Exerpted from the Book Phoenix Lectures AXIOMS (Part 1) The Axioms of Scientology are a list of usable or self evident truths and are a major part of the technical information of a Scientologist. Having these we are now operating on just fifty axioms and definitions, where the Dianetic Axioms of 1951 were in excess of two hundred and ninety. We arrived at these fifty Axioms of Scientology through a great many changes, a great many major developments -- all of them in the direction of higher workability and simplification. A student in training in Scientology is not expected to read these Axioms. He is expected to absorb them, quote them verbatim and by number, understand and apply them. Webster's says that an axiom is a self evident truth. Comparing the Axioms of Scientology with axioms in another subject, these are certainly as self-evident as those of, for instance, geometry, which is actually a relatively crude subject in that it proves itself by itself, which is a limitation that Scientology does not have. The Axioms of Scientology prove themselves by all of life. In geometry we find the Aristotelian syllogism arbitrarily cutting across the whole subject. In Scientology we needed a better base than the syllogism and we have a better one. The platform on which we base 145 our understanding is, if something doesn't work when applied we change what we are doing and find something which does work. We are certainly not bowed down to the great god No Change. Well, true enough, these Axioms are self evident truths. But they are not so thoroughly self evident that they leap out of the page and introduce themselves to you. You have to introduce yourself to them. The first of the Axioms is a bit of understanding which if you did not have and did not actually understand very well you would not be able to do anything with Scientology. It's just as blunt as that. AXIOM ONE: LIFE IS BASICALLY A STATIC. And what is this static? Definition: a Life Static has no mass, no motion, no wavelength, no location in space or in time. It has the ability to postulate and to perceive. This is a peculiar and particular static, having these properties and a further peculiarity, which we find in the next Axiom. AXIOM TWO: THE STATIC IS CAPABLE OF CONSIDERATIONS, POSTULATES, AND OPINIONS. You can't measure this Static. When you find something which has no mass, no location, no position in time and no wavelength -- the very fact that it can't be measured tells you that you have your hands on Life itself. You can't measure it, yet all things measurable extend from it. From this Static all phenomena extend. You cannot measure a dog by his biscuits and you cannot measure this Static by the phenomena extending from it. Space is one of these phenomena. You could say that Life is a space-energy-object production and 146 placement unit because that is what it does. But when you measure these you do not measure Life. A thetan is very, very close to being a pure Static. He has practically no wavelength. Actually a thetan is in a very, very small amount of mass. From some experiments conducted about fifteen or twenty years ago -- a thetan weighed about 1.5 ounces! Who made these experiments? Well, a doctor made these experiments. He weighed people before and after death, retaining any mass. He weighed the person, bed and all, and he found that the weight dropped at the moment of death about 1.5 ounces and some of them 2 ounces. (Those were heavy thetans.) So we have this thetan capable of considerations, postulates and opinions, and the most native qualities to him -- in other words the things which he is most likely to postulate -- are these qualities which you find in the top "buttons" of the Chart of Attitudes. "Trust", "Full Responsibility", etc. So we have then actually described a thetan when we have gotten Axioms One and Two. Without these known well an auditor would have an awfully hard time exteriorizing (Exteriorizing: exteriorization: the state achieved in which the thetan can be outside his body with certainty) somebody -- because if you thought that you reached in with a pair of forceps and dragged someone out of his head, well, this it not the way it is. You would not be thinking of a thetan. To exteriorize something that can't possibly be grabbed hold of, that's quite a trick. A thetan has to postulate he's inside before you can have him postulate that he's outside. But if he heavily postulated that he's inside, now your trick as an auditor is to do what? Override this thetan's postulates? That would fit into the field of hypnotism, 147 or maybe you could do it with a club, but the way we do it in Scientology is a little more delicate than these. We simply ask him to postulate that he's outside, and if he can and does, why, he's outside. And if he can't, why, he's still inside. Thetans think of themselves as being in the MEST universe (MEST universe: the physical universe, from the initial letters of matter, energy, space, time). Of course, this is a joke, too. As the Static they can't possibly be in a universe. But they can postulate a condition and then they can postulate that they cannot escape this condition. AXIOM THREE: SPACE, ENERGY, OBJECTS, FORM AND TIME ARE THE RESULT OF CONSIDERATIONS MADE AND/ OR AGREED UPON OR NOT BY THE STATIC, AND ARE PERCEIVED SOLELY BECAUSE THE STATIC CONSIDERS THAT IT CAN PERCEIVE THEM. The whole secret of perception is right there. Do you believe that you can see? Well, all right, go ahead and believe that you can see but you'd certainly better believe that there's something there to see or you won't see. So there are two considerations to sight, and they are covered immediately here in that you have to believe there is something to see and then that you can see it. And so you have perception. All of the tremendous number of categories to perception come under this heading, and are covered by that Axiom. So that Axiom should be known very, very well. AXIOM FOUR: SPACE IS A VIEWPOINT OF DIMENSION. Do you know that physics has gone on since the time of Aristotle without knowing that! Yet we read in the Encyclopedia Britannica of many years ago (the Eleventh Edition, published in 1911) that space and time are not a problem of the physicist. They are the problem of one working in the field of the mind. And 148 it says that when the field of psychology solves the existence of space and time why then physics will be able to do something with it. And all those fellows with their Ph.D.'s -- not for centuries actually but a number of decades (it seems like centuries if you've ever listened to their lectures) -- going back to the days of Wundt, The Only Wundt -- about 1867 -- they didn't read the Encyclopedia Britannica and find out that they held the responsibility for identifying space and time so that physics could get on its way. And because they avoided this responsibility we have to pitch in here and discover and develop Scientology -- not to work in the field of physics, however, but to work in the field of the Humanities. But it so happened that I discovered very, very early while I was studying nuclear physics at George Washington University that physics did not have a definition for space, time and energy. It defined energy in terms of space and time. It defined space in terms of time and energy, and it defined time in terms of energy and space. It was going around in a circle. I first moved out of that circle by putting it into human behavior -- be, do and have, which you'll find in Scientology: 8-8008*, but the point is here that without a definition for space, physics was and is adrift. One of our auditors was recently talking to an engineer in an Atomic Energy Commission plant, and happened to remark, "Well, we have a definition for space." This engineer said, "Uh, you do?" and got instantly interested. Of course we didn't make this definition for nuclear physics, but they could certainly use one. The engineer asked, "What is the definition of space?" and the auditor said, "Space viewpoint of dimension." This fellow just sat there for *Scientology: 8-8008 by L. Ron Hubbard. See book list in back pages. 149 a moment, and he sat there, and then all of a sudden he rushed to the phone and dialed a number and he said, "Close down number five.!" He had suddenly realized that an experiment in progress was about to explode and one of the reasons he knew it was about to explode is that he had found out what space was. This is of great interest to nuclear physicists, but they will get one of these definitions and then they will start to figure, figure, figure, figure, figure. They don't take the definition as such and use it as such. They figure-figure, and they lose it. Using the process R2-40: Conceiving a Static* gives an understanding of exactly why, every time they get rid of one of these definitions they lose it. AXIOM FIVE: ENERGY CONSISTS OF POSTULATED PARTICLES IN SPACE. Now, we've got space: a viewpoint of dimension. You say: "I am here looking in a direction." We've actually got to have three points out there to look at, to have three dimensional space. If we only had linear space we would have only one dimension point. One point to view. And energy consists of postulated particles in space, so we'll demark these three points out there to have some three dimensional space and we'll have these particles which we will call Anchor Points, and we'll have energy. And so we come to objects. AXIOM SIX: OBJECTS CONSIST OF GROUPED PARTICLES. If we just kept putting particles out there and pushing them together, or if we suddenly said, "There's a big group of particles out there," we'd have what is commonly called an object. When an object or particle moves across any part of a piece of space -- in other * In The Creation of Human Ability by L. Ron Hubbard See book list in back pages. 150 words a viewpoint of dimension -- we have motion. And we come to the subject of time. AXIOM SEVEN: TIME IS BASICALLY A POSTULATE THAT SPACE AND PARTICLES WILL PERSIST. Time in its basic postulate is not even motion. The apparency of time -- an agreed upon rate of change -- becomes agreed upon time. But for an individual all by himself is simply a consideration. He says something will persist, and he has time. Now if he gets somebody else to agree on what is persisting, the two can then be in agreement. And if the items are motionless then they can't have agreements about how fast or how this gives them a clock or a watch. And so you carry a watch around on your wrist. But time is not motion. Let's escape from that one right now. It is an error. We'll call that a heresy. But this gives us another Axiom: AXIOM EIGHT: THE APPARENCY OF TIME IS THE CHANGE OF POSITION OF PARTICLES IN SPACE. Now if we see particles changing in space we know time's passing, but if you had a piece of space and some particles, and you were simply sitting there looking at those particles and there was absolutely no change in them whatsoever, you would be very hard put to describe even to yourself whether any time was passing or not. And so the apparency of time is the change of position of particles in space. AXIOM NINE: CHANGE IS THE PRIMARY MANIFESTATION OF TIME. If you were looking at motionless particles you would not be able to tell whether time was passing or not because you might be looking at one time or another. Then to prove time you could say they moved this far at such and such a speed or something of the sort. And 151 you could say, "Therefore this much time has gone by." So we can say that change is the primary manifestation of time. Now, oddly enough you have your "Black Five", occluded case ("no pictures, only blackness") right there. A Black Five is trying to change himself simply because he's in agreement with particles in motion. That's all. He's simply acting on compulsion or obsession to change, and if you asked him very suddenly in which direction he's trying to change he would not be able to tell you. He has no real goal. He doesn't particularly want to be better, he doesn't particularly want to be worse, but he's got to change. He's frantically got to change. Well, why has he got to change? Because he has these particles all around him which are dictating change to him. They're saying, "Time ... time... time... time... time... change... change... change." In other words, he's in agreement with the apparency of time, and he has fallen far, far away from the mere consideration of time. So he doesn't conceive what time is. He becomes a nuclear physicist. AXIOM TEN: THE HIGHEST PURPOSE IN THE UNIVERSE IS THE CREATION OF AN EFFECT. We could do a tremendous amount with just that one Axiom, and in processing we would discover then good reason to have space and to have particles and how all these things get there. People want to create an effect, and they get into very interesting states of mind about this sort of thing. They say to themselves, well, let's see now -- I caused that effect but that effect is horrible, Therefore I can't admit that I caused that effect, so I'll introduce a lie here and say I didn't cause that effect. And then -- they become an effect. If they can't be at cause they become an effect. They are the effect of what they have caused without admitting they 152 caused. But it can get even worse than that -- worse than being at total effect. They get way down the line, to the point where they're the cause of any effect. They blame themselves, in other words. A man in Sandusky falls down and breaks a glass of pink lemonade and cuts his little pinky, and this person who is in San Diego at the time hears about that and knows he must be guilty. That's complete reversal. A person can get into a state where he's cause and effect simultaneously. That is to say any effect he starts to cause he becomes that effect instantly. He says, I think I'll kill him, and he feels like he's dead. Just like that. Now we've got to have time in order to witness an effect. As an example of this one could observe that science is dedicated to observing an effect and does not have any other real goal. Once in a while you see a scientist who is also an idealist. He wants to use his materials to improve Man. But science at large and particularly when it got over into the field of the mind. was simply a goal-less, soul-less pursuit, the totality of which is just to observe an effect. They are not really even causing an effect. They just go around observing effects. And they fill notebooks and notebooks and notebooks full of effects, effects, effects, effects, and you find they carry on experiments -- not to prove anything, not to do anything, but just to observe an effect. They go around and put a pin in the tail of a rat, and the rat jumps and speaks, and so they say "Ah," and they note it down carefully: "When you put a pin one inch from the end of the tail of a rat he moans". Actually the rat squeaked. Well this was observing an effect -- the way it's recorded by science. This goes so far that a leading scientist of the day -- an Einstein -- says that all an observer has any right to do is look at a needle. If they were just going around observing effects, eventually 153 they could build an atom bomb, and say "Well it isn't my fault. I'm not to blame." The few scientists who did feel badly about this and joined organizations to try to do something were promptly fired by the government. They had some responsibility. AXIOM ELEVEN: THE CONSIDERATIONS RESULTING IN CONDITIONS OF EXISTENCE ARE FOURFOLD. And here they are in exact axiom form: (a) AS-IS-NESS is the condition of immediate creation without persistence, and is the condition of existence which exists at the moment of creation and the moment of destruction, and is different from other considerations in that it does not contain survival. (b) ALTER-IS-NESS is the consideration which introduces change and therefore time and persistence into an AS-IS-NESS to obtain persistency. (c) IS-NESS is an apparency of existence brought about by the continuous alteration of an AS-IS-NESS. This is called, when agreed upon, Reality. (d) NOT-IS-NESS is the effort to handle IS-NESS by reducing its condition through the use of force. It is an apparency and cannot entirely vanquish an IS-NESS. AXIOM TWELVE: THE PRIMARY CONDITION OF ANY UNIVERSE IS THAT TWO SPACES ENERGIES OR OBJECTS MUST NOT OCCUPY THE SAME SPACE. WHEN THIS CONDITION IS VIOLATED (PERFECT DUPLICATE) THE APPARENCY OF ANY UNIVERSE OR ANY PART THEREOF IS NULLED. Alfred Korzybski in General Semantics was very careful to demonstrate that two objects could not occupy the same space. In other words, he was dramatizing "Preserve the universe, preserve the universe, preserve the universe". Now this statement tells you that 154 if two objects can't occupy the same space you haven't got a universe, and sure enough if you just ask a preclear repetitively: "What object can occupy the same space you're occupying?" he'll work at it and he'll work at it and work at it, and the first thing you know, why, he's capable of doing many things which he was not able to do before. His space straightens out. He can create space again -- merely because this MEST universe has been telling him so often that two objects cannot occupy the same space that he has begun to believe it. And he believes this is the most thorough law that he has. So we find a person perfectly contentedly being in a body believing he is a body. Why, he knows that he, a thetan, could not occupy the same space as a body. He knows this is impossible. Two objects can't occupy the same space. He's an object, and his body's an object, so the two can't occupy the same space. This is very interesting because you'll find that two universes can occupy the same space and actually do occupy the same space. You'll find the universe of a thetan is occupying the same space as the physical universe, but once he declares that the both of them are occupying the same space, you get an interesting condition. Now, I'm not going to try to take up at this point the perfect duplicate but it's enough just to say that two objects are occupying that space -- identically occupying that space -- and poof, it's gone. That's the way you make things vanish. That is to get its As-is-ness, and this is why As-is-ness works and why things disappear when you get their As-is-ness. This is an important Axiom. Now here is the oldest thing that Man knows: 155 AXIOM THIRTEEN: THE CYCLE OF ACTION OF THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE IS: CREATE, SURVIVE (PERSIST), DESTROY. Now, that's the oldest thing Man knows, but it went on the basis of death, birth, growth, decay, death, birth, growth, decay, death, birth, growth, decay and so on. He knew he had time involved here, on a linear line. The odd thing here is that you've got to postulate death to get a cycle of action, and you've got to postulate time to get a lineal line, so we're dealing here with one of the most intimate things of existence. We find this by the way in the Rig-Veda. It's been with Man about 10,000 years that I know of and we find that this is the cycle of action of the physical universe -- create, survive destroy. In Dianetics, I isolated just one portion of this line as a common denominator of all existence, which was Survive, and sure enough any life form is surviving. It is trying to survive and that is its normal push forward. And that has, incidentally, terrific impact, but this has two other parts and those are create and destroy. Create, survive, destroy. And survive merely means persist. So all of these things are based on time, and we have underlying Axiom Thirteen this primary consideration that there is time. Now we can go on and find that the conditions of existence fit these various portions of the survival curve. And this would be given as follows: AXIOM FOURTEEN: SURVIVAL IS ACCOMPLISHED BY ALTER-IS-NESS AND NOT-IS-NESS, BY WHICH IS GAINED THE PERSISTENCY KNOWN AS TIME. That's a mechanical persistency. In other words we keep changing things, saying they aren't, and changing them, and then pushing them out and reforming them and trying to vanish them. Using energy to fight energy, we'll certainly get survival. We'll get persistency. 156 AXIOM FIFTEEN: CREATION IS ACCOMPLISHED BY THE POSTULATION OF AN AS-IS-NESS. Now all you have to say actually is: "Space, energy, time, As-is. That's the way it is, and, it's now going to persist." You've added time to it. If you immediately after that simply looked at it and got its As-is-ness again it would vanish. All you had to do is get it in the same instant of time with the same type of postulate and it would disappear. You could create it again and it would disappear. It would As-is. AXIOM SIXTEEN: COMPLETE DESTRUCTION IS ACCOMPLISHED BY THE POSTULATION OF THE AS-IS-NESS OF ANY EXISTENCE AND THE PARTS THEREOF. Complete destruction would simply be vanishment. You wouldn't have any rubble left. When you blow something up with guns you get rubble. Ask anybody who was in the last war. There were certainly an awful lot of broken bricks lying around. If anybody had really been working at this in a good sensible way, and he'd really meant total destruction, he would have simply gotten the As-is-ness of the situation and it would have been gone and that would have been the end of that. If he'd wanted to declare the whole As-is-ness of a country, if he'd been able to span that much attention and trace back that many particles that fast to their original points of creation, he would of course have a vanishment and that is complete destruction. So complete destruction is As-is-ness, and As-is-ness is simply a postulated existence. What we're looking at most of the time in this universe is: AXIOM SEVENTEEN: THE STATIC, HAVING POSTULATED AS-IS-NESS THEN PRACTICES ALTER-IS-NESS AND SO ACHIEVES THE APPARENCY OF IS-NESS AND SO OBTAINS REALITY. 157 In other words we get a continuous alteration, and we get this apparency called Is-ness. AXIOM EIGHTEEN: THE STATIC, IN PRACTICING NOT-IS-NESS, BRINGS ABOUT THE PERSISTENCE OF UNWANTED EXISTENCES, AND SO BRINGS ABOUT UNREALITY, WHICH INCLUDES FORGETFULNESS, UNCONSCIOUSNESS, AND OTHER UNDESIRABLE STATES. Quite an important Axiom and very true one. AXIOM NINETEEN: BRINGING THE STATIC TO VIEW AS-IS ANY CONDITION DEVALUATES THAT CONDITION. 158  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 1 iDate=0/7/54 Volnum=9 Issue=14 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AXIOMS (Part 2)    CHAPTER FOURTEEN AXIOMS (Part 2) It is a remarkable thing that life itself can be codified in terms of Axioms. It has not been done before. The first time it was even attempted was in 1951 when I wrote the Logics and Axioms, which I did simply to give an alignment to thought itself. And as a matter of fact copies of these Axioms were sent over to Europe and in 1953 I found them in Vienna fully translated into German. It's quite remarkable. Over there they were terribly impressed simply because it had not been done before. Nobody had before codified life to this degree and nobody had codified psychotherapy. And they were not impressed with whether the Axioms were right or wrong, it was only that nobody had done it before. In these Scientology Axioms we're not quite doing the same thing. Those 1951 Axioms of Dianetics were quite complicated and these fifty Axioms we now have are nowhere near as lengthy, but their reach is greater and they pack a great deal more punch. We come here to the interesting subject of a proof of ultimate truth. If we have reached an ultimate truth, then we have reached an ultimate solution, and who would ever suspect, really, that an ultimate truth or an ultimate solution could be subjected to mechanical proof. We have done just that. We have discovered the phenomenon of a perfect duplicate. AXIOM TWENTY: BRINGING THE STATIC TO CREATE A 159 PERFECT DUPLICATE CAUSES THE VANISHMENT OF ANY EXISTENCE OR PART THEREOF. If you can bring someone to make a perfect duplicate of anything it will vanish. We have a perfect duplicate clearly defined: A perfect duplicate is an additional creation of the object, its energy, and space, in its own space, in its own time, using its own energy. (And we could append to that "the considerations which go along with it", because it couldn't be anything but considerations.) And: This violates the condition that two objects must not occupy the same space, and causes vanishment of the object. If you ask somebody to simply make a perfect duplicate of, for instance, a vase, just exactly where it sits, it will begin to fade out on him, and he can do that to almost anything. Why doesn't it fade for somebody else? This is quite remarkable. Everything in this universe is displaced or misplaced. When we talk about a lie, we really don't mean that simply changing the position of something is a lie. We have to alter the consideration regarding it to make a lie. It isn't really a lie that everything is so scrambled in this universe. It is scrambled. Just in the last moment or two several cosmic rays went through your body. Those were particles which emanated from somewhere and they arrived where you are -- they had been en route for a hundred million years. To get one of those cosmic rays to vanish we would have to find its point of creation, and we would have to make a duplicate of that ray at the moment of its creation, and then we would have to make a duplicate of having done so. At that instant that cosmic ray would vanish. This is very interesting to the physicist, it's very 160 interesting to almost anybody, and it is demonstrable. Yon can do this. I asked an auditor one afternoon simply to "look to the garage wall over there" and to choose a very small area, and "find the atoms and molecules in the wall there, and put an attention unit" -- a remote viewpoint -- "next to each one, and follow it immediately back to where it had been created." He was leaning on the fender of the car, and he did this -- and he came off the fender of that car as though he had been shot. The object itself, this tiny portion of the object, had started to disintegrate. And he rushed over to it to hold it in place with his hands! Why doesn't the whole universe vanish? Well, probably on the very site of this building there was another building once and that building has been broken up and the bricks have been moved and part of it is out there in the street, and part of it is still in the ground below and part of it -- maybe some brick dust -- got on somebody's suitcase who went to World War II, and part of it's in Germany and it's spread all over the place, and here are all these cosmic waves and rays going all over the universe -- and to get each one of those at its moment of creation in the time and space, and to make a perfect duplicate of all this, would be quite a job. It's not an impossible job. It requires an ability to span attention. You would get a physical object to disappear so thoroughly that everybody else would know it was gone. You see that it isn't true that an object sitting before you at this moment, or your chair, has always been in that position. Nor is it true that the materials in that chair have always been in that position, nor is it true that the atoms which made up the chair in raw material form were always in that particular ore 161 bed or in that particular tree. So you see it's quite complex. This universe is scrambled. That doesn't mean you can't make it vanish, however. As we can produce this phenomenon, we know we have an ultimate solution. The perfect duplicate was the little latch string hanging out that opened the door to an ultimate truth. Well, what would an ultimate truth be? An ultimate truth is a static, and an ultimate solution is a static. In other words, an ultimate truth and an ultimate solution is nothing. Get the As-is-ness of any problem, make a perfect duplicate of any problem, and the problem will disappear. You can subject that easily to proof. So if you can make a problem disappear by simply getting its As-is-ness, then you've got the solution to all problems, or the ultimate solution. Well, the MEST universe itself is just a problem, and so if you could get its As-is-ness, it would disappear. It would disappear for everybody. Well, let's study that and, and get that very well and get what the definition is there, in the Axioms and Definitions. This is the total solution, by the way, to the vanishment of engrams -- what we were handling in Dianetics. The vanishment of ridges, of all energy forms and manifestations, all these can simply be accomplished by making perfect duplicates of them. That doesn't mean that you should now make nothing out of everything or get your preclear to try to make nothing out of everything, but that it just can be done. AXIOM TWENTY-ONE: UNDERSTANDING IS COMPOSED OF AFFINITY, REALITY AND COMMUNICATION. We understand understanding a bit better when we see that it is simply the ability to get the As-is-ness of something. For example we could say "I don't quite understand this car. Don't quite understand what's 162 wrong with it. It just won't start." And we walk around it and look at it and then we find out that we haven't turned on the key. And we turn on the key. We've understood it, in other words. We have unmocked the fact that the key was not turned on and we have turned on the key (which actually is practicing Alter-is-ness). If we walked around a car and said "I don't understand what this object is... I don't understand what this object is ... AH! it's a car!" We would feel immediately relieved. We'd feel a lot better about the thing, but if we were to get its total As-is-ness there would just be a hole sitting there. So understanding is As-is-ness and understanding in its entirety would be a Static and so we have the fact that Life knows basically everything there is to know before it gets complicated with lots of data, merely because it can postulate all the data it knows. All knowingness is inherent in the static itself. A thetan who is in good shape knows everything there is to know. He knows past, present and future. He knows everything. This doesn't mean he knows data. This merely means that he can As-is anything and if he can As-is anything believe me he can understand it. Man's salvation I've said several times depends upon his recognition of his brotherhood with the universe. Well let's misinterpret that just a little bit and say Man's salvation -- if you want to save him from the universe -- would depend upon his ability to make an As-is-ness of the physical universe at which moment he wouldn't have a universe, and this would be total understanding. Understanding has three parts: Affinity Reality and Communication. You can actually compose from ARC all the mathematics there are. You can combine ARC into 163 mathematics. You can accomplish anything with ARC that you want to do. Symbolic Logic, even calculus, could be extrapolated from ARC. Affinity depends upon reality and communication. Reality depends upon affinity and communication. Communication depends upon affinity and reality. If you don't believe this try to communicate sometime with somebody without any affinity at all. Get real mad at somebody, and then try to communicate with him. You won't. Try to get somebody to be reasonable when he is very angry and you'll find out that his reality is very poor. He cannot conceive of the situation. He'll give you some of the weirdest things. There is no liar lying like an angry man. If you raise somebody's affinity you will raise his reality and communication. If you raise somebody's reality, you'll raise his affinity and communication. And the keynote of this triangle happens to be communication. Communication is more important than either affinity or reality. AXIOM TWENTY-TWO: THE PRACTICE OF NOT-IS-NESS REDUCES UNDERSTANDING. In other words, something is there, and we say it's not there. Someone is driving down the road like mad and there's an enormous boulder lying in the middle of the road, and almost anybody, just before the crash, will say the boulder's not there. And by golly it's there. And this makes him feel he's a weak thetan. He failed. And the funny part of it is that if he were to immediately As-is the boulder down the road, instead of denying it's there, and if he could make this a perfect duplicate, the boulder would disappear. He doesn't do it that way. He sort of puts some 164 energy up and pushes against the boulder, and says, "It's not there, it's not there. I deny it." Well, he'll have a mighty thin understanding of the whole thing. He doesn't want to communicate with it, so he says it's not there. He doesn't want to have any affinity for it at all, so he says it's not there. And believe me his reality cuts down. The practice of Not-is-ness reduces understanding, and that is what Man is doing constantly. He's trying to avow that something that isn't there is there, and he's trying to avow that something that is there isn't there, and between these two things, giving it no As-is-ness at all or new postulates of any kind, he's having quite a time of it. AXIOM TWENTY-THREE: THE STATIC HAS THE CAPABILITY OF TOTAL KNOWINGNESS. TOTAL KNOWINGNESS WOULD CONSIST OF TOTAL ARC. Here we have a condition of existence which is As-is. That would be total knowingness. Well, if we had somebody who could say "As-is" to everything, and trace all parts of everything back to their original time, location, and simply got them as they really were, we of course would have nothing left but a Static. We would have zero. We wouldn't even have space. If you wanted, by the way, to make this whole universe vanish, you would have to be able to span this whole universe. You would have to be as big as the universe. You could drill somebody up to the point where he could do that. AXIOM TWENTY-FOUR: TOTAL ARC WOULD BRING ABOUT THE VANISHMENT OF ALL MECHANICAL CONDITIONS OF EXISTENCE. All mechanical conditions of existence. It wouldn't bring about the sudden death of everything. It would bring about the exteriorization of everything. It would 165 mean the vanishment of all space and all form. Mechanics. Differentiate between a consideration -- a postulate -- and a mechanic. Be sure to get the difference between a quality such as complete trust, a quality such as full responsibility, in other words the qualities along the top of the Chart of Attitudes -- and the mechanics. A person who is all out for mechanics, and won't have anything to do with considerations, believes completely that considerations are of no worth and that mechanics are the thing ("You can put your hands on it, you can feel it, you can touch it") -- this person would have to be made thoroughly acquainted with the existence of these mechanics before he could As-is them sufficiently to reach a level where he would have the ability to consider. He has sunk below the level of mechanics. That's why 8C Opening Procedure, which acquaints the person with his immediate environment, works as it does. Well, when we say mechanics, we mean space, energy, objects and time. And when something has those things in it we're talking about something mechanical. That's all that would vanish if you As-ised all of existence -- just the mechanics -- and you could turn right around and postulate them all back again too with great ease. AXIOM TWENTY-FIVE: AFFINITY IS A SCALE OF ATTITUDES WHICH FALLS AWAY FROM THE CO-EXISTENCE OF STATIC, THROUGH THE INTERPOSITIONS OF DISTANCE AND ENERGY, TO CREATE IDENTITY, DOWN TO CLOSE PROXIMITY BUT MYSTERY. Affinity, in terms of mechanics, is simply a matter of distance. Affinity is basically a consideration, but it does represent itself mechanically. For instance, Total 166 Knowingness goes down to Lookingness. You have to look to find out. Well that's different from simply knowing without looking. We go down to Looking, now we go just a little bit lower than that. (This Know-to-Mystery scale is by the way an Affinity scale.) We go into Emotion, and then we no longer have knowledge by looking. We have to have knowledge by emotion. Do we like it -- do we dislike it. There are particles in emotion: "I don't like it" -- in other words "I have some anger particles about it" or "I have some resentment particles" -- and by the way a preclear has his reactive mind full of these emotion particles. Now if I "have to feel it to know it is there", I've gone immediately into Effort. And my affinity for something would be good if I could feel it and it would be no good at all if I couldn't feel it. You get a Step V, a Black V, who is swearing by mechanics (and swearing at all life forms) and builds atom bombs and such things -- and he tells you that he cannot contact life. He can't contact this thing called the Static, therefore he "can't believe in it". This is very interesting. You ask him why, and he says, "Well I can't feel it." He's twisting the snake around so it'll eat its tail. He's proving it all upside down and backwards. He says he can't get the existence of something he can't feel. And the odd part of it is that we can measure electronically the existence of life. There is a little meter on which we ran some tests, and we can actually demonstrate that one individual can turn on in another individual at some great distance from him a considerable electrical current, enough to make this little machine sit up and sing. And the other person can turn it on at will, and the person on whom it's being turned can't stop it. Here is a manifestation that can be measured. We've done the impossible there too. We've done the 167 impossible in many places in Scientology. You can't measure a Static but we've done so by having a person, at a distance, bring a mechanic into being. When a person gets down to Effort on this scale then he's into a level where he's "gotta work", everything has got to be work. He's got to touch everything and feel everything before he can know anything. A person in the Effort band, by the way, as he gets to the lower part of that band, has facsimiles. He's got mental image pictures. He'll even do weird things like this: he will get a picture to know what's happening to him. In other words, he'll get a mental image picture of a past incident in order to get an idea. He gets the picture and then he gets the idea, he doesn't get the idea and then get a picture. You want to watch that. Sometime you'll find a preclear who's doing this. You'll be saying "All right, get the idea of being perfect." And your preclear will sit there and say, "I got it." You want to ask him, "How did you do that?" That's a wonderful question to ask a preclear at any time. "How did you do that?" And he'll say, "Why, of course, just like everybody else. I got this picture and this picture came up and I looked at it and the picture said, 'Be perfect,' and it showed me a circle, and a circle -- well, that's perfect." That's how your preclear was doing that. He wasn't making the postulate at all. He was waiting for a picture to come and tell him what it was all about. Now we go down from Effort into Thinking, and we get our "figure-figure" case. This case is hard to get along with -- he can't work. Life is not composed of thought, particularly. It's composed of space and action and all sorts of things. The Static can do all these things and is not necessarily "all pure thought". Thinkingness comes in down the scale at the level below 168 Effort. And it comes in as figure-figure-figure-figure-figure. Now a person can postulate without thinking about it, and if that's what we mean by thought, that's fine. But usually what people mean by thought is figure-figure. "I'll just figure this out and I'll get a computation and a calculation and I'll add it up to... now let me see... can you go to the movies? I don't know," -- the kind of answer a little kid gets. "Now let me see. I'll have to think it over. Give me a couple of days." We don't know how all of this mechanic got into a postulate, but they've let it get in there. So that's the level, Thinkingness. Now we go downstairs from Thinkingness on this scale and we get into Symbolizingness. A symbol contains mass, meaning and mobility. A symbol is something that's being handled from an orientation point -- a point which is motionless in relationship to the symbol. It's motionless, and the symbol is in motion, and has mass, meaning and mobility. "Where are you from?" "I am from New Jersey." This fellow is telling you that he is from an orientation point called New Jersey. It's motionless and as he runs around the world, he is always from New Jersey. He has mass, meaning and mobility. He has a name. When a person drops down the scale below figure-figure, he is into a point where he figures with symbols. Now that's a condensation, isn't it. Each of these was a condensation. The next one down the line, below Symbols, is Eatingness. Animals eat animals. Animals are symbols and they eat other symbols and they think they have to stay alive by eating other symbols. This is real cute and eating is quite important of course and it can be a lot of fun, but here you have a real condensation. In other words, Effort got so condensed that it turned into an inverted kind of Thought, and that became so 169 condensed that it packaged thinking -- that's what took place there -- it became so condensed it became a Symbol. A word, for instance, is a whole package of thought. So packaged thinking is a symbol and packed symbols are a plate of beans. Below that, when a person doesn't believe he can eat any more, when he thinks he is not going to survive, he will go into the Sexingness band. If you starve cattle for a while they'll start to breed, and if you feed them too well they'll stop breeding. Quite irrational, but then who said any of this was rational? Cattle who are starved or lacking certain food elements will decide, well, we'll live again in some other generation -- and they'll breed up a lot of calves. Of course there's nothing to feed the calves on but they haven't paid much attention to that. In Arizona we have an interesting fact -- we have some very beautiful cattle who have stopped breeding. They've just been too well fed. The way to get those cattle breeding again would be to simply start starving them. Freud by the way was so condensed he had to get way down there to that condensation level of Sex "in order to find out". Below Sex we have a new level of knowingness, the level of Mystery. Mystery of course is the complete displacement of everything, and everything in a terrific confusion. The anatomy of Mystery is unprediction, confusion and then total blackout. First he couldn't predict some particles, and then it all seemed awfully confusing to him and then he just shut it all off and said "I won't look at it anymore". That's what Mystery is, and your Step Fives by the way are very, very concerned about Mystery. They're very concerned about Thinkingness and trying to solve the Mystery. Well the Mystery is already solved in an ultimate truth. The ultimate 170 solution of course is simply the As-is-ness of the problem. And the As-is-ness of a Mystery is simply the Mystery. That's really all there is to it. There really is nothing to know back of a Mystery, except the Mystery itself. It's just As-is-ness. But Mystery is the level of always pretending there's something to know earlier than the Mystery. To sum this up we have, under Axiom Twenty-five: By the practice of Is-ness (Beingness) and Not-is-ness (refusal to Be) individuation progresses from the Knowingness of complete identification down through the introduction of more and more distance and less and less duplication, through Lookingness, Emotingness, Effortingness, Thinkingness, Symbolizingness, Eatingness, Sexingness, and so through to not-Knowingness (Mystery). Until the point of Mystery is reached, some communication is possible, but even at Mystery an attempt to communicate continues. Here we have, in the case of an individual, a gradual falling away from the belief that one can assume a complete Affinity down to the conviction that all is a complete Mystery. Any individual is somewhere on this Know-to-Mystery scale. The original Chart of Human Evaluation was the Emotion section of this scale. 171  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 1 iDate=0/7/54 Volnum=9 Issue=15 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AXIOMS (Part 3)    CHAPTER FIFTEEN AXIOMS (Part 3) These Axioms of Affinity, Reality and Communication are inherent in everything we are dealing with in Scientology. They are of extreme importance and usefulness. If you want to find where a break in a communication line is coming from, why, look for some affinity that is off, and if you want to audit somebody who is having a rather rough time, then you had better audit them with considerable affinity. If you demonstrate enough affinity one way or the other, you will be able to overcome their communication reluctance. It's very important to understand that all these things are basically a consideration. We have to consider that they exist before they exist. We are covering on this track the considerations which Man has composited into an existence. Man has decided that certain things exist and he has agreed upon them very thoroughly and so they exist for all of men. And if he had never decided upon these various existences, they wouldn't exist. So we look at Affinity, Reality and Communication. We are looking at a long series of considerations which Man holds in common. These are not considerations simply because we in Scientology consider that they exist. We can do enormously important things with this information, this codification of the organization of this universe which has spanned a period of something 172 on the order of magnitude of seventy-six trillion years, and to be able to bust it loose and knock it apart is quite an interesting feat. In looking at the subject of affinity we see that the first thing to know about it is that it is a consideration, and then that in the ARC triangle the distance of communication is represented by affinity to a marked degree, and the type of particle. They say that absence makes the heart grow fonder. That happens to be a lie, but you could postulate it that way and make it come out. You could also say that if you get two people far enough apart, they're likely to get mad at each other. A country wars with another country as a result of being far enough apart to afford to get mad. Somebody very furious at you as long as they are on the other end of a telephone line -- when you went around to see them they weren't mad at you any more. That's an inversion on the situation. You closed the distance, and so you achieved a better affinity. There are many ways that you could handle this but again basically it's a consideration. AXIOM TWENTY-SIX: REALITY IS THE AGREED UPON APPARENCY OF EXISTENCE. The whole subject of Reality is a baffling one to people who do not add into Reality Affinity and Communication. It's not "This is my reality and that's your reality". The person can postulate anything he wants to postulate, and he does have a personal reality. He could simply say, "It's there", or "That's real". Or he can have a facsimile appear which is more real to him than the actual universe around him -- the psychotic to whom facsimiles are far far more real than anything else that exists. Well these are two conditions which we don't recognize as reality. On the one 173 hand the person merely postulates a reality, and so that's his reality and other people don't agree upon it. The other is also a not-agreed-upon reality and that is an other-determined reality. Somebody's given him a facsimile and has really impressed him with it, and so this looks more real to him than reality. In other words, we have complete self-determined postulation, and complete other-determined postulations, neither one of which is what we consider to be reality. Those are extremes. What we actually consider to be reality is in the mean of these. That is: what do we agree is real. You and I agree that there's a wall there -- and there's a wall there. We agree there's a ceiling there, and there's a ceiling there. That's real simply because you and I safely have agreed that that's how it is. Now if somebody came into the room and looked at forty people sitting down and said, "What are you all standing up for?" why, you'd have rather a tendency to believe there was something wrong with this fellow. As a matter of fact, the society uses natural selection to take out of the line-up people who have too much personal reality and too much other-determined reality. If this person walked in and said, "What are all you people standing up for?" -- if he did that consistently about a number of things and said, "What is that lion doing walking on the ceiling?" there would be a tendency for him to get locked up. In other words, he would be moved away from survival where he wouldn't procreate. In other words, we'd move these people actually out of at least the genetic line-up. These are called the insane. Now here we have in Reality a very embracive subject, because Reality is actually Is-ness. And unreality is Not-is-ness. An effort of trying to make 174 things disappear with energy. Trying to make things disappear with energy was talked about amusingly in such places as the Bible and they used to say "He who lives by the sword dies by the sword" and somebody said once "Turn the other cheek", and what these people were actually saying was: fighting force with force does not bring about anything like a perfect duplicate. Maybe they didn't know they were saying that. But using force to fight force brings about an unreality. Oddly enough using force to build force brings about a reality. Continuous alteration gives us an Is-ness. A Not-is-ness -- saying it doesn't exist -- gives us an unreality. So there we have Reality and Unreality defined. Now how could you use this principle of Reality in auditing: Reality is basically agreement. A mechanical agreement is: for two forms to be exactly similar. In other words, one's a copy of the other form. That's mimicry, and we learn by mimicry, which is the lowest level of entrance to ARC, and is a very good thing for an auditor to know in any case. What we know then as reality is: the agreed upon apparency of existence. AXIOM TWENTY-SEVEN: AN ACTUALITY CAN EXIST FOR ONE INDIVIDUALLY, BUT WHEN IT IS AGREED WITH BY OTHERS IT CAN BE SAID TO BE A REALITY. And we find that those things which have become solid to us, very fixed, must have been agreed upon by others. The anatomy of Reality is contained in Is-ness, which is composed of As-is-ness and Alter-is-ness. Is-ness is an apparency, it is not an Actuality. The Actuality is As-is-ness altered so as to obtain a persistency. Unreality is the consequence and apparency of the practice of Not-is-ness. 175 This agreement is part of the total As-is-ness of this universe. If you ask a preclear for "some things you wouldn't mind agreeing with," or "something that you could do that other people would agree with", and so on, you'll notice a change in the case. Why? We're improving his level of agreement. He is actually bound by certain considerations, and until he postulates otherwise, he will continue with those considerations. This is how somebody gets fixed into something. The whole of existence in this universe actually is run very much like a hypnotic trance. The worse off a group is, which is to say the less communication they have, actually the more communication can be forced on them, and you see a form of hypnotism there, but the interesting thing is that they must have been prepared by an enormous number of agreements before they got into that state. In other words somebody else prepared them, so they didn't care who they agreed with after a while. When someone of higher rank in a uniform walks up to a soldier and says do something, the soldier will do it. Well, this is a form of hypnotism. You could get a group to agree first that you were simply standing there, and then the next thing that you could get them to agree to is the fact that they were listening to you, and then you would give them a few little things on which they would agree, and at some point you could tell them that the world was on fire, and the audience would rush out to find out or maybe they'd just sit there and burn. Now what is this all about? Does that mean that anybody bringing about an agreement would bring about hypnotism? Oh, no. The reason why, in Scientology, we do not bring 176 about a hypnotism even in Open Procedure by Duplication, is that we are undoing the agreements which people have been making for seventy-six trillion years. We're undoing these, thus auditing makes a person freer, and freer, and freer. Now, this fellow on the stage who simply gets the audience to agree and agree and agree and agree, and then tells them the place is on fire, isn't really going in the direction of making them freer, is he? His intention for this is entirely different. It isn't that an intention is above agreement, it's that consideration is always above agreement, and he is trying to work them into a situation where they will accept what he says without question. In Scientology we're not interested in anybody accepting what we say without question. We ask them to question it. We ask them to please look at the physical universe around you, please look at people, at your own mind, and understand thereby that what we are talking about happens to be actual. This is the series of agreements. These are. I could get people to agree with me about a lot of things and every once in a while throw them a curve. I could quite imperceptibly introduce a false datum into the science, and people have done this sort of thing but one can trace back in this development and see that what we're doing here is laying out the map of what has happened in seventy-six trillion years of a universe. Your agreements have finally mounted up to a point where you believe this universe is all here and what you're agreeing to fortunately are the very things which you agreed to. We aren't giving you new things, we're giving you old things, and by understanding these old things which we have re-discovered, you become free. What is this feeling of unreality that people get -- 177 this unconsciousness and upset and forgetfulness and so on down the list of discomforts of beings. Actually forgetfulness stems from an effort to make things disappear by pressing against them with energy. You can imagine that if we push against a thought hard enough and say it isn't there while it's still there, why, we will surely become forgetful. And if we push hard enough we will become unconscious. But remember we had to postulate that we could forget and we had to postulate that we could become unconscious before either of these things could happen. People toss around waiting to go to sleep, then they say "I am going to sleep." Well, inspect R2-40 and you'll understand why the proper thing to do is to simply say, "I'm asleep." "Well," they say, "that's a lie." No, it isn't a lie unless you consider that you're awake. Now, if you said, "I'm awake, and now I am going to sleep," why of course you wouldn't go to sleep. The point here is that you could make at any moment a prime postulate. We come to the formula of communication. AXIOM TWENTY-EIGHT: COMMUNICATION IS THE CONSIDERATION AND ACTION OF IMPELLING AN IMPULSE OR PARTICLE FROM SOURCE-POINT ACROSS A DISTANCE TO RECEIPT-POINT, WITH THE INTENTION OF BRINGING INTO BEING AT THE RECEIPT-POINT A DUPLICATION OF THAT WHICH EMANATED FROM THE SOURCE-POINT. Now understand this word duplicate as copy, and we have perfect duplicate which means As-is. When we talk about a duplicate we merely mean a copy. Copy, facsimile, duplicate, are pretty much the same thing, and when we're saying perfect duplicate we mean the object created again in its place, in its time, with its own energy. So we send a telegram from New York City which says, "I love you" and it arrives in San Francisco saying "I loathe you". Something has happened 178 there, that we don't get a duplication. Well the more mechanical an individual becomes the less he can duplicate and the less he can make perfect duplicates -- so he can't As-is anything. He falls off to a point where he can't make a copy. You say, "Go around the corner and tell Betty I love her", and he goes around the corner and says, "Joe said uh... to tell you he loathes you". In a line of soldiers we whisper a message, "H hour is at 10 o'clock," and when it goes through a dozen soldiers this way we find at the other end that "We had beans for supper". This is the inability to make copies. And this is a most disruptive thing, and the most important thing in communication. A workable statement of the formula of communication is simply: cause, distance, effect with a good copy at effect of that which was at cause. That's all you really need to know about communication. AXIOM TWENTY-NINE: IN ORDER TO CAUSE AS-IS-NESS TO PERSIST, ONE MUST ASSIGN OTHER AUTHORSHIP TO THE CREATION THAN HIS OWN. OTHERWISE, HIS VIEW OF IT WOULD CAUSE ITS VANISHMENT. Any space, energy, form, object, individual, or physical universe condition can exist only when an alteration has occurrred of the original As-is-ness so as to prevent a casual view from vanishing it. In other words, anything which is persisting must contain a "lie" so that the original consideration is not completely duplicated. If Joe created something and then said "Bill made it," that's a lie, so he gets persistence stemming out of a second postulate, the lie. AXIOM THIRTY: THE GENERAL RULE OF AUDITING IS THAT ANYTHING WHICH IS UNWANTED AND YET PERSISTS MUST BE THOROUGHLY VIEWED, AT WHICH TIME IT WILL VANISH. If only partially viewed, its intensity, at least, will decrease. 179 AXIOM THIRTY-ONE: GOODNESS AND BADNESS, BEAUTIFULNESS AND UGLINESS, ARE ALIKE CONSIDERATIONS AND HAVE NO OTHER BASIS THAN OPINION. AXIOM THIRTY-TWO: ANYTHING WHICH IS NOT DIRECTLY OBSERVED TENDS TO PERSIST. It's true that if you don't As-is it and you've already said it's going to be there, why naturally it will be there. But this is worse than that. You find somebody working and paying some attention to the work but never paying any attention to his machine. And you'll find he has facsimiles of the machine just all stacked up everywhere. He's never As-ised the machine. Or you find somebody who has always looked at lighted objects in dark rooms and has never looked at the darkness eventually seeing nothing but darkness when he closed his eyes. He'll have a "black bank", in other words. AXIOM THIRTY-THREE: ANY AS-IS-NESS WHICH IS ALTERED BY NOT-IS-NESS (BY FORCE) TENDS TO PERSIST. AXIOM THIRTY-FOUR: ANY IS-NESS, WHEN ALTERED BY FORCE TENDS TO PERSIST. AXIOM THIRTY-FIVE: THE ULTIMATE TRUTH IS A STATIC. A Static has no mass, meaning, mobility, no wavelength, no time, no location in space, no space. This has the technical name of "Basic Truth". AXIOM THIRTY-SIX: A LIE IS A SECOND POSTULATE, STATEMENT OR CONDITION DESIGNED TO MASK A PRIMARY POSTULATE WHICH IS PERMITTED TO REMAIN. Examples: Neither truth nor a lie is a motion or alteration of a particle from one position to another. A lie is a statement that a particle having moved did not move, or a statement that a particle not having moved, did move. 180 The basic lie is that a consideration which was made was not made or that it was different. AXIOM THIRTY-SEVEN: WHEN A PRIMARY CONSIDERATION IS ALTERED BUT STILL EXISTS, PERSISTENCE IS ACHIEVED FOR THE ALTERING CONSIDERATION. All persistence depends on the Basic Truth, but the persistence is of the altering consideration, for the Basic Truth has neither persistence nor impersistence. Now we come to something which is tremendously interesting because it is the proof of the fact that we have reached an ultimate truth and an ultimate solution. And that ultimate truth is itself very, very important to an auditor because that tells you whether or not Scientology is a total subject. We could show this by a line representing knowledge, going upward from no knowledge as follows: ALL DATA KNOWN ONE NEW DATUM KNOWN NO DATA KNOWN From no data to one new datum to eventually at top ALL data known. But this is actually a circle. At the top is NO DATA KNOWN. Just before the top is ALL DATA KNOWN, and as we move to the top and then return to NO DATA we then move to the next point of ONE NEW DATUM KNOWN and 181 so on around the circle to more and more, then ALL data, then again none: ALL DATA KNOWN NO DATA KNOWN ONE NEW DATUM KNOWN You see that on this circle everything known and nothing known are adjacent. Well, we have reached that point in Scientology because we know that the ultimate truth, the ultimate solution, is the Static. The solution to a problem is the As-is-ness of the problem, because by solution is meant: what will cause this problem to dissipate and disappear. With As-is-ness we have reached the solution to all problems. We have reached an ultimate truth. So that we know we have in Scientology a total subject. AXIOM THIRTY-EIGHT: 1: STUPIDITY IS THE UNKNOWNESS OF CONSIDERATION. 182 2: MECHANICAL DEFINITION: STUPIDITY IS THE UNKNOWNESS OF TIME, PLACE, FORM, AND EVENT. He knows something happened, but he doesn't know what happened. He can't add it up. He can't do anything with it. We call that stupidity. 1: TRUTH IS THE EXACT CONSIDERATION. 2: TRUTH IS THE EXACT TIME, PLACE FORM, AND EVENT. Thus we see that failure to discover Truth brings about stupidity. Thus we see that the discovery of Truth would bring about an As-is-ness by actual experiment. Thus we see that an ultimate truth would have no time, place, form or event. Thus, then, we perceive that we can achieve a persistence only when we mask a truth. Lying is an alteration of Time, Place, Event, or Form. Lying becomes Alter-is-ness, becomes Stupidity. (The Blackness of cases is an accumulation of the case's own or another lies.) Anything which persists must avoid As-is-ness. Thus, anything, to persist, must contain a lie. He says: "I am a man," so he's a man. That's the exact consideration. He is not telling a lie until he has said I am a man -- and then has masked or hidden the fact that he is a man, and says, "I am a woman", Now the odd part of it is that he made a truth when he made the first postulate. And that which denied that truth then persisted. The second postulate always persists. I give you R2-40. The dissertation in R2-40 in the Handbook* makes this much clearer. The second postulate introduced time. Persist is time -- that's all. Mortality, *See The Creation of Human Ability by L. Ron Hubbard Available as listed in back pages. 183 immortality -- this is a matter of time. It's also a matter of Identity, but it's basically time. That which is persisting means that which is time-ing. And if you have assumed that after you made a postulate you then had something which permitted you to make another postulate, you'd have to postulate time there, wouldn't you? It's quite interesting. So that your second postulate then introduced time, merely because it's the second postulate. You had to introduce time. You see, there is no time in the Static, natively. Time is just a consideration. All right. So you introduce time. You get a lie. Now any time the first postulate is masked (this is mechanical by the way, this is the way it works) and you put a second postulate in front of the first postulate it's the second postulate which persists, but it derives its strength from the first postulate. Entered into the solution of this subject of Scientology and life was this datum, that stupidity is the unknowness of consideration. Well, then truth is the knowness of the consideration, isn't it? Right back there we have that perfect duplicate. We found out that when you got the As-is-ness of anything, if you made a perfect duplicate of it it would disappear. So truth is a perfect duplicate. But that's a disappearance. Well, if that's a disappearance then all you've got left is the Static. So that truth is the Static. And it follows through just as clearly as that. It's a mechanical proof. It's as mechanical as any kind of proof you ever wanted in any field of mathematics. It's totally mechanical. Now again a problem is a solution only when you get the As-is-ness of the problem. We get the As-is-ness of the problem, therefore what have we got left? We've got the As-is-ness of the problem and we have nothing left. Oh, but we don't have nothing -- we have 184 a Static. So we find out that the ultimate truth is also the basic truth, contains no time, no motion, no mass, no wavelength, and we find also that the ultimate solution contains no time, no motion, no mass, no length. So we come back to something which is not an imponderable: does and can one of these Statics exist? Yes, that too we can subject to proof, and we can subject it to proof immediately, instantly and easily. Nothing to it. You just ask somebody who's in not too bad condition to "Be three feet back of your head." You can ask him to be anywhere, to appear anywhere in the universe, and he can. You ask him to manufacture space and energy, and he can. You can inspect actually whether or not this is taking place. And you'll find out that it is taking place, and you'll find out that Man is basically a Static. So he doesn't move. He appears. Therefore we have this thing called the Static. We have the perfect duplicate -- the As-is-ness. We have an ultimate truth and we have an ultimate solution. At this point in Scientology we have wrapped it up. There are a great many strong points on the track where there's a lot of data hidden, and chaos and confusions and that sort of thing which we've by-passed, a lot of things which we haven't described adequately -- for instance I'm not even satisfied at this moment completely with our description of Affinity, but I can tell you this, that they are knowingly by-passed points. The other evening (at two o'clock in the morning) I suddenly found that I had arrived at the edge of a cliff, looking at End of Track. There isn't any more road out there, that's all, because we've come back to the Static, and we have found out what this Static is, we can demonstrate its existence, we can demonstrate what it does, we can prove it and we can all 185 agree upon that proof, and we can do wonderful and miraculous things with it. The forty processes contained in the Auditor's Handbook* can do those things just like that. When you know well this material and can apply it in the first few of these processes, you will be doing very, very well. * Auditor's Handbook: 1954 edition of the book which, greatly expanded, became The Creation of Human Ability by L. Ron Hubbard. See book list in back pages. 186  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 1 iDate=0/7/54 Volnum=9 Issue=16 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AXIOMS (Part 4)    CHAPTER SIXTEEN AXIOMS (Part 4) Having these Axioms we are now particularly interested in this whole subject of truth and its actual use in auditing. We see immediately that any problem of any character or scope is the basic business of a Scientologist. If you have someone who wants to know about solutions, you had certainly better give him not a solution to a problem but the solution to problems, and that of course would be a basic and ultimate truth. Well, if you can describe a basic and ultimate truth, and describe it exactly, you have no problem at all in solving problems. We see that failure to discover truth brings about stupidity. A person begins to believe he's stupid if he can't As-is. We see that the discovery of truth would bring about an As-is-ness, by actual experiment, and thus we see that an ultimate truth would have no time, place or form. Whatever we had there would simply disappear if we discovered an ultimate truth. The ultimate truth is a perfect duplicate and therefore a Static. And, operationally, to achieve a Static would be to make a perfect duplicate. We see that a lie as we understand it is an alteration of time, place, event or form, and that only lies persist. We have to have a basic postulate, and then another postulate, before we get time. Two postulates. We can't have time with one postulate unless it is the postulate 187 that there will be time. That could be one postulate. But normally in operation we find that two postulates are necessary to achieve time. Now which one of these postulates is going to persist if the two postulates deny each other: the second one is going to persist, because it is the time postulate. Lying becomes an Alter-is-ness, and becomes stupidity. In other words, we don't discover where the thing is, we don't discover exactly how it is, so we can't unmock it, and there we are. The only thing that we can do with it possibly is to Not-is it or Alter-is it some more or do what a Black V does -- just stir it around and hope it will disappear. He doesn't As-is it. It doesn't disappear. Oddly enough, lying will develop into a stupidity. It also develops into a mystery -- into this blackness which individuals are so upset about. It's just an alteration of time, place, event or form after the fact of its having been created. There would be two kinds of lie here. A mechanical lie does not lead to blackness. Mechanical lie: we mock up some space, and we put an object in that space and then we move it. The moment we've moved it we've lied about it. We've said it's over there when as a matter of fact it was created in the first location. Now in view of the fact that there is only consideration this of course would bring about mechanically a lie. It doesn't disappear, it doesn't do anything peculiar simply by moving it around. The mere handling of energy does not bring about a stupidity. It takes another consideration than simply moving something to bring about an occlusion. Now, anything to persist must avoid As-is-ness, and 188 thus anything to persist, really to persist, must contain a lie. And we get the next Axiom: AXIOM THIRTY-NINE: LIFE POSES PROBLEMS FOR ITS OWN SOLUTION. Now what do we find here, in a problem? We find something which is persisting, the As-is-ness of which cannot readily be obtained, and would be the definition of a problem. Now to solve that problem it would be necessary to get its As-is-ness. Well, how do we prevent something from being As-ised, in other words vanished? We introduce a lie into it. AXIOM FORTY: ANY PROBLEM, TO BE A PROBLEM, MUST CONTAIN A LIE. IF IT WERE TRUTH, IT WOULD UNMOCK. When the preclear is being a problem, we know very well that there's a lie somewhere on the track that he's trying to obtain the As-is-ness of. It's not necessarily his lie, but it certainly is a lie. And under Axiom Forty we get: An "unsolvable problem" would have the greatest persistence. It would also contain the greatest number of altered facts. To make a problem, one must introduce Alter-is-ness. In other words, this problem must have been moved and shifted and shoved around considerably to be unsolvable. AXIOM FORTY-ONE: THAT INTO WHICH ALTER-IS-NESS IS INTRODUCED BECOMES A PROBLEM. Any time you Alter-is something you've got a problem on your hands. This whole universe, then, is a problem. Therefore this whole universe must contain a lie to go on persisting the way it does. It certainly does contain Alter-is. It certainly does contain a lie. It contains a variety of lies about its creation, and there are all sorts of things 189 about this universe which cause its persistence, and all of those things boil down to the one fact that it must be based upon a lie and it must be very definitely altered. Axiom Forty-one tells us that it was alteration which brought the preclear into a problem, thus we find any child who has moved extensively, who has had his home changed, who has been shoved around to various parts of the world, eventually becomes a problem, first to the environment and then to himself. AXIOM FORTY-TWO: MEST (MATTER, ENERGY, SPACE, TIME) PERSISTS BECAUSE IT IS A PROBLEM. It is a problem because it contains Alter-is-ness. Your physicist is busily at work trying to unmock it but he is unmocking it by Not-is-ness. He's using force to alter force, and because he keeps altering it, it all naturally just gets worse and worse. He will solve nothing with an atom bomb. He will simply make things go worse, more complicated, more confused, more dispersed. The atom bomb is a dead-end track and is folly, it is great folly. If an atom bomb were introduced into a war the number of particles and the amount of MEST which would be altered, we would discover immediately, would have introduced a great number of lies into the situation, it would have deteriorated the society and everything else. If we were foolish enough, for instance, to atom bomb Russia, or if Russia were foolish enough to atom bomb the United States, enough confusion would have been introduced into the cultures of earth so that probably there would be no other choice but to sink into a barbarism, in the absence of an understanding of life itself. AXIOM FORTY-THREE: TIME IS THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF UNTRUTH. 190 Time states the untruth of consecutive considerations. I call your attention to interest, as an interesting thing to observe. There are two classes of interest, and we want to know why we're thinking about this in terms of time, and this is because time is the basic lie behind all lies. We believe there are consecutive moments. We see consecutive motions and this all very pleasant -- we agree to this -- and it's only when we have masked them with some vicious intent that we really get a kick-back from the progress of time. But we discover here in the matter of interest that we have two facets: one is "interested", and the other is "interesting". A thetan is interested, and an object is interesting. A thetan is not interesting. He is interested. And when a person becomes terribly interesting he has lots of problems, believe me. That is the chasm that is crossed. That is the chasm which is crossed by all of your celebrities, anybody who is foolish enough to become famous. He crosses over from being interested in life to being interesting, and people who are interesting are really no longer interested in life. It's very baffling to some young fellow why he can't make some beautiful girl interested in him. Well, she is not interested, she is interesting. AXIOM FORTY-FOUR: THETA (THE STATIC) HAS NO LOCATION IN MATTER, ENERGY, SPACE, OR TIME. IT IS CAPABLE OF CONSIDERATION. We have put it right in there again just to drive it home well. There's no time in this Static. Time is a lie. Time can be postulated by the Static but is only a consideration and thereafter a thetan gets the idea that he is persisting across a span of time, and he is not. 191 He is not persisting. Objects are going across time, and energies and spaces are changing, but he is not. At no time does he actually change. He has to consider he is out of his head before he can be out of his head. A Step V, or Black Five, is quite interesting in this regard. He is always thinking the auditor's going to reach in and pull him out of his head. He's waiting for something else to do it! Of course you could probably hypnotize him and tell him that he was, and he'd probably react in various ways, but he has to say, "I am now out of my head," and then he will be out of his head. But "waiting to see" whether or not he's out of his head is complete nonsense. The only way that he can get anything done, is to consider that it is done, or consider that that is the condition which exists. AXIOM FORTY-FIVE: THETA CAN CONSIDER ITSELF TO BE PLACED, AT WHICH MOMENT IT BECOMES PLACED, AND TO THAT DEGREE A PROBLEM. Any time we fall away from Axiom One, which is repeated as Axiom Forty-four, we discover that we have less of a Static than before. In other words we just place this Static, and it's less of a Static. A thetan, then, can have a problem, just by being placed. Quite in addition to that he ceases to be quite as interested. He himself, placing himself, can get away with it. This isn't very hard for him to do. And he can perceive from this new place, and so forth, but as long as he is placed, he will be less than the Static. Just remember that. He is to that degree a problem. AXIOM FORTY-SIX: THETA CAN BECOME A PROBLEM BY ITS CONSIDERATIONS BUT THEN BECOMES MEST. A problem is to some degree MEST, MEST IS a problem. What is this MEST? We find that an interested 192 thetan is a thetan, but an interesting thetan has become MEST. What is MEST? Well, it's actually simply a composite of energies and particles and spaces which are agreed upon and which are looked at. We have the difference between inflow and outflow. A thetan who is being interested is simply outflowing. Interested -- outflowing. Interesting -- inflowing. He wants the attention of others to flow in to him: interesting. That's MEST. Attention of others flows to it. That doesn't tell you that all MEST is is a series of trapped Thetans. It says that it is a type of life which is being interesting, as opposed to something which is being interested in it. Now, Number Forty-six: Theta can become a problem by its considerations, but then becomes MEST, is followed by this, that MEST is a problem, and will always be considered a problem, and is nothing else but a problem. MEST is that form of theta which is a problem. That's all. Therefore, it is that form of theta which has a lie introduced into it. And so, of course, it is a problem. AXIOM FORTY-SEVEN: THETA CAN RESOLVE PROBLEMS. AXIOM FORTY-EIGHT: LIFE IS A GAME WHEREIN THETA AS THE STATIC SOLVES THE PROBLEMS OF THETA AS MEST. Now that means that theta is the Static, and theta is the object? Yes, indeed. It can be both ways. It all depends on which one is being interested and which one is being interesting. And we find that a preclear gets more and more solid the more interesting he becomes, and the more problem he becomes, the more problems he has and the more figuring he does on his problems, the more solid he is going to get. 193 AXIOM FORTY-NINE: TO SOLVE ANY PROBLEM IT IS ONLY NECESSARY TO BECOME THETA, THE SOLVER, RATHER THAN THETA, THE PROBLEM. That is a very, very important Axiom. That tells you why SOP 8C Opening Procedure works. It works because the main form of theta which we find desirable, which has mobility, which has freedom which is happy, which is cheerful, which has all those qualities on the top of the Chart of Attitudes is an observer of problems and a solver of problems. So if you get somebody to simply look around the environment, he will cease to be a problem and will become the solver of problems. That's all. Just looking. Get him to look around and recognize a few problems and he will feel better. Somebody then who is worrying about himself constantly, well, he's all mixed up in a problem and his affinity is at a closure with this problem. He's having an awful time. Well let's take this and turn it around the other way and let's have him observe himself as a problem, and we get that part of the process which is "Problems and Solutions". And naturally, if we asked a thetan to be a solution often enough, he would eventually become a Static. That's all. If we asked him to observe problems long enough he would simply become a Static. In other words he would go out of it both ways. A Thetan could become a problem, more of a problem, more of a problem, more of a problem, more and more and more and more and more and more -- static. You see he could go "out the bottom". Or, he could go: less of a problem, less of a problem, less, less -- static. He could go either way. So there's no avoiding it, you're going to survive anyway, and so are your preclears, but we're going to have a better world doing it. 194 AXIOM FIFTY: THETA AS MEST MUST CONTAIN CONSIDERATIONS WHICH ARE LIES. In other words, there isn't a single piece of MEST in the world which isn't to some degree lying. Looking at that, then, we find that the only crime that you could possibly commit in this universe is being there. It doesn't matter where. This is the only crime that you could commit. And this is all your parents objected to, and this is all the preclear objects to when you're auditing him and he growls at you. They add tremendous significances into this, but all they object to is being there. Now if you ran SOP 8C, Opening Procedure, and you ran it very, very definitely with that postulate: to get the fact that the wall is there. Get the fact that the chair is there, that something else is there, etc., you'd be likely to knock your preclear flat at some point. I am not advising you to use this form of Opening Procedure. It's a violent process. If you get almost any preclear and just have him stand in the middle of the room, and say "get the idea", to that empty space out in front of you there, "that it's there", it's there, it's there -- his mother will show up and eight or nine of his wives and all sorts of other things will show up all the way down the line. He'll have all kinds of people standing in front of him. They're all "there". But that's the only crime a thetan can commit. It's a lie, you see. That theta can be THERE is a lie, and that's the only bad thing that anybody has ever done is to be there. Now, that's all, actually, that the body is doing. He's got a body and he's visible. He is being there. And we must have introduced a lie. And the basic lie which is introduced is Time. It is interesting to note that it is the second postulate which persists, because persist means time, and it's the second postulate which introduces time, and this 195 becomes elementary. Now let's look at this one: let's take this fellow who's awfully sick. He's terribly sick. Boy, is he a problem. He's a problem to himself, a problem to his family, and a problem to his auditor. He is a problem. He's terrific. You know that he must have had an original postulate that he was well before he could make the second postulate that he was sick. And you know the postulate that he was sick must have denied the postulate that he was well, and so his original sickness was a falsity and he knew it at the time he made it -- he actually knew it well. He knew -- when he said he was sick that day to keep from going to school -- that it was a lie. He knew it was a lie and he got a persistence of the sickness and now here he is eighty-nine years of age and all crippled up and we find out that the basic postulate was the fact that he was well. How could sickness ever get any power except through wellness? Now we look underneath every lie to find out that it was the truth -- the Static itself -- which gave it power. The lie has no power itself because it is a perversion. Persistence has no power that is not based on the Static itself. So we have the basic lineup at all times and in all places, that the lie is empowered by truth. Truth must have existed and a good condition or quality must have existed prior to a bad condition or quality. As we study the problem of goodness and badness in the world, we find out that we must be studying the second postulate, because that is all that persists. Now let's take a situation where something is persisting -- and it's good. We could say that that looks as if it must have been based upon a prior postulate which was bad. But you can't make a prime postulate which is a lie. If you'll just get the idea that there are 196 no postulates, that you've made no postulates of any kind, that there are no postulates which have been made -- now make a postulate. That would be a prime postulate. That postulate can't be a lie. Now make a second postulate denying the one you just made. That's a lie. Now which one of these two is going to persist? Of course the second one. And it is going to get its power from the first postulate. It would not matter what the prime postulate was. That is not the point, here. We're not going on the basis of badness or goodness. A consideration is a consideration. Now, do we mean reach back on the track, and find these postulates? -- reach back and run it out with straight-wire? No, because there is no time, and all address to the past -- every address to the past and every address to the future actually is validating a lie. There's only now. There's never been anything else but now. There's a consistent change and a consistent series of postulates going on which give us a continuance of now, but the continuance of now is a lie. You can move objects around, and that's quite honest, that's not bad. But we're looking at two kinds of lie here, and we discover that when we are trying to make a condition change we simply have to postulate, as though it exists in present time, the opposite condition. So somebody who hates the human race -- he must have loved them desperately by prior postulate. There's no hatred like that which can exist between two brothers or a nation torn asunder in war. Well, that's because they loved each other so well, you see. And so they can hate with violence. But what is their hatred depending on but the fact that they loved each other? So if we have somebody hating madly somebody 197 named Bill -- we would say, "Now, get the idea of loving Bill." Grrrrr, he'd go. "Now, get the idea of loving Bill." Grrrr. "Get the idea of loving Bill." Grr. "Get the idea of loving Bill." "Well, he's not too bad a guy." We wouldn't necessarily restore love, but we'd certainly run out the hatred for Bill. 198 EDITOR'S NOTE The description of actual processes given in this book are not published here as final, or current standard textbook procedure, but rather as valuable background in the development and understanding of modern Scientology technology. Though not greatly changed in themselves, these processes are now used only in the exact ways and levels indicated on the Classification, Gradation and Awareness Chart of Levels and Certificates. They belong to the auditor specifically trained for their proper levels. Standard technology is contained in the course materials compiled from the technical Bulletins of L. Ron Hubbard as issued and used in the Academies of Scientology around the world and in the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course at Hubbard College of Scientology, Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex, England. 199