************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************
Hi Karalee,
Sometimes I will use alternative commands from the original L3, which could be things like 'have the intention to have it happen (exactly as it was or as close as I can have) again' or 'get the other people's intentions/conclusions (at that time) again'. These are the closest ones to postulate-based that I have used. I don't know if that is good practice for long term learning of the skill, I use it as a last resort when the only things that seem to bother me still are these postulates and conclusions. Marcus Em 21 de abr de 2017 3:11 PM, "The Resolution of Mind list" < [email protected]> escreveu: > ************* > The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] > ************ > > Hello, Trommers, > > Question: > When you do Level Three timebreaking do you put any structure into it, or > formalize it in any way, or is it "free-floating"? Is it incident-based or > postulate-based? > > Since Dennis was lucid enough to realize the universe is life and > postulates it makes sense to begin postulate-based timebreaking asap, even > during Level Three. > > In Scientology we learned a very simple repetitive technique and I only > know to call it as "Repeater Tech". It nulls or flattens a postulate and > its opposer, because punching in the postulate brings up related scenes to > be timebroken. > > For example, for the last few days I've been running "There is no > solution", alternating with "There is a solution". It is being quite > productive of change and cognitions/releases, bringing up whatever in the > past relates to that postulate set.... quite a lot to timebreak actually... > eyes wide open, hehe. > > RI before, during and after as prescribed by Dennis. > > Repeater technique to resolve hangups re the "To Know" postulate set might > be out-gradient or unreal; however, for example for a person with a > dominating must-be-known postulate, it might run better re-worded as "I > must be important", etcetera... whatever reads and engages the mind to > cough up plenty of scenes to timebreak and take the edge off the fixedness > of "must be known". > > At the least this repeater style processing breaks up the IP, whereas > Level Five processes would run, for example: > > "The solution must be known" > versus > "Must not know the solution" > > (... if I worded that correctly ... someone can help me get the exact > correct wordings.) > > The reason this "TO SOLVE" IP is such a productive postulate set is > because the mind can be problem hungry. Dennis jokes about the husband who > set out to fix something small in the house and ended up with a disaster - > an even bigger problem, and "To solve ..." is a life-goal in games play. > > Where would "To Solve" fit within Dennis' scale of goals? From my > experience with running lesser goals, the process gradiently works the > mind's way up the scale into at least "To Create". > > It always feels real good to break up a longstanding IP. > > I'm not saying Repeater Tech will completely and permanently resolve the > mind, and it is important to continue until Level Five is consistently > approachable and meaningful for permanent case resolution: a voluntary > games player that is able to go into and out of a no games condition at > will. > > Make it fun, > Karalee > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > TROM mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > >
_______________________________________________ TROM mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
