************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************
Sent 16th of January 2016 by [email protected] (Antony Phillips)Subject: TROM: Replay B26
Note that this is a resend of a message sent some years ago, and some data (like addresses) is liable to be inaccurate.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 08:53:49 +0200
From: Antony Phillips <[email protected]>
Organization: International Viewpoints
To: [email protected]
Ä TROM (2:235/159.10) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
TROM-L Ä
Msg : 254 of 289 Rcv Pvt K/s
From : [email protected] Tue 19 Dec 95
10:38
To : [email protected] Tue 19 Dec 95
20:34
Subj : Re: Trom effects
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
ÄÄÄÄ
2/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA20783 for <[email protected]>; Tue, 19 Dec 1995
09:51:32 +0100
Bill wrote a few days ago:
>> Are sleeping disorders a common side effect of commencing TROM?
[...]
>I also had a few occasions where lack of
>havingness created some unpleasant effects, but I attribute this to
>insufficient use of RI.
There is also another potential source of trouble: leaving something
"unflat", i.e. before it ceases to produce change. I'd guess that's
the more likely cause of sleeping disorders. Basically it's just
pictures/facsimiles reactivated and left hanging around that now
play up. From my personal experience I'd suggest checking this.
(E.g. ask yourself "What is left that still needs to be handled?")
But remember: Every importance you put on something like this
comes from you since it is your consideration/postulate that it
"might be important"...
>>Is anyone able to quantify any abilities gained through TROM. Has a
>>'god' state really been achieved and what does this imply.
>
>Yes, I would like to hear this from those that are in Level 5 of TROM.
>Some time ago I came up with "Maier's Criteria", which are the basic OT
>abilities I am looking for from any clearing technology:
Which could be a mistake. If you look forward to anything you are
going into a games situation with yourself. The basic lie to that
is that you don't already have it. The truth is that you do already
have these abilities, but prevent yourself from knowing or exercising
them. As long as you are _expecting_ to _get_ these abilities you're
implicitly acknowledging that you _don't have_ them, which is an
invalidation of yourself and an opposing postulate to your own goal.
>1) ability to exteriorize at will with full perceptics
>2) ability to move, create, and/or destroy matter in the physical
>universe without use of a body
>
>I have point blank asked many if they have actually achieved these
>abilities. Few have been able to answer positively. These have
>included people in Scientology, TROM, etc.
>
>>I would appreciate some help in locating other material relating to TROM.
>> Or is TROM the only source of such valuable material.
This is not directly relating but I'd suggest James P.Carse's
"Finite and Infinite Games". It certainly explains a lot about
games and games situations.
Marc
--- GIGO+ sn 299 at jacome vsn 0.99.950801
Ä TROM (2:235/159.10) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
TROM-L Ä
Msg : 256 of 289 Pvt K/s
From : John V LuValle <[email protected]> Tue 19 Dec 95
22:23
To : Return requested <"[email protected]" <trom-l@newcivWed 20 Dec 95
07:14
Subj : Re: Trom effects
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
ÄÄÄÄ
[198.68.36.114]) by ns.dknet.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA20077 for
<[email protected]>; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 22:32:30 +0100
Richard Kennaway noted:
"... all I have to do is stop preventing myself from knowing it. So how does
one do that?"
Christine answered:
"You change your mind"
John comments:
You change it, then you stop doing the things which put it there in the
first place, then it ceases to exist. Now you have stopped preventing
yourself from knowing.... Shortly thereafter you probably put it back,
eventually, if you've got the heart for it, you stop putting it back.
There are numerous ways to go about this. Trom appears to be one approach.
Regards,
John
--- GIGO+ sn 299 at jacome vsn 0.99.950801
Ä TROM (2:235/159.10) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
TROM-L Ä
Msg : 257 of 289 Rcv Pvt K/s
From : Lenny or Jevan Gray <[email protected]> Tue 19 Dec 95
23:05
To : [email protected] Wed 20 Dec 95
07:14
Subj : Re: Trom effects
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
ÄÄÄÄ
XAA24357 for <[email protected]>; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 23:11:18 +0100
:Bill wrote a few days ago:
:>> Are sleeping disorders a common side effect of commencing TROM?
:[...]
:>I also had a few occasions where lack of
:>havingness created some unpleasant effects, but I attribute this to
:>insufficient use of RI.
:
: There is also another potential source of trouble: leaving something
: "unflat", i.e. before it ceases to produce change. I'd guess that's
: the more likely cause of sleeping disorders.
Another important possibility relates to the notion of whether eight
hours inactivity out of each 24 is "normal" for an embodied self-creator.
There are and have been exceptions to this -- reputedly Thomas Edison
was one of these. I know of this as more than mere myth, because, in my
own circle of acquaintances, my step-son's grandmother is one of them.
She's an up-tone non-neurotic who always just wakes up after 3 or 4 hours
and finds constructive things (if one considers things like knitting to
fit in that category) to do until the rest of the world wakes up.
Deviation from the normal habits of sleep shouldn't necessarily be
judged "bad" without evaluating whether it actually causes problems.
- Lenny Gray -
--- GIGO+ sn 299 at jacome vsn 0.99.950801
Ä TROM (2:235/159.10) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
TROM-L Ä
Msg : 258 of 289 Rcv Pvt K/s
From : [email protected] Wed 20 Dec 95
12:18
To : [email protected] Wed 20 Dec 95
21:14
Subj : Re: Trom effects
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
ÄÄÄÄ
2/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA07209 for <[email protected]>; Wed, 20 Dec 1995
11:28:34 +0100
Richard Kennaway wrote:
>>As long as you are _expecting_ to _get_ these abilities you're
>>implicitly acknowledging that you _don't have_ them, which is an
>>invalidation of yourself and an opposing postulate to your own goal.
>
>This is the same sort of run-around one gets on alt.zen. Ok, I already
>have these abilities, all I have to do is stop preventing myself from
>knowing it. So how does one do that? All you've done is redescribe the
>problem.
No, I have given a hint which way to look. Let me explain this a bit
more verbose.
You started off playing this game of life with some really amazing
abilities. Other's who were not as able as you (i.e. later on the
downward spiral) blamed you for that and you decided to rid yourself
of these abilities, or technically, you put up a postulate of not
being able.
Now, a while later on the roller coaster of life you want those
abilities back. But instead of changing/reevaluating your original
consideration, you start playing the game of "Regaining what has
been lost". You're trying to solve a problem with a new solution.
The problem itself was a solution to yet another, earlier problem.
The idea of TROM is to get rid of any compulsive games situation
on the basis that they are the obstacle to spiritual enlightenment.
The thing is, as long consider the GOALS to be important AS goals
you won't let yourself reach them. As soon as you lose interest
in them they get much easier to have.
Sounds like a paradox? It is. It is one of those very subtle and
sublime games you play with yourself to keep life more interesting
or for whatever other reason. Want to get rid of it? Accept it
as it is, timebreak the basic considerations you put there and
find yourself something else (I.e. do A LOT of RI :-)
There is one thing Dennis Stephens didn't mention very explicitly
in TROM. If you're running level 4 or 5, there is no limitation
to whatever is cause. If you have a scientology background you
might perhaps want to run it on four flows, where TROM might look
like only two flows. E.g. on Level 4, you would not only use the pair:
3. Get the idea of being prevented from knowing and
6. Get the idea of preventing from knowing
but use a more explicit concept like:
1. Get the idea of _yourself_ being prevented _by yourself_ from knowing
2. Get the idea of _yourself_ being prevented _by others_ from knowing
3. Get the idea of _others_ being prevented _by yourself_ from knowing
4. Get the idea of _others_ being prevented _by others_ from knowing
etc.
Unless you're already willing and able to accept that it really is
yourself that's being nasty to you by preventing you from greatness
there is not much sense in trying to go at it directly. Just break
anything away that stands in the way and you will get there eventually.
You once were a player of magnificence and have deteriorated since
then a bit. Be careful not to fall for your own traps.
One could also compare the situation to the role of the prince in
the fairy tale "Sleeping Beauty". If you as the prince try to look at
the princess all the time you'll get stung by the thorn bushes. But
to get to the princess you have to watch these bushes and get them
out of your way.
Marc
--- GIGO+ sn 299 at jacome vsn 0.99.950801
Ä TROM (2:235/159.10) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
TROM-L Ä
Msg : 259 of 289 Rcv Pvt K/s
From : luvalle <[email protected]> Fri 05 Jan 96
16:02
To : [email protected] Sat 06 Jan 96
07:07
Subj : Re: An argument for *no* common terminology
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
ÄÄÄÄ
ESMTP id DAA19516 for <[email protected]>; Sat, 6 Jan 1996 03:01:13 +0100
Steve said:
>However, there probably is a serious error in the second part. We are not
>all talking about the same thing; only about similar things. It would be
>far better if we could make allowances for others' realities on the nature
>of the "enemy" and how to deal with it. Why not let Reality with a capital
>R (if there be one) sort out who/which approach has the most accurate view.
>It will, you know, sort out who has the most accurate view by the
>practicioner's long-term success or lack of it. A little Darwinian
>selection here.
>
>Steve
If we take a broad enough perspective, we are all talking about
the same thing, we're talking about phenomena perceived by ourselves or those
we counsel. Things start going in myriad separate directions
when we start to interpret these pheonomena and attach value(s) to them.
I strongly suspect that the idea that _one_ theory and approach will be
demonstrably better (more effective) is not workable in this particular
field because each approach creates it's own reality when used by the
practitioner/
counselee.
I believe there is an underlying 'reality' which workable approaches
approximate, but this 'reality' is so foreign to our contemporary paradigms
and physical universe 'common sense' that there are significant barriers to
expressing it in a communicable form. It may be too simple ;)
I do applaud the efforts of those that are attempting to do so.
Regards,
John
--- GIGO+ sn 299 at jacome vsn 0.99.950801
Ä TROM (2:235/159.10) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
TROM-L Ä
Msg : 266 of 289 Rcv
From : [email protected] 2:236/174.10 Tue 30 Jan 96
16:51
To : All Wed 31 Jan 96
06:56
Subj : ACT-70 TROM
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
ÄÄÄÄ
You will find more information about TROM in act70 through act75
and the archives. There is also a majordomo mailing list called
[email protected].
((Editor's comments in double parenthesis - Homer))
TROM, The Resolution Of Mind
By Dennis H. Stephens
ACT - 70
10 August 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
TROM, The Resolution of Mind by Dennis H. Stephens is a must read.
It is available from Flemming.
In my own words,
The basic premise is that life is a game, and that games derive
from one basic GPM having to do with KNOWING in the creating and
destroying sense.
The GPM has four parts from which all conflict arises, and they
are,
Self - Opposing - Others
1.) To Be Known To Not Know
2.) To Not Be Known To Know
3.) To Know To Not Be Known
4.) To Not Know To Be Known
To Be Known is the goal and act of creating a mockup or importance
or 'existence' of anything and showing it to others. It is an outflow,
and tries to get the other person To Know the mockup which is an inflow
from their point of view.
Thus To Be Known is cause and is an outflow, and To Know is an
effect and is an inflow. The opposing party creates a game by
responding to your mockup with To Not Know (about your mockup) which of
course conflicts with your goal To (have your mockup) Be Known.
This is a rather new use of these terms, and may confuse
Scientologists, but try to follow it.
All games come under the above 4 lines of the GPM.
Games come about from one side trying to impose its goal on the
other side, and the other side refusing to accept the goal and positing
the opposite goal instead. Force is used to win these games.
Thus the above GPM becomes
Self - Opposing - Others
1.) Must Be Known Must Not Know
2.) Must Not Be Known Must Know
3.) Must Know Must Not Be Known
4.) Must Not Know Must Be Known
When one side wins that is an overt for that side and a motivator
for the other side.
When one side loses that is a motivator for that side and an overt
for the other side.
For example if Self wins at 1.) Must Be Known, that is Forcing the
other side To Know against its wish to Not know. Thus the overt of Self
is Forcing the other side To Know.
If Self loses at 1.) Must Be Known, it becomes Prevented from Being
Known. Thus the motivator for Self is being Prevented from Being Known.
Thus there are 8 possible overwhelms, 4 happening to Self as
motivators when Self loses, and 4 happening to the other side as overts
from Self when Self wins.
They are, (M = Motivator relative to Self, O = Overt relative to
Self.)
1.) To Be Known 1.) To Not Know
M = Prevented from Being Known O = Forcing To Know
2.) To Be Not Known 2.) To Know
M = Forced to be Known O = Preventing From Knowing
3.) To Know 3.) To Not Be Known
M = Prevented from Knowing O = Forcing To Be Known
4.) To Not Know 4.) To Be Known
M = Forced to Know O = Preventing From Being Known
One can easily recognize Enforced and Inhibited Knowing and Not
Knowing in the above data.
It is asserted that the mind is merely the accumulated recording of
all the games ever played and lost by the being, all of which are
patterned on one of 4 line items of the above GPM. It is further
asserted that the being has come to a point where his mind itself has
become a problem to him and thus a game. However rather than resolve
it, he PLAYS against it using the very patterns that are stored in the
mind, so he loses.
He wants to know about the mind, so it makes sure he can't find
out.
He wants To Not Know about the mind, so it makes sure he does find
out (hallucinations etc.)
He wants to be known to the mind, so it makes sure he is ignored
utterly.
He wants to be not known to the mind, so it makes sure he knows he
has no secrets from it.
Since the being is PLAYING a game with the mind in his efforts to
resolve it, he is inherently opposing it. He has never won such a game
for long with anyone else, why should he win it with the mind? The mind
in fact is a record of all his losses in these games, so it has a lot of
power to make him lose.
The answer then to erasing the mind, is NOT to play a game with it,
but to mock it up as it is, to make more of it.
One does this by spotting the 8 flows of overwhelm and running the
various as-isness type processes on them that Stephens recommends.
Highly recommended.
Homer
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith This file may be found at
[email protected] ftp.lightlink.com/pub/homer/act/ACT70.MEMO
Posted to usenet newsgroup: alt.clearing.technology
---
* Origin: Art Matrix - Lightlink Electra Gateway v2.4 (2:236/174.10)
--
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/
Administrator: trom-l, selfclearing-l, superscio-l, IVy lists
_______________________________________________ TROM mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
