*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
Sent 31st of October 2015 by: [email protected]
Subject:
TROM Replay B14
Date:
Fri, 20 Mar 1998 09:00:49 +0100
From:
Antony Phillips <[email protected]>
Organization:
International Viewpoints
To:
[email protected]
These got missed out of B13, and fit in that sequence (the number on
the
messages is in my FidoPoint editor, which I used at that time to
receive
TROM-l)
--
Ant
Antony A Phillips
[email protected]
tlf: (+45) 45 88 88 69
Box 78
DK - 2800 Lyngby
Editor, International Viewpoints (= IVy). See Home Page:
http://home8.inet.tele.dk/ivy/
Ä TROM (2:235/159.10)
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
TROM-L Ä
Msg : 118 of
289
Snt Pvt Loc Scn
From : Antony
Phillips
2:235/159.10 Fri 23 Jun 95
08:07
To :
[email protected]
Fri 23 Jun 95
08:07
Subj : [Ross Bright] Trom mailing list (more of!!!)
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
ÄÄÄÄ
=============================================================================
* Forwarded by Antony Phillips (2:235/159.10)
* Area : NETMAIL
* From : [email protected], 236/174.10 (Thursday June 22 1995 18:24)
* To : Antony Phillips
* Subj : Question about Level 2
=============================================================================
Apparently-to: [email protected]
From: [email protected]
Subject: Question about Level 2
At this point I have run a little more than 10 hours of Level 2 on
myself. I am working with "persons" as the object from the
past
scene, and things seem to be going well. I find myself slipping
into
Level 3 almost automatically. The scene becomes more solid and I
see more things surrounding the person, then the scene seems to
actually float in PT in front of me. Things feel pretty good up to
that
point.
But as I continue from there, I get a little dullness and tend to
get
rather scattered. It gets harder to concentrate on what I'm doing.
If I stop there and do RI, I brighten up considerably.
My question is this -- am I overrunning the object? Are these
symptoms of overrun, or should I get back to the same object
after doing the RI? Overrun indicates somewhat to me, but I don't
feel a certainty either way. These indications are, after all,
changes,
so maybe I'm still getting change with the process and should
continue.
Any opinions?
Bill
-+- GIGO+ sn 299 at jacome vsn 0.99.950303
=============================================================================
Greetings,
/ÄÄÄ\
| Ant
|
Antony A Phillips
\ÄÄÄ/
Internet address:
[email protected]
tlf: (+45) 45 88 88 69
Box 78
DK - 2800 Lyngby
--- GoldED 2.42.G0214+ -
Ä TROM (2:235/159.10)
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
TROM-L Ä
Msg : 122 of
289
Rcv Pvt K/s Scn
From : "Joachim H. Steingrubner
PhD"
236/174.10 Thu 22 Jun 95
18:05
To :
[email protected]
Sat 24 Jun 95
05:22
Subj : Timebreaking/Time Blaster/Parallelisator was:Dimi's resp
to
Terry..
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
ÄÄÄÄ
Apparently-to: [email protected]
From: "Joachim H. Steingrubner PhD" <[email protected]>
Subject: Timebreaking/Time Blaster/Parallelisator was:Dimi's resp to
Terry...
>- As to me, in the best Russian traditions of rough solutions I
am
> running TROM-like process from Rowland Barkley's L13 Rundown,
Track
> Blaster, with my friend as an auditor. Still sane. Any
advices?
>
> I wonder did Rowland Barkley know about TROM when writing L13,
after all
> they were both in Australia. Maybe he can tell something more
about
> TROM and such processes.
Timebreaking and Time Track Blaster are basically the same
process.
I did something similar in 1986, calling it at the time
'Parallelisator'
for a lack of a better name and described it even briefly in
'The
Tales from Under the Galley'.
It is basic, logical tech, which, I'm sure had some forerunner
in
Tibetan or other spiritual cultures...
I got badly stuck in '84 for exactly the reasons that Rowland
describes
in 'Excalibur Revisited'. Rowland kind of advices against this
process
unless one has a decent auditor in the vicinity. But he also
comments
on the tremendous power of it, 'tearing the timetrack
apart'.
Some results posted on trom-l indicated those problems which
were
experienced by about everybody who did not have an auditor to
help
out.
I meant to comment on the recently posted letter by a lady
(forgot
the name) to Ant who forwarded it to here. She was having an
excellent auditor. (I did not understand her comments on RI at
all).
Her remark to not change TROM as it is, is NOT valid in the
long
run if TROM is to hit the 'broad masses', sorry for the
generalization.
I do hope that Flemming gets around to finalize a better
description.
In the meantime, I think that it is worth the (potential)
temporary
problems that might arise.
Everyone on here is a pioneer !!!
Joachim
**********************************
** Joachim H. Steingrubner, PhD **
** Internet: [email protected] **
** WWW
http://www.newciv.org/ **
** CompuServe 71762,1757 **
**********************************
--- GIGO+ sn 299 at jacome vsn 0.99.950303
--
Ant
Antony A Phillips
[email protected]
tlf: (+45) 45 88 88 69
Box 78
DK - 2800 Lyngby
Publisher, International Viewpoints (= IVy). See Home Page:
http://home8.inet.tele.dk/ivy/
Administrator: trom-l, selfclearing-l, superscio-l, IVy lists
--
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
