Nov 97
I've been poking a little bit more at the AM (Animal Mind) stuff and Michael Mourer's writings.
First, I'd like to point out that he has one very dangerous idea, and that is the belief that everything comes from AM Emote.
That is worse than the CofS idea that all case and somatics after Clear comes from BTs.
Michael's idea is worse because he makes even more grandious claims than the org does about Nots.
Note that I do believe BTs exist. And I can spot something on these AMs too.
But if you start assigning all cause to either of these factors, you're going to go into a tailspin, because you will mis-own every damn bit of case that you have left.
But I don't want to shut Michael up or discourage anyone who is making gains with his stuff. I would simply suggest that they run it on whatever it runs well on and not make assumptions about other things coming from there as well.
The original audited Nots messed up PCs. Most of the people who got it during that first year needed extensive repair. The big flaw was assuming that things came from BTs and running unreading items as a result.
So if a person had a somatic, and they did not have a BT reading in the area, they ran a "BT" anyway (probably having the PC drag one in there or mock one up without meaning to).
They probably still think that the somatic must be from a BT and there is just too much suppress to allow it to read. But they know that if they force the PC to run it under those circumstances, the PC will get worse. So they leave him alone.
In practice, the guy will probably get rid of about ten percent of his somatics by doing Nots.
You can't tell which somatic goes with what. Some headaches are out-int, some are from engrams, some are from overts, some are from BTs, some are from other screwups in energy, some are probably from screwed up chakras, some are probably from screwed up GE anchor points, some might even come from AMs, and of course the guy might actually have a hole in his head.
You can't look at any manifestation and assume that you know what it comes from.
The only stuff that I've been able to find which has that peculiarity of answering up to "animal mind" is on the emotional band. And its not all emotion, just some of it.
I think that it comes from some kind of early implant that involves extensive fragmentation and self replicating machinery.
But realize that its always you who is really doing it.
One of the interesting perceptions I had while reading over Michael's stuff was an awareness of mocking up things which in turn mocked up things which in turn mocked up things and so on. I think that it applies to a lot more than just AMs. It is a very profound and useful insight.
If I write a computer program which will in turn generate programs, or write a multi-threaded program which keeps generating new threads to handle things, or even write a self replicating virus program, the final programs generated are still my creation, and I work to fix and debug them and so forth even though I did not write them directly. In this case, I would generally be fixing the generator of the programs rather than the flawed results.
It all still comes back to me in the long run.
And it would be exceedingly slow to fix each copy, especially when the code generator is probably spewing them out very quickly. Instead you examine the copies a bit and then fix the generator itself.
Hence my suggestion to permeate the whole damn thing and have it spot being made into an animal mind. It does work if you can permeate and intend well enough.
If you can't, you'd probably be better off building up your muscels on other things until you can.
But I still haven't spotted the earlier reason why this was mocked up in the first place. That would be the really powerful undercut. That might blow apart the entire emotional system (the tone scale will blow on handling the penalty universes, but not the underlying emotions themselves).
---------------
On Oct 24, Michael - amismm@aol.com (AMismm) replied to Alan on subject "A PC fighting for Survival" > You keep trying to equate it to The LRH stuff. The LRH stuff > addrresses only the emote of the of the AMs or the Emote of > what the PC thinks, incorrectly is him/her.
Pretty extreme remark.
Since looking at the wall is LRH stuff, the only possible interpretation is that the wall itself is an AM emote.
The minimum proof would require walking through walls in front of witnesses, not just once but at will and on demand.
These things do happen sporatically, so we know it can be done. Since nobody can demonstrate consistant repeatable cause over mest (like the physists do), we know that our theories are incomplete. And since Mest is fairly low on the scale, even that is not a guarantee of ultimate answers but simply the price of admission.
Don't box yourself into a corner with grandious claims. Look what happened to Ron.
Leave yourself room to percieve and manuver and handle as new factors present themselves.
And note that most of the LRH stuff works exceedingly well in most cases as long as you don't try to solve everything with it or try to use it to control and enslave people.
----------------
There is a very intresting remark a few pages into the AM manual.
> Much later, again mistakenly, you thought you were all of the > thoughts, emotions, talk, effort and such emanated by your > created thought/energy structures. > > This was the end. > > Your spiritual death.
I quite like this, although I'm reading it literally instead of the way that Michael intended. Contemplating this
rehabbed the clear state for me.
Take "created thought/energy stuctures" literally instead of limiting it to Michael's AMs. Consider it to be all the addatives, whether AMs or GPMs or game spheres or codes or problem/solution chains or ARCXs or anthing else including things that we haven't yet got a clue about.
Consider that the being either thinks that he is that stuff or he separates from it and realizes that it is not him but simply something he projects.
Separating from it and seeing it as different from yourself instead of confusing yourself with it is the state
of
clear and is another slant on the clear cog.
In realizing deep down that you are mocking it up, you become separated from it instead of being it.
It doesn't mean that it is gone, just like exteriorizing from the body doesn't mean that the body disappears.
But now you can look at it and manipulate it instead of being stuck in it and at the effect of it.
That is a nice new definition of clear. Being exterior to the bank. It means that you can think instead of reacting.
This did happen for me when I went clear. Since then I always have a moment of free choice and decision before I react or dramatize something or have an ARCX or whatever. Often I will go ahead and ARCX (for example) anyway, because this doesn't handle the reason I'm ARCXing, but I always have the chance to look first instead of simply reacting.
I think that most clears have this, but I don't actually know for sure. I'd be interested in hearing other's ideas on this.
Michael does have insightfull things to say. If only he could stop hobby horseing about the AMs and broaden his viewpoint, he could be a really powerful researcher.
Best,
The Pilot