From squirrel@echelon.alias.net Fri Apr 23 16:20:08 1999
Path: newscene.newscene.com!newscene!novia!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.wli.net!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!news.alt.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news
Date: 23 Apr 1999 23:20:08 -0000
Subject: FZ BIBLE 9/10 HCL TAPES PART 2 (1952)
Newsgroups: 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: <d87b4beef357e935c3ed783a9c2a936d@anonymous.poster>
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Lines: 715
Xref: newscene alt.clearing.technology:79199

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

FZ BIBLE 9/10 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-15 TRAINING AUDITORS: THE ANATOMY OF FAC ONE

(In R&D 10 as TRAINING AUDITORS)

(28 minutes)

(rerecorded by Flag, 1974, "due to an incompletely recorded
master, this recording ends abruptly")

A lecture given on 9 March 1952


If you were to take a person you were training as an
auditor at a moment before they had put their hands on a
single case, you were to cross-question this person with
the relationship to how he felt, you would probably discover
that he had a certain antipathy toward doing anything else 
about another mind.

The mind, after all, has been granted supernatural tendencies, 
it back through all of his lives has been very definitely
connected with the supernatural, He has many things against
touching the mind of somebody else. Quite in addition to
that, Service Facsimile One, plus its overt acts, 
practically prohibits touching somebody else's  mind,
Service Facsimile One says, "Touch them," And then its
overt acts finally pile up and says, "Don't touch anybody
else's mind."

Well, this is something which you as a - an instructor
would have to overcome, You would have to demonstrate to 
this student that it was possible for him to do something 
to somebody else's mind without himself blowing up or 
inverting or having somebody come along and issue him a 
summons to appear before the great temple priest or 
something of the sort.

Now, it is perfectly true that a person beginning to audit
is subject to, to some degree, restimulation. It's not very
dangerous. Actually is overrated in the amount an auditor
becomes restimulated and gets somatics, But do you know, I
don't know of any auditors going off the pin because they
were auditing. So that theory and danger isn't there.

You'll find them superstitious to this degree: You will
find that when they audit somebody, they think if they
audit somebody, then they're going to have to take over the
facsimiles they're taking out of that other person. Well,
the way this really works out is quite simple.

The student starting to audit, or the auditor starting to
audit somebody else, suddenly clips some overt act of his
own and he thinks - at the moment, he fails to differeratiate, 
and he thinks he's actually rendering these pains to the 
preclear, and it merely turns on his motivator against 
himself. You see how that would be?

So he'd pick up the somatics the preclear is picking up
because anybody has literally billions and billions of
incidents which they can turn on, and so they would just
match up an incident. They'll say, "Look what I'm doing to
this preclear, I'm sorry I did to this preclear," and so
on. So he gets the somatics himself in an effort not to get
the preclear to get the somatics.

Actually if you want to play around with it, you can move
over into the body of the preclear. You can move the
preclear's body into yours. You can do all sorts of weird,
weird things that are quite valid, but you don't have to. 
And just routine auditing doesn't contain these things.

All right. The best way, I would say, to get over this would
be to demonstrate to your student, as an instructor, the 
existence of a facsimile and the storage of pain.  Remember 
you're probably dealing with somebody who has no indoctrination 
in the mind at all. Or if he does have any indoctrination, 
it has been in some other direction.

Let's take an indoctrination that a psychoanalyst has had.
He's had a pretty good medical background and so on, and he
still tends to treat with structure. He still tends to
dramatize overt acts against his patient. He evaluates.
There's one of the main differences. Your psychoanalyst, in
his attitude, evaluates for the preclear. He tries to own
the preclear. He tries to get the preclear, his patient, to
transfer to him. He wants to be boss instead of letting
this person free, whereas an auditor is trying to set this
preclear free - give him his own self-determinism back. See,
that's an entirely different viewpoint than your
psychoanalyst has.

Now, it's interesting to note that if your student is
grounded in some old-time psychotherapy, he will still tend
to try to translate everything which you tell him into the
terminology in which he was trained. This is something like
taking MERSIGS [Merchant ship signal flags] and translating
them into Japanese, and Japanese  - translating them back
into English, in order to get a signal through. You don't
need the Japanese as a step. If you could just translate it
straight through, just as what it is, Scientology, and the
application thereof, you find it much easier.

Your Jungian, your Adlerian, and your Freudian - classic
Freudian - are doing a wonderful thing. They have taken
Facsimile One without recognizing what it is - Freud did
this right out of the blue. He must have keyed in
Facsimile One in 1894, the second he started to work on
somebody else's mind and burst forth with his libido
theory. Because Facsimile One has a lot of sexual shut-off
in it; it has a lot to do with sex. And Lord, it's got a
censor in it - the censor that keeps you from doing anything
else. All of these various conflicts and complexes in it
are just set up as a routine.

In other words, he did have a map of Facsimile One, but he
was trying to say that Facsimile One is the human mind, and
it's not, The human mind doesn't operate that way;
Facsimile OIle operates that way.

So you'd have this trouble with a person grounded in
psychoanalysis. He would try to tell you all the time, as
you tried to instruct him, how this translated itself into
the censor, the libido, the thisa, the thata, and he'd
keep on restimulating for himself, and try to restimulate
for you, Facsimile One. That's why their people don't get
well. They come in and they have all this stuff pointed out
to them and they - just getting Facsimile One, Facsimile
One, Facsimile One - restimulate yourself, boy; restimulate
yourself, boy. This is the way to get well, this is the way
to get well. Restimulate yourself. They might as well be
standing there with a machine and cranking it.

So, training this student, it is absolutely necessary for
you as an instructor to demonstrate to him the existence of
a facsimile and the extreme simplicity of this facsimile - 
the very, very simple thing this facsimile is. And that's 
what you should do immediately and right off the bat.

The best way to do it is with an electropsychometer. Set
him down, put the cans in his hands. Pinch him - good and
hard so he can feel the pinch - and show him the needle of
the machine, Watch it dip the second he's pinched. He
watches that thing dip. And pinch him hard enough till it
dips. And then say, "All right, go back to the moment I was
pinching you" - well, he can do this easily. "Now run
through and feel again this pinch." He does and the machine
dips. Well, that's very, very peculiar - the machine dips.

"Now run through - run through your resistance to this
effort I'm putting into your arm. This effort I am putting
into your arm, run through your resistance to it." And
he'll watch the machine dip, dip, dip, dip. Many times
you'll have to go through it a lot more times than you'd
have to through a real incident. And shift his attention,
if you have to, to get that up, shift his attention to the
top of his shoulder, whereas you pinched him on the arm.
And get that effort. And get that effort to register on the
machine. All of a sudden, he says, "That's very strange.
The pinch that went into my arm was stored or recorded
somehow."

Now get his emotion as he was pinched, and you'll see that
there's a little emotional curve bob. Particularly - you
want to pay attention to this - do it suddenly. Pinch him
suddenly Just reach out suddenly and pinch him, without
telling him you're going to pinch him, and you've got a
nice emotional curve to show him on the machine.

Now, he knows he's got the somatic out, Now show him this
curve bobbing. Very often they'll run the somatic and the
curve. You see the effort - somatic is part of the effort.

Sometimes they'll just run the pain without running the
effort. But you direct them through on this, time after
time, and get their thoughts when they were pinched. And
then have them try to get some feeling of your emotion
while they were pinched. And they'll see all of this
registering on the machine, and all of a sudden they will
see the machine settled back to where it was before you did
this to them. And you see - "Now, you see, you recorded a
facsimile, and I rubbed it out. And it was on record."

Actually, as simple as this may seem to you, it is quite
revelatory to some people. It would knock a psychoanalyst
practically off of his chair. He would try to say, "Well
now, let's see, you got a delusion or a hallucination or
something of the sort that this was taking place,
and that hallucination deluded it?" or something of the
sort. He would not care to look at a real recording unless
you were to show him a picture and you were to say, "Now
look, that's a picture. It's got a house in it. And I take
this eraser and I erase the house. I've still got the sheet
of paper. Now, that's all we're doing. Simple. Nothing to
it. But let's not try to make it complicated, because it's
easy." All right, The next thing that you could do, still
showing him the machine, would show him that his thoughts
had recording value. You say, "Do you remember your
father?" The machine does a little bob, rather, "Did your
father ever punish you?" The machine does a bigger bob.
"Let's recall a time when your father punished you." The
machine does a big bob. "Now let's remember it, remember
it, remember it." Bing. All of a sudden the machine isn't
bobbing, and he is not bothered. And he realizes suddenly
he isn't quite as bothered about this.

Now, that's straight memory. That demonstrates that he can
be in present time without very - any close contact with
this facsimile and pick things out of it.

That's memory: picking things out of a facsimile which isn't 
even brought up.

Or, as in the case of being pinched in the arm, you can
take the euhole picture - the whole facsimile - and hold it
up and run it across him again. This demonstration will
demonstrate to him that this exists and that something
happens. You demonstrate  phenomena to him.

That's the first thing your student has to know. The
phenomena exists. And you show it to him with a psychometer
and with pinching him and a few other things - just the
basic phenomena.

All right. The next thing, if you're teaching him to audit,
is not to ask him to try his skill 100 percent on a
preclear the first time. Actually, he'll be scared to
death. This is something he mustn't touch. He's
superstitious about it. He has gained the idea that the
phenomena exists, You can even show him that past lives
exist by the machine behavior. You can account for various
things for him. But this still has not gotten across this
one bridge - he hasn't touched a preclear's mind yet.

Now, he expects the preclear to blow up or something
strange to happen if he does something to this mind. So
what you do is take a - old copy of Self Analysis or the
Handbook for Preclears, even better, and you put it in his
hands and you give him a preclear. And you make him read
this thing to the preclear, Make him make the preclear
recall these things. And give him a little indoctrination 
along in this line and his confidence will come up the line.

Then have him run what you might call emotional curves on
the preclear a little bit: feeling this emotion, feeling
that emotion, getting it here, getting it there. He'll find
out the emotional curve exists. And then you can assign to
him running a secondary.

Now the running of the secondary, as you know, is not very
complex, but many secondaries are badly shut down. You have
him run a secondary: have him go from the beginning to the
end, get the exact moment and all the perceptions on the
preclear when the preclear received some bad news, and run
those through to the end of the incident - maybe ten minutes
later, maybe an hour later or a day later - and keep running
that through, over and over and over and over. But
remembering that if it doesn't spill, it has overt acts
before it, so have him go find the overt act again. But
again, this is just emotional. Just emotion - that's all you
want out of these incidents. That is running a secondary.

You could even permit him to run an engram and validate for
himself, either in himself or on a preclear - particularly
on a preclear - the fact that things are recorded during
periods of unconsciousness.

Now, oddly enough, this is not hard to demonstrate. Your
psychologist, whenever he moved in on this science, tried
to give somebody a PDH and then run it out. And, of course,
the PDH would lie on... That is to say, he would drug him
and say things to him and so forth, and then say,
"Well - well, this - this science doesn't work, you see,
because we can't get it back."

Well, every time you PDH somebody, it's liable to lie
right on top of Facsimile One, and it's impossible to pull
the thing off. So therefore they say he can't record during
unconsciousness. Great.

Now, you see, it isn't necessary to do that. If you want to
prove this, just shut off somebody's blood flow. There's a
jugular vein here - their blood flowing on either side of
the esophagus. And you just press those with your thumb and
forefinger a little bit and the guy will get a little bit
dizzy. And then you say, "Run back through it again," Ask
the fellow, "Now, did you perceive anything in the room
while you were feeling that dizziness?"

He'll say, "No." Or "Yeah, I know everything that was going
on," One way or the other.

Run him through this little period of uncon- you don't have
to hurt him. He goes through it a few times, and all of a
sudden he becomes aware of the fact that there was an
automobile that went past when he did that, there was this
that went past, there was this or that that happened, the
sensation of him sitting on the chair. All of these things
were there. But to straight memory they were covered up.

Now, better than this, take him down the track to an
incident where he hurt himself - the preclear hurt himself.
And take him back to a time - maybe he hit his thumb with a
hammer. Crash! Well, obviously he knows everything that was
there. But after you've run him through it a few times, all
of a sudden the incident gets wider and wider and wider and
wider. There was more and more data concealed in that
hammer blow. And this demonstrates to him that effort and
emotion do cover up perceptions - effort and emotion cover
up perceptions. And that there was data buried in a moment
of unconsciousness, because there was a moment of
unconscious when he hit his finger with a hammer. You see?
So you can demonstrate this phenomena to him. Very simple.

If you want the student to get a further reality on this
subject, make him be masochistic to this extent: have him
take his right foot and stamp on his left toes. And then
take his left foot and stamp on his right toes. And then
run out the right foot only. Run out the right foot only.
And he will be able to see that his left foot keeps on
hurting, but his right foot isn't hurting now. That's a
very simple experiment, but it demonstrates to him that a
facsimile was what kept his right foot hurting, and it
demonstrates to him that you can do something about it. And
that that's what auditing does. These are little proofs,
easy ones.

But his first address to the other mind, as I say, ought to
be the handbook. Let him take it easy. He will get up to a
point where, if he hit a terror charge, he would run it out
instead of run away from it. Let him become accustomed to
his tools, little by little, each time gaining reality on
what he is doing.

He has to have subjective reality, furthermore. An auditor
who does not have subjective reality on this subject finds
it very difficult to understand what is happening to the
preclear. He can study until he is the best-read person in
Scientology, and he still will not be a good auditor if he
has never touched physical pain in himself, if he's never
experienced an emotion out of a facsimile. If he doesn't
have any reality on this, he is not a good auditor. And he
will actually cut down the preclear.

Now, I have seen somebody trained in an old psychotherapy
doing a jobs of auditing when auditing had never been done
on them, And I stress this "an old psychotherapy" for this
reason: there you're going to have the most trouble. A
medical doctor with a terrific, terrific fund of
information, with enormous backlog of skill, with obviously
a basic purpose of making people well, would apparently be
the most valuable student that you could get. And so he is
the most valuable student that you could get. But
unfortunately, when you try to train him, you're training
up against preconcept that structure monitors function,
not the reverse.

And you're going to have to scan him through practically
his whole medical education. Because he will do this to a
preclear: He will run the preclear to find some reality for
himself. And he'll keep asking the preclear, "Now, how do
you know? Are you sure this wasn't just this right hip's
calcification?" or something of the sort, And his unreality
to a preclear who is a bit foggy with anaten will knock the
preclear right straight on down the Tone Scale.

So when you're training a person who has been in
psychotherapy or in medicine, you take particular pains
with the establishment of subjective reality to that
auditor; otherwise you will be losing a potentially very
valuable auditor, because he'll be a bad auditor when he
ought to be a good one.

Now, you pay attention, then, to establishing subjective
reality in him, knocking out preconcepts, his old
postulates - not so much what he has been taught, but what
he himself concluded during his boyhood and during his
medical training with regard to the body. It doesn't take
much time to swamp this up. And he can then reevaluate an
enormous amount of data, which immediately becomes
available to Scientology and to his preclears.

There is one doctor in New York City who was taught
Straightwire. I taught him Straightwire. He learned it
crudely. He hobson-jobsoned it; that is to say - the reason I
use this word hobson-jobson is because when the British
soldier went to India he learned how to speak Hindu, or
something of the sort - at least he thought he did. And the
Hindus had a word they call - that sounded like hobsen-jobsen.
And so the British Tommy went in there and he said that
that word after that was Hobson-Jobson. That's what you
call hobson-jobsoning something.

You will find these people will hobson-jobson, They'll take
a word... All of a sudden you say, "Now, this machine
goes whirrr, whirr, whirr and bap, bap, bap, and this guy is
told that he will no longer be able to experience sexual
pleasure," or something of the sort.

And the psychotherapist is liable to say to himself - 
without telling you - he's liable to say, "Oh, yes,
yes In other words, that machine restimulated his libido
theory and gave him this concept." "Oh, no. The machine
installed the libido theory."

"Well, how did it install it? I mean, after all the human
mind works in this fashion and ..." You see, you'd be off
to the races immediately.

So you must be careful when you're training students to
know that they know what you're talking about. Don't leave
anything hanging up in the air with them.

All right. Now, all the training in the world is not going
to overcome a lack of this subjective reality. And all the
training in the world is - that's only education, after
all - is not going to make an optimum individual or a Clear.
Your best auditor is euay up the Tone Scale. He has been
completely swamped up himself. Then he can commit all the
"overt acts" he wants to against this preclear. In other
words, he can make him get well, and that might be an overt
act to the preclear, you see?

And he can do most anything in this. Furthermore, he can
think faster. And furthermore, he doesn't have any
difficulty with the realities of the thing, because his own
sense of reality is very, very high.

So any time you're training auditors, you better encourage
them, by this process of taking it a little bit at a time
and a little bit at a time and a little bit at a time, to
get their hands wet, you might say, and dirty up to the
wrist in other people's engrams. And get them to work on
each other and get your advanced students to work on the
earlier students up to a point - with good auditing - so that
you wind up with students who are cleared.

Now there's - you got all the tools, there aren't any bugs
left in this. There are no bygs left in it. There's
nothing left hangincg out. You've got the tools, you learn
the tools, you apply them with good reality, with good
confidence, well learned - you get Clears. All right, then
you've really got auditors. Then you've really got
auditors.

If you could, for instance, clear a medical doctor, you
would have somebody that could go around creating more
miracles in less time...

Now, as I was saying, this medical doctor in New York City
was doing very, very bad Straightwire. He was unable to
give more than about fifteen minutes, at the outside, to a
patient.

Patients come into their office just in streams, you see,
one after the other. And they have to do a short stopgap
something or other for them. The patient wants something
done for them; they're not going to stay around there for
hours and audit and be audited. One of the ways a doctor
can do this is have some auditors around to handle his
patients - but, beside the point.

This doctor was a specialist in Parkinson's disease. And
people would come in there with Parkinson's disease just
on assembly lines. And i this doctor knew enough about
Straightwire to knock out some maybes... And, by George,
he was turning off Parkinson's disease something like
three out of five.

And how much time was he giving on the thing? It was just
patient after patient. And he called me up one day and he
said, "Someday I'm going to learn some more about your
subject." He says, "It must be able to do better than
this," And I went over and talked to him for a little while
over in New York one day and found out that he was using
the lowest possible order of Straighnvire and was getting
results like this. Why?

He was a doctor; people went there to get well. He would
knock out a maybe; it gave them an excuse to get well.
Bang! So their Parkinson's disease would turn off. He was
completely unaware of how long it would stay turned off,
but, mind you, he'd never been able to get anybody turned
off on Parkinson's disease with regularity before. So he
was quite interested. But the odd part of it was, he was
taking it as routine. Nobody said to him, "Well, there's
times when this can't be done and times when it can be
done, and so forth." He just happened to come over one day
and heard a talk by me, and he said, "That's a very
interesting idea." And he went back to his office and went
to work and never talked to anybody else about it.

By the time he was talked to and told "Well, this can't be
any good," and "Really you should do all of this with a
globe of the world hanging as a pendant from the left
chandelier," or something - when he was told that "all this
other stuff ..." and "it was a modification of something 
else" - he had so much reality on it that he just looked 
at these people and he said, "You're crazy! This works," 
And went on collecting twenty-five dollars, twenty-five 
dollars, twenty-five dollars, twenty-five dollars. It was 
a wonderful business he was generating over there. I think 
he's still very, very much in business. I haven't heard 
from him from [for] ages. He never did learn any more about 
this subject than that.

You get the person out of the maybes, and then he gets
well. He went away with this thought firmly fixed in his
head. He didn't even know some good smart ways to get them
out of the maybes. He just sort Of said, "Are you in a
maybe?" and "What was the last time you felt indecisive?"

And the fellow said, "Well, I guess I was on the train
going in from Long Island," "And what were you doing?"
"Well, I was reading a paper." "What were you reading in
the paper?"

"Well, about a stock market crash. I remember the incident
very well. As a matter of fact, that was about four days
before I got sick," "Oh, yeah? Stock market crash. How did
that influence you? What did you have in the air at that
time?" so on.

And the guy says so-and-so and so-and-so. "And I didn't
trust my partner," "Well, has your partner worked out
since?" "Oh, he turned out to be an awful crook."

"Oh, well, then you found out that he was crooked and the
stock market crash was imminent and so forth, and this..."
And the doctor doesn't even know what the fellow's business
concern is, you see? And the fellow says, "Yeah?" and
laughs suddenly and stops shaking. Well, so he said, "This
is fine."

Now, you understand that if you give an auditor just the
conviction on one tool - like your Chart of Attitudes There
are auditors out all over the country now, they have the
Hundbook for Preclears. It gives them a chart of attitudes.
They're not even working overt acts with that chart, by the
way. They don't know about it, most of them. They're
working it as counter-attitude. "When was this done to
you?" And they take this chart and they take this book,
and they're giving a few hours this way and that. They're
using it. Sometimes they don't even give this book to the
preclear, They just work with those techniques.

And the next thing you know, you have a preclear who is way
up the Tone Scale, And they call these people swamped-up,
optimum, super, something of the sort, merely because they 
never saw anybody up that high before. It's somebody - like 
saying, "Look at that fellow standing up there on the Empire 
State Building." Look at him, clear up in the stratosphere!" 
Oh no, he's not in the stratosphere.

But what I'm telling you is that a broad, foggy, unreal
knowledge of this subject is nowhere near as valuable as
one scrap of real information which you have seen produce a
result. The techniques in the Handbook for Preclear will
produce that result.

If you were to take these students and train them to
deliver Straightwire processing - just straight memory on
all the attitudes in the charts as overt acts by themselves
against the other dynamics ... If you were just to teach
them to use this chart, to ask the questions column by
column, and you were to tell them - by the way, there's two
additional charts on that. There's two additional
columns - there's fourteen buttons, not twelve.

The top of the column is "win" and the bottom of it is
"lose." A preclear who's low on the Tone Scale can't
win - he won't win - and up at the top he will win. And the
next button: He's completely free at the top of the scale
and at the bottom he's completely restrained; he's dead. So
what you do is run "restraint" and "degrees of restraint."
When he's tried to put restraint on the world around him,
he has restrained himself. Now, you just run these, then,
as a Straightwire process.

If you trained a student to do nothing but that and sent
him out to the old soldiers' home to practice, he would
come back saying, "Well, what do you know, what do you
know. Gee! There's a couple old fellows out there in the
Spanish-American War, and one of them had lumbago so bad he
couldn't walk, and you know, I worked on him for about a
half an hour this morning, and he's walking!" Sure, we know
he's walking, It works.

But that is a lot better than to give him a whole bunch of
odds and ends of technique which he unclearly understands - 
willfully misunderstanding -  and he has no subjective
reality himself.

In other words, introduce the subject to him step by step
with all the reality which you can give him on the
subject - not by telling him he has to believe, because he
natively, inherently, is himself belief.

Not by telling him he has to have faith, because he
natively is faith, but by telling him that "Here is data,
phenomena which you can understand, which can be
understood, which is real. We're only asking you to find
out for yourself that it is real and then apply what you
know out of it is real to others and get results."

(Recording ends abruptly)

*******************



