************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************
Ant,
Thank you so much for posting this. These posts or viewpoints and experiences are so honest. It is like a breath of fresh air in a dungeon. The way you, Alan, Bill and Dustin think is exactly the way I thought and think. I agree with everything that was said or described by each of you in each post. That has been my experience, exactly. I never understood what black fives case was, until now, even though I tried to understand for many yrs. I now understand and realize that I am a B5 case too. I now feel vindicated, from all the pillioring and condemnation I got on this list over all the yrs. I now realize that there has been no honest thinking on this list since Pete took over . Pete's position was that if Dennis did not say it, it was not true. If I did not see Dennis as a "God" with absolute canonical righteousness and agree with everything Dennis said, and think like Dennis and be a parrot of Dennis, I was condemned and shot at like with machine gun fire. And moderated and blocked. One thing Hubbard said that was true, was that parroting is a slight aberration (a form of insanity). I bought the hard copy of TROM in the late 90s. It was completely unintelligible. It was not possible to read one page without going crazy. My brain would hurt from trying to read it and make sense of it. There was not one intelligible sentence or a reasonable sequence of intelligible thoughts. I finally got pissed off and threw it in the garbage. Now when TROM was posted on line in it's present form, the fact is; that it is not Dennis' work. It Greg Pickering's work (and who ever else helped him). Dennis did not reach nirvana or go "clear" (nirvana, which is meant to mean the same thing as clear, except not use scientologeze). Like is mentioned in the posts, I also hate the word nirvana. Dennis died totally dysfunctional, totally aberrated, totally fucked up. What his wife said about him being a saint and having "The Saints Go Marching In" played at his funeral is pure bullshit. Many lies are often told at eulogies. If you read TROM with intellectual integrity and question everything, to evaluate and inspect if it is true or not, you will find a lot of false and limiting data and some just pure bullshit. When they enter my mind they get caught in my BS detector and hurt my brain. My internal emeter starts to go crazy. Now, that being said, I do not mean that TROM is without some merit and some workability. It is a very steep gradient. I can't imagine anyone doing it, that has not done at least some scientology. Maybe possibly someone who is already somewhere around a tone 3 or 4 *might* be able to do it. Like the "Pilots self clearing book" it is very useful for someone who has done at least some scientology and ideally for someone who has done the bridge and is still fucked up and needs a good clean up and repair process. I tried to do TROM with every way and every bit of strength I could find and could not make it work. I just about killed my self trying. I tried to do TROM many times over many yrs. Every time I just about killed myself. The TROM gradient was too steep for me, because I did not do any official bridge in the cos or the fz. I only read all the scn books and got some auditing and learned to audit mostly on my own. And read lots of fz material, from all the Free Spirit Journals to many IVys and other fz stuff. And I have learned to be a very good auditor. A couple said that I was a better auditor than a few well known high class LRH trained auditors. Their proficiency and holy reputation is only held together by intellectual dishonesty, black magic entrapping. mind numbing, morphic field memes, lies, BS and argument. It is the same with all of scientology. Most people who get into scn have their minds very insidiously totally tranquilized. Their souls (call it thetans if you want) are evicted and replaced with BTs. That is why most of them are starry eyed and fucked up. And many decades of the best processing in the world does not work. Everyone is on a wild goose chase. The tech is fundamentally wrong. Like someone said: The worst lies are the ones that are almost true. The more truth there is in a cognitive construct, the more the truth acts as a glue to hold the embedded lie in place, which is thereafter not inspected, but often defended to death. If you properly apply the data in "How to study a science" to scn, or apply scn to itself, you will realize this. The way I got to make some TROM work for me was through learning and adopting the Sedona method and some Aspectika to TROM. Then I had a break through. When I got the breakthrough, I processed a lot of case on level two, three and some four. Incredible amounts of charge blew off over several weeks. Thank you so much again, for posting those old posts. I feel so good now. I feel liberated. The truth is the truth. The truth is not determined by authority, beliefs, opinions or by who wins an argument. Every subject has a truth, many partial truths, many almost truths, many sometimes truths, many conditional truths, many false truths and many lies. The value of a datum is only determined by how many problems it solves and how well it solves them. Only the truth will set us free from the bondage of our case. The truth is nothing more than the right data to solve a problem in the best possible way, for the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics. Cheers, David On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 12:01 AM, The Resolution of Mind list < [email protected]> wrote: > ************* > The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] > ************ > > ************* > The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] > ************ > > > Sent > * Saturday second of April 2016 *by *[email protected] > <[email protected]>* (Antony Phillips) > > Note that this is a resend of a message sent some years ago, and some data > (like addresses) is liable to be inaccurate. > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > ************* > The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] > ************ > > > [The replays are old, and of course there is no garantee that addresses are > correct now. Judith Andersons preent email address is: > [email protected] ] > > Subject: > TROM: Replay B37 > Date: > Fri, 28 Aug 1998 22:03:10 +0200 > From: > Antony Phillips <[email protected]> > Organization: > International Viewpoints > To: > [email protected] > > > (Some of the material on Black Fives, etc. is published in the current > issue of IVy, number 38 Aug 1998) > -- > 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 > > > Subject: > Re: who owns TROM > Date: > Wed, 27 Aug 1997 13:19:35 +1000 > From: > Judith Anderson <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > > > Dear One and All, > > Anne Stephens gave me all of Dennis's research notes and materials that > were available after his death as he had appointed me his Distributor, and > I > have corrected the typing errors and changed the sequence of chapters as > per > his original intentions. This new format will shortly be available on the > Net (it has been distributed by me in this format for the last 2 years), > where it will be freely available to anyone wishing to avail themselves of > it. > > It will be then available for anyone to translate or copy. Rewriting is > another story, which hasn't really come up seriously, as it would certainly > take someone's time. > If there was a serious suggestion I would suggest it also go on to the net > after some consultation with say Judith Methven who is acting as Technical > Advisor (along with Leonard Dunn). > > A group of 6 people are in communication at the moment to facilitate the > above so while I don't suggest holding your breath it probably won't be > more > than a month or two away. Homer being one of the 6, has offered to put in > on > the net from disc but can't spend the time to look after it as I > understand. > > If there is anyone who has any comments or suggestions please feel free to > contribute via e-mail as I am not an experienced computer person. Is there > anyone who does have some time and/or expertise, we'd really appreciate > it. > > Good Tromming, Judith (Anderson) > > P.S. As there are two Judiths,(Anderson and Methven) it would be handy if > when referencing us that you refer to Judith A or Judith M, eh? :-) > > > > At 08:31 PM 8/24/97 +0200, you wrote: > >See the latest replay to trom-l > > > >I think you short write a breif authoritive note sating: > > > >Who right now has "control"/"owns" trom? > > > >What the current policy is with regard rewriting and translating. > > > >The replays coming up are likely to refelct the confused situation as to > >those point two years ago - a confused situation can lead to conter and > >other intentions. So let us see that there is no confusion in PT. > > > >You could also, as well, or instead,invite a present time discussion on > >what the ppolicies could be. Maybe a humble, yet effective, attitude > >would be that you own the whole idea, are uncertain how to run it, and > >would appreciate comments/ suggestions. That attitude would encourage > >participation/contripution - both of which put people at cause. > > > >Hi, > > > >Ant > > > > > > > >-- > > 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://home.sn.no/home/trone/IVy.html > > > > > > > > > > Subject: > Re: who owns TROM > Date: > Wed, 27 Aug 1997 00:55:58 -0400 (EDT) > From: > "Homer W. Smith" <[email protected]> > To: > Judith Anderson <[email protected]> > CC: > [email protected] > > > > A group of 6 people are in communication at the moment to facilitate the > > above so while I don't suggest holding your breath it probably won't be > more > > than a month or two away. Homer being one of the 6, has offered to put > in on > > the net from disc but can't spend the time to look after it as I > understand. > > Not sure what you mean by 'look after it'. > > I will give you an archive directory where you may place > the work on your own determinism, either in whole or in parts. > > Ant can do this for you if you wish. > > It will be robo posted to the net over time along with everything > else in the archive, and PGP signed to assure non alteration. > > It will also be available for anyone to download either by > web page or ftp. > > If you need more than that let me know. > > Homer > > > > Subject: > TROM communication > Date: > Wed, 27 Aug 1997 08:52:41 +0200 > From: > Antony Phillips <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > > > Dear trom-l'ers > > We have over 50 people on this list, and I strongly encourage members to > originate a communication. > > Introduce yourself. > > You can certainly say something of your interests other than TROM. This > would give a more complete picture of yourself. However the list should > be reserved for discussion related to TROM. > > If you say something about your other interests -- heed my warning: You > may find yourself involved in private conversation to the other end of > the globe. I understand that as a result of an introduction on this > list a one to one transatlantic conversation on nanotechnology was > started, and this is fine. But please send _all_ TROM communications to > the list. > > TROM has proven itself very valuable to a number of people. No-one > makes any money out of running it, which means no one has a finacial > interest in promoting it. So if it is to survive to the benifit of many > more, volantary help is required. And there are so many different forms > of help, and so many different people with very different abilities. > > One relatively easy form of help is to write to this list, with your > comments, joys, griefs and questions about TROM. > > As an editor of a very amateur magazine, I know that some people have > what one might call an inferiority complex over their ability to write, > and the usefulness of what they could contribute. If you yourself feel > that way - overcome your shyness - write to > [email protected] > > Could be you surprise yourself and others :-) > > I suspect the more present time communication and the less replays we > have, the better (though I will still keep posting replays - old > expereince is often good expereince). > > > -- > 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://home.sn.no/home/trone/IVy.html > > > > Subject: > Black Fives and TROM > Date: > Thu, 28 Aug 1997 21:12:50 +0200 > From: > Antony Phillips <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > > > > Dear Trom-ers, > > Black Fives and TROM > > This is a contribution I intended to make when I took > over the TROM-l adminstration post. First a little back > ground data. > > I joined the scientology movement (before it was a > church) in England in 1954. Things were very different then, > and among the prominent things was the question of mockups. > A mock up is a self created "picture" (in three dimensions > containing all perceptions). There were certain people who > could not mock up, or "see" pictures of things that they had > experienced (memories). I was one of those people, and we > were called black cases (when we shut our eyes, what we saw > was blackness). Scientology was supposed to be > non-evaluative, but nevertheless, as a student on course one > became very aware that to be a black case put one in a very > bad position in life and scientology. A little later the > only way to achieve the valued state of "clear" included a > mockup process which I could'nt do. Inability to mockup made > me a little frustrated and unhappy in the late 50's. > > These black cases were also called black fives, there > being levels of processing, the most able people begining at > one, while black cases came in low on the stage at five. By > the way, I don't take responsibility for the truth of this. > It is just the impression I had at the time - I am aware > that (especially more recently) some funny ideas have been > passed on purporting to be scientology which seem very > suspect to me. > > Incidentally, I also came to realize that I _did_ get > "pictures" - my problem was that I did not see them, and I > have succesfully run techniques requiring getting mental > pictures of past incidents. The most notable was being eaten > by a lion about 1,000 years ago. The lion was there (in > mental form) while I ran it - I just did not see it. It was > there, and so was the earlier part of the incident when I > put attention on it (until it erased, at which point I > started complaining loudly that I could not see it, and was > put, sort of in disgrace, onto objective processes). > > As time went on emphasis on mocking up lessened markedly. > I got gains from other processes and was far from > dissatisfied. And a few years ago I looked a bit at NLP > (Neuro Linguistic Programming) and discovered that human > beings had at least three different emphasises on Mental > perception. Some saw best, some heard best, and some where > most aware of bodily things (I won't look up and relay > details). This meant to me that us black cases were not so > bad after all - we just had a different mental perception > emphasis. > > Incidentally I got fed up with trying remedies for black > cases. > > Right - now to TROM. > > TROM came along, and I was overjoyed with the first three > levels, because, as I have said before in this column, it > seemed to be a refinement of the early things I had met in > the 50's, and modelled on a do it yourself, don't pay high > fees, basis. And the results I saw coming in matched my > expectations. > > So with much difficulty in finding regular time to do it, > I started running TROM: RI and time breaking. Scheduled an > hour a day. Now I do not have a good record of it. But this > is my memory of it. > > Unsatisfying, uncomfortable. drudgery. I don't have > details available, but that was the way I found it. And this > I believe was because I could not _see_ the important things > I was mocking up, or the things I was time breaking. > > After a period I stopped. There was an old scientology > principle that the preclear (receiver of therapy) should be > getting wins all the time and I was not getting wins. As far > as I can remember I did between 15 and 26 hours at it before > giving up. I suppose I should have raised the matter on > TROM-l at the time, but I was discouraged, and had had so > much discussion and advice on black cases (difficulties with > mock-ups) that I was unwilling to confront more. Since that > time I have had a certain amount of Idenics with good gains, > a win from reading and applying an article on service > facscimiles (a scientology term), and wins from a friend > running a scientology objective process on me (called book > and bottle - a marvelous process). > > So I am not dead, and I am not a non moving case. > > But TROM did not work. > > Incidentally, having escaped (some 15 years ago) from the > cultish atmosphere of Scientology Church, where one of the > broadly believed and indoctrinated fallacies was that > scientology could solve everything, I take particular > exception to similar claims and implications with regard to > TROM. > > People do vary. What is right for one is not neccessarily > right for the rest of the population of earth (and > satilites). Additionally, loud perpetration of this myth > (that TROM is applicable to all) seems to me likely to have > the effect of silencing those who (like me) didn't get > anything out of TROM. Even of discouraging those who could > get something out of TROM from putting their problems on the > list. > > We have a fair number of silent people on this list. This > is the case with all lists, and there is nothing wrong in > that. But I wonder if, amongst the silent there are not one > or two like me, who have not got anything out of TROM, but > are impressed by it. > > Well, a couple of years have gone by since I went through > that some what unpleasant experience of trying TROM, and I > am now willing to receive and handle any and all comments on > the above situation. > > I also have another "gripe" with regard to TROM - and > also other therapies. And that is the inclusion of the word > and subject Nirvana. One of the things I object to in latter > day scientology is the covert "implanting" of goals to > adherants, rather than letting them decide their own life. A > particularly nasty one is the goal scientology "suggested" > to adherants of "total freedom". And Dennis, unfortunately, > has done something similar, by glorifying a state he calls > Nirvanah. > > My view of a therapy or religious practice is that it > should be something to help people through the "downs" in > life, and enable them to achieve full enjoyment of (and > ability to produce) "ups" in life. And that they should have > freedom of choice on their goals and aspirations. And not > have insidouos hints as to what was "right" or acceptable. > > I would censor out all discussion of Nirvanah in TROM > (the book I mean). > > Are there any comments - or other TROM-ers not > "TROMable"? > > All best wishes, > > private citizen Ant. > > > > > > Subject: > Re: Black Fives and TROM > Date: > Fri, 29 Aug 1997 02:25:59 -0700 (PDT) > From: > Allen <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > > > At 09:12 PM 8/28/97 +0200, you wrote: > > > > > > Dear Trom-ers, > > > > Black Fives and TROM > > > > This is a contribution I intended to make when I took > > over the TROM-l adminstration post. First a little back > > ground data. > ... > > Hi, Ant; > > Thank you for the background. I have something on both your points. First, > Black 5s. > > I had a (business) client several years ago who had never seen a mental > image in his life. 56 years old, owns a prototyping machine shop. He > builds the first copy of original designs. > > I didn't even know about this. We were discussiing compensation plans, > corporate & executive integrity, how to stimulate employee alignment and > innovation. Not case-stuff. > > I often used to say, while explaining things, the word-question "See?" as a > check-in for if the client was following an explanation. This client put a > big doubt on that practice one day by suddenly revealing a screaming > frustration that "No, goddammit, I do not see! I understand, but I do not > see!" > > He was embarrassed more than I was shocked, so it took a few minutes to get > him to explain. I was very curious, but he was defensive about being > "different". I was able to persuade him that he could possibly be of great > help to me as a personal consultant and thus who-knows-how-many people in > the future, by freely discussing this thing and letting me test an idea or > two on him. He might even benefit himself. He agreed. > > The first thing I did was to convert my comprehension-checking to various > forms of "Do you understand?". Things like, "Get it?" and "Follow?" > (Americanism, maybe, for "Do you follow me (in my line of reasoning, > etc.)?". His progress as a business client doubled immediately! > > The next meeting I asked him to help me duplicate how he perceived > intangibles and past events, etc. It was extremely difficult for me because > I am wide-open visual, and learning to ignore daylight-bright imagery while > trying to conceive of his perspective was head-busting. But I finally did > it while he was explaining how he programs his CNC machines. I don't > remember what CNC stands for, but these are out-house-sized boxes that are > like giant routers with changable bits. You put in a piece of material and > program the thing and it does a Michelangelo: it cuts away everything that > isn't the finished part. > > Huh! Here's a guy who programs a computer from blueprints to carve a part > out of a block of stuff, and *he has no idea what the part will look like > before he gets it done*!!! How can he program the machine? I program > several hours a day, and even my conceptualizations of arrays and sort > routines are visualized. > > He reads the blueprint differently than I do. I see lines that float up off > the page and flesh out into a wire-fram 3-d and then shimmer into > translucent holographic objects, as I notice the dimensions written on the > plans and read the spec lists. By the time I have looked over a plan the > first time I can already do a final product walk-through in my mind. He > can't even see it _after_ it's built unless he's looking right at the real > thing. Yet he always produces perfect parts the first time, every time. I > don't think I could do that. > > He works from information: memory like a steel trap for data, not pictures. > So he goes through the blueprints developing the data for the programming, > and then just enters the data into the computer per some template. The > specs tell him what size and type of material to put in. He does it, turns > the thing on, changes the bits for the different cutting tasks as they come > up in the course of the program, and patiently waits for the mystery to > resolve. You know, what is this thing going to look like? > > At that, point, we both got it. I got what his experience is like. He got > why he loves his work so much: the resolution of secret mystery. (Other > people don't even know there's mystery. He gets to have that particular fun > all to himself!) > > Later, after several meetings of trying all kinds of things, including > running incidents just to see what _I_ would have to do to make it work for > people like him (like you, Ant?), we had developed a completely different > way of running incidents. It's based on information, yet it gets emotions, > feelings and self-images as well as it gets decisions. > > All of the content of an incident can be described as data, same as the > parts my client makes. You don't have to "see" it to address and discuss > it, unless you're being asked to perform in visual terms. Then you are > misdirected by the visual-metaphorical context of the procedure, which must > fail for lack of applicability to you. > > > > Incidentally I got fed up with trying remedies for black > > cases. > > I now believe that trying to "remedy" a "condition" of Black 5 is a crime. > The crime is trying to make an alternate form of perception wrong. The > motivation isn't criminal, it's based on a preconceived notion that we're > all the same. I had it myself. Until that client screamed that No, he did > not _see_, I thought everyone did. I hadn't even paid that much attention > to the stuff about Black 5's in the old school because the whole idea was > completely unreal to me. No it's not the intent that's criminal. It's the > effects on the client that are criminal. The invalidation. The eternally > being "missed" (not seen as-is). The unnamed feeling of distance and even > alienation that comes from the sense that other people are talking about > something that is only nonsense to you alone. And more, probably. (I could > dig out the session notes: he gave me quite a list when we finally got a > runnable process put together.) > > > > > Right - now to TROM. > ... > > Unsatisfying, uncomfortable. drudgery. I don't have > > details available, but that was the way I found it. And this > > I believe was because I could not _see_ the important things > > I was mocking up, or the things I was time breaking. > ... > > People do vary. What is right for one is not neccessarily > > right for the rest of the population of earth (and > > satilites). > ... > > We have a fair number of silent people on this list. This > > is the case with all lists, and there is nothing wrong in > > that. But I wonder if, amongst the silent there are not one > > or two like me, who have not got anything out of TROM, but > > are impressed by it. > > I guess I'm in a peculiar category. I'm a guest on this list because a > couple of my articles have been posted here. I don't have the TROM > materials and have never tried it. It's on my list for my next spate of > research. And I'm not a B5. But I have noticed the winning I hear about on > this list and elsewhere. And it just occurs to me now that my slowness in > looking at TROM has been because, I "see" now, I had subliminally already > understood from people's discussion of it that TROM includes highly visual > processes. So without even looking at it I'd already discounted its > universality. > > Anyway, from my peculiar place of having redeveloped all of my procedures > so > that none of them ask for any particular sensory perception, even > metaphorically, I suddenly suspect I might have what anyone with a > "missing" > sensory perceptic could use. Why should I be surprised?! That is what I > set out to do those several years ago. But it had until now escaped me that > there might actually be a second or third person, or hundreds more, who > needed it! Still operating from my own paradigm, I guess. :-) > > I plan to be sharing those procedures in the near future. I'm not sure in > what modality. We can talk about that if you or anybody wants.. > > I guess for now, rather than make hints of something and not deliver it, I > just wanted to let you know that I understand that you are not defective, > just different. An isolated minority in a huge majority, Yes, but even then > not alone and certainly not un-understood. And to offer you some comfort > that there are even more alternatives than commonly known about. > > - - - Topic 2 - - - > > > > > I also have another "gripe" with regard to TROM - and > > also other therapies. And that is the inclusion of the word > > and subject Nirvana. One of the things I object to in latter > > day scientology is the covert "implanting" of goals to > > adherants, rather than letting them decide their own life. A > > particularly nasty one is the goal scientology "suggested" > > to adherants of "total freedom". And Dennis, unfortunately, > > has done something similar, by glorifying a state he calls > > Nirvanah. > > I think we all do that, whether we mean to be misdirecting or not. It's > something I've been seriously reconsidering with regard to Acceptance. > > > > > My view of a therapy or religious practice is that it > > should be something to help people through the "downs" in > > life, and enable them to achieve full enjoyment of (and > > ability to produce) "ups" in life. And that they should have > > freedom of choice on their goals and aspirations. And not > > have insidouos hints as to what was "right" or acceptable. > > Absolutely. But that is the "practice" part. Most people want more than > that in their lives, and there's whence comes our motivation for explaining > our philosophies as well. > > I know that my procedures don't work well in the hands of other-school > practitioners who unwittingly conform them to their own beliefs when theirs > are different from mine. But I am also convinced that they will work very > well delivered from a neutral perspective. Which is as it should be. > > So I for one have been pounding on Acceptance as a whole to see if it can't > come apart into distinct parts that each can stand alone, among which any > combination of the parts works as a complimentary subset, and the totality > of which works as a seamless whole that yet includes "options". > > It looks doable, but for the time involved. > > > > > I would censor out all discussion of Nirvanah in TROM > > (the book I mean). > > Right. Each "aspect" in its own niche. > > I hope this gives you something. > > -0- > > PS: May I share this with Accept-L? Any edits you'd want first? > > > > Allen, Speaker for Acceptance | Acceptance Services Center > [email protected] -0- Box 390696 Mtn Vw CA 94039 > http://www.asc.org | (415) 964-3436 > Email list: [email protected] to subscribe; FAQ on Website > Subject ok No signature, just the word subscribe as the message content. > > > > Subject: > Black Fives > Date: > Fri, 29 Aug 1997 15:03:05 -0400 > From: > [email protected] (William T Fenton) > To: > [email protected] > > > Dear Antony, > > Your contribution to TROM-L about BLACK FIVES was very interesting as it > hit rather close to home. > > In my early auditing (50s), I felt as you did that there must be > something wrong with me bcause I couldn't get this clear picture in color > of my mock-ups or recalls. It was also my understanding, at the time, > that my visio would turn on somewhere along the line as a result of > auditing. But this never happened all the way up through OT VII. There > were, however, glimpses of it from time to time. A scene would flash on > for an instant occasionally. > > Gradually I came to realize that certainty of what was there in mock-ups > and recalls was sufficient. This was confirmed by Dennis in the TROM > manuscript when he said that it is not necessary to perceive one's > creations. > > I feel that the assignment of a lessor ability to what was called a > "Black Five Case" was one of Ron's major misunderstoods. I learned in > later years (late 80s early 90s) that experience is recorded as feelings > (emotional vibrations). These feelings can be translated by a being into > visio or any of the other perceptions when recalled. When charge is > being erased, it seems to me that the charge is in the feelings of the > incident rather than in the visio. > > You are right when you say that black five cases are not so bad after > all. But that judgement did hurt and caused me a bent wallet from the > unnecessary many extra hours of book & bottle and other objectives. > > Thanks for sharing your experience with Black Five. > > Best > Bill > > > Subject: > Black Fives > Date: > Sat, 30 Aug 1997 14:25:00 -0400 > From: > "Dustin W. Carr" <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > > > Hello, > > I found the two previous posts on black fives very interesting. I am glad > that both Bill and Antony have not found this to be too big of a barrier. > > Here are my ideas, intended to promote discussion, of course. > > First of all, I do not see this as too much of a problem. It might even be > a special ability, and could indicate an advanced case. I don't have > pictures any more, only emotional vibrations as Bill had mentioned. > > Don't put things in the past unless you must. Timebreaking is an > unfortunate term. It is not necessary to view across time. View what is > in present time. It is not necessary to know anything of the past. Look > at what is in the present time (if you are blind in present time, then I > use the word look to mean take in all perceptions from within and without > in the present time). > > Lack of an ability is never something that holds a person back. Those > things we can not do are as important as those that we can. They define > us, and they are part of the aesthetic that is the self. Somebody may soon > communicate the ideas of trom in a way that make pictures quite > unimportant. > > I can not throw a football like Dan Marino. While this distresses me > greatly, I must acknowledge that it has not really held me back in my life, > even if it has kept me out of professional football. > > The compulsion to make pictures is equivalent to the inability to make > pictures. > > When I do RI, I actually avoid making pictures. I either send out energy, > effortlessly, and let it go completely. Or I receive energy, effortlessly, > letting it completely dissolve into my existence. > > Pictures are not observations of what actually exists or did exist, they > are a representation of how our own creations interact with each other. > There are other representations, most of which are more revealing of the > true nature of things. > > Some may say this black five is a problem, but it may just be an indication > of the type of path of you should follow. If you can not make pictures, > then you don't need to do so. Seek to do that which is aligned with your > present abilities. When you seek after other abilities, then you are > acknowledging that one state is more desirable than another. This leads to > the compulsive playing of games. We are trying to avoid that. > > A visual picture is just a recording of a limited type of perception. This > perception is sensitive only to electromagnetic radiation that has > frequencies of about 1000000000000000 cycles per second (this is at least > true of any memories that you have in this or similar bodies). This is a > very limited range of the spectrum, and there is nothing of any particular > significance to it. The world looks drastically different when viewed at > different rates. > > We could equivalently say why we can't observe and be aware of things that > occur on much shorter time scales. We are carried into the future by a > physical world that is changing at rates well beyond that which is > perceptible. Most of us have an inability to willfully create change at a > rate that is even remotely comparable to that which occurs all around us in > the world we live. > > Have fun, > > Dustin > > > Dustin W. Carr > Cornell University Physics Department > G-6 Clark Hall > Ithaca NY, 14853 > [email protected] > > > > Subject: > Re: Replay 24 > Date: > Sun, 31 Aug 1997 12:23:13 -0400 (EDT) > From: > "Homer W. Smith" <[email protected]> > CC: > [email protected] > > > > Here is another reply. > > > > We have got another subscriber on the list. An old timer on the Internet > > who did not know the list existed. So we could do more to make > > ourselves known! > > > > Hi, > > > > Ant > > One way is to let the list spill one way into a.c.t. > > Homer > > > > > Subject: > Dustin's Post of 8/30/97 > Date: > Sun, 31 Aug 1997 19:42:17 -0400 > From: > [email protected] (William T Fenton) > To: > [email protected] > > > Thank you very much for your ideas on the subject of "Black Fives". They > have clarified my own thoughts in the areas of timebreaking, past and > present, and perception of the higher vibrations. > > Best > Bill Fenton > > > Subject: > Re: Thanks > Date: > Mon, 01 Sep 1997 07:52:56 -0400 > From: > "Dustin W. Carr" <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > > > Ant, > > Thanks for your acknowledgement. I have some further comment. > > The significant part about trom has little to do with pictures. In fact, it > has little to do with the time track even. It is about the constant cycle > of events, or choices, that drive us from the present into the future. > > I do not want to leap to the defense of trom. I think Stephens communicated > parts of it quite dreadfully, but the fragment of the fragment of truth is > still there. That truth is in the cycle called the postulate failure > chart. > > I am not attached to trom, and I see no advantage to having a cleared > planet. (all things are relative, a cleared planet would still consist of > those cleared more than others. Nothing would really be changed) > > However, I feel that maybe you stopped attempting to apply trom when you > encountered a barrier. A barrier created by imperfect communication from he > who first brought this path to our world. > > I would suggest you still look to see how you can apply trom. I have some > ideas. I do not mean to invalidate, and if you are completely content with > the idea that trom can not bring change to your life, then I certainly will > not argue. > > It seemed to me that maybe you were not so content. But, this is an > imperfect medium in which to communicate. > > Take care, > > Dustin > > At 07:59 AM 8/31/97 +0200, you wrote: > >Thanks for a rather profound contribtion on Black fives - which I will > >take a little time out to consider. > > > >All the best, > > > >Ant > >-- > > 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://home.sn.no/home/trone/IVy.html > > > > > > > > > Dustin W. Carr > [email protected] > Cornell University Physics > Clark Hall G-6 > Ithaca, NY 14853 > > > -- > 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 > > *************** > Replies, comments, to the list, send to [email protected] > *************** > _______________________________________________ > TROM mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > > Ingen virus fundet i denne meddelelse. > Kontrolleret af AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2016.0.7303 / Virusdatabase: 4545/11883 - Udgivelsesdato: > 25-03-2016 > > -- > Antony Phillips. > www.antology.info > Danish interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmXZ4X_uYRo > English interview Part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdgqweh-4WI > English interview Part 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8sGp6AwuK4 > English biography > http://scientolipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Antony_Phillips > [email protected] > (+45) 45 88 88 69 > Admin to SelfClearing2004, SuperScio, Cosmic History mailing lists > Jernbanevej 3f 4th > DK 2800 Lyngby > Skype (by appointment only) > > > _______________________________________________ > TROM mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > >
_______________________________________________ TROM mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
