Русская версия

Search document title:
Content search 2 (exact):
ENGLISH DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Definition of Control (FC-03) - L570704C | Сравнить
- Mans Search and Scientologys Answer (FC-02) - L570704B | Сравнить
- Problem of the Mind (FC-01) - L570704A | Сравнить

RUSSIAN DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Как Мы Подошли к Проблеме Разума (КСв 57) - Л570704 | Сравнить
- Определение Контроля (КСв 57) - Л570704 | Сравнить
- Человеческие Искания и Ответ Саентологии (КСв 57) - Л570704 | Сравнить

CONTENTS MAN'S SEARCH AND SCIENTOLOGY'S ANSWER Cохранить документ себе Скачать
FC-02, 5707C04FC-01, 5707C04
2nd Lecture of the „Freedom Congress“ given in Washington, DCFirst lecture of the „Freedom Congress“ in Washington, DC

MAN'S SEARCH AND SCIENTOLOGY'S ANSWER

HOW WE HAVE ADDRESSED THE PROBLEM OF THE MIND

A lecture given on 4 July 1957A lecture given on 4 July 1957
[Based on the clearsound version only.][Based on the clearsound version only.]

Well, we got a congress here?

I just wanted to make sure that we started this congress off with a bang. How are you?

Audience voices: Yeah.

Audience voices: All right.

Ah, that didn't sound like we had a congress. Do we have a congress here?

Male voice: We got a bang out of that, Ron. Good. Thank you.

Audience voices: Yes!

How are you doing this 4th of July?

Good! Now, I'll give you the way an acknowledgment really gets through now. Good. Very good.

Audience voices: Wonderful!

Audience voice: Okay. It... see? It got through.

Well you look good. You look good.

We started this congress, you know, with a group intensive - first three days of this week, and we apparently did something in that. There was one person in that that got a thirty-nine-point IQ rise, and the average IQ rise was fourteen points in those three days of Tone 40 Group Auditing.

Male voice: So do you.

Now, most of the people that were in that group intensive were actually old Scientologists. There were not too many brand-new people in that group. And to get a fourteen-point IQ rise as an average across a group which contains a lot of people who have been mined, plumbed, sifted and IQ risen practically out of this world, is utterly fantastic.

Thank you.

This by the way, was an interesting adventure, because these people who were going to do this Group Processing, walked into it saying, „Well, Group Processing! Ha-ha-ha-ha! There's nothing to Group Processing! Well, that's all well. Group Process-processed them by the thousands! You know Nothing to it:“

Audience voices: Thank you.

They were handed an HCO Bulletin, that's Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin, giving Group Processing intensive, as written up two or three months ago, which was really - and it didn't say so on it - Tone 40 Group Processing, CCH on a group. That's what that realty was.

We don't have a program for this congress but Steve's had to print something up.

They walked in here; they first went down to a big building that we'd gotten for the Advanced Clinical Unit and threw their voices around in there, trying to get the intention instantaneous and so forth. And they said, „Well, we ... it's all right - group. We've got it made in the shade.“

But as a matter of sober fact we are actually celebrating something. We are not celebrating just the independence of this great and glorious nation. Boy; I bet that has been used eighteen hundred - or will be in the course of the day - „For which our forefathers fought, shed their blood in the cause of liberty.“

And they started out with the group - it was the first time they had run Tone 40 processing on a group; getting that intention into every skull. And if the person wasn't there - back of his head. And getting that acknowledgment through every time. Almost killed them for the first half-hour. But within two-three hours of the beginning of that intensive these old-time auditors who really know their stuff anyhow, had it grooved. So, you too could do this if you're willing to die a little at first.

Well, we're celebrating something else. Do you happen to know that the birthday of the Washington organization is July 4th. It was organized, formed, chartered and incorporated on July 4, 1955, and is today two years old. Thank you.

I also want to thank all those people who took that group intensive. Thank you.

It is a fairly brawny youngster. I often say it's the first organization we have had. I know this because I can loaf. I do nothing these days, nothing. I just loaf; nothing to it.

Now, we have ourselves a lot of things we could talk about, lot of things that we could talk about this congress, awful lot of people we could introduce, lot of things we could do, lot of things we could say.

The incorporation papers of the Founding Church of Washington, DC, as well as the transfer and reestablishment papers of the HASI in the East, actually were signed on the 4th of July 1955, and it meant a tremendous independence for us. It was the first independent, non-downtrodden organization which Dianetics and Scientology ever had. It owed no money, no favors, no hat tips to anybody.

But I think the foremost thing that we should say is, thank you, all of you, who over the years or even recently have carried the ball and done the work, and spread the word of Dianetics and Scientology. And thank you from me to you. Thank you very much.

And since that time we've really been sailing. What we put in now goes in in concrete and basalt, particularly the preclears. We've had a wonderful time here in Washington. Some of us complain that it's hot, but very few of us complain that it's radioactively hot.

Audience voices: You're welcome.

An earlier organization existing in Phoenix, Arizona was in an area which is very close to the test sites. And between the bombs that were being thrown at us by the US government, radioactive bombs, and the bombs which wore being pitched us by the APA squared - they are all squares - and the AMA and so forth, the area became radioactively hot. So we decided to move back to where law and order would have to prevail or there wouldn't have to be any nation here at all, you see. So we moved back into an area where all of the federal judges are directly under the surveillance of their superiors and have to get too high a price for their services to make it worth anybody's while.

Man has been looking for a very long time for answers.

In these two years in Washington, DC, we have gone from one small building down on R Street to five buildings at the moment. That's an awful lot of buildings, it's an awful lot of space. But the amount of traffic being handled at this moment by the Washington organization is greater than - somebody who goes around and asks what happened to all the people in 1950 - our volume of traffic today is greater than it was at any time at Elizabeth, New Jersey in 1950.

Fellow by the name of Diogenes used to prowl around Athens or Sparta or London or someplace. He used to go around in a barrel, they said, or something like that. He had a lantern. Well, Walt Disney, I suppose he's done this, and some of the kiddy books would tell you that he was trying to find an honest man. Really that was just one of his gags. He had gags and so forth.

This is very significant because it tells us that there are more people sincerely - not passing or faddishly - more people sincerely interested in Scientology today than there were in Dianetics.

The truth of the matter is, Diogenes went around with a lantern in broad daylight, and all he wanted to find was answers to his questions.

Now we ask this question, we ask this question when it comes to the dissemination, the spread, the number of peoples interested in this subject of Scientology: How many people throughout the world have heard of it? How many people throughout the world are using it?

And his questions concerned where life came from and how it did arid where it was going and what was the nature of man. And a few other propounding preponderances that were utterly horrible. And nobody answered him for a couple of thousand years. But, Diogenes, whoever you are now, we're ready for you! We have answers to your questions.

And here is a great oddity. The Central Organization never contacts more than about six percent of those people. If you ask any field auditor why, he'll say, „Well, they'd have them come in here for processing, and I wouldn't get the case. I'd lose all my preclears!“

Man has been looking for a very, very long time, As I say like Diogenes, he has searched really with a lantern in broad daylight. The answers was all ... were all there, all he had to do was look.

But that isn't really the truth of the matter. The truth of the matter is that this subject is progressing beyond the various frontiers that we ourselves touch.

But people would rather figure-figure evidently and argue with Professor Snodgrass on his misinterpretation of Professor Fromptf than to look at life and find out what it was all about.

I'll give you an idea. Do you want to know how this all started? How these organizations started? What this was all about? I think it is a fitting time and moment for me to tell you.

There are at this moment good friends of mine who became too successful with Dianetics and who just say, „Well, Dianetics was fine. Dianetics is fine. Dianetics works, we know that. But this Scientology, we're pretty doubtful of it. Now, why did Ron change anyhow?“ Now you hear that; you hear it quite a bit.

Back in 1947 I wrote a little book to explain to some of my friends exactly what the work was on which I had been working and in which I was interested. That little book appears today under the title of The Original Thesis.

To go into why the change was made is not germane. But I have recently read one of these good friends of mine - they're still friends of mine, believe me, that's for sure - and he said, „This business about theta is uncertain. But everything else in Scientology is validated.“

Now that original thesis was never published in book form until about 1951. But the original thesis was something which I handed out copies of in a hectographed, mimeographed way to people who were cursorily interested who wanted to know what I had been doing. And they made mimeographed copies of it - it's a very short book - and hectographed copies of it, and mimeographed and hectographed copies of it were given to their friends. And one or two of their friends made mimeographed and hectographed copies of it, and not three months ago I heard from somebody in a far part of the world who was asking me if any more had been done.

Well, he's been going around in broad daylight with a lantern. It never evidently occurred to him that the subject that we study, that those things which we embrace are walking down the boulevard and revolving around the sun and coming off the assembly lines of Detroit and being snapped by photographers every day. That is the subject.

Now Book One, what we call Book One is not Book One. That is Book One, that original thesis. It is very amusing that this Book One, so-called, was also written because I was tired of explaining to people what they couldn't understand in The Original Thesis. So, I wrote that rather under pressure, and a psychiatric textbook house published it and it became a bestseller, and that was almost - that almost did us in. We were doing wonderfully up to that time, you see.

Philosophy is not the subject. Epistemology - ontology, I think they call it. There's 1862 different names for nothingness, and their composite was the field of philosophy. People went into the field of philosophy to find answers to the mind which was sitting right in front of their faces. That's something like going down - well, not quite - I was going to say going down to the Capitol to look at the zoo.

And then the public got interested, and Lord knows what we. mean by this term „the public“ unless it is some newspapermen who can't duplicate.

To go one way to look at something which is right there is quite interesting. And we come to the conclusion that man has been running a tremendous avoidance of the subject of man, and if we have done anything we have simply broken through this avoidance and we have taken a square look.

And Time magazine, without ever sending at any time - and nowhere in my career have I ever talked to one - without ever sending a reporter to interview me or anybody of the organization, managed to write in that year as many columns on my personal life and Dianetics as were devoted in that year to the President of the United States. This was intensely insincere interest. Do you understand that? I mean, it never went forward; it never did anything. It made a tremendous commotion, and it certainly almost did us in. An organization was formed at that time of a number of people and as long as I could keep my personality in high gear why, I could dominate it, but organizationally it was not under my control. And organizationally it branched out in various directions, and these people did a good job. But because there was too much traffic, because it was too hard to handle, because there wasn't enough known, because there weren't enough trained auditors and so on. it just overworked everybody. And it's taken us about six years to get over this tremendous popularity of Dianetics.

Now right this moment I'm going to give you an example which shouldn't wind up with the uncertainty on the subject of theta. Theta, as you know, is merely a mathematical symbol, as it represents an awareness of. awareness somethingness. But I'll give you a demonstration right now and show you how difficult it is. Now, we could read tomes, we could study telekinesis, we could - or telekinesis. I'm very very shaky on these things. As a matter of fact I should have read a book on this subject, but ... But I remember vividly reading a book on this subject - as a matter of fact I read quite a few books on this subject many years ago-and I was sitting there, I wasn't feeling very well at the time, and I was sitting there and I was reading books of philosophy, you know, and... As a matter of fact I have a book now written by - The Remarks Made by Plotinus, I think it is, and we use it in Book Mimicry.

And I can announce to you today that we have recovered from it.

Now, I read these books, and I kept reading them and I read some more books and I had some more books on philosophy over here and I read all those books and I studied all those books over here. And I got a five-foot shelf of books on philosophy and

Now, there are people here at this moment who are here because they picked up a copy of Book One out of the bookstores way back when and wanted to know more about it. I think a copy of The Original Thesis would have gotten into their hands just as easily. I think you'd be here regardless of 1950.

I read those books, and so forth. And I found out after a while what I was doing - I was reading books. So I decided to study the mind instead. In other words, to go to this degree of via, to study all the philosophers, all the religious leaders, all of the messiahs and savants of all times and ages to find out what makes things tick is just about as silly as buying a manual describing the repairs on a Cadillac but never riding in one. Now, there is the facts of a case.

Now, what's amazing is that we never listened to any advice on the subject of „We must stop research. We must halt right here because this is a good thing.“ We all know it's a good thing but in a different connotation.

All we've really done is short-circuit this thing to a good look. And we find the world in which we live is susceptible to understanding and doesn't function unless we understand it.

We have never permitted the subject to be totally, you might say, pegged at one level where people could say, „Well, we will profit by this for our own individual purposes, and the devil with the rest of mankind.“

We find all of these various attitudes, ideas, misinterpretations of interpersonal relationships, of various works of man, his various activities and so on are tremendously interesting, but they aren't a direct observation.

We've continued its advance. I have called myself a liar more times than I would care to count just because I was doing an honest piece of reporting on research. In the early days I could ... I waxed more enthusiastic at times than later. I would say, „This is it! This is it!“ It was! But what do you mean by it?

Now, true enough in Scientology we have done an awful lot of describing, but as a description on a brand-new level of action. What I describe in a book you can look for and find at once. And a book on Scientology is not a book of philosophy to air the erudite and aesthetic opinions of LRH. It is a road map of where it is, what it is - if you want to look at it. And the end product is not reading a book. The end product is taking a look at it.

Well, it's very simple what you mean by it; very, very simple. It was simply a further advance on our track, And therefore I could rather startle you today by telling you „This is it.“ But that is just what I am here to tell you at this congress: „This is it.“

Now, the only reason a road map is necessary is because so many phony road maps have been issued. And a book on Scientology becomes necessary if one has had the misfortune of being educated in the twentieth century in a public school.

Well, the past seven years have been interesting - mild understatement. Have been interesting. The past seven years we have been quite active.

Female voice: I agree.

And every once in a while an auditor says to me, „Well, why don't we get out? You know, why aren't we being heard! Why haven't we already taken the fort? I just keep talking to people and talking to people and talking and I never hear any of it coming back! Can't you hire somebody to listen to us?“

You've been told all sorts of things - via-via-via, wiggle-wiggle, alter-is, not-is. And a book on Scientology is a road map out of a morass of „don't looks.“ Do you see that? That's all it is.

I'll tell you something very remarkable: They are being heard. You simply have underestimated how many two and a half billion people are. It's a lot of people, a lot of people.

But we have achieved a subject then. But the subject itself embraces life and the subject of the subject is life: livingness, actingness, doingness, beingness, and havingness. Now that is the subject of Scientology.

The most amazing things occur. We get all sorts of feedbacks. Some fellow, by the way, who had gotten Book One, was a Book Auditor, had come in for a little briefing - he never did get trained in the Foundation - went back to some unlikely place in Texas and has been practicing ever since without any further correspondence with a Central Organization. He's just never breathed, he's just been getting results, and it's just fine. He didn't even ask me if there had been any further results! He didn't ask me if I'd made any advances in technique and theory! How do you like that? Was I insulted!

The subject of Scientology is not Professor Fromptf's contradiction of Professor Snodgrass's Phrumpfs. It is not a learned dissertation on how many angels can stand on the head of a pin.

You know, good roads and good weather, „This is a great subject I certainly do get nice results. Been keeping a nice practice going. Everything's fine. Got all my friends patched up. Even - thing's going along fine.“

I ran across a book the other day which was used until recently by a very large and profitable organization. I think it has - its central organization is in, just a minute, don't tell me - its central organization, it's someplace over in Europe. A lot of our troops took it recently, but they left this central organization alone. I don't know why. Rome, that's right - Rome. I knew it was some town where the plumbing was sort of outside.

What was he doing? The somatic strip... That was all he was doing. He was running preclears up and down the time track running off engrams. It was quite remarkable.

And they talk all about demon exorcism. But I assure you, they had to invent the demon before they could exorcise him.

And I had to wind up and say, „You know, you know there's been some more material on this.“

There is a great deal of material of a discursive nature on whether or not man is going to go to heaven or going to go to hell. And a lot of attempts to put in his hands some sort of a road map that will take him to either place. But the key question has never been asked: Is there heaven? Is there hell?

„Oh,“ he says, „there has? By the way, I want to tell you about an interesting preclear I had back in...“

I've been looking recently and I can't find them.

I said, „We know what this machinery is all about now. We know about things like overt actmotivator sequences.“ That was in his future.

Imagine the disappointment of somebody who kicks off, well aware of having led an exemplary life, gets a knock all ready, and can't find any Pearly Gates. He would then feel he was rather lost. Just as you would feel lost if you were told to go to Brumpfville and nobody had ever built it. But that's no reason for an individual to believe he's wrong just because he can't find Brumpfville. The question is: Is there such a town?

And he says, „Well, why do you want to know any more?“

Now if somebody wants to come up and say, „Look, here's a road map: You take two turns to the right; three good turns to the left; three pennies in the collection plate; and a couple of Ave Marias - and there's the Pearly Gates.“ If somebody comes up with that, I follow the directions, I arrive at the Pearly Gates; I'll go back and shake him by the hand.

That was an awful state of affairs, wasn't it? And do you know that to a marked degree we have lost a great many Dianetic Auditors and a great deal of the Dianetic public because it's too good. It works too well. You understand that? This wouldn't really be the way it was, you see, or the way you would think of it.

But I've read several road maps on the subject recently, exteriorized rather neatly - went around. As near as I can find out somebody fell into one of the volcanoes out in the South Pacific or something one time, and got an idea that hell existed. But I don't know what kind of a shape a thetan would be in to be bothered by a little heat!

You'd think, „Well, a bunch of failed cases and so forth, and failed cases would cut us down on the line, and people would be unhappy about it; they found out it didn't work this way or that and therefore they wouldn't have any more contact with us.“ Well, that isn't the way it's working.

These road maps that man has been given to read all had a pitch. They had a pitch - they were to make him be good for somebody else's benefit but not his own. That is my opinion, for what it's worth. To make him produce for somebody else - not himself.

People come into one of your Group Processing sessions and they go wong-wong, and three feet back of their head or something, and they find a havingness, and they can work better now, and they are not having any more trouble with the wife or something of the sort, and they go on living their life happily and that's that. And you don't ever hear of them again, simply because they don't come near you.

All of these road maps have been written out of a misguided idea that you have to have slaves. And I've seen slaves around, and I've never found them doing anything but giving trouble. Man cannot afford slavery.

But they tell people. Every once in a while we run into somebody, he shows up at the front door and says, „Well, here I am.“ We say, „All right, there you are.“

It isn't whether or not slavery is bad or slavery is good, or whether it's esoteric or against the Emancipation 24th Amendment, or the 29th, or which ever one that is. That is not the point.

He says, „Well, I'm supposed to have some processing - whatever that is.“

The point is, can people afford to have slavery in their vicinity? On a national level, can any nation afford to have a poor, bunged-up neighbor? No. Can any nation afford to wreck the government of another nation? No.

We say, „Well, all right. Okay. Go over and see the Registrar.“

Just a passing glance at this, look at the French Revolution. The stable government of France was overthrown; her neighbors kept that government in a turbulence by declaring war and making pressure and so forth. There was a broad world war grew out of that at the end of the eighteenth century. When France started to go out of control none of her neighbors, England, or the rest of them, reached out and said, „Let's put it back together again. Let's get the controls lined up so we have a more equitable exercise of the government of France.“ They didn't do that, and as a result they were living with a psycho for fifteen or twenty years. It was causing war on every side. Two generations of the manhood of Europe were eaten up in the flames of the uncontrolled hysteria of France.

He goes over to see the Registrar. We tell him this fantastic figure for a couple of hours, you know. He pays it. Goes up to the auditing room, sits down in front of a staff auditor, runs an intensive.

Now, France, herself, was eaten up because she founded her economy on a sort of slavery. And other nations around her were able to sit with great aplomb and watch the feudal slave state go on and on and on, to see man tromped into the mud and dust. They paid for it after a while.

Ran into one of these fellows the other day. I couldn't understand exactly what it was all about because he knew absolutely nothing about technology, theory, he knew nothing about nomenclature. An auditor had to sit him down and say; „You are now a preclear.“ And he says, „A what?“

No nation on the face of earth can afford to loosen the power of another nation. No war ever earned anything but war. And anytime you loosen the control over himself and his environment of another human being, you get the same circumstances. You get somebody that you can't live around.

No. Friend of his saw that he wasn't doing too well, says, „You have to go down to Washington, an organization down in Washington the name of Scientology. Scientology. This is the way you spell it; difficult word, doesn't sell worth a nickel. And here is the address of the organization. You go down there and get yourself fixed up. Now, you are supposed to go down there.“ And they just... They've seen something happen to this friend of theirs and he seems to be living a better life and so they have some respect for the word, and they come down and get some processing. I mean, we've had that happen lately - more often than not, You see that?

And what is slavery but the substitution of one area of controls for the proper area of controls. We take a human being who should be able to control himself and his environment and we put him in chains and we tell him that he is now totally controlled! And he mustn't breathe or spit without some kind of a government permit. And we say, „Ah, this is the way to go about it. This is the way to have a civilization.“

We are not just falling back on ourselves and taking in our own washing. Two and a half billion people are a lot of people.

Oh no, it is not. That is the way to have chaos! And man cannot afford slavery. He cannot afford duress. He can't afford to tear his fellow man to pieces if he wishes to live any kind of a life at all.

Somebody said one time that if Christ stood on the shores of the Sea of Galilee from the moment of his birth until now - although I imagine he would have had difficulty at his birth - pitching a dollar every minute into the sea, he would not, from that time to this, have yet expended one billion dollars - a magnitude of number. It's about 170 million people in the United States. How many people do you ordinarily talk to?

There is nothing wrong with the world today, except the world believes in duress and slavery as a method of possession.

Not very many, but the aggregate number adds up to something respectable. It's probably gone up toward a million now, something like that, but not all these people can talk yet. So what we get is you talk to people a little bit, and then they whisper. Got that? And then we talk to these same people a little bit more and put them in better communication and they talk just a little louder, but the people they're talking to whisper. Got the idea? And we talk more and talk more. So, you're not making a clean new contact every time who is then totally set up and in beautiful condition and ready to operate simply because you've talked to him. See, you talk to him again.

No, it's a very simple thing. It's a very simple picture. Let's look what this has done to the entire study of the mind. A study which came up from Chaldea. A study which came through all of the ages of Asia.

Now, you multiply the number of times you've talked to 170 million people, the number of times you'd have to talk to each one of these 170 million even on an expanding geometric progression, you'll find out that you have to do a lot of talking, so let's get busy. It's quite remarkable. It's quite remarkable the number of people who have heard of this subject.

Every time somebody who’d come up with a little idea that had some notion of what it was all about, there was always somebody standing there ready to take that little idea and use it as a control mechanism on somebody else, and enhance slavery, but not man.

It's also remarkable the entire change that has taken place in medical circles with regard to Scientology in these past seven years.

In other words, somebody would try to look at this, and then the next thing you know anything that was discovered would be used to make slaves.

A fellow walked in the other day up at a hospital, I think they were treating TB or something in this hospital, and he was doing all right, he was doing all right. He forgot to pull the minister's card on the fellow and straighten him up when he was... they threatened to eject him, but he was doing all right. He was helping these people, he was putting them back together again, and he was just working in this hospital, you know. He wasn't on staff or anything - he was just an auditor and he walked in and he kept working with these people and working with these people.

Let's take a poor, innocent little goof who really must have had something. You know, he was not a man of stupidity; he was a man of some genius - a fellow named Pavlov. Interesting fellow. He left government alone, he didn't have anything to do with government, he went down to one corner of Russia there someplace, and he had a hard time. He eventually got some money and he experimented on dogs.

One day the front office of the hospital called him up and asked him what he was doing, what he was, wanted his credentials, wanted some conversation with him.

And all he was trying to do was change training patterns by identification. And he had the whole idea of conditioning identification. He was creating engrams every day, but he missed the whole subject. But he was all right. He had dogs, and he was happy, and the dogs slavered when he rang bells, and it was very useful material.

And he said, „I'm a Scientologist.“ And immediately „Oh.“ This guy was shattered. This medico director was just shattered at that moment.! Well, here's the oddity: this is a different story than 1950, 1954 even, or '55.

Nobody around the Red Square - because he lived on after the revolution - said to themselves, „You know, we have an enormous number of men, women and children out here to

He says, „I think you people are a wonderful group. I think you are doing remarkable work. As far as I am concerned I would be happy to let you work in this hospital from here on out. But I have to think of my personal standing with the AMA. And I'm sorry that you can't work in the hospital.“

control. We're a government. These people have got to be clothed and fed and sheltered. There's been a revolution, and we've got to get things going again, we've got to put them back together again. Let's see what Pavlov could teach us that we could employ in our effort to make these people happy, to make them better people.“

That is a different story. I see a couple down here - they were working in Phoenix in a hospital and all they did in those days was just simply kick them down the front steps. Now, they still kick them down the front steps but they apologize. In other words, we're getting... in other words we're getting there. You know, Independence Day is a great day. All sorts of heroic quotes come to mind, you know. John Paul Jones fighting the Bon Homme Richard against the Serapis „Surrender? Wo have not yet begun to fight.“ Well, I... you know, that sort of thing comes to mind. „Don't cheer, boys, the poor devils are dying.“ You know! that sort of thing. Independence Day.

No, no. No, no. The Kremlin didn't do that. The Kremlin wrote Mr. Pavlov a letter. And they said, „Dear Mr. Pavlov, You come and see us. We are going to fix you up. We are going to give you laboratories. If you don't come voluntarily, we're going to bring you back on active service.“

But one of these quotes is terribly applicable. And that one is „We have not yet begun to fight.“ We don't intend to. That's how we lose everything.

Undoubtedly Mr. Pavlov bad reached a considerable understanding of some of the factors of behavior, and so a chap by the name of - I don't know what his name was. He called himself Stalin, he's dead now. Wonderful how beams work. And this fellow, Stalin, put him in a little corner of the Kremlin, and he says, „Professor, write me a manuscript that tells me how to employ on human beings every slavery mechanism that you have found in working with dogs.“

I'll tell you more about this later but the surest way to lose havingness is fight it. The way you have havingness is own it.

And Pavlov wrote a four - he didn't know any better - he wrote a four-hundred-page manuscript. He didn't throw Stalin into session as any of us would have done. He didn't say „Well, I'll have to give you a demonstration here, Mr. Stalin, I mean, I can't just write this stuff out. It would be meaningless. I'd have to give you a demonstration. Here's a couch,” see, „The somatic strip will go back to birth.“

But we were not in a position, actually, in past years, to throw out our chests very grandly because, bluntly, there were numbers of cases which numbers of auditors could not do anything much for, and we know that as a complete honesty. They were not in the majority but they were around.

He didn't do that. He didn't know how. But he did write this manuscript - fourhundred-page manuscript. And ever since that time, this undoubtedly valuable piece of know-how about human behavior and animal behavior has been employed exclusively to extract confessions from human beings as to how they have injured the Red state, or why they should at once desert some other control factor and join up in some fashion.

We have done some remarkable things even with unconscious people. We have had unconscious people and we've fished them back, we've straightened them up, we've done remarkable things. But remember the invariability with which I was trying to come up in 1950 was not entirely there.

In other words, it's been totally misused and they've made slaves with it. And we call that today „brainwashing“ and that's where brainwashing comes from. All brainwashing is, is getting a person to identify beyond reason. Any time you can get somebody to identify beyond reason, you've brainwashed him. It has nothing to do with scrubbing brushes; they sure could have employed some.

There were some cases that resisted the best efforts of auditors. That's terrifically honest. Now, that doesn't say that there weren't auditors around who could have cracked those cases. Some other auditor maybe or something of the sort. But it does say that it often didn't happen. Nothing happened, you see. All right. All right.

But here, here is this whole ... this whole panorama of thousands of years all in vignette. Here we have Pavlov writing what he knew, and the material then being used for the enslavement of his fellow man. In other words they give it a big pitch. They colored it. They didn't want anything to do with making people happy, making people free. They wanted nothing to do with that at all.

It was necessary to get the subject and the training of auditors up to a level where it consistently happened, where there weren't any failed cases, And after that I was willing to do the equivalent of beginning to fight, see, We actually are just now up to a level of very, very good security on training an auditor, and processes addressed properly to any case will resolve the case. Now we are at that point. We were at it verbally from me in 1950, but we're at it in actuality today.

And yet, who knows? Russia, which at this moment is failing, might well have become a successful experiment and therefore a successful nation had she taken people like Pavlov and said, „What do you boy's know? Now, how can this be used to free from slavery - the slavery of superstition, the slavery of indolence - the Russian people?“ But they never made that request.

It's quite remarkable. It's quite remarkable. There are people here who know something about this, and there are people here who think they do and really don't. Because between now and the slight backtrack of just a few months, the entire proving ground of what we call CCH, a new system of processes, and TRs met the test, took the fort, all straight.

We didn't wait for somebody to make the request, we're just going ahead and doing the job. That's the best way to go about it, by the way.

In February, I could have said. „Well, we're pretty close to there. Must be.“ But it wasn't proven that we were.

A road map is only necessary because every time a truth has been discovered heretofore, it has evidently been put to a misuse of further slavery and greater duress, and therefore the whole track is booby-trapped.

Well, now what's happened since February is that we know pretty well that we are there. When you can take a day-old baby or an unconscious woman who has been lying in a state of coma for six months or a raving psycho and crack their cases rather easily without much stress, wouldn't you say we were there?

We don't know what Gautama Siddhartha really said 625 B.C. We don't know what Buddha said. Because I can assure you that if you tell somebody ... if you tell somebody to do what a Buddhist is supposed to do - sit there for twenty years or something - he'll ossify.

Audience voices: Yes.

Now, maybe, maybe Buddha said something. Undoubtedly he released considerable truths or he wouldn't have had that much popularity. His word would not have reached across the greater bulk of mankind. Buddhism would not be today one of the great religions of earth if it had all been lies.

Well, that's what we're doing. That's what we're doing; what I announce to you officially on this Independence Day of 1957.

But how was it used? Exactly how was it used? Well, somebody must have thrown a few curves into it. Somebody must have thrown a few pitches on the line. There must have been something rearranged in Buddhism. Because I can tell you by personal experience it doesn't work.

There is a great deal to know about this thing called CCH. But there is an entirely different channel today to a state of Clear and control, or what ever else you want to have it, or Homo Novis, or anything else. There is an entirely different route than processing, and that route is training.

As a matter of fact there is one paragraph Buddha is quoted as saying that contains in it a prohibition against using practically every factor there is in CCH! It said you mustn't think on separateness or nonseparateness, and you mustn't think on this and that. And he took each one of these and he made up a series of about twelve dichotomies, and things that just - you must have nothing to do about. And if you could just conceive of mind essence you were all set.

If you can live through training as a human being and emerge from training still a human being, I'll fire the Instructor.

And I refer you to Creation of Human Ability: „Conceive a static...“ And it says, „Under no conditions run this as a process.“ Ask somebody to look at nothing. Ask somebody to look at mind essence and study it and drool over it and concentrate on it. And his havingness will go up in smoke. And his ability to control himself will go by the boards. That's quite interesting, isn't it?

This is a tremendous thing. We never expected this one to happen, that there would be a sudden appearance of an entirely new route over here that just bypassed „Look at that wall and fall through it“ and other processes. „Who wouldn't you mind scraping off that wall?“ That by the way, I threw in as a gag process, but it's a wonderful process. Let me see, how would that work? It wouldn't work. Well that's all right - run it on your psychiatric friends.

Now, I think that there was something thrown into the channel. I think the water in that stream was dirtied for somebody's profit. Therefore, it is of interest that what we now know remain clearly in view as a workable situation, as a workable activity. That is what is in ... I am engaged on right now: what we know is being codified in such a way that it can continue to be used without a lot of interpretations.

Here we have achieved something quite startling, quite unusual. We have achieved the technology and what we call the TRs which are the drills which means Training Drills - necessary to free up somebody and bring him into present time willy-nilly and let him operate totally in present time in life as well as just auditing.

The exercises and drills which make up the TRs, for instance, are very, very easy to grasp, very easy to repeat. Nothing to it, they are very simple - to do them is something else. But to describe them is very simple.

And this was an amazing thing. But it isn't something that is done by an auditor. It is done by an auditor who is also an Instructor. It's a different approach. It's something new. Of course all the technologies of it emerged from the utter dismay I have experienced for years in trying to train auditors. No kidding.. I've done a pretty good job and so have they.

Now, your subjective reality on the universe doesn't lie over there eighteen light-years or eighteen miles away. Your own subjective reality on the universe and your own objective reality are viewed right from where you sit right this minute. And that's the subject of our study.

But here we have a brand new set of (quote) „processes“ (unquote). See, they're not processes at all; they're Training Drills. And they're addressed immediately and intimately to the individual. They're not addressed to a class of people who sit there and dope off through the lectures.

Now I'm going to show you something here. This is a little gag. Now, I see some auditors are going to be going home to their groups and friends and so on; they'll be playing this gag on them, I know this. This is a lead-pipe cinch.

Training today has become something whereby we pick up somebody by the scruff of the neck and we put him in a chair and we say. „Do it.“

I did this in London, and it was once being done all over the place.

He says, „I can't.“

It goes like this. I want you to cooperate with me here a little bit - will you?

We say, „Do it.“

Audience voices: Yes.

And he says, „You're trying to ruin me.“

All right.

And we say „That's right. You’ve got the point right there. That's correct.“

Now, I want you to take a look at the parts of man. Now, in Scientology: The Fundamentals of Thought, it says the parts of man are body, mind, thetan. See, that's very esoteric. And it describes them at some length.

Now to show you the difference between processing - which is at an all-time high, and simple address to an individual is tremendously high - there isn't anything that is going to set processing aside, or the new techniques of processing. Nothing is going to set them aside.

Now, let's not worry about Scientology: Fundamentals of Thought, I want you to notice at this moment that you have a body there. Now, do you have a body?

But we have achieved this training route. And it's just like having been driving, you know, on a single-lane road, and all of a sudden you're on a two-pass highway. You know, it's a great deal of relief. We don't crack his case easily, we say he's - you know, he's one of these resistive cases, he's trained to be a tough case and so forth. We can always train him! It's quite remarkable.

Audience voices: Yes.

It isn't that we use training processes when we can't crack the case. And it isn't that we audit them when we can't train them. They're totally independent of each other. They don't have to interchange at all.

You do have a body there?

We used to do this: We used to bring somebody into class and he wasn't doing too well, so we'd give him processing and bring him back into class and he would do better. That isn't what we do now. We just bear down with both thumbs.

Audience voices: Yes.

This is quite amazing to have two routes. And we are so accustomed to having the routes of processing and for this to have the subdivisions of individual and group processing, that this new thing that has moved in since February looks like a strange beast.

There is a body sitting there in the chair?

We say, „What is this thing?“ Well, we say. “Well, it's the same as processing except we run the process of doingness on the fellow.“ Oh. no, that isn't it at all.

Audience voices: Yes.

Let me tell you that if you were to read the Instructor's Code, and then read the Auditor's Code you would know the difference. I advise you to get one of those ACC Manuals, and read the Instructor's Code in it.

You have noticed this?

It says „Never invalidate the preclear“ in the Auditor's Code, doesn't it? In the Instructor's Code it says „Never fail to invalidate the student.“ See, they're just mirror images of each other, just opposites.

Audience voices: Yes.

So if we can make auditors who can take care of such processes as are contained now in the lineup, and if we have processes which are good, why we've got it made across the boards, there's nothing to this. We've got both sides of it. We are always over this other stumbling block.

All right, that's the body part of it. Got that now?

Well let me tell you how this adds up. If you had a technique which would crack up and end forever the case of a Homo sapiens, it would chew hell out of the auditor, wouldn’t it?

Audience voices: Yes. Now, maybe there are a few occluded cases or invisible cases around and we won't worry about those particularly. But I am going to ask you to get a picture of a cat.

Let's look that over. If the technique had enough dynamite in it to blow up and explode and knock to pieces one of these carefully nurtured seventy-six-trillion-year-old cases and do that over a period of something under a couple of hundred hours - I say „something under a couple of hundred hours,“ I'm being terribly generous - then who is going to apply it? Are we going to import some robots from Mars? Look. if it is a human being sitting in this chair auditing that human being - boom! Fourth of July.

Audience voices: Okay. Got a picture of a cat?

Let me tell you more distinctly what I'm talking about. The atom bomb, about which this congress is not and about which we couldn't care less ...

Audience voices: Yes

I loved the headline that appeared the other day. They were counting off a bomb which didn't go off. And the headlines in the papers here in Washington said, „Five- Four-Three- Two-One-Zero-Thffst.“ When an Atomic bomb is no more a weapon than some of these flintlocks they used to make two or three hundred years ago - they'd hang them together with baling wire, a piece of iron pipe - and it was far more dangerous to fire one than it was to stand in front of one.

All right. Now, you notice that's a mental image picture of a cat. Is that right?

What happens if anybody uses this A-bomb? Boom! Boom! No boom's anymore. We bomb Russia, Russia bombs us. Within twenty-four hours of Russia bombing us there would be no Russia, there would be no us. Is this a weapon? No, No more than the old flintlock pistol was a weapon. And I think the A-bomb ought to be classified with it. It's a complete bust. They don't know what to do with it. They're now having a disarmament conference trying to get rid of it gracefully. They talk just as though they had something.

Audience voices: That's right.

Anybody could blow up Earth. Just jokingly, any OT could go up to one of the nearby planets, pick up a flying saucer, come down here and stick a few rays into the core of molten earth, and that would be the end of Earth, but you wouldn't call that a weapon. That's just jokingly. But it wouldn't really work, would it?

Hm? Now, can you go further than this and get a picture of a cat you have seen, or is that one?

No, a weapon is something, according to nations, which must coerce obedience from some other nation or a „better attitude“ on their part toward the nation. That's a weapon. A weapon is supposed to accomplish something, not wipe out everything.

Audience voices: Yes.

Well, these new techniques couldn't really be pushed too heavily into people's laps or released too far, because they weren't techniques if they were run by people who would have been annihilated by them.

Get a picture of a cat you have seen?

We all know the phenomena of an auditor sitting there and getting into something with the preclear which is so restimulative he can't keep himself in present time, you know. He says, „Well, mock up your mother.“ He had a bad mother himself or something like that. „Mock up your mother again. Mock up your mother again. Mock up your mother again. Mock up your mother again.“

Audience voices: Yes.

Well, by the time somebody runs some of these CCH processes perfectly - and they have to be run almost perfectly to produce much of a result - if he himself hasn't been up the training route he can't run up the CCH route. I mean that's it.

Notice that that is a mental image picture. You got it?

But we can put him up the training route, which leaves us in the interesting state of we don't have to have it work this way: I audit an auditor on CCH and that makes him clear enough to use CCH, so then he can audit somebody else on CCH, which makes that person clear enough. Get it? You know, if we could go theoretically on geometric progression of this character and so forth, who is going to audit me? You know, I'm in terrible condition. You've seer me staggering around for years. Hardly able to keep up. Hardly able to take it any more. Getting along in years. Have to use motorcycles to get around. Starting to read books instead of simply absorb their contents, Slipping. So, it wasn't really very feasible: it was much easier to invent TRs.

Audience voices: Yes.

Now, the funny part of it is, that anybody can put somebody through those TRs. And somebody who has been put through the TRs can then use CCH processes. QED - nothing to it.

Got that now?

If you can't audit totally in present time the beefiest process there is, the roughest process there is, there is no sense in even starting it. Because you re going to get lost in the backtrack someplace - going to be way back there somewhere. And that phenomenon which some of us knew back in 1950 whereby the auditor would gradually fog out (we were running an engram that he should have had run - that's why he told us to run it) and gradually he's going thud! thud! His voice is getting weaker and weaker. We get up off the auditing couch, put the auditor on the auditing couch, and say, „We will now begin a session.“ There are actually people present who have done this.

Audience voices: Yes.

Well, that’s no way to go about this business of clearing Earth. That's no way to go about it. We were actually falling over the fact that when we got very, very good processes, we would often fall back from them as too dangerous to touch. They were too restimulative to handle and instinctively we would turn away from them and have as little to do with them as possible. In this way a great many good processes were invented on the track which people didn't use very much.

You see that?

And I'll let you in on a secret. There isn't a technique in CCH, really, which in some form or another hasn't been known for three or four years. They're all old processes. They're the best of the processes in all these years. But expertly administered they become very powerful processes, which tells you why nobody ever dared administer them with total expertness - he would have wiped himself out, too.

Audience voices: Yes.

All right. Well, that's a very technical way to go about talking about things. I'm just discussing things with you here. I'm just telling you that something did happen between the last congress and this one, that a total new route of address to the problem of civilizing mankind - if that's the problem - a total new address to it has come up.

All right. That's the mind! The mind is a collection of pictures and automaticities having to do with pictures, and you have just looked at the total subject of the mind. These pict - Now, various things can be in these pictures - and the pictures can be different, but in final analysis they're pictures. You got that? The pictures can get squashed, and they get lopsided, but you're looking at the mind - that's it. There isn't anything else there. There is the machinery that handles them and the pictures themselves. All right, now, have you got the mind?

You could probably have all sorts of organizations by just teaching people to audit, and then they'd never audit at all, you see? You could take a large group of people and do this with them and you've got Group Processing, you've got this new weapon over here in the Training Drills, and we've got all of these new alignments here with processing and so on, and boy, if we were using arrows and these things were arrows, this is about the fullest quiver you ever wanted to have anything to do with. You could hardy pack this one around, be so full. All kinds of arrows. In other words, for a long, long time, with many vicissitudes, with good days and bad ones, with hard work and sometimes not any work at all, we have accumulated a technology all amongst ourselves which belongs to nobody but us, maybe. Belongs to him who would know. We have found how to administer it. And there isn't anywhere anybody who can say, „Well, we will use this now only for profit,“ or „we will no longer research along that line because it might invalidate us with the public.“ I never met the public, by the way. I only know people.

Audience voices: Yes Got the mind?

And here we are arrived in a very happy state of being in this year of l957 - in a state of owing no favors, being under no security with our information, being in a position where no security could be. placed upon it because the silliest thing in the world would be to place security on anything known in Scientology today, since it is known in almost any nation on Earth.

Audience voices: Yes.

People ask me, „Why do you keep slugging away at that Dublin Office? Its bank account is only 59 pounds! It takes up more administration around here.“

All right. Now, let's get that first picture of the cat back - would you please?

And I say, „Well, make sure they don’t fall behind.“ Well. it's a whole experiment. It's a microcosm, you might say, that we're going on soberly along our way clearing the Irish nation. And we're doing it; we're succeeding, little by little by little. But Ireland has such good comm lines to anybody that's an enemy of England that anything known in Ireland, that it was known would invalidate putting it under security wraps anyplace else. It's known in Paris, known in Berlin, Egypt - all kinds of places around the world. The very funny part of it is, is most all the information which you have under your skull at this moment is also known anywhere any government would try to deny information to.

Audience voices! Yes.

So anybody comes along and says, „You know! What's this do? This make pilots who could kill kill! kill! Ah, hah-hah-heh-heh-heh! Security! You mustn't breathe any more of this stuff. Shhhhh.“

Hm? What's looking at it?

We can say, „What's the matter with you, Joe? This can't be put under security. The law which you have just put under security as not to be released was known two years ago in Moscow's largest stronghold, Cairo. It's well known in Cairo. It was printed in German, well circulated into East Germany. To whom are you trying to deny this information - the Martians?“

Audience voices: I am.

Actually the international character of Scientology is simply my effort - sometimes exaggerated - to keep the communication lines open so wide that it drives everyone into apathy at the thought of shutting them off. They do go into apathy, too.

That's a thetan. See that now? All right, now you've got a body. You had a picture...

I said to some fellow one time - he said. „Wel1, it would be very easy to close down the Central Organization in the United States, and you could no longer get out your stuff.“

Audience voices: Yes.

And I said, „It doesn't come out of the Central Organization, United States.“

And you found out something was looking at a picture, didn't you?

He says, „It doesn't?“ I said, „No! It's ... all the Professional Auditor Bulletins are distributed from London, England.“

Audience voices: Yes.

„Ohhh??“

Or something was looking at something.

It's a funny thing. It's a funny thing to be standing here talking to you about security. You say, „Well, Ron's really reaching for it now.“

Audience voices: Yes.

Boy, there is only one thing that is not under security, only one thing now, today, really that is broadly spread about - that's your personal income. That's one thing the government doesn't want under security. But the more ... if governments of the world go mad enough to assume that weapons which are not weapons are weapons, if they go so mad as to believe that they can actually depend for their national security on such a thing as an atomic bomb, of course, the next biggest appropriation to the military would be the security.

Now, you have the subjective attitude of the thetan when you look at the picture. But let's go to just one other attitude of the thetan, the only other attitude of the thetan, and that is this.

And then that reverses. They finally find out that the atomic bomb is no longer a weapon, so they stop appropriating for it and they simply appropriate for the security agencies. After that all they have to do to govern is just be secure; be more secure and more secure. After that why they test everybody's breath to make sure no information is getting out when he exhales.

Let's look at these curtains.

No, truly enough, in a world where science and scientific secrets are the stock in trade of the militarist, one has to be alert to the fact that developed scientific information such as that in Scientology continue to be free, continue to be available.

Audience voices: Yes.

It's too large a temptation for somebody to say, „Oh. hey! we can button this up. We've got it made here. We've got it absolutely made. All we've got to do is take all this technology, brainwash everybody and put up thought police towers in all the towns and it's all set, we've got a government.“

Now, you to some degree believe that your eyes are looking at them. That I know. Are your eyes looking at them?

No, they haven't got a government as long as there are textbooks out there showing how fast you can undo this same thing called brainwashing and thought police. It's discouraging, you know, to brainwash somebody and then have his friend walk into the nearest bookstore and buy a manual of how to unbrainwash. It would seem sort of pointless, wouldn't it?

Audience voices: No. Yes. No. Well, are you looking at them?

So, as security measures increase and as security tightens across the world on scientific matters, it is of great interest to us that the information we have and which has been developed with your help, your finance, your. interest, across a period of seven years, is today free. That hasn't been just a little bit of doing.

Audience voices: Yes.

You're probably not aware of the fact that before the incorporation papers of the HDRF were filed in 1950, the Office of Naval Intelligence right here in Washington, DC, threatened to call me to active duty to use what I knew about the mind. And after that I made sure that the channels were so wide that they were very uninviting.

Well, all right. What's looking at them?

Nobody wants something that isn't a secret. There is nothing quite as unwanted by a government as yesterday's secret known today. A very amusing story connected with that attempt to seize Dianetics, a very amusing story from my standpoint anyway. Months and months and months before I had decided that the Navy and I had come to a crossroads and I had requested permission from the secretary of the Navy to resign my commission - my commission had been hanging fire since the end of World War Il - and he had granted permission. Now, that's the lengthiest amount of time consumed, trying to get a letter into a government office and get an answer to it. See, that's pretty long.

Audience voices: Me!

And I already had that. So this fellow, this officer from the Office of Naval Research, came to see me right here in Washington and he wanted me to go on as a civilian employee in order to use what I knew of the mind to make men more suggestible.

Well, that's a thetan, Honest. I needn't give you another word of lecture throughout the next four days, for today and the next three days. That is it! Those are the three things that we can most easily experience. And I gave you the fourth, which was the first... I mean, the thetan and the objective universe, and that became the fourth one, didn't it?

And I smiled a feline smile. And I said, „No.“

Page 21 is missing in the book, here.

And he smiled like something out of Faust, and he said to me, „Well, all you have to do is saw 'No' and I will call you back to active duty because you still are an officer of the United States Navy.“ And with that purr he exited.

So there's the objective universe, of which these curtains are a part, I assure you, and this body is too, it's kicked around so much - its solid by the way today. [sound of curtains being moved] Pretty good, huh? I did that just for you.

So I dived into my briefcase and pulled forth the secretary's permission. I dashed down here and found out there was actually a naval command in this area - it's called the Potomac River Naval Command, I don't know what they run. Once I think they tried to run the battleship Missouri. But there it sat down there, and it had an admiral in charge of it and everything, and I found out that my papers were resident in two places. People thought I belonged in Washington, in Washington, and people in New York thought I belonged in New York, and I had two sets of papers. This admiral that had come to see me thought I was totally out of New York. So I went down here to the Washington Navy Yard, the Potomac River Naval Command, and I got my resignation accepted. And Thursday the admiral came back to see me, and he says, „Well?“ And I said, „Well?“ Fastest resignation on record. There wasn't anything he could do about it then. And I went back up to Elizabeth, New Jersey and the HDRF, the first research foundation, was formed, and we went happily on our way just throwing it all over the place.

But the objective universe includes as a specialization other body-mind-thetan combinations who you see mostly as the objective universe, do you understand? So you see people walking around, live things walking around and so on, and what you're looking at is simply this same combination I just showed you.

The Bureau of Naval Personnel still has a form letter. If you want to know what it says, write them sometime and say, „Why don't you use Dianetics or Scientology? What do you know about these subjects?“

The three most intimate items - you have a body, you've got a mental image picture, that's the mind, and what was looking at it - that's a thetan. And then you have the rest of the universe, and it has the specialized item in it of other thetan-body-mind combinations who also see this agreed upon area we know as the physical universe.

They send you back a form letter, and it's very polite, and it's personally written. It's always the same letter: „We are keeping full records on this and are learning more and more about it. We do not know whether or not it's applicable to our work at this time. Sincerely yours, Soand-So, Chief of Naval Personnel.“ But they've got it on file! And meanwhile we go on and use it.

Now, if we go into the field of special abilities, whether or not we can make the mind stand over here at 35 degrees, whether or not we can mockup spaceships out here that run, whether or not we can hypnotize or goof in some fashion a politician, these are all doingnesses, doingnesses by which we change location and consideration with regard to the four items we have just called off. And that's all doingness is, unfortunately.

In other words, here over a period of time, over a period of many year's working together, using our own finances, squaring things up, doing things ourselves in spite of anything that stood on the track, skipping the fact that we fell on our faces here and there organizationally, not paying any attention to the entheta and the upsets but going on doing our job developing Dianetics and Scientology, we have come to this day of July 4th, 1957 with, for my money, a very thoroughly developed subject which commands the field of human behavior and ability. And that subject and information is ours and it is free and it is not subject at any moment to any censure by anybody from anybody! And we can use it as we please. We have what we have fought for these seven years! And this too, I wish to tell you on this Independence Day of July 4th, 1957.

Cross your legs the other way way to. Did you do that?

Thank you.

Audience voices: Yeah.

I'm very glad you're here and in the next hour we'll get the congress started. Goodbye now.

Physical universe change?

[End of Lecture]

Audience voices: Yeah.

Well what do you know! Now cross 'em back this way.

Audience voices: Yeah.

Physical universe change?

Audience voices: Yeah.

Interesting isn't it? We changed it, didn't we?

Audience voices: Yeah.

So we get this doingness which requires only control - start, change, and stop. Well that's the entirety of the subject. I don't know why I go on discussing it, it's too simple.

Well in actuality, it is that simple, but the funny part of it is - there isn't really a person present that believes it's that simple.

You could tell me about lumbago and goiters and the uncontrollability of cats and politicians, kings and coal heavers, couldn't you? You could tell me, then, about what? Difficulties with the doingness of these four areas. The difficulties with the doingness simply add up to non-control, don't they?

Isn't that nasty? All of these beautiful problems you have. All these lovely problems your going to lay in the lap of auditors some time or another. All these problems you're gonna audit out of other preclears. Your problems that you audit out of the other preclear (laughter) - really have to be audited out. Because they violate a direct look, a direct contact, a positive ability to control and let control, because these things obscure your view of the four items I mentioned.

Now how many classes of things would there be that obscure the view? Ha! You name it (laugh)!

Your ability is nowhere more greatly demonstrated then your ability to throw up difficulties and obfiscations! You're good at it!

You might not be able to see across your bedroom in the middle of the night, or the front of that podium, but you could think of a difficulty. Well, that should strike you as very strange that you could think of difficulties to this degree - but it's true that you can. Well, you must have Q-and-Aed with people that told you difficulties were very necessary. You must have bought a bill of goods someplace that in order to study the mind you must first study telekinesis. In order to study the mind you must first be an expert in ontology. In order to study the mind you must first be able to cut out appendices. That's the present law.

And these first must-be-able-to's, particularly when they disappear out of sight and you can't remember what they are, become the anatomy of difficulties. You first must be able to do this. You first must be able to do that. You first must be able to ... And then you forget all of these firsts, and know there is something that you should do first before you do this, but you can't remember what that is, so of course you never do this.

And one day you're driving down the street and you forget one of these now-I'msupposed-to's and you don't turn the wheel quite far enough or something of the sort, and you run up on the curb and have a flat tire or something. And you say, „Now why did I do that?“ Well, there isn't any „why you did that.“ There is no reason you did that. There were too many reasons and you did it.

So, if you keep adding reasons, you get nothing but difficulties. All we need is a few more reasons - just a few more reasons why we have to have and test this A-bomb, just a few more reasons why. Just a few more now-I'm-supposed-to's, which then buried out of sight make a complete complexity and utter obfuscation of the entire picture.

And I come along and I say to you, „Have you got a body there?“

You say, „Yes.“

I say, „Mock up a cat. Have you got a picture there?“

„Yes.“

I say, „That's the mind.“ I say, „What's looking at it?“

You say. „Huh. I am.“

Well, that's a thetan.

And, actually the one thing you're liable to know best is it couldn't be this simple. But that's all that's wrong: you know that it couldn't be that simple.

Now, processing is addressed to the perfection of control, the perfection of communication, the better observation of or creation of things to communicate with and things to control. Thus we get what we call CCH. And all the Training Drills we have simply amount to this today. We say; „Do it right now, in present time, 100 percent.“ And we've got gradient scales of things a person can do that way and he gradually comes up to a point where he can do a direct observation or execute a direct control or communication right now with it, without further vias. It almost kills him but he can do it.

Processing and training would amount to the same thing, but they are both addressed to the same things.

How long does it take for a person to become disabused of complexity, vias, varied reasons why, causations without number? How long does it take a person to he disabused of these things? Well, that's how long he has to be trained or processed, as the establishing factor.

It's all very well for you to say, „Well, ha-ha! All right. I heard what you said, Ron, and all I am going to do is I'm just going to make up my mind, and I am going to put it right through right there in present time, I am going to look at things right now. I am going to throw my glasses away and everything is fine. Heh!“

You have enfranchised some devils and demons of one kind or another, some automaticities and some vias, that you have given carte blanche to. You have said these things now have priority above all other things - including my present opinion! So, you have to get over the idea that they have power too, and sometime that takes a little time.

You speak right now in present time as I am speaking to you. A great big healthy ridge moves in and hits you in tie nose. You say, „This was not in the rule books. Ron specifically said - - .“

Well, Ron might have said something, but you said something a long time before I said it, and that was, „This ridge is going to move in and hit me in the nose any time I get cocky enough to believe that I'm close to perfect.“ Some such postulate is in the ridge. You got cocky enough to say, „Well, I can do it right now without any difficulty at all.“

And it says, „Right now! - doomp!“

And when you find these things the only other thing you have to discover is, is they really don't bite thetans. And when you discover that a thetan can't be bitten, you are a Homo Novis or a Clear or a „have“ or whatever else one might be called; and that would be the absolute end goal. Not nothing - that is not the end goal of Scientology - not the reduction of everything to nothing. Some people think it is, you know. But it is simply high directive communication, excellent control in the four spheres which I have just shown to you. And that would be the end goal of Scientology.

The subject of Scientology is livingness. You are looking at it. You are it. And I'd better give you an intermission.

Thank you. Thank you.

[End of Lecture]