What's new

OPENING PANDORA'S BOX Part One:

Status
Not open for further replies.

RogerB

Crusader
This Reveals Some Screwy Tech from LRH

As I drove across the Nullabor Plain around April 1962 – I began to go unconscious – I pulled over to the side to take a nap – Suddenly I’m running a full holographic revivification of a ship sinking – unbeknownst to me at that time - I am running out the sinking of the Titanic – As more came to view and as the Titanic sank – the command phrase came to view – “I never wanted to be rich and powerful again – the loss is too great!”

As more unfolded I also ran a full holographic revivification of who I was, how I had gone into power - how I had made my many fortunes – who my teammates were – how I connected to them – etc.

I did not go back into the past – the sinking of the Titanic came into the present!

Once I arrived at my destination in Western Australia – I set about working – “I was in the Zone” – I could do no wrong – that night I totaled up my receipts – I had earned more than a years salary that day – I did this day after day.

Alan


If one compares how this event of the Titanic's sinking was holographically perceived/permeated by Alan to how Hubbard's Dianetic processing command would cause it to be run, you will observe one of the "screwy tech points" of Scn.

When running incidents with "standard tech," one is commanded to "move through the incident" ---- I don't know whether you've noticed it or not, but carrying out that command as stated makes you smaller than the incident. You have to be within the time stream of the event to "move through it". It can actually have the effect of having you try to process the incident from an effect position. (Makes it far tougher to do.)

Better is the command to "holographically experience what happened" --- that allows you to maintain your size, power and (recover your) sovereignty relative to the incident. This way the incident is processed from a more causative position.

Rog
 
Last edited:

Tiger Lily

Gold Meritorious Patron

If one compares how this event of the Titanic's sinking was holographically perceived/permeated by Alan to how Hubbard's Dianetic processing command would cause it to be run, you will observe one of the "screwy tech points" of Scn.

When running incidents with "standard tech," one is commanded to "move through the incident" ---- I don't know whether you've noticed it or not, but carrying out that command as stated makes you smaller than the incident. You have to be within the time stream of the event to "move through it". It can actually have the effect of having you try to process the incident from an effect position. (Makes it far tougher to do.)

Better is the command to "holographically perceive what happened" --- that allows you to maintain your size, power and (recover your) sovereignty relative to the incident. This way the incident is processed form a more causative position.

Rog

Fascinating! Thanks :)
 

Leon

Gold Meritorious Patron
Now that's a good one Rog. I never noticed that before but it sure indicates. Thanks.
 

Vinaire

Sponsor

If one compares how this event of the Titanic's sinking was holographically perceived/permeated by Alan to how Hubbard's Dianetic processing command would cause it to be run, you will observe one of the "screwy tech points" of Scn.

When running incidents with "standard tech," one is commanded to "move through the incident" ---- I don't know whether you've noticed it or not, but carrying out that command as stated makes you smaller than the incident. You have to be within the time stream of the event to "move through it". It can actually have the effect of having you try to process the incident from an effect position. (Makes it far tougher to do.)

Better is the command to "holographically perceive what happened" --- that allows you to maintain your size, power and (recover your) sovereignty relative to the incident. This way the incident is processed from a more causative position.

Rog

This makes good sense. Thanks.

.
 

nozeno

Gold Meritorious Patron
For all you DB's who can't do this. Get yo'sef some o'these.

3D-glasses-404_675044c.jpg


They work pretty damn good...

titanic.jpg
 

RogerB

Crusader
Expanding on a Thought


Folks,

Copied below is an exchange of emails I had with a member on this Board. It expands on what I posted earlier about Hubbard's command to "move through the incident" versus "holographically experience what happened."

"Hello Roger,

"My name is Mario from **** and I've found your posts about knowledgism very very interesting .
I got some Alan's books and DVD and I tried his Shock Handling procedure and I'm pretty enthusiast about it.

I would ask you a clarification about your Alan's reply about Titanic's sinking.
You say that there is a great difference between "move through the incident" and " holographically perceive what happened ".
I used to audit book one but I don't see the difference that you talked above.
In both cases there is , or should be, a perfect duplication of all details that is a timeless moment .
Probably I missed something, can you explain me better ?
I'm looking forward to receiving your reply .
Bye for now
Mario"

I replied:

"Mario,

"It is as I originally wrote it.

But to simplify it (or expand on it), as I expect you speak English as a second language, the difference is this.

And, by the way, You are correct in what you write here: " In both cases there is , or should be, a perfect duplication of all details that is a timeless moment." There should be. Though, it is not necessarily true that the incident is or is always “a timeless moment” as your wrote. The incident does have time, and it has time in two senses: 1) location at a point in time and 2) span or duration of time.

The point I am making in what I wrote is that to “move through” something, in this case the incident, or the time span of it and its existence, you actually have to be lesser than or smaller than the thing or incident and its span of time. Remember, most of these incidents are in the physical universe, and any such incident and its time element is as a “thing”.. . . matter, energy, space, time.

However, you are a spiritual Being . . . you are in truth, infinite in scope (size and expanse) and without limit, and without location in time, etc (see Axiom 1).

Thus to be commanded to “move through the incident” you have to be reduced to less than it . . . this violates your true static state and infinitness. And, that command also violates your truth as a static by locating you in the incident to “move through it.”

However, if you are commanded to “holographically experience” . . . you can do so while maintaining your true infinite state and without reducing yourself and even without relocating yourself out of PT and going into the time of the incident. You can reach and perceive from where you are and as you are.

You can, by doing it this way, perceive the whole event at once; this rather than going through a sequence of little parts of it one after the other.

Alan does use the command, “Holographically experience what happened” in his “Holographic Incident Handling Procedure” (our method of handling “engrams” or other old incidents.

Roger

 
Last edited:

DartSmohen

Silver Meritorious Patron
Titanic

As an amusing aside, Titanic was built at the Belfast shipyard of Harland & Wolf.

They sell t-shirts which say on the front ; " Titanic built by Harland & Wolf".

On the back it says " She was fine when she left here". :hysterical:
 

RogerB

Crusader
H&W Sank too Didn't It?

As an amusing aside, Titanic was built at the Belfast shipyard of Harland & Wolf.

They sell t-shirts which say on the front ; " Titanic built by Harland & Wolf".

On the back it says " She was fine when she left here". :hysterical:

Dart,

If I recall my recent Brit history correctly, Harland & Wolf itself bit the dust didn't it?

Or is it that it's remnants are now a tourist attraction to the glories of the past Great Britain ??:roflmao: :missyou:

rog
 

DartSmohen

Silver Meritorious Patron

Dart,

If I recall my recent Brit history correctly, Harland & Wolf itself bit the dust didn't it?

Or is it that it's remnants are now a tourist attraction to the glories of the past Great Britain ??:roflmao: :missyou:

rog

According to their website, Harland & Wolff are still going strong.

Never mind, better luck next time.

Dart:woohoo: :naughty: :moon:
 

dchoiceisalwaysrs

Gold Meritorious Patron

Folks,

snip

However, if you are commanded to “holographically perceive” . . . you can do so while maintaining your true infinite state and without reducing yourself and even without relocating yourself out of PT and going into the time of the incident. You can reach and perceive from where you are and as you are.

You can, by doing it this way, perceive the whole event at once; this rather than going through a sequence of little parts of it one after the other.

Alan does use the command, “Holographically perceive what happened” in his “Holographic Incident Handling Procedure” (our method of handling “engrams” or other old incidents.

Roger


This is very interesting, as it has always been my nature to try to "perceive as a whole" both incidents and the current environment, but often with limited success. What insights do you have regarding HOW to HOLOGRAPHICALLY PERCEIVE incidents, and can it be applied to the current happenings,and what monitors this ability and can increase it?
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
My two cents on "running through incidents": In exactly the same way as a person's attention can already be on some aspect of things and that is what should be addressed first, I find that some part of an incident (or series of incidents if handling several similar ones at once) has the most "suck" to it and that is what should be addressed first, not necessarily the earliest moment in time. Moving through it linearly from start to finish seems like a complete arbitrary to me - I think it should be discharged in the order it is stacked up, as it naturally appears to the pc. If he can holographically perceive it all in one glorious moment, well, good for him, but if he has to bite it off and discharge it chunk by chunk then he should be allowed to do it in the sequence and at the time the different parts are revealed to him and not have the arbitrtary linear time constraint enforced.

Paul
 

RogerB

Crusader
My two cents on "running through incidents": In exactly the same way as a person's attention can already be on some aspect of things and that is what should be addressed first, I find that some part of an incident (or series of incidents if handling several similar ones at once) has the most "suck" to it and that is what should be addressed first, not necessarily the earliest moment in time. Moving through it linearly from start to finish seems like a complete arbitrary to me - I think it should be discharged in the order it is stacked up, as it naturally appears to the pc. If he can holographically perceive it all in one glorious moment, well, good for him, but if he has to bite it off and discharge it chunk by chunk then he should be allowed to do it in the sequence and at the time the different parts are revealed to him and not have the arbitrtary linear time constraint enforced.

Paul

Paul, You Old Fart, you are not dull, and are brilliantly correct here.

Your wording is nice. The part that has the "most pull" is obviously a part that has the PC "trapped" with it, and it will manifest first when the area is addressed. Also, your comment that dictating the person run the event in "a linear time constraint" is arbitrary is also very precise.


dchoiceisalwaysrs wrote:
This is very interesting, as it has always been my nature to try to "perceive as a whole" both incidents and the current environment, but often with limited success. What insights do you have regarding HOW to HOLOGRAPHICALLY PERCEIVE incidents, and can it be applied to the current happenings,and what monitors this ability and can increase it?
Today 02:11 PM

dchoice,

Hmmmm, first one would need to be sure one understands what is meant by this term, and then to be sure one is not already doing it unwittingly.

I don't know what processing you have already had, nor what spiritual capabilities of yours you are familiar with, so this is a little chancy for me to try and "pontificate" on.:)

To raise any of one's natural spiritual abilities I most certainly recommend a good serious dose of objectives which should best be run by a processor who him or herself has had great gains on them. That way they have a subjective reality on the magic they can produce.

As I read you question, I see you have lumped two time factors together (as worded). The present time environment is where one should live with holographic perception, and you'll be doing this if you are truly, wholly in PT.

It's the old incidents from the "past" that I am referring to in my post which are what can be run incorrectly. But the truth is, all that old stuff that we are supposed to get rid of is actually here now with us, hung and riding along in the time stream with us . . . . but we have "handled" it by suppressing our knowledge and perception of it, denying and ignoring it, masking and hiding it, and even attempting to abandon it:duh: So we generally don't see this stuff till something triggers it, or when you go looking for it in session.

So, to answer your question in that context, don't go "back" "into" the incident, have it manifest in PT by you simply maintaining your position and having it revivify and discharge in PT where it has been sitting all the time anyway. And of course, you have to be willing to let go of all the suppress and hide and occlude that typically has been put on these old painful pasts.:yes:

When these incidents do this, they can appear almost as real as the now physical universe to you.

Rog

 
Last edited:

Alan

Gold Meritorious Patron
As an amusing aside, Titanic was built at the Belfast shipyard of Harland & Wolf.

They sell t-shirts which say on the front ; " Titanic built by Harland & Wolf".

On the back it says " She was fine when she left here". :hysterical:

Harland & Wolf built the Apollo!

Alan
 

RogerB

Crusader
When Are You Going to Finish Your Story?

Harland & Wolf built the Apollo!

Alan

When are you going to continue or finish your story?

Inquiring minds are hanging on your every key stroke . . . .

And where's Mystic? . . . .

We want to hear about those old dogs fighting over who owned the same RI they each came up with as their "own"!

And, Mystic, Herbacious "giving" you "your" "to forget" goal . . . did you punch him out as a reward for the gift of the BPC he gave you? If not, why not? :happydance:

Rog
 

dchoiceisalwaysrs

Gold Meritorious Patron
Thank you for your response Roger.

Part of what I gather from what you have written is that our "Handlings" which are composed of the "buttons" somehow drag along or cause to persist, incidents such that they appear to be in the NOW.

In trying to cut to the chase, there seems to be something in the area of "letting go" regarding the (perhaps on automatic) created mechanisms of buttons, which underlie the MIS-handlings. In other words, why do we not always just holographically perceive in the (first place) NOW.?

Paul, You Old Fart, you are not dull, and are brilliantly correct here.

Your wording is nice. The part that has the "most pull" is obviously a part that has the PC "trapped" with it, and it will manifest first when the area is addressed. Also, your comment that dictating the person run the event in "a linear time constraint" is arbitrary is also very precise.


dchoiceisalwaysrs wrote:


dchoice,

Hmmmm, first one would need to be sure one understands what is meant by this term, and then to be sure one is not already doing it unwittingly.

I don't know what processing you have already had, nor what spiritual capabilities of yours you are familiar with, so this is a little chancy for me to try and "pontificate" on.:)

To raise any of one's natural spiritual abilities I most certainly recommend a good serious dose of objectives which should best be run by a processor who him or herself has had great gains on them. That way they have a subjective reality on the magic they can produce.

As I read you question, I see you have lumped two time factors together (as worded). The present time environment is where one should live with holographic perception, and you'll be doing this if you are truly, wholly in PT.

It's the old incidents from the "past" that I am referring to in my post which are what can be run incorrectly. But the truth is, all that old stuff that we are supposed to get rid of is actually here now with us, hung and riding along in the time stream with us . . . . but we have "handled" it by suppressing our knowledge and perception of it, denying and ignoring it, masking and hiding it, and even attempting to abandon it:duh: So we generally don't see this stuff till something triggers it, or when you go looking for it in session.

So, to answer your question in that context, don't go "back" "into" the incident, have it manifest in PT by you simply maintaining your position and having it revivify and discharge in PT where it has been sitting all the time anyway. And of course, you have to be willing to let go of all the suppress and hide and occlude that typically has been put these old painful pasts.:yes:

When these incidents do this, they can appear almost as real as the now physical universe to you.

Rog

 

Div6

Crusader
When are you going to continue or finish your story?

Inquiring minds are hanging on your every key stroke . . . .

And where's Mystic? . . . .

We want to hear about those old dogs fighting over who owned the same RI they each came up with as their "own"!

And, Mystic, Herbacious "giving" you "your" "to forget" goal . . . did you punch him out as a reward for the gift of the BPC he gave you? If not, why not? :happydance:

Rog

Did anyone else notice the subliminal reference to the Helatrobus series in these lyrics:

"Her mind is Tiffany twisted,
She got the Mercedes Bendz.
She got a lot of pretty boys
She call friends.
There they dance in the courtyard,
Sweet summer sweat
Some dance to remember,
Some dance to forget...."

Hotel California - Eagles


For some reason the CoS never commented on that song....but they went bats**t crazy over Elton John's "Take me to the Pilot".....now Elton is 'Sir' Elton, and DM and crew are laughing stocks....funny how that worked out.
 
Last edited:

RogerB

Crusader
I think You Know the Answer to That

Thank you for your response Roger.

Part of what I gather from what you have written is that our "Handlings" which are composed of the "buttons" somehow drag along or cause to persist, incidents such that they appear to be in the NOW.

In trying to cut to the chase, there seems to be something in the area of "letting go" regarding the (perhaps on automatic) created mechanisms of buttons, which underlie the MIS-handlings. In other words, why do we not always just holographically perceive in the (first place) NOW.?

Dchoice,

I think you know the answer to your question:eyeroll:

Have a look . . . . .

Might it be because you did not want to experience something at that moment?

R
 

EP - Ethics Particle

Gold Meritorious Patron
Musings...

Dchoice,

I think you know the answer to your question:eyeroll:

Have a look . . . . .

Might it be because you did not want to experience something at that moment?

R

Hmmm..."...at that moment?":hmm: :questions:

Rog, I was thinking of commonplace mechanisms I use all the time - for instance, say that I knocked over one of the C/S's prize orchids and the dogs chewed it up. Not a huge deal - but when she gets home, I do not want to experience her reaction(s) :grouch: "AT THAT MOMENT" :unsure: Not because of any particular reason except my not wantin' to hear 'bout it "then". :no:

Time passes and she doesn't notice it (she has LOTS of orchids) - so I kinda "park" the incident somewhere in the recesses of the universe that accompanies me along life's merry way. :p

She MAY never notice...:happydance: but then again she MIGHT...:omg:

Almost seems like a game, to me...:melodramatic:

Am I on any kind of useful track here, do ya think? :confused2:

(and if I'm just FOS in your opinion...that's fine - I can "have" that viewpoint as well.) :coolwink: :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top