The Rehubilitation of the Human Spirit volume 2

The Rehubilitation of the Human Spirit volume 2

Сообщение Timecops » 26 дек 2015, 10:33

Web auditing in any place on the planet http://webauditing.org/

Second American Advanced Clinical Course Lectures Camden. New Jersey • November - December 1953
Volume 2

Contents
23 November 1953
13. Formula Phi, Creation of MEST 1
14. Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C 15
24 November 1953
15. Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location 39
16. Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness 53
17. Additional Remarks: End of Cycle Processing 67
25 November 1953
18. Steps V, VI, VII—Time 71
19. SOP 8-C, Summary Of 87
26 November 1953
20. Electronic Theory, Anchor Points 101
21. Additional Remarks: Electronic Theory, Anchor Points 115
22. Exteriorization 119
27 November 1953
23. Anchor Points, Justice 135
24. Symbols 151
28 November 1953
25. Demonstration: Group Processing 167
26. Special Session: Experimental Group Process 179
Appendix:
SOP 8-C: The Rehabilitation of the Human Spirit 213
This Is Scientology, The Science of Certainty 227
Standard Operating Procedure 8 249
Tone Scale [1953] 259
About the Author 261
Glossary 265
Books and Tapes by L. Ron Hubbard 307
Address List of Scientology Churches and Organizations 329

STUDENT USE OF TRANSCRIPTS
The tape transcripts in this volume serve a vital purpose for students. With a written text of the tape in hand, students can follow the tape rapidly and spot their misunderstoods.
Such transcripts do NOT supplant the tapes, as how the words were said and how preclears in auditing demonstrations actually responded are quite important.
L. Ron Hubbard

Formula Phi, Creation of MEST
A lecture given on 23 November 1953

This morning—November the 23rd, first morning lecture—this morning we're going to take up a formula. And if you were going to write this formula, it would be "Formula Phi"—circle with a slant across the circle, which would just simply stand for physical universe—"Formula Physical Universe."
What is the basic formula of this universe?
When you start to make a cake, it's always good to know something about the recipe of the cake. You don't have to know the formula to eat the cake. But to replace the cake, or if you drop the cake off the table on the floor, or if somebody else ate the cake, why, you might like to know how to make the cake again. And that would be necessary for you to have a recipe. And on these homely terms, let me give you just this: Formula Phi.
Formula Phi is a game consisting of limitations by barriers and non-total destruction of barriers. That's it. Sounds too simple, doesn't it? And yet that's all that a game consists of. This is a game, and the point where this game cuts in, of course, is immediately below your Factors. And when played this way— barriers and non-total destruction of barriers—why, you get the MEST universe. Formula Phi is how to make a MEST universe, and it consists of limitations, of barriers which will not succumb to total destruction.
The game requires that attention be placed on others, others on self, and others on others. And attention can interchange only by barriers, and this of course requires a coordination of place and time, which is the remainder of the formula. Coordination of place and time. Time being reconstruction and replacement of barriers.
Now, in this way we would consider how do you make a barrier? Barriers are made by placing particles in juxtaposition. People are engaged in trying to make particles coincide at a point, and trying to make particles fail to coincide at a point, and that's that.
Competence consists of that. It's the ability one has to prevent particles from coinciding at a point, and causing particles to coincide at points. This is—sounds, right at first glance, like it might not lead immediately to some kind of a solution to the problem, but it is a solution to anybody's problem. Because he's dealing with this rather silly game—it's just a game. And you're dealing with this game, and after a while he starts to lose his cake—he thinks he can eat it or something.
Editor's note: The procedures LRH covers in these lectures were published in Journal of Scientology Issue 16-G, 'This is Scientology, The Science of Certainty" and Journal of Scientology Issue 24-G, "SOP 8-C, The Rehabilitation of the Human Spirit." Both of these articles have been reproduced for your reference in the appendix of this transcript booklet.

1

2

23 NOVEMBER 1953
And the moment he stops creating the cake, he no longer has cake. And then he sits around and says, "I'm in bad shape." That's real interesting, isn't it?
Now, how do you get, in this universe, something to move from one—how does one get a form or barrier, see—form, barrier. I mean, what is a barrier? A barrier is anything from particle to a Maginot line; anything from a wall down to a (quote) "electron" (unquote). I mean, a wall is just as unreal as an electron, and it's just as real as an electron. An electron is just as real as a wall, because here we are in knowingness, that's all. You know it's there, it's there. If you don't know it's there, it's not there.
We get an immediate problem here when we try to move one of these barriers. That is—moving a barrier; that's real cute. Now, every once in a while you get a pc and he can just put up something—if he could put up something, it'll just stay right where he put it up. So simple. It stays right there. He can't move it. You say, "Get a mock-up of a dog now, and let's move this mock-up of the dog from one corner of the room to the other corner of the room," and very often he doesn't move any dog anyplace. The dog just persists in staying right where he is. Well, this is where the barrier—he's gotten his barriers too mixed up. He thinks barriers are permanent. That mock-up is a barrier. See, it's— what is a barrier? It's something that stops perception. What's space? That's something that extends perception, see? So in dealing with barriers, we're immediately dealing with perception. All right.
He gets this dog, and he doesn't see through the dog, he looks at the dog and the dog won't move. And what would he have to do to move that dog? Well, he has to unmock the dog, and mock him up again in a new place. And unmock the dog and mock him up again in a new place, and unmock the dog and mock him up in a new place, and unmock the dog and mock him up in a new place. And if he does this at the rate of one over c, he can make the mock-up move from one corner of the room to the other corner of the room. And people who could still do it simply do it automatically, or in a condition of complete knowingness. They've either got a good automatic machine that's doing it, or they are doing it themselves. You can always do it yourself.
Now, the fellow whose dog stays in one place has a bunch of automatic machinery which is building the MEST universe, and he's put so much dependence on it that he says, "I have no further responsibility for putting up this dog. I was told to put up this dog, so the dog is there. Yes, I can see a dog, but he doesn't move."
Well, when somebody says, "Move the dog," why, he waits for the dog to move. How can he possibly wait for the dog to move? Only if his automaticity is in excellent condition. Then the dog will move if he says, "Move." His automaticity moves the dog, then the dog would move across rather erratically and maybe jump against the ceiling a couple of times and fly through the chandelier, and—but he'd get on the other side of the room one way or another. Or the fellow simply would know that the dog was there and know that the dog was moving, and know that his perception was stopped. First, he'd have to know that he had perception. Then he'd have to know that he was—his percep¬tion was being stopped by a dog, and then know that it was being consecu-tively stopped by a dog, all in the new positions all the way across.
Now, if we do this on the MEST universe level, we have to mock and unmock the dog in new positions, like you do an animated cartoon. You know how animated cartoons are made? Well everybody sort of does that in order to get something to move.
Now, if he has to do it by a formula of mocking and unmocking it and mocking and unmocking it—if he does this by a formula, he's actually doing

FORMULA PHI, CREATION OF MEST
it on a little piece of automaticity. The best way to have a dog there is just know the dog is there and then know you're seeing him, and know it so well that you see him—so simple. And then just know that he's moving.
But if you did it in MEST universe fashion, you have to unmock the dog and then mock him up and unmock him and mock him up and unmock him and mock him up and unmock him and mock him up, each time in a new, slightly different position, and you make all of these frames and they go across, and you've got a dog that's moving. But that's according to formula. And so that in itself is a limitation, to do it by formula. If you just know the dog's there, and know the dog's moving, you're all set.
Well, people who know, absolutely know, that this MEST universe is one, terribly real; and two, not very visible; and three, that something else, such as God, put it there a long time ago and it's still there—given these three ingredients, you get rotten perception, just horrible perception. Why? Because there isn't anything else to look but you, there isn't anything else to put anything there but you, and nothing is from a long time ago—it's all right now.
And you keep putting this stuff up and putting this stuff up and putting this stuff up, and that's a real trick—you'd know you're here, you see? How do you know? Well, you could bring two pieces of what you know is here, and make them collide, and you see that they collided—obvious. And everybody agrees that they collided, and there's the other point.
Now, there is what's known as the parasitic individual—the 100 percent parasitic individual—the parasite. If you know anything about disease, you know that there's—the optimum germ is one that does not kill his host. And then you get your bad germ, who does kill his host. And your bad germ also merely fails to survive itself—that'd be a bad germ. All right.
We have these things which are parasitic. Now, get what happens here— get the evolution. An individual comes along and he says, "There is a universe here," and there is one. See, just like that—bang, bang. He says, "There's a universe here,"—boom, and he's got one. And he says, "Now I'm believing in it," so he believes in it. And he says, "Now I'll continue to see it," so he sees it. He does these things, that's all—he's all set. That's all he has to do.
And then what's he do? He does this incredible stunt. He comes along and somebody else says, "There isn't any universe there. I know there's no universe there. I can't see one."
And the other fellow says, "Well, now," he says, "do you see an absence of one?"
And the fellow looks around and says, "Yes, complete absence of one."
He says, "Well then, you're seeing something, aren't you? You see a complete absence of my universe, so you know that my universe is hidden from you. Now, if you're good enough, heh! you'll be able to see it. Heh-heh-heh-heh-heh-heh!"
And on this speciousness, and on this complete lie, we go forward into agreement. We know it's there because we all see it. That's the next point— that's mass agreement. See, we know it's there because we all see it. And the way we got into seeing it was just on that basis of, "Well, you know, you don't see it, do you? Well, that sure shows you you're stupid. What's wrong with your perception that you can't see this?" Then they have various methods and trickery by which one convinces the other that this is that way, and this is the other way. And this becomes very treacherous, this sort of a proposition, because one can't ever be sure of what he's seeing unless somebody else tells him. And if people tell him often enough and so on, he then finds himself in agreement with all kinds of people all around the place.
Well, he's satisfied now. He's still seeing what he saw before, but he gets

3

4

23 NOVEMBER 1953
afraid, finally, that that isn't quite right, because—the communication factor which can enter into it. He's now agreed on communication systems, and he agrees on other things. And he starts depending on other people keeping the universe there, and himself agreeing with them that it is there, and this is how he sees it—he thinks.
See, his dependency is that the universe is there because they say it is, not because he put it there. So as long as he's in agreement with them, why, he has a universe. So he's dependent upon their agreement amongst themselves to continue to have a universe. Now he's in a parasitic condition: he is parasitic on other people's agreement about the universe.
Now, this parasitic quality then begins to pervade everything he does. He starts to depend on the actions of others to do this and that, he starts to depend on them going through this and that. And somehow or other he'll make it one way or the other—if he agrees, stays in close enough agreement, why, he's all set—he thinks. So he wears the same kind of hat and he wears the same kind of shoes—he just suffers at the idea of getting out of agreement with somebody, you see?
And you take somebody who is depending upon the anatomy of this knowingness—the anatomy of this knowingness, you know, the anatomy of this universe—somebody who depends upon this anatomy for his daily bread, such as engineering. You know, he depends on taking it apart or routing its currents in some direction and so on. He has become parasitic upon the postulate. So he's secondary to the postulate, so of course you can't ask him to make postulates anymore, because he depends upon the consistent and continuous agreement postulate. And so you find (quote) "scientific" (unquote) fields going around saying, "Well, according to Professor Wumpfcuddle, we believe that the writings which were made at that time were written according to the best authority available then. And, whereas this institution cannot make a forthright opinion at this time, we have the feeling that when more investigation is done, it may indicate that somebody at some time or another will also fail to know the answer."
Now, what's very satisfactory to somebody for a while, is this thing called electronics. Electronics get very satisfactory to somebody because he can put up a couple of terminals and he can see something go between them and measure it up, and all the time he—if he just keeps overlooking it—he's always overlooking the fact that he's using electronics to measure electronics.
And—but it's very satisfactory for a while because he can produce a consistent effect. And he takes old Ohm's law and holds it to his bosom, and he says, "My," he says, "I at least have one thing that won't go wrong on me." Well, he'd better not move out of the exact universe and position he's in with that Ohm's law, because it'll cave in on him. Ohm's law is all very well. And then you go out into space. And you just go out into 273 degrees minus centigrade with Ohm's law—trrhh! Impossible!
Good old Ohm's law goes by the boards, and comes into immediate collision with Boyle's law and a few other laws go by the boards, the second that you start to pour current from one terminal to another in minus 273 degrees C. This factor, by the way, makes space opera possible. You hear of somebody walking up with this little jim-dandy disintegrator, and he pulls the trigger on the disintegrator and the castle falls down. Well, of course there is your basic agreement. He's dealing with more basic agreements than anybody else—there isn't anything.
And naturally, you take anything—any current which was generated in minus 273 is earlier agreement than current which was generated in other

FORMULA PHI, CREATION OF MEST
pressures, and your engineering becomes very interesting. Now, you can make a bomb—the Russians are rumored to be doing this—they're making bombs in minus 271 degrees C or something like that, where you have almost zero resistance. Into one small condenser—one tiny little condenser of no size at all which here on Earth would hold a volt before it went zap!—well, you can pour about eight billion volts at five hundred amperes into it, in minus 273, and you just pack that thing full, see, and then you warm it up. And believe me, it goes bang! right away.
But Ohm's law looks kind of silly, the second you start—Ohm's law holds good for the area of agreement in which Ohm's law is good. And it's pretty hard to convince an engineer of this until you just insist that he go up track on his science far enough so that he all of a sudden falls in. He runs into the absence of "prime post unposted," and he's done. And he can do anything within the realm of this agreement. Of course, he is just recovering some small shadow of what's been agreed upon about the behavior of energy. Everybody agrees on this, they'll all see it. My God, they've been on the track long enough, they'll see it.
Now, somebody who starts to attempt with people who are entirely agreed upon something else, any kind of a re-perception of vanishment, or re-creation of something—boy, it gets real poor. I mean, he tries to make them perceive time as time is. Time is the proposition of, "I have no more space right here around me to put anything in, so we will just say that space was yesterday. Now we have some new space. Now we'll fill it all full, and then we'll say this new space is yesterday. Okay, it's yesterday. All right. And now we'll have . . ." The guy is sitting there in no space, you see—only except as he is saying that he's sitting in space.
Of this illusory stuff, is all of this stuff made. But it's pretty hard for somebody dependent upon that agreement to recognize that it is, because he's gotten into a situation where he depends upon the fact that other people see it in order for him to have it. Well, that's bad.
Now, there's this: Knowingness—a state of knowingness—your primary state of knowingness is the primary state of creativeness.
These two things are immediately and violently opposed to each other: knowingness and space. They're but violently opposed to each other.
Space is your first barrier. That is your first not-know. See, a fellow just knows, you know? There he is, he just knows. Now he puts something there to know which has a barrier. So he says, "Now I know this." What is the barrier? It's the eight anchor points of his first piece of space—those are barriers.
Now he says, "I know this." What's he know? He knows this space now, and he knows up to those anchor points, he says. That's real cute.
Now he says, "I know this space." Now he makes another space, and he says, "Now I know that space, which is a new set of barriers, so now I know more!" That—real good.
We've got now quantity of knowingness—and the second you have a quantity of knowingness, you've got a quantity of trouble. Because the first, the greatest knowingness there is, consists of no quantity. It has no dimension and no quantity, see? And the second you put a quantity in it—you say, "I have a quart of knowingness"—boy, the fellow has come down to one quart. See, he has infinity until he has a barrier.
And the moment he imposes his first barrier—which, by the way, makes space—he has a decline of knowingness. Now he says, "I know distance." Now, just get how this works out way on down the track: If you're in Hoboken, it's pretty

5

6

23 NOVEMBER 1953
hard to tell what's going on in San Francisco. See that? So your knowingness is immediately a foe, and space is a foe of knowingness. See, if you're in Hoboken, it's pretty hard to know what's going on in San Francisco—as long as you think there's a difference of space between Hoboken and San Francisco. As soon as you know there's no difference of space between Hoboken and San Francisco, you can "know" without going to either one. See, you could know everything that's going on.
Now, you run into this in Change of Space Processing. Some of the damnedest things happen. By the way, if this—these conclusions were not backed up by immediate processes, I wouldn't be telling them to you. And all I'm trying to do right now is not teach you theory—this is a process I am teaching you right this minute. I'm not even vaguely interested in teaching you the grand theory, or making a book covered with human skin, or something, and cryptic cabalagrams which will then impute by symbolic function some other necromancy. I'm not even vaguely interested. This is—comes to a very direct process, and the only reason I'm telling it to you is because it lands in the lap of a process, boom. And I want you to be doing this process today, so I want you to figure this one, and know what we're doing.
Barrier. The first barrier is an imposition on knowingness. So we have such things as "mental blocks." See, the barrier gets into the shadow of mind, you know? In addition to making a barrier up there, you make a mental block—isn't that cute?
Now, you—some guy going down the street here, you say, "By the way, what did you want to be when you were eighteen?"
"Oh," the fellow says, "I wanted to be a writer. I can remember it just like it were yesterday. Tsk. Here I am 58, but. . ." so on.
You say, "Well what happened?"
"Well, you know, you get old, and you lose your pep, and . . ."
"Do you?" you say.
"Oh, yes," he'll tell you very—very hastily.
You say, "Well, where'd you get such an idea?"
"Oh, I don't know, my mother used to talk about being old," he says, "I don't know—doesn't have anything to do with writing."
"Where was she, when she told you about being so old and so forth?"
"Oh that was my old home, over here in Haversham, that was my old home. You know, that's a funny thing, doesn't have any connection with it at all."
And you say, "Well, what else is wrong?"
"Well I never got a university education," he says, "and of course you have to have a university education in order to write." By the way, which is just completely reverse. If you ever want a—anybody to be a writer, why, don't even let him get into grade school. And—because that's the imposition of space, which is exactly opposed to creativeness. Fixed space—space fixed for him, see, is a direct opposition to creativeness. All right.
We talk to him a while about this, and the next thing you know, if we've just expertly flicked out the things which he's imagined lay across his track, he'll find himself chewing on the end of a pencil that night, wondering why he doesn't write something, see? Because he—all of a sudden you've made him look around, and darned if he can see any barriers! But as he was walking down the street just before you got hold of him, why, boy, he could see more darned barriers there. It seemed like everything he was trying to do and so forth, was something that he would just bump into, you know.

FORMULA PHI, CREATION OF MEST
And then there is the barrier called the future—that's real cute. A fellow permits the society and meters and all kinds of things to predict the future for them. Well, that's him saying, "The future has gimmicks in it which know." You see, the future knows, or these gimmicks know the future.
Well, let's get the two ends of a communication line, A and B—let's go into this again. One end, A, is "know" and the other end, B—effect—is "not-know," see? So we got a communication line. Now, ordinarily in life, we get that sort of thing swapping—they start swapping ends. A is "know," and that goes to B. Now we get the second line, B, now knows something and starts to communicate and we go to A', see, and we get back at the target, B'. And B' is now receiving something. And that's a uniform communication line.
But a person potentially knows. This is real easy. He potentially knows, which means he has a potential creativeness. Because the only thing to know is something which you would create so that it could be known. So knowing a communications system—huh!—it's real silly, see? Knowing somebody else's communication system—this is real silly. Do you see why it's silly? From a standpoint of knowingness. Well, it's putting in some barriers so that you can gain some data. And a communication is only really valid if it's knocking out barriers for people. Then it can be a valid communication which will lead up scale toward greater knowingness.
If the communication is putting in more barriers for people, it'll go down scale toward less knowingness. Did you ever see a fellow who had just been shot, or had just run into a brick wall, or had just hit his head on a—the lower part of the cupboard or something of the sort, and did you ever find him in a particularly brilliant state of mind? You never did.
Well, that's the kind of communication like they do in war—a fellow comes up, to whom you've never even been introduced, and shoots you. Well, now, he in essence on a particle level is "know," and boy, he sure puts you into a state of not-know quick, see? So we've got "create" and "created for," as the two ends of a communication line.
So you're getting into agreement with this and that, and I'll tell you how to make a preclear good and sick. This isn't a process. This distance, you see, is the first foe of knowingness, and the second foe is energy. But to think that energy could ever deliver into anybody's hands more knowledge—see, that's not right, it doesn't. A person knows as much as he knows.
Now, if you can knock down a few barriers for him and clip his own concepts of limitations and knock out his agreement with people who have agreed upon these limitations, he'll go right back up Tone Scale like a rocket ship, see— real fast. That's because you're knocking out these various facts.
It isn't that communication is bad or that automaticity is bad or any of these other things are bad, that's not what we're talking about. It's that they impose new barriers. And you can evaluate with great ease as to whether or not something is very handy and easy to handle, just on this basis, is: Does this system introduce a great many new barriers, which exceed in quality and quantity the barriers which it is essaying to reduce? See? Anytime you have to make more barriers than you're trying to destroy in order to effect something, the system is going to collapse.
Now we'll take the penal system of modern culture. Here they're imposing more barriers than existed before, and wonder why they have increasing crime. The system of handling criminals is to impose new barriers on the criminals, you see? And then, of course, they wonder why they have more and more crime, and why they've never solved a single criminal from the beginning of the society.

7

8

23 NOVEMBER 1953
That system, by the way, was invented and condemned and thrown out as completely unworkable in the city of Philadelphia in the United States in 1835. The modern penitentiary system of the US was reported on, worked with, and condemned in 1835—which is, of course, why they're using it in 1953, '54, see? It's real sensible. You put in new barriers, new barriers, new barriers, and then wonder why everybody gets worse and worse and worse. Well, the barriers are new automaticities of some sort or another, and they let "not know" in on the scene.
We realize that the uneducated, the unknowingness—the people who are not informed, who haven't been around and looked at the thing—are most liable to be criminals, according to modern law. That is, people who have no opportunities for havingness then get to a point where they can't have, and where they can only steal to have. People have many times observed this to be the case. Well, of course, there is an opposite one in there. If you drive somebody down completely into apathy, he won't be a criminal either.
Well, that's the course which police try to take. They try to drive the whole populace into complete apathy in the hope that this is a solution to crime. And in the process the whole populace passes through a criminal band. See, the whole populace—populace wouldn't go into this criminal band in the first place unless people were dropping new barriers in front of them. So we handle this thing of barriers as a social problem, we find out this little law (and this is a specific law): The validation of barriers is the source of aberration as well as the source of a game. And it gets into aberration only when the barriers exceed the number necessary for a freely moving game.
Yes?
Female voice: We have a wonderful example of that in South Carolina. We have the chain gang with the bars on the suits, and we have the third greatest delinquency in the United States—juvenile.
Mm-hm. Sure. Work out every time.
So you have a test, then, for any process: Any process which imposes more barriers and limitations than it destroys, is an unworkable process or a deteriorating process. If you remember that, you have a little guide rule which, in itself, will evaluate systems such as those used by psychiatry, such as those used by surgery.
Now, of course there is another way of removing a barrier. There is this method of removing a barrier which is practiced, which doesn't remove the barrier, as you can see immediately. We'll take sacrifice as an effort to remove a barrier. The whole theory of sacrifice is in itself the theory of surgery. They cut out people's appendix, they cut off people's right ears, left ears, throats—they have a good time with this "sacrificed." Now they've gotten to a point where every time a woman reports with a stomachache, they give her a hysterectomy. Take out the ovaries, womb, so forth, and then they wonder why her endocrine system goes to pieces, having removed it. There is this way of handling barriers—and this is a real interesting way of handling barriers—is handling them in such a way that they're unremovable.
Now, this is one way of handling barriers. You take an automobile to an intersection that's very busy, and fix it so it won't run. That is a method of setting barriers by destroying parts of barriers. That's interruption of flow. Any way you could interrupt the flow would erect, then, a new barrier. And this is an artificial method—they apparently, you see, are picking up barriers. Somebody come along, and they'll say something is a barrier—they'll say, "Well, the appendix is the barrier and the tonsils. So therefore, if we take out

FORMULA PHI, CREATION OF MEST
the appendix and the tonsils of everybody in the United States, we of course will have no sickness and we will have removed this barrier." Yeah, that's real good, but we have spoiled the mobility of everybody who has undergone the operation. We've hindered their mobility. So all we've done was just fix these barriers so they're less movable, by pointing to something specious. See, we were going to remedy all this sickness, you know, and there wasn't that much sickness to be remedied. So now we create more sickness, you see? And this is the MEST universe at work in the dwindling spiral. There's how it sets up a dwindling spiral.
It pretends to remove a barrier, and fixes it up so it's unremovable—see, so a bigger barrier is unremovable. So you see that little law operating there. That system which imposes more barriers than it removes is an unworkable system—up to this point: up to 20.0 on the Tone Scale. And then after a while, the loss of barriers becomes important to a person. They want to be able to make barriers. If they can't make enough barriers, they get unhappy. Why? Well, they know everything that is going on, and the only thing—the only way you can produce randomity, and the first way and the only way, really, you can produce randomity—is to claim you don't know.
First is knowingness, and then there's this cycle: create, persist, destroy. Knowingness, and then the cycle of create, persist, destroy. The only thing there is to create is a barrier. That's the only thing you could actually create. You could create the fluidity of this and that, but your inner systems of creation are not themselves tremendously workable.
Now, you can get barriers to release other barriers. There's a bulldozer, you see, plowing down the line and knocking off the top of a hill so you can build a house on it. There's a barrier removing a barrier. And work is the process of using barriers to remove barriers. It's not anything bad about this— let's just see the scope of this. All right.
What's the process that comes out of this? I'm afraid that this is terribly, terribly easy. I'll give it to you—just this: The law behind it is the material which I've just been giving you here about limitation by barriers. And the other material we had last week, such as there's automaticity, and there's two kinds of automatic operations: one is automatic creation, and the other is automatic destruction. Mock and unmock, in other words.
Now, there's several methods of unmocking. These people who have occlusions are using a funny method of unmocking. They're doing just that, they're putting up new barriers to take out old barriers, and they're putting up more new barriers than they're taking out old barriers. And that is, this blackness works in this fashion: instead of unmocking something, they've found out— they've agreed so thoroughly that nothing can be destroyed, they don't destroy anything; what they do is paint it with blackness. And that's the way they destroy something—cute, huh?
And you start to knock out the automaticity on some of these cases of painting with blackness—which is putting up black screens—you just have them put up black screens till they take over command of the machine, and you find out that they've got... If you've gotten to the point where you're going to really break the case, they've got about eight skillion, billion facsimiles that suddenly decide they're going to rush in on them or do something to them. And they've got them stacked up all around, about eighty-five billion deep. They start to pull the blackness off, and they just look at these things, ulaarrh! Tremendous pictures—very dangerous things, pictures.

0

10

23 NOVEMBER 1953
So—however, by using directly treating the automaticity, we to some degree validate black barriers. By making somebody hold on to the two back corners of the room, we to some degree validate the room. So, validation of barriers only works up to the point where one removes a few of the major automaticities of the case.
But there is one process which shotguns throughout the entire bank. He of course has depended upon other people to create this universe for him for a long time—he's forgotten he's creating it. And so he's turned over most of his machinery and responsibility for this thing to others and other places and so forth—he thinks. Now, he's still running it. His energy is actually being completely sapped. What energy he can create immediately goes into the banks with a crash, and activates some more of this stuff. So the more energy he puts out, why, the more of a trap he's in. All right.
We'll take that extreme case and we find out that this process works very well. Now, let's take a little case that's much, much less worse off—pretty good shape—they're just in agreement on the communication system, on how you put it together, and the world looks pretty bright to them, you know, and all that. Well, the process works on this case. And we come to the high case on the matter, who is trying to put a universe there, and this process has to be reversed for this case—in other words, the person who is running on a negative number of barriers. And so, we'll just go in for the process, and this process is very simple:
You have the person see through an existing MEST barrier, to another MEST barrier beyond it. And then have him see through the MEST barrier beyond that, to another MEST barrier beyond that. And then have him see through that MEST barrier to find nothingness, and then to find—from finding nothingness, relapse to merely having knowledge. You see how that is? We just get him to postulate at that moment that now he knows.
Now, it's just an automatic process, really, and this permits him to take over the machinery which he now has inherited, which is trying to unmock the universe and himself. Or it takes into his control the machinery which has in the past tried to unmake the universe. And we get the third case, the fellow who doesn't have enough barriers—now we just have to reverse the process. We have him look at a MEST universe barrier—and by the way you can do all of these on the one run, and you just do this in the same sequence.
You just take the MEST universe barrier which he sees, and have him put another one closer to him. And then have him put a MEST universe barrier just beyond the one which exists there, and then push all three of them together. You'll get some real rare barriers. They'd be good and heavy, I guarantee—good and heavy.
Now, there's another part of this process. Let's say we take those two windows—now, we see those windows a little further away from us and then a little closer to us. And that's all there is to the process. We just take a couple of MEST objects and we see them a little further away and a little closer. Why?
We're just throwing them out of line in place, because of their fixity in place. We've relied so heavily on those things telling us where they are, that they have gotten us completely discombobulated.
This is our first attack, now, in SOP 8-C, on the third step—the third step being space. Well, a fellow can't create space or have space if he thinks everything has barriers in front of it. If he's running on such an automaticity of barriers that he cannot see barriers adequately anymore, he's gone inverted.
In other words, he's—he saw barriers and he believed in barriers so hard, and depended upon them so hard, that now they're beginning to disappear.

FORMULA PHI, CREATION OF MEST
Well, you start to run the third step on this person, and you'll come an immediate cropper. This person will not be able to make space. The test of that is just: can he hold up eight anchor points and know it's his own space.
Well we won't worry about whether he can do this or not, and we'll just remove this step from the realm of a pat, formulated procedure of making space. Let's not worry about that, because that in essence is fairly slow. Let's just take the space which he's now afraid is liable to vanish, and let's go about it first in this other fact: Let's first make him see through these barriers, one right after the other, until he can get that real good and get any barrier at any depth from him in any direction—till he can get that real good. And then he can take existing barriers and have them be closer and be further away, which unfixes them, as part of the same process. And then have him put in entirely different barriers—which is your three steps that you'll have to follow— entirely different barriers. And you would actually, in the process, just do this, one right after the other, one right after the other. First, he'd see through in all directions. By the way, there's these directions you use this on: straight out in front of him, straight out behind him, straight out to the right, straight out to the left, straight up and straight down. And those six directions are the directions which you would employ.
Now, remember that this can be done also in a bracket. You have other people looking through barriers—a very disturbing thought! And other people looking through other people's barriers. What do you use for barriers in that case, mock-ups? No, just use the MEST universe, sixth dynamic. Just get the idea of your father being outside that wall, looking straight through the wall and not seeing the wall—the wall will disappear for you, too—at something in this room. Now get him looking through the wall to see Mother—wall will disappear. That's just others for others on the subject of barriers. And we work out the MEST universe, then, in terms of a bracket.
But that's nowhere near as important, to work it out in terms of a bracket, as it is simply to run the first part of the drill. You'd be amused at how far these brackets go, and how—what dependency there was on them. And now there's the next one: People who have been trying to make something out of nothing, just endlessly, and on and on and on, who are trying to make something out of nothing. Oh! You see, there's nothing there to make anything out of. They have to go on a basis of knowingness, knowingness, knowingness, and they've strained their knowingness to the complete limit. Then they finally find out they have to know something before they can make something out of nothing anymore.
What do you know? Every piece of machinery they have which is super-automatic, is either making something out of nothing or nothing out of something. So with this banishment of barriers in this universe, we run the second part of a technique. There's a second lineup: We just simply make nothing out of nothing. All right.
Now, let's just turn on, and just make nothing right here where I have my hand. Let's do that arduously, please. Let's just make nothing out of that spot.
Get the fact that there's just nothing in that spot there, and now let's just make nothing out of it.
Now let's make something out of it with nothing appearing. Let's just ardu¬ously make something out of that spot, and don't have anything appear there.
Let's just arduously make something out of that spot.
Now let's make nothing out of that spot.
Now let's get somebody else making nothing out of that spot.
And somebody making nothing out of that spot for somebody else.

11

12

23 NOVEMBER 1953
That's the other part of the process.
Why does this process work? The process is that every automatic machine that you have has . . . The most automatic machinery which you as a group have here right now, of course, is machinery which is gauged to make nothing out of nothing. Because that's practically anybody's in America. You're trying to make nothing . . . You people are trying to succeed one way or the other (this would not necessarily apply to preclears)—you're trying to succeed one way or the other, you're trying to get out of the traps of your own makings and so forth, and so it's a natural thing—your automatic machinery which makes nothing out of things turns on. But nothing—a machine set up to make nothing out of generals, a machine set up to make nothing out of garbage, a machine set up to make nothing out of food. Of course, by the way, stomach somatics turn on, on this, like mad. These machines, of course, are making nothing out of what is essentially nothing.
Now, just look at it sensibly enough from the standpoint of nuclear physics and you'll find out that they just keep trying to find space, see. Pardon me, they try to find matter, and all they find is space. And they just go on doing this. And they just keep finding space. Well, it's wonderful that they can find space. This is a great attestation to their complete phobia on space, that they can find space there—that's wonderful. It's—the boys however, oddly enough, are using up their own space to find it there. Because these boys are the shortest people on space you ever saw. They've got ridges—boy!
Now, the formula one has used, of agreement, is to take nothing out of nothing, and that condenses nothing so that you eventually get something. There's all kinds of these "explanations," you see—wonderful explanations. They've come down the line, with the concatenation of agreements, down through the ages. And, you see, if you—it winds up to the fact that if you take nothing out of nothing, you eventually will wind up with matter.
In other words, you take space out of widely dispersed particles—none of which can be found—you take the space out of these widely dispersed parti-cles, you'll get a condensation of these widely dispersed particles which gives you solidity. But nobody can find the particles themselves, so this means, essentially, that you've taken nothing out of nothing to produce something. Real cute, huh? All right.
You just start setting up, then, machinery which makes nothing out of spots behind the preclear, above the preclear, below the preclear, to the right of the preclear, to the left of the preclear, in front of him, behind him, and so forth—if you have him start working on this, you'll find out that he'll start running into two things: He'll start running into solidity and complete emptiness. Because the machine to make nothing and the machine to make something are both the same machine. And this will appear very silly to him after a while, will appear real silly.
Now, prediction machinery is giving to automatic machinery the right to know. And brother, any system that is set up that is called the human mind— we're not dealing with the human mind—we don't give a damn about the human mind. Let it go on and run around and be stimulus-response and stand on its hands, and fill chairs at universities—we don't care about the human mind. It's simply this: it is a prediction machine, set up in such a way that the future knows and will tell you. There's only one way you will ever have a future—make one. There's only one way you'll ever have one. Nobody could tell you about the future. Your future is into constant state of manufacture, and it works out in certain ways because people are solidly in agreement on this fact, and that's the future.

FORMULA PHI, CREATION OF MEST
But when you set it up so that the machine knows and you don't— nyarroww, how horrible can we get? That's "Let's go round and read all the meters so we can tell whether or not the meters are hot. Let's have the meters tell us that the motor is running all right."
And, "Go ahead, little pyrometer, you just sit there," that old boy told me. "Go ahead, little pyrometer, you just sit there and say anything you please, this motor's running okay."
Now, it's very difficult to get agreement on anything that isn't in agreement in terms of MEST, which is in itself a solid pattern of agreement. So, if a bunch of engineers can stand around and they all see that the meter reads so-and-so, they know that they have something within the composite of agreement which is agreeing with them. And they now know that they are in agreement one with another, because the thing which they most agree upon—MEST—is telling each one of them the same story. And this is a terrible dependency, believe me. The reason they can't blow up barriers—and they can't blow up barriers, they can blow up the form of barriers, but they still get residue. The reason they can't is because they didn't blow up their own agreements first.
Now, all you have to do to blow up your own agreements, is to just get masses of people agreeing with masses of people there's a barrier there. And you know what you do and what happens to your own ridges? What happens to your own body if you go and run that technique endlessly, and on and on and on? Well, I'll tell you—it just plain melts, that's all. These heavy, heavy ridges that are so thick, they just get gooey and soggy and floppy and start disappearing and falling to pieces, and boy, you have to get real hateful toward them to make them form up good. All right.
What's the technique we're going to run, then? We're going to run this technique of—which is called "an invalidation of barriers." And it consists of seeing through, consecutively, various MEST barriers in the six different directions of back, front, top, bottom, right and left. Seeing through consecutive barriers, each time seeing the next barrier. You know, we'd look through the floor, and see the floor of the room below. And we do this—with the MEST eyes or just with the MEST eyes closed, it doesn't matter which. And we just do this and we just do this and we just do this, and every once in a while we run a bracket in on it.
We get somebody else looking through barriers in six different directions. And we get others looking through barriers for others—every once in a while a bracket. And then we run this handy jim-dandy little machine, which— you're just going to make nothing out of a spot of nothing for a while. We're not going to run that one very hard, because that is a demonstration, not a therapy technique. The other—invalidation of barriers—is therapy; that's good. And the other one is a demonstration technique—making nothing out of this spot up here. Because a guy gets sicker than a pup after a little while. If he gets too sick on it, why, have him mock up dogs eating his stomach, and Papa and Mama eating his stomach, and it'll disappear—the sickness will— because his stomach, of course, is motivator-hungry.
Anybody with ulcers for instance, has eaten more than he has been eaten, so the stomach is superguilty. He's thrown agreement out of balance, in other words. All right.
There is the process, and there is the formula, and there is the game. You understand this: perception of something is an effort to get the sight stopped. And so if you keep on trying to stop your sight all the time, after a while you can't see. See how simple that is?
Okay.

13



Summary of Steps I, II, III
of SOP 8-C
A lecture given on 23 November 1953

This is first afternoon lecture of November the 23rd. We have this afternoon, a very fast review of steps up to III, and we talk about Step IV, and their use. All right.
It's rather difficult to put into a communication system all the things that can be done by an auditor because many, many, many things can be done by an auditor.
However, SOP 8 is a pretty good method of categories of techniques, and SOP 8-C would be what you ordinarily used with which to produce a maximum result with your preclear. However, you must understand that knowing the underlying theory of what you're trying to do, as you will during these next few weeks, you should be able to very adequately utilize any sort of a technique, anytime it comes up. However, we're not going to ask you this early in the course to utilize these things on a virtuoso basis. Let's just use them as they come up.
Now we have Step I. Step I is a locational step. Starts out while he's interiorized. You can start that out simply by asking somebody to be three feet back of his head; and if he's going to be three feet back of his head, he'll be three feet back of his head. But if you ask him and he isn't, you have given him a failure. In view of the fact only about 50 percent of the people you encounter will be three feet back of their head, there is a better method of doing it, which is to say, you exteriorize him by location—"where he is not," past, present and future. And "where other people are not," past, present and future. And "where is he thinking," past, present and future. And "where are other people thinking," past, present and future. And "where is he exerting effort," past, present and future. And "where are other people exerting effort," past, present and future. And "where are other people feeling," past, present and future. And "where is he feeling," past, present and future.
Locational. Locational. Negative location. You got that? That's the pattern of the step.
Now, going right along with that, is asking him to be in pleasant places and unpleasant places. But until you've got him out of the places he is uniformly stuck in, your chances of getting him very thoroughly into a new place, simply on command, are very poor.
Where somebody is unable to be in a place at will and very easily, you can know immediately, looking at the Factors, you've got a proposition of cause and effect.

15

16

23 NOVEMBER 1953
Cause and effect must carry with it, of course, attention. You see, you've got cause and effect, and "attention" is the mechanical arrangement which comes about because of cause and effect. You can't have a very good effect without somebody—having their attention. You can be at cause without giving any attention, but you can't be an effect without having given something attention. So the difference between cause and effect, actually, is whether or not you gave attention to something, and whether or not you're still giving attention to something. And there you have it.
Now, it's—attention is in two conditions. One, too dispersed and unable to fix, and the other is too fixed and unable to disperse. Those are the two conditions of attention. Follow those? Two conditions of attention. That's all the conditions of attention there are, there are no others. Too fixed or too dispersed as far as attention is concerned. When you speak of neither fixed nor dispersed and no attention, you are not, of course, speaking about attention. Well, there is no other condition of attention than those two conditions.
You could just get an idea of a searchlight pinning down on a pinpoint on a wall so hard that it burns a hole in a wall—that would be too fixed an attention. If you get an idea of a searchlight coning out until it lights everything up, but rather uniformly but dimly, so that you could barely see the wall or not see it at all because of that—well, that would be the idea of an unfixed attention.
Now, people's attention becomes so crowdedly fixed on something that it inverts. We have people looking at something very, very strongly and we find out that they will eventually begin to look in front of it or behind it—first behind it and then in front of it. What—the first condition is to look at all the space around it and the object, rather relaxedly. And then the next condition is to look at the object but not at the space around it. And the next condition is to look at the object so hard that one sees beyond it, or in front of it. In other words, one closes it out entirely.
Now, you see these various conditions of attention. Now, there is the condition of attention which succeeds that, which is, look at it so hard that they only see the space around it and it disappears, which is another in—stage in the inversion.
Now, you ask somebody to look very fixedly at the space on either side of an object, and if they tell you the object has disappeared, you've got one of the later stages of fixed attention. It is so fixed, you see, that they don't see what else is to be seen, too. You say, "Put your attention on the space around this object." They do, and the object disappears. Well, this is unmocking, but gloriously. And that, of course, is an automaticity in unmocking. What is that? They can put their attention on the space and lose the object, or put their attention on the object and lose the space. That's fairly extreme.
As we first enter this problem, the person is able to put his attention on the space around the object and on the object too. And then he is unable to put his space around the object—on the space around the object, he puts his space on the object when told to look at the object. And then his concentration is so great that his attention fixes beyond or before the object. And now as we get this deteriorating—you see this is superfixation, this is fixation on an inversion— we get another condition, whereby you ask him to put his attention on the space around it, the object itself disappears.
Now, here is inverted havingness. They can't have something, they're so compelled to look at space. And this is an automatic unmocker, and actually is the anatomy of automatic unmocking.
Unmocking itself is a very simple proposition; you merely look through something and it unmocks. This is of the essence. I mean, you don't have to do

SUMMARY OF STEPS I, II, III OF SOP 8-C
anything very—very strong. Now, that is a very, very crude method of unmocking, by the way. The best method of unmocking—in case you know anybody, any problem to unmock something, they just look through it and it'll disappear.
You don't have to go that crude. That's a crude method, you understand. The other one's to just know it's not there and it's not there. That's a very precision method, and the method which we are trying to achieve because that is the basic and optimum method of mocking and unmocking.
Now, we've got this first step, and in this first step, you'll find immediately that somebody's attention is too fixed on where he is, or too fixed on where he isn't but thinks he is. Or it's so dispersed all over the place that he can't be anywhere. And somewhere on thinkingness, effort, feeling or looking, you will find some place, some thing, some object, where his attention is entirely dispersed and he cannot look at the thing at all. Just the effort to look at the thing is so great that his attention simply disperses—it flies all over the place. You see that? It goes out into the space around the object. This extreme condition, they can't look at the object, their space just. . .
By the way, I didn't end that other. Then after their—the thing disappears, because they look at the space around it, you get the final deteriorated condition ... There are two conditions beyond that, as long as we are just going into attention (I hadn't really expected to cover the thing). You tell them to look at the object, and their attention flies into the space around it, and they don't see the object. And the next one is, you tell them to look at the object, their attention flies around it and then comes back on a false object. You see, that's delusion. It comes back and then instead of a microphone they see a spider. You see? That's somebody seeing something.
Well, you shouldn't get confused about this—is the person knows he has to have something there, and in this franticness of trying to have something there, his automatic machinery simply is—he's going full automatic now, and the automatic machinery just isn't working, that's all. It'll put anything there. He's on a complete other-determinism. He isn't even on a MEST universe determinism, so he's relied on other people to mock up the MEST universe for him for so long, that he can't tell what's being mocked up! He goes around and sees all sorts of strange, weird things because this automaticity—anything will kick in. See, he has—he's said, "I have no responsibility for mocking up this universe. This universe isn't mine. No part of it's mine." Well, that's the final deteriorated condition of attention.
Seldom you will see anybody like that. It—usually it works like this: Light stages of delusion—if the person sees a nothingness, something will appear in it.
Male voice: Space.
Yes, if he actually sees a nothingness. If you ask him to see a nothingness, he'll get something appearing in it. Well, this is your—his machinery compulsively having to have something. He doesn't dare look at anything. His intention just blears out away from it, and the machine puts something else in, and he looks at that. Everything is something else. Anything is a symbol for anything else. You got the reactive mind at work there, you see? Anything equals everything, and all things have lots of significance, an empty space has lots of significance, and everything has significance, significance, significance—real deteriorated.
But let's not pause on that too long. If you don't understand that, let's just go over it a few times and you . .. Actually you can take a flashlight and focus it and unfocus it and see all these things. It's just a condition of perception lines. There's nothing to this but perception lines. The fellow is looking at one

17

18

23 NOVEMBER 1953
thing and sees something else, that's all. He actually—there is a spider someplace. See, he's just so mislocated that you told him to see something, so he goes and looks at something, but he looks at whatever a machine is putting there for him, you see. Because if he's looking at a wall, he's looking at something a machine is putting there for him. I'm sorry it sounds complex, because it's not complex at all. You'll understand this better.
But let's get on to something very simple. You can understand how a person can be someplace, and not be someplace. You can understand, too, how a person can be someplace without looking, and be someplace with looking, and not be someplace without looking. And also, by the use of extended viewpoints, not be someplace and look.
Now, you're going to run into that one. That's a periscope effect, and so on. You'll find somebody, he—every time he gets out, why, the next thing you know, why, he has a beautiful view of something or other, and it's superimposed on a beautiful view of something or other, but he's not near these two places and knows it. And it's very confusing. He's just being supercareful. He has been hit once too often, and in this desire not to be hit, he isn't there. He puts a viewpoint there instead.
I'll show you how that'd work, is let's mock up a television camera, and we put the television camera over on the top of the Walt Whitman Hotel, and we run a cable over here and the fellow looks at a viewer. Now, in essence, that is the MEST universe dramatizing the thetan's ability to put out a viewpoint. Well, of course if anything hits the top of the Walt Whitman Hotel, it won't hit the pc. It won't hit him as a thetan, it'll simply hit a television camera. And he's very happy about this—extremely happy, you see.
So every time you've got somebody using viewpoints, there's two things taking place there. One, he can't look where he is, because there's such a scarcity that he's not there to look, to some degree, you see. But he has to be someplace else to look because he can't be there to look, and he's just confused to that degree. And the other condition is, that he is being terribly careful.
So you have him mock up some viewpoints so as to—very carefully, at a distance from him—and look from them so that when they're hit they won't hit him. And then have them hit, you know, and blow them up and so forth. And then put some viewpoints someplace else to look with. These things are very handy. You put the putting up of viewpoints in his own hands—that's an automaticity of viewpoints.
When somebody's getting this effect you say, "You're right there," and all of a sudden, he's looking at the Walt Whitman Hotel, but he's looking at it from the other side and back toward himself. This is real silly. He—don't be confused about what that is. This guy is just being superdispersed and using viewpoints, so he's being very careful.
Nearly anybody uses viewpoints. If you just waste viewpoints for a while, the condition remedies. This isn't a mysterious perception thing. He just can't be where he looks from. He knows better. Just a tricky little arrangement.
That'll come up in auditing every time you turn around. Somebody will suddenly say, "You know I can't look at—I just—I've got a—yes, I've got a big picture of the corner, but, gee, that's a big corner." Viewpoint, that's all. He isn't in the corner, he's got a viewpoint up in the corner. See how that is? All of a sudden he gets a terribly big, magnified view of a clock. You say, "Look at the clock," and he gets a huge magnification of this huge clock. He knows he's not in front of the clock, but he'll get this big view of it. Here he's got it on a screen, you see.

SUMMARY OF STEPS I, II, III OF SOP 8-C
And you say, "What on earth is wrong with this person? He feels like the universe is caving in on him." Well he ought to. My God, he's got viewpoints all over through the past, present and future, and he's got things scattered up. And every once in a while, some guy will go to sleep and he'll have big dreams about fires and so forth that he's—he's still got a viewpoint kicking around somewhere, but it's parked in front of a facsimile. See, the facsimile might still be out in Iowa or someplace, but he's got a viewpoint parked in front of it. You follow that? That's this silly business of "long lookingness."
Then there's the other silly business of unmocking everything with blackness. That's, of course, real silly. But of course, that's the first antagonist of space, is black space. You know, all space is black unless it has some light in it. And a fellow who's had to come up against space and space has really impressed him, believe me, he'll use that as his pattern of view. And he's got nothing but viewpoints scattered all over black space. If you don't think there isn't a lot of black space, sometime, why, go out on a dark night in Arizona or someplace and really take a look up. And you don't see very many stars, but you sure see an awful lot of space, and all that space is black.
Well now, you're in the edge of a galaxy; it gets a little bit thicker as you go in toward the hub, but not much. Now, let's look in the direction where there isn't any galaxy. Let's look away the opposite direction, 180 degrees of a sphere away from the Milky Way, and you look out that way and you will see a lot of black space. There's no stars out that way. See, it's real blank.
So you run out of this galaxy, and you find an awful lot of black space between here and the next galaxy, believe me. The next galaxy, a collection of stars exactly—is about the same as this. I think it's the galaxy up in Andromeda. You look through the constellation of Andromeda to see this galaxy, and you can almost see it with the naked eye; little tiny blurry patch up there. But you turn a telescope on it, and boy, that's a long way away. But it—there's a lot of black space around. There's very few galaxies in it. And there's much more space without galaxies in them by about ten to the hundredth power, than there is space with galaxies in them. And now you get inside the galaxy and you look around and you don't see much stars there, either—there's just a lot of black nothingness. Well, a fellow of course is terribly impressed by this, and he decides right away the thing for him to do is to pattern that, see? Very simple. All right. So much for his black space.
He gets the idea after a while of—he's lost so many things in space, and he's lost so many mock-ups in space and universes and things and stuff and the suns have gone out on him (he's had a lot of fun!), that at last he gets the idea the way you unmock things is to cover it with blackness. Cute trick, isn't it?
Well, of course, the most unmocking thing you ever ran into is black space— that'll gobble up almost anything. The only thing better than black space is just plain, ordinary, routine nothingness, and that's very superior. Of course, it makes these boys sick because they get it confused with the nothingness of black space and that's a very sickening thing. All right.
That's enough time on just talking about attention and beingness here and there. Well, what's the technique that goes along with Step I? Very simple technique. I'll give you an example—and this may sound very peculiar and obtuse and strange to you, but I'll give you an example of this technique.
Now, is your mother here?
Male voice: No.
Well, where isn't your mother?
Male voice: Every place but where she is.

19

20

23 NOVEMBER 1953
Every place but where she is. You know that?
Male voice: Yes.
Okay. Where is she thinking?
Male voice: She's thinking where she is.
You sure of that?
Male voice: Yes.
Good, fine. Where are you?
Male voice: I'm here.
Good. You know you're there?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Well, where aren't you?
Male voice: Well, I'm not anyplace else but here.
You're not anyplace else but here. Are you in your feet?
Male voice: No.
Knees?
Male voice: No.
Either shoulder?
Male voice: No.
Ears?
Male voice: No.
Top of your head?
Male voice: No.
Chin?
Male voice: No.
Throat?
Male voice: No.
Stomach?
Male voice: No.
Are you in your eyeballs?
Male voice: Near there.
You're near there.
Male voice: Yes.
Well, take a look. And shut your eyes and see if you are in your eyeballs.
Male voice: No.
You're not in your eyeballs.
Male voice: No.
Are you in the middle of your head, exactly? Take a look at the middle of your head and see if you're in there exactly.
Male voice: I don't think so.
Well, just take a look at it. Oh, take a look at the back of your forehead— let's do this much more artistically—take a look at the back of your forehead. Are you in it?
Male voice: No.
All right. Take a look at the section between the back of your forehead and the middle of your head and take a look at that. Are you in it?
Male voice: No.
Okay. Let's take a look at the middle of the head there, with your forehead beyond it. Are you in it?
Male voice: I feel something move back. (laughing)
You feel something move back, that's quite unusual.
Male voice: Mm-hm. I think I'm on the backside of the half of the . . .

SUMMARY OF STEPS I, II, III OF SOP 8-C
You think you're on the backside of the half there? Well, take a look at the middle of the head and just make sure you aren't there.
Male voice: There are some—should be somewhere.
All right. Well, now what—take this section between the middle of the head and the back of the head and so forth. Well, if the back of the head were in line with your forehead, and your forehead was furthest away, would you be in the back of your head?
Male voice: Yes, I believe so.
You would, huh? That is, if you were looking at the back of your head— why don't you just try it out? See there if you're in the back of your head—just look at it on the same line that goes towards your forehead.
See, if your back of your head there and your forehead were on a line, and you were looking at the back of your head, with your forehead furthest from you . . .
Male voice: I feel like I'm a lot lower now.
I don't care how you feel like you are, I'm asking you something. (audience laughter)
Male voice: All right.
All right, what is it?
Male voice: I figure.
Huh? Yeah let's figure it all out.
Male voice: No.
Well now, are you . . .
Male voice: What was your question?
. . . are you in front—in your forehead? I'm asking very complicated questions here, all calculated to confuse you.
(If he was going to move out, he would have moved.)
Male voice: I'm just back of my forehead.
Just back of your forehead.
Male voice: Yeah.
Uh-huh. Well are you back of that position?
Male voice: Am I back of that position?
Yeah.
Male voice: No, I'm in that position.
Well, let's take a look back of that position and make sure you're not there. Where are you not behind that position?
Male voice: I'm not way back.
Well, let's take a look way back and see if you are there. (pause) Find that easy to do?
Male voice: No, not too easy yet.
That's not easy to do. Well, it's much easier to look forward, of course, you're fixed on that. So tell me if we've got a ceiling over our heads.
Male voice: Yeah.
We'll just move into Step III on you and that is the way we'd go. No, I'm not going to do anything more here. Are you in your head?
Male voice: Yes I'm in my head.
You're certain of that?
Male voice: Yeah.
All right.
Now remember that before you start shifting somebody around, you better collect him.
Are you more certain at this moment that you're in your head than you were a little while ago? Yes or no?

21

22

23 NOVEMBER 1953
Male voice: I believe I am.
You believe you are, sure.
Every once in a while, somebody will look at you with a gasp of relief, and say, "I'm in my head!" Just on this kind of an orientation proposition. "Are you in your right foot, are you in your left foot, are you in your right knee, left knee, zum-zum-zum-zum-zum."
And "Oh," the guy will say, "no, I'm in my head."
You say, "Well, what part of your head? Are you in the front part of your head?"
"No."
And after a while—you can keep this up as long as you want. And he'll, after a while, just get ornery as the devil toward you. You just keep asking him if he's in the front part of his head—are you sure he isn't in the back part of his head? And he just keeps looking, see? And right away, he's gone up above symbols.
See, the fact that you keep chattering at him and saying, "Well now, are you sure you're not in your chin?" and so on, your words are rendered nothing because of the certainty of his position. You can ask a fellow, by the way, to keep on kicking a wall and keep on asking him if he's sure the wall is there, and make him kick it again. And he'll get awful mad at you, but he'll sure get awful sure there's a wall there. His perception will come way up.
Well, so much for that. Now, just as I was doing there, I was trying to make him put the back of his head in line with the center of his head, in line with his forehead, with his forehead the furthest away—he would have been back of his head looking at himself, pang! But a lot of people won't do that. So you would immediately then decide, as far as this case is concerned, that you'd just better go into an unmocking proposition.
So let's go into the second step. Now, we've gone into Step II, and the greatest automaticity there is, of course, is the body. And let's see if this fellow is going to shed it, and make it possible for him to shed it right away.
Now, how—why don't you mock up your body sitting in that chair about three feet in front of you. (pause) Do you get it clearly?
Male voice: I didn't get it clearly.
You don't get anything there.
Male voice: Just vague.
Very vague. Well, okay. Why don't you—see, and there goes Step II. Why don't you look straight up and find nothing.
Male voice: All right.
And then sit there for a moment and just stop perceiving there, and sit there and know. (pause) Now let's look straight down and find nothing.
Male voice: All right.
Now sit there for a moment and know. Look straight forward and find nothing. (pause) Got it?
Male voice: Yeah.
What happened?
Male voice: Nothing.
Huh?
Male voice: I was just. . .
What happened?
Male voice: . . . trying to find the blackness on the—um—to get the nothingness.
Uh-huh. Well, why don't you just find nothing there.

SUMMARY OF STEPS I, II, III OF SOP 8-C
Male voice: All right.
Why don't you skip the blackness and everything and just find nothing out there. And then sit there and know for a moment. Now let's look over to the right, and find nothing as far as you can see.
Male voice: Okay.
All right. Just sit there for a moment and know. Now nothing as far left as you can perceive.
Male voice: All right.
Now sit there and know. Now nothing as far back as you can perceive.
Male voice: All right.
Sit there and know for a moment. Now why don't you mock your body up three feet in front of you over there. (pause) Is the perception clearer?
Male voice: No.
No? Nothing happened there in the perception?
Male voice: Don't get anything.
Don't get a thing in front of you? You get no mock-up now.
Male voice: I get no mock-up.
Why, that's real interesting. Why don't you look up, straight up now, and find the ceiling.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
And look through the ceiling and find the roof.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
And look through the roof and find the sky.
Male voice: Okay.
And look through the sky and find nothingness.
Male voice: All right.
All right. Now let's look straight up above you and (we'll just do these steps with variation, and you can vary them any way you want to)—look straight up and find a tile ceiling above you.
Male voice: Okay.
And let's look through the tile ceiling and 150 feet up, find a granite roof.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
And now let's look up above that and find a yellow sky.
Male voice: Okay.
And let's look through that and find nothing all the way up through.
Male voice: All right.
Mm-hm. What happened?
Male voice: I had a hard time getting through that yellow.
You did, huh? Well, that's peculiar. All right, now let's put a mock-up of yourself out in front of you again. You get a better one?
Male voice: It was just a little one.
Hm?
Male voice: Same, about like I did the first time.
Oh you do, huh? Well, all right, now let's look straight down and find a mosaic floor.
Male voice: All right.
And look through the mosaic floor and find a torture chamber.
Male voice: All right.
And look through the torture chamber and find the bottom of a well.
Male voice: All right.
And look through that and find the molten core of the Earth.
Male voice: Okay.

23

24

23 NOVEMBER 1953
And look through that and find Boston on the other side of the Earth.
Male voice: All right.
And look through Boston and find a green sky.
Male voice: Okay.
Okay. Now let's look through the green sky and find nothing.
Male voice: Okay.
Okay?
Male voice: Uh-huh.
Now, let's get a little mock-up of you sitting there three feet in front of yourself. (pause) Perception better?
Male voice: No. It seems like I'm trying too hard.
Mm-hm. Interesting, isn't it? You're trying too hard.
Well, I'm just playing this one way across the other. We gave him a flock of imaginary barriers—that is to say, mock-up barriers, a flock of MEST universe barriers—and we suddenly find out that we're working with the effort band.
So put an effort out in front of you.
Male voice: All right.
Why don't you put a beam on the effort band, and push yourself out of the back of your head. (And I'm not giving you this as a pattern of auditing at all.) Put a beam on that object and push yourself out the back of your head. Did you push?
Male voice: Yeah.
Mm-hm. Are you outside? (pause) Push yourself right on out.
Male voice: I . . .
Hm?
Male voice: I am pushing hard.
Well, rig the beam up with some machinery so it pushes you out. That work real good? (pause) Hm? (pause) Did that work real good?
Male voice: It made it easier all right.
Are you exteriorized?
Male voice: I think so—I'm not, no.
You lost again? Are you in your right ear?
Male voice: No.
Your left ear?
Male voice: No.
You in the back of your head?
Male voice: No. Right in front of my face, I think.
You're in front of your face?
Male voice: Mm-hm. In my head and in back of my face, rather than the back.
Oh, you moved forward. Is that right?
Male voice: I think so.
Well! Okay.
Now, as interesting as that might be, this is not a particular pattern method of doing it. You know this man is now—this is not labeling you—skip it now, we're all through with that session.
Male voice: Okay.
We know a lot about our pc. If you listened carefully, we know an awful lot about our pc. Terrific amounts we know.
We asked him to move back and he moved forward, see? So he's got some kind of an automatic inversion of some sort. But he did locate himself. He's perfectly sane, we know that. Why? Because he can find himself in his head. Mama isn't present and so forth—so he's perfectly sane. We know he was on

SUMMARY OF STEPS I, II, III OF SOP 8-C
the effort band. Well, I've played those three with a great variation, one against the other. Now let's play it with less variation and let's take it just by rote, the way you could be absolutely sure it would happen. See, I mean you do this just by rote now.
[to another student] Are you in your right foot?
Male voice: No.
Your left foot?
Male voice: No.
Stomach?
Male voice: No.
Right shoulder?
Male voice: No.
Left shoulder?
Male voice: No.
End of your nose?
Male voice: No.
In your right eyeball?
Male voice: No.
Left eyeball?
Male voice: No.
In your right ear?
Male voice: No.
Left ear?
Male voice: No.
In the back of your head?
Male voice: Hm-mm.
On the back of your head?
Male voice: Hm-mm.
Is the back of your head three feet in front of you?
Male voice: About six inches.
About six inches, hm? Well, mock your body up just a little bit further ahead of you than that.
Male voice: Okay.
You got that? Okay. Now right from there, tell me where you are not in the room.
Male voice: Mm, not in the corner. Not in any corner.
Mm-hm.
Male voice: Not in any wall.
Okay. Why don't we mock up a whole bunch of sandbag barriers. Instead of the walls of the room, make it a bigger room with a bunch of sandbag barriers.
Male voice: Okay.
That easy to do?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
All right. Now where aren't you amongst these sandbag barriers?
Male voice: Not in any of them.
Okay. Locate you a little better?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Okay. Let's look through the sandbag barriers and find yourself completely surrounded by temple colonnades.
Male voice: Yeah.
Got them real good?
Male voice: Mm-hm.

25

26

23 NOVEMBER 1953
All right. Change them blue.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
White.
Male voice: Yeah.
Blue.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Green.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Blue.
Male voice: Yeah.
Okay. Blow them up.
Male voice: Uh-huh.
Blow up the sandbags.
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Can you be right up next to the chandelier up there?
Male voice: Mmm. Yeah, I got one up there.
Well, can you be next to the one that's there? Well, let's mock up about eight chandeliers up there.
Male voice: Okay.
Now blow them all up.
Male voice: All right.
Got that?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Now you got the chandelier up there located?
Male voice: Mm, yeah.
You got it located?
Male voice: Yeah.
Put eight more chandeliers up there, and blow them up.
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Now you got that one located?
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Be next to it.
Male voice: Yeah.
You right there?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
All right, now let's locate the other chandelier.
Male voice: What other chandelier?
Well, let's put eight more up there and look around.
Male voice: All right.
Now blow them up.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Eight more.
Male voice: Yeah.
Blow them up.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Eight more.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Blow them up. Now let's put a lot of pendant chandeliers, about twenty of them, hanging all over the ceiling.
Male voice: Mm, yeah.
Blow them all up.
Male voice: Okay.

SUMMARY OF STEPS I, II, III OF SOP 8-C
All right. Now take a look around, you find a couple of chandeliers up there? Male voice: I have to put one up there. All right, put it there. Male voice: Okay.
All right. Now be in the bottom of it. Male voice: Mm-hm. And now be very close to the lamp. Male voice: Mm-hm.
All right. Now let's feel a little heat from the lamp. Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Let's feel a little less heat. Male voice: All right. A little more heat. Male voice: Yeah. A little less heat. Male voice: Mm-hm. A little more heat. Male voice: Yeah. A little less heat. Male voice: Mm-hm.
Okay. Now let's be on the glass of the lamp. Male voice: Yeah. Pretty warm? Male voice: Yeah, it's hot. All right. Now, let's just slide inside. Male voice: Yeah. That easy? Male voice: Mm-hm.
All right. Now let's be up near the filament. Male voice: Yeah. Interesting?
Male voice: Pretty bright. Pretty bright. All right, make it duller. Male voice: Yeah, it's red. All right. Now make it brighter. Male voice: Yeah. Now make it duller. Male voice: Mm-hm. Make it brighter. Male voice: Mm-hm. Make it duller. Male voice: Yeah. All right. Unmock it. Male voice: Mm-hm. All right. Now put it there again. Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Now let's be right on the filament of the lamp—juice, you know. Let's put a beam across between it. Male voice: Okay. Put a beam across there, see? Male voice: It lit up. Okay. The beam lit up, huh? The beam?

27

28

23 NOVEMBER 1953
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Now mock up an asbestos island in the middle of the beam. Male voice: Yeah. Now let's be on the island. Male voice: Mm-hm.
Okay. Now, let's just put another tiny test beam on these two filaments. Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Now let's just connect up with them, just a little bit. Male voice: Yeah. Just let a little less through now. Male voice: Yeah. A little more. Male voice: Yeah. A little less. Male voice: Mm-hm. A little more. Male voice: Yeah. A little less. Male voice: Mm-hm. A little more. Male voice: Mm-hm. A little less. Male voice: Yeah. More.
Male voice: Yeah. More.
Male voice: Yeah. More.
Male voice: Mm, yeah. And less. Male voice: Okay. Less.
Male voice: Mm-hm. Okay. Now let's be up on the roof. Male voice: Yeah.
Find a real dirty place on the roof. Male voice: Yeah. Let's be in it. Male voice: Okay.
Now let's find a real clean, bright place where you've got a good look out across the town.
Male voice: Mm, okay.
Let's be on it.
Male voice: Yeah.
Now let's put a town all with conical roofs.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Blow it up.
Male voice: Okay.
A town with green roofs.
Male voice: Yeah.
And blow it up.
Male voice: Okay.

SUMMARY OF STEPS I, II, III OF SOP 8-C
A town with pink roofs.
Male voice: Yeah.
And blow it up.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
How does this town look now?
Male voice: This one here?
Mm-hm.
Male voice: It's okay.
Looks real good? Well, change it around so it looks better.
Male voice: Yeah.
It looks much better?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Good. All right. Now build the whole thing out of gauze, so there's no town there at all, hardly.
Male voice: Okay.
Got that real good?
Now shine some lights through the buildings in such a way that you can see they're not solid.
Male voice: Yeah.
Blow it up.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Okay. Just get a hole in the ground here.
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Now let's be—dispense with the hole. And let's be over the—is there anyplace around here—let's be up in the air about a thousand feet above the town.
Male voice: Okay.
Is there any furnace going or anything like that around?
Male voice: Big refinery.
Big refinery. All right, let's go over and be on part of the chimney there at the refinery. Go on, be ...
Male voice: Yeah.
Got that?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Interesting looking place?
Male voice: Yeah.
Yeah. Well, let's kind of flip through the smoke.
Male voice: Yeah, it's kind of—burn.
All right. Now let's make soothing smoke come out of the chimney.
Male voice: Mm, yeah.
Turn it slightly purple.
Male voice: Huh! Yeah.
All right. Now, let's take another look at it again.
Male voice: Yeah.
And flip through it the other way. Easier to do this time?
Male voice: Yeah.
That was real easy.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
All right. Now why don't we just be down outside the furnace door that's feeding this.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Take a look around the furnace room.

29

30

23 NOVEMBER 1953
Male voice: Yeah.
Fill it up full of gnomes.
Male voice: (laughing) Yeah.
Give them picks and shovels.
Male voice: Yeah.
Blow them all up.
Male voice: Okay.
Okay. Now, let's look around this room. Put another furnace there.
Male voice: Yeah.
Make it disappear.
Male voice: Okay.
Another furnace.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Make it disappear.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Another one.
Male voice: Yeah.
Make it disappear.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Now is there some fire going in that furnace?
Male voice: Yeah.
Okay, let's be up close to the door and feel some heat.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
All right. Now let's be very close to it and feel less heat.
Male voice: Yeah.
Okay. Now let's just see right straight through the furnace and see the far wall of the building.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Okay. Now let's shorten up vision until you can see inside the furnace.
Male voice: Yeah.
Got that?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Where's there a real cool spot inside there?
Male voice: Pretty hot in there.
Pretty hot in there, huh? Well, mock up a match and give yourself a hotfoot with it.
Male voice: Yeah.
Got that?
Male voice: Yeah.
Pretty easy to do?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
All right. Let's get a blowtorch and give yourself a hotfoot with it.
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Blow that up and let's be over very, very close to the furnace door so that you can see a little fire on the other side of it.
Male voice: Yeah.
Now we're going to do this real quick. When I say go, why, you jump inside and jump out again, okay?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Go.
Male voice: Yeah.
Hot in there, huh?

SUMMARY OF STEPS I, II, III OF SOP 8-C
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Let's turn the whole interior of that furnace into an icebox.
Male voice: Yeah.
Now let's be inside and feel how cool it is,
Male voice: Mm-hm. Yeah. It's real cold.
Okay. Now, be outside of it.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
And unmock the icebox and substitute a fire in there.
Male voice: Yeah.
Now let's look at the fire other people believe are in there.
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. And let's be in the fire other people believe are in there. (pause) Now turn the flames around yourself a delicate shade of pink.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Now be outside the furnace.
Male voice: Yeah.
Now I want you to be inside the furnace at the foot of the chimney.
Male voice: Yeah.
And now I want you to go right straight on up through the smoke, right on out the chimney, out into the air on the other side.
Male voice: Hm. Yeah.
Got it?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Look around from where you are above the chimney.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Mock up a couple of vacuum cleaners to mop you up and polish you up.
Male voice: Yeah.
Give yourself a halo now.
Male voice: Mm, okay.
Brightly polished halo.
Okay. Now let's be over the river.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
And let's find an old, dirty barge.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Got a garbage barge around there anyplace or something like that?
Male voice: There's one down there, I'm sure.
All right. Let's find a real dirty barge.
Male voice: Yeah.
Let's turn it into Cleopatra's pleasure yacht.
Male voice: Yeah.
And be on its deck.
Male voice: Mm.
Got that?
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Let's change it back into the coal barge or the barge.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
All right. Now let's find a very scrummy, dirty part of the barge.
Male voice: Mm, yeah.
Let's be in that.
Male voice: Mm, okay.
Real good?
Male voice: Mm-hm.

31

32

23 NOVEMBER 1953
All right. What's the matter?
Male voice: There's a rotten orange right in front of me.
Good. Be in it.
Male voice: Yeah.
Got it?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Be outside of it.
Male voice: Yeah.
Now mock up in its place a golden pomegranate.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
And blow up the pomegranate.
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Now let's be way up in the stratosphere where it's real cold.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Now mock it up as real warm.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Now be up high enough so that you see the curvature of the Earth.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Put an orange in its place.
Male voice: Yeah.
Blow up the orange.
Male voice: Yeah.
Let's take a look at the curvature of the Earth.
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Now let's be out in black space.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Good, black space.
Male voice: Yeah.
Just nice and cool? Any sensation about it?
Male voice: Mm.
All right. Now let's be up near the Sun.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
All right. Now let's get that corona. Do you see the corona—the flames coming off of the Sun, the fission?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Looks real savage?
Male voice: Mm. Yeah.
Turn them into silk ribbons.
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Turn them back into the corona.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
All right. Now let's be in—on the tip of one of these plumes of flame.
Male voice: Yeah.
And be well away from the Sun again.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Now let's be on the tip of one of these plumes of flame and roily-coast right on into the Sun.
Male voice: It isn't bad.
Good. Now let's be way outside the Sun again.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Take a look around.
Male voice: Mm-hm.

SUMMARY OF STEPS I, II, HI OF SOP 8-C
All right. Now let's be in the center of the Sun.
Male voice: Yeah.
How is that?
Male voice: It's all right.
Mm-hm. Hot?
Male voice: It's kind of warm.
Kind of warm? Well, mock up an icebox there.
Male voice: Yeah.
Is that cold?
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Blow up the icebox.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Now be in the center of the Sun.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Okay. How is it, real good?
Male voice: Yeah.
All right. Now let's be above Earth.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Now let's jump these planets one after the other: Earth.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Moon.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Mercury.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Find it?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Good. Mars.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Jupiter.
Male voice: Mm-hm,
Earth.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Sun.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Moon.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Let's be on the far side of the Moon now.
Male voice: Yeah.
Let's find a meteor coming in.
Male voice: Mm. Yeah, there's one going by.
One going by. Get in front of it.
Male voice: Yeah.
Okay. Now move through it.
Male voice: Yeah.
Okay. All right. Now be back here again.
Male voice; Yeah.
Be three feet back of your head.
Male voice: Yeah.
Now let's take a whisk broom and dust the body off.
Male voice: Yeah.
Got it?
Male voice: Uh-huh.

33

34

23 NOVEMBER 1953
All right. Now look right straight through it and see the floor on the other side of it.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Now look through the body.
Male voice: Yeah.
Got that real good? Look through all parts of the body now. Find no body there at all.
Male voice: Yeah.
Now put a body there.
Male voice: Yeah.
How do you feel now?
Male voice: Good.
Okay.
Now, there's actually a very full rendition—although I had to put a couple of other little angles in it, not to amount to anything—but there is actually a full rendition of being someplace: exteriorizing somebody by having him, just gathering him up and be in back of his head, and stabilize him and have him be in some safe places and dangerous places, and change him around.
When a person is not immediately in the vicinity of all of his automatic machinery, it's very simple. He can be any kind of an automaticity, even he— any automaticity ever set up, he can duplicate. And he can do better, much better, than feeding it to some remote machine and having it do it.
Okay. Feel okay?
Male voice: Yeah, I just noticed my leg was asleep and ordinarily it bothers me when I. . .
Oh yeah, just noticed it. Yeah, well, all right.
Now, there is a full run on Step I. Now, I tried to get the first case I did here just to snap on a couple of visios and so forth, and take over real quick. Didn't work out, case needs some work. What kind of work does this case need? This case needs one hell of a lot of III.
Did you have your own room when you were a boy?
Male voice: No.
No. That's about the first certainty that you have. Somebody's out of space. See, any of these things, he's fresh out of space. So you just better invalidate barriers with him, and you would just do III round and round and round and round.
Now, how would we do III with this first case we did—not the second one, but the first one. We would do III with many patterns, there's many patterns. You can run space in brackets of eight, you can—oh, there's just an awful lot of things you can do. The truth of the matter is that if you let him see nothing in six directions and then know after each one, you know, and you just kept that up, you would eventually breed a disrespect for barriers which would permit him to do almost anything he wanted to do. I mean, that's your basic technique as far as space is concerned. Just an invalidation of barriers. But you can come around the other way and do it the other way too.
You can go six ways and just do nothing but find the room, and then know. And then turn around, and find nothing in all directions and know. And then six directions, find the room. And then six directions, find nothingness. You could do it that way.
Or you could do it this next way: Six directions and find nothingness and know after each one, then six directions and find the room each time and then know after each one, and then six directions and find a phony barrier

SUMMARY OF STEPS I, II, III OF SOP 8-C
(you know, one that he's putting there consciously) each time and then we would go again and know each time, and just dispense with that.
Then we could go into barriers beyond barriers, which he himself is putting there, you see. And we could vary that to have him going through barriers other people mock up for him and put there, and seeing through them or stopping at them. We could do all these variations. There's just endless variations we could do on that. We could have him be in six ways of space, which is another one. But the one which you were doing this morning includes most of these ways, except the mock-up barrier.
Now, that would be Step IV on SOP 8-C. Machines or things—things which make, cause to persist, or unmake the following list. You've got the list right there, you know, in SOP 8 in Step IV—things or machines which make, or cause to persist, or unmake the following things, see? And what would you do with those machines? Would you cause them to work? No, you wouldn't cause them to work. You just run wasting such a machine, and somebody else wasting such a machine, and somebody else wasting somebody else's equipment that way. Just vary it enough so the patter doesn't get too solid. And you just beat those things to pieces till you get no registry.
You will normally find that semen and money cause the biggest commotion on a meter dial. But he's used bodies for anchor points and so forth. What's this? This is just curing up all kinds and varieties of anchor points, on an automatic basis. So we have to first get a machine which makes admiration, and then we waste that and save it and accept it and desire it and be curious about it in a bracket—see, that's one.
Then we get a machine which causes admiration to persist. And in brackets, each time, we waste it, save it, accept it, desire it and be curious about it. And then in a bracket again, we just go right on around on machines which unmake admiration; things which knock out admiration. We run this in a bracket.
Now, you want to talk about a full automatic psychotherapy—that Step IV done in that fashion, believe me, that sure does it. And all of those are used one way or the other, in one form or another, as anchor points, which again cure space and barriers. Because here's a problem in barriers which a person has in terms of ideas. So you solve the idea of barriers down there at IV.
See, the fellow—well he can't do that, he hasn't got that much money. He can't do something else because it'd make money and somebody'd take it away from him. You get somebody to find out that he can't have any anchor points because he can't have any money, we—and he—eventually get him up in money, and he'll eventually find out he can have a penny. First time in his life he's ever realized this, but he can have a penny.
You wonder what's wrong, why this guy gets frantic about anchor points. Money is the mutual anchor point in this society. See, that's an anchor point that drifts all around. Everybody mocks it up wherever it hits, complete with treasury stamp, which is a neat trick—it's very able to be able to do that.
All right, your Step III, then, would just beat space to pieces. And don't forget this: that you can just tell a preclear ... Now for instance, you're about the band where you could—well, possibly you'd have to work some IV on you, but you'd exteriorize somewhere along the line of just holding on to the two back corners of the room. All of a sudden you'll find yourself hanging out in one of the corners looking at the room—or feeling the room, anyway.
Now you get that. That's a very quick rendition I've given you here. I've given you a full review of Step I, and I've given you a mix-up of these steps. That's a real potpourri, too. And given you some kind of an idea of the varieties,

35

36

23 NOVEMBER 1953
and so forth, of running Step III. And by golly, from what you had already and what you've been demonstrated to, you sure should run—be able to run that Step IV. You see, you don't waste these things in 8-C; you waste the thing that makes it.
You'll find many a Step I will bog on you simply because he can't make admiration. Why can't he make admiration? He must have something that's unmocking admiration faster than he can mock it up. So every time he mocks up some admiration, he's got an automatic machine that on the thought and wavelength of admiration, immediately it unmocks it. And then he says, "You know, I can't have any admiration." Well, this is real silly, you see? All he's got is a piece of automaticity that's knocking it out faster than he can put it in. Somebody else says, "I can't have a mock-up." Well, he's got something knocking out mock-ups faster than he can mock them—simplicity itself.
We—first case here, we had a couple of very faint visios. Sometimes those things will do a little flick and I'm always willing to take the chance that after you've made a guy look at something or something that it'll do a flick like that. Well, he couldn't get a mock-up. If he can't get a mock-up of himself sitting out in front of himself, they're very, very vague and so forth, he generally is on barriers of effort and ideas. You know, "It's work," he kept saying. "Well, you have to try," you know, "you have to try."
How are you going to try with some energy to make an idea? Actually caused me for years to be very upset with the human race because I couldn't understand this. And it was something I couldn't wrap my intelligence around, merely because it's just about as false as a Confederate minus 28-cent bill, see? How can you put effort into an idea? An idea brings about effort, but to get a picture and use some effort to put a picture there, immediately tells you about an inversion on the subject of effort.
Well, how do we go about this? Probably he's got automaticity that furnishes effort, but he's counting on the body to work for him, and he's always counted on his body to work for him—is that true? And he's been fresh out of space. So it's just the degree which we're working on.
Case is not difficult case for you to solve. I mean, I could work with this case with what else we know here, and probably have him exteriorized in another five or ten minutes—there's nothing much to that. But you can very easily overshoot this.
Well, I'll give you an idea. Put your hand—not your MEST body's hand, but your other hands—put one of those hands on each shoulder. Now just shove yourself back there a little bit. Now pat your body on the head and say, "Poor body, it's worked so hard." Get that easily?
Male voice: I made something.
Why sure. Nothing much to it. Be back inside.
Okay. You see, the guy's got the idea you got—have to work with your hands, and he'll have what he calls a theta body, which is the same shape as his own body. You notice that? It's just another form of idea.
Well, how do you turn up anybody's perception? That's what everybody's going to start squawking about. You know, how do you turn up somebody's perception, that's the main thing.
Well, remember what I told you at the end of this morning's lecture. I'm going to tell you this practically every day, so just make up your minds that there's some validity to it. Look, thinking, on a circuit variety, is condensed effort. Effort—you condense effort enough, and you get thinkingness: the fellow works and plans ahead to do his work—he has to know before he goes and so forth.

SUMMARY OF STEPS I, II, III OF SOP 8-C
And now we have feelingness—see, effort is condensed emotion, and emotion is condensed looking. So we find a guy looking or we find him emoting or we find him effort or we find him thinking, and what we've got is too fixed an attention on all of those factors. You got it? Much too fixed an attention on some part or portion of that band, see that?
So his attention is so fixed on it that you're going to ask him to perceive— well, he can't perceive. Why? He's got this fixed on this part of this band. Well, how did that band get there? Well, that's just a different kind of barrier in each case.
People are the barriers which bring about fixation on emotion, and people get fixed on emotion and stop looking. They've got to have some sensation.
Now, MEST barriers bring about effort, and a person who's handling a lot of effort is no longer very emotional. And after he's worked like mad for a long time, he finds out that he'd rather "think about it," see?
Now, how do we stretch these things out? In each case, it's a barrier. When he's down to "thinkingness has barriers," oh boy! See? Now, we'll just cure him of his thinkingness having barriers, and we'll cure him of his effort having barriers, and having barriers of effort. And the next thing you know, we will cure him of doing anything but "know." And then he can turn around the other way, and here we go.
In essence now, on these steps, and the particular step which is III, the goal of that step is to be able to unmock the body and the room to such a degree that the body isn't sitting there, but the individual is. And after that he can be anyplace. See, that's the goal of that step as you carry it on, round and round and round.
And what about perception? Well, the only way you can see is to have something stop your sight. So seeing and stopping is the same thing. Now, in order to see the microphone you have to want this to stop your sight, see? So you want your sight to stop. And by the time you've been looking at barriers for a few trillion years, you eventually get the idea your sight's stopped. Stopped where? Stopped right up close with effortful barriers.
Those people who have trouble getting out of their heads and so forth, get the idea of a huge block of stone in front of you, an enormous block of stone— and give it a little push.
Now get a block of stone big enough to build a pyramid out of it and give it a tiny little push with your little finger. You see?
All right. Blow up the stone or move it away or leave it when you get out. (audience laughter)
But there in essence, you see, that is the idea of a barrier. You actually can have somebody who is on this, he will be able to mock up a black piece of metal or something in front of him like an iron cube or a pyramid or something solid in front of him and give it a shove, and out he comes.
And we got that test on the first case I processed here. I told him to mock up a wall and push on it, and push himself out. And you know, he darn near did—his neck straining and so forth. That's pretty good.
Well, there's nothing wrong with that, but it shows you that his level of work is still in good condition. He can mock up a barrier which is at least solid, so the case is of very little difficulty.
(Recording ends abruptly)

37



Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location
A lecture given on 24 November 1953

Okay, This is November the 24th, first morning lecture. And this morning we are going to go on into V, VI and VII on SOP 8-C.
Now, there's going to be a little more about this than what I'm giving you this morning, but I'm going to give you a very swift rundown of it.
You must realize that the whole problem in Step I is a problem of location. Location consists of being able to possess or not care who possesses anchor points. Location depends upon anchor points because it depends upon space.
Now, let's take the definition of space: Space is a viewpoint of dimension. This gives us a very workable basis for a great many techniques. But our viewpoint of dimension, as a definition, permits us for the first time to crack this problem, because we see at once that we have location in terms of barriers or limitations. "I know who I am because I can't drive a car." You get the idea? "I know who I am because I can't. I know who I am because I am not."
Now, there's a silly technique that you could just run on this; this is not a technique at all—a usable technique as you would say—but it's just a foolish one. And—all right, you ask somebody, "Are you Joe? Are you Bill? Are you Pete? Are you Henry? Are you a streetcar conductor? Are you a politician? Are you a dogcatcher?" And what do you know? If you've got that right there, you get a little—slightly heightening sense of identity.
Well, that's the idea band of location. See, "I am not so-and-so, therefore it follows that I must be somebody else." Well, this is the problem of "who." People have gone around all the time saying, "I am (identity)," whatever the identity was; and they say, "I am this identity." And somebody else says, "Well, gee, I'm at least not that identity."
This is why we love criminals, and why we nurse, as a civilization, criminals to our bosom and take care of them and put them in cages and give them all the headlines and so forth—just to give somebody something which he is not. You see? It makes people happy. They read the paper and they find out about the "Smorgasbord kid-slapping case" or something, and they say, "Well, my name is not Smorgasbord." Imagine the unhappiness, however, of Mr. Smorgasbord of Keokuk who reads that story.
Now, one of the unhappy things that occurs to a person is to find somebody else with his name. This is kind of upsetting, you see, because he can't say, "I am not George." Aaahh! So the best thing he can do is to substitute some sort of a barrier between George and himself, and hate George or something, you see. And this convinces him that he's not George.

39

40

24 NOVEMBER 1953
This is an interesting game because, you see, you don't have a name. There is no such thing as a "who." You're you, you see; you're not a name or a label or something of the sort. Well, a person, when he starts struggling against location, starts losing his sense of identity; but he's already, remember, struggling against location. So if you want to solve this problem of identity, you solve the problem of location, which is a higher level than identity. Identity is almost lost in the swamp. There's hardly anything lower than "My name is George," you see? "My name is Bill." "I am somebody because I am Oscar Schnitzowitz the Eighth," see? No, he isn't; he isn't anybody because he's— that's a symbol. And if somebody wants to push around a symbol and be a symbol for years, why, this is fine. But he's not in too good a shape as a result.
An awful lot of people that you run into are having so much trouble with this that they're trying to make something out of their own name, but desperately. So as one of the lower steps in 8 -C, we make the person work with his name. I could tell you some very funny ones on this. A person has lost himself locationally, and then finds himself as a name.
One of the main troubles with a body is that it's mobile; it doesn't grow like a tree, and therefore it can't be located against three or four or five other trees. You see, it's mobile and it drifts around, so a person gets upset about that, so he becomes this symbol, because symbols are things which drift around, too.
So, with our first step, we have the step of location. We also have this problem of identity. And if anybody, however, is going to exteriorize on Step I, he's not having too much trouble with identity; not having too much trouble. You have to get down to IV and V before you really get into trouble with identity.
Well, let's take up some more of I—location. This has to do, then, with anchor points. And so we have, as part of I, a drill which I gave you earlier in this series, which has to do with coloring and changing, altering, anchor points. Because one cannot have location unless one has anchor points. And if every-body doesn't own the anchor points—if they all belong to the state, if they all belong to the Slipslap Estate, if they all belong to General Motorcycles or something; you see, if all these belong to some huge corporation or if they all belong to the Ruff Corporation of America, or something like that—these things are all uniformly somebody else's anchor points. And so we don't get a location.
Now, in essence, what is wrong with a case that is down below the level of I, doesn't exteriorize easily—well, what's wrong with this case? Several things, but they're all a gradient scale of anchor points. Whose anchor points, see, is the first problem that enters in there. Whose? Sense of location. Fascinating. See, they're not being any identity. The problem of who owns the anchor points becomes a very foolish one and a very silly one.
See, in Step III, if you do one of the space tricks, and you simply have one of these tricks of putting somebody—have him put up space using deeds of title for anchor points. That's very silly, you see. "It's my house." Why is it your house? Well, it's your house because somebody gave you a deed of title. Well, this is what we know as "license to survive," you see; it's some—there's a deed of title.
Now, it isn't that these deeds of title and so forth are worthless, this is not the point. The point is that when you depend upon the deed of title to tell you where you are, it becomes very silly. Now, just try to integrate that one with something more than Homo sapiens logic and it just doesn't integrate. You depend upon a deed of title to tell you where you are; and yet that is exactly what a deed of title is trying to do.

ANCHOR POINTS, KNOWINGNESS OF LOCATION
"I have a deed of title and therefore I am someplace." Oh, no. No, because you have a deed of title to a house up here a few blocks away, would be no reason why you were in that house, but it would be a location or point from which you could operate. And as long as you had a feeling like you knew where the house was, and the house was yours, therefore, you had the right to orient yourself with regard to it. But listen to this: if you couldn't be up high enough, or know hard enough, the space and the intervening space and the relative direction to that one anchor point at all times, you'd still be lost, no matter how many deeds of title you had.
And so it is. A fellow who has—gets the idea, "Well, let's see, deed of title locates me, so therefore if I own 8 billion, 645 thousand deeds of title or something, why, I'm all set." And well, that's fine. But of course, the more he gets of these, and the more mobile they are, and the more he depends on them, the less he knows who he is. Because, you see, in the first place he isn't anybody. When I mentioned that number of titles, I was going to point out what a piece of money is. It is a potential title to some food, to a ride, a taxicab—they haven't figured out yet how to get dollar bills into slot machines, but they'll have to shortly, at the rate of inflation. And here we have a mobile deed of title, assigned to a mobile person, in an effort to give him an identity, which is to say a location. Oh!
And into this, we immediately get all the goofy problems of economics, taxation, political control—these problems all come under that heading and fall immediately below that frailty. Because you—if you were to take—you notice, by the way, restaurant owners very often do this. Restaurant owners are consuming so much in a restaurant, they sort of form a vacuum there, you know, and they kind of stick against it. And they have a rough time with the flow of commodity, because there's tremendous commodity flow, you see. And they'll decide that they'll make something immobile, so they will take the first dollar the store earned, or something like that, and they'll paste it up on the wall. They do this in bars and restaurants because, you see, there's so much flow; and you'll see that one thing.
Well, actually, the proprietor—you'd be surprised, but the proprietor of the shop always knows where that thing is, you see? All else may fail, but there's that dollar bill. And it's an amusing thing to speak to them about that dollar bill and see the sort of comfortable look come on their faces, see? There it is, that's one dollar they've got nailed down!
Well, now you get people with an idea that they aren't anything (see, they've gone down through the band), but now they're going to try to be something which somebody else gave them. Now, this would be honors and titles, and that's real amusing, too. And nobody seems to find this funny in this society at this time, which is something that continues to amaze me—that somebody would know where he was because he was a general. You see, that's utterly silly. In the first place, he might as well just pass in his chips as far as his health and personal comfort's concerned, because he has been presented with an anchor point which he doesn't own and which can be taken away from him unless he behaves in a certain way. It is a mobile anchor point and it exists only as a symbol— they give him a piece of paper which he can put in the safe or something of the sort, saying he is a general, and now he is supposed to be this anchor point. Oh, no. Anytime, anytime anybody tries to be an anchor point, he's in trouble— believe me, he's in trouble.
Space is a viewpoint of dimension. What do you think happens to somebody who is trying to be a piece of energy? Who is trying to be an anchor point, much

41

42

24 NOVEMBER 1953
less be a symbol? Well, what do you think happens to this person? Well, it's just exactly what you see in case after case as they go by: no space, of course! See how ridiculous this is? The fellow runs fresh out of space the moment he says—and you can find, by the way, in a person's lifetime when he suddenly decided to be something. He decided to be a piece of energy; God help him when he decided to be a symbol. You know, "George"—has to be a symbol. Or a general—that's about the lousiest symbol anybody could be. And I don't mean "lousy" there in a more grammatical sense, because generals very often have enough orderlies to take the cooties out of their clothes; they have DDT in these more modern wars. But they do manage to get crawled over considerably.
Now, where we have a title which is a big, big title; I mean, where we have an important thing, or the person by reason of this has a certain command and influence—just by reason of this thing having been presented to him from some other determinism—we've got real trouble with a case. We've got trouble— right now.
Well, what's the matter with this fellow? He isn't located. Why isn't he located? He isn't located because the main thing he is using as an anchor point is a symbol, so he's on an inversion of energy. Right away he's on an inversion of energy, because you'd have to take this symbol and convert it to energy, and then convert the energy back into a real anchor point, which he could then be far enough away from to view, in order to put him in a position where he would have space and mobility, the truth of the matter is. But this symbol, which isn't anything, which drifts everyplace, which can be taken away from him—of course, if that's his location, he's noplace. And so you will find him; so you'll find him. You'll find him unable to get anchor points, to put up anchor points and so on.
Now, it works the same way with somebody who is having trouble with money. All due respect, there are two classes of individuals that have to do with money. One is the entrepreneur—he is the person who makes it as he needs it and spends it. And the other one is the case that—you couldn't get me to process one of these for all of the spaceships on Venus, you just couldn't, because—that's the capitalist. Because his whole goal is, "If I can hoard up enough anchor points, I then can put out enough batches of anchor points so that they will multiply new anchor points."
Now, get what this boy is doing: He's taken a mobile commodity—dollar bills, credits, so forth—and he has made this an anchor point. Now he's going to put out these masses of anchor points (which didn't belong to him in the first place, you see) and then they're going to multiply, and that's the way he's going to get energy. That's how he's going to get new anchor points. Not by work, not by effort, not by thinking up ideas, but just by being kind of shifty and slippy about the whole thing.
Well now, your entrepreneur is always visible in the society because he lives rather well. He does things that are—a little color and flash. Your capitalist is practically invisible in a society—the most shoddy characters you ever wanted to run into. Their conversation is entirely engrossed with these—anchor point called a dollar.
The funny part of it is that they have almost uniformly thrown this thing called aesthetics out the window. And they make the world's roughest case; because they're trying to hold mobile anchor points close to them, and that's their location. Where? What's their location? You just get the idea of the wsshhh! This stuff, they've got eight billion of them tomorrow, and then they loan twenty kropotniks—I think a kropotnik—an interesting coin: when you have seventy thousand of them, you owe somebody fifty cents. (audience laughter)

ANCHOR POINTS, KNOWINGNESS OF LOCATION
But anyway, there you see what happens when it's somebody else's anchor point, and then they have made this anchor point their anchor point. They're trying to be this anchor point, they're trying to be a millionaire or something of the sort—well, you've got real trouble right away with the case. And boy, no kidding, those things process—you just might as well take a sledgehammer to them. These people are practically solid ridges. I know, I've practiced on a few of them, and it's just gorgeous.
Well, it's nothing to do with the fact except that anchor points are now so unreliable and so scarce that anything resembling energy has to be held very close to them. And the funny part of it is, the only real anchor point any person or any being will ever have, is something he knows he created and put there himself. Now, there's the very best anchor point. And it doesn't matter whether it's kind of small or lopsided or anything of the sort—if he put it there himself, you see, why, he can be happy about it.
Even though some—well now, some people will go into this level: they'll do terrible things, they'll commit crimes, just so they know they did something somewhere. Little kids who have been disenfranchised by parents and so forth will go around and break windows in old houses and things like that, and they go drifting by—he broke that window. See, he thinks in terms of destruction. He has actually created an effect, not created some energy or space or something of the sort, so he's .. . And there is your juvenile delinquent. He's dashing all around madly trying to give himself some kind of a location. Because you go back into his home and you'll find out it's usually a broken home—he doesn't even have his home as an anchor point.
Now, you see, this is all under the head of location. What a simple problem it is. Somebody says—thinks that this might look simple to me, but it isn't quite that simple. Oh no, it's that simple. Let's take George Doakes as a preclear, and we put George Doakes down in the middle of eight anchor points—he can make these anchor points and throw them up. Have him take a look at all eight of them and find out he isn't in any one of them, and have him change them around to a point where they know they're his, and a feeling of happiness and relief and relaxation comes over him. I don't care who he is—Bill, Pete, George Doakes—it doesn't matter. He's got some space, and he isn't being anything and he is being located by what he has created.
Well now, it's not necessary to create an anchor point in that way. When somebody is going through the whole routine of creating all the anchor points he sees, day after day, he just goes through this, and he's going through this under the delusion that all these belong to somebody else, he's in a state of delusion. So what is the delusion? The delusion is that anchor points are otherwise and elsewhere owned, and are therefore very scarce. You cure that delusion, you can cure any case of anything.
Now, therefore, part of I is this drill which changes around the emotional status and the fixed characteristics of MEST objects up to a point—that is, by changing their color, by changing their emotional status, by putting some thinkingness into them and so forth—up to a point where a fellow can have some anchor points. So that's all under location, isn't it? All right.
Now, we go on down the line and we just find this same problem repeating and repeating and repeating.
But there is something overhanging all of these steps which you must know about, and that, of course, is knowingness. And so, when we get down to Step III and we start to knock barriers to pieces—in Step I we just color them and so forth, but in Step III we're just looking right straight through them. We're just

43

44

24 NOVEMBER 1953
going to unmock barriers and unmock barriers until he can put some barriers there and know he's putting them there. And when he knows that, he's— really knows something, believe me.
But remember, it comes down to the basis of knowing. It is not necessary to perceive to know; it is not necessary to perceive to know. It is not necessary to be located by anchor points; one need only know that he is located, and he is located. You see, there's something senior to all of the mechanical operations; and this senior thing is called certainty. Well, people put up a great many barriers against their own certainty. A certainty of location without having a location and nothing with which to locate one, is of course the most senior type of knowingness you could have with regard to location.
Now, let's take this Step III, and as we look out in the six directions and come back each time and know, we're just reversing the process of why the fellow started looking—very simple. All right.
And we go down to Step IV and we then sort out, by handling the mechanisms, the machinery he uses to create, survive and destroy that following list. And you do that, you run that cycle of action, you see, I mean, that is a cycle— not a cycle of action in that case, it's a cycle of state. There's the created things, there's the persisting things and there's the destroyed things. So, on that step we simply go in at the beginning and we "waste mechanisms which," and we waste them in a bracket. He wastes one for himself or wastes a dozen for himself—it doesn't matter whether you use one or thousands. He wastes a machine which creates admiration or he wastes something which creates admiration.
And be a little bit wary of the use of this word "machine" too much— actually, it's proper, but it means many things to many people. A machine is merely a definition of something which makes or does. All right. It means "maker."
We waste a mechanism which creates admiration, or a being that creates admiration, for himself. Now we have him have somebody else up there wasting one for that person's self. And then we have somebody wasting one for somebody else—a machine that creates admiration. Now we come back on this, and we have somebody else waste one that's his, and then we have him waste one that's somebody else's—a machine that creates admiration.
Now remember, there are two more steps here. There are a lot more steps. And this is one of these superpatterned packages that just goes all ways from the middle, and it grabs on to all these brands of knowingness, you see. A fellow has gone down, in the point of anchor points, so far that he thinks he has data, see, to know. And he is—we're in—already into that, where a fellow has put up barriers against his knowingness directly, direct barriers against knowingness. And that's that list—that Step IV list of SOP 8.
Now, the next step on the bracket, of course, is to have him waste—several ways you can work this. This is one of the best ways to do it: Have him waste a machine that causes admiration to persist; and then somebody else waste a machine that causes admiration to persist; and then somebody waste somebody else's machine that causes admiration to persist; then somebody waste his machine that causes admiration to persist; and him waste somebody else's that causes admiration to persist.
Now, we haven't really beaten this thing to pieces yet. Now we're really going to beat it to pieces: Have him waste a being or machine that destroys admiration; somebody else waste a machine which destroys admiration; somebody else waste somebody else's machine that destroys admiration; and somebody waste his machine that destroys admiration; and him waste somebody else's that destroys admiration.

ANCHOR POINTS, KNOWINGNESS OF LOCATION
Now, it would just seem to you as an auditor that this is completely interminable as a process, but it does some of the strangest things to the case— boom, wham! We've added now the DEI cycle to Expanded GITA and we're resolving scarcity on all parts of the band. So let's go into the next stage of it, which is to have him save. Get him saving a, or many items which create admiration; somebody else saving many; and somebody else saving somebody else's and so forth. Creates admiration. Now, somebody saving an item for him which creates admiration and him saving one for somebody else which creates admiration.
Now him—this is just one of those things. We have him, now, saving an item which makes admiration persist; and somebody else saving an item which makes admiration persist (you get how this works?); and somebody else saving somebody else's item which makes admiration persist; and somebody saving something of his which makes admiration persist; and him—something which makes admiration persist for somebody else—saving it. All right.
Now we get him saving an item which destroys admiration; and somebody else saving an item which destroys admiration; and somebody else saving somebody else's item which destroys admiration; and somebody saving an item for him which destroys admiration; and him saving one for somebody else which destroys admiration.
Okay, now we get him accepting something which creates admiration; we get somebody else accepting something which creates admiration; and somebody accepting something from somebody else which creates admiration; and him accepting from some specific source something that creates admiration; somebody else specifically accepting from him something which creates admiration. Next stage.
It—this is—honest to Pete, this beats to pieces all possible combination of admiration. It just beats it to pieces. Many times you'll have to go over one of these brackets a couple of times. You'll be surprised how people will stumble around on these things, and it—so on. All right.
We get, then, him accepting something that persists, then the remaining bracket. And we get him accepting something which destroys admiration, and remaining bracket. And then we get him desiring something which creates admiration, and the remaining bracket. And then him desiring something which makes admiration persist, remaining bracket. And then him desiring something which destroys admiration, and the remaining bracket.
And then we get him—this is the complete, all-the-way-through, super-bracket on Step IV. Fortunately, you only have to use it on about five items. The next one up, of course, is him being curious about something which would create admiration, and the remaining bracket. And then him being curious about something which made admiration persist, and the remaining bracket. And then him being, again, curious about something which destroyed admiration, and the remaining bracket on it. And that would be it, and the whole thing would consist of the entire Step IV.
And you would hit with this—if you just went at it in that laborious fashion, one end to the other—you would hit with it every possible upset that a person had ever been through that was hanging major. And you start through that, and all of a sudden your preclear is going to start spilling tears or being very upset or being very nervous, one way or the other—because you're tearing down his (quote) "thought barriers" (unquote). The barriers to knowingness is what this consists of, and that handles these. You've got to get his knowingness

45

46

24 NOVEMBER 1953
up a little bit before you can do anything else with him, because he's stumbling around all the time thinking there's "something to know" about these things.
Well, there is! There's something terrific to know about work, and there's something terrific to know about pain. Pain is so valuable that hardly anybody can have it anymore. Isn't that interesting? But you know that you run this on the fellow, and he concludes that all by himself—he just concludes it. "Why, pain's very, very valuable," he'll say. And then he gets up along the line, "Yeah," he'll say, "I can have pain." He's real happy now; he can have pain—fine. Mama slapping him for playing with broken glass and everybody kicking him around and rushing him to hospitals just because he broke his leg, or—you know, gave himself a little pain.
The thetan—you —identify yourself with being a body. There's a point in a person's lifetime that you can find on any E-Meter, practically on any preclear, where the person suddenly made up his mind to be the body—probably in his teens or late childhood. You know, he just suddenly made up his mind to go whole hog on the thing and just be that body and really make a good deal out of it and so forth. Well, boy, he decided not to be a viewpoint; he decided to be an anchor point. Rrrr.
You can get this as a little test—you can just get the guy with the idea of space and then energy, and space and energy, and space and energy, and that incident shows up. See, because energy is not space; and if a fellow is fresh out of space, he's really out of space. All right.
So we've got the barriers to knowingness in Step IV. And if you wanted to take that whole list and run it on that whole bracket—and actually, probably— probably we ought to take this and just write it out into one terrifically long, long column, step by step, and let somebody run it on somebody sometime. Because if you ran it on somebody exteriorized, it would knock apart any bar-rier he has ever imposed to his detriment against his knowingness.
Well, you got to get it on work, because work's valuable. You'll find out the reason he can't have work is because he can't have work. Another one that he has to have run on him in this society, of course, is pain, because pain is very scarce. And another one is money. And although it sometimes hits a preclear too low to be run, the whole idea of viewpoints is run on out with the thing.
Now, there are other ways of solving the other things: love and hate and so forth, those are very important ones. And he finds out—and this one, please don't miss this one: healthy bodies. The fellow will find that he has—a medium state of sickness is the only acceptable, agreeable thing he can have. And you're trying to make somebody feel good, and he can't have a healthy body. And there's the barrier right across the track of your auditing. He's afraid that if he runs what you run there, or something of the sort, he'll actually get well, and then he's not acceptable anymore. Terrific computations on this.
And if you were to take each one of those, with that full bracket: waste, save, accept, desire, be curious about, each one, see—a full bracket for creation of an item, a full bracket for making it persist, and a full bracket to destroy it— you have relieved the major barriers to knowingness, which are very important to a person at the level at which you're processing.
There's an item missing on the 16-G list, which is "nothing." You can see how this item would be missing. It goes through the typewriter and the transcriber and it goes onto the first copy and the stenographer looks at it and says, "Oh, well. Okay." And then it goes through the typographer's hands and—I mean, the linotype operator's hands again; well, he misses it again. I put it back in there

ANCHOR POINTS, KNOWINGNESS OF LOCATION
about three times. And I think the first time I put it through, I omitted it. Well, it's a very easy thing to omit.
And you'll find that with any of those items, including this item "nothing" and so on, with any of those items, you will get some sort of a gain or a knowingness on the part of a case which he didn't have before. And, of course, what you're trying to do is give him some certainty. Well, believe me—he becomes certain that such and so has been happening in his life, he gets real happy about it.
Now, there's nothing like running a little wrinkle of this. This fellow is puzzled and he keeps complaining about his parents. And all he can think about—he complains about his parents, see, his complaints about his parents, a medium state of acceptability of illness, and so forth. What is his acceptance of his parents? See, what's their acceptance to each other? It'll work out that. And all of a sudden he'll recognize, "I needn't be complaining about my parents all the time, because what they wanted obviously was a bad little boy. And what they wanted was a sick little boy. What they wanted was a stupid little boy." Or "What they wanted was a little girl that whined. Or what they wanted was a little girl that couldn't work," or something. And they all of a sudden say, "Well, that's—I don't have to be that person! To hell with it!"
And their whole character and outlook on existence will shift. They're trying to be accepted by their parents. Why? Because their life started by stealing an anchor point—one baby. They stole the anchor point, now they're trying to make the anchor point theirs, and they can only make it theirs by taking it away from their parents. And they get into the most dreadful snarl on this, because they're trying to be an identity which they know doesn't belong to them. You've got to solve the ownership of this body. There are many ways to solve it, some of them very simple. All right.
Now, let's move right on out of IV and go into V. And everybody's ears go up, because we've been validating blackness like mad as a barrier. V is the occluded case. There are many, many, many ways to handle occlusion; I mean, they're just endless. If you simply have somebody ridiculing an occluded case—you just have people out there, standing out there ridiculing them, and have mobs of Papa and mobs of Mama and mobs of women and mobs of men in the case of a girl; ridicule, ridicule—why, you'll all of a sudden find out that they're just trying to cover it all up and wipe it all out and get through some¬how or another. And they'll talk a lot about betrayal, but what they're afraid of is ridicule, which is to have the anchor points out.
So the anatomy of the case, as far as knowingness and anchor points is, is they've got their anchor points in, which makes them out of space. And however desirable it may seem to them at first glance to have all their anchor points in, it makes them difficult to process—but not very.
Now, what is the story from V down—V, VI and VII—just like that. Well, what is this story? What common denominator is there?
The V is trying to hold his anchor points in and collect enough already-made energy in order to have, at least in himself, an anchor point, whether he's out of himself or not. He's still trying to collect energy and call it his—he isn't making any—and it tells you his creativeness is shot. But what's mainly shot is his destructiveness; his destructiveness.
And he's got the handiest little jim-dandy machine which you ever saw. It unmocks with blackness—and this wouldn't be so bad, you know, but it unmocks with blackness before the thing is created. You got that handy little one? He reversed the cycle of action, in other words. It's running D ... It—a cycle of

47

48

24 NOVEMBER 1953
action running down scale DEI in that sequence—they're running I-E-D. They're on an inversion.
And if you want to really give one a bad time, this is the process for it: just have them get the idea of something being destroyed before it can be made, and have them do this with black mock-ups. Destroy it before it can be made, and destroy it before it can be made; and more automaticities show up, and you handle these little automaticities, and this gives them twinges and so forth. And you go back and you'll find out they've had certain effects in their life, which occurred suddenly. You handle these effects and you'll find out that they normally have a very strong personal problem of one kind or another, such as another person. And you'll find their emotional shut-off occurred, for instance, when their husband left them, or something on this order. It's—again, here is the case on which we bust out the E-Meter.
Outside of your routine drills which can be done in a group, processing the case without an E-Meter is—for you as an auditor, outside of routine drills—is almost a waste of time. And this is where we do an assessment; down to there you don't need to. Because this case is double-terminaling like mad. He believes so thoroughly in energy, that anytime he puts out a mock-up, he gets discharges between the mock-up and himself.
Now, when he starts putting emotion in the walls and that sort of thing, it discharges so fast and furiously against himself, it's remarkable. Now what you're dealing there with is an inversion, a marked inversion, see? It's just backwards. He wants to put out white, he gets black. He's going to put a beam going straight ahead, and he gets a beam going straight in. He's got this stuff upside down. He's sitting, actually, in the middle of a black ridge. You can just take two black ridges and put them side by side and you'll get more action than you've seen in a long time.
But the case has a tendency to remain—what you do with a case is give them an assessment. This guy is occluded. All right, we get down to V—he can't do any of these things well, so on. We're going to be wasting time unless we just suddenly take this case and assess him and find out where he's locked up emotionally. Where's he trying to unmock before he can create? There's a thought so bad that it must be unmocked before it's created; and he's had people around him who tried to end him and his creation before he could create. See, they tried to reverse. And what do you know, that's the trick of the MEST universe: unmock you before you could create. And we're now looking for the first time at the real gradient scale, as we go down, in terms of location. It is the curve of losing creation and losing destruction.
So, as we go down this curve, we find that the MEST universe, more and more, is being depended on. And in particular, one factor in it is being depended on to destroy, and that factor is time. One is depending on time to wipe it out. And you will find out that a V puts up a mock-up and then waits for it to disappear. What does he think will make it disappear—if he gets any kind of a mock-up at all? He thinks time will. "Time will unmock before he can create," is the eventual computation he runs into at the lower part of the V band. "Time will uncreate before he can create," is the lower part of the band. The upper part of the band is, is just "time will uncreate it for me"—dependency on time to do destruction, and dependency on other energy for creation. So we get tremendous dependency on the MEST universe which is, in essence, black space— hence, the blackness.
Now, dependency on MEST universe, dependency on this and dependency on that—if you just started out on any course of action which resolved these

ANCHOR POINTS, KNOWINGNESS OF LOCATION
various dependencies. We find out that he's locked up at the age of twenty-eight with his first wife having deserted him. See, pain. All right. We find out his emotions turned off more or less at that time. If we merely get him reaching and withdrawing from her, we get some effect; reaching and withdrawing from her. Very often one of these cases will just hang right up there till somebody says, "All right. Now, start reaching for this girl. Now, withdraw from her. Now, reach for her, and withdraw from her."
All of a sudden he'll say, "She's in Keokuk, and I—to hell with her." And his emotion will be on.
Well, he's depended on time to wipe out his sorrows—that's another thing he's doing, you see. "After—if I live for a while, why, it'll all come out all right and I'll forget it all. And time will let me forget. Time is the healer." Time is the great charlatan. Time never healed anything. And he's depending on time to heal it for him. In time, his emotions will turn on again; in time, he will find somebody else; in time, this way. And he gets down to the bottom of the band and he's really dependent on time, then time itself—he's getting anxious; he doesn't dare start something, because he hasn't enough time, you see that? He doesn't dare start something.
Now, this can be, by the way—a person can get into that position where he just isn't putting in enough time to get everything done that he wants to get done. That's entirely different than this tremendous anxiety which comes over somebody that he doesn't dare start anything because he won't be able to finish it. It doesn't matter how much ability he may think he have natively, but his creativeness went by the boards just with that one. He can't start it, because he'll never be able to finish it.
Now, we find artists hanging in the middle band. They start things and they never end the story, or they never finish the painting. If they finish the painting, they feel they'll be dead. These people can't arrive, and that's typical of anybody in that particular band. He may be very able; he may be making quite a success out of it, but nevertheless, he has tremendous anxieties about arriving, because arriving to him is synonymous with death. And he is running away from death so hard that he has inverted the cycle of action by dependency on the MEST universe and time.
Now, this process—you can run this V case on any one of these steps that I've given you right now. SOP 8-C is that versatile. He doesn't have to have a special step; he can be run on any of these steps. But when we say V, we are saying he is so match-terminaled with the MEST universe, he is so identified with a body and so on, that every time you try to exteriorize him, you're going to run into this big trouble of discharges. When you try to put up emotional patterns, you run into these discharges and—of emotion. And flows—he gets into flows very easy. And the blackness persists and persists and persists and persists.
Well, the trouble with a blackness persisting—he's got things which— the machine which makes blackness is the MEST universe, and his dependency on the MEST universe gives him a machine that makes blackness. By the way, you can sometimes get him like this: you can have bottles spouting out blackness and just have him keep putting up bottles spouting blackness and bottles spouting blackness or little machines making black clouds or something like that, one after the other, and gradually his blackness will dissipate.
Sometimes you can put his father out there or his mother or her mother out there, something on the sort of half a dozen times, with the idea of ridiculing, shutting off his communication, other people shutting off his communication,

49

50

24 NOVEMBER 1953
people putting—making him put his attention on himself and so forth, and all of a sudden, boom! The case comes out of the brush.
But all of those are gunshot tech—pardon me, they're not—they're very specific techniques that you have to work with, with considerable skill. It's much easier if you actually know what he's doing. He can't see through blackness. And anything he puts there is going to be destroyed before it is created. Now we wonder why this fellow can't get a mock-up. Naturally, the thought to create anything brings about the fact that it's destroyed, and that fact is made by the mechanisms he has, to be primary to its creation. Something gets destroyed before it's created.
Now, you wonder how the devil that could possibly happen, but it can happen. It's an interesting thing to have him just keep putting out: "Just get the idea of destroying something and then putting it out; and destroying some-thing and then putting it out; destroying something and then making it; destroying something and then making it," and all of a sudden, the man's sitting there looking at the history of his life. He sits around, and he sits around for hours, and says all these horrible things will happen if he does so-and-so. See, he's going over the complete pattern of destruction before he creates anything. The only way to live is create it and throw it in their teeth and to hell with them. Nothing can happen to you anyhow.
He's reversed this, reversed this. And although he, on the surface, may not give you any indication of this, he has learned to uncreate his emotions before he feels them. Horrible! It took me a long time to find out what people on that band were doing, and it was very curious.
But there are many such drills, and let's take Step III and apply it to the V, and let's find out nothingness in all directions. And let's take Orienting Straightwire, which is that part of Step I which asks him where he isn't, and we'll find out that works on him. And we find out, however, that Step II doesn't work on him. That's just a ... Well, it works to some degree, but just don't bother with it too much—that's automaticity and so forth—because his barriers are the barriers of thinkingness.
When we get to Step V, we specifically ... So you can use Step I and Step III on a V, and you will actually mess him up if you use Step IV. So just omit II and IV for a V. But you can use all the I and all the III you want to on a fellow who's quite occluded. And you can use these special categories which go into V.
Now, to better understand V, let me tell you what happens at VI. Here this person at VI is not holding his own anymore. In mock-up form, things are being presented to him—he has almost continuous automaticity in mock-ups, almost continuous. There's always some flying random motion on the subject of mock-ups. He is being presented with all of the light and everything which he has.
Now, this flying, random automaticity. He's being presented—he asks for a plate and he gets a cow, and the cow is wiggling its ears. And just about the time he's supposed to do something with the cow, why, it changes into a rabbit and jumps over a tree. It isn't how silly the mock-ups are, it's how uncontrolled they are. And this person is almost in continuous automaticity—just continuous, consecutive—he can't control any mock-up.
What do you think a VII is? A VII is where the MEST universe itself has moved in and is beginning to present the wrong object. The fellow looks at an ashtray—right there in the broad daylight, looks at an ashtray and finds himself looking at a black widow spider, not an ashtray. He is looking at a box of

ANCHOR POINTS, KNOWINGNESS OF LOCATION
matches that we all agree is a box of matches, only he knows that that thing is a coach. And this is where it is.
So we start at V, we've just got a battle in progress with the MEST universe, time, so forth. Now we get a VI, the battle is already lost in mock-ups—every¬thing's automatic. And it isn't necessarily true, you see, that a V just graduates on down to VII; he doesn't do this. These guys go on and on and on, and they keep fighting the battle, getting better and getting worse. Because normally, somebody who's going succumb in this universe, he just succumbs right straight through I, VI, VII. See, boom! And we've got him. And the fellow who isn't going to succumb, he goes through II, III, IV and V—that route. Then he gets down at the lower rungs of V, and he battles and fights around and roars around at himself and at others and fights through the machinery and finally abandons the whole damn thing and starts it all out new again. And he's always perfectly willing. By the way, it's the willingness to persist by change which marks him as different.
I had these two states described one time, very well. And you take a psycho— psycho's going down the road, and he goes right straight down the road and all of a sudden a little zephyr comes along and goes whhhh! at him, and he just moves off the ruts and bumps into the fence. And he caroms off the fence, because it sent him in the other direction, he walks diagonally across back— the road, and he runs into a small tree and it kind of pushes him that way, and he's walking back down the road he just came, but then he hits a culvert and he stumbles there, and he has to turn around to examine something, so when he stands up from turning around, he's going down the road the first way he was going, but he hits a stone, and this caroms him off to the other side of the road. See, in other words, he's just being blown in all directions.
Now, let's take the other kind of case, the potentially (quote) "sane" case; this is why we can't just say this is a dwindling spiral into insanity, because it's not. And we take this case, and he's going down the road and he gets hit by a truck and he picks himself up and he walks on down the road—he isn't going quite so fast, but he's still going in the same direction, see. And at that moment, why, a tree falls across the road and hits him with one of its branches and he climbs over the tree and he's going a little bit slower, but he's going on down the road in the same direction. And something slams him on the right side and it turns out to be a baseball thrown from a sandlot and so forth. And he picks it up and throws the baseball back and goes on down the road.
You get the idea between these two characters? One is actually being— as much as anything else, he's determined to be prime post unposted. He's not going to move out of his course, that's all. God help anybody that pushes him out, because he just resists back. And this is a losing game to some degree. But nevertheless, he can always just skip the whole thing, you see. If he's going to change at all, he's going to move himself on his own self-determinism to an entirely new road, and then he's going to go down in that road in the same fashion. That's the—that's essentially the differences in these cases. All right.
So, a VI is being presented in mock-up form—his own stuff's all unmocked and substituted for in mock-up form. And a VII, he's all unmocked and so is the MEST universe. And he's being presented with another universe by superauto-maticities. As far as V is concerned (I'm showing you it's not sequitur), the MEST universe is unmocking before he can mock up—and remember he is the fellow who is running the machine called MEST universe, see? I mean, he's running his own machine that creates this. He's using blackness there because the MEST

51

52

24 NOVEMBER 1953
universe is blackness, and he of course has to manufacture an awful lot of blackness.
He's probably gotten awfully good at manufacturing blackness in space opera. I have not found anybody who was—with occlusion who was not a past master in space opera. You start running him along the line on space opera and brother, you really got it; you really got it. And a lot of I's I've run into, I've had to—when they've been in space opera—I've just had to bail the hell out of them on blackness. You know, they keep running into pockets of blackness and that sort of thing.
Also, there's several black theta traps. There's one up here, the Horsehead in Orion—the black Horsehead in Orion—is a theta trap, and guys can get stuck in things like that. But they're really there because they need the stuff, you understand; they need blackness. Basically, there's somewhere on the line where they decided blackness was good, and they've been using it ever since.
Well, you put up black barriers for such a case and have him see through them, by doing what? He's got a black barrier, so you put up a black barrier two inches in front of him, two inches in front of the last one, have him see through the last one at the new one. Now you put up a new black barrier outside the second one you had him put up, and have him see through that at this new black barrier. And so you get his black barriers further and further from him, and interspacing this with what I gave you yesterday for III, which is to say, seeing nothing in all directions, and so forth. And believe me, this boy will crack up, but royally, as far as an occluded case is concerned. And not crack up into psychosis; he will just get meaner and meaner, and finally break through and become a Step I.
But the only way you can possibly exteriorize this fellow is get him to a point where he can unmock the body as it remains sitting there. The body's going to leave before he does. You understand that? So you just make that possible.
Okay.

Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness
A lecture given on 24 November 1953

And this is the first afternoon lecture of the 24th of November, 1953. And the name of this lecture could very well be "the death wish." We're going to talk about death.
And soon as we get down to technique level V, we have to talk about death—same with VI and same with VII,
It is very difficult for somebody to recognize the operation that goes on here with Earth and with life, so long as they believe that continuous and consistent, persistent survival is in itself desirable. Do you understand that?
All (quote) "thinking" (unquote) on this and many other planets is oriented toward a persistency of survival as a unit organism, and as long as one holds with that philosophy, one would never understand what is going on.
As long as one believes, for instance, that work and pain are undesirable, and that unconsciousness is desirable, he's going to stay in a very horribly aberrated state; because he's got his vectors reversed.
There are two conditions: there is the condition known as "reality"— that's the one you see on the bulletin boards and which is advertised in the public school, and which is carried out by the police safety campaigns and so on. That's reality, and that's a universe operation—persistence as a unit organism.
And then there's "actuality," which is that work is tremendously desirable, that pain is a sensation which in itself is desirable, and that persistence as a unit organism is almost untenably undesirable.
Now, looking at these factors, if we recognize these two things, we'll be able to (quote) "understand life" (unquote).
You're trying to understand life and you're trying to know. In order to know, you have to be aware. So, we have consciousness as being another thing which is tremendously important. And if you believe that unconsciousness is relatively desirable, again you're on a reverse vector. Complete consciousness is desirable. That's not ultimate consciousness—that's enough consciousness to know at least what you're choosing for randomity at the moment.
And we find that unconsciousness, however, in many individuals, is a substitute for the impossibility of fighting survival as a unit organism. One cannot fight this. It's enforced by the police, it's enforced by the church, it's enforced by the family, by the culture, by the mores.
One can even be arrested in this society for committing suicide. If you commit suicide and fail, they throw you in the clink. And all teachings incline toward fearing death—death is something to be afraid of. "After you die you

53

54

24 NOVEMBER 1953
go to hell"—that is simply a religious hammer and pound to get you to drop your nickel on the drum.
And so we have a person trying to be unconscious in order to end survival as a unit organism. Do you see that? It's a halfway end of cycle—unconsciousness. So unconsciousness itself is never desirable, except when one is completely overpowered by other-determinism. And then of course unconsciousness is a token of death, just a token. And then one doesn't feel or register—he says— what is being done by the other-determinisms.
All right, this is a terribly interesting situation. We have then the very factors of pain, unconsciousness, as being the aberrative common denominator of all engrams, for instance. One of them is an effort to die—unconsciousness; and the other one is an effort to prove to oneself that one is alive. And so we have a somethingness (the pain) surrounded by the nothingness (unconsciousness) which in itself made the aberrative characteristic of the engram. And much more important than this, however, to us, is it tells us of an end of cycle.
The first time an individual went unconscious he probably said, "To hell with the mock-up, here I go" and then had to come back. He's been doing this for trillions of years: Trying to get rid of the mock-up, trying to shove off and take another run at it. And somebody is always around insisting, and the automatic machinery of the mock-up itself and the automaticity of this entire universe, insist that he pick up the mock-up again. And he stays in a state of semicon-sciousness as a protest thereafter. It parks him right on the track. And there is the most significant parking place of your preclear on the time track, and there is the Resistive V, with this slight addition: The Resistive V went—normally somewhere on the track, he went, left a body, found nothing, and came back.
Somebody has a terribly "lost" feeling. They had a body somewhere else. There's this mechanism known as the "body in pawn"—there's all kinds of mechanisms like this all up and down the track, they've been all over the place. One doesn't have to go into the incredible at all, it's much simpler than this, but you should know this data.
And this terrible "lost" feeling that people get is proceeding outward from a body, and coming back into the body in pawn, and it's dead or it's gone. See, they—intention is to go back to the body in pawn, to leave the body which has just gone unconscious, or they just think is dead or is going to be too mangled up to make life interesting—not mobile, and they go back to the body in pawn area, and find the body in pawn gone.
They will thereafter go to psychiatrists and wander around and stumble and so on. The body they have, they don't want, here on Earth, and the body in pawn is missing. And it causes a considerable disturbance. Here again, you have location. They want to be located. The body in pawn is an anchor point which locates them. When they lose that anchor point they get nothing but blackness. They can't find their way. Because they're finding their way—if they have to find their way—between two anchor points: the one on Earth and the body in pawn. And they shuttle between these two, and if one of them turns up missing, then they have "prime post unposted"—no exit. And now you try to exteriorize this fellow and he knows he doesn't have anyplace to go because he's under the delusion that he has to have a body in pawn to which he must exit. So he pings, right there, and he stays put.
Now, the other part of it is, he gets hung up with the effort of trying to stay conscious while unconsciousness is pounding him from every side, or trying to remain unconscious while people are trying to make him conscious—and the last is the least kind.

STEPS V, VI, VII; DUPLICATION, UNCONSCIOUSNESS
He's left this body—this body, you say, is dead or near death, being operated on, it's just been run over or crashed in a plane or something of the sort, and he leaves this body. And on running engrams and so forth, of trying to find people on the track, you can overlook every portion of every kind of an incident except this one: Dead body—he shoves off, then comes back because he couldn't find the body in pawn, or if he did find it, the body down there woke up—somebody brought it back to life. And he's being forced to stay alive. And after that, he acts like it to the whole society.
Now, when he's trying to stay unconscious, he's actually not trying to stay unconscious at all. He's trying to find that point of death where he departed, you see, so he can depart again, because he thinks the exit is there, and he is otherwise lost. So he's trying to stay conscious and something is making him unconscious, and then it reverses. He'll protect the mock-up for a short time, and then when he gives up, he goes unconscious.
Now, if somebody revives the body, makes it conscious again, they snap him back into it. And there's all sorts of incidents occur, such as he can appear in a body-in-pawn area and it seems to be that whoever is there knows the body on Earth isn't dead, you see. And they just turn him around and give him an implant and shoot him back the other time, and he comes up at the other end of the operation having been gone during the entire operation. He isn't even in the operating room. You want to know what happens to people during operations—they generally leave.
Now, the first time this happens here on Earth, the more intolerably persistent this society gets. People are so careful—they used to say, "Well, if the bears don't get him, he'll live to be a fine young man. If he doesn't go out and fall in the river, why, we'll have him around yet." There was no great scarcity, you see, of the body, that sort of thing, and they—and in a relatively primitive society with lots of menaces and dangers, you had him able to get out and get messed up, and if he got too messed up, he didn't have any tremendous strings on him. That is to say, he didn't have this horrible, mawkish, "you've got to stay with us."
And then in this society today, with school programs for safety, with this, with that, yap-yap, yap-yap, yap-yap, the chances of getting killed are getting slighter and slighter and slighter and slighter.
With penicillin, with all of these other persistent drugs, we're getting a point where the individual is unable to get rid of a mock-up. Just that—he can't get rid of the mock-up. So he goes out in the war, and if he were fighting the war of 1610 or 1505 or over in Flanders, and he walked through the castle breach, something like that, and somebody took off half his face with a morning star, believe me, if the blow didn't finish him, the bugs would, and he'd be out of there in a few days, see?
But now what do they do? They pick him up and they give him sulfa, and they patch him up and they do some plastic surgery, and he's in the hospital being tortured for months, all under the conclusion that he hates pain and can't stand pain—he's already gone that far, you see. And he's patched up some more, and then older and less able, and with what beauty he has completely spoiled, he has to drag this goddamn mock-up around for the next thirty or forty years! See that? See the philosophy behind this "make him persist."
The unkindest thing you can do is to make somebody persist that way. That's the unkindest thing anybody can do, is to take serious battle casualties, for instance, and patch them up. Imagine the sadism of this universe when today they still have casualties, immobile casualties, from World War I in veterans'

55

56

24 NOVEMBER 1953
hospitals—no good to anybody, but still alive. They've got a thetan parked right there—boom. And boy, that thetan is really in apathy—ahaaa! Oh no.
Well, his knowledge of what he is, where he goes and what he does deteriorates because he holds on to that unconsciousness. If he could just convince them he was dead! If he could just convince this thing, this mock-up, that he was dead, it would let go of him, he thinks. If he could just kill it, some fashion or another, why, he could shove off. Because, you see, his perceptics aren't ordinarily bad.
Now, one of the most astonishing things that is—can happen to somebody is to go along a number of years blind and then get blown up violently enough to exteriorize suddenly with full perception. You generally will find somebody parked around about that point when they've been tortured too much in the life they're living about getting rid of the mock-up. They'll go back and find these astonishing moments, trying to reassure themselves that if they do leave the thing, if they do give it a swift kick, they can still see, still feel, and still find another mock-up. It's fascinating.
Here you have this—the whole of the universe sort of militating against good sense. And good sense is to live fast, live beautifully, and live dangerously. And if you get bashed in, knock it off! Get another one.
But the universe wants to tell you it's all scarce. "You can't get another body—no, you have to patch up that one you have."
That's why I've been telling people here for a year—psychosomatics, ho-hum. And if you as an auditor think you're going to do yourself any good by specializing in knocking out psychosomatic ills, you're going to go downhill. Why? Because you're creating and furthering this whole idea of superscarcity in this universe.
What is a solution to a nonsurvival problem? A solution to a nonsurvival problem is a thing which cuts out the randomity which proceeds from that moment because of nonsurvival. People who go around all the time figuring out how to survive longer are wasting randomity: they're wasting motion, wasting action, wasting adventure. And what do you know? It isn't that I'm saying this, or that this is a philosophy which I have invented for your delection, nor is it that this is—merely makes good reading or good talking, this happens to make excellent processing.
You must understand some of this material quite subjectively in order to recognize what the devil is wrong with a V, VI, VII; why don't these people, you know, snap to, and exteriorize easily?
Well, let's look at the case—just take any case and let's diagnose him. He's got a black field. That in itself is not important—it's not—beyond telling you that he's automatically unmocking everything before it can happen, and he's using the method used by the MEST universe itself, which is black space. So he's unmocking things before they happen, which means he is planning for further survival continually—he's on an inversion. These people are very careful, they're very prudent ordinarily, and they're quite clever, and they certainly can make things persist, believe me. Whether it's an aberration or anything else, they'll just drag it out till the last dog is dangling by the neck.
This is the one thing—now, that's obvious about them, but there's something else you might not notice at firsthand. They have collapsed "know" and "not know" so that they are on a maybe. You see, "know" is always the cause end of a communication line, and "not know" is the receipt end of the communication line. And when "know" and "not know"—when the terminals collapse, and it comes right straight together, you see, why, they get on this tremendous maybe

STEPS V, VI, VII; DUPLICATION, UNCONSCIOUSNESS
of "know-not know." They don't know whether they're there or not there, or so on. That's the appearance they give. But—none of these are important mechanisms, but this one is—this one: They get a mock-up, and you tell them to put it away, and they get it back. They put it away, and it comes back. Now, just watch this, watch this. For instance, how many here, once they've banished a mock-up, are very prone to have it turn up for a little while? Sure. Or when they banish it, they get a little shadow of it. They always have a little shadow of it—same thing.
Now, just go over this exercise:
Mock up a small ball and throw it directly away from you in front. (pause)
What does the ball do? What does it do?
Male voice: It comes back at you.
That's right. What does it do? Did you do that?
Second male voice: Uh, yeah, it's out there still.
Good.
Second male voice: Quite a ways out, though.
Good, fine.
Well, that time when the ball came back tells you of somebody being forced to continue his existence after he's already kicked it off. Just that little exercise tells you that. Just ping—just like that.
Anytime you tell some preclear "All right, now make it disappear. Make it disappear. Now, get another one. All right, now make it disappear," and they say, "What will I do with the first one?"—or if you're very, very clever and alert as an auditor you will say, "Did the first ones come back?"—you all of a sudden know what this case is doing. Same thing as the ball—you can ask this same case to throw the ball away from in front of him, it'll come back and hit him. Or it won't move at all, or it'll just go in random motion. When the ball just goes in random motion, that just tells you that they don't know whether they're there or have left or it's Christmas. The ball just starts whanging around, going into random motion in all directions and so forth, and they can't anticipate it. This is pretty grim.
This just tells you that—this is the reflex. That's "know" and "not know" collapsed together which is a communication line, and it leaves them hung up in the middle of the communication line. They obviously must be in the middle of the communication line if they threw the ball and received the ball, see? So here's a particle en route.
Well, how do they get the idea they're a particle en route? Well, a body almost kicked off, and they had this tremendous struggle: They tried to keep it from becoming unconscious, and then they failed to keep it from becoming unconscious, and being unconscious, tried to leave, and then they had to bring it back to consciousness again because others insisted. You follow that?
First they wanted to be conscious and that was defeated, and then they wanted to be unconscious and shove off, and that gets defeated. And when you get a mock-up which comes back after it's been banished—by the way, sometimes they don't come back for five hours. One guy I knew didn't get them back for about a week. He got them back, though, regularly and uniformly, about a week later. This was what's known as a communication lag. I would say, in such a case, that you have this person back on the track about umpteen billion years, see? I mean, he's been at this and doing it a long time. And don't think it just happens once; it'll happen a lot of times.
How many times have you read about or thought about or you recall, of somebody being unconscious and other people standing around and shoving

57

58

24 NOVEMBER 1953
ammonia at them and cuffing their cheeks and chafing their wrists and shaking them by the shoulders and trying to bring him to?
It even got to be a habit back in the days of Camille—you know, she was the one that made TB popular in America. And here we have this continuous dramatization—everybody's saying, "Persist! Persist! Persist! Persist!" And nobody—ever occurs to anybody he might not want to, except very sadly, "Well, she has ..."—oh, dramatic, you know, three-dimensional, eighty-five foot screen in full color, or back in Vitagraph, with a three-foot screen in full jerk—"Well, she has no further will to live. Send for her son and maybe he can bring her back."
Now, very often with this auditor-preclear arrangement where the preclear "does the bunk," the preclear can only be persuaded to come back for the auditor. But the auditor always persuades him to come back because the society does not permit him to have an inanimate mock-up!
The reason people love murder stories has nothing to do with loving police—there's at least a dead body in them. And the fellow who does an able job of murder writing, who knows that, just mops the field up every time. And he just ruins all his competition—just keep dropping the bodies, fellow. Don't put much mystery around about it, just drop the bodies. (audience laughter) Kill them quick and impressively—big impacts! Slow deaths don't sell well. You can see why.
But an entire society (I don't say this is one—it is, but I am not saying that in this paragraph), an entire society gets to a point of where it's begging to be unconscious. See, it's just dramatizing the organism. Just begging. And all of its mechanisms and everything else it's got set up to keep saying, "Live! Live! Live!" and pretty soon, the whole society is lying around just begging for death, actually. And robots, by this time, are the ones that go along and they do all the work, and they put the food into the mouths, and they turn on the heat at the right time, and change the ventilation systems and move the bodies elsewhere and so forth, ur-ur-ur-ur. That's the way it goes. The universe becomes more and more automatic. For one reason only, and that is, it's rigged to persist. It has no motto but persistence.
The very first fact a person learns when studying about matter— whether in chemistry or physics—is simply this: "it persists," only they call it "conservation of energy." I don't know how they get that fancy phrase out of the mere fact that this stuff can't be destroyed by chemical means—they never add that, you know. They had no proof that this was not true; it just never occurred to anybody to modify the statement to what they really knew. They know that this stuff cannot—they know this completely—that this material, this matter of the MEST universe cannot be reduced and vanquished and made to disappear forever by chemical or physical means; that's all they know. See, they don't know anything beyond that.
They could surmise that there could be some kind of a machine called a disintegrator, but every textbook you see on the subject doesn't even permit the disintegrator to appear. So here's the universe dramatizing persistence.
It has a cycle. This is a cycle of this universe, it is not even necessarily the cycle. That's why we're studying this cycle.
And when you're processing somebody in this universe, you have to process time, because that is what is meant by persist. Time, persist, conservation of energy—these are synonyms for our purposes.
Time—any time you say time, you're just saying persist. That is the motto of time. That is what time is, that is what time means. Time means a uniform

STEPS V, VI, VII; DUPLICATION, UNCONSCIOUSNESS
rate of persistence. And it gets so bad that people can't conceive of the fact that there is no time. And yet all they are is standing suspended, you might say— motionless, not moving, not going anyplace—over a pattern of shifting particles in which they believe. And so we have this incredible picture of a time taking priority, and time driving everybody in every direction.
So we enter into every step, wherever we can, the cycle of action; since the cycle of action is itself time. And we have two things with which we're dealing: We have location, and we have time. Knowingness is senior to both of them. But cycle of action, time, persistence . . . The prayer of anybody in this universe is—of course the ambitiousness of a thetan is fantastic, he's always trying to start something, too—but his prayer as far as mock-ups are concerned, is "My god, someday end it!"
There's Schopenhauer, The Will and the Idea—the "death wish." Men have written about this since man could write. He's written about this desire for death, and nobody has believed much in a death wish. A death wish isn't popular.
In my early studies, I couldn't see where the death wish fitted in, or what it was all about exactly—where it collided with logic and reason. Well, it doesn't. It just happens to be end of cycle, that's all. And if you name it dramatically "the death wish" it becomes incomprehensible to people because they look around and they say, "Well, I don't want to die. I want to live better."
And then you say, "Well, how about your teeth? Let's see, you've got several wisdom teeth, you've got some molars and so forth, and when they start to go to pieces what about that?"
"Well, I'll think about that when that happens."
And you say, "Well, now, you know, people get old, they have heart trouble and that sort of thing, you know."
"Well, no. Well, I'll get through that somehow, I guess. I hope."
They have no wish to go through that; I mean, it's nonsense. Why go through butchering up a mock-up? It's much more fun to be outside doing the butchering. (audience laughter) But pain itself being scarce, they are on the basis of "they must persist because the pain is too great to die."
As long as death is considered painful, and as long as the soul can be conceived to be punished after death by going to heaven and sitting bored forever—what a wonderful invention! I mean that's the most wonderful invention of the early centuries of the last two millennia—gee, gorgeous. You sat on a cloud thrumming a harp, which was probably out of tune. Yeah, wearing a halo, lit by the courtesy of Yahweh.
Of course, this was an effort to keep people from dying. They painted this wholly colorless, grim, gruesome idea of being bored for an eternity; and they were always careful to say "eternity" too. Or they got burned, see, and burned to a cinder forever. That's real interesting, you see, how you got burned to a cinder forever. They had no slightest concept of the conservation of energy. No wonder a physicist despises some of the religious textbook, you see, because the idea of fire, unfed, persisting forever, is highly untechnical.
So, on the two sides, we have science and religion at war and both of them are not at war at all—they're hand in glove. I think they put on a huge show in order to have a dichotomy.
But when it comes to somebody being free to jettison the mock-up, this is a computation which is kind of new in this universe—kind of new. And it would help you a lot as an auditor to recognize that you could run mock-ups without being too closely associated with them. Not because it's dangerous to be

59

60

24 NOVEMBER 1953
associated with them at all, but they just aren't that—they aren't quite that interesting, and they don't produce enough randomity.
Now, this society is moving at a rate which—well, I'm sure that the rate at which this society is moving would make a turtle seem like a jet plane, as far as it's concerned. It is almost stopped, as far as randomity is concerned.
You can stand down there on the corner for hours and hear lots of fast cars, hear lots of perfectly savage, careless, stupid drivers and everything else. Nobody gets hit! You can stand there for hours—no randomity.
Here are police standing around everywhere—over here in New Jersey, by the way, they're very definitely dramatizing the Fifth Invader. It's just wonderful—you see these Jersey State Police? That is the uniform of the Fifth Invader Force. And "Friendship is dying together" from the Fifth Invader Force—it's gorgeous. I mean, I bet—every one of those cops looks sick; he looks real sick, see? Well, he's keyed in across the boards. But they're carrying this mock-up, and they got to make it persist and make everybody else's mock-ups persist. It is a religion actually—"Let's all get down and pray that our mock-ups persist." The arms fall off and the legs fall off and the eyes fall out and they develop psoriasis and syphilis and we still drag them along the streets, you see? "Make it persist."
What an enemy of beauty that concept is. The dramatization that only a good—the only good paintings there are, are at least three hundred years old is another symptom of this, you see? "All good paintings are old paintings." This is some kind of an effort on the part of an artist who is more sadistic than I care to have around, or an art critic, to make people recognize that it can only be beautiful if it's old or something. This is completely in reverse to the fact of the case.
Now, you go back and look at some of the bodies that have been around on the track—you look at some of these bodies. Well, you go back there about a thousand years and get a good look at it. And go back there a couple of thousand years and get some good looks at it, and they're very beautiful, very beautiful— and boy did they die young.
You know, it's only been the fashion to live for a while in this society here. It's only been the fashion in the last thirty, forty years, fifty years. They've only dragged in this carcass on this continent.
Male voice: How does India stack up on this?
They've got a tremendous philosophy on it: they just say, "Breed like hell, boys, breed like hell—and let the mock-ups fall where they may." Their god Juggernaut is interesting that way; they can always go out and throw themselves under Juggernaut.
Nobody ever objects to anybody in India being found dead. So they're dead. They're dead. They get married when they're twelve or fourteen, kick the bucket when they're twenty-one, twenty-eight—real quick.
The only trouble with the people is, it's too hot there and they key in all the prenatals they've got. It is about 90—any time you get a climate which is approaching 98.6, you can get the whole prenatal bank keyed in almost perpetually, because that's the temperature in the prenatal bank—98.6. That's why hot countries turn feminine, so forth, so it's not a hardy country. But way up north, those boys live with kind of wild abandon, too—they always have.
But you go around graveyards of 1870,1880 and start reading the tombstones and here is this old man of seventeen who kicked the bucket and left a wife and two children and so on. It's real young. And here's this old scrooge—this

STEPS V, VI, VII; DUPLICATION, UNCONSCIOUSNESS
just completely worn-out dog of twenty-eight who lived almost forever—and gee, they were glad when he shoved off. Lived practically forever.
Once in a while somebody puts up his head with 101 years or 110 years old, he is—and expects to be congratulated.
Well, if you don't have the technology, if you don't know how to make a mock-up run pretty easily and how to patch its beauty up and so forth, the best answer—if you can't keep one running persistently beautiful, then the best answer of course, is to get another one.
But in a society where they keep them going regardless of how they look, what can you do? Well, it's as much as your life is worth to get born into this society. I mean you as a thetan—I mean, just as much as a guy is worth.
Boy, they even give him a machine now that chews his rattles for him. And he goes on up to about four or five, and they're going to—they've got all the space opera he could possibly manage, they're going to key all that in on him. And then they're going to—about the age of five he suddenly wakes up to the fact, "You know this stuff doesn't shoot! Huh!" He'll try it on his teacher or something of the sort the first day in kindergarten—it doesn't work.
And then they keep him in a cage for the next sixteen years—great society. Just the place we need for lots of randomity and action and sport and fun. So aesthetic, too. You turn a button and something goes myaah and a picture comes on, which is a horrible grade of picture.
Somebody televised a color program the other night—Donald O'Connor on "The Colgate Comedy Hour"—they did it all in color, but I noticed the set was picking it up in very poor black and white. I finally realized what they were doing with that; they had actually put some color into the TV set in order to televise it in color. It made the black and white pictures look very—really a lot better than they ordinarily look—you know, the black and white screen. It's not pretty, though. Television is just stinking as a picture.
Radio: They just got radio up to a point where it was worthwhile, with FM, where you got some kind of sound that was fairly reliable, and then knocked it out. They couldn't stand that.
So, now they've got movies up to the point, though, where you have—if anybody—an usher were to walk across the stage during the picture, why, he'd have the audience yelling at him for fifteen minutes to get out of the way of the screen. You know, they've got those screens up there now, and it makes the women—oh, about 40-foot amazons or something, they look like. They sort of lean over the audience as though they're about to devour the audience at any moment. And the men—the men there—they're sort of leaning over the audience too; this is tremendous. And trains come by eight times life-size and so on, and the audience sits there and realizes that it's awfully small. They've been told that all during school, and told it every place. And they're less and less significant, and that there's more and more significance to be found.
Anytime you get a society which does not permit anybody to jettison the mock-up, which has everything all rigged up automatically ... If you fell in a fit out here on the street, see, they've got it all rigged up; I mean, ping! ping! ping! you'd be in a hospital, and then you'd recuperate—brother, you sure would, see?
This is interesting, isn't it? That it doesn't—it just doesn't occur to a person that it's not a particularly desirable thing to have around—a society which just keeps on running forever and ever, no changing it, getting more and more solid, and people wanting more and more unconsciousness and wanting less and less pain. And no work—that's the big motto.

61

62

24 NOVEMBER 1953
And on those gauges—you get with that gauge a pretty decent idea of what man is combating. He's running almost exactly backwards. The idea is if you've got a mock-up, let it be a beautiful mock-up and expend it, see? You can always make a new mock-up. But now, they've made it so complex to get a new mock-up, see? Oh, there's big systems, big communications systems.
You read all about it when you're a kid, you see, and then you're forbidden it all during school, and then you finally propose to the girl, and you court her for a long time, and then you finally marry her with all this and that.
They got this communications system of how you get a new mock-up, see? And then you have a baby and it's not yours. You're still running the same mock-up—what a gyp! You know, if you pry into cases, you'll find out that they're quite upset by this. Every once in a while, they suddenly realize they're not running this new mock-up—they don't have a new mock-up.
Well, all due respect to that, life is neither bad nor good; but it gets over-balanced once in a while, and then somebody gets hard to pry out of his head. Well, how do you pry people out of their head? Well, they certainly can't go on the idea that "everything's got to persist, got to persist, got to persist," and that they "must remain unconscious, must remain unconscious." I mean, you can't pry them out of the head— they're not happy about it either.
What happened to them? They died and they had to live. You can just count on that, see? They dragged around a body that was blind—remember that, in every black case; it's always there—they dragged around a body that was blind, they dragged around one that should have dropped dead, they were brought back into the land of the living. And even now as you process them, sometime in this present life they have been brought back into the land of the living against their will and they're still under protest; and they don't like people for making them do it, either. They'll go on, sort of soberly and somberly and with great protest inwardly, and they'll do some kind of a job outwardly and so forth. But to hell with it! They're still dragging that mock-up. And they want a new one.
Now, as consciousness deteriorates, a person becomes less and less aware of what has transpired. And during the last few decades here on Earth, con-sciousness has gotten so poor that there's been no spontaneous recall on earlier existences, and actually no great awareness on what a person was doing.
Actually, in this universe—those beings that have been in this universe the whole track—it was probably several trillion years ago when they first started to do a flip on real close remembrance of what they were doing, you see? Because the amount of consciousness which a person can have and the amount of consciousness which he has are two widely different things.
Now, "awareness"—consciousness is awareness. Awareness itself is perception. You want to know why this case is black—he's just unwilling to be aware. And he's using time to destroy it all. He's sort of broken down to the point of where he says, "Well, sooner or later it'll wear out." And sure enough, when you ask him to fix up a mock-up, he'll make awful sure that there's some methods of getting eaten up or chewed up or used up in some fashion or another, before he's really going to make a mock-up.
Now, if you were to mock up a big machine which guaranteedly would eat up his mock-ups, he would be very happy to make one. But you're not liable to get him to make one until you get such a guarantee across to him.
It isn't willfulness on his part—he's actually stumbling along, lost in this counterpoint of, one, "We must all survive, and the whole universe must survive, and you mustn't cease to survive at any moment."

STEPS V, VI, VII; DUPLICATION, UNCONSCIOUSNESS
See, there are many ways of surviving. It's all—you're all going to survive anyhow. But the point of it is, is somebody saying, "You've got to survive as a unit organism"—boy, is that introducing an arbitrary. I dare say, there have been—there are people right here who have been laboring under this as an onerous arbitrary. There must be at least four or five here. This is an onerous arbitrary.
So they picked the mock-up up out of the wreck, so they picked it up off the operating table, so they went on living. "The hell with them—kill it!" Nope, not against—it's not allowed. They know they're going to be arrested if they'd commit suicide. And they're not even supposed to appear in the between-lives area if they've done something like that. I mean, they're supposed to make it all persist. Rrrh!
Now, you as an auditor come along, and you take this fellow and you say, "All right. Be three feet back of your head."
He says, "To hell with you. You're a human being. You're making me do it. And I don't want it. I haven't got any other mock-up in the first place. I haven't got anyplace to go. I'm lost, like everybody else. So there's nothing you can do about me. (I'll make you persist, damn you—I'll make you persistently audit.) How long are we going to make you audit? Let's see now, uh, huh-huh, rawrrh." And they lick their chops hungrily, and start all out for a thousand-hour session.
Persistence! They're not doing it mean, it is just these factors which are adding up to this conclusion, see? It's just got to persist. All right, they'll make it persist.
Now, there's this one, you know: "Did you ever make your mother wrong by doing exactly what she said? Hm?" That's known as a "white mutiny" in the navy. Everybody does exactly what they're supposed to do, and of course the whole ship will sink, in fact.
Well, people are making people wrong. How are they making them wrong? Well, you go on living and you're making them dead wrong, because it's dead wrong for you to go dragging around the mock-up after a certain period of time.
When a mock-up loses the potentiality of high joy and sensation and high velocity, well, it's time to bury it with, preferably, military honors after some enormously grand sacrifice, you know? Bing! Crash! Boom! Skyrockets, you know? Bang! Lot of randomity, and then everybody says, "Poor old Bill. He served his country; he's gone. He rescued his whole regiment at the cost of his life. And got a 'posthumorous' medal too." (audience laughter) So there's Bill. Well, all right.
You'd be surprised how many times your preclear at the age of twelve, ten, thirteen, fourteen, started thinking: "Gee, if I could only serve my country with my life." You look a little deeper, and he's inquiring for the way out. That would pay for his jettisoning the responsibility he has to his friends and family. So he's trying to equate this. What's the basic solution he's trying to solve?
Every time he solves the problem on the basis of more safety, less death, and so on, he digs himself in deeper; because he is wasting, in the real universe, all future randomity. He's cutting down all car wrecks, he's cutting down all deaths by battle, he's cutting down all this and all that—he's just making randomity short.
It isn't that randomity is death, but you can't have much randomity if you're afraid of dying, and if nobody will let you die, you see? If—fear of death— 'Too much love of living and too much fear of dying makes cowards of us all," somebody said. The hell it does. The MEST universe doesn't let you die. And so

63

64

24 NOVEMBER 1953
of course, if you have to be careful not to die, you can't have any randomity. So, boy, does it get dull.
And then they tell you, "Well, you'll be in heaven eight billion years," or an inconceivable time. You're in heaven for fifteen minutes, by the way, only it is not heaven—that in terms of MEST time.
Well now, where do we have an entrance to the problem? What process do we use that solves this?
We have just straight, ordinary, routine duplication in Creative Processing. We just duplicate the incident. That's the most basic one we've got, see? And at V level, we can double-terminal it. You know, just double-terminal somebody trying to stay conscious while people want them to be unconscious. And then we double-terminal people wanting to stay unconscious while people want them to be conscious. We could just double-terminal this and get away with it, see? That's about the crudest process.
Well, in view of the fact that your pc doesn't have very much mock-ups or something like that, we could still get away with this. If he puts up his mock-up often enough, he'll eventually get one there. It's wiping out before he puts it up; because he's trying to wipe out a mock-up, and he is damned if he'll put out more mock-ups. They won't let him go free. So he's certain to have an "unmocker" before it's created—certain to have that. It's not too much action which is worrying him, it's too little. And so he answers this with no action. He's in full protest, resistance to the universe. All right, that's our first technique.
Well, what's our next technique? As I say, end of cycle, of course, is a finite stop. You'll find people who have not finished a spiral. Couple of hundred billion years ago, he was in some kind of a spiral, and gee, he was young and he was going to do so much, and they were on their way to attack . . . He had one small—he had one small rocket ship or something of the sort, and he was on his way to attack the main fleet as a complete sacrifice and his starboard tubes exploded because of an engineering error and it blew him up. End of spiral. See, it's just hanging there. He didn't get a stop action; he didn't complete the action.
That isn't a bad one. He'll bring that one out to you and show it to you like a kind of a medal, see.
It's that stinking one where he died in that tenement, without ever having lived. He went on for years and he never lived any of those years. That is the worst of it; he's always waiting for life to begin. And that's much closer to a start, so it's much more persistent and much more severe as a chop of cycle. Because he did get started, he did have a body, but then nothing ever happened. And boy, that guy is—that guy's stuck right there with getting the body. And you'll find people who are stuck in the Assumption have had this happen to them.
If you find somebody hung up badly in the Assumption, he just never considers that he ever got to do anything in this life, that's all. Doesn't matter what he has done—not in terms of action, of color, beauty and drama. He hasn't had these things, so if he hasn't had them, he's just stuck right at the start. And the start was when he was damn fool enough to pick up this particular mock-up and find out that Papa was safety-crazy, and that Mama wouldn't even let him burn his hands, and they put him in a cage and gave him a good education for just years and years, and this guy's just beat, that's all—he just never gets started. He'll be stuck in the Assumption. And you can just conclude, on any case that's stuck in the Assumption, that this is his course of action and he just never got it started—complete lack of drama.
Now, we've got end of cycle on this one. We mock him up trying to resist unconsciousness and succeeding and the other people trying to make him

STEPS V, VI, VII; DUPLICATION, UNCONSCIOUSNESS
unconscious, perishing. That finishes the cycle of action. See, they're trying to make him unconscious and he kills them. That doesn't appear to be an end of cycle, does it? And yes it is. That's a reflex action.
See, he tried to be conscious, and he succeeded in being conscious. And we know that, because he put a period to the people trying to make him unconscious, see? Nothing to it. All right, that's not a strong end of cycle.
The other one: We mock him up as unconscious—mock up a body as unconscious, preferably two bodies as unconscious, and have him leave. And two more bodies as unconscious and have him leave. And then we're really going to have to complete the cycle of action on the next one, which is to mock up two bodies unconscious, he leaves and the bodies die. But you needn't add that in until you've done it a few times to kind of break him in. But that's the technique. Get them good and dead. Real nice and dead. You know, impossible to survive. You know, cut their throats and fix up their arteries so no blood will pump, and take—bring their heart out and cut it in half and mangle it up one way or the other and so, till we know there's an absolute period on that body.
When you've done this as a cycle of action—the body goes unconscious and he leaves, and the body dies—that's at least an end of a cycle of action. And you'll get some that show up: his dental operation, or an incident two hundred years ago, earlier incidents of when he ran into this planet. This stuff will start pouring off. Do you validate it? No. You just keep running end of cycle, end of cycle.
What's end of cycle? Dead. It's the best end of cycle there is.
The guy landing on a planet, dead. That's a good end of cycle, see? He tried to get to the anchor point, and he got there and he died. And some beautiful sadness of him having executed the mission is liable to turn on, but don't bother to rub it out. More important—end of cycle.
Now, let's run the rest of the end of cycle. He gets to the body-in-pawn area and finds a body. Now we run this one for a while. We get him coming into an area and finding the body alive, and taking it away. And we just keep running this in duplicate mock-ups—that is to say, just making them appear and dis¬appear or throwing them away or something of the sort.
And at first, they'll come back like mad. He'll make a mock-up disappear and back it'll come again. And he'll make it disappear and back it'll come again. And if you run it for a while, if the case doesn't know what you're doing, he gets frantic. He just wants to rrrr! All these times when he's safely, carefully, shoved off and—mock-up's spoiled, so what? So what? He shoved off—gone.
Now you're only handling bodies, but you've ended enough cycles on the body that you've solved that problem for him. See, you've got time. He's got this stuff off the time track. He's not trying to finish this, which is in itself the key to persistence—"trying to finish." All right.
What's our next clue on this? You have to handle this as a thetan. Now, what's end of cycle for a thetan? As far as this universe is concerned, to be it and eat it—finish it—boom! That's end of cycle for this universe. Would make us process it out, huh? Just blow it up. Get the idea?
You'd be surprised—thetans would come along early on the track, they'd blow up a planet. Why? Just to put a finite end to something. But that's a finite end for the thetan in this universe. Have him eat it up, blow it up, smack it up, smash it up, expand it up. Do everything there is to do, one after the other—any way you could think of finishing off the MEST universe.
Now, we're not teaching destruction or advising destruction, it just so happens we're talking about life and the spirit's action with regard thereto. And

65

66

24 NOVEMBER 1953
the second we study this, we find out that the beast of a jungle is a pantywaist. He's a punk.
It's a symptom of thetans, by the way, that their teamwork long ago deteriorated, and now it's come back together again as a body. And you will start pushing somebody up the track, and his own teamworkingness is liable to deteriorate, and then come back.
It is real rare, you know, that a thetan—most thetans that you see around, they won't talk to you and so on. They don't have anything to say, unless you're just hypnotically strong, as far as they are concerned. They just—you kind of trance them and then they chatter. Fantastic, but true.
They're quite scared; they're quite leery. That is, every time they have a mock-up, somebody's stolen it.
What's he trying to do? He's trying to put up a mock-up that is beautiful, that will produce some randomity and do something. And he's trying to keep others from interfering with the game.
Now, how many ways are there to stop a game? And one of them is "make it continue forever." And that's the way you really stop a game. And to my calculation this game has been stopped, on MEST time for itself, about two hundred billion years. It's really been on crutches.
Why, you know, the fastest spaceships were going here a relatively short time ago, a million years or so ago—about the fastest they were going was fifty, sixty light-years. They just slowed down to a stop—hardly anything.
I imagine now if there's saucers out there or something like that, they're probably traveling at five hundred thousand miles a second, if that—slow.
Now, the point I'm making here is, how many ways are there to stop a game? Well, actually, for thetans, the best way to stop one is start one; that stops a game. There isn't any reason to blow up the playing field—no reason, no good reason, if you can just start a game for it. So you might as well set your mind to what you're doing.
If you continue to process on the basis that you think all of this super-survival, drag it out as a unit organism, is desirable, that pain is detestable, that unconsciousness is desirable, why you're going to have an awful hard time processing a V—because that happens to be a lie, those things happen to be a lie.
Unconsciousness is not desirable. You want better perception, you'll have to give him more consciousness. Pain is desirable, work is desirable, and end of cycle, always—end of cycle. And he's left and come back, and the mock-up which a V is running at this very second—this very second—the mock-up which that V is running ceased to serve him properly, according to him, many, many years before.
Now maybe you can process such a case with a little understanding.
That's all.

Additional Remarks: End of Cycle Processing
A lecture given on 24 November 1953

I think that we are far enough advanced to solve some cases, nicht wahr? You don't think so. Well, I think you are, and that makes it so! (audience laughter)
And when I tell you to run such a silly one as End of Cycle and bodies in pawn, you certainly should be able to run that like a breeze. Now, I was running that on you a few days ago, you remember? Remember? I was throwing that in about every—every once in a while, was throwing it in. You notice I throw it in on practically all the auditing I do.
Case bogs a little bit, and I suddenly notice there's an unfinished cycle there of some kind or another, so I start feeding them unfinished cycles, see? Just get them dead, get them finally bumped off, get them buried, get them completely drowned—anything that happens to show up. A nice, happy thought. And you'll see the case perk right up. "Well, we got rid of that one, see? It's kind of covert, doing it in mock-up, but we did it!" All right.
We're going to finish the day, if it's all right with you, with End of Cycle on this very limited group basis which we're doing. And we're just going to get people mocked up "finally dead" and "finally jailed forever" and "finally finished" in every way you can think of.
Now, of course, finally jailed forever is the fellow has to leave his body in the jail and shove off. See, they got him. And any possible gruesome finish you can think of, that is a finish, just keep feeding it to them and feeding it to them. Somebody goes off of his rocker, why, don't send for me. Run the next-to-the-last list in Self Analysis: "Remember something real?"
And the fellow says, "Yes, but they're coming for me, they're coming for me," and this and that.
And you say, "Very good. Now rig up the gangplank down which they're running to grab you. Now get yourself completely grabbed. Now have your body irrevocably destroyed. And have you shoving off. Good."
You get that? Let's deal in the very somber—deal in the very somber. Get it very specific.
Now, how many kinds of ends of cycle can there be, there be, there be? You've got a pretty good list of them in your book What to Audit. You got your textbooks on What to Audit?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Well, how would you run End of Cycle Processing on incidents of What to Audit? How would you do this? Now, you look especially bright today.

67

68

24 NOVEMBER 1953
Male voice: Ho-ho! I don't feel so bright.
You don't?
Male voice: On Facsimile One, get yourself in front of the camera and mock it up.
In front of the camera as an end of cycle?
Male voice: And have yourself being dead in front of the camera.
Yes, that's right. Dead and covered with cameras.
Yeah, you get extravagant. You're too conservative, all of you, in your auditing. Get extravagant. Because it's only extravaganza that a thetan actually can deal in. He deals with billions rather than one. He'd always rather have a hundred million of something than a couple. And the MEST universe would always rather he had none.
All right, how else would you deal with that incident?
Male voice: Dead as a thetan in front of the camera.
Could be. Come on, how else would you deal with it? Think fast! Come on, how else?
Male voice: Have you killing the cameras.
Yes. Come on. Go ahead and face it.
Male voice: Oh, you leave it. I mean, you're dead in front of the cameras and you . . .
And you shove off.
Male voice: . . . pushing off.
Yeah, you could do that with great ease. And dead as a thetan. And the other one? Please, there's another one.
Did you ever hear of an overt act-motivator sequence? The whole world, everybody in the universe, utterly and completely perished because you did it with a Fac One camera. You've wiped out all living organisms of any kind or size or description. You'd just get them to stack them up planet by planet—they killed them all. You'll actually find as you start this that there was a lot of beautiful glee of insanity on using that thing. And everybody did. Everybody did.
So, you get what you got there? Overt act-motivator sequence. And don't you forget that on End of Cycle. I would immediately suppose you would realize that.
Because if you got yourself dead a lot of times, you would finally be repaid enough for all the vicious things you've done. You've done more vicious things than anything else has done on your same time track, and the reason why is, is you're sitting here in fair condition. That immediately tells you that you have done more than somebody else has—just instantly. No further reason about it at all.
Well, all right. We've got our problem, with great ease there—more overt act-motivator. But always remember to throw in more motivators than overt acts, but always remember to throw in some overt acts.
"Get your mother being dead because she gave birth to you. You have that? Now the baby being dead because you grabbed it."
And by the way, with End of Cycle, add in duplication. I'll give you this: while you're doing it in class, just—we'll just lay this restriction down on it— that we will do a lot of the same End of Cycle and unmock each one as best we can. If we can't get it unmocked, have time unmock it, see? So we'll just do each one. So we've added that nice little step, duplication, in there on End of Cycle.
"You got yourself in jail? You're going to just have to get yourself in jail again." In the future, in the future. Until we get our future plotted out as being absolutely completely untenable and utterly terminated.

ADDITIONAL REMARKS: END OF CYCLE PROCESSING
Future cycle of action. Now, you wouldn't run future cycle of action on What to Audit. I'll leave it up to your ingenuity as to what you do with What to Audit on cycle of action. There's just incident after incident after incident scattered through that book.
You like to perish, you'd think, running End of Cycle, and yet it's the faster of the techniques. It's real quick. I mean, it clips in the effect and clips it off again faster than anything you ever saw. Lets the guy stop someplace. Most of the people you will process are still running, and they're running hard. And they don't know where, because they hid somewhere back.
Okay, let's go.

69



Steps V. VI. VII-Time
A lecture given on 25 November 1953

This is the November the 25th "getting close to Turkey Day" lecture. First morning lecture, 25th November, Second Unit, 1953. That is the third year after Dianetics. This morning we're going to take up some more material on SOP 8-C.
And you, so far, have been progressing very, very well. And you've been doing a very good "what wall?" on this data. But don't be upset if in the next couple of days, I suddenly throw you a quiz on the fundamentals which we have been going over very explicitly, and ask you to do freehand, and without any further thought, an entire rundown on SOP 8-C. Because, you see, you will be taking that examination sitting in front of many a preclear, you see? I mean, you all of a sudden say, "Step III, Step III—oh, so we're here on this page," you know, and the preclear will get some notion of the fact that you're maybe a little vague at what you're doing! And this spoils his certainty.
Well, we've gone from Steps I through III pretty well. And we've gotten down to Steps IV and V a little bit, and VI and VII, hardly at all. So let's just take a fast rundown: What's Step I—what do you do in Step I, in SOP 8-C? At Step I, that's locational, directly locational procedures, and what we do is do negative location: "Who isn't there? What isn't there? Where isn't he?" and so forth, on negative location in the MEST universe and in his body. And then ask him to be in various places. And then take over ownership of anchor points by giving them the entire category of emotions and so forth, and getting them back from walls. And that—in addition to that, you do that on two other universes, to do it complete. That is to say, you put up mock-ups; and you put up mock-ups of your own universe with emotion in them. And this way, we sort of get the fellow over a confusion to which, I am told, some Homo sapiens are slightly liable.
Now we take Step II. What do we do with Step II? That is where we handle automaticity immediately. And of course we start this step out by having the fellow mock up his body in front of him a few feet away. And after he does this a few times, two or three times, a person who's going to exteriorize, who didn't immediately exteriorize on Step I—which of course the key words to it, although you don't always use them is, "Be three feet back of your head." We just ask him to mock up his body a few times in front of him, and he all of a sudden finds that there's no liability in being out of his head. You can even ask him again to be out of his head.
Because the body is so automatic, people depend on it slightly to move them around. Well, the more and more they depend upon it to move them around,

71

72

25 NOVEMBER 1953
the less and less they move, and the more they move the body. Till we get down to Burke with his stunt of being beautifully exteriorized, seeing the back of his head, he—wonderfully oriented for the first time—and then his body's hand reaches up and clutches him, and he sees this hand closing on him. (audience laughter) I don't know what machine went into effect there.
But it was very interesting that part of the process used on him—we had to get him over effort, by the way. And part of the process which was used, was not the development of effort, but having the body—just giving them repeated commands: "All right, now have the body move you into the top of its head. Now have the body move you into the chin. Now have the body move you above the body." So these auditing commands might have had a little bit of something to do with that. But he all of a sudden was coming out with a wild protest: "The body doesn't move me anyplace!" Well, about three minutes before, he never would have believed that, you see. Now, actually, he belonged into the lower categories, and by this trick he was exteriorized at Step II and did pretty well at it. All right.
Now we get down to Step III, and that's everything there is to do with space. That's lots of space. Space is a viewpoint of dimension, and we handle dimensions in terms of anchor points, and so, space. Space: "Reach to the back of the room and hold two corners of the room. Mock up two corners of another room behind you and hold on to those." And "Mock up the corners of somebody else's universe and hold on to those." This all, by the way, sitting there and not thinking, you know, each time, is very productive of results.
But quite often, by the way, a person who is—normally would belong in V or VI will hold on to the two back corners of the room, just that, you see, and they hold on to this for a half an hour (they belong in a lower category) and they all of a sudden will be in the corner of the room, looking at the room. See, they just flip out of their bodies.
This is quite an ordinary experience for auditors, to do this to preclears, so don't overlook this little trick. This character shows up and they don't exteriorize on Steps I and Steps II, tell them to grab ahold of the two back corners of the room and sit there and don't think.
If you wanted to be completely lazy about it, you could just go on with that process. Preclears are very often delighted with it, just delighted with this process. Just pull them in off the street and tell them to do this, and they just sit there and not think and all of their current restimulations and so forth just fall away, and they keep interested in the two corners of the room, and the next thing you know, why, they're out in one of the corners. And they feel fine about it, and the auditor hasn't told them a thing (you've just sit there and dozed for a couple of hours). (audience laughter) It's been reported to me case after case after case, from auditors all over the world—have been writing in about this fact, as though it's surprising or something.
But, I'm very surprised that an auditor actually—I am surprised about one thing: that an auditor actually has patience enough just to tell a preclear to sit there and grab hold of two back corners of the room and just sit there. It isn't that there's anything wrong with this, but the auditor normally thinks he has to be active and put in some effort and strain, and put on a good show for the preclear—cause an effect, you see.
I've seen auditors, by the way, who did nothing but amuse the preclear. And this was very worthwhile, everybody considered him a very good auditor, but after you'd looked at the preclears, you found out that nothing had happened to

STEPS V, VI, VII—TIME
them, which of course is what an auditor's supposed to do: He's supposed to have something happen to the preclear. All right.
There are other techniques that come in under III. And they're any technique that has to do with the immediate creation of space. One of the most elementary techniques, by the way, which I used not very many days ago with considerable significant result on somebody who had no space (and not only didn't have any space, but had moved into negative space and was buttered all over this section of the universe), was to have him, have this preclear, take four flags—well, he got a staff, four flags on a staff—and have this preclear plant those flags immediately in front of his body, two of them, and two of them immediately behind his body, and then just sit there. Of course, what's he got? He's got eight points, which make space.
Now, another preclear I used this on very recently: I found out that she couldn't get these flags but, on looking around, she found a cleared space— and by the way, all mock-ups previously on this case had been in blackness; she'd get a little blackness and then slide a mock-up into it. You know, a black mock-up in a blackness, that was the only way she'd get a mock-up. Well, she looked around and looked over—way over to the left somewhere, a light-year or two—and found that there was nothing over there, and she could erect these flags with great presence of beingness. I mean, she had them and she put these four flags over there and they stayed there and fell down, and she put them back and they fell down and they wobbled, and she put them there again and pretty soon, why, she had these flags steady; and she could see them quite clearly sitting over there.
This case was so out of space that when asked to put emotion and so forth into the anchor points of the room, would go into an instant dope-off—pang! the second she put any emotion into the room. And the more emotion that was put into the corners of the room, the more this case had a tendency to dope off. In other words, you were asking this case to furnish some space and the case knew it couldn't create space, and you were just fighting against these two facts. Continuous dope-off—bang, bang, bang. There was negative, negative, negative space, as far as this case was concerned. All right. And she did find a place where she could put in four flags on their staffs and see them, and these flags started collapsing and falling in, and she finally—adjust them; when she got them steady, she had some space. It was the first space she'd ever had in, oh, probably many generations.
So, after that, the flags were put in various other places that she could see, and finally she put four flags around her, and although they set up a terrific flow in all directions and whipped and streamed and tried to fall down, they stayed there steady, and the next thing you know the flow stopped in her vicinity, and she exteriorized.
Now, there is the use of eight points making space on a case. Now, you can have somebody run space in brackets. And there is a write-up for issue here on the eleven points having to do with space.
See, that is to say, somebody putting eight anchor points around you, and you putting eight anchor points around somebody else, and somebody putting eight anchor points around somebody for somebody else, and somebody putting eight anchor points around you for somebody else. And the five different ways of putting around the room: You holding on to eight corners of the room, somebody else holding on to the eight corners of the room, somebody else holding on to eight corners of the room for you, you holding on to eight corners of the room for somebody else, and somebody holding on to the eight corners of the room

73

74

25 NOVEMBER 1953
for somebody else. And there's six commands in the "putting space around people," and there are five in "holding on to the corners of the room," and this makes an eleven. Now that's actually a full space bracket. It's a very interesting process.
But remember that every time you're handling space you are, to some degree, validating limits. So remember that—to interlace this and interlard it every once in a while with "finding a lot of nothing." Don't get somebody fixated on space any more than anything else. You have a higher goal than space which is certainty, and certainty is knowingness, and a person doesn't have to have space to be certain. But a person who is out of space is never going to get certain. So you have to give him some space. Okay.
They're so afraid of space they can't have any space, so if they can't have any space, of course, they can't know because they've got to be able to have space, and then not have to have space in order to get up into a point of knowingness— that's just backtracking on agreement.
Now, that's Step IV [Step III]. There's those eleven commands: holding on to the anchor points—at least two anchor points in each of three universes— and putting up four flags, and all kinds of other ramifications having to do with space. Now, there aren't too many of them. But if you were just doing this down the line, you would simply ask somebody to hold on to the two back corners of the room for a few minutes and find out if he exteriorized. If he exteriorized on that, why, you've got him exteriorized, that's all, and you just gave him that much space. Okay?
Now we get into Step IV. And Step IV is, of course, now in SOP 8-C. It sounded awfully laborious to you yesterday. You actually don't have to make it that laborious. Nevertheless, I gave you the full parade of what you could do with "things which make," "things which cause to persist" and "things which destroy"—machines, that is. Wasting them, saving them, accepting them, desiring them and being curious about them, in that order, in brackets. And machines which do all the things which are listed in SOP 8, plus one that isn't listed in its 16-G write-up, which is "nothing." And stressing, when you do a V, you come back to that step, and I told you there were several very important ones there. There was "work," there was "pain," as two very important ones. There's another type of machine that people pay very little attention to, which is "unconsciousness." And then there's "viewpoint machines," which are actually, in essence, locational machines—machines which give you viewpoints.
When you get a V, remember to run "the machine that makes blackness." "Makes," "makes persist" or "destroys," in brackets—waste, save, accept, desire and be curious about "machines that make blackness" and "machines that occlude." You'll find cases will break up on that one little step, black cases will. And with that, in II, we're handling automaticity as directly related to being in a body, and we're handling automaticity in general.
Now, we're handling the barriers of thought in IV. In IV we're handling the barriers of thought. You understand that? We've got the case down there who has a lot of things he can't do because he thinks he can't. His barriers have closed in on him to a point where he has—thought is his main barrier.
And now we get to a case level V. And a case level V, of course, is occluded. And I showed you how to put these spheres, outgoing spheres, that is to say further—black spheres—another black sphere out a little further, and look through the one you just put up and see the next one, and then put a new one out there, and then look through all spheres and see this new one and so on,

STEPS V, VI, VII—TIME
as a very remarkable method of handling blackness. And, however, that again is just an effort to keep particles from discharging against particles.
What's essentially wrong with this case is collapsed terminals. Don't lose sight of that. And so we have all of Step V devoted to terminals. Anything to do with terminals falls under—directly under V. Of course now you do I, you start putting emotion into things, you're going to get a discharge against them; this is a double-terminal universe, a matched-terminal universe. All right.
What other steps, then, lie under this? Well, there's a very, very important process lies under this, and this is Change of Space. And, of course, there you're using the individual himself as one terminal and then the other terminal.
There's only one thing I'd add to earlier material which was released on this, is after you've got him into a location, you have him then look around at the location and as much as he can, just look through everything he finds there, finding, eventually, nothing there and then coming back to the location he's in.
Now you do this—the basic technique, it would—is something like this: "All right, be in your childhood home. Be here. Childhood home. Here." Doesn't matter whether the guy's exteriorized or not; you'll practically knock his brains out if he's not exteriorized and you do this because you're stretching and slapping and knocking into practically every ridge in his head, and it's murder. But that's all right. You'll just ask somebody to be in the childhood home and be here, in the childhood home and be here, in the childhood home and be here.
Now, a V has all this backwards. And we get the technique "Exteriorization by Scenery." And a V has to move the scenery under him and around him, and move it away. And so we get Exteriorization by Scenery. If done correctly, this is a very interesting process. You do this on three universes. You do this on three universes. And the way you do Exteriorization by Scenery would be: move the childhood home around you, and then move it back to Texas or wherever it is, and then move the childhood home around you, now move it back to Texas. (student sneezes)This is the most. . .
[to person who sneezed] What did we hit?
Male voice: Oh, childhood home, I think.
Is that right?
Male voice: Yeah, well, I—I was doing it the other day and I ended up with it right here sort of. . .
Okay. Okay. Look through it. All right.
Now when you have a V operating, you can just take all kinds of places, all through the universe, and just have him move them around him. Now, because terminals collapse on him easily, you'll have to move away—have him move away what he just moved around him, otherwise he winds up with a stack.
Now, you can take somebody and tell him, "All right, now, pick your childhood home up .. ." I'll give you an example of this one—this is kind of weird.
Here, you say you were just having trouble with your childhood home. Now pick it up around you and give it a yo-heave back to where it is.
Male voice: Yep.
Very easy. All right. Now pick it up where it is and pull it around you.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Now pick it up and throw it back to where it is.
Male voice: Uh-huh.
Now pick it up and pull it around you.
Male voice: Uh-huh.
Now take it and throw it good and hard back to where it is again.
Male voice: Yeah.

75

76

25 NOVEMBER 1953
Now put a pole out so it stretches that distance between you and it.
Male voice: Uh-huh.
Got that real good? Now look at it and find no pole and no barrier. (pause) What's it doing, coming in?
Male voice: Uh . . . Yeah, it wants to.
It wants to, huh?
Male voice: Uh-huh.
Well, move it in.
Male voice: Okay.
And throw it back out there again.
Male voice: Yeah.
And move it in.
Male voice: Yeah.
And throw it back out there again.
Male voice: Uh-huh.
And move it in.
Male voice: Mm-hm.
And throw it back out there again.
Male voice: Uh-huh.
Got that?
Male voice: Uh-huh.
Is it staying out there better?
Male voice: I can keep it out there.
All right. Keep it out there.
What you have is the V's dependency upon the MEST universe. The MEST universe has encroached upon him. Now, one of the things is the factor of time: He counts on the MEST universe to regulate time for him. Well, don't forget this: He counts on the MEST universe to regulate space for him, to hold all space stretched and stiff. Isn't it nice of this universe to hold everything apart the way it does! Isn't it swell that this universe holds one corner of the room away from some other corner of the room? Isn't that nice of this universe?
Oh, yeah? The only reason two corners of the room are apart for you, is that you have them apart. And, believe me, for a VII, VIII, DC or Step XXIII, they're not apart anymore—the very walls of the room fall in. He walks into a room, and he finds the walls of the room fallen in. Now, you see how this is? Nobody's holding the MEST universe apart, frighteningly enough. Nobody— except you. And now you've counted on nothingness to hold apart distance. And as long as you think there is a somethingness to distance, and you're counting on nothingness to hold the distance there, you're in trouble. And that's why people are in trouble with this universe.
Now, you can do two things with a V level, just not talking—let's—we can talk interchangeably about Step V, a V level case. But remember this: after you have a thetan exteriorized, you do all these steps, one right after the other. I don't care what shape he's in. And you'll find out he'll run into the same problems anybody else runs into, but he won't occlude as badly and he'll handle them more ably, you see?
So let's look at this thing and recognize that the V has a tremendous dependency upon the universe. This is a universe made out of black space. He quite ordinarily is sitting in a black cube or he has black cubes. This is dependency on the MEST universe to give him space, and the MEST universe to give him time. You can take this case, by the way, you can take a V, interior, and just have him get a mock-up and have time throw it away or eat it up. And

STEPS V, VI, VII—TIME
on some cases that are bordering closer to VI, who are still occluded, you get the most remarkable, remarkable results with this. They'll all of a sudden have sighs of relief on this. It's quite remarkable as a technique.
Because that's what they have depended upon: they've depended on time to take away their mock-ups; time to take away their sorrows, their machines, their barriers, you see? And that's DEI on the cycle again. There's your Desire, Enforce, Inhibit, as a cycle, going on. Now, they didn't want the universe to do it, and then they began to resist the universe, and then the universe started to do it for them, then they wanted the universe to do it for them. That's giving up their self-determinism, you might say, to one of their own machines.
What machine are they giving it up to? The machine that makes the universe for them. That's very simple. Well, they won't tamper with this machine unless they get some other things fairly straight. But they'll let time eat up their mock-ups and time eat up their sorrows. And this is something on the order of putting a "forgetter machine," and now we have a forgetter machine closing in with a "time eater-upper of mock-ups." And you say, "All right, now let's ..." You could tell somebody to get a mock-up . ..
I'll give you an example of this: Somebody here get a mock-up. Get a mock-up. All right. Let forgetfulness eat it up. Real easy, huh?
Male voice: Yeah.
And you get somebody whose mock-ups are busily persisting, of course I told you there's several things wrong with him, but you got—on Matched Terminals, he's got collapsed terminals to a point where when he throws something away from him, it comes back. Well, he's tried to get rid of mock-ups, he's tried to jettison bodies and he's tried to shove off one way or the other and go here and go there and he's been inhibited from doing so. Distance and other things have kept him—responsibility, mental barriers.
He has to be—it would be too much of a shock to his parents to blow his brains out. And practically . . . There's hardly anybody here who hasn't thought that—hardly anybody—that they actually had some responsibility for those poor old dumb dodos, their parents. Had some responsibility for them, and the shock would be too great for them, and it would be absolutely murderous to these people if one disposed of himself or something. And this limitation, so-called "responsibility," is fascinating because it chains a guy down. What basically chained him down is he failed one day, for best reasons known to the incident itself, to knock off a mock-up that he was tired of. And he kept on with it, and then he had to have a reason why he was doing it. And so he added all these other justifications and reasons for that earliest incident.
Well now, in V, whether we're doing a Step V process on a thetan who is exteriorized, or whether we're doing somebody who is occluded and is yet interior, we do practically the same things. We're trying to give him back the idea that he can hold two terminals apart, himself. And time they're holding apart, to a point where he can regulate their location in consecutive spaces—which is itself time. He's the boy that makes time. He's the fellow that makes space. Nobody else does.
Now, we talk about "own universe." He can tailor this universe up and fix this universe up so it's quite habitable from his standpoint and from his viewpoint. What do you think a little kid does? A little kid's got this universe duded up the like of which you never saw. Roy Rogers rides down one block regularly and—these movie actors would be surprised how often they are conjured into existence to rescue them from the savage hands of Father and so forth; they— these people are patron saints. And they've got a whole religious society all

77

78

25 NOVEMBER 1953
built up on the idea of the cowboy in the white hat and the cowboy in the black hat. It's a religious society, and they have their rituals which consist of TV movies—movies produced by Vitagraph and shown today.
And this whole world they live in is quite habitable, and their command of time is tremendous. There is nothing as long as a summer afternoon when one is three. It just stretches forever. And there's nothing as short as a summer afternoon—nothing quite as short or quite as brief, at eighty. See, I mean, that's just poof! "Oh, what happened to the day?"
And the odd part of it is, is the amount of things can—that can be accom¬plished in that day. That's what's fabulous. You'd think that this time was actual, you see, and you look around on some days and boy, you've just got time all over the place and you're getting lots accomplished; and on another day you worked hard all day and were in a complete flat-out rush and at the end of the day, you did nothing. Of course, you never let it sneak up on you—the fact that you're putting these lags and lapses and condensations there.
Well, let's look at this factor about this universe: Why does an electric motor develop electricity? It's got two poles—actually four poles, the top and the bottom of each of the two poles. A plus terminal has to be minus, and the minus terminal has to be plus, simultaneously with the other ones, in order to produce any current. They neglect that. They have the most beautiful pictures in the textbooks that utterly don't describe how electric generators make electricity. They just couldn't work the way they're fixed there. And they make no mention, no mention at all, of the only important part of the machine, which is the base. That thing which imposes space upon the terminals so that you get an interchange between these terminals.
Now, we find this base has imposed space and time actually upon these two terminals. Well, what—how'd it do that? Well, it's sitting on a piece of concrete— it's a motor bed, and it's sitting on a piece of concrete, and the piece of concrete is sitting on Earth and Earth is ... Each time we're getting space and time imposed upon the base, and then Earth and the Sun, you see, are in position to each other and you've got space imposed there by the various forces involved; you have time imposed there too. And we find out why is the Sun there? Well, it's in balance with other planets and units and so on, and we move right on out of the universe. On what? Imposition of space. You could say this—imposition of consecutive spaces—and you have said space and time.
And so we just take a good—good, hard look at this fact, and we find out that an individual is as powerful as he can impose consecutive spaces on something. And a fellow thinks he's weak and he can't do much if his idea is that he can't impose consecutive spaces on something.
You take almost any real strongman, his effort at demonstration—just pure strength and so on—will be to show you that he can hold something apart or hold something together, against all comers. And, it's a basis of hold it apart or hold it together.
Normally, you go out to swim meets and things like that there, and you go out to various types of athletics, such as track, and you find thin guys. And they're not talking much about strength or holding something apart or putting something together. What they're mainly talking about is speed, you see. The speed with which they can take one object which is here, and put it there.
Well now, speed and competence, and force and competence, form actually, a gradient scale. But speed is actually just how fast you could impose space on two terminals, not how much terminal can you impose space on. You see, you get—that inverts, you see, and goes to how much terminal can you impose

STEPS V, VI, VII—TIME
space on? Well, there you've got your hammer thrower and your weight lifter. Boy, are those guys muscle-bound. It's all right; I mean there's nothing wrong with being a good weight lifter.
But, there isn't any reason, you see, why you can't weigh fifty-six pounds and handle a thousand-ton weight. I mean, you don't have to go train for it. If you were sufficiently cleared, you could just pick one up and give it a pitch. You know, truck in your road—ten-ton truck in your road—pick it up and put it behind your car. This "mass" is an idea which creeps in, as the idea of space creeps out.
So, we have followed this normally with a—with your people who have hit V, and you've got to go back up through this whole thing again with a thetan who is exteriorized. He has to be able to impose space. You know? He has to be able to put up a couple of anchor points and hold them there. And he has to pull them in on himself, and he has to push them away, and do all sorts of exercises with these. But these are kind of—what kind of exercises? These aren't, purely speaking, space exercises—they're space change exercises. And if you say space change, you then evolve every technique that can be evolved around Step V and any way you can do it.
Well, the most significant process that comes out of this is simply, "Be in one place. Be in another place. Now mock up a world of cats. Now be in it. Now be here. Now mock up this place as a den of snakes. Now be in the world of cats. Be here. Be in the world of cats. Be here. Be in the world of cats. Be in this den of snakes here. Now be in the world of cats," and so forth. And you're—you're . . .
"Now have somebody else mock his universe up here and fill it full of spiders. Now, good—spiders that are all poisonous. That's real good. Now get them crawling all around the floor. That's right. And get them on the ceiling. Now have a different kind of floor and a different kind of ceiling at different distances from them. Now get this place all fixed up and get the spiders dropping on your neck. All right. Now be in the world of cats. Be in the world of spiders." I mean, you could just go on and on. I'm just showing you some extremities of imagination. You can get this—three universes, you see.
Change of Space Processing only falls down when it too thoroughly validates existing barriers which are already overevaluated.
So, "Childhood home. Here. Childhood home. Here. Well, now fix up the castle in Mongula."
"Well, where is Mongula?"
"Well, Mongula sits eight mile south of your last idea. All right. Now fix up this castle and get it so that that was the place where you were born and raised, this life. All right. Now, Mongula. Here. Mongula. Here. Mongula. Here. All right."
And after a while, "Now be in this castle and look all around and look right straight through all of its walls and find nothing in six different directions from you as you're there. Now be here and find nothing in six different directions from you there."
And this takes off this validation.
Now, actually, just validating space all by itself becomes, at long last, a drawback and a limitation on processing. So in Change of Space and in "finding nothing" and so on, it's a very good thing to return your preclear where you think he is or should be; and you just say, "Now, just sit there and know." Like, "Cease perceiving and know."

79

80

25 NOVEMBER 1953
Perception only reduces because of the imposition of limitations. You have too many walls, and when you have walls and want to look at them, you have to say, "My sight will now stop at that wall."
I had a very peculiar experience the other day. I was driving along in a car, and there were very, very beautiful clouds up in the sky and I tried, while I was driving along, to find out if any perception of the clouds whatsoever— any real perception of the clouds, ever reached the body. I was outside of the car and I was trying to study the photon—so-called, much heralded, much written about, photon arrangement. We're too prone, you see, to take for granted the half-squint glances and careless notes which people have put down as cold, calculated scientific fact. We're much too prone to believe that it is fact. And, by golly, I couldn't find any photons.
And as near as I could find out, any sight of the clouds that were reaching my body was there because I had posed a beingness with relationship to the clouds, and therefore had a good perception of the clouds. Now, you could always argue if you take a photographic ...
By the way, they're always invalidating—(quote) "invalidating" (unquote) — Hindu magic or fakirism by saying, "Well, if you took a picture of it, you wouldn't find the boy on the rope." I'm going to surprise people one of these days, I've got to put in a little time on this. Because what are you validating there? You're validating the barrier of a camera. Now, you can study a camera all you want to, and you'll find a camera is slavishly being obedient to certain impositions. Well, this means that a camera is obedient, it doesn't mean that the impositions are, you see, irrevocable, unmovable and so forth. You've got to grant that the camera is unmovable or unremovable, and that all these other things are unremovable, and all of this, in order to get—come up with the idea that we have solid, unalterable fact.
This "science," so-called, is always trying to put across a fast one across home plate—that's always trying to. I mean, you—if you don't watch carefully, you won't even see it come. And all of a sudden the fellow will be sitting back there with a catcher's mitt saying, "See, heh! Baseball, ha! You struck out that time." And that is, they announce so fast and so furiously this word "fact," and it's supposed to mean such a substantial thing, that you very often don't examine the parade of facts which go to make this conclusion; and they always start with an absurdity. And actually, the whole line of them are salted with it.
Well, I couldn't find any of these photons. So what I did was, I triggered a little automatic mechanism that was set up to impose space on things to see. I could see that this thing was very, very busy in the body—it was just being very, very busy while I was looking at these clouds and the beautiful day and all this, and this was being real busy, and this was all that was being busy. And I examined it thoroughly, and it was to "impose a space to perceive." And I triggered it, and blew it up, and I had the awfulest time putting it back together again because, boy, it was imposed space the like of which you never found in an iron bar.
It was so good that it could impose space from a cloud up here to the right, to the end of a cloud over here to the left, and impose the space from the center of the cloud to the body, so as to have a complete perception of the cloud. But it was riding along on—all the time—on an auxiliary viewpoint, which was viewing the agreement of perception of those around it. And it was taking that as a clue and making it all up. It was picking up part of it from the engram bank. There was a viewpoint in there looking at experience.

STEPS V, VI, VII—TIME
This little machine was having the most wonderful time mocking up mock-ups, that would mock up, that would agree with. What exactness! What exactness! And what terrific, steel-clad, armor-plated, diamond-studded rigidity! You just never saw anything like this. I mean, the idea of—if I could take this ashtray with my two MEST hands and crush it together before the space in ... I mean, and that much strength wouldn't even have fazed this little machine. Oh, boy! You talk about imposed space! Now, that was perception. The second it was tampered with, MEST vision just started going haywire. The—what was being picked up on MEST vision, see, it was—just started going blooey in all directions and made it rather difficult to drive the car.
And so I hooked up another viewpoint to the Samoan Islands and the clouds got much prettier, much prettier (they have much prettier clouds down there); and hooked the machine back up again, and managed to pump it full of enough space and get enough hate into it and out of it, and rigidity and so forth into the machine, and after that it really saw some clouds. I could sit there and watch the most gorgeous clouds you ever saw, right up there in the New Jersey sky. They weren't in Samoa because the agreement with them was being taken from the viewpoint of people in Samoa who like to look at clouds. See? It was taken straight out of their agreement banks as an entirely different thing: a viewpoint of a past agreement that clouds are beautiful.
Well, there's the darnedest rigs. Honest to golly, it looks like anything— Rube Goldberg never built anything like the foolishness with which we fool ourselves. The little man who drops and—steps on the dog's tail, dog barks, canary bird hits top of cage, and this fills the water in the radiator in some fashion. The left hand to the right hand, and above and below and around— it is awfully, awfully complex. Exit the most remarkable thing about all this is, is that you can do it just right where you sit, and do a lot of it all at once, and not even vaguely be lost. But you wouldn't get very many surprises if you did it very directly and were forthright about the whole thing. And you'd have to choose up sides or something like that, and have a war or something about it in order to get any randomity concerning it. You see that?
Anything that you can do, you obviously have the ability to do. That's pretty—that's one of those Q-and-A statements that might not strike you until it's stated. Anything you can do, you have the ability to do. And you start thinking of the number of things you can do, and you realize that you must be a pretty competent person, you must be a pretty competent guy. But your greatest competence is in fooling yourself that you don't have the ability to do what you are doing. And that really takes a competence.
You know, you have to say, "Now, here's the ashtray and we put it on this side of the desk." Now you have to say to yourself, "You know, I—it's very nice of that ashtray to have moved from one side of the desk to the other desk. I wish I could do that."
Somebody observed you do it, say, "Well, you damn fool, you just did it."
He'll say, "No, no, I didn't. I'll tell you, ashtrays just have a will of their own. Now, you notice that—it moved back to the other corner of the desk, and I have nothing to do with it, nothing at all. It's wonderful. Ashtrays bought at Penney's always do that—at Woolworth's, they don't, they're too cheap there."
You go on with this endless stream of fabrications, this endless stream of them, a lot of which are very carefully couched to convince people that you're utterly truthful. That's the rarest one of all: all these machines which are set up to tell the truth. Well, we have to examine what people consider to be true.

81

82

25 NOVEMBER 1953
If something was agreed upon to have happened, it is true. So all truth is in the past, isn't it? If it's that kind of truth.
You get a preclear who's bad off, and you say, "All right, tell me now a small lie." And the fellow will just sit there. He will be incapable of telling you a lie. He might tell you that a gazelle just jumped through the window, but if he tells you this, he's crazy—he doesn't think it's a lie, he thinks it's the truth. In other words, his truth machines are out of whack.
Now, a preclear who is pretty bad off will... You say, "Tell me a lie."
Honest, he'll just sit there and struggle and strain and so on. And finally he'll look at you kind of self-consciously and he says, "I just took off my right shoe. I didn't, did I?"
One preclear's case just blew up in smoke by invalidating for him and putting back over to his control one machine. The machine was called "the have to have a reason for machine." And that's the finest machine there is. There's nothing like it. The endless concatenations of logic. You talk about automaticity—just double-terminal the word logic a few times and you'll find some remarkable things happen. Automaticity all over the place. It's like you double-terminal men trying to stop the motions of women. You get all kinds of automaticity, too.
So this case was told by the auditor, "Well, go over to the window and take a look."
This fellow's—"I can't."
"Why not?"
"There is no reason for me to go over to the window."
The auditor says, "Well, don't have a reason. Just go over to the window."
"No! I couldn't do that."
And it was a knockdown-drag-out argument for about twenty minutes and the auditor finally persuaded the guy to go to the window and look out, without any reason whatsoever, and the fellow did, and all of a sudden started to line charge, and came back and sat down in his chair, didn't take any more processing, went home, was well from that moment henceforward—ping! He had done something without a reason, which means he'd just blown to glory his "got to have a reason" machine. People expect everybody else to have a reason in this tremendous network of "I have to fool myself and I hope they're fooled."
Once in a while you get somebody up Tone Scale and he suddenly gets this idea, "You know I'm—oh, I'm terribly—um-mm. It's all pretense. I'm a very false person and I don't dare let anybody know." And he'll start to look at the auditor, you know, kind of out of the corner of his eyes and sort of look sheepish and so forth. This is pretense kicking in. He thinks pretense is bad. Well, as a matter of fact, the only way he'll ever be any good is just to pretend the hell out of things. Because if you can't pretend well, you can't hit a target well; if you can't pretend well, you don't put a room up there so it'll stay there. You have to keep looking around every once in a while and putting your finger up in the corner and then saying, "Well, I reassured myself and so forth that the room was there." Just put it there, see, and then you ... It's sort of like a vanishing trick.
Well, the V is doing this consistently. You get that pretense level. Now let's get this next level: he unmocks it— he's so accustomed to fooling himself by unmocking something that he has just done, and saying he didn't do it, and he has so much automaticity that does this, that he gets to a point finally where he unmocks something before it's created. And he says he does this because he's afraid things will hit him or he's afraid he'll be hit by particles which he perceives.

STEPS V, VI, VII—TIME
Now, I—as I said, I'm unable to find anything like a photon. They register on film, but I can't find one. They—the things I do find aren't even vaguely related to what I've read about in textbooks as photons. All the perception being done of the cloud is all very well and beautifully orderly and we have agreed upon it all and this is just sweet and swell and so forth, but there isn't any such flow. If there were, it'd be real interesting. It's just like sound—it's fantastic that people can agree upon sound. Bodies are agreed upon sound and so forth. But you can do this with sound. You could do all kinds of tampering with your machinery without anything breaking down.
Well, all right. He's got the idea he's liable to be hit. Well, the MEST universe has a lag, he believes. At any instant in the MEST universe, from one corner to the other, if you could be at every point of the MEST universe simultaneously, you would have present time.
But if you think that you have to see something arriving as a measure of present time—oh boy! The stuff's been on the way a long time, and you're watching something travel along, so you're watching consecutive times. Well, all right.
What bearing does this have on the V? Well, he's waiting for this to come, and he gets used to the fact that there's a lag between—he finally finds out. . . You see, he—one day, he starts to help this guy or something over here that's a light-year away; he notices the fellow was about to be hit, and he perceives it with MEST vision—that is to say, he's counted on the time lag. (It's more fun to have a time lag than to have an instantaneousness.) So he's perceived it with a time lag, and now he's reached over to help the fellow, and the fellow blew up a year ago. So he's too late, and he thinks he must have caused it. See, he thinks by reaching, that he caused the fellow to blow up.
One of the worst shocks that a person can get is processing something which makes—one of the worst shocks he can get in this universe (not processing something—you process this out, you'll find it) is when something started to fall off which would have landed safely, and by reaching for it, he gave it such a belt that it flew off at an angle and broke to smithereens. But it wouldn't have been hurt if he just wouldn't have touched it. You get that same thing—yeah, he's assisted it, therefore he's guilty for its breakage.
Now, here we have the problem of time lag. And so he says, "Well, if I just mock up some kind of a machine—if I've just got a machine here which will uncreate things before they get into my zone, I'll be all set." And eventually it's just starting to uncreate everything; and that machine is, in essence, time itself. How do you uncreate things? You put them in vanquished spaces or collapsed spaces or gone spaces or anything you want to call it—or just gone spaces, invisible spaces. And this consecutively put away, is the machine called time.
You know, you fill up one space and then it goes by, and you fill up another space, and you fill up another space, and you've got to throw those spaces away at first and this becomes boresome, just throwing things away; so you've set up a machine that throws it away. And then you start agreeing on everybody else's machine that throws away and you say, "We all throw away at a uniform rate. And then we can see what each other has and we don't get this business where you come up here and I say, 'Die yesterday,' and you—somebody else has said something just to you—just earlier, and we can't find you until next week. And this is bad."
So, the progress is that the V unmocks before mock, which is your inversion—your communication lag, in other words. You have him eat—time eating things up and so on.

83

84

25 NOVEMBER 1953
Well, what's this? He's just reversed the motor. Where everybody above that level would be flowing from A to B, he's trying to flow from B to A. He's trying to back up a communication. And you'll find out that this is indicative of his behavior: He tries to back up communications. Simple. He handles, very often, communications that way: backs them up, he inverts them. He'll much more easily—if you can have him run an explosion backwards, he very often gets an explosion quite clearly; but you ask him to run one forwards and he can't do it. He's trying to uncreate before it's created.
Now, the one person he doesn't trust is himself. He trusts everybody else, really, to some degree. He doesn't trust himself. He doesn't trust himself with unlimited powers because he's blown up too many things by (quote) "accident" (unquote) in getting his machinery assembled. So he must have lost the idea that he can create things. So he must have had a lot of automatic machinery which created things, which must, at this time, be running faster than himself and be occluded and held in abeyance and stopped, which means he can't create things.
So let's superspecialize with this case on creativeness. Now, he observably can't destroy—he can observe that. But what he doesn't readily observe is he's not creating. You might process him for a little while and he'll say, "Well, wait till I gather up some more blackness to cover it with."
And you say, "Gather up some more blackness? What are you doing?"
And the fellow says, "Well, I have to, I..."
"Why don't you just create some?"
And this will come as a startling new idea to him. "Why don't you just make a sheet of blackness?"
So he does. So he covers it up with that sheet of blackness he just made. He'll notice that he can't destroy. See, he won't look at the fact he's not creating. You have to call it to his attention.
And so, machines which create. Because he's got a machine that destroys— he's fully equipped. It's a thing called time. It takes his mock-ups away. He puts one there and it fades. He looks back at it in a little while and it's gone. Nice, comfortable, happy. Don't ever ask him to look at all the mock-ups he ever made, though—he'll get a complete stack-up and a jam in front of him; because he never vanished any of them, he counted on something else to vanish them.
Another one—V's very often have automatic exploders. Sometime in their career, they've been very happy about explosive characteristics of this and that, and so they made automatic exploders. They've made exploders that will cause big explosions and surprise them. And boy, with one of these things around they eventually . . . They make up this, oh boy, they just—they worked over this, and design, and they thought it all over, and it was real nice, and they made this perfectly wonderful mock-up—a wonderful created figure. Gee, it was real good, and all of a sudden it blew up. And they said, "Who the hell— who's shooting at me? Somebody must be shooting at me." And they look around, and all of a sudden find out that their automatic exploder that was set up to explode, has blown up their own mock-up. In other words, they've crossed their lines. And they've considered that this was wonderfully beautiful and dramatic to punish themselves by fixing that exploder so it doesn't explode anymore—and they do it in a moment of anger.
And you process almost any V, you'll find an automatic exploder sitting someplace, and he'll start to get automatic explosions. Things will start going poom! over to the right, poom! over to the left. And he says, "Isn't this fine?" He said, "Isn't this fine?"

STEPS V, VI, VII—TIME
The truth of the matter is, he has capped this and capped that. He's gone down a process of muzzling everything which was inopportunely destructive. Each time he has said, "I can't create," when he has objected to destruction. When you object too much to destruction, you're saying you can't create. This is by objecting to war and so forth, and just admitting that I can't create nations at one fell swoop, see, or cultures or civilizations in a breath. Well, this doesn't appear unusual to you to admit that. You say you've got a nice culture there and so forth. As a matter of fact, it's very hard to propose something that complex, which contains that many surprises.
But your V doesn't trust himself with his own machinery, and the auditor is working around and about and through this one fact. He isn't going to let a discharge go between two terminals—he has too often done this with disastrous results.
Generally a person who gets into that category and is hanging fire there and is really in pretty good shape, although occluded as hell—generally this person has been a pretty wild one—pretty wild one. You look at these Vs and they're very mild and they're saying, "Help people," and all of that sort of thing. Don't look too quick, because you're dealing with a real tough character—real tough. And they're tough on processing only to the degree that they don't trust themselves to let go of things unless they see that you have a proper track with which they let go. And they audit very covertly. That is to say, they are audited, when they are preclears, very covertly.
And don't ever take your finger off of this: anytime anybody says he's occluded, grab ahold of an E-Meter. And that way you will save more time; because about every one out of four of those people is going to do nothing but lie to you—and know it. See? So you just grab that old E-Meter there, if you're really processing them to go for broke on this case—do an assessment, find out where they're latched up. Don't put up with any nonsense, keep that needle rising. And when it starts sticking again, do something else. Keep track of your case.
You'll find out he's latched up in this lifetime. You'll find out that he has uniformly tried to—without success—kill a body in this lifetime. And then his key-in is, he tried to kill somebody else, but knew he'd be arrested if he did it, and so he didn't. That's the key-in on him trying to knock himself off. He got in an operation—tonsillectomy or something, you see—and he normally shoved off from the body. After that he just paints everything black. "The hell with it. Rarrrrr! Well all right, I'll go on, I'll be good. I'll persist. I'll show them. Oh, you're an auditor, huh? Heh-heh! Well, I—my case is in real bad (go ahead, try and do something to me, see?)—real bad shape I'm in, and I think if you just audit (boy, am I going to lead him down the byways, hrrh!) . . . All right, I'll be audited, so I'll persist some more. My God, is there no end to this living!" (audience laughter)
Now, you see, you have success with this character the second that you start heading for the direction of no-persistence. You can audit them from the standpoint of you just—"It isn't you, a thing which handles a body, which is dependent upon the body being exteriorized, it's you being exteriorized." And you handle him accordingly, you get places.
Because the more you try to validate his body as a barrier—he's already got too many barriers. That's also his story: too many barriers. And the more you try to audit his and validate his body, the worse he's going to handle in your hands, believe me. Because that's one thing he has tried to knock off in this lifetime. Not that he's tried to be a suicide, but that he has been in an

85

86

25 NOVEMBER 1953
operation, he thought the body was dead, he wanted to leave it, he did leave it and he did what we'll call a "reassumption." The terminals between himself and the body collapsed on the sudden agony and pain in the body and pang! he was right back up against the body—generally in the wrong place at the wrong moment. And that's a reassumption.
Now, what's he trying to do? His idea was to kill the body and turn it into dust, absolutely dispose of it completely and utterly, and go back up to the between-lives areas and find his new body and go. Well, it will actually run as final if he goes from having killed the body and turned it into dust here on Earth—you just run Future Processing on this, you'll get the past—to the between-lives area, where he himself perishes. And he doesn't have to live anymore or do anything anymore. He's quite happy about this, this is real good. And that will run on out the incident in which he's primarily stuck.
So Step V has to do with any process that has to do with changing terminals, matching terminals or otherwise. Even putting up two people so they discharge one against the other. That's a Step V. And you do it exterior as well as interior. It happens that this is the main trouble with the V: He can't hold two terminals apart easily. So you have to remedy that while he's interiorized.
But don't think that this doesn't have to be run on a Step I. Because once you've got a person out of his body, you run all the remaining steps.
Okay.

SOP 8-C Summary Of
A lecture given on 25 November 1953

This is the first afternoon lecture, November the 25th, 1953 A.D. We have been covering here during the first—this is the seventh actual study day of this unit. We've been covering here a great deal of material. Actually, you'll find the material itself has become relatively easily stated. See, you could put lots of significance in it, you understand, but it's relatively easily stated.
Our job from here on out is to clear and get cleared. And you've got specific case responsibilities. You looked at your responsibility this morning. Quite in addition to that, no matter how hopeless it was; no matter how horrible the shock was; no matter how, if you were the preclear, you almost fainted to see who was auditing you—that comes pretty close to being it. So let's just—let's go. I'm looking for people who are going to do it. To get Clear. The material here makes it very simple, really. I would be very ashamed of myself to flub the dub on anybody present, in a relatively few hours.
But on the other side, I want to teach you how to audit. Either—if you are interested in going on auditing, that's your own affair, but certainly to the extent where you can handle yourself as a being, and handle beings around you. If you're going to concentrate on just learning how to be an auditor, you're liable to fail. Because we're dealing with the root stuff of how you and others live. And you will be able, from the information which you have, to integrate a lot of questions which you may have about existence. You may be able to do that.
But being here as a group—some of you ask questions of me, you ask questions of others, so on. The information begins to get better and better and better understood because you talk it over amongst yourselves and exchange it, you see it in operation and so forth.
We're here to handle this information and to sort it down to its barest essentials and to its greatest potential use—why we're here. If we fail to get that data, if we fail to reduce it down for ourselves and our own understanding of existence, integrate it from your—our own viewpoint so that you can use it freely, and make the data itself yours, then I will have failed. And I don't like to fail, that's all.
In the first place, there isn't a single person here who can't be made into almost anything you want to be—from a first class necromancer to a grade-A politico, to a cast-iron general, it doesn't matter. Just doesn't matter, that's all. There isn't any limitation. Your first limitation would be, "I am learning this information in order to:" (colon), paragraph.

87

88

25 NOVEMBER 1953
Now we say, "Audit other people." Well, that's fine. You'll find yourself auditing other people whether you like that or not. But your goal can be a lot broader than that.
Do you know that one of you, fully cleared, could change the course of Earth? Now, that's not an extravagant statement. I didn't say MEST universe, see. That wouldn't be an extravagant statement either. But it'd be an extravagant statement to say one of you, cleared, could change the course of every universe there is. That would be slightly on the side of an overstatement. But we deal with little, tiny, itsy-bitsy, teeny-weeny jobs like completely changing the course of Earth's culture—little ten-minute job (snap) like that—yeah, any one of you could. But you run into a problem if you do that, and the problem is this: Attention.
You know, you have to have some sort of parity with that which gives you attention—some sort of parity—in order to feel that you're getting any attention, and feel there's any randomity in action. You understand that? So you could go out all on your own, and draw your sword of fire and declare randomity against everything existing and so forth; but it's—pretty hard job to stay interested in it. After you've knocked off your eight billionth human being or something of the sort—I don't know, there are only two billion of them, but they multiply—you might get the idea that it was boring.
I recall, for instance, a fellow in China many centuries ago, he was known as "the butcher." And he knocked apart, I think, a province. He killed every man, woman and child in the province. He ordered it done, and went ahead executing the plan. And this became a fascinating project. It took the longest darn time to kill a million and half human beings. They had swords, you know, and they just kept chopping and hacking and the bodies kept piling up—but boy, a million and a half human beings is an awful lot of human beings!
Now, in modern times, with the most modern weapons known, with machine guns, with lime pits, blast furnaces, political leaflets and his own speeches— with these tremendous weapons of annihilation (the last, annihilating people in boredom, you see), Stalin only managed ten million people in—how many years was he king of Russia?
It's interesting, you know, to look at Earth's history and get it straight, and straighten it up for yourself a little bit. Because people say so much about it, it's very hard to plot. And I finally found out who this fellow Stalin was. He was king of Russia and he was the world's greatest capitalist. He owned everything in Russia.
And I found out that in all the—I think it was 285 years or something (years being eight winters long in Russia), that he took all this time, and even then, he only got rid of—with the entire Red Army, with everything else, with the OGPU, the Gestapo, the O-Gay-Pay-Oo, the ugpoo, the poougs and everything else, he only got rid of ten million peasants. It wasn't worthwhile. It wasn't worthwhile. He finally realized that and kicked the bucket. I'm sure that's why he did. I was reading in a history book the other day that he had died of a broken heart, I think it was. I don't know quite what happened. It was probably some romantic tale behind it.
But there's destruction. There is destruction. He was the great boy who came in and ended the aristocracy and found himself with an aristocracy on his hands. Today, it's impossible to tell a Russian civil official from a Russian official of the aristocracy about thirty-five years before the Revolution. There's no difference. They pass the same pieces of paper. This time they're run through more machines, that's about all. And that course leads to nothing.

SOP 8-C, SUMMARY OF
The lonesomest man in the world was sitting there in Russia because he had to turn around the opposite direction and prevent himself from getting attention. And attention's very interesting stuff. And when you have to prevent yourself from getting attention, you're defeating your own ends, and you've turned what? You've turned every machine you've got backwards. Because all your early machines were gauged to get attention; and all your later machines are gauged to prevent attention. There's the lock-up.
Well now, if you don't learn some common sense along with some technical accuracies about all this, why, again, I will have failed. And I don't like to fail. And there is a position on the Tone Scale known as 20.0. There is that position. And one has a great deal of action latitude there. He also has 50 percent he's not predicting, and he's in a fairly optimum condition to go on. And you start shooting preclears up above this to serenity, and they all sit around regarding their navels complacently—well, that's all right if you want to start a game that way, just for a game—realize for God's sakes that it's a game. It's no goal to get preclears to 40.0. You'll find yourself completely out of action if you destroy the playing field. Oh, I just give you that as an interesting thought.
But it's one thing to learn information, quite another thing to apply it. It's one thing to be able to do a process and quite something else to understand it. And it's one thing to listen to a technique and quite something else to have it yourself. And I expect you to own all this material—it isn't mine; it's yours. You've struggled a long time, you've set enough booby traps for yourself; and if I'm doing anything for you, it's just tripping the lock the reverse way on a few of your own booby traps. We could be very dramatic about this, you see— I could make a terribly dramatic game out of this. The only trouble is, I don't even happen to be very hard up for dramatic games just now.
I suppose if this were a couple of hundred years ago, why, we would have a different story to tell here. Be going out in another direction, because I was real short of games a couple of hundred years ago. Gee! Ran into somebody in class here the other day that was bored for eighteen billion years. And he didn't like that. Makes him very chary of getting cleared. Might happen again!
Well, a large part of your ability to proceed is your ability to proceed as a unit. Therefore, these groups are being organized on a basis of contact units. That is to say, there is one contact unit. People going through this group become part of that group. It at least keeps you into agreement with people that are doing more or less what you are. And this makes it possible for, someday or other, maybe the club to break in half, and half of it fight the other half—if you get too bored and too desperate, this is always possible. But it's a good thing to remain in contact of people who are talking your own language. And your biggest danger is boredom. All right.
With that thought in mind, I hope you can integrate what you're getting here, and regard it in that light and do something interesting with it— interesting to yourself and interesting to others. Because if anything appears right now to be going by the boards, it's the game called Earth. It's so dull! It is getting duller and duller and duller, because we're running on a "stop motion to save all lives" to a level I've never heard of before.
Now, it's not necessary to butcher everybody the way they do here on Earth in order to have a game. It's not necessary. I mean games—there are all kinds of games. Here on Earth they think that some general who gets elected to the charge of the army or something—the way they do in one of the more interesting countries on Earth—he gets elected and that makes him in charge of the army. He was in charge of the army before he was elected. You kind of

89

90

25 NOVEMBER 1953
wonder why he got elected. But anyway, he's been commander in chief now for years—but in different office buildings.
He was entertaining the other day the boys who, by the way, who designed and manufactured the airplanes that shot down all the US pilots during the war. They were entertained as guests of honor at the White House. I think that was very amusing. Willy Messerschmitt and so forth was over there dining royally and being congratulated. Did you know that, by the way, that that happened here the other day? Yeah, the three top Nazi officials who had orders out—these orders were signed by Dwight D. Eisenhower—to arrest them, and shoot on sight, and they were dined at the White House. The difference is, a different state of psychosis now exists. (audience laughter)
Well anyway, we haven't any interest in revolutionary activities. We have a definite interest in evolutionary activities. As long as you let automatic machinery run on and on and evolute as it will, and evolute as it will, it eventually stops itself. Nothing is—comes more plain to a pc being processed than this. If you go on letting everything run automatic, eventually all the automaticity stops all the automaticity. And then you haven't got enough left to start anything again. All right.
Now, let's be a little more specific about this. You as an auditor, in auditing the preclear assigned to you, may believe that your responsibility for this preclear begins at the moment the session begins and ends the moment the session ends. In a unit such as this, that can't exist. That can't hold true.
In the first place, he's going to get coffee shop auditing. This is a method which has been invented in rather recent years to louse up pcs. You get somebody exteriorized and then drop three platters of steak, you know? (audience laughter) He comes back to the next session and you start—you say, "Be three feet back of your head," and you look at the fellow, and he asks you kind of—he says, "What head?"
And you say, "Your own head, of course."
And he says, "A body or a chair? And—or a bed?" And it's very confusing.
And if you don't recognize what's happening to your pc—this character isn't looking at something, you know? And it's just your job—you could just say, "Now look at all your aberrations. You got it all? Now look through them. Okay. You're Clear." See? Ping! It's just as easy as that.
But if he doesn't do this the first time you tell him to, there's the slight chance—there's the slight chance that for some days, at least until you get him in pretty good shape, you'll be picking him up in the hall, and off the wall, and looking rather dazed or upset or something of the sort. He's done a lot of auditing and this keyed him in all across the boards, you see. And he isn't quite sure which is which and what's what.
Well now, actual auditing . . . You can do this actual auditing weekends to pick up this condition. Oh, pick it up in the regular session, but it's up to you to look for it and pick it up. You're the auditor as far as this person's concerned. I repeat, you're the auditor.
Now, there's two auditors on this case. Now, it's very easy for the one to say to the other, "Well, you take all the responsibility," and the other to say to one, "Well, you take all the responsibility." Well, that won't work either. That won't work either, worth a darn. So we'll just have to hang any two auditors when any pc is loused up. I mean, that's simple.
So you just remember this: That if there's any midnight auditing going to be done by anybody, it will be done by both members of the team on the person, regardless of whether that—those auditors did that to the person or not. This

SOP 8-C, SUMMARY OF
person is loused up, you see, so the two auditors responsible for him are going to audit him, and both of them will be there. You understand that? That's real clear-cut. We've got this list posted and available and in the hands of the Camden police and ... (audience laughter)
Oh yes, I keep getting asked by officials around in town what we are doing. I wish I could tell them. (audience laughter) I wish I had a definition that would define into their frame of reference what we were doing. What we're talking about here and what we're doing: We're trying to make able people more able to handle more randomity. And if we can do that, why, we will see a considerable cultural change on an evolutionary pattern. And we will see a lot less "boom-boom," and we'll see a lot less criminality, and we will see actually, a great deal less delinquency and disease and all the rest of it—all these other interesting things. If we do this job, why, we'll see more actual randomity. Disease is very poor randomity: You lie still and let the bugs eat. Not exciting at all.
Now, here we have in progress, then, a number of cases. Now, when you're studying, you're auditors; you're not cases. And you just shift your frame of reference when you start thinking about something I'm saying applying to anybody, then you figure it must apply to that pc that you got. See? Doesn't apply to you. You're not human. You don't even need to eat meat—you eat hay or something. You're not human at all. And if you get terribly restimulated, something like that, why, that's just rough. That's just rough. But as restimulated as you are, you have to think about the pc. Now, I know all of you will do all this, and I know that this is—automatically would be followed through, and it was completely unnecessary for me to mention this. But I just wanted to show you that I understood too. All right.
Well let's take up now, again, V, VI and VII. Gave you a lecture this morning, which—and we had a rundown there on 8-C as far as we've gone. Now, let's go just a little bit further. What the devil do you suppose is the basic purpose of all this machinery? What is the basic purpose of all this aberration, this sickness, all this reversal, these inversions and so forth? What the dickens is all this about and can we state it "pang!"
Yes, "cause to produce an effect," that's one, with a modus operandi which sits between "you can't have an effect; you can't be cause—you can be cause, but you can't have an effect without attention." So let's state it in a breath. Yeah, that's the first paragraph we can state. And on this business of attention, what do you suppose these machines, equipment, defenses, offensive weapons, politeness, psychosomatic ills, stomach trouble, glasses, eyesight, brilliantine, ice-cream sodas, kings, household slippers, coal heavers, panthers, eatingness— what are all these things? These things are under one heading—one heading as far as machines are concerned. These are operations which create, make persist, and get rid of—that's create or pull in, make persist or not persist and stay in a not-persisted state (if you get what I mean), and shy off from or get rid of attention.
Now, you can say this about your preclear: anytime your preclear sits down and he's got—now you're thinking about your preclear, you're not thinking about yourself—you're not a preclear, see? You're somebody who has preclears. Anytime this person says to himself, "Ow!" he is examining a machine which is designed to basically attract attention, and probably more basically to push it away. And in the middle, it makes attention persist one way or the other. He says, "Ow!"—he puts his hand on his stomach and says, "Ow!" What's he replying to? All right, he's got a body—he's got a body. Now, what's he replying to in the body?

91

92

25 NOVEMBER 1953
Well, what's he got a body for? Why is his attention so thoroughly on this body, he can't get out of it—obviously. What's the mechanism behind there, or what's he got a body for? He's got a body to attract attention.
He has erected a barrier, or has acquired a barrier which he can impose across other people's perception, and which they have agreed to stop their perception on. And this gets him attention.
Now, that's what—that's what it's about. Now, why does the body have to have food? Food is condensed attention. And if you can just envision a bunch of tigers and monkeys and giraffes and things like that around in Africa, running and eating grass and running away from and running toward and being pounced on and not being able to pounce anymore and pouncing and so forth— what are these characters doing? They're just getting attention one way or the other. It's the most gorgeous network of idiocy you ever saw in your life: having to eat something in order to have some energy. What an alibi! See, big alibi. But it's very workable because it's worked out that this is the agreed-upon level of attention. And if you don't think it makes a terrific game, be beside a water hole some night in Africa. It's real noisy. There's a lot of things demanding and getting attention—crunch, scamper, scream! All right.
That gets pretty bloody. I mean, people are much too serious when they're at that level. And there's where seriousness goes. There is a definite parallel between seriousness and having to have or having not to have attention. "No attention" is completely different than "having to have no attention." Do you understand that? You see, "no attention," just plain no attention, is nobody looking, nobody threatening to look, nobody trying to look away, nothing. Just no attention. All right.
Now we get up to a point where people have looked, and are looking wrong. You know, they're looking with appetite or something, you know? And they're looking wrong. Well, that's having to have no attention. A rabbit very often gets this as he stares at the wolf. He just gets a definite feeling that he shouldn't have that attention; and this goes right along with the fact that the wolf mustn't have this attention either—meaning one rabbit in one wolf stomach. That's attention to a wolf. He knows he's got attention. He's certain. But get what the basic uncertainty of this animal is.
Homo sap isn't in really anywhere near as bad a condition as he might be. He's come up through some fantastic and incredible periods. He's come up through these periods of destruction and so forth, but not with the present crew running him. People running him were pretty civilized. They had a much higher state of being. The level of reality of a wolf is so poor, he's so psycho, that an examination of the beast discloses some interesting psychoses that you wouldn't ever have suspected any being could step into. And yet he manages to live and thrive and be that crazy.
But the worst of all of these, I would say offhand, would be the hyena. He is admittedly and very, very insane. He has the cravings—he can't even have attention fresh; he's got to wait for it to be carrion. And all carrion eaters, by the way, have the most terrible, gnawing hunger with them all the time, and it's just—no matter how much carrion they eat, they're just hungry. They go on that way. Well, all right.
What's wrong with a pc that's occluded? All right. He's got to have attention; he can't have attention. And if he doesn't exteriorize easily, he's afraid this will happen—he's caught up in this one: "If you take your attention off of it, it'll vanish." And you get somebody setting up an anchor point someday, and you say, "All right, take your attention off the anchor point."

SOP 8-C, SUMMARY OF
"Mmmm . . . Huh-uh."
Now we have an automatic machine running, in some character, known as acting, you know? He goes in front of the camera or something and he goes click, click, whir, whir. And he sets-self-up-and-he-goes-on-and-he-acts. You see? He acts. He knows exactly the gesture and the posture and the inflection and he knows how to say, "My god, not that!" and all these things, you see? And then you ask him—you say to him suddenly, you say, "How do you do that? How do you know what to do when you do it?"
Oh boy. Oh, boy. This is real funny. He does—almost does a flip if he's running on an automaticity for his acting, because he puts a couple more attention units on it than he ordinarily has on it. Now he is bypassing—to get an automaticity, he's pretending the attention never goes to it, to keep the machine running. So he goes to it on a bypass circuit, so that he can't know that he's running on the machine, and the machine is running him, so then he becomes unconscious of his acting, so therefore it's a built-in mechanism, and is apparently—all of his acting then is unconscious. See, and you've asked him to put directly on it a couple of attention units. Well, it'll start the machine running out of gear. That's how easy it is to blow up, to wreck, stop, an automaticity.
What's this actor doing with an automatic acting machine? What's he doing with one? If he has one—if a writer has an automatic writing machine, if a speaker has an automatic speaking machine, if we have any of these things, we are looking at somebody who's going to fail as an actor, a writer, musician. They're going to fail, just like that.
The first thing you know, they're—they've got more and more, further and further away bypass circuits until at long, long last we have a situation where they don't even know they have a machine, and the machine isn't running, and they are the machine, but they used to be able to—because they're not creating. They have done the horrible thing of delegating creativeness to a machine.
Now, when it comes to a brain to figure out the future, a person has put knowingness into a machine. The machine knows and he doesn't know; which means he's going be cut down, all the way on down. Now any prediction machine has the postulate in it: it knows, and the pc as a thetan doesn't know. You see how that could be? You start running one of these machines.
Now, you've got it that the future machine—it's got to have attention, but the pc isn't supposed to get attention about that. Let's just integrate this, and we find out that the pc has to fix his attention on this machine more and more and more and heavier and heavier and heavier because it builds up stronger and stronger and stronger until it, at last, is overpowering as far as he's concerned. It has gimmicks and gadgets which dominate his entire existence.
On some people it turns things white when you're going to have good luck, and black when you're going to have bad luck. It turns things a kind of a rosy color when it's going to be a good day or a dull gray color when it's going to be a bad day. In other words, it's a symbolical shift which is going on continuously, on and on and on and on, telling a person and evaluating for a person and telling him where to go and where to be and that's basically what it is.
Now, that's a prediction machine. You get a pc with that, he has delegated creativeness in one direction and knowingness in another direction. He's in horrible condition. His creativeness of the future is his best creativeness—if he's going to depend upon time. Well, when he has shoved creativeness of the future off into a machine which knows and he doesn't—oh boy, does he get in the dark! And literally that. He eventually goes black as a field. All right.

93

94

25 NOVEMBER 1953
We find this person now in another category. This person comes along— here's just automaticity at work. We find this person afraid to take his attention off something because he knows it'll vanish. You know, there's all kinds of adages in the language about "you got to keep your eye on the ball," and so forth and so on. As a matter of fact, that's all really a game is—keep your eye on some gadget.
In Hollywood they make movies—and by the way, they always have in a movie something called a "weenie." A "weenie" is movie slang—or used to be, a long time ago—movie slang for the treasure chest, the fortune, the bag full of jewels. It's something everybody is after, is its definition. That's the "weenie," and it passes along, and the villain gets it, and the hero has to rescue it from the villain, and so on. It's that thing which is put there for the audience to put their attention on, which will then connect consecutively all the action of the picture. That is the motive and that is the reason.
Now, very early in life a person decided to be something and that becomes the weenie. He is just chasing through life to become this object or to acquire this object.
Other people may start in, very early, just trying not to be some object, such as Mother. That's an entirely different type of weenie. Simple, But it's the thing which tracks the thread of attention through an entire lifetime. There are very many varieties of these, and there's very many ramifications to these. One set of values relating to this same thing we call the service facsimile. It's "What does he use to get sympathy?" is the way it's defined in AP&A. Let's just redefine the service facsimile: It's that which the preclear uses to get attention. Attention is valuable.
Now, we could go further on this, and say the inverse service facsimile which is, "that set of mechanical abilities or inabilities which somebody uses to fend off attention." What do people use? Beauty they use rather uniformly— that which is agreed to be beautiful—to attract attention; and they use ugliness to fend it off. And they get to a point where they will use ugliness to be able to eat. A spider does that. They just so horrify anything that sees them, that it then becomes edible. In other words, they get attention by being horrible.
So, here we go from beauty, you see, demanding attention, into ugliness to fend attention off, into extreme ugliness in order to demand attention, and I don't know where you'd go from there to fend attention off. But I know there's many a spider, just before you stepped on him, that wished he had something that would fend off your attention. And probably in his next incarnation he decides he'd better grow a little bit better grade of poison—one that'll go through shoe leather. I'm sure they die with that postulate—I mean, the entity that makes them.
You know, they're run by entities here and there. And every time you start to fool around with an insect or something like that, generally there's something starts pitching at you, right now. People don't like that. These entities that run insects and types of birds and things like that—you're fooling with somebody's property. They own that property; they know that. It's curious.
Well, anyway, attention is your key. Eatingness, sex—sex and the second dynamic in general, is something to make attention—a certain type of attention—and then to make it persist. Interesting, but very easy to figure out how it is. Eating, of course, is just a demand for attention. Inability to eat is trying to fend off the attention which one has been demanding. Anybody with ulcers has now turned the point of where he's trying to fend off all this attention which once he was so hungry for.

SOP 8-C, SUMMARY OF
Well, let's look at the anatomy on this fellow with ulcers. Curious anatomy. He had a tremendous vacuum of attention. He began by believing he had to have attention from elsewhere. He began by believing that other people's energy was senior to his own. And his own was not edible to him. That's his first blunder. And from there on, it gets worse and worse. And it keeps running this inverted cycle. He sets up activities, so on, to demand attention. And then he gets too much. Every time, you see, he gets too little, he just sets up more machinery to get more. Until he gets it built up. And then the machinery nearly always, sooner or later, one life or another, will operate far too well. And operating far too well, it then practically falls in on him.
He's just got lots of attention. So he has to set up machinery now in order to keep people from seeing him. In order to keep people from eating him, if you please. He's collected an awful lot of money or real estate or something like that, and people are just pawing at him continually to take it away from him and so on. He wants to fend off this attention.
And there we get, in terms of just thetans operating, we get force screens, shields of one kind or another, booby traps—when you look at them, they explode, you know, somebody else's booby trap—you get all this type of thing. And on Earth, it goes to the level of police. Companies, people, organizations which have an awful lot of MEST—an organization—have actually conjured up a protective screen in the flesh to keep people from giving them attention on the one hand, and taking attention away from them on the other hand. And these two are always locked together in the machinery of the preclear.
And we talk about automaticity—it's all very well to just sail out—little light automaticities, up higher in the bank, it's very, very good just to sail out and solve them one mechanism after another mechanism, one after the other, until we've got this case in a pretty good balanced condition, and get a thetan exteriorized and we deal with some of this machinery one way or the other. And machinery keeps showing up of one kind or another. And you know, basically, what the category of the machinery is.
But it's all right to deal with in its lightest forms in Step IV—machines which create, make persist and destroy—work, pain, so on. That's the way you handle that with IV—machines which make blackness. Specific machines. It's all right to handle that. But never be puzzled about what you're handling. You're handling a series of machines which are first set up to get attention. And then are backed by another set of machines which make the attention persist. And these are backed by a set of machines which tend to make the attention desist. Then by another set of machines which seek, by all that's holy, to make it stop. And then the fellow hasn't any attention, so he's got to set up a set of machines which get him attention. And you're drawing the picture of his time track.
Now, this set of machines maybe is not adequate, so he's got to set up more machines to get attention. And then, finally, he's got to make it—now he's got the attention, he's got to make it persist. Now, making it persist, he's got too much. So he has to make it desist a little bit, and now he's got to stop it. And here we go. Over and over and over and over. And this is the tale of any life, any spiral, any universe. This is the story of it. Round and round, over and over. Machines set up to cancel machines. And the V has done this a couple of times too often.
For instance, a V does not like ... Anybody has happened—had this happen to him. He's had a body, and after it was dead, believe me, it was supposed to be dead! You know? He didn't like anything which he had had in his possessions being manhandled and pawed around at and so on, after he'd left it.

95

96

25 NOVEMBER 1953
Do you know how people don't like to be touched? Well, that isn't the body reacting against being touched. You go up to somebody and give him a hearty slap on the back, you know, bong! or something like that, he doesn't like that. Some people go out to the point where you can't even touch their sleeve or something like that—just the lightest touch and they shrink away and shudder and so on. Well, look at how far out that thetan has backed—where he can't have a direct contact against his body. Well, they get to this point, and they get to this point rather early in this universe—they got to it; and then after that, any body that couldn't be killed outright or something like that, he just felt he wanted to hide it or—under the leaves or—anything that was dead, you know. He wanted it to be good and dead and then not there. People have this badly.
They talk about cremation and so on. They want to get rid of a mock-up, you see, very thoroughly. Now, there's some interesting cases I have run: Their bodies have been used for other purposes, you see? One case I ran one time had a—his brain was in a medical library and—for a number of centuries or something of the sort, or a century or so, sitting in alcohol. And this guy was just suffering, you see? Still—some of his attention was still on this damn brain. He couldn't burn it up or do anything about it and so on. And just processed it out, and he took his attention off of it and realized it was silly. It was just something he had associated as being his to the extent of being himself, which he therefore didn't want—now, another fellow I—he didn't want it manhandled by somebody else.
Another fellow I processed had the hor , I'd say this has happened
several times: He had the horrible adventure of leaving this body—this happens to most anybody—they leave a body and then nobody buries the body. You know, it just sits out there in the open, exposed, everybody can see it and zuuuh! they don't like that. So they'll stick around until the body gets buried.
Whenever you hit a theta bop, you know, that's—somebody's doing that. If a theta bop has a sort of a little quiver on each end, a very—a funny characteristic added to the theta bop, why, you're on the right subject, but you haven't got the right time. See, the body is actually an earlier body or a later body or something that he's standing by. But everybody that gets that theta bop, when you hit that, it's just the needle of the E-Meter rocking back and forth—he's standing by a body someplace. And he frees up like mad the second you run End of Cycle on the body. Just have it turn into dust a few times, and the dust all blow away in such a way as to be never found again, and he frees right up on the theta bop. All right.
Some people haven't been just that unlucky to have a body left on top of the ground or mummified on a plateau or something like that—somebody's picked up their skull. And somebody has the skull, and they're doing something with this skull. And one fellow's skull had been picked up and was being used in a carnival. And it had a mobile set of wires, so it made the jaw mobile, and a light was flashing to make the eyes flash off red and so on. And it was being used in a carnival as an attraction outside of the sideshow. And it was there for years. And this guy was really sensitive about exteriorization. And we finally found out that it was all tied up with this damned skull. He actually didn't have enough attention in present time to worry about it. He was all fogged up. He still had viewpoints on this skull. And he'd every once in a while get pictures of a skull, its jaws flapping, and a record—a record playing behind the skull, so the skull was evidently talking.
The other fellow I ran into one time had died (he'd been rich) and just as he was dying, the surgeon, witty fellow, probably in the pay of one of the relatives,

SOP 8-C, SUMMARY OF
slid a talking tube up through the fellow's—back of his neck, made a slit in the back of the neck, and slid this tube up into the fellow's mouth, you see? And then just went back of another set of curtains and talked through the tube, and bequeathed everything the fellow owned to the wrong characters, as his dying breath. And all the relatives were standing around and heard the last words, you see? And this thetan was frantic!
The body had been made to talk after it was dead. And after that, life after life, this thetan would just simply stand by until it was dust. And he had actively taken bodies which were getting slightly old or something like that and dump them off cliffs and get them caught in riding accidents or anything where they were going to be way out in the wilds and never found. See? Oh, real good. That's one for the book. I hope that doesn't get to be a custom, that sort of thing.
By the way, come to think about it, that's a terrifically good plot for a story—have to write a story on it someday. I was always engrossed with the idea because of the—the pc was so dreadfully upset. He just kept telling me over and over—I couldn't get a word in edgewise in processing—he just kept telling me, "And he put the tube up the back of my neck, see? And made the jaws, you see, agitated by pushing the tube back and forth, a little thing. And I didn't leave the money to the damn nephew!"
And I'd say, "Come on. Let's see if we can't go over this a little bit."
"But I—you don't seem to take this seriously!"
Well, there's our—the problem we're involved with there is the problem of attention. There is a continued attention. People are continuing to give the body attention after they shouldn't.
Now, when people are dying, they're very often—feel quite guilty because they're going to make so many other people feel sad. Early on the track, you'll find most anybody at the moment of death, no matter how violent it was, his last thought is, "Gee, a lot of people are going to lose a good friend"—boom! Just like that. This is his final, sort of final thought. It is not for himself at all, you see. It doesn't matter about him. But the only reason he was around—all these people had a good friend and they kind of depended on him. And here he was—boom, gone! This is very bad from his viewpoint. Well, this still hangs around people when they're young, in this society at this time. And they don't like the idea of a continued attention, because it's a continued insistence on their going on surviving.
We get around to what we were talking about earlier. It's an insistence that one survive, and continue to survive, and go right on and on and on surviving, regardless of what shape the body's in or what pain it's in or how ugly it's gotten to be or anything else. This is—this is the problem. What are we going to do about this body, you see? Just going to knock it off or something? Well, we can't do that because it'd make too many people feel bad. We are responsible to too many people, and so on. And the fellow just—he'll just go into apathy on the thing. Actually, he gets out and gets a new body and gets going, why, he's a roaring streak of fire! I mean, there's nothing wrong with the way he acts. But he's just conditioned down to the fact, he realizes he's part of a chain gang now. He's part of the chain gang of "let's all feel sympathetic."
Now, you're going to have preclears, people come to you, people talk to you simply because they want to get rid of the body. The funny part of it is, if you simply make them free as a thetan, the urgency of getting rid of this particular body and their feeling that it must not be violated in some fashion or other after death or so on, the idea of making it persist and other people's other-determinism

97

98

25 NOVEMBER 1953
making it persist and so on—this all gets very pale. Now, I just handled such a case and I'm talking in fact. If you don't make the thetan able while exteriorized, he is not going to carry through.
Now, we have an auditor here who is processing somebody, who, if this auditor had not concentrated on ability while exteriorized—ability while exteriorized, you understand—if he'd concentrated on the body and insisted on the body being patched up all the time, he just would have compounded the felony. But by just making the thetan able, why, the person is still alive. The case was so bad off, that the first impulse of a thetan, if the thetan had gotten free, was simply to kill the body—bang—and shoved off. But the thetan didn't do so. The thetan went on and got free and cruised around and so forth. And so the body he happens to have there is not in very good shape; well, he's not playing the role of superownership all the time. He hasn't got to protect this body, he hasn't got to be stuck there on the zero Tone Scale all the time—subzero Tone Scale—and gets away with it.
What basically, what fundamentally, is wrong with any case that has anything wrong with it? It isn't the body. But if the person doesn't exteriorize easily, they're on a lock-up and a maybe of this character: "If I take my attention off of the body, it'll disappear." Just like, "If I take my attention off that anchor point, the anchor point will vanish." You see, they pretty well believe that that body's got to be kept running by their direct attention on it. See, that's not true. The body will go on functioning without that direct attention. And "I don't dare let other people take their attention off of this body. Because, of course, it'll just disappear and perish. Because it depends exclusively on other people's attention to survive."
Now you ask this character to pull his attention off of this body, and to pull other people's attention off of this body, and be outside the body? Oh no— no you don't! He's going to be right there.
He's got a lock-up of machinery which starts in and says, "Got to have attention." See? This is machinery to get attention. You could have seen him when very young, probably—or when she was very young—doing various things, and acquiring various parlor tricks of various kinds, you know, and peculiar expressions and methods of speech, and doing odd things, any one of which, you see, would get attention. And then later on, these things, one after the other, each one, would get the wrong kind of attention. You know, Papa, Mama, others, decide this was bad, and so they'd have to set up machinery to prevent that attention from occurring. So they've set up machinery to prevent attention occurring because they've developed these parlor tricks and methods of speech and so forth. Now, there's machinery to cancel machinery.
Now they found out they didn't have enough attention, so they had to go out and do something else and something new in the line of more attention of some other kind, and then they got too much attention for this—this being this society, after all—and they had to set up immediately, reverse machinery.
And eventually, when they've done this just so often—if they've run into this when they've got a body, it half-dies, they leave it, they decide they've got to come back and revive it—oh no! See, all this machinery just goes into a supertangle—"Do I want attention? No, that's painful. I'm liable to be hit. I've got to have attention because they insist I survive. They're trying to give me attention, I don't want it. I want attention basically if I'm going to live at all, but this body is nothing to get attention with. After all, the body is frail, and if I try to take my attention off the body, it'll perish and that'll let everybody down because I'm responsible to all these people, and they're the ones that are

SOP 8 -C, SUMMARY OF
making it live, I'm not. To hell with them." And they go through this uhh-rowr-rawr-rowr—and they're going through this continually.
So they have other people's attention on them—they know they can't break this off because their machinery to do that has gone into apathy. And their own attention set up to the body—to keep their own attention on the body—first they had machinery to keep attention on the body, and then they set up various machinery, you see, to keep their attention from being totally on the body. You see, an automatic driving machine, for instance, or an automatic piano-playing machine is just some machine so you won't have to put attention on the body. But right away, you had—you started to play the piano in order to have attention put on the body and put your own attention on the body. Then you make it—as soon as you get it automatic, you see, you get it automatic in order to cancel earlier types of attention. And it just goes on in this endless cycle.
Well, this guy gets into this tremendous jam-up. He's just nyarrr! He doesn't know quite which way to go and what attention to relieve first. And the result is, he acts like everything is locked up by everything else. He's a logjam. Now, theoretically, all you have to do is wiggle one log and out he'll go. See, the dam will go. Well, he doesn't dare let that dam go, because if you lose the attention on the body—or attention will swing in on the body so sharp that he won't be able to withstand it. And there's his problem, Mr. Anthony, right there.
What does the logjam consist of? Basically, it consists of an automaticity which, in its prior section, is demanding attention; in its middle section, demanding that attention persist; and later in the middle section, that the attention desist; and then, finally, machinery and automaticity which just downright demands that attention stop. All the while, he's going along self-determinedly over the top of all this machinery which he keeps setting up, trying to live something vaguely resembling a life with some equilibrium. Meantime, all of his personal attention is just being eaten up by these relay systems which feed attention into all the banks and keep everything going full automatic.
Blackness is one of his methods of just... He can't unmock the stuff because it's there not to be destroyed, it must persist and so on. So he just starts painting everything black. He starts painting everything black. He's got more automatic machinery to paint things black with than you can count. He only has to take over parts of this machinery.
But basically, what would be the basic machine that you could run on any case that'd resolve the case? You can just run those three machines—wasting them in brackets, saving them in brackets, accepting them, desiring them, being curious about, in brackets each time—machines which cause one to receive attention, which cause one to give attention to others, which causes attention to persist, which causes attention to desist, and which causes attention from others to stop, which causes one's own attention towards others to stop. And this is the basic machinery to end all machinery.
And when he first starts to waste one of these machines, by the way, you can fully expect that your preclear, after a few minutes, will be able to waste one eye-bolt hole on one piece of equipment, which he cuts off delicately with a hacksaw so as not to destroy the rest of the machinery. Because attention is real scarce and real precious and any machine that'll help anybody make it, boy, that's right there. That's the machine we got to have. That's it. All right.
You could say this is the basic solution of any case: An analysis and handling of its problems of attention.

99

100

25 NOVEMBER 1953
What is it using to get attention? What is it using to prevent attention? And then solving it on the basis that it has set up equipment to get this attention and to refuse this attention automatically, without any further glance.
But one word of warning about this process: It should be run, it has to be run, on a thetan exteriorized. One word of warning about it: You start pushing a thetan to get rid of all the machinery he's got that'll get attention, and you are running into a thetan who's going to either start lying like hell to you or resisting like mad. So take it easy. It's like pulling toys away from a little kid. It may seem aberrated to you, but it's attention to him or it prevents one from getting attention he doesn't want.
Now do you understand this better?
Okay.

Electronic Theory, Anchor Points
A lecture given on 26 November 1953

This is November the 26th, first morning lecture, Thanksgiving. This morning I'm going to talk to you about two things with which auditors are very indifferently acquainted. One of the reasons why they're indifferently acquainted with them is because about the only time I ever mention them is in what you might call a bull session, or in answering questions. And the only time I ever address this subject is when I'm auditing. And I think it's about time I said something about it, and I may or may not ever mention it again.
It's electronic structure—talking about electronic structure. The reason why I don't mention it, is talking about it is sort of like standing here giving you an hour's lecture on the fact that there's a chandelier in the room. See? And I just keep overlooking the thing, because obviously we have chandeliers. And it is borne home to me repeatedly, time after time after time after time, that nobody's looking at these chandeliers in terms of electronic structure. Nobody ever notices it. Now, how they manage not to notice it is what I ought to be talking about, not its existence. But I'll give you both what it is, and the remedy for the pc who cannot address the subject comfortably. All right.
We have, in electronic structure, something which is senior to what has been called anatomy. And let me be very blunt about this: The auditor is not interested in human anatomy; he's not interested in psychosomatic illness. I just say this over and over and over. Please don't get so interested in it. Because if you get interested in it, then you start to process toward it and you're processing, you might say, the center of something, where you should be processing both ends.
You understand? You're processing the superillusion of all illusions— anatomy—if you start to process psychosomatics and so on. Senior to everything which can be classified as medical anatomy—senior to this—is electronic structure. You're not very interested, really, in what it is that makes the body get so solid or unsolid or have a medulla oblongata or how many strings are there on a tibia. (The tibia is a leg bone, it's not a musical instrument.) (audience laughter)
The point here is that this entire universe, entire universe, is a system of anchor points. And amongst and between these anchor points, there is a fill-in. These anchor points are of one wavelength. You'd call this, for the thetan, a "bridge wavelength." And between these points, there's this stuff that you call atomic and molecular substance.

101

102

26 NOVEMBER 1953
Now, if you're simply interested in atomic and molecular substance, you ought to just crack a physics textbook. If you're interested in atomic and molecular substance in terms of bodies, I refer you to a book on anatomy: chap by the name of Gray wrote one once which is quite embracive. But that is embracive within electronic structure only. And to understand how a body functions in terms of anatomy is quite a trick, since it doesn't function in terms of anatomy.
Now, that's a very, very wonderful thing. How—another thing that's wonderful about it is how people can go on studying dead tissue to discover the behavior of live tissue. This again is just something else. It doesn't work. They don't learn anything. There are all kinds of weird ideas turn up, and chemical companies and drug companies make billions of dollars, and maybe it's worthwhile just from that standpoint—they make so much money out of it.
But when you as an auditor start to get interested in atoms, molecules, in the form of anatomy which is malformed to the point of a psychosomatic illness, why, you've got real trouble on your hands! You're in the wrong bin, doing the wrong thing. I don't care how many pleas are laid in your lap, I don't care how many checks are put in your bank account, you're just going to beat yourself to pieces if you consistently and continually audit at a psychosomatic illness or audit at a pair of glasses or audit at a ruined leg or something like that, you see—or audit at diabetes or cancer or anything. You're in the wrong bin, you're in the wrong field.
You want to do something about these things that's practical and accepted and so forth, go over into the field of medicine and bungle there. But don't think you're going to produce results in terms of Scientology and the human energy unit, which is—can be called a "thetan" or a "soul" or a "Q factor" or a "causation point" or a "you" or any—I don't care what you call it or what name you put to it. You're not dealing with that the second that you're dealing with something as utterly, stupidly sordid as this stuff called atoms, molecules. And when you start to deal in atoms and molecules formed up as medical anatomy, when you start dealing with that, you're almost down the chute.
And it's like trying to fix a huge tractor with a little pair of electrical pliers or something. You know? That's the only tool you're going to use, and this is all we're going to address. And then the only things we're going to have anything to do with on the tractor, of course, are just those things which this little tiny tool which you've selected, which it touches—which would probably be the tips of the ignition wires or something of the sort. And if the back wheel is off the tractor, you'd be in about the same boat in trying to fix it with these little tiny pliers and the ignition wires. I mean, you just can't get further from fact. I couldn't impress this on you enough. You just couldn't get further from doing anything. You might as well go down to the corner and loaf because practically nothing is going to happen.
In the first place, the only—if you go to deal with therapy, if we must introduce such a word, the only therapeutic agent in this universe or any other, is the human soul, the beingness, the thetan, the spirit, the individual, the causation point—well, whatever phrase you want, but it's that thing that is the therapeutic agent. To then relegate it to being a therapeutic agent, when its highest role is creativeness ... You see, let's just fall all the way downstairs, let's get completely degraded now.
Something else: It, in direct address, actually can create a structure, and put a structure back where it belongs, with great directness. So there's no sense in doing something terrifically indirect and so forth, like trying to fix up

ELECTRONIC THEORY, ANCHOR POINTS
somebody's toenail which insists on ingrowing. You might as well—well, why don't you put a new foot on the guy? I mean, it's more simple.
This universe has sold everybody on the idea of this tremendous scarcity. You see, scarcity, scarcity, scarcity, scarcity; so you look at a body and they say, "Oh, dear, this is the only body I'll ever have and so on, and what can we do to repair it?" Repair it, hell—throw it away. See, it's just senseless when you think in terms like that.
Well now, how do you throw a body away? Well, there's a gradient scale of throwing a body away. Well, you could start in that gradient scale by saying, "Throw away the bad portions of it." Well, the best way—how do you throw away a mock-up? You unmock it. And how do you put a good mock-up in its place? You mock one up. So if you follow that cycle whenever you're dealing with bodies, you're on pretty firm ground. But again, you're not really doing what you should be doing.
Electronic structure is that structure of anchor points which demark the space in which the illusion of atoms, molecules and functioning structure will occur. Electronic structure is a piece of space which demarks the limits of a functioning illusion. A functioning illusion is what is commonly called the body. And to run this into medicine, by the way, is as odd as to run it into dressmaking. You know, you'd have to know anatomy to make dresses. That's right, if you don't know that people have hips, you're going to get in trouble there every time.
Now, if you'd get over closer to the idea that you're making dresses or something of the sort, rather than into a field of medicine—or that you're being a tailor, you know, and you stand back with an artist's eye and say, "Well, let's see, I think the right arm is just a little short. Hm, yes"—you're in much better shape, you know, than saying, "Well now, let's see, what malady is this that causes the arm to be short? Now, let's look into the deep significance of this and after we've looked very carefully, we will do something as far removed from it as possible. And after we've found the source and cause of the illness, then we will cure that. And we will just leave it to God or luck that something will happen to the arm after the arm is cured of this deep significance we've discovered." You see that? You see—how far can you miss a boat? Well, you can be on the other side of the continent a couple of years after its sailing. And that's about what one does when he looks for the deep significance of an illness, you see, of a piece of MEST. See, it's real gorgeous.
I don't know how to actually impress this on you—it's continuously very clear to me and I continuously come a cropper in trying to explain it to people.
People, for instance, say, "Well, there is an illness known as cancer which eats up the body." You can say, "Yeah. Yeah. Sure. I'll agree with you. There's an agreed-upon condition known as cancer which occurs and which destroys a body. And, by the way, what are you doing for lunch?" You know? I mean, it's just about this same level of importance.
Well now, the wrong way to go about this, you see—and we'll take the subject of cancer. If we've got to go into medicine, what do we do? We go into the subject of cancer, and we've got to go into medicine. And now we've got to go deeper and deeper, and now we go into the causation of cancer, which may or may not be a cell gone wild and it may or may not be an embryonic effort or it may or may not be—what's that name—something protoblast or something of the sort. You can get more wonderful names, see, of causation.
And then we can all think very hard, and we could put up big pictures of this structure so everybody gets it, you see, and we could say how horrible it

103

104

26 NOVEMBER 1953
is, and go around and get a couple of nickels on the drum in order to form a big society or something of the sort, to put up more pictures to give more people cancer and—this is the wrong way to go about it.
You as an auditor subscribe to this and you say, "Well, let's see. Cancer, cancer, what can I do for cancer?" You can't do a darn thing for cancer—you're not in medicine. You just can't do a darn thing for cancer. Not a thing. Skip it. And when I say we have a cure for cancer or we don't have a cure for cancer, we're talking in the wrong dichotomy. See? We're just—it's off the subject.
Now, is there an ugly illusion possible or is there a nice illusion possible? Well, of course, anybody can have any kind of an illusion he wants. Somebody wants cancer? Okay, they got cancer. Fine. Of course, it's kind of a dumb pony that can only get one kind of an illusion to attract some attention, see. Oh, that's dramatic stuff, there's no doubt about it. If you handle it like a playwright or drama, you'll understand what's happening. And you might even be mean enough to go into the field of electronic structure and "unhappen" it!
Now, what do you do about anatomy and structure and looks and aesthetics and all that sort of thing? Well, decide what you want, and have it! I mean, let's not go into—"Let's see, what is wrong with it? Now validate what is wrong with it. Now how do we repair what is wrong with it? And after we've repaired what is wrong with it, just sort of leave it up to God or Morris Fishbein or the national medical health society or somebody to make sure then that after the illness is cured, that something else happens.
And the funny part of it is that anybody who has treated disease, treated malformations, treated anything of this character—anyone who has treated these things, has, in the last analysis, sort of stopped where he should have begun and said, "From here on out, God will have to take a hand in it. The ultimate repair will have to be done by the body." Penicillin works, when it works, only because the body cleans up the bacteria. Penicillin doesn't do a thing to it. Isn't that interesting? Even a biochemist knows that. It's the recovery power of the body which knocks out disease.
Well, what puts back pattern? What puts back function? Well, we just sort of just all leave that up to Morris Fishbein or something. I mean, I don't know— it's something like fixing trucks by shooting the tires off of them! It's a pool of error and inexplicable complication which probably makes a lot of fellows a lot of interest, that an auditor has no business in. See, just no business in.
Somebody comes to you and somebody says, "Well, this person has cancer." And if you are so thoroughly in agreement with the society that you immediately jump up and assume a role which you shouldn't have, and say, "All right, I'm going to cure some cancer," you've just sold yourself down the river. What do you know, your own techniques won't work. Huh!—not worth a nickel. It isn't belief at all, you've got a beautiful tool kit and you're going to use all of the micrometer calipers and so forth for hammers. You're just in the wrong— wrong department.
Somebody tells you, "Now this person has cancer. What can you do for them?" This person has cancer. The person you treat is incapable—actually incapable of deteriorating very much, except as he changes his mind. The person you're—you treat steps two feet back of his head or three feet back of his head and is very, very easily in various portions of the area, and very easily creates things. That's who you (quote) "treat" (unquote). You don't treat this person with cancer.
What would you tell somebody like that? You say, "Well, if he—if I straightened him up, why, he might be able to do something about the cancer.

ELECTRONIC THEORY, ANCHOR POINTS
Who knows?" See? And you just go right ahead with the job of Theta Clearing. After a while you say to this fellow, "By the way, you want to do something about the cancer? And, if you want to ..." and so on. You keep mentioning, "Do you want to do something about it now? Well, go ahead and do it. I don't care what you do. I mean, it's my office, don't leave any dead bodies around in it." (laughter) But you just—just get that fixation of attention off of the horribleness of illness and all of the rest of that.
Did you ever see an artist out there with a big canvas and so forth and he's busy painting, and he all of a sudden starts worrying about how he's going to repair what he's painted. Well, that picture just never gets painted, that's all. He just never gets a picture. I've known artists like this up in Greenwich Village. They were normally failed—completely failed. They were clear down in the Village—they were really artists, you know?
And these boys, one time, had accidentally dropped some paint on a canvas— it spilled off the palette or something, you know, and it got on the canvas. And then they kind of repaired that and scraped it off and redid it and repaired it and fixed it up and repaired it. And there's nobody—even in the Village, you wouldn't find people who agreed they had a picture.
You want a picture. You want a being. And the point you should make, is just to boost somebody right on up the scale till he can have a picture—till he can paint one, not patch one. And anytime you stop at "patch," you're in trouble.
Now, you probably think I'm saying a lot of things and they—probably going through with various interpretations, but we're kind of outside the field of MEST language here—nobody's ever talked about this sort of thing before. He's talked about the electronic structure of illusion and that's what the electronic structure is. And you can have almost any kind of an illusion you want within the confines of this frame.
You got a frame, and there's a blank piece of canvas as far as you're concerned. And there's anything in that blank piece of canvas you want to put there. But you have to adjust the frame once in a while. You know, it's pretty hard to make a picture where the frames are—you know, you've got a five-inch right-side frame and a five-inch left-side frame, and there's only a quarter of an inch of canvas between the two. It's a little bit difficult to get a picture in that; the frame sort of overweighs it or something of the sort.
Well, if you're going to have a picture, you sort of have to adjust this piece of space. And electronic structure is the electronic anchor points, the points which demark space; and by their adjustment, you can form a frame in which you can place any illusion, even a body, if you've got to have a body. See? It's kind of handy to have a body around in this society because people look at the body and say, "He's human." (Heh! Damn fools!) And they're very handy. It communicates along a certain linguistic pattern. It's the easy thing to do—the easy thing to do. It'd be a little more startling to—you'd have a hard time with zookeepers and things like that if you went around as a lion wearing pants or something of the sort—there's no reason why you couldn't.
If during these six weeks, if I could just somehow or other pry loose your imaginations—pang! I would have done practically everything I could do for you. The poor, poor man, he gets into these terrifically bogged spots like US, 1953—gets into these bogged spots and everybody, from the time he's the tiniest little child, they say, "Oh, you're just imagining it all, that's your imagination. Oh, isn't that something . . ." You know, pang, pang, pang! That's all he's got! I mean, let's disenfranchise him completely. That's all he's got. He hasn't anything else. He never will have anything else. The world is as bright to him

105

106

26 NOVEMBER 1953
as he can create a reality. And the function of imagination is the creation of a reality.
Education, for instance, takes imagination and forms it into reason. By disciplining the imagination, people can even make geometry come true. Modern school systems, by the way, teach geometry and have it in their textbooks as "the way people think." Isn't that glorious! I mean, they've got geometry, the Aristotelian syllogism, as logic. My God, Aristotelian syllogism hasn't been declared logic even in the worst scientific circles since about 1500, and now it's finally gotten into the American high school. In the geometry textbooks being published today it says that in so many words: "this is the way people think." This is the way Aristotle thought people thought. But gee, he thought a lot of things. Natural history is an invention of Aristotle. And he thought a lot of things. Oh, he corrupted more people! But, boy, he sure never imagined a thing. He had an Aristotelian syllogism: A = B and B = C, so therefore, A equals—get those equal signs—A = C. Oh, no! Never did, never will.
One boy who carried the torch against this was so hot about it that his banner was on high practically all the years of his life. And he had the symbol "null-A." And that was Mr. Korzybski. "Null-A." His plaintive cry against the universe was: "Why, in the name of God, did anybody ever invent a syllogism!" You want to know your general semantics and so forth, why, you just take it from Aristotle—and then shoot him, and you've got it. Because that's identification: One thing which isn't that thing is that thing. All right.
Crush a man's imagination, you've crushed the man. Because out of his imagination is born his dreams. That's all he's composed of. He looks so solid, he's so convincing, but the biggest convincingness and the greatest solidity he'll ever have is that which he puts there. And if this is to be cursed, and if the idea that a man can impose with his will a new reality, on a piece of space of his own creation—if that's bad, why, we're all done. We really are, right that moment that that becomes completely bad. Because that's all you can do. It's practically the swan song of a thetan: that he cannot imagine anymore.
Let's take a look, then, at this thing called structure. And if we're interested in a body, we see that the body must perforce exist in a framework of space. It so happens that a body is so agreed upon that it is a set unit. It's a set unit of space. And when the limitations of that unit are themselves deranged or disturbed, the space itself distorts, which causes an immediate distortion of the illusion within that framework.
Now, when I say framework, I mean point one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. And I'm talking about a three-dimensional frame. And a body has a three-dimensional frame. And it knows it has an arm because it has an electronic framework which demarks an arm. The entire control function of the arm is run by, through, and because of the electronic structure of the arm. How complex is this structure? Well, honest, arithmetic is too complicated to describe it. It's that simple.
Now, the reason it's overlooked by auditors is because auditors seldom can see them at first glance. Their vision or perception, exteriorized, is pretty poor. Real poor. You get most Step Is, when they step out, why, they think their own vision is just a little bit brighter or a little bit worse than their MEST vision. Ah, there's no comparison. I mean, it's like what's the fleck of gold— iron pyrites and actual gold color, and the difference between.
Now, when you see that people are accustomed, and have tuned down their perception to this point, it's no wonder that they don't immediately get smote in the face and see electronic structure.

ELECTRONIC THEORY, ANCHOR POINTS
For instance, I stand here with MEST eyes, I see a whole flock of bodies. Some good-looking, some poised, all of them better-looking than they were a while ago—bodies. That's because this body—with this body I have agreed to perceive people. But I have to tune myself around, exteriorized—outside— which is where I do most of my looking. Somebody asked me, last night, he said: "Now take a look with your body's eyes." Gee, I had to get out a polishing rag and all kinds of things and polish them up and so forth. It's—they practically don't see at all, you know. And you go through a lot of motions with your eyes and you go through a lot of this, and you track them with a couple of viewpoints— just to make sure that they're pointed in the right direction and so forth—and it's just very interesting structure.
But exteriorized, you have to tune your vision around a little bit, if your perception is real good, to find a body. What you'll see is the electronic structure. You just see it—bing! And particularly if people have been presenting themselves to you who say consistently that they're in remarkably poor condition. So you just tune up to what is important about them, which is their—the anchor points which compose that framework of the body, which permits the body to exist.
The anchor points: This framework is composed of a number of gold sparks or little tiny balls or large gold balls, which themselves, if they are in an excellently well-arranged pattern, and if they are in the pattern which creates the illusion—you know, they're in that piece of framework which will create the proper illusion of the body—then the body's in good shape. And if they are out of line or if they are disturbed or shattered or gone, then the body is distorted at those points where they are distorted.
Now, it's this bad—you can move one of these things, with great ease, a couple of inches, and the fellow has a new joint. I mean, it's that bad. Actually, I've seen this happen two or three times now: I've seen people get almost sick at a leg bending at the wrong joint. You know, no joint there, it's bending or something. If you want to produce a magical fakirism, you know, that's a good trick—just move the anchor points around. But normally, what happens if you don't move the anchor points right and in proper alignment, this sort of a thing occurs: the arm simply distorts or hurts.
Now, let's take the other side of it. Let's look at it from a direction which you're accustomed to look at something, and that is, a wrist is sprained. Well, you'd treat a sprained wrist—that's looking at it from the psychosomatic side. Now, we can treat a sprained wrist and we can do all sorts of things to it. There's an electronic pattern holding the sprain in place. Well, the subpattern is the facsimile of the sprain itself. Back in Dianetics we used to do a lot of this: we erase the sprain and so on. But there's a much faster way of doing it in Scientology: you simply put the anchor point back. There goes the sprain (snap). Very curious.
Now, if you don't see the anchor points which enclose the space of that wrist, if you don't even look at them, if you paid no attention to them at all, and you went on massaging the wrist, you could actually—a guy would go on there for weeks and weeks, maybe years, with a wrist in bad shape, or weak, or poor condition. Why? Because the space in which the wrist exists is distorted and, of course, no—nothing but a distorted illusion can then be in that pattern.
So, let's look at the structure we want to look at as gold points arranged in certain patterns around the body. Now, where are they? We don't pay any attention to what they're doing to the body, particularly. If you look at a body and see that something is wrong with it, or if you look at somebody who's having a bad time exteriorizing—same deal—what you want to pay attention to is

107

108

26 NOVEMBER 1953
the electronic structure of the space, which is this body. See? Electronic structure of a space.
And this wouldn't merit any consideration if it merely did something for psychosomatic ills. But in view of the fact that it does quite a lot for exteriorizing people, I want to stress it. Might never talk about this again, but you certainly had better know what you're doing with this because you're going to be—you'll very often just practically beat your brains out, thetawise, trying to figure out what's wrong with this preclear. And the answer, if he's pinned down or if his body is in malformed condition or he's in consistent pain with collapsed terminals and can't handle the body well, the answer is in this sentence: He has body-space anchor points, one or more, disarranged. And the remedy is, return to him the ability to perceive and rearrange the anchor points of the body.
Now, where are these things located? They—a lot of Theta Clears say kind of sadly, once in a while, "You know," they say, "the—you know, a physical body's anchor points used to be out there a couple of hundred yards." Or some of them will tell you they used to be out there a quarter of a mile, or something like that. Big, you know. Big space. They aren't anymore; they're pretty close in. They're in terms of yards ordinarily. And up to the right and up to the left and varying anywheres from twenty feet to twenty yards out, there will be a big golden ball, and there'll be a lot of little smaller patterns of points out there. Because the structure's not entirely inside the body, any more than it's entirely outside the body. So these are the wing points. Well now, the body has other of those wing points similar to that, but that's about the furthest out that it has, at first inspection anyway, and as far as you want.
Now, a thetan—you can make him mock up an anchor point up there and push it around and it just goes—just sort of goes around, you know; he pushes it around and it stays there, and it goes around someplace else. Well, a very funny thing about the GE anchor points—the body's anchor points—you give one of them a push, and after you've pushed it, it'll wander back into place; it'll come back into place. It doesn't disappear, it just—out it goes, back it'll float, up it'll float. And you can push it in on the body, you can pull it in toward the body, and almost anything's liable to happen emotionally to the body, you see. It's—you're changing its space. And it can get frantic, and it can get calm, and it can do various things with its anchor point patterns to utterly alter the emotional pattern of the body. All right.
Where are the rest of these? Now, we've often talked about "control centers," haven't we? Well, these control centers are anchor points of this same nature. All through the body and all around the body, anyplace there is a nerve connection, you will find adjacent to this nerve connection, that which demarks its space and keeps it created: the anchor point.
Now, that means you would find a big one in the heel of the hand; you'd find them in each finger—several; and you would find one in the wrist, you would find one in the funny bone, you would find one inside the crook of the elbow, you would find one in the shoulder, you would find one each side of the back of the neck, you would find them all down the spine. (When somebody manipulating a spine has produced any effect at all, he's actually succeeded in pushing one of these anchor points back, not a vertebra.) And you'll find them inside the head and you'll find them around the eyes.
And very often, some preclear will complain of a burning sensation or something in his body; and you can do a lot for that without producing any particular relief on his part until you bring him into an ability to perceive where the anchor point is. And he perceives where it is and you say, "Now

ELECTRONIC THEORY, ANCHOR POINTS
shove it back into place," and he does, and it sort of goes "click," and after that, why, gee—all of a sudden he's got brighter vision as a body, you see, or he has a relief of a chronic flow which was going on in an area, or there is actual—a distortion of feature which is remedied.
The handling of these things is elementary. How anybody can miss seeing them, I don't know. It's something like—I feel like a fool talking to you about it, you see, because I think I'm talking to you about the fact that there's a wall up here in the front of the room. I feel I just spent lots of time telling you there—in the front of the room there's this wall, see, and that makes the space in which the room—part of the space in which the room exists; and back there is another wall, and over there is another wall, and over here is a wall with the windows, and amongst these you've got some space, that gives you a room, you know? And then I go all over it again and I say, "Well, there's a front wall up here. Now, do you see? Now I want you to be—very carefully perceive this front wall." I don't know how people miss these things. It's something like walking up to a searchlight which is turned on full right in your teeth, and not seeing it. It's just too bright, I guess, or something. Of course, you don't quite want to see these things—they make you look like a Tinkertoy set—no rods.
But the reason I'm talking about it is because I picked up a pc last night who has a bad arm and who, unwisely, as far as auditor's concerned, continues to be processed to remedy the condition of this arm. Now, this is a silly thing to do. That's a real silly thing to do.
You see why it's a silly thing to do? What should happen to this boy is, he should just be pushed right on upstairs as a thetan, you know? Until he's real bright and real perceptive and real alert and so forth. And it's interfering with his self-determinism not to: he might want another kind of body entirely. You know, he might want to change the space points around until he looks entirely different.
And last night I picked him up and I found out that nobody'd polished up his perception to a point where he could perceive his own anchor points. This was very peculiar. I mean, this is something like coming up to the scene of the accident and finding out nobody has put a tourniquet on somebody. I mean, it's just about that level of Theta Clearing, if we've got to compare it to medicine. See, I mean, this was—this was real, real weird omission. And it was finally carried home to me that the auditor was not aware of this.
And I thought a little bit further, and I said, "It's not possible that auditors aren't aware of this because I haven't called it to their attention." And I finally had to come to that conclusion because I've only mentioned it occasionally. And a lot of Theta Clears and I, when we gabfest about this and that, hardly ever fail to mention something about anchor points, because you're talking then about a basic unit of beingness, which is space. And it's just something you talk about like lunch or ... And here all of a sudden—this auditor obviously had never—never polished this up.
Well, gee, to straighten up this fellow's limb—if he had to straighten up his limb, he had two routes. One was just simply polish up the guy's perception and after a while the fellow would say, "Well, you know, I'm tired of having that arm. Flick. Flick. Pinch. Pinch. Square. Square. And bing, bing. And, I don't know, I think I'll remake the body too. Pinch. Bing. Shift. Bang." And that's the way, because thetans know how to do this when they get up along the line. All right.
The anchor point in his elbow was way out, the anchor points in his hand,
the crushed hand, were utterly out of align , they were all at sixes and eights,
and the anchor point in the wrist was out. And he hasn't been worked enough

109

110

26 NOVEMBER 1953
on just perception—just perception, not anchor points or any specialized kind of perception—to perceive the fact that the reason the arm remains in that condition is because the big anchor point at the end of the wrist bone (in the heel of the hand you might say, almost in that area), boy, it's smashed. It's just splintered. Boom. Well, that's all that's important about that (quote) "injury"— if we've got to talk about an injury.
I feel it's an imposition to talk about injuries. I'm no medico. I'm no sawbones. Hell, I've done my time in Siberia, everything else, but I've never gotten to the point where I had to saw on people to—for a living. Gee, if you're going to saw on people, eat them. Now, that's practical. It's like turkey. (audience laughter) In many societies, it's so regarded. There's one planet not too far from here, by the way, where they have a market where you go and have a good time, something like that, you buy five or six girls and take them home and eat them. I hate to bring in these crude realities! (audience laughter) Ah, well! And, of course, that's just about as silly as I feel in talking about these darn electronic structures.
The only way that—the only way to know about an electronic structure is to look at one. And the only way to look at one is to get one's perception up. And if you consistently overlook them, why, you just aren't perceiving, that's all. It isn't that you have to "have a second sight" or "fill something in" or "guess it's there" or something of the sort—you don't guess that my body's standing up here, do you? It's that real, you see it and that's that. I mean an anchor point's an anchor point, and a GE's electronic structure is there. It looks like a flock of little sparks and balls and arrangements and so on. It's not very complex. It's very interesting, if you want to pry into it.
Well, let me give you, very swiftly, a remedy for an inability to perceive and arrange them. And you must understand that the fact that they are badly out of line is quite often the reason why somebody doesn't get out of his head easily. And quite often, it's possible for you to fix this up before he exteriorizes. You know, he fixes it up. You get him into a state of perception where he fixes it up and then he's three feet back of his head, boom! I mean, this is the easiest method of clearing I know. It's just—the fact that it falls down once in a while—the fellow just can't do it, so on, makes it necessary for us to have these other techniques. But if you're going to do it the fast way, you just say, "Oh, you see that anchor point in your right temple? Anchor point in your left temple? All right. Well, now, get them into position."
And the fellow says, "Where—what—they out of position?" You know, and kind of in the center of his head, he goes krrr, pushes with one and it goes, click! And then pushes the other one, and it clicks into place—held in its proper framework, you know, in relationship to the other anchor points in the vicinity. Because it has a position; because they're in a position which is there because it has a position and everything is interrelated, one point to another. And it goes, click, and all of a sudden he doesn't have any flows or occlusion anymore and you can say, "Be three feet back of your head," and he is. That's all. I mean, that'd be very, very nice, but a lot of people can't do this, they get all fogged up, and you say, "Well, look at those anchor points in your temple and cure some of that temple flow that's going on there."
And the fellow says, "What temples?"
Well, you're kind of stumped. And you say, "In the body, of course."
And he says, "What body?"
And you say, "Well, the one you aren't in."
And he starts describing a body on the planet Zukiter or something. Mm! No, no, that—this case requires other treatment, obviously.

ELECTRONIC THEORY, ANCHOR POINTS
So let's go about this the simple way first and know why we have this spacation in brackets—making space in brackets.
Now, a fellow makes space in brackets and puts space around the body— if he's in a body, you see, he makes space in brackets. That is to say, he gets—he puts eight anchor points around himself, you see, and then he makes them disappear. And then he gets the idea of somebody else putting eight anchor points around himself and making them disappear. And then somebody putting eight anchor points around somebody else and making them disappear. And then somebody putting eight anchor points around him, as a body, if he's still interiorized—around him as a thetan if he's still exteriorized, if he's exte¬riorized already—and eight anchor points around him, and making them disappear. And himself putting eight anchor points around somebody else and making them disappear. And somebody putting eight anchor points out for somebody else, but around him. And somebody putting eight anchor points out around somebody else, but for somebody else. You understand that? That bracket was handed out to you yesterday. That's a bracket of six. All right.
We do that how long? We do that till the fellow can get gold anchor points. And we just keep this up till he gets good gold anchor points, until these things are nice and bright. Of course, flows will fly around and so forth, and then we start him putting anchor points around the house and around the building and around the basement and around the room. And the next thing you know, boy, he can get nice big gold anchor points. It doesn't take him very long to do this.
Now, if he's not exteriorized yet, why, we say—there's a lot of ways to do this: you can just look at him, but if that's too complicated, go and get an E-Meter or one of these probe meters and start passing it around or ask him questions until you've located where he has a chronic ridge. And then start—have him start mocking up anchor points and making them disappear on either side of the body where he has this ridge.
For instance, let's say he's got a ridge across his nose. He always talks about this ridge across his nose. Well, just have him mock up anchor points in its vicinity and make them disappear. Mock up anchor points in the vicinity and make them disappear. And mock up anchor points in the vicinity and make them disappear. Mock up anchor points in the vicinity and make them disappear. And all of a sudden he says, "What am I mocking up anchor points for? There is one there."
And you say, "There's one there? All right. Well, mock up some more anchor points and make them disappear. And mock up some more anchor points."
"There's a real bright one there," he says. "In fact, there's two. And they're not mine." (Meaning they belong to the body.) "And you know," he says, "one of them's in a different position than the other one."
And you say, "Well, why don't you just kind of move them forward, and just move them over so they'll be in the proper position with relationship to each other."
He does. They go click. The flows stop, the ridge stops and everything that's pinning him in his head stops. So he exteriorizes. You just say, "Be two feet back of your head."
The single difference between a person who exteriorizes easily, you might say—in terms of structure, if we must be in structure—we can talk a lot about a lot of reasons, but the single difference between a person who exteriorizes easily and one who doesn't exteriorize easily is that the person who exteriorizes

111

112

26 NOVEMBER 1953
easily has the majority of his electronic structure intact, and a person who doesn't exteriorize easily has some portion of his electronic structure disarranged or damaged. The repair of it is the manufacture and adjustment of these anchor points.
Now, I could draw you a beautiful three-dimensional map, undoubtedly, that would show you where every one of these things is, but it's something like drawing you a map to show you what a clock looks like, you know? I could draw you all kinds of pictures to show you this clock, and I could say, "Now this is—figure up here is twelve, and this figure down here is six and these other figures are here, and they're there, and the hands go around this way." And I could keep showing you these pictures of a clock. But it'd be much smarter, if you didn't know about a clock, to just simply get a clock and say, "This is a clock."
So that's the best way to do, for you, is to say: "Now, this is a clock. Any one of you have got a clock. Any one of you has one of these structural patterns. The thing to do is to brighten up your perception on anchor points, brighten up your perception in general—thousand ways to do it—and just brighten up your perception in general, one after the other, exercise after exercise, until these things become clearly visible to you."
Well, it doesn't matter whether you're "in your head" (unquote) or not. It doesn't matter whether you actually start out with any visio at all. You just do these exercises till you can see these points, and then you adjust the anchor points and out you go, bang!
This is of the essence; this is simplicity itself. But it's with great surprise that I watch an auditor who's had quite a little training, who's been exteriorized and so forth, fishing around endlessly with some preclear. I come in and I take a look at the preclear, and the preclear's got an anchor point out of line.
Well, what's wrong with this preclear? Well, part of his electronic structure is in a state of dispersal: ridges have set in between two anchor points, or some-thing of the sort. Actually the ridge is made possible by, if you please, the displacement of the anchor point. The anchor point isn't displaced because the ridge is there. Now you adjust the anchor point and put it in position, and the ridge has no further ability to stay there—bing, it's gone. You see, this is elementary.
Now, I look at some preclear being pushed around and beaten around and the auditor sweating and groaning and straining and so forth. And the audi-tor trying to run out the sinusitis or something, thinking, well, if he cures the psychosomatic illness—if the auditor becomes a doctor, then he'll make a Theta Clear. That's what the auditor's saying; that's the proposition he's running on. If he becomes a doctor, and turns into the field of medicine or turns into the field of psychiatry or psychology or something, he will make a Theta Clear. No, sir! He'll make a Theta Clear as a Scientologist, and that's the only way he'll make a Theta Clear. And he just might as well stick with it and stop validating all these reasons why the pc has attention ... You see why it defeats itself?
The pc offers you this twisted ear, which aches all the time. Well, what's he using it for? And you validate the mechanism which makes him win—he thinks. But to win that way, he's going to lose.
So if you start treating a psychosomatic illness, you are giving attention, on a sort of a spineless stimulus-response basis, to that machine which is producing something with which it can attract attention. And the fellow's been doing this for so long he doesn't want that kind of attention anymore, and yet the machine keeps on doing it. And you're right up against that type of automaticity. The second you begin to walk into the field of medicine, psychiatry, psychology— any specialized field which is organized to remedy and address illnesses and

ELECTRONIC THEORY, ANCHOR POINTS
that sort of thing, you're violating your own basic tenets of operation to the degree that you won't get the job done.
Now, because this young boy shows up with a withered arm—the auditors on it did a pretty good job, by the way, but because he shows up with a withered arm, these auditors get all in a flurry and a flussy about this withered arm. And they start doing things with and treating the withered arm. They did this to a point where, because I noticed it and that many days after being processed it should have been in good shape—and because I noticed this, I had to, some degree, validate it by making him make it disappear a few times. And then I went right to work on perceptions. Anchor points, anchor points, perception of anchor points—bring his perception up. Didn't take very long to bring his perception up to a point where I asked him to look at his right arm and find them. Then I brought his perception up a little higher, "Now look at the right arm and see if you can find some anchor points. Now bring your perception up a little higher. Now look at the right arm."
Oh, he finally saw them. Now he's—finally is looking at them.
"All right. Now, get a look at the pattern of them in the right arm. Now fix them up that way in the left arm."
And he jockeyed back and forth and he finally found one.
He completely overlooked though—and because it was late I didn't go on with it; I've got to grab him yet—his perception isn't up high enough, that's all. He completely overlooked the most obvious, glaring thing.
Is that light in the chandelier there? I mean, is it obvious to you that there's a light in the chandelier? Well, it's this obvious to anybody who wants to look, that the main anchor point at the termination of the wrist bones, in that point of space, is smashed to smithereens. It looks like a small atom bomb that's gone off and half-done the job. And that's what's wrong with his arm.
Well, this would have been remedied if the persons involved had simply gone on with Scientology. You see that? If they'd just gone on with Scientology, which is the rehabilitation of a thetan. Hasn't anything to do with rehabilitating some product of a thetan. Just rehabilitating the thetan until he can create and cause to persist and cause to desist and get rid of those things which fall below an optimum solution for survival. And you do anything else than that, you're just interfering with him.
I quite commonly process some preclear whose relatives or friends tell me consistently about the preclear's health. They keep talking to me about the preclear's health. Just how non sequitur can we get! True enough, the preclear's health will interfere with the speed of processing, but the second that you pay attention to it or validate that state of health, you've slowed your case down remarkably. Just stay right straight there with Theta Clearing and make a good thetan. Every time you start a case, just make a good thetan.
Now, he keeps complaining about the body: why, you're not getting his anchor points up and getting his perceptions up so he can see anchor points, you're getting his perceptions up so he can operate. And you get them up so high, he'll start looking at the body without your even calling attention to it.
Now, you can do this kind of work by exteriorizing somebody and then just tell him to fix up the body. But, by golly, in about 25 or 30 percent of the cases you do that to, he'll look at the body—he was all right up to that moment; the second you asked him to look at the body, his perceptic level was so small he couldn't perceive this for the first time from the outside, it was such a shock, such a surprise to him, that it caved him in and he went right

113

114

26 NOVEMBER 1953
back into the body. And the next auditor that got him had a job on his hands! You get the idea?
This idea of asking somebody to look at a body after he's outside is dynamite! And you sure better know what you're doing. Well, as an auditor, you better be very clear about that preclear. I don't ask anybody to look at his body until I see the guy's in awfully good condition. He might not be in good condition for a heck of a long time.
But sometimes I will ask him to be the space of his body and be the space behind his body and be the space in front of his body and be the space of his body and be the space of the room and be the space of the body and be the space behind the body. What are we doing there? All we're trying to do is get the guy some space. We're just getting him to take a long breath, one way or the other, and we're exercising a thetan. See, we're getting his attention off of that body—so we can work with him. Not because we want anything to do with a body. Bodies are sometimes pretty, they're sometimes aesthetic, they are sometimes carrion, but they're never important. Never! And when a Scientologist forgets that primary principle, he's forgotten all he knows.
When you address and suborn Theta Clearing to the repair of a unit organism, why, you're just using some tiny, tiny, tiny little scrap of what you can do and saying that little tiny, tiny scrap is all. Because Scientology was never, never designed, and isn't at this moment designed to repair psychosomatic illnesses or remedy bodies or fix up aberration. It was designed entirely to make good Operating Thetans who could create and cause to persist and cause to desist and get rid of what they pleased. And that's its entire goal. And the second that you've got that fixed firmly in mind and that is the goal, and the second your processing itself heads toward that goal—why, boy, will you be a roaring success as an auditor! And until that time—uhh! No. So let's just change the postulate on this.
The body can give trouble on exteriorization because you're trying to take the thetan out of a piece of warped space, if you please. And you can pick up his perception while he's interiorized to a point where you can readjust the anchor points that are holding him in the body. And I don't know how far you could go with this, but you can go a heck of a long ways. And the way you would do this would be simply to run brackets of space around him until his perception was real good, and he could see them real good, and then you get him to look around himself and adjust these anchor points. And that's all there is to it.
Okay?

Additional Remarks: Electronic Theory, Anchor Points
A lecture given on 26 November 1953

There is hardly anybody here, if you didn't ask him to shut his eyes—just do this for a moment, I'll show you what a mirror is—shut your eyes and look around you, in front of you or down on the floor or someplace or another and see if you find a picture of your body being reflected some way or the other.
Male voice: Mm.
Find one? I asked a pc one time to break one of these things, and for about three days he was in the doldrums. I've never asked anybody to break one since. They're very hard to find—they're hard centers of explosions and things like that, made up. Guys pack them around and pack them around and pack them around. Isn't that—those mirrors curious? Find any of them? Sometimes the one on the left side is reflecting the one on the right side—the right side of the body—and the one in front of the body is reflecting the back of the body. It's a mirror maze. You expect a thetan to get into that mirror maze and go boom, see. He'll never arrive, and there's all kinds of purposes on these mirror schemes.
Like the fellow one time was moaning the fact that he'd had to run a certain facsimile and the auditor kept insisting on it. And this was a long time ago, and I wondered why he was so upset about it.
And I found out about a year later. I was chewing up some energy—trying to use a technique to chew up some energy. And I was outside and making a couple of auxiliary beams chew it up to see how it was, and finally found out as I got down to it—I suddenly remembered the piece of energy I was chewing up, I had gone around and looked for. I had looked all over the place for that facsimile. It was complete minus affinity, that piece of energy was, you see? It was about the hardest piece of energy you could possibly run into. And I'd looked for it for a long time, and I'd finally found it. And you'd say, "What would a person want of a piece of energy of that hardness, of that thickness and so forth?" Well, you use it as a wedge; you drop it on people.
You know what a guillotine blade is?
Male voice: Mm-hm.
Well, gee-whiz. A guy's gone around and gone to all this trouble, see, to get this beautiful solid piece of energy which, when sliced down on something or something, will cut it. And then you just thoughtlessly chew it all up. I all of a sudden knew what he was talking about. Not that I had ever used such a wedge on anybody, but you just keep these things around—like sometimes you look in your trunk, you'll find the .45 you had in the war or something like

115

116

26 NOVEMBER 1953
this—it's a sentimental attachment, totally. And some guys will collect black-jacks, and so on.
Of course, a hard energy wedge of that character has many, many uses besides that. But when you've looked all around to find the worst possible facsimile you could steal off of anybody, see, rather than go through all of the work of pumping affinity out of something for a half a dozen years or something of the sort to get a hard block of energy, and then you blow it up with Admiration Processing, just to find out if Admiration Processing works. You find out Admiration Processing works, but then you say, "Gee-whiz, where's that hard piece of energy I used to have around here?" and you suddenly realize that was it.
Of course it blew up into a big facsimile—soft, mushy and softer and mushier and softer and mushier and poom! there it went. And I'd been keeping that around in the war bag for a long time.
And I was very amused at myself for worrying about this, because I mocked one up the next day that worked just as effectively—I dropped it on a cat just to test it out, and promptly had to patch up a cat. Worked very well, very well.
This is very—an awful lot of stuff of this character that you guys will run into one way or the other in slamming around the universe and being here and being there and visiting this planet and talking with that one and chin-chinning one day with the wind gods, and you'll find this and you'll find that, and you collect this and you collect that. And my God, by the time you ask somebody to move out of his body, he gets the thought of leaving all this beautiful furniture behind and he says, "No, no. I can't get out of my head." See, his havingness would be almost destroyed.
By the way, a person gets into this kind of a situation about controlling bodies through this process—through this process. He's lost another body than his own, see? She couldn't get some man to stay or do something, or he couldn't get some girl or woman to stay with him or do something. So therefore, a marital breakup or something like that very often brings about a condition where a person begins to be anxious about controlling the body and so clamps down on it very hard, and then he's afraid of losing it because it's very scarce, because he's just been taught a lesson: He can lose a body.
And by the way, just because you have weapons—just on weapons and things like that—just because you have weapons is no reason you use weapons. And they—you don't need them, but they, again, furnish randomity. And just because a thetan has certain things he's collected—like some old Fac One suit, you know? And he'll be kicking around one day, and . . . Somebody, just for randomity under processing very often will run into some blackness or something and say, "Oh, I'm in terrible shape." They've got this old Fac One suit, and he's got this and he's got that and so on—oh, it's just bric-a-brac and stuff that he's collected for a long time and he's sort of fond of it, it's his identity to some degree, it's stuff he has. He always feels that maybe someday he'd be on a mountaintop somewhere and he'll have absolutely nothing to do—and he's really afraid that this might happen to him, that he'll get bored, and he'd better have something to amuse himself with.
So you ask him to get rid of too many things, and he starts going into doldrums. He starts getting sad on you and he starts getting upset. You have ruined his havingness, so you got to give him something. You have him snap anchor points in on himself until he makes solid pieces of energy—that's one of the brightest ways to do it. Just have him put up eight gold anchor points

ADDITIONAL REMARKS: ELECTRONIC THEORY, ANCHOR POINTS
and snap them in on himself—not hard enough to explode, you understand—and snap eight more in, snap eight more in, eight more, eight more, eight more.
You think you—guy was making a terrific mass around himself. He isn't—he collects them. And it's a piece of energy, and he becomes happier. Right away, he becomes happier. And by the time you've processed an awful lot of things out of somebody, if you haven't put anything back in, and haven't let him create some energy, and haven't added to his havingness, he'll get upset.
So don't go on the basis that having no energy is the goal toward which you're going—that's not true. Any energy is better than no energy. Therefore, he will keep aberrative energy around rather than no energy. But he can keep straight energy and he can keep energy in various aesthetic forms. And he's always got an awful big flock of mock-ups stuck around someplace that are good and hard and solid and pretty and wild and so forth, and he isn't going to tell you about them. You'd steal them, he feels. Or the Engram Police in Universe C are still looking for him. One of those was the king's favorite mock-up. (audience laughter)
Yes, thetans have had their adventures. Very amusing. Of course, the most amusing thing at all is the game he plays with himself that he can't remember what he's been doing. That's the silliest game of all. He specializes in forgetter machines and memory machines. And by the time he's got enough forgetter machines and memory machines and prediction machines set up, why, he's bound, then, to start specializing in hiding machines. And he gets this whole bunch going and then you say, "Where were you five hundred years ago?" and the fellow draws a blank.
If you ask him real quick—that's what the flash answer was, see—you ask him real quick, you say, "All right, where were you five hundred years ago?" (snap)
Male voice: I always get "no."
Yeah, but what did you get just before you got "no"? (pause) Let's try that again. Where were you five hundred years ago?
Second male voice: I got Spain, Morocco.
Huh?
Second male voice: When you ran that on him, I got Spain.
You got Spain. Yeah, see, it'll come through before the machines can go into operation, and that's what the file clerk is. File clerk wasn't special little man, it was the guy himself saying it before he wiped himself out automatically. And that's—that was the file clerk.
[to another student] Now where were you eighty years ago? (snap)
Male voice: I got "dead."
All right. That was dead.
Where were you two hundred years ago? (snap)
Male voice: I didn't get anything.
You got nothing. Where were you two days ago? (snap)
Male voice: Here.
Right answer—he knew it, though. (audience laughter)
Okay guys.

117



Exteriorization
A lecture given on 26 November 1953

This is November the twenty-sixth, Thanksgiving afternoon lecture. The subject today: The methods of exteriorization.
I could give you a lot of material on this subject. In fact, we could probably talk for a couple of hundred hours just on various ways people got exteriorized.
The essential method of exteriorization, the method which you must have and use if you expect success in exteriorizing somebody, is to know the elements of what you are exteriorizing, and predict its behavior under certain conditions— the various conditions you encounter.
Now, if you know of what it is capable, you will then know very well how to get it out of one place and into another place. This is a simplicity, true, but it's something that you might overlook. If you know how a thetan operates, behaves, of what he is capable, you then will be able to use these capabilities in order to exteriorize him.
You are all too prone to suppose that because a thetan finds himself in the middle of a body, he then does not have the same characteristics as he would have far from a body.
This is brought about with some justification. For a thetan when trying to operate in the middle of the body, is operating straight up against his own ridges very often, and in operating against those, finds it very difficult to exteriorize. Do you see that?
Every time he tries to do something, he activates something which he has already deposited in the body, and he now becomes the effect of what he has caused. And thus you stir up too many ridges inside the body, and the thetan is apparently less capable than before.
The answer to this is the validation of MEST barriers and the invalidation of the thetan's own barriers.
A thetan can put out beams and exert pressure against them. He can string ribbons around anywhere. He does not have to be the point from which beams and ribbons emanate. He does not have to be the source-point. Now, for instance, it's just as easy for a thetan to put a beam running from somewhere outside . . . Now try this, try this: put a beam running from somewhere outside the room down to that corner of the room. See? Now make it disappear, now. You see that?
All right, now we'll take somebody who is interiorized: He's in. And he's having a lot of trouble getting out, and he has bad eyes, and he has a lot of things.

119

120

26 NOVEMBER 1953
There is this thing called "energy hunger," and a solution is possible in the lines of energy hunger.
But you can take somebody who has never been outside of his head, and you can ask him to mock up ribbons which go from a point back of his head to spots in his body. He'd get those ribbons. Now, you keep that up for a while, and you will blow a whole lot of ridges and so on, and still a whole lot of the commotion which is going on, which makes it impossible for him to be back of himself.
But this, remember, like any use of beams, is apt to restimulate existing deposits of energy which are more or less on the same wavelength. That's why I specify gold beams and so on, just to get off of the usual black-light wavelengths that a thetan who is unable to get out easily is generally embedded—he's in black energy, you see. So you put some gold energy or some blue energy or some pink energy or a red energy, and use colored energy.
Well, his inability to exteriorize is made difficult by the fact that he has too largely validated those barriers in which he finds himself enmeshed. He's too greatly validated his own thought processes, his thinkingness processes as he conceives them, his own facsimiles and other material, and he is in contact with these.
And the other part of the problem is, he is frightened of MEST. He's rather frightened of it.
Once in a while, you will exteriorize a thetan and he will try to steady himself by putting a beam on the wall, and the wall will eat up the beam. The beam, you see, is very—too close to the wavelength of that wall, and the— he'll stick.
And sometimes you'll exteriorize somebody, and you'll exteriorize him as a body, you know, and then you don't exteriorize him from the body he exteriorized in. We just—you see what's happening there. I mean, he's—he has something you might call a theta body.
Well, it's very silly for him to have this. It's not something he sends around— he's in it. But he can exteriorize out of that one. It's built out of a slightly less heavy effort, on a different anchor point system, than the MEST body.
Now, he can exteriorize out of that exactly as he exteriorizes out of a MEST body, because he is essentially just a source-point for energy. And if he locates himself as a point, he is very small. Very small, if he locates himself as a point.
Well now, in trying to agree with the body, he'll eventually mock himself up as a body. This is not true. He's a small spot of light, you might say.
And he will get out in one of these (quote) "theta bodies" (unquote), and lay his hand—you know, theta body hand, it operates just like a MEST body hand—and he'll lay his hand on the wall or on the back of a chair or into the upholstery or something of this sort, and he will go right on in, see? It'll grab hold of him. And boy, he doesn't want anything to do with that. Oh, no! He'll try to pull free—never occurs to him to just drop the hand which is caught and mock up a new hand. This doesn't occur to him. And he becomes very frightened and will dive back in.
Now, this is a different manifestation than is ordinarily encountered, because thetans that are doing this are—they're not later on the scale, they're earlier on the scale. I mean by that, they're not old antiques—they're thetans who are still almost capable of creating a body, see, without any further activity.
They're just using a MEST body because it's more accepted. But if they were to have thought hard about it a few years earlier, even in this lifetime, and if they had known some of the mechanics involved and they hadn't hidden

EXTERIORIZATION
everything from themselves too, they could have mocked up a body which was visible.
In other words, this thetan really hasn't gone to pieces—whether he's old or young, that's not pertinent—it's just he hasn't gone to pieces completely yet. And he has an enormous strength of control, and you're really fighting his strength of control more than anything else.
Well, he could make a body which is visible, and when he—he's in competition, very strong competition with the MEST universe. The MEST universe— he sees this body, he can make one just as good. He tries to, and so on; he mocks one up that's just as good as that, and—as far as he's concerned. But these are rare. This is a rare instance more than otherwise.
Generally, the theta body that they exteriorize in are simply a mass of effort ridges which have accumulated on the MEST body, which they can't get rid of, so they drag along with them, which is a different thing. That's other energy they're dragging with them.
Well, one of these that could almost make his own body will exteriorize with some sort of a hand or something of the sort, which has long electronic beams on it, all of which are vibrating, and he has, you might say, an electrical metabolism which would fascinate an engineer. Just fascinate him. Because he's an electronic machine. He's rigged up so that his energy performs certain exact functions. And you generally have four or five stringers on a—on the end of his arm, you see, in lieu of a hand, which is almost a hand—there's just three, four, five, stringers, all of which are in very strong vibration.
This is a tough boy. This is a tough boy. You very often have trouble exteriorizing him. Because he's real rough. He's real tough. What he's used that hand for, in possibly relatively recent times, is the simple act of decapitation. Just one backward flip of the hand and a MEST body's head would come off, that's all, see?
His problem is somewhat different. He's afraid that if he relaxes control over the MEST body for a moment, that it will cave in; because he's probably practically holding it together with main strength and awkwardness. You know, he's probably had a lot of things happen to him. He's sort of got this thing patched up. And he's using his body to hold it together. Quite the reverse.
He's got this thing propped up and he knows it. And he's afraid he won't be able to control it if he steps away from it. It'll either go completely out of control or cave in, because he already knows it hasn't got good sense.
But his problems are the same as anybody else's problems. He's too enmeshed in his own energy, and in addition to that, he gets too solid a contact on MEST. His terminals are too close to MEST. They're too solid, in other words. They're right on that wavelength.
It isn't that he's drifted down in combating the wavelength forever, he just mocks up on that level with great ease, and he's got a real body. He'd be visible, to some slight degree, even to MEST eyes. They're—scare people stiff if they happen to turn around and see one of these boys, because they're real rough-looking characters, there's no doubt about it.
Of course, they have a sort of a humor about their roughness. I ran into one, one time, that had a beautiful tail. This solid black, sort of furry, with a beautiful tail, and a cat's face, and long electronic—this sounds like something out of a nightmare, I know—and long electronic claws. And, I asked this character a few questions, one way or the other—I mean, I exteriorized him just that way, you see, exteriorized him in his body—and I asked him to knock

121

122

26 NOVEMBER 1953
a piece of paper off the desk, and he simply reached over and he knocked the piece of paper all right, but he also charred it!
And, he reached around a moment later and took hold of the sofa and stuck to it. He couldn't get his hand free instantly, startled him, and he did an immediate flip back into the body. But he was quite visible to MEST eyes.
It was like a dark shadow standing in the room. If you can imagine a shadow, a quite plain shadow, standing upright in the room with a quite bright set of streamers coming out of its hands, you'd have this. This is very, very strange.
This fellow, by the way, was quite afraid of demons. And he'd mocked his—he had mocked himself up this way because for many centuries he had fought demons. And of course he went in and mocked up, then, the winning valence: the demons.
That was a very, very interesting case, because it took me a couple more hours to persuade him, and drill him in letting go beams—mocking up and letting go beams, mocking up and letting go beams—before he'd have anything else to do with MEST.
The way you would do that today, is you would just have him overtly start changing the emotional context of everything around him, changing its color, and then seeing through it further barriers, further barriers and further barriers in six directions until he got nothing, and then sit there and know until he had MEST so thoroughly invalidated that he didn't give a damn about it. And then you'd turn him around and have him put black spheres, black spheres, little—each one a little further out from the last one he was in, and look through the last one to the new one until he had blackness thoroughly invalidated. And then you'd have him do a few mock-ups and put some emotion in them, and his level of contempt would come up to a point where he would, with great ease, do whatever he thought he could do.
This person doesn't control well, by the way, from an auditing standpoint. That isn't any reason why people are like that, who are just hard to control. But he's too well aware, actually, of what he's doing—he'll get way ahead of you very quickly.
You're not liable to run into very many like that, though. There's no particular reason that you won't, it's just that there aren't very many here on Earth that are exactly in that condition.
Then there's the thetan you'll run into occasionally who has never heard of a between-lives area. He didn't know he was supposed to go back anyplace. He doesn't know people can't get out of their heads. He doesn't know there's any difficulty about any of this. The second you say, "Be three feet back of your head," his knowingness turns on with a blast. He knows he's there, and he knows what he's doing.
And he becomes a little bit difficult to handle, simply because he's confused because you're confused as an auditor. You'll want him to do all these various things by gradient scales and things like that, and he doesn't need any gradient scales to do these things. He can do these things, and he doesn't see any point in all this.
Of course, he doesn't realize that he's heading for the river. One of these days, why, he'll have ahold of a body, and bing! the GE setup and so forth, and bap! between-lives and here he goes, and pang! he gets a wipeout, and he doesn't have those abilities anymore.
Well, they're pretty darn scarce. Another scarce variety. Most of them is a thetan who has been back and forth—most of the preclears you get, thetan's

EXTERIORIZATION
been back and forth between the between-lives area. By the way, that one I just told you about, he's pretty newly arrived on Earth.
Male voice: The last one?
Yeah, the last one. He's pretty newly arrived.
And anyway, the routine one that you run into has been through the between-lives area. And when this person is a Step I, it is simply because he hasn't got the between-lives incidents keyed in.
There's no reason they should key in if you get him well exteriorized without handling any energy, beyond MEST. You can handle this stuff, but I mean, not handling his own energy. If you step him back of his head and then keep him away from his body and drill him and get his perception up and specialize in all these lines, this boy's all right.
But he's always on the verge of getting the between-lives area or something else keyed in on him. So you just drill like mad so that he can look and survive. You just drill, drill, drill, percept, percepts, percepts—be here, be there, be someplace else, perception, perception.
Once in a while you'll move one up toward Mars. And, sorry I have to keep talking about this type of material because I know that it's upsetting and it's heard on these tapes particularly. But you get one up toward Mars and you take a look at it, and he says, "That's a funny place. It looks like it's pulsating, or there's something there, or something of the sort." He'll look at it and say, "You know, think I'll go down and take . . ."
And you say, "All right. Now be up near the moon," and so on. Because he actually—you could bail him right straight back out of it, but there's no reason messing him up so that you have to bail him out with auditing. You get him tough enough so that he can look more penetratively at things and know better. He wouldn't be here if he knew all there was to know. Okay?
Then there's the type who has been through the between-lives area and is occluding; and through effort has a sort of an effort fringe around the body, and feels pretty solid, and is up against large packs of energy and so forth. He doesn't have any hands. When he exteriorized, he just exteriorizes. He doesn't go into a frenzy if he happens to put his hand on some MEST.
The reason that first one, you see, goes into a frenzy about putting his hand on some MEST or something of the sort is he's—first impulse is just to shove the MEST over, you know, and he finds he didn't do that. And he just mired down a little bit more in it, and he suddenly tells himself he hasn't got as much soup as he used to have. And this scares him a little bit, because he's already losing in the competition with the MEST universe. All right.
But out of all these processes and all these cases, you use the same techniques. You don't have to have anything very special. You just—don't be startled if you run into one of those varieties.
And there are other varieties, too. I ran into a little girl one day and I exteriorized her, and she said, "Oh thank you. I've been so worried. I've been so worried." She said, "I—I've—I've been here for about two years"—ten-year-old girl. And she said, "I—I ran along to help this little girl up and I couldn't get out again."
The little girl was still unconscious. Interesting series of incidents. And this thetan that I exteriorized was just—"A body? Be in a body? Control or manage one?" Well, you did if you couldn't do anything else with it, but that was a very silly thing to do, or that was a funny thing to be, you see. I mean, just one of those things. And she went back to Ireland. That was the end of that. And

123

124

26 NOVEMBER 1953
left me with the task of reviving the little girl who was still knocked out, which I promptly did.
It's no wonder people in the old days, not knowing too much about all of this stuff, got all spooky about spooks and things like that, because good live spooks can be very upsetting. This is very, very peculiar.
Then there's—quite often you find somebody who's picked up a five- or six-year-old child. Didn't do—go through an Assumption. You know, picked up the kid (snap), there he goes.
What difference does this make in running a case? It doesn't make any difference. It merely makes some randomity for you and something of interest. And when something like that happens, don't be particularly amazed.
Now, in all the time I've been processing, exteriorizing people, I've never had anybody zap me. Had a lot of people threaten to and so forth, but I've never had anybody zap me. I don't know that this would ever happen, one way or the other. I know I have not really zapped or nipped anybody, but once in a while, dropped a beam across a couple of anchor points they had, which sure short-circuited them for a minute. But that's about the worst I ever did, and only then usually for amusement, not for antagonism.
It's a very funny thing, you know, you start doing these things out of antagonism and it sticks you. The mood with which you play a game is not anger, as anybody knows who's been part of a team on any playing field. The— it just is not compatible with the game, and your teammates have a tendency to sneer, and you have a tendency to bog down.
Well, with all of this, what you're exteriorizing still boils down to this point: You have a being who, easily or uneasily, with ease or great difficulty, is going to be left in a state by your intention and activities whereby he does not have to be in a body to control one, and where he can resist the various inroads which life and time make upon him. Where he doesn't have to flip back through a between-lives area and go through this ritual and that ritual in order to get along. And that's what you're trying to do.
And the problems you encounter are these:
One: He is very frightened of MEST; can't control it, it more or less controls him.
Two: He is utterly bogged down in his own machinery, more or less so.
Three: He is enmeshed in energy of his own creation which at the same time is coincident with the energy of the MEST body.
Four: Who probably has one or more body anchor points out of place, thus creating flows which make it difficult to exteriorize him.
And five: Who is running more on other-determinism than he is on self-determinism, and is so given too much randomity.
And six: Who has resisted things to the point where he has become them.
The solutions to these problems are just those solutions which are outlined in 8-C. But as far as pushing somebody out of his head is concerned, or getting him out of his head, this is of the essence very early in processing.
You understand that. There's no reason to keep stirring up the soup just because he's in it. You'll get him out of the soup simply by getting him out of the soup. Like that old Indian tribe that has all these terrifically wise maxims: "The way to cross the lake is to cross the lake. The way to eat duck is to eat duck." So on and so on and so on.
The way to process a preclear is to remove him from his head or remove the head from him. See, one—you got two choices there. And the processes you use to do this roughly boil down to being able to be at another point than within the body; being able to push himself to another point than in the body;

EXTERIORIZATION
being able to vanish the body and other things so thoroughly that he is no longer in them; and being able to vanish energy deposits of his own with such ease that he's no longer confronted by them, and so is again not in them; or jettisoning everything he is trying to hold on to by remaining in the body, or demonstrate to him that he can control bodies without being in them. And any one of those, will exteriorize a preclear. Any one of them.
Now, there's one out of all these that I haven't mentioned very much before, and that is the control of the body from outside. Being able to control a body while away from it. You can do this by teaching him to control a mock-up at a distance from him. Control a mock-up in motion at a distance from him. And he has a tendency, then, to relax his control on the body.
But how complicated do you have to get to exteriorize somebody? It's only really just as complicated as you make it as an auditor; really not much more complicated than that.
For instance, I had a fellow do this one time. I generally can size up a case and take a look at it and fool around with it for a while, and—fifteen, twenty minutes, something like that—and unless the case is just a champion case, well, why then it takes maybe quite a little processing, maybe several hours to do it successfully, maybe fifteen hours or something like that to fish him out. That'd really be a championship case. Fifteen minutes, twenty minutes, something on that order; that is routine time on a difficult case to exteriorize the way I operate with them.
For instance, I took twenty people one time, and threw all but one out of their heads, I think, in three hours. Just routine people. They weren't easy cases, either.
Later on, it was very interesting that auditors processing these people who were already exteriorized couldn't get anyplace much with the cases. And this was very, very weird to me. And I couldn't understand why this was taking place; till I found out that they were seeking simply an agreement with their own state, which was also very unfinished. And they sought this agreement with their own state, and nobody improved anybody else's state.
And they were all more or less stuck on this button: They were unwilling to give freedom to others. And you'll find that's a very, very upsetting button. See, you want to be free yourself, well, you have to free others. It isn't that you have to bring everybody up in agreement uniformly, you can shove off and go to the other end of nowhere as far as that's concerned. But if you keep on associating with people, why, you occasionally have your qualms about setting them free, believe me.
And it's something that can be touched in a case every once in a while. But it shows up on Step III: Brackets of space. Putting brackets of space around people. That will show up right away. So it's a button which runs out practically, and doesn't have to worry you. What you need as a technique is "brackets of space." And you do that because you want him to see the body's anchor points and his own anchor points and find other anchor points and increase his perception. So it pays dividends in all direction—as a concept it runs out. And you don't see it—there's a lot of hidden things happen—a lot of side effects would take place which we don't talk about. There isn't any reason to talk about them. They're just more significance, you see? All right.
What's our problem with this fellow that seems very recalcitrant and so forth? Well, it quite often will be a problem which is as easily solved as this: I was going to tell you about this one case, that, oh boy, everybody had—they'd just given up on this case. "The case was—championship case, this guy—there

125

126

26 NOVEMBER 1953
was nothing to be done about this case." Just—oh, "He was mean, he was stubborn, it was because he didn't want to, it's because he wouldn't get any more sympathy, it's because he actually depended upon his state to get the sympathy of women and so he wouldn't get any more sexual sensation if he got cleared." And everybody had an explanation for this. They had leaped deep into the significance and hadn't bailed themselves out. When as a matter of fact, all the case was worried about was whether or not he could control the body from outside. He was sure that he couldn't.
He was just certain that he couldn't. And so he didn't dare move out of it. He was a fellow who had lived rather dangerously, and so had had a lot of problems of sudden body control in emergency. And he wasn't going on deposits of energy or any other mechanical reason, he just didn't believe that he could control a body from outside.
Yet he didn't state that belief to himself. It was just something he lived with all the time, like the little girl who had a migraine headache for the first five years of her life and somebody took it away and she was very surprised. And the shock was almost too much for her to be without that headache, because she—you see, that was not normal to be without a headache.
Well, that was the way this was with him—it was an unexamined concept. And he was exteriorized in this fashion: "We will now run the button 'I cannot control my body while I'm outside of it. I can control my body while I am outside of it. I cannot control my body from behind it. I can control my body from behind it.' Be three feet back of your head. Okay." That was a real tough problem.
Now, you'll feel silly more times than once when you finally fling somebody out of his head or fling his head out of him. But you understand there's only— I mean, it just happens with great ease, and you say, "I wonder why I was toying with it all this time, why I just didn't do it."
I've seen a case, by the way, rehearsed on Self Analysis and other processing and—that was acknowledged to be a very difficult case. And I've seen the case going on week after week, getting this type of processing and getting light processes, and everybody being very nice and kind of snide about it, and—a difficult case. Until one day—I just keep wondering when this was going to happen—some auditor would get bright enough to say, "Now, why don't you be three feet back of your head?"
The fellow for the past month, any day of the past month, could have been three feet back of his head, but nobody ever asked him to, you see?
So I always start a session that way. Just in case some other auditor has flubbed the dub, or just in case I have a Step I—there's no reason to work hard at it. And I'll even do it on extreme cases. I had an eighty-two-year-old woman one time on the couch, and she had no more than sat down, and she knew nothing about Scientology, and I said to her, "Now, be three feet back of your head," and she says, "Okay."
I caught my breath slightly. And—because she didn't appear to be a body build that would have done it at all, and I kept wondering if she was going to make my—the break of, "My thetan is over there," or something of the sort. She didn't. She sailed right on along the line just as easy as pie. She went all the places I asked her to go to, and she gulped a couple of times thetawise, but she kept on going. And we blew up all kinds of things and patched up all kinds of things and so forth, and I don't think the session took forty-five minutes, and she walked out of there an entirely new woman. We rearranged all the anchor points and rearranged the space of the body, and—oh, did all kinds of odds and ends. Forty-five minutes, just brrrrrrrrrrrrr, see?

EXTERIORIZATION
And so one is always ready to be—quite willing to be gratified by finding out that, at the first moment of the session, you can exteriorize somebody. Or reversely, that you can banish their own universe and them from where they are setting—you know, where they're sitting—and then have them be someplace else, and then have them put their body back there. You know, that works too.
You know, you just get the guy in practice at unmocking his head and then have him in practice on unmocking all the blackness or odds and ends of energy deposits around him. And then just first unmock one ear and then the other ear, and then this ridge and then that ridge, and have him duplicate some ridges and then unmock them. You know, duplicate—duplicate and unmock, duplicate and unmock, duplicate and unmock, duplicate and unmock. And you got his right ear gone well, he's certain of that. Now he gets his left ear gone well and he's certain of that; and then he's got his nose gone, the top of his head gone, and finally, you've got his head gone. Well, don't bother with the rest of the body. He's liable to bog on making something else leave. You at least got his head gone.
Now you say, "Be over in the corner of the room." You see, you've got his head gone and all the ridges gone. Remember, it takes both—both, see. And you tell him, "Be over in the corner of the room. Okay. Now put your head back on the body." So he does—(snap) he's out.
Now, there's various variations like that. I expect an auditor to be kind of bright about this sort of thing. There's this case: this case, you say, "Be three feet back of your head," and the case says, "Mm-hm," and you go right ahead with your drills, and you just go right on and do everything you're supposed to do and so forth. And then you say, "This is the end of the session," a half an hour or forty-five minutes or an hour later, and if you were insensitive, you didn't recognize there was something a little bit wrong. There's just a feeling about the case that this was kind of haywire somehow.
Why, if you didn't—if you were kind of insensitive about all that, why, you didn't see that, and an hour later, why, the person says, "You know, well, I just still don't see quite what you're doing; everybody can do that."
Well, you can launch into a large explanation if you want to, about Scientology and so on. That is not what is required at that moment. This case doesn't know anything more for having been worked this length of time— believe me, there's something wrong.
What's the remedy? You just go through Orienting Straightwire, Step I. Because this case has worked all the processes you gave it with viewpoints. You get it? They didn't go to the moon, they sent a viewpoint to the moon. This case is just a little bit scared of looking. See, that's the only thing wrong with them. And so they use viewpoints.
Now, if you waste viewpoints, and have him make and unmake and waste and throw away and create and destroy and duplicate viewpoints all over the place—just tell them next time, "Now you be three feet back of your head. Okay. Now are you in your feet?"
And they say, "No."
"Are you in your knees?"
"No."
"Your hips?"
"No."
"Shoulders?"
"No."
"Hands?"

127

128

26 NOVEMBER 1953
"No."
"Head?"
"Hmm—no."
"Okay. Now, you're sure you're not in your head?"
"Yeah, I'm sure."
"All right. Now let's mock up a whole flock of viewpoints and throw them away. Let's mock up a lot more viewpoints and throw them away. Let's mock up a lot more viewpoints and throw them away. All right. Let's put a viewpoint down in front of the Walt Whitman Hotel. Take a look at the Walt Whitman Hotel with that viewpoint."
And they say, "Uh-huh."
"Now blow it up, and be in front of the Walt Whitman Hotel and take a look."
"Okay." And back they come.
You say, "All right, now be back of your body again."
Now, what's the difference between being in front of the Walt Whitman Hotel and having a viewpoint? Well, you can't see as well with a viewpoint, they'll tell you. But you needn't be excited about any of this because they're not excited. What they did—they did all their drills and exercises by using and throwing around viewpoints. And they did it quite well, but they're— using a viewpoint does not give one the reality of being there, for the excellent reason is, he's not there.
And so he has a foggy notion. He is (quote) "uncertainly exteriorized."
There is no two ways about it. If the guy's out, he's out. If he's in, he's in. If he's out and thinks he's still in, or if he's in and still thinks he's out, or is uncertain about either state, he's doing what lookingness he has and what reachingness he has—he's doing that with auxiliary viewpoints.
They're little things that look like four-bit pieces—little gold viewpoints. They're what people wear over their eyes like monocles, and what people try to buy down at the dime store and call "glasses." Only you can't buy a viewpoint, you can only make them.
Now, there's the uncertain case. Now, I don't care whether that case is occluded or precluded; it just doesn't matter. That case is using viewpoints.
Now, every once in a while somebody will say to you—and boy, if you don't sharpen up your ears and fan for this one, you just ought to—well, ought to go dump yourself for a good bath in the Delaware River or something and refresh yourself, to wake up. (I can't think of any nastier place to swim.) Anyway . . . Because this one, if it ever passes you by, you ought to be shot— just that. Because sometimes it's the only real clue you'll get as to a case. You just wonder, "What the hell is wrong with this case? I seem to be able to process this case like mad and nothing seems to happen. Case never has anything happen. What am I going to do about this case?" And you—instead of blowing your brains out, why didn't you discard them as useless, and just know where you are. You just didn't listen to this case, or you didn't look. Of course, if you're real sharp and real hot and well cleared, you just look and you know what the case is doing because you can see it.
But if you're just auditing blind, so to speak—tin-cupping around—the only clue you'll get to this case is location, reference to.
You say, "All right, now are you back of your body?"
"Yes, yes," and so on, and you go on and on. And then the case will refer to "there," you see. And they will say, "I'm over there."
Mm-hm. Now you got it. Now you got it. This case is exteriorizing some sort of an astral body. It's exteriorizing a mock-up. And is quite normally doing

EXTERIORIZATION
it automatically. And such people will often go into wild arguments with you as an auditor, of mysticism versus Scientology or something. There isn't any mysticism versus Scientology. Mysticism was a lot of information the boys were collecting and using that was definitely on the route to discovering Scientology. But believe me, it was on the route. Scientology didn't go back there. If we were using mysticism today, you'd be a bunch of sick, dazed cookies; I mean it. Because I'm probably one of the best mystics in the United States, and I know what I'm talking about. Take it from the horse's mouth—neigh, neigh!
But remember this: that the person has an automatic piece of machinery which exteriorizes and handles for him what he has been calling, and what he would call, and what is proper parlance for, an astral body.
They do astral walking with these things. And every once in a while somebody's going to come along and say, "Exteriorization? We've been doing it for years." See?
And you're going to try to explain to this person, "No, no, that isn't what I mean, quite. Yes, I mean being away from your body."
And they say, "Well, that's right, being away from your body." And you're evidently in perfect agreement and completely confused.
They have, by hypnotism and by self-direction and other means, a set-up machine—a mechanism—which dispatches something of them, complete with viewpoints, to a remote situation.
Well now, if you know you're here in this room, you have the same level of certainty, when you're even vaguely certain, on being exteriorized. See? I mean, if you're in Grand Central Station, you're in Grand Central Station. You didn't send your hat to Grand Central Station. You get the difference here?
And this person is going to give you a bad time as a preclear. Going to give you a bad time. Because every once in a while they'll slip. Even when they're being tremendously cooperative, see, they'll skid. Because every time you audit them, you set this machinery into operation.
You say, "Be back of your body," and they very comfortably are back of their body. On what drill, see? On a mystic drill: astral walking, seeing at a distance, talking at a distance. Actually, this—these practices have never amounted to very much in the Western world. They've never really gotten savage about this. But if you—they—these people are real good at this (other planets and in the East), they're real good at this. They can talk at a very remote spot.
And this is what you get today where that—the rather lop-eared comic sits up there with the dummy on his lap, doing (quote) "ventriloquism" (unquote). See, I mean that's not ventriloquism. Ventriloquism is talking someplace else. That's real ventriloquism.
Now, that's the mockery end of the Tone Scale. They got it down close to MEST, and they have a dummy. He wouldn't have had a dummy, he would have sent a mock-up dummy someplace that would be talking. That would be ventriloquism. But raising those—not raising those powers, but being that able to do this has long since ceased to exist, actually, on this planet, except in some very remote spots where they're not even vaguely interested in demonstrating anything to anybody.
You can do this. I was—showed somebody how to do this one time when he was—he was, himself, by that time well exteriorized and so forth, and we'd had a lot of arguments about astral walking and so forth, during sessions. Not because I wanted to argue with him about astral walking, but we'd had difficulty with this early in the processing, you see? He'd say, "Yes, I'm back there."
"Grrrrrrrrr!" You'd say, "Now"—you didn't say that, you see, you didn't

129

130

26 NOVEMBER 1953
growl—you said, "Now, you ..." Very carefully, you said, "All right. Now, you see where you are back there? You got that? Now be in that spot."
And eventually, by just exteriorization, just standard techniques, he would be well exteriorized. But this was standing in the road because it was a trained pattern.
You know, they—sometimes a guy will hypnotize himself and send himself at some vast distance away and come back with this vast piece of information. It's just putting remote viewpoints, remote hearing points and remote talking points, was the way it used to be very early on the track, and a lot of people still got these machines hanging around. It's developed to an automaticity. When he said, "Boo," he was then in the general's headquarters, you see? When he said, "Boo," he could then put these things at general's headquarters. Of course, a fellow who was doing that actually had lost his nerve slightly, because why didn't he go there? See? It's just as easy for him to be there.
Well, he'd lost his nerve to the extent that he probably had to safeguard the body which he was near. So he was already sold on this body he was near, if he was doing this trick. But actually, it's—very early on the track you'll find thetans doing this uniformly and just fooling the devil out of each other, which makes life as a thetan kind of interesting.
A little bit too much randomity: All of a sudden this horrible face appears before you and says, "Boo," and you blast it, and the author of that face, of course, was mocking it up from half a light-year away. You didn't blast him. That's very random. And this machinery, where this has happened to somebody and so on, is sometimes quite thoroughly installed.
But this is the one—you won't have any trouble with this case—if a person can make his body astral walk, you can certainly tell him to be there too. And— sometimes such a case, however, has been used himself—sent from one place to another, early on the track. You know, somebody grabbed him, and grabbed him as a body, and then made him go someplace else, and held his body in pawn. And he's just been shifted around from one corner to the other of the universe, so you say to him all of a sudden, "Be three feet back of your head"— you're just the goon squad on Planet X, see? You're just the boys from Mars, as far as he's concerned. He isn't going to go a foot. To hell with you. This has happened to him too often. You'd have to slug him to make him go. He volun¬teered the 195th thousandth time and that was the last one, and he doesn't volunteer anymore.
That's sometimes his trouble, is—the trouble is a small lack of confidence. However, you show him that you're working all right, or you don't mean to gobble him up. He'll get out of his body cautiously and then wait for you to grab it, you see, or wait for you to suddenly zap him and send him off to some other mission or someplace, then he'll gradually relax. And you'll note this case. It's this case that exteriorizes very tensely and rather watchfully where you're concerned. Watches his auditor very closely. Well, he's just afraid you're going to send him off someplace or grab his body.
And then that just is remedied by continuing good conduct on your part— you don't do him in or change his mind or give him impossible things to do, and he's all right, he's happy about it. And he finally develops enough potential so he isn't worried about such a thing anymore. All right.
This person who is "over there" is actually a relatively easy case—if you've got anything like ears or vision. They'll say this in many ways. They'll say, "Do you want—do you want me to look at—at the lamp up here now?" They'll gesture toward themselves.

EXTERIORIZATION
You just catch that clue. It may be the only clue you've got. The other one, of course, is the person is not getting certain and not getting better fast.
Now, actually, theoretically you could just keep astral walking them, you might say, and they will eventually exteriorize, if you just kept drilling them. Theoretically. But I'd give it a fifty hours or something, because you might just start running on the machine, you see, and just work more and more with a machine.
Now, another thing is, is you occasionally run into putting emotion into walls and putting light into things and so forth, also as automatic machinery which you as an auditor just start handling. The pre-c isn't doing it. He's having a rough time. He knows he's doing it, but he's not doing it.
The way to remedy that is to have him put something into something that he's absolutely certain that he himself put there; and then have him put some¬thing else into something. And if you still run into trouble, put him on that old E-Meter and just run the gamut of emotions. Just call them off one right after the other, and you'll find one that he doesn't care for. And you have him put that in things. And he'll know he'll have to do that, see. He could put the routine emotions in machine-fashion, but that one that's tough—well, he—you wouldn't possibly realize that he wasn't doing that easily until it was almost too late.
Well now, the methods of exteriorization must, whatever they are, remedy a preclear's entrapment in his own energy deposits. That must remedy that. So if you validate his own barriers—his own energy as barriers—you'll just make it harder and harder for him to exteriorize. Unless you're putting those barriers far enough away from him so that they constitute his making anchor points as in Self Analysis. You see him putting them out there and putting them around in various places.
So if you validate his own ridges and barriers too much, too often, he'll—he's liable to get bogged, that's all. He conceives what he has put up as indestructible. And when you ask him to feel of his body, he doesn't feel MEST flesh, he merely feels his own equivalent of it.
Now, that's unmistakable, by the way; a man knows whether he's handling a nose or a ridge. And he's liable to tell you he feels his nose when he feels much more strongly his own deposits of energy pouring around somewhere in his head.
Well, it's not for you to go and clean up all these energy deposits in the head, because you're inside a thinking machine and the more stuff—more energy you have him throw out, you see—the more energy you have him throw out, the more energy will cave in on him.
What you do is have him use this material as a barrier. And, as I showed you, using black barriers or white barriers or pink barriers or blue barriers, you have him put up barriers of his own energy in succeeding waves going out from him, each time looking through the last one to the next one. And you just finally get him to the point where he can look straight through his own energy.
That's the simplest drill possible. That's his own universe, you see. And then you turn around and get him into good contact and then out of contact with MEST by the other drill, which is look to the wall—to the right, and then the one to the left, and up and down and back and so on, just looking through succeeding walls and finding nothing and then sitting there and knowing; and then finally just finding nothing in all directions and sitting there and knowing, which is an advanced form of the same thing.
And he knows he's looking at nothingness as far as MEST is concerned.

131

132

26 NOVEMBER 1953
And then you make sure you check him over as far as his own universe is concerned—he knows he's not running into ridges of his own universe.
Where a man's own universe is actually thicker and heavier than the MEST universe, he's in very heavy competition with the MEST universe. And where he doesn't have any at all of his own, he doesn't feel to be in competition with it particularly. This is neither bad nor good either way, it's just a changed condition.
So you have to solve those two factors. Now, there's another factor that's bound to creep in, is freedom for others. And as long as he wants others not to be free, he will continue to set an example by not freeing—being free himself. And this is solved by space brackets.
And as I was talking to you about a little earlier, in the earlier lecture, when you've solved some of these things, when you've gotten brackets of space around him, when you've managed to clean up some anchor points, when you've gotten him to get some anchor points and made them disappear in an orderly fashion and so forth, why, you'll probably find out that there is an anchor point reason, within the body itself, for the mechanical inability to exteriorize. See that?
There's some misarrangement of anchor points which set up consistent, continuous flow, which makes him feel that he has to hold on or hold something apart; he has a feeling something is going to go wrong in the body if he deserts it. This is the case that he can't get outside of it and control it, not because it isn't controllable so much as the fact that it'd fall in, collapse, or fly into a million pieces or go into a lot of random motion.
We had a case like that—the early morning. Somebody—second we started to put up black barriers, why, some random motion—threatened random motion set up. And—this would have escaped you, probably—we handled it as an automaticity. We handled the body going into random motion as an automaticity. We wouldn't have achieved, but it would have been the same thing, if we'd said, "I can control my body from outside; I can't control my body from outside," see? We'd have had the same end result, but we probably wouldn't have gotten there just with a concept.
The person who can't be exteriorized doesn't exist. They just—I'm sure of this, you see. I've exteriorized people in Spanish, French, English, American, various—oh yes, I didn't use the language, but it was done in African, five times.
I've even exteriorized an Arab police official. Now, this is the ne plus ultra. Because they're at 1.5, and they're beefy, and they look—they're just nothing but solid glass—black glass ridges, in a hot country, with all their prenatals in complete restimulation. And if you can slip one of these boys out of his head, you can do anything. Because it's just like asking somebody . . . He has to know all this is solid, you see—if he doesn't know it's solid, he isn't there. Now you ask him to make it unsolid so that he can slide out of it or something, and you got a picnic on your hands. And yet exteriorized him. Using what techniques? The ones I'm teaching you. I haven't used anything else but this type of exteriorization for a long time.
Now, it gets fancier. It gets fancier. It gets more codified. It gets better understood what the results are. The drills necessary, the communication of it becomes better understood. But the actual operation of exteriorization is just the same operation as before: It's using the native abilities of the thetan to have the thetan be someplace else than amongst his body and own energy deposits so much so that he's continually hit by flows and aberrations.

EXTERIORIZATION
You get him out away from it, clear him up and make him strong and tough, and he can handle any reactive mind. And that's all there is to the problem. You get the body away from him, or him away from the body, and he can operate. He doesn't belong in a body because he's not very able in a body.
Now, your problem as an auditor is not a foggy one. There isn't anything odd about it. It's actually—this is just this act of exteriorization I'm talking about, you understand. I'm not talking about making an Operating Thetan, it's just this one little act.
It's actually only one part of a great deal you can do. But you're starting in at the tough end, and then going toward the easy end. And if we just had the person cleared before we stepped him out of his head, you see, it would be very easy. But that would be a reverse process. And that's not a possible process. We find him in his worst state, and we have to ask him to do the most incredible thing we will have to ask him to do, which is be away from all these ridges and universes and involvements. See, we're just real tough.
Now, quite often I'll look at somebody and realize that he won't exteriorize easily, and realizing this, I don't ask him. I merely run the operation that will lead immediately toward his exteriorization. I see, for instance, that his eyes and so forth, demonstrate consistent and considerable flows and so on, and realize it'd be very improbable for this individual to be three feet back of his head. But what do you know? I've made a couple of mistakes that way. I've actually stirred a case up that I shouldn't have stirred up at all.
Now, I—afterwards I did it experimentally. I took a case that should have exteriorized easily, and then stirred the case all up by running wasting machineries and Step IVs, see—a lot of stuff Step IV, and a lot of stuff on Step V—and got the case so it couldn't exteriorize. Nailed him. And then, of course, slid him out of his head by sliding the head off him.
So it can be done. You can make a mistake that way. The way to err is to wait too long to ask him to get out of his head.
Now, there is one that never stirs him up, and that's Orienting Straightwire. "Where aren't you thinking? Where aren't you? Where aren't other people thinking? Where aren't they? Where aren't you?" And that never stirs him up— just makes him look. And any technique which makes him look is better off.
Now, I sometimes get somebody down to about a III or something like that, I have to ask them to put a beam out. But boy, I make sure I drill this person like mad. If I can find somebody—find the front of his forehead, and give it a push and be outside, then I drill him like mad immediately on perception and get him up Tone Scale quick. Because if he slides back in, he's liable to stick and require a rougher going-over to exteriorize him next time. Because this boy is using too much energy too often.
And that's about all, actually, besides experience, that you need to know about methods of exteriorization.





Anchor Points, Justice
A lecture given on 27 November 1953

And this is November the 27th, first morning lecture. And this morning we're going to take up, once more, consecutively, methods of exteriorization.
You know, there's not very much to learn in theory. Your theory is so simple that one of these days you're going to say, "Gee, I sure have been stumbling around in the brush!" And you'll find yourself out in this good, broad highway, and there you are. It's much harder, really, to get into the brush than it is on the highway, which is peculiar.
All you're handling, in essence, is this: There's this guy or this gal, and they've come from someplace else, and they're in a state of fog and unreality, and they're sitting in a head, of all things. That's peculiar, see. I mean, it's real weird. And there they are, and they don't know whether this is the—Christmas or applejack, and this confuses them. And in their confusion, they turn to all sorts of things. They turn to psychology, mesmerism, electric shocks, broken legs, education, religion (so that they save their soul, which is something they put at some distance from them and save it, I guess). And they get into this state of confusion about "which way is 9th and Chestnut." And they don't know these things.
And you find this person walks in—now, sometimes they walk in, they're not very badly disoriented and so what do you for—do? You either get them out of the head, or get the head away from them. Well, the easiest thing to do is to get them out of their head, usually. So you say, "Be three feet back of your head"—the fellow's very surprised and is, or he "kind of" is three feet back of his head, you know, kind of. Well, if he's just "kind of" three feet back of his head, he's using viewpoints. I mean, that's just—that's one, two, three—I mean, he's just using viewpoints. He's putting a viewpoint back of his head.
One of the ways to get rid of that is have him put viewpoints around places and use them for a while. And then say in a nasty tone of voice, "Well, now be there." And he rather routinely is. And if you fail on that one, you'll waste a lot of time for yourself.
And so he isn't three feet back of his head, and he can't put any viewpoints anyplace. Why, your next choice, just in standard operation—just looking over the way I've been operating lately and looking over a series of cases and so forth—if he isn't, why, certain, or he isn't certain of viewpoints or anything, why, I start polishing up anchor points for him.
I use various methods of polishing them up, and it's very often you can put that intermediate step in there, see, just—"Put your body—mock up

135

136

27 NOVEMBER 1953
your body three or four times," something like that. I found out I've been doing that less often lately. Usually, if the guy is uncertain, why, I try to remedy it on viewpoints, and it remedies right away. And the next thing I know, why, I just say, "All right. Now put up a network of anchor points which vaguely approximate the shape of a body. And make them disappear, and put them away, and make them disappear."
And he says, "They're coming back."
"All right. Make them disappear, and make them come back. Make them disappear, and make them come back."
And now, when I've done that for a little while, before or after that, I ask him, "Can you look around in your head and find any anchor points that are out of position?"
This, by the way, is a little package technique that I suddenly looked at myself, and found, myself, that I'd used many, many times and never particularly codified. Because this isn't stuff you think about, it's stuff you look at. Ask him if he can find any of these points in his head that are out of position. Have him mock up some more patterns of anchor points. Have him mock up some anchor points inside of his head. Every time he finds an anchor point out of position or something like that, why, mock up a flock more anchor points. I mean, mock it up and unmock it and mock it up and unmock it and mock it up and unmock it until it gets real clear, and all of a sudden he says, "It's jiggling."
And you say, "All right. Mock one up and make it jiggle." And you just follow the pattern of the anchor point, and so control it.
And he adjusts this anchor point in his head—real anchor point, a GE point—and he looks around and he finds some more. And ask him to mock up more patterns of anchor points out in front of him.
So I've actually been converting Step II here, little by little, and finally caught on to myself what I was doing, as been converting Step II of "Mock up your body," to "Mock up a pattern of anchor points," see, "that represent the body." And I found out that the preclear was mocking up a flesh-and-blood body. This might seem amusing to you, but I found out he was mocking up a flesh-and-blood body rather than the space in which the body appeared, so that the body would appear in the space. This is the way it's done, you see. And you have to find out what people are doing backwards and so forth.
And I found out they were mocking up a body—you know, it had a head and shoulders and so forth—instead of mocking up a bunch of star-points in which a body could be made to appear and disappear. Follow me? Very simple.
Step II, actually, is this kind of a step, but this is Step II and varied down to Step III. And you push these anchor points around in his head and finally found—find every anchor point you can find in his body or in his head that's out of position and push each one into position. Then you ask him to be back of his head again.
Now, about this time he has an objection, and so on. And this objection is that "Hrmph-hrmph-nyar-nyar"—he doesn't know—"It isn't even there!" And he shudders or something of the sort.
And you say, "Well, mock yourself up as a thetan out in front of you, in terrible condition and shuddering and—because you don't like to leave a body." You do that a few times. And then you have him put something in the walls, like: "Put shuddering in the walls and get it back, and get everything shuddering. And now, be three feet back of your head now."
And the fellow is, and very often will tell you, "Yes, I was for a moment."
Now, well, if you searched into it a little more deeply, you would find out

ANCHOR POINTS, JUSTICE
that he simply—he knew he could get back of his head, but he thinks you're asking him to leave his body. And bodies to this person are scarce. And that's about the only reason somebody won't get back of his head, if you want to be real mechanical, is bodies are scarce. He's got the idea they're scarce. So you just go on and remedy this—scarcity of bodies.
You can remedy it in dozens of ways. The most effective way to remedy it is just mock him up abandoned and forgotten and alone and getting no attention—as a thetan, you know—because he's lost his body. And mock him up as having gotten out of his body—End of Cycle Processing, see—mock him up as having gotten out of his body and the body's been stolen.
If the preclear suddenly gets an awful sharp pain in the leg, or something else happens, you can be almost certain that somebody else walked out of their body one day, and he picked up their body and walked it into the brush somewhere or got its teeth knocked out or ... It was just like somebody stealing a car, see?
See? He walked off with that body, and it's an overt act-motivator sequence that you're running. You're right into overt act-motivator sequence. And you remedy this by—have him mock up other bodies being stolen and all messed up and thrown in the mud; and his own body stolen the second he was out of it, and run into the mud and dead (see, end of cycle) and messy; and mock up his own body very beautiful, and then it gets stolen, and then he can never get another body, and—you get the idea. You know, just end of cycle, end of cycle— terrible consequences of.
And this comes under this terrific button; there's a button there that's just hotter than a piece of dynamite, called "consequences." And if you were just to ask a preclear to sit there and get the concept of "the consequences of (blank)," see—brother! It's—practically tear him to pieces, because that's what he's running on, and that is the overt act-motivator sequence described as a concept.
So you mock up end of cycle, which—you finish the consequences of having walked out of the body and so on. Get the body going crazy and being uncontrollable, and the body being stolen, and just because he moved out of the body, it falls over on the stove and burns its hair off or something of the sort. (Thetans don't like unaesthetic things.) And then, finally, "Be three feet back of your head." Something like that.
He keeps telling you, "Still all black." Well, you haven't paid any attention to this until you've gone through all these various ramifications and "It's still all black." He can be back of his head, but it's still all black. Well, just have him do some "Where isn't he in the room?" And he starts checking off the room. You say, "Now, start checking off the corners of the room, one after the other. Start checking them off, checking them off, checking them off." And he just goes over them and looks and finds he's not there and not there and not there.
And he has—"Still all black," he says. "I don't get a good idea of this at all," so on. Well, break down and have him outside of his body and have him waste a machine that makes blackness.
Have him waste a machine that makes blackness because of the fact that somebody will see his body if he steps out of it; a machine that will cover up mock-ups so they won't get swiped. Some sort of machinery of that character.
You run—in other words, you just follow this pattern. You get him out of his head and you handle his automaticity. What is this sudden idea that the body's going to be stolen the second he gets out of it? He really doesn't think you're going to steal it. That's an automaticity; it's an idea that occurred to

137

138

27 NOVEMBER 1953
him. And so, as an idea that occurred to him, why, you remedy it—by making him get the idea. You see, this is of essence.
And then something occurs to him automatic, like he all of a sudden has a shudder or he gets real upset or he starts to cave in on himself and he's— that's an automaticity. So what do you do? You just remedy it. So a mock-up won't disappear, that's an automaticity—remedy it. So a mock-up disappears and appears again, so that's an automaticity—handle it. That's why I tell you, "My God, you'd better know how to handle automaticities!" Because that's all these sudden ideas of consequences are: they're automaticities, see?
That's just the same as he gets a mock-up and it all of a sudden begins to wave its hands around just furiously. The second you ask him to stay out of his body, he says, "Oh, no!" and he feels kind of sick. That's an automaticity. Well, now you dig on that just a little deeper, and you'll find out he's sitting in some kind of an incident connected with the body. And you don't have to handle the incident at all. But the incident itself, that it came up at that moment, is an automaticity.
Anything that happens that he didn't predict, or feels he can't handle himself, is a severe automaticity. And you only worry about those automaticities which the person feels he's unable to handle.
Now, I've had you, earlier in this course, handling very light little two-bit automaticities that didn't amount to anything, see. Like mock-ups fly around, this guy with a spacesuit keeps appearing, he vanishes it and so forth, but it keeps coming back all the time. Well, you just get him to get it back. Have him vanish it and get it back, vanish it and get it back. That's what the machine is doing, so you just make him do it and follow out the same laws, same rules that we've had before.
Well, anyway, I just kind of play this one way against the other and get rid of the blackness this way and by wasting and accepting machines that make blackness. But, when? When he's exteriorized. And we're off onto running SOP 8-C on an exteriorized thetan. The second we've got him out, and he knows he's out and he's—he could take a finger off that body for a moment, we've got nothing more and nothing less than SOP 8 -C, just as given to you on the steps. And these steps are very easy steps to follow.
But up to that point, this point of exteriorization, you're just playing these two facts one against the other: that the guy is in a body or the body is over a guy. And you want him elsewhere so that he isn't being reinfluenced all the time by the body. And you want him comfortable about walking out of a body, and you want him stable, and you don't want him to use viewpoints. And the only real uncertainty he gets is using viewpoints.
Now this astral walking—this mystic astral walking that I was talking to you about—is an educated automaticity with viewpoints. Now, there's educated emotional automaticities, too. I know one school of thought in India which is fabulous on this. But it—they practice it. Now, any time you get a school that practices something, you've got one that's setting up an automaticity.
Well, you'd better get as far away from setting up an automaticity on auditing as you can. Because the machine turns around on you and starts to audit you after a while and that's self-auditing. There's no sense in learning some kind of a pattern. You just have to know how to look.
And I'm telling you, if there's any discovery, which is of—an interesting discovery in the whole field of Scientology, two discoveries actually; we won't deal with theory or mathematics or composition of the universe or anything else—there are two very pertinent discoveries as far as we're concerned here.

ANCHOR POINTS, JUSTICE
And that is, that there's a guy in the body—what do you know? That's a discovery of magnitude. And two—you know, he's in the body, and he doesn't function well in a body, you see; you can just put that all down under the same discovery. And the other discovery is that he is handling things automatically and that this is his reduction of self-determinism. He's reduced himself by handling—letting everything be handled automatically, and we remedy that simply by making him do it, instead of do it automatically.
Giving those two points, and an ability on your part (God help you) to look, you can be the best condemned auditor that ever walked—just given those two points and knowing how to handle those two points. And then, please, putting a little imagination on it. You know? Just a little imagination. Well, there's nothing like lookingness to stimulate the imagination. So just look at the guy and listen to him.
Now, I've seen more preclears being audited on this basis: The preclear says, "But I'm going down for the third time."
And the auditor simply says, "All right. Now, let's get a recall on your mother. And let's get her standing at the stove."
And the fellow says, "But I'm going down for the third time."
And the auditor says, "Well, get another recall on your mother," and so on.
He's being calm, he's taking my advice about being courageous. Being courageous has nothing to do with being a stick of wood. It's very nice—it's a happy but unusual state—when an auditor is actually in communication with his preclear. It's a nice state, because then the preclear gets cleared. But if the auditor isn't in communication with the preclear . . .
Now, how much communication do you want? You just want to hear what he's doing that is important. So you have to separate out of all the gibberish he's liable to hand you, something that's important. What's important? He's in a body— that's important. And the other one is, he's—it's some automaticity has cut in. That's important. But only when the automaticity inhibits his exteriorization. Because you'll find soon as he gets away from a body, his automaticities drop by about 999 percent. You'd be surprised, they just practically vanish.
And after that he's dealing with rather simple machinery which is just put there by simple postulates. You just drill him into a point where he can make space and energy, and know, and be places, and get tough, and—so that he will have enough imagination to interest himself in existence.
That's all that's ever going to interest him, by the way. You take most pcs, when you exteriorize them, they haven't got enough imagination to be a drama critic. I mean, I couldn't be more scathing. What they think, they think because somebody else thinks that they should think and so forth, and they're just kind of dull on the whole thing.
They've been so condemned and kicked around about imaginings, and they're so afraid of delusion—they think that if they imagine lots of things, this brings about delusion. This is not true: Their setting up imagination as something they can't have makes it an automaticity which then gives them delusion.
Inhibiting a child from imagining is almost sure to produce the delusion in the child that he is living well, and he must do certain things in the year of 1953,1954, and that he should vote Republican and so forth. It's the finest way in the world to control somebody, is to blunt out and black out his imagination.
And—because if a fellow has imagination, why, it's—then the fellows in charge of things have to have imagination, see. They have to out-imagine the situation, and if anybody had to really think, that would make it a hard job.

139

140

27 NOVEMBER 1953
They wouldn't be able to just throw in the cops every time something went wrong. They'd have to get down and be reasonable, you know?
They'd have to say, "Well, let's see—crops, food supply, this sort of thing, that's a real problem. There are human values involved in it, and there are land values, and there are future generations involved in this, and we'll have to figure out now what's best on this situation."
And they won't figure it out by what they did in 1861—that's an auto-maticity.
And the whole—all of law is set up as this horrible, ponderous, rusting, rotten machine that just grinds on and on from the year when. Well, do you know the bulk of it is grinding on and on from the year 500 B.C.—Roman law; which is the base of English law, which is the base of our law. But English law hasn't invaded us (well, they actually, not technically since they burned the White House, but—in 1812)—but hasn't invaded us since 1776.
So it's an automatic machine. The legal procedures are set up on a—are just continuing an automatic machine that was last given a little punch in 1776. And we said, "We're all independent." And we added that to the law and wrote a constitution about it.
Actually our Constitution in the United States is not as good as the original British Magna Carta. If you want a confirmation of that, read the two documents someday.
The Magna Carta was taken away from King John, I think it was, at the point of a blunderbuss—or what was serving in those days as blunderbuss; probably a few well-aimed longbow arrows. And he recognized his kingly duty, and signed the fact that people had freedom, and that men could own land, and that men had rights to their own domiciles and so forth, and had protection of one kind and another against the state.
Later on they wrote this Constitution. The Constitution is beautiful, but not enforced. Its Bill of Rights, for instance, that follow it on as an amendment today in the United States is just plaahhh. (I know this tape's going abroad. It's perfectly true.) Rights of seizure by force, entrance by law, search—these are just violated just day after day after day after day across the length and breadth of the land.
In Great Britain, a bobby comes up to somebody's house and says—if he thinks there's a criminal harbored there, why, he knocks on the door politely and he said, "You might ask him if he would step out."
And they say, "No," and—the British equivalent of an American equivalent. And the bobby has to go away and get proper seizures and search and entrance warrants and so forth. Meantime, the cop has lost his quarry: he's in some other place.
And you think this is very, very terrible. You get the reverse on it: British justice is awful sudden. When they lay their hands on somebody who is convicted of something, they're often much too fast, by the way. They hang them quick. They sentence them and hang them the same week or the next week, you know? Boom! Just enough time to get the—dust the trial off the guy a little bit and get him steadied up so he'll stand on the platform and they drop him through.
They—by the way, this leads occasionally to miscarriages of justice. There was a young man hanged there in the Christie case. He was hanged for killing— for a murder which Christie had committed. And a year or so later they found the real murderer, and this was just one of the murderers—one of the murders which this other murderer had committed, you see. And this young man who had a wife and a baby was—had been hanged a year before for the murder of

ANCHOR POINTS, JUSTICE
the wife and baby. And he'd said at the time Christie did it. But they hanged him—quick, see?
But that's beside the point. Justice is always going to miscarry. The point is, the longer it takes to grind, the more automatic it becomes. And when civil rights and personal rights are not immediately recognized and enforced, all justice has lost its point, which is the safeguarding of the individual in the society. And you just can't have the two words sitting together: no "civil rights" and "justice." They just don't exist together. I mean, it's like saying "green is purple" or "elephants are kept in music stores." You just can't make a closure of those two terminals.
Today in the United States this is quite common to civil rights and so forth. I understand the Department of Justice—if you can imagine, all these years after, the Department of Justice was recently empowered to enforce breaches of the Bill of Rights. And the FBI was given the right to investigate them. They did this the other day—great triumph! I mean, imagine it. They're going to be surprised: I'm going to tap on their door in a couple of days—you know, come Monday, Tuesday, something like that. I'm going to say, "Well, you boys can stop fooling now, I got a couple for you." It isn't that any—I've been wrong, but I know a couple of guys who are—just plain got mauled to pieces.
So I think this is a good place to enter into the society. It might be that we can take some of the stone axes and clubs out of people's hands in this fashion. You know, civil rights.
Now, civil rights, at the same time, is what your thetan is worried about. Because he's operating outside—as poor as the law is, he doesn't have any legal power. None. He has no jurisprudence in his community of action, and this is mainly what your thetan is worried about. He's worried about, one shape or another, justice. He can't safeguard this private property called a body. The body has an identity; he doesn't have an identity. And this worries him. And he very often thinks that this body can easily be taken away from him.
Well he'd be much heartened to know that the last of the roaring lions amongst thetans was actually damped out some long time ago here on Earth. These things used to happen and they still happen in the mildest, tiniest little way imaginable, but they don't happen now. And he's been guilty of them on the past track—he's stolen people's bodies. He's asked them to step out of the body, you know, and then simply made the body walk away.
There can be justice only when there is fair justice which administers protection of the individual and gives him the right to redress under law. In the absence of that, he doesn't have any law. His home must be his castle, his possessions must be his and so on.
A second that justice falls a tiny bit short of that, there is no justice. And this is not a gradient scale of justice. There is no such thing as a gradient scale of justice, you see? I mean, it isn't things are more just than other justness. If you're going to deal with a community, and laws to handle the community, if you're going to deal with that as a community, you're going to have to have complete protection of the individual, his possessions. Otherwise you're simply hamstringing him. If you say he has protection; if you say such things as the Bill of Rights are in force and that he lives in that framework, and yet he doesn't live in that framework; if the law operates for anybody who can buy it; if the law operates to let him be sued but doesn't permit him to sue—justice has ceased anytime any one of these conditions occur, no matter how slightly. Justice is about as close to an absolute thing as one can get.

141

142

27 NOVEMBER 1953
So out of this, where justice is not possible in a large group, we get justice on a small group basis within the large group. And this is the revolution. Taking place slowly, it is called an evolution; taking place swiftly and with violence, it is called a revolution. But the revolution is always against the lack of justice. It is never against anything else. It is man's complaint that—or a group's complaint—that it has entrusted some larger beingness of itself with its own protection and enforcement, and that this entrustment has been betrayed. And we have that as the basic thought underlying every revolutionary manifesto written by any group since the beginning of time.
Now, he takes it up on a small group basis and, of course, then, we don't have large group justice because we have a small group within the large group employing force toward special means. And this is chaos. And it results in such things, in the French Revolution, as the loss of practically all the literate people in France. It results, in the United States, in such organizations as the Communist Party.
Now, such pressure groups occur in any society when a decent justice is departed from and where such things as the Bill of Rights begin to lose their purpose and meaning.
And so we have smaller groups sitting up and barking wildly. And then we get individuals all through the group who themselves, recognizing the complete lack of justice, have taken justice into their own hands. And some of them take it one way, and some of them take it another. Some are strong men and some are very weak men, and some are criminals and some become slaves. But in one way or the other, they throw the social world out of balance very markedly.
The criminal, for instance, is a product—100 percent a product—of injustice. I don't care how tough a pill it is for the state to swallow: It is parental injustice plus state injustice that makes a criminal. And these two factors are always present in the criminal. You can go down to the prisons and you can start asking people as to what the situation has been in their life. And they—you find out it starts out with some parental injustice that is quite marked, and then they find out that they are not protected in the state. And a state, by the way, which takes no responsibility for, and gives no redress, no recourse to the teenager or child, which keeps a child disenfranchised of civil rights, shouldn't ever wonder for two seconds why it has juvenile delinquency.
Now, under this little set of laws I've just been—these are sort of natural laws that kind of underlie all this structure—you can see immediately that any group, then, which is deprived of rights, to its need of rights, so as to suffer wrong at the hands of many, is going to become a revolutionary or protesting group, and any individual in a group is going to become the same way. He's going to be very wary. And his primary philosophy will be: "I have to administer justice myself." There is either, then, an absolute justice or, in terms of an individual as a member of a group or just as an individual, the person has to feel that he can handle or render justice. You get these two things? I mean, there's got to be some sort of a justice involved.
And what you're dealing with, when you're dealing with a preclear who is difficult to exteriorize, is a person who has come in conflict with these basic fundamentals. He's come in conflict with them to such an extent that he feels he has no right to protect his own property. He has been disenfranchised one way or the other.
A whole series of techniques to remedy his problems immediately display themselves the moment you understand what is justice. It means that he either must have in himself the feeling that sooner or later he can have enough

ANCHOR POINTS, JUSTICE
force and power of his own to balance the books—when they need balancing, not because of past scores—but to protect himself, to protect his body, to protect his beingness and protect those dependent upon him.
Man is not quite as egocentric as some of the past superstitions, such as voodooism or psychology, would have us believe. But—he's not that egocentric. Matter of fact, the only button that runs on problems and runs like mad is "other people's problems"; the button never runs on "my problems." It's fascinating. It's "other people's problem"—responsibility to others.
Well, so you have, in anybody difficult to exteriorize, a person who is interested in the vested interest called a body. And he feels that he can protect it—if he stays right close to it and right near to hand, you see, possibly there's some chance of protecting it. And—but if he moves away from it in any way, shape or form, he feels that he will have abandoned, somewhat, his right to it, and he will let—make it less defensible. And his problem is one of defenses.
The answer to this—where there exists no rightful justice with regard to the property of a thetan and the identity of a thetan so that he can have property; or the lack of necessity on the part of a thetan to have property, because he can simply create it at will—lacking those various solutions, the best solution doesn't quite occur to this fellow.
The best solution, if he can't have justice, is to be himself justice. And he can only be justice to the ratio that he is able to generate and use force.
And a person who is inside a body doesn't dare—any more than a person on any other theta trap—doesn't dare use any force because he'll just blow the body to atoms. So the only way he can really protect a body is to be outside of a body and in command of sufficient force in order to reach a level of desirable justice. That's his solution; that's his best bet. But he's inverted on this to a point where he doesn't feel that he can do this. Too many things have been taken from him.
Therefore, the remedy of anchor points is the problem. Because the loss of anchor points and the ownership of anchor points, their destruction, their untimely creation (so as to impede other activities), is the problem of justice. Justice concerns itself with points, and it only indifferently concerns itself with the space enclosed in the points.
So that your preclear who is difficult to exteriorize—if you understand him well, he is a person who is involved with justice. And he feels that he himself would have to be justice in order to continue to own his body in any kind of an altered condition. And you have posed him a very weighty problem. Anytime you say, "Be three feet back of your head," you have posed him this problem. And if he's already been disabused of any belief in any future justice on the part of this society, he, of course, is not going to move an inch away from the property if he can possibly help it.
It's no good to give him a lecture and tell him that justice is desirable only when he can knock people's heads off, because he immediately goes into a furious rage against all the heads that have been knocked off. But the problem is an overt act-motivator sequence having to do with the property of bodies—overt act-motivator sequence.
Well, there are many light things that you can run in order to remedy this. Let's think of the number of anchor points that a person customarily has in terms of bodies. Let's treat a body as an anchor point—that's kind of silly, because a body is a collection of anchor points.
But let's treat a body as an anchor point, and let's find out that every time an actor died, the person lost an awful lot of screen time. See? The body of the

143

144

27 NOVEMBER 1953
actor was one of his anchor points. Every time a celebrity died, he lost an anchor point. And this, by the way, is the gradient scale which leads up finally to his loss of Mother or his loss of Father or his loss of a wife. You see? The loss of anchor points is his problem. He can't even see anchor points. He doesn't dare see anchor points. And furthermore, if he created them, he'd have to protect them by painting them black. So he can't locate the anchor points in his head easily.
This is the rationale, if there's any rationale, and these really are reasons— and these are quite valid reasons—behind the failure to exteriorize. It is a problem in property. It's really a mechanical problem. But he has gotten himself to the point where he feels he needs this body, he wants to continue with this body, he wishes it well, he wants it to function well. All of his goals have to do with bodies, his ends of cycle have to do with bodies, his entire orientation is care of the body, and now you all of a sudden ask him to be three feet out!
And if he does not think that this society is capable of administering justice to him, he won't exteriorize. If his belief has chronically been in the past that injustice was a commoner practice than justice, you'll have difficulty with your preclear right at that moment. He's lost too much property, he's lost too much of this and too much of that, and he's had too many things taken away from him, you might say, in the name of justice, in order for him to easily give up another piece of MEST. You're trying to reduce his havingness to an intolerable point and it makes him frantic! Just the thought of doing so will make him frantic. He'll do all sorts of things. He's even liable to kind of curl up and get convulsive and so forth.
Well, so what's back of this automaticity he suddenly displays? He says, "Yeah, I did that for a second, and oh, I just feel terrible! I just feel terrible." What's back of this? Just—"If I'm back of this body, I can't protect it or control it, I can't defend it, and this is the main problem with which I am faced because I have lost too much." He might as well tell you that, see. If he says, "I just feel bad, and I don't like that, and I keep snapping back in"—all these remarks immediately translate to "I have problems of justice which have never been resolved." See?
He also has this concept: "I am not going to have justice, even when I ask for it, anywhere in the universe." That is his full belief. He believes this.
He believes, sometimes—when he's really, really, very, very, very hard to exteriorize, he believes at this level: "Anybody in the world can ask for any judgment or arrest against me, no matter how unreasonable, and it will be immediately granted them. But if I were to ask for, no matter how reasonably—for the slightest redress of wrong, even though I paid millions of dollars to the finest attorneys alive, it would never be granted to me." And there's his orientation. He can't have any justice!
Well, the second that you give him a smell of the idea that he can be his own justice, he starts to whip up some horsepower and starts to think about what he's going to do to them. See? They've got revenge! So we're resisting, right away, the enemy. We're using force and all that sort of thing.
Well, this kind of a churn goes on in his mind. It shows up in this form of ethics. "What are ethics?" he'll say. "What's justice? What's ethics? What's moral?" And you'll get into a tumult on these things. And I can give you, without you going over and over and over it, his—the final conclusion that comes to him. That conclusion, at length and at last, is that the only immorality, and the only failure in ethics, is to deny oneself. It finally reduces down to this, in the final analysis.

ANCHOR POINTS, JUSTICE
But there isn't any reason to get philosophic with him. You've got somebody on your hands that's being driven around by ... What big general term is he being driven about by? Hm?
Male voice: Automaticity.
That's right. He's just being pounded around by automaticities, which themselves are built out of an effort to remedy and keep even a score and balance of justice in the societies and communities in which he lives.
And you're just dealing with these automaticities, and he may, if he's in terrible shape—you might say (quote) "out of space," we have said, and so forth; he's occluded and all that sort of thing—you're just dealing with this one problem. You're not dealing with eighty problems. As far as thinking is concerned and knowing is concerned, you're only dealing with one problem and that is the problem of property. You're dealing with somebody who has to own something in order to have it. Many ways to state this. Or you're dealing with somebody who continues to protect but is actually, he realizes, failing to protect. This person has problems. Well, when you say he has problems, they're not really problems of the future or anything of the sort.
Now, a person who is quite psychotic or neurotic has problems of this nature to such a degree that they now not only cannot have property, but the property which they perceive must be different than the actual property, because they've even been disenfranchised of their right to perceive properly.
Now, a person who is occluded has merely been disenfranchised of his right to perceive. And a person who is delusive has been disenfranchised to such a degree that he can only perceive when he perceives something wrong, something out of the—order, something weird. He could see an elephant coming through the door, but he couldn't see his mother. You get the idea? So he's— his automaticity has mounted up and is running him to such a degree that it puts elephants coming through the door.
And by the way, how would you handle that? How would you handle that? How would you handle that?
Male voice: Increase it.
You'd—he—you got a pc has elephants coming through the door, what do you say to him?
Male voice: Well, get him to put more of them there.
Mm-hm. Would you do it "more of them" or would you get him to put elephants through the door?
Male voice: Well, I'd have him put lots of them through. And then finally slow one up and—oh, look through one, make some more come, so he'd have control of them.
Okay. That's right. That's right. All right.
The perception problem is, then—it becomes actually, by evolution, a justice problem. We have the justice first appearing when we first worry about "the right to look." And when it goes into the field of reason and so on, why, we have "right to own" and so on, long after we have the right to look.
So if he's dealing with perceptic difficulties, you know that low on the scale in his immediate society, he has problems dealing with the fact that he can't have justice but other people probably can, and that everything is crooked and backwards and be—going to be used against him one way or the other. And we go up the scale and we wonder why this fellow can't perceive. Other people can look, but he can't. This is the way you translate justice as you go up into perception in space, you see. That means other people can have space but he can't have any space.

145

146

27 NOVEMBER 1953
And all of this breaks down—as we get into the rationale in this universe, it just breaks down into this fundamental problem of justice—which you probably think I have been beating to death at long ends trying to get around one way or the other to spend some time, but I'm not; I'm talking about a preclear.
I'm also talking about a sick society. Anytime a society runs fresh out of justice, it's run out of society—it's like that. You know, the best way in the world to make a bunch of savage beasts is to be unjust.
Even if you're running a small group or something like that, small orga-nization—say you're a corporal in charge of a squad—you're continually dealing with this problem: problems of justice, problems of justice. And it takes a pretty skilled corporal to handle a squad. It does, to have a good squad and so forth.
How skilled does a mother with three or four kids have to be? Well, let me assure you, they're not that skilled! I don't care how skilled she has to be— they're not that skilled. They don't—ordinarily, don't function in terms of justice. And when they do, you've got a good mother, got a good father. You've got certainty. It's—even if it's only his certainty that somebody's going to get his block knocked off, you've at least got certainty!
That's a certainty of sorts. It's poor, but it's better than "knock off their blocks today, and kiss them tomorrow, and then buy them anything they want on Tuesday, and then deny them anything to eat for a week because they've been so bad." I mean, you know, this is uncertainty. And that's randomity. That's the definition of randomity, is unpredictability.
If you could always predict that some guy was going to do something bad to you—if you could always predict this—why, you see, you'd have the certainty. It's that he might do something good to you that upsets the whole equation. The only enemies—the only enemies you have that stand up and stick around are these enemies that were not predictably 100 percent bad or good. They were 50 percent bad and 50 percent good, and hung up in a bunch of maybes and so forth. One day Papa was perfectly willing to play ball with you, and then he never looked at you for two weeks. And then you complained about this and it was explained to you by Mother how he'd played ball with you every day for the last two weeks. This is the sort of squirrel bait that kids fool with.
Well, your preclear, if he's difficult to exteriorize, has suffered a great deal of injustice in youth, and it goes right back to that. It goes back to something very simple: It goes back to anchor points, loss of. You find somebody who is difficult to exteriorize had no good property rights enforced for him. He'll have his keenest memory and his best recall on that period of his life when somebody was around who enforced his property rights—or even vaguely enforced them, you know?
You'll—for instance, he'll have this terrific memory of being at his aunt's. You know, he was at his aunt's every summer, and he can remember these. And you could say, very logically, "Well, of course, it was summer and he was having a good time. That's why he remembers all those summers. And he was away from his other things and so on." And then you find out that his mother and father were also at his aunt's all these times, and he's kind of forgotten that. But it's true.
And then what pertinent questions would you start asking right about there if you just wanted to clean up somebody's track on some certain subject? Just Straightwire on the recovery of anchor points. This is what we're talking about now: recovery of anchor points. That, justice, and perception—that's all in the same band.

ANCHOR POINTS, JUSTICE
His memory of his youth is very good during a certain period. If you examine that period you will find out that his property rights were enforced. So, of course, he has memory. Memory itself depends upon being able to get in when you want some anchor points. It doesn't depend on that, but people think it does. It just depends on knowing what happened. It's a much simpler statement than a flock of mechanical anchor points coming in. But trained memories operate with: forgettingness is throwing them away—throwing away anchor points; and memory is pulling them in.
So if a person starts losing too many anchor points, he starts forgetting everything. So if he's around home and he has no justice and his rights of property cannot be enforced, he doesn't have any memory on his childhood.
I can tell you in a moment—I can be with a preclear a minute, not even look at him, and just get the answer to that: "Can you recall your childhood easily?"
And the person says, "No, it's very occluded."
I can tell you immediately what—his status with regard to property, then and now. What was his status then, what is his status now, with regard to property? How does he feel about justice? What will he vote politically? He'll vote for anything politically which tends to give a better right to property and safe¬guard his rights to property in particular. That's what he'll vote for politically.
Anybody wants to go down here and sweep a national election—I don't care if his name was known to the people ten minutes before he was suddenly put up on the ballot—if his voice could be heard simply advocating better rights to property, better protection of property and more justice, and if he sounded really like he meant it, boy, he'd sweep any office he wanted to possibly sweep. Because this is the one thing people can't have in this society today. They're very leery of this sort of thing.
We've had a rough time in this country because we've run on two standards, and one is the political standard and the other is an economic standard completely at variance from the political standard. In the political standard we've had two standards again in there, which is what we say happens and what happens.
You say, "Well, any country runs like that, what they say happens and what happens. The hell it is. I mean, no country under the sun has ever been so anxious to convince schoolchildren of the greatness and justice of liberty, fraternity, and equality as they exist in the United States. They just pound it in. Textbooks, textbooks, textbooks, beat it and pound it in: "Our American citizen has rights to justice, he has rights to property, he has good rights, and there's nothing more wonderful than the"—whatever amendment it is, the Fifth Amendment, I think. Is it the Fifth Amendment? or whatever it is. Oh, maybe it's the first ten amendments. Anyway, this Bill of Rights, so called. I've gotten so disgusted with it, I've even kicked it out of my memory. Because they keep talking about this thing, and then it doesn't come true.
The first time the little boy is down at the end of the block and gets picked up by a cop for stealing something he didn't steal or gets beaten around for breaking a window he didn't break, and then it's backed up by the whole family and he has no court of appeal, he all of a sudden looks around and realizes there's no justice anywhere he can see. And the second he realizes that thoroughly, he's a juvenile delinquent because he's in revolt against the society. And when he really realizes it, then he's down the street knocking your wife over the head or gunning some cop through the guts just to see the fellow belch. This guy gets into a terrible state. Why? Because he's been lied to continually about the

147

148

27 NOVEMBER 1953
complete power of the Constitution and the complete sanctity and security of the central government, and then he finds out it doesn't work!
If you want to make a calm country, just keep telling them that the federal government is crooked and has no intentions of enforcing anything. Everybody will be calm. But you put everybody on this double maybe. And the only reason pcs are hard to—harder to fish out of their heads in this country than other countries in the world is simply that one factor in education. And if you want to pick on any factor, it's that one.
Sure enough, it's up to you and it's up to me and it's up to the rest of us to see that there is some justice, there's rights before law, that there is right as written in the Constitution, which is the law of the land. The Constitution says it is the law of the land—okay, it's the law of the land. Just make sure it is, that's all. Don't write up the Constitution as the law of the land and then put that in your hip pocket every time you want to do a fast pitch for the Democratic Party or something. See? I mean, it doesn't work that way. If you're going to operate on a high advertised ethic, you certainly better deliver the high advertised ethic.
Now, Mama and Papa who talk to your preclear consistently and continually and forever and aye about "they were so just, and they did so much for the preclear" and he knows damn well they're lying in their teeth—gets so darn stuck in his body, he doesn't know whether he's going or coming. Because they never regarded his property rights as rights at all, they just talked about it. And when it came to his ownership and conduct of property, they weren't there.
You exteriorize him, you've got a problem in anchor points immediately. What's the gradient scale of anchor points? The least important losses which he has suffered, to the most terrible loss which he suffered, which was the person who enforced his rights to property while a child. I don't care who he says was the terrible loss, it's that one that was the loss. And that's the one who is sticking him, if you're going to go into the past. But there is no real reason to go into the past.
Now, I've laid down to you here—if you're trying to understand the preclear, you just get this idea of anchor points, ownership and justice as they're associated. Just realize he's scared somebody's going to grab this thing. They've grabbed everything else he owns.
Realize he's probably done some injustice in the past on grabbing. I'm not in—you see, it's a different thing: Theft and injustice are not a—that isn't the same bracket of words. Overt acts and injustice. Justice doesn't mean, as it's normally interpreted, "no overt acts or motivators"; it doesn't mean "no action." It merely means that if you hacked a guy's head off, certainly that guy has the right to appeal somewhere to get your head hacked off, if this was an overt act and he can't [can] prove that he shouldn't have had his head knocked off. That's really the statement of justice about this.
You'll find out your preclear's up against this problem in terms of ethics. And he's turning this round and round and round and round in his head, one way or the other. And it all boils down to this: loss of anchor points. Which means what? Anchor points out of position or gone. And if the anchor points of the body themselves are disarranged by impacts and so forth, he can't exteriorize from them because he can't find what he's exteriorizing for.
The only real view a thetan has of the body, the brightest view he has of the body, is this pattern of anchor points. If he's upset about justice, he's upset about anchor points. If he's upset about anchor points, his body anchor points

ANCHOR POINTS, JUSTICE
undoubtedly are out of line. And if they're out of line, he can't get out of them because the space in them is warped, therefore his thinkingness is warped and so on.
Do you know what you face when you face a preclear? You aren't facing anything that has to do with whether or not he was properly toilet trained— has nothing to do with it. You aren't worrying about whether or not he has horrible sexual inhibitions or whether or not he wants to get out of the body or not. It's just whether or not he has enough feeling of security to be three feet away from that darn body, and whether he can still control it, you see, and whether or not it's going to be taken away from him.
He's also got to feel a pretty good security about you. Because the trick's been pulled on him in the past that he's left a body and somebody else grabbed it immediately. The fellow who asked him out of it took it away from him! This has happened. And it's not going to happen here. Not while I still have the power to zap somebody.
Okay.

149



Symbols
A lecture given on 27 November 1953

This is the afternoon lecture of November the 27th. We are going to ask a question and we're going to take up Step VI today.
Now, the question which is going to be asked here is a very, very simple question. How do you fix a thetan up so he's disabled? Come on, how do you disable a thetan?
Male voice: Get him mixed up in energy.
Second male voice: Get him to agree on barriers.
Third male voice: Make him think he's his anchor points.
Fourth male voice: Make him resist.
Hm?
Fourth male voice: Make him resist.
Fifth male voice: Get him to agree to something.
Sixth male voice: You could put him in a body.
Seventh male voice: Invalidate him.
Female voice: Collapse his space when you get a chance.
Third male voice: Make his anchor points somebody else's or make him think so.
Gee, you guys are inventive. You know, I've asked general questions— I've asked general questions about how you made people well here several times, and everybody sits there silent. Now I ask you one about how to louse somebody up ... (audience laughter) Very interesting!
Female voice: Can't finish them, can you?
Very interesting, isn't it?
Female voice: Can't finish them.
You can come awful close.
I asked you a while ago about that, John, and what did you tell me?
Male voice: Fix him up so he can't look.
And how else did you tell me?
Male voice: Hm?
You told me another method.
Male voice: Yeah I did, but what the devil was it?
Just as you walked out of the door of the office there, you told me a method.
Male voice: Make him uncertain.
Yeah. Well, how do you do this?
Male voice: I told you something else?
Well, that's more or less what you told me.

151

152

27 NOVEMBER 1953
Male voice: Well, I told you that the way to fix up a thetan is ...
This is very interesting . . .
Male voice:. . . was fix him so he couldn't look . . .
. . . because I just played the same trick on him.
Male voice:. . . so he couldn't look and then . . .
I played the identical trick on him that he told me was the right trick, and now we're reaping the harvest of this. I told him that it was you fixed him up so he could look. And I said it very seriously, expecting to pick him up a little bit later on it today.
Male voice: I told you to fix him up so he couldn't look, but I didn't know that of my own knowledge. I knew . . .
You didn't know that of your own knowledge. That's right. You didn't know that, but I told you that, and now the first answer you gave me, which happens to be the right one, has done what? It's evaporated.
Male voice: No, it hasn't.
All right. What is it?
Second male voice: Well, he can't know.
Third male voice: Forgotten.
Male voice: No, that wasn't it. I remember telling you something else, but what the devil was it?
"Make him so that he's wrong," you said to me.
Male voice: That's right! That's right.
And I came right back and gave you the same trick. I told you, "No, no." I said I wanted you to tell me about that later because it was actually "fix him up so he couldn't look," which is terrifically reasonable. It's the second echelon of how you fix him up. The first way you fix him up is how?
Male voice: Make him wrong.
That's right. You reduce his knowingness by making him wrong.
Because—we covered this very early in the course—the first echelon is knowingness, the second echelon is space.
Male voice: All right.
Right. You've got it laid out right in front of you there, and yet in spite of this, I could play the same trick on John back here and he'd fall for it. You get that? I said, just in so many words, "No. No," I said, "that's not right."
This is just a little case, a test case I'm showing you on it. See, this is perfect, the memory on exactly what he said—because he gave me exactly the right answer, right off the bat, bang! I said, "What's wrong with a thetan? What can you do to a thetan? What's the only thing you can really do to a thetan to foul him up?"
And he gave me the right answer immediately (snap). "Well," he says, "you could make him wrong. Make him believe he's wrong. That's all you can do to him. As far as I'm concerned," he says, "that's all you could do to him."
And I said, "No, no." I said, "You give me that answer later and you tell me about that later. Now, you think about that, and you tell me some other way now. The only way that you can really .. ."And here we had the trick. Now, he's just waking up to it, right now. You see that?
Male voice: Sure.
You get that mechanism? That's been drifting all the way down the track.
Now we're dealing with symbols. We're in the level of symbols and we have hit, at Step VI, the break point of the case. When a person believes that he has lost his ability to a large degree, to a very large degree, to recover his own Tightness—you know, he's lost his ability to recover his own Tightness one

SYMBOLS
way or the other—we get all these other mechanisms cutting in. And any time other tricks have been played on him, such as occluding his vision, and anchor points, space, anything about energy, making him believe he's energy, making him think he's a barrier—you can do anything to him, but easily, after he comes across a certain break point.
You can come across that early break point when he becomes a body. That is a break point. Earlier on the track, when he became a doll. You see? That also is a higher break point. And there's a lower break point in a body. It is the point where he believes that his capabilities of being right are such that anything he does will meet with an opposite result. See, he's always going to be wrong. No matter how right he may think he is, he's going to be somehow or other wrong.
And this amounts to not just an automaticity, this amounts to a way of life. And his wrongness begins to show up more and more, and it first shows up on a single subject that is so serious that when he gets to a point where he— you give him a mock-up of this subject, it always turns out to be some other mock-up on some other subject, you would have something he can't look at.
See, we've got Tightness and wrongness now entering into looking. And we give him a mock-up, let's say, of a piano. And he gets a mock-up, consistently, of an elephant. Or inconsistently—the next time he gets a mock-up, it's a zebra. The next time he gets a mock-up, it's a baby's milk bottle. And each time he's trying to mock up the piano.
Well, it would take an auditor to force the guy to think about mocking up with a piano. See, that'd just—it'd take an auditor to make him do that. He'd never, of his own volition, think of mocking up a piano or having anything to do with a piano. And he wouldn't, in the MEST universe, see a piano. You could walk him through the room and he wouldn't see the piano.
Now, at that state (that's a rough estimate because we're dealing with an arbitrary number and—but we're not dealing with an arbitrary state), we can call that a VI. The object is missing. See, it's disappeared in a mock-up, and he gets something else every time he gets this mock-up, if an auditor forces him to try to mock it up. But the actual part of it is, is the object is missing in the whole universe. There just isn't any. But when he gets that, he is Step VI, at least about that subject.
Now, when he gets Step VI pretty broadly, why, everything starts turning up missing. I mean, if he was a Step VI on the subject of clocks, he would simply never see a clock. He'd just never see one. Somebody would have to—a la the auditor making him get the mock-up—walk up and take a clock, and put the clock in his hands and say, "This is a clock. Look at it." And the fellow would hazily see a dim outline.
Another characteristic of the step is, when the fellow isn't occluded on mock-ups, you—actually, in the room, at the moment he's sitting there, with his MEST eyes (and he doesn't know about auditing, doesn't know about Scientology or anything of the sort) a black frame may start to appear around an object, or something just vanishes. It vanishes so thoroughly he doesn't quite know what's vanished. But a black frame will, with his MEST eyes, start to appear around a specialized object like a piano. He'll notice there's a terrific black frame of some sort or another, and he won't quite see what's in the black frame.
It works out on people like this: There's somebody continually calling himself to this person's attention. And he's gotten to a point, and the strain is so great on this—and believe me, this is terrific duress; this person must have been a terrific duress to produce this effect—the individual who has been the great

153

154

27 NOVEMBER 1953
strain on this person will, in the eyes of this person, be suddenly surrounded or slowly surrounded by a black frame or a white field, or things will turn blue in the person's vicinity or something like that, and then the person will disappear. See that? That manifestation is quite common. But there are numbers of them like this.
It's where the—it's the first point where, selectively, lots—actually at Step VI, lots of symbols shift and alter. He tries to get a picture of one thing, he gets an entirely different picture. That's rather chronic with a VI. He—it's just chronic, what we'd call a VI, you see. Where—that's where we get interested in this manifestation is not when it amounts to an automaticity, anybody has those, it's when just everything starts to blur out.
And there are several objects at Step VI which have vanished or which have black hoods over them or something—they're gone, they're just gone. I mean, the person would be utterly incapable—it's hard for you to imagine this, you could say, "Clock," see, and you say, "Clock. Clock." Put it in his hands, make him feel the clock and so forth, he would then get a dim outline of a clock. He would not see a clock, you understand, he'd just get a dim outline of one. That's VI. And every VI has at least one of these objects.
Now, when we get down to VII, we have achieved the broad view of the whole universe. Just broadly. Things all over the place of all kinds and varieties and so forth are doing this trick. Walls do them—they fall in. And every time he looks at a cigarette it turns into a beetle. Or there's—he sees something else, and everything else starts to disappear and then turn into another object in this physical universe. So you see the gradient scale of what parallel we have between mock-ups and so forth.
Now, we have that with knowingness. Knowingness goes down scale, of course, senior to and accompanying all this. Knowingness is just it. And then as soon as it begins to be considered, breaks into rightness and wrongness, and this in itself is consideration. And on its highest echelon, this is solely on the subject of aesthetics. A way backtrack thetan who—way long time ago— I mean, guys of good condition, so forth, their total rightness and wrongness had to do with aesthetics. The only way they'd really get into arguments with each other and so forth would be on aesthetics.
An aesthetic what? An aesthetic thought. See, it wasn't even an aesthetic mock-up yet, it was just an aesthetic thought. They became critical of each other about their aesthetic thoughts. This was the only way you could get a big line of individuality: The fellow didn't think of something correctly. It's thought games. This is quite early.
Well, this is very easily disturbed, and it's easily disturbed in almost anybody. People have exact Tone Scale parallels on their reactions to being wrong. That is to say, motion, and being accused of being wrong, produce the same reaction in these various case levels on the Tone Scale.
In other words, you get a 1.1—you accuse a 1.1 of being wrong. Well, in terms of motion, he will let the motion go by, you see, and he'll move his hand and then put his hand back, very covertly when you aren't looking, in place. You see? Well, a 1.1 will do this—when this is a chronic 1.1—he'll say, "Yes, yes." He'll eventually surrender to your logic, and surrender this point and that point, and then when you have walked away, why, he will very covertly explain to anybody else there and to himself, that he has now put his hand back. See, he believes the first thing that he believed before. He has not altered one hair, see, really, on the belief on the situation. He's still combating on the thing.

SYMBOLS
What happens to him, though, as he's pounded and hammered with this is he goes down into grief, and when made too wrong will cry. Just that—just will cry. And then he gives up, and finally grief itself becomes the chronic tone.
Now, when people try to push him out of grief—which is a sort of a soppy, solid, holding proposition and so on—he simply goes into apathy. When people try to drive people in grief to do something, they produce inaction. See? I mean, they really start to produce more grief, and then they produce inaction.
And it's quite interesting. You wouldn't think of an army being in grief and going into inaction, but there's an historical event that—where one did. And it's only important to us because north Africa is still an arid waste. But the army of people who had been the Vandals and who had swept down and conquered north Africa—and who had been big enough and tough enough to loot all Rome and bring back, actually, the gold roofs of a temple or two back to the African coast—these people who were Carthage, and who in the long run won after all; these people there, under attack by Belisarius who was sent by Justinian to take care of this, recognized that they were under attack.
Well, they'd been in a southern climate long enough to key in clear across the boards and they were in foul shape by this time because that hot African climate, and lots of slaves and soft living and so on; and they weren't in any hilarity now, they were in grief. And the—one of the principal guard companies, cavalry unit, came galloping up a hill toward Belisarius' vanguard and were slaughtered to a man.
This news reached the capital, which is quite near Tunis, and when the news reached the capital, the other troops simply stood around and put their arms around each other's shoulders and wept. And that was true of an enormous army. That was an enormous army. It was much bigger by eight or ten times than Belisarius' army. It was as well equipped; it was better drilled.
And these men stood on the field of battle and wept for a while until they were hit by Belisarius' charges, and having been hit by those charges two or three times, they simply laid down and let themselves be slaughtered. And Belisarius' troops did do just that: They killed them all. And then the women, the widows—to show you grief again in operation—came out and sold themselves, in terms of how much property they were holding, to Belisarius' troops before the battle was even dry on the ground.
This is real interesting, isn't it? I mean, you get a—you can get a whole strata, a whole organism like an army, so forth, will go into that. So will a country go into that.
Now, here's the level of knowingness. What the devil had disturbed the Vandal knowingness? That's the question you would ask. What had disturbed that? That's the primary factor. Let's not look for significances under the energy, and significances this way and that way. I tell you all their prenatals had keyed in; this is a manifestation of something else—it's a hot climate, they were already down in energy. But what had disturbed their knowingness? History is completely blank on that point.
One can only surmise what disturbed their knowingness. They were in north Africa and their own tribal gods had sort of fallen by the wayside. These people had inherited enormous property, and with that property they had inherited the religions of north Africa. And they had just gotten through raiding all of Rome a few decades earlier. They'd wiped out Rome, really—they smashed it flat and loaded it on ships and took it back over to north Africa again, and imported with it enormous quantities of slaves.

155

156

27 NOVEMBER 1953
Mm, what was the Roman slave doing in those days? He was drinking the blood of the Lamb and eating the bread of the Lord at a mad rate. North Africa was a churning madhouse of this Christian sect raiding that Christian sect. In all the Christian purges of the Roman Empire, in all those purges I don't think fifty—anywhere near ... The first one, for instance, thirty Christians were knocked off—that famous purge that we hear so much about that Nero did— well, that included thirty Christians.
And I don't think there were more than about fifty of these purges all told; I think there were ten or twelve major ones, but there were about fifty of them. And in all these purges, there probably weren't more than five or six or eight thousand Christians killed by Empire troops.
But in one year alone in Alexandria, one sect of Christians fighting another sect of Christians wiped out and killed one hundred thousand Christians. In one year alone! This is real madness, isn't it? And their chronic emotion was grief. And here we had what amounts to Anglo-Saxon troops holding all of the north of Africa and giving a manifestation like this in the battlefield. What had disturbed their knowingness?
We can surmise what had disturbed their knowingness. They were no longer dealing with their own woods gods and so forth from northern Europe, that place from which they'd come. Their basic knowingness, which is to say that thing in which they had invested belief—they'd already gone astray by investing belief in something; now that had been redisturbed and they had become, to a large degree, "Christianized." And so that belief had been redisturbed—that is to say, their tribal gods redisturbed into Christianity—and now in Christianity, we had these huge masses of Christians attacking these huge masses of Christians. And just because two churches sat one across the street from the other, why, there'd be riots in the street every morning. And nobody raised any vegetables, they went around selling tracts.
And this was the social order in which such a strange thing could occur. You'd almost think any body of troops under drill and so on, would at least put up a—some kind of battle formation, not just lie down and say, "Kill me." But there is what made—we could surmise this, I don't say this is what happened, but I'm just trying to give you an idea of an—of shifts, shifts of belief.
You see, they had to admit they were wrong about their tribal gods, now they had to admit that they were wrong about some sect of Christians, now they had to admit they were wrong about something else, you see. And then they had to admit they were wrong again about something else, and we've just got a falling leaf effect, a dwindling spiral. One after the other, the fellow was pulled this way and that.
Now, you take anybody in the field of magic. The books of magic—magic being a process which is the materialization of spirits, and handling spirits— of course, these boys accumulated more information about the behavior of thetans, without knowing what they were doing, during the last fifteen hundred years than anybody else did.
Spiritualists didn't. A spiritualist normally considered himself to be junior to the spirits he monkeyed with. Period. I mean, I'm saying that colloquially because this about characterizes this activity of spiritualism—he monkeys with spirits. They don't know anything about them.
But magic is something else. Magic existed, and a magician was trained, to materialize and control and send off on errands, spirits—bad ones and good ones. They made no differentiation between bad spirits and good spirits as far as their own habits and activities were concerned. See? They'd just as

SYMBOLS
soon handle a good one as a bad one. So these boys were fairly up Tone Scale. They faded out fairly fast, but they were very active about 800 A.D. here on Earth—very active.
And you'll find in their books this repeated line: That if one is educated in the field of magic, he should not then and therefore, merely because he reads it in some book, suddenly desert all his past beliefs and teachings. This was one of their tenets. One mustn't desert these beliefs. Just because he was dealing with magic did not mean that he should cease to be a Christian magician. They stressed this very heavily. Why? Because by changing his belief, if he's given these beliefs and he believed he had to believe (you see, that's the first thing that you'd get—the first aberration—he believed he had to believe, and then after that he believed he had to be convinced), why, he went down the line on this, and eventually he was being a slave to the very spirits which he was supposed to control.
A very interesting chapter on Earth's history which has been almost completely masked. For instance, groups of these people—they're just not known in the history textbooks, that's all. They've just been erased. They operated in the field of biochemistry, amongst other things. In 1213 we find them operating with successfully—operating successfully with artificial insemination. They also were operating successfully in the induction of hormones into the human body in order to rejuvenate it. They were doing all these things.
They got wiped out but good. The Catholic Church wiped them out. And that, by the way, was what started Freemasonry. So here we go. We've got them right up here in present time with us. They sit down the line, and I don't know whether they know the lines they're chanting mean the lines they're chanting or not. But a lot of their lower rating rituals and so forth are definitely right straight up from the magician of 800.
The Great Seal of the United States is, on its obverse side one of these recurring symbols. You go down to Washington, you start looking around the architecture and the buildings and the symbols and the seals of the government and so forth, and you're just falling into magic every way you look. You see, you're falling into one set of symbols—these are Masonic symbols. That's because George Washington and all the rest of the boys who amounted to anything, that formed this country—that occupied any office, that is, at the country's beginning—were all Freemasons. And these people were Freemasons from Scotland, to which the people, on the breakup of Freemasonry, and the magicians of north Africa, fled. They fled to Scotland. They had a few of their lower ratings—up to about 7th degree—they fled to Scotland, formed their chapters and then from there spread out across the rest of the world. The 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th degree material never arrived in Scotland and the—Freemasonry operates up to that level now.
I'm not letting any secrets out of the bag because I've talked a few times to Masons and so forth, and managed to cross them up no end by simply knowing some of their 7th degree work. Just extrapolating it out of books of magic which are still in existence but in Amharic, another language which isn't often read. And this is very puzzling to find this—all this symbolism turning up.
You're living on top of that symbolism right now. You've got it in your pocket. You got it right in your pocket, you spent it for lunch and so on. You're still dealing with the strongest cult of the Middle Age, and actually that cult is the dominant cult of the Western Hemisphere today—still is. Even at this distance, those boys are still knowing why they're assuming command of something rather than—at early days, they didn't "believe in" near so much

157

158

27 NOVEMBER 1953
as they "made things believe in them" and that was one of their bywords. They did this. They also had a lot to say about cause and effect.
It's very odd that what—by the way, Scientology doesn't owe them anything very much except for this: where Scientology has turned up hot once in a while, it's crossed tracks with that school of thought. It's crossed tracks back and forth, which is a different thing than taking that school of thought, you see. There just happens to be agreement between these two things as you go along.
And we take cause and effect. They talked an awful lot about cause and effect; they talked widely and they talked considerably about it and they wrote a great deal about it and so on. Now, their ideas of cause and effect are a little more complex than the ideas that we have been using about cause and effect. But they used this idea, you see. Only when they said "cause," they meant it in this limited state: they were creating an effect. See, they were causing an effect and they meant that in terms of a ritual, a system of communication, and that's what they were talking about. They weren't talking about the basic fundamentals of existence. They were just talking about what they did. Well, we get a difference then.
The only reason I'm talking about this at all is just to show you that a knowingness goes flip-flop, back and forth, and every time somebody says, "Well, I was wrong," and so on, we have a little bit of a jam on the track. Well, you'd better clear this up with a preclear. Because a preclear has very often known and had full and complete belief in something, and all of a sudden you throw Scientology at him and you do what? You make him wrong.
Now, you take somebody who is very expert in the field of medicine. You take some good surgeon: He has seen results out of surgery, he knows what he can do with surgery. He can take out bones and stretch bones and hack up bones and he can cut out appendices and he can do all sorts of tricks with textbooks and otherwise. He's very good. And he's very expert, his hands are very nimble, he has a fine concept of every facet of anatomy. And true, he doesn't make much of a practice of investigating or examining any side effects of surgery. He says he's not interested in anything else, he sort of puts blinders on himself like that. And now one day he gets sick, and there's nothing to cut out, you know? He gets sick from something that doesn't offer itself up to a knife. This is very embar¬rassing, because you've immediately gone outside of his field of knowingness.
Now, surgeons have, by the way, in the past, even taken out their own appendix. They have. I mean, they've done all sorts of things. I mean, that's in their field of knowingness—they can maul a body around. They know they can do this. And—fascinatingly true.
And these boys, however, suddenly come to you, and you start off, not with the basis that surgery's all wrong but you just start telling them about the thetan repairing the body. Of course, you're let out somewhat on this by: you're in a basic agreement. They've already agreed to this way back on the track. So it's not too hard to do, because you're prior to their belief and knowingness, you see. So you're not really up against it.
But you'll find the fellow has a tendency—the second he gets a good effect, he's liable to do a terrible sag. You know, you've done just the thing you were supposed to do, and then you see this boy sag, boom. Hm! What have you done? You must have invalidated the former knowingness of the person.
Well, I don't care how skilled you are at this, on knocking out his former knowingnesses and so forth—it's terribly unimportant. If you just went on and cleared him and made him up into the bracket of Operating Thetan, it wouldn't matter what he'd known before. You see, you just went right on up

SYMBOLS
the line. He thinks, for a while, that he's being asked to change churches or change beliefs or desert surgery or to do something of the sort. We're not even vaguely involved with whether or not he stays on with surgery or psychology or anything else. We're "prior art" any day of the week, you see.
But we're not asking him to believe in something else. Every—somebody comes along, wrote a pamphlet the other day—I received a copy of it. Quite well written, except that every few lines it says, "Scientology believes in .. ." Now, here we go! I mean, this is an incomprehensible slant, because we don't happen to believe in anything. I have, very often—show a somewhat sarcas¬tic attitude toward the gods that be and so on, and I'm apt to make a little bit of fun or tease around about the cultural level which is supposed to exist today and so on. But I'm sure I'm not demanding that you believe in these things. I'm trying—what I'm trying to do is show you an illustration of what I'm talking about or where it leads and so on.
And I swear to God I can't take this society seriously anymore. I mean, the strain of doing it for a long time was just too much for me, and I finally piled up enough effort on it to blow a couple of ridges. And I haven't been able to make the grade very hard on this. I mean, I'm just as interested in doing, in fact more interested than I was in the past in trying to do something in the society, but to take it very seriously and consider that these problems are problems that are going to break the back of all existence down to the end of time, I'm afraid I can't do that anymore. And hence my general attitude when I talk about jails and criminals and so forth.
It's very funny to see people following out the exact procedure—in fact, it's a comedy—they follow out this exact procedure of producing a bad effect, such as a child delinquent. They do the exact thing they're supposed to do to produce the child delinquent. They just do it slavishly. And then they stand around and are very surprised, you see, because they produced a child delinquent. This is very silly. It's like watching monkeys having found a picnic basket, trying to eat an orderly picnic, like men do, you know, and use cups and things. It's very silly. And this just hits my risibilities.
But as far as believing is concerned, if you want to go on and believe in this and believe in that and believe in something else, you're each time selecting up a new randomity whether you know it or not. That person who gives all his faith to God can be counted, sooner or later, this generation or that, to show his teeth to God, long and sharp and lashing.
This is interesting that all of these "belief in" will turn in eventually, in man, to a "fighting against." And "fighting against" will turn, in a few generations, to "belief in." At first he believed in demons you see, and then he fought against demons, and then he became a demon. See, he thinks of himself, as a thetan, as a demon.
Now, we have some sort of an idea of what our problem is with this preclear. He's gone through this falling-leaf idea of knowingness all the way down. If there were some fine method of installing knowingness in an individual, that would be all right. But the method which we have to use at the moment, actually, is subtraction. We have to subtract from him what he really didn't know, until we find something that he actually can know. And when he starts hitting certainties, he starts hitting things he actually can know.
Now, one of the lower knowingnesses that I ran into one day in a preclear was—the biggest certainty, the only certainty he'd ever gotten—he'd never gotten a certainty on mock-up, he'd never gotten a certainty on anything. He put the mock-up up and I told him to have time make it disappear. And boy,

159

160

27 NOVEMBER 1953
that was the one thing he was certain of: that time would eventually make anything disappear.
And you know, he wouldn't take any more processing. He was so certain, and this put him so high up and so happy about the whole thing that he wanted to end the session, and we did, and he went away and he was just happy for days. The first time he'd ever been happy in this—he could remember in this life. He was certain of something. He knew this. Of course, that's a fairly high level of knowingness, you come to think about it. He knew time would take it away. He didn't know anything else. He didn't know whether he could make it disappear or whether he was in Christmas. This was just exactly what his concept of it was. All right.
We have, in rebuilding a VI, just a little more trouble than the others, because we have to hit the thing first on a locational attitude preferably, and then on some sort of an attitude which brings it up to a knowingness. And his case advances in little clicks, you might say. These little clicks are more and more and more pronounced. But his case does little jumps, little flashes, sort of, up the line—click, click—and he knows this and he knows that and so on. These certainties come in on him.
And if you work directly toward the production of these certainties without informing him, if you work directly toward this, this is a covert method of subtracting enough of the balderdash which he has digested to right his knowingness. He's righting it himself, you see, all the time. But you just give him an opportunity to right his knowingness about this and that. And you can lead him too fast and press him too hard and be far too informative—that's the only direction you'll err. Well, we have these various methods of doing this.
Now, oddly enough, everybody sounds so certain, and every individual knows he's not certain, that he never adds up the fact that he always sounds certain too. This doesn't seem to occur to anybody unless they examine this. Everybody is so certain and he knows he's not, and that's all he does know. He never adds it up—boy, how certain he himself sounds. So we give him drills about the rightness of other people. We don't even worry about whether or not they're there or not there because this person's got more people present than he even vaguely suspects.
And we start giving this person drills that run somewhat in this fashion. All right, you will—you might—you guys might as well take this drill and you'll see what I'm talking about. Now the people that are more or less on the side of the room here to my left, pick out people on the side of the room to my right. And people on the right side of the room just kind of glance over and find somebody to the left. Now just stare at each other. It's all right, there's no penalty for looking, here in Scientology. Just stare at each other.
And now I want you to put these emotions into each other:
How right this person is.
Now pick out another person. How right he is.
Now put the feeling of rightness into another person.
Now put the feeling of rightness into another person.
Now put the feeling of rightness into somebody else.
Now the feeling of rightness into somebody else.
Now the feeling of complete certainty into somebody else. Not for their sake, but just as you regard them. Get the idea of just the complete certainty that's coming from that person.
Now get the complete rightness that's coming from yet another person.

SYMBOLS
Now get the complete certainty that's coming from another person—just put the certainty into them so you can feel it back.
Now put the complete rightness in somebody.
Now put utter wrongness into somebody. (audience laughter)
Now put complete wrongness into somebody else. (audience laughter)
Now put complete wrongness into somebody else.
Now put complete rightness into that person.
And rightness into somebody else.
And get your own feeling of how certain you feel they are.
And again, your own feeling of how certain they feel they are.
All right, just get that. That gives you some sort of an idea about this.
Now, an exercise based on this is a very simple one. You get the preclear to walk down the street—this at least gets him into motion. And this is a VI I'm talking about, and this can also apply to a VII. And you just get him putting how certain this person is and how certain that person is and how right some other person is and how wrong some other person is, until he's putting the feeling of rightness and wrongness into other people and he knows he's putting it there. Because he's got a feeling to go with it—what do you know?
He's got knowingness reduced into a feelingness. It's actually life itself. But he will differentiate it in various ways until he finally decides that it is— it's just they're alive. They've got a right to be right or wrong, they're alive. This is a big decision. If you've come up to that level with a VI, believe me, you've got him well on the way! And if you get a psycho up to that person [level]—oh brother, you've done it, you really have. You could get into communication enough with one.
But a good way to process a VI, as I say, is to walk him around and drive him around. And actually, it's a very interesting way to process yourself. Because you're surrounded all the time by people whose primary motivation, as far as communication is concerned—to demonstrate how right they are, how much in agreement they are with you, how wrong they are, and how much they're in agreement with other people about how wrong you are, and how wrong you are. And they say this in various ways, such as, "Well, that may be true, but I— don't you think it is vaguely possible . . ."
This is the way Benjamin Franklin oriented it, to give you some idea of the Tone Scale of Philadelphia. Benjamin Franklin wrote a whole paper on this. A very fine paper. It's "How to be a 1.1" (the name of the paper). No, come to think about it, that wasn't the name of the paper, but it was something like that.
Anyway, he gave a dissertation on how you should present a thing to a council of men, you see, and said that you must say that: "Well now, it has occurred to me, and it might possibly—occurred to you, whereas I agree with most of your views and so forth, there is some slight possibility that there's some tiny modification, you see, could take place in the opinion which you so ably stated." You know—1.1, strictly. It never gets anything done, by the way.
The only way to handle a crew of men, if you know what you're doing and they even vaguely look like they don't know what they're doing, if they're just foggy on this subject or if they're going the wrong direction, just know harder than they do and know longer than they can endure it. You win. That's all— just know harder than them and endure longer than they do about the same level of knowingness.
It also helps to be right. If you've got both of those together, you can run anything. I don't care whether it's the United States or the South African police or a corporation or anything, is—and you can do that as long as you're around.

161

162

27 NOVEMBER 1953
Don't do this consistently though for several months to a group of men and then take an overnight trip. You've got them backed up and they will revert to Tone Scale. Sometimes they'll only revert to Tone Scale after a couple of months of absence, and sometimes they'll revert to Tone Scale only after six months of absence, but they'll revert. And after that their total passion will be making you wrong. They feel they have to do this in order to be right. That's real interesting. When people get into that slipslop of (quote) "thinking" (unquote), life becomes very confused, to say the least.
If the primary mission of somebody is to make you wrong, believe me, he can make you wrong—anytime. Anytime. Because you have based rightness on agreement. So you're trying to make him agree.
If you made him right all the time, you'd ruin him. You'd just ruin him, because you'd put him into consistent and continual agreement with the entire MEST universe. Do you see how that would be? Make him—not right according to a set of laws or axioms; not right, you see, according to the way life operates. But if you just made him consistently correct in his neighborhood—you know, you just make him consistently correct in his neighborhood—well, you'll murder him.
If you make him consistently wrong in his neighborhood, you may drive him down Tone Scale and you may cause him some unhappy moments, but you might also cause him to invent a new, cheaper electric light. He's going to prove that he's right, one way or the other, someplace. And you've given him the overt act-motivator sequence that he needs in order to complete a cycle. You see how that works?
It's very silly. You see, a person—there is such a thing as a truth. It doesn't happen to be a datum, though. There is such a thing; it's not very communicable. That's the certainty which you keep touching and tapping when these cases do these little jumps up the line.
Now, the VI does come up the line in a jump. A VII breaks to be a VI. Don't ever overlook that one. After you've processed somebody who was spinny— badly spinning and they seem to be better, you've only broken them up to about VI, you see. And after that you have to get down and process.
It's no great trick to break a person out of a psychosis. Almost any kind of a certainty is better than the no-certainty state, or the reverse or destructive-certainty state in which they're operating. You see, it's—the only psychotic that gives anybody any trouble is one that's working on a reverse certainty. He's certain that he'll be happy if everybody else is dead. Well, that might characterize the general part of the populace, perhaps, in certain societies and locales. But it—when people begin to act on that basis, you see, why, they are considered to be insane. And actually as far as the society is concerned, they sure are.
And the society likes to perform surgery, if possible. They don't ever realize that the prefrontal lobotomy is just Q and A. They're trying to run a patientectomy on society, and as far as they can go is just cut out his thinkingness a little bit—they want to slow that down. Actually, I think on most of those cases the thetan just shoves off, skips it. The bodies behave that way.
Well anyway, getting down here to knowingness: to what do they assign knowingness? Well now, I was talking a little while ago about these symbols which you're carrying around in your pocket. Well, Step VI, for our purposes, has ceased to be an SOP 8-C neurotic case as its sole thing; it is that step which includes the solution of problems posed by symbolism. "The solutions which resolve symbolism" is the definition of Step VI. Now I'll show you a technique for running this.

SYMBOLS
Get a word out in front of you.
Now have the word know.
Get another word in front of you.
Now have that word know.
Put a word behind you.
Have it be so right.
Put a word over to your right.
Have it know.
Put the Great Seal of the United States out in front of you. (It's that pyramid with an eye on top of it.) Have it know.
Get the money in your purse or pocket knowing.
Get that again.
Get the amount of knowingness in that money in your pocket.
Now get the dimes knowing.
Now there, of course, you're processing an energy unit, because there is mass to it, and the symbol. All right.
Let's get a textbook out in front of you and get it being very knowing.
Now get that textbook being very certain.
And get it finding you very uncertain.
Get a book of formulas behind your back and get it being very certain of just one thing—that you're not certain.
All right, throw those away.
Now get a word under your chair, and get it knowing.
And get a word up above your head, and get it knowing.
And get the idea or the actual sound of a peanut whistle going skeeeeeee! Get it knowing.
Because what are we doing here? We're just backing up the inversion. You know by symbols, until symbols know.
Now, remember I told you earlier the fellow who fought—believed in demons and then fought demons became a demon. And so it is that people at VI and VII—people at VI depend wholly for their knowingness upon symbols—entirely. Entirely. That's it. They don't depend on anything else but symbols. And when that sinks down the line, their symbols become solid. A mock-up is more solid than a real chair to a psycho.
I had a comment on this from somebody once and—they kept telling me, these other auditors kept telling me this girl was all right. But I went over to see her and I had her put up a couple of anchor points and I sure didn't think she was. Guess what she put up? Two pyramids. See, real heavy See, the symbol was a real heavy object. You just said to put up a couple of anchor points and you got pyramids. Next session—I mean, pardon me, the next command on it—she put up two cast-iron blocks. You see, that's—I mean, we dealt with nothing but very heavy symbols.
Now, this person's purse weighed God knows how much. Now, trying to take something away from this person is quite interesting. They're trying to become MEST, you might say. They're trying to become solid matter if they possibly can, they're trying to be energy and all the rest of it. But the point is, they're out of contact with actual energy. They're not even making actual energy. They're under the control of symbols which are solid and which know far more than they do.
Now, you'll get people who'll flip the Bible open to a passage at random to get the answer to a question. (audience laughter) Well now actually, that's not bad necromancy, and almost anybody's liable to indulge in this once in a while because the future's a pretty hard thing to predict if you have admitted that



164

27 NOVEMBER 1953
you don't make it. And somebody will take all kinds of methods of prediction. But how about the fellow who doesn't dare eat without doing it? See, then only the book knows—only the book knows.
Now, you assault this person's reality—which is the reality of symbols— anytime you make a grammatical error or a definitional error at the higher levels of VI. And when he's VII, he'll just cave in and almost faint if you misdefine something. This—you can watch his sense of humor going by the boards. This is the one thing that's very noticeable about them. You pick up this ashtray, you say, "Well, have a camel." You'll just ruin somebody, that's no kidding. You've involved him in an endless row with you and a night of doubt. (audience laughter)
He'll vary from "Did he really think it was a camel?" to "I know it wasn't a camel anyway." The symbol, you see, is so important—the misuse of a symbol. You use some word in a backwards fashion and they're very upset.
These people, by the way, will, when they become editors—they very often do. It's not because I used to be a writer, it's because I've known a lot of editors. And editors are failed writers. I'm always in favor of editors; I'm very much in favor of editors, I think they ought to exist and—that's more than a lot of people think. And so—I always stand up for them too. People say they're pigs and I say they aren't. And in fact I got into a big argument one time in front of two editors with another writer on the specious—I said, what I was saying was, in effect, that the other writer had said they were pigs; I just inferred this, you see. And I waited until these boys both had attention, then I came down with my fist resoundingly and began a very serious argument: "They're not pigs. Editors aren't pigs. I won't stand for that," see?
And I got—just got this guy going and coming on this, because he wasn't in an argument to begin with. And these two editors began to look at him and one of them began to think of all the stories he'd bought from him. And their opinion of that fellow certainly went down—certainly went down. I was dealing with three people who were all symbol-happy. Completely symbol-happy. They took this whole thing completely seriously. They never cracked a smile during the whole thing and actually could be heard to talk about it for couple of hours afterwards, from time to time mention it, so forth, saying that it was very bad.
This fellow thought it was very bad of me, rather reproachfully, to do that to him in front of a couple of editors. Never occurred to the fellow—here's where creativeness goes—to immediately come up with a rebuttal which would have been completely vanquishing. See, he could have very well—could have very well just completely ruined me. His creativeness of symbols was deficient, which accounted for the fact that he was writing comic books. He was doing nothing but turning out a pattern and so on.
Creation and imagination and so forth all lie above that band, well above the band of symbols. And when you ask somebody to create too long solely in terms of symbols, then he gets the idea that the symbols are creating him.
Now, let's take the automatic machinery by which somebody measures the future. When he has assigned knowingness to the future, he sends himself like a rocket, jet plane, straight back into the past. 'The future knows." One of the commonest phrases: 'The future will tell." And he finally sets up an enormous amount of bric-a-brac.
We had one case here not too long ago, that made no headway for a number of hours of student auditing until somebody wasted, in brackets, some machines which predicted the future. And as soon as this was done, we had a marked alteration in the case. Right up to the moment when that took place, this case was varying between V and VI, V and VI, V and VI and not doing any consistency.

SYMBOLS
Because he had assigned all his knowingness to the future. You see, in the future, not he would know, but actually the future would deliver enough knowingness in terms of data so that he, then, would be able to act. See, we weren't on a level of, he'd get the data in the future and then he'd know what he was doing; you see, the data in the future would determine his action. Now get that— that's not subtle, that's a big wide differentiation between two things.
Everybody does this other trick: they wait for some data—if they're going to wait around at all—and they wait for some data to fall into line so that they see a consecutive pattern which then they add to and use as a creational pattern for further motion. They do this all the time. This is the modus operandi of movement itself, and of planning and of delivering effort and competence and all these other things. That's the thing.
But that goes to a level where they don't wait for the data so that they can do something, they wait for the data so the data will do something. In other words, the symbol will act. They get down to that level after a while— the symbol itself acts. I swear, somebody like that would draw a symbol on a piece of paper in front of them and wait for it to blow their nose. This—it could get that far.
Now, I hope you understand something about this case. I've given you some of the processes that work on this case. These processes are around in anybody who consistently uses language. He eventually assigns some knowingness to language. But someday you're going to find a case where "only the words know." And you know, they don't exist at all—only the words know. You know, not the fellow who's giving the words, not the communication of the words, not the whole communication, but the—each separate individual word is itself the knowingness. Just because words are the servants of knowingness is no reason that they become knowingness; and yet people think that the words themselves do. And this is the incantation.
Ran across the funniest engram I think I ever processed out of anybody— it was a prenatal AA, and Mama was saying, "Tic-a-tac-a-little-baby. Now you're going down the drain. That's the way that goes. Now I'm supposed to say it this way: Tic-a-tac-a-little-baby . ..' You know, I think it's the medicine that does it. I don't think that the words have, really, anything to do with it."
This person was sitting in the middle of that engram and they were— had taken up general semantics. It was the key engram of the case. We had this fellow line-charging all over the beach and the front lawn and the third floor of the house. I mean, he was just having a hell of a time after he broke that. All right. Here we had the symbol, by command, taking prominence.
How do you process symbols? You use them for anchor points. Simple, isn't it? You put up sheets of them and have him look through them to sheets more of them. You get it up to a point where he's got symbols differentiated from energy. And this in itself opens a whole category of processes, because number VI is, of course, the processing of symbols and getting the thetan to use direct rather than indirect communication. You understand that?
You have to process any thetan exteriorized on Step VI. Get him out of this idea of symbols.
Because his postulates are all locked up and nailed down in symbols. And these are nailed down in energy. And the energy is lost in condensed space. And the space is lost because he couldn't be it anyhow. Get the idea?
Well, any thetan has Step VI run, and it's just run so as to remedy sym¬bols, however you want to do it. And I've given you some methods of doing it.
Okay.

165



Demonstration: Group Processing
A lecture and Group Processing session given on 28 November 1953

This is Saturday, November the 28th, a Group Processing session for the Second Unit.
Now what we're going to run today is gradient scale of attention.
We use the motto here that said, "Look, don't think." It would also be, "Look, don't feel." It would be, "Feel, don't use effort." It would be, "Don't use effort, think." See, that's your gradient scale.
And these characters—pardon me, I didn't mean to call them characters— these bums, these dogs (audience laughter) that will sit there telling you they've got a vague idea that they're doing something, will fool an auditor every doggone time, because they'll go on for some time like this. And believe me, it's a waste of time. No kidding—no kidding, guys. It's just a waste of time to go on and try to do anything.
Now, you saw an example of this. I went on and had him get the idea and get the idea and get the idea. And I—all they're doing is getting the idea. Well good, they got the idea, so what? We want them to look at something. That's what we want. That's what we want to have happen. We want them to look at something. I don't care what they look at. If they can't look at something, they can feel something.
Now there's a method of getting people out of their heads called tin-cupping. You have them find four points in the body that they can feel and put some pressure on, and then find four points they can't feel, and then find four points they can feel, and they can't feel. And you would just be utterly amazed. Of course, when you say "feel" in that sense, you mean effort. Where are four points of effort or pain or discomfort—you don't mean emotion. Now, where are these four points of effort and so on? Because these characters are down the line on the subject of effort.
Nobody ever thought his way out of the body, although that's the easiest way to get out of a body. It's the only way to get out of a body, but they—when they're completely sold on effort, completely sold on lookingness, completely sold on the rest of these things, you have to backtrack—and all processing does this. You backtrack the track of agreement. See, you just backtrack it.
Well, you have to find out where you can enter this case on a basic certainty. The word "certainty" hasn't been used too much with this unit, but we'd better be using it. We'd better be using it.
There are processes which are thought processes, which are very good

167

168

28 NOVEMBER 1953
processes, and which very often have to forerun looking processes. And looking processes have to forerun knowing processes.
Now these thought processes are pretty well down the line. And you can actually unlock a whole concatenation of thought and get somebody up to knowingness, but you can only do that on the track of certainty.
And if he's gone down scale to where he's thinking in the eighteenth basement—you know, he's doing a thinking machine job—why, he's having a hard time of it.
So, let's realize what people are doing there. All right. Certainty hasn't been used enough.
I hate to say this, because a chap here I processed yesterday, a boy—he'd been processed five times by people who should have known what they were doing. Five times! And not one of them had ascertained if he was sure he was out of his head. And yet all the drills he was getting were drills out of his head.
The first auditor that audited him said, "Can you get a picture of your body in front of you?" as the first step. In other words, he did Step II before he did Step I. He was actually working a Step I.
So the Step I accommodatingly says, "Why yes, I can."
And he—the auditor said, "Fine," and went on operating from that point.
Now, each successive session, it was taken for granted that when somebody said to him, "Be three feet back of your head," and he said, "Uh-huh," that he knew he was three feet back of his head. As a matter of fact, he had a picture of himself three feet back of his head. And although he was doing mock-up— although he was getting some benefit from it, for he was doing Mock-up Processing, he was just doing a slow freight. Of course, because he was doing it all with Creative Processing. He wasn't doing it exteriorized.
All because an auditor didn't say, "Are you sure you're back of your head?" We—immediately that I asked him this, we got into a big argument. Enormous argument, immediately.
And that was just this. Well, was he a body? Yeah, he was a body. He knew he was a body. Yeah he was in his feet. Sure, everybody's in their feet. You have to be in your feet if you're a body. And we got into this and I finally—I just bluntly said to him, "Well, to hell with it. I'm not going to argue with you any further. You're not a body. Be three feet back of your head and take a look at it, and reach the four upper corners of the room."
And he said, "Okay"—did.
I said, "Is that any different from what you've been doing for the last five, ten hours you've been processed?"
"Well, yeah, I've never been here before."
"Well, you know you're there, huh?"
"Yes, I do."
"Well, all right. Reach and withdraw from the corners of the room several times till you can feel them."
"Okay." He did. So he took a look around and so he got up on the roof and he says, "Well what do you know, ha-ha!" And this guy was being processed as somebody who had been exteriorized, five times, by auditors who should have known better. Shame on them. Shame on them.
That's why I usually start a session with: "Be three feet back of your head." I don't care who it is. "All right. Are you there?" Or, if I think the fellow's a little tippy, I say, "Well now, be three feet back of your head. Okay? Now are you in your feet?"
"No."

DEMONSTRATION: GROUP PROCESSING
"Knees?"
"No."
"Elbows?"
"No."
"Right shoulder?"
"No."
"Left shoulder?"
"No."
"Nose?"
"No."
"Right ear?"
"No."
"Left ear?"
"No."
"Front of your forehead?"
"No."
"Back of your head? On the back of your head?"
"No."
"Are you back of your head?"
"Yes." He's there.
Well, now you get somebody who isn't certain, you start running this process, you get up to the point of:
"Are you in your right ear?"
"No."
"Left ear?"
"No."
"In the front of your head?"
"No."
"On the back of your head?"
"Well, yes I think I am."
But this boy is so sold by science and so forth, that he was a body, that it had just never occurred to him, you see. He wasn't educated in Scientology. He—somebody said, "Can you get a picture of your body?" He says, "Okay." Then he thinks "Be three feet back of your head." Well, he thinks that's just kind of silly patter, but he goes on getting pictures of himself as a body, standing behind himself as a body, from inside his head.
Viewpoint drill. He's just using remote viewpoints and mock-ups. Yet he was a—he's a case that just runs like nothing, and that's all right.
And the moment I did that, the despair which had been hanging over this case—this case had been in despair all this time. The case sat there, and I just took a look at this case, and I said, "There's something wrong with him. Nobody who's been exteriorized for five consecutive professional auditor sessions can certainly be sitting there in the depths of despair, period." Although he was very polite, and he was very cheerful and so forth. So I just went to work to find out what the hell was wrong with him. I found out in a hurry. An auditor had never asked him this question: "Are you sure you're back of your head?"
You know, there isn't any substitute for it. It's—you know, if you had an anvil lying on your chest, would you know it was on your chest? Hm? You suppose you would? Well, now that's the degree of certainty people have when they're completely certain they're exteriorized. I mean, they know there's an anvil on their chest or there isn't an anvil on their chest, see?

169

170

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Now, you just have to work people's certainty up. Now, on the basis of perception, I find more people having a difficult time with how you pick up people's perception. But you duplicate it. You duplicate what they're perceiving.
In other words, you duplicate the room and make it disappear. And you duplicate it and make it disappear. And you duplicate it and make it disappear. And you duplicate it and make it disappear. And all of a sudden an automaticity shows up and the room turns over and goes backwards, so you say to him, "All right, now mock up the room and turn it over and make it go backwards. Now mock it up and turn it over and make it go backwards and throw it away. And mock it up and turn it over, make it go backwards and throw it away."
And they say, "Okay."
Now you say, "Duplicate the room."
"Yeah."
"Duplicate the room. Duplicate the room."
"Yeah, I can see now."
I mean the answer to no perception, for your purposes, could be many, of course, but the answer to no perception is: duplicate it.
Now, I'm going to run a dirty trick on this group this afternoon in this Group Process. This is real mean, and I shouldn't do this, but I don't think that you individually have nerve enough to run it on each other, so I'm just going to run it on you as a group, and mess you all up and let you straighten yourselves out. You'll be better for it in the long run, but I've posted the names of hospitals and so forth for you after the session. So you want to brace yourself against receiving any effect from this. (audience laughter) And the main thing that we're interested in is a thinking process that does something that matches up with automaticity. And that's what I'm going to do.
Today I'm going to run the gradient scale of attention. And I'm not going to tell you about it first. I'm just going to run it on you. Period. All right.
I want you to waste a machine, a being, a gimmick, a gadget; now let's waste this machine—waste it now, and know you're wasting it—that worries about you. Waste a machine that worries about you.
Can't waste it all at once, waste a cog off of it or a bolt.
Make sure it's wasted.
Get this one wasted. A machine that worries about you.
Now let's get somebody else wasting a machine that worries about him.
Somebody else wasting a machine that worries about him. And get that one wasted. All right.
Now get somebody wasting somebody else's machine that worried about that somebody else.
And somebody wasting your machine that worried about you. Wasting your machine that worried about you. Have them wasting it real good.
Now let's get you wasting somebody's machine that worried about him. Okay.
Throw away any mock-ups you've made now, and get you wasting a machine that worries about you.
Somebody else wasting a machine that worries about him.
And somebody else wasting somebody else's machine that they use to worry about them.
Somebody wasting your machine that worries about you. Somebody wasting your machine that worries about you.
And you wasting somebody else's machine that worries about him. Okay.
Throw any residue away.

DEMONSTRATION: GROUP PROCESSING
Now, give me hands: Who isn't sure he got one wasted? You haven't got one wasted yet?
Male voice: Well, I take the machine out and find night crawlers to go fishing, and I figure that's wasting it but I'm not sure.
You what?
Male voice: I take the machine out and find night crawlers to go fishing — angleworms.
Well, all right. Is that wasting it?
Male voice: It's just—I think it is but it don't sound right.
All right. Now, let's get you wasting a machine that worries about you. You, too. Have you wasted one yet?
Male voice: In brackets, six ways.
Hm, all automatically. You waste one and know you're doing it.
Now get somebody else wasting a machine that worries about him. Get it so you know you're wasting it, and he's wasting it and so forth.
Somebody wasting a machine of somebody else's that worries about him.
And somebody wasting a machine of somebody else's that worries about him.
And somebody wasting your machine that worries about you.
And you wasting somebody else's machine that worries about him or her.
And you not having a machine that worries about you. Just get the idea.
And somebody else not having a machine that worries about him.
And somebody not having somebody else's machine that does worrying for him.
And somebody not having your machine that worries about you.
And you not having somebody else's machine that worries about him or her.
And you wasting a person that worries about you.
And somebody else wasting a person that worries about him or her.
Male voice: I have to get a way to waste different.
Do it.
And somebody wasting a person who worries about somebody else.
And somebody wasting a person who worries about you.
And you wasting a person who worries about somebody else. Okay.
Throw any residue you have away there.
Now, who's getting factual incidents?
Male voice: I am.
Factual incidents?
Male voice: Well, do you mean just flat, kind of coming by and going on?
Yeah. Factual incidents. I mean real incidents—locks . . .
Male voice: No, no.
. . . that sort of thing.
Male voice: Wasting some real people.
Hm.
Who's wasting real people?
Audience responses: Yeah. Yes.
In other words, some locks are coming up.
Audience responses: Yes. Yeah.
All right. Now you saving a person who worries about you.
And somebody else saving a person who worries about him.
And somebody wasting somebody else's person who worries about them.
And somebody wasting a person who worries about you. If you skip one, it's all right. I'm going to beat this to death, so it's no worry. Hm?
Female voice: Saving—don't you mean saving?

171

172

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Saving, that's right. Beg your pardon. Somebody saving a person. Waste one and then save one.
And you wasting a person who worries about somebody else.
And you saving a person who worries about somebody else.
And somebody wasting a person who worries about you.
And somebody saving a person who worries about you.
And somebody not saving a person who worries about you.
And you not saving a person who worries about somebody else.
And you desiring a machine to worry about you.
And somebody else desiring a machine to worry about him. The motto of that, of course, is "if somebody would only care."
And somebody desiring a person who worries about somebody else.
And somebody desiring a person who worried about you.
And you desiring a person who worried about somebody else.
And you being curious about things which worry about you.
And somebody else being curious about things that worry about him.
And other people being curious about things which other people worry about.
And somebody being curious about things which worry you.
And you being curious about things which worry other people.
And you wasting a machine which gives you attention, at any price.
And somebody else wasting a machine which gives him attention.
And somebody wasting a machine that gives somebody else attention.
And somebody wasting a machine which gives you attention.
And you wasting a machine which gives somebody else attention. All right.
Throw any mock-ups you've got there—things done there.
Who am I going too fast for? Who am I going too slow for? Okay. Going too slow for you, huh?
Male voice: A bit.
All right. Who else am I going too slow for? All right.
All right. Now, any locks show up? Locks?
Male voice: Oh, yeah.
Really?
Male voice: Wonderful cartoons.
All right. Let's get you wasting a machine which worries about you.
Somebody else wasting a machine that worries about him.
Somebody wasting somebody else's machine that worries about them.
Somebody wasting a machine that worries about you.
And you wasting a machine that worries about somebody else.
And you wasting a person that worries about you.
Somebody else wasting a person that worries about him.
Somebody wasting somebody else's person that worries about that somebody else.
And somebody wasting a person that worries about you.
And you wasting a person that worries about somebody else.
And you wasting somebody that cares for you.
And somebody else wasting somebody that cares for him.
And somebody else wasting somebody else that cares for her.
And somebody wasting a person that cares for somebody else.
And somebody wasting a person that cares for you.
And you wasting a person that cares for somebody else.
And you saving a machine that worries about you.

DEMONSTRATION: GROUP PROCESSING
And somebody else saving a machine that worries about him.
Somebody saving a machine that worries about somebody else.
And somebody saving a machine that worries about you.
And you saving a machine that worries about somebody else.
And you accepting a machine which worries about you.
And somebody else accepting a machine that worries about her.
And somebody else accepting a machine that worries about somebody else.
Somebody accepting a machine that worries about you.
And you accepting a machine that worries about somebody else.
And you desiring a machine that worries about you.
And somebody desiring a machine that worries about her.
And you building such a machine for them.
And somebody worrying about machinery that worries other people.
And somebody desiring machinery to worry you.
And you desiring machinery to worry others.
And you wasting a machine that stops you worrying. You wasting a machine that stops you worrying.
And somebody else wasting a machine that stops him from worrying.
And somebody wasting somebody else's machine that stops them from worrying.
And somebody else wasting your machine that stops you from worrying.
And you wasting somebody else's machine that stops them from worrying.
And you wasting a barrier—a protective barrier.
Somebody else wasting a protective barrier.
And somebody wasting somebody else's protective barrier.
And somebody wasting your protective barrier, by penetrating it, of course.
And you wasting somebody else's protective barrier.
And you desiring a machine to worry about you.
And somebody else desiring a machine to worry about him.
And somebody desiring somebody else's machine to worry about them.
And somebody desiring your machine that worries about you, such as an auditor.
And you desiring somebody else's machine that worries about them.
You being curious about a machine that worries you.
And somebody else being curious about an automaticity that worries him.
And somebody else being curious about somebody else's automatic worrying machines.
And somebody being curious about your machine that worries you.
And you being curious about somebody else's machine that worries them.
And you wasting a machine that gives you action.
And somebody else wasting a machine that gives you action.
And somebody else wasting a machine that gives him action.
And you wasting one that gives him action.
And somebody wasting a machine that gives somebody else action.
And get the idea of you having a worrying machine.
Somebody else having a worrying machine.
And somebody having somebody else's worrying machine. '
And somebody having your worrying machine.
And you having somebody else's worrying machine.
And you not having a person who worries about you.
And you having a person who worries about you.
And you not having a person who worries about you.

173

174

28 NOVEMBER 1953
And you having a person to worry about.
And you not having a person to worry about.
And somebody else having a person to worry about.
And somebody else not having a person to worry about.
And somebody having a person that should be with somebody else.
And somebody worrying about people that belong to somebody else.
And somebody else not having anybody to worry about.
And somebody else having somebody to worry about.
And somebody else not having anybody.
And somebody else having somebody.
And you never being able to have anybody.
You always having to have somebody.
You never being able to have anybody.
You always having to have somebody.
Somebody else always having to have you around.
Somebody else never being able to have you around.
And other people always having to have other people around.
And other people never being able to have anybody around.
And you having to have somebody around.
And you not being able to have somebody around.
Somebody else having to have somebody around.
Somebody else never having to have anybody around.
You always being confronted with somebody.
Somebody else always being confronted with somebody.
And somebody else having a machine that confronts him with things.
And somebody else having a machine which inhibits things from con-fronting him.
You having a machine that confronts you with things.
And you having a machine that stops things from confronting you.
And you having a machine that confronts you with things.
And you with an automaticity that stops things from confronting you.
And somebody else having a machine that stops things from confronting others.
And other people not having such machines.
And other people having such machines.
You having no machines to worry about.
Other people having no machines to worry about.
The MEST universe containing machines to worry about.
A universe which contains no machines to worry about.
You wasting something which does things for you.
Somebody else wasting something that does something for him.
Somebody wasting things that does things for other people.
Somebody wasting something that does something for you.
You wasting something that does something for somebody else.
You wasting something that gives you attention.
Somebody else wasting something that gives him attention.
Somebody else wasting something that gives other people attention.
Somebody wasting something that gives you attention.
That again. Somebody else wasting something that gives you attention.
You wasting something that gives somebody else attention.
And again. You wasting something that gives somebody else attention.
You desiring an automaticity which worries about you.

DEMONSTRATION: GROUP PROCESSING
Somebody else desiring an automaticity that worries about him.
Somebody else desiring automaticities that worry about others.
You desiring an automaticity that worries about somebody else.
You desiring a machine which permits you to forget about worrying.
Somebody else desiring a machine that permits him to forget about worrying.
Somebody desiring machinery that will let other people forget about worrying.
Somebody desiring something that will make you forget about worrying.
And you desiring something that will make other people forget about worrying. Okay.
Now let's mock yourself up in the future worried to death.
Get yourself going on away to dust.
Get yourself in the future bored to death because you haven't anything to worry about.
Get that gone away to dust.
And somebody else dead in the future because they weren't permitted to worry.
And somebody else dead in the future because they worried too hard. That's one—man, it sweeps up—that was Mother. (audience laughter)
Now somebody dead in the future who solely desired to be worried about by others, and never worried.
Now get this person dead again. He only desired to be worried about by others and never did any worrying himself or herself.
Dead again.
Dead again.
Get that person dead another way now, more painful.
Get that thing worrying, now, in hellfire forever. The source of Christianity, I'm sure.
Now get that person worrying again in hellfire forever.
And get you worrying in hellfire forever.
And get you dead in the future because you couldn't solve it.
And you dead in the future because there was nobody to worry about you.
And again, you dead in the future. And let time make it disappear.
And you dead in the future. Let time make it disappear.
Again, you dead in the future. Make time make it disappear.
Let's get the idea now of waiting so that time will make it disappear.
Get you dead in the future because time caught up with you.
Get you dead in the past. And get time make that disappear.
And you dead in the past. Get time make that disappear.
And you again, dead in the past. Get time make that disappear.
And get you wasting a machine that lets you know you were dead.
And get you wasting a machine that keeps you from knowing you were dead.
And somebody else wasting a machine that keeps him from knowing he was dead.
And somebody else wasting a machine that lets them know they were dead.
Somebody else wasting a machine that keeps them from knowing they're dead.
Now let's get some kind of an idea or a picture, preferably a picture, of you being unconscious and trying to regain consciousness. All right.
Kill the mock-up. Make it disappear.

175

176

28 NOVEMBER 1953
And get you, yourself—a thetan now—unconscious and trying to become conscious again.
And again, unconscious and trying to become conscious.
And again, as a thetan, unconscious and trying to become conscious.
And again, as a thetan, unconscious, trying to become conscious.
Now mock that up as perishing because you couldn't.
And again, perishing because you couldn't.
And again, perishing because you couldn't.
Now mock up your body unconscious and you trying to make it conscious.
And now other people trying to make it conscious and you knocking it off.
And you going happily on your way.
And the body—now get the body, now, unconscious—other people trying to make it conscious, and you going happily on your way and the body dying.
And some other body unconscious and you trying to make it conscious. Somebody else's body unconscious and you trying to make it conscious. And get the other person knocking it off. The other thetan knocking it off.
Now let's waste a machine that makes you unconscious.
Somebody else wasting a machine that makes him unconscious.
And somebody else wasting other people's machines that make them unconscious.
And you wasting a machine that makes somebody else unconscious.
And somebody wasting a machine that makes you unconscious.
Now mock yourself up in the future, dead because of this processing.
And the rest of the class dead in the future because of this processing.
And you dead because of this processing.
And me dead because I processed you.
And you dead because you didn't process properly. (audience laughter)
And me dead because I didn't process you properly.
And the rest of the class dead because they weren't processed properly.
And you dead because it was your fault.
And you dead again because it was your fault.
And you dead because you didn't do a good job as an auditor.
And somebody else dead because you didn't do a good job as an auditor.
And some other thetan crazy forever because you didn't do it right. (audience laughter)
And you as a thetan crazy forever because it wasn't done right.
And the rest of the class crazy as thetans forever because it wasn't done right.
And you dead because the communication system wasn't exactly followed.
Now translate that into "ritual": You dead because the ritual wasn't exactly followed.
And somebody else dead because the ritual wasn't exactly followed.
And somebody else dead because the ritual was exactly followed. (audience laughter)
And you dead because the ritual was exactly followed.
And you dead because the ritual was exactly followed.
Now get great admiration for the precision of rituals.
Get admiration for the precision of rituals which kill you.
And admiration for the precision of rituals which keep you alive.
And get you desiring no barriers on any communication system.
And you desiring close barriers on a communication system.
And you getting such close barriers that you're dead.

DEMONSTRATION: GROUP PROCESSING
Now mock yourself up dead. Mock yourself up dead in the future. Mock yourself up again, dead in the future. Mock yourself up again, dead in the future. Mock the rest up—the human race—dead in the future. Everybody dead in the future. Earth dead in the future. Everything dead in the future. Everything finally finished. Get nothing persisting. Okay.
From wherever you are, exteriorized or interiorized, look all the way to the right.
First find the wall to the right.
Look through the wall and find nothing.
Look up.
Find the ceiling.
Look through the ceiling and find nothing.
To the left.
Find the wall.
Look through the wall, find nothing.
Look down.
Find the floor, through the floor and find nothing.
The front wall of the room—look through it and find nothing.
The back wall of the room—look through it and find nothing.
Sit there for a moment and know.
Take a deep breath.
Stand up and take a breather.

177



Special Session: Experimental Group Process
A lecture and Group Processing session given on 28 November 1953

Okay, we now have a very brief process here, continuing this November 28th afternoon session, which started out with a group demonstration and processing. We're now going to have an experimental technique. I generally test these things once in a while. I test them on individuals, but once in a while I'll test them on a group—small group or a big group—find out what happens.
Now, this is experimental. It's not a very difficult technique. It's based on this: Many people have communication lags. These communication lags stem from the fact that there is a distance traversed by particles, evidently, in the MEST universe. This is an illusion in this universe, that a distance is traversed by a particle.
When this is imitated and duplicated too much by the individual, he himself gets a communication lag because he believes that it takes a certain length of time for a particle to travel from one place to another place. So he begins to duplicate this. And he duplicates it automatically. In other words, it is an automaticity which is entered into him. It isn't that he's duplicated something, that makes him wrong.
Well, every once in a while somebody asks me, "Well now, what about this? You say that if there was an explosion on a certain star, a million years later we would see that star. Well, what is present time then?"
Present time would be a million years after the event, just because you didn't see it until a million years had gone by.
They say, "Therefore present time in this universe is very, very difficult to ascertain"; whereas it's not at all.
If you were to stop every particle in the universe, in any given instant, you would find them all stopped, and every emanating impulse stopped too. And you could then go over the entire universe and inspect it. And you would find that it was all at that moment of time. And that is our definition for present time. It's that moment of time.
Well now, although this star had exploded this minute, and the light wouldn't reach us till a million years went by, this is immaterial. If this is exploding at this instant, and we're here at this instant, the present time of that star's explosion and the present time of our beingness here is simultaneous, and that's both present time. You understand that?
Well now, this little process simply reaches out in this fashion, okay? Let's just work it out. Do it.

179

180

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Let's find present time in China. Just sort of reach for present time in China. This instant in China.
Now find this instant in Seattle.
This instant here.
In Seattle.
In China.
Here—this instant here.
This instant in San Francisco.
This instant here.
This instant in your childhood home.
This instant here.
This instant in your childhood home.
This instant here.
This instant in your childhood home.
This instant here.
This instant on the Moon.
Here.
This instant on the Moon.
Here.
This instant on the Moon.
Here.
Now all we're trying to do is reach for this instant in these other areas. You just reach for it.
This isn't, strictly speaking, Change of Space. You just tell me how you're doing it afterwards.
Now get this instant on the Sun.
This instant here.
This instant in the nearest galaxy.
This instant in this galaxy.
This instant in all this galaxy.
This instant here.
This instant in Canada.
In Montreal.
Here.
Now get this instant in Canada.
Montreal.
Here.
This instant in Canada.
Montreal.
Here.
This instant in Montreal.
In Canada.
This instant in Montreal.
In Canada.
And this instant in Mexico City.
Mexico.
This instant in Mexico City.
In Mexico.
This instant in Mexico City.
In Mexico.
And this instant in Mexico City.
In all of Mexico.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
And this instant in Mexico City.
In all of Mexico.
And this instant on the North Star.
And this instant on the North Star.
And this instant on the North Star.
And this instant on the Sun.
And on Earth.
And on the Sun.
And on Earth.
On the Sun.
On Earth.
And this instant on the Sun.
And this instant on Earth.
And this instant on the Moon.
And here. Okay.
Now let's get this instant all across the North Atlantic.
And this instant on Greenland.
And this instant on Greenland.
And this instant all across the North Atlantic.
And this instant in Mexico.
North America.
Mexico.
North America.
Mexico.
North America.
Your childhood home.
North America.
Your childhood home.
North America.
Your childhood home.
North America.
Your childhood home.
Your childhood home.
North America.
Your childhood home.
Here.
North America.
Your childhood home.
Here.
North America.
Your childhood home.
Earth.
Your childhood home.
All around Earth.
This instant all around Earth.
This instant all around Earth.
This instant all around Earth.
This instant all around Earth.
This instant all around Earth.
Your childhood home.
This instant at your childhood home.
This instant in North America.

181

182

28 NOVEMBER 1953
This instant in your childhood home.
This instant in England.
This instant in North America.
This instant in England.
North America.
England.
North America.
England.
The North Pole.
England.
The North Pole.
England.
The North Pole.
England.
The North Pole.
England.
The North Pole.
England.
The North Pole.
England.
The North Pole.
Your childhood home.
This instant in your childhood home.
Here.
This instant in your childhood home.
Here.
This instant in your childhood home.
Here.
Now this instant in your childhood home.
Here.
This instant in your childhood home.
Here.
This instant in this galaxy.
This instant on Earth.
This instant in the galaxy.
On Earth.
The galaxy.
Earth.
The galaxy.
Earth.
The galaxy.
Earth.
The galaxy.
Earth.
The galaxy.
Earth.
The simultaneous instant in this and the next galaxy.
Earth.
This and the next galaxy.
Earth.
The next galaxy and this galaxy, simultaneous instant.
Earth.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
Childhood home.
This instant in the space where you were born.
This instant in the space where you were born.
This instant here.
The instant in the space where you were born.
This instant in the space where you were born.
This instant here.
This instant in the space where you were born—this instant.
And this instant here.
And this instant in this and the nearest galaxy.
And this instant in the place where you were born.
This instant in this and the nearest galaxy.
This instant in the space where you were born.
And this instant in the space where you were born.
And this instant in the space where you were born.
And this instant in the space where you were born.
And this instant in the space where you were born.
And this instant here.
This instant in the United States.
This instant in Canada and Mexico.
This instant in Canada and Mexico.
This instant in Canada, Mexico and the United States.
This instant in the space where you were born.
This instant in the space where you were born.
This instant in this room.
This instant in the space where you were born.
This instant in this room.
This instant in your own universe.
This instant here.
This instant in your own universe.
Here.
Your own universe.
Here.
Your own universe.
Here.
Your own universe.
Here.
Your own universe.
Here.
Your own universe.
Here.
Your own universe.
Here.
Somebody else's universe.
This instant in somebody else's universe.
Here.
Your own universe.
Your own universe.
This universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your own universe.
This universe.

183

184

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Somebody else's universe.
Your own universe.
This universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your own universe.
This universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your own universe.
This universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your own universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your own universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your own universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your own universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your own universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your own universe.
Somebody else's universe.
This universe.
Somebody else's universe.
This universe.
Somebody else's universe.
This universe.
Somebody else's universe.
This universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your universe.
Somebody else's universe.
Your universe.
This universe.
MEST universe.
MEST universe, two galaxies.
The space where you were born.
Two galaxies.
Space where you were born.
Two galaxies.
Space where you were born.
Two galaxies.
Space where you were born.
Two galaxies.
Space where you were born.
This instant in the place you entered the MEST universe.
This instant in the place you entered the MEST universe.
Here.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
The place you entered the MEST universe.
Here.
The place you entered the MEST universe.
Here.
The place you entered the MEST universe.
Here.
The place you entered the MEST universe.
Here.
Your own universe.
The place you entered the MEST universe, this instant.
Here.
Your own universe.
The place you entered the MEST universe.
Here.
Somebody else's universe.
The place you entered the MEST universe.
Somebody else's universe.
The place where you entered the MEST universe.
Here.
Somebody else's universe.
Here.
Present time, MEST universe.
Present time, MEST universe total.
Present time, MEST universe total.
This instant, MEST universe total.
Your own universe total.
Somebody else's universe total.
Here.
Place you entered the MEST universe.
Here.
The place you entered the MEST universe.
Here.
The place you entered the MEST universe.
Here.
The place you entered the MEST universe.
Here.
The place you entered the MEST universe.
San Francisco.
The place you entered the MEST universe.
San Francisco.
This instant at the place you entered the MEST universe.
This instant in San Francisco.
This instant here.
This instant in the place you entered the MEST universe.
This instant in San Francisco.
The pattern of particles which makes it this instant here.
The pattern of particles which makes it this instant here.
The pattern of particles which makes it this instant here.
The actions which make it this instant here.
The actions which make it this instant here.
Your own universe.
MEST universe.

185

186

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Somebody else's universe.
Another person's universe.
Another person's universe.
Another person's universe.
Here.
Be the space of your body.
The space of this room.
The space of your body.
The space of this room.
Be the space of your body.
The space of this room.
The space of your body.
The space of the building.
The space of your body.
The space of the building.
The space of your body.
The space of the building.
The space of your body.
The space of this building.
The space of your body.
The space of this building.
The space of your body.
The space of Camden.
The space of your body.
The space of Camden.
The space of your body.
The space of Camden.
The space of your body.
The space of Philadelphia.
The space of your body.
The space of Philadelphia.
The space of your body.
Space of Philadelphia.
Space of your body.
Space of Philadelphia.
Space of New York.
Space of your body.
Space of New York.
Space of your body.
All the space between Philadelphia and New York.
Space of your body.
All the space between Philadelphia and New York.
Space of your body.
Space between Philadelphia and New York.
Space of your body.
Space of the eastern half of the United States.
Space of your body.
Space of the eastern half of the United States.
Space of your body.
Space of the eastern half of the United States.
Space of your body.
Space of the United States.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
Space of your body.
Space of the United States.
Space of your body.
Space of the United States.
Space of your body.
Space of North America.
Space of your body.
Space of North America.
Space of your body.
Space of North and South America.
Space of your body.
Space of North and South America.
Space of your body.
Space of North and South America.
Space of your body.
Space of North and South America.
Space of your body.
Space of Earth.
Space of your body.
Space of Earth.
Space of your head.
Space of Earth.
Space of your head.
Space of Earth.
Space of your head.
Space of Earth.
Space of your head.
Space of the Moon.
Space of your head.
Space of the Moon.
Space of your head.
Space of the Sun.
Space of your head.
Space of the Sun.
Space of your head.
Space of the Sun.
Space of your head.
Space of the Sun.
Space of your head.
Space of the Sun.
Space of your head.
Space of the Sun.
Space of your head.
This instant, space of the Sun.
This instant, space of the Sun.
This instant, space of the Sun.
This instant, space of the Sun.
This instant, space of the Sun.
This instant, space of the Sun.
This instant, space of your head.
Space of the Sun.
Space of your head.

187

188

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Space of the Sun.
Space of Earth.
Space of Sun.
Space of Earth.
Space of your head.
Space of a solar system.
Space of your head.
Space of the solar system.
Space of your head.
Space of the solar system.
Space of your head.
Space of the solar system.
Space of your head.
This instant, space of the solar system.
This instant, space of the solar system.
This instant, space of the solar system.
This instant, space of your head.
Space of the solar system.
Space of your head.
Space of this galaxy.
Space of your head.
Space of this galaxy.
Space of your head.
Space of this galaxy.
Space of your head.
Space of this galaxy.
Space of your head.
No space.
Space of your head.
No space.
Space of your head.
No space.
Space of your head.
No space.
Space of your head.
No space.
Space of your head.
No space.
Space of the galaxy.
No space.
Space of the galaxy.
No space.
Space of the galaxy.
No space.
Space of the galaxy.
No space.
Space of the MEST universe.
No space.
Space of the MEST universe.
Space of your head.
Space of the MEST universe.
Space of your head.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
Space of the MEST universe.
Space of your head.
Space of your own universe.
Space of your head.
This instant, your MEST universe space.
This instant MEST universe space.
This instant, space of your head.
This instant, space of your own universe.
Space of your own universe.
Space of your head.
Space of somebody else's universe.
Space of your head.
Space of your own universe.
Space of your head.
Space of somebody else's universe.
Space of your head.
Space of somebody else's universe.
Space of your head.
Space of your own universe.
Space of your head.
Space of somebody else's universe.
Space of your head.
Space of your own universe.
Space of your head.
Space of the galaxy.
Space of your head.
No galaxy.
Space of your head.
No galaxy.
Space of your head.
No galaxy.
No galaxy, no head.
No galaxy, no head.
No galaxy, no head.
No own universe.
No own universe, no MEST universe, no head.
No other people's universe.
No head, no other people's universe.
No head, no other people's universe.
No head, no other people's universe.
No head, no other people's universe.
No perception.
Perception.
No perception.
Perception.
No perception.
Knowingness.
Perception.
Knowingness.
Perceivingness.
Knowingness.
Perceivingness.

189

190

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Knowingness.
Perceivingness.
Knowingness.
Perceivingness.
Knowingness.
Perceivingness.
No perceivingness.
Knowingness.
Perceivingness.
No perceivingness.
Knowingness.
Perceivingness.
No perceivingness.
Knowingness.
Perceivingness.
No perceivingness.
No perceivingness.
Perceivingness.
Knowingness.
No perceivingness.
Perceivingness.
Knowingness.
No perceivingness.
Perceivingness.
Knowingness.
No perceivingness.
Perceivingness.
Knowingness.
No perceivingness.
Perceivingness.
Knowingness.
No space.
All space.
No space.
All space.
No space.
All space.
This instant in all space.
This instant in all space.
This instant in all space.
This instant in all space.
This instant in all space.
No space.
All space, no space.
All space, no space.
Put your attention on your body.
Put it on the room.
Lift it from the room to the body.
Lift it from the body to the room.
Lift it from the room to the body.
From the body to the room.
To the back of the room.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
To the front of the room.
To the back of the room.
To the front of the room.
To the back of the room.
To the front of the room.
To the back of the room.
To the front of the room.
To the side of the room.
To the other side of the room.
To the first side of the room.
To the second side of the room.
The first side of the room.
The second side of the room.
The first side of the room.
The second side of the room.
The first side of the room.
The second side of the room.
Attention on your body.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on your body.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on your body.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the front of your body.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the front of your body.
Attention on the ceiling.
Your attention on the back of your body.
Attention on the ceiling.
This instant on the back of your body.
This instant on the ceiling.
This instant on the back of the body.
This instant on the ceiling.
This instant on the back of the body.
This instant on the back of the room.
This instant on the back of the body.
This instant on the back of the room.
Back of the body.
Back of the room.
Back of the body.
Back of the room.
Back of the body.
Back of the room.
This instant, space of the room.
Space of the body.
Space of the head.
No space.
No space.
Space of the body.
Space of the room.
Space of the town.
Space of the galaxy.

191

192

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Space of the universe.
Space of all universes.
No space.
Attention on your feet.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on your feet.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the ceiling and find no ceiling.
Feet, find no feet.
Ceiling, no ceiling.
Feet, no feet.
Ceiling, no ceiling.
Back of the room, no back of the room.
Back of the room, no back of the room.
Put your attention on the back of the room and find no back of the room.
Put your attention on the back of the room and find no back of the room.
Attention on the front of the room and find no front of the room.
Attention on the front of the room and find no front of the room.
Attention on the right side of the room and find no right side.
Attention on the right side and find no right side.
Attention on the left side of the room and find no left side of the room.
Attention on the left side of the room and find no left side of the room.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the floor.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the floor.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the floor.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the floor.
Attention on the front of the room.
On the body.
On the back of the room.
Front of the room.
Body.
Back of the room.
Front of the room.
Body.
Back of the room.
Back of the room.
Attention on the body.
Attention on the front of the room.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the body.
Attention on the floor.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the body.
Attention on the floor.
Attention on the floor.
Attention on the body.
Attention on the roof.
Attention on the ceiling.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
Attention on the body.
Attention on the basement.
Attention on the roof.
Attention on the body.
Attention on the basement.
Attention on the roof.
Attention on the body.
Attention on the basement.
Attention on the body and no body.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the body and no body.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the body and no body.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the body and no body.
Attention on the ceiling and no ceiling.
Attention on the body and no body.
Attention on the ceiling and no ceiling.
Attention on the floor and no floor.
Attention on the basement and no basement.
Attention on Earth and no Earth.
Attention on this universe, no universe.
Attention on your own universe, no universe.
Attention on your own universe, no universe.
Put up a barrier and look through it.
Put up another barrier and look through it.
Put up another barrier and look through it.
Put up a barrier behind you and look through it.
Put up a barrier behind you and look through it.
Attention on your head.
Attention on your shoes.
Attention on your head.
Attention on your shoes.
Attention on your head.
Attention on your shoes.
Attention on the ceiling.
On the roof.
On the sky.
On black space.
On nothingness.
Attention on knowingness.
Attention on your head.
Attention on knowingness.
Attention on your head.
Attention on knowingness.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on knowingness.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on concentrating.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on concentrating.
Attention on the ceiling.

193

194

23 NOVEMBER 1953
Attention on concentrating.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on your eyeballs.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on your eyeballs.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the floor.
No body.
Find no body.
Find no floor.
Find no ceiling.
Find no walls.
Find no building.
Find no Camden.
No Earth.
Find no space.
Attention on your feet.
Attention on your hair.
Attention on your feet.
Attention on your hair.
Attention on the walls of the room.
Attention on the body, the four upper corners of the room.
Attention on the body, the four upper corners of the room.
Attention on the body, the four upper corners of the room.
Four upper corners of the room, attention on the body.
Four upper corners of the room, attention on the body.
Attention to sound.
Attention to sight.
Attention to sound.
Attention to sight.
Attention to sound.
Attention to sight.
Attention to sound.
Sound.
Sound.
Attention to sight.
Attention to sound.
Sound.
Sound.
Attention to sight.
Attention to sound.
Sound.
Sound.
Attention to sight.
Attention to sound, and no sound.
Sound.
Sound.
Sound.
No sound.
Sound.
Sound.
Sound.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
Attention to no sound now.
Sound.
Sound.
Sound.
Sound.
Sound.
Sound.
Sound.
Attention to no sound. Get the nulls between the sounds.
Sound.
Sound.
Sound.
Sound.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on sight.
Attention on sound.
Attention on sight.
Attention on sound.
Attention on what's coming in.
On what's going out.
On what's coming in.
On what's going out.
On what's coming in.
On what's coming out.
Attention on the MEST universe.
Attention on your own universe.
On the MEST universe.
Your own universe.
The MEST universe.
On your own ridges and find no ridges.
On the walls and find no walls.
And your ridges and find no ridges.
And the walls and find no walls.
And your ridges and find no ridges.
Ridges and find no ridges.
Ridges and find no ridges.
Energy deposits and find no energy deposits.
Body and find no body.
Energy deposits and find no energy deposits.
Body and find no body.
Energy deposits, find no energy deposits.
Body and find no body.
Put new energy deposits in.
Change those to other energy deposits.
Change those to other energy deposits.
Change those to other energy deposits.
Attention on knowing.
Attention on doing.
Attention on knowing.
Attention on doing.
Attention on knowing.
Attention on doing.

195

196

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Attention on nothing.
Attention on the ceiling.
Attention on the floor.
Attention on the four upper points of the room, four upper corners of the room, plus the four lower points of the room.
Hold it.
Four upper points of the room, four lower points of the room. Hold it.
Attention on receiving no effects.
Attention on receiving effects.
Receiving no effects.
Receiving effects.
Receiving no effects.
Receiving effects.
Receiving no effects.
Receiving effects.
Receiving no effects.
Receiving effects.
Receiving no effects.
Receiving effects.
Receiving no effects.
Attention on any visio you don't like, whether black, white or green, doesn't matter. Any visio you don't like.
Attention on no visio.
On a visio you don't like.
On no visio.
On the visio you don't like on your nose.
A visio you don't like on your nose.
On a visio you don't like on your nose.
A visio you don't like on your ears.
On the visio you don't like on the hair of your head.
On a visio you don't like on the hair of your head.
A visio you don't like on the hair of your head.
On a visio you don't like beyond it.
On a visio you don't like, attention beyond it.
A visio you like, attention beyond it.
A visio you like, attention beyond it.
Be the space of the room.
The space of your head.
The space of the building.
The space of the MEST universe.
A cubic millimeter of space inside your head.
The space of the universe.
A cubic millimeter of space inside your head.
Be the space of your stomach.
Space of your head.
The space of your stomach.
The space of your head.
The space of your stomach.
The space of your head.
The space of your stomach.
The space of your head.
The space of the room.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
The space of your stomach.
The space of the room.
The space of the stomach.
The space of the room.
The space of the stomach.
Space of the room.
The space of the stomach.
Space of your right big toe.
The space of the room.
Space of your right big toe.
Space of the room.
Space of your body.
Space of your head.
Space of the room.
Space of your head.
Space back of your head.
Space of your head.
Space back of your head.
Space of your head.
Space back of your head.
Space of your head.
Space back of your head.
Space of your head.
Space back of your head.
Space in front of your body.
Space in back of your body.
Space in front of your body.
Be the space in front of your body.
Be the space in back of your body.
Be the space in front of your body.
Be the space in back of your body.
Be the space in front of your body.
Be the space in back of your body.
Mock up eight anchor points anywhere and be its space.
Knock the eight down and be no space.
Put up eight anchor points anyplace and be its space.
Knock the space down and be no space.
Put up eight anchor points anywhere and be its space.
Knock the space down and be no space.
Put up eight anchor points anyplace and be its space.
Knock the space down, be no space.
Be the space of a grave.
Be this instant, space of the grave.
This instant, space of the body.
This instant, space of the grave.
This instant, space of the body.
This instant, space of the grave.
This instant, space of the body.
This instant, space of any grave.
This instant, space of the body.
This instant, space of any grave.
This instant, space of your body.

197

198

28 NOVEMBER 1953
This instant, space, any grave.
This instant, space, any body.
This instant, space, any grave.
This instant, space, any body.
This instant, space, any grave.
This instant, space, this body.
This instant, space, a grave.
This instant, space, this body.
This instant, space, a grave.
Space of a grave.
Space of a grave.
Space of a grave, in this instant.
Space of a grave, in this instant.
Space of a grave, in this instant.
Space of this body.
Space of the grave.
Space of this body.
Space of the grave.
Space of this body.
The space of a grave.
The space of this body.
The space of a skeleton.
Space of this body.
A space of a skeleton.
The space of this body.
The space of a skeleton.
The space of this body.
The space of a skeleton.
The space of this body.
The space of a skeleton.
The space of this body.
This instant, space of a skeleton.
This instant, space of this body.
This instant, space of a skeleton.
This instant, space of this body.
This instant, the space of some grave dust.
This instant, space of this body.
This instant, the space of some grave dust.
This instant, space of this body.
This instant, space of some grave dust.
This instant, space of this body.
Grave dust.
This body.
Grave dust.
This body.
No dust.
This body.
No dust, no space.
This body.
No dust, no space.
This body.
Space of a skull.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
Space of this body.
Space of a skull.
Space of this body.
Space of a skull in a grave.
Space of this body.
Space of a skull in a grave.
Space of this body.
Space of a skull in a grave.
Space of this body.
This instant, space of a skull in a grave.
Space of this body.
This instant, space, a skull in a grave.
Space of this body.
This instant, space of skull in a grave.
Space of this body.
This instant in a grave.
This instant, space of this body.
This instant, space of a grave.
This instant, space of this body.
This instant, space of a grave.
This instant, space of this body.
This instant, space of a grave.
This instant, space of this body.
Space of the head.
The space of the body.
The space of your head.
The space of your body.
The space of your head.
The space of your body.
This instant, the space of a grave.
This instant, space of this body.
This instant, space of the earth walls of a grave.
This instant, space of a coffin.
This instant, space of dust.
And this instant, space of this body.
Space of the grave.
Space of this body.
Space of a grave.
Space of this body.
Space of a grave.
Space of this body.
Space of a grave.
Space of this body.
Space of a grave.
Space of this body.
Space of a grave.
Space of this body.
Space of a grave.
Space of this body.
Space of a grave.
Space of this body.
Space of a grave.

199

200

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Space of this body.
Space of a grave.
Space of this body.
Space of a grave.
Space of this body.
This instant, space of this body, space of the head.
Space of the body.
Space of a head only.
Space of the total body.
Space of a head.
Space of the total body.
Space of the head.
Space of the total body.
The space of a grave.
The space of a grave.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave at this instant.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave at this instant.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave.
The space of this body.
This instant, space of this body.
The space of the room.
The space of this body.
The space of the room.
The space of this room.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave.
The space of this room.
The space of a grave.
The space of this room.
The space of a grave.
The space of this room.
The space of a grave.
The space of this room.
The space of a grave.
Space of a grave.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
Eight points of the space of the grave.
Eight points, the space of a coffin.
A silk-lined grave.
Lie in a grave with silk and be the space. Sprinkle it with lilies of the valley. And the faint odor of formaldehyde. And the feel of silk. And be the space of this body.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave.
The space of a body.
The space of a grave.
The space of this body.
The space of a grave.
The space of a body.
The space of this grave.
The space of this grave.
The space of a body.
The space of this grave.
A space of a body.
The space of the room.
The space of that grave.
The space of the room.
The space of that grave.
The space of the room.
The space of that grave.
The space of the body.
Space in back of the body.
The space of the head.
The space in front of the body.
The space at the back of the body.
The space of the head.
The space in front of the body.
Space of the head.
The space in front of the body.
Space of the grave.
Present time on the Moon.
Present time here.
Present time on the Moon.
Present time here.
Present time on the Moon.
Present time here.
Present time on the Moon.
Present time here.
Present time on the Sun.
Present time here.
Present time on the Sun.
Present time here.
Present time on the Sun.
Present time here.
Present time on the Sun.
Present time here.
Present time on the Sun.
Present time here.

201

202

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Present time in that grave. Present time here. Present time in that grave. Present time here. Find a grave and find no grave. A grave and find no grave. A grave and find no grave. The space of the body here. Space of the grave and find no grave. Space of the grave and find no grave. Space of this body here and find no body. The space of the room and find no room. The space of the body and find no body. The space of the room and find no room. The space of this body and find no body. The space of the ceiling. The space of the room. The space of the ceiling. The space of the room. The space of the ceiling and find no ceiling. Space of the room and find no room. Space of the body, find no body. Space of a grave, find no grave. Space of this universe, find no universe.
Get the idea of a water bucket inverted on the body and have that be the space of the head. Fill that space.
Put a washtub inverted over that. Make the water bucket disappear. Have that be the space of the head. Mock up a circular room here. Look through the washtub, find no circular room. Find a circular room. Find no circular room. Find a circular room. Find no circular room.
Look through the circular room and find no space. Now find space and nothingness. Then just nothingness.
Find no mock-ups, no universes, no body, no room, no other people. Find nothing. Sit back and know. Be the space between your ears. The space between your shoulder blades. The space between your ears. The space between your shoulder blades. Space between your ears. The space between your shoulder blades. The space of this room. Space between your shoulder blades. The space of this room. The space between your shoulder blades.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
The space in this room.
Make it a bigger room and be the space of the new room.
Have your shoulder blades wider and be the space of your shoulder blades.
Have your shoulder blades be much wider and be the space of your shoulder blades.
Have them be much wider and be the space of your shoulder blades.
Oh, have them be wider than that and be the space of your shoulder blades.
Have a much bigger room and be the space of the room.
Much bigger room and be the space of the room.
Have a much bigger room and be the space of the room.
Much, much bigger room and be the space of the room.
Have little tiny shoulder blades and be the space between them.
Much smaller shoulder blades and be the space between them.
Throw away any residue you have.
Be the space of your body.
The space of your head.
The space of the room.
Find no room.
Find no head.
And find no body.
Be the space of your body.
Sit back and know.
Relax.
Take a look at your right foot and find no right foot.
Look right straight through it and find no right foot.
Right straight through it and find no right foot.
Look at your left foot and find no left foot, while you have no right foot.
Look at your left foot and find no left foot.
Look straight through it and find no left foot.
Look at your right leg and find no right leg.
Look right straight through it, no right leg.
Your left leg, find no left leg.
Your left leg, find no left leg.
Your right leg, find no right leg.
Your left leg, find no left leg.
Your left arm, find no left arm.
Your left arm, find no left arm.
Your left leg, find no left leg.
Your right leg, find no right leg.
Find nothing below your neck. Have your head sitting in thin space. Right through the body and find your head sitting in thin space.
Now get back your total lower body.
Look out the front of your face and find no front of your face.
Through the back of your head.
Find no head now.
Now find no head.
Now find no torso and no legs and no arms.
Find an empty chair.
Sit there and find an empty chair.
Any part which is reluctant, just look straight through it.

203

204

28 NOVEMBER 1953
And put something beyond for you to look at.
Put something beyond for you to look at.
Put something all around for you to look at, but no body.
Find no body.
Now find no body but find the walls of this room.
Find no body but find the walls of this room.
Find no body but find the walls of this room.
And again, find no body but find the walls of the room.
Now reach for the walls of the room.
And withdraw from the walls of the room.
Reach for them.
Withdraw from them.
Reach for them.
Withdraw from them.
Reach for them.
Withdraw from them.
Find no body.
Reach for the walls of the room.
Withdraw from them.
Reach for the walls of the room.
Withdraw from them.
Reach for the walls of the room.
Withdraw from them.
Reach for the walls of the room.
Withdraw from them.
Reach for the walls of the room.
Withdraw from them.
Reach for the walls of the room.
Withdraw from them.
Find no body.
Reach for the walls of the room.
Withdraw from them.
Reach for the ceiling and withdraw from it.
Find no head now.
Reach for the ceiling and withdraw from it.
Reach for the ceiling and withdraw from it.
Be three feet back of your head.
Find your body.
Find the room.
Be three feet back of your head.
Three feet back of your head, reach and withdraw from the ceiling.
Put another ceiling there.
Change the ceiling again, and reach and withdraw from it.
Now throw that away.
And reach for the ceiling and withdraw from it.
Reach for it and withdraw from it.
Reach for it and withdraw from it.
Reach for it, touch it, and withdraw from it.
Feel the ceiling.
Look at the front corners of the room.
Look at the roof, straight up through the roof.
Straight up through the sky.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
Straight up through black space.
Put a roof there.
Put a ceiling there.
Put a room here.
Reach and withdraw from this new room.
New room, reach and withdraw from it.
All right, unmock everything you got mocked up.
Mock up a body in the chair.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up in the chair.
Unmock it and look straight through it and find no body.
From three feet back of your head, look straight through it and find no body.
Now mock it up.
Now unmock it.
Now mock it up.
Now unmock it.
Now mock it up and look at it.
Now unmock it and look straight through it.
Now mock it up and look at it.
Now unmock it and look straight through it.
Now mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Now look straight through it and find no body.
Now put a body there.
Now get no body.
Now put a body there.
Now no body.
Now put an entirely different body there.
And unmock it.
Put this new body there.
You can unmock it.
Put this new body there.
And unmock it.
Put it there again.
Unmock it.
Put it there again.
Unmock it.
Put it there again.
Unmock it.

205

206

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Now get an entirely different body—opposite sex. Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Body of the opposite sex sitting in your chair.
Now unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Now, put your own body in the chair.
Get somebody else looking straight through it.
And you put it in the chair, get somebody else looking through it.
And you put it in the chair and get a mob of people looking through it.
And you put it in the chair, get a mob of people looking through it.
And you put it in the chair, get a mob of people looking through it.
Throw those mobs away.
Get another mob of people looking straight through it.
Throw all those mobs away.
Get your body in the chair real solid.
Get it more solid.
More solid.
More solid.
More solid.
Now thinner.
Thinner.
Thinner.
Thinner.
Thinner.
Less.
Less.
Now no body.
Now get a body in the chair.
And be three feet behind it, and pat it on the head and say, "Nice Seeing Eye dog."
And pat it on the head again and say, "Poor body, how mean I've been to you."
Now unmock it.
And get it back again and pat it on the head and say, "Poor body."
And pat it on the head, "Poor body." Give it a little sympathy.
Now unmock it.
Find an empty chair.
Be three feet above the seat of the empty chair, putting no anchor points anyplace.
Put some there.
Vanish them.
Now put some more there.
Now vanish them.
Now put some more there.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
Now vanish those.
Put a body in the chair.
Unmock it.
Put it in the chair.
Unmock it.
Put it in the chair.
Unmock it.
Put it in the chair.
Unmock it.
Put it in the chair.
Now pat it on the head. Say, "Nice body."
Now get the idea that just because you're out of it, another thetan grabs it, carries it away and ruins it.
Have an empty chair.
Create a new body in its place.
Have another thetan come along and take this body out and throw it in the river. Spoil it.
And get a body that belongs to some other thetan, you take it down the river and spoil it.
Get it all muddy and messy.
Get it being real dead.
Now make him use it.
All right, unmock all of that.
Mock up your body in the chair.
Change it to a different body.
Change it to your body.
To another body.
To your body.
To another body.
To your body.
To another body.
To your body.
To another body.
To your body.
To another body.
To your body.
To another body.
To your body.
To another body.
To no body.
Get it as no body.
No body.
Again, get it as no body.
No body.
Now put it there again.
Now get no energy in the chair at all.
No energy of any kind in the chair at all.
Nothing of any kind in the chair at all.
No energy in the chair.
No black energy, pink, white, green energy—no energy in the chair.
Put some energy above the chair.
Unmock the energy above the chair.

207

208

28 NOVEMBER 1953
Mock up the energy on the chair.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Have somebody else put some energy there too.
Unmock both of them.
Have somebody else put some energy on the chair, you unmock it.
Have somebody else put some energy there, you unmock it.
Somebody else put some energy there, you look straight through it.
Put a body in the chair.
And blow up any residue you have.
Unmock the body in the chair.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Mock it up.
Unmock it.
Unmock its aberrations.
Unmock its name.
Unmock its past.
Unmock its future.
Give it a name.
Give it a past.
Give it a future.
Unmock these.
Give it a past.
Give it a present.
Give it a future.
Give it a name.
Unmock these.
Give it a past.
Give it a present.
Give it a future.
Give it a name.
Unmock these.
Mock up your name.
Mock up your body.
Mock up your past.
Change it.
Change it again.
Change it again.
Change it again.
Get how you're an orphan.
Change it again.
Change it again.
Get how you were born last night.
Change it again.
Get how you were born in 1776.
Change it again.
Change it again.
Change your past again.
Change your past again.

SPECIAL SESSION: EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PROCESS
Change one thing in particular about your past; make it entirely different story.
Change it again.
Unmock it.
Now mock it up.
Mock up the body.
Mock up your future.
Mock up your name.
Pat your body on the head. Tell it's a nice body.
Be where you please.
And reach for the two back corners of the room.
Contact them.
Don't think.
Contact them.
Contact them.
Don't think.
Contact the two back corners of the room.
And contacting them, reach straight through them.
Now put them there again and reach toward them from the outside.
Hold on to them.
Okay. Let go. Be where you please.
Get this instant, this room.
This instant on the Moon.
This instant in this room.
Okay?
End of session.

209



Appendix
SOP 8-C: The Rehabilitation of the Human Spirit 213
This Is Scientology, The Science of Certainty 227
Standard Operating Procedure 8 249
Tone Scale [1953] 259








Published by the Hubbard Association of Scientologists, Inc. Issue 24-G Jan. 1954
SOP 8-C: The Rehabilitation Of the Human Spirit
Scientology, the science of knowing how to know, has been developed for var-ious applications in the field of human experience.
Where it is utilized by skilled persons to enhance the personal ability and knowledge of others, the recommended process is Standard Operating Procedure 8-C.
SOP 8-C was developed after almost a year of observing SOP 8 in action in other hands than mine, and after observing the frailties and talents of human auditors. SOP 8-C might be called SOP 8 modified for clinical, laboratory and individual human applications.
The goal of this system of operation is to return to the individual his knowledge, skill and knowingness, and to enhance his perception, his reaction time and serenity.
It is entirely incidental that SOP 8-C is effective on "psychosomatic" illness, on human aberration and social difficulties. It is not the intent or purpose of Scientology to repair. The science is a creative science. If the fact that human illness, disability and aberration uniformly cease to be, because of Scientology, the effect is not intended to be primary and the goal of SOP 8-C is not their remedy. Indeed, if SOP 8-C is used to remedy these only, it fails as a system. SOP 8-C succeeds only when it is addressed toward higher knowingness and beingness—ironically, in using it, human ills vanish only when the auditor concentrates on the goals of the system and neglects the obvious physical disabilities of the preclear.
In that one creates that which one concentrates upon, a treatment of illness which validates it in treatment will always tend to be unsuccessful.
SOP 8-C was the subject of the Camden Indoctrination Course B,* from 16 November to 23 December, as well as the subject of the Phoenix International Congress of 28 December 1953.
* The Camden Indoctrination Course was the Second American Advanced Clinical Course.

213

214

Specifically, the use of these processes obtains, when correctly used, without further evaluation for, or indoctrination of the preclear, the knowledge that he is not a body, that he is a creative energy production unit, and demonstrates to him his purposes and abilities.
This energy-space production unit we call a "thetan," that being a coined word taken from a mathematical symbol, the Greek letter "theta." This is the preclear. One does not send "one's thetan" anywhere. One goes as a thetan. When a preclear is detected being in one place and finding "his thetan" in another ("I'm over there"), he is not exteriorized. To be "exteriorized" the preclear must be certain that he is outside his body. An uncertain "exteriorization" requires more work before it becomes an exteriorization.
SOP 8-C brings about a condition designated as "Theta Clear." This is a relative, not an absolute term. It means that the person, this thought unit, is clear of his body, his engrams, his facsimiles, but can handle and safely control a body.
The state of Operating Thetan is higher than Theta Clear and means that the person does not need a body to communicate or work. It is accomplished with SOP 8-O.
The highest theory of SOP 8-C is that the being is engaged upon a game called physical universe. This is a game requiring barriers, which is to say, walls, planets, time and vast distances (which last two are also barriers). In engaging upon this game he has at last become so conscious of barriers that he is limited in his actions and thoughts. He thinks, in the case of Homo sapiens, that he is a body (a barrier) hemmed in by vast distances (barriers) and pinned in a time stream (a system of moving barriers) so as to reach only the present. These combined barriers have become so formidable that they are not even well perceived, but from being strong have become unreal to him. The matter is further complicated by "invisible barriers" such as the eyes or glasses.
In actuality, the thetan is a knowingness, total in a cleared state, who yet can create space and time and objects to locate in them. He reduces his knowingness only to have action. Knowingness is reduced by assuming that one cannot know or knows wrongly. Knowingness is reduced by assuming one must be in certain places to perceive and so know, and that one cannot be in certain places.
Space is, but does not have to be, the first barrier of knowingness. With Scientology we have the first definition of space: Space is a viewpoint of dimension. Given a viewpoint and four, eight or more points to view, one has space. Space is a problem of observation, not of physics.
There is no question here of whether space, energy or objects are real. Things are as real as one is certain of their reality. Reality is, here on Earth, agreement as to what is. This does not prevent barriers or time from being formidably real. It does

not mean either that space, energy or time are illusions. It is as one knows it is. For one makes, by a process of continuous automatic duplication, all that one perceives. So much for theory—in application this theory obtains results of considerable magnitude in changing beingness.
The thetan is continuously engaged upon cycles of action. The basic cycle of action is "Create, resist effects (survive) and destroy." This can be stated in various ways: "Create an object, have it resist effects (survive) and then destroy it." Or, "Create a situation, continue it and change it, and destroy or end it." When a thetan leaves a cycle which is important to him unfinished, he tends to strive to finish it elsewhere or later in disrelated circumstances. Further, he can become overly concentrated upon creating or persistence (surviving) or upon destroying and so form an unbalanced state of beingness.
Time exists in those things a thetan creates. It is a shift of particles, always making new space, always at an agreed-upon rate. A thetan does not change in time, but as he can view particles (objects, spaces, barriers) from many viewpoints, he can consider himself to be in a "time stream," which he is not. A thetan's ideas (postulates, commands, beliefs) change; particles change; the thetan does not change either in space or in time.
Just as he is making an effort to do something he cannot help but do—Survive— he is also fighting against doing the only thing he does: sit fixed in one "position."
The thetan, to produce interest and action, operates as a paradox. He cannot die, so he firmly insists and proves continually that he can die. He never changes location, but only views new locations and constantly lives in horror of being fixed in time and space. Above that, he knows the past and the future and all of the present, and so fights to obscure the past and guess the future.
Less theoretically, the individual who is processed is at first, usually, "in" the body and perceiving with the body's eyes. When exteriorized (placed "three feet back of his head"), he is actually out of the body and still "in" physical universe space. He can, exteriorized, move about and be in places just as though he had a body, seeing without eyes, hearing without ears and feeling without fingers—ordinarily better than with these "aids." This is not like "astral walking" which is done by the individual who "sends a body" or a viewpoint to some other place and perceives with it. A thetan is as much present where he is as if he were there in body. He isn't "somebody else" than the preclear moving dimly about. He is the preclear, he is there. At first he may be uncertain as to what he is seeing. This faculty becomes better as his ability to look, hear and feel while exteriorized improves. SOP 8-C improves this perception. Because the body only perceives what the thetan is perceiving anyway, looking, feeling, hearing of the body is also better with SOP 8-C but this is only incidental.
When a thetan believes too thoroughly he is a body, he is generally unhappy, afraid, doubts his own (and validates the body's) existence and worries about his

215

216

inabilities. When he is out of the sphere of influence of the body (a very small one) he becomes serene, confident and knowing. He can handle a body better, can act faster, can recall more and do more while exteriorized than he can while in a body.
Society, thirsting for more control of more people substitutes religion for the spirit, the body for the soul, an identity for the individual and science and data for truth. In this direction lies insanity, increasing slavery, less knowingness, greater scarcity and less society.
Scientology has opened the gates to a better world. It is not a psychotherapy. It is a body of knowledge which, when properly used, gives freedom and truth to the individual.
It could be said that man exists in a partially hypnotized state. He believes in other-determinism in many things, to his detriment. He will be as well as he is self-determined. The processes of Scientology could be described as methods of "unhypnotizing" men to their own freer choice and better life.
THE USE OF SOP 8-C
This process is designed to be administered by one person (the auditor) to another (the preclear).
SOP 8-C is first used step by step from Step I on, until the person to whom it is addressed knows he is back of his head and no longer in the body. If the preclear is very difficult to exteriorize, the person should be referred to an auditor trained at the HAS Clinical Center (for there are special methods of exteriorization for difficult cases which are contained in but are not at once visible in SOP 8-C). The first three steps are exteriorization steps. They should be repeated over and over until certain exteriorization takes place.
The auditor can go through the first steps many times one after the other with the preclear until exteriorization occurs. Doing Steps IV to VII on a person not exteriorized should be minimized. (Earlier SOPs used all seven steps for exteriorization, a practice not followed in SOP 8-C where only the first three steps are used.)
When the preclear has exteriorized one then begins again with Step I and continues to Step VII, in order, with the preclear exteriorized. Here in SOP 8-C the emphasis is upon an exteriorized thetan. When the auditor has taken the exteriorized preclear thoroughly, and correctly, through Steps I to VII at least twice, one has then what may be considered a Theta Clear.
To repeat, one uses SOP 8-C Steps I to III in that order. On one of these, the first time through, the majority of people exteriorize with certainty. As soon as exteriorization takes place, the auditor starts with Step I again, does it thoroughly on the exteriorized preclear, then the auditor applies Step II thoroughly and so on until all seven are done.

The auditor knows when the preclear exteriorizes by asking him or by the pre¬clear volunteering the information.
CAUTION: Do not ask the preclear to look at his body.
If the preclear fails to exteriorize sometime during the first three steps, the audi¬tor should simply do them again. If the preclear fails the second time, the auditor patiently goes through them a third time, and so on. If the matter then seems too dif¬ficult, contact an auditor, trained during late 1953 at Camden, by the HAS itself.
The least possible result in going over these first three steps many times will be a considerably bettered condition of the preclear, superior to all past results. Only a very few preclears fail to exteriorize after Steps I to III have been several times repeated.
CAUTION: Although this process is as foolproof as it can be made, it can be maliciously used in this wise: by giving the preclear constant losses; by giving him no chance to win; by bullying him; by evaluating for him; by insisting he is "out¬side" when he is not; by invalidating him; by pretending to see him or his mock-ups or saying that one does if he does.
SOP 8-C FORMULAS AND STEPS
Opening Procedure: (Ten minutes to two hours—with MEST body)
a. Send preclear to exact places in room, one place at a time.
b. Have preclear select places in the room and move to them one at a time,
still under auditor's direction.
c. Have preclear drill in physically holding on to and letting go of objects and
spaces on his own decision to hold on, decision to let go.
Step I: Location
Prelogic: Theta orients objects in space and time. Axiom: In life experience space becomes beingness.
Formula I: Permitting the preclear to discover with certainty where people and things are not in the present, past and future recovers sufficient orientation to establish his knowledge and certainty of where he is and they are; the application of this is accomplished by negative orientation of beingness, havingness and doingness on each of eight dynamics in the present, past and future.

217

218

Step I
a. Ask preclear to be three feet back of chair. Ask him for things, people
which are not giving him directions (orders). For things, persons he is not
giving orders to. For things, persons which are not giving directions to
other things. Ask preclear for goals he does not have. For goals others do
not have for others. For goals another does not have for him. For goals he
does not have for another. For persons he is not. For animals he is not.
For places where he is not. Where bacteria are not. Where objects are not. For
places where he is not thinking.
Note: All of the above are done in "brackets" for present, past and future.
b. (If exteriorized) Have him drill while exteriorized into holding on to and
letting go of objects on his specific decision. Ask him to be in places which
are safe, dangerous, pleasant, unpleasant, beautiful, ugly.
Step II: Bodies
Axiom: In life experience energy becomes doingness.
Axiom: Compulsive position precedes compulsive thinking.
Axiom: That which changes the preclear in space can evaluate for him.
Formula II: Permit the preclear to discover that he handles bodies and allow him to handle bodies in mock-ups and actuality; and remedy his thirst for attention which he has received by contagion from bodies.
Step II
a. Have preclear mock up bodies and unmock them. Have him get some-
thingnesses and nothingnesses of bodies until he feels better about them.
Ask him to be three feet back of chair.
b. (If exteriorized) Have him complete IIa many times and then move body
while he is outside.
Step III: Space
Prelogic: Theta creates space and time and objects to locate in them. Definition: Space is a viewpoint of dimension.
Axiom: Energy derives from imposition of space between terminals and a reduction and expansion of that space.

Formula III: Permit the preclear to regain his ability to create space and impose it upon terminals, to remove it from between terminals and to regain his security concerning the stability of MEST space.
Step III
a. Have preclear hold two back corners of room and not think.
b. (If exteriorized) Have preclear complete Spacation.
Note: If not exteriorized return to Step I.
Step IV: Havingness
Axiom: In life experience time becomes havingness. Observation: To a thetan, anything is better than nothing.
Observation: Any preclear is suffering from problems of too little havingness and any reduction of his existing energy, if not replaced, will cause him to drop in tone.
Formula IV:
a. The remedy of problems of havingness is accomplished by creating an
abundance of all things.
b. As the preclear has rendered automatic his desires and ability to create
and destroy, and has thus placed havingness beyond his control, the auditor
should place in the control of the preclear his automaticities of havingness
and unhavingness and permit him, on his own self-determinism, to balance
his havingness.
c. How to make havingness: Have preclear put out eight anchor points of
size, thus creating a space. Have him pull in these eight to the center and
have him retain the resulting mass. Do this using large and various objects
for anchor points. Do this until he is willing to release such old energy
deposits as engrams and ridges but still continue to make havingness.
Step IV
Have preclear remedy problems of havingness by mocking up and pulling together sets of eight anchor points. Do this many times. Do not have him make anchor points explode in this fashion. Have him save masses thus created. Have preclear adjust anchor points in body.

219

220

Step V: Terminals
Axiom: Space exists by reason of anchor points.
Definition: An anchor point is any particle or mass or terminal.
Axiom: Energy is derived from mass by fixing two terminals in proximity in space.
Axiom: Self-determinism is related to the ability to impose space between terminals.
Axiom: Cause is a potential source of flow. Axiom: Effect is a potential receipt of flow.
Axiom: Communication is the duplication of the receipt-point of that which emanated at a cause-point.
Axiom: Wrongness in terms of flow is inflow.
Formula V: The thetan is rehabilitated as to energy and terminals by remedying his postulates about outflow and inflow and drills relating to the outflow and inflow of energy according to the above axioms.
StepV
a. Ask preclear for times he could do something. Times when he couldn't do
anything. For things he can do. For things he can't do. For things other
people can, can't do. For things other people can do for others. For things
another specific person can't do for him. For things he cannot do for
another or others.
b. Ask preclear for objects, actions, persons, ideas he is not destroying. For
objects, actions, persons, ideas he is not making survive (persist). For objects,
actions, persons, ideas he is not creating. Present, past and future in brackets.
(Note: Ideas are the most important here, in brackets.)
c. Ask preclear for objects, persons, energies, times which are not touching
him. Which he is not touching. Which are not reaching for him. For which
he is not reaching. For objects, persons, times from which he is not with¬
drawing. Which are not withdrawing from him. In brackets.
d. Ask preclear for sights which will not blind him. For people he will not
blind if they see him. For noises which will not deafen him. For people he
will not deafen. For spoken words that will not hurt him. For spoken words
which will not hurt others. In brackets.

e. Ask preclear for ideas that will not destroy, cause to survive (persist), create
or upset others. In brackets.
f. Ask preclear for ideas, sounds, sights that will not fix people or unfix them
from specific places.
g. Ask preclear for ideas he is not trying to fix in things. For ideas he is not
trying to unfix from things. In brackets.
h. Have him unmock and mock up terminals and move them together and apart until he can make them generate currents.
Step VI: Symbolization
Definition: A symbol is an idea fixed in energy and mobile in space.
Formula VI: The thetan who has been moved about by symbols is strengthened by mocking up and moving about and fixing in space ideas which have for¬merly moved him.
Step VI
Have preclear create symbols which mean nothing. Ask pc for ideas he is not trying to destroy. For ideas he is not trying to make survive (persist). For ideas he is not trying to create.
Note: The above are done in brackets. Have him mock up ideas and move them
about.
Step VII: Barriers
Axiom: The MEST universe is a game consisting of barriers. Definition: A barrier is space, energy, object, obstacles or time.
Formula VII: Problems of barriers or their lack are resolved by contacting and penetrating, creating and destroying, validating and neglecting barriers by changing them or substituting others for them, by fixing and unfixing attention upon their somethingness and nothingness.
Step VII
a. Have preclear reach and withdraw (physically, then as himself) from
spaces, walls, objects, times.
b. Have preclear do Six Ways to Nothing.
c. Have him create and destroy barriers.

221

222

Step VIII: Duplication
Fundamental: The basic action of existence is duplication.
Logic: All operating principles of life may be derived from duplication.
Axiom: Communication is as exact as it approaches duplication.
Axiom: Unwillingness to be cause is monitored by unwillingness to be duplicated.
Axiom: Unwillingness to be an effect is monitored by unwillingness to duplicate.
Axiom: An inability to remain in a geographical position brings about an unwillingness to duplicate.
Axiom: An enforced fixation in a geographical position brings about an unwillingness to duplicate.
Axiom: Inability to duplicate on any dynamic is the primary degeneration of the thetan.
Axiom: Perception depends upon duplication. Axiom: Communication depends upon duplication. Axiom: In the MEST universe, the single crime is duplication.
Formula VIII: The primary ability and willingness of the thetan to duplicate must be rehabilitated by handling desires, enforcements and inhibitions relating to it on all dynamics.
Step VIII
a. Ask preclear for actions, forms and ideas which do, do not, duplicate
specific other people. For actions, forms, ideas by which specific other
people do, do not duplicate specific other people. For actions, forms, ideas
of others which do, do not, duplicate him.
b. Have preclear duplicate physical objects and people and possess himself
of duplicates.
c. Have him make "no-duplicates" of objects and people.
d. Have him duplicate somethings and "nothings."

Group C
"Group C" is a process used on large numbers of people. It is composed of the following steps of SOP 8-C: Step la, Step IIa, Step IIIa, Step Va to h, Step VI, Step VII, Step VIII.
GLOSSARY
Pc stands for "preclear," a person being processed. Mock-up: A self-created image the preclear can see.
Bracket is done as follows: For preclear, for another, others for others, others for self, another for preclear, preclear for another. See Step la.
Special note: The first three steps of SOP 8-C could be classified as beingness steps. The remaining five steps of SOP 8-C could be classified as havingness steps. SOP, itself, in all eight steps constitutes doingness, thus approximating as described in Scientology 8-8008 the space-be, energy-do, time-have triangle.
Special note: In its entirety, SOP 8-C could be considered as various exercises in Formula H, which involves the most basic action of the thetan, which is reaching and withdrawing.
Special note: It will be noted that the negative orientation techniques are done in such a way as to make the preclear, without his being told to do so, create space. The auditor should pay specific attention when the preclear is discovering where things are not, that the preclear be caused to note specifically each time the exact location and position where the thing does not exist. This calls the preclear's attention to various positions which in themselves, thus located, create space. Thus, throughout SOP 8-C, the rehabilitation of space is also to be found, the definition of space being "space is a viewpoint of dimension."
Special note: In his auditing, if the auditor does not get a communication change on the part of the preclear, whether better or worse, every five or ten minutes, either the auditor is using the wrong step at the time, in which case he should progress on into the steps; or the preclear, even if he says he is, is not complying with the auditor's orders. The auditor, thus, should remain in continuous communication with the preclear so far as possible and should ascertain with great care what the preclear is doing after he indicates that he has complied with the direction and to discover every five or ten minutes if there has been a change in certainties or communication. The commonest source of failure in any step in SOP 8-C is a failure on the part of the preclear to execute the order given as it was intended to be executed, or on the part of the auditor in failing to ascertain whether or not the preclear is executing properly or if there has been a communication change. A careful check of auditors and preclears utilizing SOP 8-C has demonstrated in each case where its

223

224

use was becoming lengthy that the auditor was failing to ascertain from the preclear whether or not there had been communication changes, and it was also uniformly discovered that the preclear who was failing to get results while being audited with SOP 8-C was not doing the steps as directed but was either avoiding by not doing them at all, although he said he was doing them, or was failing to understand the direction and so was executing the step in some other way.
The first goal which an auditor must achieve is willingness in the preclear to receive directions. The condition of the preclear is such, in nearly all cases, that he has chosen, as a main point of resistance in life, direction of himself other than his own. Because the physical universe is designed to resist and overcome that which resists it, a continuous resistance to other direction than one's own results finally in a loss of ability to greater or lesser degree to direct oneself. In that it is the ability to direct himself which the auditor is seeking to return to the preclear, it must be demonstrated to the preclear solely by the process of good auditing that other direction is not necessarily harmful or in the worst interest of the preclear. Thus, to some degree, he ceases to resist incoming direction, and by ceasing to resist it, no longer validates it as a barrier, and so is not concentrating attention on resisting direction but is able to use it freely in his own self-direction. The self-determinism of a preclear is proportional to the amount of self-direction he is capable of executing and deteriorates markedly when a great deal of his attention is devoted to preventing other direction. Directing himself, the preclear becomes capable of execution; preventing direction of himself (resisting the direction of others) brings about a condition where he is mainly devoted to resisting his environment. The latter results in a diminishing of space of the preclear.
The first step in the rehabilitation of the preclear in self-direction is therefore a limiting of the amount of resistance he is concentrating on "other direction" and demonstrating to him that his following of the steps of SOP 8-C under the direction of an auditor is not harmful but, on the contrary, increases his command and control of himself and brings him at last to the point where he can neglect and ignore the continuous stimulus-response operation of the physical universe.
It can be seen clearly then that the auditor who sets himself up to be resisted will fail, for the preclear is mainly concentrating upon resisting the auditor. This is the primary factor in all auditing.
The preclear is brought to a point of cooperation in terms of direction without the use of hypnosis or drugs and without argument or "convincingness" on the part of the auditor, by which is meant overbearing demeanor. At the same time it should be the sole intention and operation of the auditor that his own directions be carried out explicitly by the preclear, and that these be performed with a minimum of communication break and with a maximum of affinity, communication and reality.
Using the formula that that which changes the individual's position in space can evaluate for the individual, the auditor in using SOP 8-C should use, at the beginning

of the first session and in any session where the preclear becomes unreasonably uncooperative in following simple directions, the following procedure. The auditor has the preclear walk to specific points in the room, touch, hold and let go of various specific objects. The auditor should be very exact in his directions. The auditor should do this even on an apparently cooperative case at least twenty minutes before going on to the next step in Opening Procedure.
When the preclear, drilled in this fashion, has at length realized without being told that the auditor's directions are quiet, reliable, exact and to be performed, and not until then, the auditor uses this process:
Preclear is asked to send himself to various parts of the room and do specific things. The auditor is very specific and exact about this, in that he has the preclear decide, on his own determinism and before moving from the spot where he is standing, what part of the room he is going to send himself to. When the preclear has decided this, and only then (but not necessarily telling the auditor), the preclear then takes himself to that part of the room. The auditor must be very exact that the decision to go to a certain part of the room and to reach or withdraw from a certain thing is made before the preclear takes an actual action. And then the auditor should make sure that the preclear has done exactly what he decided he would do before he moved. In such a wise, coached by the auditor, the preclear is led to direct himself to various parts of the room until he is entirely sure that he is directing himself to certain parts of the room and that the orders are coming from nobody but himself. Of course, before each new place is chosen, the auditor tells the preclear to choose a new place and tells him when to go there.
The third stage of this Opening Procedure is then as follows:
The auditor has the preclear be in one spot in the room and then has the preclear decide there to go to another spot in the room. The preclear leaves. The auditor has the preclear change his own mind, and go to yet another spot. This last is done to lessen the preclear's fear of changing his mind, to strengthen his decision and to lessen his reaction to his own mistakes.
The last two steps of Opening Procedure are done at some length. It is profitable by the experience of many auditors to spend as much as an hour on Opening Procedure even in a case which is not in poor condition. When Opening Procedure is omitted or is not carried on far enough, the auditor may discover that it will take him from five to ten hours to "get the case working." This time is saved by the expenditure of much less time in using Opening Procedure. Even when the preclear is complacent, even when the preclear is an obvious "Step I," even when the preclear shows no outward sign of resistance to other direction than his own, the first communication lag lessening which the auditor will perceive on the case will probably occur during the use of Opening Procedure. Further, the certainty of the case is heightened. Further, Opening Procedure is, for any level of case, an excellent process.

225

226

The preclear who is familiar with SOP 8 may conceive that he is doing a step which is "reserved for psychotics." The preclear should be disabused of such a concept, since the step is used today on all cases.
In the case of a preclear who is very resistive, Opening Procedure can be used with considerable profit for many hours. For such activity, however, an auditing room of the usual dimensions is usually too constrictive and the drill may be carried on as well out of doors even if only on a street.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder






Published by the Hubbard Association of Scientologists, Inc. Issue 16-G June 1953
This Is Scientology The Science of Certainty
FOREWORD
For nearly a quarter of a century, I have been engaged in the investigation of the fundamentals of life, the material universe and human behavior. Such an adventure leads one down many highways, through many byroads, into many back alleys of uncertainty, through many strata of life, through many personal vicissitudes, into the teeth of vested interests, across the rim of hell and into the very arms of heaven. Many before me have made their way across these tumultuous oceans of data, where every drop of water appears to be any other drop of water and yet where one must find the drop. Almost everything I have studied and observed has been evaluated otherwise somewhere, at some time, in relation to this or that.
What equipment must one have to venture upon these wastes? Where are the rules books, the maps, the signposts? All one perceives when he peers into the darkness of the unknown are the lonely bones of those who, reaching before, have found their hands empty and their lives destroyed. Such a thing is a lonely drama; one must cheer one's own triumphs and weep to himself his despair. The cold brutality of the scientific method fails far back, almost at the starting point. The airy spiralings and dread mysteries of India, where I drank deep, lead only into traps. The euphoria of religion, the ecstasies of worship and debauchery, become as meaningless as sand when one seeks in them the answer to the riddle of all existence. Many have roved upon this unmapped track. Some have survived to say a fraction of what they knew, some have observed one thing and said quite another, some looked knowing and said naught. One engaged upon such a quest does not even know the answer to that most important question of all: Will it be good for man to loose upon him, all in a rush as an avalanche, the knowingness of eternity?
There are those who would tell you that only a fiend would set you free, and that freedom leads at best into the darkest hells, and there are those to inform you that freedom is for you and not for them, but there are also men of kind heart

227

228

who know how precious is the cup and drink of wide, unbounded ways. Who is to say whether man will benefit at all from this knowledge hardly won? You are the only one who can say.
Observation, application, experience and test will tell you if the trek has been made and the answer found. For this is the science of knowing how to know. It is a science which does not include within it cold and musty data, data to be thrust down the throat without examination and acceptance. This is the track of knowing how to know. Travel it and see.
THE FACTORS
(Summation of the considerations and examinations of the human spirit and the material universe completed between A.D. 1923 and 1953.)
1. Before the beginning was a Cause and the entire purpose of the Cause was
the creation of effect.
2. In the beginning and forever is the decision and the decision is TO BE.
3. The first action of beingness is to assume a viewpoint.
4. The second action of beingness is to extend from the viewpoint, points to
view, which are dimension points.
5. Thus there is space created, for the definition of space is: viewpoint of
dimension. And the purpose of a dimension point is space and a point of
view.
6. The action of a dimension point is reaching and withdrawing.
7. And from the viewpoint to the dimension points there are connection
and interchange. Thus new dimension points are made. Thus there is
communication.
8. And thus there is light.
9. And thus there is energy.

10. And thus there is life.
11. But there are other viewpoints and these viewpoints outthrust points to
view. And there comes about an interchange amongst viewpoints; but the
interchange is never otherwise than in terms of exchanging dimension
points.

12. The dimension point can be moved by the viewpoint, for the viewpoint, in
addition to creative ability and consideration, possesses volition and potential
independence of action; and the viewpoint, viewing dimension points, can
change in relation to its own or other dimension points or viewpoints. Thus
comes about all the fundamentals there are to motion.
13. The dimension points are each and every one, whether large or small,
solid. And they are solid solely because the viewpoints say they are solid.
14. Many dimension points combine into larger gases, fluids or solids. Thus
there is matter. But the most valued point is admiration, and admiration is
so strong its absence alone permits persistence.
15. The dimension point can be different from other dimension points and thus
can possess an individual quality. And many dimension points can possess
a similar quality, and others can possess a similar quality unto themselves.
Thus comes about the quality of classes of matter.
16. The viewpoint can combine dimension points into forms and the forms can
be simple or complex and can be at different distances from the viewpoints
and so there can be combinations of form. And the forms are capable of
motion and the viewpoints are capable of motion and so there can be
motion of forms.
17. And the opinion of the viewpoint regulates the consideration of the forms,
their stillness or their motion, and these considerations consist of assignment
of beauty or ugliness to the forms and these considerations alone are art.
18. It is the opinions of the viewpoints that some of these forms should endure.
Thus there is survival.
19. And the viewpoint can never perish; but the form can perish.
20. And the many viewpoints, interacting, become dependent upon one
another's forms and do not choose to distinguish completely the ownership
of dimension points and so comes about a dependency upon the dimension
points and upon the other viewpoints.
21. From this comes a consistency of viewpoint of the interaction of dimen¬-
sion points and this, regulated, is TIME.
22. And there are universes.
23. The universes, then, are three in number: the universe created by one
viewpoint, the universe created by every other viewpoint, the universe
created by the mutual action of viewpoints which is agreed to be upheld—
the physical universe.

229

230


24. And the viewpoints are never seen. And the viewpoints consider more and
more that the dimension points are valuable. And the viewpoints try to
become the anchor points and forget that they can create more points and
space and forms. Thus comes about scarcity. And the dimension points can
perish and so the viewpoints assume that they, too, can perish.
25. Thus comes about death.
26. The manifestations of pleasure and pain, of thought, emotion and effort,
of thinking, of sensation, of affinity, reality, communication, of behavior
and being are thus derived and the riddles of our universe are apparently
contained and answered herein.
27. There is beingness, but man believes there is only becomingness.
28. The resolution of any problem posed hereby is the establishment of viewpoints
and dimension points, the betterment of condition and concourse amongst
dimension points, and, thereby, viewpoints, and the remedy of abundance
or scarcity in all things, pleasant or ugly, by the rehabilitation of the ability
of the viewpoint to assume points of view and create and uncreate, neglect,
start, change and stop dimension points of any kind at the determinism of the
viewpoint. Certainty in all three universes must be regained, for certainty, not
data, is knowledge.
29. In the opinion of the viewpoint, any beingness, any thing, is better than no
thing, any effect is better than no effect, any universe better than no universe,
any particle better than no particle, but the particle of admiration is best of all.
30. And above these things there might be speculation only. And below these
things there is the playing of the game. But these things which are written
here man can experience and know. And some may care to teach these
things and some may care to use them to assist those in distress and some
may desire to employ them to make individuals and organizations more
able and so give to Earth a culture of which we can be proud.
Humbly tendered as a gift to man by L. Ron Hubbard, 23 April 1953
THIS IS SCIENTOLOGY
Scientology is the science of knowledge. It contains many parts. Its most fundamental division is Scientology itself and para-Scientology. Under Scientology we group those things of which we can be certain and only those things of which we can be certain. Knowledge itself is certainty; knowledge is not data. Knowingness itself is certainty. Sanity is certainty, providing only that that certainty does not fall beyond the conviction of another when he views it. To obtain a certainty one must be able

to observe. But what is the level of certainty we require? And what is the level of observation we require for a certainty or a knowledge to exist? If a man can stand before a tree and by sight, touch or other perception know that he is confronting a tree and be able to perceive its form and be quite sure he is confronting a tree, we have the level of certainty we require. If the man will not look at the tree or, although it is observably a tree to others, if he discovers it to be a blade of grass or a sun, then he is below the level of certainty required and would not be able to grasp Scientology. Some other person, helpfully inclined, would have to direct his perception to the tree until the man perceived without duress that it was indeed a tree he confronted. That is the only level of certainty we require in order to qualify knowledge. For knowledge is observation and is given to those who would look. Things about which there is observational difficulty, such as mirror mazes, items hidden in smoke, objects guessed at in the dark, are outside the boundaries of Scientology.
In order to obtain knowledge and certainty, it is necessary to be able to observe, in fact, three universes in which there could be trees. The first of these is one's own universe; one should be able to create for his own observation in its total form for total perception a tree. The second universe would be the material universe, which is the universe of matter, energy, space and time, which is the common meeting ground of all of us. The third universe is actually a class of universes, which could be called "the other fellow's universe," for he and all the class of "other fellows" have universes of their own. A complete clarity on all three universes would be well above any goal attempted even in Scientology, and it is not necessary that one be as certain as this of three universes before one can be certain of Scientology, for certainty of Scientology requires only the same order of certainty one would have to have to know he was confronting a physical universe tree.
Para-Scientology is that large bin which includes all greater or lesser uncertainties. Here are the questionable things, the things of which the common normal observer cannot be sure with a little study. Here are theories, here are groups of data, even groups commonly accepted as "known." Some of the classified bodies of data which fall in para-Scientology are: Dianetics, incidents on the "whole track," the immortality of man, the existence of God, engrams containing pain and unconsciousness and yet all perception, prenatals, Clears, character and many other things which, even when closely and minutely observed, still are not certain things to those who observe them. Such things have relative truth. They have to some a high degree of reality; they have to others nonexistence. They require a highly specialized system in order to observe them at all. Working with such uncertainties one can produce broad and sweeping results: One can make the ill well again, one can right even the day which went most wrong; but those things which require highly specialized communication systems remain uncertain to many. Because Dianetics is placed in this category does not mean it is disowned; it means simply that it is a specialized thing based on theory which, no matter how workable, requires specialized observation. It does not mean that Dianetics will cease to work, but it means that Dianetics is not easily nor quickly forwarded into a complete certainty. Yet Dianetics is more of an exact science than many which have before borne that name; and Dianetics is an intimate part of

231

232

Scientology, for it is through its special communication processes that the data was won which has become Scientology.
Also under the heading of para-Scientology one would place such things as past lives, mysterious influences, astrology, mysticism, religion, psychology, psychiatry, nuclear physics and any other science based on theory.
A doctor, for instance, may seem entirely certain of the cause of some disease, yet it depends upon the doctor's certainty for the layman to accept that cause of the disease. Here we have a specialized communications system. We may have an arduously trained observer, a highly mechanistic observation resting upon a theory which is not, even at this late date, entirely accepted even in the best circles. That penicillin cures certain things is a certainty to the doctor even when penicillin suddenly and inexplicably fails to cure something. Any inexplicable failure introduces an uncertainty, which thereafter removes the subject from the realm of an easily obtained certainty.
Hypnotism, no matter how certain the hypnotist may be that he is effective on some people, is a wild variable and, even in expert practice, is a definite uncertainty. The use of drugs or shock produces such variable results that they class far down a gradient scale which would begin with a fair degree of certainty and which would end with almost no certainty of any kind.
We have here, then, a parallel between certainty and sanity.
The less certain the individual on any subject, the less sane he could be said to be upon that subject; the less certain he is of what he views in the material universe, what he views in his own or the other fellow's universe, the less sane he could be said to be.
The road to sanity is demonstrably the road to increasing certainty. Starting at any level, it is only necessary to obtain a fair degree of certainty on the MEST universe to improve considerably one's beingness. Above that, one obtains some certainty of his own universe and some certainty of the other fellow's universe.
Certainty, then, is clarity of observation. Of course above this, vitally so, is certainty in creation. Here is the artist, here is the master, here is the very great spirit.
As one advances he discovers that what he first perceived as a certainty can be considerably improved. Thus we have certainty as a gradient scale. It is not an absolute, but it is defined as the certainty that one perceives or the certainty that one creates what one perceives or the certainty that there is perception. Sanity and perception, certainty and perception, knowledge and observation, are then all of a kind, and amongst them we have sanity.
What will Scientology do? It has already been observed by many who are not that doubtful thing, the "qualified observer," that people who have traveled a road toward certainty improve in the many ways people consider it desirable to improve.

The road into uncertainty is the road toward psychosomatic illness, doubts, anxieties, fears, worries and vanishing awareness. As awareness is decreased, so does certainty decrease; and the end of this road is a nothingness quite opposite from the nothingness which can create. It is a nothingness which is a total effect.
Simplicity, it would be suspected, would be the keynote of any process, any communications system, which would deliver into a person's hands the command of his own beingness. The simplicity consists of the observation of three universes. The first step is the observation of one's own universe and what has taken place in that universe in the past. The second step would be observation of the material universe and direct consultation with it to discover its forms, depths, emptinesses and solidities. The third step would be the observation of other people's universes or their observation of the MEST universe, for there are a multitude of viewpoints of these three universes.
Where observation of one of these three is suppressed, hidden, denied, the individual is unable to mount beyond a certain point into certainty. Here we have a triangle not unlike the affinity, reality, communication triangle of Dianetics. These three universes are interactive to the degree that one raises all three by raising one, but one can raise two only so far before it is restrained by the uncertainty on the third. Thus, any point on this triangle is capable of suppressing the other two points and any point of this triangle is capable of raising the other two points.

233


The Triangle of Certainty of Awareness
This drawing could be called the scale of awareness. It is also the scale of action and the cycle of action. The numbers represent entirely arbitrary levels which

234

yet can be found to mean levels of predictable attitudes. It would be found that humanity at this time hovers, in terms of awareness, at the level of 2.0, slightly above or slightly below; here is scarcely any awareness at all compared to the awareness which is available. It is very puzzling to people at higher levels of awareness why people behave towards them as they do; such higher-level people have not realized that they are not seen, much less understood. People at low levels of awareness do not observe, but substitute for observation preconceptions, evaluation and suppositions and even physical pain by which to attain their certainties. In the field of Zen Buddhism there is a practice of administering a sudden blow by which is obtained a feeling of certainty. Here is a relatively false certainty—the certainty of impact, although all certainty actually is derived below the level of 10.0 from prior impact for its conviction. After a brutal accident or operation under anesthetic, it can be observed that individuals will sometimes react with an enormous conviction which yet does not seem to be based upon any fact. A certainty has been carried home to them in terms of a physical impact. This, then, is not a self-determined certainty and the self-determined certainty carries one into high echelons. The mistaken use of shock by the ancient Greek upon the insane, the use of whips in old Bedlam, all sought to deliver sufficient certainty to the insane to cause them to be less insane.
Certainty delivered by blow and punishment is a non-self-determined certainty. It is productive of stimulus-response behavior. At a given stimulus a dog who has been beaten, for instance, will react invariably, providing he has been sufficiently beaten, but if he has been beaten too much, the stimulus will result only in confused bewilderment. Thus certainty delivered by blows, by applied force, eventually brings about a certainty as absolute as one could desire—total unawareness. Unconsciousness itself is a certainty which is sought by many individuals who have failed repeatedly to reach any high level of awareness certainty. These people then desire an unawareness certainty. So it seems that the thirst for certainty can lead one into oblivion if one seeks it as an effect.
An uncertainty is the product of two certainties. One of these is a conviction, whether arrived at by observation (causative) or by a blow (effected). The other is a negative certainty. One can be sure that something is and one can be sure that something is not. He can be sure there is something, no matter what it is, present, and that there is nothing present. These two certainties commingling create a condition of uncertainty known as "maybe." A "maybe" continues to be held in suspense in an individual's mind simply because he cannot decide whether it is nothing or something. He grasps and holds the certainties each time he has been given evidence or has made the decision that it is a somethingness and each time he has come to suppose that it is a nothingness. Where these two certainties of something and nothing are concerned with and can vitally influence one's continuance in a state of beingness or where one merely supposes they can influence such a state of beingness, a condition of anxiety arises. Thus anxiety, indecision, uncertainty, a state of "maybe," can exist only in the presence of poor observation or the inability to observe. Such a state can be remedied simply by eradicating from the past of the individual first the conviction that the matter is important, next the conviction that it is totally unimportant, next

all the times when he was certain of the somethingness and then all the times he was certain of the nothingness. One merely causes the individual to observe in terms of the three universes.
We face, then, two general types of mind. One is an analytical thing which depends for its conclusions upon perception or even creation of things to perceive and bases its judgment on observation in terms of three universes. This we call the "analytical mind." We could also call it the spirit. We could also call it the "awareness of awareness unit." We could call it the conscious individual himself in the best of his beingness. We could call it the mathematical term thetan. Whatever its name we would have precisely the same thing, a viewpoint capable of creation and observation of things created which concludes and directs action in terms of the existing state of three universes, as they are observed directly.
The other type of mind resembles nothing if not an electronic brain. It receives its data in terms of conviction, delivered by force. It is directed by and reacts to hidden influences rather than observed influences and is, to a large extent, the reverse image and has reverse intentions to the analytical mind. This we call the "reactive mind." It is an actual entity and it operates in terms of experience and theory. It sets up thinking machinery around uncertainties and the course of its thinking is downward. It seeks to direct and dictate out of pain and the effort to avoid pain.
The primary difference between these two "minds" is that one, the analytical mind, is without finite duration, and the other, the reactive mind, is susceptible to death.
These two minds are a certainty since they can be observed by anyone, even in himself. He knows he is aware of things around him, and he knows that he has definite desires which are perfectly reasonable and he knows, if he is a Homo sapiens or animal, that internal commands and compulsions, even those which tell him to eat and tell his heart to beat, are not directly within his control.
All thinking can then be divided for our purposes into thinking based upon direct observation and conclusions from observation, and thinking which has to know before it can be or observe. Analytical thought can be called analytical thought because it directly observes and analyzes what it observes in terms of observations which are immediately present. The reactive mind concludes and acts entirely on experience and with only a fragmentary regard to things present which could be observed. The reactive mind begins and continues with uncertainties; and, where the course of the analytical mind is progressively upward, the course of the reactive mind is progressively downward. The reactive mind comes into being as a servant of the analytical mind, and is set up by the analytical mind to work upon and store data about the basic uncertainty that there might be something and there might be nothing. The reactive mind then continues in growth and from the servant, if the analytical mind does not observe it, tends to become the master.
The goals of the two minds are not separate goals. The reactive mind is a makeshift effort on the part of the viewpoint to perceive things which it believes to

235

236

be unperceivable except by comparison of uncertainties. Both minds are seeking to persist and endure through time, which is to say, survive. The analytical mind can, unless it becomes too uncertain and by that uncertainty has set up too many reactive mechanisms, persist indefinitely. The reactive mind pursues the cycle of life span.
The analytical mind seeks by creation to cause an effect; the reactive mind seeks by duplication, borrowing and experience to cause an effect. Both minds, then, are seeking to cause an effect, and this is their entire motivation for action.
Each of the three universes seeks to persist indefinitely. Each is continuously caused, and each is continually receiving an effect. Each has its own adjudication of what it should receive as an effect and what it should cause.
Time itself consists of a continuous interaction of the universes. Each may have its own space; each has its own particular energy.
The urge of any of these three universes towards survival is subdivisible for each of the three universes into eight dynamics. There are, then, four groups of eight dynamics each: the eight dynamics of one's own universe, the eight dynamics of the physical universe, the eight dynamics of the other's universe, as well as the eight dynamics of the triangle itself.
These dynamics could be subdivided as follows: the first dynamic would be that one most intimate to the universe which could be said to be the dynamic urging the survival of self. The second dynamic would be that one of the persistence of admiration in many forms in one's own and the other's universe. This admiration could take the form of sex, eating or purely the sensation of creation such as sex and children. In the physical universe it would be that light emanation similar to sunlight. The third dynamic could be said to be that dynamic embracing persistence of groups of objects or entities. The fourth dynamic would concern itself with an entire species. The fifth dynamic would concern itself with other living species and would embrace all other living species. The sixth dynamic would embrace, in terms of survival, the space, energy, matter and forms of the universe as themselves. The seventh dynamic would be the urge to survive of the spirits or spiritual aspects of each universe. The eighth dynamic would be the overall creativeness or destructiveness as a continuing impulse.
Each impulse is concerned wholly with systems of communication. Commu-nication requires a viewpoint and a destination in its most elementary form, and as this grows more complex and as it grows more "important," communication grows more rigid and fixed as to its codes and lines. The reason for communication is to effect effects and observe effects.
Each of the three universes has its own triangle of affinity, reality and commu-nication. These three things are interdependent one upon another and one cannot exist independent of the other two. Affinity is the characteristic of the energy as to

its vibration, condensation, rarefaction, and, in the physical universe, its degree of cohesion or dispersion. Reality depends upon coincidence or noncoincidence of flow and is marked mainly by the direction of flow. It is essentially agreement. Communication is the volume of flow or lack of flow. Of these three, communication is by far the most important. Affinity and reality exist to further communication. Under affinity we have, for instance, all the varied emotions which go from apathy at 0.1 through grief, fear, anger, antagonism, boredom, enthusiasm, exhilaration and serenity in that order. It is affinity and this rising scale of the characteristics of emotion which give us the Tone Scale. The Tone Scale can be a certainty to anyone who has seen other beings react emotionally, who has himself felt emotion and who has seen the varied moods of the physical universe itself. The periodic chart of chemistry is itself a sort of Tone Scale.
There is a downward spiral on the Tone Scale and an upward spiral. These spirals are marked by decreasing or increasing awareness. To go up scale one must increase his power to observe with certainty; to go down scale one must decrease his power to observe. There are two certainties here. One is a complete certainty of total awareness which would be at 40.0 on the Tone Scale, and the other is a certainty of total unawareness which would be 0.0 on the Tone Scale or nearly so. Neither end, however, is itself an absolute for the analytical mind, and the analytical mind can go below 0.0 of the reactive mind. However, these two classes of certainty are very wide in their satisfaction of the qualifications of a certainty. Because the two extremes of the scale are both zeroes in terms of space, it is possible to confuse one for the other and so make it appear that total awareness would be total unawareness. Experience and observation can disabuse one of this idea. The scale is not circular.
The characteristics and potentiality of the top of the scale or near the top of the scale are unbounded creation, outflow, certainty, going-awayness, explosion, holding apart, spreading apart, letting go, reaching, goals of a causative nature, widening space, freedom from time, separateness, differentiation, givingness of sensation, vaporiz-ingness, glowingness, lightness, whiteness, desolidifyingness, total awareness, total understanding, total ARC.
The bottom of the scale and the vicinity around it includes death, inflow, certainty, coming-backness, implosion, letting-come-together, pulling together, holding together, withdrawing, effect goals (ambition to be an effect rather than a cause), contracting space, no time or infinite time in a moment, connectingness, identification, identity, receivingness of sensation, condensation, blackness, solidification, no awareness, no understanding, no ARC.
These various characteristics or intentions are observable for any dynamic and any universe.
Between these two extremes is the mean of action where complete freedom to do any of these things of the top or bottom of the scale is exercised. Therefore, somewhere between 3.5 on the Tone Scale and 36.5 there is action.

237

238

The above conditions of top and bottom of the scale, of course, reach away from the extremes and toward each other.
As awareness becomes more fixed, intentions become less flexible in action. Communications systems become more rigid, more complex and less susceptible of alteration. One alters these communications systems, however, by raising or lowering certainty on the three universes.
The principal difference between the analytical mind, in a state of awareness itself, and the reactive mind is that the analytical mind, highly aware, knows that it is not the thing but is the viewpoint of things. Of this it can be very certain as it increases in awareness.
The reactive mind conceives itself to be the thing.
The analytical mind is in a state of becoming without reaching the point of being. The reactive mind conceives itself to be in a state of being and so resists becoming.
Perception is accomplished by the analytical mind in a high state of awareness by its own outflow and inflow or by its receipt of inflows which it can outflow. The reactive mind perceives by inflow only, and makes complete recordings of the inflow.
The analytical mind is capable of developing its own energy. It is the energy of the analytical mind which empowers the reactive mind, but the reactive mind can be empowered as well by the energy of other minds and by the life energy contained in any living thing. Thus the reactive mind can become the servant of all things, it can believe it is anything, it can believe it is owned or has the identity of anyone, regardless of whom it was created to serve. The analytical mind serves itself in a continuing knowledge of serving itself, but it serves as well and knows it serves the other two universes.
The analytical mind extends from it points or observes points extended from it and thus conceives space. Space is only the viewpoint of dimension. The dimension depends upon those points which give it boundary. Within these dimensions called space the analytical mind can create energy and form and thus, by change of form, beget time.
Whether created by or within any one of the three universes, flow of energy is accomplished by setting up a terminal and flowing toward it from a viewpoint a stream of energy or by setting up two terminals and causing a flow between them. Each universe could be said to be a two-terminal universe, but flows can be set up on a basis of more than two terminals. The basic unit of any universe in terms of energy is two. This, however, does not restrict nor qualify the number of viewpoints which any universe can have. A physical universe, however, is observably a two-terminal universe and a two-point universe, and it is also observable that the other two universes set up almost invariably two terminals or more and utilize two viewpoints each.

Very low on the scale in terms of awareness, the analytical mind conceives itself to be the reactive mind and so does not act or perform to put out dimension points so as to get space, and does not generate for its own accountability, energy. It does, however, always generate energy whether it admits it is doing so or not.
The concern of two viewpoints is attention. Each viewpoint is apt to be curious about or desire the attention of another viewpoint. The most valuable part of an attention interchange is admiration. Admiration is a special particle. It is a universal solvent. It is the very substance of a communication line, and it is that thing which is considered desirable in the game of the three universes. Admiration goes into the interplay of the universes in the form of made-up objects or even in the form of bodies. These made-up objects could be called "creative pictures." These, as they become more complex in form, take on the aspect of a life of their own and become animated beings.
Two viewpoints setting up terminals to be viewed by the other viewpoint demand attention one from the other and will invent all manner of "reasons" to command the continuing attention of the other viewpoint. One of the primary methods of operation is to make one's object or action of object so strange that the other viewpoint cannot look away. Another is to make the object or action of object so artistic or colorful or interesting that the other viewpoint cannot look away. Another method is the command by force for attention. Another method is to inhibit the attention so as to invite it solely to one's objects. One can plot this as a cycle of demand for attention with curiosity below 40.0, desire below that, enforcement down to as low as 1.5 on the scale, and inhibition at 1.1 on down. The lowest methods of this scale are quite observable amongst men, and the primary operation, very low on the scale, is inhibition of attention elsewhere. By cutting the communication lines of another viewpoint, an effect is created on the other viewpoint by which that viewpoint fixes with whatever emotion (since any attention is better than no attention) upon the products or objects of that one who cut the communication line. There are many methods of cutting communication lines. A common one could be summarized as "It's too horrible over that way for you to look." Viewpoints are thus given the understanding that they are surrounded by horrible things which they have never perceived and which, indeed, have never existed but which are said to be there so that they will be forced to give attention.
Hidden influences are the commonest methods of enforcing attention. Of course, any analytical mind is itself a hidden influence since it cannot as itself be perceived. Only its energy and objects can be perceived. Thus comes about the worship of the hidden influence, the fear of the hidden influence, the neurosis about hidden influences.
The goal of seeking attention is to receive the particle admiration. One creates effects simply in order to create effects, but he is given the bonus of admiration when he creates sufficient effect or, what is most important, when he demands, commands and is able to effect admiration by duress.

239

240

It might be said that there was no eating until one was so furious about not being admired that one slew as a punishment. The tiger, walking through the woods with his beautiful stripes, it could be humorously offered, would never have eaten a thing and would not be eating today if some monkey had not chattered insults at him instead of admiring him. The tiger compelled the admiration of the monkey by pinning him down and eating him up. It can be observed that the eating of living flesh or live cells delivers a kind of admiration to the taste, and it can be observed that under torture, duress of all kinds, the tortured one will suddenly, if degradedly, admire his torturer.
Energy pictures which we call "mock-ups" are created things which themselves contain admiration. It could be said that these are prior to bodies.
The acquisition of admiration by pain, by eating or by devouring something that belongs to somebody else was later succeeded by a better communications system which would prevent eating on such a rigorous scale. This thing was sex, which is an interchange of condensed admiration particles which forwards new bodies into being. So far as the body of Homo sapiens is concerned, its desire not to be eaten has been answered evidently by sex, and sex performs the function of continued survival of form. Thus, so long as one has the symbol of sex to offer, one feels relatively secure, and when he does not have that symbol to offer, one feels insecure. But of this evolution of admiration and of evolution itself, we have no high degree of certainty as we first begin to observe, and it is offered here as an explanation of why it is a thing we do not particularly need and a thing of which we will or will not gain a future certainty as we go up the scale of awareness. Many things are nonexistent low on the scale. Many things are uncertain on the scale at low levels, which become high-level certainties up on the scale; but this certainty only depends on the positiveness of observation or the positiveness of observation which says the thing does not exist. It is not the purpose of Scientology to present an uncertainty and then demand that it be accepted, for here is the gradient scale of a process by which one can become more certain. If there be immortality or even the lack of necessity on the part of the analytical mind to be a specific object, then one will find it out in due course as he is processed. If they do not exist, again one will find it out. This would be a matter of progressive observation. Where a thing exists in the form of an uncertainty, it has a tendency to plague the reactive mind, for the reactive mind itself deals only with uncertainties and its convictions are based entirely on blows and pain.
A very basic uncertainty comes about on the subject of applause. High on the scale one performs for an effect and knows that it is an effect, whether or not there is any attention or admiration, which is to say applause. A little lower on the scale, one desires a nod or the actual substance of admiration. If it does not come, he is not concerned. But even lower on the scale the individual actively invites and requests applause. Lower than that, he becomes angry in the absence of applause. Lower than that, he exhibits fear, grief and apathy in the lack of applause. Apathy is the realization that there will never be any applause for any effect.

That which is not admired tends to persist, for the reactive mind does not destroy. One can become fixed upon producing a certain effect simply by insisting that it be admired. The longer it is not admired, the longer one is likely to persist in demanding that it be admired, which is to say exhibiting it, until at length it breaks down scale to a lower level and he realizes it will not be admired, at which time he becomes the effect of it. Here one has become the effect of one's own cause. Here is the psychosomatic illness which began as a pretended infirmity in order to create an effect. Perhaps it was once applauded but not sufficiently, and after a while was not applauded at all, and one was forced to applaud it himself and believe it himself and so it came into existence and was for him a certainty. This, too, is the course of responsibility which degenerates into irresponsibility. At the top of the scale one knows that he is causing the effect. Lower on the scale he says he is not causing the effect (even though he is causing the effect, only he knows he causes it). Even lower on the scale he does not take the middle step; he causes an effect and instantly believes that something else caused the effect rather than himself and that he is the effect of the effect.
One can see cause and effect working in terms of viewpoints. If one has not been applauded for many things, one will begin to take the position of the audience. One does the trick, creates the thing and then goes out front, sits down over the whole theater and applauds it, for one can be a knowing viewpoint from many places. This is often the case with a writer who is seldom confronted by his readers. Indeed, most editors are so low toned that they cut off all the admiring letters of a writer and leave him to wonder. As other things influence the writer, he goes down scale to a point where he believes the things he writes are not admired, and so he has to go out and sit in the audience. This is the first step to becoming the effect of his own cause. After a while he thinks he is the audience. When he does this, he is no longer the writer. Thus with the painter, thus with anyone.
The little child is quite bent on causing effects and getting things admired. He is continually being evaluated in terms of what is to be admired.
Evaluation is the reactive mind's conception of viewpoint. The reactive mind does not perceive, it evaluates. To the analytical mind it may sometimes appear that the reactive mind has a viewpoint. The reactive mind does not have a viewpoint, it has an evaluation of viewpoint. Thus the viewpoint of the analytical mind is an actual point from which one perceives. Perception is done by sight, sound, smell, tactile, etc. The reactive mind's "viewpoint" is an opinion based on another opinion and upon a very small amount of observation, and that observation would be formed out of uncertainties. Thus the confusion of the word viewpoint itself. It can be a point from which one can be aware, which is its analytical definition, and it can be somebody's ideas on a certain subject, which is the reactive definition.
Because the analytical mind and reactive mind in men can become confused one with the other, one is most prone to assume the actual perception point of that person who has most evaluated for him. Father and Mother, for instance, have evaluated

241

242

about art, habits, goodness, behavior, badness, how one should dress, what manners are, to such a degree that the child has no choice, it seems to him, but to assume their "points to look from," and so we will find the child observing things as his father or mother would observe them and even wearing his father's glasses or his mother's glasses as he grows older. He has confused evaluation with actual perception. Where he has been told that he is bad looking, ugly, ridiculous, unmannerly, crude and so forth by somebody else continually, his reactive mind (which, like a prostitute, cares nothing for its master and serves anyone) eventually causes him to lose his viewpoint of himself and he sees himself not by observation but by evaluation as something undesirable. Of course, he would rather be something than nothing. He has, indeed, a horror of being nothing. So it is better to be something ugly about which he is guessing than to be nothing at all, and so he persists and continues as he is. Furthermore, because he has been talked to so much about talking, about looking, about perceiving in general, he has gotten the idea that his communications system is unalterable. His whole business of living actually is a communications system with the motivation of causing effects. Thus the lower he is on the Tone Scale the more he persists without change except downward.
The characteristic actions of the energy produced by the analytical mind are summarized above in terms of the top and bottom of the scale. However, the most important of these seem to be reaching and withdrawing. In the MEST universe, we have start, stop and change as the characteristics of motion. The analytical mind, however, with its dimension points, is more concerned with reaching and withdrawing. This is the way it perceives. It can control by creating or using energy such as that in the physical universe, and it uses this energy to start, stop and change other energy. But in itself, its handling-of-dimension-points direction consists of reaching and withdrawing. Compulsive reaching, compulsive withdrawing, bring about many odd and interesting manifestations.
The sensation of pain is actually a sensation of loss. It is a loss of beingness, a loss of position and awareness. Therefore, when one loses anything, he has a tendency to perceive less, for there is less to perceive. Something has withdrawn from him without his consent. This would be the definition of loss. This brings about eventually a condition of darkness. This could also be called an ARC break. If he has lost something, the guilty party is probably in the other two universes. It is either the physical universe or another's universe which has caused the loss. Thus he has less communication since he is unwilling to communicate, which is to say, put out things in the direction of something which is going to take them and carry them away without his further consent. This brings about a reduction of the desire to be aware which is the reduction of affinity, reduction of agreement (reality) and the reduction of communication in general. In a moment of severe disappointment in one's fellow man, the universe around him actually grows dark. Simply as an experiment, one can say to himself that he has the only viewpoint there is, that all other viewpoints are simply mocked up by him; he will get an almost immediate diminution of lightness around him. This is the same mechanism as the mechanism of loss. The result of too much loss is darkness.

Another mechanism of the darkness and unawareness settling over a person is brought about by the loss of a viewpoint which has greatly evaluated for one. One has had a mother or a father who overevaluated about everything, and then this parent or guardian or ally in life, such as a teacher, died or inexplicably disappeared. One was depending for actual looking, seeing, hearing, upon the continued existence of this individual. Suddenly that individual goes and all becomes dark. After that one is not able to perceive one's own universe, for one was most of the time actually perceiving the lost person's universe, and now that universe is no longer there, which gives one the idea that he has no universe to perceive. This even dims his perception of the physical universe, of course, because of the interdependence of the triangle of the three universes.
When one has had an insufficient amount of admiration from sexual partners, the physical body, which depends mainly upon sex for its sensation and continuance to almost as great a degree as upon eating, will actually begin to change viewpoint to the other sex. Thus we find some older men becoming as women, some older women becoming as men. Thus we get the failure of the androgen and estrogen balances and the resultant decay of the body. Here in the matter of sex one finds reaching and withdrawing rising to considerable magnitude. The reactive mind operating the body conceives itself to be withdrawing and does not know from what it is withdrawing, for it perceives itself to be under the compulsion of reaching and does not know for what it is reaching. In terms of processing, it is withdrawing from or reaching toward sexual partners. When it withdraws a great deal, or when it has been withdrawn from a great deal, the reactive mind conceives the body to be covered with blackness. This resolves in terms of sex and eating. It should be fully understood, however, that this is the resolution of the problem of the body and this resolution is employed only when the analytical mind cannot be brought itself into an immediate height of awareness, using SOP 8. When one addresses the body itself, and only the body, one addresses the subject of sex and the subject of eating in terms of reaching and withdrawing. The particular processes used on this are called Matched Terminaling or Double Terminaling. This is done in the following fashion. Even when the individual cannot create forms of his own, he can at least create two ideas in front of him. He can put a form with an idea or an idea itself facing another idea out in front of him, both of them exactly alike, "withdrawing from sex" "reaching toward sex." He will very often find other terminals he did not create suddenly appearing. When he has run withdrawing, those things he puts up will be black and the object from which it is withdrawing will be white. He should get the idea that the whitish object is reaching and the blackish object is withdrawing. He should then run this identical terminal as though it is being put up by somebody else not himself, again with withdrawing for blackness, reaching for grayness. And then he should run it as though somebody is putting it up for somebody else other than himself. These three causations of putting up this identical idea facing itself are himself, another for him and others for others. This is called Matched Terminaling. Double Terminaling simply puts up two pairs of matched terminals. The pairs may each be of two different things but each pair contains one thing the same as the other pair; in other words, husband and wife

243

244

is one pair and husband and wife is the other pair. These, parallel, give one the two-terminal effect necessary for a discharge. One will find that these terminals discharge one against the other. However, this is a physical body technique and it is limited in use. If one becomes very ill in doing it, he should turn to what is called later on an unlimited technique; or he should do the next-to-the-last list in the book Self Analysis in Scientology and do it over and over, or he should simply go straight through Short 8. It has many remedies. This Matched Terminaling for oneself, others for oneself and others for others on the subject of reaching and withdrawing on sex, can of course be considerably expanded as a technique. It can have in it compulsion to reach, compulsion to withdraw, compulsion to reach while somebody else is withdrawing, compulsion not to reach, and it can be addressed in terms of all those complexes and things which Sigmund Freud observed empirically while investigating in his practice.*
Sigmund Freud observed, even as you may have observed, that a person's concern and trouble with his body commonly began at the age of puberty, and that a curve of his ups and downs did sudden changes at those points where he was defeated sexually, where his sexual impotence ceased and where it increased. Dr. Freud unfortunately developed no fast or deeply workable techniques to resolve problems posed by these observations, mainly because the selection of sex as the prime motivator was not the selection of the basic mechanics of beingness. However, the brilliance of Freud's theories and his extrapolations from a limited amount of data, and his courage in standing before a whole world and declaring that an unpopular subject was the root of all evil, has no parallel in history. The complexes he mentioned, each and every one, are discoverable in the mind by direct observation or electropsychometry and are resolvable in the body by the technique of "Matched Terminals in Brackets" which is the proper name for the above.
Where the level of the case is Step IV or Step V or below in SOP 8, it is necessary to free the analytical mind of the grip of the body. The analytical mind cannot withdraw. The body is most swiftly reduced to compliance by running the second dynamic. This is very far from the end-all of processing, but it is the fastest method I have developed for remedying occlusion or accomplishing exteriorization in low-step cases. In sex and eating, the body desires to be an effect most strongly and in these things one does find the strongest desire on the part of the body in terms of immediate accessibility. The analytical mind, on the other hand, can create its own sensation, but it has become dependent upon the body. Even so, it is that part of the beingness which desires to give sensation rather than receive it. Thus one has the conflict of desire to give sensation crossed with the desire to receive sensation on the part of the reactive mind. The body's desire to receive sensation is so strong that an extremely powerful and persistent uncertainty ("maybe") develops, and the primary conflict of the analytical mind and the body's reactive mind comes about. I cannot help but give forth my own admiration to a man who, working without prior art,
* [Editor's Note: L. Ron Hubbard studied Freudian psychoanalysis under the tutelage of Commander Thompson (MC) USN, who was one of Freud's star pupils. Commander Thompson studied under Freud himself in Vienna to introduce to the United States Navy the theory and practice of psychoanalysis, and was sent to Vienna for that purpose.]

without electropsychometry, without nuclear physics, without any broad observation of primitive tribes or ethnology in general, separated from his conclusion by every convention of his age, yet hit upon and set forth with the weight of logic alone, the center of disturbance in the human body. He did not live to see his theory completely validated. He was deserted by his students, who began to write fantastic theories, completely unworkable and far from the point, which yet were better accepted. In discouragement, at the end of his career, he wrote a paper called Psychoanalysis, Terminable and Interminable. Freud, with no method of direct observation, spoke of prenatals, birth trauma, and verbally, if not in writing, of past existences and of the continuing immortality of the individual. No praise can be great enough to give such a man, and the credit I give him for my own inspiration and work is entirely without reservation or bounds. My only regret is that I do not know where he is today to show him his 1894 libido theory completely vindicated and a Freudian psycho¬analysis delivered beyond his expectations in five hours of auditing.
The analytical mind can be processed directly, and it improves simply by changing its mind about things. But so long as it believes itself to be closely dependent upon the reactive mind and the body, it cannot change its opinions. These opinions, however, are not simple shifts of mind. They are changes of experience. The analytical mind must discover that it can perceive, that it can perceive accurately in three universes, that it does not need to be dependent upon the body and that it can handle any reactive mind. This is done by increasing its powers of perception, increasing the number of viewpoints it can assume, and increasing its ability to locate spaces, actions and objects in time and space, and by increasing its ability above that to create space, energy and objects. This is done by drills and by the procedures of the first three steps of SOP 8.
It should not for one moment be thought that one is trying to perform by the gradient scale of increasing certainties in Scientology all the tricks and exhibitions of which the ancients speak. We are not even vaguely interested in moving physical universe objects, throwing lightning about or in creating solids which can be seen by others. We are only interested in the rehabilitation of the analytical mind to a point where it can handle any reactive mind, whatever its proximity to that reactive mind. We are not interested, in other words, in the objective reality from another viewpoint of the capabilities of the analytical mind in performing various types of tricks. Whether it can do these things or not do these things falls into the realm of para-Scientology, for it is completely beyond the ability to be certain where the analytical mind is not processed well up and where the observer is very low on the Tone Scale. We are not trying to achieve the certainty of mysticism, necromancy or, to be blunt, the Indian rope trick. We are trying to make sane, well beings.
The analytical mind, when it is in close proximity to the body, is unwittingly continually restimulating a reactive mind which, some say, evolved through very difficult and savage stages. Just as Freud said, the suppression in the mind is the suppression of things so bestial, so savage that the preclear undergoing professional processing is extremely shocked. Almost anything, and almost any impulse, including

245

246

a thirst for pain and a desire to create any kind of effect, no matter how bad, will manifest itself while processing the reactive mind. Cannibalism, purely for sensation, so as to get the last remnants of admiration of the tortured and dying being, becomes a subjective certainty to the preclear who undergoes processing and has to have his reactive mind addressed before he can be himself, which is, of course, his analytical mind. The more suppression this reactive mind gets, the more it restimulates its beastliness. The analytical mind is basically good. It has suffered from this proximity to the reactive mind. It is no wonder that Plato wrote as he did in an essay about the conduct and behavior of man. It is no wonder that states are completely convinced that man is a beast and must be held in check at pistol point. The wonder is that, in a civilized world, so few crimes are committed. Our desire is to reach the basic goodness of the individual and bring him into a level of activity where he does not have to do terrible and gruesome things in order to produce an effect. There are various levels as one goes up scale where these manifestations seem to be the all and everything of existence. One becomes completely downhearted at the thought that one goes up scale simply to get to a point where he can kill and maim and hurt with impunity. One's feelings of honor, ethics, all his finer beingness, is revolted at the idea that this is, in actuality, life. He should say instead that this is life in a stupid conflict of uncertainties. The goal is not to get above such things and ignore them. The goal is to achieve the basic decency which is inherent in all of us.
Although I have given you here "Matched Terminal Brackets" on the subject of reach and withdraw, with particular attention to sex, you must understand that this is a professional auditor's technique. The first three steps of SOP 8, when they can be done, can be done by alert, interested people. From Step IV down, a professional auditor is not simply desirable, he is completely necessary. This technique which I have given you here turns on, when one runs its compulsive aspects, particularly when one must reach and can't reach, the emotion which we see in sanitariums which is called insanity. And although the turn-on is brief and temporary and would wear away in about three days, an inexperienced auditor could become quite frightened. Simply by carrying on with the technique or by getting back to unlimited techniques or by taking Self Analysis with its next-to-last list, these things could be remedied; but these techniques walk on the rim of hell where they are addressed to cases below the level of IV. If the test subject or the preclear cannot make space, which is to say Step III of SOP 8, let a professional auditor have him. The professional auditor, by using "Matched Terminal Brackets" of reach and withdraw with attention to sex, will be able to exteriorize this analytical mind and turn on its perceptions. This is skilled work, however, and is a little too shockingly intimate to the seamier side of life for tender hands and tender minds.
Even the operation of wasting which is contained in Expanded GITA is capable of turning on a vast amount of illness and somatic on the part of the preclear. Expanded GITA is a limited technique, which is to say it can be audited perhaps only for ten minutes, and at the most for 50 or 60 hours, without finding the preclear on the downgrade. One has to turn to an unlimited technique such as contained in Short 8 if the preclear becomes too ill trying to waste things.

Just because an unlimited technique is labeled unlimited, is no reason why it is a faint technique. These unlimited techniques are extremely powerful. They're very simple, but again, when one of them becomes too strong for the preclear, it is necessary to turn to something simpler and easier.
Simply getting the idea in two places, the idea, so to speak, facing the idea "There is nothing," will turn on a sick sensation in many preclears. This fear of being nothing is very great. He will be anything rather than nothing.
A safe technique is that technique which always—I repeat, always—deals in things of which the preclear is certain. When one deals with uncertainties, one is dealing with circuits. One can use Double Terminaling, which is to say, two pairs of matched terminals, of the preclear being certain of things. One never runs things or puts the preclear up against things of which one is uncertain or of which the preclear is uncertain, if one wishes the preclear to come on up the Tone Scale. As an example of this, on any object, thing or idea, on any psychosomatic ill or any numb portion of the body, one has only to run "There is something there, there is nothing there." Have it saying, "There is something here, there is nothing here." One can do a complete bracket on this, having the numb or painful or injured area saying, "There is something here, there is nothing here," having it then say, "There is something there, there is nothing there," having the preclear say about the area, "There is something there, there is nothing there," and then the preclear about himself, "There is something here, there is nothing here." This makes a complete bracket. This turns on and off interesting somatics. A professional auditor could get the somatic or numb area to get the feeling it is reaching while the preclear is withdrawing, the preclear reaching while it is withdrawing, and bring about a change in any somatic.
As one is dealing with communications systems, one must realize that com-munication depends upon certainty of despatch and receipt, and certainty of what it is that is being despatched and received. Thus one does not deal in uncertainties. There is something, there is nothing, are of course observable certainties because one is top-scale, the other is bottom-scale. One does not say what the something is and, of course, nothingness needs no qualifications.
In the case of the person who has been and is trying to become again, one should run out by concepts the former successes, the triumphs of that person and the times when he was absolutely certain he had failed. One does this with double terminals or "Matched Terminal Brackets." This is a professional technique.
It was mentioned to me by Meredith Starr, one of the great mystics from Cyprus, that Jung had once had a great experience and had sought ever since to recover it. He gave this as another man's opinion of Jung. This gives you some clue as to what happens to someone who has a great triumph. He ever afterwards is not seeking to duplicate the triumph, he is seeking the triumph itself. This puts him back on the time track. This is particularly applicable to old people. One hangs, then, on to certainties. The certainties are important. The uncertainties are important only in their production of psychosis.

247

248

It is possible to take a sick animal and rehabilitate his idea that he is dangerous by dodging every time he strikes out, no matter how faintly, at one. It is possible to rehabilitate an individual who is very low on the Tone Scale merely by coaxing him to reach out and touch the material universe and, touching it, to be certain that it is there, and having touched it, to withdraw the touch and to be certain that he could withdraw.
Certainty is a wonderful thing. The road toward realizing what certainty is has led these investigations through many uncertainties. One had to find out what was, before one could find out what could be. That work is done. It is possible to take large groups and, using Short 8, to bring them, each and every one, into higher levels of certainty. And bringing them into higher levels of certainty brings them into higher levels of communication, communication not only with their own bodies but with others and with the material universe. And as one raises that level of awareness, one raises also the ability to be, to do, to live.
Today this world suffers from an increasing incidence of neurosis brought about by a dependency upon mechanical things which do not think, which do not feel, but which can give pain to those that live. It suffers with an overdose of agreement that there is only one universe. So long as it believes that there is only one universe, that there is only one universe to study, to be studied, only one universe to agree with, it will continue to seek the lowest end of the scale, which is to say, that point where all universes become one universe. Where the triangle vanishes to a single point it vanishes completely, and where one studies but one corner of the triangle and ignores the other two corners of the triangle, and agrees only with one corner of the triangle such as the physical universe, one will tend toward that point where that corner of the triangle is coincident with the other two corners, and this is death.
The curse of this world is not actually its atom bomb, though that is bad enough. The curse of this world is the irresponsibility of those who, seeking to study but one universe, the physical universe, try to depress all beings down to the low order of mechanically motivated, undreaming, unaesthetic things. Science as a word has been disgraced, for the word science means truth and truth means light. A continual fixation and dependence upon only one universe while ignoring the other two universes leads to darkness, to despair, to nothingness. There is nothing wrong with the physical universe; one should not cease to observe the physical universe, but one certainly should not concentrate upon it so that he can agree with it and its laws only. He has laws of his own. It is better, far better, for the individual to concentrate upon his own universe than to concentrate upon the MEST universe, but this in itself is not the final answer. A balance is achieved in the three universes and certainty upon those universes.
All control is effected by introducing uncertainties and hidden influences. "Look how bad it is over there, so you'll have to look back at me." Thus slavery is effected solely by getting people to fix on one thing. That one thing in this case is the physical universe. Science, so called, today produces machines to blow your

nose, produces machines to think for you, produces every possible argument as to why you should consider your body frail and unexpendable. Science, under the domination of capital, creates scarcity. It creates a scarcity of universes in fixing one upon one universe only. Those things which are scarce are those things which the individual has lost his faith in creating, in having. An individual who cannot create has to hold on to what he has. This leads him into holding on to what he has had. Where he has had a certainty in the past that something existed, he begins to grip it closer and closer to him; his space lessens, his beingness lessens, he becomes less active. The reactive mind that cannot create children has lost its hope of creation. It then can influence the analytical mind into believing that it can no longer create. The analytical mind creating artistically in the MEST universe and not in its own universe at all, and not in other people's universes that it can recognize, goes down scale until it meets on its own level the reactive mind. And here at this level we find the enslaver, the person who makes things scarce, the fellow who uses his ethics, so called, to enforce his crude judgments and to make things out of beings that could be men.
Here, where the reactive mind and the analytical mind have come into a parity, we have the only effect that can be produced—the effect of pain. Where we have an active desire for pain masking in a thousand guises, where every good impulse high on the scale is turned into a mockery, here we have crime, here we have war. These things are not awareness. These things merely act on a stimulus-response mechanism. Upscale is the high, bright breadth of being, breadth of understanding, breadth of awareness. To get there all one must do is to become aware of the existence of the three universes by direct observation.
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE 8
STEP I: Ask preclear to be three feet behind his head. If stable there, have him be in various pleasant places until any feeling of scarcity of viewpoints is resolved. Then have him be in several undesirable places, then several pleasant places; then have him be in a slightly dangerous place, then in more and more dangerous places until he can sit in the center of the sun. Be sure to observe a gradient scale of ugliness and dangerousness of places. Do not let the preclear fail. Then do remaining steps with preclear exteriorized.
STEP II: Have preclear mock up own body. If he does this easily and clearly, have him mock up own body until he slips out of it. When he is exteriorized and knows it thoroughly (the condition of all exteriorization) do Step I. If his mock-up was not clear, go to Step III immediately.
STEP III: SPACATION. Have preclear close his eyes and find upper corners of the room. Have him sit there, not thinking, refusing to think of anything, interested only in the corners until he is completely exteriorized without strain. Then do a spacation (constructing own space with eight anchor points and holding it stable without effort) and go to Step I. If preclear was unable to locate corners of the room easily with his eyes closed, go to Step IV.

249

250

STEP IV: EXPANDED GITA. This is an extension of Give and Take Processing. Test preclear to see if he can get a mock-up he can see, no matter how vague. Then have him waste, accept under duress, desire and finally be able to take or leave alone each of the items listed below. He does this with mock-ups or ideas. He must do the sequence of waste, etc., in the order given here for each item. He wastes it by having it at remote distances in places where it will do no good, being used or done or observed by something which cannot appreciate it. When he is able to waste it in vast quantities, the auditor then has him accept it in mock-up form until he no longer is antagonistic to having to accept it even when it is unpleasant and great force is applied to make him take it. Again, with mock-ups, he must be able to bring himself to desire it even in its worst form; then, by mock-ups of it in its most desirable form, he must come to be able to leave it entirely alone or take it in its worst form without caring. Expanded GITA remedies contrasurvival abundance and scarcity. It will be found that before one can accept a very scarce (to him) thing, he has to give it away. A person with a milk allergy must be able to give away, in mock-up, enormous quantities of milk, wasting it, before he can accept any himself. The items in this list are compounded of several years of isolating what factors were more important to minds than others. The list lacks very few of the very important items, if any. Additions to or subtractions from this list should not be attempted. Viewpoint, work and pain should be heavily and often stressed and given priority.
Waste, Have Forced Upon, Desire, Be Able to Give or Take, in that order, each of the following: (Order of items here is random.) Viewpoint, Work, Pain, Beauty, Motion, Engrams, Ugliness, Logic, Pictures, Confinement, Money, Parents, Blackness, Police, Light, Explosions, Bodies, Degradation, Male Bodies, Female Bodies, Babies, Children Male, Children Female, Strange and Peculiar Bodies, Dead Bodies, Affinity (Love), Agreement, Beautiful Bodies, People, Attention, Admiration, Force, Energy, Lightning, Unconsciousness, Problems, Antagonism, Reverence, Fear, Objects, Time, Eating Human Bodies, Sound, Grief, Beautiful Sadness, Hidden Influences, Hidden Communications, Faces, Dimension Points, Anger, Apathy, Ideas, Enthusiasm, Disagreement, Hate, Sex, Reward, Eating Parents, Eaten by Mother, Eaten by Father, Eating Men, Eaten by Men, Eating Women, Eaten by Women, Start, Broken Communications, Written Communications, Stillness, Exhaustion, Women Stopping Motion, Men Stopping Motion, Changing Motion Women, Changing Motion Men, Changing Motion Babies, Changing Motion Children, Starting Motion Men, Starting Motion Women, Starting Motion Children, Starting Motion Objects, Starting Motion Self, Omens, Wickedness, Forgiveness, Play, Games, Sound, Machinery, Touch, Traffic, Stolen Goods, Stolen Pictures, Homes, Blasphemy, Caves, Medicine, Glass, Mirrors, Pride, Musical Instruments, Dirty Words, Space, Wild Animals, Pets, Birds, Air, Water, Food, Milk, Garbage, Gases, Excreta, Rooms, Beds, Punishment, Boredom, Confusion, Soldiers, Executioners, Doctors, Judges, Psychiatrists, Alcoholic Liquor, Drugs, Masturbation, Rewards, Heat, Cold, Forbidden Things, God, The Devil, Spirits, Bacteria, Glory, Dependence, Responsibility, Wrongness, Rightness, Insanity, Sanity, Faith, Christ, Death, Rank, Poverty, Maps, Irresponsibility, Greetings, Farewells, Credit, Loneliness, Jewels,

Teeth, Genitalia, Complications, Help, Pretense, Truth, Lies, Assurance, Contempt, Predictability, Unpredictability, Vacuums, White Clouds, Black Clouds, Unattainables, Hidden Things, Worry, Revenge, Textbooks, Kisses, The Past, The Future, The Present, Arms, Stomachs, Bowels, Mouths, Cigarettes, Smoke, Urine, Vomit, Convulsions, Saliva, Flowers, Semen, Blackboards, Fireworks, Toys, Vehicles, Dolls, Audiences, Doors, Walls, Weapons, Blood, Ambitions, Illusions, Betrayal, Ridicule, Hope, Happiness, Mothers, Fathers, Grandparents, Suns, Planets, Moons, Sensation, Looking, Incidents, Waiting, Silence, Talking, Knowing, Not Knowing, Doubts, Fac One, Remembering, Forgetting, Auditing, Minds, Fame, Power, Accidents, Illnesses, Approval, Tiredness, Faces, Acting, Drama, Costumes, Sleep, Holding Things Apart, Holding Things Together, Destroying Things, Sending Things Away, Making Things Go Fast, Making Things Appear, Making Things Vanish, Convictions, Stability, Changing People, Silent Men, Silent Women, Silent Children, Symbols of Weakness, Symbols of Force, Disabilities, Education, Languages, Bestiality, Homosexuality, Invisible Bodies, Invisible Acts, Invisible Scenes, Accepting Things Back, Games, Rules, Players, Restimulation, Sexual Restimulation, Space Reduction, Size Reduction, Entertainment, Cheerfulness, Freedom for Others to Talk, Act, Feel Pain, Be Sad, Thetans, Personalities, Cruelty, Organizations. TRY FIRST: Healthy Bodies, Strong Bodies, Good Perception, Good Recall
Warning: Should your preclear become unstable or upset doing this process, take him to Step VI. Then return to this list.
Comment: The mind is sufficiently complicated that it can be expected to have computations on almost all the above. Thus there is no single clearing button and search for it is at the dictate of a circuit, the mechanism of circuits being to search for something hidden. Thus, your preclear may begin to compute and philosophize and seek to find the "button" that will release all this. All this releases all the buttons so tell him to relax and go on with the process every time he starts to compute.
Note: Running the above will bring to the surface without further attention the "computation on the case" and the service facsimile. Do not audit these. Run Expanded GITA.
STEP V: PRESENT TIME DIFFERENTIATION, EXTERIORIZATION BY SCENERY. Have preclear, with his body's eyes, study and see the difference between similar real objects such as the two arms of a chair, the spaces between the legs, two cigarettes, two trees, two girls. He must see and study the objects. It is not enough to remember the objects. The definition of a Case V is "no mock-ups, only blackness." Have him continue this process until he is alert. Use liberally and often.
Then exteriorize by having the preclear close his eyes and move actual places on Earth under him, preferably places he has not been. Have him bring these up to him. Find two similar things in the scene and observe the difference between them. Move him over oceans and cities until he is certain that he is exteriorized.

251

252

Then, preferably while exteriorized, have him do Step I.
This case has to know before he can be. His viewpoint is in the past. Give him present time viewpoints until he is a Step I by the methods given for Step V.
(Comment: Present Time Differentiation is a very good general technique and resolves chronic somatics and improves tone.)
Assume other people's viewpoints as a drill—not what they think about things, but as they look at things in the material universe. Attempt to be in the location of a leaf, blade of grass, car headlamp, etc., and view the universe.
STEP VI: ARC Straightwire using the next-to-last list of Self Analysis in Scientology which asks preclear to recall something really real to him, etc. Then use the lists in Self Analysis. This level is the neurotic. It is identified by the preclear having mock-ups which will not persist or which won't go away. Use also Present Time Differentiation. Then go to Step IV. At any drop in tone, return case to Step VI.
STEP VII: PSYCHOTIC CASES. (Whether in or out of body.) The psychotic appears to be in such desperate straits that the auditor often errs in thinking desperate measures are necessary. Use the lightest possible methods. Give case space and freedom where possible. Have psychotic imitate (not mock up) various things. Have him do Present Time Differentiation. Get him to tell the difference between things by actual touch. Have him locate, differentiate and touch things that are really real to him (real objects or items). If inaccessible, mimic him with own body, whatever he does, until he comes into communication. Have him locate corners of the room and hold them without thinking. As soon as his communication is up, go to Step VI, but be very sure he changes any mock-up around until he knows it is a mock-up, that it exists and that he himself made it. Do not run engrams. He is psychotic because viewpoints in present time are so scarce that he has gone into the past for viewpoints which at least he knew existed. By Present Time Differentiation, by tactile on objects, restore his idea of an abundance of viewpoint in present time. If he has been given electric shock, do not process it or any other brutality. Work him for very brief periods, for his attention span is short. Always work psychotics with another auditor or a companion present.
Note: All steps for all cases. If in doubt as to condition of case, test with Step VI.
Note: An Operating Thetan must also be able to manufacture particles of admiration and force in abundance.
APPENDIX 1 SOP 8
(Any alterations in SOP 8 will appear in appendixes, as they are expected to be minor and to make no radical change in the design of the steps in general.)

STEP I: The Operating Thetan must be able to manufacture and experience to his complete satisfaction all sensations including pain in mock-up form, and all energies such as admiration and force. It will be found that some Step I cases will not be able to manufacture admiration particles.
STEP II: Be very careful not to make a lower-step preclear, while still in a body, mock up his own body too long. Any mock-up will appear if it is simply put there often enough and long enough—providing the preclear doesn't spin in the process. The long-term manufacture of mock-ups of one's own body and of admiration may not produce quite the results expected—communication lines which should remain shut may open with bad results. These lines that are shut appear like hard, black cords to the preclear.
There are two types of techniques in general, positive gain and negative gain, as defined in the above text. Positive gain can be administered in unlimited amounts without harm. Negative gain techniques such as the reduction of engrams and locks, Double Terminaling, Black and White, are often limited in the length of time they can be given. After a few hundred hours of early-type auditing, the case could be found to slump. Thus we have in positive gain the unlimited technique which improves the analytical mind. In negative gain we have a limited (in terms of the time it can be audited) technique. In SOP 8 the following steps and processes may be audited without limit: Step I, Step III, Step V, Step VI, Step VII. The following steps are limited and should not be audited many hours without changing to another type (unlimited) for a while, after which the following steps could be resumed: Step II, Step IV.
The following steps can be used on groups: Step III, Step V Part 1 and Part 2, Step VI, Step VII.
APPENDIX 2 SOP 8
CERTAINTY PROCESSING
The anatomy of maybe consists of uncertainties and is resolved by the processing of certainties. It is not resolved by the processing of uncertainties.
An uncertainty is held in suspense solely because the preclear is holding on so hard to certainties. The basic thing he is holding on to is "I have a solution," "I have no solution." One of these is positive, the other is negative. A complete positive and a complete negative are alike a certainty. The basic certainty is "There is something," "There is nothing." A person can be certain there is something; he can be certain there is nothing.
"There is something," "There is nothing" resolves chronic somatics in this order. One gets the preclear to have the center of the somatics say, "There is something here," "There is nothing here." Then he gets the center of the somatic to say, "There

253

254

is nothing there," "There is something there." Then the auditor has the preclear say toward the somatic, "There is something there," "There is nothing there." And then he gets the preclear to say about himself, "There is something here," "There is nothing here." This is a very fast resolution of chronic somatics. Quite ordinarily three or four minutes of this will resolve an acute state and fifteen or twenty minutes of it will resolve a chronic state.
This matter of certainties goes further. It has been determined by my recent investigations that the reason behind what is happening is the desire of a cause to bring about an effect. Something is better than nothing, anything is better than nothing. If you will match terminals in brackets "There is nothing," you will find that a lot of your preclears become very ill. This should be turned around into "There is something."
The way one does Matched Terminals is to have the preclear facing the preclear or his father facing his father. In other words, two of each of anything, one facing the other. These two things will discharge one into the other, thus running off the difficulty. By bracket we mean, of course, running this with the preclear putting them up as himself to himself; as though they were put up by somebody else, the somebody else facing the somebody else; and the matched terminal again put up by others facing others.
The clue to all this is positive and negative in terms of certainties. The positive plus the negative in conflict make an uncertainty. A great number of combinations of things can be run. Here's a list of the combinations:
The button behind sex is "I can begin life anew," "I cannot begin life anew," "I can make life persist," "I cannot make life persist," "I can stop life," "I cannot stop life," "I can change life," "I cannot change life," "I can start life," "I cannot start life."
A very effective process: "Something wrong " "Nothing wrong "
"with you, me, they, my mind, communication, various allies."
A very basic resolution of the lack of space of an individual is to locate these people and these objects which you've been using as anchor points, such as Father, Mother and so forth, and put them into matched terminal brackets with this: "There is Father," "There is no Father," "There is Grandfather," "There is no Grandfather." In the compulsive line this can be changed to "There must be no father," "There must be a father." One takes all the allies of an individual and runs them in this fashion.
The basic law underneath this is that a person becomes the effect of anything upon which he has had to depend. This would tell you immediately that the sixth dynamic, the MEST universe, is the largest dependency of the individual. This can be run out, but then any dynamic can be run out in this fashion. "There is myself," "There is no self" and so on up the dynamics. "(Any dynamic) is preventing me from communicating," "(Any dynamic) is not preventing me from communicating" is

intensely effective. Any such technique can be varied by applying the subzero scale as found in Scientology 8-8008, which is also to be found in an earlier issue of the Journal of Scientology.
One runs any certainty out because he knows that for this certainty there is an opposite negative certainty and that between these lies a maybe, and that the maybe stays in suspense in time. The basic operation of the reactive mind is to solve problems. It is based on uncertainties about observation. Thus one runs out certainties of observation. The MEST general shotgun technique would have to do with "There is sex," "There is no sex," "There is force," "There is no force." This could be run, of course, in terms of matched terminal brackets or even as concepts, but one must not neglect to run the overt act phenomenon, which is to say getting somebody else getting the concept.
The processing out of certainties would then embrace "I have a solution," "There is no solution." These two opposite ends would take care of any individual who was hung on the track with some solution, for that solution had its opposite. People who have studied medicine begin by being certain that medicine works and end by being certain that medicine doesn't work. They begin by studying psychology on a supposition that it is the solution, and finish up believing that it is not the solution. This also happens to superficial students of Dianetics and Scientology; thus one should also run "Dianetics is a solution," "Dianetics is not the solution." This would get one off the maybe on the subject.
We are essentially processing communications systems. The entire process of auditing is concentrated upon withdrawing communications from the preclear as predicated on the basis of the body and that the preclear cannot handle communications. Thus "The preclear can handle communications," "The preclear cannot handle communications" is a shotgun technique which resolves maybes about his commu¬nications.
An intensely interesting aspect of Certainty Processing is that it shows up intimately where the preclear is aberrated. Here is the overall basic technique. One
runs "There is " "There is not " the following: Communications, Talk, Letters,
Love, Agreement, Sex, Pain, Work, Bodies, Minds, Curiosity, Control, Enforcement, Compulsion, Inhibition, Food, Money, People, Ability, Beauty, Ugliness, Presents, and both the top and bottom of the Chart of Attitudes, positive and negative in each one.
Basic in all this is the urge of the preclear to produce an effect, so one can run "I can produce an effect upon Mama," "I cannot produce an effect upon Mama," and so forth for all allies, and one will resolve the fixations of attention on the part of the preclear. Thus fixations of attention are resolved by Certainty Processing, processing out the production of effect.
One can occasionally, if he so desires, process the direct center of the maybe, which is to say doubt itself, in terms of Matched Terminals. This, however, is risky for it throws the preclear into a general state of doubt.

255

256

The key to any such processing is the recovery of viewpoints. "I can have Grandfather's viewpoint," "I cannot have Grandfather's viewpoint" and so on, particularly with sexual partners, will prove intensely interesting on a case. "There are viewpoints," "There are no viewpoints," "I have a viewpoint," "I don't have a viewpoint," "Blank has a viewpoint, " "Blank has no viewpoint" resolves problems.
One should also realize that when one is processing facsimiles, he is processing at one time energy, sensation and aesthetics. The facsimile is a picture. The preclear is being affected by pictures mainly, and so "There are no pictures," "There are pictures" forwards the case toward handling pictures, which is to say facsimiles.
A person tends to ally himself with somebody whom he considers capable of producing greater effects than himself, so "I, she, he, it can create greater effects," "I, she, he, it can create no effect" should be run.
When one is processing, he is trying to withdraw communications. Reach and withdraw are the two fundamentals in the action of theta. Must Reach and Can't Reach, Must Withdraw and Can't Withdraw are compulsions which, when run in combination, produce the manifestation of insanity in a preclear.
"I can reach," "I can't reach," "I can withdraw," "I can't withdraw " open up into the fact that remembering and forgetting are dependent upon the ability to reach and withdraw. You will find that a preclear will respond to "You must" or "You can," "You must not," "You cannot," "There is," "There is not" forgetting and remembering.
The only reason a person is hanging on to a body or facsimile is that he has lost his belief in his ability to create. The rehabilitation of this ability to create is resolved, for instance, in a person who has had an ambition to write, with "I can write," "I cannot write"—and so forth. The loss of this creative ability made the person hang on to what he had. The fact that a preclear has forgotten how to or no longer can himself generate force makes him hold on to stores of force. These are very often mistaken by the auditor for facsimiles. The preclear doesn't care for the facsimile, he simply cares for the force contained in the facsimile because he knows he doesn't have any force anymore.
It should be kept in mind that reaching and withdrawing are intensely productive of reaction in a preclear. But that preclear who does not respond to Reaching and Withdrawing and Certainty thereon, is hung up in a very special condition: He is trying to prevent something from happening. He also prevents auditing from happening. He has lost allies, he has had accidents, and he's hung up at all those points on the track where he feels he should have prevented something from happening. This is resolved by running "I must prevent it from happening, " "I cannot prevent it from happening," "I must regain control," "I must lose all control."
Blackness is the desire to be an effect and the inability to be cause.

"I can create Grandfather (or ally)," "I cannot create Grandfather (or ally) " solves scarcity of allies. "I want to be aware," "I want no awareness" is a technique which is basic in attitudes. Run this as others, in "Matched Terminal Brackets" or in Expanded GITA.
Certainty there is a past, certainty there is no past; certainty there is a future, certainty there is no future; certainty it means something else, certainty it does not mean anything else; certainty there is space, certainty there is no space; certainty there is energy, certainty there is no energy; certainty there are objects, certainty there are no objects.
SHORT 8
This is a short form of Standard Operating Procedure 8 of Scientology 8-8008. It can be used on any preclear without any survey of the case and will not get him into any difficulties and should resolve his various computations. This can also be used on groups. Just do the lettered steps in order.
A. Next-to-last list in Self Analysis, Remembering Something Real, etc., until
auditor is certain preclear has done and can do so easily. In a group ask for
a show of hands the moment something real is recalled. Take those hands
that went up in a couple of seconds and use them for the rest of this. Take
the no-hands or slow hands as a special group under somebody else and
simply drill them on this step until their speed is well up. Then put them
back into the main group, or keep all in one group and so on.
B. Examine and compare two similar MEST objects or spaces and tell the
difference. Keep this up for at least twenty minutes. It can be kept up for
hours with astonishing case improvement.
C. Run Wasting Healthy Bodies, then Accepting Them Under Duress, then
Wasting Them, then Accepting Them Under Duress. Do this for twenty
minutes or an hour until preclear or group shows signs of relief or amusement.
D. Run next-to-the-last list of Self Analysis for five minutes.
E. Run Duplication. This process is the basis of making facsimiles. Have
preclear or group look at a MEST object, then have him or them mock up a
mock-up similar to it but beside it. Have the MEST object and the mock-up
compared to tell the difference. Some people get none of the duplicates for
quite a while but will eventually. Some start making much fancier objects
of the same sort. In any result, keep this up for twenty minutes.
F. Have preclear or group close eyes and locate the corners of the room
behind them and keep interested in those corners and not thinking for several
minutes.

257

258

G. Have preclear or group move MEST scenery under them individually but at the command of the auditor. The scenery is, preferably, that not before viewed by the preclear or preclears. Don't let them invalidate what they see. This is Exteriorization by Scenery. Keep up for twenty minutes.
H. Do next-to-last list of Self Analysis. Five minutes. I. Examine and compare two present time objects.
J. Have one of the members go to the window and look out of the window. Have the remainder of the group assuming his viewpoint to see what he sees out of the window. Do this for ten minutes.
K. Start at beginning again and use list over and over. What they waste each time through can be changed to work and anchor points. Avoid pain with this Short 8. Run "Healthy bodies" for it instead.
SOP 8 is a professional auditor technique which deals with the problems of the reactive mind. SOP 8 from Step IV down and including Step IV is a professional auditor technique. Short 8 is done by someone who has been trained, preferably by a professional auditor. It can be done on a group no matter how large. Self Analysis in Scientology is a group technique aimed at the rehabilitation of one's own universe so as to bring it up to a level of comparability with one's observations of the MEST universe, and can be delivered to groups of children or adults by a person trained only through the text of Self Analysis in Scientology. Associates have courses in Group Auditing which are given free of charge and which consist of six hours of tape lectures by L. Ron Hubbard on the administration of Self Analysis in Scientology and the general techniques of Group Auditing.
THIS IS SCIENTOLOGY, SCIENCE OF CERTAINTY, was written especially for the Journal of Scientology by L. RON HUBBARD and contains a summary of his work for the use and interest of the general public.

Tone Scale
[1953]
40.0 Serenity of beingness
20.0 Action
8.0 Exhilaration
4.0 Enthusiasm
3.0 Conservatism
2.5 Boredom
2.0 Antagonism
1.8 Pain
1.5 Anger
1.2 No-sympathy
1.1 Covert hostility
1.0 Fear
0.9 Sympathy
0.8 Propitiation
0.5 Grief
0.375 Making amends
0.05 Apathy
0.0 Body death
-0.2 Being other bodies
-1.0 Punishing other bodies
-1.3 Responsibility as blame
-1.5 Controlling bodies
-2.2 Protecting bodies
-3.0 Owning bodies
-3.5 Approval from bodies
-4.0 Needing bodies
-6.0 Sacrifice
-8.0 Hiding

259



About the Author

L. Ron Hubbard's many works on the subjects of Dianetics and Scientology reflect a profound knowledge of man's nature—knowledge gained through lifelong experience with people from all walks of life and every part of society.
Ron's quest for knowledge on the nature of man began at a very early age, when he studied the Greek philosophers and other classics. He traveled across the United States and throughout the Pacific and Asia. By the time he was nine¬teen he had covered more than a quarter of a million miles. And during the course of leading expeditions, on three of which he carried the flag of the Explorers Club, he studied twenty-one different races and cultures around the world.
In the fall of 1930, Ron enrolled at George Washington University where he studied mathematics, engineering and attended one of the first classes in nuclear physics taught in the United States. This background allowed him to apply a scientific methodology to questions of man's spiritual potential. After realizing that neither the philosophy of the East nor the materialism of the West held the answers, Ron was determined to fill the gap.
He financed his early research through fiction writing and soon became one of the most highly demanded authors in this golden age of popular fiction. His prolific output as a writer during the 30s and 40s was interrupted only by his service in the US Navy during World War II.
Partially disabled at war's end, Ron applied his discoveries about the human mind to restore his own health and that of other injured servicemen.
In late 1947, Ron detailed these discoveries in a manuscript which enjoyed a wide circulation amongst friends and colleagues who copied it and passed it on to others. (This manuscript was published in 1951 as Dianetics: The Original Thesis, and later republished as The Dynamics of Life.) As his original thesis continued to circulate, Ron found himself besieged with inquiries from interested readers; and with the first publication of his work on Dianetics in the Explorers Club Journal in late 1949, the flood of letters was so great that it placed enormous demands on his time. It was in response to these requests for more information about his discoveries that he wrote a com¬prehensive text on the subject.
Published on May 9, 1950, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health made his breakthrough technology broadly available for the first time. Dianetics shot to the top of the New York Times bestseller list and remained there week after week. By the end of four months, 750 Dianetics study groups had sprung up, prompting such headlines as: "Dianetics Takes US by Storm."

261

262

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
Responding to this groundswell of enthusiasm, Ron delivered lectures to packed halls across the country. Before the year's end, tens of thousands had not only read his book, but were readily applying it to better their lives. Meanwhile, he continued his research, and further breakthroughs followed. In 1951, he wrote and published six more books, including Science of Survival, the authoritative work on the subject of human behavior.
In the autumn of that year, and in spite of growing demands on his time, he intensified research into the true source of life energy. This research led him to identify the very nature of life itself, and formed the basis of the applied philosophy of Scientology—the study of the spirit in relationship to itself, universes and other life. This track of research, begun so many years earlier as a young man traveling the globe in search of answers to life itself, was to span the next three decades.
Through the 1950s, Ron continued to advance Scientology techniques with the development of hundreds of new processes, delving deeper into the true nature of man. And as more and more people discovered Ron's break-throughs, Scientology churches around the world opened to provide services to them. Ron visited many of these churches, giving lectures and guidance to the church members to help them expand Scientology in their areas.
In 1959, Ron purchased a home in England, Saint Hill Manor, where he lectured to hundreds of Scientology students who came from as far away as the United States, Australia and South Africa. A new era for Scientology began with the opening of the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course in May of 1961 to train expert auditors. Between 1961 and 1966, Ron not only person¬ally supervised these students, but also delivered more than 440 lectures and auditing demonstrations while continuing his research and overseeing the expanding affairs of Scientology internationally.
He released the Scientology Classification, Gradation and Awareness Chart at Saint Hill in 1965, laying out the standard step-by-step route for pre-clears and auditors. Additionally, because of Scientology's rapid expansion, Ron developed administrative policies for Scientology organizations which have proven to be universal in their application.
On the threshold of breakthroughs never before envisaged, Ron resigned from all directorships in Scientology organizations in 1966 to devote himself more fully to research.
The following years saw the discovery and codification of the technology which allows anyone to move through the levels of Operating Thetan, the highest states of spiritual awareness and ability.
Ron continued to seek out methods to help his fellows. As he encountered ever-worsening conditions in society, he developed procedures to address and resolve a wide range of man's problems. He even refined the techniques of Dianetics in 1978 to bring about faster and easier-to-attain results—New Era Dianetics.
No area of life was left untouched in this search for ways to improve the human condition. His work provided solutions to such social ills as declining educational standards, moral decay and drug use. He codified the administration of organizations, the principles of ethics, the subjects of art and logic and much more. And yet he never lost sight of the man on the street and his day-to-day problems of living in these complex and troubled times. Thus in Scientology one finds solutions to any difficulty one can encounter in life.
This series of lectures represents but a small part of the more than forty

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
million words of Ron's recorded lectures, books and writings on Dianetics and Scientology.
With his research fully completed and codified, L. Ron Hubbard departed his body on January 24, 1986. Ron's legacy lives on through his works which are applied daily by millions around the world to bring understanding and freedom.
Thanks to his efforts, there is today a pathway for anyone to travel to attain full spiritual freedom. The entrance is wide and the route is sure.

263



Glossary

To assist in your understanding of these lectures, hard-to-find terms and other words which you may not be familiar with are included in this glossary. An example of usage from the lectures is included at the end of each definition. These definitions give only the meanings of the words as they are used in the lectures; this glossary is not meant as a substitute for a dictionary.
AA: an abbreviation for attempted abortion (used especially in Dianetics). Ran across the funniest engram I think I ever processed out of anybody— it was a prenatal AA, and Mama was saying, "Tic-a-tac-a-little-baby." —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
aberrate: affect with aberration. See also aberration in this glossary. As long as one believes, for instance, that work and pain are undesirable, and that unconsciousness is desirable, he's going to stay in a very horribly aberrated state; because he's got his vectors reversed. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
aberration: a departure from rational thought or behavior. Aberration means basically to err, to make mistakes, or more specifically to have fixed ideas which are not true. The word is also used in its scientific sense. It means departure from a straight line. If a line should go from A to B, then if it is aberrated it would go from A to some other point, to some other point, to some other point, to some other point, to some other point and finally arrive at B. Taken in its scientific sense, it would also mean the lack of straightness or to see crookedly as, for example, a man sees a horse but thinks he sees an elephant. Aberrated conduct would be wrong conduct, or conduct not supported by reason. Aberration is opposed to sanity, which would be its opposite. From the Latin, aberrare, to wander from; Latin, ab, away, errare, to wander. So we handle this thing of barriers as a social problem, we find out this little law (and this is a specific law): The validation of barriers is the source of aberration as well as the source of a game. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
aberrative: tending toward or capable of causing aberration in a person. See also aberration in this glossary. We have then the very factors of pain, unconsciousness, as being the aberrative common denominator of all engrams, for instance. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)

265

266

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
Admiration Processing: a type of processing which melts down masses of energy that have been accumulated in the bank by the use of mock-ups of people admiring the preclear and other people. But when you've looked all around to find the worst possible facsimile you could steal off of anybody, see, rather than go through all of the work of pumping affinity out of something for a half a dozen years or something of the sort to get a hard block of energy, and then you blow it up with Admiration Processing, just to find out if Admiration Processing works. —Additional Remarks: Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
anchor points: assigned or agreed-upon points of boundary, which are conceived to be motionless by the individual; those points which demark the outermost boundaries of a space or its corners for an individual. What is the barrier? It's the eight anchor points of his first piece of space—those are barriers. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
Anthony, Mr.: humorous reference to John J. Anthony (real name Lester Kroll), host of "The Goodwill Hour," a radio show which aired from 1937 to 1945, on which Anthony dispensed personal help to the in-house guests of his studio. Anthony set himself up as an expert in all areas of human relationships and claimed to have three university degrees. The majority of the guests on his show were women, and Anthony's standard opening line was, "What is your problem, madame?" Throughout its radio run, "The Goodwill Hour" was heard on Sunday nights, and the slogan "Ask Mr. Anthony" became a household joke. The show went off the radio in 1945, but returned four years later in a television version. And there's his problem, Mr. Anthony, right there. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
any day of the week: (colloquial) under any conditions. This phrase is used either to indicate a preference for something, or to express complete certainty of the truth of one's opinions. We're "prior art" any day of the week, you see. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
AP&A: abbreviation for the book Advanced Procedure & Axioms, written by L. Ron Hubbard, first published in November 1951. It's "What does he use to get sympathy?" is the way it's defined in AP&A. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
assess: do an assessment on. See also assessment in this glossary. We're going to be wasting time unless we just suddenly take this case and assess him and find out where he's locked up emotionally. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
assessment: the action of an auditor asking a series of questions of a preclear and noting reactions to them with an E-Meter. This helps to isolate specific areas or subjects to be addressed in auditing. And this is where we do an assessment; down to there you don't need to. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
Assumption: the name given to the act of a theta being taking over a MEST body. This takes place in most cases just prior to birth. For more information, see the book Scientology: A History of Man by L. Ron Hubbard. And you'll find people who are stuck in the Assumption have had this happen to them. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
astral body: a second body, per some forms of philosophical or religious thought, said to belong to each individual, formed of a substance which is above or beyond perception by the senses and which pervades all space. Per these beliefs, the astral body accompanies the individual through life, is able to leave the human body at will, and survives the individual after death. This case is exteriorizing some sort of an astral body. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
astral walking: using what is known in some forms of philosophical or religious thought as the astral body. See also astral body in this glossary. They do astral walking with these things. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
audit: apply Dianetics and Scientology processes and procedures to. See also processing in this glossary. You can audit them from the standpoint of you just—"It isn't you, a thing which handles a body, which is dependent upon the body being exteriorized, it's you being exteriorized."—Steps V, VI, VII— Time (25 Nov. 53)
auditing: another word for processing. See also processing in this glossary. That'll come up in auditing every time you turn around. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8- C (23 Nov. 53)
auditor: a person trained and qualified in applying Dianetics and/or Scientology processes and procedures to individuals for their betterment; called an auditor because auditor means one who listens. See also processing in this glossary. It's rather difficult to put into a communication system all the things that can be done by an auditor because many, many, many things can be done by an auditor. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
automaticity: the action of doing something but being unaware or only partially aware one is doing it; having something "on automatic." An automaticity is something which ought to be under the control of the individual, but isn't. How can he possibly wait for the dog to move? Only if his automaticity is in excellent condition. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
bank: the mental image picture collection of the preclear—the reactive mind. It comes from computer terminology where all data is in a "bank." See also reactive mind in this glossary. But there is one process which shotguns throughout the entire bank. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
bars on the suits: reference to the black-and-white striped uniforms formerly worn by convicts in some prisons. We have the chain gang with the bars on the suits, and we have the third greatest delinquency in the United States— juvenile. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
beam: an energy flow. Why don't you put a beam on the effort band, and push yourself out of the back of your head. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
beat (one's) brains out: try very hard to understand or think out something difficult; tire (oneself) out by thinking. Might never talk about this again, but you certainly had better know what you're doing with this because you're going to be—you'll very often just practically beat your brains out, thetawise,

267

268

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
trying to figure out what's wrong with this preclear. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
beat (something) to death: a variation of flog to death or do to death, meaning "overdo or repeat too often; deal with or discuss (a subject) till it is no longer in any way interesting." And all of this breaks down—as we get into the rationale in this universe, it just breaks down into this fundamental problem of justice—which you probably think I have been beating to death at long ends trying to get around one way or the other to spend some time, but I'm not; I'm talking about a preclear. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
Belisarius: (ca. 505-565) general of the Eastern Roman Empire under the Emperor Justinian I. In 533-534, he led an expedition which overthrew the Vandal kingdom in Africa. See also Justinian and Vandals in this glossary. . . . these people there, under attack by Belisarius who was sent by Justinian to take care of this, recognized that they were under attack. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
between-lives: reference to the period of time between the loss of a body and the assumption of another. At death, the theta being leaves the body and goes to a particular location where he "reports in," is made to forget everything, and is then sent back to Earth to a new body just before it is born. And they're not even supposed to appear in the between-lives area if they've done some-thing like that. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
black case: a heavily occluded case (one whose memories are usually largely hidden or made unavailable to conscious recall) which is characterized by mental pictures consisting of masses of blackness. They dragged around a body that was blind—remember that, in every black case; it's always there— they dragged around a body that was blind, they dragged around one that should have dropped dead, they were brought back into the land of the living. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
blooey, going: (slang) going totally out of commission; breaking down completely. Blooey is an echoic imitation of an explosion. The—what was being picked up on MEST vision, see, it was—just started going blooey in all directions and made it rather difficult to drive the car. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
blown to glory: (colloquial) destroyed, especially using explosives or other violent methods. Glory means "heaven" in this sense. He had done something without a reason, which means he'd just blown to glory his "got to have a reason" machine. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
blow (one's) brains out: (1) (slang) kill (oneself) by a shot through the head. He has to be—it would be too much of a shock to his parents to blow his brains out. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53) (2) (slang) work very hard; overwork oneself. "What am I going to do about this case?" And you— instead of blowing your brains out, why didn't you discard them as useless, and just know where you are. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
body in pawn: reference to an incident where a person's body is held in one place by being hypnotized or knocked out, and the person is told that he belongs in that same place but that he now has to go somewhere else and

GLOSSARY
live. For more information, read the book Scientology: A History of Man by L. Ron Hubbard. There's this mechanism known as the "body in pawn" —there's all kinds of mechanisms like this all up and down the track, they've been all over the place. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
boresome: tending to be a bore; boring. You know, you fill up one space and then it goes by, and you fill up another space, and you fill up another space, and you've got to throw those spaces away at first and this becomes boresome, just throwing things away; so you've set up a machine that throws it away. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Boyle's law: a principle formulated by Irish scientist Robert Boyle (1627-1691) which states that when the pressure on air and similar substances is doubled, the air, etc., is squeezed down to half its normal volume. Good old Ohm's law goes by the boards, and comes into immediate collision with Boyle's law and a few other laws go by the boards, the second that you start to pour current from one terminal to another in minus 273 degrees C. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
bracket: a word taken from the field of artillery, where one fires shots over and under a target so as to make sure and hit the target. Over and under, over and under, and one eventually hits the target. In Scientology processing, a bracket is a series of questions or commands based on the number of ways or number of combinations in which something can occur. A bracket covers the potential directions of flow of an action as they relate to the preclear. Examples of the different flows that could be run in a bracket are: the individual doing the action himself, somebody else doing it, others doing it, the individual doing it to somebody else, somebody doing it to him, others doing it to others, etc. Now, remember that this can be done also in a bracket. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
bunk, do a: (British slang) to run away; to leave, especially when one should not; to desert. Now, very often with this auditor-preclear arrangement where the preclear "does the bunk," the preclear can only be persuaded to come back for the auditor. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
Burke: an early Dianeticist and auditor who attended these lectures. Till we get down to Burke with his stunt of being beautifully exteriorized, seeing the back of his head .. . —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
bust out: (colloquial) a variation of break out, meaning "to bring out (anything) for use." It's—again, here is the case on which we bust out the E-Meter. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
buttered all over the universe: (slang) in a condition whereby a person doesn't know where he is. The person has used remote viewpoints (those viewpoints which an individual puts out remotely, to look through) and has left remote viewpoints located all over everywhere to such a degree that he thinks he is anyplace rather than where he is. One of the most elementary techniques, by the way, which I used not very many days ago, with considerable significant result on somebody who had no space, and not only didn't have any space, but had moved into negative space and was buttered all over this section of

269

270

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
the universe, was to have him have this preclear take four flags—well, he got a staff, four flags on a staff—and have this preclear plant those flags immediately in front of his body, two of them, and two of them immediately behind his body, and then just sit there. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
button: an item, word, phrase, subject or area that causes response or reaction in an individual. And they were all more or less stuck on this button: They were unwilling to give freedom to others. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
by all that's holy: (informal) forcefully. The phrase is a variation of the expression swear by all that's holy, meaning "to swear forcefully (that some-thing happened, is true, etc.)." Then by another set of machines which seek, by all that's holy, to make it stop. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
c: (physics) a symbol for the speed of light, approximately 186,000 miles per second. And if he does this at the rate of one over c, he can make the mock-up move from one corner of the room to the other corner of the room. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
cabalagrams: a coined word from cabala, meaning "any esoteric or secret doctrine" and the suffix -gram, meaning "something written down, drawn or recorded." I'm not even vaguely interested in teaching you the grand theory, or making a book covered with human skin, or something, and cryptic cabalagrams which will then impute by symbolic function some other necromancy. — Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
Camden: the city where L. Ron Hubbard gave the lectures of this series, located in southwest New Jersey, on the Delaware River opposite Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. We've got this list posted and available and in the hands of the Camden police and . . . —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
Camilla: the main character in the play La dame aux camelias, written by Alexandre Dumas the younger (1824-1895) and first presented in 1852. The story has been filmed numerous times; the most famous version, made in 1936, starred Greta Garbo (1905-1990). Camille is a beautiful courtesan who is part of the fashionable world of Paris. After falling in love with a penniless young man (Armand), she gives up her former way of life and moves with him to the country. However, due to her reputation, Camille's association with Armand creates trouble for his family, and Armand's father pleads with her to renounce his son. Camille agrees, returning to Paris and her former friends after convincing Armand that she is not happy with the simple life he has provided her. Later, as Camille is dying of tuberculosis in Paris, Armand's father finally tells him the real reason that Camille left him. The play concludes with the tragic reunion of Armand with Camille, who dies in his arms. It even got to be a habit back in the days of Camille— you know, she was the one that made TB popular in America. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
carried the torch against: showed unchanging opposition to something or someone. This phrase is a variation of carry the torch, meaning "to show great and unchanging loyalty to a cause or a person." One boy who carried the torch against this was so hot about it that his banner was on high practically all the years of his life. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
Carthage: an ancient city in north Africa which was the commercial and political rival of Rome for much of the third and second centuries B.C. The city was destroyed by the Romans in 146 B.C., but was rebuilt in 44 B.C., and later became the capital of the Vandals (A.D. 439-533). See also Vandals in this glossary. But the army of people who had been the Vandals and who had swept down and conquered north Africa—and who had been big enough and tough enough to loot all Rome and bring back, actually, the gold roofs of a temple or two back to the African coast—these people who were Carthage, and who in the long run won after all... —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
case: a general term for a person being treated or helped. Case also refers to a person's condition, which is monitored by the content of his reactive mind. A person's case is the way he responds to the world around him by reason of his aberrations. See also reactive mind and aberration in this glossary. If you've gotten to the point where you're going to really break the case, they've got about eight skillion, billion facsimiles that suddenly decide they're going to rush in on them or do something to them. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
cave in: to collapse or cause to collapse mentally and/or physically to the extent that the individual cannot function causatively. The individual is quite effect. Cave in is a US Western phrase which symbolized mental or physical collapse as like being at the bottom of a mine shaft or in a tunnel when the supports collapsed and left the person under tons of debris.. . . it was such a shock, such a surprise to him, that it caved him in and he went right back into the body. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
Change of Space Processing: a process in which an auditor has a preclear be in different spaces, thus enabling the preclear to increase his certainty on where he is. Now, you run into this in Change of Space Processing. Some of the damnedest things happen. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
chin-chinning: having a light conversation; engaging in chitchat. This is very—an awful lot of stuff of this character that you guys will run into one way or the other in slamming around the universe and being here and being there and visiting this planet and talking with that one and chin-chinning one day with the wind gods, and you'll find this and you'll find that, and you collect this and you collect that. —Additional Remarks: Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
chips, passed in (one's): (slang) died. The allusion is to the American card game of poker, in which a player may at any time drop from the game and pass in his chips (small, round disks or counters used in poker and other gambling games as a token for money) in exchange for cash. In the first place, he might as well just pass in his chips as far as his health and personal comfort's concerned, because he has been presented with an anchor point which he doesn't own and which can be taken away from him unless he behaves in a certain way. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
choose up (sides): (colloquial) to decide on the opposing players, as for an impromptu ballgame. Used figuratively in the lecture. And you'd have to choose up sides or something like that, and have a war or something about it in order to get any randomity concerning it. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)

271

272

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
Christie: John Reginald Christie (1898-1953), English murderer convicted in 1953 of the murder of six women (including his own wife) over a ten-year period beginning in 1943. In 1949, the wife and fourteen-month-old daughter of Christie's upstairs neighbor, Timothy Evans, were killed. Though Evans originally confessed to the murders, he later withdrew his confession and insisted that Christie had performed the killings. Christie emphatically denied it, and testified against Evans at the trial. Evans was convicted and hanged. Later, when the bodies of Christie's other victims were found in March 1953, he confessed to also having killed Evans' wife. There was a young man hanged there in the Christie case. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
circuit: a part of an individual's mind that behaves as though it were an entity or personality separate from him, that either talks to him or goes into action of its own accord. Look, thinking, on a circuit variety, is condensed effort. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
clear: audit (someone) to the state of Clear. Our job from here on out is to clear and get cleared. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
Clear: the name of a state achieved through auditing or an individual who has achieved this state. A Clear is a being who no longer has his own reactive mind. He is an unaberrated person and is rational in that he forms the best possible solutions he can on the data he has and from his viewpoint. I'm looking for people who are going to do it. To get Clear. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
clip: (slang) to hit; strike. Used figuratively in reference to contacting and addressing mental masses and handling cases. Now, if you can knock down a few barriers for him and clip his own concepts of limitations and knock out his agreement with people who have agreed upon these limitations, he'll go right back up Tone Scale like a rocket ship, see—real fast. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
closure of terminals: the phenomenon of terminals (people, fixed masses, etc.) collapsing into each other or becoming identified, one with the other. See also terminal in this glossary. You just can't make a closure of those two terminals. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
coffee shop auditing: auditing done casually out of auditing rooms, sometimes in public places such as coffee shops. In the first place, he's going to get coffee shop auditing. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
"Colgate Comedy Hour, The": a television variety show which ran on Sunday nights from September 1950 through December 1955. Hosted by various well-known comedians, the acts featured most of the top names in show business. The show boasted numerous television firsts, including the first network color telecast on November 22,1953 (broadcast as an experimental test of a new color system which had just been developed). Somebody televised a color program the other night—Donald O'Connor on the "Colgate Comedy Hour"— they did it all in color, but I noticed the set was picking it up in very poor black and white. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
collapsed terminal: a terminal that has collapsed into or identified itself with something. See also terminal in this glossary. What's essentially wrong with this case is collapsed terminals. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
commander in chief: the supreme commander of the armed forces of a nation, as, in the United States, the president. See also Eisenhower, Dwight D.
in this glossary. But anyway, he's been commander in chief now, for years— but in different office buildings. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
communication lag: the length of time between the posing of the question and the receiving of the answer, regardless of what intervenes. This was what's known as a communication lag. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
computation: the aberrated evaluation and postulate that one must be consistently in a certain state in order to succeed. A computation thus may mean that one must entertain in order to be alive or that one must be dignified in order to succeed or that one must own much in order to live. See also aberration and postulate in this glossary. He's afraid that if he runs what you run there, or something of the sort, hell actually get well, and then he's not acceptable anymore. Terrific computations on this. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
condemned: (colloquial) damned. Giving those two points, and an ability on your part (God help you) to look, you can be the best condemned auditor that ever walked—just given those two points and knowing how to handle those two points. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
cowboy in the black hat: villain; bad guy. See also cowboy in the white hat
in this glossary. And they've got a whole religious society all built up on the idea of the cowboy in the white hat and the cowboy in the black hat. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
cowboy in the white hat: hero; good guy. The expression comes from Western movies, in which you could tell the good guys from the bad guys by the color of their hats: white for good, black for bad. And they've got a whole religious society all built up on the idea of the cowboy in the white hat and the cowboy in the black hat. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Creative Processing: an exercise by which the preclear is actually creating the physical universe. It consists of having the preclear make, with his own creative energies, a mock-up. See also mock-up in this glossary. We have just straight, ordinary, routine duplication in Creative Processing. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
daily bread: (informal) a person's food, or the money he needs in order to live. And you take somebody who is depending upon the anatomy of this know¬ingness—the anatomy of this knowingness, you know, the anatomy of this universe—somebody who depends upon this anatomy for his daily bread, such as engineering. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
darnedest: (informal) a euphemism for damnedest, most extraordinary; most amazing. Well, there's the darnedest rigs. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
DEI: abbreviation for desire, enforce, inhibit, three points of the DEI Scale. These points, going down, are lowered by failure. Each lower step is an explanation to justify having failed with the upper level. For more information, read the

273

274

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
book Scientology 0-8: The Book of Basics by L. Ron Hubbard. We've added now the DEI cycle to Expanded GITA and we're resolving scarcity on all parts of the band. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
Delaware River: a major river of the eastern United States, which flows through heavily industrialized areas in the states of New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware. Now, every once in a while somebody will say to you—and boy, if you don't sharpen up your ears and fan for this one, you just ought to—well, ought to go dump yourself for a good bath in the Delaware River or something and refresh yourself, to wake up. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
delection: a variation of delectation, meaning "delight; enjoyment; entertain-ment." And what do you know? It isn't that I'm saying this, or that this is a philosophy which I have invented for your delection, nor is it that this is— merely makes good reading or good talking, this happens to make excellent processing. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
Department of Justice: the department of the US federal government charged with the responsibility for the enforcement of federal laws. It includes the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. / understand the Department of Justice—if you can imagine, all these years after, the Department of Justice was recently empowered to enforce breaches of the Bill of Rights. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
determinism: feeling determined about something; having a feeling of deter-mination. He isn't even on a MEST universe determinism, so he's relied on other people to mock up the MEST universe for him for so long, that he can't tell what's being mocked up! —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
Dianetics: comes from the Greek words dia, meaning "through" and nous, meaning "soul." Dianetics is a methodology developed by L. Ron Hubbard which can help alleviate such things as unwanted sensations and emotions, irrational fears and psychosomatic illnesses. It is most accurately described as what the soul is doing to the body through the mind. Back in Dianetics we used to do a lot of this: we erase the sprain and so on. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
Doakes, George: a made-up name for a preclear. Let's take George Doakes as a preclear, and we put George Doakes down in the middle of eight anchor points—he can make these anchor points and throw them up. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
dope off: to experience dope-off. See also dope-off in this glossary. And the more emotion that was put into the corners of the room, the more this case had a tendency to dope off. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
dope-off: a condition of feeling tired, sleepy or foggy (as though doped or drugged). This case was so out of space that when asked to put emotion and so forth into the anchor points of the room, would go into an instant dope-off— pang! the second she put any emotion into the room. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time
(25 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
double-terminal: run a process in which one has the preclear mock up something or someone facing its duplicate, then have him get another such pair beside, in any position, the first pair. The mock-ups discharge one against the other like electrical poles. That's the most basic one we've got, see? And at V level, we can double-terminal it. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
down for the third time, going: virtually defeated or finished; doomed. The phrase comes from a commonly held, though fallacious, belief that a person who is struggling in the water and drowning will submerge, come to the surface and submerge again three times before finally sinking. Now, I've seen more preclears being audited on this basis: The preclear says, "But I'm going down for the third time."—Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
drinking the blood of the Lamb and eating the bread of the Lord:
reference to the rite of Holy Communion in the Christian religion, in which bread and wine are consecrated and consumed in remembrance of Jesus' death. The ceremony repeats the actions of Christ at the last supper with his disciples before his death. Jesus took bread, broke it and gave it to the disciples, saying, "This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me." After they had eaten, he passed around a cup of wine, saying, "This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you." He was drinking the blood of the Lamb and eating the bread of the Lord at a mad rate. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
duded up: (slang) dressed up, especially in showy or flashy clothes. Used figuratively in the lecture. A little kid's got this universe duded up the like of which you never saw. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
dynamics: the eight urges (drives, impulses) in life. They are motives or motivations. We call them the eight dynamics. These are urges for survival as or through (1) self, (2) sex and family, (3) groups, (4) all mankind, (5) living things (plants and animals), (6) the material universe, (7) spirits and (8) infinity or the Supreme Being. No, just use the MEST universe, sixth dynamic. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
VIII: a coined name for a very low-level case, based on the Steps given in Standard Operating Procedure 8. (The lowest-level case addressed by SOP 8 was known as a Step VII.) See also SOP 8 in this glossary. And, believe me, for a VII, VIII, IX or Step XXIII, they're not apart anymore—the very walls of the room fall in. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
8-C: short for Standard Operating Procedure 8-C. For full information on this procedure, see "SOP 8-C: The Rehabilitation of the Human Spirit" in the appendix of this transcript booklet. You see, you don't waste these things in 8-C; you waste the thing that makes it. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
1812: reference to the War of 1812, a war between Britain and the United States, fought between 1812 and 1815. The War of 1812 has also been called the second American war for independence. It began over alleged British violations of American shipping rights, such as the forcing of American merchant sailors to serve on British ships. American soldiers attacked Canada unsuccessfully in the war, and the British retaliated by burning the White House and other buildings in Washington, DC. The war was ended by

275

276

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
peace treaty on 24 December 1814; however, the last battle, in which the Americans won their greatest victory, occurred in early 1815, before the armies could be informed that the war was over. But English law hasn't invaded us (well, they actually, not technically since they burned the White House, but—in 1812)—but hasn't invaded us since 1776. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
Eisenhower, Dwight D.: Dwight David Eisenhower (1890-1969), US general and thirty-fourth president of the United States (1953-1961). Hero-worshiped as the commander of the Allied armies that defeated Germany in World War II, Eisenhower was elected and reelected by huge majorities in 1952 and 1956. Yeah, the three top Nazi officials who had orders out— these orders were signed by Dwight D. Eisenhower—to arrest them, and shoot on sight, and they were dined at the White House. —SOP 8- C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
electric shock: (psychiatry) the administration of electric shock to the head of a patient in a supposed effort to treat mental illness. There is no therapeutic reason for shocking anyone and there are no authentic cases on record of anyone having been cured of anything by shock. The reverse is true. Electric shock causes often irreparable damage to the person in the form of brain damage and impaired mental ability. They turn to psychology, mesmerism, electric shocks, broken legs, education, religion (so that they save their soul, which is something they put at some distance from them and save it, I guess). —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
E-Meter: short for electropsychometer, an electronic device for measuring the mental state or change of state of Homo sapiens. It is not a lie detector. It does not diagnose or cure anything. It is used by auditors to assist the preclear in locating areas of spiritual distress or travail. There's a point in a person's lifetime that you can find on any E-Meter, practically on any preclear, where the person suddenly made up his mind to be the body—probably in his teens or late childhood. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
engrain: a mental image picture (a mental copy of one's perceptions sometime in the past) which is a recording of an experience containing pain, uncon-sciousness and a real or fancied threat to survival. It is a recording in the reactive mind of something which actually happened to an individual in the past and which contained pain and unconsciousness, both of which are recorded in the engram. It must, by definition, have impact or injury as part of its content. Engrams are a complete recording, down to the last accurate detail, of every perception present in a moment of partial or full unconsciousness. See also reactive mind in this glossary. We have then the very factors of pain, unconsciousness, as being the aberrative common denominator of all engrams, for instance. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
engram bank: a colloquial name for the reactive mind. See also bank and reactive mind in this glossary. It was picking up part of it from the engram bank. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Engram Police in Universe C: a made-up name for a police force on the whole track. Or the Engram Police in Universe C are still looking for him. —Additional Remarks: Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
evaluate: to impose data or knowledge upon another. An example would be to tell another why he is the way he is instead of permitting or guiding him to discover it for himself. In other words, it's a symbolical shift which is going on continuously, on and on and on and on, telling a person and evaluating for a person and telling him where to go and where to be and that's basically what it is. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
evolute: to evolve; develop. As long as you let automatic machinery run on and on and evolute as it will, and evolute as it will, it eventually stops itself. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25Nov. 53)
Expanded GITA: Step IV of SOP 8. For the full procedure, see Standard Operating Procedure 8 in the appendix of this transcript booklet. We've added now the DEI cycle to Expanded GITA and we're resolving scarcity on all parts of the band. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
exteriorization: the act of the thetan moving outside the body. When this is done the person achieves a certainty of his beingness or identity completely apart from that of the body. See also thetan in this glossary. And this guy was really sensitive about exteriorization. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
Exteriorization by Scenery: Step V of Standard Operating Procedure 8. For more information, see Standard Operating Procedure 8 in the appendix of this transcript booklet. And we get the technique "Exteriorization by Scenery." —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
exteriorize: move (as a thetan) out of the body; place distance between a thetan and his body. See also thetan in this glossary. In view of the fact only about 50 percent of the people you encounter will be three feet back of their head, there is a better method of doing it, which is to say, you exteriorize him by location—"where he is not," past, present and future. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8- C (23 Nov. 53)
Fac One: short for Facsimile One. See also Facsimile One in this glossary. The whole world, everybody in the universe, utterly and completely perished because you did it with a Fac One camera. —Additional Remarks: End of Cycle Processing (24 Nov. 53)
Fac One suit: the suit worn by the operator in Facsimile One, which included a hood and goggles, and was similar to the types of suits worn for rescuing the crews of burning airplanes. And just because a thetan has certain things he's collected—like some old Fac One suit, you know? —Additional Remarks: Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
facsimile: a three-dimensional color picture with sound and smell and all other perceptions, plus the conclusions or speculations of the individual. And every once in a while, some guy will go to sleep and he'll have big dreams about fires and so forth that he's—he's still got a viewpoint kicking around somewhere, but it's parked in front of a facsimile. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8- C (23 Nov. 53)
Facsimile One: an incident also known as the "coffee grinder," involving the use of a machine which loosely resembled a camera (boxlike, two-handled, with an exit hole for blasts in front and a peek hole in back) to administer a push-pull force beam to the body. This device was used by an invader force to tame the population. See also invader force in this glossary. Male

277

278

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
voice: On Facsimile One, get yourself in front of the camera and mock it up. —Additional Remarks: End of Cycle Processing (24 Nov. 53)
Factors: a summation of the considerations and examinations of the human spirit and the material universe completed by L. Ron Hubbard between 1923 and 1953 A.D. The Factors can be found in the book Scientology 0-8: The Book of Basics by L. Ron Hubbard. This is a game, and the point where this game cuts in, of course, is immediately below your Factors. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
false as a Confederate minus 28-cent bill: completely fake. Minus 28-cent bills have never existed, and Confederate paper money, issued by the South early in the American Civil War, quickly became almost valueless due to inadequate financial resources to back it up. And it was something I couldn't wrap my intelligence around, merely because it's just about as false as a Confederate minus 28-cent bill, see? —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
FBI: abbreviation for Federal Bureau of Investigation, a United States government agency established to investigate violations of federal laws and safeguard national security. And the FBI was given the right to investigate them. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
fell swoop, at one: all at once or all together, as if by a single blow. The expression dates from the sixteenth century; the word fell was Old English for "fierce" or "savage." This is by objecting to war and so forth, and just admitting that I can't create nations at one fell swoop, see, or cultures or civilizations in a breath. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
felony, compound the: make a situation worse; add to a difficulty, problem, or crime. The phrase refers to a person doing something which makes a crime more serious. For example, a person who receives money, property, etc., in return for an agreement not to prosecute or inform on one who has committed a major crime (felony), is compounding the felony by covering it up. Now, we have an auditor here who is processing somebody, who, if this auditor had not concentrated on ability while exteriorized—ability while exteriorized, you understand—if he'd concentrated on the body and insisted on the body being patched up all the time, he just would have compounded the felony. —SOP 8- C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
field: any thing interposing between a preclear and something he wishes to see, whether MEST or mock-up. Fields are black, gray, purple, any substance or invisible. See also MEST and mock-up in this glossary. He's got a black field. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
Fifth Amendment: an amendment to the Constitution of the United States which makes it illegal to try a person twice for the same offense and prohibits forcing persons to testify against themselves in criminal cases. It also forbids depriving any person of life, liberty or property without fair and reasonable legal procedures, and it bans the taking of private property for public use without fair payment. Textbooks, textbooks, textbooks, beat it and pound it in: "Our American citizen has rights to justice, he has rights to property, he has good rights, and there's nothing more wonderful than the"—whatever amendment it is, the Fifth Amendment, I think. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
Fifth Invader: a member of the Fifth Invader Force. Thetans from this force believe themselves to be very strange insectlike creatures with unthinkably horrible hands. See also invader force in this glossary. Here are police standing around everywhere—over here in New Jersey, by the way, they're very definitely dramatizing the Fifth Invader. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
finger off (something), take one's: stop watching something closely, resulting in a blunder. And don't ever take your finger off of this: anytime anybody says he's occluded, grab ahold of an E-Meter. And that way you will save more time; because about every one out of four of those people is going to do nothing but lie to you—and know it. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Fishbein, Morris: (1889-1976) US physician who, as editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association (1924-1949), had enormous influence in American medical politics. An outspoken critic of what he termed "medical quackery" and "unorthodox medical procedures," Fishbein became known as the "voice of the American Medical Association." And after we've repaired what is wrong with it, just sort of leave it up to God or Morris Fishbein or the national medical health society or somebody to make sure then that after the illness is cured, that something else happens. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
fix (someone) up: (informal) punish or injure (someone). How do you fix a thetan up so he's disabled? —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
flub the dub: (slang) fail to do the right thing; bungle; blunder. The material here makes it very simple, really. I would be very ashamed of myself to flub the dub on anybody present, in a relatively few hours. —SOP 8- C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
flussy: a coined word from flurry, meaning "a sudden confusion or commotion," and fuss, meaning "much bother about small matters; useless talk and worry; attention given to something not worth it." Now, because this young boy shows up with a withered arm—the auditors on it did a pretty good job, by the way, but because he shows up with a withered arm, these auditors get all in a flurry and a flussy about this withered arm. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
40.0: the numerical designation for the level of serenity of beingness on the Tone Scale. See also Tone Scale in this glossary. It's no goal to get preclears to 40.0. —SOP 8- C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
.45: a pistol which loads automatically and fires each time the trigger is pulled, with nothing further required of the shooter. The .45 refers to the measurement of the inside diameter of the barrel, which is 45/100ths of an inch. Not that I had ever used such a wedge on anybody, but you just keep these things around—like sometimes you look in your trunk, you'll find the .45 you had in the war or something like this—it's a sentimental attachment, totally. —Additional Remarks: Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
four-bit piece: a half dollar; a coin of the United States and Canada worth fifty cents. Bit is a colloquial term for an amount equal to 12 1/2 cents. It comes from the fact that in colonial America, large silver Spanish dollars called "pieces of eight" were commonly used; these coins could be chopped into eight pie-shaped pieces called "bits" in order to make change. Two bits

279

280

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
were worth a quarter of a dollar, four bits a half dollar, and so on. They're little things that look like four-bit pieces—little gold viewpoints. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
Franklin, Benjamin: (1706-1790) American patriot, diplomat, author, printer, scientist and inventor. Franklin wrote and published an annual almanac every year from 1733 to 1758. Written under the name Richard Saunders, Poor Richard's Almanac became one of the most popular and influential works printed in colonial America. The almanac included numerous proverbs expressing Franklin's ideas on thrift, duty, hard work and simplicity. The final edition of the almanac in 1757 included a preface called "The Way to Wealth," which consisted of a collection of his proverbs on how to succeed in business and public affairs. This preface was reprinted separately and was widely read in England and France as well as in America. This is the way Benjamin Franklin oriented it, to give you some idea of the Tone Scale of Philadelphia, Benjamin Franklin wrote a whole paper on this. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
freehand: (of drawing or a drawing) done by natural movements of the hand, without the use of guiding instruments, measurements or any other artificial aid. Used figuratively in the lecture. But don't be upset if in the next couple of days, I suddenly throw you a quiz on the fundamentals which we have been going over very explicitly, and ask you to do freehand, and without any further thought, an entire rundown on SOP 8-C. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Freemasonry: the principles and practices of the Freemasons, a men's fraternal organization with some religious aspects and, in some countries, political activities. In the fourteenth and following centuries its members were a class of skilled workers who traveled from place to place, finding employment wherever important buildings were being erected. The Masons had a system of secret signs and passwords by which a craftsman who had been admitted on giving evidence of competent skill could be recognized. Early in the seventeenth century the societies of Masons began to admit honorary members, not connected with the building trades; these were called accepted masons. The term Freemason was used in reference to members who really did work at the trade of mason. The group is now known as the "Free and Accepted Masons" and has the object of mutual assistance and the promotion of brotherly love. In its internal organization, the working of Freemasonry involves a system of symbolic ritual; the members are classified in numerous degrees which can only be attained after passing a prescribed ordeal or examination, as a test of proficiency. And that, by the way, was what started Freemasonry. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
French Revolution: the revolution of the people against the monarchy in France, which began in 1789 and ended when Napoleon seized power in 1799. During the revolution, a court was set up to pass sentence on French nobles and others considered "enemies of the revolution." At its peak, this court issued death sentences at a rate of seven per day, and it was responsible for the executions of thousands of French nobles. And it results in such things, in the French Revolution, as the loss of practically all the literate people in France. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
Future Processing: a method of processing the future in which the auditor has the preclear mock up, repeatedly and in great quantities, horrible things happening to himself, to others, and others making horrible things happen to others, all in the future. One holds on to things in the past on the postulate that they must not happen in the future. This sticks the person in the past. Inaction and indecision in the present is because of fear of consequences of the future. Once one has made the preclear mock up these consequences in quantity, he can more comfortably face present time. Well, it will actually run as final if he goes from having killed the body and turned it into dust here on Earth—you just run Future Processing on this, you'll get the past—to the between-lives area, where he himself perishes. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
gabfest: (US informal) to talk informally; chat. And a lot of Theta Clears and I, when we gabfest about this and that, hardly ever fail to mention something about anchor points, because you're talking then about a basic unit of beingness, which is space. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
GE: abbreviation for genetic entity, that beingness not dissimilar to the thetan that has carried forward and developed the body from its earliest moments along the evolutionary line on Earth and which, through experience, necessity and natural selection, has employed the counter-efforts of the environment to fashion an organism of the type best fitted for survival, limited only by the abilities of the GE. The goal of the GE is survival on a much grosser plane of materiality (concerning the material or physical). See also thetan in this glossary. Well, a very funny thing about the GE anchor points—the body's anchor points—you give one of them a push, and after you've pushed it, it'll wander back into place; it'll come back into place. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
General Motorcycles: a made-up name for a company; possibly a humorous take-off on major American automobile manufacturer General Motors. And if everybody doesn't own the anchor points—if they all belong to the state, if they all belong to the Slipslap Estate, if they all belong to General Motorcycles or something; you see, if all these belong to some huge corporation or if they all belong to the Ruff Corporation of America, or something like that—these things are all uniformly somebody else's anchor points. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
general semantics: a philosophical approach to language, developed by American scientist and writer Alfred Korzybski (1879-1950), exploring the relationship between the form of language and its use, and attempting to improve the capacity to express ideas. See also Korzybski in this glossary. You want to know your general semantics and so forth, why, you just take it from Aristotle—and then shoot him, and you've got it. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
Gestapo: any secret police organization similar to the German Nazi Gestapo (the German state secret police during the Nazi regime, organized in 1933 and notorious for its brutal methods and operations). And I found out that in all the—I think it was 285 years or something (years being eight winters long in Russia), that he took all this time, and even then, he only got rid of— with the entire Red Army, with everything else, with the OGPU, the Gestapo, the O-Gay-Pay-Oo, the ugpoo, the poougs and everything else, he only got rid often million peasants. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)

281

282

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
God knows: (colloquial) an interjection meaning "only someone more powerful than man can possibly know or realize," usually used to express the speaker's inability to understand or foresee something. Also heaven knows or Lord knows. Now, this person's purse weighed God knows how much. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
going or coming, not know whether (one) is: (colloquial) to be confused; not know what one is doing or should do. Now, Mama and Papa who talk to your preclear consistently and continually and forever and aye about "they were so just, and they did so much for the preclear" and he knows damn well they're lying in their teeth—gets so darn stuck in his body, he doesn't know whether he's going or coming. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
Goldberg, Rube: (1883-1970) American cartoonist known especially for his cartoons depicting the inventions of the fictional Professor Lucifer Gorgonzola Butts. In these cartoons, Goldberg devised ridiculously elaborate machines in which a number of involved steps, including features such as moths devouring a sock or a dog wagging its tail, led to the accomplishment of a ludicrously simple task. Honest to golly, it looks like anything—Rube Goldberg never built anything like the foolishness with which we fool ourselves. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
goofy: (slang) stupid or crazy; silly; dazed. And into this, we immediately get all the goofy problems of economics, taxation, political control—these problems all come under that heading and fall immediately below that frailty. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
goon squad: (slang) a group of hired thugs; hence, any group of muscular or aggressive individuals. And he's just been shifted around from one corner to the other of the universe, so you say to him all of a sudden, "Be three feet back of your head"—you're just the goon squad on Planet X, see? —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
gradient scale: a scale of condition graduated from zero to infinity. On a scale of reality, everything above zero or center would be more and more real, approaching an infinite reality, and everything below zero or center would be more and more unreal, approaching an infinite unreality. Absolutes are considered to be unobtainable. Now, in essence, what is wrong with a case that is down below the level of I, doesn't exteriorize easily—well, what's wrong with this case? Several things, but they're all a gradient scale of anchor points. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
Grand Central Station: one of the two major railroad stations (the other being Pennsylvania Station) serving New York City. Before the rapid growth of air travel in the 1950s, hundreds of thousands of railroad passengers from all parts of the country passed through Grand Central and Pennsylvania stations each day. Today, hundreds of thousands of people still use the stations, but most are commuters. I mean, if you're in Grand Central Station, you're in Grand Central Station. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
Gray: Henry Gray (1827-1861) English anatomist noted for studies of the development of the endocrine glands and the spleen. He was the author of Anatomy, Descriptive and Surgical (1858), widely known as Gray's Anatomy.

GLOSSARY
If you're interested in atomic and molecular substance in terms of bodies, I refer you to a book on anatomy: chap by the name of Gray wrote one once, which is quite embracive. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
Greenwich Village: a section of New York City, in lower Manhattan, inhabited and frequented by artists, writers and students; formerly a village. I've known artists like this up in Greenwich Village. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
Group Processing: Scientology auditing techniques administered to groups of children or adults. This is Saturday, November the 28th, a Group Processing session for the Second Unit. —Demonstration: Group Processing (28 Nov. 53)
gunshot: a variation of shotgun, which means "covering a wide area in an irregularly effective manner without concern for details or particulars; tending to be all-inclusive and nonselective." See also shotgun in this glossary. But all of those are gunshot tech—pardon me, they're not—they're very specific techniques that you have to work with, with considerable skill. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
hanging fire: delaying firing. After the trigger is pulled, a gun sometimes doesn't go off. This is called a "hangfire" or delayed fire if it then goes off late. Used figuratively in reference to something which is slow in occurring or something which does not bring about the result one might expect. Generally a person who gets into that category and is hanging fire there and is really in pretty good shape, although occluded as hell—generally this person has been a pretty wild one—pretty wild one. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Haversham: a city in southern Rhode Island, in the United States. "Oh that was my old home, over here in Haversham, that was my old home." — Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
havingness: the concept of being able to reach. By havingness we mean owning, possessing, being capable of commanding, taking charge of objects, energies and spaces. Havingness also refers to various processes designed to increase the preclear's affinity, reality and communication with the environment, and to increase his ability to reach and get him stabilized in his environment. That is, people who have no opportunities for havingness then get to a point where they can't have, and where they can only steal to have. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
hell with, to: (informal) an exclamation expressing disgusted rejection of something. And they all of a sudden say, "Well, that's—I don't have to be that person! To hell with it!"—Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
Hoboken: a seaport in northeastern New Jersey, opposite New York City. Now, just get how this works out way on down the track: If you're in Hoboken, it's pretty hard to tell what's going on in San Francisco. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
home plate, put across a fast one across: (slang) a variation of put something across, meaning "to succeed with a deception." In the sport of baseball, one player (called the pitcher) throws a ball toward an opposing player with a

283

284

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
bat (called the batter) across home plate—a hard rubber slab on the ground which the batter stands beside. A good pitch must be thrown in a zone directly over the plate; thus to "put it across home plate" means to throw an accurate pitch. A fast one is a phrase which means "a tricky or deceptive act." This "science," so-called, is always trying to put across a fast one across home plate—that's always trying to. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Homo sap: short for Homo sapiens, the Latin word meaning "modern man; mankind; a human being." Homo sap isn't in really anywhere near as bad a condition as he might be. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
Horsehead: reference to the Horsehead Nebula, a dark cloudlike mass resembling the head of a horse in the constellation Orion, composed of opaque cosmic dust. There's one up here, the Horsehead in Orion—the black Horsehead in Orion—is a theta trap, and guys can get stuck in things like that. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
hotfoot: a prank in which a match is inserted between the sole and upper of an unsuspecting person's shoe and then lighted. Well, mock up a match and give yourself a hotfoot with it. —Summary of Steps I, II, HI of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
if you took a picture of it, you wouldn't find the boy on the rope: reference to the "Indian rope trick," a magic trick in which the magician makes a rope seem to suspend in mid-air and either goes up the rope and disappears or sends other things up which disappear. By the way, they're always invalidating— (quote) "invalidating" (unquote)—Hindu magic or fakirism by saying, "Well, if you took a picture of it, you wouldn't find the boy on the rope."—Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
implant: an enforced command or series of commands installed in the reactive mind below the awareness level of the individual to cause him to react or behave in a prearranged way without his "knowing it." And they just turn him around and give him an implant and shoot him back the other time, and he comes up at the other end of the operation having been gone during the entire operation. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
invader force: an electronics people which lands on a planet inhabited by thought people (people who do things by thought rather than electronics), and then starts setting up various kinds of traps and doing all sorts of things in order to control this area. It's just wonderful—you see these Jersey State Police? That is the uniform of the Fifth Invader Force. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
invalidate: nullify; refute, degrade, discredit or deny something someone else considers to be a fact. Invalidation is a statement, action or inference that makes the preclear wrong. You must have invalidated the former knowingness of the person. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
John: a student attending these lectures. / asked you a while ago about that, John, and what did you tell me? —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
Justinian: (A.D. 483-565) emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire (a surviving portion of the earlier Roman Empire) from 527 until his death. He was

GLOSSARY
known chiefly for his codification of Roman law and construction of many churches, one of which, Saint Sophia at Constantinople, is considered one of the wonders of the world.... these people there, under attack by Belisarius who was sent by Justinian to take care of this, recognized that they were under attack. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
Keokuk: a city located on the Mississippi River, in southeast Iowa, in the midwestern United States. It had a population of about 16,000 people in the early 1950s. LRH uses the name of this town frequently to mean a small out-of-the-way town. Imagine the unhappiness, however, of Mr. Smorgasbord of Keokuk who reads that story. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
key in: to become restimulated, or to cause a key-in of (an engram). A key-in is a moment when the environment around an awake but fatigued or distressed individual is itself similar to a dormant (inactive) engram. At that moment the engram becomes active. See also restimulation in this glossary. I mean, I bet—every one of those cops looks sick; he looks real sick, see? Well, he's keyed in across the boards. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
knockdown-drag-out: (slang) characterized by great violence, especially
hand-to-hand; rough; violent; raging. And it was a knockdown-drag-out
argument for about twenty minutes and the auditor finally persuaded the
guy to go to the window and look out, without any reason whatsoever. . .
—Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Korzybski: Alfred Korzybski (1879-1950), American scientist and writer who developed the subject of general semantics. See also general semantics in this glossary. And he had the symbol "null-A."And that was Mr. Korzybski. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
kropotnik: a made-up name for a type of currency. This stuff, they've got eight billion of them tomorrow, and then they loan twenty kropotniks—I think a kropotnik—an interesting coin: when you have seventy thousand of them, you owe somebody fifty cents. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
land of the living: (informal) the condition of being able or willing to take part in ordinary activities that a person returns to after sleep, an illness, period of being alone, etc. They dragged around a body that was blind— remember that, in every black case; it's always there—they dragged around a body that was blind, they dragged around one that should have dropped dead, they were brought back into the land of the living. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
like to: (dialect) be on the verge of; be about to. You like to perish, you'd think, running End of Cycle, and yet it's the faster of the techniques. —Additional Remarks: End of Cycle Processing (24 Nov. 53)
lime pit: a hole in the ground filled with lime, a white substance made by burning limestone, shells, bones, etc. Lime is strongly alkaline; it is used in tanning hides, and to cause decomposition of matter. Now, in modern times,

285

286

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
with the most modern weapons known, with machine guns, with lime pits, blast furnaces, political leaflets and his own speeches—with these tremendous weapons of annihilation (the last, annihilating people in boredom, you see), Stalin only managed ten million people in—how many years was he king of Russia? —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
line charge: experience a prolonged spell of uncontrolled laughter or crying which may be continued for several hours. Once started, a line charge can usually be reinforced by the occasional interjection of almost any word or phrase by the auditor. The line charge usually signals the sudden release of a large amount of charge and brings about a marked change in the case. . . . and all of a sudden started to line charge, and came back and sat down in his chair, didn't take any more processing, went home, was well from that moment henceforward—ping! —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
lock: an analytical moment in which the perceptics of an engram are approx-imated, thus restimulating the engram or bringing it into action, the present time perceptics being erroneously interpreted by the reactive mind to mean that the same condition which produced physical pain once before is now again at hand. See also reactive mind in this glossary. In other words, some locks are coming up. —Demonstration: Group Processing (28 Nov. 53)
long ends, at: a variation of no end, meaning "extremely; very much or many; a great deal." And all of this breaks down—as we get into the rationale in this universe, it just breaks down into this fundamental problem of justice— which you probably think I have been beating to death at long ends trying to get around one way or the other to spend some time, but I'm not; I'm talking about a preclear. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
lop-eared: having ears that hang loosely or droop. And this is what you get today where that—the rather lop-eared comic sits up there with the dummy on his lap, doing (quote) "ventriloquism" (unquote). —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
main strength: sheer force or strength. He's afraid that if he relaxes control over the MEST body for a moment, that it will cave in; because he's probably practically holding it together with main strength and awkwardness. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
Masonic: of Freemasonry. See also Freemasonry in this glossary. You see, you're falling into one set of symbols—these are Masonic symbols. —Symbols
(27 Nov. 53)
Matched Terminals: a process in which one has the preclear mock up something or someone facing its duplicate. These two things will discharge one against the other, thus running off the difficulty. For more information, see Chapter 7 of the book Scientology 8-8008 by L. Ron Hubbard. See also mock-up in this glossary. And you get somebody whose mock-ups are busily persisting, of course I told you there's several things wrong with him, but you got—on Matched Terminals, he's got collapsed terminals to a point where when he throws something away from him, it comes back. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Messerschmitt, Willy: (1898-1978) German aircraft designer and manufacturer. He designed his first plane in 1916, and founded a manufacturing firm under his own name in 1923. Messerschmitt designed and manufactured

GLOSSARY
the most famous German fighter planes used during World War II. Willy Messerschmitt and so forth was over there dining royally and being congratu-lated. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
MEST: a word coined from the initial letters of matter, energy, space and time, which are the component parts (elements) of the physical universe. Also used as an adjective to mean "physical"—as in "MEST universe," meaning the "physical universe." And when played this way—barriers and non-total destruction of barriers—why, you get the MEST universe. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
middle, all ways from the: (slang) a variation of forty ways to Sunday, meaning "in every possible manner, direction, etc." And this is one of these superpatterned packages that just goes all ways from the middle, and it grabs on to all these brands of knowingness, you see. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
mock up: create a mock-up (of). See also mock-up in this glossary. If he gets too sick on it, why, have him mock up dogs eating his stomach, and Papa and Mama eating his stomach, and it'll disappear—the sickness will—because his stomach, of course, is motivator-hungry. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
mock-up: a full-perceptic energy picture in three dimensions, created by the thetan and having location in space and time. A mock-up is more than a mental picture; it is a self-created object which exists as itself or symbolizes some object in the physical universe. The term was derived from the World War II phrase for miniature models that were constructed to symbolize weapons (airplanes, ships, artillery, etc.) or areas of attack (hills, rivers, buildings, etc.) for use in planning a battle. The term is also used in Scientology to refer to one's body or one's presentation of it. You say, "Get a mock-up of a dog now, and let's move this mock-up of the dog from one corner of the room to the other corner of the room," and very often he doesn't move any dog anyplace. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
Mock-up Processing: another name for Creative Processing, an exercise by which the preclear is actually creating the physical universe. It consists of having the preclear make, with his own creative energies, a mock-up. See also mock-up in this glossary. And although he was doing mock-up—although he was getting some benefit from it, for he was doing Mock-up Processing, he was just doing a slow freight. —Demonstration: Group Processing (28 Nov. 53)
Mongula: a made-up name for a location. "Well, now fix up the castle in Mongula."—Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
motivator: an aggressive or destructive act received by the person or one of the dynamics. The reason it is called a "motivator" is because it tends to prompt that one pays it back—it "motivates" a new overt. See also overt act in this glossary. But always remember to throw in more motivators than overt acts, but always remember to throw in some overt acts. —Additional Remarks: End of Cycle Processing (24 Nov. 53)
navels, regarding their: reference to meditation, practiced in the religion of Buddhism as a means of attaining spiritual enlightenment. Buddha himself is almost always represented as seated with his legs crossed, in an attitude

287

288

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
of contemplation. And you start shooting preclears up above this to serenity, and they all sit around regarding their navels complacently—well, that's all right if you want to start a game that way, just for a game—realize for God's sakes that it's a game. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
Nero: original name Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus (A.D. 37-68), an ancient Roman emperor (A.D. 54-68) notorious for his cruelty. Nero had his mother and wife killed, and kicked his mistress to death while she was pregnant. He also persecuted Christians, blaming them for a great fire in Rome. A famous legend holds that Nero caused the fire himself and played a lyre (a small stringed instrument of the harp family) while watching it. From this legend comes the phrase "fiddling while Rome burns," which means being indifferent to catastrophe. The first one, for instance, thirty Christians were knocked off—that famous purge that we hear so much about that Nero did—well, that included thirty Christians. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
neurotic: (psychiatry) one who exhibits neurosis, a condition wherein a person is insane or disturbed on some subject (as opposed to psychosis, wherein a person is just insane in general). Now, a person who is quite psychotic or neurotic has problems of this nature to such a degree that they now not only cannot have property, but the property which they perceive must be different than the actual property, because they've even been disenfranchised of their right to perceive properly. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
next-to-the-last list: reference to the next-to-the-last list of questions in the book Self Analysis by L. Ron Hubbard, which asks the preclear to recall times which were really real to him, when he felt real affinity, and when he was in good communication. Run the next-to-the-last list in Self Analysis: "Remember something real?"—Additional Remarks: End of Cycle Processing (24 Nov. 53)
nicht wahr?: (German) "isn't that true?" The word nicht means "not" in German, and wahr means "true." / think that we are far enough advanced to solve some cases, nicht wahr? —Additional Remarks: End of Cycle Processing (24 Nov. 53)
nickel on the drum, drop your: contribute to a church or other organization which is soliciting donations. The phrase may have originated in an irreverent song about the Salvation Army from the 1940s, which included the chorus: "Hallelujah, hallelujah, throw a nickel on the drum and you'll be saved." (The Salvation Army is a Christian organization that employs semimilitary uniforms and ranks, holds simple religious services with music provided by brass bands, and is known for providing help to the poor, the homeless and people dependent on drugs and alcohol.) "After you die you go to hell"—that is simply a religious hammer and pound to get you to drop your nickel on the drum. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
nickel, worth a: (slang) at all; in the least degree. A variation of worth a damn. What do you know, your own techniques won't work. Huh!—not worth a nickel. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
IX: a coined name for a very low-level case, based on the Steps given in Standard Operating Procedure 8. (The lowest-level case addressed by SOP 8 was

GLOSSARY
known as a Step VII.) See also SOP 8 in this glossary. And, believe me, for a VII, VIII, IX or Step XXIII, they're not apart anymore—the very walls of the room fall in. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
9th and Chestnut: an intersection of two streets in Camden, New Jersey, in the vicinity of the hall where these lectures were delivered. And they get into this state of confusion about "which way is 9th and Chestnut."—Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
nip: to engage in nipping, a practice exercised by thetans of sending out two energy streams, like hands, and slapping both sides of a victim's head. This mildly shocks a thetan to which it is done. It can kill a MEST body. This slap is notable for causing ringing in the ears. / know I have not really zapped or nipped anybody, but once in a while, dropped a beam across a couple of anchor points they had, which sure short-circuited them for a minute. — Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
null-A: a symbol (written A) used in Alfred Korzybski's writings to stand for "non-Aristotelian." Korzybski based his system on fundamental negative premises rather than positive identities as used in the Aristotelian system (for more data on the Aristotelian system, see syllogism in this glossary). As an example of the non-Aristotelian system works, if one started with a negative premise that "a word is not the object spoken about," anyone trying to deny that would have to produce a physical object which would be the word in order to disprove the premise. See also Korzybski in this glossary. And he had the symbol "null-A." And that was Mr. Korzybski. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
O'Connor, Donald: (b. 1925) American actor and song-and-dance comedian. The son of circus performers turned vaudevillians, O'Connor made his film debut when he was eleven years old, and played adolescent roles in several films during the 1930s and 1940s. During the 1950s, he starred in several major musical films, and hosted "The Colgate Comedy Hour" (1951-1954). See also "Colgate Comedy Hour, The" in this glossary. Somebody televised a color program the other night—Donald O'Connor on the "Colgate Comedy Hour"—they did it all in color, but I noticed the set was picking it up in very poor black and white. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
O-Gay-Pay-Oo: phonetic representation (as pronounced in Russian) of OGPU. See also OGPU in this glossary. And I found out that in all the— / think it was 285 years or something (years being eight winters long in Russia), that he took all this time, and even then, he only got rid of—with the entire Red Army, with everything else, with the OGPU, the Gestapo, the O-Gay-Pay-Oo, the ugpoo, the poougs and everything else, he only got rid of ten million peasants. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
OGPU: abbreviation of Ob"edinennoe Gosudarstvennoe Politicheskoe Upravlenie ("Unified State Political Administration"), the official organization of secret police and detectives in the Soviet Union from 1922 to 1935. It was renamed the NKVD (Narodny Kommissariat Vhutrennikh Del, meaning "People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs") in 1935. And I found out that in all the—I think it was 285 years or something (years being eight winters

289

290

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
long in Russia), that he took all this time, and even then, he only got rid of— with the entire Red Army, with everything else, with the OGPU, the Gestapo, the O-Gay-Pay-Oo, the ugpoo, thepoougs and everything else, he only got rid often million peasants. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
Ohm's law: (electricity) the law (formulated by German physicist Georg Simon Ohm [1787-1854]) that for any circuit the electric current is directly proportional to the voltage (measure of force to move the current) and is inversely proportional to the resistance. In other words, if you feed a certain amount of voltage into a circuit, the amount of current that will result is dependent upon how much resistance there is in the circuit: the more resistance there is, the more voltage it will take to move the same amount of current through the line. And he takes old Ohm's law and holds it to his bosom, and he says, "My," he says, "I at least have one thing that won't go wrong on me."—Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
1.5: the numerical designation for the level of anger on the Tone Scale. See also Tone Scale in this glossary. Because they're at 1.5, and they're beefy, and they look—they're just nothing but solid glass—black glass ridges, in a hot country, with all their prenatals in complete restimulation. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
1.1: the numerical designation for the level of covert hostility on the Tone Scale. See also Tone Scale in this glossary. In other words, you get a 1.1 — you accuse a 1.1 of being wrong. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
Operating Thetan: a state of beingness. It is a being "at cause over matter, energy, space, time, form and life." Operating comes from "able to operate without dependency on things," and Thetan is the Greek letter theta (Θ), which the ancient Greeks used to represent thought or perhaps spirit, to which an n is added to make a noun in the modern style used to create words in engineering. It is also Θn or "theta to the nth degree," meaning unlimited or vast. It was designed entirely to make good Operating Thetans who could create and cause to persist and cause to desist and get rid of what they pleased. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
Orienting Straightwire: the name of the process run as Step I of SOP 8 -C. For more information, see "SOP 8-C: The Rehabilitation of the Human Spirit" in the appendix of this transcript booklet. And let's take Orienting Straightwire, which is that part of Step I which asks him where he isn't, and we'll find out that works on him. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
Oscar Schnitzowitz the Eighth: a made-up name for a person. "I am somebody because I am Oscar Schnitzowitz the Eighth," see? No, he isn't; he isn't anybody because he's—that's a symbol. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
other-determinism: a condition of having one's actions or conclusions deter-mined by something or someone other than oneself. He's on a complete other-determinism. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
overt act: an act by a person or individual leading to the injury, reduction or degradation of another, others or their persons, possessions or associations. An overt act can be intentional or unintentional. But always remember to

GLOSSARY
throw in more motivators than overt acts, but always remember to throw in some overt acts. —Additional Remarks: End of Cycle Processing (24 Nov. 53)
overt act-motivator sequence: the sequence wherein a person commits an overt, then believes he's got to have a motivator or that he has had a motivator. For instance, if he hits somebody he will tell you immediately that he has been hit by the person, even when he has not been. See also motivator and overt act in this glossary. Did you ever hear of an overt act-motivator sequence? —Additional Remarks: End of Cycle Processing (24 Nov. 53)
patientectomy: a humorous made-up term for the removal of a patient from the society, formed using -ectomy, a suffix which means "surgical removal of." They're trying to run a patientectomy on society, and as far as they can go is just cut out his thinkingness a little bit—they want to slow that down. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
patter: the special vocabulary of a particular activity. Just vary it enough so the patter doesn't get too solid. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C
(23 Nov. 53)
pc: abbreviation for preclear. See preclear in this glossary. Now, every once in a while you get a pc and he can just put up something—if he could put up something, it'll just stay right where he put it up. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
peanut whistle: a small whistle. Peanut is used as a modifier to mean "small, unimportant or trivial." And get the idea or the actual sound of a peanut whistle going skeeeeeee! —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
Penney's: short for J.C. Penney, a mail-order company and group of stores in the United States, known for quality goods at reasonable prices. "Ashtrays bought at Penney's always do that—at Woolworth's, they don't, they're too cheap there."—Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
perceptic: any sense message such as sight, sound, smell, etc. Because, you see, his perceptics aren't ordinarily bad. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
period to, put a: to make (something) end; stop. Period in this sense means "an end; termination; final stage." And we know that, because he put a period to the people trying to make him unconscious, see? —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
Pete, honest to: (colloquial) a variation of honest to God, which means "truthfully," and is used to emphasize one's sincerity or truthfulness. It—this is—honest to Pete, this beats to pieces all possible combination of admiration. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
picnic: (colloquial) an awkward adventure, an unpleasant experience, a troublesome job. Now you ask him to make it unsolid so that he can slide out of it or something, and you got a picnic on your hands. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)

291

292

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
Planet X: a made-up designation for a planet. And he's just been shifted around from one corner to the other of the universe, so you say to him all of a sudden, "Be three feet back of your head"—you're just the goon squad on Planet X, see? —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
poougs: a humorous made-up name for a secret police or military organization, from OGPU. See also OGPU in this glossary. And I found out that in all the—/ think it was 285 years or something (years being eight winters long in Russia), that he took all this time, and even then, he only got rid of—with the entire Red Army, with everything else, with the OGPU, the Gestapo, the O-Gay-Pay-Oo, the ugpoo, the poougs and everything else, he only got rid of ten million peasants. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
posthumorous: a facetious combination of posthumous, meaning "happening after death," and humorous, meaning "funny; amusing; comical." "He served his country; he's gone. He rescued his whole regiment at the cost of his life. And got a 'posthumorous' medal too."—Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
postulate: (1) a conclusion, decision or resolution made by the individual himself to resolve a problem or to set a pattern for the future or to nullify a pattern of the past. He has become parasitic upon the postulate. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53) (2) make a postulate or postulates. We just get him to postulate at that moment that now he knows. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
pre-c: short for preclear. See also preclear in this glossary. The pre-c isn't doing it. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
preclear: a person not yet Clear, hence pre-Clear; generally, a person being audited, who is thus on the road to Clear; a person who, through processing, is finding out more about himself and life. A Clear is an unaberrated person. He is rational in that he forms the best possible solutions he can on the data he has and from his viewpoint. It is a state of mental well-being never before achieved by man. You just start setting up, then, machinery which makes nothing out of spots behind the preclear, above the preclear, below the preclear, to the right of the preclear, to the left of the preclear, in front of him, behind him, and so forth . .. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
prefrontal lobotomy: a psychiatric operation performed on the prefrontal lobes of the brain (the parts of the brain situated just behind the forehead), supposedly for the purpose of relieving symptoms of mental illness. The operation is done by drilling holes in the skull and then using an instrument with a loop of wire at the end to cut the nerve fibers which connect the prefrontal lobes to the rest of the brain. They don't ever realize that the pre-frontal lobotomy is just Q and A. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
present time: the time which is now and which becomes the past almost as rapidly as it is observed. It is a term loosely applied to the environment existing in now. At any instant in the MEST universe, from one corner to the other, if you could be at every point of the MEST universe simultaneously, you would have present time. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
prime post unposted: a humorous variation of prime mover unmoved, from the idea of an immovable hitching post in the MEST universe, as described in lecture 18 November 1953, "Step I of 8-C: Orientation," in the first binder of this series. He runs into the absence of "prime post unposted," and he's done. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
probe meter: reference to the beep meter, a machine developed for chiropractors which would beep when the electrode (probe) was put onto a painful spot on a person's body. For more information, see the book Understanding the E-Meter by L. Ron Hubbard.. . . go and get an E-Meter or one of these probe meters and start passing it around or ask him questions until you've located where he has a chronic ridge. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
process: (1) a set of questions asked or commands given by a Scientology or Dianetics auditor to help a person find out things about himself or life and to improve his condition. By the way, if this—these conclusions were not backed up by immediate processes, I wouldn't be telling them to you. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53) (2) to apply Dianetics and Scientology processes to. And we got that test on the first case I processed here. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
processing: the application of Dianetics and/or Scientology processes and procedures to individuals for their betterment. The exact definition of pro-cessing is: the action of asking a person a question (which he can understand and answer), getting an answer to that question and acknowledging him for that answer. Also called auditing. Now, actually, just validating space all by itself becomes, at long last, a drawback and a limitation on processing. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Professor Wumpfcuddle: a made-up name for an authority. And so you find (quote) "scientific" (unquote) fields going around saying, "Well, according to Professor Wumpfcuddle, we believe that the writings which were made at that time were written according to the best authority available then."—Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
protoblast: a cell of a primitive or simple form, consisting of a mass of protoplasm with no cell wall. And now we've got to go deeper and deeper, and now we go into the causation of cancer, which may or may not be a cell gone wild and it may or may not be an embryonic effort or it may or may not be—what's that name—something protoblast or something of the sort. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
psycho: short for psychotic. See also psychotic in this glossary. And you take a psycho—psycho's going down the road, and he goes right straight down the road and all of a sudden a little zephyr comes along and goes whhhh! at him, and he just moves off the ruts and bumps into the fence. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
psychosis: any severe form of mental disorder; insanity. And believe me, this boy will crack up, but royally, as far as an occluded case is concerned. And not crack up into psychosis; he will just get meaner and meaner, and finally break through and become a Step I. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)

293

294

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
psychosomatic: a term used in common parlance to denote a condition "resulting from a state of mind." Psychosomatic illnesses account for about 70 percent of all ills, by popular report. That's why I've been telling people here for a year—psychosomatics, ho-hum. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
psychotic: out of contact to a thorough extent with the present time environment and not computing into the future. This term is also used to denote a person who is in such a condition. A person may be an acute psychotic wherein he becomes psychotic for only a few minutes at a time and only occasionally in certain environments (as in rages or apathies) or he may be a chronic psychotic, or in a continual disconnection with the future and present. Psychotics who are dramatically harmful to others are considered danger-ous enough to be put away. Psychotics who are harmful on a less dramatic basis are no less harmful to their environment and are no less psychotic. Now, a person who is quite psychotic or neurotic has problems of this nature to such a degree that they now not only cannot have property, but the property which they perceive must be different than the actual property, because they've even been disenfranchised of their right to perceive properly. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
Q and A: an abbreviation of Question and Answer used to express the factual principle that in perfect duplication, the exact answer to a question would be the question. The term has also come to mean an auditor doing what the pc does, or changing when the pc changes. They don't ever realize that the prefrontal lobotomy is just Q and A. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
Q factor: a factor of unknown identity. The letter Q is used in this phrase as a variation of x, which means "an unknown or unnamed factor, thing or person." But don't think you're going to produce results in terms of Scientology and the human energy unit, which is—can be called a "thetan" or a "soul" or a "Q factor" or a "causation point" or "you" or any—I don't care what you call it, what name you put to it. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
randomity: a consideration of motion. We have plus randomity and we have minus randomity. We can have, from the individual's consideration, too much or too little motion, or enough motion. What's enough motion measured by? The consideration of the individual. Well, they know everything that is going on, and the only thing—the only way you can produce randomity, and the first way and the only way, really, you can produce randomity—is to claim you don't know. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
reactive mind: a portion of a person's mind which works on a totally stimulus-response basis, which is not under his volitional control and which exerts force and the power of command over his awareness, purposes, thoughts, body and actions. Stored in the reactive mind are engrams, and here we find the single source of aberrations and psychosomatic ills. Also called bank. See also engram and aberration in this glossary. You got the reactive mind at work there, you see? —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
reality: agreement upon perceptions and data in the physical universe. All that we can be sure is real is that on which we have agreed is real. Agreement is the essence of reality. The world is as bright to him as he can create a reality. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
Red Army: the Soviet army formed by the Communist government of the former USSR in 1918. The idea was to create a "people's army," with workers as soldiers and Communist party men as officers. The word Red was dropped in 1946. And I found out that in all the—I think it was 285 years or something (years being eight winters long in Russia), that he took all this time, and even then, he only got rid of—with the entire Red Army, with everything else, with the OGPU, the Gestapo, the O-Gay-Pay-Oo, the ugpoo, the poougs and everything else, he only got rid often million peasants. —SOP 8- C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
Resistive V: a severely occluded case. A person who is so far gone he can't even see pictures anymore, he only sees blackness in front of him. For more information, see Step V of Standard Operating Procedure 8 in the appendix of this transcript booklet. And there is the most significant parking place of your preclear on the time track, and there is the Resistive V, with this slight addition: The Resistive V went—normally somewhere on the track, he went, left a body, found nothing, and came back. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
restimulated: in a state or condition of restimulation. See also restimulation in this glossary. And if you get terribly restimulated, something like that, why, that's just rough. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
restimulation: a reactivation in the present of a past mental recording, due to similar circumstances in the present environment approximating circumstances of the past. Just pull them in off the street and tell them to do this, and they just sit there and not think and all of their current restimulations and so forth just fall away, and they keep interested in the two corners of the room, and the next thing you know, why, they're out in one of the corners. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
ridge: a solid accumulation of old, inactive energy suspended in space and time. A ridge is generated by opposing energy flows which hit one another, and continues to exist long after the energy flows have ceased. These heavy, heavy ridges that are so thick, they just get gooey and soggy and floppy and start disappearing and falling to pieces, and boy, you have to get real hateful toward them to make them form up good. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
rising: (of an E-Meter needle) moving toward the left of the dial. See also E-Meter in this glossary. Don't put up with any nonsense, keep that needle rising. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
river, heading for the: a variation of being sold down the river, meaning "being deceived; being betrayed." The expression comes from former days when domestic slaves in the US were sometimes punished by being sold to plantation owners on the lower Mississippi River, where working conditions were harsher. Of course, he doesn't realize that he's heading for the river —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
Rogers, Roy: (b. 1912) American singing cowboy star of movies from 1935 to 1952, who had his own TV series from 1951 to 1957. Roy Rogers rides down one block regularly and—these movie actors would be surprised how often

295

296

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
they are conjured into existence to rescue them from the savage hands of Father and so forth; they—these people are patron saints. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
roily-coast: move like a roller coaster, a railway for amusement consisting of inclined tracks along which small cars roll, abruptly dip, turn, etc. Used figuratively. Now let's be on the tip of one of these plumes of flame and roily-coast right on into the Sun. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
Ruff Corporation of America: a made-up name for a corporation. And if everybody doesn't own the anchor points—if they all belong to the state, if they all belong to the Slipslap Estate, if they all belong to General Motorcycles or something; you see, if all these belong to some huge corporation or if they all belong to the Ruff Corporation of America, or something like that— these things are all uniformly somebody else's anchor points. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
run: to perform the steps of a process, procedure, etc., on (someone or some-thing). See also process in this glossary. Well, you start to run the third step on this person, and you'll come an immediate cropper. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
salted: scattered or sprinkled (throughout). And actually, the whole line of them are salted with it. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Schopenhauer: Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), German philosopher of pessimism. He maintained that the desires and drives of men, as well as the forces of nature, are manifestations of a single will, specifically the will to live, which is the essence of the world. Schopenhauer asserted that since operation of the will means constant striving without satisfaction, life consists of suffering and that only by controlling the will through the intellect, by suppressing the desire to reproduce, can suffering be diminished. There's Schopenhauer, The Will and the Idea— the "death wish."—Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
Scientologist: one who knows he has found the way to a better life through Scientology and who, through Scientology books, tapes, training and processing, is actively attaining it. He'll make a Theta Clear as a Scientologist, and that's the only way he'll make a Theta Clear. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
Scientology: Scientology philosophy. It is the study and handling of the spirit in relationship to itself, universes and other life. Scientology means scio, knowing in the fullest sense of the word and logos, study. In itself the word means literally knowing how to know. Scientology is a "route," a way, rather than a dissertation or an assertive body of knowledge. Through its drills and studies one may find the truth for himself. The technology is therefore not expounded as something to believe, but something to do. But don't think you're going to produce results in terms of Scientology and the human energy unit, which is—can be called a "thetan" or a "soul" or a "Q factor" or a "causation point" or "you" or any—/ don't care what you call it, what name you put to it. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
screen: a ridge that is formed for a special purpose of protection. See also ridge in this glossary. And you start to knock out the automaticity on some of these cases of painting with blackness—which is putting up black screens— you just have them put up black screens till they take over command of the machine .. . —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
scrummy: (slang) a variation of crummy, meaning "dirty, cheap, shabby, disgusting, etc." Now let's find a very scrummy, dirty part of the barge. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8- C (23 Nov. 53)
Second Unit: reference to the students of this course, the Second American Advanced Clinical Course. First morning lecture, 25th November, Second Unit, 1953. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Self Analysis: reference to the auditing processes given in the book Self Analysis in Scientology: an edition of Self Analysis (a handbook containing auditing processes which can be used by oneself or audited on another person) in which LRH revised the processing section for use in Creative Processing. It was published in April 1953 in the United States. See also Creative Processing in this glossary. I've seen a case, by the way, rehearsed on Self Analysis and other processing and—that was acknowledged to be a very difficult case. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
self-auditing: the action of running concepts or processes on oneself. Because the machine turns around on you and starts to audit you after a while and that's self-auditing. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
self-determinism: a condition of determining the actions of self; the ability to direct oneself. If he's going to change at all, he's going to move himself on his own self-determinism to an entirely new road, and then he's going to go down in that road in the same fashion. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
sequitur: a Latin word which literally means "it follows." As a descriptive term, it means "pertinent; following logically (from what came before)." As far as V is concerned, (I'm showing you it's not sequitur) the MEST universe is unmocking before he can mock up—and remember he is the fellow who is running the machine called MEST universe, see? —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
service facsimile: that facsimile which the preclear uses to apologize for his failures. In other words, it is used to make others wrong and procure their cooperation in the survival of the preclear. If the preclear well cannot achieve survival, he attempts an illness or disability as a survival computation. The workability and necessity of the service facsimile is only superficially useful. It is an action method of withdrawing from a state of beingness to a state of not-beingness and is intended to persuade others to coax the individual back into a state of beingness. The service facsimile has a complete and explicit anatomy. It begins with an effort to control along any dynamic, with a failure to control, with a recognition of the failure, with a postulate to be ill, injured or unable, continues with an illness, injury or inability and may or may not end (short of processing) in days, weeks, years or an entire lifetime. See also computation in this glossary. One set of values relating to this same thing we call the service facsimile. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)

297

298

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
1776: the year in which the American Declaration of Independence from Great Britain, the fundamental document establishing the United States as a nation, was written. The opening paragraphs state the American ideal of government, based on the theory of natural rights, such as "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." But English law hasn't invaded us (well, they actually, not technically since they burned the White House, but—in 1812)— but hasn't invaded us since 1776. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
shotgun: to cover a wide area in an irregularly effective manner without concern for details or particulars; to tend to be all-inclusive and nonselective. A shotgun is a gun with no grooves in its barrels, for firing cartridges filled with small lead or steel balls. When fired, these balls (shot) travel in an expanding, conelike pattern. But there is one process which shotguns throughout the entire bank. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
sicker than a pup: (colloquial) a variation of sick as a dog, meaning "extremely or violently ill." Because a guy gets sicker than a pup after a little while. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
sixes and eights, at: in disorder or confusion. The phrase is a variation of at sixes and sevens, which comes from a dispute in the Middle Ages between two of the craftsmen's guilds in the city of London. The Merchant Taylors and the Skinners were both founded within a few days of each other in A.D. 1327, five other guilds having already been chartered. For nearly fifty years they argued about which was to go sixth and seventh in processions. Finally, in 1484, the Lord Mayor ruled that they should take it in turns— whoever was sixth one year would be seventh the next and so on. The anchor point in his elbow was way out, the anchor points in his hand, the crushed hand, were utterly out of align—they were all at sixes and eights—and the anchor point in the wrist was out. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
16-G: reference to Journal of Scientology Issue 16-G, entitled "This Is Scientology, The Science of Certainty," a copy of which can be found in the appendix of this transcript booklet. There's an item missing on the 16-G list, which is "nothing."—Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
skillion: a made-up word for a number, used to indicate huge amounts of something. If you've gotten to the point where you're going to really break the case, they've got about eight skillion, billion facsimiles that suddenly decide they're going to rush in on them or do something to them. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
Slipslap: a made-up name for a person with an estate. An estate is the whole of a person's property, especially as left after death. And if everybody doesn't own the anchor points—if they all belong to the state, if they all belong to the Slipslap Estate, if they all belong to General Motorcycles or something; you see, if all these belong to some huge corporation or if they all belong to the Ruff Corporation of America, or something like that—these things are all uniformly somebody else's anchor points. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
slow freight: something or someone that moves slowly or at less than usual speed. From a cargo-carrying train, or freight, which travels slowly. And although he was doing mock-up—although he was getting some benefit

GLOSSARY
from it, for he was doing Mock-up Processing, he was just doing a slow freight. —Demonstration: Group Processing (28 Nov. 53)
Smorgasbord: a made-up name for a person. Smorgasbord means "a buffet meal featuring a varied number of dishes." They read the paper and they find out about the "Smorgasbord kid-slapping case" or something, and they say, "Well, my name is not Smorgasbord."—Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)
somatic: a physical pain or discomfort of any kind. The word somatic means, actually, bodily or physical. Because the word pain has in the past led to confusion between physical pain and mental pain, somatic is the term used to denote physical pain or discomfort. Of course, by the way, stomach somatics turn on, on this, like mad. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
SOP 8: abbreviation for Standard Operating Procedure 8. For full information on this procedure, see "This Is Scientology, The Science of Certainty" in the appendix of this transcript booklet. However, SOP 8 is a pretty good method of categories of techniques, and SOP 8-C would be what you ordinarily used with which to produce a maximum result with your preclear. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
SOP 8-C: abbreviation for Standard Operating Procedure 8-C. For full information on this procedure, see "SOP 8-C: The Rehabilitation of the Human Spirit" in the appendix of this transcript booklet. This is our first attack, now, in SOP 8-C, on the third step—the third step being space. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
soup: (slang) power; horsepower. And he just mired down a little bit more in it, and he suddenly tells himself he hasn't got as much soup as he used to have. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
soup, out of the: (informal) out of trouble; out of a difficult or unpleasant position. You'll get him out of the soup simply by getting him out of the soup. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
soup, stirring up the: (informal) causing trouble. The phrase is a combina¬tion of stir up, meaning "to cause (trouble)" and in the soup, meaning "in trouble." There's no reason to keep stirring up the soup just because he's in it. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
Spacation: Step III of Standard Operating Procedure 8. For more information, see Standard Operating Procedure 8 in the appendix of this transcript booklet. So let's go about this the simple way first and know why we have this Spacation in brackets—making space in brackets. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
space opera: time periods on the whole track which concern activities in this and other galaxies. Space opera has space travel, spaceships, spacemen, intergalactic travel, wars, conflicts, other beings, civilizations and societies, and other planets and galaxies. It is not fiction and concerns actual incidents and things that occur and have occurred on the track. He's probably gotten awfully good at manufacturing blackness in space opera. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location (24 Nov. 53)

299

300

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
spin: (slang) to go into a state of mental confusion. After you've processed somebody who was spinny—badly spinning and they seem to be better, you've only broken them up to about VI, you see. —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)
squirrel bait: something used to lure someone, by trickery or strategy, into looking like a squirrel (a crazy or eccentric person). This is the sort of squirrel bait that kids fool with. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
Stalin: Joseph Stalin (1879-1953), Soviet political leader known for his extreme brutality. Stalin became general secretary of the Communist Party's Central Committee in 1922; from this position he controlled appointments and set agendas, and could transfer thousands of party officials from post to post at will. After the death of Soviet leader Lenin in 1924, Stalin used his control of the party to crush his opponents, and by the end of 1929, he was the undisputed master of the Soviet Union. While promoting a campaign that proclaimed him a genius in every field of human endeavor, Stalin conducted purges in which thousands of Communist Party officials were killed (usually on made-up charges of treason), as well as members of every profession and the general population. He also deported millions of middle-class farmers in his forced collectivization of agriculture, and lost huge numbers of troops while personally controlling the Soviet armed forces in World War II. The deaths attributed to Stalin's actions have been estimated in the millions. Now, in modern times, with the most modern weapons known, with machine guns, with lime pits, blast furnaces, political leaflets and his own speeches—with these tremendous weapons of annihilation (the last, annihilating people in boredom, you see), Stalin only managed ten million people in—how many years was he king of Russia? —SOP 8- C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
Step XXIII: a coined name for an extremely low-level case, based on the Steps given in Standard Operating Procedure 8. (The lowest-level case addressed by SOP 8 was known as a Step VII.) See also SOP 8 in this glossary. And, believe me, for a VII, VIII, IX or Step XXIII, they're not apart anymore—the very walls of the room fall in. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Straightwire: a straight memory auditing technique, called "Straightwire" because one is stringing a line between present time and some incident in the past, and stringing that line directly and without any detours. In other words, the auditor is stringing a straight "wire" of memory between the actual genus (origin) of a condition and present time, thus demonstrating that there is a difference of time and space in the condition then and the condition now. The preclear, conceding this difference, can then rid himself of the condition or at least be able to handle it. And then what pertinent questions would you start asking right about there if you just wanted to clean up somebody's track on some certain subject? Just Straightwire on the recovery of anchor points. —Anchor Points, Justice (27 Nov. 53)
struck out: failed at something. The phrase comes from the game of baseball in which a strike is a ball thrown to the batter (person attempting to hit the ball with a bat) that is not hit into play and is counted against him. The batter is only allowed three strikes, then he loses his turn and is said to have "struck out." And all of a sudden the fellow will be sitting back there with a catcher's mitt saying, "See, heh! Baseball, ha! You struck out that time."—Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
syllogism: an argument or form of reasoning in which two statements or premises are made and a conclusion is drawn from them. Example: All mammals are warmblooded (major premise); whales are mammals (minor premise); therefore, whales are warmblooded (conclusion). Aristotle used the syllogism as the basis of his system of logic. / mean, they've got geometry, the Aristotelian syllogism, as logic. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
terminal: a person, point or position which can receive, relay or send a communication. Electronics get very satisfactory to somebody because he can put up a couple of terminals and he can see something go between them and measure it up, and all the time he—if he just keeps overlooking it—he's always overlooking the fact that he's using electronics to measure electronics. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
theta: life force, life energy, divine energy, elan vital, or by any other name, the energy peculiar to life which acts upon material in the physical universe and animates it, mobilizes it and changes it. The term comes from the Greek letter theta (Θ), which the ancient Greeks used to represent spirit or thought. [Definition of Assumption: the name given to the act of a theta being taking over a MEST body.]
theta body: a mock-up consisting of a number of facsimiles of old bodies the thetan has misowned and is carrying along with him as control mechanisms which he uses to control the body he is using. You see, the guy's got the idea you got—have to work with your hands, and he'll have what he calls a theta body, which is the same shape as his own body. —Summary of Steps I, II, HI of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
theta bop: (on an E-Meter) a small or wide steady dance of the needle. Over a spread of one-eighth of an inch (depending on sensitivity setting, it can be half an inch or a whole dial), the needle goes up and down perhaps five or ten times a second. It goes up, sticks, falls, sticks, goes up, sticks, etc., always the same distance, like a slow tuning fork. It is a constant distance and a constant speed, hooking at each end of the swing. A theta bop means "death," "leaving," "don't want to be here." Whenever you hit a theta bop, you know, that's—somebody's doing that. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
Theta Clear: a person (thought unit) who is clear of his body, his engrams, his facsimiles, but can handle and safely control a body. They—a lot of Theta Clears say kind of sadly, once in a while, "You know," they say, "the— you know, a physical body's anchor points used to be out there a couple of hundred yards."—Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
Theta Clearing: the process of bringing a being to the state of Theta Clear. See also Theta Clear in this glossary. And you just go right ahead with the job of Theta Clearing. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
thetan: an immortal spiritual being; the human soul. The term soul is not used because it has developed so many other meanings from use in other religions and practices that it doesn't describe precisely what was discovered in Scientology. We use the term thetan instead, from the Greek letter theta, Θn, the traditional symbol for thought or life. One does not have a thetan, something one keeps somewhere apart from oneself; one is a thetan. The thetan is the

301

302

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
person himself, not his body or his name or the physical universe, his mind or anything else. It is that which is aware of being aware; the identity which IS the individual. It won't hit him as a thetan, it'll simply hit a television camera. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
theta trap: a means used to trap a thetan. All theta traps have one thing in common: They use electronic force to knock the thetan into forgetting, into unknowingness, into effect. See also thetan in this glossary. Also, there's several black theta traps. —Anchor Points, Knowingness of Location
(24 Nov. 53)
till the last dog is dangling by the neck: until the last opportunity to achieve one's goal has been exhausted. Taken from the expression "There are more ways of killing a dog than by hanging," meaning there is more than one way of achieving your objective. Whether it's an aberration or anything else, they'll just drag it out till the last dog is dangling by the neck. —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
time track: the consecutive record of mental image pictures which accumulate through a person's life or lives. It is very exactly dated. The time track is the entire sequence of "now" incidents, complete with all sense messages, picked up by a person during his whole existence. And there is the most significant parking place of your preclear on the time track . . . —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
tin-cupping: moving or operating while being unable to see or perceive. The phrase is an allusion to blind beggars in earlier times, who carried tin cups in which to receive alms. But if you're just auditing blind, so to speak— tin-cupping around—the only clue you'll get to this case is location, reference to. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
Tinkertoy set: (trademark) a children's toy that consists of a set of wooden rods of different colors and lengths which are joined together with wheel-like wooden blocks to build models of buildings, cars, animals, etc. Of course, you don't quite want to see these things—they make you look like a Tinkertoy set—no rods. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
tippy: (colloquial) not steady; shaky. Or, if I think the fellow's a little tippy, I say, "Well now, be three feet back of your head."—Demonstration: Group Processing (28 Nov. 53)
Tone Scale: a scale, in Scientology, which shows the emotional tones of a person. These, ranged from the highest to the lowest, are, in part, exhilaration (as we proceed downward), mild interest, boredom, anger, fear, grief, apathy. An arbitrary numerical value is given to each level on the scale. There are many aspects of the Tone Scale and using it makes possible the prediction of human behavior. A copy of the Tone Scale in use at the time of these lectures is included in the appendix. Now, if you can knock down a few barriers for him and clip his own concepts of limitations and knock out his agreement with people who have agreed upon these limitations, he'll go right back up Tone Scale like a rocket ship, see—real fast. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
track: short for time track. See time track in this glossary. My God, they've been on the track long enough, they'll see it. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
Turkey Day: informal name for the American holiday of Thanksgiving, because turkey is traditionally served as the main dish at a Thanksgiving meal. Thanksgiving is observed annually on the fourth Thursday of November to commemorate the Pilgrims' harvest feast in 1621 at Plymouth, Massachusetts, by which they gave thanks for the bounteous crops and the survival of the colony during the first year of its existence. This is the November the 25th "getting close to Turkey Day" lecture. —Steps V, VI, VII —Time (25 Nov. 53)
20.0: the numerical designation for the level of action on the Tone Scale. See also Tone Scale in this glossary. That system which imposes more barriers than it removes is an unworkable system—up to this point: up to 20.0 on the Tone Scale. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
273 degrees minus centigrade: the theoretical temperature at which substances would have no heat whatever and all molecules would stop moving. Also called absolute zero. And you just go out into 273 degrees minus centigrade with Ohm's law—trrhh! Impossible! —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
ugpoo: a humorous made-up name for a secret police or military organiza¬tion, from OGPU. See also OGPU in this glossary. And I found out that in all the—I think it was 285 years or something (years being eight winters long in Russia), that he took all this time, and even then, he only got rid of— with the entire Red Army, with everything else, with the OGPU, the Gestapo, the O-Gay-Pay-Oo, the ugpoo, thepoougs and everything else, he only got rid often million peasants. —SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
universe: a whole system of created things. The universes are three in number. The first of these is one's own universe. The second would be the material universe, which is the universe of matter, energy, space and time, which is the common meeting ground of all of us. The third is actually a class of universes— the universe of every other person. . . . in addition to that, you do that on two other universes, to do it complete. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
unmock: make nothing of. See also mock up in this glossary. And what would he have to do to move that dog? Well, he has to unmock the dog, and mock him up again in a new place. —Formula Phi, Creation of MEST (23 Nov. 53)
valence: the combined package of a personality which one assumes as does an actor on a stage, except in life one doesn't assume this knowingly. One's own valence is his actual personality. "Out of valence" describes someone who has assumed the personality of another. And of course he went in and mocked up, then, the winning valence: the demons. —Exteriorization (26 Nov. 53)
Vandals: members of a Germanic people who, in the fourth and fifth centuries, ravaged Gaul (an ancient area including what is now mainly France, Belgium and northern Italy), Spain, North Africa and Rome, destroying many books and works of art. But the army of people who had been the Vandals and who had swept down and conquered North Africa ... —Symbols (27 Nov. 53)

303

304

THE REHABILITATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TRANSCRIPTS
viewpoint: a point of awareness from which one can perceive. He has been hit once too often, and in this desire not to be hit, he isn't there. He puts a viewpoint there instead. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
Village, the: short for Greenwich Village. See also Greenwich Village in this glossary. They were clear down in the Village—they were really artists, you know? —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
visio: a thing seen or the recall of something seen, so that it is seen again in the mind in full color, scale, dimension, brightness and detail. It doesn't matter whether you actually start out with any visio at all. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
Vitagraph: a motion picture production company founded in New York City in 1896, whose films were the most popular among cinema audiences in the early silent era. Vitagraph continued to prosper into the 1920s, until its sale in 1925 to Warner Brothers, one of Hollywood's major motion picture studios. And nobody—ever occurs to anybody he might not want to, except very sadly, "Well, she has . . ."—oh, dramatic, you know, three-dimensional, eighty-five foot screen in full color, or back in Vitagraph, with a three-foot screen in full jerk—"Well, she has no further will to live."—Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
Walt Whitman Hotel: a hotel in Camden, New Jersey at the time of these lectures, named for American poet Walt Whitman (1819-1892), who lived in Camden from 1873 until his death in 1892. I'll show you how that'd work, is let's mock up a television camera, and we put the television camera over on the top of the Walt Whitman Hotel, and we run a cable over here and the fellow looks at a viewer. —Summary of Steps I, II, III of SOP 8-C (23 Nov. 53)
war bag: a bag containing money, clothing or other supplies. And I'd been keeping that around in the war bag for a long time. —Additional Remarks Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)
weenie: (slang) in the old movies, the big treasure that everyone was after For example, if everyone was after the girl or everyone was after a position etc., that was the weenie. In Hollywood they make movies—and by the way they always have in a movie something called a "weenie."—SOP 8-C, Summary Of (25 Nov. 53)
What to Audit: the original title of the book now known as Scientology: A History of Man, written by L. Ron Hubbard in 1952. It is a look at the evolutionary background and history of the human race, described as "a coldblooded and factual account of your last sixty trillion years." Now, how many kinds of ends of cycle can there be, there be, there be? You've got a pretty good list of them in your book What to Audit. —Additional Remarks: End of Cycle Processing (24 Nov. 53)
"what wall?": jocular reference to a condition of such low reality or confront as to leave an individual unable to find even the wall. A person in such a condition, when asked to look at a wall, would say, "What wall?" And you've been doing a very good "what wall?" on this data. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)

GLOSSARY
whole track: the whole span of the time track (the moment-to-moment record of a person's existence in this universe in picture and impression form) including past track, prior to this lifetime. Actually, in this universe— those beings that have been in this universe the whole track—it was probably several trillion years ago when they first started to do a flip on real close remembrance of what they were doing, you see? —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
Will and the Idea, The: reference to The World as Will and Idea (1819), the principal work of Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), German philosopher. The first and third books are concerned with the world as idea, while the second and fourth are concerned with the world as will. See also Schopenhauer in this glossary. There's Schopenhauer, The Will and the Idea—the "death wish." —Steps V, VI, VII; Duplication, Unconsciousness (24 Nov. 53)
Woolworth's: the name of a chain of five-and-ten-cent stores (stores that sell a wide variety of inexpensive merchandise) in the United States. "Ashtrays bought at Penney's always do that—at Woolworth's, they don't, they're too cheap there."—Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
yo-heave: a forceful push or pull. From yo-heave-ho, a chant formerly used by sailors while pulling or lifting together in rhythm. Now pick it up around you and give it a yo-heave back to where it is. —Steps V, VI, VII—Time (25 Nov. 53)
Zukiter: a made-up name for a planet. And he starts describing a body on the planet Zukiter or something. —Electronic Theory, Anchor Points (26 Nov. 53)

Web auditing in any place on the planet http://webauditing.org/
Timecops
 
Сообщений: 1899
Зарегистрирован: 25 июн 2011, 15:42

Вернуться в L Ron Hubbard original LECTIONS, TAPES

Кто сейчас на форуме

Сейчас этот форум просматривают: нет зарегистрированных пользователей и гости: 3