THE THREE PART CYCLE (triangle) OF DAMNED NEAR EVERYTHING

Most everyone reading this is probably familiar with the cycle of action: start-change-stop. But where does it come from? What IS it? This is what I've been investigating and here are my results.

There is/was/projectedtobeforever a pattern we laid down which underlies our triangles. It consists of a first aspect which approximates theta in some form or aspect, followed by a second aspect which could be described as a flux or change, and finished by a third aspect which either returns to theta (theta triangle) or drops to the bottom of the tone scale (MEST triangle). More on those below. The highest triangle I've located in the MEST universe is the Creation triangle of as-is, alter-is, not-is. "As-is" approximates theta by being both creation and duplication, a first postulate. "Alter-is" is the change which permits universes to exist/persist, a second postulate. "Not-is" is the attempted destruction of the 2nd postulate by force, a third (or more) postulate without acknowledgement of the 2nd postulate. This is the MEST cycle of Creation and also the basis of how we operate in universes. (Please note that the above three are actions, i.e. VERBS. LRH's fourth item in Phoenix Lectures "isness" is a NOUN and the existing result of alterisness.)

It's quite sad that LRH got so close yet missed noticing this pattern. :(

In any case, my point is this: ALL VALID TRIANGLES FIT INTO THIS PATTERN. One leg will approximate theta, another will be a change of some sort, and the third will either dissolve into theta again or drop to the bottom. ALWAYS. (The third leg is a concealed dichotomy.) So double check all triangles for this pattern. If they have it, you have a valid triangle which operates within the mind and universes (same things). If a triangle does not fit this pattern then it should be rejected or amended appropriately.

Sorry if this sounds pedantic. It's not intended that way. I wish to help everyone in their endeavors by communicating what I've uncovered.

This is a major discovery. I wish I didn't have to find it. I wish LRH had found it, but the closest he came was to say something to the effect that the theta cycle was CREATE-CREATE-CREATE, and the MEST cycle was CREATE-SURVIVE-DESTROY. Don't ask me for the reference on that. I forget  where he said that.

The root of it when I first investigated seemed to be the cycle of creation.

The Creation Triangle

AS-IS    ALTER-IS    NOT-IS
(Then later I got a clear view higher on the tone scale and saw what was above creation and postulation: BEINGNESS.)
This is the cycle of creation as it appears within a universe. Therefore it will be the cycle that people can see clearly and hold within their minds because it is low enough on the scale that it can be imaged.

A thing is intended/postulated as-is, then it is immediately lied about and altered to keep it from vanishing. The common trick a person uses to alter an as-isness is to deny having made it. The persisting alter-isness is sometimes referred to as an "isness" but that term is unnecessary. Remember: this is the cycle of action and creation within a universe, because the next action is what causes us so much grief. The next action is to not-is the alterisness, to deny it completely, cover it up, black it out. The most common trick used in universes to obtain not-isness is to get the agreement of others. By agreeing, others are saying that they didn't create it -- which is untrue.

Not-isness has a rather bad reputation, but it really is an integral part of how we construct reality. Without it, we would have no solid universe in which to play. It would be far too easy to unmock. So early in track we apparently went on quite a streak of piling not-is upon not-is, deeper and deeper until we arrive at the current condition of being in rather too deep.

The real "cycle" of a thetan is not a cycle at all:
AS-IS    ALTER-IS    AS-IS
This is what auditing achieves. A spirit or "thetan" doesn't actually operate in any universe, not even his "own" universe. So a thetan doesn't function on a cycle of action. The truth therefore is the as-isness only, with alter-is and not-is being temporary untruths. Since not-is is a lie, then it really is a denied form of alter-is. "Mind" is a type of MEST (Matter, Energy, Space & Time). So to resolve MEST, a thetan needs to do its real final/initial step of as-is. But of course if that is done completely it undoes "reality", leaving no game and no universes. That latter is the purpose of Buddhism.

I was reading Geoffrey Filbert's "Excalibur Revisited" and ran across the perfect way to describe the dual nature of the third element of this triangle (in this third paragraph). He spoke of someone doing either a "not" or an "un" on a physical universe condition. Using that model the triangle could be explained like this:
AS-IS    ALTER-IS     (UN or NOT)-IS

So to reword the second paragraph: The cycle of creation which creates universes consists of an initial creation (as-isness), followed by an altering of that creation to keep it from vanishing upon inspection (alter-isness). But that also is a little too easy to undo by inspection, so a third postulate is made which either denies the existence of the first two, claiming falsely that it is the first postulate (not-isness), or returns the existence to the original postulate (un-isness). The not-isness persists as extremely solid universes.

These two cycles combine to give us an apparent cycle in which the third element either rises to the top of the tone scale (and old Chart of Attitudes), or sinks to the bottom thereof. Every true triangle based on the original archetype has its third element exhibiting this dual nature. From this it can be seen that true triangles are an expression of decay scales.

Let's take the basic triangle as a CREATE-CREATE-CREATE action and examine the postulates. For purposes of this discussion let's stick a number after each in order to distinguish between them, okay? So:

CREATE1-CREATE2-CREATE3

CREATE1 is the original creation on the subject.
CREATE2 is another original creation which is then APPLIED to CREATE1 rather than giving it it's own space. This application of a creation into the space of a prior creation is what the old man called "alter-is". Good name for it.
CREATE3 is yet another original creation which is applied -- not to CREATE1, oh no! -- but to CREATE2! Our favorite redhead called this action "not-isness" because it tends to obliterate CREATE1 completely from sight. CREATE3 can be in multiple layers. One can have hundreds or thousands or millions or quadrillions of layers of CREATE3. Is uppose one could call these CREATE4, CREATE5, CREATE183,183,658, etc as they accumulate -- but really it's much more convenient to classify all of them from 3 on as "not-isness".

What is fascinating is to look at the postulates involved in this sequence.
CREATE1 is permitted to remain theta itself, which all CREATEs are really anyway.
CREATE2 is in conflict with itself because CREATE2's space is actually the anchor points of CREATE1, which arrangement is postulated to hang up, which is bipolar and is the foundation of what we call dichotomies. This postulate to hang up and persist is itself a CREATE1, which gets modified in a moment...
CREATE3 does to CREATE2 what CREATE2 did to CREATE1. Which in turn means that it alter-ises (does a CREATE2) the postulate to hang up, which itself PERSISTS now! This alteration of the postulate to hang up makes CREATE3 seem to be the creation which goes solid, instead of CREATE2. This solidity at CREATE3 reacts back against CREATE2, making CREATE2 a gradual process of modification between the poles of CREATE1 and CREATE3. The result is a triangle, with CREATE2 the "change" which can be run in either direction: either toward CREATE1 or CREATE3.

The Creation triangle is formed on the dichotomy of "true vs lie". When something is a lie, one either uns it or nots it.

This triangle echoes or cascades down through reality in a fractal manner as a series of other triangles which are derived from it. These triangles are not the ultimate truth, but they are close enough to have enormous usefulness. Here's one:

PERCEPTION-EVALUATION-JUDGEMENT. "Judgement" can either be all viewpoints (which is pervasive and theta triangle), or one viewpoint (which is an opinion and MEST triangle version).

Another:
AS-IS = start
ALTER-IS = change
NOT-IS = stop
Therefore the cycle of action START CHANGE STOP is really the same triangle, merely a special case application of the basic principle to an already existing part of a universe containing alter-isness and not-isness. START is not really an as-isness, but it shares with as-isness the quality of beginning something, a moment of silence in a series of alter/not-isness before creation of a new isness. CHANGE normally has much more going on than a simple alter-isness, in fact CHANGE is usually a series of alterations atop not-isness. STOP is normally more than merely a third postulate, and in fact is usually a not-isness of a prior not-isness in its downscale expression, or the cancelling of notisnesses in its upscale expression.

Another triangle has been called the Experience triangle. A better name would be:

The Decision Triangle

The Decision triangle consists of: BE, DO, HAVE
BE comes closest to theta, i.e. as-isness
DO is a change, an alteration of the beingness
HAVE is a solidified beingness, being MEST
HAVE resolves upward to PERVADING the space of the thing had, or downward to POSSESS. POSSESS is having something one is not having as a pervasion, i.e. not being. This degenerates into further not-have, destruction, etc. You might notice that in language every verb is either BE, DO or HAVE. From the viewpoint of someone at DO this triangle appears to be best described as that of Experience. But that is only true within universes. But BE extends above universes. At the highest tones (in the Causal band) decisions are about beingness: who to be, who to not be, who to separate from, etc. Lower on the scale, but still relatively high from the viewpoint of a meat body, decisions are made about what to DO. Still lower and extending to the bottom are decisions about what to HAVE. But HAVE stops a Being because as one descends everything inverts into a BEING HAD, where the being is at the receipt point of HAVE as other determinism. I can also see that HAVE is the "Goal" in GPMs. The reason GPMs have such incredible charge and force behind them is because they are driven by the most powerful action that spirits make. This is "desire" of which the sages of India spoke.

(Sidebar: in descending order these are the actions of spirits (theta):
Decisions - done in the Causal range and affecting BE-DO-HAVE
Creations/Postulates - the living dream done at the top of the Thought band and creating AS-IS, ALTER-IS, NOT-IS

(The Co$ sometimes confused the MEST triangle HAVE as NOT-IS with its theta equivalent of HAVE as having something in your space as it is. More on this in the article "Collapsed Triangles.")

The triangle of understanding is another one:

Understanding Triangle

AFFINITY, REALITY, COMMUNICATION
AFFINITY is a willingness to share space, to share beingness, to BE as another IS, as-is.
COMMUNICATION is a motion of particles in space, i.e. Doingness, an alter-is of location.
REALITY is solidified, lied-about agreement without actually achieving the as-isness which is true theta agreement. OR it is spiritual duplication.
LRH placed them in the wrong sequence. The real sequence is AFFINITY, COMMUNICATION, REALITY. The third leg of "REALITY" resolves upward to DUPLICATION, or down to AGREEMENT.

(The Co$ concentrates upon COMMUNICATION and REALITY far more than AFFINITY, and by doing so emphasizes alter-is and not-is more than as-is -- except during auditing of course, where they are doing an un-is. Their lack of distinguishing between "un" and "not" allows them to emphasize the not-is, which keeps their affinity restricted (communication and reality also) enough that a lack of affinity in dealing with public, enemies (mostly self-created), and even their own staff (beans and rice anyone?) is not perceived as an outpoint. This created a ceiling beyond which the Co$ as an organization can not rise, and indeed forces their own decay as a group...)

The triangle of KRC is another one:
KNOW (as certainty, not "know about"), CONTROL, RESPONSIBILITY.
To KNOW something, one pervades or becomes it.
To CONTROL something, one alters it.
To be RESPONSIBLE, one either owns and is something by pervasion, for true responsibility causes an as-isness -- or it drops to the bottom as Blame.
(I wonder if the Co$ understood this one. It would be rather easy to confuse this triangle with its theta equivalent of Know-Control-Know, which is AS-ISNESS, ALTER-ISNESS, AS-ISNESS.)

Here's a new triangle I haven't seen anywhere else:
The first one is CREATION OF SPACE (close your eyes and visualize a three dimensional space in front of you). This seems to be analogous to AFFINITY, BE and KNOW in the other triangles.
The second seems to involve a CHANGE OF SPACE, i.e. a change of location, which is basic to movement. This would be analogous to COMMUNICATION, DO and CONTROL.
The third is those precise, FIXED LOCATIONS one uses to define the limits/parameters of a space or an object in a space. This would be analogous to REALITY, HAVE and RESPONSIBILITY. This is often a limited space, rather than the infinite space of infinite beingness.

Oddly enough our triangles relate to the numbers 1, 2 and 3. They point back to what was apparently done a long "time" ago. I did a write up on that in some detail (see Ghost Danse #6 "The Postulates Behind Numbers"), but here's an abbreviated version of what I see:
(0. Before universes and beingness was a Nothing, native state.)

1. Then the static decided "I am." That was the number ONE, for there was a single ONE being, infinite (a static). I think this is sometimes seen as a vision of infinite space.

2. Next the ONE took a single point to view, which was also a point of view looking outward at infinite space, which immediately created its opposite of being everywhere else looking in at that point. This looks like it began a beingness game, dividing and playing by refusing to know parts of itself. This led to creating TWO. TWO is the first lie. It is a lie of declaring that one point of view was unknown to another point of view. (As near as I can tell there is only one beingness. We are all a single theta.) This process individuated all thetans. It also created all dichotomies, which we later used against ourselves in such fun stuff as GPMs.

3. Next part of the game was TWO separated thetans viewing a point which both claimed, but neither was fully BEING. This necessitated AGREEMENT about that third point, which neither thetan allowed the other to be, which was laid on top of neither thetan allowing itself to be the other thetan.

That laid in the entire pattern from that point on. Different thetans who could BE one another at will, but which in order to maintain a game kept themselves separate, contended over objects which they had to communicate to one another about in order to make those objects "real", i.e. agreed-upon.

What I'm seeing is some prime principle which is behind both universes and the structure of the mind. This principle has three parts, and each part looks different depending upon what area of mind or universe it's applied to. Let's label the three parts 1, 2 and 3 so that we can easily keep track of which are analogous to one another. That gives us:
1. create  2. exist  3. destroy
1. be  2. do  3. have
1. start  2. change  3. stop
1. born  2. live  3. die
1. love (affinity)  2. communication  3. reality (agreement)
1. Knowing as certainty  2. Control  3. Responsible
1. creation of spaces  2. change of space (movement)  3. anchor points of spaces

Careful consideration will yield this relation to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle:
"1." is the observer, we who create things.
"2." is a particle in motion whose energy is known but location is unknown because it keeps changing.
"3." is a particle whose location is known, but whose energy (motion) has been stopped and is therefore unknown.
I call this the Heisenberg Triangle.

So these primal triangles relate to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which to my mind validates Heisenberg more than the other way around!

Another example of this three part primal postulate was stated by The Pilot (Ken Ogger) in Super Scio (#5A - Implant Universes):

"Universes are created by postulate, perpetuated by alterisness, and made real by agreement."

That statement is quite true, and points up the identity of the ARC triangle with the way a thetan handles MEST by postulate: as-isness, alter-isness and not-isness. Please note that "postulate" at Creation is not the same thing quite as Postulates on the tone scale. Postulates on the tone scale are limited to specific alterations or creations within universes. At Creation on the other hand, a whole unverse is made as a living dream. In order to create, a thetan must do an as-isness (not as a duplicate like in therapy, but an initial as-isness). Then the thetan (you or I) alters that as-isness so that it won't vanish, then finally "makes it real" by getting other thetans to also say it's there. Of course it was real before it was agreed upon, so that agreement between thetans is a lie, a 3rd postulate covering up the original postulate -- which is the anatomy of not-is.

But this has profound implications. For one thing it means that in order to accomplish the as-isness, the thetan must BE the thing created -- AFFINITY, remember? And what is AFFINITY but willingness to BE a SPACE? So BE of be-do-have is also AFFINITY and creation of a SPACE & what's in that space.

That means "perpetuated by alterisness" is communication and doingness.

That means "made real by agreement" is not-isness and havingness.

Let's graph this out so it's easier to see the correspondences:

1.                              2.                             3.
as-isness                  alter-isness              not-isness
be                             do                            have
start                          change                    stop
create                       survive                     destroy
space                        motion                     anchor points/objects

But why are supposedly agreeable things like "have" and "objects" equal to unpleasant things like "not-isness", "destroy" and "stop"? The key to understanding is in Heisenberg. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle states that the energy of a particle may be known, or its location may be known, but not both at the same time. Applied, this means that since life is motion and change, then if you "have" something you have stopped it and all the life (motion) goes out of it. This is why people with a lot of havingness, a lot of possessions, get sort of solid. They are stopped. That may be a backdoor way to describe what is wrong with us in this universe -- too much havingness, and everything too solid and stopped. This also chillingly validates the view of matter being "dead theta."

This Heisenberg viewpoint is further supported by a line in Ogger's Super Scio (#7C):

"Solids could be considered to be stopped motion. Also, not-isness is stopped motion."

Crowley pointed out that the Egyptian symbol of life, the looped cross or ankh, is merely a sandal strap and symbolizes the power to go. In a universe life is in doing and communication. To go solid and dead a thetan stops and "has" without motion. To create (recreate) the condition which put the thetan into a universe it should "be", which is affinity. That's how the thetan got in, and it must duplicate that in order to get out. All auditing consists of as-isness, of duplicating what it did to get so far inside a universe.

On the way the mind thinks vis-a-vis the triangles:

       "differentiation" creates space (separation) between things (1st column)

       "association" creates communication between things and brings them into
       various degrees of proximity (2nd column)

       "identification" collapses space (no separation) (3rd column)

       "disassociation" inverts the collapsed space by opening space with not-is
       (force), and/or is an expression of a thetan being in a condition of
       elsewhereness. (3rd column out the bottom)

In addition to the above, the three energy types of DISPERSAL, FLOW and RIDGE are mere manifestations of this prime archetype underlying the universe and our operation within it. A being playing a game within a universe plays by means of what we call in language "verbs." There are three types of verbs: BE, DO and HAVE. In order to play a game, to DO, one first has to BE something or someone. One needs an identity, a role to be a player, a SPACE in the game. Then one must have objects. One needs a body or other symbol to represent self, and bodies, objects and symbols to represent other players. These must be in the playing field, which can be small like a miniature chess set, or as large as an entire physical universe. This is HAVE. Once identities and a playing field full of stuff are established, then a game can be played with actions occurring. This is DO. That trio of be/do/have is very basic to existence, and our trio of dispersal/flow/ridge are special limited cases of it.

DISPERSAL is BE.
FLOW is DO.
RIDGE is HAVE.

A DISPERSAL appears to be a very fundamental manifestation of beingness, a spherical glow of energy from a location in space, a deva or "shining one." An outflowing dispersal (explosion) creates open space, flexibility and allows thought/postulates/intention to move rapidly. It also enables an easy shift of viewpoint (location in space) for a being, which is why the mutable signs exhibit these qualities. On a very high "plane" this relates to the number ONE (see article on numbers), which is pure "I am" and is sometimes seen as a vision of infinite space. This is AS-ISNESS.

A FLOW is the most basic action of doingness, from one location in space toward a second location. On a very high "plane" this relates to the number TWO. This is basic to dichotomies of opposites such as black/white, good/evil, etc. This is ALTER-ISNESS.

A RIDGE forms a solid mass and is therefore the most basic manifestation of havingness. On a very high "plane" this relates to the number THREE. This is NOT-ISNESS.

In astrology the 12 signs of the zodiac are divided into three groups:
MUTABLE CARDINAL FIXED

A MUTABLE sign (Gemini, Virgo, Sagittarius, Pisces) is mental, flexible and readily takes on other points of view. This is a very specialized case of DISPERSAL.

A CARDINAL sign (Aries, Cancer, Libra, Capricorn) is active, and a doer. This is a very specialized case of FLOW.

A FIXED sign (Taurus, Leo, Scorpio, Aquarius) is stubborn and acts/reacts slowly. This is a very specialized case of RIDGE.

The Hindus, for some reason unknown to me, deified this primal triangle as:
BRAHMA the Creator
VISNU the preserver
SIVA the destroyer
Seems like a silly thing to do, make a god out of it!

Here's all of them together:

1.                                2.                                 3.
as-isness                   alter-isness                not-isness
be                               do                                have
create                         survive                        destroy
born                            live                              die
affinity                         communication            reality
know                           control                         responsible
space                          motion                         anchor points/objects
start                            change                        stop
observer                     energy                        mass
dispersal                      flow                            ridge
mutable                       cardinal                       fixed
Brahma                       Visnu                           Siva

Add to these Max Sandor's Goal Construct triangle as it appears in Max Sandor's Purple Notebook:
I (self)                           the will                        objective
(sattva)                        (rajas)                        (tamas)
This is an excellent translation of the source material in the Bhagavad Gita.

Add another echo of the primal triangle I just spotted, the Symbol triangle:

meaning                       mobility                        mass

Add the 2nd, 3rd and 4th tones on Filbert's tone scale:

static                           coexistence                individuality
These three are the only triangle I've seen which lies above Creation on the tone scale.

In the African/Caribbean Yoriba system:
Olorun                         Eleda                            Olodumare
ORUN:
OLORUN:  This is the all encompassing IT, that which everything has within. The source of everlasting being and existence. The Creator of all things. The life giver. The Alpha and Omega. That which was in the beginning and has no end. All things comes from The Power. Beyond comprehension.
ELEDA:  Energy unconditioned by matter. The radiant force from the source of all things. All things within the power of Olorun, the indwelling spirit - Odu.
OLODUMARE:  Energy manifested into matter. That which is seen as material. All things within Olorun.
(from the IjoOrunmila  cosmology page)

Add the Awareness triangle spotted by Ken Ogger and mentioned in his Research Notes of 1997:
Knowingness              perception                  memory
If I may quote him:

On the other hand Ken, they probably do! This would have to be the triangle behind the Know to Mystery scale. (Definitely not the KRC triangle.) In the ascending version of this triangle memory is recovered as in processing, removing the not-is from Knowingness. In the descending version, memory accumulates mass and not-is until it is unconfrontable and lost to view.

You might notice that I changed the usual order in which some of the triangles appear. That is deliberate. I changed them in order to show how they line up with the others.

There are certainly more of these. But this is what I see as of now.

(10/14/00) Near the end of "Super Scio" (#10C) Ken Ogger seems to have spotted many of the same facts about the triangles as I have. His take on them is slightly different in perspective from mine (We are both viewing the same area from different POVs, which does not mean that either of us are wrong -- on the contrary, the combination of our viewpoints is righter than either alone!). He has a different triangle (pervasive - flux - fixed) at the top than I do (as-is - alter-is - not-is), which I find interesting. Mine is positioned at the top of universes, at Creation on the tone scale. I'm not sure whether his first item ("a pervasive aspect") is intended to operate at total pervasion of spaces (which my research indicates is at Creation anyway), or whether it represents something above Creation. (Please keep in mind the General Semantics dictum that the word is not the thing. Ken and I used different words attempting to say what we see, but that does not mean we see different things! Reality is far richer and more detailed than any single limited human viewpoint can encompass, therefore the more angles the better in our quest to envision the "cosmic all" as Doc Smith expressed it so nicely.) The only actions I've spotted above the postulation which begins at Creation are decisions made regarding beingness. I'd love to discuss it with Ken, but -- alas! -- he is currently incommunicado.

Another matter is that "prior" to the triangles of creation there were the dichotomies. All of the #2 items, both mine and his, are filling the span between top and bottom qualities of the dichotomies. Therefore his triangle labeled "THE OPERATION" was preceded by PERVASION vs NO PERVASION, which is another way of saying "BE = space" versus "be NO space". That dichotomy is filled by a flux, which is the second leg of the triangle, which in turn produces the third leg of the triangle, either as the top or the bottom item. The ARC triangle (please note that the excellent Ken also has placed them in the correct order!) is preceded by AFFINITY vs HATE, etc. This dichotomy is held apart by COMMUNICATION. The third leg, REALITY, may be expressed as either AFFINITY or HATE.

I notice that my Heisenberg triangle consists of Ken's 3.1.1, 3.2.2, and 3.3.3. Curiouser and curiouser... I wonder how many others exist which are mixed and matched that way?

Here is his write up verbatum:

87. In mathematics, we have what are called "fractile" patterns which are generated by performing a subdividing operation and then repeating the operation on each of the subdivisions etc. This is used in the chaos theory of physics. Things like snowflakes are fractile patterns (because the same thing happens to each piece and to each piece of a piece and to each piece of a piece of a piece).

Seeing so many groupings of three in Scientology, I looked for an underlying fractile pattern and came up with the following:

THE OPERATION: Starting from a singularity, it is subdivided into:

1. a pervasive aspect
2. a flux like aspect
3. a fixed aspect

Beginning from an infinite nothingness (static), the pattern branches out as follows (I might not have it quite right):

0. Infinite nothingness (static) divides into:

1. Theta (identity, thought)
2. Time
3. Physical Reality

These each divide and their pieces divide as follows:

1. Theta (identity, thought)

    ï 1.1 Knowingness

        ° 1.1.1 Affinity
        ° 1.1.2 Communication
        ° 1.1.3 Reality

      1.2 Control

        ° 1.2.1 Be
          1.2.2 Do
          1.2.3 Have

      1.3 Responsibility

        ° Confront
          Cause
          Connect (reach)

2. Time

    ï 2.1 Now (Awareness)

        ° 2.1.1 Observation
          2.1.2 Probability Waves
          2.1.3 Present Time

      2.2 Cycles

        ° 2.2.1 Start
          2.2.2 Change
          2.2.3 Stop

      2.3 Existence

        ° 2.3.1 Create
          2.3.2 Survive
          2.3.3 Destroy

3. Physical Reality

    ï 3.1 Space

        ° 3.1.1 Viewpoint
          3.1.2 Dimension
          3.1.3 Location

      3.2 Energy

        ° 3.2.1 Dispersal
          3.2.2 Flow
          3.2.3 Ridge

      3.3 Mass

        ° 3.3.1 Gas
          3.3.2 Liquid
          3.3.3 Solid

(Caveat 9/22/00 - The following are described as postulates. They are not postulates. They are instead high tone decisions above postulates. But to a lower awareness, such as mine when I wrote these, they look like postulates.) In reaching for the postulates behind as-is, alter-is, not-is this is what I get:

"First postulate is the truth."  (first column)
"2nd postulate is a lie."  (second column)  (know about?)
"3rd postulate is an unknown."  (third column)
Thereby laying out the expanded Know to Mystery scale by creating a separation between awareness and its opposite unawareness.

This was apparently altered (lied about) later to be:
"First postulate is Native State." (actually static, which is all space!)
"2nd postulate is existence."  (some space)
"3rd postulate is no theta."  (spiritual death, being no space)
Thereby laying out the tone scale by providing a separation between the terminals of existence and non-existence.

All six of the above are creative lies intended to provide a foundation for creating games and universes.

There's another set of postulates or decisions above those that I can sense. I haven't seen them clearly yet, but I know that they will turn out to be creative lies too.

Ouran

back to index