6406C09 SHSpec-22 The Cycle of Action: Its Interpretation on the E-meter

     The most confused, maligned area around is the auditor and the cycle of
action.  It is a difficult subject because it is all over the GPM's.  It is
not natural.  You scientologists, being a cut above the naturalness of
normality, of course see something slightly wrong in the whole idea of time
and its forward progress.  In his auditing, LRH found himself in an
interesting state: looking at a zero or absence of time.  He found it not
wholly pleasant, because without time, there is a lot of other stuff missing.
He had a pressure on the face that turned out to be not from something, but
from utter nothingness there.  This was very peculiar.  It was an escape from
the time-stream which, at the same time, was more natural than being in the
time-stream.

     At one time, a thetan was quite capable of moving back in time to
straighten out goofs.  Then he slipped into the time stream and has been
moving along with it ever since.  You therefore have a natural antipathy for
the idea that time is there or that something has a beginning, a middle, and
an end, because this cycle is an authoritative action laid down by time.  But
you are processing in the physical universe, through and across the agreement
of the physical universe.  You are apparently going along with the time-stream
and processing a bank that lays the time-stream in with an axe.  You are
trying to resolve a subject, the bank, that is cycles of action to a terrible
degree.  Mary Baker Eddy erred by shooting for too high a gradient.  As long
as you are processing through MEST, you must take account of the cycle of
action, even though it is not true at the highest levels.  Unless you pay
attention to this, you jam the bank, and the PC will get into horrible
difficulties:  high TA, etc.  The proper, precise order of things is very
important, particularly at lower levels of things, especially with regard to
the bank.  The bank is fiendishly precise.  The PC has to come up through
confusion to confront this much order.  One of the keynotes of order, and the
bank, is that things have a beginning, continue, and have an end.

     "There the cycle of action is violated in the PC, the order of his bank
is violated, and therefore it doesn't as-is.  So the road out follows the
cycle of action.  Where the auditor has nothing to do with the cycle of
action, he has trouble, because he has thrown the PC below the fiendish
demands of the bank.  We have found empirically that what you have to do is to
parallel the cycle of action.  There is no detriment involved in doing so.
Every time you process a PC without paying attention to the cycle of action,
you are processing the PC against the bank.  As a result, the bank will jam,
which will be manifested on the E-meter as a high TA and a badly-acting
needle.  A PC who is not running well has, first and foremost, violated the
cycle of action.  This is a broad enough statement to be fairly meaningless
unless you get more details.

     You could also say that the reason a case isn't living right is that the
cycle of action is being violated.  There are two ways in which a cycle of
action can be violated, in life:

     1.  Too slavish an obedience to it, where the individual was out of
         agreement with it in the first place but is forced to follow it.

    [2.  Ignoring it.]

     All the "blessings" of the machine age lie in the first zone.  Don't
follow a cycle of action to the extent of overwhelming someone's power of
choice.  Oddly enough, there is one zone where a person's power of choice can
be overthrown and he can be improved.  By following a cycle of action
repeatedly, to a point where the person is used to it, you will then begin to
as-is enough bank to compensate for the loss of power of choice that you
started with, which will when return.  You could force a PC through SOP 8C
against his power of choice, but only so long as you repeated the cycle of
action.  It isn't the person's power of choice that gives him reactivity.
Power of choice and self-determinism get imprisoned in reactivity.  A cycle of
action is the prison.  So following and running [and running out] a cycle of
action will bring about nothing but a freeing of power of choice, whether the
PC consents to it or not.  You have the determinism of the thetan -- his power
of choice -- versus the fiendish cycle of action and precision of the bank and
this universe.  The biggest overwhelm and loss of power of choice in this
universe is in time.  This universe is a trap, because having started here,
you inevitably get to there:  That is an overwhelm, because there is nothing
that you can do about it.  The thetan knows that wherever he may be in space
at 8:55, in ten minutes he will be at 9:05, no matter how much he protests.
You can do something about being moved in space, so space is less
overwhelming.  Hence movement in space from point A to point B is a smaller
gradient.

     You can approximate the action of time with the cycle of action.
Progress through time is paralleled by the cycle of action.  It is very close
to a process you might call "Make some time.'

     This is a very funny process.  You can start the PC at point A and move
him to point B and have him run into confusion between distance and time.  He
has the illusion of moving through time.  In doing this drill, one
differentiates space from time and thus obtains a new level of observation and
freedom.  This improves the individual's power of choice, at least to the
degree that he has increased freedom to observe.  As a person gets out of
overwhelm relative to something, he can perceive what is happening to it,
instead of what it is doing to him.

     O/W, in its essence, has never been understood.  O/W is not a lesson in
morality.  It is a lesson in causality.  It is really a lesson in "What power
of choice have you exercised in life?" However, it is hard to get someone to
admit that he has done something wrong, because society tries to get him to
restrain admission of overts, which is a big overwhelm.

     Justifications refute the cause of the individual.  To justify is to
state that one had no power of choice, and therefore, not being responsible,
committed no overt.  In running justifications, you are getting the PC to own
up to having been cause.  When you go for overts, you are going up against the
social mores as the point of overwhelm.  You just choose this as the point of
overwhelm.  Society tries to get the individual to withhold overts, in an
effort to suppress him.  "In lower level processing, you're choosing...
society as the point of overwhelm [of the PC] and you are running O/W: ...
You want the individual's revolts against this overwhelm as an expression of
his power of choice."  Some point of agreement with society can be found in
the course of running O/W, that will undo attention from society.  The
mechanism is:

     1.  One does things.

     2.  One can't own up to them.

     3.  One then gets caved in on because of this.

     You could ask, "What third dynamic activity have you gone along with?"
Weirdly enough, this would eventually lead into overt acts.  The individual
gets free to the degree that he can step back and look at the situation.

     When we apply this [sort of process] to the sixth dynamic, we get a much
more subtle level, one that is much less easily perceived: freedom from the
time-stream; freedom from the cycle of action.  Time and the cycle of action
are so woven into the PC, regradless of what level he is at, that even your
address to the third dynamic, junior though it is to the sixth dynamic, is
involved with the sixth dynamic.  The PC is shooting someone across space,
standing on matter, in an action across time.  There is a sixth dynamic
agreement that is overwhelming.  This is going on no matter what the PC is
doing.  So in processing a person, if you violate that to an enormous degree,
by out-cycles-of-action, the person won't know what it is that is being
violated, but his tolerance of that violation is terrible.

     There are quits a few cycles of action that you could violate.  One is
the auditing comm cycle.  That is the first one that shows up on a meter, even
on a low-level PC.  The dirty needle you get expresses the jam-up of energy in
the PC's bank because of the violation of that cycle of action.  There is a
disagreement with the reactive bank when the cycle of action is violated.  The
meter measures energy manifestations taking place in the PC's bank.

     If the PC has one erg of attention or awareness and you are asking him to
confront 8000 gallons of reality, he won't be able to do it.  For instance, if
you take a non-scientologist and tell him that he is the source of all his
problems, he can't confront it.  On the other hand, if a guy has tons of
awareness or attention available, and you ask him to confront one pint of
reality, he is going to view it as pretty unimportant.  "Just look at the
horrible conflict between Russia and the U.S.!" "Yes?  well, what about it?
So what?" When the individual's attention level and the reality to be
perceived are more or less balanced, cognitions occur.  You could violate some
things, which wouldn't be expressed on the meter, because they would be above
the PC's reality.  But violating the comm cycle will be real to the PC.

     Another cycle of action that you could violate is a process cycle of
action.  This one is expressed, not on the needle, but on the TA.  So:

     1.  The auditing comm cycle is expressed on the needle.

     2.  A process cycle of action is expressed on the tone arm.

If you get TA motion on something, you have found an overwhelm that the PC can
potentially get on top of, providing that you don't leave him in a state of
half-overwhelm, but complete the process cycle.  If you get TA going on some
subject or area and keep on the subject until there is no more TA action, you
have done completed cycle of action on the subject.  At that point, the PC
will no longer be overwhelmed by the subject.  If the subject is real to him
at all, it will register on the TA, at least slightly, and the PC will be able
to overcome the overwhelm that he has experienced in that area.  He will
process to wins, as long as you don't leave him in a state of half-overwhelm
on the subject by failing to complete the cycle of action.  He will object to
not being brought through it, and the meter will react by freezing up.  It
won't freeze up immediately, but it will freeze up as you continue to leave
unflat processes behind.

     You can go on past the point where TA action has ceased.  People don't
usually err in this direction.  More often, they take an hour to get the
subject in full view and the TA well started, and then they quit.  This goes
against both the PC's self-determinism and the cycle of action of the bank,
which is what locks up the TA.  The trick is to find the point at which TA
action ceases.  If the PC is stuck, you can go back through his folder and
complete the old cycles of action that were incomplete.  When you do this, the
bank will unjam.  Don't ask yourself, "What will produce TA action on this
PC?" That is an easy question.  What you should be asking is, "What has
produced TA action?" Process in the direction of ARC.  Let the PC tell you
about his problems long enough to find something that moves the TA, and then
get into that, with an in-ARC process or something about solutions.  Always
flatten what has moved the TA, no matter how long ago it happened.  Flatten
what you get TA motion on.  This cycle of action is the only zone or area
where you can overwhelm the PC's power of choice [legitimately].  Don't
evaluate for him, but finish your cycles of action!!  You can be smooth and
slippy about it.  Direct the PC's attention back into the area and run the
process to a flat point.

     Find out what is real to the PC before you start, by getting him to itsa
on anything and watching for TA, e.g. on the White Form.  If you are having
trouble getting TA on a new PC and you can't find any unflat processes from
his earlier auditing, you still want to know what has given TA action.  If it
wasn't an earlier process or something in life, suspect immediately that the

     PC was involved in some other practice analogous to scientology, that did
get TA, but was left unflat.  Now crank up the sensitivity to +128, and ask,
"What other mental practice have you been [in]?", and watch the needle like a
hawk:  Be specific.  Ask all kinds of things and sort out what cycle was
incomplete there.  Flatten the earlier practice when you find it.  Get the TA
off of it.  "All you have to do, if you don't get TA action on the PC, is find
out what gave him TA action that wasn't completed." If he is an old PC,
suspect [not an earlier practice, but] objective-type processes.

     When looking over auditing for unflat processes, you may find a lot of
them and have to choose which one to start with.  In this case, you have to be
careful, especially if you are advising someone else what to audit [case
supervising], where you have less control and ease of observation on the
things you check.  You want to be more certain and take fewer risks, under
these circumstances.  And one thing that you can be certain of is that any
objective process that gave TA will give TA, if it is unflat.  "The objective
process is the one that's most likely to have stuck the guy ... because it's
right here in the physical universe ... and it's closest to the sixth
dynamic.  Subjective processes are the least likely" to have hung-up TA.  The
PC could have cognited later on a subjective process, in the course of running
something else.  In advising auditors (case supervising), give advice that is
very down-the-middle and certain, and if the auditor tells you that it didn't
work, find out in what way he failed to take your advice.

     Meter manifestations at Level VI are different from the Level IV ones.
You are used to TA action taking some time to occur, or run out, below Level
LI.  But two to three sessions worth of TA (at levels 0-IV) occurs in ten to
fifteen seconds at Level VI, and that's all the TA action there is to be had.
You don't even see all the TA action that occurs.  Some of it doesn't go
through the meter.  The TA action flattens fast at higher levels.  Don't
overrun the guy.  You will drag in TA from somewhere else if you do.  If you
let the PC go on and on, you will get TA action from the next item or bank,
which violates the cycle of action.  All the bank objects to at Level VI is
overrun -- the cycle of action being extended beyond its end.  If you
overflatten TA action, you get an exaggeration of the dirty needle that looks
like a small rock slam, a sharp-edged dirty needle, a "tocky" needle.  The
dirty needle expresses TA action prevented from being completed.  The tocky
needle results from taking more charge off an item then is really there.  It
expresses the fact that the TA action is all completed.  If you continue, you
can finally drive it to a stuck needle and a stuck TA.  When you ask, "Am I
invalidating a correct line-up?", the needle smooths out.

     If you are dealing with the thing that enforces a cycle of action on the
PC and on life, it objects to a cycle being overrun.  It resists a created
cycle of action that isn't really there.  If an item has been left charged, a
new item won't read properly until you clean it up.  Suppose you haven't left
anything charged, but the new item is suppressed or something.  In this case,
when you look for an earlier charged item, the needle will go tocky.

     All the bank objects to at Level VI is the cycle of action being extended
beyond its proper end.  The bank raises Hell when you create a cycle of action
that wasn't there.  The needle will show you that this is happening by getting
tocky, and you can indicate the overrun and continue to the next cycle.

