-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
HOMER'S LOGIC
> Homer can't be criticised, because he doesn't use logic, that's one of
> those nasty things from the real world. Instead he likes his 'perfect
> certainties' all discovered without the use of logic, which is a bit
> odd, but everyone is entitled to their opinion.
> Even if they don't support it.
> He's not likely to convince anyone else though.
Now answering THIS is having too much time on my hands.
Perfect certainties are ascertained by direct perception, you see
red, thus there is red.
Logic is a detailed description of the word IS, thus once you have
said "there is red" you can't then say "there is not red."
That's all logic is, a description of IS, which is gleaned by
direct perception of something that IS.
Physical machines are not capable of direct perception, even of
themselves. However consciousness is capable of direct perception of
it's self and what it is conscious of.
By red we do not mean photons, we mean conscious color form as
there is no perfect certainty of anything physical or non conscious.
The 3 laws of logic are thus derived about the nature of IS by
looking at it directly, and they are as follow:
IS implies IS.
Either IS or IS NOT.
Never IS and IS NOT.
As Shakespear said<
"To Be or NOT to BE, but never neither and never both."
That's it, all propositional logic flows from that.
A implies A.
Either A or not A.
Never A and not A.
If something doesn't fit those 3 rules, then it isn't IS.
As an aside,
A implies B means: Either B or not A.
From the above we can derive simple things that some women
apparently have a hard time with.
If A implies B and B implies C, then A implies C.
Thus if circle B is inside circle A, and circle C
is inside circle B, then circle C has to be inside of circle A.
Thus if all dogs are animals, and Joey is a dog, then Joey
must be an animal.
Read Atlas Shrugged, might do you some good.
Now then here is some logic that WILL do some people some good.
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning with Not
Certainty.
Distance and Learning implies Learning by being an Effect.
Learning by being an Effect implies Not Learning with Certainty.
Therefore,
Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by being an Effect, and
not across a space time distance.
The proof ca 1973.
Homer
> _______________________________________________ Clear-L mailing list
> Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
> http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Fri Feb 4 17:41:04 EST 2011
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Mar 16 00:06:02 EDT 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore842.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
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Thu Mar 16 20:53:45 EDT 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore842.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)
iD8DBQFYyzOZURT1lqxE3HERAt+cAJ4+JmfgavR4YCY2r9744gfZhFhsZQCfdROO
k87ANTyVYWwCs19WpTxOuuY=
=Icr1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Thursday, March 16, 2017
Wednesday, March 15, 2017
SCI14
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
WHY IS SCIENTOLOGY NOT LIKED?
SCI - 14
Copyright (C) 1992 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
Now what we are talking about here is Scientology stripped of all
of its accoutrements.
We are talking about the Vessel of Truth.
We are not talking about the Church, and we are not talking about
its followers. We are not talking about its founder and we are
certainly not talking about any possible coterie of con men who may have
gathered around the Vessel and who, with backs to the wall, are holding
the fort against all possible efforts to look into that Vessel to see
what Truth might be found there.
We are talking about what Scientology has to say for itself.
We are not saying that these Truths in the Vessel are correct. We
only want to see why possibly so many people take such great exception
to them.
Assuming they know what they are.
So let's put aside for the moment all the bad press, all the legal
battles, all the financial intrigue, all the fanaticism and bad
feelings, all the whirlwind of terrorism and fear that swirls around
this subject, and let's just take a look at the subject itself.
Now I walk on dangerous ground here, for the Church is very
protective of what Scientology IS. They consider the word itself their
trademark, and they consider themselves the last word on what Ron said
and didn't say.
Fortunately Ron himself laid down some very severe rules about what
he did and didn't say, for he knew damn well what aberrated people would
do with his work if these rules were not put in place.
The first rule is that no one must ever say what Ron said without
showing a direct reference. This is the no verbal data rule. You are
not even allowed to ELABORATE on it, or clarify it, and heaven help you
should you attempt to explain it.
The first thing some people do when they leave the Church is write
for weeks on end getting it all out, because they had all these things
to say that they were never allowed to express.
Putting things into your own words is actually a sound part of
Scientology tech, it makes sure that you understand what you have read.
You are just not allowed to apply it to Scientology itself when trying
to teach someone else what it is all about.
The second rule is that if Ron didn't write it, it isn't true, so
you can't say 'this is Scientology tech or policy' unless you got
something in his writing that says so, in which case they should be
reading that rather than listening to you.
Some people got around this by posting things for him and putting
his name to it.
Weeding this stuff out is difficult, especially during a time when
the Church has still not caught on to the forgery. You may KNOW the
article in question is junk, but no one will listen to you. Even the
official Technical Query lines can fail you.
Then later after it becomes habit to cleanse themselves of the past
by saying, 'well Ron didn't write that', they disclaim anything that
makes them uncomfortable or gets them into hot water, by saying 'Ron
didn't write that'.
Sheesh, he's dead already, he can't even defend himself. Of course
some people just SAY 'Ron didn't write that' to appease the masses, and
then they move the policy to the inner sanctum sanctorum and use it from
there.
Of course this was never done. It never even crossed anyone's
mind.
Look I have nothing against the Church, I do however detest
aberrees, being one myself. I also know how to write up a security
check list for an organization. You sit down and think out everything
anyone could do that was bad, dishonest, and underhanded in an
organization and you write it all down like the Johannesburg Security
check list. You then put the Org on the meter, or its executives, and
you read the list off to them. If it reads, they done it, or they been
accused of doing it when they didn't.
Auditor: 'Have you ever used policy that was not publicly
available?'
E-meter: Long fall blow down, rock slam, rock slam, rock slam...
PC: 'Uh no, not me'
E-meter: rock slam, rock slam, rocket read, rock slam...
You see how it goes.
I would question anyone in the Church who claims to not be an
aberree, who claims to not have any withholds of any kind whatsoever.
And I would question anyone in the Church including LRH, who thinks
he can hold a candle to Source, *TRUE* source, the HIGH US.
The third rule is that no part of what Ron ever said must ever be
considered old, out of date or no longer used.
Now this is interesting because 99 percent of what Ron ever said is
very old, very out of date, and never used. So many a field
Scientologist will tell you that if you aren't familiar with, and using,
his material from 1952 to 1963, why then you just aren't making any case
gain.
But the fact is that the Church continues to publish all of Ron's
tech just like he wrote it yesterday, which is a very good thing because
if they didn't, it would all be gone tomorrow.
But nobody's getting any auditing with it, that's for sure.
Most of his early work was canned because the auditors couldn't
handle it (rock slam, rock slam, rock slam.)
Sometimes you wonder if the rock slams you see on the dial are the
pc's, who is holding the cans, or the auditor's.
Much of the work that was developed after Ron attained his own
personal height on the Bridge was developed solely to allow those still
at the bottom to run the processes without ruining everything to hell.
The pc was paying for all this after all, he had some right to expect to
come out of it alive. And solvent.
Anyhow the tech being developed in the 60's was just so powerful
and fast that the auditors couldn't stand it. It restimulated their own
cases, so they altered it, and screwed it up and then complained it
didn't work, all the while breathing a sign of relief.
So you see Ron put these rules in place to prevent his own people
from burying in the ground a technology that they might otherwise prefer
to never see the light of day again, lest they have to handle their own
case or have their own withholds pulled.
That's not a criticism of the Church, that's the God's honest
truth.
Just because someone is in the Church does not mean he is good or
not aberrated.
Just because a Church has the technology to pull withholds doesn't
mean anyone is pulling withholds. They could be withholding doing so!
Ron was ALWAYS up in arms because even his best people would take
what he wrote, refuse to confront it, alter it so it was unusable and
then complain that it didn't work, and that they had to do something
else.
An unbelievable amount of what Ron wrote was written to deal with
this one problem alone.
Of course now that he is dead and gone, nobody is altering tech
anymore out of respect for his memory.
Anyhow Ron put one more rule in place to make very sure that his
tech was not destroyed.
The fourth rule is that He is the One and Only Source for Tech, and
that no one else may make, create, discover, invent, improve upon or
research tech.
Now here is where you will find the Indies and the MIGS really at
odds with each other.
Members In Good Standing.
The MIGS of course believe that Ron held himself up to be the one
and only Source, because he WAS the one and only Source, and the one and
only one capable of doing this work. Therefore anyone else trying to do
this work too was really committing a high crime of hubris that goes
without peer in the Church.
The people in the field of course have a different story to tell.
They claim that the reason Ron did this One Source thing, was because if
just anyone IN THE CHURCH were allowed to create tech, then it would
leave the door open to someone burying Ron's tech to make way for this
new tech, when the inventor of the new tech knew damn well that the new
tech didn't work at all.
It was Ron's opinion that Church's tend to attract that sort of
fellow, being a drain and all for society's lowest.
Ron didn't want new tech that didn't work to push out his old tech
that did work.
So what Ron did was close the door on any excuse for anyone to bury
Ron's own tech, because he knew it worked and Ron knew that people would
try to bury it BECAUSE it worked.
The problem is of course that these rules also prevent anyone else
from expanding or continuing the research, and it also means that
anything originated by anyone else is wrong and invalid because it did
not come from Ron, even though much of what came from Ron actually came
from his co workers.
MIGS take this very seriously, actually literally as the God Given
Truth on the matter. No they don't consider Ron a God, just a big
thetan. They are however more scared of Ron's wrath than God's.
The field of course has a different view which is that Ron is the
founding father of a new and growing science and that Ron fully expects
them to take up the torch and forge a new frontier just like any other
science. Imagine if Newton had said, 'Here I am dying, this is all
there is to physics, there is nothing else to physics and if any one
should dare to add to or correct my life's work, he should be condemned
as a chipmunk.'
So the field considers that Ron meant for them to carry on the
work, even though the Church was told directly by Ron to oppose any
efforts of the field to do so.
The field claims that the only way Ron could ensure the survival of
his tech from the grave, was to put in place mandatory constitutional
mechanisms IN THE CHURCH that not only prevented any tech from being
altered, but also prevented any new tech from being found.
They wouldn't dare get RID of any old tech if there was no new tech
to replace it, don't you see? Further there could be no slightest
question as to what the good tech was, as it was ALL of the extant
writings at the moment of Ron's death.
So even if there were times when actual delivery of the tech
started to fail, and there were, the tech itself would continue to be
pumped out of the Church's book bindery just as it was originally
written for all to see for the rest of time.
Ron knew the field would go right ahead and read everything that he
wrote and advance the science in his absence anyhow.
Anyhow, that's the field's point of view.
Many MIGS by the way don't consider that Ron is coming back.
The field of course wants to wring his neck, so they are definitely
planning for a return.
There is also open debate in the field as to whether Ron could take
back control of his Church or would want to, if he did come back.
Personally I think that Ron will come back, but if he tries to take
back his Church he is going to have quite a fight on his hands. It
would just exceed the credibility of too many people.
Not to mention the resistance of those who had grown fat in his
absence.
It's one thing to piously BELIEVE in past lives, it's quite another
to have it staring you right there in the face.
Anyhow sure enough, someday someone is going to be up on a stage
somewhere saying 'And Ron said...', and a voice from the audience will
thunder out '...THE HELL I DID!'
Talk about a hush.
Anyhow I would like to be there on that day.
Ok so now that every one is appropriately enraged, let me continue.
The facts of the matter are that any given present day stance of
the Church on the subject of what Ron said, is NOT the final word on
what Ron said.
In the first place Ron said many things, often in direct
contradiction with each other.
Believe it or not Ron was a human being who grew into this subject
just like anyone else.
As he matured into his own auditing and case gain, his view of the
world evolved and changed, sometimes drastically. Thus you find him
very warm and friendly towards 'coffee shop auditing' on early tapes and
absolutely rabidly rancorous about it in later policy.
In early Dianetics he said 'so let's get together and build a
better Bridge' implying that other's work was valid. Later he stomped
on other's work as merely the aberrations of 'group think'.
Just as an aside, some of Ron's most personable lectures were done
when he was at the height of his work on withholds and security
checking. He was positively light as air and a friend to behold. It's
almost enough to make you think we should have someone like that leading
the way.
I mean the guy was feeling GOOD, and he KNEW everyone else was good
too.
Perhaps we should give withhold technology a another look.
Anyhow there is this history of what Ron has said, it is recorded
in the time track of his bulletins and tapes, and because of the
'nothing must be destroyed or altered or considered old or not used any
more' rule, ALL of it is available, for a price, to anyone who wants to
look at it, including all the stuff that should have been stomped out of
existence a long time ago lest it show the Church up for what it has
become.
By the way complete original sets of the Saint Hill Special
Briefing course tapes are selling in the field for $500. The Church has
recently released new versions of these same tapes to the public for
around $1000, maybe in Clearsound.
As a group these tapes have long been classified as confidential
because many of them were individually confidential dealing with GPM's
and OT levels. Another reason for their confidentiality is that on some
of them Ron is being quite candid about his own case and his own
sessions with Mary Sue during the times he was going clear himself in
the early '60s.
Wide public issue of these tapes would reveal very clearly that Ron
was not the expert that everyone pictured him to be, his own case was in
dire trouble and that Scientology, ALL of Scientology was really quite
experimental and on shaky grounds.
The public face is that Ron always knew what he was talking about,
and was giving out this great knowledge to the rest of us as we became
ready for it.
The truth is that Ron was an experimental pioneer into one of the
most dangerous territories in existence, and his own health and
stability were always on the line, looking over the brink of Hell as he
says in A History of Man.
Ron was actually producing first goal clears in other people BEFORE
he became a first goal clear himself in early February of 1963, and all
during this time he was trying to produce and maintain stable case gain
in others when he hadn't even attained this himself!
That is a big reason why these tapes are so secret, the Church just
didn't want anyone to get the jitters by seeing that the Captain of the
ship was sweating it out in his own nightmare.
But these tapes have always been available in the field from
disenfranchised Scientologists or those who had just gone out the top
and didn't need them any more.
Thus the field has in general had a more accurate view on what Ron
was like and what he was really about. They received an unfiltered
view. Of course higher level people in the church knew the truth too,
because everyone gets to listen to every tape on the SHSBC.
I can't imagine why anyone would sell their collection of LRH
materials for any price, but many do.
These tapes were the notorious wall of tapes, about 400 of them,
numbered from 1 to whatever, that detailed just about everything that
Ron ever said in time order. This allowed his students on the SHSBC to
gain a clear understanding of the track of Scientology up to present
time.
The Saint Hill Special Briefing Course was the 'super' course of
Scientology, the one you finally got to do once you decided to get
serious about it.
The Church of course holds that what ever Ron said last was the
truth, or at least the enforceable truth, but you have got to realize
that people mature into Scientology the exact same way that Ron did.
Thus new people who first come to this subject resent like hell
being told they may not contribute to it, as every newborn wants to
contribute.
That's their Dianetic stage. 'Let US build a better bridge.'
"Contribute to" is very high on the Scientology Havingness Scale.
Telling people they couldn't be there, sent them lower.
((Havingness Scale: Create, Responsible for (willing to control),
Contribute to, Confront, Have, Waste, Substitute, Waste substitute, Had,
Must be confronted, Must be contributed to, Created.
You will notice that as Scientologists are not allowed to
'Contribute to', they fall down into 'Must be contributed to' which is
what you usually find them dramatizing. This can be read two ways,
either the low tone scientologist insists that HE be contributed to, or
he considers the HE must contribute to the group, which is what he
originally wanted to contribute to but no longer wants to.))
After the Dianetic stage, people want to get into solo auditing of
electronic implants and things talked about in 8-80 and other books.
That's their 'let's go off and solve this thing by ourselves' stage.
Eventually they may come around to seeing things the Church's way.
Perhaps as they grow into the subject themselves, they decide they
would be better off leaving the tech to Ron, and so they become more
aligned with present Church policy. If they don't, they go off and
become Independents.
Unfortunately for the newcomer the only way to find out what Ron
said is to listen to what the Church says Ron said. Usually via
convenient excerpts from Ron's writings that the Church wants him to
see.
But those who have devoted their lives to this subject, who have
read every book five times over, who have listened to every one of a
1000 tapes, who have spent 1000's of hours auditing pcs of every kind,
will tell you in a flash that what 'Ron said' is a subject as wide as
the sky, and only poorly, if at all, represented by what the Church now
says Ron said.
In fact many a time, while listening to tapes, I couldn't believe
what I was hearing, I mean I was just totally dumbfounded, I couldn't
believe that the Church was letting this material out in the open, that
it was PUSHING this stuff on its public. It was just totally damning.
There was Ron laying out the entire anatomy of evil and the
dwindling spiral, and the later day Church following it to the letter
all the way down the line.
Completely hysterical.
In fact the best analysis of later Church behavior one could ever
hope to find is completely contained in Ron's early tapes on withholds
and aberration.
It's all there.
Check out tape 6101C24 (1/24/61), Withholds and In-Session-ness
(Essentials of Auditing Series). You'll find out what Ron REALLY thinks
about Coffee Shop Auditing (a form of chipmunking) and you will
understand the entire anatomy of the dark side of the organization, any
organization including world governments. He also says very clearly
what the fate of these people will be if they continue in their ways.
Certainly publishing this stuff broadly could not do the Church any
good, what with its corporate terrorism, its illegal conspiracies, its
extortion and blackmail, its dirty tricks departments and its lie
factories.
Why sell tapes that point out all your flaws?
The Church's usual response when someone points out its flaws is to
sue them for libel and slander.
Sometimes I mused that if the Church knew what it was publishing in
these tapes it would sue itself.
But you see that is exactly the self protective mechanism that Ron
built into the fabric of the Church. While they were busily destroying
freedom and communication on a world wide basis, they were at the same
time putting out not only a complete confession of their own operation,
but also a complete analysis of the auditing techniques necessary to
handle it, and they HAD TO DO THIS BY RON'S MANDATE!
No matter how strong the aberration, fear of Ron was stronger.
And the beauty of this was they were charging people good money for
the knowledge.
I always thought this was brilliant of Ron, that a corrupt and
rotten organization should be surviving by selling the very plans
necessary to rescue its butt from the mire.
Totally bloody brilliant.
Would that anyone was there to hear.
Or maybe there was, the present day Church claims to have cleaned
up its act. Perhaps it has taken up reading Ron?
So here is the point. In trying to explain my views on the subject
of why Scientology is not liked, I am going to have to trespass a bit
and express my views on what Scientology IS.
Of course anything stated about Scientology that does not jive
exactly and to the letter with the Church's present day policy could and
probably would be considered libelous slander by the Church lawyers.
And if what I did say were to be correct in every detail they would
consider it a copyright violation that I dared to post it to the net
without permission or payment due.
In other words there is just no freedom to speak around here any
more, and that from a subject that taught us a man is as free as he can
communicate.
Oh well, Ron's Whole Message was that aberration consisted of an
unwillingness to communicate, within oneself and with others, so one
figures that an organization manned by aberrees would have a hard time
communicating and allowing others to communicate.
So here goes, bombs away...
Why is Scientology not liked?
Scientology is an APPROACH to a problem, man's suffering in the
world, specifically what do DO about it.
Scientology also presents an ANATOMY of that problem, how
it arose and what it is made of.
Scientology as a science of anatomy and approach to a problem can
thus be considered a 'technology' to deal with that problem.
Scientology as a technology and as a philosophy is very unpopular
with the victim crowd. Past lives are very scary to someone who is a
victim because they have to ask how they came to be a victim in the
first place and what possible hand they may have had in it.
Scientology does NOT teach various forms of KARMA, things like if
you do bad you will get bad, and everything that happens to you in this
life happened because of something bad that you did in a past life.
However Scientology DOES teach that you have lived before and will
live again, and have committed harmful acts in your past lives, just as
you have had harmful acts committed against you in this life.
The basic theory here is that every one has a time track that
records everything that he has done, both good and bad, and also
everything that has happened to him, also good and bad.
Your time track is mechanical aspect of your memory.
If a thetan begins to rue some part of his time track he will go
back to that time in his memory and try to nail it out of existence.
This is called not-ising. The problem of course is that he can never
successfully not-is something that he actually did or actually did
happen to him, so he has to STAY there at that moment of time on his
time track forever making SURE that it STAYS 'out of existence'.
Thus he can not remember much of this life, little of his babyhood,
and none of his assumption of the body, in between lives, past lives,
nor times before having bodies at all.
When trying to take these moments apart in session, when trying to
unstick a preclear from his time track, you will often find that the pc
is stuck in moments of great fury and turmoil to him, moments of supreme
injustice perpetrated on him by his parents and the other significant
figures of this life.
These purveyors of injustice can also be things like God, the
Devil, other entities, and even the universe itself, space, time etc.
You will also find he has committed misdeeds of his own in this
life, sometimes accidentally, sometimes out of pure cussedness, but most
often in an effort to deal with those who were harming him.
Pcs often regret what they do to others even if those others fully
'deserved' it at the time, so the auditor has his work cut out for him.
However, often you will find that no matter how much you get a pc
to look at and reoperate a moment of despair and shut-out on his time
track it just will not alleviate. It was this fact that led Ron to get
his pcs to go 'earlier similar' which meant to find earlier and earlier
material of a similar nature. Pretty soon pcs were reporting that they
were before birth and then before conception and then plunk in a past
life or even a past universe.
The horrible thing was, that there in that past life, they were
doing to THEIR children what they were so upset about their parents
doing to them in this life.
However once returned to the 'scene of the crime' in a past life,
the auditor could then help the pc confront and erase the charge of his
own overt acts as a parent against his own children.
In relieving this charge of regret over what they had done in a
past life, the present life abuse was then willing to erase and the pc
was like new again.
This means no more not-isness and full recall, at least on that
incident.
This is called the OVERT-MOTIVATOR sequence in Scientology.
This means that motivators in this life are often locked in place
by the overt of an earlier life. It is the pc's effort to nail out of
existence both incidents together that causes the lock up.
He really wishes that neither happened.
I would again stress that there is no implication here that the
motivator in this life happened BECAUSE of the overt in a past life,
only that when a motivator happens in this life that has a similar overt
in a past life you get this double lock up situation and both must be
audited for either to clear.
Sometimes it works the other way around. Say you are a little girl
in a past life and your father is sexually abusing you, but there is no
earlier similar incident of this kind at all on your time track and you
yourself have never done it to another in an earlier life.
You grow up and die, and then you take on a male body in this life.
In this life the memory of being abused as a girl by a father gets
restimulated when you have a daughter, and then AS a father in this life
you dramatize it on her by abusing her.
In Scientology that is called going out of valence, or doing to
others what others did to you.
When the perpetrator gets into session in this life, his overts of
abusing his daughter in this life just refuse to erase and the impulse
to abuse does not go away. It is this phenomenon that has lead many to
surmise that some people just can not be rehabilitated.
However if the auditor gets the perpetrator to dig around for the
lifetime when he was a little girl being herself abused by a father then
the two incidents together erase and the problem is gone.
This is called the MOTIVATOR-OVERT sequence.
Now needless to say this theory of life is very unpopular,
especially in these climes when being an innocent victim is fashionable,
and incarcerating people for criminal behavior is big business.
Actually there are innocent victims, it happens every day, but they
are easier to audit. No matter how many times some one has been done
in, no matter how bad it was, if it is not locking up on an earlier
misdeed of their own, then the pain will erase using standard Dianetic
reverie. The patient will recover full access to the memory of the
incident, and little or no address will have to be made to past lives,
except maybe to chase down earlier times they were an innocent victim.
But if you get a pc who has had the slightest thing done to him in
this life, who is also guilty of serious harm to others in a past life,
the stuff in this life won't reduce or release no matter how often you
audit him on it or how long. Get him to contact what HE did though in
that past life and the whole thing clears up.
Now these are just the facts reported by pcs and auditors alike.
You can reject them or accept them as you like. It doesn't even matter
if past lives are REAL, if you refuse to allow a pc to go past track and
refuse to let him run out past life incidents as if they were real, he
will often not get better and the present life trauma will not lift.
By the way don't ever tell your pc that his past life memories are
a delusion, you will lose him as a pc. He just won't come back.
So there is nothing special in any of this except the surmise that
we have lived before and have found life rough enough to rue, and have
engaged in not-isness in order to make our lives more sufferable.
Who among you considers Truth so beautiful that you were willing to
know it all?
Abused children often forget their abuse only to remember it years
later. Well, if you keep going earlier similar, memories of your past
lives and your misadventures there may also start showing up, unless of
course you have some sort of strong preexisting bias against allowing
for the existence of such things.
That's a sure sign though, you know.
However, given the existence of past lives, it is reasonable to
assume that we have done bad things there, and have had bad things done
to us.
It is also reasonable to assume that some of those bad things that
we did there, were similar to bad things that happened to us in this
life, especially between parent and child, and man and woman.
It is also reasonable to assume that some of those bad things that
were done to use in past lives, were similar to bad things we did to
others in this life, again between parent and child and man and woman.
And most especially between the archetypal protagonists and
antagonists of our primary trans lifetime basic purposes (GPMS).
All that Scientology is adding to this is that when bad things in
this life time lock up with bad things in past life times, you get an
unrelievable mess unless you audit both of them to completion.
That is the sum totality of what Scientology has added to a very
old and respected subject.
And it is kind of obvious, isn't it?
Children in this life don't like to think they were mean and
heartless parents in past lives, and men and women in this life don't
like to think they were women and men in past lives.
Thus no one can remember their past lives, as they have effectively
nailed them out of existence. It is much more socially acceptable to
remember being abused in this life than to remember that you were also
an abuser in a past life.
The irony is that the thetan is totally stuck on his time track at
exactly those moments that he thinks doesn't exist.
The real catcher is that you may have been an abuser in a past life
even if you weren't abused in this life.
Such people may even go so far as to deny the validity of your
memories of being abused in this life because it misses the withhold on
them of being an abuser themselves in a past life.
They are just not-ising YOU.
Sometimes people who are afraid of what they have done in their
past lives, and who yet do not know, will pretend that nothing that
happened to them in this life is bothering them. They hope in this way
to assure that their slate is clean from the past.
'If nothing bad happened to me in this life, that means I have been
good in my past lives (I hope).'
That however is the essence of the co-excused withhold.
A co-excused withhold is when you forget what mother is doing to
you in this life if she will forget what you did AS a mother to a child
in a past life.
Nothing here, nothing there.
I assure you, if you can't remember it, you did it.
So cut the sweetness and light and get to work.
Sometimes people 'make up' for being bad in past lives by being
really really good in this life and insisting that everyone else be the
same way. They are full of righteous indignation at your slightest
misstep from the true and narrow. The maddening thing is you can never
find anything on them, they are just so squeaky clean. As long as you
keep your investigations to this life, that is.
So were does justice come into all this? Well as I said there is
no implication that bad things happen in this life BECAUSE you did
something bad in a past life. Sometimes bad things just happen to you
out of the blue.
Someone has got to start it.
In fact auditing is best directed at finding out where YOU started
it. That is the day you rue the most and which locks you into all those
other days when other people started it.
Therefore, there IS an implication that if you did do something bad
in a past life, then when it happens to you in this life you will hold
onto it harder because it helps you justify what you did in a past life.
'It's ok I raped my daughter when I was a father 300 years ago
because my father is raping me now. God, I am never going to get over
this. (Thank you Lord).'
The present life incident is impossible to audit out because the
person is relieved they have it.
Another thing that happens is people get raped and they feel
guilty. That's ridiculous, they were wronged and yet they feel to
blame. Well, it may not be a this life time blame they are feeling! So
now they know what it feels like to be on the other side of the overt
motivator sequence.
If someone is holding on to a motivator in this life because semi
consciously it is helping them justify and feel better about their
overts in a past life, then it will be impossible to audit out the
motivator in this life without running out the overt in the past life.
They just never get better, and that's why therapies that are
addressed only to this life, just sometimes don't work.
The guy's got a record and he is not telling you about it.
It could be you don't want to hear it as an auditor either.
A psychiatrist is some one who wants you to forget your past life
mis deeds and sell you drugs to help you suffer through the outrageous
slings and arrows of misfortune in this life.
About the only way that "justice" enters into this, is the old cat
in the bag theory. If you let the cat out of the bag it MAY come home
and sit in your own lap.
In Scientology this is called contagion of aberration, and 'you
reap what you sow'.
If you abuse your children as a parent, and they dramatize this
trauma by abusing their children, who likewise then abuse their children,
well then, finally when you come back as a child yourself, you may get
one of those abused children as a parent and they will abuse you!
Some people consider this sweet justice.
Really it is a pit of despair.
So this is one of the sore points that people have with Scientology
and with Immortality in general.
My Humble Opinion.
Note that an Immortal who clears all this stuff out, finally
goes Eternal. And that's the end of suffering.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Wed Mar 15 20:24:10 EDT 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/sci14.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)
iD8DBQFYydsrURT1lqxE3HERAqjCAJoDrSU2HkA6/BiDDOVYNoDEOOr43gCg0Om/
sdnTmpoNdJ4zs0knP6qKvn4=
=RIW/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
WHY IS SCIENTOLOGY NOT LIKED?
SCI - 14
Copyright (C) 1992 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
Now what we are talking about here is Scientology stripped of all
of its accoutrements.
We are talking about the Vessel of Truth.
We are not talking about the Church, and we are not talking about
its followers. We are not talking about its founder and we are
certainly not talking about any possible coterie of con men who may have
gathered around the Vessel and who, with backs to the wall, are holding
the fort against all possible efforts to look into that Vessel to see
what Truth might be found there.
We are talking about what Scientology has to say for itself.
We are not saying that these Truths in the Vessel are correct. We
only want to see why possibly so many people take such great exception
to them.
Assuming they know what they are.
So let's put aside for the moment all the bad press, all the legal
battles, all the financial intrigue, all the fanaticism and bad
feelings, all the whirlwind of terrorism and fear that swirls around
this subject, and let's just take a look at the subject itself.
Now I walk on dangerous ground here, for the Church is very
protective of what Scientology IS. They consider the word itself their
trademark, and they consider themselves the last word on what Ron said
and didn't say.
Fortunately Ron himself laid down some very severe rules about what
he did and didn't say, for he knew damn well what aberrated people would
do with his work if these rules were not put in place.
The first rule is that no one must ever say what Ron said without
showing a direct reference. This is the no verbal data rule. You are
not even allowed to ELABORATE on it, or clarify it, and heaven help you
should you attempt to explain it.
The first thing some people do when they leave the Church is write
for weeks on end getting it all out, because they had all these things
to say that they were never allowed to express.
Putting things into your own words is actually a sound part of
Scientology tech, it makes sure that you understand what you have read.
You are just not allowed to apply it to Scientology itself when trying
to teach someone else what it is all about.
The second rule is that if Ron didn't write it, it isn't true, so
you can't say 'this is Scientology tech or policy' unless you got
something in his writing that says so, in which case they should be
reading that rather than listening to you.
Some people got around this by posting things for him and putting
his name to it.
Weeding this stuff out is difficult, especially during a time when
the Church has still not caught on to the forgery. You may KNOW the
article in question is junk, but no one will listen to you. Even the
official Technical Query lines can fail you.
Then later after it becomes habit to cleanse themselves of the past
by saying, 'well Ron didn't write that', they disclaim anything that
makes them uncomfortable or gets them into hot water, by saying 'Ron
didn't write that'.
Sheesh, he's dead already, he can't even defend himself. Of course
some people just SAY 'Ron didn't write that' to appease the masses, and
then they move the policy to the inner sanctum sanctorum and use it from
there.
Of course this was never done. It never even crossed anyone's
mind.
Look I have nothing against the Church, I do however detest
aberrees, being one myself. I also know how to write up a security
check list for an organization. You sit down and think out everything
anyone could do that was bad, dishonest, and underhanded in an
organization and you write it all down like the Johannesburg Security
check list. You then put the Org on the meter, or its executives, and
you read the list off to them. If it reads, they done it, or they been
accused of doing it when they didn't.
Auditor: 'Have you ever used policy that was not publicly
available?'
E-meter: Long fall blow down, rock slam, rock slam, rock slam...
PC: 'Uh no, not me'
E-meter: rock slam, rock slam, rocket read, rock slam...
You see how it goes.
I would question anyone in the Church who claims to not be an
aberree, who claims to not have any withholds of any kind whatsoever.
And I would question anyone in the Church including LRH, who thinks
he can hold a candle to Source, *TRUE* source, the HIGH US.
The third rule is that no part of what Ron ever said must ever be
considered old, out of date or no longer used.
Now this is interesting because 99 percent of what Ron ever said is
very old, very out of date, and never used. So many a field
Scientologist will tell you that if you aren't familiar with, and using,
his material from 1952 to 1963, why then you just aren't making any case
gain.
But the fact is that the Church continues to publish all of Ron's
tech just like he wrote it yesterday, which is a very good thing because
if they didn't, it would all be gone tomorrow.
But nobody's getting any auditing with it, that's for sure.
Most of his early work was canned because the auditors couldn't
handle it (rock slam, rock slam, rock slam.)
Sometimes you wonder if the rock slams you see on the dial are the
pc's, who is holding the cans, or the auditor's.
Much of the work that was developed after Ron attained his own
personal height on the Bridge was developed solely to allow those still
at the bottom to run the processes without ruining everything to hell.
The pc was paying for all this after all, he had some right to expect to
come out of it alive. And solvent.
Anyhow the tech being developed in the 60's was just so powerful
and fast that the auditors couldn't stand it. It restimulated their own
cases, so they altered it, and screwed it up and then complained it
didn't work, all the while breathing a sign of relief.
So you see Ron put these rules in place to prevent his own people
from burying in the ground a technology that they might otherwise prefer
to never see the light of day again, lest they have to handle their own
case or have their own withholds pulled.
That's not a criticism of the Church, that's the God's honest
truth.
Just because someone is in the Church does not mean he is good or
not aberrated.
Just because a Church has the technology to pull withholds doesn't
mean anyone is pulling withholds. They could be withholding doing so!
Ron was ALWAYS up in arms because even his best people would take
what he wrote, refuse to confront it, alter it so it was unusable and
then complain that it didn't work, and that they had to do something
else.
An unbelievable amount of what Ron wrote was written to deal with
this one problem alone.
Of course now that he is dead and gone, nobody is altering tech
anymore out of respect for his memory.
Anyhow Ron put one more rule in place to make very sure that his
tech was not destroyed.
The fourth rule is that He is the One and Only Source for Tech, and
that no one else may make, create, discover, invent, improve upon or
research tech.
Now here is where you will find the Indies and the MIGS really at
odds with each other.
Members In Good Standing.
The MIGS of course believe that Ron held himself up to be the one
and only Source, because he WAS the one and only Source, and the one and
only one capable of doing this work. Therefore anyone else trying to do
this work too was really committing a high crime of hubris that goes
without peer in the Church.
The people in the field of course have a different story to tell.
They claim that the reason Ron did this One Source thing, was because if
just anyone IN THE CHURCH were allowed to create tech, then it would
leave the door open to someone burying Ron's tech to make way for this
new tech, when the inventor of the new tech knew damn well that the new
tech didn't work at all.
It was Ron's opinion that Church's tend to attract that sort of
fellow, being a drain and all for society's lowest.
Ron didn't want new tech that didn't work to push out his old tech
that did work.
So what Ron did was close the door on any excuse for anyone to bury
Ron's own tech, because he knew it worked and Ron knew that people would
try to bury it BECAUSE it worked.
The problem is of course that these rules also prevent anyone else
from expanding or continuing the research, and it also means that
anything originated by anyone else is wrong and invalid because it did
not come from Ron, even though much of what came from Ron actually came
from his co workers.
MIGS take this very seriously, actually literally as the God Given
Truth on the matter. No they don't consider Ron a God, just a big
thetan. They are however more scared of Ron's wrath than God's.
The field of course has a different view which is that Ron is the
founding father of a new and growing science and that Ron fully expects
them to take up the torch and forge a new frontier just like any other
science. Imagine if Newton had said, 'Here I am dying, this is all
there is to physics, there is nothing else to physics and if any one
should dare to add to or correct my life's work, he should be condemned
as a chipmunk.'
So the field considers that Ron meant for them to carry on the
work, even though the Church was told directly by Ron to oppose any
efforts of the field to do so.
The field claims that the only way Ron could ensure the survival of
his tech from the grave, was to put in place mandatory constitutional
mechanisms IN THE CHURCH that not only prevented any tech from being
altered, but also prevented any new tech from being found.
They wouldn't dare get RID of any old tech if there was no new tech
to replace it, don't you see? Further there could be no slightest
question as to what the good tech was, as it was ALL of the extant
writings at the moment of Ron's death.
So even if there were times when actual delivery of the tech
started to fail, and there were, the tech itself would continue to be
pumped out of the Church's book bindery just as it was originally
written for all to see for the rest of time.
Ron knew the field would go right ahead and read everything that he
wrote and advance the science in his absence anyhow.
Anyhow, that's the field's point of view.
Many MIGS by the way don't consider that Ron is coming back.
The field of course wants to wring his neck, so they are definitely
planning for a return.
There is also open debate in the field as to whether Ron could take
back control of his Church or would want to, if he did come back.
Personally I think that Ron will come back, but if he tries to take
back his Church he is going to have quite a fight on his hands. It
would just exceed the credibility of too many people.
Not to mention the resistance of those who had grown fat in his
absence.
It's one thing to piously BELIEVE in past lives, it's quite another
to have it staring you right there in the face.
Anyhow sure enough, someday someone is going to be up on a stage
somewhere saying 'And Ron said...', and a voice from the audience will
thunder out '...THE HELL I DID!'
Talk about a hush.
Anyhow I would like to be there on that day.
Ok so now that every one is appropriately enraged, let me continue.
The facts of the matter are that any given present day stance of
the Church on the subject of what Ron said, is NOT the final word on
what Ron said.
In the first place Ron said many things, often in direct
contradiction with each other.
Believe it or not Ron was a human being who grew into this subject
just like anyone else.
As he matured into his own auditing and case gain, his view of the
world evolved and changed, sometimes drastically. Thus you find him
very warm and friendly towards 'coffee shop auditing' on early tapes and
absolutely rabidly rancorous about it in later policy.
In early Dianetics he said 'so let's get together and build a
better Bridge' implying that other's work was valid. Later he stomped
on other's work as merely the aberrations of 'group think'.
Just as an aside, some of Ron's most personable lectures were done
when he was at the height of his work on withholds and security
checking. He was positively light as air and a friend to behold. It's
almost enough to make you think we should have someone like that leading
the way.
I mean the guy was feeling GOOD, and he KNEW everyone else was good
too.
Perhaps we should give withhold technology a another look.
Anyhow there is this history of what Ron has said, it is recorded
in the time track of his bulletins and tapes, and because of the
'nothing must be destroyed or altered or considered old or not used any
more' rule, ALL of it is available, for a price, to anyone who wants to
look at it, including all the stuff that should have been stomped out of
existence a long time ago lest it show the Church up for what it has
become.
By the way complete original sets of the Saint Hill Special
Briefing course tapes are selling in the field for $500. The Church has
recently released new versions of these same tapes to the public for
around $1000, maybe in Clearsound.
As a group these tapes have long been classified as confidential
because many of them were individually confidential dealing with GPM's
and OT levels. Another reason for their confidentiality is that on some
of them Ron is being quite candid about his own case and his own
sessions with Mary Sue during the times he was going clear himself in
the early '60s.
Wide public issue of these tapes would reveal very clearly that Ron
was not the expert that everyone pictured him to be, his own case was in
dire trouble and that Scientology, ALL of Scientology was really quite
experimental and on shaky grounds.
The public face is that Ron always knew what he was talking about,
and was giving out this great knowledge to the rest of us as we became
ready for it.
The truth is that Ron was an experimental pioneer into one of the
most dangerous territories in existence, and his own health and
stability were always on the line, looking over the brink of Hell as he
says in A History of Man.
Ron was actually producing first goal clears in other people BEFORE
he became a first goal clear himself in early February of 1963, and all
during this time he was trying to produce and maintain stable case gain
in others when he hadn't even attained this himself!
That is a big reason why these tapes are so secret, the Church just
didn't want anyone to get the jitters by seeing that the Captain of the
ship was sweating it out in his own nightmare.
But these tapes have always been available in the field from
disenfranchised Scientologists or those who had just gone out the top
and didn't need them any more.
Thus the field has in general had a more accurate view on what Ron
was like and what he was really about. They received an unfiltered
view. Of course higher level people in the church knew the truth too,
because everyone gets to listen to every tape on the SHSBC.
I can't imagine why anyone would sell their collection of LRH
materials for any price, but many do.
These tapes were the notorious wall of tapes, about 400 of them,
numbered from 1 to whatever, that detailed just about everything that
Ron ever said in time order. This allowed his students on the SHSBC to
gain a clear understanding of the track of Scientology up to present
time.
The Saint Hill Special Briefing Course was the 'super' course of
Scientology, the one you finally got to do once you decided to get
serious about it.
The Church of course holds that what ever Ron said last was the
truth, or at least the enforceable truth, but you have got to realize
that people mature into Scientology the exact same way that Ron did.
Thus new people who first come to this subject resent like hell
being told they may not contribute to it, as every newborn wants to
contribute.
That's their Dianetic stage. 'Let US build a better bridge.'
"Contribute to" is very high on the Scientology Havingness Scale.
Telling people they couldn't be there, sent them lower.
((Havingness Scale: Create, Responsible for (willing to control),
Contribute to, Confront, Have, Waste, Substitute, Waste substitute, Had,
Must be confronted, Must be contributed to, Created.
You will notice that as Scientologists are not allowed to
'Contribute to', they fall down into 'Must be contributed to' which is
what you usually find them dramatizing. This can be read two ways,
either the low tone scientologist insists that HE be contributed to, or
he considers the HE must contribute to the group, which is what he
originally wanted to contribute to but no longer wants to.))
After the Dianetic stage, people want to get into solo auditing of
electronic implants and things talked about in 8-80 and other books.
That's their 'let's go off and solve this thing by ourselves' stage.
Eventually they may come around to seeing things the Church's way.
Perhaps as they grow into the subject themselves, they decide they
would be better off leaving the tech to Ron, and so they become more
aligned with present Church policy. If they don't, they go off and
become Independents.
Unfortunately for the newcomer the only way to find out what Ron
said is to listen to what the Church says Ron said. Usually via
convenient excerpts from Ron's writings that the Church wants him to
see.
But those who have devoted their lives to this subject, who have
read every book five times over, who have listened to every one of a
1000 tapes, who have spent 1000's of hours auditing pcs of every kind,
will tell you in a flash that what 'Ron said' is a subject as wide as
the sky, and only poorly, if at all, represented by what the Church now
says Ron said.
In fact many a time, while listening to tapes, I couldn't believe
what I was hearing, I mean I was just totally dumbfounded, I couldn't
believe that the Church was letting this material out in the open, that
it was PUSHING this stuff on its public. It was just totally damning.
There was Ron laying out the entire anatomy of evil and the
dwindling spiral, and the later day Church following it to the letter
all the way down the line.
Completely hysterical.
In fact the best analysis of later Church behavior one could ever
hope to find is completely contained in Ron's early tapes on withholds
and aberration.
It's all there.
Check out tape 6101C24 (1/24/61), Withholds and In-Session-ness
(Essentials of Auditing Series). You'll find out what Ron REALLY thinks
about Coffee Shop Auditing (a form of chipmunking) and you will
understand the entire anatomy of the dark side of the organization, any
organization including world governments. He also says very clearly
what the fate of these people will be if they continue in their ways.
Certainly publishing this stuff broadly could not do the Church any
good, what with its corporate terrorism, its illegal conspiracies, its
extortion and blackmail, its dirty tricks departments and its lie
factories.
Why sell tapes that point out all your flaws?
The Church's usual response when someone points out its flaws is to
sue them for libel and slander.
Sometimes I mused that if the Church knew what it was publishing in
these tapes it would sue itself.
But you see that is exactly the self protective mechanism that Ron
built into the fabric of the Church. While they were busily destroying
freedom and communication on a world wide basis, they were at the same
time putting out not only a complete confession of their own operation,
but also a complete analysis of the auditing techniques necessary to
handle it, and they HAD TO DO THIS BY RON'S MANDATE!
No matter how strong the aberration, fear of Ron was stronger.
And the beauty of this was they were charging people good money for
the knowledge.
I always thought this was brilliant of Ron, that a corrupt and
rotten organization should be surviving by selling the very plans
necessary to rescue its butt from the mire.
Totally bloody brilliant.
Would that anyone was there to hear.
Or maybe there was, the present day Church claims to have cleaned
up its act. Perhaps it has taken up reading Ron?
So here is the point. In trying to explain my views on the subject
of why Scientology is not liked, I am going to have to trespass a bit
and express my views on what Scientology IS.
Of course anything stated about Scientology that does not jive
exactly and to the letter with the Church's present day policy could and
probably would be considered libelous slander by the Church lawyers.
And if what I did say were to be correct in every detail they would
consider it a copyright violation that I dared to post it to the net
without permission or payment due.
In other words there is just no freedom to speak around here any
more, and that from a subject that taught us a man is as free as he can
communicate.
Oh well, Ron's Whole Message was that aberration consisted of an
unwillingness to communicate, within oneself and with others, so one
figures that an organization manned by aberrees would have a hard time
communicating and allowing others to communicate.
So here goes, bombs away...
Why is Scientology not liked?
Scientology is an APPROACH to a problem, man's suffering in the
world, specifically what do DO about it.
Scientology also presents an ANATOMY of that problem, how
it arose and what it is made of.
Scientology as a science of anatomy and approach to a problem can
thus be considered a 'technology' to deal with that problem.
Scientology as a technology and as a philosophy is very unpopular
with the victim crowd. Past lives are very scary to someone who is a
victim because they have to ask how they came to be a victim in the
first place and what possible hand they may have had in it.
Scientology does NOT teach various forms of KARMA, things like if
you do bad you will get bad, and everything that happens to you in this
life happened because of something bad that you did in a past life.
However Scientology DOES teach that you have lived before and will
live again, and have committed harmful acts in your past lives, just as
you have had harmful acts committed against you in this life.
The basic theory here is that every one has a time track that
records everything that he has done, both good and bad, and also
everything that has happened to him, also good and bad.
Your time track is mechanical aspect of your memory.
If a thetan begins to rue some part of his time track he will go
back to that time in his memory and try to nail it out of existence.
This is called not-ising. The problem of course is that he can never
successfully not-is something that he actually did or actually did
happen to him, so he has to STAY there at that moment of time on his
time track forever making SURE that it STAYS 'out of existence'.
Thus he can not remember much of this life, little of his babyhood,
and none of his assumption of the body, in between lives, past lives,
nor times before having bodies at all.
When trying to take these moments apart in session, when trying to
unstick a preclear from his time track, you will often find that the pc
is stuck in moments of great fury and turmoil to him, moments of supreme
injustice perpetrated on him by his parents and the other significant
figures of this life.
These purveyors of injustice can also be things like God, the
Devil, other entities, and even the universe itself, space, time etc.
You will also find he has committed misdeeds of his own in this
life, sometimes accidentally, sometimes out of pure cussedness, but most
often in an effort to deal with those who were harming him.
Pcs often regret what they do to others even if those others fully
'deserved' it at the time, so the auditor has his work cut out for him.
However, often you will find that no matter how much you get a pc
to look at and reoperate a moment of despair and shut-out on his time
track it just will not alleviate. It was this fact that led Ron to get
his pcs to go 'earlier similar' which meant to find earlier and earlier
material of a similar nature. Pretty soon pcs were reporting that they
were before birth and then before conception and then plunk in a past
life or even a past universe.
The horrible thing was, that there in that past life, they were
doing to THEIR children what they were so upset about their parents
doing to them in this life.
However once returned to the 'scene of the crime' in a past life,
the auditor could then help the pc confront and erase the charge of his
own overt acts as a parent against his own children.
In relieving this charge of regret over what they had done in a
past life, the present life abuse was then willing to erase and the pc
was like new again.
This means no more not-isness and full recall, at least on that
incident.
This is called the OVERT-MOTIVATOR sequence in Scientology.
This means that motivators in this life are often locked in place
by the overt of an earlier life. It is the pc's effort to nail out of
existence both incidents together that causes the lock up.
He really wishes that neither happened.
I would again stress that there is no implication here that the
motivator in this life happened BECAUSE of the overt in a past life,
only that when a motivator happens in this life that has a similar overt
in a past life you get this double lock up situation and both must be
audited for either to clear.
Sometimes it works the other way around. Say you are a little girl
in a past life and your father is sexually abusing you, but there is no
earlier similar incident of this kind at all on your time track and you
yourself have never done it to another in an earlier life.
You grow up and die, and then you take on a male body in this life.
In this life the memory of being abused as a girl by a father gets
restimulated when you have a daughter, and then AS a father in this life
you dramatize it on her by abusing her.
In Scientology that is called going out of valence, or doing to
others what others did to you.
When the perpetrator gets into session in this life, his overts of
abusing his daughter in this life just refuse to erase and the impulse
to abuse does not go away. It is this phenomenon that has lead many to
surmise that some people just can not be rehabilitated.
However if the auditor gets the perpetrator to dig around for the
lifetime when he was a little girl being herself abused by a father then
the two incidents together erase and the problem is gone.
This is called the MOTIVATOR-OVERT sequence.
Now needless to say this theory of life is very unpopular,
especially in these climes when being an innocent victim is fashionable,
and incarcerating people for criminal behavior is big business.
Actually there are innocent victims, it happens every day, but they
are easier to audit. No matter how many times some one has been done
in, no matter how bad it was, if it is not locking up on an earlier
misdeed of their own, then the pain will erase using standard Dianetic
reverie. The patient will recover full access to the memory of the
incident, and little or no address will have to be made to past lives,
except maybe to chase down earlier times they were an innocent victim.
But if you get a pc who has had the slightest thing done to him in
this life, who is also guilty of serious harm to others in a past life,
the stuff in this life won't reduce or release no matter how often you
audit him on it or how long. Get him to contact what HE did though in
that past life and the whole thing clears up.
Now these are just the facts reported by pcs and auditors alike.
You can reject them or accept them as you like. It doesn't even matter
if past lives are REAL, if you refuse to allow a pc to go past track and
refuse to let him run out past life incidents as if they were real, he
will often not get better and the present life trauma will not lift.
By the way don't ever tell your pc that his past life memories are
a delusion, you will lose him as a pc. He just won't come back.
So there is nothing special in any of this except the surmise that
we have lived before and have found life rough enough to rue, and have
engaged in not-isness in order to make our lives more sufferable.
Who among you considers Truth so beautiful that you were willing to
know it all?
Abused children often forget their abuse only to remember it years
later. Well, if you keep going earlier similar, memories of your past
lives and your misadventures there may also start showing up, unless of
course you have some sort of strong preexisting bias against allowing
for the existence of such things.
That's a sure sign though, you know.
However, given the existence of past lives, it is reasonable to
assume that we have done bad things there, and have had bad things done
to us.
It is also reasonable to assume that some of those bad things that
we did there, were similar to bad things that happened to us in this
life, especially between parent and child, and man and woman.
It is also reasonable to assume that some of those bad things that
were done to use in past lives, were similar to bad things we did to
others in this life, again between parent and child and man and woman.
And most especially between the archetypal protagonists and
antagonists of our primary trans lifetime basic purposes (GPMS).
All that Scientology is adding to this is that when bad things in
this life time lock up with bad things in past life times, you get an
unrelievable mess unless you audit both of them to completion.
That is the sum totality of what Scientology has added to a very
old and respected subject.
And it is kind of obvious, isn't it?
Children in this life don't like to think they were mean and
heartless parents in past lives, and men and women in this life don't
like to think they were women and men in past lives.
Thus no one can remember their past lives, as they have effectively
nailed them out of existence. It is much more socially acceptable to
remember being abused in this life than to remember that you were also
an abuser in a past life.
The irony is that the thetan is totally stuck on his time track at
exactly those moments that he thinks doesn't exist.
The real catcher is that you may have been an abuser in a past life
even if you weren't abused in this life.
Such people may even go so far as to deny the validity of your
memories of being abused in this life because it misses the withhold on
them of being an abuser themselves in a past life.
They are just not-ising YOU.
Sometimes people who are afraid of what they have done in their
past lives, and who yet do not know, will pretend that nothing that
happened to them in this life is bothering them. They hope in this way
to assure that their slate is clean from the past.
'If nothing bad happened to me in this life, that means I have been
good in my past lives (I hope).'
That however is the essence of the co-excused withhold.
A co-excused withhold is when you forget what mother is doing to
you in this life if she will forget what you did AS a mother to a child
in a past life.
Nothing here, nothing there.
I assure you, if you can't remember it, you did it.
So cut the sweetness and light and get to work.
Sometimes people 'make up' for being bad in past lives by being
really really good in this life and insisting that everyone else be the
same way. They are full of righteous indignation at your slightest
misstep from the true and narrow. The maddening thing is you can never
find anything on them, they are just so squeaky clean. As long as you
keep your investigations to this life, that is.
So were does justice come into all this? Well as I said there is
no implication that bad things happen in this life BECAUSE you did
something bad in a past life. Sometimes bad things just happen to you
out of the blue.
Someone has got to start it.
In fact auditing is best directed at finding out where YOU started
it. That is the day you rue the most and which locks you into all those
other days when other people started it.
Therefore, there IS an implication that if you did do something bad
in a past life, then when it happens to you in this life you will hold
onto it harder because it helps you justify what you did in a past life.
'It's ok I raped my daughter when I was a father 300 years ago
because my father is raping me now. God, I am never going to get over
this. (Thank you Lord).'
The present life incident is impossible to audit out because the
person is relieved they have it.
Another thing that happens is people get raped and they feel
guilty. That's ridiculous, they were wronged and yet they feel to
blame. Well, it may not be a this life time blame they are feeling! So
now they know what it feels like to be on the other side of the overt
motivator sequence.
If someone is holding on to a motivator in this life because semi
consciously it is helping them justify and feel better about their
overts in a past life, then it will be impossible to audit out the
motivator in this life without running out the overt in the past life.
They just never get better, and that's why therapies that are
addressed only to this life, just sometimes don't work.
The guy's got a record and he is not telling you about it.
It could be you don't want to hear it as an auditor either.
A psychiatrist is some one who wants you to forget your past life
mis deeds and sell you drugs to help you suffer through the outrageous
slings and arrows of misfortune in this life.
About the only way that "justice" enters into this, is the old cat
in the bag theory. If you let the cat out of the bag it MAY come home
and sit in your own lap.
In Scientology this is called contagion of aberration, and 'you
reap what you sow'.
If you abuse your children as a parent, and they dramatize this
trauma by abusing their children, who likewise then abuse their children,
well then, finally when you come back as a child yourself, you may get
one of those abused children as a parent and they will abuse you!
Some people consider this sweet justice.
Really it is a pit of despair.
So this is one of the sore points that people have with Scientology
and with Immortality in general.
My Humble Opinion.
Note that an Immortal who clears all this stuff out, finally
goes Eternal. And that's the end of suffering.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Wed Mar 15 20:24:10 EDT 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/sci14.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)
iD8DBQFYydsrURT1lqxE3HERAqjCAJoDrSU2HkA6/BiDDOVYNoDEOOr43gCg0Om/
sdnTmpoNdJ4zs0knP6qKvn4=
=RIW/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, March 14, 2017
OTPOWER (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
OT POWER
If one considers that the world is a virtual projection, then the
definition of OT powers is readily obvious.
It is someone who can reseat himself in the sovereign center of his
own projection booth again, and re grab the making of any projection,
and then let go of it such that it disappears.
Christ said that if we had enough faith, we could cast the mountain
sideways. This is not exactly correct, because the projection is anew
every moment of time, like a candle flame.
However one can cease projecting the mountain where it is, and then
reproject a new refresh of it somewhere else. Even when one is just
seeing the mountain where it is, its a constant refresh every second.
It isn't the same mountain from moment to moment.
More germane to human existence is the concept of resonance and
synchronization of projection.
If two beings sit at a table, and each projects their mental image
of a colored ball on the table, it is conceivable that the two disparate
projections could lock onto each other, go into sync, and begin to act
'as one ball' to the two viewers.
By this we mean that if one viewer moved his projection of the
ball, the other viewer would find his projection moving also without his
will.
Thus they think they are two people looking at the 'same ball' from
two different viewpoints, when in fact they are both looking at two
different balls (their own rendition) from the same viewpoint, scalar
static where all beings lie.
Of course they would have had to will the syncing to take place,
or it couldn't hold, but if they play the game of denying this after it
has in fact taken hold, they can get into a struggle with the ball for
'ownership', namely whose will moves it where.
If one considers the virtual projection theory of external reality,
then it is readily obvious that the entire external projection could be
such a resonant co synchronization between all the beings in it.
Thus at no time does anyone NOT have full OT powers, they are
merely denying that they do in such a way that they can not momentarily
unsync their projection with the projection of others. That inability
to cease projecting in sync with others, is itself an OT ability.
Inability to project or NOT project is an OT power.
This results in the magic of no magic.
Whether or not one 'believes' in OT powers, one must admit that IF
there are OT powers, then the above analysis has to be correct.
It can be no other way.
Such understandings can possibly lead to fruitful lines of
research, hypothesis, experimentation and verification.
I think it is mainly a matter of willingness, the flinch from
infinite power and infinite beauty is infinite.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clear Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Mar 13 12:06:02 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/otpower
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)
iD8DBQFYxsNqURT1lqxE3HERAqeXAJ9FL9NJ3zDj1LJUsw5N8icZPj9xSwCcC6c4
FCFCCAA5qkbPCrNrkU1/7o8=
=m9Ch
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
OT POWER
If one considers that the world is a virtual projection, then the
definition of OT powers is readily obvious.
It is someone who can reseat himself in the sovereign center of his
own projection booth again, and re grab the making of any projection,
and then let go of it such that it disappears.
Christ said that if we had enough faith, we could cast the mountain
sideways. This is not exactly correct, because the projection is anew
every moment of time, like a candle flame.
However one can cease projecting the mountain where it is, and then
reproject a new refresh of it somewhere else. Even when one is just
seeing the mountain where it is, its a constant refresh every second.
It isn't the same mountain from moment to moment.
More germane to human existence is the concept of resonance and
synchronization of projection.
If two beings sit at a table, and each projects their mental image
of a colored ball on the table, it is conceivable that the two disparate
projections could lock onto each other, go into sync, and begin to act
'as one ball' to the two viewers.
By this we mean that if one viewer moved his projection of the
ball, the other viewer would find his projection moving also without his
will.
Thus they think they are two people looking at the 'same ball' from
two different viewpoints, when in fact they are both looking at two
different balls (their own rendition) from the same viewpoint, scalar
static where all beings lie.
Of course they would have had to will the syncing to take place,
or it couldn't hold, but if they play the game of denying this after it
has in fact taken hold, they can get into a struggle with the ball for
'ownership', namely whose will moves it where.
If one considers the virtual projection theory of external reality,
then it is readily obvious that the entire external projection could be
such a resonant co synchronization between all the beings in it.
Thus at no time does anyone NOT have full OT powers, they are
merely denying that they do in such a way that they can not momentarily
unsync their projection with the projection of others. That inability
to cease projecting in sync with others, is itself an OT ability.
Inability to project or NOT project is an OT power.
This results in the magic of no magic.
Whether or not one 'believes' in OT powers, one must admit that IF
there are OT powers, then the above analysis has to be correct.
It can be no other way.
Such understandings can possibly lead to fruitful lines of
research, hypothesis, experimentation and verification.
I think it is mainly a matter of willingness, the flinch from
infinite power and infinite beauty is infinite.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clear Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Mar 13 12:06:02 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/otpower
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)
iD8DBQFYxsNqURT1lqxE3HERAqeXAJ9FL9NJ3zDj1LJUsw5N8icZPj9xSwCcC6c4
FCFCCAA5qkbPCrNrkU1/7o8=
=m9Ch
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Sunday, March 12, 2017
ADORE286 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Zinj (zinjifar@yahoo.com) wrote:
>I suspect that even parchesi is a superior game to rationalizing
>inhumanity to others based on terror of an 'ever dwindling spiral'.
Rationalizing inhumanity to others IS engaging in the dwindling
spiral.
The dwindling spiral consists of the following:
1.) Overt
2.) Regret
3.) Restraint
4.) Justification by using motivators AFTER the overt.
5.) Redramatization of the Overt
6.) Goto 2
"Eventually all become marbles on the thetan plane." - Adore
That's a fact Jack.
Homer
Tue Sep 13 23:17:59 EDT 2005
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Mar 12 12:06:02 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore286.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)
iD8DBQFYxXHrURT1lqxE3HERAvzYAKCDL9k5KIOzt9C0cpej9laQeyRLUQCgkTCC
4R4BqKyxYQcpkdL7g0J/gSA=
=mPUW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Zinj (zinjifar@yahoo.com) wrote:
>I suspect that even parchesi is a superior game to rationalizing
>inhumanity to others based on terror of an 'ever dwindling spiral'.
Rationalizing inhumanity to others IS engaging in the dwindling
spiral.
The dwindling spiral consists of the following:
1.) Overt
2.) Regret
3.) Restraint
4.) Justification by using motivators AFTER the overt.
5.) Redramatization of the Overt
6.) Goto 2
"Eventually all become marbles on the thetan plane." - Adore
That's a fact Jack.
Homer
Tue Sep 13 23:17:59 EDT 2005
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Mar 12 12:06:02 EDT 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore286.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)
iD8DBQFYxXHrURT1lqxE3HERAvzYAKCDL9k5KIOzt9C0cpej9laQeyRLUQCgkTCC
4R4BqKyxYQcpkdL7g0J/gSA=
=mPUW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Saturday, March 11, 2017
ADORE711 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
STUPIDITY AS A SMART SOLUTION
From private mail, names removed.
> Remember Hanzel and Gretal? They left a trail of bread crumbs to find
> their way out of the woods and the birds ate them. You LIKE being
> lost? I hate it.
Indication: You hate it now, but at one time waking up was too easy
and you hated being found.
To replicate the choices to not know, you will need to find the
aesthetics of being lost and the joy to success.
You may considered there were 'unintended consequences' they too need
to run out.
Run the following staircase:
Beauty of being found
Ugly of being found
Beauty of being lost
Ugly of being lost
> Homer, am I doomed to stupidity?
Stupidity is unknowness of your own causitive postulates and
considerations.
Only as long as stupidity remains a smart solution for you, will it
stick around.
Recover the intelligence to being stupid, and you will regain
ability to be stupid or smart at will.
Run the,
Beauty of being smart
Ugly of being smart
Beauty of being stupid
Ugly of being stupid
That's a standard 'staircase' that we all walk down.
Run it and the one above on found and lost as:
Spot NO beauty of being smart (pretended no)
Spot SOME beauty of being smart
Spot NO ugly of being smart
Spot SOME ugly of being smart
Spot NO beauty of being stupid
Spot SOME beauty of being stupid
Spot NO ugly of being stupid
Spot SOME ugly of being stupid.
If any line makes no sense or doesn't run, just go to the next one,
run them around and around, can be soloed in session or in the background
of life. Unlimited processes, both of them.
Homer
Sat Jan 30 15:41:19 EST 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Mar 11 12:06:03 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore711.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)
iD8DBQFYxC57URT1lqxE3HERAgRWAKDZomhKxkSRIQOHxKqaZtwMkOuA4QCeMMeo
27Qb5/Jhk9Jc7GdPSxxgKTM=
=m+vM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
STUPIDITY AS A SMART SOLUTION
From private mail, names removed.
> Remember Hanzel and Gretal? They left a trail of bread crumbs to find
> their way out of the woods and the birds ate them. You LIKE being
> lost? I hate it.
Indication: You hate it now, but at one time waking up was too easy
and you hated being found.
To replicate the choices to not know, you will need to find the
aesthetics of being lost and the joy to success.
You may considered there were 'unintended consequences' they too need
to run out.
Run the following staircase:
Beauty of being found
Ugly of being found
Beauty of being lost
Ugly of being lost
> Homer, am I doomed to stupidity?
Stupidity is unknowness of your own causitive postulates and
considerations.
Only as long as stupidity remains a smart solution for you, will it
stick around.
Recover the intelligence to being stupid, and you will regain
ability to be stupid or smart at will.
Run the,
Beauty of being smart
Ugly of being smart
Beauty of being stupid
Ugly of being stupid
That's a standard 'staircase' that we all walk down.
Run it and the one above on found and lost as:
Spot NO beauty of being smart (pretended no)
Spot SOME beauty of being smart
Spot NO ugly of being smart
Spot SOME ugly of being smart
Spot NO beauty of being stupid
Spot SOME beauty of being stupid
Spot NO ugly of being stupid
Spot SOME ugly of being stupid.
If any line makes no sense or doesn't run, just go to the next one,
run them around and around, can be soloed in session or in the background
of life. Unlimited processes, both of them.
Homer
Sat Jan 30 15:41:19 EST 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Mar 11 12:06:03 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore711.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)
iD8DBQFYxC57URT1lqxE3HERAgRWAKDZomhKxkSRIQOHxKqaZtwMkOuA4QCeMMeo
27Qb5/Jhk9Jc7GdPSxxgKTM=
=m+vM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Friday, March 10, 2017
ADORE136 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
DREAMBALL VS MEATBALL
The universe runs on dicoms, not only at the lower level where
people play games of opposition, but also at the higher level where
the created manifestation is then pressed into service as persistence.
Native State - Unmanifestation
As-is - Vanishing Truth
Alter-is - Lie
Isness - Persisting Truth
Not-isness - Persisting Lie
For example the being starts off Looking By Knowing, he knows
something and then sees it, and then falls down into Knowing by
Looking, he sees something and there by comes to know about it.
Looking by Knowing is creation. Knowing by Looking is Learning
by being an effect.
Same thing with Determination.
The being starts off determining that such and so will happen,
and then falls down to trying to determine what the hell happened?!
The first is cause, the second is effect.
The being starts off as 'BE CAUSE!' creating things, and then
falls down to blame 'Well that happened BECAUSE...'.
You see what a Joke this is?
The primary operating dicom of a being creating a manifestation
and pressing it into service as a persistence, is the Consideration
Observation flip flop.
Consideration and Observation form a dicom.
Consideration is Looking by Knowing, being cause.
Observation is Knowing by Looking, being effect.
A 'God Postulate' is that postulate which the being thinks is
true because he has OBSERVED it to be true, when in fact it is true
because he considers it is true.
It is called a God Postulate because in truth all he has to do is
change his mind about it, and it will vanish. Since God Postulates
are HUGE overwhelms to the being, its like being a God when you
finally change one of these back to native state.
First he creates a space, and puts a LOT of mean nasty looking
spiders in that space. That's consideration, looking by knowing etc.
Then he observes the spiders are coming after him and are
dangerous so he runs away, thus solidifying his space/time bubble and
assuring his own doom as monster food.
I mean if you create a spider and you run away from it in fear,
SURELY it will come after you, don't you see? It can't help but do so
because your own postulates presuppose that it will.
The minute you flinch or cringe or try to get away from any
space/time manifestation, the whole thing goes solid on you. The
minute you walk towards it in utter fearlessness, the whole thing
becomes like light dust, and blows away at the slightest wind.
So the guy creates a dream by consideration and then turns
it into a nightmare through observation, learning by looking etc.
He observes his spiders eating someone else, so he LEARNS that
they must be dangerous. He is no longer MAKING them dangerous, hey
man no one makes a spider THAT dangerous, don't you see, so he has
handed his sovereignty over to the spider who now has more cause than
he, and so of course his worst fears come true.
THEY COME TRUE BECAUSE HE SAYS THEY ARE TRUE, but he believes
they were true BEFORE he said they were true.
Thus he is denying the power of his postulates, and that power
then shifts over to what is postulated!
Thus he lives and dies in a lie that causes persistance of the
spiders coming after him, or whatever his favorite Nemesis One is.
If as an Eternally motionless Orientation point you put a hundred
megatons of power into the Symbol spider, and then consider that the
spider is the orientation point and you are the symbol and try to run
from the spider, well it will come after you with 100 megatons of power.
It HAS to, the power CAN'T GO ANYWHERE ELSE.
That's justice.
And jestice.
You can't make a space/time bubble and then consider you are IN IT
and mobile without having the space/time bubble come after you.
In trying to rehab an OT then, one wants to return to the being the
facility of making postulates as consideration and cause and then
believing they are true as observation and effect.
Operating this one dicom will operate the entire machinery that
puts him into dream time running from every illusion that he ever
created.
When you can make your spiders roll on the floor in laughter and
blow them away like pixie dust with a single breath, you will have
gotten the idea.
Of course they will look at you with their sad little eyes
because they know their time is up, and you are welcome to fall for
it and enter another fear and run cycle...
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 Mar 9 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore136.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)
iD8DBQFYwYt6URT1lqxE3HERAraDAJ9z6fDxz1UA0HeCf8hUEcvPoRvttwCgxc2L
d05RXwDwP23ItifKNnQ+lJs=
=Mm/y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
DREAMBALL VS MEATBALL
The universe runs on dicoms, not only at the lower level where
people play games of opposition, but also at the higher level where
the created manifestation is then pressed into service as persistence.
Native State - Unmanifestation
As-is - Vanishing Truth
Alter-is - Lie
Isness - Persisting Truth
Not-isness - Persisting Lie
For example the being starts off Looking By Knowing, he knows
something and then sees it, and then falls down into Knowing by
Looking, he sees something and there by comes to know about it.
Looking by Knowing is creation. Knowing by Looking is Learning
by being an effect.
Same thing with Determination.
The being starts off determining that such and so will happen,
and then falls down to trying to determine what the hell happened?!
The first is cause, the second is effect.
The being starts off as 'BE CAUSE!' creating things, and then
falls down to blame 'Well that happened BECAUSE...'.
You see what a Joke this is?
The primary operating dicom of a being creating a manifestation
and pressing it into service as a persistence, is the Consideration
Observation flip flop.
Consideration and Observation form a dicom.
Consideration is Looking by Knowing, being cause.
Observation is Knowing by Looking, being effect.
A 'God Postulate' is that postulate which the being thinks is
true because he has OBSERVED it to be true, when in fact it is true
because he considers it is true.
It is called a God Postulate because in truth all he has to do is
change his mind about it, and it will vanish. Since God Postulates
are HUGE overwhelms to the being, its like being a God when you
finally change one of these back to native state.
First he creates a space, and puts a LOT of mean nasty looking
spiders in that space. That's consideration, looking by knowing etc.
Then he observes the spiders are coming after him and are
dangerous so he runs away, thus solidifying his space/time bubble and
assuring his own doom as monster food.
I mean if you create a spider and you run away from it in fear,
SURELY it will come after you, don't you see? It can't help but do so
because your own postulates presuppose that it will.
The minute you flinch or cringe or try to get away from any
space/time manifestation, the whole thing goes solid on you. The
minute you walk towards it in utter fearlessness, the whole thing
becomes like light dust, and blows away at the slightest wind.
So the guy creates a dream by consideration and then turns
it into a nightmare through observation, learning by looking etc.
He observes his spiders eating someone else, so he LEARNS that
they must be dangerous. He is no longer MAKING them dangerous, hey
man no one makes a spider THAT dangerous, don't you see, so he has
handed his sovereignty over to the spider who now has more cause than
he, and so of course his worst fears come true.
THEY COME TRUE BECAUSE HE SAYS THEY ARE TRUE, but he believes
they were true BEFORE he said they were true.
Thus he is denying the power of his postulates, and that power
then shifts over to what is postulated!
Thus he lives and dies in a lie that causes persistance of the
spiders coming after him, or whatever his favorite Nemesis One is.
If as an Eternally motionless Orientation point you put a hundred
megatons of power into the Symbol spider, and then consider that the
spider is the orientation point and you are the symbol and try to run
from the spider, well it will come after you with 100 megatons of power.
It HAS to, the power CAN'T GO ANYWHERE ELSE.
That's justice.
And jestice.
You can't make a space/time bubble and then consider you are IN IT
and mobile without having the space/time bubble come after you.
In trying to rehab an OT then, one wants to return to the being the
facility of making postulates as consideration and cause and then
believing they are true as observation and effect.
Operating this one dicom will operate the entire machinery that
puts him into dream time running from every illusion that he ever
created.
When you can make your spiders roll on the floor in laughter and
blow them away like pixie dust with a single breath, you will have
gotten the idea.
Of course they will look at you with their sad little eyes
because they know their time is up, and you are welcome to fall for
it and enter another fear and run cycle...
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 Mar 9 12:06:02 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore136.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)
iD8DBQFYwYt6URT1lqxE3HERAraDAJ9z6fDxz1UA0HeCf8hUEcvPoRvttwCgxc2L
d05RXwDwP23ItifKNnQ+lJs=
=Mm/y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, March 8, 2017
DATING (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
DATING
There is an interesting way to do dating on a meter if you find
the old greater-than, less-than hard to do.
Take a piece of paper and draw out a time line, you can do this
for this life if you are dating back to conception, or you can do it
for the whole track.
For the whole track it might look something like
0 10 100 1000
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1000 10,000 100,000 1 mi
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1 mi 10 mi 100 mi 1 bi
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1 bi 10 bi 100 bi 1 tri
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1 tri 10 tri 100 tri 1 quad
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1 quad 10 quad 100 quad 1 quint
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1 mi = 1 million = 1,000,000
1 bi = 1 billion = 1,000,000,000
1 tri = 1 trillion = 1,000,000,000,000
1 quad = 1 quadrillion = 1,000,000,000,000,000
1 quint = 1 quintillion = 1,000,000,000,000,000,000
Conceive it as one long line with the numbers spaced evenly along
the line even if its wrapped around on many lines as I have show
above.
Notice the last number on each line is the same as the first
number on the next line.
Then hold the cans in one hand and a pen in the other and POINT
with the pen along the continuous line from 0 to 1 quint. Where the
needle reacts hunt around with the pen back and forth in that area
until you get an exact blowdown reaction. Mark the line with the pen.
THEN figure out what date the point on the line refers to, if you
still need to. You can get very exact dating done this way without
ever actually getting all the digits of the number.
You can also do this when hunting for the next major incident to
run in this life, the file clerk will sometimes respond to a pen point
when it won't respond to dating. Just make a line and number it from
1998 to 1951 or when ever you were born, or even before by about 10
years if you want to get your last death, and start pointing and mark
and take up what reads.
For line plots of this life I like to mark the years along
the line but then I also mark the beginning and end of each
school year, and the beginning and end of each summer. I mark
also when my birthday was and how old I was during each period.
This makes for a more complex line plot that look slike
the following, but its more meaningful for the pen pointing.
12th grade Freshman Sophmore
--------------| |--------------| |--------------|
1969 1970 1971
-------|------|-------|------|-------|-------|--------|---------------
Summer Summer
at camp in NYC
|----------------------|------------------------|
18 years old 19 years old
It makes for a complex time line, but if you can get in every
year at school, what dorm you were in, who your room mates where,
where you went for summer vacations, all the way back to 0 years old,
you will have quite a time line. Then you can also mark your major
injuries and losses etc.
By the way when dating with words during this life I tend to NOT
like to date 2 years old, 3 years old etc. THat time line starts at 0
years old which my body doesn't like. So I use 1st year of life, 2nd
year of life, 3rd year of life etc. And don't forget conception, the
being actually turns 1 year old 9 months before anyone generally gives
him a birthday party for it!
If you are hunting for early childhood engrams or prenatals in
the sticky blackness, you can draw out one year with Jan, Feb Mar etc,
and run the pen pointing on that line. You can have one month per
line if you want really fine spotting or have them all on the one line
if you just want the approximate month something happened.
Once you find an area that reads, go before the read and then
after the read until the needle finds an area that is NOT reading, and
then hone in on the exact point that is reading, back and forth until
you narrow it down to a single point.
Then mark the point and consider that your answer, if you want to
put it into words, come up with an exact answer if you can or an
approximate answer if you wish. Don't push it.
This is a very powerful dating technique and one that your GE and
BT's/clusters can relate to really well as the language thing kind of
leaves them hanging.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith News, Web, Telnet Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 E-mail, FTP, Shell Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com info@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Mar 8 12:06:03 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/dating.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)
iD8DBQFYwDn7URT1lqxE3HERAlH6AJ0RfZp328wpcSh5wRU0EajlQr/zuwCghT3w
j3RZQDmmWiR+iYKsnbB7nfg=
=TNRq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
DATING
There is an interesting way to do dating on a meter if you find
the old greater-than, less-than hard to do.
Take a piece of paper and draw out a time line, you can do this
for this life if you are dating back to conception, or you can do it
for the whole track.
For the whole track it might look something like
0 10 100 1000
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1000 10,000 100,000 1 mi
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1 mi 10 mi 100 mi 1 bi
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1 bi 10 bi 100 bi 1 tri
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1 tri 10 tri 100 tri 1 quad
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1 quad 10 quad 100 quad 1 quint
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1 mi = 1 million = 1,000,000
1 bi = 1 billion = 1,000,000,000
1 tri = 1 trillion = 1,000,000,000,000
1 quad = 1 quadrillion = 1,000,000,000,000,000
1 quint = 1 quintillion = 1,000,000,000,000,000,000
Conceive it as one long line with the numbers spaced evenly along
the line even if its wrapped around on many lines as I have show
above.
Notice the last number on each line is the same as the first
number on the next line.
Then hold the cans in one hand and a pen in the other and POINT
with the pen along the continuous line from 0 to 1 quint. Where the
needle reacts hunt around with the pen back and forth in that area
until you get an exact blowdown reaction. Mark the line with the pen.
THEN figure out what date the point on the line refers to, if you
still need to. You can get very exact dating done this way without
ever actually getting all the digits of the number.
You can also do this when hunting for the next major incident to
run in this life, the file clerk will sometimes respond to a pen point
when it won't respond to dating. Just make a line and number it from
1998 to 1951 or when ever you were born, or even before by about 10
years if you want to get your last death, and start pointing and mark
and take up what reads.
For line plots of this life I like to mark the years along
the line but then I also mark the beginning and end of each
school year, and the beginning and end of each summer. I mark
also when my birthday was and how old I was during each period.
This makes for a more complex line plot that look slike
the following, but its more meaningful for the pen pointing.
12th grade Freshman Sophmore
--------------| |--------------| |--------------|
1969 1970 1971
-------|------|-------|------|-------|-------|--------|---------------
Summer Summer
at camp in NYC
|----------------------|------------------------|
18 years old 19 years old
It makes for a complex time line, but if you can get in every
year at school, what dorm you were in, who your room mates where,
where you went for summer vacations, all the way back to 0 years old,
you will have quite a time line. Then you can also mark your major
injuries and losses etc.
By the way when dating with words during this life I tend to NOT
like to date 2 years old, 3 years old etc. THat time line starts at 0
years old which my body doesn't like. So I use 1st year of life, 2nd
year of life, 3rd year of life etc. And don't forget conception, the
being actually turns 1 year old 9 months before anyone generally gives
him a birthday party for it!
If you are hunting for early childhood engrams or prenatals in
the sticky blackness, you can draw out one year with Jan, Feb Mar etc,
and run the pen pointing on that line. You can have one month per
line if you want really fine spotting or have them all on the one line
if you just want the approximate month something happened.
Once you find an area that reads, go before the read and then
after the read until the needle finds an area that is NOT reading, and
then hone in on the exact point that is reading, back and forth until
you narrow it down to a single point.
Then mark the point and consider that your answer, if you want to
put it into words, come up with an exact answer if you can or an
approximate answer if you wish. Don't push it.
This is a very powerful dating technique and one that your GE and
BT's/clusters can relate to really well as the language thing kind of
leaves them hanging.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith News, Web, Telnet Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 E-mail, FTP, Shell Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com info@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Mar 8 12:06:03 EST 2017
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/dating.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)
iD8DBQFYwDn7URT1lqxE3HERAlH6AJ0RfZp328wpcSh5wRU0EajlQr/zuwCghT3w
j3RZQDmmWiR+iYKsnbB7nfg=
=TNRq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)