ACT83 (fwd)

Homer Wilson Smith HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
Mon Aug 10 15:03:05 EDT 2015


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


      THE SCHMOO LEVEL

      This posting is early and wrong.

      The problem is not

      AN INDECISION TO LIVE OR DIE,

      the problem is a

      A DECISION TO LIVE AND DIE AT THE SAME TIME.

      Humans get stuck in indecisions.

      Gods get stuck in ANDS.

      3/20/2012





              ((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))

                             THE SCHMOO LEVEL
                          Session Notes 11/22/94

                                 ACT - 83
                             23 November 1994

                  Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
        Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.

      Been running,

      "Is there an indecision on whether to live or die?"
      "What is the problem with living?"
      "What is the problem with dying?"

      Spectacular.  Life saving.

      The basic problem is a conflict caused by a first postulate later
countered by a second postulate.  The first postulate is made from a
timeless position of power when a game or goal is first created.  The
basic underlying theme of any first postulate is,

      "I want to be here."

      The second postulate is made during a moment of severe loss, either
physical, emotional, mental or spiritual.  These are the engrams,
secondaries and heavy facsimiles of Scientology.  They can be moments of
physical impact strong enough to cause death or near death experience,
exteriorizations, etc., or they can be simply moments of losing wherein
the game is no longer worth playing.

      (The second postulates that are made during an actual death
incident are the most important.  This can be a death of a body, the
death of an fragile-immortal theta body, or the 'death' of a thetan.)

      The STOP that is experienced during the inner core of the second
postulate 'incident' as Allen calls it, forces the being back to the
timeless state, the same timeless state in fact that he was in when he
made his first postulate to be here and have the goal or game.  During
the enforced timeless state that occurs during the loss, the being makes
the second postulate, and because it is made from the same timeless
state of power, it has the same force and power as the first postulate,
no more, no less.  Thus you have a perfect ridge.  No one wins, no one
loses.  This is the anatomy of a GPM.

      The basic underlying theme of the second postulate is,

      'I don't want to be here."

      Or one might say also it is,

      "I want"       (first postulate)
      "I don't want" ("because I can't have", second postulate).

      The second postulate is not an actual negation of the first
postulate, it is only an apparent negation, it is "I don't want BECAUSE
I CAN'T HAVE." That's not the same as simply "I don't want." It is in
fact a case of cosmic sour grapes.  Thus the first postulate is still
desired and never given up, but the being no longer wants to want the
first postulate, even though he still wants the first postulate, so
rather than giving up the first postulate utterly, he holds onto it
fiercely and fights it with the second postulate.

      "I don't want to want you, but I want you anyway."

      This forms a ridge and is "what is wrong with you".  Having and
owning such a ridge makes it impossible to think clearly on any of the
major problems of your life, and if you are failing in life, this is
why.

      What you are looking for then in auditing is the first moment the
person changed from "I want to be here" to "I don't want to be here."
That will be the key moment that once found will spring his emotion and
goals back to the surface.  Watch out if your confront as an auditor is
low, or if your conception of the cosmic all is rather small, better
have your goggles on.

      The "I don't want to be here" chain of course has many such moments
that extend all the way to present time, and it has its first serious
occurance in this life, and then again in the 'worst' past life the pc
has suffered, and then the worst past life where the pc has caused
another to "not want to be here" and then even before bodies when
thetans were playing the game of wanting to be here and not wanting to
be here, and making others want to be here and not want to be here.

      This is not a small chain, this goes back to the Sovereignty of the
thetan and the first time he considered he wasn't Sovereign, AND HAD
NEVER BEEN.

      Beings give birth to themselves with some rather strange realities
in place.  "Well lookee here, I was just made by God and my job is to go
out and subjugate all the heathens.  Jesus, what a horrible thought, but
hell, it's all I got, it's better than nothing, right?  OK, here we go,
"Now Grovel you heathen dog or suffer the flames of Eternity!"

      And away we go.  The underlying postulate is right there, "This is
horrible, but its better than nothing, I guess I will make the best of
it I can." You see?  That's "I want to be here".  It's not TOTAL wanting
to be here, but just enough to power the game and get the guy to pick up
his sword and start lopping heads.

      The problem of course is there is a hidden postulate in the major
theme which is, "I did not create this universe, I did not put myself
here, I don't REALLY want to be here, I was MADE, I wouldn't have made
things this way if I had had a choice about it, but here I am, I will
make the best of it." So that all adds up to Non Sovereignty, see?  He
has started off his very first game with a postulate of total Non
Sovereignty and a very shaky "wanting to be here."

      So what happens to this guy?  He has a lot of fun nailing people to
crosses, burning people at the stake, doing 'heathen checks' by dunking
people in water, and extorting confessions from people with crowbars
under their spine, until one day it starts to happen to HIM!

      Then he is not so pleased any more.

      Suddenly he wants out of the game real bad.  You see that's what he
has been doing to others, right?  "I will make you regret the day you
were created!" is the underlying theme.

      So of course now that's what others are doing to him, and suddenly
he gets this twinge of regret, and he wishes the whole thing hadn't
happened or that he at least hadn't partaken in it with quite so much
zeal, and bang!  he is stuck in the incident and can't get out.

      He is not only not making having been put in the universe in the
first place, he is not making the fact of others putting the crow bar
under his spine, because he is trying to get them to NOT DO THAT,
because he is trying to undo having done it himself!  Thus he is not
making more of it, and so of course he gets stuck with it, because you
can't unmake what you are not making (more of).

      Thus reality is sort of a chinese finger trap, the more you try to
get out of it being there, without PUTTING IT THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE
IN ALL ITS GORY GLORY, the more you get stuck in it.

      That's because the underlying theme is "I didn't put this here in
the first place, something else or someone else did, and I didn't know
it would get this bad, and I am sorry for what I did, but I can't undo
it, because once something is done it is done, and these guys aren't
listening to me anyway, oh hell let them torture me, one day it will
happen to them and it will serve them right, just at it serves me
right", and at this point you have abject apathy talking and you are
going to get this guy to give up his engram in session without a fight?

      Right.

      That engram won't run out without PUTTING in the 'making more of
it' where it should have been in the first place when the incident took
place.  Essentially the only way to get rid of a REAL engram is to DO IN
THE ENGRAM WHAT YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE WHEN THE ENGRAM WAS HAPPENING THAT
WOULD HAVE PREVENTED THE INCIDENT FROM HAPPENING AND THUS FORMING AN
ENGRAM IN THE FIRST PLACE.

      I mean if an OT doesn't like what's going on, he can just change
channels, right?  Well the magic is that you can't change FROM a channel
unless you first changed TO that channel.  If you lose sight of having
changed TO a channel, you can't change FROM IT ever again.

      An engram is the persistence FOREVER of something that you wish
never happened at all.  That's irony.

      If "you didn't start it", you can never stop it.

      If "you didn't stop it", you can never start it.

      That is why Hubbard defines insanity as that moment when the being
first becomes totally devoted to stopping something.  He has let go of
starting it, and this is a break in responsibility.  He is now trying to
stop something he considers he didn't start, and that is insanity.  The
joke of course is that the way to stop something is to start it again!

      This is the "make more of it" and "The way IN is the way out." of
Adore.  The reason is that coming in puts you out so that you CAN come
in.  Trying to get out, assumes you are in, so you can't get out.
Trying to COME IN, assumes you are out, so you can come in.  To get out
and stay out, just practice coming in, until you get bored with coming
in, and then just don't come in any more.

      The way to STAY in, is to assume you didn't COME IN, and then
continue to try like hell to get out.  That is the basic way any thetan
keeps anything around, he makes something and then assumes he didn't
make it, which makes him want to get rid of it something terrible, and
that sticks him with it, so he settles for it and makes the best he can
of it, and you have a universe with no Sovereignty.

      Any persisting universe works by this rule.  And of course any
persisting universe is detested.  So it goes on because he is trying to
stop it without the consideration that he started it.

      Persisting Time is a subtle nightmare.

      The underlying theme of that nightmare is Non Sovereignty.

      So here is the point, you start off a game where the very first
postulates are "I didn't make this or put me here, I am not Sovereign,
something else is Sovereign that I can not understand, but it's ok I am
here I suppose", and a long time later you end up with "I don't want to
be here at all, but I can't get out."

      You can't leave by choice what you didn't enter by choice.

      That is the anatomy of a trap, and the track of the dwindling
spiral from "I want to be here" to "I don't want to be here."

      Now there is something very interesting here.  There is a little
chart that can be drawn relating danger and safety to disability and
ability.

      Danger and Safety are considered to lie on a gradient scale going
from total danger to total safety.  Most people find that life is either
much too dangerous for them, or much too safe.  They try to optimize
their danger levels without letting things get out of hand.

      Disability and Ability are also considered to lie on another
gradient scale that goes from total disability to total ability.  Again
people like to optimize their abilities, so that they are not so able
that there is no challenge in life, and not so unable that they they can
barely stagger onto the playing field.

      It is the UNCERTAINTY of winning or losing that makes a game a game
and worth playing, AS A GAME.  Too much ability and too much disability
alike ruin the uncertainty of winning and losing, and thus ruin the
enjoyability of a game.

                   CORRUPTION, TEMPTATION AND SEDUCTION

      There is an interesting twist which can be added into games, which
ties the ability to play future games to the winning of present games.

      In other words if you lose the present game, you don't ever get to
play any games ever again.  This twist can ruin the fun of any game,
making it super dangerous to even play the game, lest you lose it.  This
tends to skew the person's natural desire to have games that he doesn't
know if he is going to win or lose, towards having only games that he is
absolutely certain he is going to win.

      In fact such a person will often force others to play his games for
him if he can, to take the risks of losing and give him the rewards of
winning.

      Such games, where the ability to play future games is permanently
linked to whether you win present games or not are uniformly resented by
the players who are forced to play them, and this gives the whole "life
is a game" idea a bad name.

      Once you unlink the future playing of games from the winning of
present games, the whole thing straightens out and people become willing
to win, lose and play games again.  This is in part what "going eternal"
does to a meatball, as he stops thinking he has only one chance to play
and win every game in existence, in the short span of 70 years if he
lives that long.

      Mortality is a classic case of the kind of game where if you lose
the game now, you will never be able to play any game again, and in the
end you are going to lose the game permanently no matter what you do.

      And mortals have the audacity to tell you 'life is fine'.

      Mortal meatballs, because they firmly believe that the playing of
future games is dependent on the winning of present games, are cess
pools of Corruption, Temptation and Seduction.  Their basic game is to
get others to play for them, to take the risks for them, and give them
the rewards of winning.  There isn't an upstanding meatball in the lot
of them.

      OK, but baring the darker side of life, an eternal being in
relatively sane condition can enjoy games, create games, play games, win
games, lose games, and come through it like it never happened.

      It is to this kind of person that I wish to direct the discussion
of the Danger/Safety - Disability/Ability chart.

      It is pretty clear that a being who is very unable in a game, is in
great danger IN THE GAME.  He has no ability to defend himself or his
friends, and no ability to offend the enemy forces or their friends.
That's a sure formula for losing.

      It is also pretty clear that a being who is very able in a game,
has tremendous margins of safety.  He has great ability to defend
himself, and his friends, and to offend his enemies and their friends.

      So we make a simple chart that shows this relationship.

          Safety  |            /
                  |          /   <--- Normal Game
                  |        /
                  |      /
                  |    /
                  |  /
          Danger  |---------------
                  Unable         Able

      So it should be clear that as a being increases his ability in a
game he increases his Safety and as he decreases his ability he
decreases his Safety.

      OK, so now let's make it a bit more interesting.  Sometimes in
games you get under the thumb of a seriously powerful enemy who really
has no love for you or the game at all in his heart, all he wants to do
is either enslave you, kill you or imprison you, pretty much in that
order.

      They don't want to play at all, they just want to win, and they
don't want to have to play to get there.

      We call such people SP's, they are terrified of their own existence
even though they have a lot of power, and they don't want to be playing
the game they are in, so they would rather not have any competition or a
good competent opponent.

      They prefer to WIN ALL THE TIME to having a good play.

      SP's are very often convinced that the continued existence of games
to play depends utterly on winning their present game, therefore they
are not interested in PLAYING their present game, they are interested in
WINNING it, and thus the last thing they want is a challenging opponent
who will give them a good run for their money the way a sane player
would.

      This in fact demarks the difference between an SP player and a sane
player.  The SP wants to WIN BECAUSE HE DOESN'T WANT TO PLAY, the sane
player wants to PLAY FIRST, MAYBE WIN OR NOT SECOND.

      The SP thinks that losing a game means not being able to play a
game ever again, the sane player thinks that playing a game means not
being able to lose (the playing of games!) ever again.

      Thus the SP is happiest when everyone around them is sick, dead or
dying.  The more able you are, the more of a danger the SP considers you
to be to him, because you might win and cause him to lose, which means
he would be out of a game forever, and so the more able you are the more
he tries to be dangerous back to you.  The less able you are the more
the SP considers you to be unimportant to his safety, and so the more he
ignores you, which makes things safe for you again.

      Kind of like your average Parent and Child relationship, eh?

      Ok, so this is how we graph this.

          Safety  |\
                  |  \
                  |    \  <---- SP Game
                  |      \
                  |        \
                  |          \
          Danger  |------------\--
                  Unable         Able

      This shows that the more able you are, the more danger you are in
from the SP and his police state civilization around you.  The less able
you are, the safer you are.

      For example if you are strong and healthy, intelligent and
knowledgeable, outspoken and forthright, independent and resourceful,
this SP and his civilization will consider you fair game, because that
is the last kind of being they want in their political slave camp.

      So in order to survive, to just stay alive and not get tortured to
death along with all of your friends, you have to tone back some of your
abilities, to make yourself less dangerous to the SP's that surround
you.  You become weak, sick, dumb, ignorant, reticent, covert, mute,
dependent, and always at a loss, and you work for the SP and do his
bidding and accept your meager pay no matter how much it hurts you
inside to do this.

      But look, didn't we just say that being unable INCREASED the danger
in the game?  And so it does, and you will quickly notice that if you
make yourself too weak, too sick, too dumb, too ignorant, too reticent,
too covert, too mute, too dependent and at a loss, you will soon die of
total incapacity to take care of yourself, you won't even be able to
work for the SP let alone piss him off!

      I mean who ever heard of these things being survival
characteristics in the wild?  Hell you would be eaten before you were
two days old.

      So tuning down your powers to make yourself more acceptable to the
SP, puts you in more danger from the normal environment of life around
you, and so the SP kind of puts you between a rock and hard place.

      There is a limit to how unable you can make yourself to make
yourself safe from the SP's before you make yourself so unable that you
are in catastrophic danger from the everyday forces of life around you.

      And this is exactly what happens to some people.  They make
themselves so unable just to be acceptable to the SP parents that bring
them up, that they can't live at all, and indeed they don't.  They
ultimately die, usually after a prolonged, miserable, agonizing struggle
with life, possibly even long after their parents are dead and gone and
'no longer suppressing them any more'.

      But what usually happens to the vast majority of people is that
they find some 'workable' compromise between being so able that the SP
starts to hunt them down, and being so unable that life itself takes
them out.

      The SP is constantly pushing them down towards more disability
where they will die from life, and life is constantly pushing them up
towards more ability where they will die from the SP.

      That middle ground then, is the happy medium that people call their
'lot in life', their little package of moans and groans, and which they
choose early in life, and is their Service Facsimile Computation on how
to live safely in a dangerous environment BY BEING UNABLE.

      It's an effort to be able to survive by being UNABLE.

      It's the effort to WIN (stay alive) by not being able to PLAY (big
basic purpose games).

      It's the effort to (be allowed to ) continue PLAYING by not being
able to WIN.

      It takes great finesse to exactly tune your abilities down so that
you are no longer a danger to those who don't want you to play or exist
at all, without starving yourself to death through total inability to
play or work.

      Affluent survival on this planet takes tremendous courage,
enthusiasm, foresight, honesty and outspokenness, all of which are
traits that SP's hate as they mean you are a worthy opponent to them.

      But the SP doesn't want to PLAY, they want to just WIN, to get the
risk of loss over with, so they will break the rules of the game and
kill you, simple as that.  Imagine a tennis player that won his match by
killing his opponent before the game?  Well that's an SP for you, in the
game of life.  Now if you couldn't play tennis at all, he would leave
you alone, you see?

      So you learn to win (survive) in the game of life by not being able
to play, and you learn to be able (allowed) to play by not being able to
win.

      So let's take a look at how this looks on the chart, by combining
the two charts above.

          Safety  |\               /
                  |  \           / <--- Normal Game
                  |    \       /
                  |      \   /
                  |        x  <--- Schmoo Level
                  |      /   \
                  |    /       \
                  |  /           \  <--- SP Game
          Danger  |/---------------\--
                  Unable           Able

      The person starts off in the lower left corner being very unable
and in great danger from normal life itself.  He increases his abilities
and thus increases his safety until he hits the 'x' in the middle of the
diagram.  At that point if he continues to increase his ability, rather
than increase his safety like in a normal game, he will in fact increase
his danger because the SP will start to take notice of him.  Thus the
'x' spot marks the place of ability that maximizes his safety from the
two opposing forces of life itself and the SPs that surround him, and it
is well below optimum challenging play.

      This is the Schmoo Level.  You ever see someone who is just sort of
schmooing along in life, like a worm on a stump?  Well that's a God
playing it safe because there are a few too many SP's in his environment
who don't enjoy having a good game they might lose.

      So the first thing you need to do to get yourself out of this mess
is to spot your Schmoo Level, and then take a look at your computations
on the subject of being able by being unable, winning by not being able
to play, and be able to play by not being able to win.

      By the way you are going to run into the Qualms running this stuff.
If you don't you aren't running the right thing.

      The underlying theme to the Qualms is being terrified of not being
terrified any more.

      Homer

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Aug  8 12:06:02 EDT 2015
WEB:  http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP:  ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act83.memo
Send mail to archive at lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== 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)

iD8DBQFVxijrURT1lqxE3HERAkklAKCUqdWKG6NskPW6qpBeqY7jQaJXCQCfdchk
VPPSpSzUXIN1bohRsXbsKFM=
=7Tb3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the HomerWSmith-L mailing list