HOM8 (fwd)

HomerWSmith at lightlink.com HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
Fri Apr 7 07:21:24 EDT 2017


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


      THE CYCLE OF HELP

> Finally.  If the group is to be unmoderated, are there any teeth to the
> requests of the charter?  No flames?  How will that be enforced?

      A group defines its desires.  If there is strong agreement with
the charter, then in general people will obey it.

      Two things for Heidrun.

      1.) The spirit can not be enhanced, only its adornments can be,
and them mostly by removing them.

      2.) People do not want help and are not reaching for help except
as a second postulate riding on a failure to be sufficient unto
themselves.

      Help is only ethical and in fact *WANTED* to the degree that it
helps people to not *NEED* help and to be come able and willing to
tune their own involvement in help again as they see fit.

      One does this by getting them to spot the times they tuned it to
its present state and why.

      Turning help and helpee into a life's philosophy is an ABYSMALLY
low toned thing to do.

      OK / Not OK

      A being starts out in existence emmanating OKness.  He's going
along in the time stream, making each unit of time as "Things are OK,
Things are OK, Things are OK...."

      Each moment of time is created as an OK followed by another OK,
followed by another OK, regardless of how things are.

      Then one day he makes the postulate "Whoa!  This is Not OK."

      It is not necessary to go into WHY he makes this postulate, just
about anything that could be said about why he makes this postulate,
would probably be a wrong indication at this time.

      From the postulate that "This is Not OK" he then extends a vision of 
what would be OK.  From this vision, which becomes his desire, desire 
based on his dissatisfaction with what is here and now, and his extant 
knowledge that he has gleaned through the ages, he then computes what to 
DO about the here and now to make it OK again.

      He considers that if he can make things OK again, he will just forget 
that it will be forever NOT OK that things were ever not OK in the first 
place.  If he can just make things OK again, he will let go the little 
glitch in time when things were not OK. and let bygones be bygones.

      Anything to have things be OK again even if not perfectly so,
as that was in the past which he hopes to forget.

      Then he acts upon what he has computed to do to make things OK again.

      Eventually his acts do not have the intended consequence and in fact 
make the present MORE Not OK.  The problem is now HE is to blame for why 
things went from Not OK to more Not OK.

      He is no longer free to leave the present because he owes a debt
to it.

      So now he wants to make amends, which means repair the damage he 
caused and bring the state of the present back to where it was before he 
got involved.  He considers that things would be just fine with him, they 
would be OK with him again, if he could just get things back to the 
original not OK that he found them in!

      Who cares if there are a few not OK's here and there, its far
better than the worse Not OK that resulted from him mucking around
with them trying to make them better.

      Not OK's here and there are fine as long as HE's not to blame
for them!

      But to make amends then extends another vision of how things were as 
he originally found them, not OK's and all, and again he computes from his 
new desire and his knoweldge, what to do to return things back to their 
original NOT OK before he got involved.

      Notice,

      1.) His present vision to repair the damage he did tring to fix not 
OK's is a Q&A from his original vision to fix the original Not OK he ran 
across.

      2.) His present vision is diametrically opposed to his original 
vision.  The original vision wanted to fix a Not OK.  The second vision 
wants to restore that original Not OK!

      Again he acts from his second vision, and again he fails.

      *NOW* he begins to want help.

      Help for what however he does not know.

      What he wants is to recover his original state of "Things are OK,
Things are OK, Things are OK..." regardless of how things are.

      Help eventually makes things worse, worse than he could have
made alone, and now help has included other people in his woes because
now they are to blame also.

      Eventually he turns against the whole thing, says that help is harm,
help is betrayal, and that's the end of him as a 'good' person.

      Homer

======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Fri Apr  7 07:21:24 EDT 2017
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/hom8.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)

iD8DBQFY53Y0URT1lqxE3HERAr7dAJ9E55uPvERiaEnJGLcrxW5R6Obs7ACgk/VD
Gt6avMOHEGDhxA35/cbR1hc=
=1eMJ
-----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