Here is another amazing process, can run solo or dual.

      Have pc spot area of greatest interest, non sovereignty and


      "What's it NOT?"

      Now this is important, the pc will avoid all the well trained
answers that he "believes" it *IS*, he's gotta be willing to throw all
the righteous training out the door and say "Nope its not that either!"
Engrams, secondaries, locks, GPMS, BT's, masses, charge, whatever his
favorite "But it *MUST* be" is, he's finally got say "It's not that!"

      If he goes by the actual correct item, he will come back to it fast
enough.  Mostly lots of relief and loosening up happens and its starts
to run in a new unit of time.

      There are indications that, at the very top of the tone scale, one
of the first games the thetan plays with his mind is creating know about
-> not know, then questions, then answers.

      Thus his whole existence consists of "What's It?"

      Since this is denying total responsibility for not knowing and
having to ask the question in the first place, it builds mass and
eventually sinks the thetan.

      Since most of auditing is just more "What's It?" on a massive
scale, one can see how this might be a bad thing.  It's a limited
process in any case, run for a while but not forever at a time.

      Now down below the thetan gets into conflicts with himself and he
asks "What's It?" knowing full well he doesn't want to know the answer
to the question.

      This is an AND, wanting to know and not wanting to know at the same
time forever, for free.

      He can't do just one, he HAS to do both at the same time, he is
reaching with a ridge of do and don't do at the same time.

      So lower level auditing that brings his confront back up to where
he DOES in fact get the correct "What's It?" on all the stuff he second
guessed himself into the ground purposefully, will in fact help him

      A second guesser is someone who almost always get the right answer
to a question the first time, but then says, no wait a minute, and goes
off into a a whole littany of wrong answers and finally settles on the
worst wrong answer they can.

      With good AND handling he will stop thinking by "reaching with his

      Reaching by not reaching.

      A person who has had all his AND's cleared is willing to know
and/or not know again, and so he usually gets the right answer the first
time, and doesn't second guess it for long.

      However at some point all his "What's It?" will bog down because
the original mental mass created by asking questions in the first place
will key in and *THAT* stuff is unauditable with "What's It?" because
the answer is *TOO MUCH "WHAT'S IT?"!*

      At the top of the tone scale one answers questions by not knowing
the answer until the not know blows and the prior created answer
appears again.

      That's the definition of magic.

      So running "What's it NOT?" can lead to great relief on this

      Any answer will do, even right answers, especially sacred cow

      Sacred cow answers are "MUST BEs", "MUST BE TRUEs".

      Right answers of course are the most sacred cow answers there are,
so right into the thrashing bin with them along with the rest.

      The pc will come up with a lot of 'thinking the unthinkable
thought' on this.  "Oh my God I don't dare *SAY* that!" Eventually he
will see even right answers turn out to be garbage because ultimately
what it is, is not a "What's it?" nor an answer to a "What's it?"

      The pc who hasn't gotten word one of this posting will then say
"Well if it's not a "What's it?", WHAT IS IT THEN?"

      What's the sound of one answer questioning?


- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith   Clean Air, Clear Water,  Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959       A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY  Is that too much to ask?

================ ====================
Wed Dec  3 03:06:01 EST 2014
Send mail to saying help
================== ===================
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.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

Mon Dec  8 16:42:34 EST 2014