*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
Hi Ant
Would you post this to TROM? This is excellent material.
Sincerely
Pete
On Sep 11, 2012, at 8:41 PM, Ant Phillips
<
[email protected]> relayed:
Pilot'sPosts
Z21
Co-existence of Static
From Post 53 -- April 1999
We are not here to dissolve everything into nothingness.
The true Nirvana is a creative state rather than a passive one.
At basic we are balancing the nothingness with a richness of
creation.
Having everything locked down into a single agreed upon reality inhibits
free creation and therefore reduces the richness. It is therefore
abhorrent to a being and as he rises upscale, he objects to it more
rather than less.
But what is wrong is not the creations themselves but the locked down
singleness of the realities available.
There could be many realities, some shared, some overlapping, some
independent, and all visited by choice.
Imagine an Internet with many websites. There is communication and
interaction, and yet each is free to create as he chooses, and if he
really likes someone else's creation, perhaps he copies it and if he
dislikes it, perhaps he shuns it, but there is room for anything and
everything.
And then one day there is a virus, and everybody's system is permanently
locked onto the same site. Of course they will fight amongst each other
because each one's creations affects the others. There can be no true
freedom because freedom will be at odds with responsibility.
Consider what would happen if everyone became a god. One person would
wish for rain and another would wish for sunshine. It just doesn't work
if all are locked into a single reality.
And yet it is also a failure for each of us to go off into a totally
isolated personal universe, for then we loose the communication and
interaction that are so desirable to us all.
What should happen is a fanning out of multiple realities.
When some want rain and some want sunlight, then each occurs and the
multitude of beings individually choose which they want to agree
with.
Many realities but not isolated, except when someone is in the mood for
that.
In such a scenario, each individual can be a god with the power to make
any postulate stick, at least as far as physical reality goes. The
tradeoff is that he cannot make anything stick as far as trying to
enforce or demand anything from another being, because they are gods
too.
If Joe wants to visit Bill, he has to put up with Bill's postulate for a
tacky lime green sky with orange pokadots. Or he can change the sky and
see if Bill will come along with him, but if Bill chooses to keep the
pokadots while Joe insists on a blue sky, then they will find themselves
in different realities and no longer talking to each other.
Think of a radio with endless stations and you can tune in to whatever
you feel like. But a particular announcer, whom you might like, is
currently playing music that you don't care for. Its up to you whether
you stick with him or try another station.
That is total freedom. You can have anything you want, no matter how
outlandish.
Joe can even mockup a copy of Bill and give him a better taste in sky
colors. But it wouldn't be the real Bill, just Joe talking to a puppet he
mocked up.
What Joe can't have is control over Bill. He can ask for Bill's agreement
on something, but he can't force it.
Each and every one of us decided at some point that we had a right to
control others and enforce agreement. That postulate is a two edged sword
and you see the results around you now. If you hadn't made it, you
wouldn't be here.
And its a hard one to let go of completely. Deep down, you know that some
madman will come at you swinging a sabre and you are not confident that
you could shift realities and just let him hack up his own mocked up copy
of you. And with everything locked down to one reality, he would hack up
the agreed upon copy and you would end up walking around in your own
universe with everybody else out of comm.
And so we need to loosen the realities first and let go on a
gradient.
Control Mest all you want, but avoid controlling people whenever
possible. Instead work by means of communication and shared postulates
and encourage as much individual beingness as possible.
LRH's brilliance was in inspiring enthusiasm; people turned over their
lives for the sake of the tech. He erred greatly when he installed strong
controls in the late 60s. The controls were unnecessary, he already had
the enthusiastic willing hands.
As soon as the organization began to enforce agreement instead of simply
continuing to train and asking people to do their best, it backfired and
the org began to spiral down from high theta towards dramatization and
solidity.
Control MEST, not people. And as far as auditing and CCHs and other
helpful forms of "control", don't look on it as control,
because if you make that your purpose it will backfire. It is educational
guidance, like holding a child's hand and helping them cross the street
safely for the first time. The idea is not to override their will but to
steer them through new territory.
The road out is in the direction of less enforced agreement and less
control while increasing communication and affinity.
Note that this requires developing a tolerance for others disagreeing
with you.
You can have a TV set with lots of stations. You can like them all and
yet retain your freedom to shift agreements.
Think how much better that is than having only one station that only
plays the party line.
Best,
The Pilot
**
[[A "gem" from the Pilot, of which the above is an example, is
send to the list SuperScio every Wednesday - you can join at:
http://lists.worldtrans.org/mailman/listinfo/superscio
_______________________________________________
Trom mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
