6308C29 SHSpec-301 The Service Facsimile

     Although we call it a "service facsimile", there is more to be known
about it than was in earlier definitions.  In the past, it has been said that
a service facsimile is "what a person uses to explain his condition or get his
way in the world."  It is called a service facsimile because it was of service
to the PC.  The service fac manifestation is a blood brother to the O/W
mechanism.  It is how you make people guilty.  The current definition of
service fac is that it is that condition which the individual uses to make
himself right and others wrong.  Using this definition, we can crack cases.
The only hazard is the use of right/wrong in GPM's, but the use of a time
limitation to "in this lifetime" obviates any danger of restimulating the
GPM.  The GPM is not the reason for the service fac.  There is an upper-scale
rationale: survival.  For instance, the Darwinian implant [See pp. 444-445,
above] has "to persist" at the beginning of it, all by itself.  But this is
rare.  However, when the goal "to survive" occurs, it is couched in the word
"persist".  There is no GPM known, to date, that contains the word,
"survive".  This concept is therefore not motivated by bank.  Therefore you
can use "survive" in processing pretty easily.  Implanters used the words
"live" and "alive" a lot, but "survive" is the top scale of all this.

     It is OK for us to go back to healing now, since:

     a. Doctors (the AMA) haven't appreciated the fact that we ever stopped
        healing people.

     b. They will be socialized in five years, anyway.

They are convinced that "curing" is impossible.  However, 22 1/2% of people,
e.g. patients, PCs, or whatever, get well with any or no or fraudulent
treatment.  They are apparently in an hypnotic state and respond to
suggestion.  So any healing profession should get at least a 22 1/2% Cure
rate, unless it is doing something to depress the patient and to prevent
healing from occurring.  If you get less than 22 1/2%, you are actually
impeding the cure.  Only two things prevent the scientologist from healing
PCs:

     1. Inability to get in communication with the PC, e.g.  because he is
        dead.

     2. The service facsimile.

     If we allow for the fact that it takes a relatively short time to train
an auditor into using this-lifetime techniques; if you take such an auditor
and don't worry about making him into an auditor who can make an OT; if you
turn him loose with only an understanding of the service facsimile, the itsa
line, and repetitive prepchecking, limited to this lifetime; if you let him
rely on the tone arm, there he would be, practically sweeping the boards, as
far as illness is concerned.

     For a person to have a bad back, he must have more than a facsimile of an
experience involving a bad back causing it.  He must have had it restimulated
by something, and to have a real bad back, something must be keeping it in
restimulation.  Something has to kick the facsimile in and hold it in.

     You must add to the restimulation factor a mental aberration factor.  It
is not just what is restimulated.  It is what the PC feels might become
restimulated, what he himself opposes, what he becomes afraid of when he is
restimulated. So the individual is added to the equation.  The experiential
pattern of an individual -- regardless of incidents containing pain, etc. --
might be aberrative.  For instance, say a person has lived all his life in a
very cold environment.  He gets knowingness, in the process.  If you throw him
out in the 40-below cold, either he has confidence that he can withstand the
cold, or he doesn't.  Accordingly, he either freezes to death or lives,
respectively.  This is true even though a person is conditioned and trained to
handle the cold.  People may react differently to the same engram.  There is
no guarantee that someone will respond one way or the other to their
"stimulus-response" conditioning.  One person will be terrified by some
danger; another person will ignore it; another will look and say, "Oh."  What
makes the difference?  We come back to the service fac for the answer:  How
could you use a facsimile to make people wrong?

     So there are three reactions to an engram:

     1. The guy who is terrified of the facsimile has, in back of this, lots
        of ways to be right and to make others wrong by having this
        facsimile.

     2. The guy who ignores it has no use for it at all, one way or the
        other.

     3. The guy who confronts it has another method of making others wrong:
        being competent with regard to this type of facsimile.

The rightness-wrongness possibility is present to some degree in everyone and
in every bank.

     To the healer, this represents a barrier, because someone who is using an
illness or disability to make someone else wrong won't respond to treatment.
Or, if you cure one thing, he will pick up something else to do the job of
making himself right and others wrong. [Symptom-substitution.  See also Haley
on oneupsmanship games.]

     Aberrated behavior is a service facsimile in at least a goodly percentage
of cases.  When you do mimicry processing and the PC persists in crazy
behavior, he has a vested interest in acting crazy.  This makes it hard to
tell how good a deaberrative technique is.  However, if it works on a lot more
than 22 1/2% of cases, it is probably a good technique that is rendered
ineffective in some cases by a service fac.

     The tone arm turned out to be a reliable measure of case progress.  If
you don't get destimulation or discharge, you will get restimulation, because
something is happening.  If you don't get any TA action, you know that you are
not getting any destimulation or discharge and that therefore restimulation is
all that is occurring.  Therefore, don't audit without TA action.  The margin
of time during which you can audit a PC without TA action before he starts
feeling horrible is only about three sessions.  If a PC is upset about
auditing, is having trouble handling life, etc., it is only because of
over-restimulation, from whatever source -- GPM's, ARC breaks, or whatever.

     What about a medium, or "acceptable" amount of TA action:  fifteen to
twenty downward divisions per 2 1/2 hour session?  Excellent TA would be about
thirty divisions per session; acceptable is 15-20.  Below that level, more
restimulation than discharge is occurring.  These are just approximate
figures.  A great deal of adding-up has not yet been done, to tabulate the
figures exactly.  So there is a point where there is an apparency of TA
motion, yet the PC is not getting better and only restimulation is occurring.
Auditing a PC on and on with no TA will over-restimulate him all the way up
the TA dial, backwards through 7, all the way to dead thetan.  [LRH introduces
here the idea of a TA counter.]

     Why does a TA go up and stick?  Only because of the pressure of
over-restimulation.  If you have no TA action or if you are getting a rising
TA without discharge, you get [over-]restimulation, because you are
overwhelming the PC's power of choice.  You are trying to get a discharge, and
the PC won't let go of it, and he becomes more and more ARC breaky.  If the TA
is going up even when you are not auditing backtrack, you must still be
overwhelming the PC's power of choice.  Between not getting TA and getting
high TA, we move into service facs.  When you are doing a prepcheck and it
turns on mass, you have bumped into something that shouldn't be there.  A
service facsimile has moved in to assert whatever you are prepchecking and
trying to get rid of.  Any mass, for a thetan, is an assertion that something
is wrong, and there is something weird about it.  The mass comes from the
complete disagreement that you and the PC have, concerning whatever it is that
turned mass on.  You want to get rid of it.  But the PC does not intend to get
better, because he has to hang onto bank, to make someone wrong with it.

     It stands to reason that any thetan that has been hit hard and
continuously, that has had continued loses, and that is trying to get back at
and attack some area, will be unable to put the itsa line in on that area.  He
can't say if the area is bad or good.  He can't say what it is.  He doesn't
feel that he can be at cause over that comm line.  So his final method of
staying at cause is to be right and for the other person to be wrong.  This
goes down to the point where he merely has to hold the concept of being right
and the other person being wrong.  This way, in a sense, he is still being
cause.  This mechanism persists, therefore, because the PC can't as-is it,
because he can't observe it anymore.  One can be haunted by a nonexistent
thing if one doesn't have the comm lines to observe it.  The PC never knows
when it goes away.  If you can't inspect something, you can't inspect its
cessation.  Therefore, for survival, the best thing to do is to assume that
the thing is still there.  That is the safest course.  Life teaches you that
it is dangerous to go look and see.  You operate on the principle that if you
can't ascertain that something has ended, you had better assume that it is
continuing.

     Something that the PC can't cure with processing must be a service fac.
You can ask the PC how he is making others wrong.  Then, when you get it, you
can ask him how he is being right with it.  Aberrated survival mechanisms all
sit around on buttons of rightness-wrongness, survival, and domination.  The
O/W system is connected with this through the make-guilty mechanism.  These
are survival mechanisms, buy they are not sensible.  Unfortunately, the words,
"rightness", "wrongness", "survive", and "dominate" are also in the bank.  So
you have to indulge in some broken-field running to handle these buttons.

     The more force there is and the less one can stand it and be cause over
the user of the force, the more one goes into forms of aberrated rightness and
wrongness against the holder of force.  Hence people break minor laws to be
right about the government, since it is so overwhelming.  This is quite
irrational.

     To find a service fac, you could use the original listing steps of R2 or
the preliminary assessment of R3R, or you could ask the PC, "What have you
been trying to resolve about your case, in processing?", taking anything that
didn't resolve with processing as a service facsimile.  "What would be a
method of making others wrong?" could also get it.  Be prepared for the
service fac not to be very sensible, but don't reject it, even if it does seem
reasonable, as long as it is something that hasn't yielded to auditing.

