What did they do - where are you at with the upper indocs? Let me ask this question today. Has anybody arrived yet at the Congress? (laughing). Very good! Very good! Well, today's lectures are dry, uninteresting, extremely old, hardly anything in them that you want to know, so pay attention (laugh).

Thank you. I've been informed we're having a Congress down at the Shoreham and I just found out about it, and I'm a little bit late, but I wanted to come down and tell you a couple of things I've learned lately, if you want to hear them. That's what's known as running the Effects scale (laugh). The next two hours are going to concern themselves, now that we have led up to it rather carefully, going to concern themselves with Clear Procedure and this I trust, if you're not Clear already in the next few months, this will concern you intimately. Okay? I want to give you the rundown, the exact processes, and the commands, in order to Clear homo-sap. Okay? Alright!

Today ... we've, by the way, heard from some more countries. You know, this is a country we've very often slighted a little bit you know because it's so close next door, but that's Canada, and we've heard from our old friend Johan Templehoff up in Toronto. „I know this will be the best Congress until the next one. Good listening“.

The first things are the conditions of auditing: First requisite - a preclear. Next requisite - an auditor. Next requisite - a place to audit. Even if you have to make the space, you have to have a little place to audit in. If you're doing this out in some other universe, why remember that. It might be a universe around with no space in it. The State Department, I think, has a universe with no space in it (laugh). They're in Germany all the time, or some place.

You know, Scientology is ... occupies the most space on this earth than practically anything. We're certainly occupying more space than several other things. We are in countries that haven't even heard of Christianity. That's pretty good. We're also, we're also to be found, I heard recently, inside the iron curtain. Some fellows telling me that this situation ... and I wanted to know which side was inside ... (garbled). (laugh)

Now the auditor, as I have talked about in the last hour, should have a pretty good idea of this thing called the Auditor's Code and he should be pretty well drilled on his TRs. This is particularly so of Clear Procedure because you're using processes which have teeth. and if you flub on this one, why it's a little more important a flub than it is, „Well, recall a time you communicated with someone. That's fine. Recall a time you communicated with someone. Recall a time when ... er ... you talked to somebody ... ah ... er, oh I forgot to acknowledge you the last time, didn't I? Ahem ... well, recall a time, recall a time, let's see ... what's the command, recall a time when you said something“. You'll still get away with it, you'll still get away with it, running that process. „How could you help another? how could ... what was that command?“ ... ssssssst ... (hand rising up), PCs temperature (laugh).

Well, I promised you here in these early lectures that we were going to review this subject called Scientology, take a look at it and find out what are the essential parts that we had to have in order to Clear people, and I'm going to sail into it right now and talk about just that. It's a very good thing to summat importances. One of the first things you must know in the development of anything is that importance. The evaluation of a datum in comparison with other data is more important than an ocean of data. I hear every once in a while somebody saying that some student, he studied it, he just got all swamped with data, and so on. Well, I'll tell you what's wrong with that student, he couldn't evaluate importances. „Be on time at nine o'clock at the academy“, very important datum. „Always run a process so long as it produces change and no longer“, obviously of equal importance, aren't they. Actually the first one is slightly more important because Nibs said it (laughing).

Now the first process, of course, involves the session itself which is CCH-0. You must remember that there are some sub-processes that are sometimes necessary in Clearing someone. CCH-1, CCH-2, CCH-3, CCH-4, what are those processes? CCH-0 of course, simply opens the session. It's the various things that you ask. You say, „What goal do we have for this session?“, „Is it alright if I audit you?“. These various preliminaries such as start of session, you know a lot of people forget that. They forget to start a session that's been going on for three or four hours, and they all of a sudden say, say you know, I never started this session. Let's start the session now (laugh). Of course, you've never done this (chuckle). Some people talk and talk and talk and talk and never do start a session. But CCH-0 is merely the techniques involved in starting a session. That's the only thing that is involved in CCH-0 except one, and that is Present Time Problem.

The whole trick of developing an adequate and workable and practical science of life was connected with this evaluation of importances. I might let you in on a little secret. One of the things, one of the operating principles ... many of the operating principles by the way are in Dianetics, Evolution Of A Science, and we've never seen them since but they are still standing there as operating principles behind the organization of this particular subject. But I took such blocks of knowledge, such wide blocks of knowledge as religion, let us say yoga and examined it to find out whether or not it ever done anybody any good, and determined whether or not it had or hadn't, as I viewed it, and then set the whole block of knowledge aside and no further examination was given to it. In this way, I could weed out all the pieces of knowledge that hadn't gotten man anywhere and then this left a very few, this left a very few. It left such things as mathematics and the physical sciences as apparently something had done something for him but not too much. So this established a proper pattern of thinkingness in order to go about the development of the science. Now I assure you if yoga had worked everything out very beautifully and if we had a very nice result, we would have used a mystic pattern of thinkingness, but it hadn't apparently worked.

Now we get right down to auditing a person to Clear and this one we have to confront and take up. All procedure being good, all agreements being established and everything, we take up this one, present time problem. We take it up at the beginning of every session, no matter how many sessions there are in Clearing. I'll tell you why. Because the one thing that can keep a profile from changing or IQ from rising is present time problem. Present time problem, by definition, is some disturbance viewed by the preclear, which is occurring in present time or the physical universe right now. Now, you say his present time problem is the fact that he has a birth engram in restimulation. Oh no, that is not a present time problem because he's not being born right now. You get the idea? You say, well the present time problem is he's been divorced several times and so forth, and this is his present time problem. This is what worries him. Well don't get the idea that what worries the preclear is a present time problem. Present time problem is a particular item. It's something that's going on in the physical universe right now. It has terminals, it has location, it's disturbances are actual, and the preclear can be so involved with it that he never gets into the auditing room and therefore he never gets any benefit from the auditing and you're wasting your time as an auditor because his profile, demonstrably, will stick right where it was until that present time problem is out of the room. A person has actually been audited for five consecutive intensives, without the auditor clearing a present time problem, with no slightest gain in processing. That is the chief reason why there is no gain on profiles because the preclear had a present time problem and it was constant, going on all the time auditing was happening, and the auditor never straightened it out. Well the preclear is out there at the oil factory or some place or another, he's not there in the auditing room. Now there's, there's an interesting fact, that you could absolutely stall Clearing an individual by not handling a present time problem. You might be able to break the Code here and there, you might be able to flub a process, you might be able to run a TR upside down and backwards, and never acknowledge, or something of the sort, you still might Clear somebody, but I'm guaranteeing, you will not Clear somebody if you leave a present time problem in restimulation. That's how serious that one is. It's right there and it's definitely a part of Clearing Procedure. Now, when you start to clear a present time problem on a preclear, very interesting, you say, „What are you worrying about?“, „What are you worrying about?“ or, „Is there anything worrying you?“, or any other statement you care to make or question you care to ask on this sort of thing, quite ordinarily will not be answered, on a serious present time problem, in the affirmative, the first answer. That was very interesting, so you say to the individual, „A present time problem, now, do you have a present time problem?“. „Is there anything worrying you?“. You say, „Well, that's fine, we can get on with the session can't we (chuckle)”. If he's really up to here (touching throat) in enturbulance in the physical universe, he'll say, „No, nothing worrying me, no. I'm all detached from it all. I'm above such things; of course I can go on being audited. I can put it out of my mind“. You say, „Well, what can you put out of your mind?“. „Well, my house burned down this morning, and my children are still there standing on the street, but that's alright, if I get audited, I can take care of it a little bit better, so let's get on with it.“ Aw! Sometimes you have to beg for fifteen minutes to find one of these problems and find out what it's all about. That's the truth! You have to sit right down and beg, as an auditor, to get this person to be honest enough to tell you that he's in trouble. A funny part of it is, the present time problem very often will not seem very important. He got a traffic ticket this morning; he's got to go down to court after the session. It isn't anything, so we could let it go, couldn't we? You start auditing it and you find out it's got bite to it and it will clear. But supposing you neglected it, then all during the session you keep asking the preclear what he's looking at now, and what he's thinking about, and so forth, and he says, oh nothing, of course, he says, I see a jail and policemen (laugh). Quite fascinating, quite fascinating.

Now, that is what is meant by evaluation of importance. What were the important bodies of data into which one could look. I found out before I'd been on the road very long that even mathematics and the natural sciences weren't legitimate areas of examination. I found out there were some much more legitimate areas - life (laugh). It never occurred to anybody to look there before. Everybody had been studying this subject of livingness, you see, on a great many vias and it never occurred to them to look at the guy, and it never occurred to them that a mind was visible, and it is. It might not be to the practitioner but it's certainly visible to the person. He can see it, hear it, and smell it, and I've had people tell me, well I don't go into things that you can't see, feel, hear, experience, so I don't pay any attention to the mind. I had some physical scientists say this to me and of course it's rather deadly thing to say to an auditor, you know (laugh). You get into chanting it's a boy for a little while and he sees, feels, and experiences mind. Some of you people who were around with Dianetics and that of course throws them at once into birth, and birth engrams bite. I've seen people run out their noses and ears and sweat and strain and have head somatics and all the contractions of delivery and so forth, and this fellow says, I can't be being born, I'm 40 years old (chuckle). A Thetan certainly can mock up well.

An individual who gets then involved with plus randomity or minus randomity ... let's get real technical here. What's plus or minus randomity? Well, to people that weren't in the first ACC, that weren't at Philadelphia, you know, they have trouble with this, but it's very simple. Minus randomity is bored stiff with nothing to do and plus randomity is going around in small circles that nobody could possibly do the banks of (chuckle). In other words, there's too much going on or too little going on and the preclear considers it an abnormal state of motion. Either too little or too much, and either one of these things is a present time problem. There is something going to happen. Well, of course, there's something going to happen if he's going to have dinner that night, but he doesn't happen to consider that a problem. So, it's what the preclear considers it a problem after you've beaten his silly head in to get him to admit he got one, and it's better to be very careful and very insistent, much better to be very careful and very insistent than it is to just brush it off because the direction you can err is neglected. You can't err in the direction of beating it to death unless, as some auditor did the other day, and I'd be ashamed to say who it was. I told him there was probably a present time problem on the case that wasn't flat. So he ran it for five hours, four and a half hours after the preclear said it was totally flat, and wondered then why the preclear remained out of session for the next two days. In other words, the auditing session became a present time problem. That's a disobedience of the Auditor's Code. The process was no longer producing change and the auditor continued to audit it, ad nauseam. This is a PT problem run the wrong way.

Now if, if evaluation of importance is important, then what do we mean by one some thing more important than another thing, and let's just put it this way: something more real to you than another thing - and we get the basic study principle of Scientology, that which is real to you is real, and Scientology is that which is real to you, and if a part of Scientology isn't real to you, set it on the back burner. It'll boil over sooner or later (laugh). I had to explain one time to a fellow of rather limited education, what Para- Scientology was. This was a coined word we used to use that back in the days when we were ashamed of past lives, and I asked him some questions about what in Scientology was real to him. It was Para-Scientology. Well, what in Scientology was real to him - well, not very much. So I said, then the subject of Scientology, in the main, to you is Para-Scientology.

A PT problem run right is run very simply. There are various ways to run a present time problem. How long do you run it? Until the preclear ... oh, this sounds very funny, sounds very funny to some practical get up and do individual ... until the preclear no longer has to do something about it. That's how long you run a PT problem.

Here is the way we go about it. We have a fellow walking down the street, he knows nothing of Scientology. He's never even heard the word, therefore it's totally Para-Scientology, it's totally unreal to him - it doesn't exist. There is no existence. Now he hears of Scientology and hears that it did something good for a friend of his and he has a little hope that it might help him or somebody else that he knows. This little tiny bit of hope and the word which he's trying to pronounce correctly. That much is Scientology and all the remainder is Para-Scientology. And then one day he comes along and hears about such a thing as an overt act- motivator sequence. Oh what a formidable ... the difference between formidable words in Scientology and the formidable words in earlier bungled studies about the mind, the difference is that the words in Scientology are not there to confuse you, they are not there to obscure things, and they have a meaning. Now some of you may suspect that they're just there to booby-trap (chuckle) the subject for you. But the truth of the matter is, is they are rather carefully selected. There's been a whole system of nomenclature in which we have simply tried to pick the simplest word we could get hold of that would describe the thing and then describe it very precisely. There's a Scientology vocabulary, I think, of about 476 words which covers all of the words used in particular connotation in Dianetics and Scientology. That's not really a very large vocabulary in that it, that whole vocabulary describes life, the spirit, the physical universe, in like 476 words so almost anybody can learn this.

I remember I was talking to you about spheres of influence in an earlier lecture. The great oddity is, if you flatten a present time problem, it quite often ceases to be a problem in the physical universe, not only does it cease to be a problem where the preclear is, but it ceases to be a problem over here. It is so much the case that we have one on record where the wife was a dipsomaniac, that's where they keep dipping into the old man's pocket book to run down to the liquor store, and the preclear was audited on present time problem. Why? Well definitely, it definitely was a present time problem because the wife, at the time the preclear was being audited, had just got through busting up most of the furniture and so, a bit of a PT problem. The pc was rather disturbed and the auditor sat down and beat this thing through, „On what part of that problem could you be responsible for?“ That is, by the way, the optimum technique to run a present time problem if it can be run on the preclear. Sometimes it's a little high for him. „What part of that problem could you be responsible for?“, is the exact auditing command and the only auditing command for clearing a present time problem. That's the optimum. Sometimes you have to get into, „Invent a problem worse than that problem“, or „Invent a problem of comparable magnitude to that problem“. But these, these are ... these are things ... sometimes you have to run merely locational processes, „Notice that wall“, „Notice the floor“, „Notice the ceiling“ to get the pc into the auditing room. They can't even audit this PT problem, it's so strong, it's so fabulous. But the optimum one, and this will work on practically any case your working on, if the person's conscious enough to talk to you, it usually works and that's „What part of that problem could you be responsible for?“ Well, in this particular case, the preclear was asked what part of that problem, his wife, could he be responsible for, and he was run until he no longer though he had to do anything about. to, or with his wife. Quite a little while, it took about three hours to get this one shaken out. A couple of days later the auditor asked him, „well, how's your wife getting along?“ „How are you getting along with your wife?“ „Wife? we're getting along alright, yes“. „Well, just how it going?“ You know, pots and pans had been flying out of the window, and furniture had been breaking up, and bottles crashing on cops heads, the last time we heard about this, you see. „Oh, she's doing alright, she's straightened up now.“ This was reported to me, so I became interested enough to check into it at regular intervals for the next three - four weeks. She stopped drinking. She wasn't audited - he was audited but she was in his sphere of influence and she stopped drinking.

Alright, this fellow goes along and runs into, one day, the overt act-motivator sequence. You do something to somebody and you think it happened to you. He remembers vividly kicking his governess in the shins, you know, and getting his silly head knocked off and he says, you know, there's truth in that - overt act-motivator sequence. Now he has some ... he knows the word, he has some hope and although he's read a lot of Scientology, nothing had any reality to him except when you do something to somebody else, something happens to you, and he hasn't even got this right (laughing), you understand. But that's real, it's real to him. Therefore Scientology to this person, now consists of these parts - the word, the hope that it can do something, and his version of the overt act-motivator sequence, and that's the total of the subject, he's read eighteen books, but that's the total of the subject. That is now Scientology to him, you see. Now we move up the line a little bit further and one day he's reading a book and it says something about auditing and he, he hasn't read the auditor's code, he doesn't know very much about it, but he hears of something like straightwire, something like this. He runs into this fellow who can't remember a thing so he uses this process and he says, well ... The fellow's trying to remember what he said to somebody, so this fellow remembers this little process, so he says, „Can you recall a time when you communicated with someone?“ „Can you recall a time when you communicated with someone?“, and so help me this fellows memory opens up and he becomes very cheerful, very happy. Now he did some auditing before. His wife had an operation, was unconscious, he tried to do some auditing and nothing happened. The doctor standing right there kept saying, you know, the doctor was right because the doctor standing right there kept saying, well, nothing's going to happen if you do that (chuckle). And here this fellow, did though, run on his friend, a little bit of straightwire and his friend's memory opened up and all of a sudden he remembered some incidents that he'd totally forgotten, and suddenly remembered he was married and ... (laugh). After that, why his friend went around looking at this fellow that tried it, he'd say, „You know“. he said, „that's a smart man, I don't know what he can do but you know he's a smart man, he does psychotherapy or something of the sort“. The guy modestly walks around (demo's thumb in lapel-laughing). Now he has these parts real, Scientology, and the hope is something he's giving other people now. That's so real to him, he gets it up, as I showed you yesterday on the scale of dynamics, he got it up to the third dynamic, you know, and so, that's so real he takes that for granted.

You very often find this sort of thing taking place, so much so that we still have a little test running, running problems of comparable magnitude to hydrogen bombs. We haven't completed this process (chuckle) but we're running this one on some people and some day, why somebody will ask the Defense Department, „Where do you have the hydrogen bombs stored?“ and they'll say, „Hydrogen bombs, hydrogen bombs, what hydrogen bombs?“ See, there's some dim possibility that if you audited this on a couple of OTs, why atomic warfare would disappear. Now, I don't want to give you any ideas and I don't want you running on anybody ... (laughing).

Now that's part of believingness and he's got the overt act- motivator sequence, wrong version (laugh), that's real, and the fact that there is such a thing as auditing and that you can produce results with it, and he can do it. Of course there's only one process (laugh), and that's „Recall a time when you communicated with someone“. Here's an interesting state of affairs.

Now here's, here's our, here's our ... we've, we've entered the field of magic and mystery right there as to how this sphere of influence can adjust around. But the reason you audit it is so that it won't keep banging at the pc. Now, you don't solve it, you simply get the pc disentangled from it and evidently, when he is no longer a party to it, it loses the power to bite him. In other words, every time you have died, I hate to go into that, I mean the undertakers already have, but every time something very bad has happened to you, you had to consent to it first. You had to consent to get getting a finger cut off before it could be amputated. Sounds very funny, but perfectly true. It requires anyone's participation and consent before anything can happen to anyone anywhere. That's why, when we say Clearing is freedom from, you certainly do get freedom from if you run out your consent to be shocked, maimed, diseased, and so forth. If you're no longer consenting to these things, they don't happen. Isn't this interesting?

I'll let you in on something, there are actually students who have come and gone. Some of them don't have that much reality on Scientology because their idea of study is quite different. Their idea of study is not assimilation of the subject, but a regurgitation of it. They believe that study has one purpose only and that is to record on some superficial area. They all, when they're this way, they all are sure they have a part of the skull they write on in shorthand or something, that erases very easily and they take this and they read it in a book and they write it down on the inside of the skull, and then somebody is supposed to come along and say to them, „what did you study yesterday?“, suspiciously you know, and they're supposed to get off the hot seat simply by copying down what they wrote on this part of the skull on a piece of paper and handing it to them. That's an examination and they pass the subject - they got A, and now they're through with it, aren't they? Now, we're embarking on a new system of studying when we embark up on a study of Scientology. It's a new thing, it's a brand new thing. Nobody demands of you, in spite of what your instructors do sometimes when you go to school on it, nobody is really demanding of you that you swallow the whole thing and then spit it out and have done with it. That is not the system. It's the instructor's plea, more or less goes this way, please for God's sake understand it because you're not going to be able to do anything unless you grab hold of it. The instructor is trying to say, get some reality on it son or miss, get some reality on it. Now the best instruction would simply be on a basis of study all of it you please but pick out that on which you have some reality. Then get further reality on what you have picked out that was quite real and then study it again, and what do you know, another little iron door would have opened up and you've got some reality on something else, because the study of this subject is not the study of a subject, it's the study of life. The subject came from life, it applies to you. It isn't invented or created in any way, shape, or form. If it hadn't been for an agreement on what to have wrong with you, called the Axioms, if it hadn't been for this, you wouldn't be here.

An interesting broad look at life that we get out of something we've had for years and years and years, we've had this thing, PT problem. I don't think I've mentioned it very widely or very strongly. I don't think it's come up very often (chuckle) but a PT problem is something that has more to it than simply getting a session started. You've stopped some portion of the physical universe from banging at this pc, and it isn't so much that the pc would sit there and continue to worry about it, as the fact that this enturbulance still, evidently, has the strength and power of entering the auditing room, see, from elsewhere. If you get that, as well as the fact that the pc would continue to be worried about it and be out of session, you have more or less the truth of the condition that you would be trying to audit against, if you're trying to Clear somebody who had a present time problem. So, this one you must handle and as I say, the auditing command for it is, „What part of that problem could you be responsible for?“

I had somebody say to me sometime, you know, he looks at me through glasses that thick (demonstrating an inch with fingers), and back of that he's looking at me through a field that thick (demonstrating about 3 feet) and so forth, and he talks to me about your ideas on the mind and I say well, I said, you know my ideas on the mind are entirely different than Scientology and, yeah, he says, mine are too (laughing). Wonderful!

The first part of the process, of course, involves isolating the problem, finding out what the problem is. What is this problem? Now that, that takes some doing. I had a fellow who was very nervous and very upset. I looked at him; I found his auditor; I said, hey, what goes on here? This person, this person seems to be quite upset, he isn't often that way. Well, the auditor said, I checked for present time problem. I had him on a meter and I checked for present time problem, I didn't get any registry at all. So I grabbed a hold of the preclear and I put him on a meter. Of course he didn't get any registry, the meter was totally stuck, just like it was frozen. You could reach over and kick the pc, which I did (chuckle), you got no wobble on the meter. Well I guarantee that if you can get no wobble on the meter, the meter isn't going to tell you anything because it is stuck on what it is stuck on, and you guess from there on out. The only real liability a meter has, is you know something is wrong if the needle is stuck, but the needle doesn't cooperate with you anymore to tell you what it is. It just sticks harder, but you can't see something that is motionless get more motionless (chuckle). Now, the pc didn't have much of a PT problem. He was merely going to be operated on the following morning and didn't want to tell anybody in the organization. It left me with the problem of sitting there and having to take thirty-five minutes of my valuable time and get rid of the necessity of an operation (laughing).

No, all we have traced here is that system of agreements which has brought about a condition of ... we call life. A condition of livingness, and unless we address these specific agreements, we get nowhere. Unless you know Scientology before you study Scientology, you couldn't study Scientology. You get the idea? You have to know it first and this is the only subject I know of that we can guarantee that you did it first. We don't find people without engrams unless we Clear them. We don't find people who have to wear an anchor on each ankle to be able to walk down the street because they haven't agreed to gravity. We just don't find people around who are disobeying all these things because if they were, they wouldn't be here. It's a process of elimination.

This ... Thank you. The, the situation with regard to a session then does require that one ... Now, there's another thing that creeps all the way through a session - it's a sneaker. I've had a rather experienced auditor argue with me on this one. The only thing that will make a preclear drop a profile ... it's a funny thing, I say the only thing, it's the only thing I know of though, that will make a profile drop during an intensive while you're trying to Clear somebody, is an ARC Break. There's been a break of communication. The preclear no longer believes the auditor is on his side. There's been a breakdown of their affinity, their reality, their communication, and when that breakdown exists, whether it's real or imaginary, the preclear believes it's real, and auditing continues long beyond that point, you get a depression of the profile. In other words, present time problem makes it stay the same, but the ARC break with the auditor, makes it sag. I had an auditor recently say, „Couldn't have been one, couldn't have been one, couldn't have been one, I checked it over carefully, thoroughly“. I said, check it again. The auditor checked it again and something on the order of four years ago, out of session, this auditor who was auditing the same pc that many years ago, had said something the pc considered at that time, an ARC break and auditing, subsequent to that time, was depressing the profile. That's how silly pcs are (chuckle), but it was there. This auditor being a careful auditor and a good auditor, of course checked it and checked it until it finally revealed itself and we had an advancing, I'm sure, an advancing profile after that.

Now, somebody else in some other universe may have agreed to a number of other postulates, but the funny part of it is, they undoubtedly agreed to these postulates on the same pattern that they agreed to the postulates in this universe, and we could undo theirs too. Now, the point we're making here then is, it is a study of something, it is a study of life and the universe, and it is a study along certain patterns. But an individual can find life and all other things so terribly unreal that when they study some part of life they go and enroll in psychology class. That's about the most horrible thing that could happen to anyone, you know. Now there are people undoubtedly that hear about this and they'll think I'm being much, much too severe on past psychotherapy and it is professional jealousy, or something of the sort. I'm not. Probably the only reason I mention it is to sort of shake people a little bit loose from it, make them question it just a little bit, please. Because subjects which don't do anything for anybody except confuse them are always held in suspicion by me. I mean it's a peculiarity on my part. I know other people cherish subjects that do that. I'm peculiar, I like to see a subject effective and workable and usable, and that in essence, is what we have.

The point is here, that you could do something or the pc could feel that you did something or said something which was hostile and it breaks up the ARC of the session. In The Original Thesis, the first book written on this particular subject, the first published book on this subject, 1947, it gives three equations, so called: The pc less than the reactive mind, that's number one, cannot solve or handle the reactive mind. The pc is less than the reactive mind. Number two: Auditor is less than the pc's reactive mind and therefore just can't solve it. Auditor plus pc is greater than the reactive mind and so they can unravel it. Get the idea? So, as soon as you drop the auditor out ... in a present time problem we drop the pc out as a participant, you see, and with an ARC break we drop out the auditor as a participant as far as the preclear's concerned, and the reactive bank, and so forth, does not get handled. That's elementary. So these two things must be maintained: The preclear's cooperation must continue and the auditor's ARC with the preclear must continue and when these things don't continue then we get the whole thing going to pot. The funny part of it is, it is more important really, if anything, to have the auditor continue in ARC with the pc than it is to have the preclear handling his own reactive bank because, evidently, the auditor can do it better than the preclear. Because, when you drop the auditor out of the session, and yet auditing continues, you get a reduction of profile, a reduction of the factors of capability of the case, but if you just drop the pc out with a present time problem, you just get the profile staying the same. Now that's fascinating. I consider it a considerable commentary upon the necessities of ARC in a session.

But how do we communicate this subject to a person who already knows it, to whom life is totally obscured. Now there's quite a trick, and the trick I was just showing you about, make them pick up that which is real to them and then something else that's real to them in the subject, and something else that's real to them. The possibility exists that they went over the whole subject on all it's literature and all it's tapes, and I assure you there's millions and millions of words on that subject. Picking out each time that thing which seemed absolutely true and real and which they could agree with, and so on, they would probably wind up at the end of a couple of centuries, Clear. Therefore, the knowledge that is being picked up isn't a second hand knowledge. When we say reality, or that which you agree with, we say when you find in Scientology something you already find in yourself, you got it. You see, it's there, therefore it's real, because you can own it and take responsibility for it, because you sense it's true.

Now, another thing that you must do in auditing, of course, is flatten these processes. You have to flatten them for this reason: The universe and the people out there will sooner or later start flattening them or restimulate the unflattened process - see how that could be? - and we get an unstable gain. The pc was way up and then he went out and walked around in the society, about four or five blocks, and he went way down. What would cause that? The gain was unstable and it comes about because processes have been started on the case which have not been finished and the environment runs them, only the environment isn't a good auditor, and so we get a reduction of case. In other words, an unstable gain, a gain not holding up is apparently caused by just this one thing of unflattened processes on the case.

You could never educate anybody in Scientology by making them sit down and grind through all the material and say, well I don't care what your opinions are, the truth of the matter is that Axiom 41 is Axiom 41 and if you don't get it, you're going to flunk and that of course means social ostracism, the father and mother won't like you anymore, the usual thing they do in public schools. The first thing you have to have to train somebody in Scientology is somebody who wants to know something about life. That immediately skims off of the human race, the upper few ten thousands. They want to know something about life, they really want to know.

Only Scientology can undo Scientology. Quite interesting. A person has to be audited down scale to be pushed down scale, but when a process is half way finished, was dropped when in full restimulation in an auditing session, and then the preclear walked out into the environment and tried to do his job, tried to work when he went through all of these things, something clicked that process, and it will run it the wrong way too, and he gets bad auditing on the same process, you see, and the auditing is unintentional, and it can reduce the profile. It doesn't, however, go below where it was in the first place. Now, with these conditions existing, auditing can exist on Clear Procedure. Without these things well, there's no reason to get super-optimistic because just auditing won't happen. What does it take to make auditing happen? It, obviously, takes a good auditor and a preclear who still thinks the auditor is on his side.

Some people tell me sometime, well people in Scientology, you know ... (garbled) ... Of course, they get very short shrift from me because I know in actuality, having shopped around and looked under the stones, and back of the pillars, and a few things like that. I've looked around and I found people that did not want to know anything about life, didn't want to go anywhere, were in a total apathy of utterly sunk, and there is a limited number of people on earth who will suddenly up and volunteer to look over and study something. It's a limited number, They're the upper intelligentsia. I'm not telling you that for your ego's sake, out profiles prove it. People, when they come in, they're the smarter people. One of these days, why these people picking up other people, you see, will make another strata and when they can look, will want to know too, - when they can look.

Well, how do you repair an ARC break? I ran an interesting session once. This was the test session which established what havingness was in its manifestation. For half an hour I ran a process which was guaranteed to cut to pieces the mass and havingness of a pc. It was chosen with malice-a-fore-thought, as something that choked to pieces the preclears concept of mass, his concept of possession, his concept of being anything, anywhere, anyhow, and in view of the fact of being among friends, I can tell you what process this is, „Look around here and find something you could go out of communication with“. That's a guaranteed killer. Now listen, please promise me you'll only run this on psychiatrists (chuckle). Now this was guaranteed to just cut everything to ribbons but I ran it for half an hour on this basis. Every time the pc would twitch, or squirm, or start to go a little bit anaten, I would say, „What have I done wrong?“ The pc would say, „What have you done wrong?“. „You sure I didn't do something wrong?“. “As a matter of fact, a couple of minutes ago there, you, when you made that noise, it upset me.“ There had been no noise, but each time the pc could find something wrong, and the session would come back to battery, the pc would wake up, the nervousness would drop out, the twitchy feet would go. You see how this is? In other words, I was patching up havingness with just one auditing command, „What have I done wrong?“, and the pc was then permitted, little by little, to continue ARC with the auditor, even though the auditor, although the pc didn't realize it, was cutting the pc to ribbons. The auditor really was doing something wrong. The auditor was running a process guaranteed to kill anybody, and so, it becomes important then to keep the pc in session and one of the best ways of doing it is to ask the pc, when he appears to be upset, „Has something gone wrong with session?“ or „Have I done something wrong?“

Someday you will be processing cases, scraping the bottom of the barrel, so to speak, he didn't want to know, he didn't want to be there. All he wanted was to do was to keep on shooting people like he always did, you know, and he wanted to lead a normal life with his proper quota of anti-social diseases. You try to get him into the auditing room and he screams all the way down the hall, and the neighbors complain, and an auditor should be able to handle such a case, and you can actually do something for this case. It wasn't true yesterday but it certainly is true today, and when we get such a case, to be able to unwrap him and put him up into an ability, to see an ability to experience and feel and live again, why of course we will actually have done something.

Well now, there's something you don't do. You say, „What have I done wrong?“ and then the pc says, „Well a moment ago there when you said that command and made the mistake, and didn't give me an acknowledgement there, and dropped the book, when you did that it, why it upset me a little bit, it distracted me.“ I'll tell you what the auditor can do wrong at this point, what he can do wrong. He can fail to take responsibility for his action. He can say, „Well, actually the book was just teetering there and you put it there when you came in the auditing room (chuckle), and you've got a sort of an emanation coming off you that makes it very difficult for me to remember the auditing command, and it's totally natural that I would make that many mistakes“. In other words, the auditor starts to shift responsibility from himself to the preclear, removes himself from the session. The second he does that, why you got it. Now he can run, „What part of that problem could you be responsible for?“ The one shot command that doesn't work, by the way is, „What part of that bank could you be responsible for?“ Isn't that a nice command? Apparently worked like mad, „What part of that bank could you be responsible for?“, „What part of the physical universe, creation or destruction of, could you be responsible for?“ He just went unconscious for some reason or another (laugh). Obviously, it was the perfect command. Very often we have perfect commands originated, and then without checking them, of course, we can always be right. When we check them, we're sometimes wrong (chuckle). But, the auditor has to retain responsibility for the auditing session while the preclear recovers responsibility for his past, present, and future, and that's really what happens in this combination.

The cases you are auditing by and large, are those cases that you have told enough to so that they volunteered. So of course, you're just skimming the upper cream of earth. In Clearing, we crack the person who didn't want anything to do with anything anyhow, he went all the way down. As a matter of fact, we went further south than that to a person who is normally psychotic, is now in a coma, and now we can process this person. The only person we can't process at this time, I will confess to you, clearly, is the person we can't find because he's left the body. Now, we can't process that person at this time (chuckle). In the next ACC we're taking that up (laughing).

Now, given all these things, the auditor gets to the most important process ever developed in Scientology. Easily the most important process, and some of the sharpest auditors around have not heard all there is to know about this process by one awful long ways, and sitting right there, will be very surprised with this process. HELP - the most important process ever developed. Why? Because running this process - Help - will put into session, and make auditable, people who formerly weren't even vaguely auditable. Now that's just one test of it. It splits valances, it heals psychosomatic illnesses, it moves ridges out of heads, it exteriorizes preclears. It does almost anything as a single panacea process that you have ever asked of any process. Nobody's ever tried it that far. They think it's just something you audit in Clear Procedure to get it out of the road so that you can get on to something important, like step six.

So we've gotten it, we've gotten it pretty well, pretty well dusted off. We're a long way from Dianetics where we asked somebody to lie still at least, and pull an engram up and run it. He had to be willing to lie still and he had to be in good enough shape so that he would follow an order we could not inspect. I've had such cases as would not ... they would pretend to submit to auditing and I had such cases come around to me that say later - „boy, I sure fooled that auditor. I have been saying yes, yes, yes all week long and I haven't done a thing“. Of course he walks out the front door and falls flat on his face, he's been restim'd totally (laugh). But here's, here's a long look, in other words, we can process anybody, God help them.

Somebody said to me very, very recently, „I didn't have any idea help had that much breadth.“ It makes the most lovely assist you ever tried to assist anybody with. Lovely assist. A person comes in, in a normal state, homo sap, you know, got a terrible hangover - hives, you want to get him back to battery, something like that, run help. The test of help is that it shouldn't really be run on a condition, it should be run on terminals, but if you can get away with running it on a condition, which is quite interesting, gives you the command value of the process. It handles something like TNT. If you don't handle it right, your pc has had it, he's had it. Now, what are you trying to do for a pc, you're trying to help him, and the pc that never got a gain in auditing is simply wasting this commodity. That's the only thing he's doing. He came to you for help, didn't he? He said, „Oh, I'm so bad off you know, I have these horrible pains and these awful aches, and I can't see, and I can't smell, and I can't talk, and I want you to heal me all up, and so forth, and I'll pay you a lot of money if you will do this“ and get all this nonsense going on. You sit down and you audit him, he sneers, and does the very things he shouldn't do, and he fakes the process, and so on. What is he doing? He's just wasting help. He cannot be helped, and Herr Doctor, Sigmund Freud, at the end of his 28th lecture, I think it was, said, „And these by us cannot be helped.“ „And these by us cannot be helped“. This is the one thing that made him sad. There were several types of case that couldn't be helped by him - he included the sane, the insane, the ... (laugh) but he said, „These by us cannot be helped“. Now, that becomes fascinating, when you look this over carefully, because it tells us definitely, that the case that could not be helped, is the case of course, that can't be helped. So you run help on him. (chuckle) It's one of these horrible simplicities that is just painful in its stupid simplicity.

Now processing a person today is an enforcement of reality, only for a short period of time. That is, when they are totally unwilling because the processes themselves then snap them up to a point where they can see there's some point in it, which is a good thing, a pretty good thing. Now you compare this to ... there's an old practice that the witch doctors in the Ubangi territory used to practice. I think the witch doctors were known as sukiryatrists (laugh). They had, they had electric shock machines that they pulsed against people's heads and they thought this made them well and when it didn't make them well, then they went in with drills and bits into the brain, you know, and did something or other in the brain and killed the Thetan. The psychiatrists ... er, sukiryatrists, excuse me, method of approach is totally enforced insanity under the guise of enforcing sanity. Well, it's only legitimate to enforce a reality on somebody when it is a reality which they then will find freedom by embracing.

Now, the auditor who goes along and he audits somebody, you know, out of a book, and he says, „Now, what part of this problem could you be responsible for? Thank you“, „What part of this problem could you be responsible for? Thank you“, „What part of this problem could you be responsible for? Thank you“, and the pc says, „What did you say?“ „Oh you heard the command“ (laugh). So, we have an auditor who cannot help a pc, really. What's wrong with his auditing? He can't help preclears. Now in view of the fact that you run into an awful lot of preclears who are anxious for just one thing, to convince you that you can't help them, you are liable to get the idea, after a while, that you can't help them, and this is what gets wrong with your auditing. The only thing that gets wrong with your auditing, is you can't help people.

There's a bunch of prisoners in the stockade and you know there's a door unlocked. So, you go to them and you say, „the south door is unlocked“ and they say, „you silly fool, you know the south door is never left unlocked and we're gonna stay right here“. It's perfectly legitimate, boy, to sock 'em on the jaw, drag 'em over, open up the south door and throw them out (laugh). As long as they're outside, it's legitimate (laugh). It's true, because when they wake up they say, „You know, I'm free, thanks bud“. You know, big difference! It's, evidently, not the way to play the game to throw them in a deep hole on an enforced reality and close the lid over on them. That's the way they've been playing the game so long, we've got to reverse the flow. There's no further flow in the direction of entrapment, see. That's a totally stuck flow.

Now what about this help? Is it therapeutic to help people or is it aberrative? Is it right to help people or wrong to help people, or shouldn't you go along in your own little cocoon, sailing on the sea of idle dreams, and let the rest of all that silly nonsense going on in the world just take care of itself. Is that right, should you help it, or leave it alone, or what should you do about it? Well, these are moral and ethical questions that have to do with you. Whether it's right or wrong for you to help somebody or not help somebody should, however, have no bearing on the fact that you have an aberration on the subject of help. You see, there could be two different things, whether you should or shouldn't help does not at all influence this other factor, could or couldn't. „I can't help him“. The person who has a bad habit is always telling you, „I can't help it“ (laugh).

Now the subject itself has advanced apparently in leaps and bounds, and most people believe that every time the subject advances, every thing that was known before is forgotten and lost. No! The only thing that happens to the stuff that went before is it's amplified. You can understand it a little better. The evaluation of importance makes some of it not quite so important, not quite so important as it was, but it's still there and still part of the subject.

Help, you know, is forbidden, it's illegal to help several things. Did you know that? There are twenty-five illnesses that it is illegal to help in the State of California. They are listed by the legislature. Of course, nobody's ever asked this burning question, this frying question I should say, „Is the State legislature of California capable of helping anyone?“ That's the aberrative side of the question, don't you see? Capability of help is entirely independent of the duty or obligation to help. These two things should be entirely different things, and an individual cannot make up his mind on the rightfulness or wrongfulness of help so long as he himself is not totally clear on the subject of help.

Now the question comes up, what part of the subject is most important if we're going to Clear somebody. Well this subject is yours, it isn't my idea, this subject is yours. Nobody demands of you that you receive tremendous, arduous, formal training, and so forth, in order to use this subject or any part of it. We try to regulate it to keep people from getting their silly heads knocked off, something like playing with firecrackers occasionally, or pieces of dynamite, no, pieces of atom bombs, and there are certain things you should know and do in order to use the subject, providing you want to use it effectively. Now, if you don't want to use it effectively, of course just skip it. Skip anything you have to know and just pick up any old part of it and see whether or not it works, and kind of mess it up and chew up a preclear, and throw him in the ash can and get another one. You could do that. Nobody's going to interfere with you if you do that. However, you, by and large, are men of good will, and women of good will - you notice they omit that in the bible - I think it's possible (laughing), and as a person of good will, you have a right to know the proper approach in the use of the subject which has proven most effective, and the most effective levels of approach are those which increase reality on your part up to a point where you actually command the subject. When you yourself attain reality on the various parts, you know the subject no longer commands you.

Now then, fellows who run around and are criticized by their fellow man because they got to help everybody. They got to help this or they got to help that, they're always helping stray dogs, or they're always helping stray cats. I think some lady who can only help stray cats is still luckier than any policeman I ever met, who could never help anything till the end of his days. We are looking at the heart and soul of the upper dynamics when we are looking at help because this is the woof and warp of association. A man is alive so long as he can help things, and so long as he himself can be helped. If he can do this, he's alive and he's dead when he can no longer help anything, and nothing can help him. That is a new definition of death because, really, that is death when carried through to a total absolute. Definition of death, that would be the most absolute death there could be. That wouldn't be death of a body, you understand, just some light thing like that, that would really be dead.

Scientology is legitimate to this degree, that it undoes itself and therefore becomes the only legitimate mental study man has ever had. No other mental study undoes itself. In other words, anything you learn about Scientology or any restimulation that takes place by reason of Scientology, quite interestingly enough, can be undone by Scientology. Scientology can run itself out. That's a fascinating thing. It can even run me out (chuckle). People try it on me once in a while - a preclear gets down to the last ... no ... (garbled) (chuckle). I hear about this every once in a while and I'm immensely flattered. I tell them the reason, the fellow still must be awfully aberrated (chuckle) you see, on some other line, to want to hold on to any valence or any part of one.

The funny part of it is everybody responds somehow and increases on help if it is run in this right fashion. First you have to know about a bracket. What's a bracket? A bracket is the number of ways, or number of combinations that something can occur. For instance, A can give B a stick, B can give A a stick, A can hold a stick for himself, B can hold a stick for himself, B can hold a stick for somebody else other than A, this person over here, C can hold a stick for himself or for B. You get the number of combinations? You just had an idea of a stick being passed around and handed to one or another, you get the auditing command that this is run in a bracket. I think somebody added up brackets one time, and the highest series of bracket numbers I know about, I think, is 139, I think it's something like that, ways of running a bracket. What do we call a bracket? That means to cover all possible flows - artillery term - bracket. Throws the preclear out of the water. Now, help is run in that fashion and the auditing command, is again, a very simple command, and it is no other command. It isn't invent a way to help somebody, that's not right, it's an as-ising type of command. It's a command that really erases thoughts and old postulates, and things like this. You don't care whether you're draining somebody's bank or otherwise because every time you increase a potential to help, you increase havingness. So you don't care whether you drain the bank or not.

The knowledge which we take up here, I've made a short, brief list here, I can read very rapidly. The essentials which you would have to have in order to Clear somebody, and the things which you would have to know in order to Clear somebody can be very swiftly related, maybe not so swiftly studied, but swiftly related here. Now, it's the knowledge, you see, your command of the subject that gives you the results. It isn't your ability to walk like an automaton through a number of paces. Your understanding must part of your auditing.

The optimum way to run this, there's just one way to run it. Funny thing when you say there's just one way to run it, I'm talking now about Clear Procedure. I know what I know about Clearing people. I know you can people to be three feet in back of their heads and they stay Clear for two days. I know you can run engrams until they can get used to running engrams, and handle their engrams, and to have, to that degree Clear, and I know definitely this procedure is producing results when it is used with the provisos which I'm giving you. And, the Help command is: „How could ____ help ____ ?“ Now, the blanks are filled in by the sides of the bracket. In other words, „How could you help mother?“, „How could mother help you?“, „How could mother help herself?“, „How could you help yourself?“, „How could another person help mother?“ How could mother help another person?“. There's another one out there, „How could another person help another person than mother ?“ We could keep on going out this way, don't you see, and we get these various commands. We get these enormous brackets. There's a five-way bracket, a nine-way bracket, it goes on up, as I said, there's 139 combinations ... (garbled). I think there are more than that. That was (a person's name) in England got that together for me, 139, which was page after page, page after page, and he says, „How many sides does a bracket have?“, „Shall I run all these on my preclear?“ (laugh). Five, five will produce adequate results. Nine is quite safe. You could get the listings of exactly what a bracket is from an HCO Bulletin.

First thing is the Auditor's Code. The next, the Code of a Scientologist. The next is what we call the Training Drills. The next, not quite as important but you find yourself relieved if you know that this is all there are, the Axioms. Then you have to know the following scales: the ARC Triangle Emotional Scale, the old ARC Scale, the Know To Mystery Scale, and the Effect Scale. These are important scales. An auditor has to know something about these things otherwise the preclear's reactions don't make good sense to him.

Now, „How could ____ help ____?“ You understand, you didn't ask him to dream up a new way, you didn't ask him not to dream up a new way. You just asked him, more or less, to tell you a way. Now, if you're allergic to people talking while you're auditing, and it gets you upset too much, there is an alternate command, which is still workable providing you can police it and you've got him there on a E-meter good and solid, and you're watching the E-meter. You could say, „Think of a way to help mother“, „Think of a way mother could help you“. You could actually run „Think of a way ...”, but there's not any particular reason to because I don't think the preclear's conversation is going to aberrate you more than he ordinarily would be if you were worried about it (chuckle). If you were worried about it, it probably won't aberrate you any more than the (garbled). How could mother help you, this sort of thing that's a ... Now, how many ways, and different combinations, and so forth, how many things could we run this on? Well, you could say, „How could you help bacteria?“, „How could bacteria help you?“, „How could atomic particles help you?“, „How could you help atomic particles?“, „How could atomic particles help another person?“, „How could another person help atomic particles?“. You get the idea? „How could atomic particles help themselves?“ You can actually run that and get away with it, of course probably burn up the preclear, but you could get away with it. You get the idea? - Help. You have to settle this idea of help.

Now the processes he must know before he runs Clear processes, and on which he should have a good reality, are as follows: what we use to call ARC Straightwire, Havingness, the old Subjective Havingness - „Mock it up and push it in“ - „Mock it up and throw it away“. He should know about this. He should know the objective version of Havingness, which is Trio. He should know a thinkingness process like, „Assign an intention to that chair“ - „Assign an intention to that wall“. Just see what this does to a preclear. He ought to know how to do Assists, how to make a sprained ankle go down, you know, you keep touching the ankle and tell somebody to look at your fingers. And, oddly enough, he should know how to, and should have done, Engram running. The running of Engrams and Secondaries. He should know this because he wouldn't possibly believe that anybody could be this butchered up by pictures and he wouldn't know how pictures act and sound and look like and so forth, unless he has really run a few of these heavy pictures. In other words, he should have some personal acquaintance with the Reactive Bank or he'll never know what he got rid of when he Clears somebody. Sort of like bailing for hours and hours and hours and not knowing whether you're bailing mud or quicksilver or water. After a while, the boat's empty and it's apparently alright, but what have you done? Hang you up on a mystery on every preclear you audited. You ask, why does this fellow feel so good? Can't understand it. You'd feel good too if you no longer had a sword going through you, a knitting needle going through your head, you know how it is (laugh). He should be able to handle Present Time Problems and that's done, of course, by problems of comparable magnitude and so forth. He should be able to do these things before he gets in to the subject of Clearing. Now, you say these are old processes and they apparently have no great bearing upon Clearing and so forth. Yeah, but you don't get reality on Clearing processes unless you already have reality on, you might say, bank processes. Now, you get reality on the processes I've just named. Can havingness, subjective havingness, old time subjective havingness, can it do anything for anybody? Oh boy! It sure can - it's rather easy to handle. Can Trio, what we call Trio, „Look around here and find something you can have“, and then its other two steps, which is why we call it Trio; can that do anything for anybody? Wow! If a person has just had any bad accident or something of the sort, it is easily the best process if they can be audited and are alert, you know, more or less awake. It's a better process than „notice that wall“ or, „where did the accident happen?“ or „where are you now?“ These knock out havingness, and if you can run this process, it's a wonderful process, but it's a very good process in it's own right. Now, it doesn't have any lasting place in the Clearing processes but it's something you should know how to do, because when a preclear starts to, quote, run out of havingness, he gets nervous, he gets upset, he gets a lot of things. You have to know what happened. You have to know what this thing is and the best way to know what it is, is know that process and know how to run it. Now actually, that's not very many things to know, that's not very many things to know. You'll find them in various text books - Scientology Eight Eight Thousand Eight - Dianetics, Modern Science Of Mental Health - you'll find it in the various text books that exist on Scientology. ARC Straightwire, the simplest thing you ever heard of. It's earliest version was rather complicated. It took some judgment, but the pattern version which appears in back of Self Analysis is ... oh, it's a killer. You can run it on a group. You'll have the group line-charging all over the place in about an hour or forty-five minutes of an hour. You just keep running ARC Straightwire on the group, „Recall something that's really real to you“ and all of its various bracket versions. If you've never run it on a group, have a ball sometime. Get a group of people and start running this, just back of the book, back of Self Analysis - ARC Straightwire. You'll have some interesting things happening. There will be three or four people there who'll just sit there. Of course that's to be expected. If you were running them on engrams, they'd just sit there. If you were running them on anything else but the very arduous physical processes, they would just sit there and there's no reason for you to worry about the fact they didn't participate in the group auditing. The truth of the matter is, they don't participate, which is their keynote. You can cure that too.

Now what happens, what gets wrong with help? Well, there are probably many other things get wrong with it, but the main one is, you tried to help somebody and failed, and after that you could think of only one thing to do, and that was kill him. Probably all savage impulses derive from a failure to have assisted. Anybody you want to kill, you couldn't help. In other words, something gets wrong with the balance of help. There is no hate so pure - not the hate of a woman scorned - but the hate of a woman who wouldn't let you be helped, or wouldn't help you, or you wouldn't permit to be helped. In other words, there's going to be something wrong with help for her to hate you. Now, maybe it was so wrong with the person in the first place, it was already wrong before they met, but certainly something happened to key it in. You wonder why you're having domestic troubles. Wife comes in, says „dear, wouldn't you like me to get your slippers?“, and you say, „boy! is she rubbing it in - get me my slippers, hah, I suppose this is a fast touch for a five spot“, something like that. You say, „well, wife shouldn't do that sort of thing, she's been busy all day, I feel self- conscious, the idea of her ...” In other words, you got an aberration on the subject of help. So you say, „no dear, no thank you“. „Well, couldn't I get you a drink“, she says. „No, no, not thirsty, don't bother yourself, you're tired and you've been working all day“, and so forth, „just go sit down some place, you're tired, and be quiet“. „Well, what would you like for dinner?“ „Oh anything, anything“. A few minutes later why you sit down at the table, and she throws this plate of food on the table and says, „Well, I don't know where you're going, but I'm going over to see mother for a little while“, and you say, „What's wrong?“ and then she and you are liable to figure out something else that's wrong, see, some other squabble. It has nothing to do with this other sequence. This other sequence was totally hidden, this causation, and you can remember that, that morning something or other happened and you refused to let her do something of the sort, or you accused her of something, you know. It will all build up on some tremendous Oedipus here that had nothing to do with the actual activity which began with a pair of slippers.

Now, you'd say then, an introduction to Scientology would be able to use some of its principles in life, but there's nothing short of a good command of auditing itself, nothing short of a good command of it, will produce good uniform results and it requires a very good command of it to produce Clears. So don't think that we now have some sort of a button whereby the auditor walks up to the preclear, presses this magic button, and we get Clear. Don't! The auditor has to have a great deal of understanding. He has to take this case apart. He has to know what this case is about. He can run it. There are auditors who actually had to be retrained a bit before they can start clearing somebody. Unfortunately, the most rapid Clearing requires judgment on the auditor's part. He has to have the ability to find out what is wrong with the preclear. We'll take that up later. But the point is that without a knowledge of preclears, and without knowledge of the mind, without knowledge of the bank, without a knowledge of all these things, he hasn't got a prayer. Think of handing Sigmund Freud, as good as he was as a practitioner, he was a pretty good practitioner, do all sorts of tricks with people, you just hand him the commands of Clear procedure to run on somebody. Whew! Freud's a pretty sharp boy. I tell you, he wouldn't have made it.

You watch it, you watch it. If you want to take your life in your hands, just as an experiment for any given twenty-four hours - make out your will, give us your next of kin - refuse every help offered you by everyone for the next twenty-four hours. Now that, that's pretty ... Wow! There's some stories about people doing other things for twenty- four hours, but this one would be suicidal. Everybody would be mad at you, if they didn't practically destroy you. You just refuse all help offered you. Actually it's one of the more, it's one of the more interesting things to do (laugh), and if you feel tired of life, why I advise it strongly.

I well remember lecturing before a number of St. Elizabeth's psychiatrists many, many years ago. Some of you heard this story before. There were numerous stories came out of that particular incident. I lectured for a week and I gave the same lecture, which was the basic fundamentals of Dianetics and I told them about a time track. I told them ... (garbled) and then I'd say to them, now in the other room are some practitioners and they will show you how to audit people. The psychiatrists never went in the other room . They sat and listened to these fundamentals. There were patients in the other room to be audited, but they never went in there. They listened about the time track, they listened to, about Dianetic reverie. The fact that you could tell a person to go back in time, you see, you could tell these and they'd listen to this in theory, and one of them finally came to me at the end of the week, and he says, „Say, you got something there in Dianetics that we can really use“. I said, „So-o-o, hah!“, and he said, „Yes, I had a patient who's in terrible shape and I've been trying for years to get this patient to find something in his past that I could analyze“ (laugh). He started ranting down the track, the time when he was two tears old, he says, „Nobody can remember when they're two, you know the myelin sheathing isn't formed, and I got him back down there and there he was lying in a crib with his father cursing him for having dirty diapers. There it was - the father complex - right there“. He says, „I started right in and I told him what it was, yes, of course the information rather dazed him, but you've really got some things in Dianetics that we can use“, and I said to myself, yes Mister, but we can't use you as a practitioner (laugh).

I have, unfortunately, on two different occasions, not meaning to at all, having no understanding of what was going on, and not at that time having this process ... This process, by the way, was evolved for the HCA manual which was never published and probably never will be. I wrote the opening gun of it and I had to find the basic fundamental of auditing and the basic fundamental of auditing was, of course, Help. I wrote it down very glibly and wrote a nice little essay and got it all set up, and I got down to the end of the essay and I said, just a moment, let's look this over again. Oh, I said, it's not important and let it drift for three whole months before I really clamped on to it and made a thorough going test, and then, psychosomatics started flying off, and valences started breaking up, and all sorts of miraculous things started happening with the use of this thing - Help. I only had to work for about a week to find the command it should be run with. It was quite remarkable though, it developed out of auditing itself.

One of the first things which old time psychotherapy didn't have, was the Auditor's Code. Every once in a while somebody who's been auditing for a couple or three years goes back and reads the auditor's code and finds a couple of points that if he'd just kept with, he would have had it made on a case or two. That one about not changing the process so long as it produced change, of course really tells you all you really need to know about how long to run a process. If Freud and other people practicing in that wise had, had a copy of the Auditor's Code, they would have made much more startling results because it isn't necessarily true that all their theories are totally wrong. Boy! Did you get the modifiers in that (chuckle)? It isn't necessarily true that all of their theories are totally wrong (chuckle), almost as covert as their psychotherapies (chuckle).

Now, the individual, the individual is evidently part and parcel of existence only so long as he can stay in an exchange of assistance with it, as long as he can be of use, as long as he can have a game, or goal, or something - common denominator of all these things is Help. Now, help goes over into something very interesting. You really don't have a dichotomy, it isn't that you have help is plus and destroy is minus. This is not true - help goes into destroy, you get a help / destroy interaction, and wherever you have destruction, you had a failure of help. That's just as invariable ... (garbled). Now this dichotomy works to this degree. A fascist regime comes in, of some kind or another, and they know how to make the populace help them - give up produce, and so forth - they threaten to destroy them. For instance, there's one country, I don't know, it's not very far from here, it used to be a great state ... (garbled) ... cave in. They have income tax, I think, there and this, this country, this country threatens to destroy you if you don't give it some taxes. See, your taxes will help that government, but their threat is to destroy you. That's the only way, they think, they can collect. They cannot help you. They're getting more and more laws forbidding them to help you. You used to be able, you could go in and lean across on the counter and say, fix up my return. Then they scribble on for a while and say, oh that's alright Joe, and so forth, and take a small amount of money, and that would be all there is to it. Now they're running Help / Destroy. Well, help/destroy goes just down to a point where it becomes destroy/destroy; and help/destroy will become destroy/destroy.

Now, every good HCA has this memorized (book in hand), I don't (laugh). The Auditor's Code is important enough to give a good look at here, because unless an auditor gets across this bridge or agrees with some part of this as an operating activity, horrible things happen that he doesn't want to have happen. We collected these things. The first auditor's code was when knighthood was in flower. I think it was taken directly from a chivalric code. The one thing we should have preserved out of it, an auditor has to have guts. I don't think that's the way the knight's said it but that's the way I would say it. He has to have guts - courage.

So that you get help/help; help begets help and then returns help. This is fairly sane and rather optimum. Then we get help/destroy and then help/destroy the other way, and then destroy/destroy, and clear down here we get a sub-order of insanity the like of which, well, you people in this world of course have never experienced - it's called war. Doesn't ever do anybody any good, any place, and for years afterwards, now a days, the victor is faced with the problem of helping the vanquished enough to wipe out the war, and all you win is the right to help. But that's all anybody ever wins. Now, isn't it silly for somebody to fight for the right to help when all he's got to do is to help somebody, and all he'd have to do to help somebody without liability, is to make up his mind that he was not necessarily destructible. If he assumes that he himself is relatively indestructible then he is capable of helping everybody no matter what they do. But there are people around that all you have to do is offer them some help and they cut your head off. I went into an institution and it happened. Two cases I've seen spin on this offered help proposition.

I was having preclear conferences with an auditor in another country over a long distance telephone. It was rather complicated because he was not in the capitol city of that country and its phones were indifferent and I didn't happen to be in Washington. I happened to be in a place down in Virginia and its phone connections were rather indifferent, and we actually got a case on the road just because of the fact that the auditor had stark nerve - just guts, that was all. He was in a household that spoke a foreign language, that was totally psychotic. He had the relatives, the local medicos, trained nurses, and so forth, screaming at him in all directions. He just kept on going to work on a psychotic girl and he got her back on her feet, squared around. That auditor, by the way, is a rare auditor. He is superlative in this particular line. I can tell you some stories about him - practically gruesome. He's one of the best auditor's in the country. (laughing) He was auditing a criminal one day, I must tell you, he was auditing a criminal one day and I said, „Well, the man is so combative, have him fight the wall“. This auditor, by the way, is Fernando Strata, and he called me up a few minutes later and he says, „He won't do it. Shall I Tone 40 it?“ So I said, „Oh sure, go ahead, Fernando“. (Laughing) After a while I heard the building shaking next door. I didn't pay very much attention to it. Finally the preclear comes in, his hands running raw, red blood. The building next door - one whole wall of a bedroom there that we were using - plaster, lathe, right straight on out to the brick, just totally wiped out. Fernando said, „Well, he was sort of unwilling to do it“ (laugh). Fernando had just taken his fist and made him fight the wall. The criminal, by the way, I don't think he's been up before the cops since - it was quite a long time ago. This took quite a bit of doing. Now, I don't say that all auditing should result in blood, but it was better that his hands bled a little bit than he spend the rest of his life in jail. That's just about what it amounted to because he was homicidal, but Fernando didn't care. Guts - that's the one thing we should have preserved that isn't in this code.

One girl walked up to me immediately after the first Phoenix Congress and she said, I've been told I should help you, and I said, well, there's nothing for you to do right now, and I just walked off and left. She went out on the street and spun in, was picked up by the police, put into a local spin bin ... (garbled). I wrote that down in the notebook as inexplicable, and only what was inexplicable, I thought for a long time, was there must have been some other event took place between my conversation with her and that spin. No, there wasn't. There is evidently no other thing necessary, I've known two such cases where it happened. They offered help, it was refused, and they spun right in. They're on such a delicate balance of being part of the human race that they spin right out of it when they get the least inkling of the fact that they can't be of assistance. Isn't that an interesting commentary? This is how much this means to a person. This is how much of a button this is. But to ... You walk up to a raving psycho and you say I want to help you. Well, be sure there are no axes or ice picks, or anything around, because he'll finish you. Just offering help to him is enough for him to decide that destruction is necessary. Now, you notice there wasn't a single word I said there applicable to a national government (laugh).

Here's the Code: Do not evaluate for the preclear. We call to your attention that psychoanalysis was total evaluation. The analyst was supposed to find out something and then analyze that fact into the person's head with his explanation. That was the way he went about it. Scientologists do not evaluate for the preclear. Sometimes we can stretch this a little bit too strongly and never tell the preclear that it's the end of session because that would be evaluating for him, you see (laugh).

Now as we look over help/destroy we begin to understand, so much that for a while as we look over the universe and find instances of this, we tend to be overwhelmed; but it's a good thing to do because almost anything equates into this help/destroy curve, almost anything. It can be added up, some part of it fundamental, can be added up on help. A person gets up in a fairly good state, they can tolerate an enormous amount of help ... Did you ever see a little kid, little Suzette right now is going through a period of not wanting to be helped, she wants to be self-sufficient. That's a good thing, a good mechanism, nothing wrong with it, but I have eventually let her help things enough that I can now help her. I don't think anybody else in the family can help her, but I can help her. Why? Because I let her help me. I don't have to dream it up either, she's gotten awfully good at it. She gets bright and polite and dignified as long as I let her help something. And, of course, there isn't any coordination between America's refusal to let children work and juvenile delinquency - not much. If you forbid them to help for years, you wonder why then they destroy everything - it's inevitable. The way to get teeners and so forth into an awful state and get them to destroy everything, is to deny them the right to help.

2. Do not invalidate or correct the preclear's data. Preclear says, „You know, I remember I was out at that summer place, I must have been five or six“. If you’ve got somebody else in the room that knew him, „No John, that was when you were ten, you remember that, it's not when you were five or six, it's when you were ten“. If an auditor does something like this, the preclear comes up with a datum and he hasn't got it straight, and the auditor knows he hasn't got it straight, if the auditor points it out, well, you've just finished one session and not likely to get the next one started either. 3. Use the processes which improves the preclear's case. That's a dirty, snide remark (chuckle). Of course you don't know what processes improve the case until you've used some process on the case. Right? That of course gives you latitude never to use a process which improves the c ... No, it doesn't really (laughing).

So the biggest right there is, is not the right to vote, is not the right to freedom of speech, or press, or religion, or anything else. The biggest right there is in Human Rights, is the right to help. And now I just want to ask you one more question, looking at this, the index of willingness to help being the highest index in demonstration of Clearing, do you any longer doubt my statement that those people in Dianetics and Scientology are the upper tens of thousands of the population of Earth, because they volunteered to help, didn't they? Thank you!

Now, 4. Keep all appointments once made. That's the only one I find auditor's breaking once in a while. They say to the preclear, I'll be there at four o'clock, they appear at four-fifteen. Preclear says, he doesn't want to help me ... (garbled). They spend the remaining auditing period running this out as a Present Time Problem. Next day, auditor says he'll be there at four o'clock, doesn't appear till four-twenty. Preclear says he didn't want to help me and they spend the rest of the auditing session tuning this out as a Present Time Problem. I don't think that would get anywhere. Do you? Another one - Do not process a preclear after ten p.m. and do not process a preclear who is improperly fed. Very, very interesting pair of data. Every single datum in this auditor's code was developed the hard way by the early birds in Dianetics and Scientology, developed the hard way. We found out, every person who had ever spun under processing had been audited after ten p.m. and had been audited when he was improperly fed. That was enough to put this into the auditor's code. We cut that down to ribbons then. People don't ordinarily spin under processing and we haven't had anybody do it for so many years, I've almost forgotten how it is, mostly because of this auditor's code.

Do not permit a frequent change of auditors. Do not sympathize with the preclear. Now that, that of course is stretching it, that of course is stretching it too far. You should be able to sympathize with the poor fellow now and then. Shouldn't you? (chuckle) I've heard it said, that when you can no longer do something for a person, you can sympathize with him. Never permit the preclear to end the session on his own independent decision. When the preclear runs out the door, you go out the door, and you bring him back, and say end of session, of course (laugh). Never walk off from a preclear during a session. It's alright to threaten to, but never do it (laugh).

Never get angry with a preclear. That's another one that will spin one for a while. Half way through a session, all of a sudden the auditor is furiously angry with him. He just sits there and spins in; it takes him a few days to come out of it. Always reduce every communication lag encountered by continual use of the same question or process. Always continue a process as long as it produces change and no longer. Be willing to grant beingness to the preclear. Never mix the processes of Scientology with those of other practices. And number 16, which is: Always stay in two-way comm with the preclear.

Now, that code of practice is really more desirable in your kit of knowledge as an auditor, although no instructor will tell you this, I can, than a superficial knowledge the TRs, the Training Drills. In other words, it's more important to adhere to the Auditor's Code than it is to adhere to training drills. Training drills make it possible for you to tolerate the activities called for in the Auditor's Code. Do you see that? So it's actually the Auditor's Code that bring the training drills into existence and the training drills then make it possible to do so. A person studying Scientology, with the desire to help his fellow man, must enter on such a bridge otherwise he will start doing things that undo the good he is trying to do. Now, the training drills are part and parcel to it, and these other skills are part and parcel to it. All of this data can be found in the books, and I call to your attention that there are certain scales, the ARC Emotional scale, the Know to Mystery scale, the Effect scale, that these scales are still very valid and they are still very important. Now, that tells you there's a vast amount of data and a tremendous number of odds and ends of processes and types and so forth, that are not now considered vital even though they do good things, but are not vital, and it sort of narrows the look down a little bit, don’t you see? That doesn't omit these other things from Scientology and say they don't exist anymore, but it does say that these are absolutely essential, and anybody who's being trained, or who wants to know this subject, should enter it through this sort of a door.

Now, everybody's always asking for a fast way, you know, to hand a friend, to hand a friend a book. They want me to write a book - they can hand a friend a book, read it ... (garbled), very interested and then immediately becomes your friend ... (garbled) and so on, and that's all very nice, it's all very nice. I'm afraid that doesn't exist yet because, and I don't think it will ever exist., because it presupposes the ability on the part of your friend, 1. to read, and 2. to understand what he reads and I will write such a book providing you will audit all of your friends up to a point where they can get some reality on what I am saying (laugh). Thank you.