************* The following message is relayed to you by trom@lists.newciv.org ************
This should have more correctly been sent to Glen, rather than Paul, Thanks, Aarre
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Aarre Peltomaa <peltomaa.aa...@gmail.com>wrote: > Hi Paul, > Aarre > > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Paul Tipon <pti...@proftitleserv.com>wrote: > >> ************* >> The following message is relayed to you by trom@lists.newciv.org >> ************ >> Hi Glen, >> >> Very well put. I couldn't agree more. >> >> Paul, Level 5 in progress >> >> On Feb 5, 2013, at 8:05 AM, trom-requ...@lists.newciv.org wrote: >> >>> >>> Even if one assumes that there was one absolutely right way to heal or >>> reach enlightenment. And that Dennis had worked this out perfectly, in a >>> way that would work the same way for every human being. And that he >>> expressed his ideas in the clearest, most easily >>> understandable way. And that the editors did the best possible job of >>> presenting this material. >>> >>> (All of which are highly doubtful assumptions in any subject or written >>> document.) >>> >>> You will always be left with the fact that every human being will always >>> interpret and understand the material in a slightly different way. >>> What's more, one cannot own the material without developing one's unique >>> understanding of it, an understanding that either works for them or >>> doesn't. No truly literal duplication of anything exists and if it did, it >>> would be a mental straightjacket (IMHO). >>> >>> Don't believe me? Look at how many thousands if not millions of >>> interpretations there are of any religious scripture like the Bible or >>> the Buddhist doctrines. Everything evolves. And, just like every >>> Christian today picks and chooses bits of the Bible that support their >>> personal ideas and rejects the rest, TROM will also have to evolve with >>> some flexibility or wither. >> >> > >> ' I thought about this exactly the same way over a year ago, and also >>> observed that; I still think that the original document should be as >>> close to original source as possible, and then simpler (average guy) >>> editions could exist also, as long as their authorship/source is stated >>> bluntly in the beginning. Then individuals could slightly adjust the data >>> as you stated in their application. This slight alteration insures the >>> perpetuation of the work; According to LRH, to persist, there must be a >>> slight alteration. A total duplication (AS - ISness) would theoretically >>> cause a vanishment. The original document should be pristine however, so >>> that wanderers could always come back to 'more' puritanical application >>> when needed and wanted. Perhaps, allowing a slight alteration in >>> application to fit more complementarily with each individual's postulate >>> set quirks would allow the techniques to persist through time for a long, >>> long, time.' Aarre Peltomaa >>> p.s. does this sound correct at all ? >> >> > >> >> >> >>> So, it's worth preserving Dennis's original intent. But that may not be >>> the best presentation to reach and help the most people. Many people, >>> especially those who haven't studied Scientology (and fewer people do all >>> the time) would find the TROM materials that currently exist to be >>> gobbledygook. The person who can find a way to express them in a way that >>> is clear and appealing to the average person will take this material a big >>> step forward. >>> >>> (And maybe the person who subjects them to rigorous double-blind testing >>> to see how well they actually work for most people will perform the biggest >>> service of all.) >>> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Trom mailing list >> Trom@lists.newciv.org >> http://lists.newciv.org/**mailman/listinfo/trom<http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom> >> > >
_______________________________________________ Trom mailing list Trom@lists.newciv.org http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
