View source for Dianetic Auditing and the Mind (SHSBC 660728)

'''Series:''' Saint Hill Special Briefing Course (SHSBC)

'''Date:''' 28 July 1966

'''Speaker:''' L. Ron Hubbard

----

Good, you made me smile now. Now, this is the what of the which? I get these planets mixed up.

It’s 28 July AD 16, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course and a lecture on Dianetic auditing. Now, needless to say, had you listened carefully to the first lecture, you wouldn’t need this lecture. I hate to have to—have to point these things out but that’s the truth.

Now, let me ask a question here. What are you handling when you are running Di- anetic secondaries and engrams? What are you handling?

Well, boy, you should sure know this. You are handling the human mind. That is all there is to it.

If we add to that then, as an- other picture, a valence, and as we add to that another thing called a machine, then you’ve got the lot. That’s the human mind. You are actually getting your hands all dirty with the human mind.

That is the human mind. It isn’t anything else and there is nothing else in the human mind. Now, that was a basic discovery in Dianetics.

Now, what the mind was coating was the discovery of Scientology. It was coating, you know, paint coats, globs of glupf coat. It is coat- ing a thetan.

And a thetan is a life unit capable of many things as described in the Axioms, but most familiar to one and all as you. So you, a thetan—and if you don’t believe you are a thetan, I’ll give you a little exer- cise: Look around you; what do you see? You see the physical universe, correct?

All right, and look at another person next to you; you see a body, correct? All right, very good. Now look at a picture of a cat.

Make a picture of a cat. Those who are too black to do so, why, just skip that exercise. Make a picture of a cat.

All right. Now, that picture, although it is synthetic and a creation at the moment you’re making it up and so forth, that’s the mind. And what’s looking at the cat?

You are. And those of you, now, who couldn’t get a picture of a cat, what- ever you got, look at it. Now, what’s looking at it?

You are. Now, this is the entirety—the entirety of the human mind. Now you say, “Well, if we created a picture of a cat, oh well, that wasn’t part of the mind, it was part of my crea…”  DIANETIC AUDITING 2  AND THE MIND Who the hell do you think is mocking that thing up called the mind?

You are. Now, that was the great discovery of Scientology. That was discovered after Dianetic days.

What is the source of this thing? Engram originally meant “trace on a cell.” I know it’s fashionable for the newspapers to say I never went to college and there are several colleges at this particular time that are wishing that I hadn’t gone there. But I can also assure you that you give them another decade or so, those colleges I haven’t even done more than go to a prom at will have some plates on ‘em.

You know? Man is silly, you see? Anyway, in college we were taking atomic and molecular phenomena, which is a very interesting subject.

And they should have left it there as a toy subject and shouldn’t have gone any further with it because out of that subject came the atomic bomb. Now, it’s originally called atomic and molecular phenomena. Well, they narrowed the subject down and made it very compressed and highly specialized and called it nuclear physics.

And today, why, people get degrees in nuclear physics and go out with aplomb to blow human beings all to pieces because politicians don’t know how to handle governments. Now, the whole subject of the human mind was so unknown, so bedazzled and mucked about—people hardly even knew there was a mind. You find Mary Baker Eddy say- ing, “All is mind, infinite mind.” Well, we’re into a problem in semantics, meaning the mean- ing of words.

She was using mind in some other connotation and so on. She was—she thought the universe was a big think. Fortunately it’s not.

We’re here. A lot of think but there’s also us. Now, when—no criticism of her—she was trying like everybody else.

So, this thing called the engram came from a theory I developed while I was in George Washington University. And it was an interesting theory because man had no explanation for the storage of thought. But if you consider—now, hold your hat because this is—this is typi- cal scientific think, see; some theory to embrace the phenomena.

Now, if memory is contained in a molecule, there are ten to the twenty-first power binary digits of molecules in the brain—in the neuron system—yes, ten to the twenty-first power binary digits. Now, what a binary digit is, I’ve forgotten. You know as well as I do.

I knew once, but I don’t know anymore. Binaries to me—you see, I’ve been in navigation since—and they’re the two suns that go around each other and make a dumbbell sort of star. You see, I don’t know what it is.

Well anyhow, I know it’s a long figure. And if there were a hundred holes in each molecule—see this figure is something you just go on writing for a day or two, you see, or weeks—and if there were a hundred holes in each one of these molecules and there was one memory in each hole, why, man—by calculation then, of the number of things observed and remembered and by actual inspection of man’s memory—man had enough memory storage to last him three months. And although this may not be true of psychologists, psychiatrists or many professors, there are those who can remember further back than three months.

So I wrote this up as proof that this wasn’t how man remembered. In I think 19—oh, I don’t know when it was—1936, some five, six years later, something like that, this was issued in Austria (from Vienna, where else?) as the way man remembered. So, man is so scarce on  DIANETIC AUDITING 3  AND THE MIND data that he will even buy ways people have proved man doesn’t remember in order to explain the mind and memory.

Now, there’s a mirror theory that is even more ridiculous than that one, whereby one perceives by having a mirror which reflects the perceptions and concentrates it. Now, don’t ask the question—by the way that was in the 50s and so forth, that was the psychological school of thought explanation. Now, don’t ask what looks at the mirror, because they’ll tell you another mirror.

And we sort of get into an infinite—one of these German periscopes, you know, where the submarine captain lays in his bunk and looks at—looks at Berlin’s night- clubs or something. I mean, they never followed the thought all the way through. Something had to look at the mirror.

It’s the same idea they have about computers. They talk about the wonders of comput- ers, you see? Marvelous computers! “Boy, can I—can I think!” You know. “Great, great!

Can I think!” Every once in a while I’m standing around when I see some of my friends, and I—they’re in there with the ENIACs and UNWACs and mucklucks, or whatever these things are called these days, and they’re doing this gorgeous stunt of praising the computer and saying how much better it is than a human being. And I shatter their comparisons by saying, “Who asks the computer questions?” And they say, “Well, of course, we do because we’re so stupid.” And I say, “Who, then, does it answer questions for?” Oh. They’ve sort of got the idea that a computer answers questions for other computers that asks questions for other computers, you see?

But the truth of the matter is any time you go near one of these UNWACs or ENIACs or mucklucks or something, you see some guy there feeding it—feeding it cards and feeding it questions. And there’s—whatever slots they have on the things and so forth. You’ll also see somebody come over and take out a long tape and then read it.

And it didn’t mean a thing until somebody read it. Do you see? So man’s—all I’m trying to give you is man’s approach to this was so childish as to be silly.

The—his—what data he had about the mind, he couldn’t even think about. But now, it’s very difficult to think about the mind and don’t blame him too much, be- cause the mind, essentially, if all there was, was a mind… The psychiatrist thinks the mind is the brain. He’s got it moved over sideways.

That’s why he keeps sawing up brains and drilling holes in them and so forth. He thinks he’s getting something. You can’t drill a hole in a mind.

It’s not possible. He would, if he could! But this thing—this thing called the mind, you see, is being asked to think about some- thing called the mind.

An ENIAC or UNWAC (names of the big electronic computers) are not able, actually, to think about computers, see? They’re not able to design themselves. But for- tunately—fortunately, why, the mind doesn’t have to understand the mind because there’s somebody there to understand it.

And fortunately for us and unfortunately for a lot of other- isms and -ologies and so forth, I for one was there to understand it. Do you see? DIANETIC AUDITING 4  AND THE MIND So this thing called the mind is probably the least understood, the most mysterious object that anybody ever heard of.

You would have to know that an individual was quite ca- pable of making pictures, of creating mass, energy, space and time, before you could under- stand what the mind was. That would require, then, that you understood there was such a thing as an individual. And an individual isn’t something walking around in a frock coat or with pince-nez glasses or something like that.

An individual is a static. And this static is that—well now, static is something that’s motionless but actually a static by definition in Scientology is simply the ultimate in “What is it?” Now, there is no reason to try to explain a thetan or say where it came from, because it didn’t come from any place. It is!

And we have to understand now the Scientology idea of what is reality. And this really baffles people because this is the biggest philosophic conun- drum of the ages. What is reality?

Now, people tell you to face reality and so forth. But you could say with a philosophic quip, “I’ll be glad to face it if you will explain it.” And that would of course stop them cold, because they can’t explain reality. Reality totally lacks philosophic definitions and we got into such weirdities—weird things as, “If the tree fell in the forest and there was nobody there to hear it fall, then would it have made a sound?” I think that’s marvelous, you know?

I mean, the jokers—and they couldn’t have all been serious—Hume, Locke, the rest of these birds, and some of the French philosophers and so on—these fellows—these fellows really dreamed some up. You want to have a ball sometime, read some of these old timers of two, three, four, five hundred years ago and get their definitions for some of these commodities which you have to know about in or- der to be free. And reality is one of them.

Well, reality, in Scientology, is what is. And people who can’t see very much, of course, don’t have much reality. And you say, “Is the E-Meter real?” Well, the E-Meter is real because it is.

And honest, you don’t have to go beyond that as a definition. You don’t have to go into “Why is it there, and who made it, and who put it there, and how come it’s running along in time with us?” These are other questions. Well, for heaven’s sakes, break them all down to their proper, tiny components.

Not one of these questions, of course, is simply “What is reality?” Reality is what is. And you can experience reality so easily that I wonder a little bit at anybody having any trouble with it. You can stamp, and it is, so there it is; it’s real. “Yes,” they say, “but a lot of people have an awful lot of delusions.” You say, “Okay, what’s a delusion?” That would probably stop them.

We could an- swer it easily. A delusion is what one person thinks is, but others don’t necessarily. You might say that’s a reality for one person out of agreement with others.

And I’d hate to have a mental practitioner—I’d hate to have a mental practitioner who himself had a very low level of reality, you see, because he’d be out of agreement with every- body else’s. So that everything to him would be delusion. Just the fact that somebody said it was real would be enough for him to then state that it was delusion.

Now, one of the ways to handle such a person—and I say this in all kindness because, don’t cheer boys, the poor devils are dying, you know—is just get him to feel the table, you  DIANETIC AUDITING 5  AND THE MIND know? Don’t be amazed if he experiences a fantastic case gain in just that instant. But just get him to feel the table.

And you—and let him in on something: you feel the table and you say, “I can feel it, too.” And it will be such a relief to him, because for a long time he thought only he could. Now, out of these things of “What is reality? What is a being?” and “What is a mind?” and so on, we can walk, we can map a path with great security and find out what it is that has man trapped, why man acts as he does, why he reacts as he does.

And all this is very elemen- tary once you know the basic definitions. But I don’t think you would have very good luck in auditing Dianetic engrams. En- gram definition today is just something that—an experience—a mental image picture of an experience which contained pain and unconsciousness.

And of course, it still contains pain and unconsciousness. Secondary is—is an experience—a mental image picture of an experi- ence which contains loss and is therefore misemotional. Now, that’s all there is to that.

Now, in Dianetic processing, then, you have to know what the mind is. And in the process of being processed and in processing it you are running head-on into what this thing called the mind is. And it isn’t anything more complicated than what I have told you.

Now, how it got made: Well, a thetan is a compulsive mocker-upper By mock-up we mean a mental image creation, ordinarily. And he’s able to create just like that. So a bullet hits him, so he makes a full picture of him being hit by the bullet.

He is so overwhelmed by it that he thinks the obvious thing for him to do is to make a picture of it. He is stupid, man! And that is the flaw which makes him aberrated.

And that is the one flaw in a thetan. Now, if you can get him over doing this so that he can recover from this mad obses- sion to make a picture of everything that happens to him and then hide it from himself and then fix it up so it can impinge itself upon his existence, you can get him out of the cage. And the funny part with all this, you say, “Well, he didn’t have enough experience, he didn’t have enough pictures, so therefore…” You can rationalize all you want to; the case happens to be that the individual is trapped by his own creations.

Now, he dramatizes these pictures, or they enforce computations on him. He will go through being shot because he has an engram of being shot. Now, the way he does this is get dislocated in time.

Now, each of these pictures—you want to know about precision, man. The precision with which a thetan mocks these things up as they happen and then puts them on the time track with the exact time on them is amazing! You talk about the inaccuracy of a human being.

Boy, that is accuracy to end all accuracy. It is correct within seconds. It is an amazing feat!

If it happened four years, two months, one day, and three hours, seven minutes and two seconds ago, that is the exact thing that will fall on the meter. Now, he can also turn time around, you see, to how long ago it was. You can run it from the beginning, but you better not because there are some booby traps at the beginning.

But you run it from PT back and you’ll find that—this amazing ability to spot in time these mental image pictures of the things which have happened to him—are absolutely gorgeous. It  DIANETIC AUDITING 6  AND THE MIND is so great that sometimes all you have to do is date how long ago the incident occurred to have it blow. An individual has to be in pretty good shape, however, before you can do that.

Now, this then, in essence, is the mind: Is those pictures which have been made of ex- periences and plotted against time and preserved in energy and mass in the vicinity of the be- ing and which, when restimulated, are re-created without his analytical awareness. That is the mind. That’s the mind you’re working with.

That is the mind you’re trying to get out of. Now, you say this, “We’re trying to get this individual out of a body.” No. You won’t get anybody out of a body worth a nickel so that he’ll stay out of a body and so forth, because he is so weakened by his mind that he cannot control or handle himself in relationship to his body.

Now, the trick of all of this—the trick of all of this is that you cannot make a postulate or an intention through this mass called the mind. And whenever you do, the mind restimu- lates, so a thetan is not able to make or handle things by postulates. He says—he says, “You will be all right.” You know, he has this impulse to say, “You will be all right.” You talk about spot healing, you know, or something like miracle healing, you know?

Saint Pete or somebody walks along and sees somebody and he wants to heal him up. So he says—the thought—the intention is there to make the fellow all right. His intention goes just so far, col- lides with whatever engrams are in restimulation and goes splat!

So he says, “I guess that’s not a good thing to do.” Whereas his intention is actually terrifically powerful. So a thetan’s thought can’t go through his own barricade of his mockups. So obviously the less experience—creations of experiences—the less creations of experiences an individual has around him and the less that he has to restimulate, why, the more he can think or project his thoughts or the bigger he gets.

Do you follow? Now, you can delete these experiences and Dianetic auditing is that activity by which these experiences can be erased. Now, if an individual is always going around like this—he’s always going around like this, you’re fairly sure—this is—I’m now talking from a Dianetic viewpoint.

Of course, there may be dozens of reasons he’s going around like this, all contained in the mind on the same thing. But I will give you a simplified action of it. He’s going around like this, you can be absolutely sure he’s got a mental image picture where something made him go like this.

So much so that you could even… And you better not do this with any case that is hav- ing any trouble at all; but somebody who is pretty well uptone and is doing fine, you can actu- ally ask him things like that. But the trouble is, if they’re uptone they aren’t obeying their en- grams to that degree. But theoretically, you could see this fellow bent over like this, and you could say, “All right, the incident in which you are bent over like this will now appear.” And he would get the incident.

If he didn’t get it and it remained black, you could then get the duration of the inci- dent—you cou—the date of the incident. You date it—how many years and so forth, ago? And then you would date the duration of the incident—how long did it last?

And he would get the picture of it. And there he is—there he is, dangling from a tree or something like that, with  DIANETIC AUDITING 7  AND THE MIND a rope under him, having been shot with fifty-four arrows, you see, after being flogged or some mild, minor experience of this character. Now, the—there are various ramifications to all of this.

There are various complica- tions, you might say. This individual is all messed-up because he’s trying not to dramatize the engram in which he is stuck, you see? He’s trying not to dramatize it, because the tendency of the individual in a dramatization is to repeat in action what has happened to one in experience.

That’s a basic definition of it. But much more important, it’s a replay now of something that happened then. It’s just being replayed out of its time and period.

So this individual who is dramatizing is actually either totally unrestrained and therefore totally dramatizing (at which moment we consider he’s mad), or he has the impulse to dramatize it but he knows he better not. And a fellow will tie himself down like Gulliver in Lilliputia, you know, with all those strings. Just tied down and tied down and tied down and he will hold himself back and so forth.

He’s trying to keep from dramatizing some incident. So you get a double action here. You get the impulse to dramatize and the effect of the incident on the individual, and you get as well the individual’s analytical awareness that it’s not a bright thing to do to pick up rocks—whenever one sees a rock, to pick up the rock and hit somebody with it.

He’ll think he’s rather odd. He doesn’t know where this comes from, so he begins to lose confidence in himself. Every time he sees a rock, why, he has an impulse to go over and to pick up the rock and bash somebody’s head in with it.

And he knows that that is not a nice thing to do. It isn’t because he’s afraid of the police. It’s because he’s basically good; he doesn’t want to do those things.

But there’s the rock and there’s a head, and he’d sort of start holding things up so that he can’t look at rocks. And then the next thing you know he walks around like this all the time, you see, so he won’t see any rocks. You get it?

And he’s dramatizing an incident where somebody else picked up a rock and hit him over the head with it and then he went into their valence. Do you see? He became them because they were the winner.

So this—this is the way all of this stacks up. There’s tremendous amount of interesting phenomena and bric-a-brac, and so forth. You’re dealing with the basic mind, because what is the core of the reactive bank also has this same character.

But it is so outrageous and so dif- ferent and is so overwhelming that you’re not about to touch that unless you’ve got the exact map. And even when you’ve got the exact map you occasionally knock your block off. But you’re going in this lightly, lightly—dealing with this lifetime, the last year or two probably, and some people have probably not penetrated any deeper than this morning’s breakfast.

But the existence is all mapped. Now, in view of the fact that he didn’t know what happened, occasionally he tells him- self what happened and so he will sometimes have his actual experience overlaid with another experience. This is the way you get too many Julius Caesars.

You can get an almost infinite supply of Julius Caesars. The man was a mad heterosexual [homosexual] nut who had very nasty personal habits and whose ideas of conquest were so laughable as to be nonsense. He conquered such coun- tries as England which were ready to welcome the Briton—the Romans at that time.

They  DIANETIC AUDITING 8  AND THE MIND were all ready to practically bring them ashore and shake them by the hand and say, “Hey, what do you know. And we’ve been using your stuff for a long time, boys. Come on in and sell us some more,’ and so forth.

So he lands with chariots and spears so he can conquer eve- rybody. You know, loony. He cut off the right hand of fifty thousand Gauls—the act of a madman.

Now, this is a pretty suppressive punk, isn’t it, huh? Well, this made him the winning valence. So, I’d say that a lot of people who served with him on his side and a lot of people on the other side, and so forth, would register loud and long as Julius Caesar.

Now, whenever you have a personality—whenever you have a personality that has been either terrifically successful (only that’s less so), or a personality who has been terribly overwhelming, vicious and oppressive, you get a lot of people in that time in that valence. Because there’s a lot of mental image pictures of it, see? So don’t get too baffled about past lives.

Every once in a while past lives get so invali- dated to people that they don’t want to have anything to do with them because they’ve seen too many Julius Caesars. And it tends to suppress one saying that, you know, I was Cassius, you know? And you—it’s the invidious comparison.

Get the chap who’s walking along and he’s got a plan that is going to help the British Empire, you see? And he’s a perfectly valid statesman. He’s going along; he’s doing all right.

He’s perfectly capable of doing so. Some bird walks up to him who is a complete, frothing idiot, see, and he tells him that he used to be Disraeli and he has a plan to save the British Empire. At that moment the fellow who is the sane boy has a tendency to feel that he must be crazy because he has a plan to save the British Empire.

Do you follow? And by invidious comparison, you say to yourself “I couldn’t have lived before because look at those nuts talk- ing about—there are three Julius Caesars over there and two Napoleons,” you know? So sometime if a pc is being too doubtful about all this and he’s had a hard time on it, just run invalidations—run your Suppress and Invalidate and so on, on the subject of “Have you lived before?” You’ll get some very interesting results of it.

It is fashionable, simply because thetans—meshed in to the degree that they are, smashed down by mass and the mind and so forth—it is very hard to remember. It’s very hard for a thetan to remember more than a few years when he has a totally smashed-in mind, com- plete. And one of the reasons is—is his effort to remember gets painful, so he’d rather not remember.

Now, when you’ve just been blown to pieces with a cannonball—you’re twenty- one years old and twenty-one years ago you were blown to pieces with a cannonball—trying to coax anybody to remember any earlier than twenty years ago or better still eighteen or more comfortably sixteen years ago, it becomes very hard unless a person knows what he’s up against. He tries to handle this. He has methods of handling this bank.

And one of his favorite methods of handling the bank is almost as nutty as making it in the first place. His method of handling it is to forget about it. How crazy can you get?

DIANETIC AUDITING 9  AND THE MIND Of course, you have to be up in the vicinity of Clear before it really starts to look hi- lariously funny. Because you take a Grade V—even as high as Grade V (certainly as high as Grade IV), you find people still trying to figure out how that bank—you know, how the—the bank, mind: interchangeable words—how this mind of his is valuable. Of course, this is an excuse not to confront it.

You know, “I better not confront it and do anything about it because it’s so valuable.” Well, of course, his effort to confront it is an effort to confront very, very painful expe- riences. And he doesn’t want to confront those painful experiences and so he said, “There must be some virtue in it; I’d better leave it there.” Another method he uses in fooling himself concerning it. And there’s a whole cult that follows this—a real cult; not what they call us, you see—called psychologists.

And this cult actually follows and subscribes to the theory that you had better be glad you’re neurotic. But that is merely a school’s expression of something that beings kind of want to think anyhow, see? If you can’t cure neurosis and you don’t know what the mind is all about anyhow, then you could excuse all that by simply saying, “Well, you really don’t want anything done about your mind, because you see it’s a good thing you’re neurotic.

You see, all great artists are nuts. You see, that’s obvious. Look at them.” I don’t know, I also look at their artwork.

Now, therefore, the mind is a complex mechanism which influences the individual and which he’s better off without. And you really won’t believe, all the way, that you’d be better off without it until you finally get rid of it, and then you say, “I’ve sure had a lot of weird rea- sons while I was hanging on to all this coal tar.” You say to yourself “I must have been nuts!” That’s right. Now, every now and then—every now and then, somebody’s got a valence—some genius valence of some kind or another.

And this genius valence is all rigged up to answer questions. And he’s got a computer, see? So he says, “How big should I build this building?” And he gets “562_ feet high.” So he puts it down on the drawing.

He wouldn’t know what to do without that thing. It never occurs to him that he himself has to go around here and to work out the answer and then come back here and hear it. And he will become sad about losing his mind.

He will come very sad about losing his mind if he gets—if he gets one of these things half-desensitized. It’s half-gone. It’s still there but it doesn’t work anymore, and he hasn’t taken back the ability.

See, he hasn’t taken back and owned the ability to do it, and yet it is erased to a point where it doesn’t work. And at this point he will be rather regretful of having done something about it because he says, “How big should the building be?” Dead silence. And then he goes along a little further and he gets a little bit better and all of a sudden, “Of course,” he says, “the building ought to be 819 feet and a half.

Only—any fool could see that.” He can see that now, you see? What he did was attribute the ability to a circuit, put it on an automatic-response basis. But he was in actual fact using a valence.

Now, every once in a while you’ll see a child come along and they can play a piano or a violin—oh my God! They just sit down and brrroom bang, you see? And they’re only six years old or something like this, and, wow, they’re playing with symphony orchestras.

And all  DIANETIC AUDITING 10  AND THE MIND of a sudden they get to be ten, twelve, and they one day look at a piano and they don’t know what it is. That same mechanism occurred, except they’ve been working on a circuitry of some kind or another, and in the circuitry they have somehow or another erased part of the circuitry or done something about it. They never get up to a point of realization.

Now, in one lifetime you can almost erase your own skills if you’ve put them all on picture form, which is quite remarkable. So a fellow starts out—boy, he just starts out great guns, and the next thing you know, why, he’s blah. Well, the best way to do that is to stick yourself in college.

Get a nice valence of you—of you the expert; nice valence, you know—nice circuit out here, valence, a being- ness—which is the expert. And then always consult the expert; never think it out for yourself see? And then one day accidentally abandon this thing, mislay it or move on the time track so that you’re not near it anymore, and then be totally lost and not have the skill.

But who has the skill in the first place? The individual himself. Do you follow?

Now, a thetan, once having started this idiocy of mocking things up and mocking up and holding on to all of his personal experiences, then began to find virtues for it. And he made little machines and he did all kinds of things. Now, when you start reversing this proce- dure, he goes slightly mad, because halfway through any action, why, he will have lost the benefit of it without having regained it himself.

Do you follow? This does not respond, however, on the IQ graphs. Any processing increases IQ.

It’s almost impossible to lower IQ. So the individual is getting brighter, and that’s the final test of it. A great many things have worked out, of course, about Dianetic auditing since we have begun to make Clears.

And man is basically good, and the more mind you get rid of the brighter you get, until you get rid of all of it—you’re very bright. All of this—all of these things, you see, have borne out and are perfectly true. Now, when I talk to you about Dianetic auditing, when I talk to you about erasing the automobile accident you’ve been in or losing Aunt Mamie, your favorite ally when you were a little boy, or something like this, you realize I’m talking to you about play.

As far as audit- ing is concerned, this is play. The amount of benefit to be regained from running half a dozen engrams exceeds anything that man has ever been able to do for anybody in the history of the human race. And compares to Scientology processing the straight way at about one one- millionth of the potential gain.

Do you understand? So, I’m talking to you about play today. But you as an auditor had better know about it and you better look at it and you better get familiar with it, because that is the mind.

You are studying the cage. Them’s the bars. That’s what’s got you under arrest; it’s these tricks and vagaries.

And the technology which it requires to vanquish this thing was actually in excess of the simple erasure of pictures. You had to know an awful lot. Now, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t still a simple problem and that the definitions of the mind didn’t hold, but it meant that the mind was more complex and the experiences had been far more complex than anybody had ever imagined.

You see? And it was much harder for somebody to confront. DIANETIC AUDITING 11  AND THE MIND Now, there’s a question of time.

If picture by picture, you undertook to erase the mind, you would get into one of these binary digits I was talking to you about before. One of the things that made me come off of Dianetics entirely is I could make a Release and very often the fellow would sail off and so on. We’d called them Clears in those days and quite validly; he had been temporarily cleared.

But his reactions to the entirety of existence were really infi- nitely less than those of a Clear and of course infinitely, infinitely less from those for an OT. You see, after you’re Clear then you have to study up and regain what you can do. Anybody who is clever enough to mock up a mind and keep it in place and not even know about it for that long, he’s got a lot of abilities to en—he must be a very clever bunny, indeed; and so he is.

But an individual has as many engrams and secondaries as he has had experiences, as he is old. Now, I don’t ask you to take my word for how old you are because it’s very impolite particularly to ladies to hang any vast age upon them, but if you will put yourself on a meter someday and start chalking it up as to how long you’ve had a mind or something like this, you would come up with something very interesting, indeed. You’ll feel better, too.

Unless you get too serious about it, and then you’ll plummet yourself right down into the middle of the reactive bank, and then you’ll have an awful time. So this—lightly, lightly, you know? A little goes a long ways sort of thing.

But if you ask the question bluntly, “How old am I?” you would probably get a variety of answers because, of course, you are the ones who invented time. And you aren’t old. You have been in a certain state for a certain period of time and you can measure those states; but you cannot measure a total—a total, total with any degree of accuracy.

You’re going to get variations all over the place. Now, you start going back in time and you’ll find out that there have been—there’s been quite a long period. Now, in view of the fact that you’ve probably averaged a pain every—well, let’s be reasonable about it; let’s say you’ve averaged a pain out of every year.

Every year you have done something. You’ve stubbed your toe or you’ve had something hap- pen. Let’s say, you’ve averaged a pain in a year and a major catastrophe one way or the other every five or ten years.

Now, let’s be very gross about the whole thing and say at least every lifetime you’ve had a catastrophe. I think that would be reasonable to suppose. Now, therefore, divide twenty-five into the length of time you have had a mind which reads on the meter, and I’m afraid you will get too many trillion incidents for anybody in this lifetime to sit and erase.

So although theoretically it could all be erased, incident by incident, chain by chain and so forth—theoretically—you haven’t got that much auditing time and no- body has got that much patience. It would take something on the order of zaom, thousands of hours. Maybe binary digits of hours, you see?

And this is impractical for a human being be- cause, I point out, the average age of the body at the time it decays totally is something around seventy, seventy-five today. See, you haven’t got enough time. Take more than seventy-five years to get in enough auditing to erase all of the engrams on the track.

So therefore, I had to short-circuit this. I had to bring this right to basics and I had to bring it to basics of what actually did a thetan consist of rather than what was he mocking up. And then we addressed this and we addressed the mechanics of the thing, we have our current  DIANETIC AUDITING 12  AND THE MIND Gradation Chart, and then it is possible to clear somebody.

And it’s very interesting now that anybody who came into Scientology untrained, unprocessed and so forth would, if he pressed right along with it—not too frantically, but just kept going more or less the rate at which you’re traveling at the moment—he would be at least a minimum or a maximum (depending on how hard he pressed at it) of two years to Clear. Now, you could do it much faster than that by becoming much more businesslike about it. But a reasonable assumption—a very reasonable assumption at the leisurely rate people move, and all that sort of thing, would be a couple of years to Clear.

It’s—I don’t know what average time we have at the moment in the Clearing Course on the course itself. I can only make guesses, and so forth, and I knew when the technology was available—I don’t know how many Clears we’ve got now, and from that sort of thing I would guess that it’s somewhere between a ye—eight months’ and a year’s auditing. I would just guess that.

That’s very reasonable auditing, you know? That’s getting tired and lazy and stupid and forgetting about it and patching it up and going to Review and then being very businesslike for two whole weeks and… You know, that kind of thing. So that—the lower grades, however, these things are so perfected—and there is no shortcut for VI and VII.

Anybody who comes along and tells you there’s any shortcut for VI and VII, he’s just trying to cut your throat. Remember that. There is no shortcut.

Somebody said to me, “I should have thought, Ron, that you would have blown the whole bank just by plotting it.” Ho, ho, ho! Ha! Even me, no.

And I was—get—I got, on en- grams, eventually so I could take a fantastic engram, you know, where you were just blown all to pieces and betrayed at the same time and totally surprised and scattered all over the envi- ronment for a few minutes and that sort of thing, and blow those things just by inspection. Say, “Oh yes, there it is.” Whoooch! And gone, see?

I got up to a point where I could do that. Huh, confronting the basic reactive bank isn’t like that. I’m not trying to scare you; I’m just trying to keep you from making mistakes.

Now, your engrams are erasable and in the process of erasing them you get into vari- ous phenomena which I have already told you about but some of those now auditing them obviously didn’t listen. So, I will tell you again, nicely and politely and without—as Stan said the other day, he said, “What’s marvelous about you,” he says, “you don’t scream and beat the desk, and so forth.” I accepted the compliment, but actually some of your top executives will tell you I do scream and beat the desk every now and then, you know? Not really over stupid- ity—not over stupidity.

That isn’t why I scream and beat the desk. Just to get compliance. Now, what’s interesting about this is that the moment that you run a late engram on a chain… Let’s—you’ve probably got your nomenclature a bit tangled up and you probably should listen very carefully and you probably should get your misunderstood words out of this stuff and so on, because this is very, very important.

Here you have—let’s—let’s take a picture of a ladder and we’re going down a ladder here. Now, the bottom rung of this ladder is the basic on the chain. It is more important, there- fore I’ve made it blacker.

Actually this, here we put another ladder here, and we put the top rung as very black and important—that’s the way it looks. And this bottom rung,  DIANETIC AUDITING 13  AND THE MIND it—important at the time—was very slight. And you say, “Therefore, the toughest incident would be the earliest incident.” No!

No, the toughest incident to try to do anything about is the—the most recent one. And the easiest one to do something about is the earliest one. Now, a chain simply means a series of incidents of similar content.

There’s the hit-by- cars chain. Now, there may only be one engram on a chain but that would be very rare indeed. There maybe are 20 hit-by-cars chains, see, 20 on the hit-by-cars chain.

Now, if we’re speak- ing of this lifetime, you may find 1 or 2 on the hit-by-cars chain that won’t erase on account of unfortunately for the reality of some people who don’t like the truth and can’t face… You know, people don’t like past lives because you—you’re pointing their attention back at a lot of agony. There’s a good reason for it, see? This guy is 41 years old—41 years ago he died.

He probably didn’t die pleasantly, ei- ther, being the kind of fellow he is. So you tell him he’s lived before this life, you’re pointing his attention back at that horrible incident, and so forth, and he just bounces straight back to present time, shaking, actually. You think he’s mad because he’s talking about past life.

No! He’s terrified! “Don’t t-don’t talk to me about-bout-bout-bout-bout p-pp-past lives. Damn you Scientologists!” You see? “Oh, you dogs!

Kill ‘em!” You say, “Sonny boy, why be so yellow?” Now, the resolution of a problem requires that you handle the elements of the problem. The resolution of a problem requires that you handle the elements of a problem. You will never solve a problem by handling different elements than the problem has.

You just never will. This is one of man’s favorite indoor sports: solving problems by using different elements than the problem contains. So, therefore, if you insist on a person staying in this lifetime, you’re going to run into the hit-by-cars chain with 2 incidents in this lifetime which are the last of 520 incidents.

And you’re trying to erase the last 2 of 520 incidents. He was first hit by a car 1,765,000 years ago, 3 months, 1 day, 1 hour and 10 seconds ago. The mind!

See? Back! And when you go through an incident once and it doesn’t desensitize, and you start the fellow through again and the in- cident now appears a little bit heavier and massy, you better hit the silk, man.

You’re probably at 897 on that chain. And you start to put this fellow through it, you try to put this fellow through it too often, and it’s just going to get heavier and heavier and thicker and thicker And one of the symptoms of this is his bouncing out of it. Now, we’re not going to handle bouncers now and get guys repeated down into it and that sort of thing.

There’s no point in doing that. There are easier ways to handle it; just erase the earlier incident. Now, it’s the—always requires the earliest incident that you can reach to totally desensitize a chain.

But here’s one of the symptoms. You start through—start the pc through an engram, and when you bring him back through to go over it again, he says exactly what he says before without any change or variation. He is no longer in the time of that engram.

He has bounced and he’s now running out of the lock he put into PT. He’s now busy running the present time  DIANETIC AUDITING 14  AND THE MIND lock. It was so heavy that it laid in a lock in present time, see?

Do you follow? It hasn’t done him any harm. So, you were busy running an engram of ten or seven years ago, you see, and it’s the hit-by-cars, and it’s bokety-bokety-bokety-bokety-bokety-bokety-bokety-bokety-bok.

And then you start him through it the second time, and he goes bokety-bokety-bok, and there’s no new material shows up of any kind whatsoever, he’s not seven or ten years ago. He’s not back where it was at all. He’s erasing what he just laid in in PT.

He’s just going over it again. Also, he’s learned better. He’s learned better than to go near it.

And you have run into the same mechanism, exactly, of why a thetan keeps a mind—because he doesn’t want to con- front it. It would erase if he confronted it, but it is too painful for him to do so. So you’ve ac- tually got a pc a bit in over his head.

You have been a bit too persuasive, and you have been locating engrams on a meter. You naughty fellow. “Oh,” you say, “of course. Well, you al- ways locate engrams on a meter.” No, you run them on a meter.

You introduce a meter into the location of incidents and you’re going to run a pc over his head the whole time because the meter can see deeper than he can. Well, the funny part of it is, if you run what he can erase, you’ve got a level of confront he can confront. “Did you ever lose anything?” And he thinks for a little while and he said, “Yeah, I lost a ring.” All right. That’s the incident.

No meter. Now, as we run him through it with Dianetic auditing and so forth—it’s a secondary, of course, because it contains loss—as we run him through this thing, you’re going to get meter action. Great.

And you better watch your meter, too, because it’s liable to go free needle or something on you, see? If it does, forget that chain. Get onto something else.

You understand now? A man can remember what he can confront. And that’s all he’s going to remember.

If he had a fight at breakfast, he’s not going to want to remember breakfast. Well, if he got hit by a truck ten years ago, he don’t want to remember hit by a truck ten years ago. Now, if he talks about it at all, it’s because he’s talking about a lock which he’s moved up into PT which is comfortable.

He’ll tell you all about having been hit by a truck, but he won’t give it to you in present time as though it’s just now, this minute happening. Now, you see, he can come to present time away from the incident and have a sort of a synthetic history of this incident, and he can go through that, and if you locate incidents on meters, that’s the way he will run engrams. All sort of synthetic in PT and he doesn’t want to go back down… The guy—the guy who is the most shivery, the guy who is at fear on the Tone Scale will act like he’s on a powerful spring which is shooting him straight up the track to PT.

And boy, he’s stuck right here, you know? He is not going to go back anyplace. No, no, no, nopla- ce.

No. “Ah, how about breakfast?” “Oh, well, I don’t know anything about b—how about breakfast?”  DIANETIC AUDITING 15  AND THE MIND “Well, can you remember what you had for breakfast?” “Oh, I don’t know. Is that necessary?” This is not the chap who wins medals for courage. See what I’m talking about?

He acts like he’s being ejected on hydraulic thrust straight up to present time, boy, and he’s here hummmm-hummmm-hummmm! Now, you say—you say now, “In your…” Poor Freud. He was dealing with people of this type all the time, you see?

They couldn’t co—they’re as crazy as they couldn’t confront, you see, and they were pretty nutty. And he was asking them to go back and remember their childhood. Why, man, if he’d ever—it never occurred to him to ask, “Can you remember en- tering the office?” Because they would have said, probably, “I don’t know.

How did I get here?” It’s a fact. Amnesia—amnesia is simply—is not a very mysterious mechanism. It’s just a guy who is so spooked that he doesn’t dare remember ten seconds ago.

Now, he’s had some expe- rience beyond which—earlier than which he is not going to remember, including the experi- ence. So he’s only willing to remember some moment after that experience. Now, we call this amnesia.

He’s just scared. Now, you’ll run into this all the time in varying degrees in pcs. And the worst ones off are those that are just rigid in present time.

They’re going along with each click of the clock and no further back than the last click. This person will tell you he has a bad memory. That is not the only source of bad memory.

A bad memory is just accumulated occlusion of it all, but it’s nevertheless nonconfront, see? Trying to train somebody with beatings would be the last way in the world that you could train anybody because you’ve given him all of his education so that he can’t confront it. Now, here—here we have then a problem—this give—tells you why some instructors are very beloved by their students and turn out genius students, you know?

For some reason or other everything he gave the student, the student finds that’s the easiest thing in the world to confront, so that’s what he knows. Now, where do you find relief to this situation of the pc stuck in present time? Now, you’re going to find some pc, you’re going to find an incident, you will actually get him back into the first part of that incident, you’ll get him to roll off that incident.

Maybe he’ll even go through it once. He’ll all of a sudden hold back the pain that his hip—hrrh. That’s it.

He was already in it, so he said, “Mmmm, we don’t want that; we want this.” Pshmom! Like a diver coming out of the bottom of the sea, he comes up to the surface and he runs the next time straight along on present time where it’s nice and safe. He doesn’t want anything to do with that dirty old nasty pain that almost took his leg off.

Do you see? Do you get it? So it’s all a bounce.

It isn’t just a bouncer, a “get out,” that pushes people up to present time or shoots them about. Now, an individual actually will feel so imprisoned at some point of the track—he’s li- able to feel so imprisoned that he knows he cannot progress any further than that point for-  DIANETIC AUDITING 16  AND THE MIND ever. And you’ll find somebody who’s totally stuck on the track.

But this is somebody who is terrified of the future. And people get in this frame of mind about when they’re to be exe- cuted. If you can recall the last time you were about to be executed, time must halt at that point.

And you’ll find out that a pc seems to go back earlier very easily. So, he shoots back to the beginning of the—of anything. You can’t hold him in an incident.

You say, “Come, come, now, we’re going to run the automobile accident when you had—when you were 5 years old, and so forth.” “Yeah, well I—Oh, by the way, I got one now. I got one now two thousand years ago. I got one now 15 thousand.

I got one a trillion years ago; got one 2 trillion years ago.” And you say, “Well, whoa, whoa, whoa.” Well, recognize what you’re dealing with. This is the guy who doesn’t dare move forward with the time track. Now, you’d only get him misbehaving and a Dianetic audited pc only misbehaves when put beyond his ability to confront and then you run into all the problems of Dianetics.

Now you have to know an infinite number of solutions. Now you have to be clever not ‘arf. You have to be a screaming genius with answers.

You have to sit there and sweat, man, as an auditor. You’ve got to be right on the ball! So much more on the ball than you can be that you’ll flub.

Why? You’re running the pc over his head. And one of the best ways in the world to run a pc over his head in early stages of audit- ing—later on you can start using a meter—but in the early days—I mean use a meter to locate.

The way to really run a pc over his head is take him bright, brassy green, no familiarity with the mind, doesn’t even know about mental image pictures, discover the source of his lumbosis, plunge him into it straightaway and try to force him to go through it. You will have a very unwilling Pc. You have to practically sit on his head; he bounces all over the place.

The second time you bring him through it, he runs it in PT. He can find no other part of the chain. He can’t erase it, you know?

He’s in trouble all the way. You have to therefore be very clever as an auditor. Do I make my point?

It’s just you’re running him beyond his ability to confront. That is all. His ability to confront is one-millionth of a—of an attention unit.

And what he’s confronting and you’re asking him to confront requires one thousandth of an attention unit. And he’s not about to stay there comfortably and do anything about it at all. Do you follow?

Therefore, if you will look in this bulletin of 3 April 1966, it carefully stresses gradient scales. Now, after you’ve been going a little while, yes, you can find it on a meter, but the guy’s ability to confront is up. You’re getting someplace.

But the truth of the matter is if you want to make a Release this way, don’t ever locate anything on a meter, and he will come out the right end of it. He will be able to confront more and more and more, and you’ve improved his ability to confront his past experience. Now, you could almost bring about the same result with a repetitive processes—”What can you confront?” See, you could almost bring about the same result.

DIANETIC AUDITING 17  AND THE MIND But as a matter of fact, an individual can then build up, build up, build up, but he him- self is not getting an insight into his mind. With a repetitive command of this character, you’re going for broke. In other words, you’re going for result.

But with Dianetic auditing, we’re not going for result. We’re trying to give you audit- ing practice, and we’re trying to have some fun. If you get results, it’s your own fault.

And if you do this right, why, you will get results. And the test of it is, is does your pc feel any better afterwards? Now, if he doesn’t feel any better, you’ve done one of two things: You’ve either let him go too light or you’ve let him go too strong.

See, you’ve insisted that he run some tiny, light lock that he isn’t even vaguely interested in and could confront a dozen like it, or you’ve insisted he go in over his head. Now, the mind knows what it can tolerate, so the best test is the pc, not the meter. The guy knows what he can tolerate.

So, you say, you want—going to run a secondary now. Well, you can ask him for, “Now, have you ever lost—have you ever lost anything?” And if you wanted to be very sure, you could say, “Recently, have you lost anything?” See? Asking sneakily on the line.

And he says, “Yes, as a matter of fact I lost a ring.” Run it. But now, when you’re asking for moments of loss, remember that you’re ask- ing for the whole chain of all secondaries because that is the definition by—which it has. So you could soften your question up even further. “Do you recall a period of sadness?” Let’s attach the emotion to it.

Now, we could ask for times when he was sad, times when he was afraid, times when he was this, times when he was that. You talk about throwing people in over their head. In the early days of running, there were so many techniques developed for throwing people into engrams that it was practically a snap of the fingers and over Niagara Falls the guy went.

He didn’t have any choice. We were so skilled in those days of putting people into incidents, and so on, that the most remarkable dramatizations would occur—fantastic body convulsions; they’d practically fly all over the room. And I remember one chap that I snapped into an incident—and I cured something with him; it’s true that you can do something with it—of straight unadulterated terror.

Terror so great, that as his body shook on the bed, he was lifting the legs of the bed off the floor and banging them down again in a chatter Sounds impossible! I wouldn’t have believed it if I hadn’t seen it with me own eyes! That bed was chattering against the floor!

This guy was scared! And there is a thing like an odor of fear, and that odor permeated the room to a point where I never thought I would smell anything like it in my life. It smelled like a terrified army in full rout.

And it was an incident. It was right there. He’d been sitting in it.

It was in full restim. He just—an incident he kept resisting; he couldn’t confront any part of it, and I just tripped him into it, with some skill. But it was an incident where he and a fellow scout had gone—as a couple of savages—to scout the enemy position and had been caught, and his companion had  DIANETIC AUDITING 18  AND THE MIND been boiled and eaten before him and then he, in an effort not to get eaten, had managed to get free and throw himself over a cliff.

And it finally developed how—ever; that he couldn’t really determine whether he’d been thrown over the cliff because he had gone mad or whether he had thrown himself over the cliff. And it finally resolved, and so forth, that he had thrown himself over the cliff. But he ran this out and the emotion discharged from it.

I only had to go through it five or six times and it finished it. But he was not about to go anyplace else on the track. It completely changed his life, as a matter of fact.

But there we were auditing for result. And undoubtedly you could bring about a fast result. And the reason we wanted to bring about fast results is because there are so many en- grams.

There are just so fantastically many engrams that we were becoming choosy as to which ones we were supposed to run, and we were trying to speed up the process. Well, you’re not trying to do that. You’re just trying to learn about the mind.

The faster process was the first one I ever used, which is gradient scales. Find some- thing the fellow can confront and run him through it. And, factually, I’ve made people a lot better by getting them to run the incident of walking into the room to keep their appointment with me.

Managed to coax them back that far on the time track. And I had my best results with that type of an approach. So you say, “What would you consider your chronic emotion is?” And the fellow says—you know, you can be tricky about this—”What would you say your chronic emotion would be?” Well, the fellow says, “I—I—I don’t know.

I think I’m just bored most of the time.” “Well, that’s good enough. And can you remember a time when you were bored?” “Oh, yes, yes.” “Good. Now, let’s start in at the beginning of that period.” You’ll find a secondary, and you’ll find another secondary.

And you’ll find another secondary below this. And the next thing you know there was real stuff here in being bored. You find this guy in actual fact was made to be in a place of no interest but some danger for a period of time that was very upset- ting.

Now, if you went and ran engrams to parallel this—you don’t have to call for engrams to parallel this—sooner or later you’re going to come up with an incident where he was executed or something in exactly the same type of surrounding as he was waiting for while in danger. And that would be the engram which gave this other thing. Yes, it is a chronic emotion and you could ask for various types of emotions and this way you could sort the thing out.

There are lots of tricky things you can do. I’m not trying to put any slightest block on the tricky things that you can do. I don’t care how many commands you give him while he’s running it. “Oh, go on, you know, and so forth. “Keep it up.” “Continue.” Anything you want to say.

I’m just saying get the guy through it. That’s what you’re supposed to do. That’s really what you’re supposed to do.

Well, what does it take to do that? And I’m telling you that you’ll get your best results by not throwing the fellow in over his head. Then you won’t run into all of these things whereby you  DIANETIC AUDITING 19  AND THE MIND need 8,765 solutions, you see, to 50,000 problems.

See, you’re not going to run into any problems. The guy will run what he almost can confront, and he’ll get quite a—quite a bang out of running something he almost can confront. He’ll get quite a relief out of this.

But you would just be fascinated how little some people can confront. But also you could be fascinated at how much some people can confront. This fellow, he’ll run through it and somatics are tearing all over the place and so forth and, “So, the lion took another mouthful out of my left leg.” You know?

Great. It’s what the pc can do, not what you decide the pc can do. But the individual who just doesn’t run well and doesn’t seem to get anyplace and that sort of thing is of two varieties.

He has two things wrong: He is either being asked to confront far, far too much, or far, far too little. And the number of them that will be confronting far, far too little are very few and far between. So, it boils down to the most commonest—the commonest thing that you’ll run into is asking them to confront too much.

How much is too much? Well, it is too much for the guy you are auditing. That same “too much” won’t be too much for the next guy you audit.

Do you understand? It varies from being to being because experience varies. Not only does expe- rience vary but different parts of the track are in restimulation.

Some people are in a very tough basic incident of some kind or another which makes all other incidents—the lightest of locks—the most painful things imaginable. Now, you want to start running down a chain. Now, of course, if you call for a loss then that—you’re ask—making a bid now to run out every single engram on the whole track.

So, if you want to get a little more practice, why, extend it a little bit further and call for—what’s the guy’s chronic emotion, now? Well, solve that chronic emotion. Work on it as a project.

And you’ll do a lot of secondaries. Secondaries will go right straight down the line. Now, some people have an idea that there is an engram and then a secondary occurs and then the secondary accumulates locks.

Now, it isn’t that simple. The mind is—I’ve—just because I have given you simple answers is no reason the mind is simply built. You have all the jerry-rigged messes you ever wanted to run into.

Now, listen. There will be a chain; that is to say, the original and then the repeated in- cidents, plotted in time thereafter of the same type of incident. There will be a chain of en- grams, which is to say, incidents containing pain and unconsciousness.

You know, the off- with-the-head chain. The off-with-the-head chain, see? And here are 150 engrams, each one of which consists of having one’s head cut off.

Now oddly enough, there will also be, in paral- lel to that, the off-with-the-head motivator series. And there’ll be 49, or something like that, incidents whereby the individual cut somebody else’s head off. Now, in addition to all of that, each one of those will have accumulated locks which are conscious-level experiences which sort of stick and the individual doesn’t quite know why.

A shiny piece of metal would be enough to make a lock, see? DIANETIC AUDITING 20  AND THE MIND So, each one of the 150 engrams has many locks. When I say many, I would say, oh, 2 or 3 hundred thousand.

Each one of the 150. Now, what’s the secondaries? Well, the secondaries, if you had a rung of a ladder, as you were looking at a ladder, and the bottom side of that rung were natural wood color and there was a stripe of black painted across the top of the rung, you would have the secondary.

It’s actually lying right straight there with the engram. Now, each one of those 150 engrams has its own secondary. There’s a secondary probably for every single one of the 150 engrams.

And each of those secondaries has a lock, and not only has a lock but has maybe 2 or 3 thou- sand locks. Now, worse than that, this chain cross-references and interconnects with public gather- ings, injuries during. Now, that’s not a series of locks, that will be independent—an independ- ent series of engrams containing pain and unconsciousness, each one of the incidents, you know?

Why, there was the fellow in the crowd, and he was a little boy, and the crowd surged, and they squashed him and he died, you see? I mean this type of incident. Now, those will—those engrams—the off-with-the-head chain will be the smashed-in- the-crowd chain, you see?

The public gatherings, incidents in, they will be cross-referenced and their locks will intermingle. So, that the locks of one of these chains will also cross over and become the locks of the off-with-the-head chain, also. Isn’t that great!

Now, let me show you where you would really get foxed if you tried to trace some- thing like this down and you would really have trouble. We want to know… And this is a typical—a typical Freudian problem—fetishism: The fellow has a fixation on hairbrushes. I can assure you the mind has enough incident in it.

They just underestimated the amount of incident, you see, by about—one ten-trillionth is about all the incident they thought was there, see? A hairbrush would be absolutely impossible to trace back to all of its engramic and secondary influences or associators. Be impossible.

It would be impossible to take any single article and trace it back to why the individual is afraid of it. That would be impossible! You could desensitize it.

You could find some reasons for it. But to get the basic reason for it? Oh, no!

Oh, huh! It occurs in engram chain one, engram chain two, engram chain three, secondary chain four, and 8 billion locks. And it turns out not to be a hairbrush, anyhow.

It turns out to be a small black animal. Hairbrush itself just restimulated. But to set anybody a job of tracing something like that back would be pure idiocy.

There would be no point in it of any kind whatsoever. Wrong way to go about it. Wrong end to.

Those are the cognitions that the guy gets out of it. “Hey! A bridle.” “Yes, yes,” you say, coaxing him, making him aware of your presence. “I always wondered. I always wondered why.

I always wondered why. Yes, it’s the disk on the bridle. That’s what it is.” You say, “Well, what was that?”  DIANETIC AUDITING 21  AND THE MIND “Well, Mother always used to wear a cameo, and it matches the disk on this bridle.

And it’s when I was killed—heh—at the tournament, the fellow had a disk on the side of the bridle and that hit me. And that was the last thing I saw. And I used to wonder why I got colic all the time, you see?

And my mother wore this. Yeah, that’s great. I’m sure glad to get that straightened out.” Well, you be glad to get it straightened out, too.

And you be glad when he moves off of it, because he’s going to find 8 thousand more reasons before he’s through. Do you follow? Men have experienced things.

Women have experienced things. There’s hardly any- thing an individual has not been or done at one time or another of his career. And to say, “This is a specialized thetan; he has always been a magistrate”—don’t make me laugh.

At what pe- riod in his career did he get tired of being a criminal and become a magistrate? After having been a ditch digger, a coal heaver, a counsel, an artisan, a pilot, a space opera ranger, a writer, you know? But the individual’s experiential track is very important with regard to what he can do when he finally comes out, because we’re producing a new thing in a Clear.

We’re producing a being without a bank who has experience. Never had anything like that before, see? Now, one has had main points of experience on the track which have been more em- phasized than other points, and he will tend to be better at these things than things he has not had so much experience with.

But it’s a case of emphasis, not difference. Now, where your individual is being run on engrams, he can easily get in too deep, but only if you push him in. And if he’s not running up new material, if he’s not running them properly, why, you figure out why, in view of what I’ve been telling you.

Now, it’s either over—or underconfront, and my bet is on that it’s overconfront. And you asked too general- ized a question and you took too vague an answer on something. You didn’t get the thing es- tablished.

You didn’t decide what you were going to run. You didn’t get it all mapped out before you began it. You’re going to run some times when the guy was scared.

All right, great. We’re go- ing to run some times when the guy was scared. What was the last time he was scared?

All right. And the individual all of a sudden trips into this new mechanism of “mustn’t have any future.” Back down the track he goes, starts winding up in bad incidents, and so forth. Well, it’s simply because you sort of lost control of the whole situation.

You didn’t steady him on and make him run what you started to run. You got him all involved in whether he should go earlier and he’s trying to go totally Clear on engram running. Well, if he wants to go totally Clear on engram running he undoubtedly could do so.

Undoubtedly do so. It’d only take him three or four lifetimes. And I want to point out that the body goes to pieces in a fairly regular lineup at once every seventy years, or something like that, and so he hasn’t got time to do that.

You understand any more about engrams? Well, I’m talking to you about the woof and the warp and the exact thing which you’re auditing all the way to Clear. Now, I think that it’s a good time that people not only got some  DIANETIC AUDITING 22  AND THE MIND practice auditing but also made some bowing acquaintance with that thing which has got them in the cage.

And it’s always a very good thing when you find yourself in a trap to find out what the trap consists of. I often say that to myself when I find myself in traps. But don’t despair if you have not yet been able to run an engram on anybody.

You ha- ven’t been able to run an engram because you’ve disdained to run some faint lock. If all goes to pieces, and you are no longer able to make any progress—and you haven’t been able to make any progress—not no longer able—if you haven’t been able to make any progress with your pc and you haven’t been able to get him into anything, you haven’t been able to run any- thing and so forth, run breakfast. You’ll find that usually works.

If you can’t run breakfast and so forth, run the time he came to the session as an incident. Do you know that people—not just that, but people can be so bad off that present time and the march of time past him in this universe is itself a continuous running engram. He is living in a moment of pain and unconsciousness.

And the tick, tick of the clock is an engram in itself Now, a person is pretty batty when they’re in that shape. They’re very batty indeed. As a matter of fact, you won’t find them around here.

But that’s how bad it can get. And you’ve run into some vestige of that when you’re not able to run incidents on your pc. He just is not about to go anyplace.

It’s nice and safe where he is. And so, you can always run an incident on somebody. Don’t listen to orders that “I must run an engram.” No, run the incident your pc can confront and run, and you will win all the way.

Don’t take incidents that you fish off the meter because you’ll throw him in over his head, and I think you’ll have a lot of fun. This is a great sport. This is a great sport.

I don’t regard it any more than that but it’s a very worthwhile sport and it’s one that you should indulge in because it’s going to make an awful good auditor out of you that knows a great deal about the mind. Thank you. Thank you.

[[Category:Lectures]]
[[Category:Lectures SHSBC]]
[[Category:Lectures 1966]]