Clearing Archive Roboposter
roboposter at lightlink.com
Fri Oct 30 00:06:02 EDT 2020
.ce ((Editor's comments in double parenthesis - Homer))
.ce ORGANIZATION OF CASE
.ce FAF - 11
.ce 24 April 1990
.ce Copyright (C) Flemming A. Funch
.ce Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes
Confusions are handled by stable data. Ongoing confusions or large
aggregate confusions take an organization to handle. An organization is
made of lines (paths of flow) and terminals (stable functions that deal
with the particles). The confusion is broken down into manageable
chunks that are channelled to where the willingness and ability to
handle them exist.
Case is confusion. It might be active confusion (restimulated
charge) or held back confusion (dormant charge).
We handle case as confusion. If it is already confused we sort it
out as such. If it doesn't seem confused we remove what holds back the
confusion, and then we sort out the confusion.
The cycle of clearing is to bring forth a confusion and then sort
it out by establishing stable data. The intention is to deal with
existing (active or dormant) confusions, and not to create new
Note that a confusion is confused. There is not order in it. We
impose order upon it.
The skill of organization is to provide the organizational layout
that handles all the confusion and that handles it in the most efficient
The organization is not necessarily inherently obvious from the
confusion itself. The existence of certain types of particles in the
confusion might prompt certain types of organization. But it is in no
way to be taken for granted. Many different types of organization could
be laid out to handle any given confusion.
To apply that to case again: there is not just one way of
organizing the handling of case. If there were it wouldn't be a
confusion. Multiple particles are in motion at the same time, that is a
confusion. Organizing it means taking one of the moving particles at a
time and sorting it out. In principle one can start anywhere, there is
not a particle that will solve everything. Each particle that is made
stable will be a step towards removing the whole confusion.
Optimum organization is that we take in the greatest amount of
confusion and that we handle all of it. We want optimum randomity
everywhere in the organization. Any terminal should receive neither too
little or too much confusion to handle. If there is too much the line
or terminal can't handle it and it will spill over into somewhere else.
If there is too little going on we don't use the organization
effectively and are wasting it's time.
We organize case by grade charts, processes, terminology, selection
of tech, application of tech, existence of a pc and a practitioner, and
a number of other ways. We are attempting to bring up confusions in an
order so that we can handle them comfortably. And we are attempting to
have the tools for handling any confusion that we bring up.
Now, the current organization of clearing technology could be
claimed to be the way it has to be, the natural way, the only way. It
isn't, but it has evolved to be a very workable organization of what is
there to handle. However, the fact of organizing is senior to the
specific implementation of the organization. Many other types of
organization of case confusion are possible. The test is that it
handles the confusion and how effectively it does it. It is not whether
or not it is the right way - there is no right way.
Any imposition of organization on case is artificial. It is a way
of handling it, it is not the truth. The truth is what the truth is, it
can not be dictated from an external source. But the imposed structure
is a very workable mechanism.
Let us take the principle of handling time track incidents in
chains. If incidents are always in chains and one just needs to get
down to the basic to handle it, it provides us with a very workable
method of handling incidents. It works very well to treat the mind like
that. However, that doesn't mean that the mind would have been that
orderly if we hadn't introduced the idea. The mind was in a state where
that was a workable organization to set up, that is all we can say. We
might have set up a drastically different model and have gotten away
with that. I am not saying we should, it is just important to
understand the modus operandi of the tech.
A complete tech has an answer to any case that can come up. In
organizational terms: there is a line or lines we can put the case on,
and there are stable terminals (procedures) for handling it.
If we find ourselves running into case that is too confusing to be
handled we obviously need to organize more. It is not really that
somebody did something "wrong" by restimulating the confusion - it is
that we haven't figured out how to handle it.
In getting a person through the clearing levels the job of
organizing the case will gradually pass over to the preclear himself.
In the beginning we can just tell him what we will run and how it will
run and that works. As we go along, on the Operation levels, we have to
supply him with more and more tools and methods he can use, and less and
less pre-planned outcome. And on the higher strata, the Static levels,
we can really only supply the Being with a comprehensive tool kit - he
has to walk by himself and deal with what he finds along the way.
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Oct 30 00:06:02 EDT 2020
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.
More information about the Clear-L