

SHSBC-305  ren 336 12 Sep 63 Service Facsimiles

SERVICE FACSIMILES

A lecture given on 12 September 1963

6309C12 SHSBC-305

[Clearsound checked against the old reels, omissions marked ">",
Clearsound additions marked "%".]


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

> Sorry to keep you waiting, I had to turn down the static.
> 
> I see my casualties there are not doing too badly. [laughter]

% Thank you.

This is the what?

Audience: The 12th of September.

12 September A.D. 13, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course. And you're 
into the horrors of hidden standards, GPMs, chronic PT problems, 
service facsimiles, nonobservation by the pc, a postulate being 
where the pc ought to be.

How's it feel to audit a postulate? I mean, you always thought you 
had a pc in the chair and you haven't. You got a postulate: a 
postulate which is designed to make others wrong and themselves 
right. I think that's quite interesting when you get right down to 
think of it.

We've had all these things in the past. This is Scientology III I'm 
talking to you about, and as it flips over into Scientology IV. 
We've had all these things in the past, and the difficulties that a 
pc has in getting forward with his case are actually just those 
difficulties which I just enumerated. I'll go over them again for 
you seriously.

Pc has a hidden standard. Almost any pc that isn't making excellent 
progress, getting good TA action, and so forth, has a hidden 
standard.

What do we mean by a hidden standard? Well, he doesn't even know 
what he is measuring his progress by. But it's that which he 
measures his progress by. You say, "Did you make any gains in this 
session?" and he consults this standard of some kind or another. And 
then he says yes or no in accordance with whether or not this 
standard had shifted.

Now, this is your lower level of case that does this - not 
necessarily lower level, because you can get a case into 
restimulation so that I suppose he does have temporarily a hidden 
standard. Pc's got a headache. Had a headache for a week, been 
processed for some little time - a considerable length of time - and 
a headache has turned on. Well now, he's liable to measure his 
processing as to whether or not it turns off his headache. You see 
that all the time.

Well now, expand that. Of course you can take by gradients all kinds 
of aspects of things, and you can see that these tiny little things 
can graduate into very serious, overwhelming proportions. That is to 
say, any insanity or any complete spin condition is simply an 
exaggeration, ne plus ultra, to the exclusion of all other 
exaggerations, of something that is quite normal in most anybody.

You see, you eat. You see, you consider that normal. It isn't very 
normal, but you consider it normal. And that somebody is eating, is 
not used by you as an auditor to measure whether or not the 
individual is Clear or not. You just don't pay very much attention 
to it. This is something you don't think about very much.

But as a case gets a little bit worse off, why, you have to start 
paying attention to it because this may become a very great 
exaggeration. And it can become an exaggeration: a not-eat or an 
eat-too-much or something like this, you see?

Now, several other facets of life drop out at this particular time, 
and if you took this same phobia at a lower-level case, you could 
get somebody who did nothing but eat - didn't do anything else, see? 
And you say this person is crazy. See?

Supposing they just ate everything in sight, see? Pencils, razor 
blades, rose bushes. See, you'd say they're crazy. And supposing 
they refused to eat anything of any kind whatsoever - similar 
condition, see? If you want to understand what is an aberration, it 
is simply an exaggeration of the positive or negative of the usual. 
You can take anything a thetan can do and exaggerate it, in 
extremis, and it becomes an aberration. That's anything, don't you 
see?

You'd say even exteriorization can become "extremis," see? Somebody 
always flies out of his head; he is always out of his head; he 
cannot get near his body in any fashion or another; he worries about 
it all the time; he can't contact his environment via the body or 
contact the environment. Well, you'd say he's batty on the subject 
of exteriorization, don't you see?

Well, what is this then? It's simply an exaggeration of a condition 
which a thetan ought to be able to do well. Well, everybody is a bit 
batty on this particular subject at this particular time because 
practically nobody exteriorizes easily, or they're always exterior. 
See? There isn't any halfway measure on this particular line of 
exteriorization. That's because they are assisted to exteriorize by 
various means, don't you see? I mean, the implantation and other 
means to exteriorize them.

But this is an aberrated condition. But you see people around, and 
they're not exteriorizing easily, and you don't think this is odd. 
Then we look at that. So that's an accepted neurosis, see? That 
neurosis is the common denominator of the society or the "normal." 
See, that's "normal." Well, just because everybody is doing it ... 
Man has an interesting way of measuring up what's right conduct. He 
has it measuring up of what's "normal."

One day you get into a society where everybody in the society is 
terrified of spiders. You get into this civilization - everybody in 
this civilization is terrified of spiders. They're picking spiders 
off of themselves all the time, you see, and they sleep in their 
beds surrounded by spider traps, and they, you see, just go on and 
on. Well, there's practically no girl in the room who isn't a little 
bit nervy on the subject of spiders, don't you see? You find a 
spider crawling across your nose, you boys would be upset too, you 
see? 

But this society does nothing whatsoever but fight spiders, see 
- nothing known in its activity but that one thing.

But this isn't crazy because everybody does it, you see? So, 
according to those blokes in that society, they look at each other, 
and there's one guy there who isn't afraid of spiders, see? See? One 
guy there, so they say he's batty. He doesn't use spider bait around 
his plate while he eats, you see? Guy is crazy, see? Obviously!

So this shows you, of course, that a departure from the norm - I use 
an old cliche - a departure from the "normal" is no indication of 
aberration. It is actually of no real concern of the auditor, 
because you're bound, sooner or later, to find somebody who doesn't 
put spider bait around his plate while he eats, you see?

This, by the way - what I'm saying here - occasionally causes 
auditors trouble. And they'll have trouble with some case - case 
runs too easily.

Supposing you found somebody that just clipped off engrams in 
chains: bzzzzzp, bong! - that's the end of that chain of engrams. 
Well, you have trouble with him, you see, because it's not a normal 
auditing response.

I remember old Ray Thacker, she used to be worried about auditing me 
after lectures and so forth. She'll tell you about it today, I 
think, and so on. Changed too fast. It's upsetting.

Finally got this thing taped. It isn't that I'm so good, but I 
thought it was rather amusing, you see? I run Havingness, and 
zing-bang, cognitions - brrrr - and that's the end of the long 
chain of this and that sort of thing.

Well, that's a different auditing response from the normal, so 
you're not completely proof of making a mistake as an auditor, so 
long as you accept this normal or this average, you see, as the 
index as to whether or not a person is getting better or how he 
should behave in processing, you see?

Well, this gets booby-trapped too, because you start processing 
somebody and he says he's out of his head and he's on the moon and 
he's here and he's there and he's taken care of the whole bank, and 
that sort of thing. And you're processing this bloke and you may 
find out it's not true, you see? And this upsets you.

So a few weeks later you're processing somebody who is close to an 
OT and is doing it and it is true, see? Well, it's just whether or 
not the guy can do the process - that's your thing - or whether or 
not he gains and whether or not he can get tone arm motion. Now 
there's a good index, see?

Pc get tone arm motion, you know? Pc stay in session. Pc go on 
willing to talk to you as the auditor. See, these are your indexes. 
And those indexes are constant. They have nothing to do with the 
speed with which a process works or the slowness with which it 
works; doesn't leave you, then, hung with this thing called 
"departure from the normal." You don't have to then have a normal 
for the human race (God help us all) as an index, as to whether or 
not somebody is making progress in processing.

I dare say, if you went through an insane asylum, almost any insane 
asylum in the world, you would find in there somebody who was 
supernormal and who was not crazy. I dare say there's probably one 
per asylum, see?

But if insanity - if insanity or neurosis, see, is measured by just 
this one thing: whether the person is "normal," why, then you run 
into all sorts of trouble in trying to adjudicate it. So what you'd 
stick with is your auditing tools, see? You find out whether or not 
this person gets good TA, see, on what you're running on him, and 
whether or not this person can do the process and can stay in 
session with the auditor, and if the expected gains and that sort of 
thing are made on the thing. And that's your index, you see? His 
behavior, his actual behavior in life is not of any great worry to 
you.

Now, I give you that as a word of warning, because as you move up 
the line with modern processes you very often go through periods of 
change - and particularly with a service facsimile and so forth - 
you go through periods of change which may be very swift. And a case 
does some sort of a flick of some kind or another and goes from A to 
Z without bothering to stop at any other of the letters in the 
alphabet. Or does it momentarily and hits a high and then does a 
slide back from the high, or something like this. And if you were 
worrying all the time whether or not the pc had normal behavior, 
you've just added something into the whole problem of auditing which 
you just haven't anything to do with. That's all, see? And take it 
from me, it's of no value - no value at all. We don't care whether 
they're normal or abnormal or supernormal or something like that.

You can define various states. And it's easier to draw up a scale of 
abilities in life and try to measure somebody up against that, if 
you must study behavior, don't you see? Let's get a scale of 
abilities, only let's take a whole row of abilities, you see, and 
let's find out how the person measures up on each one of these 
ability lines, and so on. You might have some idea of his condition 
as a thetan, see? But that again would have nothing to do with 
normal, see? Nothing whatsoever.

You try to measure up thetan to thetan, why, that's rough.

Now, you get some case that doesn't behave well under usual 
conditions of auditing - and you are having trouble under usual 
conditions of auditing, don't you see? - well, you've got another 
problem staring you in the face here. And we don't care - that 
problem is not solved by saying the person is normal or abnormal. It 
is solved by the condition of restimulation of the case. That's how 
that is solved.

And I've given you a whole chart here which, by the way, has a great 
deal of value, and you could put any pc on this, or monitor any 
auditing against this particular chart, and start cutting down 
restimulation on the pc. And you can cut down environmental 
restimulation, you see, and cut this and that down. And you can cut 
down session restimulation in numerous ways, you see? Just don't 
give him anything new to audit, and that sort of thing - numerous 
ways of doing this (anyway, those various zones I gave you there the 
other day), and you'll pick up the necessary TA action at some stage 
or another, see?

Now, that's completely independent, you see, of what process you are 
running on the pc. That too, that doesn't come into it either. You 
could probably make almost any pc get tone arm action on almost any 
process, providing you reduce the restimulation in various fronts 
and sectors till the pc's attention could be centered on it and the 
restimulation was at minimum. And you could probably get, on almost 
any pc, tone arm action on almost any process. But on some you'd 
have to be a lot more careful than others because the restimulation 
is very great. You see these as the factors with which you, an 
auditor, handle a case.

Let's take a look, then, at the fact that there are some case 
peculiarities. And these case peculiarities all come under the 
heading of the material you've - that I've just reviewed this 
minute, see? Nothing in these things violate that. Now, that a 
person has a hidden standard does not make him subnormal or 
supernormal or normal or anything else. It merely means he has a 
chronic restimulation. That merely means he has a chronic 
restimulation of some kind that is throwing on to the case an 
additional amount of charge.

Now, that was given in your chart I gave you here about what's in 
restimulation, see? And that comes under the heading of that. And 
this thing is in restimulation; it's chronically in restimulation. 
Now, in service facsimiles and other reasons and so forth, we get 
the reasons why it's in restimulation. But we're not examining why 
it is in restimulation at this particular time. We're examining 
wholly, totally and only that it is in restimulation. You got that? 
Just reduce it to that simplicity. There's current stuff in 
restimulation. All right, if there's current stuff in restimulation, 
it includes, in some cases, this thing called a hidden standard.

And you say to the pc, "Did you have any gains in this session? Did 
you have any gains in this session?"

And the pc looks sort of hollow-eyed for a moment, and he looks back 
into his skull with his eyeballs or something of the sort, and he 
says to you, he says - after a minute or two, he says, "No."

Now, what - what brought him to say no? What brought him to say no? 
Well, the thing that really brings him to say no is no tone arm 
action. So you can predict whether or not he's going to say no.

But this hidden standard is terribly interesting as a little 
mechanism all by itself. And it's a mechanism that you should look 
at as fascinating in its own gimmickry. It's in chronic 
restimulation. It's some engram, some facsimile, you know; it's in 
chronic restimulation. And if it was changed in the session, then 
he's had a gain. And if it wasn't changed in the session, then he 
didn't have a gain. You understand?

Now, that's what makes the pc say whether he's had a gain or not a 
gain. And, of course, there's the mechanical fact that if you get 
tone arm action, you must have been discharging some of that 
restimulation. So, of course, it will have changed this thing and he 
will say he did have a gain. See, it's as elementary as this. But, 
nevertheless, his gain is measured by this thing called a hidden 
standard.

So there he is, there he is with something which tells him whether 
or not he has had a change. He, actually, most of the time is not 
aware of this. Now, if that - if that was the only thing that 
happened in the session with regard to a hidden standard you would 
be in clover, because you could cope with that, because you just 
have tone arm action, see?

But that isn't all that happens. Unfortunately, that isn't all that 
happens. There is something else going on during the session that 
you should be very interested in. And that is the fact that he's 
taking this thing, whatever it is, into every facsimile, into every 
process, and is trying to fit the process to this thing. He is 
always trying to find, hectically, scramblingly, and so forth, what 
it is in the incident that you are trying to run on him, in the 
process you are trying to run on him, in the picture he's just been 
presented with, which resolves this thing. You got that?

In other words, he takes this little red wagon everywhere he goes. 
And he doesn't look at the picture. He says, "Did it wash up that 
little red wagon?" See?

Now, you're going to run - you're going to run some kind of an 
implant or something on this fellow, you see? And the stuff is 
spitting and spapping and burping at him and so forth, and he hasn't 
got really any attention on any of this stuff at all. He's trying to 
find out whether or not it's doing anything to the paint on this 
little red wagon, see? Which in effect is what? It gives a pc such 
an introversion in a session that he doesn't as-is anything and you 
don't get tone arm action.

And time and the tone arm fit together. Now listen to this one 
because this is very important: He drags this thing into every other 
incident or thing to fit it up, and therefore is misdating something 
for the duration of the session and all sessions. He's always 
misdating something.

That's worth knowing, isn't it?

The fellow with a hidden standard, then, is always misdating, 
because he's dragging the hidden standard - he's dragging the hidden 
standard into everything you're trying to audit. And of course that 
isn't the date of it. That's a fascinating little set of phenomena. 
He's dragging this red wagon, which may have the date of eight 
trillion-trillion years ago, you see, and he's dragging it into 
yesterday and he's dragging it into the breakfast table this 
morning, and so forth. And he's dragging it here and he's dragging 
it there. If you tried to run birth on him, he would see whether or 
not it did anything to the little red wagon, you see? Wouldn't do 
anything to him. So, in essence, he's put eight trillion-trillion 
years ago into birth, he's put it into breakfast, he's put it here 
and he's given it a new date every time. It's the most effective 
stopper of TA action there can be - the hidden standard. Misdate, 
misdate, misdate.

Now, there is a way of getting rid of it. A process which is called 
- was called 3T. Actually should be called, now, 4T, but could just 
as easily remain as 3T. And until we do a complete revision you can 
write it as "3T" - Routine 3T - which simply asks the pc (now, this 
is very germane to your service facsimile, because this is very 
cute, very cute), you ask your pc for his chronic psychosomatic. 
What does he mainly complain about in auditing?

Now understand, you have asked him bluntly and directly, "Hey, bud, 
what's your hidden standard?" But all he knows about it is that he 
experiences it and that it is always present. So, you ask him what 
he is experiencing and what is always present.

And he says, "This lumbosis, this ... this lumbosis, this lumbosis."

And you slicker him. You slicker him. And that's just called R3T 
because the total action of it is you date it. You date it and let 
him get the itsa line in on it. And you'll find to a very marked 
degree, in most cases, that's the end of the hidden standard.

What you have to know, in order to understand this completely, is 
the hidden standard always expresses itself physiologically. The 
hidden standard is never hidden physically. It's hidden from the pc, 
and it'd be hidden from the auditor if he never inquired into it. 
It's that thing by which the individual measures his gains in 
processing. But that's actually just about as hidden as an elephant 
in the middle of a ballroom. It'll be what he complains about in 
processing.

And sometimes it's going to take you an hour or two of itsaing just 
to find out what it is. And that too is very good auditing. What's 
this thing he's been trying to solve in processing? What's the 
physiological condition which most worries him in processing and 
which he has been trying to solve? And he will eventually lay it out 
on the silver platter. And he will say, "It is my stomach pains."

Now he's got that all settled. Now, that, by the way, has already 
alleviated it to a marked degree, and has given you some interesting 
tone arm action, maybe where you didn't have any before.

R3T is one of these things you can use in extremis. You just put the 
itsa line in like mad on the guy's chronic somatic, you see? "What 
are you trying to solve in processing?" see? He gives it to you and 
he gives it to you and he gives it to you and he gives it to you. 
Now, the only difficulty with this: if he starts giving you 
problems, you've sort of had it because that problems isn't an itsa. 
You understand? So your question probably ought to lean in the 
direction of "What physical condition are you trying to solve?"

He'll eventually isolate these gut pains. Gradually, gradually, 
gradually, you know? Itsa line, itsa line, itsa line. It's good 
auditing, see? It's marvelous auditing. He'll gradually itsa this 
thing out into view if he doesn't tell you at once. Sometimes he 
spoils the whole process. He says, " Oh, it's my lumbosis!" see? I 
mean, you've had it, see? Then you'd have to go into it on the 
basis, "Well, when has this troubled you in processing?" Then you'd 
probably get some TA action out of it - sort of an anticlimax. But 
you could probably get some TA action out of the thing, even so.

And that may be the only way you can handle it, you know, is "When 
has this troubled you this lifetime?" or something, you see? But you 
can take that, with R3T, and you say "Gut pains. Gut pains. Order of 
magnitude. Years ago? Tens of years ago? Hundreds of years ago?"

Keep going, man, keep going. Don't stop just because you've hit a 
trillion. Some people get allergic to this thing called a trillion. 
I don't know why. They got lots of them! You have big problems in 
how to express trillions, and big problems in how to this ... I've 
even had some suggestions that we invent a new unit of time, some 
kind or another. I'm all in favor of that, but I'm afraid it would 
have had to have been done some time ago for it to work on the 
thetan. Thank God we aren't measuring it in numbers of heartbeats!

Anyway, you just get that order of magnitude, see? This is, by the 
way, good auditing to do this. You date very alertly, and sometimes 
you say "I've got a read here; apparently it's in the order of 
magnitude of trillions of trillions of trillions of years ago." And 
the gut pains go bbzzp-brrp-booom. And that's all you hear about it 
and that's the end of that process. That's the lengthiest process in 
Scientology in terms of numbers of years covered but not in hours of 
auditing.

One warning here: you try to nail this thing too closely, and you 
get yourself in trouble. And you find a pc is sitting in the engram, 
and you're going to have to shift to R3R right there. He's so stuck. 
And if he was in a GPM you'd have to shift to 3N. And if he was in 
his own GPM you'd probably - oh, well, 3M2. So therefore, you can 
make too much of a good thing out of R3T. See, that can be too. So 
the dating - now get this - the dating is done with an eye on the pc 
as well as the meter. And that's what makes it a process which 
commonly will fail because it is simply overrun.

You find out this thing is thousands of years ago, and he goes 
dlluk-glunk-tum! And you see hhhp! It's almost as good as the meter, 
see? He'll go ... And you say, "All right, I had a nice read on that. 
That was thousands of years ago. All right. Now, how do you feel?"

"Oh," he says, "I feel better."

And at that point you haul in the itsa line and go flank-speed ahead 
into your next process. You hear this? Why? He is going to push 
himself into things.

> I remember old Bert Bell there.  One of the biggest wins on
> Bert Bell I ever had in processing - I straightwired out of 
> existance one of his -

Old-time Dianeticist, been around for Lord knows how long - he's 
down in Los Angeles now - and he was in at 42 Aberdeen Road, and I 
was showing him what Straightwire was. I was showing him, 
unfortunately, the difference between Straightwire and engram 
running. Unfortunately, see?

So I took his chronic somatic and his worry about this lifetime, and 
I straightwired it out of existence like that. I just spotted the 
time and somebody else had it and it blew, and that was that, see? 
He was the happiest man you ever laid your eye on, you know? He was 
just pleased, you know? He just was shining and pleased. And then I 
said, "All right, now we'll pick that up as an engram," proceeded to 
do so and keyed it right straight back in.

But it was actually a terrible cruelty to do that to the man, and I 
actually wouldn't have done it had I realized that he was setting so 
much store by it. So let that serve us as a lesson. It's a mistake I 
haven't made again.

What's the essence of this, then? When the pc drops this one off, 
bail out. Too much of a good thing here. You can even make up some 
homely platitude, you know? Something about "A little auditing goes 
a long way if a long auditing goes a little way," or something like 
that, don't you see? I know, it confused me too! But there's 
something about medicine, you see, "If a little bit of medicine did 
a lot of good, why, a lot of medicine will do lots of good," and you 
can actually get caught in between this on this little process.

So the process is not greatly advertised. Terribly effective - it's 
been with us forever - because it's dating the somatic, you see, and 
getting rid of it. But in this particular case you're not dating the 
pc's somatic. You're asking him what he's trying to resolve in 
processing. You get the difference? And that's the only reason it 
has any importance at all, is because once you've dropped that off 
the pc, he then won't consult it to find out if he's made his gains, 
and he won't be dragging the thing into every facsimile or anything 
else you try to run on him. So he's going to make some progress and 
he's going to make more TA action because he's not always misdating 
something. You got it?

But a little of it goes a long, long way. Slippy, quick, fast. I 
daresay - I daresay when you first use it, about 80 percent of the 
time you will overrun it, when you first start using it, and then 
you will get very, very expert and about 50 percent of the time you 
will overrun it. See? And you'll eventually, if you keep using it, 
time to time, why, you'll suddenly find out that you're getting 
pretty slippy; you're getting pretty slippy. You see, if it 
disappeared on the itsa line, you'd bail out. It isn't likely to, 
but if it did, you would.

You'll find out that some horrendous body masses come off of the pc 
by reason of this operation.

The only thing - the only thing it's used for is this thing called a 
hidden standard. You got that?

Now, a hidden standard is not always present in every pc to a point 
where it ruins the auditing. But it is present in any pc who has a 
difficult or delicate tone arm. So on your delicate-tone-arm cases 
you have another little weapon. And if you don't have a delicate-
tone-arm case - this character is just running fine with the tone 
arm action and that sort of thing. It isn't always stop, you know, 
and isn't always this and isn't all that. And you find yourself 
going around worrying about somebody's tone arm, that is your 
immediate and direct answer.

If session after session you've worried about somebody's tone arm 
action and you're doing everything reasonable in order to get the 
tone arm running and you have not made it, and so forth, then you 
just remember this little point on the time track, or this little 
point on the tape, when the old man said, "Delicate tone arm: 
probability - hidden standard. Remedy: R3T." And remember, he also 
said, "A little of it goes a long way!" You can get enthusiastic 
with this R3T; you could probably try to run a whole case with it.

All right - let's see how you can run a whole case with it. All 
right, now, "What are you trying to resolve in processing? What 
pains, agonies, illnesses or sicknesses or physical sensations are 
you trying to resolve in processing?" and so forth. Pc gives it to 
you. Order of magnitude: date it, date it to the second - you even 
have to do that sometimes - but you date this thing to the second. 
Find the pc stuck in the engram - find out it is an engram - shift 
> to R3T - pardon me, R3R, shift
to R3R, get that out. And then find the engram is stuck in the 
middle of the GPM, so you shift to 3N, you see? And you get that 
handled, you see? But then you find that this, in actual fact, is 
part of one of the pc's own GPM's RI, so, of course, you have to 
shift to 3M - R3M2. All right, now you've shifted to R3M2, and you 
find out actually it's reaching up into PT, so you run a service fac 
on it. Now, having run a service fac on it, you accumulated quite a 
few ARC breaks during this auditing, so you ... [laughter]

A little of this goes a long way! And you'll finally get expert at 
hitting the silk.

But you actually could take everything the pc was worried about, 
see, and do this whole thing. You could do R3T, even well done, on 
everything the pc was worried about in present time. Now we're being 
sensible, see? This isn't ridiculous, this is true, see? You say, 
"What are you worried about?" You know, "What are you being 
processed to resolve?" and so forth.

And he says, "Well, my gut pains."

"All right, that's fine." R3T gut pains. Order of magnitude. What's 
- where's the gut pain? Well, to hell with that. That's the end of 
that, see'? All right. "What else are you trying to resolve in 
processing?"

"Well, my headaches."

"All right." R3T headaches. Pssheww! That's the end of his  
headache.

"What else are you trying to worry about in processing?" and so 
forth. "What are you trying to resolve?" and so forth.

And says, "Husbands."

"All right, let's date husbands." And - fact, see? All right, 
pssheww! Order of magnitude on husbands, you see? "Your worry is 
back there at trillions-thirty-five. That's it." Okay. No itsa line. 
Ahw-v-v-vh! See? Trillions-thirty-five. That'd be good.

"All right, anything else you're trying to resolve with processing?" 
and so forth.

"Well, I'm trying to resolve having a body - having a body. I'm 
trying to resolve having a body. Get in my way - get in my way all 
the time. You have to wash 'em, you know, have to wash 'em. And they 
dent, and they drip blood all over the place when you stick holes in 
them, and so forth. They worry me, they worry me."

"All right, body. Order of magnitude, body..." Bzz-bzz-bzzz-bmp, 
zump, zump, zump, bop. "Well, well, 208 thousand years ago. Very 
good, all right. That's it."

Pc says, "Yeah, there's an interesting... interesting thing there."

"Well, good! Good! Thank you." That's when you want to get that TR 2 
in there, see? "Good! All right! Well, what do you know! Well, I'm 
certainly glad you found that! Very fine. All right, I'm glad you 
found that! Okay. Now, what else are you worried about, in actual 
fact, in processing?"

You see, you let his line go on the backtrack, and he's going to 
have you wrapped around into every process you ever heard of, man. 
You're going to lose control of that session.

When you finally finished up, you'd have a Clear. That is a method 
of clearing. Got it?

Needle would go free, TA would come down, and so forth. Impossible 
as it seems, it is a method of clearing. That'd be every hidden 
standard he ever heard of. Anything he could dream up here. But 
don't let him pull any back from the backtrack. Ha-ha-ha! That 
return journey - no payload. Return empty, see? Nothing, no baggage. 
Otherwise he'll start scraping that track up and bring it up to PT, 
and the next thing you know, why, you're doing "Oh, my God," see?

Now, the service facsimile - the service facsimile - has to be 
severely located on the time track. And we say "this lifetime," but 
actually what you're doing is circumscribing the duration. Your 
absolute limit of your service-facsimile activity - R3SC - is the 
pair of RIs he's currently sitting in on his own GPM line. Now, that 
can be a pretty broad sphere. But if you limit it very severely to 
this lifetime, you could even work to key that out, don't you see?

But if for some reason or other this becomes so complicated and you 
can't get down to it, and somehow or another it doesn't come, and 
they just can't make it out, and you get to wondering why you ever 
came to the session in the first place, you see, why, you've still 
got another string to your bow: You've got R3T - R3T clearing. You 
can still make a Clear; he can't stop you from doing it. You see 
that?

Now, this is with the pc that you can't seem to find a service 
facsimile on that runs over any period of time. You know, difficult, 
difficult. Now, I say you're going to get some difficult pcs - it's 
impossible to say otherwise - because the hidden standard in this 
particular case is the service facsimile. But it just happens to be, 
for some reason best known to somebody else, completely undentable.

Well, there's one thing that will dent it, and that's to pick it up, 
wrap it in a small black bow, wind your arm up around your head and 
pitch it with high velocity down the time track to a place where it 
belongs. And that has a degree of workability.

Now, of course, this is all under the heading of destimulation. So, 
because it's under the heading of destimulation, you have to be very 
careful not to run anything. See, that's why it becomes absolutely 
ridiculous to start running things. Because you start running things 
on the whole track on a case that you're already trying to 
destimulate...

Why are you trying to destimulate the case? You're trying to 
destimulate the case so that it doesn't have PT problems and so 
forth to kick your auditing session to pieces. So therefore, if you 
start a destimulation action - if you start an action of 
destimulation - what have you done if you suddenly start running 
something on the backtrack? Hm? And if the pc's service facsimile 
has in it "to make you wrong as an auditor," that's the first thing 
the pc's going to do - "he gonna try to restimulate more than he 
already got."

Now, how do you keep the itsa line in on a pc who wants to 
restimulate more? That's your problem! How do you keep from ARC 
breaking this pc? How do you keep him from actually actively cutting 
the itsa line?

Well, the best way to do it, actually - and I will help you with 
this problem - is be awful damn careful of your whatsits. Use that 
whatsit line with great skill. Knock out of your auditing all social 
actions. That's the first thing you do. Avoid all violent attention 
shifts. Avoid all attention shifts that you possibly can which are 
directed by a whatsit. In other words, don't direct the pc's 
attention in such a way as to ARC break the pc so he starts to get 
even with you by restimulating more, or some weird combination like 
this occurs. Just avoid all that. See what I mean?

Be awful careful of those whatsit. Don't say "How have you been 
today?" You understand? That's a whatsit.

Gives him an opportunity to say, "Well, actually, I was sitting in. 
up in the lounge at the Bide-A-Wee Club, and so it occurred to me, 
you know, saw this figure in Roman armor." See? You've had it. Got 
the idea? It isn't a matter of withholding something, unless you're 
obsessively social. It's just don't use them.

Now, the type of Model Session that is employed on a case that is 
very prone to restimulation - isn't getting much tone arm action 
anyhow - is your W Unit Model Session. That's your zero social. Oh, 
let him discuss anything he wants to after a session - discuss 
anything he wants to after a session - but he's aware of the fact 
you're no longer auditing him and he actually won't plow it in. You 
get the idea? Now, don't keep putting the brace on him and shutting 
him off and stepping all over his toes and that sort of thing. But 
in session: "How did that go?" Hmmmm - you're walking along the edge 
of the precipice, don't you see?

Any delicate-TA case, any case that you're having trouble with, any 
case that you're having difficulties trying to stabilize them into a 
process, any case - you know, overrestimulation leads to self-
invalidation. You should know that. Case is invalidating his own 
case and he's chewing himself up all the time, and he doesn't know, 
and he this and that. Well, actually, the more you restimulate, the 
more he's going to self-invalidate and the more he's going to 
invalidate Scientology and other dynamics. You understand? This is a 
symptom of overrestimulation.

You can actually classify aberration into these two classes. There's 
the symptoms and reactions occasioned by overrestimulation, and then 
there's the particular significances caused by the service facsimile 
and other things, you see? The significances - the dramatizations 
the person goes through - that's one channel, and restimulation is 
another channel. Of course, restimulation gives you the degree of 
dramatization, too. If you raise the restimulation on a case, you 
can raise its dramatization.

If you handle these problems in the guise and line of restimulation 
and monitor nicely with destimulation, and handle a case very nicely 
like that, you can get the case up to a point of discharging a great 
deal of stuff and you can get a case to discharge lots of charge.

But if you go at it so knuckleheadedly that everything you say to 
the case leaves the case wide open to the restimulation of more 
actions, you see, on the track, everything you do with the case, and 
so forth, leads to more restimulation, and then if your queasiness 
in handling the case also gets in your road and prevents you from 
really running a process - or the pc's nerviness or 
overrestimulation - then the case is just going to get less and less 
and less and less and less controllable; less and less and less 
controllable. Do you see why? Restimulation is catching up with you.

So, therefore, the destimulation of a case is an art, and it is a 
peculiarly positive sector in the field of auditing. And most of you 
are on this sort of thing right now - service facsimile, see? Now, 
the service facsimile, discharged, decreases the restimulation that 
the case is subject to, even though it's just discharged right here 
in this lifetime - present time, a lot of action and so forth. Case 
is subject to less restimulation because he pulls in less present 
time problems in his environment, don't you see?

Now, the present time problem, the aspect of the present time 
problem, is another category of upset to you. Case with a tremendous 
present time problem does not make good processing gains. If a 
person's graph remained the same throughout a week of auditing, you 
can assume this case had present time problems. The way to handle 
present time problems is to handle that factor in the case which 
causes the case to have present time problems. What causes the case 
to have present time problems? There must be something in 
restimulation to the case which pulls in present time problems.

I'll give you another method of listing for a service facsimile 
which actually nails present time problems with magnitude. You 
realize that there are so many solutions in the zone or area where 
we are operating at this particular moment - there are so many 
solutions to the thing - that it'd be very hard to give you a total 
coverage of all of these materials. And you're going to discover 
quite a few solutions in running somebody with an itsa line and 
handling service facsimiles and that sort of thing, see? You're 
going to discover a lot of these things.

There are certain standard ones, and this could be classified as a 
standard one: "What's a safe assumption about your environment? What 
would be a safe method of handling your problems here and now in 
life?" Now, a question and a list of that particular kind is going 
to drop into your lap, with a thud, the stable datum that the 
individual is holding at bay various sectors of his existence. So it 
comes, in that wise, a method of destimulating the environment. All 
you had to do is just list the list with some such question as I 
just gave you, and you'll wind up at the other end with what he uses 
to handle his family, what he uses to handle his job (that may be 
another one, see).

All right, now let's expand that process and let's take the pc's 
whole environment to pieces. Let's take this big sector we call the 
pc's environment. Let's take that whole sector and let's compartment 
it. Let's find out - in present time, let's find out where his life 
is in conflict or contact with what. Let's find out the whole lot, 
don't you see?

Now, this is terrific itsa-line stuff. You're not saying "this 
lifetime," now, you're saying now, man. There's no opportunity to go 
restimulating something else, you see? It's now! And his idea of now 
will probably go back to yesterday afternoon, or it might go back 
for a year or so. Somebody living in a farm community or something 
like that and things are pretty calm, he may consider his present 
time, you see, much broader. You ask a London city dweller what his 
now consists of, and he will tell you about his sandwich at lunch, 
you see? That's about as far as his time goes. It's very hectic.

But let's just take this guy's environment, just in a social sort of 
an auditing way, because you've got such a terrific limiter on it, 
you see, that you can be very relaxed with your auditing. See, you 
can ask him almost anything as long as you don't throw his attention 
on the backtrack. All of your questions have to do with right now, 
your present time.

"The life you are living at this particular moment: what have you 
been in contact with?"

The person will say, "What period?"

"Well, you know, now. Now."

"Well, now I'm in contact with the session."

This guy's too sane to ask such a question of.

So you say to him, "Well, in the last thirty days, you know, what 
are you in contact with?" That might not include his parents - say 
he hasn't had a letter for thirty days, something like that - but 
it's part of his environment. Let's just get that environment all 
torn up, see? Let's get him to tell us, you know, where each sector 
of this is. This is terrific Scientology I. The guy's got the isness 
of his environment. How many people have ever sat down and seen 
exactly what their life contacts consisted of here and now? You talk 
about orientation, man! This is orientation. Well, that's going to 
throw you with TA action, and that's going to loosen your needle - 
just that.

Little innocent questions from you, "Well, where are they?" see?

"Oh, and I know the Smiths. I know the Smiths. The Smiths. I know 
the Smiths pretty well. She's pretty nice looking, and he makes 
awfully good rum nog and punches," or something, you see? And, 
"Yeah, I know the Smiths."

Well, he's just liable to go on saying, "Well, I know the Smiths," 
you know, "I know the Smiths." Your tone arm action will die down 
after a while.

Wake up. Well, what can you say? Well, it's like the questions you 
use in 2H, see? "Well, where are they? Where are they?" see? Now 
there you're running the locational process on him. You know, 
"Well, where are they?"

"Oh, they... they're... they're up at Eastbourne," see, "they're up 
at Eastbourne, and they live at - they... they moved. They moved. 
Let's see, they used to live at-at-at 13 Galloway Street, and they 
now live at 42 Yard Road - yeah, at 42 Yard Road. I don't know quite 
where that is. I was up in Eastbourne the other day..." and so forth 
and so on... "Let's see, uh... Yard Road..." and so on. "I think you 
come up from the dock.... No, no, it's that one under the hill. 
That's - that's - that's the one. Yeah, that's where they live. 
Yeah, I've seen the place before. I haven't seen their new house, 
but I know where that place is. Yeah, I got that, see?"

See that tone arm action go there, man. You watch that fly. You see, 
"Where are the Smiths?" It's apparently got nothing to do with the 
price of fish, see? But now you've got the Smiths, not only 
categorized, but located, see?

And he works for the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company, see? All right, 
that's fine. Of course, you can reduce all this to a rote procedure 
that takes all the life out of it very easily. Bide-A-Wee Biscuit 
Company - he's telling you very interestedly about the Bide-A-Wee 
Biscuit Company. They get - they're located there, and he goes down 
there to work every morning, and so forth. And there's a porter 
there by the name of George, and George has always got his hand out 
for an apple or sandwich or something of the sort, and he's always 
got some wisecracks and so forth, and there's a lot of people around 
there. And they're pretty good people down at the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit 
Company.

Well, let him get away with this "down to the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit 
Company," you see, just so long. And well, you want to know "Where 
is this Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company?" you see? He's run the tone arm 
action out of what it is, you see? Well, let's get some tone arm 
action, let's bleed it down with where it is, don't you see? And 
man, he gets the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company park, and he's all of a 
sudden liable to have a terrific cognition. He all of the time, 
because he goes in the underground, lost sight of the fact that it 
is actually twelve miles from where he lives, see?

And then he realizes they got a lot of branch offices around here 
and there. And he's been to several of these branch offices. And you 
can just see this Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company: He'll start to expand 
.. take place, and you see the tone arm start moving on the thing. 
You get a lot of nice tone arm action out of it and so forth. And he 
finally - finally he gets down to the personalities on the thing. 
And you'll notice, it will be the things which he's having a 
gradient-scale difficulty of confronting. And you'll build up this 
gradient, see? And you'll see his confront starts going up on his 
environment to the degree that you blow charge off of it, see? And 
his confront starts up on his environment.

And you can notice this in his kind of answers if you're very clever 
about it. You'll notice that he just goes down to the Bide-A-Wee 
Biscuit Company, don't you see, and he sees George. You know, George 
- that's the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company, you know? That's about all 
he's got of the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company, even though he goes 
there every day, is George. And the only important fact about George 
is the fact that George has always got his hand out for an apple. 
See? Something of that particular sort, see?

Now, however, he expands the fact that he actually works in a 
certain section of it and he has certain associates there who are 
something-or-others, you see, and they work in a little bunch of 
offices. And then he all of a sudden tells you all about George's 
family and where George lives, see? He'll revert to that and do a 
wider confront, see? And then he'll go up and then he tells all this 
and, of course, he finally can tell you who's managing director, and 
you'd consider his confront is adequate then at that moment.

But you'll see how pinned down his attention line is in the 
environment. It doesn't take a terribly clever auditor to do this, 
but it takes one that doesn't mind a pc being gabby. And you're just 
putting the itsa line in: What's his present time consist of and 
where is it and who's in it and where are they? Next thing you know, 
you got the guy permeating all over the place, see?

This is a lot of auditing. This is a lot of auditing. It's a 
terrific HGC approach, see? After that's happened to somebody in an 
HGC they'll know very well that the HGC has got their good interests 
at heart. Well, they have, you see? But they know that because a 
good Scientology I has been run here on the person's lifetime.

Well, when he's all through with this and he's got all of his 
environment laid out and his wife's relations and how likely it is 
at any moment they're liable to come to visit him and when he's got 
everything all taped every place under the sun, and you finally now 
decided that you've got his present time. Because you've used this, 
you see, "present time," a lot of times with him in the discussion - 
and you don't let him catch sight of that, otherwise he's going to 
tell you his war stories. False itsa line. False line. You don't 
want anything to do with that, see?

So what your lineup here consists of is his present time - got that 
all categorized - and then you throw in that process I just gave 
you.

Now that you've got all sections of it ... And you could actually 
lay out a plot of it and draw a map. You now know where are his 
zones and sectors of problems and you know which one he's most 
fascinated with, because he gets gloomiest whenever he talks about 
it. You don't need an E-Meter to tell you that. Although if you kept 
talking about it very long, it's problem, problem, problem, so your 
tone arm action would die down, you see? "Oh, well, there's my 
parents. (sigh)"

About that time even the most imperceptive auditor would notice that 
there were problems in that vicinity; he wouldn't even have to look 
at his E-Meter, see? But if he also looked at his E-Meter, don't you 
see, he would see all of a sudden that it started to rise and it 
wasn't doing any blowing down. Got that?

Well, that's a weird way to do an assessment. But that's a very 
accurate assessment. "There's more problems there than he can 
confront." See, a rising tone arm is a no-confront - always, you 
see? He can't confront this many problems, so he can't put any itsa 
into the vicinity.

Now, why can't he put an itsa into the vicinity? Well, you say you 
can explain that very well. "Sons feel odd sometimes about their 
parents," you see, and so on. You can explain and explain and 
explain, you see, and you can figure it all out and you can figure 
it all out and you could worry yourself to death. But let me point 
something out to you: The longer you spend worrying it out, you see, 
at breakfast, and that sort of thing - the longer you spend doing 
that - if you catch yourself doing too much of this, realize that 
you are not, at the time you are eating breakfast, putting an itsa 
line in on the pc. And even though you come to a total conclusion 
with regard to the thing, you won't have moved his tone arm one bit. 
And I point that out to you, see? You won't get any tone arm action 
on him at all.

Now, in your idea, you should be getting tone arm action on him; 
that's a reasonable assumption, see? So, use this as your assessment 
line. Now, isn't that an interesting assessment? It's not an 
assessment by tick and click and reading lists, you see? That's an 
assessment of zone. And it's an assessment by "Oh, yes ... yes." An 
assessment by rising tone arm. And you've located a zone where he 
has a service fac in operation. Right like that, see? Now we know. 
Now we know.

Now, why do you get a rising tone arm? He obviously isn't 
confronting it. Now, it's no good for you to assume that there are 
lots of reasons why he can't confront it and it blows up in his face 
every time he tries to confront it, you understand? That's nonsense 
for you to assume that, for the excellent reason it's not true. 
You're going to find out he can't confront the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit 
Company because "biscuits are no good." Stable datum. He never 
confronts the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company; he confronts, and is, a 
biscuits-are-no-good, see? So as long as he's got that problem 
totally solved in present time, he never has to look at the Bide-A-
Wee Biscuit Company. So now he will continue to have present time 
problems with the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company.

I'll give you the most elementary type of present time problem with 
the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company: If he can't confront the Bide-A-Wee 
Biscuit Company at all, he's going to make mistakes on the job, and 
it's going to make present time problems for him. Doesn't have to be 
anything esoteric about it, you understand, because present time 
problems are in direct ratio to the no-confront. The frequency of 
present time problems are the measure of no-confront. And here's the 
recent datum stated at a terrific simplicity at the service
facsimile level. Here's this recent datum, service facsimile: 
No-confront is caused by a substitute confront.

Now, that gives you a brand-new look at life. You always assume, you 
see, that the reason the thetan isn't confronting is because he 
can't confront. See, we don't care whether he can't confront, but 
that statement doesn't lead to a solution of the problem. That's all 
we need to know. See, so don't worry about whether he can't confront 
it or not.

Yeah, colloquially we speak all the time, as Scientologists we're 
always saying, "Well, well, you know Joe, he's always in trouble, he 
just can't confront that," see? That's fine, that's perfectly true, 
in its limited sense. But in actual fact, that doesn't lead to a 
resolution of that guy's case, because it isn't factual. It isn't 
quite factual. The reason he's not confronting is caused by the 
substitute confront which we call a service facsimile.

It's something like he has set up a little radio tower in the middle 
of the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company on which has got "I hate 
biscuits," see? And that thing, that thing confronts the whole Bide-
A-Wee Biscuit Company for him. And so help me Pete, as long as he's 
got that thing, the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company is going to cave that 
guy in and is going to knock down the case between sessions to a 
point where you're always having to handle the restimulation of this 
case in his environment. And if you're only auditing this case two 
and a half hours a week and the case is spending forty-some hours a 
week at the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company, in that two and a half hours 
you're not going to even come close to removing the gathered 
restimulation of the past week.

You add up the number of hours which you've spent with the case on 
the subject of the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company, you'll find out that 
they will vastly exceed, in efforts to handle his PT problems with 
the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Companies, the effort you would make to 
simply compartment his environment with great care and find the 
stable datum that he uses for the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company. Find 
that and run it as a service facsimile with R3SC. See, that'd be the 
smart thing to do.

Well, the opening gun on a case, obviously, if you've got the tools 
to do it, is to clean up his present time problem so he isn't going 
to be accumulating, continuously, this.

Now, the present time problem which generated in his environment is 
a different thing than this other thing I was talking to you about 
called a hidden standard, see? That's a different thing. Now, it 
stems simply from a bigger zone, however, of restimulation. But it's 
being pulled into restimulation arduously and forcefully by the pc, 
continuously, for some reason best known to somebody else. And the 
reason it's in continuous restimulation is just all these things are 
bits and pieces of the RI the pc is in. And it's interesting that 
you can put that RI to bed and take the thing apart in this 
lifetime. That's what's fascinating: that you can do it at all.

But this thing of Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company, he does this all the 
time. It's one of the best things a thetan does. He gets tired of 
walking down the halls, so he puts a postulate in the hall, "I hate 
biscuits," and that's the end of the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company on 
his confront. But the damn fool continues to stay on at the Bide-A-
Wee Biscuit Company.

You can put right conduct down, is "Don't remain places that you 
don't want to keep confronting." See, you can put that down as a 
little lesson in life, see, completely aside from processing, is 
don't stay in places you don't want to keep on confronting, see'? 
Because your don't-go-on-confronting will then lead you to stick up 
a stable datum of some kind or another to do your confronting for 
you in that vicinity and the next thing you know, this is going to 
be a gorgeous piece of mass, and it's going to be giving you more 
present time problems than you can ordinarily count. And your life 
is going to become very restimulative indeed. That's a little social 
lesson I give you there, out of Scientology V.

Anyhow - how to get along in this universe, if possible.

Now do you see, in essence, the compartmentation of the environment 
and the selection of these little odd bits and pieces, you see, that 
he's using as stable data in his environment? And the knocking [of] 
these things out, you see, with your R3SC processes and so on, you 
will find a very easy activity. That was what R3SC was originally 
designed against and for. It, however, goes a little bit deeper in 
that it can take apart a service facsimile. When R3SC is running 
very, very hard and very arduously, and your pc is being knocked all 
over the place by all of this sort of thing, recognize what you have 
collided with. You have collided with the RI which is the current RI 
in the forming GPM of this particular lifetime. It's very difficult 
not to collide with it. Well, it also surrenders to the techniques 
of R3SC, but makes a very much more arduous run of it, you see?

So you would say there's two versions of R3SC, see? But in view of 
the fact that they are both handled in the same way, we classify 
R3SC in terms of what assessment was done in order to find it. And 
we number the assessments. Regardless of what stable datum you find, 
you are going to handle it by the steps of R3SC. You have those in a 
crude, rough form at the present particular time. I gave you an 
amplification of it yesterday, in that you could enter the thing at 
almost any of these levels. You can also enter it at a fourth level, 
solutions. "When have you used it for a solution," see?

But you've got this pattern by which you address a stable datum - 
R3SC, see? Now, how you arrived at that stable datum would be the 
assessment you did for R3SC, and there are several of these numbered 
assessments.

Now, I've just given you a very simple one. A good Scientology I 
done by a Class II-type auditor - but it's Scientology I, 
orientation and isness, you see? He just does this with the itsa 
line in and everything running along gorgeously and he gets his 
environment all oriented on the pc and he gets this thing all taped 
and he locates the most prevalent source of PTPs on his pc by an 
assessment of mostly "Ohhh..." - an assessment also with a rising 
TA, but that is less observable than the pc's attitude about it.

He's been talking about, you see, "Well, actually, I uh ... I'm - 
I'm in contact most of the time with airline companies. I go down to 
airline companies and deliver things and that sort of thing and talk 
to a lot of people. Have to talk to a lot of passengers and so 
forth. And talk to hostesses - a lot of hostesses to talk to down 
there too, you see? Once in a while I get to talk to pilots. And uh 
.. I get out to the airport quite often and go over there. There's 
a girl at the magazine stand I like to talk to; she's ... she's lots 
of fun, and so forth. And any of the toys get worn out, why, she 
gives them to me for my kids, and so forth. We have a pretty good 
time out at the airport, and I do that, and so forth."

Well, the real knucklehead of an auditor comes in after that 
dissertation and says, "Now, what stable datum do you have for the 
airport?" He isn't going to have any.

He'll finally say, "The dispatcher's tower." See, he'll give you 
something in the airport. You know, "The girl at the magazine 
stand." You see? "She's a good stable datum for the airport. She 
always tells me what's going on." In other words, you won't get one, 
see? So you have to be perceptive just to that degree, and...

Now, you're going along, and you say, "All right, now all right, we 
got all that taped and so forth. Well, how about the socialist club 
that you belong to - you mentioned a moment ago. What about that?"

"Oh... (sigh)"

Well, the auditor after a while should wake up and realize that what 
isn't being called on here is another whatsit. What's being called 
for here is a safe assumption for the socialist club. He must have 
landed right in the middle of it, because he obviously has a 
nonobservation. The easiest way to look at it is, if the pc hasn't 
got anything to say about it, he isn't observing it.

Obviously, then, it's being observed for him. Well, who's observing 
it for him? What's observing it for him? Well, that being, person, 
idea, thing, television set - that's a service fac for that zone or 
area. What do you do with it once you've assessed it out and so 
forth? Why, you've got it lying there and you - voila! Just run your 
R3SC steps on it. That's all. "How would it make people right, and 
you wrong?" And the person said it wouldn't. "Well, how would it 
dominate somebody...?"

"Oh, well! Ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ha-wha-ha. That's a different thing, 
huh? That's the most dominative stable datum that you possibly could 
have. That-that's-that-that-that-that's the most dominative that you 
could have. Yeah. That-that-that-that is. That is. Yep."

You keep sitting there waiting for him to answer the question. Well, 
hell, he's answered it and he's blown the level, too. See? Here 
you've got to come back in there and say, "All right, now, what's 
the - how does it get you to escape domination? Help you to escape 
domination in any way?"

"Ho-ho, ha-ha. Perfect solution!"

That's the end of that level, see?

"All right, how is survival with regard to this thing?"

He's realizing things all the way along the line. It doesn't matter, 
you see, whether you flatten any of these processes or not at the 
first run through. When you finally check them over, just don't 
leave one of them hanging out unanswered, do you understand?

It doesn't matter how you chop these things up, see? Don't be neat, 
because it's not neat, see? At the end of the thing, get neat. See, 
make sure you've got them all now and it's all straightened out, and 
that sort of thing, see? Now be neat.

But he's - "What - what do you mean? What do you mean, 'domination'? 
Dominate - how would it dominate somebody, dominate somebody, 
dominating somebody? How would it dominate? I don't know how it 
would dominate anybody. I don't have any idea at all how it'd 
dominate anybody, you know? And it just ... doesn't dominate 
anybody. And ... haven't got any idea."

Well, of course the auditor's a real knucklehead if he says "Well, 
yes. Well, the question was - I'll repeat the auditing question for 
you. How would it dominate somebody?"

"But that's what I'm trying to tell you. Dominate somebody? It 
doesn't dominate somebody, and so on." See?

You say, "All right, okay." Take his answer - it wouldn't dominate 
anybody. "All right, all right! That's all right. How would it 
assist your survival?"

"Oh-ho! Well, that's a different thing. Come to think about it, it - 
it just is. It just is survival. It is - is survival. It's-it's-
it's-it's-it just is. It's just life to me, you know? I never really 
looked at that before, but it is just - it's-it's life. Tha-that's 
what it is. It - it is. It's just life."

And the auditor who says at that time "All right, thank you. Now how 
would it assist your survival?" is being a complete knucklehead. The 
guy has answered the question. He's not answered the question, he's 
answered the whole universe of questions with regard to it. He's 
given you the perfect answer, which it is. That is the most perfect 
answer there is about anything! Thing you got to do is keep your 
tone arm moving. And you do that sort of thing and you do it real 
slippily and only ask the pc what he can answer and only take it, 
and so forth; don't start getting hard or tough on the pc till you 
finish it up, see?

"Now, let's go over these things. Tsk! Tsk! Tsk! Tsk! Tsk! Ah, that 
one ticked. That one ticked. That one ticked, right there. All 
right, now, how would it make people wrong?"

"Well, I meant to tell you, but in actual fact I - I used to use 
this quite a bit, quite a bit on all of my girls. I've been 
reluctant to mention it. But there it is." And he clears this thing 
up and of course you're away.

In other words, you've got a variety of processes here that are all 
running more or less at once, and the reason why you have a variety 
of processes all running at once is you're running a variety of 
confusion. So it won't be very orderly. It won't get orderly till 
toward the end. Most of the confusion is discharged. You see, that 
service facsimile held in abeyance all the confusion that was there 
residual. It's that confusion running off which gives you the tone 
arm action. Your tone arm action doesn't come from stable data 
flying off: It comes from enunciating and as-ising stable datums 
which then permit confusions to fly off which have been held in 
abeyance by those stable data. So if your confusion flies off, 
you're going to get charge releasing, because charge is in essence a 
confusion. That's all there is to that, see?

It's elementary. You're going to untangle a ball of string, you're 
going to have string. If you don't untangle a ball of string, you're 
not going to have string. I mean, that's all there is to that. You 
untangle a ball of confusion, you're going to have tone arm motion. 
And if you're not going to untangle a ball of confusion, you're not 
going to have tone arm motion, that's it.

There's two reasons why you don't get tone arm motion, then: You're 
not untangling the confusion or there isn't any confusion there. 
That's the only two reasons.

So you enter into this problem at these various levels, and you'll 
find out there's a beautiful assessment that gives you service 
facsimiles like mad.

Now, how you run the service facsimile after you've gotten it, I've 
just covered. But it's always the same: You always handle a service 
facsimile in this particular line. You'll get very slippy at it 
after a while. It's slippy auditing. But the number of ways that you 
can arrive at what is the pc's service facsimile are practically 
uncountable.

Now, the very best method I know of, at this particular time, is the 
method I have just given you - not the method of picking up the RI 
from a pc's goal, see? That's liable to restimulate the whole GPM, 
particularly in very inexpert hands that couldn't rescue it, and 
list it out anyhow, if it did happen, see? But this other one is a 
doll. This other one is a doll. I can see you now, supervising 
auditing someplace or another, and you hand out this assessment 
sheet, you see, that the auditor is supposed to fill in, see? And 
you hand him this assessment sheet, you see, "Who are your parents?" 
and "Why not?" and all kinds of things, and they all go down the 
line. And the thing has got about three pages and you've got this 
assessment sheet.

And you say, "Now, you're running R3SC. Make sure to keep the itsa 
line in very, very well while you're doing this assessment sheet." 
And you give him this four-page sheet, see? Takes care of his job 
and his profession and where it's located and all that sort of 
thing.

The auditor bounces up forty-five minutes later and hands you the 
sheet all complete. We obviously have somebody there who "had to get 
something done," as an auditor, see? He just blew the intensive, 
that's all! And I'm sure this is going to happen to you. Every one 
of you that's supervising any auditing at all, this is going to 
happen to you. You just blew the intensive, see, for the pc. Now 
what do you do? Now what do you do? Where do you go from here? I 
mean, that's it. You obviously have to run some other process.

No, you can go off on to parts of existence and that sort of thing, 
but in actual fact, the assessment sheet was never filled in, don't 
you see? You just said, "Who's your father? Who's your mother? 
Mother's name? Mother's name? And brothers or sisters - got any 
brothers or sisters? Thirty-three brothers, four sisters and eight 
cousins. All right, that's fine. How old were you last birthday? 
Forty-seven.

"All right, thank you very much," so forth. And "Where do you live - 
what's your address? What's your address? All right, 933 North Elm. 
All right. Cincinnati. Very good. And what company are you with? Oh, 
the Bide-A-Wee Biscuit Company. Very good. All right, thank you very 
much. What's their address? Where are they located? What's the 
address? Oh, 29 Front Street. Thank you very much. Now, so..."

What's missing here? Well, the only thing that's missing is the 
total assessment. He isn't - he just missed the whole purpose of 
what he's supposed to do. You want to know all about this pc's 
present time and everything he's in contact with, you see?

Well, in a matter of fact, you could come back to the question I 
just asked you before, if you were scotched to that degree. You 
could come back to the question I gave you about assumptions about 
your present-time environment, and that sort of thing. You could get 
a stable datum and you could get the pc to run without the 
assessment, don't you see? Look at all that gorgeous tone arm action 
that you missed out on, see? You might have missed out there two 
sessions, three sessions of gorgeous tone arm action. Marvelous, you 
see? Thing would be flying all over the place. The guy destimulated 
all over the place; the guy practically Clear and flying, see? It'd 
just be in the difference of emphasis of the assessment.

So the understanding of the assessment and understanding that an 
assessment in R3SC is to produce tone arm action, not data ... We 
don't care anything about the data it produces. But the tone arm 
action! Now that assessment's supposed to produce some tone arm 
action, and you'll see that it's - an R3SC becomes a peculiar brand 
of assessment. And the individual in Scientology III who has been 
carefully, carefully, carefully educated in doing an R3SC 
assessment, keeping the itsa line in, keeping the tone arm running 
like mad, moves into Scientology IV and does an assessment for a GPM 
goals list with the itsa line in wide open. Uuhhh! Well, that's one 
case we wrote off, see?

R3M, see, is done pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa, see? No 
itsa line. Data, data, data, data, data. All of a sudden the pc 
cognites on something, you see? Oh, that's fine. He tells you 
something about it and so forth, see? All right, good. Data, data, 
data, data, data, see? Item, item, item. List, list, list. There th-
th-thuh, "There's your item, bang! 'A schnook.' Got it. That's your 
item."

"Oh, yeah." Now let your itsa line go in a little bit. "In this 
lifetime I really had ... Oh, yeah, a schnook could really - would 
really ... really mow a schnack down, man! That-that-that-that-
that's it, that's it, that's it, that's it. That's it."

"Fine, all right. Good! All right! Here's the next list. Who or what 
would a schnook oppose? Tsk-tsk! Rapidly, rapidly. Come on, come on, 
come on, come on! Come on! Give me the data. Come on and so on and 
so on. Schnook oppose. All right. Good, good, good, got it, got it, 
yeah. Your next - come on, come on, come on, what would it oppose? 
Well, all right, you can cognite. Give you thirty seconds to 
cognite." Something like that.

Give you the idea? That's 3M2. See, you could go dragging your heels 
doing one of those assessments and you'd wind up five intensives 
later with two RIs found, see? Pc in total restimulation, everything 
gone to pieces. You wonder what's wrong. You get the difference?

This lifetime, present time, itsa line in, assessment:

"Well, I don't know, I don't know. I think we're going to have to 
get rid of Bill as an auditor, because he had one of these present-
time assessments and it only lasted him two intensives! He found out 
all about the guy by the middle of the second intensive. Tsk. (sigh) 
Nothing else to do on the pc. Finished. Wrecked the case. Wrecked 
the case. Pc not Clear yet and he's got the intensive filled. Now 
what are we going to do?"

See, there's a different end goal in progress here, isn't there? 
Entirely different atmosphere involved in these assessments.

So you must keep in mind that there are two different moods of 
assessing. And if you don't keep that severely in mind, you're going 
to make an awful flub, because it's another auditing style. R3SC: 
leisurely, quiet, calm, drag it out endlessly, itsa line in. Because 
it's all guided, you see, by present time and a lifetime and that 
sort of thing, see? R3M2: pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa! 
"Gimme-gimme-gimme-gimme! What is it? What is it? Let's make it! 
Speed, man! All right! Oh, you only found four RIs in this session. 
Going to have to speed it up in the next session," you know?

Assessment: Do a goal-oppose list. "We did - we did - we did a goal-
oppose list, and so forth. All right, it's taken us two and a half 
hours to find this next goal."

"What's the matter with you? It took you two and a half hours to 
find the pc's next goal? What's the matter with you? What's the 
matter with you?"

Guy had been doing Scientology III all the time. "Well, I thought I 
had until the next intensive."

"Oh, man, you're doing another type of process here entirely, and so 
on. Let's get that goal-oppose list listed and nulled and that sort 
of thing, two hours. That's all you got. That's it, that's it. No 
more than that. So you understand?"

Why? Because backtrack, you got to keep the itsa line shut. Got it? 
Otherwise you restimulate the pc; your tone arm action disappears.

All right? I've kept you a little bit overtime. Start your sessions 
fifteen minutes late tonight.

> I have some good news for you, good new for you.  Next week
> you're going to flip flop by the week. I want to make this
> little announcement - with your auditing schedule, you're going
> to flip flop by the week, not by the day. That will cut down
> the number - I was working over how I could destimulate the
> course just a little bit and I finally found out that that was
> a good solution to the destimulation.  So you'll be doing a
> flip flop.  One week you audit - the next week relax.

Okay? Thank you.

Thank you.

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



