************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************
Hi Robin,
Thanks again for your extremely detailed answer. I always eagerly await your opinion, when I write something. So About the significance of events: Currently I'm running the To Enhance package. I know I should be running the To Know package, but since it still gives me change so I just do it, until I run out of it. I like to criticize people and people also criticize me. Is that significant? It happens quite often, but it's not like the death of a family member. I do not regard them charged, but they are not like random events from my life (which I was timebreaking previously with the same amount of yawning). So they have a little charge but nothing big. When I started trom, I started with the big ones, but there are only so many of them, and I run out of them very quickly. I'm running these because I moved to level 5, and they just pop in my mind when I put the postulate out. Regarding Wins: I did scientology grade 0 and 1, and there is where I got my idea of a win. You just sit in auditing, you go around those questions and then BAM! you just realize something. Often times it's small but in a couple of hours of auditing I have a few lasting ones, which stay with me for days or months. My Goals with Trom: Of course all of us could live with more power/money/sex, but this is not my motivation. I feel I am constrained. I am locked between my own ideas about life, and cannot break out. As the years pass, I feel more and more limited, in a smaller and smaller place to move around. I need to break out of this prison of beliefs. I want to be free and young again, fearless, like when I was a teenager. I hope trom could get me there. Level 2 and 3. I am mixing levels because of my inability to timebreak a whole scene. If I place the then and now event (very hard to do for me) then I do not experience the same level of yawning. The effects are much smaller and it is unrealistic, I cannot really do it. So whatever shows up I drop to level 2 to timebreak it. It's not like I want to do it like that. I want so much to just place a past event in the present moment, and then just see it fade away in intensity, but I guess until it takes 20 minutes to run out one person from a past event it will not be possible. That time should decrease to 10 minutes then to 5, and maybe then I will gain the ability to truly timebreak in one swell swoop. Best Regards, Gabor On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 8:56 AM, The Resolution of Mind list < [email protected]> wrote: > ************* > The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] > ************ > Hi Vorb, > > please find my comments inserted into your text below. > > > Hi Guys, >> >> I am very happy to inform you, that I just hit my 100 hour goal >> for 2016 and this gives me 200 hours altogether with TROM. >> >> You can read my previous reports here: >> at 100 hours: >> http://lists.newciv.org/pipermail/trom/2016-March/005194.html >> at 150 hours: >> http://lists.newciv.org/pipermail/trom/2016-August/005376.html >> >> So what happened? >> First of all RI started to work at around 160-170 hours in. >> Before that, when I did RI nothing happened. I run it >> no yawning, no needle movement on the e-meter, no change >> at all. So I got used to it, just did it for a minute or >> two, and then moved on to level 2. Sometimes I run it >> for 15 minutes, just to see if it turns something on. >> Well the Tone Arm on the e-meter started to rise very >> slowly (as it should do with havingness processes) and >> reaches around 3.5 in about 15 minutes, but still no change. >> And then out of the blue at around 160 hours I yawned >> a very little, and then more and more, and harder and >> harder the yawning become. In the last 30 hours I yawned >> just as hard as running an event for usually 20 minutes. >> So I start the session, do RI for 20 minutes, with a lot >> of yawning, then puff, all of a sudden the yawning is >> gone, I try for 2-3 more minutes and then move on to >> my special mixture of level 5 with level 2. >> >> So I take the postulate failure chart, put the postulate >> in the wall, wait a few seconds, and ... yawning starts almost >> immediately. Soon and event pops up in my mind from this life. >> Then I take the event and run it on level 2. This takes >> these days somewhere between 10 - 30 minutes. I do RI >> afterwards (this time nothing happens) and look back on the >> postulate failure chart put the postulates back, start >> yawning almost immediately, then in a minute a new >> event appears and repeat the whole thing. >> Then I finish with RI (nothing happens here) >> > > Those events that appear, do you regard them as significant or > charged events? Or are they just every-day events which you > remember? In the latter case running through them or timebreaking > them would not do much. You can not discharge an uncharged > incident. > > Further, there is some risk - particularly for PCs who have had > a past in Scientology - that they have a strong focus on the > way incidents are run in Dianetics. They believe that auditing must > always be about incidents and discharging traumatic incidents. They > have a tendency to be biased in that direction and auditing which is > based on concepts appears unreal to them. (A good example of > processing which is not based on incidents but rather handles them > from a conceptual point of view is the "Black and White" procedure > from the book Scientology 8-8008. That simple process handles > engrams wholesale without ever touching a single specific incident. > In that regard TROM L5 is similar. There is a high level of > abstraction contained in it which is necessary to make it runnable > as a solo self-clearing method. Of course incidents - even highly > charged ones may pop-up. But do not expect that exclusively. > > [Quote Dennis: > "Basically the difficulty is a lack of understanding that you're > dealing purely with postulates. > You're not dealing with effects here on the chart, you're > dealing with postulates. That's all you are putting up, it's > postulates. You're not putting up effects, you're not putting > up sensations, or you're not creating people, you're not > mocking up people, you are not mocking up walls, or floors, > or situations. You're simply mocking up postulates. What > we're working with are just postulates. That's the whole level > of level 5, it's postulates. That is all we are working with at > level 5, it's postulates. We don't work with anything else, we > timebreak out anything else that shows up. We only work > with postulates at Level 5. > "It is an incredible thing to work with. At first it seems very > strange and so forth, very odd and peculiar to be just > working with postulates. But after one gets used to it, when > you get into level 5 you get to a point eventually where you > wouldn't dream of working with anything else but postulates > because you get the fastest results working with postulates > and you always work with just postulates. You simply > timebreak out everything else that shows up. > Any incidents that show up, or sensations, or emotions or > whatever shows up, you simply timebreak them out. > So at level 5 you are working purely with postulates. Once > you grasp that you have got it. You have got it. You can work > then on level 5 and realize what you're doing."] > > Listen (or read) again very carefully the tape which Dennis made to > explain the L5 procedure step by step. > He says: > ["Then you simply timebreak out anything that shows up, any > sensations that show up. > Your whole situation is of cameo9, as a scenario, as a scene, > and you timebreak out anything that happens. Anything that > shows up, you time break it. Time break it out until it's gone"] > > So you pick up not only the visual content but as well e.g. > emotions, feelings, ... to timebreak them. > > Make sure that you really put up the right postulates. Which > would be in the case of the first line of the chart the MBK > (Must Be Known) of the _other_ (your opponent) and not your > own postulate. > > I quote Dennis again: > ["If you go over the column 1 on the chart you see that the level > here is "Forced to Know. It's you being forced to know. Get that? > Doesn't matter what it is, you don't have to specify as we are > just working with the postulates. So you would put up "Must > be Known" over that way in the class of not-self. > Now get yourself right where you are, right here where you > are with the "Must Know" postulate. There's a little danger > there that you could say, “Oh well, get me over that way.” > Oh no, that's wrong. You get here right where you are with > the "Must know" postulate."] > > Make very, very sure you have that right. Because otherwise the whole > procedure will not work as intended. > > This squirrel method was developed by me because all of >> you urged me to move on to level 5, and because I wanted >> to have some wins. Well, I still did not have a single win, >> but it is instructive to see for example me criticizing >> others or others criticizing me and so on. >> > > What do you regard as a win? > You may have expectations which can not be met by a certain tech. > People often go into Scientology or other practices driven by > a desire to get rich, have power, have a good 2D, ... > And that is the way it is sometimes advertised. It's not > about spiritual development or freedom. > In auditing this is known as "Hidden Standard". > > Quoting you: > "it is instructive to see for example me criticizing > others or others criticizing me and so on." > > Isn't that a win for you? > > Definition: > [HIDDEN STANDARD, 1. a hidden standard is a problem a person thinks must > be resolved before auditing can be seen to have worked. It’s a standard by > which to judge Scn or auditing or the auditor. This hidden standard is > always > an old problem of long duration. It is a postulate-counter-postulate > situation. The > source of the counter-postulate was suppressive to the pc. (HCOB 8 Nov 65) > 2 . > is not just a physical or mental difficulty but one by which the pc > measures his > case gains. A case measurement thing used secretly by the pc. (BTB 18 Sept > 72) > Abbr. HS.] > > *Level 2 overrun?* >> Previously some people hinted that I overrun level 2, >> but I no longer believe that. I spoke with my auditor >> and he told me: and overrun is immediately visible on >> the meter as a sharp rise of the Tone Arm, which would >> settle between TA=4 - 5 in 1 to 2 minutes. This has never >> ever happened. >> > > That's good that at least "overrun" can be ruled out now as > a reason for your troubles. > > So we have left those options: > - L2 is flat (at least for the time being). > - L2 is left unflat somehow. > > Now, you could ask your auditor to check that by asking you > on the emeter. He would as well use buttons like "suppressed", > "invalidated" on the question. > > And do not forget to check on L3 and L4 as well! > > But finally your own opinion about the answer will be the only > valid criterion. You can always trust your own feelings in that > respect. > > *What About RI?* >> My auditor told me, that very often preclears start >> auditing, they go really fast, and then at some point >> they collapse, and then the auditing really start to >> bite. Many preclears give up then, feeling they lost >> all wins. He compared it to a river you have to swim >> through, but some preclears start to ice skate on >> the thin ice on the river banks, until the ice cracks >> and then the hard part begins. I believe at 170 hours >> of trom the ice collapsed under me, so I reached the >> bottom, all I have to do now is swim, it cannot be >> worse than this. >> > > That is a sensible assessment. > > As well do not expect spectacular wins and cognitions from > RI when the CCHs and L1 had been flattened on you. > > The purpose of RI is not even to bring in your rudiments at > the start of a session. If that is what you need you better do > it with timebreaking all the events of the day (as Dennis > proposes in the same tape I've been referring above). > > The purpose of RI is to remedy havingness. Auditing which is > effective (you see TA-action on your meter which is a measure > of charge being blown off of your case) a PC experiences an > effect which can be described as depletion of havingness. > RI balances and remedies that unwanted sensation. > > Definitions: > > [DEPLETION OF HAVINGNESS, the truth of something, even when arrived at > by the route of subjection and force, will as-is the something and cause > its > vanishment, and thus it is no longer had. This is called by auditors the > depletion > of havingness. (5601C31)] > > [HAVINGNESS, 1. that which permits the experience of mass and pressure. > (A&L, > p. 8) 2 . the feeling that one owns or possesses. (SH Spec 84, 6612C13) 3 > . can > be simply defined as ARC with the environment. (SH Spec 294, 6308C14) 4 . > that activity which is run when needed and when it will not violently > deflect the > pc’s attention. (SH Spec 85, 6111C28) 5 . the result of creation. (SH Spec > 19, > 6106C23) 6 . the ability to duplicate that which one perceives, or create a > duplication of what one perceives, or to be willing to create a > duplication of it. > But it’s duplication. (lSHACC-10, 6009C14) 7 . ability to communicate with > an > isness. The ability to conceive an is-ness and communicate with it. ( > 17ACC-4, > 5702C28) 8. havingness is the concept of being able to reach or not being > prevented from reaching. (SH Spec 126, 6203C29) 9 . the need to have > terminals and things to play for and on. (Dn 55!, p. 137) Abbr. Hav.] > > > *What are my wins/realizations?* >> Was I ever angry while doing trom? No! Sad? No! >> Depressed? No! Any emotion? Nada! >> Only yawning, yawning and more yawning. >> I guess I will have no wins (realizations) until I >> move out of yawning (unconsciousness) and reach the >> lowest levels of the tone scale. >> > > Isn't that an excellent cognition? > Give yourself a VWD. > > *What's next?* >> For 2017 my goal would be 200 hours which would put me >> at 400 hours of trom altogether. >> My auditor said that a preclear needs 450 hours >> on average to get to scientology clear, so I am willing >> to put in that much effort. Dennis said that completion >> of level 3 results in a higher state than Clear and even OT8, >> so it would be stupid of me to think that 50 or 100 hours >> of level 2 processing would get me above Clear. >> I hope I will have the willpower and endurance, maybe I will >> decrease my goal back to just a 100 hours ... will see. >> Problem is: I still yawn (my mouth is open) for about >> 90 % of the auditing time, my nose still runs, and very often >> I have to sleep/nap after 1 hour of trom auditing. >> If I don't sleep oftentimes I'm completely useless for the >> rest of the day. (and yes, I tried with RI ... did not help) >> > > When you compare Scientology auditing with any self-help therapy > in order to estimate a time span which is necessary to achieve > the same results consider the following: > > a) Estimates for yourself are very inaccurate because you have > to place your case within a very broad bandwidth of case-states. > Such an estimation is liable to introduce large error-factors in > your calculation. > > b) The progress toward higher states of consciousness is not a > linear curve. It often happen in jumps of different sizes. > Usually they get larger as soon as you have found out of the > thick mire. > > c) It is not fair to compare a self-clearing tech with one that > is administered by a professional therapist. That would be the > same as comparing the performance of an automobile to a bicycle. > You have to make compromises if you want to make it solely on > your own or you want to save money. As they say: "Time is money." > > d) Out of own experience and what I've learned from others I can > tell this: > If one relies exclusively on processing in order to progress as > a being, the progress will be slow and you're liable to grind to > a halt somewhere. It was not only for their stats' sake when > the registrars of the church recommended to not neglect the > study/training path on the bridge. > > I guess I've always made more progress by assimilating knowledge > than by processing. Both together are an extremely powerful team - > more than just the sum of each. > > Did it ever occur to you that the manifestations (GIs or VGIs, > F/N, cognitions and case gain) are actually the same no matter if > they are derived from processing or study? Interesting, isn't it. > > So, if you want a recommendation, I suggest devote some of your > schedule to study. Oh, and do not forget to live :-) > > > Any comment or encouragement is very welcome! >> >> Good Tromming, Vorb >> > > > Best regards > > Robin > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: < >> http://lists.newciv.org/pipermail/trom/attachments/20161111/08513e74/attachment-0001.html >> > >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 10:42:14 -0800 >> From: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [TROM1] Vorb's Trom Diary at 200 hours >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >> Hi Vorb >> In your study and auditing at level five have you figured out the games >> you are playing in life and begun to recognize when others are trying to >> get you to play a role in their game? >> >> Sincerely >> Pete McLaughlin >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 08:53:22 +0100 >> From: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]> >> To: TROM <[email protected]> >> Subject: [TROM1] Replay B60 >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" >> >> Sent*Saturday 12th of November 2016* >> >> by *[email protected]*(Antony Phillips) >> >> >> This begins with the reminder of how things were in those days with >> regard to viruses. I expect everybody on this list as an antivirus >> program, the modern answer. >> >> >> 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, 07 Sep 2001 21:02:06 +0200 >> >> To: [email protected] >> >> From: Antony Phillips <[email protected]> >> >> Subject: [trom-L] Replay B60 >> >> Mime-Version: 1.0 >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >> >> >> ************* >> >> The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] >> >> ************ >> >> >> >> last sent: Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 16:30:44 +0200 >> >> >> >> WARNING: If your receive an .exe. file by email from me (or anyone >> >> else) do not run it. I received happy99.exe from a friend. As I felt I >> >> trusted her, I opened it. Saw a firewoirk display. Later I sent a >> >> message to a list I was member of, and found happy99.exe had also been >> >> sent, in a seperate email, but with the same subject from me! It is a >> >> worm. >> >> >> Data can be found on: >> >> http://beta.nai.com/public/datafiles/valerts/vinfo/w32ska.htm >> >> and >> >> http://www.avp.com/happy/body_happy.html >> >> >> I also received the following handling procedure: >> >> >> ****************' >> >> >> Removal and Protection >> >> >> If the worm is detected in your system you can easy get rid of it just by >> >> deleting SKA.EXE and >> >> SKA.DLL files in the system Windows directory. You also should delete the >> >> WSOCK32.DLL >> >> file and replace it with WSOCK32.SKA original file. The original >> HAPPY99.EXE file should >> >> be also located and deleted. >> >> >> To protect your computer from re-infection you need just to set >> >> Read-Only attribute for the >> >> WSOCK32.DLL file. The worm does not pay attention to Read-Only mode, and >> >> fails to patch the file. This trick was discovered by Peter Szor at >> DataFellows >> >> http://www.datafellows.com >> >> >> ********************** >> >> >> Excuse the harsh beginning - it is wise to be wise before hand. Not, >> >> like me, an unsusecting victim and passer on to others. >> >> >> Here is the replay! >> >> ************** >> >> Subject: meter/computer interface >> >> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 20:33:58 +0200 >> >> From: Antony Phillips <[email protected]> >> >> Organization: International Viewpoints >> >> To: [email protected], [email protected] >> >> CC: [email protected], [email protected] >> >> >> >> For those of you interested in meters connected to computers, the >> >> following message appeared on: >> >> ======== >> >> Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology >> >> Subject: new product >> >> From: [email protected] (Ralph Hilton) >> >> Date: 23 Sep 1998 07:45:48 -0400 >> >> >> On 23 Sep 1998 02:23:48 -0400, in alt.clearing.technology >> >> [email protected] >> >> (Nic Ford) wrote: >> >> >> >Press release (or should it be net release?) >> >> > >> >> >My website now contains details and a downloadable file for the new >> meter >> >> >computer interface. >> >> > >> >> >Regards, Nic Ford >> >> > >> >> >Nic Ford >> >> >The Computer Film Company >> >> > >> >> >> The URL is http://www.mindwalker.co.uk/compinterface.htm >> >> **************** >> >> >> >> All best wishes, >> >> >> Ant >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Ralph Hilton >> >> http://Ralph.Hilton.org >> >> _______________________________________________ > TROM mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom >
_______________________________________________ TROM mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
