Now I want to tell you a bit about Handbook for Preclears. A lot of work went into this handbook, not on the basis of how many hours it took to write it, but on the basis of a couple of years of trying to communicate these techniques. That is what is important.

It has taken me a long time to get the ammo stuffed into the breech, the pointer on his ledge, the trainer swiveled around in the right direction and get a hand on a lanyard.

Self Analysis was a pilot project, but Self Analysis does not come to an end because this handbook comes out. If you take a case that is pretty neurotic and try to stuff this handbook at them it can be pretty bad. But if you can coax this case to use Self Analysis for a little while before you give him this handbook, you will find he will come far enough up the tone scale to work.

I happen to believe in action — lots of action. As a “philosopher” I am a complete bust, because everything is all set for the philosopher if he is just permitted to think and maunder around and monkey around with something and write it down in a book, let the book get dusty and write some more and let that one get dusty and so on.

Self Analysis is an effort to connect the person with the material universe. You can read through Self Analysis and you won’t find anything but an effort to get the person reconnected with the material universe.

I was interested in the field of engineering because engineers build things. I found out that when you tried to build things in this world the steel would stand up but the human beings wouldn’t. Isn’t that interesting? So I decided to do something about it if I possibly could. There wasn’t quite a bit done about it then, but the direction of it is action — definite action.

So, Handbook for Preclears would be too heavy for the neurotic or the psychotic but it will serve you above that level.

We have a world today where everybody is busy blowing each other up, with secret police running inside and outside and economics going up and down like barometers before a hurricane. People are shivering in their tracks, the workers are all throwing down their chains so people can put bigger chains upon them, institutions are being built to take care of the insane so that we can have more insane, people are being thrown on operating tables and hacked up, children get started into their lives with eight strikes against them and everybody is busy fighting for a little piece of dirt that is floating around in the solar system. What a limited view man has had!

Now, when I am talking about a low-toned preclear I really mean low tones — maybe a 0.8 that isn’t spun in, where there is no volume on the 0.8 but he behaves pretty much along a 0.8 pattern. You take that individual and you find out he can’t quite click with some of the things in Hand book for Preclears: it means that either you stand there and audit him — monkey around, fool around, do the first four steps of the fifteen acts — or you shove Self Analysis at him. Let him work Self Analysis for a while. You don’t care how thoroughly he works it, one way or the other. It will do some interesting things for a case. It sort of gives him an orientation. As a matter of fact it will actually take the major apprehension off a case. It just sort of takes charge off the whole line. You are not asking the person to tackle any of his postulates; you are not asking him to tackle anything.

Trying to do something about that takes action.

Something else interesting about Self Analysis is the fact that you as the auditor can use it, and you have almost an endless chain of Postulate Processing. Just recouch each of its phrases into a postulate: “Can you recall a time when . . . ?” and then make the next line into a postulate — ”Can you recall a time when you decided . . . ?” “. . . when you concluded . . . ?” “. . . when you evaluated . . . ?” — and ask him that. It turns in your hands — you can freely translate it — into Postulate Processing. But it is not headed at Postulate Processing. It is just a reorientation with the MEST universe. That is quite different from Hand book for Preclears.

The production of an attitude of mind capable of constructively resolving the problems of man and delivering into his hands the conquest of the material universe happened to lie through the field of epistemology, and that channel went through the human mind. And that all leads out into action.

This book in its present state is made to be handled by an auditor supervised preclear. It is your knowledge which backs up this book. The uncertainty which your preclear will feel at being turned adrift suddenly with something like this in his hands is overcome by the fact that you are interested.

So, this gun is pointed — laid, trained — loaded and cocked. It has taken a year and a half to find out how to tell people to do what, to produce a frame of mind which was up the tone scale.

Now, let’s say that you have a preclear who is well up the tone scale — say 1.6, and the fellow has arthritis and so forth — and you give him the handbook and say, “Well, you process it on out from here. Just follow this book out.” This fellow’s aberration is stopping motion, and you are going to have a little trouble with the case one way or the other. If you have too much trouble with the case, take this book away from him and give him Self Analysis. Tell him, “You work that for two weeks. Then everything will get a little bit better for you and then we’ll give you the handbook.”

But there is in existence now a package which handles this, with ramifications such that you in the field, wherever you are, are not occasioned too much turmoil or difficulty because of some alteration in the package. This bridge is built pretty wide now and as a net result we can be a cause which will undoubtedly produce at least a very interesting effect upon the society.

You can do that or you can just take this book and give him a little indoctrination. Don’t bother to argue with him. “Well, if you don’t accept that, that’s all right. That’s okay. Possibly you prefer something else, but this happens to work fairly well.” Talk to him kind of quietly and follow the first four steps of the fifteen acts. This will bring him up to a little higher point; it will get him squared around and up to where Dianetics has a little reality to him.

So when we think of cause and effect, the cause-and-effect situation in Dianetics is a very interesting one to examine. What are we trying to cause and what will be the effect? We can take that up a little later.

By the way, there is nothing like turning on a good strong somatic to give people an idea of reality. The best method I know of turning on a strong somatic with a 1.5 or a 1.6 or a 1.7 — an arthritic — is to get them to get the feel of the atmosphere. Draw their attention to a knee or something and get them to get the feel of the atmosphere on that knee and various atmospheres — various counter-emotions are what you are asking them to feel — until you find some sympathy or some anger or something of the sort on that area, and the somatic will turn on.

Right now, let’s just take a look at the great purity of philosophy. I wish Kant were alive today, and Hegel and a few of the boys. Would they have fun: you would keep showing them phenomena and they would show you their mystic numbers.

This counter-emotion is very interesting stuff, because it sort of seizes up somebody else’s facsimile. The counter-emotion comes in and seizes up this particular engram. It is held there by the individual but it is apparently seized up by somebody else’s emotion. So that is a very nice tnethod.

Of course, that kind of a situation can’t exist today; fortunately we have an enlightened world. You can show individuals phenomena and they immediately recognize them as phenomena and work with them — I wish!

Now, when you get a low-toned case you don’t give them the handbook. You could give them Self Analysis. If they don’t carry through with Self Analysis, you give them the first four acts of Hand book for Preclears yourself and build them up just a little bit, show them there is some reality to it, and then give them the handbook.

Cause and effect: Once upon a time there was a life source, and it developed into a more complex life source and that developed into a more complex life source. We can say that what it was trying to cause — one of the things it was trying to cause, certainly — was a conquest of the material universe. That may be just one of its goals but it is still a very important one. It is important because when you get an individual way up above 20.0, he starts to separate from the material universe. He is neither happy nor healthy nor anything else. Regardless of what he is trying to do, when he starts going out through the top he starts to leave the material universe and he ceases to gain in his conquest of it.

In other words, you can give them this book at any stage that they are ready for it. And you will have some preclears who will be ready to handle the book immediately, so you just give them the book.

Now, when an individual goes down from 20.0 he also loses contact and loses the ability to handle the material universe.

Then you call them and talk to them every once in a while. You keep expressing interest in their case. You keep pushing them along. You can even take this book and give assignments in it if you want to. Take a blue pencil and go over it with them and sit there and say, “Well, you go from this page to this and I’ll see you Wednesday,” and so on. You can use any trick you want to pull in order to get a person rolling on it.

When you find a person operating at optimum — healthy, unworried, successful, everything running for him, things working — he is riding at about 20.0 or ten points to either side of it, and he is in good shape.

You will find occasionally that somebody will pick up this book and what he runs into will be too hot to handle. He will start running “people who enforced agreement upon you” — something that light — and all of a sudden he will say, “Yipe! I don’t want to go any further.”

We could get into a big argument about whether or not an individual is in good shape when he is healthy and strong and happy and effective and efficient and so forth. Maybe that individual isn’t in good shape; maybe the ideal would be something else. Maybe the ideal living organism would be something else. Possibly somebody could say, “Well, the ideal state is to sit on a bed of spikes and be able to resist the pain of the spikes.” Somebody else can do that if he wants to, but he sure isn’t going to get anything done!

You call him up on Wednesday and say, “How far have you gotten with this book?”

So what are we trying to cause? We will just postulate that it is the conquest of the material universe and when an individual begins to produce an effect, the effect he is producing — when it is a good effect — is an alignment of the inherent disorder in the physical universe.

“Well, I didn’t get very far. I was busy. I had to go to the store. Reginald got sick. Something happened.” You go over and you take a look at the book. Go over and call on him and start in again. Find what he wrote in it. He is hung up someplace.

When an individual fails as a cause, he becomes himself chaotic. His living body is part MEST; even his own MEST starts to demonstrate the chaotic effect of the material universe.

Now, getting people started is the most interesting manifestation of the book. Once you get them started they will roll, because it will get interesting to them. This book is much more interesting to follow than Self Analysis as far as its processes are concerned, as you may already have discovered.

A very ideal situation would be to be pure cause but this is, of course, the ideal state of being, which is up above the level of the ideal state of action. If an individual is fully responsible, then the individual is full cause along all dynamics, isn’t he? If he is going to survive infinitely or something of that sort, he is again full cause. He says “I am” as his state of beingness. He goes into a big state of beingness, “I am.” That means “I am cause.”

You can make a rule, then, that the book should be presented to the preclear at the time the preclear is ready to pursue his case in the light of the book. Your role as an auditor is to judge when he is ready and to bring him up to a point where he will be. You might be able to do that in ten minutes and you might be able to do that in five hours. Remember, the length of time that it takes to bring an individual out of an inaccessible state into an accessible state is not included in any time estimates on this book. Any time estimates so far used on this book include only accessible cases. So sometimes you may have to spend two or three weeks fooling around with somebody to bring him out of a psychotic state, the way things are now. You might have to do that. It would be regrettable if you did, but you should be prepared to do so.

We notice, as we look this over, that two things happen to a human being: he ceases to desire to be a cause or negates against being a cause, and he negates against being an effect. He does not want to be either a cause or an effect. He is a cause and something happens and it goes wrong and therefore it is fault, blame, regret and so forth. All of these things follow out from cause and he is in trouble. On the other hand, the individual does not want to be an effect of somebody else’s cause; he fends off from being this.

Now, this book can be used, actually, with you just sitting there reading it, asking the questions directly out of it, getting them answered and filling it in. If you are auditing a blind man, that is what you will be doing up to the moment when you are satisfied that he is going to roll all right. Then you give it to his wife or somebody else and you get them to read the questions to him, making sure there is no emotional conflict in that auditor-preclear group and making very sure that the person who is reading this book to the preclear and getting the questions and letting him go through these things won’t take any liberties with it and will call you if anything goes wrong. This is an effort to take the load off your shoulders, not an effort to put a load on the preclear.

But an individual can desire to be a cause and he can desire to be an effect. So actually this thing works out the way you have seen so many of these things work out.

It says right in the front of the book that there are several ways of handling it — four ways. One way is as a workbook to be used wholly by the auditor on the preclear. You actually would just sit there and all you would have to do is go through these steps: ask the questions when they are asked, explain things when the preclear doesn’t understand them, list these people all the way through, ask him to scan where he is supposed to be scanning and so forth. It is just a complete book of auditing.

Up along the top of the scale you have desired cause; below that you have enforced cause (that is blame) and still lower you have inhibited cause. And then you have desired effect, enforced effect and inhibited effect.

You as an auditor, from your experience and so forth, might suddenly see that this case is ready to run something in advance of what he is running, because this is for an average case. Make sure that your judgment is good. You don’t want to dive a 0.5 into a grief charge and expect him to run it, because a 0.5, being in grief, will not erase a grief charge. It requires a different point on the tone scale to get an erasure or a relief or a release.

Now, out of this formula — and you can call it a formula if you want to, because an awful lot of things work out when you start looking at this — come many complexities in the organization of living. Actually, it is a restatement of approval, regret, survive, full responsibility, full state of beingness and so forth. But it can be codified this way.

You might all of a sudden find this individual way up ahead of you. All of a sudden you have gotten the computation on his case and he is just running like wildfire. You start to ask him to scan the various buttons, and you just grab hold of the chart real quick and get him scanning buttons on various dynamics. Suddenly he hits the central computation on the case of who he is being the life continuum for, so you run the sympathy off that and the preclear is off to the races. You can expect a case to do that, so you should use judgment in connection with this book.

We are just making a restatement in terms of cause and effect. What is full responsibility? A fellow who is at full responsibility is willing to have caused anything, so that is way up top.

It might even be of benefit occasionally to run an engram. The fellow is sitting in one, he seems to want to run one and there it is — run it! But you wouldn’t charge him into something heavy. This book will lead him into all the heavy charges you want.

Desired cause: When you get an individual down the line to a point where he no longer desires to be cause, he is pretty badly off. When you take an individual and enforce the fact upon him that he is cause, just the act of enforcing it upon him is blaming; it says, “You’re cause” — and when he starts to blame himself finally, he comes down to the point where he won’t be cause for anything. He won’t be cause for the satisfaction of his own hunger. He won’t cause anything to happen.

There is a section in this book that tells the preclear how to run his own grief charges. That is an interesting one. You are liable to find your preclear fouled up like fire drilll on it. All you have to do, though, is just probe around with enough regret and blame and life continuum until all of a sudden the charge blows anyhow. He is liable to bog on these grief charges. People run away from grief and they run away from fear charges — particularly from fear charges — so you have to watch the person. But you as an auditor using this book should also be perfectly competent to use your own judgment with regard to its processes, because this book is designed to keep the preclear from getting into trouble, and it is designed in such a way that it fits, more or less, the average case.

And then we have desired effect: You would be surprised how many effects there are that are desirable. There are the effects of food, clothing, shelter and pleasure. Individuals desire to be an effect.

The next method of using the book would be as a homework book to be given the preclear for use between sessions. You just go into Advanced Procedure. You are giving this preclear a thirty-six-hour intensive, and maybe you aren’t giving it as an intensive in a week; maybe this preclear is getting audited at the rate of four or five hours a week or something like that. You can space it out a little bit. Give him the workbook between sessions. Just tell him it is a workbook and say, “Well, when you come back for your next session, have this thing finished up to such and such a point.”

The old mystic, the old-time ascetic, knew exactly how to get into a state of affairs where he went way up toward 40.0. He just said, “No pleasure, no effect — no effect of anything.” And of course, he went right on out through the top. He didn’t accept any cause on the line, particularly, but he refused to be an effect of any kind, and so there he went. You can see them today in India up in the highlands. They are very interesting people; of course, they don’t have much understanding of humanity. You go over there and you say, “It’s all right to be sitting there with your legs crossed, with the lice running up and down in the hems of your white robe, but it’s not my idea of a good way to live life” — nothing happens.

Regardless of where the preclear is in this book, you can just go right on along with Advanced Procedure as it is in Advanced Procedure and Axioms. It would really produce some fast processing if you were doing this double on him. But this person isn’t getting just a thirty-sixhour intensive. If you are giving him thirty-six hours of auditing and he is doing this book too, I don’t know where he would land. (And if you audit him wrong, the book will also unbog him ! )

The ascetic knows a lot better than to ever permit himself to be an effect of anything, because the second he permits himself to be an effect, he opens the door to somebody or something else’s cause.

The third method to use is the one that I really started out to describe. You get the fellow to a point where you think it is safe to turn him loose; that might be in ten minutes or it might be in ten hours. At the end of this time you give him this workbook and you keep checking with him then by phone or even by house call to make sure he is going on along the line with this workbook and where he is getting to.

There is contained in this all the ramifications of how you go about being a saint. And if you want to get there and become a saint, just close all those doors of effect and you will be a saint. (If you close the doors of food too, you will be a dead saint!)

Now, when he gets over to Act Ten it says “service facsimile,” but for your benefit, what that really means is this is where you take a hand as an auditor and make sure his case is fairly straight and that he has missed nothing, and you do some of the auditing otherwise. Because you may find he has already blown his service facsimile and you also may find he has accumulated twelve more.

Now, on effect, a person has to agree to be aberrated. That, by the way, is in the first handbook; a person has to agree to be aberrated. Here is one of the methods he uses to agree: He wants to be affected this way and that way and some other way, and then some other way and some other way. Eventually he has the doors wide open and anything can roll down that channel. He starts to hit a dwindling spiral the moment he wants to be an effect.

And the last method is as a processing manual used wholly by the preclear without an auditor. This would take a pretty intelligent person. It would take somebody who was fairly savvy on the subject of Dianetics. You give him the book, he rolls on the book and he can push himself through.

The young artist who says “Ah, I want to live! I want to know how life will affect me, and so forth” — he finds out. He stops painting too, because as long as he is an artist he is cause; as long as he is cause he is an artist. But when he becomes effect, he becomes chaotic, unplanning and so on.

This has the particular benefit of taking care of an isolated auditor. And it also breaks down the old problem of altitude as far as the auditor is concerned, because when an auditor gets back in an area and there are only two auditors in the area, will they audit each other? No, they won’t. They will go audit themselves a flock of preclears apiece, or if they do audit each other they will knock off auditing the preclears. Something will go wrong with the process.

Then there is the second dynamic. Poor old Freud: he was so close aboard the boat that I suppose that was why society got so mad at him. When he developed the libido theory he was looking right straight at this; there it was. You open the door to be an effect and you become one. What you do to become an effect becomes then the channel of aberration. An individual says, “I want to be affected pleasurably. I want to be very definitely and desperately affected,” and so forth, and it is very interesting that he will be affected by his counter-efforts and by everything else.

One of the first goals of this book, in its creation, was breaking up the cases of the auditors themselves and resolving those cases. There isn’t any reason in the world why you as an auditor can’t tear through this book and get yourself really up on top of the thing, particularly if you use this new section on life continuum. I am going to turn that out on mimeograph and we will send it out to you so that you will have a set of questions on life continuum. But I will show you that set of questions in just a couple of moments so that you won’t lose out on it, because you will be wanting to use it on preclears.

We take the second dynamic: There is a solid communication line on the second dynamic — tactile. You want to know why so many men take their wives’ orders? They want to be an effect — they have a tactile communication line — and the wife says, “Go out and jump in front of the locomotive, please,” and they do. Why? They are an effect; therefore they have elected her to be cause, particularly if she is ornery about it. She is cause. If she can ever accomplish getting blamed on the second dynamic, she is really cause — her word is law! That is how blame operates. Anything you blame becomes cause; it becomes higher and more powerful than you and it can therefore and thereafter regulate you. You blame it — you say, “There’s cause” — and you are saying at the same time, “I’m not cause.” And thereafter from that source you get your orders.

Now, this book can also be handed over to somebody to read to another person, as I just mentioned. You could really do a nice trick with this book. You could get a lot of people into class as auditors’ aides; you could actually advertise for auditors’ aides to help polio victims amongst children and get them to come in and give them two or three little evening classes and say, “This is how you do it. And you call for Papa if you strike a bad snag.” You would have located already quite a few polio cases — children, in other words — and you want these people to go to a hospital or go to a home and see that the child understands and performs the various functions of this book. They could just sit there and read the book and keep track of the case and be there all the time and so on. If they got in trouble they would call you. And s you would tell them not to try to get adventurous about the situation. They would have the security of knowing there is somebody behind them who knows.

If you want to know how to make an engram really effective against you, all you do is blame it on somebody. Blame its restimulation upon the auditor, blame a dental operation upon the dentist, and that engram — and dentists and auditors — thereafter will have a peculiarly powerful effect upon you.

There are probably many more uses than that. Somebody was talking about an armed-services project. We will have to make another call on that, because what happened was, again, a shortage of auditor talent. Terrific indoctrination evidently had to be done, so I said, “No, when the book comes out, we’ll get the book supervised through and nobody will be arguing about it.” That was one of the reasons the book had to be done this way.

If you want to get a preclear into a complete, apathetic, slavish state — in other words, if you want to get him into the state of a psychiatric patient — all you have to do is demonstrate to him that it is his fault, continually demonstrate to him that this was his fault and that was his fault, until all of a sudden he ceases to want to be cause. Then get him to blame you and blame you very heavily. (This is, by the way, psychiatric practice.) Eventually, of course, if you can get him to blame you as the auditor and blame you and blame you, pretty soon you will really be cause. You can say, “Do a loop,” and he will loop. That is how you set it up.

Another thing about this book: If you are going into a specialized type of case and you are going to have lots of these cases, we can print up this book so it says it resolves that case, give it a new cover and give it a new introduction. We can stress “bingoitis” or whatever you have decided to treat as a specialized line. Or for the armed forces, I could give out a copy of this book that would say its name is Survival Under Fire. Each and every time it is still Dianetics, but you as an auditor can say, “Well, it’s especially adapted to your case.” This solves the panacea problem: people don’t want to believe that they are that simple, that they can be cured up by one thing; they want to be known as difficult individuals.

If you want to really rule an organization, be so ornery and so mean and do so m any overt acts that there won ‘t be an in dividual in that organi z ati on but will blame you, and after that they do everything you say.

Those are the various usages and you can think up a lot more. This gives you a considerable fund of data concerning the use of this book. And where you find people are skidding or they get upset by it or it needs further resolution, and in particular when you have to answer the same question over and over and over, for heaven’s sake write me a letter about it. I will keep a summation of these things so that this book can do a natural evolution.

How is a marine company run so well? The officers in the Marine Corps know all about this, evidently; they evidently found out about this somewhere under the walls of Tripoli’ or something. The officers don’t have anything much to do with the troops. They aren’t the cause of anything or the effect of anything, particularly; they sort of hold off. They are the people that give the sergeants hell once in a while, maybe. They set a good example in battle. It is the British Army and British Marine Corps philosophy from which that is borrowed.

Now, you want these books to throw away. You want these books to be used, written in, damaged, chewed up, and you want to pick them up when you have finished a case. You want to pick them up and look them over; you might learn something from them one way or the other. And if the individual says “Well, an awful lot of information is in there that I wouldn’t want you to know about,” you say, “Oh boy, how many pages did he miss?” You say, “Well, there happens to be an Act Sixteen and that means go back through it again. Here — there is a button you need to run that’s called hide.”

They get it all blamed on the sergeant. The sergeant takes all the blame. It is his fault, but it is also his blame. Everybody blames him actively and then they have a good, smooth-running company.

This book is a destructible item. It is built to be that way. And it is also built to stay in your hands on a channel and come back to you and be destroyed.

Don’t think for a moment that that sergeant can come down along the line and go into ARC with all these enlisted men and have anything happen in that company. It won’t. Why? Because he is then not cause — they haven’t elected him cause.

You keep handing this out. When you hand this book out, you make sure you know to whom it is handed and what was wrong with the person when you handed it to him and what his name and address was. And when you hand it out, hand it out as a professional action. Don’t say “Well, here now, Bill, I think there is something here that could do you a little bit of good. You might look into it.”

Now, do you elect an individual cause by going around and voting? No — elected officers are rarely successful officers. Why? You have to blame yourself; you elected them, didn’t you? So what you really should do is elect a group to appoint an officer, and you would get results then.

No, you tell him firmly, “You want to be audited? Here. Name, address, telephone number. Yes, we’ll fix up a card for you and so forth. Here you are.”

For instance, the government of the United States would be far more fascistic if Congress were permitted to select, after Congress was elected, a president. We would have a government there that would really be operating with a meat chopper. Only we don’t want a government like that. Furthermore, we don’t want all the government we pay for.

This book is to be handed out as a professional action. Do you get the idea? Because this book is auditing. This is auditing. It is not something that tells him about Dianetics. If he wants something that tells him about Dianetics, there is Self Analysis, and also the Foundation can produce tons of small descriptive leaflets.

So you open up a channel by which you will be an effect: you can expect that channel, as you roll along, to be an aberrative channel. This gives food, clothing, housing and, in particular, sex (because it has a communication channel that is tactile) terrific emphasis. What do you worry about all the time? Food, clothing, shelter and the second dynamic.

I begin to wonder sometimes if anybody gets very busy in this business on some kind of an idea line. I got a cockeyed idea not too long ago, and I walked two blocks in each of two towns, just telling everybody I met who was obviously in horrible condition (it didn’t matter whether it was an old lady in a wheelchair, a young girl on crutches, a blind man carrying a cup — didn’t matter what), “Say, have you been down to the Foundation?” They would say, “What are you talking about?”

The only reason you worry about them, the only reason they don’t happen almost automatically, is that you want to be an effect. So a person is made to work for his food. It is a very funny thing that nobody ever set it up s o a person had to work for his after- s have loti on or ski ing tri p to S un Val ley or other odds and ends, and gave him the food. That doesn’t quite work out. The employer has uniformly selected a channel where the individual is of necessity effect and he has used that for pay. Also, he gets obedience when he does this.

“Well, I just wanted to know. You know, they can probably do something for you.”

As a matter of fact there are a lot of lessons to be learned here. There are a lot of things that have been overlooked. There are lots of ways to crack a blacksnake whip over men, there are lots of ways to enslave them; there are lots of ways to un de rm ine person al ities and c haracter an d everyth ing el se in this. This is a real hot package! I think it would sell very, very quickly in Moscow or Washington. The package is hot. But it doesn’t get very hot if an auditor knows about it.

“Something for what?”

“Let’s scan everything and every time in your life when you postulated to yourself that you wanted to be an effect.” “Let’s scan every time you blamed anybody for doing something to you.” Let’s get those out of the line and the first thing you know, the individual starts up the tone scale. Why does he start up the tone scale? Because you are taking away all the times when he desired to be an effect.

“Well, for your condition — you don’t look like you are in too good shape.”

Now, when an individual desires to be an effect of his own memories, this is really royal! A person starts in saying, “Well, I’d like to cherish this memory. That was an awfully good show; I’d like to think about that later. I hope nobody spoils this illusion for me.” He has been an effect. He has been watching this beautiful picture or a dance or ballet or something of the sort and he says, “I want to cherish this memory, I want to keep this around.” All of a sudden he has assigned value to memory, value to a facsimile. That is the first crime.

“Well, I’m not. Where? Where did you say?”

Value the show, be damned! Go to it tomorrow night, go to it next week or go to other shows. The only moment you are alive is now. There isn’t any other moment.

“Down at the Foundation in Wichita.”

When individuals pick up past memories and cherish them, the first thing you know, they find themselves cherishing material objects, and then they start wondering what all this burden of psychosomatic illness is. An auditor tries to get them to let go of this but down at the bottom is a terrific desire to be an effect.

But the point is, I was trying to find if these people were alert and interested. And a lot of them practically climbed over the top of me. That is very interesting, be cause you c ou ld open an office and you could go down the street and just hand out a little card that says “Dianetics” with a description on the back of it and your name and address. You could just say to the person, “How do you feel today?”

You start going down the line and you say, “When did you want yourself to be influenced pleasantly by a memory?”

The fellow, rolling along in his wheelchair or something of the sort, would be startled: “I don’t feel too good.”

The preclear sort of squirms for a minute and says, “How did you know?”

“Well, maybe we can do something about it. A lot of cases like yours get handled all right, and so on. If you want to take a crack at it, okay; come down and see me at this address.” Don’t make any point of it. Just give him the address.

Freud was to some degree right. On the second dynamic, because of this tactile communication system, you have a complete setup. And then the society fixes up everybody by saying, “No, you’re not twenty-one yet and you have to get married.” So a person goes through all his teens desiring to be an effect, but every time he is it is illegal in some fashion or other. So he not only desires to be an effect but he has to hide the effect. Pretty soon he hides it from himself. And about the time he gets to be forty-five or fifty somebody says, “I wouldn’t go out with him.” He loses his potency because he has hidden it all! All the way down the line he has pushed it back. He desired to be an effect and then he said, “No, I’ve got to hide this because if people found out the horrible things that I did, why, I would be ruined socially. So therefore I have to hide all this wanting to be an effect.”

There may be health sitting in that. He doesn’t know it. On the surface he thinks he wants to be healthy, and when you tackle his case, you will find it is a life continuum and he doesn’t want to give it up. But that is something you resolve afterwards.

He is thirty-two years old and he goes to a motion picture. It shows the Rockettes or something of the sort and they are doing a beautiful dance, and he is sitting there and the plot runs off in front of his face. A couple of teenagers down the line seem to be getting a big bang out of this movie but he doesn’t seem to be able to. Then he goes outside and he looks and there is green grass and blue sky, and a couple down the line seem to think that that is very nice but for some reason or other it doesn’t look very nice to him anymore. And he all of a sudden realizes that the world is not pleasant to him, that he does not any longer experience pleasure. So then he cooks up a big dream of how he is really going to make sure that Mary and the kids are secure or something and nobly goes on his way.

Now, you don’t have to spend seven and a half hours doing something or other for him: You give him a book. You say, “Well, go on home and read it. What’s your name, phone number and so on? I’ll just keep a check on your case.” And you do. You keep a check on that case as he goes on through.

What he has actually done is he has desired to be an effect, hidden it, put it back, got up a lot of blame and then, out of fear of shame (which is what guilt is; it is down between 0.9 and 0.6), he has just hidden all this. He hides it from himself. His memories become dangerous. He does not dare exhibit his memories so he starts telling people, “Well, I forget. I don’t know her name. I don’t know where that was.” He knows he is dodging something but he can’t figure out quite what he is dodging. The facsimiles are really handling him.

And he says, “Well, what’s it going to cost me?”

You should understand this point very clearly: There is a great world of difference between looking at present-time reality and looking at the memory of present-time reality. That is why we are calling them facsimiles, because they are facsimiles: you make a box top that looks just more or less like it and send it in and you get your spoon. It is not the real thing. And handling it is handling a memory; it is not handling a concrete past. It is like handling a motion-picture reel or something of the sort; it is not handling a past.

You can always tell him, “Nothing, but if it helps you, if you think it helps you, you can make a contribution.”

You can go back down the time track and find the time you were in San Francisco or Dallas or someplace. You can remember that right this minute — when you were at some other place. Now, right here in present time, think how far away that was: not in time; think in miles — distance. Just get a concept of these towns being well over the horizon. They are a long way away. That is reality.

It is a very funny thing, but an individual will usually contribute very heavily if he thinks he is going to help somebody else. He won’t contribute because he has been helped, so much. So you can come around after you know darn well that he is better, and you can simply ask him if he would like to pay for the processing of Mary Agnes Snide who lives down the block from him. It happens to cost $150 to process Mary Agnes, and if he thinks he was helped by it or something of the sort, let him pay for Mary Agnes’s work. You can actually go into action like this.

But an individual who is building up a “hide,” building up a shame, getting all loused up with wanting to be an effect this way, that way, other ways and so forth, eventually starts to hide his own memories. And then all of a sudden he says, “I’m hiding these things; therefore they must be dangerous. You know, they must be awfully dangerous — I have to work so hard to hide them.” And then he either gets to you or they get him.

One of the tough jobs out in the field is finding preclears. A lot of people sit around and no preclears show up. They even sweep off the front porch, but they don’t put out any sign; that is not “ethical.” (“Ethics” is whether you advertise for doing nothing, or not advertise for doing nothing! That is American Medical Association ethics.) The only fault that has ever been found concerning Dianetic ethics was the fact that somebody occasionally advertises in Dianetics. And you can’t have that sort of thing going on, because those doctors’ shops would just be wide open with the wind and dust blowing through them if you started advertising! Now, I want to give you the life-continuum setup for this book.

But there is a whole sphere of aberrative operation contained in this: a person’s desire to be a cause, his efforts to keep from being an enforced cause — ”you’re to blame” — and his efforts to keep from having cause in-~ hibited in him.

The first part of it is you ask the individual, “Who is dead?” And we have ten blank spaces, numbered, for him to write down who is dead. There are blank spaces sitting in front of him so he has to fill in something. After he gets through filling in all these things and he says, “Well, there aren’t any more,” your next column is “What is dead?” There are ten blank spaces, and you tell him this is animals or pets, younger children, babies — anything like this. And you get him to fill out “What is dead?”

What happens here? A couple doesn’t want children. That is sex: desired cause of children. The first thing you know, it isn’t any fun anymore. They don’t want to be cause, so they come down the tone scale. The second they don’t want to be cause they start down the tone scale and there goes the old shell game.

Now you have got him set up with two columns, at which time you want him to describe the goals and the fears and the conditions of the first one of “Who is dead?” And you have ten blank spaces each for goals, conditions and fears for number one of “Who is dead?” In other words, make him completely delineate number one of “Who is dead?” on the goals of number one and the conditions of number one and the fears of number one. That gives you three columns for number one with ten entries for each column.

Now, we take somebody around grief: You talk to them crossly, roughly or something of the sort and you tell them they have got to straighten up, and all of a sudden they begin to cry, quite unexpectedly. You say, “Oh, gee, I was too rough.” You didn’t want to be a cause. You didn’t want to be a cause of their tears, so you go into sympathy.

You make up the same thing for number two, the same thing for number three, the same thing for number four and so on up to ten.

Actually, most of the things that anybody has ever been mad about in this world don’t amount to anything. You go back over the things you have been mad about in the past and if you really take a look at them they look pretty silly to you. They are generally an effort to enforce cause elsewhere. That is really what anger is.

He is sure going to get tired of bodies before he is through.

Grief is “I’m not cause. Look what you’ve done to me. You’ve ruined me.” That is grief.

Now you take “What is dead?” — goals of, conditions of, fears of: ten entries each for goals, for conditions and for fears of every item under “What is dead?” — everything that has died in his life.

Apathy is “Well, here I lie — you can’t think I caused anything, can you? I’m innocent. Look at me. I’m innocent.”

I will give you a fast review on this: You have a column that says “Who is dead?” He lists as many people as he can think of in his life who are dead, whether related to him or not. Then you make up a column for “What is dead?” — you might say neuter-gendered. And then you make up three columns for number one of “Who’s dead?” three columns for number two of “Who is dead?” three columns for number three and so on. Then you go into “What is dead?” — three columns for number one, three columns for number two, three columns for number three and so on.

But real cause way up at the top gets confused by a 1.5 with 1.5 enforced cause. So a fellow who is causing something encounters a 1.5 and the 1.5 says, “He’s trying to force cause on me because he’s trying to cause something. Therefore it’s causing; therefore the only thing I can possibly do about the thing is stop it! So therefore I’ll stop all cause that I see around and I will pretend that I am cause. I won’t do anything to be cause, but I’ll pretend I’m cause and I’ll tell everybody how much time I have to put in being cause all the time. But I won’t do anything, so I won’t have to be cause. And then I’ll show them that they’re cause and then I’ll get sympathy.” At 1.5 a fellow really wants sympathy and approval. He is really trying to take out a license from you to survive.

When you have all that done, you have your next one: “Who failed?” “What failed?” And you have him fill in the ten blank spaces for each. He has to give you a list of at least ten people that failed. On “What failed?” these are neuter objects, including machines.

If you ever doubt this, get somebody who is terrifically angry at you sometime and just question him about what approval you can show him. He will break down and do a complete explanation. A person at 1.5 is applying for a license to survive; he is applying for it by making himself horrible to have around.

Now, you break these down the same way — goals of, conditions of and fears of. You give him a whole sheaf on that: for number one he has to make out all three columns, and so on. He has to write all this stuff down.

At 0.5 the person is making himself completely innocuous, innocent, enervated — ”I’m just a poor little thing; you wouldn’t refuse me a license, would you?”

It doesn’t matter whether the people he lists are alive or dead — anybody who failed, alive or dead. He will interpret it this way: He will find somebody who is dead and he will get one life continuum on this individual at the time that this individual dies. But then after he has got that one a little bit he will all of a sudden remember a time when this individual failed, too. And he gets another life continuum from that failure. He can get really loused up. Maybe this happened ten years before the individual died, and the individual was entirely different before he failed than he was after he failed. So for ten years after the failure this preclear is keeping on for the failed person, then all of a sudden he has to keep on for the dead person.

There is the gradient scale of cause. If you want to know where an individual is on the tone scale, see how much he is willing to cause. But then look at the quality of what he is willing to cause.

Next, you go through the same routine on “Who departed?” and “What departed?” By the way, you will get all his repossessed cars, wives, incometax payments — all kinds of things.

Now, on the effect line, an individual can safely be an effect on any channel he wants to be an effect on — he is completely safe in being an effect — as long as he doesn’t negate being a cause on any channel. Because if he desires to be an effect everything is all fine, but if all of a sudden he negates being a cause he is prime to suddenly become an effect — and he will get it.

Now we go into this on the other side of the ledger. The first one on this is “Who won?” — ten people who won. By golly, it will sometimes really try a fellow’s imagination. But this winning category should be the second group. You should have the dead group first and then this theta group second.

This is the same as the individual you sit down and tell to sit quietly and concentrate on nothingness. He then is an effect; you are making an effect out of him, and the more of an effect he is, the more counter-efforts he will continue to get.

It should be “Who won?” and “What won?” A lot of preclears will answer this stuff very interestingly, because they will start listing what won over them — not as a life continuum or anything of the sort. They will start listing things like “Well, his name was, I think, Billy, and he beat my skull in.”

There are individuals who are sort of plowing through life and they have wanted to be an effect on many things and they don’t want to cause very much. They won’t eat much and so forth; they are kind of just maundering through life gradually, slowly, carrying along. They aren’t a cause, they aren’t an effect, but they sure are close to going out the bottom and they sure give you as an auditor a lot of trouble. One of the reasons they give you trouble is they are not going to be an effect on what you say either, because that is the last ditch.

The next set is “Who arrived?” because every time an individual fails, he starts up in tone again when somebody else arrives, and that person will be an ally. You can really build up a fellow’s memory — his memory will really start functioning — if you ask him this question: “Who arrived?”

You find such people going around worrying about things; they have to concentrate awfully hard on being right if they are going to be alive at all. They correct you when you use an improper word. They leave an idea to go sidetracking over to make sure that the words are all right and so on. They do all sorts of interesting things. They are an effect, but they are so close to being a real, unlive effect (how much of an effect can a person be? Dead!) that when you try to affect them with something and you use a little bit too much horsepower on the thing, you will drive them right out through the bottom.

So, you take up those two categories: “Who departed?” and “What departed?” is the old one; its comparative level is “Who arrived?” and “What arrived?” With these, just as with the others, you have him write down goals of, conditions of and fears of — three columns for each entry on those.

But if you start using powderpuff techniques they can throw you out, for the good reason that they don’t want to be any more of an effect. You, asking them to do something, are asking them to be more of an effect. This is a weird one. How do you get to it? How do you solve it?

You can make these out on sheets for a preclear or you can simply ask and straightwire the preclear. This is the way you would make it up with a mimeo sheet or something.

They usually got that way because there was a lot of stuff on cause and effect. There have been a lot of people around them telling them that they were cause, “and cause is important, it’s serious.” This is blame — ”You see what you caused now! This is serious. You ought to know better than to do such a thing. You’re to blame!” and so on.

You do it just a little differently if you are straightwiring him. You have these categories, you ask them in routine order and you carry a tally sheet. You say, “Who’s dead?”

Actually the button behind these buttons is the seriousness with which the charge of cause is leveled at individuals. If you want to start repairing this individual, you pick up about the lightest button you can find on the case. It will be one of those buttons on our chart, and it most likely will be a “serious” button of some sort. You can’t run anything very heavy on these people. When they are way down on the tone scale, you can even get them to work a lock and the lock won’t blow; it is just too heavy for them.

He tells you, “Grandpa.” So you get the goals, conditions and fears of Grandpa. You go ahead and work it out right there. Run its emotional curve, run some regret, run some blame — run anything — in order to discover if there is any continuum on Grandfather’s death. That is what you do if you are auditing him personally.

In processing they can’t be an effect, and yet they won’t cause themselves to climb up the tone scale and get well. That is why these cases give you trouble. So what do you do? Actually there is something you can do: You can just follow the general steps leading into the solution of insanity — mimicry and so forth. You can get them in. They are willing to mimic you because you are obviously alive. Then you can find out who they are being insane for on a life continuum.

Then you take number two on that category, then number three and so on. You exhaust “Who is dead?” as a life continuum. You just work each one of those as a life continuum till you get emotional curve enough, you get the blame, you get the regret — all this stuff — off the line on this life continuum. Just work it out right there. You find out “Who is dead?” and go straight across the boards with it, asking these questions. And you just get the deaths off the case.

And by the way, practically every insane person is busily being insane for somebody else, not for themselves. The nobility of the human race! They lie there and let prefrontal lobotomies be performed on them, they let electric shocks happen to them, they let themselves be shot with sodium pentothall — they even let psychiatrists talk to them! In other words, they will go through anything to hang on to somebody else’s goal to be insane. That is very fascinating.

This comes up in the area of sympathy in this book, in Act Eleven. You still have all the sympathy to run, but right in that same section will be this life-continuum proposition. That will be added into this book at that level. It will be the first part of the Eleventh Act.

There may be a faster way of hitting the case, but in Handbook for Preclears there is a list of the exact steps you take to bring a psychotic out of it. What you hit after that is probably a life continuum, and the case should blow very quickly.

Next, you go into “What is dead?” “Who failed?” and so on, right straight across the boards, getting the goals, fears and conditions. A person will do a life continuum of somebody who failed. He will go on and “succeed for him” by failing like him. Is there anything illogical about that?

I want to give you the source on cause and effect: The basic concept on cause and effect is Persian. I first learned of it out of a manuscript which was published about A.D. 850. It talks about the role of a practitioner of the Magi. He is supposed to cause things and it warns him not to be affected by them. That is all it says. I ran into that thing head-on and I scratched my head over it for some time and tried to figure it out. I figured there was something more there and more than they knew they were writing. I coasted along for quite a while before I finally got it disentangled.

Then you get “What failed?” and then “Who departed?” You just get one name at a time, and you want to know approximately when it happened, the goals of this person, the conditions of that person, the fears of that person. (When we say “condition,” you understand, we mean physiological condition or mental condition or both.)

Now, processing the life continuum is actually Postulate Processing. Postulates cause life continuum; it is the variety in which they are made and the difficulty of getting to them that gives trouble.

Now, when you have finished “What departed?” you go on to “Who won?” “What won?” “Who arrived?” and “What arrived?” — the goals, conditions and fears.

An individual says, “I’m going to try to help, and I want him to be well, and I want him to be happy,” and then all of a sudden that other person is dead. The individual has then had his own postulates torn up and thrown in his face. He said, “I’m going to do something,” and then something prevented it from happening; something caused death. So he says, “I must have done it because I said I was going to do otherwise, and I must be to blame because I said I was going to help and I didn’t. My postulate is wrong, so therefore I’m wrong, so therefore I must be to blame on this death.”

You will find a time that an individual’s automobile departed from him in some peculiar fashion or other, and you say, “All right, now, what was the condition of the automobile?” Right away he has to think about the automobile.

This is true along any line of postulates. Postulates lie behind this sort of thing. An individual makes a postulate of one sort or another and it follows on out.

“Well, it had piston slap.”

The trick in processing the life continuum is in how you dig up these postulates, because that was such a terrible failure that to get this death undone and get some of the somatic off it and get it squared around and get back to the actual postulate really requires a little bit of doing. Once one understands, however, the mechanics of the emotional curve and running a little bit of effort and so on, these postulates will fall out. It is when you get the earliest postulates off the thing that the case starts falling apart in an awful hurry. Postulates are very, very important!

“Is that so?” This individual often goes “Click-click-click-click.” (That is how ridiculous we can get!) “What were the goals of the automobile?”

Cause and effect is very much to the point in this. A woman says to herself one New Year’s Eve, “I’m not going to smoke anymore, I’m going to be nice to my husband, I’m not going to burn any more steaks, I’m not going to talk about Mrs. Wompatattle anymore and I’m going to be nice to the children. Now, there, I’ve done my New Year’s Day duty.” She writes them all down and breaks them all on the second day of January and goes into a decline and is hell to live with the rest of the year.

“Well, to run smoothly and go places, I guess. And sit in the garage when it’s cold.” The individual will go on and tell you all about this automobile. But this is an innocuous question. He really isn’t doing a continuum on this automobile. However, what he is doing is finding out that you can be a little bit off groove. He has an idea of what you are looking for: you are looking for something else.

Why? Because postulates were made which had to be altered but weren’t altered, so the individual was going up against these postulates with a solid crunch. After she had made this postulate, every time she smoked she was calling herself a liar, because she was going up against the postulate.

It is not too bad a thing to be wrong once in a while. Don’t be wrong on purpose but don’t worry about being always right, because if you get your preclear to agreeing with you all the time, he gets into a state of trance or something as far as you are concerned, and you will have to snap him out of that before he will get up the tone scale.

It works out this way: On Tuesday you say “I’m never going to have anything to do with Annabelle anymore — never!” and on Wednesday you go over to her house. That is a failure. It is a failure to you with you because you said so-and-so and then you made a liar out of yourself, so you failed.

So, you now have all these conditions of life continuum. This is a complete process all by itself.

What happens is that an individual cannot make a single postulate without becoming the effect of that postulate, because an individual is riding in a time continuum. He can’t say “I am going to be a so-and-so” without moving on forward in time to a position where he is supposed to be the so-and-so. And he becomes a so-and-so even in his own eyes.

Now, somebody asked me how can “What failed” have a fear? Automobiles, for instance, are afraid of running into things, of course! I am being serious. I ran a little fellow who had lost a coaster wagon. What were the goals of his coaster wagon? “To carry me.” And this somehow or other was all balled up in his head in a complete bewilderment about him being carried. The coaster wagon was somehow his mother, was something else and so on.

Cause and effect: A postulate is a cause, and the second the individual moves away from that point in time he becomes the effect of this postulate. S o an in dividual is be ing continu ally an effect of his past whether he likes it or not. He is continually an effect of his past unless he gets swiveled completely out of valence or something of the sort, or unless he starts life over again or decides to be suddenly all over again. As a matter of fact, you could decide that and just drop all the past facsimiles and everything else and let them all go by the boards. You would have a fine case of amnesia, but you would be very happy! Every once in a while somebody does this; he just swivels completely out of valence and he is no longer subject to his own postulates. He says, “I’m somebody else. Now I am somebody else.” People who change their names effect this to some degree.

“Well, what’s the coaster wagon afraid of?”

This is why postulates are so important — because of cause and effect. A postulate is cause, a conclusion actually can become a cause, an evaluation can become a cause, and the individual moving along on his own time continuum then becomes the effect of this cause. You should be very chary of making promises. You say, “All right, next Tuesday I will...” but you probably won’t be there. So just before you say “Next Tuesday I will . . .” make sure you say “(You know when I promise people things I never mean it.) Next Tuesday I will. . .” And you will be able to go through all next Tuesday without keeping any appointment or doing anything and feel perfectly at ease and go to bed that night with no conscience whatsoever.

“Hitting bumps.” He would get a jolt out of that.

What is conscience? It is simply negating against your own — not somebody else’s — causes. If there is such a thing as conscience, it would be that. You have said on Tuesday, “All right, I will be a good boy, I won’t do it anymore. I won’t do it anymore, I’ll be a good boy” — not under duress or anything like that!

So you say, “Well, all right, hitting bumps.” He had been trying to reacquire his coaster wagon ever since, only nothing he acquired which was on four wheels was satisfactory because it wasn’t a -coaster wagon. This was an individual in middle age.

Then, come Wednesday, you are walking home from school and everything looks fine to you, particularly those apples. So you shin over the fence and you climb the apple tree to get a whole bunch of apples and you put them in your shirt and you get back on the road again. You start walking along and then for some reason or other you feel guilty. You know nobody is going to come and take you off to jail — not for stealing some apples — and you try to figure this out. “What’s wrong? Is it because I’m afraid of somebody catching me or something?” You consult everything but your own postulates; you consult everything else. And so you finally get the weird ideas “I am afraid of police. I’m afraid Papa and Mama will punish me. I’m afraid I will be deserted by the whole society and left to die upon these arid plains of the Bronx” — anything but the fact that “-last Tuesday I said I would be a good boy, and now I’m not being a good boy.”

If you get somebody who is dissatisfied with every possession he gets, he is trying to possess again his tricycle that departed or something. It is fascinating. You ask him these questions, and it is jolting to him that there could be something about that or about this; because at the time he lost it, if he was a little child, the thing was alive to him — it had a personality and all this sort of thing. And it sort of jars it up in his mind.

You are your own judge and, believe me, all too often you are your own executioner. Fascinating, isn’t it?

Someone also asked whether this would include who lived and what is alive. I suppose you could include it. (Most everybody is dead, though, on the cases we get!) You would get a great deal of regret. But you can add that to the lineup.

Now, if you can remember sometime in your life when you felt guilty of something, you can go back earlier and find the postulate that you are guilty of disobeying. There is really only one person you are going to disobey and that is you. You are the only person it is serious to disobey, and that is only serious until you get up the “serious” button. After that you say, “Well, let’s see, next Tuesday I’m going to be the Sultan of Siam,” and next Tuesday instead you are a hobo — so what?

So, here we have something that is very close to a complete process all by itself, merely this life-continuum process. It will make an individual much better off. Do you see what happens with each one of these cases? Something very insidious happens with these cases. You can only do so much for a case and then it does the rest of it itself.

I have heard individuals say, “You know, I have to take the rest of life unseriously and I take only myself seriously.” There it goes, from the first dynamic out. You might think that this is the sort of thing that obtains on every hand — it does. But the only reason you take yourself seriously is that so many other people have. This is a beautiful operation: You make a person make a postulate, then you make them make the postulate again and make it again, and then all of a sudden you find them disobeying their own postulate. Then you say, “Hm-hm. You yourself said . . .” “Now, you promised Mama that . . .” That is the way it works. So these things start to look serious to you.

What you are looking for is the bumper, the booster that will send the preclear up the tone scale. Any one of these processes may act as a booster.

Also, remember that every time in your life that you got hurt, you made the decision which got you hurt. Therefore you are liable to start taking your own decisions seriously, particularly if you agreed sometime or another that Mama hurt or that hurting was bad or if you are taking part in a life continuum for someone who believed that pain was horrible.

Let’s take life continuum, for instance, and just work nothing on this case but life continuum. There are a lot of people dead on the case and so forth, and we just work nothing but that. All of a sudden this case starts going up the tone scale like a sky rocket and his somatics resolve. We have given enough oomph to this case so that not only did the inherent somatics he was holding as life continuums for people that you ran resolve, but people that you have never touched resolve too. You have just gotten his governor up to speed, so it keeps on going on up the line.

The actual truth of the matter is you could probably stand up to anything as far as pain is concerned. I would bet that a Chinese torturer couldn’t make much of an effect on an individual unless he was severely aberrated on the subject of how much pain should hurt and how important pain was.

Now, you can take cause and effect, desire for approval and all the rest of this sort of thing, and process that. You can process that and not touch the life-continuum process, and very often you will find the preclear taking off and going up the line before you have a chance to work life continuum on him.

You know where this comes from? This comes from the one-life theory. This theory was arrived at without any scientific conclusion and without much thought. It was probably postulated sometime in the past in an effort to control individuals and to impress little children into the fact that they had to behave and do what they should do, because you would have an awful time trying to control people who believed they would have another chance. So you get them to make the postulate when they are still tottering around and tripping over their triangular pants that they only live once and that life is serious and it is important. Then you can lay a lot of regret into the life too. A person is swinging along, getting along fine and all of a sudden it occurs to him when he is twenty-two that he will never again be twenty-one. He gets married and he says, “I’ll never again be free. I’ll never again be able to take out four girlfriends in the same night.”

Or you can take just the button chart and do nothing but scan him into the possession of some of these buttons, and he will take off up the line from there. You are dealing with some very powerful techniques. They all head toward the same goal.

Life is sown with these horrible regrets. An individual begins at last to look back to the times when he should have but he didn’t, and does he regret that! Because he has been taught that “you only live once and you’ll never have another chance.”

But these are just ways of unmooring a fellow from the bottom instead of mooring him there, as hypnotism tries to do, as some other techniques try to do. And you can, by the way, moor a preclear there. You can really fix him. You can authoritarianly process a preclear out of his arthritis by driving him from 1.5 down to 1.1. Then when some other auditor comes along and starts to pick him up the tone scale again, he will go through a stage of having arthritis. I have seen it happen. He goes down the tone scale from arthritis and the arthritis clears up; he goes up the tone scale and all of a sudden he gets into the strata where this life continuum that gives him arthritis is, and the arthritis turns back on — he gets some deposits back and so forth. It is not as serious as it was the first time, because he has found out that it could go away and he has made a postulate already that it went away.

This also makes a person very brave on the battlefield. It is really horrendous that this boy goes out and lays down his life. That is great stuff; you can play it up very strongly. The whole truth of the matter is, it was very, very fine of the boy to go ahead and do what he thought he ought to do. But he did it! He had full responsibility when he did. The only reason that this could be considered very bad is if one were holding on to a one-life theory. Then it becomes horrible; it becomes strictly nightmare stuff! Little children start dreaming about coffins and this and that; people all around them are telling them “You’ve only got one life to live!” and the child is trying to fight himself out of this one way or the other.

You can just take straight Postulate Processing — nothing but Postulate Processing — and process all an individual’s conclusions and the postulates which he later on disobeyed because the environment insisted on changing. No postulate can be laid down that will be good for the rest of time. These postulates, then, can be picked up. You can pick up enough postulates off a case so he will start up the line, too. Sometimes you find it very difficult to pick up postulates because the case is so wound up in effort or something of the sort.

I would have had a very easy mind during the last war. I used to get pretty wrought up on two counts: my own life was skidding by ineffectively and my own work was not being performed, and on the other hand the lives and energies of a great many men were being wasted. I still protest their being wasted, because it is an ignoble waste! That is real waste.

Or you can take Effort Processing, all by itself, and run nothing but one complete experience. Run it out to its last possible dregs. Run it out till you get the effort of the cells to stay next to the cells, the effort of the liver to keep on “livering,” the effort of the teeth to communicate with the liver — in other words, all the effort and all the postulates and all the emotion off one major experience in a case. If you take the whole thing and that thing was even vaguely tied in with a service facsimile, the case is going to come on up the tone scale at a heck of a run. That is why we say “a few hours of processing.”

But if you really want to hang it up as something just utterly gruesome, convince a man that he has only got one life and then take it away from him.

But I do not believe there is an auditor around at this moment who has 100 percent exhausted every single speck of effort, emotion and postulate out of one engram, because that is really a job.

What we will do for randomity in this society!

You run a preclear back down the time track and you get to earlier incidents, earlier incidents, earlier incidents — just clipping them as you go down, trying to find a good early incident — and you find one that can really be processed. You will find it generally on a conclusion line. You are maybe looking for the conclusions of why this preclear doesn’t consider that he is important anymore or the conclusion that he has to obey; there are numerous conclusions you can reach this on. You start running back down the line and down the line, getting the effort within the effort to obey, within the effort to obey, within the effort to obey, and there he is, getting run through the stomach in the Peloponnesian War or something. He can’t help himself; he will be right there.

Don’t get me wrong. Any part of any life laid down for a cause is a very worthwhile proposition. It is real sacrifice; there is no doubt about that. But don’t rub it in!

If you were then to take that engram — any one of these engrams (it doesn’t have to be a past death or anything like that) — and you were to exhaust it 100 percent, just sit down and knock it to pieces every way that you could possibly knock an engram to pieces, the individual’s recovery up the tone scale would be something fabulous.

I don’t care whether you pick up this other theory or not. Just remember that you have thoroughly agreed and have had it postulated into you, “of your own free will, out of a vast amount of phenomena which has been examined thoroughly by experts all through the ages and found to be utterly and completely true and without any slightest contradiction,” that you only live one life!

Auditors have been getting results even though they were not exhausting all the efforts out of these things. You don’t ask for all the efforts out of them — I know you don’t — because there are very strange efforts that you can ask for in any one engram. There is the effort, for instance, of the tail of the spine to communicate with the brain in that incident. You ask for this and all of a sudden brand-new flashes of pain and everything turn on in the thing. You think, “Well, that’s all gone now,” and then you get over on to some other efforts.

One of the horrible things you can do is just show that the evidence doesn’t exist on the other side and then show people that you have something. And as long as it stays a reasonable society, a society which always will agree with you when you show them the phenomena, we are safe!

All efforts are nonsurvival. Every effort is nonsurvival in its ultimate, because at the very beginning is a state of beingness, theoretically, and then a counter-effort. Then that countereffort becomes the effort, and then another counter-effort becomes the effort and then another counter-effort becomes the effort. So each effort in turn was first nonsurvival and then survival.

Therefore, a whole new process here really opens up to your eyes when you look at cause and effect. You have seen it in Advanced Procedure. An individual throws himself wide open to be an effect and after that can really be an effect. But this is perfectly all right. In order for him to be an effect — affected pleasurably or by pleasure — he also has to be willing to be a cause.

So all the way up the line you have the nonsurvival effort and the survival effort. You have both of these efforts. You have the effort to see and the effort not to see, the effort to hear and the effort not to hear. You can hit either side of these. You can hit the effort, meaning the individual’s effort against a counter-effort, or you can hit the counter-effort.

An individual who goes through life only wanting to be an effect is a sick person. I would bet that you have an acquaintance or a preclear who, if you kind of looked at them and took a real quick glance at them right this instant, is going through life being nothing but an effect, and who is bound and determined to be nothing but an effect. They sometimes will justify it by wanting to be an effect of pleasure — they want to enjoy life and so forth, they say. They don’t want to cause enjoyment in life: they want to enjoy life.

Now, when you start running Effort Processing, you just start to ask for the effort this way and the effort that way. Effort Processing does not need much delineation from me here; there is quite a bit lying around on it already. It is fascinating stuff. When I fired the gun on that thing it really exploded, and we have seen some weird things happen in Effort Processing.

Now, all of the ramifications which come off this are very obvious. You really need no more than this.

So, the individual’s efforts and counter-efforts exhausted 100 percent from one end to the other of a good, long, solid, hard, painful engram brings about a recovery in tone which is fabulous. You can look it over.

You have to get the thoughts, which are the postulates on that engram line. They come up about halfway through. Then sometimes you have to turn around and get the efforts to have those thoughts because the thoughts themselves won’t release. The thought is based on some earlier effort, which is action, and the effort was so strong on this postulate that you have to i process out the effort to have this effort in the engram. So you go back from the engram and process out that effort, then you come back up and go on processing the engram you started.

You ought to do it sometime just for practice — process one engram from one end to the other, completely, 100 percent. There is the effort for one side of the back to communicate with the other side of the back; there is the effort for the eye lenses not to touch the eyeballs; there is the effort of the hair not to stand up and the effort of the hair to stand up; there is the fellow’s effort to breathe and his effort not to breathe, and the effort to keep the heart beating but the desire not to keep the heart beating and the effort not to keep the heart beating. In a death, it is the effort to die and the effort not to die, the effort to hold the motion and the effort not to hold the motion, the effort of the cells not to collapse and the effort of the cells not to blow up — there are lots of efforts. But you will know what efforts to ask for, because all you have to do is ask the file clerk and he will tell you.

If you want to do this job of Effort Processing, just as a technique, it has remarkable results. But you should understand also that you can go on Effort Processing an individual forever until he disappears! Fortunately it would take forever to make him disappear.