FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

FZ BIBLE 28/30 UNIVERSES CASSETTES (5TH ACC)

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

CONTENTS: Universes Cassettes (the 5th Advanced Clinical Course)

32 Cassettes containing 33 lectures plus Introduction and Appendix.
The first lecture is also the final lecture of the 4th ACC and is
numbered 4ACC-72. Posted in 30 files ("+" used where a second item
is in the same file.)

01. ..... Introduction
+ 4ACC-72 29 MAR 54 EVOLUTION AND USE OF SELF ANALYSIS
02. 5ACC-01 30 MAR 54 UNIVERSES
03. 5ACC-02 31 MAR 54 SIMPLE PROCESSES
04. 5ACC-03 1 APR 54 BASIC SIMPLE PROCEDURES
05. 5ACC-04 2 APR 54 PRESENCE OF AN AUDITOR 
06. 5ACC-05 5 APR 54 GROUP PROCESSING: SAFE PLACE FOR THINGS
+ ..... APPENDIX
07. 5ACC-06 6 APR 54 LECTURE: UNIVERSES
08. 5ACC-07 7 APR 54 UNIVERSE: BASIC DEFINITIONS
09. 5ACC-08 8 APR 54 UNIVERSE: PROCESSES, EXPERIENCE
10. 5ACC-09 9 APR 54 UNIVERSE: CONDITIONS OF THE MIND AND REMEDIES
11. 5ACC-10 12 APR 54 UNIVERSE: CHANGE AND REHABILITATION
12. 5ACC-11 13 APR 54 UNIVERSE: MANIFESTATION
13. 5ACC-12 14 APR 54 SOP 8-D
14. 5ACC-13 15 APR 54 GROUP PROCESSING: EXTERIORIZATION AND STABILIZATION
+ 5ACC-13B 15 APR 54 GROUP PROCESSING: CERTAINTY ASSESSMENT
15. 5ACC-14 16 APR 54 SOP 8-D: LECTURE
16. 5ACC-15 19 APR 54 GROUP PROCESSING: UNIVERSE ASSESSMENT
+ 5ACC-15B 19 APR 54 GROUP PROCESSING: AREA ASSESSMENT
17. 5ACC-16 20 APR 54 GROUP PROCESSING: REMEDYING HAVINGNESS
+ GP-Spec 21 APR 54 GROUP PROCESSING: REACH FOR PRESENT TIME
18. 5ACC-17 21 APR 54 ELEMENTS OF AUDITING
19. 5ACC-18 22 APR 54 SOP 8-DA
20. 5ACC-19 23 APR 54 SOP 8-DB
21. 5ACC-20 26 APR 54 GENERAL HANDLING OF A PC
22. 5ACC-21 27 APR 54 ANCHOR POINTS AND SPACE
23. 5ACC-22 28 APR 54 SPACE AND HAVINGNESS
24. 5ACC-23 29 APR 54 SPACE
25. 5ACC-24 30 APR 54 SOP 8-DA THROUGH SOP 80-DH
26. 5ACC-25 3 MAY 54 VIEWPOINT STRAIGHTWIRE
27. 5ACC-26 4 MAY 54 BE, DO, HAVE STRAIGHTWIRE
28. 5ACC-27 5 MAY 54 EFFICACY OF PROCESSES
29. 5ACC-28 6 MAY 54 ANATOMY OF UNIVERSES
30. 5ACC-29 7 MAY 54 ENERGY - EXTERIORIZATION


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

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

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


UNIVERSES (5th ACC) file 28/30 (tape 30):

Transcript of Taped Lecture by L. Ron Hubbard 

5ACC-27 - 5405C05 

Number 30 of "Universes and the War between Theta and Mest" 
cassettes


EFFICACY OF PROCESSES

A lecture given on 5 May 1954


This is May the 5th.

I have a fast rundown here on the processes which you will
find the most efficacious as of this time. I'll just give
you a very quick resume of these processes.

First, in its most applicable form, Scientology directs the
attention of the preclear to bring the preclear into an
ability to direct his attention. The auditor directs the
attention of the preclear so that the predear can then
inherit sooner or later the ability to direct his
attention. If you wanted to make a clean statement of what
auditing did, well, that's what it does.

Now, let's say that your preclear has his attention stuck
on a particular point - naturally an auditor would use
processes which would either get the preclear's attention
off of that point or subject and onto something else, or he
would simply free up attention in general. So he has two
choices: He can be very specific or he can just free up
general attention.

One of the best methods of freeing up general attention is
simply to increase the preclear's tolerance of viewpoint.
Every time you increase the preclear's tolerance of
viewpoint you, of course, increase his ability to command
and control his attention.

There is a subject known as attention span, and this whole
subject could very well be studied now. What is a person's
attention span? In other words, how long can he look at
something without being drawn into it or repelled from it.
That would tell you how well he could control energy masses.

Attention span would be the ability, then, to control
energy masses and would deteriorate as, and in the ratio
that, a person became unable to control masses. And when I
say masses, I could say fluid energies or objects.

Attention span or concentration develops two things, two
categories. One is, of course, self-determined and the
other is other-determined. An individual goes over the
first hump of deterioration when he passes from
self-determined control of his own attention to
other-determined control of his own attention. And having
passed that point, he will then invert several times. That
is to say, he'll come back into a possession of some
control of his own attention and then he will slop off into
other control of his attention and back and forth, until
actually everything demands that he fix his attention upon
it. This condition is manifest in a preclear when the
preclear, for instance, looks at an object and the object
seems to come close to him. The object is compelling his
attention. Now, compulsion of attention results in a
shortening of distance. And you want to know what is this
thing, contraction of space. Contraction of space, then, is
only a manifestation of this compulsive attention. And
again we get back to an optimum state of controlled
attention. An individual can control his attention.

Now, an individual who is sitting there waiting for an
effect - which is a chronic state with preclears that
you're having trouble with - who are sitting there waiting
for an effect, are simply waiting for something else to
shift their attention. You see this clearly - something else
to shift their attention. They are very dependent upon
other-determinism changing their direction or intensity of
attention.

And this is, in the final analysis, the really entire
mechanic of auditing. You want to make a very simple
statement that you can then use many times, that would be it.

Now, what if we just took this as a definition process? We
could do something like this: We could tell the preclear
to put his attention on the bulletin board, now take it off
the bulletin board and put it on the wall, and take his
attention off the wall and put it on the ceiling, and take
it off the ceiling and put it on the nothingness in the
center of the room, and then put it on the floor, and then
put it on the back of his head, and you're liable to find
him exteriorized right there.

An individual, when he first begins to handle attention,
finds it to be posessed of tonnage - it's heavy. That is 
the introduction of gravity into the masses he's handling.
Gravity or heaviness or co-attractiveness of masses
- gravity, you know, is just the co-attraction of masses -
is a consideration. And an individual considers that
something is very heavy or massive or gravitic and
thereafter is affected by gravity.

You can almost effect on automatic - that is to say, an
uncontrolled levitation on the part of the preclear by
simply stripping out all consideration of mass, which we
know as gravity. Gravity is consideration of the attraction
of masses. And if we stripped all that out of the case,
why, you could fully expect something weird to happen with
regard to his body. He would at least feel that it was
going to float right straight out of the chair.

And people who can handle their bodies and levitate and
pull them into centers of the room off the floor with no
further support or anything like that, people who can do
that simply have either resolved the problem of gravity -
the co-attraction of masses - or they haven't resolved this 
problem.

Well, of course, co-attraction of masses gets us
immediately back to a consideration of attention. An
individual wants his attention to be compelling and wants
his attention to be compelled. And the harder he wants it
to be compelling and the more he wants it to be compelled,
the more gravity will occur in the case.

Now, this is actually measurable upon a scale. You can
change the consideration of gravity in the preclear and
change the weight he has on a Toledo scale. I mean, we're
going at highly mensurable commodities here. We don't have
to guess about these things. We process out the gravity
from the preclear and we find out the preclear's lighter.
We put some gravity and consideration into him and we find
out he's heavier. It's almost that simple.

Now, individuals who are customarily engaged in sports or
work in the control of heavy masses will naturally
concentrate a great deal upon weights and the controls of
masses. And so they will become after a while themselves
rather heavy or massive.

Now, this is not particularly bad, you understand, or good,
or one thing or the other. The only thing that would be bad
or good about it was whether the individual knew he was
controlling weights. See, he knew there was weight there to
be controlled and he was handling it.

This might seem to you to be too great a simplicity. But
let's take the question of a machinist who is concentrating
continually upon an enormous lathe. And yet his
concentration is not upon the mass of this lathe at all. He
doesn't ever consider the mass of the lathe; he only
considers his product - the intricacies of this thing he is
machining. He's thinking of the planning on this.

And one day you pick him up and, oh, is he having trouble.
He's having trouble with havinguess. Well, he was standing
there actually paying attention to and forcefully ignoring
a several-ton mass in front of him, and it eventually
showed up in his case very compulsively. Because it was
demanding his attention and he wasn't giving it. And as a
net result, his concentration of attention being denied, he
would have the tendency to look at life as though he were a
lathe. What would happen here? In view of the fact that we
had pressure (gravity, you might say) from the lathe to him
and no consideration as far as he was concerned of gravity
from himself to the lathe - in other words, he didn't take
this into his computation at all we could expect him then
to align with the highest pressure flow: reverse valences.

And this is the basic mechanism of the winning valence.
It's a matter of masses. First a matter, of course, of
consideration, and then a matter of masses.

So we find machinists going around looking like their
machines, acting like their machines. We find railroad
engineers, for instance, looking and acting like their
locomotives. We find writers looking and acting like their
type-writers, and we discover machine gunners, of course,
being either the machine gun or what - the mass of the 
enemy. What is the biggest mass here?

And a person will eventually, by denying something
attention, create a vacuum for attention and sort of pop
into it.

Well, all these things are basically considerations, and
nothing is more easily demonstrated than this. If you can,
by changing a person's mind, change his weight, and if you
could measure this directly, I think you would consider
that you had solved the problem of which was senior, the
postulate or the physical universe. I think you wouldn't
have any more difficulty with that problem, you see.

Ideas are senior to masses. And so it is in every case.

Well, an individual's consideration, then, is what the
auditor is trying to change. And if an individual considers
that he must keep his attention fixed upon something, why,
of course he will continue to fix his attention on
something, no matter how much you handle the mass on which
his attention is fixed.

How could you do this? Let's say this individual had put
his attention consistently and continually upon a high
mountain, and had put it on this high mountain to a point
where he considered that a mountain of that character
demanded of him this many ergs, you might say, of attention
flow. How many ergs of attention flow are required to
concentrate on one mountain?

Now, if you were to gradually get him to associate any rock
with this mountain, eventually he would give any rock as
much attention flow as he'd give to the mountain. And then
if you got him to closely associate or identify a grain of
sand with any rock, you would eventually have him giving
every grain of sand the same attention which he gave to
this enormous mountain. 

And so, an individual who is rather bad off has a tendency
to regard every grain of sand as a mountain in terms of
mass. Now, I don't mean that as a philosophic quip. I mean,
literally, actually measurable with springs and balances.
An individual who is bad off considers every grain of sand
to have the mass of a mountain. It has the weight of a
mountain and therefore demands and requires the enormous
concentration that would ordinarily be given only to a
mountain. And his thought pattern behaves this way. And you
see, a secondary manifestation of this is anything that
happens in his life demands an enormous amount of attention. 
The various races have various cliches to characterize this. 
The American says the "mountain out of a molehill" and so forth.

These cliche's could be summed up to be "He makes mountains
out of grains of sand." And the worries in his life will be
such that should somebody come along and point out to him
that the postage stamp was upside down on a letter he was
about to mail, his inability to remove the postage stamp
and right it, making it right side up, would amount to so
much attention that it would probably persist for several
hours afterwards - certainly several minutes.

The individual's persistence upon any given subject on a
self-determined basis would be his level of ability. In
other words, the persistence, the self-determined
persistence on any subject would have a tendency to measure
his ability, you see? Consistency, persistency - as long as
that's self-determined, it measures his ability. But now,
other-determined persistence on any subject would measure
his disability - other-determined persistence. And the
degree that that persistence continues is a measure of how
much this individual is going to (quote) "worry, be afraid,
be upset," hit the top of the curve and not be able to get
off of it (you know, that "survive" point), to get into
traps and not be able to get out of them. All of this is an
other-determined persistence - other-determined persistence.

Persistence - there's nothing wrong with persistence.
Persistence is a very good thing, as long as it's in a
self-determined category. When it's in a continuously
other-determined category, persistence winds up into what
you find as aberration. Other-determined persistence - 
aberration, are interchangeable phrases. You could
interchange the word aberration with other determined
persistence.

Now, what do you mean by other-determined persistence? That
would mean that the individual persists only so long as
another determinism demands that he persists. And so we
get, as an example, the condition of the worker who
continually needs supervision; he cannot work on his own
supervision. As long as he is being hounded by a foreman,
he will continue to shovel. And the moment the foreman
disappears, he no longer shovels.

Now, let's look at this as a problem in an other-determinism. 
You see that. He's being run by an exterior determinism. In 
other words, all the persistence in his life derives and stems 
from another determinism or other determinisms rather than his 
own. You start auditing this person and this person will bird-dog, 
watch, fixate upon energy masses in his vicinity and wait for 
them to tell him when to stop persisting.

And so you get an individual's fixation upon erasure, or
wipe it out, or run the concept out, or strip it down, or
reduce it in some fashion or another; because he has to
keep his attention upon the energy mass as long as the
energy mass keeps its attention upon him. So the only thing
we could do, naturally, would be to run the energy mass
out, down, wipe it out, so that it could no longer have a
compulsion on the individual.

This is not what is wrong with the individual, that he has
energy masses which compel him. That is not what is wrong
with an individual. That an individual has energy masses
which compel him is not what is wrong with the individual.
I make this very, very clear. It's the individual's
consideration that energy masses can compel him that is
wrong with the individual.

You see, if the first were what was wrong with an
individual, in order to be Clear or be able, a person would
have to abstain from every possible kind of energy mass.
Therefore, he could not maintain his stability. 

The person who interiorizes after having been exteriorized 
has been audited in the direction that those energy masses 
which are compelling him at the moment have been desensitized,
and as long as they remain desensitized and no new energy
masses show up, the individual remains exterior. The moment
new energy masses show up, he's going to reinteriorize,
because the auditing gave its total attention on
desensitizing the energy masses themselves. 

As long as it was concentrated upon that, you had an instability 
enter into a case. The auditing should have been and should be
directed toward changing the consideration of an individual
on the subject of attention, gravity, masses, energy,
objects, forms, ideas. Changing his mind, changing his
consideration, altering his consideration, is a goal - the
alteration of consideration is a goal which the auditor can
well undertake and well accomplish using modern processes.

The alteration of an energy mass is something that no
auditor is ever going to accomplish, not until the end of
time. An auditor is not going to be able to take one human
being and so desensitize every energy mass with which this
individual will be in conversance that the individual can
then be free.

This has a parallel in the business of living. It is all
very well for you to take a stockade of prisoners who have
long been in a prison and simply remove the prison
fence - that's all very well for you to do that. But do you
know what the prisoners will do? Their consideration is
that they are prisoners, that they are imprisoned. They
will build themselves a new prison fence.

You can put that to test if you want to. You can go out
here and demonstrate to people that certain practices they
have are very unhealthy for them and unhealthy for the
society and that the greater, higher level of freedom is
only attained by the destruction of some of those barriers
which resist them in the progress of living. And you
yourself; like Hercules, could destroy those barriers. And
then if you went away and had a nice quiet sleep on a
mountaintop someplace for a year or two and then returned,
you would find that these people had carefully built back
barriers and resistances for themselves to use as a pen.

There is the heartbreak of an auditor, and the only place
where he can experience heartbreak, is that those barriers
which he has stripped away have been substituted for anew
by the preclear. Psychology and psychotherapy of the
nineteenth century recognized this and called it
sublimation. But they didn't recognize this intelligently,
they merely recognized it to this degree: "Any time we
try... " (of course, they were all in apathy) "Any time we
ever try to make anybody well, why, he just finds something
else to be sick about. And there's no reason to make
anybody well, then, because he'll just find something else.
And let's all give up, let's die, let's die, let's die."
Which was the highest tone ever attained by that particular
science.Anyway... "I hope some day that we will get
powerful enough to die" - that was its tone.

Well, if this was the case, then what were these people
doing? They were actually taking upon their own shoulders
the removal of certain barriers from the patient. The
practitioner was the one who was getting in there like
Hercules and hewing away with an ax to remove certain
barriers. And of course, having removed these barriers,
having taken away these energy masses, having desensitized
these energy masses, he would only discover, to his sorrow,
that the individual had simply erected new masses, new
resistances.

He cures somebody of a dermatitis and finds out now that
the fellow has developed a severe earache. And having cured
him of an earache, he finds out that the individual has now
come out with an enormous rash of ingrowing toenails. But
there's... this gets to a point where the practitioner who
does not understand the principles I'm telling you about -
it gets to a point where he believes... he'll believe
firmly that there is no freeing of a human being. He'll
believe this firmly. He'll go around saying, "Well, he just
wants to be sick, and there's nothing you can do for him,"
so forth. Anything you do for a human being which is
effective, consists of altering the human being's
consideration of spaces, masses, ideas, forms, perceptions, 
colors. You alter his consideration and you have altered 
the human being.

Now, sometimes he is so overpowered by masses with which he
is surrounded that the reduction of the charge in these
masses can be undertaken with some profit. An individual
who is suffering enormously from a migraine headache is not
easy to audit. So we might - just to get him into a position
where he could be audited - we might address the migraine
headache as an energy mass which is exerting a compulsive
influence, a compulsive attention upon the preclear. It's
an unwanted attention of some sort or another. It is a mass
which is exerting an attention upon the preclear. And we
would then use some process to alter this energy mass so
that it would no longer be able to do this. There would be
many ways you'd do that: you could simply duplicate it
enough times or put the pain in the walls enough times or
give it enough new headaches - you know, remedy its
havingness of headaches - until the attention of it was 
gone.

You could do this rather easily. It would, by the way,
probably stay away. But now do not expect your preclear to
remain in a state of beingness which can do without
headaches. He can't do without headaches. What you did was
just, with malice aforethought, threw away the headaches.
You didn't make him able to handle headaches, particularly,
and you didn't alter his consideration about headaches.
You did something else: you handled the headache. Of
course, he was doing it and he was putting that sort of
thing up, but he didn't know what he was doing. He wouldn't
be able to do it again on a bet.

If he came around and told you what you had done to him a
few weeks later, it would be the most altered picture you
ever wanted to observe. Well, here is your miracle level of
treatment - when it is done rapidly. The auditor has altered
a mass. However he did it, we don't care - maybe he did it by
putting his own mock-ups into the person's leg (you know,
you can do that, too). It doesn't matter how he did it, he
accomplished a change in the physical characteristics of
the individual.

Now, get this: He didn't accomplish a change in the mental
characteristics of the individual, save to the degree that
he impressed the individual that he'd been an effect.

This individual might have felt much happier. You see,
you'd change the mind of a prisoner that you rushed up to
with a reprieve while he was just walking onto the
execution platform - you'd sure change his mind and his
outlook and existence, you see? However, you wouldn't
change any of his basic problems as his consideration for
existence. That's why people who reprieve criminals are
very often quite upset later on to find the criminals
murdering somebody else, you know, and then getting
reprieved again and then they murder somebody else and get
reprieved again. This would be the lot of a member of a
parole board who had no command of the science of
Scientology: He would find himself releasing onto the
world... being merciful and releasing onto the world these
criminals continually, one after the other, and then
finding them right back in prison again. And he spends his
time and mercy in releasing them and they spend all their
time in trying to get back into prison again.

And he finally says, "Rrrarr!" He becomes upset about this
and he doesn't want to parole anybody else. And parole
systems start to go to pieces and nonsense enters into a
field into which it's impossible to enter further nonsense
than currently exists, which is penal systems. 

Therefore, the address to the physical self of the preclear
will always find the auditor in a position of having
altered consideration of masses toward the preclear,
rather than in the desirable position of having altered the
preclear's consideration toward masses. So a physical
address to the preclear, whether with auditing, medicine or
any other field, will result in a very minor alteration in
the ability, concentration span and other factors of the
preclear, or of the patient.

The only gains made by an auditor, a practitioner or anyone
else come about when the basic consideration of the being
toward masses, spaces, ideas, forms - when that basic
consideration is itself altered. If you don't change his
mind, you don't change the case.

Now, this gets down into great complexities; gets into the
complexities of masses and co-attractions of masses. But it
doesn't become more untrue simply because it becomes more
complex that a preclear who does not have his mind changed
- his attitude, his consideration changed - is not himself
changed even vaguely. He's not changed.

Therefore, if the preclear expects you as an auditor to do
everything for the preclear, your basic job is to get the
preclear to do something for himself and make him change
his mind about being able to do something for himself And
he will gradually shake out of his consideration of masses.
His attention span and his ability will go up and he will
be able to perform without direction those things which he
can perform early in auditing only with direction.

Okay. Give you a resume' now of the effective processes. An
individual who does not tolerate various viewpoints has
abandoned his ability to handle his attention in connection
with those subjects. You see, if an individual can't
tolerate certain viewpoints, then he has abandoned his
right to handle attention with regard to these subjects.
You see that? He has moved out of a lot of spaces, in other
words. He has moved away from a lot of spaces and he has
reduced his attention enormously.

Therefore, that auditing which expands the space of a
preclear, is one way to put it, of course is very good.
That auditing which increases his ability to handle masses
is very good. But above these things, that auditing which
immediately addresses the idea of tolerating viewpoints
becomes itself optimum auditing.

If you would have your preclear come on up the line rapidly
and readily, he would come on up the line simply on the
basis of tolerating more and more viewpoints, being able to
like more and more people, being more willing to be other
people. And the more willing he is to be other people, the
less he has to be them.

You'll very often find an individual compelled to be
Father. He doesn't want to be Father, that's why he's being
Father. And so he is less and less compelled to be Father
as he is more and more able to tolerate viewpoints of Father.

So, we have this first and foremost process in Scientology
is change the fellow's mind. First thing you've got to
change his mind about quite often is change his mind about
his ability to change his mind. And the entire consideration 
here is whether or not an individual can change his mind.

Now, he may be so anxious to change the mind of something
else that we have an immediate consideration with the
preclear - he may be so anxious to change the attention or
mind of something else and he's still carrying a picture
of it - that he doesn't change his own mind; he merely
concentrates on some tertiary, third-echelon object.

Now, you're an auditor - and I'll call this to your attention
again - you're an auditor and you're sitting there auditing 
a preclear. Well, you want to make darn sure that you're
auditing a preclear before you go very far with this case.
Are you auditing a preclear or are you auditing somebody
who is auditing something else?

Now, that's something that you would only consult, really,
if your case wasn't showing rapid progress. Case wasn't
showing rapid progress, why, you would just say, "Well, I'm
not auditing this guy; I'm auditing somebody who is
auditing something."

So, no matter what process you used of these various
processes we have today - no matter which of these processes
you use - let's get into the thought pattern that none of
these processes will work on the preclear if you're not
auditing him. That sounds like one of these horrible
simplicities, but nothing is going to work on a preclear
you're not auditing. And if you're auditing the preclear
who is auditing something else, like an energy ridge or
something out in front of him or back of him, or if he's
auditing his stomach... You're auditing the preclear and
the preclear is auditing his stomach. You say to him, "Be
three feet back of your head," and he mutters to his
stomach, "Be three feet back of your head," and then
wonders why his stomach isn't three feet back of the body
or something. I mean, it's quite dim to him; he doesn't
even readily recognize what he's doing. But you as an
auditor had better recognize it, because a case will hang
fire for a long time this way.

So let's find out if we're auditing the preclear rather
than auditing somebody who is auditing something else.

How do we resolve this if we suddenly discover that we are
auditing a preclear who is auditing something else? Well,
we'd discover it first and foremost by the failure of
processes. That's the first way we'd discover it. We'd give
him a few processes and we got no real communication change
or anything of the sort, well, don't find fault with
yourself or the way you're holding your little finger of
your right hand as you give the commands. It isn't your
form that is at fault; it is not the process which is at
fault. The only thing which would be at fault there is you
did not observe it more readily, that you were auditing
somebody who was auditing something else. The remedy for
it is quite simple: even if only in terms of concepts, even
if only giving him the idea - you know, he maybe couldn't get
a mock-up or anything like this - but preferably with mock-up
and Creative Processing, you simply have him audit whatever
he appears to be auditing. And you have him give it, if
possible, Opening Procedure. If he can make it do Opening
Procedure this is magnificent, this is wonderful.

So the first thing you would do when you discovered that
your processes weren't working readily upon some preclear
would be to discover what the devil he was auditing. And
you would simply assume that he was auditing something, and
you would... your discovery of it would merely be the
discovery that he was doing this; you wouldn't have to
know what part of the body he was auditing or what he was
auditing or what shadow or chimera in his past he was
trying to drill through this and that. You wouldn't have to
know these things. You just have him get the idea of
auditing something and, if possible, get a mock-up of
something like his body or something and audit it. You
audit him and make him audit it.

Now, you're just keying out an auditing machine, that's all
you're doing. This comes under the heading of machine
processing. When we speak of machines, we really mean
machines. Preclears have them around tucked away in the
oddest places. They look like Linotype typewriters and so
forth. Quite interesting bric-a-brac, but just
bric-a-brac - look like radio sets and all sorts of things.
And he's just rigged up a flock of postulates, you see, in
order to do something automatically for him. Well, he's got
an auditing machine there and what you do is key that out.
Just key it out - bing.

How do you key out any machine you find your preclear has
got? By the way, never go in for just knocking out
machinery. I mean, it's too limited a process. It'd be a
better process to make a preclear tolerate machinery -
tolerate the viewpoint of machinery, tolerate the effort of
machinery, its noise, its clatter, its this and that. If
you just said, "What machines could you look at?" you'd get
further, by the way - except in this little special case of
what's he auditing - you'd get further by simply saying,
"Well, now just name some machines you wouldn't mind
looking at." If you just did that as a process, you would
do more for machine processing than is generally done.

But there is a rule of thumb about all automaticities - a
rule of thumb: You key it out by getting the preclear to do
what the automatic object is doing. Any automaticity will
key out by introducing into its functions the
self-determinism of the individual, in other words.

Any case will clear up if you introduce into the case the
self-determinism of the individual. And don't think that's
any less in any part of the case. Any machine he has will
key out by introducing his self-determinism into that
machine. In other words, you've made him tolerate - and
let's get it on the basis of tolerance - you've made him
tolerate the operation of a gimmick known as a self-auditor. 
See? He wouldn't mind a self-auditor. Up to this time, he's 
saying, "To hell with these self-auditors," you know, he's 
kind of resisting it and going on auditing something that he 
doesn't know he's doing. He's running on some kind of an 
automaticity. Well, if you'll just ask him to audit whatever 
this was, he would take over the function of the machine.

The rule of thumb is: To key out any automaticity, render
it null and void, it is only necessary to have the preclear
take over and perform the function of the automaticity
itself. That's all you need to do. This gives him a
tolerance of the action of the automaticity, and as such
the automaticity will blow out. So, you make him audit
something. You make him do exactly what he's doing. And
that's a very good rule in all auditing. If all else
forsakes you, you make the preclear do exactly what he's
doing, and you have entered self-determinism into the
action and performance of his conduct or his thinking. And
just by entering that self-determinism into it, you will
key out the worst part of it. He will change his mind about it.

Let's say your preclear was rolling all over the floor and
you couldn't seem to get him to do anything but roll all
over the floor. Well then, by golly, you'd better have him
roll all over the floor. And all of a sudden, he'll stop
rolling all over the floor.

A person is only ravingly insane because they so thoroughiy
object to being ravingly insane. If you had them dramatize
being ravingly insane, they would get sane, because you've
entered self-determinism into an automaticity in which
they've been in conflict. Now, let's get the biggest booby
trap right here that was planted in this society: If you
start doing something, you're liable to keep on doing it.
That's the booby trap.

"Don't pretend that you're sick; you're liable to get
sick." "Don't pretend that you're crazy; you're liable to
be crazy." That's what this society tells you and, possibly, 
that's what your mother told you, and that's what a lot of 
people told you.

"If you start to do something, you're liable to keep right
on doing it. Anything you start to do will eventually go
out of control." This is not true. So far from truth is it
that it is a direct barricade across a road to freedom.

So an individual goes and does something. Well, if he does
this thing, he will only suffer repercussions from it if he
suddenly says, "That's bad. I'm not going to do it anymore.
I'm not going to have anything to do with that. I'm going
to fight it." Zzzzz, there he goes.

But of course, a society couldn't function at all unless it
was capable of imposing irrational conduct such as "Be
good" on all of its citizens. Being good is probably
irrational conduct, particularly if we look around and find
out who's defining "good" in this society.

Now, where we have any automaticity carrying forward it is
only necessary, to deintensify it, to introduce
self-determinism into it. In other words, the second we
find the preclear's got a certain kind of machine, now
let's have him do the operation of the machine.

If he has a machine, let's say, that makes his right ear
twitch, let's make him make his right ear twitch. And let's
make him twitch at a different rate than the ear is
twitching finally, and then let's just make him make the
ear twitch, and the ear doesn't twitch anymore. He's cut
out that automaticity.

Now, don't ever let me find any auditor present who finds
himself incapable in the face of some automatic tick or
hiccups or obsessive thinking or conduct - if you know that
law, don't ever let me find you unable in that direction.
Because that is too easy to do.

An individual thinks all the time about his past. The
immediate answer to you as an auditor to get over a
compulsion or an obsession which is this marked, in order
to get the case on the line and get the fellow up the line
- your immediate answer, you have nothing else to do, you
have an immediate choice. And of all the choices there are,
you've certainly got this one. You could do lots of things,
but all you have to do is make this individual think
obsessively about his past. And you only have to do it
maybe for a couple, three minutes, and this obsession which
has been ruining him for two decades is gone.

The only reason he is thinking obsessively about his past
is because it's an other-determinism thinking about his
past. And as long as that thinkingness is other-determined, 
he will continue to think about his past because he doesn't 
take control of the thinkingness about his past; all he does 
is sit there and worry about the fact that he's thinking 
about his past.

So, you'd have him worry about thinking about his past or
just have him think about his past. "All right, now, let's
think about your past. Now, let's think about 1935. Now,
let's think about 1986. Now, let's think about 1937. Now,
let's think about being murdered, butchered, raped, burned,
divorced or insulted."

And, "Yes, yes, oh-oh, yes, yes... Well, what the heck am
I doing this for?" is his reaction. You get a quick blowup
of these things.

Now, some little time ago I got a letter saying that
so-and-so had just been down to see an auditor who sure
should have known better - he hadn't picked that up, that's
why I'm stressing it for this Unit - had been down to see
this auditor to remove a tick of one eye.

And I was interested enough to correspond back and discover
what the auditor had done for this tick. Well, he hadn't
done anything for this tick one way or the other. And so I
asked the auditor what he'd done for the tick. I was
incredulous this whole time, you see, because this auditor
had been trained in automaticity and randomity and so
forth; he'd been trained in this, if he was ever trained in
anything. And it never occurred to him to make the person
have his eye tick.

Now you can be as incredulous as I am. This person had been
trained in this and he's being asked to cure an eye tick
and it never occurs to him at any time to make the fellow
introduce self-determinism into ticking eyes. You'd say,
"The guy's hopeless." No, he wasn't hopeless. He has got to
come back here for a couple of weeks. Now, here's the
problem in any case, is that what the case is doing isn't
being done self-determinedly so the case is worried about
it. The case is basically worried about not being
self-determined.

Now, what's this got to do with processes? I told you I was
going to tell you about processes, didn't I? Well, I'm
afraid I've just told you about processes. And if you only
knew that about human behavior, that an individual
compulsively or obsessively did things only because they
were continuing to fight and deny self-determinism (or take
responsibility for) these compulsions and obsessions - why,
if you knew that and if you knew that all you had to do to
get them over such a thing is make them be that compulsive
and obsessive about the thing on a self-determined basis,
there it goes. And we've got tolerance of viewpoints,
tolerance of action. The second we've introduced tolerance
of viewpoint, tolerance of action into the thing, boom,
it's gone. Can you see that clearly?

All right. Now, the one thing the individual doesn't want
to do above all other things, then, is assume various view
and action points. You're getting his expressed
manifestation; if you observe that an individual only
fights those things which he isn't doing self-determinedly,
then he must be abandoning a flock of viewpoints, mustn't
he? Huh?

Well, let's make him reassume viewpoints. And let's make
him reassume viewpoints - or just assume viewpoints, rather
than reassume them; reassume them and assume them - in the
mildest possible way, upsetting his own self-determinism
the least, and we'll win.

That's actually all there is to auditing. You'll find
somebody auditing himself. When you start to audit him,
you're auditing somebody who goes on auditing himself.
Well, let's introduce some self-determinism into it, that's
all. Let's have him simply, overtly take over the auditing
of some part of him or some idea or something of the sort.
Let's make him do it. Let's make him audit something. Put
it through Opening Procedure or something. And you'll find
out in a very short space of time the individual feels much
better about it.

If it takes him a long time to do this, well, that's just
an index of the fact he's having an awful time with his
case, that's all.

Now, supposing we found the individual totally incapable of
disobeying orders. I mean, pardon me, totally incapable of
obeying orders - that's the first thing you have to get, you
know, before you can get him to disobey orders with a free
heart. An individual has to learn how to obey orders before
he can learn how to disobey orders.

It's necessary for him to learn how to disobey orders
because all through life, the world is telling him, "Be
dead, be dead, be dead" - he'd better learn how to disobey
orders. That's an order, isn't it?

Mothers, fathers, teachers, police: they're saying, "Stop
motion, quieter, slower. Stop motion, quieter, slower." In
other words, "Be dead, be dead, be dead."

All right. So he'd better learn how to disobey orders.
Well, the first step toward learning how to disobey orders
is obey orders. Why? Because he's negating against obeying
orders, so you better make him obey orders. This takes over
the self-determinism, you see, of obeying orders. That's
all. Makes obedience of orders a self-determined function.
That's why you make him obey orders.

All right. And when you're in the process of trying to get
him to be a little more self-determined and obey your
orders, you know that's more self-determined than he is
ordinarily. Obeying your order is more self-determined than
he routinely, usually is. You know, that's upscale, see?

All right. And we find this individual is incapable of
obeying any of your orders. You know, you tell him to go to
the right and he goes to the left. And you tell him to
touch his foot and he sort of tries to touch his head first
and so forth. Well, you're on the second inversion, aren't
you? Well, it's very simple - with the normal... with the
usual run of preclear, you have to make him obey orders so
that then you can make him disobey orders; in this case you
have to make him disobey orders so that you can bring him
around to obeying orders. He's on a second inversion; he's
just plowed down that deep.

What do you have him do? Then you just have him
self-determinedly receive an order and do something else.
You say, "All right. Now, every time when I tell you to go
to the right and so forth, why, you receive that as a
command and then change your mind and decide to go to the
left. And when I say, 'Raise your hand up,' then you change
your mind and put your hand down."

See? And we just do this as a routine fashion. We
self-determinedly have him arrange the command. When he was
doing it automatically before, there was some little
gimmick in there that was a machine that made it
danger... You see, actually direction reversal comes
about solely from the formulas of communication itself: An
individual is faced by people who are talking to him.
Eventually, if he's overcome by people talking to him, he
will eventually get a direction reversal. This is rather
simple: The person will be on him backwards, in other words.

Well, we've got a machine of this character, and we say...
when we say... You found out, by the way, when you said,
"All right. Now run a concept," or do this or think that or
something or other, well, he did something else, you know.
He wasn't obeying the order. We've got him on the disobedience 
echelon, so let's make him consciously, self-determinedly 
disobey orders. And then he'll come up to a point where 
he'll obey orders.

And after he's been audited for a while - obeying orders,
obeying orders, obeying orders - he's self-determinedly
obeyed enough proper orders to a point where he is
perfectly free to disobey orders without any rancor
whatsoever, and that moment he's well.

He can look an order right straight in the teeth and do
something else, you know, with a perfect happiness about
the whole thing. No compulsion or obsession about feeling
guilty, or well, he should have done it, or anything of the
sort. That's about the neatest test of Clear there is.

TBD

Well, again, we have merely introduced self-determinism
into the automaticities of the preclear. We have again
made him capable of directing his attention, haven't
we - directing and maintaining his attention. We have made it
possible for him to selectively, on his own determinism,
put his attention on things and take it off things. We
have changed his ability to change his mind, to an ability
to change his mind. We've changed his ability to change his
mind from an inability to change his mind to an ability to
change his mind. And when we've done all that, why, we've
done about all there is you can do, regardless of
exteriorization or interiorization.

All right. Therefore, your understanding of the case should
be broad in the realization that the case is doing, on one
inversion or another, something he doesn't want to do. He's
sitting in the chair: This is obviously something he
doesn't want to do.

If this case is having a terrible time - this case is in
awful shape - the last thing in the world he wants to do is
sit in that auditing chair. Why don't you cure him of it?
Have him go to the door, come in, say, "I want to be
audited," and sit down in the auditing chair. Just have him
do this several times, you know? And the fellow will sit in
the chair comfortably. He doesn't sit in the chair fighting
you and fighting himself and so forth.

He'll think after a while, "You know, this is kind of idiotic, 
the kind of games you play; your ideas and so forth."

I had a fellow one time, I couldn't get anyplace with him
with auditing because he insulted me all the time. So, I
just had him sit there and insult me and insult himself and
insult the walls. I didn't have him go into apathy about
this - you know, I didn't do it on the basis of punishment.
Now, if you ran it too short a time, it would appear that
you were doing it as a punishment mechanism, because
you'll find his tone will decline at first. His tone will
go down, he'll get more apathetic. And then finally he'll
laugh about it. Well, make sure you carry it on through to
where he's bright about it - not necessarily laughing about
it, but he's perfectly relieved about it.

"You play your game" and "Those peculiar ideas of yours" -
in other words, until he's relaxed, not just to the point
where he feels he's being punished. That's the first thing
he's willing to assume about you is that you're trying to
punish him. Of course, with some auditors, he's probably
right, but...

Now, the list of procedures which you should be very
conversant with and which you should change very willingly
one procedure to another, as it might appear effective are
as follows: 1. SOP 8-C. 2. SOP 8-D, as itself; and SOP 8-D
with an entire wheel. Very effective procedure.

Viewpoint Straightwire combined with Be, Have and Do
Straightwire. Oh, you ought to know that one cold because
that's a lot of process, believe me.

And you should know how to do a Grand Tour.

How to spot spots in space and remedy havingness as just a
process, you know - spot a spot in space; remedy some
havingness. Spot a spot in space; remedy some havingness. I
don't care in what form it is, you should be able to do
that just as a process.

You should be able to start, stop and change avalanches as
a process. You know, run avalanches as a process.

You should be able to do Change of Space Processing, just
as a process.

And oddly enough, for patchups, you'd better know Reach and
Withdraw from various interested objects as a process,
because it's a sure way of getting your preclear's
attention off of things that you can't seem to get him off
of one way or the other. For instance - Reach and
Withdraw - we had a case here that kept talking about a
certain auditing session that he had experienced.
Actually, one of the ways to take the attention off that
auditing session, we'd simply make him Reach and Withdraw
from where he was toward the auditing room.

This has an application in real life, too. An individual
who has a compulsion to go to a certain area: He doesn't
have to go there; all he has to do is stay where he is and
Reach and Withdraw for it a few times and the compulsion
will vanish. What you doing there? You're just duplicating
what the thetan ordinarily does, which is reach and
withdraw. And you're putting it on a self-determined basis,
so you take away the compulsion.

Now, additional processes you should know, just for the
curiosa in it, and because you will find preclears suddenly
snapping into this: Beingness Processing, just as such.

And then you ought to know the drills incident to turning
on a thetan's perceptions and rehabilitating his ability to
handle bodies and build universes, which we call 8-O and
which has never been very thoroughly codified - because it's
a very loose process, that's why it's never been codified.
But you should understand that its theory is to return to
the thetan all those abilities which the thetan would have
as a body - give to the thetan all the abilities the body
has. That's 8-O. And more. Really, you pick up more ability
than the body has.

Now, that's a list of processes. Now, that isn't very much
to ask an auditor to know how to use, is it?

You ought to know those processes well enough so that you
don't have to look at a sheet of paper in order to audit a
preclear. There's nothing caves in the confidence of a
preclear like an auditor reading the process off of a piece
of paper. Believe me, nothing caves a preclear in as fast.

They're very easy to memorize - very easy to memorize.
They're not long or arduous. And as you use these
processes, you, of course, choose amongst them and change
them one process for another as told to do so by the
communication lag of the preclear. Right? We use any of
these processes I just mentioned - fast or slow, whichever
they are - but we use one for a while and we get no
communication change - the communication lag of the preclear
does not get longer, it does not get shorter; the preclear's 
state of perception remains about the same; his attitude 
toward existence remains about the same - just swap to 
another process.

How can I tell you how to do this, beyond just, if he
doesn't change and if you're not going in the direction you
think you ought to be going, just shift to another of those
processes which I just mentioned.

Now, I don't mean to another process of the thousands of
existing processes there are. I mean just shift amongst
that little group of processes I just gave you, one to
another. If you find that this isn't working with him or if
that particular question isn't doing anything for him, know
then, change.

Now, don't particularly either depend upon an E-Meter.
Depend more upon your own information and knowledge of
communication lag. Watch his communication lag and depend
upon that rather than depending upon any other thing.

If you know these processes and you know enough to shift
them when they are not doing as much change as they should
be doing at the moment - you know a process could be very
effective for twenty minutes and then reduce in its
effectiveness for some reason or another, and the fellow's
communication lag stay right there as a pretty fair lag for
the next half-hour - oh, you've just wasted a half an hour of
processing.

If the fellow's communication lag does not change every
three minutes, change the process - or change your position
in the process, rather. You see that? And if the process
itself just doesn't seem to be working on this case as a
whole, by golly, change the whole process to another one of
the list I gave you.

And when you get an effective process, stay with it as long
as you get communication changes. And if you know all this
about auditing, you're a wise man.

(end of lecture)




_


