From squirrel@echelon.alias.net Fri Apr 23 16:40:15 1999

Path: newscene.newscene.com!newscene!novia!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!cloudbreak.rs.itd.umich.edu!cliffs.rs.itd.umich.edu!nntp.primenet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!news.alt.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news

Date: 23 Apr 1999 23:40:15 -0000

Subject: FZ BIBLE 4/10 HCL TAPES PART 2 (1952)

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology

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: <da62c7969ace9763e4d12634b3aabb93@anonymous.poster>

Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net

Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net

Lines: 1302

Xref: newscene alt.religion.scientology:741859



FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST



FZ BIBLE 4/10 HCL TAPES PART 2 (1952)



We are posting separately to ARS & ACT, if a post is missing,

please check the other newsgroup.



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



These are the second 10 lectures in the HUBBARD COLLEGE

LECTURES (HCL) Series of early 1952.  This is based

both on the transcripts in R&D volume 10 and an old

reel-to-reel set of the tapes.



The lectures cover Fac One and some discussion of

Entites.



We posted the first part of this lecture series last December

as FZ BIBLE 1/10 HCL TAPES of 1952, FIRST SECTION.



The Time Track of Theta tapes that we posted earlier last year 

are also from this lecture series.  They fit right after the 

tapes in this current set of postings.



We will do the final third of the HCL lectures later this

year including the battle of the universes tape which has

been labled confidential and is not in the R&D volumes.

Note that this lecture series (mainly the final third) is 

the research line for NOTS.



Coming Soon: The 5th ACC (The "Universes" cassettes).





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



CONTENTS:



1.  HCL-7   6 MAR 52 EFFORT AND COUNTER-EFFORT

2.  HCL-8   6 MAR 52 ATTACK ON THE PRECLEAR

3.  HCL-9   7 MAR 52 FACSIMILES: HOW TO HANDLE RECORDINGS

4.  HCL-10  7 MAR 52 INDOCTRINATION OF THE PRECLEAR

5.  HCL-11  8 MAR 52 RESOLUTION OF EFFORT_AND COUNTER-EBFORT: OVERT ACTS

6.  HCL-12  8 MAR 52 INDOCTRINATION IN THE USE OF THE EMETER

7.  HCL-13  9 MAR 52 THOUGHT, EMOTION, & EFFORT AND COUNTER-EFFORT

8.  HCL-14  9 MAR 52 DEMO: EFFORT, COUNTER-EFFORT, STRAIGHTWIRE

9.  HCL-15 10 MAR 52 TRAINING AUDITORS: THE ANATOMY OF FAC ONE

10. HCL-17 10 MAR 52 RUNNING EFFORT AND COUNTER-EFFORT



Note that the first set of 10 HCL lectures ended with

HCL-6A of 5 MAR 52.



Note that HCL-12 consists of HCL-12 and HCL-12A on the reels.



Note that HCL-16 was not part of the reels nor is it in the

R&D volumes.  If anyone has a copy, please post it.



Note that HCL-18 was combined with HCL-27 in the R&D volumes

and we will post it in part 3 of this series.  The Time Track

of Theta tapes are HCL-19 and 20.



In cases where the reels include material that is not in

the R&D volumes, the text is marked with ">".





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



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 freezoner's are "squirrels" who should be

stamped out as heritics.  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 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 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



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

 



HCL-10 INDOCTRINATION OF THE PRECLEAR



A lecture given on 7 March 1952



Rerecorded 1973.





I'd like to talk to you about indoctrinating the preclear,

This is very sequitur to how to get through to the preclear

and teach him what you want, and have him do what you want.

A preclear is as easy to audit as he has no barriers to

your auditing him.



Now, first and primary barrier to your auditing him, of

course: the incident which you're trying to audit. That's

really the first barrier that's been giving him trouble.

Don't expect it not to give you trouble because it very

definitely will give you trouble one way or the other.



You can fully expect any incident to be a rough incident.

The only mistake you will make in this regard - the only

mistake you will make in this regard is to suppose that

this incident follows some other laws than those you know.

And that I might ask you to fix in your mind very

strongly. You will learn this by experience but at first

you had better accept it on belief: that an incident,

regardless of how it sounds or looks, will follow precisely

the things which you are being taught about it here.



I noticed this in training auditors a long, long time ago.

That the auditor insufficiently acquainted with his tools

was only too happy to suddenly suppose that new phenomena,

never before encountered, had been encountered by him. And

therefore, use this as an excuse to change his mode of

auditing to try to make the preclear do something else, And

in such a wise he would miss running the incident and

invariably and always would have upon his hands an unwell

preclear.



If you were to start into an incident with standard

processing and were then to change over after you had run

an incident a time or two, to counseling the preclear, in a

large percentage of the instances you would send your

preclear into a very sad, low-toned state. And you might

even send him to the hospital.



I am reminded - one time a fellow down at the house watched

two preclears, one after the other, change from fairly

alert, fairly normal individuals into sick people. He

watched this, one after the other. He saw one preclear go

from no temperature to a temperature of 103 merely

by being run down the track and run into a measles

incident. He saw him turn red, saw him begin to agonize and

immediately tried to interrupt the session and so on,

because obviously the preclear was being made sick.

Obviously he's being made sick. Now this is "Terrible,

terrible, terrible, terrible. So horrible. This mustn't be,

this mustn't be, this mustn't be." So just for kicks I let

him take the preclear's temperature. It was found to be

103. Preclear had the clammy cold touch, he had the

semblance of a rash - he looked terrible. And this man, an

endocrinologist of no repute, insisted - nay, demanded - that

this preclear be sent to bed promptly and that no more

auditing be done.



The other preclear was run into an incident, and I didn't

finish running out the incident for the good and excellent

reason that he was boiling off in it. And he had seen a man

faint or go unconscious, and therefore, that person

obviously needed immediate treatment, and he proceeded to

try to administer it. (He was making quite a nuisance of

himself.) And the second preclear got furious with him. Of

course, the fellow was in a boil-off, and it's rather

high-tension stuff he's running. Suddenly finds himself

slapped in the face with a wet towel, he doesn't appreciate

it.



I didn't do too much to prevent all this because I'd just

as soon the fellow got unpopular. And the upshot of all

this was, that almost forcibly holding down this objector,

I ran out the measles incident on the first preclear and

finished the boil-off on the second preclear. And they both

came up smiling, looking better, temperature was normal on

the first preclear; second preclear - all the nervous

tension was gone.



This was really grim because it completely violated another

man's reality, utterly violated his reality. When a person

gets a temperature, he has a virus, he is sick. If he is

sick, he's supposed to go to bed. If a person goes

unconscious, he's supposed to be revived. That was the

codified reality of this person.



That reality does not hold in auditing. If a preclear

develops a temperature, you're supposed to run it out. And

at first you may find it very hard to believe that your

preclear's temperature will go away by the simple process

of auditing. All that temperature is, is a facsimile with a

thermal in it. It's a facsimile with a thermal in it. And

in order to demonstrate this, you can run any preclear - or

just remember vividly, very vividly, remember exactly how

everything was on a hot day, or run the preclear into the

hot day, and he'll feel the heat again. This is thermal.

Fever is no different.



Now, the lesson involved is that the first few times you

run somebody, follow the rules. After that, experience will

tell you to follow the rules.  If you don't get results on

a preclear, the chances are ninety to one that you're not 

doing something called for in regular auditing procedure. 

The half of the remaining one chance will be that the incident 

has some sort of a freak phrase or twist in it that is causing 

an illusion, but is still running according to rote. And the 

remaining one half of one chance has to do with the fact that 

the preclear has not been indoctrinated in running it, and 

he's trying to run something else.



Now, one of the most discouraging things about a preclear

is he very often - low on the Tone Scale - will be told to do

one thing and will do something else. And when you try to

check him up and find out if he's doing what you ask him to

do, he will tell you that he is, and keep on doing the

something else. Preclears at 1.I are very good at

this - very good at this.



Now, I call to your attention the fact that running an

incident presents very, very definite manifestations. An

Individual who is running an incident, is running an

incident. If they're really running the incident, they

change their body positions, they are alert, interested in

what they're running and they're going on through with the

thing. And they are - have no compunctions about informing

the auditor as to what's going on.



A preclear who is faking it may be running something else. 

They may be flopping around but there is long pauses 

and there is a perceptible gap in their answer to the

auditor - a perceptible gap - and when you find a prcclear

who is answering you very, very slowly... You ask him the

question and then there's a lo-o-ong gap and then he

answers it, you should become suspicious of this preclear

promptly as running something else that you didn't tell him

to run. What he's trying to do is reorienting himself so

that he can answer you - and he's trying to think up a lie.

And they don't think fast when they're back down the track;

they just don't think fast when they're in the middle of a

facsimile. And he may think he's answering right up - 

pop - only he's not.



Another way to prevent this is to know your Tone Scale and

do a very, very good estimation of where your preclear is

on the Tone Scale and look at the behavior scale on the

Tone Scale. Look at the behavior and so forth - what can be

expected out of this preclear - because he'll communicate

his incident to you just like it says on the chart.



Let's say if he's at 1.1, he will communicate the incident

or communicate with you like it says under "Communication"

on the chart. So this you must beware. You must beware of a

preclear running something that you haven't told him to

run.



You'll get preclears who will start wandering all over the

track. And you say, "Now, are you running birth or

something of the sort! You running this! You running that!"



"Oh yes, yes, yes, yes" They're up at twenty and they're

down to fifteen and they're lock-scanning a time. When you

start a preclear lockscanning, you don't communicate with

him for quite a while. You start him in a lock scan and

then you're silent for quite a while. And you ask him once

in a while what he's doing, and so on. You quite often find

that he's wandered off of the track, so you want to keep in

communication with him. You start the chain for him. You

start him off at the beginning. You get the information

from him when he's at the end, and if he doesn't give you

the information when you think he ought to, you ask him for

it. Quite often you'll find he's wandered off into

something else.



The lesson here is that the preclear very often doesn't

know - in a befogged, anaten condition of being in the middle

of some facsimile - he just plain doesn't know what he's

doing, and he can't evaluate well enough what he's doing to

stay on the right track to do him the most good. If some

incident's telling him that it ought to be avoided, he'll

avoid it. And you as an auditor are there to keep him from

avoiding it. So you must remember this.



So there is a happy mean between just sitting back and

snoring while the preclear runs, and sitting there and

drive, drive, punish, punish, kick, kick to keep the

preclear going. If you find the preclear is getting very

restless and unhappy the way you're auditing him, you'd

certainly better get an adjustment of pace to his tone and

get your auditing procedure between you and him

straightened out. You shouldn't have any trouble auditing a

preclear,



Now, phenomena that you discover should be very well known

to you before you discover it. There's about two hundred

and ten, or something like that, phenomena that have been

discovered about the mind in this science. And there's

about a hundred and ninety-six of them are not in use and

do not obtrude upon you. They're manifestations that you

don't have much to do with in auditing. And they don't

suddenly send up a red flag and tell you they're there and

interfere with the auditing.



So there's two ways you can learn this. You can go ahead

and start to study every aspect there is to know about film

recording and filing - every one there is to know - and know

them all and examine them all. And the other is to know

enough to do a good auditing job. Well, of course, number

two is what you should know first. And you should know

number two very, very well and have all the answers right

there at your fingertips so that you can just sweep him on

through. And then, later on, you can get interested enough

when you have experience on the line, to go ahead and

investigate the rest of them if you want to.



There's a terrific amount of mystic phenomena, for

instance, that you can investigate. The time to investigate

that is after you got through running incidents. Because it

does not obtrude upon running incidents.



As a matter of fact, do you know that a preclear can

actually step up off of the couch and go across the room

and stand against the fireplace and watch you. Why, every

once in a while you'll run some mystic and he'll start

doing this trick. He's not auditing. He jumps out of

himself and - you call this astral walking. That's a

phenomenon that's been well known. It's a phenomenon which

has been around for a long time and a lot of people can do

it without any effort or trouble. It has a lot to do with

auditing.



But don't suppose that somebody who comes up to you and

says, "You know, I audit you every night when you're

asleep" is telling you anything. He can maybe come over and

stand alongside your bed and give you a nightmare, but

believe me, he can't audit you. I've tested this, by the

way, and such auditing is not successful.



You'd be surprised. I've gotten several letters from people

around the country saying, "I wanted to help you, so I have

come down every night, and I hope my work has benefited

you," I get a nightmare every once in a while. I suppose

that's what happens. You think I'm joking, but this is true

enough.



That's phenomena. It's valid phenomena. It doesn't happen

to be of any use in auditing, that's all. It's not that I

am trying to be stern or mean about it, it's just a - there's

certain phenomena that's of use in auditing and these are

the ones you should know and handle and when you get these

well under control, then there's lots more.



Now, I'll tell you a useless phenomenon. You can take half

of the mind and set it up to audit the other half of the

mind. And it will go on for twenty-four hours a day

auditing the other half of the mind. You can take the

whole analytical mind and set it up a yard or six yards or

eight miles from the body and have it do all the computing

for the individual. Because theta does not exist in space

or time, it doesn't matter what you do with this theta. You

produce an illusion to this effect, and the person will

answer up to it.



You can take the whole analytical mind and move it out from

underneath its facsimiles, for instance, and have it work

the arithmetic for the individual so that he'll get his

answers on a flash-answer basis. You set him a problem,

he'll give you flash answers. This is more or less useless

phenomena - at the moment, it is But it's interesting, it's

very fascinating.



Now, you can set up an auditor in the mind which will go on

and audit the preclear when the preclear's asleep. Maybe

you didn't know about this one. 



> Probably this technique will be rampant in California 24

> hours after this tape is released out there because it'd

> be a very interesting thing.  I can just see - they can

> say "This is a new way to kill preclears, we're all set

> now boys."

>

> I'm not hot about California. I wouldn't say a word about 

> the C.A.D.A. - I wouldn't say a word about them.  The 

> California association out there. A good bunch of people. 

> Of course they don't know anything about the subject, and 

> they don't produce any results but they're good people.

> 

> They think that this whole subject ought to be turned over to 

> the psychoanalysts so that everybody can run psychodrama while 

> standing on the top of a bottle in Central Park or something. 

> But otherwise they're good people.

> 

> Outside of the fact that it was everybody in California

> that worked up - I think they called it psycho-Dianetics 

> or something.

> 

> Female voice: Not everybody.

> 

> And this psycho-Dianetics that was developed was developed

> exclusively and wholly and from one end to the other -

> well it was actually developed by a man named Smith or 

> something - or did he form the Mormon Church? [audience

> laughter] - Well they're not sure either.

> 

> But we'll get on with this.



What you could do is, you can look at a preclear fixedly 

and you can say, "Tonight when you go to sleep, the left 

half of your mind will run the right half of your mind 

through all the grief incidents of any and all of your 

lives and discharge the grief." And you say, "Is this 

understood!" And they say, "Yes." "All right, that's

fine."



Now, this preclear will actually go home and put his head

down on the pillow and go to sleep and wake up the next

morning with a soaked pillow. He's been crying all night.



You can make a preclear run out all the terror when he's

asleep so that the bed is just going madly all night long

and shivering and shaking, and when he wakes up the next

morning, why - By the way, he doesn't feel any better

for any of these things because it's subawareness level

activity, and it is simply the restimulation of incidents

and the illusion that it's being done. And to be obedient,

he will simply turn on the manifestations without becoming

any more aware of what's going on.



Now, I know lots of them like this - just dozens and dozens

and dozens and dozens of ways how the human mind can be

made to react one way or the other. As a matter of fact, it

is actually no trick whatsoever to make a man get very weak

and give him chills even while you're standing and talking

to him. All you do is slide into his valence and think

weakness and chills, and he gets them.



Now, that's funny, isn't it! Well, you maybe don't know

whether it exists or not. As a matter of fact, it can't be

done very often and, as a matter of fact, you probably

never tried it, but it can be done. What its usefulness is,

that's something else. It's not useful in therapy. So this

is all a very interesting array of material.



Do you know that you can actually take a preclear, make him

look at a flashing candle for a few minutes and then tell

him he'll forget every engram he has and they won't bother

him anymore, and he will go around assuring everybody that

he's now forgotten all of his troubles and they don't

bother him anymore! He's not well. He's still got the pip

and the epizookics and so forth, but something has

happened - but something has happened.



Now, there are two stages of making something happen: one

is to make something happen which is spectacular. If you

want the spectacular, that's one thing, and if you want a

preclear to get well, that's something else - entirely 

something else. You could always have the spectacular. I 

can guarantee you that almost any preclear I take on, I 

could make them froth at the month, bark like dogs, run 

around in circles, scream, do anything. Spectacular.



As a matter of fact, I took a preclear one time that nobody

ever had - no one had ever been able to make do anything.

Tnis preclear... Not in Dianetics - no one had ever been

able to make this patient do anything in psychiatry. And

the four psychiatrists that had treated her over a period

of eight years came down to a lecture in Oakland, and

managed to foist off this patient on me as the volunteer

for the stage demonstration. And the fellow who was there

managing the show was dumb enough to take her. And boy, she

was as dumb as a wooden Indian! Whoo!



I came in to look at the couch and all of a sudden I said,

"Holy cats, what have we got here!" Here's a great big

audience out there, you see, and here's this stage and so

on. And I thought, "There's something wrong here. There's

something just a little bit wrong."



So I sat down and I found out that she had been in

psychotherapy for a little while and all of a sudden said,

"Well, they want a show, I'll give them a show!" So I just

turned up this precLear up to eighteen dozen decibels and

let her scream. I turned her up to high C and then up into

supersonic and kicked the windows out of the back of the

theater practically.



The cop in the foyer and the ushers and everybody who was

anybody around the theater at all, they were coming in and

they were standing there in the aisles just blanched-faced,

looking at this proposition, you see. Because they never

knew that a human voice could be this loud. There's

incidents almost in any bank, in any case, that you can

really start turning them up. You talk about release of

affect, she was getting a release of affect, all right.



And I ran her offstage and they finished running out the

incident offstage that this preclear had been - that I'd run

her into. It was getting down to a point where she was only

screaming mildly, so I kicked the couch off the stage and

finished the lecture.



Well, the four psychiatrists - three of the four

psychiatrists were sitting in the front row. And I had had

them spotted when they came in, and I all of a sudden

realized they had something to do with this patient that I

had just run, because they'd come in sneering, and they

were sitting there looking pale. They were actually very

pale. They are very easily restimulated people.



The next night the audience was almost double; the preclear

was a little bit better too. She at least found out that

she could scream that loud without splitting a vocal cord.



So you can do all kinds of things in auditing, if you know

phenomena and you know the subject from beginning to end,

you can play on a human being like you can play on a toy

piano. That's all there is to that, there's nothing to it.



I always consider it rather unfair to use all this - any of

this material for anything except working preclears or

investigation. And so should you, by the way. You realize

that a large percentage of the people out in the public, if

you just told them to go into the engram necessary to

resolve the case and snapped your fingers, the fellow would

look at you rather blankly and all of a sudden probably

curl up in a ball. They will! They will do that,

particularly after this subject's reputation is way up the

line. They know you're an auditor. You start looking at

somebody rather fixedly and you say, "You know, without

much trouble a lot of people can be rolled up in a ball on

the floor." And the fellow says, "Y-y-y-yes! I kind of

doubt it," he says.



"Well, it's like this," and as you start to raise your

hand, he'll roll up in a ball on the floor. That would be

shortening the technique. 



Now, the phenomena in which you're interested in auditing is 

very simple phenomena - thought, emotion and effort as they 

are recorded on facsimiles. You're interested in the fact that 

a facsimile can be run from the beginning of it through to

the end of it, and that the preclear can go from the

beginning of it through to the end of it again. And, by the

way, that's phenomenal. That's strange that anybody could

do that, but they can do that. And you as an auditor sort

of sit there as a watchdog and give him a hand. Maybe the

facsimile has gotten him bogged a little bit, but you plus

the preclear make it possible for him to run the facsimile

with ease.



You find that you walk twenty feet away, by the way

(talking of another phenomenon) - you walk twenty feet away

from the preclear and his ability to run the incident will

drop. Sometimes drop enough so he can't run it. Sometimes

he can keep right on running it but not quite as well.



Now, some auditors, by the way, who know the subject very,

very well, can run these facsimiles from beginning to end

themselves. But that's not the same thing as your psycho

who goes around out of valence running engrams on himself.

You'll find psychos who will do this.



You start auditing them, all of a sudden they'll pick up a

circuit and they'll jump in there with that circuit,  and

they are always out of valence. And they swing just a little 

bit out of valence and start auditing themselves - only that's 

themselves, see! Somebody else. And they run themselves through 

the incidents and they experience the somatics and so on.



What are they doing! They go into the valence of somebody

trying to hurt them. This valence has the capability of

hurting them, so they go right on hurting themselves, and

this type of self-auditing is merely self-punishment; it's

a sort of a masochistic practice. You'll find people do

this. You'll find they'll do this. Doesn't do very much

good.



But there's no reason why a fellow in valence can't run all

the engrams he wants to on himself. They're his files. He

can only fail to run them when he is convinced they don't

belong to him as files. He's assigned their cause to

somebody else.



All right. Those facsimiles contain fifty perceptics, and

they are all perceptions of the physical universe. They

contain sound, taste, smell, sight,  hearing,  thermal, 

motion - these are perceptions. There's over fifty of them.

They contain the conclusion of the individual, his

evaluations, his postulates - and those are important parts

of them. And the whole thing sets up into a composite of

thought, emotion and effort. And that's what you're

running.



Now, you run through thought, emotion and effort - any

incident which contains thought, emotion and effort - and if

you run it through and through and through and through, all

of a sudden its thought, emotion and effort are gone. It's

a blank piece of track - it's a blank incident. Before it

goes, however, you have to turn it up to its highest

possible level of affinity, communication and reality. On

its highest possible level, you turn up like that, and

after that it blows and doesn't bother you anymore. It's

quite fascinating that this happens, but that's about all

the phenomena you need to know - the only way you have to

run it.



It's true, for instance, that he can strike a phrase in an

incident of somebody saying, "Stay down," and he'll stay

down. In other words, the facsimile will give him the idea

that he's still in it. But your preclear will only do this

if he's pretty low on the Tone Scale. That is what is known

as a holder; and there's bouncers and holders and groupers.

"It all happens at once" will actually operate as a grouper

occurring in a heavy incident, and seem to bring other

incidents down on it as an illusion. But you don't have to

know about that.



You can audit without knowing anything about the effect of

laneguage on an engram because it's much more important to

get the effort out and get the emotion out and get the

person's own postulates out than to get out what's said to

him.



In order of importance - in order of importance, the things

to get out of an engram are thought, meaning the person's

own thoughts, evaluations, postulates, conclusions;

emotion, the person's own emotion; and the effort and

counter-Effort; and the inhibitors of affinity, reality and

communication; counter-thought, as the final swing. You can

also take out of it counter-emotion,



Now, that is the order of importance but it is not the

order used in reducing a facsimile. The order of reducing a

facsimile where you use these various items and where you

address these various items of the facsimile, is a

different order. What I have just given you there is the

order of value, the important things in the incident. And

the first of importance is thought: the own postulates and

self-determinism of the individual. 



[At this point there is a gap in the original recording.] 



The order in which these various things come up out of a 

facsimile is not completely constant. In other words, I can 

give you the order of importance with ease, but the order 

that they will appear out of the facsimile while you're 

auditing the preclear is not a constant order. It will vary, 

not only from incident to incident but it will vary from 

preclear to preclear.



Now, there are preclears that when you set them up at the

beginning of an incident will simply sail straight through,

pick up everything in it and come out at the other

end - whew! like that. You run them through it a few times

and it's gone, and you have not had to ask them for a

single thing.



There are preclears that will run through it and will get

everything out of it but the effort. They will get a shadow

of the effort when they get the pain. They will pick up the

pains out of it without picking up the efforts and

counter-efforts which create the pain. Because you see,

pain is not a separate perceptic. Pain is simply the impact

of counter-effort and effort. And when it's too much

impact, you get too much randomity, and that too much

randomity is pain.



When these two things come together, the immovable body and

the irresistihle force - impact - why, the result is

registered as pain.



So that they will get these high points of pain. They'll

just get the pain and they'll run through and they'll

consider that they've run the incident.



Actually, in addition to that pain is their effort and the

countereffort, and the incident cannot be considered to be

erased until the effort and counter-effort is out of it. So

you want to watch that. Now the very sticky sort of a case

may start running nothing but effort, and all you can get

off of this case is really just some effort and some

counter-effort.



And you fool around with effort and counter-effort and

effort and counter-effort, and all of a sudden some emotion

appears out of it, and so you run the emotion. And after

you've run the emotion for a while and run the emotional

curves particularly, all of a sudden here come the

postulates. Because what the preclear thought himself is

important, far more important than what was said to him or

what someone else thought about it.



Now therefore, the usual order of affairs of running

preclears is you're liable to get some pain and some effort

and some counter-effort, and then you're liable to get some

emotion and then you'll get some postulates and

conclusions.



That is, maybe the first run through - maybe you'll get

nothing but a little effort; and maybe the next run

through, why, you'll get some effort and counter-effort;

and the next run through you'll get a little bit of

emotion; and the next run through, you - why, he gets some

more emotion. And then the emotion becomes very plain and

then all of a sudden postulates start to fly out of this.

And about the fifth run through, you start to get the

postulates out of it. That's quite ordinary as an order.



But in many cases all you'll find there, when you run it

through the first time, is emotion - no postulates, no 

intentions, nothing - just nothing but emotions. And you

run them through from beginning to end, and you'll find

they're running nothing but emotion. And out of this

emotion may fly postulates, or out of this emotion may fly

effort. It may go either way, because on either side of

emotion - above emotion you have thought and below emotion

you have effort. So you just have to reduce this as it

comes up.



Then you will find that your preclear doesn't have a very

good evaluation of what he's doing. He has a very poor

evaluation of what he's trying to do. And he'll start

floundering through and Lord knows what he isn't running.



You take somebody that's been through seven, eight, ten

years of psychoanalysis - been psychoanalyzed four

times a week for ten years -   Who has - he's probably a 

pretty sick boy He has nearly every incident in the bank 

stirred up. In other words, this fellow's all piled up with 

facsimiles and he hasn't - isn't able to make anything out 

of them. And he tries to run one incident and he's into 

another incident. And all this time you may think he's 

running a facsimile, but actually all he's doing is running 

some kind of a concept of what his facsimile was evaluated 

to be by somebody else. He's not running effort, he's not 

running thought, he's not running emotion. He's sitting way 

up in present time or back on the track someplace taking a 

long telescopic view of something.



The auditor who does not know what his preclear is running

is in a very bad condition because preclears can run the

whole thing out of a vague memory of what somebody told

them, and the auditor may think that he's running the

incident. You get the idea! But if you just ask the

preclear, "Now, how are you getting this!" And the preclear

describes, "Well, uhm, I'm - I'm getting it all right."

"Well, what are you getting!" "Well, it's just like my

mother said." "Well, all right. What did your mother say!"

"Well, I remember now that she said so-and-so~" "What are

you running in the incident!" "Well, it's what she said, of

course! What else could I be running!" You're dealing with

somebody who can only do what somebody else told them they

could do, you see! You're running somebody with Facsimile

One in full bloom, by the way.



Well, that's a very interesting case! And you've got to do

some light Lock Scanning and a few other things. You've got

to do some indoctrination on this person. And by the way,

if you do meet somebody who has been psychoanalyzed, take

some Lock Scanning and wipe out the psychoanalysis. It only

takes a few hours at the outside. Sometimes you can do it

in ten or fifteen minutes I pride myself in being able to

knock out five years of psychoanalysis in five minutes, and

I ...



Oh, it's wonderful. I had one fellow one time that had been

treated by psychoanalysis for ulcers for a long time. And

he'd finally learned to live with them, and if he was very

careful and he didn't get off base in any way, why, he just

felt fine. And he sort of talked this way, as though he

were just on the verge of falling off a cliff or as though

he were walking a girder a hundred feet in the air or

something. And so I said, "Well, when did your analyst

first tell you you were cured!" "Ohhh," he said, "I don't

recall if he - yeah, he did tell me I was cured. Let me

see..." "Where was he sitting?"



"Well, he was sitting at his desk - no he wasn't! He was

standing out in the hall when he told me that. And I was

standing there, and he says, 'Now,' he said, 'you'll just

have to learn to live with it.' That's right. That's what

he said. 'Just have to learn to live with it.' And 'Handle

yourself carefully and be careful of what you eat, and

remember to live for the moment, don't try to plan into the

future.' " And urp! - his ulcers were right back.



What it was, was a hypnotic cut-off, really. He had gone

into rapport with the analyst and the analyst had shut off

the ulcers with a command. And all I had to do was get him

to recall the moment it was shut off with a command, and of

course, the ulcers came back on instantly.



So he sat there and was very sick and he writhed and so

forth. And I says, "Well, what happened to the

psychoanalysis! It only cost you fifteen thousand dollars."



I lock-scanned him over all the times he had thought to

himself that he was going to be sick. And we lock-scanned

all of this, and he came out of it, and his ulcers didn't

bother him. And it took an hour or something like that. Do

you get the idea of the impact and power of your

techniques?



By the way, I'm not laughing at the psychoanalysts. I

sympathize with the boys. The moment they departed

completely from Freud and said that Freud was no good, they

ceased to do very much.



And Freud and Breuer, by the way, with their catharsis

treatment were not doing what modern psychoanalysis is

doing. Freud and Breuer were doing quite something else.

All right. They spent a lot of time, by the way, and Freud

spent a lot of time, trying to explain how he was doing

it - he never succeeded. Which makes people suspicious of

one-man therapies. They think they fall under terms of

faith healing.



All right. So apprise yourself of this preclear

film-storage bank. Find out who else has been handling it

and find out how he customarily handles it. And for

heaven's sakes find out how he's handling it when he's on

the couch, because you may ask him, "Now, let's run some

postulates out of this," and you think he knows what

postulates are, but your code system has broken down. You

haven't explained to him what you mean by postulates, and

so you will fail in trying to run postulates. Instead of

this, he's running back the time he took geometry or

something. He thinks that's what you mean.



And when you say, "Run effort," why, he knows what you mean

by effort - that's emotion. And when you say, "Now, run the

emotion off of this," he says, "There's no emotion on it

and there's just apathy," And of course apathy is emotion.

So is determinism, by the way; these are emotions.



Tell him to run the emotion off of this and he says, "There

is no emotion here."



"Well, can you get the feeling of having to endure!" (If he's 

very low toned.) And "Sure, I can get the feeling of having 

to endure." Well, run the feeling of enduring off of the 

incident and you've got the first emotion. You get the idea!



If he'll run through a feeling on the incident and you ask

him for a feeling or how he feels about it, you will very

often get something that he doesn't bother to articulate,

but you'll be getting the thing that's supposed to come off

the facsimile. Get the idea!



You don't have to get too technical with him, but a good

way to indoctrinate him is to hand him a chair and say,

"Pick that up with your right hand," and he does. Then you

take the chair and you say, "All right." Take it away from

him and you say, "All right. Run through that." And he

says, "What do you mean, run through that!" "Well, go back

to the moment you picked up the chair and heft it again.

No, no, don't reach for the chair. Just heft it again as

though you were imagining it was happening," or something,

you know.



So he does, and "Do that now until you get the weight of

the chair in your hand." "Well, yeah! Yeah, I can do that."

"All right. That's effort Now run it through three or four

times." He does. And "You see, the effort is going out of

the incident. That's right, that's right.  Well, that's

reducing effort." "Oh! Is that what you're talking

about! Well, that's fine." Then if you hit him on the

shoulder, slap him on the shoulder or something like that

and say, "Now, that's a counter effort. Now lets go

back through it again and run out that effort of the

impact against the shoulder."



Mmm. He maybe runs his own effort to resist the impact. You

can tell if he's doing this. And you say, "Now, get just

the force hitting your shoulder, not your shoulder's force

hitting back at the hand." And he works at this and works

at this and you say, "You know, it's the effort of the

atmosphere or the environment. It's the atmosphere or

environment's push against you, that's what we're looking 

for," "Oh, is that what it is! Yeah, I can get that."



Now, you've got his effort and you've got counter-effort

differentiated for him. Now you say, "All right now, let's

run an emotional curve."



"Well, how do you run an emotional curve!"



"Well, can you pick up a time when you felt happy and

somebody said something to you and you felt sad! Can you

pick up that!" 



"Uh-uh. "



"Well, can you pick up the Last time you felt good and

somebody told you you shouldn't!" "Oh, yeah, yeah, my

wife." "Oh, all right. All right. Pick up the last time

this happened." "Well, I can't remember it."



"Well, feel as you would feel just before she said

something and then feel how you would feel after she said

something." 



"Okay. " 



"Now, feel just before. You got that feeling!" 



"Yeah," he says. "Yeah, I got that." 



"All right. Now get the feeling just after." And he sort 

of slumps. 



He says, "All right, I got that feeling." 



"Now get those two feelings, one after the other, one after 

the other: the fairly cheerful one and then the sad one."



"Now, see if you can get the feeling of dropping down

through several emotions to get to the sad one.

"

"Yarms-yep-yea-yea-yep. Oh, yeah! I got that. Yeah! I got

that. Yeah." All right. He's run an emotional curve. And by

the way, if you make him run this several times, he's going

to wind up at the beginning of a service facsimile lock.

He'll wind up in a heavy incident if you don't watch it,

because this emotional curve precedes all heavy incidents.

Now, that's an emotional curve.



You say, "Now we're going to let you ..." - if he's having

awful time feeling emotion, as many people do have - you

say, "Now, we're going to feel one emotion. Have you ever

felt afraid? Do you remember a time when you felt afraid?

Can you remember a time when you felt grief?" You can

exercise him on these that are the tough ones first. He

can't feel these. All right. Maybe he can - that's fine, but

let's say he can't.



"Now, can you remember a time when you felt determined

about something?" "Mm-hm. Yeah, yeah. I feel like that all

the time." 



"Well, experience that." 



"Okay" he says, "I'm experiencing it right now" 



"Okay. That's an emotion."



"Oh!" he says, "Is that an emotion! Well, all right, I feel

that. I feel that all the time."



"Well, let's feel that up and down the track a few times. I

mean, let's feel it in various situations. Let's

reexperience this."



And all of a sudden, we're right on the chain - central

aberrative chain: his feeling of determination which is

continually blunted. And he'll suddenly start hitting not

just the determination, but he'll hit the blunting and his

drop in tone. You get him to run this as an emotional

curve.



Or maybe the preclear is a bit in apathy and you say, "Run

an emotion." And he says, "I can't run an emotion," 



"Well, run the feeling of apathy."



"I can't run the feeling of apathy." (By the way, that's

all he feels all the time.)



You say, "Run the feeling of enduring. Feel how you feel

when you have to endure something." 



"(sigh) Okay." 



"All right. That's an emotion," 



"Oh, is that an emotion! Oh, I feel like that all the time." 



"Well, let's just run it for a while," and sure enough, you're 

right into the central computation on the case.



Now, you can make them feel shame. Not shame for

themselves, but if you pointed out "Have you ever been with

somebody else and you felt shame for them when they didn't

feel it?"



And they'll say, "Oh yes. That's my Aunt Tibia," or

something. "Yeah, I can remember a lot of those." And they

kind of color and blush and squirm a little bit. "Yeah,

that's when she bawls out waitresses. Heh,"



And you say, "All right. Now, let's feel this up and down

the bank several times," and sure enough, you pick a lot of

emotion off the case. And that's emotion, and that's very

valid stuff to get off of a case.



All right. This indoctrination should include what you mean

by a facsimile. And you can say a facsimile is just a - the

picture you took of what was happening. And the guy says,

"Well, I never thought of it that way before." "Well, try

and get the picture of you sitting at the breakfast table

or sitting here or there doing something." "Well, I don't

know. Well, I got a picture I see all the time," he says.

"Was that the only picture you got?"



"Yeah. Yeah, that's the only picture I got. I - that's - 

that's it. Yeah. I never thought about it before, but you 

know, I - I - I got this picture all the time. I - I see 

it all the time. It's a - it's a picture of my dog."  



"Oh", you say  "When did the dog die?" 



And the fellow says, "Why ... That's right, the dog did die."



You say, "Well, just - let's run the feeling of regret over 

it."



"Do what?"



And you say, "Well, just look at the picture and feel

regret. And feel regret over it a couple of times." 



And the fellow says, "Yeah, I did and it went away."



"Well, feel regret across it a couple of more times." 



"Yipe!"



There's the dog busy dying. He'll probably blow a grief

charge, something of this sort. Because people retain

pictures which are sad pictures which they regret because

they're trying to work the incident over again, you see?

And so, you have opened a case which is practically

unopenable.



And then there's the case to end all cases - and now we're

getting into tougher and tougher cases that I've been

talking about this stuff - the case which is completely

blank from one end of the track to the other, and it's all

black and there are no pictures of any kind. And they can't

feel an effort and they can't feel a counter-effort and

they can't feel an emotion, but they can tell you about the

time the Empire State fell on them because they know the

Empire State did fall on them, or something like this.



Whee! You can work as an auditor and sweat and slave and

squirm and try to do something about this case, because

this case is - maybe you can't get them to run anything.



Yes, you can. Yes, you can. There's something that case can

run. This comes under the heading of cause and effect,

regret and blame. The action of regretting something is the

action of trying to get it undone. Regretting means "I wish

I could do it all over again. I wish it had not happened.

Meaning, the best way to dispose of this incident is to get

ahead of it, and go before it so that it didn't happen. And

if you simply run the incident backwards, from the end to

the beginning - running all actions backwards - you take the

regret off of it. You run the incident backwards.



These are just strips of film, by the way. They go

backwards or forwards; you can run them either way. People

are accustomed to living life by running the film forwards. 

The film runs forward through life all the time, so they 

think their film can only run forward. This isn't true. It's 

just film. They can turn around and run it backwards, too.



And when they run it backwards, the regret and the feeling

of regret will come off of it. This is a quite handy thing

to know, because most of your preclears are stuck just

before some incident which they are deeply regretting. And

if they have a picture of the incident, they're blaming

themselves for it. They say, "I am the cause of this. I

regret it, therefore I don't dare act about anything, and

I'd better stay right here, just ahead of this incident."



So there's that incident in restimulation. You say, "Run it

backwards a few times." The picture goes. The incident will

blow and you can get rid of it and get on to something

else.



Now, when the person has no picture of any kind whatsoever,

it means that they are assigning cause to everything and

everybody else in the universe but themselves. You see, a

fellow shouldn't either blame himself or blame others.

Blaming is just assigning cause. So he blames the whole

universe around him but never anything else. He shouldn't

be blaming himself as an alternative to this, by the way.

He just should be able to accept the fact that he can cause

things. He isn't doing this.



All right. His track will be blank. Why! Because, simply,

he has disowned the physical universe. He say, "I didn't

cause it and it isn't my fault, and it was other people's

fault, and I am no cause, and I had no part of it. I am

guiltless; I'm not to blame." So he says, "I can't handle

my own facsimiles," in the same breath.



It's other people's causes. Other people cause - so other

people cause my facsimiles, too. You get how that would be?



The facsimiles are of the physical universe which he has

disowned, so he's also disowned the facsimiles as well as

the physical universe. He disowns the picture with the

actuality, and therefore you ask him to run something and

of course he can't because it doesn't belong to him. He

can't handle it. It's not his fault. And you get somebody

with a completely black track with absolutely nothing on it

at all.



You can get things onto that track and get incidents on it

by running "blaming others." Just have him scan "blaming

others" through incident after incident and the first thing

you know, he'll start to get some concept of pictures and

reality on it.



Of course the reason why the individual is completely occluded 

is because he's stuck in the middle of a black incident. And

visio on Facsimile One is black. Blackness. And visio in

those things we used to run and don't any more - prenatals - 

is all black. And, as a consequence, the individual is stuck 

or held in an incident.



But let's reverse it around. He is, after all,

self-determined, so to some degree he is holding a

facsimile in front of him which has a black visio. And

instead of looking at other facsimiles, he's trying to look

through this facsimile at other facsimiles. And of course he

can't see them. He's doing all of his thinking beyond this

facsimile which he's trying to think in and act in and be

in all the time. So he's being and acting and working in

this one facsimile while these other facsimiles parade on

by.



This doesn't mean that all of his facsimiles are black now.

It means that when you get rid of this black visio

facsimile, and when you knock that out, he is no longer

having to regard life through that exclusively, so he sees,

feels and hears his regular facsimiles. In other words, the

"I," the individual himself, has recorded these facsimiles.

These facsimiles are in existence. It is just whether or

not he chooses to try to get to the other facsimiles he has

through a facsimile he can't see through or hear through.



In other words, he has a facsimile blocking off his

facsimiles. He's holding on to one through regret, blame or

pain, or something of the sort, so solidly that he can't

see, feel or hear any of the other facsimiles. And this,

also, is emotion.



A case is determined in its position on a Tone Scale by the

tone of the moment in the facsimile which the case is

holding all the time.



Now, let's take a - just take a facsimile which the patient

has - the preclear has continually. He holds this facsimile

before him all the time. Where is he located in the

facsimile! Well, this should be of great interest to you.

You think of cases normally as having all their facsimiles

in apathy if they're in apathy. No. There's an apathy

underlying all the facsimiles taken since he came into

apathy. But if you knock out that basic facsimile, the

others turn up with a different tone value. You understand

how that is?



So here is an individual going along consciously [marking

on blackboard] and all of a sudden goes unconscious. At the

deepest point of the unconsciousness - in the center of it,

the deepest part of the swing - the person is in apathy. He's

almost dead. On the Tone Scale he's dropped down to 0.1.

He's unconscious; he's almost dead. But there's still 0.1

between him and death, by the way, so he's not completely

gone. Up here, [marking on blackboard] up here he was angry

when he went into this incident. He was trying to hold on,

he was trying to make them stop. So his tone, the tone of

this point, is anger.



Over here, let us say, [marking on blackboard] as well as

here, here and here on the incident, are points of fear.

He's become very afraid all of a sudden.



He was angry. Now, he's found out his anger didn't work, so

he drops down Tone Scale - although he's going unconscious

all this time - he becomes afraid, and his fear brings him

down to this point.



Now, a little bit lower than this in it, he's actually in

grief there. And he's in grief there as he comes up out of

it again.



Now, there's effort and counter-effort at each one of these

points, and there's also postulates at each one of these

points. And his life has summed up in such a way that he's

holding on to this unconsciousness facsimile at one of

these points on the dip: he's either holding on to it at

anger, he's holding on to it at fear, at grief, at apathy.

One of these points he's holding on to it, and that

determines his chronic tone. See how this would be? Now, he

can vary a little bit from that chronic tone, but not much

if the facsimile is really strong.



Facsimile One has an enormous variability of emotion

throughout the thing, and it all depends on where the

individual was chronically hung up in it, what his tone

was.



If you can get him jarred loose from that point to a higher

point, he will run as an entirely different case. You

follow this? Because it's quite important for you to

realize that it isn't something physiological or it isn't

something wrong with the guy's theta that puts him into a

low tone - nor it isn't a quantity proposition. It

isn't - doesn't mean he is in a low tone because all the

incidents of his existence are lowtoned incidents.



No. There's one that is - one point. The first point on the

track - that is, the first point where this individual is

holding on to a low-toned facsimile - is the first thing

that determines this low tone. And as that thing is

restimulated, that is, as he uses it more and more and more

and more and more, he more and more chronically becomes

this tone until you, as an auditor, comes along - come along

and knock him out of it.



You knock him out of it, you'll change his tone. And you

can change his tone lower or higher at will, particularly

when you're addressing Facsimile One. You can move him all

over the Tone Scale in Facsimile One, just by moving him at

different points of the incident, different levels of

unconsciousness, which are different points of emotion

through different postulates in it. He looks like a roily

coaster if you graphed him on a Tone Scale - up, down, all

over. There's high manics. There's hate, there's fear,

there's terror, there's confusion, there's apathy, there's

cowardice, there's braveness - there's everything on that

thing.



Because the people they were doing it to, namely you, were

very volatile, volatile in their emotions, and so they

really responded on this one.



All right. This then gives you some idea of what you're

trying to take out of an incident. If you have a preclear

that's very, very low on the Tone Scale, it may be possible

just for you by shifting him a little bit in Facsimile One,

to find yourself operating a fairly high-toned

preclear - just as easy as that.



If he's in apathy and you want to bring him up the Tone

Scale a bit, just lighten up the point he's sitting on.

It's an apathy point. Make him scan times he felt apathetic

and you'll get all the locks off and all of a sudden the

basic apathy incident will show up. Run him through the

basic apathy incident, make him experience the feeling of

apathy, and he'll start coming up the Tone Scale. That's

how you resolve it.



Very often you will find a case is too spooky, too low on

the Tone Scale to work with heavy auditing - that is, work

heavily through heavy incidents. In that case, you work

them with the handbook, you escort them very carefully, you

work with them.



If they're psychotic, you use the ten basic steps which

appear in the handbook and tell you how to audit

psychotics. But we're assuming the bulk of your people will

not be that low on the Tone Scale. You have no business

fooling with psychotics. Not that you can't handle them, but

somebody had better take that up whose work will lie

definitely in that field. And there's nothing wrong with

it, you can handle psychotics, but it's a rather thankless

task for a little while. And what I'm trying to encourage

you to do is get out there and improve the able up to such

a point the whole tone of society will kick up the line,

and they'll take care of their psychotics. Working on

psychotics is not a good road for you to take at the

moment.



Therefore, you take low-toned preclears, put them on a

handbook and let them work on the handbook. Even have

somebody else read the handbook to them, do various things

in order to bring them up the Tone Scale. And you'll get

them up the Tone Scale a ways and then, wham! - you should be

able to carry them on through the remaining heavy incident

which you have to audit in order to clear the case.



(end of lecture)



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