View source for Havingness (9ACC 541215)

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

'''Date:''' 15 December 1954

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

----

← [[Lecture_Index_9ACC|Back to Series]]

HAVINGNESS

And he set it up there because it mustn't happen again and he has to be reminded and all of this sort of thing, you see. And so he rejects, then, these bad things by putting a screen up there which will reject these bad things. And he's put it all on automatic. Well, this screen that rejects these bad things will eventually get too many bad things in front of it and it will reverse and it will act as a complete vacuum of bad things.

What has he done? He's artificially created a scarcity, hasn't he? And having created a scarcity, he's really created a vacuum. So, when he gets near these bad things they snap in.

He will go through a period of existence whereby although he allegedly detests, and says he detests, all these bad things, he gets these bad things.

There he is analytically determining that he doesn't want anything to do with all these bad things, analytically, and actually he is getting all these bad things and it makes him quite confused and gives him a tremendous protest about life in general.

He wants good luck, he gets bad luck. He wants good cars, he gets a bad one. He wants to go on with the job, he gets fired. Get the idea?

Well, here you have these machines, these stimulus-response mechanisms, reactive mind mechanisms, which are busily and happily rejecting each and every aspect of existence which he really considers desirable. And reversely, which is attracting to him every bad item of existence which he considers is very, very undesirable - and thus his confusion about life. And makes a very interesting problem though, doesn't it. But this is the exact mechanism of this problem and this is acceptance level and this is havingness.

All right, now let's tie this in to havingness.

Think about it for a moment - havingness.

You realize each one of these items or quantities are greater or lesser mass. And so these items or quantities, which he is rejecting or accepting and so forth, are masses which are denied him or masses which are compulsively, obsessively attracted to him. See. So his havingness is being continuously monitored on a reactive level.

And in view of the fact that havingness actually requires no great significance, he gets into a very, very confused state because the significance and super-significance of all of this stuff is so baffling and confusing that he hardly knows what to do about it. He wants to have a pleasant wife and he gets a screaming lunatic. He wants to have - . You see, you get the idea?

But the reason he has and not has in the first place is simply mass. And it is the mass-no-mass ratio. But he has set up things to fight mass. Why did he do this? And let's get the third factor in here.

He did this so that he would have an interchange of terminals - interchange of electricity between terminals, to be much more exact - an interchange amongst terminals.

He has to hold something off and say, "Well, I've got a good reason to hold that off," or something of the sort. And he has to hold something close to him and he has to be something else in order to get an electronic circuit going. And this is again according to his considerations with regard to this.

So, there are certain things he has - he interprets this on a thought level - there are certain things he has to fight. Actually, what happens is the thought level deteriorates into mass level.

Thought deteriorates into mass. Mass does not become thought. Let's remember that. And if we started working it the other way around, the problem would be unfortunately completely unsolvable, if the other were true, that is to say, if mass was the senior item. It's not.

All right, you get these three factors: Acceptance level, havingness, and the necessity to have a couple of terminals, one of which will discharge against another, if you're going to be automatic.

See these three things going together? Well, they all talk about automaticity, don't they, hm? Each one of these factors are influenced by an automaticity because their basic reason why is so that a person can have an automaticity.

Now, an individual gets so thoroughly, thoroughly snarled up on the track that he believes that his ability is zero and that all these automatic abilities are terrific. "My body can do this and do that" is sort of the dull idea he has, you see. "My remembering machines cause memory to take place."

Remember something about automaticity: Nothing can occur automatically in the human mind or in the human environment which cannot be done by the individual himself Remember this because the individual himself must have done it. Let's take the fabulous electronic brains which they're building today. I've seen some of these giant brains and fooled around with the giant brain theory many, many, many years ago, before it became so popular that every bootblack was making them. And these great electronic brains actually have a tendency to make a slave out of their designers or engineers. And I talked in fairly recent years to a couple of boys who were hand over fist into the electronic brain business up at Harvard. And there was another guy there from MIT. And these guys were all ENIAC, UNIVAC, ESKIMAC conscious to end all electronic brains. And they started telling me off, because they knew of my interest in the human mind, about the inaccuracy of the human mind. It was so inaccurate, it was this, it was that, it was bad, it was bad, it was bad, it was bad, it was bad, they - it had no endurance, it couldn't go on and compute and compute. It just couldn't do this. All from a standpoint of an adding machine with a couple of extra tubes in it, they're telling you how bad the human mind is.

And these guys ran off at the mouth and frothed and hydrophobicated for some - and I finally said to them, "Well, what made this UNIVAC here, anyhow? What made the UNIVAC?"

And they said, "Well, a great deal of experimentation."

I said "No, no, no. What made the UNIVAC?"

And they said, "Well, engineering science."

And I said, "No, no, no. What made the UNIVAC?"

And, "Well, people made the UNIVAC, of course."

And I - "People did! The human mind did. If the human mind were not capable of each and every operation that is contained in that machine then that machine wouldn't sit there, would it?"

This made them furious because they were utterly unable to accept the human mind in any way, shape or form. These boys were running so automatic that I swear to Pete, they had little - I mean mentally they were running so automatic that they undoubtedly had little green flags that popped up in front of their face to tell them when to get a cup of coffee, and they probably had other automatic machinery which put in the sugar. And it's just terrific. I mean they had set themselves up totally automatic. Of course, they've thrown all their automatic machinery into restimulation. Actually they didn't understand too much about the human mind or the UNIVAC either, for that matter. It could have been made much, much better. I mean, you could look it over and there were tremendous number of refinements you could make if you were cognizant of some of the mechanisms of the human mind.

Let's take the mechanism of making a facsimile. The mind makes a facsimile by resisting the environment. It puts up a big energy mass then it says bloo, see? Got a facsimile. It says "stop" or "come here," you see, a tractor facsimile. By the way, tractor facsimiles are quite cute. They quite ordinarily are black on the side that the individual is looking at them. And facsimiles which are made by resisting are black on the other side. If you turn a facsimile around you quite often find it's black on the other side. Well, anyway, the human mind will make, by resistance and by compelling something toward it, all these pictures. And a lifetime of these pictures will add up into various categories. It will file very, very neatly and so that any beam of thought which penetrates through these pictures will go only through the winning valences. And that is the way computations are solved by human mind.

Takes a - that's a reactive level. Computation, I said, you understand, not ideas or anything sensible. It will take a whole - a reactive answer is obtained in this fashion, by the way a reactive answer any day of the week is better than a mathematical machine answer. I mean, they are more accurate answers. So we take these - a machine can only deal with abstracts - we take the set of facsimiles which are made by these resistances and compulsions toward one, we recognize that these facsimiles were chiefly made and most bountifully made at periods of stress, you see. At a period of stress is the real moment to make a facsimile. People made these pictures all the time. But when you really get a nice, big mass, it was a moment of stress. All right.

They take these, as I say, stack them all up. But the way they stack up, the common denominators of them are losing valence and winning valence. We pay not too much attention to the losing valence. We pay attention to the winning valence. And of course, what apparently is winning, it may be some entirely different thing than what really wins, you see, because it's merely a reactive computation.

Father always got his way. How did father get his way? Father had migraine headaches and heart trouble. Definition of winning valence: Migraine headaches and heart trouble. See, stimulus response, machine, logic. All right, we stack this set of facsimiles of Father up and we find out that if you want to win, the computation says right there, why you have to have migraine headaches and heart trouble. So that this will begin to weave through every set of facsimiles the individual makes.

So he's out on the playing field one day, he happens to like baseball, and it looks like he's going to lose the game and he immediately turns on a reactive computation and he does almost anything he can do to get himself a migraine headache, such as stick his head in the road of the ball, or something like this, you see. That's the proper answer. Or he will simply become psycho-somatically ill and have to be taken back to the dugout so that he won't be part of this losing game.

Necessity to win, anxiety to win, fear of defeat and so on, are basic computations which are set up so that you can get a computer, such as the reactive mind, running. You have to set up these things as artificial things. They have to be set up as just rank arbitraries. Boom. You have to set up "We have to win." Now, that is just an arbitrary set up in order to get a computation. If you didn't have any choosing between winning and losing, you'd never get a computation at all on anything, you see. You could say - you could count how many apples there were in the barrel, and so forth. But the second we did something dynamic about these apples, and so on, we would start to run into some tiny degree of win or lose, you see. "Should these apples in this barrel sit out here in the sun?" Well now, if we had a method by which we could distill spoiled apples into alcohol, the answer would be yes, you see? We would win in terms of havingness. And if we didn't have one, why, of course, by letting them sit out there, we would lose, wouldn't we.

Lose. Win. In other words, have.

Well now, how in the name of common sense do we ever get something which is basically no mass, no wavelength, no location in space to get into the interesting idea that it has to have. You understand that a - that a perfect duplicate of a thetan would be another thetan. That would be about all there was to it. Not a perfect duplicate, I mean a copy.

For a thetan to communicate with anything it would have to have no mass, wouldn't it? And you mean to tell me that this beast actually develops and accumulates a thirst to have? Well, there's the basic problem on the track. There's the basic way you get some randomity. There is the basic method by which the individual makes his communication lines more complicated and makes a game possible.

He sets up things which he cannot duplicate and which cannot duplicate him. So he's got a communication breakdown of one kind or another. This is a sure way to break down communications.

The first and foremost way to break down communication is to have a distance. And he promptly you see, if he's going to have any kind of a game he's got to break down communications someplace. If he has total communication, there is no game possible. So he breaks down communication first and foremost by having a distance and next, and immediately at the same time really, by having a mass. Now, boy, that really breaks down communications. Any mass really breaks down.

Well, how does it do this? Well, it's - a thetan can't duplicate it, that how it does it. And it can't duplicate him because it wouldn't be a mass if it did.

So there're two ways to break down communication. Now let's get a third way and say this mass, when it is no longer here, cannot communicate from here but has to communicate from there, where it now is.

Get the idea? I mean, we move that mass from an original to a secondary position. We would do that and we have broken down communications further and computations begin to arise right away because you can no longer communicate with the mass in the original location, we think.

You see that? See how that would break down a communication line? It enters the factor of time. You cannot communicate now with a then. Can't communicate now with a then. The reason you can't communicate now with a then is because the then has been displaced into its now position.

These three elementary methods of breaking down a communication line much more definitely break down knowingness. Knowingness is the higher echelon; the first and foremost echelon which becomes broken down.

But they break knowingness down by first inventing communication and then breaking down communication. And so you have limited your knowingness so there is something to find out and so that you can have a game, and so on. It's an extremely elementary sort of mechanism.

What's this have to do with havingness? Havingness, then, must be an inversion on the truth. It just must plainly be that havingness is an inversion on the truth. If it can't duplicate a thetan, if a thetan can't duplicate havingness, then certainly somebody someplace has done a switch.

So the thirst and anxiety to have is the thirst and anxiety for a game. In Hollywood, in the old days, they used to have a great many slang terms which described the various parts of a story. I was out there. We used to have a considerable vocabulary along this line - some of them printable and some of them not printable. I understand the modern writer calls a typewriter a typewriter and a piece of paper a piece of paper and the heroine a heroine and the hero a hero, and he's a very well ordered fellow. He wears a coat and tie and goes to work regularly, sits down at a proper desk. And there aren't any movies for years either. Well, anyway, the computation there on the story plot was that you always had to have a weenie. Now, a weenie was the gimmick everybody was after. And a weenie could be a gold mine, it could be a girl, it could be a carload of bullion, it could be the - it was anything everybody in the story was after. And a story plot couldn't exit unless you had something there as a weenie. And you look over any story plot, you will discover that part of its anatomy is a weenie. And when it doesn't have a weenie, why, no - no story. Nobody's after it. Nobody's after anything, you see?

And once in a while a foreign movie will come along which seems at first glance to violate this necessity to have people after something. And we take a French picture that was very famous one time or another. A very pastoral picture about a fellow and he got himself a wife and he got himself a small farm and an old house and started to put it back together again, and the story wanders on and finally comes to a conclusion. And nothing happened throughout the whole story and you would immediately conclude that it didn't have a weenie. Oh, yes it did. The farm field was the weenie. Trying to keep his farm. Farm was the weenie. Now, you could have said there was a secondary weenie to get very technical; and that was the crop. He had a real rough time with the crop. God was after it too, with locusts and things.

So, here we had a - here we had one of the most classical sort of stories that - and yet we didn't end up violating this basic rule that we had to have something that everybody was after. If you don't have something like that there's no game, there's no story, there's no action, there's no desire, there's no bereftment. See, we've just cancelled everything across the boards when we throw that weenie out of the story. Yet I've had a producer do this. He'd sit there, look rather interestedly at the script and say, "Well, I don't think we need this, do we? This, all this talk about this mine here right here in the beginning. This is - isn't necessary. We'll just dispense with that." So everybody is chasing everybody throughout the story without anybody chasing anybody for anything. Public thinks this is very silly.

Actually, a - an editor of a magazine once did this to a friend of mine, Paul Ernst. Just in the interest of getting the story to fit the print, he cut the first two thousand words off the story. In this particular case, the mine was not mentioned elsewhere in the story. It made a very silly story. Here's everybody shooting everybody and people getting real upset and scrambling over mountains, and doing all sorts of things and riding horses half to death, and so on, and there's no weenie. The sole mention of the mine was in the first two thousand words.

So a story lacks causation, and the story of life lacks causation, similarly, without havingness.

The - you'd say that would be the total reason for it, is just to add some meaning to existence.

But when a person begins to be scrambled on the subject of havingness, he less and less can have a game. And we see this weird, peculiar manifestation of somebody sitting down on Wall Street - by the way, during the war, just - no, not during the war, just before the war, there was a Wall Street magnate who had an idea that war might be coming around. He probably - they probably had it on their teletypes long before. They probably knew all about Japan, I don't know. And, sake of business or something, they'd have to know this. People were secondary. And this fellow asked me down into the middle of a skyscraper where one of the fanciest dining rooms - one of the oldest, ricketiest streets you ever wanted to see - and one of the fanciest dining rooms existed - I ever saw in my life. And it's sitting right down there in the middle of Wall Street where you would very definitely never look for anything except for what they have on the street level, you know? And, all the magnates ate there. They ate magnates generally.

And he had me down there, and the sole reason for all of this confabulation that he wished to engage upon totally was whether or not I might not use my influence to keep his nephew out of the war. And he was pretty sure a war was coming and he was pretty sure that I would probably have an expedition or something which would be extragovemmental - he was misinformed in that degree, I'd much rather fight and - expeditions, that's all you can have in peacetime.

And the point was, however, that this old boy, this old boy had more rocks, diamonds, gold piles, and shares of stock than could easily be traced by the Internal Revenue people, and he was most concerned that no game should take place for his nephew. The old man had indigestion and oh, I don't know, he had - he had a lot - he had a power of difficulty as I've heard it expressed in the South. But he didn't have a game; he didn't have a game. He had worked all of his life to make all of his securities absolutely secure. He had learned well from Black Friday and the depression. He had learned well. He had gotten to a stage where he didn't even have to juggle in order to keep his money, that was in beautiful shape, that was. The game was over. He was using money for that game and as soon as he got all the money absolutely secure and there was no further question or motion regarding money, then he had gone on an inversion on a game, if you please, so that there must be no game.

Just a few years ago I was up at the Explorer's Club. And this old boy is a patron of the Explorer's Club. He does sort of reach out on an idea fashion. He does wander around there once every few Sundays or something like that in the hope somebody will talk to him.

Explorer's Club is run in a very interesting way, as a complete aside and appertaining to nothing here. The explorers, active explorers who are members of it, have very, very small dues. It's now about fifteen dollars a year, something like that. And have these beautiful quarters and all kinds of this and that, you know. And then they have patrons of exploration, and so on. And about the least that it costs any of those is about a thousand dollars a year. They don't go anyplace or do anything and they're tolerated. But the hunger and thirst for a game on the part of these people who don't quite dare, bring them there. And the club has beautiful quarters.

When the - when you see an individual, when you see an individual who has gotten too engrossed in ending somebody else's game, you'll find out that he'll not only end his game, but he'll invert and his general conversation will be on the grounds that there must be no game.

Somebody sues you and you mustn't counter-sue. You get the idea? Somebody comes around and steals your car and you mustn't load up a high express rifle. I mean, I had an argument with this character the other night, with somebody, and he was absolutely shocked and astonished that anybody would care to make a game out of such a thing, see. And the whole object must be that you must do nothing. And this, of course, has a grain of truth in it. The safest thing in the world to do, for a thetan, is to do nothing because this is his native state. But when he has entered into a game and when he does have automaticities and havingnesses and so forth, all furiously at work, the moment he starts to do nothing, he is in the soup, crush.

If you are walking around any part of your head or bloodstream, get hep to a little cell or something and go into communication with it, and you will discover that it believes itself to be the sole of truth, it is entirely encrusted by energy, it's a small black ball, and it knows what is true. And true is silent and motionlessness. And so in the middle of this crust of energy, traveling at a mad rate in your bloodstream, it is being silent and motionless. It doesn't work out.

Now, it mustn't have a game. The phagocytes are in a little bit different boat. They definitely can have a game. Actually the immunity of the body entirely depends upon the game of the phagocytes, which is to chew up any alien bacteria to the body - pounce. And every time you use a little more penicillin or a little more this and that to keep taking the game away from them, you just fix up the race up to a point where one bug walks along, you know, one small bug walks along that a few - a century ago and so forth, wouldn't have bothered anybody, and we have an epidemic with thousands dead in the streets, see, simply because we have denied an essential portion of the body its game. And having denied it its game it'll quit playing the game and it will decide there must be no game, and that's the end of it. And it will fall back into motionlessness and truth. And the bug could walk up to one of these phagocytes that's been thoroughly indoctrinated that no game is possible, and a bug could walk up and say, "Nnaw, chomp," and that would be the end of the phagocyte.

Now, where we have an artificiality, such as there must be a game, introduced in the first place, we're bound to have complications. And actually, this is an artificiality. It is not a natural thing. I mean, it's not native to the thetan. He can think of and produce a game.

Now, we can certainly understand that this can reverse, right? Well, now, a game is based on have to have. That's a game, see. At varying degrees have to have a game is the first obsession. And now, we get down to just have to have mass. And this, of course, will reverse, sooner or later, into mustn't have mass. And if we mustn't have mass what do we got left? We've got considerations or conditions.

So we ask somebody who is having a real rough time, we start processing him on 8D, and 8D starts going along very neatly and very nicely, with one exception: the replies are all conditional. 8D, you know, "Where would your mother be safe?"

And he says, "Well, let's see now, my mother - safe," comm lag, comm lag. And then finally says "Well, she would be safe right over there if my father were present."

And you say, "Well, where else would your mother be safe."

And "Well, ummmmm..., ummmmm, she'd be safe in the rain if she were wearing a raincoat."

Now, right away we've lost location. If you can get him on location once you're good but after that he's gone. It's all conditional, conditional, conditional, see? She would be safe under these circumstances if other circumstances were present. She would be safe under these circumstances if other circum - . And you finally say, for heaven sakes, find the wall.

Well, of course, you don't say it like that, you say it in a very friendly tone just as though you didn't - hadn't discovered something about this boy. The fellow who does that may be thinking about a game or may even be obsessed in talking about a game but the truth of the matter is, is he can't have one. He can't have. And you'll see everything he's doing. He may be talking about having but that's as close as he could come to the acquisition of any mass.

Such people are very, very curious when run as cases. One doesn't envision the state of mind as descending from sanity to neurosis to psychosis. This is the basic error of psychoanalysis, psychiatry, neurotomy and other mental sciences. The dwindling spiral of mental ability is not through these artificials, these are three artificials, highly artificial. Merely means the fellow is hung in some computation. It merely means he's controlled if he's averagely insane, you see?

I mean they - the battiest people can walk around out here and do the sanest motions. Boy, are they being sane. See, they've heard of this basic computation that you have to be sane. And that means that they've got to restrain wild or erratic motions.

Somebody who tells you how sane he is just have him put up a mock - up of restrained motion and watch it fly to pieces. He's, you know, he's being sane. Well, these are artificial conditions; sanity, neurosis, psychosis. These do not describe states of mind. They describe certain types energy. They describe certain conditions and certain averages. A neurosis is merely that the fellow has an inhibition or obsession in some line or another. And a psychosis he generally can be counted upon to be rather glued up with the glee of insanity which is a lower denominator of pain. And, as I say, sanity is one of these words that would defy the devil. No, which the devil would use as a tool.

No, the gradient scale of mental ability goes this way, mental ability goes: "No game necessary. To "Let's have a game." To "Have to have a game. To "Have to have something very, very valuable in order to have a game." To, well, "You better not play a game." This type of gradient scale. I haven't described the exact gradient scale but that's the type of gradient scale there is.

It would be "have" and "not have" as a gradient scale, you see. And so you get these tremendously complex mental factors, you get these tremendously complex factors because all of these conditions of life could each and every one of them be a game and that would be have and not have along some certain line.

Let's take - let's take the Know to Sex Scale. We take know, look, emote. Now, let's just take emote. Look how many games people can have in having to have emotion and not having to have emotion. I've known people that couldn't work at all unless somebody was furious with them.

I've known individuals that just thought that hate was the nicest thing to have around you ever saw in your life. He's a nice fellow, he hates everybody. Here we take lookingness. The amount of trouble which people have with their eyes tell you there're all kinds of degrees and variations of sight and mechanisms of sight which they have to have.

You look around - you'll see people inventing all kinds of mechanisms for lookingness: Weird glasses, contact lenses one lens dark and one lens light, no lens at all but a screen over the eye. Just look at these various mechanisms and we see immediately there are a lot of games possible.

Well, everyone of those things is the weenie. And if you can look at a psychosomatic ill or an attachment to assist perception or ambulation or livingness as a weenie in a game, why, the explanation of what's going on with that person will become brilliantly clear.

We walk down to a fellow's house and we look around and he's got - he's got a beautiful collection of skulls. And we say, "I wonder why this fellow would have to have this beautiful collection of skulls?"

Well, he can have skulls. This we know, see. And he will have some sort of a game mocked up on the basis of skulls. But if you ask him a little bit further and more penetratingly considering these skulls are a weenie, you would immediately discover that there was somebody else in the world who considered skulls very, very valuable. And that's Joseph Schmidt who is in New York City, and this Joseph Schmidt in New York City, he collects skulls. He thinks he's quite an authority too, you see. Just a dunce really. And he unfortunately was able to collect the skull of Mary, Queen of Scots, what was being purveyed, and so on, but actually there is some doubt as to its authenticity. We'll discover that there's a game sitting there with those skulls.

Now, we look at a person's castoff possessions. A persons a keep around, have around - a great many gadgets that they're no longer using. They have jewelry they're no longer wearing. They have all kinds of bric-a-brac. And they can tell you in a highly general sense, "Well it's gone out of style, or it's - ," there's some other glib explanation or no explanation at all. They just say, "Well, I just don't wear it anymore and that's that."

But if you wanted to get very, very significant about the whole thing you would discover that in each time and each case that the item or articles have been cast away that a player was lost. Each and every change in the use of possessions is accompanied by the loss of an old player or the appearance of a more interesting new player. Think of it in terms of a game and you've got it.

This girl no longer wears this locket. It's a beautiful locket but she no longer wears this locket. It's been sitting there in her jewelry case for an awfully long time. She is not even vaguely attracted to this locket, it has no sense or significance anymore and someday she will offhandedly give it to the maid. Well, why isn't she wearing this locket anymore? Well, it's not that it's out of style. No, that is not the case. If we questioned her just a little bit further we would discover interestingly that all kinds of things had gone on in relationship to this locket and they didn't go on anymore and the people with whom they went on are no longer around. And that's - it isn't really that she's holding onto it, for any real reason. If the reason she was holding onto it was plumbed, we would probably say, well, she hasn't thrown it away, given it away, melted it up, converted it or lost it simply because it's a nostalgic item. It consists of the memory of a game and that's why she keeps it by. It's like party favors.

I have seen people keep an old piece of tinsel of some kind or another the like of which you - you know, you can look at it and you say, "Well, that appears on the Salvation Army Christmas trees in better shape," and yet that means a great deal to them. It's a nostalgia, a party favor, something of this character, a Christmas they had, something like that. So here's our, here's diagnosis; diagnosis along the lines of havingness. We don't have to engage in very much diagnosis but if you were quite alert in processing you could understand far, far more about your preclear just by his possessions and his aversions, and so on, than he would tell you in an awful lot of conversation. Because these possessions tell you at once whether he has a game, whether he has had a game and tell you whether he still can have a game and give you, of course, an index of interest in life.

This guy who keeps crowding his bedroom with pictures of himself taken with Theda Bara, pictures of himself with Rudolph Valentino, and so forth, and we just find he's got more pictures and more clippings and, gee, they're in there as mass. Mass-mass-mass-mass-mass, in terms of junk twenty years old. We know this guy doesn't have a game anymore. And that game is represented by havingness. It's still represented. When it is no longer represented by the havinguess it won't even be represented by a memory. That's in most common cases. When they're no longer keeping around an old body they don't even remember that life. No game, no players, you see?

Now, in processing the remedy of havingness actually remedies whether or not one can or can't have a game. And you'll find most people are terribly set and blocked with gritted teeth, you might say, against certain things. Well, those were games they can't have.

See, now, let's take it down one more echelon. They can't have these things. Well, those things represented a game that they can't have. You get the idea?

Now, let's take our young hopeful preclear and discover that he has a very, very nasty case of gallstones. And he doesn't want them. Boy, does he protest. Of course, it might look to you that he is actually inverting and he really does want them and there's some kind of a desire back of all this. Well, yes, there is a desire that terminals, the automaticities, and so forth, have to do with this. But let's look at the more basic reasoning behind this. And we discover that his great protest against these gallstones has to do with this fact that his grandfather had gallstones. And we straightwire out the fact his grandfather had gallstones and his gallstones have a tendency to let up one way or the other. But the game of Grandfather-Grandmother, living around Grandfather-Grandmother, has long since ended. And he's still keeping a token of a game that was done, see, still holding onto a token.

And so we get all these things; tokens, and so on, can just as easily be a psychosomatic ill as they can be a party favor.

Grandma and Grandpa aren't there anymore. There is no game but he's still keeping the gadget because we discover that this set of gallstones was quite a game between Grandpa and Grandma.

You see, he really - Grandpa had to stop work when he was 53 because he had these gallstones and after that everybody took care of him and when he didn't want to do something or something of this sort my he'd have a bad attack. Those gallstones at one time or another were a weenie. See, they were something somebody used very actively and your preclear now isn't using them at all. They're just there. In view of the fact that they're no weenie and he is there and the game is over, he doesn't want them, all this involvement you see can go on with relation to these gallstones, they really worry him.

They wouldn't worry him a bit, by the way, if his wife, your preclear's wife, were handled easily with these gallstones. This would not worry him. But they are no longer useful in a game and yet he's got them because he wanted the old game. But he hasn't got that anymore. But he wants the token. But he's got Grandpa and Grandma; got to have the token from there, you see. And the closest he can come to possessing any part of that was a pair of gallstones. So he's got that but it doesn't work in any game he's playing now. But it might some day.

Somebody might walk into the bedroom and see all these pictures of this character posed with Rudolph Valentino and Theda Bara and say, "Well, well, my, my. You are a famous fellow. Let's put together a road show," or something of this sort, you see, and here we go off again in this game. It might be of use.

Now, have you ever seen this pack rat - the pack rat preclear who has nothing but junk out in the back yard and in his dresser drawers, and so on; the collecting preclear? Oh, Freud brought up some weird things that they collected too, but we don't have to go that far south to find people collecting things. And this pack rat preclear still has hope of a game sometime or another in relationship to something. But everyone of those items represents a lost player of one kind or another, a lost game, something of this sort.

But they have upset this individual's havingness most horribly. You know he can't quite have all those things. See, he can't quite have them but he might have a reason for them. All this involvement and entanglement with regarding a mass object. Well, of course, the introduction of mass in the first place is an unduplicatable thing.

The introduction of space makes - space is a little easier to duplicate for a thetan than mass. But he manages to duplicate mass, he manages to duplicate space, he manages to make spaces duplicate spaces and masses duplicate masses. And he gets interchanges and automaticities and so forth. And when he can't think of anything else to do with something, he puts it on automatic. Let's remember that. When he can't think of anything else to do with something he puts it on automatic.

When he doesn't know what to do with a set of memories that he was once very fond of but which now he's given up all hope, you see, of these memories ever being used in a game - my, he was one of the best Indian trackers you ever saw in your life. He was just a wonderful Indian tracker. He could look a few miles away and see where some air from a footprint had breathed on a bush. You know, he was really sensitive and he had a lot of fun too, let me tell you - the shooting behind every bush - . And gee it was a wonderful game. And he has for a long time afterwards, either by forming the Boy Scouts, or something of this sort, managed to hold onto Indian tracking. And he's finally given up, utterly and completely, utterly and completely the idea that Indian tracking could do anything about it at all. Well, he'd put it on automatic. It was a sensitivity, you see, that - so that it would grind out on a facsimile pattern, one way or the other, because it still might be of use to somebody so he'd better keep it running somewhere. And we get all kinds of weird responses so that your preclear out here walks out back and very carefully walks around a footprint which has been made in the mud only he didn't know he was doing this. He saves the footprint.

He - a little bit later on he begins to find very definite signals and that sort of thing - well, let's take paranoia. Paranoia's so many times described so differently from psychiatrist to psychiatrist that we have a very hard time. Paranoia is actually the "against it" engram. The individual, everything is against him. But they claim he has one of these manifestations which is a peculiar one, is that he will believe that nearly everybody is trying to engage in sexual activities. This is Freudian paranoia, I mean, it's distinct from other kinds.

He's - he's trying to engage in sexual intercourse with the marital partner of the paranoid, you see, so that everything and everybody is trying to make his wife, or something like that, unfaithful to him. And when this becomes very marked he will get down to signals according to Freudian paranoia. He'll get down to signals so that anytime - . Well, let's say a wastebasket is slightly displaced in the house. Well, this would be a signal to one of his wife's lovers that something or other something or other, you see. And anything that was changed even slightly in the house or his wife - oh, of course, if she put up a new set of drapes he would practically kill everybody at the place because this is obviously a complete signal. Well, there is one of these manifestations out of control. It's been put on automatic because it might've been some use sometime or another and then, of course, it's shown up as a very, very interesting mechanism; an obsessive, compulsive game that this individual is playing.

He never consults whether or not any lover would ever be able to see into a house from whatever angle to notice that a wastebasket had been moved one inch, you see. He would never notice this at all. This is not part of his - of his computation. It's just the fact that a wastebasket has made a signal, that is enough to convince him that a sexual spree is about to take place, something like this. This is again Freudian paranoia, and probably a ridiculous thing. Although, such a case has turned up in Dianetics. We have had such a case. Processed it rather routinely. Processed it without much trouble and finished it up in about 36 hours. But the main thing here - talking about is you put something on automatic because he doesn't have a knowing use for it, you see. He doesn't know of any use for it but he still keeps it around and he hangs it up on automatic because he actually has lost hope for it. More than interest he's lost hope for it and it goes on automatic. And after a while it will fly out of his control and the next thing you know why it's running him! Which, of course, is another kind of a game.

And possibly this guy that is looking for all these signals, at one time or another was one of the finest Indian trackers in the Arizona territory. You get the idea?

So that's how we get these automatic things going. You can say about any automaticity that the person has lost interest or lost hope. This is a factual fact, I mean, that you can use in auditing definitely. He has lost interest in or hope for something. And he no longer wants to stand over it and tend it himself so he's put it on automatic.

In order to put it on automatic he has to put up terminals of one kind or another which will discharge against other terminals. This is hiding a game. Hiding it. Throwing it away, as far as he is concerned, consciously. But not throwing it away at all, as far as he's concerned, automatically. And therefore we get automaticities and the causation, reason therefore. And there's why a fellow has to have a couple of quote "unknown terminals" unquote to discharge unknownly against one another to produce unknownly some other kind of manifestation so as to produce an effect or reaction. It's real cute, of course. The couple of unknown gimmicks producing an effect and reaction are fascinating. Surprises everybody.

One of the basic games a thetan has is to mock up a little black box, pretend he doesn't know what's in it, open it up and be surprised. When he gets too surprised it'll kill him. But an automaticity of course furnishes lots of surprises and so we can go along that rationale. But now we're just looking at it from the standpoint of havingness.

When the havingness is out in plain sight no possible damage can accrue, no damage at all. It's when the havingness becomes incorporated into automaticities and is lost to sight that it can then do something, strange, peculiar or unusual, to the preclear or those around him. And he ouly buries and creates an automaticity when he's lost interest in or hope for a weenie. You understand that he kept - still kept this gimmick around in plain sight for an awfully long time after the play - other players were gone, then finally he buried it. And when he buried it and put it completely out of sight he, of course, got a new kind of covert game which can raise hell in all directions.

So we get the Freudian fixation on exposing something to conscious view; the obsession to expose something to conscious view in order to bring about a release, and so forth. You sort of reach into the guy's - the vest pocket of the unconscious mind and bring out the small music box and set it on the table and say, "Look, a music box." And they would go really no further than the music box but they could've gone a little bit further and said, "Who was the player?"

And this would've exposed the game to view as well as the object. First thing that would come to view - it would come to view out of an automaticity, you see. And then having come to view out of the automaticity would simply be in view as the weenie of a game now over. And then we would have to discover who the players were and the thing would click into place in time. And those would be the steps you would take to actually uncover an unconscious mechanism.

Unless you took all these steps, or unless you could take all these steps, however, the unconscious mechanism would not uncover. Now, it all goes back to havingness. We're interested to a very marked degree with preclears in the unconscious mechanisms of the mind - those things he is doing that he doesn't know he is doing.

What he knows he's doing won't hurt him. But when he doesn't know he is doing them anymore they can raise the dickens with him and the society and people around him. Havingness is the answer to all this because all it does is sit there and overtly knock out of existence old weenies which have becoine hidden. But havingness is not the total answer to this because, again, we haven't found the players. But we can certainly knock holes in unconscious mechanism without ever bringing it to view. It is unconscious. It can stay unconscious simply by the remedy of havingness in the various parts of havingness. And one of the lightest processes there is on this would be "What can you have." And an individual run on this can achieve some very interesting and astonishing things in terms of self-cognition.

It's self-cognition because he's probably never looked at himself before so you wouldn't be able to call it self-recognition.

All right, I'll give you an example of this, give you an example of this with a little group process here, okay?

Okay. Now, think of something that you can have.

Go south young man, go south. Think of something you can have. Something on the order of tired feet or something like that. Something you can have.

You got something? You know you can have something? Hm? All right. Now, let's think of some more things you can have.

Remember no argument about it, I mean something that you really can have; a worry, something like this. It doesn't matter what.

Some more things you can have.

Okay. Some more things you can have.

All right. Now, some more things you can have - that you know for sure you can have.

You got some for sure? Hm? Have you gotten some for sure? Hm? All right. Okay. Now, let's think of some things which would fight you. Some things which would fight you.

Okay. Let's find some more things which would fight you. You found any yet? Hm? Let's think of some more things that would fight you.

Okay. Let's find some more things that could fight you. Getting some now real easy, hm? Got some real easy now, hm? Well, okay.

Now, let's think of some things you can have. Some things you could have.

Okay. Let's find some more things you could have.

Okay, getting that real easy now? Hm? Getting that real easy now? Hm? All right. Now, let's think of some games you don't have anymore.

Okay. Some games you don't have anymore.

Okay, okay. Now, let's think if you still have anything around representing games you don't have anymore.

Got anything around still representing games you don't have anymore? Let's think of some more games you don't have anymore.

Okay. Some more games you don't have anymore.

Okay. Got that real good now? Hm? You know that?

All right. Now, let's think of some players who aren't around anymore. Some players who aren't around anymore.

Okay. Okay, now some things you could have. Some things you could have. Okay. Some more things you could have.

And, let's think of some things, now, that you don't want. Some more things that you don't want.

Okay. Got that now? Hm? Got that now real good?

Now, think of some games that you could have. Let's think of some games. Good. Let's think of some games you could have. Okay. Got some good ones? Some games you could have? Everybody got some games he can have? Huh? Got some games you could have?

Okay. Now, let's think of some people you could play a game with.

Find some? People you could play a game with?

Okay. Some more people you could play a game with. Got some for sure now? Hm? People you could play a game with?

All right. Now, let's get something we can have for sure by reaching over, getting up, reaching over and touching the nearest wall. Push against it. Have it push against you. Push against it. Have it push against you. Now, get the idea that it's pulling away from you. Get the idea you're pulling away from it. All right. Now, get the idea that it's pushing and you're pushing. It's pulling, you're pulling. It's pushing, you're pushing. It's pulling, you're pulling. All right. Now, you're pushing and it's pulling. You're pulling, it's pushing. It's pulling, you're pushing. Now, get the idea it's pushing and you're pushing. It's pulling, you're pulling. It's pushing, you're pushing. It's pulling, you're pulling. It's pushing, you're pushing. It's pulling, you're pulling. It's pushing, you're pushing. You're pulling, it's pulling. You're pushing, it's pushing.

Okay. All right. Find the floor, let go of the wall, find the floor.

The floor there?

Audience: Yes.

Is it an adequate barrier?

Audience: Yes.

Is it an adequate mass?

Audience: Yes. No.

Can it be used in a game?

Audience: Yes.

Can the wall be used in a game?

Audience: Yes.

You sure?

Audience: Yes.

The floor be used in a game?

Audience: Yes.

Can the ceiling be used in a game?

Audience: Yes.

Can the space around here be used in a game?

Audience: Yes.

Can your body be used in a game?

Audience: Yes.

Can it?

Audience: Sure.

All right. Feel the floor. End of Session.

You could ask an individual to go back and dredge up every game that he had ever had anyplace with anybody and when. You could do this and with some glee you would discover all of his basic psychosomatics, difficulties, worries and aberrations suddenly falling out in your lap by asking him to do no more than just remember a game he had, and remember some players he was playing with in a game and so on. Anything that would be wrong with him would fall in his lap and also abandoned abilities. Have you any idea the attitude of a - of a famous concert pianist, two lives later, with regard to concert pianists? He doesn't like any concert pianist but he isn't one.

Male voice: Probably be crazy.

He could be.

Actually he's completely abandoned from it. It'll only show up in a complete disability of some kind or another so that he can't go near a piano. Or he can't read music once he sits there and looks at it. It'll just be a complete thud. This one he has assigned utterly to an automaticity.

Now, one of the ways to get him over that would just have him remember games, remember games, remember games. And gradually get him to spot where they were and with whom and where and so on. And all of a sudden some of these completely dark pits of disability will suddenly shake free. Because you're really validating the existence of a game, not telling him games he's failed at; remember some failures you have. I mean, this'll just run him back down scale.

I understand somebody present was run the other day, by an auditor who has since been instructed better, "Give me some things you can't do."

Was anybody present? We batted this boys ears down real good but he said - but it was a funny thing - he said, "You know, the preclear looked like she was coming up and then dropped back again," and so on. Wasn't anybody present. Okay. He didn't give me the name of the preclear. He inferred that it was somebody present.

"She'd come up and then she'd drop down again and then she'd come up again and she - I - she just looked like she was going to discover the gimmick in it and then would drop down again and so on.

And I said, "Well, this is merely an attribute to your two-way communication ability. Your two-way communication ability must be very good to have held that process up for any length of time at all." Then we slapped his wrist. Hm?

Female voice: I heard another interesting one the other day, which was, Wait. "Now, wait some more," like you were doing, started like you were doing the Group Processing that night. But the twist was "Now get the answer you weren't expecting," then "Don't get the answer you were expecting." That was real cute too. Real wild.

Well, whenever we get too far off track we know we have gone in a definite direction. One, we've gone in a definite direction toward the no games, see, no games and no action and silence. And we go toward no games, no action and no silence just be very sure that you're processing in the wrong direction. Might be a very sure, certain one that will discover lots of masses sitting around but no games, silence and no action. Any auditing command which fulfills those requirements is bound and determined to wind a preclear up.

By the way, I've just recently completely satisfied my curiosity with regard to a certain factor. And that is Validation Processing. Just completely satisfied my mind with regard to this. That processes which are not toward action, motion and communication are wrong and foul processes. And that validation of entheta, this is the other one, that validation of entheta to any degree at all on the part of the auditor - by looking for specific significances, by looking for specific aberrations, processing straight at chronic somatics and so forth - is an error of magnitude. And just after all these years - have just finally come out into the absolute clear on this subject. There's no slightest doubt left in my mind.

Now, before this - yes there was a bit of doubt. You see, I'd seen an awful lot of people get well by wiping out a chronic somatic. But now I have seen it carried along long enough, carried on enough by enough people and made enough tests that finally it is just the kind of convincing evidence you get from being struck by a cannon ball. That's very convincing. The other day another - a guy walked into the office and he had a brand-new process. Actually it's an old group process, about third unit group process, and he walked in the office and he enforces upon the preclear that they sit absolutely still while they are doing this process. And he told me an awful lot of results which he has had - had from this process. And I have no reason to believe that this individual would overtly lie to me about processing results but I must assume that he is. I must assume that he is lying to me about processing results because this same process was tried and sitting still was tried as a process with complete failure, right straight through the bottom of the barrel.

And if we combine sitting still, absolutely still you see, and being very careful not to move with the remainder of the process we know it would fail. So these are the yardsticks which research auditors and myself have managed to accumulate here over the past many, many months. Yardsticks that if it goes toward silence, if it goes toward inaction, if it goes toward no communication it will wind the preclear up in the soup eventually even though he makes some small gain. If it goes toward those things then that's bad.

So we see what we can validate. We find out another factor: freedom cannot as-is. Freedom can't as-is. You can't erase freedom. You can turn your back from it and fixate on a barrier. Getting a person to fix - unfix from a barrier is simply convincing him that there are other terminals which he can use for the generation of electricity. It's only necessary to get an individual convinced that there are terminals other than the one he's fixated upon in order to get him to shift his attention off of it. But you have to convince him of this. Therefore 8-C run on a psycho takes his mind off those terminals which are psychotic, you see? He takes his attention off of them. But he will not till he finds out there is an object around. This is real cute.

I would say, offhand, that it would be impossible to do very much for a psychotic without getting him to handle solid objects. I real - just impossible. I mean, we might read a lot of fancy things, we might think of a lot of fancy things, and so forth, but unless we actually did get him in contact, good thorough communication with a solid object, we would have left him in the position where he had to remain connected with a psychotic terminal. Some energy mass, some bank or another that has swept in on him or he's using as an old game. You know, psychosis is quite a game itself There is nothing like an eccentric behavior to command a great deal of scurry on the part of the environment.

We have this boy Hutson out here, psychosis is just a game to this boy. It's revenge. His mother, a Christian Scientist, laid into him on the subject of masturbation and invented all kinds of reasons why and had herself tell him, had other people tell him very convincingly, that if he continued with this practice that he would go insane. Now, it isn't then that masturbation would make anybody insane, but you could certainly convince somebody, couldn't you, who could then pick this up as a terminal exchange and in lack of any other game make a game out of craziness. You see? He could make a game out of this. How constrict and restrain.

Now, this boy started to come out of the soup the moment we started to run 8-C on him, just keeping you on a running report on an interesting preclear in the vicinity, started to run 8-C on him. By the way, his first contacts with the objects were like this. And then he would suddenly go over to something and grab hold of it and shake it in a rage. Then he'd relapse and would miss several auditing commands, just wouldn't do any of them, and then go like that, see? And then get mad at some other object. Then he started to come right on up the scale. You understand what he wouldn't do? He won't take his attention off of that mass which is generating energy. See? He won't take his attention off of that mass until he's got something solid he can put his attention on, demonstrating another terminal. This psychotic terminal over here is a much better terminal than no terminal. And the solid object is the only thing it could supplant.

Well, I kept you much longer than I ordinarily do.

Thank you.

Audience: Thank you.

(end of lecture)

[[Category:Lectures 9ACC]]