View source for Anatomy of Universes (5ACC 540506)

'''Series:''' 5th Advanced Clinical Course (5ACC)

'''Date:''' 6 May 1954

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

----

← [[Lecture_Index_5ACC|Back to Series]]

I want to talk to you about the anatomy of universes. How a universe comes about and why, and what occurs when it has come about.

I can answer the last question first and tell you that what occurs when it comes about is you, right where you are, doing what you are doing, thinking what you are thinking – that's what comes about.

Now let's go into how it came about. And we will discover that the process is extremely simple. Extremely simple. There are two sides to this picture: one is the mechanical side, and the other is the consideration.

The consideration actually precedes the mechanical. So we have to take up the first postulate which brings about a universe. And the first postulate one would have to make to make a universe would be "I don't know."

The next postulate he'd have to make would be "There is something out there," and the next postulate he'd have to make would be "What is it?"

This is the consecutive sequence of beginning a universe. He has to assume that there is something he doesn't know. Then he has to place something or nothing out there, and then he has to ask of it, "What is it?" and he gets the mechanics of perception.

The mechanics of perception, then, consist of putting something out there and then wondering what it is.

The gradual sequence of this brings about a condition whereby he continues to postulate "I do not know," and continues to put nothingnesses out there which he says are somethingnesses, and continues to bring in things, and he gradually builds up and out space – he has space out there, you see – and he's pulling in things through the space. And you get a condensing effect.

And this goes, then, into this: An individual believes that this condensing effect is caused by another determinism than his own. Because each time he said, "I don't know," put something out there and brought it in, each time that he did this, he of course cut down the fact of his own knowingness anew. So consecutively, the more he postulates "I don't know" and the more he brings in, the less he knows and the more he thinks he has around him to know about. Because his motive in pulling in anything to him which he has created in space and pulled to him – that is to say, he created the space by creating this thing – the more he pulls this in, the more he thinks he has, then, in his vicinity which he doesn't know about.

You should see this quite elementary. Until a preclear – he has become a preclear after a few trillion years of this idiocy – the preclear at length believes himself surrounded by things he doesn't know about. And that is the end product of it.

Now, he expects you as an auditor to permit him to know about these things. Now, the question is, is there anything there to know?

Well, yes, there is. There's the sequence of postulates which bring about this unknowing state. That's really all there is there to know.

Naturally, in view of the fact that he kept putting things out and then saying he didn't know about them, a condition came about whereby he had to believe that there was some significance in these items which he was bringing in on himself. There must be some reason to look.

Now, the first reason to look is "It is beautiful." And this is the first introduction into reason. It is beautiful. I am looking at it because it is beautiful. And that is the first reason there is.

In other words, "The whole operation gives me pleasure – of saying 'I don't know; in it comes.' The reason I'm doing this is because it's pleasurable or beautiful."

The next thing, when he has exhausted that, the next thing he gets into is "It is significant." And we have a condition whereby the preclear is totally sold, utterly, on the fact that all these things that he has brought in had a significance in them.

But let me tell you something. He neglected, from first to last, to put any significance in them. And if he didn't put any significance in them, there isn't any significance in them.

Now, we get... That's just one universe. Now, how does it get into a problem of mix-up? It gets into a situation of mix-up on the basis of agreement. And the first agreement is "I don't know." Two people agree they don't know. And then two people, or whatever you want to say – two people, two beings – are agreed, then, on this first basis.

Because their first point of association has space in it. And so we get into ARC after space. Space, then ARC. Each individual is condensing himself. He is never expanding himself. His final product, as a cycle of action, is condensation.

You see, to create is simply to put something out. The first condition of creation is space. And then, now that it's out there, let's look at it. Bring it in so we can look at it. And the next step is, It's surviving. Which is simply another statement of "I am looking at it." It is surviving; I am looking at it – same thing.

And finally, destruction occurs when he has brought it all the way in. See, when it's almost all the way in there is no space so, of course, it disappears and that is destruction.

Well, when he fails to bring them all the way in but just brings them closer, the cycle of action is incomplete. And your preclear is hung with all of his compounded incomplete cycles of action. Every cycle of action which he ever started and didn't completely finish stayed there. Because the center of it – of this action, this cycle – is, of course, "I am looking at it. It is surviving," you see?

If he brought it all the way in, he would have taken all the space out of it. You see, because space is made by the fact that he has put it out. Space being a viewpoint of dimension.

All right, the space was created by the fact that he put it out. Therefore, the space would disappear on the fact that he had pulled it all the way in.

Well, he never pulls them all the way in. I say never. Yes, he very often pulls them all the way in, but I mean, what's giving him trouble are those things which he didn't pull all the way in. They are not totally destroyed.

Now, you as an auditor come along, and he asks you to finish these things. "Let's destroy all this stuff that I don't know about and that's driving me mad. See, let's destroy it all." How would you destroy it all? Well, there'd be two systems of destroying it. One would simply be to restore his ability to create and go through the cycle again, and the other one would be simply to bring it all the way in.

Therefore, putting up eight anchor points and bringing them in, and eight anchor points and bringing them all the way in, and eight anchor points and bringing them all the way in – in other words, the remedy of havingness – is this cycle.

Therefore a preclear feels much better after he's put up anchor points and brought them all the way in, and anchor points and brought them all the way in. Of course, they really didn't amount to a mass after he got them all the way in. What they amounted to, of course, was a disappearance.

Now, there's the cycle of action. There is lookingness, there's perception, there's space, there's your primary postulate, so forth.

The consideration that lies above this is the consideration that one must put something out in order to consider. That's an operation, a mechanical operation. Nobody would ever have any space if he had never put anything out to look at.

Now, let's get down to the first and foremost game which a thetan plays. The first and foremost game which a thetan plays is, surprise. It's a game called surprise. And I've just told you the mechanics of the game called surprise. One of the more complex ways of doing it is for the thetan to mock up a small box with something in it. Then he forgets, you see, what he put in it and he opens the box and he is surprised. This is his action.

And this gives him the sensation of not having known and having found out something. What did he find out? He found out something that he knew before. The only way he could experience the sensation of finding out was to postulate that he had found out. So we get this dizzy little game.

You wouldn't think a game like this would become serious enough to wind up on torture stakes, under the grinding treads of giant tank, and under the high plume of atom bombs. You wouldn't think it would amount to diphtheria, torture, infidelity; you wouldn't think this would ever amount to such an end product.

Well, it does. Interpersonal relations seem to be to a thetan – taking a shallow look at this, you see, considering it all over again – interpersonal relations seem to be the trouble.

Well, if he looks a little harder he'll find out that really the trouble is the physical universe. Well, that actually is a little closer to what the trouble is. But most of the people that you have anything to do with will pick on first the third dynamic, interpersonal relationships, as being responsible for all of their trouble.

In order to understand the third dynamic completely, you would have to understand that a thetan is confused about who is who. His basic confusion, who is who, is manifest under this: He can duplicate himself. He can put himself out there in space and be as alive out there and where he is too, at the same time, as where he is. He can duplicate himself; in other words. One thetan that can be, then, two thetans.

And each one of these thetans have all the characteristics of the original thetan. And then these two thetans can duplicate themselves and have all the original characteristics of themselves but be somebody else too. So we get into valence trouble. This is one of the basic capabilities. The second we introduce duplication, however, we introduce space. So the second a thetan began to be somebody else and himself; too, there was space in the matter.

Well, he did this, and then he didn't reserve anything for himself; you see. He reserved no special characteristic or weapon for himself; and he is opposed by an opponent who is just as good as he is.

Well, you get an agreement. Now, it'd be very, very simple for one... two thetans to exist, you see, and each of them duplicate. And then get totally confused about whose duplicate what was. And so they simply put a forgetter in there, and every time they duplicate, why, then they forget that they have duplicated, you see. And that isn't themselves anymore. Very cute, but very confusing. Later on your preclear wonders whose valence he's in. He's confused about it. There isn't any reason to be confused about it. He is, where he sits, as capable as he ever was, as able to duplicate as he ever was.

But here we have, as we look this over, a compounding problem which results in this dwindling spiral. He's going to get worse and worse and worse, not better and better and better, and his foe is boredom.

He feels that if he gave up any part of the game which he has, he wouldn't have any game at all. And if he had no game at all, there would be nothing for him to be interested in, there would be no further responsibility, there would be no further interest and this one most of all: no reason for existence.

His biggest scarcity, because it doesn't happen to exist at all, is a reason for existence. This is his biggest single scarcity. And if you want to know what scarcity is, just say "reason for existence" and you have it.

Now, those two phrases interchange. "Scarcity" interchanges with "reason for existence." An individual begins to have things. Why does he have them? A reason for existence.

An individual begins to take on form and shape and compound universes and enter universes and exit from universes and so forth. A universe is simply a point to view from, plus the space and objects which are put up there to view.

When he agrees with some other thetan, the agreement may overbalance and he may begin to see the other thetan's mock-ups better than his own. When this has advanced considerably and when he is on a basic agreement with an awful lot of thetans, you have a universe such as the physical universe, which is a very, very strong illusion. It's very solid; it's very, very solid.

And he's on good common meeting ground there. He's... Everybody agrees that it exists, and it's perfectly all right to see it. They do not agree, however, that it's all right to see each other's mock-ups because if you started seeing in 3-D somebody else's mock-ups, this would mean he was bigger and tougher than you were and you would be in his universe, and this would make him boss.

So people avoid doing that. And before they will do that, they will shut off view of all and any mock-up.

Well, how did they get into this situation? They kept putting out "I don't know" and "I pull it in" and "I don't know" and "I pull it in" and one day this "I don't know," you know, and then they put something out and, "What is it?" they say, and then they pull it in. And somebody who was in communication with them – you see, we got an interchange, we had an agreement and then two thetans could put out this somethingness and bring it in – we would get this: Not only can they duplicate and make two more people, but in this particular case – much more interesting – they get what they brought in confused. You see, here we have thetan A and thetan B and they put out something to know about, which they don't know about, see. And then they say, "What is it?" and then they bring it in. And thetan B and thetan A can then conceive that B has brought in A's and A has brought in B's. So they've got somebody else's "Don't know about."

They've got their own, really. But now they've said, "I have somebody else's," and so we get the interweave of interpersonal relations. It just goes from that point. You've got something of mine, I've got something of yours. You put something out and then I took it, and I put something out and you took it.

We don't have just interpersonal relations. We have business, we have games, we have almost anything you want to derive from that particular echelon.

But remember basically that there was nothing put out but an idea that there was something put out. Remember this.

All right. There sits your preclear. He is surrounded with things he doesn't know about. He is totally fixated upon a mystery. What is the mystery? The mystery, basically, is what he forgot that he put out, that was called then somebody else's, that he then pulled in, that now he doesn't own, that isn't his. And it's still standing there, an incomplete cycle of action, because it still exists, saying, "I'm significant."

Now, he has to find some kind of a significance for this. Now, you could process people on significances forever, and you would find that the more significances you took away from them the unhappier they would be. Because the scarcity is the reason why.

Best way to settle the whole thing... You would run him back into all of his "I don't knows" and knock out all of his forgetters if you fed him enough meanings or reasons why to compensate for all the put-outs which he has done.

They didn't have anything in them. There was nothing to look at. There is nothing in the box to surprise him unless he says there is something and says he is surprised. And says he's forgotten that he put it in the box, and now he is surprised that it's in the box.

All right. He put something out and then he said, "I wonder what that is?" Well, did he in the first place say, "I am now going to put out a horse. Now I am going to wonder what the horse is."

No, he did not. He didn't put the significance into it. What he has been bringing in consistently and continually are things without any significance. There's a terrible scarcity for this because there must be some reason why. Because that's basic and inherent in all the postulates he's made. There must be a reason why.

See, there must be something there to look at. There must be some reason why this is here. This is just the game postulate which is made to make the game possible. And there is no reason why, so the person who goes seeking the reason why goes down, down, down, down, down, down, down. And he finally comes out the bottom and finds nothing. Which is quite a joke, really.

Now, many a philosopher in many an age has gone on this track and has looked for this deep, deep, deep significance. The fact that philosophic books are quite commonly written in the most authoritatively pedantic language imaginable, is simply a demonstration of how much we can try to add significance into insignificant things.

If you were to open A Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant, the Great Chinaman of Koenigsberg, you would know exactly what I am talking about at this moment. Never has so little been said at such length and complexity. And the fact that he had said nothing when he finished up did not become apparent until he finished his second book. His first book demonstrates conclusively that there is an innate morality to man for which he is not recompensed whatsoever.

It's just as innate in man. It's an inherent factor – like the weight in a stone. It's just there. He is innately moral.

And his second book demonstrates conclusively, all the way through, that he gets paid for it. And that this is why he does it, because he gets paid for it. This was in 1790, and the whole field of philosophy has been so overshadowed with this profundity on the subject of nothing that nobody has done anything really since in the field of philosophy.

Anybody writing since Immanuel Kant has sort of stumbled along apologetically. They knew they couldn't make a German participial adverbial clause phrase sentence. No. They just... They were in apathy. Anybody who could be that complex could never be bettered. There is the reason why. It just doesn't amount to anything. But boy, it's certainly heavy, weighty, complex and baffling. Don't forget that one it's baffling, utterly baffling.

And there sits your preclear. And if you could see a preclear as somebody who had several thousand copies of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason strapped intimately to every part of his bank, you would have a very clear picture. It's a weighty tome and there's nothing in it.

Except his total conviction that there is something in it, that it does have significance, and that somebody else put it there. He's sure somebody else has moved these significances in on him, and he's sure there's something there.

Well, all the postulates whereby he is so certain there is something there, are answered by curing his scarcity of reasons why by creating an abundance of reasons why.

You can just have him mock these up, and very strange, peculiar things will happen. These pieces of energy, these masses of energy and so on, will start to disintegrate. Bits of blackness that he's never been able to touch before will start to come apart. Any process that we have known these many years have occasionally found such a patch of blackness utterly resistive. But yet that patch of blackness will come apart by mocking up an introduction into it of reasons why.

All you have to do is get a flood of reasons why going into it and it goes to pieces.

Now, what do you mean, reasons why? You mean, do you actually give it a reason why? Do you quote a reason why? Do you state a reason why in order to mock it up and put it into that black spot? No. That's the trick.

Because the basic postulate is simply there must be a reason why. And no reason is stated. And the greatest scarcity, of course, is the resulting reason. He has postulated that something existed, something existed, something existed, something existed, something existed. And that something never did exist anywhere along the line.

So of course it is the greatest scarcity there is.

Now, just running this, just as given, on some preclears – just that will exteriorize them. I mean, the proof of anything like this is its workability, of course.

Now, this is the anatomy which precedes space: "I must cut down my knowingness and produce some random action so that I will have a game." There must be then some kind of a compulsion to have a game.

No, it's totally self-determined, just as you'll find the core of any thetan continually self-determined. He says, "I must have some action, some randomness, some game, some space. This is a good thing, space." And sure enough it is.

So he enters into this game very wholeheartedly, and every time he puts out something to view he, of course, has put out nothing to view. And when somebody else put out something to view – nothing to view.

But he believed that there was somebody else more powerful than he. Therefore he believed that there was something there to see, so therefore he saw it.

On neither side of this was there actually a reason why we had to put something out until, in desperation, he began to add reasons why. But I say in the basic operation he put something out and said, "Now I don't know about it and so therefore I've got to add the reason why."

He will add the reason why sooner or later. When he gets into a civilized state, then really for the first time, when the complexities of existence become very great, then for the first time will he add real significances, which are actually just shadows but they're real – you know, he accepts these as real significances. A chair is a chair. Its significance is that you sit in it. See? "This is what I am supposed to do with a chair."

And we have entered the game into the stage of "Now I am supposed to." And the first "I am supposed to" is "Now I am supposed to see." Before you perceive a chair, you have to say, "Now I am supposed to perceive a chair." And you perceive it. Before you perceive a mock-up, you have to put the mock-up there. Now, this is the rule of thumb of all processing: that an individual is seeking further significances in his case and will continue to seek further significances in his case until his scarcity of reasons why is remedied.

That's not remedied by explanation. You evaluate for him, of course you've just given him a bunch of specious reasons why. There isn't a mechanical way to address this whole problem, then, called aberration.

The reason why is, of course, his basic purpose. The failures of man are simply those points on his track when he has suddenly observed that his purpose – his postulated purpose – was non-existent now. Somebody has pointed this out to him or he has pointed it out, something of the sort.

His postulated purpose, his straight course, can no longer exist. And that itself is failure, which is merely a postulate. What is his intention, what is he doing, what is his goal...

Well, individuals after a while begin to believe that the goals have to come from an exterior source. And this is the make-break point of the case. This is the hump. When they hit that point and go over beyond it, they're in bad trouble. They become men, they become animals, so forth. That's the make-break point.

TBD

When purpose becomes other-determined, that's the make-break point in life. When all one's purpose is other-determined, and none of one's purpose is self-determined. We immediately look this over in terms of what are orders? And we see immediately, orders are an other-determined reason why. Or your determination of somebody else's reason why.

Orders. Orders. Directions. You start to direct somebody, you have given him a purpose. You say, Now you do so-and-so and so-and-so," so a purpose comes out to some course you are setting somebody on; something you are setting up, and so on.

Well now, he could, of course, just blindly carry out this order without any reason why, but as he begins to flag, a reason why introduces itself into there. A man will obey orders very, very happily until he starts to wonder why he is obeying them. And then he caves in.

The military forces recognize this so strongly that they are prohibited, military officers are prohibited from explaining the reason for their orders. Their orders must be given and obeyed without any further explanation.

The introduction of a reason why. Well, a reason why I am alive. An order is, in essence, telling somebody "This is why you're alive." He has to have a reason why he's alive, somebody gives him an order. Well, that's a reason why he's alive, so he can produce some action, of course. Or so that he can cause something, so he can do something. It's when a person is depending upon these exterior commands utterly, and is not generating any of his own commands, that he is in trouble. An individual is as well as he knows who is directing him.

Well, you heighten his knowledge of who is directing him simply by sitting down as an auditor and directing him. If you do a good, clean job of it, he could actually get in pretty good shape, just by the fact that you were ordering him around. He can pin that down. He knows during that auditing session that he is being audited, and he knows what he is doing, and it's very precise, and he's going along doing beautifully.

So for that period he has a great certainty. He knows where the orders are coming from. And knowing where the orders are coming from, he is fairly happy about it. He gets to feel better, and a lot of the question goes out of his life.

But we're just talking about orders. Supposing we had no mechanics involved in this whatsoever, but supposing we – instead of an auditing session – we were giving calisthenics. And the fellow was supposed to jump up in the air and clap his hands together above his head and spread his feet apart, and then jump up in the air again and put his feet together and put his hands at his sides, and jump up in the air again and clap his hands together above his head and put his feet apart – in other words, we'd just go through Swedish calisthenics, we'd find out at the end of that time a person felt saner. Now, whether he felt healthier or not is beside the point. You see, he just felt saner, that's all. He felt better directed.

He felt a little tired and so on. He can look up at the front of the group and see the instructor who is issuing the orders. He has, then, a certainty of the location of the source-point of these orders. And as such this gives him a confidence, this gives him a security.

Security could be merely that – just a security, or certainty, as to the source-point of orders and directions.

Now, orders and directions can hide in the bank. We know that very well. And we know about facsimiles and so forth. So here you have hidden orders and directions which aren't immediately located by the individual. Well, why, in the first place, is he pulling them in? Why does he have anything to do with these things?

Well, he's just going out through his old "I don't know, so I'll put something out which I don't know about and then I will pull that in," and that's actually the basic anatomy of a facsimile. It's merely a formed, heavily significant chunk of energy which an individual is pulling in to explain to himself why he's surprised. Only this can get to be very grim business. The person has forgotten all about it. His knowingness on the subject of what he is doing is completely gone, and at the moment Dianetics – Scientology's highly popularized form – was introduced into the society, the second that this occurred, found a society which had mostly forgotten that it could ever have pictures. I mean, it was so far down the line that it didn't even know it could have pictures. It didn't even know it was still pulling in pictures.

It had long gone past the stage when everybody had good, brilliant pictures. So we found that even people who had eidetic recalls quite routinely didn't know it. They just sort of had an instinctive feeling, kind of like it, and once you called their attention to it, "Oh, yes," they'd say, "I have a picture." Well, they didn't know they had until you asked them the question.

You'd have to look very close to see that transition of knowledge. The fellow has remembered things by reading them out of a book, and yet he didn't know he was looking at a picture of a book to read them back out of – Eidetic recall.

And of course, this is fairly high stage of affairs. Anyway, a facsimile is simply a whole bunch of significance. And if you get rid of a facsimile for an individual, you do what? You might take a significance out which he feels he can t tolerate, and so render the bank a little more null so that he can enjoy it, but essentially, what do you do? You can do it for a couple of hundred hours, maybe, but you can't do it for much longer than that.

Because if you do it after a certain length of time, you have rendered all these significances which he has hoarded, which he has carefully believed, which he has squared around – oh, he has worked hard to make those facsimiles significant. And you've reduced a tremendously scarce item to an unbearable level of scarcity.

And having done so, the preclear gets worse. That's a limited technique. Definition of limited technique would be that technique which reduced out of a case too many significances.

All right. Well, in the face of all this you'd say, "Well, how in the name of common sense could you possibly audit?"

Well, let's take the first level you'll find your preclear at. Your preclear has gotten to a point where he doesn't believe he can tolerate exterior direction of any kind because he knows very well that all exterior direction is very dangerous. So that's taken care of by Opening Procedure, any one of the Opening Procedures, preferably those which (1) locate space and get his attention on space instead of objects and (2) which remedy his havingness. Opening Procedures, in other words, which locate space and remedy havingness.

You know, "Locate some spots in space. Now locate some solid objects. Now locate some spots in space. Now locate some solid objects." This, by the way, remedies both space and havingness and therefore does a preclear quite a bit of good.

You're giving him a whole lot of significances He has abandoned the idea that a table has any significances. He's just sort of mechanically using tables and all of a sudden he wakes up to the fact – "Hey! What do you know? A table! And the purpose of that table is to sit down at and it's to put food on and, boy, is that table significant. Slrrp! Oh, boy." See? And that makes him real happy.

All right. Therefore, our first stage on this gives him two things: It gives him a certainty of order source, and it gives him, in addition to that, a feeling that he can obey these orders without dying in his tracks or something of the sort. In other words, it demonstrates to him he's not going to die dead just because you gave him some auditing commands.

It does something else. It improves his tolerance of interpersonal relations, because auditing – auditor to preclear – is a very personal relation. And if one can be established, you have bettered his social tolerance.

To what degree? To the degree of talking freely with one other man or one other woman. You've just remedied his interpersonal relations to that degree.

So we'd have three things happening here the moment you gave anybody auditing procedure. Opening Procedure, one right after the other, this person would find out there's a positive order source. It's right there. "It's sitting there; I can see it. And that man is significant. He is an auditor. Boy, he is significant. He's got more degrees than you can shake a stick at. He's a smart guy. He's terribly significant." The more significant you are as an auditor the more in demand you will be. The more mysterious you are as an auditor, too, sometimes, the more in demand you will be.

We would find, then, that we would remedy the source of the order, the tolerance of receiving orders, and we would give him one leg up on interpersonal relations. Now the last is why you have to establish two-way communication with the preclear. If you don't establish two-way communication with the preclear, he is simply being condensed some more. He is being picked on. He is being shoved at some more. See that? He's just getting crushed in a little bit more.

If you let him talk, then he's putting out a little space, too.

Now, all of the auditing which you do has to include these first three conditions: an improvement of his tolerance of receiving orders, an improvement of his certainty as to the source of those orders, an improvement of his interpersonal relations with at least one other person.

So all auditing contains those conditions. And when those conditions are violated, why, the preclear has a bad time.

All right. Let's take the next procedure. The next procedure would be – with the usual, routine preclear – the next procedure which would have great value would be to improve his tolerance of viewing.

Because you'll find him in a condition where he is absolutely certain that it would kill him dead if he looked at something. Oh, I know, there he has eyes and all that sort of thing, and yeah, he has visios, and so forth. Well, this preclear, no matter how good he is even if you exteriorize him instantly, would still rather look at a facsimile than at the physical universe. He'll look at facsimiles of the physical universe; he won't look at the physical universe quite routinely.

The fellow who comes out with pure, perfect visio of the physical universe, I haven't met lately. Why doesn't he see? Tolerance of things to view. His tolerance of things to view is as bad as he can't see. He can perceive as well as he can tolerate significances. Now, get this: When a thing becomes too scarce, it becomes impossible to exist.

That's theoretically. An individual eats food, but food is terribly scarce and terribly scarce and terribly scarce and terribly scarce and terribly scarce. He will actually get to a point where if you put turkey and roast beef and ears of corn and all kinds of good things to eat on the table in front of him, he would not only not eat them, he would know they wouldn't exist. And if you did manage to get him to sink his teeth into them, he wouldn't have any cognizance of the fact that he was eating. He'd tell you he was eating, he'd tell you, yes.

But that's what we know by reality – that's what we mean by reality or certainty. He'd have no certainty on the fact he's eating. Everything would be very unreal to him. He'd feel sort of foggy and drifty.

You see, food has become so scarce that food doesn't exist. Now, if food became just a little more scarce than that for this individual, the thought of trying to eat that food would cause him to throw it up. In other words, if he ate a little bit of it he would throw it up. He would reject what he had to have.

And this is your swapping ends. This is where something becomes scarce and then becomes unreal and then becomes something that you'd have to reject. And no matter what that thing is, there it was, then it became scarce, then it became unreal, and then it's something you had to reject, will be the course of existence of any significance.

Now, an individual at one time craved all these significances in his bank. And then they became scarce, there was not enough reason for living, see. Not enough purposes, not enough goals, not enough fights, not enough games, not enough toy soldiers and friends and armies and all kinds of stuff; see.

And it became very scarce. And he got to a point of where anything that seemed highly exciting was unreal. See, he got to a point where it was unreal.

So you talk to somebody, and you say, "Well; you remember .. " – unreal. That's forgotten. Unreal would be a shadow of forgetting.

And when a thing is totally unreal, it is forgotten, see. And they'd have this kind of a condition. You'd say to this fellow, "Well, you remember the days when you were in space opera?" That's totally unreal. Yeah, he's heard something about space opera. Maybe the fellow spent five million years in space opera. And it's just unreal to him, you know. He's not only forgotten that he's in it, it's gotten unreal on the second echelon. It couldn't possibly exist.

He knows that the only place there's any life is Earth. Of course he can look up there and see all those stars, and he realizes that the sun is just one such star, and yet he sort of had figured out a few decades ago that Earth was the only planet in the entire firmament.

Your early geography books, the geography books of the first part of this century, state that over and over and over and over. By some strange fluke, Earth happens to be a habitable planet which is going around one of these suns. Without any proof whatsoever, they immediately subtracted an actuarial impossibility. It's impossible that all those stars up in the sky do not have planets. That's impossible.

Because we can see the mechanical formation of planets and see the remains of one and eight others very certainly gyrating around the sun here, and – but that's... Earth was the only one. Just the only-one manifestation.

So this fellow sort of pulls out of life to that degree. His friends become scarce and so friendship becomes unreal, so friends don't exist. So you have to reject everybody. You see? That course of action.

Now, his past was scarce – you know, he didn't have enough incident, enough purpose, enough significance, enough drive, enough explanation why he was living in his past – and so he lived a few lives, you know, not enough significance. And finally it became very unreal to him he was living life after life. This fact became unreal to him and pretty soon he's forgotten that he has. Now, that we've lived life after life, that's a very unreal thought to people. "Well, we don't do that – we know that."

Here we get this cycle just in practical application all the time of too little significance. One of the reasons why somebody would leave space opera, in spite of the high adventure in space opera; standing a watch on a space-opera bridge – on a spaceship bridge – standing a watch, looking out into the blackness of this universe week after week, hurtling at a mad rate of speed through space, is week after week of standing with exactly the same viewpoint. Week after week, same viewpoint, asking the continuously tense question: "What is it? What is it? What is it? What is it?" With a dependency upon the velocity of the spaceship itself to bring in the objects which one can identify. And that's madness itself.

Now, the assembly line production which was invented by Henry "America First" Ford was the curse of labor. It was actually the death of labor. And may well be the cave-in point of this society. Assembly line production makes a workman stand in one place and handle the same item over and over and over and over. Go through exactly the same motions. You talk to one of those boys that's come out of Dearborn – nnneeeerrroowww. He's gone mad with the idea, or he's turned himself into a robot. And all he can think of is the second dynamic and get drunk. In other words, he's what you and I would classify normally as a bum. Just so that he can tolerate this idea of standing in one place. Now that's what I mean by a scarcity of significance.

Action is a lower-grade significance. Action is lower-grade purpose. First purpose is a thought purpose, you see. Thought direction purpose.

Now we get down on a lower echelon, thought is a result of not having enough action. Now we figure-figure-figure. That's the figure-figure-figure brand of thinking. Because a person can't have any action – it's too scarce, he can't have any effort – it's too scarce, so he's got to figure-figure-figure figure-figure. Most of his figuring is how he can get some action, so he'll be thinking up goals all the time.

The fellow who is involved in fighting man-eating tigers from morning till night never has a thought regarding the amount of action he's engaged in. He doesn't do any thinking at all. Matter of fact, he gets a good systematic way of knocking off tigers, and he has a fine time.

Action. Randomity. Different kinds of tigers. Different places to knock them off. Places where tigers are liable to knock him off; places where they have knocked him off. You get the idea. Now, boy, there's a lot of significance there, isn't there? Lots of significance.

Now, we take this boy who's just got through fighting tigers and we put him on a Dearborn assembly line. And he stands in one place, one square foot of concrete, and he picks up one radiator cap and he screws it on the nose of a Ford. And that Ford rolls down the line on an endless belt and he picks up another radiator cap and he puts it on the next Ford.

There's no difference in these two Fords, by the way – as far as he can see it's the same Ford. Life is getting scarcer and scarcer and scarcer. Reasons why are getting scarcer and scarcer and scarcer.

If anybody wanted to make assembly line work tolerable, even vaguely tolerable, they would at least throw some music and action and so forth so that there's some amusement going on in the joint. But management wouldn't like that – that would be pampering the workers. There might be some of them finish five years of service without going crazy. Management would never tolerate that. I'm talking today like a communist. Yesterday I was a Republican. Anyway... When I think of assembly line production I can see every reason why communism exists. It needs no further excuse.

Well, let's just take this single, unchanging viewpoint forever idea and find out that's the one thing that will drive your preclear right off of his pins. And compare that immediately with this: Here is somebody who is running out of reasons why.

Why is he alive? Well, he can't see any reason why he's alive, because he's standing in one place. He isn't doing anything. He isn't even putting anything out into space and bringing it in again. He's going through this action.

He can't introduce any mystery into existence. Boy, is everything explained! Horrible, isn't it? I mean, it's all explained because there's the radiator cap and the reason he's putting it on the Ford is he's getting two dollars and seventy-five cents an hour. I mean, that's the end of it.

All right. Let's get off of this basis of what are the mechanics of existence, and take a look at existence, and we'll find out that existence victimizes itself by slowing down motion, making possible less and less action, and less and less action, and less and less action, until an individual has to dope himself into an unconscious, forgetting state. He has to reduce his awareness down to a point where he will not recognize that he's not having any action.

If you start to feed him reasons why, you're liable to turn on the most terrific somatics he's ever had. Because he's got everything partly pulled in, you see, and looked at, and he's held it there unexplained. It's all there unexplained. And he pulls it in and it's unexplained, and he pulls it in and it's unexplained, he pulls it in... The reason he pulls it in and it's unexplained is because there was no explanation in it. And there won't be any until he adds one to it.

Now, if you were to run him constantly and continuously and for a long, long while on concepts, all you would have done was strip all the significance out of all the energy, and boy would you leave him in a mass. He would be in a solid, explanationless mass. There's no explanation to it. There's no thought in it. He knows it's there. He knows there's a reason why it's there, but he looks in vain, finally, after he's run all of the thoughts out of it, for it to have any thoughts in it at all. And so he's in a horrible mess.

The way to solve it would be to give it lots of significance. Do you know that you could audit this way. You could give that mass so much significance, just as an auditor... This is evaluating for the preclear. The only reason you can't evaluate for the preclear is you don't evaluate enough for the preclear as an auditor ordinarily, see.

You'd have to push this over the hump that would actually be a strain on the brain – imagination, plenty of it. You could explain to him down to the last ditch why that mass of energy was sitting there.

You know, he's got this pressure around his face, and so forth. And boy, you could explain this to him like mad. You would explain it to him on a basis of demonology. And you could make it so exciting and so significant, give the history of demons, their separate and various names, how they are all bossed by separate and particular archangels or archdevils, and how this has affected him in various ways and how to use them in various ways. And if you were convincing enough, he would lose that mass. This is what's known as demon exorcism. If you pray hard enough, if you explain hard enough, if you yell hard enough or beat a tom-tom hard enough, you'll finally bang enough significance into this mass so he doesn't have to pull it up to his chest to look at it.

But of course he has to be in an hypnotic state to have this done to him, doesn't he? So this actually compounds the felony and that's why evaluation is bad. As I say, you could actually make somebody get rid of one of these masses, simply by putting enough significance into it for him. That's hypnotism. That's why people are willing to be hypnotized. They've got to have enough significance to explain why they're going through all this strain. They're standing in one place, they are working hard, there's got to be a reason why all the way along the line. They don't have a reason why.

Now, every time you do a good job of auditing on a preclear, he'll go into action. When you do a real good job of auditing on a preclear, he goes into action. He goes out of thinking and into action. You lose most of your preclears before you've thoroughly cleared them. They simply come upscale a little ways and they go into action. They are not bad enough off so that there's much upset about it. Actually, a lot of preclears could come in to you, you'd simply introduce some more significance into the case, they would go away and go into action. That's elementary.

Why? Well, the borderline between inaction and action is pretty low. And it's very hard for an individual to remain still. And the only reason your preclear's gone motionless and is sitting still, really, is because he's sure that he can figure some significance into this himself. And so he goes motionless and waits in order to do that.

There's a lot of computations could come in on this, but there's your basic computations and there's the basic reason why a preclear goes off and goes into action. He doesn't start telling you that the world is bad, bad, bad. The person who is bad off tells you the world is bad, bad, bad. Not the person who is well off.

It's simply an action playing field. That's all the significance there is in it. When you try to add very much more significance, there isn't any. But to have a game, you've got to have action. Action requires antagonists protagonists and antagonists.

Once in a while, some man of action will get so desperate that he'll play both sides. He'll play both sides of his own game. He's playing chess with himself. He'll go out and make trouble for himself; just so he'll have some action.

You see people doing this on a thought level. They will get themselves into the most interesting ball-ups, just to have some action. There are people around who are so starved for action that they won't let you rest until they have argued you into fighting with them. See? You'll find yourself upset by these people all the time. The only thing wrong with them is, is they haven't enough action.

And so, they really can't have action so they simply go into an emotional wingding. And they can't do anything in life. You'll find these people are very bogged down on goals, and so forth.

Well, there you just about have the picture. You find that people, by looking for significances, find other universes more significant than their own, more powerful, more full of reason, more full of action, more capable of producing action, and they'll slide over into the winning valence, you might say – the other universe. And they'll borrow this universe and that one, abandoning their own the while, and giving up their own reasons. And the final analysis of it is what?

You get somebody who doesn't know where he is or who he is or what he is doing, but he's sure of this: He's sure got an awful lot of energy masses or something around him, and there's something devilling him, and he's not sure what. And if he could just get the significance of it – he knows that, you see – if he could just get the significance of this, if he could just get the button within the button within the button within the button, he'd be well and happy and go back into action again and all would be well.

And of course, in searching for it, he simply runs out the existing significances he has, and he winds up a significance pauper. He will find more things wrong with his case and wrong with himself than you can add up, if you keep on taking things wrong away from him.

Supposing the only process you were doing on this preclear was to take things away from him. He'd find a new one to put in every time you took an old one away.

And if he was real clever, he'd put in a dozen new ones for every one you took out, just to be on the safe side and create a little abundance. The only reason why he will ever have is the one which he states exists. That's the only reason why a preclear will ever have – the one he states exists. And therefore his self-determinism is essential to his salvation.

When an individual has lost the willingness or the right to postulate reasons for existence, he's gone. You as an auditor are supposed to solve that. The top echelon of space is significance. Below that you have Viewpoint Straightwire. And that's the immediate lower point because that introduces tolerance of looking, and so the more he can look, the more he can have.

There is no scarcity. It's only how much he can look.

(end of lecture)

PAGE 2

5-ACC-28 ANATOMY OF UNIVERSES 6.5.54

ANATOMY OF UNIVERSES PAGE 2 5ACC-28 - 06.05.54

[[Category:Lectures]]
[[Category:Lectures 5ACC]]
[[Category:Lectures 1954]]