*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
On Tue, 14 Feb 2017 01:14:51 +0100, <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Marcus,
thanks for the feedback. You pinpointed a couple of issues on which I
wanted
to expand anyhow in more detail.
Re. 1)
I share your viewpoint regarding importance of definitions.
The problem of multiple meaning and synonymous use of words in everyday
language is always present. And on the other hand there is the need for
precision in specialized fields.
When we look at the context in which a word is used we can often derive
the particular meaning the author had in mind.
You mentioned "know", which is a good example for multiple interpretations.
In the context of TROM: In the theoretical parts of the TROM-writings you
will find that Dennis based TROM on a theory of games play for the purpose
of generating sensation. A key-component in it is "effect".
E.g. the full name of the chart is:
"The Postulate Failure Cycle Chart *regarding an effect*".
[EFFECT, 1 . receipt point and *what is received at the receipt point*.
(PAB 30) 2 . a potential receipt of flow. (COHA, p. 258)]
The effect must be created somehow. (Somehow actually means by postulate.)
If there is no one around to "know" the effect then there will be no
effect as
well. (I omit the case where someone makes an effect on himself to keep it
simple.) Therefore in that context "to know" should be considered as:
to experience, to perceive, to sense, ... an effect. One could even say:
to learn the effect or to get familiar with the effect.
Re 2.)
Yes, very right.
It's good to make it a habit to word-clear the auditing
commands thoroughly to get the meaning right.
Whenever you have the source-material available you should try to find out
for yourself. Another person can only support you as far as with
hints or suggestions which stimulate your own logical thinking
capabilities.
Re. 3.)
Right, let's say you consider to do something, or desire to bring something
into existence, or create something. The outcome in the physical reality is
dynamic. In the sense that there is an action or movement. Therefore the
inference of a "dynamic connotation" on the part of the postulate - which
causes the physical manifestation - is natural. Any action or dynamic
- as far as we can understand it right now - involves the factor of time.
[TIME, 1. time is basically a postulate that space and particles will
persist.
(The rate of their persistence is what we measure with clocks and the
motion
of heavenly bodies.) (PAB 86)]
[CONSIDERATION, 1 . a thought, a postulate about something. (BTB 1 Dec 71R
IV) 2. a consideration is a continuing postulate. (5702C26) 3 . the highest
capability of life, taking rank over the mechanics of space, energy and
time.
(COHA Gloss)]
[CREATE, make, manufacture, construct, postulate, bring into beingness.
(FOT, p.
20)]
Feelings, sensations, ... can be the by-product of games play. Since
games can be dissected into complex structures of postulates, consequently
postulates are senior to feelings, ideas, sensations, thinkingness, motion,
emotion, effort, force, energies, flows, masses, .... and this list goes
on infinitely ... the more fascinating items certainly are:
FIRST POSTULATE, not know. (PAB 66)
SECOND POSTULATE, know. (PAB 66)
THIRD POSTULATE, 1. forget. (PAB 66) 2 . forgettingness. (SH Spec 35,
6108C08)
FOURTH POSTULATE, remember. (PAB 66)
Re. 4.)
I'm glad you mention this point. After doing the previous write-up I've
been pondering for quite some time what Dennis could have had in mind.
It's odd that he introduces a new word - "punch" - here. I'm actually
not able to grasp that intellectually (the translation into my native
language
(German) does make it even more vague). But never the less it makes sense
when
approaching it by using intuition. My chain of association is as follows:
punch -> press -> impress -> Yep, that's it; to make an impress. That makes
certainly sense in regard of a feelings or ideas. What else is a sensation
for a human being than the imprint or impression on a physical level? And
since our existence as Man is not restricted to the physical plane
exclusively there must be equivalents in the mind and the soul as well.
From Dennis' track record we can deduce that he was experienced enough to
deliberately avoid phrases like e.g. "mock up the idea of being forced to
know" or "mock up being forced to know" or "find an incident of being
forced to know". That would be different processes with other outcomes
than:
"get the idea of being forced to know"
The "punch" - or whatever - part tries to make it more compatible with
human
thinking habits. We got used to imagination of pictures rather than to
ideas.
The idea or concept might appear more fleeting and therefore must be
refreshed
in mind again and again in order to be held for an extended period of time.
A very good example and exercise in that regard is the "Surprise Game"
which
Dennis described. The game has two different components: There is the mock-
up part (some space, the box with the lid, the movement of the lid, ...)
and
then you have the "surprise". The feeling of surprise. An idea or concept
by
itself. Comparably intangible but never the less perceptible; subject to
awareness; although of lesser density than the mock-up. Still a Thetan is
so much more interested in the surprise than the box. Simply because the
idea is much closer to theta in terms of wavelength than a mass.
[MOCK-UP, v. 1. to get an imaginary picture of. (COHA, p. 100) —n.
1. “mockup” is derived from the World War II phrase which indicated a
symbolized
weapon or area of attack. Here, it means in essence, something which a
person
makes up himself. (Scn Jour, Iss 14-G) 2. a mock-up is more than a mental
picture; it is a self-created object which exists as itself or symbolizes
some object
in the mest universe. It is a thing which one can be. (Scn Jour, Iss 14-G)
3 . a full
perceptic energy picture in three dimensions created by the thetan and
having
location in space and time. Now, that’s the ideal definition. A mock-up is
something the thetan puts up and says is there. That’s what a mock-up is.
(9ACC-24, 5501C14) 4 . we call a mental image picture a mock-up when it is
created by the thetan or for the thetan and does not consist of a
photograph of the
physical universe. (FOT, pp. 56-57) 5 . any knowingly created mental
picture that
is not part of a time track. (HCOB 15 May 63)]
As well he gives an explanation for the purpose of L4 and processing in
general:
{Purpose: The systematic discharge of the eight classes of
overwhelms.
The completion of Level 3 signifies the end of your mind
impinging upon you in session involuntarily. However, it
will still be found to impinge upon you involuntarily in life to
some degree, .....
... There are clearly still things in that thar mind of yours that
you know not what of. This is the whole subject of Level 4.
Once Level 3 is complete you’ll find that you have to actively
stimulate your mind in session before any of it will appear.
.....}
The main difference between restimulation in life and restim.
in session is that the latter shall be under controlled, and safe
circumstances. Very much like when a pilot learns to fly first in
a flight-simulator instead of the real airplane.
So when you're beyond L3 the usual methods for self-restimulating
your mind will not work any more. Below L4 you have tried to look
at your track for significant incidents which you discharged then
with time-breaking.
The significances come along with the images as well and may have
been cause for somatics, misemotions, revelations of unknowns, a.s.o.
But from L4 onward you take a different approach.
You impress on yourself what it is like to be exposed to an
overwhelming effect - or in other words - what it is like to be
"forced to know" (as in the first class of overwhelms).
That experience certainly has a particular quality to it.
Ok, I've tried to tell the story here with different words - in
my own words - and hope that you can find some inspiration and
hints for your own conclusions.
Best wishes
Robin
-----
Thanks for taking the time for this write up Robin. It did help again
and I
found out we messed each other's words multiple times in the first
exchange
XD. I think you cleared out all of these confusions this time. :)
Since the text are a bit long I just commented on the topics you
addressed
trying to show you that I understood your message. If something is wrong,
please, feel free to correct me.
1) You warned about the importance of definitions, instead of copying
others' methods of running the commands
The language barrier is something which I keep in mind but which I may
forget sometimes to double-check. My english comprehension is pretty good
though.
I may be mixing meanings here. Leoncio is also a portuguese speaker and
actually wrote a translation of Trom. He seemed to have done pretty good
in
Level 4. This may be a good time to read it!
Similar to english, portuguese has a bunch of synonyms for 'know' with
slightly different shades of meaning. This is why I asked what exact
synonimous one would keep in mind. At first, it seems to me there's no
exact equivalent of know in portuguese but I think that to take the
broadest range of meanings would be the right answer for this issue.
2) Regarding your reservation in giving the correct way of doing the
Level
4 command
I understand that. Many of LRH's processes I've studied sound odd and/or
vague. The purpose of this reservation is to develop the person's
confidence in figuring this stuff out on his own and experience the
truths
directly rather than being told, I assume. The rule would be that there
is
no right way to start the process, as long as you have the definitions
correctly.
The root of my problem may be that I've got a lot of extra information
already, and that may have made me impatient or critical. For example, I
know of people who got this process producing the intended results on the
first attempts, and there are also some people who seemed to have slided
through all the levels of Trom. But I also know that there are easy
running
(PC's) people and also people with lots of previous processing done
besides
Trom.
I've actually been doing the smaller exercises in definitions and
examples
you've suggested, just not in paper. That seems like a good idea.
Example:
Many times I'd be wondering about an example which seemed to involve
multiple overwhelms but Dennis himself alerted to that.
3) You highlighted the difference between Postulate vs Concept
I'm not sure what exactly is meant by a postulate being dynamic and
involving action (it just reads odd to me since I rarely think of action
in
other context except the physical one), but I could take an educated
guess:
As opposed to a concept which is a construction based on other previous
existences a postulate would be itself an independent existence which
could
cause changes in other existences or exist itself regardless of those.
4) One last question. You mentioned the quote below which is from the
Trom
book in the level 4 section. It has a couple of phrasal verbs I haven't
find a formal meaning for. "Punch into" and "punch out" are the same
thing
here, right? It means "to try and hold it into the mind" and perhaps
"also
intensify it or use it in the hardest degree", right?
"Just punch the concept into your mind, and Timebreak any incident that
shows up. Don?t try and force the pace; just take your time. Now punch
out
the ?Forced to know? idea again. Get anything that shows up Timebroken.
Continue with this command until nothing further shows up, and you?ve run
it dry. Now run RI." - p.49 of trom
2017-02-10 17:49 GMT-02:00 The Resolution of Mind list <
[email protected]>:
*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
Hi Marcus,
please find my comments interspersed in the text below.
Thanks for your answer.
You're welcome
I added more questions in your response in case you could clarify it a
bit
more. Don't worry about answering each one of them. Perhaps one
paragraph
could answer them all. I just used a lot of questions to try to show
you
what is my current level of knowledge since I haven't been in the CoS
and
have done very few of other processing besides Trom.
2017-02-09 8:28 GMT-02:00 The Resolution of Mind list <
[email protected]
:
*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
Hi Marcus,
Re. Part 1 of your inquiry:
Let's take a look at the command first.
It's quite straight forward:
"Get the idea of being (forced to know)"
(E.g. for the 1st class of the eight classes of overwhelm)
The general key-word in that command is the word "idea".
It specifies the flavor of process we're dealing with.
In order to understand that, please see definition below:
[CONCEPT RUNNING, the preclear ?gets the idea? of knowing or not being
and
holds it, the while looking at his time track. The concept runs out,
or
the
somatic it brings on runs out, and the concept itself is run. It is
not
addressed at individual incidents but at hundreds. (Scn 8-80, p. 29)]
Now, what is an idea?
This can be described in terms of what it isn't or in terms of
its opposite. E.g.
OBJECTIVE, dictionary definition "of or having to do with a material
object
as distinguished from *a mental concept, idea or belief*."
So an idea can be best considered as "a mental concept" for our
purposes.
That definition of concept running is very clarifying to me. I even
read
the book of where it's from very recently but the book didn't contain
any
examples so I didn't connect it with level 4.
Actually the definition - which is out of the book 8-80 (Chapter 8,
page
19f) -
is a process/command example by itself. I admit, this can easily be
overlooked.
You can have a concept of anything, e.g. a concept of confusion. The top
and bottom
points on the scales of the Chart of Attitudes (See Handbook for
Preclears) make
good concept material. Other good items to run by concept are e.g.
Beauty, Ugliness, Cause of ugliness, Cause of beauty, No-sympathy,
Sympathy,
Good, Evil.
The command line could be: "Get the idea (or concept) of <item>" "hold
the
idea/concept of <item>" - PC originates whatever comes up - A.
acknowledges.
One can adapt that easily to solo-auditing requirements. After being
acquaint
with the process you will omit telling yourself the command and ack. and
just put up the idea or concept and hold it in your mind.
In TROM L4 you do the same. Your <item> is one of the "eight classes of
overwhelm" in the order as given in the TROM-materials.
Your analysis of "know" into the two distinct meanings is quite right.
But in my view it is easier to think about it in terms of postulates
at
L4.
Namely opposing postulates. (In this case your's would be MNK
while your opponent's is MBK. Which are opposing or conflicting
each other).
The explanatory text in the L4 section of the TROM material talks
about "punch the concept into your mind" or "now punch out the "forced
to know" [note: this is equivalent to: "Must Be Known" (= MBK)
postulate]
Now, I liked this part of your response because it went a little more
into
the specifics. But, I read from previous list contributors which also
suggested the use of pure postulates in level 4 (mind that the idea of
postulate processing is an idea that is still new and confusing to me
in
practical manners so I may be using it wrongly here). Some of them
described the overwhelm level as being a situation where there are no
more
opposing postulates since the game has already ended. So I'm supposing
there would be no more MNK in the example you gave. Is that correct
This is the part where it starts getting confusing.
Yes I see. My explanation was not clear enough here. At L4 you're not
required to put up the postulates itself. I've introduced postulates
only
to explain what is going on at postulate-level in the case of overwhelm.
From what you write below I can see now that you have a good
understanding
in that regard already.
In a moment we go into more detail.
For our reference I place below some definitions that fit in here:
[OVERWHELMING, 1. as a person begins to be unwilling to overwhelm, he,
of
course, begins to be unwilling to win and so loses pan-determinism and
sinks
into self-determinism. Games are, for our auditing purposes, "contests
in
overwhelmings." The primary overwhelming is to take space. (PAB 80) 2 .
overwhelming does not consist of space, energy et al. It is the idea
that
an
overwhelming has occurred. The winner is convinced that he has
overwhelmed the opposing player. The loser is convinced that he has been
overwhelmed. (PAB 80) 3 . to push in too tight. (SH Spec 57, 6109C21)]
[OTHER-DETERMINISM, 1. simply something else giving you orders or
directions. (8ACC-6, 5410CM08) 2 . something has so thoroughly
overwhelmed
the pc that he is it. (HCOB 7 May 59)]
So should I get the idea of an artificial complementary postulates
situation MK + MBK with something else which would identify the
overwhelm?
Or should I mockup the game situation (MNK vs MBK) with an
extiguishing of
my MNK postulate? How would that be? Because it seems the example you
gave
me looks very similar to a Level 5 process.
Thanks for giving me a better reality of your level of understanding
here.
To give you an explicit answer in the sense of "how you should execute
the
command <....>" would be a breach of the auditor's code. Since I'm
not your auditor it would perhaps be excusable. But no, I can't give an
explicit interpretation of the command because a) it could be wrong;
or b) deprive you of some cognitions. Let's see if there is some
work-around possible.
I assume the meaning of the command line in terms of each of its words
and
finally in terms of what the whole sentence means is clear to you.
If not, here is word-clearing in a nutshell:
Look up the definition of each word you feel not 100% confident about
in a good dictionary. Clear all unknown words inside the definitions.
Make sentences with the word until you feel confident.
Perhaps a translation into your native language can be useful.
Invent examples for all kinds of overwhelms on any
level you care (physical, emotional, ...)
To add mass you may demonstrate the words and concepts they represent by
means of small objects, clay-mass or draw sketches.
Now, what do you think is the common characteristic or the common idea
behind all those examples you have looked at? What is left as the common
essence, principle, concept or idea inherent in all those examples?
It's what's left when you strip off all the pictures, masses, energies,
...
The things and situations are gone. What's left is the meanings only.
A meaning of course goes hand in hand with a certain feeling or rather
a conviction or opinion (see definition of OVERWHELM above).
It's precisely at the point of overwhelm where the conviction dawns
on the part of the overwhelmed that he has lost now - while the
opponent realizes the fact of his victory. You will probably agree that
those convictions differ somehow according to a specific class of
overwhelm.
A demonstration for an idea/concept:
You sure have at times looked at abstract paintings, haven't you?
You may not have recognized a distinct object in the picture. But you
may still have grasped it's inherent significance. You might have got
the idea the artist had in mind. The meaning often induces a specific
feeling: the feeling like recognition or cognition - in the observer.
The emotions that are evoked (or absent) in the observer are something
else.
....
Do you have an idea/concept of each of the eight classes of overwhelm
now?
Is so, that means you can hold the specific concept in your mind
somehow.
I say "somehow" because there is no need to worry if this
seems to be difficult at first. It will probably get easier with doing
the
exercise.
The conceptual idea will become less and less alien to you. And do not
be surprised to have cognitions along that line in regard of concepts
itself in addition to what L4 offers in regard of the subject of
"overwhelm".
As a general rule: A concept is not a picture, a mass or a mock-up like
you do in e.g. RI. In terms of wavelengths it is much shorter or
"lighter".
In that respect it's closer to a postulate but it's not a postulate.
[POSTULATE, n. 1. a self-created truth would be simply the consideration
generated by self. Well, we just borrow the word which is in seldom use
in
the
English language, we call that postulate. And we mean by postulate,
selfcreated truth.
He posts something. He puts something up and that?s what a
postulate is. (HPC A6-4, 5608C--) 2. a postulate is, of course, that
thing
which is a directed desire or order, or inhibition, or enforcement, on
the
part of
the individual in the form of an idea. (2ACC 23A, 5312CM14) 3 . that
selfdetermined
thought which starts, stops or changes past, present or future efforts.
(APIA, p. 33) 4 . is actually a prediction. (5112CM30B)?v. 1 . in Scn
the
word
postulate means to cause a thinkingness or consideration. It is a
specially
applied word and is defined as causative thinkingness. (FOT, p. 71) 2 .
t o
conclude, decide or resolve a problem or to set a pattern for the future
or to nullify
a pattern of the past. (HFP, p. 155) 3 . to generate or ?think? a
concept.
A
postulate infers conditions and actions rather than just plain thinks.
It
has a
dynamic connotation. (SH Spec 84, 6612C13)]
And if it's supposed to be like a Level 5 similar process (I'm makig a
big
assumption now that level 5 is also concept running or very similar)
Yes there is a similarity. But - as we have seen above - it is different
from running a concept. Postulates do represent rather the building
blocks
of a concept.
should
I use a mock up or a real object at a distance to represent my
opponent?
The command line does not say so, right?
The safe assumption is that it's desirable to avoid any "crutches" to
fulfill the request or command. Keep it as simple as possible.
Never the less you may benefit to find into your final mode of
operation by using some "mental tricks" like a mock-up to start.
Similar to using water-wings when learning to swim. But one wants
to get rid of them as soon as possible.
What would be the main differences of level 4 and level 5 running
regarding
each individual command? Like, how would it be different to run an
overwhelm in level 5 compared to the running of it in level 4? (I'm
asking
this one because Dennis enters in much much more detail about level 5
compared to level 4)
Yes, that's true.
L5 goes through the whole PFC-chart which is composed of 16 lines.
L4 deals with the non-game situations only - or in other words - the
overwhelms only.
Besides that, Level 5 takes apart the situations (including the
concepts of
overwhelms) into its postulate components.
Please take a look at the last line of the POSTULATE definition again:
[A postulate infers conditions and *actions* rather than just plain
thinks.
It *has a dynamic connotation*. (SH Spec 84, 6612C13)]
In terms of "action" and "dynamic connotation" we see a main difference
to the comparably static character of a thought, idea, concept.
Dennis uses a lot of verbs on the L5 tape which make it clear that
there is a dynamic quality involved.
Contrary to that, you "punch out your concept", hold it there, punch it
out again as necessary ... wait and see what comes up.
That leads immediately to the answer of your 2nd part of the question:
2) Could you describe how was your mental process of doing level 4,
meaning
what words (commands, synonimous of know, etc) did you use and what
visualizations or steps did you go through mentally until new
material
showed up.
The mental process, as far as I do it, does not contain any
visualizations,
thinkingness in terms of phrases or symbols. There are no pictures
involved
nor emotions or feelings. Its simply putting up the mental concept
of the overwhelm situation. It could be described as the generic idea,
essence or abstraction of a myriad of exemplary events.
This mental activity will cause the show-up of feelings like guilt,
blame,
shame, regret or even whole scenes. Time break as necessary.
Then repair your demand for havingness by your favorite method.
I hope this shed some light on the issue.
Success
Robin
Marcus
Did that clarify at least some of your questions?
Best
Robin
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.newciv.org/pipermail/trom/attachments/20170213/7446d416/attachment.html>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
End of TROM Digest, Vol 148, Issue 14
*************************************
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
