From squirrel@echelon.alias.net Wed Mar 17 08:30:10 1999
Path: newscene.newscene.com!novia!nntp3.cerf.net!nntp2.cerf.net!peerfeed.ncal.verio.net!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!news.stanford.edu!su-news-feed4.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!news.alt.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news-x2!mail2news
Date: 17 Mar 1999 15:30:10 -0000
Subject: FZ BIBLE 1/35 SOLUTION TO ENTRAPMENT 9TH ACC
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology
From: Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
Comments: Please report problems with this automated remailing service to
	<squirrel-admin@echelon.alias.net>. The message sender's identity
	is unknown, unlogged, and not replyable.
Message-ID: <b408db978fe461876385f16cec942a8a@anonymous.poster>
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Lines: 1700
Xref: newscene.newscene.com alt.religion.scientology:690247 alt.clearing.technology:76199

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

9th ACC - THE SOLUTION TO ENTRAPMENT CASSETTES 1/35

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.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judiasm 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 the Christians are not good and obedient Jews and yet
are allowed 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

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


9TH ACC CONTENTS

December 1954 to January 1955 in Phoenix, Arizona.

Based on the solution to entrappment cassette version.

F# = File number (** = not available)
O# = Original Number (according to the master list posted by Pilot)
REN = As renumbered in the Solution to Entrappment cassettes

F# O#  REN  DATE  TITLE

01  1   1  Dec  6 Introduction to 9th ACC: Havingness
02  2   2  Dec  7 The Essence of Auditing, Know to Mystery Scale
03  3   3  Dec  8 Rundown on Six Basics
04  4   4  Dec  9 Communication Formula
05  5   5  Dec 10 The Practice of Dianetics and Scientology
06  6   6  Dec 13 Conduct of the Auditor
07  7   7  Dec 14 Mechanics of Communication
08  8   8  Dec 15 Havingness
09  9   9  Dec 16 Pan-determinism and One-way Flows
10  9A 10  Dec 17 Hist. & Dev. of Processes: Games & Limitations in Games
11  9B 10A Dec 17 History and Development of Processes: Q&A Period
12 10  11  Dec 20 Games (Fighting)
13 11  12  Dec 21 Anatomy of Games -- Part I
14 11A 12A Dec 21 Anatomy of Games -- Part II
15 12  13  Dec 22 One-way Flows in Processing
16 12A 13A Dec 22 One-way Flows in Processing: Question and Answer Period
17 13  14  Dec 23 Havingness and Communication Formulas
** 13A --  Dec 23 After Lecture Comments   
18 14  15  Dec 24 Pan-determinism
19 14A 15A Dec 24 Pan-determinism: Question and Answer Period
20 15  16  Dec 27 Training New People
** 15A --  Dec 27 Curiosa from Dianetics 55!
21 16  17  Jan  3 Auditing Requirements, Differences
22 16A 18  Jan  4 Time
** 16AA -  Jan  4 Q&A Period
23 17  19  Jan  5 Auditing at Optimum
24 18  20  Jan  6 Exteriorization
25 19  21  Jan  7 Elementary Material: Know to Mystery Scale
26 20  22  Jan 10 Education: Goals in Society -- Adult Education
27 21  23  Jan 11 Fundamentals of Auditing
** 21A --  Jan 11 Auditors' Conference
28 22  24  Jan 12 Definitions: Glossary of Terms -- Part I
29 23  25  Jan 13 Definitions: Glossary of Terms -- Part II
30 24  26  Jan 14 Definitions: Glossary of Terms -- Part III
31 25  27  Jan 17 Auditing Demonstration: Six Basics in Action
** 25A --  Jan 17 Auditors' Conference
32 26  28  Jan 18 Auditing Demonstration: Spotting Spots
** 26A --  Jan 18 Auditors' Conference
33 27  29  Jan 19 Auditing Demonstration: Exteriorization
34 28  30  Jan 20 Background Music to Living
35 29  31  Jan 21 Axioms: Laws of Consideration -- What an Axiom Is

Note that 6 of the 9 discussion periods (Q&A periods, Auditors'
Conferences, etc.) were omitted from the cassettes, leaving us
with only 35 files instead of the 41 that were recorded.  It is
also possible that material was edited out of the lectures which
are available.  If anyone has a set of the original reels, please
post any missing material.

========================

9ACC file 1/35

9th ACC - 1: INTRODUCTION TO 9TH ACC - HAVINGNESS

Transcript of Taped Lecture by L. Ron Hubbard 9ACC01   -  
5412C06 1st of 35 talks bound into 3 volumes entitled "THE
SOLUTION TO ENTRAPMENT" given in Phoenix, Arizona to the
students of the 9th Adavanced Clinical Course between 6
December 1954 and 21 January, 1955


INTRODUCTION TO 9TH ACC - HAVINGNESS

A lecture given on 6 December 1954


So, we have the second book of Dianetics is actually
Dianetics 1955! and all it does, actually, is expand
Chapter Two of Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental
Health. And the name of that chapter is - that's Chapter Two
of Book One - is "The Clear." And Dianetics 1955! is
forthrightly dedicated to the creation of Clear with no
further nonsense. And that's what this book is all about.
And before you finish with this Unit you will have a copy
of this book in your hands.

It will be a great shock to Dianeticists to discover that
although we have the second book on Dianetics that it is
totally dedicated to exteriorization. This will be a great
shock. But that would be mostly because they never read the
first book.

The second chapter of that book describes somebody who is
without immediate contact with the reactive mind, doesn't
it? That's who it describes; that's what it describes - the
Clear.

Now, the first book went about a negative gain process.
That is, the best way to go about this was to strip away
the barricades and you'd find your boy. All right. That's
the way that book went about it. It went about it in terms
of erasure.

Now, we know today what an erasure is - very, very precisely
know what an erasure is, know when it takes place and when
it doesn't. And we can produce an erasure with the process
known as Perfect Duplication. That is the darnedest erasure
you ever heard of. It erases both the space, the time, the
energy and all the percepts and contents of an engram,
pshewt!

How does it do this? By making a perfect duplicate - as-is -
of the engram. The definition of a perfect duplicate, if you
wanted to understand this, would be the first thing you had
to learn. And this is: a duplicate of the thing in its own
time, in its own location with its own energy. And that is
a perfect duplication.

I can give you an example of what that is. We look up here
at this microphone and we recognize that you could take a
facsimile of this microphone very easily, and then go out
in the street with this facsimile of the microphone still
sitting in front of your face, and you would look at this
facsimile and you'd be able to chew on it for a while and
at least reduce any semblance to a microphone that that
facsimile had. You recognize that this could happen?

In order to erase it completely and not have to pass it
over time after time after time, it would only be necessary
for you to recognize where the facsimile was taken. And
then without putting new energy into it, without putting
new locations into it or anything of the sort, just look at
it and put your duplicate in with it using its time, space
and energy. There's two objects sitting there, then, aren't
there? There's your duplicate and the original. Only
they're both using the same time, space and energy. Perfect
duplication gives you a perfect affinity which gives you 
poof!

Now, this is of course, wouldn't be true at all unless we
could test it. And it's testable. It very definitely is.
Just have the preclear sometime - tell him to start making
a perfect duplicate of a chair. Well, of course he can't
make a perfect duplicate of a MEST chair unless he goes
back to the point where each one of these facsimiles was
generated. Where was it generated? What was it generated?
and so forth.

It's only the fact that this chair, the contents thereof,
the molecules and atoms thereof are so far removed from
their point of origin - it's only the fact that it's so far
removed from the point of origin that it's solid and here.
Unarguably solid. It becomes completely unsolid if it were
to arrive at the point of its Origin again - if someone were
to duplicate that chain. But you can take an exercise like
this, the chair won't disappear simply because you haven't
gotten up to the point of origin.

But you just ask somebody to make a perfect duplicate of
the chair with its own time and energy in the space in
which it is sitting. And he'll start out at first by trying
to put a copy in here, you see. And he'll try to do all
sorts of things with this chair until he realizes finally
that it is simply a matter of saying he has duplicated the
chair, you see.

Well now, he will do this, and that's an easy thing for him
to say, you see. He can say that. He can say it in English
or Portuguese or something of the sort and be a very easy
thing for him to say, but here would be the chair. And he
would say, "Well, all right. Ah - I'll see that." He doesn't
expect anything to happen. So let's try it.

Take a look at that chair. Now, let's make a duplicate of
the chair in its own time, space with its own energy.

Let's do it again. Make a duplicate of the chair with its
own time, space and energy.

Now, are you trying to put another chair here? You
understand you shouldn't add energy to it if you're trying
to use its energy to make the duplicate.

Now, let's do it again. Let's look at that chair and let's
make a perfect duplicate of the chain Let's make another
perfect duplicate of the chain. Dick's really been chewed
around on this subject, huh. Remember? Okay. Chair try to
go any place or do anything strange or peculiar when you do
that? Or does it just sit there kind of inertly? Listen, if
that chair is still sitting there as far as you're
concerned, let's go over this definition very carefully
again. A perfect duplicate is one made in the space of in
the time of with the energy of the object - and also, of
course, the intention of the object.

But let's - let's take a look at it again and make a
perfect duplicate of the chair, right where it sits.

Doing that real easily now? Hm? Is it better? All right.
Once more make a perfect duplicate of it. And let's make
sure we've got this absolutely straight. We're making a
duplicate of this chair using its own energy, its own mass.
We're not putting any new energy in it. It's sitting here
and then and a duplicate is sitting here, with the same
mass. Let's try it again.

Let's try it again. Oh, we're getting there now, huh?

Getting there easily now? Hm? Can you do this with no strain?

Let's make a perfect duplicate of this chair again.

Anybody noticed yet that there's a continuing time about
this chair? Hm? That there's a continuing time about this
chair? You can pick a specific moment of its time or you
can pick consecutive moments of its time.

Now, is anybody getting - now, is anybody getting, now, an
image above the chair or below the chair, or - hm? We're not
trying to put more energy in this chair; we're just trying
to use its energy to make a duplicate of it.

Got that now? Let's make a - use its energy to make a duplicate 
of it now.

Has that chair started to fade out to anyone? Interesting 
isn't it.

All right. Now let's put it back there and make a perfect
duplicate of it. All right. Again, let's put it back there
and then make a perfect duplicate of it. Again, put it back
there and make a perfect duplicate of it.

What's occurring now? Hm? Now, let's put it back there and
make a perfect duplicate of it again. And then put it back
there again.

All right. Of course - of course you recognize this business
about source. If it were totally to disappear for everybody
you could make a duplicate of your agreement that it is
there and it disappears for you. But remember that this is
an agreed-upon situation. And its source, if suddenly
knocked apart - that is, if you really duplicate it at its
source - where it is, where it was, whatever you want to
say - this chair actually would come to pieces.

Bobby was out at the house one day and I showed him how to
do this. I had him working away on it, and he was doing
just fine. And I said then, "All right now, Bobby, take
a - take a remote viewpoint and put it on one electron in the
wall. Now, have that remote viewpoint trace that electron
back to its source of creation, and make a perfect
duplicate of it."

He said, "That's kind of interesting. Yes, I can do that."

And I said, "All right. Now put up about a hundred thousand
remote viewpoints on about a hundred thousand electrons in
a very tiny area, and have those remote viewpoints trace
them all these electrons back to their original point."
Bobby did, he jumped about half a foot, he started to go
over to the wall to hold it, and he turned around and he
looked at me real silly, and he says, "Can I go look at
it?" And he went over and looked at it. There was a tiny,
tiny chip gone from where he was working.

Now, this was a great shock to him. He thought this
universe had a law called conservation of energy, that
nothing could destroy this energy. That's not true. We have
violated the basic laws of physics at last. We knew
someplace along the line that we would violate the basic
laws of physics. Well, this perfect duplication violates
the basic laws of physics.

If you have an engram, actually the engram has mass. This
is demonstrable. It is demonstrable that an engram, as
talked about in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental
Health, has mass. It does have mass. You can ask an
individual to mock up with quote - "mental energy" what
everybody was used to - they used to be very fond, you know,
of saying this mental energy was entirely different, you
know, than this. And we used to take cognizance of this and
agree with it once in a while just to get a point across.
But this mental energy will register on meters, as
demonstrated on an E-Meter. There isn't any necromancy or
spiritualism going on with an E-Meter. If you put a guy on
an E-Meter and you call an engram into view that E-Meter
reacts. Well, what do you suppose makes it react?
Somebody's telepathic control? No, it's all that E-Meter
can do. Its total limit of action is the measurement of
energy. That's its total limit of action. And if you can
ask a guy something and it registers on an E-Meter,
obviously you're dealing with energy. You're dealing with
energy that can be measured by the same stuff as runs
through this electric light. So there's no reason to make a
separation point between mental energy and physical energy.

All right. Worse than this, there's a better test - better
test than this. You ask an individual to mock up and pull
in and mock up and pull in these mental image pictures, any
facsimiles or anything of the sort. Just mock up something,
pull it in, mock it up and pull it in, mock it up and pull
it in. Mock up heavy planets, mock up dense things and pull
them in. You shoot a person's weight up - if he's working
pretty well, and you do this very insistently, and you
insist on density and mass - you can put a person on a set of
very accurate Toledo scales, have him do this process for a
few hours, put him back on the scales and find out his
weight has gone up about thirty pounds.

Now you can have him turn around and throw this stuff
away - if he's in pretty good shape - and you have him throw it
away and throw it away and throw it away, and his weight
will come down to what it was before. And if you have him
keep on throwing masses away that he already had he may get
sick but he'll certainly weigh less. Now, what kind of
mental energy is this that can weigh on a pair of Toledo
scales? Mass, the ideas of mass are mass. All right. That's
a cute little mechanism isn't it? That's in the process
Remedy of Havingness. You can remedy somebody's havingness
and increase his weight.

Actually, individuals have a tendency to pick up a weight
one way or the other at which they're comfortable. The body
likes to have spare energy to run on, likes to do various
things, and a guy will get an energy level he's comfortable
in. You ask somebody who has picked up a little weight
where he is right that moment - you ask him, "Now, do you
remember a time when you were very thin?"

And possibly he may. And he says, "Yes, I remember a time
when I was very thin." "How did you feel?" "Come to think
about it I was sick and - I was kind of sickly you know. I
was tired all the time. Yeah, yeah! I was tired."

You can ask yourself that. That's usually a response when
one was very slender and thin, and they have now put on a
little weight and you say, "Well, do you feel tired all the
time now?" And the person says, "No."

Now, you're going to cut this person's weight down. Not
unless - not unless you remedy a few other things, believe
me. Person feels better with a little bit of weight.
Another thing, mass counts for something in this society.
All that seems to mean anything to the current society is
mass. If you get into a fight always pick a very slender
person with not much weight because they can't put any beef
behind the blow. Always do that. And not necessarily
shorter. Preferably pick some very tall, very, very thin
feilow and he'll be real tired.

These people are voracious eaters but they never put on any
weight through eating. I seriously doubt that anybody ever
puts on any weight through eating. I think they put on
weight through making a facsimile of the food which they
are stuffing in their mouths and digesting the facsimile.
And if they're unwilling to make a facsimile of the food,
they can't eat. They can get no good out of food at all.
This is also demonstrable in processing. All right. Now,
let's take this proposition of this stuff called energy.
And we discover in the Encyclopaedia Britannica of a long
time ago, back in the nineties, that time and space are
actually energy manifestations born of the mind. And that a
solution of the problems of the physical sciences lay actually 
in an examination of these mental attitudes.          

The fellow who wrote that was actually not writing anything
very, very original. But he was certainly punching
something home that's been along for a long time but was
never demonstrated. Nobody ever demonstrated this. They had
a suspicion that this was the case, that you wouldn't have
any space unless there was life to make and hold that
space, that you wouldn't have any energy unless there was
life to duplicate it there and keep putting it - putting back
these energy masses. In other words, they had an idea that
all was illusion but the physical sciences went back to
this early assumption: the conservation of energy. All
right. They assume the conservation of energy and they took
off from there. As I was saying in a lecture the other
night, I asked my professor in atomic molecular phenomena
back in school, "Conservation of energy? Why do you limit
it to that. Why don't you take conservation of space also?"
And, gee, that was a hot idea. He was about to write a
paper for the - you know, without giving anybody else any
credit - was about to write a paper for the "Mathematics
Society" or the "Physicists of the Universe" or something
of the sort and he was all set.

I let him cook for two days and then I asked him, "But we
really haven't covered this. We really are in a triangle of
operation here. We have space, energy and time. Have you
thought of the subject of the conservation of time?" And he
got rather foggy on this and I said, "Well, now look, you
have conservation of energy and conservation of space. Time
is totally dependent upon the energy and the space so there
must then be conservation of time." He almost spun till he
got rid of the idea entirely by simply refusing to talk to
me whenever I showed up thereafter.

Obviously, you see if there's conservation of energy and
conservation of space there'd have to be conservation of
time. There isn't any such thing. So, that just becomes
nonsense. And it's true of any operation in the whole field
of the physical sciences. There is also always the process
which can be applied there - the reductio ad absurdum. You
can always reduce a mathematical or a scientific axiom
down to an absurdity one way or the other.

This activity of reducing all these laws and axioms to an
absurdity was the entire concentration of logic and
argumentation as taught, for instance, in the University of
Padua in 1490, 14 - 1504. That was one of their favorite
subjects. A man couldn't get out of there as a Master of
Arts or anything else unless he had thoroughly mastered
logic and argumentation and had learned by trial, error,
careful instruction, enough authorities, enough data,
enough laws so that he could reduce anybody else's argument
to an absurdity. And they never considered him worthy of
the school or worthy of anything unless he could make
nothing out of anybody's arguments.

And science today has gotten to be, to some degree - as a
book came out some years ago called Science Is a Sacred
Cow. You're not supposed to reduce scientific axioms to an
absurdity and yet they will all reduce that way. And
similarly with this one - conservation of energy,
conservation of space: "Yes, yes. It goes up to that point,
you see? Of course. Of course. Why haven't we ever thought
of that?" "Well, how about conservation of time?" Poof!
That's all there is to that argument. That's all we have to
do, you see?

Now, let's look this over and let's recognize without
destroying our own sense of reality or agreement on
everything that it might be possible that in the absence of
life that there might not be a universe sitting here at
all. This is a philosophic argument from time immemorial.
But today, remember, we can make a perfect duplicate.

When you take this mental energy, so called, in an engram
bank and you run a preclear in a way - Oh, this is a savage
and brutal process, by the way. It just tears a preclear to
pieces; it ruins him. I mean, his whole body is operating
on a stimulus-response mechanism and if it didn't have all
these stimulus-response mechanisms and experiences to fall
back on, it simply wouldn't operate at all, that's all. I
mean, you'd just have no body.

So I say this is not an advised procedure. But you'll find
many of the boys will - because this is given in Dianetics
1955! - saying "Well, Hubbard might be right over there but
he's wrong here. Of course, to erase these engrams is the
main thing." So, therefore, they will track people back,
way back in time to the moment of origin. Now, we were
doing that and we were going over it several times and what
we were doing before was erasing the content.

We were keeping the person's mass intact to a marked
degree, you see. And we were having him go over it several
times which erased the content. It gave him a mass of
meaningless, nonsignificant energy, you see. The erasure of
an engram delivered into the preclear's hands a mass of
usable energy. It now didn't have debarring significances
in it. Energy is just energy, actually. So he was perfectly
willing to acquire energy by erasing the bad content of the
energy as he considered it.

You see, we erased birth and yet we did not destroy the
mass of birth. We didn't make a perfect duplicate of birth,
you see; we merely erased it, we went through it, we
knocked its content out of it. And this at once gave the
preclear a mass of usable energy, just like we'd fed him a
spoonful of high-power gelatin or something of the sort,
see.

And I suspected this and set up some experiments which were
conducted in New York at the New York Foundation under
very good control. We had two Otis tests, and people
without being processed at all were demonstrating no
increase of intelligence between Test 1 and Test 2. No
increase of intelligence. Otis 1 and Otis 2, short forms.
Then I had these people audited on the spot while they were
sitting right there at the desk, and shoved back into as
heavy an engram as the auditor could quickly find. Stuck in
the engram and given the second test, see. First test,
shoved into an engram, second test. Their intelligence
went up. That's a curious thing isn't it? That's a very
curious thing. Shouldn't have, you see? Should have gone
more stupid.

In other words, we gave them this first intelligence test
and then stuck them very heavily in an engram, and then
their intelligence increased. Weirdest thing in the world.
Until I experimented a little further - I found out that any
contact with the engram bank delivered into a person's
hands more energy. If it delivered into his hands more
energy, he therefore was happier and so smarter, even
though he could moan and writhe.

The other thing was - which you'll learn and which we know
about problems and solutions-the other thing was it gave
him a new problem. Remedied to some degree his scarcity of
problems and therefore let him solve something on the
examination paper. You see that? He was permitted to solve
something because he had a new problem. So we'd say that a
person should therefore function better if he's
restimulated than if he's not restimulated.

Yet this isn't true at all, you see. This is a complete
upset. This is not true. A person does not function better
when he's restimulated. So the bug in there was simply
energy. An individual functions better when he has his
hands on any kind of energy than no energy.

And the eventual process that came out of that - rather
belatedly I must confess; almost two and a half years
later - was the Remedy of Havingness. You simply have an
individual mock up masses. The less significant these
masses are the better. Just have him mock up masses and
pull them in, and mock them up and pull them in and mock
them up and pull them in and mock them up. Have him create
an energy mass. If he can only get blackness, have him mock
up black masses and pull them in. And then have him - get him
into a state where he could mock up masses and throw them
away and mock up masses and pull them in, and mock them up
and throw them away. Very odd manifestation such as an
avalanche of masses from Lord knows where sometimes
materialize and practically swamp the preclear. There's
lots of interesting things occur in the Remedy of
Havingness. But the main point is that it makes the
individual aware of the fact that he can create and have
energy. And if he can have, why, his engram problems are to
a marked degree solved.

Now, I don't know how many hours you would have to remedy
havingness in order to make an individual let go of every
engram in the bank. I don't know how long you would have to
do this. It's quite a long time. It's probably a very long
time in modern auditing. It's probably in the neighborhood
maybe of fifty hours, maybe more than that. But that's a
very short length of time, isn't it, compared to Book One
techniques. You'd have this individual remedy any kind of
havingness he could remedy.

I got on to this technique, by the way, some years ago over
in London. I had a black, caved-in V simply mock up his
body and mock up his body and mock up his body and mock up
his body until he exteriorized. I finally asked him what
was happening to these mock-ups, and he said at first,
"They're disappearing." And then he said that after a while
they were snapping in. People who won't have - can't have
mock-ups snap in and who never run into this, and so forth,
are simply lower on the Tone Scale than a snap-in. You just
have to work at it longer.

But look at this in an - look at this as a contrary fact to
this perfect duplication I was talking to you about. All
right. So we take the guy back on the track, you see, and
we ask him to take a look at the engram and make a perfect
duplicate of it, see, and it's gone, pshew!

We've had people around here who were good old Book One
auditors who just never would let go of any part of Book
One you see - wouldn't advance to any degree. And they
actually worked for some days doing this perfect
duplication on the engram bank on each other. That was the
sorriest crew at the end of that time you ever saw in your
life.

One fellow was standing on my front porch when I came up to
my office one day. He was standing there on my front porch
and he could not see a car that was across the street. He
did not quite know where he was or what he was doing. He
knew I was there and he was very grateful for that fact. I
had this individual alter, change the environment around
until finally the environment straightened out. I asked him
what that was across the street and he finally got a dim
inkling there might be a car over there, so he said, 'A
car." And that wasn't the answer I wanted, and I said,
"What is it across the street?" And he finally woke up to
the fact that I was demanding some other kind of an answer,
so he said, "It's a hayrick," and he said, "It's a this and
it's a that, and so forth." And the car got brighter and
brighter and brighter and brighter, and all of a sudden
straightened out and stopped being a Model T Ford and
became the new Oldsmobile which it was.

I mean, the fellow was completely over into the
hallucinatory band, you see? By what? By changing, of
course, and altering the condition of his immediate
environment we of course restored an enormous amount of
energy to this man. How do you do that? Well, the only way
you can actually get anything going and surviving and
continuing is by altering it. When you stop altering it, it
just coasts on a sort of an as-is basis, but it just
coasts. Two things - the altered condition, the surviving
condition, and the other.

But I don't want to give you too much data. All I'm trying
to give you here is just this kickoff here on this basis of
Dianetics 1955!

Now, in Book One-in Book One we conceived the energy of the
individual to be erasable by going over it several times.
That was not the case. Actually, all we were doing was
washing the content out of the piece of energy and he got
better because he'd now got some energy. That's why he got
better - evidently. Also, he also got better because he took
antipathetic, nonsurvival significances out of this energy
mass. But the first book did not reduce anybody's energy
masses. If it had, you would have found while running
en-grams the same manifestation, the very same
manifestation as would now occur in the Remedy of
Havingness.

You ask the individual to look at space and to fool around
with getting rid of energy and in a very short space of
time he's liable to be very sick at his stomach. And we
didn't discover all the preclears we were auditing with
Book One getting sick at their stomachs did we? We
discovered one occasionally, but this was a momentary
manifestation. You can - by tearing up a person's havingness
you can make him good and sick. He'll get good and sick.

Now, tearing up his havingness and erasing an engram are,
then, not the same things. By erasing an engram, by going
over this engram, we're simply removing perceptics out of
the mass of energy, and the preclear then - slurp, slurp -
can have this energy without any significance in it and he's
real cheerful about this. And this is a fine thing as far
as he's concerned.

And the perfect duplication or the complete eradication of
energy and time, and so forth, in the bank is antipathetic
to his good health and well being, very antipathetic. Now,
therefore there is a theoretical process which on theory
should just work out beautifully. That is to say we return
him to the moment when it occurred, we have him make a
perfect duplicate of the mass. He's at the moment and the
position where it occurred, he makes a perfect duplicate of
it, the mass, space, significance - everything vanishes
pshew! And it vanishes very fast. And we take him to
another incident, you see - this is theoretical, and that
erases you see - pardon me that - that vanishes by perfect
duplication. You take him to another, a big ridge of some
kind or another and we have him make a perfect duplicate of
this ridge and it goes.

By the way, it's very easy to take the significance out by
perfect duplication. You merely say its significances,
too, you see. And there goes that ridge and that mass and
that engram and that birth and that chain of murders and
that chain of past deaths, or any darn thing you want to
run, by returning him to the moment and doing this.
Theoretically it's a wonderful process. But in practice it
does not work, and in modern theory it doesn't work either.
You are simply reducing the havingness of this individual
down to a point which is unbearable to him. And the more
you make perfect duplicates of the bank the hotter and
faster he will work in order to find new, strange and
peculiar facsimiles to cave in on himself And you get more
facsimiles caved in by perfect duplication than you could
easily count.

Now, the individual who is in this universe has been
habituated to be caved in on. This is the regular response.
This energy universe is flowing in on him, you might say.
He's agreed to it, it's flowing in on him at a very vast
rate from a 360 degree sphere. In other words, he's being
hit from all sides. So therefore inflow is a habitual -
evidently, according to him - needful thing. And that is
his trained response you might say. That is his total
experience - that energy must flow in. Thus we get eating and
we get all sorts of things.

Sex is a puzzle to men. It's not a puzzle to women. It is
an inflow. You get an inflow of sensation, energy, mass, so
forth - a feminine reaction towards sex, you see? It's an
inflow reaction. Therefore that's just exactly what it
ought to be, you see, according to this universe. That is a
total agreement with this universe.

A man gets into a bad shape, is liable to get into a worse
shape than women and actually his death rate is earlier and
so forth than women. There are many other things. It's
because this fellow is being forced to outflow on a
physical basis. You see, there's a sexual outflow. And he
then gets impatient with women and is liable to be very
upset because he'll learn sooner or later that he's getting
no inflow.

Now, actually there is an energy sensation inflow which is
possible in the sexual act and which a man can receive. All
right. This is fine. Let's take some woman who isn't
putting out any of this at all, you see. Just no put out at
all but just a total pull in. Man gets very dissatisfied
with her. Assigns all sorts of dirty words to it, such as
nymphomania. And he'll find that she's frigid, that she's
this, she's that. There's nothing wrong there except that
she isn't doing any output. You see, no output of energy.

Now, women compensate for this by feeding men food, by
doing the cooking, by bringing the man things and so
forth. You see, they do outflow after all. And a man
expects this. And a man - a man who won't permit himself to
be waited on or a woman who will not bring a man things and
so forth; we can expect in that some sort of a bad upset in
the man. 

You see, he's doing - outflowing and then there's no
compensating inflow, and the darnedest things are liable to
happen to him.

So we get this business of outflow, inflow as just the two
basic manifestations of havingness. So we're up against
this thing called havingness. There's a matter of space,
there's a matter of energy. We find a preclear who gets
very anxious about having things and so forth runs out of
space. Space is something to him that's antipathetic. It
hasn't got any particles packed together in it. And he gets
to detest space, so if you ask him to spot a few spots in
the air and just locations, he'll get violently sick,
sometimes. He'll get quite ill. You see, there's no solid
matter there.

So solid matter becomes the final goal, form, mass, and so
on. Now, is it curable? Is it - is it natural? That's a very
definite question we face in this. Is it a natural thing
for an individual to have to have? No, it's not. There's a
higher level than this where he doesn't have to have. But
only when he has ceased to create does he have to have. If
an individual ceases to create, then he's got to have an
exterior inflow from another determinism that's entirely
dependent upon that other source than himself. Up to that
time he can create something and so he can have something
and so he can take it or leave it alone. Creation goes to
pieces, in other words.

When he gets into havingness entirely, why, he just gets so
he's just eating, you might say. He's not putting out
anything. He's having a rough time in this. Some creative
impulse must remain in the individual for the individual
to be healthy.

Well, we find out, then, the Remedy of Havingness is too
often interpreted by the auditor as meaning an inflow. And
it's not totally an inflow. Remedy of Havingness means
remedy of the condition of having to have. That's what
Remedy of Havingness means, very precisely. It's a remedy
of the condition of having to have. That means, there - that
therefore, that a Remedy of Havingness should be run in
such a way as to have the individual pull things in - mock
them up and pull them in - and mock them up and throw them
away. And he's got to be able to accept or reject any of
this havingness.

An individual who is badly restimulated, an individual who
is restimulateable, an individual who has a great many Fac
Ones and all kinds of weird engrams of the darnedest
description packed, up and stacked around him and so forth,
would be very happily - erase the significance from them and
so have them as energy, you see, or have more energy. But
there is his point of view. He's got to have a mass of
energy. And even though it has a bunch of significance in
it he's very, very happy to pull in this mass of energy. So
we get the motto of the individual, which is 'Anything is
better than nothing."

I put that in Latin one day. I've forgotten what it is, but
it's called a motto. "Anything is better than nothing."
"Anything is better than nothing." And they'll pull in
engrams and everything else on themselves.

So we get this first book. Let's take a look at this first
book again in view of what I've been saying here. And we
recognize that we're in contest with the significance in
havingness in the first book - see, that was our contest.
This havingness had significance in it and we could erase
the significance from it, but we were not remedying the
basic havingness of the individual. Therefore, we would
have difficulty in bringing about the state of Clear,
because an individual could not be entirely clear of his
engram bank unless his ideas on having to have had markedly
altered and changed. See? So we have to remedy his
havingness, remedy the necessity of his having to have in
order to have a Book One Clear.

Now, the second book is totally devoted to the creation of,
with rapidity, a Clear. Now, people will argue with terms.
Thetan Exterior stable, Operating Thetan - these are
Scientological terms, perfectly valid terms. But Clear can
be defined as an absolute today. That was never possible
before. We had to have a relative Clear. Whether or not it
can be obtained as an absolute, you see, is quite another
thing, but it can be defined as an absolute. It would be,
an awareness in Book One terminology, an awareness of
awareness unit - that thing which acts upon and is aware of
being aware in the body. Call it a thetan in Scientology -
awareness of awareness unit in Dianetics.

All right. This awareness of awareness unit would have to
be able to have or not have at will in order to remain in a
totally stable condition. But one which had the ability to
have or not have at will as appertains to anything in any
universe would be an absolute Clear. Therefore, you get a
new definition of Clear which is simply a person who can
have or not have at will anything in any universe. That's a
real simple definition, isn't it?

Now, when we say to somebody, "Be three feet back of your
head," the odd part of it is, is that we disconnect him
from his reactive mind, boom! The body is what you might
call a reactive mind. We disconnect him; he's
disconnected. And as such, then, the reactive mind has
actually no bearing on the personality of the individual.
And so we've solved it there and we have, in the second
book, the "One-shot Clear." The "One-shot Clear" which was
searched for, speculated about and so forth is "Be three
feet back of your head."

Of course, this takes the guy out of his reactive bank,
boom! To some degree it works upon about 50 percent of the
human race. So this is a pretty good "One-shot Clear,"
isn't it? Remember the human race contains lots of
children, contains lots of people in pretty good condition.
About 50 percent of the human race in general can be
cleared or, pardon me, they can be approached up toward
Clear about that fast. But you have to get their
attention, get into communication with them a little bit.
They know you're there, you know they're there, and they
have to be in a condition where they will at least do
something you said. And you get them up to that point,
which is merely the approach to the thing, and then you
would say, "Be three feet back of your head" and 50 percent
of the race would do this.

Now, if you went on and concentrated on the body - which
Dianetics does, very markedly concentrate upon the body -
the way to go about finishing this fellow off and
straightening him out has nothing to do with engrams. You
just covertly put him in shape so that he can see the
electronic structure of the body. There is a structure
senior to the flesh and blood structure of the body called
the electronic structure. The electronic structure of the
body is actually a piece of space made by actual anchor
points. And where these anchor points are disarranged or
misaligned the body will twist and turn.

Now, it will pull in facsimiles and do other things and
mess up its anchor points with engrams and all that sort
of thing. But we're not interested in that it does that.
All we want is our boy, this awareness of awareness unit,
be three feet back of his head, get him in good shape so he
has good perception. Just check him to make sure, then
have him check the electronic structure of the body and
wherever he finds an anchor point out of position to go
through the steps necessary to put that anchor point back
in position; and where he finds one shattered to glue it
back together again one way or the other and put them all
back in position.

Now, the odd part of this particular activity - auditors
are apt to forget tbis - the odd part of it is that it is a
concentration upon the body and it's not particularly a
healthy procedure unless the Remedy of Havingness of the
thetan has been very well taken care of. See?

The body itself eats up its own anchor points. These are
gold balls originally, little golden spheres, sometimes in
terrific number in the vicinity of the body. And the body
will eat up its own anchor points. Snake eating its own
tail. You have to fix the fellow up so that he won't do
this. Actually, the only reason it starts eating its own
tail is an electronic flow starts up because of the
misposition of one of these anchor points. You shove one of
these anchor points out of the road, that is the electronic
structure, and you get an enormous and immediate flow of
energy from some quarter to something else and then this
fellow is swamped to some degree. And if he can't handle
flows of energy - in other words, can't handle energy - why,
he's liable to bog right at that spot. This is where the
people come back inside, see. They disturb one of these
anchor points, or some old flow suddenly activates and
swoosh! And then they go back inside and they get stuck;
they decide they can't handle energy.

Well, all of this in a breath, so to speak - we're trying to
cover this rather rapidly, what we are going to study - and
we discover that another factor is involved here and that
is that 50 percent of the human race can't do this.

You walk up to them and you say, "Be three feet back of 
your head."

And they say, "What head?"

And you say, "Well, right there. The one you got leaning 
up against the wall."

And they say, "What wall?" And we're off to the races. The
other 50 percent of the human race.

Well, we could say right here at this point, "Look,
psychoanalysis, witch-doctoring, the Goldi medicine
man - these people produced uniformly 22 percent of cure.
Only 22 percent of cure. And this 22 percent, didn't much
matter what you did. These people would get well whether
you shook a gourd rattle or you jumped up and down and
screamed or you gave him some pills or you told him his
mother loved him again or he received a letter from his
girl or anything. It didn't much matter what you did, 22
percent of the human race will recover from almost any
malady known to man. See. Twenty-two percent."

Naturally this gives medicine and witch doctors, and other
witch doctors - excuse me - a very strange opinion about
healing. They see these fluke cases, you see? So they
conclude, then, that almost anything will work on some case
or another. So they make it very imprecise, and then they
never go further and study it to make it precise, you see?
They say, "Well, this uh - I don't know. People all of a
sudden - they - I - no telling what'll make 'em well because 
all of a sudden they'll get a letter or something."

Actually, they're only talking about 22 percent of the
human race. But they see in the - they see this 22 percent
and then they have never found out that there was a
remaining - remairnng 78 percent. And they never looked at
those.

And we find out when we look at those that we begin to find
the constants, not this variable 22. Well, this variable
22 evidently is simply in kind of a state of hypnosis of
some kind or another, or is in very good shape. See, they
could be in several states. They could be very well off or
very badly off and all somebody would have to say to them,
"You're well," and they'd go around and say, "Look, I'm
well." And whatever interesting condition this would be,
remember that this was an upsetting thing to the entire
field of research and development. Twenty-two percent of
people would simply get well.

Well, we had to pay attention to the other 78. Well, we've
raised that figure on a very easy process of auditing, if
we take into account children and so forth, to 50 percent.
See, we've raised that 22 to 50 percent. Only it isn't
almost anything will make these people well, it's "Be three
feet back of your head" - that's what makes them well. "Be
three feet back of your head. Okay. Let's look around. What
do you see? You see something? All right. Make a copy of
it." By the way, you make a copy simply by putting an exact
replica of the thing alongside of it. It's not a perfect
duplicate.

You'll find the word duplicate carelessly used in earlier
publications. It says, "Duplicate it, duplicate it,
duplicate it." That means make a copy. "Perfect - make a
perfect duplicate of it" would be to make it with its own
time, space and its own energy, in its own locale.

All right. How about this? We've shot it up to 50 percent.
Hadn't we better quit? Huh? What's the matter? Well,
look-a-there. That's a higher level of cure.

Do you realize - do you realize that there was only one
specific prior to about 1912? There was only one thing that
you could absolutely count on to cure something - thing
called aspirin. The one specific. It was a specific remedy
for a specific ill. And you think I mean the headache. No,
that was not the specific ill that aspirin takes care of;
it's rheumatic fever. Aspirin takes care of rheumatic
fever. Somebody comes up with rheumatic fever you give him
aspirin he gets well.

All right. That was along pretty near a 100 percent
proposition. So you could call this thing a specific, it
means a 100 percent proposition. Are there any others? I
read a list from the AMA. The AMA is an organization which
is allied with the "Liars of America," and they have a
great time interchanging their jokes. They listed the fact
that medicine had made great progress, enormous progress,
because they now had about twenty specifics.

In other words, all you do is just throw away the
definition of specific, you see. Just throw it away.
Actually, you don't have twenty specifics. Penicillin is
not a specific. Damn near is. You call for a lot of
remedies and you say, "Well, that calls for penicillin."
But then you find out that Dr. Jones and Dr. Hoopgala and
so forth have been giving this patient penicillin lozenges
and he's had several other courses of penicillin, and we
shoot him for this infection which he has and, by golly,
that infection thrives.

Well then, we have to change him off to aureomycin. That's
a specific, too. And then chloromycetin - that's a specific,
but that didn't work either. Well, the patient dies, so we
say there must have been something else wrong. But
penicillin is still a specific, only it's not a specific.

They speak very widely and rather wildly that cinchona
bark, known to us better as quinine, is a specific for
malaria, and is a specific in the prevention of malaria;
that atabrine is a - is a specific in the prevention of
malaria. And I've had malaria while full of both of those.
I mean, it's wonderful how unspecific they were.

So - but nevertheless, if we've gotten up to 50 percent we
could say - in the same company with the American Medical
Association - we could say, well, Dianetics and Scientology
are specifics for human illness and aberration. That's
that. Wouldn't have to go any further.

But an unfortunate thing - I was early indoctrinated in a
certain attitude of thoroughness about this sort of thing.
So I didn't really consider 50 percent good enough. And
it's taken about two and a half years to put the finishing
touches on the remaining 50 percent. Always we could find a
case who was tougher. Always we could find a case who was
more snowed in. Could always find somebody who was a little
bit blacker than we'd ever noticed before. Very, very
curious. Very, very curious thing.

I've been cracking these cases pretty regularly. Only
trouble is I've had a tendency as years went on to put on
the back grill and let simmer awhile, processes; put them
out into the hands of auditors, tell them that this is the
very hot process and so forth, and find out, whether or
not, one, they could do the process, and two, whether or
not the process continued to work in their hands. I had a
tendency to do that.

The program has paid off very well because you've got a
very interested and enthusiastic piece of auditing when
somebody tests the process with the idea that "this is it"
sort of a thing. But the main thing about auditing is
teaching the auditor. If the auditor does the process he'll
get results with it - if he does the process. It's been a big
question. We find there's a lot of the boys who couldn't
get results with rather elementary and basic processes. We
find a lot of the boys have had a tendency to shift over
and skip Dianetics because it didn't get results.

I beg to differ with them. They didn't work Dianetics and
it didn't get results. Now, there's nothing simpler than
that is there?

It's just like you give this kid a lemon when you're
supposed to give him some cough syrup and he doesn't
start - just doesn't stop coughing so you immediately say,
"Well, that cough syrup doesn't stop coughs." You get the
idea? I mean, this is a real silly situation that we have
had in this particular science.

But there was some justification for this. Old processes
were pretty complicated, preclears were quite variable,
they were very recalcitrant, they refused very often to
get well, and they were not the good, well-mannered,
schoolbook solutions by a long way. So obviously there must
have been some bugs left in the machinery of auditing.
Otherwise nobody could have made a mistake, you see? Nobody
could have drifted off the line or failed to follow the
book, see? There must have been a mistake somewhere in
there. And of course this mistake couldn't have been theirs
because they weren't working on this first investigation,
so I have to assume responsibility for it and go on and on
and on and on and on.

Well anyhow, two very true - pardon me, oh about - more than
that - about five or six very, very terrific things have
shown up. One of them is this whole thing about problems.
Until I got a perfect solution - that is to say until I knew
what a perfect solution was, an ultimate solution. That was
big news. I told a couple of the guys who were drifting
around my office about this. Didn't spread it much any
further. But an ultimate - and then, of course, it's in
Creation of Human Ability - but an ultimate solution, the
ultimate theoretical solution. What is the definition of
an ultimate solution? Well, of course, it would be the
perfect duplicate of the problem wouldn't it? So an
ultimate solution would have no mass, meaning or mobility.
It would have no wavelength, would have no position
and - rrrrrrrr - it's a static. Ultimate solution - static.

You want to know why people have to have problems? Well,
they want mass, don't they? Well, if you had every piece of
mass you had around solved, you wouldn't have any mass - not
a single scrap of it. That's a horrible fact, isn't it? If
you solved every problem in the bank. People start to solve
problems feel worse, so they immediately start creating
more problems. And they'll create problems, problems,
problems, problems, problems, problems, problems. And
unless they can create an abundance of problems, unless
they know they can have problems, they aren't going to give
up any. That was the first bug.

Talked by the way to a patrolman last night. Curious boy.
He had a problem. It was his last problem evidently. He was
sure fond of it. I offered to take it away from him. He
didn't cooperate at all.

All right. There was that, there was this business about
Remedy of Havingness, and there was this remaining 50
percent. There must be some auditing solution which
exteriorizes these people and so forth, and that is the
auditing solution which we will concentrate on in this
course. There must be, you see. Completely aside from
everything else, there simply must be an auditing solution
which does it. And there is.

So, having brought you up to the edge of the springboard,
tomorrow we will find out what Uncle Remus did to Br'er
Rabbit.

How you exteriorize somebody, exactly how you exteriorize
them, exactly how you get them over hanging onto these
pieces of mass, exactly how you work them out of the frame
of mind they're in which makes them interiorize, and
exactly how you do this in about two or three hours
regardless of what kind of shape the case is in, is of
course a rather lengthy thing to teach.

And if I'm going to teach it all today I'd have absolutely
nothing to teach you in the next six weeks. Now, the
process which I want you to run ... Going to get assigned to
some auditing teams. You won't like these assignments.
These assignments will be an affront to you. That's a
certainty. For the good and ample reason is they're usually
misassigned on purpose. That's just a cross-brained
attitude. You know why?

We concentrate on auditing in this course; we do not
concentrate on one's own case. We concentrate on the
ability to audit. You got that? The ability to audit - this
is all we care about. We don't even vaguely care what
condition the auditor is in. If he can - if with the help of
a couple of mop handles he can be propped up in a chair, if
he twitches when kicked, he is in a state whereby he can
audit. That's all we require of an auditor -
qualifications. If he can quiver he can audit. Do you know
why? Because the secret back of all secrets, as far as
masses and forms are concerned - you understand that there
could be secrets above masses and forms - but as far as
masses and forms are concerned the secret of it is
pan-determinism or control. That thing which you control
you do not have to fear.	

Would you be afraid to run a kiddie car down the front walk
out here? You might feel that you're being ridiculed. Well,
let's take it out in the desert someplace. Would you be
afraid to run this kiddie car out there in the desert
someplace, huh? No danger involved with this kiddie car.

Well, how about a jet plane, checked over recently by an
Army mechanic? You, with no training. They put no helmet
and no oxygen mask on you and jam you in the cockpit, shut
the cockpit and start the plane. You wouldn't look on that
with great calm would you? Hm? And yet the jet plane to a
trained pilot is about as hard to run as a kiddie car. He
can do what? He can control this jet plane can't he?

Human aberration has only been a bugbear to man because he
couldn't control it, he couldn't predict it, he couldn't
start, stop and change it. The anatomy of control is start,
stop and change. He couldn't start, stop and change
aberrations. He couldn't start, stop and change the state
of mind of his fellow beings. He couldn't handle
aberration.

That's - you don't find many doctors of contagious wards in
those wards with that contagious disease, do you? That's
because he can control it to a very marked degree, you see?
But you sure find an awful lot of psychiatrists in
institutions, don't you? That's right. Head nurses and
psychiatrists - because they know they can't control this
thing called aberration so they get controlled by it.

There's - to that degree in this universe at this time it's
a dog-eat-dog sort of universe. I mean, you've got to be
able to control something. Have to be willing certainly to
control something. You don't have to actually get in there
and direct every movement of it, you see. You have to be
willing and able to control something in order to sit back
and relax as far as it's concerned.

One thing that drives the public frantic about this atom
bomb out here is they do not even vaguely have the faintest
control even over the personnel that have the most intimate
connection with it, see, or even the most distant
connection with it. Far from being able to control the
explosion of the bomb, they couldn't even vaguely control
or determine the use and course of the bomb in any way. In
other words, it's just totally removed from control.

There's why people are off on the fourth dynamic: They do
not think they can control the fourth dynamic even vaguely,
see? It's gotten even fashionable to say "Conquerors are no
good," and that sort of thing. Well, actually, it's
a-conquering the human race, just to demonstrate that you
can control the human race is kind of a dull thing to do.
But - that's a rather low-scale activity, but they feel they
couldn't possibly control the human race or group. It's
just their willingness. And so they feel, "Well, I'm all
shot, you know. Fourth dynamic - there's nothing I can do for
man. I am myself. I am an individual, I am all alone, I am
the only one," they say as far as they're concerned.
"Whatever happens to the rest of the human race, well,
that's their lookout." And so of course they get no control
over it at all on a dwindling-spiral basis.

Well, let's take a look at auditing and recognize that the
control of human aberration is the goal of an auditor.
Now, it goes further than this. That is an immediate goal.
The increase of human ability is a much higher goal. First
you have to learn that you can control human aberration,
really, before you realize you can control human ability.

Recently the boys have been getting hot enough with their
auditing that a considerable change taking place in a lot
of boys - lot of auditors that haven't had any auditing to
amount to anything. See, new thing - they can control this
thing. This is an oddity. You watch this thing work out. Of
course, they have to recognize finally that they can
control it, and this takes a while for them to do. But that
is the longest trial that we have on auditing. 

Now, let's take this as compared to the apt use of a
technique. Let's take this "I can control human aberration
through these processes properly applied and so forth. I
have control over it. There is a start, stop and change,
and this kind of thing. Therefore and thereby and
thereafter, I'm in pretty good shape with relationship to
them." But that man stops restimulating, is what happens to
him. If he knows he can do this he stops restimulating. How
does he know he can do this? It's by auditing people, one
after the other, see. He audits them, he finds out he can
change their behavior pattern and ability, and it ceases
to be this huge mystery to him and he becomes very, very
certain.

Now, I ran into the Foundation one day back in Wichita. I
was in a hurry. I was going into my office to pick up a
couple of papers, but here stood an auditor, a girl, she
was white. I said "What's the matter?" Somebody said
immediately, "Why, that psychotic she was assigned this
morning," (she was a staff auditor) "has been taken home by
her husband." I said, "What's the matter here?" This kid
was just shot, see. And I asked people around. Well, then,
obviously - auditing session, short auditing session - this
auditor had evidently done all the right things. This woman
had gone into a violent restimulation, had practically
spun in and been taken home back to Oklahoma or someplace
by her husband. What about this?

A little Straightwire on this girl demonstrated the fact
that this woman was the exact replica... I - we had never
known before that this auditor had once worked in a
sanitarium as an attendant. And this woman psychotic was
the exact replica of a woman who had jumped out of the ward
one fine day and practically strangled this auditor. This
auditor was much younger. This woman psychotic in this old
institution years before had practically strangled this
girl, and now we get a duplicate person shows up. This
auditor goes into complete restimulation, practically spins
in, and although the auditor went right ahead and did the
processes, the fear, the inability was so manifest to the
preclear that the preclear just went out of mind.

Obviously the techniques couldn't have been well used. It
must of just been 1ip service to the type of process this
person was supposed to have. But you get the idea?
Person - this girl knew she could not control that preclear
even vaguely and as such, naturally was ready to quit, run.
And when seen immediately afterwards was in a horribly
restimulated state. What was in restimulation, however, was
not just this incident of being jumped. What was in
restimulation was the whole bank. "See, I can't control
human aberration," it says immediately. Bang! There we go.

So your foremost job is to learn that you can handle human
aberration, psychosomatic ills, and then that you can
increase somebody's ability. That's the first thing we'll
concentrate on. And therefore, let's get into the auditing
techniques which we will be using. The first auditing
technique we will be using is simply this one technique. I
hate to have to tell you this: It's, "Something you
wouldn't mind remembering. Something you wouldn't mind
forgetting." That's the auditing technique we will use. We
won't use it for very long, but it's the only one we can
use. See, we're totally restricted.

Why that process? Merely want you to get into two-way
communication amongst yourselves as a class unit. Get the
idea? This is an easy way to do it and there's no
significance at all.

Oddly enough, that's a terrifically potent process. But not
so potent that it will blow anybody up. It's not that we
distrust anybody; we also do that for another reason. We
want to see how well you can follow an auditing
instruction. Guy who knows an awful lot of auditing
techniques finds he has a hell of a time all of a sudden
turning around and settling down to this process. He knows
what's wrong with this case. He knows he's going to do this
he's going to do that. Well, we just put it on a training
basis. "Something you wouldn't mind remembering. Something
you wouldn't mind forgetting." Those are the two
processes - two auditing commands.

We're going to do this for another reason. I don't think
anybody here knows all he can know about communication lag
and we're going to study it. And that one turns up some
honeys.

Communication lag: The length of time from the moment the
individual is asked something to the moment when he
actually replies to that exact question regardless of what
comes in between.

Caught somebody on this the other day who was trained in
it. Said, "Well, I really couldn't..." This person must
have been doped off or something of the sort. This auditor
knew this. Said, "I couldn't tell what the preclear's
communication lag was." Auditor was kind of rattled; late
in the evening when I caught him on this. "I couldn't
really tell what the person's communication lag was."

And I said, "Well, you couldn't? Why?"

"Person kept talking all the time, couldn't get an answer."
Of course, that's communication lag. That's that. So, we
take a look at this as communication lag and we'll
estimate by communication lag the consequences and results
thereof.

When we've discovered whether or not we can follow an
instruction on auditing, then we will go immediately into a
much tougher process which is still a two-way communication
- that's a Straightwire process - we'll go into a Two-way
Communication process. And that Two-way Communication
process is simply involving problems and solutions. And we
will simply do that in order to remedy enough problems
around here so we don't have to have too many.

All right. Right now, though, your auditing command - the one
allowable command for this Unit, and that pertains to
anybody in this Unit - is on the preclear involved "Something
you wouldn't mind remembering. Something you wouldn't mind
forgetting." Okay? That's just to find out if you can
follow an auditing instruction. It's the most wonderful
duplication process known to man. Make a poor auditor
duplicate like mad all over the place, the auditing
question.

Okay. And the next thing that we will get into here in
these lectures - which will take place at 12:30 every
day - next place - thing we will get into will be this business
of havingness. And we will give that a complete knockout.
And I mean we will go over that very thoroughly.

Right along with that, at the same time we'll run in some
Opening Procedure 8-C and so forth, but this will be
rather fast. Opening Procedure 8-C is still working most
gorgeously. We will also get into a subject not - you might
think it has been, but it hasn't been - we will get into a
subject called "memory" in this unit, which has never been
covered before in any unit or in any publication.

Memory. What is memory? Why is it? How far does this thing
called memory go? Very fascinating subject. Fascinating
once you know what it is. It's very baffling until you do.
More ways to make a person's memory work than you can shake
a stick at.

I didn't ever teach one of them but I used one, one night - a
gimmick on a group here at the Church. And it worked on
them; worked on them gorgeously. It certainly did startle
them. Cases that couldn't remember this and couldn't
remember that. Actually there's a process that will turn on
a person's memory almost at will on any subject. You can
handle memory. Memory's nothing to handle.

Now, as far as the first week or so are concerned we will
be involved with picking up these various details, and then
we will get on to this pan - exteriorization process and we
will get hot with it. And we will see how hard it is to
teach and we will see how hard it is to follow, and we will
see any shortcomings which the process has by working it
broadly on a group. This will be the first time it's been
worked on a group. It's been worked, of course, by the
Department of Writing and Investigation very thoroughly at
this time, and all kinds of weird and incredible results
can be obtained.

But our auditing goal today, which is something that you
should know right here at the beginning, is simply to get
them out. As far as the physical goal is concerned, it's
adjust their anchor points. See, if we want somebody well
physically, we'll adjust his anchor points. But that
depends upon our getting him out first. So the emphasis is
on exteriorization. Techniques are all emphasized in the
direction of exteriorization. This, of course, is being
taught straight into the teeth of fast exteriorization - get
them out quick, turn on their perceptions, patch up the
physical beingness, jump the person's ability level. Just
about that order.

It may be that one auditor has more facility than another
in using the processes which I'm giving. That may be. But
I'm afraid that that is a far better determining factor
than the state of case today.

We can do the damnedest things with psychosis. I mean,
psychosis is no longer a problem. It is no problem. The
answer to psychosis is the Opening Procedure of 8-C, and
Two-way Communication, Mimicry and the technique of
nonverbal communication - no speak; tossing the object back
and forth. These are psychotic - they're not psychotic
processes; they just happen to work on psychosis. I mean,
the last psychotic that came into my auditing room, I said,
"Oh my, another psychotic. Well, let's see now. I'll have
to give about - oh, I'll have to give at least three days for
this and about fifteen minutes at a crack." And that's
what did it. I mean, it's real fast.

It has a lot to do with how fast the auditor could get into
two-way communication with the psycho. Once that is done -
sometimes only requires a minute or two. The last psycho
that walked in my office walked in gibbering and walked out
talking. And the total auditing time was two minutes. And
this was very amazing to the two attendants that were with
this psycho. This was very, very amazing.

I took the easy route. I simply flooded the psycho with
ARC, you know? I just gave him a big bunch pf ARC, did a
slight duplication of physical mannerism - brought the -
brought the person into immediate communication, snapped
him into present time, shook him by the hand and they left.
They were considerably improved by this long and lengthy
process, about two minutes.

I spent a lot longer talking to the two attendants, you
see, because they "Ya, ya, ya, ya, ya. What wall?" They
weren't disassociating anyhow.

Psychosis is no problem as an - actually, is no point for an
auditor to concentrate on. I mean, he has to learn, and he
should learn that he can do certain things for psychotics,
so he can handle psychosis today. He should learn that just
as one of the things he should know on controlling, and so
forth. Because it is the more frightening, out-of-control
mechanism. But actually your psychos are running on a
two-watt peanut-whistle transmitter and they're as easy to
handle as a small pile of beads. You can push them around,
see, and so forth. An auditor has to learn that. Where an
auditor should concentrate today is upon ability, because
ability is a measurable thing. Person - person is taking a
long time to learn how to play the piano, and you suddenly
pick him up and make him play the piano in a hurry. Person
is unable to drive a car well; you audit him for a while
and they're - all of a sudden become tremendously able
drivers.

You can never stop working on ability. It is a completely
unlimited goal simply because there are entirely unlimited
categories of ability.

I was working on ability the other day, myself' I mean
personally. I was - I do fairly well on a - on a motorbike.
It's a great sport. I ride one for sport. You've got a lot
of space around you. You don't have to have all this damn
mass of windshields and all that sort of thing. You're in
contact with your environment like a - like an old dog I used
to have. I - he used to hang his nose out the side of the car
and boy he'd just whiff-whiff whiff-whiff whiff and he'd
smell that landscape every place. Well, you don't smell
anything but a motor or the air-conditioning unit in the
car, or the dust. And on a motorbike, you see, you can
smell anything. So I ride motorbikes and I have a good time
doing this. But I ran into a kid out on the desert not too
long ago who was riding a fairly light bike, and he'd shoot
out of a gully and take the front wheel off and go ten or
fifteen feet on his rear wheel only and then slam his front
wheel down again. Get the idea? Spectacular. I couldn't do
that.

So I went out about a week ago and took a good heavy bike
and started to put it through its paces. And after I'd
pulled it over on me a couple of times, I decided that
there was something about this that I hadn't noticed. But
instead of going around limping - my shins are still all
covered up - instead of going around limping badly and
bemoaning it and so forth, suddenly recognized what I was
doing very ably. Physically, I recognized what I was doing.
I was learning how to do it; I wasn't doing it. And because
I was learning how to do it I was taking it easy at first.

You mustn't cut the throttle on a bike you are balancing
just after it's come out of a gully. And I was
instinctively cutting this throttle - see, because I was
still learning. I would do it later on. So I put my goal
too far up the time track and liked to kill myself as a
result thereof, you see.

So the next time I said, "Well, the hell with it. I've been
doing it for two years." In fact, I put it on the backtrack
to make sure that I could. I distinctly remembered when
the king and queen of Bulgaria were over here and I did
this trick, and that was where I got the mocked-up medal
that was hanging around my neck. And I slammed that bike
down into the gully and slammed it out the other side of
the gully and opened up its throttle wide as I went up the
other side and didn't cut its throttle an instant as it
came out of the other side, and of course it just walked
along on its rear wheel just like nothing because there was
no gyroscopic imbalance being entered into the situation at
all. Its wheels were travelling at the same rate of speed
right on along as it came out of the gully. It's very
interesting thing. Bikes do that.

Male voice: Now both wheels.

Huh?

Male voice: Next week, both wheels.

You've got - you've got yourself the - a similar problem in 
any point of training. Now, I've had boys in Units that go
clear through to the end of the Unit before they know
anything. You know, "I will know this at the end of the
Unit." Well, therefore, this is the last day of this Unit,
and all the rest of this Unit will be retraining. Just
finished the Unit. You all graduated. Now, we'll learn how
to audit. Okay?

I'm much more interested in what you're going to do with
this blanket exteriorization process as a Unit and learn
how to do it. I'm much more interested in that than I am
in anything else.

But I am very, very morally, horribly certain that we have
to hit some basics and some fundamentals here and there and
refresh them up.

The task of auditing is not a very - not a very complicated
right now, but funny part of it is you can't leave any pins
out of it.

There are six basic processes as we know. Those six basic
processes have to be understood as fundamentals of the
business. Regardless of what we do with these six basic
processes, you see, regardless of what we - how we apply
them, there are six basic processes and there are just
exactly six ways to do the six processes. And that
fundamental can't be overlooked. One of the main reasons
why, is because you from the Advanced Clinical Course will
be doing a lot of instruction. And you will find out that
your people - we have learned this the hard way - you'll find
out that your people all too often are apparently very well
based in theory, and then they go riding off on their
horses in all directions and you get a maximum amount of
disturbance in any kind of a small group you are training,
just because of the absence of the precision of these
processes.

There's a way to do each one of these processes, but of
course there are other things that you can do with a
preclear besides these processes. And I'm teaching you some
better things to do than these basic processes. That
doesn't mean these basic processes aren't good. They are
the standard processes and they remain so.

Those processes are of course Two-way Communication,
Elementary Straightwire, Opening Procedure 8-C, Opening
Procedure Duplication, Remedy of Havingness and Spotting
Spots. And those are the six processes, pang!

There's a precision way to do each one that's finally been
worked on, worked out and agreed upon, and cases have been
observed and results have been tabulated on each one of
these processes until they're killers. That's right,
they're just killers.

The only thing that whips those processes is this unit
exteriorization technique when they don't exteriorize on
"Be three feet back of your head," see.

Well, what do you know, then - what do you know. You cannot
even vaguely handle a preclear on this type of process. It
is not a good control process. You've got to get that
preclear under control, you've got to get him squared
around before you can work this other process. Otherwise
he'll do anything but. And he can really squirrel himself.

Any time you handle dynamite of this caliber and velocity
and nitroglycerin content, you are of course, of
necessity, having a considerable amount of trouble getting
a hold of your preclear and slamming him into the proper
position in order to do just this process.

There's a lot of this, a lot of this. Easy way to
exteriorize a preclear, of course, would be to be in
perfect two-way communication with the preclear and he'd
exteriorize. But how do you get into perfect communication
with the preclear? Well, that's the remaining five
processes.

Now, the number of boo-boos that auditor makes - auditors
make today are all involved in exteriorization itself - all
of them - really. They really foul up on this like mad. Old
Route One - Route One processes - patching up anchor points,
this sort of thing. My God, I have seen more damn mistakes
of the most gruesome kind made. Girl one time - fellow said
to her, "Be three feet back of your head." You'd hardly
call this boy an auditor. "Be three feet back of your
head." He had no training by the way. And she was. And so
then he took a book and he put it over in one corner of the
room and he says, now he says, "Go find the book." So she
did. And then he says, "All right. Now..." and he took the
book out into the bedroom and he says, "Now find the book."
And she did. And then he took the book into the kitchen and
she went and found the book. And then he put the book down
some places in the cellar and she found the book about one
more time.

And then he says, "All right. Now, read me the first page
out of it through the cover." She couldn't do that, gave
her a lose, banged her back in the head and made about
fifty-five hours of work out of a perfect preclear for the
next auditor that came along. Gave her a big lose her first
moment out. Never got her - gave her a moment to stabilize
herself, to even find out what she was, get used to the
idea that she was different from the body. None of these
things were even vaguely entered into this process. Well, a
boo-boo like that is a pretty big one, but they can still
make them - can still make them.

Well, the process is allowed again, "Something you wouldn't
mind remembering. Something you wouldn't mind forgetting."
Then we're going to take up some Remedy of Havingness.

But our next big jump after this will be a very fast review
of these six processes and then we will get into this
button process. Now, I hope to do that before the congress
so you better make up your mind that you just graduated
yesterday. You've graduated; now you want to find what the
hell it's all about. Okay? All right.

(end of lecture)












