View source for Looking, Definition of Static (1ACC 531006)

'''Series:''' 1ACC

'''Date:''' 6 October 1953

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

----

← [[Lecture_Index_1ACC|Back to Series]]

Note: The AICL series (Advanced Indoctrination Course Lectures) is also known as the 1st ACC (Advanced Clinical Course.)

[Clearsound.]

Well, here we have, today, the first meeting of this group.

This group, by the way, consists of a little - little bit more than a third of the first group I trained in Great Britain. There were thirty-six applicants on this group and we really whittled them down - had to - to a very marked degree.

We have here, today, certain purposes that we have to get clarified and certain data to be handed out and to get some sort of an idea and orientation of what we're doing.

Now, we have quite a job ahead of us. Very definitely one of the first goals of this group will be, in the first two and a half weeks, a good, high operating level of every individual in it. Now, that means - as I look around here - that means several - several cases will have to be busted sky-wide and handsome.

Well now, I will do what I can to take the rough edges off of those cases, and so on. But if we devote ourselves here for about two weeks or two and a half weeks to bringing everybody up to a good level of case; it will be paid for, in the long run, by very rapid assimilation of two weeks from now on.

We have an awful lot of work in the field of theory. And I hope that we'll get over, in this group, the fact that theory and practice don't happen to be separate. They've always been separate in other fields and too often it is said throughout the country, "Well, that's theory and what I'm interested in is making something work." I mean, it's like somebody saying, "Well, now that's an automobile," and he goes off and sits on a park bench in order to drive someplace.

You wonder why these people fall down as auditors. They fall down as auditors because they can't anticipate or predict the occurrence within the preclear because they don't know exactly what the preclear is working on. And if they're well braced in theory, they know exactly what the preclear is working on. Not because they look or anything of the sort. It's just they - they just know what this fellow is doing.

And all life looks very complex to this preclear and it doesn't look complex to the auditor. That is the difference. To a good auditor life does not look complex. It looks, actually, rather impatiently simple. And sometimes you have to sit down and think for a long time just exactly why life seems so complicated to some people.

And sometimes you have to go further than that. Sometimes you not only have to think for a long time; sometimes you just never find out according to their lights. You can state it in simple, workable terms which will predict their behavior. But for the life of you, to see how somebody came by this concatenation of logic - it's almost impossible. It's fabulous.

Well, now we're not just training auditors, I hope. That's something we can do and should be able to do a lot more than that. If one just started out on the basis of training auditors, one technique which I could give you as a group would break you out of any obsession of auditing. And I could probably run and slant techniques so that - oh, undoubtedly this - I could slant techniques so that a guy wouldn't ever look at another preclear. That would be slanted techniques.

Well, it's interesting that in the last congress here we had a lot of techniques handed out. They were pretty routine and so forth. Actually, the simplest techniques were not given at that congress, as simple as those techniques look.

[Editor’s Note: The First International Congress of Dianeticists and Scientologists, held September 30 through October 4, 1953 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.]

There is a simplicity level of Q and A which I don't think those people will fall over. It's just too idiotically simple. I'm going to tell you this technique right now. And you're going to find yourself asking these questions an awful lot of times.

"Where is the past?" That's the question. The environment. It's asked out in the environment near the preclear. A formation of nothing or something or whatever it is - you don't care. You just want something out in front of him saying, "Where is the past?" And you want that then turned around and placed on or within his body as "Here is the past." "Where is the future?" And you just want that turned around then and placed within his body, "Here is the future."

And you'll find out immediately - it's really too silly - you'll find out immediately that he's trying to bring in the past and bring in the future, which accounts for his condensation in a body.

Now, this technique is quite idiotic because all in a breath we wipe out Freudian psychoanalysis; understand it, digest it and throw it away. Just like that!

And you find out this fellow's, when trying to say, "Where is the future?" he has always understood that the future had a location and that the past had a location. And in baffled contemplation of no location, he's of course assumed both of them and put them in his body. And here we get the condensation of looking which makes a body. This one you handle lightly, around, as long as a person is interiorized. Because there's no reason to knock apart the body; people recognize him by the body. But where a person is very savagely holding on to a body or holding on to blackness, he's simply doing this trick, that's all: "Where is the past? Where is the future?" And of course, he's bringing in these long-distant anchor points, he thinks, and this condenses him.

Now, in everything we're doing, there's a motto running through here and you've heard that motto, it's "Look, don't think; look, don't think." Now, that motto becomes very explainable when you find out you can't look at the past and you can't look at the future if you are right here in the present. See? So if you can't look at the past and look at the future, then you find yourself very indistinct with regard to how to look at them. So, of course, you have to think about them.

And the other motto - and these mottoes, by the way, I'll probably have made into a couple of small - like these office door signs, these white and black office door signs. I'll have a whole stack of them made and I'll put them in each auditing room because you may think these things are something you will remember all the time, but it's possibly better to have them around.

And the other is "Looking" - pardon me - "Feeling is a condensation of looking," and "Thinking is a condensation of feeling," and you got it. You don't see how this collapses the anchor points.

Now, the apathy on the case consists of this and nothing but this, is "I'll never get it back," which is, of course, "I'll never get it in," which is, of course, "Where is the future? Where is the past? Where is the future?" You see how it is? "I'll never get it back."

And you find fellows are tugging and hauling all over the universe trying to get something back and then they go into apathy about getting it back. And although they leave the anchor point out there, thus being made to feel - the emotion on this is ridiculousness - and so they feel like they are no better off than to be human. And they've got these anchor points stretched out all over the place and other people have got their anchor points and they've gone into apathy now and they'll never get it back.

Well, forgetting is an extension away from them of anchor points. Forgetting is an extension away from them of anchor points. A memory is something you can't get back. Remembering is quite often something pushed in. So people talk continually about betrayal but never talk about ridicule.

And the act of ridicule is having an anchor point held way out from you. So, of course, a person has forgotten the ridicule and he remembers the betrayal. Betrayal is the smashed-in anchor point. Betrayal is something you have gotten back from the past. But, of course, it's all you could get back from the past, if you didn't have Scientology. The only thing you could get back would be betrayal, because that complements the action of getting something back. So the effort of getting something back amounts to the pileup in front of a man's face, which is often quite black, and that is betrayal.

So he piles up burned-out anchor points in front of his face because he can't get anything else back. He doesn't want to give live electrical - oh - really simple anchor points, in there, because he knows these things hurt. So he substitutes for this and he has black anchor points which he brings in. And that is your very, very rough, rough, rough case.

Now, I don't care what computation you put on this case. Let's just go back, move out of the field of computation and we'll find out that feeling is a condensation of looking and thinking is a condensation of feeling. So he thinks mainly about betrayal if he's low on the scale.

Now, it's pretty hard for a Step I to recognize - as I found out the past few years - to recognize what on earth is a "V" [Step V]. Very interesting. And not too long ago, I found out that I myself could turn on all the manifestations of a V. Not by mocking them up but actually turn them on and turn them off again without too much trouble. And that was simply by "What is the significance of the explosion?" And this is the suppression of white, which is reading.

[See SOP 8. A "V" refers to somebody who was capable of running Step V but not the lower more advanced steps. Also called a "Black V" because they would get blackness instead of pictures or mockups.]

So everybody's bringing in the blackness off the printed page and saying to themselves, "What is this thing?" Well, again we're into thinking and this is a condensation of feeling. So a person who has been doing an awful lot of reading eventually thinks he has no further emotion because the book is always a fixed distance from his face; the motion picture is always a fixed distance from his face.

And so we find people, by the way, uniformly take the same positions in depth in the theater. They choose their seats - if permitted - and they will have a certain depth. Unless, of course, they're in good shape, at which time they don't give a darn where they sit particularly. You get the difference in that. But people who have got to have first row, got to have fifth row and so forth, you find them expressing these preferences.

And if you were to find somebody walking into a theater expressing an enormous amount of preference all the way down the line about a seat, you could just pick him up as an occluded case. And having picked him up as one, you could just get the idea of the fixed distance of a stage or a fixed distance of a picture.

Well, now we see - now we get a good idea of what we're doing. We're unfixing distances; unfixing old anchor points.

Well, all it requires to unfix old anchor points is simply be quite able with new anchor points - which is why Theta Clearing works out so well and why it works so swiftly. A fellow all of a sudden finds that he doesn't have to have a fixed position of a body, that he can sail around a bit. Immediately he gets a lot happier about this whole thing. He doesn't have to have a fixed anchor point, which is to say a body. All right.

Let's look over that basic material as theory. You've got a book, then, in the hands of most of the preclears who are occluded. I mean, they're just sitting there reading a book. All their facsimiles are reading a book. While they're reading the book, the book tells them they are moving all over the universe. Hm. Oh, no, they're not! They're sitting in a chair. The book tells them they're being faced with sound, only they're not. The printed word is silent. It's an entirely different codification.

They are under the impression that they are getting mock-ups and admiration from the book. They are not. One day they'll suddenly stop mocking up admiration in the scenes and the scenes that they are reading about in books. And the day they do that, they just start to eat upon those they've already stored up. The next thing you know, you have a complete energy starvation, but you have a fixed emotional state. There you are - fixed emotional state. And you'll find out this is what most preclears complain about.

Well, how do you settle this? How do you settle this? Well, there are a lot of ways to settle this. I'll give you a drill right offhand that isn't the best one but it's a very interesting one and one that I'd like to have you work with. And that is to say you just take a chair and you have the chair get apathy and then you have the chair in grief, then you have the chair - have the chair in anger and you have the chair enthusiastic, until you can actually feel these emotions coming out of this chair. You've got a chair, then, doing a very - a very wonderful thing. And you realize that you have been putting an awful lot of emotion into the body.

Now, communication consists of a fixed system of looking- a fixed system of looking. Sonic goes off in the bank before visio, long before visio, because it's fixed as a distance. And a distance in sound is infinitesimally small. Because although one may reason that the point of sound is some distance away, depth perception in sound is mainly depth direction in sound. And what is actually making the eardrum vibrate is a little bunch of air. And the air vibrates up against the eardrum and the distance - fixed distance of sound - is infinitesimally small, molecularly small. So this one can turn off in a preclear fairly young and fairly early.

But to regain it again, a little drill I gave you during the congress is quite adequate. You just keep up this little drill for a very short time and - pang! - on will come somebody's sonic. There's no trick to sonic. You just snap your fingers and ask the preclear if he heard that. And he said yes, he can recall that.

One girl, who was quite catatonic, by the way, I made into a girl who could be effort-processed simply by coaching her on what effort was. She finally understood effort and when she understood effort - which is to say, when she could reexperience it and turn on effort again - she practically cleaned up the whole bank in an awful rush. She got so enthusiastic over what effort was that she was running it all over the place.

An effort would be the force or power or energy necessary to move an anchor point. So as soon as we get into the business of no force or power to move an anchor point, we get into a person who can't work or won't work because he can't put out effort. So, automatically, somebody who won't work, or can't work, is usually in pretty bad shape. That's a good common denominator. Why? It's because he can't put out effort. But that is unintelligible to us. I mean, that's just another word. But we can understand with great ease "He can't move around anchor points."

You wouldn't want scholars to farm. They'd never move anything around because they know everything is fixed. The anchor points which they have are about eighteen inches away from them and remain there. And at the same time, even while remaining there, yet move their minds all over the universe.

Now, let's take a kid and give him the idea of watching a motion picture. And this is a wonderful experience for an auditor because the kid starts to move promptly.

People frown at you if you move in the theater; you're not supposed to move like this. That's why you put all the kids way down in front because they really... On a Saturday afternoon you'll find the first few rows of the theater jammed with kids. And these kids are quite noisy. When the guns go off; the kids go off.

But you run this on an occluded preclear, you wouldn't think you'd get much response from it. But he can actually feel the motion-picture screen trying to move him around and he can actually feel the book trying to move him around the universe. And, of course, in order to - in order to read the book, he's got to sit still. So every time it tells him to move, he sits still. It says move; he has to sit still in order to keep on reading. And then, of course, the future is just slightly over to the right - that's the end of the book. And facsimiles are a page thick and they stack up.

In motion pictures the dimension of a mock-up is perfectly flat. There's no three dimension because you're the same distance from the screen. The same with television. Well, this is just an occasion of people being told they are moving when they are not moving. See, people aren't moving but they think they are moving.

Now, this is a wonderful thing. I suppose originally they really - they really do move - way back on the track. Entertainment, I guess, consisted of actually getting out and doing something, not sitting still and being moved artificially.

Well, the fixed feeling is that same unemotional feeling. Your ECT case - that's British: electroshock-therapy case, to take an example out of the field of psychiatry - complains, usually, about fixed emotions after just so many shocks. That's because somebody really fixed that anchor point but good and fixed them in their heads but good, and so on. Nobody could invent a better way to make somebody permanently unwell than to fix this anchor point, you see, with electricity.

Well now, there are a lot of other things you can find out for yourself, one way or the other - you can find out in auditing. But these I've just given you are the clues and keys to cases.

Now, I used to do this with preclears in 1947. They weren't called preclears then; I just called them people. And I used to - I used to work with these preclears in a very calm and a very certain way.

I used to say, “All right. Now, we'll go over here and we'll turn on this music box. Now we'll turn off the music box. Now, you hear the music box? Do you hear the music box? Can you hear it again?"

Work for a little while, "Yeah, I can hear the music box."

Turn on the phonograph. Turn on - drop books. That was the last one I would go through, for some reason or other.

And I would show them face cards and have them see the face cards again. I would show them a flower and let them see the flower again, and so on. The next thing you know the fellow had perception.

If you think the occluded case is very, very tough or it's upsetting and so on, just remember that it was being solved in 1947 by a rather simple technique. You just kept at it. I don't care how long it took. You just kept drilling. And you never let the guy fail. You just didn't let him fail. You brought him up on a gradient scale of being able to recall so that he could then say, "Here is the past." Now, he had a new certainty: Here was the past. He had a picture of the past and that's how life has answered it.

We don't need that today. What we do is cure his anxiety about having to have the past. "Where is the past?" Well, he's got to say, "Here is the past." And then he could say, "I can't find the past." And he's practically done right at that moment. "I can't find the past." Nothing is sillier. Time is the only aberration and it's not there. Okay.

You can't ever get an anchor point into time that will really stick. You've got to keep putting it into time. So that you'll find old people will discuss their ills and youth, and so forth, just endlessly, over and over, trying to put enough anchor points into the past to have a past. Because they're really downhill from that. All right.

Well, regardless of all this theory - we're not worrying much about theory - I'm just giving you some kind of an inkling here on what we've got as working tools. These are some terrifically simple tools. As I say, in 1947 I could turn on perception. A little bit later it all had to be done more mechanically.

That mechanistic approach got too mechanistic and I wasn't taking enough of a breather to turn around and look again and find out it was too mechanistic. I wasn't auditing enough. I was doing a lot of other things. And it got away from us at a heck of a flat-out proposition. I became more and more puzzled and more and more puzzled, forgot many of the things which I myself did, and tried to find out what I was doing when I audited preclears. It was taking me a long time to find that out.

But I'll tell you what it was. You know Q and A now - Q-and-A Processing. When I sat in front of the preclear, I knew he was going to get well. I spoke in an intensely certain tone of voice. He had no choice but to put it on.

Now, you have very, very, very wondering and puzzled, and so forth, auditors. They sit there and they say, "Well, Hubbard said it'd work. I don't know." "Let's-uh-go over it-let's go over that again, I guess. I guess that's the thing to do." "How do you feel now?" "What are you thinking?" "What does that mean to you?" "Uh-how-how about-uh-how about going over that again? Do you-would you mind that?" See, question mark, question mark, question mark. The preclear had no choice but to put it on.

And so, it took not high-toned auditors, as we were trying to say in Science of Survival, which often helped - we classify this much better right now, and we can say that it merely took a certain auditor. Not a certain person, but an auditor who was certain. That's all it took.

You've got to know that you know and then other people know and they don't know why they are knowing. Well, we're not quite in that same boat here. I'm not going to ask you to simply take what certainty I have and turn it around and put it on over there. But you've got to know what you're doing works. And you've got to know how far you can go. And you've also got to know that you're not particularly interested in getting an effect from the preclear. Most auditors get into this one way or the other. They want an effect from a preclear and they want this effect so much that they're unable to operate without being told how well the preclear is.

Of course, a preclear will never tell you that well. An auditor's acceptance level of the preclear is a sick preclear. So the preclear, to go on being accepted, of course, has to be sick. And you say, "Do you feel well, now?" And most preclears you audit, they will say, "Well-um-well, it probably does a lot of people a lot of good." You just got through curing something flaming on him, see? "Well, it probably does a lot of people a lot of good. I don't know about myself. Undoubtedly, the - you probably..."

You see, he's got to be doubtful. He can't be convinced. If he's convinced, if he says, "Gee! I'm well! Boy, I really feel good!" you don't accept him anymore. So he knows this. So to keep your attention, which is very nice, on the things you've got, he has no choice but to do this.

So, where it comes to auditing, we have several things, then, that we must go into and look for. And there probably will be a lot of personal coaching on this. And I hope you don't think this is even close to an approach that I'm treating you all like you're infants or something of the sort. There isn't anybody here who hasn't done an awful lot of auditing one way or the other, and so forth.

And if you don't mind my mentioning, though, about something that happens in aviation - in the old days a pilot used to fly by the seat of his pants. And if he got to carrying his left wing a trifle low, he went right on. He learned to carry his left wing how he did. If he learned - in the process of his learning, included several - he included in that several slight errors, he would go on for thousands of hours with these slight errors in his flying.

Well, undoubtedly every one of you has to some degree - slight or great undoubtedly has some tiny margin of improvement of auditing style. I wouldn't say the margin is large; I would say it's a small margin. It's probably a very tiny room for improvement.

And that's why I'll have to take each one of you personally (I hope you don't resent this happening to you) and just sit down with a phone on your ear while you audit a preclear and - I'm sorry if it'd be upsetting - and sort of straighten out - not what - your use of the technique; heavens no. I'm just trying to straighten out, just a little bit, your level of certainty toward the preclear.

Because if we can speed up your thinking about thinkingness sufficiently, there'd be no further remedy needed, you see. So I'm going to show you how fast it is to predict a preclear's reactions and where the preclear is going to go next. And I think that it might help out if I just pressed home the - not a patterned attitude - but the speed of prediction and certainty of address without interfering with your own basic personality. It can be done with great ease.

The attitude is based on certainty. And I want to teach you, if I can, to read a preclear without even looking at his facsimiles or ridges. Just sit there and read like he's a book; you know what he's going to say; you wish to Christ he'd run it, and still operate upon a level of restraint which doesn't permit you to say, "Well, go on. It's your mother. Let's run her out." You know? All right.

Our general effort is going to be toward, first, the first dynamic, and then second, toward theory, with particular stress on theory of investigation. Because as you learn theory of investigation, you will learn how to take apart people and life.

There are certain little basic rules which you use that - very few of them really ever will appear in any book written. Quite a little - little thumb guides. As I go over them again they may seem sort of idiotic to me, but they were the thumb guides that put all this on the road. And that's just to get us off auditing for a short time, about two and a half weeks from now.

Then we will turn around and we'll pick up some demonstration and experimental cases. And the first two of those - I don't know whether I'll get permission on this yet, but I have hopes to - are two blind children who are about to be shipped off to a home for the blind. They were born blind. And yet, they evidently don't have anything wrong with the eyesight but the medical profession says they don't have any corneas.

Now, we're not going to dress up - I don't think, maybe we will, I don't know - a MEST body. This is the roughest level of case there is - not the occluded case, but the case where the GE's eyes are real blind. And the only reason we would take on these two cases is to find out what we can do for them, amongst us.

And then there will be other cases. I haven't any intention of picking up cases which are successful cases - I mean, picking up cases which will lead to certain success. I have no intention whatsoever. You can find all the easy cases you want to. There are lots of easy cases around. For instance, there isn't a tough case in this room. I notice immediately several people might flinch at my statement of that and they base a lot of pride upon being a tough case.

Male voice: You answered it.

But I've even been breaking the cases of Spanish police officers - the final, final word of 1.5 - the final word. They're real solid. Like somebody said about another preclear: They're solid black glass.

Well, all right. When we get quite a few of these cases through, we will go into considerable more material. Particularly, we should go into some of the material that surrounds group communication systems. All the way through, actually, we ought to go in through the Axioms. We should pick up some theory; after we've already gone over the systems of theory, we should go with this other system.

We should know, at the time this course is finished, not the Axioms by number - that would be kind of idiotic - but we should know them by definition. We should take them up and discuss them rather thoroughly. And having discussed them thoroughly, you should understand them rather thoroughly.

A lot of people are still floating around wondering what randomity is. And yet there's only - there happens to be only one nice, solid, calm explanation about why life operates as life and why individuals become individuals and that's just randomity. So we've got to have a lot about randomity and see how it works, and so on.

Well, in a small group of this character, there can be lots of questions. There can be a lot of internal instruction in the group itself. There can be lots of questions to me personally and a lot of talking with me personally. And so there shouldn't be anything about which you're foggy.

But I'll give you a word of warning. If some of the questions that start popping up are too confoundedly elementary, we won't go into twenty-four hours on bread and water. We will go into twenty-four hours with our nose stuck in Book One or something of the sort. But you would be absolutely amazed how widely and grandly this track has gotten swept. We really, really have material to look at.

But still, if we can learn in this course how to think and when not to, and if we can get our speed up as a group, good and high, we will have accomplished that thing for the United States which was accomplished in Great Britain, only we'll have accomplished it better. Now, I went over to Great Britain. I took a course that had been indoctrinated on the HCA tapes, fairly well, and I took off from there straight into Theta Clearing. And I went straight from there on to Theta Clearing.

As I say, I had a group much bigger than this one and yet I was able to give personal attention to everybody in that group. I taught them for six weeks, all hours of the day and night. And we had formal lectures. We had seminars. And that was not important - formal lectures and seminars. That was beside the point. What we had was just continuous demonstration and experience inside the group.

Well, right now Great Britain is undertaking such programs as wiping out asthma in the British Isles. They're just not dabbling in this. These boys - these boys are real mean.

TBD

The British HAS is an immediate reflection on six weeks of training. That isn't an immediate reflection on me. It's an immediate determination of this original group of people in Great Britain who decided that in this six weeks they were going to get an awful lot of auditing in and they were going to get an awful lot of studying in and they were going to ask all the questions they could think of and they were going to get all the information they could possibly think of and they were going to pull each other along one way or another. And this more than anything else was responsible for what happened. But this crew in Great Britain has reflected in a very, very fine British HAS.

Well, right now I suppose most of you are situated okay and we can get underway and we are underway - and were at two o'clock - and I hope that we can bust down any barriers we may have - one, amongst ourselves or between me and thee or thee and me or anything of the sort and get a free-flowing line of communication, a bit of relaxation, get so we know each other and bring up our level of tolerance, perhaps, on maybe some of my vastly terrible failings, because I have an awful time - I have a terrible time holding on to anchors - not anchor points. I don't have any trouble holding on to anchor points.

It's a rough deal with me sometimes, particularly since this last summer. It's been a long time that I've been working in Dianetics and Scientology. Ever since I wrapped this up so that when a preclear came in and sat down and I said "bowwow" and he said "woof-woof" and a few other things happened in the thing and so on - the guy didn't have a chronic somatic and he was in good shape - I've been getting awfully impatient about sort of sitting still.

Action is what is desirable, very definitely - either action in terms of groups or action in terms of getting a civilization built. We might even go that far. I know that sounds adventurous to you - getting a civilization built - because we'd only have - to work with we've got soda fountains and Coca-Cola and Ford cars. Well, it's pretty rough. I really don't see how you people can stand this level of crudity.

But anyway, our civilization could very well get itself somewhat shifted around, if just those of us who are here now did a good job. Fantastic, but very true.

Now, as I say, I probably have numerous failings. One other thing is I crowd time very badly. I know what I can do in ten minutes and I know what somebody else ought to be able to do in ten minutes and sometimes two ten minutes will get overlapped and then try to occupy the same space. Now, I find out I can live on two time tracks at once, why can't you?

[Please note: At this point in the lecture a gap exists in the original recording. We now rejoin the class where the lecture resumes.]

The processing I'm going to give you is not model Group Processing. My attitude, when it comes to a group made up of people in training is, I'm afraid - particularly with people as well trained as those present - apt to be a trifle on the side of "Well, it doesn't matter, because they can always straighten it out." And I like to see a case finished and squared away. But it doesn't particularly matter, if we're processing in a group, if we ...

The point I'm making here is we use group techniques which you, as an individual, would never dream of using on a big group of people. If something happens here, we've got lots of auditors.

If you see somebody walking around in a daze after this kind of processing, and so forth, well, just bring him out of his daze.

These processes I give you as Group Processes under no circumstances are, in a broad sense, Group Processes. I want you to understand that. I'm not giving you a model now, of Group Processing. This is highly specialized, limited just to auditors and groups of auditors that are going to be in contact with each other.

I'm going to give you an interesting process right now known as "Cycle of Action." Now, this process came out a long time ago. I dreamed this up in order to get over the hump of start, change and stop. So here we go:

Get finishing an engram.

Running an engram; completely erasing it.

Get solving a case as an auditor.

Finishing a number of locks off on a case.

Get being a pleased preclear as a result.

Get being a pleased auditor.

Get having turned a preclear into an angel.

Get the feeling of beautiful accomplishment at having cleared an entire group of people.

Get the cheerful feeling of having erased an entire chain of engrams as a preclear.

Having erased an entire chain of engrams as an auditor.

Get the pleasant feeling of having brought a preclear to present time.

Having brought another preclear to present time.

The final feeling of having brought another preclear to present time.

The pleasant feeling, again, as a preclear of having been brought to present time.

And again the final feeling as a preclear of having been brought to present time.

Now again, as a preclear, get the comfort of an enormous number of somatics.

Now get the comfort as an auditor of having turned on an enormous number of somatics.

Get startled belief on the part of the preclear.

Get startled belief as a preclear.

Now get other people being startled into belief as preclears, by other people.

Now get everyone respecting you because you have been able to change the society for the better.

Now get in front of you two people kneeling down, saying they've been wrong about you and Scientology.

Now get two people in front of you saying, "We're so sorry we were wrong about you and Dianetics."

Two more people in front of you, looking in your direction, just winnowing away to nothing in absolute abject shame at having ever questioned your sanity.

Two more people in front of you apologizing abjectly and fading away to nothing because they questioned your godliness.

Get two more people fading away because they have offended a thetan.

Two more people withering away because they have given offense.

Get a temple falling down because it was set up by a rival.

Now get being nailed on a cross.

Now get being shot for loyalty.

Get a whole multitude withering away because it had nailed you on a cross.

Get a whole mob of people being terribly sorry they offended you while you were alive, now that you're dead.

Get the beautiful feeling of having erased an engram.

Of having erased birth.

Of having erased birth in a preclear.

Of having erased the entire prenatal bank in a preclear including birth.

The beautiful finality, as a preclear, of having had the entire prenatal bank and birth erased.

The wonderful feeling of finally hitting the beginning of the time track.

The pleasant feeling of having erased all the grief from your case.

Of having erased all the grief from a pre clear's case.

Get somebody else feeling triumphant at having erased somebody else's grief.

Now get the pleasant feeling of having remedied and wiped out all your past misdeeds.

Now get the pleasant feeling of having suffered all the wrongs necessary to put you in the right.

Now get the beauty of having graduated from the MEST universe with the honors.

[end of lecture.]

1st ACC (6 October 1953) LOOKING, DEFINITION OF STATIC PAGE 14/ NUMPAGES 14

[[Category:Lectures]]
[[Category:Lectures 1ACC]]
[[Category:Lectures 1953]]