View source for Summary Failures on Exteriorization (2ACC 531209)

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

'''Date:''' 9 December 1953

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

----

← [[Lecture_Index_2ACC|Back to Series]]

And this is December the 9th, morning lecture. This morning we're going to talk about the various combining factors, and why the preclear fails and why the auditor fails on exteriorization.

We've had a great many factors handed out here in the first few weeks of this course. And these factors, of course, combine into a rationale which is utilized in many ways. The things which have been stressed here are only the most important things.

Those things are: the curve create, survive, destroy—a very important curve; the next is the dynamics, all eight of them, what they mean—they're quite important because a preclear is inverted on one or another of them very badly; the matter of the invisible barrier because this, of course, makes solid the idea that thetans are flying around ready to tear one apart and so forth. And one knows it's solid but he can't see it, and he depends upon his sight to tell him if something's there, and then if he can't see something there, and then he finds something there—and this is the basic confusion.

The next is making something out of nothing, and nothing out of something. That's quite important, because here is your basic automaticity. A something-nothing combination is, in itself, the maybe of indecision.

So we look over automaticity and we find out that automaticity comes into being and persists in an individual on two methods. That is to say, he uses automaticity to do two things—actually, most specifically, two specific things, which is to mock and unmock things—to create, that is to say, and destroy things.

Now, automaticity itself is laid in to persist. And there isn't much of a methodology to make things persist except postulates to make things persist; and it isn't actually technically correct that an automaticity exists which make things persist, but it appears so. And so we will say that there's—for your purposes and for your uses—there are three kinds of automaticities: those which create things and those which make things persist and those which destroy things.

Now, all that automaticity comes under the heading of handling things. All automaticity comes under that heading. And when the individual is convinced that he cannot any longer handle something, he generally becomes convinced because he set up an automaticity which he has now made more powerful than himself. So the decision that one can't handle something or one can't control something is preceded by a decision to have something be automatic. To have something be automatic is—inevitably sets up the successor decision "I can't handle anything."

You want to know why the preclear can't control this and control that and control his position in space and so forth, he's set it all up automatically. The reason he set it up automatically, ordinarily, is because he lost interest in handling it. He just didn't any longer care to handle it or he believed he was wrong in handling it.

Now, we have the factors of cause and effect, and one is trying to resist effect in order to be cause. And when we combine these major factors, we find that we have several modus operandi as contained in SOP 8-C which specifically address them. And almost any modus operandi in SOP 8-C addresses all of these, or can address all of these. In other words, any step in SOP 8-C can be applied to all the material there that you've had.

These steps are—you take location—where couldn't he handle something, you see? Where wasn't he cause? So even there you could, by putting in a further significance, use in location all the factors, such as the dynamics. "Where's God?" That's one of the main stumblers: "Where's God?" Well, people have answered this with an abandonment which is glorious by saying, "He's everyplace!" That's real apathy. "The son of a gun chases me everywhere I go, I can't have any space without his space." (laughter)

Now, we take the old triangle of ARC, and we find out that all these factors come into being and become confirmed when they are agreed to. And this agreement itself becomes the reality of the individual. He makes a postulate and he's—finds that this is agreed with. And it's consistently agreed with, and therefore, it becomes a very firm postulate. Methodologies of politeness and so forth are continuous agreement that one really doesn't exist, and one can't amount to very much, and one can't do anything, and one is weak and flabby and so forth, in the present culture.

One of the most virile cultures of Europe—very interesting culture— Germanic culture, the Teutonic. The Romans used to go up and kick their teeth in regularly, burn their villages and so forth, and then the Germans would come out and burn a few on the Roman side of the border. And that's gone on now for about twenty-five hundred to three thousand years. Interesting, isn't it? World War II is just the recurring engram of the Teutonic resistance to Roman invasion.

But what in essence made these people so powerful? And what makes them even today so powerful? They don't say, "I don't amount to nothing. I'm nothing. I'm dirt beneath your feet." They don't say this. They say, "I'm big and strong, and I can lick anybody." And they only started failing when they started saying, "Well, maybe I can lick everybody."

But a German knight back in Roman days had, actually, an ethical standard which was so far out of the Roman sight that the Roman kind of made fun of it. He couldn't understand how anything could be this good; but it in essence was the reason why the German nations and tribes could stand up to the Roman legions so long, and actually are still going in 1953 a.d. Of course, we don't particularly consider it desirable that such organizations go on forever, I'm merely offering it as an example of what is being done elsewhere.

Now, Japan with their negation complex has consistently lost. And, for instance, there was no slightest thought, actually, in the Japanese mind that they would ever defeat the United States. I knew before the war, because I had many friends and knew quite a bit about Japan, I knew what their mood was— and I considered that Franklin Delano Spoofer was more sensible than he was. I figured out he might have some adviser he might listen to, but he only listened to CPs and other people I guess. Because it was inevitable that anybody that pushed Japan would get this immediate reaction: "We have to commit suicide." You start shoving a Japanese around, the most horrible thing he can do to you is commit suicide.

Now, by the way, you look this over with some preclears—the most horrible thing they can do to you is to fail to have anything happen. They're trying to get even with you. They don't have anything happen, see. That gets even with you. Isn't this weird? They're clutching to their breasts something like: "They have betrayed me"—which, by the way, is a wonderful postulate to run— "they have betrayed me, see?" And they keep holding up this betrayal. Well, that's getting even with somebody on it. Because that is actually a horrible thing to do to somebody: to hold up a betrayal and then make them agree with it. That's really vengeful, but way down scale, and is not very survival.

So, the Japanese empire with its constant talk of "an insignificant us," "holding our foul (indrawn breath) foul breath from your face," "so sorry," and so on, of course, is a setup. But it's dangerous because it will commit suicide. That's why it declared war against the United States. I knew that. I knew that in 1940, they were going to do this. But it never occurred to me that anybody in Washington would be so stupid as to realize it; because when—golly, that's some suicide—they start firing bullets through their own brains, they ricochet afterwards. And yeah, that was real tough.

So we have these two types of culture on the third dynamic which are demonstrating that the agreement, within the culture, of personal power has a great deal of bearing upon the culture's survival itself.

Now, a culture which is—agrees continually "I can't create, I can't create, I can't create, I can't create," is of course that one which is superdoomed. And that's really doomed, because it says, "We're effect, we're effect, we're effect, we can only be effect." Well, there are two methods of arriving at that end. One is to make everything automatic, which makes one an effect of everything, and this afterwards will reflect in the fact that nobody can create anything; and the other is simply to go around and be apologetic about creating.

Now, a cultural level which apologized for being creative would be one doomed to failure. And we have such a culture, it's called Hollywood—another scene across the world with which I happen to be fairly familiar. And in Hollywood you have a continuous agreement on the part of people that they can't create.

And in engineering you have the same continuous agreement. "We can't create. We're just handling the stuff that's already been created, and we're handling Professor Wumfgutter's formulas, and it's all according to Ohm's law or Poom's law or Boom's law. And we're in agreement. We're in agreement. We're in agreement." And these guys get more and more glasses, and they get more and more Pepsi-Cola or some other disease. And they wonder what on earth is wrong with them. Well, they're just agreeing all the time on the fact they can't create. They also are agreeing on the fact they can't destroy, and they wind up surviving forever in agony.

Well, in Hollywood and amongst (quote) "slick paper magazine circles" in New York, the politeness level of the authors is, "Well, it's not anything, I just knocked it off, it doesn't amount to very much. I'm not very proud of it. And I just hand this stuff out, it's just junk, you know, and we're just filming the . . ."

Actually I can't—I wouldn't put on a tape, standard Hollywood talk about what they call the hero and the villain. And what they commonly refer to in their own work. They do not respect themselves. And nobody who works in Hollywood very long can fail to note that his own respect for himself is declining.

It's a wonderful world of make-believe, and if it had a few sincere people in it, a few people who realized they could create, it would be a wonderful lot of fun. But it is not that kind of a world. And it is going by the boards. I don't mean on a tipped slide, I mean on a vertical one.

Supercommerciality—one of the finest things they will produce, after a while, will be a commercial for Boo-Boo soap. Because they're all saying all the time—here are these creative artists—they're saying continually, "I can't create. I can't create. I didn't do anything. It's just junk. It's no good," and so on. They're in superagreement upon this inability to create. "We'll make one like Blatz Pictures made last month. That went over good," so on. Because they're asking for the volume agreement of the society at large, which is registered on the box office in terms of figures and dollars. And this is a dependency on the whole society. So these organizations and artists depend upon agreement with the entire society as to what they should be able to do.

These factors are factors which you have to consider in auditing. You may think they're quite far afield, but they're not far afield at all. The thetan is absolutely nothing if he cannot create, and if he cannot destroy those things which menace his creations. He's just nothing. I mean nothing. This is all he's got! And now you're going to wash it all up by letting somebody agree that he can't create. Well, that's suicide itself.

Well, the thetan is in this state of mind of committing suicide. He's not in the state of mind of saying, "I'm tough, I'm big." People will hang around him all the time trying to get him to agree to be wrong. How wrong can you get? Human. You cannot be a human being and be right. It's impossible. You just start looking it over, and you find out that an individual who has to depend upon and put up with all the factors a human being has to depend upon and put up with, is in agreement with so many things that are contrasurvival that he himself is left with no choice about being right.

I don't wish to belabor this or upset you particularly, but an individual who takes the agreement of others with him seriously, is in trouble. And in essence, that's all that's really wrong with your preclear: it's just terrific agreement on the part of his own Wrongness. And he gets this terrific agreement, and doesn't realize it's agreement in terms of his own Wrongness.

The first wrong thing he does is to take things seriously. They're not serious. They can be wiped out overnight. Someday somebody will get bored and yawn too wide and rip the air cover off of Earth. And there's where all these wonderful problems—where will they go? They'll go poof in the vacuum. It's not serious. But your—when a people become insincere and savagely critical and in super-agreement amongst themselves that what they're doing is not worthwhile and that others around them are untrustworthy, and where there's no faith and there's no purpose and there's no goal and there's no reason why, and they get serious about this, you see, you have the difference of agreement level which makes for failure.

And these things all may be true, they just may be as true as true can be, but they shouldn't make any difference. You get the viewpoint: "So these things are true. I mean, should that modify my conduct particularly? No. I don't have to depend upon what I have learned from the physical universe in order to carry on. I can't do anything else but survive." That's your—the way a thetan ought to feel about it to be in real good shape: "I can't do anything else but survive." I mean, why take all this nonsurvival seriously?

And yet he does take it seriously, and so he fools and befuddles himself to a point where he can't even be three feet back of his head. Now, that's really remarkable. In view of the fact that he really isn't anyplace, that he can't be someplace, it'd be very remarkable.

Now, I want to call to your attention out of these various factors—you get this agreement, panel of agreement and so forth, hitting him in every side— why is it that preclears fail and auditors fail? Well, they've had to make postulates that they've failed. Where are these postulates? Well, we better look over the anatomy of a body being handled by a thetan. And we find that originally and early on the track, a thetan was handling bodies, if he handled them at all, from above and behind the body. Therefore, there's a great deal of old energy kicking around which can be re-created by any automaticity which wants to make the past last. And all of that deposit of energy has to do with "handle with energy." That's its prime postulate. It says, "Handle with energy."

If you could imagine a tall dunce cap about twenty-five feet long, sitting on the back of a preclear's head, coming to a point about twenty-five feet away— they've got a—much too stylized, much too neat a picture of it, but that's a mass of energy, and every bit of it says, "Handle with energy." All the postulates and everything that had been originated there have been shot down a line of energy to the body. And this accumulation of energy, at length, brings about a conviction one must handle with energy. Because that's the prime postulate in all that mass of energy in that dunce cap.

And then one day the failure postulate starts to come in. The failure postulate comes about when a thetan does—has depended too much upon a body, and no longer considers himself sufficiently strong or powerful to hold apart the terminal of the spot twenty-five feet back of the head and the body itself. He can't impose space on these two terminals anymore, he considers himself weak. He can do it, he just considers he can't do it. And so the body has a sudden pain, and he gets all of these "handle with energy" lines energized the reverse way to. And every tractor beam in there collapses, because it's energized.

Now, a tractor beam, when energized, collapses. A pusher beam—a pressor beam, you know, pusher—expands when energized. But a tractor beam collapses. And so in he comes. And all the way on in he's saying, "I've failed"—the whole length of the dunce cap, see? Pam! He goes into the head. The body gets its— shot in the guts or it gets tripped or scalded or something of the sort, and in comes this thetan—swoosh! And all the way in, he can't put on the brakes. In other words, he can't handle this energy which handles energy. And all the way in he's saying, "I've failed. I've failed. I've failed. I've failed." Pam!

And then where is he? He is sitting on the head end of the dunce cap. And back of him he has all of this stuff up there that says, "handle with energy." And then he comes into a failure in this life, and this stuff reenergizes, and it says—the whole kit and caboodle of it says—"Failure, failure, failure, failure, failure, failure, failure."

Now, you come along as an auditor, and you say, "Now be three feet back of your head, Joe Preclear." And the fellow does, and this horrible sadness comes over him. He gets real sad. Why—what's he get sad for? Well, it's very simple. He's just run into this mass of "handle with energy" and failure.

Now, you should see very clearly here a couple of the most important, immediate goals to handle with Postulate Processing, and why you handle it back of the preclear, not in front of the preclear. That suddenly click, whir and make sense?

And these people who back off from the body and then later on come into the body again and stick, or are upset about it and so forth, are simply running into this failure postulate which is contained in this dunce cap.

You know, this dunce cap takes many forms. It'll sometimes get around in front of the face. It'll sometimes be to the side of the body and so forth. But they're in—it'll take many forms—they'll be long lines or tubes or small tubes or anything that might look like energy.

Don't try to specialize and say, "It is a dunce cap made out of 20-weight paper," or something, because it's not. It's very different. But the purpose of all these different forms are represented by this dunce cap, and the purpose of all these different forms was to handle a body with energy, and to communicate with energy, see? And as a result, a person got that former postulate, "I have to handle with energy." That's not handle with postulates—"I have to handle with energy." That's the prime postulate in all that mass of energy. And then, with that, he comes in with a crash. And he's done this many times, and other thetans have done this on this same body, so their postulates are there too, and they all say, "Failed." Failed to what? Well, failed to handle the body, of course. Failed to control one, failed to stay outside, but mainly failed to keep two anchor points apart: the anchor point which is way back of the body where the thetan ought to be, and the body. So we can impose position on terminals.

Now, let's look at that electric motor, and we find out that the sole force of the electric motor is the fact that it has space and time imposed upon it. In other words, space—different spaces consecutively imposed upon two terminals. And the base of the motor holds these two apart, and Earth holds the base of the motor apart. And the solar system—gravitic, centripetal, centrifugal system, you know, of the Sun going around and so forth—that holds the Sun and the Earth apart, and we go on up the line until we find that the galaxies are holding apart. And when we move on out of the universe, all we have found when we get all the way out, is the fact that somebody has imposed space on two terminals.

So when it comes down to a problem of a body and a thetan, we again have this problem of can the thetan impose space upon terminals or can't he? And this is an ability, and it is done with postulates, it's not done with energy.

But he has started handling things with energy instead of postulates, and this deteriorates down to a point of trying to keep things apart with energy, and this is very silly, because energy won't keep anything apart in absence of a postulate. I mean the fact that the top of the microphone is apart from the base of the microphone solely depends upon a prior postulate, and that's all it depends upon. You think otherwise, why, you go along with this subject for a while, and you'll find that by pulling postulates out of mest you can make it collapse or make it move.

Well, we're not up to that point yet, and we're not even vaguely worried about doing that. That'd scare you to death. And by the way, thetans very often completely resign their right to handle postulates and mest. They just say, "I don't want to do it anymore." They were looking at this very pretty mock-up or this pretty girl or something of the sort, and they yanked the base postulate and so on, and it went poof and there wasn't anything there, and this was very sad and remorseful.

Well, that wasn't so bad as when they yanked it partway so as to make a cripple or something of the sort. And this was real bad, so they didn't like that, so they said, "I don't want to do it anymore." And they said, "I can't trust myself." And that's the basic source of distrust, is being convinced or convincing oneself that one is bad cause with one's own postulates.

And so we have, then, this two-terminal ability—that imposition and so forth—that thetan position which is somewhere outside of the body, and the body. The thetan will stay outside as long as he can impose space on two positions. See, he can keep space in between two terminals. Well, he doesn't do it with effort. He just says, "Space between two terminals"—swish, there it is. But he uses all of this energy to do it. And the energy isn't going to do a thing for him. He gets in there and grinds and crunches and so on. And he says, "Rrrh, rrrh — put some space between these two terminals" and, of course—collapse!

Now, it's no very difficult trick to resolve this problem. But you have been running into it and have more or less considered it, I'm sure, here and there, practically insurmountable. You exteriorize a preclear, and as soon as you get him exteriorized nicely and so forth, you say something wrong to him, or you do something that he considers upsetting, his trust level is not too good, and he goes pang! back into his head again. Well, he does that partially in revenge, and—he does it partially so that you'll be wrong and he does it partially because he can't help it.

Now, he's not being willful about this. He's just running into a lot of spooky elements that he isn't quite conversant with. Now, naturally this dunce cap is a sort of an invisible barrier. A postulate itself can make an invisible barrier. You can't see a postulate, and yet you can sense where one is. Thus we get into Postulate Processing, and we find out the postulates I've just been talking about are the most important ones. "I have failed" is a terrifically important postulate. It's not really a postulate, it's a realization, slightly a different kind of postulate. It's a consideration, we were calling it earlier, a realization—"I've failed."

Well, this stuff is fixed in energy. The thetan is trying to fix postulates in energy all the time, and boy, these postulates are sure fixed in energy.

So, "I have failed," and crash, in he comes. Well, it's an invisible barrier. And it's an invisible barrier behind him. And you would be surprised how long a preclear will process in front of him. He will just do it right from here on out. It will just never occur to him to put anything behind him. If you never said anything to him, he'd just keep on processing that way.

Well now, this is because of too fixed attention in one plane: the fore and aft plane of the body. You'll very often find a preclear unable to put anything to the right or left of him, but quite able to put things above and in front of him, and below him. This is because you have this single plane of attention, merely because his attention is mainly concentrated in that direction. Well, this is also reinforced by this dunce cap, this cone, this plane of attention.

And you'll very often find somebody who is—impossible for him to see anything. He'll even consider he has blinders on, or something like that. He'll have big black masses of energy on the right side of his head and the left side of his head. And he can see between these, you see—frontwise, particularly— very easily. But you ask him to look sideways, and he runs into black energy. That's just a fixed plane of attention, that's all.

So we move immediately into the next thing which is important to handle, which is the concentration of attention. And when attention is too concentrated, an individual is unable to release it; and when attention is too dispersed, an individual is unable to concentrate it. What makes it difficult for him to concentrate his attention and not concentrate his attention—unconcentrate it, you might say—what makes it difficult? I told you the other day what makes it difficult. It's the invisible barrier more than anything else. And so you handle this invisible barrier—the eyes, remember? An invisible barrier.

Right back of all of this problem is the immediate problem, "I'm going to be hit." That's right there.

Now, any preclear who can't perceive is a preclear who is preventing himself from being contacted by the energy particles of the room. He conceives that these things exist and that they are heavy, and that he depends upon them to give him a vision of the room. So the photons go bouncing off the walls, he thinks, and everything proves it to him that it does, and they hit the other photons which he thinks are there, and of course, he senses the impact between these two.

Now, he decides at that moment when he's—first feels his first photon— you just step him out of his head, actually, he has a slight sensation of being touched. No matter how slight it is, it doesn't matter, that is a moment when he gets very leery. And if the auditor makes mistakes on the subject of asking him to perceive at that moment—if the auditor makes mistakes on this, he's liable to reinteriorize, boom! Why? Because you're asking him to be hit.

You might as well ask him, "Now, put yourself up against the wall. Now you see those fellows out there with that Gatling gun? Now put yourself over a little closer to them. Now attract their attention and tell them to shoot." He isn't going to do that. So you say, "Look at this" or "Look at that," or "Be under this bombardment" or "Be in front of that bombardment," prematurely and too suddenly—just making some colossal blunder this way—you're asking him to be hit. By what? A bombardment of light rays and so forth, which he conceives to be there. All right, these light waves are liable to hit him, and they disturb his balance because he's tuned up to them and in fine agreement with them, and he doesn't want to see.

Now, you wonder what's wrong with your thetan's perception: A thetan in order to perceive must be able—according to his own agreements and so forth— must be able to receive on a 360-degree sphere basis, the emanations of the mest universe itself. In order to perceive the mest universe, he feels he must receive all of these particles. He must be willing to receive them in order to perceive.

You want to know what is wrong with your thetan, and why he doesn't perceive and your preclear doesn't perceive, and—he's just in that kind of a condition. The reason he wants to be behind an invisible barrier is so that he will not be hit. The reason why he wants to be at the back of a pair of eyeballs is so that he won't be hit. And with all of this, we get a situation of "superdodge" and "don't look." "Don't want to be hit" and "don't look" are the same statement for our purposes in auditing.

Now, there's a little higher one than that which you have to take into account, is "don't want to hit." He's afraid to hit. And this, of course, is on the basis of consequences; because he thinks if he hits, he will be hit. And so we run into, right there in perception, the overt act-motivator sequence. You see that? So consequences of hitting is being hit.

Parents, by the way, are very fond of training their children endlessly and arduously that if they hit little Johnny, they're going to be hit back—probably by Papa, or something of the sort. And this is not necessarily bad training—it doesn't make good children, but it certainly is a fine key-in on the overt act-motivator sequence. All right.

Some of this begin to make sense to you, exactly why he doesn't perceive?

[At this point there is a gap in the original recording.]

Now, in the various considerations which we have, the major one is the consideration of beauty. You have now a process which directly processes beauty and consideration of beauty, in shifting postulates. And it is very necessary for you to handle this in a preclear, no matter whether you think it's tactful or not—it's just handle it. There isn't a creature anywhere in the world that is sane, that believes he or she or it is as beautiful as can be. There is no zenith. There isn't a one. So that here, particularly, one shouldn't take it amiss or feel that tact has anything to do with it. Make it rather impersonal.

And in processing by shifting postulates, such questions as "Where aren't you being beautiful?" takes up number I. "Now let's get some ugly space, and let's get some beautiful space" takes up number III. In IV, in handling automaticities, so forth, machines which make beauty and which unmake beauty are very important. And in V, you shift terminals, that is to say postulates, in such a way as to bring about a betterment of this automa..., pardon me, of this various automaticity that shuts off beauty and so on. And these postulates which are shifted, of course, is, "I am not beautiful" or "they are not beautiful" or "they are ugly" or "they are not ugly" or "that is not aesthetic" or "that has no artistic sincerity" or "my beauty will be criticized" or "if I put up anything beautiful it will be spoiled"—anything that would have to do with handsomeness, beauty, charm, grace, gracefulness, good meter (that is to say, rhythm)—any of the factors which represent, themselves, beauty.

Now, you can take this all by itself and just start chewing it up, and you'd have a well preclear. That's how important that wavelength is, because that's how he gets into energy. And the only reason he ever got into energy of any kind or consideration or description was because of beauty. And beauty is a very fine, high, aesthetic wave. And it in essence, apparently, is the gradient scale—is top on the gradient scale from postulate to apathy and mest. And so I refer you to 8 -80 and the little charts in there that have to do with this. It's a very high wave. And where a person has made postulates on the subject which are very definite, why, these postulates impede his further progress.

He said, "There isn't any use, because I'll never be beautiful anyhow." This sort of thing goes on in his mind. It's a feeling of sorrow—a feeling of sorrow hits him sometimes when he stands up to a mirror or hits her sometimes when she stands up. And I've seen quite a very, very handsome woman be very, very upset every time they looked in a mirror. And they were always consulting with the mirror.

When people depend upon a piece of energy to contain all the beauty of which they are capable, they're almost lost right there. But that's so high above what your preclear's doing that it's almost inconceivable. So remedy this factor of beauty. If you feel you're stepping on some preclear's toes—devil with it. Better to step on his toes, or let him feel you're stepping on his toes, than to leave this fact overlooked.

Now, in the handling of postulates—I want to go over that again with you—preclears will do various weird things when they start moving postulates around. A preclear does not have to know why he is moving postulates, he does not have to know in order for this technique to work. But don't confuse this with other rationale than this—it's the Prelogics: theta locates in space and time, this and that. All right. Now, let's add postulates. He locates postulates and fixes them in space and time, and that in itself becomes logic. So we have joined up knowingness, logic, and geographical position, and the creation of space, and consecutive spaces which themselves become time, with this process of handling postulates.

Now, we used to have a process of putting up a mock-up in front of one, and above one, and to the right, to the left, and below and so forth. Well, that had an incidence of failure which wasn't quite discernible. I looked over why people were failing with this because I wasn't failing with it. And it seemed to me quite remarkable that they were.

Well, I found out they were doing this: They were putting up a mock-up and then they were unmocking it, and putting it in a new position and then unmocking it in the new position, and then putting it in a new position, and unmocking it in the new position. No, thank you. That's not the way to do it. What you do is put up this mock-up and move it. Now, just that—move it to the new position, no matter what you have to do—put it in a kiddie car or hitch a truck to it or anything. It doesn't matter how you get it moved, just get it moved to the new position.

You'll find out that when a preclear puts up an idea, his tendency is, if you tell him to move it, is to—it'll be there as an idea for the first inch or two, and then it'll skip all the way through. And then it'll not arrive at all—it'll evaporate someplace, and then he'll put a new postulate at the destination. He won't move this postulate through to a new position.

The first place here, you are dramatizing, straight out, "can't arrive." You just see "can't arrive" all over the place. And the pinpoint repositioning, by motion, of this, is of the essence. Now, there's no reason to just sit there and make the preclear fail on it, it's just give him light enough postulates, easy enough things to shove around, to get the idea. Because in essence, you're using postulates to make space and make anchor points.

And you'll find that if he's well processed, he just gets the postulates a little further out and more certainly located, and he can put them further away, successively, as he goes along. And finally he'll be able to get them miles and miles away with great certainty. But at first he might only have been able to get them between two corners of the room, and was having a hard time doing that. He can move them, in other words. And you're asking him to move a postulate. But remember, you're asking him to move a postulate, not make one appear, disappear, and then reappear, and then disappear again. You're asking him to consecutively parade a postulate between two places. You'll find quite often that he's unable to make the postulate arrive at the destination. Well, you just coax him into it, that's all. Let him do it for a while and he'll arrive finally. And he receives the benefit of the thing of having the stuff evaporate.

Now this, in essence, performs an erasure. Theoretically, you could take an engram which suddenly appeared with a preclear and by moving it—not by jumping it and making it reappear, see, that's a different process—by actually moving it, not moving the scenery up to it and around it and so forth; they'll do that one too. You've just got to pester a preclear to death to find out what he's doing with this technique. And don't just sit there benignly and let him go on and run it and fall on his face and do all sorts of weird things and then afterwards say, "Well, let's see, I guess that technique doesn't work."

No, your auditing didn't work, that's what happened there. That's because you just didn't keep asking him and hounding him all the time, and finding out exactly what he was doing. See, it's much better to give a preclear a completely harassed feeling of just being pestered to death than it is just to sit back and let him run benignly. ARC in a session—it has some desirability, has some desirability. But believe me, look at that C. And if you've got to sacrifice a little A and R to get a little bit better C, you do so—every time, do so.

Although it might be not polite for you to keep saying, "What the hell are you doing now?" and it will jar the affinity and so forth, it would be even better to go in on that level than just to sit there politely and let him fall all over himself and not make any progress in the session. I'm sure some of you must be doing this. I mean, you know, just, "It's not so polite to interrupt, and it's not quite polite to keep hounding somebody all the time, so we'll just kind of let that one coast, and we'll let the next one coast, and what we need is a friendly atmosphere."

By the way, that's the most gorgeous formula of all, is "what we want is a friendly atmosphere." That leads to cat-and-dog fights all over the place. It is an implant. Part of the between-lives implant in this particular era at this time is "we want a friendly atmosphere." It's a head-on implant, you might say, it's around in front of the body. A large mass of energy accumulates there, and you move that one around and you'll get some weird results on your preclear. And you'll also better his ability to audit like mad. The trouble with an auditor who is doing poorly, he wants a "friendly" atmosphere before he wants a cleared one. And that's a big difference. All right.

Getting the postulate moved to the points where he can move it with certainty is, then, the job of the auditor. The preclear must be able to move. Now, how small a gradient, and how light a postulate? Well, I imagine you're going to have to find some that are pretty light and move them a very short distance indeed. Such as, you could take the postulate—you take—just take the postulate "fingers," you know, "there are fingers," and have him move that.

Have him move it where? Always behind him. You understand? Don't let that postulate get around in front. Move it behind him, and you might be able to move it from one corner of the back of the chair to the other corner of the back of the chair. See, he might be able to get that smoothly. He might only be able to get it one inch. Move it one inch with certainty, and move it back one inch with certainty. But remember, it's got to be moved all the way, and it's got to be there all the way, and so you just drill him on it until he's had it there all the way.

And you'll find him doing some of the darnedest things. After you've got him all straight, see, and he's doing it just right, you ask him three minutes later what he's doing, two minutes later . . . You think this is rather peculiar— you've just been running this postulate, and you've run this postulate for two or three minutes and it doesn't seem to have any letup on it. Just say he's just going on running it, and he's—same communication space, you know, that's one of the ways you tell. Fellow says, yes, he's done it. And then, "Yes." And after a while he's saying, "Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes." It's one of the ways you tell. Also, he might have stopped doing it at all, and he's merely asking—answering you, "Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes," to get rid of you. But the point is that he starts doing it more easily.

Now, you must—all of a sudden you've run this three minutes, no result— "Let me see here, see? What's going on here?" You say, "What are you doing? Now, move it into the basement. Now, did you do that? Now, how did you do it?" And you'll be amazed. The fellow was doing it perfectly correct just two or three minutes before, perfectly right, and now he has it under his arm as a football and is going down to the basement with it and is bringing it back up. Now and then he will be chasing it down to the basement by throwing rocks at it. Now and then you'll find that a little man has appeared—and this is a very handy mechanism—this little man runs from this point to the other point and runs back again, thinking it all the time. I don't give you these just to model it, but believe me!

And now you've got him—you're all content now. You've got this straightened out about he's taking it down to the basement, and he's taking it to the attic. And now you've just—"You've got to move it to the attic, and you're supposed to be right back of your head and move it to the attic, you see?" All right, he does that, he's perfectly content, so forth. And then you say, "All right. Now how did you make out with that?" after it's moved six or seven more times, you know.

And he says, "Oh, that's fine. I'm just doing fine with it now."

"Well, what are you doing with it? Hm?"

Just terrible that it creates such an atmosphere of suspicion, but try not to sound too suspicious. But this time—this time he has been able to get the whole thing straight. He's running it along a telephone wire, and the telephone company is moving it. Anybody is moving this postulate but himself.

Now, the rationale behind this—and you just get him back to putting it there and moving it. Now, he wants you to—he says, "Do I—am I supposed to cloak it in energy?"

And you say, "No, you're just supposed to put the postulate there."

"Well, what if there's some energy around it?"

"Well, okay, there's some energy around it. Don't pay any attention to the energy, just move the postulate."

Well, this will work out all right until "handle with energy" turns up. And sooner or later on some cases, you're going to have to handle the dunce cap itself, and you just move it around. Now, he's been moving things around with it, and then it became automatic and moved things around for him. So now you ask him to move it around again—that gives him control of it. But move it around. Don't have it skip, skip, skip. See that?

Now, the reason we take up and tell a thetan to "be here," and "be there," and "be someplace else," is this is actually the right way to go about it. But this should not blind you to the fact that a thetan should be able to move from one place to another. You ask somebody to be back of his head, be in his head, be back of his head, be in his head, now be back of his head, now move into his head. Arrrhh-hunh! He can't do it. This'll worry him.

Well, you ask him to be halfway, and then be in his head. Then be back of his head, now be a quarter of the way, be halfway, be three quarters of the way, be in your head. And you're getting the essential elements of motion. Motion is a consecutive appear and disappear, in infinitely small gradients. And if he can do it no other way, why, he can do it by those small gradients. But a thetan ought to be able to move from one end of the room to the other.

Now, he has handled things with postulates, and now postulates are beginning to handle him. And postulates handle him to such a degree that he has demon circuits and automaticities and all kinds of things that are undesirable. So it's of the essence that he handles postulates. He also should be able to handle energy and handle objects by making them move, because they have been moving him so much as a thetan, that he has become unable to move of his own accord. He has to be moved. So we just work this out in terms of making him move the things which move him.

Now, would we run this in brackets? That's not necessary. They didn't go into his bank in brackets, so they might as well come out under his own horsepower. Is this tough on him? You bet it is. The ideas of space went into his bank in brackets, but the idea of postulates, his own postulates, never went into his bank in brackets. No matter how often he tries to tell you they did, they just went in just one way—he said so.

Now, are these postulates in the past? They are only in the past when they accompany the postulate that there is a past. They are only timed when they accompany a postulate which assigns time to them.

Now, preclears who make consistent and continual errors about time may fall into two classifications: One, they've kicked out their automaticity about time, and the other is they've gone up a high enough Tone Scale that time starts to look silly to them. They just don't care about time, and dates and things like that seem to be very nonessential.

Well, you'll find this will be the case at the moment you start kicking out the time labels—the postulate that one must have time labels on postulates. You'll make somebody feel like his whole bank is caving in to run the time labels on postulates—the idea that every postulate must have a time assigned to it. You just make him feel like his whole—everything is caving in on him. That's because he's tried to fix the postulates into energy.

But you find—he'll find out that this isn't quite as dangerous as he supposes. Particularly if you've made him handle a lot of energy before you get into that time postulate. And it's about the last one you'd kick out of anybody. And it is not in 8-C that you kick one out—that's 8-O. And that's the big difference. But I just want to give you that right now, that it's—these postulates are not timed, except as they say they're timed. Another postulate has to time the postulate. And you'll get various conditions occurring. So you should know what's happening with a time postulate. Supposing his whole track does cave in? Well, you just move a caved-in track around. Just get a caved-in track and move it around.

Now, if you're going right down the line with SOP 8-C on a preclear, and you yourself have no vast experience with it, you better handle it very much according to rote—because there are some hidden designs in it. And one of them is that perception is the last step—it's Step VII. It's not Step II, nor III, nor IV, nor V. Now, he's got to be looking at something. He just can't be getting the idea and staring into the blue space and that's that, when he makes mock-ups and things like that. But you're not forcing him to look at anything. You'd certainly better wait till Step VII—Reach and Withdraw, Contact with, Six Ways to Nothing and so forth, and the other techniques which fit in with VII— contact with this MEST universe, before you tell a thetan to look at the MEST universe very seriously.

Your failures in raising perception of individuals is because you don't orient a person before you start telling him to look. He's so scared he's going to be hit—that's the reason he can't see. If he can't see well, he's scared he's going to be hit. So you'd start—better remedy "fear of being hit" at V and VI before you go into handling (and that's "fear of being hit" and "invisible barriers"; they're both more or less the same thing) —you'd better handle that in V and VI, right there, before you start any long, protracted drills. And if the fellow can look at things and he's perfectly relaxed about looking at them, all right. But he's just looking at things. You're asking him to tell you several places where he isn't. That's a lot different than say, "Look at several places."

So, if we had another name for Step VII in SOP 8-C, it would be "perception"— which in essence is contact, which in essence is barrier. See, perception and barriers are synonymous. So you could call it "perceptions" or "barriers" or most anything. So don't ask somebody to look at something he obviously can't see and give him a big lose. Furthermore, don't give these people too many loses. Don't give people these terrific number of losses. Because that's all he's running on: wins and loses.

Now, I recommend to you, in running 8-C, the Chart of Attitudes in the Handbook for Preclears—top and bottom, negative and positive, you know—for use in handling postulates. And just take that Chart of Attitudes and handle the postulates.

Now, you know old repeater technique in Book One? The old psychoanalysts— why, I remember one down in Washington. These people who don't know are always sure that there's an awful lot of ways to know, and this boy was very, very indoctrinated in psychoanalysis. Oh, boy. And he finally told me, "You know, you have something there that psychoanalysis can use." And I looked at this character.

In the first place, psychoanalysis—I was probably undoubtedly a better analyst than he was. He was a boot-eyed kid that didn't know a psycho from a horsefly. He was supertrained, he'd been in school about twelve years or something. And he had all kinds of knowledge and no experience, and he was going to tell me something about this. And I looked at him very amused. And he went on without noticing this quite sudden and intense regard for him.

He said, "That repeater technique," he said, "that's wonderful." He said, "I just took the Book One, and I started getting a patient to repeat things, and the second I got him back, all of a sudden he was right there in the incident." And he says, "His father was scolding his mother for not having changed the baby's diapers, and we went immediately into the problem of toilet training and handled the problem of toilet training at that moment," and so forth.

And I said, "And what happened to the patient?"

"Oh, he's—he was sick today. But that's all right. That doesn't make any . .."

This guy, a complete disconnect that a process and making somebody well had any connection, see? The goal of the process was lost to him. He didn't have any goals of his own. He didn't conceive that anything he was doing had any goals. You could imagine somebody being in the business of psychoanalyzing people who wasn't psychoanalyzing anybody to get them over any mental aberration or make them any more able, or to make them feel any better or anything else? Without the slightest inkling that any of the techniques of psychoanalysis or any other technique would even vaguely influence the health, well-being, or the family, or the status, or the society? Can you imagine somebody doing this? Well, you'd better imagine it because you're looking at psychoanalysts in general.

Repeater technique—we really had something. Well, I've sheered right on off of phrases and ideas and symbols from that moment on. I shunned them, talked them down, never said anything more about them. But it comes back to the point that the trouble with this society is that it has symbolized postulates in the form of language to a point where it is utterly overburdened with symbolization, till everything is a symbol, till everything has supersignificance.

Looking becomes condensed—when condensed, feeling. Feeling when condensed becomes effort. Effort when condensed becomes circuit-type thinking. Thinking when condensed becomes symbols and words. And there is the level at which the society is resting at this very minute—symbolized. The only solid things are symbols. Nothing else is good and solid, but symbols are.

So we get back to repeater technique. Repeating symbols over and over and over did not solve them because they were being more firmly fixed too often in one place, and because of the restimulative character of the automaticity known as the facsimile. Therefore, it required, in order to handle this problem—which is peculiar to Western civilization at this time, very peculiar; it's much more acute, by the way, in Eastern civilizations—is the technique of postulate position changing.

You will find, as the cases roll along, when you're trying to handle something very specific and very pertinent to the case, that if you will handle it on the basis—just on the basis that this case is stuck in symbols; if you just say that when you look at somebody, "This case is stuck in language, he's stuck in symbols, symbols are matter to him"—you will have a better clue to the case than any other one that I can give you. And the way to handle it is SOP 8-C in its entirety.

But the things that you can handle under V was anything that could have been attempted to be handled under repeater technique—anything. And any rationale which has been delivered in Dianetics or Scientology can be handled under Step V.

It all comes about the ability to impose and change the space between two terminals. And upon that, depends the power of the individual. And the power of the individual alone is going to set him free. Not his symbols, his power. And that power has nothing whatsoever to do with setting up a machine to give him power. It has to do with his native ability—which is very native—to create space, to create energy, and do the exact things which you are doing on SOP 8-C. And those things, when all added up, give him force and power. And when we get down to it finally, it's the power of knowing a postulate is going to stay where he put it.

Okay.

SUMMARY: FAILURES ON PAGE 2 2-ACC-19A – 9.12.53

EXTERIORIZATION

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