Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Adjunct to TROM thread

  1. #1
    Patron with Honors
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    146

    Default Adjunct to TROM thread

    MORE ON TROM

    ACT - 71
    10 August 1994

    Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
    Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.

    The following is derived from TROM, The Resolution of Mind by
    Dennis H. Stephens.

    TROM is available from Flemming Funch at ffunch@netcom.com

    Please notice that this posting is not an exact replication of the
    material in TROM, but is derived from it.

    It is somewhat complex but well worth knowing. It is pure dynamite
    to audit.

    Those of you with deadly chronic physical conditions, headaches,
    back pains, spinal twisteroos, like I have will certainly want to wade
    through this material and give it a chance.

    It is the complexity of the situation that has prevented us from
    getting out before. Those of you who do not have the mental where with
    all to deal with this small amount of complexity, may never get out, or
    reclaim your Sovereign Native State, or recover the power of postulates
    that work. And in any case you will certainly never be able to handle
    the really hard cases that come your way unless you know this stuff
    cold.

    So bone up.

    The being is considered to be playing the Game of Life. The game
    consists entirely of one 4 line GPM having to do with Being Known and
    Knowing. The new thing about TROM is it considers the goal TO BE KNOWN
    to be the primary outward creative aspect of postulation and causative
    consideration. TROM considers the goal TO KNOW to be the inward
    receptive aspect of receiving what has been created or originated by
    others.

    Some of you will find this difficult to accept, and of course you
    should find your own wording for these items. However I am presently
    comfortable with the switch in viewpoint from my own Scientology days,
    where TO KNOW was the prime goal rather than TO BE KNOWN, and I
    recommend that you become flexible and facile in using TROM's usage of
    these words.

    Like all GPMS, the being indulges in each line of the GPM until he
    fails, at which point he falls down to the next line. There is an exact
    mechanism to this and although a bit complex, it is well worth
    understanding.

    Part of the secret of TROM is that every postulate made by a being
    contains really TWO postulates, the Self Determined postulate, which is
    what the being wants for himself concerning others, and the Pan
    Determined postulates, which is what the being wants others to want
    concerning him.

    For example, say we have two beings, Being One and Being Two.
    Being One wants TO BE KNOWN and wants Being Two TO KNOW him. If Being
    Two wants TO KNOW Being One and wants Being One TO BE KNOWN, then you
    have a concordance between the self determined and pan determined
    postulates of both beings, and peace ensues.

    This can be diagramed like this.

    SD = Self Determined postulate.
    PD = Pan Determined postulate.

    Being One Being Two
    1a) TO BE KNOWN (SD) ----> TO KNOW (PD) (What Being One wants.)
    1b) TO BE KNOWN (PD) <---- TO KNOW (SD) (What Being Two wants.)

    Line 1a contains the self determined postulate (TO BE KNOWN) and
    the Pan Determined postulate (TO KNOW) of Being One. The arrow points
    in the direction of causation, it points from cause to effect, from the
    originator of the game to the receiver or responder of the game.

    Line 1a says that Being One wants TO BE KNOWN, and wants Being Two
    TO KNOW.

    Line 1b contains the self determined postulate (TO KNOW) and the
    Pan Determined postulate (TO BE KNOWN) of Being Two. The arrow points
    in the opposite direction showing that Being Two is the originator of
    this set of postulates and Being One is the receiver.

    Line 1b says that Being Two wants TO KNOW and wants Being One TO BE
    KNOWN.

    Since the goals are identical on both sides, the beings are in
    agreement. Being One wants to make something and show it to Being Two,
    and Being Two wants to be shown something and wants Being One to make
    it.

    Thus there is peace.

    However consider the following diagram.

    Being One Being Two
    1a) TO BE KNOWN ----> TO KNOW
    1b) TO BE NOT KNOWN <---- TO NOT KNOW

    In this case Being One wants to make something and show it to Being
    Two, but Being Two doesn't want to be shown anything, and wants Being
    One to stop making it.

    Sounds like your average Parent and Child relationship.

    Clearly this is a games condition.

    Now games can have 3 outcomes.

    1.) They can continue
    2.) Being One can win and overwhelm Being Two
    3.) Being One can lose and be overwhelmed by Being Two.

    Situation 1. is of little concern to us because the whole purpose
    of life is to have a Game. It may get them into dire trouble later, but
    for now its FUN.

    Outcomes 2. and 3. however are very important to us. Once a being
    loses a game, the only thing he can do (assuming Original Ignorance) is
    to start a new game, usually at a lower level, and so there ensues a
    dwindling spiral of decline that can be mapped out, and which is the
    subject of this posting.

    If Being One wins, that is an overt for Being One and a motivator
    for Being Two.

    If Being One loses, that is a motivator for Being One and an Overt
    for Being Two.


    THE FALL

    A self determined postulate is what the being wants for himself,
    and the pan determined postulate is what the being wants for the other
    being.

    Both beings have their own self determined postulate and their own
    pan determined postulate, but in a games condition these are at odds
    with each other.

    Here is your first game at the very start of the cycle.

    Being One wants TO BE KNOWN and wants Being Two TO KNOW.
    Being Two wants TO NOT KNOW, and wants Being One TO BE NOT KNOWN.

    Here is the diagram of Game 1 of the 4 game decline.

    Line 1a is Being One's goals, and Line 1b is Being Two's goals.

    Being One Being Two
    1a) TO BE KNOWN (SD) ----> TO KNOW (PD)
    1b) TO BE NOT KNOWN (PD) <---- TO NOT KNOW (SD)

    When Being One wins, Being Two gives up his own self determined
    postulate (TO NOT KNOW) and takes over the pan determined postulate of
    Being One (TO KNOW) as his new self determined postulate. Being Two
    also gives up his own pan determined postulate about Being One, (TO BE
    NOT KNOWN) and takes over the self determined postulate of Being One (TO
    BE KNOWN) as his new pan determined postulate.

    Thus after Being One wins, the chart looks like this,

    Being One Wins Being Two Loses
    1a) TO BE KNOWN (SD) ----> TO KNOW (PD)
    1b) TO BE KNOWN (PD) <---- TO KNOW (SD)

    Notice that Being Two has not gone into the valence of Being One,
    even though he has lost to Being One. (This comes later.) Being Two
    has merely gone into AGREEMENT with Being One, by becoming what Being
    One wanted Being Two to be.

    This is very very important. Being Two, even after he loses, is
    still not doing what Being One was doing (TO BE KNOWN). Being Two is
    merely doing what Being One WANTS him to do (TO KNOW).

    This overt on the part of Being One against Being Two can be
    described in two ways, both of which mean almost the same thing. The
    reason that we name both of them is because they don't mean exactly the
    same thing to various people and so both need to be run.

    THE OVERT.

    Here is the 'Being One Wins' diagram again.

    Being One Wins Being Two Loses
    1a) TO BE KNOWN (SD) ----> TO KNOW (PD)
    1b) TO BE KNOWN (PD) <---- TO KNOW (SD)

    Since Being One wanted TO BE KNOWN, and wanted Being Two TO KNOW,
    and since Being Two has now given into Being One's desire, it can be
    said that Being One is FORCING BEING TWO TO KNOW. Or it can be said
    that Being One is PREVENTING BEING TWO FROM NOT KNOWING, which is what
    Being Two wanted to do in the first place.

    You should immediately recognize the Enforced and Inhibited part of
    LRH's CDEINR scale at work here. The point is that Enforcing A is the
    same thing as Inhibiting NOT A and Enforcing NOT A is the same thing as
    Inhibiting A.

    In this case we are using the terms FORCE and PREVENT rather than
    ENFORCE and INHIBIT. To each his own, ok?

    Thus this overt on the part of Being One against Being Two comes up
    with two descriptions, both of which need to be run.

    They are,

    1.O FORCING TO KNOW
    1.O PREVENTING FROM NOT KNOWING

    The '1' means Game 1, the 'O' means Overt. So 1.O is Game 1's
    Overt of Being One on Being Two.


    THE MOTIVATOR

    Now let's say that Being One loses instead of wins.

    Let's set up the game again and look at what happens.

    Here is Game 1 while it is continuing, before anyone wins or loses.

    Being One Being Two
    1a) TO BE KNOWN (SD) ----> TO KNOW (PD)
    1b) TO BE NOT KNOWN (PD) <---- TO NOT KNOW (SD)

    And here is the game after Being One loses.

    Being One Loses Being Two Wins
    1a) TO BE NOT KNOWN (SD) ----> TO NOT KNOW (PD)
    1b) TO BE NOT KNOWN (PD) <---- TO NOT KNOW (SD)

    Again the postulates match because Being One has been overwhelmed
    by Being Two and so has taken on Being Two's postulates as his own.

    Please notice once more that Being One DOES NOT GO INTO THE VALENCE
    of Being Two, Being One is still doing something different than Being
    Two, Being one has merely gone into agreement with what Being Two
    desires for him.

    As before this motivator on the part of Being One has two
    descriptions and they are,

    1.M FORCED TO BE NOT KNOWN
    1.M PREVENTED FROM BEING KNOWN

    '1.M' means this is Game 1's Motivator for Being One received from
    Being Two.

    Notice that both 1.M lines mean the same thing, right? This will
    be true for all these Overt and Motivator items. They come in pairs
    which mean almost the same thing. Run them both anyway.


    THE DWINDLING SPIRAL

    OK, so what about the dwindling spiral? Well this a bit complex
    because it involves falling down through 4 separate Games and thus 4
    separate levels of overwhelm. But this can not be skimped over, because
    the being HAS come down through these 4 levels of overwhelm and he is
    jolly well just going to have to run it all out to get free. So we
    might as well roll up our sleeves and do the complex work now, rather
    than spend the next billion years or so digging ditches to the whim of
    some cruel overlord.

    We are going to follow this decline from the point of view of Being
    One, so at each stage we are going to assume that whatever game Being
    one is engaging in, he eventually loses. He doesn't sink to the next
    lower game until he does lose, so its his loss that is important.

    Being One starts off wanting TO BE KNOWN by Being Two and wanting
    Being Two TO KNOW him back. However Being Two puts up a game and
    decides to NOT KNOW Being One instead and tries to make Being One NOT BE
    KNOWN. This is diagramed as follows, a diagram that you are already
    familiar with.

    GAME 1

    Being One Being Two
    1a) TO BE KNOWN (SD) ----> TO KNOW (PD)
    1b) TO BE NOT KNOWN (PD) <---- TO NOT KNOW (SD)

    Being One's Motivator Being One's Overt
    FORCED TO BE NOT KNOWN. FORCING (Being Two) TO KNOW.
    PREVENTED FROM BEING KNOWN. PREVENTING FROM NOT KNOWING.

    When Being one loses to Being Two, Being One, who WAS running on
    line 1a, takes on Being Two's postulate and so is now running on line
    1b.

    Thus Being One starts a new game with the goal TO BE NOT KNOWN, and
    to have others NOT KNOW him. Of course he eventually runs into others
    that decide to put a game to this goal TO BE NOT KNOWN, so they have the
    goal TO KNOW and they want Being One TO BE KNOWN. Here is the full
    diagram of Game 2, and again we assume that Being One eventually loses.

    GAME 2

    Being One Being Two
    2a) TO BE NOT KNOWN (SD) ----> TO NOT KNOW (PD)
    2b) TO BE KNOWN (PD) <---- TO KNOW (SD)

    Being One's Motivator Being One's Overt
    FORCED TO BE KNOWN. FORCING TO NOT KNOW.
    PREVENTED FROM BEING NOT KNOWN. PREVENTING FROM KNOWING.

    So let's recapitulate quickly. Being One started off with the goal
    TO BE KNOWN. He was then forced into the goal TO BE NOT KNOWN. And
    then he was forced BACK INTO THE GOAL TO BE KNOWN! The problem is he is
    already in failure on the goal TO BE KNOWN, so he is cornered. He only
    had two options, TO BE KNOWN or TO BE NOT KNOWN. Now both of those
    options have run out and he can occupy neither of them.

    SO HE GOES OUT OF VALENCE.

    That means he no longer merely goes into agreement with Being Two
    and does what Being Two wants him to do, HE BECOMES BEING TWO and DOES
    WHAT BEING TWO WAS DOING.

    Let's take a look at the second Game again and what Being Two was
    doing.

    GAME 2

    Being One Being Two
    2a) TO BE NOT KNOWN (SD) ----> TO NOT KNOW (PD)
    2b) TO BE KNOWN (PD) <---- TO KNOW (SD)

    Being one was trying TO BE NOT KNOWN, but was forced TO BE KNOWN by
    Being Two anyway. But Being One is already in failure on the goal TO BE
    KNOWN, so he goes out of valence into what Being Two was doing at the
    time of the failure which is TO KNOW.

    So Being One now sinks down to Level 3 on the goal TO KNOW. Here
    is its complete diagram, again assuming ultimate failure. Remember that
    Being One is now out of valence for the first time.

    GAME 3

    Being One Being Two
    3a) TO KNOW (SD) ----> TO BE KNOWN (PD)
    3b) TO NOT KNOW (PD) <---- TO BE NOT KNOWN (SD)

    Being One's Motivator Being One's Overt
    FORCED TO NOT KNOW. FORCING TO BE KNOWN.
    PREVENTED FROM KNOWING. PREVENTING FROM BEING NOT KNOWN.

    Being One is now in the valence of an old Being Two. Being One
    wants to KNOW things, he wants to find out things, he wants others to
    make things for him so he can experience them, HE IS OUT OF VALENCE! He
    is no longer the Creator, but the Creature!

    Of course Being One eventually runs up against someone who doesn't
    want TO BE KNOWN, but who wants TO BE NOT KNOWN instead and so another
    game ensues. The Press and the Church come to mind.

    Since Being One fails, he once again gives up his own goals (TO
    KNOW) and takes on the goals of Being Two (TO NOT KNOW). Please notice
    that this is NOT going out of valence, but merely going into agreement
    with what Being Two wants Being One to do.

    And so now we come to the 4th and last leg of this decline. Being
    One has now taken on the goal TO NOT KNOW, and here he is opposed by
    those who wish TO BE KNOWN anyhow.

    GAME 4

    Being One Being Two
    4a) TO NOT KNOW (SD) ----> TO BE NOT KNOWN (PD)
    4b) TO KNOW (PD) <---- TO BE KNOWN (SD)

    Being One's Motivator Being One's Overt
    FORCED TO KNOW. FORCING TO BE NOT KNOWN.
    PREVENTED FROM NOT KNOWING. PREVENTING FROM BEING KNOWN.

    So once again let's recapitulate what happened to Being One during
    the 3rd and 4th legs.

    Being One started out wanting TO KNOW (he was already out of
    valence, poor thing from legs 1 and 2!) When he became opposed in this
    goal TO KNOW, he went into agreement with the opposition and took on the
    goal TO NOT KNOW. But then he got opposed again with that goal and was
    forced back TO KNOW.

    However the goal TO KNOW was already in failure from leg 3, so he
    CAN'T go back TO KNOW. Again he had only two options with the goal,
    that is TO KNOW or TO NOT KNOW, and he has used both options up, so now
    he is cornered again and has no choice but to go out of valence once
    more into the goal that Being Two has during this last overwhelm. Here
    is leg 4 again.

    GAME 4

    Being One Being Two
    4a) TO NOT KNOW (SD) ----> TO BE NOT KNOWN (PD)
    4b) TO KNOW (PD) <---- TO BE KNOWN (SD)

    Being One starts off with the goal TO NOT KNOW, but Being Two wants
    TO BE KNOWN anyhow. This forces Being One back in TO KNOW, but this is
    untenable as he just lost that game.

    So Being One goes out of valence into the goal of Being Two which
    is TO BE KNOWN!

    However this goal IS THE SAME GOAL Being One HAD AT THE VERY
    BEGINNING, so he has come full circle. Since the goal TO BE KNOWN is
    already overwhelmed in leg 1a., the only way Being One can take it over
    is to do so on an utter substitute. He HAS to take it over because all
    other options are in failure to him. So he starts the whole cycle over
    again on a lower substitute goal.

    And that is the dwindling spiral.

    So what is the purpose of all this? More importantly, how to you
    run it? Well you want to get your pc to spot every moment of overwhelm
    in his mind as each of these games cascaded down into the game below it.

    There are 8 classes of overwhelms, 4 motivators and 4 overts, and
    each has 2 descriptions, so that makes 16 processes.

    We want to run them in reverse order, to get the latest failures
    first, so from bottom to top, here they are.

    M = Motivator, O = Overt

    4.M "Are you being FORCED TO KNOW?"
    4.M "Are you being PREVENTED FROM NOT KNOWING?"

    4.O "Are you FORCING ANOTHER BEING TO BE NOT KNOWN?"
    4.O "Are you PREVENTING ANOTHER BEING FROM BEING KNOWN?"

    3.M "Are you being FORCED TO NOT KNOW?"
    3.M "Are you being PREVENTED FROM KNOWING?"

    3.O "Are you FORCING ANOTHER BEING TO BE KNOWN?"
    3.O "Are you PREVENTING ANOTHER BEING FROM BEING NOT KNOWN?"

    2.M "Are you being FORCED TO BE KNOWN?"
    2.M "Are you being PREVENTED FROM BEING NOT KNOWN?"

    2.O "Are you FORCING ANOTHER BEING TO NOT KNOW?"
    2.O "Are you PREVENTING ANOTHER BEING FROM KNOWING"?

    1.M "Are you being FORCED TO BE NOT KNOWN?"
    1.M "Are you being PREVENTED FROM BEING KNOWN?"

    1.O "Are you FORCING ANOTHER BEING TO KNOW?"
    1.O "Are you PREVENTING ANOTHER BEING FROM NOT KNOWING?"

    It's actually pretty easy to follow if you gather all the Overts
    and Motivators together into their own group, and leave out the second
    wording.

    The overts and motivators merely follow the 4 games as they go down
    the spiral.

    Here are the four games,

    Being One Opposed to Being Two
    1.) TO BE KNOWN (SD) <-----> 4.) TO NOT KNOW (SD)
    2.) TO BE NOT KNOWN (SD) <-----> 3.) TO KNOW (SD)
    3.) TO KNOW (SD) <-----> 2.) TO BE NOT KNOWN (SD)
    4.) TO NOT KNOW (SD) <-----> 1.) TO BE KNOWN (SD)

    THE OVERTS

    1.O "Are you FORCING ANOTHER BEING TO KNOW?"
    2.O "Are you FORCING ANOTHER BEING TO NOT KNOW?"
    3.O "Are you FORCING ANOTHER BEING TO BE KNOWN?"
    4.O "Are you FORCING ANOTHER BEING TO BE NOT KNOWN?"

    THE MOTIVATORS

    1.M "Are you being FORCED TO BE NOT KNOWN?"
    2.M "Are you being FORCED TO BE KNOWN?"
    3.M "Are you being FORCED TO NOT KNOW?"
    4.M "Are you being FORCED TO KNOW?"

    Remember to run them from 4 up through 1, not from 1 down through 4.

    Notice that,

    Impingement is 4.M, being FORCED TO KNOW.
    Not-isness is 4.O, FORCING ANOTHER BEING TO NOT BE KNOWN.

    Any kind of Hell or Eternal ON is 4.M FORCED TO KNOW.
    Any kind of Death or Eternal OFF is 3.M FORCED TO NOT KNOW.

    It might be of interest to assess on the meter how many times the
    pc has gone through the 4 legs of this dwindling spiral, in other words
    how many levels of substitutes has he fallen to.

    One might try to do this before running the actual overwhelms, just
    as one tries to get a keyout by count on drugs before one runs the
    drugs. Each shift from one Game down to the next lower one, is a kind
    of release from the loss of the previous game.

    It is an up curve after the previous down curve. Of course the
    emotional curve never goes as high as it was before the game was started
    that was just lost.

    Remember for each time through the 4 games, there are 2 moments of
    agreeing with the opposition to be what the opposition wants you to be,
    and 2 moments of being so cornered that you can only go out of valence
    and become what the opposition is.

    So every time the being goes through this cycle of decline once, he
    accumulates two integrity breaks, one between leg 1 and leg 2, and the
    other between leg 3 and leg 4, and he accumulates TWO valences, one
    between leg 2 and leg 3, and one between leg 4 and leg 1.

    The valence shift between 4 and 1 is insidious as the being thinks
    he is becoming himself again, but he is becoming THE LAST BEING WHO
    OVERWHELMED HIM AT THE END OF LEG 4, who just happened to have the same
    goal as he did when he was brand new, namely TO BE KNOWN. So as the
    being goes through this death mill, he accumulates valences to himself,
    half of which he knows are not himself (between leg 2 and 3) and half of
    which he thinks ARE himself (between 4 and 1).

    Thus you might want to assess on the meter how many taffy layers of
    valences he has on his present life beingness. It might go a long ways
    towards blowing the whole thing and allowing it to unravel. There is
    nothing like thinking 'its all you' to jam it up but good. You can't
    get rid of you, and if you think IT is all YOU, then you won't be able
    to get rid of IT either!

    Also remember there are two different kinds of valence shift here.

    At the bottom, at the end of Game 4, he goes into the valence of
    the last guy who insisted upon BEING KNOWN to him when he didn't want TO
    KNOW about it. So he then goes about trying TO BE KNOWN to everything
    and everyone. He becomes an IMPINGER.

    Before that, at the end of Game 2, he goes into the valence of the
    last guy who insisted upon KNOWING about him when he didn't want to BE
    KNOWN. So he then goes about trying TO KNOW about everything and
    everyone, including their withholds.

    The LEARNER is out of valence into the Creature. His goal is TO
    KNOW.

    The Creator is not looking to learn, his goal is to create
    something for others to learn.

    The Creator is into the goal TO BE KNOWN.

    The Creature/Learner is into the goal TO KNOW.

    So if you want to get someone back into valence, it's a good idea
    to find out which kind of valence, of these two general classes, he's
    in. It might make it easier to pop.

    He starts off truely being the Creator during Game 1 and Game 2.
    Between Game 2 and Game 3 he goes out of valence into the valence of the
    Creature that overwhelmed him as a Creator at the end of Game 2.

    During Games 3 and 4 he plays as the Creature continuing to be out
    of valence. Then between Game 4 and Game 1, he again goes out of
    valence back into the Creator that overwhelmed him as a Creature at the
    end of Game 4.

    Thus if you find him as a Learner, he is definitely out of valence.
    If you find him as a Creator, then he is probably out of valence unless
    he is really being his Original Self, operating his own Prime Postulate.

    By the way, as worded, the above 16 processes will run NOTS.

    Happy Tromming.

    Homer

  2. Thanks Spirit says "thank you" for this post
    Likes Claire Swazey liked this post
  3. #2
    Patron with Honors archetypes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    151

    Default Re: Adjunct to TROM thread

    Hello Homer, I do not know if you still read the posts on this forum, and I read this post several years ago. However, since then I have been running, per Dennis' suggestion, "The 8 Classes of Overwhelm", from leg #8 to leg #1, and using the goal set, "To Enhance". I'm helping two other people run it.

    It is the best process in Scientology that I know of to run out overts and motivators in this lifetime. The negative goals legs of "To Enhance" are 'to-degrade' and it runs out that degrading feeling from childhood overwhelms, and the same on the overts side, which sometimes take me outside my body to higher viewpoints I was operating from at that time.

    The process I use is to Get the Idea of:


    Leg 1.
    1) Forcing to enhance. (overt).
    2) Prevented from being enhanced, (motivator).
    Leg 2.
    3) Preventing from enhancing. (overt
    4) Forced to be enhanced. (motivator).
    Leg 3.
    5) Forcing to be enhanced. (overt).
    6) Prevented from enhancing. (motivator).
    Leg 4.
    7) Preventing from being enhanced. (overt).
    8) Forced to enhance. (motivator).

    [NOTE: Run backwards, from #8 to #1]


    Effective for ones in the helping or enhancing profession. Even "To Help" and "To Control" can be run. Run it solo. Don't forget to do havingness processess.
    http://sandorian.us/newslog2.php/__show_article/_a000245-000320.htm

  4. Thanks Spirit says "thank you" for this post
    Likes Claire Swazey liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •