Subject: FZ Bible FIRST POSTULATE TAPES 16/35 (20th ACC)
Date: 25 Nov 1999 00:29:07 -0000
From: Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

FIRST POSTULATE TAPES 16/35 (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-16 (8A)  23 Jul 58 SPECIAL EFFECT CASES, ANATOMY - Q&A PERIOD

SPECIAL EFFECT CASES,  ANATOMY OF - QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD

A lecture given on 23 July 1958

[Based on the clearsound version only.]

Eighth lecture, 20th ACC, July 23rd, 1958.

And if you don't know what I've been talking about in the
last hour, don't be surprised because the total sum of it
adds up to a not-know.

Male voice: That's why!

Do you have a question back there?

Male voice: Well, I just-I was just wondering why I was a
little bit...

Well, ask me a question. Come on, ask me a question.

Male voice: Well, I don't have exactly a question.

Come on. Ask me a question.

Male voice: All right. This is on - this is on Rocks. Now,
when the needle - when you have definitely found the Rock,
will the needle on the meter stick until you have released
the Rock so it doesn't bother the guy anymore?

That's right.

Male voice: It will stick until you...

Pretty well. Unless you're auditing merely a chain of it,
then you're just getting the lock off the top of it.

Now you did know what I was talking about, didn't you,
Bruce? All right.

Okay, Jack?

Male voice: I want to see if I get this right, Ron. Right
at the end there you said: it looks to me like there - in an
uncleared person there are two existing states: a known
isness, that is the isness he is aware of as reality, and
the not-knowing isness of his Rock and all of his not-isness.

Yeah.

Male voice: And that conflict is what provides the reactions
on a meter.

Very well stated.

Male voice: Is that correct?

Very well stated. All a meter ever reads is a disagreement.

Male voice: Of those two basic...

No, all a meter ever reads is disagreement.

Male voice: I see.

A lie detector operates only because a disagreement between
the operator and the subject brings about a conflict which
is expressed in terms of an increased or decreased
resistance and you get a reaction.

Now, of course, you're going to get an extreme reaction -
very well stated, by the way, what you just said there -
because you're going to get an extreme reaction on
the most extreme conflict. A lot of people are going to
come around and tell you that it's the physical universe
that is the trouble with the preclear. See? Well, all
right, maybe it is, but they're only looking at half of it
and he knows about that. See? So it's not really a
legitimate target.

Male voice: Thank you.

That's very well stated, Jack.

Yes, Connie?

Female voice: When, as a preclear - the preclear tells a lie
to the auditor, should he be intending to lie to do the
other guy in?

Repeat that, please.

Female voice: Well, once I decided I'm...

No. Repeat the question.

Female- voice: ...going to lie to do him in.

Repeat the question.

Female voice: Should the preclear be telling a lie with an
intention towards the auditor such as to do him in?

Huh! I should say so, quite often.

Female voice: I mean if I just told you a lie like this
room is yellow, should that show on a meter?

I'm glad you've mentioned that for a particular reason.

Female voice: I had no intention...

When you turned on lies the other day or tried to turn them
on, you occasionally here and there found a person who
didn't react.

Male voice: That's right.

It's just a measure of the reality of agreement. Their
reality of an agreement could be so low - at the time you
were doing this they were perhaps violently disagreeing to
being used as a guinea pig or something of the sort and
they were being suppressed in their general agreement
anyhow - and when you asked them to tell a lie they didn't
tell a lie; when you asked them to tell the truth they
didn't tell the truth. In other words, you could say they
didn't and as a result you got no reaction on the meter.

Now, this has nothing to do with anybody in this course.
But it does have to do with this phenomenon when it is very
prevalent on a case. When it is extremely prevalent. And it
doesn't matter what the fellow says, it doesn't have any
influence on the meter. It can be the lower harmonic of it all.

Now, for any upper state there is also a lower state which
is a harmonic on it and is a sort of a mimic and a jeer.
That's one of the reasons why we question our sanity is
because insane people have simply mocked up the optimum,
from their viewpoint, method of convincing people that to
be sane you have to be crazy. The truth of the matter is
insanity is simply a lower harmonic on any sane
characteristic. All you have to do is take one sane
characteristic, exaggerate it enormously and you've got an
insane person. So long as you exclude all the other sane
characteristics.

Now, like, just set up a row of matches in your mind's eye
there. And they're all the same length, more or less. And
these would be all of the sane characteristics which went
to make up a balanced beingness. This person is now sane,
he's in good shape. He'd be very, very sane in his conduct.
He's not necessarily optimum because if they were all
exactly the same length he would be a colorless personality
indeed.

All right.

Here we have a wonderful example here of insanity when we
take all the matches except one and we add that one match,
which is just one characteristic: the ability to drink
coffee - let's be a little bit ridiculous here. And we simply
add all other characteristics and their force vectors to
stretch out the length of this one match "drinking coffee"
with all the other matches. And, brother, have we got an
insanity! See? Well, that's pretty weird.

Now get the mental image picture of taking five matches,
the buttons which we're working with here in this clearing,
and now let's put four of the matches behind one. Wipe out
four so there's nothing there with any of these four and
put all the force on just one match. And we got a guy who's
strictly fruitcake.

And I don't care which one of the - which is the one you
select and the four you suppress, you'll come up with an
insane conduct.

All insanity is, is a criticism of some characteristic of
sanity. Don't blame a psychiatrist when he believes
everybody is crazy, because he sees in everybody some of
the characteristics of an insane person since he has never
seen in an insane person anything but sane characteristics
totally exaggerated.

All right. So we get all sorts of weird combinations.

Now, when you see a needle that won't react to a lie
reaction at all, no matter what the fellow did, all we are
looking at is a total irresponsibility. And that is all we
are looking at.

So when the person you were testing, Connie, wasn't there
to be audited, was just there to be guinea pigged and he
had no responsibility at all for this auditing session in
any way, he didn't tell you lies or he didn't tell you the
truth. He didn't agree and he didn't disagree, he didn't
anything because you've dropped out the Responsibility
button off of the test.

If you were to go down to a - this has nothing to do with
anybody on this course - but if you were to go down to the
prison and grab guys there, just one right after the other,
you will wonder why the police ever got such touching faith
in a lie detector. Because the worst social criminals will
not react. They don't react at all. They've just killed
somebody and they don't react. And it's touching faith that
the police have. They don't get their worst offenders;
that's somewhere between eight and fifteen percent of the
people they test get no reaction on having just strangled a
baby or something. They weren't there and they're not
responsible for the action; therefore, they cannot react on
a meter in any way, shape or form. The idea that way down
deep somewhere somebody has some social consciousness which
will spring to the fore and will always display itself on
an E-Meter is touching faith.

A person might have the Responsibility button out the
window and, although the needle is sticky and although it
doesn't look like a Clear meter at all, it's erratic and it
doesn't give a lie reaction.

Female voice: Well, a - Clear doesn't give a lie reaction.

That would be a - that would be a matter of just the upper
harmonic on the lower manifestation. Soon as he gets a
Responsibility button he would have to more or less
postulate a responsibility before he'd then get a reaction.
He'd have to postulate a responsibility and then postulate
a disagreement and then he'd get a reaction on the meter.
To say that a Clear will not react on a meter, by the way,
is a lie itself and is not true. A Clear can react on a
meter at will. Otherwise you're saying that he couldn't
mock up anything and make it more solid, aren't you?

Male voice: Yeah.

On a Clear test you will always get a click and a surge and
a reaction when you say, Mock up something and make it more
solid." If the person is Clear, he will get a needle
reaction at that point. Naturally. Because he actually did
throw a new resistance into the circuit. And the meter will
react to that new resistance.

But the conflicts of irresponsibilities, and so forth, in
most cases react one to another in such a way as to produce
a reaction. And even on this very irresponsible case who
doesn't react to a lie reaction at all and is in-session,
boy, you get plenty of meter action. He can't help himself
but the meter's very sticky.

Yes, Connie?

Female voice: My question's a little broader. Suppose you
were looking for a Rock, say you were auditing me and you
were saying "britches".

Oh, you won't get out from underneath that.

Female voice:.., and I didn't mock up britches and I didn't
look into the past for britches and I just thought that's
an idea, it's pretty vague to me and I wouldn't get any charge.

Now, what did you say last?

Female voice: I wouldn't get any charge if I didn't
cooperate to the extent of visualizing, conceiving of or
looking at.

No, if the person has, if the person still has a Rock - let's
modify it to that degree - the auditor intention has the
power of restimulating it. You really don't need too much
cooperation from the preclear to locate a Rock. A person
might not get a lie reaction on, "Are you sitting in that
chair?" Answer "No," to that question. But if he has a Rock
which has to do with an Egyptian pyramid and you say,
"Egypt," you get a bfzzzzt, freeze. And then you say,
"Pyramid," whomp! See? And then the word "Egyptian" comes
off of it. At length "Egyptian" will not produce a
reaction; it's - produces a free needle. But "pyramid"
continues to produce a locked up needle. And you follow
pyramids down, you find out that it's any early pyramid,
not just an Egyptian pyramid. You get the idea? You could
take the "Egypt" off of it, but "pyramid" doesn't go.

And this wouldn't matter, Connie. It wouldn't matter what
the intention of the preclear was or whether his attention
was much with you.

The whole environment cooperates in the restimulation of
this Rock. So don't think that an auditor with intention to
restimulate it won't. Got it? Any other questions? Yes?

Female voice: You've spoken often of perfect form or beauty
and aesthetics as being sort of a real theta trap. How
would you use that in coming to the Rock?

Well, it's interesting that you ask this since I have just
gone through a series of experiments concerning perfect form
and aesthetics as a trap and so forth. And it is my belief in
looking for the Rock - this is why I say we probably ought to
had about four hours lecture today - that in looking for the
Rock it is an excellent idea to explore those things which
the preclear might possibly connect with creativeness.

Now, where aesthetics have turned against the preclear or
he has become dependent on something else for his aesthetic
quality and then it betrayed him, you have the neatest Rock
you'll ever have. Now, that's a wonderful Rock. That's
thud! This individual walked into the door of the most
beautiful building he had ever seen, and they grabbed him
and put him in the clink and held the body in duress and
transported the soul elsewhere, you know. Fabulous
situation. But he was attracted there by an aesthetic.

Well, this is the entrapment by aesthetics. And you'll find
aesthetics are a usual trap. That's why you find, by the
way, Dianetics and Scientology are not all trapped up with
a whole bunch of horse- aesthetics. Get the idea? You'll
find a few of them around because they're unavoidable. But
it's not that anybody's against aesthetics, but we don't
want starry-eyed people wandering in the front door
dramatizing for the hundred-thousandth time the lock where
they see a beautiful building and walk in. Or the lock of
where they hear beautiful music and walk in, where they
hear a beautiful organ playing and a choir singing and they
walk in the front door. See? Because all you do is collect
a lot of nuts.

Most interesting aspect of looking for a Rock is that it
normally turns out to be something associated with
aesthetics. It's either a complete contradiction to
aesthetics, complete reversal, or it itself is a betrayed
aesthetic. It's quite legitimate to look over every
artistic profession in any preclear. If you're starting to
get up against it, just look over any artistic profession.
How many artistic professions are there? Well, there're
quite a few; there're quite a few.

Now, you'll find, inevitably, some Freudian analysis type
thing run off a case. It's inevitable. But boy, it's so
late on the track that if Freud ever made anybody sane by
getting the time that they saw a little girl with no
clothes on and that made them crazy and Freud made them
realize that this was the case and so forth, and if anybody
turned sane at that point and stayed sane, I've never seen
it. I have never seen it.

I have made people feel better by using straight Freudian
analysis the way I got it from Commander Thompson who
imported it to the US Navy, not via Catherine Horney.
Wonderful pun on that name. Why this person should become
an authority on Freud is beyond me entirely. Crude remark.
Excuse me, ladies. But Freud's a pretty crude subject.

But I got what I knew about Freudian analysis from a chap
who had just talked with and listened to Freud for a couple
of years. You know. And it was fairly straight from the
horse's mouth. And it had factors in it that you don't find
in his books. And also had factors in it which seemed
awfully simple and reasonable. And Freud was much more
interested in association. He was much more interested in
association than he was in sex. And later on in his career
actually did start changing his mind over to social. And he
was getting - he was getting awfully warm; if he'd gone along
for another couple of decades with any enthusiasm at all,
why, he might have really fallen into something.

He had this thing, see, when he talked about creativeness,
he's always talking about artists. See? He's talking about
artists. Only to him being artistic was a dramatization of
being sexual. See, artistry was a dramatization of a
suppressed second dynamic; and an artist became an artist
because he was no fun in bed or something.

That's not true. I've lived with an awful lot of artistic
people and I've listened to an awful lot of their women and
it's just not true that they're in bad shape. It's quite
remarkably the opposite. So I don't think Freud was a very
good observer.

But here we had creativeness. Creativeness was mixed up
with sex. And, sure, sex is an automatic creativeness and
it's a very late lock on the whole chain of creativeness.

I've actually made people saner and ruined a whole series
of experiments at Oak Knoll. They were taking Japanese
prisoners of war and they were working them over with the
administration of hormones. And they were trying to find
out if hormones would bring them back to battery, you know,
so that they could eat and so on. They had been starved so
that when they began to eat they became very fat and food
didn't do them any good; they were merely hectic on the
situation. Food had become quite unreal to them. And these
boys were in pretty bad shape after years in Jap prison
camps on rice and almost never even any fish. And I used to
catch these boys, every once in a while, because I was in a
ward and a line officer can always take off one collar
ornament in the navy and he automatically becomes a staff
officer. In other words, you needn't falsify your insignia;
all you have to do is become forgetful.

I remember how I got in the medical library there; I saw a
marine on crutches outside the door and I said to the
marine, "Come in in a couple of minutes and say, 'How are
things going today, Doctor?'" and gave him a wink. And
marines are usually prone to play tricks and that sort of
thing and he didn't even quite know what the joke was but
he was perfectly willing to play the joke. I walked in and
stood at the desk of the head librarian who was guardian of
the library. The library is divided into two sections; the
general section and then the medical section. Well, nobody
was allowed in the medical section except the hospital
doctors. And so the marine came by in a couple of minutes
and said, "How are things going today, Doctor? I feel much
better. Do you think we'll have to operate?" And I said,
"Oh, undoubtedly we'll have to operate." And he said, "Well
that's sad," and gave me the wink and walked on. And the
librarian looked at me more fixedly and saw I was only
wearing one collar ornament. Obvious. And I said, "I think
I'll go into the library today." She said, "All right, sir."
They don't call patients "sir" no matter what their rank is,
see. I went on into the medical library and studied there
for the next year.

But anyway - the barriers of this universe aren't as solid
as they appear sometimes.

Anyway, I used to get ahold of patients who were part of
this experimental series on hormone administration. And a
doctor there whose name was the incredible name of
Yankeewitz - and he and I were good friends and he'd show
me the records once in a while and expostulate and so forth.
And I'd pick up, quick like a bunny, names on those who
were showing no gain in metabolism. You know? I'd make it
my business to look them up and sit down on a bench on the
hospital lawn, you know, and quick slip them some analysis,
and I could change his records. In other words, analysis
could change his records but hormones couldn't. Ruined his
theories; he didn't know what was happening after a while.
I never let him in on it. Oak Knoll had a lot of research
projects going - that was Oak Knoll Naval Hospital. In view
of the fact I wasn't sick, I was just banged up, why, I had
a ball.

But the point is that you can take sexual locks off a case,
if you get them off and don't evaluate for the person, and
he will feel better and he will recover. Now, that's an
interesting point. There's an awful lot of evaluation I
don't think Freud ever much engaged in. And after all the
center of learning for that particular subject, clear over
in Vienna; very few people ever went there; when they got
there they were not in shape to listen. No telling what
Freudian analysis is.

But you, as an auditor, in running down the Rock, will
start making a person feel better the moment you enter into
any corner of the field of creativeness. It's arduous to
enter it from a sexual angle and not very profitable
because that is the one subject in the society that isn't
talked about, ever. And so you're trying to break down his
withhold from the auditor when you enter this particular
subject. And it's not more beneficial to handle sexual
locks on a case or sexual objects, frankly, it's less so.
You could take almost any case and run Help on a painting
or the materials of painting and get some tiny gain which
would be quite permanent. And so you could take any other
artistic pursuit and follow it down the line and it'll lead
you to the Rock.

Of course, the Rock is so unreasonably on the creative line
that it is not always immediately discernible simply by
following down an artistic line. You see? Aesthetics are
very high and very potent in diagnosis - anything
appertaining to aesthetics - but are not the whole story by
a long way because you might get the reverse. It might be
the ugliness of a house that eventually turned him against
houses. The ugliness and confusion of the house associates
itself with pain and unconsciousness experienced in the
house and we get a nice Rock called a "house." Which goes
on back to being a cave. Which goes on back to being
anything you could be in. And it goes back and apparently
is just all traps and then eventually turns out to be a
specific type of trap.

And sooner or later along that line you'll run into an
aesthetic trap. And when it clears off, the individual
begins to feel quite a bit better because he's not now
ashamed of using aesthetics. See, when he ran into an
aesthetic trap he became ashamed of using aesthetics one
way or the other. That's not why we're not doing it in
Scientology: that's because aesthetics are not much in
agreement with the society at large and the only people you
pick up because of total aesthetic are just people who are
crazy as bedbugs.

Male voice: Just on an inversion.

Hm?

Male voice: On an inversion of it. On an inversion of it.

Mm-hm.

Now, diagnostic procedure does include legitimately any
subject of creativeness. But remember the physical universe
is a subject of creativeness and that has a variety of
forms. The entirety of the reactive mind is a subject of
creativeness and that has many objects and forms. So just
take your choice.

Every once in a while you see an artist who's falling flat
on his face and you say, "Well obviously the Rock has
something to do with composing music." And you're generally
as wrong as Congress. You generally are. It may be some
form of artistry but it's not a form he has practiced
anywhere along the line. Although there'll be a tab out on
it; there'll be a little tab out on it which is pretty
clear. And it's one of these locks I was talking about
yesterday that just never seems to erase or change.

I'll give you an example of this. Have to move this around
because it's a current example. Having a little bit of
trouble - I've had a couple of kickbacks lately because
people thought their cases were being described. In neither
case was it true but people get edgy sometimes.

Little boy playing music. Natural - absolute natural up to
the age of about four. Tone true. Rhythm true. Everything.
One day his mother said to him, "We'll have to give you
lessons." He never played another note this whole life! But
tried very, very hard to be an architect. Whole lifetime
devoted to architecture. Eventually architecture folded up.
Trying to rehabilitate him professionally discovered this
music lock clear back when he was four. And nothing that he
had ever had happen to him in auditing had disturbed this
statement of his mother's, "We'll have to give you
lessons." And he'd gone almost nuts with this thing, you
know. He tried to add it up to lessons-school, must be an
aversion to school. See? He tried to add it up to he
couldn't have the piano. See? He tried to add it up to
incidents where he'd been punished for learning. Oh, he
just tried to integrate this thing all over the place. But
it was lessons he was trying to integrate. Never after the
moment he was four did he ever think about music or being
an ambitious musician or studying music or having anything
to do with music. And if you'd said to him, "musician," you
probably would have got, momentarily and not - it wouldn't
have happened if you kept pressing it - after a short time
he would have gotten a stuck needle. But, if you said,
"musician," to him, this would have meant nothing to him.
He would go out and maybe listen to some music; he wasn't
interested in music, it had nothing to do with anything.
That was the Rock. That was the Rock. An old, old-time
unpronounceable music instrument, about eighteen trillion
years ago, was the Rock. The only evidence that was there
was this simple remark by his mother, "Have to give you
lessons." You see? That blew at once.

But what auditor would ever dream that you go through all
of this tremendous quantity of locks that weren't moving,
you know, to find this thing? Took up every artistic
pursuit the man could have engaged in that would have
anything to do with architecture. And there was a little
bop on form but not enough to worry about. You know? It was
music, musical instrument. He'd not thought about music,
done anything with music, and so forth. He himself, though,
in his general conversation, would often have very, very
positive opinions on music. But when you call this to his
attention - I tested this out afterwards - he had no
recollection of it whatsoever, of ever having expressed his
opinion on the subject of music.

He had tremendous concern over his hands. And he had this
to do with drawing, he'd added this up to drawing; he was
afraid that if something happened to his hands he wouldn't
be able to sketch houses and things. See? These things were
lying all over the case, don't you see, but just none of
them added up because the preclear was of no assistance.
Every time you'd talk about any incident like this, "We've
got to give you lessons," and so forth, he'd go into a long
dissertation on how bad schools were. It had nothing to do
with it. Nothing whatsoever. There was a fantastic series
of incidents had occurred, as I say, about eighteen
trillion years ago with a musical instrument, we have no
thought of, shape of or anything else. And it helped him, a
thetan, create music. And he, a thetan, could, prior to
that, create music. And then this instrument and his
profession in using this instrument continued on for many
lives and then eventually betrayed him utterly, knocked him
flat, washed him out and fixed him up royally.

Now, that gives you an idea of how abstruse and around
Robin Hood's barn one of these darn Rocks can be. But it's
always a good thing to look down the creative professions.
You may hit pay dirt quick. Questions that have to do with
creativeness very often hit that.

Similarly, questions on the other buttons. You could say,
to expect the preclear to tell you right out and out is a
lot of expectancy on your part. That's for sure. But you
can ask a preclear "Things he's not at all responsible for
in the world around him." And he'll give you a list, one of
which will contain the Rock. One item in the list will
certainly lead you into the Rock. Things he's not
responsible for. He'll tell you electric chairs or
something. Well, electric chairs might lead you daaah, see,
anyplace.

Yes?

Male voice: Well, Ron, about how many locks are there to a
Rock? Do you have any idea?

The whole aberrative sequence of the case. And it'd be some
incomprehensible number. It'd be, you know, I could just
give you a number to give you an idea: if you started up in
that corner of the wall there and started writing across in
microscopically small numbers and put one and then zeros and
then continued on down the wall with zeros all the way to the
bottom you would have some, just idea of magnitude of the
number of locks on the Rock.

Male voice: Well, this doesn't quite add in with my
understanding, and I mean my personal understanding...

Right.

Male voice:... is that there's locks to the Rock, is that right?

That's right. These things are all associated with the Rock.

Male voice: You mean you have to go through all those to
find the Rock?

Fortunately you've got a process that blows them at the
rate of dozens of those zeros at a crack.

Male voice: I see.

Help. Help definitely does.

What are they? They're basically assistance. And he'll go
to the bottom of this chain if you're on it at all and if
you're at all alert.

No, it doesn't violate your understanding of it. You don't
handle all of those things. That's just the number of
things that are associated with it in terms of locks, and
those are the number of things that fly off of it. And
practically none of them are ever inspected. You may
inspect a few thousand of them at the absolute outside.
They're just flying apart in all directions.

Yes, Bruce?

Male voice: How long would you say, if there was any
average, it would take you to find the Rock?

Well, that's the difference between whether it's me doing
it or Dick's doing it, or you're doing it, or who's doing
it. And modified by the abstruseness of the preclear and
his ability to contribute to the session. If he's at all
being helpful, the more helpful he is, the more easily he
presents you with the Rock. You shouldn't just kick his
help in the teeth all the way down. But I would say that it
is some small fraction of the auditing time certainly.
Possibly the number of times you have to go into analysis
for the Rock, the number of times you have to analyze for
it, added all together, might be ten, twenty hours, see -
the number of times you might have to.

Let's say the case was very difficult and all you kept
doing was auditing things off the top of the Rock and you'd
had to go back and analyze again and then audit some things
off the top of the Rock. Well, that would be to my thinking
a rather extreme case of diagnosis. Does that answer your
question? It's a finite number of hours, less than an
intensive, certainly.

Yes, Hal?

Male voice: The reason on this Help then, that you blow
these locks so fast, you can go directly from the service
fac into the secondary.

Oh, yeah.

Male voice: Can you get a dramatization of the emotion?

You're liable to.

Male voice: All right. And where would this - the terminal
would show somewhere in there then, huh?

Yeah.

Male voice: Well if they didn't, if they had trouble with
the service fac - and does this show very often before the
locks? In other words, in scanning...

Oh, your service fac - now you understand what a service fac
is? A service fac is sitting right up in the front row and
on the stage.

Male voice: Right.

The service fac is only interesting to you in terms of
analysis in that it is the thing which gets in your road
when you're trying to find the lock.

Male voice: The common denominator, right?

That's not a common denominator. It's the protective coating.

Male voice: All right.

Get the idea of this thing. It's what he uses in life to
protect himself from ever falling into the Rock. Now,
there's the essence of this case. There's the basic case.
Now, you just got to get the idea of a service fac as a
bunch of fabric which keeps the Rock covered. From what
you're saying there, I see we can give you a little bit
better understanding of this service fac. A service
facsimile is that facsimile which the preclear is using to
keep himself out of situations which will lead him to the
Rock. So when you start looking for the Rock, the service
facsimile comes up to the surface and dangles temptingly in
front of your nose.

Now, he has always had a bad stomach. Boy, it isn't any
private bad stomach. This is the most publicly owned bad
stomach anywhere around. You see?

Male voice: Yeah.

Because every time he couldn't go to school in the morning,
he didn't want to go to school because he thought it was
going to get him in trouble or something of the sort, he
would tell his mother about the bad stomach. In other
words, this bad stomach kept him from getting into things,
for sure, or kept him from going along a wrong route. Well,
the Rock is always the wrong route in his way of thinking.

So, he sits there. All of a sudden he tells you that he has
a bad stomach. And this is the thing which has troubled him
mainly. Boy, you're looking at a service fac! You get the
idea? This is his main difficulty in life, is this bad
stomach. If he could just cure this stomach! He's saying,
"Stomach, see-see, stomach, don't you go anyplace else."
You know? "Don't-don't-don't ask me about anything -
don't-no-ha-ha-ha-no, let's keep on a safe subject: a bad
stomach." And this is the thing which derails the auditor.
And every time you try to strike for the Rock you're liable
to get a bad stomach presented. Now, you'll become convinced
after a while that the bad stomach has something to do with
the Rock. And what do you know, toward the last hours of
auditing on the Rock, a bad stomach will associate as some
part of it, but it certainly didn't lead into it, it led
out of it. But it is of - well, it is mainly something that
gets in the auditor's road rather than something that leads
him anyplace.

I almost clipped the ears of a couple of HGC auditors who
actually sat and Q-and-Aed with, and yakked with, and took
up one particular preclear's service facsimile, session
after session and intensive after intensive. They went
three intensives, two auditors, one on two intensives and
the other on one; three intensives these guys were on. This
service facsimile was so lovely they just couldn't leave it
alone. And they never got anyplace with the case. The case
just kept hanging fire and not advancing and so forth. And
I finally turned around and had to grab the case by the
nape of the neck and give him some free weeks and put an
auditor on him and practically hold a gun on this auditor
and say, "If at any moment during your auditing of this
case this case mentions to you difficulty with a wife and
you even acknowledge the fact, you're through!" See, it was
that grim. You just never saw the like of this one.

But it was the most gorgeous service facsimile. God, was it
troublesome and was it involved and was it interesting and
did it go into things! Wow! These two auditors were just as
helpless as babes before this tremendous parade of drama.
Person would come in in the morning all bandaged up from
just having tried to commit suicide because of the wife,
see. "Obviously," they said, "we can't get anyplace because
it's a PT problem." And this had been going on for a few
days. I finally cottoned to the fact that it was not a
present time problem; his present time problem was the
auditor. He'd go home and get himself into all the trouble
he could possibly get into with his wife so he'd have a
whole bunch more stuff to give to the auditor and then he'd
never get any auditing done. You got that, Hal?

Male voice: Yeah. That's - that helps.

My bitterness here was not directed at you in any way, get
that. I mean, I was just trying to tell you - I was just
trying to tell you how desperate this situation can become
with this service facsimile.

Now, a service facsimile, then, is the red herring. Maybe
if you were - if you were ten times as adroit a mind reader
as any great mind reader ever was you possibly could look
into the service facsimile and pick up the Rock from the
service facsimile. But that trick we have not yet mastered.
And it'll become very obvious to you that some
insignificant part of the service facsimile, at the end of
the run, Hal, was part of the Rock. But every time you
touch that close to the service facsimile, it just goes
into restimulation and you've got a protective screen up in
front of you and the preclear and after that you just don't
go anyplace at all. Right?

Male voice: Yes.

You bet.

Male voice: Well, if you're scouting then, the service fac
ought to be a good clue you're getting close to the Rock.

Oh, yes!

Male voice: Just before the service fac turned on is
probably - well the service fac would be an indicator as
a sticky needle.

That's pretty good. That's pretty good. I'll tell you a
better clue than the service fac, Hal, and everybody else,
is: an area of the body the preclear's totally out of
communication with and isn't mentioning. If those two
conditions exist, boy, wow, boy, are you in a hot area!

Male voice: Can it be in restimulation?

Hm?

Male voice: Can it be, at present, in restimulation?

A Rock is always in restimulation.

Male voice: No, the service fac, Ron.

Oh, the service fac. The service fac goes in and out. If
you start asking somebody some part of the body they're not
in communication with, you may come on down to a body part
which could be run which would then unburden some part of
the Rock. It wouldn't be it, but it'd unburden some part of
it. Don't you see? And it would be worthwhile auditing. If
you said to an individual, "Is there any part of your body
you're not in communication with?" And he said, "Well I'm
just never in communication with my hands. I just never am.
You know, I've had an awful lot of trouble with my hands. I
had them mixed up in a threshing machine. And as a matter
of fact I told my last auditor that if we could just get my
hands straightened out, why, I'd be very, very grateful.
I'd consider we'd really gotten somewhere in the session.
As a matter of fact, they pain me considerably; you know
all these horrible pains go across the knuckles all the
time. And so forth. And you saying being out of
communication with my hands, I certainly agree with you
that I am out of communication with my hands all the time,
there's no communication there at all. As a matter of fact,
the pain is so bad..

You see, you just ain't got it. That's it.

And now - now supposing we discovered another one. After we
probe around for a while and you being very - it doesn't
necessarily take a lot of time now, doesn't take much time,
but it's the resistance that comes up along the
line - supposing you're saying, "Well, part of your body
you're out of communication with," or something like that,
and the fellow says, "Well, hands" and "always out of
communication with my hands." And you go, "Well, is there
any other part of the body you're out of communication
with?" And he said, "Well, I just never seem to be in
communication with - and just never really have any real
communication with my teeth. You know? They ache a lot and..

Female voice: Toothache.

Oh, yeah.

"So - and I - as a matter of fact, rest of my body is okay.
Rest of my body is okay." And you say, "Well that's fine.
Now, how about your stomach?" And watch that needle. "How
about the right side of your body? How about the left side
of your body?" Ah, ah, we got a stick. Now let's just go
all over the left side of that person's body and call off
every body part until we get a stick.

If, as you discuss various parts of the left side of the
body, your needle frees up again, you've got the wrong one.
But the left side of the body is still producing a stick,
let us say, until we get right on down to the left leg from
the knee down. The left leg. And everything frees on it.
You say, "Well, a broken left leg." Oh, boy, have you got a
stick all of a sudden! See, it sticks hard. And then you
say, "Well, a broken left leg would be pretty hard to have
around, wouldn't it? Have you ever really broken your leg
in this lifetime?" And the needle's getting freer and freer
and finally goes - say "left leg" again - Pop! You pin it,
see?

Male voice: Mm.

Anything you add to it frees up or whatever you start
adding to it makes the needle rise, you haven't got it.
See, you can free locks off of this thing or add locks to
it and you finally get down to the fact that it's a tibia,
the bone. The bone in the left leg. And from this area we
might go into various lines of associated things like
bones. The probability is we could run the left leg bone
and we'd sure get someplace else on the case. I'm talking
about very crude analysis; this doesn't have too much to do
with factualness.

But he's been out of communica- and then he all of a sudden
says, "Hey, you know, I just happened to think, you know, I
never have any sensation in my left leg. I remember one
time barking my shins and it didn't even hurt. I've always
been proud of the fact that I could do anything with my
left leg, you see, and it didn't even hurt." Now you've got
a real communication-out-of area. See? That's a real one
and it's a hot one. If he knew about it he'd have some
responsibility for it. If he's got some knowingness or
responsibility on that particular area - naw! The whole body
will in this wise peel down usually to just one or two
items, if you're going in for bodies. Don't you see? That's
a desperation; you kind of work on bodies in a desperation.
You want something to audit so you get something that
sticks no matter what you do and it's going to take
auditing to free it.

If it frees with two-way comm, why audit it? See? That's
the main criteria. Now, theoretically you could be expert
enough on two-way comm that you would peel the whole Rock
right on down to nowhere and it'd be gone with two-way
comm. But usually it takes a process.

Process is something like: you've been going along fine
with a penknife and you've been getting out the slivers
fine and you've got the limb in good shape with this little
penknife, and there isn't any reason to turn around to the
nurse and say, "Nurse, give me a hammer, chisel and saw."
But when you've got a total stick - which is the usual case
with the Rock - when you've got a total stick on the thing
then is the time to turn around to the nurse and say, "Give
me a hammer, chisel and saw." Now, it's going to take Help
in brackets. Even a clearing of the word help, all kinds of
things in order to blast this thing out.

Your contest in analysis and as you handle an E-Meter -
I'll give you your procedures. Explore the fields of
creativeness, any way you wish to. And if you find a needle
sticking on some professional creativeness, now try to get
various sections and parts of any of the equipment
connected with that field. And anything that frees up as
you talk about it isn't it. But the thing which
consistently sticks, leads in toward it. So you keep trying
to refine the thing that is sticking down to something
that'll stick worse. And it's just a contest of making the
thing stick worse and stick worse and stick worse.

And when you add things to it that make the needle start to
rise steadily and nicely, you've got some new things stuck
to it through your auditing. You added to the chain, you
didn't make the guy better. See? But when it frees and you
see that thing starting to sweep wider and wider... You
took up an "artist" and you got down to an "artist's
palette"; "artist's palette" - "artist" stuck and then got
a little bit wobbly; and then an "artist's palette" stuck
good and hard. And what's associated with a palette? Well,
it'd normally be paint and brushes. See? So you say, "an
artist's" - you say, "paint." You know? And "palette" frees.
See? "Palette" frees, but "paint" sticks. Now you're all
set - you're all set and you say, boy, we're right in there
close - we're right in there close. And you say, "brushes,"
and it apparently sticks harder. And then "paint" frees.
Now "paint" is free now. But "brushes" are stuck.

Now. Now, you say, "canvas." Your needle starts to rise,
still stuck. It starts to rise. You could probably go on
from that point and add a lot of other things on top of
"brushes." Well, this is a good indicator that it was
"brushes." See, you got "paint brush" - "brushes." That's at
least a lead-in toward the Rock. See? And you start adding
things around the room, they either do one or two things:
they either just free a moment afterward - "canvas" rises,
rises, rises; "pictures" some more rise, some more rise,
some more rise; we go back to "paint" and "pictures" and
"canvas" seem to drop out but "brushes" stay there.
"Brushes" stuck. See? It's a game in which you have a
tremendous number of objects spread out on the desk in
front of you. They are all more or less associated with one
to another. You've got the wrong object if you get a free
needle. You've got the right object if you've got a sticky
needle. You are more correct, even, when the needle sticks
harder. If you can free it, you're wrong. If you can stick
it, you're right. And you'll finally wind up with something.

Well, this indicator, this nice beautiful little indicator
that the thing is rising means you must have just a moment
before hit a very hot part of a Rock. Because it's so hot
that it'll pull in new locks on itself. Get the idea? So a
rising needle is diagnostic if you're clever enough to
remember what it was you just talked about before that
thing started rising. It's a game in which you have these
objects all fanned out in front of you. They are objects,
they are terminals, they do have mass, they are being
obsessively mocked up and they are being obsessively
repressed.

There could be billions and billions of them. And the way
to get in there is to find out what sticks - you're right.
What frees - you're wrong. What makes it rise - you had the
right one some time ago. Better track back over what you
were talking about and listen to your preclear. From the
mouths of babes all sorts of interesting things drop out.
He will all of a sudden present you, unwittingly and
unknowingly, with a major lead-in to the Rock. And then you
go happily along the line and don't pay any attention to
this at all and you're not getting anywhere - go back to
what he said.

The odd part of it is that if you ask him, "What did you
say a moment ago?" he won't remember. He's no help as a
recording mechanism.

After the session your preclear is liable to say, "How did
you get off onto 'paint brushes'?" "How did I get off onto
paint?"

"Yes, how did you find out it was 'paint brushes'?"

Look at him in amazement that he told you. He was
chattering along and you said, "What's, what is there about
'paint' there that's making this needle act this way?" "It
might be 'brushes.' Probably 'brushes,'" he said.

And then afterwards you say, "Well...

He says, "Where did you get this idea of 'brushes'?"

"You told me."

He has no recollection of having told you about brushes at
all. You see, that's the trouble with the Rock; it's a
wipeout.

The appearance of the service fac, a feeling of illness
that the preclear complains of, a feeling of restlessness
that he can't put up with any longer, is your original area
of protection. Now as you go a little deeper, however, his
interest starts picking up.

There's another rule with relationship to this. A lot of
rules can be followed in here. But another rule in
relationship to it is: If his interest isn't present either
in protest or in being audited, you're not very close to
the Rock. And if he's in protest you're not really very
close to the Rock. When you start to get on the actual Rock
chain, his interest just gets deeper, deeper, better and
better; and if you told him you were going to stop
auditing, he'd protest. And he's five minutes early for the
next session, whereas this has never happened before in his
auditing history. You get the idea? There's tremendous
interest in this Rock. You see? He's very interested when
you really get on it. Although he's been fighting you just
a moment before. He's been saying, "This terrible pain in
my eyes and these ARC breaks and everything is going to
hell and we're not getting anywhere and I'm starting to
feel awfully sick at my stomach and this terrible pain in
my eyes that turns on."

Complain, complain, complain. And then all of a sudden,
why, you start talking about a green emerald. See? And he,
"I never thought about green emeralds before," he'll say.
You know? And then the next thing, you know, he'll say,
"Well what a goofy way to help a green emerald, grind it
all up in powder and administer it to the emperor; just
doesn't seem real; it's a silly question." By the way,
there's an inversion that you could be fooled with on this
answer. The sensibility of answers could fool you. Very
often when you're close in to a Rock the first answers are
the most reasonable answers you ever heard of. They are
fast, prompt and so on. They do have this ingredient that
you'd better look for: they'll start to go off in an
automaticity in the first few questions. Brrrr! There'll be
something go automatic, start to run.

But listening to the preclear, "How could you help a canvas?"

"Well, you could make sure that the tacks were in solid so
that it wouldn't stretch too much, you know?" "How could a
canvas help you?"

"Well, it could sit still while I was painting on it."

"How could another person help a canvas?"

"Well, he could deliver it on time so that you'd have it
right there, you know." Sounds all very real. Sounds all
very fast. If you ask him carefully "Has any moment here,
four or five answers occurred to you, one right after the
other?" "Oh, yes, when you asked me how could I help a
canvas, I sort of got - I had the idea of hands flopping
around in front of my face," so on.

If the answer's reasonable and easy and there's nothing
much to it, it's a fairly good indicator that you're not on
the Rock except with this horrible example. See, it's got
an automaticity connected with it. Because those answers
will now generate insensibility to a bunch of inconsequential
hash.

"How could you help a canvas?"

"Well, you could wrap it up very carefully into a
cornucopia and you could put it up on top of a weather
vane." Oh, yeah.

"How could a canvas help you?"

"Well it could make sure that there was not too much sod on
my grave."

Get it? Most reasonable answers in the world.

Any answers along the Rock will sooner or later strike a
whole bunch of irrationality. There's no rationality
connected with it whatsoever. Completely goofed. And the
first person to tell you they're goofed are usually the
preclear. And they'll say, "What?" They'll give you this
perfectly logical answer. "How could you help a river?"
"Well, you could wind it into small ribbons and put it onto
a little girl's neck and that would help a river. Well, I
wonder where the hell that came from?" you know, the
preclear will say.

So you know when you're on the Rock chain. I've got to talk
to you more about this, but boy, you know when you're on
that chain. It's got irrationality, your comm lags, your pc
is very interested - you got all of the little automaticities
that you'll hit, the field changes, cognitions start coming
up. Even if you're on the Rock chain, not even on the Rock,
and you're auditing something in desperation that is only
associated with the Rock, why, you'll get all these
manifestations.

Pc is sitting there not caring what happens and letting it
all go to hell and so forth: you're not on the Rock chain.

Pc is protesting: you may be getting warm. But you're not
there yet. Pc is certain that it is it, absolutely certain,
and sells you a great big bill of goods that this is it and
so forth: examine service fac again.

If he tells you, "I wouldn't think that would be it, how
could that be it? I've never thought about that this whole
lifetime. Isn't that funny, I've just never thought about
that." Boy, you've got it.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Go and analyze properly this time.

[End of lecture.]


