

 


THE ITSA LINE

SHSBC 296 renumbered 325

(85 min long)

A lecture given on 20 August 1963

[checked against the old level 0 cassettes, omissions marked
with ">"]


How are you today?

Audience: Good. Fine, thank you.

> Wasn't that a nice dramatic storm.  I approved of that,
> weather's been too calm.

All right. This is what?

Audience: 20 August.

20 August A.D. 13. Thank you.

> And we have a couple of new students, I'd like to have them
> stand up and take a bow.  Cynthia Pare, and Fred Pare.
> And we got a couple of retreads on course: Wing Angel and
> Smokey Angel.

Well, this is a lecture on the itsa line. About time. The
itsa line. Why is it called the itsa line? The auditor says
whatsit? and the pc says itsa. It is the pc's communication
line from pc to auditor. And it isn't necessarily pursuant
to the auditor's whatsit; it is sometimes pursuant to the
pc's whatsit; pc very often puts in his own whatsit.

> "what's that there?"
>
> "Okay, allright".

Okay. There are numerous communication lines between the
auditor and the pc and the aggregate of these make up what
you call the auditing cycle. The auditing cycle is made up
of several communication lines. A communication line is
cause-distance-effect. I call your attention to Dianetics
1955! for the full definition of a communication line. What
is a communication: intention, attention, duplication at
the point of effect, and so forth.

All those are quite important and technically accurate, but
what you're mainly interested in is cause-distance-effect.
Cause-distance-effect is a communication line. A
communication line is not cause-distance-effect,
cause-distance-effect—that's two communication lines.

Now, a communication line can be very faint, and one of
those that you'll find out routinely on an auditor is the
attention line: line 1 minor; line 1 minor, the attention
line. And that is just consistently out. But as I say,
there are numbers of these and we're not particularly going
into them. That's the first line. That's get the pc's
attention; how do you get the pc's attention to cause the
pc to put his attention on the auditor? And that line is
the one that is put in.

Now, that line itself can be complex and become two lines
or three lines. Pc sitting there and he's saying, "Gob-gob,
walla-walla," something, and the auditor wants to get his
attention on him. See, it has to have attention on the
auditor. Now, the auditor can't really give an auditing
command or do anything with his command unless he gets his
attention line in. Now, that can be done very crudely. You
can drop the E-Meter, you can cough loudly in the pc's
face, tip over your chair, get angry. There's, in essence,
numbers of ways to get this line in very, very wrong. And
the line has to be put in, however, and very often you find
a pc fogging around at the beginning of session and his
attention is not on the auditor, it's really not on his
case, it's not on anything you're trying to do, and so
forth. Well, how do you get it there? Well, one of the ways
of getting it there is, having an attention line already
extant, you then convert it to an itsa line.

Now, this is the whole trick, because there's another
attention line. There is attention on what, see? And this
looks like another attention line; it's actually 1 minor. It
just isn't putting the attention on the auditor, it's
putting attention on something else. And this is a little
trick I used to do that used to baffle everybody in ACCs.
They used to get baffled, and everybody would drop his jaw
and look at me dully when I would try to get them to do
this; and it's been wholly unsuccessful; but by dividing down
the auditing cycle into these various communication lines
and component parts, I will bravely take another crack at it.

It's slippy. I know if I give this to you, it'll become a
repetitive-command process, which it isn't. It's slippy,
that's all; is you just very adroitly, without really
putting the pc's attention on anything except what his
attention should be on, just flick the pc's attention over
to what it should be on. I'll give you an idea.

Pc is saying, "Oh, I just ... just ... just can't stand
.. can't stand these uh ... these wild parties. Just
can't stand them. Had one last night and just can't stand
them, and so forth. There's just too much ... too much music 
and everything. And I've got an awful present time problem, 
because this guy's ... this ... this ... this girl's b ... b ...
boyfriend came over and wanted to pop me in the eye because
I was getting too familiar, and it's terrible." And present
time problem, present time problem, present time problem.

And you know you're running the GPM "to be sexual," see?
This you know about the case.

This is ... this I'm giving you, also, is the itsa line.

Hey, we're getting a nice storm tape here. We'll cut the
storm off of it, and so forth, and sell it.

They go great in the Middle West. They love storm tapes. It
reminds them of home.

I had a green tornado one time in Kansas; never been back
since. Twenty-five-pound blocks of ice were falling out of
a pea-soup-green sky, and the visibility had dropped down
to about fifteen feet; bright green. Never quite recovered.
Was impossible. Couldn't have happened; but it did.

Now, your pc's attention being all over the confounded
place, the auditor sits back and says he's going to put in
the itsa line. Now, usually by this— unless he is well
trained and has this data, and so forth; this means he's
going to sit back and leave the pc's attention totally
uncontrolled. The itsa line, when you first start giving it
to people, is just never doing anything but listen. And
that's because people think it is simply a communication
line, and it isn't. But we will go on to this in a moment.

Now, therefore this pc is running on and on and on about
this party; and this is slippy auditing. I can sit and do
this by the hour. Pc never finds out about it, and there's
no command process being run and everything else, and tone
arm moves like mad, and so forth. It requires a certain
estimation of effort, you understand? And I actually, years
and years ago, despaired of getting anybody to control
attention that lightly. This is another effort to do so,
see? So, you say ... he's going on and on, "And this guy came
over and he almost bopped me, but this was a nice-looking
girl, and so forth. And t had a terrible problem because of
my wife, you know, and so on, and ..." Here we go, see?

Now, the auditor who is not well informed and who is not
well skilled just sits back and listens to this whole
thing. Now, to do anything about it suddenly is to put line
I minor in on the auditor. Clank! And boy, the pc will ARC
break, see, because it's a sudden shift of attention.

So the whole thing is the skill by which you can take line
1 minor and flick it over onto what you were doing or want
to do in the session; the skill with which you can do this.

And, believe me, this is a skill maneuver. And when you are
really skilled at this, you could almost sit down and run a
full auditing session, and even a casual observer would
think you were simply listening to the pc, which you
weren't at all; you were actually directing the pc's
attention very closely. The pc was talking exactly about
what you wanted that pc to talk about and nothing else, and
the pc never realizes that their attention has been grooved
on it.

Now, that would be the tremendous difference between
psychoanalysis listening and Scientology auditing. You see,
these things could look quite alike.

The psychoanalyst (1) did not really know what to direct
anybody's attention to, see? He didn't know the anatomy of
the bank. He thought if he could direct somebody's
attention to sexual incidents in early childhood, he had it
made. Well, now, a pc - a pc - actually follows in his
case, at any given moment, the least-charged line. A pc
will always follow the least-charged line. Get this. Get
this good, because that's one of those remarks that goes by
in the night and you wonder someday - you're sitting there
auditing somebody and you don't know what to do, and so
forth. And it's one of those things that if you knew that
well, you'd know exactly what to do. He always follows the
least charged line with his tone arm action. If you're
going to get tone arm action, it is on the least-charged
aberrative line - not the least-charged thing he could talk
about, but the least-charged aberrative line. The tone arm
action exists on the least-charged aberrative line at any
given moment in a case progress - always the least-charged
aberrative line.

Now, give you what I mean by that. Let's take dynamics.
You've got eight dynamics you could audit on the pc. The
third dynamic is what the pc is always coming up with.
Well, if you kept the pc on the third dynamic, you know,
you would get tone arm action because this happens with the
pc to be the least-charged line. You got it?

Now, the other lines do not give tone arm action, and this
does not mean they are not charged; it means they are
overcharged. There is too much charge on them. Got that? So
you're always trying to snake through the mine field on the
least-popping firecrackers to get your tone arm action. You
got that? You want little ones that'll just tingle his
feet; you don't want those that'll blow his legs off. You
understand?

Well, the mind is so regulated and safety-valved that it
will not release charges which the pc considers over his
ability to tolerate. Now, an auditor can actually punch
these charges into view; he's got all the materials in his
hand. And therefore he could actually throw the pc into
areas which are overcharged areas to be run - the areas are
overcharged.

The result of an overcharged area is a stuck tone arm.
> There is no more really as far as you are (concerned).
Stuck tone arms have many peculiarities and
particularities. You can say that if you want to really get
tone arms moving you have to get the GPMs on a case run;
that's the most likely to give you tone arm action. It's
the most aberrative in terms of time. You can say a lot of
things about tone arm action. You say tone arm action
sticks because of time - these things are all true. But with
regard to charge, what you really want to know with regard
to charge is that in the presence of too much charge—too
much charge—the TA ceases to operate. TA action ceases when
you have too much charge.

That doesn't say that you couldn't bleed it, that you
couldn't work your way around it, that there aren't means
of getting off the charge anyhow, and all that sort of
thing. But when you see a TA ceasing to operate, and
ceasing to act, then you have entered an area of too much
charge - particularly on an extremely high or an extremely
low TA. Do you follow that, now? Too much charge.

It's not because there's nothing there to run; it's because
there's too cockeyed much there. See that? And if you don't
get tone arm action, then the charge that holds the
significances and ideas, postulates, cognitions, and that
sort of thing, in place - just the corny, electrical charge,
you understand, no other significance connected with
it - this thing packed up and held in facsimiles, masses, all
of this sort of thing, won't, then, let the case advance.
And you get no case advance in the absence of tone arm
action. That is - that's it! I mean, there aren't any ands,
ifs, are's or buts about it. No tone arm action: no case
advance!

I don't care if you erased a somatic, I don't care if the
pc has ceased to have lumbosis, I don't care about any of
these things - because you're not auditing a body. As far as
this pc is concerned - no tone arm action: no case advance.

Now, can you worsen no tone arm action? Yes. You can bring
about no needle action on top of no tone arm action.
Hu-hu-hu-hu. And if you insist on running a pc without tone
arm action, you soon will begin to see it expressed over
here in the needle, which will get tighter and tighter and
tighter. And after a while everything locks up. And then if
you use real desperate measures, why, you can just freeze
the pc into something that'll feel to him like solid rock.

The longer you run a case without tone arm action, the more
you will freeze the case into no tone arm action. And the
more the case is frozen into no tone arm action, the less
chance you have of getting charge off by any means. You see
this? I mean, you're walking away from the point of
resolution. The further you go with no tone arm action, the
less likely you are to fortuitously produce some. So it's
not just "Well, he's running without tone arm action," and
brush it off, you see? It's "Oh, my God! He's running
without tone arm action! Whew. Huh.

Hey, hey, hey! Bo-bo-bo-bo! No tone arm action! Hey, hey,
hey, hey! No tone arm action.

Get some tone arm action. Ha-ha. You know? It gets that
type of emotional response, you know? Not "Well, he's
running without tone arm action, so he isn't getting any
better," and so on, see?

Guy being run without tone arm action is somebody you're
watching go down the big toboggan. And the longer this goes
on, the harder it's going to get to get tone arm action.

Now, the most likely way to get tone arm action on any
condition, any case or any anything, is getting in the itsa
line. This has processes connected with it. These processes
are designated Routine 1C (C for communication). Routine
1C: this is the soft-touch process. This is the process
that will be given to Scientology I auditors, and after
you've studied it and used it a year or two, you'll find
out that there's a lot more to know about it.

It is at once the clumsiest use - it's the workhorse, you
see? You say, "Well, you've got two processes to make an
OT. You've got 3N, you got R3R." No, you've always got
three processes. See, if you've got two like that, then
you've always got one more, and that'll always be the itsa
line, or 1C, see? This is the workhorse. This is the workhorse.

And, yeah, somebody in a co-audit; yes, sure, somebody in
a - doing a book-auditing job; yeah, somebody, some student
in the academy; yeah, these people, oh, yes, these guys
will be able to make progress with this thing. But before
he's gone very long in the academy and before he's done
very much auditing, he'll all of a sudden begin to
believe - he'll do one of two things: either, "Well, I just
get tired of just sitting there listening to him talk and
talk and talk and talk, you know? I just get tired of this.
So this itsa line isn't so good." See? He didn't even know
what it was in the first place, see? Or he will all of a
sudden begin to realize that there is a certain deftness
required here or one will just continue to sit and listen
and listen, and the pc goes on and talks and talks.

Well, look, they talked for five years in psychoanalysis
without getting anyplace. See we don't know that they had
tone arm action, but we sure know they didn't get anyplace.
They did.

They did - pardon me, pardon me. That - I'm maligning the
boys. I'm maligning them. They got careful. They did get
someplace.

Well, look-a-here. You learn, then, that an overcharged
case can most easily be bled down by the itsa line, and
you'll restore tone arm action. So the best way to restore
tone arm action to any case that has become overcharged
through being run in the wrong departments is getting in
the itsa line. Now, that's your base process. You can
restore tone arm action, no matter how badly the case has
been jammed up, if you are clever in handling the itsa line.

Now, when I say "itsa line," and when I say "clever," yes,
they're very definitely joined together. Clever. It is not
a process; it's a cleverness. And the biggest trouble you
have anything with is (as we'll come back to this) line 1
minor. Why put the attention on the auditor when all you've
got to do is shift it slightly in the pc?

This guy is saying, "Well, and so forth, and we had this
big ... big hassle at this party and I ... this ... my wife 
bawled me out, and everybody bawled me out and so forth. And 
I've got this terrible present time problem. I got this awful
hangover and I'm having an awful time in this session," and
so on and so on and so on. Yeah, under a long series of
runs you could probably take apart this present time
problem, but you were running on the pc the goal "to be
sexual." The pc is having trouble with being sexual, that's
for sure.

Well, that's where the cleverness is, is was there anything
that happened - you know, is what the pc's talking about got
anything to do with what you were doing, see? So, of
course, the adroit question practically walks up and hits
you in the head. The adroit question is ... Pc takes a
long breath and momentarily he isn't going on any further.
Just momentarily, see? He actually hasn't run his
communication line out terribly, but he's just been
floundering, you're getting minimum tone arm action. And
you say, "Did our last session have anything to do with this?"

"Oh. Let's see, what the hell were we doing in the last session?"

"Well, I don't know. Just review what we were doing."

"Well, let's see, uh ... so and so on, so on, then we had
an ARC break and we were doing something or other and uh ... 
so on. We were running out some kind of items; there's
this backtrack and there's this stairs or something there.
Let me see, now. I ... I'll ... I'm getting' it now,"
and so forth. "Oh, yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, we were running
.. uh - you see, I ... I really can't get anywhere near
this, I'm so worried about my present time problem - but uh 
.. we were uh ... we were uhn ... uhn ... running
some goal, some goal, some goal, uhn ... some goal,
something along this line and so on. Oh, yes, "to be sexual.
Say, what do you know! (sigh) Yeah, I sure do have a lot of
trouble with ... with this thing 'to be sexual.' I ha ... 
Yeah, I sure do. Uh ... yeah, I ... I have a lot of trouble 
with that."

"Well," you say, "well, what items did we have there, right
toward the last?" "Well, I think we arrived at this point
on the line plot, and uh ... I think it was ... I think
it was ... uh, ‘absolutely' uh ... No, it was 'nix' ... 
uh, yeah. Well, all right. There we are." And you're
starting to see your tone arm move and your needle start to
twitch.

And he never knew what happened. Magic, man, magic! It's
gently taking line 1 minor, without actually putting it on
the auditor, and putting it back to the subject of the
auditing. And, you see, there's no process that you could
announce that will do this, because the auditing is
tremendously variable and the pc's worries and concerns are
fantastically agglomerate.

Now, sometimes, the pc has legitimately had a present time
problem and something catastrophic has occurred between
sessions, something like this is just using this factor for
just a present time problem - and it's something way off. And
the only thing you can do is to keep flicking that
attention line. Flick - it's really not a whatsit line; your
whatsit's already in, you see? And you just keep moving it
around till the pc will ventilate the PTP that he's
worrying about.

Now, the crudest - but still acceptable - example of this is
simply "Tell me about it." See, that's crude. See, that's
something like we're going to build house so we pile up
some bricks.

That's crude. That's about as adroit as the cow doing the
twist, see? But nevertheless, it's functional. You do get
some motion. I couldn't forbear to milk that gag.

Now, so there's the pc, see? And the pc can't get his mind
on what you' doing because something else has happened. And
this something else is re worried, and maybe it's worried
down to the level of grief charge, or something like this,
see? Well, all you can do is move this little attention
line around onto things that'll give him itsas. And you can
cut it down from - well, actual failing to relieve the
situation, that's how bad it can be, see? You just didn't
really relieve his problem, or you relieved it somewhat, or
you - next gram is you spent the session making him feel
better about that present tin problem. See, we're well into
the acceptable band, if we've got to be. Or, we handled it
in the first two hours of the session, or we handled it in
the first hour of the session, or we handled it in the first
fifteen minutes of the session. And that difference of time
has very little to do with the seriousness of the problem
it has everything to do with the cleverness of the
auditor - without putting the attention line on himself,
without cutting the itsa line - adroitly shifting the little
attention line there to this and that.

"Well," the person says, "but uh ... this ... But I
don't see ... I don't see why we had to fight half the
night after we got home. I told her I just was attracted by
blondes, and so forth, and she just wouldn't listen," and
so forth.

And the auditor says, "What have you found out about
arguments like that with your wife?" "Well, itsa, itsa,
itsa, itsa, itsa, itsa, itsa."

"Well, that's fine. All right. Now, how do you feel about
this problem now?" "Well, the problem is all right."

Well, he's still a little bit fluttery, so, "Well, let's
review now what we were doing on something or other." Got
the idea?

"Well, we were doing so-and-so and, well, you know what we
were doing well as I do." "Well, all right, yeah, probably.
But I may not have full records here this. There might have
been something that came up during the session, something
like this, or between sessions you might have thought of
something else."

"Oh, yes! I did, as a matter of fact." You're away, see?
Got the idea?

Actually, it's just about as skilled as building a watch,
but because there's no apparent skill there, don't you see,
it gets slightly into disrepute. People watch a session in
which this is occurring, and they really never even hear
auditor say anything, see? And the pc never really hears
the auditor; anything, because the attention line isn't
"All right, now. All right. Okay. A ... All right. Yeah, 
yeah. Yeah, I... er got all that you're talking about. Now, 
right. Now we're going to give you ... going to give you 
the next ... next ... next auditing command—the next ... 
the next ... the ... the next auditing command. You got that 
now? Got that now. All right. Here are, now. All right. Do 
birds suffocate? Okay? Got that now? Do birds suffocate?" 
Now, you've restimulated some charge. I won't say what 
charge you've restimulated.

See, now that can grade on down from just too much, you
see. That can grade on down to "Do suffocating birds have
anything to do with this?" "Were there any birds
suffocating in that?" See? To "Well, do you think your
processing has bettered this situation?" Now we're really
getting feather-light, aren't we? Pc hardly heard you say
it and neither would anybody else, you see?

"Well, let's see. Let's go over what we've covered so far
in auditing. Well now, you had a couple of cognitions in
the last session there that had something to do with this.
Have you had any other cognition with regard to goals, and
so forth - these implanted goals?" This is getting awful
adroit, see? You've actually got something he's already
been talking about, and you put it in by the duplication
factor. You duplicate what he has been talking about and
you just pull his itsa line a little bit further and put it
on something, see?

I'll give you an idea of doing this. He says, "Well,
auditing, auditing. I get these awful headaches in auditing
and that sort of thing."

"Well, have you particularly gotten them while we've been
running goals?" Few sessions later - he's forgotten all about
these headaches, and so forth - we're having a hard time
getting his itsa line in: "How about these headaches? Are
they troubling you as much now? When we run these goals and
that sort of thing, how are these headaches?" Sounds merely
solicitous. It isn't, it's a itsa line, see? See, you've
taken a dead-ended communication line someplace back down
the line and you've repeated its subject, so therefore you
have made a duplication, so you've created a communication
line. It's all very technical. And the person's attention
goes back onto this and he has to make a comparison. He has
to say his headaches are better or worse or there's no change, 
and while he's doing this he has to put his attention on GPMs, 
or whatever you're trying to run on it.

And you say, "Well, with this last one that we were running
in the last session - the last one, 'to be nutty,' 'to be crazy 
in the head'," so forth, something like that, "how were the 
somatics in the head getting along there? Were they turning on and
off, and so forth, while we've been running that?"

"Oh, well, you shouldn't really remark on this, because I
had them pretty well off." "Well, what item did they go off
on?"

"Well, they went off on uh ... Well, I really don't know.
Someplace in the first part of it. Um ... urn ... urn ... I 
had an item in there ... is ... uh, 'idiotably ...' I think 
it was 'idiotably nutty.' Yeah. Yeah, that was the one. Hey, 
I got that headache again, you know?"

You say, "Well, give me 'nix idiotably nutty'." You're
away, see? See? He doesn't know what hit him, see?

It's moving that attention line adroitly, adroitly, see?
Adroit. With the little pinky - the little finger, you
know - raised just right on the teacup, see?

Now, you'll see an auditor who really hasn't got much
feeling for it, and no tools and so forth, why, he's got
this teacup with both paws wrapped around it, you see? And
you'll see somebody else has poured the tea into the saucer
with both paws wrapped around the saucer and inhaling at a
very large number of decibels. See? So, that you'll see
this in all of its shades of gray, you see, down to
outright black.

But before you understand anything much about the itsa
line, you have to understand that there is such a thing as
an attention line - line 1 minor—and unless you can handle
that attention line slightly, adroitly, greatly, smoothly 
.. You'll curse yourself sometimes. Even the best of an
auditor will say, "Well, let's get to running this GPM
now," or something ... Cut your throat, you see? You
spend the next fifteen minutes getting out of this hole.
See, it was just too much in the wrong place, see, and it
just smashed everything up and the pc is busy explaining to
you that he is eight thousand light-years from that GPM and
his attention wasn't on it, you know? You find yourself
making these mistakes. Don't knock yourself in the head and
say "Well, I'm terrible at this" and run a big make-guilty
on self because you don't handle this well always.

Just, those times you have been clever, pat yourself on the
back. That's the one to pay attention to. I'm not kidding
you because ... Well, I gave a session last night and I
dropped - three times. Once I dropped a handful of - anvils on
the floor - shook up the session most interestingly - and
another time I put off a whole chain of firecrackers in the
midst of the auditing table, and another time practically
ran the mains volts through the cans, see? But that was
three, see? That was three. But there was two hours' worth,
and probably something on the order of 150 that were
handled, you know, with such aplomb, man, that nobody ever
found out anything about it, and it got the pc out of the
woods gorgeously. So quantitatively, see? - Course what you
put your attention [on] are those things that had to be
patched up, see? "Oh, oh. Well, your attention wasn't on
it. Well, I'm very sorry, and so on. Have I cut your
communication?" You know, "Sorry," and so forth. "Well what
would you have said if I hadn't have interrupted that?"
See? Got a recovery, see, level, and so forth.
Nevertheless, if you really were self-critical to a vast
degree, you would have been practically kicking your brains
out for having pulled any one of these three.

Pc is going on and saying, "Well, I think I have blown that
last GPM think I have blown that."

"Well, all right. All right. Good. Let's check some of its
items." Oh-oh, cut your throat, man, see? Just put the pc's
attention on the wrong thing, wrong place, it's all going
crash, the pc's needle goes dirty. Get the idea?

You see, you're split between wanting the pc to think well
of you, and getting your job done.

And these two things are very often at - they're diapola
[dipolar] phenomena. You try and get your job done
sometimes uphill against something and in the final
analysis it just merely depends on, did you get the job
done, see? That's what it really depends on in the final
analysis. But in process of getting your job done, you
happen to have ARC broke the pc and cut the pc's communication
line several times. Well, the difference between a good and
a bad auditor is not whether the auditor always audits
smoothly with never cutting an itsa line, but whether or not he
attains his eventual objective without creating so many ARC
breaks that the pc's case has not improved. That's the test!

If you go around training people on the basis of "You must
never cut an itsa line; you must never create an ARC break;
you must never upset pc" - all of these things, you see - it's
something like laying in a GPM, know? Oh, in the first
place, it's an impossible attainment. Always train them
with "Be as clever and adroit as you can," and "You can be
a little more adroit than that." He dropped his E-Meter
in the pc's lap halfway through session. Poor handling of
the attention line. Why? Pc's attention went on meter, not
on own case.

All right. Now, how many dozen ways are there to shift the
pc's attention. I don't know - dozens, thousands. Thousands.
I'll give you an idea. You got an alcoholic. You're trying
to process this alcoholic, see? Alcoholic's drunk during
sessions and you know you're not supposed to audit somebody
who's drunk. All the alcoholic'd do is sit there and say,
"Well, Alcoholics Anonymous will say you can't cure anybody
of alcoholism." That's all he's going to say, see - knows you
can't help him. He's saying, well, it's impossible, see?
And you say "Well, the case is unauditable."

Yes, the case is unauditable to everybody except those who
are surpassingly skilled with the attention line and the
itsa line, see? The whatsit line is practically missing.

"Now, what have you learned about Alcoholics Anonymous?"

"Oh, well, that's something else, uh ... Well, I met this
fella down the street, this fella, and so forth, and he
gave me this book, see? And I read this book and I threw it
in a garbage pail. Couldn't teach me anything. But I learned 
better after a while."

"When was that?"

"Oh, in about a few days later I learned better, see? I had
this awful hangover, and I just got fired and I was being
sued for divorce, and I found out they were your friends.
That's what I found out then." You're going to see that
tone arm starting to move, man.

He has just told you that you can't possibly audit him. He
has just told you that you can't possibly help him. So you
just - Hhh-hhh - polish up the fingernails, audit him, help
him, and somewhere up the line he finds out about it as a
major cognition.

But all the way up the line he's improving. Because if you
can get tone arm motion and get the guy with the session,
see, by flicking that little old attention line right where
it lives - parallel what the mind is doing, and it will do
everything you want it to. Nothing new - that's the beginning
lines, I think, of one of the first-book things. But
nevertheless, this gives you the anatomy of how that's
done. You just find out about what this guy's mind is on,
see? And if you can produce tone arm action by having him
locate things about it, then he will recover from any
obsessive or compulsive tendencies about it or toward it.
It's the tone arm motion that takes off the compulsion, not
the significance of what he digs up. Given enough tone arm
motion on any given subject, and that subject will right
itself in the head of the pc. And, man, I'm talking from
hard-won experience. I'd say, if we've learned anything in
the last thirteen years, man, we've learned that. It isn't 
the significance alone. It's the tone arm motion that can be 
obtained in relation to the significance that brings about 
the recovery.

Now, that's, the fastest recovery is, of course, the tone
arm motion plus the right significance to be run. Now,
that's your fastest recovery. But your recovery takes place
somewhat and eventually if you just produce tone arm
motion. That's all you have to do, is produce tone arm
motion on the case, regardless of what's run, and
eventually - at some vast distance - why, this pc is going to
recover from these various targets and so forth in the
case. He's going to recover from them. That's for sure. But
if you audit the right significance and get no tone arm
action, the pc will never recover. See, - those are terribly
important data.

Well now, the most overcharged areas of the case are the
case's - parts of the case that give the high TA. The high TA
and the overcharged area compare. The least-charged
aberrative area gives tone arm action.

You very often will find some alcoholic that gets no tone
arm action on the subject of alcoholism, but he's got
corns. You can get tone arm action on the subject of corns,
you see? In other words, he can't face that highly a
charged approach. So that sometimes the absolute direct
approach to a compulsion or obsession of some kind or
another will get you nowhere at all, because it's such a
highly charged area that it's over the pc's head, and you
get no tone arm action on that.

Well, the answer to that is don't abandon it; just get tone
arm action! See? That's the thing to do. Just get tone arm
action! Very remarkable. Because the mind is stacked up the
way it is, if you continue to get tone arm action, he'll
all of a sudden walk up on that thing, do you see? Now,
undirectedly - that's just not directing him toward any
specific target or goal or aberration or anything else, or
any reason he's not able or anything at all, anything - you
get tone arm action and he'll eventually collide with
something. And he will know processing is helping him!

You'll be utterly flabbergasted sometime. You have this
surprise in store for you, if you haven't collided [with]
it already. Knowing the idea about tone arm action, you sit
there and this pc babbles on and on and on, and it doesn't
have anything to do with anything you can see, but my God,
that tone arm is moving. You're getting up and down motions
on that thing - not a quarter division every twenty minutes,
man. You're getting - it's got to be a bit healthier than
that for a pc to know something about it - but it's certainly
getting a whole tone arm division every ten minutes, and
that's pretty fair tone arm motion, see? And that's
acceptable. I wouldn't buy much less than that myself - tone
arm division every ten minutes.

And that would say only down but you realize that it also
has to rise in order to go back down again. So if you added
the plus and minus, that'd be two tone arm divisions, you
see - one up and one down—in ten minutes. Well, that's just
barely, marginally acceptable see, to produce this phenomena.

You get that?

All right. Pc talking about his grandmother's jam making.
Well, cripes you know? This is about as aberrative, don't
you see, as petting the pup. But my heavens, you're getting
tone arm motion on it, man. Well, you can't do anything
else much. You've tried something else and gotten a stuck
tone arm so let's let him go on, see? And just completely
neglect your attention line. I you were very skilled, you
would be unable to totally neglect it. You would punch it
around a little bit and increase your tone arm motion, see?

Pc leaves the session feeling fine - feeling fine, wonderful.
Pc always makes gains if they have tone arm motion, see? If
they have real tone arm motion, they always make gains. If
they don't have tone arm motion, they don't make gains.

Now, I can tell you at the three-quarter point of a session
whether or no the pc will have anything to say decent in
the goals and gains. It's just how much tone arm motion has
there been during that session. That's all; it's; direct
monitoring factor, see? So this becomes burningly necessary
to produce tone arm motion. At any cost, produce tone arm
motion. And now you come into your own about the itsa line,
because tone arm motion only occurs when the itsa line is
in, and tone arm motion does not occur with the itsa line out.

Now, a lot of you think the itsa line is a communication
line. It's not. That's a surprise, isn't it? Just because
it's labeled C-distance-E and because it is a communication
line, why don't we just call it the preclear's line to
auditor? That would make it a communication line. But we
don't. We call it the itsa line. Why the itsa? Why? Why?

Well, one of the ways to get this across is to give the
student a drill. Just imagine a thetan in various
circumstances, you know, like a guy in jail. Alright, now
how is his itsa line cut? See, it isn't just on the graph.
That isn't the only way you can show how the itsa line is
cut in an auditing session. Let's just take it out in life.
And we say, "All right, this guy is in jail. Give me a
number of ways this fellow's itsa line is cut." And you may
get some awful comm lags on the part of the student, but
he'll eventually dig it up, see? How's his itsa line cut?
Well, let me give you some notions, then, for definition of
the itsa line. Well, he can't go anyplace else to see if
"itsa." He can't go anyplace else to itsa. He's right there
in jail, isn't he? Let's say he was up in London in jail.
All right. Well, he couldn't go down and itsa the coast,
could he? He couldn't say "Itsa water, and itsa beach, and
itsa resort, and itsa Brighton," could he? He can't get
there. How the hell can he itsa it?

Well, he can itsa it on a via, if somebody'd give him a map
or a book or a novel that's about the coast, or something
like that. That's itsa on a via - substitute. Itsa by
substitutes. So it's a kind of an itsa. Well, itsa by
facsimiles is an itsa by substitutes, too. So this is not
ineffective. But his itsa line - direct itsa line - is sure cut.

Now, there are other ways his itsa line can be cut by
reason of being in jail. I won't go into those particularly.

We have a fellow sitting at a table. We put a blindfold on
him. How is his itsa line cut? Do you see how his itsa line
is cut? He can't itsa! That's what an itsa line is.

What's a nightmare? What's a nightmare? A nightmare is the
inability to itsa, followed by mocking up something that
can be itsa'd that's wrong.

A thetan likes to be oriented. He orients himself. How does
he orient himself? Itsa. "Itsa ceiling, itsa floor, itsa
wall. Itsa. Therefore, I'm a ..."

You hide somebody. You hide somebody. The itsa line is cut
on himself. Nobody else can say itsa. Nobody can say itsa.
Do you see that?

Disassociate somebody from his identity. How's his itsa
line cut? He can't say "Itsa me. Itsa me, Joe Jones," see?
Can't be done. He hasn't got an identity now.

Well, we get into a whole tangled web of aberration and we
find out that that's the basic aberration: inability to
orient or declare or identify or recognize. Not just solve,
you understand. It isn't cure versus cure versus cure.
That's also itsas, but that's only part of the picture. How
do you know you're here? Well, that's easy. That's easy.
You say, "Itsa chapel, itsa chair, itsa notebook." Where
you are, "Itsa body." Up here, "Itsa Ron," see? You know
where you are. Your itsa line is in. You're oriented, so
you feel happy about the whole thing, see? Fine. You know
where you are.

It isn't necessarily how dangerous the environment is. You
could be out in the jungle, and you'd be surprised how
happy some hunter looked when he says "Itsa lion!" Hasn't
really anything to do with safety, security, and - none of
these. These are just extra considerations, see? So you
just shred all these extra considerations off and itsa.
See? "Itsa jungle, itsa me, itsa gun, itsa lion, itsa
bearer up a tree. Well, at least I know I was killed by a
lion. My itsa line is in on the subject of that death."

Well, look, if this is so important to power, and it is;
and if this is so important to sanity, and it is; and if
this is so important to memory, and it is; and if this is
so important to ability, and it is - then we would expect the
major tricks on the track to comprise of cutting itsa lines
one way or the other.

So, you're standing up there loud and clear on the parapet,
gripping dramatically the flag of the lilies of France,
being shot at in shot and shell, and all of a sudden
there's a snick, and you is disconnected. Well, you at
least know how you died. You got some idea that it was a
flying object, unfriendly directed. And by God, in the next
half an hour or something like that, they're telling you
you died some other way. It's correct? Spoils your itsa line.

And then in the ensuing actions that take place on it, why,
they give you a completely false position as far as you're
concerned and a false situation and a false here and a
false there and they throw your itsa out on time and they
give you a little GPM to carry home with you very happily,
give you some nice somatics to go along with it. You're an
idiot to ever go back, you know?

I mean, you move right around the corner of the thing, and
itsa where? If it's 70.6 trillion-seven years ago, which is
right now, that itsa is certainly for the birds, isn't it?
You understand, they've misdated a somatic on you, because
they say, "Now we're going to give you your future," and
somehow or another restimulate your facsimiles of the past
and say they're in the future and ... What's happening
here? Well, enough happened so that everybody on the planet
believed they lived only once. And that's how serious the
cutting of itsa line can be. You combine this with plenty
of force and you got it made man! I can see it now, the
development of a new psychiatry. A new medical psychiatry
can be developed out of this. You can get people so mixed
up that they'd report back to the medical doctor every
time. They do. Insane patients are always reporting back
for their shocks, and so forth, see? Well-known fact. The
report-back mechanism is just used and used and used and
used and used by these nuts.

By the way, I thought of a difference between a
Scientologist and the world at large on this particular
planet. The people think that what we doing is unreal, but
we know the substance of their unreality, which of course
makes us top dog every time. We know the substance of their
unreality.

In other words, we know where their itsa line is out. See,
they know what - they're not identifying. Their itsas are
just for the birds, you know "Man is an animal. He is a
biochemical protoplasm which goes no place. At death there
is a cessation of cellular commotion." That's a good itsa,
isn't it. That just immediately makes nothing out of everybody.

Ah, so there's a formula. There's a formula involved here.
And that your itsa line can be out on ARC, and KUCDEI Zero
and F. How many ways can an itsa line be? Well, it's that
whole scale I gave you for R2H. Known, Unknown, Curious,
Desired, Enforced, Inhibited, none of it [Zero] and False - 
absent and false. This is how many itsa aberrations there 
can be, see? Well, false, that's the easiest one of all. You 
hold up somebody—you "Here, have a piece of candy, sonny." Give
him a piece of chalk, see? He bit it. His itsa line is out,
man. Got the idea?

You say, "There is nothing here, boys. There is nothing
haunting our planet; there is nobody after you; nothing
happens. I mean, you're just natural and there's nobody
after you, see?" That itsa line is for birds, see? "You're
paranoid! You think people are pursuing you!" Of course
nobody is pursuing us - they don't have to. They got us, man!

So they say something isn't, which is. Well, of course you
can get reverse of that. They say something is which isn't,
such as the Darwin theory, which is just an old implant.

Inhibited. Inhibited: Give a guy a pair of distorting
glasses or make him look at things in a twisted mirror, like a
fun-house mirror. His itsa line is inhibited. Tell him he
must not examine such-and-so and so-and-so because it is
very dangerous, and of course his itsa line is inhibited at
once.

And of course, enforced itsa: "You better damn well know
about that or you will be shot tomorrow morning without
cigarette or blindfold." Enforced itsa.

Desired itsa - see, that's a "want to know" sort of itsa:
Somebody is happy to know that you're all right. You see?
That's a desirable itsa.

And the itsa of curiosity is not just being curious about
what is; it's an itsa which is curiosity.

It's a curiosity itsa, don't you see?

Now, you go up higher than that and you get an unknown
itsa. Hey, you know, there is an unknown itsa. I just gave
you an example of one. You had complete reality on the
unreality of people on this planet. See, the itsa is their
unknownness, see? You recognize they don't know! Well, that
is an itsa. it's pretty high-scale stuff for a thetan to be
able to recognize that it is an unknown. This thing really
boxes him around, because, of course, it mix with the
actual desire to make something known which can be known.
And amongst that, you get the accumulations of
unknownnesses that are just unknown and will always be unknown,
will never be anything else, because they're tailored to be
unknown. And if you don't think that can't be, look at the
word unknown. See, there's a perfect example. Yes, there is
such a thing as an unknown. There's a word, there's the
concept that you back it up, u-n-k-n-o-w-n, unknown, and
that is a something which is unknown, isn't it? I mean,
this is getting idiotic.

There's many a religion, man, which is built 100 percent on
a beautiful building which houses a nonexistence. And they
have created an unknown. That's what they have created!
See, it is something that can be created. And a thetan's
tolerance, as it rises, eventually gets up to a point where
he can actually confront an unknown without doing a thing
about it. He can recognize that it is unknown; it's a
manufactured unknown.

Like x, in algebra. There's another example. Somebody
writes x. All right, he can confront the fact that x is
unknown. Of course, if he's nowhere near an algebra teacher
he probably won't even be forced to find out a known for
that unknown, either. He probably won't even do the
equation. x + y - z = 0. Of course, you don't even know
what the equation applies to and neither does anybody else.
A mathematician is somebody who's gone overboard on the
subject of unknownnesses and he has to solve all of these
unknownnesses.

Now, if you don't think that isn't prevalent - if you don't
think that isn't prevalent - there is one of the things that
holds up auditors in auditing, is they get so upset about
the pc being in an unknown while he's trying to itsa that
they eventually grab hold of the meter and they say, "Oh,
well, let's see. Is it twenty years ago? thirty years ago?
It's thirty years ago. Yeah, well, we know about that now."
[Ron mimics heavy breathing] [audience laughter]

They say they're just helping the pc. It's just they can't
confront that "Well, and so, and so, za-za-za, za-za,
[etc.]. I don't know. I just don't know. It couldn't have
been so." And they think, "Oh, my God, if this goes on a
minute longer," you know? And they get the itsa line in for
themselves.

And then, of course, an itsa line can be too known. Every
once in a while some murder-mystery characters... The thing
is out because it is known. Every once in a while, some
murder-mystery writer has the postman do it, because nobody
ever sees a postman. See? It's too known. I bet there's
crime after crime on the books down here that remains
unsolvable because it was committed in too known a fashion.
See? It's a known itsa. Itsa of knownnesses.

Every once in a while you're doing an ARC break on some pc
on R2H and can't quite find out what it is, and you
eventually will hit "known communication," you know? Known.
Well, of course he knows it. He thought it was something
else. Why? Because he knew it. So you get how slippy that
can be, see? That's this "everybody knows" that is talked
about in Dianetics: Evolution of a Science, you see?
Everybody knows these things - that's known itsas - so you
never examine them. That's another way of having a known itsa.

But the pc's attention with his itsas rises up and down
this whole new version of the CDEI Scale, see? - goes up and
down, each one in those various stages. And he picks out
this and he picks out that and he picks out something else,
and all he's doing is saying "It is a ..." He is
identifying, in other words. He's identifying something.
And when he cannot identify something, then he identifies
by classification - identification by classification. "This
is a type of ..."

Psychiatry does this all the time. They say, "This is
dementia praecox case ..." They've gotten so idiotic with
it now that if somebody goes to that Chestnut Lodge, where
Graham - that publisher of News week and the Post that was so
against Scientology - where he went, and went home on
vacation and killed himself. He went home for a day; he was
supposed to come back. Up there at Chestnut Lodge ...
I've told you about it before. That's actually the name of
the joint; it's up around ...

And it's very remarkable. But it's very remarkable up
there. But if a person is transferred to Chestnut Lodge,
regardless of their symptoms before, they now have
schizophrenia. And I have asked this several times, trying
to get the answer. And I finally did get the answer and
understood it was the answer and after that it didn't
plague me. But it's a very interesting example of
interesting variation of itsa, see? And that is, they are a
schizophrenic because they were transferred to Chestnut
Lodge - because that's all there are at Chestnut Lodge! Well
now, that's by classification plus idiocy, see?

When you say "It is a cupboard," you have a pleasant
sensation of familiarity and knowingness.

You seldom stop to think that you have classified something.
You know something because you know of a similar something,
so you get your gradients. Your gradients of classification
establish familiarity in that particular direction.

Every once in a while this familiarity gets betrayed or
something like that and you get an ARC break with it. You
say, "It is a cupboard," and you open it up and find out
that it's a mouse home, or something, see? Somebody's using
it to breed white mice for something, or something. Or "It
is an automobile," you get into it and find out it's a
stage prop. A little minor ARC break then false itsa, don't
you see?

That's quite common in GPMs. Pc goes halfway through the
GPM and of a sudden does the right itsa. "Ha-ha, ha! These
are just railroad carriages with a painted backdrop of a
train going off in the distance. They're not trains." See?
Identified the character of the itsa.

This is all, then, on the subject of identification; it's
all on the subject of familiarity; it's all on the subject
of finding out; it's all on the subject making oneself
comfortable with what he is looking at; it's all on the
subject of straightening out one's various grades of ARC
with the universe. Now, what gives a thetan such a passion
for this, this is something else and not the subject of
this lecture, nor, actually, the subject of cases at the
present moment. But it opens up a very interesting channel
of research. What's this passion to itsa? See, that's an
interesting question.

But, that you do get tone arm action when you itsa and the
case does improve, this is well established. And this is
germane to all cases. So getting the itsa line in has
nothing to do with getting the pc's communication in. It's
"nothing to do," that's another action. That's more apt to
be the attention line - to you - or something of this sort.
Don't you see? That's getting communication in. That's not
the itsa line. No, getting the itsa line is getting the pc
to identify, separate, compartment, differentiate, inspect,
decide about, things in his bank - or, in an objective
process, in the room.

You want to see a tone arm fall, you could probably produce
it normally by saying "What's that? What's that? What's
that? What's that?" and have the pc itsa.

You say, "What's that?" pointing at the fireplace.

Pc says, "It's a fireplace."

Actually, you run it for a very little while ... This is
not a broad, general thing, because there are other factors
involved here. Pc is so introverted that it's painful for
him to extrovert his attention, and he can only extrovert
attention on a broad via. And other special conditions
arise here that does make this a pat process, you
understand? It's a pat process, though, as far as his bank
is concerned, always - not necessarily objectively. But I'm
giving the objective version here, which is a limited
version of it.

And you say, "What's that? What's that? What's that? What's that?"

Every time the pc says "ltsa." Normally, if a pc is not
having too bad a time and he isn't fouled up and you
haven't got him stuck on the track someplace and interested
in something else, you'll see your tone arm fall.

You can also see a pc getting very interested. All of a
sudden, he - "What is it? Yeah, it's a fireplace, but uh ... 
but ..." And he'll want to go over and take a closer
look at the thing to make sure it's a fireplace built out
of a certain kind of brick, see? His itsa's getting sharper.

You will see his identification rise.

Now, this is so good that a Touch Assist works.
Familiarization processes permit people to get drivers'
licenses who couldn't, by just touching cars - you know,
"Itsa, itsa, itsa car" is all he's running, you know? He
thought it was a buffalo for a while or something. Well,
listen, if he couldn't drive the thing, he must have
thought something weird - that I assure you.

So itsa, itsa, itsa, itsa - that's familiarization.

You want to teach some girl to type. Well, just have her
familiarize herself with the tools of the trade. Very
funny. She can get up to an itsa, itsa, itsa to a point,
and her ability will rise, rise, rise along with it, which
is very peculiar. But then this has something to do with
charge. The change of case has to do with the release of
charge because of the itsa. There's two things happen: The
individual who is really itsaing things is also blowing off
encysted charge caused by former confusions about them. And
that charge is encysted, and that is a force aspect and a
mass aspect with regard to this.

Here's the phenomenon, see? Here's this encysted little
thing here, see? And you said, "What's in there?" see?

And he says, "Oh, tsfoo-uh-zoo, and zoo-oo, zoo-oo,
zoo-oo." Tone arm is moving, see? Picking up those fingers
one by one off the clasped hands, you see? And "Well,
that's off.

Well, that's off also. I don't know. Let's see, see what 
.. what it is, what it is ... Oh! Palms!"

You didn't think anything was in there, did you?

That's just charge. And you see that tone arm start moving;
well, that's charge coming off of one of these bundles, and
the guy is looking and it's just a method of as-ising.

Now, while he's doing this, what drives some auditors
around the bend is he puts in a lot of additional itsas.
Why, that's of no great harm, see?

He says, "Itsa house. No, itsa car. No, itsa ..." See?
"Itsa fingernail - no, oh, no. No, no.

Oh, I know what this is! I ... I know what this is. I
know what this is. A watermelon!" And then (as an auditor
said to me last night) we get all set and we've both got a
watermelon and then all of a sudden he says, "No, it isn't
a watermelon, it's a diamond ring." And the auditor starts
feeling kind of confused, because, you see, his itsa line
is being thrown around by the pc. But only, only if the
auditor doesn't completely understand what he is doing.

He's trying to find something and then be content with it.
Well, that isn't auditing, man. An auditor's superior
knowledge should be that if the guy says it's a watermelon,
he for sure is going to call it a diamond ring shortly. And
if it really is a diamond ring, he'll never mention it
thereafter, because it's itsa'd.

But until it is itsa'd, he's going to call it all sorts of
things. It's going to be at a billion years, and it's going
to be 5 years into the future, and it's going to be back
trillions-five years, and it's going to be 465 years ago,
and it's going to be yesterday, and it's going to be now,
and it's going to be fifteen minutes ago, and it's going to
be trillions-ten ago, and it's going to be 18 trillion
years ago, and then all of a sudden it settles down to 125
billion trillion years ago.

Period. Bang - that's it.

You don't hear about it anymore than that, because he got
it, see? It's itsa'd.

So, a lot of apparent itsas come off in the process of
obtaining an itsa. And you almost could say that all the
running of a case, from the first moment of processing on
through to the final cognition of the case, consists of
conditional itsas. Conditional itsas. That's the way it is
for that circumstance and that certain place, you see? An
auditor should never have any thought that he's going to
get nothing but permanent itsas. Naturally, you go through
a GPM, you take off the items according to a plot - well,
that's the itsa of it!

Reason I don't have any trouble running a GPM is I have no
doubt about the itsa of a GPM, see? Thats it. It just is
what it is. There was nothing there to understand. It was
put there to louse you up and immobilize you and cut down
your power and ability, you see, and it's a bunch of
electronic circuits which go into a couple of boxes, and
they have a couple of things that fire both sides of the
thing, and they start you in the top, turn you upside down
at the bottom, and that's all there is to it. And you go
through and you see "Pow, pow, pow, pow, pow, pow, pow,
pow," and that's the end of the GPM. It's false itsa, see?
Actually, in most cases, not even much of a protest. You
know he's not saying "It should be some other way." Once in
a while a spotted intention with a false idea of the intention
will hang it up for a moment.

But that's itsa, see?

You don't have the immediate and direct itsa of "How come I
got into a situation where I started getting these things
in the first place?" you see? Well that's one of these big
itsas, see? This finally starts dawning on the pc. "What
the hell was I doing delivering myself up to a comedy like
this," you see, "every few trillion years?" you know?
"What's the matter with me? What'd I do? What happened to
me? Well, what's wrong with me 'ead? How come?" And you'll
find most pcs will start chewing on this after a while, and
they chew on it and chew on it and chew on it and chew on
it and chew and - they sometimes chew on it for two, three,
four, five, six, seven, eight hundred hours, see? "How
come?" There's no reason to blow your brains about it or
stretch your medulla oblongata all out of shape. It all of
a sudden will rise up in your midst and there it will be:
the itsa of "It is ..." See? "Oh that's why!" you see?

Now, the adroitness with which an auditor can use a little
attention to put the pc's attention into areas that can be
explored, that are easy enough for the pc to see into, that
will produce tone arm action ... is a very skilled
auditor. And that is what is known as getting in the itsa line.

Getting in the line does not consist of sitting back and
letting the pc talk for hours about nothing.

You understand, we do not frown on that if you can't do
anything else. You understand? But there is a much more
adroit level by which you put his attention on things that can
be identified by him, and which will therefor unsnarl the
thing called a problem or the bank or that aberrated area.

And it's the degree that you can obtain tone arm
action—that you can get that that marks the skill of the
auditor. That is the most skilled center zone of auditing.
It's almost so skilled that I hesitate to mention it again
because I've had loses along this line.

Now, if you can do that, there is its anatomy. If you can
do that, it would be known as this fantastic thing called "the
touch," "intuition" these other things would mount up back
of this.

It's quite awesome. So get in the itsa line isn't just
sitting there. It's actually doing something else.

Now, letting the itsa line exist is descriptive of the
lowest level of auditing on this, you see -  just letting the
itsa line exist. We'll get somewhere, see? We get somewhere
if we just do that.

But don't go speaking carelessly of getting itsa line in
unless you're doing just that. You're taking the
pc-to-auditor communication line, and you are putting it
right into zones and areas where he will find itsas. You're
putting the pc's attention in there to where that line be
"itsa a..." and a "itsa a..." and "Rur-rurrumda-ummrnmm. 
Well, a ..." you see and "rrrrr ra-ra-ra-rm, and so on, 
and so on, and so on. Well ... I guess - l guess
it was my complacence in college. That's what got ...
Yes, that's right.. That's what really got me in trouble. I
was complacent about everything. I was - that's it!" Bang!
You will all Of a sudden see your tone arm go right on
down, see? You see the charge come off of the case in the
bucket loads.

This is actually so skilled that it's the production of
cognitions. You can produce cognitions if you want to. You
can be that skilled. This is something that takes some
familiarization with yourself. You should know what the
tools are: The tools is [are] the line 1 minor, and that is
used to produce a searching attention on the part of the
pc; your whatsit line is left there more or less alone, to
produce this kind of phenomena. Why? Because the universe
is full of whatsit lines. The pc is suffering from too much
whatsit and too little itsa. And the net result of this is
of course to jam his itsa line. And you, the auditor, by
letting it flow, pull him out of the soup.

Of course, the direction of significances as powerful as a
GPM, as powerful as a super-duper engram, as powerful as
this sort of thing on the way backtrack, God 'elp us, and
so forth— man, that's putting in the itsa line on a
significance with magnitude. And that thing actually
requires considerable skill. You've got to have line plots
and the idea of cross listing, and the doingness of the
auditor is considerable. The skill is considerable, his
drills are considerable, and so forth. Nevertheless, even
those fail if you don't let the itsa line exist. You got to
leave that itsa line alone and let it roll.

Now, it also consists of not cutting it, and there are
numerous ways the itsa line can be cut in auditing. It's a
good drill to get somebody to come around and show you that
August 4 plot.

Have him find the number of ways you can cut that pc's itsa
line. Then make him pass the drill: How many ways could you
aberrate somebody by cutting the itsa line? And then he has
to find out what the itsa line is. That's an awfully good
drill, and that drives it home with a thud.

All right?

Audience: Mm-hm.

I hope you get a good grip on this one, because it's a
slippy one. And of course it's - trouble with it is, it's 
so known, see? It's an "everybody knows," you know? Itsa
line—obviously it's the pc's communication line. Even
though we went on saying "itsa" and calling it an itsa
line - well, why is it called an itsa line, and so forth?
And you'll see this one drift on through Scientology and 
always, forever, in some part of Scientology, this one will 
be too known. That I know, for sure.

But the very skilled auditor and the very well reputed
auditor and the auditor who gets terrific results will be
the auditor who has this one down cold. He knows an itsa
line backwards and forwards. Pc sits down with a present
time problem - it isn't necessarily a speed factor
involved - but the pc talks to him for a while and
mysteriously this present time problem blows up and the pc
is sitting right exactly in the middle of exactly what the
auditor wanted him to be in, and the pc is running on
exactly what they ought to be running, zippety-bop. And the
pc is happy and the auditor is happy and everything is
going as smooth as glass.

Naturally, there will be some jolts on the line. Every once
in a while you'll wish you had never opened your big mouth.
And I hope you don't get into as many of those as I have in
the last thirteen years.

Thank you very much.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
view for bookmarking
text only  mail this message to a friend
Sponsored by Fatbrain.com {*}  post reply    << prev · next >>  
subscribeto alt.religion.scientology 
return to search results 

 
 


SHOPPING ·  Yellow Pages ·  5˘ Long Distance 
Free Stuff  ·  Trade with Datek  ·  GET IT NOW @ NECX 
FREE downloads! ·  Auctions & Classifieds  
  
 
Home  ·  Communities  ·  My Deja News  ·  Power Search  ·  Post  
 


About Deja News  ·  Ad Info  ·  Our Advertisers 



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © 1995-99 Deja News, Inc. All rights reserved. 
Conditions of use  ·  Site privacy statement reviewed by TRUSTe  

