*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
Sent
Saturday sixth of August 2016
by
[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 B55
Date:
Fri,
01 Jan 1999 20:57:02 +0100
From:
Antony Phillips <[email protected]>
Organization:
International Viewpoints
To:
[email protected]
--
Ant
Antony A Phillips
[email protected]
Subject:
OT
definition
Date:
Sat,
09 May 1998 07:42:16 +0200
From:
Antony Phillips <[email protected]>
Organization:
International Viewpoints
To:
[email protected]
Dear Trommer,
In a private despatch to Rowland I suggested that people writing on
this
list about OT had different definitions of the word and were
therefore
discussing different things as though they were the same. Rowland
sent
me back this:
> OT as I have meant it here is "that state produced by working
to a
> completion of clearing away of Attached Spirits in the body (notice
no use
> of confidential words) in the absense of positive
processing."
>
> There are earlier more positive descriptions of "OT" in
tapes of 1952-3,
> describing positive abilities which can be gained from the
creative
> processes of the time, and are deleted from all widespread uses of
the word
> "OT" in current use, eg Cof$, Cptn Bill. People
usually quote the
> abilities, and confuse them with the totally disrelated states
attained
> from clearing Attached Spirits from the body.
(Tapes refferred to are by L. Ron Hubbard, if any one on the list is
not
aware of that :-)
I suggest if any one mentions OT again, they say what they mean by
the
term.
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://home8.inet.tele.dk/ivy/
Subject:
Re: OT definition
and <Autofrwd>Suggestibilily and logical
facility
Date:
Mon, 11 May 1998
14:31:36 +0200
From:
Snowdragon
<[email protected]>
To:
[email protected]
References:
1
Hello Trommers!
If you look up the term OT in the Technical dictionary of Dianetics
and
Scientlogy you will find something different from "clearing away
of
Attached Spirits in the body". When you are doing the lower bridge
up to
OT you are being fed with tons of promotion telling that OT is a
revival
and education of psychic powers really. And during that period (the
period of doing the lower bridge) you could very well achieve a lot
regarding improving your psychic abilities. So you get really turned
on
regarding those kind of abilities and look forward to get a further
boost on the OT levels.
When you actually do the OT levels you suddenly find yourself doing
a
different game, the game of "clearing away of Attached Spirits in
the
body". That game can of course be very good and give you many wins
and
more education, BUT the game that was set up before you reach the OT
levels was a game of achieving very strong psychic powers and abilities.
It is understandable if people doing OT levels get so apathetic that
their EEGs are "the exact reverse of measured masters in many
different
disciplines" as Rowland writes. Hopefully they have achieved so
much
skill so they can work themself out of that condition and really
arrive
at master states.
How much TROM can do I don't know. I think it is a very healthy sign
when people start doing "other practices". Such practices was
probably
forbidden to do because it is a too good idea. It indicates that
people
have the guts, the knowledge and the ability to believe in personal
responsibility. As Rowland says: "There is a dangerous drawback in
the
existing "OT" tech, namely, that personal responsibility for
creation of
the phenomena is not addressed."
Have Fun!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Love,
Lars Peter Schultz
Antony Phillips wrote:
>
> Dear Trommer,
>
> In a private despatch to Rowland I suggested that people writing on
this
> list about OT had different definitions of the word and were
therefore
> discussing different things as though they were the same.
Rowland sent
> me back this:
>
> > OT as I have meant it here is "that state produced by
working to a
> > completion of clearing away of Attached Spirits in the body
(notice no use
> > of confidential words) in the absense of positive
processing."
> >
> > There are earlier more positive descriptions of "OT"
in tapes of 1952-3,
> > describing positive abilities which can be gained from the
creative
> > processes of the time, and are deleted from all widespread uses
of the
word
> > "OT" in current use, eg Cof$, Cptn Bill. People
ususally quote the
> > abilities, and confuse them with the totally disrelated states
attained
> > from clearing Attached Spirits from the body.
>
> (Tapes refferred to are by L. Ron Hubbard, if any one on the list is
not
> aware of that :-)
>
> I suggest if any one mentions OT again, they say what they mean by
the
> term.
>
> 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://home8.inet.tele.dk/ivy/
Rowland Barkley wrote:
>
> At 13:55 07-05-98 -0400, you wrote:
> >Sender: [email protected]
> >Received: from newciv.org (server1.newciv.org
[206.83.181.196])
> >To: [email protected]
> >Subject: Suggestibility and logical facility
> >In-Reply-To:
<[email protected]>
> >Message-ID:
>
<[email protected]>
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> >
> >
> >Dear Rowland,
> >
> >As I was rereading your letter, it raised some questions.
> >> >Point 6 is fascinating. This seems to point out
that the normal "OT"
> >> >state contains high suggestibility. I have
assumed in the past that a
> >> >person in this state was almost impervious to hypno
suggestion as they
> >> >are fully at cause. Can you please elaborate on
this point.
> >>
> >> On EEGs, OTs are normally the
exact reverse of measured masters
in many
> >> different disciplines, referred to in above book. In most
systems, those
> >> regarded as masters have high Alpha brain rhythms, (ability
to visualize
> >> creatively) and low Delta and low Beta. OTs have good
control of Beta
> >> (able to activate logical thinking) extremely low Alpha
with no
control of
> >> it, and slow Delta as in the deepest hypnotic trances, at
such an extreme
> >> and uncontrollable level as to exceed all known
measurements of any
> >> measured people still able to walk.
> >Firstly, some time ago Judith mentioned on this list that
intuition was
> >one of the OT's characteristics. Your answer seems to suggest
that to the
> >contrary, OTs should possess a keen ability of logical thinking.
Is this
> >only an apparent contradiction or in fact, both abilities are
enhanced?
> >Secondly, do you imply that high suggestibility in OTs is
produced only in
> >Cof$ or uniformly, possibly suggesting an egregious drawback in
the
> >existing tech?
>
> Intuition is a skill that is not addressed on existing OT levels,
except on
> the old OT VI that dropped out of use in 1978. Logical focus is
a
> requirement of the training and processing of these levels.
>
> What I am saying is that in all cases of advanced OTs I have
measured, seen
> measured, and heard of being measured on EEG had excellent control
of
> rational Beta, badly below average Alpha with no control of it at
all,
> suggesting damaged intuition, and Delta way way off the chart of any
person
> measured not in deep somnambulistic hypnosis.
>
> Where I have seen an advanced OT do honest work on exercises
designed to be
> relevant to developing intuition, they generally can learn them
quicker and
> run into less mental barriers than non OTs. This suggests to me that
to
> refer to a state which includes "intuition" is like
referring to a state
> that includes "piano performance", when both are skills
that can be worked
> for easier in some states than others, but neither is part of
any
> particular state.
>
> Claiming that a state gives a skill reminds me of a piano tuner
that
> claimed he needed no training as God gave him the gift of tuning
pianos.
> He did a very poor job.
>
> There is a dangerous drawback in the existing "OT" tech,
namely, that
> personal responsibility for creation of the phenomena is not
addressed.
>
> >Thank you.
> >
> >Roy
> >
> * * * Rowland Anton Barkley the Deep TranceForming Shaman * * *
> * * * Email: [email protected]
[email protected] * * *
> * * * Fax:
+61-2-9475-0374
http://www.tranXceform.org * * *
Subject:
Nirvana
Date:
Mon, 11 May 1998 14:43:42
+0100
From:
Judith Methven
<[email protected]>
To:
"'TROM-L'"
<[email protected]>
To do with discussion that is occurring here at the moment, I would
like
to pose the following questions:
Why is Nirvana thought of as a no-games condition?
What is desirable about a no-games condition?
It could be interesting to substitute the word game with another word
-
perhaps no-doingness?
It is also interesting to examine these thoughts in the light of
certain
axioms and factors by LRH, from whom Dennis gained so much
information,
and upon which so much of TROM is based.
Judith
--
Judith Methven
Subject:
Re: Nirvana
Date:
Mon, 11 May 1998 04:44:09
-0700
From:
"Maximilian J. Sandor"
<[email protected]>
To:
Judith Methven
<[email protected]>, "'TROM-L'"
<[email protected]>
At 02:43 PM 5/11/98 +0100, Judith Methven wrote:
>To do with discussion that is occurring here at the moment, I would
like
>to pose the following questions:
>
>Why is Nirvana thought of as a no-games condition?
can you please define your idea of 'nirvana'?
>What is desirable about a no-games condition?
the (Ancient) Indian context of 'nirvaana' sees
'desire' (ta.nha) as the creator of games conditions.
In this context, your question is non-sensical.
>It is also interesting to examine these thoughts in the light of
certain
>axioms and factors by LRH, from whom Dennis gained so much
information,
>and upon which so much of TROM is based.
From my viewpoint, _ALL_ of TROM is based on LRH.
He just uses the word 'nirvana' without ever having defined
it
in any way.
It is the _only_ word as far as I can see that does _not_ fit
into the Scn framework.
There is one other correlation to Indian (Buddhist) thought
that
at first glance is intriguing:
(You asked me a long time ago (when I was still called
'Joachim')
why I was stating that 'to know/to-not-know' cannot be the
basic-basic in
any case. I didn't quite know how to communicate it back then
and
didn't elaborate. Hope you don't mind the two-year comm-lag
and
I don't know if my answer makes sense to you now).
If you see Dennis as thinking in the framework of Scn, than
you'll
have the paradoxical situation that the postulate in Scn seems
to
be that the Being _originally_ had full knowledge and powers
before
it got implanted, lost in games conditions, etc. How can a
fully
knowledgeable and powerful Being be trapped?
Now, Dennis seems to concur with some Buddhist schools that
'non-knowledge' is the beginning of entanglement of a Being in
this world.
I don't recall that he talked about what may have been before
this
state of 'non-knowledge'.
But this apparent congruency between Dennis and Buddhism breaks
apart
immediately when you dig just a little deeper. What is being
translated
as 'non-knowledge' is the Pali word 'avijjaa'. But 'vij' is the
root
of 'wis-dom' (and 'wicca', of course, but that's another story).
'to know'
has the root 'j~naa' and has always been used with an 'OBJECT'
what
can be known (a so-called 'transitive' verb').
In other words, the original Pali terms 'vijaaa' and 'avijjaa'
describe
states _without_ objects and the term 'j~aana' describes
'knowledge of..'
In a no-games condition (which is actually an intriguing way of
describing
'nirvaana'), there are no objects as the Being rejoices in
Boundless States
without fixed viewpoints.
It may be that you don't want to have a no-games-condition. Other
people may not want to have this condition. So, you may take it or
leave it... (just don't enforce your games conditions on
others...)
As far as what 'it is like' at the point of no-games-conditions
(whatever you call that state), is a moot point.
The only way to find out is to go there.
If you don't like you can always plunge back into the games
of this Universe.
However, if you never dare going there, you can't find out
for yourself and it would be all idle talk...
Happy Trommin', everyone!
mx
Subject:
Re: Nirvana
Date:
Mon, 11 May 1998
09:13:22 -0700
From:
Randy Nicholson
<[email protected]>
To:
Judith Methven
<[email protected]>
CC:
"'TROM-L'" <[email protected]>
References:
1
Judith Methven wrote:
> To do with discussion that is occurring here at the moment, I would
like
> to pose the following questions:
>
> Why is Nirvana thought of as a no-games condition?
I think Dennis was using the word Nirvana for lack of a better word
that
might discribe a place or state to arrive at or return to when
completing
L5.
>
>
> What is desirable about a no-games condition?
>
" The route out is from the compulsive playing of games,
through the
voluntary playing of games, to an ending of all games
by the adoption of complementary postulates and so the achieving of a
non
game situation: Nirvana.
So let us be very clear about the direction in which we are travelling
on
Level Five. There is nothing wrong with playing
games, for games are fun; but there is an awful lot wrong with having
to
play games. the trap is not in the playing of
games. The trap lies in the fact that the playing of games leads to
the
compulsive playing of games. That leads straight
into every trap this universe contains. We only have to return to the
being
his freedom of choice in the playing of games
and the job is done. "
> It could be interesting to substitute the word game with another
word -
> perhaps no-doingness?
Being able to do nothing is desirable to me, but not forever, just at
will.
Nirvana at will would be nice.
I think Nirvana works well .
nir·va·na
Pronunciation: nir-'vä-n&, (")n&r-
Function: noun
Usage: often capitalized
Etymology: Sanskrit nirvAna, literally, act of extinguishing, from nis-
out
+ vAti it blows -- more at WIND
Date: 1801
1 : the final beatitude that transcends suffering, karma, and samsara and
is
sought especially in Buddhism through the
extinction of desire and individual consciousness
2 a : a place or state of oblivion to care, pain, or external reality;
also
: BLISS, HEAVEN b : a goal hoped for but
apparently unattainable : Dream
- nir·van·ic /-'vä-nik, -'va-/ adjective
>
>
> It is also interesting to examine these thoughts in the light of
certain
> axioms and factors by LRH, from whom Dennis gained so much
information,
> and upon which so much of TROM is based.
My understanding was that Dennis had suffered some damage from doing
the
SHSBC and that LRH had it all wrong , he was almost doomed to fail
right
from the start.
> " So the mistake Ron made on the subject of goals was to look
into a mass
> of lies, in the bank, for the truth. That is why
> the search went on forever, and why he nearly killed himself in
the
> 1960s."
>
>
> Judith
>
> --
Randy Nicholson
Subject:
Re:
Nirvana
Date:
Tue,
12 May 1998 07:20:34 +0200
From:
Antony Phillips <[email protected]>
Organization:
International Viewpoints
To:
Judith Methven <[email protected]>
CC:
"'TROM-L'" <[email protected]>
References:
1
Deat Trommers
Judith Methven wrote:
> Why is Nirvana thought of as a no-games condition?
Speaking for myself. Because my first true and my deepest
understanding
of life came from Scientology.
There there was a state called Native State, which for want of
better
understanding I have equated with Nirvana.
Also there was the following "scale":
Knowing no-games condition
knowing Games condition
unknowing games condition
unknowing no-games condition
The supposition was that Static or the thetan came down from Native
State self-determindly because it was dull and it was more
fun/interesting playing a game. In 1964 Ron came out with a policy
roughly expressed: "survey reveals that the public wants total
freedom,
therefore we will sell total freedom". (I regard as an integrity
break)
Before that an ideal state was regarded as a balance between
freedoms
and barriers (with purposes).
And the top I also equated with Nirvanna.
Suspect Dennis also did.
Unfortunately I have not found time to read recent despatches that
clarify Nirvanna :-(
Must do so.
--
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/
--
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,
previous-life-scio and IVy lists
***************
Replies, comments, to the list, send to [email protected]
***************
--
Antony A Phillips [email protected]
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
