 This is first hour, afternoon lecture, on December the 17th 
 following Dreadful Tuesday. 
 
 Now, some of you have accused me of operating in this... I mean, 
 of.. no.. some of you, just - I think, just one has mentioned it to me, "You
 of course are not giving these lectures with my organizational plan" - 
 that's been mentioned to me. And uh.. well, that's all right. And that has
 not been true up to this moment. What you got was the basic fundamentals you
 had read to you there the first 20 pages of the book which covered some of
 the old material and lined it up and showed how much of it we were still 
 using, and this material was followed by our newer theory. And that newer
 theory was merely, as I was showing you in the last lecture, a little bit
 higher up the cone than we'd been before, and evaluated the same data. And
 then this was followed by an interweaving of Tone Scale and Cycles of Action
 and Cycles of Action and the Tone Scale and Tone Scales and Cycles of 
 Action. And there was an awful lot about Space. There was an awful lot about
 Energy. And there was quite a bit following that on various techniques, one
 way or the other. And I talked to you about handling preclears, here and 
 there throughout these lectures. 
 
 But we built up the body of theory before I started to talk about
 Standard Operating Procedure. And then I started to talk about Standard 
 Operating Procedure and gave you Standard Operating Procedure and outlined
 Steps One, Two, Three, Four pretty well. And I outlined earlier Step. No.
 Five. 
 
 And I brought you now to a point where, theoretically, you could 
 operate simply by using this information. And so it has not been true that
 these lectures were completely disorganized until this minute. And now it
 happens to be true. 
 
 It happens to he completely true from here on. We haven't, really,
 any more data to tell you. Somewhere in the bulk of these last many hours of
 information, practically every datum that interrelates and makes up the 
 package which you need in order to understand and evaluate the human mind
 has been present, somewhere or other. And in your hands is SCIENTOLOGY 8 
 8008 and this gives a very rough, brief summary. And the only thing new 
 about it is the technique - the exact technique known as Spacation. And the
 exact technique known as Balancing. And we've given you Standard Operating
 Procedure Issue Five instead of Issue Three, as given in the book. And these
 techniques are outlined on mimeographed sheets which are in your hands. 
 
 So there's really.. there's really nothing more to know about the
 human mind, about the universe, about aesthetics, space opera.. past lives,
 other planets - you can read WHAT TO AUDIT if you want a disentanglement.
 Whether that's true or not, whether the material in it is exact or not is
 beside the point. That material is there not to tell a story, but to help an
 auditor solve a case. And it's told from that viewpoint and from that 
 viewpoint it's accurate. 
 
 It uh.. is also, by the way, probably to a large degree true. But I
 can't tell you exactly to this day exactly how this GE gets himself into 
 such an accuracy in building a carbon-oxygen engine; he becomes fixated on
 it. Or if the GE is really just a decayed thetan or another breed of cat. Or
 if there is such a thing as a thetan native to the MEST universe. I know 
 you're not. No preclear I ever processed was native to the MEST universe -
 not one. 
 
 -112- 

 But it's very possible that the GE and its ilk are. I don't know.
 Don't have to know either. Otherwise we would have taken large steps to find
 out. 
 
 And so now that you're full equipped and need nothing, not even 
 experience, to go on and produce all the results produceable, why, probably
 I ought to simply go over something that is very technical or uh.. uh.. show
 you that really you don't know after all and that uh.. when you do get 
 certain facts memorized you will become an authority and uh.. so on. I 
 should do that, but I'm not going to. 
 
 The fact of the matter is, is when you haven't seen any of these 
 techniques in operation, really in operation, beyond those few 
 demonstrations which I have given you in between breaks. And some preclear
 says so-and-so and so-and-so. I didn't give you too much of a demonstration
 when I did that. 
 
 So I think probably from here on, the best thing that I could do is
 to show you this stuff in action. And in so demonstrating 1t to you, give
 you some feel of how you go about it, because otherwise there might always
 remain a doubt in your mind about the fact that 'Hubbard's doing something
 else', and 'I'm probably not doing it according to Hoyle' or something. And
 uh.. it might have a different aspect entirely. There is that possibility.
 
 Now, therefore, the first thing that we ought to do is take a Step
 One and very briefly.tell you how to handle a Step One and then very briefly
 show you the Operation Step One, on somebody who is a Step One. 
 
 And then I ought to tell you a little bit more about Two and about
 Three and about Four and about Five. And we haven't got any Sixes. (We've 
 got several Eights.) Now we're not going to cover that technique. There's a
 special technique for these which we're still witholding and which we'll 
 never give up. 
 
 And uh.. therefore Step One is the first thing in order. I want.. I
 want you to understand this. You really do have all the theory and all the
 applications and the interweavings in the materials which I outlined to you.
 You really do have these things at this time. Don't think something new is
 going to slap you in the face. In other words, you can relax about this. 
 
 There's a lot of things on these tapes that you didn't hear; that I
 can guarantee, because that's always the case. 
 
 But that doesn't mean the data is not available to you because at 
 the very worst, if you were to move out to - well, let's really get out in
 the sticks. I mean, let.. let's.. let's get out - well. I don't know, I 
 heard that a human being went there once. Let's go to Wichita uh.. on this
 uh.. on this level and.. and you.. you were sitting out in Wichita and you..
 you didn't have these tapes and all of a sudden you were confronted with a
 preclear and you were told solemnly that this preclear had epiglootis, and
 you say, "I wonder how you solve epiglootis?" and you could get to worrying
 about this. Well, actually you have the methods of solving epiglootis in 
 these handouts and that textbook. Who cares who gave it a name? Who cares?
 Who cares what the symptoms are? I mean, just frankly that - who cares what
 the diagnosis is? 
 
 And besides, it is against the law to diagnose. There are 25 ills 
 that it's against the law to cure in California. You could go to prison for
 years for curing a case of arthritis. That's right - 25 ills - 25 ills; 
 they're just outside the realm of action. You didn't know that? There are 
 
 -113- 

 several states that nave those things. 
 
 You never want to advertize that you cure anything. You can tell 
 people you theta clear somebody or you can tell people that you will process 
 them, and this is simply to make the able more able. If they happen to have 
 epiglootis.. this isn't just covert hostility; this is the actual truth! If 
 they happen to have epiglootis and the epiglootis doesn't happen to be there 
 when you finish up what you were trying to do, that's their hard luck. 
 That's nobody else's hard luck. That's their hard luck. That's right! You're 
 not Interested in anything, really, but making the relatively able much more 
 able. You're interested in that and you're not interested in epiglootis. 
 You've got epiglootis - if you don't believe it, go out and find a case. And 
 how do you handle it? Step One, Step Two, Step - oh, he's a Step Two. Good. 
 Goal of the body? None. Goal for the thetan? Operating thetan. That's.. 
 that's a lot different than an ambulant body that doesn't have epiglootis. 
 That IS a lot different. 
 
 Somebody comes around to you and says, "Now, do you people believe..
 do you people believe that uh.. anybody should be permitted to operate upon 
 the mind? Hmmm-hmmmm?" - somebody that looks awfully official or somebody 
 who's trying to get you to make an incautious statement. Because I don't 
 believe that and you don't believe that. And the answer which I give them is 
 perfectly true and perfectly straightforward. I tell them, "Nobody who has 
 not been thoroughly educated in the field of the actual human mind has any 
 business whatsoever doing anything with it at all." That's with 
 thoroughness. Unless they REALLY have been educated in it.. unless they 
 REALLY KNOW the human mind, they shouldn't do anything with it. And that's 
 the stand we're stuck with. And they'll come along on the other side, and 
 they'll DDy, "But you train anybody." That isn't true. We don't train 
 anybody. 
 
 Liability on training at this time is terribly off. I mean, the 
 liability has lightened up enormously because of the techniques themselves. 
 And when we say an auditor is a theta clear, he's just going to have to gimp 
 along because of our time span and so forth, while we are here. But you'll 
 find out that there's no substitute for it, if you're an auditor. And there 
 isn't much time that you have to put in on it in order to accomplish it. If 
 you think you really have to put in a lot of time on it, you're just not 
 operating in the same reality that we should be operating in. --
 
 A Step One can actually be pushed up the line to a theta clear in 
 about six or eight hours - all the way up. And if you are taking longer than 
 that, you are just poking around, and that's all there is to that. You're 
 just poking. You're just wasting time some way or another if you take any 
 longer time than that. And that includes the various exercises comprising 
 Step One. 
 
 Now as the cases go on into the deeper steps, it requires more and 
 more time. But how much time is 'more time'? Well, if you were doing your 
 job well, accurately, and doing Standard Operating Procedure Issue Five, for 
 me to make a precise estimate for each case level would be folly indeed, 
 because it has the two variables: The case itself, which will vary in the 
 length of time in each Step; and the speed with which the auditor's willing 
 to audit. And these are two variables. 
 
 Rut believe me. If you spend more than 50 hours on a Five, you ought
 to have your head examined because I can kick a Five out by running the 
 dichotomy of Responsibility and No Responsibility - in 50 hours. And I've 
 done it. Just all the various ways you can say, "Do you want to be 
 responsible?"... "You don't want to be responsible" ... "The beautiful 
 
 -114- 

 sadness of being responsible" ... "The ugliness of being irresponsible" ...
 "The joy of being irresponsible" ... "The joy of being responsible" ... "The
 glee of being insane" ... "The horribleness of being insane." They just go
 on like this. Run it, run it, run it, run it, run it, run it, run it. 
 
 The guy wi11 wake up sooner or later and he'll say, "What? What do
 you mean.. do it in front of re body? I can't reach way down there!" 
 
 And you say "What's the matter?" 
 
 "Well, I'm.. I'm auditing this stuff up here in the corner of the 
 room." 
 And you'll say, "Now, wait a minute. How'd you get up there?" 
 "Oh, I've been up here for hours, didn't you know that?" 
 
 Now that's the truth of the matter. So, I know that a technique 
 exists which will do in a Five way back on the track. I mean, way back on 
 our developmental track. 
 
 So what's the next? We can then.. then rather safely estimate at a
 guess that if you spent 50 hours on a Five, you sure would have been loafing
 along the wayside, because you would have gotten there.. you would have 
 gotten there if you had just run dichotomies on Responsibility and all the
 various ways that can be run - because that could be run a lot of ways, see?
 You could start adding them up. 
 
 Oh, yes, yes. I remember something I wanted to talk to you about. I
 wanted to show you a wheel - a wheel. I'll give you an hour on that wheel.
 
 All right, in other words, the uh.. point we're making here is that
 you are wasting time, then, if you're going above 50 hours on a Five, at a
 guess or an estimate. So how much time does it take for an auditor to get in
 good shape? How much time does it take for an auditor to get up to operating
 thetan? 
 
 Well, let's say each one of you could afford 100 hours of auditing.
 That is relatively, maybe, five times as many as you should have if you are
 being well audited. Let's put the factor of five in there. And uh.. just 
 throw that in there and say it's 100 hours. Could you afford to spend 100 
 hours as an auditor on the couch? Boy, I'm sure afraid you could. Well, you
 could dig up 100 hours some place. You could put in three nights a week at a
 couple of hours a session. Well, what would happen if you put in three 
 nights a week at two hours a session? That adds up to six hours a week, 
 doesn't it? How long does that take to get to 100 hours? 6 and 2/3, is that
 right? Six and two thirds weeks - sixteen. I have to figure in arithmetic. I
 have an awful time with MEST arithmetic - just horrible, just terrible. 
 Sixteen weeks. Okay? That's very interesting. I have to completely change 
 reality to get a MEST arithmetical thing. 
 
 You see, MEST arithmetic doesn't happen to be real - I mean, happen
 to be actual. It's real. Fascinating. 
 
 You know if you put up a whole flock of apples, if you put up 100 
 apples and then you divide the apples by ten apples, you theoretically get
 ten piles of ten apples, don't you? Pile 100 apples and divide it by ten and
 you get ten apples. You can't do that. Why, you.. my whole beingness revolts
 against saying, "Ten into 100 apples gives you ten." Boy, that's really down
 tone scale! It's really diggin' it! 
 
 -115- 

 All right, regardless of that. Let's take a look, then, at how many 
 amours of auditing you as an auditor oughta have. If you were to put in, 
 let's say theoretically that figure was 16, if you were to put in 16 weeks 
 ~t a couple hours a night, three nights a week, it.. it.. it wouldn't cost 
 you a great deal of time. If you were interchanging this auditing with 
 another auditor who was about your level of action, why you ought to be up 
 there at operating thetan if you audited and co-audited with him, you would
 be putting in, then, 12 hours per week of auditing! You auditing six and 
 being audited six. 
 
 And now the best way to do this, however, is to have a triangular 
 team - not to have a two-team. Because they just 'flow' at one another. Uh..
 let's have three and let's have point A audit point B audits point C audits
 point A, and then their cases are all disrelated. And that.. that's easily a
 much more workable arrangement. 
 
 But we go on from that and we find out, then, that you're stable 
 enough so that you shouldn't require, after that, vast quantities of 
 auditing. You can go in and tackle a preclear and you have your own energy 
 level up to a point where you wouldn't have to apply yourself to swamping 
 yourself up. In other words, you're not doing the trick of crawling up three
 inches and failing back two, and so on. Maybe you are during those 16 weeks.
 
 And let's just kind of lay that down and wonder if we could spend 
 that much time on a case - that's yourself. Now the lower a person goes on 
 the steps, the less time he'll spend on his own case, until he starts to get
 down to the bottom and then he'll run himself automatically - that's 
 automaticity - that's final level. 
 
 Well all right. Let's suppose now you're out in the sticks - I.. I..
 I.. hope none of you have to go that deep into the mire and jungle as that 
 unmentionable place I just mentioned. But let's say you.. let's say you get
 to Bingamton, New York, and the nearest auditor who is a professional 
 auditor is Bungumton, Vermont. Well, you can't audit by mail very well. Now
 auditors will ask you this question, and so I'll answer it for you: Can you
 audit yourself up to theta clear? Well, I don't know how long it would take
 you. I.. I really don't know how long it would take you. And I don't know 
 how fouled up you would get or how flat you'd spin or anything, but it could
 be done with just using Standard Operating Procedure Issue Five. 
 
 You'll find yourself lower on the tone scale when you're self- 
 auditing.. I mean lower on the tone scale of steps, than another auditor 
 would find you, because you've got to set up a circuit to audit a circuit 
 and then audit both of those as a thetan and do some other complicated 
 things in order to do this. But if you were to sit down and do this, 
 theoretically you could then, attain theta clear in God knows how many hours
 - I don't know. Two hundred? Five hundred hours of self-auditing. Because 
 the liability of self-auditing has disappeared. You start self-auditing, 
 you're starting to agree with the MEST universe like mad, and you'll get 
 mixed up in flows. And the second you get mixed up in flows, you can go on 
 forever, and I do not believe it is is possible for a person... I have no 
 evidence - no evidence of any character that tells me that it is possible 
 for an auditor to self-audit himself or for an individual to self-audit or 
 self-process himself up scale - no evidence to this effect - on old 
 techniques. On techniques which existed up to three months ago. No evidence.
 
 But I had every evidence to believe that one who audited himself on 
 these flows and techniques of various conditions and running engrams - 
 particularly running engrams - would become slightly relieved about the area
 
 --
 
 -116- 
 

 around him, but his compulsion to audit himself would increase and increase
 and increase and finally go out of.. almost out of control. And I have lots
 of evidence in that direction that that took place and no evidence that 
 anything took place beneficially beyond deintensification of the effect of
 the environment upon the individual, with the consequence that if it were 
 maintained too long, a person would sort of fix himself on that rat race on
 and on and on and on. 
 
 And if you find somebody auditing himself on old techniques, audit
 him on new techniques and he will stop auditing himself. That's all the 
 solution we have about self-auditing, and that's because it's all we need. A
 person stops self-auditing when you run Standard Operating Procedure Issue
 Five on him. That's.. that's all there is to that. We won't care if he's 
 self-auditing; we're not even vaguely interested whether he is or not. It's
 where we find him on the steps and there.. where we spring him and what we
 do for him. That's all. 
 
 So, our answer, then, on anything up to three months ago - and as 
 far as you're concerned, up to these lectures because none of this material
 was at large - that self-auditing was impossible, underscore, exclamation 
 point. Unless you just took SELF ANALYSIS, old American edition, and used it
 or did HANDBOOK FOR PRECLEARS, self, and did it routine and then you could
 get an improvement because it's relatively light auditing - it's locks and
 so forth. I don't think you could even keep that up too long all by yourself
 without any.. this and that. I don't think you could keep that up 200 hours
 without uh.. getting into the other rat race. You start to obey flows, or 
 something of the sort. It would be very bad. 
 
 All right, then what's the answer to this then? Why are we all of a
 sudden able to say it may be possible for a person to audit himself? Well,
 that's because Standard Operating Procedure Issue Five opposes and disagrees
 with flows. So you don't start up the horrors of obeying energy and flows.
 And it's theoretically and untestedly possible to audit oneself to operating
 thetan - theoretically possible. Those tests which I have seen so far were
 in the direction of alleviating one's condition, and improving one's general
 health and ability. Doing mock-ups all by itself, by oneself, is 
 tremendously improving. 
 
 If a fellow were to have an automobile accident and find himself 
 sitting there with his.. all over with bruises and he were to audit out the
 engram of the automobile accident, he might get away with it - he NIGHT. If
 he were to audit the flows and effort of the automobile on himself, my 
 evidence is very straight that he would start himself down and would be a 
 little worse off than otherwise. If he audited it just as an engram, you see
 - different. But I mean, if he started using high-powered stuff like 8-80..
 oohh! Not good. He'd chop into that one and then he'd go into an earlier one
 and he'd find a past death and he'd be handling energy as itself and the 
 flows would start up and he's in a weakened condition. But he could sit 
 there and do mock-ups for maybe as little as 10 or 15 minutes and find 
 himself in a remarkably improved condition and probably with the engram 
 fl1pped out. Just do mock-ups. 
 
 Or, he could do a Spacation - just sit down and do a Spacation. Just
 bang-bang-bang - not pay any attention to the automobile accident. Find a 
 spot; exaggerate its motion and minimize its motion until it's suddenly 
 stopped. Hold it. Then, handle it; hold it; do two-dimensional space. Then
 take the two-dimensional space and make it resistive, unresistive. Get that
 solid and go right straight on through doing the rest of the exercises 
 contained in Spacation. If he just did those by rote: One, Two, Three, Four,
 Five, Six - did a Spacation, he probably wouldn't have an automobile engram
 
 -117- 

 sitting on top of him. He probably would be in most remarkably good 
 condition. 
 
 Or if he just did a mock-up series and he just says uh, "All right,
 now let's see, uh.. That was a Packard car. All right, let's take a Packard
 car and let's paint it red and put dolls in it and run it down an incline,
 or have it run up this other hill." 
 
 The first time he'd start this.. and now let's put the mock-up 
 behind him; and now let's turn the car green. Now let's turn it around and
 make it run wrong way to up the hill. Now let's put it down under the feet.
 Now let's have another car come down the other incline and - let's see - 
 have these two cars start to approach each other and then turn off and go
 the other way. Now let's have them start to approach each other and crash.
 Any way he wanted to put this together as mock-ups, as long as he was 
 adequately handling cars, he would clip the engram, the trap being that he
 could trap himself into suddenly getting terribly interested in agreeing 
 with the MEST universe. And that's the only liability of self-auditing. The
 only liability of self-auditing is that the pressure of the flows and 
 somatics cause one to do what one automaticity starts to do, and that's to
 agree with the MEST universe. And one will be running flows when he ought to
 be running mock-ups. And that is considerably difficult for a person to 
 overcome. But if he overcomes that, there is no reason why he couldn't audit
 himself right straight up the line to an operating thetan, really. 
 
 God knows how long it would take him, how many times he would 
 falter, how many mistakes he would make, how many times he would get upset
 and feel like he was about to die as a result of not having finished a 
 session. All of those things regardless, we have a possibility sitting 
 there. 
 
 All right, now. Let's take another one: He's in an automobile 
 accident, he's sitting alongside the roadside and they're waiting for the
 ambulance or something of the sort. And what's he start to do? He starts to
 balance flows - Give and Take Processing on automobiles. He takes all the
 automobiles he ever owned or ever had and stacks 'em in himself and makes
 them run away from him. Or he parks them around all the way outside of him
 and makes them run into,him. Oh, he'd feel horrible doing that for a very
 short time. Theoretically, he would be out of the engram in a very short 
 space of time. And this applies not just to an assist, it applies also to
 what an auditor ought to do for a preclear. And it applies also to the 
 proper method of uh.. going up the line, because it says 'Don't let your 
 preclear agree with the NEST universe'. It says, 'Keep him disagreeing'. 
 
 All right, now.. now here's.. here's little tricks that a person can
 use. A person starts.. he's thinking obsessively. He starts thinking 
 obsessively on something, see? And he's thinking, thinking, thinking, 
 thinking, thinking, thinking - what he's going to say to this, what he's 
 going to do to that, where's he going to go? What's he going to do? What...?
 Thinking, thinking, thinking, thinking, thinking... running the whole thing
 off before something or other occurs and... Oh, no! How does he cure that?
 He makes himself reduce it and increase it, and reduce it and increase it,
 and stop it and start it and stop it. He puts it on somebody's hat and flits
 it. That's right, and he won't think obsessively after that. How do you 
 handle that on a preclear? 
 
 A preclear comes in and says, "I get these gruesome ideas of this..
 these horrible idols and they keep coming in and their jaws clank and 
 they're about to eat me all up, and besides I'm covered with grasshoppers
 all the time!" 
 
 -118- 

 Would you go ahead and handle idols and grasshoppers? That's 
 hallucination. You're not interested in hallucination. You're interested in 
 mock-ups. What would you do about this? He's thinking, thinking, thinking, 
 thinking - and he can't stop. He's seeing, seeing, seeing, seeing - and he 
 can't stop. You just don't pick up an idol and have him run around. 
 
 You increase doing what he's doing - you want a fast one? This is 
 the fast way to do it: You increase him doing that, and you make him have 
 more and more idols, and more and more horrible bugs crawling on him, and 
 get 'em bigger and bigger, and then turn 'em different colors and get 'em 
 bigger and bigger and more and more of 'em. And then you have just a few 
 less. Now you have more and more of 'em; now a few less, now a few less; now
 more and more and more; now a few... 
 
 He says, "To hell with it!" I mean, it's that fast. 
 
 So when I say don't treat this just as a mock-up - just don't run 
 mock-ups on these things he's talking about, there's a specific way to do 
 it. Do it by a cycle of action. Yes, use the idols and use the grasshoppers 
 if you want to. Turn them a different color. Tie bows on 'em. Turn 'em 
 around. Ship them the other way. Put 'em in coffins. Turn 'em into dead men.
 Put 'em behind his back and so forth. If you want to, put them behind his 
 back - okay. 
 
 But there's this one, is "Just think about 'em. Now think HARD about
 'em. Now think worse and worse and worse and worse about 'em. Now think just
 a little bit less. Now think much more. Now think a little bit 'less. Now 
 think a little bit less. Now.. now let's think REAL HARD about them." 
 He says, "To hell with it!" 
 It is actually faster when handling an obsession. 
 
 Now the fellow finds himself unable to think about something. He
 just can't BEAR to think about it. Just make him 'Can't bear' harder. "Well,
 let's not think about this" you say. "Let's really shut this thing down." 
 
 The guy can't remember something. The MEST universe runs in reverse.
 So you say to him, "Well, let's shut this down and let's not.. now let's 
 not.. let's put on all the force you can to thinking about not thinking 
 about keys" - the guy habitually forgets keys. All right, "Let's not think 
 about keys. Now, let's not think about them a little harder. Now let's not 
 think about them a little less. Now let's keep those keys away a little 
 harder. Now let's keep 'em away a little less." 
 
 All of a sudden he'll say, "Wait a minute. I've got these keys 
 flying past my ears here like mad. What am I going to do with all these 
 keys?" 
 
 And you say, "Well, all right. Nake 'em flow faster. Now slow it 
 down. Take one key out every once in a while as they go by. You got that? 
 Oh, they've slowed down? You say they've quit? All right, now what else is 
 worrying you?" 
 
 I mean, it's really a very fast way to do it on a cycle of action. 
 This is also the way you handle thought. The guy comes in and he says, "I 
 think all the time about..." something. That's worrying him. He has this 
 piano music going through his head all the time. He has the ringing in his 
 ear all the time. He has something or other all the time. Well, you can do 
 mock-ups and train him around, particularly if you want to clip something 
 
 -119- 

 else off his case. You figure out, well there's probably a lot on this case.
 You could do something else and ignore what he's talking about for a while.
 And then, to really impress him, leave it till last, when you do something
 for him. And then you'll get a lot of other things off the case that should
 be gotten off the case that didn't have anything to do with what he's 
 talking about. 
 
 So, what do we do? We make him think faster and faster and then 
 think slower and slower and then think faster and faster and faster, and 
 then a little bit slower, and then a little bit faster and faster and then a
 little bit slower - and then all of a sudden, stop it. He's trying to finish
 a cycle of action. You have.; in any organism, in any action in the MEST 
 universe, the most persistent and constant effort is to complete a cycle of
 action. You can think about these things in this line. I.. I might not have
 mentioned it too much in this frame of reference, but I know I mentioned it.
 I was talking about cycles of action. You think about this in this 
 framework, that anything the preclear can't do is stopped on a cycle of 
 action that is close to the end of Stop. 
 
 I'll show you this: Here's a cycle of action he can't do. And this
 is, of course, Start for any cycle, Change for any cycle, Stop for any 
 cycle. All right, he can't do. Where's that going to be located? He can't 
 do! So it's a cinch that he, at one time, has tried to do, because what he's
 saying when he says, "I can't do so-and-so," he's telling you immediately,
 "I'm trying to do so-and-so," because he wouldn't be interested in a 'can't'
 unless he was trying to do - you understand that? If he comes around and 
 he's worried about.. he runs this buzz-saw all the time and he can't bring
 himself to reach for the switch and turn it off. He's trying to reach for 
 the switch and turn something off. And somewhere on the time track, 
 somewhere, Lord knows where in the past or anything like that, where there's
 an incident where he didn't reach the switch. And he finds himself now 
 with.. he can't reach the switch. He's trying to figure out a cycle of 
 action. 
 
 The runner who is trying to win obsessively - he must run races, he
 must win - is running a cycle of action on some race where he didn't get to
 finish the race, that's all. Simple, huh? 
 
 So, he can't do something, means he's trying. And so he's put over
 here somewhere on this level of action. And he could be right here before 
 Stop, or he could be actually over here trying to Start. But, is he at the 
 beginning of the cycle? No, he's not. He's already started. And you could 
 call the history of any organism, or the history of any thought, or the 
 history of any action the effort or ambition or intention to complete a 
 cycle of action. Everything's trying to complete a cycle 'of action and when
 it becomes aberrated they're hung up on some point in the cycle of action,
 and that cycle of action, of course, is... 
 
 The thought just occurs to me, there's so many of these cycles of 
 action, there must be a common denominator we don't even know about. There
 must be some common denominator cycle of action. 
 
 Anyway, uh.. I just thought of it, uh.. the point is that he's 
 trying and so you're going to pick him up someplace and you don't care where
 he is on that cycle of action. You just run a cycle of action and he'll come
 off of it. You just start running cycles of action; you increase and 
 decrease and start and stop and you'll pick him up anyplace he is on any 
 cycle of action. 
 
 -12O- 

 So just by increasing and decreasing, starting and stopping 
 anything, this guy will complete, eventually, all the cycles of action he 
 has ever tried to engage upon in the MEST univeres. 
 
 Now the trick of the MEST universe is that it won't let anybody 
 finish a cycle of action, because its vectors are 180 degrees in reverse. 
 So, what's basically wrong with the case is that he can't finish a cycle of
 action and he's trying to finish a cycle of action. That's about all there 
 is to it - simple, huh? 
 
 So, you just keep that one in mind in treating minor things. This is
 a good showmanship technique. Very good showmanship - put it on a postulate
 level. 
 
 The guy says, "You know, I think about the future all the time and I
 kind of see that the future is..." and so on. 
 You.. you ask him, "Do you see the future?" 
 "Yeah." "Well, where do you see the future?" 
 
 "Well, as a matter of fact, it's just ahead of re nose. Well, I 
 don't know," he says, "that's impossible, isn't it? But it is. As a matter  
 of fact, when I see the future, I'm looking just ahead of my nose." And he 
 says, "The future is definitely black and bleak and terrible and it's not 
 under my control, even vaguely." 
 
 The effort to 'will have'.. 'I hope to have'.. 'I'm going to have' 
 has been disappointed sufficient times so he fills in an area and calls it 
 'the future', and of course it gets solid because his ambition is to have 
 OBJECTS in the future. So he keeps adding energy into the future in hopes of
 getting energy in the future, until the future becomes a solid object or a 
 mass of energy or a ridge somewhere in the vicinity of his head. This is 
 just showmanship techniques; you'd run into these various things. 
 
 And what do you do about this? Well, you turn it blue, of course. 
 And then you turn it red, and then you turn it green and then you turn it 
 orange and then you turn it yellow, and then you make it little bit longer.
 You're just handling a ridge, see? All right, now make it a little bit 
 shorter, and then you make it a little bit redder. and you say, "Where did 
 you say that was, in the beginning of your nose? Well, let's shift it up 
 just there so you can get a better look at it there. Let's get it up just 
 above the level of the eyes. That's good. Now turn it redder; now turn it 
 bluer, now turn... By the way, just to make sure we get both ends of this, 
 let's put it around to the back of a head and uh.. fix it up. Okay, you got
 it there now? All right, we.. now we can run it better there. Now, make it 
 get redder, now darker, now make it sort of jumpy like that. Now make it go
 smooth, like that. Oh, you can do that? That's fine. Well, now get it down 
 here in your hand, so you can watch it a little bit better. You got it 
 there? All right. Now let's make.. What are you doing with your future in 
 your hand?" That's.. that's all. 
 
 Now what do you do with him? You just change his position on the 
 cycle of action grossly. One by one you can knock out and let him finish any
 cycle of action there is on the track. But of course, the finish of every
 cycle of action on the track is nonexistence on this track. So what are you
 trying to do? The preclear goes 'poof!' That's right. 
 
 -121- 

 Well, so, when you're confronted with a terrible problem, you've 
 always got this one to fall back on. If you can't think of anything else, as
 I told you much earlier, get the effort to have it and the effort not to 
 have it, and get the effort to have it and the effort not to have it, and he
 has half the bellyache he had before. 
 
 Or, you say, "All right, now, get that bellyache. Well, there's no
 reason for you to stand up so close to it. Mock-up something out there and
 get its bellyache." If he can't do that, "Well, just put where it's 
 bellyache would be and let's..." I mean, you're already on your way. He's
 put that bellyache out here in front of him. 
 
 If you just run it out here a little while, no matter how bad that
 bellyache is, it is eventually going to be out there. And it's going to be
 out there, it's going to be over here some place and he's going to put his
 stomachache up here. And actually a fellow will sit there and run a 
 stomachache down below his feet and behind his head and.. and so forth. 
 
 And you don't have to ask him, as I asked that pilot that night - an
 awful shock! "What are you doing with an earring on top of your head?" I 
 mean, that's just too good to miss. That's just randomity for my sake. That
 has nothing to do with processing. As a matter of fact, it injures the 
 process just a little bit. But it's fun. It didn't do him any harm. 
 
 Uh.. so, wherever he is on this cycle of action, he's still trying.
 
 Now of course, if he's got to, what's got to? If he can't do.. all
 right, he's got to. He's trying. This.. this simply means he can't, 
 obviously. So we have Start, for any; Change, for any; Stop, for any. That's
 'for any' - 'any' here is Cycle, of course. He's got to and he can't. 
 
 Well, what's the score here? Compulsion - compulsion. He has a cycle
 of action operating on him, and this is a circuit really - this is a 
 compulsive circuit working - and he's got a cycle of action operating on him
 which is trying to start him. He's over here a little bit along the way on
 Start. And if he's got to go into action, he's on a compulsive cycle of 
 action, but the truth of the matter is that he's more likely to be with this
 one right here; he's much more likely to be because it's closer to apathy,
 you see. He's much more likely to be at position 'A' here than down in this
 other cycle, position 'B' here - just more likely to be, not necessarily is.
 
 'He's got to' means an impulse in an effort to increase. But at the
 same time, 'he's got to' can be over here. Why is that? Because of flows run
 both ways! So compulsion is the same as an inhibition as far as your 
 handling is concerned on a cycle of action. You don't care, then, where the
 cycle of action is. All you've got to do is increase and decrease whatever
 he's trying to do, change what he's trying to do, stop what he's trying to
 do, start what he's trying to do, or increase, decrease, change, stop and
 start what he can't do. 
 
 So, enforcement and, up here, inhibition - same breed of cat. Well,
 where does this apply on what case on what tone scale? I showed you the..
 the small cycle inside the big cycle, didn't I? So we could have this thing
 operating anyplace on the tone scale for any action, because actually the
 theory of a cycle of action is the theory that if you start, stop, increase,
 decrease anything that's occuring or can't occur - let's make it 'can't 
 occur' more. Let's really stop it. He's over here at 'A' - something like
 that - flagrantly at 'A'. He's stopped - just before he got to the real 
 stuff. He never finished it. 
 
 -122- 

 Where will you find the guy parked on the whole track? You'll quite
 normally find him decreased at the end of a spiral, so grandly and with such
 wild abandon, decreased that he couldn't finish the spiral. Many deaths can
 occupy one spiral, you see? One piece of 1ivingness - but all of a sudden he
 was going to live a spiral this time that was maybe as much as two hundred,
 three hundred thousand years ago. Nobody determined this. It was just his
 potentiality as you see in the ratio of energy use.. change. He was going to
 run this spiral that long and he lived for eight thousand years and then one
 day ran into the most horrendous 'poof' that ever puffed, and it stopped the
 spiral. Where will you find him? RIGHT THERE. You'll find him at point 'E'.
 He's still trying to finish a spiral of action which.. the havingness of 
 which marks it on an E-meter as eight million years ago. He stopped on a 
 cycle. 
 
 So when you say a person is stuck on a time track, he is stuck on a
 cycle of action, and a cycle of action goes from.. from no space to all 
 object. So of course he's stuck on the track. And when we say 'stuck on the
 track' that means he's.. he's got too much energy in one lump about 
 something that he has nothing further to do with, and that energy may be 
 representing something, which is symbolism, or it may be the actual energy
 he was working with at the time. And there he is on the track, in that 
 fashion. 
 
 Okay. What's stuck on the time track then? Now you can get this - 
 the effort to have it and not to have it. That's peculiarly workable. Or you
 can spring somebody with just Responsibility or No Responsibility. But this
 is a better way to do it. 
 
 If you have to address the actual injury, if this automaticity is 
 such that he thinks he's doing mock-ups and he isn't, you'll probably go 
 along for quite some time with mock-ups - until all of a sudden you ran Into
 this thing called a 'cycle of action' in processing. And you increase, 
 decrease, change, start, stop - anything that he can't do, make him 
 'can't-er', and he can do, make him 'can't-er'; that is being done to him,
 make it 'do-able' harder. In other words, overplay it, get it up that 
 increase curve. But 'can't' is way over, usually, past change. So to get it
 upscale, you just change it. Got it? 
 
 Well, that's the length and breadth of it. Now I'm just giving you
 that as a.. as a note here, relatively interjected. And now I'm going to ask
 for Step One. As I say, Step One consists of telling somebody to be two feet
 back of their head, and then getting them - a few mock-ups until they're 
 fairly well oriented and they can more or less perceive where they are and
 what they're doing with a little certainty. And then you get them to lift
 pieces of the body and nothing to that. 
 
 And when all of a sudden they say, "What do you know? I can handle
 this body from outside!" That's all you're interested in convincing them.
 Okay, who's the One? Are you the One? Have you ever been out? 
 Voice: I've been out.... 
 LRH: But? 
 
 Voice: But the visio is... I wouldn't say I can pick out objects, 
 but I certainly have pretty decent mock-ups. 
 
 (Rest is snipped - boring demo auditing) -123- 
