Clearing Archive Roboposter
roboposter at lightlink.com
Wed Dec 2 06:06:02 EST 2015
((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
THE CORE AND NO-SYMPATHY
EXM - 44
Copyright (C) 1992 A Voice of the Free Zone (Electra)
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
'What No Sympathy has there been?'
'What No Sympathy have you regretted?'
'What No Sympathy have you justified?'
'What No Sympathy have you gone back to doing?'
'What No Sympathy have you restrained?'
There is an indecision and a DECISION ABOUT THE INDECISION right
between the regret and the justification.
Indecision and Decision about Indecision
No Sympathy - Regret - Justification - No Sympathy
The full cycle goes as follows.
4.) No Sympathy
5.) Recognition of Error
8.) Decision about Indecision
9.) Refused Error
9a.) Refused Correction
9b.) Making something wrong right, making right what isn't.
10.) Refused Apology
11.) Refused Confession
12.) Refused Repentance
12a.) Refused Contrition
13.) Refused Forgiveness
13a.) Refused Absolution
15.) Chronic unwanted condition or overwhelm
17.) No Sympathy
The point you need to find is number 8. The whole thing is held in
place by the being's Decision about Indecision.
He is trying to pretend that the stretch of his time track from
step 5 through step 16 never happened. He wants every one to think that
it was just No Sympathy all the way through, and that he was RIGHT for
what he did. Thus he is burying the middle part of his No Sympathy
Sandwich out of sight and out of mind.
This will resolve the ALL BLACK case, because he is using blackness
to hide his regret, indecision, decision about indecision, and
justification from himself and everyone else.
This is the core.
The blackness you see when you close your eyes is that blackness.
'The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be
single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be
evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light
that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!' St. Matthew
Any part of the 16 part cycle above can be run with benefit.
1.) 'Tell me about Provocation'
2.) 'Tell me about Restimulation'
3.) 'Tell me about Dramatization'
4.) 'Tell me about No Sympathy'
5.) 'Tell me about Recognition of Error'
6.) 'Tell me about Regret'
7.) 'Tell me about Indecision'
8.) 'Tell me about Decision about Indecision'
9.) 'Tell me about Refused Error'
9a.) 'Tell me about Refused Correction'
9b.) 'Tell me about making something wrong right.'
9b.) 'Tell me about making something right wrong.'
10.) 'Tell me about Refused Apology'
11.) 'Tell me about Refused Confession'
12.) 'Tell me about Refused Repentance'
13.) 'Tell me about Refused Forgiveness'
14.) 'Tell me about Justification'
15.) 'Tell me about Chronic unwanted condition or overwhelm'
16.) 'Tell me about Re-Dramatization'
17.) 'Tell me about No Sympathy'
18.) 'Tell me about Restraint'
You can run SOLUTION/PROBLEM on each one of these. For example,
'Tell me about Refused Apology.'
'How has this been a Solution for you?'
'How has this been a Problem to you?'
What you want are the core decisions that go into locking up the
bank on the person which in this case involve justification, refused
regret, refused error, refused apology, refused confession, and refused
An apology can be given to and received from.
You can refuse to give an apology to someone, and you can to refuse
to receive (accept) an apology from someone.
If you OWE someone an apology, or you owe them to accept theirs,
and you don't, then you will screw your self to the wall with your own
People often refuse to apologize for something they regret because
the other person is refusing to apologize to them for something too.
People feel 'taken' if they admit they were wrong to someone who is
still refusing to do the same. Thus two wrongs come to make a right.
If they won't apologize, I won't apologize. Both beings go down the
tubes. The REGRET is real, so it MUST be apologized, there is no other
way out. It really has nothing to do with what the the other being is
doing. It's your own heart that makes the demand.
Your conscience has nothing to do with their conscience.
Refusing to give an apology that you owe to someone because they
are refusing to give an apology they owe to you is very bad business and
is the mark of a small being. Its also a fast way to become a smaller
A big being will make his apologies to anyone, no matter who they
are or what they are doing. This is a lesson every thetan on Earth has
failed, and every thetan on Earth must re-learn if they are to become
full OT. The alternative is unconfrontable. There are only two routes
out of here, up or down. You either go out with wings, or you go out in
THIS is the deciding point as to whether a being makes it out of
here or not: Can he apologize to his worst enemy for what he truly
regrets, no matter how much the enemy is refusing to do the same?
Nobility demands its due, even if you are the only being with any
decency left alive in the universe.
If you refuse to do the right thing only because everyone else is
doing the wrong thing, then you will be buried under their mistakes.
So running refused apology can be the make break point of a case
and a thorough address to the subject will do wonders for your pc and
raise him miles up the tone scale.
As usual you want to run this on all 8 flows of Parent and Child
and any other terminals you might find.
You will want to run both 'refused to give an apology to' and
'refused to receive an apology from'.
Run it as Parent and Child, Mother and Son, Father and Daughter,
and every combination that you can think of.
1. Have you refused an apology to a Child as a Parent in a past life?
2. Has a Parent refused an apology to you as a Child in this life?
3. Has a Child refused an apology to you as a Parent in a past life?
4. Have you refused an apology to a Parent as a Child in this life?
5. Has any Parent refused an apology to any Child in any life?
6. Has any Child refused an apology to any Parent in any life?
7. Have you refused an apology to yourself as a Parent in a past life?
8. Have you refused an apology to yourself as a Child in this life?
Remember you don't have to use these dogmatic forms to audit these
questions on people. Once they have some understanding they will want
the questions simplified as much as possible. Also the order of them
can be changed to whatever suits your pc and releases the most charge
per unit time.
'Is there a refused apology?'
'Have you refused an apology to a Son?' (as a Mother)
'Has a Mother refused you an apology?' (as a Son)
'Has a Son refused you an apology?' (as a Mother)
'Have you refused an apology to a Mother?' (as a Son)
Don't forget that what your children did to you as a parent in a
past life is critical to what you did to your parents as a child in this
life. If you don't catch the earlier charge you will never run out the
charge of what you did to your parents in this life time. Where do you
think you got most of your horrid ideas from anyway?
People complain about the implied infinite regression in the above
material. What you did in anger to your parents in this life is a
dramatization of what your child did to you as a parent in a past life.
But THAT child got it from HIS children when HE was a parent, etc.
Didn't anyone START IT?
We are all looking for the dude who started it, someone we can
finally blame for the miserable mess we are all in.
Blame is assigning cause to others for wronging oneself.
Regret is assigning cause to oneself for wronging others.
Well there is either an infinite regression or else somewhere back
along the track there was a Child Turd 1, who was hired and payed by us
to dramatize on us as parents (The MOTIVATOR) so that we could then get
on with our GPM of 'To Go to Hell' by dramatizing on others (The OVERT)
and regretting it.
If so, he started it, but we paid him to do so.
Don't discount the possibility that your pc was himself at one time
a Parental Turd 1, acting out self elected cruelty as a Parent towards a
Child (The DED), so that he could enjoy reaping the rewards of all those
cruel things his parents did to him later on the track (The DEDEX).
The question of who started it all and why, is a big one and is
probably high on your pc's mind. The day he figures it out he will be
In the end it may not be necessary to find out who started it,
only necessary to find out who is going to end it.
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Dec 2 06:06:02 EST 2015
Send mail to archive at lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer at lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
More information about the Clear-L