668. Beyond the Prime Axioms (Part 2 of 2)
The arising of the Prime Axioms marks an unprecedented degree of individuation for the Being on its way deeper and deeper into the Universes.
After the discovery
and harmonization of the Prime Axioms or Goals,there appears not much else
to do other than to address
the phenomenon of individuation itself.
Already at this
point, human language has long lost any meaningfulness. Worse, it has become
a liability. Attempting
to attach a word to either of the two prime goals is not only a futile attempt, it can seriously throw a person off the track and into insanity.
The arising of discrete polarities also brings about the phenomenon of the split of 'doingness' of 'havingness' from 'beingness'. Even limiting the Prime Goals to either an activity or a quality as such would be a grave mistake.
What processes can be run at such a point?
Certainly, any process that involves incidents would rely on some form of a time track. This excludes the majority of known processes and rundowns. For example, TROM, despite the claim of its author that it would lead to Nirvana, is completed after the dismantling of the basic goal package and obviously not applicable.
Any process that makes use of discrete locations in space, such as the UCP rundown, are not workable anymore either. Moving within space presupposes a sequence which necessarily introduces a time track.
As a result, the class of processes that addresses immediate perceptions appears to be the only workable technology available at this point.
The grave danger of such processes is the compulsion of the remainder of a Being's personality to dub in or to allocate significances to an experience that may not have any concrete significance in its context due to the lack of prime goals at this point.
The problem here is that there is already a fragmentation of the Being and any allocation of significance may lead to misattributions of authorship. As noted by The Pilot, this is the major reason of the inherent danger of running Power Processes after Clear within the framework of the existing (traditional) "bridge".
The basic Power Process ("What is?/What isn't?") is the most fundamental version of immediate perception processes. However, the same caveat applies to other processes of this class. For example, Alan C. Walter's proposal of a "connect/disconnect" rundown yields the same problem: "what fragment (dis)connects to/from what other fragment of the Being?".
An excellent and workable, yet simple solution has been proposed by Flemming Funch who uses it in his 'Polarity Clearing' approach since quite some time (see his 'Transformational Processing' books for more information):
As the fragment becomes apparent to the person, have the fragment
point to the part is was splitting off.
Here, the circle
seems to be closing and 'Clearing' flows into strikingly similar techniques
that are used in Neo-Shamanism, for example Rowland
Barkley's "Soul Retrieval" approach.
Now, it could be
argued that the phenomenon of fragmentation of a Being
would require a time track. This is due to the inclination to ask "When"
did the split occur"? Following such a temptation seems not to be wise
and can lead to disaster. It would artificially create a mocked-up and
incorrect time track, confusing further attempts to reintegrate remaining
on a path of un-individuation quickly leads to key-out
experiences that easily induce the perception of 'oneness'.
However, as Gotamo
Siddharto (the "Buddha") pointed out some
thousand years ago, the concept of "oneness" is but one element of the
dichotomy "allness/nothingness" and should be avoided by all
The problem with the "oneness" experience is that it constitutes already a basic form of identification. Therefore he insisted that, to overcome the limitations of individuation, the experience of "boundlessness" should be cultivated instead.
Even though this
distinction seems to be too unimportant to many, it reflects the structure
of the core entrapment of the Being, and could thus be called the hallmark
of successful liberation.