View source for Auditing At Optimum (9ACC 550105)

'''Series:''' 9th Advanced Clinical Course (9ACC)

'''Date:''' 05 January 1955

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

----

← [[Lecture_Index_9ACC|Back to Series]]

I look around and I see preclears who are getting hours and hours and hours of auditing. And then I get the same preclear - it has nothing to do with altitude, believe me, because some of these preclears are antipathetic, they don't want to give up some of these pet problems and they know damn well that I'm not going to give up on the subject as far as this altitude is concerned, you see; so, if anything, they fight me a little harder quite often - and I process these people for twenty minutes, twenty-five minutes, something like this, and all of a sudden the guy can remedy his havingness and his perceptions are up and he's got sonic or something like this, you see. And I look over the auditing history of this individual and find out he's had quite a bit of auditing; and he's had quite a bit of auditing and remained static in this state that he's in.

Well, then there must be a certain attitude toward the preclear, a certain freedom of action in the auditing which I'm giving - which is not off the record or is not off the processes or anything which must have been lacking in this person's auditing. See? The auditing he was getting must have been lacking something because look how many hours this fellow has been ground on.

Now, it doesn't have too much to do, today, with intuition, but it has an awful lot to do, today, with just plain orneriness on the part of the auditor.

Now, I can tell you, I can tell you endlessly, "Now you do this and you do that and you do something or other." But it might look an awful lot quicker if you simply knew the theory and saw it in action. And this, very possibly, would be a much faster relay and no via, see?

I was particularly struck with this because in the last couple of days I have audited local, that is, HASI preclears. And this is no criticism of auditors: the boys who did this did quite a bit for the preclear. We're not arguing about this; they did quite a bit for these two preclears. But the weird part of it was is the obvious points on the preclear's case had not been addressed, which is to say, we don't know what was happening, we don't know what was going on, particularly, with the auditor; but we do know that this preclear could not remedy his havingness while exteriorized, see? And the complaint about this preclear was that he simply had gotten exteriorized and his case hadn't advanced from that point. And he had been audited for twenty hours with his case not advanced from that point, with no change of case. And I thought this was a very curious thing indeed.

So I took the preclear and audited her for a relatively short space of time, just bingity-bing. And I checked over the obvious things that a preclear should be able to do.

By doing what?

By doing Route 1. All I did was standard Route 1. And before I'd ask this preclear to copy anything half a dozen times, I was aware of the fact that this preclear could not remedy havingness while exteriorized.

Well, of course, this person's case was hung up, see? The most obvious thing in the world, see? And yet, evidently, for twenty hours nothing had happened.

Now, there are some other little things that we sometimes overlook. Although we have Six Basic Processes, remember we've got four years worth of processing. There are all kinds of processes on the track. And the basic axioms which appear in Advanced Procedure and Axioms have not necessarily been departed from. The only stress difference between axioms in The Creation of Human Ability and in Advanced Procedures and Axioms is the fifty, you see, that have to do with the origin and structure of a thetan and the behavior of energy, and the others - three hundred axioms, apply much more intimately to man in his conduct and evolution. See, they apply much more intimately. And the principal difference is the fifty axioms in The Creation of Human Ability stress pan-determinism and the earlier three hundred axioms stress self-determinism. Difference. Considerable difference in direction.

Nevertheless, this doesn't mean that the fifty axioms have now superseded and the Six Basic Processes have now superseded each and every one of all these materials, so that we have an old one called gradient scales, the old axiom on gradient scales.

And it kind of made my brains creak a little bit how anybody could have missed this case. But I suddenly realized that I was doing it on gradient scales. I didn't tell this particular person... Today we say, "Give the preclear wins." Well by that we mean give him enough to do so that he can win, don't give him so much to do that he will lose. Well, what is this but a gradient scale? The basic behind that's a gradient scale.

All right. So I said to this preclear, "Be three feet back of your head. What are you looking at?"

"Back of my head" is not an unusual reply, but certainly we have to ascertain this.

So I said, "Well, all right, copy it. And copy it. And copy it. And copy it.That's fine. Now, how many copies have you got there?"

And she had all of her copies. Where? Pushed into the back of her head.

Now I says, "No. Let's get the idea now. I want you to put a copy alongside of the back of your head. You see? And then a copy on the other side back of your head. And then a copy a little bit further out. And then another copy on the other side over on this side. All right. Now, can you do that? Now you go ahead and do that."

"Oh, yeah. Well that was easy." You see?

And I said, "All right. Now pick up one of those copies and eat it."

"I can't," she says.

"Oh," I says, "Well, now can you consider that copy a pie?"

"Yes."

"Well, now take a small, tiny slice of the pie. Eat it."

"Yeah."

"Take a little bit bigger slice of the pie."

"Yeah."

"Eat it now. A little bit bigger slice. Okay, take the rest of that copy."

"Okay."

"Now take the next copy and eat it."

"Okay."

"Take the next copy and eat it."

'All right."

"All right. You got any more copies around there now?"

"Well, there's two sitting over here, left over."

"All right," I said, "clean those up. All right. Now what are you looking at now?"

"The back of my head."

"All right. Copy it. Now where'd you put that copy?"

"I put it right over here."

"All right. Copy it. Where did you put that copy?"

"Right over there."

"All right. Copy it again. Copy it. Copy it. Copy it. Copy it. Copy it. Copy it.Copy it. Copy it. Take two of the copies and eat 'em. Take ten of 'em and eat 'em." Get the idea?

"All right. Now," I said, "clean up anything you've got there now and put ten thousand copies out in this room."

She said, "That's an awful lot."

"You don't have to count 'em. Just put ten thousand copies out there."

She said, "All right. I did."

"All right. Push them all together."

"Okay."

"Eat 'em all."

"All right."

Bong!

The preclear's lines on the body which had been keeping the preclear from - no further than two feet, you know, from the body all of a sudden let up and she went out there to about hundred feet.

And I said, "Now make up a great big mass out here at a hundred feet. Now get in it."

"Yeah," she said, "that's nice."

I said, "Okay. Eat it. Now make another great big mass. Get inside it."

"Okay."

"Eat it up."

And we remedied havingness. But you understand that the basic theory of Remedy of Havingness had not even vaguely been breached. But I wasn't necessarily using the exact English to get this havingness remedied.

Why? Because I was trying to talk to a preclear who was not accustomed to Scientological terms. I was trying not to do more, you see, than get the preclear to do the exact action. I knew the exact action the preclear had to perform. Now, how to coax and by gradient scale get this preclear to perform this action was the whole meat of the auditing session. Now, that auditing session, that was only about ten minutes of this auditing session and her havingness was remedied. That is to say, she could do this because - pardon me, I did a little more on that, and I said, "Make a great big mass now and just throw it the devil out of here. Get rid of it. Make up another big mass. Throw it away. Can you do that?"

"Why, sure," she says. "Another big mass. Throw it away.

In other words, remedy of havinguess is making them be able to accept and throw away at will. It isn't just bringing in masses.

All right. This person's havingness was remedied. That is to say, this person could or couldn't, you see?

"Now," I said, "Invent some wrongnesses." And knowing very well she must be stopping something, you know.

"Let's see, wrongnesses."

This preclear, by the way, had a bad thyroid.

"Invent some wrongnesses," she says. "Uh-umm-um-well, I could run around in this room." This was a wrongness, see. "I could run outside on the street and run up and down the street. I could stand on the front porch and jump up and down. I could go out back and walk around the yard."

And I said, "What's your profession? What do you do in life?" And she says, "I am a dancing instructor." You get the idea?

And this person had an enlarged calcified thyroid. You see, the wrongnesses in her life were the wrong motions people would make, until all motion had become wrong to this person.

Naturally, the best way to turn off all motion would simply be to turn off that gland which monitors motion in the body, which is the thyroid. That is the thyroid, that is its function. Now, you don't have to know that particularly. But this would have worked right on out without anybody knowing anything more about this.

And "Some more wrongnesses. And some more wrongnesses. And some more wronguesses."

And she did it with just a little bit of comm lag, one way or the other, and she was spitting them out at a vast and swift rate here in a very short space of time, you know. I mean, in four or five minutes after I'd asked the question, she was spitting out wrongnesses without comm lag. But they all continued to be in the band of motion, but they became sillier and sillier motions. Like: "I could run out front and jump a hundred feet in the air, see. I could race all around the city screaming." See, we were really getting things that are more agreed upon as wrong. And "I could run from here to Detroit in the middle of summer." And just this sort of thing, just recalling what she was bringing up, more or less. All right. Then she says, "I could sit still and worry," as a wrongness.

I gave her three or four more times on the auditing question. And I said, "What's the wrongest thing ..."

You know that's not proper English, but it's proper Scientology. Wronger, wrongest. The dumbbells that invented grammar believe that wrong and right are absolutes and so they cannot be modified: you can't have something that's more wrong. You can't have anything that's more accurate either. I think that the boys that invented grammar were crazy.

And I said, "What's the wrongest thing you could do?" She says, "Make a misstep in dancing."

"What's the wrongest thing that one of your students can do?" And, she says, "Move." And she blew into a line charge on the thing and that was that.

And I, of course, said goodbye to her and - see, just this brief third of an hour, something like this. And I said goodbye to her. And of course, you understand this preclear was not nutty, just working a little bit poorly. But I said, "Well now how's your thyroid now?"

And she said, "I don't know. I suppose it'll be all right. It's burning hot right now." Well now, of course, you might consider we should have continued the process. Well, I merely had the precaution of having an auditor check up with her a few hours later.

Naturally when something starts to get rid of mass at a fast rate of speed, it's going to get hot. Obvious. I didn't even ask her to clean it up.

Now there's an auditing session. Now, why couldn't that have been done, why couldn't that have been done in the preceding twenty hours - because she exteriorized at the fifth hour.

Well, I ask you, ladies and gentlemen, what went on during those twenty hours if she exteriorized during the fifth hour?

Well, undoubtedly something went on. Undoubtedly some process was done which was below the level of need of the preclear. You see that? So that the persons probably did something like have her touch walls or something like that.

But, still, if you had an individual touch walls for twenty hours I can't conceive that it would not make it possible for her to get further than two feet from her head.

We don't know what went on during these twenty hours, but they were chalked up and the preclear admitted having been audited these additional twenty hours. But there were no change in the case for twenty hours. I can't understand this. It's one of these incomprehensibles. So I'll just not try to understand it, I'll just say that it's an incomprehensibility and go ahead and solve it as an incomprehensibility by, if possible, getting better object or demonstration instruction on auditing.

Now, it may be that a few years from now or. .. I will be very far from the world's best auditor. I certainly hope this condition would exist. But right now I happen to be a pretty good auditor and I know this because I keep picking up cases that are boggity-bog-bogging and doing this and that and straightening them out fairly rapidly.

Now, all due respect to the auditing which is done around, I very often accumulate the benefit of a lot of hard work on the part of an auditor. In other words, he gets in there and slugs on Opening Procedure by Duplication for fifteen hours and then, like an engineering officer I used to have, I suddenly pick up the case right about the time it was going to blow anyhow, you see, and do something spectacular. Naturally something spectacular would occur at such a moment.

But if this - this engineering officer I had, by the way, used to overawe the engine room by going up and reading the instruction manuals of some piece of complicated machinery in the engine room and then bawling out the engineers for not knowing all the names of these things, you see, which he had just memorized. And then he would forget them entirely within twenty-four hours. I know because I bawled him out one day because he had been bawling men out to this degree. And I said, "All right, now. You like to get yourself in that position, go ahead and name the parts of that pump." He couldn't do it, but he had just done it the day before. And that was when I discovered he'd been going up to his room and quietly reading the diagrams and getting all the anatomy of a piece of machinery right and then being very superior, you see, to the rest of these engineers. And they hated his guts as you can imagine they would.

Well, I'm not trying to pull that here. Because people do get some spectacular and amazing results.

But we do not have a single auditor trained anywhere - I am sure of this - who has a proper idea of the length of time necessary to get a change. And I believe the auditor's intention, in terms of time, of how long it's going to take him to get a change or an alteration of case is offbeat. He has gotten cautious. He started to - he took my estimate, which was based to a marked degree either on my auditing or some research auditor's auditing, you see, and he took that estimate; and we said, "Well, you could do this or that in two and a half hours," you see? And he went ahead and did it. We don't say that he did it right, but he did it for two and a half hours. And he did not get this same result on a preclear. He got a much quieter result. That is to say, he didn't go as far. He obtained the same amount of change which was described, maybe, in twenty-five or thirty hours, if he continued it. But the possibility is that he didn't continue it. So after that maybe he gets a slow look at a case. Maybe he gets the idea, you see - there are a lot of ways this can come about - he gets the idea, "Well, you just keep doing it for a long time and something will happen on that." In other words, he evidently doesn't expect change.

Well, now, if he doesn't expect change, he not going to get it. Because he's not going to pay attention to it when it occurs. Get the idea? Supposing - because it would make him wrong to get a change in a half an hour if he's expected to get this change in ten or fifteen hours. And if it occurred in a half an hour, maybe he wouldn't listen.

And most of the cases I've picked up are in an interesting state of not having been listened to. Well, if the individual isn't listened to then he is put into an effect, proper. Instead of being an origin of a communication he is made into an effect of a communication. And naturally, now and then, his machinery just opens up on him. It's just like opening up barrage and salvo at the preclear from his own machinery. Now I'll give you a better idea of how that is. The preclear says - he all of a sudden sees these big gold lights that start to sparkle out in front of his vision, and seeing these big gold lights, he says - "Oooh!"

And the auditor says, 'And now touch your chair."

Well, now, he's already been made the effect of something, you see - the big gold lights - and he wants to now be an origin of a communication and he is not permitted to do so. In other words, the two-way cycle of communication is violated and he is doubly made into an effect. And he's liable to go further into apathy with a quick rat-tat of effect than anything known.

Now, an example of this: A fellow struck once by a bullet is not so much upset. Let's say he's wounded and he recovers. But how about this fellow that's struck once and he just starts to get up again and he's struck again? He'll get real apathetic and lie down. Maybe both wounds were superficial, but it was the fact that he was struck again.

You'll notice when running the prenatal bank - this is not the ideal state of affairs. One doesn't represent it as the ideal state of affairs. This is just what happens and what occurs amongst men. He gets an AA and he decides he'll rebuild - we can run this sort of thing, see - gets an AA and decides he'll rebuild all like mad - the GE does - and he gets things kind of patched up and another AA hits him. And he decides he'll rebuild, you see. And he gets things kind of patched up and another AA hits him and he goes into apathy on it, and he makes, to some slight degree, an unfinished mock-up.

The unfinished character you see in some people, you look at some people and you say, "Well that person never finished."

Well, it's just too much repetition of the same sort of shock. Well now, the reason for this is a very simple one. He got an AA, didn't he? He didn't give anyone else one right afterwards, did he? Then he got another one, and certainly this time he didn't give anybody else one. And he got another one and he.... You get the idea? He didn't do anything to anybody. So you've got an overt act-motivator sequence going here minus the overt act. In other words, you've got motivator, motivator, motivator. So we have violated the two-way cycle of communication.

The way it runs and is nonaberrative is motivator, overt act, motivator, overt act, motivator, overt act.

Now, the possibility is that if he'd still - after three AAs - had still been able to do something to somebody and it was intensely effective, then a distinct possibility there that if he could have done it three times he would have made up for his two-way cycle of communication. You follow how this would be? I mean, he's got three strikes coming to him, now, and he gets them. This is why your baseball teams shift sides every inning, you see? Each one has three outs coming to him.

Well, that is the only hope in auditing. You can make up for the preclear a whole sequence of missing overt acts, you see? You can make up for him at any time you want and they'll more or less slide into the proper places and the case will rebalance so that you get a two-way cycle of communication going.

Processing would not work at all if this were not true; if you couldn't remedy the lack of communication on the backtrack by communication in the auditing session. Well, remedying it in the auditing session is actually putting in the missing parts of the communication formulas all down the track, so it can be done later. Mostly because there is no later. You understand? There is no such thing as earlier and later. So that you can remedy these overt act-motivator sequences imbalances or two-way cycle of communication imbalances anytime you want on either side.

It's just the fact that we can stack up three and we get a tone change. We stack up three, you see, and we get tone change. Now that tone change might continue and exist as a waiting time right on forward, right up to the auditing session, and then all of a sudden we give this fellow three overt acts in mock-up; and all of a sudden, bang!

Now, if you gave him fifteen or twenty overt acts in mock-up he can say, "Well, it's just in mock-up," and skip it. In other words, it's a much easier thing to do to remedy it in an auditing session because the characteristic of pan-determinism is present. And the fact that the person is pan-determining both sides now - he's working both sides - he does recover. You get the idea?

What you're raising, actually, is the individual's pan-determinism; you re not just balancing two-way cycle of communication.

If you were just balancing two-way cycle of communication you would do it this way: you'd give this individual the opportunity to give three AAs, you see?

And the oddity is, is that won't work because the characteristic of pan-determinism is absent. See? He's picking out something else for his randomity.

Dramatization, then, what they used to call in some complicated subject or other - I've forgotten the name of it - abreaction of hostility. We let the fellow dramatize madly and get rid of his hostilities by this and that and he felt much better.

And believe me, the workability of this is very faint indeed. That's because the characteristic of pan-determinism is absent. He's again, chosen out fifty percent of his environment, you see, to control and fifty percent to attack. He's again started a new division of determinism. One is separate from his environment but is able to control it. By the way, separateness is an interesting thing there. An individual says, "Yes, I'm separate from that wall. I'm separate from that. I'm separate from this. I'm separate from something or other." This is not injuring his pan-determinism: he can only monitor things which he can be cause toward.

All right. As we look this over, we find auditing itself is done much less rapidly - getting right back on the subject we started with here.

Now let me tell you about this other session. An individual - of course, we admit this, that he was audited under - earlier audited under considerable duress and he was not in very good shape but - while he was audited a series of emergency assists. But I picked up this case and audited him for a couple of hours on two different days, that is to say I audited him an hour one day and an hour another day. And I found this individual had been asked by his auditor to remedy anchor points and fix up things. He didn't have any kind of reality on these anchor points, you understand, and he went ahead and floundered around and adjusted anchor points in a sort of a dazed sort of a way. And actually, he was permitted to have enough loses so he kind of lost faith in Scientology. The boy has a broken jaw, you know the case.

All right. I made it my first business in this case to bump his reality up the line. Well, how'd I do this?

Well, there's one way to do it, is you can generally see what you can create. If you know definitely that you can't create a body you won't ever see one. If you knew it completely, that you couldn't create a body, you would not be able to see one. If you know definitely that you can't create machinery to run and remember and think and so forth, then you won't be able to see that machinery. What you can't create you can't see.

What you can see - you still must have, in order to see the wall at all while exteriorized, you still must have some sort of an idea that you can create the wall. The visibility of the wall depends upon your ability to create it to some slight degree. That is, on a lower scale to monitor it or control it. You know that you could possibly get a hammer and knock the wall down or you could at least put dents in it, you could mark it up with a crayon, you could do something with it, so you can still see the wall.

The wall starts to disappear when you are not permitted to change it in any way, shape or form.

I dare say there have been fortifications in the past which have been sitting straight out on the plain, which were such splendid fortifications which refused to be dented or affected to such a degree that people, knowing well that they could not make another such fortification, stopped seeing it entirely. And we sort of got a castle in the cloud effect, you know? They might still run into it, but they couldn't see it.

Now that's a reductio ad absurdum, you see, I mean that's a stupid length.

Theoretically, if you believe so completely that you couldn't create or control something, if you just knew that you couldn't create or control something, it would, very markedly, disappear. Therefore, you can communicate most easily with those things that you know you can create.

A story is a lot of fun to you if you know that you could create a story. Get the idea? It's much less fun when you don't feel that you could create a story.

All right. So much for that. That's just your old cycle of a physical universe. That's all. Create-survive-destroy. And that fits into perception very neatly, and is possibly a new angle and a new curve on this, but it simply fits in in remedy of havingness. That's all.

If an individual can remedy the havingness of something, he must feel that he can create it to some degree. You see? Another way we go about it.

The slightness of ability to create something is fantastic. I mean, just some slight, tiny feeling that you can create something or change it around permits you to see it. But when that's all gone: he won't see a thing.

That's why machinery disappears. The individual forgets it and doesn't create it anymore and it's set up to run forever and all that sort of thing. And he doesn't see it.

We're stretching a point and it's a rather - an obtuse point. But it happens that it works.

This individual had lost his feeling that he could create any part of the physical environment. In other words, he'd really been knocked down. He'd really been knocked down. More than physically. He'd just been knocked flat in all directions. Freud would have been quite interested because sex was all tied up in his having been hit, you see? Sex was tied up in this, there was a woman involved. So this, of course, would knock down creativeness and so forth. He was being inhibited from advances or something of the sort. We don't care. Freud would have been interested in this.

Well, we could drag a tremendous number of significances out of this. But the whole point is, is boy, it sure looked unreal.

Well, now we say the world was very unreal. That would mean, also, that he was not being permitted to communicate with it. And let's get a lot simpler about this. Let's forget about the cycle of communication for the moment and recognize that if he was being inhibited from communicating with the environment, he would not be able to see the environment, or feel that it had any reality. In other words, we drop the C on the ARC triangle - you know, inhibited communication - and we'll get inhibited reality, won't we? Is that a good simple explanation for it? All right. What would you think of some guy that had been hit hard enough, you see, to break a jaw? Boy, he's sure been thrown out of communication with his environment, hasn't he? Hm? He sure has been, hasn't he?

Well, if this is the case - you know, you're going to give him a blow, the environment's going to strike him, he's probably still stuck in the engram, you know, all this kind of thing - why, he's not going to communicate with it. So his reality's real bad. And we ask this individual, as an auditor, to adjust his anchor points. Obviously, if he adjusted his anchor points well enough his broken jaw would go bing! This is an interesting fact; it is demonstrable. But his reality was so poor that how could he possibly adjust an anchor point? Because an anchor point, Lord love us, is darn near completely invisible anyhow. You get the idea?

So we just plain have to do all sorts of things about anchor points with the idea of remedy of havingness and creation of them, and we'd have to fool around with this quite a bit before we finally got to a point where he could see some anchor points.

Now this is the most elementary thing in the world: remedy of anchor points. It was covered in Advanced Clinical Course Units much earlier at some degree. And then, I don't know just why we don't cover them this heavy again - it certainly has not dropped in importance - because if you're going to patch up somebody's mock-up you certainly better know all about anchor point structure. Because the electronic structure of the body is a series of anchor points and when these things get out of place, the fellow's in a horrible mess. And they get out of place when energy imbalances are set up. And once the anchor points of the body are out of place - by the way, you could also call them subbrains. They're talked about in Advanced Procedure and Axioms as subbrains. They're not subbrains, they're anchor points.

So that at each point of the body where you've got a bending joint, for instance, there's a big gold ball in there. See? And, here of course, in the mandibles you've got a tremendous number of anchor points. Look at the amount of motion in the vicinity of jaws.

Well naturally, his anchor points must have been pretty badly messed up. So what did I have to do?

I just had him mock up things and remedy havingness. First step.

I was astonished to discover that no auditor had worked on this individual so that he could remedy havingness while exteriorized. This boy was exteriorized, see. Fantastic. Here's two cases in a row where nobody has really gotten down and worked on the remedy of havingness with this preclear, see, while exteriorized. He couldn't remedy havingness worth a nickel.

But I had him up there, real quick, on the subject - maybe ten minutes - and he was remedying havingness and he was throwing away anchor points and he was pulling them in and he was starting and stopping avalanches and automaticities - avalanches, you know. Automaticity. A fellow starts to pull in a little havingness, you know, and all of a sudden, swoosh, and he starts to get the works: machines turn on.

Of course, the way you handle that is just have him mock up more anchor points and enforce the flow. Have him mock up more anchor points and throw them into the flow. More anchor points and make it flow faster. And then gradually stop it. And then stop it. And then start it. And then stop it. And then start it.

Control is start-stop-and-change. You're trying to get the preclear to control something, just remember that.

So have him start it and stop it. And then change the color of the anchor points, see. Just to get a change in there, you see. And then turn it around and make 'em flow outwards. And in this case an avalanche outward started in a very short space of time.

So we threw more anchor points in going out, see. And I had him throw more anchor points going out and more anchor points and more anchor points. And finally he was making 'em go out faster. And then I had him stop 'em, start 'em. You know, slow 'em down - gradient scale again - then stop 'em, then get 'em started again, then speed 'em up, then slow 'em down, then stop 'em. And then change their color. And start 'em again. And the next thing you know, boy, he was handling anchor points like one of our auditors who was a famous juggler in England handles Indian clubs. I mean, there's just nothing to this, wham! wham! Anchor points? Oh, man, there's nothing to this. And this was about a half an hour's work, about half an hour deep in the session; this was the first session.

Then I had him mock up an electronic structure for a body, totally independent to the body. He didn't have any idea what he'd mock up there, but he mocked up something. And I said, "Okay. Now let's eat that up. And let's mock up another electronic structure for the body." I said, "Put it back of the body there someplace. Put it way away from the body."

"Okay. All right." That was all right with him. So he puts it way away from the body.

And I - "Well, throw that one away." See? Get rid of stuff; be able to accept it.

"An electronic structure again. Only this time make it the biggest structure you could think of in terms of a body. You know, just a huge electronic structure."

Oh, and he had gold balls and - notice, as an auditor, I didn't tell him what the electronic structure should look like, didn't describe it to him any. But he had gold balls and wires and little gears that he had dreamed up all by himself; you see, and transformers and resistors. He was getting into MEST universe-type electronics. But he threw that away.

And I had him mock up another electronic structure for the body, which was much bigger. And then condense the whole thing and wreck it. And throw that away. And then make up another electronic structure and throw that away. And I did this for about ten minutes. And we had more darn electronic structures, fragments of; lying around there. Well, we mopped up the whole area. And I says, "Now you take another look at the anchor points of the body. Well, find one."

"Oh," he says, "you - there just wasn't anything like that around the jaw."

I said, "Who told you to look around the jaw?" I said, "Look around the body. Now, does your right arm feel pretty good?"

"Yeah. It feels fine."

"All right. Find one in your right arm."

So he goes running down the right arm, looking around, you know. He says, You know, there's big gold balls right at the joints of the right arm at the elbow." He said, "That's a funny looking thing: a big gold ball."

Now this individual had been asked to adjust the GE anchor points before by an auditor. But the auditor had not gotten him into a situation where he could see 'em or where he could handle energy. Now, in order to see anything you'd certainly better be able to handle the energy connected therewith and be able to create it and push it around, you know, and you can see it fine.

All right. All right. Very short space of time, why, he had a pretty darn good idea - just looking over the body - what these anchor points were all about. And then I had him throw a whole shower of anchor points into the air in front of the body.

He says, "Gee, that was fast." "What was fast?" "Well, they all went into the jaw." Naturally, you get anchor points flowing around like this every time you've got an anchor point or two out of position. One of the more fabulous things.

So I said, "Well, where are they going?" "I don't know." I said, "Well, throw another cloud of 'em up there." So he did. And they all went someplace. "Well, where are they going?" "Well, I don't know. I can see a little better though." What's he doing?

He's remedying the havingness of an anchor point now, see.

"Another cloud of 'em. Another cloud of 'em. Another cloud of them." And he says, "Well, I got an anchor point there. There's one that's out of position or something; it's sitting there on my chin."

I said, "Well, that's fine. Grab hold of it and push it into position." "Won't go. Won't go."

Well, I ran something else into anchor point processing, just on the spur of the moment. And I said, "Well, invent something wrong with your face." Maybe I was being too specific, but this sure worked.

And so he starts inventing something wrong with his face. And inventing something more wrong with his face.

See, we just skipped anchor points at that moment. He'd had a little bit of a lose so I didn't know a gradient scale I could get lower on rather than maybe have gone on and had him remedy the energy area where the socket was. There must be something in that. But instead of doing this I said, "Invent something wrong with the jaw."

And as usual he did not invent anything, he simply started telling me what was wrong with his jaw.

And so I stopped him and I said, "Now, listen to the auditing command: Invent something wrong with the jaw." And I had to repeat it about five times before he finally got this; so fixated was he on the idea that there was something wrong there, you see?

Well, he got off of this. And then he started to invent two or three things and then he finally says, "Well, it's got anvils around there instead of anchor points." And I said, "Well, that's fine. All right."

We just got the comm lag out of it, see, and we kept on with the exercise for a moment or two just throwing up clouds of anchor points and letting 'em go where they would, and throw up a cloud of 'em and let 'em go where they would.

And I said, "Get that jaw anchor point... Now, get that chin anchor point there. Now push it back in position." "Well," he says, "it doesn't want to go."

"Well," I said, "look where it is going to go." Which is probably what I should have done in the first place. "Now, look where it's supposed to go. Now, what's in there?" He says, "There's another anchor point in there." I said, "Well, all right. Pour fifty or sixty more anchor points in there in a hurry." So he did.

And he cleaned them out. I said, "Clean 'em up now. Get all those anchor points out of that hole that that anchor point belongs in. Now move the anchor point in there." It went in there, click! "Gee," he says, "that's ... that's .. that's there." He says, "You know, it sort of knows where it belongs."

And I said, "No." And so I said, "Well, now look around the jaw there and see if you can find more about anchor points."

And he says, "Well, you know," he says, "that there's an awful big black - there's an awful mass of energy around the break. Big mass of energy." And I said, "Well, who's it belong to?" "Oh, it belongs to me." I said, "Well, that's fine." I said, "Pick it up and throw it away. "Won't move." Belong to him, huh.

So I said, "Invent something wrong with your jaw. Invent something wrong with your jaw. Invent something wrong with your jaw." You know. You know. Just more and more because I was trying to get his jaw back into place.

I suppose this is just a frailty as part of an auditor. I should have simply gone on and stressed up his capabilities and pushed him on along the line. Except for this: He was being hounded by a doctor to operate on this jaw again. And I was kind of racing with this. So I got specific. His attention was on there anyhow.

So all of a sudden the mass of energy turned into his father's face, cabango! And then jumped out in front of him. Automaticity entirely.

So we just had his father jump out in front of him two or three times and so on. And I said, "Now," I said, "let's take a look at this jaw." You know. 'And throw that away. Now take a look at this jaw. Is there any black energy around there?" "No. There's no black energy."

I said, "Well, now, let's take a look and see if there isn't an anchor point around there somewhere."

"Yeah. There's a little one."

"Well, that's fine. Let's mock up some anchor points and throw 'em at it."

"Oh," he says. He says, "It's gettin' bigger. It's gettin' bigger. It's gettin' bigger."

"Throw some more at it."

"It's gettin' bigger!"

"Throw some more at it."

"You know," he says, "it's bigger than my head."

"Well, throw some more at it."

"Okay," he says.

I said, "Where does that belong?"

Long pause, and he says, "It belongs out in front of me someplace." Out in front of him.

You know the body has some enormous anchor points which belong way out in front of the body and on which a person depends for his balance. There's a couple to the right and a couple to the left, see? These huge anchor points are way out in front of the body. And here was one of these anchor points inside the guy's head compressed down into this jaw. Give you an idea of how far off this structure could be. Huh! We got it out there and got it into position by mocking up some energy in the place where it belonged, you see, and throwing that away. And we finally got it adjusted into place. Clank!

And I said, "Well, where are some more anchor points around there?" And just with this same process, you see. "Throw up a cloud of anchor points. See where they go. What's there? Where is the anchor point? Pull it out. Try to move it into place." "Won't go into place."

"So mock up some anchor points in the place where it's supposed to go. Throw those away." You know, clean up these flows and then get this anchor point in there.

And all four front body anchor points of this boy were inside his body! One was inside his jaw, two were in his chest and one was in his stomach. How this boy could walk - I noticed he was weaving a tiny little bit - but how he could walk with any balance at all must have been simply willpower because this is what the body depends on. You can, by the way, it's quite curious if you were sailing down the street exteriorized and you take a look at somebody, you look over his anchor points, you'll find those big wing anchor points. They're way out there, great big gold balls way out in front. You can take one of these - one of this guy's anchor points, you know, in front - and pull it sideways and he'll start to walk in a circle without knowing why he's walking in a circle. And you push it out of position and he'll start to lean. Oh, it's a very obvious sort of structure.

Well, anyway, the hour came to end, finally, with all four of these anchor points, wing anchor points, back into place, but without entirely cleaning up the jaw, you see.

But I'd improved his reality, he felt very good now, he felt fine. But he was still fixed with the idea that he had to have his jaw operated on. And he suddenly realized that he had been figuring all the time he had been audited - for an assist and everything - he had been figuring right straight along the line in this fashion, that he was going to get audited so many hours and then he was going to have an operation. He was going to be audited so many hours and then have an operation. And this was the consideration and the postulate. And right there at that moment he was entirely stuck with this idea.

Well, he came back the next day for an hour's auditing and I chased him around. He still felt fine. I chased him around a little bit, gave him a little tiny section of a Grand Tour, checked up, made sure his havingness was in good condition. You know, just checked him over, spent about five minutes doing this, and then I ran him forward on the time track to today at two-thirty when he was going to be operated on and had him go entirely through the operation. Then entirely through the second operation and then up to the time when he was going to get well; this is about three or four months from now.

Now, this is Dianetics 1950, no more, no less, isn't it? But it's Dianetics 1950 with a curve. Here's an individual who's got something on the future time track and just Q and A. Well, he's in pretty good shape, he can run, he seems to be stuck with this, this is an immediate problem and so we do something which is entirely in keeping with processes, but something that's just a little bit different, and very old, really antique.

We run the future engram. And do you know, he had the awfulest time running it. They had the awfulest time getting his jaw into place in the operation. First he had a hard time going under, then they had an awful time getting his jaw in place in the operation, and then they had.... And then all the little ligaments as he went forward on the track, they all... you know he says, "There's just so many of them, it takes so long to heal." Fabulous, see, I mean - works it all out. And so we kept running this and we ran it about five or six times, fairly rapidly. It didn't take very long, maybe fifteen minutes to run this five or six times all the way up, and all of a sudden he was going through it with great ease. Not just saying, "I've gone through it," you know, and then open his eyes. He was coming back to present time every time.

And then I took him back to the time when he got socked. And I ran him through that, and he couldn't get it, and he couldn't get there, and boy, he was the most lost soul you ever saw in your life. Took him back to the moment he got socked. Dianetics 1950. See, this was nothing else but. Just pure engram running and nothing else.

Then Dianetics 1951. Of course, I was just trying for a fast result and effect, and to hell with the text, see. Dianetics 1951, but all these are in the text one way or the other. Running future engrams we've done that. And overt act-motivator sequence; couldn't get him to get hit. So I took him back the moment before the blow and had him pulverize his assailant in mock-up. Parked him on the track the moment before the blow and had him start beating up the guy who had beat him up. See, overt act-motivator sequence. And we had him do this several times and he finally with great satisfaction says, "You know, that time I broke his jaw, I broke his arm, I killed him and he's lying there," and so forth. And he said, "Maybe I shouldn't have done that. That's too violent."

So, I had the guy kill him a couple of times, similarly, by beating him up and have him kill the guy several times more. Didn't take very long to do this. And then I started him back a moment before the blow and told him to run on forward through all major incidents to present time. Just run it as an engram, you see.

He went right straight up to the blow in the next ten seconds. And the engram exploded in his jaw.

I've had this happen very rarely, but every once in a while it will occur. An electronic explosion of the entire engram will occur. Well, that's how tight that engram was in his jaw and that's how tight he was to this situation.

Here's an unusual assist, you see. He was so tight to it and the energy in it was so compressed that it was just like plutonium, get the idea. It was completely unstable. And after we'd run overt act-motivator sequence for a little while, we got an actual explosion. This is not even desirable, it's just a freak, you see. I'm just giving you a freak phenomenon that occurred. But that was all there was to the engram of the fight. If that explosion hadn't occurred, I simply would have run it many more times. You know, just run through it, major incidents, major incidents. Almost a scan through, you know, fast. Relatively fast with the major incidents and so forth, making him work his way on up and bring him to present time and stabilizing him there with a little 8-C type "Find the floor, find the chair, you in present time? All right."

"I'm in present time."

"All right. Go to the moment just before you've been hit. All right. You got that? Now run on forward through the major incidents to present time." He'd finally open his eyes and say, "I'm here."

By the way, the old phenomena of the guy saying, "Yes, I'm in present time." He's just run this arduous engram, you see, which is way back on the track, days or years, he's just run this death, or whatever you call it, and you say to him - you haven't erased it yet, but you're bringing him to present time - and you say, "Now, come to present time."

And he says, "All right, I'm here." Where is he?

Female voice: There.

He's there, that's right. But finally when he came through to present time the last time, it took him about five seconds, see, to get through to present time, see, here he was in present time again.

Now I says, "Pick it up from the moment before you got hit, and run it into the future, from there clear into the future for about six months." Of course, he's six months in the future, remember.

"All right, come back to present time. All right." "Yeah." I said, "How is it?"

He says, "It's the funniest thing," he says, "I've changed my whole attitude about this entire thing."

"Well, you feel good about it? You feel bad about it?"

"You know, I don't feel any way about it." He says, "This is nonsense, you know. This whole thing. You know," he said, "I get awful worried over nothing."

You know, this is typically the preclear telling you it was the Bromo Selzer, almost. He'd been worried over nothing.

I said, 'All right. Let's take a look at those jaw anchor points." "Oh, brother," he says, "there's an awful lot of them out of position." I said, "Well, snap some of them in." He did.

Straighten up some of this stuff around the jaw. And the hour was coming very close to a close. I could only audit him an hour. I had people standing outside the door like mad. And he says, he says as he... "Gee, you know," he says, "it's going to take a little while to put this into shape."

And I said, "Well, all right." Now, I said, "We can hit it again in another session. And straightened him up and chased him around, and gave him some change of space and remedied his havinguess and found present time real good, and stabilized him and straightwired the session slightly, and so on.

And he was still telling me, "You know, I feel entirely different about this whole thing." He said, "It's just amazing," he said, "how seriously I was taking all this," and so on.

I said, "Well, they've been telling you you have to have an operation tomorrow, and you can go ahead and do what you please about it."

And I just left it there. At least if he has the operation, he'll have no complications from it. But it's too bad that we didn't have another hour or so on the thing because we would have boosted his jaw back. Now, if he didn't get operated on at two-thirty today, or he doesn't get operated on at two-thirty today, give him another hour's auditing, we'll get enough of these anchor points back in position so the jaw will snap in.

He finally realized the reason the jaw was out of place is because it was being held out of place by large energy masses. It was being held bodily out of place. But more important than this, much more important than this, is the fact that a positioning of an anchor point down the arm - let's say let's position an anchor point way down the arm here; we can make a guy drag an anchor point down the arm - he can bend the bone at that point. You aware of this?

This is one of the more horrible sights which a guy can engage on. This guy has to be in terrific shape. The bones, what you consider to be the great realities of structure, are dependent utterly upon the created space of these anchor points, you see. And what we consider to be reality is the most monitored thing you ever saw in your life. It's very easy to monitor. But I discovered after the session that this individual had an erroneous idea concerning his potentialities. He actually thought that he would have to - and before he could repair a little old dinky thing like a jaw dislocated - he actually thought he'd have to mock up and unmock such things as an ashtray at will so everybody could see it before he could tackle a bone. Now, I don't know where in hell he got such a dizzy idea. There is nothing easier to handle than a body. Nothing easier to handle than a body part. You don't have to be able to mock up the Empire State Building and furnish it a will so everybody will agree it's there before you can fix up one of your hangnails. And he had been waiting on an ability on his part to do such things as mock and unmock ashtrays before he thought he could handle a jaw. Just a piece of misunderstanding of the grossest kind.

Well, it couldn't have been such a misunderstanding if he all of a sudden spoke to me about it. The auditing itself unraveled this concept to a marked degree.

Now, I don't know whether I'm going to audit this fellow again today or not, see, because he's being hounded by several people to get that jaw operated on and slashed open and done this and that. And he is in the unfortunate position of having been PDHed by the doctor who struck him during the first operation. But we didn't work on this particularly but it must have cleaned up rather markedly.

Now, we're not even curious as to what decision this person made. Remember, it's his jaw. We are talking, though, about this oddity, that this man has been audited for two hours and has been pushed well on his way toward Operating Thetan.

Well, then what are we doing in terms of time? On both of these cases when I first laid my hands on them they were unable to remedy havingness, and yet they'd been audited many, many, many, many hours. Remedy havingness while exteriorized, you see.

There are just certain things that a thetan has to be able to do. These are contained quite markedly in the Six Basic Processes. Do you know, somebody exteriorized should be able to go over and touch a designated spot on a wall. Do you know that? That's 8-C for an exteriorized thetan. He should be able to do this. Of course, if he can't do that it means that he doesn't feel he can create the wall. He feels that he mustn't be the wall. You know, he has a lot of oddities here. But it still remains that there are just certain basic things he has to be able to do. He has to appear and disappear at will. He has to be able to mock and unmock energy. He has to be able to perceive actual things and it's not very tough, I mean, it's just a little list that he has to be able to do.

I guess we could fool around with him for a long time without remedying his ability to do these few little things. The few little things he should be able to do are contained in the Six Basic Processes. He should be able to engage in a two-way communication and so forth.

If you ever got an exteriorized thetan to engage in a two-way communication, of course you have an Operating Thetan. That's the end of that. It's no wonder that he is so dumb; nobody has talked to him for an awful long time. No wonder that he doesn't speak. No wonder that he doesn't hear well. This is not an oddity. He's just been out of two-way communication.

Now, what I've been talking to you about possibly comes to some of you as a shock of "My God, how much do I have to know in order to work Scientology?" Well, you don't have to know very much. The truth of the matter is you're being overburdened by what you don't have to know. See, there'd be tremendous quantities of things you don't have to know that you probably think you have to know. The things you have to know are very few. And that's why we're giving you the Six Basic Processes as a little side course as we go through this, just to show you what these things are, what they amount to.

But here is auditing in operation; that's what I've been talking about today. But of course I've been talking about auditing at a fair level of optimum. The process thrown in at the exact moment necessary to produce the result, the preclear going on winning and two-way communication being continued the whole time up the line, the preclear being led by speed, not being able to relax for one second, no waiting time in the auditing session at all, all communication 100 percent, which in itself would blow hell out of his track, see. And here is a certainty on the line.

Now, there's one point in all these auditing sessions I haven't mentioned and that is the fact that the boy, the second day when he came in, was still hanging up on his other auditing session. That is to say he wasn't stuck in anything, you know, but he had changed his considerations but not all the way. And he had become to some degree cocky, and he felt better. And he felt like king of Earth, and so forth. So I started the session by arguing with him. I said, "You know, you go and get operated on."

And he says, "Well, I know that."

And I said, "You know that's the right thing to do?"

And he says, "No, I don't know that's the right thing to do." He says, "It's not the right thing to do."

"Well," I said, "well, you do know that you have to go get operated on." So I said, "There's really no sense in my auditing you."

"Oh, yes there is," he says.

"But you're just going to go get operated on," I said.

"And no-oh, well, yes, I am. I know that - no - I ..." Unsettled him a little bit on his prime postulate that he had made on this.

And then I said, "And besides," I said, "your ability as a preclear is very poor. 'Now that's something you wouldn't say ordinarily to a preclear. And he said, "It is not." I said, "Yes it is." I said, "You can't mock up and unmock ashtrays, and you can't do this and that."

Got him - actually got him fighting me just a little bit, see. I got his attention off the outside world and got him fighting me just a little bit and then I went into two-way communication with him and we got right to work. He had no time to maunder. He already knew I was sitting there. I kind of kicked him around a little bit, you get the idea, right at the beginning of the session, because I saw - but I did that again merely because of an observation he was sort of hazily fixed on something he had been doing just before he came into the session, you see. He was elsewhere fixated, and he was a little bit fixated someplace else, so if he's going to be fixated anywhere in an auditing session, he might as well be fixated on the auditor.

So I just told him of course he was going to go get operated on. He knew that was the right thing to do. And I just more or less gave him the things the doctor's probably been feeding him, you see. That runs it out just a little bit even to do that, you know. Old repeater technique, Book One.

Oh, I use all of these darn things when they turn up, but the major things of course that have been - along the line, which are with us today, have always been with us - the major things on the backtrack are always with us. Elementary Straightwire - what is Elementary Straightwire, if you please, but a light way to run an engram. See, it's the lightest possible way.

The depth of Elementary Straightwire - if you kept on elementary straightwiring somebody and insisting that he be at the place that he was just remembering, why, you would find yourself running engrams. I mean, you can run Elementary Straightwire straight into running engrams if you want to. It isn't that you use it more and more, you get him into more and more engrams. This is not the case. But it is - as a process - is just the lightest method of running engrams.

And of course lying back of that is a tremendous amount of technology known as engram running. See, it just takes up the past and takes the pictures made in the past, and so forth.

Two-way communication, two-way communication and repeater technique are cousins. Repeater technique, as crude and as unworkable as it is, still belongs in that. You find this preclear keeps coming up to you saying "I got to get rid of it. I got to get rid of it. I got to get rid of it."

I am not above, if this preclear is way out of communication, and so forth, even though it is not too terribly therapeutic; some guy's getting in my hair personally - remember I'm an individual too, something an auditor too often forgets - gets in my hair too much with "You know, I got to get rid of it, I just got to get rid of this, I just got to get rid of this horrible headache, you see, because I just got to get rid of it," he goes with that.

And I say, "Well, you know, you've got to get rid of it." And the fellow says something to me. And I say, "Well, you know you've got to get rid of it. Now, let's not, let's not shilly-shally around with this other stuff I'm asking you to do, let's just go right straight to the meat of this situation and get rid of this headache. You know you've got to get rid of this headache, don't you!"

And the fellow says, "Well-well-oh." Because if he's doing this kind of a dramatization he must be fixed on some part of the bank, and again, let's have him fixed on the auditor if we've got to have him fixed on anybody.

I could probably sit there and say, "You've got to get rid of it."

And he'd say, "I know that."

And I'd say, "Okay." And I'd say, "You know, you got to get rid of it."

And he'd say, "I know that."

And I'd say, "Okay," you see. And I'd say, "You know, you got to get rid of it."

And he'd say, "I know that."

And I'd say, "Okay," and the thing would probably blow.

You just put into a two-way communication things that have never been in a two-way communication before. It was in a one-way communication. Or you've run the engram or you've supplied the absences or you've done something along this line.

I had a fellow one time say, "Now, decide to say..." This wasn't the phrase, but we'll use it just as the example. "Decide to say I've got to get rid of it and say it."

"Got to get rid of it."

And I had him in a line charge before very - a great length of time had gone. Because it was just part of - this phrase he was using was not the same phrase, was - I wouldn't give it to you because you might recognize the person - this phrase was simply the stuck in an engram someplace. He was running on it as a machine phrase, you see, was salting down his entire conversation. I had an awful time with it for a short time, you know, "Decide to get rid of it," and he would decide - pardon me, "Decide to say it and say it," you see.

And he would say, "Got to get rid of it. Now did you s - ."

"Now wait a minute, I said 'Decide to say it.' "

"Well, got to get rid of it," he'd say.

"No, decide to say it. Did you do that?"

"Yes," he'd say.

"All right. Now say it."

He'd say, "Got to get rid of it."

"All right. Now decide to say it and say it."

"Got to get rid of it."

"Fine. All right. Now, decide to say it."

"Yeah."

"All right, say it."

In other words, by the auditor bringing it under his control, the preclear then takes it back under his control.

Freudian analysis, if you've ever noticed, let the analyst take something under his control and have it. And never gave it back to anybody else. Just a goofy trick.

By the way, there's a whole class of auditing that goes that way. That's one of the class of phrases, class of commands: "Decide to and ..." It's a whole class of commands, it's gorgeous. "Decide to be in a body and be in one." "No." That type of auditing. "Decide to be in a body." "Decide to be aberrated and be aberrated." "Decide, decide to have something wrong and have something wrong." Just such questions as this repeated over, making the individual decide and then do it, decide and then do it, decide and then do it.

You do the same thing with a vehicle you're teaching somebody to use, you say, "Decide to run it now across that spot in the road." And then "Run it across that spot in the road." And all of a sudden his automaticity driving machines just go creak, crunch, fall to pieces because he's taking things under his own decision. Whole class of phrases. I've never talked to anybody about this particular breed of cat. It's just an omission, it's not that this is not a good process; it is.

Just like this other class of processes: invent. You can have a guy invent anything.

This person doesn't like housework and you want to get him right over inventing housework. Of course, it's still fun you know, to audit against significances even though it isn't as efficacious as it might be.

And this person just hates housework and hates housework and you say, 'All right. All right. Now invent some work," see. "Invent some more work. Invent some more work."

"Lots of trouble with people, they're always inventing work for you to do."

"No kidding. Is that right? All right. Invent some more work. Invent some more work." Now all of a sudden you say, "Well, now you take housework, isn't that terrible?"

"I don't see anything bad about it."

Yeah, really a lot of fun to monitor this kind of thing. You can take over the machinery and considerations of an individual and really maul them if you really know your Scientology. You can do it in a common conversation. I do it sometimes. I get ashamed of myself. Somebody doesn't want to do something, and I want to do this thing; the easy way to do it would simply be three feet in back of their head and want to do it. But instead of doing this, you see, instead of being that mean, instead of being that mean, why I start discussing how bad it would be to do this thing. And they listen to this and agree with it and talk about it for a little while, and then we'd go do it. All kinds of weirdities. You can use a process in common conversation with some of the most fantastic effects. Not necessarily therapeutic. Just like enforcing a two-way communication cycle on a salesman.

Now, you will find adjustment of anchor points of course is Route 1. You will find the running of engrams in Book One. Nobody's asking you to run engrams. If you do run engrams, though, for God sakes, run 'em right. Run 'em until they're flatter than a flounder. Run 'em until the guy can leave them.

It's an interesting thing. You know, after a while the engram will just be a little energy package that he's got and it's a cute picture, but when he's sitting in one and using it in his workaday world, so on, it's plastered all over him, guys are out here....

I saw a guy the other day who was the most perfect Fac One monitor you have ever seen in your life. He had the horn rim spectacles of the Fac One monitor. He was all out of shape and he's kept - his dramatization is you've got to know, you see, you've got to know this, and so on. And in lack of a Fac One machine, you see, he'd poke his finger and he'd poke his finger in a slow rhythm of a Fac One machine. This is all old-time stuff. This is way back, it's of no great use to us but the phenomena is there; it's out here in the society.

If you knew your Six Basic Processes and if you knew Route 1 and if you could keep in two-way communication with your preclear and lead him a little bit with speed, you would get the best results that we have been able to achieve. But maybe along with that is the intention of the auditor. Does the auditor have to have this much wrongness sitting in front of him? Does he have to have a long time to work it over? Is he trying the strongman stunt of having to have a big muscle in order to raise a small bar? You see, is he doing these things? This we can't absolutely guarantee that he isn't doing. But I do know this: We are auditing far too slowly per unit result. I just know that we are crawling compared to what we ought to do, with exactly what we have and exactly what we're teaching here in the Advanced Clinical Course Unit. We're just crawling.

Now, invent some wrongnesses. Now, you should have - and I'll get a quick report here before we close this up. Are you still running this?

Male voice: Yeah.

Now has anybody started running it on a two-way cycle of communication sort of thing? So that you've got the preclear saying "Okay" to something making up wrongnesses and you've got something out there saying "Okay" whenever the preclear invents a wrongness?

Male voice: (inaudible)

All right, let's get smart, this would be a cute way to do it. A fella, the fella invents some wrongness, "Well, I could be eighty-five feet tall and try to live in a doghouse."

And "That's fine," you'd say as a auditor. "Now have something out there say okay." "All right. Good."

You do that and naturally you've reversed the polarity on these obsessively inflowing machines. And little next trick - I'm leading you carefully here in spite of the fact I'm talking madly this morning about all-out processing. This would be, this would be an interesting thing. You would hear machines go creak. You, as an auditor, could practically hear them go creak.

"Have something out there say okay." The one thing a machine has never done is acknowledge a communication. It goes on and grinds and obsessively inflows and drains all the preclear's energy bank. Does an interesting job of work this bank. You run this two-way cycle of communication in on anything and you have fun.

Now, the funny part of it is a machine's never been acknowledged. You know that a person's facsimile machine has never been acknowledged? You could just have this person sit here, see, and say "Okay, okay, okay, okay," without telling him any more about it than this, see. "Okay." He'd eventually start to get the most peculiar pictures. They'd get real peculiar.

And you say, "Now, start saying okay to a spot out there."

"Okay, okay. You sure you want me to do this?"

And what you'll do is key in the darn machine. You're giving it all the acknowledgments which it has never had. You're giving it answers, rather. You're giving it answers.

It said, "You were at the canal locks at eight-fifteen yesterday morning." And of course the preclear knows he wasn't there so he's got a block up here, you know, chunk, see. This machine has long been psychotic. It hasn't given a right datum for the last two thousand years, see. And he starts saying "Okay" and all of a sudden something tells him - he has the strangest feeling that he was at the canal locks at two-fifteen, you see. Wild. Real wild.

Now, as we know, identity, space and time are very, very high-echelon things, aren't they? So if we had somebody invent some wrong locations, we had something out there invent some wrong locations and the preclear would say "Okay."

"This is Bessarabia."

"Okay."

"This is New York." The machine says, "This is New York."

The preclear says, "Okay."

"This is Washington."

"Okay."

"This is Earth."

"Okay."

"This is Arslycus."

"Okay."

"This is Earth."

"Okay."

"This is Arcturus."

"Okay."

You would find something happening, believe me, because the wrong times and places on the part of the machinery he resists. Now therefore, you could say - have something out there say, "This is 1776."

"Okay." Every time, you know, make a complete communication cycle of it. Something out there says, "This is 1776." Have the preclear say okay.

"This is Valley Forge."

"Okay."

"This is 1492."

"Okay."

"This is 10,003 B.C."

"Okay."

You sure it isn't? You see, now that's time and location, two big areas.

Now, identity.

"You're Papa."

"Okay"

"You're Mama."

"Okay."

"You're John Jones."

"Okay."

"You're Bill Smith."

"Okay."

"You're Doug Hutton."

"Okay."

"You're Rick Walker"

"Okay."

"You're Johnny Fell."

"Okay."

"I'm not either Yes, I am. Well, that is my name."

You get the idea?

The machines - what happens in this whole phenomenon called hallucination is simply this: a machine starts giving the bum dope. First an individual depended on it for the right dope, the machine set up an obsessive - it set up an inflow, you see, just in communication. It said "This is two-flfteen, or this is two o'clock at 401A East Roosevelt, January the 5th 1955." The machine said this. It was just an idea that came through. And it keeps the preclear up to time, you see, up to time. He thought this was a cute idea. And he doesn't acknowledge that. He doesn't answer

What do you think that machine's going to do? It's going to get a heavier and heavier and a much more massive, massive, massive line in, and it's going to start giving him facsimiles and showing him pictures of clocks when he wants to see clocks, or black and white masses after a while when he's right or wrong. And then after a while it's just going to give up and it's just going to give a mass, you know. It'll give a mass, it'll give a mass, it'll give a mass. You start bringing it upscale again and it'll go through the manifestation of psychosis. See, it'll give all the bum answers. And finally it will start to put through answers which are really horribly bad and wrong, you see. These answers are completely wrong, they are utterly out of agreement with everything and we call that hallucination.

The fellow who believes a lot of snakes are crawling around on the floor simply is on the receiving end of a machine which is telling him snakes are crawling all over the floor, you see. It's himself that's doing it via some machine.

Okay.

(end of lecture)

[[Category:Lectures 9ACC]]