Embedded Files
Today is the 27th of July 1994 and I want to take up now, on this third tape of material on the
upper level tech of TROM, I want to take up this subject of sensations. This tape in common with
its predecessors must not be separated from the remainder of the set.
The word sensation is one of those words that when you look it up in the dictionary you rapidly
wish that you hadn't. It's one of those words that the dictionary doesn't really help you very
much on. The further you look it up in the dictionary the more confused you tend to become.
I suppose that the best definition of a sensation that we can find in English would be a sensation
is 'that which is sensed'. A sensation is that which is sensed, but unfortunately, you won't find
that definition in the dictionary.
As a person works with the exercises of TROM, they sooner or later become aware of something
on this subject of sensations and this something can be best expressed as the following: That
sensation is generated at the boundary between opposition postulates in games play. Now if you
know that. If you know that about a sensation you probably know more about sensations than
anyone else does, because that is a very fundamental datum about sensations.
Sensation Defined
Sensation is generated at the boundary between opposing postulates in games play. Now that
proposition leads us to a definition of a sensation. We could actually define a sensation in TROM
by saying that:
Sensation is that which is generated at the boundary between
opposition postulates in games play.
And that would be a very good definition of a sensation, and it's a far better definition of a
sensation than you will ever find in any dictionary, a far better definition. It's a better definition
simply because it's more useable. It's a more practical definition than what you will find in a
dictionary. It does actually help you and it doesn't confuse you. It actually solves confusion rather
than adding to your confusion.
Let's go through the definition a bit and take it apart and see if we can learn something by just
examining the definition. First we have that sensation is generated at the boundary. Generated!
Now that tells you that sensation is not created in games play, it's generated in games play, and
it's generated at the boundary between opposition postulates.
Well we know what opposition postulates are, we know of the goals packages and we can define
an opposition postulate. So we know what an opposition postulate is. Now this is the way it
works out, this is the way it appears to be, and this is our simplest look at this subject of
sensation.
As soon as you separate the universe into the classes of self and not-self and you occupy the
class of self, and this is all done with postulates. And as soon as you achieve this state of self,
then you look across at the class of not-self and notice the postulates over there. Then any
slightest opposition postulate that you put up to a postulate in the class of not-self, will
generate a sensation at the boundary between those two postulates. So if you can get that, you
understand what sensation is.
It's something which occurs at the boundary there between a postulate and its opposition
postulate. It's something which occurs at the boundary when the classes of self and not-self are
in conflict with each other.
Unless the two postulates involved are complementary postulates, some sensation will be
generated at the boundary between the postulates. It may be a very light sensation, a very
tenuous sensation, but only when the postulates are complementary is no sensation generated
at the boundary between them.
If the two postulates are not complementary postulates then there is always the possibility of
sensation being generated at the boundary between them. And if the postulates are opposing
postulates, as they become more and more directly opposed, more exactly in opposition, as I
should say, more and more correctly opposed to each other, the sensation becomes more
pronounced and more obvious.
Now this tells us right away that sensation is a phenomenon of games play, it's a phenomenon of
games play. In the absence of games we don't get this subject of sensation. In the no games
state there is no sensation.
There's no sensation in the no-games state. You have to be in a games state, in one of the game
conditions, you have to be either, a non-compulsive, a voluntary games player or a compulsive
games player or in the insanity state to be sensing any form of sensation.
You have to have divided the universe into the class of self and not-self in order to generate
sensation, in order to sense sensations. In other words there must be a games condition, there
has to be a games condition there. So sensation is a phenomenon of games play and that is
absolutely fundamental.
Now sensation is generated at the boundary between opposing postulates in games play. The
question that immediately arises is, "Can a spiritual being create sensation?" And the answer to
that is, yes. Obviously a spiritual being can create anything, but a spiritual being can only create
sensation when he knows what he's creating. It's like anything else, you've got to know what
you're creating before you can create it.
You've got to know what it is before you can mock it up. And it's quite useless for a spiritual
being to attempt to create sensation without understanding its anatomy. When he understands
its anatomy he can create it. But until he understands its anatomy, or what it consists of, he
won't have any success in creating it. The great joker in the pack is, of course, that at the point
where he understands the anatomy of the sensation and so can create the sensation he has no
need to create the sensation because he has no desire to create it.
So there are some ramifications here on the subject of learning what the anatomy of sensation
is. And it's not as simple as it might appear. I mean, a man might say, "Whoa, marvellous if I take
up TROM I can learn the anatomy of sensations and then I'll be able to create sexual sensation
and then I won't have to go down to a brothel every Saturday night and spend all my money in a
brothel, you see. I'll be able to mock-up all this sexual sensation." Well the joker there is by the
time he knows all about sexual sensation, he's long passed any desire spiritually to spend his
Saturday nights inhabiting a brothel.
There are various things he has to do before he will get into this state and by the time he gets
into the state of being able to knowingly generate the sexual sensation and then mock it up
simply as a postulate configuration or whatever it consists of, to create its anatomy, he's long
passed the desire for it. You see that? He can think of far more interesting things to do with his
time on a Saturday night than spend it in a brothel.
In other words, he's had a case change and his change of case will change his ideas on these
things. So when you walk this route towards the understanding of sensations and the creation of
sensations, do understand that it can produce some considerable changes to your life.
Sensation Are Peculiar to their Goals Package
Now moving on, one of my original earliest discoveries on the subject of sensations, working
with the goals package, was this discovery that the sensation generated in any particular goals
package is peculiar to that goals package. Now that is a very interesting discovery.
The sensation generated between the opposition postulates in any goals package is peculiar to
that goals package. In other words, you take the 'To Know' goals package the sensations
generated between the opposing postulates in that goals package are peculiar to that goals
package.
And similarly the 'To Eat' goals package would have its own particular sensation, and the 'To
Help' goals package would have its own particular sensation, and so on across the boards. Every
goals package has its own peculiar sensations that are generated between the opposition legs in
that goals package.
Four Ways You Can Generate Sensation
Now this fundamental discovery was quickly followed by another discovery which is a much more
important discovery. And that is that the sensation that can be generated in a goals package can
be generated by occupying any one of the four legs of that goals package and simply creating
the postulate in that leg of the goals package and opposing it to its opposition postulate in the
environment.
In other words, you could take the 'To Sex' postulate and create that postulate, put yourself into
that class and say, "Right well that's me and I'm going to create the 'To Sex' postulate and
providing you can get someone out over that way to oppose you with a 'To Not be Sexed'
postulate, then you can generate sexual sensation with a 'To Sex' postulate.
Similarly you can generate sexual sensation with a 'To Not Sex' postulate, providing you can get
someone over that way in the class of not-self to oppose your 'To Not Sex' with a 'To be Sexed'
postulate.
Or you can generate sexual sensation by mocking up, in the class of self a... 'To be Sexed'
postulate and providing you can get somebody, an opponent over that way to oppose you with a
'To Not Sex' postulate.
Or, and finally, you can generate sexual sensation by mocking up a 'To Not be Sexed' postulate
and opposing it to someone over that way who is directing a 'To Sex' postulate at you.
So there's four ways you can create this sexual sensation. Now that is a tremendously interesting
datum. When you start to think about that, something very fundamental occurs. There's an
important datum immediately deducible from that state of affairs. And that is that if you can
generate this sensation by occupying any one of the four legs of the goals package and opposing
it to its opposition postulate in the environment then it follows that the sensation being
generated must only consist of the four postulates of that goals package.
Now this is one of those data that once you've grasped it the penny is suddenly dropped and you
say, "Oh my god why didn't I think of that, before. It's obvious." Let's say you take the 'To Sex'
goals package if you can generate this sensation by occupying any one of those four legs in the
package.
All you require is that somebody over that way is going to oppose your postulate and you can
generate this sensation while using any one of those four postulates. Then the sensation itself
that you are generating can only consist of the four postulates of the 'To Sex' goals package. If
you think about it, it's obvious isn't it... it's obvious. I mean if you've got a 'To Sex' postulate
sitting in space and it's opposed by a 'To Not be Sexed' postulate and at the boundary between
them we have this thing called sexual sensation being generated. Then we have a 'To be Sexed'
postulate and a 'To Not Sex' postulate sitting there and between them we find that there's
sexual sensation being generated and it's the same sensation that was being generated between
the other two postulates.
Well this sensation being generated can only consist of some configuration of the four
postulates of the 'To Sex' goals package. See? We already know that the sexual sensation is
peculiar to the 'To Sex' goals package. That was the first discovery. Then we found out that it can
be generated from any one of the four legs of the package.
So, the sensation, it follows logically, that the sensation must consist and can only consist of the
four postulates of the goals package in a particular postulate configuration and it's our job to
find out what this configuration is.
The Anatomy of Sensation
If we can discover what this configuration is we then know the anatomy of the sensation. Do you
get that? The anatomy of the sensation then in the particular goals package is simply a matter of
determining, "What is the postulate configuration that occurs at the boundary between the
opposition postulates?"
There's some configuration of postulates there and this configuration consists of all four
postulates of the goals package, no more, no less. See? It's not those four postulates plus other
things. No, no, it's exactly, the four postulates of the goals package are necessary and sufficient
to produce the sensation. Get it?
Now this might be a new idea to you, this idea that a sensation can actually only consist of
postulates. That its anatomy can be entirely a matter of postulates. That its total existence is
subject to postulates. Now this is unusual. Maybe it's a new thought to you, but you're going to
have to come to grips with this idea.
Postulates are Mass
Unfortunately a part of our general philosophy in the west, and this philosophy has been
continued in the subject of Scientology, is to separate out mass from postulates, to keep them in
separate and distinct classes.
In other words, in Scientology we have the idea that you can mock things up with a postulate.
You make a postulate to create, and you create something and that which you create may be a
mass. See? So the mass is the result of the postulate. But the idea of a mass or whatever it is, a
creation, consisting of a postulate, ahh, now that's something new. Now that's something you
have to wrap your mind around. That's a new idea to many who come to grips with this material
in TROM for the first time, it's a new thought. It's a new idea. But it's one that you're going to
have to come to grips with, as will become obvious as we proceed.
So just bear with me for the moment. But this idea that what you normally regard as a mass or as
an energy manifestation or as a manifestation of particles, a sensation and such, may simply
consist entirely of postulates in a certain configuration, and by configuration I mean a pattern,
now that's something new.
The Illusion is the Mass
Another way to look at it would be to say that, "Well if this is so then the actuality is the
postulates and the illusion is the mass or the energy or the sensation." You see that? One
perceives the illusion but the actuality is the postulates and the particular postulates of the
goals package in a certain configuration. Ok?
Now let's see how this can come about. In order to find out how it can come about it's necessary
for us to imagine a game situation. And that is all that is necessary for us to do is to imagine a
game situation. Then we'll see how this can come about, and see how this can occur.
Let's imagine a person in the general case occupying a game situation using postulate X. Here
we're going to use the XY postulate set, our general XY postulate set, our general case. And we
have one person occupying an identity that's using the postulate X. And his opposition postulate
is the postulate (1-Y), OK?
The person is directing his X postulate towards his opponent and the opponent is directing the
(1-Y) postulate towards him. Now the two postulates are going out and somewhere between
these two identities... call them A and B, we'll have A using an X postulate and the identity B is
using a (1-Y) postulate, and somewhere between the two of them, the two postulates the X and
the (1-Y) postulate are going to meet.
Boundary Conditions
Now here we have what are technically known as boundary conditions. These are boundary
conditions. And we have to go in and find out exactly what is going on under these boundary
conditions.
Now let's take it from the viewpoint of the X postulate. The X postulate goes out and meets the
(1-Y) postulate. Well now the purpose, the intention of the (1-Y) postulate is to do what? It's to
drive this X postulate into (1-X), got that?
In other words, that is what the (1-Y) postulate is trying to do is to drive X into (1-X). If the (1-Y)
postulate succeeds completely across the boards then identity A will change his postulate from
X to (1-X). Then the postulate configuration that maintains will be (1-Y) and (1-X) which are
complementary postulates signifying an overwhelm and the end of the game.
Remember our set is an XY set. It's got two complementary postulates in it. It's got XY
complementary postulate and (1-X)(1-Y) is the other pair of complementary postulates. So the
purpose of the (1-Y) is to drive X into (1-X) and so overwhelm X and create the end of game
situation and complementary postulates (1-X)(1-Y). Ok?
But let's imagine that the situation is a stable situation. In other words the boundary is stable,
the boundary is not moving towards A and it's not moving towards B, it's staying at its position.
In other words it's a static situation. But the postulates are still going out and there is this
collision between these opposition postulates which is the boundary.
Ok, can you imagine that? Well now what is going to happen to this X postulate? Well let us
imagine a little tiny parcel of an X postulate as it approaches the boundary. This is rather like
when you are working with differential calculus when you take a little tiny section of the thing
being analysed. Well this is very similar. You take an infinitely tiny parcel of X postulate and as
this tiny parcel of postulate goes toward the boundary it comes more and more under the
influence of the (1-Y) postulate on the other side of the boundary and there are two forces
acting upon this little parcel.
There is a force behind it which is holding it and driving it into X and there is the force from the
other side of the boundary, the opposition force which is driving it into (1-X). And this little
parcel gets closer and closer until it's right up against the boundary, till the (1-Y) postulate is
facing it, driving it inexorably into (1-X), but behind it there's the games player A driving with the
X postulate so the little parcel is being held in X but being driven into (1-X).
So when the limit is reached, at the limiting point the X postulate bonds to the (1-X). At a certain
point on the boundary the (1-Y) is going to drive a little parcel of X postulate into (1-X) at the
boundary, but this little parcel of (1-X) is being pressed hard up from behind by the next parcel
of X. X is driving it from behind. Follow?
So the effect is this little parcel of (1-X) postulate and the little parcel of X postulate are going to
be forced to bump together. And you're going to get the bonding of X to (1-X). Now that is going
to happen on the X side of the boundary. Now for exactly the same reasons on the (1-Y) side of
the boundary we're going to get little parcels of (1-Y) hard up against the boundary, we're going
to get the (1-Y) parcels being influenced by the X postulate on the other side of the boundary
and being driven from (1-Y) into Y so we're going to get little tiny parcels of Y postulate there
and little tiny parcels of (1-Y) postulate. They're going to be crushed together, forced together
and driven together into the common class of Y(1-Y).
So one side of the boundary we're going to get the production of the postulate configuration
X(1-X) and on the other side of the boundary, immediately facing it, hard up against it we're
going to get the production of the postulate Y(1-Y).
TIPs
Now we've already met this postulate configuration when we discussed insanity, we know what
these are, we called them IPs. So at the boundary between the opposition postulates we see the
formation of the two IP's of the goals package, on the X side you see the X(1-X) IP, on the Y side
there's Y(1-Y) IP.
There are these two IPs forming. So the postulate configuration at the actual boundary, what
we call the boundary condition, the boundary condition postulate is X(1-X)+Y(1-Y)=1. It's what
we, when we're discussing insanity, call the Twin IP situation. TIP, remember the TIP? The Twin
Impossibility Points? So at the boundary, we have on the X side of the boundary a continuous
creation of these little X(1-X) IP's.
We have the X(1-X) IP on one side of the boundary being continuously created, masses and
masses of them. Imagine them as little tiny parcels of this IP being created continuously on one
side of the boundary.
On the other side of the boundary there's a continuous creation of these Y(1-Y) IPs, and that is
all that is happening at the boundary. There is nothing else at the boundary. There are just those
four postulates you see? Two postulates in the IP form on one side of the boundary and two
postulates in the IP form on the other side of the boundary and they are the four postulates of
the goals package.
One side we've got X(1-X) and the other side we got Y(1-Y), but they are the four postulates of
the goals package, of the XY goals package. You see that? Now what happens to these little IPs?
Do they just sort of sit there? No they don't. They merge.
Now to understand how they merge we have to just pick out of our massive creation of these IP's
at the boundary one little parcel of X(1-X) IP and another little tiny parcel Y(1-Y) IP. So we've got
two postulates in the IP state. We got an X bonded to a (1-X) and right by its side, imagine right
by its side, we've got a Y bonded to a (1-Y) IP.
Now put those postulates into a square. Put those postulates into a square. In the top left hand
corner of the square you put the X postulate. OK, now in the bottom left hand corner of the
square put the (1-X) postulate. On the top right hand corner of the square you put the Y
postulate. Now in the bottom right hand corner of the square you put the (1-Y) postulate.
Alright now let's go to the left hand corner to the X postulate and let's see what the situation is
regarding this little tiny X postulate on the top left hand corner of the square. It's bonded to the
1-X at the bottom left hand corner of the square and that is the X(1-X) IP, see that?
So it bonded to its IP in the twin, but on the top right hand corner of the square there is a Y
postulate, now X and Y are complementary postulates in this universe and they tend to attract
each other.
Complementary Postulates Attract and Cancel Each Other Out.
They have an attraction for each other; remember under the laws of postulates where I gave you
that complementary postulates attract each other, merge and cancel each other out. Opposition
postulates oppose each other and tend to fly apart and do not cancel each other out. That's the
basic law of the canons of the postulates, of their attraction and repulsion for each other.
See them as rather like electric charges. So we have the X postulate and the (1-X). X in the top
left hand corner and (1-X) in the bottom left hand corner, they’re bonded together so they are
pulling towards each other, we have the X and the Y, that's the top left hand corner and the top
right hand corner pulling towards each other because they are complementary postulates.
They're trying to merge but diagonally across the square from the X postulate is a (1-Y)
postulate. Now that's an opposition postulate, X and (1-Y) are opposition postulates and they
tend to fly apart. Ok?
So they would repel each other. Now what I said for X and (1-X) is true for the Y and (1-Y). The Y
and (1-Y) are bonded together, top right hand corner and bottom right hand corner are bonded
together they're pulling towards each other and they form the IP Y(1-Y). So Y is also attracted to
the X postulate between the top right hand corner and the top left hand corner, but the bottom
right hand is opposing the top left hand corner and the top right corner is also in opposition to
its opposition postulate which is the (1-X) postulate across the other diagonal.
So you've got a square now, if you join the lines up in the square with force lines, you'll see that X
and Y are pulling towards each other, X and (1-X) are pulling towards each other but across the
diagonal X and (1-Y) are flying apart and this is true for Y and (1-X) while Y and (1-Y) are attracted
to each other. So each postulate in each corner of the square is being pulled on by two
postulates to merge but it's prevented from merging because across the diagonal it's being
repelled by the postulate across the diagonal.
Now if you were to take the X postulate out and draw up separately the forces acting upon the X
postulate you would come to see that they form what is known in mechanics as a triangle of
forces and that the three forces are in equilibrium.
Now this is a little bit of high school mechanics. But it can be easily shown that the configuration
is completely stable and that the X postulate will stay right where it is, in other words it's at rest.
It's got no impetus to move any place. The X postulate just sits there and similarly with the (1-X)
postulate and similarly with the Y postulate, and with the (1-Y) postulate they form a stable
square.
The two IP's come together and stick with the X stuck to the Y and the (1-X) stuck to the (1-Y)
and the X stuck to the (1-X) and the Y stuck to the (1-Y), but the X repelling the (1-Y) because
they are opposition postulates and the Y repelling the (1-X) postulate and those last two
repulsions being across the diagonals of the square and the whole thing is a stable configuration
that will sit there in space.
In other words you could leave it there; it has no intention to move any place. It's a completely
stable configuration. Now that stable configuration is the basic sensation at the boundary
between the opposing postulates. What you perceive as the sensation consists of those four
postulates in that configuration I've just given to you. That's what the sensation is.
TIPM
Sensation simply consists of those four postulates those Twin IP's stuck together, into that
configuration and we call that configuration TIPM. M stands for mass because that is what you
perceive. You don't perceive it as postulates; you tend to perceive it as mass. So we call it TIPM,
twin impossibility point mass, T I P M and that is the technical name we use in TROM for a
sensation T I P M.
We call it TIPM, because that's exactly what it is, it's twin impossibility point mass, that's its exact
anatomy. So TIPM is a much better name for it than sensation, which is a completely non-
descriptive term, but TIPM is highly meaningful, because we know what we're talking about
when we talk about TIPM.
Now let us consider what we might call a single parcel of TIPM in this XY goals package which is
generated at the boundary between the X and the (1-Y) postulate, under the circumstances
we've been discussing.
We have the four postulates there, in the top left hand corner we have X, in the bottom left hand
corner we have (1-X), the top right hand corner we have Y and in the bottom right hand corner
we have (1-Y), and the forces between them are exactly as I've given and we know that this is a
stable postulate configuration in a stable balance of forces.
Now each one of these four postulates is quite capable of attracting its complementary
postulate exterior to this little parcel. Do you follow that?
In other words the X postulate in the little parcel we're dealing with, although bonded to (1-X)
and attracting and stuck to its Y postulate, which it can't completely merge with, of course, but
stuck to the Y postulate. It's still quite capable of attracting the Y postulate from another parcel
of TIPM nearby. And similarly with the (1-X) postulate in the bottom left hand corner it's quite
capable of attracting the (1-Y) postulate from a nearby package of TIPM, and similarly with the Y
and the (1-Y) postulates in the top right and the bottom right hand corner of our square. Each of
the four postulates in this stable configuration is capable of attracting its complementary
postulates external to the package.
The little parcel that we're considering in this whole mass of TIPM, that is milling about and
forming at the boundary under these boundary conditions where these little parcels of TIPM are
being constantly generated at the point of conflict between the opposing postulates is capable
of bonding to another postulate set. You see that?
So the tendency will be for these little parcels of TIPM as they form to join up with each other.
With the X joined up to the Y of another packet, another parcel of TIPM, and the (1-X) joined up
to the (1-Y) and the Y joined up to an X of another parcel and the (1-Y) joined up to (1-X) of
another parcel, and so on. You see?
All the bits join up by the attraction of the complementary postulates. That's what pulls them
together. So the little squares will join up and form what we call a matrix and you will see a
matrix there, you could draw it out on a piece of paper if you wanted to, you simply take your
basic square and put by the side of it another square and put in your lines of force there and you
would see the way they would join up.
Bearing in mind that the complementary postulates attract each other and the opposition
postulates repel each other. So those forces would be sufficient to cause the whole mass of
these little parcels of TIPM to form themselves into a matrix. You follow me?
At the boundary we don't actually have a mass of what you might call parcels of TIPM, we have
one lump, there's a tendency for the little parcels of TIPM as they form and are generated in
games play to bond to the other particles and the whole thing to coalesce and become a massive
TIPM, a conglomerate of TIPM at the boundary between the opposing postulates.
Flows, Dispersals and Ridges
Now Ron Hubbard, if you recall in the early days of Scientology, if you recall the book 8-80. Ron
wrote a book 8-80 on energy flows back in 1951 or early ‘52 on the subject of energy flows and
he talked of flows and dispersals and ridges and he said when you get to energy flows crashing
together they form a ridge.
Well he'd spotted this phenomenon in his own psyche and what Ron Hubbard called a ridge was
actually the boundary condition between the opposing postulates in the goals package. In other
words we're talking about the same phenomena that Ron had spotted back in 1951 when we're
talking about TIPM. But Ron didn't know it's anatomy, he hadn't got it's anatomy out, because he
didn't ever clearly isolate the goals packages like I have done with TROM, but he knew that when
two flows crash together that a ridge would form between them, he called that an energy ridge.
And that surrounding this energy ridge would be a dispersal of energy. You remember he talked
of flows, dispersals and ridges.
Well I'll tell you where the dispersals fit in, in a moment, we'll get to those, we'll see how they fit
in, and we will see how accurate Ron was. He was tremendously accurate in his observations but
he just wasn't able to put it together in the form and to get the exact anatomy out like we can do
it. He saw it as energy. He couldn't grasp that what he was looking at as energy wasn't really
energy it was a postulate configuration which we call TIPM, with the postulates in the IP state.
He never got that far, but we've got that far so we can analyse and get the complete anatomy of
what Ron used to call a ridge, and what Ron used to call a flow. Well a flow is simply the flow of
the postulates and where they crash together it forms a ridge. Then we'll talk about the
dispersal in the area of the ridge.
So we're not talking about anything here which was not forecast, you might say, by Ron Hubbard
back in the early days of Scientology, and I refer you to his book 8-80, Scientology 8-80 I think. I
remember the book was called; The chapter is "The subject of flows, dispersals and ridges."
So at the boundary we see this massive conglomeration of TIPM which will tend to form itself
into a solid lump. In other words, this TIPM has an attraction for itself. In other words, the
separate little parcels of TIPM have an attraction for each other. Left to their own devices they
will collapse on each other and form a mass. You could say that each particle or each little parcel
of TIPM consists of the four postulates of the goals package in the postulate configuration I've
described, that each little parcel would have a gravitational pull for the other particles. You
follow?
So the tendency for them if left together in space, they would all collapse in on each other by the
gravitational pull of the complementary postulates involved. And so you would tend to see the
collapse of each little parcel, these little parcels together. They might start as a confusion of
particles or a confusion of parcels of TIPM but they would soon collapse in on each other and
sort themselves out and become a solid lump, a matrix.
What we call a matrix of TIPM, which would be quite a fixed thing. It would tend to stick together
because of the attraction between the complementary postulates that are holding it together.
There would be no tendency for it to fly apart. It would have a cohesion because of the
complementary postulates which it contained holding it together. You get that?
So understand that cohesive nature of TIPM it tends to have a gravitational attraction for other
bits of TIPM. Just thought I'd mention that in passing, we'll discuss that aspect of it more later
on.
Sequence of Events when Moving the Barrier
Well so far we've talked about this barrier being stuck between games player A and games
player B. Now we must discover what happens when one of those players starts to win the game.
We can now move from the static situation we've been discussing to the dynamic situation that
we see in actual life where one or other of the players starts to overwhelm the other player.
Now what happens when this occurs is that the boundary starts to move towards the loser. He
no longer is able to hold the boundary out there, His postulate is insufficient to hold the
boundary in its position and the boundary starts to move towards him. The TIPM is still being
formed at the boundary and as he progressively loses the game the boundary comes in closer
and closer to him.
Now as this happens he will go through a definite sequence of events, which you ought to know
about. Actually if you were to continue to do Level 5 long enough you would discover all this
material for yourself. You would discover all these events, all about boundaries and all about
TIPM for yourself but it's necessary to understand the phenomena that we're talking about.
Event 1 – Postulate Randomly Flips
Just what happens as this boundary moves towards the person. Supposing X is the loser, he's
losing the game. And this boundary of TIPM is moving relentlessly towards him. There's the
opponents (1-Y) postulate that proceeds to overwhelm him, the boundary gets closer and closer.
Now the sequence starts there, and the first sign that he gets as he starts to come under the
influence of the boundary conditions in the game is that the boundary gets so close to him that
his own postulate begins to flip at random between the postulate and it's negative.
In other words he's beginning to get right up close to the boundary now and he's beginning to go
into the boundary condition himself so his X postulate starts to flip. He can't hold his postulate in
X, it flips over to (1-X). It gets driven into overwhelm and he goes into (1-X), then he hauls it back
out again and gets it back onto X and pushes on with the game.
Then a moment later his postulate snaps into (1-X), then he snaps it back into X. And so at first
this happens at random. This random snapping between the postulate X and its negative (1-X) as
he's influenced by the boundary conditions, you see he's acting like the little parcels of X
postulate do.
They were being pushed backwards and forwards between the X and the (1-X). Well now it's
happening to the games player himself. Now the emotion, the feeling, the sense... well it's not
sensation, the feeling that goes with this is the feeling of confusion. He starts to feel confused,
goes into the feeling of confusion.
Now this is quite an important part of the proceeding, is this confusion, we better understand
what we mean when we say confusion and analyse the word itself.
Confusion
Now the word confusion comes from the Latin fundere means to pour. Also, the word confound
comes from the Latin fundere to pour and the word confound and the word confuse mean much
the same thing, to confound and to confuse. So the word confuse in our language almost literally
means to fuse with. You know, it's an interesting word isn't it, to fuse with. And we're talking
about IP's where postulates are being bonded to their negative and being fused together. It's a
very interesting word from its derivation.
It's almost as if someone way down the line sort of just picked it, picked this meaning, this idea
of confusion, the idea of two things being bonded together. Never the less that is exactly the
feeling that the person gets as their IP barrier gets closer. The TIPM barrier I should say, moves
up closer and closer to them. They go through a period of confusion where their postulates snap
backwards and forwards.
They're in the X postulate and it keeps snapping to (1-X) and they haul it back to X again, and
they hold it at X for a while and it will snap over to (1-X) and they get it back to X but it's random
it's not regular it's random, confusion. Now that feeling of confusion will intensify and then
diminish and as it diminishes, the barrier is now getting closer it diminishes and the person goes
into what is called a pulse reaction.
Event 2 – The Pulse Reaction
They're now pulsing between the X postulate and the (1-X) postulate regularly. They would be
holding their postulate X then... (1-X)... X... (1-X)... X... (1-X) but it's not random, it's regular, it's a
regular pulsation between the postulate and it's negative. Now this pulsation will get faster and
faster till a certain point will be reached where the person is holding both postulates
simultaneously.
Event 3 – The Rest Point (IP)
They're in X and (1-X), they're in both postulates simultaneously. They are in the IP. Now at that
point when they're right in the IP it's a rest point. There's no confusion, there's no pulse, it's a
rest point. There's a moment of stillness and motionlessness in there. It's a rest point there, right
in the IP.
Event 4 – The After Pulse
Then they start to go out of the IP and start to go into the pulse again. They now go into the
pulsation, a very, very fast pulsation of X, (1-X), X, (1-X), X, (1-X) in other words they start to go
out in reverse from the way they came into the IP.
Event 5 – Random Snapping (Confusion Again)
They go out, first pulsing X, (1-X), X, (1-X) then random (1-X), X, (1-X), X and the feeling of
confusion will return then there's less and less X's and more and more (1-X)'s until they are in (1-
X).
Overwhelm
Now they are in overwhelm.
The effect in other words is to drive the IP barrier through the person, it gets literally driven
through the person and out the other side, and the effect on his postulate is to change it from
the postulate X as the IP approaches into (1-X) as the IP barrier goes through him and out the
other side.
The barrier gets driven through the person and comes out the other side leaving him in
overwhelm holding the (1-X) postulate. Now that sequence of events I've given you can happen
in seconds or it can take minutes or it can take hours but it happens in every overwhelm in games
play, no exceptions. Doesn't matter what the postulates are the person always, if he suffers an
overwhelm, he goes through that sequence of events.
At first he has his postulate. He feels he's losing the game, the barrier gets closer and closer to
him, he starts to feel confused then he starts to pulse between the postulate and it's negative
postulate. Then he has this rest point where there is no motion. Then he's out the other side into
the pulses again. Then he feels the confusion again. Then the confusion lessens and he settles
into the negative postulate and the sequence is invariable. It happens every time, in every game.
Every time he's ever lost a game in this universe the being has gone through that sequence.
Now you might say, "Well if that is so, how come it's not reported in therapy? How come that the
patients regressed in therapy don't report it?" But they do report it. Every time a person goes
into an engram, a pain engram, they will always report confusion if they get sufficient contact
with the injury, sufficient contact with the impact, then they will report some confusion.
Well what about this pulse why don't they report the pulse? Well sometimes they do. I've known
a preclear to say, "Well I don't know I seem to be sort of pulsing between things here ... there but
it's... you know", but then the thing is gone and then there's a sort of calmness there and then
he's back in the confusion again. But the real reason why the person doesn't experience all the
steps in the action in recall is because the rational mind abhors the IP state. You see that? So he
skids over it, he skids over the IP.
The tendency is when you run an engram on a person or run a point of overwhelm, he'll pick up
the point where he'll start to lose the game, he'll feel the confusion, then he'll feel the impact,
and then he'll be in the overwhelm. He'll go straight through the IP unknowingly, because he
abhors it. He just doesn't register it.
And the next thing, there he is, he's in postulate reversal and his postulates got overwhelmed,
and he didn't spot it, he didn't spot the IP. See? Simply because the rational mind abhors the IP
state and so it won't duplicate it. The rational mind can duplicate the confusion so when you run
an engram on a preclear they almost invariably report some form of confusion. Sometimes
they'll report the pulse but that's rare, but they never report the stillness right at the centre of
the IP, because to experience that they would have to experience pure insanity and that they
can't duplicate.
They can't duplicate that because that's pure insanity that they went through.
Insanity or Overwhelm?
Now what is the difference between the person going insane and the person going into an
overwhelm in games play?
Well there's really only one difference, the person going insane never came out. You know, he
had no place to go, so he's stuck in the IP. It was his last game, so he's stuck in it. But your
ordinary games player being overwhelmed in games play, he will go through the IP barrier, and
come out the other side, simply because he's got some place to go. So he can come back out.
And he does come back out. All he suffers is a postulate overwhelm.
Sensation at Overwhelm
Now there's another phenomena that occurs that I haven't mentioned so far because I didn't
want to burden you with too much all at once. But there's another phenomenon occurs as the
person starts to lose the game and have the barrier move towards him.
As the IP barrier moves towards him the game sensation which he's been sensing all the time he
has been playing this game, intensifies. He can sense this barrier consists of IP's and he senses it
as sensation. Remember I said that. He doesn't sense it as postulates, he sees it as a mass but he
also doesn't sense it as IP's, he senses it as mass, as game sensation. So he's sensing the games
sensation there and as the barrier moves towards him the game sensation intensifies.
Inverse Square Law and Sensation
It can be easily shown, given that the postulate intensity is constant, that the intensity of
sensation obeys the inverse square law in the universe. In other words, if the barrier is half the
distance the sensation is four times as strong.
It's the inverse square law in the universe, Newton's inverse square law of gravity. But anyway,
that's just an interesting point in passing but that is the law that it obeys. That the closer he gets
to that barrier the intensity of the sensation he feels goes up according to that inverse square
law. And this intensity of sensation increases and reaches a peak at the point where he goes into
the IP, at which point it stops.
Then when he comes out the other side, there's a peak sensation again. Then as he settles into
the overwhelm, his postulate is changed to its negative so the barrier's gone and the sensation
rapidly drops off to zero, because the game is ended now. He's in complementary postulates
with the opponent.
Once he goes through rapid confusion on the other side of the barrier and then complementary
postulates, the game’s ended and all the sensation ends. But the sensation peaks actually at the
point just when he goes into the IP. Just when he goes through the IP barrier is the maximum
point of sensation.
Compulsive Games Players Crave Sensation
Now if you understand this about sensation and this relation between the IP barrier and
sensation you will understand something which has puzzled many researchers in the human
mind, in the human psyche, which we now can explain.
This factor of why it is that games players, particularly compulsive games players will put their
sanity at risk in order to enjoy games sensation. And they do it time and time again. They will
take enormous risk; they will put their life at risk in order to enjoy game sensation.
What are they doing? They're pulling that IP barrier closer and closer to them in order to
maximise the sensation. Remember the inverse square law, the closer that barrier is to them the
more sensation they’re going to enjoy, but you see the danger they're running for themselves.
They could easily, if they're not careful, they could easily get stuck in that IP, in which case they
lose everything, the sensations gone and their sanity's gone. See that?
And if the other side of the IP is death, and it may be, on one side of the IP they may be alive but
the negative postulate may be their death. So when they go through the IP and out the other
side they’re dead. You see that, it can happen when you have certain types of postulate
configurations, certain types of postulates.
We find that the compulsive games player in order to generate the maximised game sensation
will pull himself as close as possible to the IP barrier in order to maximise his sensation, and he
will often boast of this, of how close he could get to it.
It's like adolescents in motor cars, you know, of how fast they can drive down a road at a brick
wall and still be able to pull up in time before they crash into the wall. It's that sort of activity. It's
how close they can get to the IP barrier.
In other words, they're simply trying to maximise the thrill, maximise the sensation, maximise
the game sensation without either losing their life or their sanity. It's a fascinating phenomenon
of games play, one that's been recorded and noticed by many students of philosophy and
psychology and therapy.
But none of them have ever been able to explain it, and for the first time in TROM we can
understand it, because we've got the anatomy of it, we can see it exactly in terms of the
postulates and the IP state, and we've got all the bits involved and we can see exactly how the
person does it, and why they do it.
Once we know the relationship there, that the intensity of the sensation is inversely proportional
to the distance between himself and the IP barrier. Get it?
Sensation Generated by Games Play
You see the games player is in an awful fix on this subject of games sensation. He can't mock it
up. He can't create it. He can only generate it in games play. And every games player sooner or
later realises this system of maximizing game sensation.
He might not know it exactly in the way that we have got it described, the way we understand it
in TROM. He doesn't see it as clearly as we see it, but he does know that by taking risks he can
maximise his game sensation, and it's the only way he knows how to generate the sensation.
He can't do it any other way. He can't mock it up. He can't create it. So he has a love/hate
relationship with this IP barrier. It attracts him like a moth to a flame. It's pure sensation, the
barrier is. You see? But like the moth to the flame, if the moth goes into the flame he's a dead
moth. If the games player gets caught in the IP barrier and gets stuck right into the IP barrier,
he's a gone games player because his sanity's gone, at least his sanity's gone, and maybe his life
is gone too. So there are the risks he takes, and there is the incredible fascination that the games
player has on this subject of sensation. Get it?
It's a love/hate relationship. He's attracted by it like the moth to the flame, he can't keep away
from it and he can't satisfy his craving by his own creativity because he can't mock it up. It won't
create, it's quite incredible, it won't create. It can only be generated.
Now there's the inner datum, the inner secret, the inner button, the inner works of this subject
of sensation and the craving of sensation, and its effect in games play. But, as I was saying, the IP
state when you come to experience it, come to examine it is really a toothless tiger. When you
really get into it and learn how to handle it, it's a toothless tiger. It's the same with this subject of
sensation.
Craving for Sensation Disappears
As you work with Level 5 in TROM, you work with the postulates there and you work with the IP
state. And understand where it fits into games play, and get to know its anatomy, and get to
experience all of its parts, and so forth, you will find you're dealing with a toothless tiger.
You reach a point eventually where you don't perceive the barrier as a mass. You perceive the IP
barrier, for what it is, a series of postulates in the IP configuration. And something interesting
happens at that point, case-wise, in Level 5, the craving for sensation disappears. It's gone, at the
point where you know exactly what it is, you know all about its complete anatomy you've lost all
desire for it. It's gone. Get it?
And besides, you might say it's only the mystery of what sensation is that keeps attracting the
games player, cause he can't create it, and he can't create it because he doesn't know what it is.
At the point where he reaches the case level in TROM where he can create it exactly and
precisely, his need for it is gone. He's like the man who says, "Marvellous, I think I'll TROM so I
won't have to go to the brothel every Saturday night and I'll be able to mock-up sexual
sensation."
But the exact point where he reaches his goal he doesn't have any need to mock-up sexual
sensation because he understands exactly what it is, he's got the whole postulate configuration
there and it's gone. The whole thing's gone. The whole lot just falls apart, there's nothing there.
The whole lot just evaporates into nothing. The craving's gone, to be replaced with knowingness
and understanding.
Now that's what happens in therapy on this subject. So when a person embarks on Level 5 of
TROM, as I said in the write up when a person embarks on Level 5 it might change them into
something different from human. They might not be what is normally regarded as human by the
time they've finished it.
Well this is one of those aspects. See? Your attitude toward sensation is going to have a marked
change and you will find instead of spending a large percentage of your life going around trying
to generate games sensation, you can find other more interesting things to do with your time
than wasting it trying to find games sensation.
When you simply understand the nature of this sensation, you lose interest in it, because you
understand it.
The Anatomy of Confusion and Dispersal
Now I've just been replaying this tape so far and I've realised that I mentioned this subject of
confusion and dispersal, I mentioned Ron in 8-80 and flows, dispersals and ridges and I said I'd tie
up this subject of dispersal for you.
Well the subject of dispersal is the subject of confusion. What Ron meant by an energy dispersal
is exactly matched by a person in a state of confusion when he's bouncing at random between a
postulate and its negative. That's all confusion is, by the way, that is the anatomy of confusion, is
the random snapping between a postulate and its negative. That's all confusion is.
This feeling of confusion is the random snapping between a postulate and its negative. You can
take any confusion apart that way. And that's all it consists of, there's nothing else there, nothing
else in any confusion but the random snapping between a postulate and its negative, and that is
the dispersal that Ron spoke about now in 8-80. That's an energy dispersal, that feeling of
confusion, the confusion is the dispersal.
There isn't anything else there. Confusion and dispersal are synonyms. If you care to pick up the
points in your life when you felt confused and re-experience them, and then think of this feeling
of dispersal, feeling dispersed you'll find that it is exactly the same phenomena. There's no
difference between the two phenomena.
To feel dispersed is the same as feeling confused, there's no difference between them. A
confusion is a dispersal and a dispersal is a confusion and the anatomy of confusion is the
random snapping between a postulate and its negative.
Four Qualities of the Twin Insanity Point Mass (TIPM)
We now ought to take up the subject of the qualities of this stuff called TIPM. What are its
qualities? Well we already know what the qualities of the IP's are. Remember I gave the four
qualities there of the IP, there's identification, motionlessness, timelessness or time stop and
mass.
Well the TIPM because they only consist of IP's will also show the same four qualities. We need
to take these up in turn and look at them in more detail to understand the nature of this stuff
called TIPM. Let us take up first this subject of identification.
Identification
The TIPM consists of an identification between a postulate and it's negative and that is
absolutely fundamental to the anatomy of TIPM. But look the identification between a postulate
and its negative is the very essence of irrationality which shows you that TIPM is not a thing of
reason. It's not rational, it's not a rational state, it's not a rational thing, TIPM. It's highly
irrational in fact TIPM is as irrational as anything can get. It's not rational.
Now this tells you right away that because TIPM is irrational it won't duplicate you, it won't adopt
a complementary postulate with you. So you direct a postulate at it and order it to do something
and it won't do it. You order the TIPM to jump and it will refuse to jump. It won't jump, because
it's not operating, that's the correct word, it's not operating in a rational manner, and so it simply
will not duplicate any postulate directed at it. It will not adopt a complementary postulate to any
postulate directed at it.
So that's something you should know about TIPM. It's completely irrational in that respect. It
won't obey your orders. Whatever order you direct at it, it will simply not comply. It won't comply
with any order directed at it. Of course, by the same token, TIPM does not by its nature
automatically oppose any postulates directed at it.
Left to its own devices it will just sit there and it won't play games with you. It will just sit there.
In other words you order it to jump and it doesn't refuse to jump, it just sort of sits there being
its quiet uncomplaining self. You get it? So it neither adopts a complementary postulate to a
postulate directed at it nor does it produce an opposition postulate to a postulate directed at it.
It just sits there being it's quiet uncomplaining self. That's TIPM.
Tape ends abruptly
Page updated
Report abuse