SHSBC 55
REALITY IN AUDITING

A lecture given on 7 September 1961

Ah well, first time I ever missed a Thursday bulletin, I think. I didn't
write a bulletin today. I was up all last night till about six a.m. looking
at pictures that had just come back from a production on Tahiti. Looking at
rushes. And had to write a whole picture last night and this morning, and I
more or less did, so maybe that takes my mind well enough off things and
changes the scenery enough that now I can get to work again.
You know, every once in a while I get stuck on your mind, you know. Let's
see, "What problem could Ron have about my case?" Why don't you run that?
My attention will free up.
Okay. What is this? The 6th?
Audience:       7th.
Seventh? Seventh of September AD 11.
Well, it sort of seems like old times telling you how to get pcs into an
engram. It just seems like old times. We're back at the old stand. I mean
there's the brass rail there, and there's the dusty bottles back of the
bar, and there we stand amongst the spittoons discussing this ancient
problem.
Well, it works like this. Engrams never ran with the pc (quote) out of
valence (unquote). You could run a pc who was out of valence for just ages
and ages and ages. And all long engram running stems from the pc being out
of valence.
Now, there's two things to keep in mind about this. And one: "when pc is in
own valence" - this is a misnomer. We merely want him in the body he was in
when the incident occurred, but this doesn't put the pc in his own valence.
You see, he's Joe Jinks. He's being Joe Jinks in that particular life. The
primary swine merchant of lower Chicago, see. And there he sits. At least,
for God's sakes, if he's Joe Jinks have him the body of Joe Jinks. You got
the idea?
That's what we meant by "in valence." Simply in the valence he was in when
the engram occurred. Understandable?
Now, when we say "out of valence," we mean simply and entirely the pc was
not in the body he was occupying during the incident. But as Joe Jinks, the
swine merchant from lower Chicago - he has trouble this lifetime, he keeps
going oink, ung, oink, and so forth. He only killed seven or eight billion
swine in that lifetime, you see. And he says he couldn't possibly have done
it because he did it all from a mahogany desk, you see. So he didn't kill
any swine, so it doesn't have anything to do with him. You get the
detachments about that?
So anyway, there he is with a picture, see. You've got your pc with a
picture. So he picks up this reprehensible life - not only reprehensible
since he came from lower Chicago but reprehensible on the basis of being a
swine merchant, you see - and he wants nothing to do with any part of this.
So we pick up pictures of Joe Jinks, a body, sitting at a desk. And he is
always over there. And we try to run the life of Joe Jinks, and if the
auditor's not aware of these things, and he hasn't got good subjective
reality on what can happen in the bank, he does all kinds of weird, oddball
things, like said, "Well, go through the incident again." So the fellow
looks at the picture again. It's way over there, it's very thin, there's
not much to it, you know. Doesn't bother him.
So he goes through the incident again, and that's hun-hum. Well, not only
does it have anything - nothing to do with the pc, but that is the basic
postulate in it: It has nothing to do with him. That is his solution to the
problem.
And that's what we mean by "out of valence." He's always seeing himself
from the area of the reception couch, or he's seeing himself from the
chandelier, or he's seeing himself from someplace else, and the picture's
very thin, and the body that he was in that lifetime is over there. You
see, there is no virtue in being in valence, but the pc has to be in
valence in order to run a picture.
And I repeat, this does not mean that he is being himself. Pc in valence
and pc being himself are two entirely foreign, different statements that
have nothing to do with each other, because as long as he is occupying a
body and thinks of the body as himself, he is of course not being himself
but is being a body, and that body, of course, is a valence. Do I make my
point?
All right. So you're running him "out of valence." That is, it has gone to
this reductio ad absurdum and complete abstranormity - extremity that not
only is he not being himself, but he is also out of valence. Now, how does
this express itself when he sees a picture?
Well, it's sort of thin and there isn't much to it, you know. And it's a
little thing and it's over there and it's pretty black, you see, and
nothing to do with him. And it doesn't have any somatics in it. "This stuff
Ron talks about about somatics, ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! I never had any somatics,
and so forth. Actually, my lumbosis is a physical illness. This thing that
is gouging me in the back, you see, has nothing to do with engrams, you
see, because I'm not in any engrams, you see. There's that thing way over
there. It has nothing to do with me," you see. This is quite remarkable.
Now, if the auditor is not aware of the phenomena of this character, he can
make some of the most classic errors ever made. That is, he runs a pc this
way and he runs the pc that way, and he goes through this and asks the pc,
"Do you have a picture?"
And the pc says, "Yes, I have a picture."
And the auditor never says, "Well, what do you think a picture is? Well,
where are you viewing this picture from? What mass of meat are you
occupying during the script of this picture?" See?
That's interesting, isn't it. You never ask this, so of course, obviously,
the pc is running off his pictures, and obviously the pc is handling his
bank, and obviously it's all going all off all right, right according to
textbook.
And we say, "Well, do you have any pictures?"
"Yes. I have a picture."
"Well, what's happening in the picture there?"
"Well, there's a fellow standing there with a headsman's ax, and he's about
ready to chop off the - my head, and so forth."
"All right. Does the ax fall?"
"Oh, yes, yes, the ax fell. It's all right. Everything's fine."
And the auditor says, "Boy, are we really making knots." And he just never
finds out that the fellow with the headsman's ax - well, he's sort of thin,
you see. He's actually kind of an idea of a fellow with a headman's ax, and
is way over there where it's good and safe. Way, way over there.
Fascinating.
Of course, nothing happens with the picture. Why? Because you were not
running the picture the pc saw. You are merely running some cooked up, safe
version, you see. And the safe version, of course - it isn't that the text
is different. The text'll be the same, but the safe version is, we never
view it from the same viewpoint that it was viewed from. And if we don't do
that, the thing never as-ises. So pcs who are run in that condition, no
matter whether it's some old process or Routine 3, apparently never get
anyplace.
Don't pay any attention to a picture - the pc is not in his own valence.
It's not a picture. Won't do him any good. You could run them by the
hundreds of billions. It won't do him any good. You're not running engrams.
It has nothing to do with it. He won't even be able to get off grief
charge.
Now, the funny part of it is that all this phenomena I'm telling you about
is very old and very well known. Way back. But it has never been punched
up. Never been punched up. Because we haven't connected the pictures and
anatomy of Dianetics with the conceptual processes of Scientology.
Now, the conceptual processes of Scientology have this magnificent virtue.
They will move a guy straight back into the picture he is in that is
charging up the chain he is stuck in that make him out of valence from that
point there on. And no matter what pc you're running, no matter how many
pictures he sees, and so forth, eventually he will wind up in his own
valence. And now if the auditor doesn't know his business, he won't make
him handle it.
Now, we've run and run and run, and all of a sudden the person is in a
picture, and he is in his (quote) "own valence," don't you see, meaning
some body that he's in, with eighteen valences stuck inside of it, don't
you see. But as far as the picture is concerned, he's at the point of view
from which he viewed the picture while it happened. See, that's important.
And he runs back to this, and he goes zoooooomp! and out of there.
"Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha. Well, I got out of that." Well, of course, he did exactly
what he did before. The way to get out of that was never again to be in
that body. That was the solution to the case as far as he was concerned,
and so we don't then try to persuade him in some particular fashion, by
directing his attention mainly and only, to stick with it, until the
process you're running knocks it out. Because they don't sort out
endlessly. They don't do it. That is all there is to it.
Now, there are several approaches to this if you understand it. Actually,
you can build up little cardboard models and demonstrate this to students
if you wanted to. You could show - oh, I don't know, get some of these kid
cutouts of some kind or another, and you say, "Well, in own valence is the
thing viewed from inside this body and the pc was occupying this body and
therefore if you get the idea there, you look and you will see that
everything he sees is from the viewpoint of this body here. Now, of course
if you are trying to run this engram with the pc's viewpoint up here, while
he was actually viewing it from down here, of course you are not running
anything that ever happened. See? You're running an entirely dislocated
thing."
Well, all right. That's fine. You could make a very graphic representation
of this. It becomes very simple. And make sure that you say, "Well, the pc
is not himself if he is in any valence. So don't confuse being himself with
being in a valence or having his own valence."
You see, anybody who's sitting there looking at the scenery from inside of
a body has a valence. That's for sure, but the pictures he is making from
where he is looking at them, of course, is the track. That is the track.
And trying to run a bunch of branch railroads - you see, where he's never
looking at things in pictures from where he looked at them in the actual
incident itself, of course this is just running branch railroads. This is
running the shunt line from south Birmingham to north Colchester, you see,
which had nothing to do with the railway, and you won't get anything even
vaguely resembling an erasure. And so these things last forever.
This is the secret of a hanging engram. Of course, it isn't a hanging
engram. The auditor never asked anybody about it. It isn't an engram. It's
a picture of an engram. And you're running a secondary situation - misuse
of the word secondary, but you're using a removed situation. You're trying
to erase a picture that never occurred.
Of course, the incident that the picture is of occurred, but the only safe
thing to do about this is to get off someplace when he sees it in the bank,
you see, and be way over here someplace and look at it very safely. It's
not going to erase.
Well, how many ways would there be to remedy this situation? Well,
actually, practically countless. I'll tell you one of the oldest methods of
re - of handling this situation, and then you can see a little bit more
about the mechanics of it.
Maybe I ought to tell you the simplest method first. That'd be best. I'll
tell you the simplest method.
You say, "Have you ever seen a picture from inside the body that you were
in at the time the thing was occurring?" You know, explaining own valence
to the fellow. "Have you ever seen a picture of this character? Have you
ever had one during processing?"
And very often some pc who has been a long time in processing will say,
"Aye, aye, I have. I have. Yes."
"Well then, which ones are they?"
"Well, there was one there when I was in this automobile, and there was
this road and - out in front of me, and the other car hit us. And I ran
into that one."
"What did you do at the time?"
"Well, I ran into that one, and that was - hasn't very much to do with the
Case, you know. Ha-ha-ha-ha!" Hasn't had anything to do with it since.
Great.
And now, what that was, is a restimulated engram. And of course, the
restimulation died out in a few days, but he still remembers this.
All right, and you say, "Well, were there any others?"
"Well, I had an - I had a thing that really upset me. I was very shaky on
the subject of past lives till one day I was sitting on this horse, you
know, and this chariot ran on from the right, came in from the right and
knocked me off the horse. And that was quite real."
And you say, "Well, what was the picture exactly? Were you seeing the
picture from where you were sitting on the horse?"
"Oh, yes, yes! That was what was upsetting about the whole thing. Ha-ha."
And you say, "Well, all right. That's good. That's good now. What did you
do during processing about that?"
"Well, I answered the auditing question. That was it."
Ah-ha! We've got two of them in the pc right now. We've got two of them
that we can lambaste and finish up. All right, let's take the earliest one.
That is always the best thing to do unless it's too early - you know, like
the rock or something. Take the early one, and - which is the guy sitting
on a horse. And you say, All right. Now, do you remember the auditing
session in which this occurred?"
"Well, yeah, vaguely, dimly."
"Well, I don't want the exact date. But you do remember that? All right.
And do you remember anything about the auditing question that you answered
for that? Good."
"Yeah. Well, so-and-so and so-and-so."
"All right. Well, what is unknown about that incident about the horse?" and
so forth.
"I - well, just what you asked me. I really don't know what auditing
session it was."
"All right. Good. And what else is unknown about that incident with the
horse?"
And "Well, the auditing command. I actually haven't really remembered the
auditing command."
"All right. And what else is unknown about that incident with the horse?"
"Well, it's uh. . . Zzzzzzzzzz. You know, if you keep this up, I'm going to
have a horse over here."
"Well, don't worry about that, you know, don't worry about it; everything
will be all right. Now, what else is unknown about this?" Crash! See.
Aaaaaaaaaaaa.
Man, he'll be out of present time. And don't you do a bad job of auditing
right at that point, see. Just run the incident - the command I was giving
you just flat. "What else don't you know about that incident with the
horse?" see.
"I don't know this, and I don't know that, and I don't know something else,
and I don't know something else, and I don't know something else, and I
don't know something else." And in a very few minutes, that'll be flat. But
also he will find out something: that he'd skipped out on it; that it did
exist; that it was there; and not only that, but has been with him ever
since, and has always been with him, and he's never been anyplace but
sitting on this horse. This will dawn on him eventually if you run it good
and flat, with just Unknown. You can also run, "What shouldn't be known
about it?" and "What should be forgotten about it?" or any other variation
of the Not-Know, see.
And you'll have yourself quite an incident there. And it'll build up 3-D
and scare him half to death. And remember, boy, will he be out of present
time. That's the time to do real smooth auditing, and yourself have a
pretty good reality on the fellow actually in a thenness which isn't a
nowness. And it will keep you from collapsing his thenness onto nowness by
adjusting the cans of the E-Meter because they might be getting too warm.
It's these kinds of things that collapse thenness and nowness and keep the
guy from running an engram. You got the idea?
All right. Now, we look at this: There is a fundamental method - I don't at
this time know of any better method than this. And I'll give you an old
method. It's a simple method of doing it. Just find out if he ever has been
and put him back into it.
Well, if he's never been in one of these things and he can't recall any and
it's all just garbage and black and invisible ink, well, there's something
else you can do about it. There's an old process that does this, rather
arduously, but it eventually accomplishes this exact thing, which is,
"Recall an ARC break." Now, that's an awfully stylized auditing command,
almost totally limited to processing Scientologists. But "Recall an ARC
break" would be pretty well guaranteed to unstack a track to a point where
he would find himself in the incident that was upsetting to him. It's an
interesting one, isn't it?
Don't interfere with whether he's calling these things from motivators,
he's calling motivator ARC breaks, motivator ARC breaks. Well, he'll get it
back to a motivator incident. Don't try to put him in the overt side of the
sequence. Don't do anything about it at all. Just run recall an ARC break
and pay attention to where he's landing on the track, and he will
eventually land at the base of some chain where he is in his own valence
and something is happening. That is pretty good.
I suppose you could vary the auditing command so that it'd make it
comprehensible to a non-Scientologist, but I've never put in any time on
that. And I'm giving a lecture now to Scientologists, so let's skip it.
That one will do it. All right, there's another one that will do it.
Had a fellow last night, and I noticed that he kept asking me about his
eyes. I didn't tell him it was a Security Check question that cures up eyes
and eye difficulties faster than anything, is what - the exact auditing
command I've given you in lectures before. It's something on the order of:
"What shouldn't be seen - what have you done that shouldn't be seen?" And
that will just ruin more glass prescriptions than anything you ever had in
the way of eyesight. Just keep security checking on that basis and clear
the meter left and right and in the middle, and so forth. "What have you
done that shouldn't be seen?" And, of course, he's preventing seeingness
like mad of something he's done, that's all. People hearing this lecture
probably have just now thought of what one of them is, and others have
heard a ticking automaticity, because it'll very often send off an
automaticity. Well, it's restraint of inspection. But I didn't tell this
fellow about it. And instead of that, he was complaining about a mass that
seemed to be resident behind his eyes someplace. So I gave him the easy
one. Here is another method of doing this exact thing. And I said, "Get the
idea of some action going on way out there in front of you two or three
hundred yards away." He did.
I said, "What was it?"
"Uhh!" he said, "Well, oddly enough," he said, "I get my mother and driving
in a car."
And I said, "All right. Good. Now, conceive of an action two or three
hundred yards behind you." And he got a dog or something.
I said, "What's happened to this mass that you're complaining about, back
of your eyes?"
"Well, it's shifted. It's moved."
I wasn't processing him and told him so, but obviously, the man was stuck
in the picture, wasn't he. But as near as he could look toward the picture
he was stuck in was way out, and that is quite common. Action that is that
far away is safer than action that is up close so people will see it.
Now, you could just follow this thing through - which I didn't. I just
moved the somatic around and changed it all around and did something with
it and explained to him that these things are pictures. He was quite
amazed. He had been processed, but he was quite amazed to connect up these
odd sensations he had with this, you know, with the idea of pictures, see.
He couldn't conceive of himself being stuck in a picture. He obviously was
stuck in a picture or he wouldn't have had a mass. That was it.
But he could look at that distance. And you could follow this through and
take a process of this type, which is inspection at distance, and you would
eventually wind up with the guy in the picture he was stuck in. It would
peel it right on down to where he was. Interesting idea, huh?
If you yourself have a somatic, and you're prone to self-auditing, why, you
can always inspect something way out. Only make it two or three hundred
yards. Of course, your attention at once will start collapsing on two or
three hundred micro-millimeters, but uh - I mean in close, you know. You
look out there, oh-uh-thu-thu-du. And the next thing you know, you're
floundering around, you don't know what's happening to you, you know. Get
your attention out there again, you see. Get your attention way back there
and way over to the right and way over to the left and way below you and
way above you, and so forth. And you're peeling off some environment of
some kind or another that has been a stuck environment.
You can also get in lots of somatics and lots of trouble and have to have
auditing, and be able to gasp - be able to gasp over the telephone to a
friend of yours, "For God's sakes, come over and audit me before I die in
the middle of the living room." I - this - randomity can set up with
something like that, but you'd survive it.
Anyhow, there is a method of peeling one down. Now, because you are
extremely devoted to repetitive processes and we have to have repetitive
processes and they are the thing to do... But when you get into handling a
case, you have to interrogate and do other things, and a repetitive process
is not enough. It has to be punched up. But I'll give you a repetitive
process. I'm not running them down.
Pc has a disabled leg. We discover this by interrogation of the pc and
observation of the pc, and we are limited in this solely and entirely by
this one point. It is obvious to us that he has a bad leg, but the pc never
mentions it. He keeps talking about his burning ear.
Well, we'd better not go into bad legs because it's not real to him. But
the pc tells us he has a bad leg, we observe that he has a bad leg, and so
forth. Or if he tells us he has a burning ear, and we happen to observe
this, we could run exactly the same regimen on either of these.
Now, what we're asking for is if he has any odd pressures. Now, these could
be his face, his chest, his stomach, his legs, his back, his gluteus
maximus, his mea culpa, anything, you see. It doesn't matter what,
anatomically. This will be what is called a psychosomatic and will be his
chronic psychosomatic illness. And will also be probably his hidden
standard and will also be numerous other things that we wrestle with. See.
All right. Here's the way to handle it. This is brutal, by the way. It is
quite brutal, and the auditor has to be very good and stay in there
pitching with the pc.
All right. Now, it's "Who would have an unknown motion around his leg?" We
use this new thing, this valence thing, and it is the valence, you see. And
then we could compound the felony by asking what. "What would have an
unknown motion around it's leg?" "Who would have an unknown motion around
his leg (her leg)?" I wish English was a little more adaptable on genders.
English is gender happy. You can usually become colloquial and say "their
leg" and this covers the whole thing.
English actually - the people do try to put a dual gender pronoun in there.
You know, they say "their," making it plural.
All right. This sort of question will knock out infinite numbers of chronic
somatics providing you flatten it. And it's flattened on the tone arm just
as any other process. Now, you're getting into something you're more
familiar with. This is an easy one to do. But it is quite brutal. It is
quite brutal.
Pc complains all the time that he's got this sensation in his nose. Well,
this would be what you did with his nose, see. Got a sensation on his nose.
All right. Pc complains all the time that there is no - absolutely no
sensation around the right arm. Same process. No sensation - absence of
sensation and presence of sensation both respond to the same process.
Now, there's a way to amplify this idea and be a little more positive about
it, and that is to shake down on the E-Meter what is the most real to the
pc. Motion or confusion or some other thing, some other word, meaning
action. Could be the word action, don't you see. It could be lots of
things. Anything denoting commotion, action, confusion and so forth. Find
the best word.
The Secondary Scale of the Prehav Scale at the level of Motion gives you
most of these synonyms. And you would assess out the command, and then you
would use the same command form. You would say, "Who and what unknown
______" whatever word you found, you see, commotion, confusion, action. I
suppose you'd find some pcs that have attitude. I'm sure that'd be as close
as they could get to anything like motion would be attitude. Because the
idea - they pull back into ideas. They're down below effort and into think,
you see. Don't omit attitude.
I should say in passing, by the way, there's a way of running the whole
Prehav Scale without assessment. If you were ever caught out in the middle
of the bush, the veldt, or the deserts of New York without a Prehav Scale,
there is a way of running it, rather crude. Use action or attitude. Just
use the words action or attitude for any level. Got the idea?
"King." All right. You're running - the pc's terminal is "king." And you
say, "Action - what action or attitude would you have toward king?" or
something of that sort. "What action or attitude would the king have toward
you? What action or attitude would king have towards another? What action
or attitude another toward a king? What action or attitude would a king
have toward himself?" You get how you could do that?
Actually, it runs the whole Prehav Scale in a very haphazard, impositive
but workable fashion. It's probably only five times as long as a proper
assessment. But if you ran total out of assessment material, and you
couldn't get an assessment, and the pc wasn't going Clear, you see, and the
needle was stuck, and the tone arm hadn't moved for ages, and so forth, and
you assumed there must be some level that you knew not what of or wasn't on
the scale or something of the sort - after you made sure the rudiments are
in, and after you've made sure you'd handled any hidden standard or
anything like this - psychosomatic, present time problem of long duration,
all this sort of thing - after you had all this straight, you still
couldn't get anything on the thing, you could still use action or attitude.
What it is, is just doingness pure and simple. It's the idea or doingness.
And the whole of the Prehav Scale is devoted to idea or doingness. So
action or attitude phrases it up so that it can be run as a sort of a
blanket command, and it's an interesting thing for you to know just in
passing. It's a datum you should have. Remember it isn't good, it merely
works - to no great, high level of workability, but it goes on through.
Extends the auditing time rather tremendously, but it will work.
Okay. When I find these little bits and pieces of this character, I like to
pass them along to you whether they have vast usages or not, because you
may sometime or another be, as I say, in the deserts of north Hollywood. I
don't think anybody in Hollywood has been able to read for the last hundred
years. They deal exclusively in pictures.
All right. Now, let's get a little bit further on this line. This would be
then a method of handling the hidden standard, the chronic somatic, the
complaint of the pc, the difficulty which he is always bringing up, and so
forth. It'd be something on the order of "Unknown (assessed word)" which
adds up to motion. What you're heading for in that, I'll point up to you
again: You're heading for motion. You want unknown motion; that motion
itself may not express itself well to the pc. See, it'd be best - work much
better with "unknown confusion.''
For instance, I was dealing with somebody who had no concept of motion.
That can be run into. Wouldn't bang on an E-Meter, nothing like that.
"Motion? What the hell is motion?"
"Well, motion is a vague idea that people have that something is changing
position in space."
"Well, yeah, but what is motion? What is motion? Have you ever seen a
motion?"
"Oh, I'm sure that I've seen a motion. How silly. Of course, I must have
seen a motion at some time or another. Naturally. Everybody has seen a
motion at some time or another."
"Well, name a motion you have seen."
"(sigh) Name a motion I have seen. Well, I don't know but everybody has
seen a motion."
Didn't have any concept of the idea of motion at all. Had no concept of
motion. I don't know what all these - this person did a lot of driving.
That's why I resigned finally from the Road Safety Committee. People never
would undertake any program that had anything whatsoever to do with road
safety. I'm saving the fact that I resigned in order to send in a scathing
statement at some time or another which lays down a program which actually
just puts more punch to the program I've had in mind for some time. "Why I
resigned as Road Safety Organizer," see, I mean, this is the keynote of the
thing. Then everybody pays attention to it because this is obviously a
complaint, you see, and is a bunch of entheta and.... Somebody's mad, you
know, and that's fine.
All right. Now, we look over all of the - these aspects, of bank and
pictures, and so forth, and we find out at once why the pc will not view
his bank. He will not view his bank because he has tremendous intolerance
of two things. He has a tremendous intolerance of motion and he has
tremendous intolerance of unknowns.
Now, his intolerance of motion is best expressed to you on the basis of:
motion can become intolerant to somebody - he can become intolerant about
motion - to somebody who is extremely fixated on the subject of pain.
If this person is fixated on pain, then he believes that all motion adds up
to pain. He has no other concept of motion than it is pain. Well, motion,
of course, makes pain possible. And pain cannot occur without motion. And
you see somebody that you're kicking in the stomach stiffen up and try not
to have any motion. Next time you're kicking somebody in the stomach (out
of session, of course) notice the fact that they are trying to stop motion.
Well, that's very interesting. The reason they're trying to stop motion is
incomprehensible unless they love pain. Because that's the only way pain
occurs.
If you had a thetan who wasn't trying to stop motion around the body, the
body would experience no pain. It's just as simple as that. If he weren't
trying to stop motion, he wouldn't suffer from motion. Of course, he's
picked out motion as randomity and there he is.
And the next time you have an ache or a pain, why, notice the fact that it
seems to occur from two opposing motions. Just get analytical about it and
observe it. It's two opposing motions and they sort of grind against each
other or something of the sort, and the sensation on that tiny, tiny, tiny
motion between those two opposing areas gives the sensation called pain.
That is what pain is. Pain isn't anything more than that. And there hasn't
been enough of it so thetans don't like it. Well anyhow - it's true of all
things - there haven't been enough of, why, people don't like them. Okay?
Now, in handling a pc who has no bank visible, these factors then must be
present: that he has an intolerance of pain, therefore an intolerance of
motion, therefore an intolerance of unknowns. Not necessarily therefore -
these two things are different spheres. But doesn't like motion; doesn't
like unknowns.
He has a fantastic importance attached to motion. And he has a fantastic
importance attached to unknowns. He'll give you a fabulously exaggerated
idea of the importance of an unknown. And you'll find him nattering
something like this: Well, if he doesn't know about what all the fish are
doing off of Dover just now, why, anything could happen.
And you say, "Well, wait a minute now. He's not in Dover. He's not in the
fishing business. He has nothing to do with Dover. He had never been clear
- or near Dover and Dover has nothing to doo with him," and so forth. Here
he's talking about the fish off Dover, and he's worried about what fish are
doing off Dover. And he wants to find out about what the fish are doing off
Dover because it is very important and you can't quite make out how it's
important. Well, don't assign the fact that the fellow's crazy. Just assign
the fact the fellow has one Christ-awful intolerance on the subject of the
motion of fish and the unknowns of fish, and that's it. It just sums up to
that. He has intolerance of these things. These things he can't confront,
and he happens to have picked out for his randomity the vast importance
connected with one body of motion, i.e., the fish off Dover.
You finally plumb into it and he learned when he was a little boy that they
had soles off Dover or something. He's never quite sure about this, and in
church, why, they were telling him all the time he had to save his soul,
and it's as close as he could get to the soul are those fish off Dover. You
know, it would be some squirrel cage - I mean it would be as idiotic, you
see, as this. But it'll be some super-importance about this particular
unknown. We see this all the time and we pass it by. We just sort of not-is
it. We see people terribly, terribly worried about the terrible, terrible
conditions of the natives in Upper Slobovia. And don't be too surprised
sometime to go to Upper Slobovia and find the happiest natives you ever ran
into. You got the idea?
And similarly, everybody's very complacent about the natives of southern
East Germany. Nobody's worrying about the natives of southern East Germany,
and they're in a terrible condition, you see. So it's just a fad. It's what
- it's - "What natives we are worried aboutt at the time" and "What natives
we are not worried about at the time" are regulated totally with how much
unknown seems to be connected to these things and how important that
unknownness seems to be to the person. And the most unknownness there can
be is the unknownness about motion. That is the most important unknownness.
You'll find the fellow is suffering a somatic all out of proportion merely
because he didn't even know he was going to be hit. And he was hit. And you
find out that he'll stick with this somatic, and the somatic is there. Yet
he's been run over by a truck, and that somatic isn't sticking. But
somebody has walked up to him suddenly and said, "Hello, Joe," and slapped
him in the face hard enough to crack his jaw, see. And this somatic is
stuck. But it wasn't actually a very brutal thing, and five minutes later,
why, he didn't even realize he'd been hit. You know, I mean he didn't have
any physical damage from the thing. And you find in vain trying to evaluate
the importance of an engram to the preclear is the most fruitless task you
can possibly engage upon, because he's been run over by trucks since time
immemorial, and he just never, never, never, never, never seems to attach
any importance whatsoever to this fact.
Oh well, yes, he was run over with a truck when he was a small boy, and
they sent him to the hospital, and he had a cast on his arm for a couple of
weeks, couple of months, couple of years - depending on what doctor he hit.
And, yeah, he had another accident. He was run over by a truck when he was
seven, and he was run over by a truck when he was ten, and he was run over
by a truck when he was eleven. Well, he's become accustomed to it. And you
won't find these somatics very rough.
But a switching he got when he was five he has exaggerated into the most
familial battle royal that anybody had ever heard of. My God, to hear him
tell about this thing, why, there was blood plastered all over the ceiling,
and the only reason the neighbors came in is because of the bits of flesh
that kept flying out of the woodshed, you see. This kind of thing. To hear
him tell it, you know, this was the wildest activity, you know. They
imported an executioner from Italy just specially, you see, to whip him.
And you boil this thing down and you in vain try to find any real brutality
about it. All you do is find a switching that you yourself would not have
considered very important. But it's very important to him!
In the first place, somebody blew up at him that he didn't ever expect to
blow up, you see. So that's unpredicted, which gives you the unknown. And
somebody switched him for something he didn't do, which, of course, is not
known too. Unjust. Injustice is just an unknown penalty of some kind. It's
a penalty for an unknown crime or a not-existent crime, you see.
So there was injustice connected with it, there was unprediction connected
with it, and in addition to that there was no real familiarity connected
with it, and amongst these various points we get the unknownness and the
motion all adding up to tremendous importance. He's still trying to figure
it out. You can say the importances of anything is as great as the
individual is still trying to figure it out. And you'll find those engrams
which are most seriously stuck on the track are those engrams which are
composed of incomprehensibles.
The fellow went - kept calling on this girl, and he kept calling on the
girl, and he'd wave to her from the window, and so forth. It was rather a
strict planet on the subject of sex, they didn't have much. See, he keeps
calling on this girl, and it seems all right with him, you see. And he
thinks he's getting someplace with... He didn't intend anything very
gruesome, you know, and he was sort of paying court in the way they were
doing on this particular planet or country, and it all seemed very routine
and regular. And one day he drives up and runs into an ambuscade. A real
one. A real ambuscade, you see, complete with muskets, you know? And he's
slaughtered!
Well, he didn't have any intentions that match this slaughter, and he
doesn't know what would cause that family, you see, to be this upset about
somebody paying court to their daughter. And he adds up - tries to keep
adding this up. He keeps adding this up, you see. Keeps adding it up. Keeps
adding it up. And it doesn't ever add up, of course. And he'll get some
kind of a fixed idea about it, and he'll say, "Well, that's it." But the
number of times he tells you that that is the fixed idea about it and that
is it, you can start being suspicious about that time because, of course,
if he has to have a fixed idea about something, the unknownness of it must
have been terrific. He says, Well, in actuality her father and she
practiced incest and they were afraid to find it out. And nobody could
quite discover what this was all about. And if I had paid court to her much
longer, why, something like that would have happened, and that is the way
it was, and that was the thing, I think. I guess. No, no. It's actually a
fact. Everybody in the neighborhood knew that she and her father practiced
incest and, therefore, her father set her brothers on me, you see, to shoot
me down in order to keep me from finding this out, and that is what it is.
That's true, it's true. Everybody in the neighborhood knew it. As a matter
of fact, it was in all the papers, so forth - I think, I guess, or
something else. But that was the way it was! I guess."
And you audit a little while. All of a sudden he comes out of a fog and he
says, "You know, she'd actually been pledged to marry the local duke. And
this was all being kept secret, you see, because the duke's politics were
completely contrary to most of the people's politics, and there might have
been quite a revolution, you see, and they had me figured out as an agent
that was merely trying to reach the duke. I think. I guess."
All the time he's telling you this, why, these musket balls are still
lodged in various portions of his anatomy, and he has got somatics from all
of them, you see. And every time he gets on this subject, he gets hectic
because these musket balls were hot at the time, and he's never quite dared
to feel that littleness of the motion of the heat, you see. And these
musket balls start warming up every time he gets onto the mystery of this.
So therefore he solves the mystery, but he never solves the mystery right.
So he's just been floundering around in this engram - I can see him now.
He's on some other planet, and he is a member of the space guard of this
particular planet in its polar caps. And he has an igloo in which he's
supposed to stand by, you see, as a warning, and he's sitting in this
igloo. And life has been going on fairly well while they were building the
igloo in the station. He's sitting there, and about two months later, all
of a sudden he starts to wonder, "Well, now, I guess it was that she was
going to marry the... No, it was father's incest with uh - the uh - uh - uh
- situation. I wonder what that was. Now, llet's see, it must have been..."
You get the idea?
And eventually he gets an illness of some kind or another and has to be
carted out of the polar caps and hospitalized for a long time. And the
medicos issue very learned papers on the subject of "Polar caps cause
illnesses which are hot, burning spots in somebody's chest." And they, of
course, become very learned on the subject, and they have very, very vast
conferences, and so forth, and they bring this up at their meetings, and
they read papers on it. And you've got this piece of pretended knowingness
borne as an effort not to face the unknownness of it, you see. And this
goes on and on and on. And the primary recipient, of course, would be the
medical profession. I think there's probably a fact or two in their books,
but most of them are based on some wild effort to solve what: A
psychosomatic with a physiological explanation. And what could there be a
wilder lie than that?
The fellow has got hot musket balls in his chest, so they say, "Well,
there's a new illness called 'polarolosis,'" and here it is.
It's very amusing to read medical records when you know a great deal about
the mind and so on. They present you with everything but the facts. They
sure give you a lot of learned names to back it up too. And if you want to
know a real piece of pretended knowingness, look at the heading on it and
see how many authorities had to be called on to vouch for it. And then if
you get four or five authorities or hospitals which have vouched for all of
this, you can just be sure at that time it should have been garbage cans at
the beginning, and somebody should have audited the patient. You see how
this thing goes?
It is the idea of the importance of the unknownness, and the idea of the
importance of the motion. And these things drop back to the degree of
threat to survival. And then this, therefore, goes back to the idea that
one must survive. And you start taking this apart from all lines, and you
get down to the basic idiocy. A thetan who can't help but survive - he just
couldn't help himself. He may be surviving kind of deadly and in different
forms and out of valence, and so forth, but the one thing he cannot do
anything else but, is survive. He always will survive. That's for sure. The
one thing he can absolutely count on is the one thing he is always trying
to solve, which is, of course, itself is a basic idiocy. And, of course,
everything else which follows from that basic idiocy, of course, is
idiotic.
But if you want to take this apart, you take it apart along the road of
unknown and motion, and these two items give you a very broad four-lane
highway right down through the middle. And of course you combine any
phraseology that has to do with unknown - which is not-know, forget,
forgotten; any of the odd numbered postulates - and you combine this with
any word which sums up to a motion or transplantation in space, and you
will get a process, which is a wild one.
Now, if you put that against valences, you will get pc in pictures, and it
gives you your basic magic formula for getting the pc into the track and
onto the track and in the bank and moving on the track and out of detached
views and all these other ills that we are - have been discussing. Make any
sense to you?
When you see one of these things wheeling off, it's a lot of fun. This gag
of telling somebody to look out there two or three hundred yards in front
of him and two or three hundred yards behind him is not very new. But let
me warn you against having him look ten or twelve feet in front of him or
ten or twelve feet behind him. That's too close. He'll jump like he's shot.
Usually in space opera when they are conditioning thetans - or when thetans
are conditioning others - they - sometimes there's a tumbler incident, that
nearly everybody has some cognizance of or is stuck in or something like
this. It's quite common.
And they throw somebody in a body down a shaft, and of course he's
spinning, so the bottom of the shaft is lighted and the top of the shaft is
lighted, and he is falling in the shaft. And therefore, the image of the
top of the shaft and the image of the bottom of the shaft leave an awful
lot of bright spots because he's trying to stop himself from falling all
the way down. So he gets a vast number of bright spots stuck around him at
varying distances, and he doesn't quite know what these are afterwards. And
that is the way the picture looks.
Well, these are not very far from him, and some of them are quite close to
him, naturally, because he fell only a short distance to get the closest
ones, and he fell further to get the further ones, and I haven't made any
estimate of how far one of these bright spots would be, but probably
something on the order of about - well, I don't know - a hundred feet,
something like that.
And you tell anybody to look in closer than a hundred feet just on casual
inspection, he's liable to run into these things, and they will really hit
him. Very casually, you could be riding on a bus and tell some dear old
lady, if you felt particularly diabolical, you say, "Close your eyes. Do
you have any bright spots around you ten or twelve feet away from you?" And
she'll get it right there. Splank! She'll see one of these things. She'll
get the sensation of motion, you see, and she'll stop herself suddenly. And
it'll be a jolt. That's an interesting phenomena. That's an old, old space
opera installation of an engram. And practically everybody's got that one.
There's whole long - oh, there's long, long lists of these. Any possible
way you could get somebody, what? Dislocated.
Now, I told you the other day about dreams. Dreams. An effort to locate
oneself. Then what is a delusory bank? Let's carry it just one step
further. Instead of dreaming it asleep, how about having it in the bank
awake? Effort to locate oneself.
Out of this you get the workability and magic of 8-C, TR 10, other things.
They have some workability because, of course, they're locating somebody
and they feel better.
But how about locating somebody in the bank. Well, nearly every picture
he's got is an effort to locate himself in an area where he felt
dislocated. So unknown locations could play a considerable role and unknown
times could play a considerable role in other processes. I don't
particularly mean to cover those now, but I should mention to you that you
can have unknown locations, and you can do weird things with pictures. Have
the pc spot unknown locations. Of course, he shakes up every delusory
effort to locate himself by pictures. And you'll get pictures flying by in
all directions.
"Are there any locations you don't know about?" You see, that type of
interrogation. Bing-bang, and all of a sudden you get a bank shift. It's
quite amusing - then the fact that an individual is sitting in a bank which
locates him so he'll be in the wrong place.
Now, if you went further than that, reductio ad absurdum, you could get
down to this interesting supposition that a universe is an effort to locate
oneself. And you'd possibly get the basic consent of why a thetan is
willing to be in a universe.
It's an effort to locate himself. Therefore, because a thetan doesn't have
to be located, and it's totally idiotic - I point out in the 1954 HPA tapes
when this is mentioned - it's totally idiotic to have to be located.
There's no good reason why anybody would have to be located. It must be a
dirty trick then to locate a thetan, and it is. It is. Give him the idea
that he has to have a location.
But that is such the fundamental idea and goes back of every universe, and
is back of every bank, and is so wrapped around and hedged around with
reasons, explanations, valences and all the rest of it, that we must assume
that it is practically unreachable as a concept in processing. And there
are many such very senior concepts in processing, that if you could just
think them and realize them, flash! you see - not on any gradient but just
suddenly say, "Well, there's no reason I should have to be located, you
know," and bang! you're Clear, just like that, you see. These are the
thoughts that you think you should be able to think. But of course, you set
all these other things in motion every time you think those, but then you
stop them if you have an allergy to motion. See, so you think, "Well, I
ought to be - why, I could be cleared, very easy, all I have to do is get
the idea that I don't have to be located." Diiiing you see, and things go
bzzuuup and bzzuuup, and you don't like all that motion, so you say,
"Stop." And also you stop it because you don't know what was moving. So
there's again the unknown and the motion which blocks the road out to the
release of a concept.
Now, you go a little bit further than this, and it must have been some kind
of overt to locate thetans. And all of you must have been busily locating
thetans madly, viciously, and so on, in order to pile up enough overts that
the thing would stick with you to this degree, you see. Well, that's all
very fine, but this must be prior to the overt act - motivator phenomena.
So you think the thought and you run into the overt act - motivator
phenomena just up the track a ways, you see, bang! And you try to think the
thought again or the concept of "Well, I don't have to be located," and
bang! you get into the overt - motivator phenomena. And that is another
blocker which is a cousin to what I have been talking about.
Now, you could run somebody: "Think of locating somebody. Thank you. Think
of locating somebody. Thank you. Think of locating somebody. Thank you."
For a little while, why, the thetan says, "Gee," you know, "that was good
of me, you know? This old lady. She couldn't cross the street. She didn't
know where she was, and I told her where she was, and, ah, that's nice of
me, you know." And he gets all these "nice of hims," you know, and these
"nice of hims" and these "nice of hims" and then he finally gets nailing
this fellow down, you see, to this plank, you see. And "What's this? Well,
I - I don't know why this fellow's being nailed down to the plank. I didn't
have anything to do with it. Actually, my men wanted me to do it, and I
didn't have any choice. No, I didn't have anything to do with it. It's
torturing him for some reason or another," and all of a sudden it dawns on
him, "I'm locating him. But they - they wanted me to locate him. I - I
didn't have anything to do with it myself, you see. I'm just an innocent
bystander. I was an officer on this ship, and the crew had mutinied, I
think. I guess. And that was why we were nailing this fellow down, I
suppose." So you get this and then you get another one.
"Well, as a matter of fact, that - that - that's locating somebody. Yeah, I
can get the idea of locating somebody, pretty vicious, you know. Get the
idea of locating somebody. That's pretty mean, you know. Get the idea of lo
- . Gee, that's mean, you know."
Then the fellow goes into a total dispersal on the whole thing, and he
himself can't feel he's located anyplace, and he becomes very difficult to
audit. In other words, it's not a very good track for auditing, but it's
just a potential road.
It's one of these potential roads that is very nice, that you could drive
from - straight from here to Italy with no difficulty whatsoever on a
straight line. You wouldn't have to mind falling off many precipices, or
running head-on into any mountains, you see, or drowning in any rivers. If
you didn't mind that, why, the best way to get to Italy, you see, is just
to drive straight to Italy. You take somebody who has a tremendous allergy
to unknowns and tremendous allergy to motions, combine these things and
then ask him to run one of these senior concepts, you see - and of course,
he'll run into the other one all the time and bing-bang.
Now, the reversewise works: If you've got the unknownness and the motion
allergy is cleaned up pretty well - which of course cleans up valences and
gets him in his pictures and all that sort of thing - why, then, of course
he starts reaching back and changing his mind concerning these various
things. And we get back to Change of Mind Processing.
And the route we're looking for is the route to just change of mind. The
thetan can change his mind, and that is it. He just gets another idea about
it, you see. He just as-ises the idea he's got and gets another idea about
it and he feels fine about it.
Well, what booby-traps this? In the first place, he must have escaped from
innumerable pictures and he's off-track in numerous places, and he doesn't
have a concept of where he's been or what he's done, and the unknowness of
that must be very important because actually he does have the - he has set
the example to himself of having escaped from these things, so therefore
they must have been dangerous.
You get how he proves it to himself? He proves it to himself reversewise.
"I ran away so it must have been rough." See, it proves the point, see. If
he ran away, it must have been rough. Not, it was rough, so he ran away.
You get the idea? But, it must have been rough because he ran away. And
he's also always proving these things to him. You say, "My God! That must
be a terrible engram. The reason it must be a terrible engram? Prima facie
evidence: It must be a terrible engram is because I can't get in it. See,
I'm outside the thing. I'm not in my own valence in the engram, and it's
way over there, and it just must have been bitch kitty. This must have been
a rough-rough. There must have been nothing there but big jagged rocks
being pounded on somebody every three seconds, you see. Shame, blame,
regret and degradation are being poured into that area with coal shovels.
That's obvious. Proof of the thing is I'm not in it."
Now he gets in it and he finds out that nothing happened. Yeah, there
wasn't very much in it. He just struck it at a time of life or a frame of
mind when he thought unknowns and motion were terrible. And so therefore he
didn't want anything to do with it, and he didn't want to be in it.
People do not escape to the degree that things were dangerous. These are
not proportionate statements. You know, the more dangerous a thing is, the
more escape you will have from it. You get that? That doesn't work that way
at all. The most dangerous thing there is, is war on this planet, for sure,
in terms of human activities, and yet you never have any difficulty getting
people to sign up to fight a war. That's interesting, isn't it? And you
never have any difficulty getting contractors to build things for war. So
what does this mean?
Well, the most dangerous activity man engages upon has the most recruits.
Well, this is kind of backwards, isn't it? It's - then it's not true that
man escapes to the degree that things are dangerous. He escapes to the
degree that he conceives they are motion-full, that he doesn't like -
motion-that-he-doesn't-like-full - and the degree that they are unknown.
Now, actually a war may be very dangerous, but it's fairly well known. Man,
you've got sergeants and captains and generals and general staffs and
governments and presidents and kings, and so forth, and their whole effort
is to locate you.
And the whole effort of the enemy is to dislocate you. So you've got an
effort to dislocate being resisted and an effort to locate being obeyed.
And, of course, danger hasn't anything to do with it at all. It's just the
degree of location involved with it. And of course, you get all kinds of
recruits for a war. You could probably dream up and synthesize another
activity that would be just as attractive as war if you put your mind to
it.
It would have to be something where you were supremely well located.
Marvelously located. You'd just have to fix it up so the guy was - could
locate and was being located. Known whereabouts, you see. Known
whereabouts. Known whereabouts. Known whereabouts. You just have to play
that one off the middle with efforts to make the whereabouts different. In
other words, to fix and unfix. The whole idea of power - this is an old one
from way back, Phoenix - the whole idea of power stems from the ability to
hold a position. All power derives from the ability to hold a location.
When I say position, of course, that gives you a double entendre. It's
location. The base is what derives power to the electric motor. It is the
base. It is not the spinning amature - armature. It's what keeps positive
and negative separated that is deriving the power.
Now, you can conceive an electric motor with a positive and negative
terminal in the thing that would have enough rotation through magnetic
fields applied to it that it would collapse its base. Now, you've got two
little things, and they're sort of pinned up there on little weak pot
metal. There are two heavy magnets pinned on weak pot metal pins, you see.
And you get positive and negative going between these two magnets at a hell
of a rate of speed, you know. You turn your armature through the field and
those two poles will collapse on each other.
You take a powerful magnet, and the reason things come to a powerful magnet
is to the degree that it can stay still. Otherwise, your magnet will race
forward toward the thing. These are various laws in the fields of mechanics
which actually derive from the ideas of thetans. All mechanics derive from
the ideas of thetans. All matter derives from concept of thetans, and the
behavior of matter is based entirely upon how a thetan thinks it ought to
behave.
Chemistry is very interesting. There isn't a single product that doesn't
have a set of postulates connected with it. There isn't a single chemical
compound or a single chemical element that you cannot take apart into the
number of postulates that the thetan put in it. And you can find out what
the postulates of it were. It's quite interesting. An interesting study.
No more of that. That's rather dry.
The idea of holding a base or holding a situation. All right. There's these
- a body of troops is holding a hill and thhey cannot be dislodged. Well,
the degree they cannot be dislodged does not have anything whatsoever to do
with the number of troops on the hill. It may be influenced by that, come
to think about it, but that isn't actually it. It's whether or not they
believe they can be dislodged. That is the first requisite and whether or
not they have enough weapons of one character or another to resist
dislodgement. It only takes one man to fire an electronic cannon.
Now, you need lots of men to the degree that the hilltop can be approached.
So the power generated by a body of troops on a hilltop is totally
dependent on their ability to make the enemy hold his position, and their
own ability to hold their position. And that body of troops actually has to
take responsibility for holding the enemy where they are. And bodies of
troops almost never take this responsibility very wholeheartedly. They
think they will shoot at the enemy if he approaches. It never occurs to
them too much - although this is part of tactics, strategy - to pin the
enemy down where he is.
Now, of course, they have won the war to the degree that the enemy cannot
advance and that they can continue to hold their position. Wars are won on
the basis of held positions and dislodgments from positions.
Now, countries look very weak after wars because one of the countries has
dislodged the other terminal, and there's no power resulting.
The whole subject of electricity, flying saucers, the electric motor that
turns over your fridge, whatever is running your automobile is merely based
on the ability to hold a location and to resist an encroachment upon the
location. You look at an internal-combustion engine in this wise, and you
learn a great deal. Of course, the pistons are trying to blow the crankcase
down, you see, and the crankcase, however, is held up with bolts, and the
crankshaft goes zzzzzz, you see. It doesn't go psst down, so this must be
the thrust bearings and the main bearings, and so forth, of the crankshaft
that are holding a position, and the piston isn't holding the position, but
it's being dislodged, but there must be something that keeps it from coming
up all the way, you see, and something that keeps it from going down all
the way.
You'd normally conceive that the power of an engine is based upon the
thrust of the piston. And this is the way they normally calculate the power
of engines, and that isn't why the engine is powerful at all. It's the
degree the base can be held and the amount of effort that can be applied to
dislodge something from base, and then the amount of effort that this base
has to resist being dislodged, and it's an interplay of held positions.
And if a mechanical engineer were to look over motors from this exact way,
he would arrive with very advanced power plants of one character or
another. It's the ability to hold things apart and the ability to thrust
them at each other while holding them apart, and so on.
You always get generated energy by thrusting something at something that
will not move. If you don't believe it, start an argument with somebody.
The power of the argument is totally proportional to the degree that they
won't relent, you see. Well, you'll see actual power being generated. It
can get pretty sparky, pretty sparky.
All you want to do, if you want to keep generating sparks, why, just keep
pressing against the held position. And of course, you know how to settle
any argument: in the final analysis you could always run away. Can't
dislodge the position so you could always move off, and of course that -
there's no more power being generated. You see how that would be?
No more power being generated at all. There's no more argument. Nobody's
shouting. Nothing happening, and so forth. You're just gone. You were one
of the terminals, you see, and you were holding a position there, too. So
you abandon the position, and you don't have all of this upset. All you
have after that is detached pictures.
Now, a thetan's friction with life and his crush against life, and life's
crush against him does generate energy. You know, he himself has got masses
of energy, and he is holding a position, and so forth, and that's where the
energy basically comes from. But you want to know where a picture comes
from, the characteristics of pictures and masses and all that sort of
thing, well, they're to the degree that he is resisting a position.
Therefore, if you want to get a three dimensional picture in some pc, which
is 3-D in solid, man, solid, well, get a time when he was... Well, I'll
give you an example. I had a good subjective reality on this.
A company of men lined up in company front firing at a company of men lined
up in company front. Neither one of them giving way. They just stood there
for hours and fired at each other. And boy, the fronts of those uniforms
were just absolutely solid, all standing-wave electricity, of course. They
thought it was guns that was generating the power in the battle, but it
wasn't at all. It was these two bodies of troops confronting each other,
neither one of which would give away, both of which were trying to drive
the other away, you see. And neither one of them was driving away. And it
was pretty combustible. And of course, when you run into a picture like
that and you start to run the picture like that, the thing actually
develops a considerable amount of zing.
See, there'll be all kinds of electricity running around, and you'll see it
register on your E-Meter. The effort to hold a position.
All right. If you want to see an E-Meter go bing-bang, take somebody that
is real to the pc in this lifetime. And then find an argument between the
two. And you'll get the same phenomena and you'll get a discharge of
energy, and that discharge of energy will be registered on your E-Meter.
The study of the mind goes in, unfortunately, without - and you don't have
to feel bad about this and think that you should learn more about this.
Girls are very - mostly upset by this.
I start talking about electric flows and so forth. And I'm inferring ohms
and ergs and all that sort of thing, and girls get rather distressed. They
think that, "While I was in physics class I got A on all those things, but
I didn't understand any part of it. And I don't have much to do with
mechanics." And they start thinking, "Well," rather sadly, "well, I can't
really grasp this because I don't know much about electricity," and so
forth. They back down on this particular point, and they think that in
order to understand Scientology, they have to know something about
electricity, physics and mechanics. Well, I'll let you in on something.
I'll let you in on something.
In order to understand something about electricity, and mechanics, and ohms
and ergs, electrical engineers would have to understand Scientology. See,
it is a completely reversed idea. But a girl in this particular lifetime is
not too much or too averagely dedicated to knocking guys' blocks off and
knocking positions out and holding the front line trench, and so forth.
They haven't been doing it for a few centuries and are out of practice. And
so they think that the subject of power or force is something that they
shouldn't have too much acquaintance with. And that's about all there is to
it, is they're just out of the habit. And this is why they say, "Well, I
really ought to know something about this but he's now talking about
something very technical that I really shouldn't know anything about," and
that isn't the case at all.
I think that girls in this particular society probably generate more power
and more sparks than anything else. Kipling's comment upon "The female of
the species is more deadly than the male." I would amend this to reading
"The female of the species generates more sparks than the male." There's
nothing like a girl who just can't seem to get a different idea in her head
and insists on hanging on to that one particular timeworn idea. You can
explain to her inevitably and at long length how that idea is moldy and
went out of style and it hasn't been worn in Paris for generations, and so
on. And you can go on, and you can get quite elucidative on the subject.
You can flower it up and use rhetoric and threat and so forth. And she
finally succumbs, and that's too bad, and it's all set now and we've now
agreed, you see, until the following morning when she brings up this idea
again, you see.
Yeah, there's an awful lot of energy hanging around one of those things. So
don't think that a girl won't hold a position or try to drive somebody else
from there.
No, a thetan will do it, male or female. And banks have energy in them and
are charged. And a person has masses in his bank and is being bothered with
masses to the degree that he has experienced this interplay of energy
motions and has tried to hold positions and knock people off positions, and
so forth. And you will get resultant bank. I mean, that's all there is to
that. A bank is a sort of a mold of what you were trying to hold a position
against or a mold of what you were trying to dislodge from position.
Well, of course, when one is dislodged from position, in actuality, even
conceptually, the person then dramatizes this to the degree of having a
picture from another position. Now do you understand where I've been going
here?
So you'll have an out-of-valence view of the situation. And you'll see
these energy masses all right, but they're parked over in some safe place,
and they don't have too much to do with anything. And it's better just to
have a picture of those energy masses, don't you see, rather than to
confront the energy masses. And you start to move anybody in toward this
place where he was dislodged or where he failed to dislodge somebody else
from a position, you try to move him in that with duress and command and
hammer and pound and argue with him and that sort of thing; well, that's
what the substance was of the engram. So of course, it doesn't work. See,
the more hammer and pound and duress that you put in to getting him to hold
this position again, from which he can view the engram, the more you
restimulate the resistance of the engram, the more you blow him out. It's
very - see, it's very comprehensible. It's just a one, two, Q and A,
direct.
But if you can take him on a gradient of what led up to this solid state,
he'll find himself in it again. And when he finds himself in again, he'll
find that these are masses of confrontingness, and the reality connected
with it will be high, and so forth. And then he finds out that he did
confront it, and then it properly gets into the thenness where it belongs
and doesn't influence the nowness in which he is living, and the engram
discharges. You see what this is all about?
It's actually a very elementary subject. And it just boils down to the fact
that universes may be universes, I guess, but in actual fact thetans are
thetans. And that is far more true, you see, than universes are universes
because universes are simply the creation of thetans.
And if you can subscribe to the idea that you had nothing to do with the
creation of the universe but it was done by a big thetan, why, that's all
right, but processing will catch that up, too.
Well now, in handling pcs, let me warn you against handling them with no
idea of how a bank works. Two auditors, neither one of whom have any idea
on how the bank works but both of them trying to find out how the bank
works can probably audit each other rather successfully amidst the various
ridges which build up, because one is trying to hold the position and the
other is trying to blow him out of it. So they would probably get there
nevertheless. But good skilled auditing toward clearing would have as a
requisite some reality on all these points I'm making.
Now, the only realities you have to get on these points is just what is a
bank, what's it look like, and what is out of valenceness - because anybody
has out of valence spots on the track, that's for sure - and how does a
picture look, and where would a pc be when he is down the track, you see.
And do pictures run consecutively from one part of the track to the other,
and is there a thenness as well as the nowness? And do energy masses exist?
And what are these strange masses and feelings and sensations which the pc
has around his body?
You have reality on those various things, and boy, you'll be able to audit.
You don't have to go into the esoterics of why they're there. You just have
to get the subjective reality of the fact that they exist. And as soon as
you see that they exist quite plainly, of course you are able to handle
them, not only yourself, but you are able to handle them in somebody else.
Now, the oddity is that you can handle them in somebody else much more
easily than you can handle them in yourself because you are not being
affected by the various byproducts that the pc is being affected by. You
see, it was the pc that was having the argument, and you were the - you're
not even a party to the argument. So therefore, you can direct attention
and see the reasons that the pc cannot see. The pc cannot redirect his
attention because if he was totally regressed into the incident, his
attention would be totally fixed in the incident, wouldn't it? But you
didn't happen to be in the incident, so therefore it is very, very easy for
you to direct his attention in the incident because your attention with
regard to that incident in which he is in, is free. And oddly enough, the
bank will always obey you much better than it will obey the pc.
And these are the fundamentals of why auditing works. And this is how
auditing works. And if you don't know what you're directing his attention
toward, or away from, and so forth, you will occasionally make flubs, get
into all kinds of tangled skeins of auditing, and have to run ARC breaks;
99.44 percent of the auditing session will be devoted to present time
problems and ARC breaks. See, the pc actually will have as many present
time problems and ARC breaks as - to the degree that the auditor cannot
direct his attention. The auditor has no idea of where he is directing his
attention or how he's directing the pc's attention or if the pc's attention
is being directed, why, of course, he has a great deal of trouble handling
the pc.
Now, you have an idea of "Controlling the pc is very necessary to the
conduct of the session," don't you? Well, you just redefine what is
controlling a pc beyond keeping his body in a chair and keeping him from
getting up. There is no other control of the body that you're trying to
accomplish or attempt.
It must be, the control of the pc is simply the direction of the pc's
attention by the auditor. And that would be the whole statement of how do
you control a pc. Well, you control a pc by knowing where his attention is
and doing things with his attention, and of course that controls the pc.
And that's all there is to controlling pcs. You can go endlessly into the
subject and you won't thrash up any more data than that.
Well now, if you don't know where his attention is, can you control the pc?
See, it can't be done. So of course, then the pc is left to flounder on the
track and flounder with this and flounder with that, and his attention is
not under any kind of control, and as a result, what do we wind up with? We
run - wind up with endless auditing. And auditing takes as long as the
auditor doesn't control the pc.
Well, when we say this, then it must follow that the auditing takes as long
as the auditor does not control the attention of the pc. To control an
automobile on the road it is rather, well, and you really should, know
where the automobile is. Works much better that way. And "in driving a pc,"
you might say it's much better to know where he is and where he's going and
what he's doing. And a repetitive command will do a great deal. We
shouldn't undermine these things. It does a great deal. It is directing the
attention of the pc left, right and center. But also, the attention of the
pc may be doing some other things which are rather fantastic. And we have
to find out about this.
And we're only trying to get the auditing command executed. But in order to
get it executed, we have to find out where the pc's attention is, and where
the pc's attention is going, and keep track of this.
Otherwise, he has the idea of running under a driver that doesn't know
where the road is, much less where the automobile is. Both are missing. And
he sort of goes around, and he goes through it, and he doesn't quite know.
It almost might be enough simply to create the illusion that you know where
the pc is, and so forth. This might be all right, but there is actually no
substitute for a subjective reality on what a picture is, what a real
picture looks like, what an energy mass is, what a track looks like, the
sensation of then-ness, and these little odds and ends of phenomena go
along with subjective reality. Once you improve that, your auditing will go
up in a steep climb like one of these new aircraft they're building over
here. They don't take them off on runways anymore. They set them up on
their tail and they light a match, and they go off into the sky.
Okay? All right. Well, I wish you good luck tomorrow and this weekend. And
you're overdue for clearing somebody, and I will have to have a Clear
Tuesday morning. Okay?
Thank you.


