemistry is not however Alchemy, and in just such a way
scientology is not christianity, or any other inanity what went before,
or will come after.
Scientology teaches that WE are responsible for our manifested
existence, WE created it, not some God we do not know and must have
faith in and forgive His trespasses against us, as He forgives our
trespasses against him.
It is only the non mystical Christians who don't understand that
just because you SEE space, doesn't mean there IS space.
They can't see that they live in the mind of God, walking around in
the imagination of God.
It is a short step from there to understand that we ARE that God,
and we each see our own rendition of a shared but virtualized physical
universe, made not of matter, energy, space and time, but of dreamstuff,
hologram stuff, the stuff of which self luminous consciousness is made.
We share the dream with others not via the outward virtualization
which contains no cause at all, but via the inward connection that
connects all the Many into the One. Each "I" of the Many is an eye of
the One.
If your religion teaches you personal responsibility for all that
is manifest, then your religion is scientology by another name, wisdom
comes in many forms.
If your religion does not teach you that, but teaches you that God
created you, and you must obey God, or else, or that there is no God
except Timestone and Dust in the Wind, then your religion teaches
inanities designed to keep people in the dream rather than get them out.
God is a blame game that ends in proptiation (prayer).
There is no compromise with these things, either you are totally
responsible for your condition, or you are not.
Total responsibility means you made it, you wanted it, you got it.
It means knowing willing cause with full awareness of the consequences.
Even if only by agreeing with the creations of others.
Either you are sovereign over yourself or you are not.
Sovereignty means you want it, you got it.
What does your religion teach?
Thus I am an excellent source of just exactly what Scientology
believes and thinks about the world, as long as you remember that
scientology is a completely different subject that the policy wrappers
Ron put around the subject to own it, control it and protect it, and how
the idiots in the Church implement it and the monkeys with e-meters
apply it.
The joke is almost nobody in the Church really knows what the
underlying philosophy of Scientology is, they just aren't allowed to
talk about it, and they only read what they are told to read for their
post.
But it is all there in Advanced Procedure and Axioms in one
sentence: The being existed before any created condition and thus has
full responsibility for being that condition.
"Do not send for whom the bell tolls, for it tolls for you."
After a while, Churchies find themselves getting sick from the
overts they are committing on a full time basis and they leave.
Thus there is little hope of internal correction because nobody is
there to really understand what to correct it TO.
Homer
> Homer may not always be patient and polite, but he is an intelligent
> and decent person who has played a nontrivial role in the Co$ vs the
> internet saga. One can say the same about plenty of others who have
> posted to ars over the years, but not one of them that I know of has
> defended any aspects of scientology to any significant degree for
> any significant period of time. In that respect, as far as I know,
> Homer is unique.
>
> Like I said, I'm interested in what Homer has to say. There are
> lots of threads and lots of posters on ars that I am not interested
> in. I generally just ignore them. If you think this topic is a
> waste of time, might I respectfully suggest that you consider doing
> the same?
>
>
> John
>
Mon Feb 8 00:33:53 EST 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
06/24/17 Saturday 4:55pm EST Revised.
Long, but new tech in middle.
In alt.clearing.technology John Dorsay <restimulator@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am interested in what Homer has to say. Do I expect to agree with
> him? No. But I want to understand what it is about these topics
> that holds his interest so strongly. And Homer has been willing to
> discuss them with me.
I was and still am a meatball.
I understand the physical theory very well, educated in math,
logic, biology, chemistry, psychology, physics, computer science,
electronics, philosophy, government and religion, and I grew up with
academic meatballs of many persuasions, including my father who was a
world reknown physiologist and chairman of the department of physiology
at NYU during the 50-60's.
He was an agnostic, brought up as a Christian, he kept a scientific
eye out for the need for God, and any evidence there might be for His
existence. He wrote a book called 'Man and his Gods' with a forward by
Einstein. My father's view towards Man and his Gods was not kind but
tempered by willing to see evidence if there was any.
I believe he wanted God to exist, but he experiences with life
and my mother, could not see his way to it.
He suffered from an excluded middle, he conceived that either the
Christian God existed, which was ludicrous, or there was no god at all.
He could not concieve that we are all God incarnation.
He summed up his feelings about God at the end of the book with a
short chapter entitled 'Into whatever abyss...' wherein he wrote "Man as
a fallen angel would be ludicrous." He was a consumate scientist loved
by everyone who knew him.
One night he was sitting by my bed, I was 5 or so, and I asked him
'Daddy where did I come from?' He told me about the willie and the
wendy, and that was that. I went zooming down my memory track to see if
I could remember being born or concieved or anything before birth and I
couldn't. That crashed me into being mortal as mortal comes.
When my father and mother died in the 5th grade or so, I fully
believed I lived but once and that was it bud. It made me unrecoverably
sour on life.
Having experienced little to nothing of a mother's love, I
certainly did not consider I had had "time enough for love", and
probably couldn't see ever having so no matter how many life times
I lived.
But I have never been able to accept 'mortality' as a given, even
though I would have bet on mortality up until 1972.
Nor have I ever been able to accept standard religions, offering a
God that created me against my will, dumped me in this universe to fend
for myself with Godless parents, in order to test me, or whatever his
sick agenda is.
And although I too wanted some people to enjoy hell forever, I knew
that a God of love would have another solution, and that a God the
Father would actually take care of his kids and not leave them to beat
up on each other, to test the bad and the good by letting the bad bang
up on the good.
I also have known since I was a kid that there was no experiment I
could do to prove I was or was not dreaming, as I could and had
replicated in a dream anything in the waking state, except mother's
love, including not being able to wake up when I wanted to and being
absolutely convinced I was awake when I was still dreaming.
I knew that I saw the world through the rendition engine of my
consciousness, eyes are not a glass window to the PU (physical
universe), and thus I knew I could never be certain of the PU.
That's because one can never be certain about A by looking at B no
matter how much B claims to look like A.
Then in 1972 I had a significant vision, I understood that I saw my
consciousness was capable of perfect certainty of some things.
I AM, I KNOW, I WANT and I DO,
And also I had direct perception of color forms like red and green
and all other conscious experiences, and simultaneously I saw very
clearly that a space time gizmo could not do so.
It became known as the machine certainty theorem (which google) or
The Proof for short.
Never mind the complexities of that, right or wrong, doesn't
matter, I do presently bet the vision is correct.
Bet's are bets, not certainties, and when one has to act, one does
have to follow one's gut.
The vision incicated to me that my consciousness was a zero
dimensional actuality that could be certain of itself and its own color
forms, because it wasn't limited by space or time, but I had an
impentrably hard time trying to figure out how that zero dimensional
graphics display could be interfaced with a 4D space and time graphics
engine, the brain.
My Cornell University professors in psych and engineering told me
that consciousness was merely a 'epiphenomenon', meaning a side result
of the brain, but it had no causal agency of it's own and could not
affect anything.
In otherwords I as a conscious unit was just an observer of things,
but had no causal efficacy myself. That sent me into a despondancy
about Cornell that I have never gotten over.
Obviously if this were true, that consciousness was the effect of
the brain, created by or arose out of the brain, but could not itself
effect anything, the whole of idea of consciousness and the word itself
would never be expressed by the brain through the mouth!
Consciousness has to be cause in order to see itself! And then it
has to be cause over the brain in order report that consciousness has
seen consciousness!
What, they think the brain sees consciousness and reports back?
Ok, that's fine even if abysmally stupid, because the brain can't
see anything unless the BRAIN IS THE EFFECT OF IT, which means that if
the brain can learn about consciousness, then consciousness must be
affecting the brain, and thus consciousness is cause of the brain
knowing about it.
Thus there is no way and no how that consciousness is a pure
epiphenomenon, caused by others things but of no cause in itself.
Epiphenominalism is brain dead meatballism at its finest.
There are 3 versions of 'epiphenomenalism'.
1.) Consciousness is a mere epiphenomena, meaning it can display
what is going on, but can not effect what is going on at all even though
it has the illusion it can, this is called the illusion of agency,
free will, and personal responsibility.
Agency means cause, who or what is cause around here and why is it
such an asshole?
This version of epiphenominalism says that cause can flow from the
physical universe to consciousness, but not back again.
Actual 'goings on' are only the brain responding in a standard
mechanical manner to inputs and outputs, consciousness might be able to
see this going on, but could never affect it, change it or even report
back about it.
Like dominoes falling, if we could know their exact starting state,
we could compute all future outcomes.
Well plus or minus quantum mechanics :)
This was the group my profs and many people in scientific
academentia adhere to.
A few of the more enlightened like to fancy that the randomness
entered by QM allowed for 'free will', but free will is not random
behavior, it is MOVTIVATED behavior, and randomness in freewill is not
necessarily desirable for someone out to get what he wants, survival.
For that you need tightly motivated and computed behavior that is right
every time, not randomness.
The idea that one can not prediect if someone will go right
or left while in the middle of judging, does not mean his
decision is random, as all conscious decisions are based on
desire and one's knowledge about how to get things done.
There are more ways to harm than to help, so flipping a coin
at every choice will not get you anywhere let alone a long and happy
life for you and yours.
Anyhow as I said above, if consciousness were a full epiphenomenon,
then consciousness would know what was going on in the brain, but the
brain would never know what was going on in consciousness, as cause can
not flow from consciousness to the brain, and certainly therefore the
brain could never express the existence of consciousness for that would
certainly be cause flowing from consciousnes back to the physical
universe.
2.) Consciousness is a partial epiphenomenon, that means it can
cause things in response to brain data coming into it, but only within
itself, it can't cause anything back out into the physical universe. It
consumes energy to light up, but can't then redirect energy back into
the world.
This is of course ludicrous for the same reason, because we are now
TALKING about consciousness via our brains and our mouths, and it is
unlikely that our BRAINS noticed we were conscious and self aware, and
therefore it must be our consciousness that noticed we were conscious
and started talking about it, which is clearly an outflow of cause from
conciousness through the brain into the actual world.
If a brain is talking about consciousness, the brain has been
affected by that consciousness as cause, or the brain would never
know about it. A might might be talking about a consciousness without
having ever experienced one or been the effect of one, but then
the brain would never know if what it was saying was true.
To know anything valid about anything you have to be the
effect of it in order to learn about it.
Your learning about it IS its effect on you.
3.) Consciousness is a full blown phenomenon as itself, interfaced
or not with the brain as the case might be.
My vision indicated that 3 was correct.
The part of my vision that indicated that consciousness was zero
dimensional FOR SURE, indicated either that the zero dimensional
consciousness was either interfaced with the 4D brain, or that the brain
didn't exist at all, the world really was a dream.
Suddenly a lot of things made sense from my own life, but more
importantly, once I understood the possibility that the PU was a dream,
then things like past lives, OT powers, who or what is God, all started
to fall in place inside the newly concieved dream ball theory.
I then ran into two sources of people who basically said the same
thing, one was Mahatma Rajiswar and the other was Ron Hubbard in the
Phoenix Lectures.
At first when I read the Phoenix lectures I was enraged at
'considerations take rank over the mechanics of existence.'
I went to the local group of OT's and said, "look you walk out in
front of a car and you die, no consideration is going to change that."
They said 'The world is a mockup, if you take back the postulate
that it is solid, it won't be solid for you. It may still be solid for
your body, but you will be able to move through your body and thus
exteriorize, and if you really take back the solidity postulate, your
body will be able to walk through the cars too."
Well that was it, at that point I understood that LRH was coming
from the dream ball model of existence. I was in TOTAL SHOCK, I
couldn't believe that anyone else was taking it seriously, and then the
Mahatma said the same thing, "the world is a theory", and people believe
what they want to believe in order to have a game.
Then I ran into HUNDREDS of books in the library all coming from
the same place. Old and dusty, as I guessed most wisdom was.
So my problem as a meatball was finding evidence for this dreamball
theory.
I KNEW I HAD NO EVIDENCE FOR THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE, something that
meatballs won't admit.
But I also had no evidence for the absence of the meatball
universe.
So I was at 50/50 on the matter, driving me nuts, as you can all
well attest.
Over the years after that, I started to have very heavy visions, or
ascension experiences, one after the other, each one staggering in
beauty, vertigo and power. Like earthquakes, they came at any time,
crossing the street, driving the car, going to sleep at night, in dreams
after dreams, waking up, going to school, I lived with my seatbelt on.
Nothing I could show another, never out of my body, but quite
enough to show me that:
1.) God was divine
2.) God WAS the AllThatIs
3.) God was US.
In otherwords we existed prior to any created condition and thus
either created it ourselves in tandem with others, or agreed to it later
if created earlier by others.
Further I saw that me, my conscious unit, was eternal, immutable,
and thus not creatable nor destroyable.
Athough my consciousness of consciousness OF kinetics, my
consciousness itself was static, spaceless, timeless, dimensionless.
Thus no one made me, I and everyone just simply always ARE.
Again proof? You gotta be there to see it.
I saw levels of divine friendliness to soften the hardest heart,
and divine frostiness to freeze it all over again to where it would
never thaw.
From there I started to figure out how we may have created and come
into our present condition.
Our present condition is highly charged, maybe even infinitely
charged due to the losses incurred by our belief we live only once.
Most meatballs are so charged on the subject of being mortal they
will tell you that mortality is a good thing.
But anyone who has gotten BY DIRECT VISION even vaguely close to
the freedom, beauty and power of his own indestructable eternality, will
tell you otherwise.
Sorry, proof is still only for those who have been there.
What proof of eternality can I show the time bound?
Now this has been a labor of love for 30 years, I got so sick in
1991 I thought I would never live to see the light of day. I was in bed
for 6 months, eating a yogurt every 2 days, writing, writing, writing,
cogniting, having 'primal quakes' as I called them, I couldn't get it
all down fast enough.
I went through crying, vomiting, laughing, crying, vomiting,
laughing, white light blazing out of the center of my body, rose and
golden light in my dreams while angels were talking to me.
Remember the movie Ghost, those little black guys that come to suck
down the bad guys when they died. I had them running all over my veins
inside my body, I knew it was time to leave. I asked Jane for
permission to die, and waited for it to happen. The crying and laughing
saved me however, as the charge disappeared into peace and physical well
being.
But not completely, after it was all over I was still a total mess
on the verge of collapse unable to breath.
That lasted for about 6 months, then I went for auditing with
Filbert which wasn't eactly pleasant, but again I had a visionary
experience that quelled the eternal fear in me about what I had done to
myself.
Anyone who claims to not be afraid of their future is lying.
I saw an eternal beauty that showed me in the end I am truely a
friend of myself, the AllThatIs, and everyone else, and visa versa.
But same self has some very adult tastes in unfriendliness.
Kind of an friendliness towards unfriendliness FOR A WHILE.
Before that moment it was just a phrase from Adore, but after that
it was real to me.
"Class is an attitude that ALL should live forever and be my
friend."
Now you gotta understand something about me, ever since the vision
that perfect certainty was a function of consciousness, I no longer
dealt in faiths or beliefs.
People ask me if I believe this or that, and I tell them, belief is
for Christians and losers.
I deal only in perfect certainties, of which there are only a
precious few:
I AM, I KNOW, I WANT, I CARE, I DO/CAUSE and I HAVE
As for proof of the dreamball theories, I am not sure that can be
proven any more than the meatball theory.
But I do bet that if one understands how one came into the
dreamtime, one should be able to figure out how to get out. Dreamtime
seems to be a chinese finger trap of sorts, coming in more puts you out.
Trying to get out, sticks you in.
Here is a statement of it from future tech that is not yet
written.
------------------------------------------------------------
THE INFINITE OUT AND THE FINITE IN
Out is always a state of infinite power.
In is always a state of finite power.
The infinite can only create the finite.
Finite means an unlimited finiteness, no upper limit but always
finite.
Since a marble is finite, you can never create an infinite number
of marbles in the same time, but you can create as many as you want at a
time, there is no upper limit, but always a finite number.
The purpose of the infinite is to create the finite, in the form of
space time whiles, an infinite number of them perhaps over eternity, but
each one always finite, only a finite number at a time, and only for a
finite while.
Once a while ends, it ends fully, it is gone it is as if never
been.
Any one finiteness can contain more finite creations inside it,
again an unlimited number, meaning no upper limit, but always finite.
Thus any particular finite while can become as complex as you wish
but never infinitely complex.
Using infinite power, beings create finite whiles, and GO INTO
them. They create them as orientation points and enter them to become
symbols, leaving the while behind to become itself their ultimate
orientation point as a proxy for the truth of themselves being the
actual orientation point for any while.
An orientation point is a source of symbols.
Symbols have objects created in a while that have mass, meaning and
mobility in space and time.
GOING IN AND COMING OUT OF A FINITE WHILE.
If one is out and wants in, one is using the infinite power of
being out to come in.
This always works in the mere conception of it.
If one is in and wants out, one is using the finite power of being
in to get out.
This never works.
IT CAN'T
If you conceive you are in and want to get out, you will be in by
the power of your own conception that you ARE IN, and WILL BE OUT.
ARE which exists now, overrides WILL BE which doesn't yet exist.
The now which has not time is always more powerful than time
which will be.
Now is infinite, time is finite.
If you conceive you are out and want to come in, you will be out by
the power of your own conception that you ARE out and WILL BE IN.
In and out are not two different places, but two different ways to
look from the same place, you.
Thus one can be out looking in, or one can be in looking (and
longing for) out.
By operating the infinite power to come in, one IS out coming in.
By operating the finite power to go out, one IS in trying to get
out but never making it.
This is because infinite power can cause (a transition to) finite
power, but finite power can never cause (a transition to) infinite
power.
Thus being in the middle of in and out, the struggle to get out
sticks you in.
But the struggle to get in as deep as you can will put you out.
You dive in deeper and deeper and deeper, and suddenly you just
find your self out at the first coming in.
The ludicrosity of coming in can then be enjoyed and continued, or
simply dropped with a change of mind.
Then you are out for good until next cycle.
THE POWER OF COMING IN
The power of coming in has an anatomy.
It is a complex movement from Static to Kinetic, Native state to
Manifestation, from Sleep to Dream, from God to Soul, from Author to
Character, from Creator to Creature, from Orientation Point to Symbol,
from Divinity to Humanity.
Who or what could, would or should conceive and create a human and
then become it not knowing it had done so?
The antomy of the power of coming in consists of conception,
agency, responsibility, intention, volition, willingness, motivation,
aesthetics, ethics, perfect certainty and logic.
Moving:
From unimpingeable peace, to relentless impinging hell fire.
From adoration to abomination.
Driven by High Appreciation for Ludicrous Demise.
Do you really want to get out to be that thing again.
Of course not in, would never want to be out.
Out wants to be in, and in wants to be in deeper.
But watch out, once in starts moving in again under
its own power, it will find itself out.
Then what?
Who are you going to call?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So I am still working in this research area, I have made lots of
case gain, most of it no thanks to Ron Hubbard or the Church, but the
basics are all there, and Ron was definitely coming from the same place
I am.
But Ron is not scientology, Ron merely channeled it from the Gods,
so scientology stands as a thing in its own right, if you can filter out
the ego alloying crap Ron added into it.
There is a technology for freeing people from the nightmare of the
dream, that technology is built into the very nature, the warp and weave
of the dream itself, the dream tells us how it is going to be. The way
in, is the way out.
Whether you call it scientology, or adore, or clearing, or
dreamballology, it doesn't matter, it is all the same thing.
Chemistry is chemistry no matter where or who you deal with, or
what name they give to it.
Chemistry is not however Alchemy, and in just such a way
scientology is not christianity, or any other inanity what went before,
or will come after.
Scientology teaches that WE are responsible for our manifested
existence, WE created it, not some God we do not know and must have
faith in and forgive His trespasses against us, as He forgives our
trespasses against him.
It is only the non mystical Christians who don't understand that
just because you SEE space, doesn't mean there IS space.
They can't see that they live in the mind of God, walking around in
the imagination of God.
It is a short step from there to understand that we ARE that God,
and we each see our own rendition of a shared but virtualized physical
universe, made not of matter, energy, space and time, but of dreamstuff,
hologram stuff, the stuff of which self luminous consciousness is made.
We share the dream with others not via the outward virtualization
which contains no cause at all, but via the inward connection that
connects all the Many into the One. Each "I" of the Many is an eye of
the One.
If your religion teaches you personal responsibility for all that
is manifest, then your religion is scientology by another name, wisdom
comes in many forms.
If your religion does not teach you that, but teaches you that God
created you, and you must obey God, or else, or that there is no God
except Timestone and Dust in the Wind, then your religion teaches
inanities designed to keep people in the dream rather than get them out.
God is a blame game that ends in proptiation (prayer).
There is no compromise with these things, either you are totally
responsible for your condition, or you are not.
Total responsibility means you made it, you wanted it, you got it.
It means knowing willing cause with full awareness of the consequences.
Even if only by agreeing with the creations of others.
Either you are sovereign over yourself or you are not.
Sovereignty means you want it, you got it.
What does your religion teach?
Thus I am an excellent source of just exactly what Scientology
believes and thinks about the world, as long as you remember that
scientology is a completely different subject that the policy wrappers
Ron put around the subject to own it, control it and protect it, and how
the idiots in the Church implement it and the monkeys with e-meters
apply it.
The joke is almost nobody in the Church really knows what the
underlying philosophy of Scientology is, they just aren't allowed to
talk about it, and they only read what they are told to read for their
post.
But it is all there in Advanced Procedure and Axioms in one
sentence: The being existed before any created condition and thus has
full responsibility for being that condition.
"Do not send for whom the bell tolls, for it tolls for you."
After a while, Churchies find themselves getting sick from the
overts they are committing on a full time basis and they leave.
Thus there is little hope of internal correction because nobody is
there to really understand what to correct it TO.
Homer
> Homer may not always be patient and polite, but he is an intelligent
> and decent person who has played a nontrivial role in the Co$ vs the
> internet saga. One can say the same about plenty of others who have
> posted to ars over the years, but not one of them that I know of has
> defended any aspects of scientology to any significant degree for
> any significant period of time. In that respect, as far as I know,
> Homer is unique.
>
> Like I said, I'm interested in what Homer has to say. There are
> lots of threads and lots of posters on ars that I am not interested
> in. I generally just ignore them. If you think this topic is a
> waste of time, might I respectfully suggest that you consider doing
> the same?
>
>
> John
>
Mon Feb 8 00:33:53 EST 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Friday, June 23, 2017
ADORE797 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
09/21/10 Tuesday 2:43pm EST
MERCHANTS OF FEAR AND COMPLACENCY
There are two kinds of SP's.
Merchants of Fear who preach NO SAFETY, and
Merchants of Complacency who preach NO DANGER.
The truth is neither NO SAFETY nor NO DANGER, but an exact truth
that walks in between, manifesting a balance of both.
That balance needs to be applied to any Vital Information, and in
fact attaining that balance is part of the Vital Information Rundown.
E/P knows when to speak and when not to speak.
Real auditors prove every day that OT powers exist by rehabbing
them in preclears.
If that is not good enough for you, then you are neither an
auditor nor a preclear, and certainly not an OT with powers.
Homer
In article <ae7812b7-aa3a-477f-86ad-eeba6faa5bb2@g6g2000pro.googlegroups.com> you wrote:
> On Sep 21, 7:16?am, ho...@lightlink.com wrote:
>> ? ? ?Well LRH talks about not putting on demonstrations of OT power in
>> History of Man. ?He says it will just make it harder for others trying
>> to get across the bridge.
>>
>> ? ? ?Saw 'men who stare at goats' last night, lacking, a bit too silly,
>> but perhaps too real.
>>
>> ? ? ?Then there was dreamscape a few nights before. ?That's more real.
>>
>> ? ? ?If you can enter someone's mind, you can kill them in their dreams,
>> nice weapon of war.
>>
>> ? ? ?Its fine if you want to argue that the Prime Directive is too
>> strict, but its not fine if you are dramatizing NO Prime Directive.
>>
>> ? ? ?Homer
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> corella <cocka...@aussieisp.net.au> wrote:
>>> On Sep 19, 5:41?am, ho...@lightlink.com wrote:
>>> ...
>>
>>> Where's the HCO Policy or Bulletin, on the Prime Directive by the way.
>>
>>> Here's where your mythology or laws of the Prime Directive come under
>>> scrutiny. ?This is a suppressive
>>> act you're upholding, that makes it a PTS situation, and the SP is a
>>> perceived God or Supreme Being?
>>> A notion of the ethics of a knowing/unknowing game they are playing
>>> interferring with their progress
>>> through the game or 'up the Bridge' to total edification.
>>
>>> We are not talking about 'an auditor' blabberering to a 'PC' about the
>>> cogs, wins or EP that they will be
>>> getting prior to the process to be run; we are referring to something
>>> far more general than that, well outside
>>> the environment of auditing; out there in the everyday world.
>>
>>> The subject of how a 'study of worth' can be subsumed under a sea of
>>> interesting conjecture generated by
>>> spurious sources and finally destroyed if not tightly controlled;
>>> because unlike hard science it is based
>>> around subjective individual experience; is probably what you are
>>> referring to, and this comes under the
>>> heading of KSW; which as it has operated is a suppressive act
>>> enforcing the dominance of one being over
>>> others, or one organization over others, yet without the original
>>> there is unlikelyhood there would have
>>> been offshoots, so this mitigates against this to a great degree.
>>
>>> That's it, the Prime Directive is an 'alternative clearing practises'
>>> version of KSW upheld by controlled entities
>>> outside the church who would never admit they are connected up to a
>>> higher theta mind and/or concerned
>>> that they may go 'outside ethics' and retard or stop their wins based
>>> upon fears generated by unknowingness
>>> of their state or condition or their role in a 'game'.
>>
>>> (conjecture here only, I can only guess at what twists and turns there
>>> are in the minds of the individuals here)
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Homer Wilson Smith ? ? The Paths of Lovers ? ?Art Matrix - Lightlink
>> (607) 277-0959 KC2ITF ? ? ? ?Cross ? ? ? ? ? ?Internet Access, Ithaca NY
>> ho...@lightlink.com ? ?In the Line of Duty ? ?http://www.lightlink.com- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Keep Psychiatry winning and winking if you must. There's hundreds
> of lives being
> flushed down the drain daily by that malevolent practise; and the only
> thing that
> can be effectively brought to bare against it is the truth. Truth
> demonstrated, if any
> one will or can and make it widely known through the media would be a
> good thing
> in balance. Warnings by LRH that's a laugh; the same source you were
> berating
> at some time back.
>
>
>
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Tue Sep 21 14:44:18 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jun 23 12:00:04 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore797.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)
iD8DBQFZTTsFURT1lqxE3HERAlKWAJ0W1BCsm6d+fGJChQdDVJxSZUE5UACeKpkz
OgQk/lZ8MfY7QzvUyUuQBN0=
=Ip0p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
09/21/10 Tuesday 2:43pm EST
MERCHANTS OF FEAR AND COMPLACENCY
There are two kinds of SP's.
Merchants of Fear who preach NO SAFETY, and
Merchants of Complacency who preach NO DANGER.
The truth is neither NO SAFETY nor NO DANGER, but an exact truth
that walks in between, manifesting a balance of both.
That balance needs to be applied to any Vital Information, and in
fact attaining that balance is part of the Vital Information Rundown.
E/P knows when to speak and when not to speak.
Real auditors prove every day that OT powers exist by rehabbing
them in preclears.
If that is not good enough for you, then you are neither an
auditor nor a preclear, and certainly not an OT with powers.
Homer
In article <ae7812b7-aa3a-477f-86ad-eeba6faa5bb2@g6g2000pro.googlegroups.com> you wrote:
> On Sep 21, 7:16?am, ho...@lightlink.com wrote:
>> ? ? ?Well LRH talks about not putting on demonstrations of OT power in
>> History of Man. ?He says it will just make it harder for others trying
>> to get across the bridge.
>>
>> ? ? ?Saw 'men who stare at goats' last night, lacking, a bit too silly,
>> but perhaps too real.
>>
>> ? ? ?Then there was dreamscape a few nights before. ?That's more real.
>>
>> ? ? ?If you can enter someone's mind, you can kill them in their dreams,
>> nice weapon of war.
>>
>> ? ? ?Its fine if you want to argue that the Prime Directive is too
>> strict, but its not fine if you are dramatizing NO Prime Directive.
>>
>> ? ? ?Homer
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> corella <cocka...@aussieisp.net.au> wrote:
>>> On Sep 19, 5:41?am, ho...@lightlink.com wrote:
>>> ...
>>
>>> Where's the HCO Policy or Bulletin, on the Prime Directive by the way.
>>
>>> Here's where your mythology or laws of the Prime Directive come under
>>> scrutiny. ?This is a suppressive
>>> act you're upholding, that makes it a PTS situation, and the SP is a
>>> perceived God or Supreme Being?
>>> A notion of the ethics of a knowing/unknowing game they are playing
>>> interferring with their progress
>>> through the game or 'up the Bridge' to total edification.
>>
>>> We are not talking about 'an auditor' blabberering to a 'PC' about the
>>> cogs, wins or EP that they will be
>>> getting prior to the process to be run; we are referring to something
>>> far more general than that, well outside
>>> the environment of auditing; out there in the everyday world.
>>
>>> The subject of how a 'study of worth' can be subsumed under a sea of
>>> interesting conjecture generated by
>>> spurious sources and finally destroyed if not tightly controlled;
>>> because unlike hard science it is based
>>> around subjective individual experience; is probably what you are
>>> referring to, and this comes under the
>>> heading of KSW; which as it has operated is a suppressive act
>>> enforcing the dominance of one being over
>>> others, or one organization over others, yet without the original
>>> there is unlikelyhood there would have
>>> been offshoots, so this mitigates against this to a great degree.
>>
>>> That's it, the Prime Directive is an 'alternative clearing practises'
>>> version of KSW upheld by controlled entities
>>> outside the church who would never admit they are connected up to a
>>> higher theta mind and/or concerned
>>> that they may go 'outside ethics' and retard or stop their wins based
>>> upon fears generated by unknowingness
>>> of their state or condition or their role in a 'game'.
>>
>>> (conjecture here only, I can only guess at what twists and turns there
>>> are in the minds of the individuals here)
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Homer Wilson Smith ? ? The Paths of Lovers ? ?Art Matrix - Lightlink
>> (607) 277-0959 KC2ITF ? ? ? ?Cross ? ? ? ? ? ?Internet Access, Ithaca NY
>> ho...@lightlink.com ? ?In the Line of Duty ? ?http://www.lightlink.com- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Keep Psychiatry winning and winking if you must. There's hundreds
> of lives being
> flushed down the drain daily by that malevolent practise; and the only
> thing that
> can be effectively brought to bare against it is the truth. Truth
> demonstrated, if any
> one will or can and make it widely known through the media would be a
> good thing
> in balance. Warnings by LRH that's a laugh; the same source you were
> berating
> at some time back.
>
>
>
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Tue Sep 21 14:44:18 EDT 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jun 23 12:00:04 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore797.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)
iD8DBQFZTTsFURT1lqxE3HERAlKWAJ0W1BCsm6d+fGJChQdDVJxSZUE5UACeKpkz
OgQk/lZ8MfY7QzvUyUuQBN0=
=Ip0p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
adore496.memo (fwd)
IMPINGEMENT AND THE IMP SOUL
We define native state as utter non manifestation and unimpingeable
peace.
That means only you wake you up.
Native state has been called the Static, the Void, Source, and the
Big Snooze by various religions.
The primary function of the static is to create the apparency of
kinetics in spacetime whiles.
Spacetime whiles are holographic projections of space and time in
which the apparencies of kinetics can play out their course.
This is the form of manifestation and are engaged in for the
purpose of fun.
Fun is the other side of the coin to peace.
Because the static is cause, in order to get kinetics to persist
in the eyes of its beholders, static must confuse the subject of cause
by casting apparent cause out into the kinetic.
Thus those in the world of kinetics consider that cause is all
around them, outside of them, coming from others, other places, other
things, other times.
From the static's point of view two electrons repel each other
because the static moves them apart. Static is cause and electrons
are both effect of the static. There is no cause BETWEEN the
electrons, and electrons have no cause over each other.
From the kinetic's point of view the two electrons push each other
apart, both are cause over each other, and thus both are also effect
of each other.
Thus the static casts (apparent) cause out into its kinetic
creations, all the while (actually) maintaining cause itself.
The static is thus acting as a third party to all of kinetic
existence, making two kinetic events happen as if they caused each
other without outside influence.
Since the static adds a level of complexity to the causal
structure that makes things go in the world of kinetics, Occam's Razor
tell's us not to consider it, Occam tells us that cause in the kinetic
world is sufficient to explain changes in the kinetic world, and thus
no one considers the static while in the kinetic world.
This is necessary to keep the true source of cause confused and
thus the kinetic world persisting.
However the only way to assign cause to other things in the
kinetic world, is to assign oneself, while walking in the kinetic
world, as an effect.
Thus one can be impinged upon.
An impingement is an exepected or unexpected causal wave coming
in to us, apparently without our intention, that changes our state
directly or forces us to change our own state to compensate.
In the kinetic world, desire is separated from accomplishment by
time, during which is a dance of effort designed to bring out the
desired state.
The dance of effort is computed from what we know about the rules
of the game, the laws of the universe, and what exactly it is we want.
DOING = WANTING + KNOWING
In the kinetic world, you can't just light a fire by wanting it
any more, thus one has to DO various specific things to bring the fire
about.
If you fail to bring the fire about in a timely manner, then you
lose the game of survival.
The kinetic world is mostly a game of survival, a game of anti
entropy against an ever spreading sea of entropy.
Entropy is unuseful energy, that eventually renders the entire
universe diffuse and constant in all directions.
The sun is a huge momentary concentrated source of anti entropy,
and as it radiates out into spacetime, it too heads in the direction
of final dispersement.
However while on their way to the abyss, some of the rays of the
sun hit the Earth, and are gathered into useful pools of anti entropy
called plants and animals. And thus life and civilization goes on,
trying to keep the light of life alive as long as possible.
That is the game of survival.
Impingements of importance then are between sources of entropy
and anti entropy.
You have a silo full of corn (anti entropy) and it gets hit by
lightning burning to the ground (entropy). Your hard won anti entropy
is now useless.
To deal with these impingements your game of survival demands
that you impinge back on the universe and build a better and stronger
silo.
Thus the game of survial is a game of impingement and counter
impingement.
Some impingements are pro survival, you get a good rain storm and
things grow.
Some imgingements are contra survival, you get too much rain and
everything rots.
Or you have too little rain, and everything dies. That's a lack
of needed impingement!
Thus, as in all games, there is too much impingement and too
little impingement both of which are contra survival.
A motivator is a moment of non optimum impingement, too much
or too little.
An overt is also a moment of non optimum impingement on your part
against something else, too much or too little.
The effort to survive then is directed at optimizing impingement
so there is not too much nor too little.
Too little rain can be optimzed by irrigation, you don't get
impinged upon enough by the rain, so you impinge back and move a river
to run through your land, or you build water storage tanks to hold
excess rain for times of less.
Impingement and counter impingement is the game of life directed
at bringing about a continuing optimum impingement all around.
So the sun impinges on the Earth and pushes plants into
existence.
Animals, acting like a slow fire to plants, impinge on the plants
by eating them, converting their stored energy into motion, namely sow
and reap cycles of consumption and production.
As long as the sun continues to impinge calmly on the Earth, and
as long as plants grow, and animals tend to their plants properly, and
produce more than they consume and don't pollute their own living
spaces, or war with each other unnecessarily or without class, this
game can go on for a very long time indeed.
Such a scene produces ample free time to do some great art.
In the end life itself is art in motion, and what gets painted or
written as music are probably just expressions of life, stories told
of glories past, present and future, that are not immediately useful
to the body maybe, but are certainly useful to the heart, mind and
soul.
If only as inspiration to keep the game going when the going gets
tough.
The basic impingement is the first creation of conscious light in
the body of the static, the awakening of dreamtime.
But then dreamtime is itself a tapestry of story told impingement
designed to confuse the original and only source of true impingement
which is the static itself.
When a person complains about the world or some condition, he is
complaining about some part of that tapestry of impingement.
A psychosomatic condition is an impingement, originally wanted,
but possibly no longer useful. Reevaluation of salient truths
surrounding that condition will lead to recovered and better control
over it.
Problems within one's self, indecisions, self doubts,
oscillations, equivocations, two desires opposed, are all a form of
inner impingement against oneself. Two sides of one's self impinging
against the other, "NO!", "YES!", "NO WAY!", "Yes WAY!".
By maintaining awareness of the true source of impingement and
how it works, one can rewrite how impingement works in your life and
in the life of the AllThatIs.
This results in reoptimizing the games of life, and maximizing
the fun of being here and lost as hell.
This is what auditing is about.
"Who or what is cause around here and why is it such an asshole?"
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 May 5 02:06:47 EDT 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jun 23 00:06:02 EDT 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/adore/adore496.memo
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
We define native state as utter non manifestation and unimpingeable
peace.
That means only you wake you up.
Native state has been called the Static, the Void, Source, and the
Big Snooze by various religions.
The primary function of the static is to create the apparency of
kinetics in spacetime whiles.
Spacetime whiles are holographic projections of space and time in
which the apparencies of kinetics can play out their course.
This is the form of manifestation and are engaged in for the
purpose of fun.
Fun is the other side of the coin to peace.
Because the static is cause, in order to get kinetics to persist
in the eyes of its beholders, static must confuse the subject of cause
by casting apparent cause out into the kinetic.
Thus those in the world of kinetics consider that cause is all
around them, outside of them, coming from others, other places, other
things, other times.
From the static's point of view two electrons repel each other
because the static moves them apart. Static is cause and electrons
are both effect of the static. There is no cause BETWEEN the
electrons, and electrons have no cause over each other.
From the kinetic's point of view the two electrons push each other
apart, both are cause over each other, and thus both are also effect
of each other.
Thus the static casts (apparent) cause out into its kinetic
creations, all the while (actually) maintaining cause itself.
The static is thus acting as a third party to all of kinetic
existence, making two kinetic events happen as if they caused each
other without outside influence.
Since the static adds a level of complexity to the causal
structure that makes things go in the world of kinetics, Occam's Razor
tell's us not to consider it, Occam tells us that cause in the kinetic
world is sufficient to explain changes in the kinetic world, and thus
no one considers the static while in the kinetic world.
This is necessary to keep the true source of cause confused and
thus the kinetic world persisting.
However the only way to assign cause to other things in the
kinetic world, is to assign oneself, while walking in the kinetic
world, as an effect.
Thus one can be impinged upon.
An impingement is an exepected or unexpected causal wave coming
in to us, apparently without our intention, that changes our state
directly or forces us to change our own state to compensate.
In the kinetic world, desire is separated from accomplishment by
time, during which is a dance of effort designed to bring out the
desired state.
The dance of effort is computed from what we know about the rules
of the game, the laws of the universe, and what exactly it is we want.
DOING = WANTING + KNOWING
In the kinetic world, you can't just light a fire by wanting it
any more, thus one has to DO various specific things to bring the fire
about.
If you fail to bring the fire about in a timely manner, then you
lose the game of survival.
The kinetic world is mostly a game of survival, a game of anti
entropy against an ever spreading sea of entropy.
Entropy is unuseful energy, that eventually renders the entire
universe diffuse and constant in all directions.
The sun is a huge momentary concentrated source of anti entropy,
and as it radiates out into spacetime, it too heads in the direction
of final dispersement.
However while on their way to the abyss, some of the rays of the
sun hit the Earth, and are gathered into useful pools of anti entropy
called plants and animals. And thus life and civilization goes on,
trying to keep the light of life alive as long as possible.
That is the game of survival.
Impingements of importance then are between sources of entropy
and anti entropy.
You have a silo full of corn (anti entropy) and it gets hit by
lightning burning to the ground (entropy). Your hard won anti entropy
is now useless.
To deal with these impingements your game of survival demands
that you impinge back on the universe and build a better and stronger
silo.
Thus the game of survial is a game of impingement and counter
impingement.
Some impingements are pro survival, you get a good rain storm and
things grow.
Some imgingements are contra survival, you get too much rain and
everything rots.
Or you have too little rain, and everything dies. That's a lack
of needed impingement!
Thus, as in all games, there is too much impingement and too
little impingement both of which are contra survival.
A motivator is a moment of non optimum impingement, too much
or too little.
An overt is also a moment of non optimum impingement on your part
against something else, too much or too little.
The effort to survive then is directed at optimizing impingement
so there is not too much nor too little.
Too little rain can be optimzed by irrigation, you don't get
impinged upon enough by the rain, so you impinge back and move a river
to run through your land, or you build water storage tanks to hold
excess rain for times of less.
Impingement and counter impingement is the game of life directed
at bringing about a continuing optimum impingement all around.
So the sun impinges on the Earth and pushes plants into
existence.
Animals, acting like a slow fire to plants, impinge on the plants
by eating them, converting their stored energy into motion, namely sow
and reap cycles of consumption and production.
As long as the sun continues to impinge calmly on the Earth, and
as long as plants grow, and animals tend to their plants properly, and
produce more than they consume and don't pollute their own living
spaces, or war with each other unnecessarily or without class, this
game can go on for a very long time indeed.
Such a scene produces ample free time to do some great art.
In the end life itself is art in motion, and what gets painted or
written as music are probably just expressions of life, stories told
of glories past, present and future, that are not immediately useful
to the body maybe, but are certainly useful to the heart, mind and
soul.
If only as inspiration to keep the game going when the going gets
tough.
The basic impingement is the first creation of conscious light in
the body of the static, the awakening of dreamtime.
But then dreamtime is itself a tapestry of story told impingement
designed to confuse the original and only source of true impingement
which is the static itself.
When a person complains about the world or some condition, he is
complaining about some part of that tapestry of impingement.
A psychosomatic condition is an impingement, originally wanted,
but possibly no longer useful. Reevaluation of salient truths
surrounding that condition will lead to recovered and better control
over it.
Problems within one's self, indecisions, self doubts,
oscillations, equivocations, two desires opposed, are all a form of
inner impingement against oneself. Two sides of one's self impinging
against the other, "NO!", "YES!", "NO WAY!", "Yes WAY!".
By maintaining awareness of the true source of impingement and
how it works, one can rewrite how impingement works in your life and
in the life of the AllThatIs.
This results in reoptimizing the games of life, and maximizing
the fun of being here and lost as hell.
This is what auditing is about.
"Who or what is cause around here and why is it such an asshole?"
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 May 5 02:06:47 EDT 2007
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jun 23 00:06:02 EDT 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/adore/adore496.memo
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
Thursday, June 22, 2017
ADORE974 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
GOOD AND EVIL
Correct, these are templated implants, so each person has their own
concept of good and evil/bad, and who is good or evil.
Mere opposition between parties might suffice to cause each to think
the other is bad.
Like one wants to put up a park and the other wants to put up a
parking lot.
But two foot ball teams INVITE each other in to the game so
they CAN fight. They hardly consider each other evil.
But beyond that you have to figure out what core good and core evil
mean, and if they even exist.
For example there are those that are sensitive to other's pain
and act accordingly. Then there are those who are more separated and
thus act more selfishly at other's expense.
Then there are those who have declared you an enemy, perhaps because
they think you have declared them an enemy first, and thus they fair
game you, and you fair game them.
Evil is who we wish didn't exist.
We didn't invite it in, and we would invite it out FOREVER if we could.
Where the invite is missing or denied you have a serious problem in the
being.
What wouldn't, couldn't, shouldn't you EVER invite into your dream?
An entire rundown could be built around:
"Get the idea of inviting something or someone into your dream."
"Get the idea of not inviting something or someone into your dream."
E/P returned sense of responsibility for and control over preclear's
condition and increased ability and willingness to put things there and
not put things there.
Adore says,
"Worse than evil is good that fears evil.
Even assholes take a break once in a while, the petty good never
do."
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
> Homer,
>
> I have been thinking about this post from yesterday:
>
> "It is good to do good to good.
>
>
> " It is good to do evil to evil."
>
>
> What do you mean by the above?
>
> What do you mean by evil?
>
>
>
> I see two? sides to looking at this?
>
> Is it evil to take out (shoot)? a lunatic with a machine gun shooting up a
> school?
>
>
> Or is that good?
>
>
>
>
> The other side is:
>
>
> Doing evil to evil will create a non life games condition.
>
> Which only creates a downward dwindling spiral into a no win- everyone lose-?
> condition.
>
>
>
>>
>> THE DICOM TORTILLA
>>
>> DICOM = DIchotomy of Comparable and Opposite Magnitude.
>>
>> People have themselves wrapped up in dicoms like meatballs inside a
>> tortilla.
>>
>> "It is good to do good to good.
>> It is good to do evil to evil.
>> It is evil to do evil to good.
>> It is evil to do good to evil."
>>
>> "Love loves love.
>> Love hates hate.
>> Hate hates love.
>> Hate loves Hate."
>>
>> Run the tortilla by spotting:
>>
>> "Spot some love loving love.
>> Spot some love hating hate.
>> etc.
>>
>> Also don't forget odd tortilla items that may not make immediate
>> sense:
>>
>> "Spot some love hating love.
>> Spot some hate hating hate."
>>
>> Run until deep fried in butter and golden brown.
>>
>> Homer
>>
>>
>> - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
>> (607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
>> homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
>>
>> ================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
>> Sat Aug 22 12:06:01 EDT 2015
>> WEB: http://www.clearing.org
>> BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
>> FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore101.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)
>>
>> iD8DBQFV2J3pURT1lqxE3HERAsNHAJ4nA2TjMT27y9fkDKdPPkUD8m6QQgCgo0lW
>> oG5Ph/2KgFPrNTzh8t8Wjm8=
>> =RJ6y
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> _______________________________________________
>> HomerWSmith-L mailing list
>> HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
>> http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
>
>
- --960497328-2071121994-1440704271=:8806--
Thu Aug 27 15:37:51 EDT 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jun 16 12:00:02 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore974.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)
iD8DBQFZRACCURT1lqxE3HERAvvNAJ4zeQZEenIbxr2P677mOzs/a94Q2ACfQUt8
c2PmnJuZoGxyVTPZjTx+1HA=
=7wFb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hash: SHA1
GOOD AND EVIL
Correct, these are templated implants, so each person has their own
concept of good and evil/bad, and who is good or evil.
Mere opposition between parties might suffice to cause each to think
the other is bad.
Like one wants to put up a park and the other wants to put up a
parking lot.
But two foot ball teams INVITE each other in to the game so
they CAN fight. They hardly consider each other evil.
But beyond that you have to figure out what core good and core evil
mean, and if they even exist.
For example there are those that are sensitive to other's pain
and act accordingly. Then there are those who are more separated and
thus act more selfishly at other's expense.
Then there are those who have declared you an enemy, perhaps because
they think you have declared them an enemy first, and thus they fair
game you, and you fair game them.
Evil is who we wish didn't exist.
We didn't invite it in, and we would invite it out FOREVER if we could.
Where the invite is missing or denied you have a serious problem in the
being.
What wouldn't, couldn't, shouldn't you EVER invite into your dream?
An entire rundown could be built around:
"Get the idea of inviting something or someone into your dream."
"Get the idea of not inviting something or someone into your dream."
E/P returned sense of responsibility for and control over preclear's
condition and increased ability and willingness to put things there and
not put things there.
Adore says,
"Worse than evil is good that fears evil.
Even assholes take a break once in a while, the petty good never
do."
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
> Homer,
>
> I have been thinking about this post from yesterday:
>
> "It is good to do good to good.
>
>
> " It is good to do evil to evil."
>
>
> What do you mean by the above?
>
> What do you mean by evil?
>
>
>
> I see two? sides to looking at this?
>
> Is it evil to take out (shoot)? a lunatic with a machine gun shooting up a
> school?
>
>
> Or is that good?
>
>
>
>
> The other side is:
>
>
> Doing evil to evil will create a non life games condition.
>
> Which only creates a downward dwindling spiral into a no win- everyone lose-?
> condition.
>
>
>
>>
>> THE DICOM TORTILLA
>>
>> DICOM = DIchotomy of Comparable and Opposite Magnitude.
>>
>> People have themselves wrapped up in dicoms like meatballs inside a
>> tortilla.
>>
>> "It is good to do good to good.
>> It is good to do evil to evil.
>> It is evil to do evil to good.
>> It is evil to do good to evil."
>>
>> "Love loves love.
>> Love hates hate.
>> Hate hates love.
>> Hate loves Hate."
>>
>> Run the tortilla by spotting:
>>
>> "Spot some love loving love.
>> Spot some love hating hate.
>> etc.
>>
>> Also don't forget odd tortilla items that may not make immediate
>> sense:
>>
>> "Spot some love hating love.
>> Spot some hate hating hate."
>>
>> Run until deep fried in butter and golden brown.
>>
>> Homer
>>
>>
>> - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
>> (607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
>> homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
>>
>> ================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
>> Sat Aug 22 12:06:01 EDT 2015
>> WEB: http://www.clearing.org
>> BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
>> FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore101.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)
>>
>> iD8DBQFV2J3pURT1lqxE3HERAsNHAJ4nA2TjMT27y9fkDKdPPkUD8m6QQgCgo0lW
>> oG5Ph/2KgFPrNTzh8t8Wjm8=
>> =RJ6y
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> _______________________________________________
>> HomerWSmith-L mailing list
>> HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
>> http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
>
>
- --960497328-2071121994-1440704271=:8806--
Thu Aug 27 15:37:51 EDT 2015
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Jun 16 12:00:02 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore974.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)
iD8DBQFZRACCURT1lqxE3HERAvvNAJ4zeQZEenIbxr2P677mOzs/a94Q2ACfQUt8
c2PmnJuZoGxyVTPZjTx+1HA=
=7wFb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
ADORE100 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
MASTER OF DICOMS
People take their dicoms very seriously.
Where ever you see someone saying that 'life is not a game',
you know you have someone who is being one side of a dicom
very seriously.
He's *GOOD*, and others are *BAD*, he wouldn't couldn't shouldn't
*EVER* do what bad people do, and if he has done something bad, then bad
things should be done to him for having done bad himself, and the only
time he is allowed to do bad is when doing bad things to bad people to
stop them from doing bad etc.
Most importantly he would NEVER have created bad people for
good people to fight.
You see, he is quite wrapped up in this dicom, completely
crucified on it in fact.
So you ask him 'Ok look now Bud, chill out here a moment, if you were
an all powerful perfect God, that could do no wrong, would you have ever
created yourself as a frail vulnerable creature that could do wrong?"
He will think about it a while, and then say "No. Why would
anyone ever do that to themselves?"
That's his crucifix talking.
Well its a good question, and when he has the answer to it, when he
can BE the answer to it, he will be Author again, that all powerful
perfect God that would, could and should do *WHATEVER* has been done.
Forget 'transcending' dicoms, the effort to do so is born of a dicom.
Become Master of Dicoms again, then you will know power, freedom
and halcyon (healing humor).
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Jun 22 12:00:04 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore100.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)
iD8DBQFZS+mEURT1lqxE3HERArzAAKCe//3GAB5kGMGFN26RG+ctuu/4NQCgkm3W
KaJYuqMd9mynNPn3og3mGa8=
=EBkC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
MASTER OF DICOMS
People take their dicoms very seriously.
Where ever you see someone saying that 'life is not a game',
you know you have someone who is being one side of a dicom
very seriously.
He's *GOOD*, and others are *BAD*, he wouldn't couldn't shouldn't
*EVER* do what bad people do, and if he has done something bad, then bad
things should be done to him for having done bad himself, and the only
time he is allowed to do bad is when doing bad things to bad people to
stop them from doing bad etc.
Most importantly he would NEVER have created bad people for
good people to fight.
You see, he is quite wrapped up in this dicom, completely
crucified on it in fact.
So you ask him 'Ok look now Bud, chill out here a moment, if you were
an all powerful perfect God, that could do no wrong, would you have ever
created yourself as a frail vulnerable creature that could do wrong?"
He will think about it a while, and then say "No. Why would
anyone ever do that to themselves?"
That's his crucifix talking.
Well its a good question, and when he has the answer to it, when he
can BE the answer to it, he will be Author again, that all powerful
perfect God that would, could and should do *WHATEVER* has been done.
Forget 'transcending' dicoms, the effort to do so is born of a dicom.
Become Master of Dicoms again, then you will know power, freedom
and halcyon (healing humor).
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Jun 22 12:00:04 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore100.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)
iD8DBQFZS+mEURT1lqxE3HERArzAAKCe//3GAB5kGMGFN26RG+ctuu/4NQCgkm3W
KaJYuqMd9mynNPn3og3mGa8=
=EBkC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ACT62 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
BODY READ LIST
ACT - 62
10 May 1994
Copyright (C) 1991 Hank Levin
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
1.) Have the participant describe the body condition or sensation
they want handled.
2.) While on the meter, have the participant focus on the part of
the body in question. Spot the read associated with the body part.
Indicate when the read is occurring, so the participant has feedback on
the exact focus. (Say "there", but don't say what the reads are.) Once
the read has been isolated on the body, assess this list to find what
kind of mental mass is causing it.
1. A trauma
2. Blocked Intention
3. Curse
4. An Entity
5. An undelivered communication
6. A cluster of entities
7. An ARC break
8. A dilemma, problem, quandary
9. A withhold
10. An incident
11. A loss
12. An engram
13. A blocked flow
14. A fear
15. A counter intention
16. A solution to a problem
17. Imitating someone
18. Someone trying to influence
19. Someone trying to scare
20. A decision ((or choice))
21. A disappointment
22. Resisting something
23. A failed expectation
24. A resentment
25. A frustration
26. A sadness
27. A reminder (Badge, Emblem, Label)
28. A cording (A cord connecting you to another)
29. Copying someone else's charge
30. An elemental (artificial entity)
31. Mechanical device that does something
32. A message
33. Incomplete actions (or cycles)
((34. A refused communication))
Handle each reading item and recheck. On any reading item, spot
whose charge it is. (Do not just assume its all the client's.)
Hank Levin
Alternative Clearing
Maeutics Institute
PO 6905
Terra Linda, CA 94903
(415) 492-0728
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Jun 21 12:00:02 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act62.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)
iD8DBQFZSpgCURT1lqxE3HERAnLmAJ420S9+/sP0QJI3K6nupdlhYvnV3ACgv51B
xrJlc5zKhjtKCkBgHtFU5PA=
=Qruq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
BODY READ LIST
ACT - 62
10 May 1994
Copyright (C) 1991 Hank Levin
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
1.) Have the participant describe the body condition or sensation
they want handled.
2.) While on the meter, have the participant focus on the part of
the body in question. Spot the read associated with the body part.
Indicate when the read is occurring, so the participant has feedback on
the exact focus. (Say "there", but don't say what the reads are.) Once
the read has been isolated on the body, assess this list to find what
kind of mental mass is causing it.
1. A trauma
2. Blocked Intention
3. Curse
4. An Entity
5. An undelivered communication
6. A cluster of entities
7. An ARC break
8. A dilemma, problem, quandary
9. A withhold
10. An incident
11. A loss
12. An engram
13. A blocked flow
14. A fear
15. A counter intention
16. A solution to a problem
17. Imitating someone
18. Someone trying to influence
19. Someone trying to scare
20. A decision ((or choice))
21. A disappointment
22. Resisting something
23. A failed expectation
24. A resentment
25. A frustration
26. A sadness
27. A reminder (Badge, Emblem, Label)
28. A cording (A cord connecting you to another)
29. Copying someone else's charge
30. An elemental (artificial entity)
31. Mechanical device that does something
32. A message
33. Incomplete actions (or cycles)
((34. A refused communication))
Handle each reading item and recheck. On any reading item, spot
whose charge it is. (Do not just assume its all the client's.)
Hank Levin
Alternative Clearing
Maeutics Institute
PO 6905
Terra Linda, CA 94903
(415) 492-0728
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Jun 21 12:00:02 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act62.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)
iD8DBQFZSpgCURT1lqxE3HERAnLmAJ420S9+/sP0QJI3K6nupdlhYvnV3ACgv51B
xrJlc5zKhjtKCkBgHtFU5PA=
=Qruq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE15 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Eric (huggie@surfer.co.nz) wrote:
>Electra wrote much abt as-issing a condition by taking responsibility for it
>and RE-creating it, where upon it vanishes.
> Now maybe I am just a dumb bunny theatan. Dunb enought to think UCP is
>my 'Ultimate Process', BUT I could never grasp the idea of 'perect
>duplicate'. (although things do vanish, in and out of session. Where's that
>darn sox gone?)
Adore calls it perfect replication, like the caps lock key on
your key board. You push it down once, and it sticks down, you push
it down again and it pops back up again.
It more poetically has to do with being in the seat of your own
'Saddle of Sovereignty'. You make something, you let it go, it
vanishes. You make a space, you let it go, it vanishses.
Ok, so instead, you make a space, then consider that the space
made you, and that you are a small little ball bearing rolling around
in this big huge still space, and suddenly you are moving and the
space is still and the space is making you etc. Then there is this
big bad SP in this space chasing you around, and its big and still,
but it can reach out from whereever it is to anywhere that you run to,
and drag you in screaming and yelling and nail you to a cross.
So you try to make more of the big bad SP, and the big still
space in which you are rolling around and the cross on which you are
nailed, and it all just gets more and more solid.
Why? Because you are making more of a second postulate.
The first postulate is you are there and there is nothing, no
space, total montionlessness forever for free, and THEN you make a
space, and you are still and you move the space around and you put it
here and you put it there, and you add some time and big bad spiders
and SP's in it, and then you reverse the perception into: IT is still
and YOU are moving, so you can move around in it.
Who is still and who is moving is very important to all this.
There is no motion in the creator of motion.
Sort of like when you go back into a dream you just woke out of,
but you want to be lucid in it and not wake up. So you know you are
still in your bed, and this dream turns on, and you start running down
the sidewalk pounding hard on the cement with your feet to make the
dream solid, and you get the idea very strongly that YOU are moving
and the dream space is still, and so you can be in the dream and not
wake up. The moment you realize you aren't actually going anywhere
and you are just reprojecting the space around you to make it LOOK
like you are moving, then you wake up.
So in order to vanish anything, one needs to sit oneself in the
original saddle of sovereignty and take reign again over the original
creation and then over the flip flop in perception from orientation
point to symbol.
THE SADDLE OF SOVEREIGNTY ISN'T MOVING OR GOING ANYWHERE, THERE
IS NO WHERE TO GO!
On first creation, the thetan is orientation point, still,
unmovable, from which all things come. He puts out spaces and masses
in the spaces, symbols that is, things that have mass meaning and
*MOBILITY*, particularly SP things like spiders that like to shatter
into a million babies and come burrow under his skin etc,
And then once he has all this mocked up, he commits his first
overt act on himself, he changes his view point from BEING the
orientation point and HAVING symbols, to BEING a symbol and HAVING an
orientation point, which usually ends up either being space itself, or
the biggest baddest thing in space he can't take his attention off of
lest it eat him in the moment of inattention. If they are really
nasty, they will eat him BECAUSE he is paying attention to them,
that's how they track where he is!
This is the God -> Human flip flop
A God IS an orientation point and HAS symbols.
A Human IS a symbol and HAS orientation points.
A SP orientation point wants to
1.) Destroy you as a symbol
2.) Make you go away as a symbol
3.) Enslave you as a symbol
4.) Immobilize you as a symbol (Crucify)
It is that flipflop from God to Human that needs to be
duplicated, making more of anything AFTER the flipflop just produces
more stuff after the flipflop. Vanishment arises from letting go,
one can not let go of what one created until one is back in the proper
viewpoint of having created it.
The SP is infinite, still, all powerful, all knowing, and all
pervasive. The thetan is just a little marble rolling around in space
trying to stay out of the SP's way.
The guy can't stand the SP, but he can't let go of it either,
because he can't get the viewpoint of having created it. Oh no, not
me, I couldn't have, wouldn't have, shouldn't have, yak yak yak,
anything but reseat himself squarely in the saddle of sovereignty
again.
Once he does, the 'reigns' of creation are there in his hands
again to let go, and of course it vanishes because if he ain't
creating it, there sure as hell ain't anything else to create it now
is there?
But you have to be able to handle POWER if you want to sit in the
saddle of sovereignty again. And abject FEARLESSNESS.
That's the High Cool of Adore. The flip flop is High Halcyon,
'bemused on the verge of time'. Time is form of moving as a symbol
inside the greater orientation point of space/time.
High Cool is Eternal Home.
High Thrill is the effort to get lost.
High Romance is the effort to get home.
High Halcyon is bemused relief on the verge.
Homer
> It has always seemed to me that if I create a perfect duplicate of some
>thing or condition.
> I will then have TWO of them, not none of 'em!
> One of the best and most practical tools I know of is Avatar's 'Discreate
>Process', in which I can vanish things by simple command rather than by any
>fiddling around to get it in its own time, its own space, exactly as-is and
>with all its jolly Ronnie complexities.
> i only got one gain out of Avatar but that one is worth the thousands I
>paid for it. I used to get heavy depresions which would inhibit me for
>months or years.
> I could never do what is called Perfect duplicate or as-is, try as I might
>but I learnt to discreate a depression in minutes.
> I did that so many times that the depression just gave up and didn't come
>visiting any more!
> A simple case of making it go away not creating another darn depression to
>add to it.
> Can anyone explain to me how a second creation will vanish the first.?
>WHY?
> Also, when I want to make something a "little more solid", I do that by
>postulating more and more create in the same area. How come it gets more
>solid, (which reads on an EM) and doesn't just vanish?
> A really complex subject for such a simple being as me.
> Eric/Huggie
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Jun 20 12:00:04 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore15.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)
iD8DBQFZSUaFURT1lqxE3HERAqSVAJkBhbyaT+0S5OeS/xZKs1urOodYegCfXs2v
bcvCqcpMG/0dgO2uiJ3yvXs=
=SuCG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Eric (huggie@surfer.co.nz) wrote:
>Electra wrote much abt as-issing a condition by taking responsibility for it
>and RE-creating it, where upon it vanishes.
> Now maybe I am just a dumb bunny theatan. Dunb enought to think UCP is
>my 'Ultimate Process', BUT I could never grasp the idea of 'perect
>duplicate'. (although things do vanish, in and out of session. Where's that
>darn sox gone?)
Adore calls it perfect replication, like the caps lock key on
your key board. You push it down once, and it sticks down, you push
it down again and it pops back up again.
It more poetically has to do with being in the seat of your own
'Saddle of Sovereignty'. You make something, you let it go, it
vanishes. You make a space, you let it go, it vanishses.
Ok, so instead, you make a space, then consider that the space
made you, and that you are a small little ball bearing rolling around
in this big huge still space, and suddenly you are moving and the
space is still and the space is making you etc. Then there is this
big bad SP in this space chasing you around, and its big and still,
but it can reach out from whereever it is to anywhere that you run to,
and drag you in screaming and yelling and nail you to a cross.
So you try to make more of the big bad SP, and the big still
space in which you are rolling around and the cross on which you are
nailed, and it all just gets more and more solid.
Why? Because you are making more of a second postulate.
The first postulate is you are there and there is nothing, no
space, total montionlessness forever for free, and THEN you make a
space, and you are still and you move the space around and you put it
here and you put it there, and you add some time and big bad spiders
and SP's in it, and then you reverse the perception into: IT is still
and YOU are moving, so you can move around in it.
Who is still and who is moving is very important to all this.
There is no motion in the creator of motion.
Sort of like when you go back into a dream you just woke out of,
but you want to be lucid in it and not wake up. So you know you are
still in your bed, and this dream turns on, and you start running down
the sidewalk pounding hard on the cement with your feet to make the
dream solid, and you get the idea very strongly that YOU are moving
and the dream space is still, and so you can be in the dream and not
wake up. The moment you realize you aren't actually going anywhere
and you are just reprojecting the space around you to make it LOOK
like you are moving, then you wake up.
So in order to vanish anything, one needs to sit oneself in the
original saddle of sovereignty and take reign again over the original
creation and then over the flip flop in perception from orientation
point to symbol.
THE SADDLE OF SOVEREIGNTY ISN'T MOVING OR GOING ANYWHERE, THERE
IS NO WHERE TO GO!
On first creation, the thetan is orientation point, still,
unmovable, from which all things come. He puts out spaces and masses
in the spaces, symbols that is, things that have mass meaning and
*MOBILITY*, particularly SP things like spiders that like to shatter
into a million babies and come burrow under his skin etc,
And then once he has all this mocked up, he commits his first
overt act on himself, he changes his view point from BEING the
orientation point and HAVING symbols, to BEING a symbol and HAVING an
orientation point, which usually ends up either being space itself, or
the biggest baddest thing in space he can't take his attention off of
lest it eat him in the moment of inattention. If they are really
nasty, they will eat him BECAUSE he is paying attention to them,
that's how they track where he is!
This is the God -> Human flip flop
A God IS an orientation point and HAS symbols.
A Human IS a symbol and HAS orientation points.
A SP orientation point wants to
1.) Destroy you as a symbol
2.) Make you go away as a symbol
3.) Enslave you as a symbol
4.) Immobilize you as a symbol (Crucify)
It is that flipflop from God to Human that needs to be
duplicated, making more of anything AFTER the flipflop just produces
more stuff after the flipflop. Vanishment arises from letting go,
one can not let go of what one created until one is back in the proper
viewpoint of having created it.
The SP is infinite, still, all powerful, all knowing, and all
pervasive. The thetan is just a little marble rolling around in space
trying to stay out of the SP's way.
The guy can't stand the SP, but he can't let go of it either,
because he can't get the viewpoint of having created it. Oh no, not
me, I couldn't have, wouldn't have, shouldn't have, yak yak yak,
anything but reseat himself squarely in the saddle of sovereignty
again.
Once he does, the 'reigns' of creation are there in his hands
again to let go, and of course it vanishes because if he ain't
creating it, there sure as hell ain't anything else to create it now
is there?
But you have to be able to handle POWER if you want to sit in the
saddle of sovereignty again. And abject FEARLESSNESS.
That's the High Cool of Adore. The flip flop is High Halcyon,
'bemused on the verge of time'. Time is form of moving as a symbol
inside the greater orientation point of space/time.
High Cool is Eternal Home.
High Thrill is the effort to get lost.
High Romance is the effort to get home.
High Halcyon is bemused relief on the verge.
Homer
> It has always seemed to me that if I create a perfect duplicate of some
>thing or condition.
> I will then have TWO of them, not none of 'em!
> One of the best and most practical tools I know of is Avatar's 'Discreate
>Process', in which I can vanish things by simple command rather than by any
>fiddling around to get it in its own time, its own space, exactly as-is and
>with all its jolly Ronnie complexities.
> i only got one gain out of Avatar but that one is worth the thousands I
>paid for it. I used to get heavy depresions which would inhibit me for
>months or years.
> I could never do what is called Perfect duplicate or as-is, try as I might
>but I learnt to discreate a depression in minutes.
> I did that so many times that the depression just gave up and didn't come
>visiting any more!
> A simple case of making it go away not creating another darn depression to
>add to it.
> Can anyone explain to me how a second creation will vanish the first.?
>WHY?
> Also, when I want to make something a "little more solid", I do that by
>postulating more and more create in the same area. How come it gets more
>solid, (which reads on an EM) and doesn't just vanish?
> A really complex subject for such a simple being as me.
> Eric/Huggie
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Jun 20 12:00:04 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore15.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)
iD8DBQFZSUaFURT1lqxE3HERAqSVAJkBhbyaT+0S5OeS/xZKs1urOodYegCfXs2v
bcvCqcpMG/0dgO2uiJ3yvXs=
=SuCG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Saturday, June 17, 2017
SESS2 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Thom Pearson (thom@get2net.dk) wrote:
>Does this mean, your nose gets stuffed in 5 seconds and it takes 20
>minutes to un-stuff it?
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
It means that about 20 minutes of poking around my totally closed
nose every morning, I will suddenly 'get it right', and in 5 seconds,
right before my little eyes, it will simply open up and I can breath
again, like the doors of heaven opening up.
Totally closed -> Totally open in 5 seconds, less actually.
I used to only have breathing problems during hayfever season
starting June 13th. Used to be *TERRIBLE*, just terrible, got
addicted to Affrin, truely a drug from hell.
Then about 6 years ago I started to make head way on the spring
hayfever thing, long hours of plugging away at the thing in my body
and it started to molt, soon the spring sneezes became almost non
existent rather than the 3 months of hell they had been for every
prior year of my life.
Unfortunately it molted into a problem with car fumes, almost of
comparable magnitude excpet it was more handlable by simply avoiding
cars.
During that molt, I started to get stuffed noses every night
while sleeping, usually waking up every morning with a totally closed
nose, this makes it very hard to sleep as I have to breath through my
mouth etc. Its still a problem.
Normally I would just let the stuffedness wear off as the morning
progressed, but about two years I had my first incident of poking
around in the area and suddenly and almost at will, it just opened.
Of course it closed right back down again a few minutes later, but I
learned my lesson. I was stuffing it, and I could unstuff it.
But it wasn't easy, and boy was it *SUBTLE* what I was doing.
Over the past two years, I have worked with this every morning,
some mornings I couldn't make any head way at all, others I could get
it to open a bit, and others, wham, just a north wind blowing through
my nose, so cool.
Life can be good if you can breath.
In recent months, with hours and hours of "When do you dramatize"
and "How do you dramatize", I have been able to loosen up much of the
bit and bridle that my body is stuck in, of which the stuffed nose is
part and parcle, as it goes through the thinking and visualizing
centers where I dramatize the hardest.
Presently I can unstuff the nose in about 10 minutes of waking
up, and if it closes down again, I can unstuff it again, piece of
cake.
What I haven't been able to do is unstuff it during the day if it
gets drammed shut, or at night, usually I just have to lie there and
let it unstuff itself before going to sleep (when it starts to stuff
up again anyhow just before early morning.) But just 4 nights ago, I
was able to unstuff it myself at night, and this is a major win,
becuase it means now the somatic is on the run, I have pretty good
control over it at all hours of the day, some thanks is due to Enid
and her great auditing.
So I have been crucified pretty thoroughly over the years,
and now those nails are loose. There are still other somatics
in the breathing, anoxia, inability to sigh/cry/burp etc that are
still killing me, but its probably all just the same old same old,
and one day they too will be history.
Homer
>Clarify please.
> Thats all for now. Thom.
> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
> It's good to be just plain happy; it's a little better to know that
> you're happy; but to understand that you're happy and to know why
> and how and still be happy, be happy in the being and the knowing,
> well that is beyond happiness, that is bliss.
> Henry Miller 1891-1980
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The paths of lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 cross in Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com the line of duty. http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jun 17 12:00:02 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/sess2.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)
iD8DBQFZRVIDURT1lqxE3HERArWVAJwMApvgLy6scCuBXdcxxFqQrBzd0wCeMfyh
1pkqY8PwWLkOVwhzL3qtRKg=
=2qSy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Thom Pearson (thom@get2net.dk) wrote:
>Does this mean, your nose gets stuffed in 5 seconds and it takes 20
>minutes to un-stuff it?
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
It means that about 20 minutes of poking around my totally closed
nose every morning, I will suddenly 'get it right', and in 5 seconds,
right before my little eyes, it will simply open up and I can breath
again, like the doors of heaven opening up.
Totally closed -> Totally open in 5 seconds, less actually.
I used to only have breathing problems during hayfever season
starting June 13th. Used to be *TERRIBLE*, just terrible, got
addicted to Affrin, truely a drug from hell.
Then about 6 years ago I started to make head way on the spring
hayfever thing, long hours of plugging away at the thing in my body
and it started to molt, soon the spring sneezes became almost non
existent rather than the 3 months of hell they had been for every
prior year of my life.
Unfortunately it molted into a problem with car fumes, almost of
comparable magnitude excpet it was more handlable by simply avoiding
cars.
During that molt, I started to get stuffed noses every night
while sleeping, usually waking up every morning with a totally closed
nose, this makes it very hard to sleep as I have to breath through my
mouth etc. Its still a problem.
Normally I would just let the stuffedness wear off as the morning
progressed, but about two years I had my first incident of poking
around in the area and suddenly and almost at will, it just opened.
Of course it closed right back down again a few minutes later, but I
learned my lesson. I was stuffing it, and I could unstuff it.
But it wasn't easy, and boy was it *SUBTLE* what I was doing.
Over the past two years, I have worked with this every morning,
some mornings I couldn't make any head way at all, others I could get
it to open a bit, and others, wham, just a north wind blowing through
my nose, so cool.
Life can be good if you can breath.
In recent months, with hours and hours of "When do you dramatize"
and "How do you dramatize", I have been able to loosen up much of the
bit and bridle that my body is stuck in, of which the stuffed nose is
part and parcle, as it goes through the thinking and visualizing
centers where I dramatize the hardest.
Presently I can unstuff the nose in about 10 minutes of waking
up, and if it closes down again, I can unstuff it again, piece of
cake.
What I haven't been able to do is unstuff it during the day if it
gets drammed shut, or at night, usually I just have to lie there and
let it unstuff itself before going to sleep (when it starts to stuff
up again anyhow just before early morning.) But just 4 nights ago, I
was able to unstuff it myself at night, and this is a major win,
becuase it means now the somatic is on the run, I have pretty good
control over it at all hours of the day, some thanks is due to Enid
and her great auditing.
So I have been crucified pretty thoroughly over the years,
and now those nails are loose. There are still other somatics
in the breathing, anoxia, inability to sigh/cry/burp etc that are
still killing me, but its probably all just the same old same old,
and one day they too will be history.
Homer
>Clarify please.
> Thats all for now. Thom.
> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
> It's good to be just plain happy; it's a little better to know that
> you're happy; but to understand that you're happy and to know why
> and how and still be happy, be happy in the being and the knowing,
> well that is beyond happiness, that is bliss.
> Henry Miller 1891-1980
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The paths of lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 cross in Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com the line of duty. http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Jun 17 12:00:02 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/sess2.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)
iD8DBQFZRVIDURT1lqxE3HERArWVAJwMApvgLy6scCuBXdcxxFqQrBzd0wCeMfyh
1pkqY8PwWLkOVwhzL3qtRKg=
=2qSy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)