
SHSBC-303  ren 333  5 Sep 63 Service Fac Assessment

SERVICE FACSIMILE ASSESSMENT

A lecture given on 5 September 1963

6309C05 SHSBC-303

[Clearsound, checked against the old reel.  Omissions marked ">".]

[90 min.]

========BEGIN LECTURE========

Thank you.

Well, you're very lucky today. Very lucky today. I'm not mad at 
anybody. What is this date?

Audience: 5th of September.

5 Sept. A.D. 13. And we have a lecture here on Scientology III, 
which wraps up the field of psychotherapy.

I don't wish to overemphasize these banal, sweeping statements - and 
I don't even think you heard it. In fact, I know you didn't!

I'll say it again. I have a lecture here which wraps up the field of 
psychotherapy. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Now, we have been walking around the edges of the field 
of psychotherapy, by which we determine its relationship to the 
neurotic and the insane, and so on, for a very long time. We've been 
giving the boys who we thought were holding down this field, the 
courtesy of more or less staying out of it, and so forth.

But there are some interesting things which you should know before I 
go into the technical material involved here. And this is sequitur 
to the two lectures which you have heard this week, but there's some 
things which you should know at this stage.

The word psychiatry has no proprietorship, has no legal definition, 
is supposed to be the treatment of the neurotic or the insane, and 
isn't owned by anybody, isn't patented, means nothing in law, and so 
forth, but does mean something to the public. I consider that's 
interesting.

We were having some press trouble here a few weeks ago, 

> which Reg ably handled,

and I wrote at that time some articles on this particular subject 
which clarified ... I had to study two particular spheres - that 
of newspaper, and had to study the field of psychotherapy to some 
degree. And although I was talking a great deal about psychiatry, 
I finally differentiated exactly what I was talking about. I was 
talking about the untrained mental doctor in the field of 
psychiatry.

He has no business there. Of course, you always look for an 
aberrated situation, you'll find that there's a lie connected with 
it.

Things which people can't solve have a lie connected with them, and 
that thing we call a service facsimile. And this happens to be the 
third-dynamic service facsimile. The medical doctor who is not 
trained for and has no business in the field of mental healing is 
attempting to take dominance over this particular field.

See, he's not a trained mental practitioner. In fact, somebody just 
gave me a clipping - some London bigwig comments on the amount of 
training given the medical doctor. And I think it was ten half-hour 
lectures, most of which were unattended by the students. A real 
roast.

No, this man is not trained in the field of the mind. He's trained 
in brains and surgery. So therefore he applies brain, gray matter 
and surgery and force and electric shock - naturally applies these 
things because he doesn't understand the mind at all. He has no 
proprietorship over the mind. And as a matter of fact he's not 
trained in the mind at all, he's trained in the brain. He knows it 
occupies the skull and that you can shove ice picks in it, and this 
he considers mental healing.

Ah, but he has told a big lie. He's told a whopping lie. And he's 
put it across on legislatures and that sort of thing that the 
medical doctor is qualified to operate in the field of mental 
healing. And of course he's not trained in the field of mental 
healing.

And all you'd have to do is bring pressure to bear on legislatures 
that people who are not trained exclusively in the field of the mind 
may not practice in the field of the mind, and you've secured the 
entire field of the mind. I think any legislature would pass this. 
"People who are not trained in the field of the mind must not 
practice in the field of the mind." Banal.

It's on that stable datum that most legislatures pass laws - 
misrepresentation. You have to be trained in the field of the mind, 
do you see? That's the isness of the situation. The big lie is that 
people who aren't trained in the field of the mind at all are 
practicing in the field of the mind and calling themselves 
psychiatrists, which they are not. They're medical doctors. The 
only person you have to deny the field of the mind to is the medical 
doctor, and he has no business there.

As far as the field of the human mind is concerned, George Hay, the 
other day, did a survey out of all existing society records and so 
forth, and found out there were 272 mental practitioners in England 
outside of Scientologists - 272. And there were some eight nurses 
who were also qualified to give diathermy to the disturbed - 272. 
Well, we outnumber them, man! Over and over and over, I mean, just 
active Scientologists outnumber them in England. They're nothing to 
outnumber. There are 70 in South Africa. In all of South Africa 
there are 70.

In other words, there is no field of the mind. There's apparently a 
great deal of advertising, there's the medical doctor, who is 
numerically very short in supply, and there's lots of articles in 
the newspapers saying "the field of the mind, the field of the 
mind." There's legislatures, there's appropriations, everything is 
all laid out just as though there is a field of mental healing.

I wish to point out to you, my fair friend, that it's a totally 
unoccupied field. There isn't anybody in it. They rattle around like 
an atom in a cubic light-year of space. See, they aren't. You don't 
have an opponent. And one of our lies, then, is that there is some 
opposition. And we have done the trick of putting an item where it 
isn't. See? We've said there's opposition there; therefore we've 
mocked up our own opposition. And you know how serious it is with a 
pc when you put an extra item into a GPM. See? Well, we've done 
that.

Now, somebody, gratuitously, someplace or another, I don't know on 
what budget, is advertising the existence of mental healing. I don't 
know, but they're spending fantastic quantities of money on it. 
There's nobody to receive the results of it except us. This becomes 
a ludicrous situation.

Therefore, people qualified at Level III will very soon have 
available to them a certificate as a psychiatric consultant. It's 
perfectly all right with me if you call yourself a psychiatrist. 
Marvelous! People must be looking all over the society for these 
psychiatrists, you see? That's 272. Isn't this a fantastic 
situation? When you look at it - when you look at it right in the 
teeth, you see that it is a fantastic situation.

Now, when you recognize that human illness will surrender to R1C, 
and certainly to R2C - you know, that's just "What solutions have 
you had to your lumbosis, bud?" - you're going to get 60, 70 percent 
return. There will be 30 percent, 40 percent, something like that, 
that won't recover.

That's because they require further care. But just your ordinary 
healing: you know what you can do with an assist, you know what you 
can do in these various levels. The medical doctor isn't even then 
safe in his own field of healing. He isn't safe there. Because I 
think that an HCA, an HPA, very shortly, will be graduated in the 
field of healing. He'll know the three corners of the ARC triangle 
and the eight dynamics, and he'll know some of the basics of 
Scientology, and he will know how to keep in an itsa line and keep 
it directed to the person's illness, or something like that.

And just about that level we have an HCA/HPA. And then your Level 
III is somebody who can list and do a Prepcheck. So we've opened the 
gates here by taking out and training and specializing in.

Now, when you think of your level of training, well, this is 
something else, isn't it? So that requires a much broader 
recognition. And there's a lot of HCAs and HPAs right now who won't 
be just eligible - through the training they are getting right this 
minute, they won't just be eligible for an HCA or an HPA, they'll be 
eligible for an HSS, don't you see? All they've got to do is round 
off their qualifications for HCA/HPA with their itsa line, don't you 
see, and that gives them that. But they've already gone on to 
Prepchecking and meters and all kinds of wild things of this 
particular character and so on, so they've practically completed 
their HSS.

Now, how about you? How about you sitting here, you see? What do we 
do with you? Well, I don't know, we've already got you a 
certificate, haven't we? And we can also make this other certificate 
available to you, "Psychiatric Consultant."

So if you want this certificate, listen to this lecture! Because I'm 
not going to have it said about us that we give ten one-half-hour 
lectures which nobody attended. We'll go them one better: you're 
here, listen!

Now, you've already had two lectures on this subject. The difference 
is, we expect now that you produce some results with this. Now, 
you've been getting your fingers... (This is the lecture I'm giving 
you now. Those were mainly announcements. Giddy world we live in.)

The orientation of Scientology - reorientation of Scientology - 
looks very innocent. It looks like nothing much happened. I put out 
these five levels of Scientology, you know, and it brought order, 
order, order, order, order, and everything has been snapping into 
place beautifully. Well, you're the winner, because you've gone all 
the way on up through the lot, don't you see? And the future face of 
Scientology will look a bit different.

But Level III is expected to be able to clear. And it also, 
incidentally and accidentally, takes in the whole field of neurosis 
and psychosis and gives you a greater purchase on this particular 
zone and area than any mental practitioner in existence on the face 
of this planet - or any other one, for that matter. You'll be far 
more qualified to treat the insane if you can do this particular 
trick, because this is the only thing that makes them insane.

This is the basis of insanity. The basis of neurosis and the 
bringing about of a state of Clear are all the same breed of cat, 
except they're just different degrees. It's what is wrong with the 
mind, but it's in different degree. The degree is whether a person 
can live with it or not. And if he can't really live with it but 
just worries about it all the time, all the time, and really can't 
live at all, and so forth, well, we say he's neurotic. And if he 
can't even manage himself in his environment, we say he's insane.

But what's wrong with him? He's got the final solution. He's got a 
final solution, and that solution is not necessarily the solution of 
being insane. It is some solution which is all-pervading and makes 
it unnecessary to itsa anything. After that he never has to look. So 
of course what happens to him? He just disappears in a mound of 
un-as-ised mass. He never has to look. All he needs is the solution.

Now, in processing, a certain amount of introversion takes place. A 
certain amount of introversion takes place by reason of processing. 
But that introversion is only undertaken to bring about 
extroversion. The actual progress of a case depends upon the raising 
of the A, R and C of that case, step by step, forward. The only way 
that introversion does not lead - introversion and erasure of 
something - does not then lead to a greater ability to reach in the 
environment, or greater ARC, the only reason that does not occur, is 
when overrestimulation is brought about.

In other words, you restimulate twenty units and pick up ten of 
charge, you see? Well now, although you have advanced the case by 
means of erasure, you've actually increased the introversion of the 
case by running it at too high a level of restimulation. That factor 
still exists in Class IV. You've restimulated too much.

But it is full track, whole track, that is most likely to get a pc 
into this condition. You're not likely to get this pc into this 
condition in the very circumscribed area of one lifetime. You have 
to let his attention wander all over the whole track and on to the 
backtrack, and let him itsa this GPM and that GPM and another GPM, 
and this chain and that chain, and not flatten these things, and so 
forth, at Level IV, in order to get this individual more introverted 
by reason of processing than extroverted. But of course, you're 
winning all the time, even though you're winning with an introverted 
pc.

In other words, he's looking in all the time, he's looking in. He is 
not reaching more. He will eventually come out of the woods at the 
far end of this thing and have a tremendous reach. But during the 
period of his going, he is overrestimulated and therefore 
introverted.

That's the ills of overrestimulation. They are not very great. 
You're not likely to spin anybody.

That's at Level IV. What about overrestimulation at Level III? Well, 
at Level III you take somebody who is very, very batty. You could 
probably overrestimulate him in this lifetime. Let's take somebody 
who is in catatonic schizophrenia. Let's use a fancy term - doesn't 
mean anything. Catatonia means they're lying still, in apathy, 
unmovingly and not reaching anything. Schizophrenia means 
"scissors." I don't know how you can lie still in a scissors, but 
they've managed it.

Just shows you what happens when strange people who don't know 
anything about the mind try to invade the field and advertise that 
they can do something in it: they get things corned up this way.

Let's put it more factually. This character is in total apathy - 
total, unmoving apathy. He's lying there in the asylum. If you put 
your finger on the exact button this person could talk about and 
would talk about, the person would communicate with you. But if you 
put your finger on a half a dozen other things and plunge them into 
even this-lifetime engram, or something like that, the person would 
spin more, don't you see? So the worse off a case is, even in one 
lifetime - and this is true for all cases, even on the whole track - 
the worse off a case is, the more careful you have to be about 
overrestimulation. If you restimulate something, pick up the charge 
you have restimulated. That is the byword on this.

Now, you won't see very great upsets by this, but once in a while 
somebody will who is pretty bad off, somebody who is pretty neurotic 
or something like that - if you're treating this person, if you're 
processing this person, and you all of a sudden just ask them 
accidentally for any pain or anything that was connected with that 
incident... And of course, they've been running it on a conceptual 
basis and weren't close to anything like that, and they suddenly go 
into more pain and they practically spin in front of your eyes. You 
got the idea?

So the worse off a case is, the less reach they have, the less ARC 
they have with their environment - these are the things which 
measures worse off, see, the less reach, the less ARC - the easier 
it is to overrestimulate the case.

Becomes very easy to overrestimulate the case, because you're using 
very powerful tools, actually, and they go into the mind like 
they're going through hot butter. And it's very easy to do this.

So remember this; this datum monitors all clearing efforts, and 
that's Level III. You see, you're not going on the whole track to 
clear anybody; that is the next thing you must realize, that you're 
going to stay off the whole track. If you're going to clear 
somebody, you're going to stay in this lifetime, and that's the only 
place you gonna stay! If you're practicing Level III, you have not 
left this lifetime; if you're practicing Level II, you have not left 
this lifetime; Level I, you have not left this lifetime. You got it? 
The only place you leave this lifetime is Level IV. And the only 
reason you take somebody down the line on Level IV, if their tone 
arm is sitting more or less in a very active condition. And it never 
goes low and it never sticks high. And then you're going to run some 
body down the track. Because then it's very difficult to 
overrestimulate them.

You can overrestimulate them at Level IV. You can just, perforce, 
over restimulate them, in spite of good tone arm action and so 
forth. You can do it.

But this is Level IV. This is Level IV, when you take them on the 
whole track. So Class I, Class II, Class III, whole track? Nyet, 
nyet, nyet. See, strictly Russian participation in world affairs. 
No!

Guy says, "You know, I think I've lived before."

"Oh, good. Thank you very much. I'm glad of that. Now, in your 
immediate environment here, have you noticed...?"

You understand? Why? Because if this person is having trouble ... 
Now we get to the next factor of restimulation, see? This is all a 
piece of what you've been hearing about restimulation and everything 
else. This all integrates together very nicely. You got another 
factor you're working uphill with, with any pc on this planet 
particularly, and that [is] environmental restimulation. And it is 
environmental restimulation that is the straw that breaks the pc's 
back.

If you can audit the whole track on a pc who also has environmental 
restimulation, you are doing something heroic. It can be done; it 
makes hard auditing, and you are doing it right this moment in Zed 
Unit. So don't think it can't be done. But you know, right there, 
that it's a source of considerable amount of upset and worry. Guy 
has PTPs, he has this, he has that and so forth. What are all these 
things? What's all this constant level of restimulation in this 
environment?

You take, in an HGC, where people are walking in off the street: 
these people have PTPs; they're just nothing but a walking PTP. 
Well, all right, that means their environment is keeping them 
tremendously restimulated. Day after day, night after night, their 
environment is restimulating them. That's environmental 
restimulation. That's the wife's natter and the kid's demand for 
another shilling. That's the income-tax folder that is lying in the 
mailbox. That's the news that just comes out on TV that all males 
are now going to be conscripted below the age of, and above the age 
of, or maybe, see? It's this, it's that, it's the other thing. 
Environmental restimulation.

When this source of restimulation is at a high level, the pc is 
unauditable. And the difficulty that the auditor has in carrying 
forward a case to a good win is basically - when dealing with the 
public at large and that sort of thing - is basically auditor versus 
environmental restimulation, not auditor versus bank at all. Now, 
this is so great that an individual who has tremendous present time 
problems in his environment does not make progress on his auditing. 
He will not change his graph.

Now, we know that. That's a stable datum - man, that's in with 
spikes and rocks and welded. They know that in HGCs; before they 
operate very long, they learn that one. Pc has a continuous PTP 
throughout the intensive, there will be no graph change of any kind 
whatsoever. If he has a PTP throughout the intensive and ARC breaks 
during the intensive, the graph will worsen.

How to make a high graph? Well, you've got to audit the pc in such a 
way as to get around the environmental restimulation. Therefore, the 
practice of an HGC operating mainly with raw public or partially 
interested Scientologists or just newcomers, something like that - 
or even old-timers, very often - is a battle with the environmental 
restimulation, the surroundings in which this person lives. It's not 
a battle with the reactive mind at all.

Now, when this environmental restimulation rises or when the pc is 
more susceptible to it, he gets into states which are called 
neurotic and psychotic. There are no psychotics on the whole track - 
no whole-track psychotics. Psychosis is a temporary condition which 
normally exists in one lifetime. Interesting look, isn't it? Very 
temporary condition, because it's environmental restimulation 
monitored by the susceptibility of the individual to that 
environmental restimulation, and that's all there is to it. It's his 
ability to withstand the restimulation of the environment versus the 
environmental restimulation.

Now, of course, a person's ability to withstand the environmental 
restimulation is one erg of thrust back, you see, and the 
environmental restimulation is three ergs. Right away you're going 
to get a condition - of course, I'm giving you an erg or a dyne or 
something like that, you see, as some fantastically ... I think a 
dyne is the amount of force exerted by one something-or-other, 
infinite - one gram going one centimeter? What is this thing? It's 
something on the order of a lead dropping from the end of the pencil 
to the table, don't you see, over a distance of about a half an 
inch. You know, just nothing, see?

Well, this guy's a very weak little fellow and he lives on a little 
farm, and it's a long way from everyplace, and it's awful quiet. But 
his environmental thrust-back is capable of only one erg, see? And 
by God, one day the pigs get loose. And by God, he spins. You see, 
this is proportional. This helps you understand what happens to 
cases.

And this other guy has three megatrons of resistance, and he's got 
forty foot-pounds of thrust in his environment, see? Nothing, you 
see? Doesn't even dent him, see? Run the whole track like crazy, 
see? See, his environmental restimulation is fantastic, it would 
have killed forty people, see? This doesn't happen to bother him. 
He can handle that much, don't you see?

So it's the environmental restimulation on the one hand and the 
ability of the individual to front up to it on the other hand which 
gives you your difficulties of cases. It's those two factors in 
combination - see, these two factors in combination. It isn't just 
the environmental restimulation. Well, you see, there's fifteen 
office workers, and all of a sudden a concrete mixer sets up across 
the street. And they start putting up a new building, and one of 
them goes batty and the fourteen do all right. What's this? It's the 
same stimuli. See, same amount of environmental restimulation, but 
one of those girls had very low resistance - that is, low thrust-back.

Well, therefore if you simply studied the environmental 
restimulation and sought to reduce environmental restimulation by 
social or public measures, making it a very quiet life, you would 
make a lot of people go sane - this is perfectly true - but a lot 
more would go mad with boredom. See, so the do-gooder, with his idea 
of "Peace, peace, peace, peace," is trying to get himself an 
environment that he can live in, that he won't spin in, see? Don't 
you see? And these characters that go out beating the drum along 
this line as an exclusive thing, you see, they'll work the hardest 
at it because they're the most worried about it. But they create, 
in the final analysis, a very dull world, and therefore they get 
protested against.

For instance, people have hobbies: Some people have some hobbies, 
some people have other hobbies. Some people have the hobbies of 
knitting; some people have hobbies of sitting still and daydreaming; 
some people have the hobbies of riding motorcycles and some people 
have the hobbies of shooting down airplanes. See, there are various 
hobbies. This is how much randomity an individual thinks is 
necessary to the environment.

And you're coming back now to an old principle of acceptable 
randomity. Well, acceptable randomity is this ratio which I just 
talked to you about. People for a long time couldn't understand this 
factor; well, here's the understanding of it. It's the amount of 
restimulation of the environment measured against the amount of 
restimulation which the individual can withstand. And these two 
factors together give you a constant.

Now, it's very hard to work out this constant because we have no 
actual figures, but express it in terms of life: This individual is 
able to stand one dinner party. See? And he gets two funerals and a 
suicide. You see how you can work this out? And here's this fellow 
who can withstand two massacres, you see, and a wreck, and he gets 
as his environmental restimulation one dinner party. See, so you get 
these differences amongst people. And it makes them all look 
different, but actually it's on the same basis, and it's on this 
basis of restimulation.

Now, you're busy auditing: You're auditing this guy that can stand 
the randomity of one dinner party, and you audit him into an engram 
where he had a wreck. Now his environment consists of what? The 
ability to withstand a dinner party, but the restimulation of the 
environment is what you're running him on, which is one wreck. He's 
promptly swamped. He's promptly swamped. He can't run that kind of 
an incident. He just goes in over his head, don't you see?

Well, one of the ways pcs solve this is by not going in. And it is 
probably the favorite method of resolution. They audit only what 
they consider safe. This is almost line one of Book Three of 
Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health, see? The mind monitoring 
- you know, it won't go in over its head. We got techniques now 
which can push a guy in over his head, but that's beside the point. 
The point is that the mind tends to shut off any restimulation that 
will overwhelm it. It just tends to.

It's like, this guy can stand one dinner party. And you say, "How 
would you like to have two funerals and a wreck?"

"Uuuhgh, no!" See?

Actually, this gets so bad, that if two funerals and a wreck incur 
in his environment, he can actually just be completely - they didn't 
exist. They aren't real to him. He locks them up out there as not 
having happened. And so does he lock up his bank as not having 
happened.

In other words, his ability to resist restimulation is too low for 
him to face up to track, and there's your problem as an auditor. How 
are you going to get rid of any track with this boy, huh? How are 
you going to get rid of any track at all? How are you going to get 
anything done on this case at all? Because that case is liable to 
sit there and not even come in close to its track, or ambitiously 
going in over its head all the time.

So cases actually divide into three categories: those who are 
audited easily, those who won't even approach the bank and those who 
are always trying to commit suicide in one.

We'll call these cases Three, Two, and One, with the One, the case 
who can be audited, you see, and the other two, you see, as cases 
that always are going it too strong, man. In eating, you'd say their 
eyes were bigger than their stomachs and all this kind of thing. 
Then the other fellow, who just won't - Two, you know - just the guy 
that just doesn't even come near the bank, he just doesn't have 
anything to do with it, see? "What bank?" you know, "What bank?" 
Engrams all over the place, you see; he just got through going 
through a windshield, see? "What engram?" you know? He's cutting his 
throat with it all the time. Doesn't exist, see?

And you say, well, "Let's run out this accident you just had," see?

"What accident? Where? No accident. I just learn to take things 
calmly in life, you see?" And he's sick and sick and sick, man. He 
just learned to take things calmly in life, see? He's got something 
going there, see?

Well, how do we convert Case Two and Case Three into a Case One? How 
do we convert these two cases, one which audits at a suicidal level 
and the one which audits on a no-approach basis at all, and you 
can't get anything done ... And that no-approach basis is your most 
flagrant example of the stuck tone arm, the low tone arm, the dead 
thetan - these misbehaviors of the tone arm, see? Don't come near 
the bank. Hasn't got anything to do with him.

Now, how do you convert that case into one that is auditable with 
good tone arm motion? I've given you a lot of technical data here. I 
don't really expect you to do too much with it or think about it too 
much. I'm sure you understand it. But I'm giving you the actual 
technical background to the highly elementary material which I'm now 
going to give you. This material is very elementary.

All cases tend toward the safe solution. All cases tend toward the 
safe solution. You're making a note on it, write it down and 
underscore it. That's very, very important. That is an element of 
simplicity the like of which you never saw, see? Some cases - some 
cases - also adopt a vengeful solution: "Getting even with them by 
dying."

Now, when I say all cases adopt a safe solution, oddly enough the 
dangerous solution comes under the heading of a safe solution. This 
gets wacky, but "the safe thing to do is to jump off London Bridge." 
Because it all comes under the heading of a safe solution, don't you 
see? But it actually sounds highly dangerous, and they very often go 
in over their heads. That characterizes, then, your cases that 
you're having any trouble with or having any trouble in processing. 
One has simply adopted a good, safe solution, and the other one has 
adopted a dangerous solution because it is safe. I know it doesn't 
make sense. That's what's the trouble with it.

Now, if you move these cases over into the auditable line, you will 
move them over on the channel of safe solution: All cases move over 
on the channel of safe solution - safe solution. Very, very 
important. Safe solution can be stated as "safe decision," "safe 
assumption," "safe treatment," "safe environment," "safe position."

You have a world here which is security-oriented. It is, for 
instance, trying to keep up the ideals and ideals of human rights. 
But we notice that human rights and human liberty are succumbing. 
Why? Because twenty bystanders stand around and watch the cops mess 
up a citizen's human rights, because they're all operating on a safe 
solution. So all human rights disappear down the channel of the safe 
solution.

That is the hole in the bottom of the bathtub. It's the most 
dangerous thing in the world to have a safe solution, because that 
is the hole out of which sanity drains.

A safe solution inhibits observation. And anything which inhibits 
observation destroys. Whether a person is merely difficult to get 
over toward his bank, or is going in headlong, or in a much worse 
state - these are specialized states and are not gradients of the 
other state - is very neurotic or is completely psychotic (they are 
not cousins to these other states), it's just to the degree that 
they have adopted a safe solution. That's all that establishes it. 
That's the common denominator.

Now, you could make a lot of hay out of that, out of just that 
statement, just as a philosophic truth. And it is a philosophic 
truth. And that is the plow that plows the furrow straight down 
through the middle of the problem of the human mind, as it has been 
approached, and as it has been attempted toward solution by mental 
healing - granting this thing called "mental healing" - that just 
plows it right up, man. That's the end of that. This datum underlies 
mental healing with the same sweepingness as "survival is the common 
denominator of existence," you see? Because it's actually another 
method of saying survival, in aberrated form. People make survival 
solutions which then become so safe that they become contrasurvival.

So you have entered a brand-new datum here. You've got a brand-new 
datum which is as compelling and as sweeping and so forth in the 
field of mental healing as survival is in life. People solve things 
in the direction of survival even when it means they have to 
succumb. When it gets into mental healing, you are actually 
investigating the difficulties people are having surviving. But the 
basic method of survival is the safe solution, and that makes the 
individual right and makes others wrong, and therefore, intends to 
enhance the person's survival by bringing about a position of 
dominance; permits him to escape domination and permits him to 
dominate others; and then at the higher level permits him to survive 
and causes others to succumb - he thinks. With great amazement, 
you'll find committing suicide as a survival computation as it 
becomes more and more aberrated. How to survive: not to survive, of 
course.

Everybody is solving that. The miser: how does he survive? How does 
he survive? Well, every once in a while in New York they dig 
somebody out of an attic or something like that; he's been dead for 
three or four weeks. And the guy has got no stuffing in his mattress 
at all, there's nothing in there but hundred-dollar bills, you see? 
And his method of survival is to have lots of money. And that's a 
very safe solution. But he's neglected, in his obsession with this 
safe solution, to spend any of it in order to live.

So as attention becomes more and more concentrated, it becomes less 
and less sensible.

For an individual to be totally wise, it is necessary for him to be 
able to observe his environment. He also must be able to permeate 
his environment. He has to be able to have reach.

It isn't good enough to have a couple of maxims tucked behind your 
left medulla oblongata to which you can refer in times of stress. 
The Arabian ruler, every now and then, would be calling up poets to 
help him out in his efforts to rule a flea-bitten population whose 
favorite pastime was executing rulers, and they would come up with 
such things, such gems, as "That, too, shall come to pass away." 
Very wise. Very wise. And yet if it were adapted totally, it'd kill 
somebody.

People have philosophy all mixed up with these witticisms, these 
platitudes. They look through philosophy for safe solutions. And you 
can take a philosophic textbook that has been down in the local 
library and has been read by pencil margin-scribblers, and all 
you're reading there are things which they widely agree with, but 
which they also consider safe solutions.

Philosophy, then, is not a study of wisdom. Philosophy is simply a 
study of safe solutions. Makes it a very low-level activity, 
actually. For instance, Kant had himself a safe solution, and I 
imagine that's what made him batty. He had a good, safe solution. A 
lot of things were unknowable. They were so unknowable that nobody 
would ever know about them. And this, of course, is completely nuts. 
If these unknowable things can never at any time be sensed, measured 
or experienced, how the hell did he know they existed? Well, he 
didn't. So he made up a fantasy over there someplace called the 
unknowable. And this made him very comfortable. He could live in the 
knowable.

And this is so general, and so forth, you even find it in Dianetics: 
Modern Science of Mental Health. Says you don't have to know 
everything in order to know this. Well, that's fine. And that 
disarms one's thrust into this, and the amount of overwhelm; it lets 
him compartment things and look at things in sections, rather than 
just be overwhelmed by the whole, don't you see? Well, that's an 
entirely different operation than finding a safe solution, then 
drawing off into a corner someplace with this safe solution and 
never looking at anything again. And that activity is what you will 
find most people engaged in.

Now, that safe solution is what we call a service facsimile. And 
that's all it is.

Now, you can be a very cunning auditor. You can be a very clever 
auditor. And sometimes (let me impart this to you on the side) 
you're going to have to be clever. You're going to have to turn up 
your genius to a cube level to find that safe solution in somebody. 
It'll be lying right in front of your face and you'll feel like a 
fool when you finally pick it up. But there it was. But to find out 
exactly what it is, and to use that, and so forth - it's very easy 
to state, very easy to do this. But remember, in the pc it is 
extremely alter-ised, complicated, and so forth. Even though it's 
sitting right on top. It's not believable. That's one of the things.

There could be thousands of them, don't you see? And it's picking 
out the one from those thousands. That's what's going to give you 
the most trouble. And sometimes you're just going to do this on 
sheer genius and find that you were dead right. And other times 
you're going to exert a great deal of time and trouble and sheer 
genius, and you're dead wrong. So the final test of it is, is did it 
resolve the case?

"Have I found the service fac?" is answered by "When audited, did it 
resolve case? If answer is 'yes,' I have found a service fac on 
case. If answer is 'no,' it didn't resolve case, I have not found 
service fac." And in the first ones you find, the most you can hope 
for is that you have found something that moves the tone arm and has 
moved you closer to finding the service fac, see? So you [are] 
always willing to settle for that - always willing to settle for 
something that moved the tone arm, because that, of course, will 
move you closer to finding the service facsimile. See, always 
willing to settle for that.

And sometimes, after you've found two or three of these - and each 
one you knew was the service fac, but somehow or other this pc 
didn't go free needle. Actually, they've been very droopy for the 
next couple of days. Hah-ha. You know, didn't resolve the case. Huh. 
"We sure found the service fac on that pc, except it didn't resolve 
his case."

Yeah, I can hear you now, sitting around the table in the evening, 
coffee shop, saying, "Well, sure found Joe's service facsimile, you 
know? I sure found it. It was a very brilliant job. We managed to 
get these three coordinating lines, and they all crossed exactly in 
this place, and it was 'swallowing swords.' And he's always thought 
of that, and so forth. And we got his service facsimile," and so 
forth and so on.

Joe comes up and he's looking ... Or now he's in total propitiation: 
"Yes, they found my service fac. Yes, they actually found it. I feel 
terrible - I mean, I feel good."

So you see, the test itself - the statement is very simple. And the 
test of whether or not you found the service fac is also very 
simple: It actually reads on the meter. If you have found a service 
fac on the case, the needle will be looser and the tone arm in a 
more reasonable condition. See? And if you finally walked it all the 
way through to THE service fac on the case, see, it's like all of 
these extra service facs you've been pulling off it are something 
like bands of trees and sod that lie up against the mountain peak, 
you see? You haven't got the mountain peak, but you sure got a lot 
of trees off of it, you know, and you got some rocks off of it, and 
it's looking more like a peak, anyway. It was just surrounded in 
clouds when you first located it, see?

The test of it, in each case, is looser needle, better-acting tone 
arm. See? So you're always willing to settle for that.

Now, the other rule that you come up against here is, that which 
doesn't run on the right-wrong when found, you prepcheck. And that 
which won't run on a Prepcheck, you run on the right-wrong. So you 
got it coming and going. This is pretty loose.

Well, let me see. You looked through the pc's folder, and you found 
"peanuts," and you found "peanuts," and you found "brothers" and - 
you know, this is old-time stuff that's been found on the pc, 
assessments of one kind or another - you found "mechanics," and you 
found "dog biscuits," and you found "me," see? Various things, you 
know? You dug these up out of his old 2-12 and his parts of 
existence and his this and his that, and that sort of thing.

Well actually, you could make progress with the case if you just 
applied this rule: is just prepcheck each one. Got it? You could 
assess the list and take the one with the biggest read and prepcheck 
that, and then assess the same list again. Because it must have some 
residence in the case, you see? And whatever else you find, 
prepcheck that, don't you see? And just prepcheck anything you 
found. See, just prepcheck it. And the second that you're not 
getting tone arm action from the prepcheck, run ... This is awful 
crude what I'm giving you right now, you understand, but I'm just 
showing it. You can take this gun that's been developing - that's 
R3SC - you can just take this gun and point it in almost any 
direction and birds fall out of the sky, see? It's marvelous 
hunting, I mean. Case is going to make improvement no matter what 
you do.

Well, that which you can't prepcheck with tone arm action you could 
treat as a service facsimile, see? I mean, just one, two, one, two, 
see? So it either prepchecks or it runs on right and wrong, see? 
"How would it make you right and make others wrong?"

Well, a pc - it doesn't do much on a Prepcheck, and it doesn't do 
much on right-wrong: All right. All right. So there weren't any 
birds in that section of the sky the gun went off into. I mean, you 
haven't done anybody any harm. You haven't done anybody any harm at 
all. And this is sort of creeping up on the mountain. You take a 
layer of clouds off of it and you cut a couple of trees on the slope 
and you bulldoze away an avalanche away from the side of the thing 
and so forth. And it's looking bigger and starker and so on. More 
clouds coming off of the thing, you see, and it's getting clearer 
and clearer to view. Because you can't keep up this type of action 
without displaying, eventually, the service facsimile.

Now, the funny part of it is, even the most obtuse auditor, if he 
kept up this type of action of assessing something or finding 
something that had been assessed, and prepchecking it, and if it 
didn't prepcheck well, run right-wrong on it, see? You know, run the 
steps of R3SC on it, see? If you can't prepcheck it, it's obviously 
turning on mass, so therefore, if it's turning on mass, obviously it 
has something to do with the service facsimile. So you run the 
right-wrong and you get that out of the road, and so forth. You just 
keep going at this sort of thing, and keep a list of your debris, of 
other things that have turned up, maybe, in the process of doing so. 
And your cleverness - your cleverness will pay off in length of 
time. The cleverer the auditor, the shorter time he can do it in. 
This is about the only thing you're narrowing down.

But the very, very clever auditor can be too clever. I'm not warning 
you against being clever; be a genius, man. Perfectly all right. But 
you actually can take this case ... Now, that's why I started this 
lecture with the restimulation data: you can take this case, and 
there is an assessment I'm now going to give you which is so 
powerful that this poor guy has the resistance of one dinner party, 
see, and you're going to present him with the guts of his whole 
case. You're probably going to spend the next few hours holding his 
hand, because the walls keep going bloooo - zooong!

Now, I told an old-time auditor who is a guest here today, Mike 
Pernetta, told him a little while ago, I says, "You see, we're 
auditing the stable datum out of the road of the confusion, so the 
confusion will flow off, and that's what the flow is on the E-
Meter." And he went b-zz-zz-zz-zz, you see, because he's been taught 
differently. He's been taught that you don't pull the stable datum 
out from underneath the pc or you'll get the confusion, see? If you 
do too sudden a yank, you see? And he turned rather pale when I told 
him this. So you'll probably be rather pale occasionally.

In other words, you can climb this hill too vertically. You can 
immediately grab the mountain and say "It's gone," see? And the pc 
is saying, "My God, what am I doing in all this mist? Where am I? 
What is this? What is this? See, what - where, where, where, what? 
Ooh-oh-oh-oh! Something terrible is happening to me!" And he feels 
masses going this way and that way, and pains are turning on and 
off, and the end of the room - the boards all look like they're 
going like this, see?

See, with great genius, you just "Tsk! One mountain less!"

So you see, it isn't necessarily the wisest thing in the world not 
to sneak up on the case. But this isn't going to do him any harm, 
providing you run R3SC on it until it's flat. Now, you do this 
assessment and drop it in his lap, this is going to be the immediate 
result. It's got to be audited, now, to make it all right. So you're 
going to see periods on pcs when they're not going to be happy about 
the whole thing.

Now, I told you that any pc is liable to say, somewhere in the 
running of service facsimiles - one of the tests of a service 
facsimile is, does the pc say at any time "I'm not quite sure that 
it is wise to get rid of this"? See, he's going to say that on a 
real, honest-to-God service facsimile, somewhere along the line. 
That's what he's going to say. Well, you find the service facsimile, 
he's going to say it all at once. "Huhhh! " He's going to try to put 
on the brakes all over the place. Of course, he isn't going to make 
it.

Now, you're not going to do anything very desperate to this person, 
as long as you finish him up. Oh, so he's going to have a few bad 
days - it's all right. It's all in the business.

But you possibly, you possibly - now, let me give you this word of 
caution - will practice in a field of neurosis or psychosis at some 
time or another, see? You go into that field, you make awful 
confounded sure that you unburden the cliffs before you pull the 
mountain out by the roots. Because that person, by reason of being 
spinny, cannot withstand the environmental restimulation in the 
first place, so you've added the processing restimulation plus the 
environmental restimulation to somebody who cannot stand the 
environmental restimulation. So of course they can't take any. So, 
the only course you can follow with that case, even though he is 
standing there - and this will be true: he will be standing there 
nakedly saying his service facsimile.

It becomes very tempting. You look at some of these characters, and 
they'll be just saying their service facsimile. It requires very 
little genius to figure out exactly what the wording is to make that 
service facsimile there, because he'll be saying so.

Now, therefore, the environmental restimulation has got to be 
reduced to some degree on the case. You follow this? In other words, 
the reduction of environmental restimulation should always follow, 
and you should be able to make good that minimal environmental 
restimulation during processing will occur, must always occur and 
continue to occur during a course of processing.

You have any environmental restimulators present in the vicinity of 
a psychotic and you're not even going to come near it, anything, no 
matter what you know. See, because you add the environmental 
restimulation of processing to, you see, the actual existing 
environmental restimulation, and it - guy is already overwhelmed by 
the environment, so of course he just spins, spins harder. So that's 
why you must approach this on a gradient.

Now, with cases that are just walking about, I don't really give you 
any caution about it at all, because it doesn't matter to me whether 
or not these cases go to bed at night and have holes fall in the 
middle of the floor and various other odd phenomena occur, because 
they're going to get processed again and the process will take care 
of the restimulation.

It's a ghastly thing to confront. And the better the assessment and 
the less the assessment has been approached on a gradient - see, in 
other words, the less slopes of the mountain you have processed 
before you process the service facsimile - why, the greater shock it 
is to the person. There's plenty of restimulation. You've just taken 
their whole difficulties of this lifetime and done an "ectomy" on 
it, just like that - bang! out, gone, man! There it is, you see, and 
you leave him with nothing but the confusion. There sits the 
confusion. And it hasn't any E-Meter to bleed through and no 
auditing commands to guide it off and so forth, so it just starts 
hitting the pc from all directions.

Remember, this pc adopted this because he couldn't stand the 
confusion. So he adopted a safe solution. A safe solution is always 
adopted as a retreat from the environmental restimulation - always, 
inevitably.

Well, therefore, doing a service facsimile assessment doesn't 
necessarily require great accuracy at first. There have been things 
found on the case, there's things this guy is worried about on the 
case. Take some little stable data, R1C type of approach to the 
situation, that sort of thing. It's very good for the case.

And this becomes healing, you see, at Level II of Scientology. 
You've got healing now.

You say, "Well, what have you done for your lumbosis? Anybody in 
your family have lumbosis? What did they do for it?" don't you see? 
"What have you done about them?" Any kind of a crisscross that might 
occur on a valence shift or something, you just get the person 
talking about it.

But it's solutions. You're asking them for safe solutions, stable 
data. And the more stable data they have put in, the more safe 
solutions they have put in place about their lumbosis, the less the 
lumbosis will discharge. So you keep plucking these things out, and 
eventually the lumbosis will.

But of course, when the environmental restimulation is too great, no 
charge will flow off of the case, and you will have that percentage 
of case which, just by talking about a few things, won't give you a 
tone arm shift. And that's because this person is already pretty 
overwhelmed. See, the environment itself is the overwhelming factor.

But let's get back to the other: How do you raise... how do you 
raise the ability of an individual to withstand environmental 
restimulation? If this is a big factor, as I gave you in the 
beginning of the lecture, if that's a big factor, how do you raise 
his ability to do it? Well, you do - you pull his service facsimile. 
His service facsimile is what, in actual fact, reduces - besides his 
innate capabilities, which might be different - it's what reduces 
his ability to see his environment. The more safe solutions he has 
adapted, the more environmental restimulation he isn't as-ising, the 
more he isn't confronting up to, the less he can confront up to. 
This becomes a dwindling spiral with great speed and rapidity. So 
therefore, the thing which reduces his ability to handle his 
environment, oddly enough, is the thing he has adapted to handle his 
environment for him. You remove that and you at once increase the 
individual's ability to handle the environment.

Because he's now seeing it. He's inspecting it. It might not make 
him happy, but that's not what we're trying to make. We're not 
trying to make a happy person, we're trying to make an able person. 
There's many a lunatic who is quite happy.

Now, if you bring about a condition, then, at Level III, where an 
individual does not have environmental restimulation, he won't be 
interrupting his processing because of environmental restimulation, 
and you will be able to go at Level IV on to the backtrack because 
he's no longer fighting the environment. And that restimulation is 
not added to his case all the time. And it's that added 
restimulation which can be counted on to lock up his tone arm if he 
has any fragility of his tone arm, see? It's this little added 
restimulation of the environment. The environment is too 
restimulative, therefore he can't go on the backtrack, see? So it's 
very important that you get that out if you want a smooth, faster 
run to OT.

And now I will let you in on why I have suddenly gone into this 
line: is because I want a faster run to OT. I don't care anything 
very much about whether anybody gets Clear or not. That's just 
between you and me, see? Make a hell of a lot better human being, it 
solves neurosis, solves psychosis, makes a guy able, is a fast thing 
to do, it is not a slow freight through Arkansas. You can make a 
Clear by getting off enough service facsimiles. You can make a 
stable Clear so you don't keep apologizing for the fact he's only a 
keyed-out Clear, because he's going to stay that way longer. You 
see, and all this is better human beings, better human beings, and 
so forth, and that's fine. And it's a well worthwhile state to 
achieve, and people will be happy with this state, and everything is 
fine.

And just between you and I, I don't really care about the state at 
all - I want somebody to be able to hit the whole track, see? So 
it's been developed, and I put up the speed of development to cut 
down the length of time in processing at Level IV, which is already 
a sizable amount.

So by reducing the environmental restimulation off of Level IV 
processing by knocking out the service facsimile - which is what 
encourages the environmental restimulation - we then have enough 
attention free so that we can go whole track and erase things 
faster. And we're not always being held up by "The guy is a low-
tone-arm case," "The guy has a high, stuck tone arm," "We started to 
do a GPM, we got a little bit mixed up, we went into the Bear goals, 
and then we got into the Helatrobus, then - ha! - uhuugh! Didn't 
realize it but we were in the invisible-picture goals all the time!"

Now, we don't want that pc's tone arm all locked up because of 
environmental restimulation, see? Session restimulation also drops, 
because any difficulty your pc is having in session is actually 
environmental restimulation, because the session is part of the 
environment also. So if he has session trouble and he has rough 
sessioning and that sort of thing as one of his difficulties, of 
course if you delete that off he can get a lot more done on the 
whole track anyway. So I'm just getting rid of sources of 
restimulation, don't you see, and reasons of restimulation in order 
to buck into the backtrack and really hit the things that have to be 
knocked out, so we don't have to worry about these other things, you 
see? That's important.

Now, what is this "assessment beyond assessment"? I see you've all 
got your paper ready to put down this assessment. Two or three of 
you are going to be very surprised; you're going to pick up some 
folders tonight and find yourself looking at it and say, "Why 
haven't you done this?" You know, I mean, that kind of an attitude. 
I'm good at that sort of thing. After I get something figured out, I 
have no patience with people who don't understand it! Yeah.

Anyway, the assessment is a simple one. And we're back into our 
"old, worn-out, creaking" technology of listing and nulling lists. 
And if you don't know how to do this, man, you just haven't been 
around and I feel sorry for you. But I'm afraid nobody is going to 
waste much sympathy on you. There are many liabilities you can get 
into with listing and nulling lists, and if I hear anybody running a 
parts-of-existence list 187 pages, why, we've got a quiet place over 
at the other end of the estate where a gunshot won't be found. 

> And Herbie here has got a silenced rifle now. [audience laughter.]

So, watch it!

Because this just becomes asinine, man. I mean, some people can take 
these lists and run their service facs crazy on them. Oh yeah, 
that's a fact! I mean, just run fabulous amounts of lists.

How long is a list? Well, a list is as long as it has to be to be 
nulled. It's got the item on it, and so forth. And I can see now, 
people fighting dirty needles and listing. And I can see now, "Well, 
did they get the service facsimile on Jay? Did they get the service 
facsimile yet on Jay?" I'll be saying.

And "Well, no, they're still listing."

"Let's see, when was that? Oh, that was, see, let's ... When did 
they start listing? Let's see the folder. Oh, well, they started 
listing a month ago," or something. You'd be amazed. I've had this 
happen.

So come off of the corn. Come off of the corn. That's just nonsense. 
A list is as long as it is necessary to be in order to keep the pc 
from ARC breaking because it's incomplete. And it's just a list, 
don't you see? But - so we get into all that trouble. But that's 
perfectly all right. We can handle that, now. Any nonsense that we 
see about it, I've already given you what the remedy is, see. A 
quiet corner of the estate. Because I frankly am tired of this point 
of randomity.

My lists never go longer, never go longer than about eight, nine, 
ten pages, with about twenty items on each page, see? So I don't 
understand a long list. I don't see any reason for a long list. If 
your list isn't complete, it won't null, of course, but I've never 
had to do one longer than that in order to get the thing to null, so 
I don't understand all this other - unless it is simply safe to keep 
on listing!

So anyway, you do a list, parts of existence. Now, some of you are 
highly - I mean, you're already rich because sitting right in your 
pc's folder will be a complete parts-of-existence list. Probably 
already been done. Parts of existence - thing has sometimes even 
been nulled.

So you do a parts-of-existence list and then you null it. And I 
frankly don't care whether it comes out to one in, two in, three in, 
four in, something in that range. I don't care: I don't care if it 
rock slams, rocket reads. I don't care what the resulting item does, 
just as long as it expresses itself some way on the E-Meter. I don't 
even care if it is right, as long as the pc isn't in argument about 
it. That's the one thing that is objected to here.

So you do a good workmanlike job of listing. Just try to get 
yourself a nice list and null it down rapidly, and so forth, to a 
point where you've got one item in. That's fine, that's fine. You do 
that job, bless you. But if it comes out that four were left in and 
the list probably wasn't complete in the first place and there's a 
lot of randomity, we'll just do the second step to all four levels 
left in. You understand? We couldn't care less. It's just as long as 
the pc isn't saying, "But that couldn't possibly - it's because I'm 
objecting to it, you know? I accidentally put down 'hoop skirts' and 
I don't know why I put them down, it doesn't have anything to do 
with my case at all! It doesn't even answer the question."

And the auditor says, "Well, it's what is in, 'hoop skirts'."

Because you're going for a service fac, so all things apply. And 
basically the individual is very interested in his service fac. Now, 
the funny part of it is, the pcs come close to the mountain, and 
they'll go right on up. They can't stop themselves. But there's a 
funny zone or area before you get close to the mountain, and they 
sure bounce off of it. Because they'll dramatize it; they'll only do 
what is safe; they'll only say what is safe. And they walk very 
carefully and won't tell you anything mixed up in anything like 
that. They're walking through life on a tightrope, see?

And therefore, therefore, you may have to do several approaches, and 
this whole assessment may have to be done several times. So the 
accuracy of your first do and the ease with which you can do it or 
the difficulties with which you do it, I don't care about. Do you 
understand? You probably already got enough in the pc's folder to 
prepcheck or run R3SC on for some time, you understand? But I don't 
even care if you use that - because nobody here is in a tremulous 
condition - or just drop the bottom out from underneath him with 
this assessment. Because if he's too bad off, he's not really going 
to give you the service fac, but he'll give its cousin, and that 
cousin is just as good as anything else.

Now, you've got a list of parts of existence, haven't you? All 
right, and you assessed it, didn't you? And you wound up with one, 
two, three or four bits in. All right, dandy, dandy. Now, we tried 
to wind up with one in. We hoped one would be in. Makes life 
simpler.

And then we take that item that we found, and we now list safe 
solutions for it, or safe assumptions about it, or safe decisions 
that can be made about it. It's what we can clear with the pc. What 
we really want is service facs, with regard to it. But that's best 
expressed by "safe solutions" or "safe assumptions." And then you 
make a list there. And once more this isn't 187 tight-packed pages 
leading out, because that isn't the processing. That's just trying 
to find something to process, you understand?

So, to the best of your ability, you get yourself a complete list 
that is nullable and that's got a significant phrase or item on it, 
and so forth, and you get that out. Now, that doesn't mean you've 
got the service fac. The item there is probably, however, either as 
close as you can get to the service fac at this time or the service 
fac. It's one or the other. So we're going to treat it, regardless.

Now, we're going to take this item; we're going to work it over. 
We're not going to do a "represent" list on it, we're going to work 
it over. We're going to get this thing chewed on, the final thing 
that we found out, see? I don't care what it was - "wearing 
petticoats." I don't care what it is, see? And we're going to chew 
on this thing until we can get it till it's a solution to more than 
that dynamic.

We found "peanuts" on our parts of existence, and the thing to do 
with peanuts, the safe thing to do with peanuts, was "not eat them." 
That was our item, see? Now, that is the resulting item for "the 
safe solution to peanuts": "not eat them." See? All right.

Now, you actually could process this. See, you could prepcheck it or 
run R3SC on it - you probably won't be able to prepcheck it. Because 
it's too close in, it's going to turn on mass, it's going to make 
things pretty sticky. But if you talk about this for a while to the 
pc and ask the pc to phrase this up variously, "How might this type 
of an assumption apply to other dynamics? Is there anything else 
that this would ...?" and the pc will have to give you a variation 
of it. We're taking the parts-of-existence list now, and we're 
trying to see if this solution fits any other parts of existence, 
and how it would have to be rephrased in order to fit other parts of 
it and "peanuts." Get the idea?

We're trying to do a subtle adjustment here that throws us into a 
broader version of our safe assumption, so it applies to more than 
one dynamic. And if we can do that, why, hurrah, hurrah, hurrah, 
see? We're probably sitting on a much bigger zone or area of the 
service fac. This is a way of graduating it up, don't you see? But 
I've told you, it's perfectly all right for you to just process it, 
just what you found, do you understand? But you're going to get very 
smart, sooner or later, and you're going to say, "Well, what do you 
know? You know, this fellow says 'not eat them!' Hmm-hmm. 'Not eat 
them!' 'Not eat them.' Now, let's see. Does that fit to any other 
part of these dynamics?" and so forth.

"Not eat, yeah, not eat. Ah, yeah. Uh... it fits - yes, actually 
fits on the first dynamic. Fits on the first dynamic. Fits on the 
first dynamic," and so forth. "When I'm processing, I always feel 
like I'm eating my bank, you see, it's this 'not eat,' you know, 
'not eat.' And oh, yes, yes, fourth dynamic. You shouldn't eat men. 
Yeah, fourth dynamic, and fifth dyn ... You sure can't eat MEST. 
That's the best answer to MEST, is not eat it, you know?"

And so forth. Well, you've got it away from "not eat them." This is 
your most elementary address to the situation. You see this thing is 
broader. There was just one little flag sticking up, just one little 
piece of a dynamic had this assumption on it. But this assumption 
doesn't actually handle peanuts: This handles the whole cockeyed 
sweeping lot. And when you've got one that handles the whole lot, 
man, you're sitting there with your paws full of service facsimile. 
And if you haven't got it, you've got to audit what you did get. 
See? You're going to prepcheck it; if you can't prepcheck it, you're 
going to run R3SC. Or you're going to run R3SC on it, and if you 
couldn't run that easily - you know, questions didn't come up - then 
you're going to prepcheck it. See, you're going to handle what you 
found.

And then you're going to do the whole operation again. Only it's 
going to be a new parts-of-existence list, because, listen, you've 
prepchecked a part of the service fac, so his lookingness is going 
to change, so he's going to give you a different parts-of-existence 
list. See. And then you're going to move in on that, and you're 
going to get whatever part of existence you now assessed, and then 
you're going to take that part of existence, and you're going to 
list that, you know? Safe solutions to it, safe assumptions about 
it, safe solutions to it - whatever it was you could list that gave 
you things that sounded like service facs, see? You're going to get 
that list complete, and then you're going to rip down the line; 
you're going to take one of those out. There it sits. Now you've got 
a nice thing. And it says "assuming everything will destroy me." 
Uhoouoo-uoo-uooph. Boy, you have hit the bottom of the barrel. Safe 
assumption. If you don't assume that, something might. And of course 
"eat peanuts," well, that's actually devour - "devour me," "destroy 
me." That's as close as he came into it. So on your second 
assessment he just moved in on the center of it, see? "Assuming 
everything is going to eat me up." That was the service facsimile. 
You just found an offbeat of it, don't you see? 

And you keep working on it, you keep working on it and keep working 
on the pc until you can't make your meter work. That's when you end.

Needle gets up toward the middle and it falls, see? And the needle - 
have you seen a needle that is too difficult to set? You can't get 
it into the set area, because it goes ... [noise] ? And you can 
guess about where the TA should be, but really can't make it very 
well. Now, that's really a free, free needle.

Pc's sitting there. The pc's not worried about anything.

But don't think the pc isn't going to worry at some place along this 
line, because you're going to hit this point on every one of these 
things that you found. As you walk in on this, if you're doing any 
kind of a job of assessment at all, he's going to say, "Ooohh, I am 
not so sure. If I get rid of this ... No."

Now, there's one other thing you must know about this, is you have 
sometimes processed something on somebody, let us say - well, let's 
just use it - "eat" - "an inability to eat." And you've processed this 
out gorgeously, see? And the pc is still in a horrible state with 
regard to it. There's one more step you can do with it. After you've 
finished it all up and the pc - the needle got looser and 
everything, but the pc, "Oh, I'm not so sure about this thing. The
aa..." You've just cut the top of it off, see? So now do "a safe 
assumption about the inability to eat" or "a safe assumption about 
eating." You understand? You didn't get close enough to the service 
facsimile. You got the idea?

Let's say, "an inability to eat." Well, actually, I gave you a bum 
datum then: "a safe assumption about eating" is much more likely to 
produce the service facsimile. In other words, this is a flip-flop. 
He not only used "eating," but you only caught up to one portion of 
it, you understand? And you can work your way through this thing, 
you can get a better statement of what you just got through running 
and finishing up. And sometimes you can't get that better statement, 
at which time, of course, you made it with the first statement.

I'm just talking about the adjustments of the assessment, see? You 
sometimes will get something like "an inability to eat." That's a 
service fac. And it ran, he made people guilty with it, and you 
know, people wrong and himself right, and it all ran out and 
prepchecked, and everything had gotten better. But you notice the 
tone arm still hanging awful still toward the end of this thing. It 
ran well for a long time, and still at the end of this thing the pc 
feels kind of ...

You say, "How do you feel about, now, the 'inability to eat'?"

"Well, I don't know, I mean ... whooa. There isn't anything for me 
in it, to eat, no..." and so on and so on.

Well, you've flattened everything you could flatten out on the 
thing, don't you see? Well, you better assume that you came close in 
on the mountain, and you'd better do a safe assumption about the 
subject of what you found before. That's the rule. There's some safe 
assumption with regard to eating that the person could make. You're 
sort of doing a safe-assumption list on the safe assumption, don't 
you see? Represent. And you get closer into it, and that tears up a 
lot more ground. Got it?

Now, that last one may have confused you. I couldn't care less, 
because I am not at any moment saying that you must not exercise the 
highest level of genius in doing this. Look for identification. Look 
for identifications - that is to say, A=A=A. You're doing this 
Prepcheck; you're doing this Prepcheck on "dolls" - for some reason 
or other, "children's dolls," in this lifetime, and so forth, on 
"dolls."

And they say, "All dolls are cheap," or, "Dolls are always given 
away."

Just watch for it. This is a totally unreasonable assumption, don't 
you see? "If you don't watch dolls they are liable to attack you." 
Oh, yes? See? Completely unreasonable assumption. Draw a little box 
around it in your auditor's reports, because you've hit an A=A=A 
computation that leads in toward a service fac, don't you see? It's 
a completely unreasonable assumption.

You know why the person is having a bad time in this particular 
zone. He's just said so. Doesn't resolve, but the person just said 
so. And you'll find out that's a cousin to the service facsimile, or 
dead on it, see? And you keep fooling around, and all of a sudden, 
why, the pc will come up with it, and you'll come up with it, and 
you'll come up with it and the pc will come up with it, and ughh, 
all hell will break loose, see? Confusion starts running off and 
knocking the pc's head off. And the pc can't sleep at night and has 
to have the light on until you get back and process it again.

But that's all expected randomity. This is what's keeping everything 
in restimulation for the pc, and in taking it out you get a certain 
amount of restimulation going. But there is the way you find it. And 
the formula I gave you, of do a parts-of-existence list and then do 
a list of safe assumptions or solutions for the item found, and then 
using that as a service facsimile directly, you will find, will find 
most of the service facsimiles; or if it doesn't the first time you 
do it, will find the next time you do it, you see, because you can 
move in on it - or maybe the third time you do it. So you can do 
this on a crude basis, you understand?

Now, that - there will probably be other methods of doing this 
released. There will probably be other material developed on this. 
But let me invite your own lookingness on this subject, and not at 
any time get over the idea that a certain amount of genius must be 
invested in it.

Okay? Thank you very much.

========END OF LECTURE========



