Subject: SHSBC 15
Date: 15 Mar 2000 00:29:30 -0000
From: Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (fzba)
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology,alt.religion.scientology

NOT-KNOW

A lecture given on 15 June 1961

Okay. Here we go. What's the date? Fifteen? Gee whiz, 15th of June.
Well, it's like this. I think I better disabuse you of something that at
least one auditor was worried about today. And that is the fantastic
boil-off ability of pcs. They just boil off. I mean, it's really bad. What
is boil-off?
Now, I can tell you what it is on the mechanical side of it. Now, I can
tell you what it is on the thought side of it. And between the two, you
will now see that you shouldn't worry about it. There's no reason to worry
about boil-off.
The situation is that you are very prone to worry occasionally when the pc
suddenly conks out and you think you're doing something wrong or something
of this character. I know this because you always comment on it in your
auditing reports.
Well now, if a pc was to boil off for a half an hour at a crack, and you
were to get in no auditing, I would be very happy to know about that. See,
if they were to boil off and you didn't get in any auditing, I would be
happy to know about that. But otherwise, forget it, huh?
It's like this rising needle. I found one auditor in an HGC who was
practically hysterical on the subject. "I mean, God almighty! The
n-n-n-n-the needle rose! And ohh, de-e-e-ar!" Somewhere in the world it is
raining. Somewhere in the world it is raining. This is the same order of
importance.
And listen, I got special, screaming, urgent, telex dispatches on it now.
"This pc's needle is rising." So it's a matter of something to worry about.
Well, it was along about this stage of the time...
And now, actually, the whole thing has come up again. The auditor in this
particular case, we now discover, wouldn't run anything on the pc if it
made his needle rise, because it made his tone arm go up, and that was bad.
How do you think you're going to get somebody over any bump without their
tone arm going up?
Do you know that your case may be behaving so beautifully, and not changing
any, and the thing going up a whole tone and down a whole tone, up and down
from 2 or 3? And you say you're just getting along fine. And their graph
doesn't change and the pc doesn't change and nothing happens to amount to
anything. Now, that would be a very severe circumstance, but would be true
on a sort of a dead-thetan case.
You could get some sort of wobble on the tone arm. You could get a wobble
on the tone arm, and it never went up to any extremity, and it never went
down to any extremity, and the person just went on being calm and serene
forever. You could.
But gee, on these new processes, you'd really have to work at it. You know,
I don't know quite how you'd do this. You might-I don't know, you might
plug in the ashtray instead of the E-Meter. It'd be pretty hard to do. I
don't mean to be sarcastic, but it'd really be pretty hard to do. But
nevertheless, it could be done.
Look, that pc's tone arm is going to go to 7, to 1, to 5. And now you're
really going to see something happening. I mean, over a course of three or
four sessions you're liable to see reads like this. Wham, wham, wham. Wild
and weird reads. The tone arm starts around the dial, don't you see.
Because as responsibility increases, the tone arm falls from the dead-body
Clear read of the thetan-dead-through 1, down through 7, which your tone
arm won't register. Down through 6.5, down through 5, down through 4, down
through 3, down to 2, down to 1, down to 7, down to 6.5, down to 5, down to
4, down to 3, down to 2, down to 1.5.
And it could be expected to do all those things in the course of clearing
from a case who was on the extreme bottom when you picked him up. You got
it?
Now look, if you get worried about a rising needle, look what happens:
You're going to say at once, "Well, the tone arm mustn't change position."
Because they're hooked together. Let me point this out: that for the tone
arm to change position, the needle must rise, at some time or another. It's
also got to fall at some time or another, right?
So trying to restrain the action of the tone arm or trying to restrain the
action of the needle, on the part of the auditor, is actually an effort to
restrain the pc from recovering. And yet we hear of it every once in a
while.
Now, boil-off is not in this serious a consideration. Out of your kindness
of your hearts - you know, sometimes you are too kind. A lot of you are
suffering from an overdose of kindness.
Kindness goes an awful long ways, and I couldn't live without it, and I
think it'd be wonderful, and there's been far too much violence. And all
these things we understand. But kindness can be overvalued. You can be kind
to somebody-so kind to him that you'll kill him.
Supposing you started running a pc and the pc objected one way or the other
because the pc had a somatic. And you said to the pc, "Oh, well, we'd
better not run that because it's hurting you," and we changed it and ran
another process.
And then, we ran a process, and it turned on a somatic. And then we said to
the pc, "I'm not going to audit you through that because it's hurting you."
You got the idea?
And by the time we'd done that about the third time, the pc would spin
straight in. And you would have been kind to him; you would have helped him
to death. You see? So there is a fact.
Actually, you sometimes get a very kind manager or a very kind officer who
simply winds up getting everybody court-martialed, shot, murdered and
burned, you see? They manage it, one way or the other. Because it's just a
totality of kindness with no idea of effectiveness. See? Effectiveness gets
laid aside, and only kindness stands in its stead. And when that kind of a
condition exists ...
Some bird's doing a bad job, you see? Somebody's doing a bad job, and he's
kind and he doesn't mention it. And the guy's doing a bad job, and he's
kind and he doesn't mention it.
And then, one of two things happens. Either this fellow's accu- the
target's accumulated ineffectiveness costs the lives of a dozen men, or the
jobs of a dozen men, or quite unaccountably, the fellow who's being so kind
finally gets absolutely outraged when he finds the consequences and shoots
the guy in his tracks.
In other words, they're kind right up to the point where they pull out the
pistol and drill him in the heart. You got the idea? And very often you'll
see kindness under this particular stress. And you'll see somebody being
shot down in flames because they're being kind.
I try not to do that. I mean, an organization a short time ago had a
warning and then got shot.
And now they're convinced, and I have a cable on my desk, and all is well.
And they all of a sudden, mysteriously, have produced out of the blue,
students, pcs, see? It's very mysterious. The Academy suddenly got full. I
mean, it just happened within forty-eight hours after they received the
cable.
I don't know what they did! Maybe they went out in the street and found
natives. It wasn't running this way just forty-eight hours ago. But here
was kindness.
Now, what would have been the right thing to do, from a "kind" viewpoint,
was just to have not said anything about it because it would hurt
somebody's feelings, and let the organization collapse, and let the fellow
have a big lose, and let everybody in the area that's dependent on the
organization all of a sudden, go without service or interest or hope or
anything else. And you could have just been kind until you would have
killed the whole, lousy, cotton-picking lot. You see that?
Well, this shows up in auditing as never before. If you haul off of a
process because somebody boils off on it, you are hauling off of the
process which is running off their overts.
Now, what's the matter with a pc? It's his overts, that's what!
All right. Now, theoretically, it's a stuck flow-on the mechanical side.
Mechanical side - stuck flow. Flow flows too long in one direction, it gets
stuck. When you trigger that flow or try to flow it a little bit longer in
the same direction, the pc boils off. Boil-off is a stuck flow. You can
make anybody go unconscious by making them stick flow long enough,
mechanically. But why is this?
That's an interesting thing, that you can merely make a guy get a stuck
flow and boil him off. You can boil off almost anybody.
Some guy who was quite alert, and so forth, you can actually say, "All
right. Now you put the ashtray on the table. Thank you. You put the ashtray
on the table. Thank you. You put the ashtray on the table. Thank you. You
put the ashtray on the table...
It isn't going to show up that way quite as fast as this command: "All
right. Get the idea of somebody putting the ashtray in your lap. Get the
idea of somebody putting the ashtray in your lap. Get the idea of somebody
putting the ashtray in your.. ." Thu-thu-thu-thu-thu-thu-thu-thu.
It doesn't seem right, you know? Well, he'll do it. "Get the idea of
putting the ashtray in your lap. Get the idea of putting. . ."
Zub-zub-zub-zub-zubzub-zub...
We've got a little red character running around England right now who is
running a one-way-flow process, and it's making everybody nice and
unconscious. And she's very happy about it, because she's never had any
other target in her life but to make people unconscious. You get the idea?
She's found out if you run a stuck flow, they konk out. But there's
nothing, nothing, you see, of any importance about this. You can't ruin a
pc.
But look, where did all these stuck flows get parked? Are they over at
Graftie Manor? No. Are they in East Grinstead? Probably. Just where did
they all get parked?
And as you audit a pc, don't you suppose this pc has ever had stuck flows
on the track? Well, where are they going to go when you audit them off? Or
are they supposed to be delicately taken apart so it doesn't boil off?
Well, you're not taking the case apart that delicately, so the fellow gets
a stuck flow-running off. And when he gets a stuck flow running off, he
tends to go woag. You got the idea?
There are stuck flows in the bank. And when those stuck flows start coming
off, your pc woags. And that is all you can say about it. Got it?
Now, it happens to be a very curious thing, but most of the time, if a pc
were to go unconscious, apparently, and you were to continue to give the
auditing command, without any acknowledgment on the part of the pc that he
was doing it or had done it, the pc would do the auditing command if given
at about the same frequency or a little slower than he was getting it when
he was awake.
Because the pc doesn't go unconscious. Like the little pea in the seven
mattresses of the princess, he is sitting down underneath all the layers of
what-not, being quite alert. But he can't keep his eyes open, see? Got the
idea? And he actually will obey auditing commands. Why should you stop
giving the auditing commands? If he doesn't hear you, he won't obey them,
and what have you done? Nothing.
But if he did hear them and he did obey them, he will come out of the
boil-off with great rapidity. And I've audited many pcs straight out of a
boil-off. Now, I found in about 56, something like that, that you could do
this. You could audit a pc through a boil-off by continuing to give the
auditing command while he was boiling off. And it is not an implant
situation, although it looks like it to you. He comes right on out through
the boil-off. Of course, very often he won't remember having done it. And
this brings us to "What is boil-off?"
Boil-off is the accumulated not-know that the pc has run on everybody.
That's on the mental, not mechanical-the thought-postulate level.
And if the pc has gone around-well, let's say he's been a university
professor. And let's say that he has insisted, absolutely, in teaching
nothing but the theories of Hegel. And he has held the fort against all
corners on the theory of Hegel. Even to the point where, when they discover
an eighth planet, he proves conclusively that it is utterly impossible for
there to be an eighth planet, because the perfect number is seven.
Do you know that the discovery of the eighth planet by telescope was
utterly and completely denied for a long while and the evidence was thrown
away of its discovery? Because, according to Hegel, there could only be
seven planets because seven is a perfect number.
Now, supposing this university professor teaching this also insists that
nobody ever look for any truth anywhere. Oh, klow! You get this bird, a
million years after the fact or twenty days after the fact or something
like that, and you audit him, and what's he going to do?
He is going to boil off. And I don't care how many ways you try to run the
flow, he's going to boil off. That is all. Because what is unconsciousness
but the intensification of unknowingness? And that is all that
unconsciousness is, is the intensification of unknowingness. It is the
final mechanism of how not to know.
Unconsciousness is well below death, because a person very often gets
knocked off and goes right on knowing all about it.
What gives with an anesthetist? Don't you suppose - here's a more direct Q
and A that's more easily understood. How about this anesthetist? You start
auditing this anesthetist and she goes blooeea-bong! Why?
She's running a not-know about the operation, not-know about the operation.
They roll in another patient, she puts the mask over their face and shoots
them the juice, or whatever they do these days. I think they feed them the
needle and the whiff all at the same time, and then slap the ether on top
of it. They're being thorough these days. If they aren't permitted to kill
them, they can certainly put them out.
So you start running this girl and she says-you say, "Well, we've got a
little process here which is ARC Straightwire. And we're going to run this
process, ARC Straightwire." And we say, "All right. Now recall a time you
were in communicati -" She's gone!
And you say, "Hey! Tsk! Tsk!" Kick her in the soles of the feet or
something like that, the way used-we used to do Dianetically. That's all
right; it works.
And say, "I didn't even get to finish the auditing command. Now come on,
let's get the auditing command here."
She says, "Auditing command?" Fumph!
And you practically will have to hold her up in the auditing chair with
broomsticks, you know? Go get the broom and prop them under her head and
prop her so she'll sit there. Why?
She's been running not-know, not-know, not-know, not-know, not-know,
not-know, not-know, not-know. You understand? Day and night, she's been
dramatizing not-know with velocity.
So there we are. There is an excess of kindness that winds somebody up in
the thorough soup. Because, of course, every time she anesthetizes
somebody, she lets them be less familiar with pain, and they will recover
much more slowly.
"Oh," you say, "pain is a good thing?"
Yeah, I suppose any remedy is a good thing after a guy has gone completely
off- completely over the rolly coaster and completely off the end of track,
and he's lying there in the bushes, and there's no way to audit him at all,
and he is suffering. Well, by all means, whip out your morphine and give
him a shot in the gluteus maximus.
But there isn't any point in doing that if you could be effective, you see?
But it's only a symptom of ineffectiveness. If you can't be effective, you
can be kind. And I suppose that should appear on the tombstone of
practically every movement, organization, government and great man that has
bit the dust and seen his goals in flinders. "If you can't be effective, be
kind." And he didn't try to be effective, he just tried to be kind. And
there he went.
As a matter of fact, probably all that happened to the Romans and
Christianity is they were kind. I've, incidentally, gone over a lot of
these court records about the early Christians and the martyrs, and it's
quite interesting, quite interesting.
The courts were trying to be fair and trying to be nice about it. And
they'd be sitting there in session, and all of a sudden some wild, whirling
dervish would scream into the courtroom and say, "I'm a martyr! Execute
me!"
And the judge would say, "Well now, boy, bailiff, would you please find out
what the man wants there?"
And this guy'd come screaming up to the front of the room, throwing his
arms around, saying, "I'm a Christian! And it's on the imperial tablets
that I am to be executed for being a Christian. Now, I am a martyr, so
execute me! Because then I will go to heaven and eat pie in the sky from
here on out."
The guy never thought twice; he's probably lousy with a harp. But it's been
his whole unaesthetic career that he only does those things he's lousy at.
And they frankly would refuse to do a thing to him. And they'd kick him out
in the street and go on with whatever trial they were going on with, and
all would calm down.
And a few minutes later, the fellow would be bursting into the room and
say, "You are not doing your duty! I am a Christian; execute me!" So they
executed thirty.
And in one year in Alexandria, the Homoiousian sect of the Christians
fighting with the Homoousian sect of the Christians-and we can only find
one difference in their creeds, is one spelled its name with an "i", and
one spelled its name without one. And in one year, they killed one hundred
thousand Christians. Quite interesting what might pursue immediately after
this.
The Romans were very kind; the early Christian was very, very cruel. So now
we find out the Romans were very cruel and the early Christians were very
kind. But the records don't bear this out.
Now, as far as survival is concerned, if you want to survive, I guess, be
cruel. I suppose that's the most short-term method of survival. But it's
not any long-term method of survival.
But being kind and being ineffective, of course, is a fast way to the
electric chair; it is a fast way to insolvency; it's a fast way to
bankruptcy of all kinds and descriptions; it's a fast way to the death
chamber and the cemetery. And more important to us, it is a fast way to
oblivion on the whole track-being very kind.
"Well, we understand that you're having difficulties, Mr. Jones. We
understand you're having difficulties, and we will try to help you out, Mr.
Jones. You say we're going to have this fence down here, and we'll build
this fence for you a little bit better so, it keeps your cattle in."
And the more you're kind to Mr. Jones, the more things Mr. Jones realizes
he can now get away with. And all of a sudden he moves over too far. And
you suddenly say to Mr. Jones, "That pasture, you can no longer pasture
your cattle in. And yes, I know that means bankruptcy for you, Mr. Jones,
but you've had it." And I think this is a rather cruel operation.
We've just done it here at Saint Hill. Just done it. Of course, we haven't
made the man bankrupt, but the staff has gotten so impatient and so
screamingly angry at this fellow who always wants favors, that nobody has
ever said to him, "Mr. Jones, why don't you pull up your socks?" Nobody has
ever said this, you see?
And as a result, we've got a kind of a not-know running in the middle of
kindness, don't you see? Because the guy is left unwitting of the fact that
he's actually making enemies. You see?
So these people that have been going around saying "Love, love, love thy
neighbor, love, love, love"-I think there have been a lot of songs written
about it, a lot of hymns written about it. A fellow by the name of Bach
wrote some music about it one time. Organ player. Played in some cathedral
someplace. He couldn't hire musicians, so he had to train all of his kids
into an orchestra.
And anyway, this fellow used to write boogie-woogie, very complicated
boogie-woogie, that sounds something like a spiritual orgasm from New
Orleans, you know. And he called it "Loving Sheep" or something.
And of course, I figure the abbots of that day were all tone deaf. So
they'd look at this music, and it says, "Sheep Amongst the Meadow
Worshiping the Lord" you see, as the title of the script.
And he'd say, "You'd better give me my ten bob," or whatever they gave him
to write a song.
And they'd say, "Well, that's very nice." And they would buy it, you see,
and didn't know what they were listening to afterwards.
Now, you listen to this music, and if you don't listen to the titles, you
know, you say, "Boy, those guys-those hepcats get a little more speeded up,
they'll almost get a Dixieland, you know?"
I know this is sacrilege. Sacrilege. It's sacrilege against the worship of
music.
But let's take a look here at the anaten factor that stems from all of
these various philosophies, all of these oddities. Until we finally get a
philosophy that is so gargantuan in its unknowingness, that it is its
principal philosophy. And when that philosophy arose amongst this
particular race, it stopped philosophy. So that today, doing what we are
doing, we seem odd.
We are thinking and we're not supposed to think. And if we do anything in
the field of philosophy, you see, what we're supposed to do is read
Immanuel Kant. And he said everything there was to know on the subject of
philosophy.
You see, he writes a book to prove that you are immediately disciplined
anyway and that the overt-motivator sequence really does exist. And then he
writes another book immediately afterwards and says you're paid for it, you
see? He writes one book to say that.. . You know, that's his two main
books.
And I just noticed the other day, there hasn't been a philosopher since.
It's quite interesting. What did he introduce into philosophy?
They call him "The Great Chinaman of Konigsberg." Well, I don't know, I
don't call him that.
The only thing I've got against this runt, this intellectual pygmy, is just
this - is just this - this one little thing: He invented the fact that the
highest level of knowingness is to be totally ignorant and you could never
find out about it. It's called transcendentalism.
And he says, "Anything that is really going on, you will never know about.
So go ahead, little, stupid blinkety-blanks, my children, and you will
realize that anything that you begin to know about, you can't know about
it. So there's nothing you can know about anything anyway, so you might as
well quit."
Now, it is said in much different language. But the reason it has to be
said in such polysyllabic, German compound-felony language is that in bare
terms, and in a bare statement of fact such as I've just stated, it's
totally unpalatable. And yet you want to read all there is to know about
transcendentalism and you will find out that that is it. It is the great
philosophy of not-know.
It says, "No matter how much you study the physical universe, you jerks,
you ain't going to know anything. You're just a bunch of ignorant bums,
because all of that is unknowable."
How do you like that! It's all unknowable.
And you know why the mind has not kept pace-technology in it-along with the
pace of physics is because it was stopped on the track by the basic theory
that you can't know about it anyway. It's impossible to know about, so
therefore, you can't know about it. So ever since that time, all they've
been doing is quoting Greek philosophers.
Man, I had a few too many Greek tutors to go around quote 'em! Aw, come off
of that! You mean, you go upwards to twenty-three hundred years later,
you've still got to have these guys haunting you? No, no thank you. No
thank you.
A Greek tutor-that's something you get rid of in very early childhood. And
you certainly don't keep it through adulthood. And you certainly don't keep
it for twenty-three hundred years. Because the Greek philosophies are very
fine, and we're glad that man thought. But the last time I was down in
Athens, I found out what the Greek philosophies were all about: if you
couldn't lick 'em, you could confuse 'em. And they did it with two things
-philosophy and entertainment.
And I have seen better nightclub operation in a perfectly lousy
hole-in-the-wall, nobody-ever-heard-of-it nightclub in Athens than you
would find in the finest theaters of New York City. Guys just operating for
buttons. They were really good. They were very, very good. They were very
good at it. They have saved this all through the centuries. They are the
original cabaret owners.
After you get the enemy there and he's conquered you and so forth, you show
him conclusively that he can be out-created by turning loose a bunch of
dancing girls on him that really get his eyes popping. And he forgets to
conquer. They did it to the - they did it to race after race. They did it
to Persians, and they've done it to Egyptians and they've done it to
Romans. And they're still on top. Pretty interesting. It's a modus operandi
for conquest.
And so is philosophy. If you want a complete catalog of the Greek
philosophies, take something on the order of the Prehav Scale and figure
out each one totally dramatized, and write a total philosophy around that
level of the Prehav Scale. And say that is it, and there is only this, and
you've got one of the Greek philosophies - or one of the Persian
philosophies, or one of the Egyptian philosophies.
Try it some time. Just try and look at the level of the Prehav Scale and
figure out what would be a philosophy that obscured everything under the
sun except this one thing-what kind of a philosophy it'd be. After you've
thought about it for a while, it'll suddenly dawn on you that you are
looking at the philosophy of something like Rosicrucianism. That is it, you
see? Or you're looking at the philosophy that was practiced in Egypt, or
you're looking at Stoicism.
Just look at No Effect. There's No Effect on the Prehav Scale. Now just
figure out what kind of a philosophy would you work out that would totally
bar out any slightest effect of any character. And you wind up with Greek
Stoicism. And similarly, you can do this with every level of the Prehav
Scale. It is a reactive scale. So, of course, there's a broad appeal.
Any time you're too broke, your case has gone to pieces, and you've become
utterly unprincipled, somewhere up the track, and you land amongst the
wogs, always remember that you can dig up a piece of the Prehav Scale and
get a marble palace with a gold roof.
Just figure out where they sit on the Prehav Scale and dream up a
philosophy to prove it. And if you prove it conclusively that that's where
they sit on the Prehav Scale and this is the very best thing to do-ahhh,
they'll make you the governor of the joint as well as the high priest.
You see, most philosophy has deteriorated to some kind of a yip-yap
agreement with what they have already got. This is a natural impulse,
because all you had to do was open a book of the compound philosophies of
the ages that is in the library. And you take it down from the library
shelf and look for a copy of it where book markers have been at work. And
you will find the most fantastic banalities underscored.
Here's a perfect gem of wisdom sitting there. But do they underscore that,
you see? Oh, no, they will underscore something heavily, you see, with
marks in the margins and notes over here, "God is love."
And you say, "Come off of it, man!"
And you read on both sides of this, it proves conclusively that the guy,
actually, is talking about the fact that religion divides itself up into
love and hate. And the phrase "God is love" has gotten into a compound
sentence. And it says, "In most countries, the more inane religions
subscribed to by the very weak pronounce the theory 'God is love.' Whereas,
anybody on a casual inspection could demonstrate that if a god is love and
yet keeps hitting people with lightning bolts, it couldn't possibly be a
mono-theoristic religion."
And this book marker has read that whole thing, and he's gone right into
the middle of it, and he's underscored "God is love." And then he's put
over in the margin, "This is certainly true!"
Man, I'm telling you, ladies and gentlemen, your postulates and operations
on the whole track really stick in the philosophic line! It's a great
compliment to your ability to make a postulate stick.
Well anyhow, as you come up the line and look all this over, you get into
an interesting frame of mind about this sort of thing. You're liable to get
into this kind of a frame of mind: The truth is a subjective phenomenon and
only exists as a subjective phenomenon, and there is no broad or
agreed-upon truth or anything. You have the philosophy of the only-one:
general semantics. See? General semantics.
They've gotten it down to the fact, not only is there no truth, but there
is no meaning. And nobody can talk to anybody because everybody means
something different by everything that is said.
Well, they might have trouble talking to people, but I tell you, I don't!
So there must be something wrong with their theory. All you've got to find
is one wild variable on their theory, of course, and it blows up, and
that's me.
I don't have any trouble talking to people. I don't have any trouble
getting them to find out what I mean, either. And I don't have the least
bit of trouble finding out what they mean. I may ask them three times, and
they may practically blow their stacks and figure out that I must be the
most stupid guy they have ever met, but I eventually find out what they
mean. See? And I'm not out of communication, even if general semanticists
are, see? There are all these levels. Failed communicate - we've got it
with us.
We have one philosophy on the Tone Scale, totally built out of one level on
the Tone Scale: 1.1-ism. It's - was brought forward by the fellow of the
name of Dale Carnegie. It's how to be a successful 1.1. Read him if you
don't think so.
Man, you never saw such stuff. And you meet most salesmen that have been
supertrained in this, and you wind up dodging, never answering your phone,
going nowhere near your mailbox, just for fear these people will appear.
So I think Carnegie, having accomplished his goal, pleasantly kicked the
bucket and went on to happier rewards. But I think his effort was to stop
all selling everywhere! Must have been, because you just try and monkey
around with this 1.1 type of selling. Try to communicate with a no-reality.
Try to talk to people by never uttering what you think.
You can't communicate with people by never uttering what you think. They'll
get this odd feeling of the unreality of it all. Now, why do they get this
feeling of an unreality of it all? Because you're running a not-know on
them, aren't you?
See, you're talking to them, and you think this guy ought to be thrown down
the nearest well, see. You think his product would not even make a good
bonfire. And yet, you say, "Well yes, Mr. Jones, yes, we're very interested
in-product," and so on. "Why don't you call later or talk to our general
manager about it?" and so forth.
What are you doing? You're just making yourself more stupid, that's all.
Why? Because you've got a not-know overt.
But believe me, he will sense this. Somehow or another he'll sense this. It
sort of comes out of the atmosphere, somehow or another. It sort of drips
off the walls that there is no sincerity being accomplished around here. So
the communication doesn't occur.
And we get our old ARC triangle. And where reality is not present, a
not-know is substituted for it. Tsk! Tsk! Tsk! So you have a definition of
unreality. God, I never thought I'd get to that! And the definition of
unreality is a substitution of a known for an un-I mean an unknown for a
known. If you want to create a big unreality, all you have to do is just
substitute an unknown for a known.
The Russians do this rather well with communism. Everybody knew it was cold
in Russia and that Russians were hard to govern, and a whole bunch of
things like this. And so they put a bunch of unknowns in the line. They
even got an iron curtain. You can't even communicate about, with or around
the country. And people have an odd, odd feeling about Russia.
And yet Russia is working like mad trying to communicate to everybody.
Well, that's interesting, isn't it? They must be running a vast not-know on
all of us. Maybe there's some good things in Russia, who knows? Maybe
there's some bad things. Maybe there's something workable in communism, who
knows?
Because you know desperately, in the final analysis, that the reading of an
entire Russian exposition of what the Russian is doing is the substitution
of a series of unknowns for a series of knowns. They know what their
production figures are. And you get the weird idea that you don't know.
You've read them, see. "Eight-hundred billion pairs of shoes a minute are
produced in Russia," you see, "under our great system, and with our great
dictator," and so forth.
And you read that figure and some feeling comes over you that somebody has
tampered with the statistics. So this winds you up, actually, not just
believing that this is false; it winds you up with a whole series of
speculations, most of them bad.
You try to figure out how many pairs of shoes would really be produced in
Russia per minute. "Let's see, there are three Russians working, and I'm
sure they're not making shoes." And you wind up this way. And you finally
say, "Well, you know, there's.. ." You conclude only one thing in the face
of commie propaganda-eventually, anybody who can think at all-eventually
concludes one thing: that you don't know anything about it. They spread
this as a big unreality. They are the kings of mystery on this planet at
the present time. They have taken over from religion as being the czars of
mystery. And that's how they do it.
You can actually get pretty annoyed with a person after a while if every
time you asked them how they are, they say they're fine. And you know damn
well that they've got a backache and a headache and they feel like hell.
And you say, "How are you?"
And the person says, "I am fine."
You do several things. Amongst them is go down the Tone Scale with regard
to this person. The person is substituting a nonfact for an observable
fact, you see?
And you keep getting this unreality thrown at you. And eventually, the
person starts to kind of disappear. And this very curious phenomena will
occur around a person who is doing this to other people. One man,
eventually, could not see his wife when she was in the same room. He'd look
straight through her and would see nothing but the wall on the other side.
Now, that is one-an interesting phenomena. It is reproducible in hypnotism.
You can hypnotize somebody and tell him the table isn't there, and he'll
see straight through the table and see the carpet on the other side of it,
which was of great mystery and interest, and probably formed one of the
primary bulks of research of people like Charcot and Mesmer-these boys.
They did an awful lot of interesting things. They'd make people sense
things at a distance and do all kinds of things.
Now, what is this factor of reality and communication and not-know? They
just add up to a tremendous woag, you see? And it'll demonstrate itself
mechanically with boil-off, so that everybody gets more and more stupid.
Now, in the field of philosophy, a fellow comes along and with great
authority says everybody, if they achieved it to the ne plus ultra, would
finally find out that they couldn't know. And oddly enough, it had enough
effect on this society that I think there are people right here who used to
buy it. Or you've certainly heard it, but you didn't buy it very hard. But
you know a lot of people who have bought it.
"You shouldn't research into the mind, and you shouldn't do this, and you
shouldn't do that. And you shouldn't think about it, because you couldn't
know anything about it anyway."
Oh, wow, what is this? See? I mean, well, the least you could do is put
some invented knowingness there, the way the Christians did.
But to say that it is totally unknowable - all of the secrets of the
existence are totally unknowable. Oh, my contempt. I spit! What fabulous
conceit the man had, to know that it was all unknowable. What a conceited
dog!
Now, if there's a tremendous not-know associated with a person, he tends to
persist like mad. And you get all sorts of oddball aberrations going in the
society. For instance, the monk Dharma who existed ten thousand years ago
in India has formed the basis of most Indian religions. And not a thing is
known about him or what he said. Isn't that fascinating?
I mean, Indian religions are based to a marked degree upon the sayings,
findings and so forth of Dharma. Chinese religions are based on Dharma. We
think it means "fate." That's how far it goes. You look up in the
dictionary and you'll find Dharma has something to do with fate or
something of the sort. Doesn't tell you what it is.
And you look up in one of these textbooks of one of these
Johnny-come-lately Indian hoaxes that they call the great revelations
and-Suba-bubabooba-booba-ba I think is their last one. You look up for
the-you look up in this textbook on this and you'll find Dharma described
in a very fantastic definition which is long and drawn out.
Actually, everything in that textbook, by the way, is incorrect. You read
over the-all the definitions of the various missions and words and so
forth, of past philosophies in this new gu-gug and you'll find they're all
defined with a big zzzzz curve, see?
Actually, Dharma was the name of a monk and that is it. And of course, he
had a fantastic influence upon Indian philosophy, so they began to regard
him as fate itself. But he is actually a loftier name in the philosophies
of the East than Buddha. But nothing is known about him. Nothing. So here
you have a fabulous not-know, don't you? And you get a terrific persistence
of this not-know, don't you?
Well now, look, if it can ride so thoroughly in the philosophies of a
country or a people, how do you think it rides along in somebody's reactive
mind? Hm?
You might say the least known philosopher on the whole track Earth-
immediate track Earth - current, present-time Earth - is a fellow that we
don't even know what his name is. We don't even know it's a fellow. Got the
idea? It's a fate.
No, it wasn't a fate. It was probably somebody who washed his feet in a
brook and put his begging bowl out where it belonged and laid down the law,
and said what he thought was right and so forth. And yet, this fellow's
been totally devoured in time.
I happen to know something about this particular character myself. But if
he can ride that unknown up the track and be the influential background to
somebody that we know rather well-Lao-tse, see? Confucius. A Buddha. They
all go back to this fellow. And we don't know anything about it. Why is he
still there? It's because we don't know anything about him. He's held in
place by the not-know. Not-knowingness does not result in an obscurement,
but is known to you as not-isness, you see?
So there he is riding on the track like mad, expressed in everybody's mind
through India, through China. He's the background of the most broad-spread
religion of peace that this planet has had. And yet, we call the background
of this planet "Buddha," see, the Eastern religions. We say, well, Buddha
or Confucius or Lao-tse, or-see? But, actually, sitting right back of their
shoulders is this Dharma and we don't even know it's a man; it's fate. You
got the idea? Do you see the alter-isness, so forth?
Well now, just take that as an example of what happens in somebody's
reactive mind when you get a not-know riding along the line to this degree.
What happens? He boils it off, that's what happens! He runs into the Dharma
on his track. The total not-know that is still totally in place. And he
starts to go clog, woag, thud.
Not-know is the extreme manifestation-in its most extreme manifestation is
unconsciousness. Not-know in a lesser manifestation is death. The most
extreme manifestation is when a person cannot go unconscious. And we call
that insanity. And insanity lies on that band. You have death, which is
simply a state of beingness rather than an action. It means the fellow is
no longer inhabiting a body. But we can't say what his condition was in at
the time he left. He normally wasn't unconscious.
And we go down into unconsciousness and we're below the ramifications of
death. And now we go down in below the ramifications of unconsciousness and
we find insanity and at that level a person is unable completely, totally
and utterly to not-know it. But what is he trying to not-know? By this time
he's trying to not-know about the fifteenth substitute. And you get a
delusory state that the person cannot not-know.
And you'll find people who are incipiently insane are going around all the
time a little bit worried about something that might be just around the
corner. They-"Let's see, thuhhh..
You listen to them. Just get the common denominator of all of their
conversation. It's the inability to not-know a substitute. Or it's the
inability to not tolerate not-knowing a substitute.
It's the ability-their sole ability left is just to recognize that there
are intolerable not-knowingnesses that they cannot escape-and that they lie
in wait for them. They lie in wait everywhere, everywhere.
And they walk down the street, and just outside the circle of the
lamplight... They don't even dare articulate it, you see? Just outside the
circle that the lamp is - street lamp is making on the pavement there.
And you find them all in a-always in a constant, inarticulate terror about
something. Or you find them in immediate and terrible combat against
something that is undesignatable. And you find them in a state where they
have collapsed before the not-knowingness of what assails them. And you'll
get them running the whole Tone Scale about a not-knowingness.
But that Tone Scale occurs after unconsciousness. And it's a Tone Scale-is
not-knowingness. They go from an inseni-serenity about a notknowingness.
You can find a total nut who's going around saying-he's just entering the
field of nuttiness, but it'll be something like this:
"Well, I don't know, but it doesn't matter. Nothing matters, really, that I
don't know. And I don't know really, but it doesn't matter! It doesn't
matter and I'm being very serene. The best thing to do is to be calm about
it all. And I will just go on being calm about all this, and so forth. And
what happens happens and uh, so forth. And uh, I just won't think about it
anymore. I'm going to stop thinking about it now. That's right. And what
happens, happens. And uh, I just don't know anything about it, so there
isn't any reason to perturb myself about it at all. Because I don't know
anything about it, you see? And therefore, I have forgotten it all.
"And I'm in that pleasant state, right now, of not even being-not dwelling
on it for a moment. And I just don't give it another thought, so that is
the state I am in. And that is very nice and I am being very happy. And
it's a sensible state to be in, you see, because there isn't any knowing
about it, you see? So you just might as well be serene about the whole
thing.
"And that's why I'm so serene. I never worry. You think for a moment I am
worrying, you're very mistaken. Because it doesn't matter anything to me
that I don't know about this. Never enters my mind that I don't know about
it. In fact, I don't even know what I don't know about!"
You run into this person. They usually pass for a sane person. They're
pretty sane compared to the rest of them.
Now you go on down Tone Scale from that and you get each point of the Tone
Scale about a not-know. The person is angry about a not-knowingness. But
remember, it-this-in insanity it is always a not-knowingness about an
unknown. They don't know what they don't know about. You got the idea? They
have no target.
It's interesting. You get a classification of this. Don't hang this
appellation around somebody because he's simply upset because he can't find
his car keys! This boy is all right. He knows he doesn't know where his car
keys are. Not only that, but he also knows that it's car keys that he
doesn't know about. See?
Well, that's sane as can be. And he can be very misemotional about this
thing on the misemotional scale without being insane. He might be frantic,
but he's not insane. No, no, you're looking at an entirely different
phenomenon.
This person does not know what he is in-frantically looking for. You got
the idea? If you can envision somebody who has lost his car keys but
doesn't know that he has lost his car keys and is looking for his car keys
but doesn't know it's his car keys that he's looking for, but is just going
around, just going around, looking, looking in a terrible frantic state of
mind, looking, looking, looking, looking, looking.
You see them in asylums. You'll say, "What are you looking for, bud?"
And he'll say, "Don't disturb me! Don't disturb me! I might forget what it
is."
Well, forget what it is! He doesn't know what it is.
Everybody-of course, people like Freud immediately go kling-klonk, and try
to find out what the man is looking for. Well, of course, the man is
looking for nothing. It's simply a phenomenon of looking. You understand?
        It's franticness about it. He'll be in grief You'll see somebody sitting
there crying and crying and crying. You say, "What are you crying about?"
Well, they can't articulate what they're crying about. They don't know what
they're crying about. They haven't a clue what they're crying about. But if
you stated it one way or the other, they're crying because they, of course,
haven't been able to find out about what they don't know about.
And that is the way the reactive bank stacks up. Just
ting-ting-ting-tingting. Right there, bing-bing-bing-bing-bing! They're
crying about not being able to know what they're crying about. You see,
it's a total reactive-thought device. You'll find them all up and down the
Tone Scale and characterize every one of them.
If you want to put together a new scale of insanity and make a name for
yourself amongst psychiatrists, go ahead. Because you just describe the
Tone Scale and describe each one of these states. But describe the person
being unable to conceive what it is that is in this state that he is upset
about, envisioning what he would do in those mental reactions, you of
course wind up with a hundred percent and only just this one thing, totally
fixed on that misemotional state, because he can't know or mustn't know or
is curious about knowing or mustn't let anybody else know about what he
doesn't know about. And there's where your knowingness doubles up and
there's where you get the guy totally fixed on the track.
If you've ever worried about whether or not you're potty and going around
the bend, up the chimney or something of the sort, just ask yourself this
question: do you know what you're going up the chimney about? Just ask
yourself that question, you know? "Why am I unhappy tonight? What don't I
know about tonight?" Well, if you can find out about what you don't know
about tonight, why, you're very far from insane.
Insanity is the manifestation of not being able to. A fellow can't even
find out that he is in grief because he can't find out about what he can't
find out about. See? And of course, that-the mere fact that you are able to
speculate, moves you out of the total-dramatize category. Just the fact
that you'd say, "Let's see, what am I unhappy about tonight?"-just the fact
that you could say that-you're not nuts. It's just as easy as that.
But of course, there isn't anything when a person gets into that state.
There is nothing there-anyhow. If you understand these various mechanisms,
when you look at somebody then they won't baffle you. Because your
bafflement is simply a Q&A with their not-knowingness. And the reason you
get concerned about insanity and that sort of thing, and the reason you
very often find an auditor going puppy to the root on an insane case, and
not being able to stop auditing the insane case, is because the auditor
starts Q&Aing, trying to find out what the insane case doesn't know. And
the auditor gets to try to find out what it is that the insane case doesn't
know and the hideousness about it is, is factually, the insane case doesn't
know about a don't-know, which of course adds up to the double-compound
felony of it all.
So when you don't know about a not-know, you don't know whether not-know,
and what it is, and whether or not you not-know it and you don't even know
what it is that you don't not-know, you're a candidate-you're a candidate
for the spinbin, you see.
There are two things that move it out. One of these things is the fact that
you can speculate as to what you don't know. If you can do that, that's
sane.
By the way, it's very interesting: you can introduce to a person who is
even feeling spinny, you know, a sudden feeling of sanity by just asking
them to think of one person who doesn't think they're insane. Did you know
that? It's one of the most interesting tricks I ever dreamed up. You just
say, "Well, think of one person that doesn't think you're crazy." Person
will eventually think of his dog or something and turn sane just like that.
Why? You've introduced a knowingness into his unknowingness. And you can
introduce just one knowingness into an insane person's perimeter and you'll
turn them sane. You just say, "Look around this room and find something
that is really real to you." And this person will look all around the room
and they may take a half an hour to do it and they eventually pick up a
silver tea pot or something of the sort and say, "Boy, this is really
real." And you'll just see them go sane.
It's good for one command. That's why it sort of tends to drop out of the
lineup. But that's a terrific trick. That's a terrific trick. Both of
those. Both of those. You get somebody who's going to blow his brains out
and commit suicide and they're so terrified of all the terrifying things
that they don't know what's terrifying about them, which is what makes them
terrifying. If you were to say to them, "Think of one person who thinks
you're sane." That's evidently a total non sequitur to them, but they'll
think about it at once. They're almost incapable of not thinking about it.
And you don't hear any more about suicide. So you see, it's an interesting
little trick to have in your war bag. Hm?
Now, so much for all that. I've given you a very long, rambling discourse
here today and I haven't answered any of your questions, and I can see that
I have slugged you to some degree. You look a little overwhumped. So I'll
tell you how to unwhump yourself-unwhump yourself. We're going to start to
give the students Security Check practice. We'll start giving them a
Security Check, insofar as possible, along with their auditing. In other
words, you have to learn how to do Security Checks and you better learn how
to do lots of them of various kinds. So if you just spend an hour or
something like that a day or one page of the Joburg a day, security
checking somebody, then you can be supervised as to how you're doing the
Security Check. And you can be looked over about what you're doing, at the
same time you're catalyzing the auditing which is going on.
And those auditors that are running CCHs on somebody shouldn't, actually,
be doing a Security Check on them also. That Security Checking should be
relegated to this other program. And then you will see faster case gains.
It's almost a double-auditor situation.
But you need experience in doing Security Checking. And you need to do
enough Security Checks that you become familiar with doing Security Checks.
And with your familiarity, there may suddenly pop up something you feel you
don't know about doing Security Checks and this is the place to find out
you don't know. Because the information is all over the place. Got it?
Okay. Sound like a good program to you?
Audience:       Yes, very good.
All right. So that's my contribution to unwhumping you.
In addition to that, I think you're making pretty good progress. I just
looked over all of your case reports. There doesn't seem to be anybody
hanging up here particularly badly-except you, of course! You seem to be
doing all right. I'm actually very pleased with the way things are going on
the thing.
But if you don't think that should be the state of affairs, don't get into
a frame of mind that you mustn't tell Ron because it'll hurt his feelings.
Realize you're just running a don't-know on Ron. Okay?
If you don't think things are running all right for you or your training or
something like that and you can't nerve yourself up to say it to an
Instructor or something-you think I ought to know about it, something like
that-why, by all means just put a dispatch on my lines. Okay?
And if you do miraculously find out there's something you don't know that
you should know while you are here, and so forth, and you don't find it
out, I'll think you're stupid!
        Thank you.
