************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************
Ant,
Thanks again for positing these old comms. I almost always find them like how much a breath of fresh is welcome in a dungeon. There is a type of sanity, intelligence and sensibility in them, that is non existent today. In fact is difficult to find any useful intelligence of any kind today. (I mean intelligence that is conducive to the survival of civilization) This is the old school type of intelligence, sanity, good reason, good logic, good judgement and good common sense. I find it so helpful. It is very sobering. My sanity and well being, increases just by reading these old posts. (The are laced with stable data.) The reason why is that these people grew up in the old school, before modern media, especially before TV. People who were brought up in front of the TV, are fucked up to the degree, they were brought up in front of the TV, or did not have parental control and positive parental influence. . Generally speaking, these people had the influence of good mothers, good fathers, good grandparents, good Christian Chuches, church activities, social and family gatherings. It is a matter relative to degree. There is a right way and wrong way to do almost everything. These are the best conditions for raising the best children and the best adults, that civilization has ever had. It all ended with the onslaught of TV and commercialism, which led to liberalism and in liberalism right increasingly became wrong and wrong increasingly became right. In other words right was perverted to wrong and wrong was perverted to right. Family issues was perverted to women's issues. This is the fundamental definition of insanity. And insanity became politically correctness. Liberalism is a slippery slope into the abyss of the end of civilization. In the old days, before TV, the mass of sanity was sufficiently greater and stronger than the mass of insanity. Today, it is the opposite. So how can one go sane or stay sane today? I mean truly sane? It is extremely difficult,if possible at all, especially long term. An insane civilization cannot help but self destruct in due time. That is called the armegeddon and the apocalypse. It is happening now, although still in slow motion but speeding up. I can see that there was a considerable and appreciable amount of sanity and useful intelligence in the early days of scn, when the first members were in their 20's and up. The 20s were born in the 30s. And the more stable data, were the older ones born before the 30's. The more before the 30s, the more sane and sensible. But as these died off, or quit after the more and more young people began to fill staff positions, things became more and more insane. Until critical mass occurred during the 70s and all hell broke lose. I don't think this was the only factor. I can only speculate, because there is no way for me to really know. Because I do not have first hand experience. I am sure that I would of really relished the opportunity to be there in the first days, like Bob Ross, who was my first fz auditor in 97. I learned a lot from him. And he helped me a lot. Thanks again for posting those old comms. They are priceless. David On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 12:09 AM, The Resolution of Mind list < [email protected]> wrote: > ************* > The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] > ************ > > Sent > * Saturday 9th 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] > ************ > > > Subject: > TROM Replay B38 > Date: > Fri, 04 Sep 1998 12:49:02 +0200 > From: > Antony Phillips <[email protected]> > Organization: > International Viewpoints > To: > [email protected] > > > Subject: > Intro: MICHAEL W. BONNYCASTLE > Date: > Wed, 03 Sep 1997 21:17:38 +0200 > From: > Antony Phillips <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > CC: > Ant <[email protected]> > > > "MICHAEL W. BONNYCASTLE" <[email protected]> > > wrote me the following: > > Hello Ant, Sept. 3, 1997 > > Please post the letter of mine with name and address if you > like. Sorry for the delay in response as I have been on a road > trip also. I am now running Trom level 5 exactly as layed out > by Dennis on that marvelous tape he sent to Judith. Getting > splendid results and I will continue. As far as a progressive > action after TROM, I would like to exteriorize as I havn't yet, > I think that would be one goal. I would like to pursue > training, in the COS this was always most satisfying, though I > still receive PR from the church I would far prefer to do this > in a free zone environment. With my new understanding of level > 5 of TROM I will definitely see where it takes me over the next > few months. > > Best Wishes, > > Mike > > And the following is what I asked if I could publish to the list: > > > [[[[[formatted 97-08-05.02]]]]] > > > > Dear Ant, > August 2, 1997 > > > > In your letter you had mentioned an interest in what my > > Scientology background was. Well, I met a fellow just over a > > year ago at an outdoor shopping mall here who introduced me > > to Scn and brought me to the org. I found it quite > > fascinating, one of those things one felt they were in > > search of their whole life. I took a few basic courses which > > taught the basic TR's, ethics, and suppression data. I then > > was approached about staff and quickly decided that this > > would be far more important to me than any considerations of > > my then full time job. I joined to go on the TTC for full > > auditor training but they had no PPO and was quickly posted > > as such. What I really enjoyed was the daily access to the > > data and I devoured every course pack I could find in the > > Qual library. I was using public transportation at the > > time(3 hours daily) so I would listen to 2-3 LRH lectures > > daily (PDC, SHSBC, Phoenix, etc.) which was a real Scn > > education. I eventually was told I was going to go to FLAG > > for magistrate training by the ED and it didn't happen. The > > FBO decided she would only pay me(20$ week) for day schedule > > although I was working the full org schedule in hours. I > > then was told I was accepted for the TTC but could clearly > > see that HCO did not want this to happen. I was instructed > > to find as many new recruits as possible to go directly on > > to the TTC although I was promised this and it didn't > > happen. In the six months on staff I had absorbed a great > > deal of data, alot more TR's and fully resolved to somehow > > continue studying the Tech. But the contradictions that > > surfaced and the realization that per the suppression data I > > was rollercoastering a great deal caused me to become fed up > > and I just left. I had copied some early PAB's and had 'Self > > Analysis' and continued to use and study these. In spite of > > the PR, I found myself now much happier off staff. Then by > > way of the internet I discovered this wonderful thing called > > the Free Zone, then Trom and Ivy, and this is where I intend > > to stay. I really had almost no 'other practioner' auditing > > before Trom but all the principles I had learned and the > > belief in the data helped tremendously. Bob Ross has > > mentioned his auditing to me in a letter and I am > > interested. What do you think might be a progreesive action > > after Trom? > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Michael Bonnycastle > > There is a question here which someone on the list may care to answer to > the list. > > 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 > > > > Subject: > Re: Intro: MICHAEL W. BONNYCASTLE > Date: > Wed, 3 Sep 1997 18:10:26 -0700 (PDT) > From: > ladyv <[email protected]> > To: > Antony Phillips <[email protected]> > CC: > [email protected] > > > On Wed, 3 Sep 1997, Antony Phillips wrote: > > > "MICHAEL W. BONNYCASTLE" <[email protected]> > > > > wrote me the following: > > > What do you think might be a progreesive action > > > after Trom? > > > > > > Michael Bonnycastle > > > > There is a question here which someone on the list may care to answer to > > the list. > > You might like to check out my stuff on the Dynamism web page. > > Love, > > Enid > > Dynamism, 7507 Ohio Place, La Mesa, CA. 91941. > Ph: 619 462-5160 Fax: 619 465-8848 > http://www.lightlink.com/dynamism > > > > > Subject: > After TROM > Date: > Thu, 04 Sep 1997 13:18:33 +0200 > From: > Antony Phillips <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > > > In his introduction recently MICHAEL W. BONNYCASTLE says: > > "What do you think might be a progreesive action after Trom? > "As far as a progressive action after TROM, I would like to exteriorize > as I havn't yet, I think that would be one goal. " > > What I would say is get a good (free of church indoctrination) auditor > to run S-C-S on an object > and S-C-S on the body, if thats the way you want to go. You need an > auditor with the original philosophy of Scientology, not the modern > "Hitlerian" one (Those who have read the recent IVy, No. 33, will know > what I mean). These processes (as mentioned in the coming IVy) are hard > on the auditor (practitioner) as they run his/her case also (I think the > only way to avoid that is to run robotically - and that does not help > the victim). I would _love_ to run them on him. However he would have to > get his body over to my flat (I don't need him here :-) ) > > However, here is another thought. Having succesfully run all levels of > TROM, how about time breaking times you went into a body, and times when > you went out. > > MICHAEL also writes "I would like to pursue > training, in the COS this was always most satisfying, though I > still receive PR from the church I would far prefer to do this > in a free zone environment. With my new understanding of level > 5 of TROM I will definitely see where it takes me over the next > few months." > > This is a good idea -- there is an enourmous amount to be gained by the > thorough understanding of Scientology one gains from thorough training > (under the older scientology philosophy) and auditing. > > Unfortunately It is perhaps not so easy to get as it was in the 50's. My > belief is that much false data was passed on in various ways as a result > of the suppressive environment of the church. That is a (minor) cause of > scientology being hated. It is one of my intentions in running IVy to > illuninate these outnesses and illogicalities in the data many have > received. I wish Michael succes in a very worthwhile intention. > > I'm very curious about results from time breaking in and out. > > There, Enid and I have used Michaels question to hang an advertisement > (I mean reccomendations) on - any more comers? > > What one does after TROM depends very much on what one wants to > acheive. I have already expressed my scathing scorn over the goals of > Nirvanah, total freedom, OT, and others some groups coerce other to > accept as their own. > > No hard feeling I hope :-) Every one has a right to his own goals, even > if I regard them as ..... > Who am I any way? > > > -- > 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: After TROM > Date: > Thu, 04 Sep 1997 18:05:37 -0400 > From: > "Dustin W. Carr" <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > > > > At 01:18 PM 9/4/97 +0200, you wrote: > >In his introduction recently MICHAEL W. BONNYCASTLE says: > > > >"What do you think might be a progreesive action after Trom? > >"As far as a progressive action after TROM, I would like to exteriorize > >as I havn't yet, I think that would be one goal. " > > > > I find that people who have been a part of the church (including myself) > have a tendency to have this goal. I dispensed with it a few years back. > > My advice is this: proceed along your path of meditating or auditing > without > "lust of result". Desire nothing to come of it, reach for nothing. > > Then you can have anything. > > Dustin > > p.s. Nothing wrong with having this goal, and exteriorization is fun and > interesting, but is not all that special. Exteriorization is an easy sell. > There are bigger and better things to find. > > > Dustin W. Carr > [email protected] > Cornell University Physics > Clark Hall G-6 > Ithaca, NY 14853 > > > > Subject: > Track Blaster, Exteriorization > Date: > Mon, 8 Sep 1997 15:07:51 -0400 > From: > Rowland Barkley <[email protected]> > To: > TROM <[email protected]> > > > >>> > From: Dimitri Ivakhnenko <[email protected]> > Subject: Track Blaster process > > Here is Track Blaster from L13 as I have got it from Joachim > Steingrubner. > > As far as I know, Rowland Barkley has an e-mail address, but now is in > Los-Angeles auditing L13. > > If I unwittingly disclose any secrets, please let me know. > <<< > Dear Dimitri, and others, the secret is that auditor consciousness > is 10 times as important as any technique. The intense discipline necessary > to run the Track Blaster is unlikely to come from a peice of paper. For > instance, if you were to ask "GET ANY INCIDENT OF WARRING REALITIES" > usefully, you would need to be totally willing for the client to experience > any two realities, and to be there comfortably experiencing both. If you > can do this, such questions are powerful. The comfort threshold becomes a > little challenged if you have to ask the questioin 20 times, as there will > be 40 warring realities solidly in the room. You don't try to blow any of > them, because when the client ceases creating the illusion of time in that > subject area, all simply cease to exist. Just before that happens, the > intensity of charge can be truly horrendous. > > EXTERIORIZATION: I was at a presentation by the Indian physicist Amit > Goswami, yesterday, at the Transpersonal Congress in Brazil. Amit > considered it proved by physics that the brain is an artifact of mind, > rather a similar idea to the universe being here by agreemnent. > > The problem with "exteriorization" is that the premise is false. Such > transcendent states are simply shifting perspective to a higher > consciousness body you already have. While processes will free you of gunk > at a lower level, and therefore may make you accident prone to accidentally > reaching a higher dimension, learning to shift perspective, as an > elementary step to multiple perspectives, is more to the point. > > * * * * * * * * * * * > Rowland Anton Barkley the Deep Tranceforming....shaman > http://tranceform.org email: [email protected] > * * * * * * "Create your dream and step into it" > > > Subject: > Re: Track Blaster, Exteriorization > Date: > Mon, 08 Sep 1997 23:16:36 -0400 > From: > "Dustin W. Carr" <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > > > > >The problem with "exteriorization" is that the premise is false. Such > >transcendent states are simply shifting perspective to a higher > >consciousness body you already have. While processes will free you of > gunk > >at a lower level, and therefore may make you accident prone to > accidentally > >reaching a higher dimension, learning to shift perspective, as an > >elementary step to multiple perspectives, is more to the point. > > > > This is quite an enlightening way of putting things. Thanks for sharing it. > > Dustin > > > * * * * * * * * * * * > >Rowland Anton Barkley the Deep Tranceforming....shaman > > http://tranceform.org email: [email protected] > > * * * * * * "Create your dream and step into it" > > > > > Dustin W. Carr > [email protected] > Cornell University Physics > Clark Hall G-6 > Ithaca, NY 14853 > > > > Subject: > Re: After TROM > Date: > Tue, 9 Sep 1997 17:51:30 +1000 > From: > Judith Anderson <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > > > Dear Ant and List Members, I have already sent Michael a reply as to > suggestions as to what he should do after TROM, privately. At this point it > would be difficult for anyone to know what to do when he gets to the end, > only then will he know wha he has and what he needs. love Judith A. > > > , At 01:18 PM 9/4/97 +0200, you wrote: > >In his introduction recently MICHAEL W. BONNYCASTLE says: > > > >"What do you think might be a progreesive action after Trom? > >"As far as a progressive action after TROM, I would like to exteriorize > >as I havn't yet, I think that would be one goal. " > > > >What I would say is get a good (free of church indoctrination) auditor > >to run S-C-S on an object > >and S-C-S on the body, if thats the way you want to go. You need an > >auditor with the original philosophy of Scientology, not the modern > >"Hitlerian" one (Those who have read the recent IVy, No. 33, will know > >what I mean). These processes (as mentioned in the coming IVy) are hard > >on the auditor (practitioner) as they run his/her case also (I think the > >only way to avoid that is to run robotically - and that does not help > >the victim). I would _love_ to run them on him. However he would have to > >get his body over to my flat (I don't need him here :-) ) > > > >However, here is another thought. Having succesfully run all levels of > >TROM, how about time breaking times you went into a body, and times when > >you went out. > > > >MICHAEL also writes "I would like to pursue > > training, in the COS this was always most satisfying, though I > > still receive PR from the church I would far prefer to do this > > in a free zone environment. With my new understanding of level > > 5 of TROM I will definitely see where it takes me over the next > > few months." > > > >This is a good idea -- there is an enourmous amount to be gained by the > >thorough understanding of Scientology one gains from thorough training > >(under the older scientology philosophy) and auditing. > > > >Unfortunately It is perhaps not so easy to get as it was in the 50's. My > >belief is that much false data was passed on in various ways as a result > >of the suppressive environment of the church. That is a (minor) cause of > >scientology being hated. It is one of my intentions in running IVy to > >illuninate these outnesses and illogicalities in the data many have > >received. I wish Michael succes in a very worthwhile intention. > > > >I'm very curious about results from time breaking in and out. > > > >There, Enid and I have used Michaels question to hang an advertisement > >(I mean reccomendations) on - any more comers? > > > >What one does after TROM depends very much on what one wants to > >acheive. I have already expressed my scathing scorn over the goals of > >Nirvanah, total freedom, OT, and others some groups coerce other to > >accept as their own. > > > >No hard feeling I hope :-) Every one has a right to his own goals, even > >if I regard them as ..... > >Who am I any way? > > > > > >-- > > 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: Black-5 > Date: > Tue, 9 Sep 1997 18:12:00 -0400 > From: > [email protected] (William T Fenton) > To: > [email protected] > > > To:Antony Phillips <[email protected]> > From:Frank Gordon via <[email protected]> > Re:Black-five > Date:5 Sept 1997 > > Dear Ant: > > I have a few comments on the subject of the "black-five." > > The term originated with Hubbard, and he remarks upon it in his article > on Straight Wire > (Tech Vol 2) on p.229. > > "Now let's take his thing we call a Black Five...He only sees blackness > in front of him...it > prevents him from seeing pictures...and being victimized by all these > pictures. We don't > have a special category of (1) people who get pictures, (2) and people > who get blackness. > We have only one category. We get people who have pictures of various > things and > people who have pictures of special things." > > I assume what he's saying here, is that a picture is just a picture, and > he goes on to > describe ways he's found to handle any picture, if you wish to do so. > > In Tech Vol I, under "Basic Reason-Basic Principles," he discusses on > p.150 two major > types of cases: the wide-open (who has been invalidated) and the occluded > (who has had > his self-determinism interrupted). > > He then goes on to discuss ways to handle these. > > The trom approach > As I said in my article on TROM (IVy31), I have been very cautious with > it. But it has one > very good idea, the idea of complementary postulates (and these don't > have to include a > must). > > Another point is that when Hubbard asserted that the only part of games > which could be > processed were overwhelms (questionable in my mind), he said that these > should be done > separately; i.e., put out into the environment. > > So I've experimented with blackness by putting out TWO terminals facing > one another, > one postulating "not to be known" and the other "not to know." And with > both of them > doing this quite consciously and agreeably and without the slightest hint > of mustness. > > Kind of interesting. There are many ways to do this other than using > black screens such as > just "wool-gathering" or not being present. And if this were to be made > into a pleasant > game, it could be done by adding just the faintest hint of a must, like: > "If you really want > to be cultured, shouldn't you --?" > > The above is typical of how I've gone at TROM. Cautiously. I tend to shy > away from long > drawn out procedures you MUST do JUST SO or else! > > Best, Frank > > > Subject: > [Fwd: re mockups and Dennis > Date: > Wed, 10 Sep 1997 07:37:27 +0200 > From: > Antony Phillips <[email protected]> > To: > [email protected] > > > As you can see, I have Rowlands OK to pass this on. > > The earlier mail I referred to included the following: > PASTE: > When I visited Dennis and Anne Stevens in 1983, his wife used the name > Anne > Walker, she just hadn't copied his name. I visited to ask what > processes > they had really seen work, as Anne was D of P in London when some early > books were written. The conversation was mostly about creative > processing > circa 1952, as that was what they had seen get results more than > anything > else over the years. > > Dennis said Creative Processing went out as nobody had the idea of > completing, but of participating in the discovery of wherever Ron was > at. > Paradoxically, he saw no reason to do it now, as he said before you mock > something up, you already know what it is. Maybe he was a "human > knowing", > and I am a "human doing". > END PASTE > -- > Ant Antony A Phillips > [email protected] > > > Subject: > [Fwd: [Fwd: Replay 25]] > Date: > Tue, 9 Sep 1997 15:08:32 -0400 > From: > Rowland Barkley <[email protected]> > To: > "INTERNET:[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > > Dear Antony, > >>>You say of Dennis: "Paradoxically, he saw no reason to do it now, > "as he said before you mock something up, you already know what it is" > refferring to creative processing. That does not make much sense to me. > And I can't really explain why.<<< > > If I am about to "Mock up a Piano", I have the sense of a piano about to > appear, so Dennis thought the mock-up itself wouldn't do anything. My > interest was how great inventors like Nicola Tesla made mockups they could > hardly distinguish from "reality". I feel that actually doing the mock-up, > or even making it in clay, gets what you are working with in lower > dimensions, and more likely to result in practical application. > Scientologists have gotten into the habit of "just postulating" what they > want, but the is an incredible emphasis in the PDC tapes where Ron referrs > to magicians using ritual to enable them to track of what effects result > from their causes. "Just postulating" or "just knowing what you are about > to mock up" leaves no feedback to help correct errors. My other interest > was that in asking Anne and Dennis what they had actually seen produce > "advertised OT results", they both only named mock-up processes as applied > in the 50s as doing that. > > I don't know their official marital feelings at the time (1983-4), only > that they were sitting at the table together for some hours seeming > perfectly friendly. None of us showed any restriction as to information, > so I am a little surprised to hear of later restriction. Maybe that is an > advertising stunt to get people to reach. I described the Track Blaster, > Dennis said he was working on something like it, so we both took the > principle to be self-evident, so didn't spend much time on it. My whole > purpose of the visit was "have they actually witnessed advertised OT > results, and if so what process did that", and I had little interest in > claims of clearing or people feeling better in the absence of advertised > abilities. > > Anything you want ot post to the list of this you can. > > - Rowland > -- > 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 > >
_______________________________________________ TROM mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
