HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
Mon Dec 14 15:37:58 EST 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
BEING AND BECOMING
>homer at lightlink.com wrote:
>> Becoming is replaced by being. (As one goes OT)
>> *THIS IS A NEW THOUGHT*.
CB Willis (cbwillis at adore.lightlink.com) wrote:
>Still seems intimately related to your Proof.
Oh yes. Its been there for years, but finding the application of
it and really getting it makes a difference.
When Hubbard said the question IS the answer, what the hell did he
mean? I mean how is a question an answer?
Well to a meatball it makes no sense, but to a being that obtains
in the mere conception of having, the pre postulations that questions
commit to, are deadly.
Thus if you want to vanish something that is pesisting, you have
to vanish the QUESTIONS that are causing it to persist first.
The Proof talks endlessly about the cycle of creation, wherein a
being creates something via Looking by Knowing, and then flip flops into
making it persist via Knowing by Looking, which is trying to learning
about it by looking at it and question asking.
The efforts to ask the questions of life tie up the body in force
and pain. The questions that have sunk into failure, forgetfulness and
oblivion still wriggle once in a while causing alarming pains and shifts
in internal arrangement and mood.
In auditing you want to spot the incident, spot the questions, find
the PRE postulates implied by the questions, make sure the asking of the
questions ceases utterly in present time and forever more. The common
cognition to every incident is how the questions about "the condition
postulated", continued the condition postulated.
In other words the answer to 'why is this condition persisting'
is because the being is dramatizing the question 'why is this condition
persisting.' The question implies that the condition is persisting,
which creates it in the mere conception of it.
You can't just stop asking questions, you have to duplicate the
entire train of entrails from conception, to creation, to UNWANTED
vanishment, to INTENTIONAL SELF DECEITING question asking, to
persistence, to total defeat.
Intent, motivation and aesthetic must be run out completely or the
condition will simply persist and stick its tongue out at you.
But once you hit the big ones and run them and spot how the
questions about the condition are and always were and always will be the
answer to the condition and thus themselves, then the mind just sits
still. There is just no reason to move.
I mean if you never HAD to ask or answer another question ever
again, would that be heaven on Earth?
You see the being postulates something doesn't matter what, he
puts something there.
"Let there be something!"
Whamo, he's got something, he hasn't a clue WHAT it is because he
hasn't adorned it yet with a WHAT, because he hasn't yet coneived any
considerations on it yet.
So it's just an IS.
Then he adds considerations to the IS that relate it causally
to other IS's and now he has a persisting WHAT. But to reallyt
keep it around he has to consider that the persisting WHAT is a problem
to him, so he needs to figure out what to DO about it, namely what
ELSE he should create in order to deal with this persisting WHAT that
he now considers is a problem to him.
And so now the WHAT is persisting like a rock, which was the intent
behind the machinations and deceits that came before.
There is no liar lying like a man seeking the truth. becuase
that's a train of persistence powered and continued by "Why is this
persisting and what should I do about it?"
Any postulate is a decent from surviving eternally by BEING into
surviving temporally by BECOMING,
This is a change, hence becoming.
If the being loses sight of HOW he does this, then he feels
survival is ONLY by becoming. But that means he CAN not survive, so he
has to continually question how to continue to survive, think, think,
Thinking is question asking is thinking is question asking.
Hubbard said it when he mentioned that thinking was the silliest
activity there was. Few got it, because it makes no sense if all there
is, is surviving by becoming.
The ONLY way to survive by becoming is to think, compute on DOING =
KNOWING + WANTING.
What do I want? What do I know? What should I do?
Once a being falls away from knowing that he can survive outside of
time by being, and can't help but do so, he gets the idea he can die.
You can only die forever IN TIME, and even then its just an
apparency while still in time born of becoming something that can die.
Once it dies, he pops out of time, and the charade is up.
This non the less scares the hell out of him, the mere
contemplation of the possibility of dying forever, to be no more etc, is
enough to make him feel so bad he becomes just SURE its quite possible,
for no being who couldn't die could ever feel that way! :)
Adore calls that the Doubt Effect.
Feelings generated by doubting Eternality are further evidence of a
detested Immortality or Mortality!
This is the decent into seriousness and dramatization.
Dramatization means to bring drama to.
Drama is seriousness, importance, *PERMANENCE* and pain.
Drama enters when FOREVER enters into the realm of becoming.
To become something FOREVER is hell forever, to become nothing
FOREVER is death forever. Both are lies.
The permanence of dying forever, of becoming nothing forever, is
infinite, and thus the seriousness of this becomes infinite too, so the
being starts to dramatize INFINITELY on the subject of how to survive
FOREVER. But that's a game he can't win. He isn't trying to BE
forever, he's trying to BECOME forever, and he knows damn well that it
just won't work.
There is no ethics to a mortal and no logical sense.
As the questions on how to survive forever begin to fail, one by
one, they fail into infinite charge in the back of the brain, sink into
oblivion where the beast is 'never disturbed', and pretty soon, like
layers of sediment, you have layers of dead questions, each containing
infinite charge on infinite failure of infinite survival.
It's this question stack of pancakes that needs to be audited.
It is mind (question asking) and becoming in time that keeps the
stack charged and stirred up, seething in the bowels of the spirit.
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Dec 14 15:37:58 EST 2015
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)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L at mailman.lightlink.com
More information about the Clear-L