The Tech Error of ’62-’63—How it Went Negative: RogerB’s FZ Presentation in Pasadena

[RogerB]

Here is the video of my presentation at the FZ Conference in Pasadena, October 2-4, 2009.

Ken Aaron did a wonderful job of editing and presenting it. Actually quite a surprise, as I expected it to be simply prepared for up-load to YouTube. I did not expect all the bells and whistles Ken produced. He even created some clever titles for each of the five pieces!

As you YouTube denizens already know, YouTube limits its clips to 10 minutes. What Ken has done is link the first 10 minute vid so it automatically triggers the start of the next 10 minutes and so on all the way through the five sections. He tells me he is also producing DVDs of the conference speeches that are each complete and unbroken as this rendition for YouTube is.

(Edit: on live test here on ESMB, the automatic continuation to the next video does not occur, so I have inserted the remaining four vids on the next page, with further notes following.)

What I have done below is present additional information concerning my presentation and the related tech points for you ESMBers, with some extra charts and improved diagrams so things are easier to follow.

Also, there is a key word I used early on in my presentation that, due to sound quality, is not quite clear to the ear in the video. That word is “vector”; it is used in the phrase “a catastrophic reversal of spiritual vector.” (A vector, by definition is “a quantity with direction and magnitude.”) The context of all this is explained in my notes below.

I have presented my accompanying notes in four parts over several pages for easy access.
_________________________________________

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRTq5GImhyw


Part One

Here is the image of the Mood Chart I used in the presentation. It has been amended since then to actually show the “Power Split.”

My presentation in Pasadena was intended as an up-date on technical developments that have occurred outside of the “church” since its blow-up in 1982-3.

In it, I also attempted to point out where LRH and his research went awry in 1962-3 such that the entire tech he release went south from that point in time. This was the point where he went negative and he took the tech with him; and that negativity has since ground the church and its members to dust.

The presentation, as delivered, ended up a little hurried and abbreviated as we reconvened after lunch a half-hour late (cutting my time almost in half), and I sought to get the key points conveyed such that we could then handle any issues that came up for the audience.

This write-up is intended to convey relevant information I did not have the opportunity to deliver as part of conveying the whole picture needed to put all the pieces together.

The thing to realize is that what we, as humans, are experiencing in the physical universe is very, very late on the chain of games development. There is very little real truth here. There is apparent truth, and acceptable truth, and variations on a basic theme of solutions to prior scenarios now manifesting as “truth” — but the real and actual truth is way early at the basic on the chain now lost to an antiquity of added solutions, masking devices, avoidances and denials.

The sequence of actions and creations that led us to our present state of relative delusion followed a path down the scale of emotions and attitudes we developed toward life and the games we have played — this many, many times over. Every game scenario or universe we have had went through this decline from creation at the highest of levels of operation down to annihilation in a state of delusion. Hence so much of it now appearing to be “lost” and/or occluded.

It is, however, all able to be recovered. One can restore to one’s highest levels of truth, knowledge and powers.

Many have posited that LRH “went nuts” and “lost it” doing his research into “the R6 Bank.” That is possible, and it is almost certainly a part of the truth, that tangling with the own goals GPMs the way he did screwed him up.

Hubbard made the unfortunate error of approaching what in fact is our real case: the devastating alterations to our true Being and powers, from a wrong perspective that was too low on the scale of emotions/moods and attitudes.

He unfortunately attacked it from a negative point of view and from a position too low on the “Tone Scale.”

Hubbard approached case from the perspective that all goals and all the identities one assumed in order to pursue our goals were all in opposition to something or another. He actually wrote this in his HCOBs.

This is an error. Hubbard missed the real power and truths at the very top of our scale of moods/emotions where the beginnings of our games and creations occurred. He came at the “Bank” from too low a level on the scale of awareness and moods — he was into opposition and conflict: not co-creation and harmony. And in approaching our case phenomena thus, he by-passed all of the charge on the case — the charge which is locked up in what he called “GPMs” — that is above opposition and disharmony on the Tone Scale.

That is what hit him in the head. And it is vicious charge. See Alan Walter’s “Opening Pandora’s Box” thread: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=33&highlight=pandora's+box
See reference to GPM failed handlings here on post # 42:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=33&page=5&highlight=pandora's+box
also post # 107 onwards:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=33&page=11&highlight=pandora's+box

His other error was that he approached this material from the position of present time conflict and a negative case perspective. He failed to address it from the truth of our highest level action of creation and the sourcing of our games and states of Being.

Thus he was trying to unravel the unknowns of the case from a position of unknowingness while buried under the charge of eons instead of establishing our highest level of operational truth and then, from that position, learning what occurred to change or “destroy” our true power scenario.

Presented here is a chart I created for use in corporate America. It presents an expanded emotional tone/mood scale, but on the left-hand side you’ll notice I have a Scale of Relationship Levels. This depicts how Beings relate in or to the game as they descend the scale of moods/emotions. Note the level of “Opposition” occurring between boredom and contention/antagonism. This is where a Being flips from positive to negative.

This is the level of spiritual vector reversal I speak of in the video.

In the version I am presenting below, I have included the “Power Split.” It was not included in the version shown in the video of my presentation in Pasadena.

Note that at the Relationship Level at -10 on the scale a being “Substitutes.” This parallels LRH’s “Being Other Bodies” and is the result of having failed at or lost out in an activity, where the person then substitutes another game or existence for it. Below that, as a result of avoidances of, substitutions for and other solutions superimposed on the failed games scenario, one ends up in delusion.

 

[RogerB]

RogerB’s FZ Presentation in Pasadena: Parts 2-5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3qyZWaMIHI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML6WIIdg8uE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guQWM8kXWUA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgUqBQLIX-Y

Enjoy

RogerB

 

[RogerB]

Part 2--The Tech Error of ’62-’63—How it Went Negative: RogerB’s FZ Presentation in

Part Two

How I came to discover it.

I was asked in Pasadena, how I came to discover this tech. Well, in actuality, it is several techs that complement each other and make up the whole:

1. The phenomenon of the spiritual vector reversal cum polarity inversion or “Power Split” (as Alan Walter calls it) that occurs at just above 2.0 (at Antagonism) on the Emotional Tone Scale. This is the state and action of going into opposition to one’s own earlier true wants, dreams, aspirations, goals and state of being, doing, having. It could be called a “Theta-break-inversion.” It is where the Being flips from positive to negative and against what it formerly stood for and was aligned with. It indeed inverts from presence to absence, cause to effect; from work with to work against. It is the adverse and oppositive to its former states of being, doing, having.

All our old failed and abandoned games have gone through this reversal of polarity as one went down the dwindling spiral out the bottom to total loss of destroyed games and victimhood.

2. The top of the Games Matrix and the notion of the Complementary Power terminal or identity. This in contrast to earlier notions that “all goals oppose something,” or that “all identities are in opposition to other identities.” And it also contrasts with Alan Walter’s formula where he posits the two top terminals as a “Power Identity” and an “Opposing Power Identity.” I do not see the top of the game as one where the terminals/identities are opposed. Instead I see them as being complementary and co-creative.

3. The fact that one also creates or envisions the complementary or reciprocal Beingness or terminal in the game relationship and can then also choose to become that complement in order to participate in a return flow. Also that, in the game, the other player(s) one relates with coincidently create or envision you as their complementary power terminal, and when roles in the game are reversed they are co-creating each others’ Beingness or identity in the game.

This is true at the top of the Tone Scale where our most important, basic games were created. In subsequent aberratied games, relationships did decline to one of opponency and conflictive disharmony.

4. The fact that one of our basic abilities is the ability to simply be present and to receive the emanations of another; and that we had never drilled that ability in our TRs but only the out-flow, cause vector.

5. The processing towards the recovery of the prior basic abilities, powers, purposes and positive states of Being and capacities versus the mere getting rid of the negatives.

6. The “record” that is the build-up as one’s case items is not really “in one’s mind” but instead is a sequence of impressions recorded in one’s spiritual existence. That is, “the mind” is a part of one’s spiritual existence or self that has been designated as “mind.” This is why there has been immense confusion down through the ages between “mind” and “soul” or “spirit,” with the terms often used interchangeably.​

There was a sequence to the discovery that ran over a number of years.

As you already know, I was a highly trained champion athlete, and involved in the research into athletic performance with Forbes Carlisle, the famous Australian Olympic Team Coach, during the very early 1950’s.

This taught me two things: a) pursue an underlying positive to enhance, empower and make more of and, b) we each have underlying natural abilities and powers that can be addressed and upgraded. (It also taught me discipline and the value of pursuing my goals, dreams and aspirations . . . and sticking to them. You don’t win championships by giving up at the first hint of defeat . . . you instead raise your power output!)

Further, I was fortunate enough to live the development of the early tech; it is not just theory to me as it is to those who later did courses such as the post 1967 SHSBC. This gave me a very different perspective on the tech to those who were told to view the “old tech” as theory only.

Early Scn pursued the positive. The book, Creation of Human Ability is almost wholly this, even if with some failures.

As already noted on ESMB, LRH departed from this premise (officially) in April, 1963. This was when he abandoned processing the client’s own goals and instead switched to only addressing implants. At that point in his life and the development of his tech he went into “attacking the enemy.” Instead of enhancing the positive, he flipped into addressing only that which he believed was “wrong with you,” and/or had to be gotten rid of because it was having a negative affect on you or was otherwise “bad, wrong and evil.” See: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=207730#post207730 “GPMs not your own but implants”
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=207738#post207738 The point where the tech went negative.

It is this focus on the negative that has since driven the church into the dust.

When I ran afoul of the church’s insanity in 1983, I refused to buy the crap and simply continued processing “my unflat level” of S/NOTs.

In around 1990, I began to see what I was processing a little differently than how it was presented in the party-line from the church. Instead of seeing the “entities” or spiritual Beings I had connection with as being degraded and as “body thetans,” I began seeing them as spiritual Beings with whom I had relationships. Yes, some of the relationships had soured, while some were still more in alignment with me.

My focus then shifted to unsticking these Beings from what they were hung up in. Routinely, I began addressing them with a question that addressed their ongoing or hung-up purpose and/or intention. Depending on the mood/emotional level of the Being the question asked as the process for them was: “What intention or purpose are you pursuing?” or “What intention or purpose are you hung-up in or dramatizing?”

This routinely freed them to upgrade their game and our relationship; or leave if they so chose. This area of processing often involved earlier universes, where games were at a spiritual level, not physical universe oriented. (I discovered and introduced earlier universes to standard Scn tech in 1977 while on OT3.) See:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=214820#post214820 (dealing with the MEST universe) and part 2:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=214825#post214825 (mentioning my discovery of Earlier Universes)

It was at this time, in around the end 1990, I began seeing meter phenomena not described in LRH tech.

The meter reaction was that of a “Reverse Rocket Read.” The needle would explode off to my left as an explosive rise read. Also observed was what I refer to as a “Conflict Read.” This is a rather large dirty read pattern that has some continuity to it. Dirty reads were a needle manifestation followed up on and used in 1962. They sometimes turn into a R/S.

When you are processing solo, you can feel the spiritual/mental phenomena that is producing the needle manifestation when you are alert enough.

Investigating this, I found the Reverse Rocket Read occurred every time I contacted an intention or event of reversal of spiritual Life-force vector or polarity from being positive to being negative as in from Love to Hate; from co-survival to the intent of destruction; from willingness to know to anti-knowingness; from a whole relationship to denial of relationship and its destruction; from truth to lies; from presence to deliberate absence or non-presence.

That is, the Reverse Rocket Read occurred whenever I contacted one of these immense “dichotomy flips” or counter-intentions. It is a reversal or inversion of spiritual presence, intent, action, polarity or vector and even of survival.

My observation was that it was the colossal and intense power involved in the counter-intention against self and one’s game and/or relationships that caused an instant jamming of Life-Force and a catastrophic, explosive build-up of mass; and that produced the Reverse Rocket Read. Case-wise, it is experienced by the Being as an instantly jammed flow. All Life-Force flows and exchanges instantly jam stuck throughout one’s being.

As one processed the area connected to these events, and they opened up, the area would cease the Reverse R/R and then begin to R/S as the continued conflict of the event began to read on the meter as the conflict of a R/S. Further, as the area was processed and charge removed, the intensity of violence of the conflict would lessen, and the meter would register this as what I call a “Conflict Read.” This Conflict Read is an often continuous pattern of needle action (when one has attention on the conflicted event hung up in the case) that is as a large dirty needle on the dial of the meter that is actually reacting to the conflict on the case as it jerks about. The jerking, though, is nothing near as severe as a R/S.

An R/S occurs in the presence of an unknown automatic conflictive and opposed set of counter-intentions. The conflict that produces a Conflict Read is usually produced while one is being aware of the conflicted intentions, which conflicted intentions are no longer wholly unknown but yet not resolved.

Though another note of caution applies here. There were times when dealing with this material, even after seeing the Reverse RR and R/S phenomena on the meter, that the meter packed up completely. That is, on occasion I’d be in the middle of the immense charge and force of the event, with charge and force that was palpable, and yet the meter would often be completely null. The trick there was to simply continue processing by way of indicators, and by-pass the un-reading meter.

 

[RogerB]

Part 3: The Tech Error of ’62-’63—How it Went Negative: RogerB’s FZ Presentation in

Part Three

The “Power Split” and its relationship to one’s Goals (Hubbard’s GPMs) and one’s actual Games Matrices.

One needs to define and have a clear definition and comprehension of this word/concept “matrix”. (I’ll leave it to you to do the dictionary work so as to save me the typing)

It is to be noted that all the games we involve ourselves in are based on a construct (a formula, if you will). This construct has components that form, shape and confine the game! This is the MATRIX. The Game Matrix. It is a different (though similar) beast to Hubbard’s superficially perceived, addressed and then abandoned GPM scenario.

The key thing to know about this reversal of spiritual polarity or “Power Split” and its relationship to one’s games in life and one’s Games Matrices is that the opponency it causes in the first instance is against the game and positions and conditions at the top of the Tone Scale.

That is, it is against the formerly wanted, desired and created/contributed to items of the game and its relationships. Following the “Power Split” the horizontal “cross-over” occurs wherein the identities involved begin to oppose each other horizontally across the game domain since they are now in a lower mood. (LRH mistakenly saw this Games Matrix construct as own goals GPMs, and mistakenly saw the changing mood/emotion relationships as identities assumed . . . further explanation on this to follow.)

That is, having descended vertically down the Tone Scale of moods/emotions the Being begins to oppose and conflict with the other players instead of support, co-create with or work in harmony with the other players as was the case at the top of the scale.

I had not fully seen this in 1990, though I was aware from the old 1962-3 GPM tech that there was a “cross-over” wherein LRH said that at the middle of the GPM one’s identities crossed over to oppose that which at the beginning of the GPM they supported and sought to achieve. Though that 1960’s tech did not relate it to the Tone Scale per se. It was only posited that the result of the opponency inherent in the GPM phenomenon resulted in alterations to one’s beingness that eventually resulted in the “cross-over” that expressed as you opposing your own goal.

But note, this was all predicated on Hubbard’s notion that all of the identities of a GPM, and all goals, inherently are in opposition to something. This I have found to be false, and an error on the part of LRH and others who continued in that view of things.

The genesis of this error is as stated on page 416 of LRH’s Vol IV: “The theory back of Routine 3D is that a goal has the anatomy of a problem and is not only postulate counter-postulate but also terminal counter-terminal.”

Of course, Hubbard here is demonstrating his rather limited and fixed thinking based on the false notion that all is based on opponency—but hey, that’s not new for a “dominator”! A “GPM” may have such an “anatomy”—but he does not articulate that. He states that a “goal” does and elsewhere in his materials he states “all goals oppose something” almost as though a goal inherently has to oppose something, and/or is always opposed by something.

What is true is that all the actions of a Being below the “Power Split” are opposed to something; and that is what is typically dramatized and is what was being addressed by Hubbard. He failed to address the top of the Tone Scale aspects of Goals and Games.

He addressed the subject of own goals from too low on the Tone Scale. He addressed it from the position and perspective of opposition, opponency and conflict; he missed the positive “work with” and harmonious, co-create aspects of the game that exist at the top of the Tone Scale and game—and all that power and energy became by-passed charge and left on the case.

It is also to be noted that this Power Split phenomenon in its origins is gigantic. When first implemented, it was of God-like proportions. We see it carried on in present time on a human scale in the form of former lovers turning to hatred of each other, children who formerly wanted to play a game turning to tears and vowing never to play that game again and we see it in all the little ways we reverse ourselves from what we formerly wanted and loved to do but now are violently opposed to. I don’t think I need to point out that many have done a “Power Split” vis a vis the Church of Scn.

It is easily observed that the actions and attitudes at the very bottom of the Tone Scale are the reverse of the positive God-like powers and abilities at the top of the emotional scale.

The tragedy of what happened in 1962-3 was that LRH approached this whole case area from a perspective and position too low on the Tone Scale. He approached from below the “Power Split” and not from the high mood levels at the top of the scale of awareness, powers and abilities. He was into opponency, and it kicked him in the teeth. He missed the charge at the top of the GPM or Matrix where the game is co-created on a harmonious, reciprocal and work-with basis.

What happened is that he (and we) stirred up too much powerful charge in 1962-3. Not only was the missed positive scenario at the top of the moods and awareness scales missed, but, and a big but, in failing to handle this huge, basic subject correctly, it stirred up the later similar, superimposed implant materials (implanted to mimic and trigger the charge and case of the underlying, earlier own goals) and Hubbard then began to think that this later implant material was the important issue to handle . . . it certainly seemed easier to handle since it contained much less force than the own (failed, screwed-up and occluded) goals area.

It is also to be noted that Hubbard did not actually handle the identities uncovered in his own goals handling. He actually only packaged them into “opposition packages” that, in essence, only nulled or jammed the charge between the items such that these forces no longer appeared to be hitting the PC. Fact is, that charge and force simply coagulated as further hidden mass on the case.

 

[RogerB]

Part 4: The Tech Error of ’62-’63—How it Went Negative: RogerB’s FZ Presentation in

Part 4

In November, 1994, I had my first Knowledgism services. My first action was the Prime Source Axiom “Codes” Course and processing.

For those wondering about the Codes, here is one of Alan’s answers to the question on public lines: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/acw/codes.memo The specifics of the Codes tech is held as confidential. There is good reason for this as, mishandled, the negative side of the Codes case will cause real strife to an individual. We saw too much of that kind of thing with the old own goals GPM handling in ’62-’63.

After I’d found my Codes, the next action was an attempt at the 1994 version of Alan’s “Games Matrix” R/D to package my Codes as part their applicable Games Matrix.

That process bombed out. I won’t get into the details here, for various reasons, but will say I believe it was because the way in which the Games Matrix tech was presented at the time has an inherent little flaw in it.

Basically, Alan’s Games Matrix is diagramed thus:

This four part matrix is as outlined in his November 8, 1994 taped lecture: “Free Radical Identities.”

You’ll note he has the two top power identities as opposed and indeed conflicted. In Case Advisor Series 4, he articulates this further in these terms:

1. The Empower—the Spiritual Being himself
2. The Power Identity—an identity created by the Being
3. The Opposing Identity as an Anti-Power of Destructive Identity—it is an identity created to oppose the Power Identity
4. The Malicious Identity—a combination identity that is a result of shocks, overwhelm, lies, harmful acts, kepts (W/Hs). It is created by the conflicts of the Power and Destructive Identities colliding. This identity is held together by the Being’s hatred of power and authority.
5. The Weak Identity—a multi-other-determined creation that is brought about by others to handle the malicious identity. The Being keeps this in place by resisting all those aspects he does not like about others.

All this follows and is aligned based on Alan’s rather phenomenal work on the subject of “Paradigm Matrices” as expounded on in his book: “The Paradigm Matrix, and its Effect on Future Prosperity and Human Events.”

There are a number of matrices diagramed in that book, including the human Ability Paradigm.

What is being expressed in this work is that our human (and spiritual) activity goes through cycles. And one of the cycles is a cycle of decline, as in one declines down the mood scale from successful activity to failure.

Here is a presentation of a matrix that expresses that phenomenon from his above cited book. Note also the sequence of the life-force flow through the paradigm wherein the Malicious Identity is in the position of receiving and processing the flow before the Weak Identity at the end of the cycle.

In my view, this alignment as a Games Matrix structure is incorrect. Note the distinction I am making here between a Games Matrix and an operating Paradigm Matrix. I believe the errors in the presented Games Matrix tech and package that I have seen/heard, and including the latest tape dated July 10, 2007 are two-fold; which points I’ll discuss in detail below with diagrams.

For now I’ll present what I find to be a more workable and correct structure of the Game Matrix:

Since 1994, I have worked assiduously at recovering all of my highest level ascension states as have occurred over the fifty-plus years I’ve been processing and training. This is a critically important action for anyone who has had major spiritual ascensions from any practices of spiritual enlightenment, etc. It is so important, Alan at one time referred to his subject as “Ascensionism.”

About a year ago I was working on one such old ascension, cleaning up the crash and burn charge that had occluded it and, as I said in my presentation in Pasadena, I was working toward what had been the prior positive, high state of Being of that ascension area before it originally got charged up, muddied and was descended from in a universe way prior to this physical universe.

And as the higher, earlier spiritual state began to be recovered, I became aware of the elements of the Game Matrix of that game. It is to be noted that I had already spent many, many hours over the years erasing the forces, charge, mass and case turmoil from the negative, below the Power Split areas of this game (for now, we might call it the Game of Relationships). And what happened as I was recovering the positives present in the game is, I began to see how it had been begun (created) as a harmonious relating between complementary powers (or terminals) assuming positions to work with each other.

Wow! This was an eye-opener. Then the whole of the Game Matrix construct below these two complementary Power Positions began to become perceivable to me. I became aware of how, as we variously screwed up and goofed and, as charge in the relationship built up, we descended the Tone Scale of moods and emotions and eventually went critical of each other and into opposition at the Power Split.

The whole cycle and sequence was visible and experiential to me. Further, as I addressed each of the Power Identities with the Identity Handling R/D, I experienced and was able to run how, as I declined in the game and on the mood scale, I created myself as and into being the Weak and the Malicious Identities. Yes, you had some help on the way. Yes, as Alan says others also create you as and in these conditions of being—but the real deal is that I did so as my solutions to the problems presented in the game as it progressed.

And the fact that I had created these conditions and Beingnesses for myself as solutions is what stuck them there for me. That others also created me as these Beingnesses is simply added force that can either be processed for its own sake, or it unlocks and blows as you erase your own creating of the identities (actually, in practice the area resolves with address to both flows, though mostly the Flow Zero).

It is to be noted that this processing “from the top down” is wonderfully easy, and things pop to view easily and simply because you are senior to, above, earlier in time to, and more powerful than the case you are wanting to address and restore an optimum scenario to.

Below is my first full Games Matrix as found. It is one of three I have addressed. Senior to and actually outside of the “Matrix,” of course, is me the spiritual Being as “Empowerer” and source. I have not shown myself in this position on this diagram.

Note two things: 1) the two top, beginning-of-game identities are complementary. They reciprocate in a positive and empowering manner. They are not in opposition and nor are they destructive to or disempowering of each other. 2) The Weak Identity is vertically below the Complementary Power Identity (the Receiver Identity in the example given); this being the result of declining in power down the mood scale to loss of volition and failure in the game in all respects. The Malicious Identity, likewise, is vertically below the Power Identity where it has declined down the mood scale to become a destructive, delusional cause.

This is very well diagrammed in the presentation below of my first actual Games Matrix successfully packaged and addressed. You’ll notice I have refined the concept and name of the Weak Identity here as compared to what was shown in Pasadena. More came to view on it since I first prepared the slide—case progress is a “work in progress.” I noted that the complete name/concept of the identity includes the condition or concept of "victim."

Here is a combo presentation of Roger’s Matrix layout juxtaposed with Alan’s. You can now readily see where we are different.

As further notes on this, while running the three matrices I have my hands on so far, I would say I am lucky to have had some very huge ascensions early in my processing and training “career”. Working on the recovery of these states led me to some of my very early Games Matrices. My Codes Matrix being one of them.

The process used to handle own goals and GPMs by LRH was fraught with error and potential error. Not the least of which being that the listing questions used invited one’s spiritual connections/entities/BTs/spiritual teammates to answer up and get into the fray. One has to be alert to this while handling these matrices, and to work with one’s spiritual connections in the appropriate and harmonious manner. To ignore or by-pass them is to create and (or continue to) by-pass enormous charge!

My personal observation is that each of the Power Identities spans and operates across the spectrum of the moods from the top to the Power Split, and at various times acts out particular moods at particular times and can even appear to be stuck in some moods. Similarly, after the Power Split one’s dramatized identity spans the negative moods all the way to the bottom. But it is the top and the bottom identities that are the “stuck points and fixed identities. This appears to be the case as they are at the beginning and end of the games, and hence are “stuck points.”

Hubbard appears to have mistaken these changes of mood and/or attitude and spiritual address to the game as being individual and separate identities that compose a “line plot.” Either that, or he was unwittingly listing out implant “identities” while running own goals and mistaking them as belonging to one’s own goals. What is certain, is that addressing it all from the perspective that all is opponency and the effort to counter something else, is a sure-fire way to produce and/or by-pass charge no matter what activity you are engaged in.

Personally, I came to these matrices by looking at my game construct from a position at the very top or most positive and powerful position relative to the game . . . that is, from the ascended to Empowerer Position.

Here is a diagram I did to forward to Alan on the matrix structures of two key Games Matrices I have so far addressed. I have combined them into one diagram. Though this is not as weird as it might seem as the condition we Beings find ourselves in Present Time is that of old games with newer games superimposed on them, running through them, triggering and accessing parts of them, and generally presenting a jumble!

Note the Empower Identity position is depicted outside of and senior to the game and its matrix.

Hubbard attacked equivalent case from a very negative perspective and position. Example, the process used to get the top present time “items” or “identities” the PC was dramatizing in 1962 was called R2-12. The listing questions used were (see, HCOB 23 November, AD12):

“In present time, who or what have you been upset about?”
“Who or what would you prefer not to associate with?”
“Who or what have you detested?’
“Who or what isn’t part of existence?”
Etc., down a list of decreasing degrees of negativity.​

Pretty negative stuff, no?

It is one way to enter a case. I don’t know it is the best or most workable way. History shows it is either fraught with difficulty or it was an erroneous approach.

According to Alan’s taped lecture dated July 10, 2007, he begins an entry to a client’s Games Matrix using similar questions, particularly listing for the “Person you detest the most?” This terminal is then represented to get the underlying whole-track identity/Beingness that this present time detested person is actually triggering on your case and is appearing to be in PT to you.

I won’t get into how the then found item is handled, that is inappropriate here.

My only comment is that I don’t know what the case conditions of the individuals are that this line-up was designed for, and it may not be the only way Alan has of starting his address to the Games Matrix case scenario.

But I would prefer to take an individual up into an ascended state of Being, have him articulate his basic “Game” (it is a question actually run on the Vital Fundamental One Process, but unfortunately not really run on most folks by processors) and/or his Prime Identity scenario, and based on those high level truths have the client list for the components of the matrix from the top down.

It is to be noted that the negative stuff does need handling, but the question becomes: is it best and easiest handled from a position of power at the top of one's states of Being, or from the position of being weak, occluded, unknowing and suffering from the effects of same.

RogerB

 

[EP - Ethics Particle]

Holy squirrel!

Rog, my hat's off ta ya my friend!

And also to those who helped!

Now I have my study assignment for the remainder of fall and the winter too, most probably!

Love to you and V,

Mike

 

[Panda Termint]

Yes, indeed! Thank you, Roger.
That was a great presentation, very insightful and enlightening.

Thanks to Ken too for preparing the video, good job!

 

[Div6]

This is fascinating to me Roger, and quite helpful. Having arrived a bit later on the scene, I have some differing viewpoints on some of this, but am greatly appreciative of your time and effort to write this up and share it with us.

"The abberration above time is that 'there must be a game'".
I think this was in the PDC's.
LRH also talked about responsibility and basic purpose in Advanced Procedures and Axioms.

Thetans playing the game of "life" can be pan-determined, self-determined, other-determined or delusional, which aligns fully with your published scale.

One of the control mechanisms in this corner of this galaxy has been to overwhelm beings with false purposes and false terminals as a method of getting them to leave areas and stay away. Hubbard postulated that it would take 'a billion years' to clean up this sector, such was his estimation of the effort needed to restore beings to the point of self-determinism, much less pan-determinism. I think part of what he missed is that as beings, we have become so inured to having the "game" mocked up this way that we compulsively keep it in place. But along the lines of "full responsibility" we had to agree to it in the first place.

The tone scale, to me, is just a reflection of the degradation and emotions contained in the Implant GPM's. The "cross-over" point was installed, in part to convince beings that they COULD NOT do anything forever. (Which they can, as LRH pointed out in the over-run material.)

Further, the point of "reverse rocket reads' is interesting to me as well.
The only action I know of that takes reads like that in Scn is C\S Series 37R, which is a part of L-11. L-11 is usually the shortest L, but also the most 'spectacular' in terms of effect on a person. It was only after I received that L that this whole area of 'implant GPMs' and 'actual GPMs' came apart. It is not unusual for me to find other types of implant GPM's than the ones LRH described in his materials in beings I run across in solo. But just like you described, all the implant GPM degradation and games are just substitutes for earlier, bigger games and 'matrices'.

On NOT's, you may recall that there is a "Flow Assessment Rundown". And in the issue that describes that Rundown, it is pointed out that stuck flows are the genus of Bt's and out-int. These vectors, where we went into alignment with other beings (or opposed other beings, depending upon the tine level of the game), are the remnant ridges of old games, when we were bigger and more powerful (and in some cases way less intelligent!)
To me, these flows are the "make-break" point between life as an ascendant game, and life as a dwindling spiral.

And of course, each beings spiral is different, so above the level of MEST (and all the degradation involved) each beings unfolding will be different.
Which is why I say that the CoS can not deliver or support solo auditors at that level. They can't handle that much truth!

Thanks again Rog!

 

[Mystic]

There is no "tech" which is not an error.

 

[uniquemand]

There is no error.

 

[Terril park]

I know three people who were on the experimental briefing course program of 1962 and they all have commented on the severity of problems associated with it.

I found Alan's comments on his tech very hard to follow and admittedly I didn't try so hard. Yours are a little easier, just.

It seems to me that you are saying the power identity, and the complementary power identity are from one source or being.

Perhaps you could clarify that?

 

[Mystic]

I was on that Briefing Course. Some folks still are.

 

[RogerB]

I know three people who were on the experimental briefing course program of 1962 and they all have commented on the severity of problems associated with it.

I found Alan's comments on his tech very hard to follow and admittedly I didn't try so hard. Yours are a little easier, just.

Yes, what we are dealing with is a complex and large subject which does not lend itself to “one-liner-instant-wisdom.” (Despite, based on what we see, what some pundits might want to make you think.)

Though it's possible, my version of the Ozzie mumble lends itself to a tidier articulation of things.

It seems to me that you are saying the power identity, and the complementary power identity are from one source or being.

Perhaps you could clarify that?

In essence, yes, that’s what my last diagram depicts . . . though some games were co-created by us from an omni-present position senior to the game. These very early games on the chain were created by us when we were in union operating at the highest level of harmony, and the game was played throughout that domain of existence we shared.

Later, after we separated into being our “individual selves,” and we then created games, we created them from a position senior to and above the game as three-dimensional holographic existences completely mocked up with position/identities to assume in order to play the game we created and invited others to play. If/when others agreed, they would create things from their perspective as their contribution to the parade.

I and you have created games and invited others, and others have created games we have agreed and joined.

One of the statements I made regarding this in the presentation appears to have ended up on the editing floor . . . it was the short comment that in the game, once it is going and certainly once it has degenerated, the other players also create you as being the various identities they see you as and wish to have you be to have the game they want. Thus, not only do you create yourself as the various identities, the other players in game also do so.

The trap was that when we went down into the game, leaving and forgetting our position of having sourced the game, we assumed the limited positions within the game. Then things began to go awry and out of control.

The human view of it is all very complex.

Rog

 

[Smilla]

It's the same old stuff.

 

[nexus100]

Relative complexity is the ratio of not understood parts to understood parts of anything. There is no absolute complexity. If you understand all the parts to something no matter how many, you understand the whole.

So it would make sense to understand more in general, with the intention to put the data into context.

Since we focus directly on one "thing" at a time, this is a process. But the process as itself can be understood.

It also makes sense to look simply at what is there. Otherwise one is creating more "stuff" to understand instead of placing one's already created items into context. Simplicity is best.

 

[degraded being]

Recipe for mumbo jumbo.

Put some semi deluded people into a paranoid schizo's spin machine.

Put them on full speed.

Take them out.

Add (2) LARGE egos

Tell them that they are so clever that they are even more ingenius than the original schizo.

Get them to "improve" upon the output of the original schizo.

Get your own spinner and crank it up to full speed.
Add a bit of commercial profit.

HIDE THE "EXIT" DOOR.

 

[ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn]

There is no "tech" which is not an error.

Oh there is a "Tech" alright, it's just most of us refer to it by it's more common name ... a con game.

 

[Smilla]

Oh there is a "Tech" alright, it's just most of us refer to it by it's more common name ... a con game.

It's such a devious con that the con man doesn't know that he's been conned, or that he's a con man himself. But don't worry - they have the tech to resolve that. At very reasonable rates, compared to the major brand.

 

[Terril park]

I was on that Briefing Course. Some folks still are.

I know.

 

[Terril park]

In essence, yes, that’s what my last diagram depicts . . . though some games were co-created by us from an omni-present position senior to the game. These very early games on the chain were created by us when we were in union operating at the highest level of harmony, and the game was played throughout that domain of existence we shared.

Much of what you say is reminiscent of the Pilots comments.

This seems to descend to a mere data series outpoint.

Co create

In union ... at the highest level of harmony. Omni present position senior to the game.

Or more simply you seem to be saying we are one, then saying we are many.

Later, after we separated into being our “individual selves,” and we then created games, we created them from a position senior to and above the game

From this, and my own gut instinct I say that the power identity, and complimentary power identity are two different sources, beings if you will.
Or many beings really. In that we are creating games, two " individual selves"
would be more complex and entertaining than one.

three-dimensional holographic existences completely mocked up with position/identities to assume in order to play the game we created and invited others to play. If/when others agreed, they would create things from their perspective as their contribution to the parade.

My earliest recall is screaming and throwing my rattle out of the pram.
Metaphorically speaking. During what seemed to be the creation of the physical universe, I left the group, or maybe the creating of the game, in order to make them wrong. I believe a very common ser fac. Discovered on FPRD. Guess I got others to coax me back.

I and you have created games and invited others, and others have created games we have agreed and joined.

One of the statements I made regarding this in the presentation appears to have ended up on the editing floor . . . it was the short comment that in the game, once it is going and certainly once it has degenerated, the other players also create you as being the various identities they see you as and wish to have you be to have the game they want. Thus, not only do you create yourself as the various identities, the other players in game also do so.

Not unless you agree.

The trap was that when we went down into the game, leaving and forgetting our position of having sourced the game, we assumed the limited positions within the game. Then things began to go awry and out of control.

The human view of it is all very complex.

Rog

Hmmm. A game that is simple, as opposed to complex has limited means to amuse and entertain.

Your theories have at least the virtue of complexity.

Maybe I'm irrevocably lost. I love games in almost all manifestations.