TWO OTs - SCIENTOLOGY GRADE III PART II 

      SCIENTOLOGY GRADE III Part I
      http://www.clearing.org/archive?/homer/ador1047.memo
 
      SCIENTOLOGY GRADE III Part II
      http://www.clearing.org/archive?/homer/ador1048.memo

      SCIENTOLOGY GRADE III Part III
      http://www.clearing.org/archive?/homer/ador1049.memo

      So say OT A does something terrible to OT B.

      OT A has the CAUSAL postulate "I have done you in."

      OT B has the CAUSAL postulate "You have done me in."

      These two postulates lock up with each other due to agreement and
zero responsibility on the part of either of them, to produce a
persisting situation of

      1.) damage to OT B,

      2.) blame of OT A by OT B for the damage done, and

      3.) regret of OT A about doing damage to OT B.

      OT A considers HE is responsible for the damage, that OT B had
zero responsibility for letting OT A into OT B's world.

      OT B considers OT A is responsible for his damage, that he had zero
responsibility for letting OT A into OT B's world.

      Total agreement on zero responsibility and two strikes and you are
out.

      So both OT A and OT B have a persisting upset about each other.

      OT A is upset with himself, and OT B is upset with OT A.

      This lock down of upsets creates a hell forever for both OT A and
OT B.

      For OT A that hell consists of regret forever and hatred of
himself.

      For OT B that hell consists of hatred of OT A forever.

      These forevers are in time, which is what makes the joke so heavy
and so ludicrous, because no one is at time = 0 any more.

      So an auditor comes a long and grabs OT A by the neck and puts him
in the chair and runs Hubbard's Black V process, modified by the need of
the moment.

      "What part of this could you take FULL pan determined
responsibility for?"

      Figure out some way to run this without what questions unless the
preclear can answer them.

      Pan determined means causing both sides of a game, like playing
chess against yourself because you can't get a date.

      "What part of this could you allow OT B to take FULL pan determined
responsibility for?"

      Now you have two OT's playing both sides of the SAME chess game.

      You see pandeterminism isn't just a matter of causing both sides of
the game, it is also a matter of WILLINGNESS to have caused, and let the
other guy also have caused, it doesn't matter at all WHO caused it
originally.

      Originally, in this case, means time NOT equal to zero, because
originally implies the consideration that the persisting problem was
caused IN THE PAST.

      Time 0 is always NOW, regardless of how 'long ago' something was
originally created in its original time = 0.

      If you think time = 0 was a million years ago, then you will be
looking for time = 0 in your facsimiles of back then, rather than at
time = 0 NOW.

      That is in part why auditing the past via facsimiles is a waste of
time = 0, and auditing fails or is limited at best.

      You don't want to know what he DID, you want to know what he is
DOING, which is mostly mucking around with facsimiles NOW of what he
DID!

      He is not suffering from what he DID, he is suffering from his
facsimiles NOW of what he did, everyone of which has a wrong time tab on
it because its not time = 0 NOW.

      Facsimiles give the illusion that the correct time = 0 for any
creation is in the past!

      Ransacking facsimiles gives you a face full of ransacked
facsimilies.

      That's cool if you want to impress your girlfriend with it and gain
her sympathy.

      If you want to as-is your facsimile time track, spot its creation,
its moment of time = 0, in the NOW.

      It's right there in front of you nose, just LOOK for it in the
operation of it.

      It may take a bit to be there when it most needs for you to be
there to as-is it, but that's better than being stuck with it forever
trying to date and locate it.

      The creation of the time track is not recorded in the time track!

      And so we have willingness at the bottom of the auditing stack, and
the result of cleared willingness which is change.

      1.) RESPONSIBILITY
      2.) CREATION
      3.) PROBLEMS
      4.) HELP        (audit this stack)
      5.) CHANGE      (postulate lockups come apart)
      6.) WILLINGNESS (to be cause and have others be cause)

      Audit from the bottom up.

      Grade III clears willingness, willingess to face the eternal
future.

      Anyone can jump in the seat of a run away car, grab the steering
wheel, and bring it to a controlled halt.

      It just doesn't matter who started it, and asking that question is
a waste of time not equal to 0.

      If YOU recreate time = 0, well you ARE STARTING IT, present time =
0, and when you let go of it, its gone as if never created, no memory,
no lessons learned, no must not happen again, no being careful next
time, no warning/punishing others, no being leary of being cause or
allowing others to be cause.

      Running full responsibility, suddenly OT A is looking at time = 0
when he let OT B into his world and OT B let OT A into his world.

      AND THEY SHOOK HANDS AND UNANIMOUSLY INVITED EACH OTHER IN AND
AGREED TO BE IN EACH OTHER'S WORLD.

      An invite is an as-isness of the time = 0 postulate to put
something there and/or to consider that a particular posted thing can be
cause over some other posted thing and visa versa.

      Without invite nothing can be created at all, for invite is the
invite for the created thing TO BE THERE.

      That's called 'putting it there' or posting it there.

      Once invited to be there a loss of direct awareness of that invite
by considering now is a different moment of time later, will cause
anything to persist forever.

      This is not magic, persistence of postulate A is caused by a second
postulate B that one must postulate MORE in order to vanish postulate A.

      So chasing postulating MORE, prepostulates that A is true,
and won't vanish on its own.

      Postulating MORE is called chase.

      And chasing starts at time greater than 0!

      Thus the being is chasing a solution to the existence of A at time
= 0, by running down the time track time > 0, for the rest of time.

      And not being any more at time = 0, the being won't be able to
vanish A and it won't vanish by itself.

      The being is WELDED to creating A continuously by the postulate
that A won't simply vanish on its own, but needs some more things
postulated to help vanish A forever!

      Postulate 0 at time = 0: A IS

      Postulate 1 at time = 1: I don't want A but A is still there and
won't vanish on its own.

      Postulate 2 at time = 2: I must postulate B, C, D etc to get rid
of A.

      Good luck.

      Putting A there, and then chasing putting OTHER things there in
order to get rid of A, is not the same as putting A there and letting
go, wherein A will vanish on its own.

      Postulate 1 is called a prepostulate because it prepostulates that
A exists, which causes it to exist over and over again.

      Postulate 1 is also filled with poison postulates like "Where did A
come from!, I didn't make A, I don't want A, who ordered or invited A?"
and other zero responsibility gimmicks to keep postulate 0 being
repostulated over and over again, while he figures out what to DO about
A!

      The proof of invite is only available at time = 0 with postulate 0.

      By the time he gets to postulate 1, he is no longer in contact with
postulate 0 and the invite, by direct perception, so he postulates he
didn't make an invite at all.

      So the persistence of A becomes self proving, "you see its 10
thousand years later, and A is still there."

      Every time he looks for A, he puts it there, and says "yep,
A's still there, I told you A won't vanish on its own, gotta keep
looking for a solution to the persistence of A.

      A is self vanishing, why is he looking then for something to help
him vanish A?

      He is doing this to make sure A doesn't vanish, thus giving
him a game to play of vanquishing A.

      A will outlast the being.

      And when a being's postulates out last the being MAKING THEM, you
know you got a problem on your hands.

      The being nervously looks around to see if the original invite to A
has his signature on it, breathes a sign of relief when he can't find
the invite (because he doesn't want to), and thus can't be blamed for
the existence and persistence of A.

      Some relief, for now his hell is having A forever, and chasing
doing something about it.

      Admired original invite will vanish anything,  because in part it
is taking full responsibility without added significance of shame, blame
or regret for having invited and put the thing there in the first place.

      Admired original invite.

      Knowing willing cause with full awareness of the consequences.

      Don't go near it, if you want to keep your suffering around.

      So in session with our auditor, OT A finally seeing time = 0 on the
matter, vanishes the postulate "I can affect you without your say so and
without your desire that I do", and suddenly OT A's regret vanishes into
humor.

      At the same time B's postulates vanish that he can be the effect of
OT A, and both are now out of hell.

      Notice the auditor only had to audit one of them to break the lock
down, doesn't matter which one.

      It takes two to get locked in hell, and if either one takes full
responsibility for both sides, and the zero responsibilities involved,
the hell simply vanishes like an as-isness, because it has just been
as-ised.

      But contacting that time = 0 is critically important to get rid of
the causal postulates that each can cause the other harm.

      If someone says "You have harmed me", and you agree that you have
harmed them, they and you have harmeed *YOU*.

      When you take full responsibility for something, not by owning up
to having caused it in the past, but in CAUSING IT NOW, admiring,
inviting and putting it there, it becomes yours, no matter who
originally did it.

      The aesthetic of it being yours completely heals all wounds.

      "Clear laughter is all the kind justice there is, and all the
justice you will ever need forever, for real.

      This thing ain't called a religion for nothing." - Adore.com

      Seeking forgiveness continues the postulate that OTHERS can't heal
themselves via the same mechanism.

      "Man if someone did that to me, I would be pissed, so I can see why
they are pissed at me for doing it to them", you see victim, victim,
victim...

      And this, although human, actually solidifies THEM in their own
mispostulate of victimness, because you are not a human, and neither are
they, you are both OTs.

      Thus when an OT worries about others needing his help, they need
his help more, because OTs create in the mere conception of things.

      And so no, they will never 'forgive you', once they get it however,
they will send you awards and accolades for the brilliance of your work
of doing them in, they couldn't have done it without your help, and you
will return the favor in like kind.

      Your greatest laugh will be when you resolve what they did to you.

      That's High Halcyon on the verge of time, High Appreciation for
Ludicrous Demise.  -Adore.com

      You see (my clarifications in brackets):

      "There is no compromise with full responsibility.

      It lies above 20.0 on the tone scale, and is descended from in
order to effect [the apparency of] randomity [and other cause], but is
descended from with the full knowledge of its assumptions [and
consequences]." LRH Advanced Procedure and Axioms, page 57.

      Still the coolest words ever written.

      TONE SCALE
      http://www.clearing.org/archive?/electra/tone.memo

      That's why people hate LRH by the way, they can't stand the idea
that life is the illusion that there is other cause than your own.

      There is other cause, but only if you cause it to be so and invite
it in and it accepts and invites you back :)

      On some worlds that's called FRIENDING.

      And you can take that invite and it's granted cause back, through
the process of auditing out the times you gave it away to others, and
cemented it in place through shame, blame and regret/guilt.

      That's called UNFRIENDING.

      DEFRIENDING or debonding is when you remain further down in shame,
blame and regret creating the illusion of no further connection between
the two of you, when in fact both of you are held together like glue
from your hate and wish the other didn't exist.

      UNFRIENDING is what this posting is about, because one starts to
take cause over one's life back from others during the auditing of Grade
III.

      The only way to handle a prime upset in a Homo Novis, is to admit
you are causing it and know how to stop doing that.

      Homer

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith   Clean Air, Clear Water,    Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959       A Green Earth, and Peace,  Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com  Is that too much to ask?   http://www.lightlink.com
Tue Sep 11 20:44:46 EDT 2018