************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************ Hi David and Pete, I wanted to do what in other sector of life is called a ring of control. What I mean is this : I formulate the "to sex " goal package and run it, David formulates in his own the same package and run it , Pete doea the same . Then we we confront our experiences with the package with the other persons, till we arrive at a good formulation of the package that is workable.This a "TUNING RING " of the package.It is a way to tune a package to the best. For the rest my basic tool is RI and the "TO KNOW " package. For me is the safiest package.My experience with other package is only with life goals, I do only what Dennis says in his theory.They work to clear up some charge but the "TO KNOW " goal package is the most powerful and cover all the other. Sometimes could be hard to address a charge deeply buried , with the TO know package,and a junior package can help. Wins are not necessary to be spread all over the world.It is just to live succesfully,and people will come to you in crowd. Dennis has done a great job,really great.But there is more to advance in the knowledge of this universe.One way is to get out , but also another way is to get control of it. Money are important because are spiritual energy in the material world.About this I have found interesting stuff from Alan C. Walter.He was an ex scientologist but has develop some interesting stuff. But the most inspiring book I have found about the subject of money is from Wallace D. Wattle "the science of getting rich". Quantum physic is another great stuff to study. We live in an energy universe.And it is constituted of particles which are "consciousness and energy". And they respond to a thought. and the uman being is a thinking center that CREATES !! THOUGHT !!!. You know what I mean ? As Alan Walter says " we are using always 100 % of our brain , but the 10 % consciuosly and the other 90 % unconsciously!" . thats the problem ! what the hell is creating the other 90 % that I am not aware of ??? In that Trom can help us in spotting charge hidden in the past the keep holding an old pattern , or an old attitude that creates the reality we live in. If the attitude is positive we have a nice reality , if the attitudes is negative we have a bad reality. Trom is also a tool for spotting and releasing old attitudes we keep having without knowing of them. Level five has made a small change in my flesh body , just taking me out of a compulsive game i was unconsciously playing. Dennis has done a great job , i consider him has my spiritual father, ( thanks Dennis,),but to honor his job we should add some knew knowledge and go further in getting total control of life in this universe.Quantum Physic i think is the direction. Pete i can see you are quite good in theory, thank you very much for the formulation of the "TO SEX" goals package. Maybe one day we can meet and make a TROM WEEK somewhere. Good tromming bye, alex.
Il giorno 16/nov/09, alle ore 04:50, [email protected] ha scritto: > Send Trom mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Trom digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Formulating life goals (David Pelly) > 2. Re: Formulating life goals (Pete McLaughlin) > 3. Formulating life goals (David Pelly) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:31:25 -0500 > From: David Pelly <[email protected]> > Subject: [TROM1] Formulating life goals > To: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed > > > > Hi All, > > ( Probably directed to Pete and Alex, as they were in comm on this a > few days ago) ( But meaningful or useful or helpful comments or > experiences are welcome from anyone and everyone ) > > ( This would at least remove some of the rust off this comm line. ) > : ) > > > > I am trying to get my head wrapped around level five, in particular > understanding life goals that are in addition to the "to know" > package. > > This is along the same line of effort as Alex posted the question a > fews ago to Pete on how to formulate the "To sex" package" . > > Dennis states that they must be worded exactly correct or else... so I > do not want to go wrong. > > I have tried to word these on the partial list which follows and I > ran > into a few areas of doubt. > > Reading the book again on the Theory section on the " know stuff " > only confused me more. > > > Copy quote: > > A partial list of life goals follows. Each of them, in addition to the > ?To know? package, have been tested and found to be therapeutic and > erasable. > > To Create. To Love. To Admire. To Enhance. To Help. To Feel. To > Control. To Own. To Have. To Eat. To Sex. > > There are also the perception packages. These are all within the ?To > Know? leg of the basic package, and are therefore therapeutic and > erasable. > > To See. To Hear. To Touch. To Smell. To Taste. > > End of quote. > > > Now to work these out based on Pete's reply to Alex: > > Must be known To sex > Must not be known To not sex > Must know To be sexed > Must not know To not be sexed > > Then the rest would be: > > To create > To not create > To be created > To not be created > > To love > To not love > To be loved > To not be loved > > To admire > To not admire > To be admired > To not be admired > > To enhance > To not enhance > To be enhanced > To not be enhanced > > To help > To not help > To be helped > To not be helped > > To feel > To not feel > To be felt > To not be felt > > To control > To not control > To be controlled > To not be controlled > > To own > To not own > To be owned > To not be owned > > To have > To not have > To be had > To not be had > > To eat > To not eat > To be eaten > To not be eaten > > > It seems to me that the above are straight forward and would be > correct. > > Am I correct? > > > Now a couple of more came to mind > > Along the line of "Be" "Do" "Have". > > Could "To be" and "To do" be formulated? > > > And in particular " To have money " > > And > > "To have things" > > > > If so how? > > They seem relevant to me. > > > > > Alex: I would like to know what you did or and how you worked > that > data into the postulate failure chart and how you ran it? > > And the results you got. > > Thanks, > > David > > PS: > > Contrary to Dennis' comment that no success stories are necessary > because there is nothing to sell> > > I think that is primarily a product of Dennis' arrogance. > > There may be or is some truth to that statement or viewpoint, but > not > always. Scientologists, other groups and businesses tend to mis > use it or overdo it which creates skepticism. > > I think inviting lessons learned, extra insights, helpful tips in > running TROM , experiences and successes with TROM would most > definitely be helpful to the greater good. > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:21:52 -0800 > From: "Pete McLaughlin" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [TROM1] Formulating life goals > To: "The Resolution of Mind list" <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <63bc2ae139564a978cea490d731f8...@toughboo05d7e2> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=Windows-1252; > reply-type=original > > Hi David > These are excellent questions. Your understanding of TROM is > imporving. > > The formulations for the goals packages are correct. I know that > one of my > difficulities was getting from the basic goal package to the junior > universe and then to the incidents I could actually timebreak so > here are > some examples. > > On the to sex goals package if you listen to Dennis Lecture on sex > you will > get that the basic package in the vulgur is > must fuck > must not fuck > must be fucked > must not be fucked > > to put these in the Level 5 Chart we have to reverse the order to: > must not be fucked > must be fucked > must not fuck > must fuck > > > The conflicts would be "must not be fuck" opposed by "must fuck" > and "must > not fuck" opposed by must be fucked". > The questions then could be phrased: > > 1. Did someone force me from "must not be fucked" to "must be > fucked"? > 1A. Is someone trying to force me from "must not be fucked" to > "must be > fucked"? > 2 Am I forcing someone from "must fuck" to "must not fuck." > 2A. Did I ever force someone from "must fuck" to "must not fuck." > > 3 Did someone force me from "must be fucked" to "must not be > fucked"? > 3A. Is someone trying to force me from "must be fucked" to "must > not be > fucked"? > 4. Am I forcing someone from "must not fuck" to "must fuck." > 4A. Did I ever force someone from "must not fuck" to "must fuck." > > 5 Did someone force me from "must not fuck" to "must fuck"? > 5A. Is someone trying to force me from "must not fuck" to "must > fuck"? > 6. Am I forcing someone from "must be fucked" to "must not be > fucked." > 6A .Did I ever force someone from "must be fucked" to "must not be > fucked." > > 7. Did someone force me from "must fuck" to "must not fuck"? > 7A. Is someone trying to force me from "must fuck" to "must not > fuck"? > 8 Am I forcing someone from "must not be fucked" to "must be > fucked." > 8A. Did I ever force someone from "must not be fucked" to "must be > fucked." > > As you pose these opposing postulates you will find incidents come > to mind > that have to do with fucking and being fucked. Timebreak anything > that > comes up Then re-pose the opposing postulates until nothing shows up. > > When you do enough running of the "to fuck" questions you will > realize that > it is just a junior universe of trying to be known to a sex partner > and this > is the collapse of a junior universe that Dennis talks about. > > > "To Be or Not to be, that is the question." Hamlet. To be is a > question > that cannot be answered at the level of awareness of a human being. I > suggest you leave it alone till after level 5. If you are curious > about > where it fits in see the expanded tone scale of Geoffery Filbert in > "Excaliber Revisited or The Ghost Danse articles by Ouran.(look up > ghost > danse spelled just that way on google.) > > To Do. All the goal conflicts are doingnesses. Run Level 5 and > doingness > will take care of itself. > > To Have. havingness is a lie. The triangle of creation is as-is, > alter-is, > not-is. This can be restated be, do, have. Have then is a mis > ownership of > all created objects. Everything you see in the apparency of the > universe > around is stuff you can have, and not what it seems. You can do some > interesting therapy discovering the real isness of objects like > money but if > you do the money will cease to exist. > > For example I wanted to know what money was so I looked into its > isness and > found. At one time the US dollar was 1/20 of an ounce of gold. > Then in > 1913 congress created the Federal Reserve bank which creates money > out of > nothing. In 1932 Franklin D Roosevelt confiscated all the gold > coins held > by the people in the US. In 1934 the Supreme Court ruled that > "money" was > the denomination printer or stamped on the face of the coins or > bills not > the market value of the coins so what FDR did was not an "illegal > taking". > "Money" now is created by the Fed as digits in a computer. They > can create > trillions of dollars as fast as a clerk can type zeros in a computer. > Now you know the isness of money. Is you havngness better or > worse than > before? What else would you like to know the isness of? > > How to have money. Knowing the above you will still need US > dollars to by > food and gas so you need some. With the understanding that the > dollars have > no value except what others feel they have you do not want to hold > onto > dollars any longer than the minimum time it takes to earn it and > exchange it > for what you really want. In the next two years the Fed will > destroy the > credit markets. Paper money will increase in purchasing power and > stocks > bonds, houses and many other things will get cheaper. Credit cards > will > become unaffordable to most as fees and interest rates skyrocket. > Once the credit markets are destroyed the Fed will continue its money > creation and we will have inflation again. If you can figure out > when that > point is reached you can buy stuff at the cheapest prices you will > see in > your lifetime. The last time this occurred was 1932 to 1938. > > How to get money. Create goods and services that others need and > exchange > them for money. The financial institutions are dying so avoid > those kinds > of businesses. Get into real goods production. My suggestion is > to buy > land and start an Organic Farm using heirloom seed. Keep it small. > Sell to > local resturants and markets. Any similar business that uses locally > produced raw materials and sells to local people will have a chance of > working in the comming years. > > Money therapy. Formulat at junior universe on "to have money" and > run out > all overts and motivators on the subject. Once free of those you > will still > have to create goods and services to exchange for money but you > will then > find that the "effort" is minimal and the self destructive reactive > mind > causes will happen less often. > > > As you can see I have been studying the money issue for many > years. Hope > this helps. Keep the good questions comming. > > > Keep on TROMing > > > Pete > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 22:50:20 -0500 > From: David Pelly <[email protected]> > Subject: [TROM1] Formulating life goals > To: Pete McLaughlin <[email protected]>, The Resolution of Mind > list <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > > > Hi Pete, > > I THANK YOU FOR YOUR DETAILED REPLY. IT IS VERY MUCH APPRECIATED. > > I WROTE IN CAPS TO MAKE IT EASIER TO READ AND FOLLOW. > > SEE INTERSPERSED; > On 15-Nov-09, at 8:21 PM, Pete McLaughlin wrote: > >> ************* >> The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] >> ************ >> Hi David >> These are excellent questions. Your understanding of TROM is >> imporving. > > THANK YOU. I THOUGHT I MIGHT GET SCORN AND REBUKE. > > IT JUST OCCURRED TO ME THAT LIKELY MY PRIME POSTULATES ARE TO GET > SCORN, REBUKE, REJECTION, SUPPRESSION, RIDICULE, ETC. > > THAT HAS BEEN MY LIFE. >> >> The formulations for the goals packages are correct. I know that one >> of my >> difficulities was getting from the basic goal package to the junior >> universe and then to the incidents I could actually timebreak so here >> are >> some examples. >> >> On the to sex goals package if you listen to Dennis Lecture on sex >> you >> will >> get that the basic package in the vulgur is >> must fuck >> must not fuck >> must be fucked >> must not be fucked >> >> to put these in the Level 5 Chart we have to reverse the order to: >> must not be fucked >> must be fucked >> must not fuck >> must fuck > > WHY REVERSE ? > > I DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN BY TO PUT ON THE LEVEL FIVE CHART, YOU > HAVE > TO REVERSE THE ORDER? > > I SEE: "MUST KNOW " AS THE FIRST ENTRY ON THE CHART NOT "MUST NOT BE > KNOWN" . > > YOU ARE SAYING >> >> >> The conflicts would be "must not be fuck" > > > IS THE ABOVE A TYPO? > > DO MEAN "MUST NOT BE FUCKED" > >> opposed by "must fuck" and "must >> not fuck" opposed by must be fucked". >> The questions then could be phrased: > >> >> 1. Did someone force me from "must not be fucked" to "must be >> fucked"? >> 1A. Is someone trying to force me from "must not be fucked" to >> "must >> be >> fucked"? >> 2 Am I forcing someone from "must fuck" to "must not fuck." >> 2A. Did I ever force someone from "must fuck" to "must not fuck." >> >> 3 Did someone force me from "must be fucked" to "must not be >> fucked"? >> 3A. Is someone trying to force me from "must be fucked" to "must not >> be >> fucked"? >> 4. Am I forcing someone from "must not fuck" to "must fuck." >> 4A. Did I ever force someone from "must not fuck" to "must fuck." >> >> 5 Did someone force me from "must not fuck" to "must fuck"? >> 5A. Is someone trying to force me from "must not fuck" to "must >> fuck"? >> 6. Am I forcing someone from "must be fucked" to "must not be >> fucked." >> 6A .Did I ever force someone from "must be fucked" to "must not be >> fucked." >> >> 7. Did someone force me from "must fuck" to "must not fuck"? >> 7A. Is someone trying to force me from "must fuck" to "must not >> fuck"? >> 8 Am I forcing someone from "must not be fucked" to "must be >> fucked." >> 8A. Did I ever force someone from "must not be fucked" to "must be >> fucked." >> >> As you pose these opposing postulates you will find incidents come to >> mind >> that have to do with fucking and being fucked. Timebreak anything >> that >> comes up Then re-pose the opposing postulates until nothing shows >> up. >> >> When you do enough running of the "to fuck" questions you will >> realize >> that >> it is just a junior universe of trying to be known to a sex partner >> and this >> is the collapse of a junior universe that Dennis talks about. > > OK, I FIND THIS INTERESTING . > > I GUESS I CAN RUN ANY JUNIOR UNIVERSE OR JUNIOR GOALS THIS WAY? > > BUT WHERE DOES THE GETTING RID OF POSTULATES COME IN AND HOW IS IT > ACCOMPLISHED? >> >> >> "To Be or Not to be, that is the question." Hamlet. To be is a >> question >> that cannot be answered at the level of awareness of a human >> being. I >> suggest you leave it alone till after level 5. > > > WELL IN MY EXPERIENCE, I WAS HAMMERED SO MUCH AS A KID, > > THAT I THOUGHT THAT I MUST NOT BE. > > OR THAT I MUST I MUST NOT BE ME. > > THAT I WAS WRONG. > > > I TRIED TO BE SOMEONE ELSE. > > I CREATED AND TESTED SEVERAL VALENCES OR MANY VALENCES OVER THE YEARS. > > I OFTEN SAID TO MY AUDITOR I FEEL LIKE YOU ARE PROCESSING SOMEONE ELSE > OTHER THAN ME. > > CAN YOU SEE OR UNDERSTAND WHAT I MEAN? > > SO THAT IS WHY I BRING UP THE QUESTION. > > HOW CAN I ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF > > TO BE > > WHO SHOULD I BE.? > > WHAT NOT TO BE" > > WHAT TO BE " > > WHO CAN I BE THAT MY DAD WOULD ACCEPT ME AND NOT BEAT ME. > > I STILL SOMETIMES FEEL I AM NOT THE REAL ME. > > I THINK MY REAL ME WAS HAMMERED DOWN BELOW DEATH ON THE TONE SCALE. > > MAYBE I AM NOW A " WALK IN" ? > > OR SOME VALENCE? > > OR VALENCE UPON VALENCE UPON VALENCE, ETC. > > DO YOU KNOW WHAT WALK INS ARE? > > > > > > IT HAS JUST COME TO MIND THAT " TO NOT BE KNOWN " HAS INTEREST AND > SIGNIFICANCE TO ME. > > MAYBE ALL MY ISSUES ARE UNDER " TO NOT BE KNOWN" > > >> If you are curious about >> where it fits in see the expanded tone scale of Geoffery Filbert in >> "Excaliber Revisited or The Ghost Danse articles by Ouran.(look up >> ghost >> danse spelled just that way on google.) > > OK >> >> To Do. All the goal conflicts are doingnesses. Run Level 5 and >> doingness >> will take care of itself. > > OK , I STILL AM NOT ENTIRELY SURE WHAT YOU MEAN, BUT I WILL DEAL WITH > IT LATER. >> >> To Have. havingness is a lie. > > I NEVER HEARD THAT BEFORE. > >> The triangle of creation is as-is, alter-is, >> not-is. >> This can be restated be, do, have. Have then is a mis ownership of >> all created objects. > >> Everything you see in the apparency of the universe >> around is stuff you can have, and not what it seems. > > I THINK THIS IS QUITE CONTRARY TO WHAT I HEARD ON THE HAVINGNESS > TAPES IN SCIENTOLOGY. > > WHAT IS : WHAT MOST PEOPLE HAVE ; HOUSES, FAMILIES, BUSINESSES, > MONEY, THINGS. > > I HAVE STRUGGLED ALL MY LIFE OF 57 YRS AND HAVE NOT GOT A POT TO > PEE IN. > > THAT DOES NOT FEEL VERY GOOD. > > SO YOUR COMMENT DOES NOT SIT WELL WITH ME. IT MAY BE PHILOSOPHICAL > BUT > WE HAVE TO LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD WHERE THERE ARE CERTAIN AGREEMENTS > AND DEMANDS. > > > >> You can do some >> interesting therapy discovering the real isness of objects like money >> but if >> you do the money will cease to exist. > > I WAS NOT CONSIDERING THE ISNESS OF MONEY. > > I JUST WANT / NEED TO HAVE SOME. > > THINGS ARE PRETTY TIGHT RIGHT NOW. > > ALSO COMPLICATED BY SOME MEDICAL ISSUES WHICH PREVENT ME FROM BEING > ABLE TO HAVE REGULAR JOBS OR TO WORK WITH OTHERS. > > IT MAY SEEM CONTRADICTORY BUT I HAVE TO APPLY FOR DISABILITY. > > BUT I CAN WORK FOR MYSELF WITH NO ONE TO SCREW ME AROUND. > > MY HISTORY HAS BEEN ONE OF BEING VERY PTS. > > > DENNIS SAID THAT A MAGNETIC PERSONALITY IS ENTIRELY THE USE OF > CONSCIOUS OR UNCONSCIOUS PD POSTULATES. > > MY POSTULATES ARE AT THE FAR OPPOSITE END OF THAT SCALE. > > SEE MY STORY BELOW THAT I POSTED YESTERDAY TO A FREEZONE SCIENTOLOGY > WEBSITE; IVy post. > > >> >> For example I wanted to know what money was so I looked into its >> isness and >> found. At one time the US dollar was 1/20 of an ounce of gold. Then >> in >> 1913 congress created the Federal Reserve bank which creates money >> out >> of >> nothing. In 1932 Franklin D Roosevelt confiscated all the gold coins >> held >> by the people in the US. In 1934 the Supreme Court ruled that >> "money" >> was >> the denomination printer or stamped on the face of the coins or bills >> not >> the market value of the coins so what FDR did was not an "illegal >> taking". >> "Money" now is created by the Fed as digits in a computer. They can >> create >> trillions of dollars as fast as a clerk can type zeros in a computer. >> Now you know the isness of money. Is you havngness better or worse >> than >> before? What else would you like to know the isness of? > > I KNOW ALL THE STUFF ABOVE. > I HAVE BEEN STUDYING IT FOR A LONG TIME ALSO. > > I AM IN THE PROCESS OF WRITING A BOOK ON IT. > > BUT MY MIND IS SO FRIED THAT I CANNOT COMPLETE IT. > > I WANT TO CLEAR MYSELF SO I CAN THINK BETTER AND WRITE BETTER. > > >> >> How to have money. Knowing the above you will still need US dollars >> to by >> food and gas so you need some. > > THAT IS THE CONTRADICTION. >> With the understanding that the dollars have >> no value except what others feel they have you do not want to hold >> onto >> dollars any longer than the minimum time it takes to earn it and >> exchange it >> for what you really want. > > WELL I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE SOME RESERVES FOR DRY > SPELLS. > > >> In the next two years the Fed will destroy the >> credit markets. Paper money will increase in purchasing power and >> stocks >> bonds, houses and many other things will get cheaper. Credit cards >> will >> become unaffordable to most as fees and interest rates skyrocket. >> Once the credit markets are destroyed the Fed will continue its money >> creation and we will have inflation again. If you can figure out >> when >> that >> point is reached you can buy stuff at the cheapest prices you will >> see >> in >> your lifetime. The last time this occurred was 1932 to 1938. > > IN MY OPINION THE ABOVE IS CONJECTURE, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE. > THE ONLY THING THAT IS CERTAIN TODAY IS CHANGE AND LOTS OF IT. >> >> How to get money. Create goods and services that others need and >> exchange >> them for money. The financial institutions are dying so avoid those >> kinds >> of businesses. Get into real goods production. My suggestion is to >> buy >> land and start an Organic Farm using heirloom seed. Keep it small. >> Sell to >> local resturants and markets. Any similar business that uses locally >> produced raw materials and sells to local people will have a >> chance of >> working in the comming years. > > WELL.........BY TRAINING I HAPPEN TO BE AN ADVANCED ORGANIC > AGRICULTURAL ENGINEER SPECIALIZING IN GROWING HIGH NUTRIENT DENSITY > FOODS, OR NUTRICEUTICAL GRADE FOODS. > > AND I AM LOOKING FOR MONEY TO BUY A FARM. >> >> Money therapy. Formulat at junior universe on "to have money" and >> run >> out >> all overts and motivators on the subject. > > > WHAT ARE MOTIVATORS IN REGARDS TO MONEY? > > THE CONCEPT OF MOTIVATORS IS VAGUE TO ME. I DO UNDERSTAND IT IN SOME > RESPECTS BUT NOT TO MONEY. > > DO YOU MEAN WHAT MOTIVATED ME TO COMMIT OVERTS IN REGARDS TO GETTING > MONEY OR MONEY IN GENERAL? > > > > >> Once free of those you will still >> have to create goods and services to exchange for money but you will >> then >> find that the "effort" is minimal and the self destructive reactive >> mind >> causes will happen less often. > > THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE FLOW OF THE UNIVERSE AND CAN MANIFEST > PRETTY WELL ANYTHING THEY WANT JUST BY POSTULATING. > > THAT IS THE STATE I WANT TO BE IN. >> >> >> As you can see I have been studying the money issue for many years. > > > AS I SAID BEFORE I HAVE ALSO STUDIED IT WELL. >> Hope >> this helps. > > YES INDEED I HAVE SOME BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE MATTER NOW. > > BUT I HAVE A WAYS TO GO YET. > > > THANKS AGAIN. > > I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR NEXT REPLY. > > David > > > >> Keep the good questions comming. >> >> >> Keep on TROMing >> >> >> Pete > > MY STORY: AS POSTED ON IVy > > >> >> Hi all, >> >> I have been away for a few weeks and away from the computer also. >> >> It is good to be away from the computer. It is sort of a reality >> check from cyberspace. >> >> >> I have a couple of things to say and comment on: >> >> First: >> >> Even though I was away from cyberspace, the unfortunate or >> disconcerting fact is: >> >> I was working for a very SP person. >> >> I have been working for him off and on since 1991. >> >> Well, actually we were business partners for four years from 91 to >> 94, but my/ our efforts failed and it is now very clear to me, >> why >> . >> >> Oddly enough he was the financier and I was the engineer and the one >> with the know how. >> >> No one can create in a negative or condescending environment with an >> antagonistic SP always criticizing, complaining, going on witch >> hunts, >> fault finding, invalidating, looking for a fight or wanting to get >> into a pissing contest, always pulling in the wrong direction, >> crapping >> on my work, and what ever other kind of insanity he can come up >> with >> . >> >> I have caved in a few times while working for him over the years. >> >> I went back because I needed the work to make some extra money >> and to >> not burn any bridges and possibly fix things up. And >> unfortunately as >> I recently read some one on this site mention, it also a matter of >> being so PTS, that I usually land up work for SPs of one kind or >> another. >> >> (That is why I brought up the subject of the PTS rundown last summer, >> on this list. ) >> >> The last few times ( prior to this this time ) I went back, thinking >> that I knew a little more about handling SPs, and that I would not >> cave in, but I was wrong. >> >> This guy is a professional relentless SP. >> >> I was honestly near death several times over the years. >> >> >> But this last few months I have been studying TROM. >> >> I think I have much of level four done. I have not been able to >> follow the patter as written, but I can't find much charge , at >> least >> not yet. (Still going to try and do more work with level four. ) >> >> I haven't got level five figured out yet. >> >> But what I mainly learned up to now in TROM is about games, ( >> conflicting and complimentary postulates) and the how the downward >> spiral works step by step to the point where we hit bottom and all >> flows are blocked. >> >> This knowledge as well as other, helped me survive the insanity and >> abuse without caving in. >> >> Now there will not likely be another time for me to work for him. >> >> If anything; possibly hopefully some law suits. >> >> But what I want to stress is the extraordinary invaluable data I >> learned from TROM as I mentioned above. >> >> Ron did not discover this, and that is one reason at least, from my >> present viewpoint, why scio does not work as well as it should in >> some >> cases, at least to the degree it should. >> >> Scio does very well as far as it goes, but it does not go far enough. >> The idea that the bridge is complete may be true for some, but not >> for >> all. The way I see it now is that it all depends on one's case. >> >> >> >> Quote from the TROM chapter on "stability" : >> >> In the early 1960s I had done the Saint Hill Briefing Course. I >> reviewed everything I had learnt on that, but none of it helped. >> Back >> on my own again, I learned how to handle postulates in conflict >> --- and >> found out that Ron had never learnt how to do it. There was a >> certain >> fundamental truth in that area that he had not spotted. >> >> My own techniques for resolving postulates in conflict ---- handle >> correct goals packages. I found what the true goals packages look >> like >> and how to take them apart. You will find this, and it is in Levels >> Four and Five of TROM. >> >> The research on goals and so forth took me about a year to iron >> out and >> turned out to be a lot more complex than I had thought it would be, >> especially Level Five. I understood why Ron had failed in 1960. His >> efforts were valiant. He was almost doomed to fail. >> >> The actual legs, the actual postulates of the true GPMs aren't in the >> reactive bank. They're in the analytical mind. If you search in the >> bank, you will do it all wrong. >> >> It is an analytical construct, so they're in the analytical mind. >> All >> that is in the bank is a mish-mash of wrong opposers. The lies. The >> truth is in the analytical mind. >> >> So the mistake Ron made on the subject of goals was to look into a >> mass >> of lies, in the bank, for the truth. That is why the search went on >> forever, and why he nearly killed himself in the 1960s. >> >> end of quote... >> >> I never heard anyone mention this before. >> >> >> >> >> Over all Dennis' style of writing is really frustrating to me, >> but I >> have to give credit where credit is due on what i understand so far, >> ( the above few lines are an exception to this frustration, they are >> clear and straight forward, but otherwise he tends to talk in clues, >> in my opinion. ) >> >> Otherwise Dennnis' discoveries are invaluable. I cannot find a >> better >> word to describe it. >> >> >> Also level two and three of TROM has released tons of charge for >> me on >> this life time track on incidents that I have had over 300 hours of >> processing on over the last 12 years. >> >> So my thanks go out to Dennis. Scientology was a life saver for me >> back in 1997 and this summer TROM was another life saver. >> >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Trom mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Trom mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > > > End of Trom Digest, Vol 64, Issue 9 > *********************************** _______________________________________________ Trom mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
