SOLO VS DUAL Just try to understand the situtation. You are in a universe. The universe has a swamp in it. The swamp has a car in it. The car has your body in it. Your body has YOU in it. Then YOU now create and HAVE a restimulatable facsimile of all of the above. So you got a universe, and then a copy of that universe. So does your body and 10 to the gobzillion BT's and Clusters, that are in your space and make up your body and extend out to the edges of the universe. And as if being in the universe is not bad enough, you also have a fair chosen need to stick the facsimile copy of your condition in the universe on your self as a key-in in this life as a solution to a problem, so: You are now also in a facsimile of a universe, with a swamp in it, with a car in it, with a body in it, with you in it. Universe plus facsimile of universe, get it? Lower dual auditing tries to audit either 1.) the key-in moment of the facsimile in this life as a useful service faccimile, one you are using to service yourself, or, 2.) the creation moment of the facsimile many lifetimes ago. when the original universe incident originally happened. or, 3.) the original incident in the universe itself, not the facsimile that was made. Auditor: "Go to the beginning of the incident, grind your nose flat with it, tell me what happened (running the incident is another incident!), go to the beginning, grind your nose..." etc until flat or erased. Solo auditing using causal conception says: Get the idea of a universe. Get the idea of a swamp. Get the idea of a car. Get the idea of a body. Get the idea of you. Repeat until too ludicrous to consider. That will run the creation of the universe and the creation of the facsimile. Now get the idea of needing an excuse that is convincing, which will also help you run your life FOR YOU so you can just sit back and let it drive. Get the idea of not needing an excuse that is convincing, and driving your own life. Run until you can make needing or not needing an excuse, either way just by conceiving and unconceiving of it. That runs the USE of the facsimile in this life. You will probably have to alternate between running the creation of the facsimile and the USE of the facsimile, that puts you WAY down the whole track, then up here in this life, then WAY down the whole track, then up here in this life, and causes a loosening up of being able to move on the track, because each lock up on the track consists of TWO pieces of track. The first piece of track is when and what was created long ago, and the second piece of track is when and why it was keyed in during early babyhood. All case incidents were created in one moment of time and used later in another moment of time, so you will have to deal with a unflattened mess of two moments of time making the present time chronic somatic in your face. As usual every incident has a WHAT, WHY, WHEN, and also a WHO and HOW MANY. What happened, why it happened and when it happened. But there is also the key-in in this life: What was keyed in, why it was keyed in and when it was keyed in, (pre speech). Also more generally we can say: The PAST is WHAT was keyed in. The PRESENT is HOW it is being keyed in. The FUTURE is WHY it is being keyed in. The agency that makes it all work is all in present time. That agency, you, is concerned about the future, and has access to the past, and is using the past to excuse the future in present time. So auditing your FUTURE will blow the service fac into sight. Get the idea of NO FUTURE. Get the idea of SOME FUTURE. Also the service fac USE is undoubtedly yours, the facsimile itself is almost assuredly not, stuff that has happened to you is almost never too convincing, but stuff that has happened to others or you did to others is stomach curdling and anyone will accept it as the 'Poor Dear You!' that you seek, just so they don't have to conceive it any more. The best facsimile to use against your parents is one taken from a universe THEY have never been in, that gives them the thought "Wow, no one could make this up!" Thus there are multiple ownerships in each squash in the face somatic, just as there are two times. And then there are God knows how many earlier similars until you get to basic basic of conceiving being an effect, ruin, disaster, catastrophe, hysteria, shock, catatonia, oblivion and gone. Down below nonexistence the being will be found to be circling around in Luck, Chance, Fortune, Destiny and Fate. High Reponsibility cases in other words. Just run them top down. Get the idea of NO LUCK. Get the idea of SOME LUCK. Maybe add GOOD and BAD to them. Get the idea of NO GOOD FORTUNE. Get the idea of SOME GOOD FORTUNE. Get the idea of NO BAD FORTUNE. Get the idea of SOME BAD FORTUNE. Run them all. The guy who "can't make mockups", this is what he isn't making. E/P Inkling of total responsibility. But for God's sake don't forget QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, these keep the bank totally stirred up and hard as a suppressed rock. WHO, HOW, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, WHY, WHICH, IS IT, DOES IT? etc. Run all of them on trying to answer a question, and trying to question an answer, run them out of every incident you find, as it is the seeking questions and answers that ultimately cause CONTINUANCE of anything created. So you mockup an blue elephant, who cares. But then you start mocking up questions about the elephant. Mocking up means causally conceiving. Whose elephant is it? How did that elephant get here? What kind of elephant is it? Where the hell am I that there should be a blue elephant there? Why is that elephant blue? Which elephant is this? Is this really an elephant or what? You see? NOW you have an elephant that not even Ron Hubbard could get rid of. 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 > Solo processing the more difficult parts of case is like you >pulling your car out of the swamp, with a rope. Homer Said: No, its worse than that, its like you putting the universe and the swamp and your car there, and then running the car intentionally into the swamp enough times to get the ludicrosity of it and it vanish as if it never happened. Solo is a top down activity. Dual is a bottom up activity. Homer Fri Dec 4 19:42:43 EST 2015 ================ http://www.clearing.org ==================== Fri Feb 10 12:06:02 EST 2017 WEB: http://www.clearing.org BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore988.memo Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body =========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof =============== Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty. Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect. Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty. Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFYnfL7URT1lqxE3HERAoV/AKCxXA/FrXMtiIa3trKwrC1H7IJtcQCcCAU1 JTtM61oqG9inCFqBiS3oT0M= =u62N -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Fri Feb 10 16:27:35 EST 2017