06/09/10 Wednesday 12:43am EST
     HIGH US
In alt.clearing.technology chuckbeatty77 @aol.com  wrote:
> Tremendous answer.
> Who or what is "High US"

     All life is 'God' in carnation through its own choice.

     This God is called the Great I AM by Christians, but is in fact not
one I AM, but a multi I AM being.  Thus it can incarnate multiple times
at the same time, since all of life is this being in carnation, that
would about a bazillion times at a time :)

     The High US is the total conglomeration of all I-AM's either
incarnated or not.  It especially includes all of one's own most
detested terminals (people), in this life and lives to come, those we
wished had never existed, didn't exist, or won't exist.
     It discriminates between merely US which allows for a THEM and the
implied separation and animosity which an US-THEM relationship allows,
and the true High US, where there is no THEM to the HIGH US, as everyone
is in the High US group, leaving the THEM group eternally empty.

     > a) Did you basically continue your own research on all this, and
> conclude all this?  And did you use ANY of Hubbard's ideas as >
springboards, like how did you come to your conclusions about the >

     Most honest answer is I haven't a clue, this stuff comes to me in
visionary chunks, more like gut feeling intuition that says how could it
be any other way.  Remember if its true at all, much is memory of things
we all used to know and chose to forgot.  So when you get it rights, it
kind of 'rings a bell'.

     Just as physics has elemental fundamental particles, so must any
other causal system, even if it is based on consciousness rather than

     The problem is that beings like to believe in the causation of
mass, two electrons repel BECAUSE of forces between them, but not even
physicists will say that is any more than a convenience for working with

     So in the conscious world, where all space time and mass are a
hallucination, a virtual reality in dreaming consciousness rather than
an objective out there actual actuality, we still need to understand
'why' two electrons repel, not just how they do it, or what math
describes it, but actually why it happens.

     Most science throws up its hand at ultimate whys, many say they
can't be known, which from the proof's point of view is correct for
actual multi dimensional matter universes (which don't exist anyhow).
But for conscious zero dimensional universes, the conscious being knows
when it is being cause, and expects to be able to know the causes of
other things happening too some day down the road, through direct
perception rather than through forever uncertain 'theory'.

     Now beyond all that, the ideas expressed by Hubbard and me all have
a long lineage, going back through theosophy in modern times to
buddhist/hindu/veda traditions.  Even early Christianity said all beings
were sons of God, and meant it, God in carnation.  But that hit a dead
end at the council of Nicea I believe, no money in it.

     The scientist generally considers that life is a subset of the all
that is, anything less than a DNA strand is not life.

     The conscious theories say that EVERYTHING is life, everything is
Brahma in carnation as a conscious unit, stones, water, objects, bodies,
thetans, all the way down the last quark.  Although science doesn't NEED
consciousness to 'explain' how things work, in the absence of the actual
existence of physical things, the why remains important, and from the
proof, directly knowable,
     And that WHY is conscious units interacting at whatever simple or
complex level they interact with, right down the last quark in the
shared dream of virtual space time.

     Just as your body is the virtual physical avatar of the GE, (not
your avatar, you are the cowboy on the horse, not the horse), just so is
the quark and every level of complexity above the quark and other
fundamental particles, the avatar for some unit of conscious incarnation
that may or may not be self aware according to its level of function.

     Thus the quark is some conscious units body, but so is the proton,
the atom, the molecule, the organ, the body, the planet, the solar
system, the galaxy etc.

     Theosophy has its own idea of how conscious units evolve upwards
into self awareness, no clue, its just an idea.  Buddhism/Hindu's etc
have their own ideas.  Hubbard had his.

     Most of these systems are just people who haven't a clue, but who
might have had a vision or two, trying to bring it to the people as best
they can.

     Lots of people on the way to Newton were literally wrong, but way
more right than anything before.

     So you have to just keep on trucking with how it would all have to
be, given the world is a dream amongst dreamers, of whatever
hierarchical level.  That includes material space time and all the
objects in it, and also Gods, Devils, angles and demons, and endless
little buggers with some job or another on the emotional, mental and
spiritual planes of existence, not just the physical.

     Every mental image picture is an elemental mocking it up for
example, so is every engram.  It is fine to run out all the stuff that
happened IN the engram, but the engram remains until you run out the
elemental mocking up the picture in the first place.

     There is more LIFE in the ENGRAM than there is inside the engram
with all its valences and drama.  Things persist to the degree they are
not granted life, and that includes the engram bank and time track etc.
More below.

     Science works with observations of the external, and religion works
with observations of the internal.  Each seek to replicate the observed
experience in others to gain some sort of peer review.

     There is no harm in this as long as religion stays out of the way
of science, if science says carbon dating shows the universe to be 12
billion, and the religion says nope its only 6000, well then religion is

     Or as long as science stops saying that God doesn't exist and
calling upon Occam to 'prove it', when science doesn't have a clue, and
Occam was deeply religious, as were Galileo, Newton and Einstein.

     I mean if the possibility of divinity existing was good enough for
those three, it's damn well going to be good enough for me.

     The problem arises when science tries to mandate truth in the
internal world where it can not observe, and religion tries to mandate
truth in the external world where it can not observe.
     In both areas, the highest high crime of all is to write 'The Book'
first and do the research second, and then try to force the research to
match The Book.

     Hells are so FILLED to capacity with these kinds of people, they
are letting them free early, the waiting lines are so long with new

> b) How many other practitioners are at your level of understanding of
> all this?   Like 10 people or less?   Do you guys hang out on some
> other chat site chatting about this?

     Difficult question.

     I am not advanced in the actual abilities of an OT, I can make
myself sick apparently, but can't make anyone else sick :) I am not
exterior, and I haven't ever really exteriorized the way Roland Barclay
did in his write up that I posted a while back.

     There are probably 50 to 100 people that I would consider that they
would claim they actually attained something of magnitude through
Hubbard/Freezone auditing.  I mean magnitude, can't say anything further
on it, cause I don't know, cause they don't talk to me much.

     Probably another 500 to 1000 who came in to Scn in relatively good
shape, and made good gains, but probably aren't OT's as I would define
the term, stable exterior with full perception of physical universe,
weapon of war stuff or worse, game creators, destroyers and optimizers.

     Lots of others who made some case gain, but did not attain what
they came into clearing to attain, and left rather grumpy about the
whole thing.  Most of them just wanted proof they were eternal beings,
and know how to run their futures.

     Most of these guys were never given a contextual framework in which
being an OT was possible, so they kept trying to go OT in a meatball
view of the universe.  Exteriorization usually blows that open, but it
has to be replaced by an alternative theory of the world (dream time),
or else the exterior preclear comes back in, and STILL doesn't have a
context in which any of it is possible, so he can't get out again, and
comes to doubt the whole thing, like Roland did.

     The rest are flaming mad.

     No I do not hang out with anyone, I find most of them lost in their
technology, it didn't help me after all, and most of them are not strong
in The Proof.

     No I do not belong to secret lists, everything I publish is
published on a.c.t.  and is publicly available.  There are lots of
private lists, and probably secret lists, but I find the postings there
effete and not worth my time reading.

     It's mostly people nitpicking the subtler forms of which side of
the dinner table the fork and napkins should be, not one of whom can
really blow a pc out of their body for good.

     When the bombs drop, what will be left of the secret lists?
Probably nothing.  What will be left of the public lists?  Probably
something.  So if it is worth knowing, it should be posted publicly,
screw the consequences.

>      c) Did you get all this understanding by mainly solo auditing 
>yourself?  Or meditating?  What is your spiritual practice?  
>Therapy/auditing asking yourself questions and answering them like in 
>Solo auditing, or something else?
     Certainly not 'meditating', sorry such attention focusing can have
its benefits, but I had to run out mediation of various kinds, because
it has damaging results from too much one way flow.

     Power comes from being able to create and destroy mockups of space,
time and objects in them, and mockup and destroy communication lines and
relationships with other beings, not necessarily through illusory MEST.

     Two beings talking through space time and objects to each other,
are like two prisoners in two different cells passing pieces of paper
back and forth through a crack.

     Thus if one can not create and destroy mockups and relationships,
one needs to ask why, find out and change it.

     It is assumed that any limitation the being has, is self created
for a reason, and the time and place need to found and the reason
reevaluated and blown.

     It probably won't be a this life time thing, but will be echoed
over and over in this life.

     Now that said, I have found through my own 30 years of trying to
find out why I am still a Black Infinity case, can't mockup anything,
including infinities, that question asking per se is one of the greatest
traps in the bank.

     If I have an ability, and I take it away from myself, and I choose
to not know that I did this, then I start asking how come I can't do
such and such, I am getting further and further away from as-ising the
action of not knowing that I restrained my own ability and why.

     One of the biggest causes of failure in trying to blow the not know
off of a limitation, is the preclear is secretly trying to know, asking
between each auditing command to not know, "Did I really chose to not
     That's not not knowing you see, so the process doesn't run.

     One is not asking the preclear to believe he chose to not know, or
have faith or something, one is asking the preclear to not know, and
shut up and run the damn process.

     Thus auditing for me in present time consists almost entirely of
running the material in the posting called NO SOME on all items that
come up of interest.  Problem now is that all known items are chilled
out, but the somatics and Black Infinity case conditions persist, so
there are more items, that I do not presently I know I have.  Asking
what they are is a waste of time, as all question asking in this realm
is just stirring the tar up.

     However these items do seem to have a genesis back in the first 2
years of life where I can't remember anything at all.  Nothing, nada,
rien, zip, squat.

     Thus running the intention to NOT KNOW and the effort to NOT KNOW
is the only thing left to me.  The process is mentioned in passing by
LRH, but is not used extensively in the Church, they only want to run
what the preclear knows about, hoping what he doesn't know about will
surface on its own.  Good luck.  It won't.

     You can find NO SOME at


> d) Do you use a meter in your solo auditing or whatever your practice
> is?

     Yes, about 50 percent of the time.  At times the meter is useless,
even looking at the needle is the wrong effort.

     At other times it takes me right to the dramatization that next
needs to be run out.
     We look first for a smooth rising needle and High TA, around 4.0 to
5.0.  Then we look for efforts to make NO and SOME of something until we
get stops and falls, then we hunt for WHAT is being NO and SOMED, until
we get long fall blow downs and TA coming down.  Cogs follow from that.

> e) Is this whole spiritual setup you talk about, is this similarly
> talked about by other spiritual researchers, if so, who are a few of
> them (meaning you just view Hubbard as fitting in with a group of
> other thinkers who said pretty much the same as Hubbard and who
> actually say MORE than Hubbard, if so, who are they)?

     Start with C.  W.  Leadbeater 'Masters and the Path'.

     Also Percival, 'Thinking and Destiny"

     These are OLD books, Percival is excessively wordy, you will have
to hunt to find them, but they are in the Cornell Library.

     It's basic theosophy, which like scientology has its leaders who
all misbehaved, got discredited.  Its one thing to write what the Gods
whisper in your ear, quite another to live up to it all.

     Annie Besant is another one.

     They had no technology, but they did have a very rich world view of
how the Brahma in carnation was evolving.

     Any of it true?  No clue.

> I'm kinda getting the idea you take Hubbard's Bridge up to OT 8, then
> go further, correct?   And I'm just curious who inhabits that world of
> the beyond Hubbard out there with you.

     First I am not OT 8, I never made it past Life Repair in the Church
after hundreds of hours.

     My case is still BELOW at 'knows he or she won't get worse'.  I
can't run ARC straightwire to get up to that :)


     At worst I can spin a good tale.

     At best, I might be right about some of it.

     The proof is all I know for sure at this moment, and the proof
proves what the proof proves, and they will be arguing over that one for
centuries to come.

     "A machine can't be certain of anything, I can, therefore I am not
a machine." A machine is defined as any system of parts interacting via
cause and effect across a space time distance.

     It is the self luminous perfect certainty of consciousness that
leads us away from the science of dead matter to the religion of living

     I have seen higher states of consciousness, candylands, micro
nirvanas, etc, but they were only for microseconds, and I am still
trying to reconstruct what they are trying to tell me.

     As for BT's, if a face shows up in my auditing, and its glowering
with evil and anger, is that a live being, or just a 'picture'?  If I
trying everything to get rid of it, and nothing works until I says 'Yo,
you are a BT!  What are you being?  Who are you really?  How many are
you?' and it counts up 1, 4, 13 whirr, click, 110, and then smiles,
thanks me and goes poof, why does that work?

     No clue!

     Hubbard gave us the idea that pictures are dead images of living
beings in the past.

     Truth is the pictures are themselves living beings incarnated in
that picture, so the picture itself is alive, just like your body is
alive with the GE and you and gobzillion others.

     What's IN the picture is not important, its who has that picture
tattooed to itself glowing in the self luminous void of the night, that
is important.  Get the being to stop mocking up the picture, and WHATS

     But when beings start throwing me around in my dreams, or holding
my head underwater, and really scaring the living daylights out of me
and my body, and the above doesn't work, they just start mocking me by
repeating it or giving the commands ahead of me, what does that mean?

     If I then count up for them, how many are you?, into the 100
trillions, and they all go eyes wide and freeze, and I say 'You are real
people!", and they all go poof, what does that mean?

     No clue!

     But I am sure glad I know it.

     Real question is would it work on a gang of thugs in the waking
world?  It might but one would have to be able to count higher than 100
trillion, and no clue how high that is.

     I been trying to count how many am I?, and goes up and up and up
and up...


> Chuck

Homer Wilson Smith     The Paths of Lovers    Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF        Cross            Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com    In the Line of Duty    http://www.lightlink.com
Wed Jun  9 00:49:22 EDT 2010