ADORE508 (fwd)

Homer Wilson Smith HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
Tue Jul 21 20:37:27 EDT 2015


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

06/06/07 Wednesday 01:05am EST
06/23/09 Tuesday 01:37am EST

       PURPOSE, ORIGINATION and MOCKUPS

       When you first ask the pc 'Whasamatter?', he will tell you all
about his 'hard to confront' items.

      He will talk and talk and talk and get sicker and sicker, because
not one of these items is anything but a smoke screen for what he really
can't confront and what is really wrong with him.

      Every one of these things that the pc complains about gets its
energy and stems from a staggering, utter unwillingness to know
something else.

      In fact the items he talks about HELP him continue to not know his
true items, because he is successfully running an artful dodge on his
true items, namely not knowing the true items BY knowing or trying to
know about the false items.

      When he finally comes up to realizing this, he will stop all the
struggle, and self auditing and trying to know, and get back to being
quite happy not knowing and making damn sure it stays that way (for a
while).

      "You can not know anything by not knowing.

      You can know anything by not knowing.

      But only if you pride not knowing.

      And pride knowing and not knowing only proud knowledge." - Adore

      If he can't confront it, he won't know about it.

      Thus all this 'trying to know' is bogus.  He knows damn well that
if he just settles down into not knowing about it, he WILL start to know
about it spontaneously, probably before he is 'ready' for it.

      He complains about not knowing, but really has too little not
knowing.  He had to create false knowing and false trying to know in
order to keep the not knowing safely in place, because not knowing is
inherently self erasing when done knowingly!

      There are two rules in auditing, the first is more generally true
than the second.

      The first rule is, only the pc knows what is wrong with him.

      Worded differently, only the pc has a clue what is wrong with him.

      That means the auditor should not evaluate for the pc or tell him
what his item is, period.

      The second rule is, if the pc knows about it, it isn't what is
wrong with him.

      Worded differently, the pc hasn't a clue what is wrong with him.

      That means you continue running the superficial garbage just long
enough for the pc to realize its all garbage and no longer, certainly
don't spend hours and hours running the pc's havingness into the ground
with it.

      Asking a pc 'Whasamatter?' is a sure fire way for the pc to hand
you endless problems that are actually SOLUTIONS to him, and thus his
havingness falls like a lead balloon as you take the force out of his
solutions.

      People will hate you for as-ising their solutions for them, unless
you are prepared to handle the underlying problem QUICK!

      One real problem here is Q&A, the auditor says "Whasamatter?" the
pc says, "Oh my mother insulted me again", the auditor says "Ah, your
mother, of course, tell me about your mother."

      GOD DAMN FLUNK!

      Thus if you are going to start a session with 'Ok so Whasamatter?"
you had better FINISH the session 300 commands later with the same
question!

      Then your pc might get a hint that what's going on is he is not
knowing something so ferocious that he has filled his entire life with
garbage just to forget about it.

      But the other real problem is simply, if the pc knows about it, its
a waste of time auditing it!

      In fact it is a gross auditing error because it runs the pc's
havingness down.

      GENERAL AND SPECIFIC

      Now here is the truth about evaluation.

      The auditor DOES know exactly what is wrong with the pc *IN
GENERAL*, at the ONE level.

      But only the pc knows what is wrong with him *IN SPECIFIC*, at the
MANY level, but if he is chattering all about it up front, it ain't it.

      Thus the auditor MUST evaluate for the pc by choosing the general
process to run, but must never evaluate for the pc as to the E/P or
specific item that needs to be found.

      The general item has its roots in the ONE, it is the same for
everyone, the specific item has its roots in the MANY, it is different
for each individual.

      Thus the auditor starts at the ONE, where we are all one being, and
works down from there into the MANY, the specific for each different
being.

      From this we can state a little rule which says, the auditor knows
the general and not the specific, and the pc knows the specific but not
the general.

      That is why the pc needs an auditor at first to help him with the
general.  But in the mean time, the pc doesn't consciously know the
specific either, because he has long ago entombed it in the mausoleum of
his life.

      At the moment the auditor has chosen the general process he has
already evaluated the ONE for the pc, and thus once he starts running
that process, any answer which is a specific, must be the pc's, not the
auditor's, because the auditor has no clue.

      The pc will EXPECT this evaluation to take place by the auditor
from the ONE, or else the pc won't go into session at all.

      If the auditor is not in contact enough with the ONE to be able to
create the presence of the general evaluation, the pc will sense this
and bolt.

      In session is defined by LRH as interested in own case and willing
to talk to the auditor.

      It can further be defined as the auditor is asking the questions
and the pc is answering.

      The second the pc turns it around and starts asking questions and
the auditor is answering them, guess who is the pc?

      Some pc's are very skilled at this, they just want some help,
spelled advice.  Such pc's turn the session around from the word go.

      Some auditors are very skilled at billing the pc for this time, as
there is no need to audit the pc which is a hell of alot harder than
giving useless advice and opinions to the pc.

      IN SESSION means auditor asks the questions and pc answers.

      OUT OF SESSION means pc asks the questions and auditor answers.

      IN SESSION means auditor says "Whatsit?" and pc says "Itsa".

      OUT OF SESSION means pc says "Whatsit?" and auditor says "Itsa".

      That pretty much defines evaulation for you, and its a high risk,
high crime.

      It will put the pc INSTANTLY out of session, but they will continue
to ask and pay for advice forever afterwards.

      To absolutely no avail.

      By the way for ISNESS cases without a lot of not know on their
case, whatsit and itsa may work well, but for seriously far gone not
isness cases like we are talking about here, its a waste of time.

      Why are you asking him 'Whatsit?'.  The pc hasn't a clue what it
is.  Why are you asking him to look, he CAN'T look, it just gives him a
loss.

      The pc has been not looking BY looking (at something else) for
eons, the more you ask him to look the more he will not look.

      You are going to win doing this?

      Most case failures can be attributed to this one cause, running
ISNESS level processes on a NOTISNESS case.

      Auditor says "Whatsit", pc says "I dont know".

      Usual answer is to get the pc into something lighter.  His bank
weighs 40 tons and we are going to run something lighter?

      Something lighter = no auditing = treason.

      Much better to simply run the command to create the not isness in
the first place.

      Prepchecks approach doing this indirectly:

      "Has anything been not-ised?"
      "Has anything been made nothing of?"

      So what's wrong with these?

      Well in the first place they are QUESTIONS, questions are evil.

      Tring to know locks in not know.

      Secondly they direct the pc's attention to his memory to see if he
has a MEMORY of not-ising something.  Efforts to not-is are not recorded
in memory in a way they can be accessed easily.

      The pc is busy not knowing, you expect him to have a clear memory
of not knowing?

      And lastly questions just don't carry the punch of a direct
command:

      Spot NO   not-ising.
      Spot SOME not-ising.

      The pc is going to turn it into a question anyhow:

      "Gee, I wonder what I have been not-ising?"

      so you might as well make it as hard as possible for the pc to do
this by keeping the flow of commands going smoothly enough that the pc
doesn't have a moment's chance to formulate a question out of it.

      ASKING 'WHAT AM I NOT-ISING?' IS NOT RUNNING THE AUDITING COMMAND
"NOT-IS SOMETHING!"

      You understand this?  If not read it again until you do.

      You can't not-is something and ask "what am I not-ising?" at
the same time!

      Once you get a pc smoothly into running commands mode, you will see
the damage done by asking a single question that throws him over into
question asking mode again.

      You might as well scramble his entire bank.

      Not know is like taffy, questions put it through the taffy wringer.

      Stay away from asking questions looking for answers, audit only
with commands.  Question/Answer pairs will arise on their own.

      Remember asking the pc WHAT he is not-ising is asking him to look
through the not-isness to find what is underneath.  This is frankly
impossible as long as the not-is is there.

      It is treating a not-isness case as an isness case who CAN see what
is there.

      You don't want the pc to look at what is under the not-isness, you
want him to look AT the not-ising process itself in present time.

      In other words you want him to stop not-ising not-ising, so you get
him to practice not-ising knowingly, until he nails the not-ising he has
been doing unknowingly.  Then question and answer will appear.

      What is underneath will show on its own once the not-ising is
as-ised.

      "Spot the effort to not know something."
      "Get the idea of not knowing something."

      "Not know something".

      "Not know an effort to not know."

      "Spot an effort to not know a purpose".

      "Spot an effort to not originate."

      That's what he is doing anyhow, and getting him to do it
consciously will cause it to become self vanishing and startle the hell
out of the pc when something actually turns on.

      The auditor may have a heart attack and jump out the window, but
the pc will get better and be left crying and laughing his eyes out,
because he has found his personal fountain head of love again.

      The pc may have informational questions before session which the
auditor should address,

      The PC may ask, "Will this hurt"?

      Answer kindly and quickly "I do hope so."

      Be sure to explain the difference between dull chronic pains
(grind) and loud acute pains (blowoff).

      If the pc doesn't scream "OW!" at the top of his lungs once in a
while, well what are you auditing, the Pablum Rundown?

      And there will probably be basic indoctrination as to what and why
the pc should be there and get auditing, such as what is provided below.

      BUT NOT DURING SESSION.

      Not after you have said "TITS!" (This Is The Session.)

      Once a session has started, that's it with the pc's questions, he
can originate, even originate a question, but never let the pc put you
into answer mode.

      "That's a good question you got there, perhaps you might give me a
few answers..."

      Then get back to the process, "

      "That was interesting, thank you for telling me that ...so spot
no notisness."

      And even before session don't make a big deal out of answering the
pc's questions, he knows damn well why he is there, he just wants to
know if you know also.

      *EVERYTHING* beyond that is a pc's pretense designed to forget
about things more.

      The pc is a MASTER at not knowing BY asking questions.

      He is running one of the deepest most fundamental service fac
computations in existence, the way to not know an answer is to ask
questions.  It is the effort to not know A by trying to know B.

      The guy with all the questions, is trying the hardest to not know,
and all his questions will be about everything but.

      You got a white colar on?  He KNOWS what he is there for.

      But man is he wondering if you do.

      He has a whole track of white colars that pretended to know, but
didn't know.  Worse they wanted the pc to help *THEM* continue to not
know!

      "Today we are going to audit the Pablum Rundown, so we can all
continue to not know.  The registrar is this way..."

      REMEMBER THE PC KNOWS, even the woggie on the street knows.

      Natter merely means you have missed it, you have helped him in his
pretense that nothing is wrong, and boy DOES THAT HURT.  He has to
practically kill himself to not know what he is not knowing.

      Your preclear just doesn't have it to close his pandora's box
once you have nicked it open a bit.

      What the pc wants to know is, if you know how much he is not knowing
and with how much force.

      If he gets the feeling you have been there and lived to tell the
tale, all will be well.  If he feels you are a twit with no confront at
all for force and not know, or worse he thinks you are trying to subsume
him into YOUR OWN need to not know, then HE WILL EAT YOU.

      YUM FOOD, fresh foolish auditor meat, bringing me stupid questions.

      So here is a basic general truth that works for all pc's, that a
process can be built around and run on anyone.

      This starts the session by properly evaluating for the pc from the
ONE, thus putting the pc happily in session because he knows his auditor
knows too.

      With a properly formulated ONE question, the pc and auditor are
one, because the question will indicate deeply to the pc giving him the
feeling the auditor knows the pc from the inside out, IN GENERAL.

      That's called 'pc interest'.

      In sessionness = relief.

      OK, here then is some general brainwash or indoctrination, the
auditor does NOT have to teach this to the pc, but the auditor had
better damn well know it himself.

      PURPOSES, ORIGINATIONS AND MOCKUPS

      Prime purposes give rise to originations of communication.

      Originations of communication are presented as mockups.

      Mockups are full surround sound 3D holographic mental images.

      When a preclear mocks up something, he IS IT, mocking up is an
act of BEING not LOOKING.  After he mocks something up, he can separate
from it, and look at it.

      Words are a via to mockups, the pc sees it as a mockup, tries to
get it across to others as a mockup, and will lower himself to using
words for those who can't BE or see his mockups directly.

      If I BE a pink elephant, and you can BE a pink elephant too, then
we are in direct telepathic resonation with each other, as everything I
choose to BE, you become too.  That's 'seeing' each other's mockups.

      People think "Oh I am not powerful enough to get someone else to
see my mockups."

      No, any being can shut out anyone else's mockups he wants to.  If
he can't see your mockups, no matter how faintly, that's his problem not
yours.  Taking it on as your problem is a wrong indication about the
severity of his condition, and will get you auditing you rather than
him.

      Yet a pc can be in the odd position of not being able to see his
own mockups!

      Nice.  But its the same causal principle, a being can block out
anyone's mockups including his own.  So if you can't get through to him,
its his fault, and if you can't get through to you, its your fault.

      Not being able to see one's own mockups arises from the basic
causal equation we laid out above:

      PURPOSE -> WORTHWHILE ORIGINATION OF COMMUNICATION -> MOCKUPS.

      Turn it around and we get

      NO MOCKUPS -> NO WORTHWHILE ORIGINATION OF COMMUNICATION -> NO
PURPOSE

      So there we have the basic not know on the case and the basic
dicoms that need to be run.

       NO PURPOSE      -  SOME PURPOSE
       NO ORIGINATION  -  SOME ORIGINATION
       NO MOCKUPS      -  SOME MOCKUPS

      Loneliness by the way is simply having no reason to originate to
another, or to receive an origination from another.

      Deeper, one can be alone amongst millions chattering away with you
forever, as long as no one is chattering about *PURPOSE*.

      The minute purpose comes up, interest comes up, and interest means
no longer lonely, even if you are the only being who ever lived.

      People who have lost their purpose, think they need others to have
purpose.  That might be true at a practical level of doing something
about that purpose, but having purpose is something a being has alone
anyhow and gives him reason to be.  Others are merely icing on the cake.

      It is tempting to blame others for not being interested in your
originations, and that may well be, but believe me, if you could
originate a communication of worth, a REAL origination, they would
become just fascinated by you, and follow you around like a puppy dog
that just found a new friend.

      Imagine you sitting in a huge beautiful plaza with thousands of
people crossing it every day, without one thing to say to anyone of them
for the rest of your life.

      No reason to get up and move in any direction means no
communication terminals of worth in any direction.

      Which means no purpose of worth in any direction.

      Imagine sitting in a chair alone for a few hours and never once
having a single interesting thought occur to you.  This can cause untold
panic in a being, who then feels he must DO something to get interested.

      No, no interest means no purpose.  Once purpose is recovered, you
CAN'T sit in a chair alone for an hour and not have so many interesting
thoughts you don't know what to do with them all.

      Invisibility of original purpose, no mockups, dead silence on
everything of importance to both sides, and a substitute purpose that
strangles the being to death with every step he takes pursuing it, is
hell.

      Remember as you run this process, purpose, origination and mockups,
one of the first mockups that will turn on with be infinite BLACKNESS
forever for free.

      He has never seen this kind of blackness before and it will give
him the qualms.

      Worse he can hallucinate anything he wants into that blackness, if
he thinks a growing spot of wriggling blackness is a bunch of spiders,
IT WILL TURN INTO THE WORST SPIDERS HE HAS EVER SEEN.

      There is a mechanism behind this, its called doubt is self casting.

      This is what happens.

      The energetic black spot turns on and the pc goes "WHAT *IS* THAT?"

      He's worried it might BE something, so he thinks "MAYBE ITS
SPIDERS!" Suddenly the black spot obliges him and starts to turn into
millions of writhing spiders, so the pc goes "OH MY GOD IT IS SPIDERS!"
and away we go.

      He has to learn not to do this, it is energetic BLACKNESS period,
if he chills out about it, it will REMAIN just blackness.

      Eventually it will turn into beautiful blackness and become his
friend again.

      Worry about "WHAT IT IS", Whatsit, will turn it into whatever ugly
blackness he can conceive of, usually his worst fear.

      Your pc is absolutely beyond trigger happy on mocking up things so
ugly they make him want to make nothing of everything forever.

      So the minute he regains the ability to mockup anything at all,
that is what he will mockup.

      When mockups first turn on, he will either get totally banal stuff
he has no clue where it came from and even less interest in it, except
that he can finally see something, and he will marvel at the clarity of
the colors and detail of objects in the picture.

      Or it will be mockups of searing beauty.

      Or it will be mockups of disaster or agony.

      By disaster I mean he is dangling over the abyss, holding onto a
single branch by one hand, and the other end of the branch is not
connected to anything any more.  That's where the mockup STARTS.

      Talk about fear and the willies.

      By agony, I mean take all the pain ever suffered across all people
and all time and all universes, and put it into one face blaming him for
it all.  He will be very happy to mockup that face and never go near
mockups again.

      You will know this has happened by the distinct sound of gulping.

      As an auditor you had better be the Rock of Gilbralter at this
stage.

      So say the pc suddenly opens up a picture of disaster, being
covered by spiders all over him.

      Pc says "Oh my god you even have a spider crawling on your arm!"

      Now you understand this isn't just any old spider, this is the
meanest nastiest BLACK spider there could be, and it has smaller spiders
all over it, and they have more spiders all over them.  And they are ALL
just breeding and multiplying all over the place even as the pc watches
in horror.

      You say "Oh yes, his name is Goober, he likes jokes, tell him jokes
until he laughs!"

      All the spiders start laughing and they become a beautiful black
spot again peaceably.

      Beautiful blackness runs smoothly in all directions, ugly blackness
is enturbulation, which is caused by worry about WHAT IT IS.

      "Make it laugh, make it smile" will handle just about anything that
turns on.

      The auditor must never allow the pc to take these visions
seriously, because they can out serious the pc right into the mental
ward.

      ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT 'WHAT IS IT?' MAKES IT WORSE, BECAUSE THE
ONLY ANSWER IS ALWAYS THE SAME THING, SOMETHING SO UGLY IT WILL MAKE HIM
WANT TO MAKE NOTHING OUT OF EVERYTHING FOREVER.

      And that is exactly what he is doing.

      The blackness becomes what the pc fears most if he allows it to.

      The pc's wondering what is in the blackness, allows the blackness
to tell HIM what is in it, and fear and doubt then become self casting.

      That is why you can't ask a not isness case "What is it?"

      The last time it started to open up on him and he asked "What is
it?" it made him want to make nothing out of everything, and that's what
an invisible or black V case is.

      A black V case is someone who can't mockup anything or sees only
darkness.  The 5 senses are sight, sound, touch, taste and smell, but
also includes emotion, effort, and motion among many other things that
can be mocked up.

      One way to audit a black V case is to ask him

      "What are you not mocking up?"

      GOD DAMN FLUNK!

      That would violate everything we have said in this posting, so run
instead,

      "Not mockup something!"

      The beauty of the process is he doesn't have to know WHAT he is not
mocking up before he not mocks it up, thus he can't lose by failing the
command, until his mockups turn on in spite of his efforts to turn them
off.  But that's a win :)

      But don't let him ask 'What am I not mocking up?' because then it
will turn on all kinds of terrible things he can't confront.  He is just
certain that if he turns them on, he will never be able to turn them off
again.

      So FIRST we get him ABLE to not mockup things, and once he is
stable KNOWINGLY not mocking up things, he can then let go a bit and
allow the stuff to turn on under his control.

      And remember part of not mocking up something, is not knowing WHAT
you are not mocking up!  Because if you know, even a little bit, what
you are not mocking up, you are in fact mocking it up a bit.  In this
case enough to kill you and your body, or send the two of you to the
mental ward.

      Pandora's Box has an odd kind of lid, you push once on it to close
it and it locks closed.  You push it again, and it flies open, letting
everything out.  Your pc is terrified to tears of this mechanism.

      So now he CAN'T open the box, can't make any mockups of any kind,
good or bad, beacuse he dares not touch the lid again lest it open, and
he doesn't know what to do about it, and worse he has completely
forgotten how it works.  He knows there is something he shouldn't do
lest he open the lid, but he no longer remembers that what he shouldn't
do is try to close it more, as that will open it for good!

      The trick then is to get him to SIT on the lid, so the top unlocks,
but does not fly open, then he can let things out on HIS determinism,
slowly, one thing at a time, until it all turns beautiful again.

      It takes an infinite feed back loop to turn an infinite knowing
being into a blind basket case.

      He hates spiders, so he wonders if there are spiders in the
blackness, and so he starts to see spiders.  He THINKS the spiders were
there before he wondered what was there, but in fact his wonder created
the spiders.  Now that he believes the spiders are there, he is just
sure they are going to come eat him, so he runs away, but they are his
spiders, so they go with him, and he can't get away fast enough, for the
faster he runs, the faster they follow.  And God, he just never knew
spiders had teeth that big...

      That is what it takes to put a GodSoul in the looney bin.

      A being can confront anything as long as he doesn't turn it against
himself by asking questions about it.

      The *QUESTION ASKING*, the worrying about what it might be, is the
problem, and thus the QUESTION IS THE ANSWER.

      The guy thinks the problem is the absence of an answer, but the
problem is in fact the presence of the question.

      Chill out the question, chill out the need for an answer, and the
problem ceases and things return to a state of sovereign peace.

      Wonder kills.

      Terror is knowing by looking, "What is it?", being an effect.

      Peace is looking by knowing, "It is.", being cause.

      Cease the question, and the whole thing smooths out and runs out as
beautifull rather than enturbulated blackness.

      Otherwise, the question turns the full power of the being against
himself, and so he can't win.

      A being can lose utterly, this is how.

      Not know is your friend.

      True not know is self erasing because it is the perfect as-ising of
the not know originally added to the item one wanted to not know.

      One can only keep not know around by pretending to try to know,
question asking.

      Thus knowing not-knowing will always lead you to the truth in the
end.

      In the end spiders are probably enemies and not natural opponents
to his goals, so too much attention on them is not needed.  See
discussion below on enemies and natural opponents.

      After the black will come white and color in a dizzying
kaleidoscopic array of frenzy.

      Then scenes, motion and significance, usually of beauty and
disaster.

      Most of it not even his.  Nice, no need to go to the movies any
more.

      Want to get scared silly, just close your eyes and relax.

      Talk about pc interest, he will just want to turn it down, TOO MUCH
pc interest!

      Not know is your friend at this stage, you can not know ANYTHING
you want for as long as you want.

      In the presence of knowing not-knowing, ANYTHING will run out
smoothly.

      Go "What's it?" and you are dead.

      It is quite alright to let the lid off pandora's box SLOWLY by
sitting on it for a while while things crawl out.

      So you start running:

      Spot no purpose.  Spot some purpose.

      Sometimes a pc will say to you "Well I always wanted to be an
auditor, I want to help people!"

      Bull.  What would he do if everyone were clear?

      The pc will hand you all kinds of 'get rid of goals', "A world
without insanity, criminality or war, now there's a star high goal,
yup!"

      He can't touch putting something there, all he can conceive of is
getting rid of things.

      He would be happy if only he could get rid of ...

      Auditing that list is a deadly high crime.

      Because guess what, if he can't PUT the bad things there, he can't
get rid of them either.

      So you must never waste time on get rid of goals.  They are all
precious solutions to deeper problems of putting things there in the
first place.

       "Spot a no put there."
       "Spot a put there."

       "Spot no worthwhile origination."
       "Spot some worthwhile origination."

      An origination is a PUT THERE.

      A worthwhile origination is a WORTHWHILE PUT THERE.

      Happiness is engaging in WORTHWHILE PUT THERES.

      You see, THAT will tear him up, and quiet him down, because all the
crap he has been putting there, that he has been complaining about are
things that he wants to UN PUT THERE, get rid of, and these aren't the
problem at all.

      Now the question comes up, what about running enemies?

      "Who or what is your worst enemy?

      He will say "Oh I just hate it when my big brother picks on me."

      Oh garbage, he loves that to pieces, it just totally keeps him from
thinking about anything real.

      How about those asteroids coming into smash earth?

      Remember your first monster feelings as a child?

      The first time the toilet water came UP rather than went down!

      Or how about that mountain out in the pacific that is about to
split and cause an 1800 foot tidal wave across the USA.

      Or all the religious nut cases trying to get to heaven by sending
sinners to hell before their time, and who don't give a damn if they
leave the Earth growing green or glowing green?

      But in the end enemies are things that shoot at you from the side
while you are driving on the road to Baghdad.

      Every once in a while an enemy will occupy the FRONT of the road
and you can get so bogged down fighting the enemy that IT becomes your
basic purpose and total reason for living.

      Getting to Baghdad becomes lost in the fray.

      He will audit his ENEMIES all day long, because it is easier to
fight enemies and lose than confront why he has a problem with winning
and getting to where he was going in the first place.

      Enemies are like spiders, the slightest doubt about your heading,
and suddenly things are shooting at you from all sides.

      If you put too much attention on them, and slow down, they will get
ahead of you and STOP you.

      Involvement with enemies is a SOLUTION to the problem of ARRIVING.

      *GETTING* TO BAGHDAD had become a problem to him, so all the
enemies now in the way are a SOLUTION TO HIM because now he has a reason
he can't get there.

      Thank God for all these enemies!

      He has become so introverted on the original problem that he has
closed terminals with the enemies, and now all he can talk about is
"ain't it awful", namely all these enemies to the left, right and
center.

      Part of it is a matter of size, the goal to get to Baghdad was
HUGE, as was the problem that resulted.

      The enemies are just tiny swarms of dev-t, but now they look the
world to him because he had to get small in order to get introverted
enough to worry about them.

      Dev-T means unnecessary developed traffic, detour.

      He used to be bigger than his enemies, as big as the original goal,
but now he is smaller than his enemies, and the goal is GONE to him.

      Fighting the enemy has BECOME the GOAL.

      Ask him what happens when he wins?

      "Oh that will be a relief, probably go home and get a job pushing
hamburgers."

      ?

      WHAT HAPPENED TO GETTING TO BAGHDAD?

      What happened to his original purpose?

      You see?

      Prime purposes have enemies, but most of these enemies are
sideliners throwing peanuts from the peanut gallery, they don't have the
same ontological status as the goal itself.  One doesn't need enemies to
have a goal and to have fun with it.

      Beware of people who think that life without enemies is no fun.

      They will be bogged down doing NOTHING of import, but watch it when
they win against all their enemies, they will begin to create more
rather than get on with their original purpose.

      They may be big enough to vanquish a few enemies along the way, but
they are no longer big enough to encompass their original goal let alone
remember it.

      They win against their enemies and they get a kind of sad forlorn
'now what?' feeling.

      Your average being is SO afraid of that forlorness that when they
come close to finishing off their last enemy, they won't.  They will
mess up and lose, or go mercenary on other people's enemies, or start to
wrong target people who aren't enemies at all.

      ANYTHING BUT HAVE NO ENEMIES ANY MORE.

      They just can't say goodbye to that 'good fight'.

      But the sorrow and loss is based on the feeling of smaller size and
having been vanquished oneself anyhow, because the original goal is
still too big to be re embraced.

      This is in part why so many people got depressed after WW II ended,
and is common for vets coming home from war even if they won.

      They are stuck in a NO ACTION point, underneath a much bigger
sphere of action of their original goal that was once theirs before they
got sidetracked into fighting enemies.

      They just have to spot this, to fix it, with a little help from a
good auditor who can span big goals.

      There will be NATURAL oppositions to your goals, mostly consisting
of MEST and it's inexorable move towards entropy.

      MEST means Matter, Energy, Space and Time, the physical universe at
large.

      Most games have NATURAL oppositions but they are always invited
opponents, not enemies per se.

      The guy on the other side of the chess table is a natural opponent,
and shouldn't be confused with the guy on the side about to shoot you if
you come near winning.  HE's an ENEMY.

      The guy you are PLAYING against is an OPPONENT.

      Enemies are dev-t, opponents are the fundamental fabric of the
game.

      Enemies are sometimes fun to audit, and may lead back to the
original goal and its problem if the pc is all enmired in making enemies
into his basic purpose.

      But get rid of goals are not good for people, there is no love in
them.

      People HAVE to put something constructive there as natural
oppositions during normal game play in order to have fun, and without
fun, they eventually die themselves.

      To clear the Invisible V case, bring him up to blazing blackness by
spotting no mockups, no worthwhile originations, and no purpose on all
dynamics.

       If purposes won't run, try FALSE purposes, first.

          NO FALSE PURPOSE
        SOME FALSE PURPOSE
          NO TRUE  PURPOSE
        SOME TRUE  PURPOSE

      Around and around, if you can't get them to read and run, your
meter is off.

       Homer

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith     The Paths of Lovers    Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF        Cross            Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer at lightlink.com    In the Line of Duty    http://www.lightlink.com

Wed Jun  6 01:05:54 EDT 2007

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Jul 20 21:39:45 EDT 2015
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore508.memo
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.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFVraLhURT1lqxE3HERAuFkAJ4iw374yDyASCK3qaysdOdM1Cnr+QCcCAyx
VJcJjvshkafCXnfskaD7Uqc=
=OGTX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L at mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l


More information about the Clear-L mailing list