Technical Essay # 27 - FAF 17 January 1991

The Spiritual Surfer

3D Clearing

 

There are some important principles that provide the key to solving the 3rd dynamic.

First of all, there are some inconsistencies in the typical picture of what an OT is.

It is true that one is fully creating one's own reality. It is true that postulates make things happen. It is true that a being can be fully cause. However, this all happens at a very high level. Charted along the dynamics it would be the 6th or 7th dynamic viewpoints.

We are all operating to some extent on all dynamics simultaneously. However, fully assuming the viewpoint of a higher dynamic requires a gradual process of expanding across the lower dynamics. That is roughly what we call the bridge.

Attempting to operate exclusively on the 6th or 7th dynamic when one doesn't know how to handle the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th bypasses all the case on these dynamics. That is not only not very workable, it also can produce nasty side effects. Another way of saying it is that exteriorization and havingness isn't balanced.

I am not saying, of course, that one shouldn't make postulates and create things. I am just saying that one doesn't get on top of that unless one goes through what one needs to go through. One doesn't get directly from total effect to total cause without looking at all that is in between. Unless one in some twisted way goes out the bottom, and that is not what we had in mind with the bridge.

Now, what can we really expect in clearing the 3rd dynamic? What we are looking for is ways of sorting out the ability to start, change, and stop activities, games, groups. We are trying to get someone to confront the barriers to doing that, to as-is them, and to regain the ability to comfortably and naturally do it.

Notice that 1st through 4th dynamic mostly deal with effects, 5th through 8th mostly deal with causes. So, on the lower dynamics we are not overly concerned with the ultimate causes of things. They are not quite available anyway.

Life on a broad scale can be regarded as consisting of flows or waves. Above the low level significances, mass, and experiences in life there are conceptual flows. That is, above the detailed phenomena that can be observed there are vectors. Things are moving in certain directions.

To get activities to come out right in the universe one has to evaluate the existing vectors, find the optimum point to operate from, and align vectors in the desired direction.

In other words, one gets something done most effectively by taking all existing forces into consideration, choosing the path of least resistance, and aligning the forces in a more optimum direction.

One does not get something done very easily in this universe by ignoring all existing vectors and postulating arbitraries. That requires an unfathomable amount of horsepower and it isn't the agreed upon way of playing the game. As a matter of fact it isn't playing the game at all.

The key to operating successfully in this universe is to find, use, and optimize the flows in it. Maneuvering on the path of least resistance in the direction one wants to go. Or, to use a suitable metaphor: skillfully riding the waves.

A skilled surfer uses the existing flows to his advantage. He selects the waves that have potential, he puts himself in the most optimum position, aligns the existing forces, produces the result he wanted, and has a great experience in the process.

The surfer doesn't create the waves. As a matter of fact, it would spoil the fun if he first had to engineer some waves, plan their path, and then follow them.

The waves & surfer analogy goes quite deep. We can learn quite a bit about life through it.

Energy is very important in this universe. A great many phenomena, including clearing, can be described in terms of energy. All flows and vectors are basically energy. Energy can take various shapes: flows, dispersals, or ridges. Energy has other attributes such as frequency, wave forms, amplitude. Flows have direction. Ridges have degrees of compressedness. Matter is basically ridges: compressed energy, standing waves.

There is a whole mathematical and physics base to waves, so-called Wave Mechanics or Wave Theory. All of it can be very useful for understanding the universe.

The subject of resonance can be taken to wider analogies. Resonance is when two or more waves interact to get into a common agreement that produce a resulting wave much more powerful than the simple sum of the waves. They hit the right note and suddenly out of apparently disorganized randomness rises a new organized force. That is what lets an opera singer shatter glass by hitting the right note.

Now, lets take a group of people and put them in the same room for some purpose. Sometimes such a group will align with each other and produce marvelous results. Sometimes they will be in wild disagreement and produce nothing. Why is that?

We could apply the idea of resonance here. A group that gets into alignment and produces something gets into resonance. The vectors and frequencies of each member somehow get to align and the result will be a new vector bigger than any of the individual vectors.

If you can achieve resonance in a group you can accomplish something with it. If you can't - you can't.

So what does it take if you want to produce alignment in an area? You need to observe and evaluate the existing vectors and characteristics. Then you need to assume the location, vector, or characteristic that will produce resonance. If you do that, alignment will "magically" result and cooperation will be very easy.

So, how do you win the lottery, how do make a successful business, how do you change the world? Same way. You need to spot the flows that are involved. You need to observe which ways things are going. You need to get in on the line exactly where you can produce the maximum effect with the minimum effort. You need to present your own vector in a manner that aligns the greatest number of vectors in the desired direction.

So to become more of an operating thetan, the route is towards maximum result with minimum effort. Not towards maximum effort with minimum result, and not towards minimum result with no effort.

Maximum result with minimum effort is what is known as "leverage" in the business world. Many successful people intuitively understand it very well. "Do more with less".

It is also the principle of several types of martial arts: judo, jiujitsu, etc. You use the existing forces to accomplish your objectives with minimal exertion of effort.

The attempt here is to unify these concepts into their philosophical and spiritual basis. There are some inherent characteristics of the universe that open the door to successfully operating in it. There are some flows going on, and one will accomplish more by using and aligning them than by rejecting them. And I don't mean agreeing with them. I mean: noticing them, using them, coordinating them, changing them.

The way of conquering the universe is from within. This is where the game is being played. One has to confront and work with what is there.

Flows happen between terminals. Energy flows if we put up two terminals in firm positions with space between them. That is the way electricity is created: two terminals kept apart from each other. Mastering the use of flows requires a practical understanding of this. How flows are started, changed, or stopped.

One can of course not only use existing waves and flows. One can create new ones if one knows how it is done. And those new waves and flows can interact with the existing waves and flows for the optimum effect.

The dwindling spiral can be described in terms of energy. The phenomenon of entropy is a physical universe manifestation of it. It means that the potential of energy gradually get spent. Energy that can flow will flow, will gradually use its power, and will eventually be evenly spread over the universe with no more potential power.

If the phenomena of generation of energy are mastered it can and will reverse the physical and spiritual entropy. What is involved is the creation of new terminals and the imposition of space between them. That is most correctly associated with the 4th dynamic, categories of beingness. In other words the dwindling spiral is finally reversed with the mastering of the 4th dynamic. If one is not up to handling the first 4 dynamics one is subject to dwindling spirals. Beyond that point one doesn't have to be.

As regards to the third dynamic, the best approach is the rehabilitation of the ability to ride on the flows.

Notice that we aren't talking about "going with the flow". We are talking about "riding on the flow". Those are two different things. That is a little trap built into the 3rd dynamic. "Going with" the flow is an effect viewpoint.

Tech that it is useful to know here are:

¥ Data series evaluation, which is basically the method of finding the optimum spot to work at

¥ PR Tech, about surveying and using existing vectors

¥ Admin tech, about setting up fixed terminals and lines and coordinating different vectors

¥ Energy theory: Scientology 8-80 type of stuff, plus wave mechanics

Clearing-wise we need to bring a person up to an awareness of and command of a simultaneous multitude of vectors, flows, and forces.

In order to do that we first have to have cleared lower level flow phenomena. That is, the person shouldn't have reactive flows internal to himself, i.e. 1D charge. He shouldn't experience reactive flows when dealing with individual others, i.e. 2D charge. If these things have been taken care of, the being should be able to start perceiving 3D flow phenomena directly.

3D flows aren't words, or even communication. They are conceptual energy phenomena. One has to become able to see them as such. Trying to hit the right words is not part of the trick.

How one goes about restimulating and clearing charge in this area is not quite clear yet. That is subject to further development. One thing that comes to mind though is that the ability to logically evaluate is central. So anything that blocks logic should be addressed. General perception drills should fit in also. And exercising the ability to conceive of many directions at the same time.

Catch a wave. Surf the universe.

Technical Essay # 28 - FAF 17 January 1991

Traps

 

There are some traps appearing in each of the dynamics. These are concepts that can appear to be the same but aren't. One is the way up, the other is the way down. There might be many of those, but here are some candidates.

 

1: Be effect vs Experience the effect

1st dynamic clearing is about becoming able to experience any effect. It is not being the effect. On the contrary it is experiencing the effect as something different from you. Whatever the effect is it isn't you. We are trying to get the individual to realize that he is creating the experiencing of any effect by himself. So the way through this is not by just letting things happen and not caring. It is about being able to actively experience anything.

2: You need to handle other's case vs Granting others beingness

On D2 you come into contact with others and their case. You need to be able to allow what is there to be there and to confront the 2D aspects of case. However, that doesn't mean that you have to handle their cases for them. You can't fully handle somebody else's 1D. You can only inspire them to handle it themselves by your application of 2D or 3D tech. To successfully clear 2D you have to have the ability to let people be what they are. You have no business operating other people's dynamics for them. That's what implanting attempts.

3: Go with the flow vs Ride the flow

D3 can now be looked as relating to the ability to recognize and utilize flows and vectors. That is however not the same as "going with the flow" which is an effect viewpoint. What is required is operation, not passive consent.

4: You are a character vs You use a character

The subject of personality and character seems to fit on D4. One could assume the idea that when one clears away valences one becomes "oneself", a thetan with a certain character. As a matter of fact that is just another high level "service fac". Any character is an assumed character. Any personality characteristic is assumed. Identifying with it will only stop it from being inspected.

5: Your attention is where you are vs You are where your attention is

You can be wherever your attention is. To "go" somewhere you just need to put your attention there. As a matter of fact that is all there is to locating oneself. However it doesn't necessarily work backwards. Just because you "are" somewhere doesn't mean that all your other attention must be in that location. That is a basic for the subject of restimulation by time and location. A little tricky to understand, but the two views of attention are very different.

6: Thetans are creators not created vs I create you & you create me

One could regard a being as the creator of things, itself not having been created. That is a half truth, it doesn't provide the full solution to resolving it. There wouldn't be other thetans there for you unless they were created by you. And you wouldn't be there for them unless they had created you. It goes both ways. Any being in a universe is both created and is creating others. That can be said about any speck of "theta" in a universe. Now, the real "you" isn't any of that anyway, it is beyond both creators and creations.

7: I am really a static vs Whatever I am I am not

The real you isn't anything. If it was it wouldn't be you. Whatever is limited isn't really you. And even a static source point is in the final evaluation a limitation to overcome.

8: All is one vs All is infinity

"All is one" is a common idea of D8 in the new age community. It is attractive because it is apparently close to the truth. However it is quite opposite to it. There is an 8D where one can be "all". But that is infinity, it isn't one. There isn't really oneness, there is infinite-ness. And we can and do all meet in infinite-ness. Doesn't make us all one, quite on the contrary. Makes us either zero or infinity, whichever way one looks at it.

Technical Essay # 29 - FAF 19 January 1991

What to Clear

.. and what not to clear

 

Clearing is about eliminating unwanted barriers.

This fits in with the view of life as a game. A game has goals, freedoms, barriers, and players. If a game doesn't have these things it isn't a game. To have a game we need these elements present in an optimum combination that makes for an exciting game.

In this universe there are a lot of extra, unwanted distractions. That is, a lot of factors that don't contribute to having an exciting game. Noise, basically. A wealth of aberrated sub-games, old stuck games, sabotaged games, unknown games, unbalanced games, and so forth.

We are addressing all these undesired distractions. We are trying to enable beings to play the games they choose, to know exactly what they are doing, and to not have to play unwanted games.

Where clearing stops is where the being is playing the exact game(s) he chooses. Those games are played in life. They are finished by actually playing them. In life, not in session.

So, what we want to clear is undesired, distracting game elements.

That is important, because one can make the mistake of clearing what one really wants to keep.

That sounds very obvious, and it is. However, it has often been overlooked.

It depends on where one starts, which entrance point one uses into clearing. Do you start with something desired or with something undesired.

If you clear what is connected with a desired element, you are likely to as-is what makes it persist. And it will disappear! You tend to lose your desired game element.

If you put the attention on undesired elements and you clear those away, well then those are the ones that will disappear. That is probably a better idea.

Now, we can do clearing both negatively or positively.

Negatively, we can locate and erase occurrences of a certain type of phenomenon that aren't desired. We find out exactly where it is, when it is, what it is, who made it, and so forth. That will produce as-isness. There will no longer be an issue there.

Positively, we can exercise what one really wants to do and thereby deflating the value of any distractions or contrary vectors. We directly make the being better able to play the games he wants, and anything contrary to that will tend to drop out of sight.

In other words, desirable elements are drilled and improved in a positive way. Undesirable elements are viewed as exactly as possible, so that they will vanish or at least go out of sight, negative clearing. As discussed previously positive and negative need to be balanced throughout one's path of clearing.

Putting attention on desired elements and then doing negative clearing is quite risky. Even if we ask for what is blocking the desired elements we run the risk of clearing away something that shouldn't have been cleared.

Going up the bridge the person's attention will naturally shift from negative phenomena to positive aspirations. So, if we just follow the person's attention and clear what is there, it is going to work fine at first, but on the higher levels we might end up clearing the wrong thing.

At the higher levels it takes a bit more work to locate something undesirable. It is not necessarily right there in front of one's face, one has to go out and look for it. One has to work at restimulating something, going out of one's way to find something one doesn't want to deal with.

Let's look at the main methods of finding something to clear for the first dynamic case band.

D1:   We look for stuff the pc has difficulty experiencing. That is material that he can't remember, is embarrassed about, is opposed to, has committed overts against, has service facs about, that has overwhelmed him in the past, and so forth. We simply need to bring up a subject and see if he gets a reaction to it. We keep doing that until, ideally, he doesn't react on subjects.

D2:   If we have already cleared D1 we need to do something more drastic to bring up some charge. It is not enough to just mention a subject. We need to bring him in contact with other beings and viewpoints of different kinds. When some undesirable game element appears we will clear it. We will continue doing that until he can interact with any being or viewpoint without the appearance of something unwanted.

D3:   Here the keyword is undesired activities, groups, and games. Is the guy involved with some activities and vectors he doesn't really want. Distractions. That is what we are going to clear. When we have cleared what he immediately knows of, we will bring him into contact with new activities, vectors, flows, groups, games until he can handle any of them.

For the first four dynamic areas the watchword is apparently resistance. One is resisting something undesired: experiences, interactions, activity flows, or categorization. The main thing one has to learn is how to be transparent under any conditions while one is doing exactly what one wants. If any effects can go "right through you" at your option you can be free to position yourself to have the game you want.

The last four dynamics probably have a different underlying principle. Maybe persistence, I don't know.

Technical Essay # 30 - FAF 29 January 1991

Boosters and Bridge Actions

 

Several actions on the traditional bridge are boosters that are used out of their logical place in order to make the routine levels run faster and more smoothly. Looking at it by dynamic again provides a clue to what that really means.

Power is a 5D booster used on 1D. We are dealing with attention that is stuck, an inflexibility of viewpoint. Full command and freedom of attention and viewpoints are accomplished by clearing 5D. However, it is very useful to remove some stuckness in that area before. On Power we blow apart the main stuck areas in time and location.

On Date/Locate we also address attention and viewpoints to blow something free. It can't be called a booster, but it really builds on higher dynamic charge than where it is used. Notice that we are only attempting a release with D/L, the actual clearing happens on 5D.

Valence or Identity handling is a 4D booster used on 1D, 2D or 3D. For example in the Ls L10 addresses 1D, L11 2D and L12 3D, roughly. But, we don't go all the way and clear personalities and categories of beingness. We only do just enough to free up the current level of the pc. Same thing with XDN, LX lists and so forth. They are boosters.

Now, very interestingly, entity handling is a 7D booster used on 2D. We've got some confusion of sources that can incapacitate one's abilities to deal with life as it is. We handle the phenomenon until the person can concentrate on where he is at. But it can be overrun. We don't have a chance of fully clearing its basics at that point.

Implant handling, like on CC or OT2, is a 4D, 5D, 6D, 7D action done for 2D.

Attention unit recovery, like on the Phoenix, is a 5D subject used as a booster on 3D. Running it further than unblocking one's ability to act provides a potential danger. The person is not ready to recover full command of his attention.

Creation handling, as in OT12&13, is a 6D handling given on 3D. Same thing goes there, it is a booster.

The Grail is a 5D unsticking done for 3D purposes.

Exteriorization drills are 5D actions used to booster 2D and 3D.

Well, I'll be darned, there goes most of our OT levels. They are all boosters that might be useful where they are at, but that aren't directly handling 2D and 3D as they were expected to. No wonder people have a hard time becoming Operation Clear.

That is not as bad as it sounds. The ultimate causes of things are always found in the higher dynamic areas. What we are trying to do on lower dynamics is to attain a flexibility in the area so that one is bigger than case manifestations on that level. E.g on the grades we look at the phenomena of life from very many different angles until one is flexible in all of those areas.

To clear 2D or 3D we would need to look at their phenomena from as many angles as possible. To bring up subjects and clear them in as many different ways as possible until the person gains the ability to see it all for what it is and to act unhindered in those areas.

We do some of that on the existing operation levels. But not in anything near the systematic way we use on lower levels. And there is the additional factor that 2D and 3D charge isn't easily restimulated in a 1D solo session.

What would really be needed are a series of grades for D2 and D3. Subjects belonging in those dynamic areas that one needs to master to handle that dynamic. Orienting the chart around such areas is much safer than trying to fully handle more advanced areas prematurely.

The rundowns that address higher level subjects before their time for booster purposes should be recognized and labeled as such.

Any higher dynamic subject can be brought up before its time if it will boost the clearing of a lower dynamic. However, it will always be a limited process at that time. In its correct place it is an unlimited process, at least until such point where that dynamic area is fully cleared.

 

Technical Essay # 31 - FAF 29 January 1991

Secrets of the Universe

This universe is built on certain underlying principles. The understanding of these principles is necessary to ultimately make sense out of phenomena here. There are a great many phenomena and principles, but some of them are more important than others in that they provide much of the persistence and trickery that is possible here.

These are some of the basics of trickery:

¥ The universe is built on gradient scales. Infinity valued logic is required to evaluate here.
¥ The gradient scales aren't really gradient scales. They are just as much cycles of action and manifestations of balance. And vice versa, cycles of action and balanced triangles aren't exactly what they seem either.
¥ The gradient scales have circular reference. You end up where you start in one fashion or another.
¥ What you reach for will withdraw from you. What you withdraw from will reach for you.
¥ You can't be cause over anything you aren't effect of, and vice versa.
¥ Mobius flows. Any flow in any direction will end up being the opposite if continued long enough.
¥ You can only see what you aren't looking at. You don't have what you can see.
¥ The universe is holographic. Any part of it describes the whole.
¥ Anything in the universe is dynamic, but the ultimate truth is static.
¥ Gradient scales have harmonics. The same patterns repeat inside each other ad infinitum.

To summarize:

Don't ask me what that means. I just wanted to write it up.

One can't be totally free as regards to the physical universe unless one can see its basic mechanics as they are. That is of course a subject of clearing on the sixth dynamic. The universe will persist for you automatically until you have sorted it out.

Much of philosophy can be learned or verified by observing physical phenomena. Many subjects of physics can be transferred to the subject of clearing.

Looking at things as energy phenomena is particularly useful. A cycle of action is a flow, a balance is a ridge, an expansion or ascension is a dispersal. Per quantum mechanics any particle can be regarded as a wave (a flow) or a particle (a ridge). And we can then guess that it can be regarded as a dispersal also. Wave theory provides insights into how things are done in this universe. The mathematics of relativity theory opens the door to understanding different dimensions and universes.

This just proves the point that philosophy and science add up to the same thing.

Technical Essay # 32 - FAF 1 February 1991

Order of Clearing

 

Let me expand a bit on what to clear and what not to clear.

For the purposes of playing games theta sub-divides into two parts, a known and an unknown. We can describe that a number of different ways: what one is responsible for, and what one isn't responsible for; what one is, and what one isn't; what one looks at, and what one doesn't look at; and so forth.

We can call this plus- and minus-theta. Basically the cycle is that theta as full knowingness decides to not-know something in order to create games and experiences of various kinds.

The dynamics can be said to represent various balances of know/not know, and as a gradual way of becoming able to experience all the stuff one has not-known.

Seen from above (higher dynamics) the urge is to not-know what one knows in order to create a life-game. Seen from below (lower dynamics) the urge is clear not-know and re-establish know.

Erasure is the conversion of a specific not-know into a know. A true know can not be erased.

Now, there are several kinds of not-know. The not-know could be said to be divided into two parts which are lower harmonics of know/not-know.

In any game there is a portion of
      know: goals, freedoms
and a portion of
      not-know: barriers, opponents.

Both the know and not-know portions of a game are ultimately created by not-knowing. Something had to be not-known to make goals and freedoms persist. And something had to be not-known to make barriers and opponents persist.

That gives us two directions of know/not-know.

This can be seen in relation to the coordinate system in TE#26 "Clearing Coordinates". There is know/not-know in at least two different directions. The vertical direction above could be said to correspond to Exteriorization and the horizontal direction to Havingness.

In session we are clearing unwanted vertical not-know. Thereby we optimize the life-game so that it is more playable. The horizontal know/not-know makes up the desired game we play in life, not in session.

Now, that tells us a great deal about what it would be desirable to clear. It also tells us what happens if we concentrate on clearing different aspects.

None of those three options produce a very desirable result, they all screw up the game in one fashion or another. None of them are desirable objects of clearing, in that they are all needed for a balanced game.

Again, what we want to clear is the undesired game elements. They follow the same pattern, the only difference being that they are unwanted.

Unwanted game elements can be manifested as unwanted know, that is unwanted goals or freedoms. They could be unwanted not-know, that is unwanted barriers or opponents. Or, they could be complete unwanted games. Spotting which category would contribute to clearing it.

If it is not quite obvious what we are trying to clear, the safest choice will always be to clear not-knows; barriers and opponents. If we ever try to clear a know we have to be very sure that it is unwanted.

So, what do we regard as unwanted? Remember, just because something is there doesn't mean we want to get rid of it. And if you did want to get rid of everything you should better start with the not-knows, anyway.

The most optimum order of clearing seems to be in the order of the dynamics and focusing on unwanted elements and leaving desired aspects alone, at least until such point where one is ready to be full cause over their creation.

Technical Essay # 33 - FAF 7 February 1991

Descent from Eternity

 

Eternally there is totality of all that might be. An infinity of ascending and descending infinities. Total knowingness of all potentialities.

Descension into actualities is accomplished by limitation of potentialities.

The first and highest actuality is the static. There is an infinity of statics. The static is total cause without reservation.

The static considers things to be and they are.

The entire purpose of cause is to produce effects. Cause creates a universe of effects. A universe is a collection of created effects. Creation involves reach and withdraw.

A universe is kept in existence by and is based on an illogic agreed upon to be in-duplicatable. All logic is based on illogic.

The universe of a static and the universes of any other statics can be are are brought to overlap by common creation. Thus a playing field is created that is commonly available to all contributors.

On the playing field many universes and dimensions are agreed upon.

Most universes have
the consideration of apartness which is space,
the consideration of potential which is energy,
the consideration of thereness which is matter,
the consideration of sequence which is time.
In universes viewpoints might or might not be required.

In this physical universe viewpoints are mandatory in order to participate.

The static creates viewpoints within and as part of the universe. Viewpoints are points from which to view. These viewpoints can again extend remote viewpoints.

Things are accomplished in this universe by the manipulation of a viewpoint and by the extension of remote viewpoints and dimension points. Dimension points are points to view.

Any viewpoint can also be considered a dimension point, and any dimension point can also be considered a viewpoint. Any point can both view and be viewed. Any part of the whole contains the whole. Opinion is the selection of viewpoint and the assignment of other points to be viewpoints or dimension points.

The static creates all other viewpoints and allows its own viewpoints to be created by all other viewpoints.

Viewpoints can and do interact. They can and do exchange remote viewpoints. Thus any interaction is possible.

Viewpoints can consider things. Thus thought occurs.

Viewpoints perceive space by considering dimension points as being apart.
Viewpoints perceive energy by considering dimension points as being different.
Viewpoints perceive matter by considering different dimension points to be similar.
Viewpoints perceive time by considering dimension points to change.

Combinations of viewpoints and dimension points construct any function and structure. Viewpoints monitor them through thought.

The action of a viewpoint is to construct, to observe, and to evolve. The urge of a viewpoint is to achieve ordered complexity.

The action of a dimension point is to be constructed, to be observed, and to decay. The urge of a dimension point is to achieve disordered simplicity.

The interplay between viewpoints and dimension points and the confusion between them accounts for all phenomena within the universe.

A viewpoint can assume a beingness or category of beingness. Thus a viewpoint takes on persistence and consistency. The viewpoint achieves beingness by identifying with a limited group of dimension points.

A beingness can associate with other similar beingnesses and engage in a game of common activity.

Through the activity the beingness engages and interacts with other beingnesses.

Finally the effects of life are experienced by the beingness.

Any situation of existence can be resolved by observing the experiences, interactions, activities, beingnesses, viewpoints, universes, sources, and potentialities involved and optimizing any concourse between them.

This description will likely be further evaluated and modified, but contains at this point a great deal of the basics of life, the universe, and everything.

 

Technical Essay # 34 - FAF 9 February 1991

Clearing and Programming

 

There are three main ways of dealing with charge:

The first method is the traditional focus of clearing. We try to erase or release any way we can charged material. That is what Clearing has its name from. That usually works fine at least initially. However, if that is the sole approach we might end up removing something that we actually needed to keep.

Pasting over the charge, suppressing it and putting a band-aid on top of it, is the approach of many other practices. For example that is typically what would be done in hypnosis. In stead of finding and clearing the causes of things, a new pattern is installed to override the unwanted one. That approach has some success, but is very limited. It can have a limited keying-out effect on existing charge, by at least pushing it out of sight. It is often also what we would do by applying ethics tech.

The third approach is to convert the charge to work in a more optimum way. Re-routing the flows to work for you instead of against you. Channeling the existing energies in a different direction. That is done with greater or lesser success in various types of therapies, such as Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) or psychology. It is also to a large degree what we would do by admin tech.

None of the three approaches are necessarily right or wrong for all situations. Each one has its use, also in our field. Depending on the charge, the area, the situation, the case level, and so forth, different approaches could be taken.

A piece of charge that is wholly unwanted and unnecessary would need to be removed. Determining if it falls into that category isn't always self-evident, however. Just because something is there doesn't condone removing it. Just because there is something unwanted about it doesn't mean immediately that it must go. Maybe the removal of it is not practical at that stage. Maybe it is just a twisted symptom of a very desirable underlying mechanism.

An unwanted behavior can come into being different ways. It might appear as the result of misunderstoods, confusing un-evaluated data, and mind overload. Following it back to its source we might realize that it doesn't have any reason for existing at all, and we would erase it as thoroughly as we can. Engrams are in this category.

A behavior might also start as a well-intended solution to something, a mechanism that does some work for us. It might have been an imperfect solution, or it is has become corrupted along the way, or it is now out-dated. If we erase that without looking too closely at it we might be left without any method of dealing with that part of life. It will often be more useful to track it back to its desired outcome, and it it is really desirable then direct it in a more optimum direction. Attention units, anchor points, and goals are often in this category.

The issue comes up if clearing should play a part in re-programming the mind. If the goal of clearing was to totally leave all games, everything would need to be erased in the appropriate order. However, if the goal is an optimized life-game there is a definite need for leaving mechanisms in existence. Some things need to persist in order to play the game effectively.

In that light clearing could be said to have a responsibility for removing unwanted programming or converting it into useful programming. And possibly even for creating new programming.

Abilities in the physical universe sense are something created, programmed, and persisting.

When you are able to speak English it is because you have learned sub-conscious programming that keeps track of the method of doing that. You wouldn't want to erase that, at least not while you haven't erased your need for operating in a human society. You would rather want to channel more abilities in that direction so you could speak better English. But when it really comes down to it the program for speaking English is made to persist in much the same fashion as unwanted mental charge is: the as-isness is altered to make it into an is-ness. The main difference is that it is a desired program.

When you put out anchor points or attention units to keep track of your space and the people, areas, and subjects you are associated with you do that to help you play the game better. You would do more poorly if you couldn't keep track of these things. But these anchor points and attention units might be misplaced, there might be too many of them, they have been altered and so forth. You would probably want to be cause over them and to optimize the way you use them.

There are situations, even in clearing, where the pasting-over method might be most appropriate. If a pc doesn't want clearing, and the reason for that is too far out of sight, you might very well handle the situation with PR or ethics and get him to agree to do it anyway. That doesn't clear anything, but it allows the process of clearing to take place. Likewise, the practice of disconnection in PTS handling doesn't really clear anything. But it might submerge the issue long enough so that the real charge can be cleared.

What I would like to suggest here is more awareness of the types of charge and the approaches for dealing with them. A much more optimum result can be accomplished by identifying charge correctly and doing the optimum action on it.

More understanding is needed about the area of positive programming. Drilling, exercises, and admin fits in here, but more subjective methods seem to also be needed.

Technical Essay # 35 - FAF 9 February 1991

Advanced Incident Clearing

Ideas

 

Incident Clearing can be addressed at body incidents or spirit incidents. That should be regarded as two different things and addressed in different ways.

Body incidents are pain and unconsciousness incidents from this lifetime or from a genetic track that are producing unwanted bodily feelings or reactions. They are part of the animal mind of the human species.

Spirit incidents are periods of un-inspected plus-randomity on any spirit track that are producing unwanted responses for the being. They might or might not have pain and unconsciousness.

The basic procedure for spirit incident clearing could be like this:

The end result of an incident clearing is the erasure of the reaction, the ability to look in the area, a conclusion about what was learned from the experiences in it, and the ability to experience that comfortably in the future.

The reason for unwanted effects of experience is the inability to handle the randomity involved. Too much randomity to experience what is going on, evaluate it, and learn from it. The handling is to experience the events more slowly, little by little, from all the different angles involved. Then one can experience what one couldn't experience in the first place. Further more it can be useful to bring up one's ability to experience that sort of lessons in a more optimum way in the future.

Positive Clearing improves the ability to handle life by learning lessons in advance and also thereby lessening the effect of any unlearned lessons on the subject matter.

 

Technical Essay # 36 - FAF 9 February 1991

Ways of Thinking

 

Looking at where thought "comes from" provides some insight into what it really is. I looked at that after running into some people who said they were channeling when they were giving lectures, and after hearing the theory that LRH channelled some of his material. None of that bothered me, but it made me think about where thought comes from.

There is a scale of thought going something like this:

Sub-human No thinking possible
Human being Reactive, introverted thought
  Analytical, figuring things out
  Responsive, extroverted action
Theta being Observation, change of viewpoint and considerations
Static being Postulation, making it up
Infinite God All possibilities known, no thinking necessary

Depending on who does the thinking, or which aspect of you, the process is different.

There is a level of thought below being human where independent thought isn't possible at all. There might be some higher sub-human grades covering the thinking of Lambda or Phi beings.

The lowest band of human thought is that performed by a reactive mind. Thinking by sub-consciously reacting on external or internal stimuli. Thought is only produced based on input and existing programming.

The next band involves an analytical approach. The available data are consciously evaluated into logical conclusions and contemplations. That is what most people would mean by "thinking". This method is limited by the data at hand.

Next kind of human thinking is thinking by action. Being responsive to what is going on in the environment and taking the most optimum steps. That is an operating being in the human sense. Seeing opportunities and taking advantage of them.

The way a free thetan thinks is by selecting a viewpoint, observing what is going on, and having considerations about it. There is no figuring out here, just a selection of what to look at from where and which consideration to assign to it.

A Static doesn't need to do that. It just makes up some truth, that is thought at that level. The thought is whatever it is, it doesn't relate much to anything else.

At the infinity level all possibilities are available. There is no point in deciding anything or finding anything out, all is known. This is the ultimate origin of all thought. Anything that can be thought or thought about is there, but no thinking is necessary.

Now, "think" about for a moment: If you suddenly get a bright idea, where does that come from?

These are the ways of producing thought. They do interact and integrate with each other. They have very different degrees of scope and power.

The process you used tell us which band of thought something is coming from. If you are mainly operating on the analytical band and you suddenly get a bright idea, then we can make some conclusions. If you didn't figure out that thought consciously, based on your data, well then it doesn't come from that band. It probably comes from a higher band, but it might come from a lower.

If you are not consciously aware of what you did to get the thought, then you got it by connecting with something else that did. A higher or lower aspect of yourself most likely. Or somebody else operating at any level of thought.

Getting data from the higher thought levels when you are operating on a lower level is what new age people call "channeling one's higher self". That is another way of saying that you as a thetan or as a static or as infinity have access to some things that you as a human being don't, and that you currently keep most of your attention on being a human.

Take for example the fact that I am sitting here in front of my computer writing about esoteric philosophical subjects. Is this something I have previously learned and am picking out of sub-conscious recordings? Mostly not; the way I word things probably is. Is it something I am logically figuring out from the data in front of me? Partly, but I don't have these kinds of data in front of me. I am sitting in a room with furniture and papers and a computer; no such advanced pieces of data are presenting themselves to my human sensory input. I have studied such subjects and use my learning to evaluate the data, but the data mostly come from somewhere else. Did I exteriorize as a thetan and go and look at some things? Yes, sometimes I do that, and I have learned a lot. But many other pieces of data just appear without it being clear how they came about. The likely place for them to come from is the theta, static, or infinity thought levels of myself or others.

Now, my point here is that no human being is gonna sit down and produce new, revolutionary philosophical ideas about spirituality and the universe by thinking as a human being. They are not part of the human frame of reference, they have to be found somewhere else. And, like it or not, that is a form of channeling unless it is done fully consciously.

What we are aiming at in clearing is to make all states of awareness available and optimized in their relationship. Until then it is assuring to know that they are already there and that one can visit them at times and that one can draw on their abilities.

Technical Essay # 37 - FAF 10 February 1991

Eight Steps to Divinity

 

The Road to Optimized Existence is roughly this:

1.   Clear away unwanted reactions and unwillingness to experience
2.   Learn to re-route and re-pattern the desires of self and others
3.   Gain the ability to generate new desires and vectors
4.   Assume the exact beingness one wants and none one doesn't want
5.   Become able to occupy any space or viewpoint
6.   Create your own universe
7.   Make, unmake, or adjust your postulates about existence
8.   Allow possibilities to appear as actualities

That is the mastering of the eight dynamics again. The new insight is on what it takes on D2 and D3.

D1 is about clearing unwanted reactions. We are mainly dealing with personal reactions here; automaticities one gets all by oneself that are in the way of experiencing life. And we are talking unwanted stuff: case one didn't ask for and has no need for. And what we do with it is to clear it, that is we erase or release the unwanted parts.

If we do that job well enough we are mostly done with internal reactions, we are mostly done with purely unwanted stuff, we are now fully able to experience. From that we can suppose that the next level is about something else.

On D2 we can no longer blindly suppose that everything is unwanted and must be deleted. Actually most unwanted responses are based on wanted patterns that have been mis-directed. Also, we are no longer talking about unknowing internal reactions, but more about responses to external situations. One still has certain ways of responding to the environment. These ways would mostly need to be aligned with each other and with the overall goals of the being, not to be erased. And we need to give the being the ability to route the patterns and responses of others and align with them when he so desires. In other words, this is about positive self-guidance and the ability to get along with others. Freedom from unwanted responses.

If D2 puts us on top of the flows and patterns that are already there, the next step up would be to make new ones.

D3 is then about generating new vectors of action. Positively constructing the direction things should move. That includes programming of mental patterns and desires, and it includes the ability to engage self and others in new activities. That means a high level of positive self-control and the ability to make an arbitrary stick. We are not really talking clearing of charge here, or even re-direction of existing forces. We are talking about how to start new abilities and activities.

See, this is quite a different view, and it moves us away from the strict meaning of clearing. Clearing unwanted charge in a session is only fully in its right for the D1 area. Going on with the next areas will likely bring up more unwanted reaction that would have to be cleared, but it wouldn't be the main line of address.

According to this the main focus of each area would be:

D1:   Unwanted Reactions - Remove them
D2:   Non-optimum Responses - Re-route them
D3:   Persisting activities - Generate them

Now, each dynamic has aspects of all other dynamics. For example, on D1 unwanted reactions can relate to interaction, groups, beingnesses, viewpoints, creations, postulates, or limitations and can be cleared. And on D2 any of those areas can produce non-optimum responses and can be rerouted. Or on D3 they can be generated to produce persisting activities.

One can also devise processes that include all dynamic aspects. For example a D1 incident handling could include the clearing of the blocked experience, unwanted reaction, re-routing of the related desires, generation of a new approach to the area, charting of the identities involved, seeing the incident from all viewpoints, observing which universe it is part of, finding postulates behind it, and recognizing the possibility sphere it is part of.

As a little aside, the dynamic areas can be described as harmonics of energy phenomena. Energy can appear as ridge, flow, or dispersal. There are cycles of these going through the dynamics as there are in most other scales, the tone scale etc. For this purpose a ridge is something persisting, clearing it or setting it up; a flow is something that needs to be channeled; a dispersal is the generation of something.

1 - Ridge: Persisting charge, automaticities, etc. Needs to be cleared.
2 - Flow: Own and others' directions and patterns. Need to be routed.
3 - Dispersal: Generating action patters.
4 - Ridge: How to set up persisting terminals.
5 - Flow: Moving and changing in space.
6 - Dispersal: Generating a universe.
7 - Ridge: Setting up persisting postulates.
8 - Flow: Channeling possibilities into actualities.

Clearing and optimizing the dynamics looks much more realistic now.

Technical Essay # 38 - FAF 25 February 1991

Ownership

 

The subject of ownership on OT levels is often mis-understood.

When one goes Clear one realizes that one is mocking it (case) up. It is an assumption of responsibility for case.

If one is to advance from that state it is logical to assume that one wishes to advance further up the various scales; that is further up towards pan-determinism, full responsibility which is 'create', full knowingness, source, and so forth.

Responsibility means 'the ability and willingness to assume the status of full source and cause for all efforts and counter-efforts on all dynamics.' or 'the determination of the cause which produced the effect', or 'to admit causing'.

Now, many preOTs forgot about these things when they started to assign other ownership to case.

When one is Clear one has cleared the case from one's own viewpoint. All further case will be held from other viewpoints and is therefore still persisting. To clear that case we need to take the viewpoint into consideration. We can no longer assume that it is seen from the preOTs viewpoint. It will almost exclusively belong with other viewpoints, that is, it is on higher dynamics.

If that is not taken into consideration the preOT will misown that charge, meaning that it won't as-is because he doesn't get the exact viewpoint.

That does not, repeat not, mean that the preOT isn't fully responsible for the case. As a matter of fact he put it all there himself. But not from his own viewpoint.

So, it is not all 'somebody else's' case. It is all from other viewpoints, but it is all your full responsibility.

If you run any scrap of case after clear without assuming responsibility for it - you are mis-owning case. You are on your way down in responsibility, not up.

Take the concept of entities. After clear we can regard any particle of case as a being, or more correctly as an alter-ised viewpoint. That is in the final evaluation something you created. By clearing it you will either as-is it or have it return to its appropriate position. However, if you regard it just as somebody else you need to get rid of you've missed the point.

Other people aren't stuck in your space, you didn't create them. What you created was representations of their viewpoints. They did the same thing in their universes. You can look at those viewpoints, see what is being held from that viewpoint, and thereby as-is unwanted persistences. If you as-is the viewpoint it often gives the impression of either blowing away from you, or coming back to you.

If you regard an entity as 'doing something against you, so you just need to get rid of it' you are not taking responsibility for it. Remember, responsibility means 'to admit causing.' An entity is a symptom, what is most interesting is 'How come you carry around entities?'.

If you have an unwanted phenomenon in your space, pointing out the viewpoint it is being held from is only half the story. You can throw that viewpoint away and get a temporary release. But if you don't take over the creation of that viewpoint you didn't finish it. That might or might not be done in conjunction with 'blowing' the viewpoint, but it must be done at some point.

Assigning ownership can be used as a way of escaping responsibility, but that is not its purpose.

If a preOT is committing overts he might establish that the intention to do that is associated with a certain entity or identity. That will help resolve it. However, that in no way releases him from the need to take responsibility for using that entity or identity.

Attacks from implant stations or postulate thetans, or influences from weird entities don't change the clear cog. You are mocking it up. Assigning other authorship is not valid as an escape, only as a tool in as-isness.

'Ownership' is a misleading word to begin with. 'Viewpoint' would probably be more appropriate.

Other viewpoints can be regarded as entities, identities, or attention units, it is still fundamentally the same thing we do with them.

OT level case is all your case on higher dynamics, it is not others' case.

Technical Essay # 39 - FAF 7 April 1991

References on Ownership

 

I figured some LRH references on ownership needed to be looked at since it seems to me that the concept has been subtly changed and mis-understood.

The definition on ownership in Tech Dix is:

If we are talking case, I guess that would mean that one owns one's case if one has havingness on it and keeps it.

A basic mention of ownership is Factor #20:

This tells us that in this universe things have been confused to a point where one can be dependent on, or be effect of other viewpoints or their dimension points. Failure to distinguish ownership brings about a dependency. We can then assume that recognition of the correct ownership brings about a resolution of the dependency.

Factor 20 basically says for practical purposes that one is dependent upon other viewpoints and upon dimension points, but that it really is just a mix-up.

In life in the physical universe we can use statements like "Joe hit me and now my jaw hurts" or "I need to have my vitamins every day" as workable truths. However, looking more behind the scenes the reason for being effect of these things is a mix-up of viewpoints and dimension points.

Checking for ownership on OT levels addresses this. Now, there are some subtle points in it that I claim have been mis-understood and changed. That can in the worst case lead to the opposite result of what was intended.

The idea of checking for ownership was given increased emphasis and somewhat new uses in 1978-79 in David Mayo's bulletins relating to NOTs.

The most common reference given for checking of ownership on OT levels (e.g. in HCOB 23 Dec 79 Flying ruds at OT III and above) is Scientology axiom 29:

That ought to explain itself, but for some reason it has been used to back up the exact opposite of what it says. What it says is that one gets something to persist by pretending that somebody else did it. Because otherwise one as-ises it and it disappears. That is backed up by axiom 20:

In other words, anything that exists will vanish if it is seen as it is by the static.

And the static is you.

To make things persist and to provide a game to play, the static must use some tricks to make his as-is-nesses persist as is-nesses. The primary trick is as axiom 29 says to assign other authorship to what he put there.

Notice that nowhere in the axioms does it say anything else than that the static is the cause of things, and he makes things persist by introducing lies about them, and he makes things vanish by seeing them as they are.

Because of the mix-up described in Factor # 20 the being might consider himself dependent on and effect of other beings and things. We go along with that and audit the guy on things that have been done to him or that he is effect of, like engrams and so forth. Eventually he realizes that he creates the effect himself, and that is basically the Clear Cog.

The axioms are about the most fundamental fundamental in the subject called Scientology. I personally haven't been able to find a single thing wrong with them, they pass as basic truth as far as I am concerned. They are very basic though, and for practical purposes we have to address is-nesses at a lower level. But, going up the levels, we have to get closer to the truths in the axioms.

To look at axiom 29 again, it says that other authorship has been introduced to make something persist. That means you did it but you say Joe did it, and then you can experience it without making it vanish.

To undo the persistence, what you need to do is to see exactly what you did and exactly what it really is: you said Joe did it, but really you did it. This goes for case or for anything else that persists.

In other words: we might not succeed in as-is-ing case if we don't get the full story. The full story is that you did it, but you made it seem that somebody else did it. To say that you did it is only half the story. To say that somebody else did it is only half the story.

A pc on lower grades is likely to assume mostly that others caused his case, he is not quite up to taking responsibility for it. The point of going clear is the exact point where he does, the realization that "I'm mocking it up". He knows that he is doing it now.

There is a fallacy in that: he doesn't necessarily know how he is doing it yet. Anything that still persists for him has other authorship assigned to it than himself (as per axiom 29). If he continues to regard the existing case as the generality of "his case" he is likely to get snarled up. When he is clear he has cleared his viewpoint, he is clear on the first dynamic. All remaining case has other "authors" to it. And that is where the main point of discussion is. He assigned it. That doesn't mean that the other authors really did it to him, that is just the lie that made it persist.

Axiom 30:

When we view the full story the condition vanishes. If we view part of the story the condition decreases.

Particularly after Clear it is found that we have to get the viewpoints case is being held from, the authorship, and that without that we don't get a full as-is-ness.

Notice that LRH didn't say "ownership" when he described as-isness in the axioms, he talked about assigned authorship. The idea of ownership seems to have been assigned added importance by Mayo as a solution to the above mentioned phenomenon. The phenomenon certainly needed a handling, but the subtle alter-is was the introduction of the idea that is is other people's case. Checking for authorship on ruds or other charge is very useful, but if it is interpreted as a broad philosophy of assigning other ownership to case it is a different matter.

If Joe who is Clear feels ARC breaky it might not resolve by him deciding "I am ARC broken", it might as a matter of fact compound the charge. But when he spots that the ARC X is from the viewpoint of another person or an entity and he assesses it it might resolve completely. Axiom 29 gives the explanation to that. Joe created an ARC X and said that it was Bill's ARC X. It might or might not have been a copy of an ARC X that Bill had, that is beside the point. Notice that axiom 29 is rather one-way: you create something and say somebody else did it. It doesn't say that somebody else did it and you said you did it. What can happen is that somebody else did it and you create the effect of it for yourself and say that the other guy did it to you. There is a difference.

This brings us into the subject or whose case you are really handling. Is it possible to handle anybody else's case directly?

This is what Factor #11 says:

Well, that says clearly that you don't interact directly with any other viewpoint in this universe, you just exchange dimension points, i.e. communication particles. In other words you can't as-is something for somebody else. You can give them some comm that suggests that they do it themselves, or you can somehow remove some of their dimension points and hope that they notice. But none of that is as-isness. As-is-ness is done by the creator of something.

As-is-ness is per definition a knowing activity. If you as-is something you are aware of it. If you get somebody else to as-is something then they are aware of it.

As Factor 20 said we have chosen to disregard the fine detail and pretend to be dependent on other viewpoints and dimension points. That is really what allows the life game to happen, but it isn't exactly the truth.

You can encourage or inspire others to as-is case. That is a quite laudable activity, and it is what we call "auditing". You exchange communication with someone and coach them into looking at something until it as-ises or at least temporarily releases.

Can you be bothered by somebody else's case? Sure, if you agree with it and mock it up and deny that you did. Axiom 29 and 30 still provides the key: you must view how you are assigned other authorship to it and made it persist, at which point it will vanish for you. If the other guy still has it is a different matter.

There is a subtle difference between recognizing authorship and assigning other ownership to the case. Deciding that it was somebody else's case without realizing your own cause produces at best a temporary release and might at worst in itself be a source of misownership.

Responsibility is a key factor. According to Tech Dix it means:

In other words full responsibility is when you know that you caused it. There is a gradient scale to responsibility of course.

Look through any of the scales in "Scientology 0-8" and you will find along the top "pan-determined creation", "cause", "source", "postulates" and things like that. If find it hard to believe that anybody can interpret any of this as meaning anything by that they way up goes towards an increased recognition of how you are source, how you are creating things.

After Clear you have to start taking responsibility for other viewpoints and other dynamics. Assuming the position that it's all somebody else never get's you much further than the first dynamic. Restimulating phenomena and then assigning them to other beings is the way you make them persist on automatic; it isn't the way you as-is things. It has very little to do with going up the bridge.

An Operating Thetan is:

meaning that ultimately you must figure out how you are or how you can be cause rather than how you are being effect.

This doesn't contradict running entities in any way. Any piece of case could be regarded as a being and run as such. But that doesn't mean that you aren't the source of having it there in your space. If you bump into a guy and take a copy of him and he does the same and you both get confused, that is taken care of for you by you realizing you did that and you not doing it anymore. The guy might need to do the same, and he might have other problems and you might help him with them, but that has nothing to do with your case unless you are mocking it up too.

Ownership checking is very valuable if used as a method of achieving more full as-isness, but it can become detrimental if consistently used to avoid responsibility.

Quotes © by L.Ron Hubbard

FAF 1 May 1991

Doors

 

Your mind is like a vast house full of doors.

The room you are in is your concious mind. You are immediately aware of what is there. To get to anywhere else you need to open some doors.

Many of the doors are locked. And many of them are barred by debris. Many doors are hidden in other rooms behind other locked doors and debris.

Some of the doors are not locked and you can open them. But you might not know what is behind them. You might get burnt if you just fling the door open and barge in. But if you open first a crack, take a peek, and only open further and enter when you are ready, then you can explore any of the available rooms.

If a door is barred by debris you must clean up the debris first or you will have to bring it with you.

When a door is locked you need to find the key or combination that will open it. You might guess it right away, or you might have to try the combinations that you know. If the door won't open you must save it for a later attempt. Don't dynamite the door by using force or drugs; it might be useful in the future to have a door there.

If you unlock a door for the first time, open it cautiously. Only enter when you are comfortable with the open door.

When you enter a new room, look at it until you know exactly what is in it. You might have to walk around and look from several different angles before you see everything. Do not leave the room until you know what is there and you can handle it. Only then might you consider going to other rooms.

When you are finished with a room and you don't currently need what is in there, close the door after you, but leave it unlocked.

When you know what is in a room, it is now available to you. You can open the door and see and use what is there at any time.

The contents of any room that you know and have cleared will not cause you any trouble. However, the rooms you haven't looked at can give you any kind of trouble you can think of. Maybe the faucets have been left running, maybe termites are eating the woodwork, maybe vital knowledge is collecting dust in there.

In some of the rooms you have records, in some you have tools, in some you have connections to other people, other places, other times, in some you just have junk.

When you have accessed, looked at, and cleared enough rooms you can start working at changing them. You can put things there that you want, and you can even add new rooms.

When you know and can handle everything that is in the house, you are free to leave the house. You can take the house down if you wish, you can go and build another, or you can walk around outside.

 

Previous page

Contents

Next page