Subject: FZ Bible FIRST POSTULATE TAPES 26/35 (20th ACC) Date: 24 Nov 1999 23:26:16 -0000 From: Secret Squirrel Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST FIRST POSTULATE TAPES 26/35 (20th American Advanced Clinical Course) ************************************************** Contents 20th ACC - First Postulate Cassettes [clearsound] New # Old # Date Title 20ACC-1 (1) 14 Jul 58 OPENING LECTURE 20ACC-2 (1A) 14 Jul 58 OPENING LECTURE - Q AND A PERIOD 20ACC-3 (2) 15 Jul 58 ACC PROCEDURE OUTLINED E-METER TRS 20ACC-4 (2A) 15 Jul 58 ACC PROC OUTLINED - E-METER TRS - Q AND A PERIOD 20ACC-5 (3) 16 Jul 58 COURSE PROCEDURE OUTLINED 20ACC-6 (3A) 16 Jul 58 COURSE PROCEDURE OUTLINED - Q AND A PERIOD 20ACC-7 (4) 17 Jul 58 BEGINNING AND ENDING SESSION 20ACC-8 (4A) 17 Jul 58 BEGINNING AND ENDING SESSION - Q AND A PERIOD 20ACC-9 (5) 18 Jul 58 ACC TRAINING PROCEDURE 20ACC-10 (5A) 18 Jul 58 ACC TRAINING PROCEDURE - Q & A PERIOD 20ACC-11 (6) 21 Jul 58 THE KEY WORDS (BUTTONS) OF SCIENTOLOGY CLEARING 20ACC-12 (6A) 21 Jul 58 THE KEY WORDS (BUTTONS) OF SCN - Q & A PERIOD 20ACC-13 (7) 22 Jul 58 THE ROCK 20ACC-14 (7A) 22 Jul 58 THE ROCK - Q & A PERIOD 20ACC-15 (8) 23 Jul 58 SPECIAL EFFECT CASES, ANATOMY OF 20ACC-16 (8A) 23 Jul 58 SPECIAL EFFECT CASES, ANATOMY - Q&A PERIOD 20ACC-17 (9) 24 Jul 58 ANATOMY OF NEEDLES - DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE 20ACC-18 (9A) 24 Jul 58 ANATOMY OF NEEDLES - DIAG. PROC - Q&A PERIOD 20ACC-19 (10) 25 Jul 58 THE ROCK: PUTTING THE PC AT CAUSE 20ACC-20 (10A) 25 Jul 58 Q&A PERIOD - CLEARING THE COMMAND 20ACC-21 (11) 28 Jul 58 ACC COMMAND SHEET - GOALS OF AUDITING 20ACC-22 (12) 29 Jul 58 ACC COMMAND SHEET (cont.) 20ACC-23 (13) 30 Jul 58 ACC COMMAND SHEET (cont. 2) 20ACC-24 (14) 31 Jul 58 RUNNING THE CASE AND THE ROCK 20ACC-25 (15) 1 Aug 58 CASE ANALYSIS - ROCK HUNTING 20ACC-26 (15A) 1 Aug 58 CASE ANALYSIS - ROCK HUNTING (cont.) 20ACC-27 (16) 4 Aug 58 CASE ANALYSIS - ROCK HUNTING (cont. 2) 20ACC-28 (16A) 4 Aug 58 CASE ANALYSIS - ROCK HUNTING - Q&A PERIOD 20ACC-29 (17) 5 Aug 58 ARC 20ACC-30 (18) 6 Aug 58 THE ROCK - ITS ANATOMY 20ACC-31 (19) 7 Aug 58 THE MOST BASIC ROCK OF ALL 20ACC-32 (19A) 7 Aug 58 THE MOST BASIC ROCK OF ALL - Q&A PERIOD 20ACC-33 (20) 8 Aug 58 AUDITOR INTEREST 20ACC-34 (20A) 8 Aug 58 REQUISITES AND FUNDAMENTALS OF A SESSION 20ACC-35 (21) 15 Aug 58 SUMMARY OF 20TH ACC The clearsound set includes an Appendix containing two HCOBs. This has been included with the first lecture above. Note that old 15B "Q & A PERIOD" of 2 Aug 58 was marked as missing in the Flag Master List and was later found by Gold. Its absense here probably means that they found it to be the same as old 16A (20ACC-28 in the above list). Old number 19B "Q & A Period" of 8 Aug in the Flag Master List is also omitted but 20ACC-32 (old 19A) is extremely long and probably contains both old 19A and 19B. Note 20ACC-2 (1A) does not appear on the Flag Master List but appears to be genuine. We were able to check ten of these against the old reels and found minor omissions [marked ">" in the transcripts.] ************************************************** 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 freezoners are "squirrels" who should be stamped out as heretics. 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 Judaism 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 ************************************************** 20ACC-26 (15A) 1 Aug 58 CASE ANALYSIS - ROCK HUNTING (cont.) CASE ANALYSIS - ROCK HUNTING (cont.) A lecture given on 1 August 1958 [Clearsound, checked against the old reel. Omissions marked ">". A paragraph restored in the clearound version that was omitted from the old reel is marked "%".] This is the second-stage lecture, lecture 15A, of the 20th ACC, a regular lecture thrown in as a double-header here, August the 1st, 1958, Rock Hunting, Continued - Case Analysis, Continued. Okay. Now, we've gotten so far as to classify cases, and I am going to classify them again for you. And they go like this: first-stage case, second stage, third stage, fourth stage. Now, what we mean by "stages" is simply this: is, how far is the fellow out from the engram chains. The further he's out from them, the more complicated the case appears to be, the harder it is to get a needle reaction, the more detached he is from the whole thing. Now theoretically, this fourth stage is simply classified as: a person who does not react upon the meter. No matter what you say, you get no meter reaction. This doesn't matter what you say. Do you understand that? There's just no meter reaction possible here. The actual reason for that is, of course, the Rock, and of course, we are really getting a picture of somebody who is sitting in a Rock. But we have to classify it theoretically as no reaction on the meter. Yes, you have him squeeze the cans and he gets a fall, but that's it. Now, he doesn't even react well to - touch your fingers on the back of his neck and say, "Has any girl ever kissed you here? Has any guy ever kissed you here?" You know, he just doesn't react well. You understand that? He doesn't react well to it, but you might get some reaction. He might react if you kick him in the shins. But he doesn't react on things he ought to react to. Now, you can do a lie test if you're suspicious of this case, and you'll find out that it doesn't react well to a lie test. But that again is not a total test for this case because there are people of the third stage and a few of the second stage who don't react on lies either. But this case for sure doesn't do a good lie reaction. In other words he just isn't acting on the meter, that's all there is to that. And the meter is following through a pattern, the upper part of which is a stuck. Do you see this? It's a stuck. The upper part of the pattern is a stuck. First, second, third and fourth stages. Fourth stage, he is a spectator indeed. It has nothing to do with him. No, he's just this little thetan sitting out here someplace and he might notice something's going on sometime but if he noticed, it would kill him dead. Now, you're talking to a whole bunch of composite machinery on such a case. And the machinery can answer up very smartly, the machinery can be helpful, the machinery can be not helpful, the machinery can be this, the machinery can be that. You understand? Case might be very convincing in some way or another but it isn't acting on your meter. Now, the thing to do with this case, which is the toughest one for you in the ACC here, is not to try to clean off the meter, but something a lot more desperate. Let's as-is some of the bank and move him in closer to the bank, something I doubt that I would put out in general. And you move him in closer to the bank by having him (quote) - whether he can mock up or not, this is beside the point - have him "In front of that body, mock up a person who would be pleased with your condition. Behind that body mock up a person who would be pleased with your condition." You understand? "Beneath that body mock up a person who would be pleased with your condition. To the right of that body mock up a person who would be pleased with your condition. To the left of that body mock up a person who would be pleased with your condition." Front, behind, above, below, right and left. Do you get that? Six sides of the body. "Mock up a person who would be pleased with your condition." Now, people who have been fooled around with in auditing and who had an analysis run on them can be momentarily or temporarily in this state. You see that? Now that does two things; it isn't just the idle action of Connectedness. Now Connectedness will do this, and in an auditor's hand who doesn't know his business as well as I would like him to, Connectedness is a safe tool. It keys the thing out; it kicks it out of the road. Get the idea? But this other one doesn't; this other one tends to narrow him down, move him in closer to the Rock, cure his spectatorishness. It's like moving a small bulldozer up that's a very gentle, considerate bulldozer, you know? And all ten horsepower, push him over closer to the Rock. Got that? Now, I'll tell you a version of this that'll blow somebody through to Clear; that's how good this process is. By the way, this is one of the hottest processes that has ever been in - that I've ever come up with in Dianetics or Scientology; it's hot. Runs on everybody; cases good and bad can all run on this process. I'm not sold on the process because it did anything spectacular for me, I'm sold on the process because I've done some spectacular things with it. Versions of this process are all capable of producing interesting, specific changes on a case, the various versions of it, and they are to a marked degree permanent changes. They are permanent changes, do you understand? They aren't just brush it all off and key it out and so forth; it's real auditing, but it can be beefy at times. It can be rough, a little bit rough at times, but it's always on a gain. Now I will let you in on a little secret; although it is totally possible for a person to be in a total not-know about his Rock, there is a process that you could run on yourself that will show you your own Rock. Now, that's a good one for an auditor to know. It is, isn't it? Male voice: Yeah. This is the only self-audit process I know of that is worth a damn. All the rest of them are sheer dross, they're just a mess-up. But this is a circuit killer and therefore is a very safe self-audit process. You had to have for a self-audit process something that would kill circuits, otherwise self-auditing was just a circuit running a circuit and nothing was happening anyplace. You get the idea? Well, this kills the circuit you are running it with and you have to keep setting up new circuits to run it with. You understand? And it gives you exercise in setting up circuits and so it runs. It's quite interesting. Theoretically, a person could not find his own Rock and in the absence of a good, basic, personal knowledge of Scientology, it would be utterly impossible. But this one will do it. What is the common denominator of all Rocks? "Don't know," of course. It's the one you always look for. So you run this process on your preclear, and if you're feeling too rough for words, you could run it on yourself and you won't even interrupt your auditor's auditing of you. You move your case along the way a little way, and he'll be kind of amazed when you come back off of a break or something. And you can keep your secret if you want to, it doesn't matter, but you're not going to damage your case this way. This particularly should be run on the person who never cognites in auditing, you got that? He is the spectator to end all spectators, the person who never cognites on anything in auditing. You got that one? Now, he's so submerged - by the way, this is the roughest case for a Scientologist to handle, because in the final analysis it is knowingness that gets the case in shape, see? That is the basic therapy of all cases and those processes which create knowingness faster than others are simply the better processes. That's about all there is to that. Now, this individual is snowed under with a not-know and a don't-know, see? That's the common denominator of all these things. The person who doesn't cognite is simply snowed under with stupidity, see, not-knowingness, stupidity and so forth. All of us rant and rave about stupidity; we've never had a process which just took stupidity and kicked it out the window. It's one of our primary targets so we might as well recognize that although I'm giving you this as a patch-up and something you do one way or the other, you should recognize in passing that we have a major gain here. "In front of that body, mock up a person who would be pleased with your stupidity. Behind that body mock up a person who would be pleased with your stupidity. Below that body mock up a person who would be pleased with your stupidity. Above that body mock up a person who would be pleased with your stupidity. To the right of that body mock up a person who would be pleased with your stupidity. To the left of that body mock up a person who would be pleased with your stupidity." Well, what comes off? The not-knowingness that covers the Rock. And if you ran it long enough, the next thing you know, why, you'd say, "I wonder," you know, your first "I wonder, I wonder. Seems to me highly possible, although I'd never hang myself with being a manure factory, it seems to be more real somehow." And you run it a little bit longer and here's a fertilizer factory. See, it's not a manure factory, but a fertilizer factory of some kind or another, and it makes everything live and it's the prime via on livingness for the person, see? Pretty weird. You can actually whittle that not-know off the case. Got it? Now, you as an auditor on a case that isn't cogniting, isn't being cooperative, isn't doing this and isn't doing that can always do this. We have run this with a person lying in bed, sick with a temperature, waiting an ambulance, % and cured his cancer. We'll have to edit this off the tape % because it's not proper to cure cancer, it's frowned on. % We didn't audit him just to cure his cancer but just to % make him feel a little better. By the time he arrived % where he was going and got his diagnosis from the medicos % and so forth, he no longer had cancer. Quite interesting, quite interesting history this little process has; it has a rather short history, but is basically a killer. Now, get this. If you run a creative process - now I've given you a good one - now I am going to give you a horrible scene: If you run a creative process on somebody whose Rock has not been found, you would have done a kinder thing if you'd picked up a shotgun and blown his head off. Never run a creative process on a person whose Rock has not been erased. We have made the mistake and we won't make it again. Because as the person's ability to mock things up increases, the Rock, of course - because that is basically his ability to mock things up - becomes tougher and tougher and more and more painful. That's not a therapeutic action; that's to half kill somebody. You got it? Now, write that one up in red fire because it certainly belongs there. Don't run a creative process on a person whose Rock has not been erased. Now, it says in some notes > that Millie took, and that came out here - I didn't even look them over - > but she's taking some notes. It says, "Get the Rock and then run Help and Step 6, and Help and Step 6," see. Now - now look, the way that was said - we mustn't have any further misunderstanding here - is get it, which means erase it, kill it, knock it out, get it forevermore gone, and now you run Help on other minor little things and Step 6, and Help and Step 6, and Help and Step 6. Why do you do that after you found the Rock? Boy, that ought to be awful obvious. You run the Rock with Help. Well, you just run Help on anything you can dream up, or anything that makes the meter react, or anything you get a little stick on or a little blip on, something of the sort. After you've got the Rock, you've got to clean up all the debris on the case to make a good, thorough, stable Clear. You see? And the way you do that is any time you can get a knock on anything - and the old SOP 8 List of Expanded GITA is a very nice one to use, and anything else you can dream up and anything else you've learned about case analysis, you can get in there and pitch. It's going to be awful hard to stick a needle after a Rock is gone but you can make a needle go luppp! and you say, "That's good enough for me," and run Help on it. And you run three, four brackets and it's missing. Now run some Step 6. Why? Let's improve his ability to mock up. As we improve his ability to mock up, new little tiny dikes in the road will appear in view, see? And it's not an endless process; they clean quick. Well, you take a person who is mired down totally in a Rock and you run some Step 6, you half kill him, and some of us have been through that. Now, if you want to call such a thing a goof, it's a goof. I'm responsible for it, I did it. > I consider it a totally allowable goof, because it hasn't > murdered anybody yet, but it has certainly given them some > damndably awful weeks. Before you've got a consumer of scaly monsters off the case, you run Step 6 and improve his ability to create. And the next thing you know, there's just a bigger and better scaly monster consumer. And also, the scaly monster producer, which must always accompany any consumer, has gone into action and he has become the scaly monster that is being consumed. So he's mocked up and consumed and mocked up and consumed hour after hour after hour after hour all of his waking days. Actually, the funny part of it is, his morale is better in spite of it. You feel like hell, but your morale's better! You get the idea? Well, now, that condition we become familiar with in clearing because this sometimes happens inadvertently, quite by accident, the preclear improves his ability to create when he's running Help on the Rock. He gets off some major lock and he hasn't gotten the Rock off yet and his ability to create improves better and all of a sudden the whole bank beefs up. Well now, those are his facsimiles and somatics coming to life, see. And that's the whole cycle and explanation for somatics during auditing. The ability to create improves which, of course, improves the quality of the engrams he is surrounded with and they have more bite. That's all there is to that, so you get a somatic. Now, if you're running real smoothly and if you're going for the exact, correct Rock, you run almost a somaticless session. But beware because you could be running a case that couldn't feel somatics. That'd be a different thing. You're improving also the somatic shut-off, and you're just storing up balls of fire to dump on this guy's head when he all of a sudden runs out the somatic shut-off, see. So therefore, auditing toward Clear can be tough on the pc; it doesn't make him feel better always, every session. He goes through some very bad times after a session or in - during a session, naturally, occasionally. Sometimes he runs it through; he's interested, you know, but it's just not biting, it's not biting, it's... He's interested but nothing really is happening and he's - not biting and all of a sudden he's - Help on some part of the bank - an identification flips out his primary barrier to creating something and - boom! See, he's got it right there. Now that explains the mechanism of somatics - is why somatics occur. Got it? Now, this fourth stage of case, then, is either just in a Rock, stuck needle, can't react otherwise or he's incapable of reacting. If he's also incapable of ever getting a cognition in session, why, you can just get the idea that he's just so far detached from anything that's real, that you're going to have a hard time. You could run him on this stupidity line which, of course, has a gradient scale, "Mock up a person who would be pleased with your condition." Then you can get special, you can get highly specialized. You can do almost anything with this process, but "Be pleased with your stupidity, pleased with your ignorance" or anything else that seems to be apt and so forth, will start to unbury the Rock. And this one all by itself takes off things as fast as it improves creativeness, and that process all by itself keeps apparently an even balance between creativeness and somatic and upset. Now, I have not made a test; I imagine this thing is probably two, three hundred hours to Clear. I imagine it is, just from experience of one kind or another. That's just a guess; that's an awful guess. It might be faster, it might be slower, might be a thousand hours on somebody, but certainly we can guarantee that up the line it's going to wind up. Now this is not admiration; it's just clear ARC. For a while he'll run admiration, the admiration particles as-is everything, and he is liable to get into a soft gooey bog. You see, he's liable to get all boggy and confused and that sort of thing, but he'll come out of it, particularly if you clear "pleased," see? "Pleased" is not admiration. Pleased is just a person who is pleased, not a person who is admiring the condition. Get that? Just made the person happy, just mock the person up happy because you're in that condition. He, by the way, will find all of the ghosts that we used to try to find in the 2nd ACC. You know, the "ghosts"? People are walking around all the time and they have these damned valences that are hanging around. And their younger brother has been with them all the days of their lives as a mock-up walking right along the street with them and they never recognized or seen it, you know, the old ghost idea. Well, this blows the ghost into view and tells you why the guy kept the ghosts around, because the ghosts were pleased with their bad condition, and the ghosts were pleased with their ignorance and stupidity. And they're trying to get their ignorance and stupidity as-ised and the basic mechanism they use to do this is to keep people around who were pleased with their ignorance or their pain or their stupidity. And these, of course, were their worst enemies. But they were pleased with these conditions. Get the idea? So those are the people that start showing up. Now, you don't care what kind of a person it is. You don't care if he mocks up the same one for an hour, then gets tired of it and then starts mocking up Mother and Father and women and monsters, and then all of a sudden mocks up God, just on and on and on and on; and mocks up God being pleased with his condition and then all of a sudden doesn't mock up God anymore - just leave it on automatic what he mocks up, as far as the auditor is concerned. Don't bother with it. Of course, if he starts mocking up thetans being pleased with his conditions, you can shortly expect fireworks of one kind or another. And they won't be nice because this lack of mass will take its toll and the pc start coming apart at the hinges. I - in such an eventuality where he is mocking up nothingnesses being pleased with his condition - I usually kick him in the shins and make him put a mass there. All right now, you've got under your belt then a process which does take care of this case all the way without a case analysis. And then when you've done that one, you will know that you are operating in the field of clearing from a security. You're operating from a nice solid security. You can do it regardless of cooperation or anything else. You got to get the guy sitting there. Got it? Hm? Now you can operate from this fourth case from a security. Now, the thing which will come out in Clear Procedure that you do with this fourth case is a simple thing. You simply key it out with Responsibility or Connectedness, Connectedness preferred, and start all over again with a case analysis. And why will it come out that way? Well, the auditor has already gotten the fellow in some kind of trouble usually when he can't find anything else. Well, why let him get the pc in further trouble by miring him down further in the bank with a process that probably won't be finished, you know, and will be dropped halfway through or messed up somehow or another. So let's at least give them an out. Got it? But boy, don't do this to somebody where you have an idea of what the Rock is and you are already on the Rock. You'll change the characteristic of the case and you're now - now have got to do it all over again, and it's all messed up, this connectedness deal, see? If you want to erase a needle and get a new reaction at all, you as an ACC student would adventure with some diffidence in the direction of just wiping the needle, getting a new reaction and starting all over again. Not a good thing to do at all, because it'll slow you down. Every hour you spend with Connectedness is wasted time. You've just wasted that much auditing, don't you see? Now, know that clearly because some people will hit a Rock in somebody else which is very close to their own Rock while they're still real aberrated and they do experience a tendency to run. You'd be amazed, when we're going for Rocks, that auditors who usually get a session right on the road will unknowingly and unwittingly stall one down for three or four hours going over a lot of nonsense: checking and rechecking for a PT problem, wanting to wipe the dial to see if that was really the Rock, going on endless scouts when they already got the Rock in their little hot hands, see, avoiding getting that thing going and in session. Why are they doing that? Their own Rock's in restim by the same deal, their own Rock is in restim and it tells them reactively they better run. Well, their method of running, since they have to sit there and audit, of course, is just not audit. Got the idea? If you find yourself - just look at yourself sometime while you're auditing - if you find yourself getting a show on the road awfully slowly, and you just can't seem to get this session going, just exert some of your own "kick-in-the-buttness." Just give yourself a swift kick and just start right out in the blue, you know. You found the Rock, you found it yesterday, you know. It was a perfectly valid Rock, only you went on and scouted more and cleaned up PT problems and did this and did that. And you find yourself doing that suddenly, don't depend on somebody else to call it to your attention, because an auditor is - being an auditor is a highly responsible, rather lonely activity. Your own action is your own action; you have self-determinism and freedom of choice of great magnitude. And there's not always somebody else there to give you a swift kick, and then you wonder why you've never cleared anybody or something after a couple, three months, you know? So you have to be your own best disciplinarian. And you say, "Boy, I certainly am taking a long time to get this show on the road." Don't blame the pc, blame you. Your pc will answer questions, even if you have to tie him in the chair. So you found a Rock, and it looked like a pretty good Rock and you're not going to spend another nine hours. God, don't spend nine-hour scouts, feel ashamed of yourself. Length of my scouts are usually about twelve, fifteen minutes. Now, I'm not holding myself up as a glorious example or something like this on the situation, but remember I had to learn this too. I had to figure it out as I went along. And the rules I'm giving you now are just the rules that have proved out out of this figure-out. You could go back over the same ground right now and figure them out all over again for yourself. You understand that? I horrified my auditor, I found my own Rock and this was impossible. I could have kicked the auditor, the auditor was doing just the same thing I was talking to you about. I told the auditor exactly what the Rock was, exactly where it was, and exactly how I had found it and exactly how it had stuck a rising needle. Auditor couldn't believe it, spent an hour and a half, wiped the dial, came back in, tried to find something else. I finally said, "Don't you think you've wasted enough of this session? Why don't you go and try to find the Rock again?" Auditor could find nothing else on the case but that Rock, not because I was mocking it up - because it was the Rock. What the auditor didn't realize is that the E-Meter registers what it registers. That light registers electricity, it registers what it registers. You understand? And you see some guys that say they can kick an E-Meter around. Well, I found out I had spooked my own auditor, because in watching the engrams and body engrams - I still had quite a few engrams around the body-and when I'd see the engram in its various manifestations, I was enough of an auditor to know what the E-Meter was going to do now and I'd call my shots. And it had eventually given my auditor the idea that I could move the E-Meter. I wasn't trying to cheat and move the E-Meter, I could simply call my shots. I knew when there was going to be an exteriorization take place in the engram and when a theta bop was going to occur. Gee, you see the engram off and all of a sudden recede and you see it just start to go, you know? And you see there's a dead body lying down there, and you say, "Well, watch for a yo-yo, here we go." See? And run the next command and all of a sudden, zoom! The meter would yo-yo and the auditor would become superstitious about this sort of thing. People tend to get superstitious about me anyhow and that I could call these shots had actually given the auditor some kind of an idea that I was moving the needle around - wasn't doing any such thing. I just knew what meters did when things happened. I been auditing long enough to know what they do. You get the idea? But on the basis that a person never knows what his Rock is, the auditor could not get the idea that a person could ferret out his own Rock. You got the idea? Never seen anybody else that could ferret out their own Rock. The auditor is just beat half to death, finally having to come back with a cleaned needle and get the same thing to stick and get only that to stick. And the auditor was invalidated because the auditor had been running something else for a Rock, and it hadn't been getting very far, you know? It had been rising rather consistently and actually the Rock in the first place hadn't been made to stick on the dial. Don't you see? Well, this other thing was an absolute halt. You know, just dudidudidu, stop! No further surge, no further rise, no further nothing. Auditor finally looked at me with a real ornery look and says, "Well, you're right. We'll have to run it." And I started to run the thing and a few energy masses of one kind or another and computations and so forth started shifting around. I relaxed as far as session was concerned, but I'd been in-session and relaxed from the beginning, see? It was the auditor who was upset. You get the idea? And as an auditor, I've seen myself get upset. "What is there that I utterly detest about this preclear?" See? "I just can't bring myself to audit this preclear with any degree of pleasure at all. Well, I guess I'll have to get over it somehow." And every such preclear came off the top of my Rock. They had computations that were almost dead on the head, see? Get the idea? Which is fascinating from various standpoints of what an auditor can do. Now, what an auditor can do is not what a preclear can do. A preclear who is just a preclear without any training, without any anything, that is one breed of cat. What you can do as an auditor is quite something else. You're not having to audit through your circuits or do this or do that. You know when you're being a nut on the subject of your own sessions. You never get so far gone but to realize that you could be doing better. Right? In other words, we are still masters of our own fate to a very marked degree. And although as placid as lambs, we sit there and get run through things that we may not even think they're it, you know. We may not really have any confidence in it at all and so forth, we still know enough about being preclears to go on and be a good preclear. And if it works out, it works out and we're as willing to be surprised as anybody else. You know? But we know what we know. If the auditor doesn't buy it we know that's a liability of auditing and maybe we're wrong. We're a different breed of preclear when we're a preclear, we're a Scientological preclear. Get the idea? It isn't that we know a lot of data; we can do things with minds. Don't think it very strange that we can get back and do things with our own minds. If you haven't some confidence of being able to do something with your own mind, you got no business in this thing. You have some confidence in it. You have some confidence in being able to look at it or confront it to some degree or you wouldn't be here at all, don't you see? Well, to be able to confront something, just know something about it. Right? So when I tell you to watch these computations going by while you yourself are being audited, I am not putting any stress or strain on your auditing. I have never done anything else but watch the computations go by while I was in-session and then never add them into the bulk of Scientology. That probably is why we got where we got to; is because I would always steadfastly refuse to take a personal experience and subjective reality and foist it off on everybody and anything until I knew what I was doing with it. One time I was so amazed in session I could have fainted with humiliation, a long time ago. Poor old George Wichelow was running me on subjective don't-know, which is the lousiest process there is; he knew it was a lousy process. I was just about to give a lecture, he didn't have any business running a beefy process like this, but he was going to make me feel better. And he came over and the London fog had penetrated my beingness. And he came over to the hotel and just before I was going to give a lecture, why old George sat down with his usual cocky aplomb and decided that he would run subjective don't-know (even though he knew better, undoubtedly) on London and fog and things, you know, and cheer me up. See? And boy, he ran me right on down the line - boy, he ran me right on down the line. But as murderous as the session was, it took me, I think, oh, twenty-four hours to get totally destimulated from the session. It was pretty grim. Next time he audited me I felt fine and he did a good job, but he just picked a sour one that day. But I found something out during the session that I sure didn't like. I found out that the one thing I would never do, I had done. I found out that in about - in 1938, when I wrote the first notes and book on mental investigations, that every single cockeyed piece of terminology in it (none of which ever survived to 1949 or 50), every piece of that terminology was taken straight out of my own engrams. Boy, was my face red. And I was certainly pleased when I realized I'd had enough sense after the war to reevaluate, take other people's experiences and do a totally analytical approach to the thing and drop all of these terms. You get the idea? Boy, was my thetan red. And that experience, which happened several years ago, and seeing that I had done it once has made me just trebly cautious about it. So I always go around and I look at it myself and I'm on fairly good terms with my own bank now. I can look at it without it biting and I can mock up large sections of past, and it's all right for me to remember the name of the guy that killed me in such and such a time, you know, without suddenly going into hate-hate-hate. The bank has tamed down considerably, you know, which means the past experience has tamed down considerably from a standpoint of its velocity. And to look over this vista of things and see whether or not there is any personal onus or curve on any of the material which I'm handing you, see? That's quite a trick, quite a trick. But it's panning out now like it never panned out before. Because everything I'm giving you about case analysis is totally based on several months of intensive inspection of other cases. And every datum which I have picked up subjectively, I have very carefully set aside and classified it as such until it itself shook out of the woods, see? That I could knock out and get acquainted with my own Rock without much help and assistance might discredit my idea of "willing to be helped." Right after I did that I said, "Gee, did I do this because I was unwilling to be helped?" You know, I looked it over, 'spect it very carefully. I don't want to add this thing into what we know, you know, if that's the case, and then observed the fact the following day that, far from being unwilling to be helped, I was inventing things for some people around me so they could help me. I saw I was clean of that. And I've handed this out to two or three other people (three to be precise) to see where they got - because I know that they are chronic self-boggers-inner. And when they got - came up bright and shining, why, I knew we had something that closely resembled a self-auditing process for the first time in the history of this business which, if used by an auditor, would go through to Clear because it improves help and it improves goals and improves desires up to a point where an individual can operate. Now do you understand this? It is possible to override your bank. Once in a while I feel like saying to somebody on staff or something like that - sure, maybe they're awful caved in - I feel like saying to some of them, "You don't have to obey a reactive mind. You don't have to follow its orders. It is not absolutely necessary that you be crazy, or that you be chicken about something of the sort." So I well remember being thrown into a whole chain of engrams many, many years ago, 1949, and going up to Bethursday Naval Hospital and my total medical history was totally medical. It never had anything to do with psychiatric, but I was in a horrible state of restimulation. The auditor had thrown me clear back into a prenatal and here we went. See? God almighty, I didn't know whether the world was falling in or going apart because the auditor got me all the way back down the train and then agreed with my mother. Oh man, that was rough, never brought me up to present time, never said another word. Next morning I was walking down the corridor of Bethesda Naval Hospital and I'll be darned if that corridor wasn't moving itself into four, five different points of the compass, one after the other. First it was going north and then it was going northeast, and then it was going northwest, you know? It was heading different directions, actually physically heading different directions and I said, "Boy, I've had it. I - I don't think I can go on, not another inch. After all, I've - I've had it," I said to myself and I leaned shakingly and horrifiedly up against a door. Couldn't even get on to the eye clinic where I was supposed to have an examination. And I looked up out of the corner of my eye and I saw the sign "Psychiatrist." And I took myself by the nape of the neck and I straightened myself up and I squared myself into a straight line and walked on down to the eye clinic. That's easily the worst one I ever had, easily. But Dianetics had already pulled me up to a point where they certified me as totally fit for combat duty by rank and grade from total disability. I'd already gone through this; I'd already achieved this gain. But I got a reality at that moment that has been a reality on me in research ever since. Two things: You don't have to do what your bank says. And the other one is: You don't have to add your own case in to any computation you make. And these are two of my stablest, stable data in Dianetics and Scientology, not because I've been through that sort of thing, not because I have to tell you about it. They are good ones to use, they're good ones because they've gotten us a very, very long way. They are a couple of hidden stable data that you otherwise wouldn't know about unless I suddenly took down my hair and told you about this. You understand? Now, never at any time in the history of Dianetics and Scientology has it been as necessary for an individual to grab himself by the nape of his own neck and to keep his own case out of it, as it is now in Rock hunting and Rock running. You can't add your own case in on the other guy. If you find yourself consistently, mind you, consistently avoiding a certain type of computation in these types of computation, you better get suspicious. And if you haven't got anybody else to help you and this thing has come up and you haven't gotten Clear and that sort of thing, look it over, it won't bite you. You say, "I just never seem to want to ask the person if he has a consumer." You better take a look. You get the idea? And get your category as wide as possible. And just because your Rocks are similar to the other guy's Rocks and his answers might be similar to your answers, don't worry about it; it takes physical pain and unconsciousness to get a bite. You're not there sitting in chairs slugging each other with clubs. You can pick up as locks any answer you're given, that's for true, but they're as light as a summer breeze because we have processes now which bulldoze out everything that holds locks in. You can't lose any way you look at it. Always be able to pick yourself up by the collar and fly straight no matter what's happening to you. And on the other side of it, never add your own case into a computation if you can possibly help it; and if you have, admit it, admit it and do better. And with that in view you can tackle the three remaining cases very easily. But such an attitude is necessary to tackling them. The last three cases from stage three back to stage one are computational cases of one degree or another. And you have to be able to think flexibly and imaginatively, neither fixedly nor obsessively. And you're as good a Rock hound in investigation as you can think flexibly and keep yourself out of it. And you're as good as you can evaluate for this person without the slightest qualm. Point your finger at him and say, "I think what's wrong with you is..." if you want to. Who cares? Because in essence, what are you doing? Every time you throw one of these computations at him you're - you're saying in essence, "This is what I think is wrong with you." And this sometimes telegraphs through to him. He sometimes gets nervous about the thing or restive. Well, patch it up if you want to as an ARC break or let it go. You're not auditing when you're doing a case analysis. And you better get over the idea that you are. And very often the case only starts to show into view when he gets a little bit mad at you, very often. So you are going on two different codes and these last three cases are the easiest thing in the world to handle. The furthest down case is the case of the busted machinery. Now, that case is doing a rise. You understand if the needle is simply doing a cyclic stick-fall, stick-fall, stick-fall, he's in a Rock already. Run the process I've given you or try to get him to remember or get his past auditor or something to give you the Rock. Or just straighten him out with Connectedness which is the absolute last resort. You've got ahold of that case now, but this third case, you've got to get in there and pitch? Got to get in there and pitch on. And he's a case of busted machinery. He collects it. Now, a second-stage case still has operative machinery. The first-stage case is direct, he's still operating on engrams. And it could be said that the individual goes from being able to confront an engram into a first-stage case. Now, an individual who could simply confront all of his engrams would be Clear, because they'd blow if he wanted them to blow. He was in this state on the track one time, the schnook. He could have blown all of his engrams just by looking at them, and he kept them around because they had pretty tassels. They didn't hurt him, he liked a little pain now and then. Now, he gets a body that is subject to pain and agony and unconsciousness. He gets himself some responsibilities in life, he has some goals and ambitions he would love to carry through, and boy, are these things in his road and he can't even find where they are to knock them out. His dilemma is real, not imaginary or fictitious, his dilemma is real. He's used every computation he could possibly dream up to heal this situation. And the first of them was to be irresponsible for it, in other words, not to know anything about it. That was the first thing that he decided to use on it, see? And so you get not-knowingness as the common denominator of all such chains and Rocks. The next computation that he's tried to heal situations with, was create. That's why he created the engrams. Do you know the creation of an engram - the creation of the engram is a method of solving time? That's its basic purpose, method of solving time. Now, it has other vagaries I could say from a computer I found one time, a story-maker. It also has the advantage of amusing somebody if he's bored and that sort of thing, but it undoubtedly has many other purposes which are sub-purposes, but the first one is a defeat of time. The past disappears, at least we can keep the painful parts of the past. We can keep that much past, and that comes from just having kept an ability to mock up the past in order to have it again. Then we mocked up - the parts we mocked up of the past that we didn't want, then we tried to get rid of. And so an individual gets rid of it in various ways and his solutions to it; first he was irresponsible for his environment, then he started to create his environment. You know, to get it back again and he's off to the races now. He's getting confused already. He's mocking up things that aren't there, don't you see, that have passed. He's got the wrong time tags on them, he's getting them scrambled. Incidentally an engram always has the exactly correct time tag on it. But that he doesn't recognize this thing, puts it in the wrong time channel. And the next one is - one of his methods of handling all this sort of thing is being helped and helping things - assistant, succor. And that comes under the heading of persistence, which was the creation of time itself, which is an effort to be at the cause-point over time. Found himself pouring along the time track so if he helped enough things, he would then get to cause on time. And the common denominator of all time is, assistance-persistence. Assisting something to persist is the basic thing. And when that computation didn't work even vaguely, why, he decided to have problems, lots of problems. And if he could keep his mind and keep himself involved with these problems, he would no longer mock up these things obsessively. You get the idea? See that? I mean. Now he decided to have problems all the time in present time, and mock up new kinds of problems in present time all the time, to yank his attention off the past as a further way of having problems to keep his attention away from these things that he was doing so badly. And now let's get into the first stage, why he invented time in the first place: change. He didn't like what he had so he wanted to change it. So time is again and change is a basic effort to get rid of things and solve things. And we have those five buttons of solution: those are the five solution buttons to life. And everybody is stuck to some degree on one of these solution buttons. And they are the five buttons I have talked to you about often. And those buttons are very simple, just Change, Problems, Help, Create and Responsibility. These are the buttons. Responsibility is a version of not-knowingness and so forth. All right. Now, when he could no longer face life, why, he made a chain which was life and faced it. See? Now, there is the first entrance of a bank. Now, from not being able to confront a chain of life, see, the synthetic experience which he mocked up from the actual experience, he fell back to mocking up something to handle or confront the thing for him. See? And he started doing that with machinery; he started confronting with machinery. He'd mock up machinery which would mock up things so that he wouldn't have to mock them up so he wouldn't have to confront them. And you have your first condition of nonconfrontingness. You got that? First condition of nonconfrontingness. Now, your next condition of nonconfrontingness was not to confront the machinery anymore, so he'd break up the machinery. Now look, he's already living through life and contributing to the mock-up of the physical universe as it goes along step by step. The next stage here - the next stage is to mock up a synthetic physical universe which is the picture chains. The next step is no longer mock up the picture chains but mock up machinery to mock up the picture chains and then machinery to justify that machinery as a little interim stage. Machinery to consume what is produced, machinery to produce what is consumed, see, there's that stage right there. And now finally, his enemy is the machine so he breaks the machines up and not-knows about it. And he's a collector - he's a collector of broken machinery and of machinery to break machinery. Now, there is the three no-confronts or the three degrees of going out into being a spectator and not a participant anymore. And those are the degrees of that's happening, so therefore your questioning must follow that degree. And your whole problem is to find out what he is fixedly using as a solution to reach people, to withdraw from people, to withdraw himself and to keep himself where he is. You see? So he's got these four flow things, he wants to reach without reaching, to withdraw without withdrawing. See? He's withdrawing with things, and he's reaching with things and so forth. And all of the flows of Help are reach and withdraw. Help gives every part of it a persistence and you take apart Help to take apart the persistence of the mock-up of the chain, of the solution. Do you see? So Help is used as the common denominator of persistence. Now, there is a lighter command than Help which is being used right now by an HGC auditor on a boy who cannot talk very well yet. "What could you do to _______?" he is saying instead of "How could you help _______?" "What could a sword do to you? What could you do to a sword?" Well, that's all right, as kind of a lighter phrase but it is a doingness thing without the exact and proper thing. Now, undoubtedly that will get there, but sooner or later "help" will have to get there too, because our target is not doingness, our target is persistence. Helping - we're not so interested in the doingness of help as we are the persistence of help. Now, help then is the common denominator to all these persistent solutions. And help is usually used under this term, "assistance in the survival of." And if it ever got so automatic that somebody couldn't define it, you can always slip him that "How could you assist the survival of _______?" as another phrase substituted for help. So if you go auditing in a foreign language, "assist the survival of" is a much safer way to handle help than "help," if you don't know the exact translation for "help." You get the idea? So you translate their - you get their word for "help" through translating "the assistance in the survival of." That's what exactly we mean by this, and that's why we run Help. Now, survival shows up - the persistence shows up on the E-Meter. An obsessive persistence shows up as a stuck. That which is always persisting as itself will be stuck. All other things will be assisting it or being assisted by it and that is the definition of the Rock. It is that chain which is being assisted by everything and which is assisting everything in survival and therefore is the stuckest thing there is. There's no energy adding to it, there's no energy subtracting from it. It just is as itself, hence we want this stuck point. Now, as we try to stick a needle, we find in the first stage that all you have to do is name an object and you'll stick a needle. That's very simple. Why? The individual is on the chain already, he can still confront the engram chain. Now, that was the boy we could audit in Dianetics. But this next fellow we didn't find out about until the early stages of Scientology and that was the machine character. He mocked up a machine to confront for him. Now, that machine does one of two things; it consumes or it produces. It consumes what has been produced or it produces what is being consumed. And that is the common denominator of all questions asked on the second stage. Now, things that would stop things from consuming and producing or broken consumers and broken producers is the common denominator of the third stage. Now, the exact questions you ask to make these things come into a reality, have not been plotted out. It might be a terribly interesting thing to plot them out, but it'd certainly be a very lengthy tome. Now, you have to have some knowledge of the whole track, you should read What to Audit, the old What to Audit, History of Man, to get some clue as to what to ask for. Robots? Space Opera? And if a word doesn't fit, try a synonym for the word and you will very often find it fitting. "Producer" doesn't work, so you try "factory." "Factory" doesn't work so you try "manufacturer." Get the idea? "Consumer" doesn't work so you get "collector." "Collector" doesn't work, so you say, "accumulator." "Accumulator" doesn't work so you say, "attractor." "Attractor" doesn't work, so you say, "attractive" and all of a sudden you have an "attractive robot" as being the answer. That's a second-stage case. Now, the rise is occasioned by additional material being added into the resistance of the needle. So constant addition to the case is what causes the rise. A blow-off of what had been added causes the drop. And the little cycles of rise-drop, rise-drop, rise-drop, you see. The present time environment is adding something, his attention to the present time environment is taking it off. And you can see that rise-drop, rise-drop, rise-drop, rise-drop, rise-drop in any stuck needle, if he's at all alert or awake. The wider the drop, the less thoroughly stuck he is. You want to stick him, with good ARC, much closer in and you will have a thoroughly stuck needle. That you don't see a totally fixed needle is totally assigned to this fact: is, you haven't narrowed it down to an absolute, close enough. But you can run it. Now, do you understand this? Unless you understand what you are looking at, what you are looking for, you won't ever know what question to ask about it. First question, simple terminal, simple objects. That's the first stage. Second stage is things that consume, things that produce. In any phraseology, third stage is the busted up remains of it. You're looking for things that bust up the remains of the things that are there and so forth. You are liable to find any kind of an answer sticking the case, deuces are wild. But there's this one - there's this one that you can always remember: that the five buttons are apparently the keys to all cases - things that do each one of the five things. Something that holds help, a responsibility manufacturer, a responsibility breaking machine, a home buster, that's a third-stage situation. In this way you will be able to find Rocks and once you've found them, run them. Experience alone will tell you more than I can tell you now. So look carefully at your needle while you're running and you'll find yourself adding on and subtracting, and your tone arm going up and down. It is all right to have a rising needle while auditing; it is not all right to have one while Rock hunting. You understand that? Okay, now do you know a little bit more about it than you did? Audience: Yes. Thank you. Audience: Thank you. [end of lecture.]