Subject: FZ Bible FIRST POSTULATE TAPES 02/35 (20th ACC)
Date: 24 Nov 1999 20:01:32 -0000
From: Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
Organization: mail2news@zedz.net
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

FIRST POSTULATE TAPES 02/35 (20th American Advanced Clinical Course)

**************************************************

Contents

20th ACC - First Postulate Cassettes [clearsound]

New #    Old #   Date     Title

20ACC-1  (1)   14 Jul 58 OPENING LECTURE
20ACC-2  (1A)  14 Jul 58 OPENING LECTURE - Q AND A PERIOD
20ACC-3  (2)   15 Jul 58 ACC PROCEDURE OUTLINED E-METER TRS
20ACC-4  (2A)  15 Jul 58 ACC PROC OUTLINED - E-METER TRS - Q AND A PERIOD
20ACC-5  (3)   16 Jul 58 COURSE PROCEDURE OUTLINED
20ACC-6  (3A)  16 Jul 58 COURSE PROCEDURE OUTLINED - Q AND A PERIOD
20ACC-7  (4)   17 Jul 58 BEGINNING AND ENDING SESSION
20ACC-8  (4A)  17 Jul 58 BEGINNING AND ENDING SESSION - Q AND A PERIOD
20ACC-9  (5)   18 Jul 58 ACC TRAINING PROCEDURE
20ACC-10 (5A)  18 Jul 58 ACC TRAINING PROCEDURE - Q & A PERIOD
20ACC-11 (6)   21 Jul 58 THE KEY WORDS (BUTTONS) OF SCIENTOLOGY CLEARING
20ACC-12 (6A)  21 Jul 58 THE KEY WORDS (BUTTONS) OF SCN - Q & A PERIOD
20ACC-13 (7)   22 Jul 58 THE ROCK
20ACC-14 (7A)  22 Jul 58 THE ROCK - Q & A PERIOD
20ACC-15 (8)   23 Jul 58 SPECIAL EFFECT CASES,  ANATOMY OF
20ACC-16 (8A)  23 Jul 58 SPECIAL EFFECT CASES, ANATOMY - Q&A PERIOD
20ACC-17 (9)   24 Jul 58 ANATOMY OF NEEDLES - DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE
20ACC-18 (9A)  24 Jul 58 ANATOMY OF NEEDLES - DIAG. PROC - Q&A PERIOD
20ACC-19 (10)  25 Jul 58 THE ROCK: PUTTING THE PC AT CAUSE
20ACC-20 (10A) 25 Jul 58 Q&A PERIOD - CLEARING THE COMMAND
20ACC-21 (11)  28 Jul 58 ACC COMMAND SHEET - GOALS OF AUDITING
20ACC-22 (12)  29 Jul 58 ACC COMMAND SHEET (cont.)
20ACC-23 (13)  30 Jul 58 ACC COMMAND SHEET (cont. 2)
20ACC-24 (14)  31 Jul 58 RUNNING THE CASE AND THE ROCK
20ACC-25 (15)   1 Aug 58 CASE ANALYSIS - ROCK HUNTING
20ACC-26 (15A)  1 Aug 58 CASE ANALYSIS - ROCK HUNTING (cont.)
20ACC-27 (16)   4 Aug 58 CASE ANALYSIS - ROCK HUNTING (cont. 2)
20ACC-28 (16A)  4 Aug 58 CASE ANALYSIS - ROCK HUNTING - Q&A PERIOD
20ACC-29 (17)   5 Aug 58 ARC
20ACC-30 (18)   6 Aug 58 THE ROCK - ITS ANATOMY
20ACC-31 (19)   7 Aug 58 THE MOST BASIC ROCK OF ALL
20ACC-32 (19A)  7 Aug 58 THE MOST BASIC ROCK OF ALL - Q&A PERIOD
20ACC-33 (20)   8 Aug 58 AUDITOR INTEREST
20ACC-34 (20A)  8 Aug 58 REQUISITES AND FUNDAMENTALS OF A SESSION
20ACC-35 (21)  15 Aug 58 SUMMARY OF 20TH ACC

The clearsound set includes an Appendix containing two HCOBs.  This
has been included with the first lecture above.

Note that old 15B "Q & A PERIOD" of 2 Aug 58 was marked as missing in
the Flag Master List and was later found by Gold.  Its absense here
probably means that they found it to be the same as old 16A (20ACC-28
in the above list).

Old number 19B "Q & A Period" of 8 Aug in the Flag Master List
is also omitted but 20ACC-32 (old 19A) is extremely long and probably
contains both old 19A and 19B.

Note 20ACC-2 (1A) does not appear on the Flag Master List but
appears to be genuine.

We were able to check ten of these against the old reels and
found minor omissions [marked ">" in the transcripts.]

**************************************************

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoners are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heretics.  By their standards, all Christians,
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judaism form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

**************************************************

20ACC-2  (1A)  14 Jul 58 OPENING LECTURE - Q AND A PERIOD

20 ACC 2  (1A)

OPENING LECTURE - QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD

A lecture given on 14 July 1958

[Based on the clearsound version only.]

Question period, first ACC lecture.

Yes.

Male voice: This question of a person not-know, not-know,
not-know - that seems to me that's an apparency. Actually
what he's doing is create-cease create, create-cease
create, cease create. Is that correct?

Yeah, but after a while he takes the apparency as real and
he not-knows with mass, or not-knows with space. You get a
track stretched out at time intervals which is a method of
not-knowing. You know? And he - it develops a methodology
of something which doesn't exist in the first place. That's
very well asked because it brings up this point: that is
probably the basic reason why you can neglect not-know and
still clear somebody.

Male voice: Thank you.

Because it ain't.

Male voice: Thanks.

It's all right.

Well now, this is your question period and it may be on the
lecture or it may be on your current auditing. This is your
chance to have a crack at me here on all the horrors of war
that you're experiencing. Yes?

Male voice: Ron, I'd like a little more on that tolerance of
violence, if you could, as versus responsibility.

Well, if you have a tolerance of violence, you don't need
a stable datum to hold it back. So as a person becomes
intolerant of violence he begins to assume more and more
stable data, doesn't he? Now, if a person is being
irresponsible for the violence, it of course is far more
impressive to him.

Male voice: Mm-hm.

So the less responsible he is, the more stable data he has
to get and the more protective he has to be of the stable
data. Don't you see?

Male voice: Yeah, I see that.

So that some fellow eventually will take a rifle and it
will be the one thing - it's the stable datum for all
violence, a rifle. You get the idea?

Male voice: Yeah.

After a while it'll become so valuable that he won't fire
one and you get a collector.

Male voice: I see.

Female voice: Wow!

You get all sorts of manifestations of this nature. It's
quite an amusing look at life.

Yes, Miriam?

Female voice: I want to see if I understand what you were
saying. In this association: we may agree to an association.
Then we will find out that we have agreed to more than we
thought.

Yeah.

Female voice: They say, "Skip a grade. I'll teach you a
little." That means you don't play with any of the children
all summer. This spring, in working, I came across that
thing with preclears and with myself a dozen times. So here
was association without consent suddenly and then you were
trapped.

That's right. But you must realize that the only
associations that are valuable - and this is the reason we
are clearing people - if we took all unwanted or all apparent
associations without consent and started to run them out of
a case, oh wow! See? This is one of these tremendous tasks
because it's just gone on and on and on.

What you have to do is take something which assisted
somebody to create, to cause to survive and to (as he
thinks) not-know things; and we take this assistant
creator, you might say, which became the individual, became
definitely associated with him, and then by some betrayal
mechanism became unusable. Now, by this mechanism we have
now blocked out a whole zone of creation, see? We had a
dependency and we couldn't do it without the thing.

There's many a writer today, for instance - I know this
personally - who are unable to tell stories verbally. As
a matter of fact it's rather symptomatic of our age, but
these boys all need paper and pencil and solitude to tell a
story. Well, that's a funny thing to need to tell a story,
isn't it? Huh, if you think it over? The thing you've got
to have to tell a story is an audience! And so these boys
write themselves out and run downhill in two or three
years, and they talk about writers these days getting all
burned out.

Well, that's fascinating when you look at the career of
Alexandre Dumas, and he was telling stories to the world
and association to him was a thing of joy, certainly. You
never saw a guy associate with Paris with quite such
intimacy. And this fellow - this fellow was writing all
of his days. See? Well, you could take almost any art and
separate out the things which are associative with the art,
run it on a whole track basis and find the reason for
failure. Now, it won't be what the fellow tells you, but
you, a Scientologist, could just work it out on a writer
with paper, a painter with canvas, and either (or any
artist) with a critic. Critic's very valuable and then he
cuts your throat.

And you could run this, and although it would be merely a
surface computation on the case - see, you're not really
clearing this fellow, you're giving him an assist; I want
you to get the difference between clearing somebody and
giving an assist - you can run these same mechanisms on any
given subject on a case and get a tremendous resurgence of
ability, and if you handle the present lifetime, all you're
going to do is give the fellow an assist.

A present lifetime set of auditing is merely an assist,
that's all. You could get rid of all the unwanted
associations in the present lifetime - if you could; I
doubt it. But you certainly could get rid of all of the
dependencies on help in the present lifetime and get some
resurgence of a skill. You could make a painter paint
better, an electronics man do work better and so forth,
just by getting rid of all of the little odds and ends and
people that he depended on to help him.

Now, you're not going to clear him because it was eight or
nine million years ago during a period of space opera that
he got zapped thoroughly by his assistant who up to that
time had done all of his construction. You get the idea.
Every time he wanted to invent some electronic gadget, why,
his assistant was an absolute genius on the subject and
he'd just mock up all the wires and connect everything and
put all of everything in a proper place - and very well
educated, terrific technical man, and a pal, you know,
and they were good friends. And then one day - the fellow
didn't even know that there was an affair between the
assistant and his wife or something of the sort - and one
day he told the assistant to do something and they were
rolling ahead on this big project and the assistant picked
up a zap gun and killed him deader than a mackerel.

See, it wouldn't happen every lifetime but it certainly
happened that time. And so we find this electronics man in
this kind of a state of mind in this lifetime: he
absolutely has to have somebody to help him wire things,
but if he does he'll get killed. See, and therefore we
could unburden all of the help he needs and we would make
him just a little bit better an electronics man, see? And
it would be a measurable difference, but it wouldn't clear
the case.

So we have a choice of giving people an assist and clearing
them. And that difference is: handling the present lifetime
and handling the whole track.

Now, association with education and learning, or anything
of that character, is very long because the one thing he
has done since the beginning of the universe was teach and
learn. He has done both. You can get anybody by saying,
"Have you ever taught anybody anything?" Oh, wow! See, this
goes right on back to beginning of track.

Yes?

Male voice: Changing over to this question of violence,
what about a process which would clear the person's
understanding of violence as you clear the understanding of
help, in the same manner? How would that...

Well, you could, but there is a short process that I didn't
mention which does handle violence. Raising his tolerance
of violence and so forth by various mock-ups and that sort
of thing is very limited. But you can run Help on violent
terminals and you will find this as you start analyzing
people, that violent terminals are themselves... So that
Help on a soldier, "How could you help a soldier?" is one
of the killers.

You got the pun all right.

Male voice: Ron, as the preclear's acceptance of violence
comes up to a high degree, what would violence be, then, as
a definition?

An unappreciated series of particles.

Violence has been the servant of a preclear, you see? And
he has caused violence and then has withheld causing
violence. One of the favorite methods of mothers the world
over is to teach children they should not be mean to
animals or their brothers and sisters because it hurts them
too. Did you know that? The little child slaps his baby
brother, so Mama slaps the little child to show that it
hurt the baby brother. You got that? Well, she's showing an
association which will inhibit the child's use of violence.
Well, I suppose there's nothing else they could do because
the child already has a very deranged idea of the uses of
violence.

There's another interesting mechanism on this violence
thing that might interest you offhand: is a person gets
into violence and confusions by associating himself with
one particle and watching all the other particles. So
therefore apparently the particle with which he's
associated isn't moving and all of the other particles
are moving.

Now, he's just part of a confusion and a chaos, you see?
But he thinks this one particle is not moving because he's
viewing all other particles from it.

Male voice: Yeah.

All right now, if there's plus or minus randomity in the
remainder of the particles, he's liable to object to it.
When the courts, for instance, counter violence with
"wait," you wonder why wait is such an integral part of an
aberrated justice. They always put everybody on wait. The
wait actually is as trying as the violence and can become
actually quite as painful. So it's plus or minus randomity
or objected-to association.

The association's too slow: everybody in this neighborhood
is square, see, they're all a bunch of squares; don't want
to have anything to do with them; they're all a bunch of
slowpokes, you know? So the kid leaves for the big town.
You get the idea? That's his computation.

Now, he's actually refusing to confront a slowness of
particle, isn't he? Well, his reverse computation on it
would be: he moves into a neighborhood of - oh, a bunch of
criminals and guys that are very fast, savage, high-impact
people. See? And he leaves that area because these people
have too much speed to them; there's too much motion there.
So, in either case you have an aberrated condition where
the individual will not confront. But his idea of plus or
minus randomity is what causes him to confront.

Now, the individual associates himself with one particle
and it's moving just as fast as all the other particles -
or just as slow - but he views the others from it. And we
get the basic idea of confusion, violence or lack of it.

Now, an individual could associate himself with one
particle in a mass of motionless particles and see no
motion on the part of other particles, and he gets the
sensation of boredom and other such things. You get the
idea? He thinks there must be a certain amount of change,
see, or absence of it. It's just his opinion.

Now, it's the help on the part of the particle with which
he associates himself that causes him to associate himself
with that body of violence. You see? So help unlocks him
from these single-particle connections.

It's an interesting picture. If you look this over, there's
a lot to know about that one fact there. If you're driving
down the highway, you're in your car and your car is
relatively motionless and all these other cars are going
fast. They're passing you, they're coming the other way,
they're all in motion, but your immediate confine is not in
motion. That is a gross look at it. You have hold of a body
which in itself is a center point of view, and other bodies
and things are in motion in relationship to that body.

Now, let's look at this: you think you need a body to do
things. To knit, you think, well, you've got to have a pair
of hands and a body. You've got to have a lap to put the
yarn on and all that sort of thing. I don't know why; used
to be able to knit without anything. Well, as a matter of
fact, why should you need needles and yarn to knit? See,
why don't you just mock up the knitted object? You get the
idea? Here's doingness entering into this thing.

So, old Dianetic expression: You learn how to knit, see,
and you're knitting away and you're being very happy about
knitting and you can handle knitting needles - you a thetan,
no body, see? And you could take some yarn and a couple of
needles and you can make the needles sing around in the air
and they knit like mad and it amazes your friends and it's
very interesting. This is in no wise aberrative. And then
you go along the line and get associated with a body and
during an embryonic period and so forth, you get a knitting
needle through the chops. Think that over, see? That's very
noncomputive. See, you have to have a knitting needle
because you depend on that, but a knitting needle kills
you. So it's a noncomputive situation; doesn't work out.
That's true of all aberration; it won't compute.

But what is noncomputation? If you just said, "All
aberration is noncomputation," and washed your hands of the
whole affair, you'd never cure anybody or clear anybody of
anything. See, you'd have to do a lot more than that. What
it is, is help, assistance in creating. That's the thing
that makes the whole thing noncomputational. It assisted
you to create or to survive or destroy, but mostly create
because that was the beginning of everything and that's all
survive and destroy is, is subversion of create.

So you have this create - item A is absolutely necessary in
order to live. General - absolutely necessary he has an army.
That's the one thing he's got to have. He was going along
for just generations. He had an army, a wonderful army, and
the - army after army and the one thing he had to have in
order to live was an army, and the more army the better.
And he just went on that even to this day, generals and
admirals do nothing but collect armies and navies. They
don't do anything with them; they just collect them. And he
just had to have them, see, and it's absolutely necessary
till it's so associated with his survival that he can't
imagine himself getting anything done without an adjutant
and a Quartermaster Corps and an engineer corps and all
this sort of thing. That is the way to do this.

You give him - one of these fellows - a civilian job and he
goes appetite over tin cup because he doesn't have his army
with him, see? Yeah, right now we've got the Washington
hospital center over here with an admiral in charge. And
he's a lost dog! He doesn't know whether he's coming or
going. Everybody is doing so much paperwork they have no
time to take care of any patients. That's true. I mean I'm
not being just sarcastic.

Nurses are sitting there at their desks through their whole
watch - see, their watches - and they sit there and they
make out forms, make out forms, make out forms and make
out forms. Well, he doesn't have a hospital administrative
corps, so he knows all this administration has got to be
done, so he saddles all of it onto the people who are
supposed to take care of patients. You could be in there
for a week and a nurse - and flat on your back in a bed
unable to move and nobody would come in and give you a
bath. See? That's the way that place is.

All right. Now, what happens to him? This general, he's
going along and he - generation after generation he's got
this army and he's all set and he has to have an army and
that's what you need and all this sort of thing. And then
one day - damned if they don't mutiny! See? And they string
him up and burn him in effigy and he reads in the history
books in the next lifetime about what a bum he was. Imagine
Benedict Arnold reading again for the fifteenth or
twentieth lifetime now, that he was the greatest traitor
that ever lived.

See? He'd get an idea not only that armies were bad but
that governments were bad, that everything was bad that
was connected with his organizational pursuit. You get the
idea? And you get, then, this dependency interrupted by
pain and unconsciousness, see; interrupted by impact,
interrupted by duress. You get injustice, betrayal, all of
these things entering in and they end that line.

Now, the guy is persuaded that he himself has lost all the
skills which he was dependent upon an army to perform. See,
he got the idea that he didn't himself any longer have the
power of doing these things. The army did but he didn't.
Now, when they betray him and he can't have an army,
therefore he loses all those skills.

Now, you start running Help on an army and his cognition is
that he didn't need an army in the first place, which is
true. And therefore he gains all the skills that he
invested in the army and at the same time loses the
injustice and loses the betrayal computation. It just goes
away, because it's not important anymore because he doesn't
need the association. So you're really curing people of
associations and identifications.

The first book ever written on the subject stressed
identification. Well, we're right now to the heart of
identification and that's necessary to live, create.

Somebody back there had a question.

Female voice: Oh, no, it's okay. I'll let it go and I'll
think about it, think it over.

Okay, what have you got?

Male voice: Can you say a little bit more about the ways
that a thetan gets rid of the things he has around him that
he wants to get rid of? How does he get rid of them?

Well, he doesn't. If he continues to obsessively create
them, then he lays over the top of them some sort of a
shield that's a solid not-knowingness. He's obsessively
creating over here and obsessively suppressing over here.
And when he's got everything that he is creating suppressed,
then he says he's gotten "rid" of everything. And when all
of the things he himself is mocking up in order to live he
considers highly antipathetic toward his survival - see, this
is noncomputational: the individual has to mock up these
things in order to survive but if he mocks them up they'll
kill him, see? So his answer to that is he continues to
mock them up, but to make sure they won't kill him, he
suppresses all of them and renders them to zero.

Now, that person is anxious about getting rid of
everything. One of these things might turn out to be the
thing which he knows he had better not confront, so
therefore he has to suppress everything. You get somebody,
then, with an obsession of getting rid of everything. He
gets rid of everything everyplace. And you'll find a lot of
preclears with this.

Now, you say, "How does he do it?" The way you, an auditor,
make it possible for him to do it is simply cure him first
of his belief that he must go on mocking this thing up
because he has to have it to survive. You get rid of that
with Help, don't you see, and then the obsessive creativeness
you get rid of with Step 6. See? So you cure him of obsessive
creation and so on. So, therefore you run Help, Step 6, Help,
Step 6.

Now, that's how you can actually get him up to a point
where he has gotten rid of these counter-conflicts and
that's all that you're trying to get him rid of.

Male voice: So eventually he gets so he could destroy the
things directly without having to bury them...

Yeah, but look. There wouldn't be anything there for him to
destroy if he wasn't making it.

Female voice: No.

So, therefore, you never do any destruction; you never
worry about destruction in auditing. You don't run this
process: "Mock up something. Now get rid of it. Mock up
something. Now get rid of it. Mock up something. Now get
rid of it." Because the "Get rid of it" is a mirage. It's a
chimera.

That's denial of self. You've heard me speak for years
about the only thing you can really do that is aberrative
is to deny yourself. You've heard me say that. Well, what
is destroying one's own productions but denying yourself?
So of course, he invalidates himself by destroying his own
creations and the more he invalidates himself, the more he
destroys his own creations. You get the idea? And he gets
into this rat race and he doesn't know whether he's coming
or going. He doesn't know whether he is the thing that is
destroying him or that he is the thing which is being
destroyed or - after a while why, he just says, "It's all so
confusing. I don't know what to do." Well, he doesn't know
what to do because he can't compute. See, he's got to mock
it up in order to survive but he can't have it because it'd
kill him. And he's - gets caught in this mess and then he
becomes the thing which is destroying him, becomes a circuit
and you get all of these various computive mechanisms. But
truthfully and basically, when an individual is Clear, there
would be no sense in destroying. All he'd have to do is not
mock it up. See, it's just this elementarily stupid.

Right.

Any other question here?

Yes. Yes, Harold.

Male voice: You mentioned assist processing. Let's say you
have a preclear for a very short time, not long enough to
clear him. Would you run assist processing on him?

No. No. Assists - let's - don't have it - I've - see I've
introduced a confusion in terms. Assist - an assist is
something that you do just temporarily because you can't do
that. But let me make this very clear: You will make greater
gains with a preclear just by running Clear Procedure straight
from scratch than by doing any other thing with him.

Oddly enough, if a guy is lying there with a broken leg,
you could actually make greater speed with him by just
starting in at the beginning and clearing him than by
patching up his broken leg. This sounds utterly odd but of
course this takes in a broken leg with problem - a PT
problem, you see? That is a broken leg and so forth. So
that handling a PT problem and an assist are the same breed
of cat and you wouldn't get any further than that if a
person was in bad shape, anyhow.

Male voice: Right.

See?

Male voice: Yeah.

So you can lay down this truism, although it just appears a
little shaky to you at first, you just say, "The thing to
do to audit somebody is to apply Clear Procedure."

Male voice: Yeah.

See? And the reason the public is told to assist somebody
or told how to do Touch Assists and things like that is it
doesn't get them all gummed up into any serious auditing.
It's something that you can do, miss-do, abandon, you know?
And we don't find people stuck in assists. People don't get
stuck in assists if they're this kind of an assist.

But if you, an auditor, just went in to help somebody and
you're only going to have five hours to audit this guy,
easily the best thing you could do is just start out from
scratch and go right straight up the line with Clear
Procedure. At the end of five hours he would have made a
higher gain than he would have made if you just patched him
up...

Male voice: Right.

.. with something else.

I ran some tests on this you might be interested in. I had
Step 6 and nothing else run on some HGC pcs at a time, some
little time ago - and I didn't think we were getting an
adequate gain during an intensive - so I just assigned three
or four to run nothing but Step 6 on the supposition that
they would get more gain running Step 6 - stone-blind,
couldn't see anything, couldn't feel anything, didn't
matter, but just try to run Step 6 for twenty-five
hours - that they would get a greater gain than they were
getting on old-time processes that tried to unlock some
mysterious computation in the case. See? And in each case
we got a greater gain. Boy, that was certainly sailing out
into the blue, you see? Okay, we've had it here.

For the rest of today I want you to check out people and if
you run out of checksheets, let's not stop checking out
people. You just check out the next person, write his name
under it and put a little asterisk and you check him out by
putting an asterisk down the list. You got it? Using the
same checksheet as you already have if you run out.

Now, I don't care how many times any of you are checked out
for Clear. It won't do a thing to you or for you. It won't
stick you in anything that you're not stuck in already.
Now, if a person does get too involved and too stuck and
the needle was fairly free before you "Clear-checkout" him,
if you have a kind heart today, if you want to do a nice
thing or something of the sort - mind you, this is somebody
that you stuck in a Clear checkout - just run a little
Connectedness on him. "You get the idea of making that wall
connect with you. You get the idea of making that floor
connect with you," and so forth, and it'll unstick.

But we don't care how gummed up people get here at this
state of the game. Oh, brother, if you've got a free needle
and you've got a potential stuck needle, see, if
potentially on your computation of the thing it's going to
be absolutely rigidly stuck and momentarily your needle's
free and everything's happy - you're just in a dispersal
anyway, so the hell with it.

All right. I'm very glad. You know, I've had some very
excellent reports on your past week, very excellent, and I
want to thank you very much for buckling down the way you
did. I didn't think as many would make this as did.

Now, those who are still on the TRs, I understand for the
most part, just have fragments of the TRs to straighten out
and you will be out of that in very short order, probably
by Wednesday for sure, and then you go straight over onto this.

I'm having mimeographed the procedure which you will use in
order to accomplish this clearing that you're going to be
doing in this course. And it starts out with: Check out a
lot of people with a Clear Check Sheet, see? So, when you
start in auditing - as soon as you come off the TRs and go
into auditing - why, there'll be a bunch of people brought
off at the same time, why, just get together and check each
other out ad nauseam on Clear Check Sheets and get started.
So you won't miss any of this and you're not missing
anything by still being under TRs because as I told you
before, it is better to have skilled auditing going forward
than auditing. Better to have skilled auditing, so we want
to be sure.

For instance, it's a very silly thing to go ahead and audit
people and worry about auditing and try to grasp theory and
try to grasp what the preclears are all about, and so
forth, when you're falling over TR 3, see? TR 3 is busily
flubbing and invalidating everything you're doing;
therefore, you'd never find out what the auditing was
doing, you see? It's TR 3 that isn't doing it. Got the
idea? So we want those real smooth, so get with it. I don't
want to see anybody in that TR group by the middle of this
week, so get with it.

We didn't have anybody that checked forthrightly out to
Clear, so we didn't have a third unit. See, we've only got
two units going. But if in a few days we don't have
somebody in the Clear group, why, I'm really going to have
to buckle down here.

Yes?

Male voice: The one point of confusion about Clears - I've
had a chance to look over some people on a meter who've got
bracelets and they don't always read at 3.0 or 2.0
respectively, and this is a point of confusion.

What meter are you using? You see...

Male voice: The old...

Yeah. This meter varies with heat. Now, that's one thing.
The other thing is that the individual - as he's going along,
plowing along one way or the other... We had a case of this
at the congress. We had a girl that was no longer reading
properly. She was pregnant.

What is going on with this case? Do we get a variation? You
should not consider an absolute, see, from hour to hour and
day to day with this. You should only be pedantic about
their exact reading here for the purposes of auditing. If
it's up here it tells you male valence, if it's down here
it tells you female valence; and you get a girl reading up
here, you know what to do: Get some male valences off the
case. And if you get a guy reading down here on female
valence, you sure know what to do. It's some variety of
female. This is about all that tells you, see? Now, the
actuality of what the reading is - if you will read in the
original instructions - it says apparently this is the case.
It says apparently this is the resistance. Now, these
happen to be the resistances of a dead male body and a dead
female body. So, it is a body without a thetan attached.
It's a thetan that's running the body by postulate and
without very much association. See? Get the idea? All
right. Now, all you'd have to do... I can knock this
myself. You put me on a meter, I can knock it down to
female Clear, knock it up to male Clear, knock it up here
to about this high or knock it down off the bottom. By
doing what? Just by adding a few beams to the body. See?
All you had to do is add a few masses into the body at odd
angles.

Now, all I've got to do is to go out and look at something
and make a ferociously heavy copy of it and this thing goes
appetite over tin cup. It no longer reads.

Now, what an individual is doing who is Clear and who is
varying on this reading is still a matter of study. All
we're interested in is that the individual is really free
on Help and Step 6, see, and that he isn't looking at a
bank all the time. He thinks of cats, he gets a picture of
cats, see, but he isn't doing this now. Well, that's what
we're interested in as a Clear. It's a bankless person,
rather than a constant or absolute person.

Male voice: Thank you.

You betcha.

Any other thing here? I think you ought to give your
Instructors a hand.

Good.

Say, "Thank you."

Audience: Thank you.

All right.

I'm glad you're here. I think it's going to be the best ACC
we ever had. It's certainly starting out that way, so I
want to thank you.

Audience: Thank you.

Okay. I think you've even got two or three minutes left of
your break.

[end of lecture.]

