View source for LRH Questions the Class on Exteriorization (2ACC 531204)

'''Series:''' 2nd Advanced Clinical Course (2ACC)

'''Date:''' 4 December 1953

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

----

← [[Lecture_Index_2ACC|Back to Series]]

This is December—December the 4th, first afternoon lecture. This afternoon, I'm going to do a check-up with you as to—we'll reverse the flow this afternoon. I'm going to do a check-up with you as to how you're exteriorizing people.

And let's start in with you.

Male voice: With me?

Yeah. How do you exteriorize somebody?

Male voice: Oh, do the first three steps as you have them listed in, or given them to us in Clinical Procedure.

Mm-hm.

Male voice: First starts out with, oh, "Where are you not? Where are you not thinking?" And locate the person.

Now, I asked you another question entirely. I asked you how you exteriorize somebody.

Male voice: How you exteriorize him? You've got to collect him together first and scare …

Getting real interesting.

Male voice:… scare him out of his head any way you can get him out, I guess.

Mm-hm. It's getting very, very interesting. Now tell me how to exteriorize somebody.

Male voice: Ask him to be three feet back of his head.

That's right, that's right.

Male voice: That or back him out gradually.

All right. All right. So there's somebody out of his head. Okay. Now, how do you exteriorize somebody who says he's there, he guesses—he doesn't know. What do you say at that moment? Do you say at that moment, "You're there—you know you're there. You see this club?"

Male voice: No.

Or do you audit according to newer methods? How do you do that, what do you do then?

Male voice: You check him by, "Are you in your ear?" Or "In your nose?"

Mm-hm.

Male voice: Or "Back of your eyes?"

Mm-hm.

Male voice: So on and so forth. And pretty soon, you've got him backed out.

No, no, what do you do at that point? We've got him out more or less—he doesn't know, he isn't quite sure.

Male voice: Oh.

What do we do then? He isn't certain.

Male voice: You give him the certainty that he's got it. And that's where he says he has it, you know? Or he says he isn't.

It's about time we had this lecture—you run SOP 8-C.

Male voice: Oh.

Oh.

Male voice: After you get him out, yes.

No matter how uncertainly he is out, SOP 8-C takes care of the remainder. Matter of fact, it will back him out without asking him out, but that's asking too much.

Now, let me make a little note: there is one slight difference there that possibly may have escaped you. You ask him if he is out. Now, this appears to be one of those nonsensical questions … You say, "Be three feet back of your head," and he says, "Yes." And he does a lot of other things and says, "Yes." It might occur to you to be a nonessential step to say, "Are you back of your head?" That might occur to you to be entirely nonessential. But believe me, it's so essential that a Step I preclear who audits like a breeze, like waving a small stick through the air—I mean, there's nothing to it—went five sessions in the hands of an auditor who is otherwise a good auditor, getting pictures of himself as a thetan doing these things. The boy had a slight case of using viewpoints—the mildest case of using viewpoints imaginable—and it had just never occurred to him that he could be three feet back of his head.

He was sold on what is laughingly called "modern science" to the point where he knew he was a body. And as soon as it was explained to him I wanted him, a personality, him a being, three feet back of his head, he put another being back there and threw that one away, and …

"But I'm a body," he says.

And so I said, "Well, on what course"—because he obviously was a very mild case—"on what course were you instructed that you were a body?" so on.

And he said, "Well…"

And I said, "Did you ever take science in high school?"

"Yes, yes. Majored in it. Ha-ha!"

There we go. I simply straightwired—just on that little point alone—back to third-grade hygiene. They get them real early, see? And heaved him out with main strength and awkwardness. And said, "Now, to hell with it! You're not a body. Be three feet back of your head!"

So he says, "Well, all right." And then he says, "Well, what do you know, I'm not."

This was a boy, a young boy—you could do that with him. And I just shortened up the whole thing, just with a very rapid Straightwire, and then without arguing any further, just told him to be back there. And he discovered his certainty immediately.

Now, the point I'm making here is that the boy had been audited five times, five long sessions, to remedy a condition—something somebody never should have started auditing him on, you see. They shouldn't have started auditing this boy to remedy a condition, exteriorized him so he could fix up something—hm-mm, wrong goal, entirely wrong goal.

So the goal involved here is to make a Theta Clear. And a Theta Clear has nothing to do with making somebody minus an ingrown toenail, see? Because the way to fix him up so you don't remedy an ingrown toenail is to audit him for an ingrown toenail. That's a fact. Because you validated the condition is the first reason why not; and the second reason why is, you're asking him to get into shape a piece of MEST, so you certainly better have a being that can handle MEST. All right.

Now, we got that? So that little question is inserted in there. Now we will go over this all over again. How do you exteriorize somebody?

Male voice: "Be three feet behind your head."

That's right.

Male voice: "Are you there?"

That's right, "Are you there?" And if he is, he says, "Well, I don't know whether I am or not. I—I don't know—mmmmm …"What do you do?

Male voice: Negative location, then.

What do you do?

Male voice: Oh! Start out with Clinical Procedure, Step number one.

That's right. That's right. Now let's go over it again.

Male voice: "Be three feet behind your head. Are you there?"

That's right.

Male voice: Clinical, Step number one.

That's right. Now, what other steps of Clinical Procedure?

Male voice: Follow straight on through.

That's right. Now, sometimes for the sake of randomity, when somebody is fairly certainly back of his head, why, I'll skip a step, and then go back and get it. When the person's worried about something specific and I think it'll speed things up or something of the sort, why, I'll occasionally skip a step and then go back and get it later.

For instance, if he tells you immediately, "Yes, I'm three feet back of my head—but you know, the room keeps going this way."

You say, "Okay, put up eight anchor points to hold it straight. Now, put them up there, you got it there?" And then go on further.

But it is a problem which can use a great deal of judgment on the part of an auditor. But I would say when you've exteriorized fifty or a hundred people, why, you will know how to do it faster than SOP 8 -C. You'll know how to do it faster—after you've exteriorized fifty or a hundred people. All right.

Now, let's go over it again. How do you exteriorize somebody?

Male voice: "Be three feet behind your head."

That's right, and what do you do then?

Male voice: "Are you there?"

Mm-hm. And he says "No."

Male voice: And he says, "No?" You start in on negative location, and Step number I, II, and III, and I, II, and III and I, II, and III until he is three feet back.

That's right. But after he's done Step I, II, and III, and I, II, and III, then what do you do? He's still not three feet back of his head.

Male voice: And he's still not.

What do you do then?

Male voice: Oh, there's a problem of either space or havingness or—well, not beingness, that's a little higher up. There's something he's hanging on—he's hanging on to the body.

He's been through it… He's been through it… He's been through it nine times. What do you do?

See, he's hanging on to the body, that's obvious. He's not three feet back of his head—that's the first conclusion you could make. Now, what's the next—what's wrong with him?

Male voice: He's—havingness is wrong with him.

What else is wrong with him?

Male voice: He won't get out! (audience laughter)

Come on, what's wrong with him again? You've been through them three times and he's still not out. What's still wrong with him?

Male voice: By that time, it's the auditor that's wrong.

Mm-hm, mm-hm. Mm-hm. Two things wrong with him.

Male voice: Because he hasn't done them right.

There's two things wrong with him. That's right, but there's still two things wrong with him, which boil down to one thing wrong with him, and you said it—havingness. And the other one wrong with him is, of course, what follows with havingness—space. But you were right.

What are you letting me shake you off the drill for?

Male voice: Well, I don't know, but it didn't seem …

That's mean of me, isn't it?

Male voice: Yes.

That's real mean.

You gave me the right answer. All right, know when you know, will you?

Now, the first three steps to a large degree, though—the way I'm putting them together right this minute—I have put enough emphasis on those two points as we go through it, that the probability of somebody still being in his head after the first three steps are run is getting very slight.

But supposing he is still in his head. Now what do you do?

Male voice: Well, if he's hanging on to the body …

Mm.

Male voice:… got to find out why he's hanging on. There's some fault or some loss in his life that's been too much. Discover what that is with an E-Meter and …

You can.

Male voice:… work on that.

Mm-hm. You could. What else might you do?

Male voice: Some effect that he's had, emotional effect, and have that placed around in walls, get him …

You've got that cared for in the first three steps. Although (this probably shouldn't be on a tape)—but the most famous case, the most famous case we've got—we've got not here, he's not in this unit.

The most—oh! Oh, this—you know when you, those—we tried to cover them up, but those blood stains which you see in the hall over there at 726 are places where auditors have blown their brains out over this case. (audience laughter)

On this decision on the auditor: "Put fear into those walls—and as far as I'm concerned, you're going to be doing that for the next forty hours," the case exteriorized. This case carried along—it would look at you sadly, sadly.

"Now, did the session do you any good?"

He'd look at you sadly. "No."

It was always with that quiet little voice. But this is easily the most famous and the "worsest" case I ever saw or confronted anyplace. Not in terms of sanity—this guy is eminently sane. He just couldn't get out of his head. This is just impossible. Okay.

Now, what you would do would be, to some degree, establish if there was some weird, impossible, stuck-up, gummed-up reason—that's right. Because you've got a case obviously that's dealing with a reason as very senior to everything else. You E-Meter him. But there's even another way of doing it. I'm going to tell you about that today.

[to student] That's very good. Thank you very much.

You know your answers were all wrong, don't you?

Male voice: Yes, sir.

You realize they're all wrong. Okay. That's very interesting. The establishment of a certainty by repetition of action is a step which shouldn't be necessary to an auditor. But before he is in real good condition as a Theta Clear, it happens to be, at this time, necessary. After he's thrown a few people out of their heads and squared them up, he has no doubt about what he's doing.

And auditors are now starting to get back rather directly from preclears, the exact—rather uniformly—the exact effect that is the reason why the technique is being used.

In other words, we—technique used, reason why shows up instantly. The same reason why as you've been getting right here—you know, the fellow "comes to the conclusion." These things are hitting rather uniformly.

After you've exteriorized a few people, you'll know what you're doing—very, very well know what you're doing.

What do you do after you get a preclear out of his head?

Male voice: Out of his head? Well, that differs with the preclear.

You what?

Male voice: Differs slightly with the preclear.

Uh-huh. What do you do?

Male voice: Well, I do what I think is fit at the particular time to do.

Uh-huh. Good. What do you do?

Male voice: I make SOP 8—dangerous places, familiar places.

That's right. What else do you do?

Male voice: I go on to SOP.

What have you been doing that was necessary to vary this? What problems have you run into in the people you've been exteriorizing, necessitated a variation from what you've gotten here in the last couple of weeks?

Male voice: Now, I'm afraid I must admit candidly that there's no need for any variations from SOP 8.

Well, you must admit that candidly. (audience laughter) Are you saying that to be safe or because it's a fact?

Male voice: No, I'm saying it because I believe it to be a fact.

That's right.

Male voice: Definitely.

I shouldn't put this on tape either, but well, I asked him what you did after you got a pc out of his head and he looked at me very blankly, and—he looked at me very blankly. And he was auditing a couple of—three, actually—very difficult cases. And he was getting results on these cases, maybe not with the speed he should have, but he was getting results.

What he was doing was probably exactly applying theory to the operation of the case. He was getting his results. And of course actually, that is—that's very good auditing, no doubt about that. But it hadn't occurred to him to codify the thing. And however, what we have here and what we've done is—far as practice is concerned, 8-C (he's talking about use 8, all right, that's good)—but 8-C takes the theory and there it is. I mean, that's the theory, only you use it in practice. That's the slight advance. It's almost direct.

For instance, it's inherent—I mean, you couldn't run on Orienting Straightwire, you couldn't run that without seeing that his mental condition depended to a great degree upon his ability to find himself. Which means orientation was the ne plus ultra as far as this case was concerned. And that that must be an operating process of existence which is senior to many others. And now you can't go down and—the same step—now, the same step, and start throwing barriers and emotions around (or the next step), and throw barriers, emotions and so forth, and start handling those, without recognizing that he was actually dealing with a problem of barriers. First, location, and then location amongst barriers. I mean it would just follow.

And then by the time you get to Step III, you've got space problems. And as soon as you've got these problems of space, it must be obvious that a thetan is terrifically dependent upon space, and that he's dependent on it in very peculiar ways, and the three universes is sitting in there right straight through, so here we go.

And if you did apply direct theory, just as it's been dug up and laid out here, you would just get SOP 8-C. I mean, that's all you'd get.

Yes?

Female voice: Ron, when I—before I came here, just as a relief, after I'd done all the heavy work, I would say to the preclear, "Okay, we're going to end this session. Now, give me your hand and let's walk on air."

Oh, this is wonderful. I was anchoring that preclear and he wasn't afraid. I didn't even know that was exteriorizing—now I see it. "Give me your hand and let's walk on air."

And one day, a woman—she wasn't being processed, she was in a group—and she said, "Oh, no you don't!" And the woman had cancer.

Mm-hm.

Female voice: But that—couldn't we do it—well, in our sessions here. Ron, you get it? "Give me your hand and let's walk on air." And the preclear would say, "Oh! This is wonderful."

Hm.

Female voice: Well, isn't that it? Then go home. You see the first time …

Hm.

Female voice: "Give me your hand …" I didn't know what I was doing.

You give them a hand?

Female voice: Yeah, "Give me your hand and let's walk on air."

You could, except that preclears who are in real good shape don't move.

Female voice: Hm ?

They don't move. Asking a preclear to move will sometimes bog him down, so you'd have that liability there.

Female voice: They go out feeling wonderful.

Well, I know, but what percentage? Now, when we're gunning for the whole bank …

Female voice: Mm-hm.

… you ask an awful lot of preclears to move and you're going to have a lot of difficulty.

I got ahold of a case once—this is quite interesting. I got ahold of a case once on that—now, I want to make this differentiation, right when it comes up.

Female voice: Yeah.

It's "Be three feet back of your head." It's not "Move three feet back of your head." Be three feet back.

Ran into a preclear who was all bogged down. Had been out a couple of times and was never out no more, no how, and was very upset about the whole thing. And come to find out, he had been moved—he was Step I—but he'd been moved out of his head. And ever since, he'd been trying to move—and he'd never moved before, you see. And it had keyed him in all over the place.

Female voice: But that's not the same thing, Ron.

Yeah, I know, but you're still asking him to move.

Female voice: "Let's—let's …" Yeah, but I'm going with him—see, "Let's walk on air."

Well, all right.

Female voice: So he doesn't feel alone.

Sure, this is a perfectly good theory.

Female voice: Then the next time … Now I know what to do after that, you see. He's had a taste of it then.

Mm-hm.

Female voice: He says, "Oh, that's wonderful."

But you want your preclear to be places.

Female voice: Yeah, yeah, that's—/ know, yeah.

Now, I'm making this the differentiation. Now, let's get it very clear: We want him to be places. We don't want him to go into locomotion through places to obtain places. Because the second you ask your preclear to do this, if the preclear is at about Step level III or IV, you're liable to key him on this: "The distance is too great. To walk to it is impossible." To walk through space is the one thing he can't bear to do.

Now, distance is the enemy of havingness. And so we get him to move through the air, and a preclear who is at about III or IV, it might occur to him for the first time that he was moving. And if he thinks he's got to move outside—that's why we get away with it on a lot of cases. See, it's a sleeper that's in there—that's why we get away with just popping them out and them being places. See—"Be here. Be there." Whereas this case had been moving from one place to another, you see—been moving along from one place to another, arduously and horribly. "The distance is so great" is a facet, and an important one, of havingness.

Now, get this idea for a moment, you'll see what it is.

Let's get the idea of somebody 150 miles from here with a ten-dollar bill that he will give you, if you walk down there. No, no. Hm-mm.

Now let's get the idea of having to walk down to the corner for lunch. Now, there's some preclears that this would hit, just get the weariest feeling. They've got to move something or expend some energy in order to possess, and they don't and won't do it.

As a consequence, they just anchor themselves in one place with the havingness they've got, pull in everything that they can pull in and don't move.

It's because they feel they have to move that they anchor in their heads. See, because havingness—in order to have more havingness, they feel they would have to move to some other place. And the feeling of motion will require effort, and this effort they cannot expend. Thus, distance is the thing which is the nearest enemy to havingness for such a person. It needn't be at all, you see—he just thinks it is. That is definitely an aberration.

You see, he can be here and then be in San Francisco, and actually be in San Francisco; and if he's real good, make the clock in the Ferry Building stop or something. I mean, he'd be in San Francisco all right, and then be here again. In what space of time? Well, just about as short a space of time as you care to make a space of time.

Now, when he's real, real good he can be here and be in San Francisco too. That's getting real sharp. And then he can also be in Seattle.

Now, this is an interesting development. This is "scarcity of me," you know, that runs out. He's running out "scarcity of me." "There's only one me"—he's awfully sold on that idea. But it doesn't happen to be a correct idea at all.

The first time you take somebody that you think you have nicely polished up and you—they're a Theta Clear—and you say, "All right, now be here. Now be in San Francisco." He is in San Francisco, you know, and then he's here, and then he is in San Francisco, and then he's here. Now, you say—now, let's get this now—"Let's stay here and be in San Francisco." He'll put a viewpoint in San Francisco.

You say, "No, no, no, no. Ha-ha! Be here, and be in San Francisco."

He says, "Both places at once! What are you trying to do to me, tear me to pieces?"

And you say, "Yup."

And you work with him for a while, and you do it on a gradient scale. You don't process somebody that way, I just said if you asked somebody, that would be the result.

If you do it on a gradient scale, you have him be—not with viewpoints; you'd have him put viewpoints there and throw them away until he's sure he knows the difference—have him be, for instance, on both sides of a cigarette. See, very small space there: "Now, be on both sides of the cigarette."

He'll say, "Mmmmm, errrrr. Nope. Well, I can be on both sides of a crumb of tobacco." And here you go.

And you can eventually get him to be in San Francisco and be here; and that finally cures his major psychosis. And this is a psychosis with a thetan. I don't care how well off the fellow is—he's nuts as long as he thinks he's just in one place. He's really goofy. That's where you creep up to and break the next rung.

As long as he's only one, he has this "guard trouble" I was talking to you about this morning. You know, wouldn't it be nice if he had two bodies, but he'd have to put one in a vault. No, no. Have him be in one body and be asleep, and be in another body and operate. Now, he could do that with great ease and shift that way without leaving either body, see?

But the next one up that he would run into and balk at would be in both bodies fully attentive. And he'd find out he had an attention problem, see? He doesn't know which—which—he—he—let's see, how do you run both of these with his mind simultaneously?

I ran into this problem myself, and I know what I am talking about. And for about five days, without any help from anybody, I was practically daffy. Finally, at the end of about seven days or something like that, just gave it up—see, just gave it up. Just threw in the sponge, just got completely disgusted and so forth, and started running one mock-up at one time. But for the space of five days there, I was—almost went batty and then the space of two days, did successfully run two mock-ups simultaneously. And at the end of those two days, why, I threw in the sponge on it again.

And I was so befuddled about the whole thing, and my attention units were so crossed up, that it wasn't until—oh, I don't know, three, four, five weeks went by and I went back and picked up that doll. I was using another doll. See, dolls get thrown away rather easily. They're quite easy to manufacture, and you find dolls around the universe and you just run one experimentally.

And it was—great concentration I was able to get this doll picking up, monotonously, grains of sand and putting them aside, you see? And I'd be there watching the doll do this monotonous operation. But each time, putting the grain of sand just a little bit further out, see, so that we would get an eventual difference of motion of the doll. Because the problem was how to create two motions and observe differently two different sets of motions simultaneously.

And I practiced on it also out on the highway, driving two cars! I can tell you, Homo sap—needn't worry, he's not quite conscious. And it's the easiest thing in the world—most people driving along are doing something inattentive like that and so forth—is just to sit up and steer the car and speed it up and slow it down and so forth. He's driving all automatically anyhow, he's got a ridge sitting there.

And if you put a beam on his ridge, and just short-circuit his automatic driving ridge to the dead end of the car battery or to the frame, he stops driving the car and doesn't ever know that he stops driving the car because nobody calls it to his attention. He's real low on attention; his attention is just almost not there at all.

You try to drive two cars simultaneous—try to do this and try to do that. I was trying to work this thing out, see, and get back to where I felt I was doing something.

Well, I finally got this doll sorting out these grains of sand, and sorting them out and sorting them out. And then I got real hot and I got two dolls doing it—sorting them out and sorting them out. But it only worked as long as one was sorting out pebbles and the other was sorting out grains of sand. And then I finally got it so two dolls would sort out grains of sand, and I could tell which doll was sorting out which grain of sand at which moment, and what I was doing where I was.

At that time, I almost blew up, however. Came back down to one mock-up. Mostly because I was simply trying to work out the drills that one would go through, I had no further interest in the problem.

But there is where effort comes in. There is where you get thought into effort, and get thought and effort all mixed up—that's two attentions simultaneously. And that's baffling—very baffling.

You feel thetawise, I mean, just as a thetan, like you've got to sort of set your teeth, if you can get the—that's the MEST phrase that'd go along with it. You set your teeth as a thetan, you see, and get this emotion over here on the right, see, and get it going around—you got this one going along here on the right, see? And then sit there and look cross-eyed at it. (audience laughter)

Well, that's the hard way to do it. That's the very hard way to do it. But that was just in the process of running drills. So it's no wonder that a fellow drifts down to the "only one."

Furthermore, this is a bombardment universe, and we'll come into what's wrong with that. That's just an aside. There are methods of doing this which are much easier as I just showed you. You just do it on a gradient scale, which is what I found out eventually.

You have a fellow be in two places at once, and you get him very expert at being in half a hundred places simultaneously, viewing each one of them with great interest, and then you get him into motion and action in a couple of places and he finds it's very easy to do. But that's SOP 80. It's very easy to keep track of two motions when you can be in all these places simultaneously.

But you start moving something in two places at once, and keep track of two automobiles and two roads and two different sets of state laws … And one time I did this on—driving a car on the left-hand side of the street in London, and a car on the right-hand side of the street someplace else. Anybody who listens to this tape and doesn't know Scientology will think I'm crazy. (audience laughter) Well, I thought I was for a while—two different sets of traffic laws, two different concentrations.

Now, a man can change his patterns of motion and action as much as he has lots of attention. So what about the fellow who is pinned in his head? What about this guy? Basically, he's having problems with havingness. Space is uncertain, and solidity is certain. So he avoids space and its uncertainty, in favor of any material certainty which he can touch. All right.

So far, so good. But you understand that once a person has done this, he's hitting into the GE's squirrel cage. He's hitting into the GE very badly, because the GE believes that his main attention should be down—that's gravity. And he is not only short on attention, the GE is fixed in attention—completely fixed—and you hit a dwindling spiral.

Now, this is a bombardment universe. Every time you turn around, there is another set of waves hitting any object. Anytime you want some randomity, you can find some more types of waves which are incoming. If you said, "This is an incoming universe," you'd certainly be right.

MEST eyes, if they saw at all, would depend upon photons bouncing off something and coming toward one. Well, those photons actually accumulate—they actually hit the individual. It believes it's under a bombardment, you see—any piece of MEST.

And I think after something has been standing there—if you cancelled out the erosion factor—after something had been standing there so long, it would probably have more mass in this universe. And you'd probably gain mass just because of this constant bombardment.

Now, you take sound—sound hits you 360 degrees, right—or all the way around the periphery; it doesn't just hit the ears. A person is always in the middle of a sphere of sound—always. Just—see, if I stop talking here for a moment, it just—you think this is a silent room. Well, just listen to the sounds in it. (pause)

Now get how many directions those are coming from. (pause)

That's 360 degrees worth.

Now, in such a wise, you have light. Light does the same thing, and all other things.

Now, I'm not trying to validate this "new inflow" barrier, but there is why the thetan apparently dwindles in size, dwindles in space, and dwindles on down. Well, he starts fighting being the center of such a sphere, and of course, he really isn't any bigger than that. See, there's the joke—he starts fighting his own size.

So first he starts expanding outwards, and then his next step is to contract inwards. And these are on a spiral basis. And his next motion, you see, next—not motion, you know, this is not fast—he starts expanding outwards on the basis of years, you see. And then he gets out to a certain limit, and he starts contracting inwards and does that for years. And then he'll try to expand outward again and does that for years, and then he tries to come inward again and does that for years. So that you get the mystic belief in "concentric shells of beingness," if you've ever heard of that.

But they actually exist—they can be perceived, but what is being perceived isn't quite what they said it was. They thought it was the "shells of experience." In other words, you had a life and then you got another shell, and you had a life and you got another shell and so forth. This is balderdash. But the point is that they do have concentric shells, and it's "What is the significance of these concentric shells?" that balled them up—not "Are there concentric shells around the being?"

And you'll find that preclears who are having difficulty exteriorizing have sets of shells inside their own heads. There is sort of a little being, you know, it's this little shell, and then there's a little bit bigger shell, and a little bit bigger shell. They often can just—just sense these things. They're ridges.

What kind of ridges? Well, as a thetan, they have resisted. They have begun to resist something, and then it has eventually overwhelmed them. Well, as long as they were resisting it, they were going out toward it, and in the case of a 360-degree sphere, they simply developed a larger sphere than themselves.

A thetan is his own size, and he fights being made smaller. This is, you see, nonsense, because he can't be made any smaller. He is his own size. He conceives himself to be about the size of a small navy bean or a small pea or something like that. And he wouldn't get any smaller or any bigger if he lived to be eighty thousand billion years old, except as he builds up ridges and calls those himself.

Hence, the genus of the body. A body is as big as the average impacts it has received over the evolutionary line. That is a direct law which modifies evolution. It is designed. Don't ever think that a body isn't designed, they are designed. Darwin, running around, did a wonderful job in most respects but he himself sort of exhibited the evidence of a tail when he started talking about "natural selection." You know, that's "the MEST universe does it all, does it all, does it all. Let's all be scientific, scientific, and mud, mud, mud." Because he said that it would be the difference of climates—it was the survival of the fittest.

And I had that explained to me one day. There was—family had a number of cats that had kittens—one of these cats had kittens, and one kitten had more fits than the others, and the rest of the cat's kittens died. But that one there that had more fits than the others, it lived, so that's the "survival of the fittest." So we got the thing figured out finally so it did make sense.

When anybody comes along and tells you that something exists without a basic design, that if somebody … "There's no pattern," he says, "there isn't any shape. Beauty is by accident. All things are just the combination of old forms, and nobody thought it up. Everything just sort of happened, and the reason life is on Earth is because there was a sea of ammonia, and it generated some H plus 6 O gel and this combined accidentally with a virus, and that made everybody virulent." And this conclusion has been reached so many times by men who should know better. It's been reached by men who wouldn't drive a car—who wouldn't actually drive a car with no gasoline in it. It's been reached by men who would be otherwise reasonable in their actions, and yet they get into a classroom and they go mad. They go mad. They say, "Ammonia and so on, and there's the virus, and it just all sprung up, and then there was 'spontaneous frogation' occurred all over the universe, and that's life. And if you don't think you're mud, we're going to fix your clock."

"Have you joined the Communist Party lately?" is the next line to that, by the way. They have to make people believe they're mud.

Basic design. A body would never have achieved anything even vaguely resembling beauty, or have any beautiful attribute—whether of a body of a butterfly or a human being—unless there was some intention toward beauty.

And I've never seen a beautiful impact. I've heard impacts described as a "beautiful impact" when struck by somebody like Joe Louis in the old days. But I have just never seen, really, what was actually a beautiful impact.

But I have seen some beautiful designs. So running along with all these other modifying factors, and actually prior to, senior to, the modifying factors, are design factors—intentional design factors. So we have all of life following along on this basis.

Now, what a person believes he can create is modified by impacts. Let's take a body: a body gets pretty slammed around. You start engaging in any of the indoor sports of Earth such as war, you start doing any of its parlor games such as Prohibition, you get a series of impacts of one kind or another which are none of them to the enhancement of beauty.

In fact I've never heard it said that anybody went through a war and became beautiful. Now, men have said many silly things, but they've never gotten that silly. And this deterioration of the design and a conviction—not just a feeling that, but a complete conviction—that he himself cannot or must not design beauty, is the sorrow of the havingness problem of the IV, V, VI and VII. That's what makes it bad. See, they can have or not have and so on, but could they shift the basic design? Well, they're convinced they can't shift the basic design. And this is how solidly that basic design has been pressed upon man. They don't think they could make a body more beautiful. They don't think they could make a beautiful body.

They think in terms of… You take some business executive—he thinks in terms of having a new letterhead, he doesn't reach for a pencil, ordinarily, and a crayon or a brush, and design himself a new letterhead. No sir, he sends for an artist. That's a specialized function. And if he—if you watched him very closely while he did this, he would heave a slight sigh. He has not lost anything, according to him, he just can't do it. See, that's because people wouldn't be pleased with the design which he designed. And all these things he's terribly convinced of.

Now, maybe this fellow has lost a lot of his looks, something like that. Well, the ability to create beauty and the ability to create, for our purposes, are the same statement. That's the same statement: the ability to create beauty and the ability to create.

If you make sex nasty enough, the whole race will degenerate aesthetically. Why? Because that's the communication system of more bodies for the future. See that? And there is essentially a creative function which is done by the GE. And if the GE is disabused of this, and he's restrained in all directions, why, it starts to look like Mr. Freud had a point.

It would be unfortunate for our race, however, if Mr. Freud did have the point on the subject which monitored our future behavior. He had a point about the GE. Everything he said is right—about the GE. We're not processing GEs. And it's an insufficiently high enough echelon to reach into any level of processing which will restore creative function.

Once you have restored the sexual creative function, by logic alone, it should follow that one's other capabilities should rise—see, by logic alone. It is so thoroughly believed that this takes place, that in more medieval times, a group known as the psychoanalysts would very often advise a female patient to go out and have promiscuous intercourse—this was routine.

Now, this doesn't follow, however, because they're not striking at basic creativeness. They're talking about duplication through a sexual communication line, and that's all very well, and once in a while somebody does get some spark of creativeness because of something there.

But I ran into a fellow one time that had met a beautiful girl and was terribly stimulated and satisfied sexually. And you know, he was a writer, and he wasn't doing a tap of work—not a tap! And he just had a wonderful time for himself for three or four months, until she ran off with the butcher or a millionaire or something, the way girls do around Greenwich Village. And he went into the complete doldrums and gave it all up for over a week and then got back on the job—was doing a good job after that.

And reversely—reversely, I've seen it work the other way around. Spotty, you see, unpredictable. So that we don't have duplication via the sexual line being the answer to this. But we do have creativeness. The reason—the main difference of this is, is the creation of the sexual sensation is not the creation of the sensation which we call beauty. It's a condensation of the sensation we call beauty. Sexual sensation is a condensation of beauty. Terrifically condensed.

Well, now, when it becomes abhorred, though, in a society, and when creativeness in general is frowned upon, it is quite normal and routine and usual to find on every hand that men's creative abilities, the creative abilities of women, have to a marked and large degree degenerated so they have no further belief in their own ability to make anything better aesthetically.

It does no good to tell such a person the bald truth of the matter. A GE can—that is, a body—can actually be patched up if you're very careful about it and so on. It can be patched up. It occasionally, if you were good enough and interested enough, you could actually remake some of its anchor points and redesign and change and get it into perfect static balance—oh, what job this is, by the way. The fellow that first designed these bodies, my hat is off to him. What a terrific job of superbalance and counterbalance and so forth.

And it is possible to return to them something vaguely resembling their native beauty or enhancement of that beauty. But let's take the body after it's gone up to a rather high point of no return (oh, let's say—well, let's say seventy, something like that, eighty, we're getting up there), when we start to work on a preclear. Nuhh. Boy, that's a real rough job. The capability of the preclear doesn't rise as it should, and they have different agreements as to how they should do this. And the way they should do this is just jettison this mock up and get another one, they think. And they're fighting right there on the agreement track with everything they try to do about the body.

But you take somebody who is thirty-five, forty, forty-five, somewhere in that bracket, if you work him real fast and so forth, why, you'll get him to put his body back together again pretty well and still function, still function real good.

But to change the aesthetic factor of a body is spotty in results and sometimes very unsatisfactory, because it takes the creative ability of the thetan.

Now, by the time you've pushed him up to a point where he can simply mock up a mock-up that everybody can see and walk around with it, by the time you've pushed him up to that point, what's the idea of repairing a GE? He only gets stuck when he gets a body that is well-recognized, see, and then he's stuck with an identity. He doesn't dare change it too much. If he changed it too much, nobody'd know what the hell it was all about. He might as well go get another body. There you got a problem on your hands. You'll run into that in anybody whose identity has become valuable, or he's trying to do something because of an identity. You get into trouble then. You try to get him to change his body very much and he won't. That's the good sense of the fact of recognition. He doesn't want the difference in recognition.

Might not have anything to do with him with—as far as attention was concerned, he just doesn't want to give a shift of identity which would be so marked and so pronounced, that one, it would defeat his own identification, and two, would impede his own existence. No, the thing for you to do, and the way you solve that problem, of course, when a fellow gets up there, is to chase him on out someplace—some other universe, some other state—get his attention concentrated in various directions, let him run a pretty mock-up someplace. Very soul-satisfying. See, that's real easy.

Let's get back to this creativeness and creative ability, and what it has to do with havingness. A person is only satisfied, really, with havingness which he can consider beautiful. But understand that a V, having lost his ability to create beauty, he feels, may very well lose something else: his ability to have beauty just as such. Desire it? Yes, he can do that somewhat secretly. But have it? Well, it's something he'd have to waste. And it's about the most important thing that you could waste on a case, oddly enough, to somebody who's having a terrific time with havingness.

Now, these very, very tiny little points. The very fact, you see—if he couldn't have beauty; this is the one thing he couldn't have—and you say, "Now look, we're going to exteriorize you and get you in good shape, and then you can patch yourself up," he can't have any point in it, you see, because he can't have beauty, see?

So there'd be no point in patching him up. But he's right along the groove and very responsive on this particular point. If you waste beauty in brackets, and if you place beauty into the scenery with such a person, you'll very often break him out of the effort band. It's real weird, it's very interesting. Particularly if you waste the ability to create beauty—waste the ability to create beauty and so forth.

Now, that's not a fast road toward exteriorization. But when a person, over and over on the first three steps, doesn't exteriorize, then there is something wrong with his havingness. And the first thing there is wrong with it is that it isn't beautiful, and he can't have beauty. That's usually the first thing that clues with an auditor.

There is a thing called "shame of beauty." At this level on Earth today, you'd hardly understand it. I mean, it's—why, we could say, "Shame of beauty, yes, I know, I think that's totally beautiful, it's …" But listen, there can be beauty to such a degree, that a feeling of tremendous shame sweeps over anyone beholding it. What's the shame, see? It's simply this: he realizes he is not that beautiful.

Now, a woman could be so sufficiently beautiful that she could walk through the worst den of thieves and amongst the most rowdy rabble on Earth with complete safety and command. It's pathetic, however, today to see some (quote) "beautiful woman" (unquote) being run by a thetan who can't have beauty. And this is so much the case, that it quite often happens that a beautiful woman is about as safe to have around as a couple of cobras, because this person can't have her own beauty.

That's what you'll run into in processing some very, very, very good-looking man or some tremendously beautiful woman—they can't have their beauty, so they turn themselves into kind of accident-prones or anything, you know? They're ashamed of their own beauty.

Now, we get with a V, the complete—they exteriorize easily, these beautiful people—but you get a V, VI, VII, it's very often this kind of a conflict with him: He doesn't want to know what he looks like. He feels he looks much worse than he is. His idea of his own appearance would rival anything put out by Cruikshank in many cases. He believes he's horrible! He really can't quite understand how people can look at him without commenting on it, and then it kind of makes him feel like they're somewhat nice because they don't. He doesn't see himself. He shut off his vision originally because of beauty, because of the desire to agree with beauty and not look at anything else.

And he, of course, started fighting ugliness. And blackness is the antithesis of beauty, and so we have blackness covering up beauty, and he uses—sees that if he fights ugliness, he eventually winds up with blackness. But he has long since departed from the concept of beauty. The V doesn't know how he looks. And he will exteriorize with effort. And the "hands on the shoulders" technique is your best method. He's going to do everything with effort.

There's why he has another body—the inflow, so forth. Also, he's got a body in reserve, probably less beautiful than the body he has. And the inflow—he's going to fight against that by having another body and so forth. So you ask him to do things with effort and he can do things with effort. But if you just ask him to do things by thinking about it, he knows that's impossible because he's thought at too many blocks of stone, and they didn't move. And he's thought at all sorts of things, and nothing happened. And so you ask him to think his way out of his head, and he'll just sit there and figure. That's all he can do. All right.

What is this, in essence, this method of exteriorization? It's picking up what is essentially wrong with the case. It will ordinarily be found the person who is very difficult to exteriorize has a highly aberrated idea of how he looks, and beauty is mainly what's wrong.

Now, I have to point that up—there can be other things wrong, you see, that are quite obvious—I mean, they become obvious on the E-Meter. He's so worried about his daughter, you know, and his whole goal of life is toward making his daughter succeed or something like that, you know. And you just can't get this guy squared away because he's hardly—his attention isn't on himself at all or where he is, this doesn't seem to make any difference, he's got too fixed an attention on something else. But that little factor of beauty might be one which would slip by you. It might slip by you because of some feeling of courtesy or discourtesy, or that it'd be impolite to run "wasting beauty" on someone. Well, believe me, it's not. They don't know how they look.

I have seen a rather good-looking young man, for instance, completely bog on this point. He wept. He knew he was one of the most horrible-looking beasts that ever lived; he was just utterly convinced of this. And there was nothing else he knew as well as that. And what do you know, he had three of the ugliest sisters you ever laid your eyes on, and they had just beaten it into him, day and night, how ugly he was and how beautiful they were. So he was all mixed up. I solved beauty with him, as far as that's concerned—just make him waste beauty, and have beauty, and waste things that created beauty, and waste machinery that created beauty, and waste things that unmock beauty, and all of a sudden he said, "Well, if I do look bad, it doesn't make any difference. Let's see."

And sometimes he'll get so curious as to how he looks that his inverse vector—that is to say, he comes when he should go—his inverse vector will not permit him to get out and take a look at himself. He is afraid of being confronted with Mr. Hyde and he's very startled, very often, to find out he's just another Jekyll. So it has a great deal to do with it—creativeness. In Theta Clearing, you're essentially creating a new situation for him—you're asking him to create continually. When he can't create, the trouble lies straight away with beauty.

This will first manifest itself as trouble on the second dynamic, and second, manifest itself—but much more importantly—on the subject of beauty and aesthetics themselves. And that you must rehabilitate with this case.

LRH QUESTIONS THE CLASS ON PAGE 2 2ACC-16B - 04.12.53

EXTERIORIZATION

[[Category:Lectures]]
[[Category:Lectures 2ACC]]
[[Category:Lectures 1953]]