09/01/10 Wednesday 01:35am EST

      ENVESSELMENT

      The static mockups the kinetic.

      The kinetic cannot mockup, because a mockup can't mock up!

      The static envessels itself in its mockups.

      The envesselment contains all of the beingnesses, identities and
dramatizations the static has mocked up for itself.

      The envesselment is not just the being's body, but the entire
spacetime continuum around it and everything in it.

      Every envesseled static mocks up its own copy of the kinetic around
it.  Where different statics share common kinetic objects in their
vessels, like a common MEST universe, the co resonance between the
objects, makes them act as one object.  Thus statics can come to effect
each other via their mocked up kinetics.

      The co resonance does not causally take place directly between the
two copies of the kinetic objects themselves, but via an inner backplane
that connects two or more statics together in the underlying fabric of
the cosmic all.

      There is no cross cause between objects in the apparent out there.

      There is only cause between a static and its own kinetic, and
between two statics, so they can share the illusion of one kinetic.

      The static is like a chameleon, it can change the 'color' of its
'body' from nothing to something.  When it does, the result is self
luminous consciousness of that something.  This is (the apparency of)
the kinetic.

      The apparency is actual, the represented kinetic is virtual.

      Thus nothing of substance is ever created or destroyed.  only the
static, which is the true something of substance, changes state.

      The 'substance' of the static is not like the substance of the
kinetic, mass, energy, space or time.  In fact to the kinetic the
substance of the static looks like nothing.  But in fact it is the
kinetic that is nothing except a chameleon coat on the static changing
from off to glow in the dark.

      The kinetic is the body of the GodSoul itself luminescing in the
dark night of the void.

      Thus the static 'adorns itself with', 'dresses it self up with' or
'dons' the kinetic.

      The kinetic is a 'skin' to the static, but its a change in the
static's own skin, no new skin is added or deleted.

      But really the skin never comes off, as the skin IS the static, the
skin merely changes shades according to what the static is perceiving.

      As there is no space or time in the static, there can be no
distance between the static and its kinetic overcoat, thus although it
may look like you are here, and the kinetic is out there, it is more
useful to try to imagine you are looking into yourself as the static,
and seeing the kinetic deep inside you.  Thus the deeper you look into
yourself, the further away the kinetic you are looking at seems to be.

      The static does not permeate its mockups, the mockups permeate the
static.

      Thus permeation takes place by mere recognition that permeation has
already taken place and seeing it that way.

      The static natively sees itself AS a clear space with objects in
it.

      The kinetic vessel itself can try to mockup, but at no time is
anything but the static doing the mockup.

      The issue is always mocking up, because what ever you are suffering
from is always a mock up!

      If your preclear is a Black V, can't mockup anything, it is because
he is being his kinetic rather than his static.

      The kinetic can not mockup!

      His inability to be the static is mostly one of consideration of
alienation from the static, he can't duplicate what the creative intent
of himself as the static might be.

      And he is a little upset with it, whatever it is.

      Thus you might do well to run

      "Who or what would a static mockup?"

      "Who or what would a kinetic mockup?"

      The second question is questionable, because a kinetic CAN'T
mockup, but your preclear as a kinetic (body) is trying anyhow.  If your
preclear wants to mockup, he will have to do it as the static.

      In any case, each answer will be swamped with guardian dicoms,
preposterous, impossible, don't believe it, incredible, can't be, too
dangerous to know etc.

      Each dicom is powered and mocked up by an entity or cluster of
entities specific to that guardian dicom

      These need to be run as themselves, with

      "What are you, who are you, how many are you, you are real people!"

      Notice however, "Who or what would a static mockup" is a question,
and if you are asking questions, you are being the kinetic and not the
static, which is why question asking in session does not work in the
long run, only commands to item or not item.

      Statics do not ask questions.

      Statics mockup questions.

      A static doesn't have any questions.

      Particularly in the sense of needing to know answers.


      ORIENTATION POINT AND SYMBOL

      A static is an orientation point not a symbol.

      Orientation points create space, time and symbols.

      Symbols have mass, meaning and mobility and exist in space and
time, and move around in space and time.

      Orientation points exist above and before Q1.

      Q1 is: Theta has the ability to create space and locate objects in
it.  - LRH Axioms and Logics

      Orientation points operate from Q1 as their sole mode of operation.

      Symbols ask questions and seek answers, mostly as to their own
meaning or point in life, seeking the why to their ultimate demise.

      The fate of a symbol, continuing to be a symbol forever, without
respite or clearing or reclaiming itself as an orientation point, is
mystery, unknowableness and unconsciousness.

      The static which has no choice about living forever outside of time
relishes engaging in trying to die forever inside of time.

      Contacting that relish will go a long ways towards erasing this
cycle's dive into the apparent abyss of no return.

      The dive is just too beautiful to contemplate, so you have your
work cut out for you.

      An eternal God's effort to die forever is the hysterical
tragi-comedy of the century.

      If you do free the static, and well you should try when the time is
right, the static will eventually just go do it again after some rest,
and man he's back to the drawing board, this time he's going to make
sure no one gets him to spot anything about no relish.  Of course he
will fail and go free again, just to do it again, each time more grand
than the time before.

      Eternity is a long time to play trying to die forever and failing.

      The static dives by mocking up a composite of questions and answers
with the question seeking the answer.

      Basic goals on questions and answers might be something like:

      To know, to look for, to see where, to seek, to search for, to
find.

      There are more, I am sure you can find, er, uh, spot your own :)

      For a being who can look by knowing, knowing by looking is a
primary mechanism for sinking himself forever in time.

      The game is 'This time, time has to last forever no matter what!'

      Fat chance.

      Each goal powers a question.

      Thus asking a lot of questions of the preclear gets him to mock
himself up more as a symbol rather than as an orientation point, thus he
gets massier, more full of meaning and significance, and more mobility,
which manifests as LESS ability to move anywhere other than where he is.

      The static is unmovable because it is zero dimensional, there is no
where to move.

      A kinetic that can't move is imprisoned in its own considerations
of counter kinetics.  Too much mobility therefore leads to not being
able to go anywhere.  Stuck forever in a prison of motion.

      Thus a kinetic seeking to become the static by being a kinetic,
using more and more effort and try harder etc, will become more and more
imprisoned in the APPARENCY of a static, a kinetic with so much motion
that it can not move.

      A straight jacketed bug in amber.

      On the other hand asking the preclear to become the static doesn't
work either, because the static is a nothing there.

      But the static is a nothing there whose sole purpose, aside from
doing nothing for unfathomable eons, is to put something there.

      Or worse the preclear tries to approach the static as a kinetic,
big efforts to be or conceive a static.

      Talk about a total waste of time, why would you ever use time to
approach or recover timelessness?

      Doing so, he runs into huge barriers of kinetics that are 'bigger'
than him, things he wouldn't couldn't, shouldn't mockup.

      As a kinetic, he can't really mockup anything of import anyhow, so
when he runs into something bigger than he is, he can't mock it up again
to duplicate it, because it's got more stuff (space time motion) than he
does.

      This is overwhelm.

      On the other hand if the preclear would simply flip over to the
static side of the overwhelming barrier, then he is suddenly bigger than
anything that could ever be, and he can come back into the kinetic
mocking up the barrier with full power.  Then he can let go of that, and
the barrier will cease.

      This is how to get out of an overwhelm.

      All overwhelms are kinetics that are bigger or more powerful than
the kinetic the preclear is presently being.  If the preclear approaches
the overwhelm as a kinetic, he will lose.  If the preclear approaches
the overwhelm as a static, he will be able to recreate the overwhelm in
its full glory, and glory it is, and then vanish it if he wants to.

      Glory and humility are the flow from static to kinetic because it
always succeeds.

      Shame and humiliation are the flow trying to get from kinetic back
to static because it always fails.

      The way out is the way in.

      Trying to get out, puts you in.

      Trying to come in, puts you out.

      It couldn't ever be any other way.

      The creature can become the creator by BEING the creator becoming
the creature.

      The kinetic can become the static by BEING the static becoming the
kinetic.

      There is being and there is becoming.

      The static is being, the kinetic is becoming.

      Practice creating becoming (entering into time), creates not
becoming (being out of time), because you have to not be becoming (be
out of time) before you can create becoming (enter into time).

      The static is always at its best when it is creating the kinetic,
thus the way to become the static, is to be the static becoming the
kinetic.

      It's the TRANSITION that counts, because it gives you both sides of
the transition at once.

      And that is power, ability and flow.

      Wanting just the kinetic won't work.

      Wanting just the static won't work.

      Wanting the static to become the kinetic will work.

      This is where desire is sovereign.

      When the kinetic tries to command the static, things come a
cropper.

      Thus the being has to decide to be the static and not the kinetic
in order to mockup.

      But he won't simply be the static and that's it bud.

      He doesn't WANT to be the static.

      He WANTS the kinetic, but he wants NEW kinetic.  Thus you have to
get him to be the static that is mocking up new kinetic.

      Watch out, you get this working on a preclear, and everything he
looks at will have all kinds of new stuff all over it.  If you don't
want to change, make sure he doesn't look at you!

      But who or what would a static mockup?

      Notice however that by asking the question you are being the
kinetic.

      But you can ask the preclear to BE the static BECOMING the kinetic.
That will give him both, in equal balance, under his control.

      The static already knows who or what a static would mockup, not as
an answer to the question, but as a basic native ability to mock it up.

      If he is still thinking about it, or wanting to know what he will
mockup as a static once he gets there, he is being a kinetic 'need to
know before he goes' case.

      Shoot him, it's probably less painful.

      So if you are still asking the question, you are being the kinetic
rather than being the static.

      This is a straight forward application of Q1:

      Theta has the ability to create space and locate objects in it.

      More to the point is to place objects IN MOTION in space and time,
in particular objects that are moving in 'causal' relation to each
other.

     Don't just mock up a ball in motion, have the pitcher throw the
ball, have the player hit it with the bat, have the ball go flying out
over the park etc.  Mocking up objects and motion without apparent
causation between them, makes it way too obvious the static is
orchestrating the whole thing, and all the kinetic goes poof back into
vanishment.

     To really keep it there, there has to be cause postulated between
the objects that make them move in space and time.

     To vanish the whole thing, simply take the postulation of causation
back and notice the orientation point orchestrating the whole thing as
if there is cause between the kinetic objects.

     Poof, what kinetics?

     The static HATES that.

     Kinetics without postulated cross cause between objects just won't
persist long enough to play a game with.

     The meatball theory considers that mocking up is a secondary
function or result of, whatever originally created things.

     "God or chemistry made me and he gave me the ability to mockup!"

     Whereas the dreamball theory says that the original act of creation
was itself the act of mocking up.

     And therefore down in the world of the kinetic, when you are
mocking up, you are engaging in creation all over again as the static.

     How do you know if its the static or the kinetic making a mockup?

     The kinetic can only mockup something that is old.

      The static can only mockup something that is new.

      Spot what a static would mock up.

      Spot what a static wouldn't mock up.

      E/P Mockups turning on again.

      Fasten seatbelts.

      Homer

------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Sep  1 01:39:10 EDT 2010